michel_broeders Reviews

Phantom of the Opera (1943)

Every violinist has written a concerto!

[8/10 · 23 October 2018]

Phantom of the opera (1943) is Universal's second adaptation of Gaston Leroux's classic novel "Le Fantôme de l'Opéra", on which the film is loosely based. It can also be seen as a remake of the 1925 Lon Chaney version. The film was directed by Arthur Lubin, a prominent director for Universal Pictures in the 1940s and 1950s, and stars Nelson Eddy, Susanna Foster and Claude Rains.

Violin player Erique Claudin is hopelessly in love with a young soprano from the Opera House and secretly tries to support her career. But Claudin is losing the use of his fingers and loses his work. He kills a music publisher and gets acid in his face during the incident. After his misdeeds, there is a mysterious wave of crimes in the Opera House, blamed on "the Phantom".

Although Claude Rains didn't get top billing, he proves to be the true star of this film. He can, like no other, elicit sympathy for his character, who during the film loses almost everything that is dear to him, although at the same time goes on a killing spree. Likewise is the powerful and determined performance of Suzanne Foster, who ensures that the audience experiences the story mainly through her eyes. She is the only one who sympathizes for the lost soul of Claudin.

In contrast to the 1925 version the 1943 version focused on the grand operatic spectacle and downplayed the horror. Director Arthur Lubin shot scenes at the same Paris Opera House studio as the 1925 version. The film also includes the grandiose scene where the chandelier crashes down on the heads of the audience. However, Lubin's film focused more on the romance than the frights. Phantom of the opera was also nominated for best scoring of a musical picture, and rightfully so, the original theme "Lullaby of the Bells", composed by Edward Ward, is beyond perfection.

The 1943 Phantom of the Opera was so successful that Universal announced that a sequel titled "The Climax" would be made, which wasn't nearly as good as its predecessor. With an effective production design and a great musical richness Phantom of the Opera shows Hollywood expertise at its best.

The Wolf Man (1941)

It isn't a wolf... it's a werewolf!

[10/10 · 22 October 2018]

"The Wolf Man (1941)" was the second Universal Pictures film featuring a werewolf, preceded by "Werewolf of London" in 1935. In contrast to its predecessor, The Wolf Man was a major hit and made lead actor Lon Chaney Jr. a star. The film was written by Curt Siodmak, a Jewish war refugee from Germany, and was directed by George Waggner.

In this very recognizable version of the werewolf myth, Lon Chaney Jr. plays the role of Larry Talbot. After the death of his brother Larry returns to his hometown to reconcile with his estranged father. During his stay Larry is bitten by a werewolf. This event literally and metaphorically changes Larrry.

The role of Larry/the Wolf Man would define the rest of Lon's career as well as help him move out of the shadow of his famous father, Lon Chaney (Sr.). He reportedly said of the role: "He was my baby". It is with this passion Chaney approaches his role of Larry. During the day a charming Welshmen who falls in love with a local girl, during the night a werewolf who knows no equal.

Director Geroge Waggner directs a dark and suspenseful film which became the atmospheric masterpiece it is known for. Screenwriter Curt Siodmak created a story that examines the duality of man and superstition versus religion against the backdrop of an estranged father-son relationship. It was also Siodmak who introduced several "werewolf legends", such as: being marked by a pentagram and being nearly immortal apart from being attacked by silver. The emphasis on the suppressed sexuality as the driving force behind Talbot's transformations separates the script from other werewolf stories. Like all the famous Universal Monster films, the success is partly due to the wonderful make-up techniques of Jack Pierce. His design made for a distinct, convincing monster unlike any other.

Due to its success, several sequels were made, all starring Lon Chaney Jr. and in the many years of cinema several Werewolf-films were produced. Nevertheless none of these films reached the superiority of its original.

Bride of Frankenstein (1935)

Do you like gin? It is my only weakness

[10/10 · 21 October 2018]

Universal had to wait almost four years before director Jame Whale accepted the offer to direct a sequel to Frankenstein, his big blockbuster from 1931. Based upon Mary Shelley's timeless novel, and once again starring Boris Karloff as the inimitable monster, The Bride of Frankenstein follows immediately upon the events of the first film.

