What always confuses me in Dick Tracy (1990)

Fair warning: this post contains spoilers about the movie. 

I recently re-watched this movie for maybe the 10th time. I really love watching it; it's one of the coolest looking movies ever. Every scene is made up to look like a comic strip and everything visually about it is incredible. I first saw it when I was 14 years old in the theaters when it came out and was impressed by it so much I probably rented the VHS and DVD copies 2 or 3 more times, and later bought the DVD and then upgraded to blu ray where the picture quality looks fantastic. It's also a good movie to watch near or around New Year's Eve since the big climax of the film takes place on New Year' Eve.

If you've seen the movie you know it contains numerous storylines, including the orphan "The Kid" who wants to be on the police force, Tracy's relationship with his girlfriend, the new crime lord of the city (Al Pacino) and the corrupt district attorney (Dick Van Dyke) - a part that is too small; I think it could have been larger. 

Another subplot involves the rival crime lord "The Blank" - these sequences always confuse me when I think about them. At first, the Blank wants to obtain a percent of Big Boy's profits in exchange for immunity, but then the Blank changes his tune and wants to frame both Tracy and Big Boy. Alot of these details went over my head when I was 14 years old and to this day I still have trouble following The Blank's part of the story as it is told in the movie. 

If you've seen the movie, you know that Madonna/Breathless is revealed to be The Blank. 

But every time I rewatch the movie with that knowledge, the subplot is still puzzling.

This is either brilliance on the part of the screenwriters and director Warren Beatty.....or it's choppy editing that leaves out some details. I don't know which. 

The movie as it plays out gives the viewer the impression that The Blank is a mysterious rival villain who wants control over Big Boy and his criminal empire, when in reality The Blank is Breathless' way of protecting herself.....or maybe becoming a criminal crime kingpin of her own.  In my opinion I think the film should have revealed Madonna to be the Blank much earlier in the film. For example, show a scene of her putting on the mask, and dressing up. I think that would make the film much more interesting and less confusing. The first time we see the Blank, the Blank wants 10 percent of Big Boy's profits. Ok I think I follow the motive there - Breathless hates Big Boy and that is made clear. So why not give Breathless' character some extra weight--make her true identity known to the viewer, but not to Big Boy and Tracy. 

As the movie plays out, The Blank promised that Big Boy would be off the hook as a suspect in anything that would happen to Tracy if BigBoy makes the deal. But he doesn't make the deal. So what was The Blank planning to do with the money? Leave town? And what was Breathless planning to do if she successfully seduced Tracy? Testify and/or let Tracy in on the Blanks's scheme?  

Once Breathless/the Blank is rejected by Tracy, I can see why she wants both of them out of the way. And with the money she's made as the Blank, she could leave town. That would be one way to explain it.  So here's what ends up happening - The Blank frames Big Boy by kidnapping Tracy's girlfriend and placing her in the attic of the club, making it look like he kidnapped her. And she frames Tracy by killing the District Attorney and making it look like Tracy did it, but also making it look like Big Boy framed Tracy. If it worked, she would take the money and run? It's a brilliant scheme, but it was really confusing to pick up on the first watch.

What do you think? Is this how you understand The Blank? 

Steve Martin movies I don't like

Lately I've been on a Steve Martin kick and watched a number of his films for the first time (or on a re-watch),

Sadly, I enjoyed almost none of them. 

Bringing Down The House
This movie I didn't like at all. The first 10 minutes seemed somewhat tolerable. We see Martin (playing a stiff attorney) perusing an old-fashioned online dating site. He manages a date with Queen Latifah's character but doesn't know she's Black and when he first sees her his jaw drops and my jaw dropped at how cringy the scene was. Turns out she's also a felon and wants to live in his house. Meanwhile he's embarrassed by her manners and tries to hide her from his racist next door neighbor (not-funny Betty White) and racist client (Joan Plowright, a role that made me dislike her!). The movie's plot was uninteresting to me and I was distracted by all the scenes where Steve Martin tries to enjoy hip-hop. Doesn't hold up.  

Verdict: "Thumbs Down"

My Blue Heaven
I hated this movie when it first came out; I didn't find anything funny about it. So I thought I would give it another re-watch, now that I know more about the history of the film --- it was written by Nora Ephron who partially based it on the life of Henry Hill when he was in witness protection. Apparently she knew him because her husband wrote the book "Wiseguy" which was made into Goodfellas. 

So I tried to keep an open mind and enjoy the movie as a satire. But still, I didn't find much to like about it. I could probably find 5-10 minutes of Martin doing an Italian accent tolerable for a comedy sketch, but after two hours, it's too much. By the end of the movie I wasn't believing he was Italian anymore. And all those stereotypical Italian/gangster jokes don't really hold up after 30 years. 

Verdict: "Thumbs Down"

All of Me
I didn't like this movie much at all either. Lily Tomlin's character inhabits Steve Martin's body, and there's only one funny joke in the whole movie and that's when Martin has to go pee. The whole movie seemed to be made for that joke. The rest of it was really dull and dated. 

Verdict: "Thumbs Down"

Grand Canyon
I liked this movie better the others, but this one is heavy on the drama and lighter on comedy. There's almost no comedic moments, actually. The main characters are Kevin Kline and Danny Glover, and they both deal with their own family issues. Kline's wife wants to adopt an orphan baby, while Glover's family and home is targeted by drive-by shootings. Martin plays a film producer who gets shot in the leg and is a cast for most of the film. His character wants to make less violent films as a result, which I didn't find convincing, honestly.

Verdict: "Thumbs Down"

Mixed Nuts
In my opinion, this is a really crappy ensemble dark comedy that is probably one of the worst "Christmas Movies" out there.  This film was based on a play and an obscure French film, taking place inside a suicide hotline clinic on Christmas Eve. Honestly, there's not much funny about people who are depressed and need help. But somehow the film tries to make the situations funny - Martin and his co-worker Rita Wilson have crushes on each other, and Madeline Kahn gets stuck in the elevator for half the movie and it's not very funny. Adam Sandler plays a janitor who doesn't have any funny lines except a ridiculous serenade during a dinner meal. Then there are two ghastly subplots - one involves Juliet Lewis who is pregnant and her fiancé who brandishes a gun for most of the film. And finally - and worst of all - is a transgender character who is played for laughs and is the butt of everyone's jokes and it's painfully unfunny. It's really a shame that this was written by Nora Ephron who wrote a couple movies that everyone seems to love - Sleepless in Seattle and When Harry Met Sally - about cisgender and hetero couples.   It's a shame that the only queer character in the movie appears to only be there to provide homophobic slapstick comedy, when the character could have more profundity. But that would be asking for the impossible in a film where all the other characters are basically unlikeable and none of them have any soul or any heart.

Verdict: "Thumbs WAYYYY Down"

A Simple Twist of Fate
So unlike the other movies, Martin wrote and co-produced this one, so it's his "baby". It's meant to be an inspirational story of how this single guy takes care of an orphan girl whose biological father is a corrupt politician (played by Gabriel Bryne) who wants to gain custody of her when she grows up.

This movie could have had some real potential and have been a classic, but today, the movie isn't considered a classic, or a great movie, or even a cult classic. 

When I first watched the movie in 1994, I hated it. It was dull and boring. No laugh-out-loud moments that I remembered. So for almost 30 years I never watched it again.

But recently I gave it another shot. It's still not very funny, but more amusingly funny in an old-fashioned sort of way. 

And there's a few moments in the film that are kind of disturbing to watch in 2022. 

One scene involves Anne Heche's character (a very minor character) getting involved in a car crash, which is sad because she just died in a terrible crash earlier this year. 

