Thursday, January 10, 2013

Reviews For The New Year

      I'm so sorry that I haven't written a post since Halloween. You wouldn't believe how many events happened in my life, and how all of them impacted this blog. To make up for this, I've decided to post five pictures of movies that I will review for this site. Keep your fingers crossed that these do come through. Enjoy. :)
Ah. I've got nothing to do but to trim my nails. What a sexist that our conductor, Ralphie, is to us.
Tell that meanie that if he gets his Red Ryder BB Gun, I'll shoot his eye out.
Nah. I would rather throw Baby onto him. :)
If he does get his gun, I'm going as far away from him as I can.
I'll tell you a nice little story of a boy who shot his eye out.

Monday, October 29, 2012

Godzilla (1954) Buy 12+


How come Godzilla has a Criterion release? Oh well.
             Monster movies from the 1950s onward feel the same to me every time I watch one. They're a) too frightening, b) very annoying, c) too stupid, or d) really, really badly made films. The worst part to me is that they were mainly made to entertain the masses who wanted to have a good scare. Now, I'm not a sourpuss, and sometimes I can be enjoyed by an entertaining low-budget stupid horror film. It would be much better if a monster movie or any kind of film had a message to go along with that wasn't slapped onto it. That theme also has to have a point to be in the story. So, that's why I was surprised by Gojira or Godzilla, a 1954 Japanese monster film that deserves to be in the canon of great complex horror classics such as The Bride Of Frankenstein,  The Haunting,  Misery, and Cat People. The film's not only fun to look at for plain pleasure, but it also has a serious melancholy message of nuclear catastrophe to go along with it. 
           When Ishiro Honda directed it, Japan had just barely survived from the trauma of the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which devastated the country with its horrifying loss of human life and its unprecedented side-effects. What's even more worse was that other countries were still testing their nuclear weapons on island near Japan. As a result, Godzilla became an allegory of Japan's suffering. The film constantly refers to nuclear disaster such as having "atomic tuna" or having ill health effects following the radiation.
            The film follows Japan after a series of disasters rock the stability of the nation. To explain what the cause of all this is, the government sends a group of investigators to the site where a monster was supposed to be seen. They are able to locate the monster, called Gojira/Godzilla, and they discover that he's an ancient dinosaur that's been contaminated by nuclear radiation. From here on, it becomes an allegorical drama about the consequences of nuclear testing as well as human emotions following a disaster. As Godzilla terrorizes Tokyo, some of  the experts  experience strong emotions about whether or not they should use a breaking new discovery of destroying oxygen to kill the monster.
Is Godzilla flossing his teeth with the model train set?
      Of course, the monster is the scariest thing in the movie. Its big bug-like eyes, breath of death, and menacing roar just send shivers down my spine whenever I think about it. What's even more amazing is that you can tell that it was a guy in a suit and you still are convinced that the monster really is there . (Apparently, that guy didn't like the suit too much. It got really hot in the suit and he often suffocated in it. Furthermore, the suit was really hard for the actor to move around in. I'd always be amazed at how the guy was able to press through that experience.)
    When the film got released in America, the producers decided to cut the atomic references from the original and have Raymond Burr play an American reporter describe the action rather than showing it. In other words, they reduce the complex philosophy into something so stupid that I don't want to talk about it! Let's move onto what I think about the film.
      To me, this film feels more like a complex disaster drama than a campy horror B-movie. Yes, there is absurd acting, and yes, there are frightening scenes. However, the film focuses more of its attention to the victims rather than on the monster. People are seen crushed, and dying in the hospitals because of Godzilla's destruction. In a heartbreaking scene, several schoolgirls are shown singing a hymn of peace to soothe the fears of the nation. Scientists and politicians fight over what is the right thing to do in this situation. The music and cinematography present a very gritty situation, and the ending is more of a pessimistic warning suggesting that there will be more disasters or Godzillas up ahead. No, it wasn't referring to the massive amount of sequels or the two awful American revisions that appeared after this. 
        
