October 30, 2008
Slasher Movie Roundtable
Slasher movies – innovative horror subgenre, or just "some stupid killer stalking some big breasted girl who can't act who's always running up the stairs when she should be running out the front door"? To discuss the relative merits of slasher cinema, we have four people who may have taken their love of scary movies a little too far: Drew Edwards, writer and creator of Halloween Man; Tim Seeley, writer and creator of Hack/Slash and artist on Halloween: Nightdance; Stefan Hutchinson, writer/producer/director of the documentary Halloween: Twenty-Five Years Of Terror, and writer of Halloween: One Good Scare, Halloween: Autopsis, Halloween: Nightdance, Halloween: 30 Years of Terror, Halloween: Sam and Halloween: The First Death of Laurie Strode; and Russell Hillman, editor of Halloween Man.
WHAT WAS THE FIRST SLASHER MOVIE YOU SAW?
Drew - Friday the 13th Part III. At the drive-in, like God intended. And it was love at first sight.
This stands out as an important memory from childhood. I remember someone at our church telling us not to see Jason movies, because when they finally made thirteen of them, it would start the apocalypse. They were 'evil' movies. This of course only made all of the neighborhood kids want to see it even more.
I think it's funny because those movies have gone on to become Americana. But back in the 80s? EVIL!
Stefan - That would be Halloween, which is different to other slasher films in that it's really one of the originals - one of the films that spawned the blueprint. Prior to that I'd been watching monster movies and gothic horror, so this was something completely new to me.
Tim – A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy's Revenge!
Russell - I was a latecomer. I had a friend at school who loved the Nightmare on Elm Street movies, and we watched part 3 [A Nightmare on Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors], followed by 1 and 2. It was the weekend after part 4 [A Nightmare on Elm Street 4: The Dream Master]. came out, but they didn't have a copy in the video shop so we had to make do with the first three. I hadn't seen that many horror movies at the time so this was a real eye-opener.
I still don't like part 2.
Drew - Maybe it's because my expectations have been lowered by repeat viewings. But the last time I watched Nightmare on Elm Street part 2, I found myself actually *Gasp* enjoying it. It's got a kinkier vibe than the others, and I kind of dig it now.
Stefan - I think it's alright too. I certainly prefer it to the goofier sequels that started afterwards.
Tim - It's actually a very GAY kinky movie. Not that I noticed that when I watched it as a kid.
Drew - Yep and it works for me. Freddy is kind of sexually ambiguous anyway.
Tim - But, yeah, the gay kinky aspect of Freddy 2 is kind of amazing, if not just for the way it flips the 'final girl' thing, by making it a guy... but it retains that weird feminine sexuality thing.
Stefan - The Burning is like that too, if not as openly homoerotic as Freddy's Revenge! One thing that's interesting is that if there is a 'Final Dude' then he's usually emasculated - he's not a male that corresponds to how 'guys' are in horror movies. He's usually socially dysfunctional in a lot of ways, rather than some buff football player. He's the guy that is the target of bullying. The stereotypical gender roles are interesting in that sense, because they're not equated to the actual physical bodies that the leads have. A lot of the film theory on these movies (of which there is very little - basically Carol J. Clover, Vera Dika and their various acolytes) is built around the Freudian stuff - that in the end, the woman becomes the bearer of the phallic symbol as she kills the villain - the starting roles are reversed. I don't think the filmmakers really considered this though. I think they just copied what went before without thinking about it too hard!
Drew - While not a slasher movie in any real sense, I sort of feel like that song and dance was perfected in the Evil Dead movies. Ash is basically a male 'final girl'.
Russell - OK, you've persuaded me. For you guys, I'll give Freddy's Revenge another try.
WHAT MAKES A GOOD SLASHER MOVIE?
Drew - I think the design of the killer/monster is very important, naturally. The death scenes need to be inventive as well. But most importantly, I think the victims need to be appealing. Even if it's merely on an archetypal level.
Stefan - That's a tough one. I don't think there's any one thing, and the mistake people make is that there is just the formula and nothing else, which isn't really true. All of the best films in this sub-genre have something that puts them above their peers. Halloween has its style, Friday the 13th has its raw brutality, etc.
Tim - Likable victims, a creepy, yet likable antihero/villain/slasher, and inventive death scenes.
Russell - Not much I can add here to what's been said. It needs something to mark it out from the pack (like Stefan says, the best ones have something that puts them above their peers).
CONVERSELY, WHAT MAKES A BAD SLASHER MOVIE?
Drew - Wow! That's actually the tougher question of the two. Even a bad horror film can be entertaining.
Tim - If it's neither fun, nor scary, it's not a good slasher movie.
Stefan - Most people who are out to make a quick buck and just put out the basic ingredients - final girl, boobs, a few notable death scenes. Because the basic elements of a slasher film are so basic and obvious, you need to have something more to keep it fresh.
Russell - Again, I think Stefan pretty much nailed this one. I'd say the mark of a bad slasher movie is the same as any other kind of bad movie - lack of respect for the audience. The other day I watched Sorority House Massacre 2, and that's just awful. There's a scene where they tell the story of what happened in the house five years ago - and it's just footage from [the unrelated movie] Slumber Party Massacre. The house is completely different inside and out, and the people they describe as the killer's wife and daughters all look to be about the same age as one another. Plus - somehow - unsexy toplessness.
HAVE FILMS LIKE THE SCREAM SERIES AND BEHIND THE MASK: THE RISE OF LESLIE VERNON MADE IT HARDER TO TELL A SLASHER STORY?
Tim - Not at all. If anything, they've made it easier, since now a savvy audience knows the 'rules' and they can enjoy it more when a film cleverly plays with their expectations.
Drew - Those are spoofs. Did Young Frankenstein make it harder to make gothic horror films? No.
Stefan - Maybe Scream did for a little while, but that's mainly because horror was in a bad place anyway when that came out. What Scream demonstrated was that audiences are familiar with the conventions of the slasher film. However, it also celebrated that the joy of watching these films is seeing the inevitable play out in fresh and surprising ways. We don't need to be ironic, tongue-in-cheek, or smug to make a good slasher movie. We just need to put some effort into it. As for Behind the Mask, it didn't really crossover to the general audience, so in that sense it doesn't matter.
Drew - I think what Scream did so well is that it hammered home this idea of the horror movie 'rules'. And for a while it was fun, but then it got to the point where it was rammed down our throats. I'd love to see some new horror movies that forge their own set of rules instead of working off this shared mythology we've invented.
Stefan - I completely agree. I think it points to a bigger problem with the horror genre in that so many people working in it now are horror fans and ONLY horror fans. They're not bringing any fresh ideas or influences with them. If you look at people like John Carpenter, they weren't just schooled on horror directors, but on the whole of cinema up until that point.
Russell - They've certainly made it harder to tell a formulaic slasher story. Or, at least, they should have.
I think Behind The Mask should have been bigger.
WHAT'S YOUR FAVOURITE SLASHER MOVIE?
Drew - It's not a perfect movie, but I have an overwhelming fondness for [Friday the 13th Part VI:] Jason Lives.
Stefan - Outside of Halloween (because I'm always raving about that one), it's probably Friday the 13th: The Final Chapter. I love that movie. It's brutal throughout, it's not campy in any way and they actually gave the characters more depth than usual. It punches, kicks and screams in all the right places.
Drew - While I'm not sure I'd agree that it's devoid of camp. I do think Final Chapter is probably the first movie where Jason is fully realized. You have the now iconic hockey mask throughout the entire movie of course, then Jason seemingly rising from death in a morgue, and he's just this force of nature from that point on. Prior to that, the series used a lot of POV shots. You were the killer. Here Jason was the star and out in full force.
Stefan - I'd say that he's used as sparingly in this film as he is in the previous two myself. Even though there's no surprise to his look as it carried over from Part 3, he's still kept very much in shadows and shot from the waist down until the latter half of the movie.
There's one shot in The Final Chapter that plays perfectly on the POV shot. It's when one of the twins is outside about to leave, and the camera moves towards her like a predator, making us think we're seeing from Jason's perspective. However, the camera surprisingly carries on right past her, and then the murder occurs behind the camera - we see the shadow of it occurring on the wall as lightning flashes. I think that's a beautiful and clever moment in that film.
The big changes to the Friday the 13th formula, for me anyway, occurred with 5 [Friday the 13th: A New Beginning] and 6. In 5, it becomes almost solely about bodycount. There's no build-up to any of the deaths. Characters appear only to be killed a scene or two later. The rhythm to this film is completely at odds with the four that came before it, and it looks very 80s, whereas the first four, because of the grainy cinematography, feel so much more timeless (well, maybe not part 3 as they had lots of light in that one). Part 5 is neon and overlit throughout. There's no mystery in the frame. Then 6 comes along and Jason IS the star. They don't keep him hidden at all in the whole movie.
I guess that's why I don't care for any of the films after the fourth entry
Drew - The original four movies to me almost have an EC comics look to them, even though I doubt that was by design. That grainy look you're talking about is the thing I keep seeing the recent remakes trying to recreate, and it always ends up looking like a Nine Inch Nails video instead. Like I said, I think it's kind of strange that they'd do that. The Hammer remakes of the classic monster films work because they have their own feel and look.
I think they all look pretty 80s though. The originals are early 80s, so there's still that slight 70s vibe. The others (in the Paramount series) have a more mid-to-late 80s look. All of the movies are very much of their time, but it's not a bad thing in my opinion. I found and loved old Universal horror films on video as a kid, and part of what I liked about them was that they were like little time capsules. I think with DVD, we'll see a whole new generation of Freddy and Jason fans.
As far as only sticking to the original four? I've already declared my love for the entire franchise. I even love Jason Goes to Hell, which is a terrible movie. All the other kids on my block loved Star Wars and I loved Jason Voorhees.
Stefan - That film, in the unrated cut, has the ridiculously awesome tent spike kill. I was watching it for the first time some ten years ago with my then girlfriend in Canada, and her grandmother, a cute little Indian woman who spoke very little English, who decided to join us at that point, and I was floored and she was quiet. Too quiet. Needless to say I ejected the VHS straight away...
Drew - See I love watching horror movies with people who aren't fans - They still get really scared. My wife and I went to see Shaun of the Dead (not a scary movie in my opinion) with one of our friends. She isn't a horror fan like we are, and she was terrified. I stopped watching the movie and started watching her reactions to it. I think as horror fans we start to get kind of jaded. We know all the tricks, whereas people like our friend still have this primal gut reaction.
Tim - The first Halloween... but I really, really like TRICK or TREAT.
Russell - The original Halloween is such a perfect movie, it's really hard to pick anything else... but I'm going to do so anyway. Nightmare on Elm Street 3, as it's pretty much the borderline between original Freddy and special effects showcase wisecracking Freddy. (This conversation has put me in a real Freddy and Jason mood.)
Drew - Jason Lives has one of my favorite images in any horror film, hands down. There's this part where one of the camp counselors is walking by this grouping of windows, totally unaware that Jason is on the other side. It's perfect and creepy looking. I'll take a stand for that movie any day of the week.
AND YOUR LEAST FAVOURITE?
Drew - The remake of the Texas Chainsaw Massacre. That's actually one of my least favorite movies period.
Stefan - Gotta be Don't Go in the House! Admittedly I didn't see an uncut of it, but even so. There's a scene in a nightclub where the main slash-happy character freaks out that is unintentionally hilarious.
Tim - The worst one I've seen, technically, is Asbestos Felt's Killing Spree, but that's actually a pretty fun movie. The ones I've enjoyed the least are the PG-13 remake types... When a Stranger Calls or Prom Night.
Russell - Well, the aforementioned Sorority House Massacre 2 is a pretty low point.
ARE THE RECENT REMAKES SUCH AS TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE, HALLOWEEN AND PROM NIGHT, AND THE FORTHCOMING FRIDAY 13TH AND MY BLOODY VALENTINE A GOOD THING?
Drew - I think the retro-slasher films have a fighting chance at being our generation's answer to Hammer Horror. But so far they haven't produced anything overly interesting to me. I thought Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning was entertaining enough. Much better than the prior film anyway.
I think they're kind of weird. You have these slick, Michael Bay produced movies all trying to look like low-budget movies from the 70s and 80s. So they have kind of a strange feel to them. I'm not sure that I like it.
Stefan - For the studios making the money, sure. Half of the time though, there's really no need to remake the originals as what we've seen so far could easily have been adapted into sequels. I'd be more interested if these remakes were approached in the same way as some of the 80s remakes were. You know, films like The Fly and The Thing - radically different from what they were based on. The new ones seem like pale imitations of the originals, lacking the atmosphere and nostalgia-factor that made you ignore their shortcomings. I'm really sick of seeing green filters and shakycam too!
Tim - What they lack in originality, a lot of these remakes do bring in a new audience. So, they are good for that. Some of them have even been okay.
Russell - By accident or by design, I've managed to avoid them all so far, but I'm looking forward to the new Friday. Whether it will be worth seeing is another matter.
Stefan - Actually, I'm looking forward to the new Friday the 13th too. The original Friday the 13th is a classic, but it's a classic through age and influence rather than quality, so to me it's not a Holy Grail like Halloween is. I'm hoping this one is going to be a lot of fun.
OUTSIDE OF LICENSED TIE-INS AND HACK/SLASH, THE SLASHER SUBGENRE SEEMS UNDERREPRESENTED IN COMICS COMPARED TO SAY, VAMPIRES OR ZOMBIES. IS IT HARD TO MAKE A SLASHER STORY WORK IN COMICS?
Tim - I don't think so. I just think there's less fans for the genre.
Russell - It's difficult, but not impossible, as has been proven. I'd like to see more people give it a try.
Stefan - In some ways, yes. You lose the visceral nature of the violence, and more important that that you lose movement and sound, which are integral to the formula. You also lose the audience participation and make it a solo experience. You'll find that most slasher comics go the violence route or the campy route. Both are considerably easier to pull off in comics than actually telling a serious and genuinely disturbing story. It's only the latter slasher films that were really 'fun' - the earlier ones were considerably more serious and terrifying. I'd like to see more of that in comics.
Drew - If anything you'd think slashers would be right at home in comics. They wear masks and funny costumes. In fact, why isn't Batman running around hacking up teenagers? I like the sound of that! Move over Marvel Zombies, make way for DC Slashers!
RECOMMEND AN UNDERRATED SLASHER MOVIE
Stefan - There's not many that are underrated now, because all the gems have a cult following. The Burning is worth a look and should be on the shelves of any slasher collection. I'd also cautiously recommend The Prowler. It's not really a good film, but when it's brutal, it's really fucking brutal.
Tim - Just one?! The Burning is a gem. I recommend Midnight Meat Train, which is a recent Clive Barker goodie.
Russell - Yeah, I finally saw The Burning a week or so ago, and I have to echo the recommendations. Also, I took a recommendation from Tim's Hack/Slash lettercol and checked out Cherry Falls. Better than I was expecting, although the identity of the killer is fairly obvious.
Drew - Candyman, even though it's more of an 'Urban Gothic' than an outright slasher movie. I think it's probably one of the best horror films of the 90's.
Tim - I wanna throw in Nightmare Man. It was one of the HorrorFest flick last year, and stars my friend Tiffany Shepis. It's a really fun movie, with a nice twist on the genre that wasn't as obvious and glaring as Haute Tension.
IF SOMEONE WANTED TO KNOW MORE ABOUT SLASHER MOVIES, WHERE SHOULD THEY START?
Stefan - Tough one, because the slasher roots are everywhere throughout horror history. Normally I'd say Halloween, but that's not really representative of the genre due to its lack of blood. I'd probably recommend the original Friday the 13th. Either that or they could jump in at the deep end and spend 90 minutes with Maniac, which is probably not the best idea for the uninitiated!
Tim - Jim Harper wrote a great book called LEGACY of BLOOD which covers everything you need to know.
Russell - I need to track down Legacy of Blood, but I can't find it anywhere nowadays for anything approaching a reasonable price. There's also a handy little book called Pocket Essentials: Slasher Movies which gives a few good tips.
Stefan - I'd also recommend Games of Terror by Vera Dika. It's an interesting read and less phallocentric than Carol J Clover's Men, Women and Chainsaws!
Drew - Rent the original versions of Psycho, Texas Chainsaw Massacre, and Halloween. Watch them all in one go, alone, with the lights off. Consider your cherry popped.
Now if you want a deeper understanding of the genre I think you need to go back much further. Even something as seemingly unrelated as the Rouben Mamoulian version of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde has proto-slasher DNA in it.
Russell - As for the movies, the start points of the Halloween/Friday the 13th/Nightmare on Elm Street sagas would work quite nicely.
YOU'RE CLEARLY ALL HORROR MOVIE BUFFS, ARE SLASHER MOVIES YOUR FAVORITE SUBGENRE?
Tim - For sure. Vampires come in a close second.
Russell – Pretty much, yeah. It's grown from the Freddy fandom of my early teens to discovering the original Halloween, through Scream and its imitators, up to the present day. I like a good zombie or werewolf movie, but give me a guy in a mask hacking his way through a bunch of teenagers and I'm happy.
Stefan - I'd probably say so. I also like horror films that aren't strictly slashers, but incorporate certain elements. I'm thinking of films like Tenebrae, Nightbreed, Candyman and as Tim said, Midnight Meat Train. That was great fun. A lot of recent slasher films have been 80s throwbacks, which don't really do enough for me. Haute Tension was pretty good until they tried too hard and blew it with that retarded twist at the end.
Drew - Ya' know, not really. I'm more of an overall horror fan than swearing loyalty to any one sub-genre. I love slasher movies when they're well done and I love the big icons like Jason and Freddy. I love Leatherface because I'm from Texas. But I'm just as likely to watch an old gothic from the 30s as a slasher movie. It really depends on what kind of mood I'm in. I'm not sure that I can pick a favorite.
Lately I'm at the point where I'd like to see something really bold and new from the horror genre. I think I'm over torture porn (a term I hate by the way) and we haven't seen any new iconic characters in a good while. Where's the new monsters? Where are the new villains? That's what I want to see. It kind of makes me sad that the best this generation has is the Jigsaw Killer. I don't think he's all that iconic either. My 91 year old grandmother knows who Jason Voorhees is. Jigsaw Killer? Not so much.
WHO IS YOUR FAVOURITE FINAL GIRL?
Stefan - Corey Feldman, hands down.
Tim - Laurie Strode/Jamie Lee Curtis. Marilyn Burns too.
Drew - Laurie Strode. Hands down.
Russell - Heather Langenkamp as Nancy Thompson from the first Nightmare on Elm Street
FINALLY – WHAT'S YOUR FAVOURITE DEATH SCENE?
Drew - Today? Jason stabbing the jock, the using the bed to snap him in two in Freddy vs. Jason. Tomorrow I might answer something different. But I love that scene dearly. It always puts a smile on my face.
Russell - Thinking of Nightmare on Elm Street 3 from earlier brings back memories of the puppetry scene, so right now I'm going to say that.
Or the garage door scene from Scream.
Or the sleeping bag scene from Friday the 13th part 7. Or the soundproof glass scene from Scream 2. Or the entire cornfield party rampage from Freddy vs. Jason.
Tim - Jason X. Liquid Nitrogen dip followed by face shatter.
Drew - That was awesome. If I ever felt guilt, Jason X would be my guilty pleasure
Stefan - It's gotta be in The Intruder, when one poor guy gets his head put through a bandsaw. I first saw that when it was mistakenly released uncut in the UK on the Colorbox label, and man, that was really something. Watching that made me feel I was definitely seeing something I shouldn't be, and I'd found a gem.
Posted by YourMomsBasement at 12:00 PM
May 21, 2008
Ten Scenes That Weren't In The Movie.
by Russell H
10. Mercedes Ruehl learning a very valuable lesson about Antwerp in The Mosquito Coast (1986)
9. The polystyrene sequence with Danny Glover and Fairuza Balk in Serpico. (1973)
8. The scene in Broadcast News (1987) where Bruce Boxleitner experiences Photosynthesis.
7. Nashville (1975) – Jeremy Irons doesn't smoke a pipe.
6. The scene in The Colour Purple (1985) when Roger Ebert and Def Leppard have to stop the Superbowl.
5. Faye Dunaway's upholstery technique, The Brdge on the River Kwai (1957).
4. Robert Mitchum serenades Richard Dreyfuss, Dangerous Liasons (1988)
3. Martha Plimpton making her own copper-bottomed saucepans in Fort Apache: The Bronx (1981).
2. On the Waterfront (1954) – Lindsay Wagner redecorates her windmill
1. Matthew Broderick's birth trauma, King Ralph (1991)
Posted by YourMomsBasement at 12:00 PM
June 07, 2007
10 Great Big Movie Douchebags
There are many things that contribute to making someone a douchebag. An overinflated sense of self-worth. A worthlessness despite pedigree. And an inneffectiveness that, when all is said and done, borders on the pathetic.
