Change Your Image
randeclip-1
Reviews
Inside Deep Throat (2005)
Sex and politics
There are few film titles in the history of cinema that evoke the outcry, emotion, and condemnation as the title "Deep Throat". This name has become synonymous with hardcore pornography. While the documentary Inside Deep Throat capitalizes on the film's name, sex is not at the forefront of this film as much as the political hysteria at the time for the public good and censorship. Inside Deep Throat is not just a film history, but a chronology of a low budget adult film, the political target it became, and what ultimately became of all the people involved.
Documentary filmmakers Randy Barbato and Fenton Bailey did a good job in showing us the history of the film Deep Throat. Interviews from archival footage of the original actors edited together with new interviews conducted solely for this film serve to make for some interesting changes in opinions over the years. Some interesting information is gained. One such fact is the films original title was to be "Doctor Makes a House call", but the director Gerard Damiano convinced his backers of the more marketable title. Another fact that came to light was the film took six days to make for a cost of $25,000. It ultimately grossed over $600 million to date making it the most profitable movie in film history.
This film does not just document the making of a porn film. It tries to put into context how a society is changing, and is changed because of such a film. In the late sixties and early seventies society was in the midst of change. The film Deep Throat, though unremarkable by itself, served as a catalyst for the sexual revolution and a rallying cry for the proponents of censorship. One factor that served to make the films production possible was a 1970 commission, headed by former Illinois Gov. Otto Kerner, which found that "pornography was not particularly linked to antisocial behavior and not harmful". Director Gerard Damiano felt that this ruling gave permission to exhibit any and all sexually explicit material. After the films release (along with the Nixon administration throwing out the commission's report), the mayor of New York decided to clean up Times Square. Deep Throat was made their primary target with three highly publicized police raids. This publicity served to galvanize the public against censorship and to gain the support of Hollywood celebrities. There is a great piece of vintage footage showing a young Jack Nicholson, Warren Beatty, and Harry Reems commenting on censorship to news cameras. It was just this publicity that catapulted the film's popularity and made its name a household word, and magnet for the wrath of the political right wing.
One interesting facet of this documentary is the way archival interviews are mixed with current interviews. We are able to see the film's principle actors and creators while in the midst of the controversy and their take on it now, opinions and memories that are tamed by the luxury of time. These people are nether stars nor "prostitutes and whore mongers" as one prosecutor labels them. They are shown as everyday people, complete with complaining wives and suburban homes decorated with pictures of their kids. These people look back on the film and its scandal and see it as a forgotten moment in history. The creator and director Gerard Damiano, lives an uneventful, retired life with his grandchildren in a modest Florida home. Linda Lovelace, the star of the film and one time "queen of porn", went on to become a radical feminist and renounce the porn industry. Ultimately, after a failed attempt to profit off of her past fame, she passed away as a result of an auto accident in 2002. Harry Reems, the film's male lead, was prosecuted in Tennessee for his involvement in the film. The feds tried to make him a scapegoat, but he was eventually cleared of obscenity charges. After a failed film career and years of alcoholism, he became clean, Christian, and a real estate agent in Utah.
Inside Deep Throat is a fast paced documentary with an almost MTV like feel to it. The editing tended to be quick and at times designed to steer the viewer's opinions. When a very straight fundamentalist prosecutor is trying to explain why he had to watch the film six times to make his case, it is not necessary to inter-cut sex scenes throughout the interview to sway our opinion. A modern audience is fully able to see such hypocrisy, and such editing tricks only serve to make an otherwise serious scene "cute". In the end, after so many political fights and court battles over Deep Throat and the pornography issue in general, it is as if nothing has changed. After 33 years, and a supposed sexual revolution, our society is still battling over radio hosts talking "dirty" and "clothing malfunctions" at football games. If this film shows us anything it is that the public morality is a social pendulum and pornography is a tough nut to swallow. (how could I resist?)
Violent Shit III: Infantry of Doom (1999)
My spoiler: It does end!
I am dumbfounded that I actually sat and watched this. I love independent films, horror films, and the whole zombie thing in general. But when you add ninga's, you've crossed a line that should never be crossed. I hope the people in this movie had a great time making it, then at least it wasn't a total waste. You'd never know by watching it though. Script? Are you kidding. Acting? I think even the trees were faking. Cinematography? Well, there must've been a camera there. Period. I don't think there was any actual planning involved in the making of this movie. Such a total waste of time that I won't prolong it by commenting further.
Sang faa sau see (1998)
Sayonara sucker
Okay now, let me start this off by saying that I'm a sucker for anything with the word zombie in it. And every time I come across another movie that has the word zombie even remotely associated with it I'll have to sit down and watch. Unfortunately, time and time again I am tricked, and find myself sitting in front of the TV being inflicted with the pain of yet another crap horror movie.
