Classic Movie Quinella – ‘HEY, ARNOLD!’: A Schwarzenegger Marathon – See You At The Party

Since the doors first opened in August of 2013, Alamo Drafthouse Yonkers has hosted four fantastic actor-centric marathons: Caged, Stallone Zone, Van Dammage, and Burt Day (aka Cristina Cacioppo‘s Westchester curtain call).

Enter 2017.  New Year.  New programmer.  New marathon.

Lovingly curated by Justin LaLiberty, “Hey, Arnold!” was an epic half-day celebration consisting of five mystery Schwarzenegger films, all on 35mm prints, spanning ten years of the prime of his career (and sparking such debates as “Which Arnold is better: beard or no beard?”  …Actually, that’s not a debate at all.  Bearded Arnold is clearly superior).

And if that weren’t enough, there was, in fact, a giant cake (which was delicious, by the way) to celebrate his upcoming 70th birthday, among other surprises.

At this point, the man himself needs little introduction, so let’s jump in.

 

Movie #1: ‘True Lies’ (1994)

It sounds weird to say because he’s been so influential (for better or worse), but, since his directorial debut in 1981 (which he’d rather you forget), James Cameron has put only eight feature films under his belt, which makes the fact that Arnold has starred in three of them even more significant.  Frankly, I’d say True Lies is the last Cameron movie worth watching, but that’s a different discussion.

This was the longest film of the day (and second longest of Arnold’s career, behind T2), which was good, because when you’re stuck to your seat for ten hours, you’d rather get the biggest chunk out of the way first.

Anyway, True Lies is a movie I’ve seen the third act of perhaps dozens of times, as it was a cable staple of the 2000s, so it was definitely worth seeing in it’s entirety, as there was much I either didn’t remember or straight up hadn’t seen (like the fact that a good chunk of the move is in Washington D.C.).

A remake of the 1991 French hit La totale ! (which I totally did not learn just now), True Lies is a top notch 90s action thriller that’s also unafraid of laying the comedy on thick.  I particularly enjoy the long, slow push-ins on Arnold’s steely eyes when he knows something the person he’s talking to does not.  It’s also a surprisingly grounded film given its over the top nature.  Honestly, the only element that took me out of the movie was the fact that Charlton Heston’s character had a patch over his obviously scarred eye, as if he walked in from the set of a different movie.

Really though, the magic of True Lies, other than the action set-pieces and ‘splosions, is that just about everyone in the cast is used appropriately, from Schwarzenegger and Jamie Lee Curtis, to Tia Carrere and Art Malik, to Tom Arnold (fantastic in this) and the now late (sadly) Bill Paxton, everyone’s playing a part they can easily dive into.

It may not be the biggest and baddest Arnold movie in terms of a testosterone-fueled thrill ride, but it’s a very good action/comedy that a lot of people can appreciate (and that doesn’t even include the one-liners [Spoiler]).

Rating: ★★★★☆

 

Movie #2: ‘The Running Man’ (1987)

Ah, the far, distant, post-apocalyptic future of 2017!

You won’t hear me say The Running Man is bad, because it’s not.  It’s got a solid backbone of a Steven E. de Souza script (just look up his resume; it’s ridiculous), and a cast that’s chock-full of great character actors and action men.  I just can’t help but wonder if the movie could have been something more with a more visionary director at the helm.  Not that I blame Paul Michael Glaser.  Reportedly, producer Rob Cohen went through four other directors (including Andrew Davis, who got production off the ground but quickly went over budget and behind schedule; and who later would direct Arnold in Collateral Damage) before hiring Glaser to basically just get the movie done.

The final product of The Running Man is still eminently entertaining and audience-pleasing, even if not every visual concept works perfectly (it also receives bonus points for giving us some bearded Arnold, if only briefly).  Arnold is great, the rogues gallery is great, and the casting of Richard Dawson as an evil version of himself is a move that feels years ahead of its time (you could argue the movie stands on his shoulders more than anyone else; not to mention it leads to one of my favorite incidental lines from Aqua Teen Hunger Force).

The Running Man may not be an all-time great piece of science fiction (like another movie we’ll get to), but it’s no less influential (Hunger Games, anyone?), and, above all, it’s fun, especially with an audience.

Rating: ★★★★☆

Just before The Running Man started we all received one of these glasses, which was a generous and welcome surprise:

 

Movie #3: ‘Kindergarten Cop’ (1990)

This movie’s something of a miracle.

