 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I've never seen the film (THE INNOCENT) but I've long enjoyed the score CD by Gerald Gouriet.
Nice use of the song (Glaube Mir??) for the main theme, given some lovely orchestral renditions and also some tender moments and decent suspense scoring.
I think I'll leave the film alone and stick to the one I see in my head, when I play the CD, Mitch 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Dec 7, 2023 - 1:55 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
MusicMad
(Member)
|
Shadow of Fear (1963) ... 3/10
A cheap one hour production filmed entirely in Sussex which has some promise until one line of dialogue* destroys the magic and from that point it's all basic stuff: man on the run, can't risk contacting the police as he's just killed someone who might be a police officer, but - as we all have - his girlfriend has an uncle who knows someone in MI5.
* perhaps an in-joke but the script has the actor then say Maybe some day I'll learn to keep my mouth shut!
Some nice scenery, quiet roads (allowing for a car chase with shooting), action on the high seas ... and lots of talking.
Lead Paul Maxwell is good as the innocent caught up in a spy-ring and there's decent support from a few well-known British TV actors. The story, acting, direction and overall production mirrors many 1960s' TV dramas.
A highlight is the music score by Martin Slavin ... a great title theme and melodic, if not dramatic, underscoring. I know his name from only one other film: The Cool Mikado (1963)
As for the film's title ... your guess is as good as mine ...
Sully (2016) ... 7/10
As a dramatic re-telling of a recent dramatic event it's pretty good and the script/direction allow you to become involved wanting Sully and his co-pilot to be fully vindicated for their actions which saved all lives. Most of the flying scenes and the landing sequence look realistic such that, even if you know the outcome, the film holds your attention.
Where the script has a problem is deciding how to open the story out without it becoming a tedious portrayal of everyday people doing their everyday jobs. Hence the events which probably took months are shown to take only a few days and nobody other than Sully is given any character ... the witty remark his co-pilot makes at the end is the closest we get to seeing anymore of the second lead, Aaron Eckhart.
IMDb Goofs demonstrate how the script departs from reality but most of the issues described did not occur to me whilst watching.
If I'd known, I'd forgotten that Clint Eastwood was the director; I don't know the names of the music contributors and the score was mostly nondescript.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SILENT NIGHT (2023) – 6/10
This film lives up to its title, since not a single word is uttered by any of the characters during the picture. The story is told solely through the visuals, sound effects, and Marco Beltrami’s sometimes poignant score. Unfortunately, screenwriter Robert Archer Lynn has not stretched himself at all, devising a simplistic tale of suburban father “Brian Godlock” (Joel Kinnaman) whose pre-school son is killed just before Christmas by a stray bullet fired by gangbangers engaged in a drive-by shootout. Afterwards, a grieving Godlock turns to the bottle, losing his wife (Catalina Sandino Moreno) in the process, then decides to arm up and go into training to avenge his son’s death. He sets the next Christmas Eve as the date of his retribution.
This film was directed by noted Chinese action director John Woo (FACE/OFF, MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE 2), his first film in 6 years and first American film in 20 years. Known for his stylish action sequences, Woo has decided this time to go light on the style and to lead with brutality.
I suppose that this film is proof positive that many action films could dispense with the dialogue entirely and still be understandable. If so, it’s also proof that the story has to be stripped to its bare elements for that to be a viable technique. But there is definitely something lost in the process. There is only so much an actor can do to build a character with just facial expressions and flashbacks. Even most silent films had intertitles, and the silent film actors were much better versed in their technique than is Joel Kinnaman, whose stern face is onscreen for nearly every one of the film’s 104 minutes. Beltrami’s score helps somewhat, providing the emotional core of the quieter scenes. But when the slaughter starts, the score slips into standard action mode.
The film is an interesting experiment, but I can’t call it a success.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Milady: The Three Musketeers - (2023) 9/10
This continuation follows on from the first movie, with a lot of intrigue, double-crossing, lots of action, and a murder plot to unravel!
