- Alphabetical
- Most Reviews
- Most Views
- Top Rated
- Least Recent
- Most Recent
In my opinion, Quentin Tarantino has never directed a truly cohesive film in which all the parts really work. Sure his movies have some unique and interesting scenes, but there are always other scenes that are flat and boring or have characters discussing the most non-relevant things for 20 minutes at a time. It’s like he just throws things in that are interesting to himself; I sometimes wonder if he really cares about the viewers watching his films or if it’s just about his own self-indulgence. His movies are full of scenes that probably should’ve been left on the cutting room floor. Well I’m happy to say that Django Unchained is his first truly complete film (and yes, that includes the overrated, all over the place Pulp Fiction). For once, he’s made a movie that follows one story and sticks to it without veering off into some other unnecessary character’s backstory just to take up time. Sure there are a couple of flashback scenes but they’re very brief and often essential to the plot. As for the plot itself, that’s typical Tarantino. Has he ever made a film that doesn’t deal with revenge in some way? Jamie Foxx stars as Django, a slave who was sold separately from his wife and obviously has not seen her since. When a bounty hunter named Dr. Schultz comes along and takes him from his current owners, Django soon realizes there’s an opportunity to find his estranged wife. The bounty hunter is trying to find and kill some men that he knows Django can identify since Shultz doesn’t know what they look like. Since Django is technically no longer a slave, he wants to do whatever he can to find his wife. So if helping this man out can in turn help him accomplish this, of course he’ll go along for the ride. Since this is a Tarantino film, you can believe there will be blood and guts. While there’s plenty of action and violence, the acting is really good too. Christoph Waltz plays the bounty hunter with sort of a playful delight while other stars make their presence known later in the film. Kerry Washington plays Django’s wife and effectively shows why she’s worth risking his life for. Leonardo DiCaprio is the ruthless plantation owner who owns Django’s wife, and Samuel L. Jackson is his head house slave. Jackson’s character has it better than all the other black people in the film which makes him abuse his own power against them. It brings ironic humor to the film but also shows how classism can overpower racism. He seems to hate the other slaves more than many of the white characters do. Quentin Tarantino is no stranger to controversy so you can count on him to always push the envelope. And for once, he’s done it right. Only he can turn a movie about slavery into a spaghetti western shoot-‘em-up. The very end of the film is a bit corny and clichéd, especially for him, but overall this is his most complete film to date. It runs a lengthy 2 hours and 45 minutes. But if you have a few hours to spare, you might as well watch an entertaining flick where a slave gets to shoot a bunch of racist slave owners.
Cowboys and Aliens is a cross genre film based off a graphic novel, starring Harrison Ford and Daniel Craig. Craig’s character wakes up not knowing who he is, or how he got a strange metal object attached to his wrist. He soon gets captured and learns he was a wanted outlaw. As he’s about to be taken away spaceships fly through the night sky and start attacking the town and abducting people. At this point he realizes the device on his hand can fight the aliens, and joins the townspeople in trying to get their loved ones back. The neat thing about this movie is it’s a cowboy movie first, and a science fiction film second. It has all the tropes of a western, Cowboys, Indians, bandits, saloon brawls, etc. It also has the beats of the UFO phenomenon, alien abduction, lost memories, cattle mutilations, but also the aliens methods (they basically lasso people to abduct them) and their overall plot fit in perfectly with western mythology. Along the way there are nice character beats for the various townspeople, including the dorky saloon owner and his search for respect. Despite the somewhat goofy title the premise is played completely straight. My sole complain is that, while it has some suspense, it should have/could have been outright scary. One really interesting thing to me was that, unlike most movies of this type, it left no room for a sequel. It has a definitive ending, and is a neat experiment in cross genre film. 8.5 out of ten.
