The music transforms this entire movie from camp to something approaching the sublime. "Frankenstein's Theme", which is looped over and over the Criterion menu, is so Godd*mn haunting that I spent weeks tracking it down over the internet and listen to it incessantly. The music is the perfect complement to the retro-Hammer production design and costumes. It's so heartbreakingly mournful that it casts a spell over the whole movie, manufacturing pathos for the shots of the children watching the Doctor (their father) and creating a sense of inevitable doom over the whole film. Brilliant! See the movie and hear it.
Reviews
7 Reviews
Shivers
(1975)
Better than expected
6 September 2001
I'm a big fan of the director's but had never seen this one until the other day (the VHS re-release "director's cut" or whatever). The other user comments had let me to expect an amateurish curiosity, but I found it polished and feel no need to make any excuses for it (perhaps the new release is a cleaner print).
It's pretty sly, the acting's not bad and I found the film most remarkable for its restraint and subtlety. I'm not sure I buy the idea that the parasites are a metaphor for Americanization - Cronenburg's concerns are, I think, more personal and abstract than such a reading gives him credit for.
The movie is deliberately paced and the shock/gore factor is relatively low. I found it to be a modest footnote in a career that later bore stranger, richer fruit.
It's pretty sly, the acting's not bad and I found the film most remarkable for its restraint and subtlety. I'm not sure I buy the idea that the parasites are a metaphor for Americanization - Cronenburg's concerns are, I think, more personal and abstract than such a reading gives him credit for.
The movie is deliberately paced and the shock/gore factor is relatively low. I found it to be a modest footnote in a career that later bore stranger, richer fruit.
A.I. Artificial Intelligence
(2001)
Spielberg for adults (finally) *vague spoiler
9 August 2001
Warning: Spoilers
This one's been intelligently commented on already, so I'll be brief. I'm a huge Kubrick fan and I haven't seen a Spielberg movie since Jaws that held up for me through a post-pubescent viewing (at 14, E.T. brought tears to my eyes, but most of Spielberg's work now seems cynically manipulative to me now, and his "serious" work is most offensive of all).
A.I. seems to me to be a worthy post-script to Kubrick's career, however - certainly not the movie SK would have made, but respectful, imaginative and intelligent. There are longueurs and set-pieces (the public robot execution circus sequence) that don't quite work - but I was engrossed throughout. The last, post-ice-age sequence especially evoked a sense of wonder in me unlike any movie of recent vintage. Cloying sentiment is largely skirted throughout (even the damn teddy bear was handled with restraint - was this in Kubrick's script?).
One of those rare films that comes out of Hollywood that justifies the excesses of the industry. This film could only have been realized using all the technical and financial resources of a Spielberg, and I'll tolerate another decade of liberal "Oscar-mongering" (not my term) on his part for another such achievement.
A.I. seems to me to be a worthy post-script to Kubrick's career, however - certainly not the movie SK would have made, but respectful, imaginative and intelligent. There are longueurs and set-pieces (the public robot execution circus sequence) that don't quite work - but I was engrossed throughout. The last, post-ice-age sequence especially evoked a sense of wonder in me unlike any movie of recent vintage. Cloying sentiment is largely skirted throughout (even the damn teddy bear was handled with restraint - was this in Kubrick's script?).
One of those rare films that comes out of Hollywood that justifies the excesses of the industry. This film could only have been realized using all the technical and financial resources of a Spielberg, and I'll tolerate another decade of liberal "Oscar-mongering" (not my term) on his part for another such achievement.
Safe
(1995)
Unique, unsettling *some spoilers
9 August 2001
Warning: Spoilers
All the other reviews I've submitted were written immediately after having seen the movie in question, but this one's 4-5 years after the fact. I haven't seen any of Haynes' other movies, and at the time I saw this one (at an Art House theatre in Chicago), I didn't think I took much from it. In fact, later, when I saw "Vanya on 42nd St" and "Boogie Nights" I didn't realize I'd seen Julianne Moore in this film (I thought she was strikingly charismatic and gorgeous in both the other films).
However, this movie seems to have lain dormant in my brain, emerging recently and compelling me to submit a review. The "greatest" movies convey mood and ideas that are uniquely suited to the medium (as opposed to movies - good and bad - that are at heart simply visual analogues to plays or books). For example, the works of Kubrick or Scorsese or Hitchcock could not be imagined in another medium. "Safe" seems to me to be an example of uniquely filmic art, and its resonances have stayed with me for several years.
Although the photography is slick and smooth, I still recall a very low-budget feel to the film. The soundtrack, it seems to me, was hissy and indistinct. Perhaps this is a fault of the print I saw, but the amateurish, almost pornographic intimacy now seems very effective. As I have indicated, I didn't even recall Moore's presence in this movie, which now seems a testament to her achievement. Her character is essentially transparent, hollow - an empty vessel, seeking purpose/direction first from middle class marriage, later from a self-help guru. It seems significant to me in retrospect that an actress I've subsequently found immensely attractive registered to me in this film as dull and sterile.
The later half of the movie, when she embraces the new-age self-actualizing cultism and comes to live in the nature retreat felt, I recall, a little forced, a little too symbolic or point-making. However, the mood at the en was appropriately ambiguous and appropriate.
