Reviews

Central do Brasil has everything. You come expecting a story of a woman who takes care of a child in a harsh social milieu. You sit in disbelief as this woman shows herself to be a heartless opportunist, and as your expectations are being confounded, you begin to realize how this villainess came to be such a person. The boy she begins to help is also no innocent movie cherub, he has an endearing slyness and a will to survive despite the horrible tragedy he has experienced.

Their road trip is an odyssey from bad to worse, and you begin to sympathize. The characters they meet and the landscape they traverse give us in the north a flavor of Brazil which I cannot confirm as being authentic. But they seem as complex and beautiful and full of contradiction as the Brazilian music that I love. And the final destination for the boy (you're on the edge of your seat hoping things will turn out right) is not a happily-ever-after, but seems to indicate a new direction for the character.

If I sound overly sentimental (I'm sure I do) it's because very few films have moved me like this one. I watched it through three times and cried at the scene of Dora on the bus every time. The use of religious imagery, from the modern evangelicalism of the truck driver to the more unfamiliar scenes with the pictures of the saints (incredible camerawork here) added dimensions of complexity in a medium where Christianity is often treated either in a saccharine fashion or with heavyhanded disdain. See Central Station.

I was fascinated by this self-contradictory, sometimes maddening film. I had only seen a snippet of it before, the brilliant song parody of a right-wing folksinger singing about welfare recipients who "complain and complain and complain and complain and complaaaaain!" I was impressed by the quality of this ditty and rented the movie.

Although billed as a comedy, I found this one to be a generally oil-and-water mixture of paranoid leftist diatribe and political comedy. Everytime a stereotypical "Republican" character elicited the response in my brain "nobody acts like THAT" I remembered, "oh yes, it's a comedy". Although I laughed less and my heart beat faster as the movie progressed...

I guess what disturbed me about this picture is it's off-kilter perspective. The viewer realizes that this slimy Machiavellian manipulator needs to be opposed. But the opposition seems to be almost equally unsympathetic. The screaming, cursing, holier-than-thou Saturday night live cast. The urbane liberal running against Bob who maintains that the CIA and National Security Council run the country. (Yeah, right...they can't even figure out that people can fly planes into buildings). The only rational perspective comes from the British documentary reporter, who views our political system with dry distaste. Was Tim Robbins making the statement that all Americans are crazy, including American filmmakers, and that only Europeans can be rational? If so, I strongly disagree (see Exhibits WWI and II)

The other disappointment for me was the downward spiral of song quality as the movie progresses. "Drugs stink"? Songs like this wouldn't bring even the zombified audiences the movie postulates into a frenzy.

Despite its flaws, however, I found Bob Roberts well worth watching for its star performances (Tim was great), its innovative camera work, and its emotional impact. I'd give it an 8.

I am a big fan of this film and may not be able to make a coherent case for it, especially after reading some of the lukewarm comments some of the viewers offer. I agree that some of the themes could have been developed better, and think that the ending smacks of a "Planet of the Apes" solution to a mystery, yet this film is superb for its relentless atmosphere of otherworldly possibility.

Perhaps I associate this film with the strangeness of the 1970's, when Pyramid Power, UFO cults, and interest in occult phenomena occupied much of popular culture. Weir plays on the apocalyptic feelings of many in that decade with his shots of mud falling from the skies and other phenomena. One of my all time favorite scenes is when Charlie the shaman visits the urbane upper-middle class household of Richard Chamberlain et al. and asks to see the family photo album. I still get chills up my spine thinking of that one.

An element that I enjoyed is the counter-intuitive idea that "there are no tribal aborigines" living in Australian cities...they are all assimilated into the European worldview. This opinion, asserted by the most prominent aborigine in the movie, is subverted bit by bit until the very structure of European logic (as represented by the lawyer Chamberlain) is completely undermined by the end of the movie. Another amazing touch is the juxtaposition of the aboriginal sacred cave complex and what the Europeans are using it for, and Chamberlains descent into all that darkness.

Don't try viewing this one on a commercial channel, it will make very little sense broken up in pieces. Rent it, suspend disbelief a little, and enjoy.

