11/20/06 Don't Come Knocking

Don't Come Knocking (2005), directed by Wim Wenders

watched solo; DVD rental (Blockbuster) @ home & car ride (Raleigh, NC)

There was a period in college (basically because I had a German Cinema class and access to the university's movie library for rentals) when I was in to watching Wenders' stuff...if nothing more than for interest into something different or artsy. I'll be the first to admit that some of his stuff can be utterly boring and drag on, but then there are others that are very in tune with human emotions and relationships with one another. There you have the bad ("The End Of Violence" comes to mind) and the good ("Paris, Texas" and "The American Friend" to name two). I consider this one to fall in the latter category, as it stands as a simplistic yet mesmerizing tale of redemption and finding oneself. In a combination of talent, Sam Shepard comes in with not only the lead acting part in the story, but also penned the screenplay for the film. Sheapard plays Howard Spence, a washed up western film star who has for years drowned his sorrows in booze, drugs and women...squandering the high life and putting his secretive past behind him. Finally wanting something solid, Howard suddenly leaves a film shoot in the desert to travel back to his boyhood home and visit his mother (Eva Marie Saint) that he hasn't seen in decades. Upon this stilted reunion with his mother, Howard comes to find out something about his long-lost and jilted lover of his past, Doreen (Jessica Lange). Doreen, the only woman he's truly ever loved and never had the courage to stand beside forever, may very well have had his child and been keeping it secret from his Hollywood world. Now set on a quest to find them both, Howard is a man with an empty soul and sent in the first true direction of his life. It goes without saying that the reunion will happen with many bristles, trudging up past mistakes and misfortunes...and a son that wants nothing to do with a deadbeat father. All the while, another journey is happening with a young woman (Sarah Polley) who also looks for the long-lost father from another relationship, and whose path may very well cross in their common journeys. Set amongst a desolate western backdrop, and punctuated with a quiet western town full of wild personalities (an ensemble cast including Fairuza Balk as the son's erratic girlfriend, and Tim Roth as the man assigned to bring Howard and his contract back to the Hollywood shoot)...the film flows very smoothly into an intoxicating tale of solace. Albeit a dusty dirty bumpy trail to solace, but a beautiful one nonetheless. Wenders, you have done the lonely beleaguered soul well again...and maybe some college kid can check out this work in some other German Cinema course.

4 out of 5 stars

11/19/06 Strangers With Candy

Strangers With Candy (2005), directed by Paul Dinello

watched solo; DVD rental (Blockbuster) @ home

Coming off the tails of the cult classic TV show of the same name (actually, I think they waited a bit too long to bring this feature length film to fruition...it may have gotten a bit stale on the shelves), this dark comedy brings back all the usual suspects in base filthy humor of self proclaimed "boozer, user and a loser." If ever you have caught the short-lived, but disturbingly hilarious tales on Comedy Central, of Jerri Blank...you know what I'm talking about. Coming from the twisted comedic minds of Amy Sedaris (sister of acclaimed writer David), Stephen Colbert (yes, we all no where he has ended up..."Daily Show" or "Colbert Report" ring a bell?), and Paul Dinello (who also directed this, but not too sure what else he has gone on to do)...comes this delightfully bizarre trip down memory lane. Sedaris plays Jerri, the 46 year-old ex-con/reformed drug addict/teenage runaway...who after a life of hardened lessons and prison trouble decides to reunite with her long-lost family and return to high school to finish what she never accomplished in graduating. Obviously not in tune with modern day teenage life, her family's odd behaviors, or sanity in general...Jerri stumbles through everyday adolescent mishaps, and tries desperately to fit in. We have all of the band of characters from the beloved TV show returning, including ambiguously gay art teacher Mr. Jellineck (Dinello), his closeted uptight colleague Chuck Noblet (Colbert), gruff yet weird principal Onyx Blackman, and dysfunctional family including her constantly comatose father (Dan Hedaya)...spiced up with a handful of Hollywood notables added to the eccentric cast, including Philip Seymour Hoffman, Ian Holm, Matthew Broderick (the science fair genius), and Sarah Jessica Parker (the sexually frustrated guidance counselor...actually one of the funnier roles). However, none of these hair-brained roles or plot ideas ever truly make this film worth any laughs...with a film packed with so much talent...and such an long-awaited arrival to the big screen, you would expect more, and I did. Seen as a prequel to the funnier TV show's entries, as I stated before...there was just way too much time off from the show being cancelled and them deciding to dust off the material to make this crap. If you want to see the true awkwardness in Jerri's corrupt humor, you will look into the TV series and not this forgettable installation. Even better, and more obscure of reference...look into the trio's (Sedaris, Dinello and Colbert) other cult classic Comedy Central sketch comedy show "Exit 57" for some early twisted stuff. Also, what I found most fascinating about researching this film is that the Jerri character is based on a real person named Florrie Fisher. Fisher was a motivational speaker to high school students in the 60's & 70's, talking about her past drug addictions and fall into prostitution...which were chronicled in the story/movie "The Lonely Trip Back." Her checkered past was one that was horrible and fascinating, and larger than life...with her mysteriously falling out of the public eye as quickly as she came into it...with her whereabouts/death never truly known. I had no idea that all this dark comedic plotline held some relevance to reality...that's the craziest part of all.

