God damn hippies. Ok, so I had to get that out. That, my friends, was my first words to say after the final credits were finished with this movie. Surprisingly my first viewing ever of this film, a film in which the soundtrack precedes the film, I found myself confused by the long lackluster cult-ish standing this film carries. Introducing a bold cast, "The Big Chill" fails, epically fails, due to the storytelling. How can there be such a lush cast, and the only one I cared about was the unseen, dead Alex? Perhaps it is the time that this film takes place. Follow this logic, it is an 80s film nostalgic about the 60s. Can a generation today understand this? I couldn't - I could understand the bones of the story, the idea that college friends could reunite and reminisce about different times, exchanging words about how life has treated them, but did it have to be so doom and gloom? Yes, it surrounds a funeral, but does everyone have to spend two hours griping about life? "Did anyone tell you that this would be fun?" Doom and Gloom everyone, doom and gloom.
This is a talking film. In a talking film, your characters have to be believable enough to carry the viewer throughout the full two hours. Alas, "The Big Chill" didn't have anyone that felt any emotion, that felt more than just readable lines, nobody that pulled me into a world that never existed, well, except for one. The only character that I thought was never discovered, never true to the screen, and darker than anyone imagines was Kevin Kline's Harold Cooper. While he seems to be the pushover, the everyman who has it all together, suddenly transforms into this dark being that felt like he had this hidden agenda. Sex with other women, always saying that he hated his friends, and his constant runs to escape from the world he has created - it intrigued me. Nobody else did that - everyone else just felt like carbon copies of someone else. Originality was just thrown out the door, Berenger, Place, Goldblum, Hurt, and even Close just felt normal, nothing surprising or exciting to talk about when the scene ends. Kline was it, oh, and Alex - who still, not to sound repetitive, was the strongest character in this feature. To have a talking film with nobody that can carry the film, ultimately hurts the overall themes and emotions that are supposed to be seeping through the print.
In the end, "The Big Chill" is a dated, over-populated film that misses the mark. As I listen to the documentary on the disc, studios didn't want to make this film, and I think they saw what I happened to see when I watched it. This inability to connect the decades. Today's generation could care less about this movie, technology, friendships, whatever - we are moving too far behind. Then, the characters were just bland. Nobody was a breakout character, or someone that I felt would be a connection to my life. The hype behind this film feel unjustified. The last entry in my "Essential Films of the 80s", this was my first yellow highlight with black mark, not to be watched again. I could suggest giving this to friends to show the darkness of "normal" life, but Jen said that would be too weird. Nonetheless, I just couldn't wrap my arms around this "classic", both characters and story just fell flat. Urg.
The biggest box office sensation in France in the 80s finally made it to my DVD player, which wasn't easy due to it being OOP, and my world just got a bit blue-er? This is the film Blu-Ray was made for, yet an authentic R1 DVD is more expensive than the cost of a high-def. disc. The peculiar nature of things in the motion picture industry always seems to bring out random others instead of films that need to see the light of HD. Nonetheless, this was my first time with this film, and I must warn you - if you are hoping to experience "The Big Blue" in all its glory, I recommend the director's cut, and at least three hours of time. Yep, it is that long. Yep, it feels that long, but unlike other films that have time against them, this - director Luc Besson's pacing - works wonders for character development, friendship, and the honesty of passion. Looking back, are there scenes that could be cut? Are there moments that just didn't seem to fit within the scope of the film? To both of these (an many more), my answer remains a "no". "The Big Blue" took about three days to fully watch, and while I kept thinking I wouldn't enjoy this film, I suddenly find myself thinking of when the next time I could watch this ... it is impressive what a director could do with a long time and a powerful subject.
"The Big Blue", as stated earlier, works because of Besson's control of his subject matter. The constant discovery of the darkness of ocean and self-discovery within is focused and accomplished each time the camera transforms its focus. BUT, what really enhances this cinematic experience is our leads. "The Big Blue" would not, nay - could not, have worked without Jean Reno and Jean-Mark Barr's chemistry as competing divers. While Rosanna Arquette does add a level of drama to the screen, nothing can match that of the rival friendship of Enzo and Jacques. From that opening scene as budding divers, until that tragic ending - we watch the screen because of them - because of their intensity, excitement, and ability to do merely one thing, but keep us glued to the screen each and every time. As polar opposites, these two flounder individually, but when they arrive at dives, parties, or homes together - sparks and chemistry fly off the film. Brilliant casting by Besson to bring these two together.
