film reviews

Film Review: THE HANDMAIDEN (South Korea 2016) ***

festreviews 2016 movies, movie, Movie Review, Uncategorized , , , ,

the_handmaiden_posterTHE HANDMAIDEN (South Korea 2016) ***
Directed by Park Chan-wook

Starring: Min-hee Kim, Jung-woo Ha, Jin-woong Jo

Review by Gilbert Seah

South Korean helmer Park Chan-wook, known for his excellent thriller OLDBOY returns with another suspense thriller, this time adapting Sarah Waters’ Victorian England-set bestseller Fingersmith to Japanese-occupied Korea in the 1930s. The adaptation works with a few flaws but the result is nevertheless something completely different – a historical drama that turns out to be both an erotically charged thriller and a lesbian romance, with sex scenes rivalling BLUE IS THE WARMEST COLOUR.
Park’s film is told in three chapter’s from the points of view of the story’s three characters. The film contains lots of flashbacks, with each flashback containing possibly a different meaning to the story than when the scene first appears. It is tight and clever editing, but too many of these lend to a bit of confusion. A few parts at the end are also confusing like the one in which Fujiwara rows a boat in a misty lake with the two women in it.

The three distinct perspectives are of: Japanese aristocrat Lady Hideko (Kim Min-hee), Korean thief Sookee (Kim Tae-ri), and pseudonymous schemer and thief, Fujiwara (Ha Jung-woo). Hideko lives isolated in the luxurious colonial manor built by her tyrannical and depraved uncle (Cho Jin-woong), a book collector who forces Hideko to read erotic stories for his lecherous old friends. Into this bizarre yet static daily routine enters new handmaiden Sookee, who is in on the purported Count Fujiwara’s scheme to marry Hideko and seize her inheritance. But the twist in the plot does not end here. The Count is in reality scheming against Sookee with Hideko with even more plot twists (not revealed in the review) on the way. It all becomes clear in the very end though confusing when each twist is revealed and in flashbacks.

But for all that the film is worth, Western audiences will be treated with a sumptuous feast for the eyes, in terms of the Korean and Japanese period atmosphere, from the colourful costumes, to the sets and wardrobe to the strange practise of the rich and famous. The one scene in which the two women destroy the valuable scrolls and books is one that stands out the most.

Park’s fondness for the gruesome and excesses, as observed in his films OLDBOY and LADR VENGEANCE is on display here. The digit chopping with the page clamp cutter segment had one critic walk out of the press screening. The lesbian love-making scenes between Sookee and Hideko, with their bodies sliding along each other with extreme moaning will also have the audience drooling. Other excesses include foul language, surrealism (the misty boat ride on the lake; the lengthy tooth rubbing scene) and erotism (Hideko’s sex readings to her uncle and dirty cronies).

THE HANDMAIDEN has delighted many critics for these excesses. But excesses are excesses and the film which runs a full two and a half hours could do with a bit of trimming. The film nevertheless is a beautifully meticulously crafted period piece with enough plot twists to tease most audiences.

Trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IkvHtfRAKNk

 

 

SUBMIT your TV PILOT or TV SPEC Script
Voted #1 TV Contest in North America.		 FILM CONTESTSUBMIT your SHORT Film
Get it showcased at the FEEDBACK Festival
writing CONTEST1st CHAPTER or FULL NOVEL CONTEST
Get full feedback! Winners get their novel made into a video!		 SCREENPLAY CONTESTSUBMIT your FEATURE Script
FULL FEEDBACK on all entries. Get your script performed

Film Review: TOWER (USA 2016) ****

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

tower_.jpgTOWER (USA 2016) ****
Directed by Keith Maitland

Starring: Violett Beane, Louie Arnette, Blair Jackson

Review by Gilbert Seah

TOWER is an animated mixed archive footage reaction of one of the most chilling incidents in American history. On August 1st, 1966, a sniper rode the elevator to the top floor of the University of Texas Tower and opened fire, holding the campus hostage for 96 minutes. When the gunshots were finally silenced, the toll included 16 dead, three dozen wounded, and a shaken nation left trying to understand.

This is the first of America’s mass shootings. The film explores this untold history through the first-person stories of seven specific characters: two students who were shot that day, the two police officers who ended the siege, two civilians who inserted themselves into the story to provide aid to victims and police, and the radio reporter who broadcast live from the scene for more than an hour and a half, and whose broadcast was picked up nationally, bringing the events in Austin to listeners around the nation.

