Eraserhead Review- By Michael Carlisle

Title: Eraserhead

Year: 1977
Director: David Lynch
Country: US
Language: English

Eraserhead was my introduction to the weird world of David Lynch. As a teenager that was new to Cinema I had never seen such a strange film that left me wondering about what I had just seen. What was it about? Perhaps it was too intelligent for me back then. As I saw more Lynch films I realized they all had a similar tone and feel, though this film was definitely among the creepiest. The Elephant Man was among the most straightforward, despite very beginning. I was very hesitant to watch this again, but I gave it a shot.

Eraserhead is set in an industrial town in which giant machines are constantly working, spewing smoke, and making noise that is inescapable, Henry Spencer (Jack Nance) lives in a building that, like all the others, appears to be abandoned. The lights flicker on and off, he has bowls of water in his dresser drawers, and for his only diversion he watches and listens to the Lady in the Radiator sing about finding happiness in heaven. Harry has a girlfriend named Mary X (Charlotte Steward) who gives birth to Henry's baby, a frightening mutant child. This of course entices shocking imagery of fear, panic and depressive sexuality.

The film works on one level, it does have an incredibly creepy atmosphere. You do get a sense that Henry Spencer's world is almost post-apocalyptic. He lives in a wasteland of fear and doubt, almost in isolation from the rest of the world. The little scenes, such as the odd chicken one, add to the tension and sense of fear that looms throughout the film. The lack of dialogue also contribute to the strange fear. Something is wrong and the baby is likely the tipping point where everything spills out in the open.

However, what IS this film about? I have seen many films with peculiar imagery such as Stanley Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968) but at least there was a tremendous story behind it to back it up. Lynch's Eraserhead just seems to be weird for the sake of being weird. Which seems fine for some people, but I would like a little coherency as anybody can flash odd images on a screen and claim it is "art". The audio commentary on the current dvd does not suffice at all as Lynch fails to provide any sort of clearancy. Though his entire career is based upon being strange so why should he?

In conclusion, don't bother with this film, or any of Lynch's work (besides Mulholland Drive) for that matter. It is contrived nonsense that attempts to pass itself off as "art". As I said, anybody can slap strange images together, Lynch is nothing special. He is merely a man who tries much too hard to be "different". Piss on it! 2/5

La Strada Review- By Michael Carlisle

 Title: La Strada
Director: Federico Fellini
Year: 1954
Country: Italy
Language: Italian

For a long while I have avoided many of the films made by the renowned Italian Director Federico Fellini, I saw Satyricon, La Dolce Vita and Juliet of the Spirits a few years ago and wasn't as enchanted by them as I thought I would be. I also am not a fan of "circus" films or the circus in general. Far too optimistic and strange for me, not very entertaining or insightful. However I saw an interview with Martin Scorsese, he too hated the circus but found himself drawn to La Strada as a child. His words filled me with great intrigue as I trust Scorsese's incredible knowledge of cinema. So I watched it and it completely blew me away with awe and inspiration.

La Strada is an emotional story about a woman named Gelsomina (Guilietta Masina) who is sold by her mother to Zampano (Anthony Quinn) for 10,000 lire and a few kilos of food. Zampano is a brute, a travelling showman who shows feats of strength by breaking various chains around his chest. He treats her horribly, beats her when she tries to run away. Once they join a traveling circus they meet Il Matto (Richard Basehart) and a minor disagreement turns to sad tragedy.

What is interesting about this film, is that each character can be sympathized with. While Zampano seems to be a despicable man who beats women, we see that he is a victim of his own rage. It plays a pivotal part in the downfall of his own emotional state. He reminds me of Jake LaMotta in Martin Scorsese's Raging Bull. Both characters have extreme jealousy and hatred brewing within them and it hurts the people they love. Of course this is not a coincidence as Scorsese's version of LaMotta is loosely based upon Zampono, whose ultimate tragedy is that he loves Gelsomina yet cannot emotionally comprehend it until it is too late.