I mean, I don’t know about you, but if you pitched me Kindergarten Cop, a comedy/action film starring Arnold as an undercover police officer posing as a substitute kindergarten teacher (who has no experience) in order to track down the estranged family of a fugitive criminal, I’d tell you straight up that this concept has failure written all over it.

And yet, somehow, it works.

How much credit should go to whom, I don’t know, but given Ivan Reitman’s track record with Ghost Busters, wrangling that film together from three or four disparate creative visions, I’m going to bet he gets the lion’s share.

Anyway, Kindergarten Cop isn’t perfect.  It’s a bit uneven and a bit clunky at times (understandable given the elements it’s trying to hammer together), but, what little action there is is well executed, the comedy mostly works, and, again, it gets bonus points for some bearded Arnold action.

Frankly, the film’s biggest strength is that it never goes completely over the top (except maybe when Pamela Reed suddenly puts on an Austrian accent to maintain cover, but that’s not unforgivable).  There’s enough subtlety and realism in the plot, the characters, and, especially, the children, to hold everything together when a different movie would just come unglued.

It wasn’t my favorite of the day, but I’ll be less inclined to flip the channel on it in the future.

Rating: ★★★½

 

Movie #4: ‘Eraser’ (1996)

The world of film is not without its binary planets that eventually spin off onto different trajectories.  For example, the Coen Brothers collaborated with Sam Raimi earlier in their careers, but it was they, not Raimi, who went on to near-constant critical acclaim in the proceeding decades.

Similarly, Frank Darabont began his career writing with Chuck Russell, but it was he, not Russell, who went onto direct such films as The Shawshank Redemption and The Green Mile, whereas Chuck went on to direct The Mask.  Not that we have anything against Chuck Russell, because he also went on to direct a little movie called Eraser.

Every Alamo Drafthouse actor-centric marathon features at least one movie that throws people for a loop, and I’m going to say Eraser is the left field pick in this case, if for no other reason than one of my friends and I had completely discounted it as a possibility (mostly on account of the CGI reptiles).

However, I have to say, Eraser earned its keep.

It may not have been the best movie of the day, nor the best movie of Arnold’s career, but Eraser has a lot going for it.  Good villains, solid supporting characters, and enough mid-Nineties action to keep you going for a couple of hours.  Whatever elements that haven’t aged well are smoothed over by a rather impressive top-to-bottom cast (including James Caan, James Coburn, and James Cromwell, just to name a few) all putting in solid shifts.

It’ll hurt your brain if you think about it too hard, but, like most of Arnold’s movies, if you’re down for a fun ride, Eraser delivers.

Rating: ★★★½

 

Movie #5: ‘Total Recall’ (1990)

This film was the pièce de résistance, both for the day itself and for me personally, as I’d never seen it before.

Paul Verhoeven as a filmmaker (and perhaps in his life in general) is nothing if not provocative (I mean, if you haven’t seen Elle…it’s provocative), though, by his own standards, Total Recall may be his least provocative movie (you know, outside of all the horrific gore).

What Total Recall is, however, is an extremely successful sci-fi/action film; an all-time great, in my frank opinion.  I won’t claim to be an expert, but it’s generally accepted that Philip K. Dick is a difficult writer to translate from page to screen (e.g. Blade Runner‘s 10,000 different versions), but I’m going to take an educated guess that Total Recall is the best filmed adaptation of his work (or at the very least in the running for such an honor).

In all seriousness though, this is a big, bad, beautiful movie, full of amazing visuals (shot in Mexico, which worked well for Arnold before), bloody violence, and a wry sense of humor, while also featuring a good hard sci-fi story with plenty of twists and turns.  Total Recall is also a touch philosophical, asking the question of what makes us who we are, which I appreciate.

Naturally, of course, there’s more than a few familiar faces from Verhoeven’s other work (most notably Ronny Cox, Sharon Stone, and Michael Ironside).

On the one hand, I don’t know why it took me so long to see this one, but, on the other, I’m glad I got to see it for the first time in the same way everybody else did nearly three decades ago.

It’s a real treasure.

Rating: ★★★★½

 

So, that’s it; that’s all.  A great day all around.

