Calvaire Review

Directed by: Fabrice du Welz
Starring: Laurent Lucas, Jackie Berroyer and Philippe Nahon
Running Time: 94 minutes
Rated: R
Released: 2004
Language: French with English subtitles

Marc Stevens (Lucas) is a traveling entertainer on his way to his next gig in southern France. It's just a few days before Christmas and he finds himself stranded with a broke-down van in the remote, dark wooded Hautes Fagnes region of Liège. Begrudgingly, he has to stay in the only lodging available for miles and miles. There he meets the old innkeeper, Bartel (Berroyer), an old lonely man who confides in Marc about the wife that left him and the sad life of solitude he now leads.

Very soon, Marc realizes that he has stumbled into a nightmare from which he may never wake. Bartel's hospitality becomes less endearing and more and more psychotic by the hour.

I don't think I can fully express how utterly disappointed I was with this movie. There were certain aspects of it that gave it such a great potential that I think it actually made an even worse impression on me than if it had been awful throughout.

The concept of this film is quite scary. There are no fictitious monsters or demons roaming about the woods, just a bunch of scary, lonely, cult like, livestock-sodomizing, backwoods French rednecks. This film flows in the same vein as Deliverance and Wrong Turn in that: someone gets lost and the wrong people found them. I can't think of a much more frightening venture than that.

There were also a lot of really cool looking, stylish shots that gave this film a feel that was probably the only real reason I actually kept watching it. One of the more intense scenes was shot from a long overhead view that was pretty neat. It gave the viewer a more complete picture of the multiple things happening all at once.

Unfortunately, this movie fell short in such an important area that it left me completely disgusted. The main character, Marc was for all intents and purposes, completely unlikable and unidentifiable. At certain points in this movie, I found that I disliked him so much that I think I started cheering for the other side. You find yourself waiting throughout the entire 94 minutes for to grow a set and get Burt Reynolds on these freaks. Instead, he spends almost the entire second half of this movie crying and waiting for someone to save him

This film did a good job of filling itself with moments that make you feel uncomfortable watching it. I don't necessarily have a problem with that, as long as you give me something in return. I know that I can sometimes sound like a bit of a broken record when it comes to this. But, if you can't empathize with the character that you are spending the majority of this film with, the film is a failure.

Clean Review

Directed by: Olivier Assayas
Starring: Maggie Cheung, Nick Nolte, Martha Henry and James Dennis
Running Time: 111 minutes
Rated: R

Clean begins with the heroin overdose and subsequent death of a formerly successful rock star. This leaves his girlfriend, Emily Wang (Cheung) to serve a six month sentence alone and without the drugs she is so desperately addicted to. She is also left with a deep desire to reconnect with the son, Jay (Dennis) she has yet to build a relationship with.

The child has been raised by her deceased boyfriend's parents, Albrecht and Rosemary (Nolte and Henry) and they are more than apprehensive about letting his addict of a mother slip in and out of his young fragile life. If she is to have any chance of a meaningful relationship with her son, she must change her life. She must get clean.

I found myself very reluctant to give this film a bad review. There really was nothing about that I felt was terrible. And there were certainly a few points of it that I found interesting and well done. The problem with this movie is that it in spite of its good points, it was put together in a way that makes it very hard to hold an interest. It was slow paced by and large and it seemed that every time a new aspect (character, job, location) was introduced, it would quickly turn into a dead end, leaving the viewer frustrated and less willing to invest any emotion into the next direction.

Although I didn't think the camera work was anything special enough to spark my interest, I did like some of the longer shots in which we would follow the character through a house and in and out of several rooms without cutting. But again, these were not the types of shots that I would have taken note of if I weren't trying to think of something good to write about in this review.

I think the film maker left the characters a bit under developed as well. I may have had an easier time identifying with Emily, if I had known more about who she was before that fateful day. This could have been done with a few well placed flashback montages. The experiences she shared with her boyfriend, her first drug encounter, carrying the child and the decision to leave him to be raised by others are all scenes that could have made the viewer more emotionally invested in her and her struggles.

