patrickullmer-09930 Reviews

Purgatory (2020)

"I didn't believe, but I wanted to..."

[10/10 · 8 June 2023]

I'm a sucker for a good documentary (keyword "good"). I saw the trailer for this film and was uncertain whether it was a movie or a documentary. It turns out, it was a documentary with several cinematic scenes placed within. This was a great way to bring the audience in before explaining the beliefs, doctrines, and details about the place between Heaven and Hell.

Is Purgatory a place of torment? A place of salvation? A state of being? Something to be avoided? Something to be thankful for? The film explains all of these ideas and giving you the decision to come to your own answers.

The cinematic scenes of the agnostic lady opening herself to the ideas of life beyond and being visited by figures from Purgatory was perhaps the most intriguing aspect for me. Throughout the documentary I was hoping for more coverage of this character's life, but I was thankful with what it did show. There were also scenes of seemingly unrelated characters, events, and storylines, etc. Nevertheless, this film left me feeling hopeful, and the very end of it had perhaps the most beautifully filmed one-take of a documentary I have ever seen. Highly recommended.

The Day of the Siege: September Eleven 1683 (2012)

F. Murray Abraham carries this film on his shoulders

[8/10 · 4 June 2023]

So yeah, I'm a bit mixed on this film too. Perhaps it was the CGI horsemen, the obviously green-screen backgrounds which look too much like blue-screen backgrounds, or even the bizarre subplot of an undead werewolf, that bothered me- but this indie film had 10 years ago what few no Hollywood film does today- heart and soul personified in F. Murray Abraham.

Abraham plays a monk who is a willing saint but a reluctant miracle-worker. In my favorite scene, a physically weary Abraham admonishes a group of followers for mistaking his miracles as his own and not God's only to inadvertently cure a blind person and be swarmed by the audience, eager to tear pieces of his cassock off for relics.

The first two-thirds of this film are genuinely great, but the last third is overcome with poor CGI, hilarious dubbing, and a surprisingly dour ending which left me somewhat mixed of the experience. Nevertheless, I still believe it is a good movie and worth watching simply for the eloquent performance of F. Murray Abraham and the surprising but welcome inclusion of Claire Bloom as his mother.

Padre Pio (II) (2022)

Watch Raul Julia's "Romero" instead.

[1/10 · 4 June 2023]

I was not expecting much reverence for the subject matter in a film by Abel Ferrara, whose latest film was about the Vatican blowing up. Ferrara seems to be his own audience these days.

Nevertheless, Shia Labeouf's publicized conversion to Catholicism did spark some interest (though I thought he already did this for "Fury"). However, my nose was still very well plugged, and it remained so. This is not a biography. It is just empty, with no real direction in story, nor any perceivable goal. The shark in "Jaws" was better utilized than Saint Pio was in this film; at least the shark was central to the plot, and his presence was felt- even when he was offscreen.

Ferrara's other films are brutal, unrelenting, dark and negative, and yet utilize Catholic imagery as little more than window dressing. Such is the case with this film, only its also part of the title. Don't waste your time. Watch "Padre Pio: Miracle Man" or "Padre Pio: Between Heaven and Earth," instead.

Nefarious (2023)

An Actual Possession Movie

[10/10 · 8 May 2023]

It seems ironic that there are three films out now that focus on demonic possession, "Evil Dead Rise," "The Pope's Exorcist" and this one. The first two seem little more than gruesome spectacle while this one is more real and serious; no possessed people levitating, vomiting gross things, spinning heads, etc. The plot is simple, just two men sitting in a room- and talking about very interesting topic of the true nature of evil. This is not a film for the squeamish and is not subtle one bit. It does not sugar-coat anything (though it is more toned down in social commentary than the book is).

I recommend this film not because of what it does do, but in what it doesn't do. It does not borrow subplots from William Friedkin's "The Exorcist" like most others do, but instead brings the idea of possession and puts it in a realistic situation, which makes the horror more real and relevant- and not subject itself to ineffective "The Conjuring Universe" level of escapism.

The Stalking Moon (1968)

Could have been better, but let down by awful cliches

[5/10 · 14 November 2022]

A kindly cowboy takes a woman and her young son under his wing, only to be stalked by her murderous captor/mate all the way. The first half I found quite enjoyable, however, when the hammer comes down in the third act and the stalker wreaks havoc, I knew exactly who would live and who would die. I found the mother and her son a bit unlikeable after a while.

I could never understand what the son (who by the way is never named, even when they try to give him a name) kept wanting to go back to his murderous father, even after he attempted to kill his mother for no reason. The chemistry between Gregory Peck and Eva Marie Saint was nonexistent. I figured they would show no more chemistry than platonic friends and I was right.

The stalker kills the dog of an old man Peck is partners with and for some idiotic reason the man runs out into the woods with no weapons. I knew he was a goner the moment he was introduced, but I had no idea he would be so foolish about it.

A likeable character resurfaces in the film to aid the protagonist and I knew he would not make it to the end credits. I was right.

The only thing I could not predict was how unsatisfied I was with the climax. Isn't the scene where the good guy blows away the bad guy supposed to be satisfying?

Despite my nit-picks, I did enjoy most of the film. I liked the music, which was humble, adventurous, and frightening when it needed to be. I loved the cinematography and sweeping landscapes, specifically the surroundings in the third act. The final battle is grueling and brutal, which kept me on the edge of my seat until the final part. I just wish the film weren't so predictable.

Firecreek (1968)

"A man worth shooting is a man worth killing!"

[7/10 · 13 November 2022]

This film is worth watching alone for the powerhouse performances of its legendary stars, James Stewart and Henry Fonda.

This is the first film in which Henry Fonda played a villain, and though his role in "Once Upon a Time in the West" the same year completely eclipsed this film, I find his performance of a reluctant, thoughtful bad guy infinitely more intriguing than a through-and-through villain.

James Stewart plays a good guy in a hopeless situation. He combats impossible odds with patience and calm decision-making, being extremely out of his depth when he confronts the troublesome horde led by Fonda's character. It is only at the end when he is fed up by the town's cowardice that he takes matters into his own hands.

This film is very formulaic, and extremely similar to the superior "High Noon"; however, what it lacks in originality, it makes up for in character. Stewart and Fonda were great friends in real-life, and their genuine chemistry is easy to spot in this film though they play enemies. Fonda is not a strictly evil man, he is just in a bad situation with evil men of whom he must adhere with, yet he has no regrets no qualms of getting his hands dirty. Stewart is a good man in a bad situation with spineless people of whom he adheres with until he cannot do so any longer, leading to the most heart-wrenching performances I have seen from James Stewart, which made me speak aloud, "Give him the Gun."

Good movie, and its dark tone and solid direction. I was surprised when I found out it was from the director of "Million Dollar Duck," "Gus," and "The Apple Dumpling Gang Rides Again."