mcgriswald Reviews

The Last of Us (2023– )

Purists should be pleased

[8/10 · 16 January 2023]

Last of Us is based on a classic video game of the same name which takes place in a world where a global pandemic has wiped out most of the world's population not with a virus or bacteria, but a fungus that has evolved and now infects humans. Humans are relegated to various quarantine zones which are controlled by military governments who enforce the law with brutal efficiency.

The story focuses on an unlikely pair, a man who lost his daughter in the chaos that followed the initial outbreak and a teenage girl who while infected, carries a natural immunity to the fungus. The pair are played by Game of Thrones veterans Pedro Pascal as Joel, a hardened smuggler who ekes out a living in the quarantine zone, and Bella Ramsey as Ellie, a young teen who was discovered by the rebel group the Fireflies and has the immunity. Following a botched attempt at securing a battery for their truck, Joel and his girlfriend meet up with the leadership of the Fireflies who have just endured a skirmish with the Quarantine Zone police. Injured, the Firefly leader tasks Joel with getting Ellie to another Firefly group at the Massachusetts state house to use her to create a cure to the fungal infection.

That's the jist of the first episode, and other than a few minor things, it basically tracks the game exactly, including the prologue. Hopefully, this will appease the gaming community, who are notorious for thrashing any adaptation that doesn't exactly follow the established canon. The opening episode is well executed, and the scenes in the Boston Quarantine Zone are very faithful to the video game. The performances are also very good, with Pascal's Joel hardened and embittered by his losses, while Ramsey's Ellie has grown up in the apocalypse, and is rebellious and street tough. Ramsey nails a generic American accent, so much so that it took a while to place her as the young Lady Mormont from GOT.

Recommended, particularly for gamers who have teenage daughters. I have a feeling this one is going to be heart wrenching.

Resident Evil (2022)

Enjoyable backstory

[8/10 · 17 July 2022]

Well, the trolls got here before I did, as well as many folks who aren't paid or biased. This isn't Shakespeare, but it is a very coherent script with young capable actors playing the lead roles.

Maybe because these girls don't look like Milla it disappoints a certain fan profile, but the hate on this series is pathetic. Simply put, this is an engaging story for anyone who followed the game, movie series or other media on RE.

I can't imagine that the average sci fi/horror fan won't enjoy this.

Papillon (I) (2017)

Not bad, but why?

[7/10 · 21 February 2019]

I've always enjoyed watching the two actors who are the principal characters, I first saw Rami Malek in HBO's miniseries "The Pacific", in a pretty creepy role, and Charlie Hunnam in SOA, and I've liked them in their subsequent roles. In this version of Papillon, their performances and particularly the performances of the supporting cast is very good, but the original was a full blown Hollywood epic with two of the biggest stars of their era. Plus, unlike other remakes that bring a less censored version, the 1974 version pulled no punches when it came to gore and suffering, so there was little to add in that respect.

So where was it lacking? For starters, the original had a much more sweaty feel to it-the lighting and cinematography always imparted a sense of decay. Everything seemed to be rotting and falling apart, including the people. That whole feel carries over to the solitary confinement scene, and McQueen's fetid hellhole seems dry and sterile and even Hunnam's reputed weight loss just doesn't convey McQueen's abject suffering.

This movie is worth watching, but if you have a choice, go with the original.

Lady Dynamite (2016–2017)

How do you solve a problem like Maria?

[9/10 · 23 May 2016]

It's hard to describe what this show is, so many levels of comedy and drama, but it works.

Maria Bamford suffers from bipolar disorder, and this show is a semi-coherent fictionalized depiction of her life, how her career operates, her family, and the various people she interacts with in the entertainment industry.

Flitting back and forth in time, each episode covers a specific narrative, should she date this guy, is she going to get the big movie role, is she objectively funny, etc., but each is framed in the roller coaster of emotions that make up her mental state. When she's manic, it's a little off putting, and when she's depressed, it's sad, but her support system of friends, parents, agents and various helpers sort of keep her on track, sort of.

For those unfamiliar with Maria, dial up one of her standup shows so you get some feel of who she is before you dig in to this show. She is about as "alt" as "alt comedy" can be, but she has crafted a stage show and a persona that are truly endearing and entertaining.

Unlike other entertainers who suffer from mental illness and hide it, Maria embraces it, and this show to some degree gives us the world seen through her eyes.

Overhaulin' (2004– )

Just dreadful

[4/10 · 26 February 2015]

Foose's show exhibits every dumb trick that makes these shows so irritating--faked up scenarios involving "theft", "accidentally towed" vehicles, hyper presenters who are constantly jazzed over every development, major "issues" with the modifications that cause lots of fake consternation and make every job a battle with the clock.

But such is the nature of all these reality shows that seek to create conflict and make the various characters zany and eccentric, which is what passes for compelling TV these days. Add in a zingy rock beat over every scene and bump and you have the makings of a truly irritating program.

Foose does good work, but all the contrivances detract from, rather than add to the finished product.

