The Great Communicator cried out for a biopic all his own. Until recently, we’ve had a Showtime miniseries eager to deflate President Rona...

The Great Communicator cried out for a biopic all his own.

Until recently, we’ve had a Showtime miniseries eager to deflate President Ronald Reagan and projects capturing glib takes on the 40th president.

Dennis Quaid changed all that.

The veteran actor brings The Gipper’s story to vibrant life in “Reagan.” It’s unabashedly pro-Gipper, but then again so is history. For those who didn’t live through President Reagan’s historic two terms, much of this will play out as a fantasy, from his bipartisan pluck to that plainspoken mien.

That’s a sad undertone in an otherwise impressive feature.

YouTube Video

“Reagan” is really Viktor Petrovich’s story. Jon Voight plays an aged KGB agent recalling Reagan’s life from the Soviet Union’s perspective. Viktor calls him the “Crusader,” a man with a mission to crush Communism.

The film takes its cues from that filter. It’s the driving force behind Reagan’s political life. Komrade Kamala won’t be amused.

We see Reagan as a boy, and later a lifeguard, all the while the screenplay ladles out elements of his future self. He loathed drinking because his Dad loved the bottle too much. His faith came organically, and we see those spiritual highlights, too.

A sequence where a young Reagan embraces his black teammates is a fact-based rebuke to the racism charges that haunt Reagan and, for that matter, every GOP figure in the press.

It’s engaging but facile, like a CliffsNotes retelling of his formative years. Time constraints matter, of course, but perhaps a tighter focus on his White House days with efficient flashbacks would work better.

It’s still invigorating to see a modestly budgeted film re-create the ’50s and ’60s with such finesse. Our leads, from Quaid’s Reagan to future spouse Nancy (Penelope Ann Miller) also age before our eyes in impressive fashion.

Makeup? CGI? A smattering of both? It doesn’t distract us from what matters: Reagan’s rendezvous with destiny.

The extended prologue gives us the measure of this man. He’s proud, unassuming and driven. Always driven. Miller’s Nancy is his rock, and her emotional outbursts play out like Obama’s Anger Translator from “Key & Peele.”

Except hers is born from love, not Beltway politics. The Quaid/Miller bond proves sweet and satisfying.

 

 
 
 
 
 
View this post on Instagram
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 

A post shared by REAGAN Movie (@reaganmovie)

Director Sean McNamara cut his teeth on humble projects like “Soul Surfer” and “The Miracle Season.” “Reagan” demands a broader canvas. The director, aided by cinematographer Christian Sebaldt, capture Reagan’s journey with compositions that sizzle.

Love or loathe President Reagan, he remains a consequential figure.

The story takes few detours to show Reagan’s detractors. An exception? A video montage of actual anti-Reagan protests, attacks on his AIDS record and more. The scenes covering the Iran-Contra scandal are meatier, showing Reagan’s missteps and political acumen.

Some exchanges may seem simplistic for a 21st century production, but they convey Reagan’s way of deconstructing complex matters to make them digestible. A certain former (and future?) president shares a similar knack, albeit without Reagan’s aw-shucks appeal.

It’s still impossible not to see the parallels.

The story’s political battles fascinate, especially Reagan’s protracted talks with Mikhail Gorbachev (Olek Krupa). It’s a chess match, with Reagan ready to use charm and guile to get the job done.

Quaid looks enough like the real Reagan to pass the all-important test, and his gravelly voice is similar to the real deal. His crowning achievement? He channels the president’s inner life, an Everyman thrust onto the world stage.

The team behind “Reagan” chose its lead wisely.

Modern biopics are either hagiographies (any given pop music yarn or Democrat icon) or hit pieces (any movie made by “Vice” director Adam McKay). “Reagan” falls in the former camp, full stop.

It’s also a powerful time capsule recalling when leaders led, didn’t hide from microphones and took their lumps when needed.

In that way, “Reagan” feels more like fiction than history.

HiT or Miss: “Reagan” rushes through the GOP icon’s formative years, but when he’s installed in the White House this sprawling biopic finds its purpose.

The post ‘Reagan’ – A Cinematic Tribute Long Overdue appeared first on Hollywood in Toto.



from Movies - Hollywood in Toto https://ift.tt/9vSdLqk

Baseball is more than a game, and the best sports movies lean into that hard truth. “Eight Men Out.” “Bang the Drum Slowly.” “Field of Drea...

Baseball is more than a game, and the best sports movies lean into that hard truth.

“Eight Men Out.” “Bang the Drum Slowly.” “Field of Dreams.” They all had more to say than who struck out with the bases loaded.

“You Gotta Believe” reminds us what matters beyond balls and strikes. The fact-based drama tugs at the heartstrings, mostly due to the collective on-screen talent.

The big-hearted film struggles to find a rhythm. It’s “Bad News Bears”-lite one minute, a sobering look at living every moment the next.

YouTube Video

Luke Wilson stars as Bobby, a Little League coach who lives and breathes baseball. His sons do, too, even if young Bobby (Michael Cash) can’t hit a lick. Nor can most of his teammates.

Their Fort Worth, Texas squad gets a second chance when a businessman (“The Sandlot” alum Patrick Renna, a nice touch) gives the team a lifeline of sorts.

They can compete in the Little League World Series, even though they’ll probably get trounced.

Coach Bobby experiences a medical episode before the team can even get in playoff shape. A few short scenes later we learn he has terminal cancer. He hands the team off to fellow coach and best pal Jon (Greg Kinnear) who dedicates their Little League run to him.

Can this ragtag bunch honor their dying coach and prove their doubters wrong? Well, it’s based on a remarkable true story, so do some of the math.

YouTube Video

“You Gotta Believe” understands baseball is a tough sell to Gen Z. The game’s glacial pace is no match for TikTok attention spans, and some scenes take liberties to make the sport more appealing.

Bad move. It clashes with the rest of the film, and it does the game’s small pleasures few favors. There’s pageantry to baseball – the knee-buckling curveballs and diving plays that make the sport memorable.

Take it or leave it. 

Director Ty Roberts uses fast edits and silly graphics to pump up select sequences.

But not all of them.

Kinnear’s coach can’t relax, but when his friend is diagnosed with a terminal illness he reasseses his lifestyle. That’s good, as is Kinnear whenever he’s in front of the camera. 

The youthful cast is a collective asset, seeming both age-appropriate in their reactions and refreshingly feisty.

The respective spouses (Sarah Gadon, Molly Parker) do some of the heavy lifting, including a complicated scene that starts with an act of compassion but ends badly.

Superior baseball films, including the original “Bad News Bears,” hover over “You Gotta Believe’s” sports sequences. And a few moments ring false, from the curious reactions to the coach’s illness to a collective shrug over on-field violence.

Those narrative hiccups fade when Wilson is front and center. His performance is earnest and true, a father trying to squeeze as many life lessons in as possible. The film doesn’t lean into his frail state, but Wilson makes it clear his character is fighting for every last breath.

Parents often teach by doing. That’s the most poignant part of “You Gotta Believe,” watching a dad realize he can’t squander a second with his children.

HiT or Miss: “You Gotta Believe” has its heart in the right place, and the film’s talented leads help paper over some unfortunate flaws.

