Saturday, June 04, 2022
The Jungle Book 2016
- Commentary: This movie crept up slowly on me. The first time I checked it out of the library, mostly because of the personal draw of the animated trailers I saw, I enjoyed it but wasn't wowed by it. I found, however, that I retained several moments of the movie in my mind and checked it out twice more. After the third viewing, I knew I had to own it. The story isn't particularly engaging. Frankly, I never saw the original Disney movie nor read that book upon which it was based for a reason. I just wasn't interested. The animation, though, in this version, surrounds me with its magic and I continue to go back to it. The choice of voice actors is excellent, as well. I've instituted a new category for it: "pseudo/cgi-animation". There are a few other movies I should move into this category, most notably, Maleficent. That will come.
Update 6/2/2022: This post was originally published on 2/5/2018 but disappeared from public view. I am now reinstating it.
Actor Role Actor Role Actor Role Actor Role Neel Sethi Mowgli Ritesh Rajan Mowgli's Father Bill Murray Baloo Ben Kingsley Bagheera Idris Elba Shere Khan Lupita Nyong'o Raksha Scarlett Johansson Kaa Giancarlo Esposito Akela Christopher Walken King Louie Garry Shandling Iki Brighton Rose Grey Brother Jon Favreau Fred Sam Raimi Indian Giant Squirrel Russell Peters Rocky Madeleine Favreau Raquel Sara Arrington Nilgai
Here's a link to the Wikipedia write-up of the film.
Release Date: 2016
Directed by Jon Favreau.
Labels: ben-kingsley, christopher-walken, fantasy2, film-art1, giancarlo-esposito, popcorn-and-soda2, pseudo-cgi-animation, spectacle1
Funny Face
- Commentary: Yes, yes, yes, I own this silly, cotton candy movie. Let me explain. When I had cable TV it used to show up often enough on TCM to satisfy my need for a Funny Face fix. Once I disconnected, though, at least once a year I would find myself on my local library site placing a hold on the movie (it comes from another library in the local system) so I could watch it yet again. And, no, I don't watch it for the story, I watch it for the fashion, for the dances and for the delight that was and is Audrey Hepburn. I know Hepburn has been in many other movies, most notably Breakfast at Tiffanys. Movie gods forgive me, I don't like it. I don't like the "thriller" she's in with Peter O'Toole. I don't like Charade. I can handle Roman Holiday (it reminds me of The Princess Diaries, which I can also handle but wouldn't bother to own) and Sabrina (a bit more than Roman Holiday) but would never seek them out. The Nun's Story is interesting and I might check that one out again but, well, maybe not. The Children's Hour is equally interesting, but I'm not sure I'd check that one out again, either. There are, of course, others. Many. I just don't seek them out. Maybe I will. Maybe I won't. But Funny Face, all I can say is, when I find myself in an Audrey Hepburn mood, only Funny Face will do! And, by the way, Kay Thompson is a hoot, a perfect foil for, and as much of a draw in this film as, Audrey Hepburn. Think pink!
Update 8/12/2021: Can you handle it? One more excellent, in depth review of Funny Face researched (that's right, I do mean researched!) and written by The Blonde at the Film, Cameron.
Update 6/2/2022: This post was originally published on 2/5/2018 but disappeared from public view. I am now reinstating it.
Actor Role Actor Role Actor Role Actor Role Audrey Hepburn Jo Stockton Fred Astaire Dick Avery Kay Thompson Maggie Prescott Michel Auclair Prof. Émile Flostre Robert Flemyng Paul Duval Dovima Marion Jean Del Val Hairdresser Virginia Gibson Babs Sue England Laura Ruta Lee Lettie Alex Gerry Dovitch Suzy Parker Specialty Dancer Pink Number
The Wikipedia write-up for this film is here.
Release Date: 1957
Directed by Stanley Donen.
Labels: 20th-century-chick-flicks1, comedy1, dance, fred-astaire, me-favorite1, musical1, period2, romance1, spectacle1
The Way Back
- Commentary: I own this, in large part, because it is a Peter Weir film and I strive to own most of his films. It is a crazily involving film, for me. Trek films are one of my weaknesses. This one suits me and, besides, contains many of the hallmarks that make Peter Weir films great in my eyes: startling landscapes, curious and difficult relationships, complicated conflicts, minutely specific characterizations, a sense of time standing still.
I notice, in the Wikipedia write-up, some critics considered this film not up to his usual quality, not one of his best, as Roger Ebert points out in his review, linked to the title of this post. I quibble with him and others who have "Peter-Weir-expectation" problems with it. This is a Peter Weir film. That's why I own it. Peter Weir, through his films, owns me, this film, included. It is, as well, a "spectacle" film, if for no other reason than the landscape, which is so involving that, well, it demands to be in a Peter Weir film.
In addition to the Actor/Role table, below, Mark Strong plays escapee Andrei Timofeyevich Khabarov.
Update 6/2/2022: This post was originally published on 2/5/2018 but disappeared from public view. I am now reinstating it.
Actor Role Actor Role Actor Role Actor Role Jim Sturgess Janusz Wieszczek Ed Harris Mr. Smith Saoirse Ronan Irena Zielińska Colin Farrell Valka Dragoș Bucur Zoran Alexandru Potocean Tomasz Horodinsky Gustaf Skarsgård Andrejs Voss Sebastian Urzendowsky Kazik
Release Date: 2010
Directed by Peter Weir.
