Reviews

Willi Patton's striking follow-up to his equally memorable "The Big Fiddle" is both an engaging expansion of that film's universe and a bold expression of his metaphorical approach to dramatic cinema. Food and sex provide the backdrop for an intense examination of the demise of a relationship, set mostly within the confines of a New York apartment. Everything in "Monk Fish" is at once ordinary and profound, like all the details of one's most painful memories. But the viewing experience is pure intoxication, and further proof of Patton's promise as an auteur and gift for bringing out the best in an auspicious cast and crew. Working within an effectively compact running time, Collin Smith and Mia Van De Water never hit a false note: the characterizations are relentlessly honest. Consistently impressive production values belie the film's low budget while still maintaining a gritty New York indie vibe, underlining Patton's growing body of work as both wholly unique and yet part of a vital American cinematic lineage.

When a friend recently lent me the opportunity to attend an early morning trade screening just outside of Boston of the Guy Ritchie/Madonna remake of `Swept Away', I was more than a bit skeptical. I truly believe that Madonna could be the greatest actress in the world with the proper training and direction. However, I couldn't predict ANYONE being able to top Mariangela Melato's superb work in Lina Wertmueller's 1974 original, and if Madonna failed to do so, we all know this would mean another opportunity for critics and cynics and everyone outside of her camp to hound on her acting and wobbly film career.

I started watching the film, and before long my fears were...dispelled. Yes, it's true, Guy Ritchie's "Swept Away" really is a good movie. In it, Madonna plays a rich, vitriolic socialite named Amber, and Adriano Giannini plays a poor, bitter sailor named Giuseppe. I'm not going to bother spilling the plot itself, because most of you know it anyway, and frankly, it sounds pretty stupid: the idea of a rich woman and a poor man trapped together on an island seemed stale when the original hit screens in 1974, and it's infinitely more tired some three decades later. But what makes both films work so well is the complexity of these two characters, and the notion that the confines of society, as opposed to innate human nature, may be the reason for human frailty. Neither character is particularly appealing alone, but together they spark in each other a sense of passion and intense sexuality that is rarely seen in conventional Hollywood love stories.

The film stays surprisingly faithful to the source material, despite my early fears to the contrary. The much talked about "Come-On-A-My-House" sequence was certainly not even hinted at in the original. And the biggest omission (an unwise removal, in my opinion) is the original's famous sodomy scene. It would have been great to see Madonna's take on this most erotic of film sequences, but I'm guessing that this had more to do with husband Guy Ritchie's own uncomforability than anything else. This is a shame, because this is a great scene to begin with, and wouldn't it be nice to harken back to the days of unrestrained, borderline pornographic sex onscreen? Sigh.

For the most part, though, I was surprised at how well Guy Ritchie adhered to the original film, and I commend him for it. Furthermore, he has not been bitten by the "Americanization" bug in translating the film to a new generation; in other words, the sumptuous characterizations of the first film are not simplified to appeal to contemporary, dare I say less intelligent, audiences. The lengthy discourses on Communism versus Capitalism have been toned down, but the clashing of ideals is still ever present enough, and this alteration is actually justifiable considering the vastly different sociopolitical climate of today versus Italy in the 1970s.

As some one who was never very interested by Mr. Ritchie's film work in the past, I have to admit to being converted after this movie; he struck me as far more talented, and capable of a greater deal of depth, than his first two films had led me to believe. Attempting to remake a classic film is hard enough, but attempting to remake a classic European film for an American film market is about five times more challenging. After years of lousy American remakes of great European films, I was happy to finally enjoy a solid translation.

And yes folks, Madonna is very, very good. I won't say "excellent" or "brilliant", because it's not her very best work nor is it quite as dynamic as Ms. Melato, but she proves that she is a damn good actress capable of much more than she is often given credit for. One of the few problems that I had with the original film was the 180 degree turn in the Raffaela character on the island; it may have showed off Melato's range as an actress, but for the character, it did not feel entirely believable. Madonna & Ritchie have ironed out this kink quite nicely, and Amber's "evolution" on the island is easier to swallow and ultimately much more impressive; it adds dimensions to both the character AND the actress that were not present in the first half of the film.

Similarly impressive is Adriano Giannini, whose father, Giancarlo Giannini, played the same role in the original! Giannini Jr. is not quite as good an actor as Giannini Sr. (who headlined many of Wertmueller's best works), but he's some one to look out for. He's much more strapping than his father, and he also boasts a tangible sexual presence that should take him far. I hope that the bad press the film has already endured won't stilt his career, because I'd be very interested in seeing where this chap is headed in movieland.

Michel Colombier's score is superb, and brilliantly showcases the emotional journey of these two characters. In fact, I found it so personally stirring that I was reminded at times of Michel Legrand's legendary music for "Summer of '42", and this is particularly true during the final minutes of the film; fans can rest assured that the scene at the telephone is damn near as heartbreaking this time around as it was in the original. I am too familiar with much of Colombier's work but I wouldn't be surprised if he earned the film's sole Oscar nomination.

All in all, I was pleasantly surprised, and wholly satisfied, by Guy Ritchie's take on "Swept Away". True, it does not match up to Wertmueller's original, but that's understandable; hers was a great film, his is a very good film. I would heartily recommend seeing the original first, as it will surely enhance your viewing of the remake. However, Guy Ritchie has managed to put together a memorable, entertaining, and refreshingly unconventional film that can stand quite nicely on its own, and thus I enthusiastically recommend `Swept Away'.

"The Case of the Bloody Iris" (as it has been redubbed for DVD) is, without a doubt, one of the finest gialli to come out of Italy during the subgenre's heyday in the early 1970s. It's tense, it's funny, and it's deliriously inspired, the type of film that could almost pass for a work by genre masters Dario Argento or Mario Bava.

Jennifer (Eurohorror fave Edwige Fenech) is Jennifer, a beautiful model who moves into a luxury highrise shortly after its previous tenant had been brutally murdered. Soon enough, she encounters a masked man creeping into her room at night; her estranged husband's possessiveness turns violent; she finds herself falling in love with the most peculiar landlord....and, of course, the bodies start piling up.

