Very much like hockey, I am not a fan of car racing in the real world. It seems loud, it deals with machines that are way out of my league or understanding, and I just never got interested in it. Also like hockey however, I seem to have a soft spot for movies about the subject. From "Speed Racer" to "The Fast and Furious" movies, along with "Rush" and "Ford vs. Ferrari", heck even "Cars", I have enjoyed a bucketload of car racing movies. I am happy to add "Gran Turismo" to the list. This is a slick, very well made and very familiar story, but as they say, it hits on all cylinders.
This movie comes from Play Station Productions, so it seems like a video game film, but as is emphasized by several characters in the movie, it is a simulation not a game (in spite of the fact that the lead goes on line and plays against others). It appears that the designers have been meticulous in creating environments and feedback that replicate much that goes on in formula one racing. I looked up the guy who is the basis for the movie and there is a reason this film got made. His emergence as a driver did derive from his sim play and there was success on a level that seems impressive for someone with that background. Frankly, as I read about all of the racing formulas, levels, classes, championship circuits, my eyes glazed over. There is too much for a non-fan to take in, but I was convinced he was legit.
Obviously, the real events have to be fashioned into a story, and the script will contain no surprises at all. Jann, played by Archie Madekwe, is a gaming phenomena in his local gaming den, and has a reputation across the internet as a formidable driver. He is also alienated from his father played by Djimon Hounsou, a former professional soccer player who does not understand the obsession with a "video-game". Jann gets recruited through an on line invitation to the "GT Academy" which is designed to hone the skills of sim players into actual race car drivers. Orlando Bloom plays a marketing executive who is trying to sell Nissan Motorsports on the idea of making a sim player a driver for their team. Once he gets that idea approved, he has to find an engineer/mechanic who can teach the gamer kids how to be real drivers. David Harbour is the reluctant former driver who takes up the challenge after being fed up with the snot faced racing team he is currently working for. So antipathy from his family, a mentor with a tragic past, a team of competitors that he has to beat to get his chance, does all of this seem familiar? It feels like a hundred other movies but here is the thing, it is executed precisely. The Academy montages, the setbacks and recoveries, the philosophical talks and lectures have all happened in plenty of movies before. I was expecting Jack Salter, the trainer played by Harbour, to say at one point, " You're gonna eat lightnin' and you're gonna crap thunder!".
Meanwhile, director Neill Blomkamp, who made "District 9" so many years ago, creatively puts Jann in sim cars that turn into real cars and real cars that turn into sim cars, so that we can see the relationship between the two experiences. Jann proves himself to his mentor now the two of them have to prove their concept to the world. There are several races where Jann is trying to qualify for his racing license, I'm a little unclear as to how that works, but in the context of the story it is fine. Those races are staged imaginatively, including one spectacular crash that provides the major moment of doubt before the last act. One thing I did notice in the racing scenes is that the shots frequently have the camera facing the opposite direction and running past the cars, not simply matching speed and showing the forward progress. This has the nice effect of making the speeds seem even faster as we are watching.
The emotional journey of Jack and Jann is fairly standard, but there is a reason for that, it works. The goal of our two protagonists are to prove themselves and gain redemption. The excellent car racing scenes show us why the process is complicated and give us enough context to know that the two leads have to have their ducks lined up in a row to achieve the end result. There are plenty of obstacles that have to be overcome, and there are the bonding moments that will emotionally satisfy. David Harbour is especially effective as the guy who knows where it's at because he could not get there himself. I was surprised to see that Jann's Mom, who has one scene of anguish while watching a race, was played by former Spice Girl Geri Halliwell. She was a nice match with Hounsou.
The film is not groundbreaking, but it is very entertaining and well worth your investment in time and money. I found plenty of suspense in the right spots, and a little bit of humor in others. Maybe the reconciliations and moments where the a-hole competing drivers get shown up are a little conventional, but that sort of reassurance is what you see a movie like this for.
Throwback Thursday on the KAMAD site will be a regular occurrence in the next year. As a motivational project, to make sure I am working on something, even in a week where I don't see a new film in a theater, I am going to post on movies from 1975. Along with 1984, this is one of my favorite years for movies and it is full of bittersweet memories as well. 1975 was my Senior Year in High School and my Freshman Year in College. The greatest film of the last 60 years came out in 1975, as well as dozens of great and not so great cinematic endeavors. Most of the films in this weekly series will have been seen in a theater in 1975, but there are several that I only caught up with later. I hope you all enjoy.