Drew: The Man Behind the Poster (2013)

Great documentary about legendary movie poster artist Drew Struzan

[10/10 · 8 January 2014]

Movie poster artist Drew Struzan has created many of the most iconic movie posters of the last few decades, and "Drew: The Man Behind the Poster" is a loving tribute and examination of his long career. Composed mainly of interviews with the various actors, producers, and directors whose movies Struzan made posters for, as well as unobtrusive narration that keeps the story going. Notable are interviews with Steven Spielberg and George Lucas, who talk about Struzan''s posters for Star Wars, Raiders of the Lost Ark, ET, and Back to the Future.

Drew Struzan comes off as a humble, extremely talented, and very nice guy who had a rough start in life but truly made his mark on movie history.

This documentary was recently made available on Netflix, and I highly recommend it--well made, and interesting to movie buffs, Star Wars fans, and even people who have never heard of Struzan.

Fighting (2009)

Wrong Audience saw this film

[8/10 · 30 March 2010]

In the last several years, Hollywood has screwed up in marketing films in such a way that cause their target audience to get angry, and the resulting negative buzz kills the film. The people who watched this movie expected an action filled smash up with a clearly defined plot and evil villains and shining heroes. Nothing wrong with that, but a movie like this one is bound to disappoint those folks, and the people who would like it will never see it, because they automatically pigeonhole it into the entire fight movie genre.

Fighting reminds me of a typical good film from the early '70s, where our attentions are drawn to the nuances of character, motivation, and the setting in which these people live. Plot is important, but secondary to our exploration of a world where desperate people take desperate steps to survive.

Our protagonist here is kid who is selling counterfeit junk in New York, when he is discovered by street hustler after he beats up some of the hustler's minions. Offered a chance to fight in a winner takes all contest, the kid wins, and starts to gain a name and engage in fights with bigger and bigger purses. Over time, he develops a relationship with the hustler, a love interest with a girl who isn't what she appears to be, and reacquaints himself with a rival from his past.

The fight sequences are raw, brutal, and quick--the atmosphere and settings of the fights are examined as much as the fight itself. We get a look into the street culture that supports these contests, as well as the shady characters behind all of the arrangements and wagering that goes on. The hustler, who becomes the kid's de facto manager has a past as well, and while down on his luck, sees the kid as a chance to regain the respect and position within the underground community they inhabit.

Even though the relationship has the absolute opportunity to be exploitative--particularly when the hustler asks the kid to take a dive, the mutual respect and genuine fondness that develops between the two is great to see.

I am happy with the acting--Terence Howard, who plays the hustler always comes through, and the kid, played by Channing Tatum, comes across as a young DeNiro, understated, but with a sort of longing that comes through particularly when he is pursuing his love interest played by Zulay Henao. It reminded me a little of DeNiro's pursuit of Cybill Shepard in Taxi Driver, before she figured out how screwed up he was--some small charm and a lot of persistence. The relationship between the kid and the hustler echoed that of Ratso Rizzo and Joe Buck in Midnight Cowboy. Like Ratso, Howard's character saw a degree of redemption.

As for the remaining cast, the supporters came across as real humans, not street caricatures that we are so used to seeing. The heavies who were played by the ever reliable Luis Guzman and Roger Guenveur Smith, were menacing enough, but never let their performances go overboard.

I have a feeling that this is one of those movies that has slipped under a lot people's radar, but as word of mouth gets out about it amongst people who like this sort of movie, the rating, now abysmally low will creep up where it should be.

Out of the Blue: A Film About Life and Football (2007)

Great, upbeat football documentary

[8/10 · 11 November 2009]

Most football films these days present the sport in negative terms, the cheating, the steroid use, the treatment of athletes like a commodity, etc. Finally comes a documentary that explores the positive side to the sport and how it helps athletes grow as human beings.

Out of the Blue is a well made and entertaining documentary of the Boise State University Broncos football team leading up to its upset win over Oklahoma in the 2007 Fiesta Bowl ( a game I missed, thanks to my wife's comment that "We've watched enough football for one day--lets watch a rerun of Law and Order"--she knows she owes me FOR THE REST OF MY LIFE!)

Made up of game footage and interviews with (surprisingly well-spoken and courteous) players, coaches, media and fans, it explores Boise's improbable position as an up and coming football power in a part of the country most people believe is the middle of nowhere.

The film is remarkably fair, and even an Oklahoma fan wouldn't find anything objectionable other than the outcome of the game. In fact, the players admit their apprehension when the Sooners take the field--"They were huge!" "This is what bigtime college football looks like", etc. Perhaps the only cringe (and its a major cringe) inducing moment is when one fan who is watching the game at home gets injured in a horrible freak accident, that left the ER doctors speechless.

Highly recommended for the College Football fan.

Anime: Drawing a Revolution (2007 TV Movie)

Revisionist nonsense

[1/10 · 31 August 2009]

Anime: Drawing a Revolution purports to be an exploration of anime's roots, Tesuko, manga, etc., with the normal array of talking head "experts" who gush on about anime's influence and supposed superiority to Western animation.

