Entry#161: Fury

Trailer

I have mixed thoughts on Fritz Lang. While his earlier films are visually stupendous, the characters and stories are, for the most part, pretty lacking - especially in his later films. This film, Fury, marks the German director's first picture made within the U.S. At first, Lang found it incredibly difficult to work in the U.S. as MGM, the company he worked with, often canceled his projects because they were "too dark" or "too provocative". In fact, Lang was getting ready to leave MGM when he found the script for Fury. So, finally finding a script that both he and the studio executives liked, Lang was able to make his first feature-length film in America. It's a shame, then, that the film isn't actually that good...

In Fury, we follow two lovebirds, Katherine and Joe, who are planning to be married ASAP. After an unspecified amount of time, Joe finds himself a job, a car, and the eagerness to use his newfound wealth to marry his fiancee. However, Joe's hopeful plans for the future are dashed after he's arrested on circumstantial evidence that suggests he, along with two other supposed men, kidnapped a young girl for ransom. Despite claims that he's been mistaken for someone else, an angry mob forms and tries to do whatever it can to make Joe face the death sentence.

The concept for the film's interesting and definitely relevant, but it lacks any concrete or memorable characters to support it. Joe, Katherine, and Joe's brothers? Are these lacking characters really our backbone for the film? They're bland cookie-cutters, sadly, and it makes it really hard to care about what's going on in the film. Not only that, but it isn't as if this film were the only one to speak out against mob violence. Even Lang's previous films, such as M, targeted these issues in a manner that was much more satisfying than Fury. For example, I'd much rather re-read To Kill A Mockingbird - a story with the same moral AND great characters - than watch the forgettable Fury again.

MGM's bothersome intrusions can also be seen in this film. Events such as Joe reconciling with Katherine, forgiving the mob (partially), and having a kiss to end the film would have NEVER happened in a Fritz Lang film. The whole thing reeks of MGM's demands for "family-friendly" entertainment that remained on an "upbeat and optimistic" level. I sympathize with Lang here, as MGM used to have a reputation back in the day for censoring other peoples' work. Just look at the Marx brothers' A Night At The Opera - it's so tame when compared to their earlier work.

I'll admit, however, that Lang was able to create some decent visuals for this film. They're fluid and they get the job done, but I wouldn't call them spectacular or anywhere near his earlier work. Still, I thought the sequences involving the burning down of the jailhouse and Joe being haunted by the ghosts of his perpetrators were innovative for a 1930's film.

Fury is a pretty poor film. It sports some good performances and decent visuals, but the rest of the film feels hollow, censored, and lacking in strong themes or characters.

Entry#160: Barry Lyndon

Trailer

I've said it once and I'll say it again - Stanley Kubrick is one of the greatest directors that ever lived. His career started off with straight-forward narratives (such as The Killing), but Kubrick soon started making some of the atmospheric and contemplative films known to man (such as 2001: A Space Odyssey or A Clockwork Orange). This film, based on the novel by William Makepeace Thackeray, is no exception to Kubrick's greatness and superb talent in filmmaking.

In the film, we follow the roguish, yet lovable, Redmond Barry - an 18th century Irish adventure, particularly his rise and fall in English society. Starting off as a lonely and poverty-stricken boy, Barry's hopes and dreams are only limited to marrying the 'love of his life', Nora Brady. Once an English official steps in for Nora's hand, however, Barry steps up to the plate and challenges the officer to a pistol duel. Seemingly killing the officer, Barry is forced to flee his hometown until matters cool down. The rest of the film follows Barry as he joins various armies, fights in the Seven Years' War, becomes a devious gambler, and slowly climbs the social ladder of 18th century Europe.

