sjwest Reviews

Alexander (2004)

A Biopic Of Noteworthy Achievement.

[7/10 · 19 January 2005]

One of history's' most notable figures once again graces the grand cinema stage. With a massive budget, an accomplished director and a newsworthy ensemble cast, one would expect a positive opening. This was, however, not the case. In fact, critics have slated it and many viewers have vociferously voiced objections. Despite the negative attention, as a fan of Oliver Stone's, I found it difficult not to enjoy. Against this background I will discuss the salient points.

Alexander's sexuality is a core issue. The inclusion here is for me to bring forth a real impression of what Alexander was like. Indeed as Alexander creates the empire in his vision, he begins to experience dissent within the ranks, his sexual tendencies lean more towards men. At one point of his life, not included in the movie, Alexander considers suicide when Hephaistion dies and therefore some of Alexander's behavior is a consequence of what he was.

Stone has signed himself some artistic license with the portrayal of Alexander's mother. Angelina Jolie takes to the task admirably. She uses a Romanian vampire – like voice while adorning herself with snakes - a consequence of her religious tendencies. Her voice is what distinguishes the character and I am sure that Stone liked the look of Angelina's prominent lips, attractive - mind you, as it accentuated the image of a serpent. This portrayal displays a manipulative woman with intent against her husband, Prince Philip. Jolie gives us an entertaining insight into the motivations of the mother. We see her impact on Alexander.

The flashback to the death of his father is done to illustrate how the event affected him. Story flow is crucial but given the length of the movie and the fact that we were given further insight into the character of Alexander, it was the appropriate thing to do. This as an influential factor on Alexander's drive and ambition was critical and well highlighted.

The high points of the movie were the battle scenes and here again we see the strategic use of Alexander's extensive history of battles. The first one at Gaugamela is indicative of the height of Alexander's leadership. He takes on an apparently insurmountable force and displays single mindedness to kill Darius in the field. His tactics proved correct as Darius fled. He was the heart of the Persian army – without him they ceased to function as a cohesive unit and thus folded.

The camera work is panoramic and emphasizes the tactical battle by displaying the opposing forces with their deliberate placement and order. The close – ups display the ferociousness of the encounter and the brutality of war in those times is clearly depicted. It also helped to indicate the glory of this great time in Alexander's life. The soaring eagle as a metaphor for Alexander's greatness was at no time more relevant than at this battle.

The final battle at the Hydapses River showed his deep – set belief that he was the son of Zeus. When the lines started to retreat, he charged forward and crashed into selfless attack thus motivating his forces to follow. The next scene was a defining one for Alexander. He turns to charge an elephant, undaunted, driven by rage and self – belief. His equally brave horse, Bucephalus, rears up to face the enemy and the two are momentarily frozen in time facing each other like bitter enemies. The image represents Alexander's drive and ambition and his unwavering bravery against foes far greater in size and number. It is the most endearing one of the movie. The image of Alexander in the minds eye of Stone.

A justifiable point is that the accents did nothing to serve the biopic. I do understand that Stone was trying to illustrate the cosmopolitan nature of dialects, but the obvious European accents only served to distract the audience from the story and yanked us from what was a seamless story flow. I did get used to it, but the impression did linger long after leaving the cinema. Although it was not enough to ruin my enjoyment, it is a detractor and the attempt did not follow through.

What interested me after seeing the movie was to access if Stone was still delivering after being many successful years in the industry. The best comparison for me was to compare two scenes which depicted the soul of the movie. The first is the eternal image of a soldier in 'Platoon', arms open to the heavens crying for the loss of innocence and tragedy of the Vietnam War. This while listening to the melancholic soundtrack forever etched on movie history. It was an enigmatic image, simple in design, masterful in delivery.

Already touched on is the confrontation with the elephant. Although the scene itself has the same effect, the lead – up to this scene showed camera effects by the way of red tint and is followed by Alexander being carried away on his shield in grandiose fashion. It is this added complexity that Stone has added to his work that seems to be an influence from 90's Tarantino work that makes me favor the scene from 'Platoon'. It seemed more pure and unadulterated. The point here is that although the unique craftsmanship of Stone's is still strongly evident, it seems to have taken a new direction by way Tarantino.

Knowledge for the sake of knowledge is an exercise in futility. A dictation of history serves a lesser purpose and it does not move man forward. Greater understanding of great figures in history can only enrich us. This fact as well as the fact that the life of Alexander could not be adequately displayed given the time constraints that the big screen has, shows that Stone chose the correct analytical path to portray a character that has obviously occupied his mind for most of his life. In an era of remakes and sequels, it is most welcome.

Unforgiven (1992)

'A Man With No Name' Becomes 'A Man With A Real Story'.

[8/10 · 12 November 2004]

Clint Eastwood's storytelling gives the western genre one of its most sublime story's. Gone is the trademark mysterious hero and in its place is an ex gunman who made his peace when he met his wife. Eastwood has transcended traditional entertainment to storytelling craftsmanship. He delivers rich characters with deep rooted problems inextricably linked to the villains of the story. Refusing to wither and die away, style has been perfectly adapted with age thus ensuring his maturation into a true Hollywood legend.

Besides his now distinctive storytelling, there are numerous factors that make this a landmark Western. The ensemble cast could not have been stronger and there were no weak performances. The soundtrack accentuates the intended atmosphere of the director. A single detracting factor I could find only just qualifies as such. Munny's whimsical lines seemed a little contrived at times. They droned on like pale attempts to capture the Western era. But this is a consequence of the fact that they were more to do with the character of William Munny. He is after all a reformed killer with a now passive approach to people. Given this fact and also that it may have been distracting since it was so out of sync with what we are used to seeing from Eastwood, I still have to list it as a demerit on the account it slightly jerked me out of the story.

Hollywood producers have to satisfy audience preferences if investments are going to accrue profits. It is the nature of the beast. The action and more specifically the Western genre will stick to tried and tested formulas in order to guarantee audience acceptance. But every so often you get people who as a natural consequence of their unique character appeal are able to deliver a story that is outside these understandably restrictive boundaries. Eastwood is a cool individualist who normally plays characters who are not team players and do it their own way. His own way this time is to give the western genre a real story oozing characterization. A sort of ballad for the bad guy.

The ballads tune provides the story with a sad, introspective mood, within the opening and closing scenes. The opening scene depicts Munny in his new found life. He is cured of his wicked ways, helped by his dear, departed wife. But men are not willing to forgive or forget his monstrous deeds and in the final scenes he is who he has to be. Such is the sorrowful life of William Munny.

Westerns are typified by clearly defined goodies and baddies, but this is definitely not the case here. Eastwood and Freeman play reformed killers who find circumstances drawing them once again to their evil ways. But the older and wiser men now realize the value of life and come face to face with their troubled consciences. This is unlike their naïve, young partner who is attracted to the bravado image of the killer and relishes taking a man's life. This moral issue is virtually taboo for the classic western which glamorizes the lawlessness and the hero attraction of the gunslinger. This is also why in my view no-one besides Eastwood should have handled this movie.

Then we have the juiciest character of the movie superbly played by Gene Hackman worthy of the weight of every micro granule of his Oscar. He is the epitome of every hard-line lawman that ever was. The misguidance of the so called righteously empowered, swinging the hammer against evil for good. Hackman must have salivated when he read the script since there was obvious relish in his performance. All the better for the movie, and of course for Eastwood at the Oscars. By far the best performance and the others were good further underlining the talent of the man.

The antagonist of the movie is almost always the most complex and thus most interesting to analyze. His vain attempts at carpentry are his way of trying to appear to be a good man. There is purity in building ones own home and it is this wholesomeness that he wishes to capture. In that way his fellow citizens will see him as a simple man only wanting to lead a righteous life. But his inability as a carpenter is indicative of his depravity. He cannot be a good man. The source of his drive is anger and hatred. It is through this failing that we realize he cannot escape who he is.

Indeed it was not only the power of the script that gave the audience a spellbinding climax, but the talents of the actors. The actors' characterizations deliver the audience a spellbinding climax. It is only through Hackman's performance that we not only acknowledge his ending as inevitable, but also as deserving. We saw him as a man who virtually thought that he was righteously empowered to rid the earth of Munny and his kind What he thought was an honorable task was one rather of abuse and suppression. He became the baddie in the eyes of the audience and it is he who the audience wants to see justice served upon.

Munny was so weak throughout the movie that the eruption of his evil ways captured the interest of the audience. He transformed into the Eastwood of old – the anti hero with a far more malevolent presence. Never could we have sensed this hatred and evil that we now see in William Munny. It is now that the frivolity of his mannerisms that I touched on in the beginning adds to the story as it helps to accentuate the turn in character. He is now only a killer, in it neither for money or fame as the writer nearly finds out to his tragic detriment.

Those who have only seen his Westerns of old or the 'Dirty Harry' movies may enter the cinema with expectations of such like will either be disappointed or pleasantly surprised. It is the atypical western and an unfamiliar portrayal by Eastwood. But I believe that most people will have the latter reaction. The differences are their strengths helped by the fact that it was a superbly crafted movie with a meaningful story and thought provoking lessons for our heroes and villains. Eastwood was directly suited to the roles that we identify him with, but it is exactly because of this suitability that he eases into the role of Munny. No mellowing with age, no identification with the mainstream, he has always done it his way, and he is so good that any way could be his way.

Collateral (2004)

Big Lights, Bright City. SPOILER

[8/10 · 24 October 2004]

Neither is prolific, but the creation of a movie that will grace DVD rental stores down the years is a one of time, effort and respect. Collateral is indeed a movie that transcends the norm and epitomises the work of these two moviemakers.

Besides Vincent and Max, there is a third character consciously created by Mann. This is of course the city of Los Angeles. The evidence of this is within the opening scenes where we glide gracefully above the city soaking in the vibrant life of the city as if it were a living organism. The silky ambiance has an undercurrent of a city coursing with life and an unquestionable hint of danger. Then we meet up with Max - a true part of the city. What better way to reveal the character of the city than through the eyes a taxi cab driver. It is they who see every corner of the city and meet its people from every walk of life. They are an innate part of the city, a direct tap into its lifeblood.

Another scene designed for the character of the city is where Vincent and Max are drawn in by the mystical image of a wolf crossing the road in front of their cab. The danger of the city reveals itself. It is the true predator and master of its domain. Although the city does not overwhelm the lead characters, this scene shows what strength the city has and can bewilder and excite the others. This is indeed within the fabric of the story, but one cannot help but notice that Mann has put his own personal experience and impression of the city that captures his imagination.

The city is further revealed when we are taken to a seedy suburb, a jazz nightclub, a discotheque and finally an upmarket apartment block. The diversity of LA is exposed and gives our characters numerous settings with different obstacles and characters. All this with a character who is the very fabric of the city – Max, and one that hates the city – Vincent. The richness and diversity of the characters thus mirroring the city. The more they interact the more we learn about the city.

The character interaction between Vincent and Max is reminiscent of the characters of the 80's movie 'The Hitcher'. There is a strange connection between the two which is noticeable in the final scene where Max seems moved by Vincent's most feared death. The differences between the characters seem to lock them together on their perilous journey and which will ultimately result in the demise of one of them.

The casting is not too dissimilar to the type of thing that Martin Scorsese would do. He is a master of conflicting images and messages. Here we have the two lead characters played by actors who would be synonymous with vastly different characters. Tom Cruise is usually the hero and more often than not capitalises on his looks. Vincent is, however, the villain who wears a non – descript wardrobe and is wash born grey. Completely atypical, thus a new challenge for Cruise. Jamie Fox is a natural typecast for a comedic character, but here he is a mundane, unimposing, melt into the background kind of guy. Sometimes this type of casting, especially for the main star can be a mistake. However, here it is perfect for the story as it accentuates the essence of the city which is one of beauty and danger, not all what it seems and what we know. It also commits the actors to concentrate on their acting as they are outside their comfort zone and under the microscope. Their performances as a consequence are virtually flawless. In fact, their unnatural circumstances became their natural acting circumstances. We normally expect Cruise to deliver, no matter what the character and thus the unknown factor was Max. He was even more under the spotlight and he delivered. Jamie Fox has now made his mark.

The supporting cast were all good, the most noticeable of which was Jade Pinkett – Smith. She is the last target of Vincent's and her apartment block is the setting for the climatic scenes. It is her character that brings Max out of his own self – preservation instinct and drives him to take on Vincent at his own game. The frailty of Pinkett - Smith adds to the danger and gives Vincent the edge. This creates a greater obstacle for our hero this providing greater tension for the audience.

High profile movies with high profile personalities always invite a wide variety of opinions. This is a natural consequence of expectation. The main problem area seemed to be the extent of exaggeration of some scenes. This is of course true. The suspension of disbelief is stretched a bit, especially in the final shoot – out scene and the fact that Vincent sticks with Max despite the obvious risk to himself. Also Vincent seems to have no fear of exposure in public as he executes his targets in full view. For me, it was not too distracting and did not adversely affect the story. After all, we do not go to the movies to see ordinary people in ordinary situations. The characters we wish to see are larger than life and transcend our normal limitations. There is a line to this, but I believe Mann flirted with this line, but did not cross it.

A scene that raised the movie was the nightclub scene. Here we are mesmerised by a series of fleeting images of wild gunfire and multiple targets and villains. We have the cops, the target and the gang out to nail Vincent if the job turned sour. In between all this is the crowded and the swirling lights, glass and smoke. It created a chaotic, sporadic scene where the outcome for the lead characters seemed to be out of bounds. The pace was raised and the stakes were higher. Our characters were now riding a crest and never faltered from here.

When Max first meets Vincent, he openly proclaims his dislike for the city and particularly notes the apathy and the loss of identity within its walls. He had heard a story where someone died on a train and was not noticed for several blocks. In the end Vincent dies alone on the train as it carries on along its route. The villain had met with a worthy end. It was the death he most feared in the city he most hated.

Not intended to be one of the blockbusters of the year, it is nevertheless one of the strongest movies of the year. There is obvious attention to detail here, particularly with the casting and the scenic views of the city. The audience is suitably drawn into the world of LA with superb acting and artful directing. Mann does not get carried away with the portrayal of the city and blends it in with the characters providing a tense background for the action. It is deservedly highly rated and should leave the audience feeling that were entertained.

Troy (2004)

The 'Not The Choir Boys Show'.

[8/10 · 30 May 2004]

If there is anything the poster was going to scream at you, it was that this is going to be one of the biggest movies of the year. In the cast department, we have Brad Pitt, Orlando Bloom, Brian Cox, Eric Bana and Peter O'Toole. When quality actors are brought together on the same production, you know that it has to be something special. Then there is of course the director, Wolfgang Peterson who is synonymous with movies that display his penchant for realistic craftsmanship. This is no more admirably displayed than in 'The Boat'. The team list and epic sequences brings comparisons between it and 'Ben Hur'. In my opinion, it will not surpass 'Ben Hur', but you will find no better way to be spellbound at the movies this year.

One cardinal rule in the art of movie-making is that you must capture your audience within the first ten minutes. Enter a stand – off between two great forces led by determined powerful Kings. A dispute settling challenge is agreed upon and out steps a snarling Herculean warrior waiting for full blooded action. The Kings calls for our hero and he is eventually tracked down sleeping off a good night with the women. He snaps up the challenge and nonchalantly makes his way to the battlefield. A malevolent grin cracks across the giants face as he eyes out his diminutive opponent. It begins and Achilles dodges the spears and leaping into the air buries his blade deep into the colossus's shoulder who falls to the dust. Oh, and by the way this is for a kingdom. Interested yet?

