The Birds Review- By Michael J. Carlisle

Title: The Birds
Year: 1963
Director: Alfred Hitchcock
Country: US
Language: English

By the time the 1960's rolled around, Sir Alfred Hitchcock had already cemented his legacy as "The Master of Suspense". He was beloved throughout the world, having won a staggering amount of awards throughout his career. One person who didn't love him however, was Tipi Hedren, star of The Birds. She thought of him as a misogynist; a "sad" character who ruined her career by keeping her to an exclusive contract for two years when she rebuffed his sexual advances. This was unfortunate, because Hedren had the looks of a major female box office attraction. 

 Tipi Hedren stars as a wealthy San Francisco socialite, who  pursues a potential boyfriend to a small Northern California town that slowly takes a turn for the bizarre when birds of all kinds suddenly begin to attack people in increasing numbers and with increasing viciousness.

Based on a 1952 short story by Daphne du Maurier, The Birds is grisly, brooding and savage. Hitchcock has no conventional score, but instead makes a soundtrack out of dive-bombing gulls and crows. One may wonder if the external events (bird invasion) is a reflection of internal events in each character's mind (love birds= Hedren's love? Crows= emotional distress?) and that would certainly be typical of Hitchcock, but I'm not sure the characters are well developed enough to make this claim. The Birds is a little bit of a miss, because the patented Hitchcockian  "psychological horror" slowly devolves into "AHHHH! The birds are clawing my EYES!!!" 

It was not difficult to scare a 1960's audience with gore, and I certainly think critics at the time mistook the disgust for blood, mayhem and missing eye sockets for genuine fear. Personally, I was bored by this picture, which had all the contraptions of a B-movie, just with better cast and a bigger budget. While the special effects, were done at Walt Disney Studios by animator/technician Ub Iwerks, may have been great at the time (though I've seen better from that period) they are laughably dated by the standards of today. Hitchcock has made classics like Vertigo which stand the test of time, but The Birds has been outdone by Birdemic: Shock and Terror. 

 The Birds certainly isn't a great picture, it's not even a "good picture". How this glorified heap of trash is still being talked about in 2015 and beyond is beyond me. Sure, the ending is memorable and slightly spooky, but that brings it up to a Shyamalan flick at best. Thankfully this picture didn't represent a permanent slump for the Director, as he would make more memorable, but often overlooked, films. 0.5/5

Jurassic Park Review- By Michael J. Carlisle

 Title: Jurassic Park
Year: 1993
 Director: Steven Spielberg 
Country: US
Language: English

Based on Michael Crichton's novel of the same name, Jurassic Park is the first installment of the Jurassic film series which includes two awful sequels. With the backing of Universal Studios, Spielberg acquired the rights for $1.5 million before publication in 1990; Crichton was hired for an additional $500,000 to adapt the novel for the screen.It had an extensive an extensive $65 million marketing campaign, which included licensing deals with 100 companies. The marketing worked; Jurassic Park grossed over $900 million worldwide in its original theatrical run and became the highest grossing movie of all time until James Cameron's bloated Titanic in 1997.

 Huge advancements in scientific technology have enabled a mogul to create an island full of living dinosaurs. John Hammond (Richard Attenborough) has invited four individuals, along with his two grandchildren, to join him at Jurassic Park. During the preview tour, the theme park suffers a major power breakdown that allows its cloned dinosaur exhibits to run amok.

Jurassic Park won more than 20 awards (including 3 Academy Awards), mostly for its technical achievements. Brought in to create the unique look and movements of the dinosaurs were Stan Winston, who insisted that they be animatronic rather than stop-motion; motion superisor Phil Tippett; on-set effects supervisor Michael Lantien;  ILM animators Mark Dippé and Steve Williams and paleontologist Jack Horner. Together, they were able to make dinosaurs look more "realistic" than originally thought possible. The dinosaurs looked more animal-like than monsters.

Unfortunately, this is where the positive aspects of Jurassic Park ends. It's a rather tedious film which relies on jump scares and the blood curdling screams of children to create tension amongst its viewers. Jurassic Park throws a lot of dinosaurs at us, but doesn't have any convincing human characters. The acting is stiff and their emotions are a jumbled mess of "AHHHHHH!". How is Spielberg's "masterpiece" any different from a B-monster flick? Aside from the establishing shot of the park, there is nothing worth any amount of awe or excitement. Pity, because the movie had all the potential to be a remarkably intelligent journey.

A great mess of cliches, Spielberg succeeds in technical production but fails in providing any kind of depth and ultimately undermines the intelligence of his audience. Jurassic Park is yet another film that reminds us not to play God. Such a shame, because Spielberg does know how to tell great stories (like Schindler's List, which came out the same year) but this is just mindless entertainment at best.  3/5

All About Eve Review- By Michael J. Carlisle

Title: All About Eve 
Year: 1950
Director: Joseph Mankiewicz
Country: US
Language: English

"Fasten your seat-belts, it's going to be a bumpy night!"The story of All About Eve originated in an anecdote related to Mary Orr by actress Elisabeth Bergner.While performing in The Two Mrs. Carrolls during 1943 and 1944, Bergner allowed a young fan to become part of her household, eventually regretting her kind favor as Orr constantly tried to undermine her.  This messy relationship was the basis of Bergner's short story The Wisdom of Eve (1946). In 1949 American film Director Joseph Mankiewicz  considered making a film treatment for Wisdom of Eve and presented his idea to Daryl F. Zanuck. The Twentieth Century Fox studio executive was thrilled to help produce the picture. It was eventually nominated  for 14 Academy Awards and won six, including Best Picture.

