Change Your Image
CharlieHearse
Reviews
The Loved One (1965)
Hmmm...
I read so much about this legendary dark comedy that it may have gotten too built up expectation-wise for me. Well, as it turns out, I read too much about how "offensive" & black this film is. Frankly, it's a meandering story with no particular reason for much of what unfolds in the plot. Everyone delivers a fairly good performance with the exception of Jonathan Winters, who quite frankly, does quite have the chops for the material. What makes this particularly unfortunate is that he plays two characters, which is not only something he isn't too qualified for, but just adds to the stretches of seemingly pointless scenes. Terry Southern, who was a very good writer and contributed to "Dr. Strangelove," and worked closely with the also late and great Michael O'Donoghue on SNL, couldn't even bring anything more than a few subtle humorous character traits to the table. I won't hold Mr. Southern completely accountable for this, as he clearly didn't have too much creative control over the script. The same goes for "Dr. Strangelove," which is a far more darkly funny film, but didn't quite catch the boat on a lot of scenes that ultimately took a much sillier route after some rather astute set ups. A lot of filmgoers cry "blasphemy!" at such an observation, but trust me, I'm right. I hear a lot of things along the lines of "well, consider the time 'The Loved One' was made." To this, I say watch "Lolita"(1961.) That film is the sharpest dark comedy of that era. The topic of death is way too easy of a way into the black comedy genre. "The Loved One" milks this kind of darkly humorous ethic. In spite of all this, it is certainly worth a look, because it is quite smart in certain parts. I do admire it's attempts at subtle character quirks, but generally end up a little disappointed at the resolutions of many of the situations, which really don't have much of a resolution, making the film feel a lot longer than it is. If you can get past these lulls, it's an interesting piece in terms of going against the Hollywood grain, even taking a number of below-the-belt jabs at the studio system. 64% out of 100%.
In the Light of the Moon (2000)
Like an overlong episode of "Tales From The Crypt"
This could have been an intense, brilliant study of the true story on which this is based. Unfortunately, the filmmakers were too in love with the idea of making a movie about Ed Gein, thinking that the facts themselves combined with a few embellishments would carry the movie. Everything here is pure by-the-books tv biopic formula. It opens with real news footage of the farm yocals saying what a gentle, quiet and friendly man Ed Gein was. When the movie kicks in, all the yocals are portrayed as people who feel he is rather odd. So right off the bat there is conflict between reality and this "guesstimate."(Did Geins' mother really call him a "booby-loving snake" while beating him after she caught him in the bathroom with a dirty magazine?) By the same token, you have to ask yourself why is it necessary to even make a movie about Ed Gein? It's already been done countless times, and very rarely done successfully. Although it is mildly humorous watching Steve Railsback portray Gein as he tries on different noses in front of a mirror.
The back of the box boasts how Gein's story inspired "Psycho" and "Texas Chainsaw Massacre," both of which are much much better films, "Chainsaw" being a near masterpiece. Stories of serial killers that salvage their victims' pieces parts for multiple uses around the house like Martha Stewart on mescaline seems old hat by now, and making a movie about Ed Gein appears to be a note from the old schoolers to "Chainsaw" fans saying "if it weren't for Ed Gein, there wouldn't have been a 'Psycho' or 'Chainsaw'." Maybe, but we already know that, and I don't think we care. There's no denying Gein's story is bizarre, but trivializing it into a one-dimensional, formulaic "Tales From The Crypt"-meets-Mayberry destroys any morbid curiosity one would have about this story. *1/2
Blaze Starr Goes Nudist (1962)
A moving and inspirational experience...
I never fully realized the pressures of being an actress. The story obviously hit so close to home that Blaze Starr just plays herself. Anyone who feels exhausted and disenchanted with their job or life in general will relate to Blaze's circumstances. The attention paid to the details is astounding. Never has a film stretched the musical montage sequence and make it work so well with the theme. This movie is nearly perfect. The only flaw was that it was too short.
