Cast: Christopher Guest, Eugene Levy, Fred Willard, Catherine O’Hara
Plot: In the small Missouri town of Blaine, an effeminate wannabe director from the city attempts to reach stardom by bringing a musical with local residents to the attention of a Broadway representative. And it’s not played cute or fake, but ultimately, and satisfyingly, for REAL.
Review: How truly and utterly refreshing this was, a low budget down-to-Earth look at interesting and believable characters attempting to reach heights in all their naiveté. Anyone familiar with director Christopher Guest and his troupe of regulars, as I am, knows what can await them. All of their other “mockumentaries” including A Mighty Wind, Best in Show, and This Is Spinal Tap (Guest did not direct the latter) impress with their honest takes on unique and hilarious characters. However I had never been privy to this film until after seeing those mentioned, and what a pleasant and hilarious surprise I had to find this might be the best of the bunch.
The story is simple enough: a small town coming together to celebrate their culture and history in an original musical. What really makes this movie effective are the diverse characters, which is ostensibly the director’s modus operandi. Guest had a script in hand, but would basically just give an outline of a scene to the actors, and let them proceed how they wanted (the basic procedure of films to follow, but revolutionary here). In every sense of the word this is a wonderfully goofy character piece, both character driven and character supported.
"A musical is like warm apple pie..."
Other elements in the film come out fine, emulating a fairly cheap documentary atmosphere that completely suits the film, almost to the point that you forget its fake. The use of real location and lack of music also assist in sucking you into verisimilitude. There’s even a slightly exciting underdog element, as they acting troop awaits the arrival of the man from Broadway (the titular Guffman) believing success is truly a possibility.
If there’s one complaint to be had, it’s the fully shown realization of the musical. This does add to the realism of the story, documentary style, and is funny, but it also slightly takes away from the pacing, lacking in the plethora of comedic moments seen earlier. Perhaps its better this way though; being a character driven piece, and actually being able to care for these people, one can appreciate what they have strived for, and it is pleasing to see the group come to fruition.
Written By: Alejandro Amenábar & Mateo Gil (film "Abre Los Ojos") and Cameron Crowe (Screenplay)
Cast: Tom Cruise, Cameron Diaz, Penelope Cruz, Jason Lee
Plot: A middle-class average everyday everyman pretentious and vain magazine heir lives the “dream” until crazy women, bad face days, and varying states of actual/fake dreams alter his “dream” life… whether the dreams are real or are just dreams as he’s sleeping because its hard to tell if he’s dreaming his dream life or dreaming about dreaming or… never mind.
Review: I could not help but basically loathe much about this movie’s first act. It appeared to be a romantic comedy sans any conflict, just a yuppie whose toughest trial is not letting Cameron Diaz know that he wants Penelope Cruz (difficult). However, once the second act takes off with a face-changing event (pun intended), the happy dreamy vision alters its course towards a darker, slightly more interesting dreamy vision about life and scifi conspiracies.
Tom Cruise takes the lead role in stride with his Jerry Maguire cohort Cameron Crowe, and has probably never acted more annoying. The prose that comes out of his mouth here almost convinced me to quit altogether and watch Legend (less annoying, but still). The pain generally decreases as the film goes on, especially with Penelope Cruz as the earthy love interest whose ease on the eyes make the film more bearable. However she is also to blame, with lines like “I’ll tell you in another life, when we are both cats,” which is ridiculous-cute, except Tom Cruise steals it and vomits it later (NOOOO!). Cameron Diaz actually shines as a very fine fling who brings out surprise in her love craze scene.
Why did you make me do "Knight & Day"?! TECH SUPPORT!
I remember upon release there was much ado about what really happens, as various interpretations bring different possibilities for psychological states of the main character. I also remember that I was basically just starting High School, and having just watched it a mature 10 years later, realized that this entire hullabaloo is for naught. You can take certain things away at first, but overall the result of the plot is fairly clear to me. Maybe this is a case of “mainstream enigmatism” (BAM, Edward Felt Ph.D., just made that up!); a large budget film with large budget stars acting like concentration of the masses is key to their enlightenment. Perhaps it was a film truly difficult to breakdown a decade ago, but I can’t imagine its very tough to decipher in this day and age, possibly due to more thought-provoking films like it. Maybe its positive overall, as feelings of belonging and intelligence can arrive through the mind-work completed in understanding the story.