Another scene involves Martin and his adopted girl singing an old-fashioned song about an "Indian Maiden" and wearing Native American makeup and feathers. On one hand, it's meant to be a harmless "father-daughter bonding" scene, but on the other hand, it's so unfortunate that this is the only mention of Native Americans in the whole movie and a cringy reminder that the rest of the cast is all-white. I'm sure Steve Martin would probably not include that scene if this film was made today out of respect.

So what about the rest of the movie? Well I really like the music score and premise that the Steve Martin character wants to adopt the child. However I'm not sure he's right for the part. I wonder if someone else should have played it. I really like Gabriel Bryne; he's a fantastic actor. Maybe his role and Martin's should have been switched. Martin could play the snobby, snooty politician and Byrne the dad. That would have been inspired casting! And might have made things more interesting and memorable; today, it's a forgotten vehicle in Martin's filmography that I'm not sure deserves to be proudly resurrected.

Verdict: "Thumbs Half-Way Up/Down"

The Karate Kid Parts 1-3 (1984-89)

I watched all of the first 3 movies and really enjoyed them! I hadn't seen the first in over 30 years so it was an enjoyable rewatch. The movie holds up pretty decently. I think one of the secrets to not make a film look dated is to avoid showing alot of technology like phones, camera, radios and tvs. There's not much of that in this movie so it appears more timeless. I really liked Part II and their trip to Okinawa. The scenery and music were great and I liked the love stories in the movie and the storm at the end that causes the corrupt landowner to have a change of heart. Part III spotlighted Miyagi's bonsai tree store and the "secret tree' he had hidden at the bottom of a steep cliff. That was a pretty amazing development. He also reveals something that he hadn't said before in the movies, that his heart would be empty without the young Daniel character. It was fate that they met, like many great friendships. 

I got a better sense of how merciless the "kobra kai" students and their teachers are. And now I know why the TV show has been popular using the same characters. I never saw the show but my friend was telling me that it's basically a new generation of students doing the same thing. I'm not sure I'm really that interested in it, and the drama. I guess I don't really care for the characters that much. They're a bunch of racist assholes in the movies and don't really care to spend more time with them. I asked my friend if Ralph Macchio's character Daniel still has the car that Miyagi gave him, and learned that he does, and that the Daniel character is now teaching his son the ways of the master. That's about all I really care about in the saga. 

The Man In The Chair (2007) starring Christohper Plummer

I knew I would enjoy this movie from the first few moments it begins. We see an old man (Christopher Plummer) in a theater by himself enjoying a bottle of booze and watching His Girl Friday with  Cary Grant. Then as the credits roll, he's watching another classic in the darkened theater, this time The Last Time I Saw Paris and the argument scene with Elizabeth Taylor and Van Johnson, where Van throws his writings/manuscripts in a fireplace, giving up on his dreams. Immediately, Plummer's character gets up and yells at the screen; we don't hear what he's saying but we can tell he's emotionally affected by the drama (and dashed dreams), and in love with classic movies.

Then the credits montage continues with scenes of him riding the bus at night, and walking down a darkened street, eating lunch outside, or sitting/reading on a bench - suggesting he likes to get out of wherever he's living for a while. He goes to see more films, and the cycle repeats.

It's a bit mysterious at first, but as the film continues and unravels, we learn more about the grouchy old character. He lives in a home for retired film/tv veterans, and has a past career working on classic Hollywood films. 

Meanwhile, we're introduced to another character with a troubled past, a young high school cinephile and aspiring filmmaker, who wants to make a short student action film, but struggles with writing and can't pronounce "Nietzsche". The kid - when he's not stealing cars - spends his free time going to classic film screenings; at a screening of Touch of Evil, he meets Plummer. 

The rest of the movie is about their relationship, and about they work together making the short film which they are both passionate about. It's a charming buddy film about a young movie lover and the old Hollywood vet. As the kid gets to know the old man and his friends, you can sense his inner growth, and begins to consider making a documentary instead. He also teaches an elder to use Google and introduces him to blogging.

Christopher Plummer is very believable playing a cranky old Hollywood film crew member. His character is filled with loneliness and bitterness at the start of the film, but his life changes when he meets the kid; you can sense the spark of life coming back to him. I love the scene where Plummer talks and reminisces with his old, forgotten writer friend whom he encourages to help with the film. And I love how his character imparts his wisdom on the kid as they take the bus around town; he points out landmarks of classic cinema history and tells him stories about knowing Orson Welles. 

Special appearances by M. Emmet Walsh who plays a fellow resident of the home and Robert Wagner as a rich, retired Hollywood producer - and adversary - of Plummer's. 

Filmed on location in Los Angeles/Hollywood.

Written and directed by Michael Schroeder. Unfortunately, I don't know much else about what else the director has made other than some low-budget horror films in the 80s and 90s. But if I had to guess, I would say that this is a dream project of the director's and subsequently went on to pursue other endeavors. I applaud his efforts making this film; I found it enjoyable and very memorable.

Film Critic Roger Ebert didn't like the movie when it came out (see his review here), but I really liked it. I consider it a great tribute to not only the elderly, but also aging movie stars who are often forgotten in their twilight years. 

---

This is an entry in the Charismatic Christopher Plummer Blogathon, hosted by Realweegiemidget Reviews and Pale Writer. December 10-12, 2022

Peggy Sue Got Married (1986)

I love this movie - it has emotion, heart, and smart writing/dialogue (by husband-and-wife team of Jerry Leichtling and Arlene Sarner, who unfortunately didn't write many other screenplays, per IMDB).

If you haven't seen this movie, it focuses on Katheleen Turner's character (Peggy), who at the start of the movie plays a 42 year old at her high school's 25th Anniversary Reunion, where she wishes what we all do - "if only I knew then what I know now".  Then - for the rest of the movie - she plays 17 and her character relives her high-school senior days in the spring of 1960. 

I don't think it's really a spoiler or a surprise if I say that the film (in my opinion) is very "Capra-esque", especially the ending...was her experience in 1960 all a dream, or did she actually time-travel back to 1960? Hmmmm. I still have fun thinking about that idea. You'll have to see it to fully understand what I mean. But there's profundity to it, too, as Peggy's relationships and fate may change as a result. 

So now it's time to shine a spotlight on the entire cast who make this movie so good - most of the main actors have the challenging task of playing two ages, 42 and 17, and they are all great - including Nicolas Cage, who plays Peggy's high school sweetheart of 2 years. 

I won't list the age of each actor, but all of them are either in their mid/late 20s or early 30s, and really convincing in both roles.

First I'll start with Kathleen Turner, course playing Peggy, a character with an adult mindset from 1985.  Of course, she plays both 42 and 17 fantastically. She was about 30 at the time when the movie was made/set, but when she plays both roles and delivers. 

Her scenes at school with Nicolas Cage are really great especially when she gets to say things to him she wished she would have said at 17; one of the best lines comes when Cage (who years later will cheat on Peggy) is expressing his jealously and says "when I imagine you going out with other guys, I feel...." and he can't find the words. Peggy says as an adult would...."rejected, worthless, and miserable? Good!". 

After awhile, Peggy realizes she is "trapped" in her predicament - is she dreaming or dead, she wonders. Then she does the most sensible thing anyone would do - reaches out to her school's high school expert on science (Barry Miller) and asks him if time travel is possible. She then begins to disclose some "future facts" she knows of (often humorously), such as heart transplants, man walking on the moon, televisions that get smaller, and radios "that get bigger" (referring to the boom boxes). Had the movie been made today, no doubt her character would reference the internet, smartphones, and Twitter for sure, but watching this movie reminded me that there were some pretty impressive achievements between 1960 and 1985. 