The original True Grit, made in 1969, was not a good film. Yes, it did launch John Wayne to an Oscar for Best Actor, but other supporting actors were poor and the whole thing is now seen as a parody rather than setting a benchmark for Westerns today . However, the Coen brothers' effort, based on the book by Charles Portis of the same name, succeeds where the original failed, and Jeff Bridges essentially carries the film forward and is what makes it such a joy to watch. True Grit tells the story of a young girl called Mattie Ross (newcomer Hailee Steinfeld), who enlists the help of a bonded US Marshall (Bridges) to track down her father's killer, a man who goes by many names, but is known to her as Tom Chaney (Josh Brolin). Mattie spends the first half hour of the film trying to convince Rooster to help her, and eventually manages to talk him into taking her with him. Unfortunately, it is this bit of the film that has pacing issues, which is a shame since it moves forward quite spectacularly from then on. Not the best of starts. Mattie soon meets Texas Ranger La Beouf (pronounced La Beef) who has his own reasons for wanting to apprehend Chaney. He's a despicable character- when Mattie wakes up in her bed one morning to find him sitting in a chair staring at her, La Beouf admits he contemplated stealing a kiss whilst she was asleep, before realising that she was possibly a bit young for him, and ugly to boot. /</gispan style="font-size: 1px;"/>/giIts wonderful to see Damon playing such a character. He has had a very busy couple of years that man, starring in Inside Job, Hereafter, The Adjustment Bureau, Contagion and Margaret - all in the space of just over a year. His work-rate is tremendous, and although he has been juggling many projects, his performance is always excellent. But enough of Mr Universe- this is Steinfeld's film. Whilst she may come across as demanding and arrogant, we soon sympathise with her plight. So desperate is she to find her father's murderer, despite not being wanted by Rooster or La Beouf, she follows them on horseback out of town and plunges her horse into a river and struggles across to get to them. Its an emotional moment, and it creates a bond between her and Bridges' Rooster. Ah, Bridges, he makes this film. At times it is hard to hear what he is saying, as he mumbles into his beard a lot and his accent doesn't help, but his actions are hilarious and his stout heart and calculating mind provide many laugh-out-loud moments. Cinematographer Roger Deakins shoots a beautiful film, complete with cross fades and beautiful panoramas of the starry skies, and snow. The problem is, the film ends quite abruptly. Just as you are hankering for some more, its all over, much too quickly. Its a two hour film, not short by any standards, but the time flies by and some might find the ending unsatisfactory, as voice-over fills the void when you just want to see more of what happened to Rooster and Mattie. Hailee Steinfeld is excellent as Mattie, absolutely terrific . She carries herself with the grace of someone well beyond her years and considering the fact this is her first feature film, its safe to say she has a successful career ahead of her. Its thanks to her responses that we actually get the gist of what the hell Rooster is mumbling about half the time. True Grit is exceptionally acted, scripted, shot (but not paced) and has a lot of heart. If only Jeff Bridges could articulate more clearly, then this film would earn an extra star. big ☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆ span style="color: red;" 8/10 /big /span /span
One from Column A and 2 from Column B. Remember that? The traditional Family dinner at your local Chinese restaurant. A little of this and a little of that. Well the mix and match style has reached film-making as well and I don't mean recently. Here director Sngmoo Lee has mixed equal parts of Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon for the martial arts, the wire work and even the bamboo forest, spaghetti westerns for the setting and the laconic and iconic posturing of the hero, and the Fantasy film Wild Wild West , he then transported the whole thing to a small town called Lode in the American West, and you come away with The Warrior's Way . We now have reached a new low in cinematic fusion films. Instead of a Sheriff or a Marshall facing down a ruthless baddie at noon in the center of town, we now have a master of the slice and dice teaming up with the local townsfolk including Geoffrey Rush (above) who fared much better in Elizabeth , Shakespeare in Love , and the Pirates of the Caribbean films, as the town drunk who also possesses can't miss shooting skills, against a large gang of bad-ass cowboys led by Danny Huston on one side, and hordes and hordes of faceless and nameless ninjas on the other. Not only that, but this is all done in a CGI style with similar amounts of CGI but with far less style than we saw when Frank Miller 's graphic novel 300 was brought to the screen by Zack Snyder in 2006. However, this film is just so dull. All the swordplay is stylized to the extent that it never takes more than one swing of the blade to kill off an opponent. Blood spurts and gushes, heads, hands, and feet are severed. But all without a lot of color. Forget about sunlight, blue skies, majestic panoramas, even red blood. All of that is totally and emphatically missing. It seems as though the entire film was done on a sound stage. The Ninjas? Not once do they arrive in a standard way, they fall from the sky, explode upward from bodies of water, or even out of the desert floor. Once they have arrived, they stand gathered like so many crows on the wire in Alfred Hitchcock's The Birds . They also enter a room by crashing through the doors, roofs, or boarded up windows. Aside from killing totally defenseless townsmen, they are useless against the one man that matters. The story begins with an assassin from a far off land refusing his mission which was to kill off the absolute very last of this place's enemies. He refused because the last of the enemies was