1987 Movie Review

1987 Movie Review: WITHNAIL AND I, 1987

festreviews 1987 Movies, movie, Movie Review , , , , , , , , ,

WITHNAIL AND I, MOVIE POSTERWITHNAIL AND I, 1987
Movie Reviews

Directed By Bruce Robinson

Starring Richard E. Grant, Paul McGann, Richard Griffiths, Ralph Brown
Review by Christopher Upton

SYNOPSIS:

Two unemployed actors tire of their impoverished surroundings in London and head off to a cottage in the countryside for a weekend of heavy drinking, drug abuse and fresh air. However uninhabitable conditions and a home invading uncle with deviant intentions quickly destroy their plans. Based on the life of the director Bruce Robinson.

REVIEW:

The art world is full of people completely convinced the only reason they aren’t famous is because of some horrifying conspiracy, Withnail is such a person. Bruce Robinson based the character on someone he shared a house with in the Sixties, and the film is a mostly autobiographical account of their time together. Withnail was notable for being the first acting job for Richard E. Grant, who captured the drunken spirit of the titular character impressively considering he is a teetotaller.

Trapped in the squalor of his London flat with his long suffering flatmate, the thespian in Withnail itches to get out as it struggles against his alcohol dependency and his, unfortunately all too obvious, lack of talent. Living from week to week, surviving on benefit, the two actors feel the weight of busy London crushing down on them.

The two of them decide on a break and convince Withnail’s equally deluded actor of an uncle to lend them his cottage, a chance to reacquaint themselves with nature in order to rejuvenate and come back fully charged and better than ever. The problem is that what they mainly reacquaint themselves with is pills and enormous amounts of alcohol. In a sense it has a slapstick feel to it, the two of them trying to gather fuel, barter with a local farmer and fend off a bull are sort of a re-imagining of Laurel & Hardy- if they’d had access to a selection of fine wines and a courser grasp of the English language.

Then Uncle Monty turns up and the weekend takes on a much more threatening tone for Paul McGann’s Marwood (though he is never referred to by name in the film, he’s just ‘I’) who has managed to snare the affections of the rotund ex-thespian, much to his horror. The rest of the time at the cottage is spent desperately avoiding flimsily disguised advances and, at the extreme end, avoiding a buggering. Try as they might, they never managed to tackle that storyline in those old silent shorts. Richard Griffiths manages to inject a feeling of deviant menace into every flirting gesture or comment he makes to Marwood, every word is so lascivious and over acted; also a great reference to why the character of Monty never captured his much desired fame.

Over the course of the weekend the two friends start to pull further and further apart, possibly because of Withnail offering up Marwood in exchange for the cottage, and what starts off as a vacation quickly becomes a goodbye note to their friendship. There’s a definite sadness in the way that Withnail is outgrown. You can tell that director, Bruce Robinson, had a real affection for his friend and Paul McGann manages to convey both frustration and adulation towards Withnail effectively.

Clearly, both characters have a similar problem and their chemical dependencies are more than likely what is holding them back. The thing that separates them, and what allows Marwood to move on, is his recognition of his situation. Withnail is stuck within a trap he created and is far too ingrained now to escape. The character is trapped as the world moves on around him, a sign of the times for many towards the end of the decade.

 

WITHNAIL AND I, 1987

Also, Free logline submissions. The Writing Festival network averages over 95,000 unique visitors a day.
Great way to get your story out: http://www.wildsound.ca/logline.html

Deadlines to Submit your Screenplay, Novel, Story, or Poem to the festival:http://www.wildsound.ca

Watch recent Writing Festival Videos. At least 15 winning videos a month:http://www.wildsoundfestival.com

Advertisement

1987 Movie Review: SPACEBALLS, 1987

festreviews 1987 Movies, movie, Movie Review , , , , , , , , , , ,

 

SPACEBALLS MOVIE POSTER
SPACEBALLS, 1987
Movie Reviews

Directed by Mel Brooks
Starring: Mel Brooks, John Candy, Rick Moranis, Bill Pullman, Daphne Zuniga
Review by Mark Engberg

SYNOPSIS:

Having squandered their own air supply, the inhabitants of Planet Spaceball kidnap a wealthy princess to rob her planet of its precious resources.

CLICK HERE and watch 2009 MOVIES FOR FREE!

REVIEW:

“Everybody got that?” Dark Helmet asks the audience after his chief-in-command Colonel Sandurz delivers the plot exposition to his fellow villains.

This late 80’s parody of science-fiction fanfare may have been tardy in satirizing the “Star Wars” empire that George Lucas built a decade earlier. In describing his prime target in making “Spaceballs”, Mel Brooks calls the sci-fi epic “the final frontier. It is the last genre I can destroy. So I am destroying it.”

Additionally, he has categorized this entry as “half wit, half physical, half disgusting, and sometimes beautiful. It’s my appreciation of the human event.”

While some critics have challenged Mr. Brooks’ timeliness in the sci-fi parody, this film has enjoyed a cult appreciation in terms of its clever writing and enjoyable characters. Another factor to appreciate: Apogee, Inc accomplished the special effects in this comedy in the dwindling days of pre-digital CGI. Like the original “Star Wars” trilogy, Agogee’s special effects team had to construct models with computerized motion control systems to give the flying Winnebago and endless Spaceball One the illusions of movement.

During these contemporary days of special effects design where anything and everything can be done with digital enhancement, it is refreshing to watch a master like Mel Brooks carve genuine comedy out of handcrafted science fiction.

Even though “Spaceballs” features lasers, spaceships, and alien make-up galore, Brooks never steps too far away from his fan base in delivering the pratfalls and one-liners that made the man a comic icon. He even gets a guy in a bear suit to get a cheap laugh in the third act.