The character of Gelsomina is beautifully acted by Guilietta Masina, Federico Fellini's first and only wife of 50 years. She approaches the character  with a Chaplin-esque like innocence which proves not only to make her an enticing character but it adds to the sadness of the entire film. La Strada is incredibly simple for a Fellini film, but extremely potent. It contains many of the visual elements that would be re-visited during his later films like 8 1/2.

In conclusion, while La Strada's style moves away from the postwar neorealism that gripped Italian Cinema in the 50's, it is still considered among the best of what Italy has to offer. It won the Academy Award for "Best Foreign Film" and is among Fellini's most accessible work. Full of simple characters with complex emotion, it is definitely a film worth owning. Praise it! 5/5

Fanny and Alexander Review- By Michael Carlisle

Title: Fanny and Alexander
Director: Ingmar Bergman
Year: 1982
Country: Sweden
Language: Swedish

The great Swedish Director Ingmar Bergman started his feature length film career with the intriguing Crisis (1946) and ended with the long yet mesmerizing Fanny and Alexander (1982) never missing a beat in-between these films. His large body of work spanned over 50 feature films, many cited in critic's "Best Films" lists. He is often spoofed by comedians or comedic filmmakers such as Peter Hewitt, who made Bill and Ted's Bogus Adventure, as well as imitated by lesser dramatic filmmakers as well. His films usually show the darker side of the human spirit, but as in Wild Strawberries can also be quite optimistic. Fanny and Alexander is a perfect blend of light and dark, of pessimism and optimism, of good and evil.

The title characters, Fanny (Pernilla Allwin) and Alexander (Betil Guve) live in a colorful Ekdahl household in a Swedish town early in the twentieth century. Their parents, Oscar (Allan Edwall) and Emilie (Ewa Froling) , are the director and the leading lady of the local theatre company.Oscar's mother and brother are the leading operators. After Oscar dies, Emilie marries the bishop and moves with her children to his place. He turns out to be a brute of a man, and the children are miserable, however there is always hope.

Often regarded as Ingmar Bergman's swan song (though he did make television features after this) , Fanny and Alexander was a quake of energy to fans who were enticed with his brooding films like The Seventh Seal which was made much earlier in his career. It is an almost Dickensian tale of ghosts and magic. There are also parallels to William Shakespeare's Hamlet, we see the ghost of Alexander's father more than once in the film, both Hamlet and Alexander's mothers marry nasty people and they both have quite a spiritual crisis. It's interesting that we see Oscar's illness creep in during a re-enactment of Hamlet where he plays Hamlet's father and completely forgets his lines, infact completely forgetting where he is at that time.

With this film Bergman moves beyond storytelling and into a strange series of events that could be considered dreams. It's as if you're transported to another reality when watching this film. The cinematography by Sven Nykvist is phenomenal and enchanting, it truly contributes to the overall mood of the film. The bishop (Jan Malmsjo) reminds me of another villainous religious man known as Reverend Harry Powell (Robert Mitchum) from Charles Laughton's Night of the Hunter (1955). Though I would argue that the bishop in this film is more vile because he seems more realistic and does more harm to the children than Powell does.

In conclusion, Fanny and Alexander is one of the most spiritual films I have ever seen. It is a real treat to own the 5 Disk DVD Box Set from the Criterion Collection so I be fully in awe whenever I feel like watching it. Well worth a buy and well worth the runtime (312 min). This is definitely in my top ten, as well as Bergman's other incredibly spiritual film known as The Seventh Seal (1957) Praise it! 5/5

Wild Strawberries Review- By Michael Carlisle

 Title: Wild Strawberries
Director: Ingmar Bergman
Year: 1957
Country: Sweden
Language: Swedish

Victor Sjostrom is known as the father of Swedish Cinema, with films like the silent classic The Phantom Carriage (1921) he influenced great filmmakers like the legendary Ingmar Bergman who made this film. It is quite interesting that Victor Sjostrom agreed to be in not one, but two of Bergman's films. The first was To Joy (1950) and the second was Wild Strawberries. Bergman would only make this film if Sjostrom agreed to act in it, he did and to his delight won the National Board of Review's Best Actor award at 77 years old.

