Kagemusha ***
(Second Viewing)

In 1572, there is a civil war in Japan, and three powerful clans, leaded by the lords Shingen Takeda (Tatsuya Nakadai), Nobunaga Oda (Daisuke Ryu) and Ieyasu Tokugawa (Masayuki Yui), dispute the conquest of Kyoto. When Shingen is mortally wounded, the Takeda clan hides the incident and uses a poor thief to be the double of the strategist Shingen and keep the respect of their enemies. Along the years, Kagemusha incorporates the spirit of the warrior of the dead warlord.

Akira Kurosawa has got to be one of the finest visual directors I've ever seen. By watching more and more of his films, I'm beginning to appreciate him more. I love the way in this movie, how the 4 different parts of Shingen's banner (Wind, Forest, Fire and Mountain) all have different uniforms. Wind = blue, Forest = green, Fire = orange/red, Mountain = black/purple. Also, the way Kurosawa centers things like the opening scene where Shingen is seated in the center, his brother Nobukado to his right (stage left) and the thief Kagemusha is on the right with a single candel near him. That pretty much sets the tone for the movie right then and there. Although, I felt it did run a bit long at 177 minutes and I feel 20-30 minutes could have been cut out, I definitely enjoyed it more with a second viewing. Next, I hope to be able to find the time to view Ran a second time.

The Driller Killer 2/5

The plot...well there is this artist and he gets really stressed about paying the bills, noisy neighbors, and his girlfriend so he kills people with a power drill. Homeless people mostly - then he works up to more intimate targets.

I actually thought this was a terrible film for the first 10-20 min I was almost groaning - then something happened this film went so far down on my scale that it actually came back up. It was so bad to me that it actually turned out good.

First the look of the film, yes I didn't expect something this old to look digitally clear or anything but there is no way that this was shot of good film stock even for its era. However once associated with the character the graininess of the film like the rawness of the music helped or in some way conveyed the main characters mental and emotional state. The screenplay was minimal at best, but really how deep to you expect a movie about someone who kills people with power tools to be? I was going to say that it gets the job done, but really it almost feels incomplete. That along with the directing, where a lot of the shots are very close and sometimes muddled with darkness can be viewed either way. As serviceable craftsmanship or deliberate contributions to the telling of the story.

All in all not a horrible experience - but I'm not buying it.

Glad you enjoyed it suspect_5

Man, Abel Ferrara has made two really damn good dramas: KING OF NEW YORK and BAD LIEUTENANT.

Otherwise, he's unimpressive.

Still suspect, check out the criminally underrated BAD LIEUTENANT. Maybe Harvey Keitel's last great performance before he either quit, or Hollywood quit on him.

THE SIEGE (1998) - **1/2

Middle-Eastern terrorists demand the U.S. Government release their leader from custody. They declare war on New York City.

Made years before 9/11, one would think it would become much more relevant for movie-goers after the attacks.

Yet the same problem that sank the movie back then is the same fault that keeps it from being considerable for either intellectuals or movie buffs, a weakness that movies can't escape from: MEDIOCRITY!

What went wrong?

Maybe once upon a time, the original script drafts had potential for an engaging, suspenseful, but smart, political thriller. Yet after years in the pipeline, and with massive major movie stars in Denzel, Willis, and Warren Beatty's bitch, its bound for such a story to become more....generic enough....so to make more money in theatres.

Thats the problem with THE SIEGE. It wants to be smart and a possible "what-if?" martial law scenario in America, but either its not daring enough, or its got nothing useful to add to the conversation.

You can't win that war.

Corpi presentano tracce di violenza carnale, I (Torso) ** 1/2
(First Viewing)

Someone is strangling coeds in Rome. The only clue is that the killer owns a red and black scarf, and police are stumped. American exchange student Jane and her friends decide to take a break from classes by going up to Danielle's uncle's villa in the country. Unfortunately the killer decides to follow, and the women begin suffering a rapid attrition problem.

I'm really starting to enjoy cheesy horror movies. This is only the 2nd Italian "horror" movie I've seen, with Suspiria being the first, and I felt this film was superior to it. The killer was easily predictable but I just felt the directing and some choice shots (as well as the storyline of course), made this film more enjoyable than Suspiria. Can anyone recommend some other Italian horror films that might follow in the Suspiria or Torso realm? Capo? ronnie?

TORSO is good, though the problem you had Irish with SUSPIRA is the same mistakes that American horror fans do when they jump into Italian horror cinema.

