muerco Reviews

And Justice for All (1979)

the kitchen sink

[7 July 2007]

I remember seeing this movie when I was about 10 and it seemed like the heighth of sophistication. An idealistic, principled lawyer sees the world falling apart around him and makes his stand. The world's a crummy place, he learns.

Watching it again recently, a lot of things became clear. It's essentially a kitchen-sink potboiler melodrama with some black comedy in it, a puree of everything from Paddy Chayefsky to Frank Capra to Elia Kazan in which a little man rails against the system. The script is much more mediocre than you'd find in those guys' movies (Lumet is the most obvious touchstone here, and would've been the right person to direct), with lots of planted insights and twists that we've seen coming a mile away. It's faux moral in the manner of a 15-year-old who learns that not every defendant is innocent of a crime, and I think Levinson and Curtain really have no idea of what lawyers really do. Everything in the movie is an idealistic Showstopper about the system--no poring over the books or sweating out the details. There are a couple good scenes/characters I guess (Jeffrey Tambor is really entertaining), but the movie really makes little sense. Why the banally comic scene with the helicopter? Why the crummy lounge jazz score? Why does Pacino SUDDENLY YELL in the middle of every other sentence?

I jest about Pacino though. He's great, totally alive, spry, and enervated--the last of his great run through the '70s, and in the service of a generic crap picture. Jewison's direction is pretty lousy, and it seems like the actors (many good actors, I might add) are essentially flying blind. Pacino makes it work for him, though, and if the movie has any weight at all, it's because he's so committed to it. He's still young enough to be completely charismatic (in the manner of "Dog Day Afternoon") yet old enough to carry some authority and wisdom. The movie doesn't really deserve him, but without him there'd be no movie at all, and I'm glad he stooped to be in this to do his thing at its most unfiltered.

Khrustalyov, My Car! (1998)

in the dark

[4/10 · 28 May 2007]

I saw this at a festival years ago and it stands as perhaps the paradigmatic Difficult Festival Experience--you suffer because it seems like it might be good for you. I had heard good reports from Cannes and knew that this would probably be my one chance to catch the film, so I went with it with a few friends who were even more in the dark about this than I was, although who were game to see anything that might be potentially good. My own feelings about how confounding and unpleasant the movie may have been were certainly colored in part by my feeling responsible for their enjoyment; I dragged them to this.

Things looked promising in the opening two or three minutes. The b&w photography was gorgeous and sinuous. The cold chill of the Russian winter oozes from the screen. But as soon talk and action began I was instantly, laughably lost. Occasionally my friends and I shot looks of eye-rolling befuddlement to each other; we were being taxed as never before, and unfortunately none of us had a Ph.D. in Russian history or film to serve as an anchor. To say that I had no idea what was going on, where we were or how the characters were related, is an understatement. This movie makes "The Master and Margarita" seem like "The Catcher in the Rye." I can't really make a judgment on the film other than that I felt the other comments here seem too weighted toward people who obviously came to the movie with a lot more history and background than I did. If I had come to the film with that critical apparatus, I probably would have appreciated it much, much more. I don't doubt that those comments are valid, but I did want to put a warning in there that this was a supremely Difficult film even for a fairly adventurous moviegoer. I can't really think of any other film I've ever seen that stumped and mystified me so fully yet so clearly had some structure and apparatus to it. It would probably take 500 pages of text for someone to explain in detail what's happening here, a further investment I wouldn't want to make.

Lonesome Jim (2005)

bravo Buscemi

[9/10 · 11 May 2007]

This is the most pure example of American independent film that I've seen in years. Zeroing in on a few characters, a limited situation, perfectly consistent in tone (which might be characterized as realist-deadpan), simply yet effectively done--this is the best Raymond Carver adaptation ever made, yet of course it's not even based on one of his stories (it's based on a fine original screenplay by James Strouse).

It seems like back in the late '80s films like this were made, but very rarely are anymore, when every independent film has become either a star vehicle or a strident, obvious Satire. This film (like Buscemi's also marvelous "Trees Lounge") seems organic to the story it's telling. I came to the film knowing nothing about it, had no idea where it was going or what it was up to, and was always happily surprised that it didn't take the cheap route through anything.