'Bloody Iris' is a most unusual giallo in that it was released in 1971, at the peak of the genre's Italian output, and yet it always seems so supremely self-conscious. The traditional giallo elements (the gloved killer, the violent flashbacks, the sexual taboos) are all present here, but not necessarily in the manner you'll usually find them. It is as though director Giuliano Carnimeo put all the cliches into a blender and let the screenplay mix itself up...meaning that seasoned fans of this type of film will have a much more difficult time guessing the killer's identity, and thus a much more satisfying time watching the film. As some one who has seen more of these movies in recent years than I would care to count, I was shocked to find that I was WAY off on figuring out the killer OR the motive. The red herrings are all so subtle and the colorful supporting characters (usually fertile ground for the killer in these movies) so expertly presented that the viewer never feels manipulated by the director. It's anyone's guess as to who is killing and why, and it makes the experience all the most exciting.

Furthermore, the film has more going for it than merely a good mystery. The acting is surprisingly solid throughout, especially Edwige Fenech, who is every bit as goregous and innately watchable as you've heard. Bruno Nicolai's score is appropriately minimalist while being beautiful and often creepy, and at least one piece certainly seems to have influenced music played in a similar scene in "Halloween"...astute fans should pick up on this towards the end of the film, when Jennifer sneaks into a neighbor's apartment... There is a fair amount of humor throughout the film, most of which is, surprisingly, quite effective (!), and several of the suspense sequences are smashingly successful; you don't have to be easily scared to find yourself hanging off the edge of your seat during several of the film's most memorable set pieces. Speaking of which, fans may want to note that some of the film's highlights actually predate (and dare I say influenced?) similar bits in such Dario Argento classics as "Deep Red" and particularly "Tenebre". Although those two gems are, ultimately, superior films, 'Iris' does deserve credit for influencing later efforts of the man who essentially defined the genre in the first place.

Finally, I should close my review by offering typical kudos to Anchor Bay Entertainment for yet another stalwart DVD release. Can they do wrong? Probably, but I have yet to find any concrete proof myself! Simply put, their transfer of this film is out of this world. Taken from what seems to be an immaculate print of the film (or, perhaps more likely, the original negative!), the gorgeous job they have done made it hard to pay attention to what was going on onscreen during several sequences. Stelvio Massi's gorgeous photography looks stunning on this DVD, boasting a unique and highly appealing array of pastel colors and bright lighting; an unusual choice for a thriller, but a smashing choice all the same. And as Anchor Bay has been kind enough to present the film in its original 2.35:1 scope ratio, fans can fully appreciate director Carnimeo's masterful use of the widescreen lens. I don't know of any other thrillers he has directed, but if this is his only contribution to the genre, then it is a damn shame...with a few more titles under his belt, he could easily have wrestled his way onto the same shelf as Argento and Bava.

All in all, this is a terrific, wonderfully inspired giallo that any fan of Italian thrillers will want in their collection.

My Grade: A-

Today, on a whim, I decided to pick up the Media Blasters DVD of the Hong Kong living dead flick "BioZombie". I'd heard only a little about it before, and popped it in expecting a trashily enjoyable rip-off of Dawn of the Dead. Well, I was wrong, and right, in equal doses. And having finished the film only minutes ago, I am still unable to wipe the smile off of my face.

Woody and Bee (Jordan Chan and Sam Lee) are two slacker employees of a mostly bootleg VCD shop (changed to DVD for less familiar American audiences) at a shopping mall, who spend their days playing videogames, harassing customers, ditching work, and finding clever (and riotous) ways to make extra cash. Running an errand for their absent boss, they accidentally run over a man carrying a suitcase containing "soda". They give the drink to the injured but still breahing man, not realizing its actually a biological weapon, and then stuff him in their trunk. Shortly after they've gone back to the mall, the man has strangely disappeared...and you can guess what will ensue.

As seems to be the case with so many of the films I've reviewed on IMDB, the plot of this one is razor thin and merely a set-up. It's the clever execution that takes this film to the comedy/horror stratosphere...not to mention, surprisingly, the acting. Chan and Lee are fantastic in their roles, and if this movie gets seen by enough genre fans they could easily give Bruce Campbell a run for his money as the top shelf of smartass horror movie heroes. The first thirty minutes or so of the movie have little to do with zombies, and merely offer a chance for the camera to follow this duo around during their everyday exploits, giving the film the feel of an Asian "Mallrats". In fact, one could almost mistake the first act of the film for a Kevin Smith comedy. The two terrific actors play off of each other like a smarter vision Jay and Silent Bob, making up for what they lack in lovable doofus-ness with almost incomparable cynicism. Trey Parker and Matt Stone would be very, very proud.

Although the "zombies in a shopping mall" motif is clearly meant to be an homage to George Romero's all-time fright classic "Dawn of the Dead", by no means is this what I would consider "a horror film". It's actually just a very, very dark comedy, much in the same vein as such wonderful fan favorites as "Return of the Living Dead", "Re-Animator", and "Dead Alive". However, it's a bit less slapsticky than any of those films, and a bit darker in its humor, too. It's also complete with references to a good number of horror classics. One sequence, for example, is lifted almost shot-for-shot right ouf of Dario Argento's "OPERA" (but believe me, Argento fans won't mind!), and Woody and Bee's hitting the "man with the soda" is followed by a hillarious nod to the then-recent "I Know What You Did Last Summer". The film also manages to do a great job of paying homage to Romero's "Dead" films. One couple in the movie clearly a wonderfully caricatured update of "Night of the Living Dead"'s Harry and Helen Cooper, and another character plays like the direct descendant of "Bub" from "Day of the Dead".

Gorehounds might be a bit disappointed, as the violence is only slightly more graphic than the average American horror film, and zombie fans will perhaps be a little bit let down that the film is significantly less frightening than the newly released Resident Evil. However, I doubt very much that this will dampen their enjoyment very much. BioZombie is a real treat for horror fans, a chance to sit back and laugh WITH a zombie movie, not at it.

The DVD from Media Blasters is a pretty good package. It presents the movie in widescreen (1.85:1) and it looks pretty good despite being non-anamorphic. The sound is a suitable Dolby Digital stereo in either original Cantonese or dubbed English (yes, there ARE optional English subtitles) but the extras are unfortunately limited to some lobbycards and a few trailers...none of which are for this film. However, I'd recommend that horror fans plant the $24.95 for this purchase. It's a fabulously entertaining film, and if it makes its way among genre fans, this could be a Friday night party movie for years to come.