The post ‘You Gotta Believe’ May Carpet Bomb Your Tear Ducts appeared first on Hollywood in Toto.



from Movies - Hollywood in Toto https://ift.tt/FL4RwSO

John Glen’s “License to Kill” (1989) is an easy candidate for the most underrated James Bond thriller. It’s also among the most unusual. T...

John Glen’s “License to Kill” (1989) is an easy candidate for the most underrated James Bond thriller.

It’s also among the most unusual.

The film’s brutal, risk-taking story made it the first 007 thriller to merit a PG-13 rating.

YouTube Video

This was the second and last film to star Timothy Dalton as Bond. and it’s his best performance and installment.

Glen’s film begins with a pre-title sequence that, rather than work as a stand-alone mini-Bond, actually sets up a lot of the plot.  Felix Leiter (David Hedison), Bond’s best friend and fellow agent, is getting married and interrupts his wedding to corral Sanchez (Robert Davi), a Latin American drug kingpin.

This prelude ends with a cheeky joke (both Leiter and Bond make it to the wedding on time) and showcases an amazing opening stunt. Yet the smiles and Gladys Knight’s elegant title song don’t entirely put us at ease.

YouTube Video

Sanchez’s brutal intro has his cheating mistress being whipped and her lover getting murdered off camera. That, plus Davi’s suave, threatening presence, announce there has never been a 007 movie like this.

The savagery is out in the open from the very start and was a major surprise at the time. Bond movies were never this tough, at least until Daniel Craig showed up decades later.

After the wedding, there’s a deft touch – Leiter’s adorable bride forces Bond to catch her bouquet. The beautifully handled, melancholy bit references that Bond was “married once.” That this film would confidently dip back as far back as “On Her Majesty’s Secret Service” (1969) to add that sad character detail is why these movies matter

The best in this series, which “License to Kill” certainly is, understands who this character is and how time and a violent life have taken a toll on the martini-loving agent.

After discovering that Sanchez has not only abducted but brutally tortured Leiter and his bride, Bond breaks protocol, loses emotional control and seeks revenge. With his license to kill revoked by the British Secret Service, he goes after Sanchez alone.

Sanchez is a cruel, casual sadist, not the colorful megalomaniacs we’re accustomed to Bond facing. Davi, who could be loose and funny in other films, makes Sanchez shark-like and disturbing.

Dalton and Davi are tremendous in this.

The pocket lighter that starts as a wedding gift becomes a crucial totem symbolizing the urgency of Bond’s mission. It’s also the humanity and self-discipline he’s sacrificing in carrying it out. Someone tells Bond, “You know we got laws in this country, too.” Yet, Bond isn’t going after Sanchez in his country as a righteous warrior, but a vigilante.

It’s interesting the way Sanchez and Bond wind up mirroring one another during the film (there’s even a large stretch where Bond pretends to be his ally).

YouTube Video

Benicio del Toro, in a very early role, is effective as Sanchez’s loathsome brother. There’s a bar fight right of “Road House” (also 1989), in which Bond gets into a tussle with character actor extraordinaire Branscombe Richmond.  Also, the terrific Cary Takagawa makes a strong impression in the second act.

Desmond Llewelyn’s Q enters the film later than expected and gives a sharp, welcome performance. Seeing Q active on the field is fun.

Carey Lowell is very good as CIA agent Pam Bouvier. She’s not playing Bond’s sidekick or sex kitten but someone who more than holds her own.

“License to Kill” is among the most disciplined of 007 thrillers, as it doesn’t pile on too many villains or subplots. While the focus is primarily Columbian drug lords, there is a subplot involving a corrupt televangelist, played by Wayne Newton.

To his credit, Newton does here what he did in “The Adventures of Ford Fairlane” (1990) – his villain is initially amusing but also reveals himself to be a vile corruptor of trust. Newton plays the role as a creep and stops short of camp.

In one of the most striking scenes, M (played here for the last time in the series by Robert Brown) confronts Bond in the Hemingway House. He correctly accuses Bond of having “a private vendetta.”

Bond lashes out and runs off.

After decades of dry scenes with the likes of Sean Connery and Roger Moore playing Bond and making puns in M’s presence, seeing Dalton’s no-nonsense take on the character as he ditches his superior is a jaw dropper.

YouTube Video

There are little comic touches, such as the recurring visual of Sanchez’s diamond-necklace wearing pet chameleon, but they don’t take the edge away. The vicious carnage and tone of “License to Kill” was a lot in ’89, but it feels in line with the Daniel Craig era.

It also gels with the opening act of 2002’s “Die Another Day,” before the goofy, final Pierce Brosnan entry ditched the rough edges and began its second act in a literal ice castle.

Michael Kamen’s excellent score has the same emotional cues of his “Lethal Weapon” scores (it fits not having a lush John Barry orchestration this time out).

When it was released during the summer of 1989, its weak box office was blamed on the competition. Both the red-hot “Batman” and “Lethal Weapon 2” dominated theaters that summer. Yet, the mixed reviews and audience response (I can recall many confessing they found it “too serious,” “too dark” and “too violent” at the time) was also a factor in its quick exit from the multiplexes.

“License to Kill” presented the end of an era for these movies, and not just in the addition of real-world dangers and powerful monsters as the new villains. The title sequence concludes with old-school dissolves and optical effects, whereas “Goldeneye,” the first 007 to arrive six years later and with Pierce Brosnan in the lead, utilizes amazing CGI surrealism in the opening credits.

The latter is now a series staple.

The PG-13 rating was no joke in 1989, as the shockingly mean carnage is a huge contrast to the bloodless gunplay of the prior installments. What seemed a little too “Miami Vice” and not escapist enough in ’89 was truly ahead of its time.

While it lacked the tradition of “The Living Daylights” and the comfortable bravado Moore brought to Bond, “License to Kill” is a lot better.

The wild ending concludes with a final encounter between Bond and Sanchez that is satisfying and poetic. Not even the comeuppance of Auric Goldfinger was this good.

The stunt work throughout is incredible, particularly a wow bit of a tanker truck making a wheelie. The climax is even more exciting for its lack of a music score.

FAST FACT: Timothy Dalton hoped to play Bond a third and final time and flirted with such a project. The franchise’s producers insisted he stick around for multiple installments, though, and he didn’t want to commit to such a long-term deal. Pierce Brosnan took over with 1995’s “GoldenEye.”

The end credits are worth mentioning because they declare “James Bond Will Return” (which was true, just not as soon as anyone predicted) and there’s a surgeon general warning about smoking.

I guess the barbaric torture Sanchez inflicts on his victims is nothing compared to the dangers of secondhand smoke.

Also, Patti Labelle’s beautiful “If You Asked Me To” sounded like a hit in 1989 but wouldn’t emerge as one until it was covered by Celine Dion three years later.

Finally, if you only recall “License to Kill” as a footnote, the “too-serious” entry in the mostly oversized and flamboyant series and think of Dalton as the Trivial Pursuit equivalent of George Lazenby (Dalton the two-time Bond, Lazenby the one-timer), here’s the thing:

Revisiting these movies reverses the order of value considerably. “License to Kill” is easily the best Bond movie of the 1980s (if you’re curious, I’d state that “On Her Majesty’s Secret Service,” the one starring Lazenby, is still the best Bond movie in the entire series).

