Fight Four Your Life is an exploitation flick about a group of criminals who bust out of jail, while in transit. Incredibly violent, and on the run, the three men escape to upstate New York where they hide out in the home of a black minister and his family, holding the family hostage. Most of the film takes place in this house, with dialogue between the leader of the criminals, Cane, an incredibly racist man whose disdain for African american's is only matched by his lunacy, and the family, terrified for their lives. This film is sleazy as hell and features quite a few sequences that are pretty hard to watch-the sequence where one of the criminals beats a young boy to death with a rock was particularly disturbing. The f While watching this film I couldn't help but think of comparisons to Larry Cohen's BONE, just in reverse. It's kinda a silly comparison, as this film is far more sleazy and exploitative, not as smart-though it does have it's moments, but quite fun in that outrageous sleazy sorta way. I definitely love how the film ends, essentially becoming a lot smarter even taking a look at the reasons for Cain's hatred from a psychological perspective. While it's arguably too little too late at this point, it does add to the piece. A film that is clearly not for sensitive viewers, though William Sanderson's performance is so outlandish and well done that it's definitely good for a few laughs. 7.5/10
0 Comments
I was in the mood for some good old fashioned camp so I decided to revisit Frank Henenlotter's Frankenhooker. The story revolves around Jeffrey (James Lorniz) a mad scientist of sorts, who pretty much loses his remaining marbles when his girlfriend, Elizabeth (Patty Mullen), is killed by one of his inventions, a remote control lawnmower. Determined to get her back, and with only Elizabeth's head attached, he decides to kill some Hookers using a super crack drug he creates, using the body parts to re-animate her. If you couldn't tell from the title alone, the synopsis should give you an indication that this is a Horror exploitation-comedy that revels in it's campy premise. James Lorinz central performance really is a great blend of eccentric and disturbing, really caring the film to a degree with this off-kilter performance. The whole thing is just really fun, and treated with this energetic sense of gross-out humor. A small but great example of this being the news report which James watches over and over again as a way of reminding himself of her. The news report is a great example of hysterical bad taste, at one point the reporter refers to Elizabeth, as a "tossed salad", which I just found hysterical. While this is a lot of fun, it's not as good as Stuart Gordon's Re-Animator, the obvious comparison, but I would still definitely recommend it to anyone who enjoys these types of Campy exploitation horror flicks. 7.5/10 Dr. Charles Forbin and his team of scientist have just debuted their new electronic computer system, Colossus, a super-computer designed to take control of America's missile defense system. Underestimating the computer's ability to learn and adapt, Colossus takes control of the country and ends up communicating with the Russian equivalent, Guardian, in an attempt to take over the world, for what it perceives as, better for man kind. This is a very well done film, and as far as the Machines vs. Mankind genre goes, it's one of the better ones out there. Made on a low budget, the film relies heavily on its ingenuity to create this Supercomputer and the world around it. It's very well done, and I would argue that the lack of budget actually helped the film in a lot of ways. The story is very tight, mostly focusing on Dr. Forbin, the man responsible for the computer, who is now tasked by Colossus to be the representative of the human race. Lots of great tension and paranoia follow as Korbin attempts endlessly to stop Colossus, even while being under constant surveillance. All this is great stuff but what makes this film so effective for me is how socially conscious it all is. Coming out in 1970, the Cold War was in full effect. The film shows how the Russians and Americans in an attempt to defend themselves from each other (in the fact that they both build these super computers) end up, in essence, destroying the world for all mankind. It's a case for humanities need to unite as one; hell, even the president in the film has a striking resemblance to JFK. 8.5/10 Frank is a divorced, his daughter hates him, and he lives alone in an apartment where he watches countless garbage television. Frank has grown sick and tired of the downward spiral of American culture, and after learning that he has develop terminal cancer, he decides it's time to take out as many people poisoning our culture and society as he can before he dies. He teams up with Roxy, a young psychotic high school girl with similar views and together they declare war on the various reality stars, O'Reilly-type conservative talk show hots, people who talk in movie theaters, and anyone else viewed as poisoning society. God Bless America is a pretty fun concept but man it misses the mark in creating something actually interesting. What amounts, is essentially a 100 minute vehicle for Bobcat Goldthwait to stand up on his soap box and bitch and moan about his grievance with our society-most being shallow grievances about shit like American Idol. The film is very over the top, which isn't necessarily a bad thing, except for that in this film it just makes all the grievances feel cheap and manufactured. One example of this being how Frank's doctor is so ridiculously ignorant that he answers his cell phone while informing Frank about his brain tumor.. It