Willem Dafoe – People Talking

Quick Thoughts: ‘Parasite’ – ‘The Lighthouse’ – ‘Jojo Rabbit’ – ‘Dolemite Is My Name’

Just as a brief preamble, it’s been a pretty down year for movies, as far as I can see. Other than Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, nothing else has come close to being my favorite of 2019, but, all of the following four are standouts in their own way, and the first two in particular I bet will get some awards love.

From the director of Snowpiercer (a very entertaining movie with a questionable ending) comes a film that I think is getting a little overhyped in terms of the level of praise, but is nonetheless one of the best films of the year.

I say that because I was led to expect that Parasite would be totally mind-blowing, and, well, it didn’t quite reach that level for me (I mean I wouldn’t call it more successful than Burning in that regard), but it’s still a sight to behold (figuratively and literally; the cinematography is wonderful), and it did go places I didn’t expect, so I must give it that credit.

What really makes Parasite go though is the performances. As the plot essentially revolves around a long con, there’s a lot of acting on top of acting that could easily be overplayed, but this ensemble handles it with an impressive level of nuance.

Some have called this movie a dark comedy, and while there were moments that made me laugh I think I’d label it more of a twisty drama, but we’re splitting hairs at this point.

As I said, one of the best of the year, if not totally mind-blowing.

Rating: ★★★★☆

Regrettably, I’ve still not seen Robert Eggers’ previous film, The Witch, though after seeing The Lighthouse I feel even more inclined to seek it out.

I’m not the biggest fan of Stanley Kubrick’s The Shining, but The Lighthouse definitely cribs some notes from it, in a good way. I wouldn’t say I found The Lighthouse horrifying or unsettling in the way of, say, Hereditary; I’d actually call it a rather entertaining, darkly comedic descent into madness, which I don’t think I really expected from a film about two men stuck on an island, living that harsh 19th Century life.

The most compelling factor by far though, beyond even Dafoe and Pattinson going mad together, is Jarin Blaschke’s cinematography. Forgoing colorful widescreen for 4:3 black & white, every single frame of film is a work of art, to the point that you could populate an exhibit at The Met (or maybe MoMA? Hard to say) with just stills from The Lighthouse.

It’s certainly not cookie cutter Halloween fare, but you could do a lot worse.

Rating: ★★★★☆

Everything I have seen so far from that quirky Kiwi, writer/director Taika Waititi, I have enjoyed, and Jojo Rabbit is no exception.

You might not think a comedy about a 10-year-old fanatical Nazi in late-World War II Germany whose imaginary best friend is Adolf Hitler would work, but somehow Waititi (who also plays Der Führer) pulls it off. Not to heap too high praise on it, but, to me, Jojo works in much the same way that Blazing Saddles works (in fact I’ll go ahead and call it a blend of Blazing Saddles and Moonrise Kingdom) in making a farce of blind bigotry; but it’s not exactly the same in that, despite its fanciful premise, Jojo is a bit more grounded (as opposed to the more cartoonish reality of Blazing Saddles), which allows it to move in some surprising tonal directions. Frankly, it’s the sort of story I think could only be handled by a New Zealander.

It’ll make you laugh, perhaps make you cry as well, but I recommend it across the board.

Rating: ★★★★☆

You could write the history of Black American Cinema without mentioning Rudy Ray Moore (aka Dolemite himself), but why would you want to?

Dolemite Is My Name marks Eddie Murphy’s return to the world of R-rated movies after a twenty year absence (seriously, it’s been since Life), and while he may not look like or particularly sound like Rudy Ray Moore, it doesn’t matter. He’s totally invested in the film and having a great time doing it, which easily extends to the audience.

Beneath the torrent of ribaldry, however, is a rather heartwarming story about chasing (and grinding for) your dreams no matter how far along in life you may be; which is nice, though parts of it feel a bit by-the numbers.

However, as fun as Murphy is in the lead, there’s one actor who steals every scene he’s in, and that’s one Mr. Wesley Trent Snipes.

Maybe I’m insane (or just insanely ignorant), but playing real-life actor/director D’Urville Martin might be the best performance of Snipes’ career, at least comedically. I couldn’t take my eyes off him whenever he was on screen.

All-in-all, much like its namesake, Dolemite Is My Name may not be a total work of art, but for a Netflix watch it’ll be well worth your time.