But douchebags aren't jerks. Jerks are generally more effective and/or aggressive than douches. Johnny Lawrence was a jerk. Biff Tannen was a jerk. Anakin Skywalker was a jerk. These guys below? Douches.
Fred O'Bannion, potrayed by Ben Affleck in Dazed and Confused
Ah, young Ben Affleck before we knew who he was. And even then did we hate him. But not for the usual "overexposed famous guy of middling talent" reasons, but because the character he plays in this film is a tremendous douchebag. A super-senior, O'Bannion takes way too much delight in the paddling that was the apparent birthright of any senior in high school in 1970's Texas. If you've not seen the film, let us put it this way: he might be the poster child for anti-hazing laws. Just shy of homoerotic, and pretty far from being playful, the guy is just nasty.
There are some other reasons to hate him- he's a bad winner at pool, his muscle car is painted an ugly gray, he has 70's hair- but all of the paddling he gets into is plenty. The sheer joy he expresses as he's spanking the freshmen... well, we wonder what freaky things O'Bannion might have gotten into later in life. The icing on the douchebag cake is that when he gets his comeuppance (they dump paint on him) he has a total hissy fit, storms off and is never seen from again. And that's it. Not much of a villain, there eh? More of a douchebag.
Obi-Wan Kenobi, potrayed by Ewan McGregor and Sir Alec Guinness in the Star Wars films
"Luke, I know that the only family you've ever known has just been killed by stormtroopers, but this girl asking for my help? She's your sister. You're not alone in the universe. Come with me and we can help her."
But Obi-Wan never said that, did he? Instead he just lies to Luke. Like, a lot. Then equivocates like a douche when called on it. "Certain point of view", my ass. In fact, when you get down to it... it's really his fault Luke and Leia kiss in Empire.
But, even before that, he was pretty lame. He has to go to the alien equivalent of Vic Tayback for clues because he can't figure something out. He can't handle one bounty hunter on his own. He can't tell his Padawan is secretly married, in violation of the Jedi code. And, after lopping the limbs off The Chosen One, he leaves Anakin alive and smoldering to become the most evil bastard in the universe (next to the Emperor). He really was a pretty lousy Jedi.
And, let's be honest here, magically disappearing is a douche-y way to die.
A controversial choice, to be sure. But, a douchebag, he is.
Ed Rooney, portrayed by Jefferey Jones in Ferris Bueller's Day Off
HE WAS ON THE TV SCREEN WHEN YOU WERE IN THE BAR! RIGHT ON THE TV SCREEN! LOOK UP, DOUCHEBAG!
Man, there's a lot of competition for high school principal douchebag, and, honestly, this almost went to Principal Vernon from The Breakfast Club. But he was really more a jerk than a douche. He did, after all, get Bender into detention for weeks upon weeks.
Rooney, however, has an ineffectiveness about him that lands him squarely in the douche camp. He can't tell a 17 year old in a trenchcoat from an adult. Can't tell a boy from a girl. Misses endless opportunities to catch Ferris. And ultimately breaks into the Bueller's home (by knocking a dog unconcious with a potted plant), gets beaten up by a girl, has to ride the school bus home, and ends up eating a handful of warm gummi bears.
Bill Lumbergh, portrayed by Gary Cole in Office Space
Part of what made Office Space such a great movie, is that there's no clear antagonist in the film. The enemy is the 9 to 5, not any one master villain behind it all. The movie rails again the button down, day in day out lifestyle that so many of us have to endure to put food on the table, and that's a special thing. It's interesting to see a movie that can get you rooting for the hero without giving you a villain to hiss.
It did give us a supreme douchebag, tho. Bill Lumbergh.
Oh, Lumbergh. You're just so terrible. What would you be without passive aggression? What could you be? You ooze it from your every pore. Your suspenders and pink shirt radiate it. You're the worst boss one could ever imagine, and somehow we've all worked for you; or some aspect that is you. And yet you're not someone to really be hated, at least from the outside. We don't have to work for you, we just look at you and grimly smile at the memory of the last boss we had that made us work extra and smiled about it. To us, you're just a harmless douchebag. But if we worked for you, I am certain that we'd pee in your coffee.
Walter Peck, portrayed by William Atherton in Ghostbusters
When else than in the 1980s could one of the villains of a movie be a bureaucrat from the Environmental protection Agency? The EPA! The good guys. The guys who keep our waters clean. And our air fresh!
But no, in Reagan's America, the EPA was evil. The EPA's endless rules and regulations hampered small business owners. Including small business owners who kept dangerous amounts of ectoplasmic entities in the basement of a rundown firehouse.
Enter Walter Peck. The man who gets a court order, shuts down the containment grid, and has the Ghostbusters arrested. Like many small-minded bureaucrats, he can't see the big picture, but luckily those above him can, and he gets kicked out once the mayor realizes that New York needs the Ghostbusters.
And you could tell he didn't really care about the safety of New Yorkers. He just didn't like Peter Venkman. Well, you know what kind of people don't like Peter Venkman? Douches.
Starscream, voiced by Chris Latta in Transformers: the Movie
You can hear it in your head: "Of course, mighty Megatron." That voice. That oddly shrill, whiny, cocky prick tone that can only mean Starscream. You know the dirty bastard, from the comics to the cartoon to the movie. Starscream's a big ol' douchebag. He talks shit, but when it's time to back it up? "Decepticons RETREEEEEEAT!"
And then the movie. Was there anything more satisfying than seeing him finally get capped for all of his treacherous bullshit? But then the show went and screwed it all up and brough him back as a ghost. An indestructible ghost. A shrill, indestructible ghost. Lord, what a douchebag.
Merovingian, portrayed by Lambert Wilson in The Matrix Reloaded
Merovingian: I love French wine, like I love the French language. I have sampled every language, French is my favourite - fantastic language, especially to curse with. Nom de Dieu de putain de bordel de merde de saloperies de connards d'enculis de ta mire. You see, it's like wiping your ass with silk, I love it.
...it's been about ten years since I last looked at a French textbook, so I have no real idea what he's going on about there. But I am reasonably certain that those are the words of a douchebag. The biggest, most douchey thing he is responsible for? Count the minutes he took up onscreen during Reloaded/Revolutions as valuable movie time entirely wasted.
Prince Humperdinck, portrayed by Chris Sarandon in The Princess Bride
He lost a fight to an invalid because he was too worried about his pretty face.
He was going to kill Buttercup. He did kill Westley. He employed the evil Six-Fingered Man. And he was mean to Miracle Max.
Humperdinck was well on his way to evil jerk-dom.
Except... his plan sucked. Rather than just go to war like a man, he had to come up with a convoluted plan that involves having to murder his own wife and blaming the country he wanted to go to war with. But, hey, guess what Humperdinck?... You're the prince. You're going to be king. If you decide to go to war... everyone has to pretty much go along with it.
And his grand plan? Beaten by "true love". Lame. Douchebag lame.
Caledon Hockley, portrayed by Billy Zane in Titanic
There's not a lot we have to say about this guy. I assume we've all seen Titanic by now, right? So we are all aware of why this prissy douchebag makes the list. Is it framing hunky young Leonardo DiCaprio? Trying to buy the love of young Kate Winslet? Shooting wildly at the pair of them as the boat starts to sink? Trying to pussy out off of the boat by pretending to be a child's father? His general arrogance and self-importance? His 'rich white guy' act?
We don't know, either. Pick a couple. We like to focus our hatred on him in his entirety, as a sort of focal point of our hatred for Titanic in general. But for all of his time on screen, there is not one moment where you can look at him and not seem him acting like a total douchebag.
Carter Burke, portrayed by Paul Reiser in Aliens
There's a reason none of us ever bought Paul Reiser as a romantic lead on Mad About You. And it's because we knew that he'd let a facehugger suck on Helen Hunt if The Company told him to. When you get down to it, Burke is the smarmy, douchebaggy Lumbergh-esque business guy taken to sci fi extremes. So concerned with profit and his future employment, he would, literally, endanger the entire human race to cover his own ass.
So, when things turn to shit and securing an alien to take back becomes unlikely, what does he do? He tries to get a facehugger to implant an alien into either Ripley or an EIGHT YEAR OLD LITTLE GIRL.
Preferably both.
Douche.
Discuss this article in our forum.
Posted by YourMomsBasement at 12:00 PM
April 18, 2007
Pulp Fiction vs. Battlefield Earth (Free Pass or Not?)
by EdContradictory
You know the deal. You're hanging out with friends, maybe you're all over at someone's house. Maybe you're at Friendly's splitting some quesadillas. But, inevitably, after the talk about jobs and politics and the weather runs out... you're left staring at each other, unwilling to discuss the issue hanging over everyone's head. Like the Sword of Damocles.
Namely: Was Pulp Fiction such a great and importantly fantastic movie that merely being in it gives John Travolta a free pass for all the dreck he's been in since?
In other words, is Pulp Fiction more gooder than Battlefield Earth is more bad?
So let's get the simple part of this equation over with first. Battlefield Earth is an awful movie. How bad is it? It was so bad that I re-watched it for this article and as I watched it, my brain erased the very memory of watching it in order to protect my fragile psyche. All I know is that Travolta is in platform shoes, some dudes learn how to pilot planes, and Forest Whittaker is in it.
But there are many other Travolta films that are also bad. There's Phenomenon, wherein Travolta gains the powers of a Thetan Level 7, but then we find out it was just a brain tumor. There's Michael, where he played an angel with Andie MacDowell, who, it is important to mention, cannot act. And White Man's Burden, the one with Harry Belafonte where Travolta's a minority. And there's... that other movie where he played that guy... who did that stuff.
So, there's a lot of bad. But, on the other side of the equation, there's Pulp Fiction. And Pulp Fiction is so fucking amazing, none of those shitty films matter.
I remember the first time I saw Pulp Fiction. I remember sitting in the theater stunned at the end. My friends and I just staring at the screen and slowly acknowledging the outside world again. And when we finally had the wherewithal to notice each other again, we just smiled. We knew, we knew, we had just seen something amazing. So amazing that in years past I wish I could remove the memory of the film from my mind so I could watch it new, all over again. How cool would that be?
Yeah, yeah, yeah, you're going to say it was derivative. That the narrative structure was gimmicky. That the characters were over the top. You know what I say to that? Fuck you. Fuck you, you Forrest Gump loving son of a bitch. Sam Jackson was robbed and you fucking know it!
Glowing briefcase? Cool. Marvin shot in the face? Cool. Adrenaline shot to the heart? Cool. The Wolf? Cool. The scene with Butch in the cab? Not completely awful. "Bring out the gimp"? Cool. Jules' wallet? Cool.
The feeling and mood of Pulp Fiction might have been copied to the point of being tiresome since then, but in 1994 it was still new and unfamiliar and unique. In fact, without Pulp Fiction, the 90s would have sucked. It would have been all John Hughes baby movies. The nineties were Pulp Fiction and Pulp Fiction was the nineties. It doesn't matter that a bunch of crappy directors came after that and copied Pulp Fiction and married Madonna. Pulp Fiction is a diamond, brilliantly gleaming, and their shit can't stick to it.
Look at it this way: Pulp Fiction is so amazingly amazing that without it, Battlefield Earth wouldn't even exist. Travolta used the clout he had from being in the most important film of the nineties and used it to make the worst.
Years from now, decades from now, which will be remembered? Will we even remember Travolta was in a film called Battlefield Earth? Does anyone remember that Jimmy Stewart was in The Magic of Lassie? Hell, no. People don't even rememebr that he was in Fievel Goes West. You remember Mr. Smith Goes to Washington and It's a Wonderful Life.
So, in closing, even if you don't currently believe that Pulp Fiction's awesomeness outweighs Battlefield Earth's badness, know this: Ultimately you're wrong and twenty years from now when you try to spread your dirty lies, people will laugh at you. Just as I laugh at you now.
Read the same author rant about Wolverine, Spider-Man, and bone claws.
Discuss this article in our forum.
Posted by YourMomsBasement at 09:00 AM
January 24, 2007
Look Back In Anger: HIGHLANDER
by Pete Goodrich
Christopher Lambert is sort of a terrible actor. By sort of, I suppose we mean 'Is.' He's not much of a ladies man as his low heavy brow and massive fivehead do not make for 'Hollywood heartthrob.' Admittedly his deep, penetrating gaze is due to him being legally blind, but vision impairment is no excuse for shitty acting. For an example, please see... Christopher Lambert. Though he was born on Long Island, he was raised in Switzerland which accounts for his bizarre, unspecified accent. He's like a French Mushmouth. Take a look at his IMDB page, and you will see a slew of straight-to-video crappiness with some weird French-lookin' movie titles mixed in. This is not news. Well, except for perhaps the French films.
We all recognize that Christopher Lambert is not a star. But I think that all of us, as geeks, would agree that his finest work was 1986's Highlander. We all have fond memories of the swordfights and the romance and the tales from different eras. We knowingly forgive Sean Connery playing a Spaniard ("My name is Juan Sanchez Villa-Lobos Ramirez. Laddie") because he's Sean frickin' Connery, we all know that the Kurgan is just the baddest ass of all movie badasses, and gosh darn it Highlander was just plain awesome, number one and the best. We love Highlander. We remember it as being awesome.
My friends, our memories are wrong. This movie is bullshit, and does not deserve the warm place in our memories that it has. Myself, I was perhaps eleven years old when I saw this catbox of a movie. I didn't know any better then and I'll wager that you didn't either. I watched it again last night, for the first time in years and years. And I tell you this: IT SUCKED. A lot. I will admit that it was at least laughably bad, so it wasn’t the worst time I’ve had watching a movie. But for my attempt to see it as 'so bad it's good' a larger part of me was saddened to see that this happy movie memory of mine for so very long, was so very bullshit. Let us take a look, shall we?
There will be no spoiler protection added, as this movie is old enough to drink.
Problem #1: THE ACTION AND F/X
In a word: dated. I know that we are all pretty spoiled by the standards of today. Both special effects and fight choreography are greatly improved from what they had been back in the day. We can’t expect a lot of wire-fu and shit from lightly trained (I assume they were trained somewhat) American actors in 1986. But I remembered the swordfights being a lot…faster? More brutal? Better? Yes, I remember the sword fights as being better than what we get. It’s just the standard movie “And thrust and parry and swing and clash! And thrust and parry and swing and duck! And thrust and parry and…” It was not as innovative as I remembered it to be. Why did I think it was so nutty? Was it because it was in a parking garage? I cannot explain this.
And as for the F/X... Whenever an Immortal takes his enemies head, he is suffused with a weird, eldritch energy (The Quickening) that causes tearing winds and electrical energies that affect the area around him. Which means that the PA’s bust up a lot of windows and have some fun with the spark machines. The first time we see it, the Quickening is so powerful that it causes the cars in the parking garage of Madison Square Garden to break their windshields and headlights and rev their engines uncontrollably! Incredible! Not cheesy at all! Oh wait, yes it was. Big ups to whoever decided that the other perk of the Quickening process would be that a huge spotlight goes up in the background.
These criticisms are not unique to Highlander, but still one that has to be noted in order to fully explain how and why this movie is actually not very good.
PROBLEM #2: WHAT?
There are movies that are so powerfully entertaining, that they give you pause. This movie is not one of them. Take for example the interrogation scene with the police that MacLeod (false identity of Russell Nash) has to go through. They (rightly) suspect he had something to do with the headless body they find in the shattered parking garage at Madison Square Garden. Apparently they had a hard time believing that this foreign-sounding antiques dealer digs the 'rassling shows. The banter and wit exhibited here…yeah.
Garfield: Are you a faggot, Nash?
Connor MacLeod: Why, Garfield? Cruisin' for a piece of ass?
Garfield: I'll tell you what happened, Russell. You went down to that garage for a blow job. But you didn't want to pay for it.
Connor MacLeod: You're sick.
That's a dandy comeback. YOU ARE THE BURN MASTER! Well Officer Garfield then flies off the handle and pops MacLeod one in the face, so our hero then gets up and starts pounding the bejesus out of a police officer in a police station. Which yes, is a little ridiculous…but more ridiculous is that they let him leave right after! I guess a sketchball who was found fleeing the scene of an unexplained murder can get away with that shit in the 80’s. But how? I know not. A bit of a plothole with this scene, which also ties in with the largest minus this movie has going for it being that Connor MacLeod is kind of a dick.
PROBLEM #3: CONNOR MACLEOD: KIND OF A DICK
I understand why he was dropping so much attitude in the police station. Makes sense, if you want your hero to be tinged with a little anti-heroism, you give him some snappy patter and a disrespect for authority. Whereas Highlander went whole hog, and just made him an utter prick. I'll admit I felt bad for him in olden times when he got kicked out of his village; but everything about 80's MacLeod was just plain Dick. One could say that it was centuries of longevity that led him to his cold, cynical attitude.
But on the other hand, Connor MacLeod is a pretty creepy asshole throughout this movie. In the origin flashbacks I suppose one could forgive it as “It’s the 1500s! Of course he’s going to treat a woman as an object! Where’s Braveheart?!” Which I suppose is fair, and his relationship with his wife in olden times is actually shown to be quite happy and uncreepy. There’s some weird male wish fulfillment going on in one bit with his Old Wife in the 1500's. After sex wife Heather MacLeod replies “You can do that to me forever if ye like me lord.” One supposes that line was there for ironic purposes, but watching it...just plain weird.
And then in the 80’s, MacLeod has become a weird, stalker dick. It is incredible that his behavior in this movie actually manages to win him the girl. I guess she could not resist his magnificent jutting brow. Forensics examiner/ancient sword expert (I shit you not) Brenda Wyatt has been investigating traces of ancient sword metal she found at the site of the first battle of the movie. MacLeod’s ancient sword metal. He follows her to the bar for…no good reason. He mumbles something at her telling her not to follow him…although he had just followed her to the bar from the crime scene. He looks intensely creepy as he does so. And of course, as any rational individual would do she then starts to follow him into a shadowy alley. IT IS PERFECTLY LOGICAL THAT SHE DOES THIS. He of course grabs her from behind and puts her hand over her mouth because he sensed the Kurgan was lurking nearby, but I bet he would have done that even if the Kurgan wasn't there.
Later on, she goes to his office to try and get more insight into MacLeod, who then unleashes his powerful pimp powers!
MacLeod: Can you cook?
Brenda: …yes.
MacLeod: I think we should have dinner.
And she says okay, and invites him over. To her house. Where she would then cook dinner for him. And when he comes over, he starts going through her stuff. To be fair, it was all a clever ruse on Brenda’s part as she had hidden a pistol and a tape recorder in a box on her bureau. In her bedroom. Away from the dining room where presumably she would have taken him for dinner.
And finally in the “WTF? Why does she dig him?!” category, is the scene where he proves to her that he is in fact an immortal. By putting an ancient blade in her hand, and forcing her to stab him. And then they fuck. And keep in mind, throughout all of this he has fixed her with a gaze that I am sure he intends to be "intense and smoldering," but in actuality is more the "psycho looking dude on the bus’' variety. Yet still, he gets to nail her and then lovingly caress her 80s bangs. And Brenda of course ends up chained to a billboard by the ol' Kurgan as bait for MacLeod, and the circle of objectification is complete.
All movies ask for a little suspension of disbelief, but I kind of get the sense that Highlander expected us the viewer to just shut up and eat the shit they shoveled at us. I found the "Immortals who can only be killed by beheading" stuff to be more believable than the love story, which got equal screen time. It's not something you'll notice when you're a preteen and just learning about girls in the first place, but twenty years later this shit sticks out like a sore thumb.
