1997

1997 Movie Review: PRINCESS MONONOKE, 1997 (Directed by Hayao Miyazaki)

festreviews 1997 Movies, movie, Movie Review, Uncategorized , , , , , ,

PRINCESS MONONOKE MOVIE POSTER
PRINCESS MONONOKE, 1997
Movie Reviews

Directed by Hayao Miyazaki
Voices by: Yôji Matsuda, Yuriko Ishida
Review by Amish Mulmi

SYNOPSIS:

On a journey to find the cure for a Tatarigami’s curse, Ashitaka finds himself in the middle of a war between the forest and Tataraba, a mining colony. In this quest he also meets San, the Mononoke Hime.

 

REVIEW:

Princess Mononoke (1997) is indeed a very deceptive film. It may be an animation, but that does not mean it’s a children’s film. Its complexities and multiple themes layered within mean that it is very different from the Disney-esque animations that children are rather fonder of. It begins in an idyllic rural setting, but soon jumps into a battle between forest-gods and humans. A decapitation—probably a first for a Hayao Miyazaki film—later, it engulfs the audience into a debate between development and sustainability, greed and satisfaction, and war versus pacifism.

Japan’s highest grossing film until Titanic overtook it, Mononoke, a Studio Ghibli production, is a testament to the power of animated films and their visual capabilities that allow them to capture elements which are impossible to otherwise capture in a live-action film. It seeks to answer the eternal questions pertaining to human greed and relationships, society’s evolution and civilization’s progress. It seeks to leave the audience enraptured in its visual detail, yet lets them question the themes of the film by themselves.

The film begins in a rustic village, where Ashitaka battles a demon that threatens his village. But, it turns out—the demon is actually a forest god, Nago, corrupted into hatred by human intervention. Ashitaka is cursed by the god’s ailment, and he leaves his village to seek a cure before the hatred engulfs him completely. He meets a monk, Jigo, who informs him of a forest deep into the west, where gods and spirits are still alive.

This particular forest borders an upcoming mining town called Irontown, and is ruled by a very ambiguous Lady Iboshi. The town’s economy is based around the extraction of iron ore from the surrounding mountains, and the human’s devastation of the forests causes the direct intervention of the forest gods, and a human girl called San, who has been raised by the Wolf-Goddess Nara.

Ashitaka is drawn into the battle between San and Iboshi—he realizes he is attracted towards San, and is repulsed by Irontown’s wanton destruction of virgin forests. But, the lepers and the prostitutes that Iboshi has taken under her wing assure him the lady isn’t an evil person, and only has the good of the town in her mind.

However, Ashitaka is gravely injured while saving San, who takes him to the Forest Spirit. The spirit, a deer-shaped creature that has the power to give or take life, heals Ashitaka, but does not lift the curse. San cares for her human benefactor, viewing him with both fascination and revulsion, as he represents a race she has come to hate, despite her being a part of it.

Soon after, as Irontown’s exploitation continues, the boar-god Ikkoto arrives with his warrior boars, who have decided to attack Irontown and take back the forest. However, the humans are aware of their plan—made aware by Jigo who seeks the Forest Spirit’s head for the Emperor, as it is believed to bring immortality. Irontown lays a trap for the boars, blasting them with their newly made rifles and grenades, and the boar army is annihilated. However, behind their backs, the Emperor has laid siege to Irontown, where their women defend the town against marauding samurais. Ashitaka is asked to take a message to Iboshi.

Ikkoto, however, survives and is led towards the Forest Spirit’s pool by San. But he has been poisoned by the same hatred that engulfed Nago—and his hatred begins to overcome San, who is saved by Nara. The Forest Spirit grants both Nara and Ikkoto a peaceful death for all their tribulations, and as he is transforming into the Night-Walker, a sort of a mythical kirin beast, Iboshi shoots his head off.

The Forest Spirit now becomes an all-encompassing blackness that brings death and barrenness to anything it touches, and destroys Irontown completely, including the foundry that was the key to its wealth. San and Ashitaka seek out the Spirit’s head, and upon reuniting it with the headless void, all the land which had turned barren burst out in a kaleidoscope of life and beings. Iboshi realizes her mistakes, and though she loses a hand, vows to rebuild Irontown in a much better way. Ashitaka, cured of his curse, pledges that he will never be very far away from San, as he will help in rebuilding the town.

At first glance, Mononoke seems to be a fantasy love story between San and Ashitaka; however, at its core, it includes diverse themes within itself—an anti-war sentiment, development at the cost of environment, sociological statements such as feminism, gender bias and discrimination and the idea of living at peace with nature. Miyazaki is famous for his environmentalism—this movie is a continuation of the themes explored in My Neighbour Totoro and Nausicaa of the Valley of the Winds in this respect, and explored further in his Academy Award-winning Spirited Away. Only, he brings it to the forefront over here, explaining the cause behind the displeasure of the forest spirits—being the reckless and wanton destruction of nature for the pursuit of human development. The eternal debate, prevalent even today among political and social commentators, of development versus sustainability is brought to the pedestal, and Miyazaki, in this film, provides a very different solution that should please conservationists around the world—stop the unjustifiable destruction of virgin forests, probably alluding to the vast deforestations that have been going on across the planet.

Mononoke is also a very anti-war film, in that it tries to seek reason in war through the character of Ashitaka, who questions the motives behind both the boars’ and Iboshi’s decisions to fight. He is indeed a pacifist if there ever was one, and seeks to explain the futility of the fighting, though unsuccessfully. He is not a coward—but wants to impress upon both parties the outcome of all the hatred: a continuous cycle of further hate and war-mongering.