Henry Frankenstein no longer wants to create life from death. The monster, created by him, causes great mayhem and together with his old mentor Dr. Pretorius, Henry is persuaded in creating a mate for his monster.

Although Boris Karloff wasn't easily convinced, it was decided that the monster should speak. This gives Karloff's performance a great duality; a frightening monster for whom the viewer has a great empathy. The humanization makes him more complete and is more consistent with the character of Mary Shelley's novel. It also makes his desperate search for a comrade more emotional. The Monster's bride, played by Elsa Lanchester, is one of the greatest, most iconic performances in horror-film history, although she only appears for a mere moment on screen.

The greatness of this film lies in the fast conversions from the daunting to the comical. Whales' special sense of humor is particularly evident in the character of the maid Minnie (Una O'Connor) and the effeminate portrayal of Ernest Thesiger (the devilish Dr. Pretorius). In addition to the sublime direction of Whale, the technical aspects are extraordinary. Much of what made this film so popular are the special effects by John P. Fulton, the music by Franz Waxman, and the make-up by Jack Pierce.

The Bride of Frankenstein is a surprising mix of horror and comedy, which in many respects became superior to its predecessor.

The Invisible Man (1933)

How can I handcuff a bloomin' shirt?

[9/10 · 21 October 2018]

James Whale, previously known for directing Frankenstein (1931), created yet another masterpiece in 1933 for Universal with The Invisible Man. Based on the science fiction novel of the same name by H.G. Wells published in 1897, the film is a nearly perfect representation of the atmosphere of the book . The film was a Box Office success, and Universal's most successful horror film since Frankenstein.

The Invisible Man tells the story of Dr. Jack Griffin, a scientist, whose experiments turned him invisible. The story picks up after the wrong outcome of those experiments. We follow the story of Jack, represented as a mysterious stranger, who causes a lot of uproar when arriving in the village of Iping.

Jack is played by Claude Rains, who was then still relatively unknown to the American audience. The role of the scientist, who is damned to a life of invisibility, made the actor a star overnight. Rains immediately shows great talent by bringing a character to life who, ironically, is in nearly every frame of the picture while invisible for almost all of his screen time. He uses his wonderful voice to convincingly portray a professor who is lost, alone and slowly going mad.

James Whale flawlessly directs The Invisible Man. His direction makes the film one of the most influential and nuanced horror films ever made. The combination of horror, suspense and humor became a distinctive style of Whale and was perfected in The Bride of Frankenstein (1935). In addition to the peculiar direction of Whale the film is supported by John P. Fulton's groundbreaking special effects. Fulton was head of Universal's special effects department and used traveling mattes, optical printing and other movie magic tools to create the illusion of an invisible Griffin.

The Invisible man is a remarkable achievement that will satisfy all those who like the freakish and the outlandish in film.

The Mummy (1932)

Excuse me... I dislike being touched... an Eastern prejudice

[10/10 · 20 October 2018]

The opening of the tomb of Tutankhamun along with the rumors about the curses of the Pharaohs of old gave producer Carl Laemmle Jr. the idea for a horror movie with an Egyptian theme. The Mummy was released in 1932, with Boris Karloff in the title role, and directed by Karl Freund, previously known as Dracula's (1931) cinematographer. It should not be confused with the 1999 film by Stephen Sommers, which is a personal guilty pleasure that used the 1932 version as its basis.

The film tells the story of archaeologists who discover an ancient mummy, called Imhotep, who is accidentally brought back to life. Imhotep disguises himself as a modern Egyptian in search for his old beloved who, according to him, is reincarnated in the body of a modern woman.

Boris Karloff, Universal's favorite Englishman, is once again the perfect choice as the Mummy / Imhotep. His reserved and mysterious performance of the mummy makes this one of Karloff's most memorable roles. Although the scenes with Karloff as the mummy are iconic in monster-film-history, it is remarkable that he only appears for a few minutes as the mummy on screen. In the rest of the film he plays Imhotep and he is wearing hardly any make-up. This shows the talent of Boris Karloff even more clear.