2 out of 5 stars

11/18/06 Casino Royale

Casino Royale (2006), directed by Martin Campbell

watched w/ Leslie, Joel, Laurie; theater (Crossroads 20 Cinema, Cary, NC); free screening

Finally rejuvenating one of the most timeless and longest running film franchises in history, this wonderful punch of spirit comes through in the latest installment of the brilliant spy series...known simply as 007, or is that Bond, James Bond. I always grew up a huge fan of the James Bond series, due in large part to my father's extensive VHS collection (and Beta before that) of Ian Fleming's world-reknowned super-sleuth. We could talk ourselves until we were blue in the face (as I'm sure many web geeks do daily on various Bond chatrooms) as to the legacy and honor of the series, and could anyone supplant Sean Connery in the titular role of suave, and how huge a mistake was Timothy Dalton...but alas, I will keep my web geek site simply to enjoying the medium of said films on the big screen (and pertaining to this year's Challenge). Unless you' ve been living under a rock, you should know the success of the classic Ian Fleming spy novels about Bond, and his gloriously sexy escapades in what has now been its 21st official installment. That statement right there leads me into a large debate over the validity of just how many "Bond" films there are out there, and I'll leave the discussion up to you after perusing some of the sites, but suffice it to say that one of Connery's own films doesn't count in the traditional sense...where you could say that this latest one is the 22nd...but that is of course not considering the bastard child of a comedy spoof Bond film aptly named "Casino Royale" back in 1967 with Peter Sellers, Woody Allen and an all-star cast. Alas, I'm being sucked into the conversation now. Let's just look at the fact that this is a brilliant movie, on par with some of even Connery's greatest stabs at Bond ("Dr. No," "Thunderball," and "Goldfinger" to name a few), and enlivening the franchise with a new hip urgency by casting the talented Daniel Craig in the leading man's role. Take a director Campbell, whose already helmed a Bond film ("GoldenEye"), and add the 21st century special effects and enormous budget to pull off one hell of a caper. The plot takes us to a prequel setting of Bond's emergence as a top-notch spy, first gaining "00" status and taking on his first solo mission...to spy on a head terrorist in Uganda. Going rogue with his investigation of an international terrorist plot, Bond follows his leads & instincts to the Bahamas and happens upon the dangerous Le Chiffre, banker to the world's terrorist cells. Engaging in a potent high-stakes poker game, Bond must coolly outlast his opponent to gain intelligence on the evil plot...all the while keep his cool with the hot love interest in mysterious British agent Vesper Lynd. Bond gets the girl, gets the bad guys, gets bad-ass with a sadistic streak of killing that puts an edge to the entire series in the past. And the main baddie Le Chiffre bleeds from his dead eye...yeah, you have to see it to understand, but it's still bad-ass. Bond has a stellar supporting cast here, with the talented likes of Judi Dench as the smart yet irascible M, Jeffrey Wright, Eva Green, and Giancarlo Giannini. Even our present company to go see the film with were friends of ours who had already seen the movie once and insisted that we all go to see it (them again)...and this was after the evening involved going to a sushi bar and meeting a man with six toes on each of his feet...another long story. That's how cool this movie was. This epic undertaking to rebirth a legendary figure in cinema goes off splendidly, and you can see in this exciting new sequel what makes movie-going so fun. I don't expect you to like this movie Mr. Bond, I expect you to die.