I loved "The Big Blue" for what it represented and what it showed. It is a film made in 1988 that still seems relevant in 2010 (and honestly, without the NYC scenes, could be considered timeless). While the time of three hours will make some viewers cringe, it is worth every minute that you watch. Besson takes time and makes three hours worth watching with charismatic characters and a dark, deep unknown that keeps you wanting more. Found in my "Essential 80s Film Posters" book, I am drawing to a close with this one. I have one more to watch, another classic that I seem to have missed, but I have been impressed. "The Big Blue" will be getting a green mark with blue stars. I will watch it again when it arrives, I will suggest it to friends, but honestly - Hollywood - release this on Blu, it would make HD finally look beautiful again.
Watching this movie last night I realized that I was witnessing a very "cool" movie. Like a modern day "Inception" or anything using Hollywood's elite, this played like a grand day at the cinema on a rainy afternoon ... BUT (because there always has to be a BUT), is it truly one of Hitchcock's best films out of his catalogue? As I continued to watch, I found myself questioning Grant's appeal, the elongated Mt. Rushmore scene, and the true "hows" of Hitch getting us from scene A to scene B. This is not to say that I wouldn't watch this movie again, but as it is currently ranked at #34 at IMDb's Top 250 Greatest Movies, I couldn't help but wonder if it has held up over these past 51 years. My answer, a hesitative "yes". While Grant proves that he can swap lines with the blondest of ladies, my concern arrives when his continual candor deviates from the overall darkness of the plot. Reading somewhere that Jimmy Stewart was interested in playing the role, I wonder if his portrayal of a man with mistaken identity wouldn't have brought a sense of darkness to "North by Northwest". This is a dark story, it is about a man mistaken for a spy and tortured for it, nare to be stopped by either the police or by the CIA themselves. He is on the run, from NYC to Chicago to Dakota, in most of the iconic scenes ever put on film, but Hitch uses comedy to fill those eerie moments where tension should have been. Again, Grant was a strong choice, I am a fan of his work, but was he the BEST choice for this film?
Length also seems to be against Hitch on this film. Running at a bit over two hours, there are parts that just don't work in this decade, specifically the Mt. Rushmore scenes near the end. They just felt overdrawn and misused to push even more fabricated tension onto the viewers. My favorite scene still had to be that crop duster moment, not just for that one instance itself, but because of what Hitch surrounded it with. I loved the meeting of the guy, the passing of cars, and that looming line, "That's odd, that plane isn't dusting any crops" - you know something big is about to happen. "North by Northwest" is a cult film. It is a classic film. It is a film that I would watch again and perhaps again, but it is not Hitch's best film. There was no sense of reality in this movie. Grant walks around with an endless supply of money and time, while the threat of nothing continues to persue him. Unlike "The Lady Vanishes" or even "Frenzy", Hitch suspends belief for commericialism, and this film suffers for it. Sure, it's dated - but what lies behind Grant and Hitch's wordplay is a film surrounded by intregue and mayhem. I just wish we could have watched that for a bit more.
Overall, I am happy. It was my first time watching this film, and I am seemingly happy. It could have been darker, or Hitch could have made a comedy. Found in my "99 Classic Movies for People in a Hurry" - I am taking a quick break from the "B" section due to the length of "The Big Blue", but don't worry - I am nearly done! Thinking about this film, I liked it enough to give it a green mark with blue stars - to watch again and again when the time allows, but heed these words: I don't love "North by Northwest", but that crop duster scene left me in complete awe - and for that - green mark, blue stars.
What took me nearly a month to finish; honestly - shouldn't have. Claude Lelouch's "Bandits" will trick you into believing that it is nothing more then another slow French film about the plight between a father and daughter; the first thirty minutes will only affirm this. My suggestion - keep trying it. Break through that initial barrier and one could discover a revenge [slash] uncompromising love story buried near the end. A modern day 'Robin Hood' story, Lelouch has crafted a tale that is emotion-felt, dangerous, and unforgiving in its quest for revenge. Using his real-life daughter as the main catalyst for our aging thief's desire to go back into the populous, Lelouch creates a dynamic that initially becomes bold and passionate, but later drivels into mere cliche. I don't mean to come out of the gates bashing this film, "Bandits" quite surprised me and unlike most dramatic French films, actually kept my attention to the end, but boy, was it a confusing ride. Lelouch sets up the story with a heist gone wrong, and our main character (played with deft invigoration by Jean Yanne) takes the fall for ten years, decaying due to the death of his wife, but living vicariously via daily letters from his daughter. These scenes are amazing, creating this excitement for their return, but what actually happens is anything but...