I enjoy seeing Peggy go directly to all the "forbidden" spots - her dad's liquor cabinet, the cigarettes hidden under the stairs. She argues with her dad and she humorously exclaims "I'm an adult --- I can do what I want!" and "I'm going to go to Liverpool and discover The Beatles!"

Another great scene is when Peggy sees her younger sister in 1960; her sister is a few years younger, perhaps 14 (played by Sofia Coppola - the only real teenager in the whole movie). The way Peggy responds to her is touching and convincing, she's almost in tears when she sees her. The details are not explained, but it makes me wonder if her sister had died tragically....or something bad happened to her where they became estranged or something and so therefore seeing her again would brought back alot of joy for Peggy.

The movie has a number of nice moments like that, especially when Peggy decides to visit her parents and grandparents -- both of whom  have died years prior to 1985. Sequences like these can make us think of our own relatives who passed and who we miss. Haven't we all dreamed about long-gone relatives or friends at one time or another? 

This is a really great performance by Kathleen Turner in one of her best movie roles in my opinion, and deserving on her Oscar nomination that year.

Next up, I wanted to write about Nicolas Cage in one of his first movie roles. At the start of the movie he's 42 and looks the age and is made up to look generally down-and-out and gruff, having made some questionable decisions in his life. Then, when the movie shifts to 1960, he's 17 and looks the age again, but this time he's optimistic and full of life and in love with Peggy, passionate about music, singing in a band, and his hair and wardrobe is made up to make him look like Fabian, who is his celebrity idol. (Full disclosure - I had to Google and look up Fabian to learn a little more about him LOL).  It's an amazing transformation, and even transforms his 1960 voice and mannerisms to match a teenager's. He's really good in this role. 

Jim Carrey is also in a small role, also playing 42 and 17. His character is meant to be something of a class clown and he really is - at both ages. His character only appears in few scenes, but I think it's just enough in my opinion - if he were in any more scenes, I think he would have unnecessarily stolen (or ruined) a good part of the movie with his comic antics. 

Also playing classmates are Joan Allen (The Crucible) and Catherine Hicks (Child's Play), and their costumes and makeup really convince you that they are teens, especially when they drive Peggy Sue home from school while "Tequilla" by the Champs plays on the radio.  

Kevin J. O'Connor was 22 but played 17, and played one of the "outcasts" of the school that Peggy reaches out to in 1960 and cheats on Nicolas Cage (who subsequently throws a jealous tantrum, but still professes his love for Peggy in the end).

John Barry's score, the costumers, set designers, and cinematographer deserve much credit for re-creating a very memorable and dream-like film. And it is superbly directed by Francis Coppola; in real-life, he is the same age and generation as the adult Peggy character so handles this film with a great sensibility for that late 50's/early 60s era. And of course, amazing job by the screenwriters who also have a great sensibility for the era and write some pretty funny, clever, and satirical dialogue without going over-the-top. 

I recommended the movie if you haven't seen it!

This post is part of the Fake Teenagers Blogathon!

Hosted by Taking Up Room (November 18-20, 2022)

P.S:  Realweegiemidget Reviews has a great post on this movie from a few years back!
It's a great post that features MORE about this awesome movie and its amazing cast!

Check out the post here!

The Addams Family (1991), Addams Family Values (1993), and The Addams Family (2019)

I watched both when they first came out 30 years ago, but didn't like them very much. 

And then just the other day I watched it again, and enjoyed it more than ever. It's funny how this is a rare movie that gets better for me each time I watch it. 

The entire cast is so good! I love the design of the castle, and the hidden "fortune" and the lore behind the Addams lineage. Such good stuff!

I didn't like the sequel  (Part 2) very much when I first saw it, but rather enjoyed it on a rewatch. Much of the subtle humor was lost on me years ago. 

Part 2 really belongs to Joan Cusack! She really steals the whole movie as Fester's nefarious girlfriend who wants a piece of the Addams fortune. And I liked the summer camp sequences with the crazy hyper-positive-attitude counselors. The ending was bad, though. The whole electrocution deal....doesn't hold up well, and don't love the movie as much as the first one. 

I tried giving the 2019 animated movie a try, since I hadn't seen it yet. Surprisingly, it had a number of the same jokes from the 1991 movie and didn't capture my attention enough to watch the whole thing. 

Going to stick with the 1991 version again if I ever am in an Addams Family mood again! 

Read another review of Addams Family Values from:

Reel Weedgie Midget here

Five Questions I Had Re-Watching The Exorcist (1973)

Nashville, TN showing in 1973

I've never blogged about 1973's The Exorcist before, but it's a movie that I rewatch every few years, usually around Halloween time or in October. Recently, I watched it on a big screen in a theater for the first time, along with an audience/crowd. I felt less frightened with a crowd around, but I'm sure viewers in the 70s were horrified; I always remember the accounts I read about of "around-the-block" lines and how people walked out of the theater out of fear, disgust, or physical sickness/illness. I was hoping to re-live or re-capture that feeling in 2022 somewhat, but was a little distracted by the numerous cell phones flashing by enthusiastic millennials/Gen Z'ers taking pictures at key moments. And after several viewings of the movie, I guess I'm not as frightened as I once was of this film. However, I still think it's a great piece of filmmaking with great writing, directing, and performances.5 lingering questions that came to mind after this last re-watch.

1. If the mom character (Ellen Burstyn) is such a big movie star, and the British director "Burt" is fairly well known, wouldn't the murders and strange phenomena happening near the set attract and create extensive media and tabloid attention? This wasn't addressed in the film and not sure if it was mentioned in the book (I never read it). A minor issue, but it seems like it would be a big deal for a movie director's horrendous death to be national/world news. But there were no media reporters or crews outside the house at any time.

2. The alcoholic director "Burt" uses a profane adjective several times in the film and it's strange because I never heard it used by anyone in any film or real life. Is this a phrase unique to this director or something? Like when everyone says "broomhead" on the TV show Degrassi but no one else in world uses that term? Or was "c---ing" a common slang term in the 70s? Seriously, it's so bizarre. 

3. I don't quite understand the relationship between the live-in workers in the house. Are the German workers there full time, and attend to each new renter? Is Reagan's mom only renting the house? Are the Germans the owners? This still remains fuzzy. I don't get who the lady with the typewriter is either - is she Ellen Burstyn's personal assistant? Is she the older daughter (like the older daughter in Poltergeist?) Update: According to the commentary by William Friedkin, they are Ellen Burstyn's assistants that travel with her (but I don't think it's explicitly stated in the movie) 

4. When the detective (Lee J. Cobb) inspects the stairs for the first time, he picks up a small sculpture off the ground...I never noticed that before. Apparently, it's one that was made by Reagan and is suspiciously at the bottom of the stairs. Did Burt pick it up which prompted Reagan to throw him out the window? Was it a sculpture of a demon? 

5. Who put the crucifix under Reagan's pillow? Everyone in the house say they didn't, so I wonder if someone at the hospital gave it to Reagan (maybe a priest) and she kept it in the blanket with her as she came home, and put it under her pillow herself. That's my interpretation.  

What do you think?

Fright Night (1985) and The Lost Boys (1987)

Watched these movies for the first time recently; In the late 80s, I guess I just wasn't interested in vampires or vampire movies all that much. 

In Fright Night, a teen discovers that his suave new neighbor (Chris Sarandon - maybe his most famous role) is a vampire, but no one believes him. When the vampire starts to stalk the kid, he turns to a has-been horror actor and late-night horror TV host "Peter Vincent" (Roddy McDowell) to help him slay the vampire. The movie has alot of grisly makeup and visual effects which - at the time - were no doubt pretty impressive. 