Rating: ★★★½ (out of five)

Valentine’s Day Shandy – ‘John Wick’ & ‘John Wick: Chapter 2’ – Back and Backer

Why see just one when you can see both?

Hollywood’s always trying to figure out how to maximize box office returns, including figuring out what movie to release when. For example, James Cameron’s Titanic was originally slated for a summer release, but got pushed back to the weekend before Christmas, thus making wintertime the new summertime for big budget blockbusters (the Star Wars franchise has been dominating this slot for the past two Decembers and likely will continue to do so indefinitely).

On a much smaller scale from a money standpoint, but equally as revelatory, 20th Century Fox discovered a couple years ago that there’s a market for fresh, fun, violent, R-rated action on Valentine’s Day weekend with a little movie called Kingsman (which itself was originally slated for October, as is its coming sequel). A year later they followed that up with the even more successful Deadpool. Frankly, how Logan is NOT in the same slot this year is utterly baffling. Maybe Lionsgate/Summit just beat Fox to the punch this time around, but, in any case, this year’s contestant in the R-rated Valentine’s Day massacre is the somewhat anticipated John Wick: Chapter 2.

I feel a little guilty that I was as excited for John Wick 2 as I was, because the studio was obviously pandering to my generation with the promised on-screen reunion of Keanu Reeves and Laurence Fishburne (in reference to some other movie), but, what can I say? The marketing got me in the door.

Of course, the natural question is, “Is John Wick: Chapter 2 better than the first one?”

Swarms upon swarms of people are answering, “YAS!” because it has “MOAR ACTION!” but I don’t agree. Chapter 2 might have more (and more stylized) action, but the 2014 original is the superior film because of story and characters.

The first time I saw John Wick was in a real IMAX theater, completely alone. Seriously, I was literally the only person in the theater (I don’t think there were even any staff), so it was LOUD. At the time, I thought it was an okay action movie, but I realized after seeing it again ahead of Chapter 2 that I was missing something: an audience.

I have a rule that I don’t write any reviews here unless I’ve seen a movie theatrically, because movies are meant to be seen theatrically, but there’s something else you don’t get while watching a movie on your couch, and that’s the collective experience of other people in the theater; the oohs and aahs, the audible laughter, the heightened sense of awareness that adds to the enjoyment of the film. I missed that the first time I saw John Wick, and seeing it again under more proper circumstances made me realize I had been underrating it.

Action movies in general aren’t quite what they used to be, largely because of bad CGI, but John Wick is very good for its time, and its biggest strength is its clarity. We know what’s happening, we know why, we connect with why, and John Wick himself is uncomplicated in his quest. Throw in some more-than-competent action, a dash of good humor here and there, and a nice gallery of supporting characters (good and bad), and you’ve got a real crowd-pleaser of a film.

On the other hand, where John Wick is clear, Chapter 2 is muddled. His motivation is less interesting (the first one he did it because he wanted to; now he’s doing it out of obligation), the villains aren’t as strong, there are no supporting characters who can compete with Willem Dafoe from the first one, the plot is more convoluted, and there’s some backtracking with John Wick’s character (trying to soften his edge) that I did not appreciate. Not to mention the third act is a disappointment from a story perspective.

This is not to say that Chapter 2 is utterly useless. I enjoyed how it expanded the secret hitman universe established in the first movie, and the build-up is a lot of fun, but, on the whole, it’s more than a full step down from John Wick. There’s just too much we don’t know or care about, and too much sequelitis (aka “Remember this!?).

They make a fine pairing back-to-back, but the difference is clear.

(Also, as someone familiar with public transportation in and around New York City, I was annoyed with the “geography” of the PATH train in Chapter 2. Like, either use real locations or don’t. I know this is a bit of a nitpick on my part, but it just got to me.)

Ratings:
John Wick: ★★★★☆
Chapter 2: ★★½

P.S.
Shout out to Alamo Drafthouse (as usual) for their John Wick-themed specials this month. The “Carbonara Pizza: Chapter 2” and “Hotel Continental Special” are worth killing for.

Quick Thoughts – September Round-Up, Part 1

‘Suture’ (1993)

All I knew about ‘Suture’ going in was that it was something of a neo-noir, and it was shot in black and white (which is one of the most appropriate creative choices I’ve ever seen). Beyond that, I didn’t know what to expect.