Happy Halloween, everyone! I know I haven't written a post since August, but I was getting overwhelmed by schoolwork, the moving into a new condo, and the sheer terror of the hurricane. Sorry. To make up for it, I've decided to do a post of a classic monster movie for Halloween! :) Thank you for being patient with me. And please do not send me hate mail for hating the Americanized version. It's just my opinion- I just think Gojira (1954) is superior to Godzilla, King Of The Monsters! (1956). 

Sunday, August 26, 2012

The Razor's Edge (1946) Rent 15 and up

What is the meaning of life? Based on a 1944 novel by W. Somerset Maugham,The Razor's Edge is unusual for a Hollywood picture because it deals with a subject that Hollywood rarely ever did, and that was spiritualism and life's meaning. Despite my applauds for finding a film that was trying something different at the time, I'm still kind of puzzled by this film. To help clear my muddled thoughts, let me explain my opinion on this 1946 classic.
    In it, a well-to do Chicago veteran named Larry Darrell (Tyrone Power) is traumatized for his best friend sacrificed himself during a battle in World War One. To clear his muddled thoughts, he decides to go to Paris and India to find enlightenment on the meaning of life. After he learns about goodness, he decides to go visit his old friends in Paris who for the most part aren't doing really well in their lives. For instance, Sophie (Anne Baxter) used to be in a happy marriage until her husband and child gets killed in a car accident. Now, she's a washed-up drunk. Larry decides to save her from her sins. However, his ex-fiancee Isabel (Gene Tierney) is still in love with him. Let me rephrase that. She's obsessed with him. She wants to marry him, and she doesn't understand why he won't focus on society. So to make him realize that he should accept society over life, she decides to sabotage his work with Sophie which ends in tragedy for all of three of them.
       As usual with other golden age pictures, this one is a beautifully produced movie and the acting is really good. Tyrone Power is a genuine good actor with real charm, despite his character having to say awful lines as "The dead have never been deader." The other actors, like Clifton Webb is admirable. Anne Baxter's award winning role easily is the best of the performances for she's a devastating tragic heroine. The audience actually feels sympathy for her when things don't work out for her. She's a character that fate hasn't been kind to, and her performance as a person trying to see that but unable to prevent it is an unforgettable one.
           Gene Tierney's character, though well acted, seems more like a Shakespearean villain rather than a hero. She literally gets Sophie back on the path to doom through psychological warfare and the reason why she does this is she only wants Larry for herself not for anyone else. Did this film turn into a prequel to Leave Her To Heaven? Why would our main leading heroine commit second-degree murder and still be Larry's main affection throughout the entire picture? I know that she doesn't understand his philosophy but that's no excuse for doing despicable things. Ever.
        The main problem that I have with this movie isn't our heroine but the freaking story itself! I just found it boring and uninteresting for our hero is bland, and his quest for meaning didn't resonate with me. That's probably because I haven't experienced his feelings yet , but if you have questions about life, this might be a good choice for you if you don't mind the fact that it's a depressing story with no uplifting moments in it. I'm sorry to say this but I do not like this film at all. But, it's still a good movie but it's not really engaging or interesting to watch.
A tragic heroine who went on to harass Bette Davis.

Saturday, August 4, 2012

The Wizard Of Oz BUY 5 and up

Yeah! I'm going to see a movie! Hopefully a good one.....
               This post is part of an amazing blogathon hosted by the one and only Forgotten Classics Of Yesteryear. I'm so honored to be here because I'm a huge fan of the blog for it has introduced me to some of my new favorite movies that I probably would have never heard of had I not read the blog.