But don't hate me for this, I admit there are good things in this movie too. The Queen soundtrack is brilliantly hilarious. Apparently they were so moved by the love story between Connor and Old Dead Wife Heather they wrote the song “Who Wants To Live Forever” just for the movie. This is notable only because it’s fun to sing along with the music whenever it comes up again later in the film, which is often. You can’t go wrong with a Queen soundtrack; sometimes it’s what tips a movie over the top from godawful to awesome. You can see which side I feel this movie is on, whereas Flash Gordon is only made more awesomely bad by the Queen soundtrack.
And of course the best part of Highlander- the only truly enduring good thing in this movie- is the character of the Kurgan. Clancy motherfucking Brown trumps all, and if the movie had been all about him and his quest to behead a sleazy Christopher Lambert I would go back in time to see the movie twenty times. He does the crazy/menacing thing so very well. The scene where he terrifies Brenda into submission (not kidding) by going on a crazy joyride down the streets and sidewalks of NYC is just amazing, and the bit where he steals an old couples station wagon and goes for a crazy drive with her clinging to the hood…well, that’s just great stuff.
A surprisingly normal looking picture of the Kurgan.
So what have I learned from this little exercise?
1) I might be totally wrong. This one film spawned 4 sequels (another one getting ready for video as we speak), a TV show, several novels, a comic book, and one terrible animated series. So you know, if majority rules and popularity is what counts then I am totally wrong about the movie sucking. So…yeah. I’m not wrong.
Hey, I’ll admit that the mythos as a whole has grown to the point where it’s bigger than the movies. And that’s cool. I used to like the TV show a bit. But I used to say that the only good Highlander movie was the first one and after last night I know that is simply untrue.
2) When Rob Liefeld stole this concept for his own long ago and rightly forgotten idea of ‘The Externals,’ I thought it was bullshit that he so blatantly copied one of the more interesting elements of the film franchise. It’s still true. I just wanted to remind you of that.
Your mileage may vary of course, but I think the past twenty years have elevated Highlander to a level that it really doesn't deserve. If anything, this movie needs a remake. With better actors, FX, fight choreography, and script. Don't believe me? Go watch it. Go on, watch it. Let me know what you think. But beware! You might end up shattering a favored childhood movie memory as I have. It's not the biggest thing to lose, but I know that it sort of bummed me out when I realized how bad this was. Shit, now I'm afraid to go back and watch Flash Gordon.
Our previous Look Back In Anger: 1996
Discuss this article in our forum.
Posted by YourMomsBasement at 09:30 AM
December 06, 2006
Star Wars: Attack of the Afterthought
by Weston Kenley
There was a time when I use to love this saga unconditionally. I remember playing with the toys while the vinyl soundtrack played in the background, having the bed sheets protect me from unseen monsters, and wearing out the VHS copy of Empire Strikes Back because I needed to watch it over and over again. The movie held such majesty in my mind at the time. All three of those movies could do no wrong in my book. I worshiped them like many people of my generation. It wasn't until I went with my friends to see the re-released version The New Hope that the loyalty of my fond memories was tested. As I sat there in that darkened theater, watching my favorite franchise in its natural habitat, I realized that this movie was not what I was suppose to see. It was like I stepped into the wrong theater, and as my punishment, I was forced to watch all these small nightmares holding together my once perfect dream. Suddenly I was left to question my love of a childhood staple. Why did Jabba the Hutt not look right? Since when did Greedo shoot first? And, who the hell is Biggs Darklighter?
My heart ached at these first few changes, and I hoped that they would not continue, but they did. I'll admit, when I first heard that Mr. Lucas was going to "enhance" a few scenes in the originals and finally make the prequels to the story, I was excited. After all, this fantasy was his baby, but nothing prepared me for the idea that he was going to ruin our memories with all his changes. Though, the enhancements to the sound and lighting effects bended seamlessly; many of the new scenes, themes, and characters did not. At many points during the re-releases, I even found myself distracted by the smooth CGI layered with the graininess of the original footage. It was like he had forced adverse puzzle pieces together, which threw off the final image that we were expecting to see.
This single idea then spilled over into a motif, that would continue until the final credits of Revenge of the Sith, as Mr. Lucas used his will (and lack of foresight) to mutilate the filmed fantasy of a whole generation. There were so many points that could have been improved, if he had only taken the time to study his previous work, before going back to make changes and carry the beginning of the story forward.
I know that Mr. Lucas has said that he is happy with these films, they were now as he intended them to be seen, and that everyone who disagrees with that, can shove off. Well if that's the case… Mr. Lucas, OK, you're right. How could we argue that you've successfully made a bunch of inconsistent, poorly acted, over-compensated, B-quality fantasy movies (that had the all-too-real-possibility of being amazing) when you apparently planned for them to suck all along? If I were you though, I'd try to shoot a little higher when creating the crown jewel in your legacy of film. Howard the Duck will only carry you so far towards greatness.
Since I'm here though, let me make 10 suggestions, that range from general to specific, but they all might have made for a better film collection, or at least, one that would have been not-so-damaging to the spirit of all those who believed in you...
1. Remember what things look like if you’re going to show them in multiple places. In the re-release of The New Hope and the pod race scene of Phantom Menace, Jabba the Hutt's eyes are yellow, but in Return of the Jedi they are red-orange. Yes, that pretty insignificant, but really, the look of Jabba during his introduction (in Jedi) was never repeated again in any of the films. Maybe that was because you decided to not put enough effort into recapturing the image of Hutt that so many people fell in love with. This is the same reason that Yoda in Phantom Menace was a such a farce image. If you're going to use CGI for everything, why use a half-ass-puppet for Yoda in this movie? It looked like he was hiding taffy from the rest of the Counsel, by shoving it between his gums and upper lip. It tore a tiny hole in consistency of the character image, and could have been saved by going CGI from the start, but there IS a dark side to that...
2. If it's not broke, don't go spending a few million to fix it. CGI doesn't always trump everything else in the rock/paper/scissors of visual effects. God knows that some things were not originally as you intended, but that doesn't mean they were wrong. Really, if you had left a lot of the CGI changes out of Episodes 4-6, people would have still loved it regardless. Giving the Sarlacc a beak was like putting Mick Jagger lips on the Mona Lisa; you made a joke of a masterpiece. Just like Greedo shooting first cheapened the badass nature that we came to expect from the first second we saw Han Solo. I mean, did we really need to see a complete song and dance number at the beginning of Return of the Jedi? Don't get me wrong, some CGI was good and effective, but you have to take a note from the Gambler, and know when to hold em’ and know when to fold em’. With that said...
3. Recycle ideas and plastic, not characters. Having C-3PO, R2-D2 and Chewbacca intertwined with the overall story was unnecessary. There was no need for them, when new characters would have been done fine (if not better) in their place. If anything, having them all there damaged the way that all the stories were connected. Case in point, if R2-D2 didn't have his memory erased at the end of Revenge of the Sith, what was to stop him from telling the whole story to Luke and the rest of the gang during the second half of the saga? What about Chewbacca? Wouldn't he have mentioned to Han that he knew, and also fought along-side, one of the greatest Jedi Masters of all time? Sure a few of the characters needed to be brought forward, like Luke's foster parents, Obi-Wan Kenobi, and the Emperor. I was even cool with a young Boba Fett being thrown into the mix, but a lot more effort should have been put into new characters. Oh yeah, about that...
4. Why create new actually-interesting characters when you can use real-life stereotypes for free? Right? The whole thing about fantasy is that it doesn't have to be mirror our world completely. The Trade Federation didn't have to look and sound like some mockery of Asian businessmen, and Watto didn't have to resemble some Italian junkyard owner. There are billions of different personality traits in our world to pick from, why choose the ones that are so cliche? Having Ben go to a poor illustration of a "space diner" is one thing, but to have him meet up with a freakish alien version of Mel Sharples (from Alice), is just taking it too far.
Star Wars was about originality of it characters and all that was lost in the prequel trilogy. When we saw Chewbacca for the first time, we wanted to know more about him and other Wookies. The same can even be said of Admiral Ackbar and his fellow Mon Calamari. I would have loved to see that race of characters carried forward into the prequels. Hell, many of the more interesting aliens, like the Sullustan (Nien Nunb's race), could have been made more prevalent this time around too. Instead, we were shown all these new creatures that lacked individual personality, which thinned out an original trademark of these movies. Since we're on the subject of lack-of-depth...
5. It's possible to write an exciting sci-fi love story that isn't a Lifetime Original movie in space. A lot of people blame Hayden Christensen's stellar "I am a tree, hear me cry" performance on the lack of depth in Anakin Skywalker's character, but it also has to do with the love story itself. Some of the hardest scenes to get through were those involving the love of Anakin and Padmé Amidala. The age-difference included, the whole affair came across as the story of a powerful politician falling for her creepy, and incredibly religious, stalker. Jerry Springer would kill to have guests like that! From the first moments, there is something about their love that is just not right (and I’m not talking about how Jedi’s aren’t suppose to have lovers). Much of the way they came together seemed so contrived. Not like the story of Han and Leia, which developed from, and in spite of, a clash of personalities and ego. It would have been far more interesting to see Anakin and Padmé discover their feelings for each other, and develop it, during some well-placed tense situations.
In fact, all those scenes, with them running gay through the fields, should have been replaced with the two of them being hunted by Aurra Sing, the Jedi bounty hunter. That would have killed two birds with one stone. On the one side, you would have brought in one of the truly great (and left-out) characters of the Star Wars universe; giving us some possibly amazing fight and chase sequences. Plus, you would be making a more believable situation where two people would discover that their feelings run deeper than expected; while creating a clear bond between the two. Actually, I’m even going to take it one step further…
6. Death is important and it only happens once… so let’s not mess it up. Padmé dies of a broken heart? Huh? What? Mr. Lucas, did you have somewhere else to be, when you were finishing up this script? It would have probably been easier, more plausible, and just totally hardcore, if Anakin stabbed Padmé with his lightsaber causing her to go into labor, and eventually die. This would have perfectly illustrated how far gone Anakin had slipped into the dark side. Plus, it would have eliminated the need for that whole “screaming NO! with the force” scene at the end, which was totally out of character for Darth Vader, because he should be like Shaft; once the suit goes on, he’s a stone-cold motherfucker.
This also brings up another death that should have been done with a bit more planning, the death of Qui-Gon Jinn. At the end of Revenge of the Sith, Yoda mentions that Qui-Gon was the first Jedi to figure out how to transcend death, but when Qui-Gon died in the Phantom Menace he didn’t disappear. It would have been more interesting to see him die and vanish, with a look of surprise on Obi-Wan’s face, because he wouldn’t have known what was happening. Beyond that, even if his death remained the same, it’s just crazy that we didn’t see one scene of Qui-Gon reappearing to Yoda for the first time in Jedi history. That, of all things, would have made our day, but I guess you were too busy ruining the illusion…
7. You know, it’s not really a religion if it’s based on science. Some things are better left unexplained. The mystery of its miracles is power station of religion, and it kills the defensive shield when the mystery is wiped out. We don’t need everything to be explained for us to believe in them. I think I would be heart-broken if I found out that the Burning Bush was just a herb, possibly called Dictamnus albus, which is native to southern Europe, north Africa and southern and central Asia, that also happens to secrete an oily residue, which is prone to combustion due to excessive exposure to the sun. It would no longer be a mystery. Just like, we didn’t need to know that the Force was actually little microbes in the cells of all living things, allowing the Jedi to have special abilities. We enjoyed the mystical nature of the Force as it was. If you’re going to elaborate on anything…
8. Silly Mr. Lucas, your tricks with the Force are for kids! I know you didn’t make this movie for the fans. God forbid you might throw a bone to the people who put your kids through college, but you really could have made up some more cool new moves that we hadn’t seen a Jedi do before. Even in the books, there are Jedi that use the Force to control other things, like the weather and water. Yes, it was nice to see Yoda kick ass, but I’d like to think that some of the Jedi could have been a bit more insane with their stunts. Mostly, the Jedi were left to look like faster versions of Luke in Return of the Jedi. With so much more training than him, the Jedi of the past should have had a little bit more going for them. Instead, you gave us an Obi-Wan that was prone to being injured, and a Yoda that didn’t expect the Emperor to use his lighting blast, right out of the gate. I mean, the only real badass things Mace Windu ever did, was to constantly have that “I’d rather be killin' the motherfuckin' Sith” scowl on his face, and his over-powering of the Emperor, but even then, he and the other members of the Counsel were not that impressive. Hey, speaking of that word…
9. You need a phrase book like a redneck in Tokyo. It’s cool to be cute and have Count Dooku repeat something that Vader said in original trilogy, but did we have to hear “Impressive…I see that so-and-so has trained you well” a bunch of times? Really, couldn’t they have mentioned something about the lightsaber dueling techniques they were using instead? Or maybe have one person question why they weren’t trying this other move instead? Oh that’s right, Mr. Lucas, you didn’t bother to come up with a variety of attacks for the Jedi to use, because you were too caught up trying to figure out how to insert pop stars into the battle sequences. The banter during the fight scenes seemed to rehash the same lines that you came up with 30 years ago. Seriously though, most of the dialog in the prequels was sub-par compared to the beautiful moments of wit and class you created in the original trilogy. Co-writers probably could have helped you with that but…
10. You need to get off the Control… I think you’re addicted. As much as I know that you were going to make these movies your way, you probably would have had a better response if you took some advice once and awhile. You didn’t have to direct all the prequels, you know? Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi were still pretty amazing, even if you weren’t the one calling all the shots. Honestly, The Phantom Menace probably would have turned out great, if you had talked over all your “great ideas” with people that understand a thing or two about consistency, plot development, non-annoying character profiles, and maybe even the Star Wars universe beyond the movies. It’s one thing to work towards making your version of art; it’s another to piss on all the other art in that category (even your own) during the process.
In many ways, it seems like you woke up one day, decided to make the prequel movies to Star Wars, and three days later you started filming without a second thought about it. Not only that, you also decided that it wasn’t important to try and make a movie that that fans will love. After all, who needs fans? They’re only the ones that made this idea of yours, a franchise. Do you think people are going to be saying 20 years from now how good those prequels were? Probably not, Mr. Lucas. It’s more likely they’re going to say something about how you had this one-of-a-kind great idea, but through laziness and greed, you ruined it for the world forever. Instead of being a wonderful moment of our lives, it’s a tarnished memory of our childhood, but you know what? When all was filmed, watched, and done; it wasn’t the acting, or the effects, or even the characters that made these movies bad… it was you, Mr. Lucas. You made these movies the lackluster non-event that they were. I hope your ego sees that some day, and you do your best to correct it in the future projects…
And do us a favor, don’t make anymore of your Star Wars movies.
We can’t take much more of this abuse. Thanks.
Discuss this article in our forum.
Posted by YourMomsBasement at 09:00 AM
June 08, 2006
Foreign Film Watch: Chinese Fists & Korean, Japanese & French Swords Pt. 2
by Won Kim
Part II:
Slice & Dice: Korean wu xia, A noble French chevalier and pretty Japanese super ninja.
Last time we discussed two films co-directed by Yuen Woo Ping Jet Li's new film Fearless and Tai Chi Master 2005 with Jacky Wu Jing. I will close this update on martial arts films with some recent contributions to the time honored wuxia, swashbuckler and chanbara genres.
Director Kim Young-Joon's previous film, Bichunmoo, was a movie criticized for its complex plot, and its fight scenes that were so jazzed up they looked like they belonged in a rock video instead of a kung fu movie. In contrast Kim's new film, Shadowless Sword (Korea 2005), has a lot going for it: good looking popular actors with a decent level of physical skill in the major roles, the participation of choreographers from Yuen Woo Ping's stunt team, location shooting in China, and fantastic production design. The plot is simplicity itself. Whereas Bichunmoo was a muddled variation on The Count of Monte Cristo, Shadowless Sword sports a straightforward pursuit plot akin to Peckinpah's Getaway that frames a variation on the age-old Arthurian fable, The Sword in the Stone, wherein a young man learns (or in this case re-learns) what it means to be a king.
10th Century Goth Villains!
It's 926 AD. Mongol warriors threaten to topple the Balhae Dynasty, and half of the country's armed forces have chosen (1) to side with the invaders, and (2) to dress goth. The loyalists in the military need a legitimate figurehead to rally the people to their side. Unfortunately, turncoat hit-squads have killed the king and almost all of the heirs to the throne. Then one loyal general remembers a prince who was exiled nearly a decade and a half ago, so they dispatch Soha, a highly trained young swordswoman, played by the beautiful action star, Yoon So Yi (memorable as the irritable taoist superwoman in Arahan) to find and the last remaining prince and then rendezvous with the armed forces at a predetermined location.
Yoon So yi and Lee So-Jin, the noble Soha and the dissolute Prince.
However, the assassins also remember the young exile, and are in hot pursuit. If that weren't bad enough, the young prince, embittered by his years in exile, is highly suspicious of anyone representing the dynasty. Moreover, he has turned to fencing stolen objects d'art to get by, and has since built a large network of fellow criminals to fall back on when he feels the need to disappear. Not only must the dissolute young man re-learn what it means to be a leader, he has to be convinced it's a desirable thing to do.
Whereas looking at Fearless from the perspective of Hong Kong's kung fu films of the 90's really isn't the best approach to that film, it's perfectly suited to the strengths and weaknesses of Shadowless Sword. When the film opened in Korea, local critics charged that Kim hews too closely to the example set by HK directors Ronny Yu (Bride With White Hair) and Tsai Hark (Dragon Inn, Swordsman). On the surface, this argument sounds ridiculous. The Chinese have been making period wuxia adventures and kung fu films since the turn of the last century. Anything produced in those genres will bear unavoidable similarities to those previous efforts. Also, it's not as though emulating their work in the genre is necessarily a failing: it all depends on how it's done. Witness Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon which successfully wedded the tension of Jane Austen's domestic dramas with the conventions of the wuxia genre. The 2005 film Duelist is another good example: there director Lee Myung-Se's creative use of lighting and digital editing breathes new life into the genre. However there is some merit in the Korean critics argument. This is evident in the way Kim Young Joon shoots fight scenes, and in the way he directs his star, where paradoxically he falters by not following his forebearers closely enough. Even though Kim is working with members of Yuen Woo Ping's stunt team this time around (the same people who graced Ang Lee's Crouching Tiger with inspired, easy to follow, wire assisted sword fights) Kim insists on shooting the fight scenes in such a frenetic style that it's often hard to clearly see what the actors are doing, thus diminishing one of the pleasures of the genre. True, the balance between clarity of movement and wire assisted spinning is far better in Shadowless Sword than it was in Bunchimoo there is still room for improvement. I do hope the director tips the balance further in his next outing. Excessive spinning gets old fast.
Yoon So-Yi as Soha.
Another characteristic of the wuxia genre is the combination of simple linear plots and one dimensional characterizations. Shaw Brothers directors like Cheng Cheh and Lar Kar Leung, and the independents of the 90's, like John Woo and Tsai Hark, got around this by having their actors to play their roles as heroically as possible. However for this to work, all of the principals have to perform their roles with an equal level of melodramatic intensity. Actors who do not follow suit end up looking bland in comparison. Oddly for a director who so clearly loves martial art dramas, Kim directed Yoon So-Yi, the woman who has to carry the picture, to play Soha with a great deal of restraint in half of her scenes. Thus while she once again proves herself a competent action star, her Soha comes off as curiously bland through much of the picture, especially compared to the intensity shown by Lee Seo-jin as the fallen prince, the magnetic Lee Ki-Yong as death squad leader Mae, and Hyun Joon Shin, who positively boils with barely restrained rage as Mae's commander. Though there is a reason Soha is so reserved around her reluctant charge, this important revelation comes rather late in the story. Her performance makes much more sense on second viewing once the audience has that critical piece of information. As it stands, however Yoon's restraint distracts from the film until her character finally begins to show some warmth, a little over half way into the film.
Lee Ki-Yong as Mae.
Lee Ki Yong deserves note. She makes Mae's intense hatred of Soha and her slavish devotion to her commander, compelling, and you end up wanting to learn more about the roots of both passions. The overall production design and cinematography is top notch. Shadowless Sword remains worth seeing for its period spectacle alone, and those fight scenes where wire work isn't so prevalent. In many ways Shadowless Sword is a big improvement over the director's previous effort, but he also has a ways to go. I hope he gets the chance. The man clearly loves the genre.
