Dito Montiel’s “Riff Raff” is one of the most off-putting films I can remember, the kind of bad movie that isn’t so-bad-its-good but genuinely hard to endure.

That the leads are Ed Harris, Bill Murray and Jennifer Coolidge, for starters, only makes the film’s failure even more depressing.

Appealing newcomer Miles J. Harvey stars and narrates as DJ, a talkative young man raised by Sandy, his mother (Gabrielle Union) and Vincent, her much older husband (Harris). While staying at an isolated home during the holidays, DJ and his parents find their quiet retreat interrupted by the arrival of Vincent’s son Rocco (Lewis Pullman), his pregnant girlfriend Marina (Emanuela Postacchin) and Vincent’s unconscious ex-wife Ruth (Coolidge).

It turns out that Rocco is on the run from a violent gangster named Leftie (Murray) and Lonnie, his lackey in training (Pete Davidson).

“A Guide to Recognizing Your Saints” was Montiel’s 2006 directorial debut – in addition to filmmaking, Montiel reportedly teaches screenwriting at UCLA. The problem with “Riff Raff” isn’t the performances but the screenplay by playwright John Pollono.

This comes across like a pastiche of so many other movies that came before it, ranging from “Pulp Fiction” (1994) to “Fargo” (1996) and “The Ref” (1994) and many more.

“Riff Raff” feels like one of the dozens of post-“Pulp Fiction,” Tarantino-wannabe crime comedies that littered so much of the late 1990’s film scene. Not all of those violent, self-consciously “hip” shoot n’ quip movies were bad.

However, for every “Things to Do in Denver When You’re Dead” (1995), there were at least three “Suicide Kings” (1997), “Feeling Minnesota” (1996) and “8 Heads in a Duffel Bag” (1997).

What Tarantino accomplished wasn’t easy, he just made it look and sound that way. The long line of imitators only demonstrated that “Pulp Fiction” was kind of a miracle, with everything that came in its path mostly terrible.

Considering the author’s background, it comes as no surprise that “Riff Raff” feels like a stage play, though seeing it presented as an insufferable night of bad theater isn’t preferable to the all-star treatment it gets here. The actors work the material, but Pollono keeps his story firmly in neutral.

Everyone present is giving performances that remind me of their prior work.

Coolidge is playing a washout with a tendency to say some vile things at random, the kind of role she played far better in Werner Herzog’s “Bad Lieutenant: Port of Call New Orleans” (2009). Harris has given far more impactful depictions of men enduring a public slow burn and Union deserves better than appearing in this.

Pullman is effective in a tougher role than usual, though it oddly reminded me of the comic turn his father Bill Pullman once gave playing a similarly impulsive criminal in “Ruthless People” (1986).

Murray’s scary portrait of a truly dangerous man is the best reason to see this, though he was even more intimidating playing a similar lowlife in the vastly underrated “Mad Dog & Glory” (1993). Davidson’s promising scenes with Murray made me wish they were in a different, better movie, instead of appearing here sporadically to bring some needed menace.

The other standout in the supporting cast is Michael Covino, captivating as Leftie’s rotten-to-the-core son, though his scenes, like all of the flashbacks, aren’t really necessary.

“Riff Raff” starring Jennifer Coolidge, Ed Harris, Gabrielle Union, Lewis Pullman, Pete Davidson & Bill Murray – The Poster is Here! https://t.co/JfV5aT4ZLa pic.twitter.com/J5GEN4gMD0

— Craig Zablo (@CraigZablo) February 8, 2025

Once we get to the third act, where the ensemble cast faces one another in a single location, it should all come together but just gets even uglier. The ending is a big nothing and the intended thematic exploration of dysfunctional families is, likewise, a complete bust.

Aside from a visual bit where yet another flashback is constantly interrupted by DJ’s needing instructions on how to operate a stove, I never found any of this funny. Adam Taylor’s score emulates Howard Shore’s ticking clock theme from Martin Scorsese’s “After Hours” (1985), yet another movie I wished I were watching instead of this one.

“Riff Raff” premiered at last year’s Toronto International Film Festival to mixed reviews and missed the awards-heavy winter. When a film with a cast this good can’t squeeze into the Oscar season, consider that a warning.

Here’s another one – I love most of the actors in this but will never watch “Riff Raff” again.

One Star (Out of Five)

The post Starry ‘Riff Raff’ Falls Incredibly Flat appeared first on Hollywood in Toto.

Parenthood isn’t for the faint of heart.

Sleepless nights. Sudden illnesses. Bills atop bills. The Terrible Twos (and threes).

The parents at the heart of “The Unbreakable Boy” face two additional layers to family life. Their adorable son is autistic and suffers from “brittle bone” disease.

Their fact-based journey fuels a sobering look at parenthood. Yes, the “Oz Man” is the heart of the film, but Zachary Levi’s character offers an inspirational look at a flawed but fearless parent.

The charming courtship of Scott (Zachary Levi) and Teresa (Meghann Fahy, “The White Lotus”) gets an unexpected jolt. She’s pregnant, and the couple decides to move in together to care for their baby.

That’s Austin (Jacob Laval, excellent), an adorable lad with dueling medical conditions. He’s autistic, something the budding couple didn’t realize for some time. He also inherited his mother’s genetic condition leaving him prone to broken bones.

It happens so often that Austin’s narration ticks them off like minor achievements.

It’s enough to leave any parent woozy, Scott included. He’s comforted in two wildly different ways. He has an imaginary friend from his childhood named Joe (Drew Powell), a storytelling gimmick that shouldn’t work but often does, and beautifully so.

And Scott drinks when the stress becomes insurmountable.

The latter causes the most problems, naturally, and it’s one way “Unbreakable Boy” disappoints. Scott’s descent into alcoholism is too tidy and inconsistent to generate dramatic tension. The film’s PG rating keeps some grit off-screen, an understandable approach given the story’s feel-good bona fides.

Audiences of all ages will savor Austin’s joie de vivre.

We know Levi mostly for sweet, oversized roles (think “Shazam!), but he delivers an understated turn as a parent in crisis. Much of his pain is internalized, which makes those acting decisions wise.

Director Jon Gunn (“Ordinary Angels”), in turn, wrangles the tonal shifts with authority. It’s OK to relish Austin’s flights of fancy while processing his parents’ fear he’ll end up back in the hospital.

Or worse.

Patricia Heaton deserves more screen time as Scott’s mother, a no-nonsense type who looms large over his psyche. She’s maternal yet cold, a combination that could have been explored in a more nourishing fashion.