These two major themes aside, Mononoke is also an exploration into sociological relationships, especially into the ideas of gender bias, discrimination and social structures. Irontown’s wealth has been made possible by its women, who were prostitutes earlier until rescued by Lady Iboshi, who herself comes across as a supremely ambiguous character. As the lepers tell Ashitaka, “she’s the only one who saw us as human beings. The world fears us…but she is the only one who took us in and washed our rotting flesh and bandaged us…” Yet, she is a ruthless expansionist, willing to go to any lengths to ensure the survival of Irontown.

Lady Iboshi’s proclaimed nemesis, San, is herself an individual driven by a singular sense of direction—to kill Iboshi and halt the destruction of the forest. And while the other forest gods are all driven by their hatred towards the humans in varying degrees, it is remarkable that the most powerful god, the Forest Spirit himself does not bear any such acrimony and even forgives the humans despite them shooting his head off.

Mononoke, thus, is a tale that speaks of volumes about reconciliation and the power of pacifism. Ashitaka is singled out as a champion, but the Forest Spirit, along with the tree-spirits Kodamas are themselves unmindful of the hatred that fosters around them, and perceive their lives to be an intricate part of the surrounding environment.

Miyazaki once again blurs the line between fantasy and reality in this film, which, despite having overt fantasy elements, never really ventures into becoming a fairy tale. Its protagonists are very real, and the presence of paranormal elements in the chain of events does not amaze the viewer at all; rather the spirits and gods contrast with the human ways, and allow the audience to juxtapose the two races and judge them accordingly.

The English translation does the filmmaker a disfavor by toning down the language and Japanese terms, so as to make the film more accessible to global audiences. However, it could be argued that without the translation, millions of viewers would not have been able to watch this fantastic film. Atleast, the English version has not been mutilated, like Miyazaki’s earlier films. Maybe it was the katana that he sent with the message ‘No cuts’ when Disney, Studio Ghibli’s American partners, suggested a few edits to make the film more child-friendly which did the trick. Or it could be the fact that acclaimed writer Neil Gaiman adapted the story for English audiences. Whatever the reason, Mononoke is truly what landmark cinema stands for—and long after the audience exits the movie theater, they will ponder over the questions that the film raises.

 

 

PRINCESS MONONOKE, 1997

1997 Movie Review: METRO, 1997 (Eddie Murphy)

festreviews 1997 Movies, movie, Movie Review, Uncategorized , , , , , , , , , , ,

 

MOVIE POSTERMETRO, 1997 
Movie Reviews

Directed by: Thomas Carter

Starring: Eddie Murphy, Michael Rapaport, Kim Miyori, James Carpenter, Art Evans, Donal Logue, Jeni Chua, Denis Arndt

Review by Russell Hill

SYNOPSIS:

Roper, a hostage negotiator catches a murderous bank robber after a blown heist. The bank robber escapes and immediately goes after the man who put him behind bars. The ending is played out with Roper and his partner McCall attempting to rescue Roper’s kidnapped girlfriend. A major element in the plot is the relationship between Roper and his girlfriend.

REVIEW:

I am always thankful to the BBC for their late night films. Not only do they show movies which otherwise escape many people’s attention but the movies which they do show star some bone-fide legendary actors and actresses which shout out to you that you should be watching this movie; this can certainly be said about this movie in particular.

A respected yet unorthodox hostage negotiator, Inspector Scott Roper (Murphy) is at the top of his game. Resolving any tricky situation with whatever approach he believes is best, he might not act by the books but Roper gets the job done. To his dismay, a new hostage negotiator arrives in town and it is down to Roper to teach Kevin (Rapaport) how it’s done. Not only does Roper have this to deal with but also a former-bank robber who has been released and has a vendetta against Roper. Who will survive?

Although his career has gone downhill recently, it is only the “Shrek” movies which have saved his career and given it a new lease of life. Eddie Murphy was once the funniest man in Hollywood but has lost that edge thanks to many forgettable roles. This film is not one of them and shows one of his last great films that he has appeared in.

One actor whose career has not dwindled is Rapaport. Regular in work, in the other films and television shows I have seen him appear in he has excelled and after looking on his profile on http://www.imdb.com he has appeared in nearly ninety different projects in just over two decades. This man’s workrate is nothing short of remarkable; maybe Murphy should take a leaf out of his book and not keep his expectations so high?

The director at the helm is Thomas Carter. A respected director who has worked for over thirty years, he directs the high-pace action extraordinarily well. There are multiple scenes where cars come crashing over one and other along with Trams smashing into whatever comes to hand. For action sequences to be shot in this convincing way is remarkable and if there was ever another “Die Hard” film (with one rumoured to be released in 2012) then Carter should be considered to front this.

Not one of Murphy’s most well-known films, this should be corrected as the comedy which he displays is top-notch and with support by the likes of Rapaport and directed by Carter this is a must-see for anyone who prefers their ‘cop’ movies to be fast-paced and full to the brim with action scenes.

METRO, 1997

1997 Movie Review: NIL BY MOUTH, 1997 (Directed by Gary Oldman)

festreviews 1997 Movies, movie, Movie Review, Uncategorized , , , , , , , , , ,

NIL BY MOUTH, 1997
Movie Reviews

Directed by Gary Oldman
Starring: Ray Winstone, Kathy Burke, Charlie Creed-Miles, Laila Morse, Edna Doré, Chrissie Cotterill, Jon Morrison
Review by Russell Wray

SYNOPSIS:

The family of Raymond, his wife Val and her brother Billy live in working-class London district. Also in their family is Val and Billy’s mother Janet and grandmother Kath. Billy is a drug addict and Raymond kicks him out of the house, making him live on his own. Raymond is generally a rough and even violent person, and that leads to problems in the life of the family.

CLICK HERE and watch 2009 MOVIES FOR FREE!

What is WILDsound?

REVIEW:

In 1960 Albert Finney starred in Saturday Night Sunday Morning, a film which brought social realism to British Cinema. It stood out as it showed working class characters in extremely realistic scenarios. These characters usually struggled in their down and out positions in society. Saturday night Sunday Morning attempted to break stereotypes of working class people by showing them as intelligent and articulate youngsters. We fast forward almost forty years to see Gary Oldman bringing social realism back to the screen but with a much bleaker view for a modern audience.