Clean, Shaven (1993)
excellent...
In a time where independents films are on the rise, it's nice to see a film like this. While it was independently produced, it is, in the end, a great film, and not a pretentious piece of garbage about a bunch of young people falling in and out of love or trying to hide a dead body. More than half "indie" films produced are crap. They're all about no one over 23 years old, and have a soundtrack full of of "cool" bands, and the dialogue is always trying to be so damn clever. Zero attention is paid to the photography and the stories are all so awful. Almost no one knows how to write something remotely poignant. Even if they're just trying to entertain, all their material is so stale. With the exception of Todd Solondz and Wes Anderson, most indie filmmakers are terrible. As much as I think Lodge Kerrigan should be added to the list of great indie filmmakers, I don't want to consider him an indie filmmaker. He is plainly a filmmaker, and one of the best newer directors in the last ten years. Kerrigan has the vision and command of some the most legendary directors. I don't say things like that very often, but I am so impressed with this film. I have not seen "Claire Dolan," but intend to as soon as I get my hands on a copy. Why has there not been anything ever written about Kerrigan? I cannot wait to see what he does next.
The Unbearable Lightness of Being (1988)
A lot to like...
This film has so many great qualities it's hard to believe that anyone who would want to see it could walk away disappointed. I can certainly appreciate that fans of the novel may be let down because the film is quite different than the novel. However, all of the meaning is there. Seldomly does a film ever fulfill the intentions of the book it is based on. But with this film, it goes beyond the book's intention by throwing in a lighter context. The book is excellent, and I did read it before seeing the film. There are so many qualities in the book I would have hated to see attempted on screen. There is so much of what's explained in the book that can be easily implied in the film. I'm not saying you have to be familiar with the book to understand the movie. That is what is so amazing about the screen adaption. The characters are so vivid thanks to the incredible performances by the entire cast. If anything, it's like watching a novel come to life. The cinematography is almost half the reason why this film is so bold, thanks to Nykvist. As with any great film, the musical selections were all carefully picked and appropriate. This is quite an underrated gem.
Arena: Making 'The Shining' (1980)
Fascinating...
This is such an amazing little documentary. Before I saw it, I thought that it was going to be a two-hour documentary covering the entire making of the film. It's only about thirty-five minutes long and yet it covers so much. You get the gist of how things went down behind the scenes within the first five minutes. Not to mention the interesting post-production interviews with the principle cast members.
I have so many favorite parts in this film. One part that sticks out is when you get to see Stanley's ideas come to life when he comes up with the camera angle for the scene when Jack is leaning against the food storage door. It's one of the greatest shots in the movie and you see Stanley come up with the the idea seconds before it's shot. Nicholson is a riot as he flirts with Vivian (which, incidently, had me thinking, "take it easy, Johnny, you're old enough to be her father, plus her father is right behind you.")Scatman proves to have been a really sweet person, although knowing that this film really took its toll on him, one can't help but think he's crying for help during his interview. Danny Lloyd was an outgoing tike. Shelley Duvall is a great actress, but never seemed too horribly prepared on the set. Later she admits with exhaustion that she understood why Stanley treated her the way he did and that she does like him after all. My only complaint about this film is that we barely see John Alcott(I think I saw him for a quick second in the background,) but it would have been nice to see him work. I highly recommend this to Kubrick fans and anyone in filmmaking. Vivian did wonderful job piecing this together and I thank her for providing me a look at her Father's film set.
Eyes Wide Shut (1999)
Film history.
