Last Seen Movie - The Latest Movie You Have Seen; ratings

[ksrymy]

Rebel Without a Cause (Nicholas Ray, 1955) 7/10

After moving to a new town, a rebellious, trouble teen makes friends with a disturbed classmate, falls for a nice, local girl, and gets in trouble deep with the local tough kids. Nicholas Ray moves away from the brutality of the Old West and moves it to suburbia in "Rebel Without a Cause." While the film isn't as successful as its predecessor (and not many films are), it still manages to be pretty good despite its big shortcomings.

Ray has good control over the melodrama here. It's like Sirk Lite, and rightfully so as this is focused on teens. He reflects the drama on the screen the way these young adults view their own lives: larger than life and love. The use of color is great with a not-so-subtle red jacket always loving to steal the spotlight. If you never understood that red is symbolic for passion in literature, this jacket is like a hammer to the head.

But for all the work Ray builds in the mise en scène, it's torn apart by the inexperienced, jolting cast. James Dean is rightfully iconic. He broods and broods and looks good while doing it, but if a scene requires more than acting tough, he really drops the ball. His screaming, "You're tearing me apart!" at the beginning of the film should be heartbreaking and helping us delving deep into the Jim Stark character, but it comes off as super phony. Maybe it's because that line has become so trite over time, but you'd be hard pressed to ever find that line in a real, true, genuine working fashion. And the "I got the bullets!" at the end is a really bad delivery in arguably the film's greatest moment. Sal Mineo actually gives a decent performance, but the problem is that his character, Plato, doesn't ever feel real. Every scene with him feels oddly out-of-place. And Natalie Wood, as always, doesn't seem to know how to act human. Her sobbing and sputtering in the opening scene is pretty awful; it's in the smaller moments of the film that she really manages to bring something of substance to Judy. Worthy of an Oscar nod? I think not. But, honestly, it's probably the best work she'd done up until this point in time.

"Rebel Without a Cause" is, what I assume, a unique take on growing up in the '50s. The existential angst that course throughout the film is obvious and ever-relevant. I think it's shy of being a great film because the three main characters don't mesh quite well. Still, it's a solid film because the director knows what he's doing.

Smiles of a Summer Night (Ingmar Bergman, 1955) 8/10

Bergman's most notable comedy winds its course around lovers switching partners for a summer night. It's the first film that brought Ingmar Begrman to the international stage. Oh, what I wouldn't give to see a few more like this and a few less angstfests against God not listening to the Swedes. To be fair, these angstfests are usually stellar, but I digress.

"Smiles of a Summer Night" is one of the most unusual films in Bergman's filmography. The laughs aren't outrageous and raucous, but they're plenty and easy to like. Had you asked me if Harriet Andersson could be so funny, I'd have scoffed. But Andersson steals the film with expert timing and, as always, a raw sensuality. Eva Dahlbeck is also magnificent as Desiree Armfeldt, the film's most famous creation. Bergman's women are always a step ahead of every other director's, it seems.

TIME Magazine chose this as one of the All-TIME Top 100 films over Bergman's better works, but it's not hard to see why this was their choice. It's unique and inspiring. It works incredibly well and has had great longevity through adaptations. It's a smart sex comedy that marks another great entry into Bergman's career.

REWATCH: Ordet (Carl Th. Dreyer, 1955) 10/10

The father of a good-hearted agnostic whose wife is pregnant, another who believes he is Jesus, and another son, in love with the tailor's daughter, gets caught in the complicated matrices of religion. Carl Th. Dreyer's "Ordet" is the greatest film about and centered around religion of all-time. There is no equal. "Ordet" is an outright masterpiece in every sense of the word. The film has a scathing, sweet, and smart script forcing us to fathom these different facets of religion. The film is rife with Dreyer's angst and anger; some say the ending subverts this tone throughout, but I wholly disagree - it reinforces it.

Henrik Malberg gives a stellar performance as the family patriarch at age 80. He's never frail and incredibly pensive. His stoicism reads deep instead of hollow. And Preben Lerdorff Rye's performance as the Christ figure, after studying Kierkegaard naturally, is mystifying. It's a magnetic turn - one that's almost impossible to look away from - and he carries the brunt of the film's message on his shoulders. It's a lofty task, but he does everything he needs to to make the film work. And where would this movie be without Birgitte Federspiel's performance as Inger? She's the heart and blood of the film. It's Inger for which we yearn and pray and hope. She's the most human of the bunch, so that's why we get so attached. She's magnificent.

Jonathan Rosenbaum said that the summits of mise en scène were Tati's "Play Time" and this film, "Ordet." It's hard to disagree with him. While Tati's sets in the 1967 film are used for play, delight, and confusion in the modern world, the mise en scène here is used to perfection, helping us feel lost, closed-in, and focused. The settings and especially the cinematography are absolutely masterful.

It's cliché to say "it's not a movie; it's an experience," but if I had to make that comment about any one film, this might be the one. "Ordet" is unlike any film I've ever seen or will see, probably. One of the brightest, most brilliant threads in cinema's fabled tapestry.

REWATCH: Night and Fog (Alain Resnais, 1955) 10/10

This documentary, set ten years after the Second World War, depicts the problems of Auschwitz with shocking images from the concentration camps. I'm not sure why I watched this again. I knew full well going in that I would be a wreck after seeing it. "It couldn't have been that bad, right?" I said to myself going in. I must've been overreacting.

I was not.

"Night and Fog" is probably the best Holocaust movie ever. It's stark, startling, disturbing, and depressing. It's everything it needs to be and then some. The stark black-and-white footage from inside the camps contrasted with the colorful shots of Auschwitz nowadays is obvious in concept, but it plays on our most basic emotions so hard that it's impossible to deny. It's an excellent stylistic choice. I've always thought Resnais was a great director, but this may be his masterpiece (on another day, I may say "Last Year at Marienbad" though). The film is short, sweet, and very, very to-the-point. The scene with the women's hair is one of the most disturbing things I've ever seen and will see again. There's no way I can't revisit this film every so often. No narrative Holocaust film that I've seen has done the tragedy justice like "Night and Fog" has. It's literally gut-wrenching. If I could only select one documentary to ever be shown again, I may very well pick this one.

Death of a Cyclist (J. A. Bardem, 1955) 9/10

A university professor having an affair strikes a bicyclist with his car and doesn't offer any help out of fear of his illicit relationship with a housewife, also present, being exposed. This movie really took me aback. I am not sure exactly why I sought this film out. I hadn't heard of anything by J. A. Bardem before going into the film. Maybe I just wanted a solid thriller. All I know is that I got something truly awesome.

"Death of a Cyclist" is Hitchcock by way of Buñuel, and I'm not saying that just because it's a Spanish production. It has all the thrills we'd expect from the Master of Suspense but with the social critiques Buñuel is so known for. Bardem damns the flighty attitudes of the rich with all the intensity of a T-bone wreck. Lucia Bosè is solid as the woman caught in the affair and the mess. Her eyes do most of the talking. And she's excellent opposite Alberto Closas whose nerve-wracking intensity really keeps the film on edge and on ice. It's unlike any Hitchcock leading men I can think of.

But the film's best surprise, in addition to its delicate, subtle set design, is Carlos Casaravilla as the housewife's friend who may or may not be onto them. His excellent performance is a more suave version of Donald Calthrop's character in Hitchcock's "Blackmail" but with more ambiguity. Casaravilla gets all the best lines; he's funny and he knows it. It still sticks within the tone of the film as the quips would fit right in in any society story. Casaravilla owns the film.