I had heard "Pandora's Box" called a German Expressionist film, the class to which such great and outlandish films as Wiene's "The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari", and Lang's "Metropolis" and the sadly dated but very interesting "Nosferatu" by Walter Murnau, I expected it to have the same elements-- extremely stylized acting and direction, bizarre artificial sets, and a general atmosphere of utter surreality. So I was very surprised at and fascinated with the naturalism of G. W. Pabst's "Pandora's Box", particularly with Louise Brook's celebrated performance as the cheerful, childlike, tragic femme fatale Lulu. Pabst's direction is essentially modern, even without the use of sound. While sometimes the direction and acting in even "Caligari" and "Metropolis" provoke laughter from the bemused audience,"Pandora's Box" holds the viewer spellbound, and its not infrequent humor is intentional. Like other German Expressionist silent films, "Pandora's Box" has a dark message. From the beginning, however, it is far less stylized, and the settings look like they might actually have existed in the 1920's, instead of only in someone's dream world. Nevertheless the film makes excellent use of Expressionistic lighting and chiaroscuro, which highlights the visions of fruitless and immoral frivolity, desperate gambling and unhealthy sexuality.

Altogether, this film is beautiful and absorbing, and even if nothing else, it should not be missed for Louise Brooks' superb performance.

Most remakes of great movies stink because they try to clone the original and then make it more hip. Philip Kaufman's "Invasion of the Body Snatchers", however, has a completely different take on the story first filmed by Donald Siegel. Though Siegel's masterpiece of science fiction is more taut and engrossing than its remake, Kaufman's adaptation is a good, very scary film in its own right. Siegel's version is an analogy to Nazism, Communism and general forces of de-humanization. Rather surprisingly, it is more swiftly-paced than its remake. The 1956 classic's terrifying power came from the images of normal-looking people in a nice town doing strange and insidious things. The camera is beautifully handled; the director presents these images without a lot of show, so that they can take their grip on the viewer. Kaufman's 1978 version is slower, more ponderous. The camera is constantly on the move-- zooming, jumpily cutting, hiding behind banisters, tilting, and going so far as to fly into a character's mouth. Kaufman's film is shot like a chiller, taking tremendous care to throw the audience into confusion. In a way, this lessens the overall effect by drawing attention away from the material. However, the material itself is enough to make you want to burn all your houseplants. It starts out terrifically in a very slow build-up, very different from, but quite as good as the 1956 version's plunge into the unknown. Unfortunately, when the action really gets under way, the film starts to drag. It's buffered with some rather unnecessary gore. Too many things happen before that neat, chilling ending. Still, the story translates wonderfully to themes more appropriate to 1978; rather than representing the brainwashing power of society, the pod people are treated like members of a huge and growing cult, an ordered revolt against the order of the human race. By not trying to outdo the near-perfection of Don Siegel's film but approaching the material differently, Kaufman has turned out a unique horror movie that will probably keep you up a good part of the night.

"Violent Saturday" was not an outstanding movie, nor very original, but that is not to say that it had no merit. Richard Fleischer's direction goes much farther than skin-deep. From one angle, "Violent Saturday" is about a hold-up and the normal guy (Victor Mature) who tries to stop the criminals. That's fine, and there are some very exciting moments toward the end of the film. But another angle is more interesting: it's a study of what normal small-town-folks do in secret. Indeed, in comparison to the unscrupulous dealings of a voyeuristic bank manager, a larcenous librarian, and a trampy wife and her alcoholic husband, the sadistic bad guys (including a memorable Lee Marvin) seem less sinister. In its studies of the dynamics between husband and wife, parent and child, and its Everyman hero and hard-bitten villains, "Violent Saturday" is half a tribute to noir tradition, half a fifties family-drama. The mixture is sometimes uneasy. Particularly annoying are the conversations between doofy dad Mature and his cute little son who wishes his dad was more of a hero. But the drama between the weirder citizens of the little town is intriguing. A masterful use of the camera and Hugo Friedhofer's strident score are other assets. All in all, "Violent Saturday" is worth a look.

Few color films have the sumptuous flavor of Jean Cocteau's black-and-white "Beauty and the Beast." From the masterful use of contrast to the dated yet still-eerie special effects, "Beauty and the Beast" is more than sophisticated entertainment; it is cinematically compelling as well.

In the opening title, Cocteau asks us to be like children so that we can fully enjoy this fairy tale. True, there are some elements that belong solely to a children's story; the characters are as one-sided (and as allegorical) as any fairy-tale Poor Beautiful Maiden, Squabbling Sister or Kind Bumbling Father. Yet by no means does any viewer require a child's ingenuousness to appreciate Cocteau's masterpiece. It is interesting to compare this with Disney's animation, which so clearly derived from this film-- though of course Disney's film is delightful, and has a wonderful score. A proto-Gaston (of the animation) is visible in Cocteau's Avenant.

