Monday, February 11, 2013

The Sting (1973)

There is a whole sub-genre of movies about crime.  Audiences simply love to watch films about heists, fraud, corporate spying, drugs, gangs, and the mob.  As wildly popular as the genre is today it is nothing new.  In fact, some of the more popular films of this type in recent years -Ocean's Eleven and The Italian Job -are both remakes of films from the 60's.

The ultimate crime drama is 1973's The Sting.  This is the story of a couple of grifters, played by Paul Newman and Robert Redford, trying to get back at a mob boss for the murder of a friend.  They do it in the best way they know how: they try to con him in a confidence racket.

Nothing about The Sting is sub-par.  But there are standout amazing aspects.  The writing is spectacular.  Great care was put into making these guys actually speak like con men from the 1930's.  Lines abound with slang terminology like "These guys must be the quill!" that are quite unfamiliar to modern audiences, yet context always allows us to understand what is meant.  Listening to what is said transports us back in time.  And all that's before we even consider the plot, which is great and well thought out.  There even are aspects of the plot that seem like plot holes, yet upon reflection make sense.

The music is marvelous.  The score for The Sting is among my favorites of all time.  Marvin Hamlisch gets credit for adapting the score, which he borrowed almost entirely from Scott Joplin piano rags.  The result is a musical experience; we see the world of the 30's, while at the same time hearing that world's music.

The art department did a great job as well; everything from matte paintings to sets to the costumes and props looks authentic and genuine.  The life and world of a Chicago grifter comes to life in a way that may never be seen again.

The acting is great -Redford and Newman are having a jolly good time, and Robert Shaw has one of his most memorable parts.  The pacing is wonderful, with the film broken up into segments such as "the set up," "the tale," and "the sting."  The direction good, the editing fine, the ending sublime.

This is one of those films where the good guys are not that good, but you cheer for them anyway when they come out on top.

Entertainment: 9/10
Artistic Value: 7/10
Technical Merit: 8/10

Overall: 8/10

P.S. Music: 10/10!!!

Saturday, February 9, 2013

The Best Trains of Alfred Hitchcock

Alfred Hitchcock and trains go together like Michelangelo and a marble slab.  Trains are for Hitchcock a medium and a metaphor, a plot element and a character at the same time.  He used trains in his films in amazingly memorable ways, and he uses them with remarkable frequency.  In fact, if you randomly choose to watch a Hitchcock film tonight, chances are it will feature at least one train.  This post is a celebration of some of his best uses of this romantic, bygone method of transportation.  There are other trains in Hitchcock films, but these are my favorites.


Suspicion (1941)
Perhaps not the best on this list, Suspicion has nonetheless a place in my heart.  It's a story of two very different people who meet, fall in love, marry, and then go through the hard times that come when you don't communicate very well prior to marriage.  For example: should the man work?  How should money be spent?  Should you sell off family heirlooms to pay gambling debts?  Is he trying to kill me?  You know, questions all married couples ask.

But it all begins on a train.  Here, in close quarters, our lovable characters are introduced to each other in intimate ways that only a train can force.  And it sets the tone of the film.  He's the cad, helping himself to money that isn't his ("legal tender my good man, legal tender.") and she's the shy one, going along with it.


Strangers on a Train (1951)

You knew this one had to be on the list.  After all, it's the only Hitchcock with the word "train" actually in the title!

Unfortunately, the train itself is not as memorable as what happens on the train.  Just like anyone, you probably speak with those you randomly meet in places where you are stuck together for a bit.  I mean, it's only polite to have a conversation with the guy next to you on a plane, or someone riding with you on the elevator, right?  So when Guy talks for a while with Bruno, we think nothing of it.  It's normal -we're together a few hours, let's chat.

And chat they do, as the countryside rolls by.  They chat about normal everyday stuff.  Like the perfect way to exchange murders.  Only one of them doesn't think it's a joke...so when the train ride is over, the consequences still follow.

Perhaps you'll think twice before chatting again with a stranger on a train.


The 39 Steps (1935)
Escaping from London, Richard Hannay must get to Scotland to pursue the only lead he has that can prove his innocence.  So he boards the "Flying Scotsman," the famous express train.  There he learns of the police manhunt chasing him, and to elude them he breaks into a private compartment, passionately kissing the girl he finds there (after all, no policeman would ever break up such an embrace to look for a fugitive, right?).  He then doubles back, pulls the emergency cord, and jumps off the train as it comes to a bridge.  It's thrilling, it's fun, and it is classic.  Wonderful use of trains to inspire that claustrophobic feeling of "nowhere to go, even though we are going somewhere."


Shadow of a Doubt (1943)
Hitchcock always called this one his favorite film.  So he put two train scenes in it.  The first is great, with the fugitive from justice hiding out as though sick, while others ask questions and play spades.  And by the way, that's Hitchcock with the flush.  Then when the train comes to a stop in the sleepy town, Uncle Charlie hobbles out, looking infirm, then makes a miraculous recovery.  He's arrived, and nothing will be the same.

