'Angel Heart'
Alan Parker's noirish, occult, tale set in 1950's New Orleans is a mixed bag for sure. One the one hand it's a fairly gripping suspense and on the other a laughable yarn who's climax is signposted from the very outset.
Everyone is having fun though and its obvious limitations aside, it's a joy to watch a pre-ugly mug Mickey Rourke inhabit the scruffy persona of Harry Angel as he's hired by the immediately sinister Louis Cyphre to investigate the whereabouts of a crooner called Johnny Favorite, because Cyphre is afraid that the contract he and had with the singer may longer be upheld.
The conclusion of 'Angel Heart' should be extremely clear to all, except the most clouded and innocent of minds. Perhaps being of such a nature would be a boon when watching the film, because when the journey stops at its inevitable last station, it's nothing but a let down.
'Angel Heart' is all about the journey though and in that regard there's a lot to be said for it. Aside from Rourke, everyone else jumps into their roles with great relish and Robert De Niro clearly enjoys his turn as Mr. Cyphre. Parker's direction is ok, but then it always is just ok. So, if you have ever seen any of his films, you'll know what to expect from that point of view.
'Angel Heart' is an odd film. Not awful, but not successful either and yet fully deserving of one's time if you're in the mood.
6.5/10
'The Shining'
Upon release, like John Carpenter's 1982 classic 'The Thing', Stanley Kubrick's 1980 foray into the horror genre met with very mixed critical reception indeed. But also like Carpenter's effort, it's subsequent reappraisal has seen it soar to the heights it fully deserved when it was originally shown in cinemas.
These days, 'The Shining' rightly holds its head up high and resides on many an aficionado's top horror movie list. A film of considered pacing and deliberate creepiness, Kubrick charges the film with an uncomfortable feel throughout, not just in the foreground, but also in the background as was befitting a man of his meticulous (and dare I say it somewhat autistic) nature. Nothing is on the screen by accident. Everything is placed and misplaced with purpose. That chair that goes missing during a single take...done on purpose. Jack's typewriter changing model between shots...done on purpose. Little Danny's Big Wheel trike making those on carpet/off carpet sounds as he traverses the Overlook Hotel...done on purpose. Never knowing whether what's happening is in Jack Torrance's head or whether it's real...done on purpose. That David Hicks hexagon carpet design...done on purpose. Every single item that makes it to the camera is as a result of Kubrick wanting it there. Everything is framed for a purpose. Everything is shot in the way he dictated it to be shot. Even the famous "All work and no play" manuscript was fully typed out across thousands of pages, across multiple languages.
In addition to Kubrick's hand, there's also a brilliant score by Wendy Carlos, which punctuates the scenery perfectly. Her crash/smash soundscapes capture the horror of the Wendy and Danny Torrance's ordeal as the Overlook Hotel slowly closes in around them. The vocal sections of her soundtrack complement Wendy Torrance's screams and hang in the air during the final act as if the ghosts of the Overlook are around every corner.
The script, which came in for much damnation from Stephen King - who wrote the original novel - veers away from from what King wrote and goes its own path. So much so as to be an entirely different tale. The essential plot is the alike, in which Jack Torrance is charged to act as a caretaker of a rural hotel where the winter months see the establishment abandoned and over the course of his and his family's stay, creepy events start to occur. King hated what Kubrick did with his story and especially despised Jack Nicholson and Shelly Duvall in the roles of Jack and Wendy Torrance. To be fair to King, he's not wrong. Nicholson and especially Duvall's characters are nothing like their written counterparts. But, instead they are their own creations and are just as compelling of not more so.
Shelly Duvall's limp, lank haired, but awfully good natured Wendy looks like a human skeleton that has had skin stretched too tight over its frame. We feel sorry for her when Jack berates her and he clearly hates her as much a Stephen King does. With her shaky collapse in the last reel, her character comes full circle and she is fascinating to watch. Remarkably, and unjustifiably, poor Shelly Duvall got nominated for a Razzie Award. But she is now considered one of the best victims in all of horror cinema.