Karl Freund who arose from German Expressionism and who was previously known as Dracula's cinematographer proves to be a fantastic choice as director. Although the film shows less of his Expressionistic influences , Freund's skillful use of the camera and lightning create an eerie and mysterious atmosphere. It is a style that suits the story perfectly. In addition to Freund's direction, make-up artist Jack Pierce ensured that the film would be a guaranteed success. Pierce studied photographs of mummies in detail so that he could convince even the most critical viewer. When he worked his magic on Karloff, it took him eight hours to fully apply the make-up.

The Mummy became a big Box Office success and Universal created numerous sequels, all of them inferior to the original. In 1999, it was even resurrected by Stephen Sommers, with its sequels and spin-offs. But none of these films came close to this original masterpiece.

Dracula (1931)

Children of the night, what music they make

[9/10 · 20 October 2018]

It is only one of many unforgettable quotes in the 1931 version of Dracula. Although Bram Stoker's vampire novel from 1897 was adapted as early as 1922 by F.W. Murnau (as Nosferatu) and director Tod Browning had let Lon Chaney perform as a fake vampire in the silent film London After Midnight, this early-speaking film was the first representative of a separate genre within the horror film, the vampire film. As was not uncommon with American horror films, this Dracula was not based on the literary source text, but on the 1924 stage adaptation (by Hamilton Deane and John L. Balderston).

The film starts brilliantly, with a hint of Swan Lake and a rickety carriage in which we drive with solicitor Renfield (Dwight Frye) to Lugosi's Transylvanian castle, where we get a memorable introduction to Dracula. The story follows Dracula to London. There we meet Van Helsing, who is played by Edward Van Sloan as a thorough professor. In addition, Frye steals the show when Renfield turns into a fly-eating, giggling lunatic.

The first major star of the new genre was Bela Lugosi, who played the role of Dracula on Broadway and was cast for the film after Browning's favorite actor Lon Chaney died. Maybe that's why Browning's direction was a bit flat, because George Melford directed the Spanish version at the same time (and on the same sets!) much more inspired. However, this version has to do without Dracula's powerful interpretation by Lugosi. With his demonic glowing eyes and his strong Hungarian accent, Lugosi portrayed a beautiful, threatening Dracula.

Cameraman Karl Freund arose from German Expressionism and director Browning had provided Hollywood with grotesque productions. Hereby two horror traditions came together in Dracula. The castle of Dracula with its enormous Gothic windows is the most beautiful setting of the film, but during the scenes in London we can behold an impressive staircase and beautiful catacombs. It is unfortunate that the end comes to a sudden and anticlimactic end.

Despite the primitive technique and a story that plays almost exclusively indoors, Browning's film is convincingly sinister and creepy.

Frankenstein (1931)

Well, we've warned you...

[10/10 · 19 October 2018]

With these words we are introduced to Frankenstein, directed by James Whale, which was a hit upon its 1931 release with both critics and audiences. The film was followed by numerous sequels and has become arguably the most iconic horror film in history. The film raised the bar for all horror films that followed.

Henry Frankenstein, played by Colin Clive, and his assistant Fritz (Dwight Frye) piece together a human body, the parts collected from buried bodies and hanged criminals. The multi layered body is perfected with an abnormal brain. Frankenstein succeeds in creating life from death. The honors of portraying this monster goes to horror icon and Universal household name Boris Karloff.

William Henry Pratt, better known by his stage name Boris Karloff, succeeds in frightening the audience while emotionally captivating them at the same time. Just as important as Karloff's interpretation of the monster is the brilliant make-up trickery of Jack Pierce. He designed the iconic head and hands for the famous monster, while James Whale gave the monster a shabby tramp suit with heavy, clumsy shoes. But it was Karloff who turned the monster from a scary bogey into a sympathetic, contact-craving blockhead, who inadvertently or rightly commits his misdeeds.

The film has a number of theatrically staged moments that now belong to our cultural heritage: the "creation" that appeals to the imagination; the first appearance of the monster; the heart-rending scene with the girl who does not keep drifting; the attack on the young woman who is about to marry and the pursuit of the monster by farmers with torches. This chase ends in an old windmill, where Frankenstein and his creation face each other in one of the first spectacular closing scenes from the horror genre.

Ever since, good, bad, humorous and satirical horror movies have been made, but Frankenstein is and remains the rock on which the whole genre seems to rest.