just feels so forced and silly. Other parts of the film feel incredibly stages-the movie theater sequence being a prime example, which one again takes any and all weight outta any commentary Goldthwait was hoping for. In the end, this is the type of film that pisses me off cause ti could have actually made some valid statements about modern culture and society, but instead opts for this self-righteous pandering. Seriously, is Bobcat Goldthwait such a saint?.... It's kinda funny I guess.. but ugh.. 4.5/10 Set in an alternate-1983, Beyond the Black Rainbow is a challenging, ambiguous piece of filmmaking that provides little concrete answers, yet is incredibly intoxicating. It's essentially the most bat-shit insane "mad scientist" film ever made. The film centers on a Scientist, Barry Nyle, who performs strange experiments on a young girl with psychic abilities. Really this is the type of film in which plot isn't really of much interest because of the overwhelming sense of style and atmosphere in which the film is able to create. The film's imagery is top tier stuff, using bright contrasting colors (bright reds, lavish oranges, etc), lots of blurry imagery and all sorts of various compositions to create this oppressive exhausting atmosphere. The flashback sequence involving some sort of portal is straight up experimental in its approach and one of the highlights of the film for me. Besides the visuals, the performance by Michael Rogers as the scientist is worth mentioning. This man absolutely knows how to play creepy, and he's down right frightening to watch. Oh, the score! is also a fantastic addition, the heavy synth score which underlays the film reminded me of Carpenter's work on Assault on Precinct 13, which is a helluva complement if you are wondering. So, this is a must see for anyone that loves films that challenges narrative conventions and/or enjoy an insane visceral experience. While Ambiguous, I think the film does have a message and point to it all, besides the visceral experience. What I took from the film could be completely different from what someone else took and that doesn't mean either of us are write or wrong. Personally, I found the film to have a very interesting thematic strain about the notion of Science vs. God, maybe not god as we understand it, but of a higher presence in the universe. I think the portal signifies man reaching past him limitations creating forces which they can't hope to control- Barry Nyle being the evil carnation while Elena is the force of good. Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if no one seemed to have similar feelings, but that's why I think this film is so great. Would love to hear what the director's vision was. This better be released on blu-ray... 8.5/10 Where to begin on this piece of shit. I have read that many people have been impressed with Uwe Boll's Heart of America, his first true venture into the dramatic. What ensues is a film that is so insanely over-dramatizes of the horrible events leading up to, and including a school shooting. The viewer is introduced to an ensemble of characters the morning of the school shooting. Using a ton of flashbacks, we learn about these characters and why they are who they are. The biggest problem with this film is the absolutely terrible script that uses every stereotype in the book to create this exaggerated and quite frankly laughable sentimentality. EVERY character is a walking cliche, from the stoners to the jock to the nerd- one dimensional characters aplenty. The film tries to hard to capture every aspect of adolescnes (bullying, virginity, unplanned pregnancy, drugs, rape, bad parenting, etc) to the point of it all becoming just silly and over stuffed. I also enjoyed how the script felt the need to remind the viewer a million times that it was the last day of school. Of course, Boll opts to use black & white photography for the flashback sequences (CLICHE as fuck), while an overabundance of music is used in some poor attempt to illicit more emotion from the audience. Boll's attempt to question the moral dilemmas and complications which arise is rather weak as well-using the Bully character of Rick, who has a change of heart towards the end of the film, yet dies by the hands of the bullied. I get what he was going for, but it simply doesn't work to the degree he was hoping for, though it is a good point I suppose. I will say that from a purely technical standpoint (editing and cinematography) this has got to be Uwe Boll's best film. There are some surprisingly well done sequences, using tracking shots, long takes, etc. but it doesn't save the film by any means. Uwe Boll is a lighting rod for people to hate on, and I find it pretty funny that a majority of people who do so, think this is his best film. I much prefer Boll stick too the action/horror/comedy genre as a film like POSTAL, for example was great, ridiculous fun. When he ventures into drama.. Yikes. 1/10 An in-depth, gritty look into the world of drug addicts who frequent Sherman Square in New York City. It's a character study centering on the relationship between Bobby (Al Pacino) and Helen (Kitty Winn). From the outset of the film, Bobby, is a heroin addict but the slow descent which Helen experiences into becoming addicted gives the viewer a character which is somewhat relate-able, which is important given the film is entirely a study of the life of addicts in New York. Helen's character is emotionally shattered who takes Solice in Bobby, a stranger who treats her well. During the first hour of the film we experience a slow build-up until Helen actually uses Heroin for the first time. Given what the film is about, it's very monotonous and almost a little too slow paced but one could absolutely argue that this just aids in capturing the drug addict lifestyle and circular nature of trying to find their next "fix" no matter what. The most interesting aspect of the film for me is this love that is shared between Bobby and Helen. They are complete and utter screw-ups, yet, in the end they seem almost destined to be together and help/care for each other. The addiction essentially gets in the way of this throughout the film, causing countless riffs in their relationship, yet the love they share, burns stronger. This is a gritty, realistic film that features lots of needles puncturing skin-it's not for everyone but it's definitely a strong effort from all involved. 