I liked the story element where the old has-been actor gets involved, and that his name is an amalgamation of Vincent Price and Peter Cushing. Vincent has a funny line where he says (paraphrasing) "the only horror your generation is interested in has to do with a guy in a ski mask slaughtering virgins". I suppose it was kind of true at the time, but ironically, I think movies like Fright Night helped to revive the vampire movie.

The Lost Boys was something of a cult vampire hit but I was never interested in it.  Watching it in 2021, I can see how appealing it could have been, with a cast that includes Cory Haim, Cory Feldman, Keifer Sutherland, Jami Gertz, and Jason Patric, who plays the older brother in a family that just moved into town. 

The marketing buzz I remember about this movie showcased the vampires hanging out and flying about in the night with their new "recruit", and that was my impression of the movie for years.  However I didn't realize that there was more to this movie, including a few other rather entraining subplots that add to the suspense. The first one involves the two Coreys getting together to become vampire busters, and it's pretty interesting to see them get close to and eventually break into the vampire's lair. 

The other subplot involves the single-mom character (Diane Weist) who dates a mild-mannered gentleman in town played by Edward Hermann who steals the movie at the end in a twist I did not see coming. You have to see it to believe it. 

It's A Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad, World (1963)

I don't know alot about the story behind the making of this film, but I'm guessing that Stanley Kramer, who normally directed dramas, wanted to do an all-star slapstick comedy. I've seen parts of the movie when I was younger but recently watched the whole movie. Watching the movie in 2022, 60 years after it was first released, it feels like a product of its time. Dialogue and jokes seem very old fashioned and dated, such as when Buddy Hacket calls the mother-in-law character (Ethel Merman) an old bag and various other names. Mickey Rooney is cast as Hacket's best friend, but he seems really miscast among the other comedians. It was nice to see a couple of Black comedians such as Eddie Anderson but when they appear they only appear for a few seconds, sadly.

As I watched the movie I kept thinking of a better title. I thought "Greedy" might be good, since all the characters are rushing to find a stash of hidden cash before the other does.

This movie reminded me of another film I enjoyed watching on tv as a kid years ago - "Scavenger Hunt". I remember enjoying it at the time but maybe it doesn't hold up, either; will have to look for it one day.

Another review from:
Confessions of a Film Philistine

Goodfellas (1990), and State of Grace (1990)

I recently watched Goodfellas in its entirety (not just bits and pieces) and enjoyed it. When I first tried watching it, I thought it was really boring, but now I find great appeal to it because it shows how an "outsider" like Ray Liotta's character, who is Irish, finds community and respect with the Italian mobsters.  Speaking of mob films, I still haven't seen Martin Scorcese's 2019 movie The Irishman yet; it was nominated for several Oscars a few years ago, but didn't win any.  

State of Grace (also from 1990) also features an Irish-Italian mob theme. I've known about it for years, but never watched it until recently. It's about an Irish cop (Sean Penn) who goes undercover and gets caught up with an Italian mob, who fight against the Irish mob including his friends. It's really suspenseful and makes you wonder how Sean Penn is going to get out of the predicament he's in. Ed Harris and Gary Oldman are in it and they are great as well. I liked the scenes showing New York. One day I want to go there, I keep saying that. 

Nuit #1 (2011)

This account of a one-night stand and the subsequent night is very realistic portrayal that seemed very authentic, unlike other similar themed movies that inject a ton of comedy and humor. Made in France, it is relatable to people (especially young singles) from across the world. Clara, a teacher, and Nikolai meet at a club, then go back to Nikoai's flat to fuck. When Clara tries to leave unnoticed, Nik stops her and pulls her back to the apartment. I didn't like how pushy he was and its a bit disturbing. She goes back to the apartment and pretty much bares her soul to him, opening up about her innermost feelings of regret, shame, and despair. And they end up sleeping together on the roof, where Clara looks down at the street and we're unsure what she is going to do. The film was written and directed by a woman (Anne Émond), not a man, important to emphasize that the film is from a woman's perspective, so many films with characters like these are directed by a man.  

At the end of the film, we see Clara's students, but we're unsure if this takes place the next day, the next year, or prior to Nuit 1 (the first night). I liked how the film left me wondering about that. 

Candy (1968)

I first heard about this movie from a post from the blog Mike's Take On The Movies which featured a newspaper ad for this movie from December of 1968, almost 55 years ago. Check it out at the link below-

https://mikestakeonthemovies.com/2019/03/25/now-playing-december-28th-1968-at-a-theater-near-you/

The movie came out around the same time as The Odd Couple, Hellfighters, and The Lion in Winter. 

Also I Love You Alice B Toklas and Skiddoo, which were comic satires about the current drug and hippy cultures that I enjoyed and found humorous.

With its all star cast that includes James Coburn, John Huston (believe it or not), and Charles Aznavour, I thought this movie might be a fun watch like those other movies. 

But it's not. It's horrible. 

This movie is so bad. I doesn't hold up well. If I were anyone involved in it, I would be embarrassed. Ringo Starr is in it, which is cool, but he plays a Mexican gardener in brownface and a bad accent, which is not cool. Marlon Brando also appears in brownface playing an Indian love guru, similar to a character that Mike Myers created in the 2008 movie The Love Guru. It's supposed to be funny, but it's not. 

It seems like very Hollywood actor wanted to appear in a comedy that lampoons the modern culture of hippies but this movie, which makes sex the main focus, falls flat. Buck Henry wrote it, and I guess I was expecting for it to be better. But I don't know what he's trying to say in this movie - that all adult men are sex crazed, or is there something about authority figures (doctors, gurus, soldiers) that he finds ridiculous and wants to criticize? I didn't get it. 

Every adult male character in this movie is awestruck by Candy, who is a pretty blonde white girl who wears short skirts, has pretty eyes, and is rather naive. Is the character's naivete supposed to be the gag? Or the fact that she's so sexually attractive that every adult man who meets her wants to have sex with her? It gets really cringy and creepy at times. There are even some creepy incest jokes involving the dad (John Astin)  And it's really bizarre to see a military general (Walter Matthau) order her to undress for him in the cockpit of a plane, and him trying to screw her. It's also super-creepy to see a middle aged poet (Richard Burton) want to sleep with her too after he visits her school to give a poetry reading. I did like Burton's chauffeur played by Sugar Ray Robinson who winks at the camera and is in on the joke that Burton is a buffoon. That was inspired comedy. But Candy just doesn't work in a modern era. I don't think it was funny back in 1968, either. What were they thinking?  

Read another review from The Magnificent 60s

Interesting article about mid-budget movies

CNN.com recently had an interesting article about mid-budget movies which includes thoughts about why we don't see them in theaters as much anymore:

Mid-budget movies as we knew them are in decline. What does that mean for cinema? - CNN

Raquel Welch movies

Turner Classic Movies had a marathon of Raquel Welch movies the other day, and I was excited for this because it was a great chance to watch some of her movies for the first time. Either due to availability (never being on VHS/DVD) or on TV, I had never seen any of these movies before, ever.  

Unfortunately, most of the ones I watched were pretty mediocre, and not very good. Or they were just average. I wasn't missing much.  It's too bad because I feel Raquel Welch deserved much better roles and parts in better movies. I could see/imagine her in movies like Gloria or Coming Home. 

The Three Musketeers (1973)

I didn't like this movie! It really didn't interest me at all so I didn't even watch the whole movie all the way through. I don't remember Raquel Welch being in the movie very much. Sort of a cameo type role, really.