The film focuses on the Raymond family in working class London. Raymond (Ray Winston) is the alpha male of the house hold. He is an aggressive alcoholic who is always out for a good time at the expense of someone else. Val (Kathy Burke) is the subservient wife who is victimised by her husband and does not have the strength to leave him. Their son Billy is a drug addict. He is forced to live on the street due to his father finding out about his addiction. Nil by mouth shows these characters struggle but is it their fault or the fault of their hierarchy in society?

Nil by mouth is a film about failures but there are not many to be seen here. The cinematography works brilliantly to provide beauty in the strangest of down and out places, the performances are terrifyingly accurate, and the direction is brilliantly constructed. The only problem is with the script.

The story may be a little bit too observant at times. The constant arguments and scenes of failure make it hard to maintain attention for some parts of the film as it almost slips into an x rated watershed soap opera. The film is relentless as there is not much comic relief provided. This is forgivable by the scenes which really stand out, such as Ray Winston on the lash with his mates.

This scene strangely forces the audience to relate to the characters playing drunken fools around town but also makes them scared of them at the same time. Oldman is not afraid of getting close to these characters. His frequent use of big close ups allows the audience to see every action and reaction from the characters in precise detail. Being an actor himself Oldman understands the importance of performance especially in an intense character which is presented here.

Winston is comfortably at home here playing the working class villain. The intensity of the character is evident but also the humanity is presented brilliantly by Winston who shines in those drunken moments in the film where he is on his own. Here Winston is allowed to bring the character to life as the audience witnesses his self destruction. Burke also offers an effective performance but is not as memorable as other characters because of the shy nature of the character in which she is playing.

Nil by mouth is an unflinchingly hopeless film. The characters are not taunted of a better life in anyway even though that is their desire. The film simply allows the characters to live without any feeling of pre constructed character arcs.

 

 

NIL BY MOUTH, 1997

1997 Movie Review: MEN IN BLACK, 1997 (Will Smith, Tommy Lee Jones)

festreviews movie, Movie Review, Uncategorized , , , , , , , , ,

 

MEN IN BLACK
MEN IN BLACK, 1997
Movie Reviews

Directed by Barry Sonnefeld
Starring: Will Smith, Tommy Lee Jones, Laura Flynn Boyle, Rip Torn, Vincent D’Onfrio
Review by Andrew Kosarko

SYNOPSIS:

In the 1950s a super-secret government agency was formed to monitor and police the activities of extraterrestrial aliens on the planet Earth. Some 40 years later a founding father of the agency, Agent Kay (Tommy Lee Jones), finds himself with a new smart-mouthed partner fresh from the NYPD who is soon dubbed Agent Jay (Will Smith). Their first mission is to save the Earth from destruction by a giant insectlike alien (Vincent D’Onfrio) that, incidentally, drives an exterminator’s truck. Armed with their matching Ray-Bans, skinny ties, and space-age weapons that Jay barely understands–he calls the Neuralyzer the “flashy thing”–the new duo begin another average day of fighting intergalactic terrorists.

OSCAR Winner for Best Makeup

OSCAR Nominee for Best Art Direction and Best Music

REVIEW:

It’s funny. It’s fun. It’s entertaining. It’s engrossing. What else can you ask for? Oh, Will Smith? Yup, this movie hits the mark across the board.

The Story: The story follows the induction of Agent Jay into the MIB agency. Not only does this give us a background of the agency, but it also gives us an “everyman voice” throughout the film that makes for some great comedy. Will Smith is the guy that says what everyone is thinking, and is still able to twist it to make it funny. He’s teamed with the rough seasoned veteran Agent Kay, who’s on his way out. This perspective really opens up the world and gives us two very contrasting takes on this journey while one character struggles to understand it all, the other is trying to forget it. The story is perfectly structured to involve some minor characters but never getting off base of training Jay and uncovering the mystery of an intergalactic terrorist bug who plans on stealing a precious galaxy from earth (condensed into the size of a marble) which, in turn, puts the aliens trying to keep their enemies from controlling that galaxy, in the position to destroy earth to save themselves. Say what you will, it is an original take on the “destroy the world” problem.

Acting: Not a bad hat in the bunch. There’s things in Hollywood called bank-able elements. AKA, something that is guaranteed to make money for the studio. The actor that will define my generation is Will Smith. You put him in a movie, and you have a hit. Smith really doesn’t get the acclaim he deserves. Sure, he’s no Gary Oldman or Johnny Depp where as he doesn’t dissapear into his roles, but Smith can carry a scene like no other. No other actor in recent memory has been as consistently funny as Smith has. He brings his A-game to everything he does and I have never seen a film where he disappointed me. Tommy Lee Jones, while I have a personal disdain for the man, does a solid job as well. The real “chameleon” of the movie is Vincent D’Onfrio. He is almost unrecognizable once he becomes “the bug.” Granted, there’s a heavy makeup job involved, but the walk of an alien uncomfortable in human skim, persona and voice changes, he really does an incredible job.

Directing: Sonnenfeld is known for more kooky, campy humor, and while that is an element in this film, it never overshadows the narrative. Which is important. Substance over style has always been my favorite approach. There are really no “flat” scenes in the film, and everyone of them keeps you hooked and intrigued.

Cinematography: It works just fine, don’t get me wrong, but there’s really nothing amazing to say about it. It’s just….shot like a movie. Can’t really compliment or condemn it.Production Design: Somehow, there’s this weird off-beat characteristic to the production design, and yet you can’t put your finger on it. I mean, it’s realistic, and yet otherworldly. At times it’s a bit too colorful and leans toward this teal blue color, but overall what matters is that it’s effective. Editing: From what I can gather, it’s effective. It’s not special by any means, but the pacing is there and the emotional resonance is intact in every scene, which is an editor’s two main concerns.