Most classical Western animators would disagree with the film's premise, that anime somehow introduced adult themes and complex human interactions to the world of animation--the idea that what started out as a cheap way to create a moving cartoon (co- opted by the penny pinchers at Hanna Barbera) that eliminated actual animation in favor of a static figure with a moving mouth that badly dubbed the dialogue became something revolutionary, is absurd.

Western animation is reduced to "talking dogs" aimed at children, when in reality early cartoon shorts were designed to work on two levels--funny characters aimed at the kids with content that was clearly aimed at adults. According to the film, American animation, in general (and it doesn't mention French, German, Canadian, etc.) was Disney alone--Snow White and Bambi. Great animators like Tex Avery, Chuck Jones, Friz Freling never existed in ADAR's universe. And of course, Speed Racer introduced us to cartoon violence, with its crashes and "serious" events.

The one thing that is glossed over as "part of Japanese culture" is the so-called "stylized" nature of the genre, the silly facial expressions (even in serious stories) the big eyes, the sweat drops that are held in holy reverence by all the animation studios, elements that to the Western eye seem repetitive and inane.

Finally, and with an obvious ignorance of such underground artists such as Robert Crumb, and mainstream artists like Stan Lee among others, Manga and anime are given full credit for the modern graphic novel. Sorry, never happened.

Everything Is Illuminated (2005)

Jarmusch-like quirky brilliance

[10/10 · 24 May 2007]

I haven't read much about the director of this film, but I would guess that he draws on Jim Jarmusch' work as a major influence. Something about the pacing of this film reminds me of "Stranger than Paradise"--not as choppy, but the way the scenes leave you hanging for a second before moving on.

Unlike Stranger than Paradise, however, there is a consistent flow between scenes and the humor is more deliberate. So deliberate, in fact, that many of the scenes will leave you laughing "like crazy man". Particularly funny is the way the young tour guide mangles the English language, using sentences like "Because of my premium break dancing abilities, many women seek to be carnal with me." He asks a post nap Johnathan if he has been "manufacturing Zs". As the film's narrator, we get the hang of his lingo, but it stays funny throughout the film.

Everything is Illuminated tells the story of young Jonathan, played with google eye glasses by Elijah Wood and his search for his families roots in the Ukraine. Accompanying him is the tour guide, his chauffeur grandfather, and the grandfather's dog, who is a character unto his own. Searching for an old Jewish shtetl, or village that has been obliterated by the Nazis during WW2, the characters learn things about themselves and their collective ancestries.

While this film has a surprise of sorts towards the end, it isn't a hugely complicated story, it relies rather on some eternal truths about the nature of families and relationships. This film is definitely not for everyone, but if you are a fan of offbeat humor or a Jarmusch fan, you might enjoy this.

Meet the Robinsons (2007)

Pass the Bong, Please

[7/10 · 10 April 2007]

The first 35 minutes of Meet the Robinsons is an incomprehensible mishmash of manic activity. It makes for and odd dichotomy, as kids watching it are probably torn by confusion as to what is going on, and simultaneously entertained by the manic humor on the screen.

Its the story about an orphaned kid who attends a science fair to show off one of his many inventions and is accosted by another kid who reputedly comes from the future. Thats about all I got out of the first few minutes as it--I kept looking over at my kids to see if they were as confused as me, but the non-stop action kept them glued to the screen. Although ultimately this movie's plot makes sense, its probably too complicated for the younger set to "get", and it really made me think that the creators were a bunch of stoned kids putting the craziest crap on the screen that they could think of.

All in all, MTR is highly imaginative, visually stunning, and the kid from the future is animated to make him look like a Jim Carrey clone, which I doubt was accidental, although Jim wasn't credited as far as I could see.

This film could probably do better with multiple viewings on DVD, but its worth seeing on the big screen because of the great visuals.

The Best Years of Our Lives (1946)

Neatly escapes every opportunity to be cliché and sappy

[10/10 · 22 February 2007]

Best Years of Our Lives is a film that slipped under my radar for years--I had heard about it, but never had the opportunity to watch it. Thanks to TCM On Demand, I was able to watch it uncut and commercial free.

What surprised me about this film was how quickly it was made after the war. The film frankly deals with the people who were wounded in the war, both physically and mentally. It manages neatly to encompass nearly all the varieties of war experience within three characters.

We have the Air Force officer, who was a veteran of the early European bombing campaign. Because of the horrific attrition rate amongst the crews of the bombers, the Air Force at that time had a reputation for cranking out officers who quickly rose through the ranks. Such was case with this fellow who went from a lowly soda jerk in civilian life to a Captain and bombardier of his B-17. He also suffers from PTSD, called "battle fatigue" at the time.

We have the Army non-com who served in the Pacific, and suffered through the horrors of that campaign. His story is opposite that of the Air Force fellow in that he goes from a prestigious job as a banker to a lowly grunt in the Army and rises to the rank of Sergeant. From the stripes on his sleeve it is clear that he is the highest level of Sergeant, yet he is still on the front line.