Jack Nicholson's portrayal of Jack Torrance eschews any attempt at nuance from the get go in another deliberate move by Kubrick. He's a real piece of shit, who disregards his family and perhaps there was a bit of loathing from King, because he probably saw a lot of himself in both the literary and the cinematic Jack Torrance, with Nicholson's barely concealed malice for his family's welfare mirroring King's own familial problems due to his struggles with alcohol and other drug addictions.
Finally, Danny Lloyd plays a cute kid in the shape of Danny Torrance. A boy who has the supernatural ability to reach others through his mind and is susceptible to the Overlook's scary going's on before anyone else. This supernatural ability is shared by the cook at the hotel who explains to Danny and the audience what the ability is and gives it a name.
'The Shining' should be seen at least once by all fans of horror films and film in general and it's an eternal shame upon the forces of critical opinion pieces that they just didn't get what made the film so great in the first place. It's an absolute masterpiece of subtle, creepy, horror that would be lost on most film makers today. It's clever, without being knowing or pretentious. It's scary without resorting to boo! And it never feels bloated or in a rush to get to its money shots, so it's fully deserving of its rare 10/10 score.
10/10
'Dr. No'
James Bond's first dip into cinematic history and the start of a 50+ year career as the screens premier secret agent, 007, is a curiously quaint start to a long tenure. Made in 1962, the largely British production boasted high budgets, exotic locales, and plenty of action in an absurd plot (even for its day) based on the pulpy novels of Ian Flemming, who made a tidy living knocking out one ridiculous Bond adventure after another.
Sean Connery, who beat out Cary Grant and Richard Johnson for the title, is perfect as Bond and he is clearly loving the role that made his name at this point, which ceased to be the case some time around 1967 as he got increasingly desirous to get away from it. Connery's Bond is not the suave sophisticate that Roger Moore's was and is, instead, a more rough and tumble sort, who despite fitting well into a dinner jacket, seems to never be at home in it or with the company that goes along with such attire. Connery's Bond will coldly and causally dispatch his enemies, without the obligatory wisecrack (although they appeared in force by the time of 'Goldfinger') and he's much more of a serious businessman that his other famous 1970's successor, who's outings were always firmly in camp territory.
But, unfortunately, it's the story of 'Dr. No' that's the real let down here, which is unfortunate, because until the titular character makes his appearance, Bond's investigation is quite compelling. But, once we get to the the baddies secret underground base that's the location of his operation for world domination, the film fizzles out.
'Dr. No' is far from awful, but most of its pleasure is derived these days from seeing where Bond's movie history began and for someone who couldn't possibly call themselves a Bond fan, it was just about ok.
A final curious note, however, is that I saw that the mouth of Bernard Lee's "M" clearly state that Bond is in MI6 (British foreign intelligence), while the audio says MI7, which was a strange pause for me during the viewing.
5/10
'From Russia With Love'
Connery's second outing as Flemming's spy hero is an altogether more accomplished affair than the previous 'Dr. No' and features a far more grounded plot, even if Blofeld's ridiculous SPECTRE organisation makes an appearance as the primary antagonist. In this story, Bond is tasked with securing an Enigma-like device, called the Lektor, a cryptographic machine that is of great importance to British Intelligence. This device is to be handed to him by Tatiana Romanova (an awful Daniella Bianchi), who is a SMERSH agent recruited by Blofeld's No.3, Rosa Klebb (a great Lotte Lenya). Of course, Tatiana is unable to resist Bond's charms and falls head over heels for him and buggers up SPECTRE's plans.
'From Russia With Love' is often hailed as the best James Bond film, but I have to confess a wonder as to why it's held in such high esteem. Sure, it's better than 'Dr. No' and probably better, in many respects, than most of the other Connery Bond films, although 'Goldfinger' is the more enjoyable film, even if its story is more absurd. But, it's terribly tedious in many of its scenes, especially the gypsy section which has always been a crashing bore.