Score: Danny Elfman’s last hurrah if you ask me. His scores following this were on a continual down slide and got worse and worse following this. But this score is solid. It captures the tone of the film, gives it some identity and intensifies the emotional underscores.

Special Effects: This is one of those films that really hits that middle mark in terms of it’s visual effects. Which, in my humble opinion, is right where it needs to be. It’s not overly obvious that it’s CGI, and at the same time it’s not so realistic that it’s not realistic (fif that makes any sense?). It just works. Much like Jurassic park, there’s a blend of the digital composition and live action animatronics which really helps make this world believable.

In closing: I suggest this movie for anyone. It walks the line of being a family movie with some choice language and occasional violence, but is still fun none the less. Guaranteed entertainment.This film won Best Director and Best Cinematography, and was nominated for five other categories. The screenwriter was nominated, and rightly so. Taken from a short story that first appeared in the Saturday Evening Post in 1933 by Maurice Walsh, Green Rushes, Frank Nugent was able to weave a story rich in subtext and conflict.

The collector’s edition of the DVD includes an interview with Maureen O’Hara where she reminisces about filming The Quiet Man, and is well worth watching.

 

MEN IN BLACK, 1997

1997 Movie Review: LIFE IS BEAUTIFUL, 1997

festreviews 1997 Movies, movie, Movie Review, Uncategorized , , , , , , , , ,

 

LIFE IS BEAUTIFUL, MOVIE POSTERLIFE IS BEAUTIFUL, 1997
Movie Reviews

Directed by Roberto Benigni
Starring: Roberto Benigni, Nicoletta Braschi, Giorgio Cantarini, Giustino Durano, Sergio Bini Bustric, Marisa Paredes
Review by Stefan Leverton

SYNOPSIS:

A Jewish man has a wonderful romance with the help of his humour, but must use that same quality to protect his son in a Nazi death camp.

REVIEW:

Before the onset of plot summary, and technical analysis, I just want to try and convey the feeling I have for this film, without neither under or overstatement. On many levels people could acknowledge a certain aspect of the film and its surrounding press and come to unsatisfying conclusions. It may well be a war film, a holocaust film, more accurately. Therefore you may also deduce that it is tragic and dramatic. You may know a little more and understand it to be a comedy. Its an award winning foreign language film. However, the success and power of this film transcends all those things because when you are watching it, you are totally immersed in this wonderful tale. And how many films set amongst the backdrop of one of the most atrocious events the world has ever seen can say that?

Roberto Benigni’s masterpiece follows his charming character Guido, as he waltz’s, chaplinesque, into town to make his way in the world and subsequently try and win over the woman of his desires, Dora. I’m giving nothing away when I say he succeeds and they are happily in matrimony with a young son, Giosue, when the crux of the film really takes hold. That crux is the terrifying emergence of the Nazi Party and a wave of anti-Semitism which, unfortunately for the Jewish Guido and his Son, snares them into a concentration camp.

The film is really split into two, maybe three sections. The first being when guido arrives in the Tuscany town as somewhat of a chancer. The true nature of the film is veiled so heavily in humour, and Begnini’s performance is directly influenced by the silent stars of the early 20th century that all the dialogue could be removed, yet the plot could be easily understood as the whole experience is so animated. At this time Dora is already set to marry a local dignitary and the conclusion of the first part is Guido winning her affections in the most endearing, romantic and funny ways.

Throughout the first sections there is mention of the unsettled nature of Germany which is clearly starting to infiltrate Italy, its when we pick up the story five years later that we see the full extent of the Nazi’s influence and terror campaign. Guido and his family, now including five year old Giosue, are happily living with his uncle until Guido, of Jewish origin is arrested, along with his son. Guido being the man he is tries to keep the true horror from his young son by making out the trauma they are going through is a game. It is a situation of sweet sorrow and one that you can’t help but smile through the tears.

Benigni’s performance can’t be underestimated. His attempt to remain optimistic and portray their ordeal as some sort of game to his son, is on the one hand playful and full of humour. And on the other it is just heart-breaking. Never has a film made you laugh so hard and want to cry so much. The optimism the film promotes is inspiring. And around the truly great script and the unrivalled performance of Benigni is a consummate piece of filmmaking. No tricks are needed as the most important element is the story and how many films could learn from that, put the characters and the story first and the rest will follow.

LIFE IS BEAUTIFUL, 1997

1997 Movie Review: LEAVING LAS VEGAS, 1997

festreviews 1997 Movies, movie, Movie Review, Uncategorized , , , , , , , , , , ,

 

LEAVING LAS VEGAS, MOVIE POSTERLEAVING LAS VEGAS, 1995
Movie Reviews

Directed by Mike Figgis
Starring: Nicolas Cage, Elisabeth Shue, Julian Sands, Richard Lewis, Kim Adams, Emily Proctor, Valeria Golino
Review by Nina Katungi

SYNOPSIS:

After losing his family and then his job to alcoholism, Ben decides to pack up his life, head to Las Vegas, and drink himself to death. Sera, a worn and wasted prostitute crosses paths with Ben in Las Vegas. They find solitude in one another and soon enough an unconventional relationship starts to bloom.

WON OSCAR for BEST ACTOR (Cage)

REVIEW:

“Leaving Las Vegas” is based on a semi-autobiographical novel written by John O’Brian. John O’Brian was an alcoholic with the end in sight, just like his character, Ben. His fate arrived sooner than expected. O’Brian took his own life just two weeks after he found out his novel was going to be adapted into a film. O’Brian’s father believes that “Leaving Las Vegas” was his son’s suicide note. Mike Figgis adapted the novel into a screenplay and managed to maintain the dark undertones that the novel entails. Figgis succeeded in bringing this beautiful but extremely solemn tale onto the big screen. Figgis also composed the music for the soundtrack. What he put together was a rather haunting but delicately emotional sound.

