Sunday was a double dose of Paul Verhoeven satire and action. The first movie was the perfection that is "Robocop". I don't know if I can count the number of times I have seen this film. I do know that I have seen it at least a half dozen times on the big screen, including a 2023 screening right here at the Paramount Theater. Quentin Tarantino apparently agrees with me that the script is perfect. What is also perfect are the performances from the main actors in the film. Dr. Peter Weller fully commits to the persona of the cyborg, but only after charming us as the eager to please Dad and new partner.
Kirkwood Smith, sneers his way thru the movie as the repulsive Clarence Boddicker, the crime boss of old Detroit. Although they don't all get as much time to display their horrendous sides to us, the four toadies that make up his crew are equally loathsome, with special emphasis on Paul McCrane as Emil, the one bad guy who gets a deservingly nasty end to his story.
I have always loved stop motion animation when it is integrated into real life surroundings. Ray Harryhausen was a cinema hero to me. Phil Tippet and his crew do a great job with ED-209, with little touches everywhere that add to the humor and tension of the film.
Robert Rodriguez Presented both films and his opening remarks are in the message above.
Starship Troopers came out a decade after "Robocop" but it contained a lot of the same bitter satire that the earlier movie did. The hostility to fascism is clear, but of course it is largely missed because we get engaged in Johnny Rico's story and we can admire his mentors in spite of their authoritarian tendencies. Michael Ironside and Clancy Brown are terrific as the older generation, trying to mold the youth of this world into soldiers and subsequently citizens. It also doesn't help the anti-fascist theme to have Rico's parents be a couple of mealy mouthed characters that today might be revered to as woke.
The Special Effects in the film were pretty impressive for 1997. The vast numbers of bugs that the Mobile Infantry has to face is intimidating. Anyone who has dealt with an ant infestation will recognize how much we are outnumbered. In this world however, the bugs are not small and you can't just stomp on them.
Our host is friends with the star of the film and got him on the phone when it was time to go to the second movie.
You already know a few of my favorite things, so I will spare you my singing about them and instead praise Julie Andrews for singing about a few of her favorite things. The Sound of Music is one of those films that inspires both love and derision from film aficionados. Cynics object to the sugary take on the Von Trapp family story. They would say the children are too upbeat, the songs are treacle, and the pretty people facing Nazis is a misuse of History. I'm cynical about a lot of things, but "The Sound of Music" isn't one of them. This is just a joyful experience with Sweet Moments, terrific staging, and some of the best songs of the 20th century.
The movie is a love story, but it is not just a story about a love between a man and a woman. Christopher Plummer and Julie Andrews portray the adults who fall in love in perilous times and difficult circumstances. There are however still seven children who also need to fall in love, at first with a governess and finally a new mother. The way in which Maria wins over all of the children, by exhibiting more patience than is imaginable, and singing about their very needs, makes for a great story. Don't forget it's also a story about people who love their country, and see it being torn apart by the events of the day. I can understand if you don't like "The Sound of Music" because you don't care for musicals, or if Julie Andrews just isn't your cup of tea, but if you don't like this movie because of the themes or the story( which for the most part is true), then you are missing the point. And I feel sorry for you because you're going to lead a less fulfilling life.
The exuberance of some of the dancing sequences, which really aren't about dancing at all but just about children playing at being adults, is part of the fun. The world is full of people who don't like it when kids appear in movies, they should probably stay away from this as if it were the plague. I on the other hand am perfectly content to try to remember the names of each of the children, like Maria does when she says her prayers. By the way, I didn't forget Kurt.
The synchronization between the helicopter shot and the introduction of Maria on the hillside is a miracle a filmmaking at the time. Today it would be accomplished with drones and computer adjusted shots. Yet it wouldn't be any better. A lot of sequences go on for a while, without the heavy editing of a director who is trying to hard to show off. Robert Wise knows exactly what he is doing when telling this story. It may have moments of suspense in the Final Act, but it is not a thriller that requires Quick Cuts and close-ups of sweaty faces. This is a character piece with music, something that Wise has already shown he can handle.