The performances are all excellent. Mary Kay Place perfectly plays the all-American mom and without calling undue attention to himself Affleck absolutely embodies a type we've all met many times before but rarely see on screen with this level of detail. Even Liv Tyler is good. But a special word should be said about Buscemi as a director. There's nothing fancy in how he works yet he seems to know completely how to shape a movie, getting the most out of his actors and the bland settings that the drama plays out in. I wish we had more darkly comic, substantial, humane films like this. I really hope Buscemi gets to make many more films.

The Age of Innocence (1993)

sublime

[9/10 · 2 March 2007]

I can't recommend this movie highly enough--to Scorsese fans or non-Scorsese fans. It is, I think, the best costume picture I have ever seen. OK, "The Leopard" is greater, and "Barry Lyndon" might also be, but what company! The book is of course wonderful source material, but that doesn't guarantee greatness as a film; and the film has a sensuality, a tactile, flowing quality, that is utterly remarkable. Every vase on the bureau, painting on the wall, teapot on the table seems to have been chosen with meticulous care, and the whole thing feels lived in too; the camera roams the walls or the gallery at the opera the way our eyes might. Sublime. This is what I was hoping for when Scorsese labored for years on "Gangs"--a lovingly detailed, completely sensual immersion in the past. Didn't happen that time. But why this movie isn't on the shortlist of great literary adaptations I will never understand. It's a master filmmaker at his most fluid, and (as another reviewer on IMDb presciently put it) Visconti-like.

I first saw this film at its (world?) premiere at the Venice Film Festival in 1993. As just a normal plebe, I couldn't score a ticket for the daytime screening on the Lido, but as I waited to see something else I saw the European cinejournalists coming out, all looking nonplussed. I talked to a few of them, and all of them said it was boring and offered criticism along the lines of "he just filmed the book". Nonetheless, I went later that week to an outdoor nighttime screening for the public at the Campo Santo Stefano (if I'm not mistaken), and from the opening shots of the blooming flowers across that widescreen space, I was truly captivated. But I must admit that I didn't fully trust my feelings about the film--the later American reviews seemed to echo the ones of the Euro journalists, and I wondered if it was seeing this film so far from home in a foreign location that had made it so vivid for me. But I saw it again about 12 years later and it came into focus just how great it really is, critics be damned. This is a film that gets better and better with age, especially since we're not surrounded by Merchant/Ivory style films like we were then, or rather nowadays they've all been Weinsteined into star vehicles for Gwyneth or Keira. Just as in that wonderful earlier comment on this thread by Jess Fink, I am happy/sad to see the film get so much love on this board. I had assumed there were so few of us, and we'd have 40 years in the wilderness before the world would catch on.

Day-Lewis is terrific, as is most of the supporting cast, but the reason I can't give this a perfect 10--the only flaws I can think of--are the performances of the leading ladies. Pfeiffer has some good moments, but I think she is unable to fully carry off the complexity of the role. On second viewing, Ryder's performance seemed less stiff than I remembered from the initial viewing, but I do think she's also a little overmatched by the incredible actors around her. She makes a good effort though.

A terrific film that will help round out your understanding of this great director.

Saturn in Opposition (2007)

more of the same

[5/10 · 21 February 2007]

I saw the premiere of this film in Florence the other night, with Ozpetek and a lot of the cast (including Accorsi and Buy) in attendance. It will soon have its release throughout Italy but I highly doubt (despite its esteemed cast) that it will make it abroad--for good reason. Having liked "Le fati ignoranti" and been less impressed with "La finestra di fronte," I came to this hopeful but with some reservations. The basic theme (though not the plot, which is too uninteresting to go into) is the same as in those other movies--that family is something one forms among friends and lovers rather than the traditional tight/strangling norms that define Italian family bonds. When Ozpetek really brought this out in "Le fati ignoranti", he seemed like a fresh voice in Italian cinema: unjudgmental, sane, equally interested in straight and gay relationships, kind with actors. Things haven't really changed in the intervening years, but his approach now seems a limitation, or rather, there's nothing to get excited about or involved with in this new film. The stakes seem low, the actors seem unplugged, the melodrama feels forced, and with no especially compelling central character (like Accorsi's in "Fati ignoranti"), there's no real involvement for the audience. Tears are shed, lessons are learned, compassion is shown. This could be a TV movie. It's only the sad state of Italian cinema in general that makes something like this pass for a serious drama. It's not really a bad film or a terrible failure, just something slightly better than mediocre. Is that good enough for one of Italy's leading directors?

Bonjour Tristesse (1958)

what's not to like?