That’s not an insult to what Sean Connery, Moore, Brosnan and Craig contributed, it’s just that time is not always kind to a movie franchise that began in 1962 with “Dr. No.” Yet the gems in this series still sparkle, and “License to Kill,” an underdog in the history of James Bond thrillers, remains excellent.

The post Dalton, Davi Made ‘License to Kill’ a Brutal Bond Highlight appeared first on Hollywood in Toto.



from Movies - Hollywood in Toto https://ift.tt/Lwy0etT

There’s a reason “Harold and Maude” is both a cult classic and darn near impossible to remake. The May-December template is tricky in moder...

There’s a reason “Harold and Maude” is both a cult classic and darn near impossible to remake.

The May-December template is tricky in modern times. Swap the genders and you’re supporting The PatriarchyTM.

“Between the Temples” proves it can be done after all. You just need a perfect cast, droll dialogue and insights into the human condition that almost always ring true.

YouTube Video

Jason Schwartzman stars as “Cantor Ben,” a 40-something widower mourning the death of his wife. He’s a mess, and he can’t find escape in either work or his parents’ attempts to find him a new love.

He’s also lost his voice, an occupational hazard giving his synagogue chores.

Ben has a meet-cute moment with Carla (Carol Kane), a music teacher from his childhood. Carla’s heart is three sizes too big, and Ben finds comfort in her antiquated layers.

Plus, she suddenly wants to have a Bat Mitzvah. Better late than never.

Is there something more happening here? Or is “Between the Temples” a wry exploration of grief and love?

We won’t spoil the first question, but the second earns a definitive, “yes.”

YouTube Video

Director/co-writer Nathan Silver (“Thirst Street”) throws several “wacky” conceits our way but grounds them with keenly observed characters.

Yes, Ben’s the son of a hip lesbian couple, but his moms react to his emotional chaos with genuine feeling. Sure, his dating foibles could be air-lifted from a Judd Apatow comedy, but Schwartzman’s dry line readings make the humor pop.

The film offers not one but two great sequences. One involves Carla’s unctuous adult son, and the contrast between him and Ben couldn’t be more stark. The other is a dinner exchange where Silver’s jittery camera work and droll dialogue work in concert.

Kane has never been better, which is saying something. Schwartzman’s role is more intricate at times. He’s withdrawn and somber, but the actor lets just enough light into his eyes to make us root for an emotional comeback.

“Between the Temples” supports the duo with fine comic complements. Robert Smigel (AKA Triumph the Insult Comic Dog) is Cantor Ben’s exasperated Rabbi. Madeline Weinstein plays Ben’s potential love interest, a role that could be marked as “throwaway” but the actress won’t take the bait. 

Silver and co. mine rich humor from Jewish culture without being disrespectful or glib. Schwartzman and Kane do the rest, creating a believable bond forged by pain and loneliness.

What a cute couple by any standard (or decade).

HiT or Miss: “Between the Temples” is funny and self-aware, a finely tuned dramedy that never stops delivering insights.

The post ‘Between the Temples’ – Indie Cinema at Its Most Appealing appeared first on Hollywood in Toto.



from Movies - Hollywood in Toto https://ift.tt/k4STpMQ

W.D. Richter’s “The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai: Across the 8th Dimension” (1984) is among the definitive cult movies, a secret handshake ...

W.D. Richter’s “The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai: Across the 8th Dimension” (1984) is among the definitive cult movies, a secret handshake of science fiction, comedy, horror, metaphysics, comic book heroes and Twinkie consumption.

YouTube Video

Peter Weller is Dr. Buckaroo Banzai, who we first meet when he’s testing his “Oscillation Overthruster,” an invention that allows his Jet Car to drive through solid matter, such as a large mountain.

It’s one hell of an opening scene.

We later observe how Dr. Banzai is also a practicing MD, a video game and comic book character and a rock star – this is demonstrated by a concert he holds with his bandmates and adventuring sidekicks, The Hong Kong Cavaliers. They play a rockin’ set before the performance is halted when Dr. Banzai notes that someone in the audience, the downtrodden Penny Priddy (Ellen Barkin), is not having a good time.

Dr. Banzai consoles her from the stage and reminds her, and us, that “No Matter Where You Go, There You Are.”

There’s also time devoted to the introduction of Dr. Emilio Lizardo, an Italian supervillain played by John Lithgow. Lizardo becomes possessed by an alien, Lord John Whorfin and aims to lead his extraterrestrial villains on a plot for world domination.

Oh, and there’s the sight of Jeff Goldblum as New Jersey, one of Dr. Banzai’s sidemen, who often dons full-on cowboy attire. The movie is barely 30 minutes in, and it’s a lot.

YouTube Video

Richter made a real anomaly in 1984, a truly strange movie at the Hollywood studio level, carefree in its weirdness but earnest in its love for sci-fi and sustaining a hip attitude for the entire running time. I didn’t see it during its brief initial opening in theaters and only caught up with it on HBO.

It’s an easy movie to get addicted to, because, at the time, there was nothing else remotely like it. Today, one can see the fingerprints of “Buckaroo Banzai” are all over “Guardians of the Galaxy” (2014), “John Dies at the End” (2012) and the new “Borderlands,” to name just a few.

Pacing is sometimes a problem, as there are some dead spots, especially in the third act. Yet, the best scenes are exciting, inventive in their staging and crammed with ideas. What “Buckaroo Banzai” has over most ensemble sci-fi comedy hybrids is that it never stops stacking concepts and always maintains a droll sense of humor.

There’s a brazen cockiness to the whole thing, like the kid who knows he’s going to win the school science fair and does, easily.

Weller has an otherworldly cool that is hard to describe. He’s like that hip, handsome science teacher who makes you willingly memorize the periodic tables.

Weller has been amazing before (“Naked Lunch,” “Robocop” and “The New Age” come to mind) but what he pulls off here is kind of remarkable. Dr. Banzai is too cool for the room but still somehow personable and endearingly dorky.

Weller gives such conviction, even as he must inject urgency into lines like, “Evil! Pure and simple, from the eighth dimension!”

Lithgow’s fearless, bombastic villainy is so truly alien he seems a great contrast to Weller’s performance because the two bring such wildly contrasting acting approaches: Weller dials it down and plays everything earnestly, whereas Lithgow barely contains himself from literally chewing the scenery.

I have to mention that Clancy Brown is also in this, as is Vincent Schiavelli and Christopher Lloyd (the Oscillian Overthruster looks an awful lot like the Flux Capacitor from “Back to the Future,” which Lloyd made after this and “Star Trek III: The Search for Spock”).

The screenplay by Earl Mac Rauch somehow crams in a subplot involving Orson Welles’ famous radio broadcast of “The War of the Worlds” and wars between Lectroids from Planet 10; I assume the latter touch is a reference to Edward D. Wood Jr.’s “Plan 9 From Outer Space” (1957), just as I’ve always assumed Rauch himself is probably an alien.

Richter, whose only other director credit is the sweet, little seen “Late For Dinner” (1991), concludes this with a famous strut-walk to Michael Boddicker’s wild theme music (how’s this for a first- it’s an 80’s New Wave synth cowboy hero march!) that was beautifully mimicked in the ending of Wes Anderson’s “The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou” (2004).