Despite a few flaws, Billy Wilder's condemnation of Hollywood's egotism is one of the best. "Sunset Boulevard" is grim, often depressing, and truly unforgettable. Its portrayals of a narcissistic woman's hunger for now-vanished fame, and the tough-guy writer who is engulfed by her destructive ambitions, overcomes some slight script flaws that result from over-striving for the noir tone. Sometimes the emphasis on the characters' utter doom is hard to take; more often, it is extremely effective.

William Holden is perfect in the role of Joe Gillis, a down-on-his-luck scriptwriter; many actors could not convey his mixture of repulsion and fascination with the ex-movie star. Gloria Swanson is occasionally too melodramatic, but her grotesqueness distinguishes her character from the classic femme fatale of most films noir. Altogether a great film-- the camerawork alone is worth watching.

Fritz Lang's "Woman in the Window" could hardly be called less than fascinating. With a classic, simple device-- a death which the main characters try to cover up-- the film rapidly unfolds into an improbable but still very scary nightmare. There are many moments of pure tension, while all along the irony of the main character's plight pursues us. The story is stylishly-- in fact, beautifully filmed, exemplary in terms of noir's tense, claustrophobic technique. Edward G. Robinson and Joan Bennett have good rapport; Dan Duryea is perfectly nasty as a cold-blooded blackmailer. All in all, an extremely worthwhile film. But it's probably best to turn it off before that awful let-down of an ending.

Everything about this movie is astonishing. First, that a director could make what is essentially one long car chase into an terrifying film; second, that this was the director's first time out. The movie is phenomenally structured; we, along with Dennis Weaver's character, go from riding along peacefully to exhausted terror. The Hitchcockian long sequences with no dialogue are broken by occasional visits to ominous restaurants, and stream-of-consciousness monologues which are somehow not corny. Aside from being a great flick, "Duel" is fascinating cinematically. The sharp, often angular camerawork perfect the rhythm of the film, also emphasizing the various themes Spielberg chose to use. Steep angles along the top of the truck make it look like a charging bull; low angles showing the mechanical workings of the truck complete the image of a mechanical behemoth. Meanwhile, Dennis Weaver's little red car seems more and more like a fleeing mouse in front of the dirty-gray monster. Since this is such a cinematic film, there are few chances for real virtuoso acting, yet Dennis Weaver as the terrified commuter comes off memorably. And though the score is a thinly veiled rip-off of Bernard Herrman's "Psycho" music, it does add to the atmosphere, to Billy Goldenberg's credit. It's true, some people may find this film boring, but every cinema enthusiast or Spielberg fan or anyone able to sit down and enjoy a good chase-- you must WATCH IT!

Nicholas Ray is mostly known for his work, "Rebel WIthout a Cause", but his first work, a dazzling, moving (if sentimental) film noir, is far better. Unjustly out-of-print, "They Live By Night" may have its minor flaws, but the stark, beautiful camerawork, stolid dialogue and (perhaps above all) exquisite performances make up for it. It has none of the often phony emotions and annoying characters that are found in "Rebel Without a Cause."

Bowie, the innocent, sympathetic outlaw hero of "They Live By Night" is a wonderfully drawn. By no means is he the cliched nice-guy-in-a-bad-situation; though essentially good-hearted, he can be frighteningly callous at times. Farley Granger, working with excellent direction, he gives us glimpses of a violent yet passionate nature, struggling against the condemnation of society. Cathy O'Donnell is also entrancingly tender, yet we can vaguely see that her character is trapped in a hopeless relationship with Bowie. She is also sadly obscure, which plainly has nothing to do with her talent.

The one significant fault of this film is over-restraint. At times, Ray's understated direction can be extremely effective, such as when he is dealing with violence. But at other times the characters' (and especially Keechie's) emotions are so tightly controlled that some of the impact on the audience is lost. Still, despite a few faults, "They Live By Night" is a wonderful film, and if ever you can find it, sell your hair but GET IT!!!

