Tag: Adaptation

COUP DE TORCHON (Aka CLEAN SLATE) (1981)

~ jbg ~ Leave a comment

Directed By: Bertrand Tavernier 

Written By: Bertrand Tavernier and Jean Aurenche

Based On The Novel “Pop. 1280” By: Jim Thompson 

Cinematography: Pierre-William Glenn

Editor: Armand Psenny 

Cast: Philippe Noiret, Isabelle Huppert, Jean-Pierre Marielle, Stephane Andean, Eddy Mitchell, Guy Marchand, Irene Skobline, Michael Beaune, Jean Champion, Victor Garrivier 

1938, in a French-African colony. Lucien Cordier is the cop of this village, populated with blacks and a few whites (usually racialist and lustful). He is a washout, everyone (including his wife Huguette) humiliates him. He never arrests anyone and looks at elsewhere when a dirty trick occurs. But one day, he turns into a Machiavellian exterminating angel.

This film can be looked at as a bit experimental, as it is based on a pulp thriller set in the United States but this version of the story is played out internationally in Africa, amongst the French colonists who are in the country.

While in the African’s land and home, these French characters who are more invaders in their territory, still think of themselves as superior and treat the natives like savages even though more or less, the so-called civilized characters, truly act more savage and heinous than any of them.

There are very few likable characters throughout this film it’s just that it takes time to learn the despicable of each, and somehow they seem to outshine each other as the tail goes along.

The Protagonist is a police chief in the area, though he is very Azih, and not very effective. He is in a loveless marriage, and having a secret affair that it seems most snow about but certain people acknowledge, but others are shocked. 

The young married woman that he is having an affair with is played by a very young Isabelle Huppert. Their early scenes are certainly sexual, but not erotic, and certainly feel dirty.

Until the police officer truly shows his sociopathic and psychopathic sides. And he ends up murdering two local pimps and covering up their murders implicating a colleague for it, and it seems like after that he seems to start a domino effect of anyone in his life who bothers him or stands in his way him getting rid of for whatever reason, and with each murder, he seems to lose another piece of his soul which already seemed kind of worthless. 

On one end, you could see this as a kind of revenge tail of a meat character finally standing up for himself and getting revenge on those who either don’t think much of him or sell him short,  but you also must wonder at times was he planning this the whole time And was waiting for the time to strike or was he just finally pushed too far and decided to act when the opportunity presented itself.

By the end, he has his own kind of superiority over other characters as he began, he seems to have a plan, and along the way, his plans seem to be changing as does his mindset.

whereas the reason he was doing it, and he was doing it, for he seems to see their true side And see them for what they are and wants to test them to see if they are worthy, and commonly they fail. He is the most testable it becomes a crabs in a bucket situation.

At first, it seems that lust is what drives his character and money seems to others as the film goes along. He seems to lose faith in anything, and everything that he believes in.

His married lover, who his wife seems to know about yet sometimes seems shocked, and his wife’s so-called brother, a truly her lover, are all over each other, and his house tries to even threaten to blackmail him with this affair.

The only character throughout this film, who seems innocent or just doesn’t know any better is the schoolteacher who the detective is on and sometimes has conversations with.

Don’t get me wrong. This film is hard to sit through. Almost every character is racist and uses that kind of language as well as assaults plenty of black characters that just seem to go with the territory and how evil the characters are in the first place.

Moving the setting of the tale from a small town in Texas to a small town in Africa. It seems to match the territory and gives the tale a wider point of view of which to not only look at it but study it also. As it is similarly, dusty, dirty, remote, yet tranquil.

The film can feel detestable at once, but not keep your interest. Never quite knowing what is going to happen next. It almost feels like a mystery only It’s not a who done it and we are watching from the killer’s point of view.

All the characters are racist. Which fits the noir tale. Most of the characters are unlikeable and a nest of vipers waiting to strike first. It’s Very inventive taking the Jim Thompson tale and making it a more international tale. The film is fascinating.

Based on the novel POP. 1280 by Jim Thompson. which I haven’t read, but this feels a bit similar as far as main characters go to the main character from another Jim Harrison tale THE KILLER INSIDE ME. As both are sheriff’s and psychopathic sociopaths 

Grade: B

PRISCILLA (2023)

~ jbg ~ Leave a comment

Written & Directed By: Sofia Coopola

Based on the Book “ELVIS AND ME” by: Priscilla Presley And Sandra Harmon

Cinematography: Philippe Le Sourd

Editor: Sarah Flack

Cast: Cailee Spaeny, Jacob Elordi, Ari Cohen, Dagmara Domincyzk, Tim Post, Lynne Griffin, Dan Beirne, Rodrigo Fernandez-Stoll, Dan Abramovici

When teenage Priscilla Beaulieu meets Elvis Presley, the man who is already a meteoric rock-and-roll superstar becomes someone entirely unexpected in private moments: a thrilling crush, an ally in loneliness, a vulnerable best friend.

