45 Years (2015)

☆ ☆ ☆ ½

45 Years (2015) – A. Haigh

The acting by Charlotte Rampling and Tom Courtenay (both actors of distinction with impressively long careers) is fine-grained and subtle; they disappear into the characters of Kate and Geoff Mercer who are about to celebrate their 45^th anniversary with a big party.  We see lives that have worn grooves into their environment and people who know each other intimately; Kate in particular often talks about Geoff’s personality, attitudes, and ways of behaving as though they are obvious to her and set in stone.  So, she is particularly taken aback when the body of Geoff’s former fiancée is discovered in the Swiss Alps (frozen solid after 50 years) and she discovers that he still harbors a longing for her.  This casts a cloud over the upcoming anniversary party.  As they engage in various preparations, we see how their preoccupation with the news from Switzerland affects each of them separately, presented subtly through their behaviour.  Slowly too, we see how this new knowledge about events “before their time” has consequences for their relationship.  Although Geoff does his best to “make up” for his (understandable?) absorption into the past, it is Kate who seems the hardest hit, principally by the fact that Geoff has kept a secret from her for this long – that is, by a loss of trust.  But is it fair? That is for the viewer to decide.  Personally, I empathized with both – but if I interpreted the last shot of the film correctly, then I think one of them has to work harder to let things go.  Surely, after 45 years, they would have learned to overcome issues such as this. (For the record, although I feared this would be a film suitable only for oldies, it felt real and natural for me – meaning what?!?).

Poltergeist (1982)

☆ ☆ ☆ ½

Poltergeist (1982) – T. Hooper

Better than I expected (after all these years) but still an uneasy mix of Spielberg’s childlike wonder and fantasy and Hooper’s dread.  Fortunately, the dread comes through despite the attempts to smother it with schmaltz.  And surely this is streets ahead of other films in this horror sub-genre (The Amityville Horror, Paranormal Activity, etc.).  JoBeth Williams and Craig T. Nelson live in a new-ish suburban development with their three kids.  About 30 minutes into the film, one of them (5-year-old Carol Anne) is sucked into some sort of void (bi-location) inside the house and the rest of the film is about how to get her back.  They can communicate through the TV (but only when it is showing white noise).  A group of paranormal investigators is brought in and they begin to discover the nature of the problem (which is fairly ridiculous, almost a MacGuffin).  A highlight is a visit by psychic Tangina (Zelda Rubinstein), spooky enough in her own right.  Of course, the special effects are over-the-top and pretty good for 1982.  But I couldn’t help thinking that if you dialled back the “over-production” by a few notches, this could have been a really scary and downright creepy affair (rather than a blockbuster, I suppose).  Worth revisiting.    

The Rats of Tobruk (1944)

☆ ☆ ☆

The Rats of Tobruk (1944) – C. Chauvel

This version of the Australian WWII war picture is nearly 30 minutes longer than the version currently circulating in the US.  This might explain some of the bad reviews it has received on the internet, although it’s true that it doesn’t really distinguish itself in the field of combat.  Yet, it is (and was) something to see (stereotyped) Australian characters on the big screen.  Grant Taylor is Bluey, the rough womaniser (who secretly yearns for his one true love); Chips Rafferty is Milo, the lanky Ocker with the broad Strine accent; and Peter Finch is the Brit journalist who narrates the picture and delivers some stirring patriotic speeches (including from the Bard’s Henry V).  The plot is largely anecdotal, focused on Australian troops who held off Rommel in the North African city of Tobruk (Libya).  The battle sequences are intercut with comic relief and scenes reminding us that Bluey is pining for his love back home.   

  

Jason and the Argonauts (1963)

☆ ☆ ☆ ½

Jason and the Argonauts (1963) – D. Chaffey

Seeing this again through the eyes of a 7-year-old (Amon) refreshed it quite a bit.  Of course, it is the Ray Harryhausen stop-motion animation scenes that carry the film.  Jason and his crew battle the giant bronze statue Talos, the harpies that plague blind Phineas, the seven-headed hydra, and of course, the skeleton battalion that grow from the hydra’s teeth.  The craftsmanship is impressive (a lost art?). In between these set pieces, there is some passable acting that explicates the plot.  Jason (Todd Armstrong) is the rightful king of Thessaly but first must find the golden fleece at the end of the world before he can return to claim the throne from evil usurper Pelias.  The gods, particularly Hera (Honor Blackman) and Zeus (Niall MacGinnis) either help or hinder his quest.  Medea (Nancy Kovack), high priestess of Hecate, sells out her own kingdom to help Jason after falling in love with him. The Argonauts themselves are rather indistinguishable (save perhaps Hercules – Nigel Green) but character depth is not the point here.  When I asked Amon how many stars this adventure yarn deserved, he simply said “lots”!

