Not the crappy American horror movie from the 80's or the medical drama with Hugh Laurie, but the bugshit crazy Japanese movie from the 70's.
I don't know if words can convey what watching this movie is like.
It seems like whoever wrote this film, directed this film and edited this film had never been involve with film before. This is a film of wild exuberance. An everything and the kitchen sink approach. The film shifts so rapidly between tones that it may give you whiplash. I can see how people may hate this film.
So what is it all about? A girl and her friends (stereotypes all, with names like Gorgeous, Melody, Professor and such) invite themselves to the girls aunt's house for a summer vacation. The girl, Gorgeous, has not seen the aunt in years and may have only met her the once. The girls go the house and things go crazy.
How crazy? Deadly futon attacks. A dude turns into a pile of bananas. Flying heads biting bottoms. Pointless nudity. Bizarre editing and sub-amateurish special effects. Pointless green screening. Freeze frames and dissolves for no reason. Music that makes no sense mixed poorly with the dialogue.
So crazy. Impossible to describe. There is no real through line to follow, the people involved just seemed to shoot whatever came to mind and then threw it all together.
It sounds like it should be a disaster, but it is so unlike anything else that it is definitely worth a watch. I might even buy it on Blu Ray, especially if there is any sort of commentary track.
Monday, August 23, 2010
Wednesday, August 18, 2010
Raderday
One Saturday, not so long ago, we watched a couple of 'classic' 80's movies. Rad and Thrasher.
Rad is about BMX biking whilst Thrasher is about skateboarding.
Rad is better at conveying what BMX biking is was all about at the time. The opening and closing credits have dudes pulling all kinds of tricks off on their bikes. The hoppy, near stationary, climbing all over the bike in ways a bike was not meant to be climbed all over kind of tricks. There's off road races, track races, ramp tricks. And there is bike dancing. Just about anything being done with a bike in the 80's is in this film somewhere.
Also in this film? Adrian, and Uncle Jesse's hot wife from Full House. And My Favourite Martian. Truly a cast well studded with stars. And there were probably some famous bikers in there too.
The bikers were good at their biking. This is a couple decades old and some of these tricks are still impressive.
So the movie is good, when people are on their bikes. Off the bikes, the movie ain't so great.
Luckily, people spend a lot of time on bikes. They even dance on their bikes. The bike dance is just awesome.
There is nothing awesome in Thrashin' (not Trasher, I've been referring to it by the wrong name forever. Oops)
It ain't bad, it is a good example of an 80's sports movie, but there is nothing all that remarkable about it. Now let me make some remarks about it.
Josh Brolin has always looked older. Always. And he may have been allergic to shirts back then. At the very least, he was allergic to buttons. The female lead in this came of poorly in direct competition with Rad's Full House lady. No real impressive skating in this film. Not a lot of board tricks. Barely any grinds. The only half pipe in this film gets burned down before it ever gets used. Mainly it's just Josh and his gang goofing off on their boards around L.A. Then the Chilli Peppers show up.
And there's some skateboard jousting and downhill racing. None of it shot with any real energy.
What is it about the 80's, man? The 70's gave birth to some of the greatest films ever. Timeless classics. FIlm making as an art form made a couple giant leaps. And then the 80's showed up and forgot all that. The nicest thing I can say about the style and craft of these two films is that they are charmingly inept.
Rad is about BMX biking whilst Thrasher is about skateboarding.
Rad is better at conveying what BMX biking is was all about at the time. The opening and closing credits have dudes pulling all kinds of tricks off on their bikes. The hoppy, near stationary, climbing all over the bike in ways a bike was not meant to be climbed all over kind of tricks. There's off road races, track races, ramp tricks. And there is bike dancing. Just about anything being done with a bike in the 80's is in this film somewhere.
Also in this film? Adrian, and Uncle Jesse's hot wife from Full House. And My Favourite Martian. Truly a cast well studded with stars. And there were probably some famous bikers in there too.
The bikers were good at their biking. This is a couple decades old and some of these tricks are still impressive.
So the movie is good, when people are on their bikes. Off the bikes, the movie ain't so great.
Luckily, people spend a lot of time on bikes. They even dance on their bikes. The bike dance is just awesome.
There is nothing awesome in Thrashin' (not Trasher, I've been referring to it by the wrong name forever. Oops)
It ain't bad, it is a good example of an 80's sports movie, but there is nothing all that remarkable about it. Now let me make some remarks about it.
Josh Brolin has always looked older. Always. And he may have been allergic to shirts back then. At the very least, he was allergic to buttons. The female lead in this came of poorly in direct competition with Rad's Full House lady. No real impressive skating in this film. Not a lot of board tricks. Barely any grinds. The only half pipe in this film gets burned down before it ever gets used. Mainly it's just Josh and his gang goofing off on their boards around L.A. Then the Chilli Peppers show up.