An ingenue named Eve Harrington (Anne Baxter) insinuates herself in to the company of an established but aging stage actress (Bette Davis) and her circle of theater friends. Eve slowly conspires against her friend, out of desire for success.

CAT FIGHT! Receiving overwhelmingly positive reviews from critics upon its release, All About Eve has been intensely analyzed by film historians for the better part of a century. One can view the film as a study of post-war politics regarding sexuality and gender roles. The pressure to resume "traditional" female roles after being involved in the workplace while the men went to war is mocked by Margo and Eve. Karen Richards (Celeste Holm) is seen as a "happy little housewife" who is not truly a woman due to having a man constantly beside her. The feuding actresses in Eve and Margo are the opposite of the commercial 50's woman; they're competitive, ruthless, egotistic and powerful. They're physically and mentally strong, no man will get in their way on their rise to the top.

The Oscar-winning script allowed Joseph Mankiewicz to climb out from under the shadow of his older brother, Herman, who had earned an Oscar for writing one of the all-time great scripts in Citizen Kane (1941) Like Kane, All About Eve revolutionized the sort of non-linear, fratured narrative structure to which we’ve become so accustomed. The characters in All About Eve are rather complex; by the third act we have completely different sentiments for each character.  Mankiewicz's universe is as exuberant as it is cynical. Here every emotion is put on the table, no motive is far fetched and everyone is suspect of psychological manipulation. In the world of theater it seems as if nobody can be trusted, aside from the naive folk like Karen Richards.

All About Eve is one of my favorite films ever made. Bette Davis is quite a phenomenal actress, and I'm glad this picture gave her a boost to her then fading career. The run-time is well over two hours, but that doesn't seem enough. Mankiewicz could have made All About Eve a 4hr epic and I still would be glued to my seat. I suppose that's a testament to how well the film was made.  Praise it! 5/5

Odd Man Out Review- By Michael J. Carlisle

 Title: Odd Man Out
Year: 1947
Director: Carol Reed
Country: UK
Language: English

Born December 30, 1906 Sir Carol Reed was an English film director who made one of the greatest UK films of all time; The Third Man starring Joseph Cotton and Orson Welles. In 1953, he became only the second British film director to be knighted for his craft, the first being Alexander Korda; the producer of some of Reed's most admired films. In 1968 he won an Academy Award for Best Picture with his admittedly dated musical Oliver! Decades before that event however, he directed James Mason in the actor's self proclaimed greatest performance in Odd Man Out

A wounded Irish nationalist leader named Johnny (James Mason) attempts to evade police following a failed robbery. Action and fleeting takes place in Belfast, Northern Ireland.

Odd Man Out was the first British film to win the BAFTA award for "Best British Film" after the event was established in 1948. It is commonly claimed to be a masterpiece and earns this title by capturing a deceptive, tilting world in which man is a stranger even in his hometown. Working with the Australian-born, German-trained cinematographer Robert Krasker, Reed's picture visuals perfectly describe the pessimistic post-war attitude of Western Europe. Undeniably noir, Reed’s urban nightscapes does dare to show some compassion and humanity in the form of some remarkable individuals, but nonetheless his atmosphere is full of dread, doubt and doom.

Helpless, gradually immobilized, the dying Johnny takes on a fantastic, morbid glamour. He’s both pitied and coveted; a prized object and a cursed thing that no one wants. Odd Man contains both the realism of David Lean's Brief Encounter and the visionary excess of a Powell and Pressburger picture. The film begins with a more neo-realist tone but becomes increasingly stylized as it progresses. This transition doesn't harm the plot too much, but the nearly 2hr run time eventually feels excessive and tedious. Reed's picture is compelling, Mason's character is complex and well developed, and the score is remarkable but I still feel a half hour or so should have been cut.

While ultimately powerful, I felt that the ending could have been greater if it borrowed from John Steinbeck's Of Mice and Men. It is unfortunate however,  that the violent ending had to be toned down after receiving negative criticism from test audiences. I would agree with Mason that this is his best performance of his career, I'm quite surprised by the English actor's range. Reed has certainly made a memorable film for the ages. Praise it! 4.5/5

Saving Private Ryan Review- By Michael J. Carlisle

Title: Saving Private Ryan
Year: 1998
Director: Steven Spielberg
Country: US
Language: English

The late 90's and early 2000's saw a resurgence of World War II fanaticism into Western pop culture. Games like Call of Duty and Medal of Honor made an incredible amount of money, garnered a huge following, and are still being made to this day. Films such as Terrence Malick's Thin Red Line and Steven Spielberg's Saving Private Ryan were a huge box office success and swept the Oscars that year. 9/11 and the second gulf war changed the public's perception of war and would make WWII flicks unattractive, but for a brief period of time Nazis were America's favorite enemy.

Following the Normandy Landings, a group of U.S. soldiers go behind enemy lines to retrieve a paratrooper whose brothers have been killed in action.

The movie's opening scene is considered so shocking that it still talked about to this day. Indeed it is quite graphic; more-so than the majority of real war footage and unlike anything I've seen in any other Hollywood war picture. It successfully demonstrates the chaotic, terrifying nature of the battlefield as Spielberg tries his best not to glorify the act of war. Spielberg's camera makes no sense of the action, because for the average soldier the Normandy landing was a jumbled mess of noise, blood and death. 

