Review #897: Juno (2007)

Title: Juno
Year: 2007
Director: Jason Reitman
Country: US
Language: English

Like the Roman goddess who is her namesake, Juno is a bright, often sharp-tongued individual who prides herself on her observant cynicism and her way with a sarcastic quip. Juno is a very different film in regards to teen pregnancy, as the main character refuses to see herself as a victim of her circumstances. While she doesn't know exactly what she wants, she knows that she is the only person who can determine her future. Which is...inspiring I guess? 

Faced with an unplanned pregnancy, an offbeat young woman (Ellen Page)  makes an unusual decision regarding her unborn child. 

Stripper turned screenwriter Diablo Cody hits an unusual beat with her debut feature. Juno contains a structure that flows naturally, working through its story to where it should obviously go, but doesn’t allow the audience to anticipate it. Though working off sentimentality, Cody avoids patronizing her characters and undermining the intelligence of the audience. She also avoids being too preachy, as many teen preganancy films often are riddled with social commentary about abortion and teen abstinence.

I do have a problem with the subject matter itself; should the troubling reality of teen pregnancy be turned into a teenage rom com? Perhaps this is a life situation that shouldn't be taken this lightly because it has ruined the lives of many people. I also wonder if the character as written is suitable for this film. Juno is a fully fleshed out human being, but every action is done with lethargy and every word of dialogue feels sarcastic and, dare I say, mean spirited. I doubt many women can actually relate to Juno. 

Jason Reitman directs this film rather well, I can't say I have a problem with any technical aspect of this picture. I do have questions of ethics, as I wrote above, and I didn't find as much depth or meaning to this film as I did with many other rom coms from the same period. I haven't had the urge to see this picture again, unlike Superbad which was released the same year. A surprise hit of 2007, it's barely mentioned a decade later.

Review #896: Superbad (2007)

Title: Superbad
Year: 2007
Director: Judd Apatow
Country: US
Language: English

On the heels of such early successes as The Larry Sanders Show and The Ben Stiller Show, American director Judd Apatow seemed poised to break big. His next teen-centric tv series (Freaks and Geeks & Undeclared) were critically successful, but met a premature demise. Apatow's creative visions would prove more successful in the realm of cinema, as features like 40 Year Old Virgin and Knocked Up re-invented the rom-com for an entirely new generation. Some would argue he did the same for teen comedies with Superbad.

Two co-dependent high school seniors (Jonah Hill & Michael Cera) are forced to deal with separation anxiety after their plan to stage a booze-soaked party goes awry.

Through the ashes of Freaks and Geeks, Seth Rogan emerged as a talented writer with credits like 40 Year Old Virgin and Knocked Up. He also proved to have acting talents similar to his frequent costars like Michael Cera, who played a goofy youngster named George Michael in the hit tv series Arrested Development. The writing of Seth Rogan, directing of Judd Apatow and acting of Michael Cera (along with Jonah Hill & Christopher Plasse) amount to a vulgar and obscene coming of age comedy which has a surprising amount of heart. 

Superbad is ripe with absurd sexually explicit dialogue that can be quite hard to take at times. Rogan's writing narrowly avoids being completely sexist by having a well meaning message and some surprising character transformation. Deep down it is a story about friendship and the fear of separation. While that doesn't sound like it has the dramatic impact of Juno's unplanned pregnancy, it does manage to hit the right sentimental notes.

I enjoy that we have Michael Cera's goody two shoes character to counteract Jonah Hill's eerie female obsession. I also like the side story featuring McLovin' and the two SNL'esque cops. While perhaps it's not the most intelligent film, Superbad is pretty fun to watch and I did find myself laughing quite a bit.