And there's some skateboard jousting and downhill racing. None of it shot with any real energy.
What is it about the 80's, man? The 70's gave birth to some of the greatest films ever. Timeless classics. FIlm making as an art form made a couple giant leaps. And then the 80's showed up and forgot all that. The nicest thing I can say about the style and craft of these two films is that they are charmingly inept.
Saturday, August 14, 2010
The Expendables
I think that this film may have made more sense if I was mainlining Human Growth Hormone. Or this flick is HGH for the eyes. Or both.
I had fun watching this film. But I knew that I would. Yeah, this is that kind of film. If you think you're going to like it, you probably will. If you know you're going to hate it, you ain't wrong. This is a film that rips the heart out of some nameless mook and then proudly wears it on its sleeve. You've seen the list of names. You know whether you are going to like this film.
The question is whether you will like it as much as me. Notice the word like, not love. That's deliberate. There was thought put into that word choice. Not sure how much thought went into the script for this film, other than thinking up awesome ways to kill dudes. It's basically like Stallone's last Rambo but with more dudes. The Expendables plays like the latest instalment of a franchise that has been going strong since the 80's. The characters are less than sketches, they are drunken doodles. The subplots add up to less than nothing, they are there to pad out the running time.
These are not complaints, I liked these characters, which is to say I liked these actors. I liked the non action beats the script forced them through. Charisma Carpenter is in this film solely to be another strong Whedon woman who needs rescuing. She needs to be beat up so Statham can beat the dude who beat her. And that is the least senseless of the violence in this film.
The Expendables get involved in this film's plot because a pretty girl asked them Sly to. You can tell that Stallone likes this girl because he raises he eyebrows. That's a joke. You see, because dude's face has been pulled so tight that the most developed muscles on his whole body must be his eyelids. He's looked better. They all have. Which is kind of the point. If a film like this can have a point.
Wait. No. The point of this film is the violence, the gore and the explosions. And they are all present and accounted for. Plenty of shooty shooty stabby stabby kicky punchy slammy 'splodey. At least a few points where the audience I was with all turned to each other to ask 'Did that just happen?'
It did.
There is a lot of violence against the human body in this film, all filmed for maximum impact. There's a little bit of the too tight, too shakey, too edited to tell what the hell is going on, this mainly happens during the Jet Li fight scenes. Stallone is good at capturing gun and knife violence but his kung fu filming skills are weak. Which is too bad because I think his fight scene with Dolph Lundgren was pretty cool. I think it was, but I can't be sure. That Dolph, he's a big boy.
These are all big boys (even Eric Roberts who looks like a cross between Vince McMahon and Cuella DeVIlle), and they all hurt things and get hurt. Sometimes in cool ways, sometimes in cliched ways, but you knew all that just by watching the trailer.
I had fun watching this film. But I knew that I would. Yeah, this is that kind of film. If you think you're going to like it, you probably will. If you know you're going to hate it, you ain't wrong. This is a film that rips the heart out of some nameless mook and then proudly wears it on its sleeve. You've seen the list of names. You know whether you are going to like this film.
The question is whether you will like it as much as me. Notice the word like, not love. That's deliberate. There was thought put into that word choice. Not sure how much thought went into the script for this film, other than thinking up awesome ways to kill dudes. It's basically like Stallone's last Rambo but with more dudes. The Expendables plays like the latest instalment of a franchise that has been going strong since the 80's. The characters are less than sketches, they are drunken doodles. The subplots add up to less than nothing, they are there to pad out the running time.
These are not complaints, I liked these characters, which is to say I liked these actors. I liked the non action beats the script forced them through. Charisma Carpenter is in this film solely to be another strong Whedon woman who needs rescuing. She needs to be beat up so Statham can beat the dude who beat her. And that is the least senseless of the violence in this film.
The Expendables get involved in this film's plot because a pretty girl asked them Sly to. You can tell that Stallone likes this girl because he raises he eyebrows. That's a joke. You see, because dude's face has been pulled so tight that the most developed muscles on his whole body must be his eyelids. He's looked better. They all have. Which is kind of the point. If a film like this can have a point.
Wait. No. The point of this film is the violence, the gore and the explosions. And they are all present and accounted for. Plenty of shooty shooty stabby stabby kicky punchy slammy 'splodey. At least a few points where the audience I was with all turned to each other to ask 'Did that just happen?'
It did.