D'Artagnan is forced to join forces with Milady to save an acquaintance who was kidnapped on purpose before his eyes. But as war is declared and Athos, Porthos and Aramis have already joined the front, a secret from the past shatters old alliances to reveal who is the true enemy and friend are right within the heart of monarchy and government.. Just brilliant yet again thoroughly enjoyable in all categories: Direction, story etc. A classic has truly come alive!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Dec 13, 2023 - 11:07 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Bob DiMucci
(Member)
|
DIE HARD (1988) – 9/10
Is DIE HARD a Christmas movie or not? Disney seems to think so, since they have chosen December to re-release the film to theaters, just catching the tail end of its 35th anniversary year. (It was originally released on 15 July 1988.) Christmas movie or not, it’s still a hell of a bang-up action film, and hasn’t aged more than a tad.
This seems to be the film in which the crime drama/heist film graduated into an action spectacular. I was trying to think of an earlier film that treated the crime genre in this manner, but none came readily to mind. Maybe the previous year’s LETHAL WEAPON, also produced by this film’s Joel Silver. Whether or not there are prior iterations, this was the one that made such films into a genre, such that producers could pitch a film by calling it “Die Hard on a plane,” or “Die Hard on a ship,” or Die Hard wherever.
Given how over-the-top such action films have become in the past 35 years, it’s interesting to see the origins of the genre—how screenwriters Jeb Stuart and Steven E. de Souza, and director John McTiernan, pace the film and carefully meter out its action scenes between the quieter moments of Bruce Willis’ “John McClane” talking to himself, to baddie Alan Rickman, or the patrol officer whom he contacts on the outside (Reginald VelJohnson).
This was also the film that turned Bruce Willis from a television star into a movie star, and he never looked back. Willis was paid like a star for the film, taking home $5 million of the film’s $28 million budget. But the picture earned its keep, grossing $143 million worldwide.
It’s fitting that DIE HARD was added to the National Film Registry in 2017. The film received four Oscar nominations in the technical categories. The film print (now DCP) retains all of its original credits, with no suggestion that the film has been updated in any way. But it was previously digitally remastered for its 25th anniversary re-release, and the analog Dolby Stereo sound that is still credited would have been upgraded to digital then. It sounds great.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Boy and the Heron: 8/10
Q: What does a "gray heron" have to do with being the guide to time and space and life and death? And why do anthropomorphized, warlike parakeets have a kingdom guarding that inner world? And why does the ramshackle temple, conveniently placed in an outlier locale, serve as the conduit between our world and theirs, especially for a kid who suffered a recent, terrible loss? And what does WWII have to do with any of this?
A: ... hey shaddap.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
How the Grinch Stole Christmas (Ron Howard, 2000) 2/10
Overblown, fuzzy, and confused movie. Ron Howard has shown that he is capable of crafting excellent mainstream movies, but in his attempt at a Tim Burtonish surreal Christmas fantasy he turns out a garrish nightmare.
The backstory has the Grinch hate Christmas because of past rejection as a child, which is cringe- but not gringeworthy notion and deflates the character beyond recognition. The Grinch seemed quite reasonable in not wanting to have anything to do with the obnoxious and loud Whoville citizens and their Christmas-Fury.
Not even James Horner, whose music is the only thing that hits all the right notes, can save this mess.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Dec 28, 2023 - 1:12 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Bob DiMucci
(Member)
|
CHARLIE AND THE CHOCOLATE FACTORY (2005) – 7/10
WONKA (2023) – 8/10
These two films provide two different versions of the backstory of “Willy Wonka.” In Tim Burton’s CHARLIE AND THE CHOCOLATE FACTORY, Wonka (Blair Dunlop) is the son of a stern dentist played by Christopher Lee, a part written specifically for the film to give the character of Willy Wonka a bit of a family history. Dr. Wonka strictly forbade his son from consuming any candy. After sneaking a piece of candy, Wonka instantly became hooked and ran away from home to follow his dreams. When the older Wonka (Johnny Depp) returned, however, both his father and their house were gone. Wonka’s mother is never mentioned.
In Paul King’s WONKA, Willy (Colin O'Brien) is raised by his loving mother (Sally Hawkins), a maker of delicious chocolate herself. While the older Willy (Timothée Chalamet) develops chocolate-making skills of his own, his mother passes away before she can impart to Willy her secret for making her delicious variety of chocolate. Wonka’s father is never mentioned.
