Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein (1948)

Tags

Comedy, Horror

 

If Frankenstein or Dracula
Appeared and had his back to ya,
Would you be voiceless in surprise
Or too afraid to paralyze?
Perhaps you’d wake the neighborhood
With every bellow, if you could,
Or call a hotline in distress
Until they hear what you confess
And hang up on your craziness.

Perhaps you’d try to call a friend,
Who might be quick to condescend
If you appear at your wits’ end.
Perhaps you’d flee, still shivering,
But by that time your dithering
Would let the monsters notice you
And do what monsters tend to do.
Next time don’t wait to prove it’s true.
_________________

MPAA rating: PG

Okay, one more horror review for October, if this can be classified as horror. After I covered an anthology from the ‘70s, a classic from the ‘80s, and a modern cult classic, my VC thought I should review a much older and lighthearted member of the genre.

I can’t say I’m familiar with Abbott and Costello, but I enjoyed their antagonistic pairing in the spirit of Laurel and Hardy and predating Gilligan and the Skipper. In Abbott and Costello’s case, though, the thin one is gruff and bossy (Bud Abbott), while the stout one is the absentminded goofball (Lou Costello). My VC actually had the two confused until I told her who was who and rattled her perception of the universe.

The film itself is a fairly entertaining crossover, with Abbott and Costello meeting not only Frankenstein (Glenn Strange) but also Dracula (Béla Lugosi) and the Wolf Man (Lon Chaney, Jr.). Dracula plans to transplant the brain of Wilbur Grey (Costello) into the Frankenstein Monster, while the Wolf Man, Lawrence Talbot, tries to save him in between full-moon transformations. This was actually the last appearance of Chaney as the Wolf Man, and the only other time Lugosi played Dracula other than his famous 1931 film.

The presence of the monsters is really the only thing that would classify this as a horror, since the title duo ensure there are plenty of witty one-liners and slapstick. The horror-comedy combination actually reminded me a lot of Scooby-Doo, such as how Costello would scream and mutter about seeing a monster while incredulous Abbott would arrive just as the creature disappeared. I was actually surprised at how many aspects of the film seemed to have been copied by later ones, such as a hidden revolving wall anticipating the bookcase scene in Young Frankenstein. The monster-filled climax featured Dracula and the Wolf Man fighting and was like a CGI-less version of the final battle in Van Helsing. Even the very last gag was blatantly ripped off in the final scene of last year’s Goosebumps.

If Scooby-Doo is as scary as you want to get, Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein is a fun little caper, the last for the original three Universal monsters. The ending isn’t very decisive, but between the title pair’s friendly bickering, the spooky Gothic sets, and the presence of classic horror legends, it’s an amusing romp even decades later.

Best line: (Abbott as Chick Young) “Get up on your feet. It’s only a dummy.”   (Costello as Wilbur Grey) “Dummy nothin’. It was smart enough to scare me.”

 

Rank: List Runner-Up

 

© 2016 S.G. Liput
416 Followers and Counting

 

The Babadook (2014)

Tags

Drama, Horror

 

If it’s in a film or it’s in a book,
It might be as real as the Babadook.

Believing in fairies is darling and cute;
What is the worst they can do?
Believing in him will put him in pursuit,
And now he is after you.

You may say there’s no Babadook;
Deny it all you like.
It’s just a silly made-up book,
Until you see him strike.

The thought of him will mean he’s there,
Which means he always is.
The Babadook is everywhere,
When he decides you’re his.
____________________

MPAA rating: Not Rated (might be R for intensity and brief language, but actual content is closer to PG-13)

In the proud tradition (and bad habit) I’ve adopted of watching a scary movie alone at night (also done with The Others and The Conjuring), I decided to investigate the universally lauded Australian horror The Babadook. Like the other fright fests I mentioned, I found it to be very much my kind of horror: one with more focus on atmosphere than jumps, featuring complex relationships and psychological distress, and almost devoid of blood. But dang, is it frightening! Poltergeist is a walk in the park next to this top-hatted creature feature.

