The Conversation (1974)

Directed By: Francis Ford Coppola

Written By: Francis Ford Coppola

Players: Gene Hackman, John Cazale, Harrison Ford, Terri Garr and Robert Duvall

Setup: When a secretive surveillance expert is hired to record a couples conversation he feels what he heard could lead to their murder he forgets his cardinal rule: don't get involved.

What follows is an unraveling of control and a smothering paranoia all driven by the guilt of a previous job that ended in cold-blooded murder.

Just be careful what you say, you never know who's listening ...

Review: To say Francis Ford Coppola was on a filmmaking hot streak in the '70's would be an understatement but it still wouldn't be as brilliantly understated as his 1974 thriller The Conversation. The writing is taut and the slow-burning suspense is maddening, couple that with Gene Hackman's layered portrayal of a guilt-ridden surveillence expert Henry Caul and you have the recipe for something that borders on a line between Hitchcock and reality. It's a damn good winning combination (even those highfalutin French folk over in Cannes thought so)!

While many may view this simply as a film about growing paranoia it is Gene Hackman's portrayal that elevates it above most dime-store imitators. His character is a devout Catholic complete with the guilty concience, in his case a decade old triple-murder that was commited after he turned in some audio recordings. This guilt drives him to do things outside of his normally controlled and introverted nature that put him in the middle of a coorporate debacle that could have at least two lives at risk. Support Hackman's performance with that of a loyal, even when pushed away, character of Stan (John Cazale, The Godfather) and a looming and demanding client's assistant in the form of a young Harrison Ford and you've got a cast that can't really be topped.

If you're not a fan of a good slow-burn The Conversation may not be your bag, but I'd argue that its sometimes maddeningly slow pacing is deliberate and allows you to share in the unraveling of Henry Caul's determinedly controlled world. This is a thriller from the words and direction of one of the greatest film auteurs ever to spend time behind a camera and should definitely be checked out if you a fan of the genre, filmmaker or are looking for an phenomally unconventional performance from an actor of Gene Hackman's caliber.

Even though Henry Caul was "the best bugger on the West Coast" he never forgot his roots ...

Tidbit: It was brought to my attention that Gene Hackman's paranoid character Edward Lyle in 1998's Enemy of the State could be seen as a continuation of Henry Caul from The Conversation. I like that idea so much, in fact, that I'm just going to treat it as fact from here on out.

Drink of Choice: Like Henry Caul I'm a man that can enjoy some jazz from time to time (Dave Brubeck and Django Reinhardt are my cats of choice) so why not "The Jazz" Cocktail? The mixings: 1 Oz Campari, 1 Oz Havana Club 3yrs Old Rum, 0.5 Oz Passoa passion fruit liqueur, 1.5 Oz Sweet and sour mix, 2 Spoons passion fruit puree, 3 Oz Sparkling wine or champagne. Add ice and shake to a grooving bass line and serve in a classy highball. Cheers! 

High Noon (1952)

Directed by Fred Zimmerman

Based on the magazine story “The Tin Star” by John W. Cunningham

Adapted by Carl Foreman

Starring Gary Cooper, Grace Kelly, Lloyd Bridges, and… Lee Van Cleef!!!

Plot:  A recently married Marshall can’t help but give in to the call of duty when three thugs come to town with their fearless leader en route, newly released from prison and out for revenge on the Marshall.

Review:  Knowing someone who holds this film dear to his heart (his top film of ALL time, or just the last 113-136 years), I’ve been meaning to watch this film for quite a while.  I’ve also been fairly excited for it; Gary Cooper stars, it’s a classic western, and it’s touted to be in real time.  With decently modest anticipation building, and a challenge from the ultimate fan that I would never watch it, I finally started the streaming process.

Right from the get-go, it wasn’t exactly what I expected.  The opening credits start with friendly enough western images of what appear to be friends gathering in the desert and riding off to some distant location.  All normal, except for the song (“The Ballad of High Noon”) which provides the true, ominous nature of the scene: these characters have no good intentions (Lee Van Cleef of The Good The Bad & The Ugly fame should be a clear giveaway).   We proceed to the wedding of Marshall Will Kane (Cooper), and the receiving end of news given about Frank Miller, a released convict the Marshall previously arrested, coming back to take back the town and ostensibly Kane’s life. 

From this moment on it is literally a race against the clock (an instrument we see displayed often) before the eponymous time when Miller returns to town.  We see this race in the form of Kane trying to gather other lawmen and townspeople together to defend the town, only finding apathy from most except for his new wife (who is against her husband because he is defending the town).  All other characters he has previous in-depth history with seem to either not care, or actually appear excited at his possible demise.

DRAW!

