Rain Man

Rain Man usually, and justifiably, receives plaudits for Dustin Hoffman’s performance as the autistic Raymond Babbitt, a role for which Hoffman won his second Oscar (after Kramer vs. Kramer), but it is the performance of Charlie Babbitt by Tom Cruise that should receive accolades too. His Charlie is wound up a little too tightly by the wishes of his recently deceased father to leave his fortune to Charlie’s brother Raymond, a brother Charlie didn’t know he had. He’s angry at his father, angry at his brother, and everyone around him as he struggles to come to terms with the aftermath of his father’s death. I don’t mean to underrate Hoffman’s performance at all, his is the stronger of the two, and it is the little moments that make it so, such as the moment of childlike confusion on the escalator.

Choose film 6/10

Paths of Glory

Paths of Glory emphasises the differences between the high ranking officers and the lowly privates during the first world war, as after a failed advance, the general in charge demands three soldiers to be made an example of, via a firing squad. The general assumes cowardice on behalf of the men, yet each of the men chosen has a valid reason for retreat, be it finding themselves alone against an insurmountable challenge, being ordered not to by their superior or being knocked unconscious during the advance.

The film is part war, part courtroom drama, as Kirk Douglas attempts to defend the three against their charges. There were some good shots, such as the tracking shots through the trenches, that I feel would have benefited from being single continuous takes, although perhaps budgetary conditions and the technology available at the time limited this. The final scene, as Douglas stands outside watching the troops leer at a female German singer, makes us think who is worse, the generals more than happy to fire upon their own men to make them attack, or the soldiers themselves, reduced to their base urges in the face of death.

Choose film 7/10

Jurassic Park

Last week some friends and I started a Movie Night, an event that will hopefully become a regular occurrence, and should allow me to keep crossing off films, whilst also achieve something approaching a social life. We kicked off the soon-to-be tradition with a film that means a great deal to me, Jurassic Park. I have previously waxed lyrical about the virtues of this cinematic landmark, or rather the shortcomings of the third film in the series, but I’ll try not to repeat myself too much.

The plot, and I really hope that none of you need to know this, although one of the attendees at the movie night admitted ashamedly that this was his first ever viewing of Jurassic Park, concerns a group of people traveling to an island where an eccentric (you can’t be mad if you’re rich) scientist (Richard Attenborough) has discovered a way of cloning dinosaurs from DNA found in mosquitoes frozen in amber. Inevitably, not all goes to plan, and there’s much merriment to be had in the dinos vs. people aftermath.

Jurassic Park is a masterclass in efficient film-making, showing a lot with a little. This is shown early on, when an early velociraptor encounter is terrifying, yet only a couple of close-ups of the raptors eyes are seen. Shaking leaves, haunting sound effects and shots from the dinosaurs own point-of-view are enough to believe the presence of this creature. When shown, the Stan Winston-created dinosaur models and ILM-rendered CGI are on the whole impeccable and, even though they are obviously fake (obvious for lack of plausibility, not quality) the illusion is so well realised that you almost believe.

As with most Spielberg classics, the key is in casting ordinary, relatable characters in extraordinary situations. In this case, Sam Neill’s Dr. Alan Grant has a well rounded persona, a palaeontologist stuck firmly in the past, unable to touch a computer without breaking it and loathing children. Just watch him trying to let go of Lex’s hand after he helps her up, or how he probably scars a child for life with his raptor story at the start of the film. He is ably supported by Attenborough’s scientist and Laura Dern as a paleobotanist, as well as Jeff Goldblum’s excellent interpretation of rock-star chaotician Dr. Ian Malcolm, although I never really understood why he was invited onto the island. Wayne Knight’s Newman-esque bad guy (does he play anyone else? But then why should he, he’s so good at it) is also a joy to behold, especially his childlike glee at the Bond-style gadgetry he’s provided with to steal dinosaur embryos, causing the chaos that ensues.

We’re introduced to the dinosaurs gently, first meeting the gentle herbivores and baby dinosaurs, before building up to the more threatening velociraptors and tyrannosaurus rex. The plot is largely dealt with in the first half of the film, leading for the remainder to be made up of unforgettable set pieces, such as the electric fence, or raptor encounter in the kitchen. Greatest of all though must be the introduction of the T-rex. I don’t think I’ve ever seen ripples forming in a glass of water since without being concerned there is a giant dinosaur about to attack me.