The Eiger Sanction
This is the second time I have written about this film for the blog. The first was on my original Movie a Day project that started the whole blog. "The Eiger Sanction" was number 73 on that summer countdown. As one of the few films on the project from Clint Eastwood, that was not a western, it should stand out a little more. I was probably a little underwhelmed when I wrote about it thirteen years ago because it was a slow burn that took ninety minutes to get to the featured premise of the movie, mountain climbing spy action.
In filling the time before we actually arrive in Switzerland to ascend the Eiger, there first is a series of scenes and plotlines that feel only slightly connected to the plot. The best is Clint going to Europe to execute one of the killers he has been sent to "sanction". He is Johnathan Hemlock, an executioner for a secret agency known as C-2, that is directed by a mysterious Albino called Dragon. Hemlock wants out and is refusing to continue to work for C-2, but Dragon blackmails him into performing this last sanction by threatening his art collection, which is Hemlock's main motivation for working in the field in the first place. Like Charles Bronson in "The Mechanic", Hemlock appreciates art and music and uses his wealth to acquire a fantastic collection that today would be worth hundreds of millions.
In my original post I warned that this film might be a little tough for modern audiences to accept. The intervening years have made that even more the case. Hemlock passes himself off at one point as an effeminate delivery man to throw off the prey he is after. When he gets a chance to gain revenge against a former friend who is a raging homosexual by 1970s standards, he is particularly cruel. The name the antagonist has for his dog is not only insensitive but nearly as objectionable as if he had named to dog with the "N" word. Like Ethan Hunt or James Bond, Hemlock ends up in bed with another asset of the company and gets trapped into carrying out an even more elaborate "sanction" of an as yet unidentified counter agent. That woman is named Jemima Brown, and there are plenty of jokes about pancakes and ethnicity. There is an extended sequence of Hemlock training for a climbing expedition, and an attractive woman of Native American heritage becomes a sex object with the added bonus of jokes about Cowboys and Indians.
A few things that I do want to draw attention to. First of all, the opening section of the film is set in Zurich, as a man drinks his beer next to a canal or river, and then strolls through some older traditional parts of the city to his apartment. All the while, there is no dialogue and the music is by the great John Williams.
I feel like I have seen a dozen movies from the era that repeat the same kind of sequence at the start. It was a trope of the era and if you listen to the music clip above, you will hear a familiar piano style tune that has been enhanced with some jazz and electronic tools to make it sound more mysterious. It's not a bad thing at all, it just feels overly familiar, although it may not have been so when the film first came out.
The main reason to see the film is for the suspenseful climbing sequences that take place in the last half hour of the film. The movie was made on location and there are no blue/green screen composite shots in the film. Eastwood did his own climbing in this section as well as some the ascent of the Totem Pole edifice in Monument Valley (although he and George Kennedy were helicoptered to the top and professional climbers did the main ascent).
On the Eiger, there were dangerous shots that actually lead to some injuries to a camera operator, and a another climber, helping with camera shots was killed by falling rocks. Eastwood did the ultimate stunt at the end of the film when dangling by a rope several thousand feet above the valley floor. He actually drops when he cuts the rope above him, it is hard to imagine that a movie studio could get insurance for an actor/director in that scenario today (Tom Cruise being the exception maybe).
The plot gets convoluted as it usually does with a spy film. There are double crosses, mixed motives, and attacks from unanticipated sources around every corner. There is a sense that this is a more serious sort of James Bond film, but then "Dragon" runs the command from his light free subterranean lair, and the other operative we see is an ineffectual lug who has less knowledge of karate than I do. I will say there is one trick I learned from this film. If someone is following to close behind me, instead of tapping the breaks which interferes with my momentum, I sometimes turn on my head lights which activates the rear lights and makes whoever is following, think you are breaking.
I will recommend the film to those who like a slow burn, a satisfying action climax and don't mind a little 70s sexism and racism spicing up the film.
Earlier this year, we got a variation on the Dracula legend that followed the supporting character of Renfield. That film was primarily a comedy, but the twist of focusing on a secondary story component as the basis of a film is what seems to have produced this movie as well. The film directly gives credit to the Captain's Log from the original Dracula novel. If you have never read Dracula, you might be surprised to find that it is structured not as a singular narrative, but as a series of letters, journal entries, legal communications, telegrams and such. The Captain's Log is one such document that fills in the story. This film attempts to fill in the log.