Given certain factors (like the “state of race relations” at the moment), I’m not sure if ‘Suture’ would be better received now, or more poorly received, because there’s a central conceit to the movie that if you don’t pick up on, it’ll go right over your head, and that is that Dennis Haysbert plays a White man. Mind you, he’s not in any make-up or prosthetics with the intention of looking this way, but he plays the brother of a White man, and according to dialogue, they have a quite a familial resemblance.

I don’t want to get into any spoiler specifics, because I liked this movie and would recommend it, but I will explain that the point of casting someone like Haysbert in that role is to make it clear that he is not his brother, because the key theme of ‘Suture’ is not only identity, but what it is inside of us that lets us know who we are individually.

So, yes, it’s something of a heady movie, perhaps a wee bit pretentious, but as long as you understand the central conceit, it’s not all that complicated, and there’s no question that Haysbert carries the film on his shoulders with aplomb. A fine performance from a fine actor.

Rating: ★★★★☆

‘The Hunger’ (1983)

After seeing this one, I now understand why Paramount executives were so concerned when the first dailies that came back from ‘Top Gun’ were nothing but magic hour shots from the deck of the USS Enterprise, because if I were to describe ‘The Hunger’ in one phrase, it would most definitely be, “Too art-house for its own good.” (‘The Hunger’ and ‘Top Gun’ are Tony Scott’s first two movies, in case you wonder what I mean.)

Like ‘Wolfen‘, ‘The Hunger’ is based on a novel by Whitley Strieber, and much like how ‘Wolfen’ is about wolf creatures that aren’t werewolves, ‘The Hunger’ is about vampires that don’t have fangs. It’s weird.

Now, like I said, the movie is too art-house for its own good, and in that respect it’s too frustrating to recommend (not to mention there’s a lack of emotional connection for the audience), but I will give it props for perhaps the best old age makeup I’ve ever seen, used on David Bowie.

Frankly, the experience of this movie is not unlike 2014’s ‘Godzilla‘, in that once the most interesting character is dispatched (Bryan Cranston/David Bowie), there’s no need to watch anymore.

Rating: ★★☆☆☆

‘Blazing Saddles’ (1974)

Seeing this movie on the big screen (in honor of the recently passed Gene Wilder) after seeing ‘Sausage Party‘ this summer just reinforced my assertion that trying to compare the latter to the former is absolutely ridiculous, because ‘Blazing Saddles’ is everything that ‘Sausage Party’ isn’t. It’s consistently funny, it’s actually clever, and it deals with racism in a very real way (while still making you laugh).

I don’t know if Mel Brooks ever sat down and thought to himself, “Someday, I’ll be the king of parody movies,” like it was an actual goal, or if that’s just how his career progressed, but ‘Blazing Saddles’ was the start of all of it (for the record, ‘Spaceballs‘ is overrated, ‘High Anxiety‘ is underrated). And what makes ‘Blazing Saddles’ great (besides, you know, everything), like all great parody or homage movies, is a love of the source material. It’s one thing to sit back and make fun and take potshots at something you think is inherently silly, and it’s another to mine humor out of something you genuinely enjoy, which is true of most of Brooks’ work because he’s a lover of cinema.

Anyway, even if you’re not a fan of Westerns yourself, I can’t recommend ‘Blazing Saddles’ highly enough. Every performance from the headliners down to random extras is spot on, I think most of the humor still holds up (and some is still quite shocking), and it’s a movie with a hugely important message that never, ever gets preachy about it.

Rating: ★★★★★

‘Gang Related’ (1997)

It’s safe to say that Tupac is basically Hip Hop Elvis, right?

A rapper, a dancer, a poet, and an actor, he left quite an impression on the world before (and after) his death at the age of 25. It seemed fitting to commemorate the twentieth anniversary of his passing with a look at his final film performance.

Circumstances aside, ‘Gang Related’ is a decent movie. I’d actually call it three quarters of a pretty great movie before it kind of falls apart towards the end. Tupac and Jim Belushi play homicide detectives who have been using seized drugs to lure unsuspecting buyers to their deaths, then taking the money and covering up the murders as “gang related.” One night, however, they kill somebody they really, really shouldn’t have, and that’s when things get complicated.