Finally we have the Navy Seaman, who is part of the faceless support staff, commonly referred to as REMFs (Rear Echelon MFers)by the fellows on the line. Ironically, he suffers the worst physical wounds when working as a mechanic below decks on a Navy ship, his ship is struck, presumably by a kamikaze and is sunk with loss of 400 lives. He is pulled from the water but his badly burned hands are amputated and replaced with prosthetic hooks.

BYOOL tells the story of how these three meet on a transport plane they have boarded for home, and how they readjust into civilian society.

What impressed me most about this film is that despite the obvious issues that face the three protagonists, it never descends into melodrama. The Navy kid, played by an actual amputee, is placed into situations where we might feel sorry for him, yet the script never lets us feel that emotion. The Army sergeant is clearly an alcoholic, and the story points that out, but never dwells on it. The Air Force captain struggles with the loss of status when he is forced to return to the drug store he soda jerked in (now bought out by a large chain) and take a demeaning job to support his ungrateful and disloyal wife.

The script allows plenty of opportunities for all these characters to come to some dramatic climax regarding their plights, but it neatly avoids that. But for the overly dramatic score, the director has tread around exploiting the obvious.

In one scene that well represents the entire movie, the daughter of the Army sergeant (Frederic March) is having a discussion with her father and mother regarding the Air Force captain. Despite his marriage, they have fallen in love, and she is determined to break up the marriage which is obviously troubled. Now we've seen thousands of scenes typical of this where the father blusters angrily and the daughter ends up running away to her room in tears, slamming the door and falling on the bed. Later, Mom shows up, consoles daughter and offers words of motherly wisdom, and everybody lives happily ever after.

In BYOOL, this scene plays out completely differently than the cliché I have described above. Sure the conversation gets heated, but all parties are reasonable, and there is a serious and timeless discussion of the nature of relationships that has some of the best dialog I have seen.

Ultimately, BYOOL is a highly satisfying film, with honest performances from the entire cast. Technically, it is well shot, the editing and cinematography frame, but never overshadow the gripping narrative. Despite the score, which is cliché and over-dramatic, I give this film the highest rating that it clearly deserves

Unforgiven (1992)

Eastwood drives the final nail in the coffin of the Western mythos

[10/10 · 12 February 2007]

Unforgiven is one of those movies that demands close analysis. Sure it pushes all the time-tested Hollywood buttons: its beautifully filmed, it has great acting, a compelling story and the payoff is very satisfying. Yet Unforgiven does much more, in that it wears its deeper themes on its sleeve; it doesn't take a master critic to explore the meaning below the story.

Clint Eastwood plays William Munny, an unrepentant killer who has abandoned his outlaw ways and has married and settled down on a hardscrabble farm. After the death of his wife, Munny gets word from a young whippersnapper that there is a reward on the head of man from the town of Big Whiskey because he has savaged and maimed a prostitute and the local sheriff, Little Bill (Gene Hackman) has essentially given the perpetrator a slap on the wrist.

So Munny summons his old sidekick, Ned (Morgan Freeman) and heads off to Big Whiskey along with the young man, who goes by the handle "the Scofield Kid", to kill the man who cut the whore, along with his cohorts. In the meantime, Little Bill has gotten wind of the reward, and savages one potential mercenary, English Bob (Richard Harris) who while handy with a gun in the "Wild West Show" sense, ultimately lacks the heart and mettle of a true killer.

English Bob is accompanied by a callow young writer of dime novels, who has swallowed the whole white hat/black hat mythos whole cloth, and stays behind as Bob is sent unceremoniously packing. Munny arrives in a driving rainstorm and misses a sign demanding that visitors relinquish their firearms to the sheriff. When he is discovered, armed, in Big Whiskey's saloon by Little Bill and his minions, Munny is savagely beaten, almost to death.

That set me to thinking. Now Eastwood's famous Man With No Name took his share of beatings, but unlike Munney, he recovered quickly. Munney's old body felt every blow, and he spends a lengthy period convalescing.

Yet Munney is relentless, and once he is able he gathers up his crew and gets back to the business of killing.

One by one, all of the standard clichés that populate the typical Gene Autry type film are exploded. Munney doesn't wear a white hat; while his cause is just, he is a mercenary. Little Bill certainly doesn't wear the white hat either, he is a brutal sadist, essentially the head of his own fascist dictatorship. His minions weren't good guys, nor were they truly hard men like Munny and Little Bill. Rather than a brave posse of old, they remind me of and old picture of a lynching; Little Bill might be holding the rope, but they were the smiling faces in the background.

Ned is ultimately a victim of his own loyalty to Munney, he lacks the heart to be a killer. English Bob and The Scofield Kid are full of bluster and stories, but they are essentially poseurs.

Even the so-called "modern" westerns are skewered. During a critical scene, Little Bill accuses Munney of being a "killer of women and children" during a train robbery where explosives are used. I immediately thought back to the scene in Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid where they use "too much dynamite" and blow up a train's safe, including its contents. That scene was played for comic relief, yet one couldn't help imagining hot shrapnel from the safe spinning its way through the wooden passenger cars and killing innocents.