Even the special effects, which often show their age, are so cool for what they achieve and their ambition (the model work, blue screen and optical effects are excellent for a film that lacked a “Temple of Doom” budget).

YouTube Video

Despite being the first and only installment in a proposed and unrealized series, this has the confidence of a franchise that is well liked and already adored by its fans. You could say the film is a little full of itself, but that’s also something of a put on. Everyone involved is committing to something so absurd, though what emerges is a genre hybrid that was ahead of its time.

It’s been a pleasure seeing the cult following of “Buckaroo Banzai” grow over the decades. In college, it was a videocassette I played for any of my adventurous theater major buddies. The year I got married, it was the first DVD I ever bought.

The last time I wrote about “Buckaroo Banzai,” it was for the film’s 30th anniversary. I made the mistake of citing the wrong Lectroid, which was something my friend Bud (professional name DJ Blast), who is a BB Super Fan, noted very quickly – I made the change while the article began circulation.

The same friend later gave me his Buckaroo Banzai and the Hong Kong Cavaliers T-shirt and would always find ways to include “No Matter Where You Go, There You Are” into most of our conversations.

Bud is a hard-core fan and he’s not alone. This movie, with its too-hip-for-the-room attitude, adoration for its multiple genres, dense mythology and ability to be corny and awesome at the same time, is one of the ultimate 20th century cult movies.

How do you know you’re watching a definitive cult movie? The easy answer is that the film tanked upon original release and needed years of rediscovery, with new and younger viewers finding it, and decades of an entirely new perspective to arise.

Most cult films can claim to having a few scattered enthusiasts upon original release, but most of these films now have newfound passionate followers. Which movies am I referring to? “Buckaroo Banzai,” meets “The Monster Squad” (1987), “Hocus Pocus” (1993), “Office Space” (1999) and “Big Trouble in Little China” (1986).

Initial box office and/or perceived artistic failure is the inauguration of a future cult movie, which is why “The Shawshank Redemption” (1994), a Best Picture Oscar nominee but massive box office flop, is as beloved and high profile a cult movie as “Showgirls” (1995) and “Road House” (1989).

Round one box office rejection and/or movie critic dismissal is what makes these movies desirable as newfound art.

They said this was terrible back in the day, but is it as bad as they say?

YouTube Video

Say what you will today, but there’s a chance that the likes of “Battlefield: Earth” (2000), “Green Lantern” (2011), “Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets” (2017) and even “Catwoman” (2004) could be a future cult classic. Why? Because they’re being declared outright failures by the moviegoing population at large makes them intriguing candidates for reassessment.

The one rule that seems to have stuck is that you can’t make the cult happen on purpose, it has to happen over time. When the one sheet for “Repo! The Genetic Opera” (2008) declared it “An Instant Cult Classic,” a feeling of desperation sets in.

Likewise, the infamous test screening 20th Century Fox once held for “Shock Treatment” (1981), their infamous failed sequel to “The Rocky Horror Picture Show” (made in 1975 and one of the defining 20th century cult movies).

Whereas “Rocky Horror” tanked during its initial release and became a blockbuster during midnight showings, the belated sequel also tanked upon opening. Then a series of midnight screenings popped up, with reported plants from the studio trying to drum up audience participation for “Shock Treatment.”

Whether these reported plants were real or the thing of legend, the movie bombed either way. Clearly, the phenomenon of “Rocky Horror” couldn’t be easily duplicated.

Like any great cult movie, there are breadcrumbs around the film that reveal hidden gifts for longtime fans. There’s the famous “lost scene,” a charming opener, featuring Jamie Lee Curtis as Dr. Banzai’s mother, presented as an old-fashioned home movie.

There’s the concept trailer for the unmade but intriguing looking TV show spinoff. In the early days of the internet, the vast number of fan-made websites dedicated to the film was staggering. I treasure all my “Buckaroo Banzai” memorabilia since 20th Century Fox didn’t quite know what they had in 1984.

We have yet to see the long-announced, never made sequel, let alone a follow up of any kind, to “Buckaroo Banzai.” There’s a witty comic book adaptation of Rauch’s “Buckaroo Banzai: Return of the Screw” (2006 from Moonstone Books) but, aside from the overt reference in Steve Spielberg’s “Ready Player One” (2018), Dr. Banzai and his rock and rolling Hong Kong Cavaliers have never returned to the big screen for a new adventure.

I actually prefer it this way. The once-in-a-lifetime pairing with this dream cast and the writer/director combo is why this works.

Accept no substitutes.

The post ‘Buckaroo Banzai’ at 40: Accept No Substitutes appeared first on Hollywood in Toto.



from Movies - Hollywood in Toto https://ift.tt/E14BHqI

Imagine “The Purge” as a Bidenomics satire! We’ll get comedy maestro Paul Feig of “Bridesmaids” fame to direct and lasso Awkwafina and John...

Imagine “The Purge” as a Bidenomics satire!

We’ll get comedy maestro Paul Feig of “Bridesmaids” fame to direct and lasso Awkwafina and John Cena to headline. 

What could go wrong? Try absolutely everything.

“Jackpot” is so bad that, by the halfway mark, your senses have been bludgeoned into a stupor. The rest is neither good, bad nor indifferent. It just exists and you wait patiently for the sweet release of the end credits.

And then you’re met with a crush of unfunny bloopers. The pain … it never ends.

YouTube Video

Awkwafina stars as Katie Kim, a former child star who returns to Los Angeles circa 2030 to revive her acting career. She literally hits the jackpot when she wins California’s “Purge”-like lottery. Yes, she’ll be a billionaire soon enough, but only if she lives long enough to grab the payout.

You see, this lottery allows anyone to kill the winner before sundown and get the money.

There’s more inane rules. You can’t shoot the lottery winner, but knives and other deadly implements are fair game. And you can hire people to protect you during that vulnerable, post-announcement window.

That’s where John Cena’s Noel comes in.

He’s happy to keep Katie safe for a percentage of her winnings. He appears to be the only person in all of California who has her best interests at heart. (And she can’t stop trashing him…) Everyone else is lunging for the nearest weapon to off Katie.

Hilarious, right? It’s even worse than it sounds.

First, we’re pummeled with third-rate “John Wick” action where dozens upon dozens try and fail to kill Katie in the first 20 minutes.

House wives. Yoga devotees. Karate masters. Everyone. All armed to the teeth.

Remember, this is Awkwafina not the second coming of Rambo.

She’s a petite actress (5’1″ according to Wikipedia) playing a character with no fighting ability. Yet she goes toe to toe with trained warriors double her weight.

Noel’s fighting chops offer some logical balance in Katie’s quest for the money, and he IS John Cena. It’s still so absurd on its face – and not in any way that resembles humor.

And that’s more or less the movie. Yes, “Shang Chi” alum Simu Liu appears as a competing bodyguard happy to take over for Noel. It’s a smorgasbord of man’s inhumanity to man with eye-roll one-liners peppering the screenplay.

The film’s satirical potential is mostly ignored. 

Is this a slam on California? Technically, yes, but there’s nothing in the screenplay to build on that premise. Could it be an attack on capitalism? Probably, but once again the story lacks any kind of teeth.