A movie of such grandeur necessitates CGI in order to field a great attacking army. This is delivered supremely and we are aghast at the magnitude of the force. The explosive impact of the massive battles that take place explode across the big screen as we witness a titanic struggle between an army thought to be invincible and a gargantuan drove of soldiers at the service of a power hungry king. Although some of the CGI is noticeable to the practiced eye, it did not dilute the realistic effect.

The individual battles were well coordinated and it is obvious that a great deal of planning and preparation had gone into these scenes. They indicated the supreme skills of Achilles and the brute strength and courage of his followers. The only evident fault here was when the Greeks landed on the beaches of Troy; it was noticeable that these scenes were slightly speeded up in order to capture the ferocious pace of the battle. While understanding the purpose here and it is essentially a good idea, the speed reduced the realism effect. Fortunately, this effect was used sparingly throughout the forthcoming skirmishes.

The scene between Prince Hector and Achilles' cousin was another well prepared scene and it showed the lack of battle time that the cousin had. His inability to keep his balance and poise led to his death at the hands of a revered opponent. This would prove to be the turning point in fortunes for the Greeks as Achilles was now going to put the rift between him and the King to one side as he sets to avenge his cousin.

The story was an encapsulating one. We have the hero on the side of a grossly ambitious King who wants all the credit in history for the conquering battles that are undertaken. They are against a King who is virtuous, albeit naïve, and leads his people with respect and honor. Prince Hector is the way Achilles should be. Although not as great a warrior as Achilles, he is a noble one who fights for his own survival and that of his people rather than for notoriety. This is a classic character situation where the opposing forces are opposite in nature and their interaction will influence their outlook. It is Achilles the hero, who learns from his journey. The characters turning point was witnessing the risk that the King took in trying to give his son a decent burial. Achilles realizes that his lust for immortality within the annals of Mans history books is at the cost of his own humanity and the love of a Princess.

His revelation motivates him to sends his soldiers home as his battle was now a personal one for love and not the glory of the battlefield. During the invasion of Troy, he searches only for the Princess and when he finds her, his passion for war is lost and in its place was his passion for her. Her cousin attacks him and although processing the skill to kill him, he does not. He was no longer the self – serving bloodthirsty warrior, but a man who had saved the woman he loved and had now achieved the honor that a great warrior should have. This tragic ending was indeed a fitting conclusion to the story and it made its impact on the audience.

The performances were all good with the ensemble cast delivering the goods. No – one stood out, but this is indicative of the fact that the actors were all of a high standard rather than someone not putting in an outstanding performance. Brad Pitt was ideal for the role of the hero as the audience could see the good in this warrior and the lessons learned did not seem out of character, but rather as inevitable. Pitt's nature was thus exuded. Brian Cox was a natural for the role of a power hungry King and his affinity for the role is plainly evident. The audience can sense the pleasure that he takes in playing an evil, powerful character as he revels in being somebody outside the norms of his regular life. Who can forget him as the original Lector in 'Manhunter'? Many a critic thought that he was better and for me that is no surprise. It was good to see Peter O'Toole and although age has softened his eyes thus making him amenable to playing the role of a compassionate king, he still has an obvious air of authority. Indeed the movie had a cast worthy of it.

Wolfgang Peterson has yet again delivered a story that virtually all can see. Despite the lavishing of violence and romance, the movie appealed to both genders, something very necessary for blockbusters. His craft is showcased once again as his skill at delivering realistic scenes and sets is graced upon the audience.

Watching an epic movie is a great way to spend some of your spare time. The strong emotions that they evoke as well as the spellbinding visuals will keep you entertained from the introductory narration until the rolling of the credits. Producers know that people like to escape to another time, another place and engage themselves in a story of a hero that they would wish to aspire to. Unquestionably, grand historic periods are formidable settings for this to happen and tales of valiant warriors have spellbound people down the ages. No movie as big as this would have been appropriate without a message. It would not have done justice to the scale of the project and ultimately all truly great stories must teach as well as entertain. We see that personal glory at the cost of humanity is unfulfilling and does not attain true honor in the writings of Man. Like Achilles, if we all listen, we can learn.

The Passion of the Christ (2004)

‘Mad Max' To ‘The Passion' – From So Ridiculous It's Good To So Sublime, It's Brilliant.

[8/10 · 9 April 2004]

Last year was the year of the sequel and the comic character adaptation. Now we have something that is an adaptation of one of the world's most well known stories, but it is nature of the adaptation itself that makes this movie stand head and shoulders above anything thing else that you will see this year, if not for quite a few years to come. There is no accommodation for audience mass appeal. At face value this may seem to be a strange statement considering that Mel Gibson is using a story that has been deeply discussed many times between different cultures the world over. What I mean by this is that there is no sprucing up of the story to cover a higher demographic count. There is no girl meets boy, boy eventually wins girl over for the woman or fashionable character to tap into the current audience trend. There is also no watering down of the story. We see what happened as told through the ages and witness the horror and brutality of the times. Indeed this is the movie that we have been waiting a long, long time for.

Mega successful movies are the result of the careful crafting of the components of story, images, sound and, of course, acting. Here we have these elements blended together so finely that not one stands out above the other. For sure, this movie will etch itself on the mind because of its intense graphic scenes of violence, but without the strength of the other elements we would have only been witnessing a movie intent on shocking the audience rather than a movie that wanted to communicate a message, that is, the suffering endured for the sins of man. The sublime craftwork created a movie of substance thus giving the audience a truly unique experience.

The movie opens with the scene at the garden of Gethsemane. The scene is a mesmeric one awash with ethereal blue light and mist giving the audience a sense of mystery and the anticipation for the rest of the scenes is immense. The use of lighting is used once again in the High Priest's house where he stands before the council in the presence of the teachers of the Law and the elders. Here a gold – like swath of light is used to augment the authority of the gathering, but at the same time it did not dilute the raw emotion of all within the courtyard. This clever use of artistic methods of storytelling also helped to accentuate the period of the story. Satan's presence is also ingenious. It is not ever – present, but it is there, hovering, waiting and enticing. Sometimes, producers can get carried away with the use of special effects which would have only served to undermine the story. The Satan character would have been a tempting opportunity for the lesser artist. Restraint exercised was restraint rewarded.

All the actors were unrecognizable to me with the exception of Jesus, who was portrayed by the character actor, Jim Caviezel. This was an important and extremely effective tactic. Blockbuster stars may secure backsides on seats, but they may detract from the nature of the story and of more importance to Mel Gibson, the message. The story was the star here and with the objective of authenticity, actors who were ideal for the characters of the story were cast.

Jim Caviezel is a man who radiates a sense of mystery and intense inner pain. That is what made him such a good choice for the role. He never got carried away with cries of agony which was necessary for the character that was enduring pain for the good of man. Overacting would also have negatively affected the longevity of the movie. His eyes were doctored with some brown lenses and at first seemed to distract, but ultimately accentuated the deep aura that radiated the man.

Further to the quest for authenticity was the use of the language of the time and for the benefit of the audience, the insertion of sub – titles. This was another key success factor and was absolutely no hindrance to my enjoyment of the movie. It is without doubt the prime contributing factor to the transporting of the audience to another time, another place, that is, the time and place of the last twelve hours of the life of Jesus. What a welcome change from the era of remakes and sequels. The typical Hollywood spruce – up is now being given a substantial challenge in the form of authentic storytelling.

No user comment on this movie would be complete without a profound discussion on the brutality of the violence rained upon Jesus. As previously mentioned, the core objective of the movie was to indicate to the audience the suffering of the man. How would this have been achieved without showing just how cruel people were in those times? Messages against smoking and drunken driving show the tragic results of these types of substance abuse. These messages are powerful since they show people the reality they may face if they persist with habits that have negative effects on the human body. The same principle is applied here. Mel's message can only carry weight if he authenticates the historical references which could only be achieved with the inclusion of these graphic scenes. They are scenes of necessity, as dictated by the quest for authenticity and the message.

As with all movies involving religious material, there is controversy in the form of the handling of iconic characters or groups of people. This is the nature of the world we live in and there is a lot of intent within material to disadvantage certain groups. I did not feel that this was the intent here and thought that the producers of the movie were all consumed with the objective of telling it as close as possible to the way that it occurred. This is, of course, my opinion, which is the opinion of someone who loves to watch movies and to critically analyze them which is my own purpose here rather than to expound a theological interpretation of the material.

Whatever color, creed or religion, ‘The Passion Of The Christ' is by far the best movie you will see this year. From the eerie setting of the garden of Gethsemane to the unworldly harshness of Golgotha, you will be unwittingly lured into a brutal world to witness the sad and deeply moving events within the last twelve hours. You will not be spared a single lash, a single drop of blood as all will bear witness to the cruelty of mans quest for power and for the appreciation of the masses. Stories such as these were meant to move people and you will leave the cinema amongst a group of people who will be quieter than the norm because they have just witnessed a movie beyond their normal experience. Sugar – coated Hollywood offerings are fine to escape the monotony of our everyday existence, but we also need a movie to make us think and feel. If you have not already seen it, see it quickly before the talk waters down the experience for you.

The Terminator (1984)

‘Um, Excuse, Mr Terminator, Sir. Let Your Head And Your Rifle Move Together To Meet The Target. You Won't Miss So Much – Sorry'.

[9/10 · 14 March 2004]

Master storyteller James Cameron, brings to the big screen one of its most memorable characters. Although not his original intention for the role, we are all thankful that an agreement was reached to have Arnold play the role of the Terminator rather than the protector, Kyle Reese. This casting proved to be the crucial element that ultimately gave the franchise the ability to continue for many years to come. No disrespect to Lance Henrikson who eventually found a role almost tailor made for him, that of the man with a dubious gift in ‘Millennium'. The movie is also testimony to the art of screenwriting giving us rich characters, an original story and insurmountable obstacles for our heroes.

The task of commenting on ‘The Terminator' is hardly a grinding task. Besides the fact that it is such an enjoyable movie, there is not much to complain about in terms of its craft. Many successful movies are a product of having the writer and director as being one and the same. The writer is able to create a visual form of his own text and the end product is his own vision. There would have been few problems here of scenes not adding value to the story or the image not bringing the character fully to life. These skills are not always endowed to the moviemaker, but it is heaped on in Cameron's case.

Right from the first scene, we start to realise that this is more than an above average action movie. The inciting scene indeed gives momentum to the story. We see the apocalyptic future and fully grasp the dark, foreboding threat of the machines. The genocidal machines crush the skeletal remains as they advance relentlessly without emotion, doing only want they were programmed to do – wipe out the resistance. The narrator voice has a tone of impending doom thus heightening the sense of tragedy. The story is set in motion for the battle to continue back in time, our time. This phenomenal piece of writing is also included in the tagline. Almost bordering on cheesiness, but it is so well done, it gets away with it.

The characters are all of purpose each with defining characteristics that bring the character to life. Sarah Conner is the sweet, innocent waitress battling to cope with life in general. Hardly a sterling foundation for the mother of the future! This does succeed in making her more vulnerable to the Terminator and the vast differences in their character help to set the story of our unwilling heroine against the seemingly indestructible machine. As the character develops and the final confrontation is at hand, she realises her destiny and rises to the challenge. Linda Hamilton is also well cast here, in fact, superbly. She has a look of innocence about her that changes to one of menacing determination, a switch done with believability – a trait necessary for the translation of the character of the story. Indeed her presence was missed in the third movie, no matter how charismatic Arnie is.

Then we have Arnold as the Terminator. If ever there was a role suited to an actor, we have the prime example here. Arnold has the name that shouts action. He has a thick Austrian accent that sounds distinctly robotic whenever he uses it. Arnold does not speak much here. He didn't need to since we were all ears whenever a line exited his lips. Remember ‘I'll be back'. His massive frame served to accentuate the indestructible nature of the character. If ever Sarah had a worst nightmare, it would seem a cakewalk next to this guy. In summary, Arnold had all the necessary traits for this character and it has quite rightly become his signature role.

Michael Biehn is a regular in a Cameron production and plays the role of Reese very well. We can see that this is a man who has suffered and his determination not only stems from a deep – set hatred of the machines, but from his love for the woman who will be one of the leaders of the resistance. Being slight of frame making him look more like a lean soccer player makes him less of a challenge for the Terminator. In fact, even though he knows he has to ultimately face the machine, the best he can do is run. He always seems to be clawing onto survival and in the end he dies in the final stand against the machine.

It would of course be impossible to say that I had satisfactorily completed my comments without a mention of the scene at the police station. This scene is the Terminator's defining scene. It is here that we see him for the cold, heartless, single – minded killer that he is. It all starts with Arnold's most memorable line and then the doors crash in as the Terminator careens into the station with his stolen car. The machine sets about his task with ruthless intent. He shoots anything that gets in his way as he searches for his prime objective. This is all he exists for and it is all he is programmed for. Like personal computers that process its input commands, he follows his input command regardless of all that stand in his way. After all, he is a Terminator so it is as they said in the sequel – nothing personal.

The story is uncomplicated, but nonetheless stimulating. Several science fiction concepts are used here, namely, time travel and machine dominance. This blend ensures sufficient obstacles for our heroes and it is also interesting to note that the Mcguffin is not Sarah, but her unborn child. This also creates a sound opening for the second movie that picks up on this in the future where another chase is on, not for the mother but for the young John Conner. The story ensures that the violence is meaningful – a machine programmed to kill would relentlessly pursue its target vanquishing all before it. Nothing to tease the brain, but the craft and intent in the story ensures that the audience is fully engrossed in the movie.

As man advances with computer technology, the more relevant this story will become. That is why the story was able to continue and audience demand grew. Science fiction takes a known scientific concept and dramatises it. The concept of machine autonomy has now graced our screens in two monster productions – ‘The Terminator' and ‘The Matrix'. The reality of machines in our lives today goes beyond our conscious and ignites our unconscious fears, that is, the fear of losing control of our world and of ourselves. These deep-rooted fears manifest themselves as inspiration for movies such as this. This is not such a bad thing since master storytellers are able to exploit these ancient fears and deliver sublime entertainment that will continue to provide enjoyment across the generations.

Dune (1984)

‘I Foresee A Lack Of Understanding' – Usal Muad'dib.

[7/10 · 12 March 2004]

This is without doubt a more than ordinary science – fiction movie. The defining factors here are the complexity of the story and of the characters. Indeed as the Guild Navigator mind read the Emperor ‘I see plans within plans'. On first viewing, one may be ‘Lost In Translation'. There are a lot of reasons for this. The first, as previously indicated, is that the story is an involved one. The second is that in trying to adapt a story from an immense novel, editing may leave out aspects that will clarify certain points in the story. The last one belongs to the Director – David Lynch. One of the best he may be, but also one who likes to tease audiences with bizarre images. ‘Dune' gave him ample opportunity to indulge. The fantasy aspect of the story meant that the character list was a tongue – twisting affair. We have among others, Reverend Mother Ramallo; Usal Muad'dib; Gurney Halleck; Padishah Emperor Shaddam IV and Feyd – Rauta. Try saying that all in one go. But these complicating factors are also its endearing qualities, especially the mind – boggling story. Indeed it promotes its longevity. Although not a movie for everyone, fans will find themselves drawn into the web of deceit and the beautiful, cruel world of ‘Dune'.

There are a number of others aspects underlying the movies appeal other than its story. The grand sets, solid performances and special effects contribute greatly to the spellbinding affect. It is this combination of factors that, for me, make it stand out amongst the remake. I thought it superior to the mini – series in almost all departments. Even when taking into account the natural preference one may have for seeing ‘Dune' before the series, I still stand steadfast by my opinion.