This is a VHS for you young readers out there.
           When I was in Kindergarten, I never was fascinated with movies at all. Sure, I would watch my healthy dose of Disney/Pixar/Warner Brothers. But, I wasn't compelled by them to find out other movies to watch or to explore the people who actually made the films. Then, I saw the film that forever changed my life.
      My mother always would go to Blockbuster to rent videos for me to watch. (This was before Netflix and DVDs made it easier to watch films.) One day, she rented a video that she knew I was ready to watch. The movie was called The Wizard Of Oz.
        Now, you have seen and know everything about this movie, so I won't be going over the plot or background behind it. I'll be writing just about my thoughts of the film. The reason is that a person's thoughts about a beloved film is more powerful than the history of the film. Especially if he is a young toddler who's obsessed with Dr. Seuss. Now, let's move on.
           When I first saw the Serpia Kansas farm scenes, I at first questioned why the film wasn't in color. Instead of my mother lecturing me about the history of film, she just told that there's a surprise coming later. So, I patiently waited to see this surprise. In other words, I wanted the Kansas scenes to be over with when I first saw it. But, nowadays I kinda like them. They have a wholesome quality that catches you off guard. For example, after the evil Mrs. Gulch takes Toto away from Dorothy, Auntie Em says to her, " For forty years, I've always wanted to say this to you." A modern film would have her say a quote like "You are a godless woman!" Instead, Auntie Em says " But now, I'm a Christian woman and I can't say things like that anymore now." When you analyze it now, you see that Auntie Em hates this woman so much but because of her values, she won't give in to the temptation of cursing her, which would her character seem unfavorable in front of the family.
There's something out there for us, Toto.
        The best scene in the entire movie is the classic scene where Dorothy sings the classic song called "Somewhere Over The Rainbow". When I first saw it, Dorothy represented childhood wanting better and new things to do, and I identified with her because her life was misunderstood by her family, and the song represents hope and a better future. Now, I always cry at the scene. It's so beautiful.  
       After a visit to the local fortune teller, a twister hits the area. This part always creeped me out as a kid. None was more terrifying than Dorothy's own family accidentally locking her and poor Toto out of the shelter! I know that the tornado made it impossible for them to hear her cries, but as a kid, I was shocked to see Dorothy's loved ones abandoning her to the evil of the storm, and blocking the only way out of the dangerous situation! If that didn't terrify me enough, then we have poor Dorothy being knocked out by a flying window. What the heck!
           After a dream sequence that ended with a thunderous boom of the house, Dorothy wakes up and walks toward the door. When she opens it, the world changes from boring black and white to a colorful wonderland that's apparently been built out of plastic. But, it still is an impressive scene because of the way we are introduced to Oz with the magical score and beautiful cinematography.
         She finds out from Glinda, a.k.a the Good Witch, that she accidentally killed the Wicked Witch of the East. Since she was so wicked, the Munchkins who live around here are pleased with this that they sing an entire song dedicated to her. It's actually a charming sequence because the audience gets to know that the citizens are really happy to have someone rescue them from their villan. Apparently, since this is a children's film, we need to have a villan to come along and spoil the charming scene for a while. Enter the Wicked Witch of the West, and everyone but I was scared by her. I don't know what was wrong with me, but maybe I had seen people getting dressed up like her at Halloween. So, I was not scared by her because I knew what was coming already.
                 She's apparently upset with Dorothy because Dorothy not only killed her sister but she also got a hold of the MacGuffin that's very valuable here. If you don't know what I'm talking about, I'm talking about the Ruby Slippers, but I digress. Glinda saves Dorothy by saying the coolest thing ever. She says, " Go away because you have no power here." That quote is basically saying that evil won't win and it should get the heck out of here before the powerful good comes along and kills evil.