The movie begins with a “Star Wars” scroll giving the audience a brief history of the Spaceballs universe. Under the hilarious leadership of President Skroob (Mel Brooks, hmm, I just realized the name is an anagram) the citizens of Planet Spaceball are forced to invade new worlds in order to steal their air supply.

Mimicking “Star Wars” to the last detail, Dark Helmet (Rick Moranis) and Colonel Sandurz (George Wyner) kidnap Princess Vespa (Daphne Zuniga) in an effort to blackmail her father, King Roland (Brooks all-star for father figures, Dick Van Patten).

This is where Bill Pullman and John Candy come in, as Captain Lone Starr and his sidekick Barf, an allusion to Chewbacca in that he is half-man, half-dog. Candy is hysterical in his performance of the mawg, but the real winners of this role are the operators of Barf’s mechanical canine-like ears. Every time Barf appears to listen, his auto-receptive ears perk up like antennae. The effect is comic gold.

Like Han Solo, the character of Lone Starr is motivated by money. With perfect deadpan, Pullman says, “Barf, we’re not doing this for the spacebucks. We’re doing it for a shitload of spacebucks!”

The reason for the greed is that Lone Starr has a heavy debt to pay Pizza the Hut (voiced by the recently departed Dom DeLuise). And Pullman plays the character of Lone Starr with a humorous yet touching sentiment that would have made Harrison Ford proud. With a note of sadness, Lone Starr tells Vespa he hails from the Ford Galaxy. Those who do not remember the Ford Galxie 500 have come to assume that this joke is a reference to the actor who played Han Solo.

But there is more than enough of “Star Wars” reference to go around. Brooks even uses the famous Wilhelm scream as one of his Spaceball troops is shot in the ass by incoming laser fire.As a matter of fact, keep an eagle eye out for the Millennium Falcon parked next to Lone Starr’s Winnebago at the interstellar gas station.

This is not to say that George Lucas’ beloved saga of “Star Wars” is the sole target of Mr. Brooks’ parodying lightsabre. In “Spaceballs”, he references “The Wizard of Oz”, “Star Trek”, “Alien”, and even “Planet of the Apes”. Keep a sharp ear ready for that last one. That is the voice of Michael York playing the second ape on horseback.

Brooks definitely goes above and beyond his traditional self-reflective voice in this film. In ways like never before, the writer/director/producer/star lists his former Hollywood achievements as videotapes stored upon a futuristic spaceship.

“Instant cassettes,” says Col. Sandurz. “They’re out in stores before the movie is finished.”

In one of my favorite comedic sequences of all time, the villainous Spaceballs fast-forward through their own movie in order to discover the location of the good guys. After which, Dark Helmet and Sandurz engage in an Abbott and Costello routine of existential misunderstanding.

And the self-reflective filmmaking joke continues throughout the movie. Before teaching Lone Starr about the powers of the Schwartz, Yogurt (also played by Mr. Brooks) explains his profession upon his lonely planet.

“Merchandising,” says Yogurt. “Where the real money from the movie is made.” Yogurt then goes on to sell the audience item after item of Spaceballs merchandise, all of which is a joke. In fact, Mr. Lucas allowed Brooks to make “Spaceballs” on the condition that there would be no merchandising for this movie. This would, of course, account for the spotty nature of the “merchandise”. Notice that “Spaceballs: The Coloring Book” is nothing more than a Transformers illustration book (Twenty years before Michael Bay began ruining my beloved robotic heroes himself!)

There are many other individual items of “Spaceballs” to enjoy for the pure sake of silliness. John Candy wins the award for the best use of the middle finger (beating out Keanu Reeves in “The Matrix” and Jennifer Aniston in “Office Space”) after Lone Starr and Barf park the Winnebago in the Spaceball penal territory.

I am also a big fan of the great Stephen Tobolowsky’s short yet pleasing scene as an effeminate Captain of the Guards. He only has a couple of lines, but there is just something about his delivery that makes his character as memorable as Barf.

“Spectacular stunt, my friends, but all for not . . .” he lectures to his captives before realizing they are nothing more than stunt doubles.

The scene when Dark Helmet is caught playing with the Spaceballs action figures is also one of my favorite reactions in filmed comedy. According to cinema trivia, Moranis performed this scene impromptu after Brooks suddenly conjured up the premise on set. How they got the action figure so quickly is anyone’s guess.

And let’s not forget Joan Rivers as the voice of Dot Matrix, Princess Vespa’s personal assistant droid. Ironic, though, that the Joan Rivers of today currently resembles the physical appearance of the golden android.

A subtle shout is also made to fans of literary essays. When Spaceball One is revealed to be a gigantic transformer about to engage in “metamorphosis”, Dark Helmet prompts his officer: “Ready, Kafka?” Think about that one.

Final thought: Does the alien that bursts out of John Hurt’s stomach play a song that seems familiar to all who watched those classic Looney Tunes cartoons? It should. The song and top hat dance number is homage to “One Froggy Evening”. You know, the one where the frog grabs a cane and dances to “The Michigan Rag.”

SPACEBALLS, 1987.jpg

Also, Free logline submissions. The Writing Festival network averages over 95,000 unique visitors a day.
Great way to get your story out: http://www.wildsound.ca/logline.html

Deadlines to Submit your Screenplay, Novel, Story, or Poem to the festival:http://www.wildsound.ca

Watch recent Writing Festival Videos. At least 15 winning videos a month:http://www.wildsoundfestival.com

1987 Movie Review: ROBOCOP, 1987

festreviews 1987 Movies, movie, Movie Review, Uncategorized , , , , , , ,

 

Robocop (1987)
Directed by: Paul Verhoeven
Classic Movie Review
Starring: Peter Weller, Nancy Allen, Kurtwood Smith
by Mike Peters

Synopsis:

After being murdered by a ruthless gang of criminals, Alex Murphy (Peter Weller) is resurrected as a crime-fighting cyborg named ‘Robocop’.