Thanks again to Alamo Drafthouse Yonkers for hosting and Justin LaLiberty for curating, and to all the servers, runners, cooks, and bartenders who took care of all of us in the audience.  My “Mind Eraser” cocktail (whatever was in it) was quite enjoyable.

Unlike in the past, we know what next year’s marathon will be, and I couldn’t be more excited: Russellmania, here we come!

Classic Movie Review – ‘Planet of the Apes’ – Make America Ape Again

Original Release Date: April 3, 1968

Directed by Franklin J. Schaffner
Written
by Michael Wilson and Rod Serling, based on the novel La Planète des Singes aka Monkey Planet by Pierre Boulle
Cast: Charlton Heston, Roddy McDowall, Kim Hunter, Maurice Evans, James Whitmore, James Daly, Linda Harrison, Robert Gunner, Lou Wagner, Woodrow Parfrey, Jeff Burton, Buck Kartalian, Norman Burton
Soundtrack: Jerry Goldsmith

It’s no secret that 1968 is on record as one of the most volatile years in the history of the United States (save maybe for 1814, when the Redcoats actually burned down the White House).  From the Vietnam War, to the assassinations of MLK and RFK (and subsequent riots in the case of the former), to the violent demonstrations at the Democratic National Convention, much of the country was at a fever pitch.  And in the midst of this landscape of rancor, a movie like Planet of the Apes was released into the wild.  A film that, like many great science fiction stories, asks questions of the time in which it was written.

Even if you’ve never seen it, you’re likely familiar with Planet of the Apes through shear cultural osmosis.  You probably even know what the big twist is, which I was concerned about in relation to seeing the movie again, but I will emphatically say that knowing how the movie ends does not spoil the experience of watching it (it passes “The Usual Suspects test” with flying colors).

One thing I never realized before seeing it on the big screen is that one of the credited screenwriters for Planet of the Apes is Rod Serling, which makes perfect sense, given that he’s the man behind The Twilight Zone.  The movie is pretty much a feature-length episode of that show (except in color)

What also makes perfect sense is the movie’s use of a cold open.  I’m generally a fan of cold opens anyway, but the way it’s used in Planet of the Apes is perhaps the most logical application I’ve ever seen, because it establishes that the astronauts are on their way home (Charlton Heston aka “Taylor” is about to join his crew in hypersleep), before going to a space montage underneath the opening credits, then once the credits are done, the story moves to the crash landing on the mysterious planet.  Those are some quality creative decisions right there.

Anyway, as I said, Planet of the Apes is a classic science fiction story.  A crew of astronauts crash land on an unknown planet and discover that apes rule civilization while humans are feral animals.  Needless to say, the very existence of these outsiders threatens to unravel all of ape society.

The success of the movie, besides the story, comes down to two primary factors: the ape costumes/makeup (which, though dated, still largely work), and Charlton Heston.  Say what you want about his politics (although you might be surprised to learn he attended the March on Washington in 1963), Heston always had a commanding screen presence as an actor, and it’s put to full use in Planet of the Apes.  You can’t help but root for the guy, even if he’s kind of a weird jerk when the astronauts first arrive on the planet.  And I take issue with people who say he’s humorless.  Sure, you probably wouldn’t cast him in an out-and-out comedy, but he’s got a dry sense of humor that works in movies such as this.  I think one of my favorite moments is when he tells a young ape, “Don’t trust anyone over thirty.”

I’d also be remiss if I didn’t at least mention Jerry Goldsmith’s score, which could be described as avant-garde in all the right ways, and helping to generate a very primal tone (if not downright primordial at times, especially towards the beginning).

In the end, there’s not much more I can say that hasn’t already been said about this movie.  It may not be perfect, it may not have aged well in every respect, but it still works, and it still has plenty to say to us as a society.  And even if you’re not looking to generate a political dialogue, it’s plenty entertaining.  A great Saturday afternoon movie if there ever was one.

Rating: ★★★★☆


P.S.
Shoutout to Mondo Tees for these awesome shirts.  I’m totally wearing mine on Election Day.
Make America Ape Again

Classic Movie Shandy: ‘Ben-Hur’ (1959) & ‘Spartacus’ (1960) – Swords and Sandals and Stanley Kubrick

 

Hey everybody!

It’s been so long since I wrote anything, I almost forgot my password.  But, we’re here now, so let’s go!

I’m calling this dual review a “Shandy” because I’ll basically be reviewing both movies at the same time, as opposed to writing individual reviews.