Wild Strawberries is about a seventy eight year old retired doctor and professor named Dr. Isak Borg (Victor Sjostrom) who has retreated from all forms of human contact with exception of his elderly caretaker. He is traveling from his home in Stockholm to Lund to accept an honorary degree. Instead of sticking to his original plan of flying, he decides to take a long drive with his daughter-in-law Marianne (Ingrid Thulin) instead. The many stops along the way remind him of his life, mainly his childhood and his cold mother.

Wild Strawberries reminds me of a Dicken's novel. Dr. Isak Borg starts out as a cold cynical old man but eventually becomes humbled. Through various important discussions, especially with his son Evald (Gunnar Bjornstrand) , we see the professor's journey to self discovery, self knowledge and the awareness of his own mortality. All these memories and flashbacks through his life shine a light on the character. We see his vulnerabilities and understand the reasons for his retreat from humanity.

While Ingmar Bergman is often seen as too pessimistic and dark, with this film we can see that it's not entirely the case. Wild Strawberries is  the most optimistic and heartwarming film Bergman has made in his four decade long career. Like all of his films, the dialouge is extremely important. Conversations and moments that radiate the screen surely remind us of this man's redemption. Sjostrom's performance is remarkable, made only a few years before his death we must wonder if Sjostrom was going through the same thoughts and emotions of his character.

In conclusion, this film will likely having you question your own life as well. Making you reflect upon your decisions and likely living for the better. Surely, it will have you in a self reflective state long after the film is over. It is honest, emotional and intense. A brilliant character study that deserves to be seen by generations of people. Praise it! 4.5/5

Persona Review- By Michael Carlisle

Title: Persona
Director: Ingmar Bergman
Year: 1966
Country: Sweden
Language: Swedish 

Persona is one of legendary Swedish Director Ingmar Bergman's most peculiar films, even though it is not too difficult to understand as all the scenes, even the dream scenes, are perfectly clear. I find myself watching this film over and over again, in attempt to analyze the great cinematic style of Bergman. I also realize that this is a film of buried truths and complicated emotions, to uncover them all is a long yet fruitful endeavor. It's a film that if made by any other man could be labelled "pretentious", yet Bergman pulls it all off perfectly.

Persona is about a young nurse named Alma (Bibi Andersson) who is put in charge of Elizabeth Volger (Liv Ullman); an actress who seems like she is at the peak of her health, with the exception that she refuses to talk. As they spend time together, Alma constantly finds company in speaking to Elizabeth, even though she never receives an answer. She reveals a lot of her deep secrets to the seemingly sympathetic Elizabeth. Slowly Alma's personality is emerging with Elizabeth's Persona.

This film opens with a series of quite unusual images a spider, a montage from silent comedies, a spike being driven through a man's hand, and faces in a morgue. Then it cuts to a picture of a young boy watching women's faces appear on a giant screen in front of him. The montage intentionally distorts reality and gets us ready for one hell of a psychological film. Persona is somewhat of a female power game. Alma starts off as a confident nurse who does all the talking in their "relationship", though who really knows if Elizabeth is actually listening? Therefore Alma feels in control of the silent woman. However over the course of the film, Alma's stability seems to disintegrate Her talks that were designed to help Elizabeth end up becoming confessions of secrets, desires and guilt. Eventually her mask or "persona" is taken away, and we see a completely different side of the character.

It is quite interesting that words begin the downfall of a rather healthy woman. Perhaps Elizabeth was never really sick, what it wrong with not wanting to talk? Alma's language begins to break down and we see her struggling to perform coherent phrases. Bergman's brilliant use of close-ups show the  intricate details of her emotionally fragile state. Steady movements of the camera show the emerging ambiguity of each woman's identity. It can also be seen as a study about loneliness and what that can do to a human being. Alma's chatter shows a desperate need for human contact and I guess Elizabeth will be this "victim". She goes as far as to describe an orgy she had on the beach, it's interesting to see how far times have changed.