In terms of production values, Shonobi Honpen or Shinobi: Heart Under Blade (Japan 2005), equal those in 2002's Azumi. The similarities don't stop there. Both films are set in the peace enforced by the Tokugawa Shogunate after decades of bloody war, and both films feature cute, pretty stars in lots of fast, special effects assisted ninja action. The style of the fight scenes recall, but do not copy, those in the anime feature film, Ninja Scroll.
Joe Odagiri as Gennosuke, and Yukie Nakama as Oboro.
That alone should be enough for many action fans. However, Shinobi Honpen is saved from pleasant mediocrity by a better than average script. Two young, skilled martial artists meet and fall in love. As their clans, former rivals, have been at peace for some time, they hope their union won't meet too much opposition. However, fearing the ninja could be used against the Shogunate some day, the Shogun sets the clans against each other, and our young lovers face harsh, unwelcome choices. That the production begins as a transparent variation on Romeo & Juliet (and with a nod to Zhang Yimou's Hero the young lovers remind me of Broken Sword and Falling Snow) then leads the viewer to a sounder and more satisfying ending than expected, is a credit to Kenya Hirata, who adapted Futaro Yamada's novel. Shinobi Honpen may be a simple popcorn movie but (like Azumi and Aragami) <>Shinobi Honpen works. Recommended.
I wish I could say the same about On Guard! (Le Bossu, France, 1998).
Daniel Autieul as the eager swordsman Lagardere, a Chevalier in heart if not in name.
On Guard features a great cast headed by Daniel Autieul, a lot of decently choreographed fight scenes, and a fast moving script. Unfortunately all those pluses cannot save On Guard! from the unimaginative cinematography and routine editing that rob this action packed, old fashioned swashbuckler of it's a natural spark. With the right director (Christophe Gans? Luc Besson? Richard Donner? Tsai Hark?) On Guard! could've been great.
Foreign Film Watch: Chinese Fists & Korean, Japanese & French Swords Pt. 1
Discuss this article on our message board
Posted by YourMomsBasement at 01:53 PM
May 12, 2006
Foreign Film Watch: Chinese Fists & Korean, Japanese & French Swords Pt. 1
by Won Kim
Part I:
Real Life Kung Fu Heroes.
Be forewarned, spoilers follow in the detailed discussion of Fearless below.
Many of us think fondly on the Hong Kong Action Cinema of the late ‘80’s and early ‘90’s. For approximately ten years, the colony churned out a nearly unbroken stream of fun popcorn movies, films whose sheer entertainment value an unabashedly sentimental and resonant themes appeal to audiences across the globe. I quickly became enamored of John Woo’s urban “bullet ballets (like The Killer), Johnnie To’s triad stories (like The Mission) and the art films of Wong Kar Wai (In the Mood for Love). These films showed us that Asians could blow up cars, shoot each other, and break each others’ hearts, as well as anyone else, and look good while doing it too. However, when it came to martial arts movies I retained a stodgy preference for the ‘bricks and baseball bats’ kung fu films of Chang Cheh (Five Venoms), Lau Kar-leung (Thirty Sixth Chamber of Shaolin), and Sammo Hung (Prodigal Son) over Jackie Chan’s comedies and wu xia epics in which daoist supermen spun around so fast during fight scenes you couldn’t see what the performers were doing. It wasn’t until fairly late in the 90’s that I finally turned onto one of the great pleasures of the period: the kung fu films Yuen Woo Ping and Jet Li worked on together in the 90’s.
Jet Li as Hung Gar Kung Fu master, Dr. Wong Fei Hung in Tsui Hark & Yuen Woo Ping's Once Upon a Time in China series.
Working with Maverick writer-director-producer Tsai Hark, Yuen and Li collaborated on four of the six films in the wildly successful Once Upon a Time in China series, that set a new standard for kung fu films of the era. Instead of a skeletal plot that served as a vehicle for one set piece after another, Once Upon a Time in China and its sequels featured appealing characters and fully developed stories mixing proud nationalism, broad comedy, social commentary, romance and breathtaking action sequences that artfully blended the usual brutal exchanges with wire-enhanced moments of physical grace. Li's Wong Fei Hung (only the latest in a long line of stars who played the role, including Jackie Chan) battled prejudice, ignorance, fanatics, violent colonial carpetbaggers, agents of the Imperial powers, government officials, desperate martial arts masters, gangsters and dangerously deluded cultists. He led a group of students (who provided most of the comic relief); was romanced by his youngest aunt by marriage and met major figures of the day, including Dr. Sun Yat Sen, the father of the short lived Chinese Republic. (I highly recommend the first two films in the series.)
Though Li eventually broke with Tsai, he and Yuen Woo Ping continued to work together on Fist of Legend (a remake of Bruce Lee’s Fist of Fury and probably Li’s most popular film in the West) and Tai Chi Master, a wonderful send up of the legends surrounding Daoist sage Zhang San Feng, credited in legend with creating the exercises that evolved into Tai Chi Chuan among other things.
Jet Li as Hua Yuan Jia, here facing off against Hans, Head Coach of a Unit of Guardsmen from one of the European Colonial Powers in Fearless.
The imminent release of Yuen Woo Ping and Jet Li’s most recent collaboration, Fearless, China 2006 gives us an opportunity to reflect on the strengths and weaknesses of that marvelous period as it’s almost impossible to watch Fearless without comparing it with their previous work together. One drawback of the 90’s kung fu films was the combined effect of low budgets and breakneck shooting schedules. Despite bravura camera work and lighting, you couldn’t help but notice the occasional minor gaffe, a discordant background detail, inopportune glimpses of people gawking at the filmmakers in the background, etc. Today, films like Wong Kar Wai’s 2046, the crime thriller Infernal Affairs Hong Kong cinema attest to how far the Hong Kong filmmakers have come, despite the East Asian currency crisis of the mid-nineties and gradual re-absorption into China, while recognized directors from the Mainland have always had the resources to mount grand epics like Farewell My Concubine and Hero, but operate with far greater restraints on subject matter.
In this sense Fearless is a Mainland film. The period detail is perfect, and the outdoor photography and aerial tracking shots of action scenes are beautiful and stunning. There are numerous fight scenes, and action fans will be glad to know Li puts down his opponents hard in this one. If Fearless does turn out to be Li's last martial arts movie, (reportedly old injuries threaten to put Li in a wheelchair if he continues) Li’s going out on a high note. (Many will not need to read further, in deciding whether or not to see this film.) As such the script demands a lot from Li as an actor. We're used to seeing Li play man children like the protagonists of Fong Sai Yuk or stoic bad asses, as in Kiss of the Dragon. Grafted onto some of the known facts about the life of a real-life martial arts folk hero of the early 20th Century, Fearless is the story of an arrogant bad ass, who pays dearly for his hubris, and after a wandering for while, earns a hard won redemption.
The historical Hua Yuan Jia.
In his youth the historical Hua Yuan Jia (1867 - 1909) was a sickly child, and was bullied by older children. Compounding matters Huo’s father judged Huo too frail to ever develop sufficient skill and strength to master his martial arts and refused to teach his son. Huo’s response was to observe while his father taught others, and practice what he managed to pick up on his own for ten years. After Hua prevailed against his peers in street fights, his father finally accepted him as a student. By the time Huo was an adult China was in disarray. The central government was in decline, and warlords, gangsters, competing political factions and the colonial powers, including Americans and Japanese, came to China, seeking to take advantage of the central government’s weakness for economic gain, and carve economic niches for themselves out of sections of the country. Before long it became common for people to refer to the Chinese as “Sick Men of Asia”, and Chinese morale was at an all time low.
Jet Li's Hua sizes up an afternoon's challengers.
Accustomed to fighting public challenges against his countrymen, Hua accepted challenges from a number of foreign fighters and won, gaining immediate fame. He then sought to make use of his newfound renown and founded the Chin Woo School. He opened the door to all Chinese so they could strengthen themselves, improve their self-image, and some day help defend the country from further foreign encroachment.
The historical Chin Woo in its' early days.
Soon however Huo died. He had ingested medicines prescribed by a Japanese physician (who left China the day before Huo died) which gradually destroyed his lung tissue. Many Chinese believe Hua was poisoned on the orders of Japanese Imperial government who wanted further demoralize the Chinese. However, Huo's legacy outlived the Imperial Powers. After Huo’s death, branch schools were opened in other parts of China and across Southeast Asia, and in time, Europe. The organization survived the Japanese occupation of Manchuria and Shanghai, World War 2, the Civil War between the Nationalists and Communists, and repression during the Cultural Revolution. Chin Woo still exists today as something akin to the YMCA, a chain of gymnasiums open to the public where members can learn basketball, baseball and other western sports as well as the dozen or so kung fu forms that formed the basis of Huo’s fighting style.
Jet Li as Hua's student, Chen Zhen in Fist of Legend, a remake of Bruce Lee's Fist of Fury.
Long time action film fans will be interested to know that Fearless is a dramatic prequel of sorts to Bruce Lee’s Fist of Fury (and of course Li’s version of the same story Fist of Legend). Both of these earlier films told the story of Chen Zhen, a student of Master Hua, who seeks revenge on the Japanese for his teacher's death. In Lee’s version Chen Zhen succeeds in striking a blow against Japanese Imperialists, but pays the ultimate price for his rampage. (In Jet Li’s version, Chen Zhen lives on to wreck more havoc on the Japanese in Manchuria). Rather than glorify violent revenge Fearless dwells instead on the high price paid for arrogance, emotional immaturity and a lust for ego-gratification, which puts the onus on Li to expand his range as an actor. In Fearless he brings an intensity of feeling to Huo’s brutal rise to prominence and the inevitable fall. If Li is undercut at all, it's due to decisions the directors and editors made during the latter two thirds of the film. But here, in the first third of the film, Li shines as a fighter and as an actor.
Bastard!
It’s quite jarring to see Li play such a bastard. His Hua keeps pushing his luck, and pays a terrible price for his hubris.
Shattered over his grievous losses, Li's Hua stumbles off into the countryside. We next see him near death in rural Thailand where rural villagers take him in.
Here the film's weaknesses become readily apparent. Here Director Ronny Yu stages shots evoking scenes in other films, using them as emotional indicators instead of actually telling a story. For instance, there is a shot late during Hua's interlude in the village, where Hua tells a villager who cares for him that he has to leave. By this point in the film even Hua has our sympathy, and the actors (and the director) could have chanced more. Instead we get a compositional swipe of a shot from in Peter Weir's Witness where Harrison Ford's detective bids Kelly McGillis' Amish woman farewell. The same could be said of the blurred point of view shots in the last third of the film which recall the use of the same technique in Ridley Scott's Gladiator. This kind of cinematic short hand is becoming more and more common and never fails to annoy. However I am sure genre fans will likely forgive these failings. Fans of Shaw Brothers and Golden Harvest films of the 70's have forgiven worse, and Hua's quest for redemption will resonate with viewers.
In this Fearless is more than a throwback to the 90's. The majority of the films of the “Hong Kong New Wave” were about entertainment pure and simple. However successful the new big budget films from Mainland China, Hero, Warrior of Heaven and Earth, House of Flying Daggers, The Promise and now Fearless, aren’t made solely to please audiences, or even make a return on the producers' investment. These films are products of China’s ongoing quest for a new place in the community of filmmaking nations.
Jet Li in Zhang Yimou's Hero.
Since Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon, filmmakers on the Mainland have been searching for the right formula for their own crossover martial arts films, a grand big budget epic that will please critics and audiences, East and West. (It didn’t surprise me to learn that expatriate HK director John Woo recently bought a house in Beijing. The man goes where the work is.) In this context Fearless is an attempt to bring together the entertainment value and crossover potential of the kung fu film (as distinct from the wuxia, or historical drama) with a sober, mature examination of the costs of violence and a story of human redemption.
In this Fearless is hardly unique: dozens of kung fu films play with the same themes. However, in most cases, however resonant, those themes were subordinated to the need to string one fight scene to another. Fearless is an attempt to push the kung fu genre into the realm of cinematic biographies like Spike Lee’s Malcolm X. Li’s Hua rises and falls hard. He goes into exile and achieves a kind of awakening. In the last third of the film Li’s Hua returns to public life. He finds a way to turn his dangerous skills to a larger, higher purpose, and is cut down for his efforts. It’s a testament to the power of such themes that the film works. As part of China's quest for recognition Fearless is a step in the right direction, but the Mainland filmmakers aren't quite there just yet.
The film's biggest problem is the result of choices made by the filmmakers while assembling a cut for distribution in the West. The European and American editions of Fearless begin with a public challenge match where Hua battles the first three of four martial arts experts from the colonial powers: a barehanded boxer, a spear fighting coach, and a master fencer. Then the film takes us back to Hua's childhood. We travel the whole of the protagonist's life before the film concludes with the fourth match, when Hua faces Shido Nakamura's Anno, a master swordsman and karateka. This kind of narrative structure is a time-honored story telling device, and usually works fine. However, the lack of build up to Hua's final match deprives the film's climax of its potential power. Also, coming as it does so soon after Hua's quick rise back to the top of the martial world, and the founding of the Chin Woo organization, it all seems rather sudden.
This was a late editing decision, made to cover for scenes cut from the original version. As is often the case with big budget Asian productions, 40 minutes of material were cut from the film, ostensibly to make the film more attractive to distributors in the West. Lost was an entire framing sequence where Michelle Yeoh, playing a diplomat who makes a pitch for wu shu (an athletic performance art based on standardized versions of the old kung fu forms) being accepted as an Olympic sport. Also cut was an entire subplot set during the Thai interlude, one that climaxes in a major battle scene that has been described as “pivotal” online. (Images on the net indicate a night time battle with Thai warriors at night).
Missing in Action: Li's Hua takes on Thai warriors.
All I can hope is that the original cut (that will be available in Chinese and Thai, without English subtitles, will someday be made available here, with English subtitles, in the US. If nothing else I want to see Li's Hua's battle with the Thai warriors. The few images available on the net look great.
Jackie/Jason Wu Jing as Yang Luchan in Tai Chi Master.
For those who really need a taste of entertaining spirit of the pre-takeover, pre-currency crisis Hong Kong filmmaking, I suggest checking out Tai Chi Master (China, 2005). Please note: I am not speaking of the 1993 film, also titled Tai Chi Master starring Jet Li and Michelle Yeoh, based on legends about Daoist immortal Zhang San Feng (also called Twin Warriors) but a marginally more fact-based movie film (actually a two-hour compilation of major plot points and fight scenes from a successful 2002 TV series) about the youth of Yang Lu Chan, founder of the Yang Style of Taijiquan.
The historical Yang Luchan (1800-1873) sought to become a great martial artist. He’d heard that the Chen family practiced a formidable art called taijiquan but clan rules forbade teaching the art to outsiders. He became a servant of the Chen family, spied on practice sessions and practiced on his own. When discovered Yang trounced his captors and earned the respect of the teachers. He was accepted as a student, and given permission to teach.
Northern Praying Mantis expert Yu Hai as Chen Zheng-Ming, Yang Luchan's teacher.
Where Fearless is dark and serious, Tai Chi Master (2003) is breezy. It's an utterly enjoyable popcorn movie, leavened with generous helping of good humor loaded with fun fight scenes. The writers jazzed up the story to include cross-dressing daughters (likewise not permitted to study tajiquan at that time), battles to defend the village from attackers, challenges from rival martial artists, and much imperial intrigue. Wu Jing (often hailed as the neglected ‘should-be’ successor to Jet Li’s kung fu star crown) utilizes recognizable Chen style movements throughout the film - even more so than the heavily wire-assisted mix of Yang and Chen style technique that Jet Li employed in the 1993 feature film.
Featuring actual Chen Family Style movement!
This telling detail actually makes a lot of sense. There are readily distinguishable differences between the postures in the Yang and Chen style forms. This story takes place before those changes were made, so it makes sense that when Jacky Wu Jing fights in THIS film, he uses characteristic Chen style movement and techniques. Another treat for people practicing internal stylists is a series of matches between young Wu-Jings Yang Lu-Chan and Xu Xiang Dong, who plays Dong Hai-chuan, the founder of Baguazhang The character’s movements are clearly based on Baguazhang circle walking and ‘palm changes’ (strikes, throws and deflections). Even with soap-ish story elements cut from the re-edited, subtitled 2005 version, Tai Chi Master is a real treat to anyone who has studied Chen or Yang style for a year or longer, and has some knowledge of push hand applications drills, chin-na practice or sparring. It’s also pretty damn entertaining. Whereas Fearless is not an entirely successful effort for a Mainland Chinese cinema that is trying to assimilate the lessons of the West and claim larger audiences worldwide, Tai Chi Master 2005 really is a throwback to the golden age of 90’s Hong Kong action cinema. A key element missing from the recent big budget martial arts films is humor, something Tai Chi Master 2005 has in abundance. I want to see the rest of the TV series. I hope it is subtitled in English someday. Discus this article in our forums.