Review #895: Porky's (1982)

Title: Porky's
Year: 1982
Director: Bob Clarke
Country: Canada
Language: English

Oh Canada! When thinking of some of the greatest Canadian Pictures of all time, one has to gravitate towards the Winnipegger Guy Maddin. He has a distinct visual style that is very reminiscent of Weimar Era German Expressionism (Cabinet of Dr. Caligari) and his odd narratives makes for quite an entertaining film. My favourite film of his is the bizarre 2007 documentary My Winnipeg. Unfortunately his films aren't among the highest grossing Canadian movies, You know what is? Porky's.

In 1954, a group of Florida high schoolers seek out to help their buddy lose his virginity, which leads them to seek revenge on a sleazy nightclub owner and his redneck sheriff brother for harassing them. 

Porky's barely qualifies as a Canadian film as it was set in 1950s Florida with a mostly American cast, but I suppose being partly financed in Canada during the tax-shelter era ought to count for something.  The film made enough money upon its release that its executive producer, Harold Greenberg, built his Astral Communications empire on its profits. Though Porky's and its two sequels are reviled by film critics, it did manage to receive the Golden Reel Awaed for the highest-grossing Canadian film of 1982.

It is not the most sophisticated picture, much of the humour is low brow and aimed at teenage underachieving boys. Director Bob Clark filled his script with plenty of comedy at its lowest form, which makes how crude it is seem like a remarkable achievement. It is the opposite of John Hughes more well-made angst filled comedies (Ferris Bueller's Day Off) and yet Clark gained far more imitators, especially in the late 90's and early 00's. I think it's safe to say that American Pie didn't base its humour off Pretty in Pink.

The raucous raunchiness of Porky's has, sadly, proved indearing to many American filmmakers. I suppose this isn't shocking; sex sells and this film has plenty of that. I must applaud the film for not having a mean bone in its body and not being entirely sexist. As far as I know, this film was to 80's teenagers as Superbad was for 00's teenagers.

Review #894: The 40 Year Old Virgin (2006)

Title: The 40 Year Old Virgin
Year: 2006
Director: Judd Apatow
Country: US
Language: English

By 2006 Steve Carell had achieved cult status by appearing in straight-yet goofy- roles in The Daily Show with Jon Stewart. Despite having minor roles in Anchorman and Bruce Almighty, he managed to outperform both lead stars, comedy legends Jim Carrey & Will Farrell. The US version of The Office was only a year old yet lead Carell to even more financial & critical success. 40 Year Old Virgin would be an interesting film venture in his career.

Goaded by his buddies, a nerdy guy (Steve Carell) who's never "done the deed" only finds the pressure mounting when he meets a single mother.

40 Year Old Virgin is notable for being the film debut of American Director Judd Apatow, a man now notable for making sex comedies that have moral lessons behind them. This is a far cry from 1980's sex comedies like Porky's which merely displayed exploitative sexual humor. This is a mixed marriage between the traditional rom com (When Harry Met Sally) and a vulgar "locker room" film (Animal House)

With 40 Year Old Virgin Apatow managed to blend heart and raunchy humor in true-to-life comedies that don’t need to rely on sight gags and gross-out shocks to be funny. Apatow and Carell write a magnificent screenplay which highlights a very character driven picture with clever dialogue. The main joke is that the main character is an inexperienced awkward man who needs every little thing about sex explained to him, yet is in denial of his inexperience. 

The language is filthy and the sex talk is graphic, yet 40 Year Old Virgin also manages to be sweet and sentimental. It's a smart film that manages to give some rewarding commentary regarding healthy relationships. It's a well made picture that hits all the right notes. Even though it is not the most entertaining comedy of the 00's it still is a decent achievement. 

 

Review #893: How it Feels to Be Run Over (1900)

Title: How It Feels to Be Run Over
Year: 1900
Director: Cecil B. Hepworth
Country:  UK
Language: N/A

The final shot of Edwin Porters' Great Train Robbery (1903) shocked many filmgoers at the time. It featured an outlaw cowboy staring into the camera and firing his gun into the lens. Considering motion pictures were at their infancy, it's understandable that some audience members, particularly the very old and the very young, would be startled by this image. Early filmmakers would this shock & awe over the fairly new invention of film to their advantage. 