Once the film goes into first person, the audience is immediately immersed in the current situation looking at it from the person’s objective. Being animated, distractions are a minimum. The exact reactions and emotions, as realized by the animator can be most effectively conveyed. The identity of the shooter is clearly omitted, thus creating a more mysterious, chilling feel.

The film’s listenable soundtrack of hit tunes of the 60’s most effectively creates the feel of the 1966 film’s setting, aided by the arrival footage of vintage cars and people walking in 60’s garb. Maitland also uses the classic “Claire de Lune” (clearly his favourite music piece) during the siege and closing credits of the film,

One can also consider the film to be short stories of the different victims. The first victim is 18-year old Claire Wilson. She is first shot and she is revisited as she recounts her story – a sad one. Claire says: “All of a sudden I felt like I’d stepped on a live wire, like I’d been electrocuted.” Her boyfriend Tom reaches down to help her and he is struck down as well. For over an hour of the siege, Claire remains exposed to the shooter, conscious and steadily losing blood. Claire knows that her boyfriend has been killed and that she’s lost her baby too. “After some time, a really lovely young woman with red hair ran up to me and said, “Please, let me help you.” I told her to get down so she wouldn’t attract attention, and she lay down next to me. She stayed with me for at least an hour. It was a beautiful, selfless act.”

Some stories are more effective than others. Claire’s is the most touching. Halfway through Maitalnd’s film, a shiver would surely be sent down ones spin as one admires the heroes who sacrifice being shot while aiding the wounded victims. The film is also intersperses with the talking heads of actors of the real heroes, now aged since 1966, but their presence makes a marked impact to the story.

Maitland’s approach to documenting the tower shooting incident is no doubt novel and one may question why not enactment by real actors. A valid question, no doubt but this approach has produced a successful account, just as a live re-enactment might have achieved the same purpose. It helps tremendously that Maitland has worked close to the material, obtaining all the facts – from interviews of the surviving victims and then animating the action.

Trailer: https://vimeo.com/153727380

 

SUBMIT your TV PILOT or TV SPEC Script
Voted #1 TV Contest in North America.		 FILM CONTESTSUBMIT your SHORT Film
Get it showcased at the FEEDBACK Festival
writing CONTEST1st CHAPTER or FULL NOVEL CONTEST
Get full feedback! Winners get their novel made into a video!		 SCREENPLAY CONTESTSUBMIT your FEATURE Script
FULL FEEDBACK on all entries. Get your script performed

Film Review: SAINT AMOUR (France 2016) ***1/2

festreviews Uncategorized , , , , , ,

saint_amour_poster.jpgSAINT AMOUR (France 2016) ***1/2
Directed by by Benoît Delépine and Gustave Kervern

Starring: Gérard Depardieu, Benoît Poelvoorde, Vincent Lacoste

Review by Gilbert Seah

When father and son order a bottle of SAINT AMOUR in a restaurant, the film starts to bubble as the pair take off on an educational wine tour around the wine regions of France. Surprisingly, the education comes in a different form, as the two discover more about life, women and their relationship towards each other, rather than in the wines they savour.

A refreshing French dead-pan comedy, SAINT AMOUR is a road trip movie in which three very different characters embark on a road trip wine tour.

There is the father, Jean (his name perhaps taken from his other farming movie JEAN DE FLORETTE), his son Bruno (Benoît Poelvoorde) who he wants to take over the farm and the reluctant young and handsome 24-year old Parisien cab driver, Mike (Vincent Lacoste), who they hire to drive around France. The best scene has the three of them in the cab as if posing for a photo, goofing around and nudging each other way from the cab mirror.

All during the trip, the three try to conquer the opposite sex. But each has a problem. Firstly, Bruno is an ugly, middle-aged, unmarried farmer who immediately comes across as an uncultured hick. Jean, is old and portly but worst still, has not gotten over the recent death of his beloved wife. He still calls her just to hear her voice on the answering service. (But the voicemail finally gets full.) Mike is young and corky but a past illness of Phimosis has left the tip of his manhood black. He has an inferiority complex so bad that he food the other two to think that he is married with children. But his is a French film in fairly tale mode, so the trio naturally get to prove their manhood each in their own way, by having sex with a red-headed type Lady Godiva who first appears to them on horseback.