Often times I log onto IMDb and read these reviews in the hopes of getting a "heads up", and maybe stumbling upon some lost zombie gem of the film. Maybe and supercritical. When I read good reviews for a film such as this it only strengthens my doubt in my own opinions of the zombie genre.
The truth! This movie was bad. This movie was bad with a Chinese accent. Save your dollar, put on your old copy of "Night of the Living Dead", and order in some takeout.
Lola rennt (1998)
Fun to watch and think about.
This might be one of the most stylized movies ever made. Run Lola Run is the story of one woman's attempt to solve a problem. Nothing special there except for the fact that we are treated to three completely different methods of solving that problem and there outcomes. At the start of the film there is a quote that time is a constant but "everything else is pure theory"; this is the true center of this story. Lola's desperation to put things right in the face of the unstoppable enemy called time is fascinating. Something always goes terribly wrong and what we are left with is the main characters, together in a dream like scene, contemplating their lives, and deaths. The main focus on the film is time. This is the ultimate "race against the clock" film- and what a great film it is. The director uses every trick in the book to tell this story. The main story, centering on Lola and her boyfriend Mani, is shown to us in color whereas her memories are shown as black and white. Plot that exists away from Lola and Mani are show in a grainy type of film. These tricks are designed to subconsciously differentiate the perspectives of the film. I have seen this film about half a dozen times. This film is so complex that each time I view it I spot more details I missed in previous viewings. This film is fast, fresh, interesting to look at, and gives the viewer much to think about after it's done. I am looking forward to discovering something new the next time I see it.
Nuovo Cinema Paradiso (1988)
Go and watch this now!
What criticism can I give this movie? Was it overly sentimental? It was the sentimentality that made this such a fine film. The character "Alfredo" says it best when saying goodbye to the young Salvador, "Don't give into nostalgia." The film is about what is lost in time. It's about coming home again.
The Italian film Cinema Paradiso is about the life of a Fellini-esc movie director who must return to his home village after leaving thirty years prior. The film is told from his perspective with memories and flashbacks of his time as a young boy and through his teenage years. What is most remarkable about this film is that in his years away from his home village, the world he new so well (and one that I think he expected to be identical to his memories) has changed so dramatically. The movie house, The Cinema Paradiso, once the center of the village and where he first found his love for film and met his friend (and surrogate father) Alfredo, is now no more then an afterthought. Nothing more then a forgotten ruin waiting for the wrecking ball. It is as if with the death of Alfredo, his link with the past is cut for good; only to leave the now grown up "Toto" truly alone.
The first time I saw this movie my feelings were that it was good and entertaining but otherwise unremarkable. Then came THE END....
In the center of the world that is Rome we find the great "Director Salvador De Vita", busy at work. Almost as an afterthought he hands over an old, worn out film reel left for him by his dead friend "Alfredo" to view. With this the film is catapulted into greatness.
This film, if not for anything else, is interesting to watch. We see a portrayal of an Italian village and lifestyle as it was. It was a closed world that relied on itself for life, religion, news, and entertainment. The world today with its cheap and easy transportation and mass communication makes "Toto's" meager village more of a suburb of the global world. Lost is the community of "Alfredo", and with him is lost a simpler way of life for us all.
The Limey (1999)
For a bad guy it's sort of good
The Limey can be easily classified as a revenge film. It is in the same vane as films such as "Death Wish" and numerous westerns, where a lone gunman must set things right by doing what the law either can't or won't. This film is about a man who, after the murder of his daughter, feels he must track down her killer to impart his own form of justice. The characters in this film are nothing new. We have the father (The Limey), a cockney accented, British ex-con. He teams up with a tough Mexican con that is "going straight after doing time in the joint". The dead daughter's friend, a straight-laced, wanna-be-actor (who drives a Volvo, as if we couldn't figure out how very straight laced and domestic she really is). Leading the bad guys are: the ageing sixties record producer complete with his California vanity and ex-flower child deep sounding but otherwise shallow advice. His partner, which is the films real "bad Guy", complete with a cold stair, black Mercedes-Benz, and a sawed-off shotgun. He surrounds himself with the typical assortment of mafia looking goons; fat and dumb so we wouldn't mistake them.
This film, despite the unimaginative, overused story line and stereotypical characters is great. The director's use of the camera and his masterful editing stand out. This is a tremendously violent film that never actually shows much violence. Lots of people die, and we are tricked into thinking we have just witnessed these acts, when in reality we never saw a thing. The directors use of flash backs serve to make the main character's memories almost dream like. We see the world through his eyes; a point of view he has idealized over many years, but one that is far removed from what is real. Ultimately, for us the viewer, it becomes difficult to judge just who is the real "bad guy". It is this uncertainty that the director wants to instill in us, which he does so well.
