Bugonia

Well, they never showed that on the history channel. Those of us who are well-versed in the various themes of paranormal paranoia will have little trouble navigating this narrative, but I suspect many others will find this story to be a real head-spinner, possibly so much so that it may take them out of the movie. If one focuses on the dynamics of the performances, that should steady the metaphorical ground under the viewer’s feet—and that is a good strategy, given that the verbal and emotional duel between Emma Stone and Jesse Plemons forms the core of this movie’s appeal. Admittedly, there isn’t a lot else to work with here, as the film is a study in interiority, but the leads do such a good job of giving their characters life, detail and plausibility that you can ignore the bits of the plot that are clearly telegraphed and the ones that don’t entirely add up. (You'll be helped in that if you don’t have a rigidly logical mind, and most people don’t). So, good acting, a brisk pace, and a tolerable amount of preachiness add up to a solid cinematic trip—whether you’re of this earth or not. 

The Great Dictator

Transitions are difficult. This film serves as an example of that fact, as director and star Charlie Chaplin presents an uneven effort in his first full talking picture. The movie catches Chaplin caught between the type of visual set pieces that were standard fare in silent films and the more structured narrative demands of the modern, sound enhanced motion picture of later days. Some of the visual sequences fall flat, while others still work well enough to elicit genuine laughs. Meanwhile, a compelling narrative tale, featuring excellent supporting work from Paulette Goddard, is woven into and around those visual jokes, offering a story of deep pathos—in the story of the crimes of the period leading up to World War II—and biting satire—via a full-throated attack on the perpetrator of the those crimes. The sympathetic story is genuine and moving, even within the unevenness of the full presentation. And then, when the film reaches its climax, Chaplin steps out of character and delivers an end statement that is surprising and electrifying and that carries the potential of rousing the passions of even the most diffident viewer. This film was nominated for Best Picture, and that was clearly a reach; I can’t deem that nomination as anything other than a nod to lifetime achievement. Yet the movie’s message comes across so forcefully in the denouement that this film deserves recognition as must-see material, for its instructional value on being a human being if nothing else—and especially so as a great deal of that message remains so sadly relevant today.

Spinal Tap II: The End Continues

The recursiveness may be the most striking aspect of this production. While parodying the idea of it not necessarily being a good idea for an over- the-hill band to do a reunion concert, these guys make a movie … as an over the hill group of comedians getting back together to do a sequel. Hmm. The good news is, this outing is not the kind of disaster that inevitably follows the fictional rockers around … but it isn’t exactly a triumph reminiscent of the original movie, either. There are good bits in here, mostly during scenes where the participants offer some fresh gags and wry remarks rather than rehashes of the first film’s notes. That’s a fine line, of course; they couldn’t possibly have made this sequel without referring back to at least some of the earlier material, so they can hardly be blamed for echoing previous jokes. Still, the viewer can help but get the sense that the principal creators didn’t quite trust their own abilities to really let loose and come up with entirely fresh pieces of funny. Maybe they were just tired; if nothing else, this flick shows the impact of age catching up to you. That condition especially comes through in the musical performances, which are uneven throughout. More encouraging is the support the core group gets from the guest stars, Paul McCartney and Sir Elton John in particular; both are quite funny in their cameos. All together, this work is something short of what one might have expected or hoped for, but the movie does deliver enough new laughs and nostalgic moments that it certainly isn’t anything to be ashamed of. These banshees still live, and they do (sorta) live well. 

Glass Onion

A few years ago, it seemed like Daniel Craig was certain to be remembered as a guy who played James Bond. Maybe that still holds, but a couple more of these films—we're at three as of this writing—and it may no longer be a sure thing. His Benoit Blanc is arguably a more memorable character, and you can’t deny that it is a persona that is truly Craig’s own, rather than a borrowed or inherited legacy. It helps, too, that these Knives Out movies are good, entertaining, fun and funny, and blessed with a lot of current (at least) cultural currency. In this edition, the story works well, and the cast and setting have plenty of interesting facets (though here the collected characters border on caricature). The fly in this ointment lies in the focus on—and critique of—the ultra rich and their natures. The view has merit and the parody pulls few punches, but it means spending a lot of time with some really unpleasant characters, even if just representations thereof. That aspect of the story does get a bit distracting, one might say…though one can argue the critique is not so much a distraction as the point of the presentation in the first place. I guess it depends on how much you care about the mystery aspect of a mystery, versus character, setting and mood. Me, I’m not so much on the whodunnit angle, so my viewing mind tends to shift towards the other story elements. It works here, though I’m not sure it would in every story. As it is, you can just focus on Craig and let him be your guide to a decent way to kill a couple of hours. I guess this movie doesn’t exactly shatter any expectations, but the fact that it works overall is crystal clear. 

