In Which We Serve (1942)

☆ ☆ ☆ ½

In Which We Serve (1942) – N. Coward & D. Lean

Entertaining WWII propaganda piece that shows the Brits keeping a stiff upper lip as they fight the Germans at sea.  Noel Coward wrote and co-directed (with first time director David Lean) this gritty look at the crew of the destroyer H. M. S. Torrin as they ship out, fight numerous battles, and eventually get sunk.  The title correctly tells viewers that the film is really about the ship (her birth, life, and death) and the sailors who serve in her do give a large number of speeches about her worthiness.  Much of the story is told in flashback, as the first scenes we see are the bombing of the ship and the “abandon ship” decree from Captain D. (played by Coward himself).  The cast cling to a lifeboat as the camera shows their faces in turn and cuts to their lives just before shipping out, showing the people whom they love (and for whom they are fighting the war).  The action sequences feature real wartime footage and ships, along with studio work.  John Mills plays a key role, as does Bernard Miles, and there is a good bit part for Richard Attenborough.  Celia Johnson is strong support as Coward’s wife.  With ANZAC Day tomorrow, it seems important to remember the sacrifices that some made and to hope that they won’t be needed again.

The Andromeda Strain (1971)

☆ ☆ ½

The Andromeda Strain (1971) – R. Wise

Perhaps in 1971, soon after the Moon landing, this was astounding.  Just thinking about possible viruses brought back from outer space must have been scary (and author Michael Crichton capitalised on that fear with his book).  But now in 2018, the film just seemed long and drawn out and dull.  Director Robert Wise spends a lot of time on the procedures that need to be undertaken to identify, understand, and counteract the virus – the science of it all – which is normally a good thing but it isn’t gripping cinema here.  (A few rats and monkeys die to help humans, but apparently this was carefully staged – remember this was the age of analog). Still, the film did win awards for its set design and it is very futuristic, if you can buy the green-text computer screens.  The cast of unknowns probably doesn’t help matters although at least they aren’t all men, as was the case in the book, apparently.  Of course, it isn’t outside the realm of possibility that we will all be killed by a new and deadly virus and perhaps a president (this president?) would consider nuking an American town to eradicate it.  But let’s hope our science has improved in the past 50 years to offer a better solution.

Cold in July (2014)

☆ ☆ ☆

Cold in July (2014) – J. Mickle

I saw this on a list of recent “neo-noirs” and checked it out, despite the DVD box looking (and advertising) like a 90s Tarantino rip-off.  So, I went in cold, as it were, barely knowing who Michael C. Hall is (wondering half the time whether he had once been in The Breakfast Club).  He plays a not particularly bright picture framer who kills a prowler in self-defence and then has to deal with the prowler’s just-out-of-jail father (played menacingly by Sam Shepard).  A good deal of tension is created just out of this situation, as Shepard stalks Hall and his family.  But soon the police move in and the threat is removed…until Hall realises that all is not as it seems.  Soon, he’s partnering with Shepard and private eye/pig farmer Don Johnson to take the law into their own hands.  Things get very dark, so much so that I would say that the film crosses the line into tawdry (sordid and unpleasant) and risks invoking some bad shit without enough heft to the plot to justify it.  That is, the subsequent pay-off to the film and the exploration of the characters just seems to go flat at the end with no attempt to investigate their psychology or a more literary theme about fathers and sons that falls away just out of reach.  It isn’t a complete write-off: the tension remains high throughout and the inevitable ultra-violence is well-staged (for that sort of thing) plus the film takes place in the ‘80s with period detail to match (I gave a little shudder).  But my recommendation is to give this a miss.   

  

The Lost City of Z (2016)

☆ ☆ ☆

The Lost City of Z (2016) – J. Gray

Although the material seems perfect for a film – an explorer travels the uncharted border between Brazil and Bolivia along the Amazon River in the early 20^th century – somehow the execution lets things down.  Perhaps it is the “Masterpiece Theatre” treatment that keeps things stately and stodgy?  A quick comparison with Herzog’s Aguirre, the Wrath of God (1972) which admittedly placed its Amazonia voyage a few centuries earlier, shows how dynamic and real-seeming this sort of film could be (cue Klaus Kinski and spider monkeys).  Instead, director James Gray somehow reduces the tension within the film, despite the physical challenges faced by the explorer, Percy Fawcett (played by Charlie Hunnam), and the moral/political conflict between him and the establishment.  Of course, some of the problem could be due to the rather earnest style of acting by Hunnam and others which comes across as stylized or phony – only Robert Pattison, playing Fawcett’s aide-de-camp, seems natural and charismatic.  Yet, the story of Fawcett, who ended up disappearing in 1925, is interesting enough that I looked him up on Wikipedia later.  And the cinematography by Darius Khondji does offer some beautiful shots in beautiful locations.  But the film is over-long, misuses Siena Miller (as Fawcett’s suffragette wife), and squanders whatever chances it had for something really special.  Too bad.  