Labels: §, adventure1, drama4, haunting1, historical2, period2, peter-weir, political2, popcorn-and-soda2, saoirse-ronan, spectacle1
Elmer Gantry
- Commentary: This is one of those films I've watched so many times I can quote dialogue from it. The story is incendiary (literally). The production is spot on. The acting is masterful. Although I wouldn't ordinarily label a film like this a "spectacle" film, it certainly isn't in the mode of, say The Ten Commandments, the spectacle film against which to judge all spectacle films, there is something spectacular about every element of this film, not the least of which are Burt Lancaster and Jean Simmons. Both were made for these roles.
Roger Ebert wrote an extraordinary essay in memory of Burt Lancaster. I thought it was fitting to include it in this post since this movie belongs to Burt Lancaster. This was a movie that Mom enjoyed, as well, although it was one we caught on TCM and checked out of the library rather than owned. I own it, now. It's the kind of movie that makes me want to read the book. I haven't, yet, but I have a copy. I'll be cracking it soon.
And now, dear reader, an essay by Roger Ebert, the famous film critic, you will note, on reading. I remembered this essay, which I read a while back, immediate after I wrote "It's the kind of movie that makes me want to read the book." Since, in fact, I have realized that I did read the book, in high school, along with several other Sinclair novels. And yet, the reading of the book has vanished, in my memory, below the watching of the film. Hmmm. This essay reminds me that if I love the movie and it's based on a book, I need to read (or reread) the book. The two are tangled media. Employing both, I think, enhances one's intelligence with perspicuity. Consider my write-up of Rosemary's Baby. Rarely does a movie follow a book so closely, usually only in the case where the book was written with the movie in mind. Which is the point. If the book was written long before the movie was even a twinkle in someone's eye, and, if you enjoyed the movie, I guarantee, you'll really enjoy the book. Think you don't have the time for the book? Time doesn't put demands on us, we put demands on Time. Make some demands. I think you might be pleasantly surprised at what results.
Update 6/2/2022: This post was originally published on 2/5/2018 but disappeared from public view. I am now reinstating it.
Actor Role Actor Role Actor Role Actor Role Burt Lancaster Elmer Gantry Jean Simmons Sister Sharon Falconer Arthur Kennedy Jim Lefferts Dean Jagger William L. Morgan Shirley Jones Lulu Baines Patti Paige Sister Rachel Edward Andrews George F. Babbitt John McIntire Rev. John Pengilly
Here's a link to the Wikipedia write-up of the film.
Release Date: 1960
Directed by Richard Brooks.
Labels: burt-lancaster, dean-jagger, drama4, jean-simmons, period2, spectacle1
Monday, May 09, 2022
Gladiator
- Who's watched: M & G
- Mentions: *1* *2* *3*
- Commentary: As covered in one of the above Mentions, this movie was suggested by MFS. I was surprised at how much Mom loved it. I enjoy it, too. It's yet another spectacle movie for me (I should create a "spectacle" category, shouldn't I...I think I will, then add to it later) and I love a variety of the acting performances in this movie, particularly (but not solely) Richard Harris as Marcus Aurelius. Before he ever says anything in the movie his acting makes many aspects of Marcus Aurelius' character clear. We watched this movie on TV several times, in "to-fit-your-screen" format, before I finally purchased it. Much better in widescreen. On a whim, I watched the movie last night. I continue to find it supremely entertaining; and, as well, now that Mom's dead, surprisingly emotional, specifically at the end when Juba says, as he buries Maximus' personal idols, "I will see you again, but not yet." If you have any interest in this movie, I urge you to click into the link to the title of the movie, above, which will send you to a thorough and compelling critique of the historicity of the movie. Believe me, despite the astonishing number of historical inaccuracies in the movie, the critique renders watching the movie even more enjoyable.
Update 2/7/18: So much has been written about this film since it aired. Quite a bit has been dumped, as well, including the link I had originally attached to the title above. I've attached another which may be helpful but, just in case, here's the Wikipedia link for Gladiator which may be a good starting place if you're interested in historicity research.
Update 8/2/21: The link I attached in 2018 still holds strong, is still remarkably interesting, and even has a comment attached. Take advantage of it before it disappears into the oligarchic ether.
Update 5/23/22: Another post I managed to disappear. It's original publication date is 4/9/09.
Actor Role Actor Role Actor Role Actor Role Russell Crowe Maximus Decimus Meridius Joaquin Phoenix Commodus Connie Nielsen Lucilla Oliver Reed Antonio Proximo Derek Jacobi Senator Gracchus Djimon Hounsou Juba Richard Harris Marcus Aurelius Ralf Möller Hagen Tommy Flanagan Cicero David Schofield Senator Falco John Shrapnel Senator Gaius Tomas Arana General Quintus Spencer Treat Clark Lucius Verus David Hemmings Cassius Sven-Ole Thorsen Tigris of Gaul Giannina Facio Maximus's wife Omid Djalili Slave Trader Giorgio Cantarini Maximus's son Adam Levy Condemned Officer David J. Nicholls Giant Man
Release Date: 2000
Directed by Ridley Scott.
Labels: action3, adventure3, derek-jacobi, drama7, historical2, joaquin-phoenix, oliver-reed, period3, political3, revenge1, richard-harris, ridley-scott, russell-crowe, shared-favorite, spectacle1, suspense2, violence3, war1
Thursday, November 18, 2021
Game of Thrones: First through Eighth Seasons
- Commentary: Yeah, I know, what am I doing with only the 5th season? A friend of mine gave it to me when I was complaining about having to wait forever to check it out from the library, and told me not to bother giving it back, she was done with it. "Pass it on," she said. Once I'm done with it I will, on to the library. I know from the length of their hold list on this, of which I was once a part, they could use another copy of it. And, yes, I enjoyed it, but not enough to keep, I don't think. Although I'm not sure. We'll see.