In How it Feels to Be Run Over a car veers off course and runs straight into the camera. 

The film is appropriately titled. Literally, all it is, is the camera planted in the middle of a road, and we watch a car approach in the distance. The people in the car, all of whom look like they just came out of an F.Scott Fitzgerald novel, wave and scream for us to get out of the way. We (the stationary camera) don't and we cut to intertitles that say "Oh mother will be pleased". Quite bizarre. 

Directed by Cecil M. Hepworth, How it Feels to Be Run Over is an appropriately suspenseful film as we see the car coming and are powerless to stop it. The audience gets tense waiting for the impact of the "hit" to happen. I can see many audiences at the time having to look away or brace themselves for the imaginary impact. 

The editing trick, cutting away from the impact, is something that is still done today. Often it is better to cut away from the violence just before it happens and leave the audiences' imagination to its own devices rather than showing every gruesome detail. Hitchcock's Psycho shower scene is a great example of this trick being employed. How it Feels to Be Run Over is certainly a historically important novelty, even if it is without a comprehensive story. 

No Rating

Review #892: The Big Swallow (1901)

Title: The Big Swallow
Year: 1901
Director: James Williamson
Country: UK
Language: N/A

The very beginning of Motion Picture entertainment featured some remarkable shorts, but had very predictable staging. Essentially everything was framed in a wide/long shot wherein every prop, set piece and actor was visible. Early film-makers didn't have the greatest sense of space & it would be a half a decade after the first film ever made (The Lumiere Brothers' Workers Leaving the factory) before we would see unique angles, shots & actor positioning.

In The Big Swallow a man, objecting to being filmed, comes closer and closer to the camera lens until his mouth is all we see. Then he opens wide and swallows camera and cinematographer.

The Big Swallow is a fairly unique joke film that demonstrates the ingenuity of some of the early filmmakers. While this effort from British filmmaker James Williamson doesn’t use trick photography, it does use a vivid imagination to deliver an unexpected punchline to an innovative little movie. Considering moviegoers of the day have been seeing the same style of shots over and over before this, I can imagine this "closeup" & "extreme closeup" would have been quite startling.

Williamson's work is a surreal experimental picture that finds humor in its own offbeat way. The camera doesn't necessarily move, rather the character moves towards the camera to make the "closeup" & "extreme close up" but still, it's quite a unique oddity that entertains  despite its incredibly short run-time.

Influential on a technical level and important in regards to the history of film, The Big Swallow is a film from the beginning of the 20th Century that would likely please audiences today. It's a priceless work of art with an enjoyable punchline.

No Rating

Review #891: Twilight Zone The Movie (1983)

Title: Twilight Zone The Movie
Year: 1983
Director(s): Spielberg, Miller, Landis, & Dante
Country: US
Language: English

Created by Rod Sterling, The Twilight Zone encapsulated a wide variety of genres including psychological horror, fantasy, science fiction, suspense, and psychological thriller; each episode  often concluding with a surprise twist and moral lesson. The original series. shot in black and white, ran from 1959 to 1964. It was critically and commercially successful. Its success led to a feature film, a radio series, a comic book, a magazine, and various other spin-offs that spanned five decades.

Four directors (Steven Spielberg, George Miller, Jon Landis. and Joe Dante) collaborated to remake four episodes of the popular television series The Twilight Zone for this movie. The episodes are updated slightly and in color. 

I don't have a problem with the film trying to recreate old episodes rather than creating new ones, however I think the chosen collection of "classic" stories is a mixed bag at best. The first story, wherein a racist businessman gets a taste of his own medicine is remarkable. Based on Season 3 Episode 13's A Quality of Mercy, it's a fantastic intro that evokes themes of the television show. The second segment, directed by Spielberg, slows the film to a crawl. Kick the Can, a story about senoirs wanting to be children again, is far too sentimental in this horror filled picture. It completely shifts the tone and feels very of place.

