sgoldgaber Reviews

Primer (2004)

Just watch the film!

[10/10 · 29 May 2005]

Some advice to prospective viewers...

First, if you haven't seen the movie and don't know anything about it you will be doing yourself a favor if you stop here and just watch it.

Second, if you have seen the movie but haven't yet read anything about it you should just watch it again and try to figure it out for yourself instead of taking the easy way out and reading the conclusions others have come to and various spoilers.

Finally, my thanks and congratulations to the filmmakers. All the praise in the reviews here is well deserved. Here's to hoping that you will continue to eschew convention and make movies that aren't dumbed down for the average moviegoer.

Where the Buffalo Roam (1980)

Unbelievably NOT Funny

[3/10 · 28 January 2003]

It's hard to believe Hunter S. Thompson's life and writings could be made in to a movie without making it funny. Yet, Where the Buffalo Roam has done it. Even Bill Murray, who should be perfect as Thompson, is unconvincing, self-conscious, and... not funny. Virtually every gag falls flat as the movie bemuses you with badly it can mess up something with so much humour potential.

On the bright side, it's interesting to see how many scenes Terry Gilliam stole directly from this film for Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, and how much of Johnny Dep's acting style for that film was taken from Bill Murray.

Shame (1968)

Incredible

[10/10 · 28 January 2003]

Bergman's Skammen is one of the most realistic depictions of war ever set to film. This is not an action film by any means, though the pacing is faster and there is most action than in most any other Bergman movie. Nor is this a romanticisation of war or patriotism, unlike most war movies. In fact, the gritty realism and the deliberate ambiguity of the character's loyalties has a very contemporary feel.

Skammen is a darkly lit movie, that should be watched at night, so as to let it work it's magic. Many of the effects are conveyed indirectly, but so effectively that some scenes compete in intensity to a contemporary, insanely huge budget film like Saving Private Ryan. Of course, the action in Skammen is on a much smaller scale but it is impressive none-the-less.

While the film-making style feels contemporary, the setting of the film feels timeless and placeless. The war-torn countryside, and even the yet intact provincial hamlet could be anywhere, any time. And this film is not so much about specific historical events, with specific names and dates, but about universal human reactions to adversity and chaos.

The acting in Skammen, though typically impressive from Ullman and Sydow, is not of primary importance in this film, unlike most other Bergman movies. Through much of the film they are spectators, much as we are. Bergman has the war imposed on them, and through them on the audience, and their reaction is perhaps what any of our reactions might be.

Highly recommended. 10/10

Lathe of Heaven (2002 TV Movie)

Dream, dream, dream, dream, dreaming

[22 January 2003]

Lathe of Heaven's potential is ultimately betrayed by pandering to mediocrity.

Had the producers of Lathe of Heaven any sense they would have kept the script of the original 1980 version and only updated its corny effects with today's technology and a decent budget.

Unfortunately, they felt compelled to make a cliche love interest the focus of the film, added some New-Agey pseudo-reincarnation mysticism, and eliminated the nightmarish feel of the original. This is the new, improved chocolate-coated nothing designed for easier swallowing.

There are some bright sides to the remake, such as some lush sets and costumes, and the actors' recital of their lines in measured monotones that add to the dreamlike atmosphere, reminiscent of Heart of Glass (but not as emotionless).

I am left dreaming for the day when a remake does the original full justice. 6/10

Warm Summer Rain (1989)

Ken saves Barbie

[22 January 2003]

Barbie is sad. Ken is sad. Together they are happy, and Ken

teaches Barbie to love life.

The pretentious script, constantly sounding like it's imparting

pop-psychology wisdom is made doubly silly when it comes out in

monologues from such incompetent actors, who can't even be

convincing in the less-demanding, non-verbal, gratuitous sex

scenes.

Insipid, sappy, and shallow, Warm Summer Rain can't hold a

candle to Ordinary People, to which it had been favorably

compared. The themes are also completely different, with the

exception of the theme of suicide.