The second scene is the more memorable though, as it comes at the film's climax.  Uncle Charlie is leaving, the family is seeing him off.  He manages to delay young Charlie, they go to the space between the cars, the door is open.  Then the shoving starts...




Uncle Charlie wanted to see the train.







North by Northwest (1959)
Carey Grant and Eva Marie Saint share a moment over a meal on the train.

I love North By Northwest.  It is fun, action packed, exciting, humorous, witty, lively, and a host of other pleasant adjectives.  It is the most perfect of all Hitchcock's movies about mistaken identity, with a good guy on the run accused of being the bad guy.  To prove his innocence, Roger Thornhill must get from New York to Chicago.  

So he takes the train.  Without a ticket.  With cops dogging his every move.  And with a mysterious blonde suddenly quite interested in his well-being.  Cat-and-mouse, intrigue, romance, and some of Hitchcock's most daring dialogue follow.  What's the best form of travel?  Well, in North By Northwest the answer is most definitely train.

It even ends on the train, with Thornhill and his new wife becoming better acquainted while the train rolls on. The train has almost become a character in the film, and most certainly is a metaphor.


The Lady Vanishes (1938)
Almost the whole of The Lady Vanishes takes place on a train.  It provides the central mystery: where could Miss Froy have gone, given that we are in a confined space on this train?  She is nowhere to be found?  The Lady Vanishes has everything good that a movie can possibly mine from trains: the claustrophobia, the false intimacy of being put in close proximity with strangers, the feeling of movement, the class distinctions between those traveling first class and those in third, and so much more.  At various times the train in The Lady Vanishes symbolizes freedom and confinement.  It represents the dangerous world, while England and home at the same time.  There are friends to be made, but enemies at hand.  We travel the way to safety, but never have been more in danger.  Our characters move through the compartments and on the outside of the train, exploring nearly every inch of it.

This train, above all others, is the greatest in Hitchcock history.  It is setting, plot, theme, symbol, character, hope, and danger all rolled into one.  Those who ride these rails will not emerge the same on the other side.

Sunday, February 3, 2013

The Amazing Spider-Man (2012)

Not Amazing.  There are many fine reasons that this version of Spider-Man should not have been made.  First, it's only been 10 years since the first Sam Raimi movie, and five since the third sequel.  It's just not been enough time for a reboot.  Second, the Raimi Spider-Man movies were great, with the exception of #3, which was a horror and pathetic disaster that covers Sam Raimi in perpetual shame.  So there was no need for a reboot, since people were happy with the first two and did not need a massive change.  A fourth sequel would have been fine (one that ignored the very existence of #3, because Spider-Man 3 was a failure and disgrace).  Third, there was just no compelling internal reason to make The Amazing Spider-Man.  By that I mean there have been no massive advances in technology that helps tell the story, no fantastic plot ideas that justify a reboot, no phenomenal actors just begging to be included, nothing fresh, nothing new.

Everything simply feels very "been there, done that."  There's the same "mentor injects self with formula that turns him bad" plot element from the first Spider-Man.  There's the "if you can do good you should" speech from Uncle Ben.  There's the genetically modified spiders.  Even the bad guy's evil plot is basically the same as Magneto's in the first X-Men!

The movie just plain fails on many levels.  It is quite frankly boring for the first 30-40 minutes.  It isn't particularly well-acted, with Andrew Garfield being the prime failure.  If the director wanted us to believe that Peter Parker was awkward by having Garfield stammer incessantly, then ok.  But he should not have then made him into a skateboarding, stand up for the real geeks non-geek.  And can anyone tell me why Gwen had to be daughter of the chief of police AND the intern for Dr. Connors?  Seem like an incredible coincidence to anybody else?

What else to say?  The special effects were sub-par for a movie of this caliber.  The action only so-so, and precious little of it.  The cornball cheesy moments over the top.  The first Spider-Man was better in almost every way; more fun, more memorable, better acted, better directed, and better received.

Entertainment: 4/10
Artistic Value: 4/10
Technical Merit: 6/10

Overall: 4/10

Monday, January 28, 2013

The Rock (1996)

The Rock does have a plot.  Y'see, there's this general who thinks his men have been treated badly, so he takes over Alcatraz and holds San Francisco hostage with chemical weapons.  The only hope we have is a guy who's been in prison for decades and some geek who...

Oh forget it.  The plot is absurd.  But who cares?  This isn't a fine drama or a believable character study.  This movie exists for one purpose: loud, high-speed action and explosions.  The Rock thus is the penultimate '90's action film.

It was directed by Michael Bay.  This would usually be a loud, obnoxious point against the film.  However, this is one of the two or three films that Bay's done that actually works.  It works for several reasons: it doesn't take itself too seriously, the actors are of fine quality (excepting Nicholas Cage), and the screenplay is phenomenal.  The script is full of wit and humor, with one-liners and zingers that help keep the movie feeling light and fun, while at the same time keeping it out of the realm of camp.  (for example, when told there is a "situation" that Mason -Sean Connery's character -might help with, he replies, "And what might that be?  I've been in jail longer than Nelson Mandela, so maybe you want me to run for President.")  I must warn you though; this movie has quite a bit of the "colorful" language.

