Roughly 10 years ago I was in London and saw Fiennes play Coriolanus on stage (directed by Jonathan Kent, I think) in a theatre that was where Hitchcock had filmed The Lady Vanishes. Fiennes and the entire production were knockouts. I even remember the way his helmet merged with the shadow of his cheeks and his eyebrows. Wow, this was powerful! The movie version, in modern costume, was good, but instead of the modern costuming and artillery making things more real to us in the 21st century, they just called attention to the cleverness of Fiennes the director. Besides, as another reviewer said, people today simply don't talk like people at time Shakespeare wrote the play. Fiennes, toning his voice down for the screen so as not to rant, toned Coriolanus down as well. He was good, no mistake about that, but on stage he was great. A few weeks after I saw the movie I saw the DVD of the BBC's Coriolanus with Alan Howard as the lead. Better than wow! Howard was fantastically good--far better than Fiennes on screen. And Gerard Butler, in the Fiennes film, was no match for Mike Gwylim in the BBC film. I don't remember who played Menenius in the Fiennes film, but in the BBC film Joss Ackland was superb (and did not overact, as he sometimes does, e.g., Citizen X). You don't have to Balkanize Shakespeare to make him pertinent. In the original context, the pertinence shines through better. Coriolanus's battle with himself about the citizens and with the citizens was more understandable without the modern costumes (today, the issues would be different). OK, so the BBC version didn't have the budget for big battles. So what? I honestly don't remember Fiennes asking his wife for "A kiss. Long as my exile, sweet as my revenge," but that may be my bad memory (I even forgot the line was in the play) or Fiennes underdoing it too much. But when Howard spoke that line, it was memorable! Do yourselves a favor and try to see the BBC Coriolanus with the great Alan Howard. If you don't agree with me, you'll at least have seen a viable alternative to Fiennes's movie Coriolanus.
Reviews
15 Reviews
The Lookout
(2007)
a very pleasant surprise
31 December 2010
Every now and then I check out a DVD of a movie, usually an indie, I never heard of but which for one reason or other sounds as if it's worth a look. More often than not, I discover there's a good reason I never heard of it. The Lookout turned out to have been one of the happier discoveries. Why wasn't it distributed more or marketed more? My guess is that it's a difficult film to market. The story, which others here have told and which I'll not repeat, sounds predictable (much of it is, but there are enough differences, based on character, that make it not predictable and very appealing); and the only actor I've heard of is Jeff Daniels (who's excellent, as usual) and he's in a supporting role, not the lead. Other actors, who are young, are excellent and give credibility to their roles, but how do you convince audiences to see non-name stars or featured players? (Their names may be familiar to TV viewers and to readers of this appraisal, but as I rarely watch any TV shows that have commercial interruptions, they're new to me.) I suggest you take a chance. The worst that can happen is that you'll disagree with me and spend a little more than an hour and a half on it. The best is that you'll agree and, like me, wind up buying a DVD of the film.
Me and Orson Welles
(2008)
An absolute knockout!
15 September 2010
Warning: Spoilers
All reviews, however objectively phrased, are at base subjective. Frankly, I do not know what anyone who hasn't been in professional theatre; who doesn't know the history of American theatre in the 1930s; and who doesn't recognize the names Sam Leve, Norman Lloyd, George Coulouris, Martin Gabel, and those of many other characters in ME AND ORSON WELLES will think of this movie and how they will respond to it. Since it premiered at the Toronto Film Festival in Sept 2008 and didn't hit North American screens until over a year later, and then received limited distribution (it didn't play at the Mall near my town) suggests either that its appeal is limited or that it was marketed poorly. Based on my subjective view, this film hits the bull's eye. Professional theatre IS the way this movie shows it to be, as is cinema. A genius, or even a very talented director or actor, may also be a bit of, or more than a bit of, an egotistical, self-serving, grudge-holding bastard who will cast you aside once you have fulfilled his or her needs. This genius--director, actor, writer, designer, producer--will have no one share the glory with him or her, although he will let a portion of the credit go to a member of the company, with the understanding that the member is one of his or her company. In the case of this film, it's Welles's Mercury Theatre. What happened to its, or rather his, production of JULIUS CAESAR is true, and it was a milestone in American theatre. (The only nit I have to pick--well, it's more than a nit--is that the film skimps on showing why that production was so sensational, which is important.) If you recognize the names mentioned above, you'll be pleasantly surprised to see them in their youth as embodied by a uniformly excellent cast. Of course, Welles was an egomaniacal genius, with equal emphasis on egomaniacal and genius; although I have no idea whether he treated a young man the way he treats the young man in this film, the action has the ring of truth. To me, the picture was exciting, thrilling, and very realistic. Let me again praise the actors, who were entirely credible,and the director, who filmed the drama of creating a theatre production excitingly.