Review:

Albert Einstein once said that: “It has become appallingly obvious that our technology has exceeded our humanity”. It is a very true fact indeed that technology has become an unstoppable entity. It is ever-growing and constantly on the move. It has strived to make our lives easier but has managed to gain the reputation as a slave master. We, as society, have become enslaved to the very idea of technology. It has taken us over and has rendered us vulnerable to its’ utopian ideals. Some of have said that it has stripped us of what many hold dear to them; our humanity.

Robocop is a film that does much more than entertain. It strives to understand the relationship man has with technology/machine. The fact that Robocop is a man controlled by technology is a statement unto itself. Even the title of the film is a hybrid of two opposing factors; man and machine. After being systematically slaughtered, it is only through the power of technology that Murphy is allowed to live once again. However, as a result, technology has rendered him a thoughtless and emotional free being. He is mundane and computer like in his speech and his suit is highly symbolic of the cold/sterile and colorless world that technology represents.

The film, on the surface, is about his role as a crime fighter, striving to uphold the law no matter the cost. On a much deeper level however, the film is about his fight against the technology that now controls his body. Throughout the course of the film, Robocop attempts to retrieve some evidence of his once prevalent humanity. When he first became Robocop, all his memories and emotional content were erased, thus making him an invalid without the proper guidance of human beings. It is only through a relapse and his quest to regain his old self that the audience begins to realize that man cannot always control technology. It now has the ability to control us.

Robocop soon begins to act irrationally as he begins to have dreams, memories and thoughts (He is now beginning to retrieve some of the individual characteristics that made him human in the first place). The scientists governing him have no idea what has happened as they are no longer able to control him. In one telling scene near the end of the film, Robocop removes his mask and fights without it, revealing the face of Murphy. It is a very shocking sight since Murphy’s human face is fused with the mechanical properties of a machine. The very fact that he begins to speak, think and feel as a human once again during this sequence represents his quest to separate himself from the machine that is now in control of him.

Paul Verhoeven, in his second American film, presents an idea that technology can be understood as a major threat to our very own civilization. In the film, many scenes, in which Robocop or Ed-209 (Robocop’s nemesis) appear, strongly depicts the failures that technology is capable of. In one particular scene, Dick Jones (Ronny Cox) is presenting the new and improved machine crime fighter, Ed-209. In a demonstration, one of the business men present, is told to point a gun at Ed. He does so and the machine tells him to drop it. The man relinquishes the weapon but the machine continues to warn him. In the background, scientists scramble to fix the problem but it is too late. Ed-209 opens fire and massacres the man to death with automatic weapons. It is an undeniable statement that technology which cannot be controlled by man is capable of eventually decimating mankind to the point of extinction.

The film is very strongly-opinionated. It not only critiques technology but, as well, society, politics and commercialism. With that being said, the film is also a solid form of entertainment. It is a must see for action buffs. The film is very violent and unrelenting in it’s’ brutality but it does manage to tell a cohesive story while simultaneously critiquing many things. The next time one watches this film however, try to understand how undermining it truly is. There is a lot more going on then mere action filled sequences. It is a highly subversive piece of work and manages to illicit many reactions as a result.

*Humanity is acquiring all the right technology for all the wrong reasons. ~R. Buckminster Fuller

 

Also, Free logline submissions. The Writing Festival network averages over 95,000 unique visitors a day.
Great way to get your story out: http://www.wildsound.ca/logline.html

Deadlines to Submit your Screenplay, Novel, Story, or Poem to the festival:http://www.wildsound.ca

Watch recent Writing Festival Videos. At least 15 winning videos a month:http://www.wildsoundfestival.com

1987 Movie Review: RAISING ARIZONA, 1987

festreviews 1987 Movies, movie, Movie Review, Uncategorized , , , , , ,


RAISING ARIZONA
Movie Reviews

Directed by Joel and Ethan Coen
Starring: Nicolas Cage, Holly Hunter
Review by Andrew Rowe

SYNOPSIS:

When a childless couple of an ex-con and an ex-cop decide to help themselves to one of another family’s quintupelets, their lives get more complicated than they anticipated.

REVIEW:

10 minutes, that’s how long Raising Arizona rolls until the title card hits. If this sounds odd it is, but so is everything else about the Coen Brothers’ second film. As they’ve often done throughout their career, the brothers normally follow-up a serious film with a comedy. Fargo led to The Big Lebowski, No Country for Old Men led to Burn After Reading. With Raising Arizona the brothers had just come from the neo-noir Blood Simple, their first ever film. Where as that film dealt with deception and murder in the shadows of Texas, Raising Arizona basks in the sun with non-stop slapstick, silly fun.

Nicholas Cage stars as Hi, or H.I. if you’re talking to his friends. He’s a petty criminal who has a thing for robbing convenience stores with ammo-less guns. Because he doesn’t use armed weapons his jail sentences are always small in length, which allows for multiple visits. During these multiple visits he meets Ed, a policewoman played by Holly Hunter. Ed’s fiance leaves her, which opens up the door for Hi to reform and win her heart. This is when the Raising Arizona title card hits.

The unlikely couple moves into a trailer in the desert and realize they need something more in their life because they have too much love to give. After multiple attempts of conception, they learn that Ed is unable to bare children and due to Hi’s criminal record, unable to adopt. Devastated, hope arrives in the form of the ‘Arizona Quints’, 5 boys that are born to a locally famous unpainted furniture storeowner, Nathan Arizona.

