Directed by: Oren Moverman
Starring: Woody Harrelson, Robin Wright, Anne Heche, Cynthia Nixon, Ned Beatty, Sigourney Weaver, Ice Cube, Ben Foster
Rated:R
I've got good news and bad news...
The good news is that Rampart is a great “cop gone wild” film that reminded me of Abel Ferrara's, Bad Lieutenant from 1992.
The bad news is that by the time you read this it will not be showing here in Springfield. But it is due out on DVD on May 15.
The story is another one “based on true events.” These happened in Los Angeles in 1999.
Director Oren Moverman co-wrote the screenplay with novelist/screenwriter James Ellroy. Ellroy knows a thing or two about crime novels and screenplays. The body of his work includes L.A. Confidential, The Black Dahlia and The Big Nowhere.
The film stars Woody Harrelson as L.A. cop, Dave Brown. Those who remember Harrelson as the affable and slightly naïve bartender from Cheers may be surprised by his character here. He's less than affable and certainly not naïve. Brown is a misanthrope to the nth degree and the film never really lets us understand why. That adds even more creepiness to his character. He simply seems to enjoy being the way he is. To the extent he can enjoy anything. As he tells an internal affairs investigator (played by rapper and actor Ice Cube), “I'm not a racist...I hate everybody.”
Brown has been caught on video severely beating a suspect. A few years earlier he had murdered a serial rapist. Brown has two daughters and said he did it because of his feelings for them.
Brown also has two ex-wives (Anne Heche and Cynthia Nixon) they are sisters and live, with the daughters, next door to Brown. At first the situation seemed a little weird to me but it's one of the least weird things in Brown's life. To his credit he is generally respectful of women. His ex-wives aren't afraid of him (he never physically abused them) but it's plain he has wearied them over the years.
After the video of the beating is made public, Brown is brought up on charges. The prosecution in the trial is handle by an assistant DA, a no-nonsense character played with determination by Sigourney Weaver.
His defense is being handled by an attorney played by Robin Wright. He met her at a bar and ended up spending the night with her. So their relationship makes for another unsettling plot device.
Also on hand is the great character actor Ned Beatty, playing an ex-cop who taught Brown everything he knows about being crooked. With this character and a homeless man (Ben Foster) who serves as an informant, we increasingly get the idea that Dave Brown's life is going from bad to worse.
While the tale is, as mentioned, loosely based on a true story, the corruption scandals of the L.A.P.D. in the late 1990's is well documented and one of the most infamous incidents of police misconduct in American history.
The look of the film is glaring and gritty, which matches the tone of the theme. Cinematographer Bobby Bukowski (The Messenger, Arlington Road) used a technique he calls “360-lighting.” He uses light from the natural sources in the scene and keeps traditional movie lighting to a minimum.
He says, “It's a way of using available light and shaping it. Subsequently, it gives the director a lot of time with the actors...and a lot more time shooting as opposed to setting up the film. Finally, we're spending more time shooting rather than setting up.”
He also used a new kind of movie camera (for real movies, I mean.) It stores the images on 32 gigabyte memory cards. 15 minutes per card. But it's a far cry from a home camera or cell phone. It uses real lenses and has to be fitted with a wireless device that sends what he's shooting to a monitor for the director.
(See http://magazine.creativecow.net/article/behind-the-lens-bobby-bukowski-cinematographer for the complete story about Bukowski and the new technology.)
I don't want to give away too much but I will venture to say that while Rampart is a laudable film, it will never be referred to as “The feel good movie of the season.”
Tuesday, April 10, 2012
Saturday, March 17, 2012
This past Oscar ceremony had some pleasant surprises. Nearly all of the awards given were well-deserved and all of the nominees deserved the honor.
“The Artist” won the best picture award (it's a great and entertaining film) and the surprise there was the fact that it is only the second silent movie to take home that honor. The other one was “Wings” and it won in 1929, at the very first Academy Awards presentation. The fact that “The Artist” was shot in black and white made it a bit more of an outsider as well.
In the early days, everything was in black and white. The first color film to win best picture was “Gone With The Wind” in 1940. The last black and white film to win it was “Schindler's List” in 1994.
I've been in theaters and have seen (mostly younger) viewers complain and walk out when they discover the movie is a black and white feature. It seems some folks have a misconception that black and white is old school, low-tech and cheap. Nothing could be further from the truth. Just think about some of the most notable still photographers. I dare say that the works of Ansel Adams and Diane Arbus would not be as beautifully powerful if they were color prints. I can't even imagine an Arbus photo in color.
With that in mind, I've compiled a short list of the most beautifully filmed black and white movies; some old some new, some well known, others obscure.
Especially if you have an HD TV, you should treat yourself to some of these. If you're a “color snob” they will change your mind.
“Nights of Cabiria” (1957) and “La Dolce Vita” (1960) Director: Federico Fellini Cinematography: Aldo Tonti/Otello Martelli (“Cabiria”) Otello Martelli (“La Dolce Vita”)
While best known for -as The Internet Movie Database states- his “bizarre, abstract plots peppered with risque humor,” Fellini wrote and directed several films that were fairly straight forward. “Nights of Cabiria” was one of his most personal films. Written as a love pean to, and starring, his wife, Giulietta Masina, it is the story of a waif streetwalker living in Rome and awaiting the miracle that will transform her life. The first time I saw it, I was stunned. Any given frame of “Cabiria” could be blown up into a beautiful black and white still. I am a fan of all of Fellini's films, but this one occupies a special place in my heart.
“La Dolce Vita,” which I first saw while preparing for this article is another stunner. The depth of field that cinematographer Otello Martelli achieves is at times, nearly unbelievable. Those raised on wowza zowza digitally created special effects (which are fine when needed) may not even notice “La Doce Vita's” beauty or simply take it for granted. Big mistake.
“Rashomon” (1950) and “Seven Samurai” (1954) Director: Akira Kurosawa Cinematography: Kazuo Miyagawa (“Rashomon”) Asakazu Nakai (“Seven Samurai”)
Another duo from an iconic director. Kurosawa continues to influence generation after generation of filmmakers. These days, with the films of Quentin Tarantino and others, audiences are getting used to the non-linear method of telling a story on-screen. But Kurosawa broke new ground when he used the technique in “Rashomon.” The story unfolded and was told from several different characters' points of view. Director Edward Zwick copped this style in “Courage Under Fire.” Kazuo Miyagawa's for cinematography for “Rashomon” is as rich as it is subtle.