Ben (Cage) works in the film industry in Los Angeles. It is a pivotal time in Ben’s life. His alcoholism has past the point of no return and his life is hastily withering away. His wife and son have left him and now, after tolerating his erratic behaviour for a while, Ben’s workplace finally let him go too. Ben packs up his life in LA, obliterates everything that is personal to him and heads to Las Vegas where he shall drink to his death. Once in Vegas, Ben stumbles upon an angel, Sera.

Sera (Shue) is a prostitute working on the streets of Las Vegas. She moved to Las Vegas with Yuri (Sands) her pimp/boyfriend and since has endured a life of using her body to make money. Sera has been in this business a long time and has experienced all the horrors she can imagine. Her body no longer seems a part of her rather a mere tool to make money. Yuri is in control of this tool, using it for his own personal needs as well as a form of income. Sera’s long lost a sense of herself but when she meets Ben things start to change for the better. In the meantime Yuri is in trouble with the Romanian mafia – it’s so far gone that a group of thugs have been sent to deal with the situation. Yuri is aware of his fate, he cuts strings with Sera and lets her go free.

Ben almost runs Sera over at a stop light and being the tough girl she is, Sera struts to the car and gives Ben a piece of her mind. This is Ben and Sera’s first encounter. Ben later finds Sera on the street. Ben’s aware that Sera’s a prostitute, he offers her money to come back to his motel. Sera is prepared for yet another with a “client” but to her surprise it turns out to be the first bearable night that she has had in a long time. Sera encounters something that she’s never encountered before. Ben simply wants her to keep him company, not for sex but just to talk. Sera realises how lonely she’s is and has been for a long time. Ben is the void that Sera’s been missing for so long. With Yuri out of the picture Sara asks Ben to move in with her. Ben is hesitant but agrees on one condition – Sera must never ask Ben to stop drinking. This promise seems easy at first but as soon as Ben’s alcoholic world becomes real to Sera and as soon as Sera’s falls for him, this promise to allow him to kill himself, well the promise is broken almost as quick as it was made.

This is he last time I’ve seen Nicholas Cage play a great role. I think he’s talented but unfortunately there hasn’t been much proof of that since “Leaving Las Vegas”. Cage’s choice in roles, up until now have been terrible, bad films which have resulted in some very poor performances. When I think of the great films he’s been in like “Moonstruck” or “Raising Arizona” I get sad because I honestly miss what he was and perhaps what he won’t ever be again. He may find himself turning another corner soon, I hope, I really do. Cage won an Oscar for his performance in “Leaving Las Vegas” and it was well deserved. Elisabeth Shue played the role of Sera so well, she was also nominated for an Oscar but regretfully she didn’t win like her co-star. Before this film Shue was only really known as Tom Cruise’s love interest in “Cocktail”. She managed to turn a lot heads in “Leaving Las Vegas” but unfortunately after this role she fizzled away, which I also think is a shame. Perhaps she too will find another role that fits her just like a glove. “Leaving Las Vegas” wasn’t only a success with its two lead actors it received a generous amount of nominations for best director, screenplay, and film as well. This is not a classic love story with a happy ending. It’s a love story that ends as quickly as it begins but what it does is it leaves you with a compellingly emotional state of mind. It’s such a great piece of work.

LEAVING LAS VEGAS, 1997

1997 Movie Review: LAWN DOGS, 1997

festreviews 1997 Movies, movie, Movie Review, Uncategorized , , , , , ,

 

LAWN DOGS (1997)
Clascic Movie Review
Directed by John Duigan
Starring Mischa Barton, Sam Rockwell
Review by Russell Hill

SYNOPSIS:

A young family move into an upmarket housing area, hoping to climb up the social ladder. Their daughter does not share her parents’ ambition and, instead of making friends with someone her own age, befriends a shy gardener.

REVIEW:

Almost unrecognisable from her role in The O.C., Mischa Barton here gives a matured performance for such a young person of only eleven years of age. Ably supported by Sam Rockwell, it seems at times that he is the star of the film, not Barton, and certainly relishes in what was his break-through role. Upon discussing this film with my loved ones, they didn’t even know this film existed! Such lack of acknowledgement should be rectified.

I guess you could say that Devon (Barton) is our protagonist, but then again Trent (Rockwell) might be in a number of scenes. Recently moved into what can only be described as a very affluent area, Devon with her mother Clare (Kathleen Quinlan) and father Morton (McDonald) are the new kids on the block. Morton is a very ambitious man, and always strives to better his social standing by inviting the neighbours over for a barbeque or discussing intellectual matters with them. Either way, he’s a man with a goal. Devon, on the other hand, couldn’t care less for her father’s aspirations.

Upon the chance discovery one day selling cookies, she meets Trent; a loner character who makes a living cutting the lawns in the neighbourhood where Devon lives. Looked down upon by his customers as his profession is not an academic one, Trent just carries on with life despite their resentment. Even the local idiots, the type who wouldn’t piss on you if you were on fire, give him slack but even this doesn’t bother him. Thick skinned? Yes, Trent is certainly that.

Upon their first meeting, Devon keeps appearing at Trent’s home; a shot-gun trailer in the forest that wouldn’t even make good firewood. Despite both being independently-minded characters they find friendship in each other. Theirs is a strange friendship, but a close one. In spite of her father’s wealth, Devon would rather live this semi-nomadic existence Trent has. I guess money doesn’t always buy you happiness. Both Devon and Trent are outsiders, and only seem to find companionship in each other. Trent’s isolation is self-imposed but Devon’s is due to her personality. Certainly not one to win a Miss Popularity contest, she finds herself more at ease with her pet turtle or joining in with the howling of the neighbourhood dogs. A character more suitable for The Twilight Zone than Disney.