The Kentucky Fried Movie

Well, you have to start somewhere. This flick is where the Abrahams-Zucker team made its first foray into filmdom—and boy, did they experiment with everything under the comedic sun in this one. The result is highly uneven; there are gags that hit in a big way, while others either go on too long or totally miss the mark. But the entire soup is never boring. Plus you get to see lots of nudity, and many of the jokes are of highly questionable taste—always a good thing. Indeed, many of the bits are insensitive enough on various and sundry of today’s “cancellation” landscapes that you can get a certain twisted joy just from imagining the aneurysms the holier-than-thou types would have at most of this material. So it has that going for it, too. I wouldn’t say this is a great movie, or maybe even a good one in objective terms, but we wouldn’t have gotten Airplane or The Naked Gun without it, so perhaps we should grade on a curve. Sometimes, you crave that original recipe—and that’s what you get here. 

The Substance

There are a lot of different dimensions to the question of what this movie is, is all about, and whether or not it succeeds, either overall or on its own terms. Just for starters, the story asks for a fairly massive amount of suspension of disbelief, and not just as regards the tale's science/horror elements. For instance, how is it even possible that Elizabeth—who is still viable as of the beginning of the story—winds up so isolated and alone that the action could even have plausibility? I mean, even has-beens tend to have hangers-on long after their expiration dates. Also, are the generic settings, elements and trappings of the story meant to convey the kind of stripped down aesthetic of a stage play, or does the lack of a more fleshed-out context simply reflect laxity, if not outright laziness, on the part of the screenwriter? Finally, the overarching message seems to be a muddle; the film wants to have its chocolate mousse cake and eat it too. To wit: is the sexism and emphasis on youth and beauty presented as the catalyst for Elizabeth's actions truly an example of villainy, as the script wants to suggest (if not insist upon)? How is that so, given the objective reality presented in Sue’s side of the story, where standard measures of beauty, youth, vigor and attractiveness all translate into success and positive attainment? The whole tableau seems highly debatable, even as the story appears to be very pointedly in favor of a specific, feminist critique of Hollywood in particular and the world in general. So did the filmmakers create a movie to be puzzled over, or did they fail to clearly convey their message? It’s hard to know. What is for certain is that this flick is arresting in its concepts and visuals—particularly in its lack of squeamishness about showing the viewer all of its gory details. It can be hard to look at and impossible to look away from at the same time. An enigmatic work, for sure, with a qualified PURR, but substantial and absolutely worth viewing, especially if it gets you thinking about all of the various elements this movie has on its mind. 

Clueless

See, this is how I like my Jane Austen: looking nothing like Jane Austen. There is an argument to be made that this film represents the pinnacle, the zenith, the high water mark of American culture. The amazing script by writer and director Amy Heckerling, with its gentle, loving skewering of California Culture (and by extension the greater American milieu that took its cues from the Golden State), simply bursts with clever lines and visual jokes that mock yet also admire the relative innocence of the country circa 1995, back before everything here began to turn to madness. The translation of that script into greatness is powered mostly by an astonishing, one of a kind performance by Alicia Silverstone as Cher; she is the perfect embodiment of everything that was shallow yet wholesome about the country back in those long gone days. Cast mates Paul Rudd, Stacey Dash, the dearly-missed Brittany Murphy, Breckin Meyer, Donald Faison, Dan Hedaya, and more provide note perfect accompaniment to Silverstone's tour de force. And a terrific soundtrack of perfectly chosen songs sets the mood all the way through this journey of laughs and delights. Without a doubt, this is a Best of All work, and is only not included in the Top 10 of all time simply because there are just too many great movies to fit within that numerical framing, but this flick stands behind few other works of cinema, especially as regards comedies. Is it even possible to call oneself a movie fan if you’ve never seen this masterpiece? As if!

Casino Royale (1967)

Every spy movie has to have some sort of mystery in it. The mystery here: who the hell thought this was a good idea? I mean, it’s not like the legit Bond movies take themselves all that seriously, so how far can you really go in parodying them? The answer to that question is painfully evident here. Every so often this movie raises itself up and achieves a level of extraordinary stupidity; the rest of it is a mishmash of lame, incomprehensible, unwatchable, or some combination of all three. The only moment in the movie that is even within hailing distance of competence is the baccarat scene—and that’s the one part of the script that plays it straight! Otherwise, this is a bomb of staggering proportions, a film that is so bad it can’t even achieve "so bad it’s good." Seriously, I like a spoof as much as the next guy, but this...words fail. At least, as I struggle to find something good to say, I can at least report that a few of the women in the flick are great to look at. So there’s that. Otherwise, yeesh. Your mission: avoid this at all costs.

