FranksFilms

This week’s cheesy double feature:

DEATH PROOF

PLANET TERROR

Perfect memory rarely is.

The problem with memory is that the world is too full of detail. And as marvelous as the human brain is, it has a finite capacity. So, to conserve resources, it decides what is worth remembering – the rest is discarded. You know this is true – how many times, while driving, have you suddenly realized that you can’t account for the past twenty minutes? Were you not paying attention? Of course you were, but nothing happened of any importance, so why waste brain bytes? You usually do store a certain amount of detail – but with time, keeping it needs to be weighed against cleaning up the clutter and making space for new memories.

People my age remember the sixties as though it were the Golden Age. They remember the great music and the revolution (everything was a revolution in the 60’s), the Cultural Revolution, the political revolution, the sexual revolution, the civil rights revolution, and the lesser known squid revolution (people started eating more squid for some reason). They remember the excitement of big things happening and especially the music. Ask anybody around at that time and they’ll tell you the same thing, “The music was the best, and things – man, things really seemed to matter. Not like today.” Was it really that great?

No.

But the emery cloth of time sands down the structure of memory until you get a little polished marble that represents just the thing you’ve decided was important to remember, the essential concept. Details like The Cold War, the filth, the bad drugs, the gender gap, the generation gap, the bad music, clashes with the police over civil rights and the war, the “real” war in Viet Nam – these are just sawdust that end up on the workshop floor. Does that mean memory becomes less perfect with time? No, just the opposite. Memory becomes more perfect with time because it becomes more focused ……polished ……..shinier.

I remember a lot of the grind house movies from the 60’s and 70’s (we didn’t use the term “grindhouse” back then). They were just quick and cheap movies that would come out every week (more so in the summer – drive-in theater season) and was just an excuse to go to the movies. They were always sensational with lots of sleaze and shooting and stuff exploding and scantily clad women. I’m sure there was more to it, but those are the kind of details that now lie on the workshop floor.

When the film GRINDHOUSE showed in theaters last summer, it was as a double feature, quite common in the grind house days – two movies, one directed by Robert Rodriguez and the other by Quentin Tarantino. They have now been released as two separate movies on video. While they are not like the cheap grind house movies from back in the day, they are, in essence, the marble that is the polished memory of those films. All the essential elements are there. Shooting, fast cars, a mad killer, scantily clad women, stuff blowing up, monsters. Face it, anything that doesn’t survive the sandpaper of time isn’t worth showing anyway. They’ve just filled up the leftover space with more of the good stuff.

They obviously did their homework by re-watching a lot of old films. They’ve reproduced this experience by making their films look “old”. I’m not sure why – certainly they didn’t look old when the films were new. They’ve added scratches, color gone awry, and in one movie, even a missing reel of film. Each of the directors brought their strong points to their film. Tarantino’s strength is in dialog. In DEATH PROOF, his characters have great revolving conversations with hip dialog. A huge cinephile, he throws in lots of inside movie references – how many can you get? Don’t get them all? Check out the trivia page at the IMDB site. There is an amazing chase scene at the end with incredible stunts. Tarantino made the brilliant decision to hire the stuntwoman, Zoë Bell, as a member of the cast. Zoë Bell plays herself as a stuntwoman – BTW she did all the stunts for Uma Thurman in the Kill Bill movies. DEATH PROOF is the “cooler” of the two films.

Robert Rodriguez uses his talents to pack a movie with wall-to-wall over-the-top absurd action. In PLANET TERROR, his retro-futuristic vision of horror, there is so much shooting and zombies and stuff blowing up and blood and guts and scantily clad women, that there’s virtually no time for much of anything else – which is OK because why would you want anything else? It’s very very violent – but absurdly so – so much so that it’s actually pretty funny – much like the Itchy & Scratchy cartoons from The Simpsons. PLANET TERROR defies logic. When you watch it, if you try to apply physical logic to anything happening on screen, you will certainly lose your grip on reality and may go completely mad. Not even movie logic can be applied here, not even grind house logic works – only Rodriguez logic exists. I think this is what helps viewers deal with the totally bizarre images on the screen.