a baby girl. So he leaves with just the clothes on his back, his sword, and the baby girl in tow. Somehow, in what would have to be many, many months later, he arrives in this town called Lode, and he is set up as the town's laundryman. His fortes are silence and looking at you without ever showing any emotions at all. Two strange things have occured so far - the baby hasn't aged much, and this town looks like the home base of a failed circus or carnival. In fact, some of the townsfolk, still are dressed in clown costumes. There's a huge ferris wheel, and beyond that the town looks like a partial ghost town. Why? We aren't told. So much for the story. Kate Bosworth has the female lead, Lynne. Apparently, the original female lead was Zhang Ziyi, but for reasons unknown to me - that didn't work out. So Lynne aligns herself with the laconic assassin who is called Yang in the credits, but I don't think he is called that, or anything else in the film. Her plot purpose? She has to exert revenge on The Colonel. He is played by Danny Huston (below). Huston is hidden behind a leathery mask, ala Phantom of the Opera , for most of the picture. The thing about this Huston, is that these days, he most often plays a villain. But if you close your eyes and listen to him (I think he has the most spoken lines of any character in the film) you will hear that he speaks with the same tone, manner, and style as his father, John Huston . It is uncanny. Danny Huston is speaking and you will hear Noah Cross played by John Huston in the classic 1974 film directed by Roman Polanski called Chinatown . Strange once more: If the assassin Yang left after refusing his mission, as in left the country, with the last of the enemies (the baby girl) why was it necessary to hunt them down a year later, in a foreign land, and waste dozen and dozens of ninjas in the attempt? I think everything in this film was lifted or borrowed from films that came before it. Films that we are quite familar with. The film isn't a good story, has no spoken lines that amount to anything (unquotable to the nth degree), there's hardly any 'acting' in the usual sense, and the film is more of a study in the use of CGI technology instead of film direction as we commonly understand it. I guess you can say that I didn't care for this film. I even dozed off a few times during it. There are no characters to root for. None of the combat is realistic, and the film isn't very visually attractive. All of the sunsets, starry skies, and backdrops are all mattes. A final thought. Most films open on Friday's hoping for good reviews to fill the theaters over the opening weekend. Neither the New York Times , the Los Angeles Times , or even Roger Ebert reviewed this film on Friday. Edit Dec.5th: Both the NYTimes and the LATimes did publish reviews, but not by their lead critics. Ebert still hasn't published a review of the film. The Internet Movie Data Base (IMDB.com) did not show any external reviews at all, and only two user reviews. Edit Dec 5th: IMDB still doesn't show any external (professional reviews but the number of User reviews has increased. To me this means the film was not made available for press screenings, a usual sign of problems. Which only amplies the fact that film was shot in late 2007 and early 2008, but was only released at the end of the 48th week of 2010. Financial problems, maybe? Or lack of any one willing to distribute the film, possibly or even likely... Towards the end of the film, we get this exchange between Rush as Ron and Yang ( Dong-gun Jang ): Ron : I guess that's the end of them Yang: No, it is just the beginning Is a sequel in the works? Heaven forbid. Check out the trailers which are readily available on the web. But don't bother seeing this one at the theater.
In the vein of Great Wersterns Winchester '73 is often overlooked. It's obvious that the Western spaghetti genre revolutionned or revisionnized the way Western were made. But before this revolution, the genre always been one of the most popular in American Cinema. Many directors made Westerns but they are quit a few that could handle it like John Ford or Howard Hawks. Sometimes, you can add Fritz Lang to this list but Anthony Mann is often forgotten. Bend of the River , Man From Laramie , Man of the West , The Far Country just to name a few and Winchester '73 will be observed here are Mann's most popular Westerns. The title of the film refers to one of the best gun a man "cowboy" could own. We follow its path through different hands. From the man (James Stewart) who won it in a shooting contest to the worst bandit of its region. With Shelley Winters as the woman (romantic relief of the story), a young Tony Curtis as a soldier and Rock Hudson as the Indians wild chief. As always James Stewart is the perfect American hero, he is the good son, a gentleman with the ladies, the cold blood competitor and the good "conscience" of the story. One quality he has more than any other cinematic icon of its time: he is human and has this fragile kind of personnality. He could be anyone, your friend, your neighbor, or even you. He was the son of America, in a good way. He reprensents justice, rightousness, truth, love, friendship, etc. His charcater wouldn't be the same without its presence. With Anthony Mann he made many westerns and the combinaison seems to fit very well. Mann's camera waits patiently and captures the essence of the story, the scenery, the faces, and gives a great projection of what was the West. It was made of small heroes like Stewart that yes conquered the bad guys but also they don't become Presidents of the U.S.A. at the end of the story. Mann's approach has just the right sensitivity while staying dusty while the Indians attacks and capturing the dirty faces of the bad guys. The imposing number of Westerns offered can maybe justify why Winchester '73 is often, too often overlooked in its genre but I'd like to take this opportunity to write out loud (if it's possible) how this film is a beautiful black white Western that deserves so much more praise and words from the cinephiles.