“Seven Samurai's” most obvious descendant is the classic American western, “The Magnificent Seven.” I had the pleasure of seeing “Seven Samurai” on the HUGE screen at The Gillioz a few years ago. I saw “Casablanca” (another b&w classic) there as well. Anytime The Gillioz is showing a film, I recommend you attend. If only to remember the time when screens were BIG. The Palace also has one auditorium with a nice sized screen. I saw a fresh print of “Taxi Driver” there. DVDs are convenient and inexpensive but nothing compares to a large theater screen. If only The Palace or Gillioz would show “Lawrence of Arabia.”
Oops, veered off a bit. Back to black and white masterpieces.
“Manhattan” (1979) Director: Woody Allen Cinematography: Gordon Willis
Cinematographers such as Gordon Willis and Roger Deakins are icons to movie geeks (myself included.) Willis was director of photography for all three “Godfather” films,
many other well known movies and eight Woody Allen projects starting with “Annie Hall.” He can shoot color but is also equally adept at black and white. His b&w work with Allen includes “Zelig,” “Broadway Danny Rose,” “Stardust Memories” and parts of “The Purple Rose of Cairo.” And, of course, “Manhattan.”
Allen has said this is the least favorite of his films and added, “I can't believe I got away with it.” Considering what happened in his personal life, one can understand he might be uncomfortable by being on-screen as a man of 42 who falls in love with a 17 year old girl.
You can make your own judgment call about the plot, I'm talking about the cinematography.
Willis is a textbook example of how a cinematographer doesn't actually shoot simply in “black and white” but manages a thousand shades of gray. “Manhattan” is a beautiful film to watch, especially if you have been to New York City. It's the place Allen loves the most and it has been a character -of sorts- in most of his films.
“Citizen Kane” (1941) Director: Orson Welles Cinematography: Gregg Toland
Much like Kurwosawa, Orson Welles is responsible for many innovations in film- making that are now considered to be in the norm. But the style of “Citizen Kane” was a startling production and to this day it remains at the top of a great number of “Best Films of All Time” lists.
“Citizen Kane” is described as a film à clef, a French term describing a movie about real life that is portrayed as fiction. In this case, the “real” component is the story of William Randolph Hearst and his publishing empire. It's because of Hearst -who owned the tree farms and mills that produced the paper his newspapers were printed on -that marijuana is now illegal. Hemp is a non-potent form of marijuana that had long been grown for use in making rope, textiles and paper. The Declaration of Independence is printed on hemp paper. George Washington and Thomas Jefferson grew it. Ben Franklin had a hemp mill.
And to ensure full disclosure I will tell you I have several garments made from hemp. They are all legal and all very comfortable.
But this has nothing to do with the film...
When asked -years later- about what made him (a first time film director) want to be so innovative, Welles claimed it was merely ignorance. He had no idea how films were made. But he knew how to tell a story. His “War of the Worlds” radio broadcast caused a nationwide panic.
Cinematographer Gregg Toland experimented with lighting and lenses and created the “deep focus” technique, giving “Kane” a previously unseen depth of field. There are also several matte shots. They are essentially double exposures where the background is shot first, the lighting is changed, the film rewound and the foreground is photographed. This too, adds incredible depth of field. Keep in mind it was all done “in camera.” There were no computer generated effects back then.
“Kane” is another early example of the non linear storytelling technique. The bulk of the film is one flashback after another. There's a reason that it is still considered by many to be the best/most important American film ever made. Plan a double feature night and watch “Citizen Kane” along with another Welles classic, “Touch of Evil.”
Hopefully your appetite has been whetted for some “old fashioned” black and white film. As an addendum, let me add this list:
“Raging Bull” (1980) Director: Martin Scorsese Cinematography: Michael Chapman
Later picked as the best film of the decade, it lost its Oscar bid in 1980 to “Ordinary People.”
“The Night of the Hunter” (1955) Director: Charles Laughton Cinematography: Stanley Cortez
The only film that has classic actor Charles Laughton credited as director. It's scary in the cerebral way. You know. Before “scary” meant chainsaws, hooks, saws, dismemberment and blood and guts.
“Metropolis” (1927) Director: Fritz Lang Cinematography: Karl Freund, Günther Rittau and Walter Ruttmann
A look at the dystopian future through the vision of Fritz Lang in 1927. Incredible special effects for the time. It's somewhat unsettling but has a ring of truth for then, today and tomorrow.
“Double Indemnity” (1944) Director: Billy Wilder Cinematography: John F. Seitz
If you aren't familiar with the film noir genre, this is the place to start. Seeing Fred MacMurray -the affable dad on “My Three Sons”- as a cold blooded S.O.B. (and insurance salesman. Hmmmm...) is disturbing enough. Add to that a screenplay by hard boiled novelist Raymond Chandler and you've got a chiller. Murder and betrayal run rampant in this film. I've seen it a dozen times and it never gets stale. The b&w work by John F. Seitz captures the noir genre and is a benchmark for the style. It's an absolute must see.
“Nosferatu” (1922) Director: F.W. Murnau Cinematography: Fritz Arno Wagner and Günther Krampf
THE first over the top horror film and still rated a classic among aficionados of the genre. Based loosely on the Dracula legend, Max Schreck's performance as the vampire is the stuff of legend. So much so that Tim Burton made a film, “Shadow of the Vampire” (also gloriously b&w), about the making of “Nosferatu.”
“Psycho” (1960) Director: Alfred Hitchcock Cinematography: John L. Russell
Hitchcock, the master of the macabre, fashioned “Psycho” based loosely on the psychopathic killer with a mother fixation, Ed Gein. Hitchcock adapted it from the 1959 novel by Robert Bloch. The film caused quite a stir at the time. It was somewhat too visceral and, well, psychotic, for the times. One might argue that the film ushered in the new wave of very frank horror films that came along in the 1960s. The cinematography is stark and at times it makes the viewer uncomfortable. I'm fairly sure that was what the film makers intended. It's a true classic and has influenced horror films (some good, many bad) for more than 50 years.
Anyway, these are merely some suggestions. With the advent of HD, home theater audio systems and large screen TVs -and the fact that most things on DVD these days are clean, restored prints- the home viewing experience is better than ever,
“The Artist” won the best picture award (it's a great and entertaining film) and the surprise there was the fact that it is only the second silent movie to take home that honor. The other one was “Wings” and it won in 1929, at the very first Academy Awards presentation. The fact that “The Artist” was shot in black and white made it a bit more of an outsider as well.