PLANET TERROR is the “fun-er” of the two movies. It’s just jam-packed with impossible images and funny dialog. This is the movie that has the missing reel of film. The resulting abrupt disconnect provides one of the best sight gags in the movie. One other memorable sight gag occurs during a romantic interlude and involves a wooden table leg (don’t go there – not what you’re thinking!). I think that the enduring legacy of this film will be the still photo shown above. To me, there is no greater iconic image in the history of cinema than that of Rose McGowan standing in profile, wearing a tube-top and sporting a machine-gun leg. Then again, that’s just me.

To recap. Here’s the top 10 reasons why I liked the two GRINDHOUSE movies: DEATH PROOF and PLANET TERROR.

1. Rose McGowan standing in profile, wearing a tube-top and sporting a machine-gun leg.
2. You don’t have to watch both together, as a double feature. With the magic of two separate movies on two separate DVD’s, you can watch them in any order and at any time you want.
3. It performs a vital public service by promoting the importance of the seat belt law.
4. Fergie’s in it, and Bruce Willis too – although not at the same time.
5. It features the best barbecue in Texas. That’s got to be good, doesn’t it?
6. Bruce Willis says he shot Osama and I believe him. So, the troops can come home now, right?
7. Did I mention Rose McGowan standing in profile, wearing a tube-top and sporting a machine-gun leg?
8. If you remove any restrictions that you have to follow some kind of logic, all new possibilities open up for you. For example, the same gun that chips some splinters out of a door jamb in one instance can knock down a brick wall in a fiery blast a moment later. Another example: Rose McGowan can shoot her leg-gun (how does she pull the trigger? - No, no! Mustn’t use logic! Logic, bad.). She can do this while standing on one leg and blow a door out with the blast ………without any apparent recoil.
9. DEATH PROOF: Fast cars ……..faster women ………and Kurt Russell.
10. If you can actually “death proof” a car, why doesn’t everybody have one. Then everybody can “bumper-car” their way to work in the morning. Oh wait – they do that anyway.

As a double feature, GRINDHOUSE makes the IMDB top 250 at #149, between The Princess Bride and Brief Encounter.

DEATH PROOF
PLANET TERROR
Double feature or one-at-a-time – it’s all good.
Enjoy.

view Death Proof trailer

view Planet Terror trailer

In the spirit of the Halloween season, you may be in the mood for for a scary movie or two this week. Although not entirely necessary – somehow watching Lassie while dressed as a ghoul and eating peeled grapes done up to look like eyeballs, just doesn’t cut it. So here’s a quick post to make a few recommendations. I apologize, in advance, if i neglect to list your favorite scary movie.

FIRST – the criteria:

1. I don’t want to be grossed out – I want to be scared.
2. I don’t go in for the new generation of “torture porn”. I don’t want to be disturbed – I want to be scared.
3. I don’t mind being just slightly grossed out or somewhat disturbed if I’m also a little scared.
4. You know what wouldn’t be so bad? – if there’s a little comedy relief in there somewhere – as long as it doesn’t interfere with me being scared.
5. If a movie isn’t going to scare me, it should, at least, spook me.
6. Startling me – doesn’t count!
7. If a movie could be funny AND creepy – at the same time – now THAT would be something.
8. In the future, there should be a technology that makes all the characters in the movie look like you and your friends. Think of the possibilities. (Do I have to spell it out?)
9. #8 has absolutely nothing to do with the criteria for choosing scary movies for Halloween.
10. I don’t want to be blatantly obvious by recommending the film Halloween for Halloween.

SECOND – the movies:

The Changeling: Perhaps the scariest and eeriest ghost movie ever. You never see the ghost, just boatloads of creepy atmosphere.

The Lost Skeleton of Cadavra: Strictly for laughs, it’s reminiscent of an earlier time where you might have been scared of a movie like this.

Shaun of the Dead: If you’re going to have zombies – you might as well make them amusing. This relate to somewhat to criteria #4.