The Ghost Writer
(2010)
Good, but not more than that
21 March 2010
Warning: Spoilers
***SPOILER ALERT! SPOILER ALERT!*** A good thriller--better than the flashy, over-emphatic Shutter Island--but not more than that. Still, good is good and I'm not knocking it. I enjoyed the movie. Brosnan was really impressive. It was shrewd of Polanski to cast him (he needed a star to give the small role heft) and it took balls for Brosnan to take the role. Also, the directing was usually first rate and had some really creepy effects. BUT a few big problems, which don't make THE GHOST WRITER a bad movie, prevent it from being better than good. I won't write further about the good things in it (others have done so) but here's why I was disappointed and why I give it no higher than 7 out of 10. (REMEMBER SPOILER ALERT! READ NO FURTHER IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN IT!) When the Ghost is given the room of his dead predecessor whose belongings have not been cleared out, it's a tip-off that's too obvious. First, the crowd that runs this house would have gone through it with a fine tooth comb and got rid of everything a.s.a.p. Second, we know that once the Ghost moves in he's going to find something incriminating. Then there's the ending. Why does the Ghost tell the wife what he's found (which I assume is what's in the note he passes to her)? Given her company's record of murder and its attempted murder of him, it's like a suicide note. And the staging of the final scene is so unoriginal it's not worthy of Polanski. After the Ghost walks out of the frame and the camera stays put on the street, we know--if we've seen Hitchcock's FAMILY PLOT and other flicks that use the same device--that the street is waiting for a killer car to drive down it for you-know-what.
A Serious Man
(2009)
very disappointing
9 February 2010
Some of the notices here suggest that if you're Jewish you'll get a lot more out of this flick than if you're not. News flash: I'm a Jew and I thought this was one of the Coen Brothers' worst efforts. They're better doing Irish (Miller's Crossing) than Jewish. OK, it's the Book of Job minus the interesting theological arguments (which is a huge minus). Yes, I get the Schroedinger's Cat theory (about quantum physics and it's unexplained), but it's poor physics and Einstein among others debunked it. The title character's admission that he doesn't understanding the story is damning--and unfortunately not pursued. (His Korean student and that student's father understand it perfectly.) To put the story briefly, at the risk of doing it an injustice, it posits that everything in life is uncertainty until you do something, like observing it, that makes it certain--which alters it. A cat in a box may be alive or dead, but opening the box (according to the theory, if I understand it correctly) alters things by making it certain. No, as Einstein said (not in so many words), it doesn't alter the fact of the cat being alive or dead, it alters our perception from uncertainty to knowledge. OK, uncertainty pervades the life of our serious (and uninteresting) title character, who could also be called A Mediocre Man--just as uncertainty is what we are left with after the apt prologue. But so what? He's just dim. And the serious rabbis who talk to him in religious catch phrases and parables (like the cute but not apt dentist story) are just as dim. The Coens should have employed Bill Maher to help on a rewrite. They've done superior work before (starting with their first, Blood Simple, and including No Country for old Men), but they've done tedious piffle as well, including this one. I'm willing to put up with stuff like this while waiting for the superior stuff, but I'm unwilling to praise it just because they made it.