5 out of 5 stars

11/17/06 He Loves Me...He Loves Me Not

He Loves Me...He Loves Me Not (2002), directed by Laetitia Colombani

watched w/ Leslie; DVD rental (Netflix) @ home; suggested by Christina M. & Allyson

Going against her usually charming and innocent casting types in previous films, French star Audrey Tautou (of "Amelie" fame) goes a bit dark on this one, in a jealous obsessed stalker of sorts in this lovely thriller. Tautou plays Angelique, a young and troubled artist/student who falls deeply in lust with a married doctor, Loic. The only problem is that Loic does not see this "relationship" for what it is...or isn't, it gets a bit confusing. Angelique will stop at nothing to have her affections met with some sort of acknowledgement or satisfaction. The movie is basically split into two very different takes on the twisted romance...beginning with young Angelique's passionate and heartbroken rendition of an older married man playing havoc on her emotions. He never shows up for meetings together or shows affection, or never will leave his wife for her. Then, half way through the movie, we get a chance to view the same "relationship" through the eyes of Loic. The innocence is lost on him, as he sees the "Fatal Attraction" type attention by Angelique as a mysterious and dangerous stalker-esque endeavor. The mystery and malevolence now plays heavily on his own realtionship to his wife, and eventually his sanity. It is a twisted little piece of French romantic candy, and you should enjoy. Ain't she sweet? Enjoy the bittersweet aftertaste that this taut psychological thriller will leave on your lips...disturbingly enjoyable, much more than any dead rabbit in a stewing pot could ever be. I just don't think I will ever trust Amelie again.

3 out of 5 stars

11/16/06 The Notebook

The Notebook (2004), directed by Nick Cassavetes

watched solo; DVD (borrowed from Sarah) @ home; suggested by Sarah & Jason

Call me a sucker for listening to my sister on this one...but then again, call me a sucker for listening to my guy friends about this one too. This just seemed to be one of those romantic dramas that pulled at the heart-strings of every warm-blooded person who's seen it. Don't get me wrong, I'd love nothing more than to curl up with a pint of Haagen-Dazs in my bathrobe & slippers and cry my little eyes out like the next girl...but I wasn't expecting something phenomenal from a film that garnered acclaim and awards from the teeny-bopper set of the Teen Choice Awards' "Choice Date Movie" or MTV Movie Awards "Best On-Screen Kiss" nods. The film had a lot of power potential behind it's making, in adaptation from uber-successful sexy romantic novelist Nicholas Sparks (also came up with blockbuster romance adaptations in other movies I would care not to see "Message In A Bottle" and "A Walk To Remember"), and through the directing lens of uber-hip pedigree Nick Cassavetes (of "She's So Lovely" and "John Q"). I claim that Cassavetes is uber-hip due in large part to his parental units in John & Gena. John just so happened to be the forefront pioneer in American cinema verite (with such classics as "Faces" and "Shadows"), a style that did not seem to rub off to much on his son, but at least he picked up the knack for directing. Equally as talented is his actress mother Gena Rowlands (who Nick also directs here in one of the lead roles of the film as the elderly woman). The story is one that will undoubtedly make you well up with emotions as you see the beautiful tale begin to unfold before your eyes (if you can see past all the damn tears). I don't want to ruin the overall build-up of emotions that will take over you naturally (unless like millions, you've already heard about this incessantly from your younger sisters or your sensitive male friends)...but it is absolutely a touching and moving story to tell. The story begins with an elderly man (James Garner) reading and reminiscing a story to an elderly woman (Rowlands), whose memory is slipping away in the nursing home she now calls home. Most of the movie is told in retrospect through this man's narration, and tells of the meeting and eventual love that blossoms between two young lovers (Ryan Gosling and Rachel McAdams...could you ask for a hotter young couple?). The story takes the usually drastic and traumatic courses that most powerful love stories do, but with such bittersweet twists & turns along the way. Definitely a movie (and a novel) worth checking out...especially if you're in need of a good cry. You big sap. And it is a very hot kiss...in the ever-present torrential rains that seem to frame up any romantic encounters/reunions. Why don't we all just move to Seattle and fall in love?!