This Kubrick at his best, as always, so virtually everything in the film is sheer perfection. The characters are complex and well-written, or adapted, and everything from the script to the performances only enhance the quality of these characters. Barry Lyndon, our leading man, isn't exactly a moral or decisive figure, but he's in touch with the "scoundrels" and "romantic rogues" that the Romanticism movement was absolutely fond of. Whether we're meeting new faces or losing familiar ones, Barry Lyndon's excellence in character is evident even in the supporting cast. It's the perfect film for character-lovers and character actors.

The visuals are, as always, innovative and relishing. The innovation for this film comes from the fact that, aside from a few sequences, the majority of the film was shot using only natural lighting. That's right - virtually everything you see was shot without artificial lighting of any sort. This is especially evident during the candle-lit scenes, which bounce light off of the characters' faces while creating an interesting atmosphere. Even if you ignore the innovation, the film's still a visual spectacle. With Kubrick's signature long takes and tracking shots, he's able to create a film that looks absolutely breathtaking and real. As Richard Schickel stated, the film's "an uncompromising artistic vision".

At first, I didn't know how to feel about the film's narration from an omniscient, but not impartial, narrator. I'm not a big fan of narrators, and Kubrick's film The Killing was hurt by narration, so it took a me a few hours after finishing the film to decide how I felt about it. After some thought, I realized that the film needs the narration just as 2001: A Space Odyssey needed its brilliant classical score. If Barry Lyndon didn't have narration, it'd be feel very empty and would require some big changes to characters' dialogue. Thankfully, the narration is very poetic and reminiscent of Thackeray's style of writing, making it fit the film like a glove.

Despite having a runtime of three hours, I was never bored by this film. It's elegant, stylish, and has a brilliant cast and script. It's slow-moving, yet the film never drags or tries to stretch anything out for more than it's worth.

All in all, Barry Lyndon is a romantic masterpiece. Brilliant characters, fantastic writing, beautiful visuals - I can't stop singing this film's praises. Without a doubt, the film's another Kubrick achievement.

Entry#159: Night of the Demon

Trailer

I'm not usually a huge fan of 1950's horror, but Night of The Demon certainly impressed me. Instead of using the typical B-horror concepts or cliches, the film is surprisingly mature and thoughtful with its subject matter. The film can still be quite cheesy, granted, but it's leagues better than any 1950's horror movie that I've ever seen. It's also interesting to note that, despite how obscure it is, the film has influenced several big-name directors, including Sam Raimi and his film Drag Me To Hell.

The film follows skeptical Dr. John Holden, a psychology major and paranormal debunker, that travels to Britain after the mysterious and gruesome death of Professor Henry Harrington. Though the police believe he was electrocuted by a fallen powerline, the locals and the late professor's niece, Joanna, think that darker and more sinister works were behind the professor's death. As Holden investigates the professor's death, initially being very skeptical of anything involved with cults or ancient demons, the presence of a dark cult leader and an unseen shadow leads to a mystery that may make even Holden a believer in the supernatural.

The script and characters are, surprisingly, very literate and intelligent for a 1950's horror film. In a decade filled with films like Plan 9 From Outer Space and The Atomic Man, Night of The Demon brings some classic horror back to an age where sci-fi horror had become all the rage. Back to the film, the characters, while not entirely memorable, are interesting enough to hold one's attention throughout the film. The concept of paranormal investigators and demons have been around for ages and still, to this day, are effective storytelling means. The concept and the characters aren't brilliant, but they're certainly very good.

The visuals look great, which is, again, surprising for a film of this genre during the 1950's. It's black, moody, and the washy effects used make the film feel as much like a drama as it does a horror. The visuals are at their best, perhaps, when we see Holden running away from the demon in the dark woods. It's human fear at its best - the thought of being chased down by an entity that you can't see and couldn't possibly understand.

However, as interesting as the film is, it's not without its cheesy moments. The seance, for example, was painful to watch because of how much the medium was over-acting. It wasn't creepy, it wasn't cool, nor was it atmospheric - it was just lame. Another example would be the sequence when Holden almost loses the cursed paper to a fire. I don't know why, but for some reason, the idea of paper flying away to a sweeping musical score just seems rather silly.