There will always be anger in a movie when there is a somewhat questionable friendship between an adult and a young child. And boy, do the fireworks truly happen. It doesn’t help that Devon informs her father of this whilst crying. Similar to shooting someone whilst smiling, I guess. There always is something you’re not quite following. Think Heath Ledger’s portrayal of The Joker in The Dark Knight. You think he’s being sincere, but in fact is pure evil. Anyway, I’m rambling. Where was I?

Rockwell and Barton are supported by some fine actors. McDonald, one of the finest actors of our generation and otherwise known as Shooter MacGavin from Happy Gilmore, excels here. His over-the-top reaction to the friendship that Devon has with Trent is both understandable and believable. Although he is not an A-List actor, his ability in this film is worthy of that status. As with Mr Destiny, a previous review of mine that can be seen in the Classic Movie Review section and a movie not shown much on television in Great Britain, Lawn Dogs is, and I hate to use the phrase but certainly necessary here, an underrated film and certainly a modern-day classic. It doesn’t help that this film is difficult enough to obtain on DVD (I recorded this on VHS from the television) but when you do get a copy, boy, is it worth it.

As I mentioned, a number of my loved ones were not aware of this movie. But, upon showing them my grainy and worn copy on VHS, their eyes were opened to the aspects that make this movie a classic-great characters that you can believe might actually exist, great direction by Duigan and starring an actress that still has the potential to be a Hollywood great. I always root for British-born actresses to succeed, and hope that Barton won’t throw away talent that, despite her young age, is evident. What a movie to start your career in.

LAWN DOGS, 1997

1997 Movie Review: LA CONFIDENTIAL, 1997

festreviews 1997 Movies, movie, Movie Review, Uncategorized , , , , , , , , , ,

 

LA CONFIDENTIAL MOVIE POSTER
LA CONFIDENTIAL, 1997
Movie Reviews

Directed by Curtis Hanson
Starring: Russell Crowe, Guy Pearce, Kevin Spacey, James Cromwell, Danny DeVito, Kim Basinger
Review by Brent Randall

SYNOPSIS:

The corruption existing within Los Angeles police force of the 1950s is exposed in this crime thriller.

WON 2 OSCARS – Best Supporting Actress (Basinger), Best Adapted Screenplay

REVIEW:

From the opening scene to the final credits, L.A. Confidential keeps you on the edge of your seat as it weaves through the murky waters of the Los Angeles police force. Set in the 1950s, the movie opens with discussing the wonders of Hollywood by showing a series of shots of the beach, the grand strand, and Hollywood, and how life in L.A. is better than anywhere on the planet, much less America, and the Los Angeles Police Department is the pride and joy of the City of Angels. After about five minutes of praising the city with a marvelous voice over from Sid Hudgens (Danny DeVito), Hudgens shifts gears and begins shedding light on the mobster, Mickey Cohen (Paul Guilfoyle), and how Cohen is pushing heroine through the city and causing chaos in a clean and pristine town.

At first, it seems that the police force is dead set on snuffing out the crime with the arrest of Mickey Cohen in the opening sequence with their brilliant detectives, Bud White (Russell Crowe), Jack Vincennes (Kevin Spacey), Ed Exley (Guy Pearce), and Captain Dudley Smith (James Cromwell). However, it is merely an illusion, and the corruption within the famous police department is quickly exposed. As the viewer, you get the sense early, all is not right within when a brawl breaks out between the inmates and the policeman on Christmas Eve. Personally, I thought it was brilliant to stage the fight on Christmas Eve, a time known for peace and joy, and the fight is one of the most vicious, realistic fights I have seen in recent films. Shortly after the fight, the event that sends everything in motion is a horrific set of murders that occurred at the infamous “Night Owl” restaurant. A blood bath that took place over a failed robbery attempt in Captain Smith’s account. Captain Smith, who is always trying to get justice, in his own words, “swiftly and merciless”, pins the murders on three young black men who had previous records . Smith feels no one would raise too many questions regarding these suspects, and they could shut the case for good.

However, Bud White and Ed Exley, while not choosing to work together for most of the film, know something stinks about The Night Owl investigation, and desire to find some air freshener to eliminate the “smell.” They employ the help of Detective Jack Vincennes, which is brilliantly performed by Kevin Spacey, and Lynn Bracken, a high class hooker, played by Kim Basinger in her best performance ever, in my opinion. We quickly learn that Bud White believes in justice, cares for women, has a major temper, and is loyal to the department. Exley, on the other hand, is a kiss up, but also believes in justice. Throughout the movie, it is easy to see why these two do not get along, but one quickly learns they have much more in common than originally thought, and they both prove to be honest and men of integrity. Russell Crowe (playing Bud White) and Guy Pearce (playing Ed Exley) both give brilliant performances, and makes one realize the line between right and wrong is very, very, complicated and sometimes justice is found on both sides of this proverbial line.

Bud White is probably, in my opinion, Crowe’s best roll to date. Not to take away anything from the movie Gladiator, but in L.A. Confidential, his character is not always right, he is not always wrong, but his quest for justice and righteousness gives the viewer a real sense of hope. Bud White is a character, as a human being, I can relate to. He is real, honest, has major flaws, but genuinely seeks the good in all and more importantly, the good within himself.

In fact, Bud White and the other character is what makes this film great. The story line is solid, but as the film progresses, you find yourself loving some, hating others, and not sure how to take the rest. Some represent the good in the world, Bud White. Others represent the evil in the world, Captain Dudley Smith. Some represent the people who look out for themselves as in Jack Vincennes, and then there is Lynn Bracken. In my opinion, she represents the hope we all have as humans for a brighter future, and that hope along with her brilliant acting might be why she took home the best supporting actress Oscar.

