JayDee's Movie Musings

→ in
Tools    





Great review on rear window mate. Although I LOVE Grace kelly so I may be biased
Hitch is one of my fav Directors and Jimmy one of my fav actors so great movie all round for me!
__________________
When a naked man is chasing a woman through an alley with a butcher's knife and a hard-on, I figure he isn't out collecting for the Red Cross!



Miss Vicky's Loyal and Willing Slave
Great review on rear window mate. Although I LOVE Grace kelly so I may be biased
Thanks mate. Always nice to get some acknowledgement. And having someone take the time to say so is just as good, if not probably better, than just giving rep.



Miss Vicky's Loyal and Willing Slave
mirror
mirror

Year of release
1973

Directed by
Herbert Ross

Written by
Stephen Sondheim
Anthony Perkins

Starring
James Coburn
Richard Benjamin
Dyan Cannon
Joan Hackett
James Mason
Ian McShane
Raquel Welch

The Last of Sheila


Plot – At a party in Hollywood which is attended by numerous celebrities gossip columnist Sheila Greene is killed in a hit and run incident. The guilty party is never found. One year later her husband, famous movie producer Clinton Greene (Coburn) invites a group of six friends aboard his ship for a week long cruise. All of the invitees attended the party one year previously and include - actress Alice Wood (Welch), her talent manager/husband Anthony (McShane), talent agent Christine (Cannon), screenwriter Tom Parkman (Benjamin), Tom's wife Lee (Hackett) and film director Philip Dexter (Mason). Along with laying out his idea for a movie based on his wife's life, Clinton is a great lover of games and has devised a devious scavenger hunt for his friends to compete in; a hunt that will reveal a number of uncomfortable truths about the group. Very soon however the game becomes all too real, and all too deadly.

This murder mystery is quite quirky. Quite camp. And quite a lot of fun. It's a film that I actually found quite reminiscent of the previous year's Sleuth which I reviewed a while back; an elaborate tale of gamesmanship and parlour games, full of twists and turns they're both fun but with a dark edge. And while it concerns a group of friends, it doesn't seem that any of the actually likes anyone else.

It's not often that the writers of a film cause such interest for me. As the opening credits were rolling I saw the phrase 'written by Stephen Sondheim and Anthony Perkins.' I immediately stopped the film to get on the web and check if these were the two same people I was aware of. And it is. This film was indeed written by one of the biggest stars of musical theatre, and Norman Bates himself. A surprising combination. Apparently the inspiration came from real life scavenger hunts that Sondheim and Perkins would host for their showbiz friends such as Lee Remick and George Segal.

The film certainly isn't the most cinematic to look at. Visually it is quite uninspired and very often it has the appearance of a TV movie, and in fact I could very easily picture it being a radio drama. Perhaps the only break away from this visual drudgery are the scenes at the monastery in the caverns, which do have quite an atmospheric bent to them. Other nitpicks which may hurt people's possible enjoyment of this include the series of extremely unlikeable characters who we only get to know on very shallow terms, and the fact that it is commonly exceptionally talky.

Film trivia – Despite being filmed just off Cannes it didn't prove to be an overly pleasant shoot. While shooting the monastery sequence the shoot was disrupted by gale force winds and rain, which left Raquel Welch reticent to leave her Venice hotel. And to top things off filming of the café scene was disrupted by the anti-Semitic terrorist group, Black September. They informed police that they had left a bomb near the set which they would detonate unless everyone left. With help from the local police the shoot went ahead as it seemed to eventually turn out to be a hoax.
I'd say the performances are a bit of a mixed bag. There are a couple of good performances, in particular from James Mason, Richard Benjamin and James Coburn. Mason as the understated, thoughtful film director, Benjamin as the film's core and Coburn as the flamboyant, self-satisfied orchestrator of it all. On the downside however Raquel Welch gives an extremely limited showing. From the little I know of her she seems to mostly be playing herself, and she still struggles! And faring only slightly better I felt was Ian McShane. Though the fact he is assigned probably the film's blandest character doesn't help.

