Change Your Image
whepler
Reviews
King Kong (2005)
A Surprising Disappointment
If anything, I entered "rooting" for Peter Jackson's dream project come true. Trusted friends praised it. But I left finding this Kong a clear case of an empowered director too close to his dream, throwing in everything but the kitchen sinkliterallyand taking almost everything to the extreme, as if to make the movie "even better". Kong is overlong and poorly scripted from the start, with excessive back stories in over 40 minutes of build-up, including a sudden, inexplicable romance between Watts and Brody. While the original Kong also false-started, it had the legitimate excuse of 1933 pacing that Jackson can't claim.
HIGH ON CREATIVITY, WEAK ON PACING & EDITING: Kong finally takes off with the creatively swirling, hazardous arrival in the waters of Skull Island that gives the viewer hope, until the grotesque and ultra-violent islanders appear and confront our heroes. As happens all too predictably in the film, a "knick-of-time" occurrence leads us to the star of the showand Kong is a well-done piece of computer imagery (and arguably the best actor, too). But the barrage of blitzkrieg edits & images that follow leave even the most attention-deprived viewers occasionally asking Jackson, "Can I just see this scene for a second?" To be sure, a rumble in the vines between cliffs is very creative and funbut like most everything else, goes too far for too long. And how many Spielberg-like, humorous "near misses" can credibly occur between dinosaurs, bugs, ape and the unbelievably resilient femme fatale? In fact, the movie with all its length, FX and edits is more like a few films: while Kong and Watts cozy up (this is beyond fantasy and simply not believable, including a laughable vaudeville routine to placate poor Kong), the male pursuers engage in a couple movies of their own, reminiscent of Ray Harryhausen's old Sinbad and Mysterious Island flicks, and begging thoughts of, "Interesting FX, but can we get back to Kong?"
WEAK ON WRITING TOO: The writing left the actors with little defense, often delivering lines directly to the camera as if stepping out of scene, particularly the slimy Carl Denham played by Jack Black, who for all his talent, can't carry this film as Jackson intended him to. Fact is, the original Carl Denham wasn't slimyhe was an opportunist with heart, and Jackson and his co-writers simply mis-wrote the part. Watts grew into her part by film's end, but no actress can teach Kong "beautiful" via a sunset, while supposedly fearing for her life, and engaging in the aforementioned vaudeville. Perhaps worst of all is her call to soothe the enraged Kong in the streets of New York when he's tossing aside every blonde to find her: there, in back-lit silhouette, stands Wattsseeking Kong out(!), much like Dirty Harry in Sudden Impact ("Go ahead, make my day"). It was honestly laughableand ill-timed laugher could occasionally be heard during Kong. Give Jackson credit, though: he was insane not to include the legendary train scene from the original (his extreme pacing couldn't have tolerated it anyway), but the planes and Kong put on a bravura finale before Black uttered the famous last linedirectly to the camera, of course.
I'm sorry to drag this film down. I was rooting for it. But it's hard to believe an honest, objective viewer could watch this Kong and continue the glowing reviews of others. An honest viewer would instead ask what Jackson might have done with his pet project had it come before Lord of the Rings, as intended.
Shall we dansu? (1996)
Pleasant But Overrated
This is a pleasant, but overrated, film. I'd wanted to see it for a few years. I got the character and acting performances I'd hoped for, but the writing, and to be more picky, use of sound, leave it a lesser film than it could be.
To be sure, this is a pleasant, mostly clean, and likable film. Its basic plot within the maleness of Japanese culture is a definite hook: the secure, middle-aged nice guy is drawn to a fetching face in a dance studio that his quiet person would never normally consider. He encounters that face, along with a few stereotypical, but fun, "losers." Meanwhile, equally likable Mom and daughter long to see him happier. The movie is photographed well, if paced a bit slowly.
