Joe vs. The Volcano (1990)

 I watched this year's ago, just rewatched it, looked here to remember what I thought, apparently I forgot to write a review. I get it, not much to say, while it is something of a cult film now, and has some moments, I don't think Tom Hanks and Meg Ryan's first outing is very good. The whole thing plays like an in joke I'm not in, and probably wouldn't be very impressed with if I were. Good cast, some moments of sold dry and rye humor, but most of this just doesn't work for me. **

Breathless (1960)

 'Breathless' is probably the French director Jean-Luc Goddards best remembered film, it's certainly the film that established him internationally, it's also the first of his films I've seen. It's one of those films that is very good, but I don't know if I could break it down and tell you why. It seems greater then the sum of its parts.

Jean-Paul Belmando is a Paris based small time hood, he kills a cop who catches him with a stolen car, then spends most of the rest of the film trying to convince American student Jean Seberg to run away to Italy with him, at first she does not know what he has done. Jean-Paul is an asshole, but a charming one, somehow you just like him. Seberg is also charming, but more calculating and less innocent then she at first appears.

There is alot of activity in the film, though very little actually happens. The stand out scene of the film, which also works as a stand in for the picture as a whole, is a meandering flirty conversation in Jean's apartment. It must go on for at least 10 minutes, nothing is resolved or much pushed forward by the conversation, it takes alot of detours and there are alot of little pieces of business. It feels real. 

While the stakes of the film get to be pretty high it maintains a low key, wandering sensibility. 'Breathess' is an odd title in that this is not a rushed movie, Jean-Paul doesn't seem all that concerned until vary late in the picture. I'm not entirely sure how I should feel about this, but somehow this movie just manages to be great, I can feel it is so, but don't quite comprehend why. I should revisit and look into directors other work as well. ****

But I'm a Cheerleader (1999)

 Indy comedy about a very ineffective homosexual conversion camp. Good girl, Christian and cheerleader Natasha Lyonne, hadn't seriously considered she was gay, though her friends and family having noticed signs (she loves Melissa Ethridge music and recently became a vegetarian) stage an "intervention". Off to True Directions and their 5 step program to turn you straight, but by time of"graduation day" she is very comfortable with her sexual identity and in love with Clea Duval.

Low budget film has an appropriately campy sensibility and is loaded with names you (or at least I) will recognize, Melanie Lynsky, Bud Cort, Michelle Williams, Richard Moll, Julie Delpy, RuPaul is one of the conversion councilors. Yes it has its fun with clichés, but still pretty progressive for the time. More amusing then laugh out loud funny, it still works more then it doesn't. **1/2

Oppenheimer (2023)

 An IMAX character study, an epic of people talking in rooms. 'Oppenheimer' is not your typical summer blockbuster, it's tent seems much smaller, I'm surprised it's doing so well. I enjoyed it, seemingly everybody's in it; it's got some intense sound design and solid visuals, but it's highlights are more cerebral, dialogue, performances, construction. There are Oscar's to be had. I knew the setting form the TV series 'Manhattan' and I'd seen, I think it was an 'American Experience', on Oppie back in college; I'd forgotten most of it but memory bells rang throughout. It is to be seen on the big screen, drink your beverage sparingly, it's a 3 hour bladder buster. ***1/2

The Decline of the American Empire (1986)

 Eight French Canadian intellectuals discuss sex and gather for a weekend in the country in 'The Decline of the American Empire'. The 'aren't we naughty' tone is amusing at first but goes on so long that it outstays its welcome, which I think is the point. It gets tiresom and revels the shallow, unhappiness of many of the characters, the extent to which sexual excess controls them, does not satisfy in any lasting way, complicates their lives and is destructive to their own wellbeing.

There is the gay man whose promiscuousness has made him ill, the divorcee who finds escape from her children and a lackluster career in a masochistic relationship. One wife has made her peace with her husband having trists when  out of town, so long as he behaves locally, not knowing he has slept with two of the other women at the party. Perhaps sadist of all is the middle aged man who may have finally found the love of his life, but doesn't trust it and self sabatoges.

Denys Arcand likes to explore both the comic and the tragic in his subject matter, the bittersweet. Be that sex and academia in 'Decline', the Canadian public health system and strained father son relationships in 'The Barbarin Invassions' (2003), or the contemporary theater and the nature of the divine in 'Jesus of Montreal' (1989). I had seen these films so far apart from each other, I'm only now realizing they are part of an extended universe, with characters overlapping in venn diagram manner; with for example the cheating husband here being the dieing old man in 'Barbarians'. 