Fuzz (1972)

I also really disliked this comedy. For one, I hate the title; it just doesn't seem to fit. Raquel's role in the film is very small; she only has a few scenes as a detective which is a shame because I think she would have been great in a larger part. Burt Reynolds and Tom Skerrit have larger parts as police/detectives.  I didn't realize that most of this whole movie would took place in the police station. (Later I found out that this movie was based on some book or series of books) 

After about 10 minutes the movie's goofiness gave me the vibe of a Police Academy movie or a Barney Miller tv comedy episode, which might have been inspired by this film. Don't think I'd watch this one again.

Flareup (1969)

I also disliked this one! Raquel's part is much larger; she plays a stripper who is targeted by an assassin. She travels from Las Vegas to Los Angeles and the only interesting things about the movie is the scenery and location shots. And the cool cars. That's about it. It does have a '60s vibe to it, too. Everything else is really dull; all of the other performances are really bland and I didn't care much for this one. Don't think Id watch this one again.

Hannie Caulder (1971)

This Western is a bad film overall; I think this movie's mistake is that it tries to be a comedy when it should just be a straight-up drama/thriller/revenge story. Then I think the movie would have worked a bit better. It starts off with a trio of bumbling outlaw brothers (Ernest Borgnine, Strother Martin, and Jack Elam) who kill a rancher and then proceed to gang-rape his widow/wife who is left behind. The rape scene is very disturbing and uncomfortable to watch so early on. It's choppily edited, but that could be the director's intent. It's also very creepy to watch Ernest Borgnine (Marty) as a dirty rapist; reminded me of his character in The Wild Bunch.

The gang leaves and then wisecracks their way out of the village. There are multiple scenes showing them in various other situations joking and wisecracking with each other, like a pair of Three Stooges, and I think that was a wrong choice since it gives the impression it's meant to be some kind of comedy; there's nothing funny about rapists. 

The best parts of the movie show Hannie (Raquel Welch) planning her revenge and learning to shoot. There are some bloody sequences in the movie, which seem to be inspired by Wild Bunch, especially with all the flowing blood that shoots up into the air when people get shot.  Raquel meets bounty hunter Robert Culp who trains her. Christopher Lee has a small role as a man who lets them stay at his house for awhile. Compared to 100 Rifes, this is the lesser of the two in my opinion. 

Kansas City Bomber (1972)

I was bored with this one and didn't like it. I liked some of the roller derby scenes but honestly, they went on for too long. The movie doesn't really explain what the point of the game is, and I guess the audience is expected to know the rules. Like with Football, or Baseball, or Hockey movies, the filmmakers don't stop and tell you how the game is played.  I did like the scenes with Raquel and her children and the scenes with her at home. It made me want to see more scenes like that or even an entire movie about her with kids.

The Last of Sheila (1973)

A very odd film. It's interesting that it's Stephen Sondheim's only screenplay he wrote. He was good friends with the other co-screenwriter, Anthony Perkins, and they came up with this interesting scavenger-hunt type movie. I thought it was just "OK". I remember enjoying the movie "Scavenger Hunt" way better; maybe since it was aimed at kids more. Both movies have Richard Benjamin. 
Incidentally, Bobby Rivers' blog had an interesting post on a collaboration between Sondheim and Perkins from the 60s - read it here. 

Laura's Miscellaneous Musings: Tonight's Movie: The Last of Sheila (1973) (laurasmiscmusings.blogspot.com)

The Biggest Bundle of Them All (1968)

This is a really stupid movie! But I liked watching it and got hooked once the heist got underway --- which takes over an hour to get to. The first hour is really build-up and interplay between the Italian thief and Robert Wagner, which is really dull. Sadly, Raquel Welch's part is so small. It would have been great to see her in the Wagner role instead. Watching this movie made me want to re-watch Oceans 8 (2018) with Sandra Bullock - I always enjoy seeing how she works with her team to pull off the heist that they do in that one. 

Bundle only picks up steam once Edward G. Robinson enters the picture and becomes the mastermind behind the ultimate heist which involves a train hijacking. However it takes an hour and a half to get to those exciting parts featuring the heist, and by then I'm almost not interested. But I did like the ending and it shows how they blow the heist and their expressions. I kind of wish The Italian Job (1969) ended in a similar way where we get some satisfaction out of seeing them blow the heist. 

Compared to Topkapi, my favorite heist movie of them all, this movie is far inferior.  

The Wild Party (1975)

Terrible movie! I cannot believe this is a Merchant/Ivory film. The opening credits were really amusing, jovial, and a clever throwback to silent cinema. 

But the next ten minutes were horrid. James Coco plays a washed-up silent comedian, jealous of "up-and-comers" Buster Keaton and Chaplin. If you know your history of film you may recognize similarities between the Coco character and Roscoe Arbuckle, a heavyset comedic silent actor whose career went down in a similar way.

However, modern audiences have no idea about any of this. This film is good example of when you really need context --- some type of opening "crawl" or written prologue on the screen to give you context. 

Instead of a fun movie experience, in the first ten minutes, Coco's character slaps Raquel Welch in the face and throws a hot cup of coffee on her legs. It's really horrendous and misogynist and Coco is so unlikable that I couldn't watch this movie with any real interest. The movie is so long and boring and leads up to the titular "wild party" which doesn't take place for about an hour and a half. This movie really sucks. It's a shame that Raquel Welch had to take this part. This is a totally forgettable movie. 

Should have probably been called "The Arbuckle Story" or something like that. 

100 Rifles (1969)

I liked this movie; I liked the action and that it focuses on the Yachi indigenous people of Mexico; even though it's fictious I feel it gives a bit of an idea of how the Yachi were displaced and how they might have fought the colonizers. It also is my first time learning about the Yachi, and I feel this movie could have been better at explaining them. Instead, it aims to focus on the three fugitive characters. I like how I don't know how the three would end up at the end - which one would die (if any?), which ones would romance, which ones would leave the group, etc. And the Mexican General played by Fernando Llamas was really nasty and one of the meanest screen villains. I didn't like some of the anti-indigenous sentiment, but I could see how a movie like this was an influence on Tarantino. This movie might be the only one of Raquel's that I would watch again. 

A good blog post on the movie here at Just Hit Play

Best Picture Winners I don't like: Grand Hotel and Green Book, plus Round Midnight

I recently caught up with two Best Picture Winners for the first time; both of them I didn't like!

Grand Hotel is a movie I've known about forever but never saw --- finally I had a chance to watch recently, but realized I wasn't missing much. I felt the characters were introduced to the audience too quickly and I kept trying to follow with what everyone's purpose in the hotel was. Joan Crawford shows up as a stenographer/reporter needing to interview Wallace Beery for some reason but gets distracted for about 20 minutes fighting off flirtatious advances from John Barrymore's character. Beery has a German accent in this film and his character is different from other tough-guy roles I've seen him in. Lionel Barrymore comically plays a doctor but is ultimately un-interesting. Greta Garbo also shows up but also was really un-interesting to me.

This movie didn't work for me! Apparently it was turned into a musical about 30 years ago but I can't imagine how better or worse it would be with songs. 

I also did not like Green Book.  I didn't find the Viggo Mortensen character very likeable or believable at any stage of the film. At the very start of the movie he is shown throwing two glasses in his garbage can at home because two Black workers drank from them. If he hates Black people so much I can't believe that he would ever take the job as a driver for Mahershala Ali's jazz musician character, which is almost made to be slightly comical when more seriousness should have placed on his character, I felt. And the movie should have focused more on him instead.  