Anyone who was into ‘Breaking Bad’ will particularly appreciate the dramatic twists and turns of ‘Gang Related’, especially in the area of characters trying to cover up their crimes when pretty much everything that can go wrong does go wrong.

In terms of performances, I’m not going to lie and say that Tupac is super special, but given the heavy hitters he’s sharing the screen with, he more than holds his own (James Earl Jones, for one, isn’t in the movie very long, but his commanding presence makes up for lack of screen time). I mean, if somebody saw Tupac’s performance without knowing who he was, I doubt they’d suspect he wasn’t exactly an actor by trade.

Also, props to Jim Belushi. Again, his performance isn’t perfect, but it’s effective enough to carry the movie; and his character does get darker as time goes on, which he handles well.

If I have one particular criticism of ‘Gang Related’, it’s that you definitely feel its length, but it’s entertaining enough to watch one time.

Rating: ★★★☆☆

‘Mars Attacks!’ (1996)

It seems like they’ll make a movie out of just about anything these days, but 20 years ago Tim Burton made a movie out of a trading card series (usually it’s the other way around).

I have to admit, I’m not, nor have I ever been, a fan of Tim Burton, and this particular movie doesn’t help my opinion of him at all.

At face value, ‘Mars Attacks!’ seems like a great idea: a simultaneous pastiche of 1950s alien B-movies and later Hollywood prestige pictures (the kind with more movie stars than you can shake a stick at, e.g. ‘The Towering Inferno‘). The problem lies with the execution. There are so many baffling creative decisions, I hardly know where to begin, so let’s just discuss a couple.

Number One: Why does Jack Nicholson have two roles?

Look, I get that Tim Burton loves Jack Nicholson so much that 1989’s ‘Batman’ should really be called ‘Joker’, but he’s one of the most recognizable people in the history of ever. You can put some sunglasses and a wig on him all day, everybody is still going to know it’s Jack Nicholson, because Jack plays Jack in every movie, and twice in this movie. Peter Sellers in ‘Dr. Strangelove‘ he is not.

Number Two: Why, why, why so much CGI?

I get mad when I see period piece movies obviously shot digitally rather than on film, and this is a similar gripe. I’m sure CGI in the mid-90s was super expensive, so why, especially when making a film based on 1950s B-movies, would you choose that option rather than investing in stop-motion animation and rubber puppet monsters? This is especially egregious when you consider that Burton had just recently written and produced a little movie called ‘The Nightmare Before Christmas’, which was done entirely in stop-motion animation. Unforgivable.

Ultimately, as is so often the case, the biggest issue with ‘Mars Attacks!’ is the tone. To say it’s all over the place is an understatement; certainly a far cry from other successful horror comedies. At one point, the film cuts to a clip of ‘Godzilla vs. Biollante‘, and I immediately said to myself, “I wish I was watching that movie.”

I will admit though, the very end is a good bit, but I’m also a total mark for Tom Jones, so, there it is.

Rating: ★★☆☆☆

Quick Thoughts – August Round-Up

Across 110th Street (1972)

Anyone who’s seen Quentin Tarantino’s Jackie Brown is familiar with this title, as the Bobby Womack single of the same name (which appears on the soundtrack album but not in the actual movie?) plays at both the beginning and end of that film.

It gets lumped in with the Blaxploitation genre, but after seeing it, it’s clear that Across 110th Street doesn’t belong there. For one thing, the tone is too serious (there’s nothing really tongue-in-cheek about it), and there’s no strong, Black protagonist, because there’s no protagonist of any kind (we’ll come back to that).

Let’s back up for a second. Across 100th Street begins with the violent theft of a large sum of Italian mob money by three Black robbers. From there, it’s a race against time between the mobsters and the cops to find out who did it; the cops wanting justice for their gunned-down brethren, and the mob wanting to set an example to those who would try to steal from them.

This is where things get problematic for me, because the movie constantly cuts around between the three concerned parties (thieves, mobsters, cops), which is fine in theory, but in practice it doesn’t really allow you to connect with any character in particular, good, bad, or otherwise, and thus you never really connect with the movie as a whole.