The story centers on Amelia Vanek (Essie Davis), a struggling mother still deeply grieving her husband’s death and quietly resentful of her young son Samuel (Noah Wiseman), who was born the day his father died. Samuel continually causes problems at school and obsesses over monsters he imagines himself fighting with homemade weaponry. Then comes an innocent bedtime story, where a randomly chosen pop-up book takes a swift left turn; how many books from your childhood ended with “You’re going to wish that you were dead”? After that, Sam becomes convinced the Babadook from the book is real, much to Amelia’s annoyance. When she learns that her denial makes the creature stronger, though, it begins to target her, turning her exasperation with her son into madness.

For her directorial debut, writer/director Jennifer Kent did an outstanding job with developing the mood of unease to which most horror films only aspire. With inventive camera angles and muted colors, the Vanek’s home becomes a breeding ground of anxiety, and after the picture book mentioned three knocks as the creature’s call sign, I liked how there were three knocks anytime someone was at the door, instilling worry regardless of who was really there. As I’ve said before, the most effective scares are often the simplest, and The Babadook doesn’t need set pieces or creepy dolls to freak out the audience. The most intense moment stems from the knowledge of a barely glimpsed something present, against which Amelia can only cover herself with her blanket and hope she is wrong. It’s the kind of visceral tension that hits on a child-like level. The fact that we only see flashes of the Babadook’s shape and long fingers only makes him more mysterious and frightening, a newly invented boogeyman for the ages, especially when he says his own name like some diseased Pokémon.

What makes The Babadook so intriguing is its symbolic nature. While it can be enjoyed as a familiar haunted house picture, it also puts an emphasis on the mother/son dynamic. When Amelia falls under the Babadook’s influence, she lashes out at Samuel, and we’re left uncertain how much of her rage is possession and how much is simply being released for the first time from pressure and lack of sleep. Samuel may seem like an irritating problem child at first, but his initial belief in the Babadook allows him to defend his mother, prove his love for her, and convince her to banish her oppressive grief. On a more conjectural note, the Babadook might also represent the demonic spirit behind all these news stories of murder-suicides that no one seems to comprehend, and Amelia and Samuel are just the latest to fall under its influence. Either way, the resolution is far different from the usual “evil-wins-to-scare-another-day” ending that most horrors try to spin into a sequel, and it makes clear the film’s bittersweet metaphor of grief.

As much as I admired The Babadook and acknowledge it as one of the most chilling films I’ve seen, there is one aspect that I think allows The Conjuring to edge it out in my opinion. They both depict evil being confronted by familial love, and while that’s enough for the purely secular Babadook, The Conjuring also utilizes religion in its arsenal against the malevolent spirit at work. I appreciate that the dark presence is subdued in both films, but the role of Christianity tips the scales for James Wan’s film and makes its conquering of evil more convincing in my eyes. The Babadook still has a meaningful end, though, especially when taken more allegorically than literally.

Although some of the editing is a bit choppy toward the beginning, I see why The Babadook is considered a modern classic. Because of its cult following, they’ve even distributed copies of the Babadook’s disturbing storybook; who would want one of those around the house?! With an emotional backbone, intense performances, and moments of unbearable suspense, it’s got more than the usual chills and thrills and doesn’t rely on gory effects to make an impact.

Best line: (crazed Amelia, to Samuel) “I AM YOUR MOTHER!!!”

 

Rank: List Runner-Up

 

© 2016 S.G. Liput
415 Followers and Counting

 

Poltergeist (1982)

Tags

Horror

 

Hearing of hauntings may trouble a tenant
And give them some pause and concern.
A bump in the night or mysterious light
Conjures notions of ghosts who may fancy a fright
To make known their unholy return.

Yet others believe their house couldn’t be haunted.
It’s mortgaged and newer than most.
But those are the ones who don’t know what they did
Till a closet or tree tries to gobble a kid.
Sure, then they’ll believe there’s a ghost.

So if you see signs of a spook or a spectre,
You’d best take it seriously.
Don’t wait for a coffin to pop from the floor
Before getting the heck out of Dodge evermore.
Less sequels the sooner you flee.
_______________

MPAA rating: PG

This is it, the movie I’ve been avoiding for years. I saw Poltergeist for the first time when I was about ten years old (I think), which was around the same time I saw Aliens. While I didn’t seem to have a problem with chest-bursting extra-terrestrials, I consider Poltergeist the movie that traumatized me, and it was all because of that one scene. Not the tree scene or the steak scene or the giant demonic head jumping out of the closet. No, it was the clown! I could handle the entirety of Stephen King’s It (albeit some years later), but a single jump scare involving a clown doll made me swear off this movie for over a decade!