However where the film truly excels is in its central mystery. At no point did I ever know what was going on, or what was coming next; always a huge plus for a film of this nature. And anyone who says they had it all figured out on their first viewing is a much smarter person than I. Or more likely they're lying! It's certainly not fit for a casual watch, you really have to pay attention if you are to follow all of the twists, turns, sly clues and discount the numerous red herrings. And even then you may not pick up on everything. In fact I perhaps shouldn't be giving the film a review based on just one viewing, as I can see how the film might require a repeat viewing, and will hopefully reward upon it.

It's a film that very much takes place in the world of Hollywood. The characters talk in a very knowing 'movie way', sounding like dialogue, and dissect the words and actions of others in the same way; saying what they would do or mean were it written in a screenplay. It's also quite a brutal and scathing indictment of Hollywood and its values. To start with none of the characters are at all likeable; all slimy backstabbers (and that's before we even learn of their dark secrets). And then if we were left in any doubt about their low morals the extremely cynical finale comes along. By film's end we know what has happened, who is guilty, and yet the group come to the decision to keep the truth between themselves so that they can still make the film of Sheila's life. The only punishment the guilty shall suffer is smaller, less distinguished roles in the production. God bless Hollywood! And the ending is milked for all its worth by playing Bette Midler's “Friends” over the closing credits.

Conclusion – While the direction and some of the acting may leave a little to be desired, the puzzle that Sondheim and Perkins constructed ensures that this remained a rather enthralling and compelling mystery which demands a repeat viewing.



Miss Vicky's Loyal and Willing Slave
mirror
mirror


Year of release
2011

Directed by
Lynne Ramsay

Written by
Lynne Ramsay (script)
Rory Kinnear (script)
Lionel Shriver (novel)

Starring
Tilda Swinton
Ezra Miller
John C. Reilly
Jasper Newell


We Need to Talk About Kevin


Plot – Eva Khatchadourian (Swinton) is attempting to rebuild her life following a dark incident. Once a successful travel writer she is now struggling financially and living a solitary life as she is shunned by the community around her. The incident that brought this about concerned her son Kevin (Miller/Newell/Duer) and a dreadful act he committed. Kevin and his mother had always had a very troubled and tempestuous relationship, as from a very early age there seemed to be a great darkness within Kevin. It was a darkness however that his father (Reilly) did not see and refused to believe in, with tragic circumstances.

Do you remember Kevin McAllister? The character Macaulay Culkin played in Home Alone. He got into arguments with his relatives, disrupted the family meal, destroyed his brother's room and told his mum he wishes his whole family would just disappear. He was a little bit of a brat. Well this Kevin is...worse! A lot, lot worse.

I certainly wouldn't describe this as a particularly easy watch. It's disturbing, uncomfortable viewing which really gets under your skin and sticks with you for the following days. What really grips and fascinates is the complex relationship between mother and son, and how it's portrayed by Tilda Swinton and Ezra Miller. Tilda Swinton excels as Kevin's mother, creating an agonised and terrorized woman. She wears a seemingly constant haunted look on her face. And she plays a terrific, and quite heartbreaking scene where Kevin is sick and finally he looks for, and happily accepts, her attention and love. All the frustration, regret and fear just drains away from Swinton's face and for pretty much the only time in the film her face lights up. And then there is the combo of Jasper Newell and Ezra Miller. Together they manufacture a creatures of sheer terror, the titular Kevin. Just on appearance alone they are both well cast. Newell has that classic devil's spawn, omen kid kind of thing going, while Miller just has a disturbingly mesmeric presence.