Updated 2/5/18: "By hook, crook" (not really, regarding the "crook") and purchase I now own all seven seasons of this serial, and I'll probably own the eighth, when it's available. I don't have the luxury of watching this show when it debuts on HBO, but I'm hooked, now, much to my surprise. I don't agree with the critics that it's the best television series ever produced (I haven't made my mind up about that, yet), but I do think it's close, certainly many-notes-worthy, and a production to which I know I'll refer many times. Just in case, since I'm noticing that many links to the producers of these movies and tv series often go dead after awhile, here's the Wikipedia link to Game of Thrones.
Updated 1/18/21: As you can see by the title, I now own the entire Game of Thrones series. My favorite seasons are the middle ones, where people are striving to accomplish their goals. I felt I owed it to the series, though, to follow it through to the end, not knowing that the final season would be anticlimactic throughout all six episodes. I'm okay with that, though. Like many others, worldwide, I became addicted, for good reason. The last season competently ended that addiction. Not that I will never watch any of the series, again. I am currently, and slowly, making my way through the series. I'm early into Season 5. Great acting and great storytelling doesn't exist to be abandoned on a shelf.
Update 11/17/2021: This post was originally published August 14, 2016. It was one of the accidental deletions that occurred, which is covered in this post.
Update 6/15/2022: If, like me, you found yourself unpleasantly gob-smacked by the eighth season of this series, you might find this video commentary interesting.
Seasons 1 - 8 Actor Role Actor Role Actor Role Actor Role Peter Dinklage Tyrion Lannister Lena Headey Cercie Lannister Nikolaj Coster-Waldau Jamie Lannister Emilia Clarke Danerys Targaryen Kit Harington Jon Snow Sophie Turner Sansa Stark Maisie Williams Arya Stark Iain Glen Jorah Mormont Alfie Allen/Reek Theon Greyjoy Sean Bean Eddard Stark Michelle Fairley Catelyn Stark Harry Lloyd Viserys Targaryen Isaac Hempstead Wright Brandon Stark Jack Gleeson Joffrey Baratheon Rory McCann Sandor "The Hound" Clegane Aidan Gillen Petyr "Littlefinger" Baelish Liam Cunningham Davos Seaworth Stephen Dillane Stannis Baratheon Carice van Houten Melisandre Natalie Dormer Margaery Tyrell Conleth Hill Varys Jerome Flynn Bronn Charles Dance Tywin Lannister John Bradley Samwell Tarly James Cosmo Jeor Mormont Joe Dempsie Gendry Oona Chaplin Talisa Stark Kristofer Hivju Tormund Giantsbane Gwendoline Christie Brienne of Tarth Iwan Rheon Ramsey Snow/Bolton Hannah Murray Gilly Nathalie Emmanuel Missandei Dean-Charles Chapman Tommen Baratheon Tom Wlaschiha Jaqen H'ghar Indira Varma Ellaria Sand Jonathan Pryce The High Sparrow Daniel Portman Podrick Payne Bella Ramsey Lyanna Mormont Pilou Asbæk Euron Greyjoy Anton Lesser Qyburn Gemma Whelan Yara Greyjoy Lino Facioli Robin Arryn Jacob Anderson Grey Worm James Faulkner Randyll Tarly Diana Rigg Olenna Tyrell Keisha Castle-Hughes Obara Sand Joseph Mawle Benjen Stark Kate Dickie Lysa Arryn David Bradley Walter Frey Jim Broadbent Archmaester Ebrose Max von Sydow Three-eyed Raven Julian Glover Grand Maester Pycelle Peter Vaughan Maester Aemon Kristian Nairn Hodor Jason Momoa Khal Drogo Thomas Brodie-Sangster Jojen Reed
Here's a link to the Wikipedia write-up of the film.
Release Date: 2011-2019
Directed by: Okay, so here's a huge disappointment. Despite having many directors, only one of those directors was a woman and she directed only two episodes in Season 4. Shameful.
Labels: action1, adventure1, drama6, fantasy2, female-director3, indira-varma, jonathan-pryce, max-von-sydow, period2, peter-dinklage, political2, royals, spectacle1, suspense2, tragedy1, TV1, violence2, war1
Saturday, January 16, 2021
Exodus: Gods and Kings
- Commentary: I own this movie because I have a particular fascination for the Moses part of the origin story of the Jewish people and their attempts to, and successes at, forming a nation. This is my fourth version of the Moses story, the others being: The Ten Commandments with Charlton Heston as Moses, Moses with Ben Kingsley playing Moses, superbly, I think, and Cecil B. DeMille's The Ten Commandments, DeMille's first, silent production of the Moses story, which combines the story with a modern day film meditation of the application of the ten commandments in what was, at that time, modern life.
This movie, staring Christian Bale as Moses, is certainly entertaining. I go on "Moses" binges during which I watch all of my Moses movies back-to-back. This version is as involving and entertaining as all the others. Joel Edgerton is particularly fun as Pharaoh Ramses. John Turturro strikes an appropriately wise and world-weary Seti. Much to my delight, Ben Kingsley also appears in this movie as a major/minor figure, Nun. There are so many recognizable stars playing bit parts in this movie that it makes you wonder ...