A major theme of all his work is the center not holding, a civilization in decline due to its selfishness. There is tragic truth writ both large and small throughout. There is a subtlety of construction in which things already set up, leap out at you in the end. I was shocked how a film I was losing patience with tuned this around and bowled me over. ****

Ben-Hur (2016)

 Blah! Why? *

Cape Fear (1991)

 I'd seen the 1962 version of this story and read the source novel, but hadn't previously seen Marty's take. Interestingly the 90's remake of 'Cape Fear' started out as a Spielberg project, but he eventually deamed it too violent and Scorsese took it over, he's more at home with the cinematic violence.

There is homage here, the original 62 score is repurposed and there are visual nods to Hitchcock throughout, though he did not direct the original film. Also a Saul (and Elaine) Bass title sequence, one of his last. Gregory Peck and Robert Mitchum, stars of the original movie, have cameos, Mitchum even has multiple scenes. Their original roles are taken over by Nick Nolte and Robert DeNiro respectively.

The biggest difference between the movies, other then the greatly increased level of violence, is that this movie is morally grey. In the book and 62 version the protagonist is the man whose testimony put the antagonist away, it just so happens that he was a lawyer. In the 91' film the protagonist had been the antagonists lawyer, his public defender in a violent rap and assault case. Nolte had come across evidence impeaching the victim as promiscuous, in violation of professional ethics, and because he wanted his client to go to prison, he suppressed that evidence. Antagonist figured this out while in prison, so when he is released after 14 years he has well planed his revange.

So in the first movie the horror is the mostly arbitrary nature of the terror inflicted on the protagonist and family, in this version there is some karma here. DeNiro's character is a backwoods pentecostal in his upbringing, he inflicts vengeance for wrong times 7 in a biblical manner; he is terrifying and relentless like and old testament God.

This is a solid thriller with a particularly brutal final act. Good supporting cast, a more fleshed out story, Nolte is good but DeNiro just terrifying. ***

The Sound of Freedom (2023)

 SPOILER AND POTENTIALLY TRIGGERING CONTENT WARNING

'The Sound of Freedom' has been making unexpected waves in both the culture war and at the box office. Shot 5 years ago the film was shelved in the Disney acquisition of 20th Century Fox, subsequently the movie was acquired by Angel Studios, a divison of VidAngel, same folks who put out the popular 'Dry Bar Comedy' videos. Since it's opening on July 4th 'Sound of Freedom' has taken in a remarkable $96.2 million (as of July 19th) off its $14.5 million budget, a major and unexpected success story in a summer of flops.

TSOF tells the story of Tim Ballard, a special agent with The Department of Homeland Security who delt with child trafficking. Limited in what he could do by that government role, in 2013 he left the department and founded 'Operation Underground Railroad', a non-profit organization dedicated to combating sex trafficking, most famously by conducting military style search and rescue raids.

The movie provides a partially fictionalized account of the organizations founding, as well as telling a streamlined account of an elaborate sting operation conducted in Columbia, which rescued dozens of sex trafficking victims and saw the arrests of multiple perpetrators.

The movie gets the most out of its limited budget. From things I had heard beforehand I was worried that it might play like a TV pilot movie, but the film realltly does look cinematic and other then a somewhat clunky transition into the final act, it is well put together. Jim Caviezel is suitably stoic and fatherly in the lead role. The two lead kids are good, otherwise the acting is mostly middling, a couple of the bad guys venture into cartoony performances, while the MVP of the movie is Bill Camp, he elevates every scene he's in and gives a monologe which is the verbal high point of the picture.

The film does an admirable job of communicating the horror of its subject matter without getting graphic. The picture feels more grounded then I had expected and works reasonably well as both a thriller and a message picture. I liked it.

The film has gotten an unusual amount of criticism and has become something of a flashpoint in the American culture war. Among the criticisms directed at the movie are the inaccuracies in the film, most of these seem to be standard tweaks to simplify narrative and make the storyline more kinetic. It should be pointed out however that the final act is made up, Ballard did not go by himself into millita controlled Columbian jungle to rescue one girl and kill a man with his own bare hands, that's pure Hollywood.

The film has also been critiqued for focusing on a "stranger danger" abduction narrative, when at least in the U.S. children are far more likely to be sexualy abused by people they know, such as family members, then by total strangers. 

The film has been mostly embraced by people on political Right, some of whom have looked askance at those on the Left as not being sufficiently on board with combating human trafficking. One thing that might turn more politically liberal or even moderate viewers off to the film, is the extent of the venn diagram overlap between the movies most vocal supports (and even its star Jim Caviezel) to Qanon and Qanon adjacent conspiracy theories, as well as simple Trumpism. The embrace of the film by "The Right" as a form of virtue signaling or dog whistle, seems to be what is turning off viewers outside that bubble. Also it's a film about sex trafficking, not a light subject matter well suited to date nights or family outings to the theater.