While it's never expressly brought up, there is quite obviously the case of the nature v nurture argument going on here. Is it Eva's fault that Kevin grows up into the psychopath that he does, or was their nothing that could be done to save him? It seems quite obvious that Kevin was an accident, it was most certainly not something his mother had planned for, or indeed wanted. This is clear before Kevin is even born. When she goes to the birthing class all of the other expectant mothers have their pregnant bellies out on show, but she keeps hers hidden beneath layers of clothing. Does she give her all when it comes to being a mother? From the early stages of Kevin's life there is a clear division between the two of them. Does this come about as a result of Eva's attitude towards Kevin, or is Kevin just born this way? And moving forward does Kevin become the man he does because of how he was raised? Or was he just born with a streak of pure evil running through him? It's always an interesting issue. Though I personally think Kevin was just a little s**t, and would be no matter what his mother did! Though due to her demeanour and interaction with Kevin it's tough to feel any great sympathy for her, no matter how cruel and perverse his treatment towards his mother gets.

Film trivia – The producers believed from the outset that due to the subject matter of the film they would be unlikely to secure any corporate sponsorship. As a result production designer Judy Becker put together a series of generic brand labels, such as “Ma Ramsay's Tomato Soup” (a reference to director Lynne Ramsay). After the film debuted however the producers were approached by Heinz for a tie in product – Kevin Ketchupdourian (as opposed to Khatchadourian). The idea was eventually scrapped however, with many believing the disturbing tagline to be the problem - “Killer taste!”
As for the look of the film, well I'll describe it in a Sesame Street kind of style, “Today's colour is the colour red!” Yes there is certainly a crimson motif running throughout the film, with pretty much every scene having splashes of it in one fashion or another. It may not be the most subtle of techniques but it is undeniably effective at playing into the foreboding sense of doom that permeates the whole film.

Even though I knew what the film was about there were still plenty of times throughout were I expected the film to go down the route of an indie comedy. You've got the classic dysfunctional family, a quirky and eclectic soundtrack and a few brief moments of dark comedy such as Eva's reaction to religious salesmen come to the door. Though I wasn't sure if the comedy was always intentional. There's a scene where his dad gives Kevin a Christmas present of a large hunting bow; I don't know if there were aiming for ominous but to me it just felt like a bit of farcical black comedy.

I found the first half of the film in particular to be very strong. Once we switch to the teenage Kevin I felt their was a moment or two where the film just resorted too easily to clichéd psychological horror territory. Though the scenes between Swinton and Miller do keep the film on track as they share an uneasy and awkward chemistry. Indeed much of the film takes on a very uncomfortable nature when they share a scene, such as Eva's attempts at bonding of a game of miniature golf and dinner.

Another interesting theme is the addressing of the maternal instinct. Even with everything that goes on, at the end of the film she is still standing beside her son. Does she do this because no matter how much he may disturb and disgust her she still feels a bond with her son? Or is it due to an element of guilt; she believes she is responsible so feels the need to support her son. And the need to punish herself by staying around this community where she is loathed by her neighbours? As a result of the film's flashback structure we feel like we are robbed of some of the story, such as what happens in court at Kevin's trial. Does she strongly defend her son, and that's the reason why she is so hated? In fact the whole flashback, in hindsight move leaves us with a few holes which we have to try and fill ourselves and come to our own conclusions. One hole is the question of whether Eva ever tries to actually get help for the problem. Does she ever visit a councillor? Does she ever confide in friends? We see a conflict in her relationship with her husband over her attitude towards Kevin. What direction did their conversations about him take?

Conclusion – A disquieting and extremely powerful film which really gripped me, so much that it has very much stuck in my mind since watching it a couple of days ago. Swinton delivers a supreme showing which leads the film from start to finish.



Miss Vicky's Loyal and Willing Slave
Was going to ask out of curiousity whether anyone else had actually seen The Last of Sheila, but I'm forgetting about Mark. He will obviously have seen it, he's seen everything!



