Wake in Fright (1971) Review

IMDB Review: Wake in Fright (1971)

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I saw the restored print at Film Forum.

The main reason this is a partial success is because Bond is not a compelling or likable or interesting character. He's bland and it is his ordeal and his change during the ordeal that engaged me in the picture, but most of movie prior to his invitation to a drinking buddy's home is dramatically flat. One could argue that that is the point-- that not much is there, but the sequence in which Bond maniacally talks himself into betting (some of which seems like ADR added after the fact) is clumsy and tells me that I was supposed to have some emotional investment in whether he won or lost his freedom from the school system purgatory in which he was trapped.

The piece really takes off the moment the two big, menacing fellows step into the house and works very well once Bond is relegated to a witness of Donald Pleasance, who has never been better than he is here, maybe not even comparably good. 

The hunting scenes are difficult to watch, but it is the wild abandon of the riders after the hunt, the berserk and forced "enjoyment" of their sadism, that is the high point of the movie and quite excellent. The filth and squalor of this presages things like Gummo and the overall tone reminds me of Walkabout, with a dash of Cannibal Holocaust.

It's sort of strange that the film is quite comfortable graphically showing animal death but shies away from depicting any of the implied drunken homosexuality.

Overall, this movie has about 40 really engaging and disturbing minutes, but lacks a compelling lead and ends a little to quaintly to be truly substantial.

The Master (2012) Review

IMDB Review: The Master (2012)

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Exact rating: 5.5

First a technical comment. I saw this projected in 70mm and although this is a gorgeous format, the sharp definition is often squandered by the shallow depth of field-- out of focus 70mm is not very different from out of focus 35mm. Still, it looks great, but often just felt like 35mm, despite the effort and cost of shooting 70mm.

The core problems of this piece are problems of most Paul Thomas Anderson work. It works sometimes as allegory and cinematic diorama, but infrequently as drama. Phillip Seymour Hoffman is neither beguiling nor charismatic, the way this role requires. (Compare the various Hoffman speeches to any scene with John Hawkes in the far, far, far superior cult picture, Martha Marcy May Marlene.) From the beginning, we see Hoffman as quick to anger and a cold manipulator and there is no element of seduction in terms of bringing Joaquin Phoenix, and the audience, into the cult. Joaquin is neither charismatic nor very interesting, unless you find a mediocre love interest and drinking interesting.

Both actors overdo it and get quite theatrical, though nothing like the abhorrent mugging and apoplectic histrionics of Daniel Day Lewis in There Will Be Blood. Maximum acting and method actor anger (the jail scene and singing bits are quite forced). I can engage in a movie with unlikable characters that are interesting, but these characters are neither and the actors do not bring enough personality to the roles to overcome the limitations of the script. Their relationship does not really work, and it's supposed to be a pillar of the movie--- see the failed melodrama at the end.

Like the excellent opening sequences of There Will Be Blood and the Tom Cruise stuff in Magnolia, The Master has about 20+ minutes of material that is truly noteworthy--- the processing sequences. The drama and intensity of these scenes crackle vibrantly in comparison to the other sort of engaging two hours, which plays out like a vague biopic sans pathos. With the exception of the processing scenes and the overwrought acting, the overall piece is mild and less interesting than its subject.

Branded (2012) Review

IMDB Review: Branded (2012)

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

branded is a mess.

there is no scientific grounding whatsoever of the far out concepts or even a consistent logic with these concepts once they are presented.

the filmmakers obviously hoped to coast on the "important" message and allegorical nature of the piece, but the lead dude has no charisma, no core (a historian turned agent turned advertisement guy turned shepherd turned crusader) and the fx look like garbage for the most part. the pacing has a strange lumps and overall, the movie has the feel of a cobbled together eastern European movie that is imitating mainstream Hollywood, which seems like an idea that also goes against the premise of the movie. we are told of an important romance that happens in the center of the movie, but we do not see this.

i wonder if this movie is a tax write off.

if you want thoughtful, real science fiction that has a sense of wonder and makes you think without pandering, go watch moon.

if you a cerebral, trance-inducing sort of science fiction experience, check out beyond the black rainbow, although the piece is flawed

Star Trek: The City on the Edge of Forever (#1.28) (1967) Review

IMDB Review: Star Trek: The City on the Edge of Forever (#1.28) (1967)

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

i like some episodes of the original series, but certainly not this one. the popularity of this episode is truly confusing. although i am not expecting Ted Chiang, Greg Egan, Greg Bear, Larry Niven or Arthur C. Clarke in a star trek episode, this beloved episode is not science fiction and this premise--- altering the past and then the future-- was done repeatedly (and better) a decade or more before this piece (by bradbury and in outer limits) without the stultifying "drama."

there are some star trek episodes that have engaging science fiction ideas--- the corbomite maneuver, the changeling, metamorphoses and a taste of Armageddon--- but the many crappy time travel episodes in this series (or slight variations that show "parallel worlds" with gangsters and romans and gladiators and belly dancers and Nazis) are why i cannot fully embrace the show and feel it contributes to people not understanding what the term science fiction means. 

more than a decade before this program, Hal Clement wrote mission of gravity and Clarke wrote childhood's end--- so weak time travel episodes (even worse in season 2) as well as the ones with evil kirks and the many creatures that can make your wishes into reality cannot be wholly excused because of the era. it seems like they were out of ideas or just had access to these costumes and sets and wrote something around them.

season three of star trek: the next generation was the first season of this franchise that is predominantly science fiction (even if the risible q character does turn up), and the first one that i, a sci-fi fan, like the major part of.

so for sci-fi fans looking to explore this show start with the above episodes or jump to the next generation season 3 (unless you want to watch joe piscopo, one of the least funny comedians ever, teach an android how to be funny in an episode that was probably not meant to be ironic). or just watch babylon 5, which is good from the very first season.

The King of Pigs (2011) Review

IMDB Review: The King of Pigs (2011)

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

although this received some good press and was supported by the excellent folks at subway cinema, this movie is heavy-handed, monotonous and badly made junk. i suppose it would be a novelty to somebody who has never seen adult animation, but otherwise don't waste your time. if you want smart and rich adult animation, go watch heavy traffic (bakshi), berserk, shigurui, my neighbors the yamadas, ghost in the shell: innocence or porco rosso.

the king of pigs animation combines limited, inconsistent and ugly drawings (like king of the hill and beavis and butt head) with rotoscoping (tracing) and bad computer generated models. i saw this on the big screen and the animation is definitely the worst i've ever seen for a theatrical film-- and i saw cool world when it came out.

like many bad korean movies, it is monotonously mean and there are stupid twists that undo the limited amount of characterization the writing provided (see also: the good the bad and the weird, the host, shiru). the characters are dull and one dimensional, the scenes are repetitive, the animation is awful and the overall experience tedious.