It’s not just a monster disaster movie though, as there are genuinely hilarious moments of comedy (the blink and you’ll miss it rear view mirror gag is comic perfection), and the scenes are pitched perfectly, with the T-rex car chase immediately calmed by a gentler encounter with a herd of brachiosaurs. All in all, this is an example of movie perfection, and I look forward to enjoying it many more times in the future.


Choose film 10/10

In a Lonely Place

There's only so much planning I can do towards what I'm going to watch when, but in the end a lot of this challenge will be left up to fate, when I come across films to watch, what films are available to rent, and if some are shown on television. Last Sunday, fate dealt me a kind hand when, after Something for the Weekend, the gods of weekend TV saw fit to show In a Lonely Place at a time when I had nothing else planned. And so, without any planning or preparation, another film has been crossed off.

In a Lonely Place sees Humphrey Bogart play with his romantic persona as Dixon Steele, a thriller writer suspected of murder after he invites a girl back to his apartment to hear a story idea, and the next morning she is found dead. Steele is known to have a temper, and is prone to violent outbursts, and Bogart plays this barely-suppressed rage masterfully. The scene where he describes how he thinks the murder took place is gripping.

I liked the way we are kept unsure for most of the film as to whether Steele is guilty of the crime. We assume he's innocent, but he very easily couldn't be, a feeling shared by his neighbour, drawn close to Steele during the investigation.

Choose film 6/10

Olympia

I’ve been putting this off for a while. I can quite easily sit down any time and watch a long film, or a documentary, a film about sport (not massively into sport), a very old film or a foreign film, but an old (1938), long (3 ½ hours) documentary about the 1936 Berlin Olympics? That’s a tough sell. I mean, I don’t care about next year’s Olympics, when some of the events will be taking place not far from where I’m typing, let alone ones that happened almost 75 years ago.

The film is essentially just a retelling of the Olympics, showing the events and then revealing the winner, with occasionally shots of the commentators, crowds or photographers. Some tension is brought around from some of the closer run events, such as the men’s pole vault going on into the night, and there’s a collection of clips of people falling off horses that I felt would have been vastly improved with a Harry Hill voiceover.

Choose life 1/10

Second Chance: The Bodyguard

Previously, I only knew of The Bodyguard as the Kevin Costner-Whitney Houston film, one of my Dad’s guilty pleasures that he can almost quote word for word. I’d never had much desire to see it, as I’m not a huge fan of either of the stars, and thought that the plot seemed incredibly straightforward and obvious. Man-with-a-past (Costner) is forced by circumstances to guard woman-with-a-diva-complex (Houston). Initially, the pair hate one another, until he saves her life and she shows him who she is inside. Eventually, they fall in love, possibly after someone dies. I was not disappointed. 

The film mostly annoyed me for how blatantly it is trying to set up an acting career for Houston. Her character, Rachel Marron, is a famous actress, trying to launch a music career by singing in a film, just as Houston is trying to launch an acting career by appearing in a film in which she performs most of the soundtrack. The main drawback to the launching of Houston’s film career though, is that in the Bodyguard she does no acting, whatsoever, as the ‘character’ she plays is herself, the diva with the overstuffed ego, blissfully unaware of anyone but herself.

Choose life 3/10

Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest

The second pirates film is not as good as the first, but is still thoroughly entertaining, and features several enjoyable set pieces, not least of which is the three-way swordfight between Johnny Depp, Orlando Bloom and Jack Davenport (who really should be in more films). This is probably my highlight of the trilogy, especially once the giant wheel comes into play.

The special effects are stepped up from the first film, with Davy Jones and his crew looking exceptional, with the many hours of work involved being well worth the effort. Still, the cliffhanger endings do make this seem more of a set-up for the trilogy closer.

Choose life 6/10

Scarface (1932)

I’ve seen Brian De Palma’s 1983 Scarface a couple of times, and have never fully understood why it is as revered as it is. I’m not saying it’s a bad film, I just don’t think it’s that great, but more on this another day, for that too is on the list. No, today I’m here to discuss the 1932 original, in my opinion somewhat superior to its remake. The story tells the tale of a young gangster rising up through the mob ranks, and the effect it has on those closest to him. There is far more comedy in this version than the remake, mostly from the dialogue (“I was kissin’” “I don’t like it” “You’re missin’ lots of fun”) and from the bumbling, illiterate secretary and his endeavours to use a telephone.