From scene to scene, and character to character, this film keeps probing deeper and deeper into corruption and darkness in search of hope, justice, and peace. It grips your the viewer’s emotions and takes you on a roller coaster ride. The acting is brilliant, and the stars (Kevin Spacey, Russell Crowe, Danny DeVito, Kim Basinger -just to name a few) are even brighter. It is a film that makes you want to search within yourself, question your own morality, and makes people realize that some of the worst enemies are the ones who appear to be friends, and vice versa. While it did not win best picture, (it was nominated and in my opinion, should have won!) it definitely qualifies as one of the best crime thrillers of all time.

 

LA CONFIDENTIAL, 1997

1997 Movie Review: JURASSIC PARK 2, 1997

festreviews 1997 Movies, movie, Movie Review, Uncategorized , , , , , , , , , ,

 

JURASSIC PARK 2 MOVIE POSTER
JURASSIC PARK 2 The Lost World, 1997
Movie Reviews

Directed by Steven Spielberg
Starring: Jeff Goldblum, Julianne Moore, Pete Postlethwaite, Vince Vaughn, Richard Attenborough, Peter Stormare
Review by David Hammond

SYNOPSIS:

Set several years after the teething problems that occurred at the worlds first biological prehistoric amusement park, a second island full of dinosaurs is revealed to the public after an incident involving a small girl being attacked by its previously extinct inhabitants. Millionaire John Hammond has come under public scrutiny and his company has been taken away from him. He enlists the help of a team to document and study the animals that have been allowed to develop in their ‘natural’ habitat before the island is interfered with. Dr Ian Malcolm reluctantly joins the team when he discovers his girlfriend is on the island. Soon after they arrive they soon discover they are not the only people on the island when a team lead by Hammond’s nephew has come to extract the dinos in order to populate another Park in San Diego.

REVIEW:

After the overwhelming success of Jurassic Park which is rightly regarded as one on the seminal points in filmmaking due to the technological advances that were made in the creation of the creatures and the amount of realism that was injected into them; a sequel was always inevitable. The Lost World is ultimately missing the thing that made Jurassic Park so special, which isn’t dinosaurs because there’s loads of them wandering about.

Four years after the incident at Jurassic Park, a wealthy family stumble across a beautiful island and decide to take a break on its picturesque sandy beach. Soon after the tea, cakes and indeed sandwiches are unpacked the families little girl is attacked by a mob of small dinosaurs. The attack proves that not only should you never feed luncheon meat to a dinosaur but also the genetically engineered inhabitants of the island are a danger to the public. With “Site B”; the breeding ground for Jurassic Park in the spotlight, beardy millionaire John Hammond (Richard Attenborough) has had to relinquish control of his company to his nephew Peter Ludlow (Arliss Howard) who plans to remove the dinosaurs from the breeding ground and open a new park in San Diego in order to keep his newly acquired company from bankruptcy. With previous experience of the potential pitfalls of such a business venture, Hammond is naturally worried about the potential dangers involved.

In order to protect Site B from being pillaged Hammond has put together a scientific expedition to record the animals in their natural habitat, and asks Dr. Ian Malcolm (Jeff Goldblum) to be a part of it. Understandably he is reluctant due to the somewhat jarring experience that he had the last time he did Hammond a favour, but is quickly roped in when he discovers his girlfriend Sarah (Julianne Moore) is already there. Soon after the team (along with Malcolm’s stowaway daughter Kelly (Vanessa Lee Chester) arrive they are soon joined by Ludlow’s mercenaries who begin to capture dinosaurs to transport them to America. However after both the factions equipment is destroyed the rival teams must work together in order to survive the predators on the island.

Once again the creature effects in the Lost World are completely believable and therefore should be applauded. But Lost World suffers from the same problems as Jurassic Park did, but does so on a grander scale. The characters once again seem to have been put to the side in favour of the dinosaur effects. Ian Malcolm serves as both the main protagonist and the comic relief in the Lost World, but is lacking many aspects that made him such an enjoyable character in the first film. Malcolm is much more embittered in the Lost World due to they way he was treated after the Jurassic Park incident, which essentially robs him of any of the likeable characteristics that he had in the first film. Julianne Moore and Arliss Howard are lumbered with thankless roles as is true with the majority of the supporting cast; who you can identify from very early on who is and who isn’t going to be eaten and or stepped on. Only Pete Postlethwaite portrayal of big game hunter Roland Tempo who’s only desire is to hunt a T-Rex seems to raise above the materials limitations. The deep performances once again are credited to the dinosaurs.

The poor characterisation in the film is obviously a product of a shaky script. In the worst cases it makes the characters act with the shocking absence of any form of common sense. For example unbalanced hunter Dieter Stark (Peter Stormare) wanders off into the jungle to relieve himself and asks his friend to wait for him. His friend is listening to his Walkman and therefore fails to hear his friends cries for help when his is eventually attacked and eaten. Even for downtime personal cassette players should always be left at home when you plan to be navigating harsh jungle environment hunting prehistoric animals. The lack of common sense even extends to the more educated characters like Dr. Sarah Harding. After treating the infant T-Rex of its injuries Sarah’s jacket is stained by its blood, she later mentions that the T-Rex has exceptional scent detection, but is later shocked when the disgruntled mother T-Rex sneaks into camp to investigate said jacket with questions. Having theorised and witnessed the Rex’s fierce paternal instincts first hand there was only one outcome, and it should’ve been something that a behavioural palaeontologist would’ve predicted and avoided.

The aforementioned lack in judgement the characters often display lead to some impressive set pieces. One of the highlights is where panicked mercenaries run into a field of long grass, they are stalked by raptors. Spielberg shows a strange amount of restraint in the scene only showing their tails and the trials left behind as the grass is separated as they approach their prey; proving like he did with Jaws that less is more. But as with most of the Lost World while some things work brilliantly others fall flat. The climatic T-Rex rampage in San Diego feels tacked on and like a lot things in the film doesn’t make a lot of sense and seems as it’s just there for the sake of it.