The one saving grace of this film was, without a doubt the acting. Maggie Cheung was nothing short of superb. She did not take this character and make it her own; rather she took herself and made it her character. It was her performance that, in spite of every thing I didn't like about this movie, kept me cheering for her. Nick Nolte was more than convincing in his role. His face showed the pain of a good man that couldn't help but to pull at your heartstrings. Martha Henry played his wife, Rosemary very well and I ended up wishing I would have learned more about her throughout this film as well.

In summary, I can't say that I would recommend this film to everybody. It was slow and sometimes frustrating and if you don't have a particular interest in the subject of getting sober and the struggles that come with, you may very well consider this one a waste of time. However, if you were looking for a female role that exemplifies the term great performance, look no further.

The Year My Parents Went On Vacation Review

The year referred to in the title of this film is 1970. Brazil is being held by a totalitarian regime. The great soccer player, Pele has just scored his thousandth goal and the national team is preparing for the World Cup.

Mauro (Joelsas) is like any 12 year old Brazilian boy at the time. He thinks only of soccer and girls. Unfortunately for him, his political parents have to leave him with his Grandfather while they go "on vacation.

I can't really say anything bad about this film. It seemed interesting from the box and I had pretty high hopes for it. I am very pleased to report: it did not disappoint. The only challenge I had to get past was the fact that I am not particularly familiar with the history of the backdrop of this film and it doesn't do much to fill you in. I believe I made a similar comment about Summer Palace, but in the case of this film, you don't really need to know the history behind the struggle. I actually think it may have worked out better knowing less in this movie. Keep in mind, you are trying to empathize with a 12 year old that knows and cares nothing about politics.

I tend to make a comment about the cinematography of every film I review so why should this one be any different. It was actually shot beautifully. We never see the same camera angle twice throughout this movie. And, I really liked a lot of the angles that this was shot from. Many times we see what's happening from behind an obstruction of some sorts, giving the viewer almost a mischievous "peeking in" feeling.

The acting was very well done as well. The lead character, Mauro was played by Michel Joelsas. I wasn't sure about him at first, but by the end of the movie, he had convinced me. This performance was by far the most critical to the film. On several occasions, he gets his heart broken and the audience really needs to feel that with him for the film to be even remotely successful. I also really enjoyed the performance of Hanna, as played by Daniela Piepszyk. She was the street wise, neighborhood girl that befriends Mauro.

One of the themes that runs through the veins of this film is that of a community pulling together when someone is in need. This is another reason that it felt unnecessary to get into too much depth in regards to the politics of the conflict. Within that neighborhood, it just didn't seem to matter which philosophy you subscribed to, everyone was in the same boat and the compassion they showed the new Mauro took precedent over everything. Well, everything except soccer of course. I think the country's passion towards the sport was the one true common philosophy of Brazil.

My favorite aspect of this film was that although the underlying plot was heartbreaking, there were plenty of subtle comedic moments designed to break the tension and keep audience light hearted. I laughed out loud at one particular scene in which Mauro is being served breakfast by one of the old women in the building. He has to constantly reposition his plate and cup because she is apparently blind as a bat and is spilling everything onto her kitchen table.

This is the type of film that grows on you as you watch it. At first, I was only mildly interested but as I got deeper into it, I fell more and more in love with the characters. I would give this one my full recommendation.

Summer Palace Review

Summer Palace is the story that follows a beautiful and rebellious young Chinese woman, Yu Hon (Hao Lei) throughout almost a two decade period. Her story starts in a small town in 1988 where she receives word that has been accepted to Beijing University.

We follow her and the rest of modern China through the next twenty years of political and emotional unrest. We are subjected to her struggles with love, life individualism and sexuality.

To be honest, I really have no idea how to review this film. It had every mark of a classic dramatic masterpiece. But alas, I like masterpieces and I really couldn't get into this one. It seems that for every separate aspect of this movie that I liked, there was something else about it that was much less desirable. But the overall flow of the film was at best a bit slow and confusing. At worst, this movie was convoluted and repetitive. But I digress; maybe I just didn't get it.