Little Otik: Scary AND disturbing AND funny all at the same time! How about that.

Audition: Horror film directors like Rob Zombie, Wes Craven, John Landis, and others, all agree – Audition is one bad-ass movie – maybe a little too creepy.

The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari: Great spooky and creepy movie from the silent film era. Don’t be put off by silent movies enough to miss this one.

May: Creepy creepy creepy – funny funny funny – creepy – disturbing – funny.

Bubba Ho-Tep: Elvis and JFK team up to battle an evil Egyptian mummy. Need I say more?

Three Extremes: A collection of three 40 min. stories from three different Asian horror masters. These guys know how to push the right buttons on the creepy meter.

Army of Darkness: Ash, from the Evil Dead movies, is transported to the 1300’s to fight the army of the dead. It has perhaps the most quotable of all horror movies – then again, it’s not really a “horror” movie.

Grindhouse: Death Proof /Planet Terror: More on these two movies in a future post.

Scream: Hip dialog with lots of inside references. A must for horror movie buffs.

And, of course, you can’t go wrong with the classics:

Psycho: The granddaddy of all scary movies stands the test of time. If you’ve never seen this film, do it now – preferably not alone.

The Shining: Gothic horror as only Stanley Kubrick can do it. Based on a novel by Stephen King.

Invasion of the Body Snatchers: The 1978 version of this film is effectively creepy and has one of the all-time greatest endings.

The Thing: More of a psychological thriller than a horror movie – but it is scary – and so makes this list.

This week’s movie:
PLAYTIME

A comedy of epic proportions!

The people who put up the money to make movies generally only amass a huge budget for action movies, or war epics, or star-studded thrillers, or science fiction, or FX extravaganzas. They generally don’t throw big bucks at comedies. That’s why French film-maker and actor Jacques Tati put up his own money to make Playtime exactly the way he wanted it. The result is probably the greatest biggest most ambitious most thought provoking ……..and funniest comedy of all time. But let me explain a little, because everybody has a different idea of what’s funny.

This is not the crude Porky’s – American Pie – the girl gets her top ripped off and then some poor schmo ends up eating poop – kind of funny. It’s also not the witty Tracey & Hepburn or sophisticated Some Like it Hot kind of funny. It’s not even the kind of dialog-driven intellectual give and take between two people where they talk about a variety of topics and the comedy arises from the juxtaposition of both mundane and absurd content, all with an underlying theme stretching the arc of the film and which is either resolved – or at least better understood by the end – such as in the similar (sarcasm) films Clerks and My Dinner With Andre.

Most comedies derive their laughs from dialog. Shoot out those one-liners, two-liners – certainly not more than three-liners. Some of it is situation comedy where they set up a thing where the characters misinterpret something and go through the movie completely clueless – hilarity ensues. In PLAY TIME, there’s practically no dialog, it isn’t necessary. Instead, the comedy (as well as other things – awe, social observation, etc.) is physical – or at least, visual. This put PLAY TIME on the same footing as say Charlie Chaplin’s Modern Times (a FranksFilms favorite), or the films of Buster Keaton. Jacques Tati was indeed the Charlie Chaplin of his day – but PLAY TIME is in no way, a silent film. For one thing, it was released in 1967. Secondly, it far surpasses most movies in sheer visual scope. There are only a small handful of films that transcend the visual medium, that transcends its own genre to deliver a film-maker’s artistic vision – this is one of them.

“But Frank, why should I see it? It sounds pretentious! What if I don’t like it?”

No guarantees, but here are a few things to consider.