My Grade: A

I can understand why people would love "I Am Sam", and I can just as easily understand why people would hate it. It's easy to call the film manipulative and cheesy and predictable...it most certainly is. However, I loved this film, and I can assure you that I did NOT expect to. I'm not sure what exactly I did expect, but I went into this movie fearing the worst; after the wildly mixed reviews, and having nearly overdosed on Cinema Cheese in the terribly disappointing 'The Majestic', I was a bit leery of this film. Much to my surprise, I came out of the theater feeling supremely satisfied.

The film poses its audience a rather difficult question: should a mentally retarded man be allowed to raise a young child, even if he is the biological father? It's bound to leave its audience sharply divided, and this is part of the reason that it could likely spark a love-hate reaction in viewers. I won't bother discussing my views on this subject, I'll leave that up to you. But I will say that the movie made me think, and it made me reassess the values I cherish in life and love.

IT goes without saying that any discussion of this film begins and ends with Sean Penn's knockout performance. While I do agree with some fellow IMDB users and a certain film critic that playing mentally retarded individuals is usually just a ploy for Oscar consideration, there's no getting around the fact that "I Am Sam" underlines the rationale that Sean Penn is, indeed, the greatest acting talent of his generation. His character may be seemingly "simple minded", but his trademark raw emotion is conveyed so beautifully that he adds a whole other dimension to the character that could not possibly have been on paper.

And as for Michelle Pfeiffer...she's simply wonderful, as always. She's always boasted the sort of fascinating screen presence that recalls the ladies of Hollywood's Golden Age, but in recent years she's become more comfortable than ever onscreen. She exudes so much charisma and finesse that she makes acting look like the easiest job in the world, all the while bringing about her own personal touch to the character. Many critics have called this one of her best roles, and I would have to agree. However, this is also the biggest fault in the film. Her screen time is surprisingly a LOT less than one would expect going in, and her character is never as fully developed as she should be. I also wish the movie would have focused more on her relationship to Sam. At one point in the film there seems to be a very clear hint of romance in this interaction, but it never amounts to anything. Perhaps it was intended to be conveyed ever so subtly, or perhaps the studio was too afraid of how audiences would react to a possible romance between a hot shot lawyer and a retarded man. Either way, I think that this sort of edginess would have heightended the emotional impact of the film.

"I Am Sam" is not a perfect film by any stretch, but it's so incredibly good hearted and truly riveting that I don't see the need to pick apart its shortcomings. It's a worthy film to view, and regardless of whether your reaction to the film is negative or positive, it will surely be a potent response. And in this age of instantly forgettable films, that is a worthy accomplishment in itself.

My Grade: B+

NOTE: It's interesting to point out that this film, released in 2001, is often rather similar to a certain film released in 2000....The Next Best Thing, which starred Penn's ex-wife, Madonna. Both films consciously reference the classic Kramer vs. Kramer in depicting a father's struggle to defy societal prejudice in an attempt to gain custody of his child. It's not a particularly relevant detail, but in a year that began with films directed by Penn and Guy Ritchie (Madonna's husband) being released in America the very same weekend, I'd say it's worth pointing out.

I just got back from the first showing of the first day of release of The Mothman Prophecies, and I am left with only four short words:

Go see it. NOW!

Simply put, The Mothman Prophecies is the scariest horror movie since RING, Since many Americans won't be able to see RING for quite some time, they should consider tasting another slice of the terror pie with "Mothman". It's already a strong candidate for best horror film of 2002...and even as a hardcore genre fan, I'd have to put it on my list of favorite horror movies of all time.

I had been fascinated by the Mothman myth since 1995, when I first read of its existence in a book of legends and folklore. Since then, I've often thought about making a horror film based on the story. And as you might guess, some one clearly beat me to the punch! The film takes some bizarre, allegedly true events that occurred in the mid-60s in Point Pleasant, West Viriginia and updates the strange phenomena to present day using a somewhat fictionalized story.

Richard Gere plays John Klein (a character that I assume is based on real life author John Keel), a Washington Post reporter whose wife dies of a brain tumor shortly after a bizarre, seemingly unexplainable car accident. After she dies, he finds pictures she drew during her final days, pictures of a bizarre looking winged creature with glowing red eyes.

Flash forward two years. Klein is on his way to meet the governor of Virginia, when his car breaks down. He goes to get help (I won't reveal the creepy details of this sequence) and learns that he is nowhere near his destination. Rather, in the space of 90 minutes he has somehow managed to travel 400 miles to Point Pleasant, West Virginia. There he encounters Sgt. Connie Parker (played by Laura Linney), who tells him of the many strange going ons in the town...specifically, the accounts of a bizarre creature from witnesses who are by all accounts reputable. She shows him a sketch that one witness drew of the creature, and it is nearly identical to the bizarre drawings Klein's wife had done before her death.

You can probably guess where the film is headed from this point; in fact, that's part of the beauty. Astute viewers will always be one step ahead of the characters onscreen, and one step behind...The Mothman, or just director Mark Pellington. Each is pretty damn good at scaring people.

Pellington his his second feature, Arlington Road, a top notch thriller along the lines of Rosemary's Baby. Here he goes for a more Twilight Zone approach, with the "did it really happen?" factor of films like The Amityville Horror, Snuff, and Cannibal Holocaust thrown in for very, very good measure. Pellington has been gaining quite a bit of critical attention for this film, and rightfully so. If he keeps up, one can see Mark Pellington, Victor Salva, and Alejandro Amenbar doing for the horror/thriller genre what John Carpenter, Wes Craven, and Dario Argento did for it in the 70s.

Some critics have been apt to attack the film for its reliance on classic horror movie conventions...as if this is a bad thing. It's quite ironic, considering that it is the film's good old fashioned sensibility that makes the proceedings so overwhelmingly effective. It does not rely on cheap scares, post-PC "gore", or loud sound effects to jolt its audience. The film's power is rooted in its fundamentally chilling story, and taken to another level thanks to Pellington's assured direction. He never condescends to the audience, and he never goes for anything less than the extreme. He knows how to push audiences to the edge of their seat...and fortunately for horror fans, he does not know when to stop. Hitch would certainly be proud.