Peter Facinelli also feels underserved as Preacher Rick, a calming influence on Scott’s life. The “Twilight” alum offers the film’s faith-kissed elements, a hint at how faith becomes the most valuable element in Scott’s potential salvation.

Other story arcs deliver unexpected results, like the bully targeting Austin’s younger brother (Gavin Warren). 

Yes, “The Unbreakable Boy’ hits some predictable notes, but it does so with consistency and heart. Credit young Laval for holding the film together. Had his performance been too sticky-sweet this “Boy” would keep us at arm’s distance.

That’s hardly the case in this sweet and soulful drama.

HiT or Miss: “The Unbreakable Boy” has its flaws, but the joys of watching a bright lad inspire friends and family alike more than make up for them.

The post ‘Unbreakable Boy’ Puts an Imperfect Family First appeared first on Hollywood in Toto.

“Millers in Marriage” may be set in modern times, but the ‘90s are never far from the screen.

Writer/director Edward Burns dissects the travails of 50-somethings in mid-life crises. They pine for their younger days, when “Seinfeld” ruled and AOL flooded the zone with Internet CD-ROMs.

So does the film, a throwback to storytellers who focused on lost souls seeking life’s missing ingredients. Think “Walking and Talking,” “Singles” and, of course, Burns’ “The Brothers McMullen” (1995).

Middle-aged malaise rarely gets a sober closeup like this, but too many story arcs fall into predictable ruts and never see their way out.

Burns lured a terrific cast to act out his latest New York story. Meet Maggie (Juliana Margulies), a writer married to a fading novelist named Nick (Campbell Scott).

Yes, two of the key characters are writers, another is an artist and everyone clings to their Big Apple roots. Burns takes the “write what you know” saw seriously, even putting the phrase in one character’s mouth.

Gretchen Mol co-stars as Eve, a former indie singer who settled for life with an unrepentant drunk (Patrick Wilson, lost in a one-note role). A music journalist (Benjamin Bratt) wants to do more than interview Eve about her one-hit-wonder days, but she feels too old to shake up her life.

And then there’s Andy (a bearded Burns playing the generic, well-intentioned guy). He’s dating Renee (Minnie Driver) after escaping from the awful Tina (Morena Baccarin).

Both Baccarin and Wilson should have held out for a rewrite of their toxic characters.

The family ties barely matter in the film (Eve, Maggie and Andy are siblings) beyond giving the title its teeth. It’s about marriages in decline, fueled by work disappointments, alcoholism or lives veering in different directions.

It’s all fine dramatic fodder, and Burns has the chops to pull it off – at least on paper. So why are so many subplots bland and predictable? Bratt resonates as a man who sees his handsome visage fading along with his career goals.

He’s desperate to save Eve from her terrible marriage. Her reluctance is hard to process despite Mol’s best measures.

What’s missing? A sense of narrative surprise. Why can’t some of these characters disappoint not just their spouses but subvert our expectations? Human nature is messy. The film embraces that truth without taking advantage of it.

So we wait for characters to wake up, make a move or just stop being passive-aggressive. A lethargy sets in just as the relationships should be coming into sharper focus.

Edward Burns’ MILLERS IN MARRIAGE starring Burns, Minnie Driver, Gretchen Mol, Julianna Margulies, Morena Baccarin, Benjamin Bratt, Patrick Wilson, and Campbell Scott will be in theaters and on digital VOD next Friday. It had premiered at the Toronto Film Festival in September. pic.twitter.com/ROMAtnurf5

— Film Festival (@LifeIsAFilmFest) February 15, 2025

Don’t blame the cast. They make the most of an uneven screenplay, each getting a moment to shine. Eve’s frustrations over abandoning her career for married life are familiar yet palpable. It might help to see more of her now-grown children to flesh out what she lost and gained by that decision.

A few quieter scenes crackle as partners reveal the limits of their affection. It’s still hard to watch yet another on-screen author enduring “writer’s block.” That film cliché needs a 10-year sabbatical.

At the very least.

Burns, now 56, is the perfect age to essay the love lives of older couples. It’s an unsexy topic ripe for indie storytellers.

“Millers in Marriage” looks like the Burns feature we need from him now, but the results prove more frustrating than fulfilling.

HiT or Miss: “Millers in Marriage” explores the love lives of attractive, 50-something souls. What’s missing is the insight the subject demands.

The post ‘Millers in Marriage’ Stalls Just When It’s Ready to Soar appeared first on Hollywood in Toto.

“The Monkey” shouldn’t work on any level.

The gimmick is simplistic to the point of ridicule. Most of the movie’s deaths are telegraphed a country mile away. You could jot the story down on a cocktail napkin with room left over for a stranger’s phone number.

Maybe two.

So why is it a cinch for the year’s Top 10 horror movie list? Writer/director Osgood Perkins, that’s why. The rising horror auteur (“Longlegs”) makes the most of the wafer-thin material, touching on family dysfunction in ways that give the story teeth.

Not the titular monkey’s teeth, mind you. They’re scary enough.

A ghoulish prologue, no spoilers here, announces the film’s gleefully dark tone.

Twin brothers Hal and Bill squabble endlessly, but they agree on one thing: They adore their single Mom (Tatiana Maslany, superb). She’s an odd duck but loving and sincere.

They’ll need that support when the boys discover an old toy left behind by their estranged Pappy. It’s a large, mechanical monkey with a snare drum.

Simple. Weird. Old school. It’s a curiosity they can’t resist.

Wind it up and, well, someone better call the funeral parlor. The toy haunts the lads’ childhood and, inexplicably, bonds with them.

Flash forward to the present. Mild-mannered Hal (Theo James, perfectly cast against type) never got over the monkey’s legacy or his bullying brother. Now, the twisted toy is back in his life, and it threatens not just him but his teen son, too (Colin O’Brien).

“The Monkey” is based on a Stephen King short story, and on the surface, there’s little “there” there beyond a cute horror ploy. Wind the Monkey up and watch what happens next.

Again, how pedestrian.

 

 

 

 

 

 

View this post on Instagram

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A post shared by NEON (@neonrated)

Perkins develops the dysfunctional family with quick, assured strokes. Funny strokes, to be clear. You’ll laugh early and feel a tad guilty later. Black comedy has that effect.

The laughs flow from the maniacal kills and character reactions. Both prove irresistible and long-lasting, and the precise editing heightens the humor. Every gag cuts like the knives Idris Elba wants to ban.

James’ handsome visage should work against the character’s morose mood. Nothing doing. His Hal is a prime-time sad sack, and we feel for his attempts to do something fatherly at long last.