Life (I) (2015)

An unfulfilled promise

[5/10 · 26 September 2015]

"Life (2015)" is the fourth film directed by notorious Dutch photographer and director Anton Corbijn, in which we get a look into the life of James Dean. Corbijn proves to be an accomplished director since the release of his debut and gritty masterpiece "Control (2007)". A film that set the bar so high it became hard to satisfy his newly found fan-base. After his escapades with the thriller genre he returns to the genre he became known for, a biopic. And this time our favorite "Rebel" gets the "Corbijn- treatment", or so we hope.

As the title suggests the story revolves around Dennis Stock, a photographer for the magazine "Life", who gets the assignment to shoot rising and rebellious Hollywood actor James Dean, before the release of his first headlining film "East of Eden (1955)". A friendship develops between both gentleman and the pair travel to L.A., New York and Indiana to get those precious shots Stock is longing for.

DeHaan rather gives us his own interpretation of James Dean. The resemblance between portraying and portrayed actor is marginal. Stock on the other hand is portrayed by Pattison who gives a dull performance although the concept of his role feels dull on its own, something we can't blame Pattinson for directly. Stock's assignment and private life should feel like a struggle though this is poorly translated into the script.

Throughout the movie there are sparks of chemistry between both but in the end it's sad to see that this chemistry is absent for most of the film. It's because of these aspects this period drama sometimes feels like it's sleepwalking throughout its own story, which is a shame considering the fact that "Life" can be considered as almost a personal film for Corbijn. You might expect that a photographer making a film about photography would create something more lively than the overall boring "Life".

Maybe Corbijn made us spoiled little brats, we expect too much from the director that gave us "Control", while you can't blame an audience for expecting something more daring than "Life". James Dean was not only a fascinating character, he also possessed a complexity towards his sexual identity, something the film largely ignores. In conclusion there are some pleasing touches, such as the beautiful cinematography or a refreshing cameo by Ben Kingsley, but in the end this film becomes a frustrating experience for Corbijn fans.

Blazing Saddles (1974)

Why don't you... loosen your bullets?

[8/10 · 17 September 2015]

If there was one year that could be proposed as the year of Mel Brooks, it would be 1974. With two of his films, "Blazing Saddles" and "Young Frankenstein" represented in the Box Office top 10, he was America's funniest man. Mel Brooks has his own atypical style, but both pictures differ in their ways of being funny and it's almost an impossible task to agree on which one is the best. So in retrospect I watched his "Blazing Saddles", probably the funniest Western ever made.

The story line is quite... well, let's call it unstructured. Though we can find a certain plot in this total mess. "Blazing Saddles" tells the tale about some untrustworthy land speculators who are constructing a railroad, with only one problem. The railroad needs to run through a town called Rock Ridge and they need to find a way to drive the townsfolk out. They hope to accomplish this by sending a black sheriff so the townspeople will revolt. Then again the film has so many things happening at the same time it's hard to give a good synopsis. Because in the end this film was created for the purpose of being funny, and damn it is!

It feels like as if Mel Brooks can literally get away with anything, and people will let him say or do anything because he has earned this privilege since the distinctively funny debut: "The Producers (1968)". Brooks does everything to keep us laughing at the screen, and overall he succeeds. To truly understand these kind of films you must understand that this is an "audience movie". It is pure entertainment for your jaws and doesn't try to be an over-polished film in any way. And "Blazing Saddles" is pure entertainment from beginning to end, sure there are some slow bits though maybe these are a necessity to rest the jaw muscles for a while.

"Blazing Saddles" is the perfect introduction for those who are not yet familiar with Brooks' work. What makes him stand out from your typical satirist is his ability to willingly embrace the redundancy of everything . His humor is more than just vulgarity and something he will always be remembered for. Brooks has no taste, which makes it in some weird way tasteful, and well, if you don't understand that, stick with your "Scary Movie" franchise I'd say.

E.T. (1982)

A movie that gets better with age

[9/10 · 14 September 2015]

"E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial" (1982), one of the most famous science fiction films ever made, needs no introduction. Even if you're not the biggest filmfreak you'll know without a doubt that it was directed by the one and only Mr. Steven Spielberg. Upon its release date in 1982 the world fell in love with this oddly creature from outer-space. Not that it matters much, but even Lady Diana and Ronald Reagan were moved to tears after seeing this film. But what were those secret ingredients that made E.T. as unforgettable as it turned out to be?