The film, sadly, also commits one of the greatest monster movie sins ever - they show the demon, in a full close-up, during the first five minutes of the film. I don't have a problem with catching a glimpse of a monster (or person) near the end of a horror movie (see Halloween, Paranormal Activity, etc.), but revealing the big baddie within the first few minutes really kills momentum. Not only that, but the demon doesn't even look that great to begin with. It's got an interesting design and all, but it's easy to tell how fake the creature is.

Overall, Night of The Demon's a pretty good horror flick. It's not great or brilliant, as the cheesiness factor and poor creature-puppets show, but the film's literate and interesting script make for a film that's worth watching.

Entry#158: Vampyr

Trailer

If anything can be said about Carl Theodor Dreyer's Vampyr, it's that the film's incredibly atmospheric, gothic, and hypnotically dream-like. What's interesting to note is that, despite being a "talkie", the film borrows many techniques and elements from silent film. The cinematography and dark mood resemble films like Nosferatu and The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari, but Dreyer adds elements of his own style which allows Vampyr to stand on its own as an enjoyable and mesmerizing gothic horror film.

The film follows the quiet Allan Gray, a scholar of the occult and supernatural, as he checks into an eerie country-side inn. The night of his arrival, after finally getting to sleep, Gray is awakened suddenly by an old man who enters into his room. Saying only a few cryptic words, the man leaves a package in Gray's room marked "To be opened upon my death". Gray takes the package and ventures outside as he's soon led by a band of shadows to a desolate castle and nearby manor. The rest of the film follows Gray's paranormal experiences with shadows, bizarre dreams, and mysterious vampires.

The visuals are, by far, the best aspect of this film. Using special blurring techniques and a slow-moving camera, the film feels like it's been ripped straight out of a gothic horror novel. The imagery and mood are particularly effective, as the film's dream-like haziness creates an atmosphere that few films have ever achieved. Not only is the camerawork very effective, but the use of both intertitles and recorded sound make for an interesting and dark combination. In other words, the film feels and looks like a silent film, but the use of recorded voices, all of which sound like a dreamy echo, add to the eeriness of Vampyr.

This isn't necessarily a character-piece, so characters don't mean too much to the filmmaker. That said, though, the film has some interesting faces and Allan Gray's character bares a striking resemblance to H.P Lovecraft - arguably one of the greatest horror writers to ever live. This may not mean much to most people, but for a Lovecraft fan, it's like watching one of his stories come to life.

Sadly, the film isn't without faults. While Vampyr is very fascinating and has an amazing sense of style, the narrative feels very disjointed and confused. I understand the film's supposed to feel like a dream, but sacrificing coherence for style isn't usually the best idea. It alienates an audience and makes the film seem like it's indulging itself. Not only that, but the film becomes far more conventional afer reaching the halfway mark. It's still gothic and stylish, but the morality becomes more black-and-white and the ending feels totally predictable.

Vampyr is a very good film but it's not necessarily great. The atmosphere's fantastic and the subject matter is intriguing, but the characters feel only slightly important and the narrative feels more confused and less creative after reaching the halfway mark. It's not as revolutionary or marvelous as Nosferatu, but it'll still please fans of gothic horror.

Entry#157: Seven Samurai

Trailer

Seven Samurai is both hailed as Akira Kurosawa's magnum opus and as one of the greatest films ever made. Having just finished the film, I probably wouldn't agree with either of those statements. I will admit, however, that the film's indeed fantastic and a certifiable landmark in cinematic history. Incredibly innovative in its execution of narrative, the film created and aided several tropes into becoming household cliches for the next 50+ years. Despite not being Kurosawa's best work, the film's still a grand sweeping adventure.