An aesthetic to dig deeper into characters and moments lived in, not just the surface. A sensitive portrait or snapshot.

I get so excited about the new Sofia Coppola movies. While I enjoy her style, her movies I will admit at times aren’t the most exciting or action-packed. They are like stylistic recreations that are dramatized seem like recreations, and often feel humorous.

THE VIRGIN SUICIDES, LOST IN TRANSLATION, SOMEWHERE, and MARIE ANTOINETTE is her best and a kind of winning streak. The rest have had moments and pieces that are admirable it can be hit or miss even if beautifully filmed they are generally passable they can’t say that they are totally enjoy, they all make you think certainly are experiences in themselves.

In fact, some people will use that against her, saying that they are stylish live-action photo shoots to make her films easier to write off, though they do contain more than that you have to be willing to sit and experience them to finally discover it.

there is something about the everyday realities more than all the glitz and glamour that she tries to dissect looking to expose the truth maybe because she grew up on the other side within the fantasy of Fame so she knows it inside and out. She gets to see the power of fame and how it can easily corrupt, even those who are supposed to be Bastians of morality.

It Is a love story, but still showcasing a young lady a teenager who feels like she’s being groomed by a female, older established, and famous male, not only a star but an eventual icon.

There is expected to be an adult around them even though innocence is what seems to be the attraction for him.

The film is about her coming of age with life in this relationship, where she has to learn to gain her strength eventually and be independent from a more one-sided relationship.

The film is not a gossipy or sensationalistic account as that has never been Miss Coppola’s style. We already have many movies and documentaries about Elvis Presley Coppola seems to be trying to expose the more intimate portrait of a well-known love story, not focusing on the legend or his career as much as this is her story so that we can get a better understanding of where she’s at And had to go through.

As the domestication is more than anything, as we watch her, it shows like a little girl in a grown-up world, her being contained and cut off.

The film doesn’t have as many artistic flourishes and retro but is also kind of plain. It seems most of the movie takes place at Graceland.

Jacob Elordi is believable and gives an informed performance as Elvis Presley. he excels in the story of a relationship that offers snippets of his career So he gets to focus more on the dramatic side and charming side of Elvis not so much the showman or the performer. With him being cast in the old days, this might’ve been a starter film for him or a beefcake movie to test out a heartthrob and their box office strength but here it’s more artistic and not so much stunt, casting the film could easily be seen as movie material, made a bit more with depth and patience

Cailee Spaeny is as good as Priscilla in one of her first leading roles. She comes across, is fragile, believable, and strong in each iteration of Priscilla. Even if the performance doesn’t blow the audience away, it is more of an emotional one, as she is the one to take us through all of this, and who we care about.

I am more familiar with Priscilla Presley as an actress primarily from THE NAKED GUN movies so this film was actually kind of eye-opening for me. The film offers glimpses of what we know or what he is known for but shows what it was like to have to live with him through his crisis

We get to see romance from the beginning until the end, as it seems like at some point got tired, and the passion died. the passion died, we do see the introduction the first the seduction, the liking the falling in love the consideration of the marriage, The fights, and infidelity on his part.

This is a narrative a bit like the recent release, maestro seeing young love, but also as famous as maintained, and acquired how to affect a loved one behind the scenes, and how they learn to manage, staying more in the shadows, but still being a partner.

Also, it should be a given, and I love the soundtrack that doesn’t have that many Elvis Presley songs on it. It’s a return form for Sophia, Coppola, and Hits harder than one might expect at times and it still feels just a bit fluffy.

I remember when certain Directors had movies coming out part of the anticipation of a new release was the soundtracks not necessarily the scores, which one looked forward to unless it was done by a favorite like Jon Brion. Not even new music it was whatever classic or unknown songs or artists of the past they would use if it was a popular song, the Directors used it in such a way that you looked at an experience or listen to it differently than before if new to you you have obsessed over it like a brand new single hot off the presses.

Sofia Coppola still manages to do this, There’s a moment in the film where they listen to songs, and she says that the song lacks a catchiness to it, which is how some might feel, but this kept me thoroughly entertained and might be one of her more accessible films, though some will consider it a bit too slow for their taste.

It might represent the same old, which is successful, though, doesn’t end him to an audience as he comes across more as a time capsule, rather than changing with the times and him wanting to move on yet afraid. Just as his wife Priscilla has needs he seems to be deterred because it doesn’t fit in with what he knows especially during the 1960s a time of rapid change.