"Undead or Alive” is a western zombie comedy written and directed by Glasgow Phillips in 2007. Of course, you know it’s an indy film because you never heard of it. It often happens that awesome ideas turn out to be shit. “Poultrygeist” comes to mind. Sometimes it’s just the budget, or to be more precise, the lack of one; but mostly it’s just that the director/screenwriter sucks. Fortunately, “Undead or Alive” is not one of those films. Elmer Winslow is a soldier on the run from the Union Army, and Luke Budd is a cowboy with a broken heart. When the two misfits rob the corrupt sheriff of an old west town, they have no idea that a plague of zombies is sweeping the country, or that Sue, Geronimo's sexy niece may be their only hope of survival. The film is cheap, but for what it’s worth, money was not really needed. It takes place in mostly desert areas and they look the same with or without budget. No complaints about the visual effects here. The beginning was not that promising, but rather pretty lame. When you see the best like “Hot Fuzz”, “Shaun of the Dead” and such, enjoying a comedy can be pretty hard because “the bar” is set really high. It started out with some lame jokes you usually see in Leslie Nielsen’s or Steve Martin’s shitty comedies that only kids and old people would find funny. At least, they didn’t have any fart or stupid sex jokes. After that, the comedy gets better, and while it’s never brilliant, it’s very good most of the time. The introduction to the Sheriff Claypool character was hilarious, not just the lines but how the actor Matt Bresser delivered them: "You little [???] just made me put a hole in my own ceiling. Now how you gonna pay for that? You say another word, and I'm gonna shoot that jaw clean off your face. And then I'm gonna take a shit in your chinhole." One of the reasons… well, actually, the main reason why I watched “Undead or Alive” is Navi Rawat. She became famous as Theresa in “The O.C.”, but fortunately left that gay teen drama series. She then starred as Heroine in the helluva fuckin’ balls to the wall awesome “Feast”, a true gem of modern trash horror, and now in “Undead or Alive”. She is not a good actress, but you know what? I couldn’t care less, as long as she will be appearing in projects like this in the future. She doesn't have to act, she just has to kick ass. As long as she keeps doing that, she’s cool in my book. And she’s damn hot in everyone’s book. One plus of the film is its awesome soundtrack that comprises of really good rock songs. I don’t think I’ll watch it again in the near future, but I had fun for this hour and a half. It’s definitely worth a look. Rating: 7/10
Yes, people – it's a Japanese western! With Japanese actors speaking English. And the director is none other than the legendary Takashi Miike, the master of horror whose previous work inlcude classics like «Audition», «Ichi the Killer», «One Missed Call», «Full Metal Yakuza» and other. And when such a wicked project is underway, can you guess who is expected to be involved in it? Oh, yes – Quentin Tarantino, in a cameo role. If that's not enough for you to go and see this film, I don't know what is. The story takes place several hundred years after the Genpei Wars (the war of the Taira and Minamoto clans, 1180-1185) in Japan. In a small town named Yuta, descendants of these clans are still there, fighting their war. They took over the town, in search of a legendary treasure that's supposed to be hidden somewhere. The town is split between the Genji clan (Minamoto) and the Heike clan (Taira). Then, a lonely gunslinger rides into Yuta, known only by the name «The Gunman»... It's nice to see that Takashi Miike still knows how to have fun, because this film is just that – a funny as hell ride, totally out of the ordinary, a hommage to spaghetti westerns! Not only that, but Miike pays tribute to so many other stuff. Quentin Tarantino as the gunslinger Ringo is hilarous. He has a son named Akira. Ringo then later says, referring to his son's name: «After all, I am an anime otaku at heart.» I mean, how awesome is that? Awesome to the core! Awesomeness MAX! All of the characters are special. It's just so funny to hear Japanese actors speaking hardcore western lines you usually hear from Clint Eastwood. The action is no less spectacular. Gunfights, swordfights, crazy weapons – it's got it all. The last battle is epic, fought on the snow covered ground, like in the best genre films. The soundtrack is fitting. It was composed by Koji Endo. It's awesome, like the rest of the film. Especially the main theme, «Django Sasurii». Seeing how many people came on this blog in search of this song, I uploaded it on MediaFire. There are a few problems, though. The first one is – the DVD has only Japanese subtitles. And the English speaking skills of the actors vary greatly. Some are very fluent, some you can barely understand. It's a good way to improve your Engrish, anyway. The other problem could be the understanding of the background story, i.e. the «Heike monogatari» , the Japanese epic that tells the story of the Genpei War. I'm sure I missed many motives and references as I did not read «Heike monogatari». Nevertheless, «Sukiyaki Western Django» is required viewing for any serious film fan. And it gets even more fun the more you watch it. Rating: 9/10
“800 Bullets” (“800 balas”) is a Spanish drama with some comedy elements, directed by Alex de la Iglesia. This quite obscure title serves as a beautiful homage to the Wild West and Westerns, and also the bygone days of good ol’ real filmmaking in general. Carlos is a 10-something year old living with his mother, a wealthy businesswoman. She doesn’t tell him much of his dead father who worked as a stunt-double with his father Julian, Carlos’ grandfather, on many American made Westerns; there, after a stunt gone wrong, he also met his end. Stumbling upon an old, worn-out poster of a film, Carlos decides to secretly visit Julian who nowadays, along with a rag-tag group of enthusiasts, does Western themed shows in “Texas, Hollywood”, a rundown theme park located in Almeria. The young Carlos is drawn into this strange world of old, but all will come to a end when his mother buys the property and decides to tear down the town. However, its residents – cowboys and Indians alike – will stock up on real bullets instead of blanks and defend their home to the end, against the police and the National Guard. If to be compared with anything, I’d do