In the early days, everything was in black and white. The first color film to win best picture was “Gone With The Wind” in 1940. The last black and white film to win it was “Schindler's List” in 1994.
I've been in theaters and have seen (mostly younger) viewers complain and walk out when they discover the movie is a black and white feature. It seems some folks have a misconception that black and white is old school, low-tech and cheap. Nothing could be further from the truth. Just think about some of the most notable still photographers. I dare say that the works of Ansel Adams and Diane Arbus would not be as beautifully powerful if they were color prints. I can't even imagine an Arbus photo in color.
With that in mind, I've compiled a short list of the most beautifully filmed black and white movies; some old some new, some well known, others obscure.
Especially if you have an HD TV, you should treat yourself to some of these. If you're a “color snob” they will change your mind.
“Nights of Cabiria” (1957) and “La Dolce Vita” (1960) Director: Federico Fellini Cinematography: Aldo Tonti/Otello Martelli (“Cabiria”) Otello Martelli (“La Dolce Vita”)
While best known for -as The Internet Movie Database states- his “bizarre, abstract plots peppered with risque humor,” Fellini wrote and directed several films that were fairly straight forward. “Nights of Cabiria” was one of his most personal films. Written as a love pean to, and starring, his wife, Giulietta Masina, it is the story of a waif streetwalker living in Rome and awaiting the miracle that will transform her life. The first time I saw it, I was stunned. Any given frame of “Cabiria” could be blown up into a beautiful black and white still. I am a fan of all of Fellini's films, but this one occupies a special place in my heart.
“La Dolce Vita,” which I first saw while preparing for this article is another stunner. The depth of field that cinematographer Otello Martelli achieves is at times, nearly unbelievable. Those raised on wowza zowza digitally created special effects (which are fine when needed) may not even notice “La Doce Vita's” beauty or simply take it for granted. Big mistake.
“Rashomon” (1950) and “Seven Samurai” (1954) Director: Akira Kurosawa Cinematography: Kazuo Miyagawa (“Rashomon”) Asakazu Nakai (“Seven Samurai”)
Another duo from an iconic director. Kurosawa continues to influence generation after generation of filmmakers. These days, with the films of Quentin Tarantino and others, audiences are getting used to the non-linear method of telling a story on-screen. But Kurosawa broke new ground when he used the technique in “Rashomon.” The story unfolded and was told from several different characters' points of view. Director Edward Zwick copped this style in “Courage Under Fire.” Kazuo Miyagawa's for cinematography for “Rashomon” is as rich as it is subtle.
“Seven Samurai's” most obvious descendant is the classic American western, “The Magnificent Seven.” I had the pleasure of seeing “Seven Samurai” on the HUGE screen at The Gillioz a few years ago. I saw “Casablanca” (another b&w classic) there as well. Anytime The Gillioz is showing a film, I recommend you attend. If only to remember the time when screens were BIG. The Palace also has one auditorium with a nice sized screen. I saw a fresh print of “Taxi Driver” there. DVDs are convenient and inexpensive but nothing compares to a large theater screen. If only The Palace or Gillioz would show “Lawrence of Arabia.”
Oops, veered off a bit. Back to black and white masterpieces.
“Manhattan” (1979) Director: Woody Allen Cinematography: Gordon Willis
Cinematographers such as Gordon Willis and Roger Deakins are icons to movie geeks (myself included.) Willis was director of photography for all three “Godfather” films,
many other well known movies and eight Woody Allen projects starting with “Annie Hall.” He can shoot color but is also equally adept at black and white. His b&w work with Allen includes “Zelig,” “Broadway Danny Rose,” “Stardust Memories” and parts of “The Purple Rose of Cairo.” And, of course, “Manhattan.”
Allen has said this is the least favorite of his films and added, “I can't believe I got away with it.” Considering what happened in his personal life, one can understand he might be uncomfortable by being on-screen as a man of 42 who falls in love with a 17 year old girl.
You can make your own judgment call about the plot, I'm talking about the cinematography.
Willis is a textbook example of how a cinematographer doesn't actually shoot simply in “black and white” but manages a thousand shades of gray. “Manhattan” is a beautiful film to watch, especially if you have been to New York City. It's the place Allen loves the most and it has been a character -of sorts- in most of his films.
“Citizen Kane” (1941) Director: Orson Welles Cinematography: Gregg Toland
Much like Kurwosawa, Orson Welles is responsible for many innovations in film- making that are now considered to be in the norm. But the style of “Citizen Kane” was a startling production and to this day it remains at the top of a great number of “Best Films of All Time” lists.
“Citizen Kane” is described as a film à clef, a French term describing a movie about real life that is portrayed as fiction. In this case, the “real” component is the story of William Randolph Hearst and his publishing empire. It's because of Hearst -who owned the tree farms and mills that produced the paper his newspapers were printed on -that marijuana is now illegal. Hemp is a non-potent form of marijuana that had long been grown for use in making rope, textiles and paper. The Declaration of Independence is printed on hemp paper. George Washington and Thomas Jefferson grew it. Ben Franklin had a hemp mill.
And to ensure full disclosure I will tell you I have several garments made from hemp. They are all legal and all very comfortable.
But this has nothing to do with the film...
When asked -years later- about what made him (a first time film director) want to be so innovative, Welles claimed it was merely ignorance. He had no idea how films were made. But he knew how to tell a story. His “War of the Worlds” radio broadcast caused a nationwide panic.
Cinematographer Gregg Toland experimented with lighting and lenses and created the “deep focus” technique, giving “Kane” a previously unseen depth of field. There are also several matte shots. They are essentially double exposures where the background is shot first, the lighting is changed, the film rewound and the foreground is photographed. This too, adds incredible depth of field. Keep in mind it was all done “in camera.” There were no computer generated effects back then.
“Kane” is another early example of the non linear storytelling technique. The bulk of the film is one flashback after another. There's a reason that it is still considered by many to be the best/most important American film ever made. Plan a double feature night and watch “Citizen Kane” along with another Welles classic, “Touch of Evil.”
Hopefully your appetite has been whetted for some “old fashioned” black and white film. As an addendum, let me add this list:
“Raging Bull” (1980) Director: Martin Scorsese Cinematography: Michael Chapman
Later picked as the best film of the decade, it lost its Oscar bid in 1980 to “Ordinary People.”