In Munney's world innocents died.

And finally, in a slap to all of the antihero movies of the 70s, Munny doesn't meet his end as comity demands, rather he quietly lives out his life as a purveyor of dry goods in San Francisco.

As I understand it, Eastwood wore his Rowdy Yates boots from Rawhide in Unforgiven. It is fitting that he chose to give birth and kill off his career in Westerns wearing the same boots.

Open Range (2003)

Five movies for the price of one

[10/10 · 12 February 2007]

Open range is a Spaghetti Western, a romance, a buddy film, a samurai flick and a classic western rolled into one. And Kevin Costner balances each genre within the movie and creates an unforgettable classic.

Coaxing first rate performances out his entire cast, Kevin Costner hits a much needed home run after his recent run of stinkers. Bening and Duvall and the supporting cast play it low key but sincere--the only bad note is the cattle baron played by Michael Gambon, who is not one of my favorite actors.

As the film plays out, we first get the sense of an old Sergio Leone classic in that there are moments punctuated by extreme violence with a slow buildup in action during the rest of the film. Costner is the nexus upon which the other genres build. He is in a romance with Bening that never overburdens the action, he has interplay with Robert Duval that rivals the greatest buddy films. His resurrection of his old warrior ways reminds one of the samurai film where circumstances force a character into action long abandoned.

Finally, the elements of the classic western are all there, battles with the weather, the sappy rescue of a puppy from rising floodwaters, a goofy character in the livery man.

Through all of this Costner maintains the level of authenticity similar to Eastwood's turn in Unforgiven. People get cold and wet. A guy gets chloroformed and stays groggy and helpless long after he comes to, instead of springing right into action. Townsfolk show a level of righteous indignation instead of being cowed by the power base in the town. They act reluctantly, but they do ultimately react.

Spoiler below!!! In what I think is the most climactic scene, Costner approaches the top hired gun for the cattle baron and asks him if he shot his friend. After the gunslinger replies that he had indeed shot his friend, and that he did it in a cruel manner, Costner walks towards the guy and blows his brains out and kills a couple of the gunslinger's buddies before you can count a beat. I found that scene both shocking and refreshing. How many movies do you wait as the two antagonists jawbone about the situation, there is a suspenseful pause and ultimately the good guy is faster on draw? Pretty much every single one.

In Open Range, Costner is revealed to be a killer, a machine that simply acts without remorse or pause. That he is in the right is secondary to the fact that he is every bit as violent and ruthless as the bad guys when it comes to killing.

What is very satisfying about Open Range is that all the subplots and loose ends are tied up. Costner's relationship with Annette Bening has a satisfactory resolution, as does the windup of the cattle drive business. The injured boy gets better, and no detail is left alone.

Technically, its very well done, the camera, editing and cinematography is all first rate.

Flags of Our Fathers (2006)

Not Enough

[8/10 · 12 February 2007]

Flags of our Fathers does a great job of portraying the book upon which it is based, but unfortunately, it leaves too much story, too much action on the table.

Sadly, the movie was over far too soon--Clint Eastwood could have given the film another 45 minutes to an hour running time and would have just started to cover the subject matter. He should have dropped certain subplots, such as Gagnon's girlfriend, and used the time to fully explore other characters such as Barry Pepper's Mike Strank.

During the scene where Ira Hayes is crying on Strank's mother's shoulder, we see more of a drunk, irrational Hayes, than we see a man who is heartbroken over the loss of a great leader. Exploring Strank's character would have given us more reason to understand the love felt by all the men towards him.

Flags of our Fathers is a well-made film, the editing, camera work and cinematography are first rate. As usual with Clint Eastwood's films there is great attention to detail, and he gets work from all his actors.

Politically correct, the movie shies away from the realities of the Pacific war, including the extreme hatred felt by each side for the other, and save for one instance the atrocities committed by the combatants. In that one instance, the victim is off camera, but you do get a sense of his fate by the reactions of the men around him.

All in all, a good war film, but I am still waiting for the definitive Pacific war film--so many films have been based on the European war. Hollywood films like Bridge on the River Kwai and Sands of Iwo Jima are not it.

The 40-Year-Old Virgin (2005)

Prudes, ninnies, foreigners and the excessively sensitive need not apply!

[10/10 · 11 February 2007]

I have a theory about this type of comedy.

Unless you are an American with some semblance of a normal middle class upbringing, you will neither "get" nor appreciate the humor of films like The 40 Year Old Virgin. I identified with Steve Carrell's character, in that I, too, have had my share of bizarre sexual encounters--had there been a "perfect storm" of these types of experiences it may have turned me off of sex just like it did poor Andy.

Everyone who has any type of normal working life has ran across these co-workers, the smooth playa, the stoner, the lonesome loser, and the guy who cracked me up the most, the foul mouthed little foreign dude. My little foreign dude was Thai waiter named Sammy, while Andy's happened to be a little Indian guy. The part where he is trying to be all sensitive towards Andy and starts spouting about "butt love" and the "rusty trombone" and the "dirty sanchez" had me in tears.