As mentioned, the storyline is the factor that makes it the most unique sci – fi movie that I have seen. The hero's journey is a perilous one wrought with obstacles the likes of which have never been seen before. We have a psychic fraternity of women; a cruel and repulsive opposing family; a tangled web of deceit and, of course, the worms. Let's not forget the terrain that the worms inhabit. Not a drop of rain has fell on Arrakis. There are so many movies revolving around the unlikely hero who rises to become the one, the messiah. But as in ‘The Matrix', this is not noticeable. The originality of the world that the characters inhabit and the events that pull them together in the quest for the power to control the universe, entices you in beyond the predictability giving you a thrilling journey.

The sets are at times breathtaking. Not only do they appear realistic, even by today's standards, they also accentuate the nature of the characters. The opening scenes with the Guild Navigator and the Emperor show a set which displays an aura of power and wealth. A palace thus befitting a ruling monarch. The Guild Navigators craft and the holding tank for the 4th stage Navigator is indicative of the ominous and twisted beings that they are. The spice Melange has done them no favors' as far as appearance goes. House Harkonnen resides in a dark and foreboding place created to indulge their disgusting way of life (please note the drain). The craft they possess is of an imposing nature. Robust and crass thus mirroring their character. The set for the House Atreides creates a sense of opulence and taste. It is indicative of a noble family in the 18th century. The contrasting sets for the enemies distinguishes them into distinctly good and evil. A lot of hard work was put into the sets which paid off tremendously as the world of ‘Dune' was bought to life for the big screen.

The ensemble cast was superb and it was obvious that everyone was taking the movie seriously. Kyle Maclachlan was solid as Paul Atreides. Jurgen Prochnow as always plays the leader with his own cool quality. There is also a notable appearance by Sting who seemed to relish the opportunity at playing a bad guy. The star performance must undoubtedly go to Kenneth Macmillan who played the Baron giving us a reminder of a character we first encountered at school – Richard III. The audience can also sense the fun he has with the role which does not detract from the evil nature of the character. The audience would have believed that the Baron was a twisted man who wanted to destroy all that is beautiful since he was afflicted with a disgusting ailment. This portrayal was not achieved in the TV series which gave us a more unbalanced character on the side of comic relief. The movie gave us a Harkonnen which was a far darker breed thus posing a far greater obstacle to our heroes. Although we see more of the characters in the series, the image of the maimed and disgusting Harkonnen of the movie is the one that lingers.

The special effects were noticeable by their weaknesses in a few scenes, but this is through the eyes of someone attuned to the special effects of today's movies. At times the characters seem to be copied and pasted onto scenes. The shields certainly looked fake. But on the whole they were still better than the series, especially the Worms who exuded a far greater power which was accentuated by the natural elements in the form of lightning. Indeed a memorable touch. The TV series was more elaborate but only succeeded in magnifying the fakeness.

Another interesting point involves the use of voice – over as a method to give the audience a deeper sense of the story when we learn of characters inner thoughts. This adds to the surreal effect of the movie which may or may not have been intended. The initial intention was probably to try to tap into the multi - layered story that ‘Dune' is and bring this translation to the big screen. I believe that it assisted the fantasy aspect of the story more than the insight that was intended.

I have to agree with other users here that the ending does not do just to the slow, methodical build – up of the movie. It needs about 15 – 20 minutes extra to heighten the climatic scene and to not feel that we are being briskly guided to the exit door. However, there was a problem of choice since the movie would have been deemed to be too long. But the end choice did leave a gap creating a desire for another production which evolved into the TV series.

Sci – fi has a mass appeal which rivals that of the action genre. We have a deep desire to explore the unknown and the advancement of technology does not satiate this, it exasperates it. Therefore the space travel and aliens has a certain resonance for us as the world becomes smaller and our natural boundaries are less inhibiting. It is so easy to learn about ourselves and the world around us, that we neglect this as we look further. The sci – fi movies address these fantasies and ‘Dune' succeeds sublimely. It may not be the most popular, it may not be one of the best, but it is certainly one of the most sophisticated. If you are looking for a sci – fi movie outside the norm, ‘Dune' should pose to be no disappointment.

From Hell (2001)

Its All In The Wrist Action.

[23 February 2004]

One of the greatest murder mysteries of all time, a timeless whodunit, necessitates the big screen interpretation thereof to be of high caliber. ‘From Hell' is certainly well done and most interesting to watch. When the subject matter is so well known and it's history has been meticulously pieced together accessible to millions the world over, a significant challenge is presented to the moviemakers. How do you inspire interest in a story that has been heard many times over? One way would be to look for a novel that takes one of the theories and adds unique qualities to the big players of the time through which the story unfolds. Now what you have is a captivating story of interest to those in the know as well. Of course, acquiring the services of a talented cast will be of assistance too. When this is put together with surreal imagery and artistic sets, you have the formula to take up the challenge.

The moviemakers do much to exploit the audience perception of the time which is evident from the opening statement that the Ripper sees himself as the one who will be credited with giving birth to the Twentieth century. Although this illustrated the mind – set of the character that they had chosen for the Ripper, that is, one of a man who had lost all appreciation for humanity for the mastery of his trade, he is an iconic figure of the 19th century and the boldness of his statement serves to accentuate the gravity of his evil presence.

Audience perception is largely due to the rise of media at the time which achieved mass production and the story of the murders spread like fire. Whitechapel was in a grip of terror since gruesome details were of the present rather than a stale story. The rest of London read with fearful interest. His will – o – the wisp nature and methodical brutality was quickly immortalized and even today new documents are rising to the fore further titillating public interest.

The opening sequence reminds one of ‘The Crow' where we are shown a cruel, inhospitable part of London where people are expendable commodities and civil society would have nothing to do with them. The blood red sky relayed a message to the audience of the bloodshed that lay ahead. We then descend into the city and witness the degradation in the form of drunkenness and street women being exploited. A problem that some may have is that the characters are not realistic enough since they are too pleasing to the eye. However, we are not dealing with a realistic account, but a movie that must identify with the audiences perception of the times which has been molded by countless movies and novels. The Hughes Brothers would do well not to deviate from this and they did not.

The use of this kind of imagery was presumably taken from the graphic novel. Not necessarily a direct excerpt, but its use helped to tie in the world of the graphic novel with that of the big screen. In that sense the movie should appeal to readers of the novel as well as presenting a new fictional interpretation of these events to other members of the audience. Current CGI technology certainly has the ability to enable a transition of this type. As with ‘The Crow' the moviemakers have successfully brought to life the pages of the graphic novel.

An impression of the medical fraternity of the time was given as being social beings above all others who were specimens for their diagnosis. The scenes with the Elephant man illustrated this. They were devoid of empathy and utilized the tools of the trade to achieve the required ends of the clan. This was the crux of the Ripper's actions and was the object of a few mesmerizing montages. What was noticeable here was that the gore was limited to suggestion and the savage attacks were indicated by the flash of a sharp blade. This was a cinematically acceptable way of capturing these gruesome scenes and most of the movie rides on the ominous presence of the Ripper rather than on the extremities of his crimes.

His overbearing presence was also achieved by scenes where we see the back of the Ripper and hear his voice as a hissing, malevolent evil. When we discover his identity and his eyes turn to pitch black, we are given an image of the dark, raging evil entity that resides within. The eyes rather than his actions are used to better describe his nature. This is done again in one of the final scenes where we see him in confinement with milky eyes – no longer a threat, devoid of means to do anything.

The cast was full of notables and all aptly contributed to the movie. Johnny Depp was a good choice for the lead role of Detective Abberline. His natural and genuine sense of empathy was an entertaining stark contrast to that of the Ripper and the members of the clan. He is also a staunch individualist who will do things on inspiration rather than to the book thus fitting snugly into the shell of his character. Ian Holme got the transition from being the physician at the twilight of his career (a harmless old man), to the demonic, twisted Doctor with an evil purpose in the confrontation scene with Depp without hamming it up and was utterly convincing. Depp's sidekick, Robbie Coltrane, is an outstanding character actor and is always memorable. Ian Richardson has a strong penchant for playing powerful people with dark ulterior motives and delivers once more. Heather Graham perhaps did not do enough with her role, but did not pale too badly in comparison to the strong cast.

The fear of the stalker who strikes without warning and leaves his gruesome acts for all to see has a special place deep in the sub – conscious of society. He attacks our sense of security and rekindles our ancient fear of the unknown. Jack The Ripper was such a being and his heinous acts seemed to be not of man, but of an evil entity. Horror will always be a walking ground for the man who got away. Even if they do solve the case, which I doubt, the continued deliberation as to his true identity will continue to inspire future tales of the world's most infamous night stalker.

The Last Samurai (2003)

And James Brown Said ‘Living In America, Oops, Sorry – Japan'.

[8/10 · 10 February 2004]

The epic movie seems to creating a lot of interest among producers and when we see this we can wonder no further. These movies are very moving and draw you in with their deep characters and even deeper stories. The dedication required from cast and crew will be far higher than for the regular popcorn movie designed to put butts in seats. If well done this does translate to the audience who become fully engrossed in a good story and will remain transfixed to the very end despite these movies usually long time length.

‘The Last Samurai' is indeed an epic movie displaying all the necessary characteristics indicated above. Unfortunately the translation to the audiences did not carry through to the Academy and this will be largely due to the fact that ‘The Lord Of The Rings' trilogy has come to end and is due for a few necessary awards. I am not going to look at the look at the reasons for the few Academy nominations, but rather at what aspects made this movie capture my imagination above others.

As good as it is - it is flawed in a few places. The one area of particular note is the beginning. It is a logical start to the movie which quickly introduces us to some of the main characters and tries to show us the mental torment of Nathan Algren (Cruise). He is plagued by the memories of the atrocities of the American army when they fought the Indians. The right direction was thus set as this enables the story to ease quite nicely into an interesting clash of cultures later on, but at this point the moviemakers seem intent on quickly moving us through an important part of the film where we see the characters problems of conscious and the shame he holds for his own culture. The scenes splutter across the screen as we are ushered through the obligatory character aspects to the juicy part of the movie which for me is where the unprepared Japanese trainees have to face the formidable Samurai's. From here on, the movie flows gracefully until the final scenes.

During the final stand of the Samurais', some of the Japanese soldiers start to exude pity and remorse in the face of the slaughter of their fellow countrymen who are after all only taking a stand for the Japanese way. The acting here is not of the highest caliber and nearly ruined what was a most grand climax. It appears hammed and although this was the right emotion to portray for the moment, it was not strong enough especially in the face of other performances.

Despite the opening scenes, there is a real effort to tell a meaningful story. This is evident through the restraint exercised over the characters. The bad guys do not have cheap punch lines, but as in the case of Algren's superior officer, seems well schooled and sophisticated. The love interest between Cruise and his fallen foes wife is completely devoid of the high testosterone charged skirt chasing reminiscent of some of Cruise's past characters. The only hint at sexual yearning was when she lovingly dresses him for the final battle. The final scene consists of a loving look into each others eyes. This clearly indicated the intent at making a meaningful movie which may mature on DVD stands like a fine red wine.

The epic movie needs an epic character and this is provided in the form of Cruise. Complexities of character for the lead role are necessary. To this regard, he portrays a man distanced from his own culture which practices the end justifies the means. The culture which he falls into the capture of has elements which he does not approve of, such as their apparent lack of value for life when they must take their own life in the face of defeat. But he warms to them since they are standing against the predatory culture of which is so ashamed. The Americans and ambitious Japanese see savages while he sees a people who wish to retain their ancient ways which are pure in intent. The characters obstacle of acceptance is great since he has killed one of their best in battle but was ultimately defeated meaning that he should have taken his own life. His spirit and discipline wins them over and they accept him as a warrior worthy of their own. The epic character had found that their belief in similar principles endeared them to each other.

Cruise as always has a commanding presence throughout and after the opening twenty minutes truly shows that he has what he takes to win an Oscar. Although it will not be this year, his dedication to making each project that he takes on a success must mean that he will eventually win it. I have always thought of his name on the poster as a quality stamp of approval. Even his less popular movies are still commendable. ‘The Last Samurai' leaves no room for doubt that this is a man who takes his craft very seriously indeed – for a movie of this magnitude, it needed to be.

Authenticity is important for the epic movie and we are not disappointed. The sword fights are well rehearsed and the cinematography is well orchestrated here as we do not stay long with one shot which heightens the action as well as not allowing for evidence of unskilled swordsmanship – not that these guys were that bad, though. The costumes were striking and did not appear to drown the characters as sometimes occurs in period movies.

The acting was solid throughout with a few minor noticeable exceptions. Connolly was entertaining for the short screen time that he occupied. Tony Goldwyn was good as the self – righteous and pompous Colonel Bagley. The Emperor was portrayed very well by Nakumura as being weak and open to influence from the greed of the West. At the end he realizes his heritage and sees the traders for what they are. A lot of acclaim has gone to the supporting actor, Ken Watanabe, and although rightfully bestowed it is for me as already mentioned, Cruise who leads from the front.

Depth of character and depth of story is the strongest redeeming elements here. We have a character haunted by a tortured past, disillusioned with his culture and sells' his skills, which were used for suppression, for money. He is captured by a group of rebels who may be different in many ways from himself, but have the same sense of disillusionment with their culture which is losing it's purity for greed. He had finally found himself and was willing to die for it, as were the Samurai. The epic movie must mean that the hero has to have something that he believes in so dearly, that he is willing to die for it. Only by doing this, will he find ultimate fulfillment and become the gallant hero that the audience were wishing for. This story is delivered with a juxtaposition of cultures skillfully crafted leading us not only to the end of the hero's journey, but to teach us something about ourselves as well. Indeed, this is upper end entertainment well worth a place in the DVD cabinet.

The Matrix Revolutions (2003)

Every Beginning Has An Ending – Just Kidding, Folks.

[23 January 2004]

If there is one thing ‘Revolutions' is not, it is not controversial. One look at the user comments here and you are left in no doubt as to the plausibility of this statement. Usually controversy arises from the inclusion of taboo subjects in movies, but this is definitely not the case here. The ‘Matrix' machine has given itself the concomitant reality of its own hype – elevated expectations. For a large group of people their expectations were not met. No matter how good a story is, and I am of the opinion that this is one of the best that I have seen for a long time- with some minor glitches – if you elevate expectations to such a high level as is the case here, expect some disappointment. In reviewing this movie, I shall outline some of the factors that have contributed to the wide range of differing opinions.

Characters and their problems provide impetus for the story. Without these elements, there is no story. This is obvious, but there is a point to be made here. Therefore the makeup of the characters and the problems that they have to solve will virtually be the sole source of success or failure. In ‘Revolutions' the problems that the characters encounter are of great magnitude thus keeping the audience spellbound. It is therefore the characters themselves, that is, the changes that they have undergone as a consequence of their past experiences that should be the centre of the controversy.

Neo is the movie's hero and it is his journey that the audience is most concerned with. He will lead to story to its ultimate resolution. The most important character change here is that he is more vulnerable and not the superhero that he was in ‘Reloaded'. Neo faces his challenge as a man and not as a digital entity. Hence the obstacles that he faces are more daunting. The problem with this is that much of the action that he was involved with in ‘Reloaded' was not evident until the climatic scenes. In fact, Neo has far less screen time than the previous two chapters. This is also true of the other two central characters – that of Trinity and Morpheus. The directors may be looking to the future and in a sense ‘passing the torch' of the ‘Matrix' story to other characters. It did much to make ‘Revolutions' a better story since it involved more characters with greater problems, but it certainly did not appeal to fans of the past two chapters.