Ir Shows him learning and teaching himself having a rebellious attitude and learning independence. Even though the colonel shut him down, the same is happening with her. Only Elvis was doing it to her as they say hurt people hurt people, and then leaving her alone in a huge house to entertain herself, but not wanting her to mix too much with the staff, what was she to do?

Grade: B

FERRARI (2023)

~ jbg ~ Leave a comment

Directed By: Michael Mann

Written By: Troy Kennedy Martin

Based on the book “Enzo Ferrari: The Man, The Cars, The Races, The Machine” by: Brock Yates 

Cinematography: Erik Messerschmidt 

Editor: Pietro Scalia 

Cast: Adam Driver, Penelope Cruz, Patrick Dempsey, Shailene Woodley, Jack O’Connell, Gabriel Leone, Sarah Gadon, Michele Savoia, Valentina Belle, Tommaso Basili 

Set in the summer of 1957, with Enzo Ferrari’s auto empire in crisis, the ex-racer turned entrepreneur pushes himself and his drivers to the edge as they launch into the Mille Miglia, a treacherous 1,000-mile race across Italy.

Every holiday season, Adam Driver seems to cast a big project that might be questionable or controversial.

This film is a portrait of a certain time and the title character’s life that helps explain it and capsulate his past and present. That becomes exciting as its director, Michael Mann, and anyone who is a history aficionado of the title character.

Michael Mann seems to get older you notice that he has more interest in camaraderie and the definition of decision in a person’s life which is usually an older man looking back on life, he might identify more necessarily looking to or including the audience.

The film isn’t like the character reflecting on his life or on his last day or days before his death. It just focuses on a certain period in his life. The worst of times.

Penelope Cruz looks ravishing even here when they try to make her look plain. As she gives an exciting performance throughout the film, she has an international flavor with a jealous streak. As she gets older, she seems to become a more interesting actor, as she is no longer an ingenue, and the roles she gets are filled with more emotions and quite frankly seem to be a bit more juicy, even if not, necessarily the star or the damsel in distress.

I love Lady Gaga, but maybe her role in HOUSE OF GUCCI, if she was going to command the screen so much. She is one of the few notable things about this film. As she is so captivating, you can’t keep your eyes off of her. Takes with could’ve been a thankless role. It gives her something to do with plenty of dramatic territory and scenes. 

Shailene Woodley as the character’s unofficial mistress seems miscast, It could also be the writing as she’s never as interesting as the other characters and can’t seem to keep up with them either as even Sara Gadon playing one of Ferrari‘s drivers seems to have more of a dramatic and more to do or at least throughout.

Patrick Dempsey plays a supporting character. He is barely recognizable in the film. That was quite good.

The film is a Slow Burn. This film seems more for an audience of current enthusiasts or history fans who went to see the story you brought to life yet don’t like to read, maybe the film was meant for people to of the Ferrari car and Branding providing more insight and renewing interest. How he even views his drivers as disposable and wants to keep his brand pure, even though for success, he would have to dilute and make more cars essentially having to hand it over to another business to replicate more copies faster.

I wonder if the racing might’ve been more exciting watching in a theater. The film keeps feeling like it’s building towards something that never comes. Even if it seems like the race will be what this film will revolve around. It Never gets that exciting until a little twist, which is honestly the most shocking scene in the film and one of the best scenes of the film as it finally feels like something is happening.

The only time the film seems to come alive is in the scenes of Penelope Cruz and some of the car crashes.

This film feels like a brick, solid and heavy something to build upon or off of that never quite grows and needs more construction, though it is very well-made. It’s not that entertaining, It’s something to more admire than feel anything for.

The film is like a fine wine that has aged well. It looks luxurious. It looks delicious and refined and looks well made but when you finally go to taste it, it’s not what you expected, nor as good as it should be. Though I guess it comes down to Taste.

Grade: B- 

ALL OF US STRANGERS (2023)

~ jbg ~ Leave a comment

Written & Directed By: Andrew Haigh

Based on The Novel “STRANGERS” by: Taichi Yamada 

Cinematography: Jamie Ramsey 

Editor: Jonathan Alberts

Cast: Andrew Scott, Paul Mescal, Claire Foy, Jamie Bell

A screenwriter drawn back to his childhood home enters into a fledgling relationship with his downstairs neighbor while discovering a mysterious new way to heal from losing his parents 30 years ago.

First off before you even redistribute, this is a film that it’s best to go in blind to to get the most out of it. So please watch the film before you read this review as there will be some spoilers.

This is definitely a movie that would’ve been in my top five had I seen it in 2003 when it was released.

The film plays more like therapy sessions of unresolved issues that still exist, mentally, which can also be seen as a vivid confessional. Which might come across as a bit more theatrical or staged for some audience members. 