"Death of a Cyclist" is incredible. It's a film I'm super happy to have stumbled upon. It's another reminder that I need to delve into Spanish cinema outside of Buñuel and Erice.

Pete Kelly's Blues (Jack Webb, 1955) 6/10

The leader of a Depression-era Kansas City jazz band has to contend with a local gangster muscling in on his operations. "Pete Kelly's Blues" could've really been something. The film doesn't have much to say, but the story's engaging and never gets boring.

The major problem lies in Jack Webb. His direction is competent and he seems to know what he wants to do with the story, but, in all the hubbub of framing the story and performances, he seemingly forgets that he has to direct himself. I'm not sure if he's trying to make Kelly out to be a stoic hero or stonefaced in the face of danger, but something's not clicking. He blends in with the furniture which makes a majority of the film (since he is the main character and has significantly more screentime than anyone else) rather bland. So Webb's failure in the acting department makes the rest of the cast look good. They don't give great performances, but the film is much more exciting when they're around. Janet Leigh is pretty okay and comes especially alive in the final so-many minutes. Edmond O'Brien plays his usual character with not much else to really do. Peggy Lee is probably the best part of the film. She gets a few really good numbers ("Sugar" is fantastic) and her turn to the drink is sad to witness, but it's easy to see why Oscar nominated her: she's a big-name performer and manically clutches a doll while singing in an asylum. It's fifties as hell. Also, Lee Marvin pops in a few times and isn't half bad.

So "Pete Kelly's Blues" isn't bad. It's a pretty-looking film as well. The sets look sleazy yet refined. It reeks of the jazz era in the best way. And the cinematography is good too - the alleyway killing is framed and lit gorgeously in a Sirkian way. With a better lead and director, I'd say this could've been great easily.

Fear and Desire (Stanley Kubrick, 1955) 1/10

"There is war in this forest. Not a war that has been fought, or one that will be, but any war. And the enemies who struggle here do not exist, unless we call them into being. This forest, then, and all that happens now is outside history. Only the unchanging shapes of fear—and doubt—and death—are from our world. These soldiers that you see keep our language and our time, but have no other country but the mind."

This is how "Fear and Desire" starts: with a godawful metaphor. And not just a metaphor but an obvious metaphor. A condescending metaphor. Kubrick hated this film. It's obvious at this point to say that Kubrick's trying to destroy the film would've been great, but that statement isn't wrong. The dialogue fails to be as poetic as it thinks it is and it's not as artistic as it thinks it is either. And I've seen several Kubrick loyalists claiming that the film's failure is just the material Kubrick had to work with, but that's blind defending. Kubrick has no idea what he's doing here, and it shows. There are no flashes of his future brilliance. You'd hope never to see a movie by this guy again if you saw this first.

And the performances are awful. Paul Mazursky's performance should go down in the annals as one of the worst-ever. And maybe even worse than that is the narration, especially the narration of the paragraph I started this review with. It sounds more forced, unnatural, and ridiculous than something out of an MST3K film.

"Fear and Desire" might be the worst film ever made by a master-class director. It might be the worst film ever. At least things like "Plan 9 from Outer Space" and "The Touch of Satan" and "Snowbeast" are redeeming because they're goofy and campy. This is an abortion.

Killer's Kiss (Stanley Kubrick, 1955) 5/10

A welterweight finds himself caught in the midst of the relationship between his girlfriend and her violent employer. This is a huge step up from "Fear and Desire." We get to see flashes of Kubrick's brilliance to come in "Killer's Kiss."

To be fair, the first two-thirds of the film aren't really all that exciting. The boxing sequence is directed and edited well, but that's the climax of the doldrums of the film. The real reason to see the film is the incredible chase scene that occupies the last fifteen or twenty minutes of the film. We go across rooftops and end up in a factory full of mannequins. It's old hat now, but the way it's shot here makes it gripping and unforgettable. And even if the fight (which basically equals out to a samurai duel between a man with a fire axe and a man with anything he can get his hands on) is a bit goofy, it's still a load of fun to watch.

The performances aren't particularly good and the story isn't very investing. The sandwich/bookend style with the train station doesn't even seem too relevant. But I couldn't really care after seeing "Fear and Desire." This isn't a classic film noir by any means at all, but, man, it sure looks good next to its predecessor. Come for Kubrick, stay for the cinematography and the chase scene, leave moderately amused.

REWATCH: Kiss Me Deadly (Robert Aldrich, 1955) 8/10

After an attractive hitchhiker is tortured to death after he can't protect her, a hard-boiled private eye delves deep into who wanted her dead. I originally didn't like this movie. I remember not liking it because I remembered it being super misogynistic and poorly paced. I must have been drunk and/or stupid. While it is still misogynistic, the film flew by for me this time.

"Kiss Me Deadly" is solid, sleazy film noir. The opening image is of a beautiful woman running from an asylum in nothing but a trench coat; this sets the whole tone for the film. The camera work in this section alone is superb - the shot of Cloris Leachman, arms outstretched, with headlights coming fast is perfect. The film finds this balance of sleaze and artsy style to not only craft a stylish thriller but to symbolize our characters as well.

And the one thing that really keeps me from calling this a masterpiece or undeniably great are the performances and/or characters. Ralph Meeker is alright as Mike Hammer, but I'll be damned if Hammer isn't given much to do here. He kinds of drifts where the script tells him to go, does a scene, slaps a broad, beats a baddie, then goes somewhere else. It's a very dry lead. And as stoic and tough as Hammer is, you'd expect something more out of this. As for the women, Leachman is the most memorable part of the film for a reason. It's Gaby Rodgers though, as our covert villainess, who really makes the film rocky. She feels very amateurish compared to everyone else. It's like her entire knowledge of acting comes from repeated viewings of Stockard Channing's Betty Rizzo in "Grease."

But with that ending (that ending!), it's impossible to not reel in utter, catastrophic, symbolic delight. We were in the Cold War and we knew it. It feels a bit out of place, but it's chaotic and in-line with the film's tone. It works super well. "Kiss Me Deadly" is a real thrill.

A Murderer (Roman Polanski, 1957) 5/10

A trenchcoated man approaches a shirtless, sleeping man. And that's the whole thing. It's a two-minute student film made by Roman Polanski when he was 18. To be fair, it shows what talent it can and you can see Polanski is already toying with themes of vulnerability and the comfort of one's own home.

Is it good? Maybe. Is it bad? No. But it's only two minutes and I can't think of much else to talk about. It looks nice enough and is edited wonderfully.

It's a perfectly fine way to spend two minutes if you love the director like I do.

The Seven-Year Itch (Billy Wilder, 1955) 6/10

A man with an active imagination sends his wife and kid off on vacation for the summer and starts a teasing, awkward relationship with the beautiful blonde bombshell upstairs. "The Seven Year Itch" is definitely weaker Wilder. It doesn't have the consistency most Wilder comedies have as the jokes that stick are sparse. It's a very, very '50s film as well. Incredibly mismatched romantic duo? Check. CinemaScope for no good reason? Check. Based on a play from a few years earlier? Check. The list goes on.