This movie actually felt like two separate films. The first ended when she leaves the college, then we fast forward several years and pick up her life in a new city with a new job, new friends, but all of the same old tendencies. It was kind of a disappointment when I realized the new direction the film is steered in. This film switched gears shortly after the Tiananmen Square riot scene and I was just starting to become interested in what the film seemed to be trying to say about that extremely important period of Chinese history. I sort of felt as if this was intentional, in order to keep the story fully engulfed in Yu Hon's personal struggles. Unfortunately, at this point, I was starting to get excited at the prospects of this film using the period to illustrate a philosophical parallel of Yu Hon's individualism versus the collective oppression surrounding her. I honestly feel that this was an opportunity squandered. But again, I digress; I'll try to review the film for what it was and not what I wish it was.

The acting, especially in the case of Hao Lei, was quite exceptional. She actually had a tougher job than what may have been apparent. I think that just a bit less tumult and personal struggle would have made her character seem more like a slut than a complex individual struggling with love and sexuality. The supporting cast was just as convincing but there were simply too much of them attempting to be crucial parts of her story. She was the only one that really mattered in this film and I think it could have done itself a favor by eliminating some of the support and shortening the running time of this movie a bit.

The cinematography in this feature was simultaneously artistic and awkward. I don't think there was a steady cam shot in this entire movie. For some of the more intimate scenes, this worked very well, while at other times, the scene was just too shaky to get a good grasp on what was really going on. I'm not a big fan of disorientating the audience and many times this technique is used in a cheap ploy to cover up the lack of believable effects.

There was one portion of this movie that I found to be particularly spectacular. The score was nothing short of fantastic. The music behind the individual scenes did every other aspect a favor. It emphasized the dreary and dramatic in ways that no camera angles or teary eyes could have accomplished. I am probably the last person to notice a movie's score, unless it was completely out of place and bad or really, really good. This one was quite moving.

In summary, I would probably recommend this film purely on the basis that I finished it with an overwhelming feeling that I had missed something. I would watch it again in hopes of finding it, but at 140 minutes, I simply don't have the time to take another stab at something that I may not like even more the second time around.

Manda Bala (With A Bullet) Review

I was a bit unsure of this one. Although I have found myself being drawn into them once I start them, I have never gotten very excited about watching documentaries. They usually seem to be the type of film that you would see when an interest in that subject already exists. Oh well, I digress, it had all the makings of something I'd be interested in: fascinating synopsis, good cover art, frogs and subtitles.

First and foremost about this movie had to be the cinematography. This is not a trait you would necessarily associate with docs but this one just set the bar. The overall scenery was gorgeous, and some of the angles they used with the high speed camera, especially at the frog farm, peaked my interest. I also liked the ear replacement scene in the dimmed operating room.

I liked the music selection as well. I did think the sound editing was a little confused. It seemed that parts had the background music so loud that you couldn't really hear the interviews. Of course, I don't speak Portuguese anyway so I'm not sure exactly what I'm complaining about.

This movie also has a bit of footage from ransom tapes that are mixed in. As the film progresses, this clips continue to get more and more graphic. It actually is a little surprising that the director chose to put some of the more gut-wrenching scenes in because it comes up so gradually. I didn't find this to be overly sensationalistic and if you are squeamish, you have plenty of time to close your eyes.

The problem I had with this documentary was that for the vast majority of it, I wasn't sure of its thesis. I believe that the filmmaker (Kohn) was attempting to make a dramatic philosophical point, but it ultimately became clouded by the many different directions the rest of the film takes you. I think that what he was trying to say was that, if S.U.D.A.M. (a government program designed to re-distribute wealth to poorer regions) would have not been taken over by corruption and greed, Sao Paulo would be a dramatically different place. This may very well hold to be true, but didn't we also learn that the same politicians who are corrupted by greed are staying in power by buying the vast majority of their votes with more social welfare programs in the slums?