Technically, there are some creative shots, such as a machine gun shooting away the calendar pages to show both the course of time and the violent acts that take place during it, and the scene of a mass execution being shown only in silhouette. I very much enjoyed this film, and hope to find many more like it as I journey through the list.

Choose film 8/10

Pirates of the Caribbean: the Curse of the Black Pearl

The original Pirates of the Caribbean film, the greatest ever made best on a theme park ride, is tremendous family-friendly fun, especially in its first half. It loses its way towards the end of the second reel, as the plot becomes inundated with various bluffs and double crosses, although in a film about pirates this is only to be expected. The CGI is excellent and well used, as is the comic relief, mainly provided by Lee Arenberg and Mackenzie Crook, surely the closest any human being can get to being a scarecrow without an awful lot of hay. Geoffrey Rush could well have been cast as villain Barbossa on the strength of his piratical laugh alone, and for that deserves at least a mention.

Choose film 7/10

Juno

I live my life by a predetermined set of rules. These rules are not written down, and they are frequently adapted to however I fancy, but one rule that remains is that a film cannot be added to a list of favourites until at least 6 months after its release, and at least two viewings. Upon its release many people of a relevant age, including several acquaintances of mine against my frequently versed opinions, elected Juno to the hallowed status of their favourite films, thereby explaining it's presence upon the list.

Ah, Juno, yes, you won the Oscar for best original screenplay, but really, did you deserve it? Although witty and endlessly quotable (“Honest to blog”, “Your eggo is preggo”), the main character is very unlikable and rude. Yes, she’s supposed to be a teenager, so these characteristics are entirely suitable, but I find her to be very annoying, although I’m sure she wouldn’t mind that at all.

Choose life 5/10

Au Hasard Balthazar

Au Hasard Balthazar is the kind of film that just couldn’t be made today, at least not with the same result. Today, it would most likely be made by Dreamworks, telling the tale of a morose animated donkey, voiced by Christopher Plummer, as he sets out an epic journey to be reunited with the family he’s worked for his entire life. Along the way, he learns lessons about friendship not judging by appearances, with the help of a lazy squirrel (Kathy Bates) a know-it-all platypus (Jemaine Clement) and a wise-cracking raccoon (Cuba Gooding Jr.).

As it is, Balthazar is a tale of the life of a donkey, from children’s plaything, through toiling away for various family’s, finding fame in a circus and finally, tragically, used for drug trafficking. It took me two attempts to watch this film, as after the first viewing I did not fully comprehend the cause of the mass adulation poured upon the picture, although I was quite tired and may have drifted off a couple of times, as it’s not necessarily the most captivating of films. That said, on the second viewing I more greatly understood the reasons for the various plot jumps, as for the most part the film is shot from the viewpoint, and therefore the understanding, of Balthazar himself, thereby it would not always be clear as to why some characters behave the way they do.

Choose life 4/10

L’Avventura

L’Avventura reminded me a lot of Hitchcock’s Psycho, released the same year, in that the first segment set’s the plot up to follow the female lead, only to have her disappear from the screen, never to be seen again before the halfway mark. In this instance, the plot concerns a young woman who, whilst holidaying on an island with her friends, goes missing, causing her best friend and her lover to search for her. When compared to more modern day missing-person films, such as Ben Affleck’s excellent Gone Baby Gone, the plot tends to meander a bit, with the supporting characters not seeming to care about the fate of the missing girl.

I was also reminded slightly of Polanski’s the Tenant, in which a man moves into a new apartment, only to slowly turn into the apartment’s previous occupant, as the missing girl’s best friend seems to inhabit the life of her missing mate, becoming closer with her former lover during the search. It almost seems like this was the plan of the missing girl, setting up the transformation by giving the friend some of her clothes before she goes missing. This all seems an improvement for the friend, and indeed for the life she inhabits, as she seems much happier within it than her predecessor. This is most clearly seen by comparing the almost identical shots of the original girl kissing her lover, and how little emotion she shows during this, contrasting with her friend kissing him much more passionately later in the film. There are other parallels between the two ends of the film, such as the friend being initially concerned at the girl’s disappearance, only to end up more concerned that she has returned to claim her life back.

Choose film 7/10