The set up of the story is pretty effective with a group of Roma men delivering a set of crates to be delivered to England, dockside. Their are anxious to leave before sundown and will not assist in loading the crates. A young man, anxious to get back to England, ultimately hires on as a hand to set things in motion. The story telling convenience is that he is a doctor. Why would a medical professional have to join the crew of the Demeter to get back to England? The plot creates a reason that he is unable to get work as a doctor, because he is a black man. These two contrivances are the only things at the start of the story which feel a little forced. Otherwise, it all works at building the situation pretty well with a little bit of mystery.
We get a plotline that has been pretty well established over the years in horror films. The crew gets wiped out one at a time by a malevolent evil on board (I just saw Alien again last week, and the parallels are obvious). Unlike some previous films, like Alien, we don't quite get to care about the crew as much as we might need to. The manner in which they are dispatched is usually pretty interesting and creepy, but it does not feel particularly surprising. Maybe that's because of the prologue at the start of the film that lets us know from the beginning that everyone is dead.
"The Last Voyage of the Demeter" is a good looking film, with a production design that convincingly shows us the environment and operating of the ship. The CGI effects are pretty heavy and the vessel in the long shots from the sea is not quite as convincing as the moments on the deck or down in the hold. The creature effects are fine but we see Dracula too soon and too often in the film. The only surprise that comes in the climax are the wings, but we were tipped to that earlier and that also diminishes the horror effects. There is a coda section that does not make much sense, and it seems designed to justify a sequel, which also does not make any sense.
It is not an essential film in the Dracula portfolio of films. I was mildly entertained by the film but I was not impressed by it. I like the idea of trying a variant on the story while using a part of the original plotline, but it seems a bit ambitious for what is ultimately a simple story. When I see it in the five dollar blu ray bin at Wal-mart or Best Buy, I will add it to my collection, but I won't feel compelled to buy a special edition 4K release, it just is not that special.
I have been a fan of Ray Harryhausen since I can ever remember seeing a movie. "The Beast from 20,000 Fathoms" played on the Saturday Night Creature Feature on KHJ TV Channel 9, sometime in the mid-sixties and that's where it started. "Mysterious Island" was always my favorite although "Jason and the Argonauts would give it a fierce fight in my heart. The stop motion effects in movies always felt magical to me, even when they were not always convincing, I think that's what a child's imagination can fix. I still prefer the motion effects tauntauns in "The Empire Strikes Back" to the CGI monsters of the Star Wars Prequels.
Yesterday at the Paramount Theater in Austin, the Summer Classic Film Series offered Harryhausen's final film, "Clash of the Titans" as a matinee feature, and it was part of the 🎬 Robert Rodriguez Presents, series where Austin based filmmaker Robert Rodriguez introduces the films he has chosen and shares some information about the movie and the people who made it. As part of his presentation, he had a set of pictures that he shared with the audience, from one of his film sets, where Ray Harryhausen had come by to watch him work. Seeing the smiles on the faces of the people making the movie, including Quentin Tarantino and Tom Savini, as well as Rodriguez, tells you everything about how these contemporary movie people felt about Mr. Harryhausen and his work. He also shared some clips from his soon to Debut on Netflix Spy Kids Movie. It features several scenes with creatures that are clearly inspired by Harryhausen's work.
"Clash of the Titans" tells the story of Perseus, the favored son of Zeus, who has been cast adrift with his mother by an angry grandfather, the King of Argos. Zeus intervenes, and has Argos destroyed and Perseus saved, so that he can meet his ultimate destiny. The gods and goddesses of Olympus are played by well known actors, including Laurence Olivier himself portraying Zeus. Jealous Goddesses play tricks on the character, putting him in a series of dangerous situations but also providing him with tools to face those situations with.
Basically, the film is a set of events that allow Harryhausen to show off his technique. Perseus battles Calibos, each of them captures Pegasus at some point, a giant Vulture picks up and delivers Andromeda in her dream state, scorpions and other monsters need to be defeated. The ultimate goal is for Perseus to obtain the head of Medusa to use against the Kraken which will soon be set on the city of Joppa, home to Andromeda and her mother Cassiopeia. It's all very convoluted with the actors on Olympus doing very little except standing around on the set. There is plenty of wanton destruction in the film and the loyal soldiers of Joppa who accompany Perseus on his mission are decimated by the time the climax of the film shows up.