Spielberg does a tremendous job showing the distance between those who give the order that Pvt. Ryan be saved, and those who are ordered to do the saving. "This Ryan better be worth it" grumbles one of the men. None of the men, even Capt Miller (Tom Hanks), is sure this Ryan is alive, even if so, there's no certainty that the mission is worth their lives. Saving Private Ryan is quite a suspenseful film, but its attempts at philosophy and reflection come off as shallow due to the sentimental, and often patriotic, tone of the picture. It does have heart, but it lacks a brain, especially when showing attempting to portray any other nationality besides American. 

Overall I think Malick's Thin Red Line is the stronger war film of 1998. Lacking the courage of any real conviction, Saving Private Ryan cannot offer any challenge to its audience. Instead, it panders to that audience with easy answers, impressive effects and a soundtrack that boils the blood of patriots. It's technically well made of course, and the first ten minutes are masterful, but overall I was not impressed. 2.5/5

E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial Review- By Michael J. Carlisle

Title: E.T.
Year: 1982
Director: Steven Spielberg
Country: US
Language: English

Born December 18, 1948 Steven Allan Spielberg is considered one of the founding pioneers of the blockbuster era. This era was defined by American adventure flicks that cared for special effects over dialogue, and action over character. Jaws (1975) started this trend, while George Lucas' Star Wars (1977) cemented it into pop culture and convinced the studios to abandon the carefree attitude of the former New Hollywood era. The 80's churned out more cashgrabs, but no money-maker captured our hearts quite like E.T. did in 1982.

E.T's plot is essentially about a troubled child (Henry Thomas), who summons the courage to help a friendly alien escape Earth and return to his home-world.

Steven Spielberg always described E.T. as his most personal film, but it was a decade after its release before he admitted that his enchanting tale of an alien stranded in suburbia is really about his parents' divorce. No other director could have blended the domestic setting with a science fiction adventure and gotten away with it. Spielberg's picture is breathtaking at times; it melts your heart with its innocence and mesmerizing quality. Very few films capture the feeling of what its like to be a child in subrubia, but this one certainly does.

E.T is an impressively enjoyable movie, even if it is overshadowed by spikes of fear and anxiety at times.  he story is quite a narrative accomplishment. It reveals facts about the E.T.'s nature; it develops the personalities of Elliott, his mother, brother and sister; it tells us a lot about extra-terrestrial life without numbing us with exposition and voice-over.
This is a triumph of the imagination, because the creature is so utterly convincing that we feel empathy and legitimately care when he/she/it is in danger.

Could E.T. be remade nowadays and still have the same effect? I doubt it. CGI seems to be no match for a puppet, even if it can physically do more. Upon researching for this review I was surprised to find out that Spielberg shot most of the film from the eye-level of a child to further connect with Elliot and E.T.This is remarkable foresight and proved to be essential to cementing the picture's legacy. In addition, John William's score is masterful, essential to the grand beauty of it all. Praise it! 5/5

Inception Review- By Michael J. Carlisle

Title: Inception
Year: 2010
Director: Christopher Nolan
Country: US
Language: English

It is said that Dark Knight Trilogy director Christopher Nolan spent 10 years working on the screenplay for Inception, in my opinion he should have spent a longer time. The man trots out the old brain myth which states that we only use a small part of our brain (10%). Many other mainstream films, like Luc Besson's most recent Sci-fi Lucy, hinge on this fallacy.Medical studies have repeatedly shown that humans use all parts of the brain. It's a common error, but if the man is going to create characters like Cobb who are top experts on neuroscience then he shouldn't write dialogue that is suitable for an undergraduate at best. 

A thief who steals corporate secrets through use of dream-sharing technology is given the inverse task of planting an idea into the mind of a CEO.

Most of us have plenty of ideas -good and bad, practical and impractical- but we don't always act on them. So how exactly would we know if the inception was successful or not? Even if the idea was successfully imprinted into the CEO's mind it doesn't mean they will act upon it. Plot holes and inconsistencies aside; despite the fact that the characters are inside a dream (within a dream, within a dream) it doesn't look or feel like it aside from strange architecture and zero gravity some of the time. The mind is far more complex than Inception gives credit, dreams are also far more surreal and random.

Credit should be given to the editor, who must have had a tough job in the editing room trying to make the convoluted plot make a lick of sense. The score is memorable, likely because it's being used for almost every gritty superhero reboot. The acting is poor at best; even Leonardo DeCaprio's performance just doesn't stand out. It was hard to care for any of the characters because of the wooden dialogue and un-established subplots. Sorry Cobb, but I just don't care about your dead wife. Was that a spoilter? I can't tell.

Inception is a film I haven't watched, talked about or even thought about since I viewed it once in 2010. Every film about dreams has the potential and permission to be as abstract as it wants to, but this was far too conventional and even cliche at some points. For such a popular film, it has very little redemptive qualities. Piss on it! 0.5/5

Who Framed Roger Rabbit Review- By Michael J. Carlisle

Title: Who Framed Roger Rabbit
Year: 1988
Director: Robert Zemeckis
Country: US
Language: English

Since the 1940's there have been films which blend live-action and animated elements, typically both interacting with each other. The 1940 Warner Bros. cartoon You Ought to Be in Pictures, directed by Friz Freleng, brought this trend to the mainstream and Anchors Aweigh (1945), in which Gene Kelly dances with an animated Jerry Mouse, set the bar in terms of quality and had many imitators. For me, the best example of this...style? genre? was Who Framed Roger Rabbit

'Toon star Roger Rabbit is worried that his wife Jessica is playing pattycake with someone else, so the studio hires detective Eddie Valiant (Bob Hoskins) to snoop on her. The stakes are quickly raised when Marvin Acme is found dead and Roger is the prime suspect.