This is not to say Across 110th Street is terrible. As well as having some entertaining moments, the movie addresses serious issues in a mature fashion, which is admirable. I just wasn’t expecting it to be so cold and flat from a stylistic standpoint. It’s one thing to go that route for a based-on-a-true-story movie (like Tora! Tora! Tora!), or a this-is-what-could-happen movie (like Contagion), but for a fictional police procedural I don’t think it’s the best idea.

Rating: ★★★☆☆

eXistenZ (1999)

If you made a cocktail out of Videodrome, The Matrix, and Inception, you’d have eXistenZ.

I was a bit nervous about seeing this one, given David Cronenberg’s infamy for gross-out material, but eXistenZ is surprisingly measured in the body horror department (even the “Chinese Restaurant” scene didn’t really bother me, although whether or not a lot of this stuff upsets you comes down to individual tastes and fears).

The movie takes a hard look at the concept of virtual reality, and, while it may not be an action movie, it feels appropriately dream-like (without question one of the movie’s strongest aspects). There’s also some commentary on videogames which gamers past and present will understand and appreciate.

Performance-wise, Jennifer Jason Leigh and Jude Law put in solid shifts, but I think I find the supporting roles more interesting (Ian Holm and definitely Willem Dafoe in particular).

Overall, eXistenZ may feel somewhat dated, give that it’s a late-90s vision of the future, but the way it questions our ability to unplug from the machine is as relevant now as ever. Kudos to David Cronenberg for that.

Rating: ★★★½

Red Mob aka Chtoby vyzhit (1993)

Information on this movie is sketchy at best, but if you understand Russian, you can enjoy the whole film on YouTube.

The boys at Vinegar Syndrome are putting together a Blu-ray release of Red Mob and I can’t wait for it to go on sale. It’s not on the same level of hidden gem as, say, Ninja Busters, but it is the right mix of incomprehensible and funny-bad that makes for a “magnum opus” of low-budget cinema (not to mention lots of guns and explosions).

I’m not going to bother to explain the plot, given that it took me until about forty minutes into the film to figure out who everyone was and what was going on, but I can tell you that it involves the Russian Mafia (obviously), weapons smuggling, former Soviet soldiers, kidnapping, and, if you can hold out til the end, some of the best helicopter flying I’ve ever seen committed to film.

One thing I know for sure about Red Mob is that it was shot in the former Soviet Union, maybe a couple of years after the Berlin Wall came down, and it makes use of a fairly wide variety of locations. The only one I recognized outright is what I assume to be Moscow, but I’m guessing they also filmed quite a bit in one or more of the Central Asian states.

Anyway, like I said, I can’t wait for the Blu-ray release. Definitely a bonkers kind of movie to be enjoyed with a group of friends.

Rating: ★★★½

(Update 05/26/17 – The Blu-ray is finally on sale: https://vinegarsyndrome.com/shop/red-mob-ltd/)

The Lost Boys (1987)

Before True Blood or Twilight or even Buffy the Vampire Slayer, there was The Lost Boys.

I can’t say with absolute certainty if it’s the first ever presentation of contemporary teenage vampires, but it seems to get the most credit as such. Regardless, it’s years ahead of its time from that standpoint

And yet, it’s also very much of its own time, not just in terms of music and fashion and all that (not to mention the first ever pairing of “The Two Coreys”), but because, for whatever reason, the 1980s were the heyday of the horror comedy (Gremlins and Ghost Busters come to mind), although there has been something of a resurgence of such films in the 2000s, but we’re not talking about that, we’re talking about Joel Schumacher’s The Lost Boys.

He takes a lot of crap for Batman & Robin, which is fair (at least he owns up to it and doesn’t point fingers elsewhere), but I disagree with the popular notion that Joel Schumacher is a “bad director.” In addition to Lost Boys, he’s also directed Falling Down and the very much underrated 8MM. as well as other successful projects, but again, we’re not talking about those; we’re talking about The Lost Boys here.

The movie is a fairly classic type of story: a family moves to a new place and discovers things are not all as they seem But, in addition, the look of the film still holds up pretty well (I appreciate how they handled “flying” on a budget), there’s some great set design, the cast is pretty solid all around, and, most importantly, the tone is such that you can seamlessly move between horror and comedy.

If you’ve never seen it, especially with Halloween season coming up, I definitely recommend this stylish flick.

Rating: ★★★★☆