a comparison with Woody Harrelson’s “Defendor” , since I saw that recently. It kinda has the same feel and atmosphere, being both a serious film, and a comedy with a string of lightness and uplifting about it. I liked the scenes where Julian shared his bitterness with how the world of films and the real world work today – all about money and profit, with no heart put into anything. He said how he was a tank driver and a stunt-double for George C. Scott in “Patton”, and continues telling about Patton being “a guy with balls”; or how he doubled for the legendary Clint Eastwood on many occasions and how they don’t do real films anymore. Naturally, his stories are taken with a huge grain of salt, being seen as only demented ramblings of an old and withered out fool. The ending, just like “Defendor” will leave you with a bittersweet feeling. Believe it or not, Clint Eastwood was slated to make an appearance in person in “800 Bullets”, but was unfortunately held up by other engagements, which is a damn shame because then this film would’ve been complete. There is one scene for which “800 Bullets” gained notoriety. It’s something you’d never see in the States, not in a million years. In it, the prostitute Sandra (the gorgeous and quite curvaceous Yoima Valdez) teaches young Carlos how to properly grab and properly “work” a titty: “You have to feel its weight. Just imagine that they’re little bags, full of coins that make a sound like this. Now you try it. Do it gently, or it won’t work.” The next morning, Carlos wakes beside Sandra who is totally naked. I’m guessing young Luis Castro was the object of envy of many a man. Personally, I don’t get why the controversy at all, because the scene wasn’t “dirty” or “perverted” at all, but actually cute. The cast was wonderful, especially Sancho Garcia who plays Julian. He really brought emotion into the character and made the story that more convincing. Little Luis Castro, considering he was just a child actor, also performed very well. The whole film was made more authentic by the Western soundtrack, of course. If anything in this review has peaked your interest, give “800 Bullets” a chance. It is a charming, heartwarming comedy drama with a message. And there’s Yoima Valdez… Rating: 8/10 - review by Ventilation Shaft
“Pistoleros” is a Danish film, written and directed by Shaky Gonzalez, trying to take elements of Tarantino, Rodriguez and Guy Ritchie and combine them. The result is not a complete success, but it’s far from a failure, either. Crazy Uffe tells two amateur filmmakers, Martin and Camilla, the story of the legendary heist that took place some years ago. Frank Lowies (Erik Holmey) was a mean motherfucker in his prime and he hasn’t lost any of his notoriety as the years passed by. Now, Shameer (Mustafa Ali) approaches him for the job of their lives – 20 million crowns, theirs for the taking. Frank calls up Ramirez (Hector Mauricio Vega) and his niece Tina (Sofie Lassen-Khalke) and the 4 proceed with the plan. Of course, there wouldn’t be any film if everything went according to it. 15 million were recovered by the police, and Frank managed to hide 5 mil before they got him. Now, years later, the gang’s out of jail, looking for the loot. Naturally, the story had become an urban legend so now every crook and thug wants a piece of the cake. After Frank’s murder it is up to his son Sonny (Daniell Edwards) to find the cash and avenge his death. Shaky Gonzalez tries to emulate Rodriguez, Tarantino and Ritchie, but emulation is never good as the real thing. Shaky fails, although not completely, in a number of things. #1: the characters are not developed enough. They all look good on paper. Frank, the veteran badass. Ramirez, the loco Latino. Shameer, an equally crazy Pakistani. Tina, a neurotic tough bitch. Let’s not forget Sonny, Yugo Ivan the Balkan gangster (played by Zlatko Buric), Tuki the arms smuggler, Michelle – Frank’s stripper girlfriend, etc. As you can see, you’ve got some really good material to work with. But none of them ever got past the basic cardboard cutouts of a character. Worst of all, they’re bleak and forgettable. Besides maybe Frank and Ramirez, I couldn’t care less for the lot. #2: there’s a lack of style and action. Guy Ricthie, for example, is not an example of originality as every one of his film had the exact same formula and ingredients, but the result was always stylish as fuck. He always valued style over substance, and that’s OK. I mean, stick to what you know, right? “Pistoleros”, on the other hand, is too held back and has virtually no action. That "gratuitous violence" part of the tagline is a complet lie. Essentially, "Pistoleros" has neither particular style nor substance. #3: the script’s not witty enough. Ritchie, Tarantino and Rodriguez all have very memorable scripts, especially Tarantino. Well, none of their traits, dialogue-wise, are present in “Pistoleros”. There are traces of some humor now and then, but nothing really worth remembering. It's too by the book . With that out of the way, let’s talk about the positives. The actors did good jobs, every one of them. Erik Holmey in particular. The Wikipedia articles describes him perfectly: "Danish actor of the stage and screen with a tall, rugged, handsome presence". And some trivia: In 1979 and 1980 Erik Holmey won the Danish middleweight body-building championship, and in 1981 he became Danish heavyweight body-building champion. And maybe I’m crazy, but at times he looked just like a buffed up Tommy Lee Jones. Oh, and the music was brilliant. Shaky opted for traditional western music, spiced up by some electric guitars. Wonderful! All in all, “Pistoleros” is not a bad film by any means. My point being, given the director’s obvious role models, I expected too much out of it. I made a faux pas, mon Dieu, and I admit my mistake. “Pistoleros”, taken the fact it’s only a low budget flick, delivered just enough to make it enjoyable. Rating: 7/10 - review by Ventilation Shaft