Gattaca (1997)

☆ ☆ ☆

Gattaca (1997) – A. Niccol

Surely “designer babies” were not too far-fetched an idea in 1997, but Gattaca takes this premise further and proposes a world where the technology has been so widely adopted that to be imperfect means to be discriminated against.  Members of this underclass (whose parents did not engineer them) work as cleaners and such – unless they use the black market to buy an identity from one of the privileged who has fallen from grace.  DNA testing is everywhere, used for job interviews, prospective relationship partners, and, of course, for the detection of crime.  To buy an identity means an elaborate and ongoing con to avoid being caught.  Ethan Hawke, an “invalid” who desperately wants to be an astronaut, purchases Jude Law’s identity (which he gives up after succumbing to the pressure of expectations to be perfect) and begins to work for the Gattaca corporation, assigned to visit Titan, one of Saturn’s moons.  When one of the company directors is murdered, the subsequent investigation (led by Alan Arkin) threatens to expose Hawke.  Uma Thurman, also working at the company, begins to suspect things but also falls in love with Hawke, thinking him as perfect as he pretends to be…  In the hands of first-time director, Andrew Niccol, this potentially intriguing and dystopian premise is rather glossy and flaccid.  The surfaces are gleaming and futuristic, sure, but somehow we only see these surfaces and not enough depth. A remake might better reveal the complex psychological tensions underneath?

Sherlock Holmes Faces Death (1943)

☆ ☆ ☆

Sherlock Holmes Faces Death (1943)—R. W. Neill

Another solid outing for Basil Rathbone as Sherlock Holmes and Nigel Bruce as Dr. Watson.  This time, there is a murder at Musgrave Manor in Northumberland where the Musgrave family has turned their mansion into a home for convalescing servicemen (the film is set in modern day WWII England).  The mansion is spooky and filled with secret passages (in which bumbling Inspector Lestrade gets lost) and has an underground burial crypt which holds the secret to the mystery.  But it takes some time before this secret is found – the Musgrave family members are murdered one-by-one and a ritual poem read at their funerals provides clues (with allusions to the game of chess) that enable Holmes to discover just what is going on.  There are a few too many minor characters and the major red herring is rather too obviously innocent but it’s all good fun.  I have fond memories of watching these films on Boston’s Channel 38 on Saturday nights!

  

711 Ocean Drive (1950)

☆ ☆ ☆ ½

711 Ocean Drive (1950) – J. M. Newman

A take on the gangster film (wherein a naïve newcomer rises through the ranks to become the boss, losing his moral compass along the way) blended with elements from the “true crime” and police procedural genres.  Edmond O’Brien (with plenty of noir cred already) plays the lead role, starting as a telephone technician and then applying his knowledge of electronics to assist a “wire service” to help bookies keep up with race results.  When his boss is killed by a bookie under stress, O’Brien moves in, makes improvements, and starts raking in the cash while squeezing the bookies more.  Soon, the syndicate takes note of his West Coast operations and wants a piece of the action – O’Brien joins them but soon feels ripped off (and his burgeoning romance with the wife of one of the mobsters, Joanne Dru doesn’t make things easier for him).  By the end, both the police and the mob are after him and there is a final climax on location at the Hoover Dam.  All told, 711 Ocean Drive (the address of a Palm Springs hideaway for the gang) isn’t too original or striking but it’s a solid noir for when you want one.  O’Brien is always worth the price of admission.