In conclusion, while this may not be Bergman's best (many agree that title would belong to The Seventh Seal) I think it is Bergman's most psychological. Certainly the optic effect of fusing the woman's faces into one haunting image is intense and unique to Swedish film. Again, I must applaud the director for making such a great film dominated by women. Praise it! 5/5

Cries and Whispers Review- By Michael Carlisle

Title: Cries and Whispers
Director: Ingmar Bergman
Year: 1972 
Country: Sweden
Language: Swedish

Cries and Whispers is the film that both introduced me to the wonderful world of Swedish film, and the genius of a legendary Swedish Director known as Ingmar Bergman (1918-2007). His feature film career started with Torment (1944), which is considered one of the greatest films of all time, and ended with Fanny and Alexander (1982) which is often his most praised film. Throughout his four decade long career it appears that he has never missed a beat. His films always impressed and still continue to inspire even after his death.

Cries and Whispers is set in turn of the century Sweden where a woman dying of cancer named Agnes (Harriet Andersson) is visited in her large isolated mansion by her sisters Karin  (Ingrid Thulin) and Maria (Liv Ullman). As Agnes' condition worsens and her pain becomes increasing unbearable, fear and distance grab hold of the sisters who seem unable of showing any empathy. As the end of Agnes' life draws near we see all the repressed feelings of the sisters come to a boil and then surface.

Aside from The Seventh Seal (1957) and Persona (1966) no other Bergman film has made an impact greater than Cries and Whispers. It received Academy Award nominations for Best Picture, Director, Screenplay and Cinematography. It is complex yet there aren't as much interpretations of the film as there are in more popular films. Which is great, the emotions within the film are explanation enough. The screen is filled with such powerful emotion that it's easy to understand why many people claim this is Bergman's most painful film. His use of closeups and extreme close-ups are masterful, Often stopping the camera on a still and silent face for a few seconds, showing us a window into the character's soul.

The use of colour in this film is used incredibly well, it is perhaps the most important, unique and memorable aspect of Cries and Whispers. Red is dominant throughout the film, in the furnishings and on the walls. Eve in the color of the fade out which in most films is usually black. Bergman had always explained that he imagined the human soul was this particular shade of red. Certainly it intensifies the study of death and the particular emotions it evokes on the living.

In conclusion, Cries and Whispers is definitely a thought and mood provoking film that will have you reflecting on it long after you've seen it. The performances by all the women are utterly fantastic if not, phenomenal. It is incredibly refreshing to see a film completely dominated by women rather than a male driven film. Bergman blends "horror" with poetry in a truly accomplished way. Praise it! 5/5

A Brighter Summer Day Review- By Michael Carlisle

Title: A Brighter Summer Day
Director: Edward Yang
Year: 1991
Country: Taiwan
Language: Mandarin 

Brilliant but incredibly long for my first Taiwanese film. I started watching it in one sitting but realized I had to watch it in parts because I kept getting distracted. Edward Yang's A Brighter Summer Day is definitely epic in scope, but not in scale. It is not an epic in the traditional American sense of what an "epic" film should be. Amazingly, Yang's ingenious portrait of Taiwan and Taiwanese life is so detailed that this films seems much shorter than it actually is. When watching this film you will be so engaged with the characters that you wont even think to look at the clock.

A Brighter Summer Day is set in the 1960's during a single Taipei School year. It shows a country that is still greatly imbalanced by the disruption of the Chinese Nationalists who were led by the  oppressive Chiang Kai-shek in 1948. It is a film distraught between communism, democracy, nationalism and democracy. The characters are full of confusion and alienation with the ever changing world around them. You may need to read up on some Taiwanese history before you watch this film.

As dark as the film may seem, Edward Yang blends the right amount of humor and humanity within the film to make it feel like it's not just about drudgery and impending doom. It is a slow-moving film which shows that the Director has great patience with his shots and the rhythm of his film. Watching this is like watching an orchestra play. Each character's timing & tone is absolutely perfect for every scene they are in. I also admire his indifference to close-up shots, he prefers slower long shots which I feel capture the emotions within his scenes better.