Now, naturally, I saw both of these films on a big screen at the Alamo Drafthouse Theater [Yonkers].  Alamo is awesome; you should totally go if there’s one near you (I swear they’re not paying me to say this).

I had seen bits and pieces of both movies on television while in my youth, but I have to admit I was too young to appreciate them at such a young age.  These days, I’m in a much better position to identify their strengths and weaknesses.

But why review these movies together at all?  Well, other than taking place in pretty much the same era of history, and having the Romans as the bad guys, and being released theatrically within a year of each other, and both being over three hours long (Intermission!), there’d likely be no Spartacus had Kirk Douglas not been turned down for the role that Charlton Heston ultimately occupied as Ben-Hur (he didn’t get to be in one epic, so he just went and made his own; that’s pretty epic).  So, yeah, I think it makes some sense.

Just to quickly sum up the plots of these films, Ben-Hur stars Charlton Heston as a Jewish prince who is at odds with his Roman occupiers, and because of this ends up in all sorts of shenanigans until Jesus comes and and makes everything better and is also crucified.  Spartacus stars Kirk Douglas as a slave who is at odds with his Roman occupiers, and because of this ends up in all sorts of shenanigans, but is unfortunately unable to make everything better and is also crucified (SPOILERS!  Oh, wait, I should have put that before.  Whatever).

If I only had one sentence to compare Ben-Hur and Spartacus, it would be this: Ben-Hur is a better film, but Spartacus is a better movie.

What I mean by that is that Ben-Hur, from an artistic standpoint, is more complete in the execution of its vision.  The writing, acting, direction, and visuals work in near-perfect concert (it didn’t win 11 Academy Awards for nothing).  But, it’s largely slow-paced, which means you do feel it’s massive length.  Spartacus, on the other hand, hardly ever lingers, its plot almost constantly in motion, which makes for terrific viewing, but it does suffer at times from strange creative decisions, mostly casting-related (I’m so sorry, John Gavin, but I don’t buy you as Julius Caesar one bit).

This contrast largely has to do with the men who directed these films (and produced, in the case of Spartacus).  William Wyler, director of Ben-Hur, began directing shorts and some features in the Silent Era, so his overall style is highly reflective of “Old Hollywood” (other than Ben-Hur, perhaps his most famous film is ‘The Best Years of Our Lives’, another epic-length Oscar-grabber).  Although it wasn’t his last hit, Ben-Hur essentially is the beginning of Wyler’s twilight, as he would direct only five more movies afterward (out of roughly seventy career credits).

Stanley Kubrick, on the other hand, has roughly one-fifth the career credits of William Wyler (he would only direct eight more films after Spartacus), but with Kubrick it truly is about quality over quantity.  Kubrick is a quintessential “New Hollywood” director, having started his career in the 1950s and pretty much directing two or three highly influential films in each of the following three decades. However, Spartacus is something of an asterisk film for him, as it was not his project from the outset, but rather he was brought on by Kirk Douglas (the executive producer as well as lead actor) after his firing of the original director.  The lack of complete creative control (which Kubrick would maintain for the rest of his career) is evident; there are scenes which feel as if they could be perfectly inter-cut with Ben-Hur.  Because of Kubrick’s involvement, Spartacus is a movie which often but not always feels ahead of its time, but for him it feels like a overall step back compared with his previous film, ‘Paths of Glory‘ (also starring and produced by Kirk Douglas).

Overall, I have to rather strongly recommend both epic movies, particularly if you’ve never seen them before.  And if you’re into the history of film, then you definitely need to see them.  Although Ben-Hur is slow-paced overall, the Chariot Race is a wonderful centerpiece; quite frankly it’s one of the most visually stunning action sequences ever put to film.  I don’t know if I can say much more about it that hasn’t been said already, but I have to give William Wyler credit for making a rather progressive creative decision by not adding any music to the scene, giving it an even greater sense of realism (he could have easily asked composer Miklós Rózsa to “Mickey Mouse” it, but he made the right choice).  And Spartacus, well, it’s quite a lot of fun, and although there are some questionable casting choices, overall the performances are quality.  Kirk Douglas’s natural screen presence and likability do a lot for the film, and having an old pro like Laurence Olivier as your main villain is never a bad thing.

Go watch ’em!

Ben-Hur:
★★★★½

Spartacus:
★★★★★