Hi and Ed decide that abducting one of the boys for themselves is a good idea and do so. After welcoming the child into their home, Hi and Ed are greeted by two of Hi’s friends from prison, Gale and Evelle, John Goodman, and William Forsythe. The two inmates have broken out of prison because the institution no longer had anything to offer them. Against Ed’s wishes, the two fugitives stay at their home where they begin to influence Hi.

At this same time a heavily armed bounty hunter by the name of Leonard Smalls, “My friends call me Lenny… only I ain’t got no friends”, is on the hunt for the child. Blowing up bunny rabbits with grenades, Leonard is fear itself. Gale and Evelle eventually learn of the child’s actual identity and decide to turn him in for the reward money. Everyone collides on a strip in the middle of the desert highway that involves a bank robbery, gunfire, hand-to-hand combat, screeching tires, and a large explosion.

The script, written by the Coens possesses their trademark tongue-in-cheek dialogue as well as an explosive climax and slow burn denouement. No one writes stupid characters like the Coens do. These people that inhabit the film aren’t very bright, and it’s hard to believe anyone in the world could be of this level of intelligence, but the Coens draw you in, first making the world they live in real, then the characters, then the silly things they do. Besides the charming dialogue, there are so many ridiculous sight gags that you may not even catch them all the first time around.

Raising Arizona is arguably the craziest movie the Coen Brother’s have made in their three-decade career, and that’s saying a lot. The film acts as a live-action Saturday morning cartoon. Working for the second time with cinematographer Barry Sonnenfeld who had shot their debut film Blood Simple, the visuals on screen are closer to a Dr. Seuss book than any of the current film adaptations. Using his trademark wide angles, everything remains in focus allowing the viewer to fully appreciate the immaculate Art Direction. The camera also moves with the action at the right time giving certain scenes a feeling that the camera is a character in the film, namely a chase scene through a house, and a fistfight between two characters.

The actors do a tremendous job of bringing these cartoon characters to life. John Goodman who would go on to work with the Coens several more times is perfect as Gale, the harder of the two brothers and number one bad influence on Hi. Nicholas Cage and Holly Hunter have great comedic chemistry and give weight to characters that otherwise wouldn’t have much soul. Hi may just be a dummy, but he’s a dummy with a large heart that wants nothing more than for his Ed to be happy. He is like Bugs Bunny mixed with Wilde Coyote, he’ll get away from Elmer Fudd only to celebrate and have an anvil fall on his head. Randall “Tex” Cobb is a towering inferno on wheels, and makes lighting a match look almost as cool as Clint Eastwood.

It’s of course the Coens that bring it all together. The characters all seem real in this colorful world they’ve created. The slapstick is done wonderfully and gives you a nostalgic feeling of when these Buster Keaton-style comedies were king. It’s just a really fun movie that’ll have you laughing and shaking your head in tandem. This film is also the Coen’s most family friendly; it is almost Disney-like in some aspects.

The film’s innocence is something rarely seen in today’s crop of comedies as well as in the Coen’s filmography. It doesn’t feature as dark of humor or the violence that comes with most Coen Brothers’ films, but here that’s a good thing. The film is a great little gem that shouldn’t be missed.

raising arizona

Also, Free logline submissions. The Writing Festival network averages over 95,000 unique visitors a day.
Great way to get your story out: http://www.wildsound.ca/logline.html

Deadlines to Submit your Screenplay, Novel, Story, or Poem to the festival:http://www.wildsound.ca

Watch recent Writing Festival Videos. At least 15 winning videos a month:http://www.wildsoundfestival.com

1987 Movie Review: THE PRINCESS BRIDE, 1987

festreviews 1987 Movies, movie, Movie Review, Uncategorized , , , , , , , , , , ,

THE PRINCESS BRIDE, MOVIE POSTERTHE PRINCESS BRIDE, 1987
Movie Reviews

Directed by Rob Reiner
Starring: Robin Wright, Cary Elwes, Mandy Patinkin, Andre The Giant, Billy Crystal, Chris Sarandon, Christopher Guest, Wallace Shawn

Review by Virginia De Witt

SYNOPSIS:

A young boy is home sick from school, when his grandfather arrives and begins to read to him from a story book. The tale of Buttercup and Westley, who live in the faraway land of Florin, then unfolds. They fall in love but are separated, and Buttercup believes Westley has been killed by the Dread Pirate Roberts. Years later, Buttercup, now betrothed to the villainous Prince Humperdinck, is kidnapped on the eve of her wedding. A mysterious man in black appears to do battle with the kidnappers and save Buttercup. Westley eventually reveals himself to Buttercup as the man in black, who has survived his encounter with the Dread Pirate Roberts, and together they set off to escape Humperdinck and his men, only to be caught and separated again. The Princess Bride, Buttercup and her true love, Westley, eventually endure many tests and trials before their ultimate and inevitable reunion.

REVIEW:

This adaptation of William Goldman’s 1973 novel of the same name, is as heavily indebted to the history of the movies as it is to the stories of Hans Christian Anderson, which its title and its core story are meant to evoke. William Goldman was a successful Hollywood screenwriter, e.g. “Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid” (1969), when he wrote this children’s book and he, along with director, Rob Reiner, made it into a deeply affectionate tribute to the Saturday matinee idols of their youth, particularly to the swashbuckling films of Errol Flynn. It is a swiftly paced, beautifully shot and often funny adventure fantasy, that is aided greatly by its large cast, as well as Goldman’s imaginative writing.