I've never actually seen a film with Marilyn Monroe where she was the best thing about it, but "The Seven Year Itch" breaks that streak. Monroe's comic timing is impeccable. One critic I follow but mostly disagree with, Filmspotting's Josh Larsen, says that "Monroe’s timing is so perfect, it’s impossible to write the character off as a dimwit even though she seems barely aware of what room she’s in. There’s a particularly dexterous moment when The Girl demonstrates a toothpaste ad she’s the star of, and you can see Monroe working the various layers of allure – as Marilyn Monroe, as The Girl, as the toothpaste model – while being funny the whole time." I think Larsen really gets at what makes this performance work: it's Monroe making fun of her own image in a way. Today, people know Monroe as a sex symbol but also, apparently, as a genius with a massively high IQ (at least all the memes shared by trashy girls on Facebook say so, so...). Watching her toy around with this image is a treat.

But what keeps the film from really being good is Tom Ewell. The guy won a Tony for his work in the Broadway play, and I can see why. It's a lot of talking to one's self in a manic way. That works really well for theatre. For film, this performance does not translate well one bit. Any time Monroe isn't on screen, the film drags and grows old really quickly. Ewell isn't charming or sweet or endearing in any way. It's like watching an episode of "The Odd Couple" where only Felix Unger gets screentime - it doesn't work without the counterpart.

So "The Seven-Year Itch" remains good if only for Monroe's work. Chronologically, it's her best performance so far as an actress.

Guys and Dolls (Joseph L. Mankiewicz, 1955) 6/10

A New York gambler is challenged to take a cold female missionary to Havana, where they inevitably fall for each other, but the bet has a hidden financial motive to it. For it's two-and-a-half-hour runtime, "Guys and Dolls" mostly gets praise from me for never being boring. The characters are interesting enough though not compelling enough to lead a film of their own. It's an ensemble piece at heart.

And at the heart of the group, the film has about two-and-a-half characters worth anything. Frank Sinatra's Nathan Detroit is alright. The character himself isn't too special, but Sinatra plays him with a sense of suaveness and oiliness that works really well. Opposite him is Vivian Blaine who is the half-a-character worth anything. Blaine's numbers are pretty fantastic; I'd say they're all in the better half of the film's catalogue. However, Blaine can get pretty annoying at times with her mugging smile and infantile voice. It rings especially false during the film's regular sequences. But she's not nearly as bad as Marlon Brando who, in theory, is a perfect Sky Masterson but really blows the film apart as it chugs along. Brando's regular scenes are mostly good with the actor providing Masterson with a sleazy, misunderstood aura that makes you never doubt Sister Sarah would fall for him. However, his musical numbers are truly terrible. He relies on sprechgesang to get through the film, and it doesn't work one bit.

But then there's Jean Simmons who gets her own paragraph because she's absolutely radiant in this film. One wonders why she wasn't as big as the other actresses of her era. She sings beautifully, looks beautiful, and acts beautifully. She nails the frigidity of Sister Sarah, and her transition is an interesting one to behold. She doesn't go from ice queen to a lusty, slutty piece of meat like most movies do. She still retains all her initials characteristics only she learns to love. Sister Sarah's a surprisingly round, full-bodied character, and I was not expecting that one bit.

As for the production design, it's as fake as I've ever seen in a Hollywood musical. The kitschy pastels of everything is really detracting from anything happening in the foreground. This design works in scenes like the opening dance number and the dancing before "Luck Be a Lady," but it is very awkward any other time. The costumes are really nice though, I'll give them that. Costumes and sets are usually one-in-the-same in terms of quality, but that diversity here took me aback.

Mankiewicz gets a bit talky like normal, but he mostly avoids all the purple prose he's so keen on. "Guys and Dolls" is good. Does it deserve to be a well-remembered cornerstone of the genre? Probably not. Am I mad that is it? No. It's a fun musical that charges towards the end going full-blast the whole time. If Jean Simmons weren't in it, then I'd say we've got a big problem on our hands.

I'll Cry Tomorrow (Daniel Mann, 1955) 6/10

This biopic covers the life of film and stage star Lillian Roth who turns to alcohol after the death of a loved one and after years of her mother pushing her into a showbiz career. "I'll Cry Tomorrow" is '50s melodrama at its most melodramatic. Daniel Mann does okay guiding the film along. He never was a very good director, but he found his niche as a studio hack with an eye for sad women.

Our sad woman here is Susan Hayward who does pretty good work as Lillian Roth. Hayward has always been good at delivering dialogue, especially of the inflated variety, and she delivers her lines well here with enough emotion and reality behind them to sell the performance. One small thing that bothered me was that Hayward never seems at rest in the film. She's always moving and animated, and that doesn't really align with Roth's personality. It works when she has the DTs for what it's worth.

Maybe the most impressive work in the film comes from Jo Van Fleet as Katie, Roth's domineering stage mother. Van Fleet's cold, hard mother is a smart creation. Most stage moms on film are depicted as loud, brash, and bossy. Van Fleet takes a much better alternate route and makes her privately pushy. She tells her daughter exactly what to do without slaps and screaming. It's a more chilling path that makes her more monstrous. To have a grip on a child like that... Van Fleet's performance is wonderful.

The film ends on a cheesy though uplifting note. Hayward won the Actress award at Cannes for this. I can't get behind it as some of her best work, but I think, if anyone had to play this role, Hayward was the one. "I'll Cry Tomorrow" and its gloriously melodramatic title are good by me.

REWATCH: Se7en (David Fincher, 1995) 9/10

Two homicide detectives track down a serial killer using the seven deadly sins as his motivation. My wife had never seen the film (or had the ending spoiled for her somehow) and was curious to see it. A rewatch tonight has confirmed to me that this really is a great movie.

I think the only detractors to the film are Brad Pitt's performance which is wildly uneven even if Mills is written as fairly annoying. His "What's in the box?!" deliveries are pretty bad as are the "Oh, God!" lines and looks away he gives us while pointing his gun at Doe.

The only other grievance I have is that Fincher and Darius Khondji's incessant close-ups get really tiresome after a while. The film is shot superbly, but these close-ups of shirts being buttoned and other things seem really forced in at times.

But Morgan Freeman is excellent as always and keeps the film grounded and realistic. He wears hard-but-not-too-hard-boiled really well. His last scene opposite Gwyneth Paltrow is excellent mostly due to him. His exasperation is felt vividly. But while Freeman is good, Kevin Spacey is great. The movie is tense and interesting throughout, but the film turns absolutely electric once Spacey's John Doe enters the police station. And the car ride out to the powerline-ridden desert is some of the best writing the genre has ever seen. It's like a twisted, stomach-wrenching "On the Waterfront" car scene.

Yeah, the film feels a little brainless at times with all the literary references and cat-and-mouse which has become super tired since 1995 (and might have even been way tired by 1995 when the movie came out), but it feels so engrossing and great that you never think about it until the movie's over. "Se7en" is a fantastic film and one of Fincher's best still. It's a thriller, the likes of which we won't see again for a long time if ever. Often imitated, never replicated.

The Quatermass Xperiment (Val Guest, 1955) 6/10

After Earth loses contact with the passengers, a rocket crash lands to find that two of the occupants have vanished and the third begins to transform into a deadly creature. "The Quatermass Xperiment" is an exercise in interesting horror and sci-fi with Hammer showing signs of what was to come.

The practical effects and makeup are superb. It's some of the best work I've seen in the genre up to this point. Even if, at times, it's nothing more than a breathing blob, it's a realistic-looking breathing blob. It's better than Steve McQueen's titular Blob.