Everything leading up to the final (see: only) battle make this movie an excellent alternative to westerns, even in this modern age.  I can see how it is regarded as a “Western for people who don’t like Westerns”.  While it takes place in that familiar setting with basic archetypes present, it holds a uniquely tense atmosphere, not presenting any real action until the end (albeit a slightly anticlimactic end).  It also gives plenty of room for character development in its tight runtime (decent acting from all parties, including Grace Kelly in an early role), showing friends and enemies revealing true feelings and much more in the subtext, not only towards the Marshall but also each other during this trying time.  All of this takes place with the opening song peeking throughout its core, and with the beautifully stark cinematography matching the feelings of real heat and dire consequences in store for our protagonist. 

After reading it was meant to mirror Gary Cooper’s own battle with Hollywood and the House Un-American Activities Committee, my opinion slightly lifted (I always appreciated solid symbolism and allegory without being blatantly obvious).  However, I don’t need this knowledge to appreciate a film; most aspects except for the slightly abrupt ending make for a well-acted piece of western cinema that is taut, tense, and terrific.

"Even I know about the Pendleton Roundup "

Drink of choice: Pendelton's Whisky (even though its Canadian, the name Pendelton makes me think of rodeos due to the Pendelton Rodeo...making me think of Westerns...so there).

 

Collateral (2004)

Directed by:  Michael Mann

Screenplay by:  Stuart Beattie

Starring:  Tom Cruise, Jamie Fox, Jada Pinkett Smith 

Plot:  After meeting the woman of his dreams, a Los Angeles cabbie in denial catches up with a killer brimming with STYLE!…It’s really kind of a bummer for the Cabbie.  Either way, both men will never be the same.

Review:  Alright alright, I know this is way ridiculous.  It has been a whole YEAR since I’ve written a review, and after all this time, I resort to reviewing ANOTHER Michael Mann movie.  My last review was The Last of the Mohicans, where I happened to unabashedly profess my love for the director and his films.  So where do I go now?  The MANN!

I coincidentally happened to watch Collateral recently, and as I meant to get back into the spirit of sharing my feelings on film with the masses (currently mass…or lack thereof), this 2004 beauty seemed like the perfect place to hang.  Do my ecstatic feelings shown previously appear in this endeavor?  For the most part, yest.

Collateral is a film I find myself pushing endlessly towards the masses (again…maybe just Mom here) regardless of my recent knowledge of it.  In all actuality, I truly believe I’d only seen this film twice, and the second time possibly more than 5 years ago.  Upon this revisit, there were moment of true bliss, and others that left me slightly perplexed; these were few and far between however, as Collateral may very well be Mann’s most taut film to date.

One major difference compared to all of his previous work is the script: it wasn’t his (although he reportedly revised it substantially).  Stuart Beattie is credited with this little baby (early drafts by Executive Producer Frank Darabont of Shawshank and The Walking Dead Fame) making quite a tightknit piece of work.  Not only does the story take place over the course of one night, but much of it is in a cab with major philosophical battle between the two leads.  The story is simple enough, with Vincent the hit man (played cool and efficiently by Tom Cruise) essentially taking Max the cabbie (Jamie Foxx in a star making turn) hostage, as he takes out his 5 targets he has been contracted to kill.  While you may think one has the upper hand over the other, events of the night and fairly calm debates show a continually alternating picture of who each of these two men really are, played effectively up front and in the subtext.

Mann’s first foray into digital cinematography (and justified by the accent of the LA night) truly is a visual masterwork.  Scenes showcasing life in and out of the taxi cab, in clubs, skyrises, and trains are truly stunning and beautiful.  One issue I could not separate myself from was that while it looked like Mann, it did not completely feel like Mann, most likely based on the fact that the story did not originate from him.  This should not be viewed as a fault necessarily; directors shouldn’t have to keep exactly consistent from movie to movie (why should they).  It just took me slightly out of the story, and I can’t help but feel upset.  Still….that’s my own damn fault, isn’t it?!  Not the fault of the MANN!  Even if it was something completely new, he actually did go with a script that in the end seems almost to be tailor made for his visual sensibilities. 

Maybe in my old age, I’m becoming a little short with my favorite filmmaker.  Regardless, Collateral truly is a slick spectacle that remains taut and tight through to the end.  Music here is fairly stellar (maybe a little too bombastic at the end) and the setting of LA is fleshed out well enough to truly be a supporting character.  And speaking of supporting, the cast adds depth and background that effectively surrounds our two leads without being overbearing.  Some of the cast you will may not even recognize at first (Mark Ruffalo never looked so Narc) while others might be making some of their first big US appearances (never realized Javier Bardem was here).