 It was smart to create a film out of four episodes, rather than ruin one particular episode by making it 2 hours long. However I feel the film missed out, as the most appropriate episode to remake for this film would be To Serve Man, but I guess Spielberg thought otherwise. The final segment Nightmare at 20,000 Feet demonstrates great acting by John Lithgow, who plays a frightened passenger that thinks a gremlin is destroying the plane from the outside. George Miller (of Mad Max fame) directs perhaps the best segment in this picture.

Twilight Zone: The Movie is a bit of a disappointment compared to the original television series. It's also a disappointment compared to The Simpsons' parodies of many Twilight Zone episodes (as well as horror movies in general) which they feature on their annual Treehouse of Horror specials. It's not a terrible film, I've seen all but the second segment more than once, but if you can find the originals I implore you to watch them instead. Three people (which include three illegally hired children) DIED making this picture.

Review #890: Kingdom of the Fairies (1903)

Title: Kingdom of the Fairies
Year: 1903
Director: Georges Melies
Country: France
Language: N/A

By 1901 Georges Melies was at the peak of his popularity. He had been making well over 100 films since he first started in 1895, attaining financial and critical success along the way. Though there wasn't that much competition, he did prove himself to be a competent film-maker and was making great effort to improve the special effects of his films. 1902's A Trip to the Moon brought him into the international spotlight; from there he was able to make notable ground in the United States. 

At the royal court, a prince is presenting the princess whom he is pledged to marry, when a witch suddenly appears. Though driven off, the witch soon returns, summons some of her servants, and carries off the princess.

Widely distributed and promoted like no other film before it, Kingdom of the Fairies has been cited as the best film Melies has ever made. Thankfully the film still survives in its hand-colored form. Mme Thulliers and her team of girls were responsible for coloring each frame—each girl was assigned a different color—and they provided this service for the majority of the French film industry. The film is widely reported as being based on either the stage works, by the Brothers Cogniard or Nicolas Brazier, Pierre-Frédéric-Adolphe Carmouche and Jean-Baptiste Dubois but apparently (because I haven't seen the plays) little similarity exists. 

What a visual spectacle! Kingdom of the Fairies is an intoxicating beautiful film that captures a wonderous atmosphere in every frame. This is, I feel, the most accessible of Melies pictures simply because of the sheer showmanship involved. The underwater scenes, which include fish, giant crabs and an octopus, are a sight to behold. I'm impressed despite this film being made well over 110 years ago! 

This is my favourite Melies. It is a fairy tale in every sense of the word. It has inspired the hearts and imaginations of generations to come.There are a lot of different sets for a film of this age. Many of them are quite elaborate and detailed. Though many silents at this time were somewhat difficult to follow considering the absence of intertitles, I viewed this with great ease. 

Review #889: The Impossible Voyage (1904)

Title: The Impossible Voyage
Year: 1904
Director: Georges Melies
Country: France
Language: N/A

One of Georges Melies' most famous films, 1902’s A Trip to the Moon, detailed the exploits of a group of astronomers taking a trip...to the moon. A still of the man in the moon with a spaceship in his left eye has become a famous image of early Cinema. Curiously less talked about is The Impossible Voyage (1904) and for the life of me I can't figure out why. It's every bit as good as his earlier sci-fi, infact it might even be better. 

Using every known means of transportation, several savants from the Geographic Society undertake a journey through the Alps to the Sun which finishes under the sea.

The Impossible Voyage was released in 1904 and was based around the Jules Verne fantasy play Journey Through the Impossible. The film, running to 374 meters, was Méliès's longest film to date, and cost about ₣37,500 (US$7,500) to make. A print of the film was deposited for American copyright at the Library of Congress on October 12, 1904, and the film was sold in French, American, and British catalogs by the Star Film Company. It was one of the most popular films of that decade, rivaling only by Melies other films. 