The story itself is the proverbial roller coaster ride which never lags and features every familiar figure from the world of fairy tales, from giants to a wicked prince; a beautiful princess in waiting to a wizened old wizard. Goldman throws in a few inventions of his own along the way – in the Fire Swamp, for instance, where Buttercup and Westley hide from their pursuers, they must battle Rodents of Unusual Size, monsters which are fun to watch and which conjure up memories of cheap horror flicks. The film is memorably shot by Adrian Biddle who successfully evokes a technicolor story book landscape. Florin is a world unto itself of gauzy meadows and moonlit waters, and which features Ireland’s Cliffs of Moher standing in for the Cliffs of Insanity where the Man In Black first does battle with the three marauders who have kidnapped Buttercup.

The key to the film’s success, however, is its cast, which Rob Reiner has directed with a sure hand. This is especially true in the comedic interludes, which dominate the film except for the love story between Westley and Buttercup. Their story is always presented in iconic fairy tale terms, as when Westley earnestly declares to Buttercup on his return from his encounter with the Dread Pirate – “Death cannot stop true love. It can only delay it for awhile.” Cary Elwes as Westley, seems cast as much for his resemblance to the young Errol Flynn as for his acting ability, but he achieves the requisite romantic chemistry with Robin Wright’s Buttercup. She has a lovely natural honesty in the part that makes even the most shopworn of romantic cliches seem fresh.

Every other situation is played for laughs and Reiner is assisted by a group of wonderful comic actors. As a result, he manages to strike a winning balance between humor and romance. William Shawn as Vizzini, one of Buttercup’s inept kidnappers, is a scrappy little gnome of a bad guy, constantly in everyone’s face, arguing and complaining. Mandy Patinkin as Montoya, one of Vizzini’s partners in crime, who is seeking revenge for his father’s death, is like a figure out of comic opera, sporting a campy accent and dueling his way through the film. Chris Sarandon as the wicked Prince Humperdinck and Christopher Guest as Count Rugen, his equally repugnant co-conspirator, are perfect comic villains, always more silly than scary. Billy Crystal and Carol Kane have a wonderful cameo appearance at the climax of the film as Miracle Max and his wife, Valerie, an ancient bickering couple who live in a tree but kvetch like Borscht Belt comedians.

In the framing story, Peter Falk as the grandfather and Fred Savage as his grandson have a gently funny rapport. The intermittent return to them throughout the telling of Buttercup’s story is not intrusive as it might have been, as Reiner sets an appropriately light tone for this material. We’re never really in doubt about the outcome of the tale and therefore don’t resent a bit of meandering in its telling.

“The Princess Bride” is a re-imagining of the fairy tale, from the point of view of a writer and director saturated in the equally powerful world of classic adventure movies. Together, William Goldman and Rob Reiner, create a magical combination of fantasy, romance, comedy and action that has not dated in the least.

THE PRINCESS BRIDE,1987

Also, Free logline submissions. The Writing Festival network averages over 95,000 unique visitors a day.
Great way to get your story out: http://www.wildsound.ca/logline.html

Deadlines to Submit your Screenplay, Novel, Story, or Poem to the festival:http://www.wildsound.ca

Watch recent Writing Festival Videos. At least 15 winning videos a month:http://www.wildsoundfestival.com

1987 Movie Review: PREDATOR, 1987

festreviews Uncategorized , , , , , , , ,

PREDATOR, MOVIE POSTERPREDATOR, 1987
Movie Reviews

Directed by: John Tiernan

Cast: Arnold Schwarzenegger, Carl Weathers, Elpidia Carrillo, Bill Duke, Jesse Ventura
Review by Jarred Thomas

SYNOPSIS:

Dutch and a small group of commandos and sent by the CIA to a Central American Jungle, to rescue capture airmen from Guerillas. But it’s not the armed terrorists which are the problem. Something hidden in the jungle, something invisible to the naked eye, something not of this earth is the problem. As Dutch and his men had back to transport, they are slowly targeted one by one.

REVIEW:

Y One of the best action movies of the 80’s and quite honestly of all times, Predator introduced us to an iconic monster with a penchant for hunting and killing its opponents for sport. Arnold Schwarzenegger is one of the most popular action stars and at the prime of his career he was in action films where for the most part he dominated his enemies with explosive, guns, cars, and fist fighting, but now Arnold meets his match in the form of an alien being set out to kill him and his elite military friends.

Predator is an excellent action movie with a solid supporting cast dishing on campy one liners and B movie dialogue. But none of that really mattered. Audiences went to see someone get their head blown off, not to listen to philosophical Shakespearian talk. John Tiernan has done some engaging movies in the past and here he truly delivers with Arnold leading the cast.

An elite military force led by Dutch (Schwarzenegger) is being hunted down by some unknown predator who not only kills his prey but removes their skulls as a trophy. The Predator is equipped with vast amount of highly advanced weaponry that puts the military to shame and outmatched. Throughout the majority of the film the Predator remains cloaked in a disguise that allows him to blend into the background.

One by one he takes out the soldiers, one death more brutal than the last finally until finally its Arnold’s turn to take a crack at the superior warrior. What’s interesting about this film is that in only a short amount of time, the director is able to hint at a possible history for the Predator without having to go into specifics.

Anna, a prisoner of Dutch’s elite team, tells about past stories in which the jungle supposedly came to life and started killing then skinning its victims. It’s possible, or at least alluded to, that it was another Predator at a different time. While running from the creature, Dutch notices that the killer is only killing those who are armed, as if for sport.

The action scenes in particular are well handled. Most of it however consists of mowing down the jungle with their machine guns, shooting at an object they can’t see or hear. After the death of one of his comrades, Duke unleashes his rage on the jungle believing that the killer is present. It’s a great scene despite being over the top.

Clearly the director and actors are having with the film, and it shows making the viewing experience even more enjoyable. Predator is one of the best action films alongside Terminator, Terminator 2 and Total Recall, all of which star Arnold. If you’re looking for a good time with no insightful dialogue or in depth study on character relationships, just pure action with a solid cast, then Predator is the one you’re looking for.