The film could've really been something too, but the acting is so poor that it's hard to get past sometimes. Margia Dale in particular is awful. She should gain all our sympathies as the suffering wife, but Dale is so wooden and irritating and ridiculous that it's hard to care about her at all. So goes the film's emotional core. That isn't to say it invokes no emotion because it's really thrilling, but thrills alone don't make for a good film. And having a tired old American like Brian Donlevy play a central part feels a bit goofy too. You can tell that he really doesn't care for this work at all.

"The Quatermass Xperiment" is sci-fi fun, but it also feels just as much like the radio drama you can tell it was and wanted to be. It's worth seeing for the effects alone, but it's disappointing overall.

The Rose Tattoo (Daniel Mann, 1955) 5/10

A grieving widow discovers a new romance after she finds out her now-deceased husband was cheating on her before he died. "The Rose Tattoo" is a messy film. On paper, it looks solid. Anna Magnani is perfectly cast as Serafina. I'm glad she won an Oscar even if it's for this role. She's one of the best actresses we've ever had the opportunity of watching. And even though "The Rose Tattoo" is an overly chatty, frankly boring melodrama, Magnani makes it tolerable. She grief is always deeply felt. She had a way with sadness that most never did.

As for the rest of the cast, Marisa Pavan doesn't do anything to really earn her Oscar nod or Globes win. But she's inoffensive and harmless compared to Burt Lancaster who's not only terribly miscast but who also gives a dreadful performance. Lancaster always seemed to get jobs just for his jawline; this is no exception. Since 1946, I think I've come to find Burt Lancaster is actually one of the worst leading men of the era. He's no Tyrone Power or Robert Taylor, but, man, he's insufferable and mugs the camera with his smile almost as much as Gene Kelly does.

There's a reason nobody lists this right away if you ask for someone's favorite Tennessee Williams work. It doesn't even feel distinctly like him. I love Williams' work, but this is a skidmark on his résumé. "The Rose Tattoo" is very mediocre. It's never truly bad because of the radiant Magnani, but it's not a film I'll run back to any time soon.

Finding Dory (Andrew Stanton, Angus MacLane, 2016) 8/10

Pixar's beloved blue tang goes to search for her family after she remembers she has one. "Finding Dory" ticks every box you'd expect in Pixar bingo, but it still works, works well, and stays massively entertaining and emotional. The film's new characters are fill the void we get by not having the original tank gang from the first film show up. Ed O'Neill's curmudgeonly octopus is an absolute delight. Ellen reminds us why her character was the breakout role of the first film and doesn't let us forget it. Dory is as entertaining and great as you'd want and expect.

I think I'd label this as a great movie too. It's a rare great sequel in this day of pre/re/sequel overload. It's not a necessary story to tell, but it's one that I'm glad we got to see. And the tonal change between this film and its predecessor is a nice change of pace. "Finding Nemo" was a grand adventure with action set piece after action set piece. "Finding Dory" trades in half of the adventure for truly touching, remarkable emotional scenes. Baby Dory is just about the cutest thing I've ever seen. I'd be lying if I didn't cry when she reunites with her parents too. The shells got me. This heightened emotion is excellent not only for the kids who will watch it relentlessly but for the adults, the parents taking their kids to see this. Parents have become big in Pixar's recent pictures. This is most likely because the kids who saw "Toy Story" in theaters are having their own children today. Everyone gets to be included now.

"Finding Dory" is great. It's an absolute treat. I'm glad it got made. I'll probably buy it.

The Man with the Golden Arm (Otto Preminger, 1955) 6/10

A former heroin addict and dealer tries to go straight after prison but struggles immensely with life, addiction, and his wife.

I have to give props to "The Man with the Golden Arm." It tries to take a daring look at drug addiction in the midst of the Code and its censor-happy presence. And it's a bit edgier than I expected it to be. The end of Eleanor Parker's story line took me waaaaay by surprise. It's dark and moody in ways I didn't expect. I'd be a bit more interested to see what would've happened if Preminger got a hold of "The Lost Weekend" around this time if it hadn't come out ten years before.

Frank Sinatra is the main reason to see the film, and he's very good in the lead role even if he looks a little goofy, uninspired, and unrealistic in his jazz drumming scenes. Sinatra tackles the role with gusto and plunges headlong into this character's downward spiral. The cold turkey scene near the end is hard to watch. Sinatra mostly does this well even if his body language is a little awkward at times.

The title sequence by Saul Bass is as excellent as you would hope; his distinctive style is one of my favorite things of the era. And Elmer Bernstein's evocative, moody jazz score is rightfully remembered. As for the filmmaking, there are some long takes that work really well. I wasn't expecting that level of filmmaking here.

And I never really got that level of filmmaking because the film never becomes anything other than a standard cautionary, drugs-are-bad-don't-do-them tale.

Every other cast member in this film serves up fresh, pungent ham. The characters are all so broad and vague which really hurts the film. The only character other than Sinatra's that the film invests in is his manipulative wife Zosh played by Eleanor Parker. And Parker, whom I usually enjoy, is absolutely atrocious here - Razzie-worthy even. She sits in her wheelchair bug-eyed and turns into a statue in each scene. It's honestly some of the absolute worst acting I've seen in my life. I'd never have expected this from Parker. As for Kim Novak, she doesn't get a lot to do. Her character is basically a deus ex machina. Sinatra spends a single night with her and we're to believe he's cured? That's hilarious. Maybe it was the lack of education on addiction at the time, but it seems awfully silly. She's there to look good and that's it. A really unnecessary role.

And even though the film aims to be a hard-hitting drama, the film couldn't look any worse. The set design is truly bad. It's like they filmed on sets immediately used after a TV show finished filming there. You'd expect the club(s) to look good too, but they're not. I wish there were more grime everywhere because the film aims to feel that way but never looks it.

"The Man with the Golden Arm" is good though. It's ballasted by Sinatra and the music. They're really the only good parts of the film. Maybe a 6/10 is too high a rating, but it feels wrong lowering it. Otto Preminger is better than this.

REWATCH: East of Eden (Elia Kazan, 1955) 7/10

A young man contends with winning the love of his father, meeting his absent mother, and finding love in pre-Depression California. If "Rebel Without a Cause" is the film James Dean's image is most remembered by, then "East of Eden" is probably the one his acting should be most remembered by. I don't think it's a great performance by any means, but, of his three performances, this one is probably his best. His angst and brooding is far more understood, conceptualized, and realistic here than it is in the Ray film. In the Ray film, Dean is too melodramatic to really come off well; here, under the direction of Elia Kazan, Dean finds himself a role that complements his talents as an actor, specifically his low speech. He does get a bit hammy whenever he yells which is unfortunate because all acting in pre-1967 Hollywood calls for it, it seems. His scenes opposite Julie Harris are alright. Harris isn't too good as Abra (she seems super miscast) so their arc comes off awkwardly.

If the cast gets kudos from me, it goes to mom and pop. Jo Van Fleet's turn as the deplorable Kate is amazing. Van Fleet, having a banner year in '55 with another solid turn in "I'll Cry Tomorrow," imbues Steinbeck's most evil creation with an underlying sympathy so that we question ourselves more than her motives. Our introduction to Kate is memorable largely in part to Van Fleet's shock and calm. She's marvelous. But it's Raymond Massey's turn as Adam that really dominates the film. Children don't care if their parents are mad, but, boy, if you hear they're disappointed, you really feel awful. And this drives the central relationship between Adam and Cal. Massey's righteous, holier-than-thou performance is as mesmerizing as it is terrifying. There's real hypocrisy emanating from him, but he's a fully realized character whose motives we slowly learn and understand. It's a brilliant turn.