Truth is, even though I consider it a delightful addition to my Moses archive, it's easy to wonder, as I watch it, why this Moses story was even produced and why all these major stars (including those in minor parts) assented to participate. Mind you, I have no quarrel with versions and versions of the Moses story. I find them endlessly fun and fascinating. Of all the versions I own, though, this is the only one that appears to be an obvious Ridley Scott money grab, and, frankly, only a money grab. We know how spectacular Scott can be producing an epic. You only need to point to Gladiator. In that movie, it's obvious that Ridley Scott, the director for that movie, too, was not only thinking about content, he thought assiduously and well about it. Not so with this production. There are some roles that featured large in my other Exodus epics that were merely spit upon in passing in this movie: Dathan, for instance, and Jethro. There are others that featured large in this movie that were, again, spit upon in passing or altogether ignored in my other Exodus epics: Miriam, for instance, and Viceroy Hegep.
Still, it's fun to watch, in the context of my other Moses movies. I'll not be passing it on to someone else.
Actor Role Actor Role Actor Role Actor Role Christian Bale Moses Joel Edgerton Rameses II John Turturro Seti I Aaron Paul Joshua Ben Mendelsohn Viceroy Hegep María Valverde Zipporah Sigourney Weaver Tuya Ben Kingsley Nun Isaac Andrews Malak Hiam Abbass Bithiah Indira Varma High Priestess Ewen Bremner Strategy Expert Golshifteh Farahani Nefertari Ghassan Massoud Grand Vizier Paser Tara Fitzgerald Miriam Dar Salim Cmdr. Khyan Andrew Tarbet Aaron Ken Bones Court Scribe Anton Alexander Dathan Kevork Malikyan Jethro
You'll notice, above, that the name "Malak" is hyperlinked to an article that well discusses the use of this word/name biblically. I became very curious about this word/name because of the character who sports it in this movie. Interesting read, no matter how you feel about the movie. Although many people, including some prominent reviewers, have identified this character as the Abrahamic God, the definition to which I've linked clearly undermines this interpretation by identifying this word as meaning a "messenger" and an "angel".
Here's a link to the Wikipedia write-up of the film.
Release Date: 2014
Directed by Ridley Scott.
Labels: ben-kingsley, ben-mendelsohn, bible-movies1, christian-bale, drama2, historical1, indira-varma, john-turturro, military, moses, popcorn-and-soda1, religion1, ridley-scott, sigourney-weaver, spectacle1, violence1
Wednesday, January 22, 2020
Confucius
- Commentary: I almost didn't acquire this movie. I found out about it, looked for it at the local library, couldn't find it and figured, well, I don't want to take a chance on it if I can't pre-view (yes, the dash is intentional) it. I mean, I'm familiar with some of Chow Yun Fat's work, martial arts stuff, find him riveting as an actor but knew almost nothing about Confucius except for the dubious details that our culture pawns off on us. When I discovered the movie, by accident, I was intrigued enough to go looking for information on the man, himself. It was this research, which is voluminous, that whetted my interest in the movie. There is a great deal of information on Confucius, but the most intriguing bit of information is that there is some (little) historical doubt as to whether he or his renowned teacher, Laozi, even existed in anything other than legend. Regardless of whether either figure actually existed or were combinations of several Chinese philosophers and legends, the impact of both figures on both Chinese and global society cannot be denied.
So, based only on Confucius' impact, my appreciation for Chow Yun Fat's work and finding the movie, new, at a good price, I decided to purchase it.
I'm pleased I did. Whether Confucius is legend or fact, the movie is so well done and very involving. It swept me up and delivered me into a life full of action and intrigue. Extraordinary man. His life, legendary, actual, whatever, was a touchstone. If such a person hadn't have lived, he surely would have been invented, by the best minds of his day and the days to come.
Actor Role Actor Role Actor Role Actor Role Chow Yun-fat Confucius Zhou Xun Nanzi Xu Huanshan Laozi Yao Lu Duke Lu Dinggong Ma Jingwu Duke Jing of Qi Bi Yanjun Duke Ling of Wei Wang Huichun Li Chu Li Huan Kuai Kui Chen Jianbin Jisun Si Lu Yi Jisun Fei Wang Ban Shushun Wu Wu Liansheng Mengsun He Kai Li Lady Qiguan Qiao Zhenyu Kong Li Chen Rui Kong Jiao Ren Quan Yan Hui
In case you're curious, here's the Wikipedia page on this film. It's a sad affair, especially since most of its wordage is about (some) of the controversies surrounding the film. The review linked to the title of this post is from ScreenAnarchy and, I think, is a much fairer representation of the film, including the constroversies it stirred. Don't be surprised if I link to more of their content in the future.
Release Date: 2010
Directed by Hu Mei.
Labels: §2, action2, adventure2, biography1, cgi-animation, drama2, female-director1, historical1, period1, political1, reflective, spectacle1, spiritual1, war1
Mulan: Rise of a Warrior
- Commentary: I didn't know this movie existed until recently. Yes, I enjoy the Disney cartoon version of Mulan, I have it in my collection. When I discovered that this live action version existed, though, I immediately checked it out of our library system and watched it. Although it dramatizes many of the same themes, including romance, although a thwarted one, it is a much more serious take on the legend, especially since any comic elements this one contains (and, there are a few soft moments that could be considered comic) do not have anything to do with Eddie Murphy or a dragon and a chicken. However, there is a striking parallel between the portrayal of the Mulans.
Much to my surprise, I'm not sure which version I prefer. Immediately after I watched this version (when I initially checked in out of the library), I found myself hankering to watch Disney's version ... and I did. Both movies have such a high degree of respect for the heroine that I find them both satisfying, and mutually complementary. Which is why I now own a copy.
You'll notice the number of tags I have attached to this movie; and the fact that the same number is not attached to the Disney version of Mulan. I think all the tags I've attached to this version could apply to the Disney version, but I think this movie had more of an impact on me than the Disney version. Truth is, I'm curious about the 2020 live action Mulan put out by Disney. At some point I'll check it out of the library and watch it, but I'm not sure I'll purchase it.