Who Framed Roger Rabbit is a remarkable film; not only because it blends live action and animation, but also because it is a mixture of genres & styles which appeals to both child and adult alike. When I viewed this picture as a child I missed a lot of jokes, as well as Valiant's creeping alcoholism, but as an adult more of the story is visible to me. In retrospect, it shouldn't be that shocking that a guy named "Judge Doom", who is seen harming toons, is the bad guy of the story.

 Director Robert Zemeckis allows us to believe (at least for 90 minutes) that "toons" exist, and that they are capable of interacting with 3-dimensional human beings. For this movie, animation director Richard Williams set out to break three rules that previously were conventions for combining live-action and animation: first, move the camera as much as possible so the Toons don't look pasted on flat backgrounds; second, use lighting and shadows to an extreme that was never before attempted; third, have the Toons interact with real-world objects and people as much as possible. It was a big risk and an incredible gamble, but it eventually paid off despite initially costing $70 million to make.

Even 20+ years after its theatrical debut, the "advanced" 1988 special effects still look remarkable.  Virtually every major cartoon character of the late 1940s shows up, with the exceptions of Felix the Cat and Popeye the Sailor, whose licensees couldn't come to terms with the producer. I couldn't image how difficult post-production should have been. Considering Bob Hoskins wasn't actually interacting with anybody on stage, his acting ability is really impressive. Roger Rabbit is very funny as well. "They're playing patty cake!?" Praise it! 4/5

Arsenic and Old Lace Review- By Michael J. Carlisle

Title: Arsenic and Old Lace
Year: 1944
Director: Frank Capra
Country: US
Language: English

Over the years I've soured on the filmography of Frank Capra. Most of his pictures, especially post-war, were far too sentimental. With It's A Wonderful Life he came off as dishonest and condescending; it was a picture nobody wanted at the time and it showed when the film wasn't able to make its money back until the 70's when it was presented by television stations around Christmas-time.  Two films, It Happened One Night and Arsenic and Old Lace, are the exception to my distaste for Capra-corn. I will review the latter now.

A drama critic (Cary Grant) learns on his wedding day that his beloved maiden aunts are homicidal maniacs, and that insanity runs in his family.

Arsenic is not just a good comedy, it may be the greatest comedy to ever be put to screen! Unfortunately Cary Grant considered his acting in this film to be horribly over the top and often called it his least favorite of all his movies. Screenwriter Julius J. Epstein complained to Frank Capra that Cary Grant's acting "was going overboard with the comedy." Capra agreed and told the writer that it would be toned down in the editing process. However, when World War II unexpectedly began, Capra left the studio to make propaganda films and could not oversee this picture's editing. I personally don't agree with the complaints made, because Grant's cheesy acting contribute very well to the comedic tone of the film. A toned down Grant might have made for a less entertaining experience. 

With Cary Grant's talent for madcap comedy, combined with the aunts' sinister plans and his wife's oblivious nature make Arsenic unpredictable, chaotic and remarkably fun. There is plenty of witty dialogue, lots of funny slapstick and physical humor, and quite a few wild plot developments. None of it is meant to be plausible, but this theatrical version does great justice to its stage origins. At the height of the Hays' code and the middle of WWII for most countries,  creating black comedy must have been incredibly difficult for Capra, but he pulled it off with astounding success.

I've seen Arsenic and Old Lace many times, none of which make me fail to laugh at the slightest. The cinematography, music, script and actors all combine to make one clever flick that is incredibly hard to forget. While I do think the film could have been slightly shorter, as it does get a tad tedious near the end, I still think this is quite a masterpiece. Praise it! 4,5/5

It Happened One Night Review- By Michael J. Carlisle

Title: It Happened One Night
Year: 1934
Director: Frank Capra
Country: US
Language: English

Over the years I've soured on the filmography of Frank Capra. Most of his pictures, especially post-war, were far too sentimental. With It's A Wonderful Life he came off as dishonest and condescending; it was a picture nobody wanted at the time and it showed when the film wasn't able to make its money back until the 70's when it was presented by television stations around Christmas-time.  Two films, It Happened One Night and Arsenic and Old Lace, are the exception to my distaste for Capra-corn. I will review the former now.

 A spoiled heiress (Claudette Colbert), running away from her family, is helped by a man (Clark Gable) who's actually a reporter looking for a story. Throughout their journey it seems like they are slowly falling in love, but the reporters intentions are suspicious at best.

The first film to win the Oscar "grand slam" (Best Picture, Best Actor, Best Actress, Best Director and Screenplay) It Happened One Night is credited as being the first screwball romantic comedy. Unfortunately both stars were displeased with the picture as it was in production, with Colbert complaining on set everyday and eventually telling a friend "I just finished making the worst picture I've ever made". History would be more kind as it is almost universally acknowledged as a masterpiece for the ages. Certainly just the fact that I decided to review the picture, which is 81 years old as of 2015, will tell you much about its positive legacy.

Director Frank Capra, the great American cheerleader, assures everyone that his fair country’s wide-open spaces, while not without peril, are full of fellowship and democracy. It is an escapist flick that, astoundingly, treats both genders with more respect than the majority of modern comedies. While It Happened One Night is a Depression Era movie through and through, with images of people looking for jobs and hints of hunger & class division, it remains incredibly sexy. Colbert and Gable do not need to have sex nor do they need to break the damned Hays code to demonstrate their incredible chemistry.