Melies hyper dramatic narrative has a unique charm that is goofy yet easy to love. The plot is supposed to be a daring expedition but all the characters have less than enthralling name. How am I suppposed to take a scientist named Rattlebrain seriously? The Impossible Voyage shows a culture at the cusp of a steep cliff of innovation. There is something remarkable about this society's clear love of travel and the desire to be more scientifically literate. 

The Impossible Voyage reaches into the great deep of creative imagination and immerses us into such a surreal fantastical setting. Melies make his audience feel like anything is possible, and that we should embrace stepping into the unknown. It's a fine picture that is far more entertaining that it gets credit for.

 

Review #888: The Last Cartridges (1897)

Title: The Last Cartridges
Year: 1897
Director: Georges Melies
Country: France
Language: N/A

After studying the design of the Animatograph, Georges Melies modified the machine so that it would serve as a film camera. Due to the lack of availability of film in France, Méliès purchased unperforated film in London and developed it himself through trial and error. In September 1896 he would go on to patent the modified machine, but by 1897 better cameras were put on sale by Gaumaunt, The Lumieres, and Pathe. He used that camera in The Last Cartridges. 

The film shows an incident from the Franco-Prussian War.  More specifically we see the bombardment of a house at Bazeille.

Based on an 1873 painting of the same name by Alphonse de Neuville, The Last Cartridges could very well be the first "war" film, depending on your definition of what a "war" film is of course. It is also the first film adapted from a painting. .

The Franco-Prussian war was an embarrassing lost for the French. They suffered 7x more casualties than the Germans and suffered a surprisingly quick defeat. The outcome was that France had to pay a war debt up to 5 Billion Francs ($1000 Million USD, which adjusted for inflation is roughly $342 BILLION today). They were given a limited timeline and the Germans would occupy them until the money was paid. Considering this, one has to wonder what Melies was thinking at the time, and how this film could have possibly been popular in Paris in 1897. Why didn't this film cause riots in the streets!?

It must have been a success (for some reason) because Gaumaunt would produce many imitations in the years following this. There's no much of a story, but I must admit that it is pretty entertaining. The set is well built and the actors demonstrate great ability despite having limited actions in this extremely short film. History depicting history is always fun to witness. 

No Rating

Review #887: L'Arroseur Arrose (1895)

Title: L'Arroseur Arrose
Year: 1895
Director(s): Lumiere Brothers
Country: France
Language: N/A

L'Arroseur Arrose is a short film by the Lumiere Brothers that contains a surprising amount of firsts. It has the distinction of being the earliest known instance of film comedy, as well as the first use of film to portray a fictional story. The latter probably being the most interesting fact because the Lumieres were best known for their disinterest in fiction and fascination with documentary. Another first is that the poster for L'Arroseur arrosé is the first poster ever designed to promote an individual film.

The film portrays a simple practical joke in which a gardener is tormented by a boy who steps on the hose that the gardener is using to water his plants, cutting off the water flow. When the gardener tilts the nozzle up to inspect it, the boy releases the hose, causing the water to spray him.

The poster for L'Arroseur, illustrated by Marcellin Auzolle, was quite unique for the time because, while early posters would promote a whole slew of pictures at once, touting their technological advancement over potential competitors, this poster was for the individual film and was fairly simplistic. The film itself was filmed by means of the Cinématographe, an all-in-one camera, which also serves as a film projector and developer.

The film has quite a charm and contains a modestly humorous slapstick joke that would be paid homage to by film comedians throughout Cinematic history. In this joke I see Charles Chaplin, Groucho Marx, The Three Stooges, Buster Keaton, Harold Lloyd and so many others. For the beginning of comedy it is a remarkably good place to start. One of the few "first" films that is entertaining along with having immense historic value. 