Spielberg takes us on a trip in an American suburban development. Out in the wilderness a spaceship lands at night, with odd-looking creatures taking what seems to be samples of trees and plants. After being startled by humans the creatures depart again into outer-space. There is just one problem, they forgot one of their friends, E.T. Without spoiling too much of the script E.T. befriends a little boy named Elliott and an adventure for both little 'men' begins.

Our hero in this particular film, besides E.T., is in the human form of Elliott who's played by Henry Thomas, a now former child actor who gives an extraordinary performance. The strength of his performance lies in the fact that it comes across as very natural and childlike. What Thomas feeds his character is something rarely seen around child-actors in Hollywood films.

Upon watching "E.T" again, for probably the 20th time or so, it becomes clear that this film tells much more than just the story about a little boy befriending an "Extra-Terrestrial". In its essence "E.T." deals about friendship and love. The sequential story develops the back-story of our little creature, the personality of Elliott, the relationships between the humans and so on. All of this is told in a fluently manner that makes us, as viewers, involved in what is actually a creature created by special effects. We empathize in the friendship between Elliott and E.T, sometimes with tears and sometimes with laughs.

"E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial" is a film that drives on a stream of different emotions throughout its entire runtime and Spielberg serves us just the right amount of these emotional ingredients. The film has moments of childlike innocence and hope, funny and exciting moments and a sequence that's so tear-dropping even Conan the Barbarian with blow his nose during the end credits. In the end E.T. is one of the most remarkable characters ever created in Modern Cinema and a film that ,like fine wine, only gets better with age.

Back to the Future (1985)

Great scott! 30 years! We're getting old Marty!

[8/10 · 14 September 2015]

Back to the Future (1985), an eighties classic, is already celebrating its thirtieth birthday this year which makes it the perfect opportunity to review this 'popcornflick'. Back to the Future was written (together with Bob Gale) and directed by the now famous Robert Zemeckis. Together with Spielberg they proved that eighties films could have cheese all over it while still being a whole lotta fun. Assisted by a top-notch cast in the likes of Michael J. Fox and Christopher Lloyd, Back to the Future became the quintessential 1980s flick that inventively combined a funny script, with action, science fiction and romance, that brings joy to both children and well... big children.

It's present time, or at least it was in 1985, and we are introduced to the teenager Marty McFly, played by Michael J. Fox, who lives together with his rather nerdy parents. Though his household sometimes feels like a funhouse, Marty tries to escape from his boring life through his friendship with the eccentric Dr. Brown, played by Christopher Lloyd. Dr. Brown appears to be some sort of inventor and can only be described as the lovechild of Einstein and Stokowski. With the time-traveling DeLorean created by Dr. Brown, Marty is send back in time to make sure his parents will still fall in love... again and to stop his own existence from being endangered. Back to the Future plays with the fact that teenagers believe their parents were never teenagers. How could Marty's parents have ever been teenagers if they don't understand their own son? Luckily Dr. Brown has the perfect solution and Marty travels back in time to meet his 'teenage' parents. Without spoiling the plot in detail it's quite the encounter.

Let it be faith or luck, it seemed almost as if Michael J. Fox wouldn't become synonymous with his role of Marty McFly. Due scheduling clashes it was nearly a certainty that Eric Stoltz would play the now famous part. Although Stoltz is very capable in his own respect it's a blessing they found a solution to Fox's busy schedule. Michael j. Fox plays Marty with an unique and energetic charm for which he is known and it works brilliantly. In addition, the chemistry Fox and Lloyd share on screen is one of a kind, their friendship feels so natural that it is a true pleasure to withhold.

This friendship is indeed one of the reasons why Back to the Future works so well and still holds up to its time. But even more importantly for its success, is the way in which the film has fun with the paradoxes and difficulties of a kid meeting his own parents. And if this alone wasn't enough we are faced with many running gags of the changes that happened in 30 years.