Must be doin sumthin right
Glad WNTTAK's stuck with you, Jay. imo Lynne Ramsay should be included on the shortlist of living European masters with Haneke, Trier, Denis, et al



Miss Vicky's Loyal and Willing Slave
mirror
mirror


Year of release
1975

Directed by
Clint Eastwood

Written by
Hal Dresner (script)
Warren Murphy (script)
Rod Whitaker (script and novel)

Starring
Clint Eastwood
George Kennedy
Vonetta McGee
Jack Cassidy


The Eiger Sanction

-

Plot – Jonathan Hemlock (Eastwood) is an art history professor who also happens to have one of the most impressive personal collections of art you'll ever see. How is he able to assemble such a collection on a professor's salary? Well the fact that he is also one of the world's foremost assassins may just be a factor. Lured out of retirement by an obscure government agency to avenge the death of an old friend, Hemlock is assigned two sanctions (assassinations). One of them however requires Hemlock to join a dangerous mountain climbing expedition up the treacherous Eiger, a climb he has failed twice before.

I found this Clint effort to be very much along the same lines as The Gauntlet. It's a bit rough and trashy. Heck I'd even say it's a bit naff in points. And yet somehow it emerges as another entertaining vehicle for Mr Eastwood. Actually I just said 'somehow', but I know exactly why it works. There are two main reasons - Clint himself and the stunning on location photography and stuntwork.

In 1976 the James Bond series was still in full flow, and in many ways this almost feels like a two hour audition tape made by Clint with the aim to don the famous tux. I don't know if this is the closest Eastwood got to the adventure genre but it's certainly the nearest that I've seen so far. Eastwood's Jonathan Hemlock certainly has a James Bond vibe to him; a talented spy and assassin who has a way with the ladies and is never short of a one-liner or quip. Indeed from both the mouths of Hemlock and other characters there are numerous examples of rich, chortle-worthy dialogue. He also engages in a sexual relationship with a character which feels very much like something you'd see in a Bond flick. And a number of the characters follow that Bond template as well of being eccentric and memorable in one way or another. There's the flamboyant, raging homosexual villain Miles Mellough and his bodybuilder henchman (oh and Miles has a little dog called Fa**ot!). There's Dragon, Hemlock's employer who has a touch of a villainous streak in him as well. His particular trait is being lumbered with albinism which confines him to a dark room away from sunlight, and demands regular blood transfusions to keep him alive. Oh yeah and he also just happens to be an ex-Nazi!

I've mentioned a couple of times while reviewing his films that I was surprised at the roles Eastwood took on throughout his career. I had been expecting to find a lot more classic macho kick-ass characters; that kind of characters that litter the resume of someone like Arnold Schwarzenegger. Well this is one of those roles. And Clint seems particularly comfortable with it, putting his strong, monosyllabic style to good use. Interestingly it's the first character of his I've seen along these lines when it comes to films that he also directed. Usually he seems to be undermining his macho image, treating himself in an ironic and unflattering matter. In The Gauntlet his character was an inept cop and a drunk. In Play Misty for Me he was a sleezy womaniser. And in Unforgiven he was a broken down ex-killer who returns to that world. But here he is all about action and girls. Oh and as one of his co-stars George Kennedy gives a highly engaging performance as Hemlock's friend.

Film trivia – Clint Eastwood originally wanted his friend and regular collaborator Don Siegel to direct the film, as he wasn't sure he was capable of handling an action film which included so many dangerous stunts. After a long talk between the two however, Siegel was able to give Clint the confidence and encouragement to take on the challenge of directing.
And as I mentioned at the start the other great trick this film has up its sleeve is how it presents the scenes of mountain climbing. Alongside some beautiful nature photography there is the truly remarkable sight of Clint himself (no stunt doubles) hanging off this mountain, thousands of feet above the ground. Now I know this film was made nearly 40 years ago and Clint is still with us, but it really does add a great element of suspense and excitement. Any time we see that it's him my mind would just go “Oh my god Clint, what the hell are you doing?!” And Clint takes full advantage of this. By showing us beautiful panoramic views of the mountains to establish his position the camera will then zoom in to show you it's him. He wants you to understand and appreciate the incredible feat he achieved. Indeed a young climber did die on the shoot. David Knowles was killed by a boulder on just the second day of filming while standing in a position Eastwood had just vacated moments before. There is also an incredible helicopter shot of Eastwood and George Kennedy sitting on top of a towering pillar in Monument Valley.