“The Night of the Hunter” (1955) Director: Charles Laughton Cinematography: Stanley Cortez
The only film that has classic actor Charles Laughton credited as director. It's scary in the cerebral way. You know. Before “scary” meant chainsaws, hooks, saws, dismemberment and blood and guts.
“Metropolis” (1927) Director: Fritz Lang Cinematography: Karl Freund, Günther Rittau and Walter Ruttmann
A look at the dystopian future through the vision of Fritz Lang in 1927. Incredible special effects for the time. It's somewhat unsettling but has a ring of truth for then, today and tomorrow.
“Double Indemnity” (1944) Director: Billy Wilder Cinematography: John F. Seitz
If you aren't familiar with the film noir genre, this is the place to start. Seeing Fred MacMurray -the affable dad on “My Three Sons”- as a cold blooded S.O.B. (and insurance salesman. Hmmmm...) is disturbing enough. Add to that a screenplay by hard boiled novelist Raymond Chandler and you've got a chiller. Murder and betrayal run rampant in this film. I've seen it a dozen times and it never gets stale. The b&w work by John F. Seitz captures the noir genre and is a benchmark for the style. It's an absolute must see.
“Nosferatu” (1922) Director: F.W. Murnau Cinematography: Fritz Arno Wagner and Günther Krampf
THE first over the top horror film and still rated a classic among aficionados of the genre. Based loosely on the Dracula legend, Max Schreck's performance as the vampire is the stuff of legend. So much so that Tim Burton made a film, “Shadow of the Vampire” (also gloriously b&w), about the making of “Nosferatu.”
“Psycho” (1960) Director: Alfred Hitchcock Cinematography: John L. Russell
Hitchcock, the master of the macabre, fashioned “Psycho” based loosely on the psychopathic killer with a mother fixation, Ed Gein. Hitchcock adapted it from the 1959 novel by Robert Bloch. The film caused quite a stir at the time. It was somewhat too visceral and, well, psychotic, for the times. One might argue that the film ushered in the new wave of very frank horror films that came along in the 1960s. The cinematography is stark and at times it makes the viewer uncomfortable. I'm fairly sure that was what the film makers intended. It's a true classic and has influenced horror films (some good, many bad) for more than 50 years.
Anyway, these are merely some suggestions. With the advent of HD, home theater audio systems and large screen TVs -and the fact that most things on DVD these days are clean, restored prints- the home viewing experience is better than ever,
Friday, March 2, 2012
The 84th Oscar ceremonies were, as is usual for awards shows these days, a double edged sword.
On the plus side, the majority of the films, performances and technical teams nominated this year were top notch. The one film that seemed out of place was the latest in “The Transformers” series. Sure it had the wow factor and made a ton of money but it's a film based on kids' toys, for crying out loud. Cars that turn into robots. Or vice versa. I can't tell. Nor do I care. I guess it's not as ridiculous as a film like “Super Mario Brothers” which was based on a video game. Give us movie lovers a break, please. “Transformers” didn't win anything and the nominations it got were just a nod to the money it made...and its ability to pull in the lucrative 5~14 year-old male demographic.
The latest exercise in tedium (by that I'm referring to the newest Harry Potter installment) didn't take home any of the three awards it was nominated for, either.
The minus side of the presentation was comprised of the usual misfires. The show was poorly paced and Billy Crystal's ninth (and hopefully final) stint as host was nearly unbearable.
Hank Stuever of “The Washington Post”said, “Crystal seemed to be to be overseeing a cruise ship dinner show designed to appeal to the over-50 travel club. Early on, it hit the rocks and started to list. Almost everyone drowned."
That was a kind way to put it.
The montage scenes need to be permanently banned and there were even more than usual this year. I was singing the montage song from “Southpark” several times. At least that kept me from nodding off.
As always there was the mostly unbearable (unless you're doing some illegal substance or laughing gas) pre-show. Because of the time difference and the fact the show had to be in prime time on the East coast and here in the Midwest, it was rather bizarre to see these denizens of L.A. showing up in extravagant evening wear and jewelry, IN GLARING DAYLIGHT. It was still the afternoon in California.
A newly coined word that makes my skin crawl came about in a segment with the mothers of some of the actors being nominated. These parents were referred to as “mominees.' In my hand-scrawled notes I have written, “Kill me now!”
Hey, if actors can be melodramatic we “little people” have that right, too.
After my eyes stopped glazing over, I had my first good thought since this thing started, I would love to watch the Oscars with writer/director/raconteur John Waters. He revels in this kind of thing and does so with the most wicked of good humor.
There were technical problems (to be continued in the ceremonies, too) but live TV is hard to do, I suppose. I found it sort of ironic in a way, but laughed all the same.
The top moment for me in the pre-show was seeing Rooney Mara (from the American version of “The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo”) looking like, as someone mentioned, “a cross between Audrey Hepburn and punk.” More power to her.
J Lo nearly had a Janet Jackson moment and someone (again, my notes are incomplete) was wearing something so sheer you could see her undergarments. If you're going to go that sheer, go “commando” as well.
I am totally sick of the phrase (reserved for these kind of affairs), “Who are you wearing?” Would “Who designed your dress?,” be too hard to say? Or, more appropriately “WHAT are you wearing and what were you thinking?”
To be fair, many of the actresses (mostly the “older” ones, you know, 30 or above) looked very lovely no matter who they were wearing. Meryl Streep, Glenn Close,
Nick Nolte looked about the same as he did in his mug shot a few years ago. But that's a good look for him (and Gary Busey.)
I somehow missed the Sacha Baron Cohen bit where he spilled “ashes” on Ryan Seacrest. Seacrest claims he had no idea it was going to happen. And he just happened to have a spare tux jacket with him and I have some prime land in Florida I'll sell you CHEAP.
Since my admittedly overwrought death wish didn't materialize (thank you, powers-that-be) I was catapulted into the the belly of the Oscar beast and while I was happy with nearly all of the nominees, I was equally horrified by the execution (that's an appropriate word in more ways than one) of the schlock.
There was an ongoing problem with the audio from the live mics onstage, You'd think a show that was awarding not only artistic but technical achievements would hire competent audio engineers. But as I learned many years ago in the video production business many people simply say, “It's only audio.”)
There are hundreds of places you can go online to find the list of winners so I'll sidestep that here and just hit some personal highlights and low points.
A deep valley was Crystal's now obligatory “spoof” introducing the films nominated for Best Picture. And that was merely the first of many interminable montage scenes.