4 out of 5 stars

11/15/06 Bedazzled

Bedazzled (1967), directed by Stanley Donen

watched solo; VHS (borrowed from John S.) @ home

No, no and no. This is not the 2000 remake (although, if you would have read my little description a few lines above you would not have assumed such an idiotic thing) by Harold Ramis that posed Brendan (why am I always cast as a big dumb oaf?) Fraser and Elizabeth (I'm hot & British, but took Hugh Grant back so I'm a big dumb oaf as well) Hurley...but rather the lesser known (and apparently unavailble on DVD) original of the same name from 1967. There are oddities abound in this quirky British dose of jolly good fun, starting off with the director himself, Stanley Donen, who is much more well-known and abundance of musicals..."Singin' In The Rain," "Damn Yankees!," "Funny Face," "The Pajama Game," and "Seven Brides For Seven Sisters." Granted, I don't watch a lot of musicals, but from the titles of those movies, and any person's penchant for such silly schlock as musicals provide...has to have some sort of sense of wry humor in order to ever try and take themselves seriously. In this psychedlic 60's version of "Bedazzled" we see a young Dudley Moore serving as a short-order cook Stanley in a joint called Whimpy Burger, and he's infatuated with the pretty waitress Margaret. Never good at much, especially when it comes to talking to women, Stanley decides to end it all...but even that he can't do right. Saving him from his untimely demise is one dapper fellow named George Spiggott, AKA the Devil himself. George makes a pact with hapless Stanley to land him the girl of his (day)dreams only if he signs over his soul in the bargain. With this price gladly taken on, as he didn't have much use for it anyway, Stanley proceeds to have his 7 wishes in transforming Margaret into his ideal woman...except the catch. That catch being that he's visited by the 7 Deadly Sins (a la "A Christmas Carol" and the ghosts of Christmas' past) who sabotage and advise him against meddling with people's true beings. One of the more memorable (and most appealing to watch even on an old grainy VHS recording) is Raquel Welch (isn't she still hot and pushing 70?!) as Lilian Lust. Being that it is a much older, wiser and successful low-budget version of a pretty clever twist on the old "sell your soul to the devil" pact...I don't understand why it's not well-known or hailed over the 2000 crappy remake. Oh wait...could it be that Hollywood too sold its soul in order to make tons of our hard-earned money in watching these crappy films in return for their collective Oscar-winning souls? Perhaps.

3 out of 5 stars

11/14/06 Edmond

Edmond (2005), directed by Stuart Gordon

watched solo; DVD rental (Red Box) @ home

Do you ever mistakenly pick up a movie, or perhaps go to the theater to catch one, without truly realizing what it is you've just done? Say, you wanted to rent a film like "Dirty Dancing" with the logic that with a title like that (and you have no earthly idea about the plot at all...Ok, everyone must by now, but put yourself in 1987 and Patrick Swayze had yet to break hearts, unless you count "The Outsiders" or "Red Dawn"...Wolverines!) you were bound to learn a thing or two about the lambada from a yoga instructor or perhaps a naughty movie with some tittlating innuendo that the guys were gonna watch at the bachelor party. Well, were you so unfortunately mistaken! you had the pleasure of sitting through that ultimately cheesy and screaming-girl-fanatic inducing turd of a romantic drama...puke! Man, I can't even stomach the description of it. hey, nobody puts baby in the corner, and nobody is immune to choosing a movie that they thought they knew something about, only to have the truth sink in and their hopes & dreams crushed. I rented this one, seeing the name of David Mamet attached (thinking he was the director, and I love most of his directed/written films including "Glengarry Glen Ross," "The Untouchables," "The Spanish Prisoner," and "Oleanna" to name a few)...figuring it would be another one of his hard-hitting and gritty human dialogues that would be compelling and unnerving at the same time. It also had a cast of talented people, in what would seem to be a unique meshing of ensemble performances...including the titular William H. Macy, Julia Stiles, Joe Mantegna, Mena Suvari, and Bokeem Woodbine. What I got was a very distraught and disturbing tale of urban violence and commonplace horror that caught me off guard, but never really did much to prove to me it was a hard-hitting piece of work. Directed by the creative shock-horror guy Gordon ("Re-Animator"), the story is based off of the Mamet play, where unassuming businessman Edmond (Macy) heeds the ruminations of a fortune teller's Tarot card readings and begins to change his boring life. What he does next is taking that hazy advice to the extreme. Wanting nothing more than to experience the seedy underbelly of society and try in vain to "feel" something in his hollow existence...Edmond sabotages his marriage by walking out on his wife, then takes to the mean streets of the city to find solace in apathy. He visits bars, strip clubs, pawn shops, subways, low-budget theaters, churches and diners for someone to connect with an abandon (yet talk incessantly about his past). In this process, he begins to lose his identity and become a monster of his former self...resorting to racial slurs, outbursts, sexual deviancy and the ultimate violent act of murderous mayhem (in the form of Stiles' artsy but understanding waitress character) in getting his point across. All of his dark and twisted undertakings lead him on a downward spiral of epic proportions, and land him in his final place of jail...where once again he is forced into hellish confinement, sexual questioning and tempering of his violent nature. It's a very twisted tale, one that spirals around constantly, but never gets to the point. It's just a glorified way to watch violence in a steadily building manner. Granted, this artistic approach to a horror film where the lead character is at his wits' end and willing to take vigilante violence into his own philosophizing hands could have been done better...maybe "Falling Down" with Michael Douglas, but on an acid trip bender.

2 out of 5 stars

11/13/06 The Fast Runner (Atanarjuat)

The Fast Runner (Atanarjuat) (2001), directed by Zacharias Kunuk

watched solo; DVD rental (Netflix) @ home; suggested by Andrew A.