Actor Role Actor Role Actor Role Actor Role Zhao Wei Hua Mulan Chen Kun Wentai Hu Jun Mendu Jaycee Chan Fei Xiaohu Nicky Lee Hu Kui Liu Yuxin Rouran Princess Yu Rongguang Hua Hu Vitas Guide
If you feel the need, here's the sparse write-up on this film at Wikipedia.
Release Date: 2009
Directed by Jingle Ma.
Labels: §2, action2, adventure2, cgi-animation, coming-of-age1, drama2, fantasy1, father-daughter-dynamics, gender-bender, historical1, military, period1, political1, romance1, spectacle1, tragedy1, war1
Tuesday, November 05, 2019
The Age of Innocence
- Commentary: Truth is, I read this novel long, long, long before I saw this movie, which is why I was reluctant to see it. I read the book at a time, being an older teen, when I found the story poignant and troubling. This is no longer true for me. The movie exists for me, now, as an opulent drama of manners, well done by Scorsese, well acted by the entire cast and a great way to spend a rainy (or snowy, which was the weather the last time I watched it) afternoon in a mountain community.
Roger Ebert christened this movie as one of his "Great Movies", as well. In addition, he conducted an interview with Martin Scorsese specifically about this movie and Scorcese's history with it, among other issues highlighted by the movie.
Actor Role Actor Role Actor Role Actor Role Daniel Day-Lewis Newland Archer Michelle Pfeiffer Ellen Olenska Winona Ryder May Welland Miriam Margolyes Mrs. Mingott Geraldine Chaplin Mrs. Welland Michael Gough Henry van der Luyden Richard E. Grant Larry Lefferts Mary Beth Hurt Regina Beaufort Robert Sean Leonard Ted Archer Norman Lloyd Mr. Letterblair Alec McCowen Sillerton Jackson Siân Phillips Mrs. Archer Carolyn Farina Janey Archer Jonathan Pryce Rivière Alexis Smith Louisa van der Luyden Joanne Woodward Narrator
Just in case, as always, here's the Wikipedia write-up for this film.
Release Date: 1993
Directed by Martin Scorsese.
Labels: Criterion1, drama3, historical1, joanne-woodward, jonathan-pryce, martin-scorsese, period1, popcorn-and-soda1, romance1, spectacle1
Swing Time
- Commentary: The story is silly and forgettable but the dancing is divine - "an exuberant celebration of its stars' chemistry, grace, and sheer joy in the act of performance", per the back of the movie case. This movie remains one of the standards of dance musicals. It may be old, it may be black & white, but it is, as I note in the labels, a spectacle. Such a spectacle, in fact, that Roger Ebert has named it one of his "Great Movies", as the link affixed to the title of this post will explain.
And, yes, Mom loved this movie, too. We didn't own it, but it was ever-available through our county library system and we liberally took advantage of that. That's why I decided to own it, now. Since my mother's death, it's been a frequent check-out of mine. Why not own it?!? In fact, why not own the Criterion edition of it?!?
Actor Role Actor Role Actor Role Actor Role Fred Astaire John Garnett Ginger Rogers Penelope Carroll Victor Moore Edwin Cardetti Eric Blore Mr. Gordon Helen Broderick Mabel Anderson Betty Furness Margaret Watson Georges Metaxa Ricardo Romero Landers Stevens Judge Watson
Here's the Wikipedia write-up for this movie.
Release Date: 1936
Directed by George Stevens.
Labels: Criterion1, dance, dramedy1, fred-astaire, me-favorite1, musical1, popcorn-and-soda1, romance1, spectacle1
Monday, January 28, 2019
A Touch of Zen
- Commentary: Welcome to the ultimate possession of my movie collection!
I'm going to quote from a few letters I sent to my sister about my discovery of and affection for this movie. Any other information you can probably glean from the Wikipedia article attached to the title of this post.
Quote 1 [dated 8/27/2009]: I've been searching for years (on the internet) for another movie I saw at a Chinese film festival in Sacramento in either 1984 or 1985. It was an old movie at the time I saw it ... although not as old as I have been thinking (I thought it was made in the early 1960's; turns out it was made in 1969 and released in 1971). It was a long and mesmerizing movie ... one of the first that used magical martial arts (although not THE first; the first Chinese martial arts movie was made in, get this, 1927; I learned that on the way to finding the movie I was looking for). For years I thought I remembered the name as being "The Golden Buddha" because at the end of the film a Buddhist monk bleeds gold ... a scene I've not been able to forget. I don't know why, but, not until today did it occur to me to try searching "classic chinese films" with a description of that scene, "golden blood" ... and, I found it, you'll never believe this, on Wikipedia (fie on those who dismiss Wikipedia): "A Touch of Zen". Seems it's actually a very popular movie; rated, among moviephiles (especially Asian moviephiles) as one of the best to come out of China. Turns out, there is a DVD available, Region 1, for rental at Netflix and to buy at Amazon. However, I'm not going to buy it (yet, anyway), because, although most of the reviews of the movie on Amazon were favorable to ecstatic, there were complaints, even in the best reviews, about the sound and the darkness of some of the more spectacular martial arts scenes and landscape scenes (I also had this memory from the movie of a river valley with spectacular oblong rock formations, sort of like natural obelisks) ... so I'm renting it on Netflix, first ... will probably get it sometime next week. It may not be worth buying if the quality is bad, but it will certainly be worth watching again. I was sad, actually, a little, finding the movie, because one of the reasons I looked so diligently for it all these years (but, obviously, not diligently enough) was because Mom loved Hero (we have a copy of it) and I figured she'd love this movie even more. Who knows, maybe she's able to look at it over my shoulder. I hope so. [This was written about 9 months after my mother's death.]