[9/10 · 6 February 2007]

Yes, it's a soap opera, and yes, it's in some ways derivative of Sirk. But I just love this movie, as much as any movie of its type from the '50s. Short, swift, luxuriously filmed, and perfectly cast, "Bonjour Tristesse" is the best of Preminger's many best-seller adaptations ("Advise and Consent," "Exodus"). On a formal level, the movie is beautifully constructed throughout; the blocking and movement in and out of the frame is practically balletic, especially in the black-and-white sections. Even with her bland affect, Seberg is simply magical (and completely believable), with one great outfit/swimsuit after another. Niven and Kerr fit their roles exquisitely well, with the exactly right degree of self-awareness and (to some degree) self-loathing. I saw this movie recently 20 years after I first saw it (and was charmed then) and was not disappointed--it was exactly as good as I remembered. I can't think of any Preminger film more entertaining or more worthy of reaching a wide public. Enjoy!

The Easy Life (1962)

oft overlooked Italian classic

[10/10 · 25 January 2007]

This is probably the most undervalued of all the great Italian films made during the boom period following the late 1950s economic revival. The others you already know--"La Dolce Vita," "Rocco and His Brothers," "L'Avventura" and Antonioni's next few, "Divorce Italian Style" and "Seduced and Abandoned". But Risi's film, though considered archetypal in Italy, has not reached nearly as many viewers. This is a shame, since it's a movie that everyone can enjoy while it raises many serious issues about responsibility, adulthood, the pursuit of happiness, and the perils of always trying to "fare la bella figura".

"Il Sorpasso" is above all a character study, in the best sense. Bruno is charming, witty, obnoxious, deluded, lovable, manic--all of these things at once. Gassman gives the performance of a lifetime. I can think of few film performances that soar through the comic bits but also fully suggest the tragic dimension of the empty soul. Trintignant is very good also--a perfect foil.

I hope that everyone will get a chance to see this movie. The one time I saw it was on video in a poor print a few years ago. Criterion, Rialto, New Yorker Video: please, do a deluxe set! This one is ripe for rediscovery by everyone.

Once You're Born You Can No Longer Hide (2005)

a treasure

[9/10 · 10 January 2007]

Agree completely with the comment of David from Seattle (the only other comment on the film so far). Just saw it on Italian TV and was blown away--a remarkable work of the humanist cinema (insofar as such a term exists anymore). I had read some festival reviews of the film that basically criticized it because it didn't have the wide scope of the "Best of Youth", but that's hardly grounds to penalize a film that does so many things through its central story.

The basic plot sounds like it could be tedious--a boy from a wealthy industrialist family who is thought drowned is saved by a refugee boat. He becomes especially close to a Romanian brother and sister and in many ways ties his own fate to theirs. The film is so beautifully directed--subtle, never obvious, not belabored or sentimental--that it feels as much like it is observed so much as created for the screen.

No recent film can top "The Best of Youth", but this is also great. I hope more people outside Italy get a chance to see it. Giordana is the best Italian director at work now.

The Spirit of the Beehive (1973)

graceful and elegant

[10/10 · 7 August 2006]

Like many of the other commentators here, I had heard about this movie long before I had ever had a chance to see it, although it typically is mentioned as one of Spain's greatest films. It definitely is. It is masterfully directed and I have not been able to stop thinking about it for days.

The story is elliptically told and demands your participation in making sense of the narrative, but it's also leisurely paced and allows you to breathe in the atmosphere rather than forcing a particular reading on you. One thing you wouldn't guess from reading the other comments is how this is as much a film about nature as about history--it is like a poem of the countryside in winter, with long vistas of stone farmhouses framed against the rising sun. The film with the most similar visual palette is Malick's "Days of Heaven", but that film feels simplistic compared to the full immersion in history and memory presented in this film--a much more complete vision of the past.

Ana Torrent is unforgettable. I can think of no better film about children, yet (as with so many other things in this movie) it doesn't feel forced--these kids aren't just the director's pawns, but real, living beings.

If you get a chance to see it, definitely make the effort.

Elvis: That's the Way It Is (1970)

The best way to experience Elvis' Vegas period

[8/10 · 10 July 2006]

Having recently read Peter Guralnick's extraordinary "Careless Love" (the second part of his gold-standard Elvis biography), I was pleased when I saw this was going to be shown on TCM. The film shows Elvis at the very beginning of his Vegas period (August 1970)--that is, soon after his '68 comeback to live performing, but before he was hugely bloated and out of it. The Elvis here is still reasonably fit, in good voice, and enthusiastic as a performer (most of the time). It's amazing--after seeing so many Elvis impersonators and cultural kitsch surrounding the King, I think I've very rarely seen real footage of Elvis singing from this period. He definitely still had it, even if he's not quite at the peak form of the '68 special.