1. Cinephiles (film nuts, like me) will tell you that the only way to really see this film is on the big screen in the theatre (Cinephiles always use the “..re” spelling in stead of the “.er” spelling as in theater. That’s how you know they’re Cinephiles.) That’s because there aren’t a lot of close-ups. Most, if not all, of the camera work is in long shots, back from the main action, with lots of stuff going on on the screen – and you need a big screen to get it all in. While this is true in principle, I do believe that it’s no longer playing in the theatres (or theaters for that matter). However, with the proliferation of large screen plasma and LCD televisions, it’s not bad. I, myself, recently watched it on my 28 year old – nowhere near being flat screened – tiny CRT television, and enjoyed it just fine.
2. The film was recently restored and released on DVD as part of the Criterion Collection. They did an excellent job revitalizing the color and sound track. Pass up the older VHS version and look for the DVD.
3. Being an older movie, local video rental stores may not carry it (mine doesn’t). You may find it at your local library (I did). If not, the most on-line sources carry it.
4. Don’t confuse this with the 1994 film, also called Play Time. You may see more than you bargained for.
5. Like Chaplin’s “Modern Times”, it portrays people trying to navigate a modern technological world.
6. The film takes place in Paris – but this is not the real Paris. Tati constructed a replica of Paris on his movie set at huge cost. It is the essence of Paris – actually of any large modern city. In this way, he was able to eliminate the clutter of a real city, and show only those elements necessary for the film (there has never been a cleaner or nicer Paris anywhere). Today, he would have used CGI. In 1967, it had to be built from scratch.
7. There is no equivalent to Jacques Tati today. PLAY TIME was his masterpiece, but it’s not like ordinary films. It has no plot, it has no dialog to speak of, there’s no real narrative. If you start watching this film expecting conventional movie story elements, you may be disappointed. But if you keep an open mind, you won’t soon forget it.
8. If you want to get a better feel for Tati comedy, try some of his other films like Mon oncle, or M. Hulot’s Holiday. Like PLAY TIME they also feature Tati’s alter ego Monsieur Hulot.
9. Scores a 100% on the tomatometer. Not 99% – 100% ! Read some of the critical reviews there.  It’s also one of Steven Jay Schneider’s  “1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die”.
10. You can read film critic, Roger Ebert’s review of PLAYTIME here.
11. As always, Jacques Tati’s films are suitable for the whole family. Even the dog.

You deserve a little PLAY TIME

Enjoy.

view trailer

Movie of the week:

CITY OF GOD

There are neighborhoods in every city where the tour buses don’t go.

I recently came across the following two descriptions of Rio de Janeiro.

“Rio de Janeiro is one of the most beautiful and spectacular cities on the planet. Even the well-traveled individuals will love what the city has to offer. One of the best ways to appreciate the setting is by going up Sugar Loaf Mountain (Pao de Acucar), where you’ll get a fantastic 360 degree view of Rio ……. Cristo Redentor (Christ the Redeemer), elected one of the “New 7 Wonders of the World”. ………. the natural harbour is surrounded by lush, high mountains that meet the sea in the world-famous beaches of Copacabana and Ipanema.”

Then, this one.

“Rio is one of the most violent cities in the world. As of 2007 the homicide rate of the greater metropolitan area stands at nearly 80 victims per week, with the majority of victims falling to homicide, assault, stray bullets or narcoterrorism. In 2001 the murder rate in Rio was 45 for every 100 thousand people and between 1978 and 2000, 49,900 people were killed in Rio. The numbers are comparable with war conflict zones like Baghdad and Kabul. “

It’s tough to comprehend that they’re talking about the same place – but they are. Rio is like that. There are areas (such as downtown and along the waterfront) that are everything the travelogues promise ……..the playground for the rich and famous and the beautiful people. The rest of it is pretty much a hell-hole. A lot of big cities are like this, (e.g. South Chicago, East L.A., Mexico City, and we won’t even talk about Calcutta). The story from this week’s movie, CITY OF GOD, takes place in the not-so-nice part of Rio. “City of God” isn’t an attempt at sarcasm, it’s actually the nickname for that part of the city (like “The Big Apple” or “The Windy City”) – it was probably a nice place once.

Buscape and Lil’Ze grew up together in the same slum of Rio. They each find their own way to survive. Lil’Ze works his way up in the gangs (“works”, in this usage, is a politer way to say “brutalize”), it’s that or get killed. In Rio, you’re either a criminal or a victim. Buscape has only three goals in life, 1. don’t get killed, 2. become a photographer, and 3. become a photographer without getting killed. The story is told from his point of view. It is his real-life story and his photographs on which the movie is based. I suppose I just gave away that he realizes all three of his goals, but there’s no surprise there – you know this from the beginning.