This film is special. It shows that a great director can take a tired story with poor characters and create a gem of a film. And who said that gold couldn't be spun from straw.
Paths of Glory (1957)
Wow!!!
Many films preach to us the horrors of battle and tout the slogan: "war is hell". Most only serve to give the viewer two hours of grand battle scenes interspersed with mostly forgetful introspective moments by the main characters. Then there is the film Paths of Glory directed by Stanley Kubrick. It could have been a grand World War I spectacle with a cast of thousands and sets rivaling the war itself. Instead, Kubrick brings us a story of a failed battle told from a personal side rather then the often used long shot of war, shown on a grand scale, so often used in lesser films. Paths of Glory is the story of an egotistical Generals failure and the lengths he is willing to go to protect his reputation.
What a truly grand film this is. Even though this is one of Stanley Kubrick's early films, his genius is plainly evident. In one of the first scenes in the film he took what could have been a long, dull conversation between two Generals and choreographed their movements, along with the cameras, in such a way as to keep the viewers attention. Also, the long dolly shot that followed the General through the "trench" is purely Kubrick. One of his signature moves that he has incorporated in all his films.
The film ends with a scene of a frightened captured German woman being forced to sing to the French troops. On first thought I wondered why this scene was in the film. Looking back this scene provides much more incite to the situation then first at hand. She puts a face on a faceless enemy, thus humanizing them. We see her fear and realize that the French troops, who are soon off to another battle, are just as scared and unsure of their own futures. She is the only person of beauty in a world filled with horror. The palaces that the Generals occupy are grand, but also cold and lifeless. She is alive and out in the terrible world alongside the men in the trenches.
War is hell, not only for the soldier but also for all of humanity, and the only Paths of Glory shown to us in this film is the one taken by the three men. This is what the film is truly about.
Do the Right Thing (1989)
I liked it until the end
Director Spike Lee has brought us a film that is a series of vignettes that converge in the end to tell one story. The film is told through the use of multiple characters that inhabit a one-block section in New York's Bedford Stuyvesant neighborhood. This is a case study of people who are forced to live together and the ways that they interact with each other. This "hood" is made up primarily of such un-stereotypical African American characters that in any other setting might not be believable. There is "The Mayor", the local drunk and unofficial eyes and ears of the neighborhood. He interacts with "Sister Mama", a crotchety old busy body of a woman that judges her world from her kitchen window. Also found on the block is "the three men on the corner" who think they know all and are more then willing to share their views with everyone who passes. The stuttering "Smiley" who spends his time selling post cards. "Radio Raheme, a local tough who spends his time wandering the hood with his boom box and playing the same song over and over. There are numerous others that add to the mix of personalities on this street. The star of the film, Mookie (which is played by the director Spike Lee), a young, directionless man who works in the local pizzeria, which is owned by a white Italian man and his two sons. It is this white owned business in a predominantly black neighborhood that is at the center of this story.
I liked this film in spite of the ending that I felt was designed to do nothing more then evoke controversy. This film, despite the ending, is just a slice of life tail about a neighborhood and the people who inhabit it. Spike Lee tries to make a statement about race relations and prejudice by inserting a riot in the end. Not only does this seem terribly out of place, but also unnecessary to the story. I felt that referencing Dr. Marten Luther King and Malcolm X in the end of the film was only a shallow justification to the addition of the riot scene. Maybe Spike Lee felt that he would not be taken seriously by making a nice, lighthearted comedy on his second time out directing. By adding this violent end he transformed a pleasant, fun film into a controversial "statement". This may not be the "politically correct" way of seeing the film but that's how I saw it.
Being There (1979)
It does make you think
A society that has such a short attention span and only sees the world through the sound byte is the one shown in the film Being There. Peter Sellers uses this film as a way for us to view our society from a different perspective; the perspective of the simple minded "Chance the gardener". Even thought Peter Sellers was only the actor, he is responsible for translating what could have been a lifeless, dull character into a seemingly clever and deep individual. Chance is a half-witted gardener who has spent his entire life apart from the rest of the world tending the plants of an aging millionaire. After the death of the "old man" and the closing of the house that has been Chance's world, he is forced out into an alien society that he has only viewed from the safety of television. He is so unprepared for this new world he finds himself in that fear is not even a consideration. Through a series of accidents and misunderstandings, Chance eventually finds himself in the centers of power. Presidents and the leaders of industry come to ask him advice thinking that his explanations about gardening are some kind of deep analogy for the economy or politics. By the end of the film the "powerful" are discussing Chance as the next presidential candidate. This film asks us the question: is our society so shallow that a simpleton could be mistaken for a leader? This film is a great statement on the modern world. I do think that we as a society make so many assumptions as to believe anything. In the end Chance wanders off into a forest and we see him "walk on water". Are we being led to believe that he is of so pure as to be Christ like or just lucky to have found an unseen sandbar? The film worked for me up until this point then I find myself being forced into considering some supernatural explanation.