It’s just ugly from start to finish. 

 

 
 
 
 
 
View this post on Instagram
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 

A post shared by Prime Video (@primevideo)

Running gags fail the first time but keep showing up as if to mock the audience. Katie’s irrational rage against Noel, the only soul who treats her with kindness, makes us pine for her swift demise.

She’s the most grating heroine in recent memory, played by an actress with Hollywood’s most grating voice.

Everyone is trying very hard with zero results. Even Cena, so hilarious in “Ricky Stanicky,” can’t do much with his character.

Machine Gun Kelly appears mid-movie as himself, proving that “Jackpot” can actually, somehow get worse.

HiT or Miss: “Jackpot” fails on so many levels you may need to watch it twice to catch it all. But for the love of all that’s holy … don’t.

The post ‘Jackpot’ Could Be the Worst Comedy of the Decade appeared first on Hollywood in Toto.



from Movies - Hollywood in Toto https://ift.tt/zi60dvU

Feminist horror cuts both ways. The Hulu original “ Fresh ” showcased real-world gender imbalances with a slick genre twist. “Blink Twice”...

Feminist horror cuts both ways.

The Hulu original “Fresh” showcased real-world gender imbalances with a slick genre twist.

“Blink Twice” hopes its cringe brand of feminism will make us forget it’s one of the year’s worst movies.

Not a chance.

First-time director Zoë Kravitz reveals a gimlet eye for grisly details but doesn’t come close to a coherent story or characters.

YouTube Video

Frida (Naomie Ackie, “I Wanna Dance with Somebody”) and Jess (Alia Shawkat) snag a gig serving cocktails at a media titan’s gala. That’s Slater King (Channing Tatum), the handsome face of the mega-company in question. He’s on a PR tour to make amends for some unspoken “sin,” but our culture is too eager to forgive and forget.

That might be the first and last wry observation in the film.

Frida and Slater connect during the gala, and he impulsively invites her and Jess to join him at his private island.

Yeah, he’s that rich. 

The women leap at the chance, and they’re bombarded with bottomless drinks, decadent meals and a heaping helping of paradise. Jess suspects all isn’t as pristine as it appears.

And, slowly, Frida suspects her friend’s instincts are spot on.

We’ll say no more … except the mystery in question is both boneheaded and kept from audiences for far too long.

Until then we vicariously live through Frida and Jess, and while that’s tantalizing at first we soon realize there’s almost nothing of caloric value here.

The key players, including Christian Slater, Haley Joel Osment, Simon Rex and Adria Arjona, go through their hedonistic paces but nothing sticks. Plot holes quickly pile up, and when Kravitz reveals her narrative cards she’s got a pair of threes, at best.

 

 
 
 
 
 
View this post on Instagram
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 

A post shared by Blink Twice (@blinktwicemovie)

“Blink Twice” traffics in serious horror film tropes, and the visuals are never less than enthralling. Kravitz stockpiles unsettling images atop sounds that keep us on edge.

Good.

Except there’s little follow-up.

The Frida-Slater courtship is wobbly from the start. Is he leading her on? Does she think there’s something soulful behind his well-coiffed image? Had the film developed their relationship in any meaningful way it would have made what follows register.

“Blink Twice’s” third act is a disaster, with characters running hither and yon between making stupefying speeches. The story doesn’t go fully woke, at least from a lecture point of view.

You get the message all the same. Men … bad!

There’s nothing wrong with a feminist revenge yarn — there’s a reason we’re still talking about B-movies like, “I Spit on Your Grave” decades later. “Blink Twice” lacks chills, thrills and coherency.

HiT or Miss: “Blink Twice” squanders a ripe premise for lazy, down-with-the-patriarchy shtick that wears thin in a nanosecond.

The post ‘Blink Twice’ Wallows in Empty Fourth-Wave Feminism appeared first on Hollywood in Toto.



from Movies - Hollywood in Toto https://ift.tt/tGw5DOy

In space, no one can hear you say, “Remember how cool the first ‘Alien’ was?’ Hollywood heard it anyway, which is why we’re getting “Alien:...

In space, no one can hear you say, “Remember how cool the first ‘Alien’ was?’

Hollywood heard it anyway, which is why we’re getting “Alien: Romulus” despite modest U.S. returns for 2017’s “Alien: Covenant.”

Director Fede Alvarez (“Don’t Breathe,” the “Evil Dead” update) proves a wise choice to prolong the saga. Yet despite some exhilarating shots, one thought can’t be denied.

No one can top either the 1979 original or James Cameron’s dizzying 1986 sequel, “Aliens.” “Romulus” doesn’t come close. 

YouTube Video

“Priscilla” standout Cailee Spaeny stars as Rain, a mining colony worker who gets stiffed by her corporate overlords as the story opens. Furious, she impulsively joins a mission to hijack an abandoned space station to seek a new place to call home.

Bad move.

She and her colleagues quickly learn why the ship is so deathly quiet. You know where this is going.

Face huggers. Acid blood. Skittering, crab-like beasts that grow at exponential rates. The confines of outer space.

Game over, man. 

RELATED: WHY ‘ALIENS’ RIPLEY IS THE ULTIMATE ANTI-MARY SUE

Alvarez faithfully replicates the production design from the original “Alien,” and it’s a marvelous tapestry on two fronts. It feels like the story was shot in the early 1980s, and the reliance on practical effects delivers over and again.

Yet this isn’t the seven-member Nostromo crew from director Ridley Scott’s classic. These characters lack substance, to be kind. Only Spaeny, a legitimate rising star, stands out. The rest are buried in hard-to-understand accents and bland character beats.

And must they speak in ways that feel so very 2024? Ugh.

Only the latest synthetic human, a bot named Andy (David Jonsson), carries some weight. Even his character arc gets a maddening makeover mid-film, and Andy’s cognitive challenges make little sense.

A few sequences pop in ways that’ll make “Romulus” easy to watch again. Alvarez leans into these moments, setting them up with child-like glee. This is a full-on horror movie, and he wouldn’t have it any other way.

Other scenes will trigger eye rolls, like reciting a classic line from “Aliens.”

That one stung.

 

 
 
 
 
 
View this post on Instagram
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 

A post shared by Cinemark Theatres (@cinemark)

The story connects in clever ways to the franchise, both in its cold corporate machinations and the lethality of the creatures. They remain a design for the ages, and the less CGI used to bring them back to life, the better.

“Romulus” enlists an impressive score that also connects to the source material, but it can’t beat the hypnotic drumbeat James Horner delivered in “Aliens.”

The new film is essentially a reboot of “Alien.” We meet a small crew in way over their heads, and one hero emerges to thwart the all-powerful creatures.

This crew lacks the gravitas and personality we saw in Scott’s sci-fi classic. That matters more with every new “Alien” joint.

“Alien: Romulus” takes place after the events of 1979’s “Alien,” suggesting a timeline brimming with sequel/prequel potential.

You may now scream to your heart’s content.

HiT or Miss: “Alien: Romulus” is competent and recycled, a grab bag of franchise highlights in dire need of a personality.