When father and daughter finally reunite, the fireworks, shall we say, just don't go off. It is a bland reunion, with dad going back to theft and murder as his unique way of life. He revenges his wife's death, and spends the rest of his on-screen life on the lamb. That emotion felt during Lelouch's letter writing scenes were intense, but once they came back together it felt as if Yanne's true self came out. Nothing the loving father, but merely a thief and murderer. Though there is an attempt to add a dueling love interest throughout, it just falls short because we lose that fierce connection between father and daughter. That is the key to this film, keep them emotionally connected, and you have a film that stands out - becomes a bolder representation of the classic robber story, but instead - it just falls flat. Characters create scenarios that just don't work, and Yanne's desire for revenge becomes second story to random other events. "Bandits" is an odd film because it begins slowly, redeems itself from the half-hour mark until the hour-fifteen mark, but then falls flat again. Lelouch's misuse of characters forces this obscure French film from great to merely good.
Found in my "Essential Film Posters of the 80s", watched only on VHS, "Bandits" is getting a pink mark. Not to be watched again, but could be suggested to someone looking for a twist on an old tale; but beware. It is the characters that will sing and swim, yet sink again. Not be watched again - but glad to be seen, this is a film that has never made it to DVD for obvious reasons. Excited to have it in the collection, but could never watch again!
Listening to director Martin Breast's commentary on this film, he continually uses the phrase, "reminiscent of Laurel and Hardy" to describe the style of comedy and action used during many of the bigger scenes of this film. Notably recognized as the man who brought us "Midnight Run" and the cult-showdown film "Gigli", watching "Beverly Hills Cop" a second time, I found myself wanting to watch more Laurel and Hardy than Murphy's Axel Foley. Combining a Detroit cop with the background of Beverly Hills, the humor should have been fast and furious, and perhaps more cultural humor (a la a fish out of water), but instead it becomes a vehicle merely to showcase the semi-humorous ability of Eddie Murphy. Combining the genres of action and comedy, Breast and crew admirably attempt to make a notable film, which in many circles, it is considered a classic, but again - watching it a second time - it feels uber dated and less comedy with even fewer action. There was no character known as Axel Foley, just an actor known as Eddie Murphy - there is no definition between the two. Even if I eagerly await the viewing of the subsequent two films, this beginning one just feels flat.
Having watched this film recently, I decided to go with Breast's commentary on this film. It was interesting to learn more trivia about the film and his passion towards Bronson Pinchot, but I don't think I could watch this film entirely again. The bad guys are semi-evil, the Beverly Hills locations feel more like Detroit locations, and the final shoot-out is detailed, but overly dull. "Beverly Hills Cop" was a blockbuster for its time, but it lacks that lasting power to really remain a vital element to cinematic wonders. There is a part of me that will always give Eddie Murphy an attempt, I don't know why - perhaps it will always be "Delirious" - but this just feel way too short. Nothing like loading the entire plot into the final moments of the film, way to go Breast. The only value-add to this film HAS to be the banana in the tailpipe gag, for me, and perhaps it is merely the cult status of that scene, but it makes me laugh over and over again. Banana in the tailpipe ... hilarious! I am glad that it never became a potato.
Found in my "Posters of the 80s" book, I am going to have to take "Beverly Hills Cop" down. It wasn't a film I could watch again, nor did I find value in any of the extra features in the disc. Teetering between that yellow mark and pink one -- I finally decided on the pink one ... ONLY because of the banana in the tailpipe. You can't find humor like that anymore. Could I recommend? Probably not - but I do look forward to Tony Scott's sequel. Let's see how this grows, but for now - I am going to leave this behind.