This film was shot by Lucien Ballard ("The Wild Bunch" among others) and looks good. This is definitely the best thing to see if you want to see the rapport the later Elvis had with the audience. The band is probably the best one he had in Vegas--Burton, Tutt, Scheff, etc. Props to TCM for assembling the most useful outtakes from the sessions with the band--a rare chance to see Elvis in the studio, jamming and working out his ideas.

Definitely worth a rental or Tivoing if it comes back on--this is a crucial historical record.

Demonlover (2002)

c'mon people, it's NOT the worst film ever

[21 July 2004]

If a movie upsets this many people (check the reviews below), there must be something to it. Perhaps people are reacting to the insidiousness of the world of corporate espionage, pornography, lovelessness, pleasurelessness, etc. on display in every corner of the movie. Although its final 30 minutes or so veer toward incoherence--the meaning of what ultimately happens seems less interesting as a resolution than in (for example) "Mulholland Drive"--it's a cool, controlled, provocative rethinking of the modern techno thriller. It's a far more subtle and nuanced movie than the kind of head trip movies that kids go for these days ("Requiem for a Dream," bleh!), and the Sonic Youth score and cinematography are terrific.

I was originally attracted to the film on the strengths of Assayas' other films--all three I've seen ("Irma Vep", "Late August/Early Sept.", "Les Destinees Sentimentales") excellent and each in its own way unique. His work is eclectic and unpredictable in the best sense, seemingly at ease with big or small productions--in the great tradition of Jonathan Demme or Michael Winterbottom or Louis Malle. This is probably the only one of his films so far that could have attracted an American audience, but the chilliness of its surfaces apparently has scared a few too many away. It's a pity, because the film's definitely worth seeing.

Facing Windows (2003)

award-winning, but just ordinary

[19 April 2003]

This film won quite a few awards last week at the Italian film awards, the David di Donatello--best picture, actor (Girotti), actress (Mezzogiorno), music, etc. People in the rest of the world might be interested in it, especially as Ozpetek's last film, "Le fati ignoranti", is one of the more interesting products of recent Italian cinema--one that embraced the margins of contemporary Italian society and had a feel for the world beyond the traditional Italian contours of family, Church, and politics. This one however, despite the promising cast, proves to be a fairly traditional character study, of a young woman (Mezzogiorno) examining her life. Ozpetek seemed to be an exception to the Italian film industry, with his multi-ethnic casts and his world-music soundtracks (both of which are again here, but in much more muted ways). In "La finestra di fronte," however, the closing theme is by Georgia, the Celine Dion of Italy. That says a lot about the direction his work is taking.

Giovanna is a 30ish mother of two who makes ends meet as a food inspector, nursing broken dreams of becoming a pastry chef. The catalyst comes when her and her husband slightly unwillingly welcome into their home a mysterious old man with amnesia. Instead of triggering off a serious of bizarre events as in a Pasolini film, it instead basically invites her to examine the choices made in her life in a fairly predictable way. Her marriage is not happy, and she contemplates an affair with the stranger next door (a thoroughly uninteresting "romantic" figure with Clark Kent glasses and a strong, silent manner) as well as perhaps changing careers. Unfortunately both these scenes and the flashbacks of the older man seem to be revealed too slowly: we seem to know where it's all going well in advance of the characters, and watching it unfold really isn't that surprising. The best scenes are between Giovanna and her husband, a well-drawn and interesting character in his own right, equally flawed as Giovanna and struggling to make the relationship and family life work.

Girotti--who worked in Italian films for 6 decades (he was the lead in Visconti's 1941 "Ossessione"!)--is decent in his role, but Bova is very weak (and it's partly a problem of how the character is conceived as well). However, the reason to see the film is Giovanna Mezzogiorno. She's becoming one of the best Italian actresses of her generation--not a traditional great beauty or siren, but someone who can convey the depths of ordinary lives and sufferings. She was quite good as the justifiably angry girlfriend in "L'Ultimo bacio" and she's even better here. She's perfectly able to convey her character's wild mood swings between rage and occasional moments of tranquility. Without her, the movie would be forgettable. With her, it achieves occasionally good moments.