Andy, who could have been just another stereotypical dweeb is played with surprising depth by Steve Carrell; he's a fairly normal guy, he just never got laid, and like a bad habit its stuck with him his entire life.

The supporting cast, Andy's coworkers, his boss and the various "hoodrat" women he interacts with hit at perfect pitch. The secondary roles like Paula his boss, and the drunken girl who takes him on an automobile ride from hell are priceless. Her line about wanting some "Frrrench toast" is a classic.

Although Virgin winds down at the end, the total strength of the movie outweighs the anticlimax. If you enjoyed Wedding Crashers and There's Something About Mary you will get a big kick out of 40 Year Old Virgin.

Scarface (1983)

Realistic portrayal of a cocaine kingpin

[8/10 · 11 February 2007]

As the entire drug culture segued from the psychedelic era of the 60s and early 70s to the Studio 54/Disco era of the late 70s, early 80s, an interesting phenomenon, the ultra-violent drug lord appeared. Americans who may have shunned LSD and marijuana became enrapt by the drug of glamor, cocaine. With the increased demand came huge profits to be made by those ruthless and violent enough to dominate the underground world of narcotics trafficking.

Enter Tony Montana, a man who was in the right place at the right time, and could parlay his own extreme amoral ambitions into untold wealth. The character played by Al Pacino in the movie Scarface is often written off as over the top, too violent and too extreme.

Far from it.

Men like Tony Montana were responsible for a murder rate that grew 500% in cities like Los Angeles and Miami. Places where authorities would estimate with total seriousness that two people would be killed by falling bullets fired from these gangster's automatic weapons in celebration of New Years.

Men like Tony Montana were responsible for the federal governments discontinuing the printing of higher denomination bills, since they were usually used by drug dealers. Men who not only used the famed automatic bill counter, but got to a point where they were weighing money instead of counting it.

That Tony was Cuban only fit the Mariel Boatlift plot device at the beginning; he could have been Colombian, Mexican or Jamaican, among others. That Tony suffered hubris and met his demise reflected events that were far too common. That he died in a hail of automatic weapons and that military style arms were used was also not an atypical death for one of these guys. Rocket launchers, hand grenades, armor piercing rounds--all occasionally used against adversaries.

Tony's descent into madness and paranoia was also typical of cocaine addiction--while most people don't suffer as flashy an end as Tony, thousands and thousands of people ended up as addled as he.

So for those of you out there who think this all just a big overwrought exercise in excess, think again.

There Was a Crooked Man... (1970)

Too black for comedy, too upbeat for tragedy

[5/10 · 11 February 2007]

We've seen this film many times before--a villain double crosses his partners one by one and ultimately meets his deserved demise. What doesn't work here is that we are expected to be sympathetic toward the Kirk Douglas character who is the most unrepentant antihero I can think of.

Sure, Douglas plays him at the height of his career, when his charm, looks and charisma were legendary, but even though he plays him upbeat and humorous, the weight of his treachery upsets any balance that might have us liking the guy.

Conversely, the score is typical upbeat Western fare of that era, and would sound quite at home on an old episode of Bonanza. We're assailed with swelling harmonica riffs, followed by the bright orchestrals that are a hallmark of that period. When the final body count is tallied, it becomes very clear that a score like this doesn't belong in a movie like this.

What does work well in this film is the performances of the secondary figures who make up an almost who's who of great 1970s character actors. Not an ensemble piece, but hardly a face goes by (including some extras) that you don't recognize. There's an old lifer played by Burgess Meridith, a turnkey played by Alan Hale ("Skipper" from Gilligan's Island), Hume Cronyn and that Carl Reiner lookalike John Randolph play a couple of con men, and even one background character is played by the great Jack Elam.

In one entertaining vignette, Burgess Meridith hams it up as very reluctant recipient of a much needed bath. Apparently he hasn't taken off his union suit in thirty-five years. However, such light moments are offset by dark ones; later on in the film during the jailbreak, Meridith's character gut shoots Hale's character, despite the fact that two seem to be old chums.

The ending of this movie is anticlimactic--its a foregone conclusion that Douglas'character will pay, but its more an act of serendipity than the expected confrontation between he and his pursuer, a prison warden played by Henry Fonda. The "moral" of the story, that even a stand up fellow like Fonda can be lured by greed seems tacked on.

Sadly, had this film been shot with the same actors, but by a director like Sergio Leone who would matched the tone of the movie (particularly the score) to the darkness of the movie's content, it might have worked. As it stands, it is flawed and it fails.

Extras (2005–2007)

American View of a Very Funny Britcom

[8/10 · 10 February 2007]

"Extras" is a British situation comedy created by Ricky Gervais, famous for creating "The Office", a British production that the American "Office" is based on.

Now showing on HBO, "Extras" tells the story of an actor who has been relegated to playing as an extra, typically with no speaking parts, and his struggle to make it in the rough and tumble world of BBC television.