Yet the best element of The Mothman Prophecies is that, like the films of Hitchock, it is intended for its audience, and continues to engage them long after rolling the end credits. The film has a wonderfully self-reflective structure, and a haunting ending (Owen Gleiberman's comparison of this film to Nicholas Roeg's Don't Look Now is much deserved). However, many questions are left unanswered. Many plot threads still hang. Like Bob Clark's unnerving Black Christmas, The Mothman Prophecies does not provide the closure that most mainstream audiences would demand. The audience is forced to think about the film, and what it means, long after it's over. Mark Pellington insures that the Mothman's glowing red eyes will indeed stay fixed in our brains alongside the film's other haunting imagery. So remember, grown ups and young people alike....sleep with the light on.

My Grade: A

I'm not sure if I would call "Interiors" the finest film of Woody Allen's career. After my personal favorites, "Annie Hall" and "The Purple Rose of Cairo", it becomes nealy impossible for me to rank Woody Allen films. How exactly do you say that one movie is more perfect than another? Even in this league of sky-high standards, "Interiors" certainly ranks near the top.

The story is simple enough: In the twilight of his life, Arthur (EG Marshall) decides to seek independence from his domineering wife, Eve (Geraldine Page). Eve becomes unstable and suicidal, and the couple's three grown daughters-Renata (Diane Keaton), Joey (Marybeth Hurt), and Flynn (Kristin Griffith)-must deal with this radical life change in their own ways.

Interiors, like Woody Allen's subsequent (and extraordinary) dramas, is not a plot driven film. Rather it is a movie in which we have a beautifully illustrated ensemble of characters whose rich complexity is veiled by a guise of stability and contentment. Allen then throws an intriguing, somewhat melodramatic trauma into their lives, and the rest of the movie is seeing how they react and evolve. As such, the effectiveness of each individual performance is crucial to the film, and thus the power of the film lay largely in its perfect cast.

There is not a bad performance to be found in Interiors. In fact, there is not even a "good" performance: everyone here is pitch perfect, lending sympathy and empathy to characters who are not the most intrinsically likeable people. No one in Interiors is particularly pure; for every good point we see early on, there is a much darker, often selfish side to be revealed. And this is where the beauty of the film lies: these are not the cookie cutter "good guys" of your average American family drama. They are three dimensional, multi-layered human beings who are sympathetic for their flaws and weaknesses and naievete, not because they represent "who I'd like to be". Especially good here are Marybeth Hurt, Diane Keaton, and Geraldine Page. All of them are Oscar worthy here (especially Page, who is almost frighteningly good), but it's better that none of them were nominated; instead, for the rest of history, we can argue about how they were better than any of the nominated actresses anyway!

Of course, the real "winner" in Interiors is Woody Allen. Say what you will about his personal decisions, as an artist he is simply impeccable. It's so great that MGM's wonderfuly "Woody Allen Collection" Box Sets are letting us reappraise his illustrious career. A lot of people have called Interiors "Bergmanesque", but like a previous reviewer, I feel that this is a bit insulting. Although I am not an especially big fan of Mr. Bergman (I appreciate his genius, but am personally not especially moved by his films), this is indisputably a Woody Allen Film, period. From his unique screen compositions to his long, uninterupted takes to his use of flashback/flashforward/confessionals, this has all the energy of a great Woody Allen Upper East Side comedy (Annie Hall, Manhattan, Hannah And Her Sisters, et al), only it is sent in a new direction. It marked an even greater watershed for Woody Allen than Annie Hall did, for it proved that he was as capable of great dramatic films as he was of extraordinarily entertaining and textured comedies. Subsequent efforts like September, Another Woman, and of course Crimes and Misdemeanors would prove this, but Interiors might just be the best of the lot (again...I can't decide!).

Interiors has all the marks of a "boring" film: lack of music, heavy handed treatment of tragic subject matter, dark cinematography and a muted color palette, etc. So perhaps the greatest testament to its power is that the film is EXCITING. Not in a car chase/explosion sort of way, but rather in the sense that it is constantly engaging from beginning to end. It MIGHT not be perfect...but if it isn't, it sure comes close.

My Grade: A+

I have to say that no one is more shocked than me about my reaction to "Shallow Hal". I'm definitely a fan of The Farrely Brothers, having enjoyed all of their films on different levels. Like most fans, my favorite film was obviously "There's Something About Mary", and I always cited that film's romantic plot as the true enduring factor in its appeal. Sure, it was one of the funniest movies of all time, but we all have our own love story about some one from our past who we could never get over, and it was central to the film's humor and fundamental sweetness.

If "There's Something About Mary" was sweet, then "Shallow Hal" is simply beautiful. "Beautiful" might seem like a strong word to use when describing a film from Peter and Bobby Farrely...God knows I'm the first person to admit that. But in truth, all of their films have been slightly romantic, from "Dumb and Dumber" right through "Me, Myself, and Irene". And while "Shallow Hal" is certainly a comedy, I'd go so far as to say it's the best indication thus far that The Farrelys might just have a future outside of the comedy genre.

The plot of the film is unnecessary, because it is given away in the trailer. And like another viewer mentioned, most of the laughs are given away too. However, it's not any big loss. The film has some big laughs, but it is really not as funny as I might have expected, and in all honesty it's probably the least amusing of the duo's films thus far. But here, the comedy is actually secondary...there are several long stretches where the film goes on with hardly an attempt to make the audience smile, let alone laugh. It really is THAT interested in the budding romance between the Hal and Rosemary.

The theatrical trailer to this film has gotten a decided mixed response from audiences, prompting me to wonder if perhaps audiences are returning to their PC ways these days. A lot of people have expressed offense at the notion that a male hero can only find love with a woman if he views her as being a thin, blonde sex symbol. However, the trailer is wholly misleading. A lot of people may chuckle at the seriousness which I apply to the film, but it deserves to be taken seriously. With "Shallow Hal", the Farrelys are exploring The American Male at its most, well, shallow. This is embodied through the characters of Hal and Mauricio, who are on the endless prowl for an aesthetically perfect female. For Hal, romantic feelings can only be understood through physical attraction...any spiritual or emotional fulfillment is completely foreign to him. The progression of the storyline challenges him to grasp that beauty and attraction without needing to see it in front of his eyes, but rather feeling it through his heart and soul.

