Netflix Pix: the Man Who Shot Liberty Valance (1962) Review

To me the film's of John Ford represent pure "Americana". His films are filled with an individual and uniquely American spirit which today feels both refreshing and nostalgic. Ford was all about the juxtaposition between the larger than life and the intimate. His favorite leading actor was as American and larger than life as it gets, John Wayne, yet Ford always gave Wayne complex characters which somehow both support the actor's mythic status and yet give him new parts to play. In the Man Who Shot Liberty Valance Ford is once again reunited with Wayne and this time he, Wayne, has an equally iconic costar: James Stewart.

The Story follows an older Stewart recounting his days as a young lawyer coming into contact with the dark side of the American west in the form of a gang leader named Liberty Valance. Wayne plays a popular man in the territory and has a rivalry with Stewart over a woman played by Vera Miles.

The plot of this film feels both archetypal and unique. On the one hand, Wayne and Stewart are characters who represent different ideals and on the other they are fully realized characters with several nuances. the story itself can be read two ways as well both as an allegory and a specific narrative.  It is clear that with this film Ford wanted to look more critically at the myth of the west, a myth which he had helped to create. The film seems to be caught in a struggle between myth and truth and really unable to decide which is more important. When you see the film yourself you will understand how this plays into the storyline as well.

Wayne and Stewart both give great performances, as does Vera Miles. It's great fun to see these two legends on the screen together and the pace of the film allows its story to suck you in. There may be some moments of overacting and melodrama but on the whole the cast acts tremendously well and the direction is everything you'd expect from the man who gave us the Searchers. It was great to see a classic like this one which lives up to that label 5/5!

The Hateful Eight (2015) Review

When I first heard the description of the Hateful Eight I thought it would be vintage Tarantino. The cast was uniting the director with his favorite collaborators and the unique premise sounded like it would be one of Tarantino's best films. Unfortunately it isn't, in fact, It's probably my least favorite Tarantino film.

The Basic story follows eight strangers who, just after the Civil War, find themselves stranded in the middle of a blizzard. Each one of these strangers has a storied past and a secret to hide and all will be revealed in a tirade of bloodshed.

This film begins well enough with beautiful vistas and a soaring Morricone soundtrack, one of the best I've heard in years. The initial "chapters" adequately build anticipation and suspense as each of these characters meet one another. There is this atmosphere of palpable mystery as well as a sense of scope not previously felt in a Tarantino epic. As the characters eventually arrive at the small set where most of the film is confined they seem to be coming into their own. In these initial sections the shadow of the Civil War is strongly felt and there's a tension that hasn't been in a Tarantino film since Pulp Fiction. Then it all goes to hell.

The second half of the films three hour runtime is spent reveling in nearly senseless bloodshed. The tension only builds to a poorly constructed and developed mystery whose plot twists come out of left field and have no emotional resonance for the audience. Basically it all feels like an excuse to push the boundaries of film violence one more time. Gone are the realistic and post Civil War tensions, strong character development, and sense of impending doom. They are replaced by repulsive acts of violence and cartoonish sequences which feel like a bad Agatha Christie parody set in the old west.

The film's two strongest points which survive this second half cannot save it. The first strong point is the acting by the main cast which is very good. Special nods to Samuel L. Jackson and Jennifer Jason Leigh, who rightfully deserves her best supporting actress nomination. The second strong point is the film's 70mm cinematography. this really adds a great look to the film despite its confined nature. Tarantino is now a sure handed director whose style has been honed and he shows great command of the camera here.

Unfortunately, at the end of the film one cannot help but feel that this was an overblown mess of a movie. It had great potential but that potential is washed away in the gallons of blood thrown at the screen in the second half. This film really has all of the weak aspects of previous Tarantino efforts on display in one film. I do not recommend it 2/5

Plan for 2016!

Happy belated New Year!
Due to an incredibly busy schedule last semester I really did not write as many reviews as I would have liked, the plan is for that to change in 2016! Here are my goals/ plans for 2016
1. at least one review a week which will come out on Sundays. These reviews will probably be a mix of both classic and recent films, more recent films as we head into the summer.
2. One video review a month
3. One TV Tuesday entry a month
4. at least one week per month with two or more reviews.
5. Updating of all pages on the blog including the top 100


So, those are my goals for the New Year. This week is going to be a big week for reviews since I've seen a lot recently and want to make up for lost reviews last year. Here is this week's schedule:
Today: the Hateful Eight
Tomorrow: Classics/ Netflix: the Man Who Shot Liberty Valance
Wednesday: the Revenant
Thursday: the Big Short
Friday: Star Wars the Force Awakens (Video Review)

As you can see there will be lots of reasons to check out this blog this week and this year! If you have any suggestions on things I should do for 2016 comment below!

Star Wars blogs 1: Episode IV A New Hope

This is the first in a series of five video blogs documenting my impressions of watching the Star wars films in the, now famous, Machete order (4,5,2,3,6). Enjoy!

Curse of the Demon (1958) Review

Jacques Tourneur is arguably the most underrated director of the classic film era. His sense of light, shadow, and storytelling is on par with directors like Wilder and Hitchcock but he worked on much less prestigious and expensive projects. His early Val Lewton produced chillers Cat People and I Walked With a Zombie reused sets from previous films. His classic film noir Out of the Past was a B picture that has received A status. Arguably his coolest film however, is Curse of the Demon made in Britain in 1958.