Avoid at all costs. 2/10

Interiors (1978)

Distant, detached

[22 January 2003]

Interiors is not your typical Woody Allen movie. It is a look at family life virtually without comic relief. Allen's introspection is there, but it is stark and detached. There is an analytical, third-person feel to most of the dialogue in the film that makes it feel like Allen was uncomfortable with his subject-matter. As he meanders from one tenuously connected scene to another he loses focus and impact. Interiors winds up feeling like it had much potential that went unrealized because Allen was unwilling to dig deeper. 6/10

La Cérémonie (1995)

Predictable and pointless

[21 January 2003]

Predictability is the cardinal sin for a thriller, and La Cérémonie has certainly sinned. Any viewer can easily predict that something will go wrong from the first scene, and the foreshadowing is all too transparent, so that by the time something does the viewer can even predict precisely how it will happen.

In the meantime the movie does not build an ounce of tension or suspense, so when it ends predictably it is with a whimper, not a bang, as if the air had been let out of an already flaccid balloon.

The characters are not interesting in the least. The acting is banal. One wonders why this movie was ever made. Calling this movie a waste of time would be an understatement.

A Woman Under the Influence (1974)

What society can't deal with

[21 January 2003]

Be authentic and genuine in how you relate to people, be a wonderous child in an adult's body and society will tear you apart. You can't expect understanding from any "normal" adults, even in your immediate family. Children will be the only ones who will be able to see you for who you really are, and accept you that way. Everyone else will try their hardest to hammer you in to the narrow, cold, petty role they expect you to play.

It's not surprising that so many people react negatively to this movie. They don't like to see the ugly, cold side of society or themselves. They don't like to have a mirror held up to them. If you want entertainment, untinged with uncomfortable truth, this movie is not for you.

That's not to say "A Woman Under the Influence" is not flawed in how it goes about showing society's fear of non-conformity. It requires some suspension of disbelief. Particularly, that Mabel could have raised three kids in a family, while in such a state without medication. There are also some unsatisfying "intermission" scenes. Finally, there's the very unbelievable ending where Mabel is slapped back in to lucidity by Nick.

However, the vast majority of the film is intense and quite believable, especially in it's depiction of the lack of understanding the average, unconscious, "normal" adult society shows Mabel.

Highly recommended. 10/10

Bleak Moments (1971)

Insightful

[10/10 · 21 January 2003]

The characters in Mike Leigh's films live in different, often isolated worlds. Some haltingly, painfully attempt to communicate and relate to one another. Others just blindly or blithely drift by. There is some caring, often much misunderstanding. In Leigh's later films the characters come to some reconciliation, but there is no such relief for them here. The movie is, true to its name, bleak.

Tom Noonan's "What Happened Was", which is highly recommended to anyone who likes this film, is really a working out of one critical "coffee and sherry" scene in Bleak Moments.

One of the best films I've seen in recent years. 10/10

12:01 (1993 TV Movie)

No Groundhog Day

[20 January 2003]

After hearing favorable comparisons to Groundhog Day, some even going so far as to rate this movie much higher, I eagerly rented 12:01. I couldn't have been more disappointed.

First, and most obviously, this movie didn't have Bill Murray as the lead, but some two-bit hack that couldn't be funny if he slipped on a bananna.

Second, the script is trite and utterly mundane. Groundhog Day was much more than a mere comedy, tackling interesting questions such as what a person could do if they had all the time in the world, and showing how something that could be completely overlooked may be rich with possibilities. 12:01 does not reach beyond what it is, a third-rate made for TV movie with a time loop as a gimmik. Take out the time loop and all you have left are cliches of office-life, a couple of car chases, and a very unconvincing romance. It was a chore to watch through, and I couldn't wait for it to be over.

Finally, even setting aside the plot and point of the film, it is just not funny. You can see every worn-out gag coming a mile away. And they are performed by uninspired actors that don't have a hair of talent between them.

Do yourself a favor and just watch Groundhog Day again.