There is a lot of violence in this film. The truly frightening thing is how extremely young children are exposed to and drawn into the violence on a daily basis. I know I’m probably making this sound like a perfectly dreadful film, but it’s not. It’s a terrific film. It’s not entirely without bright spots and without redemption and without hope. It’s scary, it’s funny, it’s exciting, it’s inspiring, it just runs the gamut. Since it’s a true story, it doesn’t have to follow Hollywood plot formulas – good guys can lose – bad guys can win – people needn’t necessarily be saved at the last possible moment – million-to-one shots probably won’t pay off – but they just might. So I will leave you with some last thoughts to convince you to see this film.

1. Ranks #18 in the IMDB top 250, between The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring and The Usual Suspects. So it’s good, right?

2. Score 92% on the tomatometer.

3. Featured in Steven Jay Schneider’s book, “1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die”. You don’t get into heaven unless you’ve seen this film.

4. I talked to someone who recently visited Rio de Janeiro and asked her if it’s as bad as it’s portrayed in the film. She replied, “Worse”

5. It’s in Portuguese with subtitles in various languages – not really a reason to see the film, I understand, but at the same time, not a reason to not see it. Besides, the subtitles ARE in English and they’re a pretty yellow color and usually show up at just the time somebody is talking on the screen.

6. It’s a true story. I know that you can’t always go by that, because I once watched a movie called “Monstroid”, about a giant sea serpent that rises from the ocean to terrorize a small fishing village. In the opening credits, they actually claim that “….this story is based on actual events.” But in CITY OF GOD, it actually is true, not made-up Hollywood true. Not true-ish!

7. The movie was filmed on location in the City of God. This was extraordinarily dangerous mostly because of the shootings and robberies and such.

8. Many of the actors were locals from the neighborhood. They know the street language and local customs. Some of the locals were the real people or were related to the real people portrayed in the film. It all adds a degree of “realness” that shows through the film.

9. I’m not making up #6. They really did claim that it was based on actual events. But as far as this movie goes, you can real film critic, Roger Ebert’s review here.

10. As I said in the beginning, CITY OF GOD is a part of town where the tour buses don’t go ……but maybe they should. It would probably go something like this: “Ladies and gentlemen. My name is ……, and I’ll be your guide today for the Inner City Bus Tour. I’ll ask you to please fasten your seat belts, as we may need to take corners at full speed in case of emergency. I must also remind everyone to please keep your arms inside the bus. The bullet-proof glass will not protect any part of you that is not behind it. Please pardon the bumpy ride in this neighborhood, as there are many bodies in the street. Now if you look to your left, you’ll see the ElDiego Courthouse, and one of the oldest buildings in Brazil. Built in 1725, it is an excellent example of classic Iberian architecture brought by the Portuguese to the new world. The sculptures of Christ surrounded by angels were added early in the 1900’s, in the great modernization that made the city what it is today. Unfortunately, the building was fire-bombed last week which is why you’re now looking at a pile of rubble. Now if you would direct your attention to the front of the bus, we have a special treat for you. An actual crime lord has just boarded the bus. This is El Condo and two of his men. He has generously agreed to answer any questions you may have about the neighborhood. You must concede that this degree of authenticity cannot be found on any competing tour program. Now if you would kindly prepare your money and other valuables, the men will relieve you of them. Just another example of the personal service we provide here at Inner City Bus Tours. We do hope that you visit us again the next time you’re in town. And to those of you who do not survive the tour, we look forward to serving you in the next life. Have a nice day…

Visit the CITY OF GOD soon (on video, not for real)

Enjoy.

view trailer

This week’s movie:

AWAY FROM HER

I first remember seeing Julie Christie in François Truffaut’s excellent film, Fahrenheit 451. It came out about the same time as Doctor Zhivago, where most people remember her as Lara, but I didn’t see that film until much later. I’ll always remember her most in that dual role as the bureaucrat’s dutiful wife, and as the idealistic revolutionary. I was young and impressionable, and at twelve years old, I absolutely fell in love with her. And if, in the intervening years, I’ve forgotten why – I’ve only to watch this week’s movie, AWAY FROM HER, to be reminded.