Later on was the stupefying Cirque Du Soleil acrobats who actually did a routine using wheel chairs. (I think I ask to be killed again at this point...)
Tom Cruise in his “crazy on Oprah's show mode” was the weirdest of the presenters. He was strange, seemed like he was “on something,” self satisfied, unctuous and downright phony. My hope is that if I ever make even one tenth of what Cruise has been paid (less what he gives to the Scientologists) I'll still have the good manners to simply become a hermit. He's truly frightening.
The high point of the side excursions was a spoof on focus groups with Christopher Guest, Catherine O'Hara, Fred Willard, Eugene Levy and Bob Baliban. I'm surprised the Academy signed off on this. Another surprise was the rather risqué routine done by the ensemble female cast of “Bridesmaids.”
Two films I was happy to see get their just deserts were “The Artist” and “Hugo,” both with five Oscars.
“The Artist” is only the second silent movie to win the Best Picture award. The other was “Wings” in 1929. The fact that it is not only (almost entirely) without dialog, it's also a black and white production. That made it even less likely win. Director Michel Hazanavicius won the award for Best Direction and “The Artist” took home honors for Best Actor (Jean Dujardin), Costume Design and Original Score.
“Hugo,” directed by living legend of film Martin Scorsese, won awards for Cinematography, Art Direction, Sound Mixing, Sound Editing and Visual Effects.
Meryl Streep won her third Oscar -she's been nominated 17 times- and as I wrote in my review of “The Iron Lady, she outdid ever herself in that role. There was no possible way she could be denied.
One of the biggest surprises came when Oscar shunning Woody Allen (who never attends these ceremonies) won for Best Original Screenplay for his “Midnight in Paris,” a throwback to the days of his films along the lines of “Crimes and Misdemeanors,” “The Purple Rose of Cairo” and “Radio Days.” Like Scorsese, Allen is one of the best directors working today. Or ever.
There were many other good and bad moments. The tribute to those in the business who passed away last year was moving and even the segment with actors talking about their favorite films was pretty good from a film buff's point of view. Even if it was a bit cloying.
I've been marginally involved in the music “business” since I was 14 and I've watched TV for as long as I can remember. But you'd never catch me viewing The Grammy or The Emmy Awards ceremonies. There's something about the Oscars, though, even with all of its expected faults, laborious self congratulations and overblown production, that still draws me in. It's the power of the movies.
And, you know, I wonder why they don't televise the Nobel Prize ceremonies?
That would grab me, I know. Instead we still have The Daytime Emmys.
YIKES!
On the plus side, the majority of the films, performances and technical teams nominated this year were top notch. The one film that seemed out of place was the latest in “The Transformers” series. Sure it had the wow factor and made a ton of money but it's a film based on kids' toys, for crying out loud. Cars that turn into robots. Or vice versa. I can't tell. Nor do I care. I guess it's not as ridiculous as a film like “Super Mario Brothers” which was based on a video game. Give us movie lovers a break, please. “Transformers” didn't win anything and the nominations it got were just a nod to the money it made...and its ability to pull in the lucrative 5~14 year-old male demographic.
The latest exercise in tedium (by that I'm referring to the newest Harry Potter installment) didn't take home any of the three awards it was nominated for, either.
The minus side of the presentation was comprised of the usual misfires. The show was poorly paced and Billy Crystal's ninth (and hopefully final) stint as host was nearly unbearable.
Hank Stuever of “The Washington Post”said, “Crystal seemed to be to be overseeing a cruise ship dinner show designed to appeal to the over-50 travel club. Early on, it hit the rocks and started to list. Almost everyone drowned."
That was a kind way to put it.
The montage scenes need to be permanently banned and there were even more than usual this year. I was singing the montage song from “Southpark” several times. At least that kept me from nodding off.
As always there was the mostly unbearable (unless you're doing some illegal substance or laughing gas) pre-show. Because of the time difference and the fact the show had to be in prime time on the East coast and here in the Midwest, it was rather bizarre to see these denizens of L.A. showing up in extravagant evening wear and jewelry, IN GLARING DAYLIGHT. It was still the afternoon in California.
A newly coined word that makes my skin crawl came about in a segment with the mothers of some of the actors being nominated. These parents were referred to as “mominees.' In my hand-scrawled notes I have written, “Kill me now!”
Hey, if actors can be melodramatic we “little people” have that right, too.
After my eyes stopped glazing over, I had my first good thought since this thing started, I would love to watch the Oscars with writer/director/raconteur John Waters. He revels in this kind of thing and does so with the most wicked of good humor.
There were technical problems (to be continued in the ceremonies, too) but live TV is hard to do, I suppose. I found it sort of ironic in a way, but laughed all the same.
The top moment for me in the pre-show was seeing Rooney Mara (from the American version of “The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo”) looking like, as someone mentioned, “a cross between Audrey Hepburn and punk.” More power to her.
J Lo nearly had a Janet Jackson moment and someone (again, my notes are incomplete) was wearing something so sheer you could see her undergarments. If you're going to go that sheer, go “commando” as well.
I am totally sick of the phrase (reserved for these kind of affairs), “Who are you wearing?” Would “Who designed your dress?,” be too hard to say? Or, more appropriately “WHAT are you wearing and what were you thinking?”
To be fair, many of the actresses (mostly the “older” ones, you know, 30 or above) looked very lovely no matter who they were wearing. Meryl Streep, Glenn Close,
Nick Nolte looked about the same as he did in his mug shot a few years ago. But that's a good look for him (and Gary Busey.)
I somehow missed the Sacha Baron Cohen bit where he spilled “ashes” on Ryan Seacrest. Seacrest claims he had no idea it was going to happen. And he just happened to have a spare tux jacket with him and I have some prime land in Florida I'll sell you CHEAP.
Since my admittedly overwrought death wish didn't materialize (thank you, powers-that-be) I was catapulted into the the belly of the Oscar beast and while I was happy with nearly all of the nominees, I was equally horrified by the execution (that's an appropriate word in more ways than one) of the schlock.
There was an ongoing problem with the audio from the live mics onstage, You'd think a show that was awarding not only artistic but technical achievements would hire competent audio engineers. But as I learned many years ago in the video production business many people simply say, “It's only audio.”)
There are hundreds of places you can go online to find the list of winners so I'll sidestep that here and just hit some personal highlights and low points.
A deep valley was Crystal's now obligatory “spoof” introducing the films nominated for Best Picture. And that was merely the first of many interminable montage scenes.