The emotion, plot points and execution of the film seems much like a great novel. It is incredibly sophisticated the way Yang makes his film about more than his characters but about paces and events and Taiwan entire. It all fits together perfectly in an almost flawless way. Though it's what you should expect when a Director spends four years working on just the per-production phase of his work. The search for the identity is Universal and therefore anybody from any culture can relate to these characters.

In conclusion, A Brighter Summer Day is the pinnacle of Taiwanese New Wave. Definitely one of the greatest film to come out of the 90's, let alone the entire twentieth Century. It is quite long, but worth the watch. It will also likely help yo better understand the Taiwanese people and you may probably make more friends because of that. If this is your first film from Taiwan do recommend reading some history and watching this in parts. Either way it will completely blow you away.Praise it! 5/5

Goodfellas Review- By Michael Carlisle

Title: Goodfellas
Director: Martin Scorsese
Year: 1990
Country: US
Language: English

After The Godfather and The Godfather Part II, Martin Scorsese's gangster epic Goodfellas is commonly considered one of the greatest American gangster films of all time by film buffs and critics alike. Indeed it is one of the many films that have made Scorsese's name synonymous with Gangster Cinema, though I personally like his non gangster films like Hugo, Last Temptation of Christ and Raging Bull a lot more. I have seen Goodfellas at least three times a year for the past five years, it seems to be a favorite among movie channels, and every viewing I find more to like about it.

The film begins with a narration by Henry Hill (Ray Liotta) "As far back as I can remember, I always wanted to be a gangster. To me, being a gangster was better than being President of the United States." Indeed Hill is a small time gangster, who takes pat in a robbery with his friends Jimmy Conway (Robert De Niro) and Tommy De Vito (Joe Pesci). Their sights have been set a little higher, to rise in the mob hierarchy by killing off everybody else who chose to join the robbery. The film follows Hill's quest to live the life of luxury he never had as a child.

One thing that is a little bit unusual for a gangster film is the amount of screen time the women in Goodfellas get.. Usually screen time for women is sparse, they are usually seen as an object to obtain (A quote from Brian De Palma's Scarface goes "First you get the money, then you get the power, then you get the women") and are subservient to the male lead. Karen Hill (Lorraine Braco) get narration to show her side of the story. She is as strong as her husband, yet has the same amount of flaws. She has equal power, yet equal fault as well.

Goodfellas is essentially about the nature of power and what can happen if you take shortcuts to obtain that power. Joe Pesci plays his role as the maniacal Tommy De Vito phenomenally well; he definitely deserved the Oscar he received for Best Supporting Actor. He demands respect and when he isn't given that respect he often resorts to violence. When a bus boy tells De Vito to f*ck himself h shoots him in the chest out of blind rage because he feels his power has been taken away from him. Unfortunately this negative characteristic is what leads him to his downfall. Everybody's lust for power in this film affects them quite negatively.

In conclusion, Goodfellas is an incredibly well made Gangster film. There is immense character development as well as inventive cinematography that seems to change style the further along we are into the film. It's quite interesting to see how different the first half of the film looks and feels compared to the second half of the film. Is it better than The Godfather? I would say that it's less historically important, but more entertaining. Praise it! 4/5

Breaking Bad Review- By Michael Carlisle

Title: Breaking Bad
Creator: Vince Gilligan
Year: 2008-2013 (5 Seasons)
Country: U.S
Language: English

Would it be a bold statement to say that Vince Gilligan's Breaking Bad is the greatest television show of all time? I think not. It's an ingenious mix of dark comedy and drama that will always have you on the edge of your seat. Nothing short of mind blowing, it's a sheer punch to the gut and a show of remarkable character development. It's essentially a show about an innocent man with cancer who slowly becomes the cancer to everybody around him. It also has a strong anti-drug statement that resonates throughout each season.

Breaking Bad is about a chemistry teacher named Walter White (Bryan Cranston)  who is diagnosed with Stage III terminal cancer and only given a short amount of time to live. Thinking he has nothing to lose, he embarks on an odyssey full of drugs and crime to-at first- ensure his family has a financially secure future. Walter proves to be a major player in th drug business as he produces and sells methamphetamine with his former student Jesse Pinkman (Aaron Paul).