Posted by YourMomsBasement at 09:58 AM
by Won Kim Short Looks at Three Oscar Contenders From Asia & A Festival Favorite. I was surprised to learn that countries actually nominate the films that compete for the Best Foreign Film Oscar at the Academy Awards. (I thought academy members nominated stand out films that screened at the international film festivals.) Equally surprising were some of the films that get nominated. In recent years China’s Hero, Hong Kong’s In the Mood for Love> and Japan’s Twilight Samurai certainly deserved their nominations. Those films were well directed, beautifully shot share a certain dramatic gravitas. In contrast, this years entries from South Korea, China and Hong Kong were all crowd pleasers at home, but I question if they are strong enough to compete for an Oscar. In some cases there are clearly better films to choose from, and in one case, however meaningful one comedy might be at home, I question how readily it’s import will translate abroad. A pleasant mix of drama and comedy, Welcome to Dongmakgol (2005) is the Korean nominee for the best foreign film award. Closely adapted from a successful stage play, Dongmakgol has the look of an extremely well-produced episode of M*A*S*H. The look suits the story: with the exception of a few scenes set on the mountain outside the village, and quick shots of American military radio traffic, most of the action takes place squarely in the center of town. The comic elements and the ‘theatrical quality’ of the production already separates this story from most cinematic treatments of the Korean War era, of which the bombastic melodrama Taegukgi: Brotherhood of War is a good example. Separated from their company, three North Korean soldiers barely survive an ambush. Stumbling away from the carnage, the injured, bloodied men run right into a simple-minded farm girl on a mountain trail. She leads them to her village, high up in the mountains. There the soldiers are stunned to learn that somehow, miraculously the inhabitants have been spared the ravages of war. In fact they are completely unaware a war is going on at all. More surprises are in store. The villagers already are putting up an American fighter pilot, badly hurt in a crash landing. Soon two lost South Korean soldiers, join them. A tense stand-off results. I held my breath watching the last third of this film. Dongmakgol could have ended up as yet another variation on “Lost Horizon” where the soldiers either (1) learn the meaning of peace by being assimilated into a low rent rural version of Shangri-la, or (2) “Seven Samurai”, where the soldiers band together to fight off outsiders or (3) the soldiers could turn upon themselves, resulting in a nihilistic bloodbath, or (4) learn they stumbled into a time warp, as in < Star Trek and change the course of history. I shouldn’t have worried. I’m pleased to report the film comes to a solid conclusion - a strangely fun spin on the notion of sacrifice. Jeong Jae-young, the pugnacious squad leader in Silmido, the abusive boxer in No Blood No Tears) is the senior of the North Korean soldiers. Shin Ha-Kyun, the deaf mute factory worker in Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance, and the alien hunter in Save the Green Planet plays a South Korean demolitions man. While they make the tension between soldiers feel very real, the script doesn’t give them the opportunity to show the range they’ve displayed in earlier roles. Likewise Kang Hye-Jeong (Mido in Oldboy), who is fun as the simple-minded farm girl. The peasants seem there primarily for laughs. Welcome to Dongmakgol is well-made and entertaining: I wish it were more. Like Forest Gump I imagine it will mean much more for domestic audiences in Korea than it will to members of the academy. I agree with those who say it’s a bit light for academy award consideration. Were it up to me, I would have opted for Duelist to represent South Korea despite that films tendency to polarize audiences. Nominated for Best Foreign Language Film at the Golden Globes, director Chen Kaige’s (Farewell My Concubine) The Promise (China, 2005) is an engaging storybook fantasy. The results aren’t half bad, if you can forgive the mystifying production design of the early battle scenes. This sequence has a bizarre Loony Toons feel, one that is underscored by the use of outside battlefield weapons by some of the soldiers, and cheap-looking computer animation. (I could not help but wonder if the director consciously intended to ape the style of the CGI in Stephen Chiao’s dark violent comedy Kung Fu Hustle here.) Here the process shots are unintentionally hilarious, at worst laughably bad. It took me three viewings to get beyond them. This kind of approach works in Stephen Chiao’s films because his comedies are essentially genre farces. However The Promise is meant to be taken straight. Like Welcome to Dongmakgol, The Promise features an A-List cast. Hiroyuki Sanada (Twilight Samurai) plays Guang-Ming, the Master of the Crimson Armor, a ruthless, if sleazy warrior general. Cecilia Cheung (One Nite in Mongkok is Qing-Cheng a concubine and Princess who is so beautiful that she can bring an army to its’ collective knees. Dong-Kun Jang (Taegukgi: Brotherhood of War is the slave Kunlun, who runs (and sometimes flies) so fast, he can break the time barrier. Kunlun’s utterly guileless and as dopey as Forest Gump. These three are ably supported by Ye Liu Purple Butterfly as the guilt ridden assassin Snow Wolf, Nicholes Tsu (Time & Tide) as an envious Wu-Haun, the Duke of the North and Guang-Ming’s greatest rival (whose ultimate motivations made we wonder if he was a parody of Yu Yi-Tae’s Wu-Jin in Oldboy) and Hong-Chen (Together) as the Goddess Hanshen, who offers Guang-Ming and Qing-Cheng glimpses of the future while exacting devils’ bargains from them the whole time. Once the battle scene is over the special effects settle down (though for no lack of drama, action and beautiful costumes and sets) and the story turns out to be the stuff of epic children’s adventure stories (were it not for some brief and racey plot elements). There’s a fair amount of magic, intrigue, betrayal and adventure. There's even some time travel, and almost every shot is beautiful, if at times, silly-looking. The film is worth seeing as all-out no-holds-barred fantasy. Whether an audience finds The Promise entertaining or laughable depends on how willing the viewer is to forgive its’ excesses, and buy into the simple fantasy world on offer here. As an Oscar contender, I don’t think The Promise has a chance in hell: the film asks far, far too much from the audience. Foriegn Film Watch: Award Season (Part II). Hong Kong director Peter Chan, is best known in the West for his 1996 film, Comrades: Almost A Love Story a film with Leon Lai and the great Maggie Cheung, as a pair of immigrants, and eventually lovers, from the Mainland, whose lives in early 1990’s Hong Kong, and later, in the United States, criss-cross each other’s over a ten year period of time. The film swept “Best Film” awards across Asia, and made a respectable showing at the international film festivals. Then Chan left directing, seemingly for good, concentrating on producing the films of protégées under the aegis of his United Filmmakers Organization in Hong Kong, a company noted for high production standards and strong source materials. When I heard he was directing a new film, I had high hopes. Comrades remains my one of my favorite films of the Hong Kong new wave, and one of only two that aren’t art films or an action melodramas. Chan’s Perhaps Love (2005), the academy award nominee from Hong Kong, is an ambitious production about an equally ambitious production, a Broadway style musical being shot in Beijing, essentially a film, within a film, within yet another film. A Beijing-based filmmaker, (Jackie Cheung) assembles his cast, unknowingly reuniting his lover, business partner and lead actress (Zhou Xun, who is best known for her role in Balzac & the Little Chinese Seamtress) with a rising Hong Kong heartthrob and romantic lead (Takeshi Kaneshiro, last seen in House of Flying Daggers), who was a film student in Beijing, when Zhou, then an impoverished street kid, and struggling would-be actress, befriended, loved then left him for other men, men could advance her career. When the director has to step in to cover for an actor who backed out of the project at the last minute, “the stage is set” for a complex mixture of film business drama, musical production numbers which underscoring the characters emotions in the present, and flashbacks to Zhou and Kaneshiro’s characters’ shared past. The film’s great strength is it’s realistic (if a bit clichéd) depiction of three people whose lives and loves are twisted by the cold-blooded competition that fuels the film industry, set against the backdrop of the colossal logistic undertaking that is the making of a big budget movie. These scenes make for solid, even riveting drama at times, particularly those scenes depicting Zhou’s and Kaneshiro’s actors salad days in a snow covered Bejing, and Cheung’s director’s struggle to reconcile his need to deliver a successful film with his fears he is losing Zhou’s affections in the present, set (and shot) so Where the film falters are in some of it’s musical numbers, that underscore the feelings and emotions driving the characters, in the past and the present. These scenes vary in impact depending on who is doing the singing. Jackie Cheung, a long time singing star in Asia and an often under-rated actor (in part because he hasn’t made many films in his long career, preferring to focus on his music career) walks away with his production numbers, where the lyrics are set to music that recalls the great operatic solos in musicals like Les Miserables. Unfortunately the same can’t be said for Kaneshiro and Zhou, who don’t quite pass muster as Broadway-level performers. That’s not to say there aren’t some really good musical numbers here, my favorite being Zhou Xun’s visit back to the harsh Beijing slum of her youth, where she faces an uncomfortable truth about the price of her ambition, amidst a chorus of singing and dancing whores in cheongsam dresses, a set piece whose style owes much to director-choreographer Bob Fosse’s (All That Jazz, Chicago) influential mix of striptease and dance. Kaneshiro, who has made a pretty decent art film career of playing men caught up in their contradictions in films as varied as Flying Daggers and Chungking Express, is fine here. It takes a bit longer to warm up to Zhou Xun’s character, whose child like good looks belie her cold blooded, iron will to succeed at any price, but by films end, she’s utterly sympathetic. However understated his troubled, preoccupied director, Jackie Cheung is great from the start. He’s made few dramas in his film career (the best likely being July Rhapsody). I hope he makes more. Korean actor Jee Jin-Hee (likely best known here as a detective in the Korean serial killer movie, H) is almost unnecessary as a kind of Phantom Stranger-type character, a figure who subtly pushes people towards emotional realizations they need to move on with their lives. He’s decent in the part, but given how little he does in the film, I was amazed his part wasn’t cut out of earlier drafts of the final shooting script. I recommend Perhaps Love with some minor reservations, for the Chan’s interesting way of telling the story, inter-cutting between past, present and on-set production numbers. Also notable is his depiction of the hard life of young would-be actors and filmmakers in Beijing, his re-creation of life on sets, and the stories satisfying and surprising resolution, where everyone gets what they need, if not necessarily what they want. However I question how much English-speaking audiences enjoyment might be mitigated by the uneven quality of the musical numbers. (I do admit, that inadequate subtitles might have made it difficult to immerse myself in Kaneshiro and Zhou’s musical numbers. I simply don’t know enough Mandarin to be able to say for sure. In my opinion however, all this does is but more of the onus on Kaneshiro and Zhou to carry their musical numbers with the physical qualities of their performances. If Jacky Cheung pulled it off, in his relatively understated musical scenes, where he’s sitting most of the time, Chan should have pushed Kaneshiro and Zhou should have done more to step up to the challenge.) A Recent Festival Favorite: Shot in a style reminiscent of the work of American independent filmmaker and actor, John Cassavettes, Butterfly (Hong Kong, 2004) is unsparing look at one woman’s struggle to undo ten years of denial and “come out of the closet” as an openly gay woman. A 3o-year old married school teacher and mother, Flavia (Josie Ho) daily routines and family life are hopelessly upended when she notices twenty-something songwriter and musician Yip (Tian Yuen) quietly shoplifting a meal in a supermarket. Drawn to the Yip, Flavia begins a passionate affair with the younger woman. As Flavia and Yip’s relationship develops, we learn that the younger Flavia (played by Isabel Chan in flashback) had been involved with a political activist named Jin when the two girls were in high school, a relationship that lasts into their college years. A key event for both woman is the 1989 the massacre of pro-democracy protesters in Tiannamen Square. The televised footage of the tanks rolling over victims galvanizes activists all over Asia, including Jin. Her increasing radicalism, and Flavia’s slavish loyalty to her emotionally weak mother eventually tears the girls apart. Jin disappears, and Flavia buries her feelings for women. She shortly marries the distracted, but well-meaning Ming (Eric Kot in a strong sympathetic performance) and gives birth to a daughter. Flavia’s affair with Yip, forces Flavia’s to face ten years of denial, with painful, but unavoidable consequences for all involved. Though Jose Ho has very little dialogue in this film, nevertheless, the focus is squarely on her character's emotional state as she struggles to reconcile her re-emerging lesbian instincts with guilt over how her previous relationship ended, the needs of her husband, child and parents in the present. Like some of the finest Chinese actresses: Gong Li (in any of her early films with director Zhang Yimou), or Maggie Cheung (in Comrades, In the Mood for Love), Josie Ho manages to communicate the torrent of conflicting emotions raging within with the simplest of looks and gestures. Butterfly is a great showcase for her talents. The film's one great flaw is it’s running time. 124 minutes may not seem overly long for a feature film, but the film could have shed up to 20 minutes without losing any impact (in fact, it might have had more. As it is, it feels like it meanders a bit). One obvious place to cut is the surfeit of flashbacks. Though they serve a necessary purpose in the narrative, there are far too many of them, forcing the viewer to maintain focused concentration to follow the storyline. Some struck me as utterly unnecessary. Regardless, it’s a great role for Josie Ho, and the filmmakers don’t cop out when showing the painful consequences of not living true to oneself. Not everyone emerges from the tale unscathed. Butterfly remains the best treatment of homosexual themes out of Hong Kong since Wong Kar-Wai’s Happy Together came out almost ten years ago, which likely accounts for the accolades the film received at seven Asian and European film festivals. Love & Pathology: A Guaranteed Crowd-Pleaser Funny, after two weekends of would-be Foreign Film Oscar contenders from Asia, the most entertaining film I watched this weekend had to be the 2004 French hit comedy Love Me if You Dare, a loving portrait of two young person's shared pathology. This is the way Bonnie & Clyde should’ve been. Highly recommended for those looking for sick laughs akin to Secretary. Note: For Fan fans of Oldboy, the Tartan Extreme Region-1 DVD Edition of Director Chan-Wook Park's (Sympathy for) Lady Vengeance is due out May 5th.
Posted by YourMomsBasement at 02:00 PM
In the time since my last FFW review, I've seen at least a couple dozen films, mostly from Asia and Europe, quite a few of them in the last few weeks as the All-region, and region-3 DVD editions of the Asian holiday season releases finally became available here in the states. Below I've summarized my response to the six new films: dramas, horror movies and fantasy-action-comedy hybrids, that made the strongest positive impression on me. I've also added my 'second thoughts' on two action films I gave a second viewing. Without question the strongest foreign films I’ve seen over the last three months are, The Duelist, Election and Head On. The Korean novel Damo is a complex, multi-faceted tale of a highly skilled 17th century undercover policewoman who, while investigating an widespread counterfeiting conspiracy finds herself caught between her loyalty to her adopted brother and commanding officer, and a charismatic revolutionary who might just be her real, flesh and blood brother. The story features a large supporting cast, much intrigue and the occasionally, huge battle scenes. It was adapted for television a couple of years ago, and became one of the most widely seen miniseries (14 episodes) in Asia a couple of years back. Director Lee Myung-Se wisely pares down the complex story of Damo for Duelist (Korea, 2005) placing the emphasis on the doomed attraction between the two young people, whose only common ground, is their incomparable skills at knife, sword and staff fighting. For them, it’s virtually a language of lethal movement. In Lee's version of the tale, a crude, tomboyish 17th Century policewoman finds herself unaccountably attracted to an elfin assassin at the center of a grand conspiracy to destabilize the economy. As the two are near polar opposites, as well as being on opposing sides of a lethal conflict, their infatuation with one another is sure-fire recipe for tragedy. However, Lee Myung-Se surprises with his daring and inventive use of color and light use and startling changes in tone and tempo. You really do have to leave your preconceptions and expectations at the door before watching this film. Duelist mixes elements of lowbrow comedy, lethal martial arts action, a complex conspiracy and romantic fantasy adventure. Far more tightly paced than the director’s previous film, the self-indulgent but highly influential Nowhere to Hide, Duelist is also a rare visual treat. The compositions, color, use of lighting, martial arts and dance choreography are simply stunning. Empty your head and Duelist will transport you. If you must, think of it as a great big live-action anime epic and you'll enjoy it just fine. Despite a tendency to polarize audiences, Duelist comes highly recommended. Region-3 editions are available. Turkish director Faith Akin’s Head-On, (Germany, 2004) won a well-deserved Golden Bear at the 2004 Berlin Film Festival, and this engrossing drama is a gift to anyone who’s grown up in an immigrant household that followed different, much more constraining, rules than the rest of the world outside. As such, this intense story won my heart hands down. The film opens on the 40-year-old Cahit (Birol Unel) who is utterly convincing as a Turkish immigrant who long ago rejected his own culture, became a small time punk rocker. His “moment” having long passed him by, Cahit ekes out a living collecting bottles and busing at a bar, and seems intent on killing himself slowly with alcohol. One night Cahit smashes his car into a brick wall and he winds up in a state-run mental hospital for observation. While the in-house counselors decide whether or not he’s too self-destructive for unsupervised existence, another patient, a failed suicide Sibel (and earnest, clear-eyed and sympathetic Sibel Kekilli) approaches him with a daring proposal. Desperate to escape the suffocating code of behavior that her immigrant parents insist she lives by as a young Muslim woman, Sibel proposes she and Cahit enter into a marriage of convenience. In her parents’ old world way of thinking, a woman is essentially chattel, and once married her parents will butt out of her life, leaving her free to party and generally find her own wild way in life. In return Sibel promises to keep Cahit in soaked in booze. He refuses, but Sibel persists, and eventually, she wears him down. After a tense interlude where Sibel and Cahit struggle to convince her family that his proposal is sincere, they marry, and for a time the arrangement works. Sibel goes dancing every night, and beds a series of young men. In the distance, Cahit watches in amusement, drinks himself into happy stupors, and on occasion sleeps with another aging veteran of the German punk scene, Maren (Catrin Striebeck), a rather burnt out looking hairdresser. In time room mates Sibel and Cahit become loyal, if unlikely friends, but not before the contradictions of their arrangement catch up with them, making for riveting drama in the latter half of the film. Available in a region-1 DVD edition, Head-On is highly recommended, especially for anyone who has grown up trapped between two cultures. Election (Hong Kong, 2005) is an excellent ensemble drama set in the tradition bound world of an old and powerful triad organization, the 50,000-member strong Woo Shing Society. Periodically, respected elders, "Uncles", led by Teng (Wong Tim Lam) elect an executive director, a Chairman, who leads the triad for limited terms. The current Chairman, "Whistle" (Wang Chung), is due to step down, and two high ranking capos, the calm, collected politician, Lok (Simon Yam) and an aggressive fire-brand "Big D" (Tony Leung Ka-Fai) are vying to become the next Chairman. The story takes us up and down the ranks of the organization. We witness Lok and Big D's political maneuvering before the "Uncles' vote, followed by a proxy war for possession of a physical token of triad leadership, the Dragon Head Baton, hidden away in Mainland China. This race involves and consumes soldiers from all levels of the organization: an intelligent and slick capo (Lous Koo), the pathological Jet (Nick Cheung), the hard core Kun (Lam Ka-Tung) and the righteous, if dim, Big Head (Lam Suet). Reportedly To's depiction of the rules and customs governing triad life is based on extensive research. If so, it makes fascinating viewing. To manages a great balance between tense debates and negotiations involving Uncles, under-bosses and pragmatic high ranking police officers, and shocking bursts of violence between the foot soldiers, where knives, sticks, cars and pieces of broken furniture, and not words, are the elements of daily "discourse". Ironies and absurdities abound, as the conflict between triad "righteousness" and machiavellian maneuvering keeps coming to the fore. To’s multi-level, realistic approach is refreshing and exciting, and the acting is uniformly excellent. (In comparison, John Woo's similarly themed Just Heroes (1987) plods in comparison.) Stylistically, the only recent Hong Kong drama that compares is Derek Yee's true-life urban drama One Nite in Mongkok (2004). To's Election is just as uncompromising, and ultimately, even more nihilistic: it's also more entertaining, and in some ways much more satisfying. Highly recommended. Available in 2-disc and single disc HK all-region DVD editions. A sequel just wrapped in Hong Kong. Of Current Interest: I had to watch the first two films in Park Chan Wook’s trilogy on the theme of revenge, Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance and Oldboy twice over, to get over the shocks, before I could appreciate the films for what they are: black comedies based on a pitliless view of life. I had no such problems with Park’s newest film, the last in the trilogy: Sympathy for Lady Vengeance (South Korea, 2005). Shot with the same “diamond cutters eye” for precise, sharp-edged, striking composition, Lady Vengeance (the international release title), is the story of a woman, Geum-Ja, who confesses to kidnapping and murder. Thirteen years later, she emerges from prison complete with a network of eager ex-cons and methodically begins working toward her revenge. Though a few surreal shots and quick cuts caught me by surprise, I found “Lady Vengeance” to be a twisted joy (repeat viewings of the earlier films have had an effect: I can apprehend Park’s dark sense of humor). Ultimately, Geum-Ja’s story celebrates both the strangely life-affirming and communal possibilities of revenge, as well as the outer limits of the therapeutic function of the quest. Be forewarned however. While “Lady Vengeance” has it’s share of surprises, visual and otherwise, it’s also far more evenly paced than the jolting Oldboy. It’s also brighter (if that is the right word) than the bleak, but funny “Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance.” Presently available in Region 3 DVD, I expect Lady Vengeance and region-1 dvd before the end of the year. Those jones-ing for Oldboy old boy shocks, are advised to check out Save the Green Planet (Korea, 2003) which recently came out in a Region-1 DVD edition. Based on the novel Shimotsuma Story by the cult writer Novala Takemoto, the surprisingly successful Kamikaze Girls is a frenetic, and surprisingly entertaining journey through two clashing sub-cultures at the center of the wacked out media bath that comprises contemporary Japanese pop culture. The film opens on Momoko (played by J-pop star Kyoko Fukada), a 17-year old devotee of the “Lolita Look”, wherein young women dress themselves in designer fashions based on the dress of the 18th Century French Court. Trapped in an isolated rural town some sixty miles outside metropolitan Tokyo, with her “useless” father, a former low-level yakuza, and her grandmother, Momoko retreats into her own (CGI-enhanced) fantasy world, an impregnable fortress where she idealizes the late Roccoco ethic of cultured hedonism and worships her favored fashion designers from afar. That’s when she isn’t scamming money from her idiotic father, or bilking people who buy his cheap second-rate knock offs of designer labels. Momoko needs a lot of clothing and accessories to buttress her rich internal fantasy world, and the “baby doll” look doesn’t come cheap. Momoko’s glorious isolation is punctured when, answering one of her ads on the net, a snarling, foul-mouthed Ichiko (rocker Anna Tsuchiya) a young biker partial to heavy-metal hair, supe-ed up mopeds (complete with samurai-style cavalry banners) and embroidered dusters, comes charging up the dirt road to Momoko’s house, initiating one of the most unlikely partnerships I’ve ever seen on film. Momoko initially wants nothing to do with righteous, loud and obnoxious wild-child Ichiko, who worships a peculiar and storied variant of the ideology shared by yakuza and triad gangsters all over Asia (illustrated by animated sequences that recall the look of Samurai Jack). Yet all- to-well aware on the essential fakery of such ideals, Ichiko instinctively admires Momoko’s stubborn insistence on living according to her own strange, if isolating rules. Another biker broad’s attempt to unify the local girl gangs, leads to a challenge being laid down that Ichiko cannot ignore, and this speeds the films resolution. Refreshing and fun, Kamikaze Girls is available in both Region-1 and Region-3 DVD editions. The Red Shoes (Korea, 2005) is a gorgeous, inventively shot drama about a truly put upon woman (Kim Hye Su) who gets NO breaks, whatsoever. Her husband despises and cheats on her, her child hates her, and her best friend is a obnoxious boor. Finally breaking with her husband, she tries to start her life over, opening up her own eye care business and making a new home for herself and her daughter when she stumbles upon a pair of irresistible high heel shoes which bring gruesome ends to some (but not all) of the women who wear them. While the plot rehashes elements from popular Japanese horror films from Asia Dark Water and The Ring, the film is redeemed by it’s fine cinematography and a the tour de force performance by Kim Hye Su in the leading role. Comparable to Isabelle Huppert’s star turn in The Piano Teacher Kim is amazing as a woman whose mind is cracking under the strain of trying to control her own long suppressed passion and emotions. Outside of festival screenings, the film is currently available in a two disc region-3 DVD edition, which includes an English-subtitled theatrical cut and an unrated directors cut with an alternate (and to my mind, far superior) ending. Unfortunately the directors cut isn’t subtitled. If you've seen the first version, you can follow the unrated version fine: you don’t necessarily need subtitles to enjoy the cinematography, Kim Hye Su’s amazing performance, and the alternate ending. For those willing to spend the extra time and money, I think it’s worth it. Still, when a Region-1 edition of this film comes out, I hope they simply add subtitles to the unrated directors cut version instead. It's definitely the more satisfying version. (Why the Korean distributor didn’t just release a subtitled version of the director’s cut is utterly beyond me.) Second Looks: Action Films. Hailed as a throwback to the glory days of the early 90’s Hong Kong action cinema, a stylistic trend best exemplified by John Woo’s ‘bullet ballets’ like A Better Tommorrow 2, The Killer, Bullet in the Head and Hard Boiled, Sha Po Lang (Hong Kong, 2005) was one of the most anticipated films to come out of the former colony this year. I got to see it the first time a few months ago at the AFI Los Angeles Film Festival. (An uncut theatrical release version is now available in a Hong Kong all-region edition.) Then as now, I feel obliged to pass along a warning. SPL's spare script and the directors shooting style really calls for more nuanced talents like Tony Leung (either one), Andy Lau and Chow Yun-Fat in the three leading roles to really work. As it is, Donnie Yen and Sammo Hung, two great kung fu action stars and fight choreographers, don’t have the range as actors to really pull off their roles successfully, something made all the more apparent by the films relatively high production values. The exception here is Simon Yam, who plays a terminally ill but nevertheless hard charging and police commander. The character actors filling the secondary roles are fine, but aren’t given enough to do to compensate for the lack of completely compelling performances in two of the three principal roles. The films saving grace are two well staged and lengthy fight scenes in the last third of the film: a savage fight between an assassin, played by a great Jackie Wu Jing, who wields a wicked looking knife, and Donnie Yen making skilled use of a collapsible steel police baton. This fight is followed by a brutal close quarter battle between Yen and Sammo Hung integrating ju-jitsu throws with intense ‘70’s old school’ hand-to-hand, and foot-to-head, blows. Alone these two scenes should satisfy, if not gratify, the fight scene-starved HK kung-fu movie fans out there. The fights are so well choreographed that I wish the filmmakers’ had chosen to develop three earlier scenes into full blown set peices: one where Donnie Yen knocks a suspect into an altered state of consciousness, a scene where Jacky Wu Jing takes out three cops in a row, and where Sammo Hung’s triad boss fights his way through a lobby full of cops. Personally I'm amazed they didn't. A martial arts action-comedy Arahan (2004) is set in contemporary Seoul, where an ineffective rookie cop Sang Hwan (Ryu Seong-Beum) gets his ass kicked by low-level thugs. A chance meeting with an easily irritated young Taoist super-woman Wi-jin (Yoon So-Yi), leads to the discovery by her father, Ja-Woon (Ahn Sung-Ki), an acupuncturist and one of the most powerful Taoist martial arts masters alive, that Ryu has superhuman potential. Not that such powers and abilities counts for a lot in contemporary Seoul. Constricted by an ethical code, the other Taoist super-humans are reduced to telling fortunes and other demeaning uses of their abilities to make a living. For his part, Sang Hwan just wants to be able to fight effectively, and has to be dragged kicking and screaming into adopting the spare regimen of super-humans-in-training, a lifestyle utterly divorced from life in contemporary Seoul. However when a dangerous Taoist master (martial arts director Jeon Du-Hong), is freed from his tomb (where the other Taoist masters locked him away decades ago) rejuvenates himself, and starts knocking off the other Taoist adepts, looking for a key to even greater power, ready or not, the next generation, Wijin and the hapless Sang Hwan, have to step up and face the ultimate badass, to prevent him from becoming a cross between Superman and Stalin. The sequence where the Sang-Hwan slowly adapts to his new lifestyle could have been more tightly edited, and the scenes where Ja Woon and Wijin bicker get a bit tiring (after a while, I wanted to tell the bitch to give the poor schmuck a break.) Otherwise, production values are high and the actors are uniformly good in their roles. (As ever Ahn Sung-Ki and Jeon Du-Hong are excellent). Comic relief comes courtesy Sang-Hwan and the other Taoist Elders, and Jeon Du-Hong’s action scenes (which are concentrated in the latter half of the film) are fun and exciting. Available in Region 3 (Asia) and Region 2 (UK) editions.