The movie as a whole just didn't work for me. The blogger and former TV personality Bobby Rivers wrote about Green Book and I tend to agree with his assessment; he explains a bit better than I can - Blog post from Bobby Rivers' blog talks about Green Book

I also recently watched another movie about a Jazz player and his white friend -  Round Midnight - it's been on my "to-see" list for years and I finally watched it for the first time, and I liked it. Liked it much better than Green Book. Like Green Book, Round Midnight is also about a Black jazz musician (Dexter Gordon) in the 1950s-early 60s era, but in a different country and in a neighborhood with less racial prejudice. Instead of at the prime of his career, Dexter Gordon is at the end of his career - and life. He's a heavy drinker. 

The film shows how he befriends a white Parisian man who has idolized him all his life. When they meet and become friends, the white man becomes his caretaker and lets him live in his home with his daughter.

It's similar to Green Book in that it is ultimately a bout how an artist inspires another man's life. But in Round Midnight there's lots of jazz and musical performances from start to finish. I was convinced that Dexter Gordon was this jazz musician in Paris, and that he really was an alcoholic. It was almost difficult to watch because I really felt I was watching a real person disintegrate on film. 

Jaws 2, Jaws 3, Jaws: The Revenge

I re-watched these three sequels recently -- my verdict is that they did not age very well, especially Part 2 and Part 3 - I found those to be so dull and boring to watch. 

As for Part 2 - Who cares about the people on Amity Island? I mean, really? Give us some characters to like or care about besides Chief Brody. Or his kids. At least make them interesting. The Mayor is a jerk--- it would've been really satisfying to see him get eaten by the shark. 

Jaws 3 is also very dull. The characters aren't interesting, not even Dennis Quaid. Louis Gossett is supposed to play a greedy corporate type, but I wasn't sure if I was supposed to like him or not. I kind of like the idea of a shark attacking a theme park - think of all the various situations that could happen--but there's not much to it. The best part only happens in the last 10 minutes when the shark breaks through the glass - it should have happened 2 hours sooner. I always remember - Jurassic World (2015), which handled suspense and thrills at a theme park much better.

To my surprise, the Jaws sequel I enjoyed the most out of these three was the most critically panned one - Jaws the Revenge. It's almost universally panned as one of the worst movies and sequels ever made. Except by me. I found I actually liked it on this re-watch. I first saw it when it came out in theaters in 1987, and at the time, I didn't think it was great, but I didn't hate it either. There is some subtle adult humor and dialogue by some of the characters - including the marine biologist (Mario Van Peeples) that went right over my head at the time; I was only about 11 years old. I liked Peeples' character, and also liked the diversity of the cast which is really refreshing. And I liked the Brody widow/mom/grandmom and Michael Caine relationship - it was totally believable that he would be interested in her. He's such a good actor that he's good even in a crappy movie.

As for the shark stuff. Well I dunno about that. I do like that the Brody mom finally leaves Amity and goes to live somewhere else. But another killer shark following her and attacking her family even after she moves??? You really have to turn off part of your brain to enjoy this film I think. 

There is a spiritual/magical/mystical element to it that I kind of liked, and wished was explored more in this film. From what I read, the original plan was to have someone put a voodoo curse put on the Brody Family and have a shark attack them no matter where they go. That would actually explain a whole lot about this movie. But that specific element \got cut from the film, unfortunately. Apparently, the novelization of the film has the curse in place. 

One thing I didn't like - the ending...it's really bad - it's not clear what happens to the shark. That's the worst thing about it in my opinion. I guess it's good that no other Jaws movies were made after that. And hopefully these sequels are lessons to future filmmakers on how to make good sequels and avoid bad ones.

Still, out of all the Jaws sequels, Jaws:The Revenge is my favorite.

The Card Counter (2021), The Sting (1973), and Atlantic City (1980)

The Card Counter is a new movie with Oscar Isaac as an ex-military gambler who travels around to card games and teams up with Tiffany Haddish; I like both actors so this was really a fun movie to watch. 

More reviews of the film from other bloggers here:

• Cinemascope: The Card Counter [2021] (cliched-monologues.blogspot.com)
• Filmhounds review here

There's plenty of card games in the film, and afterwards, I felt like rewatching The Sting, which is one of my favorite movies and rewatch it from time to time. The plot is so detailed and each time I rewatch I pick up on some new things I missed the last time.  I love how the characters pull off the cons in the movie. And also love the music, sets (some scenes filmed in Chicago), and costumes as well. 

I wondered why I enjoy this movie so much. The two main leads are criminals, liars, and thieves. But there's a likability about them; their personalities really connect with me. Even though they are so conniving, Paul Newman's behavior and mannerisms make me laugh. I like how the gang all cares about each other's families, especially when Luther (Robert Earl Jones) gets killed, and how they come together to avenge his death. 

I also was curious about The Sting II so I rented it from Netflix to give it a try. It's horrible. I couldn't even finish watching the whole movie, it's so bad. What were they thinking when they made this movie?  The dialogue (by the same writer as the first movie, unbelievably) is atrocious, and features some homophobic slurs by Karl Malden, presumably an attempt to make his character more loathsome. He must have needed the paycheck. This has got to be the worst comedy sequels of the 80s. It makes Caddyshack II look way better in comparison. 

And finally, to close out my gambling-themed movie kick, I tried watching Atlantic City (1980) with Burt Lancaster and Susan Sarandon, but I didn't like it so not much to say about it. 

The Blues Brothers (1980) and Every Which Way But Loose (1978)

I recently had a craving to watch The Blues Brothers again for the 3rd or 4th time. I didn't have the DVD in my collection, so instead of renting or streaming it, I decided to buy the blu ray to add it to my collection. Then enjoyed it again. It was great to see all the legendary music performances by Aretha, Ray, James Brown, and Cab Calloway again. With another repeat viewing I picked up on some subtle jokes and humor I missed the previous times. It's really a crazy movie and even ridiculous and absurd at times but it is still really funny to me to see the Brothers' building blown up, and then in the next shot, see them climb out of the rubble unscratched and unhurt and walk off to their next stop. The chase in the mall is also hilarious to me. It was cool to see all Chicago locations again, and I forgot that Steven Spielberg appears at the end. It is one of those movies I'll enjoy again sometime soon.

For the first time ever, I watched a movie that has long been on my "to-see" list - the Clint Eastwood comedy Every Which Way But Loose. I liked it. It kind of reminded me of the Blues Brothers because throughout the whole movie, Clint and his friends are chased by people that either want to kill him or get revenge for something. 

It's another crazy road movie but instead of blues, there's a country vibe to it, and even features a few cameos by country singers Charlie Rich and Mel Tillis. Eastwood manages to get into a lot of dive bar fights, enters street fights for quick cash, and even tries to get his pet orangutan laid at the Santa Fe zoo. Ruth Gordon has a small part as the mother, and she's pretty funny in it, too. She keeps failing her driver's license test, but eventually passes at the end, sort of predicable. 

Pretty much the entire movie is ridiculous but really amusing. 

Throughout the whole movie, Clint pursues a woman (Sondra Locke), but then at the end when he does meet up with her she blows him off. I liked that ending; it's so unconventional. In the climatic fight at the end Eastwood nearly beats the best street fighter in the nation, but he decides to go down and lose  because...well, its left to the audience to decide why. I think it's because he didn't want the fame and reputation. 

Eastwood's best friend (or was it his brother - I don't remember) in the film is played by Geoffrey Lewis, who is really good in this part, very believable and funny. Never saw any movie with him before, so I checked out what else he did on IMDB, where I also learned that his daughter is Juliette Lewis. I never knew that.  

