Life and Death of Colonel Blimp Review- By Michael Carlisle

Title: Life and Death of Colonel Blimp
Year: 1942
Director(s): Powell & Pressburger
Country: UK
Language: English

 "War starts at midnight!"

Michael Powell was born in Canterbury, England in 1905. He began his film career in Southern France as an actor under the direction of the legendary silent film Director Rex Ingram. Eventually having an encyclopedic knowledge of the craft he returned to England to work for British International Pictures during the advent of sound. Born in Hungary in 1902,  Emeric Pressburger had been a professional violinist, journalist and writer which captured the attention of famed German producer/director Erich Pommer, leading to a film contract in Berlin. He left Germany when the Nazis came into power. The two would meet and become an unstoppable creative force which made hit after hit. Life and Death of Colonel Blimp is perhaps their most critically acclaimed picture.

From the Boer War through World War II, Clive Wynne-Candy rises through the ranks in the British military. We first meet him as an old man, the epitome of stuffy, outmoded values. However as we travel backwards in time we see a different man entirely.

Life and Death of Colonel Blimp was produced in 1942 at the height of the Nazi threat to Great Britain. Production was far from easy, even though they were able to utilize the immense resources of Denham studios.  Great Britain was under aerial attack by Nazi Germany, the “Blitz” was laying waste to London, shortages of men and material had to be overcome daily, and the situation was not helped by the Government’s attitude toward the film. Winston Churchill rejected the picture, his administration sought to kill it as they felt would make people unhappy with the British military. Though the film was completed, it would be years before the film was released internationally (when it was it would be cut). During production Powell was told that if he made the picture he could forget about being knighted. Powell pressed forward anyways as he was a brave man, certainly not one to back down due to authoritative pressure. 

The magic of Colonel Blimp is the Directors' ability to transform a stuffy, pigheaded old man into one of cinemas most beloved characters. We look past the walrus moustache, to see an idealist and romantic. This is a civilized film about war and soldiers, one that defends the old against the young. It is about the loss of fair play and a sense of decency among military classes. It is about growing old, falling in love and so much more. Powell & Pressburger not only clearly show us that attitudes and morals have changed, but they tell us why. 

Photographed by Georges Perinal, Colonel Blimp is one of the most gorgeous looking technicolor pictures ever made. Its rich period detail in sets, costumes and manners, makes the audience feel like they are part of that time period even if we are actually 100 years removed. The cinematography is as outstanding, similar to how the acting is. Soldiers will never again play so fair as the past, unfortunately war has become a lawless game. Praise it! 5/5

Signs Review- By Michael Carlisle

Title: Signs
Year: 2002
Director: M. Night Shyamalan
Country: US
Language: English

M.Night Shyamalan's fifth picture, Signs features a lot of crop circles; huge geometric shapes in fields of corn and wheat, which were seen all over the world in the 1970s. Many conspiracy theorists thought it was the work of aliens who were sending various messages on our planet. Their origin was explained in 1991 when two hoaxers came forward and demonstrated how they were made. Despite this the crop circles lives long after its unmasking, with many people forgetting or not knowing that they were explained. The director explores this phenomenon, as well as the idea that we may not be alone after all.

Preacher Graham Hess (Mel Gibson) has lost his faith in God after his wife dies in a brutal car accident. He along with his son and daughter and his brother Merrill (Joaquin Phoenix) moves into a farmhouse. Soon they find the appearance of mysterious crop circles, which suggest more frightening things to come.

The strength of Signs lies in the Director's unwillingness to explain what is happening. Shyamalan doesn't bother with labored explanations and a climax wrapped in a nice little package. Why do the aliens come to Earth? We aren't quite sure. This adds to the suspense and overall fear of what is about to happen. Rather relying on gore or jump scares, the film evokes us through pure emotion. We must listen intently, even when nothing is to be heard. We are on the edge of our seat, even when no action happens onscreen. 