There is a lot of violence against the human body in this film, all filmed for maximum impact. There's a little bit of the too tight, too shakey, too edited to tell what the hell is going on, this mainly happens during the Jet Li fight scenes. Stallone is good at capturing gun and knife violence but his kung fu filming skills are weak. Which is too bad because I think his fight scene with Dolph Lundgren was pretty cool. I think it was, but I can't be sure. That Dolph, he's a big boy.
These are all big boys (even Eric Roberts who looks like a cross between Vince McMahon and Cuella DeVIlle), and they all hurt things and get hurt. Sometimes in cool ways, sometimes in cliched ways, but you knew all that just by watching the trailer.
Friday, August 13, 2010
Cop Out
Is not a good movie. It is a bad movie. The worst of Kevin Smith's career. It looks better than a lot of his earlier stuff, he's become a better visualist, but that doesn't mean much when everything else is so substandard. The story is a non-starter. I can't quite recall what all happened, actually. There were buddy cops, a wedding, a rare baseball card, and it all flowed together not at all. It's like someone once saw a buddy cop movie and thought it was neat so they tried their hand at writing one. It didn't turn out so good.
And maybe the original script was good. This film makes it impossible to tell. Maybe Smith was trying to test himself, stretch himself, expand his horizons because it seems like half the dialogue in this film is improvised. I don't know if Tracy Morgan is capable of remembering lines. Or he is so good at seeming spontaneous that he's got me fooled. And maybe a lot of his improv was funny, but I couldn't understand most of it. I like Tracy Morgan. He's great in 30 Rock and I've enjoyed some of his other roles but I don't know if he's cut out to be a leading man.
Especially if the other lead is as lackadaisical as Bruce Willis. You'd think he would have hit this role out of the park as both WIllis and the part he plays in this film are mainly just interested in getting paid. His near catatonic performance cancels out Morgan's spittle fuelled anarchy.
This film just... it's just bad.
The action isn't horrible, but there is nothing memorable about it. I surprised myself by laughing maybe twice, but I felt dirty afterwards. The only thing of note about this film, other than how bad it is, is the soundtrack. It sounds like an 80's buddy cop movie, all cheesy synths and such. I enjoyed it, but it didn't seem to fit the film at all.
Which is the main problem of this film, there are a lot of great things about this film in theory. Tracy Morgan's whirligig of crazy off the cuff comedy. Bruce WIllis' gun and quip slinging chops. The crazy synth soundtrack. Kevin Smith's love of words and characters and how characters use words. These are all good things, these are all things I like. And they are all in this movie, but none of them seem to be in the same movie. This film is like oil and water and vinegar and baking soda. A big messy explosive misfire.
And maybe the original script was good. This film makes it impossible to tell. Maybe Smith was trying to test himself, stretch himself, expand his horizons because it seems like half the dialogue in this film is improvised. I don't know if Tracy Morgan is capable of remembering lines. Or he is so good at seeming spontaneous that he's got me fooled. And maybe a lot of his improv was funny, but I couldn't understand most of it. I like Tracy Morgan. He's great in 30 Rock and I've enjoyed some of his other roles but I don't know if he's cut out to be a leading man.
Especially if the other lead is as lackadaisical as Bruce Willis. You'd think he would have hit this role out of the park as both WIllis and the part he plays in this film are mainly just interested in getting paid. His near catatonic performance cancels out Morgan's spittle fuelled anarchy.
This film just... it's just bad.
The action isn't horrible, but there is nothing memorable about it. I surprised myself by laughing maybe twice, but I felt dirty afterwards. The only thing of note about this film, other than how bad it is, is the soundtrack. It sounds like an 80's buddy cop movie, all cheesy synths and such. I enjoyed it, but it didn't seem to fit the film at all.
Which is the main problem of this film, there are a lot of great things about this film in theory. Tracy Morgan's whirligig of crazy off the cuff comedy. Bruce WIllis' gun and quip slinging chops. The crazy synth soundtrack. Kevin Smith's love of words and characters and how characters use words. These are all good things, these are all things I like. And they are all in this movie, but none of them seem to be in the same movie. This film is like oil and water and vinegar and baking soda. A big messy explosive misfire.
Thursday, August 12, 2010
Shoot Em Up
Finally saw this flick.
When it was good it was great, but it was pretty bad in the in betweens. The action is the highlight, of course, but the one liners are horrible. I know that is the point, but...
I know that a lot of one liners in action movies are stupid, but movies with nothing but shitty one liners are usually the shitty action movies. Each action classic has at least one or two line that hit. Shoot Em Up has no memorable dialogue.
Weird that I nit pick the writing, but that's kinda what I do. Let's continue with the negatives: this film doesn't look all that nice. Kinda blah. Don't remember any of the music either.
