vyto34's reviews

I simply don't know of any better modern musical. Stunningly creative and an absolute starburst of colors and sounds. Amazing sets that are both "real" and fantastical at the same time. Plus, there's a huge number of them, so it must have cost a fortune. Ray Davies' singing in a house built like a dollhouse is a knockout scene--totally creative and unusual and is often the scene which is considered the high point of the film. David Bowie is fabulous, as is Anita Morris, although her role is way too brief. The movie is from 1986 but it seems absolutely fresh today. A totally wonderful romp and a positive message, in addition. Highest recommendation! Please let's have more winners like this one.

This film has been described as a "punk-music documentary," which is most certainly is not, as clearly explained in the "Making of" featurette contained on the DVD. It is an art house film written by Jarman to take the p*** out of the Queen, who was then very pompously celebrating her 25th jubilee. Since the punks were of the same inclination, he used a punk-scene setting as his way of making his point. There is actually not much live-music performance in the film at all. Toyah Willcox gets to play the lead, but she does not sing. She acts very well, but even though her character is odious. Jenny Runacre, in my mind, makes the best contribution to the film, because she is elegant, beautiful, and shows off her naked form attractively. Apart from Adam Ant, no major punk-music acts have any significant role in the film.

As usual with Brass, this is a very classy sex film, with Hollywood-class production values. (This, I might add, is a rare exception, not the rule, among other sex-film makers. Radley Metzger is the only other director I can think of offhand whose sex films invariably have great production values.). Stefania Sandrelli is an absolutely stunning woman, with a gorgeously filled-out body, unlike the skinny-jinnies that many other directors are fond of. The film is set in Venice in 1940 and the locales are beautiful, while at the same time focusing on a "native's Venice," rather than the few over-photographed canals and churches one generally sees.

But the people who did the U.S. version DVD are incompetents, unfortunately. This is only the second DVD that I have watched where the brightness/contrast were so badly mangled in making the transfer that the film is unwatchable until one moves his controls way off their ISF-calibrated positions. To be precise, it is the second-worst. The worst has been the total butchering of Antonioni's "La Notte", where even moving the controls to their limit cannot produce a decent picture.

Not a pretty picture. Glamorizes a gay black thug and his white accomplice. Pointless overall, although Yekaterina Golubeva is quite pretty and Line Renaud is a very charming grandmother-type. The few sparks produced these by two are just way outnumbered by the nasty stuff. Denis' fame does not make this into a good movie.

Cheaply made, unconvincing story of assorted characters pretending to be somebody else in wartime Poland. Supposed to be a comedy, but very few chuckles. Weak script does not help. It was Carole Lombard's last film, but she appeared in much more entertaining vehicles. Plus, in this one, her good looks had rather faded.

The movie is certainly not deep, but it has charm and has weathered much better than some other films of the hippy era. Lesley Ann Warren is luminous, sexy and a luscious knockout. Definitely one of her more appealing roles.

This is basically a German takeoff on a Sherlock Holmes story. Now, if told in a competent way, Sherlock Holmes-inspired tales can be entertaining, even if of secondary heritage. But this abomination is FOUR HOURS LONG! Every shot and every scene is presented in excruciating slow motion. In addition, all of the themes are telegraphed so ineptly that generally you don't need the scene at all, because you already know exactly what will take place before it starts.

Except for hardcore students of German cinema, who are known to love this film, this is unbearably EXCRUCIATING to all of us that are not in a German film class. I'd rather be at the dentist, especially since my dentist, unlike Dr. Mabuse, is a nice guy.

Yes, the exterior street scenes are often very good German Expressionist set creations, but this turgid piece of molasses is not worth seeing just to see a few artistic sets.

The Perfect Vision magazine has (at least, currently) available on its web site a full review of Mulholland Drive. To my knowledge, their reviewer is the only magazine reviewer who appreciated the movie, UNDERSTOOD IT, and explained it in detail. Please read it at: http://www.avguide.com/film_music/film/reviews/david_lynch.jsp

Pathetic losers abound. Even Marianne Faithfull, whom I expected to be classy, gets to play a frumpy character not too different from a bag lady. The males are all notably unattractive, while none of the female characters is developed enough to care about. Kerry Fox is reasonably attractive, though. Lots of sex scenes; totally unerotic, they seem to suggest that people should have sex because they dislike each other or have no use for each other.

Jane Birkin is attractive and the set decorator created a very colorful Carnaby-Street-in-Oxford. But the only theme of this flick is sadism and this is not exactly uplifting. The characters are 2-dimensional cardboard cutouts and no subtlety is to be found.

This badly-done movie comes across as a 1970s porn film--without porn! It has the same 1-dimensional, slimy characters that populated porn films of that era, and it is very hard to believe that this was actually a Hollywood production. The story is insulting to adults--everything is predictable and trite. Jacqueline Bisset is gorgeous, but she does not get to show the front of her body off, despite a bunch of teasing scenes that suggest she might.

This tedious bit of filmmaking received some very strong publicity and film festivals but one wonders what those folks were smoking...

It is boring and unispired, phony, and nothing is lovely at all, not even the ladies starring in it. Maybe it is amazing that the director found financing for her film, but that's about it. "Women's films" usually are over-emotional and melodramatic, this one is just a bunch of ladies with nothing to do or say.