Quote 2 [dated 10/23/2018]: So, I ordered myself a "birthday present" (That's my story and I'm sticking to it; aren't birthdays handy?!?) and it came today. ... there's a little story behind it. You may know some of it.
When I lived in Sacramento from 1983 - 1985 I lived in the middle of a mixed Asian community (primarily Chinese, Japanese, Korean and Vietnamese). I became acquainted and friendly with several people and was often invited over for dinner and to Asian-specific events. So, some time in 1984 the community became very excited about the possibility of a particular movie (which was around 10 years old at that time) that was going to be showing in Sacramento, "A Touch of Zen". I knew nothing about the movie. The Chinese people I knew in my neighborhood were insistent that I should go with them and the whole mixed group of Asian Americans to see the movie when it arrived. So, I did. I was mesmerized. Yes, it's a martial arts movie (of sorts). It's also this long, elegant, somewhat confusing epic story full of magnificent and evocative cinematography and thought provoking moments (not necessarily related to one another in a traditional European-centric story sense). Although I've seen the movie twice since then (one time I found it on the internet; I think I wrote you about that; at the time I was looking for it I thought it was called "The Gold Buddha", which made it somewhat harder to find), I can't tell you what it's about, although the heroine has a baby and there are some great martial arts scenes in it, full of magical moves. And, the comic relief character actually plays the second largest and most important part in the movie. The "hero" is almost a sperm donor afterthought. My neighbors and friends and I talked about the movie for days afterward.
So, about a week ago, for some reason unknown to me, although it's not unusual for it to occupy my thoughts unbidden, that movie was suddenly on my mind. I couldn't stop thinking about it, so I went on the internet and tried to find the original site where I watched it some years ago. Never found it, but, I did find that the movie has been remastered by Criterion (I love Criterion edition movies; I only own a few because they are usually very expensive, but they do a damn good job of restoration, when that's necessary, and they sponsor some excellent movies, like Antonia's Line, for instance) and was for sale at a reasonable price (reasonable compared to the prices I'd been following in previous years) AND, included a whole second disc devoted to special features about the movie! So, I decided, hmmm, my birthday's just around the corner, in fact, I see it peeking at me, so I think I'll get myself a birthday present!
Current Comment [1/28/19]: I've had the movie for just over three months, now, and have watched it three times. It remains amazing and mysterious to me and evokes all the times I've watched it and hunted for it in the past. 'Nuff said, I think.
Update 10/02/19: Well, I was wrong, Antonia's Line is not a Criterion movie. It should be. I recently signed up to their website, for the articles and newsletter about movies. Maybe I'll suggest it to them as a possible acquisition. Also, I noticed I've not labeled this movie. That is being corrected now.
Actor Role Actor Role Actor Role Actor Role Hsu Feng Yang Hui-zhen Shih Chun Gu Sheng-tsai Bai Ying General Shi Wen-qiao Xue Han General Lu Ding-an Roy Chiao Abbot Hui-yuan Tien Peng Ouyang Nian Cao Jian Xu Zheng-qing Zhang Bing-yu Sheng-tsai's mother Wang Rui Mun Ta Miao Tien Nie Qiu Han Ying-chieh Chief Cmdr. Xu Xian-chun Wan Zhong-shan Lu Qiang
Here's a link to the Wikipedia write-up of the film.
Release Date: 1971
Directed by King Hu.
Labels: action2, adventure2, audio-visual, Criterion2, drama3, fantasy1, film-art1, gender-bender, haunting1, historical1, period2, spectacle1, thriller1
Spartacus
- Commentary: Yet another film I was surprised to discover I didn't own. This was a Mom favorite and it was through me watching her savoring the movie (especially the love story and the plight of Varinia) that I came to appreciate it to the point that, a good year or so ago, after checking the movie out of the library several times, decided to purchase it.
Yes, it's clearly dated in its portrayal. It rather reminds me of my reaction to The Story of Ruth, when I blurted, in response to watching the priestesses preparing for a sacrifice to Chemosh, "Isn't it interesting that the priestesses gowns look exactly like 1960's evening gowns. Do you think the state of dressmaking, at that time, included all those stays and breast shapers?" My mother ignored me.
At any rate, I continue to find this movie involving. The write-up of the movie on the back of the case in which the movie came characterizes it as a portrayal of a "triumphant" slave revolt. Maybe idealogically and politically it was "triumphant" but, certainly, the fate of the slaves who participated in the revolt was, well, not particularly triumphant. Looking back at the revolt from 2100 years, noticing the current failings of imperialism, the nascent revolt of everyone but the plutocrats, the years-long dismissal of Christianity, let alone religion, and the success of various social democracies versus the burgeoning torpor of a variety of neo- and post-imperial regimes, well, however inspirational it might have been in 1960, it is mildly depressing, now.
Update 9/29/19: Is this a "gang-movie"? Yeah, it is. More of a "good-gang" movie, but a gang-movie, nonetheless. Still fun to watch.
Actor Role Actor Role Actor Role Actor Role Kirk Douglas Spartacus Laurence Olivier Crassus Jean Simmons Varinia Charles Laughton Gracchus Peter Ustinov Batiatus Tony Curtis Antoninus John Gavin Julius Caesar John Dall Marcus Glabrus Nina Foch Helena Glabrus John Ireland Crixus Joanna Barnes Claudia Marius Charles McGraw Marcellus
Just in case, here's the Wikipedia write-up for the movie.
Release Date: 1960
Directed by Stanley Kubrick.
