|
|
 Posted December 11th, 2007 at 12:38AM
I just finished another marathon round on Netflix. The site loads very slowly so I typically only go on and add to the queue in fits. Last time, about two months ago, I ended up adding dozens of old Japanese movies, mostly samurai-focused (only to determine that I don’t really enjoy most old samurai movies. Although I’d recommend Hiroshi Inagaki’s Samurai trilogy).
Even if the site is slow, I find it to be very adept at recommending movies. I will usually start somewhere concrete (say, The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai, which we own.. on Beta) and then branch out from there. Read the blurb, scan the reviews, check the date released, director, actors… and you have a good feel for whether or not it’s worth putting on your queue. And considering the amount of movies you can “rent” in a month – practically anything is worth adding.
One movie begets two or three recommendations which you’ve forgotten or never heard of, and it continues to snowball, until you have twenty tabs open on your browser and your dial-up connection begins squealing in pain from all the bandwidth you’re asking for that it’ll never be able to deliver. At least, that’s what usually happens with me.
Tonight’s selections are varied. Some are classics I’ve never watched, some are classics I’ve forgotten. A lot are the sort of random, cult and b-movies that you’d never be able to find in your local area movie store. (If you’re lucky, you might be able to find some of them. On VHS. The original copies that the store bought. Totally unwatchable.)
And I’ll admit. Some on my queue are trash. Sometimes, if the reviews are just so bad, a movie has to be worth watching.
God bless Netflix.
Here’s my queue. Show me yours?
(Note: I used Albert Banks’ excellent Netflix plug-in to generate the list with links, and then I copy+pasted the generated html to create a tidy, static list.)
- Bob Dylan: The Other Side of the Mirror: Live at the Newport Folk Festival 1963-1965
- Killer of Sheep
- The Wire: Season 4: Disc 1
- Incident at Blood Pass
- Stand by Me
- The Wire: Season 4: Disc 2
- Shinsengumi: Assassins of Honor
- The Wire: Season 4: Disc 3
- High and Low
- Trial of the Moke
- Kagemusha
- The Wire: Season 4: Disc 4
- Le Samourai
- Fires on the Plain
- Throne of Blood
- Tears of the Black Tiger
- Chushingura
- Iron Monkey
- Flight of the Conchords: Season 1: Disc 1
- Flight of the Conchords: Season 1: Disc 2
- Kandahar
- This Is England
- Everything’s Cool
- The Madness of King George
- Best Motoring: Drift Bible
- The Cyclist
- Free Zone
- Gabbeh
- Children of Heaven
- Can Mr. Smith Get to Washington Anymore?
- Badlands
- The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai
- Osama
- Best Motoring: Rotary Reborn
- I Like Killing Flies
- Zzyzx
- The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari
- Best Motoring: Fuji Fast!
- Banzai Runner
- Once Upon a Wheel
- Skip Barber: Going Faster
- Le Mans
- Thrashin’
- Space Mutiny
- Ronin
- Hot Version International: JDM Racers
- Nine Queens
- Bullitt
- Heartbreaker: Streets of Fire
- Fast Company
- Demolition Man
- 2010: The Year We Make Contact
- Robot Jox
- Dead Ringers
- Solarbabies
- Born in Flames
- Dust to Glory
- Best Motoring: Skyline GT-R: The Prodigy
- Vertigo
- North by Northwest
- The Deer Hunter
- The Magnificent Seven
- The BRD Trilogy: The Marriage of Maria Braun
- Three Days of the Condor
- The Brood
- The BRD Trilogy: Lola
- Cannonball
- Judge Dredd
- Billy Jack
- True Grit
- The BRD Trilogy: Veronika Voss
- John and Mary
- Masters of the Universe
- Freejack
- Red Sonja
- The Aggressives
- The Bitter Tears of Petra Von Kant
- The Texas Chainsaw Massacre
- Speedo: POV
- Midnight Cowboy
- Existenz
- Genghis Blues
- Taxi Driver
- Dog Day Afternoon
- A Fistful of Dollars
- Spider
- Howard Zinn: You Can’t Be Neutral on a Moving Train
- Z
- Marathon Man
- I Shot Andy Warhol
- Soylent Green
- The Boys of Baraka
- Fox and His Friends
- Why Does Herr R. Run Amok?