  

The 13th Letter (1951)

☆ ☆ ☆

The 13^th Letter (1951) – O. Preminger

Otto Preminger’s remake of Henri-George Clouzot’s Le Corbeau (1943) loses a lot of the bite and bitterness (and the abortion references) but still retains enough of its mystery to be interesting.  A new young and handsome doctor (Michael Rennie) in a small town in Quebec begins to receive anonymous “poison pen” letters accusing him of having an affair with a senior doctor’s young wife.  The wife (Constance Smith) and the senior doctor (Charles Boyer, almost unrecognisable) also receive letters, as does most of the hospital staff and other people in the town.  Some are ready to believe the doctor is guilty but soon suspicion falls on the wife’s sister (Judith Evelyn), a nurse at the hospital.  When a war hero patient commits suicide after receiving a letter, the nurse is arrested because she had had a recent conflict with the patient, as well as with her sister and the young doctor.  But soon the letters continue…  even as the young doctor falls for another patient (Linda Darnell).  Filmed on location in Quebec, the film looks moody and provincial, with a bit of French spoken for good measure.  Rennie is solid as the aloof young doctor who has secrets of his own.  Still, I can’t help recalling that Le Corbeau struck me harder – I’ll have to rewatch it.

  

The Neon Demon (2016)

☆ ½

The Neon Demon (2016) – N. W. Refn

Pretentious, ponderous, puerile (OK, I stole that from Glenn Kenny in the NY Times), and pointlessly provocative.  Nicolas Winding Refn turns out to be just another poseur trying to affect some cool by needlessly using sex and violence in a film that could have been made by someone on drugs, but probably was intended for viewers on some heavy drugs, presumably the kind that interrupt cognitions of any sort.  Because, yes, there is no real plot here.  Or let’s put it this way – the movie starts off with the beginnings of a story, with poor Elle Fanning arriving in LA to become a model, wide-eyed, impossibly young (16 in reality), and ready for exploitation.  She meets people, goes to parties, gets yelled at by brutish Keanu Reeves, joins an agency, makes enemies and then things fall apart, get weird and weirder and pretty well offensive until the end.  To try to pass the time, I imagined that Refn was trying to do a Dario Argento film – after all, the ostentatious coloured lighting, occasional jolts of gory violence, and somnambulistic acting are similar and the plot does fall by the wayside in favour of psychedelic staged setpieces in both.  Except Refn doesn’t have the imagination of Argento (who lost his way after a handful of pictures when incoherence began to dominate artistic value – Refn may be already there).  Perhaps more upsetting is the way that The Neon Demon seems to reference Kenneth Anger (Lucifer Rising, in particular) with its odd triangle totem and hypnotic electronic score.  If any of this sounds interesting, please don’t be fooled – the film is mind-numbingly boring and senseless as well as insulting on both the intellectual and moral level.  Not worth your time.      

Shin Godzilla (2016)

☆ ☆ ☆

Shin Godzilla (2016) – H. Anno/S. Higuchi

Ayako watched this with me and I am certain she got a lot more out of it.  To me, it was your typical disaster film, although amped up for the 21^st century.  Godzilla comes out of the water and then progresses to destroy parts of Tokyo while the armed forces of the world and numerous scientists try to stop him.  However, to her, it was very nearly a satire on the bureaucracy of the Japanese government (and relationship with the USA) with a lot of jokes that sailed over my head (or were lost in translation) and a clever use of particular character actors to tweak the audience.  I could see there was some comedy and the editing and music were used to good effect to keep things moving; nevertheless, at 2 hours, the film started to feel long.  Godzilla himself was digitized but they used motion capture to keep him looking like a man in a rubber suit.  When he gets fully going with lasers coming out of him everywhere, it was pretty impressive (especially when seen in context in the middle of Tokyo).  However, unless you are Japanese, I’m not sure I would recommend…