The films subject matter is of course a rightly uncomfortable one, but in the way it was approached on screen I found very little to object to. I think there could be some real positive repercussions from the film, both in terms of topical awareness and spuring more modestly budgeted, out of the box film offerings. ***

Z (1969)

 "Z" is based on a novel, which in turn is based on real events, the assassination of an opposition political leader in Greece in 1963. Made in Algeria with a mostly Greek cast, the film is just excellent, it wowed me. There is so much here, it's a movie that is easier to talk about then write about, because where to even start. It's a rich tapestry that looks at the event, it's run up and aftermath, from many perspectives, the man himself, his wife, those that work with him, local authorities, the assassians, police, press, medical personal, the public prosecutor assigned to investigate. So it's full of character pieces and hints of more story, but it's also a taught and engaging investigative procedural with a documentary flare. The cast is excellent, the cinematography is impressive, the construction of the piece is intricate. Top notch all around. This may be one of my new favorite movies. ****

 https://youtube.com/@CreatureFeatures3

https://youtube.com/@RetrospectiveMovies - Classic movies

Pendulum (1969)

 It's a busy time for Washington DC Police Captian Frank Matthews (George Peppard), he's just been appointed as a "special consultant" for a Senate subcommittee on "Law and Order", though the conviction that got him the post (of a rape murderer played by Robert F. Lyons) has just been overturned by the Supreme Court; Also he thinks his wife (Jean Seberg) is having an affair. Turns out she is cheating on him, but when he goes to confront wife and lover in his bed they are already dead, now he is the prime suspect.

In short order Matthews has retained as counsel the man who got Lyons off, the suitably Gore Vidal looking Richard Kiley, playing a character named Woodrow Wilson King, you know because "Pendulum". This undercooked topical piece had an obvious irony right there for the taking, King's civil libertarian ways being what gets Matthew's off the hook, but the movie doesn't do that, Matthew's solves the murder himself (one guess who did it). He didn't really need King and he didn't learn anything. It's just not very good, Roger Ebert described the movie as Fascist. It was however nice to see Madeleine Sherwood in a small role, one of the great memorable faces of this era of American film making. *1/2

The Passion of Joan of Arc (1928)

 Carl Theodore Dreyer's 'The Passion of Joan of Arc' is the best known film from probably the best known film director to ever come out of Denmark, with the possible exception of Lars von Trier (you sickos). Concerning its self with the (then newly sainted) French Catholic martyrs trial and execution. Most of the dialog is taken from the actual 15th century court transcripts and the film is famously shot mostly in close up.

Renee Jeanne Falconetti who plays Joan has a wonderfully soulful and expressive face, ironically she had been a musical comedy star before this and never made another movie, she died by suicide in Argentina in 1946, age 54. The movie is innovative, an impressive piece of work way ahead of its time, we still don't make movies like this. I find that I appreciate it more then I enjoyed it, I hope to revisit sometime. Too iconic to not give ****

Denial (2016)

Around the turn of the Milleniaum the holocaust denying English historian David Irving (Timothy Spall) sued the American academic Deborah Lipstadt (Rachel Weisz) for liable in a British court: she had labeled him a holocaust denier in her book about holocaust denialism. In England your not presumed innocent, you have to prove that you are, unlike in America where the reverse holds true. 'Denial' is the story of the trial and events leading up to it. 

It's a fascinating story, the holocaust on trail. Tom Wilkinson plays Richard Rampton, Lipstadt's barrister, he dominates every seen he's in. Irving was his own council in court so you really got to see the two face off, this movie is really built around the satisfaction of seeing Rampton best Irving in court. The need for satisfaction is a major theme; Irving wants to be seen as a legitimate historian, which he had been prior to embracing holocaust denial: Lipstadt wants satisfaction as well, but must learn to trust her legal team who want to keep both her and holocaust victims off the stand, putting off a sense of moral satisfaction to better reach a legal one in the end.

There is a TV movie vibe here, it plays like an HBO telefilm. You kind of want it to seem grander, but this a court room story and that is where much of it plays out. The cast is solid, Weisz's Queens accent borders on parody but mostly keeps to the right side of the line, apparently that's how Lipstadt really sounds. ***

The Exterminator (1980)

 I watched this because I had mis remembered another movies title. Years ago I watched 'Executioner II' and I thought this was the original. On further research it turns out there is no 'Executioner I', just II, they started and ended with II. This was done for marketing? An injoke? To imply more back story? Ironically there is an 'Exterminator II'.