I know all of this sounds cheesy, and in truth, it is! But that's because "Shallow Hal" is, at its core, merely a good old fashioned love story...and an exceptionally beautiful one, I might add! This is largely thanks to a luminescent performance from Gwyneth Paltrow, who captures the role of Rosemary perfectly. Paltrow is a beautiful young woman, but its not her physical attractiveness that contributes to her characterization...in fact, she glows as much wearing a latex "fat suit" as she does in a mini skirt! She's simply wonderful in the film, and I would go so far as to call it one of her best performances. I cannot say that I was familiar with Jack Black prior to seeing the film, but he did a solid job with the title role. He's not quite Ben Stiller, but he was ideal for the role, a mass of vulnerability and naiveté glazed over by a bravado of not-so-assured confidence.

However, the true stars of this film are Peter and Bobby Farrely. They have crafted a wonderfully enchanting modern fable, and given it just the right dose of humor to keep it from ever being preachy or offputting. Had this been done straight, it could have played like an afterschool special about body image and insecurity and purely intellectual love. In the hands of two comedic geniuses, it's a piece of cinema magic.

I cannot say that "Shallow Hal" is a better love story than "Moulin Rouge", but it's a damn close second. Although few people will admit to being as superficial as the lead character, many audience members actually are, and I am confident that a lot of people will come away from this movie with a new understanding for beauty and true love. You might not expect a whole lot from The Farrely Brothers by way of emotion and sentiment...but after this movie, I think everyone will.

My Grade: A-

(It's worth noting that some critics who found the plot troubling were nonetheless quick to point out the relative unattractiveness of the leading male characters..a glaring example of hypocrisy

(Please note that while the plot is not spoiled in my review, I describe some of the real-life atrocities depicted in the film and readers are advised to skip over the second paragraph if they may be disturbed by the content.)

This past Spring, I had the distinct privilege to view a film which, to the best of my knowledge, remains unreleased on any format in the United States. The film was Godfrey Ho's Men Behind the Sun, an incredibly disturbing and realistic account of horrors inflicted upon the people of China and Russia by the Japanese government during World War II. The film details the events that went on behind the walls of `Unit 731', a facility based in China that the Japanese government used to test biological warfare on living, human subjects.

These `experiments' included locking a man into a decompression chamber until his body expelled his organs; chaining a woman to ice in the freezing cold to see how long it would take before her arms fell off; and dissecting a living human boy. These unspeakable atrocities were not unlike the crimes committed in European concentration camps, yet they have not been given a fraction of the recognizance. I had only the vaguest notions of Chinese people being tortured during World War II, and even my fleeting knowledge is probably greater than that of most Americans; it is a subject that is simply not covered in conventional classroom environments.

I did not view Men Behind the Sun entirely by choice, as I was asked to screen it for a DVD review. Had I not seen this film, I would not likely have ever known about the tragedies which it depicts. And if I were to learn about it, it would most likely be through a documentary, a textbook, or a toned-down Hollywood reenactment. Fortunately, I learned about the subject matter through this film. Because it was made outside of Hollywood (it is a Hong Kong production) it did not have to pander to censors or mainstream audiences. As such, the violence in this movie is incredibly brutal and realistic. Many of the special effects were supposedly shot using medical cadavers as opposed to prosthetics, and having seen the film I would say that this was the case.

It has only the faintest semblance of a (presumably fictionalized) storyline, instead playing like a documentary and presenting the factual accounts as if they were happening before the viewer's eyes. The `story' is of a group of young Japanese boys who are sent to Unit 731 to train for enrolment in the Japanese army. There they are stripped of their innocence, brainwashed into dehumanizing the Chinese prisoners and molded into heartless killing machines. Their story parallels the gruesome experimentation of the generals on the Chinese and Russian victims, and is equally tragic and pessimistic. Characters and dialogue in this film are fairly incidental, but the imagery is not. Many of the film's scene compositions and setpieces are as strangely fascinating as they are horrific, merely adding to the queasy feeling provoked in the viewer. This, however, is director Godfrey Ho's intention. Once you embark upon the journey of viewing this film, there is no turning back. When the credits have rolled, the viewer is inevitably still staring at the screen in disbelief, its images certain to linger in the mind's eye for days. This only serves to prove that the film has successfully made its point, and will not be forgotten by the viewer.

The film is clearly advertised as an exploitation film, in spite of the fact that none of the content is actually exploitative. It is bold, it is real, and it is vital, making a crucial point that might otherwise elude the masses. To relegate it to `hard gore cinema' is to damn it to the disgust of censors and scoffdom of film critics. Only through choosing to overlook its undue reputation can viewers fully appreciate the film, and only through fully appreciating the film can a viewer further appreciate the true horrors and untold threats of World War II.

The film is presented in its theatrical 1.85:1 letterbox aspect ratio in a transfer that has been digitally restored from the original 35 mm negative. For a film that is sadly rather obscure in most parts of the world, Japan Shock Video has really gone all out to insure a solid transfer, and the result is a terrific DVD. It would be nice if Synapse added this title to their Asian Cult Cinema Collection or if Criterion restored and repackaged this film as they did with Pier Paolo Pasolini's Salo (a similarly disturbing film) a few years ago.

There has been no word in the DVD community of a domestic issue of the film, and considering the hotbed of censorship issues it would provoke, I doubt that it will be seen on Stateside shelves in any format anytime soon. As such, this code-free DVD is an absolute must-have for fans of the film and those interested in the most comprehensive history of World War II or the darkest possibilities of human nature. Casual viewers may want to give it a second thought, for while Men Behind the Sun is truly one of the most tremendous cinematic achievements of all time, it is also perhaps the most unshakeable and disturbing.

When I first saw The Howling, it was via the film's original videotape incarnation (unfortunately I missed out on the theatrical run). At the time, I thought the film was bizarre and rather overrated. Of course, I was only seeing part of the film; the video was so dark and murky that I could not see what was going on most of the time. It was not until years later that I watched a `cleaned up' cable presentation and realized what a good movie The Howling really is. Perhaps the better the image, the more enjoyable my experience, because seeing The Howling on DVD I was finally able to fully appreciate its greatness.

Karen White (Dee Wallace) is a Los Angeles reporter suffering from nightmares, panic attacks, and frigidity as a result of a botched undercover mission to trap a serial killer called 'Eddie the Mangler'. Karen's psychologist, Dr. Waggner (Patrick MacNee), advises her to stay at `The Colony', a self-help village that he operates. She and her husband Bill (Christopher Stone) travel to this secluded sector in Northern California for a week long `therapeutic vacation'. Before long, though, Karen starts to sense something is very wrong in The Colony. Her nightmares are becoming more vivid, and are now incorporating images of her husband and of people staying in The Colony. She hears howling in the night, and finds a mutilated cow in the woods.