I do remember a lot of the action beats. Which is the most important part. I remember shooting with the carrot. I remember the baby on the playground, the hideout shootout, the gun warehouse shootout. There is some crazy inventive stuff in here. Enjoyable crazy nuttiness. And the bad guy is a real scumbag. And I like the protagonist's hatred of jerks and douchebags.
So while I wasn't blown away by Shoot Em Up, but I'm glad I finally saw it.
Man! The text on this MacBook screen is tiny!
When it was good it was great, but it was pretty bad in the in betweens. The action is the highlight, of course, but the one liners are horrible. I know that is the point, but...
I know that a lot of one liners in action movies are stupid, but movies with nothing but shitty one liners are usually the shitty action movies. Each action classic has at least one or two line that hit. Shoot Em Up has no memorable dialogue.
Weird that I nit pick the writing, but that's kinda what I do. Let's continue with the negatives: this film doesn't look all that nice. Kinda blah. Don't remember any of the music either.
I do remember a lot of the action beats. Which is the most important part. I remember shooting with the carrot. I remember the baby on the playground, the hideout shootout, the gun warehouse shootout. There is some crazy inventive stuff in here. Enjoyable crazy nuttiness. And the bad guy is a real scumbag. And I like the protagonist's hatred of jerks and douchebags.
So while I wasn't blown away by Shoot Em Up, but I'm glad I finally saw it.
Man! The text on this MacBook screen is tiny!
Friday, August 06, 2010
Inception
Inception, though I've only seen it the once may be my favourite film of...
Quite some time, let's say.
I cannot stop thinking about it. Snatches of scenes continually float through my brain. And a lot of people, most of whom are better thinkers and writers than I have clicked a fair amount of keys discussing all sort of Inception minutiae. So I won't do that.
I'll just mention a couple things. One: the main complaint against the film is that it is a little cold, the emotional thrust of the film is a little muted. To this a have a few responses. The first is that I don't agree with them. It worked for me just fine. The scenes with the wife near the end got to me. I wasn't bawling, but I was moved. Also: this is a frikkin Nolan film! He ain't known for his melodramatic weep-fests. He has a style. And Inception fits his oeuvre perfectly. Finally...
Let's look at Joseph Gordon-Levitt's character, Arthur. Within the dreams, he's all business. In the waking world he is also all business. Other characters mock him for his humourlessness. But when you see him asleep, working in the dream, he has a beatific, untroubled smile on his face. He's having fun, but only we (the audience) know this. The people, their job is to invade other people's dreams, they try to blend in so as to not alert the mind's defences. Bringing your own emotions into other people's dreams ain't the best idea.
Also: the ending.
I don't think the point is wether he's dreaming or not. The point is he doesn't care.
Quite some time, let's say.
I cannot stop thinking about it. Snatches of scenes continually float through my brain. And a lot of people, most of whom are better thinkers and writers than I have clicked a fair amount of keys discussing all sort of Inception minutiae. So I won't do that.
I'll just mention a couple things. One: the main complaint against the film is that it is a little cold, the emotional thrust of the film is a little muted. To this a have a few responses. The first is that I don't agree with them. It worked for me just fine. The scenes with the wife near the end got to me. I wasn't bawling, but I was moved. Also: this is a frikkin Nolan film! He ain't known for his melodramatic weep-fests. He has a style. And Inception fits his oeuvre perfectly. Finally...
Let's look at Joseph Gordon-Levitt's character, Arthur. Within the dreams, he's all business. In the waking world he is also all business. Other characters mock him for his humourlessness. But when you see him asleep, working in the dream, he has a beatific, untroubled smile on his face. He's having fun, but only we (the audience) know this. The people, their job is to invade other people's dreams, they try to blend in so as to not alert the mind's defences. Bringing your own emotions into other people's dreams ain't the best idea.
Also: the ending.
I don't think the point is wether he's dreaming or not. The point is he doesn't care.
Thursday, August 05, 2010
Maybe I shouldn't try to go day by day
We didn't even really try to watch a movie on Tuesday. We lazy.
Instead, the wife and I stayed home and watched I Love You Man. Decent enough movie, but no one mentioned how cringey a lot of the humour is. Not vulgar or gross, just a dude being uncool. Not the biggest fan of the cringey humour. But Paul Rudd is much better in such a film than, say, Ben Stiller.
Instead, the wife and I stayed home and watched I Love You Man. Decent enough movie, but no one mentioned how cringey a lot of the humour is. Not vulgar or gross, just a dude being uncool. Not the biggest fan of the cringey humour. But Paul Rudd is much better in such a film than, say, Ben Stiller.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)