The post ‘Alien: Romulus’ Delivers Franchise’s Greatest Hits appeared first on Hollywood in Toto.



from Movies - Hollywood in Toto https://ift.tt/h4NoI8U

Roger Corman’s “Frankenstein Unbound” (1990) is a fascinating work that deserves rediscovery, and not simply because we lost Corman this yea...

Roger Corman’s “Frankenstein Unbound” (1990) is a fascinating work that deserves rediscovery, and not simply because we lost Corman this year and this was the last film he ever directed.

While Corman’s body of work is a tall stack of cheaply made independent films, most of which have been deemed “schlock” or B-movies, Corman’s shoot-fast-and-inexpensively mode of filmmaking not only resulted in many drive-in classics but also inspired and launched dozens of careers.

YouTube Video

Under Corman’s mentorship and collaboration in front of and behind the camera, Corman gave early breaks and creative opportunities (and this is just a small list) Martin Scorsese, Francis Ford Coppola, Ron Howard and Jonathan Demme.

Corman made numerous films with Vincent Price and Peter Fonda, though he also gave Jack Nicholson the string of opportunities, in front of and behind the camera, that led to his breakthrough.

Corman died earlier this year at the age of 98 and directed about 54 movies (I say “about” because a few instances where he went uncredited but is still noted as being the maestro behind the camera).

Corman’s works were often defined by their low budget and sensational titles, ranging from exploitative creature features (such as “Attack of the Crab Monsters” in 1957), his series of Edgar Allen Poe adaptations (the best of which is “The Pit and the Pendulum” from 1961) and “hippie” features (the best is the Peter Fonda/ Dennis Hopper starring “The Trip,” released in 1967 and written by Nicholson!).

Most film aficionados know Corman directed the original black and white, dirt cheap and hilarious “The Little Shop of Horrors” (1960), which not only featured Nicholson in his first scene-stealing role but was reported shot in 48 hours.

Corman’s tireless work ethic and prolific body of work (which includes creating multiple companies and mini studios) remain legendary.

So why is Corman’s “Frankenstein Unbound” so remarkable? It brought Corman out of semi-retirement after a decade and was his only big-budget film, released by 20th Century Fox.

YouTube Video

Based on Brian Aldiss’ imaginative 1973 novel and featuring the kind of all-star prestige cast that would be the envy of most mainstream films, “Frankenstein Unbound,” which was filmed in Italy and co-written by Corman and ex-movie critic F.X. Feeney, wound up being a footnote upon release.

Critics were mixed in their response and, in interviews, Corman sounded unhappy with the end result. Viewed today with a greater understanding of how it bookends Corman’s body of work and in proper context from the misleading promotional campaign, it feels like a lost gem.

John Hurt stars as Dr. Buchanan, a mad scientist in the 21st century who creates a time tunnel that sucks him from the year 2031 into 1817. Dr. Buchanan realizes he is now in Switzerland and has only his futuristic talking car (think Knight Rider, only much sleeker) to aid him.

After stumbling into a local pub Dr. Buchanan realizes that he is in the midst of Mary Shelley (Bridget Fonda), who is being wooed by Lord Byron (Jason Patric) and Percy Shelley (Michael Hutchence, the late lead singer of INXS!). 

Stranger still, Dr. Buchanan meets Dr. Frankenstein (Raul Julia) and his Monster (Nick Brimble)- Mary Shelley is writing her book “Frankenstein- The Modern Prometheus,” based on the events that Buchanan witnesses.

RELATED: ‘DEPRAVED’ PUMPS FRESH BLOOD INTO FRANKENSTEIN LORE

Corman’s enjoyable, weird sci-fi period piece is something of a Frankenstein’s Monster itself. Sometimes the sets look laughably cheap. Later, he cuts to gorgeous Italian exteriors and exquisite locations.

The special effects are also that way, ranging from jaw dropping (that time ribbon in the sky is awesome) to silly (the overuse of theatrical lighting during the climax is shameless).

The actors take this seriously and manage to keep it grounded, starting with Hurt, who was always game for anything and gives this total conviction. Likewise, Julia, a superb actor we lost too soon, whose haunted eyes make him ideal as Frankenstein.

As evidenced by what he contributes here, Hutchence could have been a character actor – it’s surreal watching him share a scene with Fonda, Hurt and Patric. Best of all is Brimble, a scene stealer as Little John in “Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves” (1991), who is great and formidable as The Monster.

Add Carl Davis’ grand score and some arresting visuals (like that killer closing shot) and you have an overachiever of a B-movie that somehow managed a dream cast and an $11 million budget. The screenplay is overstuffed with ideas about the monstrous possibilities of science and humankind, as Buchanan’s contribution to science is every bit as devastating as Frankenstein’s playing God.

Corman’s final film only stumbles when it tries to add genuine shock to an otherwise charming fantasy. The moments where The Monster yanks out a heart or appendage are clumsily handled and out of place.

In terms of tone and what “Frankenstein Unbound” feels like: this will sound like a backhanded compliment (and it’s not) but this feels like an all-star episode of “Quantum Leap.”

Unfortunately, “Frankenstein Unbound,” was advertised as an all-out horror movie, complete with a riveting trailer (set to Chris Young’s scary “The Fly II” score) that made it look much heavier than it is. Corman’s film was in theaters briefly and only flourished later on home video.

Corman’s best film remains the startling, ahead of its time “The Intruder” (1962) the searing drama with a riveting lead turn from William Shatner; it’s another hall-of-famer for Corman and Shatner but few have seen.

If cinephiles want to program a night of Corman’s greatest hits, I’d recommend “The Little Shop of Horrors,” “The Intruder,” “X-The Man with the X-Ray Eyes” (1963) and finishing off with the one where Julia’s Buchanan shows Fonda’s Shelley her face on the cover of the book she has yet to write.

Corman’s movies are akin to the tastiest, most buttered and crunchiest bag of popcorn you’ve ever had.

The post This Made Roger Corman’s ‘Frankenstein Unbound’ So Unique appeared first on Hollywood in Toto.



from Movies - Hollywood in Toto https://ift.tt/1HczM3j

“Ocean’s Eleven” spoiled us for heist films. We expect movie thieves to be dashing, debonair and oh, so good at their job. Not “The Instig...

“Ocean’s Eleven” spoiled us for heist films.

We expect movie thieves to be dashing, debonair and oh, so good at their job.

Not “The Instigators.”

The quasi-buddy comedy follows crooks who couldn’t rob a baby’s bottle without setting off alarms. That’s the best part of a tale told by terrific actors scrambling to bring life to a middling script.

YouTube Video

Rory (Matt Damon) and Cobby (Casey Affleck) are down on their luck in different, if obscure, ways when the story opens.

Rory wants to reconnect with his estranged son, according to therapy sessions with his no-nonsense shrink (Hong Chau). Cobby gets grief from a local bar owner who knows he’s one dumb move away from going back to jail.

So it makes Hollywood Movie Sense that they’d risk it all on a heist to ease their financial pain.

The plot appears foolproof, at least to them. Sneak into a Boston hotel where a lot of dirty money is just begging to be stolen. Wave a gun around to maintain order.

In. Out. Easy peasy.

Except the plan proves anything but foolproof, and these mismatched souls must improvise to save their skin.

YouTube Video

“The Instigators” looks great on paper, starting with the cast. Think Alfred Molina, Michael Stuhlbarg (playing against type), Paul Walter Hauser (wasted), Ving Rhames and Toby Jones.