I'll be the first to admit that I have seen very few Inuit movies. I'm going to go out on a limb and say that there probably aren't too many Inuit movies out there altogether. That is again, a very uniinformed guess, but I'll take my chances. Honestly, how can the filmmaking equipment stand those frigid temperatures anyway? Wrapped in blubber or packed tightly inside of an igloo, I just think the camera would freeze over, and any decent footage would be lost and be forced to carry on in the tradition of word-of-mouth re-tellings of ancient times and the spirits that transcended all technology of the present. Such is the plot of this beautifully shot (I know that camera equipment can indeed last the frozen tundra, but will this movie review? probably not) and scripted tale of a nomadic Inuit tribe and some of their memorable members of the community. In essence, this is a cautionary tale of love, family, tradition, honor and sacrifice in their close-knit tribe. The two lead characters are brothers, and best friends, elder Amaqjuaq (the Strong One) and younger Atanarjuat (the Fast Runner). The two brothers are well-liked and well-respected within the tribe, but are still by no means without enemies. When the younger Atanarjuat begins romancing the good-natured Atuat, the tribe leader's son (and all around jerk) Oki is none too pleased. Seeing that he was promised her in marriage at a very young age, Oki will stop at nothing to denounce the feelings of Atuat & Atanarjuat, and bring shame on the two brothers. What Oki does not anticipate is the strong resistance that not only the stoic Amaqjuaq possesses, but the eager defiance that Atanarjuat displays in professing his feelings for Atuat. The heated debate over a promised hand in marriage boils over into a fight for manhood and pride within the tribe, which Atanarjuat wins. With his pride hurt, Oki and his lackeys threaten revenge at any cost on this happy union and the family of the brothers. In a flash of hated violence, Oki and his men storm the camp of the brothers' family's and kill Amaqjuaq and send young Atanarjuat fleeing naked (yes, completely naked in frigid conditions) on foot across the polar landscape. Escaping with his life, it is a long time before Atanarjuat can return home to his wife & brother's widow, and face Oki once again. It is a tumultuous tale of this ancient tribal community, and goes into touching details about how they live their everyday lives, feed their young, love one another and try to survive amongst harsh conditions. It's a very raw and realistic glimpse into a world that is so completely foreign and unknown to me. A thoroughly engaging film, you will find yourself completely awe-inspired by the cinematography and simplicity to the actors' re-telling of such a timeless battle of good vs. evil. It's as if you have been invited intimately into this wonderful Inuit tribe's life and had the privilege of getting to understand where they are coming from.

4 out of 5 stars

11/12/06 In Her Shoes

In Her Shoes (2005), directed by Curtis Hanson

watched w/ Leslie (partially); DVD (borrowed from parents) @ home & car ride (Raleigh, NC)

Now to a much more light-hearted and less inspiring type of movie-making. Playing off an oh-so-not-clever title, and I guess being adapted from some trite novel of similar name, this movie flops onto the screen with a little more potential than the average so-called "chick flick." And I'm not simply trying to pigeon-hole this bore-fest as nothing more than that stomach-churning genre of "chick flick"-ness, but it does little to keep the interest of the viewer in developing characters or relationships. You see, I think the audience is to not only get that these two sisters share little more in common than an obsessive love of shoes (get it), but that it takes a significant life-questioning moment for either of them to place themselves in the other's shoes (get it) to fully understand or appreciate the other as not only a sister but a human being. Lame. Unless you are a fan of high-priced fetish-inducing stiletto heels or over-bearing stress-inducing sister fights...well, I guess those can be morbidly intriguing, like a car wreck...than steer clear. I really though that having acclaimed director Hanson (of "L.A. Confidential," "8 Mile," and "Wonder Boys" fame), and even a producing credit from Ridley Scott himself...their would be something to trigger an emotion from the on-screen talent. And I mean an emotion that's not over-done far-fetched and nauseatingly nauseating. All three ladies on the screen (Cameron Diaz, Toni Collette and Shirley MacLaine) play it for too big of laughs or cries, never making me believe they care about each other...but hey that's what family is for right? Let's set the formulaic script so that you can get a taste of what's annoying, and a pinch of "I-can-see-it-coming-a-mile-away" plot jumps. OK, straight-laced boring sister Rose (Collette) tries to always reason with and knock some sense into care-free wildchild sister Maggie (Diaz), who wants nothing more than to loosen up her sister and party their cares away. When the sisters are forced to live together, late-night hi-jinks, dirty laundry & stealing of boyfriends lead the two to irreconcilable differences and a split from seeing one another. Maggie decides, with no real direction in her own life, that she will search for the long-lost grandmother that will unlock the key to her past and perhaps help her understand herself better. When Maggie and her grandmother (MacLaine) hit it off, she tries to reunite Rose with the two of them...leading to even more hi-jinks, hurt feelings and dark secrets galore! Will stuck-up Rose let down her hair and show some spirit? Will Maggie buckle down & get a job, or just keep shaking that ass in string bikini bottoms (don't get me wrong, a movie that can showcase Cameron Diaz behind shaking is ok in my book...but is that all she does anymore?)? I'm probably making it sound too exciting, because it's really not. I'm playing it up for yuks, because you won't find many here. I guess it's supposed to push the bounds of loyalty and family, and maybe introduce purpose and feelings to distant relatives...but I don't care. We all have our own family dysfunctions to work out in some way, shape or form...so who cares what these chicks with the same taste in Keds have to say about it anyway?