At heart, it’s a love story in the midst of all that develops like his relationship with his parents there’s an unknown history that is slowly brought to the forefront of its kind of acceptance, even though it does have its problems and issues by the end of the film it’s still heartbreaking nonetheless. As we witnessed the breakthrough more was revealed.

Director Andrew Haigh manages to make everything look like almost every frame could be a photograph in a museum.

Watching this film lead actor, Andrew Scott, as always can do no wrong as an actor for me at least he is similar to Sterling K. Brown, as he truly inhabits, their characters, deeper and deeper Sterling K is more of a chameleon who always has a different look with his roles and characters, Andrew Scott here the more his character opens up the more comfortable he becomes with himself, and also the more vivid the performance and memorable.

The director has a way of making the normal look extraordinary at times in simple ways.

It’s a story of nostalgia coming of age and finding peace within yourself as well as acceptance. 

At the end, it shows you can go home again not entirely. Always ghosts from the past waiting that need to be released no matter how much you want them to stay.

It’s truly hard to describe exactly the emotional strength of the film how powerful it is and where it leaves you at the end but it’s definitely worth watching. 

Grade: A 

THE MOD SQUAD (1999)

~ jbg ~ Leave a comment

Directed By: Scott Silver
Written By: Scott Silver, Stephen Kay and Kate Lanier
Based on characters created By: Buddy Ruskin
Cinematography: Ellen Kuras
Editor: Dorian Harris 

Cast: Giovanni Ribisi, Omar Epps, Claire Danes, Josh Brolin, Steve Harris, Richard Jenkins, Dennis Farina, Michael Lerner, Sam McMurray, Bodhi Elfman, Eddie Griffin, Holmes Osbourne, Toby Huss, Monet Mazur, Larry Brandenburg

Three troubled teens sent to jail are offered a deal to work with an undercover cop, uncover an intricate drug ring, and are caught in a deadly set-up. With cops on their trail, they have little time to solve the case and clear their names.

The nicest thing I can say about the movie is that they cast actors rather than stars. Even though they were trying to set up these up-and-coming to-be stars. Which actually gives the film, a little more authenticity, and credit than it probably deserves.

One of the problems with links character played by Omar Epps is that he’s just supposed to be the cool guy yet we rarely see him do anything that’s cool but as soon as he shows up his vibe, is that of the cool guy so you’re making the audience trust in assumption before actually exhibiting any of that type of behavior or action Which never really comes so it feels like a buildup only to be let down. Some might say is the same when it comes to this film though was there really any big demand for this film?

As it came out, remakes and reboots of old television series were kind of still successful, and a fad. Maybe the problem was it needed to tell the original story, but it also comes off as just another episode that could’ve been of the series.

As the villain seems to be a kingpin, but is a local kingpin, which realistically if you are kind of a side project, an undercover team makes sense, but it has all the excitement of taking down a local drug dealer now that really cinematic for an action film not real, even with all the intrigue that this film involves. 

I mean the film at least has all the villains as Caucasian, but then again, most of the characters are caucasian, with a sprinkling of minorities mostly African-Americans. So it makes clear who the audience source is for Home Truly is.

Now, here is where I get more into the problems of the film, which are overpowering. Any good takes the film might have. 

The film is kind of set up to fail as the most memorable character is taken away as Link was a cool and dangerous black guy from the show with an Afro here has Omar Epps with a regular haircut not particularly physically, scary, or too big. So that he resembles just a black guy without the Afro it feels like they are kind of castrated or circumcised. He has no iconic look, you know they could’ve at least made them bald (like hawk on SPENCER FOR HIRE) for here. He just comes off as normal and uninteresting.

Giovanni Ribisi is a good actor and his character is supposed to be a screwup, his overarching arc is supposed to finally by the end of the movie make good and become a kind of the facto leader. His loser status is so great that his parents don’t believe him have any faith in him or even really take him seriously. Plus at times he seems a little touched and this is supposed to be our hero of sorts and an ensemble. The closest thing we get to a leader or protagonist.

Claire Danes’ character Julie is an addict which makes her the most vulnerable and fragile of the team. Yet she was still hired to be undercover and strong enough for this job. Then her ex-boyfriend happens to be the villain. So she really has the most to lose here though is kind of treated as a damsel in distress rather than an Ingal part of the team I guess she is supposed to be the bait. Her character was kind of a sexpot here. She just seems to be kind of a basic normal girl who’s in the scene? Maybe it’s better as she doesn’t draw too much attention to herself. This would unfortunately be one of the last times she appeared in a studio film that was more after blockbuster viewers than anything else. 