The comedy woks primarily for the actors. Both Depardeieu and Poelvoorde are not afraid to reveal their weaknesses. Depardieu is simply splendid as the overgrown old bear snoring in his sleep and grimacing in disgust when he cannot connect with his son. It is an experienced nuanced performance, the best that any actor can deliver in a comedy. Poelvoorde is perfect as the hick, constantly pasting back his hair like a child that does not know how to control his bad habits. Vincent, in real life is 23 and is a hapless charmer. The connection among the three are as ridiculous as one can imagine. But the film charms and entertains, the best thing next to a good French wine.

The film’s additional bonus is the wide range of characters the trio meet during their journey. One is a hotelier who offers them their room in his house while his entire family sleeps snug in one tiny room in order to make space for their guests. Another is a sincere patriot girl, fearful that France will go broke, who is willing to work for free so as to help France decrease her National Debt.

Fall in love with SANT AMOUR!

Trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H6UZq-G2qPQ

 

 

SUBMIT your TV PILOT or TV SPEC Script
Voted #1 TV Contest in North America.		 FILM CONTESTSUBMIT your SHORT Film
Get it showcased at the FEEDBACK Festival
writing CONTEST1st CHAPTER or FULL NOVEL CONTEST
Get full feedback! Winners get their novel made into a video!		 SCREENPLAY CONTESTSUBMIT your FEATURE Script
FULL FEEDBACK on all entries. Get your script performed

Film Review: MISS HOKUSAI (Japan 2014-2015) ***

festreviews 2016 movies, movie, Movie Review, Uncategorized , , , , , ,

miss_hokusai_poster.jpgMISS HOKUSAI (Japan 2014-2015) ***
Directed by Keiichi Hara

Starring: Yutaka Matsushige, Anne Watanabe, Erica Lindbeck

Review by Gilbert Seah

The Japanese animated feature MISS HOKUSAI is set in 1814 in Edo,where peasants, samurai, merchants, nobles, artists, and courtesans live together in apparent harmony. It is also just the time that marked the end of the samurai era when Edo was renamed Tokyo – an important period for the Japanese, that unfolds here for the education of the westerners.
The artist is the film’s subject.

Accomplished artist Tetsuzo spends his days creating astounding works, from a giant Dharma portrayed on a 180-metre-wide sheet of paper to a pair of sparrows painted on a single grain of rice. Short-tempered and with no interest for saké or money, he (Hokusai) would charge a fortune for any job he is unwilling to undertake. But it is his daughter, O-Ei who is sane and completes the work her father leaves unfinished.

As all of Edo flocks to see the work of the revered painter Hokusai, the artist’s daughter O-Ei toils inside his studio, creating masterful portraits and erotic sketches that — sold under her father’s name — are coveted by aristocrats and journeyman printmakers alike. Shy and reserved in public, in the studio O-Ei is brash and uninhibited, but despite this fiercely independent spirit she struggles under the domineering influence of her father and is ridiculed for lacking the life experience that she is attempting to portray in her art. This film is her story (the young woman behind one of history’s most famous artists) and it shows her coming-of-age in a precarious and difficult situation.

Based on the manga Sarusuberi by Hinako Sugiura, MISS HOKUSAI is carefully crafted animation, similar to the type Ghibli Studio produces. The animation is impressive especially during the fire and water (very difficult to animate) scenes but the film lacks dramatic drive. The characters often appear just coasting around, like the objects of a painting. The fact that a lot of mythical elements are introduced does not help the film’s credibility either.

The film was first screened during the Real Asian film festival in Toronto in 2015 and is finally getting a screening run at the TIFF Bell Lighbox. There are two versions – I saw it in the original subtitled version. The other is the inferior dubbed version.

Trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3nj1rwo_d-s

SUBMIT your TV PILOT or TV SPEC Script
Voted #1 TV Contest in North America.		 FILM CONTESTSUBMIT your SHORT Film
Get it showcased at the FEEDBACK Festival
writing CONTEST1st CHAPTER or FULL NOVEL CONTEST
Get full feedback! Winners get their novel made into a video!		 SCREENPLAY CONTESTSUBMIT your FEATURE Script
FULL FEEDBACK on all entries. Get your script performed

Film Review: MOONLIGHT (USA 2016) ***

festreviews 2016 movies, movie, Movie Review, Uncategorized , , , , ,

moonlight_poster.jpg


MOONLIGHT (USA 2016) ***
Directed by Barry Jenkins

Starring: Mahershala Ali, Shariff Earp, Duan’Sandy’ Sanderson

Review by Gilbert Seah

MOONLIGHT is one of the most talked about African American films screened at the Toronto International Film Festival. It has garnered rave reviews based on its raw content and originality. And indeed, this film deserves all accolades.