2 out of 5 stars

11/11/06 Flags Of Our Fathers

Flags Of Our Fathers (2006), directed by Clint Eastwood

watched w/ Dad; theater (Sandhills Cinema, Southern Pines, NC)

Being that it is a day of hallowed memory for those who have perished over the years of our country's existence, Veteran's Day, and one that always brings to mind for me personally the service that many in my own family have given through the military. My brother is still currently serving during a time in our world of great conflict, but my father had for my entire childhood served in the U.S. Army with great courage and leadership. I never got to know much of both of my grandfathers' service during World War II, but I have since heard stories and seen pictures of their experiences over there. With those moving memories, I tend to always be a bit inspired by a tale of true heroism in battle as is on display in many war drama motion pictures. My dad is also a big fan of war movies, and this is one that we both had talked about seeing for awhile, and I figured what better way to see it then together back home. Tales of heroism and courage are the key elements to this story, but with a very different and historic spin on them. What we have as the focus of the picture is none other than the content of yet another picture. A still picture in photography that has since seeped deeply into the American psyche as one of tremendous valor, patriotism and hope to the human spirit, and set its place in folklore as one of the most memorable images ever. That image that had engaged a nation and spawned many stories as to its origin is none other than the snapshot of six soldiers planting the American flag high atop Mt. Suribachi of the Japanese island of Iwo Jima during fierce battles of WWII. While many probably believed the photo to be a sign of sure victory, the actual raising of the flag happened early on in the battle more as a rallying cry to the troops who were in need of a morale boost. That fact is one of many myths that are debunked, yet still lovingly honored for its sheer significance, throughout this wonderful movie by esteemed actor/filmmaker Eastwood. What is most compelling about this film, is the honesty for which it portrays these national heroes who would return to the States after the taking of the photo in order to re-establish the American spirit and bring relevance to the issues of war back to the homeland far away. Even the taking of the now famous Pulitzer-Prize-winning photo was by chance, as an original smaller flag had already been placed in the same spot, with the hopes of a much larger and more noticeable symbol supplanting it by six unknown soldiers (5 Marines and one Navy Corpsman). That second raising was captured on film, and thus thrust into the international spotlight as a symbolic gesture, taken on by ordinary means. The six men would forever be linked together by one image, as three of the brave men would soon perish in the War...leaving the surviving members of the group to return home safe & sound and try to rationalize their role in being honored by the public. That had to be something that is so overwhelmingly difficult to do, and this film tries its best to follow the three surviving soldiers along that journey through Hell & back. That's another beautiful thing about this movie, not only is it a war movie, but it goes much further than that as it delves into the personal drama of the men and their lives. It is a conflict fought by thousands on battlfield soil, but also fought individually by men within their own souls. The movie is brilliantly captured in spirit by Eastwood, whose ambitious approach to the story will also come out again in 2007 as he has a second adaptation of the same story, yet told from the Japaneses perspective in the title of "Letters From Iwo Jima." Truly remarkable to think of two extraordinary films about the same moment, yet told from two varying points of view. The acting is superb here, and will no doubt cast some familiar Hollywood faces on a truly historic moment, like Ryan Phillippe and Paul Walker. Yet, let us remember the men that they are playing, who are the true veterans and heroes to honor: Sgt. Mike Strank, Pfc. Franklin Sousley, Cpl. Harlon Block, Pfc. Rene Gagnon, Pfc. Ira Hayes, and PhM. 2/c John "Doc" Bradley (www.iwojima.com).