The Front Page

As has been noted before, the past is like a foreign country that you can never visit again. Contemplating that fact is often the root for nostalgia, but in some cases, it conveys a sense of relief. That’s what roughly the first third of this movie is like; it takes about as long as that to figure out just what the hell this thing is all about, and to wade through all of the baffling trappings of olden (1931) days. Eventually, the story coalesces into a coherent vision that mostly represents the reality that “fake news” and media manipulation and political/press corruption are nothing new. Though this is a comedy—really, a satire—laugh-out-loud moments are few and far between, such that the real value of this tale comes from documenting how appropriate is one’s cynicism regarding the press and the powerful (and especially where they intersect). The film’s archaic elements can be a bit of a challenge for modern viewers, but for the most part the effort pays off, if only to learn the lesson that paeans to the prestige of the Fourth Estate are mostly humbug. Remember that when you watch the news these days, oh boy.

Borat Subsequent Moviefilm

You can go home again, but usually when you do you find a lot of things have changed. Unlike our first go round with Kazakhstan‘s most famous fictional son, this outing is uneven, less focused, and not exactly the laugh riot we got from the original. That’s not to say that this movie isn’t funny; there are a number of good bits within this piece that provide some laugh-out-loud moments, but those scenes are too few. The plot is more diffuse here; unlike the first movie’s relatively straightforward storyline of Borat's quest to meet his dream girl—alas, Pam does not make a return appearance—this time it is abundantly clear that his and his daughter’s journey is a scattershot tour of various points in the country, with Texas being a main theater for the action, with predictable results. Indeed, a lot about this outing is predictable, leading to the sense that these scenes, in contrast with the first flick’s impromptu, guerrilla-style comedy, were largely staged. It seems like fewer and fewer of the participants were unwilling dupes, and that makes a lot of the jokes come across as flat. Ultimately, the conclusion is inevitable: try as he might, Cohen tried to pull off for a second time what was a one-time only trick. And that’s the kind of thing that will get you banished to Kazakhstan...or someplace worse: irrelevance.

Heathers

This, the wickedest satire of high school from the eighties--or, indeed, any time--holds up amazingly well, even for those of us who were there. The cruel and cliquish teenagers, the clueless and cynical adults, the grotesque and ghoulish media and society at large--it’s all here. And the laughs remain fresh and hearty, even if the language in which they are delivered has grown somewhat stale. (Of course, the visual language of this film has also aged, but that’s part of the appeal, too--getting a laugh out of what once was fashionable and normal.) In many ways, this is the perfect eighties movie, the perfect teen movie, and the quintessential combination of those two conceptual archetypes. It’s clearly the zenith of Christian Slater’s career (and maybe even the top of Winona Ryder’s arc, too). On top of all that, this flick became a cult classic, and eventually spawned a successful and wildly entertaining musical show that in certain ways exceeded the original. (The film’s script is so well written that many of the musical's song lyrics come directly and intact from the source's dialogue.) No wonder this work has long had standing in the Best of All ranks--it earns some of the loudest PURRs in this whole collection.

Jojo Rabbit

Well that's weird. You can say that about a lot of this movie, but I'm specifically referring to the unusual fact that this movie's most notable conceit--Hitler as the protagonist's imaginary friend--was in fact completely unnecessary. This would have been a better film overall without it, if writer and director Taika Waititi had had the belief to just let his young lead go on this journey on his own. One suspects that  Waititi indulged himself, largely to get himself in his own film. (Perhaps someone told him once that he kind of looks like Hitler, and an idea was born--though perhaps not a great one.) There are other issues: a certain unevenness in tone--possibly unavoidable, given the Anne Frankishness of the plot--some of the funny isn't quite up to satirical snuff, and (one of the worst transgressions for this viewer) this is one of those movies that seems to think the world would get better simply through people dancing (it wouldn't--sorry). All that reads a little harsh, probably too harsh in fact; you can watch this one and find it enjoyable and ticklish (except for one very jarring moment); it's just not as good as some made it out to be.