Decided to revitalize the show as was common at times people recognize the name of the show, but at the time, not too many might’ve had memories of it as prime entertainment. On the plus side, you could write it without really copying it down too much but also there isn’t that huge of an audience either. Then the film stars are not unknown but no real stars they’re a more recognizable cast, which at least keeps the cost of the budget down but how is it going to make any money because it’s not like the film has two dramatic storylines it’s not that funny intentionally, and there are no real action sequences and the stakes aren’t big enough for you to really care or even be suspenseful. 

The film is supposed to be an ensemble, but the characters are separate through most, as each seems seduced or on their own separate adventure then they finally come together at the end. It feels like we should see them as a team, at least at first see how they work together, or at least the film could’ve shown how they learn to work together. Instead of just seeming like they separate stories, come together or cross paths at the end. The film is an origin story that should come off more as a film like THE DIRTY DOZEN as they are all ex-cons given a chance on a suicide mission who are forced together of sorts, to learn to make it as a team. They come off as a bunch of at the time hip club kids trying to solve a mystery that involves a conspiracy. If it was played that way with a bit more comedy and impressive action. The film could have worked 

Whereas you know, the enjoyment of this film is subjective as some might like, or enjoy, like a date or romance with a beauty that ends up, not working out in the end, or eventually, but good enough for the time being. Where it’s not right for some but good enough for others it all comes down to the right place at the right time, maybe something chemical or even the vibe. Unfortunately, this film just doesn’t seem to have exactly what it takes.

Grade: C- 

THE BRINK’S JOB (1978)

~ jbg ~ Leave a comment

Directed By: William Friedkin

Written By: Walon Green

Based on “BIG STICKUP AT BRINK’S” By: Noel Behn

Cinematography: Norman Leigh 

Editor: Bud Smith and Robert K. Lambert

Cast: Peter Falk, Peter Boyle, Allen Garfield, Gena Rowlands, Warren Oates, Paul Sorvino, Sheldon Leonard 

A fictional retelling of the infamous Boston Brink’s Company robbery on January 17th, 1950, of $2.7M, cost the American taxpayers $29M to apprehend the culprits with only $58,000 recovered.

The film feels fact-based and amazingly recreated, Sticking to the facts.  though it also feels like the film has no personality. Which is evident as neither do the characters. 

Just as the characters never come off as interesting just there to do a job or complete a mission no real character to them. As it’s supposed to be a comedy though the jokes are far away and many calamities happen in the caper. 

We never get to know any of the characters or their quirks to see how they might be funny or add to the proceedings. Even when given more of a comedic scenario. It feels so basic with no excitement that it just comes across as flat. 

Technically there is nothing wrong with it, But it comes and goes very easily without too much to remember. The cast is good, the production design is beautiful and the movie-making is good. It just feels like a project that was exactly where everyone did what was needed but nothing more or nothing less.

The film looks great from a production design stand pony and it feels like you are in that time. 

This was a film that was originally set up under director John Frankenheimer who left after problems with the studio. William Friedkin took over the project but threw out the original script and ordered a new one. So it wasn’t exactly a for-hire job. 

The film just seems to lack any spontaneity or any humor that many of the characters and situations the characters find themselves in and that the actors are clearly capable of but seem reigned in a bit. 

Grade: C

EILEEN (2023)

~ jbg ~ Leave a comment

Directed By: William Oldroyd

Written By: Luke Goebel and Ottessa Moshfegh

Based on the novel by: Ottessa Moshfegh

Cinematography: Ari Wegner

Editor: Nick Emerson 

Cast: Thomasin McKenzie, Anne Hathaway, Shea Whigham, Siobhan Fallon Hogan, Marin Ireland, Sam Nivola, Owen Teague, Brendan Burke 

The stagnant waters of Eileen’s dull, stifled life as a solitary worker at a juvenile detention center in 1960s Boston, are unexpectedly disrupted when the institution brings in a new psychologist, the vibrant Rebecca. The fervent enthusiasm that blossoms between the two women almost immediately gives way to a closer relationship, until their fragile connection takes a dramatic turn.

The first act of the film seems to be drenched in character as we build up, not only the title character of Eileen, but her circumstances with obvious deep trauma and depression in her life, and what she has to deal with in her day-to-day until Anne Hathaway’s character comes into her life a blonde bombshell of the upper crust, upbringing, and beauty who takes an interest in her and kind of seduces her at first it seems like a friendship or maybe a mentor relationship but it seems the valves and something more and this is where the films first half is strongest clues as to what is to come But never dis PLAY them outright

Then, when the twist does it fits into the mood of the film, but it is such a left turn that it almost seems ridiculous that you’re questioning yourself. Is this one of Eileen’s fantasies that we have seen earlier, even though those usually involve more death or suicide, in their own way, it is all real. 