What you come to realise with the Lost World is that we have seen it all before. The dinosaurs are still brilliant, but because we’ve seen them before you find yourself focusing on other aspects of the film that weren’t so important when you first watched Jurassic Park. The lack of the initial reaction of wonder to the animals means that the Lost World has to rely on the story and the script, both of which are mediocre. Even John Williams classic score fails to resonate the same epic feelings that were attained with the original and sometimes feels out of place. Spielberg falls short of topping his 1993 classic by making the same mistakes again but on a grander scale. The usually reliable Spielberg makes some strange decisions with the Lost World and the special effects fail to support this somewhat jumbled sequel.

 

JURASSIC PARK 2, 1997

1997 Movie Review: THE ICE STORM, 1997

festreviews 1997 Movies, movie, Movie Review, Uncategorized , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

 


THE ICE STORM, 1997
Movie Reviews

Directed by Ang Lee
Starring: Kevin Kline, Joan Allen, Sigourney Weaver, Janey Carver, Henry Czerny, Tobey Maguire, Christina Ricci, Elijah Wood, Adam Hann-Byrd
Review by Russell Hill

SYNOPSIS:

Set just before the Watergate Scandal was exposed to the world, a group of neighbours live the 1970’s lifestyle in the most hedonistic way possible.

REVIEW:

Responsible for bringing together a stellar cast of true Hollywood greats, some even not that recognised at the time of the movies release, THE ICE STORM has all the hallmarks of a well-made independent movie; great script, good character development and amazing direction. But what’s this? It’s actually a Hollywood release?

Based on the 1994 novel of the same name by Rick Moody, the main bulk of the movie revolves around an actual ice storm that hit Connecticut in 1973 that turned the nutmeg state into an overnight icy Armageddon. The main family of the movie are the Hoods, with husband Ben (Kline) and wife Elena (Joan Allen) along with their kids Wendy (Ricci) and Paul (Tobey Maguire) and they seem as normal as any other. But not all is what it seems. Ben and Wendy aren’t exactly getting along, with Ben having an affair with the neighbour’s wife Janey (Weaver). Elena isn’t the happiest sandwich in the picnic hamper of the world either and always suspects of her husbands infidelity. What of her children? 14-year old Wendy is growing up fast, and starts to find other things to do with the neighbours’ kids, such as Janey’s son Mikey (Elijah Wood), than play monopoly. Even Mikey’s brother Sandy (Adam Hann-Byrd) is fond of Wendy, but too shy to do anything about it. I’m sure we can all relate to Sandy when we were his age. Paul lives away from home, but remains on good terms with his family. Even he has his own problems in his love life. Unsuccessfully vying for the affections of his school mate Libbets (Katie Holmes), Paul too isn’t getting the best ride life can offer.

These people are not exactly poor, and shower themselves with all things expensive that was available in the 1970’s. But, despite this wealth, they’re still not happy. Their depression of being in this situation they have found themselves in is masked over by alcohol and an obscene amount of extra-marital sex. The phrase that children follow in their parents footsteps can sure be applied apply to Wendy and Mikey. Wendy, confused by the unfolding events of Watergate and her home life, finds solace in the arms of a very nervous-looking Mikey. What a shit storm of a world these families are in. By the time the ice storm has hit town, the accumulation of the actions that all involved partake in result in quite a dramatic and upsetting scene that is bound to distress even the more placid of viewers.

Applauds to all cast here must be made. Kline, as in all roles I have seen him in, is quite the professional here. He is known as a joker on set, but you couldn’t tell it from his performance here. Allen too shines here once more. Over the past decade or so, she has appeared in some sublime movies with PLEASANTVILLE being one of her best. Allen’s solemn looks throughout really do portray the depressed housewife well. It seems at times that just one look from Allen could be painted onto canvas and be the backdrop for a Dali painting, but instead her figure is limited to celluloid but it sure is great to see her in a role she was born for. Weaver too excels here. It is strange to see her playing this adulterous character, with not one alien in sight, and shines in every scene she appears in. Her inability to cope with her current predicament of cheating on her husband with her children growing up quicker than she would like to have had them do is a credit to Weaver’s talents and, as with Allen and Kline, acts in a role it seems as though she was born to play.

It may be shocking to say, but I believe the more-younger actors outshine the senior members of the cast. Before the movies release, Ricci was seen as a child actor who could not cope with more mature roles. Her role of Wendy is delivered with maturity that seems a long way from the days of Wednesday Adams. Wendy is not your innocent character and, despite Ricci being only 17 years old at the time of this movies release, deals with more grown-up aspects life very respectfully. Despite appearing for only a brief amount of screen time, Maguire too is given the opportunity to excel and succeeds beyond all expectations. Before THE ICE STORM, he was restricted to appearing in lacklustre made-for-television movies, but soon after the release of this 1997 classic he was appearing in films such as THE CIDER HOUSE RULES, PLEASANTVILLE and more recently as your friendly neighbourhood Spiderman. His on-screen persona as the unlucky-loser-in-love started with his part here as Paul. It always seems odd to see Maguire playing anything else but this type of character and long it may continue. Just like Maguire, I have to commend Adam Hann-Byrd for his role as Sandy. His nervous character that is madly in love with Wendy is played to perfection. Since his role as Sandy, he hasn’t been given the roles like the other’s he acted alongside. A shame really. Over the past decade or so, there have been a number of quite excellent independently made movies that have made it onto the mainstream market and reaped rewards. It was due to THE ICE STORM that several doors were opened for Ricci and Maguire, and to this day they have gone onto bigger and better roles. Even the more senior members of the cast have continued this success. If it wasn’t for THE ICE STORM, then who knows who would have played Peter Parker and Frodo to perfection. A highly recommended movie for those aged thirteen and up.

 

 

the ice storm