MOONLIGHT is Barry Jenkins’ second feature after MEDICINE FOR MELANCHOLY.

It is s very strange feature, low-budget, very originally told (in three parts; each part titled by each of the three names the protagonist is given) of the life of Little or Chiron or Black from childhood to adulthood. His real name is Chiron, but is called Little in school due to his small stature. Little is ‘adopted’ by a local thug and his girlfriend when he is not living with his drug addicted mother.

Bullied and beaten up frequently because of his small stature and curly hair (he looks very much like a girl), Little cannot take it anymore and is arrested after he finally breaks a chair over his bully right in the middle of a class. The scene deserves quiet cheers.

Little grows up, surprisingly into a big muscled guy and meets back with his school buddy who gave him the nickname of Black. He obviously had the thug of his childhood as his mentor. Kevin and Black have a gay sex encounter which Black can never forget.

Jenkins’ film feels like it is all over the place though it is obvious he is leading his audience somewhere. One good thing about Jenkins film is that you never know where he is leading the audience. Though slow moving at times, Jenkins film is never boring and a compelling watch for start to end when the audience finally figures out the purpose of MOONLIGHT.

Trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5fYFIj16YC0

moonlight_1
moonlight_2
moonlight_3
moonlight_4
moonlight_5

Free logline submissions. The Writing Festival network averages over 95,000 unique visitors a day.

SUBMIT your TV PILOT or TV SPEC Script
Voted #1 TV Contest in North America.		 FILM CONTESTSUBMIT your SHORT Film
Get it showcased at the FEEDBACK Festival
writing CONTEST1st CHAPTER or FULL NOVEL CONTEST
Get full feedback! Winners get their novel made into a video!		 SCREENPLAY CONTESTSUBMIT your FEATURE Script
FULL FEEDBACK on all entries. Get your script performed

Film Review: THE ACCOUNTANT (USA 2016) ***

festreviews 2016 movies, movie, Movie Review, Uncategorized , , , , ,

the_accountant_poster.jpgTHE ACCOUNTANT (USA 2016) ***
Directed by Gavin O’Connor

Starring: Ben Affleck, Anna Kendrick, J.K. Simmons, Jon Bernthal, John Lithgow, Jeffrey Tambor

Review by Gilbert Seah

Directed by Gavin O’Connor (WARRIOR, PRIDE AND GLORY) and written by Bill Dubuque, THE ACCOUNTANT is a action thriller that strives to be stylishly different. For one, it centres on an accountant, one that cooks the books for dangerous drug cartel members. He is hunted down by Revenue Federal agents. Is THE ACCOUNTANT a good or bad guy? How can he be made into an exciting action hero? How can he be made into a more than special human being? All these factors are infused into Dubuque’s script, which often appears to be trying too hard, resulting in a film more confusing and complex than need be.

As the film stars Ben Affleck who plays a human fighting machine, the film feels like a BATMAN with numbers.

Christian Wolff (Ben Affleck) is a mathematics savant (autistic) with more affinity for numbers than people. His childhood is traced, in flashback till the present. As a child, Christian’s military father believes that difference is perceived as a threat to most people. To protect his son, he forces Christian to better himself in martial-arts.

Grown up, Christian is a top-notch accountant who uses a small-town CPA office in a strip-mall as a cover. He makes his living as a forensic accountant for dangerous criminal organizations. With a Treasury Revenue Agent, Ray King (Oscar winner J.K. Simmons from WHIPLASH ) hot on his heels, Christian takes on a state-of-the-art robotics company as a legitimate client. As Wolff gets closer to the truth about a discrepancy that involves millions of dollars, the body count starts to rise. With the help of a new Revenue recruit, Median (Cynthia Addai-Robinson) who Ray blackmails into helping, Wolff’s identity is revealed. The showdown finally takes place in the mansion of the company owner (John Lithgow) who turns out to be the villain of the piece.

Besides Dubuque’s clumsy script, the film contains too many unintentional funny moments. The result is the promo audience laughing at too many parts during the climax. Median’s character could also be eliminated from the script for a leaner film, without much effect.
Affleck delivers an almost perfect low-key performance as the stoic accountant, whose body movements are basically stationary unless absolutely necessary as in the action scenes. Of the remainder of the cast, Jeffrey Tambor shines as Wolff’s cellmate, who was also involved with the drug cartels. Thankfully, the audience is spared the torture scenes, though a few hints (like the sight of a blow torch and damaged face) are enough to make anyone shudder.