In the end, the film, like a wannabe noir that ends up as a drama, with a kind of ridiculous third act the third act could’ve been believable, but but the way it comes about just feels so silly 

Especially the first half of the film, so in tune and stylish, even if at times, Anne Hathaway’s character seems more like a caricature of Femme Fatale movies. She still comes off as believable in the end, even though her actions seem rather far-fetched. 

I will admit, I never read the original book so maybe it’s better explained there, but the way it’s put on screen there always seems to be attention and intention that is going to happen but the film always seems to fall short, or never reaches the peak that it presents 

The actors are all great, and Hathaway is memorable, as is Shea Whigham, who is believable as her mentally unbalanced and constantly drunk, who is a burden but seems in his own way, trying to educate the young Eileen 

I have to say, Thomasin McKenzie totally walks away with the film as she portrays this innocence and you see her falling you see her heartbroken you see her hopeful, but then also you can kind of see her more angry and vengeful side and she plays it so well, just through her facial reactions and physicality as it seems like she is truly being awakened, and the beast is out of its cage to a certain extent either that or in desperation for survival her instincts finally come alive and it’s truly a revelatory performance, not that from what I’ve seen so far she’s ever given a bad performance, but this one truly felt like a showcase for her and her talents finally.

I wish the suicidal ideation or fantasies off a little better throughout the film as it does enhance the character and maybe gives us a peak into her mentality, but for the film, I thought it would play off the scene where we think it’s a fantasy and then realize it’s reality or maybe You know in another universe or telling of the tail the whole act is a fantasy that she uses to finally take action even though when it’s own way it does though it’s not a fantasy it seems to be the push or the thing she needed to run and live her life

Even though her way of tidying things up, will still lead to her, needing to keep being on the run so to speak and Hathaway’s character, we are at a loss as to what becomes of her. 

As Hathaway and her character come in like a guest star and leave that way. Where we are left wondering so many things. 

The film tries in its own way it it tell a story and makes itself useful to a certain degree, but it just seems to fall short as the audience is because they were expecting something better, especially with how strongly the first half was presented in the film, seems to not take advantage of its strength that could’ve made the film a lot more memorable and stronger.

The film is well directed by not as sharply directed as one would expect from director William Oldroyd, who has captured passion, deceit, double crosses, and cold hearts in his previous movie LADY MACBETH. As this seems to lack a strong payoff to what has been building throughout. 

GRADE: B-

NEW ROSE HOTEL (1998)

~ jbg ~ Leave a comment

Directed By: Abel Ferrara

Written By: Abel Ferrara and Christi Zois

Based on a short story by William Gibson

Cinematography: Ken Kelsch 

Editor: Jim Mol and Anthony Redman

Cast: Willem Dafoe, Christopher Walken, Asia Argento, Annabella Sciorra, Victor Argo, Gretchen Mol, John Lurie 

In the not-too-distant future, two New York businessmen plot to play two multinational rival corporations against each other, with a little help from a shady Italian street woman, to obtain an important Japanese businessman for the company they work at, only things are not always as they appear.

Abel Ferrara is a talented writer and director who always seems to dip his toe into things that could be seen as shocking. It might be that is just his interest in the stories that he wants to tell. Nowadays he makes more personal, dramatic, artistic films, but for a time he seemed to be a provocateur when it came to cinema stories of the streets of New York, in particular, starting out with more horror films, then seemed to have a period where it was mostly crime related films.

He is a filmmaker of interest who is very unapologetic, though I will admit since his movie, BAD LIEUTINENT, and his one studio-made film a remake of INVASION OF THE BODY SNATCHERS, his films have been for me at least hit or miss. Unfortunately, it feels like they usually miss or fail to make a connection. Though he’s a filmmaker where you can always find something of interest in his films or his filmmaking.

I remember at the time being interested in this movie, more to see Asia Argento and I felt because she looked very enticing, and the story sounded somewhat interesting. Not to mention liked the cast of it mostly being her Willem Dafoe and Christopher Walken, even though at the time it seemed like Willem Dafoe and Christopher Walken were almost in everything so seeing them in yet another film wasn’t that enticing but with her as the added attraction. 

As I had only seen pictures of her and not really seen her in a movie, not to mention with Abel Ferrara directing, I knew it would be dark and troubling, but reading the synopsis of the story and plot it never quite gelled with me, especially from people who have seen it They just didn’t seem like it was worth going to movie theaters to check this movie out.

Watching it now. Almost 25 years later I’m kind of glad I didn’t see it in theaters. It’s not a bad movie, but I would’ve been greatly disappointed and it would’ve probably been more forgettable to me. I would’ve seen it as more experimental and artistic, so it would also show how the story could be told more on a limited budget, especially one that is set in the future and kind of cyberpunk. As after all, it is based on a short story by William Gibson. This might be why the film seems so rebellious and Avant Garde or striving to be different. 