However, now that I am my more mature self, I decided to brave Poltergeist once more, and truth be told, it’s not that bad. By that, I mean it’s a decent haunted house film, but it’s nowhere near as nightmarish as I recalled. With Steven Spielberg as writer and producer, the film’s pre-horror opening has an E.T.–style charm, setting up the Freelings as a typical happy suburban family.  Craig T. Nelson and JoBeth Williams are sympathetic as Steven and Diane Freeling, cutely fascinated by the supernatural occurrences they notice until they discover that their home sucks…literally. Trees suck you in; closets suck you in; swimming pools full of corpses suck you in; it’s a madhouse!

The creepiness begins early with young Carol Anne (Heather O’Rourke) in front of the iconic snowy television but remains mild for a while, and even after Carol Anne is abducted by the ghosts, a few touches of humor keep the film lighter than the dark mood most horrors try to achieve. Except for a rather shocking hallucination in a bathroom with the only violence to speak of, the film doesn’t aspire to full-blown horror until the end, starting with the infamous clown and going all-out with a scream-filled finale.

There are a few logic issues I couldn’t help noticing, particularly that the title doesn’t seem to fit. A parapsychologist (Beatrice Straight) helping the Freelings talks about how poltergeists are connected with a person, like Carol Anne, while hauntings are linked to a certain location. While Carol Anne’s importance seems to support the former, the end reveals that, no, it was the house and thus a haunting. A minor complaint, I know, but it’s true. In addition, the timing of the finale may make sense for horror pacing (false sense of security and then boo!), but it seemed odd after the house was supposedly “clean,” throwing the spiritual mumbo-jumbo and wisdom of Zelda Rubinstein’s psychic medium into doubt. Plus, while most of the acting is solid, the constant yelling of “Carol Anne!” and the screaming at the end (“What’s happening?????!!!!!!”) are a little overdone.

 Poltergeist is a horror classic for good reason, not only offering some manageable, mostly kid-friendly frights in a decade full of slashers but also explaining why the cable companies got rid of the late-night snow. Perhaps it’s because I’ve seen scarier and more compelling horrors since, like The Conjuring and the film for my last Halloween review for Sunday, but Poltergeist has lost much of its fear factor, for me at least. I suppose it’s like the basement in Home Alone or any number of scary things from our childhoods; with light and a little perspective, they aren’t so scary after all. Except that clown! It still gives me the willies.

Best line: (Carol Anne) “They’re here.”

 

Rank: List Runner-Up

 

© 2016 S.G. Liput
415 Followers and Counting

 

The House That Dripped Blood (1971)

Tags

Horror

 

Here is the house you’re considering renting,
A beauteous country estate.
Feel free to explore, though I mustn’t forget
Some minor concerns to relate.

I’d humbly suggest to stay out of the den;
A strangling there once occurred.
And that closet is full of the clothes of a tenant
Who vanished with nary a word.

The master bedroom is a sticking point too,
We couldn’t get all the stains out.
And stay out of the basement; not one is alive
Who’s journeyed down there with a doubt.

What’s that? Oh, you think this is not the right house.
Perhaps that decision is best.
I hate to lose tenants; I’ve told you of four,
But I won’t even mention the rest.
____________________

MPAA rating: PG

Ever since I outgrew trick-or-treating, I haven’t really celebrated Halloween much, so while other bloggers have been dedicating all of October to horror films, I tend to keep my distance. However, because ‘tis the season, I’ll be reviewing three horror films leading up to Halloween. They’re from three different eras too, the first of which being the horror anthology The House That Dripped Blood. Doesn’t that sound charming?

Now with a title like The House That Dripped Blood, you might have certain expectations for this film, but honestly this has got to be one of the most blatant examples of cinematic false advertising ever. Yes, there’s a house, but throughout the whole film, there’s not one drop of blood. Not that I’m complaining since I try to steer clear of gore in general, but didn’t the producer think people might be disappointed when he replaced director Peter Duffell’s original title Death and the Maiden with the more lurid name?