Horror mavens crave quality “kills,” deaths that are wild, inventive and fresh. It’s a ghastly part of the genre’s fan base. Few filmmakers have as much fun with the trope as Perkins’ “Monkey.”

Each death is a masterpiece of gore and mayhem, and we laugh partly out of discomfort and shame.

The third act puts a few pieces of the story in place, a process that isn’t as satisfying as needed. There’s still enough danger and creativity to power those final sequences.

Perkins drops by as the boys’ blissed-out uncle, a small role that lets us glimpse the fun he must have had on set.

We get it. We’re having a blast with his “Monkey,” too.

HiT or Miss: “The Monkey” sets the comedy-horror bar sky high, delighting in death while teasing darker truths about family dysfunction.

The post ‘The Monkey’ Delivers Enormous Blast of Outrageous Kills appeared first on Hollywood in Toto.

Will Vinton’s “The Adventures of Mark Twain” (1985) is the only film to be made entirely in Vinton’s patented “Claymation” technique and remains a one-of-a-kind animated film.

Vinton was already an Oscar winner for his short films. “Closed Monday” was Vinton’s breakthrough in 1974, an 8-minute stunner that resulted in the first Oscar ever given to a stop-motion animated work.

By the 1980s, Vinton was building a reputation as an alternative animator in the age of Disney and Saturday morning cartoons. This movie, his only feature film, was a years-in-the-making showstopper that was intended to revolutionize his stop-motion brilliance to the mainstream.

While the film wound up a box office flop and Vinton’s massive commercial breakthrough came after (more on that in a moment), “The Adventures of Mark Twain” remains a little-seen but staggering discovery for lovers of unconventional animation.

It begins with a title card, reminding us of the arrival of Haley’s Comet, once a popular topic in the early 1980s (the comet returns in 2061). The wonder begins immediately, as the film is merely two minutes old, and we get the image of a book opening and the pages pouring into liquid visions that represent Twain’s vast imagination.

Once we settle into the sci-fi trappings and the odd fusion of semi-steampunk and Twain tales, the limitations and possibilities of Vinton’s technique are in plain sight. While the characters all sort of resemble bulky action figures, the facial expressions are amazing.

Vinton’s film presents a loving ode to both Twain and his works, albeit in a sci-fi presentation. Twain is depicted as both author and the captain of the massive airship. Huckleberry Finn, Becky Thatcher and Tom Sawyer all sneak aboard, as the airship ascends into the cosmos.

Twain hopes to immerse himself with the comet and kills time by telling the trio some of his best-known tales (none of which feature Tom, Huck or Becky, but are depictions from some of Twain’s most famous short stories).

As a conceptual fantasy intended to introduce audiences to Twain’s wit and storytelling, the concept is fun. I can envision similar films with this novelty. How about a haunted Stephen King locomotive or a Michael Crichton Island?

Vinton’s landmark film works for both Twain enthusiasts or anyone willing to be mesmerized by animation at a time when by-the-numbers kiddie fodder dominated the field. The exceptions? Don Bluth’s 1982 “The Secret of NIMH” and Ralph Bakshi’s output).

This is pre-Aardman Animation, playing in theaters the same year that Disney produced its notorious, tired flop, “The Black Cauldron.” Vinton was among the less mainstream innovators (such as Adam Elliot of “Memoir of a Snail” and Bill Plympton of “The Tune”) who were avoiding safe, cookie-cutter work and making animation that was personal, risk taking and defiantly different.

As a celebration of all things Twain, it’s worth mentioning that there’s no Jim, nor anything else here that courts controversy (Jim’s absence is understandable, though Twain completists might see that as a missed opportunity).

In addition to the frequent Twain quotes (such as “I became a writer…I haven’t worked a day since”), the vignettes that break up the story are funny and strange. The “Adam and Eve” sequence (which Vinton reportedly made first, in order to create a concept for the film around it) is wondrous, particularly in its depiction of God creating Earth and providing commentary.

(“This is nice…this is cute…”)

While the Adam and Eve sequence goes on too long and the satire is limp and dated, the technique is still stunning. The whole film is like this – even if the segments within the main story differ in maintaining interest, Vinton’s wizardry at making expressive performances and environments from clay is always captivating.

Many of the images are poetic, such as Adam first seeing Eve’s reflection in a pond. There are some jarring tonal shifts, such as the melancholy bit where Twain is spotted playing a pipe organ while tortured faces provide solemn accompaniment.

There’s also the eerie “Mysterious Stranger” sequence, a precursor to the still-wow inducing character work Vinton provided the magnificent “Return to Oz” (also in 1985).

There are surprisingly deep moments to be found, such as Twain ranting in a massive room containing stacks of his works. “The Adventures of Mark Twain” is episodic and jarring at times. Yet, even when the story loses momentum, the animation always amazes, and the brilliance of Vinton’s technique keeps it from capsizing.

Released by Funhouse Pictures but barely making a mark upon release (I remember the trailer but couldn’t find the movie playing anywhere during its original run), Vinton’s greatest successes came after.

While “The Adventures of Mark Twain” was eventually discovered by frequent airings on The Disney Channel, Vinton’s TV advertisements for “The California Raisins,” contribution to Michael Jackson’s “Speed Demon” music video (1989) and three seasons of the Eddie Murphy-led “The PJ’s” (1999-2001) are his most well-known accomplishments.

“The Adventures of Mark Twain” showcases the potential Vinton always knew was in his trademarked Claymation, shaping strange and gorgeous visions that offer dazzling, lifelike or dreamlike (or nightmarish) reflections of life, forged in clay.

The post How ‘Adventures of Mark Twain’ Rocked ’80s Animation appeared first on Hollywood in Toto.

Talk about big shoes to fill.

Anthony Mackie isn’t just taking over for Chris Evans as the star-spangled hero in “Captain America: Brave New World.” Mackie must serve as a bridge to future “Avengers” films while restoring the MCU’s luster.

The “Hurt Locker” alum is up to the task in the moderately satisfying sequel. A few nips and tucks could have elevated the character in ways the struggling franchise demands.

Mackie is now established as Cap as the movie opens, coming off “Avengers: Endgame” and the Disney+ series “The Falcon and the Winter Soldier.”

His Sam Wilson is open to partnering with Thaddeus Ross (Harrison Ford), a frenemy now known as the nation’s new Commander in Chief.

“Get off my plane!” (Wait, that’s another film.)