The film is shot with overbearing beauty; the idea of California, Salinas Valley especially, as a kind of Eden and Hell in the same is very thoroughly evoked. Up to this point, Kazan's films were very simple and refined; this mixes it way up.

If Dean and Harris were better, we'd be looking at a truly great film. However, it's worth seeing simply for Massey and Van Fleet themselves. "East of Eden" is an engaging look at growing up, family drama, and jealousy.

Mister Roberts (John Ford, Mervyn LeRoy, Joshua Logan, 1955) 5/10

An officer, hungry for battle, is stuck on a noncommissioned Navy ship run by a bully of a captain. "Mister Roberts" really confused me. It's incredibly minor and light for someone like John Ford but not for Mervyn LeRoy and especially not for Joshua Logan. The film isn't enough like "Gone with the Wind" to where you can tell who directed what sequences which certainly would've made it more interesting.

The cast is the real reason to see the film. Henry Fonda, after years away, is okay as our lead. He doesn't really do much, and his comic timing seems off. I guess those years on the stage got to him. His jokes didn't translate too well. Actually, none of the jokes really translated well. I don't think I laughed once. I may have exhaled quickly through my nose a few times, but nothing was ever laugh-out-loud funny. And most scenes that are involve either William Powell, in his final performance, and an Oscar-winning Jack Lemmon. Lemmon's performance is super interesting. You can tell why this was a star-making turn for him. It seems to cater to his expert comedic cadences and love of language, but it comes off as really tonally different from the rest of the film. It's like an episode of "M*A*S*H" where something super serious is going on and then in comes Lemmon with an oddly-placed joke. "Mister Roberts" doesn't balance its comedy and drama too well. As for Jimmy Cagney, he's sleepwalking through an easy, unexciting, unoriginal part.

I can't say I actively disliked this film, but "Mister Roberts" is much worse than it could and should have been. Ford' temperament got the best of him, and the other two directors had to step in and do what they could. It's a messy film.

REWATCH: All That Heaven Allows (Douglas Sirk, 1955) 10/10

A widow falls in love with the son of her gardener, 15 years her junior, and her community bands against her because of it. No color film has looked or ever will look as beautiful as "All That Heaven Allows." Douglas Sirk's mastery of melodrama, his ability to balance style with substance while not going overboard, is perfected in this film. His other films can get a little sappy at times, but everything seems so justified and perfect here. The scene where Cary sees Kirby while looking for a Christmas tree is heart-shredding and yet totally uplifting in a way. It's a deadly cocktail of emotions from melodrama mixologist Sirk.

Jane Wyman and Rock Hudson, once again, are a scintillating couple, and the material here is even better than it is in "Magnificent Obsession." It's as good an "us against the world" tale as the screen has seen. Wyman's quiet reserve and Hudson's brawny quietude are refreshing in a genre so happy to scream and cry. They're a perfect match. And it has to be pretty brave for producers to have let this into the theaters seeing how quiet and smooth it is - that and Wyman's daughter, played by Gloria Talbott, who's giving the suburban couples in the audience lessons on sex throughout. Maybe best of all is Jacqueline de Wit's small role as Mona. All through the film, we hear about how snide and judgmental Mona is, and, when we get to meet her a few times, de Wit makes it all worthwhile. She gets the best lines, delivers them with acerbic sass, and steals every scene.

What more is there to say about this gorgeous film? It's the perfect melodrama. Nothing can compare.

One Froggy Evening (Chuck Jones, 1955) 10/10

A workman finds a singing frog in a time capsule, but, when he tries to get rich quick on this, he finds the frog will sing only for him. One of the three or five or so most perfect animated shorts. Michigan J. Frog is either a madman or the biggest inconvenience. His ragtime standards are simply amazing and I'd wager more people know them from this short than in general context.

"One Froggy Evening" has a couple different readings I've be interested in looking into. First, I'd love to see a scholarly article over this critiquing capitalism. The workman's instinct to immediately make money off this discovery is gross and hilarious. I think this lends itself to economic and Marxist criticism easily though that was obviously not the intention.

The way I've always read the film is as a humorous spoof on stage parents. The workman is out Mamma Rose, and Michigan J. Frog is Louise/Gypsy Rose Lee. Or Mama June and Honey Boo Boo. Whatever comparison you'd like to choose, the workman sees something special in his "child," so to speak, that nobody else sees. Whether the frog's doing it on purpose or not doesn't matter - the workman goes way out of his way to get this kid/frog noticed and it takes a toll on him. Stuck in a dead-end job, he pours all his juices into one last vicarious attempt at happiness.

"One Froggy Evening" is a total delight. It's one of Looney Tunes/Merrie Melodies' best pieces of work. It's one of the best pieces of work ever. All it took was some recycled music and a cute frog too.

Wichita (Jacques Tourneur, 1955) 6/10

Buffalo hunter Wyatt Earp rolls into Wichita and refuses to be the town's marshal until he's truly needed.

This gorgeously shot western by genre-less Jacques Tourneur can't quite live up to the way it looks on paper due to the story being way sterilized.

Joel McCrea is fine. He's always been a solid actor, and, oddly, he's much better in the film's first half. He makes for a really interesting Wyatt Earp even if he's a bit long-in-the-tooth to be playing the part. He paints a smart portrait of the iconic lawman. Had this expert performance gone the whole way though, I'd say his performance would be the best the character's ever had. As for the rest of the cast, they all seem a bit out-of-sorts. Vera Miles is a bit wooden and mannequin-y here.

The most interesting part of the film is that, while it's very straightforward and doesn't seek to push an envelopes or boundaries, it goes out of its way to make points on gun control, and I'm not saying this simply because of today's political atmosphere. I think everybody who was afraid Obama would come for their guns saw this film in early, early November 2008. The film focuses more on this debate and Earp himself than the town itself like Tourneur did in "Stars in My Crown," but, with the tepid supporting cast, I'm glad it happened this way.

"Wichita" is pretty good. If Tourneur ever made a film I'd call bad, I've certainly forgot about it. He's a journeyman, everyman, man's man. His talent behind the camera is what keeps "Wichita" from being the mediocre film it could've been under the reins of one of the studio hacks.

Tarantula (Jack Arnold, 1955) 7/10

A rapidly-growing spider, on a strict diet of a vitamin made to counteract humans eventually wiping out all of earth's food sources, escapes a lab and wreaks havoc on a nearby desert town. "Tarantula" is really, really good. Don't let people tell you otherwise. It's a lot smarter than it lets on.

"Tarantula" basically lures people into a monster movie and gives us a smart dialogue about human and animal testing and the inevitable problems of the future instead. John Agar and Mara Corday play a pair of scientists trying to figure out what the hell is going on, and there's a lot to figure out. The film plays well as a snappy procedural but without ever feeling like an episode of "NCIS" or "Law & Order." The scientific subplot (which is probably the film's real plot with a giant tarantula lurking in a secondary background) is well thought out and, gigantism aside, pretty believable. The injections and transformation are really, really cool too. Leo G. Carroll goes all in on these scenes and it's fun to see especially since he's always so reserved.

And the film's effects are still really solid. Granted, you can totally tell how they're doing everything and it isn't exactly seamless, but everything looks fantastic and realistic.