Even though at first the film may have differed from what I remember, I cannot deny the cool, the real, the vibe that makes me truly feel I’m in LA like I’ve never seen it before.  He may have not written the piece, but make no mistake, this is Michael Mann’s movie, and it ranks up there with his best. 

 

Killer Joe (2012)

Directed By: William Friedkin

Written By: Tracy Letts

Cast: Emile Hirsh, Mathew  McConaughey, Juno Temple, Thomas Haden Church and Gina Gershon

Synopsis: Killer Joe is the most effective anti-KFC ad you'll ever see.

Or ... Killer Joe is simply that ol' tale of young, trailer trash dumbass getting into trouble with drug dealers who will kill him if he doesn't pay up. When said young, dumbass (and this kid is thick!) can't pay up he formulates a brilliant plan off his mom for the insurance money. While it's clear that this entrepreneurial ignoramus doesn't know much about anything he definitely doesn't know the first thing about killing. So, along with his even dumber dad, he hires a man to do the dirty work and when they can't pay the advance Killer Joe takes his innocent sister as collateral.

Dumbest. Decision. Ever.

"You ever hear of Joe Cooper? He's a cop. A detective actually. He's got a little business on the side ... he kills people."

 

Full Disclosure: Preceding the screening of Killer Joe at the Seattle International Film Festival director William Friedkin won the SIFF Lifetime Achievement Award (for the second time he pointed out) and in what was supposed to be a 30 minute tribute/interview with the accomplished director turned into almost two hours of him just telling awesome, hilarious and truly enthralling stories about his experiences in the industry.

If I wasn't laughing at his anecdotes it was because he was blowing my mind with some factoid. For example, did you know he directs operas? The guy that was behind the camera of The Excorcist and The French Connection dabbles in opera! How cool is that?! Friedkin may be in his late 70's but he is one of the funniest and most genuine men I have ever watched speak.

He can also cuss up a storm and I somehow find that incredibly endearing.

So I was rooting for Killer Joe and I wanted to like it a lot before the theater even darkened ... I ended up loving it. Now let's review a movie!

Review: This isn't William Friedkin's first rodeo with the screenwriter/playwright Tracy Letts (the other being 2006's Bug as well as some stage work) and their collaboration is performing at the highest it has ever been. "It all starts with the words" Friedkin stated prior to the screening going on to say that what we would see onscreen was pretty much word for word from the Letts screenplay meaning he's probably the most responsible for what makes Killer Joe work.

First off I want to talk about the tone of Killer Joe which truly allows the actors performances to shine. To call it a dark comedy would be an understatement. I guess the best way I can sum it up is by classifying it as a "trailer trash film noir battered in humor and deep-fried in brutality". Yeah, that'll do. Hell, that'd look great on the back cover of Killer Joe's Blu-ray ... just sayin'.

This film is perfectly cast as well with most of the actors going against their normal typecasts and just nailing it. Emile Hirsch is entirely believable as a stupid, frightened boy who is in over his head and just doesn't know it. Mathew McConaughey's character is both so deliciously sinister and charming you almost can't help like him ... even when you should be utterly repulsed by his actions. He masks his sinister side with politeness, but his eyes are cruel ... I haven't seen a movie that has the antagonist walk that fine line so well since Robert Mitchum's murderous character in The Night of the Hunter. Juno Temple plays an innocent, in virtually every sense of the word, girl who appears to be blissfully ignorant of the predicament she has found herself in but also seems to be fully aware of her own actions. Gina Gershon (an NC-17 vet) and Thomas Haden Church truly shine through as dirtbag trailer park parents.

"I heard ya'll talkin' about killin' Mama... I think it's a good idea."

Especially Church, he owns the role of dumbass dad. Seriously. The way Church plays the father figure as more of an equal, or even intellectually inferior to Hirsch is brilliant and probably gets the most laughs. You totally believe that he is this dude, who's content just to sit around in long johns, a trucker hat, chuckling at monster truck DVDs whilst sucking down cheap beer. Church pretty much steals every scene he's in by playing stupidity straight and in doing so creates some of the greats gut-busting laughs.

As for the pacing Killer Joe is a bit of a slowburn initially but where a typical film noir could easily get bogged down trying to force the plot forward the welcomed addition of humor in, virtually nonstop ranging from lowbrow to completely absurd, thoroughly entertain and keep you engaged. Clocking in at only 103 minutes rest assured the action pops up like controlled bursts of insanity propelling us to a final showdown and it pays off in a very satisfying and brutal way.

And when the credits roll I reckon you'll probably have a big stupid, satisfied grin on your face. I sure as hell did! By the way, you may not have to wait too long to see Killer Joe as it looks like it finally received  a limited release outside of film festivals late last month on July 27th!

