Change Your Image
lordrob
Reviews
The Third Man (1949)
I give it a 7
This is a very good film, but it could have been better. The plot, while clever, is rather predictable. (I figured out who the Third Man was as soon as the Romanian guy denied there was a third man). Also, while Welles' brief performance is probably the finest of his career, Cotten's acting is rather flat and uninspired, making his character more one-dimensional than is really necessary. The cinematography is inspired, truly some of the finest to be found anywhere, but the editing is rather choppy. The movie deserves to be on the AFI 100 list for its contribution to cinematic history, as it is really the forerunner of the entire film noir genre, but on its sheer artistic merits it does not quite rank with Fantasia, Network, The Manchurian Candidate, and a number of other films AFI placed farther down on the list. However, on the whole The Third Man is certainly worth seeing--Welles' entrance (however predictable) and the superb ferris wheel sequence can make the film worthwhile all by themselves.
Random Hearts (1999)
Awful
I can honestly say this is the worst movie I've seen in awhile. It was marketed very deceptively, with tag lines such as "What's the last thing you know is true?", making it appear as though the film was an interesting conspiracy theory type of plot. It wasn't. It was more like a bad effort at a "chick flick." The script was canned, which left Ford and Thomas little room to effectively use their immense talent. Moreover, Ford's character was thoroughly disagreeable, which did not help to involve the audience in the plot which surrounded him. A plot which, I might add, was rather thinly spread between Ford's police work, Thomas' reelection bid, and the relationship between the principal characters, leaving all three woefully underdeveloped--particularly Ford's police case. I did not enter this film anticipating an Oscar-quality movie, but I also did not expect to leave counting all the ways in which I could have better spent $7. Give this one a miss.
The Castle of Fu Manchu (1969)
The worst movie ever made.
Forget *Plan 9 From Outer Space*. *Fu Manchu* is far and away the worst movie ever made. Even the Mystery Science Theater crowd said it was worse than anything else they had ever seen. Why they bothered to dub it is a mystery to me, since even in a language the audience can speak the film is so hopelessly incoherent that no sane person--and few insane persons--could possibly discern what is happening throughout the bulk of the movie. I cannot help but wonder why I am even wasting my time and energy in writing a review, except to say that if you want to see a classic example of how *not* to write a screenplay, see this film, but if you have any other motive in mind, avoid it like the plague.
Suspiria (1977)
A masterpiece of the horror genre
I've seen hundreds of horror films (including all of Argento's work), and *Suspiria* is my unequivocal favorite. It is not a perfect film, but it comes closer than any other film in the genre. Everything until the last few minutes is masterfully orchestrated, combining skillful direction with chilling cinematography, not to mention a score that ties my stomach into knots every time I hear so much as a snip of its odd techno-funk beat. Unfortunately, the voice of the witch at the end turns masterful horror into overriding cheese, making the tagline ring all too true: there is *nothing* more terrifying on film than the first ninety minutes, but the last few fall somewhat short of genius.
That fact notwithstanding, *Suspiria* is a fine example of how horror movies should be made, and I sincerely hope that any director or screenwriter contemplating a horror film first sits down to watch this one so they can be reminded that the horror genre properly contains a good deal more than the simple-minded slasher flick that has become all-too-typical in American theaters. After all, no less a filmmaker than Wes Craven seems to have followed this advice, and it allowed him to move from such pitiful efforts as *A Nightmare on Elm Street* to *Scream*, the first (and thus far only) classic horror film of the 90's.
A Simple Plan (1998)
Twisted, but exceptionally crafted.
This is not the film to see if you're looking for a feel-good Hollywood anesthetic to cope with the end of the holiday season. If, however, you wish to experience a great film, then I highly recommend *A Simple Plan*. Its disturbing twist on the American dream may be too difficult for some--especially the very dark ending--but that is part of what makes the film such quality fare. Scott B. Smith's screenplay is tight and flawless. Sam Raimi's inspired direction may finally reveal to the rest of the film industry what fans of the Evil Dead trilogy have known for years: that, though his tongue is often firmly in his cheek, Raimi is a fine and grossly underrated filmmaker. Especially impressive is the way he and cinematographer Alar Kivilo approach the snow-covered landscapes. There is an immensity to the frozen wastelands of the film's crucial scenes that is almost worthy of David Lean. Also commendable is Raimi's skillful use of animals (among them crows and foxes) for symbolic purposes.
But the cast, not to be outdone by their crew, is equally notable. Billy Bob Thornton gives his best performance to date, surpassing even his award-winning role in *Sling Blade*. Bill Paxton is phenomenal as a straight-laced-family-man- turned sociopath, and Bridget Fonda's convincing portrayal of Paxton's determined wife complements him well.
Audiences at the screening I saw were commenting on the film's similarities to *Fargo* as they exited the theater, and seemed to belittle *A Simple Plan* for its lack of "originality." Granted, *A Simple Plan* is not entirely original. There are indeed vague shadows of *Fargo*, as well as *Macbeth* and Robert Frost, among others. But there is no such thing as an entirely original work, as great art is made by standing on the shoulders of giants. Make no mistake, this is NOT a cheap replay of *Fargo*. The differences are too numerous to note here, but suffice it to say that *A Simple Plan* is a great work in its own right, and deserves to be appreciated as such.
The Thin Red Line (1998)
Very Disappointing
Considering all the Oscar hype surrounding this film, I really was expecting a much better work. This film lacks any coherent sense of itself. It tries to be a character study, but doesn't adequately develop any of the characters. Moreover, the costume and makeup units do a very poor job of making the soldiers distinguishable from one another. While this may constitute an interesting statement in itself, it further hampers the effectiveness of a character study. The result is a slow-moving film that seems to have little point to it. There is some interesting dialogue in the voiceovers that smacks of Gnostic dualism, but it is disjointed in the context of the story and comes across as rather "tossed off." There is little else to distinguish it from the generally hackneyed war film genre. All the classic elements are there--the Dear John letter, the rebellious squad commander--but they are there in their most cliched format. If you want a quality war film, see Saving Private Ryan, but give this one a miss.