This film took me a bit of time to watch, not because the topic didn't pull me in, but because the director (aka the child whose parents are the main subject) just couldn't seem to find her voice. This is one of those rare documentaries where our director is directly embedded into the course of the film that it becomes difficult to become a conscientious objector to the events occurring. There are several instances where our "Mother & Father" are speaking to Sandhya Suri as if she already knows, forcing us to accept whatever background we can find as truth. That is where "I For India" struggles the most. Attempting to break that barrier where Suri pushes past the idea that these two are her parents and truly uses the experience to show the struggle between those leaving India (subsequently the surrounding influx of Britain's voice) and the passion that families in India want to see their children return. Having just finished reading "Midnight's Children", I had one fictional view of what India was like during this time - but Suri never captures it.
Structure is what faults this film. From the beginning, we are shown images of television programs discussion the racial influx happening in Britain, and how that is effecting the medical profession. We then transform into a film about a couple's struggle about leaving India for a better career opportunity and the consequences that follow. What should have been emotional video tapes and messages sent, instead just turn into a gripe-fest. There is so much nagging and personal conflicts that the larger scope of what Suri attempted to create on this film just gets lost. By the end of the story, I cared nothing for the family, was lost to whom was speaking, and never quite felt that emotional heart-string being pulled. The opportunity was there, the final cut just lacked that glue to hold it together. Instead of a social commentary on India and Britain in the 1970s and up, all we were left with was just a photo album. A visually intreguing photo album, but still a photo album none the less. By the first twenty minutes, I was bored.
The last entry in my "Halliwell's Movies that Matter", "I for India" just fell flat. It wasn't a horrible film, but a pink mark is all I can muster. I need to ask others what their feelings are when they watch this film, but for myself, something was just missing. I liked the concept, just felt mislead on the final production. Interested in seeing how it does in the collection, but may not keep it as years progress. Good, not close to great.
"Back To The Future" represented an era of filmology that demonstrated the ability to tell a great story, and at the same time, have FUN. Lacking in today's modern cinema, the story of a young Marty McFly uses comedy, emotion, and honest sci-fi (not too convoluted or irrational) to bring together an eclectic group of characters that may never be repeated again. Crispin Glover as Marty's old/young dad, the influence of one Biff on the family, and Lea Thompson as the not-so-puritan mother. Not to mention the influential Christopher Lloyd and the "everyman" Michael J. Fox, who, possibly the only fault of this film, cannot seem the capture the essence of bad-kid at all. Instantly the audience falls in love with these guys, and for the past 25-years (GULP), it has continued to be an icon moment of cinema coupled with Spielberg, Zemeckis, and that Delorian,
Watching this film with a group, the question of whether this film continues to last or not, becomes apparent. This is the perfect example of a cult film. A film that lines can be repeated, characters will remain dressed for Halloween, and these young actors become big stars on their own. This is a film to introduce your children to ten, fifteen, even twenty years from now. Many will ask, "Who was Huey Lewis?", of which you don't need to answer. From "Back in Time" to "Power of Love", to the Flux Capacitor, to even Biff knocking on McFly's head - "Back to the Future" remains a staple in our cinema cannon, and a personal favorite amongst this reviewer. Being an avid Criterion fan, I could imagine this first film getting the royal treatment, its vision of a dark 85 is impressionable and stark, the science of interaction in the past is honest, and the classic mom-on-son action will continue to make you laugh. There is nothing wrong with "Back to the Future", it is a flawless film (don't know if I could say the same with Eric Stoltz). Found in a NEW book - going to flip-flop for a moment - "Film Posters of the 80s" this film couldn't have come during a better time. It was 99 degrees outside and the group needed, nay, desired a Summer Blockbuster - and this perfectly fit the bill. With no questions or hesitation, this is getting a green mark with blue star. Oh yea it will be watched again ... it will be watched again.
On a lazy Sunday nothing seems to fit better than a French romantic comedy that feels fresh, uses bold ideas, but teeters at the end. Not the most original film to be released, "I Do" boasts a pleasant lead, a vibrant Charlotte Gainsbourg, and a snappy twist on the idea of love an marriage. Where "I Do" seems to flounder is the excess of background information found needed to complete this story. "I Do" begins with "Amelie"-esque beginning demonstrating how this man has gone through life without marrying and the taxing feeling it has on his six sisters and mother. It shows his family and his career, and surprisingly, how he found his way into this choice job. There are unique characters, strong sub-plots, but "I Do" finds itself needing to wrap up quickly, so the ending feels mixed. While I did enjoy the film overall, the ending just felt choppy and all-together rushed. A mix of messages from, adoption is hard alone to opposites attract take away from the immediate desire to see love between these two characters, thus ending with merely a sparkler, not a full-fledged firework (4th of July humor for just today). That is what pulls away from this film, that is what makes this romantic comedy, merely viewable - not re-watchable.