In the first season, we are treated to Gervais' character arguing with other extras as to whether or not they had ever actually said a line during a show. The holy grail for these marginal actors is to get a speaking part--any extra who gets it is sure to lord it over the other extras.

Ultimately, Gervais character writes a thick-headed sitcom full of low humor and catchphrases, and the BBC buys it and casts Gervais as the lead character, complete with stupid catch phrase, fright wig and owl-eye glasses-because the producers insist they make him "funnier".

The hallmark of this show is feature appearances by famous celebrities, who unfailingly act like complete idiots--Orlando Bloom is obsessed with being hotter than Johnny Depp; Daniel Radcliffe (Harry Potter) is an oversexed teen hitting on all females in range; Ian McKellan (Gandalf from LOTR) explains his acting method in a bit that is reminiscent of the "this amplifier goes up to 11" bit in Spinal Tap. One of the funniest appearances is by Patrick Stewart, who makes Star Trek references to Brits unfamiliar with the show, and whose pet project has himself playing a man endowed with superpowers that allow him to make women's clothes fall off.

Many of the actors are also British TV actors who Americans may or may not be familiar with, but they all parody themselves mercilessly.

Surrounding Gervais is a supporting cast that includes a very clueless platonic girlfriend, an astoundingly inept agent, and various other extras who are hugely jealous of Gervais (albeit sellout) success.

Definitely worth a watch, and if you have HBO on demand you can look up old episodes to catch up.

The Ring (2002)

Ring introduced new horror genre

[8/10 · 1 February 2007]

When I first saw The Ring, I had yet to see other films of that type, such as the original Japanese films, The Grudge and Dark Water.

For me, the film introduced the creepy, malevolent water child with jet black hair. Just the way the thing crawled around was frightening, and I had goosebumps throughout the film, which I saw on TV.

Although I grew up in Seattle, it was hard to recognize the dark, Gothic locations, particularly the island where the child grew up. I knew where it was, but I never associated that island with anything that dark and foreboding.

This film is truly scary, and I recommend it to anyone who wants to see a good non-slasher type of horror film. Its one of the few horror films that I have seen in recent years that I would go back and watch a second time.

There's Something About Mary (1998)

Getting your twig and berries caught in a zipper is not funny....

[10/10 · 1 February 2007]

...but watching the "Oh sweet Jesus" reaction to the people who see it is priceless.

I mean, its just downright tragic what happen's to poor Ben Stiller's character, but the "you gotta see this" attitude displayed by the cops and firemen who show up is what makes "There's Something about Mary" into the comedy gem that it is.

Incongruities, perfectly timed incongruities are what makes this film tick, and the Farelly brothers showed the importance of editing, timing and context that make this film one of the funniest comedies of all time. In lesser hands, this material might have become consigned to the bin where all tasteless, stupid and sophomoric films lie; it is tasteless, stupid and sophomoric... and pure genius.

When you look at comedy classics like "Some Like it Hot" or "It Happened One Night", the material is less funny to the modern film-goer, but they remain funny because the interplay between characters and the editing are rock solid. Its all about the delivery.

Years back, my wife and I were film buffs--we saw all the art-house stuff as well as the mainstream films. Today, we may see three or four movies a year in the theater. We saw "There's Something About Mary" after it had gone to HBO, and we both had tears coming down our faces. We hadn't read any reviews, nor had any of our friends spoiled it for us, so we saw it cold, unprepared for the level of hilarity.

One of my favorite lines: "You said she was cute as a button!"

"No, I said butt plug...she's heinous."

City of God (2002)

People actually hate this film

[10/10 · 1 February 2007]

Whenever I look up a film on IMDb, I typically go to the "hated it" category and see 1) who is panning it, and 2) what other films they have reviewed and whether or not I share common tastes with the reviewer. Sadly, IMDb doesn't do a good job of filtering out trolls, so there is going to be one star reviews for Citizen Kane type films that aren't really serious, only an attempt to get under people's skin, or possibly an attempt to knock a film down on the Top 250.

I also discount the "worst film of all time/I wasted two hours of my life" kind of reviews as attempts by the writer to get you to read their review. Besides, that approach is tired and cliché.

City of God is the type of film that I can honestly only think of two type of "serious" negative reviews: People who are offended by the violence, and perhaps individuals who are dyslexic and can't keep up with the subtitles. For everyone else, this is patently a great, entertaining film.

I try to rent this film at least once a year, and will watch it when it comes on Sundance or IFC. Aside from the technical aspects of the film, it is a great and compelling story.

If you enjoy great gangster films like the Godfather or Goodfellas, you need to rent City of God as soon as you can. You won't regret it.

Firewall (2006)

Great movie idea ruined by poor editing

[6/10 · 1 February 2007]

Firewall had the makings of a great movie, unfortunately screen time that should have been devoted to the technical aspects of the film were replaced by scenes that could appear in any stock action flick.