As an anthology, the film is made up of four smaller stories, all involving new tenants of a foreboding country home. One involves a horror writer (Denholm Elliott) whose character seems to jump off the page; one is about a waxworks museum that lures in two men (Peter Cushing and Joss Ackland); one features Christopher Lee as a stern father who hires a teacher to look after his potentially dangerous daughter; and the last sees a horror movie star (Jon Pertwee, the third Doctor Who) obtain a vampire’s cloak. All of the stories are relatively well-told, with the first two clearly being the best for suspense, but there’s very little that this film does that has not been done better elsewhere. I don’t watch many horror films, and I could tell that.

The biggest issue I had was the focus on the house. The film’s frame story stresses the house as a constant in each tale, but the truth is that the house never seems that involved or important. The supernatural elements that cause each story often come from outside the home, making the house’s significance feel rather shoehorned in.

The House That Dripped Blood works best as a curiosity. We get to see a host of British thespians going through the horror movie motions, but elevating the material with their mere presence. The first story also felt significant as a possible partial inspiration for Stephen King’s The Shining. While the resolution goes off in a different direction, Denholm Elliott’s writer character seems to become more unhinged by the mysterious happenings in the house, and I wouldn’t have been surprised if he’d been typing “All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy.”

The House That Dripped Blood is nothing overtly special, with four stories that often lapse into boredom before the “horrifying” climax, but for those who prefer horror that’s tame, mildly creepy, and very British, it’s a decent enough experience.

Best line: (Paul Henderson, the famous actor) “That’s what’s wrong with the present-day horror films. There’s no realism. Not like the old ones, the great ones. Frankenstein. Phantom of the Opera. Dracula – the one with Bela Lugosi, of course, not this new fellow.”

 

Rank: Honorable Mention

 

© 2016 S.G. Liput
414 Followers and Counting

 

Sophie’s Choice (1982)

Tags

Drama, Triple A

 

Choices, choices, none rejoices
When they’ve no choice but to choose.
How can anyone decide when
Every option sees them lose?

The mind will race, the conscience brace
For all the doubts of if and why
You chose the lesser of two evils
Or the road less traveled by.

Choices, choices, haunted voices,
More ashamed than they’ll admit.
The deepest burden of a choice is
Learning how to live with it.
______________________

MPAA rating: R (mainly for language)

I’m that strange sort of guy who doesn’t seem to care about spoilers. Of course, that only increases the value of twists or plot developments I didn’t see coming, but typically I have few qualms about reading up on a movie before seeing it. Thus, I was rather surprised that, as famous as Sophie’s Choice is, I didn’t really know what the titular choice was. I suspected it during the film, but watching it play out was no less gut-wrenching, thanks more than anything to an incredible performance by Meryl Streep.

Based on William Styron’s novel, Sophie’s Choice is what I call a Triple A movie, one that is All About the Acting, and I would encourage anyone who thinks of Streep as an overrated actress to see Sophie’s Choice and be reminded of her in her prime. She isn’t the narrator, though; that honor goes to a young Peter MacNicol as aspiring author Stingo, who moves into a New York boardinghouse, only to witness a furious break-up between Polish immigrant Sophie (Streep) and her lover Nathan (Kevin Kline). Before long, though, his neighbors make up and warmly welcome Stingo into their friendship, as well as their personal problems.

MacNicol is a rather dull protagonist, whose main role is as a framing device to learn about Sophie and Nathan. Kline, on the other hand, in his first film role, is almost as astonishing as Streep, even if he gets the bulk of the foul language. His extremes of eloquent camaraderie and profound hatred are electric and so intense that I was not surprised by the eventual explanation for his behavior. How he was not nominated for an Oscar that year, I will never know, especially when Charles Durning was for The Best Little Whorehouse in Texas! Come on, there’s no comparison! Even so, this movie is Streep’s forever, from her meticulously assumed Polish accent to her heart-breaking flashbacks where she speaks both Polish and German; it’s no wonder her performance is considered one for the ages.