Cap also is training the “new” Falcon (Danny Ramirez), a headstrong soldier eager to make his mark. The Avenger introduces him to an old friend named Isaiah Bradley (Carl Lumbly) as part of his super-heroic training regimen.

Isaiah was part of a super soldier experiment and boasts supernatural strength. He also has a super-chip on his shoulder from being jailed for decades by his own government.

Can’t blame him.

When Isaiah attempts to assassinate President Ross the story activates. The attack threatens a potential treaty between the U.S. and Japan and strains Cap’s ties to the president. And Cap is wondering why his dear friend would attempt something so awful.

What follows is clear-eyed but busy, taped together with big stars and an eagerness to get the franchise back on its feet.

Secondary characters add spark to the proceedings. Lumbly doesn’t get enough screen time, but his haunted face and super-strength are welcome. Shira Haas plays a Secret Service agent and a badass in her own right, although the film takes great pains to hide her real identity.

Yeah, she’s the Israeli superhero known as Sabra.

Giancarlo Esposito gives Cap fits as the venomous Sidewinder, but his character will be confusing to those unfamiliar with comic book lore. Esposito is never less than engaging, but his purpose here feels fuzzy.

A larger foe remains out of focus, but that won’t be the case for long.

 

 

 

 

 

 

View this post on Instagram

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A post shared by Marvel Studios (@marvelstudios)

“Brave New World” has a choppy feel that suggests those infamous reshoots left scars. The tensions between the U.S. and Japan are never believable and Ross’s conflicted emotions come across as inconsistent.

It helps to know your cinematic Hulk lore – a previous film’s events weigh heavily in the plot.

Mackie’s Captain America shares his predecessor’s never-say-die pluck, a welcome hangover from Evans’ tenure. He’s more cynical than Steve Rogers, though. Sam has seen too much to be a red, white and blue Boy Scout.

It’s a laudable difference between the two, but the screenplay doesn’t fully embrace it. A late scene suggests Cap’s value as a person of color, but the film isn’t sure what to do with the moment.

Nor does the story reflect the grittier elements of “Captain America: The Winter Soldier.” That film had an intensity that “Brave New World” lacks.

The events here can be comic-book silly.

RELATED: HOW TIM BURTON’S ‘BATMAN’ MADE THE MCU POSSIBLE

Ross’s disconnect with his estranged daughter Betty (previously played by Liv Tyler) gives the story an unexpected warmth. The old warrior crumbles at the thought of her absence, but he’s still formidable when it counts.

Stars like Ford defy Father Time.

The anticipated Red Hulk appearance doesn’t disappoint. The film could have played as a second Disney+ miniseries, but red-hued finale deserves its big-screen fate. Mackie more than earns his wings in the battle royale.

The best MCU films gave us indelible characters and robust action, but the writing often provided the secret sauce. A quip here, a memorable line, there, and the super antics took on a brighter glow.

Some even hinted at broader ambitions that only a superhero film could explore.

You won’t find much of that in “Captain America: Brave New World,” a workman-like MCU entry that entertains but never dazzles.

HiT or Miss: “Captain America: Brave New World” reminds us of the MCU’s strengths and weaknesses in a post-“Avengers: Endgame” world. 

The post ‘Captain America: Brave New World’ – A New, Slightly Improved MCU appeared first on Hollywood in Toto.

It’s true that when the common defense becomes unreliable, the prepared will want their safe havens to be secure.

But life isn’t so cut and dry, says part of the message within “Homestead.”

A blow-‘em-up disaster scene under the bombing of Los Angeles may be how

This Ben Smallbone movie begins with a nuclear bomb detonating in Los Angeles, but when the nuclear fallout settles, genuine slices of humanity punctuate the film’s adventurous remainder.

Ian and Jenna Ross (Neal McDonough and Dawn Olivieri), the owners of a well-stocked, secret location called Homestead, have their grain stores and underground water supplies locked in.

What happens when a family with a member suffering from a difficult disease, whose ability to prep was lesser, shows up at the gate pleading for a safe place to heal?

Will Ian, Homestead’s chief protector, give entry?

The circumstances are beyond what the civilized mind can imagine, as fears about “us and them” are taken to an extreme. How would essential trust be built in this “SHTF” scenario? Where is the right balance between protecting and sharing?

Questions such as these make for relevant drama on several counts.

“Homestead” is written by Phillip Abraham and Leah Bateman, a married couple working in the entertainment industry together. Their marriage may contribute to the realistic dialogue between Ian and Jenna, and is a welcome, unique factor in the “Homestead” script.

In a reflective line in the script, Jenna Ross says, “Everyone’s wondering how the world ended, but this is the story of how it began again.”

Perhaps that positive energy of freedom being reset is what is driving the large and growing homesteading movement. Though counting the number of people who’ve exited the system to raise their food is difficult, it has been estimated at 2.2 million Americans in the millennial generation are homesteaders.

Don’t expect that in headlines. To paraphrase Gil Scott-Heron:

The homesteading will not be televised.
not be televised, not be televised.
The homesteading will be live.

The film deals with topics of revolutionary changes without and within. Capitalizing on a growing audience interested in such subjects, “Homestead” joins other films and shows on small farm communities such “The Lunatic Farmer,” the multi-season “Clarkson’s Farm,” and, in its own way, 2024’s “Civil War.”

Rather than a full movie about escaping LA, reaping harvests of food when it counts, and picking off interlopers by rifle, “Homestead” is also a Bible-based message about walking with the prudence and kindness worthy of God, no matter the trials one faces.

Some more metropolitan establishment reviewers have called that a relief about the movie, since they find prepping films “preachy” or off-putting, Why spoil the unity a movie like this can achieve and make survival with humanity an either-or matter?

The team at Angel Studios and “Homestead” might have you ask, as we all start anew daily in one form or another, what spiritual ground are we standing on?

NOTE: “Homestead,” and the first two episodes of the “Homestead” TV series are now available to Angel Studios’ Guild Members.

The post ‘Homestead’ Goes Deeper than Apocalyptic Prep appeared first on Hollywood in Toto.

Wim Wenders’ “The Million Dollar Hotel” (2000) begins with one of the most amazing open sequences I’ve ever seen.

We pull in, or rather we float across the glittering skyline of Los Angeles. The camera cranes around to the massive sign for The Million Dollar Hotel.

On the roof, standing next to the sign is Tom Tom, played by Jeremy Davies. Tom Tom suddenly breaks into a sprint, takes a moment to wave to someone off-camera then dives off the edge. What it all means won’t be clear until the very end.