Labels: action1, adventure1, drama4, fantasy1, gang-movie, historical2, jean-simmons, kirk-douglas, mom-favorite1, period2, political1, spectacle1, stanley-kubrick, tragedy1
Full Metal Jacket
- Commentary: As I mention in my write-up for Platoon, this movie, here, is my favorite Vietnam movie. I finally purchased it a while ago. I've watched it a few times since. It is always a thrill. I am ever aware that the movie was, in its time, still is, in fact, controversial. It is not an actor's movie, that is true. Neither was the Vietnam War an actor's war (in the sense that, for instance, WWII became an actor's war). It was a brutal, bloody mess of a capitalist imperial "adventure". It deserved to be lost, as did all the connected wars in Southeast Asia that the U.S. perpetuated. This movie makes that fact abundantly clear.
Although the war, itself, was carnage on a grand scale, the movie is not. As a director's movie, it is a prime example of the interpreting art of film directing. As such, it gets the misdirection/misadventure of the actual war and the global (let alone U.S.) reaction to it right. I will never tire of wanting to watch this movie. It's probably a generational thing. So be it.
Update 9/29/19: I've added this film to a category that I feel I need to defend: the "gang-movie" category. Although the group of men portrayed in this movie are a military unit, they are, clearly, also a gang, as well as part of a larger gang, the overwhelming military gang of professional warriors. It's impossible for me to consider them different than a street gang. Watch the movie. You'll see what I mean.
Actor Role Actor Role Actor Role Actor Role Matthew Modine Pvt./Sgt. J. T. Davis Vincent D'Onofrio Pvt. Leonard/Gomer Pyle Lee Ermey Gunnery Sgt. Hartman Adam Baldwin Animal Mother Arliss Howard Pvt./Sgt. Evans Kevyn Major Howard Rafterman Dorian Harewood Eightball Tim Colceri Doorgunner Ngoc Le VC Sniper Ed O'Ross Lt. Walter J. Schinoski John Terry Lt. Lockhart Bruce Boa POG Colonel
Just in case, here's the Wikipedia write-up for this movie.
Release Date: 1987
Directed by Stanley Kubrick.
Labels: action1, coming-of-age1, gang-movie, haunting1, historical2, horror1, matthew-modine, military, period2, spectacle1, stanley-kubrick, vincent-d'onofrio, violence2, war1
Saturday, May 26, 2018
Evita
- Commentary: This is one of the musicals I watched when I was in deep consideration of La La Land [see my write-up for An American in Paris for a meticulous discussion about my ad hoc study of musicals in order to try to understand, well, something about my niece's, and, frankly, the world's overwhelming veneration of La La Land, which I have not bought and will not be buying, BTW]. Although I was surprised at how thoroughly Evita involved me, I was even more surprised at how many times, over the next few weeks prior to my purchasing it, I was recalling scenes from the movie. Many things about this movie engaged me: The caliber of the actors' performances; the interesting adaptation of this particular musical to film, which almost seemed more appropriate than a theater performance (although, I must confess, I have not seen a theater performance of this movie); the staging; the pathos; the cinematography. I could go on. Suffice it to say, finally, a few weeks ago, after checking it out of the library yet again, strictly for my own pleasure, I decided, yes, I'm adding this movie to my collection. Bravo, everyone involved in this production! Striking and, as one film critic, Zach Conner, put it, "... pretty damn fine ..."!
You will notice that I've labeled this, in addition to other designations, an "oliver-stone" movie. According to the Wikipedia write-up of this movie, Stone's involvement is convoluted, at best, but IMDB lists it as one of his writing credits.
Actor Role Actor Role Actor Role Actor Role Madonna Eva Perón Antonio Banderas Ché Jonathan Pryce Juan Perón Jimmy Nail Agustín Magaldi Victoria Sus Doña Juana Ibarguren Julian Littman Juancito Duarte Olga Merediz Bianca Duarte Laura Pallas Elisa Duarte Peter Polycarpou Domingo Mercante Andrea Corr Juan's Mistress Alan Parker Tormented Film Director Peter Hughes General Francisco Franco
Here's a link to the Wikipedia write-up of the film.
Release Date: 1996
Directed by Alan Parker.
Labels: drama4, historical2, jonathan-pryce, musical1, oliver-stone, period2, political2, spectacle1
Monday, March 26, 2018
An American in Paris
- Commentary: Why did I come by this one? Hmmm ... one day about a month ago I decided to check out La La Land from the library. Mind you, other than it being a musical that was heralded and had won lots of awards, and who starred in it, I knew nothing about it. Hadn't read anything on it, laudatory, critical or otherwise. I happened to mention to my niece, the actor with whom I share a love of films, that I'd borrowed it for a line-up of movie watching. She confessed to me that it was her favorite film and asked to know my reactions once I'd watched it. I trust her tastes and instincts so I was ready to love the film. As well, I knew it was written and directed by the same guy who is responsible for Whiplash, a movie I loved, so I was excited to see it. Still and all, it took me a couple more weeks to get around to watching it. By that time, my anticipation level was through the roof. I should have remembered my experience with Mary Poppins decades ago. Oh well.
Certainly, I enjoyed watching La La Land, but my anticipation was not satisfied. I did, however, notice significant correlations with Singin' in the Rain, which I own, and An American in Paris, which, at the time, I didn't own. I decided I wanted to do a comparison of La La Land with both. I borrowed An American in Paris from the library, watched it and was reminded of how intriguing and masterful that film is. That's when I looked it up, found a reasonably priced copy and decided to buy it. Although I've noticed, since buying and watching it (twice, and once for all the special features, which are very interesting), that Singin' in the Rain is celebrated more than An American in Paris, well, let's just say, An American in Paris is such a treat I'm surprised we never bought it when Mom was alive.