The film starts with the revelation that a small village, comprised of only farmers and peasants, is going to be attacked by marauding bandits as soon as harvest time has come to an end. This news leaves the villagers divided about whether to surrender to the thieves or to fight back against the bandits. Consulting the village elder, the decision is made to hire masterless samurai, or ronin, to protect the villagers from the upcoming bandit attack. A fellowship of seven samurai is soon made, each with a distinct personality, and the film follows the group as they begin to form, prepare for the oncoming battle, and reflect on their respective lives.

The film is very character-orientated, there's no denying that. Each of the samurai has their own distinct personality and they're all likable in their own way. Kambei, for instance, represents the wise old sage of the seven samurai - he's cool and collected in the heat of battle but has slowly become war-weary over the years. Kikuchiyo, on the other hand, is a temperamental and zany warrior that gives off a sense of humor and deadly skill. All of the samurai are interesting characters are interesting, but, if for some reason, you aren't a fan of one samurai, you'll certainly be able to identify with another. Even in the quieter moments, such as when Katsushiro passes Kikuchiyo at the well, you can feel the subtle use of emotion portrayed through the script and through the actors.

The visuals are also quite fluid - especially for a 1950's film. The camerawork shows off the details of the countryside and the details on the samurai's faces. Before Sergio Leone ever got into the movie business, Akira Kurosawa started using the wide closeups in this film to convey style and emotion without using any dialogue. I'm not saying Sergio Leone copied or ripped off Kurosawa, because I adore Leone and he's my favorite director of all-time, but it's easy to see some of Leone's influences in this film. Another interesting thing to note about Kurosawa's visuals is how he portrays violence in his films. Unlike in most films, where the violence romanticized in some form, the violence in Kurosawa's film are completely chaotic and unshaped by camera lenses. The screen feels cluttered, hectic, and the sheer chaos that results from the violence is probably more realistic than most action films.

The film is definitely long. At a runtime of 3 1/2 hours, the film's not a picnic when it comes to maintaining patience during the slower sequences. Because of how streamlined the action and characters are, the film surprisingly doesn't drag that often because of how enrapturing the setup is. It does drag sometimes, I'll admit, but these moments are worth sitting through for the better sequences.

Though the film suffers from a few hitches, Seven Samurai is a fantastic film directed by a fantastic director. Genre-spanning, cliche-creating, and innovative, the film helped to create the formal three-act structure that most films follow. It's a cinematic gem with few rough edges.

Entry#156: A Night at the Opera

Trailer

Ever since I saw Duck Soup, I've been absolutely in love with the Marx brothers and their sense of humor. Anarchic, pitiless, bold, and hysterical with their play-on-words, the brothers have a style that's firmly withstood the tests of time and has remained just as hilarious throughout the years. Duck Soup, to me, will always be their magnum opus and my favorite comedy of all-time, as it's simply perfect in every way. Because of the success of previous Marx brothers films and a meet-in with an MGM executive, MGM eventually took the Marx brothers from Paramount to create new films. However, because MGM was more family-orientated than Paramount, some drastic changes were made. The mean-spirited nature of the humor was gone, Zeppo was gone, the characters were made more sympathetic, musical numbers were added, etc. and so forth.

The film follows our lovable rogues, Groucho, Chico, and Harpo, in a tale that revolves around the culture of the upper-class and of the opera. None of the men start with a huge part in the plot but, as the film progresses, the brothers band together to help a young couple stay together despite the advances of a dubious third man. In typical fashion, jokes are hurled, clever gags are used, and the film retains an atmosphere of fun and humor.

While not at their 'A-game', the Marx brothers are still very funny in A Night at the Opera. All three of the brothers use their respective and clever styles of humor - Groucho with the one-liners, Harpo with the silent humor, and Chico with the dialect and language humor. They're all very humorous when alone, but united they remain one of the greatest comedy trios since Mickey, Donald, and Goofy. In fact, cartoon-like humans are words that would exactly describe the Marx brothers. They're over-the-top, larger than life, and have a very theatrical feeling that makes them so lovable. Goofy and clever as always, the brothers still prove to be some of the greatest comedy masterminds that the world has ever seen...