While the two central performances in Sophie’s Choice are exceptional, it’s not a film I’d watch often, and it’s not simply because of the crushing sorrow involved. Depressing films can be some of the most powerful, like Grave of the Fireflies or The Elephant Man, and I love those films. Yet Sophie’s Choice falls into another category that leaves a certain profound emptiness. When an ending feels more like a waste than a misfortune, it’s harder to admire. I’m glad I saw Sophie’s Choice, a film that always brings my VC to tears and did this time as well, but it will be some time before I revisit its upsetting story.

Best line: (Sophie, to Stingo) “The truth does not make it easier to understand, you know. I mean, you think that you find out the truth about me, and then you’ll understand me. And then you would forgive me for all those… for all my lies.”

 

Rank: List Runner-Up

 

© 2016 S.G. Liput
414 Followers and Counting

 

Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy

Tags

Comedy

 

This just in; here’s breaking news,
It seems that men have changed their views
On women in the workplace, though
If they’re aware, we do not know.

But we’ve confirmed, in quite a twist,
That girls don’t like a chauvinist.
In other news, there’s been a rise
In lies so we apologize.

In other other news, we’ve heard
Reports of news crew wars absurd.
Please call this number if you find
The missing arm they left behind.

And finally, I’d like to say
My hair looks terrible today.
Stay classy, San Diego. [sighs]
Who wrote this Teleprompter, guys?
____________________

MPAA rating: PG-13

I’ve never found Will Ferrell particularly funny, even in the much loved Elf, so what prompted me to check out one of his signature comedies? TCM. Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy was playing on Turner Classic Movies, and I found it hard to believe that it had already entered the pantheon of “classics.” Thus, I saw for myself, and while I’m not sure I’d consider it a classic, it managed to surprise me in more ways than one.

Like Baz Luhrmann’s dance romance Strictly Ballroom, Anchorman started out as clearly not my kind of movie and progressively got better and more successful. At the start, we’re introduced to mustachioed 1970s news anchor Ron Burgundy (Ferrell) and his San Diego newsroom cohorts (Paul Rudd, David Koechner, and a socially loopy Steve Carell). They’re the kings of their hill, and when Veronica Corningstone (Christina Applegate) is brought on as a new hire, they all prove their stupidity in trying to seduce her. The first half of the film succeeds only in confirming the four men as juvenile idiots and sexist pigs without much worthy of laughter, though Applegate is a needed tempering personality as she outshines her boorish coworkers.

There are a few moments of over-the-top chuckles, such as Ron’s flute performance and an animated dream sequence, but the film doesn’t really hit its stride until a certain battle scene. It seemed like the kind of scene that should be famous, but it caught me off guard with its celebrity cameos and ridiculous excess. Before that, maybe one out of ten jokes hit their mark, but by the time the bear-related climax rolled around, I couldn’t help but laugh.

Anchorman is easily Ferrell’s funniest and most quotable film that I’ve seen, and even if his character is extravagantly awkward, his unlikability improved with time. I suppose I most appreciated getting to see the context of famous lines I’ve heard quoted repeatedly, such as “That escalated quickly” and “I immediately regret this decision!” Anchorman’s appeal seems to lie in individual scenes of original randomness, whether shocking or laughable, and I can see why that’s enough for TCM to deem Anchorman a hit-and-miss classic.

Best line (aside from the two above): (Brian Fantana, wondering about real love) “I think I was in love once.”
(Ron Burgundy) “Really? What was her name?”
(Brian) “I don’t remember.”
(Ron) “That’s not a good start, but keep going….”
(Brian) “She was Brazilian, or Chinese, or something weird. I met her in the bathroom of a K-Mart, and we made out for hours. Then we parted ways, never to see each other again.”
(Ron) “I’m pretty sure that’s not love.”

 

Rank: List Runner-Up

 

© 2016 S.G. Liput
414 Followers and Counting

 

Star Trek Beyond (2016)

Tags

Action, Drama, Sci-fi, Thriller

Space, the final frontier
Entices the brave pioneer.
Adventures await
When cadets graduate
At the start of a thrilling career.

Yet in between alien wars
And interdimensional doors,
The truth is that space
Can be one boring place
For a hero in search of encores.