"Tarantula" is awesome. I remember briefly seeing part of it on TV as a kid, thinking it was cool, and remembering that I should watch it. I'm glad I finally got around to it. A really cool, smart movie.

House of Bamboo (Samuel Fuller, 1955) 6/10

A man is hired to get inside information on an ex-G.I. who's running a racket in Japan with a gang of other dishonorably-discharged vets.

Seeing as I love Samuel Fuller and Robert Ryan, I was really thinking I'd like this movie, but "House of Bamboo" comes off as a disappointment. The film's location shooting is marvelous, and, when it moves to sets like it does at the end, it's still seamlessly gorgeous. The film looks amazing with its vibrancy on full display. It's a brave, interesting thing Fuller did making a film noir in bright, loud color, taking place mostly during daylight. It works well - maybe not as well as a more night-savvy "Party Girl" from three years later, but it works well. Robert Ryan stealthily dominates scene after scene after scene, and Robert Stack is pretty okay as our detective lead. And Shirley Yamaguchi is alright as our token widowed love interest - where would film noir be without this character?

The opening train heist is thrilling as is the final rundown. Fuller's eye for movement and direction is as solid here as it ever has been. And the cinematography from Joseph MacDonald is breathtaking. These two men complement each other's styles well.

You know, though, for a Fuller film centered on ex-vet gangsters in Japan, you'd think this film would have a lot more bite, more acerb, more darkness. The film doesn't pack as many punches as it should have, so it feels a bit more lightweight than Fuller's other films. And I'm not sure who's to blame here. Maybe the screenwriter. It's the mid-'50s, you expect bad guys to get slapped about, people to fall off things, and vitriol to drip from the cold, white teeth of the villains. And those are all things sorely needed here.

But "House of Bamboo" is a good film nonetheless if not only for the bounty of beauty laid before our eyes. It's an aesthetic's film.

It Came from Beneath the Sea (Robert Gordon, 1955) 4/10

A giant octopus travels from the Philippines to San Francisco looking for food and havoc as H-bomb tests have altered its appetite and life. "It Came from Beneath the Sea" is worth seeing just for the now-legendary Harryhausen work, especially the Golden Gate Bridge attack sequence. This is also a great example of seeing a film for one thing and one thing only; Harryhausen is the one reason to see this film. The tentacles look really solid and the movement is more fluid than in other Harryhausen features, notably "The Beast from 20,000 Fathoms."

The actors are all dreadful, the dialogue is poor, the logic is flawed, none of it works. Two full stars seems a bit nice, actually. But I can't say I wasn't entertained the whole time.

REWATCH: Artists and Models (Frank Tashlin, 1955) 7/10

A struggling artist uses his roommate's loud nightmares as fuel for stories and art. Upon rewatch, it's still true: Jerry Lewis is magnificently annoying and mugs the camera more than anyone else in history. His infantile screeching is absolutely intolerable. Granted, his character is supposed to be annoying, but this is overkill. Apparently, this is around the time Dean Martin and Lewis' friendship started to strain. I'm not sure you can tell so much. Their scenes opposite each other are good, but they also don't have a lot of scenes with each other once the story gets going. Lewis gets to hang out with Shirley MacLaine who is good fun in an early role.

The film is also a fun parlay into the world of pop art which was being born in the U.K. around this time. The look at comics pervading pop culture, making money off it, and seeking fame from it embodies everything Warhol is known for on a standard level. The only thing missing from the film are benday dots on the celluloid itself. The Technicolor and VistaVision here are glorious and used to full effect. The opening credits are a fantastic example of this. And the musical numbers, for the most part, are very colorful and cute even if they are rather lackluster in their choreography and overall production. Then again, I feel like Gene Kelly would've made this film worse. So maybe the conventionality of these numbers isn't a bad thing.

"Artists and Models" is basically a living cartoon but not in the way I mean it when I say the same thing about Russ Meyer. It's a total delight that runs on color, star power, and jokes. It's a film I enjoy visiting every now and then and will come back to soon. Frank Tashlin deserves a spot in the canon limelight for his work.

Moonfleet (Fritz Lang, 1955) 4/10

Dear Cahiérs du Cinema,

Why do you insist that this is the thirty-second most essential movie of all-time?

Love,

Ryan

But seriously, "Moonfleet" is a pretty bad film, and I'm not sure why it has received the acclaim it has. It doesn't have any kind of auteur theory going on behind it. It feels like a shoddily-molded adventure film you'd expect from someone like Delmer Daves, not Fritz Lang. Lang is one of the very best, but you'd never know from this. There are a few shots in the film that are taken right out of the German Expressionist Handbook, and they look good, mind you, but it never really makes the film feel any more dangerous or exciting. The film focuses on Viveca Lindfors and Stewart Granger and that terrible child actor while ignoring George Sanders and Joan Greenwood who are two proven professionals that usually elevate a film easily. But even Sanders feels a bit muted here and isn't allowed to go full cad like he usually succeeds at.

The film looks alright. The CinemaScope makes some of the action set pieces look nice and the sets themselves are really pretty, but the rest of the film is aimless and wandering. At 30 and 60 minutes in, I wasn't quite sure what we were supposed to be caring about. There's treasure and that's about it. I don't know whether the children's material held Lang back or if the material itself was just plain bad, but "Moonfleet" doesn't work, and I really hurts to say that Lang has made a bad movie.

The Shallows (Jaume Collet-Serra, 2016) 7/10

An injured surfer remains about 200 yards offshore while a shark stalks her after all help has gone. "The Shallows" is way better than you will expect it to be. It plays with claustrophobia in an agoraphobic setting really well and never gets boring or repetitive. On paper, the two-hour runtime looks a little long, but the movie flies by due to the merciless editing and brisk pacing. Also, that cinematography was absolutely astounding. There's a slow-motion scene during the shark attack sequence that's absolutely breath-taking; it's more memorable than all the beautiful landscape we get to take in.

Maybe the most surprising part of the film is the powerful performance we get from Blake Lively. Lively's always been an okay actress in my book. She never really got to stretch her dramatic chops in "Gossip Girl" and hasn't been in anything since that's let her experiment outside her comfort zone, so to see her fully capable and moving in this film took me aback. It's more than the typical "glamor girl goes unglamorous" role we expect in situations like this. To be fair, the first act of the film is pretty tepid and looks like nothing more than Lively modeling clothes, electronics, and jewelry, but it's nothing we haven't seen in other, artsier films. It isn't super distracting which is the biggest key to this not inducing groans. Lively's performance anchors this film.

A few things keep the film from being great though. One: the CGI used for the shark is really bad at points. There's a point where the shark is biting into a buoy, and it looks really, really fake. Some good practical effects would've been miraculous. And, speaking of bad CGI, there are several moments in the final fight between Lively and the shark that are look bad and are bad in concept. The shark's ultimate demise has been divisive, so I've read, but I think it's really badass. I think the way we get there, the moments leading up to it, are a bit contrived and unrealistic, but, in the moment, I was caught up in utter escapism.

Survival horror has been going strong and popular for about a decade now, but I can't think of a film about pure, natural survival recently that's been as good as this. Yes, that includes "The Revenant." I saw in "The Shallows" what everyone else saw in that contrived, overdirected monument to cinematography and begging for awards because of what you did behind the scenes. "The Shallows" is really good. It's the biggest surprise of the year so far. It doesn't even matter if the character I was most invested in was a seagull.