The biggest fear Shyamalan sells us on is the collapse of the family unit. We do not fear the aliens because they are strong, rather we fear the aliens because the humans are week. Preacher Graham Hess is emotionally, physically and spiritually drained. He tries to be a role model, but sees that he is not in control of anything and thus must face the consequences of his inaction. As his faith gets stronger, his outlook does as well. Though the twist involving water is absurd, because why would aliens land on a planet made mostly of water, the film has a promising human climax

In conclusion, Signs is the greatest work of M.Night Shyamalan, though oddly enough he almost ruins it with his own cameo appearance. It's a picture about grief, dread and suffering. It has an atmosphere of ominous dread with very little explanation. Those who wish to make suspense nowadays ought to watch this picture.  Praise it! 4.5/5

The Happening Review- By Michael Carlisle

Title: The Happening
Year: 2008
Director: M. Night Shyamalan
Country: US 
Language: English

M.Night Shyamalan started his career strong with the 1999 classic The Sixth Sense which won the praise of critics and cinephiles alike. He would follow this with another hit, Unbreakable, a film about a man who seemingly cannot die, then slowly make worse pictures throughout the rest of his life. He compares himself to Hitchcock, which is quite baffling, as he has none of the technical master that Hitch did.  He is mainly known for his twist endings, which often don't make any sense. Why would aliens, who are allergic to water, come to a planet  made mostly of water?  His career hit an all time low in 2008, so why not review the picture that sank the tugboat?

In Shymalan's The Happening, a science teacher (Mark Whalberg), his wife (Zooey Deschanel) , and a young girl (Ashlyn Sanchez) struggle to survive a plague that causes those infected to commit suicide.

Rotten Tomatoes gives The Happening a 17% rating, even Mark Whalberg has gone on record saying that the film is "complete shit", only signing onto the project because he wanted to play a scientist. Unfortunately there is no science in this movie, the scientist just dismisses everything by saying "it's nature". Shyamalan tries to give us an explanation for why people are randomly committing suicide (is it the wind? the plants? are the clouds in on it?) but it's very conflicting and still not clear by the end of the film. Perhaps he was trying to instill a sense of realism. In reality, nobody would understand the cause of the sudden suicides and everybody would be trying to connect the dots. Citizens and news stations would voice conflicting beliefs as science races to put an end to the hysteria. That being said, if nature is killing you why wouldn't you just stay inside?

Shyamalan tries to stick an enironmental message in his picture, don't harm the environment or else it will harm you,  but it falls flat. The acting is atrocious; as bad as the script. I do think there are many memorable and frightening scenes, including a man purposefully laying in front of a tractor and an old woman going insane. It is very well paced, slowly unveiling the climax. If the Director intended The Happening to be a campy B-movie then I'd say he did a great job as it is very fun to watch, but as an intelligent thriller it fails on many levels. Great premise, lousy execution.

In conclusion, The Happening is worth watching, but only as brainless entertainment. It is not boring, but it's not full of substance either. This flick could have been far better in the right hands, but Shyamalan doesn't know what to do with the material and thus it cannot bloom. Does it deserve the low ratings? Yes and no. You'll enjoy yourself, but for all the wrong reasons.  2.5/5

Ace in the Hole Review- By Michael Carlisle

Title: Ace in the Hole
Year: 1951
Director: Billy Wilder
Country: US
Language: English

"I was attacked by every paper because of that movie. They loathed it. It was cynical, they said. Cynical, my ass. I tell you, you read about a plane crash somewhere nearby and you want to check out the scene, you can't get to it because ten thousand people are already there: they're picking up little scraps, ghoulish souvenir hunters. After I read those horrifying reviews about "Ace in the Hole", I remember I was going down Wilshire Boulevard and there was an automobile accident. Somebody was run over. I stopped my car. I wanted to help that guy who was run over. Then another guy jumps out of his car and photographs the thing. 'You'd better call an ambulance,' I said. 'Call a doctor, my ass. I've got to get to the L.A. Times. I've got a picture. I've got to move. I just took a picture here. I've got to deliver it.' But you say that in a movie, and the critics think you're exaggerating." - Billy Wilder

Kirk Douglas stars as a frustrated former big-city journalist named Chuck Tatum who is now stuck working for an Albuquerque newspaper. He exploits a story about a man trapped in a cave to re-jump start his career, but the situation quickly escalates into an out-of-control circus.

Billy Wilder's Ace in the Hole is a unique film noir; there are no private eyes in rundown offices, nor any femme fatales, nor are there any heroes. In this picture there are only victims. Douglas is a victim of his own greed and ambition, the man trapped in the cave is a victim of  fate, and everyone is a victim of the media. This satire of the media circus that would envelop us all goes beyond noir and falls into something more deep, more personal and more honest. Douglas' chilling over-the-top performance will chill its audience to the very core. 