In 1985 Spielberg gave us besides Back to the Future two other productions: "The Goonies" and "Explorers". It leaves us wonder if Spielberg, at the peak of his science fiction/adventure heyday, tried to imitate the great studio executives of Golden Hollywood, who were known for matching the right director to the right film. Robert Zemeckis and Back to the Future proved to be a match made in heaven. His big breakthrough is the perfect blend of everything cinema stands for. It's made with such an unforgettable spirit you only wish they made more like these today. Too much nostalgia? Oh well...

Rosetta (1999)

Rosetta and the search for a job

[8/10 · 12 September 2015]

Rosetta (1999), directed and written by the now critically acclaimed Dardenne brothers , is a film with a simple premise, a young and impulsive girl, looking for a job. Nevertheless it was this film that won the Palme d'Or at the 1999 Cannes Film Festival, as well as the best actress prize for its portraying of the title character, played by Emilie Dequenne. Rosetta is the ultimate prove that these two brothers of cinema are masters in creating intensely naturalistic films about lower class life in Belgium.

Rosetta tells the story about a young woman that wants to find a job at all costs. She knows that her own life is falling apart before her eyes and tries to avoid this by any means necessary. In her search for a job Rosetta has to deal with an alcoholic mother, with whom she lives together in a rickety trailer. The search for work becomes almost as a metaphor for going to war, she won't stop until she has the stable life she is longing for. Along the way she makes a friend, Riquet, with whom the relationship is one of an awkward and weird nature.

As mentioned earlier Emilie Dequenne received the best actress prize for her portrayal of the title character. Leave aside that this was deserved or not she convinces us as a girl with a grim determination who's mainly relying on her instincts. Although the Dardenne brothers know how to perfectly blend a good casting with an effective use of camera.

The film never makes any effort in portraying Rosetta as a heroine, she isn't winning neither sympathetic. It's in these aspects that lies the true subversive power that this film possesses. Upon watching this film you'll learn that the title is kind of misleading. This film is about the determinism of being employed, which is synonymous for Rosetta with happiness. The only problem is that it's her point of view because as soon as she gets a job she still isn't happier than before. It leaves us, as the viewer, wonder: 'Has this girl ever learned to have happiness and can employment alone make our lives more stable?'

Rosetta feels at times very claustrophobic, although it has an universal theme. This is due the stylistically straightforwardness of Alain Marcoen's cinematography helped with a handheldcamera style. It gives the film the feel of a small European art movie, which it is to some degree, if not in its totality. It's thanks to this style of filming that the movie is so exceptional at maintaining an objective view into the world of Rosetta.

In the end Rosetta proved to be the big breakthrough of the Dardenne Brothers and a breakthrough that was well deserved. It even inspired new laws surrounding the labor of teenagers in Belgium such as preventing employers from paying teenagers less than the minimum wage. This is a fine example of the influence of filmmaking on society, especially if it is as good as Rosetta. Instead of resting on their laurels the Dardenne brothers made a notable selection of critically acclaimed films such as Le fils (2002) or L'infant (2005). Although, personally, Rosetta is a grand introduction into their amazing body of work and style.

Galloping Mind (2015)

Belgian rock and roll cinema

[7/10 · 12 September 2015]

Galloping Mind (2015), a film written and directed by Wim Vandekeybus, and also his debut drama feature proves to be more then a pleasant surprise. Together with what seems to be almost a full house, I had the opportunity to witness the premiere of his debut, a drama starring Jerry Killick, Natali Broods and an assemble cast of terrific child actors.

Galloping Mind tells the story about twins separated during birth. They both grow up in different environments. Twelve years later their paths cross again and the search for their roots and independence starts. The story of these twins are interwoven with those of their adult counterparts played by Jerry Killick and Natali Broods. The voice over spoken word by Jerry Killick during his radioshow 'Galloping Mind' serves as a 'link' throughout the movie and changes in nature with the tone of the film and the emotions of the characters.

The casting can only be described as intriguing. Jerry Killick is a true pleasure to withhold. He plays his role as part-time pet shop owner, part-time radio maker with a natural fury rarely seen in Belgian productions today. The scenes he shares with his young counterparts are a feast for your eyes and make you wonder how Vandekeybus could bring these children on the same level as Killick. Its maybe due this dynamic that Natali Broods' character seems to be one of the only flaws in his film. Her accent made it difficult to portray a believable character.