Near the end, the film suddenly decides that it has to provide some message on autism. This results in one of the film’s most awkward segments with the music tuned to ‘melancholy’. For a film supposedly positive towards autism, the film contains some really disturbing scenes involving strobe lights and loud sounds.

Despite all its faults, THE ACCOUNTANT is a well-mounted film, with very exciting actions segments aided by crisp editing that conveys the accountant’s martial-arts training. THE ACCOUNTANT at least, attempts to put in some originality into the well-worn action genre.

Trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBfsgcswlYQ

 

SUBMIT your TV PILOT or TV SPEC Script
Voted #1 TV Contest in North America.		 FILM CONTESTSUBMIT your SHORT Film
Get it showcased at the FEEDBACK Festival
writing CONTEST1st CHAPTER or FULL NOVEL CONTEST
Get full feedback! Winners get their novel made into a video!		 SCREENPLAY CONTESTSUBMIT your FEATURE Script
FULL FEEDBACK on all entries. Get your script performed

Interview with Festival Director Joseph Kephart (Wait A Minute Film Festival)

festreviews film festival, film festival reviews, Interview, Uncategorized , , , , , ,

wait_a_minute_2.jpgThe WAM (Wait-a-Minute) Film Competition and Festival started in 2013. It is part of the Tacoma Filmmakers group. You can find them at http://www.Tacomafilmmakers.com as well as Facebook.  They are here to help the community as well as facilitate contacts to help filmmakers. They look forward to partnering with companies to assist the needs of filmmakers.

Matthew Toffolo: What is your Film Festival succeeding at doing
for filmmakers?

Joseph Kephart: We’ve just started a few years ago, so as far as succeeding I’m not sure yet, but the intent is to give filmmakers an opportunity and a venue to display their craft.

MT: What would you expect to experience if you attend the festival this year (2016)?

JK: A great time, recognition, some nifty prizes and if needed the push for filmmakers to continue on their path.

MT: What are the qualifications for the selected films?

JK: Films must be 1 minute in length and contain the mystery element required for the current competition. Filmmakers have 1 week to film their masterpiece. We are unique in the fact that among other competitions where filmmakers are given 24 to 72 hours to complete a film, we believe in giving them a week to polish their films. Also, we require a mystery element to be included in the film, but unlike other festivals we offer a concept that must be used. Example, our most recent requirement was the concept of “Transformation.”

MT: Do you think that some films really don’t get a fair shake from film festivals? And if so, why?

JK: As I understand it, the trend is to cram as many films into a festival as possible. Which I can understand from a marketing standpoint. So… speaking from experience if your film doesn’t fit into the box so easy, you may not have a chance.

MT: What motivates you and your team to do this festival?

JK: We like to help filmmakers and believe in promoting this type of “art medium” in our community. It’s also a great way for everyone to network.

MT: How has the festival changed since its inception?

JK: The prizes have gotten bigger and we’ve changed venues. We’ve gone from showing in a historical building to showing films at a lovely historical theater.

MT: Where do you see the festival by 2020?

JK: I’d like it to be an institution, a fun one, eventually passed onto others to run.

MT: What film have you seen the most times in your life?

JK: Probably Delicatessen by Jean-Pierre Jeunet and Marc Caro.

MT: In one sentence, what makes a great film?

JK: For me it’s always been creativity.

MT: How is the film scene in your city?

JK: As far as indie film making goes, it seems to be blossoming. Tacoma and the Pacific Northwest is a great place and most people that I’ve met are cool and laid back. This film festival is all about helping and promoting filmmakers. I think Tacoma shares that same sentiment.

wait_a_minute_1.jpg

_____
Joseph Kephart is a filmmaker who lives in Tacoma WA and serves on the executive committee of Tacoma Filmmakers. His production company Hooligan Street Pictures, has made short films in the past and is now venturing into the world of feature film making. Visit www.hooliganstreet.com for more information.
_____

Interviewer Matthew Toffolo is currently the CEO of the WILDsound FEEDBACK Film & Writing Festival. The festival that showcases 10-20 screenplay and story readings performed by professional actors every month. And the FEEDBACK Monthly Festival held in downtown Toronto on the last Thursday of every single month. Go tohttp://www.wildsound.ca for more information and to submit your work to the festival.