The opening credits hint at an ongoing scheme to both steal Ford's character's identity and find out all the details of his life. We're shown snippets of spy camera shots of Ford at work, documents that he has shredded being re-assembled, etc. That the "normal" means of identity theft would work against a guy whose entire career is built around maintaining the security and integrity of sensitive information seems implausible.

The criminals who take over Ford's house show up with all sorts of high-tech equipment, but other than survelling Ford at work, they don't really do much of anything with it, and when they blackmail Ford into providing them with secure info from the bank, they don't seem to have a plan as to how to use it. Despite hints at breaking through the bank's security by disabling the "firewall" of the title, the money is ultimately gotten by stealing account numbers then doing a routine wire transfer.

Instead of spending any time on the nuts and bolts of breaking through the system a la Sneakers, Hackers or any of the similar films about breaking into a secured system, we are treated with scene after scene showing us what brutal homicidal thugs these guys are. Its a routine set-up that prepares us emotionally for the satisfying climactic scene where the criminals meet their deserved end. When the end comes and the head bad guy gets his comeuppance with a pickaxe "Hills have Eyes" style, it left me shaking my head at all the loose ends that were never tied up as the credits roll.

For example, Ford is supposedly set up to take the fall for the bank heist, yet the bad boys inexplicably decide to kill him. They leave a message from his wife on another character's answering machine (who the hell uses a tape answering machine anymore?) that makes it appear that the wife is having an affair with that person. They shoot the guy with Ford's gun to make it appear that Ford has killed the man in a fit of jealous rage, but then why kill Ford's character? The criminals are supposedly technical masterminds, yet despite their attempts at covering their tracks, they leave behind clue after clue, dead bodies, bloodstains, fingerprints, etc., that would scream at the most ham-fisted investigator that funny business is afoot.

A shame that an otherwise promising premise is ultimately sabotaged into a routine action flick.

Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (2005)

Everyone got shortchanged

[5/10 · 28 January 2007]

For the apologists for this movie, I have to admit they have a point. The special effects are exemplary, and to the non-Potter reader, it certainly is an eyeful.

For all the British schoolchildren who are Potter maniacs and have universally expressed their extreme displeasure, I feel your pain. Goblet of Fire is my favorite of the Harry Potter books, and it is a pleasure to read the extreme detail and careful subplots that JK Rowling has crafted.

The biggest loser, however, was anyone with a financial stake in the movie: Rowling, the studio, and the investors.

Originally, GOF was planned as a two-parter, to be filmed simultaneously like the Lord of the Rings trilogy. The two parts could have been released 8 or so months apart, and would have effectively doubled the income from the film--had it been true to the book, repeat viewings and increased DVD sales might have tripled that income.

Unfortunately for both the fans of the book and the monied interests, the director was talked into condensing the book into one film, and the result is less than satisfying to all concerned. During filming, JK Rowling was either pregnant or had just given birth, so her attention was expectedly elsewhere, but I don't doubt that if she was giving her full attention to the film she would have insisted on a two-parter.

Given the reaction of her fans to the movie, I am sure she has some second thoughts about that decision.

Saving Private Ryan (1998)

Gut wrenching depiction of Normandy invasion

[9/10 · 28 January 2007]

Reading several of the negative comments about this film, I concluded that they could be grouped into a handful of categories, the pedantic, the America haters, and those who find innate fault with the Spielbergian tendency to manipulate the audience. For those in the Spielberg hating camp, I would ask, What do you expect? Audience manipulation is every bit a hallmark of a Spielberg film as a sappy ending is to a Capra film or existential Jewish angst is to an Allen film.

As for the other two categories, it doesn't pretend to be an historically accurate film, it is a dramatization. For the people that feel that Spielberg depicts the Americans as purely good or the Germans as purely evil, I would ask you to go back to two scenes, one where GIs summarily execute a surrendering German, and second, the look of compassion in the eyes of the German sniper when the GI he has just shot is trying to hand off a letter to his family.

That said, I would focus on the technical aspects of the film. The initial scene of the invasion looks just like first hand accounts of the Omaha beach invasion I have read. Veterans of the landing who have seen the film have attested to the authentic look and feel of the film. Perhaps what I find most striking is Spielberg's use of old style cameras and film stock that give the movie an old newsreel type flavor.

I won't argue with anyone who accuses the actual mission as being unrealistic--I would say that the mission itself is secondary to the storytelling art. It takes little vignettes assembled from stories I have heard over and over from WW2 vets and tells them succinctly.

Hank's character suffers from PTSD, known then as "battle fatigue" ; Vin Diesel's character was the guy who forgot for one second to keep his head down and it cost him; the interpreter overcomes his initial cowardice after it costs his buddy's life; overcome with emotion, another character wants to summarily execute an unarmed German, but is talked out of it; two opposing soldiers who have lost their arms attack each other hand to hand. All of these stories are archetypal and universal among veterans who survived the war.

These characters represent the amalgam of experience of all combat soldiers; similar to Platoon, its unrealistic to believe that one small group of soldiers experienced them all, but as a dramatization the story is excellently filmed and told.