These two approaches to Wonka’s childhood mirror the attitudes taken by their respective films. In CHARLIE, Willy Wonka is a sly sometimes devilish character, who seemingly delights in giving obnoxious children (and their parents) their comeuppance. In WONKA, Willy is a wide-eyed innocent, seeking to make a name in the chocolate business, and naive enough to fall prey to any manner of schemes hatched by unscrupulous boarding house owners or rival chocolatiers. It’s hard to see Chalamet developing into the character portrayed by Depp.
CHARLIE is a much darker tale than the upbeat WONKA, and Depp’s character is much less approachable than is Chalamet’s. The songs in CHARLIE (by Danny Elfman) are pretty much limited to one each celebrating the “demise” of four ill-mannered children taking the tour of Wonka’s factory. WONKA’s songs (by Neil Hannon) are more in the nature of Broadway production numbers.
While CHARLIE is a faithful adaptation of Roald Dahl’s book, there was not as much source material (other than the Wonka character itself) for the more original WONKA to follow. So, the approaches taken by the filmmakers for each film are equally valid, even if the evolution of the character from one film to the next seems problematic.
CHARLIE was a hit at the box office, with the $150 million production taking in $475 million worldwide. The $125 million WONKA is unlikely to do as well, with a 3-week total box office standing at $272 million.
[Follow-up (4/26/24): As it turns out, WONKA did much better at the box office than I predicted, grossing $632 million worldwide.]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Dec 29, 2023 - 2:41 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
MusicMad
(Member)
|
Fragment of Fear (1970) ... 3/10
It must be so easy to write a film script ... a few scenes with characters talking and, with a little effort, have the scenes interrelate so that some of the characters appear in more than one scene and appear to be talking about the same subject.
Or am I unkind? Perhaps the scriptwriter delivered a coherent story and it was the director who decided to drop a scene here or there ... what's it matter? The audience will have paid their entrance fee before they know they've been conned.
Or perhaps the director delivered a film which ran far too long so the editor/producer/??? chose to chop a section here and there ...
During the 1960s and 1970s one actor, above all others, in British cinema delivered the confused, possibly drug addicted, leading male role and here is perfect: David Hemmings. He is supported by a wonderful cast of known British faces (plus a very brief turn by Adolfo Celi suggesting a link to the weird giallo films of that era) and it's played out so seriously that you think you're watching a decent thriller.
Excellent cinematography in Italy: Pompeii, Sorento and Solerno, UK: Seaford (superb wet conditions in comparison to the glorious Italian sunshine) and London plus a great score by Johnny Harris (the melodic title music is repeated but there are several atmospheric disturbing cues which add to the tension).
All let down by a script/production which couldn't be bothered to tell the story.
The Facts of Life (1960) ... 5/10
Both Lucille Ball and Bob Hope are good in this inter-marital affair comedy and the script has many amusing lines ... but it's rarely laugh out loud material. The best line to achieve this, for me, was spoken by a character who was on screen for less than a minute.
IMDb states that it was chosen as the 1961 Royal Film Performance which I find difficult to comprehend. Despite its two stars it appears cheap, mostly studio bound, lacking a decent support star. The B&W print was mediocre ... the film called for bright Technicolor.
The Johnny Mercer penned title song, performed by Eydie Gormé and Steve Lawrence was sufficiently good to be Oscar nominated; the score by Leigh Harline hardly registered. I'd forgotten I have a copy of the song (conducted by Don Costa) in my library! 
Anatomy of a Murder (1959) ... 8/10
If you're not a fan of courtroom dramas then nothing I say/write is likely to attract you to watch this long melodramatic, implausible - dated - B&W story of an inexperienced defence lawyer taking on his first murder trial. Perhaps the inclusion of Duke Ellington at the piano, speaking a few words, will bring in a few viewers.
Despite my parents being fans of star James Stewart, this was not a film ever discussed or promoted and I first saw it some years later. I owned the DVD and after a couple of viewings disposed of it, only to watch, this time, a TV broadcast.
I'm not sure Lee Remick is right for the role - perhaps at the time but too many dominant female roles since mean I struggle to accept her portrayal here. Perhaps some of the courtroom procedures (antics?) are far from realistic; the denouement which leaves the clever prosecuting lawyer - a great performance by George C. Scott - flummoxed is too obvious.
All are minor compared with the commanding performance of James Stewart and a wonderful support cast.
I've owned the score for many years ... it's not a favourite but I enjoy the occasional play.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