Film Review: ART BASTARD (2016)

festreviews 2016 movies, movie, Movie Review, Uncategorized , , , , ,

art_bastard_poster.jpgART BASTARD (USA 2015) ***
Directed by Victor Kanefsky

Starring: Robert Cenedella

Review by Gilbert Seah

“Art from day one for me was the special part of life – the part of life that was above the gutter.” – Robert Cenedella. In a madcap art world obsessed with money, fame and hype, how does an artist driven by justice, defiance and his own singular style thrive? Cenedella was the contemporary of Andy Warhol, but in reality was anti-Warhol.

When ART BASTARD begins, the camera takes the audience through a tour around the NYC Transit where a few of the subject’s paintings are seen. The artist, obviously the ART BASTARD referred to in the film title is a little known artist known as Bob Cenedella.

So who is this Cenedella? Fortunately Cenedella is still alive. Director Kanefsky allows Cenedella maximum screen time to introduce both himself and his works. His family members are interviewed too along with art experts in order to put Cenedella’s work into perspective.
Foremost, Cenedella’s paintings are introduced. The main characteristic of his paintings is the inclusion of many, many faces crammed into a scene. The year in which the paintings were drawn and a good detailed shot is provided.

Examples of these include:

Fun city 1979
The Fight 1964
Give to Cenedella 1977

The film contains a few diversions. One is an examination of contemporary art and what it means. Several art experts give their view in the context of Cenedella’s paintings. A discussion also follows on what art rises and what art fails. The individuals are pawns who can hardly make a difference. Cenedella also discusses family life. He is clearly upset about his father and the film contains quite a few scenes with him and his son. Cenedella claims it is not hard to become a good father.

Cenedella’s character is also revealed on screen. He is shown to be an artistic person. He loves Beethoven and made quite a bit of money in his youth selling Ludwig pins. He does not like Elvis. His joy as a teen are his weekly visits to the New York Metropolitan.

The film’s best scenes are those that show Cenedella actually painting and teaching it. “Holding a bush is one of the greatest disciplines in the world”, says Cenedella convincingly.

As a fair bit of the film’s running time is devoted to Cenedella’s family, some insight is added into his paintings. When Cenedella was young and his mother very drunk one night, she told him that his father is not his real father. He therefore felt like an outsider within his family. Similarly, he despised the art scene feeling like an outsider too and hence the film title ART BASTARD. Cenedella finally meets his biological father finding him to be a bit weird with a huge sense of humour. His painting in 1964 entitled ‘The Fight’ shows his father and stepfather battling each other in a boxing ring. Another one, called ‘The Third Movement’ one of his series of ‘orchestra paintings’ shows all the characters fighting each other. His paintings often are inherently funny, satirical and often contains a deeper meaning.

One can hardly complain about ART BASTARD as a documentary. Director educates his audience with interviews, archive footage of films and photos while explaining quite a few of the paintings. The film though serious in most parts, contains a bit of humour,primarily because Cenedella had a good sense of humour.

ART BASTARD is an interesting, entertaining enough documentary in which everything one wanted to know about the artist is dished out.

Trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eXhy5prz83k

 

 

TV CONTESTSUBMIT your TV PILOT or TV SPEC Script
Voted #1 TV Contest in North America.		 FILM CONTESTSUBMIT your SHORT Film
Get it showcased at the FEEDBACK Festival
writing CONTEST1st CHAPTER or FULL NOVEL CONTEST
Get full feedback! Winners get their novel made into a video!		 SCREENPLAY CONTESTSUBMIT your FEATURE Script
FULL FEEDBACK on all entries. Get your script performed

Movie Review: LOVE HAPPY, 1949

festreviews Marilyn Monroe movies, movie , , , ,

CLICK and WATCH MOVIES ONLINE!LOVE HAPPY MOVIE POSTER
LOVE HAPPY, 1949
Movie Reviews

Directed by David Miller
Starring: The Marx Brothers, Marilyn Monroe
Review by Steve Painter

SYNOPSIS:

The Marx Brothers help young Broadway hopefuls while thwarting diamond thieves.

REVIEW:

The final Marx Brothers movie was Love Happy (1949). At least it was the final movie for the three Marx Brothers to appear together. In 1957 they all appeared in separate segments of The Story of Mankind. Actually, for a good part of Love Happy, only Harpo and Chico appear. Groucho is nowhere to be seen, which really takes away from this movie.

