I watch movies every week and then write down my thoughts. Read my previous reviews!
My rating is simple, Watch It, It Depends, Skip it.
 |
| Back to the Future Part III -Better than Part II, not as good as the first. |
Buy Back to the Future Part III
Watch Back to the Future Part III on Netflix
Written by: Robert Zemeckis & Bob Gale (characters), Robert Zemeckis & Bob Gale (story), Bob Gale (screenplay)
Directed by: Robert Zemeckis
Starring: Michael J. Fox, Christopher Lloyd, Mary Steenburgen
Rated: PG
Plot:
Marty McFly travels to the Wild West to save Doc Brown from "Mad Dog" Tannen.
Verdict:
It's better than the second, but lacks the tense mood of the first. There are no consequences anymore. Anything can be undone. It isn't a question of if Doc and Marty can do it, but whether it will be done in ninety or one hundred and twenty minutes. This sticks to the formula of the first, with Doc Brown having a romantic interest this time, and multiple plot points concerning Bif, Marty's ancestors, and of course the question of whether they can fix everything and get back to the future.
Watch it.
Review:
The idea to set this in the wild west originated when Michael J. Fox was asked what time period he'd like to visit during the first movie. This movie was filmed back to back with Part II. Seamus McFly was originally going to be played by Crispin Glover, but a contract dispute caused him to be replaced in Part II and Part III.
I've now re-watched the entire trilogy. (Review for Part I) (Review for Part II) The first movie was better than I remember it, and I already loved the movie. The second was surprisingly not that good, while the third was better than I remembered. The first is still head and shoulders the best of the trilogy.
This isn't as clever as the first movie, but it doesn't succumb to the common make yourself rich trope of the second. This has a bit more fun by traveling to the wild west, though it doesn't delve into the alternate dimensions that have been referenced in previous movies. How does Marty enter the correct dimension? The fact is this is entertainment and not a science movie.
While it's fun, the setting is uninspired and contrived. The movie is hokey compared to the original. I feel like I'm watching another one of Marty's shenanigans instead of a movie that's trying to at least pretend to stick to some variant of science. We get the same scenes of Bif antagonizing the McFlys and Bif eventually ending up in manure. It's not a bad call back, but the movie relies too heavily on them. This movie tries even harder than the second to emulate the first with an ill fated romance. Instead of Marty and his mother, it's Doc Brown and Clara. The movie franchise has just one formula. It was perfect in the first movie and just copied for the second and third. The third definitely juggles plot lines better than the second, but it still has a hint of silliness, from Clara on the train, Doc's plan to reach 88 mph, and Marty's confrontation with Mad Dog. The stakes don't feel as grave as the first, because the series has proven that Doc and Marty can undo anything.
The story is much the same in that Marty has to save the future. This time Doc Brown is trapped in 1885 and is in danger of being killed by an outlaw.
The references to Clint Eastwood in the second movie pay off here with Marty using the name and dressing like Eastwood from A Fistful of Dollars (1964). The theme song even gets a Western remix. It helps to have seen the second, but it's not mandatory. It stands on it's own well enough, another adventure in the saga.
It's surprising how the movie treats Jennifer, Marty's girlfriend. The producers and writers must really hate that she was in the end of the first movie because that made them come up with a way to ditch her. They stick her on a porch and make two movies without her. There had to be a better way to handle this. While she does serve to bookend the second and third movie, it's comical how she spends most of her time.
Doc Brown rides off into the sunset in a train, now a time traveler rather than a odd ball scientist. The train doesn't compare to the Delorean, now an icon. While this movie is fun, it doesn't compare to the first. This lacks the classic moments and most of that is because at this point we have no concerns that Marty might fail.
While Robert Zemeckis, Bob Gale, and Steven Spielberg stated they would not do a fourth installment, there was talk of a fourth movie in the mid nineties with Doc Brown going to Roswell, NM in 1947. I'm glad that never happened.
It Follows (2014) - Read my Review
 |
| The Wicker Man - This is when it gets exciting. Light that fire. |
Buy The Wicker Man
Written by: Anthony Shaffer (screenplay)
Directed by: Robin Hardy
Starring: Edward Woodward, Christopher Lee, Diane Cilento
Rated: R
Plot:
A cop goes to a Scottish town looking for a missing girl, and finds a cult.
Verdict:
I expected a horror movie and got more of a thriller with musical tendencies. The ending really makes this, but it doesn't quite overcome the rest of the movie. It's an attempt at a thriller that misses the mark with a twist that almost makes up for it.
It depends.
Review:
Sergeant Howie visits a small Scottish town trying to track down a missing girl but no one is helpful. As far as the town is concerned the girl never existed.
It becomes clear the town is a cult with frog based cures and mass orgies. Howie, being a good Christian, is incredulous that this town worships pagan gods.
It's a strange town, but the movie doesn't do the best job of capturing the creepy feeling. This should feel like an episode of The X-files, but it doesn't.
I was surprised that not one but two musical moments are packed into the beginning of this movie. It's not quite a horror, and the musical segments seem out of place.
What makes this movie is the ending, when the rug is pulled out from under Howie and he lands sprawled on the ground face first, figuratively. The mystery is larger than I imagined, and the twist is a horrifically good bit of story telling. This almost makes the movie worth a watch. I just wish the tension and mood had lived up to the conclusion. The atmosphere just isn't there.