Add Ron Perlman as the scenery-chewing mayor, and they could collectively read recipe ingredients and keep us engaged.

Director Doug Liman (“Road House” 2.0) makes Boston look both grimy and gorgeous, the latter courtesy of water-based shots that bask Beantown in a wondrous light. The few action scenes reflect the “Bourne Identity” director’s comfort with controlled mayhem.

It’s not about the action.

“The Instigators” starts out stone-cold sober with a few darkly comic lines. The more things go haywire, the wackier the story becomes. Little makes sense at this point, from characters who appear out of sheer plot contrivance to events that only make sense in a screenwriter’s warped imagination.

You’ll get a few chuckles from the Damon/Affleck banter, but it’s not enough to sustain a 90-plus minute film.

Still, the overall sloppiness is almost a selling point. The film feels disconnected from Hollywood formula for a good 40 minutes, and the results are invigorating. Sometimes we need to see life’s rough edges.

Even better?

When has Damon played such an incompetent soul? It suits him well, even if the screenplay suggests cognitive woes explain his dysfunction.

No. He’s just hapless by design.

 

 
 
 
 
 
View this post on Instagram
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 

A post shared by Apple TV (@appletv)

Chau, a rising star thanks to strong turns in “The Whale” and “The Menu,” does everything she can to make her therapist character click. She almost succeeds.

Perlman’s crooked pol shtick is out of Central Casting. Why not grant him a modicum of decency to stir things up?

It’s useless to think too much about “The Instigators.” It’s designed for casual viewing, a streaming lark with enough star power to grab our attention and keep it for lack of better options.

HiT or Miss: “The Instigators” works best as a palate cleanser to slick blockbuster fare. That faint praise speaks for itself.

The post Matt Damon’s ‘The Instigators’ Can’t Steal Our Hearts appeared first on Hollywood in Toto.



from Movies - Hollywood in Toto https://ift.tt/pIMihKA

Joel and Ethan Coen’s “Blood Simple” launched their directorial careers, established their dedication to no-nonsense film noir and marked an...

Joel and Ethan Coen’s “Blood Simple” launched their directorial careers, established their dedication to no-nonsense film noir and marked an enormously accomplished film debut.

In the decade that is often generalized as the height of empty Hollywood filmmaking and the death of 1970s independent auteurism, not enough credit is given to the fiery artists who grabbed hold of the decade:

  • John Sayles
  • David Lynch
  • Spike Lee
  • Oliver Stone
  • A rejuvenated Martin Scorsese
  • The Coens

The output from the aforementioned listed directors was always unpredictable, personal and impossible to ignore.

YouTube Video

With 1984’s “Blood Simple,” the blood-stained poetry and guilt-ridden anxiety of adult film noir, which seemed to have hit a peak with “The Postman Always Rings Twice” (1981) was really just getting revved up here. The Coens weren’t simply setting the table for the likes of “Fatal Attraction” (1987) and “L.A. Confidential” (1997) but were fine tuning their ability to craft playful, intelligent, fiendishly funny, truly original work that was an extension of their passions and personalities.

In other words, the glamourized 1970s era of directorial authorship and indie dominance never went away, it just took a nap. Works like “Blood Simple” are a reminder of how exciting a film can be from a newcomer that lives cinema.

It begins with a shot from the backseat of a car, driving through a rainy night. We listen to the characters revealed by the backs of their heads and the yearning in their dialogue.

We meet Ray (John Getz), who works in a Texas bar and is having an affair with Abby (Frances McDormand), who is married to Julien (Dan Hedaya), the owner of the bar. Julien hires a vile, bottom-the-barrel-scraping private detective named Loren Visser (M. Emmett Walsh, in a performance guaranteed to make your skin crawl) to murder Abby and Ray.

That’s just the set-up.

YouTube Video

We’re deep in film noir country here, as the unreliable protagonist (Ray) and his femme fatale lover (Abby) have enraged Julien to the point where his life would be so much better if this one little murder would erase his problems. The environment is lived in and scuzzy, with the long stretch of roads every bit as menacing and endless as you’d find in a David Lynch film.

Rain, ceiling fans, swigs of liquor, revolvers, close-up murders and wicked twists of fate drive the story. What could have seemed like a variant of “The Postman Always Rings Twice” is instead infused by the creative energy and exciting cinematic choices made by the Coens, who turn their small but rock-steady film debut into a genre master class.

RELATED: HOW ‘MILLER’S CROSSING’ CHANGED EVERYTHING FOR COEN BROTHERS

McDormand reveals the intriguing layers and touching vulnerability that would mark her later performances, while Getz, as he would be in “The Fly” two years later, is compelling without ever being likable.

Hedaya makes anything he plays colorful and darkly funny, while Walsh is so vivid and unsettling, it’s hard to believe the Coens found an actor and didn’t just recruit the real deal.

Barry Sonnenfeld’s cinematography is wizard-like. I don’t normally refer to the Director of Photography as “wizards,” but there’s no better word for the man who gave everything from this, “Throw Momma from the Train” (1987), “Misery” (1990) and the Coens’ subsequent “Raising Arizona” (1987) and “Miller’s Crossing” (1990) such precise, quirky, and breathtakingly dynamic distinction.

Sonnenfeld later became a successful director. Don’t forget the scenes of Thing “running” across the floor in “The Addams Family” (1991) or the hip mood he gave “Get Shorty” (1995).

Sonnenfeld was a great collaborator for the Coen brothers. Likewise, the tender and eerie music by Carter Burwell, whose score for “Psycho III” two years later sounds like a harsher reprise of his “Blood Simple” theme.

The best scenes in “Blood Simple” are juggernauts – from the violent confrontation on the front lawn (with a swooping camera angle right out of “The Evil Dead”) to failed highway burial in a vast field, there’s a devious inventiveness to the film’s ’80s take on film noir conventions.

RELATED: COEN’S ‘HUDSUCKER PROXY’ – FROM FLOP TO CULT CLASSIC 

Then there’s the final scene, in which Abby must face Visser alone: the visuals of the threat on the other side of the wall and how bullet holes and a well-placed blade play into it, make for an astonishing finale.

The Coens made a stunningly accomplished calling card with their first film. Forty years later, “Blood Simple” is just one masterpiece of many from Joel and Ethan Coen.

There aren’t many missteps to note here, but I will say that it’s puzzling how Meurice the bartender (Samm-Art Williams) gets a big introduction and seems to be an important figure in the plot but fades out of view by the end of the second act.

My only complaint with the repeated use of The Four Tops 1965 hit “It’s Not the Same Old Song” is that I now only associate it with this movie. Good luck getting it out of your head, or, the next time you hear it, try not to think of anything other than “Blood Simple.”

The post ‘Blood Simple’ – Blood-Stained Poetry That Left a Mark appeared first on Hollywood in Toto.



from Movies - Hollywood in Toto https://ift.tt/wuMSU1k

Daniel Myrick and Eduardo Sanchez’s “The Blair Witch Project” (1999) was not the first horror film to utilize the “found footage” angle. Ot...

Daniel Myrick and Eduardo Sanchez’s “The Blair Witch Project” (1999) was not the first horror film to utilize the “found footage” angle.