Magic helmets that create invisibility, swords that can cleave marble and a mechanical owl with intelligence are all assets that Perseus uses and that Harryhausen gets a chance to integrate into the action at times. The pace of the film seems to lag between the animated pieces, and the actors are not particularly dynamic, but any moment something wonderous will show up so be patient, your eyes will be rewarded.
The 35mm print that was used to show the film has some color inconsistencies that have resulted from aging, but the effects look pretty vivid on film. The audience was appreciative and the host was excellent. My praise for the host is maybe a little biased, he asked the audience about when they had first seen the film and which other Harryhausen films we'd seen. I am not a shrinking violet, so I shouted out my answers and Rodriguez asked me in particular some follow ups. He then called me down to the front of the proscenium and awarded me a book on the Art of Ray Harryhausen. I am grateful for the gift and I was even more pleased when I got home and found that Mr. Rodriguez had signed the book as well. This was a terrific cap to my afternoon at the Paramount, which has essentially been my summer home this season. Still looking forward to some great films to finish August.
Many have said the trailer above is the greatest film trailer of all time. It establishes that there is a mystery, that it involves horror, that there is action, and it shows tidbits of information without giving anything away about the plot. It also has the greatest tagline of a movie, ever. Last night, at the Paramount Theater, you could hear the screams. "Alien" continues to be one of the best fright films ever made, with a stellar cast, a terrific production design and the tension ratcheted up by director Ridley Scott. When we got on the elevator in the parking structure to go over to the film, two guys saw our shirts and knew we were headed to the film. We chatted very briefly, and one of the young men said he was seeing the film for the first time. I envied him. This is a movie with surprises and scares and seeing it for the first time in a theater is the best way to experience it.
The premise of the film is that Earth Conglomerates have started mining the universe for minerals and that they are also interested in other valuable properties as well. If you have not seen the movie, proceed with caution because I am going to dance around a couple of potential spoilers here. The crew of the Nostromo, a towing vehicle with a full load, is awakened from their interplanetary slumber, to investigate a signal that cannot be natural but must have some kind of intelligent design, maybe an SOS. The crew are working stiffs with their own hierarchy, reflecting a chain of command but also the jobs that they perform. There are some normal resentments about pay and working conditions, but everyone shares the discomfort of the job and wants to get home. The detour to a nearby planet to investigate the signal, results in a series of events that are catastrophic but also may be deliberate. As a late 70s film, the plot is thick with conspiracies, suspicions about the motives of the corporation, and distrust of various crew members. If it were not a science-fiction/horror film, it could easily have fit in with other conspiracy based movies of the era.
Slow burn set up was typical of movies in those days and that is what we get here. All the characters are introduced, we know a little about them. The routines of the job are shown and the work space is mapped out for us a bit. All of that is needed and it takes a half hour before we get to the first terrifying moment of the film. Of course the score by Jerry Goldsmith has been building up the tension from the beginning, but it is not until Dallas, Lambert and Kane are on their expedition to the derelict ship, that we know it is time for our sphincters to tighten.
Sigourney Weaver dominates the film, in spite of being third billed because her character has the biggest story arc. She has to be a hard ass bureaucrat, then a tender hearted animal lover, and a inquisitory third in command who is rapidly moving up to a position of even greater authority. She is a character who gets mocked at one point, ignored at a critical junction and then has to take charge. The suspicions that she develops about one of the crew come from legitimate questions about procedure and not just personal animus. It's a little ironic because the Weylan-Yutani Corporation might have sabotaged their secret agenda, if everyone followed the rules the company had set up in the first place. Ripley is a great character, who expands even more as a compelling presence in the sequel film. I've said it before, when people ask me which film I like the best, "Alien" or "Aliens", the answer always depends on which one I saw last. So for today, Alien is my favorite.
There is only one shot in the film that struggles to work for me, and it is an aggressively obvious transition shot that just could not be done except with an awkward edit. It is over quickly though and the remainder of the scene is really creepy and effective. Sure, in the end, the film is about the elimination of the crew one by one, but the journey is filled with great characters, funny moments, some great jump scares and a lot of technical detail. On the way out of the theater last night, I heard someone saying that the film worked well for an older movie. I'll take the practical effects and gritty sets over CGI imitations anytime. That "old" movie line was used in "Infinity War" and it got a laugh, because people who remember the film, don't see old, they see "classic".