Tone is all-important in films, and this film's tone is unique in my experience - a sort of morbid, detached cynicism; not judgemental, but finally rather sad. The subject matter seems fodder for smugness and point-making, and it is Haynes' achievement that the results are so compelling. See it for a subtle, uniquely troubling experience.
However, this movie seems to have lain dormant in my brain, emerging recently and compelling me to submit a review. The "greatest" movies convey mood and ideas that are uniquely suited to the medium (as opposed to movies - good and bad - that are at heart simply visual analogues to plays or books). For example, the works of Kubrick or Scorsese or Hitchcock could not be imagined in another medium. "Safe" seems to me to be an example of uniquely filmic art, and its resonances have stayed with me for several years.
Although the photography is slick and smooth, I still recall a very low-budget feel to the film. The soundtrack, it seems to me, was hissy and indistinct. Perhaps this is a fault of the print I saw, but the amateurish, almost pornographic intimacy now seems very effective. As I have indicated, I didn't even recall Moore's presence in this movie, which now seems a testament to her achievement. Her character is essentially transparent, hollow - an empty vessel, seeking purpose/direction first from middle class marriage, later from a self-help guru. It seems significant to me in retrospect that an actress I've subsequently found immensely attractive registered to me in this film as dull and sterile.
The later half of the movie, when she embraces the new-age self-actualizing cultism and comes to live in the nature retreat felt, I recall, a little forced, a little too symbolic or point-making. However, the mood at the en was appropriately ambiguous and appropriate.
Tone is all-important in films, and this film's tone is unique in my experience - a sort of morbid, detached cynicism; not judgemental, but finally rather sad. The subject matter seems fodder for smugness and point-making, and it is Haynes' achievement that the results are so compelling. See it for a subtle, uniquely troubling experience.
Tough Guys Don't Dance
(1987)
Essential Viewing - a milestone
9 August 2001
I always quote this as one of my two favorite movies (the other being "The Ninth Configuration"). Like that film, it's unpolished, awkward and brilliant.
Ryan O'Neal, a brilliant empty vessel, as in "Barry Lyndon", is the perfect receptical for Mailer's essentially passive protagonist. Grotesque, awkwardly paced and fascinating, this should be considered manditory viewing.
Mailer's hand is so heavy and the film feels so writerly that the experience is play-like and unusual. This exploratory quality is to be hugely prized (see "Kids", "Ninth Configuration", "Safe", "Dancer in the Dark" to see vastly different but equally praiseworthy examples of what can happen when Hollywood outsiders are allowed access to decent budgets and distribution).
Ryan O'Neal, a brilliant empty vessel, as in "Barry Lyndon", is the perfect receptical for Mailer's essentially passive protagonist. Grotesque, awkwardly paced and fascinating, this should be considered manditory viewing.
Mailer's hand is so heavy and the film feels so writerly that the experience is play-like and unusual. This exploratory quality is to be hugely prized (see "Kids", "Ninth Configuration", "Safe", "Dancer in the Dark" to see vastly different but equally praiseworthy examples of what can happen when Hollywood outsiders are allowed access to decent budgets and distribution).
The Ninth Configuration
(1980)
Naive, hilarious, flawed - fascinating
9 August 2001
WP Blatty's outrageously indulgent and and embarrassingly overreaching is tremendously rewarding if you are receptive to the ideology and tone of the movie. This stagy, loquacious specimen is an extremely entertaining experience. Blatty here serves as his own director (having made his career as Blake Edwards' collaborator a decade earlier - of course, he is best known as author of `The Exorcist') .
Anyhow, this is an amateurish work in the best sense of the word. It is naïve, uncinematic, and disarmingly sincere. Any film with the ambition to address the nature of man's relationship with his fellows and with his creator in such a sincere, ambitious and unironic way deserves a viewining.
This is very much a staged play, awkwardly verbose and symbolic (but engaging, compelling like Pinter or Mamet), but enjoyed as such, it's effective. I always quote this as one of my two favorite movies (the other is `Tough Guys Don't Dance'). It's hilarious, sophomoric and ingratiating.
Anyhow, this is an amateurish work in the best sense of the word. It is naïve, uncinematic, and disarmingly sincere. Any film with the ambition to address the nature of man's relationship with his fellows and with his creator in such a sincere, ambitious and unironic way deserves a viewining.
This is very much a staged play, awkwardly verbose and symbolic (but engaging, compelling like Pinter or Mamet), but enjoyed as such, it's effective. I always quote this as one of my two favorite movies (the other is `Tough Guys Don't Dance'). It's hilarious, sophomoric and ingratiating.
The Getaway
(1972)
Not top drawer Peckinpah but not without interest either
31 October 2000
Despite the presence of some striking and characteristic directorial touches, this movie felt kind of empty compared to Peckinpah's richest work (Wild Bunch, Alfredo Garcia, etc). There are some exciting chase sequences and, eventually, the obligatory shootout, but there's a slick quality to most of the movie that put me off. Worst of all, the central relationship between Doc (Steve McQueen) and his wife (Ali MacGraw) is completely unconvincing, and much of the dialogue is laughable. The subplot involving Doc's double-crossing partner forcing the Sally Struthers character and her milquetoast husband to drive him across Texas in pursuit of Doc and Carol is the best (funniest, most disturbing) part of the movie.
Tell Your Friends