No Rating

Review #886: Workers Leaving the Lumiere Factory (1895)

Title: Workers Leaving the Lumiere Factory
Year: 1895
Director(s): Lumiere Brothers
Country: France
Language: N/A

In 1895, French cinema pioneers Auguste and Louis Lumière screened the first film they ever made. It was a 46 second long, continuous shot that was taken from a single fixed position. The film was called Workers Leaving the Lumière Factory (Sortie des Usines Lumière à Lyon). It was filmed by means of the Cinématographe, an all-in-one camera, which also serves as a film projector and developer. It was first shown in Paris, alone with nine other short pictures. 

The film consists of a single scene in which workers leave the Lumière factory. The workers are mostly female who exit the large building 25 Rue St. Victor, Montplaisir on the outskirts of Lyon, France.

Audiences of the time were spellbound by these seemingly simple images and the technology of film itself. They had never seen moving photographs before, thus cinema began as a state of spectacle and amusement. The Lumiere Brothers caught the interests of many creative minds, like Georges Melies, who would go on to further enhance the art through special effects and onscreen magic.  

The Lumiere Brothers' first short would be an indication of their entire career. They were fascinated by documentary, and by the following year they had sent employees throughout the world to film the many exotic locations. That year they would also travel with their primitive documentaries to major cities, like New York, London and Montreal, to bring this small slice of cinema to the public. 

As a historical document Workers Leaving the Lumiere Factory is a treasure that should be shown to the public until the end of human civilization. It's not that entertaining, but that can be forgiven because it's the FIRST film! We owe the Lumiere brothers a great deal of gratitude.

No Rating

Review #885: The Vanishing Lady (1896)

Title: The Vanishing Lady
Year: 1896
Director: Georges Melies
Country: France
Language: N/A

With his Star Film Company Georges' Melies desired to separate himself from the Lumiere Brothers. While they had sought realism in capturing the world on camera (ethnographic documentaries), Melies sought to give his audience pure fantasy and escapism. His specific brand of magic and illusion divulged in experimentation with special effects that were fairly unique to cinema at that time. Melies would build his studio to physically accompany such tricks. 

An elegantly dressed man enters through a stage door onto a set with decorated back screen, a chair and small table. He brings a well-dressed women through the door, spreads a newspaper on the floor, and places the chair on it. She sits and fans herself; he covers her with a diaphanous cloth. She disappears.

The Vanishing Lady is commonly identified as Melies first "Trick film". In this he used the “stop trick” (seen previously in Edison’s “Mary Queen of Scots”) to perform magic on screen. This was one of his most important camera techniques, and to some degree defines the rest of his career as a filmmaker. It's not an exciting film to current audiences, but I can imagine that audiences in 1896 were left bewildered. Melies certainly demonstrated that film was a suitable replacement for live stage. 

There is not much more I can say about the film as there isn't really a plot, and on most home video releases there is no music. It's an important picture in the history of Cinema, one that shouldn't be looked over in College classes. An amusing short picture that has traces of charm in each second of film. 

No Rating

A Terrible Night (1896) Review- By Michael J. Carlisle

Title: A Terrible Night
Year: 1896
Director: Georges Melies
Country: France
Language: N/A

On December 27th, 1895 Georges Melies attended a special private demonstration of the Lumière brothers' cinematograph, given for owners of Parisian houses of spectacle. He was amazed by their machine and offered to pay for a copy, but the Lumiere brothers were adamant about keeping close control of their invention. Méliès then traveled to London, to obtain an Animatograph from Robert W. Paul. By 1896 he would begin his lengthy film career. 

In this, a man tries to get a good night's sleep, but is disturbed by a giant spider that leaps onto his bed, and a battle ensues in hilarious comic fashion

In total, Méliès made 78 films in 1896. He had covered every genre of film, which included the Lumière-like documentaries, comedies, historical reconstructions, dramas, magic tricks and horror. A Terrible Night (1896) is certainly a contender for "first horror film". Albeit Georges Melies' picture is not entirely scary & The Haunted Castle (1896) may have come out earlier, though most historical sources aren't quite sure of the timeline. 