In order to pay off more of Chico’s gambling debts the Marx Brothers were forced to make this last movie. For the rest of his life, Chico’s gambling debts would have to be paid off by either Groucho or Harpo or Zeppo, who became rich as an agent after leaving the Marx Brothers act. Although money was the main reason why the Marx Brothers decided to make another movie, getting funding was not so easy. In fact, there was so much trouble getting funding that the end had to be changed to accommodate some product placement advertising from the firms that were paying for the movie.

If you are a fan of Harpo Marx then this movie should appeal greatly to you. Harpo wrote the story and is the main character. In a familiar routine, Harpo begins the movie by stealing something. This time it is food. He ends up stealing a can of sardines that contains priceless diamonds. Being the great guy Harpo is; he was not stealing the food for himself, but for a group of struggling theatre performers.

The theatre company is in such dire straits that the show’s backer is threatening to close the group’s play before it can be taken to the stage. He wants to reposes some of the scenery used for the play, but is foiled in his attempt by Faustino the Great, a mind reader who is looking for a job. Of course Faustino is played by Chico and because Chico is able to foil the plot, the grateful director allows him to remain as part of the crew.

With Harpo stealing the diamonds a $1,000 reward is put out for his capture. Harpo is captured and taken to the apartment where they bad guys attempt to interrogate him. Although it seems like an obvious comedic situation to use with Harpo, this is the first time that he is put in a situation where people try and make him talk. Typically it is Chico who tries to get Harpo to talk, and he knows that Harpo doesn’t talk, but here the bad guys have no idea Harpo can’t talk so there is some good comedy in them trying to use interrogation techniques while trying to make Harpo speak. Of course they can’t. They get too tired and when they leave, Harpo telephones Chico, who is able to understand him when he communicates through a bike horn.

Apparently the can of sardines that contain the diamonds was left outside of the theatre for a cat to eat. Harpo finds the sardine can when he arrives back at the theatre. Amazed at what he has found, Harpo pockets the diamonds.

The bad guys have tried to get the diamonds back themselves, but have failed. So they decide to enlist the help of a private detective, this is where we are formally introduced to Groucho. The movie actually starts with Groucho saying that he has been trying to find these diamonds for many years and the story we are about to see is how he was able to finally get them. This is all very nice, but the scene in which the bad guys threaten to kill Groucho in an hour if he does not get the diamonds back before them is notable for the first appearance of a future screen legend – Marilyn Monroe.

In a walk-on role, Marilyn Monroe was cast as a client that comes to see Groucho’s character just after the bad guys arrive. Groucho is so thankful that someone has opened his door to let him out that he runs and leaves, but when he sees that Marilyn Monroe is the girl who opens the door he immediately comes back in where the bad guys are and tries to seduce the young screen legend.

The introduction of Marilyn Monroe and Harpo’s interrogation scenes are basically all that are worth mentioning in the movie. The rest is Groucho and the bad guys chasing Harpo around the roof tops of New York while billboards and lighted advertisements, put up by the movie’s financers, clutter the screen.

Today, Love Happy is billed as a teaming of Marilyn Monroe and the Marx Brothers in order to get people to watch the movie. Don’t be fooled though. Neither one is at the top of their powers. The Marx Brothers were doing this for money and Marilyn Monroe did not know how to use what she was given yet. Perhaps in another time or place this team would have worked out well. The possibilities sure could have been endless, but so could’ve the teaming up of Lucille Ball with the Marx Brothers in Room Service and that was also a dud.

The bottom line is, don’t watch Love Happy unless you are a huge fan of Harpo.

TV CONTESTSUBMIT your TV PILOT or TV SPEC Script
Voted #1 TV Contest in North America.		 FILM CONTESTSUBMIT your SHORT Film
Get it showcased at the FEEDBACK Festival
writing CONTEST1st CHAPTER or FULL NOVEL CONTEST
Get full feedback! Winners get their novel made into a video!		 SCREENPLAY CONTESTSUBMIT your FEATURE Script
FULL FEEDBACK on all entries. Get your script performed

Movie Review: A NIGHT IN CASABLANCA, 1946

festreviews movie , , , ,

CLICK and WATCH MOVIES ONLINE!A NIGHT IN CASABLANCA MOVIE POSTER
A NIGHT IN CASABLANCA
Movie Reviews

Directed by Archie Mayo
Starring: The Marx Brothers
Review by Steve Painter

SYNOPSIS:

The Marx Brothers are employed at a hotel in postwar Casablanca, where a ring of Nazis is trying to recover a cache of stolen treasure.