The cinematography is a wonder to look at, from the galloping horses to the action scenes or a dancing and drunk Jerry Killick. All of this is filmed in a fast and exciting pace that takes you on a emotional roller-coaster ride. At first it feels like total chaos, but after a while you feel that Vandekeybus' past as a choreographer is interwoven with the chaotic yet structured camera-work of Gabor Szabo. This great photography is supported by the jazzy, rocky and chaotic sounds made by Mauro and Ribot, and perfectly suit the story and visuals.

For his directorial debut Wim Vandekeybus proves to be a risk taker, he uses the 'three don't's' of movie making: water, kids and animals, and is willingly using them all together. He takes the challenge to combine them all in his structured chaotic world. He is a director who knows how to direct children. These young stars acted fluently and were on the same level as the grown ups.

Upon watching this debut it is a certainty that this isn't for everyone. The movie is fast, exciting and takes you on an emotional roller-coaster ride although this isn't your normal roller-coaster ride, maybe due to it's 'rock and roll' approach in filmmaking. In the end Galloping mind is the result of a great start for Wim Vandekeybus and hopefully an interesting career as director.

Playtime (1967)

A magical masterpiece that still holds up to its time

[9/10 · 8 September 2015]

Playtime (1967), written and directed by Jacques Tati and probably one of his most brilliant films, is one of a kind, an amazingly funny movie that drives rather on incidents of comedic value than a funny dialogue-based script. A sign of Tati's craftsmanship in using the language of film in its true form.

Playtime is set in Paris, or a Paris that still needs to exist in the future. At first sight the landmarks of the city seem to be excluded although, if we are fast, we can see the reflections of these landmarks in the reflections of the so modern (for its time) glass and steel constructions of the buildings.

Upon watching this film you get a high sense of incidental chaos although everything is very structured and layered. The modern world created by Tati is a chaotic yet structured ballet of the people living in it. There is no plot, no main cast and almost no audible dialogue. Tati rather chooses for a script in the form of funny incidents. He controls the viewer and creates a game of observation. There's hardly any dialogue, and the dialogue that we get is mostly inaudible. The comedic relief comes from the nonstop flow of the visual gags that keep happening on screen, something that only Tati masters. These aren't laugh-out-loud gags, but smiles of recognition.

As mentioned earlier there are no main character in this movie although some stand out more than others, for example his own Mr. Hulot, an attractive American woman or a restaurant owner. It is as if Tati tries to trick us with this kind of technique. As movie goers we are trained to find the main characters and we empathize with their emotions throughout the movie though this won't work watching Playtime. Sometimes you lose the 'main' characters and find them again walking around the corner. All these elements make Playtime a movie that begs to be watched more than once to fully appreciate the art that Tati has created.

The cinematography of Jean Badal and Andréas Winding show us only the big picture of it all, instead of close ups or reaction shots. This particular style gives you the opportunity to search action at the screen wherever and whenever you want. As a viewer you are almost played at with a game of hide and seek, you constantly want to know what happens in the background, the forground and behind the camera lens.

Tati draws a strong contrast between humans, hopeful, and wondering through the impersonal and modern cities of the future. We see all these things happening before our eyes, not from someone's point of view but rather through the lens of the camera. Tati gives the movie goer the opportunity to make their own assumptions of the world he created. Although you can feel that the comedic touch of the film is actually his reaction towards these modern societies, the loss of a more personal city.

Although the high production costs bankrupted Tati, Playtime is undoubtedly a magical and funny masterpiece that still holds up to its time. It shows that Tati is an artist as a physical comedy actor and visionary director.

The Guest (I) (2014)

Great 80s action-horror thriller (that didn't came out in the 80s)

[8/10 · 29 May 2015]

The Guest is a film brought to you by Adem Wingard and Simon Barrett, the director and writer of You're Next and some of the segments of the anthology series V/H/S. Because I haven't seen one of these movies i had no clue what to expect.

In this movie a "guest" shows up on the doorstep of a family who lost their son during a war. Because our guest fought with him on the battlefield he is invited to stay with the family for a while. And you might guess it, a lot of weird stuff starts to happen. It's a simple premise and one of my worst plot synopsis' i've written so far but i feel that it wouldn't be right to spoil too much of the story.