A Terrible Night predates Méliès's use of cinematic special effects in his film, as the first known Melies picture with camera effects was The Vanishing Lady, which was made later in 1896. This is an early demonstrator of the man's keen eye for fascinating visuals and an indication of a very creative mind. Amusing, but not terribly entertaining, the film is worthwhile for its historical value in Cinema. 

I must commend Melies for trying to tell a story, when most pictures at the time didn't bother. Still, what we get in terms of story is really just a bug on a string. It has a bit of a charm, and because it's 1896 I have to give it a pass anyways. When recounting the history of horror pictures, one should not leave this short film out. 

No Stars

Review #883: Girl Happy (1965)

Title: Girl Happy
Year: 1965
Director: Boris Sagal
Country: US
Language: English

In his first seven movies, starting with Love Me Tender in 1956 and ending with Wild in the Country in 1961, 20th Century Fox and Paramount produced light musical dramas to boost Elvis' acting ability. Blue Hawaii opened a second phase of Presley pictures in 1961, when Hal Wallis and other producers decided to showcase Elvis' comedic timing with comedy musicals set in exotic locations. Girl Happy, however, was the first of a dozen straight Elvis pot-boilers, low-budget, formulaic productions designed to create $$$.

A Chicago mobster hires a rock and roll singer (Elvis Presley) and his band to keep an eye on his daughter during Spring Break in Fort Lauderdale, Florida.

The film takes a while to take its stride, the over-acting on behalf of Elvis, Gary Crosby, Joby Baker, and Jimmy Hawkins comes off as too strong and thus can make the picture feel a bit cringy in the first 20 minutes. At about the midway point, however, Girl Happy suddenly morphs into pretty entertaining stuff. We see Elvis as an aggressive, scheming, sexually-charged young rock musician, who does whatever it takes to get his woman. 

Elvis’s songs in Girl Happy present a mixed bag. The title tune is a catchy one, although it sounds a bit odd due to its original recording having been speeded up. The ballads are nice, but they're out of place considering the King was still able to produce some fine rhythm and blues. Elvis still has a fantastic voice however, and even though the soundtrack didn't make that much money, it would still have been a treat to see his musical numbers.

Girl Happy represents a decline in Elvis' filmography. It can be exciting at times, especially after the first 30 minutes, but overall it is underwhelming. Mega-fans of the King might find some enjoyment out of this, but its not for casual viewers.

Review #882: Kid Galahad (1962)

Title: Kid Galahad
Year: 1962
Director: Phil Karlson
Country: US
Language: English

Kid Galahad would be Elvis Presley's 10th feature length film, and in the eyes of most of the nation's reviewers it's the film that turned him from a "detestable" (their words not mine) rock n' roll phenomenon (my words not theirs) into a competent money making movie superstar. For the motion picture industry Elvis had changed his look somewhat, from a teenage horn-dog to a more mature man, but it still didn't detract his audience which was growing every day. 

When he completes his military service Walter Gulick (Elvis Presley) returns to his birthplace where he hopes to be a mechanic but instead becomes a prizefighter with unfortunate ties to the mob. 

United Artists also had a similar feelings to that of the film critics, thus they gave Elvis more varied roles in the early 60's. His previous film Follow that Dream had the King pretending to be a poor hillbilly. This feauture has him as a poor prizefighter with no other alternative. While Presley had played a street brawler before, this role had the unique challenge of having to physically look like a professional. Unfortunately this is where his performance lacks as his abs are non-existent and his muscles are nowhere to be found. 

Presley does bring the right amount of emotion to the role, and that can be attributed to the film's light script which ranges from light romantic melodrama (albeit not in the same league of Sirk) to a bit of a family comedy. Kid Galahad contains the standard Presley musical numbers designed to draw his faithful followers to the box office. I'm not entirely sure any of them are memorable and attracted much soundtrack buys. 

Many will cite this as their favourite Elvis Presley picture, but unfortunately I don't really see the appeal. Even Blue Hawaii & Viva Las Vegas had songs you could hum, even belt out to. Elvis has improved from his early days, but the direction falls flat and the script amounts to little more than Hollywood fluff. 