Denzel Washington is surely one of Hollywood's most consistent actors. Even when he's appearing in a true cinematic flop, Washington always seems to perform with subtlety and intelligence. Unfortunately the same can't be said for his movie choices. While his performances are always worth watching, the films themselves vary widely in quality, and in recent times there have been some true stinkers. If only his critical skills were as sharp as his acting talents. The sci-fi movies on his CV have supplied some of the lowest moments in the past, but The Book Of Eli isn't quite as forgettable as it might appear. Sure, there are still plenty of problems - including a Bible-thumping plot and a borderline-ridiculous last minute twist - but at least it remains entertaining from start to finish. For once a lazy, derivative script doesn't have to be the end of the story. Naturally Denzel gives an eye-catching performance in the lead role, but The Book Of Eli is also helped by the inclusion of Gary Oldman , a surefire bet for some on-screen fireworks. Oldman hams it up with gusto, and alongside Denzel's understated restraint he helps turn a mediocre post-apocalyptic religious fable into a surprisingly engaging action movie. It's thirty years since an unspecified event turned the world into a deserted wasteland, and in many ways The Book Of Eli plays out like a muscular postscript to The Road . Eli (Washington) wanders America's devastated highways alone, following a voice that tells him to head westwards with a book that he has in his possession. Eli may look like a desperate bum, but in actual fact he's a man on a mission - and he's not afraid to kick ass along the way. His life changes, however, when he wanders into a fledgling settlement, ruled over by educated thug Carnegie (Oldman). Along with his imposing henchman ( Ray Stevenson ), Carnegie calls the shots in town, but he's desperately searching for a book that he believes will secure his future empire. When he hears about Eli's prized tome his interest is immediately piqued. Eli quickly takes to the road again with his new sidekick Solara ( Mila Kunis ), but Carnegie isn't prepared to give up that easily. They end up playing a game of cat and mouse in an environment that's almost as dangerous as Carnegie himself. We've already mentioned the eye-popping double-act of Washington and Oldman at the film's core, and the rest of the cast give capable supporting performances around them, although no-one truly shines. Singer-songwriter Tom Waits appears in a gnarly cameo as a helpful engineer, and watch out for Brits Michael Gambon and Frances de la Tour as an unlikely cannibal couple. Beyond the central performances, however, the story degenerates into the kind of religious fable that would usually be reserved for the Faith Network, and its jumbled message does nothing to lift an already derivative script. The Hughes Brothers display the same eye for visual detail that made From Hell such a sleeper hit, but their ears seem deaf to so many dialogue clunkers that you have to wonder whether they read the script at all. The Book Of Eli still offers some butt-kicking action in a striking depiction of a post-apocalyptic wasteland, but ultimately the screenplay isn't even as convincing as Denzel's martial arts. A fun addition to the genre, but not as groundbreaking as it seems to think. 3/5
THE SCOOP Director: Sergio Leone Plot: Two bounty hunters with completely different intentions team up to track down a Western outlaw. Genre: Action/Western Awards: - Runtime: 132min Rating: PG for some violence. IN RETROSPECT The weakest of the “Dollars” trilogy, and by a mile if I may add, Sergio Leone’s For A Few Dollars More is a substandard western which tries to replicate the breakout success of A Fistful Of Dollars (1964). While the latter announced Leone to the world as an audacious cinematic talent capable of turning the traditional American western into a multi-sensory, ritualistic exploration of the taciturn hero as played by Clint “the man with no name” Eastwood, it is only after the third film of the trilogy – The Good, The Bad, And The Ugly (1966) – that the great director is assured of the status of legend. For A Few Dollars More becomes the weak link between an admirable ‘prequel’ and a great ‘sequel’. Notice the quotation marks because the trilogy is not actually a continuous tale but rather a series of unrelated films starring Eastwood in character throughout the three films. In this film, the plot is simple. Eastwood plays Manco, a quick-witted bounty hunter in search of Indio (Gian Maria Volonte), the leader of a gang of ruthless bandits. He faces Colonel Mortimer (Lee Van Cleef) who, coincidentally, is also hunting for Indio. Anyone who captures Indio and his gang will receive a bountiful sum of money. The race is on between Manco and Mortimer who must decide whether to work together or face possible death at the hands of the brutal killers. The plot lacks weight and is an excuse for Leone to craft another spaghetti western for the sake of (pardon the pun) a few dollars more. Running at more than two hours, the film is long-winded, slow, and offers not so much an impressive climatic payoff but a saw-it-coming, predictable end to a forgettable film. Yes, it may be shot on a shoestring budget, but there seems nothing interesting of note that happens in the film except for the typical one-to-one shootouts, and extreme close-up shots of the actors that would later become Leone’s signature direction. The story does little to engage us, and the characters feel distant. A short flashback is cut into the film to provide a relational connection between Mortimer and Indio, but it is not as effective as it promises in developing Mortimer as a man of vengeance rather than of justice. For A Few Dollars More starts out well, but fizzles into a lackluster action picture. The second-half of the film is set in a desolate town in which its inhabitants have gone into hiding upon the arrival of the bandits, Mortimer, and Manco. I would have liked to see Leone add complexity to the situation by involving the villagers some way or another in the action. At least it would have made the film more involving as innocent people are placed in danger, not that I want to be cruel and sadistic. The one aspect that remains consistent in quality is Ennio Morricone’s haunting score. He extends his musical experimentation from A Fistful Of Dollars , creating a primal soundscape that ranks as one of his best in the western genre. Even with Eastwood and Morricone on board again, Leone fails to make a better picture than A Fistful Of Dollars , or at least one that is on par with it. Is this the curse of the sequel? Perhaps. Still, For A Few Dollars More is very much revered by Leone fans. As a Leone devotee myself, I have to be honest and say that this is far from what the great director is capable of. SCORE: 6.5/10 [www.filmnomenon.blogspot.com] All rights reserved!