Sometimes a more perilous foe
Must devastate our status quo,
Reminding us why
We decided to fly
And where we’re committed to go.
_____________________

MPAA rating: PG-13

After the rebooted Star Trek had its glorious return in 2009 and its original-continuity-referencing sequel in 2013, it’s logical that the filmmakers for its third entry asked “What next?” Surely they thought it wise to distance Star Trek Beyond from the original series timeline and stories that so influenced the first two, and I’m glad to say they succeeded. Star Trek Beyond feels like it’s settled into the story-of-the-week format that the series had, and this particular story both references that potentially dull routine and spices it up with audacious sights we’ve never seen before.

The famous characters have already been established in prior films and pop culture, so the film doesn’t spend much time on new character development (aside from the brief but unnecessary implication that Sulu is gay). Yet the film still finds a way to insert emotional weight at the beginning, from a much more mature Kirk (Chris Pine) dealing with how the thrill is gone to Spock (Zachary Quinto) getting some sad news. We also get to see the eye-popping Yorktown, a space station so futuristically cool it makes you wonder why we’ve never seen it before in the Star Trek universe (though it does have visual echoes of Inception and Upside Down).

This setup is rather slow at the start, but once the action starts, it doesn’t let up. Before you know it, a swarm of bee-like ships are crashing into the Enterprise’s hull, and all hell breaks loose. Much of the crew become stranded on a nearby planet, hunted by a mysterious alien named Krall (Idris Elba). To make sure everyone in the ensemble gets their fair share of screen time, they’re split into twos, a method that works rather well in spreading the characters out and exposing them to different elements relevant to the plot. Also added is Sofia Boutella as another stranded ally named Jaylah, who helps the crew battle Krall.

Being a fan of Star Trek: Voyager, I noticed that this latest film seemed to draw some inspiration from that show. In the third season episode “The Swarm,” Voyager runs into a fleet of small swarming ships not unlike Krall’s armada, and they even defeat the swarm in a similar manner, though admittedly with less style. Voyager also seemed to have more episodes where one or two crew members were stranded on alien planets, making that aspect of the film also feel more familiar.

Even more than the others, Star Trek Beyond is an action movie, with new director Justin Lin bringing some flair from his experience with the Fast and Furious franchise. The camerawork makes the running and explosions a bit more frenetic and hard to follow at times, but there’s no shortage of dynamic thrills. Several impressive scenes and set pieces just left me saying “Dang!” (in a good way, of course), though if there was any Trek movie I would not want to be a redshirt in, this is it. The effects are still awesome to behold, not least of which is “that scene,” the one so many reviewers have noted as being particularly over-the-top, for good or ill. I for one thought it was brilliant and spectacular, especially on the big screen, as well as a nice musical callback to the 2009 film.

The only place Star Trek Beyond seriously stumbled was the villain. Elba is all right as Krall, though hard to understand at times, but his character’s backstory was far too ambiguous. Why did he look the way he did? Where did the fleet of alien ships come from? I’m not sure if these questions were answered and I missed it, or if the writers just glossed over those details. Either way, it could have been clearer.

Of the reboot trilogy, I still love the first most, but Star Trek Beyond is just as good and more original than Into Darkness. Couple the rousing action with the bittersweet tributes to deceased cast members Leonard Nimoy and Anton Yelchin, and Beyond becomes a well-rounded addition to the Trek canon. Yelchin’s death, in particular, throws the future of the series into doubt, but I certainly hope that there are more Star Trek stories to tell.

Best line: (Krall) “You can’t stop it. You will die.”   (Kirk) “Better to die saving lives, than to live by taking them. That’s what I was born into.”

 

Rank: Top-100-Worthy (Joining Star Trek into Darkness)

 

© 2016 S.G. Liput
413 Followers and Counting

 

VC Pick: Roxanne (1987)

Tags

Comedy, Romance

 

‘Tis no simple means
By which women are wooed.
‘Tis not for the boorish
Or foolishly rude.
The poets have proffered
And songsters suggest
What romantic remarks
Are the sweetest and best.

And men have spent centuries
On making sense
Of how to atone
After giving offense.
The language of love
Is a varied pastime,
And most would agree
‘Tis a mount worth the climb.