We're off to see the wizard and to kill a wicked witch!
             After the Wicked Witch leaves via explosion, Dorothy and Toto are shown the way to Oz via the Yellow Bricked Road. Along the way, she meets the Scarecrow, the Tin Man, and the Cowardly Lion who accompany her for the trip. These characters were awesome for they not only help the main character but they have probelms that we can relate with. That's pretty rare considering the sterotypes in modern films.   
        Long story short: They get caught in the  infamous poppy fields, but they get rescued by Glinda. They arrive to Oz where they participate in the Cowardly Lion's worst song ever. I'm not kidding. This song is just horrible to listen to, and Oz just looked too green for me. Luckily, we get to see the Wizard's big face come the heck out of nowwhere and scare the living daylights out of us. Thank you.
            The Wizard tells them that they must kill the Wicked Witch and bring him her magic broom. But, Dorothy gets captured by her flying monkeys whom always are cool to me. Seriously, you have monkeys with wings. What idea can't be so stupid in real life but is cooler in fantasy?!?
       The scene where Dorothy is locked in the castle brings real peril to me for the timer is running out and we know that if the trio of sidekicks don't hurry up, there's not going to be a happy ending. Luckily, they do arrive and after a chase through the castle, Dorothy kills the Witch by throwing a bucket of water at her. That's an epic villain death scene because she literally melts away into nothing! That scene gave me nightmares for weeks but they always ended with the Witch dying. :)
       The Wizard is shown to be a good-hearted fake who helps the trio realize that they had everything that they needed with them the entire time. Eventually, Glinda shows Dorothy the way home via clicking her ruby slippers three times. She returns home, and says the classic line, "There's no place like home."
             This is my favorite movie of all time. It not only has imagination, but has great acting, sets, directing and mostly good songs. But, it also revelaed to me that movies could be the most magicial thing ever. So to find out more, I started viewing other films that are now favorites of mine. Thank you, Oz.
       
There's No Place Like Home.
         
   

Monday, July 30, 2012

Night Train To Munich (1940) Buy 12+

Where is his face?
    This post is part of an awesome blog-a-thon honoring films that honor one of the greatest directors of all time. Thank you, Tales of the Easily Distracted and ClassicBecky's Brain Food for letting  Classic Cinema Reviews For Kids take part in such a diabolical great adventure as this one proved to be. I'm just so sorry that I haven't had any time to do the review until now, but I had to move to another house. So thank you for being patient with me. Now onto the review.....
      Alfred Hitchcock may have been best known for his Hollywood nightmare fantasies, but before he made Rebecca in 1940, he made some magnificent thrillers in Britain during the 1920s and 1930s. One of these films is a little picture known as The Lady Vanishes in 1938. Boy was that film fun! It had all of the ingredients of a modern good Hollywood blockbuster. It had romance, thrills, comedy, and a smuggled political message. One year later after that classic was released, Hitchcock left for Hollywood. Around at the same time, World War Two started. So what would be the most Hitchcockian thing to do in England without any help from Hitchcock? Well, that would be make a lot of generic espionage thrillers that could also be propaganda that would lift up people's spirits at the same time. Brilliant, lads.
        To be honest, some of those films would become unmemorable dull cheesy crap. But since this is a blog-a-thon honoring the "best" Hitchcockian films, I've decided to write about the 1940 film called Night Train To Munich. The director of the film was Carol Reed who would later direct other classics such as The Third Man, The Fallen Idol, and Oliver!. He later claimed that this film was an unofficial sequel to The Lady Vanishes. Let's see if that is true or not and whether it's better than the Hitchcock thriller.
       Our movie begins in 1939 when the Nazis march into Prague. There, a super important scientist a.k.a the MacGuffin that has nothing to do with the emotional conflict is flown to the safe country of England where the Blitz hasn't happened yet. Unfortunately, his daughter named Anna (Margaret Lockwood after she divorced Micheal Redgrave and realized that she's a daughter of a Czech scientist) is arrested and put into the miserable concentration camps. There, she meets and is befriended by fellow abused prisoner who goes by the name of Karl Mansen ( Paul Henreid ). One night, they escape from the camp in the probably most easiest way to escape prison, which is to turn off the lights so the guards can't see you. Wow. At least, it can't be insulting for the thousands of people who died trying to escape the camps during the war. And for that matter, why doesn't the prison scene feature the horrific torture/killing of many innocent people. But at least, Carol Reed had an excuse for no one knew what was really happening inside the camps until later.