- Logan’s Run
- Westworld
- Serpico
- Silent Running
- The Andromeda Strain
- Rollerball
- The Black Hole
- Tron
- The Day the Earth Stood Still
- The Hindenburg
- The Last Starfighter
- Death Race 2000
- Sleeper
- The Fugitive Kind
- Atomic Submarine
- 20 Million Miles to Earth
- Take the Money and Run
 Posted November 13th, 2007 at 11:08PM
Welp, I finally got to watch Sicko tonight. I’d have to say it was one of the better (if not best) Moore movies.
If you go by some of the forums and blogs out there, you’d think everyone either idolizes or demonizes Moore. But, as par the course, those are just the loudest reactionaries on both sides of the fence. Moore is an excellent polemicist, and that draws out the worst in people.
I don’t particularly care for Moore, but I don’t spend time micro-analyzing his movies hoping to catch some sloppy editing. Sicko was not meant to be a comprehensive review of healthcare systems, whether in the U.S. or the four other countries he travels to. Similar to his prior works and any documentary or movie, really, it presented the debate in the filmmaker’s framework. Generalizations are necessary in a 2 hour film. Hopefully no one would take away everything in Sicko as the gospel truth, just as no one should do the same with a press conference or 60 Minutes report.
The oddest part of the film was the bit where he mails a check to some nutjob writing for an “anti-Moore” blog. Its connection to healthcare was tenuous at best. Obviously it was meant to rile the nutjobs (similar to many of the special features on the DVD).
And that it did. I did a quick Google, found the site. Spent too much time (read: 5 minutes) reading a few of the posts responding to said part of the film. I thought briefly of commenting, but appealing to the irrational is a pretty futile exercise. Do you pet rabid dogs? Same concept.
 Posted April 9th, 2006 at 7:12PM
Anthony Hopkins is looking old. Or perhaps he just pulls off a deaf, doddering 68-year-old New Zealander very well. Either way, his performance in The World’s Fastest Indian makes for an entertaining, light-hearted film based on true events. Hopkins plays Burt Munro, an eccentric personality from Down Under, whose sole passion in life is his 1920 Indian motorcycle. The year now is 1967, and Munro’s health is failing. He’s owned and slaved away on the bike for the past forty years. His dream is taking it to the Bonneville Salt Flats, a mecca for speed freaks, because of the miles and miles of flat, smooth surface. Munro wants to set a new land speed record.
Munro faces the sort of hardships one could expect – health issues, finances, getting to Bonneville in one piece (with the motorcycle). The film is safe and conventional, the ending a forgone conclusion. First we see Munro in his element, New Zealand. There is the neighbor kid Tom (Aaron Murphy, narrowly walking that thin line between adorable and nauseating), the young scamp who believes in Munro. Fran (Annie Whittle) is the elderly love interest. The biker gang which eventually gives Munro some “beer money†for the trip over. Munro gets to America, where he (predictably) meets a new eclectic group – the cross-dressing Tina Washington (Chris Williams), the “real†Indian Jake (Saginaw Grant). And in the end? Well, we all know what will happen.
Despite the predictability, Fastest Indian is still an entertaining film. The acting is seamless. The characters spend a great deal of time repeating themselves to Munro, who’s a bit hard of hearing. And we’re eventually left rooting for the guy, hoping he’ll make it. Even if we didn’t want to. (After all, the guy is a serious liability on his bike.) Writer / director Roger Donaldson deserves the most credit here, since the film teeters incredibly close to being overly sentimental. He manages to keep it reined in, however, and we get an amusing, feel-good film as a result. The PG-13 rating is laughable, there’s nothing here to offend even the most puritanical viewer. See The World’s Fastest Indian for some innocent fun.