Once again I cannot recommend highly enough seeing a film like this on the big screen with a receptive audience. This was one of the family films for the Paramount classic summer film series, and there were plenty of families there to experience this film on its 60th anniversary. The world is a better place for it.
One of the great masterpieces of Cinema played on the Paramount screen last Wednesday, and once again I was there to appreciate it. What I was really flabbergasted by though, was the fact that so many people in the audience were seeing "Psycho" for the first time. Our host, the programmer of the Paramount Classic Summer Film Series, asked for a show of hands for people who had never seen "Psycho". It was hard to believe that almost a third of the audience in attendance that night raised their hands.
The rest of us, who are seeing "Psycho" for the umpteenth time, waited in glee for the many twists and turns that take place during the story. In the long prologue to the violence, Marion Cranes transaction with the used car dealer got a lot of laughs, but you could also sense a great deal of tension in the audience. In fact the laughter that came from the audience almost certainly was generated by people who had seen the movie before and knew the irony of a particular statement, we're waiting for the turn that comes very quickly.
Once again I think the best scene in the movie takes place in the parlor as Norman Bates tries to relate to Marion, but marks himself as a strange fellow with every sentence he utters. We can still empathize with Norman at that moment, because of the brilliance of Anthony Perkins performance. We can also see the moment of redemption when Marion decides to face her mistakes and return to Phoenix and try and clear up the horrible decision she had made. This is the moment where the movie turns from being a mere thriller to a tragedy, and the two actors in the scene are both brilliant in the way they play their parts.
It must be nearly impossible in modern culture to be on the outside of the big twist in Psycho. 25 years ago I tried to keep my kids from knowing about Norman Bates and his mother, until they had a chance to see the film for themselves. Social media, YouTube, endless memes, all results in fewer surprises for film audiences. That's too bad. One of my friends on the Lambcast refuses to watch trailers for films, and I completely understand her perspective. I just wish trailers didn't give so much away. But I still need to have some sense of what a film is about if I'm going to decide to watch it. I think we could use more trailers like the one above, famous for Alfred Hitchcock walking us through the set of his movie.
Anytime you can watch "Psycho" from beginning to end, you should take advantage of it. Anytime you can see it with an audience in a real theater, the real crime would be skipping it.
A lot of people when asked what it is the best shark movie after Jaws, might choose Deep Blue Sea. I saw DBS a week or two ago and was once again impressed with how much fun the movie is. Genetically altered sharks, hunting humans, in the middle of a natural disaster, is obviously a lot of fun. The story is filled with mayhem related to the cumulative destruction of the Marine Research Center where the sharks are housed. As entertaining as this film is however, I must say that it pales in comparison in regard to tension, anxiety, and reality, to the shallows.
This is practically a one-woman show, as Blake Lively plays a surfer, confronting a shark in a shallow bay, somewhere on the Mexican Coast. The setup for the film is very strong, there's a reason that nobody will miss her for a night, and there's a reason that the shark lingers in the area, which doesn't require it to have any particular emotional Arc that it is following. Unlike Jaws the Revenge, it's not really personal it's instinct.
Our protagonist is Nancy, a medical student who is uncertain that she wants to continue and become a doctor. She's retracing the steps of her deceased mother, to locate an isolated beach in a bay that was her mother's favorite place. She caught a ride with a local, while her traveling companion has been rendered incapable of going with her by inebriation and infatuation with man that she met near their hotel. So Nancy is on her own except for a couple of other surfers with whom she shares the secret of the perfect waves in this idyllic location.
The shark who becomes her nemesis, is there feasting on a whale that it has killed and which is floating into the bay. Perhaps even more harrowing than the shark, which is a consistent threat, is the shallow reef and rock formations, which have rendered Nancy injured, bleeding, and trapped on. After an initial attack, Nancy looks for refuge as she tries to figure out how to reach the shore while the shark doggedly pursues her and lingers in the area attracted by both the whale and her blood in the water.