Posted by YourMomsBasement at 08:00 AM
Foreign Film Watch: Lethal Loves. Sick of sappy love stories? How about the relentless ‘good cheer’ of premature holiday season marketing? Or are you merely feeling a bit misanthropic? If so, check out these films: all of which explore the darker dimensions of obsessive love. There are two absorbing dramas: one from China and the other from Korea; an entertaining, if flawed thriller from Hong Kong; and a controversial depiction of one young man’s descent into sexual depravity from France. The final four are horror films, two from Thailand and one from Korea and one from France. The second Thai and French horror films are guaranteed to scare the proverbial “living shit” out of you. Three of these films may well put you off dating for a while, but with the right frame of mind, you’ll enjoy achieving your renewed appreciation for the virtues of solitude. Top to Bottom: The assembled cast of "Springtime in a Small Town". Yuwen (Jun Hu) and Zhang (Bia Qing Zin) check out the sights, Liyan (Jingfan Wu) begs for it. Winner of the Best Film Award at the 2002 Venice Film Festival, Springtime in a Small Town (China 2002) is set in China during the brief period of peace after Japan’s 1945 surrender to the Allies, and before Communist Party takeover in 1949; and depicts the acute longing and uncertainly brought on when first loves are reunited. The tubercular Liyan (Jingfan Wu) and his wife Yuwen (Jun Hu) are trapped in a loveless marriage. They reclaim the home they were forced to evacuate months before, and before long Liyan's childhood friend Zhang (Bia Qing Zin) pays them a visit. Much to Zhang's surprise, his friend Liyan's wife, Yuwen, is an ex-lover who he left behind when he left town to begin his medical studies years before. Zhang and the unhappy Yuwen fight themselves and each other in their efforts to resist temptation, when a drunken party brings the three adults unresolved issues to the fore. Springtime in a Small Town is recommended for those with the patience for deliberately-paced, but well-played, absorbing human-scale drama. Like Wong Kar-Wai’s In the Mood for Being Wild, Tian Zhuang Zhuang’s Springtime explores what happens when personal passions are severely restricted by cultural conventions, and like WKW, Tian relies on his actors to convey the drama through expressive performances. These are characters whose every word, every gesture has to be “proper” and yet reveal the passions raging just under the surface. The lovely Jing Fan Hu stands out as the demure Yuwen, a young woman who is nowhere as ‘correct’ and submissive as she appears to be on the surface. While cinematographer Lee Ping Bing's ( The Vertical Ray of the Sun, Millennium Mambo, In the Mood for Love) cinematography isn't as inventive as Chris Doyle's on WKW's films, he deserves credit for the way he graceful drifting camera beautifully frames the actors against stunning even painterly, rural backdrops and probes the darkened interiors, while subtly direct the viewers gaze without having resort to much back-and-forth editing. Springtime in a Small Town is available in Region 1 DVD. Left to Right: Seo Ki-Min (Choi Min-Shik) grasps his child and ducks out of sight. Seo & Choi Bora (Jeon Do-Yeon) his wife. Choi Bora with Il-Beom (Joo Min-Joo). Seo “loses it”. Happy End (Korea, 1999) is a realistic, straightforward and suspenseful depiction of a marriage crumbling under intense emotional strain with horrific results. The story itself is quite simple, and oft-done. What makes the film notable is the intensity of the actors’ performances. Choi Min Shik (Oldboy, Crying Fist) is solid as a middle-aged man who becomes deeply depressed when he loses his job. He escapes in cheap novels, and appears to take the news that his wife is cheating on him with resignation, at least until his wife’s indiscretions endanger their child. Then he becomes dangerous, even terrifying for the deliberate and methodical manner with which he exacts his cuckold's revenge. However the story is hardly one-sided. One of Korea’s finest and most versatile actresses, Jeon Do-Yeon (No Blood No Tears, Untold Scandal) perfectly plays his busy, wayward wife, Choi Bora. Her need for relief is almost palpable, as is her concern when her lover complicates her already busy life, rather than being content with simply providing her with a respite from it. It’s to Jeon’s credit that her character remains sympathetic despite her escapist impulses. (Jeon’s range is amazing: I’ve seen her convincingly play radically different characters and utterly disappear into a new personality each and every time.) Joo Min-Joo (Musa) rounds out the cast as her needy lover, a man who just doesn’t seem to “get it”. Happy End is available in subtitled Korean region-3 DVD editions, as well as an all-region, Cantonese and Mandarin-dubbed Hong Kong edition. Top to bottom. Daniel Wu as “Coke” with his “agent” Ting (Jing Ning), Suen (Aaron Kwok) gets shocked out of his jet leg. Coke beats on Suen, because "he likes him, and it will be good for him". Divergence (Hong Kong, 2005) is an entertaining, if flawed action thriller. Depending on your level of expectations, you will either find it fun or a well-meant train wreck. A plainclothes cop, Suen (Aaron Kwok), assigned to the Corporate Crimes Division, is escorting a key witness in a money laundering case back to Hong Kong from Canada when his charge is killed by a sniper. What follows has to be longest week in poor Officer Suen's life. Topping it all off, he is constantly plagued by his memories of Amy (Angelica Lee) a woman who walked out of his life without a word of explanation years before. Before long Suen is caught up in a punishing, even humiliating game of cat-and-mouse with the sniper who put down his witness, “Coke” (Daniel Wu). For his part, Coke does his level best NOT to kill the distraught, harried Suen. We will eventually learn Coke’s reasons for sparing the increasingly pathetic cop. Without a witness, the police cannot convict Yiu (Gallen Law), the businessman who hired the sniper, but he can hardly celebrate. Even bosses have bosses, and when his son disappears Yiu becomes convinced his ‘elder brother’ is holding him to ensure his silence. Yiu’s attorney, To (Ekin Chen), allegedly hates his work (in the films weakest performance, Chen barely never shows To's distaste for his lucrative job, leaving it to Angelica Lee, playing To’s wife Fong, to say so aloud, announcing it for the audience’s benefit). During a stake out, Suen catches a glimpse of Fong, who resembles his long lost Amy. Stunned Suen begins stalking the couple from a distance. Paradoxically, it’s by giving in to his obsessive love for Amy that Suen uncovers the truth behind the disappearance of Yiu’s son. For three-fourths of its running time, Divergence is a perfectly good action thriller. The fight scenes and car chases are well choreographed, and Benny Chan’s taut direction of Ivy Ho’s complex story will keep you on your toes. However the story suffers from Aaron Kwok’s overwrought performance (and the maudlin music which follows hims wherever he goes) as Suen, Ekin Chen’s opaque turn as To, and a disappointing, rather perfunctory ending that made me think the filmmakers cut short the shoot when they realized had enough footage to assemble a feature film. I wanted to see more of Daniel Wu’s cocksure “Coke“, a friendly, frisky young wolf of a man, who can be a surprisingly forgiving soul when he isn’t on a job. He’s certainly the most engaging presence in the film. We also needed to see more of the attorney and his wife. Neither Ekin Chen nor Angelica Lee make much of an impression in their characters’ few scenes, however important they are to the film’s final resolution. Chen was certainly miscast, and the capable Lee utterly wasted (or totally mis-directed) in her role. Finally I don’t think other reviewers have given Gallen Law enough credit for his performance as a man gradually losing his composure over the gnawing mystery of his son's disappearance. Divergence is available in all-region Hong Kong DVD editions. Top to Bottom: (Isabelle Huppert) touches bottom, then fondles her son Pierre’s (Louis Garrell) bottom. Pierre contemplates an uncertain conquest. Ma Mere (France, 2004) focuses on a disorienting summer in the life of Pierre, a sheltered adolescent in his late teens. Raised by his pious grandmother (isn’t that always the way in these European films?) he joins his parents in the Canary Islands for a summer, only to learn that they hate each other, flaunting their contempt for on another by openly indulging in affairs with others. When Pierre’s father dies suddenly, Pierre’s mother Helene has her lovers initiate Pierre into their private world of alcohol-fueled debauchery. His mother distances herself for a while, and Pierre soon finds himself in a mire of anguish, shame, sexual pleasure, and self-disgust. Then Hélène returns to the scene, and things get even darker, fast. The story is pretty bleak stuff, akin to Kim Ki-Duk’s Bad Guy in its nihilism, and its un-glamorized depiction of sex which is both a strength and a weakness here. Despite the presence of the formidable Huppert, Ma Mere isn’t a lot of fun. Though flawed, Don’t Bury Me On a Sunday is a more entertaining treatment of the same themes and ideas. Ma Mere is available in a region-1 DVD edition. Top to Bottom: Fear, love, pain and suspicion in "Nang Naak": Mak (Winai Kraibutr) loses it, the happy couple, Mak questions Naak (Intira Jaroenpura). Nang Naak (Thailand, 1999). There is no Thai who does not know Mae Naak … mentioning her name can make young children run and scream … mothers invoke Mae Naak's name to quiet their crying infants otherwise, the ghost might break their necks and eat their heads with chilly sauce … Winner of the numerous festival awards, including Best Film at the 1999 Asian Pacific Film Festival, Nang Naak is a beautifully shot, lovingly produced and sympathetic interpretation of Nang Naak’s tragic tale, placing much emphasis on the sad love story at it’s core, intertwined with the story of a rural community of rural subsistence farmers faced with an extraordinary situation. Like Springtime in a Small Town (discussed above) the film is beautifully shot, and the filmmakers let their story unfold at a leisurely pace. I’ve never before seen such a detailed and sympathetic portrayal of life in Thailand’s rural areas. Unfortunately, unlike Springtime, the simplicity of the story, and the simplicity and directness of the characterizations don’t really give the viewer enough to chew on, however heart-rending the tale. Also, the films deliberate pacing has the effect of dissipating much of the story's potential suspense, sapping the even the story’s most effective scares of their full impact. Despite the beauty of the production, and Intira Jaroenpura's fine performance as Naak, I’m sorry to say that I was disappointed with this production as a whole. Top to bottom: the formidable Cecile de France as Marie, Alexa (Maiween de Besco) “loses it”, Marie tries to comfort a distraught, traumatized Alexa. A well made thriller that hinges on hidden desires, Alexandre Aja’s High Tension (France 2003) was deliberately shot and directed to emulate the look and unrelenting suspense of the better cut-rate slasher flicks made in the seventies. As such it’s a near masterpiece of its type. An excellent Cecile de France, plays Marie, the weekend houseguest of an isolated rural family, who watches helplessly as a powerful man in dirty yellow coveralls breaks into her hosts house one night and methodically dispatches her friend's father, mother and brother one-by-one. The man leaves, dragging Marie’s friend, Alexa, the sole surviving member of her family, with him. Marie spends the rest of the film in desperate but determined pursuit, looking for a chance to rescue the hysterical and traumatized Alexa, who lies chained up in the back of the man’s van. If you enjoy well-shot gore you will appreciate the loving care that went into realizing and depicting Marie and Alexa’s desperate ordeal. Good, but definitely not for the squeamish. There are no concessions to sentiment here. If you think you can handle it, go for it. High Tension (Haute Tension) is available in Region 1 DVD. Three faces of Natre (Achita Sikamama) the vengeful ghost of "Shutter". Despite a couple of minor jumps in continuity Shutter (Thailand, 2004) is a well shot, wonderfully cast, and above all, convincing tale of a haunting. Thun, a young photographer, and his girlfriend Jane, flee the scene of a hit and run car accident. Soon they discover strange smears of light in their photographs. Finding no technical reason for these spectral impressions, they investigate the phenomenon. Meanwhile Thun’s closest friends find themselves assailed by their own ghosts and Jane uncovers something horrible linking her lover and his friends, speeding the stories resolution. The scares are subtle, but pretty damn effective, producing an effective sense of disquiet that builds nicely though out the length of the story. The actors do a good job - particularly Ananda Everingham’s as Thun, and a key revelation is handled quite well. The linchpin of the story is both ugly and utterly believable. One can easily see something like this happening in your own neighborhood, or among your own college classmates. Not that this is any comfort to Thun, who is going to learn more about the motivations of the restless dead than anyone, even he, should have to. The film loses some points for using of some visual tropes familiar to Western audiences from Japanese films like The Ring or Ju-on (The Grudge), but on the whole Shutter stands very well on it’s own. Other writers have referred to it as the quintessential Thai horror film. I agree. As such I recommend it. Shutter is currently available in a region-3 DVD edition. A region-1 edition is expected soon from Tartan Extreme Video. Clockwise from top left: Hee Jin (Suh Jung) reels in her man, the lake, Hyun-Shik (Kim Yoo Suk), contemplates his limited alternatives, “See what you made me do?”, and Hee-Jin’s justice. The Isle (Korea, 2000). No discussion of “obsessive, dangerous love” in recent foreign film, could not be complete without a consideration of iconoclastic Korean filmmaker Kim Ki-Duk’s, The Isle. Like the French films, Haute Tension or Ma Mere, The Isle is definitely not for the weak of stomach, but it’s also beautiful and haunting fantasy of one man’s desperate plight from the law, which leads him to crossover into one woman’s primal private universe, the kind of journey from which no one returns unchanged, if they return at all. The story opens on a picturesque lake high up in the mountains. Here a striking woman, Hee-Jin (Suh Jung of Spiders Forest) operates a kind of floating motel, a series of floating one-room shacks on rafts, where city people come, alone, or in small groups, to fish, have quick assignations with their lovers or prostitutes, camp out on the lake, or in some cases, hide out from the police. The nearly mute Hee-Jin silently ferries her guests from shore to cabin and back again, and brings them food, coffee and fresh bait, cleans out the rooms, and when asked, provides sexual services, either herself or by calling in young prostitutes from nearby towns. It’s clear that Hee-Jin is more than just a caretaker or a prostitute, if not quite fully human. My best guest is that she's some kind of barely domesticated, possibly abandoned “wild child”, barely literate and largely asocial but not asexual. She is also the embodiment of the motel’s ethereal, otherworldly setting (much like the elder monk in Kim Ki-Duk’s Spring Summer Fall Winter & Spring), both benevolent and vengeful. (Here she differs from the monk. That character is beyond vengeance.) People, men in particular, come to her floating motel to indulge in their most basic impulses without realizing that, at best, they’re just visitors in a place that runs by definite rules – Hee-Jin’s. She is everywhere, sees all, ministers to her guests needs however craven or distasteful, and punishes those who trespass against her unspoken laws. Into this strange vaguely threatening world comes an anxious man, Hyun-Shik (the unfortunately named Kim Yoo-Suk) who's clearly on the run from the police, and wants to hide out in one of the floating cabins. Thus begins an engrossing game of cat and mouse, as man and the woman eye each other warily, make tentative, clumsy attempts at contact and connection, with results that are both touching and horrifying. He is barely aware of it, but Hee-Jin is subtly and slowly drawing him into her primitive world, a place that’s both dangerous and well beyond the reach of normal “human” society. While the film’s ending is intentionally left ambiguous, I have no doubt that wherever the man went, he’s well on his way on a one-way journey to something other. Recommended for those who like horror movies and art films, preferably both, The Isle is available in a region-1 DVD edition. PETA members, and others squeamish about seeing animals killed on screen, or fishhooks used in ways they were never intended to, need not apply. In fact, you are cautioned to stay away. Purists may want to check the running time (90 minutes) as censored versions have been released in some countries. Won Kim Discuss this article on our message board.