 

PREDATOR, 1987.jpg

Also, Free logline submissions. The Writing Festival network averages over 95,000 unique visitors a day.
Great way to get your story out: http://www.wildsound.ca/logline.html

Deadlines to Submit your Screenplay, Novel, Story, or Poem to the festival:http://www.wildsound.ca

Watch recent Writing Festival Videos. At least 15 winning videos a month:http://www.wildsoundfestival.com

1987 Movie Review: OVERBOARD, 1987

festreviews 1987 Movies, movie, Movie Review, Uncategorized , , , , , , , ,

OVERBOARD, 1987
Movie Reviews

Directed by Garry Marshall

Starring Goldie Hawn, Kurt Russell, Edward Herrmann, Katherine Helmond, Roddy McDowall

Review by Russell Hill

SYNOPSIS:

Rich bitch Joanna hires country carpenter Dean to build a closet on her yacht. When the two don’t see eye-to-eye, Dean is left unpaid while Joanna sets sail. The following day, Joanna is fished out of the sea, after falling overboard, suffering from amnesia. Dean sees a neat way to regain the money she owes him… he tells her she’s his wife; that way Dean gets a free housekeeper and mother for his four kids.

REVIEW:

First and foremost, I am not a huge fan of chick flicks. Heck I would even go as far to say that I despise the vast majority of these films. “Bridget Jones Diary” can stay far away from me but, over the years, I have come to like the odd film which is normally targeted at this market. I didn’t even know “Notting Hill” was one of these films, and thought “While You Were Sleeping” was a classic. “Overboard” was perhaps the first film I saw which could be seen as a chick flick that I actually enjoyed, with the reasons for this being numerous and heart felt.

Joanna Stayton (Hawn) is your typical yuppie who treats those who earn less than $1 million as muck. Stuck where to put her 2,000 or so pairs of shoes on her luxury cruise liner that she owns with husband Grant (Edward Hermann) she hires a handyman called Dean Proffitt (Russell) to build her a wardrobe. However, being the nasty person she is, Joanna takes a disliking to Dean and his uncouth manners and decides to push him off the boat and, literally, into the water.

Angry at what has just happened, Dean switches on the television at a local bar the next day to learn that during the night Joanna had been found off the coast by lifeguards with no Grant in sight and her memory gone. Dean sees an opportunity to get back the money he is owed by turning up by Joanna’s bedside and pretending to be her husband and saying that Joanna is not her real name, but is in fact Annie. The authorities fall for this as does Joanna, and is taken back to Dean’s ramshackle house in the country where she is tricked into looking after him and “their” four children who are about as clean as the house itself. Will Joanna ever leave? Or will she regain her memory and return to the life she once had?

On a personal level, this was the film which first exposed me to the music of Elvis Presley as one of the best scenes of the movie uses “Can’t Help Falling In Love”. But other than that, this movie does well on two points.

First, it makes you laugh. The genuine warmth between Hawn and Russell is touching and a relationship you can believe in. The interaction between the two is moving, and is blindingly obvious to see why they have been together in real life for so long. Hawn has always been a much underrated comic actress. Her leading role in the 1980 movie “Private Benjamin” was great, and her portrayal of spoiled Joanna was genius casting. Her naïve transformation from rags to riches is very amusing indeed, and it shows what an improvement she does with the dilapidated house she is forced to inherit along with the four children who, at first, look as though they had been taken from Dickensian London.

Russell too does very well here. His shabby appearance at first makes him seem like a cruel and unkind character, but over the course of the movie that appearance is changed permanently when he discovers what a wonderful person Joanna/Annie is when you take away the pearls and diamonds. I always find Russell’s acting career to be a bit of an oddity. Is he cast in a movie simply because the women can then drool over him? Or, is he to be taken as a serious actor? Here, in the role of Dean, he seems to act in the middle of these as he does show an Adonis body shot or two but also demonstrates what a fine actor he really is.

I admit that not many heterosexual men will appreciate this movie due to its romantic inklings, but if you take this element away you have a great movie full of humour and excellent acting by all involved.

TOP 100 SEXTOP 100 SEX SCENES of all-time
WATCH the revised 2011 list!		 TOP 100 NAKED MOVIE SCENES
WATCH the all! Best in cinema history!		 TOP 100 TV SEX SCENESTOP 100 TV SEX SCENES
WATCH the best in television history!

OVERBOARD, 1987.jpg

Also, Free logline submissions. The Writing Festival network averages over 95,000 unique visitors a day.
Great way to get your story out: http://www.wildsound.ca/logline.html

Deadlines to Submit your Screenplay, Novel, Story, or Poem to the festival:http://www.wildsound.ca

Watch recent Writing Festival Videos. At least 15 winning videos a month:http://www.wildsoundfestival.com

1987 Movie Review: NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET 3, 1987

festreviews 1987 Movies, movie, Movie Review , , , , , , , , ,

A NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET 3, 1987 MOVIEA NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET 3, 1987
Movie Reviews

Director: Chuck Russell

Starring: Heather Langenkamp, Robert Englund, Craig Wasson, Patricia Arquette, Jennifer Rubin, Laurence Fishburne

Review by Russell Hill

SYNOPSIS:

Picking up where the original Nightmare left off, Nancy has grown up and become a psychiatrist specializing in dream therapy. She meets a group of children at a local hospital facing Freddy Krueger, the same demon she once encountered in her sleep. One of them is Kristen, who has the power to draw other people into her dreams. Working with a male doctor assigned to the case, Nancy helps the kids realize their special abilities within the nightmare world. When Freddy captures one of her charges, she leads a rescue attempt into Krueger’s domain, in hopes of putting his spirit to rest once and for all.