Modern Vampires (1998 TV Movie)

Thinner than water

[3/10 · 19 January 2003]

It's sad to see a film strain so hard to be funny and fail to do so so miserably. By now breaking old horror movie cliches has become very cliche, and this movie adds absolutely nothing new as the script writer hasn't a hair of creativity growing on his thick skull.

This is a C-grade script filmed on a B-budget. How do painfully awful movies like this ever get funded? There is so much money flushed down the toilet in Hollywood that it never ceases to amaze me.

The Ice Pirates (1984)

Funniest sci-fi spoof ever

[10/10 · 18 January 2003]

Ice Pirates is the funniest sci-fi spoof, and one of the best comedies ever made. There is no way that Galaxy Quest is even close. Even Spaceballs has to take a back seat. Ice Pirates is Spaceballs on Nitrous Oxide.

Of course, to appreciate it you'd have to have seen a lot of science fiction movies, as they are what Ice Pirates is poking fun at. Fans of Red Dwarf are also advised to take a look at this film, as it was obviously an inspiration for the show.

Bleak Moments (1971)

Brilliant, insightful film

[10/10 · 18 January 2003]

Mike Leigh is much more effective in "Bleak Moments" than his later, more popular efforts like "Secrets and Lies". The latter lacks much of the intensity and focus of this film.

The characters in Mike Leigh's films live in different, often isolated worlds. Some haltingly, painfully attempt to communicate and relate to one another. Others just blindly or blithely drift by. There is some caring, often much misunderstanding. In Leigh's later films the characters come to some reconciliation, but there is no such escape for them here. The movie is, true to its name, bleak.

Tom Noonan's "What Happened Was", which is highly recommended to anyone who likes this film, is really a working out of one critical "coffee and sherry" scene in Bleak Moments.

One of the best films I've seen in recent years. 10/10

Citizen Kane (1941)

Most overrated movie of all time

[4/10 · 18 January 2003]

Citizen Kane is the most overrated movie in cinema history, with the possible exception of Battleship Potempkin.

CK is a movie about a millionaire, and Americans are fascinated by money, so it's really no surprise that they'd be fascinated by this film. However, make the lead character an encyclopedia salesman, without a fancy house or a newspaper and I think the fascination would quickly dissapear, as people start to see him and the film for what both really are: an utter bore.

Kane is insipidly shallow, as the identity of "Rosebud" plainly shows. But, far from being an effective satire of expose of upper class society, the film is puddle deep. It also fails to get the audience interested in the paper-thin characters, or snoozer of a plot.

You might be surprised that a film so mediocre would be rated so highly, until you took a look at what passes for Oscar material, or what gets voted to the top here. People have no taste or clue. So it's really no surprise at all.

Battleship Potemkin (1925)

Very overrated!!! Stay far away, unless you study film

[1/10 · 18 January 2003]

This movie vies with Citizen Kane for first place as the most overrated movie in cinema history.

This film has absolutely nothing, or even less than nothing to offer you unless you are studying film professionally. If you are looking to be entertained, or looking for depth, acting, plot, interesting characters, or most anything apart from ancient visual technique, stay far, far, far away.

This movie may have been, debatably, groundbreaking in 1925, but as of 2003 it's only interest is as a historical curiosity for film students, and possibly as an antidote for sleeplessness.

One True Thing (1998)

One True Yawn

[4/10 · 17 January 2003]

One True Thing may have seemed like a horror movie to the yuppies of the 80's, but it doesn't ring true today... unless you happen to be part of a pampered, upper-middle class family which is so insulated from the world that it has never tasted suffering.

Avoid this shallow flop.

Long Day's Journey Into Night (1962)

Heavy handed, overacted, predictable

[6/10 · 14 January 2003]

In 1962 this movie may have come to Americans as a revelation about failed dreams. But, as of 2003, it comes across as very heavy handed, and cliche. Every character overacts in presenting their tragic fate, whining about how they were cheated of life by one another.