The film has a lot of cutaways of digital video and photography that we come back to throughout the story.

There is a lot of eroticism and a few scenes of sex on display. One of the themes of this film seems to be fantasy and how much you let it take over especially as you know the truth but you want to believe.

It seems like the film is more about all these vipers being hustlers on their own, being brought together to take down a big fish, and slowly turning on each other, as at the center of it one makes the dangerous decision of not only trust, but love, especially with somebody who works as a professional seductress were acting is their professional, so you never know when they’re being genuinely Trust or telling you what you wanna hear to their own satisfaction

It seems like the camera is as captivated with Asia Argento as much as The characters are as it always seems to be exploring and exposing her allure, so while it doesn’t provide her an acting exercise where we see her day-to-day. this is a goddess movie. Where it seems the allure and the strength of the film is on the femme fatale and how the audience feels about her as a film and its own wife fetishizes her to a degree, making the film and the protagonist see her more as a goddess.

There is Something about Asia Argento, her films, and her career. I’ve always been kind of in awe, but she rarely got a chance to shine or have that career-defining performance. It was more she was in hit movies, but you don’t, in particular, remember her performances or character, because you could point out movies like LAND OF THE DEAD or MARIE ANTOINETTE or XXX, yes she was in those films as a cast member, but none of her performances stand out.

Even when she directed her own films such as an adaptation of the book THE HEART IS DECEITFUL ABOVE ALL THINGS. which were more controversial and shocking, she made a little impact, but never long-lasting unfortunately, as they were artistic, but seemed more poised to shock. so I always look at her career as a kind of example of promises made, but never quite capitalizing on all the talk, hype, or Fame. there might’ve been more personal reasons as to why her career stalled at a certain point, but I still find her talented, beautiful, and stunning and half the time when I watch some of her movies. It was just to see her in it And she looked sensational and in most of them captivating. 

It’s also interesting that the film has great actress Gretchen Mol featured in a small but important role throughout as at the time she was also considered an ingenue in the acting world, the next big thing or flavor of the month at the time, though she is displayed for less in this film.

The film comes across as a futuristic tale that had an idea that was original but did not have the budget for the ambitions of the script so it feels like the third act is made to put the story of what actually happens or happens from scenes we’ve seen earlier as flashbacks or memories to explain it all.

It’s an interestingly constructed film with a good soundtrack. that uses a lot of it looks to be handheld video and a bunch of scenes, or at least the beginning of digital video being used and more professional films.

Offering a third-act explanation of everything by pointing out what was evident in playing sight from before now that might be because I just didn’t have enough money to finish and film. Actually, it is very creative but can be seen as frustrating to someone in the audience who is traditional filmmaking or is used to having, their hands held to end to the end

Does it have an ending? Strangely it feels somewhat unfinished. This would be a film that definitely could stand the case of being remade.

A bit disappointing but creative. Its artistic flourishes seem born out of not having the budget that was expected and making the best out of the situation. Though definitely a film where the camera is in love with Asia Argento. As much as the main character.  As it spotlights her almost fetishistically. 

Grade: C

101 REYKJAVIK (2000)

~ jbg ~ Leave a comment

Directed by: Baltasar Kormakur 

Written by: Baltasar Kormakur and Hallgrimur Helgason 

Based on the Novel By: Hallgrimur Helgason 

Cinematography: Peter Steuger 

Editor: Skul E. Eriksen and Sigvaldi J. Karason 

Cast: Victoria Abril, Hilmir Snaer Guonason, Hanna Maria Karlsdottir, Baltasar Kormakur, Pruour Vihjalmsdottir, Olafur Dari Olafsson, Prostur Leo Gunnarsson, Eyvindur Erlandsson, Halladora Bjorn Sdottir 

Will the 30-year-old, Hlynur ever move out of his mother’s apartment in Reykjavík? Social welfare keeps him passive but things change when his mother’s Spanish friend, Lola, arrives and stays through Xmas and New Year’s Eve.

Before going off to make more action-oriented Hollywood films. Director Balatasar Kormakur (2 GUNS, BEAST, EVEREST, CONTRABAND) came through with this very visual erotic coming-of-age story of late maturity and being in a love triangle with your mother.  

I would like to say this film can be easily categorized, but this film is one you can never quite take too seriously. So that one minute It’s a romance then it seems like an aimless character study. Then it seems like a woe-is-me for a character we can never quite feel sorry for. So if anything we can say this film is a quirky comedy. 

There isn’t much substance to the material. A kind of love and lust triangle between a son, mother, and lodger. So that it ultimately becomes a film about relationships or connections.