The film builds a lot of tension, as others enter into this scenario, unaware of the danger that faces them as they interact with Nancy from her perch on a rock outcropping. Actually, Nancy has had three locations from which she tries to stay away from the shark. The first is on the floating dead whale, but as that is like seeking sanctuary on a a dinner plate, that location is not secure for long. The high and low tides exposed part of the reef and shallow rock bottom, at least enough to give Nancy a safe spot to contemplate her woes. Her injuries are significant, including a bite wound that threatens to leach the life away from her. It is convenient that as a budding physician, Nancy understands how to apply a tourniquet and create a pressure bandage out of part of her wetsuit. The Third location that she seeks protection on is it nearby buoy, which becomes her final refuge in the extended confrontation with the shark.
They are desperate attempts to acquire materials that will help her in her fight, some of which work and some of which fail. Her hopes are raised by the arrival of others on the beach, but those hopes are often dashed by the motives of the beachcombers, or by the actions of the shark. As horrifying as a shark bite would be, the moments that caused me physical pain watching the film came from seeing her tumble on the rocks or crawl across the poisonous coral. There's also a painful interlude with jellyfish, all of which will give you plenty of reason to cringe in your seat.
Most shark movies have some goofy element to them , or a human conflict in the background. "The Shallows" takes an experience that is very serious, and treats it in a way that makes you share the pain and frustration of our protagonist. The only thing that might make this movie feel a little artificial, is the climax and the resolution with the shark. It is dramatically solid, although a little improbable. In the end though none of it matters because we've spent two hours living an incident completely through our senses, and hope never to have to share.
I could have sworn I'd written about this film before, but as I looked for any version of a review on the site I came up empty. It must simply be that I've talked about it with other people on a regular basis and so I thought I had actually written something about the movie. There are a couple reasons why this feels somewhat personal, but it has nothing to do with my drug use or participation in the adult film industry. Many of the reasons that I identify with this film have to do with the time and setting of the movie, which in some ways do parallel my own life.
The house that Eddie, our main character, lives in with his parents, before he becomes Dirk Diggler, is in Torrance California and it looks exactly like the home of my college debate partner who lived in Torrance. The interior layout and the exterior Frontage might very well have been filmed in his neighborhood. In 1981, which would be in the middle of the time that this film is set, I had a summer job making deliveries of photographic supplies to a variety of businesses, and one of my routes consisted of the San Fernando Valley. Famously, this was the home of the pornography industry at the time, much like it's depicted in the film. Some of the locations that I made deliveries to were in fact producing magazines that were largely pornographic. So I have a tangential connection to what was going on. The one element of the film however that most closely connects me to the story, is maybe the most compelling scene in the film, the drug deal that goes wrong. One of my closest friends in college took a wrong turn and ended up working as a low-level drug dealer, in the valley. By the time he was doing this I only saw him occasionally for lunch or to talk to on the phone just to check in. I was not immersed in his lifestyle, except that there was one experience when we met for lunch and I drove him to a location where he was making drop off of his supplies. It was one of the most uncomfortable experiences I ever had with him. A year later he was murdered by his partners in the drug business. So although the experience is not exactly the same I can certainly share the perspective of how crazy and dangerous the times were.
My personal connections with the story aside, this is an incredibly watchable movie that is propulsive and uses needle drops and inserts to create a sense of verisimilitude. There are some truly great performances in the film, Mark Wahlberg gives us a desperate, insecure character in the last act, for whom you can feel surprising sympathy. Philip Seymour Hoffman is a minor character in the film, but he develops a sense of pity from us that feels quite realistic. Burt Reynolds notoriously disowned the film, but his performance in it, as the father figure / pornographic film director, is one of his career best. Julianne Moore, William H. Macy, Robert Ridgely, John C Reilly, and a dozen other players all create characters with big faults that we still find ourselves empathizing with, to our surprise.