The Pirates of Penzance
(1983)
A DVD of this is long overdue
12 January 2010
I saw the Kevin Kline-Linda Ronstadt-Rex Smith Pirates of Penzance on Broadway and loved it. Then came the 1983 movie version, which I also loved. The orchestration and singing modernized the old Gilbert and Sullivan music but was faithful to it; and the actors-singers rejuvenated it. Furthermore, they (especially Kline, who's one of this country's best comic actors) brought out more laughs than I remember P of P having. Thanks especially to director Wilford Leach for this production. When, oh when, will a reputable company bring out a fresh DVD that's not a copy of the VHS? A quarter of a century after it came out is long enough to wait.
Devil in the Flesh
(1947)
Ah, memories!
9 January 2010
Why 9 instead of 10? Because films seen long ago are not always, on re-viewing, as good as they seemed at the time, when one was younger; and I have no idea whether or not this will be the case here. The restaurant scene in which Philipe, to impress Presle, returns the wine lingers still in my memory as both comic and touching. I don't remember when I saw it (and returned to see it again). While I think I was between 18 and 21, I may have been older. Needless to say, I loved it. I even went to the library and read the Radiguet book on which it was based. More recently, I've searched for it on VHS and DVD. No luck. With The Charterhouse of Parma and Fanfan the Tulip now out on DVD, perhaps this one will appear soon. And The Red and the Black not cut for US distribution. One can only hope.
Top Notch!
18 December 2009
After having yawned my way through Abel Ferrara's Bad Lieutenant (despite good acting by Harvey Keitel), having been disappointed by latter-day Herzog, and having been bothered by Cage's mannerisms in some recent movies, I don't know why I decided to give this a try; but I'm glad I did. Herzog is in top form. From the slithery-snakey outset, the film oozes with corruption and the kind of bizarre ambiance in which he excels. In Cage, he seems to have found a new Klaus Kinski. In some movies, when Cage is over the top, it seems to be the actor overacting. Not here: everything he does is driven by a character who is emotionally and physically stretched and stressed to the almost breaking point. Cage is quiet when need be, explosive when warranted. He and Herzog, not to mention the excellent Eva Mendes, consistently surprise by their valid choices. And the movie surprises in the best way possible. When something unexpected happens, you don't see it as an oddball gimmick but as a logical event or action that you realize you might have foreseen had you been just a tad more alert. No spoilers here, but do watch the pic all the way through, even past what might seem like a tidy ending but is not. Wow, what a picture! One of the 10 best new ones I've seen this year & Cage give the best leading actor perf I've seen this year.
a compendium of schlock
8 October 2009
It's informative, all right, but after a very short while you realize that all you're watching is a bunch of clips of junk exploitation pix & mostly fatuous comments on them. OK, so Tarantino (we're not on a first name basis) was blown way by the outrageous idea of having an almost nude woman as a hood ornament on a car. So what? Some tastelessness is highly enjoyable (most of Tarrantino's work is) because of style, panache & great dialogue. With rare exceptions, the Ozploitation stuff shown in this pic is not. It's just juvenile & I'm old enough to be sorry I wasted my time watching this one. Most of the reviewers have disagreed or will disagree with this comment. Well, that's Show Biz.
A Royal Scandal
(1945)
time marches on
27 June 2009
When A Royal Scandal first came out, I probably would have considered it saucy and sophisticated and very funny. Times have changed. It's now old-fashioned, spiceless sauce, unsophisticated, and not at all funny. I watched 45 minutes without laughing and then gave up. I don't know at what point Preminger took over for Lubitch when he died and perhaps Lubitch might have wound up making it sophisticated and comic even for today (as he did others, notably Trouble in Paradise); but Preminger was the wrong choice to complete this one. Tallulah, who sparkled on Broadway (when young, I saw her in Private Lives), was so-what? here. She read her lines well enough, but the dialogue itself was mediocre and predictable. Much blame must go to writer Edwin Justus Mayer (of the delighful Midnight), who faltered here.