REWATCH: Floating Clouds (Mikio Naruse, 1955) 10/10

A married Japanese forester during WWII is sent to Indochina and has an affair with a young Japanese typist; he promises to leave his wife, doesn't, and, after the war, she turns up to resume the affair. Mikio Naruse's masterpiece is a searing, scorching slow burn of a romance with the sense of dread and longing by film's end being almost unbearable.

And this has almost entirely to do with the excellent work by both Masayuki Mori and Hideko Takamine. Their performances are master classes in subtlety and body language. "Floating Clouds" is a quiet film that relishes in the breaths that hover quietly between conversations. It lives on the wind. Takamine and Mori have an electric chemistry that sucks you in and steals your peripheral vision. Each time I see this, I forget I'm watching it on a screen. It feels like a dream.

And in addition to Mori and Takamine, who both won the Blue Ribbons for their work here, Naruse's impeccable direction showcases his brilliance. He does was Ozu is best known for doing but translates it into a much more modern feel. This movie feels like it could have been made in the '70s or yesterday. It feels drastically set apart from all other movies that take place in Japan after WWII. The relationship is modern yet flawed. It's a look at the toxicity of affairs and the human heart in general.

"Floating Clouds" is a masterpiece. I don't think there's any film in American cinema just like it which is one reason I love the cinema of Japan so much. A grand film packed into a small, quiet box. It's the most pleasant cinematic "pop goes the weasel" I can think of.

A Generation (Andrzej Wajda, 1955) 8/10

Two young Polish men become at odds with the Nazis during the German occupation. Andrzej Wajda's first film (and my first Wajda viewing) is a red hot, in-depth look at revolutionary views and attitudes during and after World War II. Wajda's impressive debut never quite endears us to the main characters like you would expect it to, but we're never so distant from them as to not care. If we grow to like them, it's more out of a sense of anger and sympathy than because we like them as people. That isn't to say they're played poorly or are awful people because neither of those statements are true. The performance that stands out to me isn't from any of the men though. Wajda gives us a great character in Dorota played marveously by Urszula Modrzyńska. She's simultaneously muse we need for inspiration when we're feeling down-and-out and a dynamic, intriguing character who shows women were important in revolution too.

Wajda's direction is what I keep finding myself thinking of though. His eye for placement and framing, coupled with the lighting talents of the cinematographer make for a highlight reel of indelible shots - most notably, the staircase finale is absolutely jaw-dropping. As we see everything unfold slowly and directly, it only draws out the horror and suspense more and more. The shot from the bottom of the spiral staircase up, people leaning over, is absolutely gorgeous.

"A Generation" is an angry Polish film with much to say and a ton to show. Wajda, who's still alive at 90 years old, lets us know everything he experienced and gives us a direct account of the war. It's something Hollywood was far too afraid to show (and because we never got attacked inland and/or occupied) and even the French, Italian, and German films I've seen were never quite this dark - I'd say only Rossellini comes close. But "A Generation" is a brilliant debut by a director I'm incredibly excited to see more from.

[Sabin]

An Officer and a Gentleman (Taylor Hackford) -- 5/10

Aside from the fact that it's not a good movie, I'm trying to figure out why I didn't like it more. I think it's because films that give the appearance of something deeper frustrate me. At heart, Douglas Day Stewart is a TV writer and this film is a by-the-numbers playbook. Or maybe it's the Jack Nitzsche score, which is good but repeated to the point of meaninglessness. Or maybe it's Richard Gere. He's not bad but he doesn't suggest an inner-life of torment and obsession the role demands. He's not a bad boy. He's a himbo. Or maybe it's because without Debra Winger, it's inconceivable that anybody else could create such sparks with him and suggest a frank, alluring sexuality at the core of this film, which would tie it back to being frustrated by the appearance of something deeper. Aside from Terms of Endearment (which I haven't seen in some years), this is my first encounter with 1980s Debra Winger. She does incredible things with this role. Maybe one of the reasons why I'm less impressed by Richard Gere is because there's just no reason to look at him when she's on the screen. It becomes clear that this film isn't a romantic drama two-hander but a coming of age film for a man and everyone is there to serve his education -- but when Debra Winger is on-screen it feels like a two-hander. She's captivating. Maybe I should stop trying to think about why I didn't like it more, and why I didn't like it less. That reason is clear.

I'm a little surprised this film didn't sneak into the Best Picture lineup. Was it not taken that seriously? A giant hit with a series of star-making or enhancing performances? Hackford managed a DGA nomination over Lumet and Costa-Gavras and eight Golden Globe nominations (albeit two throwaways for Best New Star of the Year Male & Female). I'll certainly laud the Academy for passing it up over more serious fare.

[Precious Doll]

The Fencer (2015) Klaus Haro 4/10 (Scandinavian Film Festival)
The Here After (2015) Magnus von Horn 5/10 (DVD)
Heart of a Dog (2016) Laurie Anderson 7/10 (DVD)

Melbourne International Film Festival Screenings

After the Storm (2016) Hirokazu Koreeda 7/10
Blood of My Bood (2015) Marco Bellocchio 6/10
Graduation (2016) Cristian Mungiu 6/10
The Salesman (2016) Asghar Farhadi 5/10
The Son of Joseph (2016) Eugene Green 6/10
Paris 05:59 (2016) Olivier Ducastel & Jacques Martineau 4/10
Unlocking the Cage (2016) Chris Hegedus & D. A. Pennebaker 6/10
The Death of Louis XIV (2016) Albert Sera 9/10
The Lovers and the Despot (2016) Ross Adan & Robert Cannan 6/10

[Precious Doll]

Everybody Wants Some (2016) Richard Linklater 6/10 (Blu Ray)
4th Man Out (2016) Andrew Nackman 6/10 (Blu Ray)
Tumbeldown (2016) Sean Mewshaw 4/10 (DVD Rental)
Batman V. Superman (2016) Zak Synder 2/10 (DVD Rental)
No Home Movie (2016) Chantal Akerman 4/10 (DVD)
Love & Friendship (2016) Whit Stillman 8/10 (Cinema)
Losing Ground (1982) Kathleen Collins 6/10 (Blu Ray)
Rabin, the Last Day (2015) Amos Gitai 7/10 (Blu Ray)

Repeat viewing

Rush (1991) Lili Fini Zanuck 9/10

[Sabin]

No, I put the brackets around them because I've seen them before.

-- George Gaynes is very good in Tootsie. Bill Murray hadn't quite figured out how to act natural on-screen, but (to quote Michael Gebert) when you can quote an entire performance, you're doing something right. I'm very pleased that Teri Garr was nominated. She's quite good in the film. I got a newfound appreciation for Jessica Lange in the film. She brings an entirely different sad/sweet energy to every scene that she's in. This isn't a great part so the fact that she can do anything with it that feels genuine is worth something. She's helped immeasurably by the editors who linger on every shot that she's in -- it's probably no coincidence that she is at her best in close-ups, which is true of almost nobody else in the film. I'm probably Team Teri Garr.

(NOTE: although I need to see The World According to Garp, Frances, and Victor/Victoria again, there's very little chance my pick wouldn't be Lesley Ann Warren.

I wonder who the predicted nominees were. The Golden Globes chose Jessica Lange, Kim Stanley, and Lesley Ann Warren, but also Cher for Come Back to the Five and Dine... and Lainie Kazan for My Favorite Year. The National Board and LAFCAA chose Glenn Close for Garp, while NYFCC and NSFC chose Lange. Teri Garr's only citation was runner up to Lange at NSFC.