 Posted April 5th, 2006 at 2:48PM
Night Watch is the first in a trilogy, based upon the science-fiction novels of Russian author Sergei Lukyanenko. Working with a budget of around $4 million (exceptionally large for Russian cinema) director Timur Bekmambetov created a popular piece of action film for 2004, raking in one of the largest openings for a Russian film in Russia and catching the eye of Fox Searchlight, which bought the rights to it and the sequel (and is currently financing the third). Those accustomed to Hollywood budgets will be shocked at the CGI eye candy in Night Watch – its special effects can compete with the best, proving that innovation is just as important as a large budget.
But Lukyanenko’s sci-fi universe is terribly convulted for a movie, leaving the viewer puzzled and walking out of the theater wondering what he just witnessed. Combine this with static characters and a limp-wristed ending (even taking into account two more installations, the ending here hurts the film), and you’re left wanting to root for a film that doesn’t really deserve it.
In Lukyanenko’s universe, there’s a conflict between Light and Dark, your typical good versus evil, fought between the Others, seemingly ordinary humans who possess supernatural powers. (Originality in cinema is a pipedream at this point.) Their powers vary tremendously, but oftentimes involve some sort of shape-shifting ability. The Other all have a tendency towards drinking blood, and the Dark (evil) Others are referred to as vampires at various intervals.
After a gruesome battle at the beginning of the film, circa 1342 AD, an uneasy truce is settled upon – the forces of Light will watch the day, while the Dark get the night, keeping each other in check. Several hundred years later, in 1990s Moscow, we meet protagonist Anton Gorodetsky (played by Konstantin Khabensky) in a scene which sets the stage for several of the story-lines. He discovers that he’s an Other after a traumatic event (how they often find out, we learn), and then we flash foward twelve more years. The rest of the film spends equal time attempting to create the universe and setting up the overarching conflict – a final battle between Light and Dark. Little is resolved, and the movie feels more like an introduction to the second part (Day Watch, currently playing in Russian theaters) than a film in its own right. We get a taste for the conflict, and issues are raised – whether the good / evil dichotomy is even valid. But we’re left wanting more.
One of the largest problems with the film stems from this universe. It’s as if Bekmambetov spent too much time telling the overarching conflict and not enough time developing the characters or any of the subplots. Anton Gorodetsky changes little through the course of the film, despite an intriguing (but obvious early on) personal link to the overarching conflict. And a static protagonist does not bode well for the rest of the cast. Anton’s “sidekick,†Olga, introduced halfway through (first played by a stuffed owl in a humorous bit, and then later by Galina Tyunina), is brought into the picture, acts as a possible love interest, and then spends maybe fifteen minutes onscreen total. The only real character development comes between Anton and his neighbor Kostya (Aleksei Chadov), which is still never explored, but left for the next two sequels!
The movie also suffers a bit of schizophrenia at times: the special effects occasionally missing the mark, or the atmosphere jumping from dark and serious to humorous and back. The truck-flipping scene (reminiscent of Hellboy) comes to mind as an unnecessary bit of CGI that doesn’t fit in with the feel of the film. And the humor, while decent, comes seldom at odd intervals, in an otherwise sober movie. Is this supposed to be funny?
The music and atmosphere is gritty, reminding the viewer of any sort of American fare, particulary Underworld. The Russian language suits the film (one entertaining scene has a TV showing Buffy the Vampire Slayer, dubbed) and subtitles are treated novelly – instead of staid lines of text at the bottom, the lines are revealed and disappear behind moving characters or objects, or they might turn red and dissolve, like drops of blood in water.