"Once you fuck the story, which doesn't matter at all, then its splendid horror cinema" - HALLOWEEN director John Carpenter

SUSPIRA's plot is generic-ass. I mean, a girl comes into a ballerina academy, which is run by a cabal of witches. Eh?

Forgetting the derivativeness of Italian horror cinema, I loved the slinky creep mood of SUSPIRA, and its editing narrative. Dario Argento rules, bitches!

Irish, you want recommendations?

Check out Luci Fulci's work. He's derivative as hell at times, but his ZOMBIE(a favorite of Tarantino) and for example is worth wathcing. Again, a shit-sandwich of a zombie story, but its the details that make it interesting.

I mean, you have a zombie fighting a shark. I don't need to say much more.

Jigoku (1960) *** 1/2
(First Viewing)

A high school student has a friend who is pure evil. Him and his friend are outdriving one night when they hit a drunkard and the friend leaves him to die. The student's life then goes down hill from there.

One word can sum this movie up pretty accurately: beautiful. What a fantastic roller coaster ride this was. A lot of black backgrounds with wonderful music and extraordinary use of lighting. I love the concept of the movie because I haven't seen many films that deal with the depths of Hell in great detail. I'm not sure how many movies are made that do explore Hell but that's what makes this so original for me. Personally, this is definitely one of, if not THE best Japanese movie I've ever seen (and yes, that's including any and all of Akira Kurosawa's work that I've seen thus far).

ZOMBIE by Luci Fulci - noted, I mean how the hell am I going to pass up a movie where a zombie and a shark throw down.

Funny that you should bring up this movie. I just watched it, for the first time, last night.

Your critque is dead on. It starts out by capturing the viewer's interest right away, but as it moves on, something is lost, especially when, as you correctly labeled it, the "what if" martial law scenes begin.

While the scenes of our country coming under martial law are somewhat disturbing, and had the potential to bring this movie up a notch or two, the movie just fails to "go the distance" with those scenes. It was as though the makers of the film were afraid to really step over that line.

An interestingly fast start to a movie that gradually loses steam as it tries to progress.

I agree with the **1/2 star rating.


Don Cardi

Glad you agreed with me, Don Cardi.

THE PRODUCERS (2005) - **1/2

Mel Brooks is one of my favorite comic writers & directors. BLAZING SADDLES, YOUNG FRAKENSTEIN, the misunderstood SILENT MOVIE, SPACEBALLS, etc.

His THE PRODUCERS was his memorable 1968 directorial debut that landed him an Oscar victory for Best Original Screenplay, and really was a humorous comedy that, in its time, was the SOUTH PARK of its day. Teasefully risque, but smart.

Brooks resurrected THE PRODUCERS as an insanely successfull and popular Broadway musical with Matthew Broderick and Nathan Lane that briefly made Americans care about Broadway plays. Thankfully, it was short-lived. CURB YOUR ENTHUSIASM established its Fourth Season around it. It won a truckload of Tonys, made millions, and a movie-adaptation was inevitable. (A movie based on a musical that itself was based on a movie)

Yet something about this movie is stagnant once the credits open. Why?

Theories abound, all correct in varying degrees. A musical designed for a live audience that then is played for a filmed set loses its charismatic magic. The SOUTH PARK-esque humor from the past now seems to be quite tame and nothing offensive about it. Maybe its that a movie, transformed into a musical designed for a stage, just doesn't seem to translate as well on a small screen.

My own hypothesis is that I blame the director. Susan Stroman helmed the original play, but seems to be as moving and fluid cinematically as a Polaroid camera.

While the movie never gets into a satisfying rhythmn, there is some nice things about THE PRODUCERS remake. Nathan Lane seems to always give it his best, and like MOUSE HUNT, he sometimes is forced to make a movie better than it should be.

But Will Ferrell. Wow, I tell ya folks, hes the best comic player that never got to be involved directly with a Mel Brooks movie. While he's been coasting with success from ANCHORMAN and TALLADEGA NIGHTS(really, both movies have the same basic premise), hes not been given his chance to be as fully dangerous on a physical level as his best work from SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE displayed.

Yet for an average movie, Will Ferrell owns the screen whenever he appears, and rather is great.

Vulcan Video my friend?

Farce of the Penguins **
(First Viewing)

A mockumentary the illuminates penguin survival and mating rituals, as well as one bird's search for love while on a 70-mile trek with his hedonistic buddies.