Trinity's character did not change much from ‘Reloaded', except for the cut back in screen time, but Morpheus changed dramatically from the previous chapters. Now he is far more uncertain about the path of ‘The One' and as a consequence is not the ever present strong leader. Other characters take over this role as the strong leader as Morpheus is relegated in status. What this did was to take control away from the one leader who believed that he had the answer to the ending of the war. It created tension for the audience since leaders less visionary than Morpheus controlled the actions of the defenders of Zion. The idea has a sound foundation in reason, but it did weaken the character of Morpheus who was central to the story. A better balance could have been obtained by giving him more support from some of the top leaders. This would have created greater character conflict and would have not undermined the threat of the machines.

Another big change was that of the composition of the action. The others were kung – fu orientated and this one was largely a straight shoot – out. This meant that much of the signature special effects were minimally apparent here. The special effects that were now on show were very good and did much to display the power that the machines possessed. But this alienated fans of the signature special effects who may have felt deprived of what bought them much enjoyment.

Not only its composition, but its duration has changed as well. This is particularly evident from the opening scene where Neo is trapped between worlds whereas the other chapters opened up with the signature special effects and action. It was thus evident from the start that the story was going to move much slower thus emphasizing a dramatic build up rather than continuous action. This allowed for the development of other characters which further evidenced the continuing story of the ‘Matrix'. This change to the action would not have been what many would have expected. It is probably the downturn in action which is the source of most disappointment to many users.

Over the course of a long story, there will be changes to allow for character development of the heroes and also for the introduction of new characters. Character changes are very difficult. These changes are inevitable to the continuing story and the characters we see in later chapters will be different to the ones that started the adventure. A balance is thus necessary. The basic nature of the heroes needs to be retained in order to keep their mass appeal. In meeting this balance some of the changes were not appealing. The one that did not appeal to me was that of Morpheus. This is also due to the fact that Lawrence Fishburne has a natural leadership charisma and this strength was thus underscored. In essence, his basic nature was not adequately retained.

The introduction of new characters is necessary in order to stimulate audience interest and to add freshness to the story. It is the addition of the leaders of the resistance that was disappointing. They were emotionally one – dimensional and were not good for the Morpheus character in terms of undermining his strong leadership appeal. This was probably also due to the fact that they wanted to project gutsy fighters for the invasion, but it was at the expense of one of the central characters of the story.

The wide range of opinions regarding this movie is almost as interesting as the movie itself. That is why I have dedicated most of my comments to the reasons for this. A story which is going to be bigger than the characters necessitated a gradual progression into the introduction of new characters and the ending of the adventures of our old heroes. This meant that ‘Revolutions' was going to have a greater mixture of action and drama. ‘Revolutions' was thus a step above ‘Reloaded' in terms of story, but as a consequence lacked enough of the spellbinding, imaginative impact of the original. On the whole it was a fitting conclusion to the story and the many questions that were left unanswered will be a subject for the continuance of this great story.

Suspiria (1977)

And Momma Said 'Please Don't Be A Serial Murderer' – So I Became A Director Instead.

[8/10 · 18 January 2004]

The horror genre can range from the sublime to the ridiculous. This is especially true of the late Seventies, early Eighties where slasher movies had some mainstream acceptance. Moviemakers sometimes strived to deliver the blood without much thought to anything else. So where does ‘Suspiria' fit into this – sublime or ridiculous? When the movie is given some serious thought, the answer is not quite as simple as one would have thought it should have been. This is largely due to Dario Argento – a well-known figure in horror. His complexities of character overrun this movie as he instinctively performs his task of directing. Below I shall outline some of the salient factors within the fabric of his foremost creation, which give it its place in the horror genre.

The first thing that strikes you is Argento's use of images and sound to create atmosphere. This is seen from the outset where Suzy arrives at the airport into a downpour with creepy music as a backdrop. She has now entered the world of the unnatural - unnatural evil. It is the lair of a dark foreboding force waiting for the next victim. The conditions are cold and the people even colder. We also see close-ups of water pouring down drains, something that is used throughout the movie as he attempts to create an illusion of the bloodletting and loss of life.

Even more striking is the architectural settings that are used. It is like Old Europe meeting Picasso and it is quite breathtaking. This is a signature of almost every Italian directed film that I've seen. It was evident in ‘The Ninth Gate' thus accentuating the illusion of book readers having refined tastes and in ‘Dracula' to give an indication of the ancient, dark evil that he is. The advantage here is that the story is easier to become engrossed in. The senses are fully engaged as the settings add real value to the storyline. Another world is created and we are not put off by realistic settings that can jolt you from the story.

The use of lighting is strongly emphasised by other users here and quite rightly so. Not only does it reflect the evil personality of the clan, but it also gives evil life to the dwellings. There was deliberate intent here that is proven by the death of the Black Queen, which causes the school to explode. This is a clever tactic since the majestic settings' thoroughly engages the imagination and our heroine is not only against the shapeshifting entities, but the whole complex itself. If we go to a place of splendour, we can feel the vibe that it gives – it seems to have a life of it's own - and the shrewd camera technique takes full advantage of this.

The setting for the blind mans demise is a perfect example of this. The courtyard has an effect of foreboding power and when alone you could feel overwhelmed by the magnanimous aura. This effect is fully exploited by Argento. The sense of ever-present evil is also created by the set where they go to sleep away from the maggots. The blood – red lighting that awash the sheets and walls is indicative of the intent of the not only of the horde, but of the school building. This setting becomes all the more macabre when we learn of the Directresses (The Black Queen) presence.

On the subject of the blind mans demise, it is also where one of the weak points of the movie is evident. The effects stand out as very weak to an audience used to high – tech CGI. This will be a problem for most movies of this time period as advancements create realistic effects. We can easily see the fake blood and the mannequin. Even though the scene stands out as a truly gruesome murder scene, an Argento signature, this will diminish with time, as effects become more seamless.

One thing that is inescapable here, is the deep – set misogynist element. This is overwhelmingly evident in the first and third murder scene where the victims suffering is drawn out and vicious at the same time. In the first one she is methodically and brutally stabbed instead of an all out knife assault which would have resulted in a quicker death. Argento even uses his own arm in these scenes to deliver the lethal blows. A slow death is the worst kind of death and that is meticulously planned here. As if this was not enough, she is hung for all to see with another woman creatively impaled below.

In the third murder scene, the woman seems to seductively ensnare herself in the barbed wire thus causing more suffering. Indeed Argento's complex personality is laid to bear in scenes like this.

Also one of the witches conjures up an image of a Frau Blitzen who teased the weak boys at physical training class.

As a lead - up to the first murder scene another shrewd ploy was used and that is of the presence at the window. The sensation of a presence draws in the frightened woman who looks but then draws away. But her curiosity gets the better of her as she is now driven by her fears – a fear not uncommon to many members of the audience. The hanging clothes block her vision accentuating the effect of something hiding. Suddenly she is attacked through the window and the vicious assault begins. This scene with the assistance of surreal music and a room visually vibrant is one that will stay long with the audience.

Another camera trick used has its roots in Edgar Allan Poe. The wine glass is lifted to the camera as if we were drinking. This is an attempt to instil us in Argento's symphony of terror – much like Poe used to do.

Italians seem to lay their souls to bare for their chosen art form. Perhaps a part of the emotive make – up as they draw on all their senses to deliver a product to satisfy their particular artistic tastes. This is fortunate for movie fans. The camera work, lighting and music have already been mentioned, but sometimes this will not do when the required effect is necessary. In the first murder scene, an animal heart is stabbed. In the third murder scene, it looks like a chicken breast is being slashed in order to simulate a throat being cut. These attempts did not go unnoticed and do take the already gruesome scenes to another level, even if we can tell what has been done.

The story is not particularly of note, although I do not believe it is as weak as some say. The climatic scene builds up quite nicely as the heroine is given an insurmountable task, that is, to kill the Black Queen in her own lair. But she delivers one strike and as she perishes, the evil complex starts to disintegrate. For a movie that made its name out of scenes, it should not be the climax that is the let down. For everything to end in thirty seconds certainly went against the grain of the movie.

Where exactly this movie fits was not easily determined. But it was the creative use of sets, lighting and sound that ultimately elevates this movie above most in the genre. Any true horror must have this in collection. Cheap thrills were not the norm here as we are spellbindingly drawn into a wicked, cruel world of parasitic witches drawing their evil power from the weak and unwitting. Although there is ominous motivations in the make – up of some scenes, there is no doubting Argento's talent and the contribution he has made to the genre. While you are reading this, I am probably searching for ‘Tenebre'. I believe that there is an axe murder scene like no other. If Picasso did murder, perhaps it would be something like this.

Conan the Barbarian (1982)

Barbarians And Bad Hair Days.

[11 January 2004]

There are few stars that can lay claim to a character as being solely their own. But Schwarzenegger can undeniably count sole proprietorship on two characters. The first, and undoubtedly the most famous, is the ‘Terminator'. Who can ever begin to imagine any one else playing this role? Without him, the ‘Terminator' franchise can only produce products based on the three movies. He is the franchise – period. Then there is ‘Conan'. If there ever were roles tailor made for an actor, these two were made for Schwarzenegger. Here was another story that could not continue without this star. The audience identified Arnold with the character. No – one else would suffice.

The obvious implication of the above statement is that Arnold was a huge contributor to the movies success. This together with the story – albeit with some cheesiness – and a powerful soundtrack helped to prevent the negative factors detracting from an entertaining movie. The detracting factors of note were the obligatory 80's cheesiness, weak special effects and hammed up acting. Oh, I almost forgot to mention the wigs. How can anyone ever forget those?

The gargantuan presense of Arnold is all conquering from the moment we see him. He is perfect for the role. Besides fulfilling the physical appearance needs of the character with his obvious girth, he radiates the charisma of a leader. As in real life, the audience is in no doubt as to the fact that this is a man destined for greatness. His chiseled features and thick accent accentuate him as a mighty warrior with a deadly purpose. It also gives us the audience's visual pre – conception of barbarians. The word barbarian conjures up an image of powerful warriors who ensured that their foes met with a bloody end. They were ruthless and justice was meted out with powerful swings of their oversized weapons. Their history has been more than glossed over with tales of fantasy and folklore. This is a fact that is also attributable to Arnold when we hear of stories of incredible feats in his bodybuilding days. The character thus demanded someone larger than life and Arnold fills the tag quite comfortably.

The story tells of a man who when released from slavery, seeks revenge and embarks on a dangerous journey with many perils in the form of creatures of the night and fearless warriors. He befriends others as daring as himself and their combined talents draws the attention of the King whose daughter has been kidnapped by Conan's enemies. This is a classic version of the hero's journey where he rises from suppression against his enemies overcoming seemingly insurmountable obstacles and wreaks his revenge. This is a story that has mass appeal since most people feel suppressed by the system and would like to cause their own havoc in overcoming it. The resonance of the characters therefore has a real effect despite the fantasy aspect of the story.

The mixture of characters is reminiscent of folklore, especially the barbarian's small sidekick. All knights and warriors have their dependable right hand man who is usually very much the second man. This is also evident in other media and I was particularly reminded of ‘Slaine' from the 2000AD comic strip. It is this combination of characters that keeps the story moving forward with added interest. Each new character must add something different thus making a worthwhile contribution. This necessary element is well included here.

Movies in this era were unfortunately burdened with obligatory cheesiness in order to have appeal to the audience. A concomitant factor to this is that the acting becomes hammed up. Although understandable from a financial point of view since movies have to be in tandem with the current trend, better scripting could have been used in order to retain the stories respectability. It would have also contributed to audience appreciation in later years. Lines such as ‘Do you want to live forever?' should be changed to ‘They can keep their cages for somebody else'.

The soundtrack resonates the strength of the lead character. Its booming drums are the battle cry of the barbarian. A barbarian must make a loud entrance to be in character. The larger than life character now has a larger than life soundtrack and the movie explodes into life in front of the audience. The strong opening number is thus very effective as it sets the tone for the movie. Audience mood is initiated as value is added to the character as well.

The special effects as delivered to today's audiences will result in these on show here being a detracting factor. Audiences are now inundated with high – tech CGI and will immediately notice the artificial nature of the effects. Most of them looked very fake which will adversely affect the movie's longevity. It is difficult to immerse yourself into a story when you are jolted to reality with effects that literally stand out like a sore thumb.

I will take one final look at the last of the detracting factors. It concerns the little matter of the wigs. Although this could fall under the previous paragraphs discussion, the wigs were so bad that they deserve special mention. Even in the 80's where big hair and even bigger wigs were the norm, these must have been noticeable. The wigs looked exactly like what they were – wigs. Forget the sore thumb – this one was a sore limb.

Well told fantasy stories will always have an audience. Together with a strong cast the story will carry itself through to general acceptance. Members of the cast of special note were William Smith, Franco Columbo (a small appearance but the well known name draws attention) and Max Von Sydow. Powerful character players were well utilized here which complemented the aura of the age of the barbarian. It is this factor together with the story that will keep the movie available to future audiences, although the flame is starting to falter in the face of greater expectations for CGI. Production companies will invest heavily in CGI as this is what the current audience expects. There will, however, be fans of Arnold for many generations to come and it will be his star appeal that will be the key to this movie's endurance.

This also means that the continuing story of ‘Conan The Barbarian' will not be told for many years to come. There is no – one today who can prise this role from Arnold. Any remake can only be attempted long after Arnold has left the movie arena. Others will only pale by comparison as movie fans have resoundingly chalked up another character for Arnold. If a remake is attempted, please do not raid the props cabinet where the old material may lay. Maybe they can digitally animate the wigs.

Ghosts of Mars (2001)

How To Make A Hollywood B Movie An A movie – By John Carpenter.

[9 November 2003]

When you first see the movie poster, you can be forgiven for writing it off as another cheesy B grade horror movie. You see the grotesque alien with many scars and hooks and rings worn as if they were a natural part of his body. But when you look up to see the title, your attention is drawn to the name of John Carpenter. Your opinion suddenly changes to that of a more serious consideration. His name has been alongside horror classics such as ‘Halloween' and ‘The Fog'. His reputation precedes him – a good one – and his name is a like a guarantee stamp reassuring the audience of entertainment beyond that which most horror directors can provide.

A John Carpenter movie always has an interesting mixture of good and bad elements. I am sure that this is due to the fact that we can assume that part of his developing interest in movies revolved around B grade movies. His movies are strongly indicative of this. This is by no means a problem. In fact, a lot of good horror directors have their influencing foundation in this genre. Their talents have ensured that this genre has not only flourished, but also improved. The elements contributing well here are the soundtrack – always a dead cert with Carpenter, the characters and the story. Acting has always been at the centre of criticism for his movies and although not as bad as in the past, it is the weak point of the movie.

The soundtrack was as always a leader of a Carpenter movie. The opening track starts up with a strong, heavy beat preparing the audience for an over – the – top ride. The heavy metal soundtrack is perfect for the characters, especially the aliens, since it is indicative of their aggression and their hell – bent intent on total utter destruction. Heavy metal is anti – establishment with powerful overtones of rage at society in general. This is exactly the mind – set of the aliens. The wanton violence is the front for the soundtrack that mirrors the images we see.

We can see from the DVD version that Carpenter has a particular passion for music. He immerses himself with the work at hand and is oblivious to the attentions of the camera. This is much unlike when we see him directing. We can thus see that music is his first interest when it comes to the production of his movies. Besides the unforgettable, outlandish characters that he creates, it is the music that we remember.