REVIEW:

Having been a fan of the Elm Street movies since I was about seven, Part 3 is the best interpretation of Wes Craven’s vision outside of the first Freddy movie. It has both the power to terrify and shock you, with a touch of comedy used which I’m sure was intentional by its director Chuck Russell.

Kristen (Arquette) is having some bad dreams. Believing that she is going insane due to her staying up late at night, Kristen is sent to a psychiatric ward where she is overlooked by the kindly Dr Neil Gordon. It is not long after Kristen arrives that Dr Gordon is joined by an up-and-coming staff member named Nancy Thompson (Langenkamp). Having survived Freddy’s (Englund) attempts on her life in the first movie, she is as much as an expert on what to do with Krueger and his evil ways.

Not long after first arriving, Nancy notices that the other patients are suffering from the same problem which Kristen has. Will she ever be able to help her? Or will they suffer as Nancy’s friends did all those years ago?

With a great cast, this movie is a fine interpretation of how a sequel should be. Wes Craven, who did not return for the first sequel, wrote the story for this and you can see his creepy influence here. This is a movie made before CGI, and what you see happening pretty much occurred in reality and not on a computer screen. There are times when you are deeply impressed by what occurs in front of you, such as the head of Freddy trying to eat Kristen to a ventriloquist’s dummy changing into Freddy and cutting some poor soul to pieces. In all, it’s a very decent looking slasher movie.

As with all films, it is content over style and this film is that. The script throughout is solid, as are the performances. Admittedly not a huge fan of Arquette, this was her second film and shows true acting ability that previous star’s of this franchise have not shown.

As with all slasher franchises, a heroine has to emerge and in this movie that is Nancy. Someone who can defeat the lead character when all around her cannot, she returns here once more and her main objective is to destroy Freddy in both the conscious and subconscious world. Her caring nature does not become hindered at any one time, and you honestly and truly believe in her quest to rid the world of Freddy.

And what of Englund as the child killer? Marvellous and over the top as usual. Although he may be a classically trained actor who has worked in the theatre since the end of the Freddy movies I believe he relished his portrayal of the psychopath as he had the opportunity to let rip, so to speak.

I shall always watch movies like this. Yes I admit to loving the work of Bergmann, Truffaut and Eisenstein but there just seems to be something about the Elm Street movies which make them totally endearing and fantastic to watch.

TOP 100 SEXTOP 100 SEX SCENES of all-time
WATCH the revised 2011 list!		 TOP 100 NAKED MOVIE SCENES
WATCH the all! Best in cinema history!		 TOP 100 TV SEX SCENESTOP 100 TV SEX SCENES
WATCH the best in television history!

NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET 3, 1987.jpg

Also, Free logline submissions. The Writing Festival network averages over 95,000 unique visitors a day.
Great way to get your story out: http://www.wildsound.ca/logline.html

Deadlines to Submit your Screenplay, Novel, Story, or Poem to the festival:http://www.wildsound.ca

Watch recent Writing Festival Videos. At least 15 winning videos a month:http://www.wildsoundfestival.com

1987 Movie Review: NEAR DARK, 1987

festreviews 1987 Movies, movie, Movie Review, Uncategorized , , , , , , ,

NEAR DARK MOVIE POSTER
NEAR DARK, 1987
Movie Reviews

Directed by Kathryn Bigelow
Starring: Adrian Pasdar, Jenny Wright, Lance Henriksen, Bill Paxton
Review by Gemma Eagle

SYNOPSIS:

A mid-western farm boy reluctantly becomes a member of the undead when a girl he meets turns out to be part of a band of southern vampires who roam the highways looking for their next meal.

REVIEW:

After re-watching Near Dark last night I couldn’t understand why very few mainstream movie go-ers have heard of the film, especially given the almost macabre excitement that tends to follow most vampire flicks, regardless of quality.

1987 saw the release of several high profile films (Robocop, Good Morning Vietnam, and Full Metal Jacket) and as a result, it was almost inevitable that Near Dark would be overlooked. Coupled with the DEG (DeLaurentiis Entertainment Group) studio going bankrupt and being unable to provide much publicity during its release, it’s understandable why the film failed at the box office, earning little more than $3,000,000.

Writer and director Kathryn Bigelow (K-19 The Widowmaker, Point Break) re-imagined the creatures, combining diverse genres such as horror, western, crime, and romance into what may be the first vampire movie that strays aware from glorifying vampires, instead returning them to their chilling origins.

Set against the eerie backdrop of perpetual twilight, the atmosphere of Near Dark is both moody and beautifully dream-like and unusually for a vampire movie, the word “vampire” is never mentioned. The stereotypical supernatural and religious undertones are almost non existent in the film focusing instead on the characters themselves. Take away the blood drinking in the movie and you’ve got a compelling and somewhat disturbing film essentially focusing the workings of the family dynamics between these rogue killers.

There is a definite James Cameron influence visible at almost every turn in the film, not just in the films cast (the film reteams 3 of Aliens’ cast members – Henriksen, Paxton and Goldstein) Bigelow however doesn’t try to hide this glaring truth instead pays tribute to Aliens in the film. At one point the protagonist, Caleb, stagger through a random town in which Aliens is showing in the local cinema. Instead of the horrible shadows of true black evenings, we get the chrome and steel scenery that fans of the Terminator creator will instantly recognize. Bigelow is excellent at creating mood and feeding atmosphere, and Near Dark is her best example of that skill. Steering away from any special effects, Near Dark certainly feels like it was made in the 80’s which works for the film rather than against it. The grainy feel of the set drops adds a somewhat dirty feel to the films already VHS quality, settling for realism over fantasy. Credit goes to The Terminator’s director of photography Adam Greenberg for creating the films beautifully haunting look.