Meanwhile, back in L.A., Terry (Belinda Balaski) and Chris (John Dugan), a young couple who work at Karen's TV station, investigate the death of Eddie the Mangler for a news special the station has planned. Eddie's body disappears from the morgue, and they investigate further, only to discover that he was obsessed with werewolf mythology. When a panicky Karen calls Terry to tell her that Bill was bitten by a wolf in the woods, she rushes to The Colony to offer comfort and further her investigation. At this point, I will say no more. Of course you can probably figure out where it is headed, and if not by this point in the film you will know exactly what is going on. But The Howling is a film full of twists and turns and to spoil even one of them would be an injustice to first-time viewers.

I have not seen enough werewolf movies to recognize every homage paid by this film, but apparently most of the characters are named after werewolf movie directors. Additionally, an expository scene from The Wolf Man plays as Terry learns that Bill has been bitten by a wolf, and a cartoon adaptation of The Three Little Pigs is cut into a scene of a woman being cornered by a werewolf. And there are a course an endless roster of genre cameos; Kevin McCarthy (Invasion of the Body Snatchers), B-movie king Roger Corman, and Joe Dante regular Dick Miller, to name a few. Sound familiar? Sixteen years before Scream was even a reality, The Howling invented the `self-referential scary movie' sub-genre. In fact, the humor laced throughout the film is generally the most celebrated element of The Howling. It was certainly among the most influential; contemporary classics like Evil Dead, Fright Night, Return of the Living Dead, Re-Animator, and of course Scream owe a debt to the road paved by this film.

The humor may be the most widely regarded facet of this film. However, in the end this is a horror movie, and a damn scary one. As much as I love the somewhat similar An American Werewolf in London, I give The Howling the edge largely because it never gets carried away with the comedic elements. Joe Dante, who at this point was best known for the cult classic Piranha, updated werewolf folklore by applying it to two of the more popular horror trends of the time: female paranoia (Rosemary's Baby, The Stepford Wives, Suspiria) and fear of non-urban environments (The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, Deliverance, The Hills Have Eyes). Dante makes the most of these two thematic elements, while also cultivating a classic, spooky atmosphere rarely seen in post-Psycho horror movies. Dante also manages to tap into primal childhood fears of the dark, the woods, the fog, and The Big Bad Wolf. In fact, some of the film's most terrifying scenes make their mark because they so aptly recreate images from Little Red Riding Hood and The Three Little Pigs.

Looking back, it really is shocking how ahead-of-its-time this movie was. Not only did it turn the mirror on horror films of the past and present, but it also offered a shockingly accurate, post-Network glimpse into the media. From what I have read, the novel The Howling by Gary Brandner is vastly different, particularly in this regard. Instead of being an author (as she was in the book), Karen is a reporter, and this allows Dante to explore the notion that the American public was so desensitized by 1981 that television had to resort to extreme shock tactics to maintain viewership. Yet even more innovative is the similar viewpoint that people were also too sophisticated to believe anything even if it happened right in front of them. In a time of unprecedented cynicism and complacency (not to mention being the era of `reality shows'), Dante's message is more relevant than ever.

When The Howling was released, it was extremely well received by critics and became a box office hit. Dee Wallace went on to play the mother in E.T.: The Extra Terrestrial (prompting one of the funniest lines in Scream). Joe Dante went on to direct the blockbuster Gremlins. And special make-up effects man Rob Bottin went on to such films as The Thing, Total Recall, and Se7en. As the cast and crew were busy moving on with their own successes, The Howling did not get its inevitable sequel until 1985's loosely related (or so I have heard) The Howling II: Your Sister Is a Werewolf. Over the next ten years The Howling would amass a total of six sequels, many of them barely released in theaters or sent straight to video. I have intentionally avoided these films, but from what I understand they give Amityville a run for its money as the worst horror franchise of them all. In fact, The Howling IV: The Original Nightmare, is actually a remake of the first film! Normally a string of ill received follow-ups harms a film's reputation, but in this case, it may have actually strengthened it. More than two decades after its initial release, The Howling remains one of the most enduring horror films of the 80s.

My Grade: A+

This review refers to the theatrical cut of the film.

When George A. Romero's no-budget horror movie Night of the Living Dead hit screens in 1968, the same year that had already given audiences the all time genre classic Rosemary's Baby, no one could have predicted the indelible effect it would have on the history of cinema. The film introduced audiences to a degree of graphic violence never before witnessed on American screens. However, it was the film's intense, omnipotent terror that forever scarred a generation of viewers.

Although the film enjoyed unprecedented mainstream success for an independent production, the filmmakers saw little of the movie's earnings. Romero's string of box office disappointments in the years to follow would diminish his clout in Hollywood, and as such he found it was an uphill battle to fund his ambitious sequel to the film. Then along came Italian horror maestro Dario Argento, hot off the heels of such international blockbusters as Deep Red and Suspiria. Argento helped secure funding for the film, in exchange for the rights to personally oversee the international cut of the film.

The collaboration would be a match made in horror movie heaven, for the end product would be Dawn of the Dead, one of the most acclaimed and enduringly popular horror movies of all time.

Dawn of the Dead's plot is so effectively simple, and now thoroughly familiar, that it almost goes without description. While the world approaches a still unexplained and ever growing zombie apocalypse, four individuals-two millitary men, a helicopter pilot, and his TV reporter girlfriend-barricade themselves in an abandoned suburban shopping mall. The mall provides fodder not only for the film's well known social commentary, but also for some truly thrilling-if not terrifying-setpieces.

With its graphic depictions of human evisceration, exploding heads, and gruesome flesh eating, Dawn of the Dead may well be the goriest American film of all time. The film is actually so violent and gruesome that it was released unrated in the United States for fear of being slapped with an X Rating. That didn't stop the film from being a huge hit at home and abroad. The film earned rave reviews from critics (most famously, from Roger Ebert, who called it `one of the best horror movies of all time'). It instantly became recognized not only as a genre classic, but also as one of the sharpest social satires of the decade, with its often hilarious commentary on an ever growing consumer culture embodied by the film's mall location.