             Anyway, the couple runs/hop on a boat to England where it's always happy and free. There, Anna manages to find her father who now is working for Britain. How? She writes a cryptic ad in the newspaper at her fellow escapee's suggestion. That way, no enemy spy could ever read it. Since her father is working for Britain and is in possible danger form the Nazis, he's guarded by Dickie Randall, a British officer disguised as the charming Gus Bennett played by Rex Harrison. Did I forget to mention that Gus Bennett is a really bad singer? Well, he is. Unless you're a fan of My Fair Lady, grab some earmuffs during those singing parts. Even Anna can't stand it for she says to him;"Pity nature didn't give you a voice". Yikes.


        Well pity the fool for he can't keep a close eye on Anna for she and her father gets kidnapped by some Nazi agents. Among them is Karl Mansen who was actually a Nazi spy to begin with. Surprise. At least Dickie is smart for he volunteers to get them back from Germany. He disguises himself as a German army engineer major. In other words, Rex Harrison plays a Nazi and according to a Criterion essay, he loved it. Let's move on before I'm scarred for life. He tells the Germans that he and Anna used to be lovers, and he might get her to be on their side so she will persuade her dad to cooperate. Clever idea. After a night of literally no sex, he persuades the pair to get on a train to Munich accompanied by Mansen and two guards. Once they get to Munich, they would leave on a plane where they would pass over the ice cream mountains- yes the sets are that bad- to the land of freedom . You're a clever spy, Dickie.
            Who should also be on the train at the exact same time? It's my favorite characters, Charters and Caldicott, of course. Now if only they could get Dame May Whitty to be the Czech scientist. Anyway, they spot Dickie because he used to go to college with them. This arouses Mansen's suspicions and to make a long story short, he realizes that the Army Major is just Dickie Randall in disguise, and he has orders to arrest him when they get to Munich. So much of your plan now, Dickie.
         However, Charters and Caldicott happened to a) miss their valued golf clubs, b) listen to the conversation and c) be British at the exact same time that Britain declares war on Germany. They decide to help Dickie, Anna, and her father escape but not before a big chase. How? Since this is a thriller, I'm not going to spoil anything. Sorry. It wouldn't be fair to let the tension loose.
          Overall, this film is surprisingly good fun. The acting's great, the thrills are genuine, and the smart writing reminded me of its predecessor, which was The Lady Vanishes. In fact, it reminded me too much of that film. It has a clever damsel in distress,  a charming eccentric Englishman, ordinary people getting into extraordinary adventures, an elderly MacGuffin, a villain thought to be a hero, a sort-of generic plot, a train, a climax involving guns, Charters and Caldicot, and a trip around Europe. However, this movie has special things to stand on its own. One is that Charters and Caldicot are much funnier and heroic in here, and they aren't useless to the narrative like they did in the first one. The heroes have much more of a reasonable relationship here than in the other film, and Paul Henreid plays such a stark contrast as a villain rather than in his famous role in Now, Voyager  that I didn't recognize him at all. The major reason why it works is that it has a death-defying stunt among the Alps that has a great deal. All of those ingredients make this a fun, thrilling adventure.
Our heroes.......

Friday, July 13, 2012

Note For The Hitchcock Blog

I've got some good news and some bad news on my post of Night Train To Munich. The bad news is that I just arrived from Paris yesterday. Orginally, I was going to write my post today, but thanks to a horrible side effect known as jet lag, I was unable to write it. Sorry. But the good news is that I have started on the post and it will be up by tomorrow. Thanks for your consideration.