It isn’t exactly the most clear film anyway, or simple for that matter, with surprisingly complex characters. The almost unjustly pretentious nature is slightly bothersome, but also attractive and beautiful (in visuals too; club scene anyone?). The “cover” of a Spanish Film, as Crowe likes to call it, Vanilla Sky brings engaging mystery to annoying romantic comedy cliches, with mixed but entertaining results.
Directed By: Paul Michael Glaser Written By: Stephen King (novel), Steven E. de Souza (screenplay)
Cast: Arnold Schwarzenegger, Maria Cochita Alonso, Yaphet Kotto, Jesse Ventura, Richard Dawson
Plot: In the near future the citizens of the world enjoy hardcore games shows as provided by the new totalitarian state. Arnie basically decides to screw it up after becoming a contestant, taking out the competition and throwing up one liners in this numb dumb look at violence and media.
Review: The Running Man seems to fall right in with Arnold Schwarzenegger's film theme for the 80s; unapologetic, flashy funny cheese with slight Sci-Fi smarts. Before this was The Terminator, after was Total Recall (both of which are superior). While it may attempt to give slight forewarning in regards to the future of reality television and possible dangers of desensitization and an overbearing government, its basically sinks down to a story that will best serve the movement and continuation of the action. That being said, I couldn't help but smile watching it.
Characterization is frail here, with Arnold's character speedily being presented as one man against the world (when is he not?) moving him into position to unwittingly become a pawn in game/reality show with elements we are all use to, aside from the fact that violence and death are mainstays. His main opponent (besides Planet Earth itself) is a maniacal game show host played by Richard Dawson of Family Feud fame, essentially playing down any seriousness previously implied to the plot. From here on, it’s a number of video game levels, each with their own boss and environment, with scenes that are slightly repetitive, but fairly enjoyable over all.
As expected, there's no great acting here to mention; however, if Arnold didn't act the way he generally does in everything (or lack thereof) would the movie be as enjoyable? It is his hackneyed delivery and overly extreme gestures that help to make all of his films worth watching. Credit must be given to the writer as well; a threat from our protagonist to his arch enemy in the third act was so belabored and excessive, I had to re-watch it three times just to understand what exactly would happen if the threat were carried out (and to continuously laugh). Visual effects are fun and enjoyable, just like that synth-infused Harold Faltermeyer score; very dated as well, but maybe that’s what adds to the viewing here over 20 years after it first appeared.
You won't find anything unexpected, you will find strange computer game opening titles, your mind will be stimulated slightly by real world relevance and then squashed back down immediately, and you will have to put up with not one, but TWO future governors (both ALSO in Predator). Nonetheless, The Running Man offers lighthearted entertainment with gloss and smiles that you can't help but enjoy.
Note: Watch TOTAL RECALL; it may be strange that I bring it up here, but the similarities are palpable, and I can't help but stress it is a much better film.
Directed By: Michael Curtiz Written By: Julius and Philip Epstien and Howard Koch
Studio: Warner Brothers
Players: Humphrey Bogart, Ingrid Bergman, Paul Henreid, Claud Rains and Peter Lorre
I really don't care who you are, what walk of life you come from or your individual film experiences because Casablanca is one of those rare films that transcends such trifles and encapsulates everything that is great about this fine art that we enjoy. This review was going to happen eventually anyway and I could not think of a more appropriate, or more worthy, film to cut my teeth on. So grab a brew and make a toast because Cinebriated is taking a crack at one of the greats, "Here's looking at you, kid."
Setup: "With the coming of the Second World War, many eyes in imprisoned Europe turned hopefully, or desperately, toward the freedom of the Americas. Lisbon became the great embarkation point. But, not everybody could get to Lisbon directly, and so a tortuous, roundabout refugee trail sprang up - Paris to Marseilles... across the Mediterranean to Oran... then by train, or auto, or foot across the rim of Africa, to Casablanca in French Morocco. Here, the fortunate ones through money, or influence, or luck, might obtain exit visas and scurry to Lisbon; and from Lisbon, to the New World. But the others wait in Casablanca... and wait... and wait... and wait."
