diamond-31 Reviews

2001: A Space Odyssey (1968)

A film about everything

[10/10 · 3 March 2001]

Like a Circle around the human condition, 2001 starts at the beginning, skips the middle, and proceeds to the ending, right back where we started. Noting the weakness of words compared to image(s), Kubrick wisely dispenses with dialogue, preferring the power and essence of the scenery, and allowing the intelligence of the audience to do the deciphering. Or not, depending on the audience.

A monolith in cinematic history, 2001 is a high water mark of direction, execution, and achievement. If one considers the ambition of the film (a film about everything), and the measure of success the film achieved to that end, a very sound argument for this being the greatest of all films can be made.

The Silence of the Lambs (1991)

Too pedestrian

[2/10 · 19 December 1999]

I saw this movie when new, and liked it plenty. That was years ago, and I've grown considerably. My interest in Thomas Harris' "Red Dragon", and the screenplay I'm working on based on it, prodded me into renting SOTL for repeat viewing. I've always held the Oscars in low regard, but have dropped that regard all together after viewing this nonsense. The 1,000 word maximum on these posts prevents me from mentioning all the folly I found in the film. But I'll try....

Acting: In most instances, overwrought. Hopkins was a good psycho, but a bad Lecter. The Lecter of the novels was far more sedate in his demeanor, prefering to "charm" his opposition, allowing himself access to their psyche. Sniffing the air for skin cream is highly dubious. Foster did a good job as a young recruit. The problem I have with her is has more to do with the story. Seems a bit too unrealistic. Will Graham convinced me. Clarice Starling didn't. Dr. Chilton was played as a complete idiot. Typical Hollywood bad good-guy. Made the viewer biased for Lecter. WRITER SHORTCUT! I recognize this as a substitute for compelling writing and acting. Simply bias the audience toward the main character by surrounding him with easy-to-dis-like characters. No childish brat like the Chilton portrayed would ever hold a job of such responsibility. Ted Levine was terrific throughout. Voice, appearance, contortions, crotch, : all wonderful. Most of the supporting players were of TV movie quality. Canned dialog, playing dumb for an assumed dumb audience. Posh on that, Director. As for direction, too many flubs and gimmicks to mention here. I'll mention one: The cat in the window growling as Buffalo Bill drives away with Fat Girl # Whatever. Like any cat is going to react in that fashion. A cat would not bat a whisker if in the presence of such drama. Would only move if the master was going to land on it. Otherwise, no fur ruffled. What a gimmick that was.

The music was typical of Hollywood reality. Never in my life, when confronted with drama of any intensity, have I heard violins out of nowhere. DIRECTOR SHORTCUT!: Adding sappy "music" to enhance mood. In most cases, this is to bolster or cover any weaknesses in writing, acting, direction, or all three. (NOTE: This is certainly not exclusive to this film. Most Hollywood productions employ this tactic.) The ending of the film was almost good about this. No music, just Foster in the dark. ***NO SPOILER*** But the ending could've been better. Easily.

MANHUNTER should have won 15 Oscars, if SOTL could win 5. Sure, it was a bit too 80's in appearance, but far more accurate and convincing. Better book, too.

In summation, too dumbed down. Booooooo.