Others came before it that also claimed to be “real,” documentary footage of a frightening anomaly that was caught on camera. However, even with film history reminding us of other works that pushed this angle (more on this later), “The Blair Witch Project” succeeded in a way that not only created a specific sub-genre of horror film but found widespread popularity by being among the first films to utilize the Internet as a marketing tool.

Also, and this is most important, the film is still scary decades later.

YouTube Video

The first thing we see is “In October of 1994, three student filmmakers disappeared in the woods near Burkittsville, Md., while shooting a documentary. A year later, their footage was found.”

After the title card (which also adorned most of the posters and trailers leading up to the release), it begins with a blurry shot that switches into focus of documentarian Heather O’Donohue. It’s a perfect start, as O’Donohue, playing herself (as do her two male co-stars), is the true focus of the film.

Set on Halloween, with a film crew of three – O’Donohue, Michael Williams (embodying the face of fear) and Joshua Leonard (the necessary skeptic and, arguably the one who suffers the most for his doubts) – investigate the growing myth of the Blair Witch.

If all you remember about “The Blair Witch Project” is the forest-set squabbling, shaky camera work and histrionics, it’s a pleasure to remind viewers how involving the first act is. The footage is always handheld and alternates between color and black and white.

The early interviews with the townsfolk are engaging, good humored and well-paced. At one point, there’s an interview with a woman who identifies herself as Mary Brown – it’s chilling, as she presents woodwork that, in my ’99 mindset, presented an obvious clue.

Is Mary Brown the Blair Witch?

The leads journey deep into the Maryland woods and, with every passing day, discover they are lost and that someone or something is making nightly visits to their campground. Then one of them vanishes.

While not the first “found footage” faux supernatural documentary, “The Blair Witch Project” was the first to catch on like this. Pre-“Blair Witch,” there was Charles B. Pierce’s still wonderful, if awfully quaint “The Legend of Boggy Creek” (1972) and Dean Alioto’s simple, chilling “The McPherson Tape” (1989).

Post-“Blair Witch,” we not only got the quickly made, ambitious but conceptually misguided “Book of Shadows: Blair Witch 2” (2000), but the obvious rip-off of “The St. Francisville Experiment” (2000), “Cloverfield” (2008), “REC” (2007) and the American remake “Quarantine” (2008), “Paranormal Activity” (2009) and “Chronicle” (2012), to name just a few.

There were also genre films that applied the technique as a storytelling device, ranging from “Halloween: Resurrection” (2002) to George A. Romero’s “Diary of the Dead” (2008) and M. Night Shyamalan’s “The Visit” (2015).

YouTube Video

Whether you go as far back as “In Search Of…” consider the infamous “Cannibal Holocaust” to be the true originator of this genre (I don’t), the devious novelty of watching a “real,” found encapsulation of the unnatural has always been irresistible. The Blair Witch was only one of many media Pandora’s Boxes to come before and since.

Because “The Blair Witch Project” was shot on film and in the overly familiar digital mode that just about every subsequent found footage horror movie has been since, it has a scrappy feel, akin to Romero’s “Night of the Living Dead.”

O’Donohue’s is the film’s center. She is sometimes irritating but also intelligent, engaged and authentic. While her work has been often parodied, O’Donohue gives a terrific performance, and her big scene (you know the one) may have been filmed at an unflattering angle but her straight-to-the-camera confession is still heartbreaking.

The shots of the documentarians filming themselves turns the camera into a character and storytelling tool, not a POV.

It all begins like a droll camping trip video and becomes increasingly strange (another odd theory that circulated the year of the film’s release that still holds up – if it’s not Mary Brown, then maybe it really is just O’Donohue (the character, not the version of herself she’s playing…you know what I mean).

As the filmmakers get lost (“I agreed to a scouted-out project!”), the tensions build. In the age of YouTube, Tik Tok and reality TV, this is less arcane than one would imagine.

YouTube Video

The complaints lobbed at the film in ’99 still hold up. The camera shakes too much, the characters get on our nerves and the third act reveal is more cerebral than finite.

Considering the way the characters are often presented in an unfavorable light (Heather’s shrill self-importance contrasted with the sulking whine of the men), it’s no wonder audiences thought this was real.

Still, “The Blair Witch Project” (especially if viewed with the lights off) is scary, as the distant noises that surround the camp at night, the sudden appearance of the Stick Men and the morning “gift” outside the tent are still jolting.

The camera is weaponized, as it not only captures the horrors but occasionally becomes the tool in which the three use to survive; their cameras are also used by us as a character study and by them as a confession booth.

Someone notes, “I can see why you like this camera – it’s not quite reality.”

Indeed, it’s easier to look at the screen than face the truth in front of them. At one point, the trio decides to head east, because they recall The Wicked Witch of the West. The final scene plays like “Hansel and Gretel.” The ending is still seriously terrifying, an immersion into a haunted house with the final shots creating unbearable tension.

Because the footage is allegedly real (and that was what many believed in ’99, even after the film played in theaters!), we lean in closer, looking at the possibilities.

This is a Rorschach Test of a horror film, as some felt cheated and declared it the Emperor’s New Clothes, while others deemed it an instant classic.

The subtext is fairly rich: one of the filmmakers declares, “It’s very hard to get lost in America these days.” This becomes a cautionary tale of assuming a paper map, a compass and youthful nerve are enough for novice hikers to survive the unpredictable obstacles within nature.

To step away from the phenomenon the film created, this is a keen reflection, both then and now, on our obsession with self-preservation through documentation.

Aside from the eerie, ambient end credits “score,” there’s no music. The characters feel trapped in those woods and we feel it. Nothing that happens is a given and no Hollywood conclusion is in sight.

Actually, if there’s a perfect and sadistic double feature to be had, check out this movie and follow it with John Sayles’ “Limbo,” which also came out in 1999 and is every bit as riveting and frustrating as “The Blair Witch Project.”

httpv://http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HSjiCN–ZKs

There needs to be a movie made about the making of “The Blair Witch Project.” For now, here’s what we know: it was filmed in October of 1997, mostly improvised, with 20 hours of footage cut down to 82 minutes. After post-production, it cost less than $1 million. It was filmed in Seneca Creek and Patapoco Valley State Parks in Maryland.

The three actors weren’t properly compensated and deserve to feel cheated. This is a bare-bones production, which grossed an astonishing $130 million domestically, and the three leads are doing most of the work.

After the buzz-building premiere at the January of ’99 Sundance Film Festival, there were months of the addictive official website and dread-inducing trailer (which I must have downloaded at least 20 times on Quicktime).

Surprisingly, “The Blair Witch Project” changed cinema as much as “The Matrix” (also ’99), as it proved enormously influential and a permanent talking point in pop culture. It also put the small potatoes Artisan Entertainment on the map, made a gigantic profit and outgrossed mainstream summer movies like “Wild Wild West.”

As crude and divisive as “The Blair Witch Project” is, few contemporary horror movies deserve a Criterion Collection release more than this is.

The post ‘Blair Witch’ at 25: Found-Footage Shocker Still Gives Us the Creeps appeared first on Hollywood in Toto.



from Movies - Hollywood in Toto https://ift.tt/QujiwzH