THE SCOOP Director: Sergio Leone Plot: A wandering gunfighter plays two rival families against each other in a town torn apart by greed, pride, and revenge. Genre: Action/Western Awards: - Runtime: 99min Rating: PG for some violence. IN RETROSPECT Sergio Leone’s “Dollars” trilogy begins with A Fistful of Dollars , an admirable attempt at reinventing a genre – the Western – that John Ford had mostly made his own from the thirties to the fifties. It is shot in Italy and the dialogue is in Italian. However, it is difficult to find an original video in its native language track. The dubbing in English is average but it will not be taken into consideration in my assessment of the film. A Fistful of Dollars stars the legendary Clint Eastwood who plays the iconic “man with no name”. Here, he takes on the name of “Joe” after wandering into a town on a barren, desolate land. In this town, there are two warring families driven by greed, lust, and power. Their method of communication is through violence; this has wrecked the entire town resulting in its few inhabitants leading their lives in constant fear. Joe, the unwavering gunfighter, decides to pit the two families against each other through a series of cat-and-mouse games in an attempt to wipe all of them out and free the town. His plan works and backfires at the same time, making it interesting to observe how the situation would play out. Of course, if you have seen Kurosawa’s Yojimbo (1961) in which Leone’s film is based upon, then you would have an idea what to expect. A Fistful of Dollars is Leone’s second feature but his first collaboration with composer Ennio Morricone, whose music would play a huge role in the success of Leone’s future films, reaching its zenith with the epic, operatic Once Upon a Time in the West (1968). Here, Morricone’s raw sounds complement the stark cinematography and rough editing, giving the film a kind of gritty cover over its amateurish character interplay characterized by dead one-liners that are occasionally unintentionally funny. The final action set-piece raises the tension a notch higher. Complete with wind, dust, and in sweltering heat, Leone sets Joe against the chief villain in a dawn shootout that is expertly staged and precisely executed. It is this climatic sequence that gives viewers the best glimpse of Leone’s filmmaking talent and his unmatched sense of timing. A Fistful of Dollars is a B-grade “spaghetti Western” that entertains and is quite admired by many. Leone tried to replicate it with For a Few Dollars More (1965) but, in my opinion, to a far less successful outcome. However, in The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly (1966), he finally scored big time with a film as legendary as they come. SCORE: 7.5/10 [www.filmnomenon.blogspot.com] All rights reserved!
THE SCOOP Director: John Ford Plot: As a Civil War veteran spends years searching for a young niece captured by Indians, his motivation becomes increasingly questionable. Genre: Adventure/Drama/Western Awards: - Runtime: 119min Rating: PG for some violence. IN RETROSPECT 'That will be the day!' John Ford's evergreen Western is one of the most visually pleasing pictures ever filmed. The Searchers is a landmark motion picture, with many unforgettable shots of the vast, desolate land, as well as famous scenes such as the last shot of John Wayne in the shadows as the door closes on him (which inspired The Godfather ), and the parallel horse chase sequence between the tribes and the cowboys. The Searchers raised the bar in Western filmmaking in the mid 1950, at a time when the genre was starting to fade away. Four-time Oscar-winning director John Ford is the undisputed top dog of the Western genre. There's no one who could ever match his ability to consistently craft out films of the highest quality that exhibit astonishing cinematography, strong scripting, and peerless ensemble of actors at their prime. The Searchers touches deeply on the issue of racism (superior whites vs inferior blacks) that might have shocked viewers at the time of release, but proves to be enlightening for the current breed of moviegoers. The film is multi-layered and is presented with smaller subplots (of a romantic nature) to build intrigue and character. The Searchers' pacing is largely unquestionable, although it slows down noticeably two-thirds into the film. However, John Ford is on hand to limit the slight fault by further developing the characters. It's widely debatable that this is the legendary director's greatest work. For me, The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance is the more accomplished picture compared with The Searchers , while Grapes Of Wrath is Ford's most mature and emotionally satisfying work. But in The Searchers , the legendary director has shown that the Western genre is an important contribution to cinema. A recommendable Ford vehicle. SCORE: 8.5/10 [www.filmnomenon.blogspot.com] All rights reserved!