Fear not if you stumble
In stoking the flame.
The right words to women
Are rarely the same.
__________________

MPAA rating: PG

Roxanne, which my VC has been urging me to review for some time, features Steve Martin at his most charming. Martin himself adapted the 1897 play Cyrano de Bergerac (which interestingly provided the English language with the word “panache”) into this modern comedic retelling. The major events of the famous love triangle are faithfully translated from 17th century France to picturesque Nelson, Washington in the 1980s. Martin is C.D. Bales, the effortlessly charismatic fire chief who knows how to castigate those who insult his unusually long nose, while Daryl Hannah is his crush Roxanne, who is sadly enamored of the handsome numbskull Chris (Rick Rossovich).

To me, Roxanne is a film that excels in individual moments much more than the big picture. There are some brilliant comedic scenes, such as C.D.’s listing off twenty witty ways to insult his nose or the hilarious balcony scene (“I was afraid of worms, Roxanne! Worms!”), and I always get a good chuckle out of C.D.’s sexual teasing of a gaggle of gullible old ladies.

Yet, even with the verbal cleverness and the slapstick of C.D.’s bumbling fire crew, the romantic plot has never seemed particularly memorable to me. Martin certainly sells his eloquent passion for Roxanne, and Daryl Hannah is a beautiful love interest (a good normal role as opposed to her acting strange in Splash and Legal Eagles). Their love is worth rooting for, and I was reasonably satisfied by the end. Yet the original play concludes tragically, and Martin’s invented happy ending does feel rather easy and tacked on, earning just a smile rather than the grinning sigh that the best rom coms achieve. It may not make it one of my favorites, but Roxanne has enough “panache” to be a worthwhile charmer.

Best line: (C.D., telling some old ladies about supposed aliens in town) “They wanted to ask me about older women.”
(Nina) “Why?”
(C.D.) “Because they wanted to have sex with them.”
(Sophie) “Where?”
(C.D.) “Here! Right here in Nelson. They wanted to start a colony of supermen who would have sex with older women because they said, and I quote, ‘they really know what they’re doing.’”
(Lydia) “We do!”
(Sophie) “It’s been so long!”
(Dottie) “Oh, girls, girls! Do you actually believe that there are creatures from outer space who want to have sex with older women? [pause] Let’s go and check it out!”

 

Rank: List Runner-Up

 

© 2016 S.G. Liput
413 Followers and Counting

 

Opinion Battles Round 20 – Favourite Clive Owen Role

Don’t forget to vote for your favorite Clive Owen role in the latest Opinion Battle! I picked bank robber Dalton Russell in Inside Man, but there are actually more choices than you’d expect.

Movie Reviews 101

Opinion Battles Round 20

Favourite Clive Owen Role

Clive Owen was once tipped to be the next James Bond but now his star seems to have faded. He has been in some of the most respected films through his career but which one is our favourite?

If you want to take part in the next round of Opinion Battles we are picking our favourite Tom Cruise roles and you will need to send you entries to moviereviews101@yahoo.co.ukby 16^th October 2016.

Darren – Movie Reviews 101

Theo Faron – Children of Men

Theo is the lead in what is one of the most underrated movies of the latest century and it gives one f the best stories. We see how Theo has to risk his own life to potentially help save the human race from their impending extinction.

Kim – Tranquil Dreams

Theo Faron – Children of Men

Clive…

View original post 1,112 more words

Life, Animated (2016)

Tags

Documentary

 

“Life as we know it” – a strange thing to say,
As if we all share every daily cliché,
As if you and I, in our habits and cares,
The views she retains and the burdens he bears,
All somehow add up to the same.

Life outside yours cannot fully be known;
Though we walk together, our paths are our own.
When other lives deviate, some may presume
Their paths are less worthy where tragedies loom,
And some may regard it a shame.

Life can have weakness without being weak.
Life can have sorrow without being bleak.
Support can be found where we least would suspect,
In plans that are clear only in retrospect,
In paths that are never the same.

Life in its innocence, life in its trials,
Life in its mirth and its merciless miles
Is something we each have the privilege to face,
Each life its own story and none a disgrace,
“Life as I know it,” by name.
_______________________

MPAA rating: PG

One genre that I’ve barely scratched the surface of is documentaries. I’ve always thought of them as interesting and informative, but lacking in entertainment value. Seriously, would you rather watch a Disney movie or a documentary? (I know; depends on which one, right?) Not to mention, I’m always suspect of many “true” stories if there seems to be an agenda behind them. The few documentaries I’ve seen have been quite good (In the Shadow of the Moon, The Drop Box), but they haven’t whet my appetite to seek out others of their kind. Life, Animated has.