A Secret
(2007)
A real surprise
27 June 2009
Having read the comments on this site, after having heard a friend (whose opinions aren't always reliable) say I must see it, I expected a marginally good picture when I rented the DVD. OK, I thought, another personal story about French and German anti-Semitism in WW II. This time my friend was right! A Secret was a knockout. It hit home and revived childhood memories. And it's as much or more about pre-WW II & post-WW II as it is about during. I won't repeat what others have rightly said about the uniformly excellent acting or the directing or the photography, etc. Among the things that hit home to me were the child's (or children's) point of view--SO on target--and the very different types of Jews portrayed in this film. Even though I "knew" (intuited) what would happen to some characters, what actually did happen was better than my imaginings. Its reference to the big illusion (La grande illusion) was apt (as well as the one character who actually saw it). More than one illusion is shattered by this pic, which like my friend I highly recommend.
The Organizer
(1963)
One of the greatest films about the labor movement
18 May 2009
Earnest, as 1 commentator said? Yes. Depressing, as the same commentator said? No, no, no. It's realistic, showing what was and too often is, not upbeat with false hopes for the future, except that the perseverance of the title character is upbeat. The Organizer is one of the best, perhaps the best, movie about union organizing that I can recall. As is often the case, Mastroianni's acting is different from any other role he has played. The same is true of Salvatori and Girardot. The movie itself is far superior to director Monicelli's Big Deal on Madonna Street, which doesn't really hold up today. I saw The Organizer when it first came out in the US and later on VHS. A DVD is long overdue.
Voditel dlya Very
(2004)
well worth seeing
7 May 2009
I don't agree with previous writers that this film is a masterpiece or that it's hokum or that's it's a rerun of Burnt by the Sun. As a non-Russian, I found its evocation of the period (1962) enthralling & its depiction of characters multifaceted. The title character is torn by ambition (partly grounded by his upbringing) & attraction; the general is both ruthless & a loving father; the KGB man spins a web of intrigue but has integrity. Some,who are cleverer than I am, may have figured out what would happen next, but I couldn't. The camera work is gorgeous & made me want to visit the Crimea. Main drawback is the script's over-use of our old friend Coincidence. Even so, the film's pluses outweigh this minus & make it well worth seeing.
Story of a Prostitute
(1965)
can't disguise a B movie
30 April 2009
No, not perfectly awful (that would rate a 1), but bad enough. I can't understand all the ooh's and ah's about what's no more than B-movie trash. Some good lighting, well-composed frames (along with, sad to say, some overly artsy ones), and nice camera movement can't disguise a bad script. The good-girl-prostitute-in love is laughably unrealistic; her supposed motivation, set at the beginning, and her desire to have sex with just about everyone in revenge for the man who spurned her is ridiculous, as is her love for the one soldier who can't tolerate her; the villain's snarling is out of the most overacted silent films; and the patriotic soldier (I won't give away what happens to him) who is supposed to help convey an anti- war theme is clunky. Want anti-war? Try All Quiet on the Western Front, Grand Illusion, and Cross of Iron! As for the title prostitute, it's the sort of nonsense men used to write about women, prostitutes and others; probably still do, but I no longer read it. The DVD's Japanese critic who talks about the film and director said that 90% is what the studio wanted from the director and 10% is the originality the director provided. I'll take his word for that, but 10% isn't enough to make gold from trash. Hmm. Maybe I should have given it a 1 after all.
The Outsider
(1979)
Irish-American Vietnam vet, disillusioned, goes to Ireland, gets more disillusioned by IRA
15 April 2006
Years ago I visited NY, noticed this film and despite a pan by the NY Times, saw it since I'd been impressed by Craig Wasson in Go Tell the Spartans (still the best fiction film on Vietnam). Loved it: excellent story that avoids clichés, very well acted and directed. Came off a bit as The Further Adventures of the Craig Wasson Character Who Had Been in Nam. Disillusioned Nam vet wants purpose in life, goes to ancestral home Ireland, gets more disillusioned at being used by both IRA and Brits for their own, different purposes. Even becomes disillusioned with grandfather, whose screwed up memories of IRA glory persuaded him to go there. Maybe my memory of details is inaccurate (saw it once when it opened), but the final scene stays with me still: Wasson in a phone booth in Detroit, hitting the receiver on the phone box in frustration. Hope it comes out in DVD. If so, I'd order it in an instant.
Tell Your Friends