Internationally, the film was even bigger. The movie was released in a special 117 minute cut overseas (the US theatrical version was 120 minutes) which was edited by Dario Argento and featured a more prominent presentation of the soundtrack by rock band Goblin as well as a much faster overall pace. Released in most countries as `Zombie: Dawn of the Dead' or `Zombies', it was so big in Italy that the following year Lucio Fulci, previously a director of `giallo' thrillers, helmed a gory semi-sequel. His `Zombie 2', released in the US as `Zombie', would become one of the most popular drive in hits of the 1970s, a massive international success that solidified the zombie/cannibal craze of the early 1980s and sparked Lucio Fulci's own reign as a horror movie icon.

Dawn of the Dead is a truly stunning example of the horror genre's ability to produce works that are as socially relevant as they are terrifying, films which break free of the constraints of conventional horror movie elements and in doing so establish themselves as being truly timeless. While I would still give Night of the Living Dead the slight edge between the two, Dawn of the Dead is still an extraordinary film in its own right as well as an almost superior sequel to another of the scariest movies ever made.

As has already been mentioned by a fellow fan on this list, I didn't see any reason that I should offer my perspective on Suspiria. However, considering the shockingly negative comments that have been dominating this discussion as of late, I felt it was my duty as a devoted Argentophile to defend and further acclaim this masterful film.

Suspiria is the story of Suzy Banyon (cult superstar Jessica Harper, of Phantom of the Paradise and Stardust Memories fame), a young American woman who enrolls in the Tanzakedemie dance school in Germany...only to learn that this celebrated establishment is a beautiful front for a coven of evil witches.

Yes, that's basically the plot...but Suspiria is not about plot...it's about experience. This is not an American horror film, and should not be judged by the same standards used to judge American horror films. As a matter of fact, Suspiria pretty much throws out the rules of cinema in favor of the logic of dreams...to put it bluntly, Suspiria is the definitive cinematic nightmare, a wildly colorful and dizzyingly stylish funhouse of blood and beauty. Take it seriously and you'll laugh. Take it too lightly and you'll be bored. It demands a degree of intelligence and sophistication from the viewer, but this does not mean that it necessarily follows any archetype, and it certainly should not be discredited for its lack of conventional movie wisdom.

A lot of Argento's fans and critics alike attack his films for bad acting, but I would have to disagree, particularly in the case of Suspiria. All of the actors in this film are fine actors, and if their performances seem "dull" or "weak" its because Argento WANTED them to act that way, much the same way David Lynch put to great use "intentional badness" in such films as Blue Velvet, Twin Peaks: Fire Walk With Me, and the current smash Mullholland Drive. The unusual performances in the film add to the surreal quality, benefitting both A.)the film's dreamy feel and B.)its root in gothic fairy tales.

Suspiria is, in my opinion, one of the most truly terrifying films ever made. However, this is MY opinion. I find my nightmares to be far more frightening than any horror movie or ghost story or strange noises in the middle of the night. However, fear is a far more subjective emotion that people give it credit for-witness the unbelievably extreme responses to 1999's The Blair Witch Project-and thus it's not fair to blast Suspiria based on whether or not it frightened you. On a personal note, my all time favorite horror film is Wes Craven's A Nightmare on Elm Street...yet it has NEVER scared me. Contrary to what American filmmakers profess, horror films are about much more than simply scaring an audience. Essentially they are just conventional dramas, pushed to the extreme in terms of visceral emotional response and, often times, the explicitness of onscreen content. Such a definition could and should be applied to Suspiria.

The most popular theory about Suspiria is one shared by many critics and many fans, and that is that the film is a technical masterpiece...period. This is something with which I partially agree, AND vehemently disagree. First off, Suspiria definitely has an emotional component to it. It's not as present as in other popular horror films of its time-Halloween, The Shining, A Nightmare on Elm Street, etc.-but its there. And while the plot gets criticized, its apparent "weakness" is crucial to the effectivness of the film; if the movie made sense, it wouldn't be scary at all! With all that having been said, I must admit that the strongest elements of Suspiria are its technical merits. In all honesty, this film is one of the best movies I have EVER seen in regards to 1.)cinematography, 2.)musical editing, 3.)camera movement, 4.)framing and composition, and 5.)original soundtrack. The film is literally a sensorial assault on the viewer, with bizarre color schemes and an even more bizarre soundtrack being thrust upon the audience throughout every frame. The most minute details are splashed across the screen in Argento's wonderfully fanciful style, and the result is....SUSPIRIA.

I realize that I have done little more than defend Suspiria against some of its criticisms, but quite frankly I think the film speaks for itself as a true work of art. Suspiria is the most beautiful horror film ever made, and if you never thought that "beautiful horror film" could not be an oxymoron...watch this film immediately. This is truly required viewing for horror film fans, the perfect introduction for cinemaphiles everywhere into the fascinating realm of "EuroHorror", and most of all the best possible starting point for anyone interested in the work of Dario Argento, who gets my vote as the finest director working today. The best thing about seeing Suspiria for the first time is that his other, less renowned films are even BETTER...which will be hard to believe by the time you are getting over the experience of this one!

I highly recommend that you all purchase Anchor Bay's stunning DVD edition of the film, recently released in a standard edition as well as a three disc special edition. Unfortunately the three disc edition was limited to 100,000 copies, and after less than two months of release is all but impossible to find in stores. If you can get a copy, do so...it contains the excellent documentary "Suspiria: 25th Anniversary" and overall gets my vote as the very BEST DVD on the market! However, the standard movie-only edition is extraordinary as well. It boasts a jaw-dropping transfer from the original negative of the uncut Italian version of the film, as well as a bevy of newly mixed DTS and Dolby Digital tracks and a batch of great supplements.

Avoid the backlash, watch the film...and prepare to "never again feel safe in the dark"!

My Grade: A+

I had been working on a fairly in depth discussion of this film to post on the IMDB, but I decided to just shorten my lengthy diatribe to one word: RUN!

I don't want to give away ANY of the plot, because the less you know the better. And all you need to know is that this is the BEST serial thriller to come along since The Silence of the Lambs...it's better than Seven, it's better than Copycat, and it's even better than The Crimson Rivers. In fact, I would rate this top notch film on the same level as Dario Argento's Deep Red and Tenebre...and for those of you fortunate enough to have seen those classic films..yes, it really is THAT good! Yet whereas acting and even the screenplay are secondary to classic Italian thrillers, this gem boasts an exquisitely constructed screenplay (the ending will surely take you by surprise!) and two outstanding lead performances by the commandingly handsome Suk-kyu Han and the breathtakingly beautiful Eun-ha Shim.