The film's plot is a bit of nonsense if I'm honest. And at no point did I really accept the notion of Clint being an art professor. And yes as I mentioned above it's a bit naff at points, and also quite dated. The extremely insulting, stereotypical homosexual character of Miles in particular feels a million years away from out current time. However all of that aside it emerged as something I really enjoyed, perhaps on a sort of guilty pleasure line. Clint's performance, the fun if clichéd action sequences and stunning mountaintop photography mean that it's pure spectacle just overwhelms the flaws.

Conclusion – Ok so it's not a particularly 'good' film but I personally found more than enough here to make for an enjoyable movie watching experience. I can certainly see other people really not liking it, but if you enjoy the grubbier Bond films (the Dalton efforts) or some of the dumb action flicks that populated the 80s then this may just be worth your time.



We've gone on holiday by mistake
Quite enjoyed "The Eiger Sanction".

It was quite daft in places though, like that weird Albino "M" type character. I think that the mountain actually improves the film. The Eiger North face is such a mythical place, so much human daring and tragedy.

Did you ever review the Dark Knight Rises? If so I must have missed it. I know you did Avengers.

How about reviewing another Takeshi Kitano flick? Hana Bi or Zatoichi are both outstanding.



Its a long time since I have seen this movie great review as usual
__________________
Health is the greatest gift, contentment the greatest wealth, faithfulness the best relationship.
Buddha



Miss Vicky's Loyal and Willing Slave
Glad WNTTAK's stuck with you, Jay. imo Lynne Ramsay should be included on the shortlist of living European masters with Haneke, Trier, Denis, et al
Thanks for the input Upton. And welcome to the thread. And it's always nice to see a fellow Glaswegian succeeding.

Did you ever review the Dark Knight Rises? If so I must have missed it. I know you did Avengers.

How about reviewing another Takeshi Kitano flick? Hana Bi or Zatoichi are both outstanding.
No didn't review DKR. The fact I've not seen it could be a contributing factor to that.

Hmmm may just take you up on that.

Its a long time since I have seen this movie great review as usual
Thank you very much nebbit.



Good whiskey make jackrabbit slap de bear.
Never saw that one, although it does look interesting.

Have you watched A Perfect World yet? That is, in my opinion and many others, Eastwood's masterpiece.
__________________
"George, this is a little too much for me. Escaped convicts, fugitive sex... I've got a cockfight to focus on."



Miss Vicky's Loyal and Willing Slave
Have you watched A Perfect World yet? That is, in my opinion and many others, Eastwood's masterpiece.
I have sort of seen it. When it was on channel 5 two or three years ago it was on in the background and I got a fair chunk of it and really liked/loved what I saw. Now usually that would make someone want to watch the movie in full. But in my mind I didn't want to in case it didn't live up to my impression of it. Weird I know! Definitely going to be watching it very soon though



We've gone on holiday by mistake
Beware Zatoichi. It has CGI blood. Maybe take a look at the originals.
LOL what do you think the old Zatoichi films have? Real actors being sliced up.



All good people are asleep and dreaming.
+1 for your disturbia review. Another +1 for this.




Miss Vicky's Loyal and Willing Slave
Thanks mate. I had been desperately waiting for someone to comment on it!



We've gone on holiday by mistake
No, but physical is always better than CGI.
That's debateable. To be fair Zatoichi's CGI blood isn't that great but you have to remember that the film is a low budget Japanese flick.



Miss Vicky's Loyal and Willing Slave
Can't believe my thread has managed to spark a debate about a film I've not even watched!