A lodger is a free sprint and flamenco teacher played by Victoria Abril. Whose performance full of life, charisma, vitality, grace, and spirit is what saves the film.  Not to mention her obvious beauty. She truly saves the film and is the only reason to watch it. It’s what got me to watch. As when she isn’t in the film it drags. You wonder was the character written around her or was she cast perfectly and it worked out? 

Only wish she was in a better film that matched her talents and made her just her own thing to admire and love about the film. Rather than the only thing.

The main character is an unlikeable selfish jerk, but he is our guide. So when he gets his comeuppance. We aren’t as upset as it is expected.  The film tries to come off as a foreign Woody Allen-inspired film. Only less artistic and more aimless. 

His mother finally found a relationship and forced him to grow up. The downfall of his responsibility. Though originally seemed like it might focus on a lesbian relationship. It ultimately adheres to the male gaze and sexual fantasies and actions of straight sex.

The film is pretty open-minded for its time and has a liberal openness as it offers no judgments on anyone. It ultimately becomes about a young man learning to grow and become responsible. Learn how to truly have an adult relationship. So in certain moments is a relationship comedy. 

Which leads to the increasingly complicated situations he finds himself in. That proves to be his downfall and maybe his saving grace.

The film is a time waster and has some good ideas and tries to twist it so that instead of playing the victim the main character is almost a villain at times, but learns to grow up somewhat. Though none of it Is compelling enough to keep a major interest. 

Grade: C 

THE LOVER (1992)

~ jbg ~ Leave a comment

Directed By: Jean-Jacques Annaud 

Written By: Jean-Jacques Annaud and Gerard Brach

Based on The Novel By: Marguerite Duras

Cinematography: Robert Fraisse 

Editor: Noelle Boisson 

Cast: Tony Leung, Jane March, Frédérique Meininger, Arnaud Giovaninetti, Melvil Poupaud, Lisa Faulkner, Jeanne Moreau

In 1929 French Indochina, a French teenage girl embarks on a reckless and forbidden romance with a wealthy, older Chinese man, each knowing that knowledge of their affair will bring drastic consequences to each other.

This is one of the more troublesome movies to watch now as even though it’s based on a classic novel, it still is a love story between an older Asian man and a young French girl. Watching the film we know that both actors are of age but the film is overly erotic, and both actors even being of age are extremely attractive.

So while full of sex. at heart, it tries to be a romance and shows how power, race, and class bring them together, but also pull them apart, as take advantage of the other in their own way. The film feels like a book textured with beautiful international yet a small story. That has heavy and strong ramifications.

I remember when this film came out as one of the first artistic erotic films I remember seeing. As the sex was graphic and realistic, rather than being exploited, it seems to come more from passion, romance, and love.

This would obviously be hard to make today one of the other aspects that was the appeal at the time was that there was an interracial romance on screen. Full of risky material that deals with racism as well as classism.

The rules were reversed as here was an Asian man who was more classy, and had money which he comes from, and her family is more poor, desperate, and savage, he seemed to pluck her off the streets and seduce her, and to a certain point her family despised him for being Asian do like the money that he spends.

The film has plenty of artistic touches that help the film flourish. The art direction is top-notch, and the main character is the defining, all-white suit that he wears throughout. 

The film also happened to be the jewel in the way to the brief film career of the actress, Jane March it was also her screen debut. She was unbelievably beautiful. She followed this film up with films like TARZAN AND THE LOST CITY OF GOLD and PROVOCATEUR and the infamous Hollywood bomb THE COLOR OF NIGHT. Though like her The scope of the film is beautiful to look at. She has continued to work over the years here and there, but never quite in a starring role. The biggest budgeted Hollywood film she was in recently was the remake of CLASH OF THE TITANS. 

By the end when it comes to the characters she is the one you won’t forget, and was hoping that Jane March would have a memorable acting career aside from this film, but she achieved one-and-done status (One-and-done is usually where an actor actress is so good, but they never ever act again, and are only defined by one role where they stay unforgettable maybe even that character to life so strongly that even when you look at pictures of them in real life, you still see more of the character than the actual actor Which can work for the film as in your mind it makes them more real) even as she appeared in a few other films. None were good one was more infamous and reputation so that leaves the one she truly shines in and shows so much promise.

I remember being pulled into this film and caring about the characters beyond the sex scenes I will admit that the first time one watched the cultural and political stuff went over my head. Though one can remember the lush Scenery and feeling like you are watching an escapade.

The film truly is a perverted story of a taboo romance that once was more common at the time based on a novel, luckily in the film, the girl is aged up a bit and shows her learning of the world through him, usually through the comfort that he can bring her.

Grade: B