The story then flashes back to earlier in the year, when Tom Tom was just one of the dozens of strange, sad and lost tenants living in the hotel. By the way, the setting is real: it was filmed inside the Rosslyn Million Dollar Hotel in L.A., the same one where U2 was filmed singing “Where the Streets Have No Name” in their music video.

We learn that a tenant named Izzy Goldkiss (an unbilled Tim Roth) was recently murdered, which explains the sudden appearance of Special Agent J.D. Skinner, FBI (Mel Gibson). To be more specific, Gibson plays him as slightly crazed and pain-riddled with a massive neck brace.

Only Tom Tom knows the secret behind Izzy’s death and he’s not telling anyone. Tom Tom, in his child-like way, is far too busy focusing on his infatuation towards Eloise, the beautiful, equally lost misfit played by Milla Jovovich.

Here’s a true oddity, both in its story and reputation- behold, a Wenders-directed genre bender, written at least partly by Bono of U2, starring Gibson at the height of his fame (fresh from “What Women Want”) and featuring a terrific ensemble cast and a sublime song score from Bono and Brian Eno (among others).

So why haven’t you heard of it?

Wenders’ film made a splashy debut at the 2000 Berlin Film Festival. What followed was a baffled response, bad reviews and even a negative soundbite from Gibson (who clarified that he was kinda-kidding and didn’t realize he was on the record when he called it, “as boring as a dog’s ass”).

While it found an audience overseas, “The Million Dollar Hotel” died a quick death stateside, where it played for barely a single weekend.

A likely culprit for the film’s witness protection release and some wildly varying critics’ assessments? The movie is, to put it mildly, weird with a beard.

People have told me over the years that they hate the film. I get it, as it rambles and frustrates as often as it dazzles, especially during the first act.

The hotel’s other main tenants are played by Gloria Stuart, Jimmy Smits, Bud Cort, Peter Stormare and Amanda Plummer. The film comes to a dead halt whenever they take focus. Any scene where they meet around a red pool table and yammer endlessly feels like bad improv.

Another big problem that nearly derails the film is the near-fatal miscasting of Davies, a fine actor but not entirely right for the role of Tom Tom.

Davies’ whispery, mumbling narration makes subtitles a must. It’s really saying something that the film manages to overcome the lack of a strong protagonist – it actually falls to Gibson’s wonderful slow burn and Jovovich’s excellent performance to carry this.

To be clear, Davies can be extraordinary (just look at his work in “Saving Private Ryan,” “The Black Phone,” “Solaris” and “Rescue Dawn”) but his performance here, as much as it reflects the film’s playful spirit, comes across as one note.

Nevertheless, Davies’ scenes with Jovovich are beautiful, as the innocence and naivete of the characters come across.

Wenders’ film is whimsical, gritty and challenging, especially in the manner it casually changes genres: this is film noir crossed with a love story, murder mystery and experimental drama, emerging like a film from the 1970s.

The episodic nature helps, as the scenes that don’t work are followed by ones that hit hard. There’s always another great scene coming, but that requires audiences to be patient enough to get through the moments that are overindulgent.

“The Million Dollar Hotel” tests your patience but, in the end, rewards it.

Boa noite.

Mila Jovovich – “The Million Dollar Hotel”. Wim Wenders, 2000. pic.twitter.com/7PyJqJCoj7

— Mauricio Machado (@Mr_Machado) May 9, 2024

As in Richard Kelly’s somewhat similar “Southland Tales” (both in its reputation and refusal to play it safe), a hit-and-miss first hour leads to a third act when everything comes together. In fact, both films conclude with a gala party and a game-changing final reveal.

The best scenes look like Edward Hopper paintings (as was the case in Wenders’ wonderful “The End of Violence” from 1997). This is as scrappy and soulful as Wenders’ “Paris, Texas” (1984) but, unlike Wenders’ 1991 masterpiece, “Until the End of the World,” which belatedly emerged with a 5-hour director’s cut that salvaged a mangled release, “The Million Dollar Hotel” could stand to lose 15-minutes and emerge a stronger work.

RELATED: HOW WIM WENDERS CAPTURED POPE FRANCIS ON FILM

At 100 minutes, it might possibly feel like one of Wenders’ best, instead of an overstuffed two-hour wonder that has too many characters but is still full of stunning visuals and poignant moments.

Perhaps the idea of making the hotel a microcosm of America was overreaching (if that’s even the idea here). Unlike Wenders’ more celebrated works, maybe there’s just too much movie here.

Yet, Wenders, along with Terrence Malick, is one of the few filmmakers whose work make me wander outside to watch a sunset and find time to stare at a starry night sky. His films are journeys, physical and figurative cinematic trips into the unknown with characters who seem less like real people and more akin to figures concocted in poems and love songs.

His films are earnest, in love with life, curious about human nature and full of wonder. I can recall the moments in “The Million Dollar Hotel” I can live without, but I’d also report that the killer opener and the powerful final moments make the missteps worth it.

For adventurous filmgoers, Wenders’ offbeat love story is overdue for rediscovery.

The post ‘Million Dollar Hotel’ – Weird, Misunderstood and Unforgettable appeared first on Hollywood in Toto.

“Kinda Pregnant” deserves a more accurate title – “When Amy Met Adam.”

The film fuses Amy Schumer’s rah-rah feminism with Adam Sandler’s Happy Madison shtick. The result? A fitfully amusing comedy that never delivers belly laughs but wins us over with it sweet underbelly.

Blame Schumer’s on-screen romance with Will Forte, a bond blossoming around one kinda huge fib.

Schumer stars as Lainy, a 40-something whose longtime beau (Damon Wayans, Jr.) wants a threesome, not wedded bliss.

Meanwhile, her very best friend Kate (Jillian Bell) is pregnant, and Lainy can’t help but feel envious. It’s everything she wants but life has other plans.

One wacky twist later, and suddenly Lainy is pretending to be pregnant. As Maxwell Smart might say, “And … loving it.”

Strangers give up their seats on the subway. People say she’s glowing. And she meets a new bestie (Brianne Howey) who is legitimately pregnant. Even better? She has a handsome brother whom Lainy previously met in a meet-cute coffee shop moment.

That’s Forte as Josh, a Zamboni driver who seems as emotionally adrift as Lainy. Could this be a Love Connection, or will Lainy’s huge secret get in the way?

 

 

 

 

 

 

View this post on Instagram

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A post shared by Tyler Spindel (@tylerspindelllll)

Schumer co-wrote “Kinda Pregnant,” and it couldn’t be more obvious. The film plays to her strengths – frequent bursts of rage between feminist bromides. The latter get painted on too thickly at times, but in some sequences show just how hard pregnancy can be.