On the one hand it's the actors who are trying to play roles too big for their britches. Dean Stockwell is particularly inept in his monologue about experiencing life intensely. He is better just playing the role of a wide-eyed kid, without any depth. Jason Robards brings absolutely no character or originality to his depiction of a drunk. Ralph Richardson's character is a ham, so I can't exactly blame him for continuously hamming it up. Still, you'd think he'd have been able to bring a little more depth when his turn at the revealing monologue came. Katharine Hepburn, of course, is completely overwrought throughout the film. I guess this should be excused because the characters are inebriated throughout half the film, but they're not even convincing at that. The characters are just mouthpieces for O'Niel to tell his hard-luck tales, which could be told better by being shown and not just told through monologues.

So the fault of the film does not lie completely in the acting. There are some similarities between Eugene O'Niel's themes and Checkov and Strindberg, but the inferiority of the American playwright is clearly apparent. O'Niel treats the themes of marriage, family, codependancy in a much more superficial manner. The characters that O'Niel dreamt up are also very two dimensional and cliche.

Morphine addiction is also presented inaccurately. Basically, Hepburn winds up acting even more drunk than the other drunks in the movie, and whines and carries on even more than they do. This might have fooled the average moviegoers of 1962, but just winds up looking ridiculous to today's audiences, who are used to much more realistic depictions of opiate use and abuse. The character's shock and upturned noses at "hop heads" and "dope fiends" seem equally ridiculous.

All of this just shows that the movie really isn't about opiate addiction, or even alcoholism (which is what the opiate addiction is dressed up as). It's about wasted lives and being dealt a bum hand (oh no! echoes of the movie's corny slang are creeping in!). Unfortunately, none of these character's lives have been really all that bad. So the movie winds up being, unconsciously, about self-pity. The characters sit around and pity themselves for three hours. I can get an equivalent three hours of whining by hopping over to the corner bar. This is why O'Niel will always be a minor playwright, and another reason for this movie falling on its cliche 1962 behind.

Ikiru (1952)

Overrated, but worth seeing

[6/10 · 13 January 2003]

I would rate this movie as above average, but not nearly the masterpiece that most other reviewers here see it as.

**SPOILER WARNING**

Plot Synopsis:

A man who's life is perfectly routine and without passion finds out he has a terminal disease. Distractions, such as drink and women are unsatisfactory, so he throws his remaining energy towards a selfless act. Posthumously, his endurance and accomplishment are an inspiration to his former colleagues in a Kafkaesque bureaucracy.

Analysis:

On the whole, the acting in this movie is superb, with the exception of the protagonist, who constantly overacts, with his haunted, wide-eyed look that quickly becomes monotonous after the first dozen or so close-ups. However, there are some effective scenes, such as his newfound girlfriend's boredom and revulsion at Watanabe's pathetic, desperate attachment. His former colleagues are also impressive in their admiration for the deceased.

The plot itself is also a mixture of successes and disappointments. Watanabe's realization of the meaninglessness of his life is presented too suddenly. Finding out that one has a terminal illness is certainly a shock. Still, I believe it would have been more effective to show the emptyness of Watanabe's life gradually dawning on him as he attempted to live it his routine way, rather than immediately running off to seek to live it more fully.

However, Watanabe's disillusion with hedonism is effective and essential. Hedonism only leads to the repetition and boredom that mirrors too closely his earlier life. Watanabe buys company, but it is empty of genuine human affection: the women he is with are only interested in his money.

Watanabe's attempt to live vicariously through a younger, vivacious woman is also convincing, as is her quickly growing tired of a brooding man likely twice her age.

The most unsatisfactory parts of the movie come in the second half of the film, following Watanabe's decision to redeem his life through selfless service. In order for him to succeed several artificial contrivances are necessary which wind up detracting from the effectiveness of the film.