The characters are a good mixture offering characters aspects of audience interest as well as opportunity for directions for the story. Natasha Henstridge is the capable policewoman with an antisocial drug habit. It seems that she holds no hope for society – much like the followers of heavy metal - and takes drugs to escape the hopeless reality. Jason Statham is the crass policeman showcasing little tact, but much bulldog spirit as he tackles the aliens. His accent accentuates his lower middle class character. Ice Cube does not have to act much since he plays a character that is a natural for him – a streetwise gangster that is always targeted by the authorities. The aliens are of course loud, angry and destructive. Their self – mutilation are symbols of war which send a clear message of intent to their victims. Finesse was not the call of order for the actors as their carry out their hosts' revenge.

The story is in itself is nothing original or shows any intent of delivering a message. It is, however, told in an interesting way. It is told as a personal account as we see the images of the story that she is telling her superiors. This has the advantage of accentuating the danger faced by the characters since we are now told of their ordeal. It takes on a personal feel. Stories told to us by those that have experienced the events give the audience a sense of the harrowing experience. We listen more attentively to those who have personal traumatic stories to tell. The physical result is evidenced before us and we see the trauma the teller experiences as they recall those terrible events. It is thus bought closer to home.

The suspense is maintained in the beginning, partly due to the narrator being the one who endured the ordeal, and also as we see more evidence of the terror that has fallen on the town. The tension then breaks like a very thick elastic band as we witness those beings unleashing their horror. What we then have is our heroes outnumbered by a cancerous race that has overcome the town and will destroy any being that they come across.

The acting at various points in the movie is weak. It appears as if there were not enough takes and the actors at times do seem to be plodding through the emotions. Although acting is not the skill most called upon for movies such as these, the quality of acting is improving these days and poor acting becomes more noticeable. Carpenter seems to breeze through the direction as he pays most of his attention to the soundtrack. This works for the genre that he is operating within and his attention to the other elements more than carries the movie through, but as previously mentioned the acting in his future productions will have to improve so as to keep pace with his peers.

The B movie has long outlived its official demise. Talented moviemakers carry on their legacy showcasing their influence in movies such as these. The B movies took advantage of our basic fears and Carpenter has created several characters around these fears. B movies are the manifestation of our subconscious that makes them interesting to analyse. The superficial nature of their characters belies the intricacies behind their development. Horror is the face of what we do not want to see or experience in reality. It is the extremity of the fear of possibility – the possibility of the realisation of our fears of the unknown. There will thus always be a market for the movies of Carpenter as audiences visually experience the tales of urban legend and the horrors of mankind's advancement in the field of science.

Halloween II (1981)

Family Ties – The ‘Not The Afternoon Sitcom.

[9 November 2003]

What is interesting about this movie from an originality point of view is that the movie starts from the ending point of the original. We now have continuous story flow which is indicative of the strength of the original concept. Audiences did not have to put up with some ill – conceived spruced up story which gave an excuse to bring Michael Myers back to the big screen. From an unoriginal perspective, we do have the predictably higher body count. Fortunately it did not reach the levels attained by other sequels within the genre. The other predictable element of this horror sequel is that the death sequences are far more gruesome. Notwithstanding these obligatory elements, the sequel is relatively strong and although not as good as the original, this sequel did much to build on the ominous reputation of Michael Myers.

Looking at a sequel is surprisingly interesting. We have the original to compare to and we can access how the characters have developed. In this one, character development was not an issue since we are dealing with a story that follows events directly after the original. This in itself is interesting as we do not see this very often.

There are elements that contribute well, but also those that contribute poorly. The ones that contribute well is the soundtrack, the Shape and Donald Pleasance. Elements that did not work well here is unbelievable character decisions, and poor special effects.

The music is for me the outstanding element here. The opening theme track seems to be updated with more bass giving a far more ‘in your face effect'. This is exactly what Michael is. He is no longer an unknown force. Haddonfield knows he is there somewhere in the shadows – lurking, waiting to strike. Therefore the theme does not emphasise the suspense indicative of the original – rather the gruesome intent of the villain. This seems to be more in line with the Halloween festival around the world where the costumes are loud. The movie had become more indicative of it's title.

It has been mentioned by other users here that the ‘Sandman' track is out of place. Although this may seem so on the face of it, I feel that it offers a contrast to the Halloween theme track as a ‘feel good' track is played and then we are led into the ominous theme track – muck like what would be done at Halloween parties. This sequence of track, probably not intentionally, highlights the way that this story has become synonymous with the festival as previously touched upon. It not only takes the name of Halloween. It takes the character of Halloween. Myers is the evil that never dies – the bogeyman. John Carpenter has created a story that identifies strongly with makes no small contribution. October 31st and has stolen into the ceremony. His music is a prime example of this.

The Shape is now played by Dave Warlock. The suspense lacking from the script itself becomes evident in his body language. His movements accentuated his evil presence and dehumanised him. It also shows us that he is not a normal human being - rather a cold, soulless entity that exists only to kill his sister. This was also evident in the first, but was more noticeable in this movie since we saw more of Myers. The Shape was given more screen time, but his basic character remained true to the original. A necessary keep – over since the sequel deals with the same night the attack started.

Donald Pleasance is as much affiliated with ‘Halloween' as Jamie Lee Curtis is. His major contribution is creating a sense of plausibility for the audience. He recites his lines with such authenticity that the audience will be drawn into the story. We think of the ‘mad scientists' of an era gone by, only this is not his creation but a shell born onto the world to carry out evil deeds. He is what Alec Guinness was to ‘Star Wars' and what Vincent Price was to horror movies. Pleasance adds to the aura of Myers and was a vital part of the ‘Halloween' franchise. Even with Jamie Lee Curtis on board in the most recent ‘Halloween' movies, the impact of the first two ‘Halloween' movies was never rekindled which is due in part to the loss of Pleasance. He was a great opponent for Myers.

The believability added by the abovementioned members of the cast was undermined by unbelievable character decision making. Curtis is always hiding not far away from Myers. Not rational for somebody who was previously attacked and knows what she is up against. There would have been more plausible solutions to making Curtis more of a helpless victim. She could have injured herself while she was trying to escape and the perfect opportunity for this was in the hospital when she narrowly escaped Myers. What she did, did not assist the story, but weakened it. It is these areas within which audiences drawn in may be lost.

The effects were weak in places. The blood drained on the floor was way too red. It served to weaken the movie since this is another element which may jolt audiences from their imagination. Special effects serve to add believability to the story and when attention is drawn to them in a negative sense, the story can only be adversely affected. It was also too much blood for a Myers kill. He strikes a lethal blow rather than causing too much gore. It is unfortunate that this seemingly obligatory element became a part of this movie.

I had seen this movie before the original and for some time favoured this one, mostly due to the haunting soundtrack. But I grew to prefer the original because of its suspense. The music, in my opinion, is still better in this sequel since it adds ominous intent to Myers and more truly reflects his character. But this was not enough to improve it over the original and if the weaknesses mentioned above were ironed out, we would have had a much stronger comparison.

What separates ‘Halloween' from other slasher movies is that Myers has real purpose, although there is no evident motive. He exists solely to kill his sister. Myers does not kill all that are within his territory, but those that may stand in the way of his objective. This is the essence of the story and gives reason for his continued existence. This has now been stopped in the most recent ‘Halloween' movie – ‘Halloween Resurrection' and although it is said that this gives way to a new story, it seems to lead it to older stories where the villain kills senselessly. It is true that it had to change in some way, but if Myers is not stalking a relative his core purpose is lost. I am sure that there will be another sequel and I am hoping that they bring back Laurie. The original concept was very good and if the story is going to continue, the foundation should be kept.

A Nightmare on Elm Street (1984)

You Can Sleep – But You Cannot Hide.

[26 October 2003]

Many horrific characters have terrified audiences down the years, but only a few seem to touch the subconscious profoundly enough to return to the big screen many times over. Universal produced many monsters in the early part of the last century. Most of these were subject to severe constraints such as the ability to communicate. They were monosyllabic since their inability to communicate was indicative of the fact that they were not human and we could not reason with these beings that only existed to wreak havoc. The only one with any sense of sophistication was Dracula. This is the one of the prime reasons why this character has such strong appeal.

Wes Craven has now given us another character that is worthy of recall to the big screen. Although lacking the sophistication of the past vampire characters, he can interact more on screen thus creating entertainment beyond the Universal monsters. He had many wise cracks, which also was necessary for audiences of the Eighties – a prime requirement for the superficial era. To an audience which had been bombarded with slasher flicks as a consequence of the success of Friday 13th, it was a progressive step. For the audience of today, we now have ‘Freddy Vs Jason' which is an interesting idea, albeit a sensationalist one.

There are many reasons why Freddy Kruger has captured the imagination of audiences. The first and most obvious is his appearance. His burnt features make him have the appearance of a monster. He is human in shape only – a disfigured monster hell bent on revenge. The trademark finger knives are also an image of terror. He does not just want to kill - he wants to maim and destroy. The ‘stalker with the axe' now takes a fiendish pleasure in his vicious deeds. Killing is not enough. He has to torture his victims and see their pain. His demented psyche needs to be satisfied. He is above the aimless slayer and there is method in his madness. A far more deadly assailant.

Another is the children playing outside his house. Their presence is an ominous one as the image of pure innocence is now a messenger of foreboding evil. A sense of impending doom is created since we now see the all-consuming power of Freddie's evil in his victims. His past victims are now an element of psychological torture for his next victims. Although this has been an element of stories of the past, this image becomes a more striking and harrowing one when we learn that he was a child killer.

Self – mutilation is another feature of Freddie's psychological torture. In one scene he slices his fingers off. This accentuates the impression of invincibility since if he can harm himself in such a way, how can we hope to harm him. His form also changes as he contorts himself into painful images. This is indicative of the predator's adaptation to his hunting ground. He holds great power over his victims. Warriors of times gone by used this tactic in the field whereby they would endure pain in adorning their body with aggressive artwork showing their commitment to wage war. Freddie is the supernatural caricature of this ancient practise.

The final element is part of the high concept of the movie. Sleep is escape for us. Peaceful sleep is secure sleep. This security has now been invaded by the being that Freddie has become. Our final hiding place has now become a place of terror. We cannot call for help in this dream world. It is now the world of Freddie that is at his every whim. The monster is now seemingly invincible. Our final refuge is the predatory ground for the evil killer and the prey is not equipped to defend against attack. This element of originality is the defining one of the ‘Elm Street' movies.

The performances are very strong as one comes to expect from a Wes Craven movie. The leading character could easily have been hammed up and appeared contrived. Robert Englund plays the role of Freddie with obvious enjoyment. We can tell that he calls on that side of him that wants to strike back at the system and it thus came naturally. The danger of identifying with a role of this nature has, however, been realised since seeing him in other roles he seems to be out of place. The audience is accustomed to seeing him as Freddie. Typecasting is not always necessarily a bad thing. The actor gains recognition and success, but once the story has run its length, he will struggle to achieve similar success and his typecasting will limit his ability to successfully engage the audience in a character of another story.



The young cast all perform well with a notable debut by Johnny Depp. In the past, acting performances were secondary to the necessity of the look and the scream as the mad axeman delivers his coup de grace. This is definitely not the case here as believable performances are given. Craven also sets his movie apart from the others in the same genre by using up and coming talent and maximising their potential. When creating movies that have to capture the imagination, good acting becomes a greater necessity since a hammed up performance will not draw audiences into the story.

Besides a good debut performance, Depp's end is met in a cult scene where he is torn to pieces in his bedroom. Despite the gore, the scene was not an excuse for a gratuitous violence. It gave an image of the destructive evil that Freddie was. It rose above an obligatory slasher scene because the story was laying down a platform for it by building on the acts of Freddie and the terror that the teens faced increased with each incident. It therefore fitted within the fabric of the story.

The stalk and slay movie concept is now being adapted to mans ability to control his environment and therefore conquer his ancient fear of the unseen foe. The monsters are now not only powerful, but have other supernatural abilities. Their menace is now manifold, as these screen monsters have evolved to face audiences and our screen heroes. Our ancient fears are still there, only more suppressed and characters like Freddie have now come to being in order for moviemakers to give rise to these fears and ensure audience entertainment as well as terror. Slasher movies should never be the same again.

Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl (2003)

Hoisting the Jolly Roger.

[17 October 2003]

Most genres suffer the effects of booms and depressions associated with audience fickleness and the current trend. Only the Action, Thriller and Drama genres retain any sense of stability. Therefore the large – scale investment in a movie which does not have the benefit of a boom period is a risky one. ‘Pirates Of The Caribbean' is an attempt at regenerating the pirate movie with a movie so bold that it even has a sub – title thus indicating the intent of future development of the concept. The pay – off could be big or it could be a major loss. The achieved success is a consequence of the producers doing their homework. If it was a gamble, it was a confident one.

The elements of its success are numerous, but the one's that got the attention were the story, the acting, the characters and the visual feast. No single element took centre stage and an excellent balance was struck which ensured that audience attention was not diverted by any one element being stronger or weaker at any point in the movie. Bruckenheimer's production style is well suited to a movie such as this and his experience in the production of several Hollywood blockbusters must have significantly decreased the risk factor.

The story was a rich one that flowed gracefully introducing new characters at opportune times and providing sufficient obstacles for our heroes to overcome. This was crucial considering the movies length, although this time length is becoming more acceptable to audiences of today who are adapting as blockbusters are now being produced with involved stories which create greater character development. This is good for moviemakers who may sometimes find it difficult to condense stories to the allotted time limit.

Suspension of disbelief was a subconscious one since the audience knew that it was watching a story which had the fantasy of a children's book. This is a natural component of stories about pirates since they conjure up an image of outlaws living outside the natural realm. Past stories captured our imagination as we were told of these barbaric beings that slipped out from under the shadows and plundered returning to their dark realm only to return to strike another hapless target. The great expanse of the ocean abound with uncharted territories and riches to plunder accentuated this quasi – romantic image.

The acting on show perfectly set aside each character as an individual who added to the story in their own way. Johnny Depp gave a style to his character that would have been amusing for the younger audience including enough expected character of a pirate so as to keep it in line with the story. As defined by him, pirates would have been something akin to rock stars in their time. This interpretation would have made it easy to be contrived which would have ruined the opportunity created for an original character. This was definitely not the case as the lines were sufficiently sublime and the acting was restrained enough so as to avoid a transparent performance. Let's not forget the assistance provided by the make – up department in the form of eyeshadow. Which self – respecting aspirant rock star would not have black eyeshadow? Our conventional image of a pirate was not portrayed here and this task was left to the character of Jeffrey Rush.

This characters entrance was tantalisingly held back as the audience were given entertaining clues as to the character of Barbossa. Lines like ‘he was spat out by hell' served to create an image of extreme depravity and insatiable greed. When we see him for the first time, this image is smoothly slipped into with restraint similar to that of Depp's. He is the archetypal pirate with which the audience will readily identify. We even have the characteristic ‘Aaaaarrr'. As with the character of Depp, there is also originality although more in line with the producers' conception of the character rather than the acting adaptation of Rush. The parrot is traded in for a monkey. This is in tandem with his hyped up image of evil since the monkey looks more mischievous than a parrot. A pirate who is supposed to be the most evil of all must have the most mischievous companion of all.

Who also gave a good performance and was consistent throughout. She did not fall into the trap of being too fragile and thus becoming a Scream Queen. Instead she developed into a heroine as she took the battle to ‘The Black Pearl'. The originality evident in the characters of Depp and Rush was not adapted here which did not bring too much disappointment since she retained enough presence in their company. Although she looked like a clone from ‘Titanic', she gave enough adventurous spirit and was therefore not as fragile as a ‘rose'. Excuse the pun, it was hard to resist. The producers were right in casting someone who had a tried and tested look with the audience, but in doing so did not build on the originality as delivered by the leading men.