The story, inspired by a 1925 incident in which a Kentucky man, trapped in a mine, was turned by reporters into a nationwide sensation, and eventually given to Wilder as a treatment by radio writer Newman. The media circus is only made possible by an apathetic society, under the guise of empathy. Essentially everyone is out for themselves, even when real lives are on the line. It is as true in post-war America as it is today, though nobody would make a film about the same kind of greed today because all the money is in Star Wars and the newest Comic Book adaptation. 

In conclusion, Ace in the Hole is a remarkable picture that expands the definition of "film noir". Billy Wilder has made a picture so grotesquely uncommercial that it is satisfying to see for the first time. It is a fundamental critique on North American society that must be viewed. Chuck Tatum is the most vile Wilder creation ever put to the screen, even he succumbs to his own self-hatred. Praise it! 5/5

Shallow Hal Review- By Michael Carlisle

Title: Shallow Hal
Year: 2001
Director(s): Farrely Brothers
Country: US
Language: English

"Hot young tail," his father says while on his deathbed. "That's what it's all about." Hal (Jack Black) promises his father that he will only date beautiful women. The Farrelly Brothers are the raunchiest Directors of the 90's, often pissing people off with their lowbrow and immature humor. They are not afraid to seek jokes where few would dare, like a children's burn ward. Despite this, they can occasionally made decent films. . Shallow Hal might be one of their better outings.

Hal is a very shallow individual who can only see a person's outer beauty. Then one day he is hypnotized by a self help guru and can only see the inner beauty of women. Thus he falls in love with Rosemary (Gwyneth Paltrow) , a 300 pound woman.

Some have criticized the Farelly Brothers for mocking the obese. While I can somewhat see where they're coming from, I'd argue that they are making us empathize with Rosemary, rather than laugh at her. While we are clearly seeing Rosemary's exterior beauty, it is necessary because visually it is the only way to see Hal's point of view. Due to this, we come to loathe Hal's buddy Jason Alexander for being so shallow that he breaks up with women because their big toe's are too big.

For Jack Black's first starring role, he has done a pretty good job at being a delusional bachelor desperately fallen in love with a girl who seems to not have had much luck in that department. I'm not a fan of how the directors treat Walt (Rene Kirby), a man who has spina bifida, as his disability is a source of many low-brow jokes. However, he is eventually treated with dignity. Shallow Hal is a mixed bag, but we can be certain that it is full of nuts.

In conclusion, Shallow Hal is very polarizing. It has as many people laughing as they do cringe. I'm on the fence about this, because while I do see their intention (don't judge a book by its cover) they often go too far and sometimes it seems like they're achieving the opposite of their goal. 2.5/5

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind Review- By Michael Carlisle

 Title: Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind
Year: 2004
Director: Spike Jonze
Country: US
Language: English

Charlie Kaufman was the most gifted screenplay writer of the 2000's. Even in the 90's he was making superb scripts like 1999's Being John Malkovich for director Spike Jonze. He was clearly fascinated by the process of thought and memory, many of his characters were curiously complicated because of this. Sometimes heavy with symbolism, Kaufman knew how to dissect modern life and strip it to the bare. Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind delivers the normally wacky Jim Carrey in his most serious role yet.

When their relationship turns sour, Joel (Jim Carrey) and Clementine (Kate Winslet) undergo a procedure to have each other erased from their memories. However, it is only through the process of loss that they discover what they had to begin with.

The film begins like a melancholic romantic comedy; extremely depressed Joel meets quirky Clementine and they fall in love. It has Sci-Fi elements but nothing in the picture suggests that they live in the future, not even the near distant future. The film is non-linear which is confusing at first, but as Eternal Sunshine progresses the chronology becomes a little more clear. Much of what happens is in Joel's memory, and as we know from psychology, the memory is very fickle. 

While the main plot is ingenious, the subplot involving Mary (Kirsten Dunst), Dr. Mierzwiak (Tom Wilkinson) and Patrick(Elijah Wood) is mediocre at best. We don't care at all for these characters, rather they are an inconvenience to the audience and only serve as some odd form of comedy which distracts from the main problem. Kaufman shows wisdom in the way he illuminates memory and love. Too often we focus on pain, which distracts us from the amazing experiences we have had. If Joel was not so focused on revenge and all the bad in his life perhaps he would have stayed a happy man.