Since watching it, I've become curious about musicals as a form in themselves, and have been working my way back through my own meager collection and checking even more out of the library. Considering what I own, this is a worthy addition.
In case you're curious, here's what my initial verdict on La La Land was to my niece:I just finished my first viewing of "La La Land". I say that because I'm convinced I'll have to watch it again, probably tomorrow, while it's fresh in my mind. That's because I'm, well, ambivalent.
Frankly, I prefer An American in Paris, Singin' in the Rain and, dare I say it, all the other musicals I own, over La La Land. But, it was the watching of La La Land that has launched me on a serious consideration of musicals (I've made a list of several I'm planning on borrowing within the next months) and the ownership of yet another, this one. For that, I'm grateful.
I was prepared to love it because it was written and directed by the same guy who wrote and directed "Whiplash", which I absolutely loved. When I learned that he is responsible for "La La Land", without knowing anything about the movie (including before I watched it this evening) [I know, hard to believe but I didn't look it up anywhere before I watched it and didn't run across any material about it prior, even though it was such a smash], except that it is a musical, I figured the movie must have a really interesting take on Hollywood musicals because, well, holy shit, this guy did "Whiplash"! So, I was shocked to discover how wrong I was. That realization is taking some getting used to. It is obvious, though, that the writer/director has serious chops, being able to do "Whiplash", then turn around and do "La La Land".
Right off the bat, here are some things I loved about the movie. Ryan Gosling, for one, but, I love him in anything. He could play a mushroom and I'd love him. "The Fools Who Dream" song, for another; that whole sequence, in fact. Sounds like my theme song! Sounds like I'm Mia's aunt, except for the whole Paris thing. Even better, though, I'm your aunt, and Emma Stone is merely a stand-in for you in that movie! I'll just go to Paris, and invite you!
The movie is clearly a revival of the old-time Hollywood musical. I easily recognized many parts of "An American in Paris" (which I saw with Mom too many times to recall, on TCM; it was a regular, so we never needed to own it) and just about every Ginger Rogers/Fred Astaire movie in existence (all of which I saw more than once with Mom on TCM). The brilliant color is taken right out of just about every musical Gene Kelly ever made. Sadly, neither Emma Stone nor Ryan Gosling are very good singers or dancers. [Frankly, Gene Kelly and Fred Astaire were only passable actors, but Ginger Rogers was good; even more so, Leslie Caron.] That was mildly disturbing. But, I think I can forgive them that, since both are, clearly, well developed and flexible actors. It would have been nice, though, if great actors who were also stellar singers and dancers had been given the parts. Hollywood should spend more time checking out stage musical actors. I'm not sure why such people weren't sought out for roles like this. I really like those old musicals, too, so I was ready to be wowed by this reinterpretation ... but I wasn't. I loved how Chazelle worked in the day-dream sequences, how he introduced them, what he did with them. The final one when Mia and her husband were watching Sebastian in his club was lovely. That's right out of "An American in Paris", including the use of the road. He must have a thing for that movie. In fact, I'm surprised he didn't attempt to resurrect Gene Kelly and Leslie Caron. To be fair, there was stuff from "Singin' in the Rain", too, specifically Gene Kelly's work. And, the dancing on stars and clouds? Ginger Rodgers and Fred Astaire.
Initial impressions of the story: Sad, sometimes sober, sometimes delightfully silly, sweet, sweet, sweet. The music? Aside from the "The Fools Who Dream", which I loved, okay. Definitely enjoyable. The production was made for the big screen, rather than the home screen, I think. My TV screen sometimes had trouble with the spotlighting techniques used. It seemed to me that there were places where the movie story went flat, but it never stayed that way and I'm willing to concede, upon a second viewing, that it may have just been me.
One more tiny, tiny thing about the movie: The end disappointed me. I don't usually have problems with movies in which initial relationships wither and evolve into others, like the branches of a tree. For some reason, though, and I'll have to reconfirm this with a second watching, Chazelle did not prep his audience well for it in this movie. It was, frankly, an unpleasant denouement to see Mia with a throw-away husband and kid, even as she was a famous actor. And the suggestion that Sebastian was alone in his personal life. Yes, I know, I saw the two something-or-others he was frying up in the pan before going to his nightclub, but, where was his throw-away wife and kid? Better yet, there never was a really good explanation for why Mia and Sebastian weren't married to each other with a kidlet, and an international acting career, and a successful night club. Not good story construction. Chazelle needs to work on crafting realistic, believable and successful love relationships.
Update 11/18/21: By the way, each mention of the name of this movie in this write-up is linked to a different review (including the last link, which is the Wikipedia write-up). This is such a famous movie and so many people are familiar with it, I thought it would be fun to scatter the availability of internet reviews throughout this write-up. I know, my sense of fun doesn't have much to recommend it, but it's mine and I enjoy it.
Update 6/4/22: Yet another movie made during the year I was born!
Actor Role Actor Role Actor Role Actor Role Gene Kelly Jerry Mulligan Leslie Caron Lise Bouvier Oscar Levant Adam Cook Georges Guétary Henri Baurel Nina Foch Milo Roberts Eugene Borden Georges Mattieu John Eldredge Jack Jansen Anna Q. Nilsson Kay Jansen
An American in Paris [Wikipedia write-up attached] is breathtaking. I'm glad I own it.
Release Date: 1951
Directed by Vincente Minnelli.
Labels: birth-year, dance, dream1, fantasy1, film-art1, mom-favorite1, musical1, popcorn-and-soda2, romance1, spectacle1