I also was unsure about the message behind the part about the violent nature in which Portugal took over Brazil. Was his attempt to say that this type of behavior is so embedded into the culture of Brazil that the country's future is doomed by its history?

After seeing all of the different industries that exist in Sao Paolo as a result of the kidnappings, I couldn't help but to ask myself: How many residents would be out of work if the region became more secure. If people stopped bulletproofing their cars, hiring bodyguards, replacing their ears, taking helicopters to work, putting microchips in their body and taking advanced defensive driving courses, what would happen to that part of the economy? And more importantly, will we ever find out?

Regardless of anything I didn't like about the movie, I would still have to recommend it. It was everything that you should want in a documentary. It was gripping from the opening scene and it keeps you absorbed with it right up until the closing credits. Any documentary should aspire to do what this one did, it pulled my interest into a subject that previously, I had none in.

13 Tzameti Review

This is the short story of Sebastian, (George Babluani) a 22 year old roofer who finds himself down on his luck when his mysterious employer suddenly overdoses and dies before he receives payment for his services. Times are hard for Sebastian, so when he happens upon an envelope with a train ticket and a paid hotel room in Paris for a seemingly lucrative job opportunity meant for the recently departed, he decides to follow the lead himself.

He soon finds out that he may have bitten off more than he could swallow. As soon as he arrives, he is strip search and locked in a room awaiting his "sponsors". The decision of whether or not he would like to participate is soon made for him. He will not be at liberty to leave until his task is complete, that is........if he survives.

I was very interested to see this film when I found out what the plot was about. Unfortunately, I feel very strongly that I would have enjoyed this film much more if I knew nothing about it. This is the reason that I left the synopsis as bare as I did. That being said, this movie was far from ruined for me. I enjoyed it a great deal, for many reasons more than just an intriguing plot. My only hint will be that it reminded me of a Spanish film I saw a few years ago called "Intacto".

The first thing I loved about this movie was the cinematography. It was shot in black and white, which did well to convey the darkness of the overall subject matter. Many of the shots were reflections, where the subject is shown in the reflection of a mirror or a window. I have always like these shots and the film maker did a great job fitting them in with fluency. There were also many shots in which only the subject was in focus, and a large portion of the screen was out of focus. This not only draws more attention to the subject but it adds to the feelings of confusion and disorientation that Sebastian was feeling. These techniques shot in black and white gives the audience a visually stunning view of this picture.

I found the acting to be very good, especially with respect to George Babluani, who I believe is the brother of the director, Gela Babluani. All other supporting cast members brought their talent to the table in this film as well.

The only real downfall of this film is the amount of time it takes to for the real story to begin, although I don't know if it could have been shortened in the beginning without losing parts of the story. When Sebastian does arrives to his destination, the pace quickly speeds up. It may just take a slightly more patient viewer to get that far.

Everyone who has read my reviews knows that I tend to be more partial to foreign films with unusual plots and I am a big sucker for great camera work. If you share my enthusiasm for either or both, I would highly recommend this film. Anyone else that would just like to see a good suspense thriller can enjoy this film just the same.

Double feature of the week: One Crazy Night (A Tom Noonan Extravaganza)

This week’s double feature is kind of like a double double feature. No, it’s not a quadruple feature. There are only two movies…. But they’re both connected in two separate ways. First off, they both tell the story of a single night. This is actually something you find somewhat often in cinema, especially in the horror genre. Both Spanish horror films, “REC” and “REC 2” take place in the same night. And Romero’s classic, “Night of the Living Dead” is a simple story of one hellish night. There is definitely something to be said for a story that can establish, develop and complete a character arc over the course of twelve or so hours. Some comedies have had success in this as well: “Dazed and Confused”, “Superbad” and “Harold and Kumar Go To White Castle” to name a few.