Later on was the stupefying Cirque Du Soleil acrobats who actually did a routine using wheel chairs. (I think I ask to be killed again at this point...)
Tom Cruise in his “crazy on Oprah's show mode” was the weirdest of the presenters. He was strange, seemed like he was “on something,” self satisfied, unctuous and downright phony. My hope is that if I ever make even one tenth of what Cruise has been paid (less what he gives to the Scientologists) I'll still have the good manners to simply become a hermit. He's truly frightening.
The high point of the side excursions was a spoof on focus groups with Christopher Guest, Catherine O'Hara, Fred Willard, Eugene Levy and Bob Baliban. I'm surprised the Academy signed off on this. Another surprise was the rather risqué routine done by the ensemble female cast of “Bridesmaids.”
Two films I was happy to see get their just deserts were “The Artist” and “Hugo,” both with five Oscars.
“The Artist” is only the second silent movie to win the Best Picture award. The other was “Wings” in 1929. The fact that it is not only (almost entirely) without dialog, it's also a black and white production. That made it even less likely win. Director Michel Hazanavicius won the award for Best Direction and “The Artist” took home honors for Best Actor (Jean Dujardin), Costume Design and Original Score.
“Hugo,” directed by living legend of film Martin Scorsese, won awards for Cinematography, Art Direction, Sound Mixing, Sound Editing and Visual Effects.
Meryl Streep won her third Oscar -she's been nominated 17 times- and as I wrote in my review of “The Iron Lady, she outdid ever herself in that role. There was no possible way she could be denied.
One of the biggest surprises came when Oscar shunning Woody Allen (who never attends these ceremonies) won for Best Original Screenplay for his “Midnight in Paris,” a throwback to the days of his films along the lines of “Crimes and Misdemeanors,” “The Purple Rose of Cairo” and “Radio Days.” Like Scorsese, Allen is one of the best directors working today. Or ever.
There were many other good and bad moments. The tribute to those in the business who passed away last year was moving and even the segment with actors talking about their favorite films was pretty good from a film buff's point of view. Even if it was a bit cloying.
I've been marginally involved in the music “business” since I was 14 and I've watched TV for as long as I can remember. But you'd never catch me viewing The Grammy or The Emmy Awards ceremonies. There's something about the Oscars, though, even with all of its expected faults, laborious self congratulations and overblown production, that still draws me in. It's the power of the movies.
And, you know, I wonder why they don't televise the Nobel Prize ceremonies?
That would grab me, I know. Instead we still have The Daytime Emmys.
YIKES!
Sunday, November 20, 2011
Lawrence of Arabia
Directed by: David Lean
Starring: Peter O' Toole, Alec Guinness, Anthony Quinn, Jack Hawkins, Omar Sharif, Jose Ferrer, Claude Rains, Arthur Kennedy, Donald Wolfit
Rated: PG
Very rarely does a film come along that truly deserves the praise of being an “epic.”
Lawrence of Arabia, directed by David Lean and released in 1962, is such a movie. Epic in story, beautifully filmed and at 3 hours 42 minutes, there's not a wasted frame. I've only seen it on DVD where it looks fantastic. Seeing it on a big screen, like the big one at The Palace or at the Gillioz, would be nothing less than awe inspiring.
This is the apex of director David Lean's career, and he was no stranger to epics.
He directed 19 films, including The Bridge on the River Kwai, Dr. Zhivago and A Passage to India. Yes, his “epic pedigree” speaks for itself.
Lawrence of Arabia is listed at number five of “The Greatest Films of All Time” by The American Film Institute and at number one on AFI's specialized list of “Greatest Epics.”
Deservedly so.
Lean took on what seemed to be an impossible task. The ergonomics and logistics of shooting in the desert and the breadth of the story made Lean seem like a man gone mad.
Where could he raise the money for such a wild dream? He was committed enough to throw in his own funds and while not listed in the original credits, he has since been acknowledged as the other producer along with Sam Spiegel. Spiegel is a legend in his own right, having produced The Bridge on the River Kwai, The African Queen, On the Waterfront and Suddenly, Last Summer.
As Omar Shariff put it in an interview many years after the fact, ''If you are the man with the money and somebody comes to you and says he wants to make a film that's four hours long, with no stars, and no women, and no love story, and not much action either, and he wants to spend a huge amount of money to go film it in the desert--what would you say?''
Most producers would say “NO!.”
We can only appreciate the fact that Lean and Spiegel were men with vision.
O'Toole plays T.E. Lawrence, the main character and author of the memoir on which the film is based.
Lawrence is a soldier in the British army and is dispatched to the Middle East in 1915. He soon makes allies of many of the tribal rulers of the region and eventually becomes a powerful leader in the Arab's war against the Turks. His trials and tribulations are equal to, maybe ever greater than his triumphs.
If you've seen the film, there's no way you have forgotten the magnificence of the spectacle. If you haven't seen it, I don't want to spoil anything for you.
Just suffice it to say that Lawrence of Arabia is one of the most beautiful, powerful and moving motion pictures ever committed to film. Seek out the collector's edition DVD, presented in a beautifully restored print in its full wide-screen glory. Avoid the older versions that were released in the “pan and scan format” or better still, call Mike at The Moxie and urge him to have a showing of it at The Gillioz.
The Wind and the Lion
Directed by: John Milius
Starring: Sean Connery, Candice Bergen, Brian Keith, John Huston
Rated: PG
After seeing Lawrence of Arabia I started thinking about other “epics” and realized (and I'm embarrassed) that I had never seen The Wind and the Lion.
I remedied that situation last weekend with a Netflix order.
It, too, is an incredible film in every way: Looks, plot, execution, production values, etc.
And it, too, is based on a true story. For me it was a very informative bit of history (besides being a beautiful movie) that filled me in with a piece of important American history in which I was sorely lacking knowledge. The body of the film is based on a real incident (but the “facts” have been changed somewhat) involving the kidnapping of an American citizen in the first years of the 20th Century and the political bargaining that went on between the Theodore Roosevelt administration and the Berbers of Morocco.
There is an overwhelming sense of a sea change in the world as it was known at the time. It was the beginning of a new century, technology was growing at an exponential rate and the geopolitical scene was evolving in ways heretofore unimagined.