It’s not all baby showers and crib assemblies. There’s vomit, endless urination and extreme self-doubt.

All of the above adds texture to a movie that often traffics in Sandler-esque broadsides. Schumer is game for just that kind of silliness, and her comic style makes some of the gags click.

Some, mind you.

It helps that Urzila Carlson brings a welcome edge as Lainy’s co-worker. She’s constantly sucking on a vape pen and pressuring her colleague to do the right thing. Or get out of the way.

It varies from scene to scene, but it’s often funny.

“Kinda Pregnant” stumbles over some rom-com cliches, and seeing Lainy repeatedly fall on her faux baby bump gets old fast. Director Tyler Spindel (“The Wrong Missy”) mines some genuinely warm moments to bring humanity to Lainy’s big, fat lie.

The main character’s sense of isolation is palpable and unforced. Schumer can be an effective dramatic actress when called upon.

Plus, watching Josh read to his nephew is a minor joy. Forte has never been more approachable on screen.

RELATED: PRESS ATTACKS AMY SCHUMER FOR DEFENDING ISRAEL

That Lainy-Josh pairing makes “Kinda Pregnant” worthwhile. You’d think Lainy reading him an Anne Sexton poem would be stuffy, at best. Instead, it leads to one of the better first-screen kisses in recent memory.

The film’s sole sex scene could have gone for Sandler-sized laughs. Instead, it plays out in a more gentle fashion, echoing how women often feel insecure about their bodies. The sequence wraps with the film’s biggest laugh, one that’s absurd and oddly appropriate.

Happy Madison films require top-flight casts, a steady stream of yuks and a dollop of heart to win us over. Not all manage that feat, gliding on a sea of crude sight gags. “Kinda Pregnant” shows the production shingle may be growing up. A little.

HiT or Miss: “Kinda Pregnant” finds small charms in Amy Schumer’s quest for love and motherhood.

The post The Truth About ‘Kinda Pregnant’ Will Surprise You appeared first on Hollywood in Toto.

“Reservoir Dogs” unleashed a crush of Quentin Tarantino copycats in the 1990s.

The films looked cool and stylish, but they lacked Tarantino’s boundless skill set. And it showed. Boy, did it ever.

Now, the producers behind “Nobody” are trying to duplicate that sleeper hit with another tale of an ex-killer lured back into action.

Nothing doing.

“Love Hurts” asks Ke Huy Quan to play an amiable Realtor with a dark past, but the wafer-thin screenplay lets him and his co-stars down.

Quan plays Marvin Gable, a mild-mannered Realtor who bakes cookies and treats his job like a gift from above. He’s kind and courteous, the kind of boss everyone would love to have.

Turns out Marvin’s past isn’t so cookie-cutter perfect. His evil brother Knuckles (Daniel Wu) wants to terminate Marvin’s old flame Rose (Ariana DeBose, in her second dud following “Kraven the Hunter“). It’s up to Marvin to stop him, all the while keeping up his Realtor facade.

Three screenwriters burned more calories coming up with cool names than developing a story or characters. Everything here is one-note or less, with actors repeating thoughts that hardly keep our interest.

Yes, we know that Knuckles will kill anyone who steals his money. Isn’t that Gangster 101 anyway?

“Nobody” hid the main character’s violent past for as long as possible. It gave the film a jolt when we learned Bob Odenkirk could take out the trash like 007.

Here, Marvin’s “reveal” happens early on, taking some air out of the story. And there’s precious little Oxygen remaining.

 

 

 

 

 

 

View this post on Instagram

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A post shared by GOLD HOUSE (@goldhouseco)

A bizarre love connection between Marvin’s assistant (Leo Tipton) and a Knuckles thug named The Raven (Mustafa Shakir, a bright spot) is so dumb it demands some Ibuprofen. The rest of the story is no better.

The Marvin-Rose bond may have the least romantic chemistry ever seen on screen. They might as well be strangers who met on the subway. Give these actors something to do!

Quan ís perfectly cast as a nebbish who harbors a violent streak. Even that isn’t played out effectively. Why not show the reasons why Marvin succumbed to his darker impulses for so long?

Director Jonathan Eusebio’s stunt coordinator past helps paper over some flaws. The action is frantic and steady, and some of the set pieces are fun to watch. That proves less so over time, and “Love Hurts” wraps in a welcome 83 minutes.

So why does it feel like an endurance test to watch?

We’ve become numb to bravura action scenes, which isn’t “Love Hurts'” fault. We just expect a little more now, and the film can’t deliver.

It’s cheeky to see Marvin go all out to protect a framed Realtor award, but it also makes a deeply silly film more ludicrous. Even the wackiest action comedies have a kernel of reality to them, another element “Love Hurts” lacks.

Join Oscar-winner Ke Huy Quan at his imprint ceremony at @ChineseTheatres in Hollywood, California.

Ke Huy makes his comeback to the big screen at the premiere of Love Hurts, where he stars as a realtor who reunites with his former partner-in-crime for one last dance… pic.twitter.com/39XcyfnMgt

— TCL (@TCL_Brand) February 6, 2025

Rhys Darby and Sean Astin show up briefly but make little impact. Both try their best, but there’s so little to work with in a story that wheezes to a final, predictable showdown.

Quan’s Hollywood comeback capped with a Best Supporting Actor Oscar for “Everything Everywhere All at Once.” What a wonderful story, one worthy of a film all its own.

He deserves a better follow-up vehicle than this.

HiT or Miss: “Love Hurts” is a mess, a violent mashup of would-be comic bits that goes nowhere fast.

The post ‘Love Hurts’ (But Not As Much As This Movie) appeared first on Hollywood in Toto.

Drew Hancock’s “Companion” is about a couple’s retreat in a lake house surrounded by miles of forest and isolation.

The central couple is Josh (Jack Quaid), who proudly accompanies Iris (Sophie Thatcher), who visibly adores him. Josh and Iris are met by two other couples, all seeking escape and relaxation but holding secrets that threaten to unravel the nature of their relationships.

What kind of secrets are we talking about? The kind that I want to be careful not to spoil, though my wife saw the teaser trailer months ago and guessed the big twist immediately.

My point is A. My wife is a lot sharper than I am, obviously and B. If you don’t know what “Companion” is about and want to see this uninformed, stop reading now and come back after. Minor spoilers will follow.

“Companion” is an eerie, brutal and darkly funny work. This is one of the few films that I haven’t stopped thinking about, as its central themes have followed me home.