This is the last great film of the millennium. I waited patiently for twelve years for this film. So many people are critical of the length, the performances, and the "epic-lessness" of this film. First off, Kubrick always deliberately paced his films. This is a very intimate story, therefore it is aesthetically paced to build a simple understanding of the characters which are in a complex situation. The performances are so on target. Cruise's pent up emotion is brilliantly showcased through a grand subtlety. Kidman is so saturated with wit and displays emotions so openly it's mesmerizing. Her confession of her fantasy reminds me of Bibi Anderson's story of fulfilling a similar fantasy in "Persona." As always, Kubrick's choice of supporting characters nicely outlines the heart of the film.Larry Smith's photography is beautiful. He obviously learned a lot of what he knows from Kubrick and Kubrick's former lighting cameraman, the late, great John Alcott. Not to mention the excellent musical selections Kubrick had an intense visual ear for. I loved this movie so much I hate to mention that there are some technical goofs here and there, but that's the price you pay for doing hundreds of takes only to find out that the one that has the best performance also has a reflection of a crewman(as in this film) or has a shadow of a helicopter(as in "The Shining.") I feel Kubrick is too much of a perfectionist to actually miss such errors, I feel he knew they were there, but sacrificed technical perfection for performance perfection. There you have it, the most I could ever possibly criticize Kubrick for. So for those of you that didn't care for "Eyes Wide Shut," I recommend seeing it again because it is pure filmmaking, in concentrated form. It is film history. If the last thing you want to do is see it again, I at least have the comfort in knowing you'll never forget it.
Going Overboard (1989)
Pitch this idea to a production company...
Adam Sandler has taken immaturity to new heights, but it is an obtuse immaturity that I can appreciate. He certainly is not the unfunny, harmful presence that jealous people like Albert Brooks and Janeane Garofalo blame him to be. He's not a genius, but he's not supposed to be. "Billy Madison" may be his most cerebral comedy to date. Billy Zane may be under-appreciated in some circles as well. Billy Bob Thornton (that's three Billys in a row) may have sold out and we may never see a "Sling Blade" or "One False Move" again. But be thankful for movies like "Going Overboard," a movie that is so painfully unfunny, it really hurts not laughing for that long. Some may say that having watched this movie, that writers must have tried to actually think of unfunny things to put in a movie. I beg to differ. The writers of this movie do not exist, for no one who wrote a line of dialogue in this script is a writer. There are bad writers and there are awful writers. There are abysmal writers. These guys are simply not writers. No one can make up something this unfunny, you actually have to be unfunny, you actually have to have never made a single solitary soul laugh to be able to come up with something like this. Either that or you're a little kid trying to write an adult comedy, in which case is funny. In that context, this movie is quite morbidly fascinating and is of interest to those who like to watch reputable actors perform a grade-school play (I do, and I think it is a riot not only because this movie I'm sure haunts Peter Berg, but because the cast thinks they're making something funny and they so aren't-THAT is what is funny.)So in conclusion, pretty much don't see this movie, or watch it and see how context is obliterated.
Le notti del terrore (1981)
Two words: Accidental Genius
This is one of the most brilliantly funny movies in the history of film. It displays humor that is so complex, and it's so unbelievably fall-on-the-floor-until-you-can-no-longer-breathe-and-your- friends-have-to-dial-9-1-1-but-they-can't-because-they can't-breathe-either-and-you-all-end-up-suffocating-funny that it should not be missed. What's almost as funny are some of the other reviews on this site. People actually admitting to being scared by this unintended laugh fest. The soundtrack is the stuff Academy Award-winning scores are made of. I want to turn that kid who played Michael into a cult hero. I know he's no longer living because I think he had that aging disease. I love the 40 year-old man who dubbed Michael's voice with that soprano-mock-child voice. Paper machet zombies always liven up a film that wears it's no-budget aesthetics proudly on it's sleave. What may be the funniest thing of all is that I own this movie(not the rights, just the video, although I could probably afford the rights.) The blurb on the box says that it's about a "group of jet-setters and a mysterious professor that we don't see too much of." Priceless. This is a rare movie to find at rental stores, but if you look hard enough, it may pop up and your searching efforts will not go unrewarded when you find it. You can trust me on this one. To quote the professor at the beginning, "I'm your friend."