Throwback Thursday on the KAMAD site will be a regular occurrence in the next year. As a motivational project, to make sure I am working on something, even in a week where I don't see a new film in a theater, I am going to post on movies from 1975. Along with 1984, this is one of my favorite years for movies and it is full of bittersweet memories as well. 1975 was my Senior Year in High School and my Freshman Year in College. The greatest film of the last 60 years came out in 1975, as well as dozens of great and not so great cinematic endeavors. Most of the films in this weekly series will have been seen in a theater in 1975, but there are several that I only caught up with later. I hope you all enjoy.
Jaws
This was a hectic day and I didn't get a chance to rewatch a film for the project, so I'm sharing with you some of the material from the past on the greatest film of 1975.
I had two theatrical presentations of Jaws this year, one in May, and the second in July. Of course I have seen the movie at home a couple of times earlier in the year. Frankly, I could watch this movie ten times a year rather than the four or five that have been standaard for me over the last couple of decades. This is the movie that I know I have seen the most and it is also the one I have written about the most.
Back in 2015, on the fortieth Anniversary of the film, I did an extensive set of posts celebrating the four decade long reign of this film as my favorite (At least of the second half of the twentieth century).
Here are some links for you to go back and see from that time frame.
A list of non-shark shark sightings in the film.
Everyone knows the most famous line from the film, here are some other good ones.
We have probably added a dozen to the collection in the last eight years, this was Amanda's Closet in 2015.
The three leads are not the only great characters in the picture.
Let's face it, "Ferris Bueller's Day Off" only pretends to have a social value buried in it somewhere. It is not really there. Cameron is a puppet, Sloane is a trophy, and Mr. Rooney is the Coyote to Ferris's Roadrunner. It's a live action cartoon set in Chicago, featuring misbehaving high school kids against the world. We root for them because their antagonists are so exaggeratedly drawn that you want them to succeed in spite of how obnoxious they can be. Ferris is an entitled brat, Cameron is a put upon drone and Sloane is the eye candy they drag along with them. That said, he's very popular. The sportos, the motorheads, geeks, sluts, bloods, wastoids, dweebies, dickheads - they all adore him. They think he's a righteous dude, and for the most part so do I.
Ferris is living out a fantasy of a day skipping school. You get your best friend, your best girl, in the coolest car possible, and you lead them on an adventure that will be talked about the rest of their lives. Of course we love it, we all wish we could do some of those things, and boy do John Hughes and Ferris Bueller sell us on that dream. I remembered the review from Siskel and Ebert when Gene complained that the kids didn't do anything very interesting on they day off. They went up in the Sears Tower, ate at a fancy restaurant, went to a Cubs game at Wrigley field (Gene's big complaint was that they didn't sit in the bleachers), spent time at the Art Institute of Chicago, hijacked a parade in an elaborate fantasy moment, and outwitted their nemesis at every turn. He had a pretty high standard for what a good day in Chicago would be. He also complained that the breaking of the fourth wall was not funny. Before it was used in every comedy show in the 2000s, it was not typical for characters to address the situations they were in from a third person perspective, now that is everywhere, Hughes was just ahead of his time.
When Ferris addresses the audience, he says things that the target audience will relate to. "I'm not going to live in Europe so why do I care if they are socialist?" He is the unstoppable force that is impervious to the barriers that are thrown up against him. Cameron points out the fantasy at one point, "He never gets caught". We see that superpower played out repeatedly and we are in on the joke. We know it is a fantasy and that's what helps make it so much fun. Of course Ferris did not choreograph the parade watchers and participants in the dance sequence in downtown Chicago, that is just the dream and it is an enjoyable one.
Matthew Broderick was becoming a big star at the time and this role sent him to the top. He was never lumped in with the brat pack actors of his era, and he managed to play a lot of parts that showcase him as the star, not just one in an ensemble. His supercilious delivery of his lines and attitude to everyone else in the film is right, but it could easily be off-putting. Broderick manages to wald the line between everyman and arrogant snot pretty well. The sort of tacked on relationship advice he gives to Cameron seems plausible only because he is a kid as well.
The parade, the good natured theft and return of the Ferrari, the intricate tricks Ferris used to fake out his parents and anyone else questioning hi illness are all humorous moments that are not meant to be taken literally. It's not really a film about empowerment, it's a film that embraces a philosophy of fun, regardless of how difficult the dream would be to attain. Life moves pretty fast, maybe we ought to enjoy it while we are here.
I had this poster on the wall of my office at school for several years.