I did like the connection between Gainsbourg and Chabat, it kept me guessing if these two really would otherwise fall in love. The underlining theme of opposites attract is found throughout, from the boss to Chabat's best friend. The power-struggle in a home full of women is also demonstrated well, the joke of forming the G7 never felt old or overused. "I Do" was original, it knew when to stop a joke or just how long to push the envelope. There were some sexy moments non-discovered in American films that gave watching a foreign film a joy. Yet, overall, I don't think I could watch it again. It never took risks, it wrapped up too quickly, and some of the edits seemed really bad (aka the time to the wedding seemed too short and unbelievable) - so, "I Do" is getting a pink mark for average nature. Found in my "Halliwell's Movies that Matter", this wasn't disappointing in any way, but it didn't require a second viewing. Would others like this? Maybe. Could I suggest it? Yep. BUT, it is not making it into the collection. There needed to be something that stood out, and the scenes between ABBA and The Cure could have done it, but that momentum ended early and never returned. "I Do" is your average French film, nothing more -- nothing less.
"I Am Legend" is one of those films that perhaps promoted horror, rightfully fulfilled sci-fi, but added this really intense layer of human drama instead of hardcore violence. What could have been a story about the end of the world easily became this plight of one man, his emotional struggle of being the "last man on Earth", and his fear of God. Alright, so that last part doesn't fit - and it didn't fit in the third act of this film, but the rest was like gravy on Sunday, it just was comforting, fattening, and well-deserved. Smith does a fantastic job playing the "Omega Man", desolate in New York, he hunts for both food, items, and a cure for this Emma Thompson born virus that has eliminated humanity. What makes "I Am Legend" stand out are core scenes, scenes that normally wouldn't see the light of day in a blockbuster action film, but instead director Francis Lawrence takes Will Smith's ability and creates a true solitary man. His relationship with films, mannequins, and his dog will draw tears into your eyes early into this film, but that just shows the power that Mr. Smith has. He needs no co-actors, just place a camera on him following the words of "Shrek" and you have a scene that both shows his sadness, his time alone, and lack of real-world ability. It is intense.
I would strongly encourage the alternative ending to this film instead of the theatrical one, it changes the tone of the film, and really accompanies the emotional beginning, as well as the issues Smith faces throughout. The flashbacks make more sense, and the lack of explosions intensify the truth of this virus. There is something about the alternative ending that just makes "I Am Legend" transform from a normal film into a film I could view again and again. Sure, the special effects are fun and the monsters are spooky, but "I Am Legend" is about the man - not the machines, and Lawrence embraces that. My only complaint, the third act. While I loved everything going into the film, when Smith reacts to a loss, it unwinds for about thirty minutes until fitting right back into its original mold. It felt like studio interruption, but perhaps I am wrong, but it didn't fit. Found in my "Halliwell's Movies that Matter" book, this is one of the few "modern" films that I have watched lately, and while it was eye candy with CGI, it was Smith that took a normal story and transformed it into something memorable. This is getting a green mark with blue stars, I will watch this film again and suggest it to friends. Sans the third act, it was nearly flawless.
God damn hippies. Ok, so I had to get that out. That, my friends, was my first words to say after the final credits were finished with this movie. Surprisingly my first viewing ever of this film, a film in which the soundtrack precedes the film, I found myself confused by the long lackluster cult-ish standing this film carries. Introducing a bold cast, "The Big Chill" fails, epically fails, due to the storytelling. How can there be such a lush cast, and the only one I cared about was the unseen, dead Alex? Perhaps it is the time that this film takes place. Follow this logic, it is an 80s film nostalgic about the 60s. Can a generation today understand this? I couldn't - I could understand the bones of the story, the idea that college friends could reunite and reminisce about different times, exchanging words about how life has treated them, but did it have to be so doom and gloom? Yes, it surrounds a funeral, but does everyone have to spend two hours griping about life? "Did anyone tell you that this would be fun?" Doom and Gloom everyone, doom and gloom.