"Diabolique" is a wonderful film in terms of tight suspense, atmospheric camerawork (at times sweeping and ominous, at times clipped and jarring) and a shocking, twisted climax. It is admirable in many other respects; interesting though bizarre characterizations, a double-edged performance by Simone Signoret as Mademoiselle Horner, and many deliciously shot scenes. But though this is a great suspense film, I very much object to director Clouzot being hailed as "the French Alfred Hitchcock", and I imagine that Clouzot would be indignant as well. Though both brilliant, both of these artists have styles, techniques and even basic plots that are extremely distinct from one another. Hitchcock almost never introduced a "surprise ending" to his films, and his techniques of suspense require the audience to know everything the protagonists don't know. This, as anyone who watches "Diabolique" will soon see, is NOT the case with Clouzot. The French director relies on the viewer's uncertainty to stimulate his or her fears. Still, "Diabolique" is a terrific film, though no rival to Hitchcock's very best, and Clouzot clearly displays his virtuosity as a cinematic artist.

"Call Northside 777" looked good in the movie store. But ultimately, this film was a disappointment. It has some good assets-- a nice cast is one of them. James Stewart proves that he can deliver dumb lines with as much charming style as he does the good ones. But as a character he is hardly better than cliched, despite obvious attempts on the part of the moviemakers to humanize him (note the corny love scenes between him and wife Helen Walker). Richard Conte, as the jailed Frank Wiecek, also struggles bravely against the hackneyed part of nice, innocent family man. But the script gropes clumsily for atmosphere, suspense and style, without really attaining much of either. And as the story is based on a real event, some key facts of the murder are never revealed, since they never were in real life. With a cast like this, and maybe with a few more good ideas, "Call Northside 777" could've been quite memorable. But as it is, the film is hardly more than a failed noir flick.

Ghost stories, when truly good, are ideal for heightening a character's emotions of fear and possible insanity, but few reach the heights to which "The Innocents" takes Deborah Kerr's character, Miss Gibbons. Yet director Jack Clayton does so in such an elegant, cinematic fashion (no gimmicky shockers here!), making it one of the best ghost movies of all time. Remarkably, Clayton transforms a literary masterpiece into a brilliant (as well as terrifying) film.

Right from the credits, "The Innocents" snares you into Miss Gibbons' world of possible madness and subtle, growing terror. "The Innocents" is filmed in an absolutely unique way, with sweeping camera moves and tight close-ups, that brings us closer and closer to the nature of corruption and evil. And all through two seemingly innocent and happy children, played to ominous perfection by young Stephens and Franklin.

Deborah Kerr also gives a fascinating performance. Like the other aspects of the film, she adopts an old-fashioned style of acting that starts out foreign and distant and eventually becomes terrifying.

There is little more that one can say about "The Innocents" without stating the obvious. I will say merely that this film is one of the best, scariest ghost stories ever, on a par with such modern classics as "The Sixth Sense".

"The Skin Game" is not exactly classic Hitchcock-- no one could dispute that. But I still think it does not entirely deserve its bad ratings. There are a few--not too many, but a few-- interesting scenes and surprises. The characters are fairly sympathetic and well-drawn.

I think the fault of "The Skin Game" lies not in the fact that it is a stage-bound play-- Hitchcock worked wonders on screen with stage-bound plays, notably "Rope" and "Dial M for Murder". Perhaps it is that the emotions of the characters are not focused upon-- the camera keeps rather too distant. If the tone were more personal in this film, the performers might have a better chance to hold our interest.

If you are looking for entertainment and stimulation that one can normally find in a Hitchcock-- better to look somewhere else.

One must be realistic-- the plot of "The Stepford Wives" is not all that brilliant, or even unique. It deals with the same themes as much better movies have featured. Yet there is something appealing about this film.

I think that much credit should go to director Forbes for making such a strange concept so enjoyable. He deals with the material with just the right touch-- he does not take it too seriously, which is perfect for the tone of the film. He does not attempt to give you any great scares, but he lets the creepy clues haunt you until you figure out what's going on. And there are some memorable moments: i. e., a scene in which one of the housewives acts very oddly at a friendly picnic. The performances, too, are worth note. Katharine Ross, despite her character's somewhat obnoxious behavior on various occasions, is quite appealing by the end. And both the direction and acting on the part of the blandly happy, slavish housewives is quite effective. The film's only real shortcoming, that detracts from its status as an well-made chiller is the unimaginative conclusion. It left me, at least, rather unsatisfied. But still, "The Stepford Wives" is a nicely wrapped little package, if the package only contains fluffy material.