In conclusion, such a unique concept like this would have gone to waste with any other director, screenwriter and cast but this near perfect ensemble manages to make a memorable picture. It is a feast for the mind, analyzing how memories are assembled and disasembled while simultaneously dissecting how the heart and mind work together. What would you choose if you could completely erase the memory of your ex? Praise it! 4/5

The Aviator Review- By Michael Carlisle

 Title: The Aviator
Year: 2004
Director: Martin Scorsese
Country: US
Language: English

Perhaps the most interesting man to have ever lived, Howard Hughes was an enigma wrapped inside a mystery. During his lifetime he was the richest man alive, yet struggled to overcome his extreme OCD. There are stories of him locking himself in his theatre, watching Ice Station Zebra dozens of times in a row and peeing in glass jars rather than seek a washroom. He rarely spoke to the public, only doing so via telephone when trying to dispel rumors made about the mad genius.

Leonardo DiCaprio plays the eccentric figure. The film opens with the shooting of Martin Scorsese's favourite flick; Hell's Angels. Even in his early years we can see Hughes' desire for perfection to come at a cost. We follow the man's life, uncertain that he will ever get the help he needs. 

The Aviator focuses on Hughes' golden years, when he has not yet bought a bungalow  behind the Beverly Hills Hotel and refused to leave. Like most Scorsese characters, we see his time at the top. Spending lavishly, dating Hollywood's greatest beauties, an heir to his father's fortune. Life seems dreamy, but he slowly fights to be mentally healthy. At times he can see what's normal, but unfortunately it grows out of his reach. 

Leonardo DiCaprio pulls off a great performance as he endures two simultaneous emotional storms; one where Howard Hughes is a success professionally, another where he is a failure personally. Though even trapped within his own mind, he is able to pull off a great public act without revealing too much about his private life. Unfortunately DiCaprio is nobody's ideal look-a-like for Hughes, but he does capture the spirit of a genius. Scorsese should be applauded for perfectly capturing the look and feel of the Golden Age of Hollywood. His use of special effects greatly enhance the picture, rather than destroy it with phonyness. 

In conclusion, while Cate Blanchette didn't strike me as a convincing portrayal of Katharine Hepburn, I felt the film was vibrant with energy and captured all the excitement of that particular era. Scorsese rarely makes a poor picture, and this was no exception. The Aviator is a film I would watch many times over. Praise it! 4.5/5

Vengeance is Mine Review- By Michael Carlisle

Title: Vengeance is Mine
Year: 1979
Director: Shohei Imamura
Country: Japan
Language: Japanese

Curious about the film, I asked one of my friends about it. He said that Shohei Imamura's Vengeance is Mine was like a "Japanese version of American Psycho". This immediately sent me to the store, as I wanted to own a copy. Imamura was an innovative director, who spent much of the 60's and 70's making pictures regarding the displacement felt by Japanese Citizens following World War II. He transformed a stale film industry, pouring his heart and soul into his fiction and non-fiction works.

Basing his screenplay on a true crime novel by Ryuzo Saki. The story follows killer Iwao Enokizu (Ken Ogata, Mishima, a small-time con man who went on a five-person killing spree, eluding police for over two months. 

The plot is non-linear, it weaves out of present and past, and is all the better for it. There is no real reason for Enokizu's killings, although some suggest his run is a suicide-by-cop scheme while others contemplate if it's a rejection of the old ways of the samurai, which was death by honorable hara-kiri.  A modern psychologist would claim Enokizu is simply a sociopath. His victims are all powerless, he shows great weakness against any authority, including his own father, whom he has every notion to kill.

It is not clear where the vengeance is in the picture. Enokizu's murders seem random and their death proves no point. He doesn't even seem to have strong feelings for the people he kills. When the cops ask for a confession, he has no important statement to make. Although he seems to not care what happens to him or the people in his society, so why devulge important information at all? He only shows passion when he is having sex, which says a lot about the animalistic nature of man. He claims to be a catholic, yet is far from it in practice.

In conclusion, Vengeance is Mine is a great film that I hope to watch many more times so I can get a better idea of the symbolism in it and what it has to say. The performances are astounding and the cinematography is intelligent. Imamura never ceases to amaze me, his direction is simply perfection. Praise it! 5/5