These franchises are basically the same as they both concern a vigilante and the cop who is trying to stop them. Street toughs paralyze Steve James who had saved his buddy Robert Ginty's life in Vietnam, so Ginty goes vigilante on them and then just keeps doing it, moving on to an organized crime boss and then to a pedophile ring. Ginty is versatile in his weapons choices as well, including pistol, AR-15 and flame thrower.

Christopher George is the good guy cop out to stop this extra legal killing, he too is a war veteran. Samantha Eggers is a doctor who George is romancing. There is also a CIA agent out to stop Ginty because his actions somehow threaten the president's reelection; the Agency under Carter was viscious.

Low budget but surprisingly watchable. One of my favorite moments is when Ginty first gets wind of the pedo's after he goes to have consensual sex with a prostitute, she happens to have had runins with the ring who wanted her for a three way. Despite all these plot elements the movie was tamer then I'd expected as regards what is actually shown on screen. **

Boyhood (2014)

 I'm arriving rather late at this one, and even while watching it took awhile to come together for me, but 'Boyhood' really is a remarkable achievement. Filmed between 2002 and 2013, I really felt like I witnessed Mason Evans Jr.'s boyhood, and I really did witness a far bit of actor Eller Coltrain's. DIrector Richard Linkletter's ambitious project is a triumph of follow through and editing, he didn't know where exactly this was going, at times you can feel him trying to stear it and at times the development seems quite natural. It's a catalog of life events large and small, as well as an era, the Iraq War, Obamamania, Harry Potter book parties and Roger Clemons. I don't know if we need many more films like this, but I'm glad we have this one. Kudos to our lead, Patricia Arquette, Ethan Hawk and Linkletter's real life daughter Lorelei. This film made me ache for memories of youth. ***1/2

Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny (2023)

 'Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny' is the 5th and at this point all but assuredly final, Harrison Ford Indiana Jones film. People had concerns about Spielberg not directing (though James Mangold is a more then solid directing talent) and the presence of Phobe Waller-Bridge because sarcastic woke Millenial, however I liked it, I had a good time.

It's not the strongest in the franchise by a long shot, and often (but not always) plays it safe. It's formulaic, but these films are by nature, it's part of why we come. Action set piece, exposition, action set piece, character moment, action set piece. It has the mechanics down and I think largely had the spirit down. 'Kingdom of the Crystal Skull' had sequences which I felt ran far too long, I didn't have that feeling here. The deep faked younger Indy sequence at the beginning came very close to pulling that off, but 80 year old Harrison Ford's voice coming out of 40 year old Harrison Ford's face, well that is noticeable. On the whole though I recommend it. ***

Hair (1979)

 'Hair' is director Milos Forman's ('Amadeus', 'One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest', 'Man on the Moon') adaption of the hit counter culture musical of the late 60's. You likely know many of the songs which have become staples like 'Let the Sunshine In', 'Good Morning Starshine' and the titular 'Hair', but you likely don't know the others in part because many of them are vulgar. You also likely don't know the plot, which is about a young man from Oklahoma (John Savage) who visits New York City prior to reporting for army service and befriends a group of hippies (lead by the recently departed Treat Williams, who can really sing and dance) and falls in love with a young socialite (Beverly D'Angelo, who while quite striking is a little old for the part, she is also nude a surprising amount in this).

I thought the movie worked, as unusual as it is at places. Having seen it in film form I find it a little hard to imagine how you could do it justice on stage, this adaption feels quite liberated from those constraints. The main cast has a real chemistry together and there are a number of faces I found fun to recognize in the supporting players, including Charlotte Ray, a young Micheal Jetter and a literally dying Nicholas Ray who passed three months after this film came out. Despite being a late adaption of a topical show it still did extremely well at the box office, $38 million off $11 million. Though the story has been around for decades I somehow did not see that ending coming. ***

Asteroid City (2023)

It's the mid 1950's and a recently widowed war photographer (Jason Schwartzman) and a Hollywood actress (Scarlett Johanson) share a moment, while chaperoning at a junior stargazer convention in the titular small desert town; also a lot of other stuff happens. This is a Wes Anderson film with all that implies, including a large star studded cast, an esoteric and drawl humored plot and a retro aesthetic, in this case mid century storybook and train set. 

Not on the level of say 'The Grand Budapest Hotel' I still found it a pleasant time. Anderson tends to throw so much at you and be so 'weird' that his films often require multiple viewings to really get a handle on. The writer/director is also obsessed with story framing and I'm not sure how well the wrap around device here works, though it does contain one of my favorite knowing jokes of the film. I also really liked the soundtrack. For now it's ***