I actually had a unique opportunity with this film. It was being shown at a local theater that usually shows second-run movies for $2, but they were showing Life, Animated for free, presented by a local autism organization complete with a Q & A with Ron Suskind, the father of the film’s subject. That subject is Owen Suskind, who seemed like a normal child until he stopped talking at the age of three and was diagnosed with regressive autism. After years of silence, he found his voice again through the inspiration of Disney’s animated films. Donning a hand puppet of Iago from Aladdin, his father discovered that Owen would converse with him through the puppet. Over time, they were able to share conversations with dialogue memorized from Disney films, and Owen even learned to read using the names in the credits.

Life, Animated features a pleasantly non-linear style, jumping between 23-year-old Owen in the present day as he learns to be more independent and flashbacks to young Owen, often told through semi-animated drawings. Owen himself is winsome and naïve, still somewhat of a child who has come a long way and has far yet to go. My earlier suspicion of documentaries being potentially manufactured doesn’t apply to him, since he is inherently earnest and open whether a camera is there or not. Ron called this sincerity a “compensatory strength” to offset Owen’s social weaknesses and mentioned that the cameraman called him one of the best subjects he’d filmed.

Interspersed with Owen and Ron’s narration are a multitude of film clips from Disney classics and even an unexpected cameo from some voice actors. Honestly, I can’t imagine any bigger compliment to Disney filmmakers than this movie, a tribute to how their work literally helped to change Owen’s life, which might explain why they allowed the use of their fiercely guarded films for a reasonable price. As much as we all love Disney movies, they are mere entertainment to most of us, while to Owen, they were a lens through which he could understand daily life. In a world that was suddenly hard to make sense of, he latched onto this “scripted constant” that provided accessible insights, which the film’s editors managed to translate to the screen. When Owen and his brother regret having to grow up, they reference the likes of Mowgli and Peter Pan. When Owen talks about enduring bullying in school, we see Quasimodo’s flogging in The Hunchback of Notre Dame. When Owen suffers his first taste of romantic pain, we remember Ariel’s despair over Eric in The Little Mermaid. During Owen’s first night on his own, he watches Bambi.

The film’s most fascinating visual touch is two extended animated sequences of a story Owen wrote called The Land of the Lost Sidekicks, brought to life by the French animation studio Mac Guff. In a swirling, painterly style, Owen imagines himself as the protector of various Disney side characters, battling despair and darkness. It’s simple yet profound, like so much of Owen’s story. Owen was encouraged that Life, Animated showed him to be, not a sidekick, but on a hero’s journey, and the struggles and joys he goes through depict him as a person, rather than a collection of tics as autism may seem at first glance. As Owen relates during a climactic speech, those with autism can latch onto any number of fixations, and Disney films allowed him to comprehend a constantly changing world. During the Q & A afterward, Ron confirmed autism’s similar patterns when he and a young man in the front row, much like Owen, shared a few back-and-forth lines of dialogue from The Lion King. (I was also interested to learn from Ron that Owen has branched out into live-action films and enjoys the Dark Knight trilogy as well.)

It may not be saying much, but Life, Animated is one of the best documentaries I’ve seen, and despite its independent status, I do hope it gets some notice for a Best Documentary nomination during Oscar season. Not only does it ennoble the Disney canon as “human sagas of struggle and triumph,” but it provides an endearing look at how they helped shape one boy’s inspiring development. Owen’s family is a constant encouragement for him, worrying and helping him however they can, and one question his parents asked was particularly resonant: “Who decides what a meaningful life is?” Ron said his wife and he asked it many times, but Owen finally answered it. “I do.”

Best line: (see above)

 

Rank: No documentary has made me reconsider my opinion of them like this one, but I still can’t help but put them in a different category from “regular” movies. Thus, any documentary reviews won’t be eligible for my List but will just use a simple Five Star system, and this one is definitely worth Five Stars!

 

© 2016 S. G. Liput
413 Followers and Counting