Perhaps the early scenes feature dialog that is too on the nose, hinting all too obviously at the big twist around the corner. Yet, once everything is out in the open, the plot presents possibilities, not inevitabilities. When it seems like the film is settling into its genre, there’s another whammy of a confrontation around the corner.

To finally get to it, this plays like a contemporary twist on “The Stepford Wives” (1975) and even opens with the protagonist pushing a shopping cart (the signature image of both the original film and the wonky, guilty pleasure 2004 remake).

Jack Quaid Was ‘Desperate’ to Star in ‘Companion’

While geeking out over comic books in New York, the actor recalls “shaking” during his initial meeting with writer-director Drew Hancock.

Interview: https://t.co/nuj0tzi9OB pic.twitter.com/s1mmPlmudB

— Rolling Stone (@RollingStone) February 4, 2025

Hancock makes an impressive writer/director debut, and he’s aided enormously by a powerful, downright wonderful performance from Thatcher (who was terrific in “Heretic” just months ago). Iris is a tough character to get right, and Thatcher made me care deeply about her.

Quaid brings some effective layers to his character, never allowing us to figure out exactly how we feel about him until the very end. In the flashiest supporting role, Harvey Guillén of “What We Do in the Shadows” (where he plays Guillermo) manages to steal every single scene he’s in.

A repeated flashback, involving a dinosaur costume and a dance-off that follows, is delightful when presented the first time and hysterical when revisited with a new twist. The notion of memory as depicted here is especially effective.

As far as pop culture cinema philosophy goes, this would make a great double feature with “The Matrix” (1999).

While not on the level with “Blade Runner” (1982) or its sequel, “Companion” manages some visual and thematic references to “Hardware” (1990) and “A.I. Artificial Intelligence” (2001). I found it haunting in how it explores how couples sometimes “weaponize love” and, human or otherwise, we all fall victim to programming.

In keeping Iris not only the focus but also vulnerable and likable, it counters expectations. Who is the audience meant to root for? The answer isn’t easy. “Companion” is neither pro or anti-A.I. but an exploration of how memory, feelings and learned behavior can either make us empathetic works in progress or self-serving monsters.

Hancock presents a sadly plausible futurist premise. Classifying the story as from the “near future” is a reach, as the events of this movie only feel, at most, a decade away.

In comparison, “M3GAN” (2022) seems like escapism, while this comes across as a dire warning. The whole thing is ambitious and thought provoking, even as the deviously entertaining third act finally leans into genre expectation and character payoffs.

“Companion” has fun shuffling genre expectations in ways that reminded me of “Warm Bodies” (another love story!), though this one is a sour valentine. If you’re planning to take a special someone to see this on a date, it will either create great conversation afterwards or be enough of a turn off to become a break-up movie.

It all depends on your programming.

Three and a Half Stars (out of four)

The post ‘Companion’ Announces a New Genre Name to Know appeared first on Hollywood in Toto.

Mel Gibson’s “Flight Risk” opens with a wanted fugitive being arrested while hiding out in Alaska.

The U.S. Marshal who slams the cuffs on Topher Grace’s Winston is Madolyn (Michelle Dockery. She hires a private plane to fly her and her fugitive to New York, where Winston must testify in a high-profile criminal trial.

Madolyn employs a pilot named Daryl (Mark Wahlberg) who seems gregarious and professional. The trio take flight, the plane lands safely and without incident. The three have long, fulfilling lives and live happily ever after.

The End.

Just kidding.

Actually, things go badly from the jump. The pilot and the two passengers are hiding all sorts of secrets, and a deadly battle for control of the plane takes place while flying over dangerous terrain.

“Flight Risk” demonstrates how, after three heavy-going and terrific epic dramas in a row, Gibson, the superstar actor-turned-director, is having fun. That sense of playfulness is both an asset (this is a B-movie, take it or leave it) and a mark against it (after “Hacksaw Ridge,” “Apocalypto” and “The Passion of the Christ,” I couldn’t help but expect more from Gibson).

As much as I enjoyed “Flight Risk,” it has a major problem: even at a reasonable 91 minutes, it still has filler. The second act is so dialog-heavy, it drains the suspense, unloads unnecessary character exposition and bloats what should have been a brisk ride.

“Flight Risk” has a riveting start, an overly drawn out mid-section and a finale that delivers the goods. Then it keeps going after it should have ended.

It’s also bookended by CGI that wouldn’t fool a child.

Gibson can’t make this Hitchcockian, but he at least keeps it on the level with enjoyable popcorn junk food like “Turbulence” (1997) and “Cellular” (2004). That may sound like faint praise, but I like those movies.

However, a film that beats them all is Phillip Noyce’s “Dead Calm” (1989), the still-great, three-person, one setting thriller that “Flight Risk” ought to have matched. “Dead Calm” keeps audiences on edge, even with repeat viewings (the combo of Sam Neill, Nicole Kidman and Billy Zane remains incredibly potent).

In terms of casting, “Flight Risk” gets its central trio exactly right. Wahlberg excels in the kind of role Gibson himself probably could have played earlier in his career (imagine his wonderful character in “Conspiracy Theory,” only with the crazy knob turned up to 11).

Grace somehow manages to make his annoying character endearing over the course of the story. It’s still Dockery’s movie. The “Downton Abbey” star gives the most layered and intense turn.

Considering the forcefulness and effectively scary choices Wahlberg makes here, Dockery’s ability to go head-to-head with him (sometimes literally) is impressive. Wahlberg has been wonderful before, but Dockery deserves more lead roles after this.

“Mark’s got the madman in him…” Mel Gibson on his new movie Flight Risk- releasing today. On the Arroyo Grande Podcast he discussed the casting of Mark Wahlberg and why the star went bald for this role. The full episode is here- Subscribe and Like it: https://t.co/pONOfHJeQ5…… pic.twitter.com/CnDQOBTg4a

— Raymond Arroyo (@RaymondArroyo) January 24, 2025

Gibson manages in the pacing and editing to provide enough cuts to the plane’s exterior, preventing this from becoming genuinely claustrophobic. The sense that the three main characters are trapped and surrounded by the threat of death at all times comes through.

If it sounds like I’m asking too much of the director, again, remember that Gibson also made “Braveheart,” one of the few Best Picture winners that I’m always happy to revisit, the harrowing “Hacksaw Ridge” and “Apocalypto.” That jaw dropper is so fierce and accomplished (and my pick for Gibson’s best), even his detractors couldn’t deny how awesome it was.