Bob Saget writes a pretty funny comedy with this effort and it was all new to me since I haven't seen March of the Penguins. I think Samuel L. Jackson should do more narration/voice over work. I found Tracy Morgan and Mo'Nique to be my two favorite "penguin voices."

The Gathering
(First Viewing)

While going to the town of Ashby Wake, the drifter Cassie (Christina Ricci) is hit by a car driven by Marion Kirkman (Kerry Fox) and loses her memory. Marion invites Cassie to stay in her huge old house with her family, while recovering from the trauma. Cassie becomes very close to Michael, the young son of Marion's husband Simon Kirkman (Stephen Dallane). He is researching a recently discovered buried church from the First Century, with images of the crucifixion of Jesus and many anonymous persons watching it. Cassie starts having visions and premonitions with some locals, and decides to investigate the weird and nasty mechanic Frederick Michael Argyle (Peter McNamara). Her findings about who she is and the mystery relative to the locals and the town surprises her.

The perfect recipe for a sh*tty movie: 1 decent idea that doesn't transcend well into a screenplay or furthermore a movie, add 1 8-year-old puss boy who's afraid of his own shadow and needs to be comforted every scene and told "it's OK," add uncareable characters plus a ridiculous storyline involving 14 people who watch the crucifixion of Christ just for "curiosity" and are punished as a result of it for eternity by having to view every tragedy that befalls mankind, and cook for 92 minutes. Bon Appétit!

Capo, Ronnie????

And who the hell am I? Nobody?

Ok, I'm in a forgiving mood today... Check "Deep Red" aka "The Hatchet Murders" (Profondo Rosso), possibly the most famous horror movie directed by Dario Argento. It scared me to death. You'll love it.

The Descent
(First Viewing)

After a tragic accident, six friends reunite for a caving expedition. Their adventure soon goes horribly wrong when a collapse traps them deep underground and they find themselves pursued by bloodthirsty creatures. As their friendships deteriorate, they find themselves in a desperate struggle to survive the creatures and each other.

I actually heard someone liked this movie and thought it was pretty good (my prayers go to them). Horrible lighting, pitch black sets (yes I know it's suppose to take place in a cave but the audience should still be able to see what is going on), gollum-like creatures, 6 female hikers. Need I say more? Whatever you do, do yourself the favor and invest the 100 minutes of your life on something else. Avoid this movie at ALL COSTS!

Lavi, since Irish didn't respond to you, I apologize that you weren't mentioned.

you are not supposed to apologize for anything, Ronnie. But, of course, for not being a GWTW fan......

That's got to be one of the silliest things I've ever read.

I didn't like The Descent, though. It opened nicely, full of claustrophobic darkness, though I would have liked it had Marshall made more use of the frame - he kept shooting his characters in the centre of frame, and it would have been far more effective had they been lost to either side of shot. There's a melodramatic moment near the end too when the one survivor resembles something out of Carrie, which I sort of liked. But the means by which she went about surviving was something like Tomb Raider, not a cave explorer chased by monsters. It had a lot of potential and little creative flair. I would have done away with the monsters altogether and it would have been a lot more taut and tense. But that would have been a different movie, then, I guess.

Little Miss Sunshine ** 1/2
(First Viewing)

Olive is a little girl with a dream: winning the Little Miss Sunshine contest. Her family wants her dream to come true, but they are so burdened with their own quirks, neuroses, and problems that they can barely make it through a day without some disaster befalling them. Olive's father Richard is a flop as a motivational speaker, and is barely on speaking terms with her mother. Her uncle Frank, a renowned Proust scholar, has attempted suicide following an unsuccessful romance with a male graduate student. Her brother Dwayne, a fanatical follower of Nietzsche, has taken a vow of silence, which allows him to escape somewhat from the family whose very presence torments him. And Olive's grandfather is a ne'er-do-well with a drug habit, but at least he enthusiastically coaches Olive in her contest talent routine. Circumstances conspire to put the entire family on the road together with the goal of getting Olive to the Little Miss Sunshine contest in far off California.

I'm not quite sure why this got a Best Picture nomination over United 93, Apocalypto or even a dark horse (like last year's Crash), Thank You For Smoking.

Oh Irish, you still think the Oscars run based on substance? I bet you even think Presidential elections are won based on quality of the candidate's credences.



Anyway, what if I told you that the SAG (Screen Actors' Guild) union did everything in its power to stomp out Paul Greengrass' UNITED 93, a non-union actors movie? The fact that enough people in the AMPAS voting ranks were able to squeeze in a Best Director's nod for Greengrass, in spite of SAG being gestapo, is a testament to how much respect that U93 got.