Joseph Walker’s cinematography can be both gritty and gauzy, focusing on tiny confined spaces and on vast open one. Capra's desire for lengthy takes improves the quality of the film as it allows for each gag to set in quite comfortably. The characters are certainly American; Colbert represents a democratic capitalistic ideology, but this does not deter from the story. Much of the dialogue, including the famous "arguing married couple" scene in the middle of the picture, is hilarious even after multiple viewings. Praise it! 5/5

Broadway Danny Rose Review- By Michael J. Carlisle

Title: Broadway Danny Rose
Year: 1984
Director: Woody Allen
Country: US
Language: English

Of all the Woody Allen films I've watched, Broadway Danny Rose was the hardest to locate. Luckily the distribution label Twilight Time has a limited edition blu-ray which you can find on the Screen Archives Entertainment website for approximately $30 US. Personally, I feel like the 1980's was the Director's boom period. Allen collaborated with his then lover Mia Farrow to create masterpiece after masterpiece. The majority of the pictures were introspective and brooding (Crimes and Masterpieces) but he was also able to make fun chaotic romps. 

In his attempts to reconcile a lounge singer (Nick Forte) with his mistress (Mia Farrow), a hapless talent agent (Woody Allen) is mistaken as her lover by a jealous gangster.

The thirteenth feature film directed by Woody Allen, Broadway Danny Rose is also one of his favorites along with Purple Rose of Cairo. During his relationship with Mia Farrow Woody Allen loved to write roles for Farrow that she had always wanted to play but couldn't because no one would believe her as that particular character. Even though she was already an established actress by the mid-80's most people in the film industry couldn't see the seemingly fragile woman being able to play a convincing Italian woman, but Allen was so sure of her talent that he wrote the screenplay specifically so she could play the part. Remarkably Farrow's performance as Tina Vitale is a real treasure. It's a complete transformation from her usual roles and definitely does show her versatility. 

The main character, Danny Rose, is one of Woody Allen's most touching characters. The skating penguins and singing parrots who are Danny's clients fit perfectly in the world of poor show-biz. Rose is a man with a dream, but has a lot of bumps throughout his struggle to the top. This particular bump (being chased by a jealous gangster) is hilarious. The notoriously neurotic actor/director places his character in a situation where panic would be completely understandable, even welcomed. Among the most gratifying things about ''Broadway Danny Rose,'' which is one of Mr. Allen's more modest films, is the almost flawless dialogue which never lets the story down.

The costumes, this time by Jeffrey Kurland, and the production design, by Mel Bourne, are subtly hilarious throughout. Dick Hyman's score and Susan E. Morse's editing are perfectly apt. And Gordon Willis, again working in black and white, manages to do exquisite photographic work in some very unlikely places. Everything works in this beautiful picture. Praise it! 4.5/5

The Hangover Review- By Michael J. Carlisle

Title: The Hangover 
Director: Todd Phillips
Year: 2009
Country: US
Language: English

My older brother David Carlisle recommended that I watch  The Hangover. Until that point I had been hesitant however, because on paper it reminded me of the 2000 flick Dude, Where's My Car? which was mind numbingly awful. Thankfully Todd Phillips' venture is just a smidge smarter, slightly raunchier and has a bit of heart. It isn't a comedic masterpiece by any means, but it has genuinely funny moments despite following a formula. 

Three buddies wake up from a bachelor party in Las Vegas, with no memory of the previous night and the bachelor missing. They make their way around the city in order to find their friend before his wedding.

 The Hangover is really just another entry into the "one crazy night" genre, it's Superbad but made for a different demographic. The crazy characters do absolutely anything together- ranging from self-dentistry to stealing Mike Tyson's tiger- and tread the line between "boys will be boys" and "that guy might be a sociopath". It's an immense amount of fun, making us wish we were along for the ride but at the same time it's clear we would never be friends with these people. This is the story drunk idiots wish they could tell, but sadly can't.

One aspect I didn't like about The Hangover was the treatment of women. This movie is a "boys only" club where women are treated as fun vampires; nags, who are kept from the adventure in order to take care of their children. Perhaps a female might not have been suitable in a movie about male bonding, but the concept surely could have been (no pun intended) broader in vision. Movies like this try to sell us on the idea that "real men secretly fear their wives" and that is nonsense. Women can be just as funny and outrageous, Bridesmaids proves this 

Despite the fact that The Hangover is a one sex/gender show, I found the film rather enjoyable. While it never threw me into a fit of laughter, I could certainly enjoy the comedy and the messy situation the guys were in. How would they find the bachelor? Where was he? It was a good bit of mystery that kept me guessing. 3/5

Horrible Bosses Review- By Michael J. Carlisle

Title: Horrible Bosses
Year: 2011
Director: Seth Gordon
Country: US
Language: English

The first time I viewed Seth Gordon's Horrible Bosses I was underwhelmed, because I had expected a careful and calculating dark comedy with a hint of dramatic murder mystery (think Cohen Brothers' Fargo or Robert Hamer's Kind Hearts and Coronets) This picture has roots in slapstick comedy and is rather cartoon-ish. It has a considerable lack of depth & not a hint of serious emotion. While initially I considered this a weakness, now I consider those qualities a strength that pushes the film forward. 

Nick (Jason Bateman) hates his boss because he's a blackmailing jerk. Dale (Charlie Day) hates his boss because she sexually harasses him. Curt (Jason Sudeikis) likes his boss, but when he dies his cocaine addict son takes over and makes Curt's work-life miserable. Together they plan to kill their bosses Strangers On A Train style.