REVIEW:

Chico Marx was known for two things off-screen. First, he was known as a ladies man. His name was originally Chicko because he liked the chicks, but a promoter left out the k one night and the name became Chico. Chico was also an avid gambler. Sometimes this gambling addiction helped the Marx Brothers. He played cards with Irving Thalberg all the time. This friendship led to the Marx Brothers leaving Paramount for MGM and fame and fortune there under Thalberg. Then there was the bad side of Chico’s gambling – the debt. Chico was so far in debt by 1942 that the Marx Brothers had to come out of retirement to make a movie – A Night in Casablanca (1942).

Groucho plays the manager of a hotel in Casablanca, which is a similar occupation to being a saloon keeper. Warner Brothers reportedly investigated how far the Marx Brothers were going to go in the parody of their hit Casablanca, released in 1942. Legend has it that Warner Brothers would not let the Marx Brothers use the word Casablanca in their movie title, as it might confuse people with the Humphrey Bogart and Ingrid Bergman movie. Groucho supposedly responded that his group and several others before had used the word Brothers in their title before Warner Brothers came out. Whatever the truth to any of this, nothing stopped A Night in Casablanca from being made.The story takes place after World War II. Just to stick it to Warner Brothers, two previous hotel managers have been murdered before Groucho takes over. The reference is to the two German couriers who were murdered at the beginning of Casablanca. Just like in Warners’ picture this one has a Nazi as the bad guy. This time the Nazi, played by Marx veteran villain Sig Ruman, wants to take over the hotel so he can find some objects that the Nazis had stolen and hidden there.

Harpo has some nice bits in the movie. He plays the Nazi’s valet and accidently vacuums the man’s toupee so he cannot go out in public for fear of people noticing the scar on his head. Harpo probably has the best gag of the movie as well. He is introduced leaning against a building. A cop walks by and asks Harpo what he’s doing. Of course when he receives no reply he is forced to ask if Harpo thinks he is holding up the building. Harpo shakes his head yes, which causes the cop to come over and grab him for being a wise guy. As soon as Harpo leaves the building, it collapses in on itself.

Chico plays the owner of a cab company, which is kind of ironic considering his financial situation and the fact that most of the characters he played were down on their luck. But Chico isn’t exactly breaking the bank with all the money he is collecting; most people just don’t want to ride around on camels.There is an interesting dinner table scene in which Chico and Harpo try to get some money for their friend Pierre, who happens to know that there is some Nazi hidden treasure in the hotel as he was forced by the Nazis to fly items there. Chico and Harpo end up taking reservations for an already fully booked dining room. They are able to find tables and chairs and then move them onto the dance floor that is already crowded with people. They charge those who wish to get in a ton of money and pocket it and then sit them in the middle of the dance floor.

Other than this scene and Harpo’s introduction there really is nothing else worth going into detail about. Harpo has to tell Chico about a plot to kill Groucho through using charades, just like he did in A Day at the Races. There is also a scene at the end where the Brothers are unpacking the Nazi’s luggage and putting it into his closet as he makes a decision to leave Casablanca with the stolen merchandise. Too bad for him though, he accidently packs the Marx Brothers in his luggage trunks. The three are able to ambush him on an airport runway, inside his getaway plane. The only bad thing is no one knows how to fly a plane and Harpo has to take over. The plane crashes into the police station where the Brothers are able to expose the Nazi as a thief.

And with that the Marx Brothers should have gone into the sunset. A Night in Casablanca is not a great movie, but it is better than some of the later efforts by the Marx Brothers. It would have been a serviceable conclusion to a career that spanned more than four decades. But it was not the final movie made by the Marx Brothers. Chico’s gambling debts would cause one more, really unwatchable movie to be made before the three Marx Brothers called it a career together.

TV CONTESTSUBMIT your TV PILOT or TV SPEC Script
Voted #1 TV Contest in North America.		 FILM CONTESTSUBMIT your SHORT Film
Get it showcased at the FEEDBACK Festival
writing CONTEST1st CHAPTER or FULL NOVEL CONTEST
Get full feedback! Winners get their novel made into a video!		 SCREENPLAY CONTESTSUBMIT your FEATURE Script
FULL FEEDBACK on all entries. Get your script performed