Sadly, Tell Me Something has yet to get a US release (outside of all too rare arthouse screenings from time to time), and after two years it remains unreleased on VHS or DVD. So I would HIGHLY recommend that you all purchase the code-free NTSC Hong Kong DVD. The A/V transfer is stunning, and the English subtitles get a surprisingly accurate translation.

I have no idea why none of the Hollywood studios have yet given this film a theatrical release, but like the equally brilliant Japanese horror film RING, I'm guessing it's because they are first planning an American remake...so before that dark day comes, experience for yourself the film that I consider the Best Movie of 1999 (besting even The Matrix), and one of the Top 5 Horror/Thrillers of the decade!

My Grade: A+

I can still vividly remember the impact of first seeing The Bird With the Crystal Plumage. I had already seen several Argento films-Suspiria, Phenomena, Trauma, Inferno, Opera, and Tenebre-and yet the work that preceded them all did not fail to truly amaze me.

The plot is, upon intense scrutiny, fairly pointless, so let's just focus on the film's key setpiece: A frustrated American writer, Sam Dalmas (Tony "Toma" Musante), is walking through the streets of Rome late one night when he sees a woman being attacked by a knife-wielding assailant in a closed art gallery. When the killer knows he is being witnessed, he disappears, and the woman survives.

Essentially this is all you need to know, becuase the rest of the movie revolves around this one incident as the protagonist pokes and probes at his memories in an attempt to solve the mystery of a Jack-the-Ripper kiler stalking the women of Rome.

What makes The Bird With the Crystal Plumage so special is not the story, but rather how the story is told...an essential accolade to any truly great director. Argento had NEVER shot anything on film before (not even shorts!), and thus his seemingly effortless mastery of the director's chair is a joy for thrill seekers to behold. In fact, I would rank this film 3rd on a list of the best directorial debuts of all time, behind only Citizen Kane (Welles) and The Maltese Falcon (Huston). And while the film may get unnecessarily smeared on the IMDB (why??), I think that millions of (terrified) viewers would probably agree with me!

The film is beautifully composed; this film's legendary "art gallery sequence" marked the beginning of Argento's career as THE master of the 2.35:1 aspect ratio, and it's a shame he doesn't shoot many of his films in CinemaScope anymore. The cinematography is as stylish and colorful as fans would come to expect from future Argento efforts. And it goes without saying that Ennio Morricone's score is simply out of this world; stylish, suspenseful, erotic, rhythmic, and scary, it would foretell the future of Argento's consistent directorial style.

A lot of fans point out that BIRD was made before Argento really established his own style, and I would only partially agree with this sentiment. In the film you'll find the obbsessions that dominate the rest of Argento's filmography: gender frustration; homosexuality; the eroticism of violence; the corrolation between love and depravity; the artist's need to face danger; etc.

However, if you're more interested in visceral thrills than "artiness", rest assured: The Bird With the Crystal Plumage is a guaranteed good time for fans of Hitchcock...in fact, considering that The Master of Suspense was at this time directing disappointments like Topaz and Torn Curtain, BIRD definitely gave Hitch a (temporary) run for his money! The movie served as the template not only for Argento's seminal Deep Red, but also for such equally extraordinary thrillers as Halloween, Dressed to Kill, and Thesis, the latter two serving as virtual remakes of BIRD.

BIRD is tough to find at your local video store, and since many DVD rental outlets don't carry titles from VCI Entertainment (BIRD's distributor) you may want to fork over the extra cash for VCI's very good widescreen DVD. I PROMISE you will get your money's worth!!

Stylish and terrifying, The Bird With the Crystal Plumage will keep you guessing until the final minutes. It is an absolute must-own for fans of suspense, or anyone interested in viewing one of the greatest films ever made from one of the greatest directors of all time!

My Grade: A+

WHAT HAVE YOU DONE TO SOLANGE?

If you are reading this review, then the likelihood is that you already know firsthand or have a very good idea of what a great giallo thriller this film is. I don't want to say too much, because as anyone who has seen this film already knows, divulging even the most minor details can potentially spoil everything. This much I CAN say:

Elizabeth is a young woman having an affair with her married Catholic high school teacher, Henry. One one rendezvous she witnesses what she believes to be a murder committed by a man dressed like a priest. Sure enough the body of one of Elizabeth's classmates turns up, and not long after more of her classmates show up dead. The only apparent link is that all of them are attending the same Catholic high school, and all of them are killed in the same shocking manner (I won't divulge the vital MO used by the killer, but I will say that you'll be glad it's not explicitly shown!). But as sophisticated giallo fans know, there is indeed a connection between this string of dead girls. It's up to Elizabeth, Henry, and Herta to uncover the dark secret of exactly what has been done to Solange...

WHAT HAVE YOU DONE TO SOLANGE? gets off to a rather slow start, and I have to admit that for the first 30 min or so I thought that the film was going to be a vastly overrated disappointment. However, much to my satisfaction, I was quite wrong. Although it takes a while to get there, once this movie gets going, it simply does not let up. That's not to say that it has a particularly fast pace, but the story unfolds with so many twists and turns and new characters that mystery fans will be tingling with glee. As if the intriguing title were not enough, the slowly but surely unfolding technique of the screenplay will leave your mouth watering for a big pay off. And, unlike 99% of otherwise good thrillers, this movie has an extraordinary denouement. The final minutes of the film will shock you, stun you, and have you starting the film all over again. Furthermore, the killer's identity in the film is not only a surprise, but it also makes perfect sense in the context of the story...a rare feat achieved in thrillers, but one which caps off the film quite nicely (to say the least!).

I would not go so far as to say that I could see this film being written/directed by Dario Argento, because it is not quite as exciting or edgy or offbeat as his works. However, unlike many of the giallo thrillers that have managed to make it to the US (dozens and dozens were produced in Italy during the early 70s, only a fraction of which were distributed in the US one way or another), "Solange" is a film which can certainly be ranked on the same level as some of Argento's classics. I might not put it up there with Deep Red or Tenebre, but I'd certainly place it on the same ranks as The Animal Trilogy.

Even if you have never seen this film before, I can assure you that it will be worth owning for any fans of thrillers/gialli/Italian horror. It's simply stunning, and speaking as an avid fan of Hitchcock, Bava, and Argento, I cannot recommend it enough.

My Grade: A