The other way that these two films are connected is by a common actor. Both of these films contain the stylings of a performer that I’ve grown to enjoy more and more over the years. His name is Tom Noonan and I think he’s about twelve feet tall. You may know him as the Francis Dollarhyde (The Tooth Fairy killer) in Michael Mann’s “Manhunter”. Or you may know him as Frankenstein’s monster in Fred Dekker’s “Monster Squad”… or maybe even as Cain in “Robocop 2”. Either way, he’s one of those guys… with one of those faces…. And those guys never get enough credit.

The first feature this week is Jim Jarmusch’s “Mystery Train” (1989). This film tells three separate stories from beginning to end, one at a time, all revolving around a Memphis hotel and the spirit of Elvis. Musical greats, Scremin’ Jay Hawkins, Joe Strummer and Tom Waits all have parts in this film. Steve Buscemi, Cinqué Lee (brother of Spike Lee), Nicoletta Braschi and the adorable Yuoki Kudoh also have parts. Tom Noonan shows up for a small but pivotal part in the “Ghost” segment of this film. “Mystery Train” is a fantastic film and one of my favorites from Jarmusch’s filmography. He does a great job of making three small intertwining stories come together as an homage to the home of Sun Studios, Graceland, Carl Perkins and Elvis Presley.

Our next film this week is writer/director Ti West’s horror throwback “The House of the Devil” (2009). Mr. Noonan plays a much larger role in this one. I suspect that the part was actually written for him. The film is about a young college student who is hired for the night to babysit for an elderly couple on the night of a lunar eclipse. She spends the first part of the film dancing around to her walkman, watching TV and eating pizza. Soon she begins to suspect something is very wrong in the house. I would say that one of the true stars of this film actually is the location and how it was shot. This house makes the perfect creepy spot for an 80’s splatter film to take place. You spend about the first half of the movie just wandering around, opening doors and exploring the layout. I’ve actually heard a lot of complaints about this. Some say that this film just takes too long to get going. I disagree. I think the long build up is perfect. It’s shot on 16mm and the costumes and props make this film a very authentic look at the early 80’s. No cell phones or ipods, I even noticed the old style twenty dollar bill that she uses to pay for the pizza. This film even brings Mary Woronov out of retirement and has a cameo by Dee Wallace. I dig this movie a lot. It’s rare to find a slow burn horror film nowadays and this one comes together geniously.

Enjoy.

Double feature of the week: Post Apocalyptic Funtime II

So, here we go. It’s my first double feature sequel. I did the first ‘Post Apocalyptic Funtime’ back in April. I liked it so much; I decided to do it again. As I said before, a post-apocalyptic world is a backdrop that I will always be interested in. The story being told very often takes a back seat to the world it exists in. It could be a heartfelt drama, fantastical sci-fi or undead horror. I’ll be into it either way. What I tend to be most interested in are things such as set and costume design. If the story takes place 20 years after the apocalypse, does the present world look as though it’s been lived in for the past 20 years? Likewise, if the apocalypse was more recent, do you still see traces of modern technology and architecture?

This week’s first feature comes to us from one of the most critically acclaimed directors of all time. His acclaim comes for good reason. Andrey Tarkovsky’s “Stalker” (1979) is about a man, a ‘stalker’, who’s mental gifts enable him to lead people into the Zone, a restricted area that contains a room that your most secret desires will come true. We follow him as he guides an alcoholic, washed up writer and a quiet scientist searching for answers. This film takes it’s time to say the least. It clocks in at 163 minutes, many of which are spent watching long shots of scenery and people doing next to nothing. It’s a very patient film and requires a very patient audience. But for those of you willing to take the journey, Tarkovsky delivers one of the most beautiful pieces of cinema ever created…… again.

And in this corner…. Our next film is a little less critically acclaimed. Donald G. Jackson and R.J. Kizer directed “Hell Comes To Frogtown” (1987) starring “Rowdy” Roddy Piper as the titular Sam Hell. Sam is one of the very last fertile men in the nuclear wasteland the world has become. So, as one would guess, he is kidnapped by a group of beautiful women in an attempt to repopulate the Earth. It’s kinda like that game you and your cousin used to play in your Dad’s makeshift bomb shelter (a.k.a. root cellar). Only this time, the mutants are already here and not the result of inbreeding. Before he can spread his seed, Sam must rescue the fertile women from the grips of the gigantic mutant frog like things that now rule the world.