Can You Ever Forgive Me? (2018)

☆ ☆ ☆ ½

Can You Ever Forgive Me? (2018) – M. Heller

Here we have a “small” film, of the kind that the big studios hardly make anymore, a character study of two lonely and rather miserable humans.  Melissa McCarthy plays Lee Israel, a writer of biographies down on her luck (partly because of her misanthropic attitudes), who pragmatically turns to forging historical memorabilia from famous authors (Dorothy Parker, Noel Coward) in order to pay her rent and her cat’s vet bills.  Richard E. Grant plays her only friend, Jack Hock, a gay man apparently living on the streets, living from drink to drink, score to score.  Both are sarcastic, cynical misfits (and perhaps pointedly, also sexual minorities) unwilling or unable to join in mainstream society. So, the film is also about loneliness, the kind of loneliness that you can only find in big cities, where the constant reminder of other people’s relationships is all around.  Not that either Israel or Hock would readily admit to needing others, but you can see it in their actions and in certain moments (that the script presents well).  Given that the film is based on a true story, of course, everyone finds out about the deceptions at hand – but this is all rather besides the point except that it seems to have lead to a redemption (of sorts?).   Apparently, some of the dialogue from Grant echoes Withnail and I (1987), his first feature, which I shall have to watch again.

Dune (1984)

☆ ☆ ☆

Dune (1984) – D. Lynch

I saw this on the big screen back when it was released – but I didn’t remember it at all.  Now that I’ve read Frank Herbert’s novel and well, because David Lynch, I thought I would watch it again.  And despite some surreal Lynchian passages (giant worms with giant mouths) and an overall dreamlike feel to the proceedings, the damn thing would surely be incomprehensible if you haven’t read the book.  Now, if you have read the book, you’ll find a strangely abridged rendering of the rather epic story, with a lot left out (and some tiny bits from other novels in the series seemingly added in).  Characters are barely introduced (occasionally by voiceover from Princess Irulan who also offers some similar overviews in the book) and hearing their whispered thoughts (also a feature of the book) is rather disorienting when we don’t really know them at all.  Kyle MacLachlan is Paul Maudib, the self-anointed (but true to prophecy) saviour of the planet Arrakis and its rebel group, the (blue-eyed) Fremen.  He is up against Baron Harkonnen (with nephew Sting) and Emperor Shaddam who are aligned with a big corporation that mines and profits from the spice melange (which is highly addictive).  The politics of Dune are rather lost in this version (truncated by the producers but unable to be satisfactorily reconstructed according to Lynch) as are the more-pertinent-than-ever environmental implications of a desert planet with no water.  The pre-CGI special effects are at times clunky and at other times just plain weird (a la Lynch).  You could watch the film and just marvel at its weirdness – there is probably enough to enjoy; but if you are looking for plot or substance, then look elsewhere (perhaps in Denis Villeneuve’s upcoming version that is currently in post-production). Also, for fans of the book, it does appear that Lynch has changed the ending.

  

Annihilation (2018)

☆ ☆ ☆ ½

Annihilation (2018) – A. Garland

Hahahahahahaha – what just happened?  Alex Garland’s follow up to Ex Machina (2014) is another sci-fi flick that echoes Tarkovsky’s Stalker (because there is a mysterious and dangerous zone called the “Shimmer” that the characters enter) but also hews close to certain horror genre conventions (characters are picked off one-by-one – we know this from the start).  Natalie Portman plays the biologist/geneticist whose military husband (Oscar Isaac) disappears on a secret mission (to the Shimmer, of course) – when he returns, damaged, she decides to join a subsequent party of women scientists (kudos to the writer-director) who are the next to venture to the lighthouse which is the epicentre of the Shimmer (and where a meteorite seems to have struck).  Jennifer Jason Leigh plays Dr Ventress, a psychologist who is the team leader, and Gina Rodriguez, Tuva Novotny, and Tessa Thompson round out the team.  As they trudge through the forest, I’m thinking Predator (1987) – however, things are far more psychedelic than that.  Plants and animals have all mutated – and our heroes may be mutating too.  Garland and his production team use CGI to good effect to make a bizarro (yes, lysergic) world that comes complete with some mumbo-jumbo scientific explanations.  Things do escalate to ultra-weird levels (and ultra-incomprehensible) but you can just lie back and let the images wash over you.  Perhaps there is something deeper here – a meditation on Thanatos or a puzzle about what or who is real and what or who is not – but figuring it out doesn’t really feel worth it to me.  A trippy but awkward mix of familiar genre moves and cracked philosophizing.