I can honestly say that The Guest was one of the biggest surprises of 2014. I saw this movie without even having a clue and it was widely entertaining for a bunch of reasons.

The aspect that differentiates The Guest from similar attempts is its soundtrack and how the filmmakers gave the soundtrack an importance equal to the main characters. It has that gritty 80s feel all over it that sets the tone for this movie from beginning to end.

Dan Stevens as "the guest" is fantastic and this role really shows off his range as an actor. He infiltrates this family in every single way and the filmmakers did a really good job of keeping tension and having you wonder for a long time who this guy really is. Much of this is thanks to the performance of Stevens. In a way he's a very likable lead, even when things start to get weird you keep rooting for him. He plays "the guest" with so much conviction it's hard to tell what is going on in his mind but one thing is certain, you don't want him in your house for too long.

In conclusion The Guest is a great action-horror hybrid from the 80s that's influenced by it in the best possible way. You can tell that these guys have respect for 80s action-horror but also know how to transcend it in to a good movie with a lot of style and tension build in to it.

The Kid (1921)

The First of Many

[9/10 · 12 March 2015]

Charlie Chaplin's 'The Kid' is the first of many golden treats Chaplin gave us during his extraordinary career. As an actor, director, producer, writer and composer he shows how to make a perfect blend between humor, drama and a taste of surrealism.

It's The Tramp in all its glory. A character that "speaks" a universal language and makes us fall in love with it over and over again. Though it isn't The Tramp that steals the show completely. 'The Kid' is the real star of this movie. The child actor arguably gives one of the best ever on screen recorded performances throughout movie history. You can literally feel the pain in his eyes when separated from The Tramp. On the contrary the sparkling eyes touch you when he's with his so called adoption dad.

How Chaplin did this is a big question mark. Or should we give the child all the credit? Nonetheless it certainly tells us something about the genius of a storyteller he was and his ability to translate emotions of this kind to the big screen.

Although 'The Kid' can be seen as a child of its time the humor is timeless and an universal language everyone speaks. The shots sometimes feel quickly cut but then again this was common for 1920's Hollywood.

I must admit Charlie Chaplin is a personal favorite, if not a personal hero.

Conclusion: The greatest films are those which make us think about the carefree times when we were a child... 'The Kid' is one of those and a true treasure in movie history.

Turkish Delight (1973)

Girls with red hair...

[10/10 · 11 March 2015]

How can you review one of your personal favorites and still give a neutral view? Then again movie reviews are seldom a neutral piece of literature.

That aside i have to acknowledge that 'Turks Fruit/Turkish Delight' is a masterpiece of Dutch cinema and one of the greatest movies by Hollands most notorious directors Paul Verhoeven.

Why? Because it's a well balanced mix of Verhoeven's typical filmy realism as a pure cinematic device with a love story. The power of this movie lies in this realism, it's Paul Verhoeven throwing sh*t in your face, not afraid of any subject, it's if there is no taboo in Verhoeven's head. This was probably the reason why Turks Fruit was such a success at it's time.

Turks fruit is a roller coaster movie about two people that live by the opportunistic way that characterizes Verhoeven's films and there characters. They are free, don't care about the rules and are one of my all time favorite couples on screen.

To conclude: I'm still amazed at who unknown this film actually is compared to it's genius. So, one big advice, see it now, and if it's good tell everyone you know.

Agent Carter (2015–2016)

A pleasant and stylish surprise

[8/10 · 10 January 2015]

Agent Carter turns out to be an interesting espionage and period series. It serves as a nice prequel to Agents of SHIELD, and if not a better TV series overall, although it's early to tell.

All the references and "easter eggs" in the two part episode premiere are great but this is not what makes the series special, it is the feeling you get watching Agent Carter. The music, the cars, the typical diners, the jazzy clubs, 1946 New york,... All this elements make Agent Carter a stylish piece, relying on Peggy Carter, not only as an action hero but a woman in the 1940s.

If you love Marvel, you're going to have fun with this one. And even if you're a non-marvel fan-boy/girl, you'll be satisfied with the tone of the Series and Peggy Carter kicking some ass.