Horrible Bosses is an R-rated comedy, which usually would get a groan from me as most comedies with this rating are full of poop jokes, but Gordon's picture is raunchy without trying far too hard to offend. It is profane without being reundant and outrageous without being tedious. One main reason is due to the actors; Bateman, Sudeikis and Day can do a lot with minimal material. Unlike many modern comedies, most of the hilarity is in the dialogue and character interaction rather than visuals. Bateman plays a great "straight man", which was necessity to have in the presence of two bumbling idiots.

Murder. Car chases. Scandal. Conspiracy. Blackmail. Revenge Horrible Bosses plays with the fantasies of many working men and women, although is far more contrived and deservedly so. The ridiculous twists and turns keep the picture entertaining and make it far from predictable. Even the seemingly scariest character Motherf*cker  (Jamie Foxx) is full of surprises. My only gripe with this picture is that it makes light of rape and sexual harassment in the workplace. I suppose the writer(s) thought this would be acceptable if the genders were switched, but this still is creepy. The joke is that males can't be raped by women because men like to have sex with women at all times. Errr....

Despite that particular relationship, I would recommend this picture to those who want to laugh but don't wish to seek out films as old as Arsenic and Old Lace, mainly because I can't think of many examples of "good" mainstream comedies in 2015. Horrible Bosses is clever, well written and often hilarious. 3.5/5

The Cameraman Review- By Michael J. Carlisle

 Title: The Cameraman
Year: 1928
Director: Edward Sedgwick
Country: US

The advent of sound came in 1927 and Joe Schenck stopped producing films as an independent in order to run United Artists. Keaton's beloved studio closed and thus the comic decided to sign with MGM at the protest of Lloyd and Chaplin. This proved to be a poor decision; shortly after he acquiesced to pathetic roles in limp, big-budget spectaculars, and gave in to a long-creeping alcoholism. He pitched to Irving Thalberg a full-length parody of the recent MGM megahit Grand Hotel, which was immediately denied. The Cameraman (1928) would remain the only MGM comedy with a clear imprint of Keaton's vision. 

After becoming infatuated with a pretty office worker for MGM Newsreels, Buster trades in his tintype operation for a movie camera and sets out to impress the girl (and MGM) with his work.

 This film was used for many years by MGM as an example of a perfect comedy. The studio would get all its directors and producers to watch it and learn. Although unlike Keaton's earlier masterpieces, very few stunts were improvised on the fly/ Sadly, Keaton was originally given very limited creative freedom. Only when the original Director Edward Sedgwick couldn't get the set-ups he wanted, couldn't get the actors to understand his direction, and eventually gave up, was Keaton given a temporary chance to flourish in a studio system that always attempted to undermine him at every turn.

Not surprisingly, some of the funniest and most inspired moments were not in the script but were improvised by Buster during filming: when he pantomimes a baseball game in Yankee Stadium, when he calmly demolishes his room in an effort to open his piggy bank, and when he attempts to change into a swimsuit in a small cubicle shared with an irascible fat man. The Cameraman reflects Buster's fascination with film-making and the mechanics of the camera. His character's clumsy initial efforts are a textbook of film-making mistakes. The romance is much more developed in this picture, than any of his earlier films.

The Cameraman is a terrific blend of humor, drama and romance. If Keaton was never allowed to make a a picture in his vision again- and subsequently, he never was- this is a last great swan song. The current print, from the TCM archives, is rather poor however. Hopefully a good restoration is in the works. Praise it! 4/5

The Navigator Review- By Michael Carlisle

 Title: The Navigator
Year: 1924
Director(s): Buster Keaton & Donald Crisp
Country: US

While The General (1926) and Steamboat Bill Jr. (1928) are the most revered Buster Keaton pictures among modern film enthusiasts, The Navigator was  Buster Keaton’s most popular vehicle in his own day, and said to be Keaton’s favorite of his own films.. The Navigator isn't as thought provoking and intelligent as his best works, but it's a brilliant slapstick comedy regardless. It has a fantastic third act, culminating in a riotous climax.

The star plays a spoiled rich twit who seeks solace from a rejected marriage proposal in a long sea voyage, Then Keaton and his intended (Kathryn McGuire) find themselves stranded on an otherwise deserted ocean liner, fending for themselves for the first time.

The Navigator was co-directed by Keaton and actor/director Donald Crisp. In a familiar Keaton-esque setup, The Navigator's plot is dependent on utter lunacy. The premise is quite inventive, even if it is quite far fetched. Comic highlights include a virtuoso exercise in comic timing in which the hero and heroine, unaware of each other’s presence, wander the ship looking for another soul; their subsequent struggles to make breakfast; and Buster’s battles with a recalcitrant deck chair.  

Keaton drifted through his career with content passivity; it had always been other who pushed the stoic comic into new heights.  Keaton wanted stories of a certain kind of innocence, and aspiration, and even mulish indifference to what might make people laugh.  His pictures gave the action sequences a documentary flavor, not just because he never faked stunts but also because what was captured on film was a bold attempt at something really dangerous or difficult, not a practiced slam dunk. Unlike Chaplin, Keaton thought rehearsing performances looked "too damn mechanical" The Navigator itself is s richer in gags and weaker in drama. It lacks the warm heart of his later pictures, yet is special because it has such a remarkable Keaton touch. 