To my surprise, George Gaynes was actually first runner up to John Lithgow in New York.)

-- Charlotte Rampling is very good in The Verdict. My favorite scene with her was when Newman brings her back to the apartment for a drink, they kiss (drinks in hand), and then she sees a picture of his ex-wife on the bed. He goes to turn it over, slightly embarrassed. She looks at him for a long beat and then says "It's okay." Or something like that. The fact that we don't suspect anything about her motivations is because Charlotte Rampling is drenched in mystery herself. She's quite good.

[Greg]

Sabin, is this the first time you've seen Tootsie and The Verdict?

Also, for Tootsie I would add George Gaynes as someone who could have received a nomination if he had more screen time; and, I was as impressed by Charlotte Rampling's performance in The Verdict as her looks.

[Sabin]

/Tootsie (Sydney Pollack)/ -- 9.5/10

Great, but I have one reservation about the role and that is this: Michael Dorsey so successfully becomes Dorothy Michaels that his maturation doesn't quite land. One of the reasons why Tootsie was such a successful film is this is a fucking fantastic screenplay. It moves along so efficiently that it doesn't quite find time for me to register him as an evolving man. The film is so successful at explaining why he becomes Dorothy Michaels for the work and why he is stuck as Dorothy Michaels that the reason why he wants to reveal himself seems less for love and more because of exhaustion. The film also does an incredible job of making itself a social satire about then-contemporary gender roles that it becomes about so much more than this struggling actor. By the end of the film (especially in his final scene with Jessica Lange), I wasn't quite rooting for Michael Dorsey and it's not helped that Dustin Hoffman plays that moment a bit too smugly/confidently.

But it's a great, funny film full of performances that would have doubtlessly received nominations had they received more screen-time (Charles Durning, in particular) and of all the Oscars it deserved in 1982 I'll single out Best Film Editing as one that's less frequently cited. Far from the last time I'll watch this film -- possibly this year even.


/The Verdict (Sidney Lumet)/ -- 6.5/10

Well this is quite a bit overrated. I think there's a chance that nobody in this picture is on the same page. Paul Newman is playing it like The Verdict is an excuse for a character study in lost soul alcoholism (he's not wrong). David Mamet puts existential weight on the verdict itself. It has the appearance of both, Sidney Lumet can't seem to make up his mind which road to go down, but there's not enough of either to be either. It's a gorgeously dreary film, but whenever it zeroes in on the case itself it just feels like TV. I couldn't tell you what was so special about the book but it feels like an episode of Perry Mason...written by David Mamet, directed by Sidney Lumet, and starring these guys. To be fair, I haven't seen And Justice For All or any number of preceding courtroom films so I don't know how entrenched in mawkish tropes that era was, but watching it today it seems incredibly minor.

This feels like a strangely impersonal Paul Newman performance. The first act is the film's highpoint which sees Newman targeting his ambulance chasing lowlife's character sweet spots. James Mason is very good in his Oscar nominated performance, but for me one of the joys in the film (besides just looking at young Charlotte Rampling) was Jack Warden. This is not an Academy bait role but he's such an enjoyable actor and this is the kind of stock part he's made for.

[Precious Doll]

Tsili (2015) Amos Gitai 4/10 (DVD)
Land of Mine (2015) Martin Zandvilet 7/10 (Scandinavian Film Festival)
Maggie's Plan (2016) Rebecca Miller 4/10 (Cinema)
Demolition (2016) Jan-Marc Valle 4/10 (Cinema)
Embrace of the Serpent (2015) Ciro Guera 6/10 (Blu Ray)
Boy & the World (2013) Ale Abreu 4/10 (DVD)
The Mermaid (2016) Stephen Chow 1/10 (Blu Ray)

Repeat viewing

Girlfriends (1978) Claudia Weill 8/10

[Precious Doll]

Zootopia (2016) Byron Howard, Rich Moore & Jared Bush 6/10 (DVD rental)
Robot Overlords (2015) Jon Wright 2/10 (DVD rental)
Valley of Love (2015) Guillaume Nicloux 6/10 (DVD)
Goldstone (2016) Ivan Sen 6/10 (Cinema)
The Munekata Sisters (1950) Yasujiro Ozu 6/10 (DVD taken from video master)
Francofonia (2015) Aleksandr Sokurov 8/10 (Blu Ray)
Futureless Things (2014) Kyung-mook Kim 6/10 (DVD)
The Shameless (2015) Seung-uk Oh 6/10 (DVD)
The Tower (2012) Ji-hoon Kim 2/10 (DVD)

Repeat viewings

Claire's Knee (1970) Eric Rohmer 10/10
Inserts (1976) John Byrum 8/10

[ITALIANO]

quite fat as in the sterotypical Italian wife.

Well...

[Precious Doll]

Precious Doll where do you watch films....special screenings or on dvd?

Repeat viewings are almost always from my collection of DVDs/Blu Rays. Raging Moon is an exception because I taped off TV and watched without having realised that I had already seen the film (happens from time to time). My rating turned out to be the same as one I first saw it.

In the case of the films I watched for the first time I saw them as follows:

Knights of the Teutonic Order - Polish film festival at the cinema
Fassbinder - Documentary film festival at the cinema
Portrait of Teresa - DVD (taken from a video purchased from Movie Detective)
Landmine Goes Click - Blu Ray
The BFG - Regular cinema release
The Wait - Regular cinema release

Most of the films seen I saw in the first two weeks of June were at the Sydney Film Festival. For you interest I'm happy to include in what capacity I saw the films in the future.

[Reza]

Precious Doll where do you watch films....special screenings or on dvd?

[Precious Doll]

Knights of the Teutonic Order (1960) Aleksander Ford 7/10
Fassbinder (2015) Annekatrin Hendel 8/10
Portrait of Teresa (1979) Pastor Vega 5/10
Landmine Goes Click (2015) Levan Bakhia 6/10
The BFG (2016) Steven Spielberg 4/10
The Wait (2015) Piero Messina 2/10

Repeat viewings

Germany in Autumn (1978) Various directors including Fassbinder, Kluge, Reitz & Schlondorff 7/10
The Raging Moon (1971) Bryan Forbes 5/10
The Snake Pit (1948) Anatole Litvak 6/10

[Precious Doll]

One Angels Have Wings (1939) Howard Hawks 5/10

Oh wow, such a low rating?

Yeah I know. I first saw the first over 30 years on the big screen and didn't care for it. Given Criterion recently released it I thought I would give it another try given it's status. I still felt pretty much the same.

Cary Grant & Jean Arthur are two of the most charismatic actors of the era but they are stranded with characters that never come to life. It's also so dull though I must say I much prefer the model planes and sets than most the CGI garbage made these days. Rita Hayworth stands out as being utterly dreadful, it's hard to believe that she would go on to greatness of Gilda.

[Reza]

Next Time We Love (Edward H. Griffith, 1936) 8/10

For all the soap opera ingredients on display this is surprisingly a fairly sophisticated view on marriage, ambition, infidelity and divorce. The plot covers the trials and tribulations of a married couple - a foreign correspondent (James Stewart) and an actress (the incandescent Margaret Sullavan) - as both find their careers coming in the way of their happiness. His roommate (Ray(mond) Milland) forms part of the love triangle. The first of four memorable teamings of Sullavan and Stewart and both are terrific here thanks to their exceptional screen chemistry.