Candice Bergen is the kidnapped American, Sean Connery is the chieftain behind the abduction and is doing the deed to embarrass the powers that be in Morocco as well as stick a thorn in the side of Roosevelt's empire-building political philosophy and jingoism. Roosevelt was an enigmatic president and besides his bent for empirical domination, he also had a hand in establishing the National Park and monument system, did a lot to break up financial monopolies and trusts and was a staunch proponent for protecting the environment. He was instrumental in enacting the Pure Food and Drug Act and was the first president to: fly a plane, take a submarine voyage, own a car, have a telephone and win a Nobel Peace Prize.
WHEW! That was back when presidents could get things done. His accomplishments are all the more confounding when you realize he was a conservative Republican. Political stripes were different 100 years ago, I guess.
The Wind and the Lion is a great movie and makes me long for a biopic about Roosevelt.
Directed by: David Lean
Starring: Peter O' Toole, Alec Guinness, Anthony Quinn, Jack Hawkins, Omar Sharif, Jose Ferrer, Claude Rains, Arthur Kennedy, Donald Wolfit
Rated: PG
Very rarely does a film come along that truly deserves the praise of being an “epic.”
Lawrence of Arabia, directed by David Lean and released in 1962, is such a movie. Epic in story, beautifully filmed and at 3 hours 42 minutes, there's not a wasted frame. I've only seen it on DVD where it looks fantastic. Seeing it on a big screen, like the big one at The Palace or at the Gillioz, would be nothing less than awe inspiring.
This is the apex of director David Lean's career, and he was no stranger to epics.
He directed 19 films, including The Bridge on the River Kwai, Dr. Zhivago and A Passage to India. Yes, his “epic pedigree” speaks for itself.
Lawrence of Arabia is listed at number five of “The Greatest Films of All Time” by The American Film Institute and at number one on AFI's specialized list of “Greatest Epics.”
Deservedly so.
Lean took on what seemed to be an impossible task. The ergonomics and logistics of shooting in the desert and the breadth of the story made Lean seem like a man gone mad.
Where could he raise the money for such a wild dream? He was committed enough to throw in his own funds and while not listed in the original credits, he has since been acknowledged as the other producer along with Sam Spiegel. Spiegel is a legend in his own right, having produced The Bridge on the River Kwai, The African Queen, On the Waterfront and Suddenly, Last Summer.
As Omar Shariff put it in an interview many years after the fact, ''If you are the man with the money and somebody comes to you and says he wants to make a film that's four hours long, with no stars, and no women, and no love story, and not much action either, and he wants to spend a huge amount of money to go film it in the desert--what would you say?''
Most producers would say “NO!.”
We can only appreciate the fact that Lean and Spiegel were men with vision.
O'Toole plays T.E. Lawrence, the main character and author of the memoir on which the film is based.
Lawrence is a soldier in the British army and is dispatched to the Middle East in 1915. He soon makes allies of many of the tribal rulers of the region and eventually becomes a powerful leader in the Arab's war against the Turks. His trials and tribulations are equal to, maybe ever greater than his triumphs.
If you've seen the film, there's no way you have forgotten the magnificence of the spectacle. If you haven't seen it, I don't want to spoil anything for you.
Just suffice it to say that Lawrence of Arabia is one of the most beautiful, powerful and moving motion pictures ever committed to film. Seek out the collector's edition DVD, presented in a beautifully restored print in its full wide-screen glory. Avoid the older versions that were released in the “pan and scan format” or better still, call Mike at The Moxie and urge him to have a showing of it at The Gillioz.
The Wind and the Lion
Directed by: John Milius
Starring: Sean Connery, Candice Bergen, Brian Keith, John Huston
Rated: PG
After seeing Lawrence of Arabia I started thinking about other “epics” and realized (and I'm embarrassed) that I had never seen The Wind and the Lion.
I remedied that situation last weekend with a Netflix order.
It, too, is an incredible film in every way: Looks, plot, execution, production values, etc.
And it, too, is based on a true story. For me it was a very informative bit of history (besides being a beautiful movie) that filled me in with a piece of important American history in which I was sorely lacking knowledge. The body of the film is based on a real incident (but the “facts” have been changed somewhat) involving the kidnapping of an American citizen in the first years of the 20th Century and the political bargaining that went on between the Theodore Roosevelt administration and the Berbers of Morocco.
There is an overwhelming sense of a sea change in the world as it was known at the time. It was the beginning of a new century, technology was growing at an exponential rate and the geopolitical scene was evolving in ways heretofore unimagined.
Candice Bergen is the kidnapped American, Sean Connery is the chieftain behind the abduction and is doing the deed to embarrass the powers that be in Morocco as well as stick a thorn in the side of Roosevelt's empire-building political philosophy and jingoism. Roosevelt was an enigmatic president and besides his bent for empirical domination, he also had a hand in establishing the National Park and monument system, did a lot to break up financial monopolies and trusts and was a staunch proponent for protecting the environment. He was instrumental in enacting the Pure Food and Drug Act and was the first president to: fly a plane, take a submarine voyage, own a car, have a telephone and win a Nobel Peace Prize.
WHEW! That was back when presidents could get things done. His accomplishments are all the more confounding when you realize he was a conservative Republican. Political stripes were different 100 years ago, I guess.
The Wind and the Lion is a great movie and makes me long for a biopic about Roosevelt.
Saturday, November 12, 2011
"The Truth, the whole truth and nuthin' but the truth."
For the past 25 years, I have been writing movie reviews (and the occasional feature piece) for a weekly publication based in Springfield, MO. The Springfield Business Journal. During that time I had the pleasure and good fortune to work with two great editors. Any writer will tell you that, along with a word processor, a lust for research, a basic knowledge of the language and a passion for the subject, a good editor is an asset that cannot be discounted. That said I would like to offer my most sincere thanks to Ms. Clarissa French and Mr. Chris Whitley (the sweet smellin' man) for the guidance and tolerance they offered me. I love them both and cannot express how much they have helped me understand and develop my craft, such as it is.
I recently resigned from my 25 year stint. (The first review I wrote concerned the John Hughes film Pretty in Pink, released in February, 1986.) After doing the math of my situation I realized I was making about $2 an hour for my efforts. And that's BEFORE taxes. So I quit and decided that working for nothing on my own was better than working for slave wages and dealing with an executive editor who didn't understand my style and sensibilities and actually, at one point, suggested that I could keep on writing reviews but they would not pay me for them.
I have no ego or delusions about my writing skills. I'm sophomoric at best. BUT, I have a passion for what I write about (film) and I research things to the point of madness.