Review #881: Dirty Harry (1971)

Title: Dirty Harry
Year: 1971
Director: Don Siegel
Country: US
Language: English

Along with Blazing Saddles (1974) one film that would absolutely NOT be remade for 21st Century audiences would be Dirty Harry (1971). The first of five films in the Dirty Harry Series starring Clint Eastwood, Dirty Harry is not only filled to the brim with racist and sexist stereotypes, but the main character openly sneers at liberals for aiding and abetting society’s scum. In our current society where "Black Lives Matter", police are viewed under a microscope and any word can be used against you it's hard to see what place this film would have. 

When a mad man calling himself 'the Scorpio Killer' menaces the city, tough as nails San Francisco Police Inspector Harry Callahan (Clint Eastwood) is assigned to track down and ferret out the crazed psychopath.

With Dirty Harry, it's amazing to see how many movies and TV shows have copied key elements from that film: the loose cannon police detective, the crotchety superior officers, the cackling sleazeball criminals, the catchphrases, and more. Made during the "New Hollywood" era, a time when the Hays Code of Golden Hollywood no longer mattered and filmmakers were pushing the boundaries of what could be shown onscreen, Dirty Harry took advantage of the elevated tolerance for adult content to deliver something truly outrageous. 

America in the early 70's was either a hippie paradise or a conservative's nightmare. Upon becoming president Richard Nixon promised to crackdown on "pothead liberals" and I believe Dirty Harry was a more right-wing reaction to this. Despite its politics Dirty Harry is a surprisingly entertaining picture that will have you hooked in shock, disbelief and suspense. Bruce Surtee's photography is the real standout in this film, as such Dirty Harry has an excellent sense of city and landscape. 

 I don't agree with Dirty Harry's politics and I don't know how I could recommend this film to a friend without sounding insane. However, this picture is a classic and it deserves to be viewed as such. It's a thoroughly entertaining picture that benefits from being on shaky moral ground. Moreso it's a landmark in the history of cinema, inspiring countless films since its release. 

Review #880: Live By Night (2016)

Title: Live By Night
Year: 2016
Director: Ben Affleck
Country: US
Language: English

An astounding adaptation of author Dennis Lehane’s best-selling novel about Boston private detectives, Gone Baby Gone would be the directorial debut of then fallen actor Ben Affleck. He would go on to make The Town (2010), which would receive some acclaim, and Argo in 2012. This third feature, which was about the 1979 Iran hostage crisis, would go on to receive an Academy Award for Best Picture at that year's Oscars. Would his fourth feature, Live By Night, make similar waves? Lets see.

Affleck plays Joe Coughlin, the son of an irish cop, who returns from WWI with a lost sense of morality. He is then enlisted into the Boston mob as a foot soldier carrying out nefarious deeds.

Fans of noir features will probably link Affleck's Live By Night (2016) to Nicholas Ray's They Live By Night (1948) based off title alone. I tried to find some thematic connections, but the only similarities are shallow; both fulfill the genre of crime/gangster pictures. The amount of plot in Affleck's film is suitable for Scorsese's Goodfellas (1990), but unlike that crime saga this one is a little too fast paced. It's hard to keep up with everything going on. If you miss 10 minutes of the picture you might as well restart the entire film because you won't understand what's happening. 

The character's aren't fleshed out and many plot points go unresolved, seemingly because the Director forgot about it. Live By Night isn't all bad however; the cinematography is stunning, Afleck's mise en scene makes you feel like you're infused with the film's setting, the costuming is terrific and the score adds to the film noir atmosphere. 

Visually Live By Night is a stunning film that would deserve very high praise, if not for the writing and lack of character development. Affleck has made a very rushed feature that would probably have faired well if it was extended by another hour. Perhaps a director's cut will be released on home video that will make up for what I've just reviewed.