Sean Connery carries the film, basically reprising his role as James Bond (a much older, much more foul-mouthed Bond).  Nicholas Cage is his usual, "shouldn't be working as an actor" self, but he does seem to be having fun.  And Ed Harris is a great conflicted bad guy/good guy, trying desperately to achieve his good ends through bad means without losing control of the situation.

But of course the real star is the action.  And there is lots of it.  There's the unforgettable Hummer vs Ferrari chase through the streets of San Francisco, and the many shootouts and explosions on Alcatraz itself.  It's all done well, and makes for a very exciting, very fun flick.

So ignore the plot holes.  Ignore Nicholas Cage.  Disregard the cheesy moments or the over-the-top and unbelievable elements.  Just enjoy The Rock.

Entertainment: 9/10
Artistic Value: 2/10
Technical Merit: 6/10

Overall: 6/10

P.S. Content warning: lots of death, mayhem, and violence.  Grizzly deaths abound, and strong language ensues.

Saturday, January 26, 2013

An American in Paris (1951)

For clarity's sake, I'm allowed to like both Alien and An American in Paris.  Both are fantastic at what they do.  They just do very different things.  One scares the daylights out of you, the other will invariably make you smile anytime.

Gene Kelly was at the peak of his game with An American in Paris.  He's witty, charming, bombastic, free-spirited, and contagiously happy.  He's after one girl, while another girl is after him.  The girl he wants is the fiancee of a friend, while the girl who wants him happens to be his patron (he's an artist).

But the movie isn't about the plot.  This movie works because of three things: 1) The music is entirely Gershwin, and the use of his music is inspired.  2) The dancing, especially during the ballet piece, which is by far the best dancing sequence ever put on film.  3) Gene Kelly.  Honestly, I'd watch Gene Kelly work in anything, even in his garden.  I know that sounds all stalker-ish, and I'm willing to accept such accusations.  Kelly simply was a master on film.  He knew how to act, how to sing, and how to dance -the Hollywood triple threat.  And he does all three with a seemingly effortless precision; I say "seemingly," because I know that he worked dog hard and was a notorious perfectionist.

An American in Paris is the feel-good, happy, all-singing, all-dancing great film that won Best Picture.  Watch it.  's wonderful. 's marvelous.

Entertainment:  6/10
Artistic Value:  6/10
Technical Merit: 8/10

Overall: 7/10

Tuesday, January 22, 2013

The Departed (2006)

Never have I disagreed more with the Academy than when The Departed won four Oscars.  Truth be told, 2006 was not a very fabulous year for really fantastic film (there were a few, but not many).  However, none of the best films of that year were even nominated for Best Picture.  So instead of something good winning, we got The Departed instead.

Ok, to be fair it wasn't bad.  In fact, as a movie it worked on many levels.  It was fun to see such a great cast working together, and the last little bit at the end with Mark Wahlberg made the whole film worthwhile.  But the errors started piling up, from writing shortcomings to massive continuity goofs.  The sheer amount of filthy language (including every possible racial slur) and intense violence is enough to put anyone off.  To be honest, some things were so bad (perhaps "lazy" is a better word) in the technical aspects of the movie that the awards for best editing and direction completely baffled me.  "Oscar," I started to think, "must be in on the take."

The 79th Academy Awards was such a joke, and the punchline was The Departed.  So many better movies were available: Pan's Labyrinth, The Prestige, Cars, and Blood Diamond all come to mind (ok, so I'd have been just as upset at a Blood Diamond win, but hey, it WAS a better movie than The Departed.).

Bottom line: Not a bad movie, but should never have been Best Picture of any year.

Entertainment: 5/10
Artistic Value: 6/10
Technical Merit: 4/10

Overall: 5/10

Monday, January 21, 2013

Hoosiers (1986)

This little gem starring Gene Hackman is hands down the best basketball film ever, and perhaps the best sports film ever.  Also, it has fantabulous '80's synthesized music.

About an underdog tiny high school basketball team in Indiana that makes it to the State Finals, Hoosiers is everything you could hope from a sports film.  The actors clearly know the sport and actually play it, so nothing looks "wrong."  You care about the characters, and each is developed in individual ways.  Plus, the film does a great job exploring both small town politics and how a sport can become so important to people that it overwhelms tiny, insignificant things like truth and justice.

Hackman brings his usual firebrand style of acting, and it fits his character perfectly.  He has many great lines, and forms the heart of the film.  As Hackman shines, so also does Hoosiers.  But unfortunately, we also see why Hackman plays so few romantic roles in film.  His kissing scene is painful in a "slobber all over her" kind of way.  The other standout is of course Dennis Hopper, who plays the town drunk who is given a second chance.

Hoosiers has heart.  It's often overlooked, but hey, Goliath might have overlooked David too.

Entertainment: 8/10
Artistic Value: 7/10
Technical Merit: 6/10 (loses a whole point for the music!)

Overall: 7/10

P.S.  As a sports movie, and not compared to other films outside the genre, Hoosiers might score a 9/10.