This film came out a year before Roddy Piper would star in John Carpenter’s classic Book of Mormon adaptation, “They Live” as an unemployed loser who finds a pair of magic glasses that allow him to see the world as it truly is. Unfortunately, the Academy wasn’t quite ready to award a man that jumps from the top ropes wearing a skirt….. If they only would have written his character a little more autistic….

Enjoy.

Double feature of the week: A Nasty Case of Stockholm Syndrome!

This should be a good topic. Even beloved animated features about a young woman falling in love with her captor (instinctual defense mechanism to avoid the bi-polar rage of a dangerous monster) have explored this topic. Beast did such a good job of crippling Belle with fear that she eventually took even the smallest pleasantry (like not killing her) as a grand romantic gesture.

We’ll kick this week of with a great performance from Terence Stamp in William Wyler’s “The Collector” (1965). In this film, Stamp plays a socially awkward bank teller whose hobbies include: nature walks, dousing rags with chloroform, collecting butterflies and locking beautiful art students in his basement/dungeon. Ok, so his collection of art students isn’t very extensive… he actually only has one, but she’s pretty special. The Stockholm Syndrome doesn’t take right away though. Sometimes she has to fake her affection at first. But as the film progresses, tension and melodrama seem to constantly take turns in the driver’s seat.

The second film of our double feature has, over the years, become one of my favorites. It also did wonders to reaffirm my crush on Christina Ricci. Vincent Gallo writes, directs and stars in “Buffalo ‘66” (1998). Gallo plays Billy Brown a man fresh out of prison in upstate New York. He does what most of us would do right after a five year lockup. He kidnaps a ballerina (Ricci), makes her pose as his wife and sets out to find and kill the Buffalo Bills placekicker that he blames for ruining his life. The plot is far from the only thing about this film that is unique. His technique of shooting this film seems as though he went to film school simply to learn which rules to break. Most notably, he has absolutely no regard for the 180 degrees rule. As a result, some of the scenes are confusing and disorienting. The end result of this film as a whole however shows how much fun you can have when an original story is told by a visionary storyteller.

Enjoy bitches....

Double feature of the week: Stranger in a Strange Land

The stranger’s story has been a staple for westerns for a long time. Films like “Shane” (1953) and “The Ox-Bow Incident” (1943) have used this trope very well. Clint Eastwood made a career out of playing this character and this year’s “Rango” has done it better than I would have ever expected from an animated feature about a lizard. But this type of character is not limited to the Wild West. So, this double feature is include a couple films that show that while the time a place change, some things stay the same.

The first film to check out is a classic among classics. That is to say that it is one of the greatest films from one of the absolute greatest filmmakers of all time. Akira Kurosawa’s “Yojimbo” (1961) is about wandering masterless samurai, Sanjuro Kuwabatake (Toshiro Mifune). He finds himself in a small town ripped apart by two warring factions. Being the savvy business samurai he is, he decides it would best serve himself to scam each side into hiring him as protection against the other. Spaghetti western fans will probably find this plot pretty familiar. That’s because it is the basis for Sergio Leone’s “Fistful of Dollars” (1964). It was so similar in fact that the “Yojimbo” producers filed for and won a lawsuit because of those similarities.

Next up we have a much newer film that I’m sure will someday be seen as a classic in its own right. Jason Eisener’s “Hobo With A Shotgun” (2011) stars Rutger Hauer as the titular character who rides into a new town on the railroad, only to find that it is disgustingly overrun with criminal activity. Aghast by the state of the world he has found himself in, he does what any Good Samaritan would do. He befriends a local prostitute, buys a shotgun at the nearest pawn shop and begins the very delicate process of cleansing the criminal element from streets he calls home. This movie is a hell of a lot of fun. It comes complete with copious amounts of gore, cartoonish violence and characters and a monologue that can’t help but bring a tear to your eye.

Enjoy.