After tendering my resignation, I realized that I had done the right thing. Not ONE person from SBJ had the common courtesy to even acknowledge my bailout. Not one person, after 25 YEARS!, had the decency to send me an email saying “thanks for the 25 years and good luck.” Nope, it's like I never existed there. Besides Clarissa and Chris, I need to thank Dorothy Gardener, Cynthia Hammond, Diane Zipf, Geoff Pickle and Maria Hoover. Dorothy is the patron saint of “taking care of business” and was always a bright spot in any of my dim days. Diane and Cynthia always laughed at my cynical jokes and they seemed somewhat scared of me but I knew that we all liked each other. Geoff and Maria are two editors still with SBJ and they have been very pleasant in our dealings.
So thanks to y'all who deserve it and as for those of you who don't...well, you and I know who you are.
So now I'm my own boss and the site is dedicated to nothing but film reviews -not surrounded by articles about who bought the Dairy Freeze and what their itemized expenses were for fiscal year 2009.
With my new power, I have decided to assign myself an offshoot column that will deal with “Must See DVDs.” Look for the first installment tomorrow.
Thanks to all of you who sent letters of encouragement over the years. Those of us who love the art of the cinema have an unspoken connection. Film is a viable, vibrant and ever evolving art form. When done properly it is a thing of true beauty. Case in point: The Last Circus.
So keep watching. The opportunities these days are boundless: DVD rentals, Netflix, online streaming, DVDs for FREE at the Spingfield/Greene County Library and the many friends you have who will gladly loan you anything from their personal library.
Must see DVD of the week is: Lawrence of Arabia. Review will be posted post-haste.
Thursday, November 10, 2011
The Last Circus
Directed by: Álex de la Iglesia
Starring: Antonio de la Torre, Carlos Areces, Carolina Bang, Santiago Segura, Fran Perea, Sancho Gracia
Rated: R
Much has been – and a lot more no doubt will be- written about Alex de la Iglesia's Felliniesque mindfreak of a film, The Last Circus.
One thing you'll never see, though, is someone declaring it to be, “The feel good film of the season!”
It is one of the most, possibly the most, disturbing movies I've ever seen. And I don't mean that in a bad way. Unless you're talking about over-the-top gore-fests, a really disturbing film can teach the viewer much and evoke deep seated emotions.
As unsettling as the story and actions on the screen are, The Last Circus is aesthetically beautiful to behold. The black and white cinematography of Kiko de la Rica-
like the work of Aldo Tonti in Nights of Cabiria, Gordon Willis in Manhattan and Michael Chapman in Raging Bull- is utterly beautiful. It juxtaposes aesthetic beauty with the brutality witnessed in the action on the screen. Any given frame from any of the movies mentioned could be made into a B&W photo print and stand on its own as a piece of photographic art at the highest level.
The story begins in 1937 with young Javier watching his father perform- as the “happy” clown- in a traveling circus. A year earlier the Spanish Civil War had begun and there were factions on all sides of any given issue. The man who eventually rose to power -and kept it for decades- was General Francisco Franco. As his power grew during the war, he began conducting purges. (So many fascist dictators do this, it's almost a cliché...)
As young Javier watches his father perform, the bigtop is suddenly overrun with rebel militiamen. They round up every able bodied man in the tent, give them machine guns and tell them they are going to fight. The clown, still in full clown attire and makeup is handed a machete and told he is to use it. He wants to change clothes but the rebel leader barks at him, “No! A clown with a machete? You'll scare the shit out of them."
He single-handedly wipes out an entire regiment of Franco's army with a sharp blade and plenty of greasepaint.
But he is captured and imprisoned. Young Javier visits his dad through barbed wire fencing on a regular basis and dad tells his son he must follow the family tradition and become a clown.
The film then jumps to 1973 and Javier is grown up, working in a circus. He's trying to fill his dad's oversized clown shoes. The trouble is he cannot -after dealing with so much tragedy in his life- play the role of the “happy'”clown. He has to be the flip side of the coin, the “sad” clown. As played by Carlos Areces, Javier's sad clown is a work of poignant genius. Javier is not pretending to be sad for the sake of the act, he is really one very depressed human being.
His partner/boss is Sergio, who plays the “happy” clown. Sergio humiliates Javier on a regular basis in their act; more importantly he does so in real life as well.
Sergio is in a relationship with Natalia, the trapeze artist. He shows his love by controlling her every move and beating her on a regular basis. Javier is enamored with Natalia as well and wants to save her from the louse, Sergio. Natalia appreciates his concern but always returns to Sergio. This is a form of Chinese water torture to Javier who is becoming -bit by twisted bit- more insane. After repeated attacks on Sergio, Javier is caught and jailed. But no jail can hold a clown with a chip on his shoulder that is as big as his funny shoes. Javier escapes. To say “all hell breaks loose,” would be a gross understatement. The final act, featuring several unbroken minutes of payaso en payaso (clown on clown) action will undoubtedly bring to the fore a whole new crop of coulrophobics. Coulrophobia is the pathological fear of clowns. I have a couple of friends who suffer from this and I plan on buying DVDs of The Last Circus for them. And for myself, who, after seeing “The Last circus” may become a coulrophobic myself.
In the final act I saw one of the most unusual and striking images I've ever seen on film (or anywhere...)
An enraged clown, in his suit and wearing makeshift makeup -for the lack of red greasepaint, Javier makes his cheeks and tongue rosy by applying a hot clothes iron- is shooting his way along with two machine guns, wearing a bandolier and sporting a look in his eyes that makes Charles Manson seem normal.
There is a lot of violence in the film and a bit of it is over the top, as in the scene mentioned above. But the scariest, most disturbing and visceral violence is up close and personal. The kind of pummelings you might expect to see in a bar fight or a street brawl. Body punches that knock a man (or woman) to the ground. Kicks to the ribs. Blunt objects to the teeth. Acid on the face. And ad hoc cosmetic surgery with a clothes iron.
To say I enjoyed The Last Circus would not be a true statement. It's not a film to be “enjoyed.” But I was captivated by the brilliance of the film making and the story has stuck with me for several days. I'll be buying this when it comes out on DVD. Despite the disturbance factor, it's an incredibly well executed piece of film making and deserves multiple viewings. Just don't put it on during a holiday get together with family and friends. Unless you're trying to clear the room.
It's not for everyone, to be sure, but for those who don't mind the painful and bizarre...you're going to want to see The Last Circus.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)