Bryan Cranston? Isn't he that goofy dad from Malcolm in the Middle? How useful can his acting be in such a dramatic show? Surprisingly Bryan Cranston's diverse acting is what drives this show. It contributes quite an amount of emotional intensity that will surely grip your emotions. Aaron Paul also provides great acting in the show, especially in Season 4 when he produces very real symptoms of post traumatic stress disorder. What is especially interesting about this show is how the characters become polar opposites of what they once were. In Season 1 Walter White is an honest, hard working man who uses his mind to think of creative solutions to problems whereas Jesse Pinkman appears to be just a junky with no morals or intelligence. Throughout the show the roles seem to switch, while Walter White is breaking bad and becoming pure villain, Jesse Pinkman is breaking good and trying to become and honest person.

Breaking Bad shows the incredibly negative effects crystal meth has among society and the individual. It not only affects your life but the lives of everybody around you and pus you in incredible danger. Crystal meth is indeed a cancer on society and I feel that this show portrays that well. "Children" are a common theme in the series. While at first Jesse Pinkman may seem like a scummy guy, we see that he has a great love for children and thus maintains some innocence. When Walter White has his encounters with Brock in Season 4 we see his complete loss of innocence and his descent into darkness. A key character in this known as Gale Boetticer is also extremely child-like in his innocence as well.

In conclusion, Breaking Bad is the best shot & well written television series that I have ever seen. There are a staggering amount of themes that will have you re-visiting the show for years and years to come. The acting, score and lighting make this a suspenseful thrill ride that you wish would continue forever. Breaking Bad is not only entertaining but it is a necessary reminder of the damaging effects of drugs and ego. Praise it! 5/5

Sunday, Bloody Sunday Review- By Michael Carlisle

Title: Sunday Bloody Sunday
Director: John Schlesinger
Year: 1971
Country: UK
Language: English

I did not know what to expect from John Schlesinger's Sunday, Bloody Sunday, at worst I expected a bumbling  melodramatic soap opera. Then I remembered Peter Finch, who played Howard Beale in the incredible late seventies film Network. He acting was top notch in that film and I expected it would be in this one as well. I decided to watch this film because The Criterion Collection had announced it as a November release and I was intrigued by the premise of the film. I am proud to say that this film delivered and I will definitely be buying it when it comes out.

The plot of Sunday, Bloody Sunday involves three people in a rather peculiar love triangle. Alex Greville (Glenda Jackson) is a divorced working woman and Daniel Hirsh (Peter Finch), a Jewish family doctor. They not only share the same answering service but also the same man. Bob Elkin (Murray Head) bed hops between the two of them whenever the mood fits. Both Alex and Daniel know about each other but prefer to live with the situation rather than be without any sort of love.

In the film Alex Greville tells us, "Some people believe something is better than nothing, but I'm beginning to believe that nothing can be better than something." We get a sense that this is not true, for either her or Daniel Hirsh. They both fall for a man who has no dimension to his character, he seems to have no real deep thought or emotion in this film, and is likely twice as young as them. While Daniel is not upset by his homosexuality but he does his best to keep it a secret from his family, mainly because he strongly wants human companionship

I think a lot of people feel this way, unloved and in need of someone to talk to. That's likely why you will see people who jump from bed to bed & people who sacrifice their health just to be with another person.It may seem pessimistic but all great films reveal certain truths about mankind and the society we live in. Humans are indeed quite complex social creatures who long to be understood and loved by others. The characters are quite graceful in the way they accept loss of love and I respect the writers for that. A lesser film might reduce this film to savagery. A lot of the film also had to do with fear, they shared Elkin not because of kindness but because they were worried about trying for all.

In conclusion, Sunday, Bloody Sunday is not about a breakup but about the absence of love and what that does to a human being's psychological state. It does so in a purposefully non confronting way that really makes the film standout. Along with screenplay and direction, the acting by all three main actors is brilliant. This film is an underrated masterpiece. Praise it! 5/5