5 out of 5 stars

11/10/06 The Terror

The Terror (1963), directed by Roger Corman & Francis Ford Coppola, Monte Hellman, Jack Hill, Jack Nicholson

watched solo; DVD (personal copy) @ home & car ride (Raleigh, NC)

The film itself is quite terrible, in the best of senses. It means to be nothing more than a shoe-string budget B-horror flick (it was shot in something like three days), yet it comprises some major talent and major cult status all in one helping. Credited as being directed by shock/sleaze godfather Corman (producer of "X: The Man With The X-Ray Eyes," "Caged Heat," "Rock 'N' Roll High School Forever," and "Death Race 2000"), it also had the un-credited fortune of involving some other big names (in both the world of campy fare and eventually Oscar-nominated respectability)...including Jack Hill (of "Big Bird Cage," "Foxy Brown," and "Switchblade Sisters" fame), Monte Hellman (exploitative "Cockfighter" and "Two-Lane Blacktop"), Francis Ford Coppola (yeah, "Godfather" trilogy ring a bell?), and Jack Nicholson (wait 'til they get a load of him). With that impressive, yet at the time mostly unheard of expertise...this was sure to be an amateur's lesson in filmmaking. Well, to a certain extent it was...in what not to do, but what will most likely happen. You will end up with a great idea gone bad. It's not for lack of trying (if you can call three days worth of shooting trying), but more likely just lack of resources that force this hand of horror into something rather tame and bland. Nicholson plays Lt. Duvalier, who is an officer in Napoleon's army that just so happens to pursue a woman into a dark castle. Upon his arrival, Duvalier is sucked into a macabre world of the castle's Baron (played by the decrepit Boris Karloff), and witches and evil spirits and blah blah blah. All the supernatural treachery in the world (or in the talent-filled room) could save this from the shelves of "MST3K" and its eternal library of maddening mediocrity. It's still fun to say that I watched it, enjoyed it for the unintentional laughs, and proved to myself that even the most talented of artists struggle to reach the level of success that we all pursue. And some like Boris Karloff, just hit that peak and take a nose-dive.

2 out of 5 stars

11/09/06 The Forgotten

The Forgotten (2004), directed by Joseph Ruben

watched w/ Leslie (partially); DVD (borrowed from parents) @ home

This is one of those movies where you never know quite what to expect, as the previews for it always seem a bit interesting…but never quite enough to hold your attention all the way through the commercial. You hear mixed reviews about it left & right, from friends who haven’t seen it yet, but just have a thing for Julianne Moore thrillers. The title seems so simplistic and straightforward, but you can’t quite remember the name of it when perusing the aisles at the local video store or (if you were really ambitious) staring at the showtimes flashing on the marquee at the theater and debating between the ambiguous title and the latest Eddie Murphy misdirected comedy flop. What is it about those titles, the one word ones that jump out at you, but don’t quite conjure up feelings when you try to remember it (ironic huh, that it’s called “Forgotten”)? However this film came into your possession (somehow my family owns it and recommended indirectly for me to borrow it), hopefully you gave it a chance, because it ain’t half bad. And speaking of ain’t half bad, why does Julianne Moore have that uncanny ability to seem strangely erotic (kind of like a goth chick who hasn’t dyed her red hair jet black yet) and totally creepy (kind of like the police sketch of an alien visitor with a wig on) at the same time…and no matter what her role is?! Uh, where was I? Oh yes, the movie…not half bad. Moore plays a grieving mother, Telly Paretta, who is struggling to cope with the tragic loss of her 9 year-old son and keep her marriage (to “E.R.” & “Revenge Of The Nerds’” Anthony Edwards) afloat amidst the bleakness. While seeking help from her shrink (“Lt. Dan’s magic legs” Gary Sinise), Telly’s memories of her son come flooding back in nightmarish forms. What happens next is unsettling, as she slowly begins to piece her sons’ memories back together…she is told by her shrink and husband and all others around her that she in fact never had a child at all. Obviously flabbergasted, she refuses to believe this and claims that everyone is out to get her. Happening across another random man, whom she forms a romantic attachment to and seems to suffer the same mysterious loss of his daughter, Telly is dead-set on finding out the truth. Top secret government agencies seem to be behind the cover-up of the childrens’ deaths, their existence, and the attempted brainwashing of Telly’s sanity. But why? That’s where it gets trippy…and I don’t want to ruin it, but let’s just say about an hour & half into this unsettling yet slow-paced thriller…um, someone gets just sucked up into the sky. That’s all I’ll say about that, and it catches you completely off guard (although someone told me about it prior, but I still forgot about it & was surprised). I guess I must have forgotten. He he.