So begins the opening narration of 1942's Casablanca, set within a backdrop of desperation, fear and with the impending specter of yet another World War. When two of the highly coveted "Letters of Transit" find themselves in the hands of jaded, American nightclub owner Rick Blaine (Bogart) his cynicism and self-preservation are put to the test. But when a woman (Bergman) from Rick's past unexpectedly reenters his life he becomes emotionally and morally conflicted, leading to an ultimate decision between love and a greater cause.
"Of all the gin joints, in all the towns, in all the world, she walks into mine ..."
Review:Casablanca is a damn good film, but you shouldn't have needed me to tell you that. But what exactly is so exceptional about it?
When it was being made nobody involved expected it to be anything out of the ordinary and was, in fact, a very rushed production. The odds were stacked against it from the beginning, but something came together and produced one of the greatest films of all time. Was it the breakout performance of Humphrey Bogart? The current world socio-political climate? The chemistry and emotional depth brought to the table by Bergman? The dignified Henreid? The stellar supporting cast? Flawless dialog, one of the most tragic love stories or ingenuitive filmmaking? Surely it was all of these things that solidified Casablanca as the quintessential Hollywood Golden Age film, but there is so much more to praise and these only scratch the surface. We are going to take a closer look into the nuances of what exactly make Casablanca a timeless classic and essential viewing for anyone that professes to love film.
Let's start where all films start, with the writing. Adapted from the play "Everybody Comes to Rick's" Casablanca would go through an intense series of rewrites at the hands of at least 4 credited screenwriters who, for the most part, were working on their separate versions in seclusion. It was a tumultuous start and even when the cameras began rolling May 25th, 1942 the script was far from finished. Despite several writers working on adapting Casablanca for the screen a solid story always remained the core with the different writers playing to their strong points it was a collaborative effort from the very beginning, and ended up winning the 1943 Academy Award for screenplay. Tight, witty dialog is a great basis for a film but it takes a whole lot more to make it something special. Between the four of them they took an unproduced play and turned it into a passable melodrama, but when the cameras started rolling that is where Casablanca really begins to shine.
If there is one thing that defines Casablanca it is it's diversity and this group of writers exemplified that, but not more than the cast. Of the cast there were only four credited American actors, the rest was an international who's who affair. Many were real life expatriots that had recently escaped to the U.S. adding their personal experiences to their roles, however brief. This rich background cast adds an extra depth that you rarely see in cinema, then or now, and the fact that so many people had a shared experience similar to what shown in Casablanca (in an albeit romanticized version) make it a time capsule of early World War II socio-political issues and is a unique look at the people that lived it.
"We'll Always Have Paris ..."
Now on to some of the screens most celebrated performances; Humphrey Bogart, Ingrid Bergman, Paul Henried and Claude Rains. Prior to Casablanca Bogart was more or less a hardboiled thug, while he still carries a similar persona into Casablanca there are so many more facets of his immense talent that he manages to exhibit. Through his apathetic and sardonic exterior it is clear that there is a tortured soul that lies underneath and much, if not all, of Casablanca centers around this emotional and moral struggle within the character of Rick Blaine. When he finally breaks down into tears you share his pain, when he resolves to run off with Ilsa you can empathize. It is unquestionably Humphrey Bogart's film and everyone else feeds off of his performance and character and none so beautifully as Ingrid Bergman as Rick's former lover Ilsa. Bergman's passionate performance can only be matched by Bogarts tortured one. She is a woman divided between love and her cause (Personafied by the great Paul Henreid) and she tries with every essence of her being to do right by the latter. The history between Rick and Ilsa will threaten that devotion and Bergman's slow and emotional breakdown throughout the course of the film will culminate in her choosing one over the other but at anytime you know it could really go either way. Bergman's brilliant portrayal of Ilsa is truly what makes Casablanca a thrilling romance, it takes two to make a love story and these two had one hell of a story.
"Ricky, I'm going to miss you. Apparently you're the only one in Casablanca with less scruples than I."