Oh don't fret the underdog always wins when it's Buster! Genre: Silent Comedy Starring: Buster Keaton ( Our Hospitality ; Neighbors ), Brown Eyes Directed By: Buster Keaton Overview: A down and out city slicker decides that he would have a better chance at being a cowboy. When he ends up being the only person left on the train with 1000 cattle, he singlehandedly must save the rancher's business by delivering the herd in time. Performance: When you've got plans to see everything Buster Keaton's ever made, it cause you love him. I'm partial. I'm partial because he is a frikken genius. There's a frikken cow in in that plays the love interest! What a concept!!! No, wait, I said that wrong... Rating: 9 Cinematography: As far as stunts go, playing toreador with a couple of bulls is some of the tamer that he's done, but imagine taking a herd of cattle through busy L.A. streets, or literally taking bulls out of china shops (groan I know!). That my friend is a sight to see. As always it's great fun watching Buster's physical comedy and this is no exception. Rating: 9 Script: Nothing outrageously hilarious or deeply poetic to be found here. Mostly just people talking to order the new cowhand around. If you want a good script in a silent slapstick film, I think you're missing the idea. It's nice that it's mostly pure physical comedy, because sometimes silent kitsch can be a little lame. Not so here though! Rating: 8 Plot: We have a lovely subplot where Buster grows fond of one of the cows. He protects her, nurtures her, takes her wherever he goes, including in the house. Oh and he shaves her to save her from the pain of branding too. Some great light humour, with a nice happy ending, just as expected. Rating: 8 Mood: Classic Keaton fun with a wild west twist. We have the Great Stoneface doing the standard standing toe-to-toe, face-to-chest of all the bigger, taller, more experienced cowboys and doing what he can to be accepted as one of the boys, but with only a puny little derringer and no idea what he's doing? It's cute and fun for the whole family, unless of course you don't like your kids learning about slaughterhouses and guns... Rating: 8 This is quite the moooving scene Overall Rating: 84% (Go Anywhere, As Long As You Stop Here) Aftertaste: After so many posts about Buster Keaton I guess I'll just add that without him we'd have no Jackie Chan (it's true). I'm sure his films also played a huge part in making sure that stuntmen get some good union representation, and a nice worker's comp package. I wonder whatever happened to old Brown Eyes...
Nope, not dead yet Genre: Adventure Crime Drama Western (USA, Germany, Japan) Starring: Johnny Depp (Charlie And The Chocolate Factory • Corpse Bride), Gary Farmer (The Score) Directed By: Jim Jarmusch (Mystery Train • Broken Flowers) Overview: An accountant from Cleveland moves out to the Wild West. When he shoots a man, he ends up on the run where an Indian named Nobody nurtures him back to health. Performance: Johnny Effin' Depp, sure he's had his misses (Cry-Baby; Nick Of Time) but I haven't seen any of them, and my record is still clean. That having been said, you know this guy makes wicked awesome films, and Jarmusch is perfect at guiding them along. After this, Gary Farmer is one of my new favorite native actors, and he's been in quite a bit. Add the likes of Iggy Pop, Crispin Glover, Billy-Bob Thornton, Lance Henriksen, John Hurt, Gabriel Byrne and Michael Wincott, and we prove that this is a director who not only can wrangle up some good talent, but keep them reins tight. Rating: 9 Cinematography: Filmed in glorious black and white, you'll appreciate the way the old West seems more real this way, almost like looking at an old picture. Besides having the costumes just right and the wilderness as impressive as ever, we have some pretty cool action and some intense cinematic style that frankly makes me wonder why he didn't do this sort of thing more often. The best Jarmusch film out there for the visuals that I've seen so far. Rating: 9 Script: "That weapon will replace your tongue. You will learn to speak through it. And your poetry will now be written with blood." This movie is full of awesome stuff like this. Not only is this filled with both literal and figurative poetry, but I was genuinely astounded at the depth of understanding I had for each character. Writers would do well in learning the lesson of how to create characters that become richer with every word, rather than scenes that simply banter their way to the end. Rating: 10 Plot: The simplest stories can be the strongest. This is not some twist-rich story full of intrigue and double-crosses. It's the common story about a man who commits himself to a new life, when right away happenstance interferes. His meek character must change quickly in the face of these harsh challenges that he faces, but they aren't insurmountable. It's one man against the limited few that chase him. It's brilliant in its simplicity, as rather than bogging us down with events, we can focus on character. It's great. Rating: 9 Mood: The opening scene on the train shows our hero amongst wild men. We learn before he even arrives that his transformation must be quick. Stepping off the train we see his astounded by the muddy filth of the streets, the sinful filth of the rugged men that surround him. The realistic style of the fights he gets into and the almost supernatural way he adapts to the changes are what make this film so great. Add to this the chiaroscuro style of filming and we have the entire gamete of art covered, creating a deep and meaningful film, as well as a comment on our darker history. Rating: 9 "Stupid Fucking White Man" Overall Rating: 92% (Knocks You Flat On Your Ass) Aftertaste: I have no idea what happened to Jim Jarmusch in the four years between Night On Earth and this. It's like he became an entirely different director. From two films about short stories with very little plot, to this deep tale of fate, rebirth, and spirituality. I have two more films to watch of his to complete my study of his works, and after having seen this and Ghost Dog, I'll tell you I'm completely stoked.
» = New Post(s)