The pirate movies that I have seen in the past all seem to visually fantastic. This one does much to continue this necessary trend. The world of the pirate is something otherworldly belonging only to our imaginations until some moviemakers give us their graphic depiction of this. The sets are at times spectacular in bringing this world to life. This movie does much to satisfy one of the requirements of the big screen which is to take our senses to another level. After all, the big screen is not ordinary – it is grand. Why use a Mako as a prowler of the deep when you can use a Hammerhead.

‘Pirates Of The Caribbean' is an enjoyable movie, but it is not particularly memorable. This was probably not the ultimate aim of the producers. Audiences are looking for quick fix panaceas to their daily stress and in depth storylines do not provide this. The movie was aimed at profit – taking in the short – term. This means that the movie would have to be devoid of messages, but high on family amusement. This allows the producers to target the mass audience and thus make the movie more bankable. It is important to note that the story itself is not weak, it fact as previously mentioned it is a rich offering many avenues for entertainment. It does, however, fall short of the ideal for the stage that it graces. The grand stage requires a story of greater magnitude, which will entertain as well as teach for generations to come. Notwithstanding this fact, there are at present certain economic realities that the producers are paying attention to. Hopefully the future holds greater prospect for stories down the generations.

Star Wars: Episode VI - Return of the Jedi (1983)

Act Three In The Art Of Entertainment – The Final Duel.

[9/10 · 12 October 2003]

So it had finally come to be – the final chapter of an epic story. The attention span of a movie audience has always been a limiting factor for the movie industry. When taken into consideration with the time and cost constraints that influence audience attendance at the movie theatre, we can well appreciate the fact that the series concept well accepted for television, is not considered bankable for the movies. A potential investment in the ‘continuing adventures of……' by production companies would result in the application of financial prudence, meaning that the preference would rather be to concentrate on one story and if box office success warranted it, the production of a sequel to take advantage of a potential cash – cow. This is still a solid norm today, although more risks are being taken in stories like ‘Star Wars'

Good stories will always attract audiences to the theatre, but to bring them back for another chapter, it will have to be special. The principle of high concept would certainly have more relevance here. Of prime importance would be the unique challenge of creating story flow throughout the chapters with each setting the platform for the next. Keeping audience attention throughout the chapters is necessary in order to inspire audiences to return and follow the continuing adventures of their heroes.

‘Star Wars' is one of those few special stories that can meet all these challenging requirements. It introduces new characters throughout the chapters which created enough interest for the audience. Each chapter ended tantalisingly thus giving impetus to the next chapter. Stories involving mystical worlds with wizards, princesses and knights duelling always seem to captivate audiences thus making them particularly favourable for the series format. This is also evident with ‘Lord Of The Rings'. Lucas's unique adaptation of ancient worlds to that of the future has firmly claimed an established place in cinematic history.

The third chapter offers much in the way of strengths, but unfortunately also in the way of weaknesses. As a result, it does pale in comparison to ‘The Empire Strikes Back', but it still falls short of disappointing. Lucas had gone much further in trying to delight the younger members of the audience. There may be method here to the effect that being the final act, it should act on a happy note. It may also be that feeling freer to apply the child within him due to the mass audience acceptance of previous characters, Lucas added more comic characters. Even if we consider the first point to be correct, and I personally feel that it is the second, the story has been weighed down with comic characters, which may annoy the older audience. These characters take up much screen time in the third chapter and it began to take on a pantomime – like style. This undermined the battle between good and evil as the threat of the Dark Side seemed to take a back seat to these characters. If it were not for the greater role that the Emperor played in this chapter, it would have been disappointing.

The Emperor is a sublime manifestation of the Dark Side. He absolutely oozes dark menace which serves to accentuate his great power. The eyes beneath his cloak projected ominous intent. Even his surroundings mirrored the evil that he is. His window is in the shape of an unshapely spider web symbolising the disorder and chaos of the Dark Side and hideous design also indicated to us that we were now in the presence of evil. The room is devoid of ornaments or furniture making him appear more purposeful in his evil intent. He does not reminisce or luxuriate – he exists only to dominate and rule at all costs. His priests have the appearance of demonic minders who submissively attend to their masters needs. The Emperor is purposeful in motion – confident in who he is and the outcome of his fiendish plan which is unfolding in the presence of his adversary.

The stand – off between the Emperor and Skywalker did much to increase the perception of the Emperor's power. He seemed to be in total control and was getting the necessary reactions from Skywalker. It is these scenes which rescue the movie and keep it in line, not only with the box – office success of the previous chapters, but also as a story. It gave the continuity to the chapter that was necessary due to the excess inclusion of comical characters. It did not address the balance entirely, but served to anchor the storyline.

The Emperor was a character which served to draw on the line of evil characters such as the Bounty Hunter and of course, Vader. The balance of characters between the good and the bad side was generally very good. But for me, it was the Emperor that tipped the balance of memorable characters in favour of the baddies which already benefited from strong audience appeal due to characters like Vader. This is indicative of the fact that stories such as these require immense characters as opponents for our heroes. This creates a greater obstacle to overcome thus maintaining audience attention as they attempt to conquer an insurmountable force. Audiences also enjoy these characters since they solve their problems ruthlessly and with impunity. It may be costly to us in reality, but we can fantasise about it. We imagine the face of ‘Star Wars' and it is not Skywalker.

The comical characters had their place in the movie, but they were greatly over – utilised. Some of them were silly, especially at Jabba the Hut's cave. The Special Edition only served to exasperate the matter. Alien's continually belching was a joke that was replayed as if we would never tire from the novelty. If their comical nature and screen time had been toned down, they would have strengthened the movie rather than weakened it. A sound balance between the comic and seriousness of these characters was struck in the previous chapters. It was a pity the same was not applied here.

Notwithstanding the above criticism, ‘Return Of The Jedi' is an entertaining movie with a satisfying conclusion. The assault on the imagination launched by the story tapered a bit here. but it remained to be a movie far above the average. The final chapter had despite it's weaknesses, given us a movie which was still one of the best at the time. A traditional story had been adapted and as a consequence of this adaptation, cutting – edge technology not only needed to be used, but had to be upgraded. Lucas carried this application through to all future projects involving ‘Star Wars' and although their impact has, and never will be the same, we will continue to look forward to the continuing story of ‘Star Wars'.

Pale Rider (1985)

The Man With No Name Rides Again.

[8/10 · 28 September 2003]

The Westerns is what gained Eastwood mainstream recognition, and he returns to prosperous grounds with this movie. Much like his character, he returns the Western from the dead and avenges their loss of appeal at the box office. A few years later, he was to strike gold with ‘Unforgiven' and although this story is not as gripping as ‘Unforgiven', it is well crafted with minor flaws.

The similarities between this movie and his well-known Spaghetti Westerns are vast, but the difference lies with the superior quality. Once again he is the ‘Man With No Name' defending the weak and settling an old score. Where this one differs from his earlier work is that the characters and dialogue are realistic surpassing the one – dimension norm for the genre. The characters are credible in the sense that each has believable motivations for their actions. The Hood are motivated by their greed and the gold miners are motivated by their dreams. The credibility is thus intact with regards to the characters drives meaning that we now do not have to rely on suspension of disbelief as we witness the action unfold. The dialogue is in sync with each character. The Hood speaks with an educated tongue, but his desperation is apparent as the Preacher stands his ground. The miners speak with little sophistication thus reflecting their social status of the times. The Preacher speaks as we would expect ‘The Man With No Name' to speak. He is cool and rational and what little is said carries a lot of weight. The dialogue thus enhances the rich diversity of characters.

Of special note is the casting. All the actors are well suited to their roles. Stockburn and his deputies are particularly memorable. The deputies look like they are all recruits from Hollywood B type action movies. This by no means understates their significance. Instead of playing their usual outlandish bad guys, they relied on their natural ability to exude devilish intent. They look cold, dark and menacing. There was no dialogue which accentuated their malevolence - talk did not interest them. They were there to do a job and small talk was meaningless. Their movements were slow and methodical thus adding to their character's coldness and creating tension as the harbinger's of death prepared to deal out their own brand of justice – the kind of justice that only dollars can buy. Although the screen time dedicated to these characters was limited, their impact was far greater.

The casting of Stockburn as a Lee van Cleef look – alike was also very good. This could be construed as a lack of originality, but it was ideal for the story. He looks like a weathered, tough baddie, much in line with the impression we have of those times as provided by Hollywood, who had dealt with many situations such as these with a cool, ruthless hand. His dialogue, with assistance from a menacing voice, mirrors his appearance – hard and to the point.

Eastwood is the archetypal ‘Man With No Name'. His natural coolness forms the basis for the character. He has the ability to limit his dialogue and communicate to the audience with the assistance of minimal body language the emotions of his character. The sharpening of a glare was all he needed to show that he was a man with a past who could be dangerous. This was vital to the character since it helped create the enigmatic figure that the Preacher was supposed to be.

An indication of the craft of the movie is the scene where the Preacher starts to help his freind break the rock. The rock became an obstacle that they would have to overcome and they began to realise that if they pulled together, not only could they beat the rock, but the Hood as well. Scenes such as this elevated this movie beyond the Spaghetti Western. Attention had been paid to the story and gratuitous action was obviously never the intention. This is not to say that the movie lacked action, it means that action scenes were an integral part of the story and not as eye – candy offerings for a hormone charged audience.

As well crafted as it is, it is not without flaws. The first is the scenes within the town. It is easy to tell that the town is a small set for the movie due to the camera angles. This became particularly evident when the Hood is trying to bribe the Preacher with an offer of a church in a rich town. This immediately draws attention to the shots within the town which thus highlights the flaw. I have not checked to see whether this is a consequence of a low budget, which would be feasible since Westerns were not as bankable at that time as they were in the past. Even with due consideration of this fact, the cinematographer could still have made more creative use of camera angles to negate this limiting factor.

A more minor flaw is the how the character of Megan is used in the movie. The book has her name in the title which is indicative of the fact that the story is told through her eyes. The telling of a story through the eyes of a young innocent can add various dimensions to the story. The adventures that unfolds before her would have a greater impact on the audience since the struggles of a child will touch the audience more than that of an adults. People always sympathise for the young. It can add complexity to the story since a child's emotions and pre – conceptions will create more opportunity for conflict. There was effort made in this direction, but I feel that if Megan had been given more opportunity to tell the story from her perspective, the story would have been more emotive appeal.

Westerns will always have an audience, although their popularity may fluctuate over time. The lawlessness of the times set the stage for good storytelling and unfortunately also poor storytelling. In the past, they concentrated on a Hollywood B style movie with characters existing as an excuse to pull a trigger in the outlawed West. This formula worked for a while, but the stories lacked the substance to withstand the test of time. This has led to the present situation where the few that have now been on offer have shown an increase in quality. This is probably due to the fact that the limitation in audience appeal has meant that the story has to be of solid value in order to attract the investors. As with all genres, they have actors that are naturally adept to the role. Eastwood was such a man for the Westerns. We now wait for his successor to carry on the legacy of ‘The Man With No Name'.

Star Wars: Episode V - The Empire Strikes Back (1980)

Act Two In The Art Of Entertainment – The Search For Skywalker.

[9/10 · 21 September 2003]

This movie achieved an extremely rare accomplishment in cinematic history – the sequel surpassed the original in all departments. Other examples of this are ‘The Godfather' and ‘The Terminator'. ‘Star Wars' and ‘Godfather' were the next chapter in a trilogy and thus were the continuing story rather than the beefing up of an original high concept movie conceived with the sole objective of cashing in on the appeal of the original. ‘The Terminator' was not planned as a trilogy, but rose above the production company cash –in norm by delivering a developed story and limiting action sequences to fall into the context of the story. These movies indicate to us that good stories are fundamental to the long – term audience acceptance. Lucas certainly had this in mind.

The composition of the next chapter requires character development. Of importance here is ensuring the characters have changed as a consequence of their previous experiences. This not only creates audience interest for the audience, but also offers opportunities for challenging adventures for our heroes.

The best example of this is Skywalker. The realisation of his power has given him a sense of purpose and he relishes the opportunity to learn. He retains his youthful enthusiasm and spirit of adventure. Although feeling a high sense of duty, he still has concern for his friends and rushes to their aid. His development as a Jedi Knight has alerted the Empire to the threat that he poses. Vader has relentlessly pursued him and taking advantage of his commitment to his friends, finally manages to lure him into a showdown. This of course led to the memorable scene where Vader reveals his true identity.

This set the stage for an engaging conflict in the next chapter. The story can now flow seamlessly thus maintaining the captivated audience. Conflict is what gives impetus to the story and it must be plausible so as to maintain the credibility of the story. It is the prime character driver and as our characters develop, so the conflict becomes greater further motivating them towards resolution. There is no greater emotive conflict than that of father and son on opposing sides of the battlefield. It would be natural for audiences to identify with this. This served to create a solid platform for mass audience appeal.

The relationship between Ford and Fisher had grown. Their differences in character had endeared them to each other. The conflict between the two was riddled with weak lines that at times were silly but which probably helped to inspire giggles from the younger members off the audience. It was designed to indicate innocent love. Given the huge success of this movie, the lines would not have gone to waste. Ford was well cast for the role. He is a watered down Clint Eastwood doing it his own way, but as a team player with a strong sense of moral commitment to his friends, much unlike Eastwood who is a loner lacking commitment and with lewd sexual fantasies. Although his character needed to go, the natural family values of Ford seeped into his character. He was not the gunman, but the man fighting for the survival of his family.

The acting was the single biggest improvement. Much of this can be credited to the new director. Lucas is a writer by nature and the reticence inherent in a writer may not translate well to that of the director who needs to be outwardly expressive. The most visible improvement for me was that there was a greater menace about Vader. I believe that this was due his less animated style. He was more methodical in method somewhat like a cold assassin. He did not expend unnecessary energy as he ruthlessly hunted down Skywalker. This improvement to the character augmented the dark feel of the movie.

Also worthy of special mention was Hamill. Gone were the false facial mannerisms and now we have a performance showing the inner turmoil and conflict. Hamill, with a little help from the director, was growing in stature. The lack of restraint was not evident here as it was in the first one. This was a necessary progression since the character was faced with greater personal conflict and without the restraint we would have had a hammed up offering.

An obligatory requirement for sequels is that our heroes encounter different characters on their adventures. This can be a most difficult task, especially when the first chapter was a great success. The idea is to introduce new characters to the audience which would spark new interest as well as being within the context of the story. The new characters of note were the Bounty Hunter and Yoda.

The Bounty Hunter blended into the story since he compared well with Vader. This was by no means indicative of a lack of creativity, but was in fact the perfect addition. A character was created that inspired interest, but retained the continuity of the story since he was instantly recognisable as someone who could be in allegiance with the Dark Side. The retention of the story continuity and the addition of originality required inspired creativity.

He was human only in shape. We could not see any part of his body thus limiting his identification as an emotional being that could be reasoned with. He was the manifestation of a cold – blooded killer. Although lacking the over – bearing presence of Vader, he was an ominous foe. Characters such as these do not have much screen time. The more we know about our foes, the less of a threat they are. Notwithstanding this fact, he is one of the more memorable characters.

In the battle between good and evil, Yoda was the wizard preparing the knight for the duel. He had the characteristics necessary of someone on the side of the good. His animated mannerisms and comical features endeared him to the younger audience and his grim warnings about the power of the Dark Side enthused entertainment for the rest. Guinness had a small part to play in this chapter and Yoda was his replacement, thus evidencing the continuity and originality previously mentioned.