I was flying solo at this performance at the Paramount, and I got there a little bit later than I usually do. I had to sit near the back on the orchestra level because the theater was packed for this Thursday night screening. The audience was incredibly receptive, and Paul Thomas Anderson, who is not making his debut with this film but for whom this was my first exposure, impressed me and everybody else with how this movie was put together.
One of the guests on the Lambcast covering "Fantastic Four First Steps", quoted Theodore Roosevelt "comparison is the thief of joy." I can see how this is true in many respects, especially when looking at films from a similar genre. It is nearly impossible however to ignore comparisons when the film's open within a week of one another and both of them are comic book icons. Superman and the Fantastic Four come from different Studios, have slightly different sensibilities, long range purpose seems to be dissimilar enough that a comparison might be unnecessary. I think an exception has to be made however when both films embrace their comic book roots so thoroughly.
"Fantastic Four First Steps", like James Gunn's recent Superman film, accept the concept that they come from a comic universe. The Superman film features a pocket universe in a different dimension. Some of the threats that appear on screen are interdimensional beasts, which are Illustrated to be comic book monsters. In the Fantastic Four film, the universe is traversed by a faster than light spacecraft, and our heroes encounter a villain who looks like he stepped out of a Transformers movie, with pretensions to becoming a star of a Godzilla film. It is a completely wack idea, but it is straight out of the comic books of the era. That's what makes this retro version of the Fantastic Four so much fun.
I've created an artificial statistical measure, to trace the Joy from each of these films. 80% of my enthusiasm for Superman comes from the dog Krypto, a CGI character who is more realistic and which behaviors seem more real than most human actors are capable of achieving. I loved every minute of the Superdog in that movie. In contrast, about 70% of my enthusiasm for the "Fantastic Four First Steps", comes from the Retro stylings that have been pursued by the filmmakers. This movie personifies the aesthetic of a 1960s comic book set in a future world, as imagined by the artists of the time. The vehicles used by the Fantastic Four look like spaceships designed by imaginative 12-year-olds from 1960. There is a sharp pointed a trifold fin arrangement and a ring which encircles the vehicle which renders it capable of light speeds. Back at home, the Fantastic Four Drive a flying car that reminded me of George Jetson. The uniforms worn by the Fantastic Four looked like they could have come out of a Thunderbirds movie or maybe Fireball XL-5.
Vanessa Kirby plays Sue Storm (Richards since she and Reed are married and expecting. She is the Invisible Woman. There might have been some anxiety that she would be turned into a girl boss in a woke version of this comic. Instead she is the embodiment of 60s values, a loyal and loving wife and a fiercely devoted mother. The fact that she is competent in her job and cares for the family that surrounds her makes her a figure of sympathy and affection rather than a symbol of feminists rejection of a traditional male female relationship. In other words Sue is a hot woman with a husband that she loves and a job that she's good at. On top of that she's about to become a mother, and motherhood becomes the defining characteristic of this hero.
Pedro Pascal feels a little bit Overexposed at this time. In spite of that, I enjoyed him as Reed Richards / Mister Fantastic. He does bring a certain gravitas to the story even when we're talking about giant space monsters who eat planets. The other actors in the film were fine as well but it was clearly Vanessa Kirby who is making the greatest impact in the movie.
I also like the fact that this was mostly a standalone film, not dependent on a series of TV shows or prior films for me to be able to understand what the heck is going on. Although it will ultimately be connected to the larger MCU, at the moment it feels fresh and distinct enough that I think it could survive on its own as a film series, if people are willing to commit to it. I said it in my review of Superman that I enjoyed the film but I was not enamored with it, for the Fantastic Four I think I can say I enjoyed the film and I was enamored with it. That's a good feeling to leave a theater with.