Curse of the Demon is one of those filmic gems that makes one realize just how incredible and diverse the output was during the Hollywood studio system . It's a movie that very few have heard of let alone seen and yet its better than most of its classic horror brethren. It stars Dana Andrews as a Psychiatrist who is traveling to London for a convention but discovers when he gets there that his London colleague has died unexpectedly while investigating a cult of Satanists led by a suave and sinister leader. Needless to say things soon become sinister for our hero and his duel of wits with the leader will lead both of them to the brink, Oh and there's a demonic creature and some ancient symbols involved too,

What is so cool about this film is how unabashedly pulpy it is. It involves curses, cults, demons, and luxurious mansions. It has a tone at some points humorless, at others thrilling, and at still others utterly terrifying. Tourneur pulls out all the stops in the directorial department. His ability to create a tense situation and to build that tension to the breaking point is part of what makes him an incredibly effective director. That, and his use of shadows and beautiful black and white cinematography. The shadows are beautiful in both their atmospheric and otherworldly quality.

While working in the Lewton horror unit Tourneur had to work with what little was at his disposal. On this film he is aided by the wonderful Ken Adam. Ken Adam is the production designer who created the look of the first James Bond films. His style has an elegance and modernity that is rarely ever created so effectively. This film works because the pulpiness of the story is brought off with such sophistication. A lot of the credit for this is due to Ken Adam.

Apparently Tourneur didn't want the audience to ever see the Demon but the producer put shots of the creature in afterward. This is a shame as the weakest point of this film is the dated look of the creature. It shows up sparingly however, and it has a classic charm to it like the rest of the film. Rarely have horror films been as pulpy, sophisticated, or fun as Curse of the Demon. This is one to savor and enjoy on a dark autumn evening with a favorite beverage 4.5/51

Bridge of Spies (2015) Review

Steven Spielberg is probably the most recognizable movie director in the industry. He made his name on blockbusters like Jaws and Raiders of the Lost Ark in the 1970s and 80s'. Today, He devotes most of his movies to biopics of historical figures. With Bridge of Spies he continues this tradition in fine form even if nothing in the movie is particularly spectacular.

Tom Hanks plays James B. Donavan a highly skilled attorney who soon finds himself being asked to defend an accused Soviet spy. While reluctant at first, Donavan eventually comes to respect the accused and his right to a defense. The climate of the time however puts everybody against Donavan including his family. The plot eventually involves the U2 incident and sees Donavan in East Berlin, how he gets there will be for you to find out.

There's something very old-fashioned about Bridge of Spies. Hanks' character with his lofty ideals and down-to-earth manner is played by Tom Hanks in a way that channels Jimmy Stewart in a Frank Capra film. The pacing and style of the film also evoke a timeless feel. this feeling also pervaded Lincoln. there is some nice sharp humor provided by the Coen's script and moments of intensity are punctuated by moments of levity.

The performances are entertaining and in some cases excellent. Hanks carries the film well and in a way that makes him easy to identify with, again this evokes Jimmy Stewart. the supporting cast turn in fine performances in what really becomes a cold war epic. This epic quality may be the film's strongest point. Through this story Spielberg is able to explore many aspects of the cold war and view the conflict from many angles. The production design helps to bring this point home with its attention to detail.

While all of the above are points in the film's favor this viewer couldn't help feeling that the whole was really good but not excellent. One reason for this is that the script hits the right notes almost too perfectly. In some scenes I could figure out exactly what would come next. This predictability probably won't be an issue for many viewers but with the number of great and unpredictable films I've seen so far this year it was a point against this film for me.

Overall, Spielberg's direction is on form and he tells the story in an exciting and evocative way. He does it so well that he makes it seem as if he isn't even behind the camera. bridge of spies has great direction, good performances and an energetic and witty, if slightly too predictable, script. It's a very good film 4/51

Meru (2015) review

It's been far too long since I have written a blog post. This time of year tends to be particularly busy, but now I plan to be back with a vengeance, beginning with my review of the outstanding documentary Meru.

Meru tells the incredible story of three climbers and their journey up one of the most difficult ascents in the world. To say any more about what happens would be to ruin one of the most exciting stories I have witnessed on film this year, fiction or non fiction.

Meru is filmed in a style that  allows the audience to be both an observer of the climbers incredible feats and right there in the center of the action. It's incredible to think that the film was even made at all. To have to deal with cameras, no matter how small, on a journey of this difficulty seems incredible. But, thankfully, cameras were brought along on this journey every step of the way.

Meru succeeds primarily because of how incredible its story is. To say why the story is so incredible would be to spoil the film. If this had been a fiction film I would have found it unbelievable. The story also unfolds in a way that works on a very emotional level, hitting beats at the right moment. There must have been hours of footage to go through and the editing is expert. Interviews are placed at the right moments and never slow down the action like some interviews in films of this sort can.

The other aspect of Meru that makes it a one-of-a-kind film experience is the way that the story lets us ask questions of what these guys are doing and why they do it. These men are risking their lives for what? that question pervades the film and it will continued to be pondered by anyone who sees this incredible achievement. There is something about this documentary that feels special. It should be experienced on a big screen and with as little about it known to the viewer as possible 5/5!