The technical aspects are, thanks to MGM, very advanced for a Marx brothers film. Take, for example, the sequence when Harpo trapezes around the backstages of the opera house. Regardless of whether a stutnt double was used or not, this sequence is leagues ahead of anything that the brothers could have achieved through Paramount. The sets are larger, the scales are larger, and a bigger world simply translates into a bigger set of targets for the Marx brothers.

The main problems I have with this film, however, derive from MGM's interference with the Marx brothers' style. Because they wanted to make the group more accessible, many things about the humor and characters were changed. For example, the brothers could no longer poke fun at someone unless that individual, man or woman, had previously done something to deserve the torment. If that person was "morally unquestionable", than the brothers were barred from mocking the person at all. Not only that, but the executives demanded that the brothers have "motivations" and "challenges" now. Instead of having an anarchic and silly mess, which is what the Marx brothers symbolize, they're forced to go through plot points and aid with the serious subplot of the film. Speaking of which, this dramatic and overly serious subplot was added in to make the film more friendly to the average viewer. So now, not only are the brothers slightly censored but they're forced to take a part in a dull narrative - a narrative that tries to make them "friendlier". What made the Marx brothers geniuses in Duck Soup was their boldness. They could make fun of anything, anyone, and any idea and not have to have any motivation for it. They lived and laughed for the simple love of living and laughing. Adding unnecessary meaning to the Marx brothers is simply ridiculous.

Still, as aggravating as the changes and bland music numbers were, I'll admit that the romantic leads were slightly charming. It wasn't anything new but, as a wise man once said, "there's nothing new under the sun". In other words, it doesn't have to be new in order to be enjoyable or entertaining.

A Night at the Opera is a fun movie with silly and lovable characters. Though the censorship of the humor and the other dramatic changes are really irksome and idiotic, the film's still great and enjoyable for all that it does right.

Entry#155: Caro Diario

Trailer

Caro Diario is, without saying, a very personal and human film. I hadn't heard of Nanni Moretti until this film, but I can understand why the director has such an appeal in the indie and Italian market. Instead of this film being a narrative, or a short collection of stories, that revolve around fictional characters, this film is a series of reenactments of real-life events that happened to director Nanni Moretti. In fact, most of the film is comprised of exploring the countryside and discussing American cinema and television, specifically Henry: Portrait of A Serial Killer and The Bold and The Beautiful.

We're given three entries from Moretti's diary in this film - the first deals with the beauty of Italy, dance, and film, the second deals with finding a location to shoot a new film, and the final deals with Moretti fighting a year-long illness. Though these events are obviously exaggerated, the film intends to comfort, humor, and amuse us with its lovable quirkiness.

I admired this film mostly because of the interesting Nanni Moretti and concept. The idea of following a real man in his life, rather than characters or symbols, is creative and truly provides a unique experience. Watching Moretti discuss his experiences in exploring, filming, and critiquing film is like meeting an interesting stranger at the airport. You may not know the man, but his stories are nonetheless fascinating and entertaining.

That said, the film feels very, very disjointed. I understand the film's supposed to follow everyday-life, but it often feels repetitive in the way that the idea is executed. For instance, in the first third of the film, we're basically just watching Moretti drive from place to place in his Vespa. He drives to such-and-such, makes some observational and witty comments, moves on - it's rinse and repeat. This may be interesting at some points, but it can feel very bothersome and dull at other points.

There isn't too much else that can be said about the film. As it's focused solely on Moretti's life, aspects like cinematography and atmosphere don't mean much in this film. I would like to say, however, that the landscape in Italy is absolutely beautiful, and the camerawork really captures that essence of beauty in the countryside and in the people. Caro Diario, while a heavily disjointed and messy film, is pretty enjoyable for what it does right. It's not bad, but I wouldn't say it's pretty good either, which leaves the film to fall somewhere in that region of "fair" to "OK".