But perhaps a comparison is in order. "Pretty Woman" isn't the likes of "Citizen Kane," but it does well what it's supposed to do: create a light-hearted reality in which we come to care about the characters. Some great acting--and good writing--drive that home. This is what "Shall We Dansu" should do. Instead, it creates some very serious concerns on the viewer's part, taking you away from the fun that should be the film's bottom line. For example, the wife character and the issue of infidelity are treated seriously enough to leave you talking to the screen: "What about this," and, "What about that?!" But the film clearly isn't such a message piece. Also, when certain meeting of the hearts take place, with potentially serious ramifications, there isn't adequate resolution. Finally, the fun that does exist is mostly "hit-and-run," with only momentary giggles that could be fun on a grander scale. Considering the characters and acting involved, that is a shame.
The use of sound is distracting. Though the music in a dance film can certainly be given liberties to roam, some choices here are just odd or undercut the humor and romance that could be achieved. In addition, some of the music and background sound are so low as to take the viewer right out of the atmosphere of a scene--think dance hall with live music at a level that's little more than the hum-drum of an office. Also think of humorous music and sound effects from romantic comedies you've loved--perhaps enhancing a facial expression or an embarrassing moment--and then think about them without those clever twists. That's what you have here.
In the end, this is a movie you want to love with characters and actors you can embrace--and you can, but only to a point. And that's what leaves it frustratingly short of its potential.
The First 100 Years: A Celebration of American Movies (1995)
Magical, Mature Perspective
Okay, so a previous commenter is correct: this isn't the movie for every detail about film history. But if you want the feel of eras gone by in an entertaining and first-class package, you just can't beat this. Workman's idea seems to have been to capture the essence of cinema, from its electrifying start that wow'd a quieter, slower age, to its post-Hays Code period--NOT our more contemporary times. Thus, you don't see every critical name--it's the story of a medium, not all of its movers and shakers, though you'll certainly see enough of those. Most of all, expect to have a sense for what it was like "then," whichever "then" is under discussion as you go. Cinema is, in a very real sense, time travel: there are few ways we can go back and be there--in the 20s or 30s, for example--but film was there and Workman's project is very credible in the way it transports you, as well. The only question remains how one can get a copy of this feature, since I haven't seen it after its mid-90s HBO debut. Any ideas?
Dilwale Dulhania Le Jayenge (1995)
Not What It's Cracked Up To Be
Yes, it's famous and popular. No, it's really not a well-produced movie by international or U.S. standards--and I'm no fan of Hollywood.
Where to start? "Dilwale's" acting is not strong, as fans claim (though how it's shot doesn't help, with silly zooms and slow-mo). The film uses practically no natural sound behind the actors, but insists on having music just about everywhere else, droning on, wearing on the viewer. As other critics have said, the editing--and consequently, the continuity--is awful, such as when the two lovers first see each other: where are they and how did they go from being totally unaware of each other to a sudden musical high at first glance? In slow-mo, of course.
Add to that almost laughable build-ups, as when we meet the lead actress in a strong wind (why?) standing at her window, veils swirling across her face (I watched for Mary Poppins' entrance). Next thing we know, she's doing a towel dance in a kind of silly tease, jumping on her bed, singing directly to us as viewers, and subsequently prancing clothed in the rain. The hero is idolized in her dream song, though she doesn't know he exists, through such heroic ventures as go-cart riding, bowling, and my personal favorite, virtually outrunning an airplane on take-off in a shot directly stolen from the famous Stallone boxing flicks. (We find out SHE can outrun a train.) He can also allegedly dunk a basketball as shown in the classic tight shot that doesn't show his feet. In slow-mo, of course.
Let's not even talk about the heroine's dad's make-up and hair dye, or the ludicrous slow-mo used for the climactic conflict--don't worry, no spoiler necessary. No viewing necessary, either. Take this as stereotypical Indian fare, fairly pretty, but well behind the times even then in 1995, let alone the 21st century. India makes better, and so do a lot of other people.