The assault launched on the imagination by the original had now been intensified with advanced weaponry. Improvements to the armoury were more emotive content within the acting; new characters which added value to the battlefield and of course the then spectacular special effects. Of particular note is the twist in the plot where the true identity of Skywalker's father is revealed to him. This jolt was not enough to awaken us from our trance – like state of hyper – imagination. The ‘Star Wars' machine rolled on ever conquering, enslaving audiences worldwide who readily accepted their subservience. The stage was graced with a story rich in design and complemented with vivid images. The wait for the next chapter would be a long one.

Star Wars: Episode IV - A New Hope (1977)

Act One in the Art of Entertainment – Rise of the rebellion.

[9/10 · 7 September 2003]

To put this trilogy into perspective, it should be compared to another of great success. The one that I am referring to is of course ‘The Godfather'. An appropriate analogy for comparison would be that of a family visiting an art gallery. They come to the ‘The Godfather' display and the parents take a step back and seriously consider the portrait. The children take a look but soon loose interest and start to nag their parents ushering them to move along. The father has his hand on his chin – the customary body language of a man in deep thought and looking intellectually satisfied moves on the next display. A big hurrah for the young ones for the next artistic offering is that of ‘Star Wars'. They go 'Wow' and the parents attention is also drawn in – the child within touched. They all move along with a facial display of joyful appreciation.

‘Star Wars' was pure entertainment – an example of the art in entertainment in its purest form. It appealed to all, no matter what colour, creed or gender. The imagination is emotionally hauled away on a journey relieving the traveller from reality. There was no sophisticated effort at delivering a message or any subliminal images necessary of interpretation. This is the epitome of big movie entertainment – screaming Hollywood, but without the big name actors. An aspect of Hollywood which if used would have detracted from the audience's attention to the engulfing story and adversely affected its ability to transport the audience to an unknown world. The other aspects were well included. Firstly, it is loud, it has dazzling special effects, and there are glamorous actors. A reflection of the style of American culture and the movies success is indicative of the worldwide acceptance of this culture. Hollywood is indeed the hub for the exporting of American culture to the world. Although lacking the artistic sophistication of ‘The Godfather', it will entertain even the most discerning members of the audience. One need only ask ‘How many people do you know who have not seen this movie?' to gauge the magnitude of the applicability of the preceding statement.

The attributing of the success of this movie to any single element would be wholly incorrect. No element of the movie steals the show entirely as it is the seamless combination of these elements which flow together throughout the movie, one stealing a scene here or there, but each delivering significantly when the movie is reviewed overall. It would be more practical to identify the weakest element rather than the strongest one. The elements that will be discussed are the acting, the music, the story, and the special effects.

The acting is the element that is the weakest here. I believe this is due to the fact that Lucas is not a natural director. Writers are asocial by nature and directing is social. This is a natural consequence of each artists make – up and is therefore a strength when this natural consequence is applied to the appropriate trade. All the actors are good but in certain scenes, especially Hamill often had contrived expressions. Given the fact that Lucas never did many retakes or communicated to any great extent with his cast, it is hard to lay the blame at their feet. Ford and of course Guinness rendered sublime performances. Guinness utilising to its full extent the suspension of disbelief necessary for his lines, gave them credibility and life. He was ideally cast as the old Jedi who would pass on his knowledge and experience in order to prepare the young Skywalker for his battle against the Emperor and his dark forces, most notably Darth Vader.

The music is my affectionate choice as the number one contributor, but in an attempt to be objective, I have to put my personal sentiments aside as I am aware that a movie of this grand scale needs to have all the elements giving great contribution. This is indeed the case here. The opening scene jolts you awake and you are whisked away by the triumphant orchestra to the world of ‘Star Wars'. It booms away salvo after salvo and your imagination capitulates to the unrelenting attack. As the introductory storyline brings light to bear on the ensnared audience, the music gives the story a sense of grandeur and a spirit of adventure. The words and images are given an elevated status – one which could not have been achieved alone. Memories of this composition will linger for the audience, so powerful it is almost ungraceful, but it never crosses the line.

The story is a testimony to the creative writing. The story flows through all the acts and we are transported between them without noticing the start or exit signs. The characters are all different each playing a part in the life of our hero, Skywalker. Many of them are met by Skywalker as embarks on his quest and not only do they add value to his adventure, they all entertain. The obvious choice for the best character must be Darth Vader. He is the complete caricature of evil. His life support system makes him inhuman and therefore seemingly devoid of any righteous emotions. Like the cover of the video indicates, he is the face of ‘Star Wars'. Our hero is given a grand task and many obstacles are encountered along the way before the satisfying conclusion is reached. With great imagination came great craftsmanship and everyone, especially the audience, wins with this one.

The special effects also deserve special mention. Any inclusion herein of the impact the special effects of ‘Star Wars' on cinematic history made would add to value to anyone and will probably bore all and sundry. This has been documented exhaustibly. My own experience all those years ago, as I am sure was the experience of many members of the audience, was to go ‘Wow', then ‘Wow' again. They gave authenticity to the storyline and bought the world of the galactic battlefield to life. The opening sequence showed a craft being chased by a gigantic pursuer and the camera rolls by closely thus emphasising its enormity. This effect would have been simplistic in comparison to what we further to witness, but it set the tone. By today's standards, the effects are a little dated, but besides thrilling older viewers reminiscing about the enjoyment felt in their youth during their first experience of the movie, it will still provide enjoyment for the young audiences of today.

Lucas has taken an age – old convention and combined it within a relatively new genre and created one of the great stories. Knights battling against forces of evil and rescuing a damsel in distress have always captured the imagination generation after generation. Wizards used their white magic to counter the black magic of the dark forces. They mustered their power from an all powerful source which could only be accessed by the gifted few. It was stories like this that adventurers told their sweethearts and became a part of folklore as a source of inspiration for the weak and helpless. When all this folklore, as well as elements from great stories of old is transposed into the futuristic world of sci - fi, it deepens the fantasy. The timeless appeal of Knights and the fantasy world of the future when used together in a well crafted story will enthral audiences giving them a unique experience and the rolling of the final credits will serve to ease their return to reality from a galaxy far, far away.

Cape Fear (1991)

The language of movies as delivered by Scorcese.

[31 August 2003]

There are many collaborations between directors and actors that are familiar to audiences, but none more so than those of Scorcese and De Niro. These two have given us some of the most sublime entertainment available. Their collaborations have produced movies no less than ‘Taxi Driver' and ‘Raging Bull'. Although this one did not achieve the lofty heights of these two, it was still one of the most memorable movies to come out of 1991.

This year was also the year of ‘Terminator 2' and ‘The Silence Of The Lambs'. Big movies like this released around the same time can diminish other top movies which may not achieve the mass audience attention of its competitors. Notwithstanding this fact, for me, ‘Cape Fear' was more memorable than ‘Silence Of The Lambs' The reasons are numerous, but it mostly appealed to me because of the way Scorcese fully utilises the language of the movies.

The language of movies, from my point of view, involves utilising images, sounds and the actor's ability to relay a particular emotion, theme or element of the story. The first example of this is within the rolling of the credits. We have the image of still water over which booms an ominous track and we see dark shadows in the shape of a man. This sets the tone for the movie perfectly. The serene family life of our heroes is about to be viciously disrupted by a malevolent man who has overbearing power. This is carried on over the next two scenes, which is ‘far more on the nose' than the opening credits. We see Juliette Lewis nervously delivering her oral English class project. Her final line leads us to the next scene where ‘reality comes crashing in' in the form of De Niro who is up until the last minute preparing himself for the battle ahead. As he leaves the prison, a storm is approaching symbolising the approaching terror for the family. This message is further accentuated by De Niro walking right up to the camera. The storm finally crashes in on Nolte on the river in the form of a squall heralding De Niro's boarding of his boat. It dies down during the rolling of the final credits as the storm subsides following the death of De Niro.

Another example of the language of film is where Lewis runs into her room following the witnessing of an argument between her parents. She puts on her earphones to listen to ‘Guns and Roses' ‘Patience', but the video that is playing is one by ‘Janes addiction' showing someone shoplifting – a paradox. This is a favoured tactic by Scorcese who always likes to create paradoxical images. This makes it more interesting for the audience as sometimes these types of images do hold some meaning for the story. In one scene Lewis is again watching TV where a woman methodically covers her eyes with her hands. This symbolised the shielding from the world that Nolte was doing with great fervour as the threat from De Niro became more ominous. The audience is drawn into the movie as they try to identify images that may relay a message for them. Although this was done in ‘Silence Of The Lambs' with the theme of the degrading of American society, Scorcese has much more artistic flair for this and demonstrates it.

The acting is strong throughout, but two stand out above the rest. The first one is Robert De Niro and the other is Juliette Lewis. De Niro is deservedly renowned as one the greatest actors ever. He is the complete actor and fully immerses himself with the character. He not only takes on the personality of the character, but physically adapts himself. His collaborations with Scorcese are prime examples of this. In ‘Cape Fear', Max Cady prepares himself for his vengeful plan against Nolte. He develops himself to be an angel of vengeance by strengthening his body and using it as a means to deliver messages to his enemies by way of tattoos. The tattoos were not real, but I am sure that they would have adorned his body throughout most of the production of the movie - a trail in dedication. De Niro has now taken the portrayal of Cady more than one step further. He is now the character in mind as well as body. This far exceeds the usual blockbuster ploy of employing an actor who has mass box office appeal rather than casting an actor who can bring the character to life and add substance to the story.

Cady has also developed his mind, but he could not fully escape years of neglect. De Niro realistically relays by way of incorrect usage of words. His tattoos indicate his fanatical devotion to revenge. The righteousness that Cady experiences through the realisation of the betrayal by his lawyer, translates itself into religious fanaticism as he seeks to punish the sinner who suppressed one of Gods children. This never subsides as Cady faces his end and whilst sinking, he leers at his foe, hatred carried in life and through till death.

His past life is used to advantage as he is able to use his experience as a con – man to destabilise the fragile family by identifying their weaknesses and targeting them. He upsets the wife by killing her dog and also by launching a hideous attack on the object of one of Nolte's infidelities. He takes advantage of the rebellious stage in the life of Lewis. She is also at the door of sexual sensibility. Cady utilises these two elements of her teenage life during the scene where they meet each other at the drama set.

The top accolade may go to De Niro, but Lewis did not pale too much by comparison. When considering her comparative experience, we realise the magnitude of her achievement. Lewis was consistent with her performance and was able to realistically portray the girl at the brink of womanhood. She never faltered once and even her eyes were in tandem with the moment. She had grasped the emotion that the director wanted. No mean feat for an actress of this age. Her character was a perfect target for De Niro, as she was not strong enough to stand up to the persuasive con – man. She had weaknesses as a consequence of her life – stage which further diminished her in relation to De Niro.

The editing in the first half an hour presented a story which did not flow and seemed choppy. Whether this was due to pressure by the producers to shorten the movie or a conscious effort by the director to show the spiral that the characters were entering would be immaterial since story flow is paramount in keeping audiences attention uninterrupted and giving continuity to the story. On second viewing this problem becomes more evident. It indicates an attempt at showing the audience the complexities of the characters which would create conflict during the movie. It is always difficult in criticising a director as acclaimed as Scorcese, but attention to this problem would have led to the creation of an almost perfect movie.

Italian directors always have a yearning to explore the extremities of violence and sex in movies. This may be due to the fact that they may feel that to explore these areas is to fully exploit their emotions and to leave themselves bare to their chosen art form. Scorcese definitely portrays the extremities of violence in this movie, but it is not out of place with the character. De Niro is a depraved, vicious man who is completely devoted to revenge and wants to dehumanise his oppressor by making him experience what it is like to be an animal as he was in prison. The psychological exploits by Cady are not overawed by these scenes, but supplement them by visually revealing his hellish intent and dedication.

The fear of a stalker is a fear deep set into many members of the audience. The feeling of helplessness pervades as we sense a powerful presence, but cannot see it. The unseen is terrifying since we know something is there, but cannot locate it and we anticipate the forthcoming attack. When this fear consumes us within the confines of our own home, the fear reveals the person that we are and we will either stand and fight or run for our lives. Even the weaker ones like Nolte will have to stop running and face their foe. Scorcese knows this fear uses it to give impetus to the story.

Top Gun (1986)

Flies high on action sequences, but low on story.

[24 August 2003]

When the see the Jerry Bruckenheimer amongst the producers, you know within a millisecond what you will be getting. He produces movies for the mass audience, which are more indicative of the perception of coolness within the era the movie is produced. ‘Top Gun' is a prime example of this. It is Eighties personified. The only thing missing is the big hair. We were saved this due to the fact that the movie is set within the Air Force. I am not criticising what the producers have done. It will take a lot of guts to put the elements together to create a big bucks bonanza. I just feel that movies such as these do not do full justice to the big stage that they occupy. It did not have enough story to fill the gap between action sequences. The story is inconsequential and the main focus was on the exaggerated dogfight scenes and the less than subtle courtship of Cruise and McGillis. As it turned out it was enough to achieve the big box office draw, with a little help from a mammoth soundtrack. Considering that this was the prime objective, they got the targeted success.

A pulsating soundtrack supplemented the testosterone inspired action sequences. This was a prime additive and each track was used to augment the emotion of the scene. Kenny Loggins' ‘Danger Zone' epitomised the action adventure lifestyle of the fighter pilot, which the producers wished to emulate Hollywood style. It screamed out the personality of the main character. The man who lived for the adrenaline rush, scant respect for the rules and of very few words – none being too sublime. Just listening to the track alone and you can visualise the jet fighter streaking through the air, barely noticeable to the naked eye, and the opponent's aircraft exploding. I am unclear as to the sales figures of the soundtrack, but I am sure it must have been one of the best of its era.

In addition, Berlins' ‘Take My Breathe Away' song was used to accentuate the secondary storyline, that is, the courtship of Cruise and McGillis. Any blockbuster action movie must have an electric female interest for the main character. The song did the work that could not be enacted on screen. The reason being is that Kelly McGillis could not generate the mixed emotions and seemed to stick with the same routine, that of the sophisticated, no nonsense ambitious girl. Notwithstanding the fact that Cruise's character was more adrenaline charged and would have naturally exuded the raw emotions, Kelly McGillis failed to progress beyond an emotional monotone which was adequate for the start, but fell short as the relationship grew with intensity. Considering the success the movie generated, this story element can have its success attributed to the song and Cruise's acting.

Sharing centre stage with Cruise were the Tomcats. Creative camera shots and angles were used to capture the speed and finesse of flight. When they are set against the majestic backgrounds of the natural surroundings, it creates a memorable scene. That is, the grandness of nature set together with the powerful machines of man. The use of two – seater aircraft enabled dialogue between the characters in the cockpit. This also facilitated greater rivalry on the ground between competing teams.

The acting was solid for a popcorn movie. Even the boisterous, pale lines were done with good acting. The top performer, which is not always necessary for a blockbuster production, goes to the leading man, Tom Cruise. Some of his lines were mediocre, much in line with the superficial nature of the Eighties, but he still managed to attach some credibility to them. There is no doubt that Cruise has a massive ego and he enjoys the opportunity to showcase it. A natural and necessary trait for a Hollywood leading man. The powerful aircraft, the loud jackets and the monster motorbike, all personified his delight in being the centre of attention. The role therefore suits him. But given the fact that certain aspects of the role would have come naturally to him, his emotional turmoil concerning his father's disgraced history and that of the tragic passing of his flight buddy, show how Cruise can play a flawed character and make it believable.