Read another blog post about this movie from  Diary of a Movie Maniac here

Incidentally, the other day I was in a Hallmark store and saw a new Juliette Lewis/"Audrey Griswold" Christmas Ornament for the 2022 season; it's part of a new set of "Christmas Vacation" ornaments -- the others in the set are Chevy Chase, Beverly D'Angelo (who is also in Every Which Way But Loose), and Johnny Galecki ("Rusty Griswold"). Geoffrey Lewis died a few years ago but I'm sure he would have been proud to have an ornament feauring his daughter's likeness, maybe. 

Where The Crawdads Sing (2022)

I went to see this movie knowing nothing about the story - I had not read the book nor knew anything about what happens. 

But I liked it. It definitely kept me in suspense, and left me trying to put together all the pieces in my head throughout the movie. I liked the performance by David Strathairn who plays the lawyer. He's good, but I don't think this is an Academy-Award nominated role (even though I think he definitely deserves an Oscar). 

I liked the main lead, and thought she looked alot like Anne Hathaway to me, so much so that I wondered why the real Anne Hathaway couldn't have been cast (is she too old - gasp!).  The marsh where she lives was depicted as so serene and secluded and safe...until the threat comes - a crazy ex.  

The only likeable people in the town is the Black couple who own the local variety store in town. I liked those characters, and wished their characters had more screen time and were somehow more involved.  

I liked the scene when the brother comes back. And I liked how they showed all her drawings and illustrations, and I wished the movie focused on them some more.

Trivia - the actor who played "Angus" in the 1990s movie Angus has a small cameo in a bar at the beginning. Not sure how he got involved, but I also wish his part was way longer. Can we say "comeback"?

Sigh! Maybe another director would have had more vision. 

But otherwise I recommend the movie. Even if it feels like something that might be made-for-tv.

Top Gun (1986), Heartbreak Ridge (1986), and the latest Top Gun

Last weekend I watched two military-themed movies, Heartbreak Ridge and Top Gun, both from 1986. Both have similar parallels and deal with senior officers training younger fighters. In Heartbreak Ridge, Clint Eastwood is a marine about to retire but gets put in charge of training some new recruits including Mario Van Peeples, whose character is really interesting; he's a musician and loves to sing and perform in bars and occasionally gets in trouble or thrown in jail for reckless behavior. Eastwood's character is pretty reckless, too and the two form an unlikely relationship. I'd like to have seen a whole movie about Mario Van Peeples's character, similar to how the "Maverick" character is portrayed as the focus of Top Gun. But it was an okay movie; one needs to keep remembering that it is a movie set and made in the 1980s. One bizarre scene involves the marines trying to make a long-distance phone call with a credit card. 

The two Top Gun movies are pretty similar to the Eastwood movie, I feel. In the first movie, the focus is not on the senior officer but of course Tom Cruise's character and friends. For whatever reason, I never saw this movie before last week.... but as I was watching, I was paying close attention to some of the details because I knew there'd be some callbacks in the sequel. The movie was good had some good flying sequences.

Then I saw the sequel, which came out last weekend, and I liked it better than the first. It had some typical Hollywood cliches, but I didn't mind them because I was basically looking for mindless escapism and fun and so I didn't criticize the film too heavily. The sequel is a bit more like Heartbreak Ridge because the "older" Cruise character is now the senior officer on the verge of retiring and faced with training some young hotshots. And I liked that the Val Kilmer character got promoted to admiral, but Cruise never advanced that far. And it was nice to see a diverse group of fighter pilots. And I liked the pairing of Cruise and Jennifer Connelly who is a bar owner and has becomes the love interest. Their scenes were really good and reminded me of Eastwood's and Marsha Mason's in Heartbreak Ridge a little bit, especially the ending. 

 

Article: 'Top Gun: Maverick' Smashes Memorial Day Box Office Record; AMC Stock Surges

Wow, I didn't expect the new Top Gun to do so well. This article hails it as a "film for the ages" and "stunning" "a perfect movie" and a "masterpiece". A special Cannes Film Festival prize for Tom Cruise. Really? It's that good?  I guess I need to go see it to believe it. 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/movies/news/amc-entertainment-stock-surges-on-record-memorial-day-weekend-for-top-gun-maverick/ar-AAXUURV

It's great that AMC theaters are doing well again, and nice that more people are going to the movies. 

Each time I've gone to an AMC this year to see a movie, it's always been a good experience; the theaters are clean, mask-wearing encouraged, sanitizers are aplenty. I am looking forward to seeing "Jurassic World Dominion" this summer in the theater. 

Munchies (1987)

I was just in grade school when Munchies came out; I never watched it when it came out, or rented it on video tape/dvd over the years. Probably it was because I may have grown tired of the tiny creature horror comedies that came out in the mid-late 1980s; most all of them seeming to capitalize over the success Gremlins (1984) the first of these types of movies and the most popular and best-remembered today. Full-disclosure: I've rewatched Gremlins and its sequel many times over the years; they are definitely "childhood favorites". I also remember watched Ghoulies (1985) which I didn't like. Then came Critters (1986) and its sequel Critters 2 (1988) and those were fun and I liked those.

But Munchies? Nope, never seen it. Until now.

Watching it for the first time in 2022, I now understand that the filmmakers were aiming for outrageous parody, no question about it. Had I watched the movie as a kid, no doubt most of the subtle satirical humor would have gone over my head. Examples of this are all the cops and townsfolk afraid of communists around every corner, common back then (and modern times!).  A sleazy entrepreneur / media mogul / real-estate developer (Harvey Korman) and his wife are totally reminiscent of disgraced televangelists and politicians of that era (and modern times!). 

It's notable to point out that Munchies director Tina Hirsch was the Film Editor on Gremlins, and co-star Nadine Van der Velde was one of the heroes in Critters. So we've got alot of little movie monster cred happening here. And of course Roger Corman was producer. Back in the 1980s when this movie came out, I had no idea who he was. 

It felt like the filmmakers and actors were all having fun making this movie, and when I can tell that is happening, then it makes me enjoy the film, too. And it seems like the writer (Lance Smith) really got creative in finding new ways the little creatures can attack us. 

For example:

• In Gremlins, we had creatures in a mailbox, a microwave, a movie theater, a bar, and in a department store.
• In Ghoulies, there were creatures in a toilet and in an old mansion
• In Critters, we had creatures in space and on a farm.

But Munchies raises the set-piece bar in new ways - now we have creatures driving a car, in a lake, in a mini-golf course, in a cave, in an ice cream store, in a fast-food restaurant, and finding ways to multiply in a factory warehouse. One of my favorite sequences involves a showdown in a video store, where the heroes shield themselves with a giant Clint Eastwood cardboard advertisement (for Pale Rider). A pretty neat scene, and a nostalgic one, too, as video stores are non-existant today.

When I watch older movies today, what often distracts me is seeing the old technology being used. I recently watched a thriller film where there were countless scenes of people talking on telephones, or people using a phone booth. But....I can't remember any telephones used in Munchies, even with all the mayhem and destruction that happens in the course of the film.  I'm not sure if that was intentional or not. To me, if there are no telephones use in a film, it makes the film appear "less dated" than some other movies of the same time. Funny how one character in the movie is obsessed with a vinyl record collection; a modern viewer (and vinyl collector) might really appreciate that since vinyl collecting is "in" again in 2022. One unappealing thing about this movie - like other movies like it - is how sexist those little creatures are made to be, and this can make a modern viewer cringe. It's satisfying, though, when they meet their eventual demise (no spoilers here, though). 

Then there are the special effects. Some people who are used to CGI don't like these types of movies where puppets are used. But in my opinion, when it comes to tiny alien creature horror-comedies, I'm ok with the use of actual puppets vs GCI, even if they are ridiculous-looking as they are in Munchies.  Recently, I watched a semi-newish horror comedy called Yoga Hosers (2015) starring Lily Rose Depp; in that movie, she battles little sausage creatures. The movie was OK, but the creatures were all CGI and I kept wishing the filmmakers just went "old-school" and just used puppets the old fashioned way. If you are going to make a ridiculous movie, why waste time with all the GCI and just go for ridiculous looking puppets?