APOCALYPTO got screwed because Mel Gibson screwed himself when he got hammered and yammered on about those Jews....no one wants to admit it, but thats why it only got a handful of tech Oscar noms.

Fox tried its best to score a Screenplay Oscar nod for THANK YOU FOR SMOKING, but Eastwood's LETTERS FROM IWO JIMA bested it for that slot. Opps.

Would that Carrieish moment be the scene on the DVD cover?

I'm not that naive anymore, but I think it's a shame that Little Miss Sunshine got the nod over United 93.



I still feel The Passion of the Christ could have been (and maybe) should have been nominated for Best Picture if people would just set there personal or religious differences aside and view the film as an independent "piece of work" as others here have claimed. The same could be said for either volume of Kill Bill, ESPECIALLY for Uma Thurman and David Carradine being screwed out of there noms

Irish, religion aside, PASSION OF THE CHRIST wasn't good enough to be a Best Picture nominee.

Really, name one unique thing about it compared to previous "faithful" Christ stories? I'm sorry, but having the will to be bloody gorey, which is cool and all, isn't enough to impress me.

Remember my BALLS column on Mel Gibson? Whatever one thinks of the movie(me? Decent but a better director was needed), one does have to admire somebody spending $30+ million of one's own cash on such a personal project.

Then APOCALYPTO, a ruthless movie about the Mayans, and one that wouldn't have the church groups going to see in raves of buses...that impresses me more.

Apocalypto isn't really about the Mayans as much as it contains them, though, is it? For me it was just a conventional chase movie with at least one gorgeous scene.

The Passion of the Christ was awful, I thought. I cannot really remember one lasting image in the entire thing. It had no narrative drive or purpose; there was certainly no arc there in any of the characters, and little emotional award. I think if anybody did have some emotional response to the film, whether in love or hate, it would have stemmed from religious views which stand outside and regardless of the actual film or the experience of watching it. It was not killed by horrid editing and dubious CGI.

I gotta agree with you Capo, on PASSION OF THE CHRIST.

True, the term 'Mayan culture' is a very broad one. It represents a large number of tribes in a large area over a very long period of time. So to say the ppl in this movie are Mayan is misleading.

However, from what I have gathered the movie is quite accurate in it's portrayal of these human sacrifices.

I posted a review of this movie earlier. Mel Gibson said of the movie..."The precursors to a civilization that’s going under are the same, time and time again... What’s human sacrifice if not sending guys off to Iraq for no reason?"[/wikipedia] He is comparing the human sacrifice of sending the young to die in Iraq to the human sacrifices of the 'Mayans' who also sacrificed their young. All ancient cultures have practiced this. In Gibson's mind, war is a modern day human sacrifice not so unlike the literal human sacrifices of the 'Mayans.'

But I got little out of it regarding Mayan "culture", the same as I get little out of 1950s New York in The Godfather. The fact you can relate Gibson's film to Iraq (as intended) means its setting is secondary to the fact it is an action film.

I want to go a bit off-topic (i.e., my post is not pertaining to the movie 'Passion of Christ' or the religious views).

Is it possible to have an emotional response to a film just by the viewing experience, without having (or primarily being) anything to do with the views held outside the film? All my favorite movies are my favorites because they deal with the themes that I am currently dealing with or dealt with in my real life.

American Pie 5: The Naked Mile * 1/2
(First Viewing)

The movie will shift its focus on Erik Stifler, the cousin of Matt and Steve, a youngster who is nothing like his wild relations. Peer pressure starts to turn him to live up to the legacy of the other Stifflers when he attends the 'Naked Mile', a naked run across the college campus. Things get worse when he finds that his cousin Dwight is the life of the party down at the campus.

It's unfortunate that the American Pie franchise is coming to be the new age National Lampoon's series, which means that they'll take any piece of sh*t "comedy" and slap the National Lampoon's (or in this case, American Pie) name of it and expect it to sell (when it essence it's just tarnishing the original work or the series). Furthermore, it's more disturbing that Christopher McDonald has to resort to these types of movies. The man hasn't done a good movie since 2000's Requiem for a Dream and before that it was 1996's Happy Gilmore. The ending of the movie however was WAY too cheesy and "chick-flickish" even for an American Pie movie (that's what made it even worse). I will say one positive thing about the movie, at least it was better than American Pie 4: Band Camp.