Where 'From Russia With Love' excels, though, is in its baddies. Aside from the already mentioned Rosa Klebb, Robert Shaw appears as Red Grant, who is generally considered to be one of the greatest Bond villains of all time and Shaw is perfect in the role, with the famous train scrap being one of the very best fight scenes in any Bond film.
Over all, it's worth a look, but like 'Dr. No' it's vintage can render it very old fashioned to modern tastes.
6/10
'Goldfinger'
Without a doubt the best of the early James Bond efforts, the third film, 'Goldfinger', is where all the familiar Bond tropes come together for the first time. All of the usual Bond things come into play, like the gadgets, the one liners, and the cool car - this time in the shape of the wonderful Aston Martin DB5 that regularly tops the greats list for Bond fans and car fans alike.
If Red Grant is James Bond's best hard man, then Auric Goldfinger is its best arch villain, played perfectly by the great German actor Gert Frobe. Goldfinger's preposterous plan is to set off an atomic device in Fort Knox and reduce America's gold bullion reserve to a heap of radioactive junk for 58 years, thus elevating his own reserves many times over and causing a certain amount of chaos in the west that will have him in good stead with the east. It's less ludicrous than a lot of Bond villain plans, but still laughable in its silliness, while never scuppering the whole endeavour.
Apart from Goldfinger and his crazy scheme, Bond also has to deal with another great Bond baddie, Oddjob, Goldfinger's mute Korean henchman who sports some killer headgear and a strength that would put every heavyweight to shame.
The obligatory Bond girl, if she can really be called that, comes in the shapely form of Honor Blackman, a sassy semi-villainess, who works for Goldfinger, while never seeming to be totally on his side. The smoky voiced Blackman is a smart foil for Connery's Bond, to whose charms she's "immune". For a short amount of time anyway.
'Goldfinger' plays out at a pleasing pace and its 1 hour 50 minute run time is never wasted. All the Bond elements come together in a pleasing fashion and they suit its 1960's period much better than in the later films, where they just come off as camp. But, even after 55 years, it's still very enjoyable.
7/10
'Midsommar'
Ari Aster is quickly making a name for himself as one to watch for genre fans and hot on the heels of 'Hereditary', he has followed up with 'Midsommar'. A film about some Americans who never saw 'Hostel' and really should have stayed at home, instead of going to attend a bizarre traditional pagan festival in rural Sweden.
Aster has obviously seen and is a great fan of 'The Wicker Man', as is clear from the many parallels between his film and the 1973 classic, which both feature naive protagonists who meet their fate at the hands of a group of weirdos who are visibly out of their time.
Like 'Hereditary', 'Midsommar' is a fine movie, but also like the 2018 film, it features a somewhat tired and played out genre antagonist that will be, at once familiar to fans of horror. But where Hereditary's coven stays relatively concealed for most of the film, Midsommar's equally hokey pagans show their hand far too quickly, as to kill the film's suspense to a large degree. But, this doesn't really matter, as the film plays out in an uneasy and skin crawling way, which is its main charm.
'Midsommar' isn't really scary or frightening, as some viewers may be expecting, but it does hold the attention very well despite those shortcomings. However, it's about 30 minutes too long and can come across as a bit indulgent. It has a few genuinely shocking moments, for sure, and some great gore effects, too, which should please the fans of the red stuff.
With two hits under his belt, fans of horror with certainly be keeping a keen eye on Aster's future efforts.
8/10
|
Look again at that dot. That's here. That's home. That's us. On it everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever was, lived out their lives. The aggregate of our joy and suffering, thousands of confident religions, ideologies, and economic doctrines, every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and destroyer of civilization, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every mother and father, hopeful child, inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every "superstar," every "supreme leader," every saint and sinner in the history of our species lived there--on a mote of dust suspended in a sunbeam. [click for more]
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by EvilNed
Bookmarks