7.75/10 Teshigahara's The Man Without A Map tells the story of a private detective who is hired to find a missing man by his wife. The search is long and ultimately unsuccessful but as things progress the detective's life slowly begins to resemble the life of the man he is looking for. Hiroshi Teshigahara's film is an beautiful film that is ominous, mysterious and ultimately quite ambiguous. It's the type of film that has got to require multiple re-watches in an attempt to capture all the small details in this puzzling, yet engrossing film. While Teshigahara's highly praised films consist of beautiful black and white, his transition to color is unnoticeable, delivering beautiful imagery. The film uses lots of vintage Teshigahara-quick zooms, extreme close-ups and exquisite depth of frame that uses the foreground and background of the image to the full extent. The camera in this film is incredibly voyeuristic, perhaps used as a way to help isolate the detective from the world, creating this sense that he is ultimately alone, adding to this mysterious atmosphere. The same can be said for the editing, with some very abrupt transitions almost intentionally trying to confuse the viewer. For me, this film is really about the loneliness in people's lives and how the hustle and bustle of everyday life takes away our own personal identity to some degree. This is illustrated in the films prevalent use of cars shown in traffic or flying around on freeways, showing the disconnect between the individual and the collective. This could be incredibly off-base and not at all what Teshigahara was going for, but yea, that's what I got. Either way, I absolutely have to read the book by Abe Kobo and re-watch this a few times to truly grasp all it's themes. 8.25/10 Intouchables is based on a true story about a wealthy man, who has been paralyzed from the neck down, and young, erratic, yet good intentioned ex-con, who is hired on as the man's caretaker. This film could have easily fallen off a cliff into the world of forced emotion and sentimental-drivel but it never does in this touching story of friendship which can come in the least expected of places. The story really takes it's time and never changes the characters to help aid the story. For example, Driss is a good-humored man, who even comes off as somewhat lazy early in the film. As their relationship evolves, Driss never changes really, becoming suddenly serious, or over-sentimental, rather, he stays the same good-humored loof that he was in the very beginning. This film is all about the relationship between these two men, and honestly, Omar Sy performance as Driss, I found to be particularly fantastic. The man has a lot of charisma and really injects the film with lots of laughs and fun-much of what our central character ourselves needs and feels himself. Obviously there is a lot to be said towards the whole "Don't Judge A Book By It's Cover" notion, as in just because people come from backgrounds that are far different, doesn't make them any less compatible as human beings. The film nails Philippe's feelings of being in a wheelchair and how the last thing he wants is too be pitied, which I feel would ring very genuine to those with similar problems. All and all this is a really strong touching film that's actually really funny and genuine. I think it could have done more in it's dissection of Phillippe's emotions and issues dealing with being the way he is, but this is just not the path the film choose to take. This def should have won the Cesar over The Artist. 8.25/10 Thunderbolt and Lightfoot is part character study, part road movie, part caper flick about a retired thief, Thunderbolt (Clint Eastwood) and a young drifter, Lightfoot (Jeff Bridges) whose chance meeting leads them after long-lost money from an old robbery which Thunderbolt committed. The reason this film succeeds so well is it's free-flowing narrative. It's rather hard to explain, cause there definitely is a concrete plot, but the film really focuses on these characters, as we follow them on their crazy adventure. It's a film that relies much more on the interactions between these two men, richly developing the two characters and showing the viewer the type of men they are through these interactions more so than focusing on the narrative, which works extremely well in this film. The chemistry between Bridges and Eastwood is really stellar stuff. Watching Bridges young, carefree ladies-man character play off the older, stern Eastwood is a thing of beauty. While the film is well shot, it's not nearly as concerned with image as some of Cimino's later films, opting to focus more-so on character, which I think Cimino's later work would suffer from doing too much of the opposite. It's so much fun yet has some dramatic moments, including a strong emotionally resonant ending. Definitely the best thing of Cimino's I have seen. 8.75/10 |
AuthorLove of all things cinema brought me here. Archives
June 2023
|