Watanabe is fortunate to be in a position where he can be effective. A mere clerk certainly could not have accomplished the creation of a park. As a clerk would Watanabe have been satisfied with being responsible for the installation of just a bench, or a trashcan instead of the park? The park, though relatively modest, is still a contrived contingency for effectiveness of the redemption through service solution.

Further contingencies are Watanabe's superior's eventual yielding to pressure, and the gangster's deferance to a man who has nothing to lose. Both are unconvincing.

A final note should be made in comparing this film to another movie that treats similar themes of existential meaning, Groundhog Day. Both films avoid the real reprecussions and the ultimately unsatisfactory answers that their protagonists come up with by ending the movie immediately after the answer is proposed.

In Groundhog Day Bill Murray is redeemed through love and caring for others, and the film immediately ends. However, had he gone through as many repetitions of his caring, selfless days as he had days to learn to play the piano or throw cards in to a hat he would likely find his answer unsatisfactory. Likewise, the reality of being married is also sidestepped by immediately ending the film.

In a similar way, the park that is built by Watanabe is a fantasy park, which is really left unexamined by immediately ending the movie. Furthermore, selflessly devoting one's life to the service of others fails as an antidote to the meaninglessness of one's own life, because one is just passing the buck. Essentially, one is saying that someone else can do better with the life you give them than you can. This is not at all clear.

Weaknesses like these are the sorts of things many Hollywood movies are guilty of. They pull punches in order to create an inspiring and uplifting film. These weaknesses are also what seperate this film from masterpieces worthy of the designation such as works by Kafka and Ingmar Bergman. At their best, the latter do not pull punches. Kurosawa, of course, has his own masterpiece, which I find much more mature than Ikiru. Namely, Ran. Of course, since Ran was based on King Lear, Shakespear must be given some credit.

Still, there are some admirably realistic scenes even in the second half of Ikiru. Watanabe's superiors are hypocritical and self-serving in their robbing Watanabe of credit for the park. And despite Watanabe's colleagues' inebriated, freverent pledges to work as hard as he, in emulation they quickly fall back in to apathy.

All in all, despite many weaknesses of philosophy and plot this movie is well worth seeing for its attempts at dealing with an issue many people find uncomfortable. Namely, how is one to live one's life?

The Anniversary Party (2001)

The Player on Ecstacy

[7/10 · 5 January 2003]

Uptight, two-dimensional Hollywood hypocrites loosen up with some Ecstasy. Unfortunately, the movie becomes overwrought towards the end, with one catastrophe piling on top of another. I was surprised the house didn't catch fire at the climax, which really became an anticlimax as yet more things go wrong and the befuddled party comes to a weary end. But no amount of contrived tragedy could force the film in to a somber Festen mold. Worth watching for the Ecstacy bit. Too bad they didn't stick with it.

Bangkok Dangerous (2000)

Boring, pretty, shallow

[3/10 · 29 December 2002]

Pulling out every visual trick and camera angle in the book doesn't save this dull and vapid snoozer.

The box review compares the film to John Woo and Terrantino, but this is far from true. Yes, lots of people get shot and there are even gangsters involved. But Bangkok Dangerous can not come close to Woo's awesome action choreography, nor his, and I thought I'd never say this, depth.

Calling the characters in this movie cardboard cutouts would be an insult to cardboard. True, the melancholy killer theme is reminiscent of Woo's "The Killer", but the comparison ends there, and there is so little character development that the audience hardly cares who gets shot or why.

This movie has even less in common with Terrantino's films, which have infinately more character and a much more interesting plot than this **SPOILER WARNING** "assasin takes revenge on treacherous boss" predictable yawner. Save two hours out of your life and skip Bangkok Dangerous, unless you are absolutely dying to see lots of red, green, and blue lighting and overdone digital editing, which is really the only thing this movie has going for it.

Magnolia (1999)

half and half

[28 June 2002]

First half of the movie is witty, funny, and quick paced. Half way through the pace slowed and my interest waned. It ended with an utterly corny, sappy, music video with all of the characters joining in a sing-along. A disappointment, considering the promising first half.