Buster Keaton's excellent use of body language, pantomime, and facial expression put him in league with other of his revered peers, such as Charlie Chaplin and Harold Lloyd.This picture is a fine example of his genius at work; a prime explanation of the man's popularity at the time. Though it doesn't feel as complete as its other works, The Navigator is an hour well spent. 3.5/5

Steamboat Bill Jr Review- By Michael J. Carlisle

Title: Steamboat Bill Jr.
Year: 1928
Director: Buster Keaton
Country: US
Language: English

Steamboat Bill Jr. and The General (1926) are generally conceived by critic's to be Buster Keaton's last masterpieces. The former was made a year after Warner Brothers' The Jazz Singer made "talkies" all the rage, thus was considerably less popular at the time. It does contain Keaton's most famous stunt, where an actual full weight wall nearly falls on top of him. Interestingly enough, the previous day he was told that his studio was being shut down, and was so devastated that he didn't care if the wall crushed him or not. 

Buster Keaton stars as an  effete son of a cantankerous riverboat captain, who decides to join his father's crew.  

Keaton was a seemingly natural director and stuntman; blessed with the gift of knowing precisely where to put his camera at every moment for maximum emotional and comical impact. . Most of the movie is done in long shots so that the audience can see the reality of the stunts and gags without cutting. Close-ups are used sparingly, only to underline a particular emotion. The placement of the actors within the frame is always flawless. If Keaton does a fall, he sets up the shot so that the starting point, fall, and landing are all perfectly composed, going from one end of the frame to the other.

The cyclone sequence, changed from a large flood due to a real Mississippi flood and bickering amongst the producers, is breathtaking. It has a real human element that we don't see in any modern movies, even if they look more "real" (actually the CGI usually shatters the illusion of a "real" storm) Keaton braves the storm with no raincoat, and in full view, striding almost horizontally along the street, making no headway at all. The sequence in the film is clearly done with some kind of crane carrying the uprooted tree, but it's still impressive. 

Unfortunately, the failure of the original copyright holder to renew the film's copyright resulted in it falling into public domain, meaning that virtually anyone could duplicate and sell a VHS/DVD copy of the film. It resulted in many poor quality copies of the film. Thankfully Kino Lorber has released a solid transfer of Steamboat Bill Jr on blu-ray. It is a hilarious and powerful film; one of Keaton's best. Praise it! 5/5

Our Hospitality Review- By Michael J. Carlisle

Title: Our Hospitality
Director: Buster Keaton
Year: 1923
Country: US

Our Hospitality was a major cinematic event in 1923. After years of apprenticeship in comedy shorts, during which he demonstrated a mastery of the visual gag, Buster Keaton made his feature debut with The Three Ages, but it was more of an anthology made up of three different segments. It could be split into shorter comedies if the public did not warm up to Keaton as a feature length attraction. With this film, he put his full foot forward and abandoned the short for good. Following the feature debuts of Charles Chaplin and Harold Lloyd, Keaton's film came at the right place and the right time.

The plot involves a man who has returned to his Appalachian homestead. On the trip, he falls for a young woman. The only problem is her family has vowed to kill every member of his family.

The story had the potential to be a Cecil B. Demille drama, but Keaton injects the grim subject with a dose of whimsical comedy and hair raising stunts, which nearly kill the actor/director off-screen. Keaton’s scenario is a riff on the notorious real-life feud between the Hatfields and the McCoys, which has largely come down in history as fodder for rural comedies and cartoons. This is his first truly plot-driven film; his earlier shorts held a strong reliance on gags to move a scene forward. The slower pace and subtler comedy show Keaton's confidence that he didn't need to clown non-stop to retain the audience's interest. The grand scale and period authenticity look forward to his later masterpieces, like The General.

Buster had always had a serious side, but this was the first time it dominated a film. Consequently, Our Hospitality is not his funniest work, but it has a unique sweetness and charm, rich with atmosphere and drama. Buster's performance is masterful in grace and sentimentality. The joke of the title is that once he enters the home of the rival family, they can't kill him without violating their code of hospitality—until he steps outside. Our Hospitality was the swan-song of Big Joe Roberts, who played the "heavy" in almost all of Keaton's early films. Already ill during the making of this film (he died shortly after it was completed), he plays the aged, forgiving patriarch of the Canfield clan. 

Our Hospitality is a remarkable entry in the filmography of Buster Keaton. It's a masterpiece that shows the comedic genius in one of his finest endeavors. This is a strong start to his feature length career, certainly a tremendous preview of things to come. Remarkably this is a family affair as it stars Keaton, his father, his son, his wife and is produced by his brother-in-law. Praise it! 5/5

The Electric House Review- By Michael Carlisle

Title: The Electric House
Year: 1922
Director: Buster Keaton
Country: US

Coming from a background of vaudeville, Joseph Frank "Buster" Keaton entered the film industry in early 1917. Despite a meeting with popular comedian "Fatty" Arbuckle, Keaton had reservations about the medium, mainly because he did not have much knowledge about the technical aspects of making a film. One day he took a camera back to his hotel room, dismantled and reassembled it. With this rough understanding of the mechanics of the moving pictures, he returned the next day, camera in hand, asking for work. He appeared in a total of 14 Arbuckle shorts. After Keaton's successful work with Arbuckle, Joseph M. Schenck gave him his own production unit, Buster Keaton Comedies. It was this unit that allowed him to make The Electric House. 

Botany major Buster mistakenly graduates in electrical engineering and is hired to wire a new home. He installs lots of fanciful gadgets. The engineer who should have received the degree gets even by rewiring all the gadgets to wreak havoc. 
  