This may seem like a small, insignificant, b-movie, but I have a feeling alot of directors have watched Munchies and been inspired by it for their own horror-creature-comedies. 

I'm sorry I passed up on it for so long and never watched it until now. But am so glad I have seen it, and I would recommend it to you if you have never seen it!  

This post is part of the Roger Corman Blogathon!

Hosted by Cinematic Catharsis and Reelweedgiemidget Reviews

What happened to music stores (such as FYE) in malls?

This was a really good video commentary posted in the last month that talks about why are there so many fewer music (and movie stores) stores in malls anymore. (Spoiler - spotify and streaming music and movie platforms have alot to do with it!)

Coming to Blu-Ray - The Wonderful World of the Brothers Grimm (1962)

I was so excited to see this announcement on the Blu Ray new releases coming up:

https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/The-Wonderful-World-of-the-Brothers-Grimm-Blu-ray/134981

It's such a long and epic film with sequences of Grimm tales intermixed with drama about how the Brothers started writing and how they got inspired to write. 

I love this movie! It features Lawrence Harvey as one of the brothers, a fantastic George Pal puppetoons sequence about the Elves making shoes for the shoemaker, Great costumes and scenery, Arnold Stang as Rumpelstiltskin, Russ Tamblyn as Tom Thumb, Buddy Hacket as the Dragon Slayer, Barbara Eden, Claire Bloom, and Terry-Thomas. And an awesome musical score.

I saw this in Los Angeles/Hollywood on the big screen in 2012 at the Cinerama Dome Theater in honor of its 50th Anniversary and it was really cool to see the film projected from 3 cameras and see it the way it was meant to be seen! Russ Tamblyn was in the audience, I remember. 

It's a rare experience because there are hardly any Cinerama theaters/projectors anymore.

It's one of those films that might look terrible on a small screen/square TV in the olden days; that's probably why it hasn't been on TV much over the years, and may be one of the "forgotten films", which is a shame because it's a pretty cool movie. 

The next best thing is to watch this on a big-screen TV on DVD or Blu-Ray - even better. I hope the picture quality is good. 

This was shown on Turner Classic Movies a few times and I remember watching it on TV but honestly it is one of those movies that was made-for-cinerama and the 3-camera system. It's still fun to watch. I hope more people see it!

Ben Mankiewicz introduces the movie on TCM a few years ago:

No Oscar Rant This Year

The Oscar awards are today. I didn't see many of the films nominated, so no "oscar rant" this year. It seems it's a bit harder to watch every film now that so many are premiering on streaming channels that I don't subscribe to.  

I did see a few though. Belfast was good, but I don't think worthy of Best Picture. The new West Side Story was good, but I'm not sure I would vote Best Picture either. 

I didn't like Dune and fully don't understand why people like it so much as to be nominated for Best Picture. 

Spencer was good, and I would vote for Kristen Stewart winning Best Actress.  

The Power of the Dog seems to be really acclaimed and many are rooting for it but I haven't seen it. It is on my list but not sure where to watch it. 

The movies I really want to see are: Passing, Encanto, Power of the Dog, Parallel Mothers, and Flee. Documentaries on my list are Summer of Soul and Attica. 

Kiss of the Spider Woman (1985) and Moon Over Parador (1988)

I watched Kiss of the Spider Woman in honor of William Hurt's passing last week; it is one of those that has been in my queue to watch for awhile. It was so good, especially knowing some of the backstory that is was based on a play and before that, a novel that deals with prisoners in Brazil during a time of dictatorship and uprising in the 1970s. Brazil isn't mentioned (or at least I didn't hear it mentioned), but there is a shot of the Brazilian flag in the warden's office, so it is up to the audience to make sense of whatever isn't explicitly explained. 

Raul Julia is an imprisoned revolutionary looked upon as a dangerous criminal to the government. He's excellent, and shares a number of stories of the women he loves and misses, and of the cause he believes in. "I hate being a martyr" he grieves, and we sense he hates being in that cell. The William Hurt character is his cellmate. Just two people in the cell, which is interesting, because almost everyone in the prison seem to be in overcrowded cells. This cell almost seems luxurious in comparison. But still unpleasant nonetheless. The character's name is Luis Molina and it dawned on me that perhaps this character was meant to be Latine, and I thought what other\ actor in the mid 80s could play this character so well, and I'm not sure. Hurt is very good, though, as he plays a gay and overly effeminate prison who turns Raul Julia off at first but their relationship grows over the course of the film. 

The movie has some great suspense especially toward the end, as well as some slow parts. There are also some exterior, on-location shots of São Paulo Brazil including this one (below) that shows a very odd-looking waste/trash can that I have never seen before; it's so unusual. Perhaps it was part of a street carnival happening locally. 

What is this trash can supposed to be? Very curiously placed in between the two actors.

When I was younger I don't think I would have understood the interpersonal interactions between the two characters. It is a movie that holds up very well I feel, and very relevant to an audience that understands the themes such as political imprisonment, homophobia, and repressed sexuality. This movie could have ended totally depressing and bleak as some movies are. However, the ending of the movie isn't, which I appreciated.

Moon Over Parador came out in 1988 and I remember renting the VHS Tape to watch it; I didn't like it very much at the time but remember finding some of Richard Dreyfus' antics amusing. But overall I didn't like much else. I decided to give the movie a re-watch again after over 30 years. So I gave it another try, but it still seems like something isn't right. 

If you don't know about the film, it's a satirical comedy (heavy on the satire) where Dreyfus plays an American actor who impersonates a South American dictator after the dictator dies. Raul Julia plays the dictator's assistant and drama aficionado, who  coerces the actor to play the dictator, so he's essentially a villain character.  Dreyfuss: "You're asking me to be an imposter!" Raul Julia (as the dictator's assistant): "Ah..The essence of the stage!"  I liked how Dreyfus practices the salute, mannerisms, and voice of the dictator. My favorite part was the "Dream the Impossible Dream" speech, though. But there were few other moments like that. There is an interesting part where Julia's character seems to use an early version of the internet and prints out an article from The New York Times. I also liked the autographs in Julia's office - I spotted Michael Jackson, and Ronald Reagan and some other 80s figures. 

But overall the movie seems overly long and dull, especially towards the end or last half of the film. Raul Julia plays the dictator's aide  Sonia Braga (who was also in Spider Woman) plays the dictator's mistress who eventually finds out the truth during a sexual encounter. 

By the half of the movie, I stopped caring about who finds out and who doesn't and how things pan out. There are some political elements where Dreyfus experiences seeing a village torn and repressed by the government which adds some drama to the film, but ultimately it wasn't very satisfying. I may have to watch it again to appreciate it more, and appreciate what the writers and director (Paul Mazursky) were trying to accomplish. And sadly, the advertising/marketing of the film didn't emphasize Raul Julia at all; see the American poster (above) which gives the impression of an island honeymoon romantic comedy, which it's not. 

Both of these films were featured in the great documentary about Raul Julia called American Masters: Raul Julia: The World's a Stage which aired on PBS last year and I saw for the first time. It was all about Julia from his early years as a Shakespearean actor (acting at an outdoor Shakespeare fest in New Year with Meryl Streep) to his final films including The Burning Season which I have not seen but looks very interesting.

Tribute to William Hurt from Just a Cineaste:

http://justacineast.blogspot.com/2022/03/william-hurt-1950-2022.html