Ordinary People (1980)
Like a fine wine
Their world is truly a perfect place; with its groomed lawns and freshly painted homes, and even the people are polite, proper, and happy with life- or so we are led to believe. Robert Redford brings us this perfect world with its perfect people only to show us the imperfections that are so well hidden and are never supposed to be seen. Ordinary People is the story of a families struggle to accept the death of a son and its consequences on all who are left. The main character that is highlighted in the story is the younger son Conrad. Having recently returning home from a mental hospital after an attempted suicide, he is the primary victim of this tragedy. He was on the boat when his brother "Buck" drowned, and he blames himself for his death. The parents are almost polar opposites. The father is desperately trying to keep the family together and to understand what is happening, while the mother is seen to ignore everything and continue to uphold all the pretense that is her life. Also featured in this film is Conrad's psychiatrist Dr. Burger who serves as a means of telling the background story as well as to help the family in realizing their true situation.
I first saw this film twenty years ago as part of a high school field trip. The theater was filled with high school seniors and we wondered who thought up the bright idea of seeing this "Boring" film. This thought went on for about the first ten minuets then we were all engrossed in it. I distinctly remember the gasp of the audience when Conrad receiver the news of his friends suicide over the phone. That gasp was missing in this viewing of the film. I can only attribute it to the age of the audience. The odd thing about seeing this movie after so many years was that the first time I saw it I was seeing it from the son Conrad's eyes. This time I looked at the story and felt more for the father. I suppose age can change a perspective that one views a story from. The gasp was voiced from a room full of Conrad's twenty years ago where this time we were a room full of parents sympathizing with his plight. The ability of a director in being able to tailor a film to his audience, even years later, is a noteworthy achievement. Ordinary People was and still is a great film.
Les quatre cents coups (1959)
Still relevant today
Upon first seeing the Francois Truffaut film 400 Blows, I was struck with the thought that this film was either designed to scar children away from a life of crime or just a social commentary on juvenile delinquency in Paris in the early fifties. This film is neither. Truffaut's main goal in making this film was to show the uncontrollable downward spiral of one boy. We are shown this through the boy "Antoine" eyes. Whether reflected in multiple mirrors at his mom's vanity or from the bottom of a spinning carnival ride, it is his view and perspective of the world that we see. The adult world is conspicuously absent except for the occasional villain or incompetent who happens to pass through Antoine's life. This film is shocking today, with our modern views on decency and political correctness. It was not designed to shock its audiences at the time. The idea of a child being disposable is a lost concept in today's world. The end of the film is especially important in the fact that Antoine, alone on the beach, could be interpreted as having reached his end. He has, throughout the film, sunk lower and lower no matter how hard he tried to better himself. By the end, we are led to believe he has reached his end, both figuratively and literally. My feeling is that instead of despair, he is faced with hope. The beach represents not an end but beginning, and one of limitless possibilities and a chance to begin again. This film is a timeless story of hope and the possibilities of redemption. Truffaut's style is modern and creative for its time. He stays away from stylized techniques that would have only dated this film. If this film was in color, I feel that an audience of today would have a hard time differentiating 400 Blows from a modern movie.
Un chien andalou (1929)
Sometimes being the first counts for something
A modern audience is used to a certain structure in a film. We have come to expect a film to be a story with a beginning, middle and end. The 1927 short film Un Chien andalou disposes of that concept in favor of total randomness. This film, instead of telling a story, is designed to evoke a feeling in its viewer. The famous surrealist Salvador Dali and filmmaker Luis Bunuel created this film more to shock then to entertain. It is as if they purposely took unassociated scenes, threw them in a hat and shook. What came out was spliced together and shown. If this film was made today I would just dismiss it as uncreative modern art "crap", but to do this in 1927, when film was in its infancy, I consider innovative if not groundbreaking. The idea of evoking emotion without purposely using a story to persuade the viewer was a concept un-thought of at the time. Dali and Bunuel are guilty of the use of the cheap shot; cutting a human eye with a razor, even today, shocks an audience, but not so much for its cinematic creativity as for its repulsion. Time has dissipated much of the "shock" factor. The religious criticisms in the film are lost. I did get a chuckle in the part when the man's advances were spurned by the woman, he tries to win her back by dragging in two dead priests tied to two donkeys on top of pianos. I have always found flowers more effective, if not more portable.