3 out of 5 stars

11/08.06 The Eagle Has Landed

The Eagle Has Landed (1976), directed by John Sturges

watched solo; VHS (borrowed from parents) @ home

Today is my father’s birthday, and it is a momentous one. The big 5-0! That’s right, my dad is fifty, and still looks like he could kick my ass at any moment. Not only is he a strong role model in my life, but he’s always taught me to persevere over adversity and never to sweat the small stuff. To put that little nugget of wisdom into perspective…I see even silly things like this year-long Challenge as a test of the will (even though it’s purely for entertainment value) which should remain in perspective because it’s not life & death. While he’s influenced my work ethic in my professional life, so goes the ethic for this Challenge. I will finish this, and I will have fun doing it damn it! A career military man as well, my dad has always had a fascination with war movies (particular those that have dealt with the extremely layered and globally complicated World War II). This is just one of the many films that he’s always had around the house growing up, most of which I’ve caught bits & pieces of all my life…all blurring into one large war epic in my adolescent brain. Now, as an adult and more a connoisseur of film than ever, I have grown to appreciate the impact of such sweeping historical adaptations. I still remember trying to wrap my head around some of the war board games that he would strategize with, representing both sides of the War, and never quite understanding. I still remember seeing the tragic stories unfold on screen and make some sense of who’s on what side & so forth. Now I have an acute awareness of much of what happened in that era of our country’s history, and this film is just one snippet of that awareness. Including a stellar cast of Hollywood heavyweights (Michael Caine, Donald Sutherland, Robert Duvall and Donald Pleasance), this story recounts a certain fictionalized version of a plot by the Nazis and Hitler to capture British Prime Minister Winston Churchill. When it is studied that Churchill could be captured, German parachute unit commander Steiner (Caine) is sent to England on the covert mission devised by veteran Col. Radl (Duvall). The impossible mission gains some momentum as Steiner and his men dress as Polish soldiers in order to overtake a small English town and successfully kidnap Churchill. It’s a complex a sensational plot, but will it come to fruition? Again, the powerful actors in the cast, as well as able director Sturges (“The Magnificent Seven”), make this a solid performance all around. It’s all based on the book of the same name from renowned military thriller author Jack Higgins…whom I remember doing a book report on in middle/high school for something called “Eye Of The Storm” I believe…it’s weird that I remember that, but again probably an influence from my father’s library. Whatever it is that now draws me to good war movies, I know I owe to my dad, so happy birthday old timer.

3 out of 5 stars

11/07/06 Training Day

Training Day (2001), directed by Antoine Fuqua

watched solo; DVD rental (Netflix) @ home; suggested by Jason

Let's just re-title this film for what it truly is. Let's call it "The Film That Denzel Was Given The Oscar For Finally, Despite Earlier Performances Which Should Have Garnered It, But The Academy Messed Up & Wanted To Make Up For Their Mistakes In The Eyes Of The Audience." Except, that title probably wouldn't fit on most theater marquees. I mean, this should in no way take away from the directors' gritty portrayal of street life and undercover cop work, which is done very well by the talented Fuqua. This should also not belittle the fact that Denzel got the Best Supporting Oscar in 1989 for the remarkable Civil War epic "Glory" (great movie by the way). This merely should draw notice to the Academy's lack of selection prowess in the past, usually not recognizing truly the most worthy performances, but rather sometimes bowing to a popularity contest. Perhaps it was not having the gumption (see cahones) to honor an African-American with such a prestigious award for many years...but whatever the case, Denzel should have won a few times over...perhaps with the likes of "Malcolm X" or "The Hurricane" before his deserving win. Now, that I'm off that moral high horse, it should be said that this is one hell of a performance...and for such a heroic guy on screen, it's one that showcases his ability to play the bad guy well too. He plays the tough veteran narc officer Alonzo, who must take the inexperienced rookie cop Jake (Ethan Hawke) under his wing on the mean streets of Los Angeles. Looking to clean up the streets of gang violence and drugs, Jake wants nothing more than to be a good cop and learn from his new mentor. However, Alonzo teaches with a questionable approach of living the life of the gangsters, emersing himself in the culture so deeply to reach his goals, that's Jake's unsure if he hasn't crossed over to the darkside himself. Alonzo's rogue tactics at first are met with Jake's skepticism and critique, but when his methods produce results, the rookie is forced into an ethical dilemma on what is right & wrong. This 24-hour period in the day of these two men with very different approaches to law enforcement will turn out to be one that either will ever forget. It truly is a moving performance, in harsh form, from Denzel and the gritty filming style. While worthy of the accolades that the film garnered, I wish that it would have just come sooner rather than just as an afterthought to the man's legacy of film. Oh, and you get to see Eva Mendes completely naked in the film...do they give out Oscars for best bare-ass of the year as well? She'd probably be snubbed and then given the award a few years later for a cameo in some James Bond film or something.

4 out of 5 stars