Now I know some of you are wondering if Killer Joe deserves its NC-17 rating and I honestly don't think it does. William Friedkin said it best before the screening of Killer Joe even started, "Fuck the MPAA." The MPAA is pretty damn hard to get a handle on but it's pretty safe to say that when it comes to sexual content they tend to be prudish while when it comes to violence they tend to let it slide a bit more. I have seen a few NC-17 flicks over the years and I don't feel like Killer Joe has the explicit sex and nudity of last year's Shame, the nun-rape and hyperdermic drug use of Bad Lieutenant (not that Nic Cage flick, the other one) or the gratuitous nudity of Showgirls to warrant this super-restrictive rating.

"It smells heavenly ... who'd like to say grace?"

*******POSSIBLE MINOR SPOILERS (but probably not)*******

Yes, there is definitely nudity, some awkward sexual content and some very brutal violence but nothing that I'd consider NC-17 level, just in hard R territory. I don't think it is much of a spoiler to say one of the most shocking moments in the movie that probably will be talked about the most involves a certain foodstuff filling in for a certain part of the male anatomy. While it is definitely degrading for the person on the receiving end it is not exceptionally explicit. It's not like an actual dick was whipped out and being sucked, it was a proxy penis by way of chicken leg.

The Last of the Mohicans (1992)

Directed by:  Michael Mann

Screenplay by:  Michael Mann & Christopher Crowe

Based on the novel by James Fenimore Cooper

Starring:  Daniel Day Lewis, Madeleine Stowe, Wes Studi

Plot:  Set in the year 1757, the last three members of a Native American tribe becomes caught in the middle of the French and Indian War as they attempt to protect the daughters of a British Colonel. 

Review:  It’s hard for me not to be biased in this review.  I’m generally in love with any film that is directed by Michael Mann.  Not only is he the creator of my all time favorite film Heat (aka “The Greatest Film of All Time”) but he also never ceases to keep his works grounded in atmospheric reality, regardless of story, genre, or period.  Is it any different with this film?  Nay.

This film completely stands out as a modern classic, joining elements of rousing adventure and romance with grounded story telling and filmmaking techniques, making it, in this reviewer’s eyes, one of a kind. 

The sweeping cinematography, beautiful locations, and grandiose action assist the viewer in completely being entranced and accepting the film as reality.  Moving at a steady pace, it never really slows, keeping conflict and the stakes in constant focus.  The set pieces feel realistic and legitimate, the numerous supporting characters add to the epic nature, and the music (scored partly by Trevor Jones and partly by Randy Edelman … truly phenomenal.  In fact, this movie could succeed fairly well with a different score solely based on previous aspects listed, but it wouldn’t nearly have the efficacy and grandeur. 

Taking place in 1757, we see an America still in development, with a wilderness that no longer exists, tragically along with various Native tribes (including the titular Mohicans).  Not only is this setting unique, but the main characters including Hawkeye (Daniel Day Lewis), and, by adoption, his father Chingachgook (Russell Means) and brother Uncas (Eric Schweig), create a fresh and interesting dynamic; the latter two are blood relatives, and Hawkeye is not, nor is he native. 

This adds to the interesting conflicts and duplicitous nature within the epic; how all these various groups can and cannot get along.  We have settlers fighting to live their own lives, English fighting French, and native Americans fighting either for revenge in the case of the antagonist Magua, or more generally just to survive.  Evoking what ostensibly were major issues of those times, we see politics and real issues come into play in the subtext, without being overstated or commandeering the story, making a for a welcoming and complex experience.  We also can find some way, if at all possible, to understand the plight of the Native Americans with the unstoppable invasion by immigrants.  They are hard struck to find a choice or answer in regards to living the way they had for centuries.  As a Huron war chief puts effectively in the third act, “What are the Huron to do?”

"Dad's always constapated and sooo sloow... CMON!"

Other aspects of the film excel as well; acting seems to be obviously fantastic, with Daniel Day Lewis at the helm.  One may doubt his talent in an action piece, based on previous works (Room With A View, My Left Foot) but after viewing his total submersion into the Hawkeye character, there is no doubt.  Just as well, the action set pieces are clearly planned and executed, with a vivid geographical sense at play, so we know where everything occurs. 

Based on a book by James Fenimore Cooper, the film is adept and able in keeping with the rousing and adventurous nature while including complexity (the book is rather simplistic in its plot and description of Native peoples).  There was also a previous film made in the 1930s, of which I have not yet seen.  I imagine it to be similar in some regard to the subject of this review.  However, I cannot imagine either to be as exciting, entertaining, dramatic, rousing, romantic, and epic as Michael Mann’s version; truly an amazing vision of adventure you can take seriously.