Wednesday, June 20, 2012

Gentleman Jim (1942) RENT for ages 10 and up

Get ready to swoon, ClassicBecky! 
       Before he got himself involved with scandals, Errol Flynn was one of the most popular leading men in Hollywood. With box-office/critically acclaimed hits such as The Adventures Of Robin Hood and Captain Blood, he showed that he was more than an athletic swashbuckler and romantic lover. The real reason why Errol Flynn is still famous is that he had charisma. He was one of the first actors who showed that this trait can help an actor evaluate his acting skills even more than action or romance can. No movie can better show this than the 70-year-old drama, Gentleman Jim.
          It's loosely based on the true life story of "Gentleman"James J. Corbett, the boxer who redefined the sport forever. Before him, boxing was more rough and tumble bare knuckle brawls than the kind you might see on T.V. today. (Even though I probably will not be watching that for I do not like sports at all, but I digress.) His style followed the more civilized way of the Marquess of Queensberry Rules, which emphasized more on the fairness of the sport rather than on the illegal brawls. (Literally, boxing was banned in many states until the early 20th Century. Yeah!) Jim also used polished footwork and technique that of course bewildered most of his rough opponents. This and of course his gentleman like personality helped him defeat John L. Sullivan in 1892.
The Real James Corbett Who Looks Nothing Like Errol
    Like most Hollywood biopics of the time, it is more of a fanciful imagining of the life rather than what truly happened. A main part of the film involves with a romantic love interest,played by Alexis Smith, who doesn't like our hero at all. In fact, she wants him to be knocked out in all of his big fights. But of course, he manages to get the girl by the end.Major shock. Another subplot involves James' family who are very combative yet loving at the same time thanks to his parents. The movie also shows that James was an outgoing person and he had a great sense of natural charisma. From what I can get from this movie, it suggests he would have a boxing career for his main income. Yeah, those scenarios didn't happen in real life. By 1892, he was already married, and his parents apparently took their own lives in a murder-suicide. Ouch. He supposedly was a mostly reserved man, and since boxing was mostly illegal, he became an actor to support himself. So in other words, it's mostly Hollywood gloss covering good potential for an emotional study of a compelling character.Why Hollywood?!?
          The shooting for this movie was also harsh for the main actor. According to TCM's article on the film by Jay S. Steinberg, "The famously hard-partying Flynn had been wracked with assorted health problems in 1942, and it all culminated with his collapse during the filming of one of Gentleman Jim's fight sequences. While the studio had publicly chalked it up to fatigue, the doctors diagnosed a mild heart attack. Alexis Smith recounted in the biography, The Two Lives of Errol Flynn by Michael Freedland, how she took the star aside and told him, "'It's so silly, working all day and then playing all night and dissipating yourself. Don't you want to live a long life?' Errol was his usually apparently unconcerned self: 'I'm only interested in this half,' he told her. 'I don't care for the future.'" 
           Despite those major setbacks (and the fact that I don't find any of the comic scenes funny at all), it's a really decent movie with more strengths than flaws. It's riddled with terrific work from most of the supporting actors, including an awesome performance from Ward Bond who plays a bigger-than-life performance of John L. Sullivan. The directing by Raoul Walsh is just amazing especially with those magnificent boxing scenes that are still stuck in my head to my annoyance. The plot's okay with some really good moments (the family scenes) with some really boring scenes (any involving Alexis Smith except for the end). I'm sorry but I didn't find her captivating as Ingrid Bergman in Casablanca. She's just really an uninteresting character with nothing to offer than love/mock Errol. Boo you, Mr. Corbett. I hope you lose that Oscar for Best Actor That Was Beaten Up By Errol. Oh wait. I love you for no reason at all. At least, she's a great actor compared with another one named Jack Carson. Grr. I'm sorry but I just find his character to be really annoying and to have no purpose at all, except to drink heavily and to be funny. Rarely a good sign in movies.
   Thankfully, this movie has Errol Flynn to save it from Jack. The reason why this movie works is because of him. Case in point: the ending. As John L. Sullivan is giving him his belt as a sign of acceptance, notice Errol's underplaying. The reason why he's doing it is because he as an actor wants the audience to notice at what his character is showing rather than what is visible from the dialogue. In the scene, the audience can tell that Jim is respecting the man he had just beaten, and to show it without saying much is a grand accomplishment for anyone. Even though I'm only recommending this movie for those kids who would love Errol Flynn or boxing stories for the plot's really boring, this is one of Errol's greatest roles in film.