Far and above, however, my favorite aspect of Casablanca is the relationship between Rick and the the captain of the French police, Louis Renault (Claude Rains). Both have their jobs to do and it often means interfering with eachothers work but at no time does that strain their friendship, or as close to friendship as Rick's character will allow, and the banter between Bogart and Rains is a treat to watch. These two characters are the heroes of the story, even if it isn't obvious at first, with Rick as the bold anti-hero and Captain Renault as a passive aggressive Nazi subordinate. I would argue these are both the roles of each actor's career and anytime they share screen time is cinematic gold. You are never sure of what either man is capable of or if they have some kind of endgame in mind but they compliment eachother flawlessly. Both men have their own personal wars to fight and it takes a climatic ending for them to both openly realize that their causes are one and the same.
Casablanca is dark and dire tale of love lost but there is also an underlying, and more important, theme of hope and a greater cause. The cause is worth sacrificing, worth dying, for and that was a hell of a powerful message when the world was engulfed in the middle of a second world war. It may have been made almost seventy years ago but it is a message that continues to resonate to this day, Casablanca is a film that will always be relevant and it was not one single thing that made this so. The combination of masterful writing, brilliant performance by the stars and the rest of the cast and some ingenius filmmaking under the restrictions of war time film production made it so.
Casablanca is a timeless masterpiece of cinema that is a cardinal cinephile sin not to experience. It is beautiful film in so many ways and you discover more to apprecriate everytime you watch it. It should go without saying; perfect score for a flawless example of filmmaking.
Directed By: Barry Levinson Written By: Lorenzo Carcaterra (book), Barry Levinson (screenplay)
Studio:Warner Brothers
Cast: Kevin Bacon, Robert De Niro, Dustin Hoffman, Jason Patric, Brad Pitt
Synopsis:Boys will be boys, but of course this may have a slightly/completely different context within Hell’s Kitchen, where boys will be boys by stealing hot dog carts and pushing them down on the ostensibly middle upper class because of the extreme malaise of their lives.
Wow, I’m so judgmental. Ok it was an accident, and these naïve, harmless, and God fearing children really didn’t mean it, but this was the pivotal event of their lives, changing everything from that moment forward, leading to the second act in the detention center, and a third act regarding the aftermath of their incarceration. All of this is tied together because Kevin Bacon is a total wanker.
Note: Kevin Bacon is my 3rd, 4th, or 5th cousin…by marriage through Kyra Sedgwick… and even though I’ve never met him, my life is still awesome because I can beat anybody else in 6 Degrees of Separation from Kevin Bacon!
Review:This is one good ol film I’ve been curious about since 10 years after it came out, due to the fact that in my youth, this looked like what I regarded as dummy drivel (AKA not a Bruckheimer production; ironic). However, I finally saw the talent and fairly decent acclaim backing it, prompting me to eventually check a copy after a long wait.
It may have its dull moments, but overall Sleepers contains a fascinating look at childhood bonds, revenge, and morality. The look at what our main characters must go through after being put in an institution is fairly effective without showing too much, due in large part to Kevin Bacon’s character being completely ruthless and inhumane. With this in mind, the controversial path they take as adults is something I can appreciate and accept; payback could not stray far from one’s mind after viewing the torture they endured, even through the fatal accident they caused.
Throughout we have a fairly in depth-look at the main characters and their connections with each other, and along with the decent chemistry between them as children, we can effectively care for them when they become physical/sexual fodder of the guards when incarcerated. The transition to adults, and to our headlining stars, may be awkward and seem to lose some of the characterization from childhood, but they receive help from some major supporting players in an alcoholic lawyer (Dustin Hoffman) and a priest (Robert De Niro, in a wonderfully understated, interesting, and oddly polite role). Here the story becomes slightly more immediate and thrilling; in essence, the whole film heads on an upward slope of intensity throughout, but it does start off in slightly dull territory.
Main aspects aside, the film scores fine points for its interesting and moving John Williams score, as well as creating and using the identity, culture, feel, and environment of Hell’s Kitchen, making the boys and those around them evoke authenticity. There may be overly melodramatic moments, unbelievable connections between past and present, as well as an ending that is not completely satisfying due to revenge being taken too early and stakes not being high enough, but overall I fell for it. In this case, even if you have qualms, it works.
Ed Felt 
"A musical is like warm apple pie..."