The attention to story, as previously mentioned, was minimal. To criticise this would be an exercise in futility – it was never their intention to crate a multi – layered plot or to deliver a message. This was pure entertainment engineered for short – term massive cash flow. The story was spoon – fed and there was absolutely nothing to give serious thought to. The filmmakers know the task at hand, and the mass audience were generally not disappointed. Of credit was the fact that the main character was given an overwhelming obstacle in the form of the disgraced history of his father. It was a burden for him and bought out the extremeness within. His flying was circus – like death defying antics and he was in the face of superiors by negotiating illegal fly – byes.

Although more than stretching believability, these antics appealed to the cavalier side of the audience always wanted to unleash. Within the Eighties where this was cool, it is well understandable why the success was achieved. The obstacle also accentuated the relationship between himself and the commanding officer of Top Gun, who had flown with his father. Despite Tom Skerritt being his usual laid – back self, it did not underscore the emotional turmoil the producers wished to project. Skerritt is one of the few actors who could pull that off. It is probably due to it being a natural part of him.

‘Top Gun' is pure popcorn entertainment. It exemplified the Eighties for which It was created. It may therefore seem a little dated for today's audiences. Notwithstanding this fact and also that the fighter aircraft are long outdated, the racy soundtrack and beautiful cinematography do enough to provide entertainment. But do not brood over the lack of story, this will only lead to disappointment. View it for what it is.

Terminator 2: Judgment Day (1991)

Blown away by the blockbuster.

[9/10 · 22 August 2003]

What can one say about a movie that about which everything has been said? How can one find something critical to say about a movie which is as close to perfection as one can make? These are two questions which you have to ask yourself when submitting a user comment for a movie like this, and it is no easy task. The answer to the first question is probably to just go ahead and say your say and tell yourself that although it is only a drop in the ocean, it is a drop nonetheless. The second question poses a far greater challenge. Answers to this will be very short indeed and may be included if only to satisfy a desire for a sense of completeness. As far as finding points to cheer, it is difficult to find a place to start. Terminator 2 has its rightful place in cinematic history and when seeing its high rating on the IMDB site, I still feel that it is underrated.

The first item which I wish to discuss is what can be attributed to its longstanding appeal. I believe the answer lies not solely, but to a large part due to the fact that James Cameron can combine a flowing story with high action and spellbinding special effects. The story acts as a precipitant for the action and not vice verse as is the case with most movies within the genre. We have character development, moral dilemmas, and character arcs. All these story elements combine seamlessly to leave audiences spellbound.

Character development will be examined from the point of view that the characters from the original have changed over the years. The experience would have left its indelible mark and would have changed their outlook on life. This is particularly evidently in Sarah and John.

Sarah's physical adaptation is not the mirror of her emotional adaptation, which it far exceeds. The imminent day of horror weighs heavily on her shoulders. Her way of telling the world has been one of desperate outbursts culminating into an attempt to destroy Cyberdyne. Her knowledge of the future and her militant attempts at trying to divert it has meant that society has seen her as mentally unstable and she is rightfully detained for treatment. Her physical adaptation is surprising for audiences since she is identified with her meekness in the original and the TV series ‘Beauty and the Beast'. She is now a soldier, ready for the onslaught against mankind and her son. It was a logical progression for the character and inspired interest since there was emotional conflict between being a mother and preparing for the battle ahead. This change was a monumental factor in the sequel being the superior.

John was not born in the original, but the character that is introduced to us is feasible to the story. He has a mother who lacks emotional stability and he is now in the care of apathetic foster parents following her detention. John is now a rebellious youngster operating outside the rules of society. Self – destruction is his escape - a far cry from being the saviour of mankind.

The Terminator was a positive change for Arnold. It put him in the place of the hero. It must have been tantalising for Arnold who probably wanted to soften his image as an out and out action hero. The role was perfect for that. The Terminator although retaining the same basic programming of the original, that is, to remove all obstacles permanently, had to protect a child. He was now on the side of the good. This entailed the concomitant respect for human life, something the young John wanted to teach him. Given the fact that this was a virtual complete turnaround from the original, the plot created the opportunity – and it worked. This change was the platform for the moral message. No matter how grim the future may seem, we must still respect human life.

The T1000 is the Terminator sent to prevent the victory of man. He is the replacement for Arnold, but we do not notice this since Arnold and Patrick are so strong in their roles, they stamp their authority and lay claim to them. Patrick is phenomenal as the T1000. His mechanical walk illustrates robotic efficiency and malevolent intent whilst emphasising his confident power and purpose. His piercing stare indicates his resolute drive to accomplish his sole objective.

The character arc is the journey of self – discovery that the character has taken during this particular film. Sarah was still battling with her demons as she once again became a vigilante and goes to terminate the computer programmer. She had little faith in mankind, faith that was ironically rekindled by the Terminator. The machine had learnt to identify with humans and if the machine was capable, then mankind was capable of acceptance of others. She had progressed to retain her humanity and to recognise the humanity in others.

John had momentarily gained a family, albeit a machine for a father. It had given him a sense of purpose and realisation of what was to come. John had come back onto the rails and when they had changed the future, he was given a sound foundation to live a normal life.

The Terminator by way of his learning processor had commanded a sense of human emotion. It was this that gave hope, the kind of hope that Sarah was looking for. This was a quantum leap from the original Terminator.

The moral dilemma, already touched on, is that no matter what the future holds, human life must be respected. It is not a case of tough situations require tough solutions. Respect for human life is the foundation of moral rights. The right to live is fundamental to mankind.

Another interesting issue was the one concerning the changing of the future. ‘There is no fate, but what we make' was the impetus behind the story. The machines had developed the capability to do this, but it was used against them. It presents a dilemma to us, knowing what the future is and how we should deal with it. These actions define us as human beings.

It is these story elements that meant that the movie ensured it's longevity for audience memory. ‘Mission Impossible 2' is an example of how a lack of story substance can make a movie forgettable, no matter how good the action sequences are.

The only possible fault I could find is during the introduction the Terminator approaches you as the credits are completed. This could be construed as cheesy, but it could also mean ‘Prepare for an action rollercoaster ride'. Cameron had well omitted the imperfections of the original.

The Terminator is an icon within pop culture. The ability to solve our problems with impunity and overwhelming destructive power is a fantasy for many. Our fascination with creating something that could turn on is has long been immortalised in storytelling. Mary Shelley's ‘Frankenstein' is a good example. We have grown up on similar stories and the good ones endear themselves to history. This story surpassed its original, a feat achieved by the cinematic few – ‘Godfather 2' and Star Wars 2' – are the esteemed company it keeps. It is deserved.

Scarface (1983)

The rise and rise and crash of Tony Montana

[22 August 2003]

This movie falls with considerable ease into the category of being one of the top movies of the Eighties. All facets of the movie were extremely strong. The direction was fantastic, but for me it was the acting of Al Pacino and the script of Oliver Stone that were the attributes of its success. These are the elements without which the allure would have been adversely affected. Given the commendable contribution of the rest, this serves as an indication of the enormous talent of these two.

‘Scarface' is the name of the movie, and therefore its core focus. Tony Montana is Scarface and the central character in a frontline Hollywood movie always requires a powerful leading man exhibiting charismatic appeal, acting ability or both. Al Pacino is a popular actor whose acting ability graces the big screen. The role of Tony Montana could have been hammed up and appeared contrived, but neither is evident here. Instead we have an authentic portrayal of a Cuban exile that comes from a hard background and finally wants to prove his worth in the free country, America.

Pacino manages to show the unschooled background of Montana without overacting. It was not the result of the Cuban accent he used which limited his grasp of the English language. It was more through his mannerisms. The emotive outbursts are clearly part of the character makeup and show his determination to make the world his own. Although he may be unschooled, he has the street savvy through which the confidence oozes in confrontational situations. Pacino is probably the best at playing the tragic hero. These are usually complex characters that the audience has to support no matter how depraved they are. Montana is a tragic hero because he is doomed from the start. Frank tells him that those who want it all never last was a message that was never heeded. He is also told to never get high on his own supply. These two unheeded messages are the mechanism of his downfall. Montana begins his slide from grace when the bank dealer raises the rates on him. It is from this point on that Pacino shows us how Montana starts to feel like a failure. He begins to want full credit for his success and starts to distance himself from those closest to him. Everybody else becomes a target for blame as Montana fails to take account for the realities of the world and his own failings.

Of significance is that he fells that he cannot escape his depraved nature. The only redeeming factor that he has is a burden because he is all consumed by power. Tony becomes possessive to the extreme. He will not let anyone near Gina since she is like a child to him and the only thing pure in his life. In the end his self – obsession results in all that he cares for doing away with him. His business partners want him out of the picture and his sister turns on him, who snaps under the strain of overbearing control. The tragic hero is about to meet his dire end. Pacino explodes into an inhuman rage as he faces his foes as he is unwilling to accept defeat and to relinquish power - power which he had always wanted – results in a gruesome death under the statue which epitomises the mind- set of Tony Montana – ‘The world is yours to own'. The explosive rise met an explosive end, indicative of the time bomb that he was. It was only a question of time.

Oliver Stone has delivered a script which is in tandem with his style. We have the central character with virtually no redeeming characteristics and as usual a solid message fro the audience. All the supporting cast are inextricably linked to the life of Tony Montana and some issue warnings which he chooses to ignore because of his insatiable thirst for power. Stone shows that there are rules to abide by and a self – obsessed conquest for power will result in the possible loss of all that we care for. We are shown how people are obsessed with material gain as an indication of success in America. Pursuit of the American dream must be done with circumspection and respect for people, no matter how great the appeal of the superficial perception of success. Also of note is that the story flow is unabated and well beyond interesting.

The name of the movie, ‘Scarface', is not used throughout the movie. Its purpose was to serve to illustrate the depravity of Pacino. He cannot escape who he is. He is bad and the scar is indicative that he will not change. The tragic hero's journey is one of doom, and Stone indicates this at many points throughout the story.

The movie starts off with a documentary feel to it. This relates a sense of authenticity and sets us well into the timeline. Although the events are dramatised, this start assists the audience in accepting the hatred that is evident in the movie towards people like Pacino because they degrade the Cuban people and lower the American quality of life. The movie accentuates this affect and creates a sense of human tragedy, tragedy offset by two opposing systems – communism and capitalism.

The supporting cast all deliver excellent performances. Robert Loggia is good as the seemingly weak drug boss from which Pacino derives justification for his path to success. Pfeiffer is believable as the smart wife who may not have full control of herself, but is confident enough to tell it straight, much like Montana. Steven Bauer shows us how a wise guy playboy of Cuban descent should be portrayed. Even though only a small appearance, we can see the talent F. Abraham Murray. He plays the weasel dealer whom no-one can trust and fawns to the big players.

Gangster stories if well crafted sell well to audiences. The appeal of people living on the edge outside of society's acceptable norms, living the high life is conducive to the big screen. They are larger than life and their emotions make for creative character interplay. All this is evident in Scarface. Not all gangster movies have to be about the Mafia and this is the best one outside those oversold stories.

The Shining (1980)

Kubrick's contribution to the horror genre.

[8/10 · 16 August 2003]

From the pen of one of the most prolific writers to the direction of one of the most obsessive perfectionist directors. Stephen King's imagination has inspired many movies and Stanley Kubrick's adaptation of ‘The Shining' is the best that I have seen. Given the fact that many top directors have bought King's work to the big screen, we can thus see how good Kubrick really is. Kubrick has made many top class movies, but this one probably captured audience's imagination the most. It also became a signature role for Jack Nicholson, which is further indicative of the status of this movie.

The soundtrack was not to inspire gross sales or to add greater revenue by way of soundtrack sales. It was utilised with one purpose in mind, and that was to significance to the story. The DVD edition includes the compositions in the chapter headings thus indicating how each particular composition was used to manipulate audience emotion and add value to the storyline. How do you portray the terror of the mind using the big screen? The ingenious use of camera shots and angles certainly helps and this was used. But overuse of this will underscore the effect the director is trying to create. It will translate to the audience as someone who is trying too hard and it becomes pretentious and this will be foremost in the audience's mind rather than the effect itself. Music has the benefit of creating the impression that some overbearing, ominous evil is present, but we cannot see it. This effect is used very well in the opening scene where Nicholson is travelling to the Overlook Hotel. An overhead shot is used with the car seemingly overpowered by the landscape and this is accompanied by a chilling opening number. Here the two are combined to enhance the overall effect. Nicholson is heading towards an enemy far stronger than him and a sense of impending doom is initiated for the audience.

This is also used in the scene where Danny sees images of foreboding terror at the hotel. Excessive use of blood can be cheesy, but it's usage here has a definite part to play in moving the story forward. Danny picks up the image of terror that the hotel‘s inhuman occupants have to show. This image is shown whenever Danny senses something terrible is about to occur, most notably in the scene where Nicholson confronts his wife after his experience in Room 237. The blood indicates the presence of the terrible beings at the Overlook Hotel and shows the true horror that they wish to impose. There is very little sound of gushing or none at all – just the use of dark sound which rises as the terror is shown thus excentuating the image of horror for the audience. Although a shocking image, it is not out of place and clearly delivers the message of the foreboding terror that is about to unfold.

Kubrick has a firm understanding of how to visually translate the terror of the mind. His work can be compared to that of the well-known writer of the 18th century, Edgar Allan Poe. Poe had a great eye for detail and also used very little dialogue in his horror stories. He usually portrayed the story from the viewpoint of the himself thus creating reality for his stories. He described the inner workings of the mind when subjected to terror, sometimes terror self – imposed by the frailties of the main character's own mind. Kubrick has the same style, only he uses the big screen, which is sometimes more difficult when attempting to create this illusion. Kubrick made the necessary use of dialogue, but his mark was made by using other elements to project this effect. This is a complicated task to perform and one can well understand why he used Nicholson in the key role. Nicholson used his eyes to great effect with a little assistance from his devilish looking eyebrows. This is evident in the scene where he stares seemingly into nothing, but we can see the evil intent taking hold of him.

There are no weaknesses as far as the performances are concerned. Nicholson is brilliant as the writer who already has problems with his wife from the start. We can see that this is a man who is impatient with her lack of intelligence and becomes less tolerant as the ghostly inhabitants increase their influence and guide him towards their diabolical objective. We can see that Nicholson relished the role of the demented axeman. He was able to fulfil his fantasy of wreaking havoc on society, which he does with boisterous aplomb. Duval is good as the wife who is gradually subjected to terror by Nicholson and it is the ghosts that finally decide to take control of the situation, revealing the full perverted horror that the hotel holds. Kubrick gave her a psychological drubbing in order to ensure that she looked unlikely to handle the situation. This may have been unpleasant for her, but it was essential to create a character that would seemingly falter against her husband and the ungodly spirits. Danny was superb. He showed maturity beyond his age as he was able to portray someone who had to deal with these images of terror. When Tony, his name for the power that his mind has, attempts to tell his mother through Danny that his father has escaped, he was able to keep his concentration throughout a long scene. This scene hung the suspense on a shoestring, which snapped when Nicholson starts to chop the door down. Working with children has it's own unique demands which were well met. Scatman added a lot considering his small role. He helped Danny deal with his images and the connection between the two offscreen oozes onto the screen.

Without doubt this is one of the most prominent horror movies to date. Most satisfy a fast – food mentality whereby cheap thrills and abuse of special effects is evident. If these are the fast – food, then ‘The Shining' is the escargot. It is in a class of it's own. To watch it once is to not experience the full effect of the movie. The sound of Danny's tricycle as it crosses the carpet onto the wooden floor and back again, the sense of isolation, the approach of the tennis ball and the terror within the eyes all take on a greater significance when viewed for a second time. These all helped to make evidence of the terror of the mind.