mkendra29 Reviews

American Boy: A Profile of Steven Prince (1978)

not just another talking head

[8/10 · 30 June 2010]

If this documentary (which is hard to find on home video but I was lucky enough to watch on YouTube) does not seem like a Scorsese film, that is understandable; he generally aims for certain themes, and I don't want to pigeonhole this national treasure... but let's face it, there are certain elements you expect from him: character studies, the mob, loners, criminals, doomed lovers, rock soundtracks. That's just a small list. His forays into nonfiction film are sporadic, although he is great at those: "The Last Waltz" holds its own with scripted material from that (or any) time, his Dylan doc is compelling, and I'm sure the one about George Harrison will be also. Yet this is as stripped-down as anything that Martin has done.

I love that fact that while the lion's share of AB is Steven Prince talking, the few cinematic flourishes are carefully chosen, such as the home movies; even the parcellization of his many adult adventures (which eventually settle around his long battle with the needle) feels like it moves like a conventional cinematic story. It was interesting to me to watch some of Scorsese's gems from the period like "Raging Bull" and "Taxi Driver" and then this - to me, his portraits of Gotham losers make infinitely much more sense after watching this! Certainly, there are bits of him borrowed for those fictional films (and I could make a case for much of his later career's pictures as well). It doesn't hurt that Prince himself is a great storyteller and comfortable in front of the camera. MS himself is a constant but, thankfully, at the end of the day an unobtrusive presence. The material either makes or breaks with Steven Prince and, luckily, it all works.

This is not the first "one man band" film I've seen that is impressive - "Tyson" and "Blind Spot: Hitler's Secretary" come to mind as great films that focus primarily one one individual being interviewed. I'm not going to put "American Boy" up there with those, but I would happily recommend it to someone who thinks they have seen it all when it comes to the work of Martin Scorsese.

Reel Radicals: The Sixties Revolution in Film (2002 TV Movie)

very good "introductory" overview of the '60's

[8/10 · 5 April 2007]

I watched this program on AMC back in 2002 and I must say that it is similar in ambition and scope to "Easy Riders, Raging Bulls" which covers the 1970's in similar fashion, Obviously, the running time is hardly sufficient to cover the decade's films. By necessity, something of this duration is going to leave out cult classics, neglected foreign films and the like, so obviously anyone wanting to do more than skim the surface is best advised to look elsewhere. But for neophytes, this is a great starting point.

The program is structured in segments in which several contributing factors are each analyzed for a few minutes. The increasing popularity of foreign films, the stylistic influence of East Coast live television and the recurring motif of the "antihero" as embodied by Newman and McQueen are given individual segments, as is the politically bent (almost always) leftism brought in during that time. the program tries to work in other issues such as the dissolution of the Production Code and the progressive and antiwar movement; of course, it's hard to encapsulate it all into an hour, but this program does well with what it can.

Interestingly, the film arrives at a segment where it analyzes the two films that they seem to feel embodies the decade most: "The Graduate" and "Midnight Cowboy." The former is unmistakably a sixties film all around; the latter is extremely entertaining despite its flaws (and of course is best remembered as the least likely Best Picture winner ever). This program didn't really go into seventies cinema much other than to talk about the number of careers launched or revived by the sixties. I think it wisely treats the seventies as another discussion altogether. All in all, I think this would make - if one can find it - a great thing to show in a "Film 101" type of class.

Shafted! (2000)

hilarious, craptastic parody

[6/10 · 14 March 2007]

A few years ago a friend of mine loaned me this video. It was part of a promotion Hollywood Video had a number of years ago in which they gave first-time filmmakers the opportunity to get a release of their movies through the chain. The series was uneven (check out "The Road to Filn-Flon," the best of the bunch), but "Shafted!" is amusing, if not stellar. The idea is that the white protagonist is essentially unaware (or doesn't care) that he is not the black, system-hating character he thinks he is. This careens from gag to gag in hit-or-miss fashion, parodying the "blaxplotiation" movement of the seventies. Best moment: his session with his black doctor/love interest. It's as predictable as a sunset, but is funny in fits and starts. 6/10

Art House (1998)

indie parody of "the industry"

[6/10 · 14 March 2007]

"Art House" was part of a series Hollywood Video did a few years ago where they gave releases to first-time filmmakers. This one is a send-up of film-making and the auteur condition (think "8 1/2" with a modern patois) with Chris Hardwick as this type of person. His performance reminded me of Richard E. Grant in "The Player" as he is very hilariously unable to compromise on anything. It also shows a lot of young guys trying to navigate their social lives (think a bit of "Swingers" and their foibles around town.) I wanted more; it seems to pick all-too obvious targets and the low production value shows. It also seems to be self-consciously hip at times. Still, there are a few belly laughs here. 6/10

The Sinister Saga of Making 'the Stunt Man' (2000 Video)

offbeat look at an offbeat classic

[7/10 · 14 March 2007]

This feature-length making-of documentary is worth watching for those who are big fans of this movie. Richard Rush hosts this with obvious passion, as this was certainly the apex of his professional life. It covers things you'll see in other "making-of's" such as how people got cast, how they got locations, financing, etc. (I won't spoil anything here.) What distinguishes this is the fact that Rush takes into studio politics, courting of critics and their reviews, and basically shows how hard it is to get offbeat material like this onto the big screen. Basically, some out-of-town screenings saved it from oblivion; it could very well still be sitting on a shelf today were it not for a lucky break in a Seattle-area theater.

While the piece is hurt by an overall air of silliness, I think it works because the director pretty much touches all the bases in terms of how the movie and all its elements came together. Sadly, the successful release of this movie seems to, in retrospect, have been something of a Pyrrhic victory for Rush, who has since only had two credits (the screenplay for the formulaic "Air America" and direction of the unwatchable "Color of Night"). One wonders if maybe his quest to make "The Stunt Man" made him enemies or gave him a bad rap. Nevertheless, Rush - who made his name in '60's exploitation - was able to produce this masterpiece, and it is a good, if flawed, companion piece to the movie.