This isn’t a knock but just the hard truth – Gibson’s low-key but emotionally resonant directorial debut “The Man Without a Face” (1993) is a stronger film than “Flight Risk.”

There’s a lingering shot of a bloody, shackled hand that reminded me of both “Braveheart” and “The Passion of the Christ.” Is this Gibson’s signature shot? Maybe not. I hope Gibson keeps directing and has more films on the way.

The long-rumored sequel “The Passion of the Christ” would really be something. For now, we have Wahlberg in Wile E. Coyote mode, visibly having a ball.

You could do a lot worse in January.

On a personal note: I saw the film with my dad, a licensed pilot who used to fly a Cessna aircraft. My father noted the wildly implausible moment where the plane flies through a snowbank unscathed and without crashing.

When it ended, we both agreed the film was fun but could have benefitted with a lot less chatter and more white-knuckle thrills.

Two and a Half Stars (out of four)

The post Mel Gibson’s ‘Flight Risk’ Offers Pure, B-Movie Fun appeared first on Hollywood in Toto.

Carroll Ballard’s “The Black Stallion” (1979) begins in a distinctly grown-up environment.

The titular stallion is under the watch of cruel, uncaring attendants. A boy watches the stallion and gives him a sugar cube, their friendship immediately established.

The setting is 1946 and young Alec Ramsey (Kelly Reno) is traveling on the ship with his father (Hoyt Axton), who we meet playing poker. Alec’s father dazzles his son with the tale of Bucephalus, Alexander the Great’s horse.

In the middle of the night, Alec and his father awake to the ship being on fire during a massive storm. While the ship sinks, Alec is able to the free the stallion. The next morning, Alec finds himself alone on a deserted island.

The only other companion is the stallion.

There is a purity to this kind of visual storytelling. Caleb Deschanel’s staggering cinematography, Ballard’s documentarian approach and the generous performances from the cast create a film devoid of cynicism or easy crowd-pleasing.

The victories of the characters are hard won and the inner life of both the boy and his stallion are complex. The boy carries the statue of Bucephalus as a totem that represents his inner strength and his lack of a father figure.

Reno has soulful eyes and never gives a forced, cute performance. We believe in the anguish and sadness that Alec carries. Axton, the late country singer turned character actor, is immensely likable (the role seems a precursor to the inventor/father he’d later play in “Gremlins”).

The first-act set piece of the boat sinking is terrifying. There’s almost no music, just sounds of the boat creaking, waves splashing and people screaming.

The intensity is jarring, as people are stomping everywhere, a man desperately tries to steal Alec’s life jacket and Alec struggles to save the stallion. This sequence is why I could never get through an entire HBO screening of “The Black Stallion” in my youth but was belatedly able to embrace it as an adult.

The second act is like “Cast Away” (2000), except Alec has no advantage. The story wisely takes its time to establish that rescue and survival are not inevitable.

The bonding that takes place between the boy and his stallion is a means of killing time and searching for food but not a guaranteed precursor to salvation.

The grown-ups Alec encounters are often cruel. The exception is his mother (Teri Garr) and especially Henry Dailey, the horse trainer played by Mickey Rooney.

Garr was a welcome presence who brings a different energy from the rest of the film. It’s a fitting touch as her character is just outside of the central story.

She has two wonderful scenes – the small, perfect bit where she thanks the stallion for saving her son and gives it a blanket, and her big scene with Reno, where Alec and his mother finally understand one another.

The latter is beautifully handled.

This was the first of the noted comeback projects for Rooney, a movie and stage star with a nine-decade-long career. He dominates the film’s second and third act.

Simply put, Rooney is magnificent. The scene where Dailey uses a pile of hay to teach Alec how to ride a horse at a fast speed might be the best acting moment of his career.

As a film about a child or children raising and caring for an animal, it doesn’t get any better than this. It will sound silly, but I’ll call “The Black Stallion” the “Citizen Kane” of equestrian films.

That’s exactly what it is.

Ballard’s film has a patient sense of discovery, reminding me not of the feel-good formula of “National Velvet” (1944) but a true adventure film like “Walkabout” (1971).

Ballard’s film is sweet but never cute. It’s exciting without seeming manipulative or condescending. There are no corny reaction shots, no jokes about horse droppings and it’s better than any Disney animal drama (yes, even “Old Yeller”).

Ballard later made “Never Cry Wolf” (1983), “Wind” (1992) and “Fly Away Home” (1996), all stunning and gritty works about people immersing themselves in nature.

In the years since “The Black Stallion,” everything from “Seabiscuit” (2003) “Dreamer” (2005) and “Secretariat” (2010) have arrived. All may be heartwarming and well produced, but they haven’t come close to matching or surpassing “The Black Stallion.”

The one film that especially merits discussion is “The Black Stallion Returns” (1983), that was directed by Robert Dalva, the accomplished editor of “Raising Cain” (1992), “Jumanji” (1995) and “Captain America: The First Avenger” (2011).

He also edited “The Black Stallion,” and “Returns” is the only film he ever directed.

The sequel gets off to a rough start, as the stallion is stolen, Garr makes the briefest of cameo appearances and Alec is off to Morocco to rescue the horse.

Since the first and second act are Alec traveling through the desert in search of his friend, much of the film is a literal slow march. Once it gets to the third act, two elements almost salvage the film.

One is the rapturous, magical score from Georges Delerue, and the other is the grand finale. It’s a thrilling horse race on a massive scale. The sequence is almost enough to make the audience forget how overwritten and underwhelming the first hour is.

I’ll conclude with one of my favorite stories about “The Black Stallion” producer Francis Ford Coppola, which I’m told is true but sounds made up.

Coppola would have all the filmmakers at his Zoetrope studio share a theater and watch each other’s dailies (the assembly of shots acquired from a day of filming).

Coppola’s assembly of dailies came first, and it was brutal: it was a montage of shots from “Apocalypse Now” (1979), with flubbed lines, a helicopter missing its mark and the director heard yelling, “Cut! Cut!”

Next was Ballard’s dailies from filming “The Black Stallion.” On the massive screen was Reno, running alongside his stallion, barefoot on the beach, waves crashing, while a rainbow graced the sky.

Coppola suddenly stood up in the theater and asked Ballard, “How did you do that?!” Ballard humbly explained that a light rain had occurred, and he knew that a rainbow would likely form if they were lucky. Coppola again asks, “How did you DO THAT?!”

Even the director of “The Godfather” was astonished.

The post ‘Black Stallion’ Remains the ‘Citizen Kane’ of Equestrian Films appeared first on Hollywood in Toto.