As mentioned, what sets Near Dark apart from any other Vampire film is that of solid character development brought to life by a string of underrated actors. We realize the vampires need to practice self-preservation and instead of shying away from the brutality involved, Bigelow highlights its monstrosity culminating in the famous bar sequence. Even though, the victims themselves are not nameless patrons; Bigelow still makes sure that their true terror is shown as they are slaughtered one by one.

Lance Henriksen is genuinely terrifying in his underplayed portrayal of Jesse Hooker the age-old chief of the clan.

Wild Bill Paxton is simply magnificent as the blood-guzzling cowboy Severen and despite his obvious brutality, his southern lilt enthusiasm for all things gruesome endear him to the audience right from the get go, ensuring that he steals every scene he appears in. Throughout the film you get the impression that Paxton is constantly seeking the approval of his co-star Henriksen, both in and out of character, showing off like a desperate-to-impress teenager at every available opportunity as Lance/Jesse watches from the sidelines. Though Paxton clearly enjoys the character he is playing, he never successfully makes the character real enough that we forget he is acting.

Jenny Wright who plays Mae, Caleb’s love interest and the cause of his downfall into the vampire world, is interesting throughout the film and despite her onscreen role throughout the majority of the film there is a sense of underdevelopment in her character. Her naivety is believable if not annoying but one can’t help but feel the writing fails her at times.

The script does little to challenge many stereotypes in the film and the almost compulsory Man Child is ever present struggling to deal with the quandary of being trapped in a child’s body. The acting by Joshua John Miller who plays said child (Homer) is a let down much like his character.

The music, composed by Tangerine Dream’s Christopher Franke is somewhat overshadowed by the film itself, though its loud and atmospheric sounds compliment the story well.

Near Dark may not quite come close to masterpiece status by any means, but it is ingenious within its genre, and definitely offers a new spin on the overdone tale. It has its share of let downs but these are generally overshadowed by a solid plot and interesting character dynamics. With the remastered release available on DVD, Near Dark definitely deserves the release it didn’t get upon it’s initial debut.

In the words of Severen (Bill Paxton) – it’s finger-licking Good!

 NEAR DARK, 1987

Also, Free logline submissions. The Writing Festival network averages over 95,000 unique visitors a day.
Great way to get your story out: http://www.wildsound.ca/logline.html

Deadlines to Submit your Screenplay, Novel, Story, or Poem to the festival:http://www.wildsound.ca

Watch recent Writing Festival Videos. At least 15 winning videos a month:http://www.wildsoundfestival.com

1987 Movie Review: MOONSTRUCK, 1987

festreviews 1987 Movies, movie, Movie Review, Uncategorized , , , , , , , , ,

MOONSTRUCK MOVIE POSTER
MOONSTRUCK, 1987
Classic Movie Review
Directed by Norman Jewison
Starring Cher, Nicolas Cage, Olympia Dukakis, Vincent Gardenia, Danny Aiello, John Mahoney
Review by Cheyrl Farr

SYNOPSIS:

An Italian-American widow, Loretta Castorini, settles for a loveless engagement, believing that she has bad luck nothing better will come along. She meets her future brother-in-law, Ronny Cammareri, and does her best to flee the hot passion that exists between them. But, under the “Bella Luna,” their romance cannot be denied. With love’s ups and downs, they all come together at the conclusion of a whirlwind courtship with a toast to family.

REVIEW:

Loretta Castorini is a take charge kind of woman who lives and works in the Italian-American neighborhood of Brooklyn. Brilliantly played by Cher, this character is matter-of-fact, and has little joy in her life. She is resigned to the fact that bad luck has played a major role in her life, and as a widow, she accepts the proposal of Johnny Cammareri. He is a momma’s boy, and the two seem to gravitate to one another out of a sense of duty rather than any love or passion.

Johnny gives her the unenviable task of contacting his younger, estranged brother so that he will attend the wedding. Johnny flies off to Italy to the

Loretta meets Ronny (the younger brother), and tries to impose her will on him as he recounts the reason why he never speaks to his brother…he lost his hand in a bread slicer during a conversation with Johnny. As their arguing escalates, the heat between them leads to the bedroom, and as much as the level-headed Loretta tries to end the affair, the two have a deep chemistry which won’t be denied. Ronny invites her to the opera, and she undergoes a wonderful makeover for the occasion. She covers her gray hair, buys new clothes, and seems to find the light that was snuffed out of her life when her first husband died.

When Johnny returns from Italy, where his mother has a miraculous revival from near death, he decides to call off the engagement in deference to his mother. Within moments, his brother steps in and asks for Loretta’s hand in marriage. A precious moment is when the patriarch, Loretta’s grandfather, becomes confused by the quick turn of events and sobs because he doesn’t understand what is going on. The subplots are in harmony with Loretta’s own roller coaster ride with romance. Her father is having his own affair with a gold-digger, as her mother tries to understand why men chase women. Her mother has dinner with a man, but with her feet firmly on the ground, says goodbye at her doorstep. Her aunt and uncle find a fresh breath of romance under the “Bella Luna” that shines as bright as the noonday sun and seems to guide all the lovers.

Highly recommend watching this entertaining film with all of its dry humor and commentary on life and love.

MOONSTRUCK, 1987.jpg

Also, Free logline submissions. The Writing Festival network averages over 95,000 unique visitors a day.
Great way to get your story out: http://www.wildsound.ca/logline.html

Deadlines to Submit your Screenplay, Novel, Story, or Poem to the festival:http://www.wildsound.ca

Watch recent Writing Festival Videos. At least 15 winning videos a month:http://www.wildsoundfestival.com