Like any decent sci-fi dystopia, Night Watch makes the audience wish they were in the universe, taking place in the action. It sparks the imagination. But director Timur Bekmambetov would have better served the movie by spending less time on the special effects, simplifying the overall conflict, creating a greater climax and resolution at the end, and focusing his energy working on character arcs and making the subplots more involved. As is, Night Watch is an admirable effort from Russia – and an entertaining piece of film. But it fails to be especially good. For fans of the genre, be sure to catch it. For people who want something a bit different, try it. But for those wanting to see a high caliber film, you might just want to pass.
 Posted February 2nd, 2006 at 11:26PM
Munich was a worrying film. Steven Spielberg is a great director, to be sure, but his recent efforts – everything from War of the Worlds to Artificial Intelligence: AI – have been lacking. Spielberg’s true opuses were made in the seventies and eighties. Since then, the emphasis seems to have turned more and more to big budget special effects and name recognition (both his and the stars he regularly employs) rather than expert, engrossing storytelling.
But even more worrying going into it was the subject matter of Munich. The film follows a group of five Israeli Mossad agents, assigned to exact revenge for the killing of 11 Israeli athletes during the 1972 summer Olympics in Munich. Those responsible? A militant Palestinian group named Black September. It’s timely, whether because of terrorism broadly, or the fractured Israeli-Palestinian peace process specifically, and that is what makes it such dangerous subject matter.
On the one hand, Spielberg ran the risk of dehumanizing the Palestinians, neglecting to show anything but the brutality of the murderers. And he could have just as easily swung the other way, painting Israel with a thick brush. To his credit, he does neither. In an interview with TIME magazine, in response to a scene in which a Palestinian argues the justness of his cause with lead character Avner (Eric Bana), Spielberg said that without that scene, he “would have been making a Charles Bronson movie – good guys vs. bad guys and Jews killing Arabs without any context. And I was never going to make that picture.â€
And he didn’t. While a few scenes such as that one come off a bit heavy-handed, Munich does avoid that first hurdle, of being overly sensational or one-sided. With that fear allayed, how does Munich rate as a film? In a word, sublime. The cinematography works very well with the mood and pace. While the film does weigh in at a hefty two hours, 44 minutes, it doesn’t seem unduly slow. The shots are closely cropped, giving a sort of urgency during the action sequences. And there is action. Disregarding the historical subtext and all of the other human conflicts, Munich has enough explosions and gunplay for anyone interested.
One of the things really going for the film, is that Spielberg does not go with the high profile stars. The two Toms (Hank and Cruise) that Spielberg often use are nowhere to be seen, and this allows the viewer to become more engrossed in the film (provided none of the actors are immediately memorable from another earlier role – unlikely). Eric Bana plays Avner, the leader of the five person squad chosen to take down the organizers of the Munich killings. Bana works the part magnificently; the mission takes a visible toll on his character. There is a visible character arc for Avner and the others on his team. But none of the roles are especially memorable, and none need be. The actors do their jobs admirably, so you’re left believing that they’re characters, and not actors grandstanding in the hopes of award show glory.
Ultimately, Munich is a well crafted, big-budget (rumored to have topped the $70 million mark) Hollywood flick. The operative phrase here being well crafted. The film avoids most of the pitfalls that Spielberg routinely falls into: sentimentality, ham-fisted dialog, being overly dogmatic – or even simply too safe and “happy.†Spielberg took risks, and it paid off. While it might not be groundbreaking, Munich is still an exciting film that’s worth the price of admission, and by most accounts ranks among Spielberg’s better work.
 Posted October 29th, 2005 at 11:08AM
Today I finally went back to the local pharmacy (they don’t sell drugs. Go to an apothecary for them) and picked up some rolls of film that I had developed. Four rolls, half of what I’ve shot so far.
And they look great! I was disappointed with a few rolls earlier in the year, and I naturally blamed the camera / film / developer. But all four of these were sharp and vibrant. Some pretty nice shots all told. On Monday I’ll haul in the rest of the film to have developed.
The university library does have a scanner, so perhaps I might scan a few of these pictures. Time will tell.
Oh, and the developing was cheap too! Two euro and some odd cents per roll. Nice!
|