Team America: World Police

One has to assume that watching this movie when it first came out would have helped a lot. It also probably would be a good idea to watch it with other people in the room, who could amplify the laughs when they come. Solid laughs do come, throughout the movie, though a little too sporadically for the flick to be a wall-to-wall riot. Part of the problem may be the movie's most obvious hook: the puppetry. This might have worked better in Parker and Stone's more familiar animated format, or even as a live action film. There's also too much attempt, throughout the proceedings, to pull back from the zany parody and turn the story into something almost serious, or at least something meant to be taken seriously. Those pulled punches, plus jokes and a zeitgeist that has not aged particularly well, ultimately undermine the work. Much like the bungling forces they wished to mock, the makers thought they were doing better work than they were.

Downsizing

A little bit of hucksterism goes a long way. Such seems to be the premise of this flick. It's a notion well worth pointing out, and that might be enough to build a movie upon--especially early on, when flaws in the characters' thinking and the sales pitch abound, and the viewer is just sort of grinning at how much smarter he is than the protagonists. But writer-director Alexander Payne has more on his mind. Soon the film turns mostly about the thought experiment--that is, getting the viewer to ask what would I do? And what would you do if you make that choice? On that level, I think this movie succeeds; as the story drills down into something more personal, it shifts tone and focus yet remains affecting. Most noteworthy is an amazing performance by Hong Chau as Matt Damon's eventual guiding light. She has to cover a wide range in her role while staying within a limited vocabulary, both verbal, physical and in characterization. This will not be a film that's everyone's cup of tea, but I think it's rewarding for viewers who are open to a thoughtful experience.

Sorry to Bother You

It's a ringtone that gets your attention, for sure, and maybe even will get you to buy what it's selling. Maybe. I think this is a good movie, but I'm distracted by how it seems like it could have been substantially better. The best parts of the story are in roughly the first half, when protagonist Cassius is scuffling his way towards something that can resemble success. And then when he makes it...that's when things go off the rails. Again, maybe. Some viewers will be more tolerant of the second half's deep dives into absurdity (or, if you're more generous, not-so-subtle Swiftian satire). This viewer felt the movie, and its serious subject matter, had enough going for it to be fascinating with a more straightforward treatment. Lakeith Stanfield does strong work as Cassius, the young man who wants to do the right thing...eventually...perhaps. And the city of Oakland has a star turn as itself--a most realistic setting for this tale. All in all, it's good, and I'm probably being overly critical, but only because I was expecting this flick to be much better. You have to decide on your own if you're willing to take this call.

Thank You for Smoking

A good satire that doesn’t bog down too much in delivering its message. The numbers are there, figures on cigarette deaths and all that--but the data is delivered so smoothly that you never feel like you’re being preached at. And, despite the evident progress made against smoking (in this country, at least) this film’s message still remains relevant today (especially for the broader picture about the incest between death merchants, their lobbyists, and our government).

Idiocracy

Let he who is without the sin...You've set yourself up for a rough ride when you make a movie about the ubiquity of stupidity, then turn around and seed lots of stupid throughout the movie itself. I'm feeling what Mike Judge has to say here, but the execution could have been much, much better. You've got to think it through! Posted 5/9/09.

The Hospital

A strange experience--a movie so stylistically different from today's films that it might as well be from another country. And the '70s cultural vibe, on display throughout, pushes the film even further away, making it almost like a movie from another world. There are positives here: several fine and typical moments of cynical, satirical absurdity in Paddy Chayefsky's script, and a stand-out performance from George C. Scott which holds everything together. But that oddly spare style is distracting. Tough to recommend, yet tough to ignore, too. Check in if you feel like it.

Borat

No, it's not the funniest movie ever made. But it has to rank up there. It's not an entirely original idea--the concept owes a lot to the Festrunk brothers from old SNL days, among others--but the trip is brilliantly executed here. Sacha Baron Cohen's particular genius seems to be a dogged determination never to break character, plus a great instinct for never letting a gag go too long (a common mistake in comedy). I don't know from offensive, so I won't warn anyone away from this hodgepodge of racial/ethnic humor; movies like this are for real adults anyway. Bottom line: if you have any kind of sense of humor, you will laugh

But I'm A Cheerleader

A subject ripe for satire--homo hysteria--but the treatment here isn't nearly smart or biting enough. Most of the jokes fall flat, and only the presence of numerous familiar faces can flag down the viewer's attention. The message of tolerance barely registers; indeed, the ultimate outcome in many ways seems to validate the targeted hysteria. And it all gets lost in too much blandness. Bottom line: this razor needed a much sharper edge.