Howie should have seen the red flags. His response just never feels real. You can argue that Howie assumed being a cop was all the authority he needed. He certainly thought that, but it can't save him.
 |
| The Road - Paternal devotion in dystopian society. |
Buy The Road
Watch The Road on Netflix
Written by: Cormac McCarthy (novel), Joe Penhall (screenplay)
Directed by: John Hillcoat
Starring: Viggo Mortensen, Charlize Theron, Kodi Smit-McPhee, Robert Duvall, Guy Pearce, Molly Parker, Michael Kenneth Williams, Garret Dillahunt
Rated: R
Plot:
In a post apocalypse future, a father and son traverse a dangerous road.
Verdict:
This is bleak. It's a series of moments between a father and son as they try to survive. How far is the father willing and able to go? Despite how desperate they both are, the son helps his dad maintain humanity. It's easy to succumb to fear and kill people in the name of protection. It's much more difficult knowing that letting them live could be a costly mistake.
Watch it.
Review:
This is based on the 2007 Cormac McCarthy Pulitzer price winning book by the same name. From the first scene we realize this is a father and son movie about love and devotion. The father's (Viggo Mortenson) one job is keep his son (Kodi Smit-McPhee) safe.
This isn't the typical dystopian world with shoot outs and wish fulfillment. The father is scrounging for food and needs socks. Supplies are scarce and he's trying to save his last two bullets for his son and himself. Some fates are worse than death.
I began to wonder how they had made it this far with a kid no less, but as the movie unfolds and we get a few flashback scenes, we realize that they've just started on this journey. It's still impressive that they were able to survive in their house without getting raided or killed though.
The father is prepared to kill his son to spare him. That's a tough decision. This life will never get easier. Men will just get more desperate as what few supplies remain disappear. Is it better or easier to end their lives now rather than waiting? They are traveling to the coast, but nothing awaits them, just more death and destruction. The reason his son is still alive is that the alternative is a difficult decision. The son is keeping the father human. Without his son, the father would resort to killing everyone he meets just to ensure his own preservation. His son saves his humanity and reminds him to be a good guy. The father is trying to impart his wisdom to the son.
This is a society stripped of everything. Everyone left is trying to survive and many willing to take advantage of anyone else to ensure their own lives. It's a zero sum game with no way to win. The best case is that you die without suffering.
It's a lonely life as the father and son try to avoid other people. Other people are dangerous, and this creates incredible moments of tension. The father reassures his son that they are good guys, and that they'll stay good guys. They won't resort to cannibalism.
As a parent this connects emotionally. You can't let your kid be a child. He have to survive a deadly world, and you are his only means to live. You have to make him hard, because otherwise you're leaving him to the wolves. To fight wolves you have to be a wolf.
Guy Pearce appears briefly in the movie. Everyone outside of Mortensen and Smit-McPhee appear briefly. Pearce picks some neat roles. Despite being a top billed star, he's done numerous movies where he has only a couple of minutes of screen time.
The ending is bittersweet. It seems to end on a happy note, at least judging by the music, but this world is only going to be more of the same. It will never get better or easier. The son is relieved, but nothing has really changed.
 |
| Texas Chainsaw Massacre - Man with chain saw, just like it says. |
Buy Texas Chain Saw Massacre
Written by: Kim Henkel (screenplay) and Tobe Hooper (story & screenplay)
Directed by: Tobe Hooper
Starring: Marilyn Burns, Edwin Neal, Allen Danziger
Rated: R
Plot:
A man with a chainsaw attacks people. What did you expect?
Verdict:
This is a simple low budget concept that goes bonkers towards the end. It's never less than entertaining despite its shortcomings and poorly written story.
It depends.
Review:
The acting is rough, very rough. Combined with the strange editing it makes this almost surreal, like some kind of bad dream. Nothing about this movie makes much sense, it's just a nightmare brought to film so that a man with a chainsaw can be on the screen.
It's ominous. We know a chainsaw will appear, but when? We have to wait through a strange hitchhiker encounter and Franklin. Franklin is in a wheelchair, and that's not all. The boy just ain't right. We finally get to the house and have to wonder if you'd really knock on a door that many times. It's like the chainsaw wielding actor missed his mark, so the guy just keeps banging on the door.
Looking at this from chainsaw man's perspective, these kids keep breaking into his house and he's forced to defend himself. He's just misunderstood due to his speech impediment.
I don't know if this is the most mindless movie, but it serves it's purpose. The chase scene through the woods is intense, but the guy must have a big fuel tank on that chainsaw. This movie remains unsettling without having to be gory. The fact is, they probably couldn't afford to add much gore. They could afford windows, and the girl can jump through them regardless of height.
It takes a strange twist in the last quarter and really goes bonkers. I wasn't even sure what I was watching. I have to give a shout out to grandpa. "What are you doing grandpa?" We get to meet chainsaw guy's family, and that's a treat of sorts.
This is incredibly low budget, but there's something to it. You could claim it's Franklin's bad dream just to make sense of it, but this is creepy in a way that bigger budget movies often fail to emulate.
No comments :
Post a Comment