The Electric House was written and directed by Buster Keaton and Edward F. Cline.  It finds Buster once again manipulating, and being maniplulated by,  his surroundings. This is a showcase for Keaton's curiosity and love of mechanical devices. It's a very inventive short; Keaton was such a perfectionist that he decided to shoot the film twice. He broke his ankle filming the escalator scene in 1921, and put the film on hold.  When he returned to it the next year, he scrapped everything he had filmed the first time and started completely over again. Unfortunately, the first version of the film is now considered lost.

Keaton is a master at using his surroundings to make a memorable gag. Although The Electric House suffers from making most of the jokes centered around the gadgets, lacking a human element that his later films would exploit. There is no character development to speak of and there's no real indication to why Keaton would put himself through all this havoc. I understand the message; reliance on technology makes fools of us all, but there are many pictures before and after that dissect the theme better.

In every Keaton short there is something to enjoy, certainly the escalator gags are hilarious. The Electric House inspired those automated Houses of Tomorrow cartoons that were popular in the 1950s and many more "futuristic" cartoons. Though the film is not perfect, it does contain a glimpse of Keaton genius. 3/5

Seven Chances Review- By Michael J. Carlisle

Title: Seven Chances
Year: 1925
Director: Buster Keaton
Country: US

Unlike most silent movie- stars, Buster Keaton was eager to go into sound considering he had a fine baritone voice with no speech impediments and years of stage experience. In 1928 he left United Artists, which frequently interfered in his artistic endeavors, and signed with MGM (Metro-Golwyn-Mayer); the biggest movie studio in the world at the time. Unfortunately mounting personal problems and his loss of independence as a filmmaker really harmed his early-sound era career. Until he was fired from the company during the production 1933's What! No Beer? he would only find solace in reminiscing about his earlier works like Seven Chances.

Financial broker Jimmie Shannon (Buster Keaton) is nearly bankrupt when an attorney presents grandfather's will leaving him seven million dollars. In order to inherit the money Jimmie must marry before 7 pm on his 27th birthday - today!

Buster Keaton had this project burdened upon him by producer Joseph M. Schenck, who had bought the rights to the hit Broadway show. Much later in his life, the stoic comedian would consider Seven Chances to be his least favorite feature. He even went so far as to attempt to prevent film historian Raymond Rohauer from restoring the only known copy of the movie. The original Broadway production of Seven Chances by Roi Cooper Megrue opened at George M. Cohan's Theater on August 8, 1916 and ran for 151 performances. It was obviously a very popular attraction and would prove to be financially successful considering the star of the film was at the peak of his career.

In retrospect, some scenes and instances in Seven Chances seem slightly racist. For instance, he passes over every black girl he sees, yet will consider somebody who is Caucasian. I'll defend Keaton here as there were miscegenation laws, specifically against whites and blacks marrying, all throughout the individual states until 1967- when the supreme court finally ruled them unconstitutional. Keaton's character needed to get married, and when he saw that she was black, he knew that he could not enter into a legal marriage with her, which he needed to get the money. He never looks in disgust, but rather astonishment, though it is unfortunate that these black characters are obviously white actresses in black-face. As a director, he did hire more black actors than anybody else at the time, and he paid them as much as white actors- which was unheard of. Even Chaplin, a man who frequently made movies about the poor and desperate, did not have many non-white folk in his cast. 

Like in most of his pictures, the man's sheer physicality is astounding. Each stunt is done to perfection. Keaton is absolutely fantastic here, in a film that, for all intents and purposes, is far smaller in scope than many Keaton comedies before or after. Visually the film is most notable for its opening use of Technicolor and has remarkable set pieces. Seven Chances is laugh educing and genuinely moving. Charming as it is intelligent, Seven Chances is one of the greatest comedies of the silent era. Praise it! 4/5

Sherlock Jr Review- By Michael J. Carlisle

Title: Sherlock Jr.
Year: 1924
Director: Buster Keaton
Country: US

 Chaplin is the sweet innocent; Lloyd is the working man; Keaton is the stoic human crash test dummy. The strength of any Buster Keaton performance is his sublime physicality. The man's ability to use props, co-stars and his own body to carry out well choreographed sight gags and stunts is remarkable. He frequently put his body in danger in order to make an audience laugh, while simultaneously be struck with awe. Even in 2015, his stunts look quite impressive.

 Buster Keaton stars as a  film projectionist, who longs to be a detective, and puts his meager skills to work when he is framed by a rival for stealing his girlfriend's father's pocket-watch.

While The General (1926) was a great Buster Keaton picture, I would say that Sherlock Jr. is his absolute best. Sherlock Jr. is a short film, lasting only about 35 minutes, which seems to work in the film’s favor.  Made in 1924 came at a transition point in Keaton's career--one year after he had stopped making two-reel shorts, and was concentrating exclusively on longer features, as were virtually all of the other major silent comedians. Keaton claimed "once we started into features, we had to stop doing impossible things. We had to make an audience believe our story,"

Keaton excelled at doing impossible things, and his sight gags and death-defying stunts are extraordinary not only for their ingeniousness, but for their flawless execution, making complex physical feats look completely effortless. Such stunts are always filmed in continuous long takes, no interruption, to prove that they were legitimate and not faked. Unfortunately, sometimes these stunts would end in serious injury. In one scene Buster grabs onto the watertower spout and is knocked down to the train tracks by the force of the rushing water; he actually broke his neck and didn't find out until an examination decades later.

Although Keaton would never admit to having intellectual intentions with his art, ultimately Sherlock Jr is an extraordinary study of the nature of film and the dreamlike escapist quality of it. When Buster walks into the screen and becomes a participant in the movie; he is exemplifying the greatest quality of the medium. Keaton's work is unlike anything made at the time. Praise it! 5/5