Maybe this is an interesting film if you're a New Yorker. If you're not, I'm sorry, but stereotype neurotic behaviors of New Yorkers just does not turn me on. Plus the majority of the lead players are unattractive (but there are some exceptions). If you want neurotic New Yorkers, go see Woody Allen movies, at least these are well made.

Roeg has done some great movies, but this a turkey. It has a feel of a play written by an untalented high-school student for his class assignment. The set decoration is appealing in a somewhat surrealistic way, but the actual story is insufferable hokum.

The movie is a fabulous classic, but the DVD version released by WinterTainment (1999, UPC 698140-56833-9) is an outrageous botch job. It looks like a transfer was made from a poor quality VHS tape! The DVD is now out of print; do not be taken in by high-priced dealers offering "collector's copies"--a worn out rental VHS tape will be no worse. Hopefully, a decent DVD transfer will someday be issued.

This is the sort of crap film that gave foreign films in the US a bad reputation: Excessive intellectuality, shortage of action, repetition of themes ad nauseam, interminable navel-gazing, etc. For a high-school student's project, this would be acceptable, but for a professional filmmaker, it is a total disappointment. Since all the viewer can do is stare at endless, static presentations of the same actors, it might at least be fun if they were highly attractive. Alas, they are not. Jeanne Balibar is moderately attractive, as is Bruno Todeschini. (Balibar does take her shirt off at one point, but her tits are hardly something to get excited over). The rest of the cast would better be unseen. Let me emphasize that this piece of tedium is 2.5 HOURS LONG. There's barely enough material here for 60 minutes worth of movie.

What is the point of a prudish movie about sex? The girls are constantly in bed, but never take their clothes off. Why do we still have such rubbish in the 21st century? But, of course, the movie is not of the 21st century, it is stuck in cliche-land of many decades past. Even apart from the fundamental botching of the presentation of sex, the film is trite and unoriginal. Much of it comes across as an old-fashioned travelogue for the hicks about visiting New York.

As an actress, Agnès Jaoui is a gorgeous and very appealing woman. But as a director, she falls flat. There's simply no point in this tedious bit of French life where nobody is decisive, nobody cares about much of anything, and nothing progresses anywhere. In addition, none of the other actors are appealing--indeed, apart from the bodyguards, all the others are remarkably frumpy. The bodyguards are no work of joy either, since they are both bored and boring. No "Vive la France"; it's "La France est mort" instead. Even Jaoui's performance is unsatisfying, since she plays all her in-bed scenes wearing a leotard (a French Doris Day?).

Sheryl Lee gets to play a dull-witted strumpet--now isn't that creative! Her supposed love interest, Colin Lane, is no heart-throb, but does get to play a tight-arsed boor. Charles Dance is good and likable, but cannot save this turkey. The decayed, picturesque Latin American village is photographed gorgeously, but the movie is better with the sound off.

If you like intelligent European films and don't much care for American blockbusters, gore-fests, or trivial comedies, this is a film for you. It totally stiffed at the box office (I think there were 2 other people in the theater when I saw it), but it is an exceptionally fine, unusual flick. The Coppola film for those of us who would rather watch Antonioni.

This is possibly the only intelligent US movie ever made with a menage-a-trois theme. It also involves some metaphysical rudiments that are rather well presented. The Philippine locations are attractive and rarely enough featured in movies to provide additional interest. Sheryl Lee is drop-dead gorgeous and does an excellent job with her role. The two male leads have a bit simpler task, but they too come across very well. Terence Stamp in the role of a Dutch monk is a blast. A thoughtful, well-paced jewel of a movie that did not get the boxoffice success it should have had.

Gorgeous Sheryl Lee needs to get a better agent. As the trade magazines for movie theater owners used to say in the 1950s: "For the lower half", meaning suitable only as the poorer half of a double-bill. It would have made a boring, standard half-hour TV show. But stretched out to 1.5 hours, it is painfully redundant and repeatedly-telegraphed (except for the ending, which is not telegraphed, but is totally unmotivated). To make things worse, Sheryl does not even get to do anything sexy in the film.

The theme of a malevolent stranger insinuating herself into a family, seducing everyone in it, and wreaking havoc before getting her final comeuppance is an old tale. But it is told in this movie in a fresh and engaging way. Part of the appeal is the New Zealand landscape, and the cinematography dwells on its most unusual, dream-like aspects. Marcia Gay Harden is absolutely spot-on as the seductress. Caitlin Bossley is also very appealing as the daughter. William Zappa is rather frumpy, however, as the famous author. In an interesting twist, the direct victim of Harden's malevolence is played by Donogh Rees as a character which is just as malevolent.

The script for this film is no better than for low-rent, American TV shows--unimaginative, predictable, telegraphed way in advance. Basically there are two stories, a teenage girl's coming of age, and a dentist's philandering. But neither story is developed enough so the viewer would care. No involvement is created with the characters, because the characters undergo no significant changes or growth. The cinematography is attractive, but the acting is variable. Marceau does not get to do anything beyond staring from underneath her bangs. Fossey is gorgeous and highly likable, but she does not get to do anything significant either. Brasseur is a most unfortunate choice for the dentist...he seems to have wandered in from the set next door where he was playing a Marseilles gangster. It is just too difficult to visualize him as somebody who nominally graduated dental school and not as a waterfront thug. Denise Grey is charming as the grandmother, but her part, again, is predictable and introduces nothing new.