Posted by YourMomsBasement at 10:47 AM
My love for Hammer, Amicus and all camp 60s/70s horror So, what cinematic delights do you have lined up for this Halloween? Me? How kind of you to ask. Well, this year I will be indulging in my horror movie passion. I fell in love with the British horror movies of the 60s and 70s through television. In the late 70s and early 80s the BBC would show seasons of British horror movies every year, taking advantage of the long, cold, winter nights. So it was that on a Friday and/or Saturday evenings, that I would sit down with my gran (and avid horror fan) and watch the terror unfold. Films from Hammer dominated these seasons, but I was also exposed to those from their greatest rival of the time Amicus, and some other productions aiming to cash in on the popularity. For me, these films were the perfect blend of horror, kitsch and sex. Some of the plots, indeed the entire premise of some were laughable, but they were truly great at the time and I think have aged well. Here are some personal recommendations of my favourites from that time which you probably haven't seen. They have that heady mix of gore, sex and high camp which typifies the output at the time. "The Ghoul" The first horror film I remember was called "The Ghoul" and centred around two young couples who were out racing in their jalopies (the 1920s dontcha know) and found themselves lost in the mist. They come across an old house, wherein lies a horrendous beast hidden behind a locked door. Sustenance was supplied red and foaming in a bowl left on the floor outside the door. Room service hasn't changed a bit. The owner of the house was played by Peter Cushing and this was my first exposure to the type of eloquent, yet sinister character Cushing would portray for Hammer and the like during the 50s/60s and to a lesser extent, the 70s. The film also starred Veronica Carlson, another Hammer stalwart and one of a line of scream queens (the others including Ingrid Pit, Yutte Stensgaard and the Collinson twins) who would act as precursors for the 80s versions (Linnea Quigley, Adrienne Barbeau and Barbara Crampton to name but three). "Twins of Evil" Twin sisters (played by the first Playboy twins to appear on the same centrefold, the Collinson Twins) go to stay with their aunt and puritanical uncle (Peter Cushing in full Witchfinder fury). One is wicked, the other virginal. The wicked one sneaks out one night and becomes embroiled with a vampire. Cue mix ups aplenty as the good girl is swapped for the vampiric twin to save her from a burning at the hands of her uncle. The only way she is found out is when she tries it on with the good girl's sexless boyfriend who smells a rat when they go to first base, and then has his suspicions confirmed when tossing his crucifix, leaves a burning shape on her left breast. The film is awash with sex, up to and including the good girl's kissing of the blessed cross when atop the pyre. "The Beast Must Die" A horror movie with a difference; a werewolf mystery. A big game hunter/millionaire sets the scene to hunt the ultimate quarry: the werewolf. At his sprawling estate he assembles a group of people who have been linked to stories and legends surrounding the werewolf, believing that one of them must be the monster. Using high tech surveillance and tracking equipment, he begins his hunt and one by one, the guests and servants are brutally slain by the guest/werewolf. As the mystery unfolds, in true Agatha Christie all-suspects-assembled-in-a-room-for-the-big-reveal style, the film's greatest card is played: The Werewolf Break. For the next 60 seconds, an analogue clock ticks down onscreen, superimposed over pictures of the suspects and the viewer is told they have this time to guess the identity of the perpetrator. Pure kitsch, but there is something so wonderfully fascinating and simple about it, it works. As the culprit is revealed and the hunt comes to an end, the conclusion is particularly heart rending. A fitting end to a truly unique film. "Dr Jekyll and Sister Hyde" A twist on the classic Robert Louis Stevenson tale as this time Dr Jeyll's potion transforms him into a woman. Yes, years before "Tootsie" and "All of Me", the perils of a cross gender were being explored but for horrific value. Cue lots of bodily exploration by the transformed Dr Jekyll, and other such "experimentation". The ongoing subplot of Jekyll and Hyde romancing the true brother and sister in their building is an interesting idea, as is the female being the killer. The ending is effective, but unfortunately falls down (almost literally) due to its depiction of the female half of the equation being weaker than the male. Entertaining stuff however. "The Vampire Lovers" An adaptation of Sheridan Le Fanu's Carmilla, finds Ingrid Pitt as the titular vampire. The opening has a fearless vampire hunter tracking down the last of the vampiric Karnstein line and beheading her. Thinking they are all dead and gone he goes about his business. However, he reckons without Carmilla, who ingratiates herself into a well to do household, and proceeds to seduce not only the daughter, but various household members including the chauffeur. Not so much awash with lesbian undercurrents, as completely flooded and gasping for air, this film is one that I remembered seeing once and could never track it down. "Frankenstein Must Be Destroyed" Cushing's fifth appearance as the Baron, and possibly his most vicious portrayal. Frankenstein here is not the scientist, but the monster himself. He murders without compunction and acts like a God. As the gore rating is increased, and with it the level of violence both physical and mental, so is the emotional content. The latest creation is a man of science himself, transplanted into the body of a monster. The scene where he pleads to his wife to believe it is him beneath the hidesous shell is heartbreaking. "Hammer House of Horror" Not a film, but a series of one hour dramas with titles such as "The House That Bled to Death", "The Silent Scream" and "Witching Time". These were screened on ITV in the UK and all 13 episodes (you see what they did there?) are now available on DVD in one handy package. These shorts are excellent bite size pieces of Hammer schlock, featuring such stars as Cushing, Brian Cox, Patricia Quinn and Denholm Elliot. "Theatre of Blood" In the vein (aha) of the Hammer films, this stars the third of the triumvirate Vincent Price (the others being Cushing and Lee) as a Shakespearean actor, panned by a group of critics who then leaps to his death in the icy waters of the Thames. Some time later, one of the critics is found murdered. Another then bites the dust in a gruesome manner, and another. Before long its easy to see who is behind it, as Price's Edward Lionheart cuts a theatrical swathe through his victims, using twists on Shakespearean plays to exact his revenge (the best of which is the serving of gastronome Robert Morley's beloved poodles in a pie in a scene from Titus Andonicus). Superb fun, and camp throughout "Theatre of Blood" is a must see. "Dr Terror's House of Horrors" This anthology had a group of individuals sharing a train carriage with the titular Dr Terror, played by Peter Cushing, offering to read the tarot cards and by extension their futures. These tales are then recounted, all building up to the denouement and the obligatory twist. Other stars included Christopher Lee, Donald Sutherland, Bernard Lee (James Bond's 'M') and jazz-trumpeter-tap-dancer-record-breaker Roy Castle. Amicus obviously thought the anthology format was a winner, as they produced many others such as "Tales from the Crypt", "Asylum" and "From Beyond the Grave" which again had Cushing as the link man, this time as the antique store owner whose wares are left out so people can steal them and ultimately befall a terrible fate. And finally: "Zoltan: Hound of Dracula" The dark one's vampiric Doberman is freed from its eternal slumber to hunt down Dracula's only living relative and persuade him to turn to the blood sucking ways. Zoltan even went on a bit of a road trip to hunt his potential new master, and there may have been a vampire cat but perhaps my mind is playing tricks. Zoltan even had a little doggie coffin. Ah, bless. Discuss this article in our forum
Posted by YourMomsBasement at 03:45 PM
Foreign Film Watch: Asian Horror Acacia (Korea, 2003). While the Korean film industry also produces it’s share of solid, well made conventional horror films, like the well received Tale of Two Sisters and Korea’s contribution to Ringu mania, The Ring Virus, and supernatural comedies, like Ghost House or Romantic Killers,a good number of them aren’t “just” horror films. Some filmmakers use the conventions of the genre to comment on social issues. How close the resulting movie is to what we conventionally think of as a horror film varies from film to film. While pretty conventional, in it’s focus on teenage girls in trouble, Whispering Corridors also serves as an indictment of the severe treatment students undergo in Korean schools. This film was so realistic and honest that the Korean Board of Education tried to have the film banned outright. Much to their consternation, it spawned a number of quasi-sequels and sparked some debate on the issue. Told from the point of view of a deceased girl, Voice is a meditation on our shared fears about social isolation and uncertainty about what lies beyond death. Phone and Samaritan Girl implicitly attack the abuse of underage girls in Asia. Acacia falls in the category of horror movie as social statement. While the film delivers unsettling imagery, and much suspense, its’ subject is the implosion of a small surbuban family under the stress of conflicting expectations. A childless couple adopts a child, and unsettling events follow, fraying the very fragile bonds holding the family together. In this, Acacia is closer to director Luis Bunuel’s indictments of middle-class hypocrisy and social conformity, like Diary of a Chambermaid than any conventional horror movie. In some of these films, like Belle Du Jour and The Descreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie, Bunuel employed surrealistic dream sequences, fantasies and hallucinations, to underscore his points. Filmmakers like Kim Ki-Hyung (Acacia, Whispering Corridors)and Kim Tae Young and Min Kyu-Dong (Memento Mori) follow suit, punctuating their films with similar scenes. Kim Mi-sook (Shim Hye-jin) is married to a gynecologist, Do-il (Kim Jin-geun). They live quietly with Do-il's father in a bleak looking suburb. Though Do-Il and Mi-Sook cannot conceive, Mi-Sook is content to focus on her career as teacher and exhibiting artist. Besides, she is wary of starting a family. She shows visible unease, however, when her husband and father-in-law pressure her to consider adoption. Eventually she gives in and visits a local orphanage. To Mi-Sook’s surprise, she recognizes the Edvard Munch-like drawings of a child, whose work she noted during a recent school competition. She meets Jin-sung (Mun Oh-bin) and is taken by the child’s dedication to his art. She decides to accede to her husband’s request and agrees to the adoption. However once settled in their home, Jin-Sung refuses to adopt the family name, and becomes convinced that his birth-mother’s spirit resides in the long dormant acacia tree in their backyard, and gets hostile when the adults suggest otherwise. In turn Mi-sook resents the child for disrupting the routine of their daily lives, and her husband, for putting her in the awkward position raising a distant adopted child. He also begins to pressure her to put aside her artwork for good. Jin-Sung isn’t happy either, running away on occasion. Tensions worsen when Mi-sook discovers she is pregnant. Threatened, Jin-sung attempts to smother the newborn. Then Jin-sung discovers that the adults have decided to return him to the orphanage, sparking a violent row. Jin-sung runs away again. Stressed out, instead of looking for him, the husband, wife and father-in-law turn on each other. Adding fuel to the fire, the acacia tree flowers overnight, producing strange blossoms. Nasty, malevolent, mysterious things begin to happen (including some surreal set pieces) to each adult in the household, making them distrust each other all the more. Things decline from there. Looking back on the work of Bunuel and some of his contemporaries, it’s easy to see what Kim Ki-Hyung is doing here in Acacia. Despite the horrific results of the family's inability to cope, what emerges here is a not entirely unsympathetic look at husband and wife cracking under the strains inherent in contemporary middle-class life anywhere in the developed world. Added to the pressure of traditional Korean conformist attitudes, and the need to maintain appearances, are the very modern issues of gender roles in the family, the need to set a balance between the demands of family and career. Such pressures take a toll on people everywhere, including the West, where divorce rates are high and people view themselves as individuals instead of members of a family unit. These stresses are felt all the more acutely in Korea, where economic development has been both fast and recent, and people are still adjusting from their “great leap forward”, while retaining strong internalized sense of feudal social obligations, and the manic desire to maintain “face”. In making his critique, Park Ki-Hyung makes impressive use of filmmaking technique. Music is used to reinforce a gradually growing sense of unease during the length of the film. A gradual shift in the imagery, lighting and production design is likewise coordinated, to move from the nearly colorless, washed out imagery of the opening of the film, suggesting a cold sterility, to a much darker, gothic look punctuated with bursts of bright reds and browns as the film progresses. On the whole the film has a stark, almost unearthly beauty to it. Shim Hye-Jin deserves high marks for her portrait of a beleaguered woman who has never completely adjusted to the demands of hearth and home, and the two child actors, Mun Oh-bin in the role of the adopted son, and Jeong Na-yoon as the little-girl-next-door, Min-jee, deliver great performances for their age. The films greatest weakness is it’s slow pace, as it demands much from the audience in terms of patience and concentration. This is not disposable entertainment. I wish the American and UK distributor didn’t promote it as such. Infection (Japan, 2004) Some of us remember the prime time hospital drama St. Elsewhere that broadcast in the early 80’s, and formed the template for glitzier programs like Chicago Hope and ER. Watching Infection can be fairly described as akin to watching two back-to-back episodes of a Japanese version of St. Elsewhere (with comparable production values) with a script based on typical American horror films of the late seventies or early eighties, like Nightmare on Elm Street or Friday the 13th. Set in a hospital that’s so poorly managed that the staff hasn’t been paid for weeks, and even the most basic medical supplies are in short supply. The few nurses that haven’t quit work around the clock, swaying on their exhausted feet. The doctors on staff have taken to turning new patients away whenever possible. Unsupervised patients stumble in the halls, and collapse onto waiting room benches. Others beg for painkillers or call out to long dead relatives. Inevitably an inexperienced, incompetent young nurse injects a badly burned, unidentified patient with the wrong drug, and kills him. Rather than risk being shut down, the attending doctors and nurses make a pact to cooperate in covering up the junior nurse’s mistake. They will put the burn victim’s remains in an unused room, and leeching the tell-tale toxins out of his body by surrounding the corpse with space heaters, essentially roast him for two hours. They reason that no one knows who he is, and no one has come forward to claim him, so what difference can it make? This is a pretty standard set up for a horror movie. What follows is equally routine, if solidly done. Those involved in the cover up have just, wittingly or not, just made a “deal with the devil”. What they don’t expect is that this time the devil will demand payment in full right away. An ambulance pulls up to the emergency room, and leaves a new patient in the emergency room lobby: a patient whose entire body is being consumed by a gangrenous ooze, the likes of which no one on staff has ever seen before. Soon the co-conspirators are struck down one-by-one by his hideous airborne infection, which drives each victim spectacularly insane, before their innards are completely liquefied, pouring out of their orifices, or bursting out of punctured skin. The horrifying deaths that follow owe their effectiveness more to the performances of the cast, than they do to the film’s decent, if not terribly sophisticated, mechanical special effects - especially since the infection drives its victims mad before consuming their internal organs, bones and muscle tissue. Particularly noteworthy are the performances of the three actresses playing the nurses: the chief nurse, an acid-tongued journeyman, and the incompetent beginner. (I have yet to find a detailed enough cast listing to identify who plays who in this film so I can credit them properly.) The film is shot in a straightforward, workmanlike way, like any decently-produced television drama. Some lighting effects seem a bit forced but that’s easy to forgive given the intent of those scenes in question. Overall, the use of sound effects is pretty effective, and well timed. My only real complaint about the film is its ending. During the last 12 or so minutes of the production, the narrative fractures into a series of alternate endings that segue into each other. This would have been fine if, say, the alternate endings were used to allow the audience to experience the effects on the infection on a victim’s perception. Unfortunately there is no clear connection between any of the endings and any of the preceding plot threads, so the close of the film is confusing, even disorientating at best. This came struck me as a cop-out of sorts. Thanks to the acting, Infection remains entertaining most of the way through the film. On the whole, it isn’t a bad way to wile away 97 or so minutes of your life, assuming you don’t expect too much and keep the movie’s weaknesses in mind (hence the spoilers about the ending). The Eye 2 (Thailand-Hong Kong, 2004). Where the Japanese film, Infection, was a solid, workmanlike horror movie, a throwback to American horror films of the seventies, the next two films clearly show how stylish use of the filmmaking technique, creative editing, and well chosen and timed music can elevate the simplest genre vehicles. Both films were directed by Danny and Oxide Pang, a pair of brothers who shuttle back and forth between Thailand and Hong Kong, producing action films and horror movies so stylish that it’s often said their filmmaking technique transcends their source material. Born in Hong Kong, the Pangs moved to Thailand and worked in advertising before becoming filmmakers. They first came to attention in the West for Bangkok Dangerous , a beautifully shot, if fairly standard story about a deaf-mute killer who gets a shot at both love and redemption. Their biggest claim to fame are their horror films: Bangkok Haunted, The Omen, The Tesseract and The Eye which enjoyed widespread theatrical release in the US and the UK last year. The brothers are currently at working with Sam Raimi on their first English-Language film, starring Kristen Stewart, Dylan McDermott and Penelope Ann Miller, as siblings torn apart by suspicion when weird things start happening on the family farm in North Dakota. The Eye (Hong Kong-Thailand, 2003) was a well made film about a blind young woman named Mun. The recipient of new corneas, Mun finds not only has her sight been restored, but she has the unwelcome ability to see ghosts. Some are simply unnerving, others quite horrifying, depending on the circumstances of their individual deaths. She eventually realizes the reflections and rooms she sees in mirrors are not her own, and begins to fear for her sanity. Her quest for answers leads her to Thailand, to uncover a tragedy, and even more frightening aspects of her new found abilities. While The Eye has it’s shares of inventive, evocative scares, what makes the film stand out is the way the Pangs make the audience identify with Mun’s plight, and share in her reactions to her unhappy dead and the discoveries she makes about the afterlife during her trip to Thailand. It also helped that the brothers had a strong lead in Angelica Lee, who won Best New Actress honors in Hong Kong and Taiwan for her work in this film. (The Pangs got honors for Best Visual and Sound Effects at the same awards ceremonies.) Tom Cruise bought the remake rights to the film. All this money and attention spells one word: S-E-Q-U-E-L. I’m happy to say the resulting film, The Eye 2 (Thai-HK, 2004, available on Region I DVD) is pretty good. This time the Pang Brothers give us Shu Qi (So Close, Stormriders)in one of the best performances of her career as a self-centered young woman named Joey Wong, who is involved in an affair with a married Thai named Sam (Jesdaporn Pholdee). Pregnant, and abandoned by her lover, she retires to a luxury hotel room in Bangkok and takes an overdose of sleeping pills. Discovered by the hotel staff, Joey's stomach is pumped at the hospital. During her recovery, she gets a quick glimpse of ghosts gathered around her bed. Though shaken, she chalks this first encounter with the restless dead up to a hallucination. Depressed Joey returns to Hong Kong, tormented by her lover’s desertion and wrestling with the question of whether or not to keep the child. There begins a series of stylishly executed set pieces as she stumbles upon the ghosts wherever she turns, each encounter more disturbing than the last. Many of these encounters land her in police precinct houses and hospitals, and she quickly gains a reputation as a crazed, suicidal, pregnant girl who suffers from delusions. The Pang’s pace these scenes very well, treating us to a series of increasingly frightening set pieces, each more imaginative and startling than the last. Joey’s encounters take their toll, and her nerves become increasingly frayed as time goes on. Much to her horror, she notices that one ghost in particular (Eugenia Yuan) seems to be following her, even taking control of her body at critical moments. She eventually recognizes the woman, as the ghost she watched reenact her own, more successful attempt to kill herself by flinging herself in front of a moving train. Finally taking the initiative, Joey investigates the woman’s past, and learns that seeing the dead isn’t her most pressing problem, which is inextricably intertwined with a severe conception of the Buddhist law of karma and the cycles of reincarnation. A few of these scenes feature welcome appearances by fight choreographer Phillip Kwok (Mad Dog in Hard Boiled playing the toughest looking monk I’ve ever seen. At this point it becomes clear that the ability to see the spirits of the dead, while an essential part of Joey’s story, isn’t as important to this story than it was to Mun’s journey in the first Eye film. The Eye 2 is another story entirely, with an equally interesting, but different theme than its predecessor. Were the Pang Brothers to alter their presentation of ghosts (which remind viewers that the film is a sequel) they’d still have a perfectly good, stand-alone horror story about how an unwelcome new ability forces Joey into an wider awareness of things beyond her own selfish concerns. Though Joey’s it takes a while for Joey to take the initiative (and that moment of transition isn’t quite as convincing as it was in the first Eye film - perhaps because Angelica Lee’s Mun is a much more admirable and proactive character than Shu Qi’s Joey Wong), Shu Qi turns in a strong enough performance before and after that the lapse is easily forgiven. Shu Qi rarely gets the chance to exhibit the range shown in her independent films, Beijing Rocks, Millennium Mambo and Viva Erotica, and she makes the most of the chances her character provides here. Ultimately though, however strong her performance, or sound the script, what matters here is style, something the Pangs have in abundance, and bring to almost every project they participate in. They are the true spiritual heirs of the director like Tsui Hark, John Woo, Ronny Yu among others, who became leading lights of the Hong Kong film industry in the mid-80’s to the late 90’s. In other hands, The Eye 2, could have felt as routine as Infection described above. Thanks to the Pangs, it manages to rise above a bit above its genre roots, at least as much as the story’s conventional structure will allow. Abnormal Beauty (Thailand-Hong Kong, 2004). Nowhere is this more evident than Oxide Pang’s most recent solo effort as director, Abnormal Beauty (2004) which screens in cinemas in the UK this September, and will be released in an Region I DVD edition in the US this spring. The story of one young woman’s self destructive obsession with death, the movie could have easily become just another exploitation film, not unlike Dario Argento’s "gaillo yellow” sex and splatter movies of the seventies. Instead, Oxide Pang’s skillful, even bravura direction, the way he uses creative camera work, editing and sound cues, makes the audience share in the heroine’s growing madness. Until the introduction of some questionable plot elements in the films last third, Abnormal Beautycompares well with Roman Polanski’s classic 1965 thriller Repulsion, a film with which Abnormal Beauty shares a number of themes and narrative devices. I found myself wondering if Oxide Pang intended Abnormal Beauty as a homage of sorts, to the Polanski film, much as Stephen Chow’s Kung Fu Hustle and Quentin Tarantino’s Kill Bill films were tributes to Lau Kar-leung, Sammo Hung and Chang Cheh’s kung fu films of the sixties and seventies. In Repulsion Catherine Deneuve plays a young Belgian manicurist, Carole, who lives with her sister and her sister's fiancée in a cramped London flat. Fed up with caring for the reclusive, fearful young woman, the couple goes on an extended vacation, leaving Carole behind. Before long, Carole begins hallucinating: threatening, anonymous men appear in her mirror, hands reach out from the walls and molest her. Soon she is barely able to function. Her madness worsens until Carol imagines herself being raped in her bedroom, and she loses whatever tenuous grip on reality she had. When a concerned co-worker checks in on her, the story reaches its horrific climax. Though the same script could, in lesser hands, easily become a titillating piece of exploitive trash, Polanski’s and Deneuve’s approach to the material never falters. Where others might have taken the easy way out by resorting to full-on nudity or a gratuitous rape scene, Polanski inserts suggestive aural cues and quickly spliced in visual hints, to chart Carol’s descent into psychosis. He is also greatly aided by Catherine Deneuve's disciplined performance, which makes you believe in Carol’s madness. Together they keep the audience riveted to the screen, producing a masterpiece of psychological horror. In Abnormal Beauty Race Wong plays Jiney, an accomplished art student. Though she wins award after award for her technical proficiency, on a personal level she’s deeply dissatisfied with her own work. Taking photographs one day with her roommate and lover, Jace (short for Jasmine, and played by Rose Wong, Race Wong’s sister – the two comprise a Singapore-based singing act called 2R) the couple happens upon a fatal car accident. Shocked at the bloody tableau, Jiney begins snapping pictures of the accident scene, at first cautiously, then with increasing fervor. With growing excitement, she realizes she’s finally found her “subject”, an absorbing thematic focus for her work. She begins searching for dead animals to photograph, and when that doesn’t satisfy her, she begins paying butchers kill animals in front of her. One day, while resting (masturbating?) in the bath, repressed traumatic childhood memories surface, in a sequence recalling Carol’s hallucinations in Repulsion. While these scenes aren’t entirely successful, the viewer (voyeur?) begins to wonder just how far Jiney will go to exorcise the energies released by her formerly repressed memories. She’s certainly clear about what she wants: to capture the moment life leaves the body, as a metaphor for the essential nature of art-making art, capturing and preserving a single moment for all eternity. The first two thirds of the film are excellent. Even more so than Shu Qi in The Eye 2,Race brings Jiney to memorable life. While she isn’t the actress Deneueve is (few are), her portrayal of obsession growing into a dangerous madness is pretty convincing. (In contrast, Race’s co-stars Anson Leung and Rose Wong, turn in adequate performances as the dull young man who harbors a strong attraction to Jiney; and the loyal, if demanding, Jace. Fortunately the script doesn’t require too much more from them.) Especially engrossing are the numerous sequences of Jiney making art. Oxide Pang makes clever and creative use of the physical work of being an artist - cutting quickly between close ups of Jiney’s changing expressions to shots of her shooting film on the street, developing the film in her darkroom, working a visual idea with quickly sketched thumbnails, then transforming that idea via the broader motions of moving paint across canvas with brushes of various sizes - to trace Jiney’s enthusiasm and concentration, as it mutates into something nearing hysteria. Whether she is tracking a suicide victims descent from a rooftop using a camera equipped with a motor drive, tracing an imagined flow of blood from the top of a model’s head to her toes with a single flowing line of cadmium red, or taunting Anson sexually, in order to get him to assume even more distorted poses while “playing dead” for Jiney’s camera, Oxide Pang and Race Wong collaborate to make Jiney’s day-to-day descend into madness palpable. Jiney's psychological journey may not be novel, but the trademark Pang style and Race Wong's performance together more than compensate. Some find fault with the final third of the film, saying it’s, “more ugly than compelling”, and at points sloppy, as though Oxide Pang lost control at some point, and made an ill-advised turn to a kind of lurid, even gratuitous fetishism. It’s true that elements of sadomasochism and sexual stalking enter the story at this point, but I thought the end of Jiney’s journey is perfectly in keeping with the downward spiral that got her there in the first place. In this Abnormal Beauty is akin to Repulsion and a more recent French film, Don’t Let Me Die in a Sunday, wherein sloppy, sexually obsessed, Parisians stumble from orgy to orgy until the meaningless of their lives becomes too much for some of them to bear. The protagonist’s nocturnal activities get progressively kinkier as their shared sexual addiction spurs them on to wilder encounters, but there ultimately comes a point where one is either consumed, like Jiney, or destroyed by personal insight into the barren hopelessness of their way of life, like Jean Marc Barr’s Ben, in Sunday. Discuss this article in our forum
Posted by YourMomsBasement at 08:00 AM
by Won Kim Crime films seem to dominate my viewing list these days. Some reviews follow... Center: Lee Marvin in “Point Blank”. Clockwise from top left: Lee Byung Hun as Sun Woo, Alain Delon in “Le Samourai”, another shot of Lee Byun Hun, Jeon Du-Hung (right) faces off against Yakuza in “Fighter in the Wind”, Philip Kwok in “Hard-Boiled”, and Michael Caine and friend in “Get Carter”. Kim Jae-Woon’s, “Tale of Two Sisters” (2003) is a stylish slow-burn horror-mystery based on an old Korean fairy tale (of surprising psychological depth) that featured memorable production design (think Laura Ashley from Hell), clever use of a classical score, and great performances by Im Su-Jeong and Mun Keun-Young as the sisters, and Yeom Jeong-Ah, who is unforgettable as the evil stepmother. Impressed put in a standing order for Kim’s next film, A Bittersweet Life (2005) which turned out to be equally stylish as “Sisters”, but otherwise a bit frustrating. The story is simple. A trusted mob enforcer, Sun-Woo (played by Lee Byung-Hun) finds that he cannot fulfill his boss’ latest order. He takes a big chance, and as a result, suffers terribly, then, having been a loyal mobster decides to retaliate. Hardly original as crime stories go. However, what matters in genre films like this, is not what happens, but how the story is told, and the film is certainly stylish. The world Sun-Woo operates in is filled with dramatic locales as shiny and reflective, as the settings in Michael Mann’s urban crime stories “Thief” and “Heat”, and fans of those films will no doubt like “Bittersweet”. The fight scenes are brutal and well choreographed by Jeon Du-Hong (“Fighter in the Wind”, “No Blood No Tears”) particularly the extended finale. There’s one sequence involving low-rent illegal gun dealers that stands out for its’ grim humor. Whether one considers the film a success or not depends on how one reacts to the casting of Lee Byung-Hun in the lead role. Michael Hodges’ memorable “Get Carter” (1971) and John Boorman’s “Point Blank”, work so well in part because Michael Caine and Lee Marvin look like people who intimidate, and otherwise brutalize, others for a living. Caine and Marvin make it believable when they endured beating after beating and dish out death and destruction in return. I felt Lee’s youthful good looks worked against him in “Bittersweet”. He stands out a bit too much among his fellow mobsters, who are a generally dangerous looking, bunch indeed. found myself wishing the producers and filmmakers had cast Jeon Du-Hung (the black-clad enforcer in “No Blood No Tears”, a demonic martial arts master/sorcerer in “Arahan”, and the noble martial arts teacher in “Fighter in the Wind”) in the lead. He has craggy looks for the role. As with Jeon’s fellow actor and fight choreographer, Phillip Kwok (“Five Deadly Venoms”, “Hard Boiled”) I hope Jeon gets a few starring roles in some well-directed action films before either of them gets much older. Both men look great on film, have the requisite acting ability, and are “hell on wheels” in motion. Compounding matters, Lee’s character, Sun-Woo, is a cold-blooded perfectionist (well illustrated by his first scene in the movie, involving an interrupted meal) and a relatively repressed man, a key plot element in the story. Though Lee Byung-Hun has turned in an engrossing and sympathetic performances “JSA: Joint Security Area”, in “Bittersweet” I suspect he was asked to underplay his character’s reactions. (This is reinforced by the late revelation of his reasons for making a critical choice early in the film.) This was a mistake. Lee doesn’t get to externalize Sun-Woo’s emotions until his enemies put him ‘through the wringer’. Cold blooded killer that he is, we need to sympathize with him earlier on in the story, as we did with Jean Reno’s Leon, in “The Professional”. The rest of the cast is fine. Shin Min-Ah (“Volcano High”) stands out as a young cellist Sun-Woo is assigned to watch, as does Min Hwang-Jeon as a nasty piece of work named Baek, the leader of a rival gang. Given the high quality of the production, and action scenes, I expect “A Bittersweet Life” to get released in a Region One DVD edition. With the above reservations in mind, I think many people will still enjoy it. A good rule of thumb is to ask yourself if you like Michael Mann’s work, and if Alain Delon’s stoic good looks didn’t get in the way of accepting him in films like “Le Samourai” and “The Sicilian Clan”. If it the answer to both questions is yes, give “A Bittersweet Life” a try, you’ll like it better than I did. Top to bottom: David Belle, Bibi Naceri & Dany Verrissimo as Leito, Taha, and Lola in “Banlieue 13”. Belle begins a descent, film poster illustration. The title of Luc Besson’s Banlieue 13 (2004) stands for a district in a near future Paris, a multi-racial ghetto, abandoned by the municipal government (which walls the entire neighborhood off from the rest of Paris) as an ungovernable underclass enclave. In lieu of a central authority, what passes for order in the district is maintained by a crime boss, Taha, and his lieutenant, K2. Leito, a low-rent Robin Hood, played by David Belle, the chief exponent of an form of acrobatic fighting that utilizes the handholds and abutments found in any urban setting, and fantastic leaps from building to building. (For more information on Parkour, see: http://www.urbanfreeflow.com/FRPK_parkour_...r_beginners.htm ) Leito’s personal crusade against Taha takes a bad turn and he lands in prison. Taha gets his hands on a nuclear weapon, a neutron bomb mounted on a small missle, and the government teams Leito up with Damien (Cyril Raffaelli), a member of an elite police unit trained for high-risk situations, to enter the district, locate and disarm the bomb. Jackie-Chan/Tony Jaa-like mayhem ensues, with dialogue that reminds me of an updated version of Denny O’Neil’s dialogue in “Green Lantern-Green Arrow”, with the predictable twist that the cop is more idealistic in his straight razor way, than the much more cynical vigilante. Other than a gritty showcase for Leito and Raffaelli’s enviable physical skills, there isn’t else to recommend “Banlieue 13”, except to say the settings have the look of the decaying urban settings of European science fiction comics, particularly Tanino Liberatore’s “Ranxerox” ( http://www.valdisangro.it/arte/liberatoreg...primapagina.htm ). I wish the filmmakers had gone further in this regard. Some creative costuming, as seen in the Chinese ghettos depicted in Jeong Yun-Su’s unfairly maligned, Yesterday”, would have helped a lot. Still for the undemanding fans of films like Tony Jaa’s “Ong Bak”, or Besson, Louis Letterier and Cory Yuen’s “Transporter” films, “Banlieue 13” for a decent evenings diversion.
Posted by YourMomsBasement at 08:00 PM
Red Dawn? Yes, of course there is. But also not. You'll see. For one, this was the first movie ever released with the rating of 'PG-13.' That's historical fact. After PG-rated films such as Raiders of the Last Arc and Gremlins came out and pissed off the 'rents with their graphic violence, the MPAA came up with the PG-13 rating in an attempt to shut up the parents groups who were interrupting their money-counting. So Red Dawn was granted this new, unproven rating as it was quite the violent movie. In fact per IMDB.com, "This film was entered into the Guinness Book of Records as having the most acts of violence of any film up to that time." Can't front on that. Despite the new, unproven rating Red Dawn took 8 million dollars on its opening day. Sounds like not a lot now, but in 1984 that was still some serious cheddar. Plot: The dirty, evil Commies invade America via the Bering Strait and Mexico! Colorado is lost, >and only a group of 8 plucky and patriotic teens could save the country from the Red Menace! I was perhaps ten when I saw this, in Reagan's America. Cold War paranoia was still going strong. The old coot referred to the Russians as the 'Evil Empire,' and as a kid who's earliest memories include both the Empire and Doctor Doom as my personal definition of evil...lets put it this way: I did not like the 'Commies.' I feared them. This movie scared the living shit out of me when I was a lad. Images of Russian and Cuban soldiers parachuting down into a small town in Colorado scared the figurative bejesus out of me. I mean, what if this had happened to us? Images of the evil forces of communism parachuting down into Boston filled my head, leaving me to plan (well, daydream) contingency plans to defend myself and my family from the Red Menace. This movie grabbed me by the brain and shook me. How could America withstand such a threat?! Ah, but how could I (or the dirty commies) forget the high school football team? WOLVERIIIIIIINES! Yes, armed with hunting rifles, hunting bows, and then eventually stolen Russian AK-47's (the'in' assault weapon of the 80's-sorry M-16, you're old news) and rocket launchers, the former small town football heroes team up and form a well-organized guerilla unit that takes to the hills of suburban Colorado to take it to those nasty commies. And guess what! They win! In that they get whittled down one by one, ultimately dying on a swingset! And still, their noble battle cry makes my spirit soar! WOLVERIIIIIIINES!! And the cast. Oh, that cast. It is not unlike a poor man's 'The Outsiders.' You have your Patrick Swayze AND Jennifer Grey several years before they would heat up the screen in Dirty Dancing. Okay, there's a little something-something for the ladies. Also Charlie Sheen, star of 'Two and a Half Men' and prostitute enthusiast. Lea 'Caroline in the City' Thompson, just a year before she hit it big as Marty's hot mom in Back to the Future. And you have your C. Thomas Howell. I concede that while I find this movie to be excellent for the most part (WOLVERIIIIIINES!!) his character part here...well, it went a little beyond his means. Because when you want somebody to effectively convey the horrors of war on a young man's heart and soul, you go with the babyfaced C. Thomas "Soul Man" Howell. I love when he gets all hardened and has to shoot his friend for turning traitor on the Wolverines. It's such an effective rendition of some Hollywood kid trying to act like a tough guy. And to complement the rest of the the cast as the movie takes a dramatic turn for the cheese: Powers Boothe shows up, as a renegade Air Force colonel. Powers Boothe is...well, he's Powers Boothe. Oscar caliber? Nay, my friends nay. His name is Powers. And of course, Harry Dean Stanton as dad to Sheen and Swayze. You cannot front on Harry Dean Stanton. The guy's amazing, even in cheestacular right-wing terror fantasy films such as this one. Remembering his plaintive cries from the drive-in/internment camp where the evil Russians made the captive menfolk of this small town Colorado town watch Aleksandr Nevsky...oooh, that's good cheese. Good cheese. "AVENGE ME BOYS! AVENGE MEEEE!!" I am amazed and impressed that he managed to yell that with as straight a face as he did. ...not convinced? Fair enough. There's a lot of cheese out there in the video tores and on Netflix, so I can understand how Red Dawn could be a hard sell to someone. I mean: I love it, but I also love a lot of ludicrous stuff. You do too. Somewhere on this very website is someone who can and will defend Hudson Hawk as a quality film, and try to find a way to convince others that it had some sort of bullshit serious societal impact on popular culture as a whole. Ahh, but peep this: A user review from Amazon.com, your best stop for slightly sketchy movie reviews. Note to self: do not piss off truckers. Another one: QUOTE(Amazon.com) 1) AK 47 toting guerilla freedom fighter 2) AK 47 toting guerilla freedom fighter I mean, holy shit. Dude, that's messed up. And you want to know something similarly messed up? I sort of feel what he's saying. WOLVERIIIIINES!! When I was a kid, it was about battling evil, fighting for freedom; being a hero, being a good guy. There were many factors in my youth that formed my idea of what being a 'good guy' was, and Red Dawn...well it definitely played a part. This movie stuck with me, and it obviously stuck with these...interesting individuals. Moreso than with me - when I was in high school I wanted to be Spider-Man. Sadly, that job was taken. This movie left an impression on me that still persists today. Both in a personal manner, as well as in the oh-so-valuable 'this movie's so cheesy it RULES' manner. So I say that in terms of 80's war movies: there is nothing better than 'Red Dawn.' Please feel free to disagree, and see if you can prove me wrong. One last review quote to shed some light on the caliber of the reviewers of Amazon: QUOTE(Amazon.com) ...WOLVERIIIIIINES!!
Posted by YourMomsBasement at 11:57 AM
Retired wushu athlete Xu Xiang Dong as Dong Hai Chun, founder of Baguazhang.
Look for Part Two next week...March 02, 2006
Foriegn Film Watch: Award Season
Discuss this article on our message board.January 24, 2006
Won Kim's Foreign Film Watch: the Last 6 Months
Won Kim's Foreign Film Watch: Lethal Loves
Discuss this article in our forum.November 02, 2005
Won Kim's Foreign Film Watch: Lethal Loves
Sherman Oaks, California
October 2005October 27, 2005
Friday/Saturday Night Horror
October 25, 2005
Won Kim's Foreign Film Roundup: Halloween Horror!
Warnings & Recommendations for All Hallows Eve. 
Clockwise from left: images from “Whispering Corridors”, “Tale of Two Sisters”, “Dairy of a Chambermaid”, “Belle Du Jour” & “Phone”. Center: “Ghost House”.
Suddenly paying usurious malpractice insurance premiums doesn’t seem that bad, in “Infection”.
Mun’s (Angelica Lee) Takes the Initiative in “The Eye”.
Joey Wong (Shu Qi) Takes It and Takes It, in “The Eye 2”.
Polanski’s “Repulsion” (1965) with Catherine Deneueve.
Jiney (Rose Wong) learns that Art can be Dangerous in “Abnormal Beauty”.September 26, 2005
Foreign Film Watch: Criminal Behavior, Part 1
Discuss this article in our forum.May 02, 2005
Is there anything better than...Red Dawn?
This scene? Never happens within the film.
Cleancut 'Mericans!
I can barely see the Sheen
QUOTE(Amazon.com)
But if you can get beyond that tactical hurdle, the backyard war against Communism is irresistable to the Conservative heart. As long as somewhere in the land, a truckdriver is at rest in his sleeper cab, one hand on his 9mm Glock and the other on his remote pressing "play" for the Red Dawn DVD in his mini-TV, America is safe.
As someone who graduated from high school in 1984 I can tell you most in my generation loved this movie! It featured a great cast of rising stars and plenty of action. The cold war was at it's heighth and it sent a reassuring message that American bravery would win out over the commies!!! Red blooded Americans will love it...left-wingers will cringe and go watch a Warren Beatty film.
Hey buddy, step back! Dick Tracy was an underrated film! And Bulworth was surprisingly intelligent! Okay, one more crazyguy review:
QUOTE(Amazon.com)
If I had been able to choose any career, when I was a highschool student filling out career aptitude forms, my top 3 choices would have been:
and
3) AK 47 toting guerilla freedom fighter
Actual movie prop!
Lea Thompson and Jennifer Grey do look really good in grubby, army-surplus commando gear. It raises the question, why don't more women don't occasionally toss on a beret or special forces sweater? I would think it would be a low cost way of supplementing a wardrobe and adding a little spice to casual outfits.
Teh hotness! OMG LOL!
He's Gene Shalit to my Roger Ebert.