If you’ve heard anything about this film, you’ll be tempted to say, “Isn’t that the movie where Julie Christie gets Alzheimer’s?” Well, yes, you’d be right – but that’s like saying, “Star Wars? Didn’t that have a spaceship in it?” These kind of statements are inadequate to describe what the movie is about. So what is it about? Julie Christie comes down with Alzheimer’s, and worse yet, she quite aware of what’s going down.

Let me try to do a little better. I have an aunt that was recently widowed. She and my uncle were married for almost 60 years. Like any marriage, it had its ups and downs, but they were both totally devoted to each other. They were inseparable. One never went anywhere without the other. They were two halves of one whole. It was a storybook relationship – and I’m sure that someday, someone will write a story about it. They were happy! But when he died, half of her was gone. She didn’t know what to do with herself – she didn’t know HOW to be alone. So now she’s wasting away, her mind retreating into herself and waiting to die. That’s how she deals with her loss. Everybody deals with loss a little differently.

In AWAY FROM HER, Julie Christie comes down with Alzheimer’s. It’s not sudden and she has time to make certain decisions while she’s still herself. Her husband of 40+ years is the one who has to deal with the loss. This is a remarkable film, and it’s remarkable for one reason. The treatment of the actions of this couple is true and realistic. It’s not dumbed down for a mass audience. It’s not a manipulative tear-jerker, and yet it’s powerfully emotion-evoking. That, and it’s adult.

Okay, two things – make this remarkable. Its realistic depiction of a tragic situation, and that it is adult. By that I mean that the main characters are aging. While the majority of movies today feature young gorgeous beautiful actors mainly because they’re great to look at – and if you don’t have a great story or great acting – then at least something ought to be great, this story doesn’t need that because it has a great story with great acting (although Julie Christie is still gorgeous – old – but gorgeous). So for those two reasons, this film is remarkable. That, and the fact that this is a directorial debut from Sarah Polley.

Okay, so that would be three things. Young Canadian actress, Sarah Polley, is best known for playing interesting roles in movies you’ve probably never heard of, such as Last Night, eXistenZ, The Sweet Hereafter, The Weight of Water, and The Secret Life of Words. Every actor wants to direct but most find they’re not very good at it. This is quite an impressive achievement for such a young actress. The real achievement though, is that someone that young can understand what it’s like to be old. Should you care about this? Not necessarily – but it’ll be interesting to see what she does next.

To recap, the three remarkable things about this film are: It’s realistic, it’s adult, and it’s Sarah Polley’s directorial debut. Oh – and also the performances. Okay, four! Four things make this a remarkable film. The performances by each of the main characters are all Oscar-worthy. Not because they’re dramatic – not because they’re NOT dramatic, but because they’re not unnecessarily dramatic. It’s so easy, given the subject matter to turn this into the “Hallmark Channel Alzheimer’s Show”, where a tragedy occurs, everybody cries, everybody cries some more, and then everybody cries one more time, then due to the overwhelming courage of the main character, everyone perseveres – lights come up – not a dry eye in the house. That is the definition of one-dimensional story-telling. AWAY FROM HER peels back layer after layer, as the movie progresses, you discover more and more details about the marriage, and how that affects the way both of the main character deal with the affliction. There may be some tears shed along the way, no doubt, but all eyes should be dry by the end.  It’s a beautiful film that make you feel good about life and stuff – even though a lot of crappy stuff happens.  It scores a 95% on the tomatometer, and although it’s too new to have appeared in Steven Jay Schneider’s book, “1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die”, it does appear in (let’s see – I think this is the 147th review I’ve written so far) “FranksFilms 147 Must-See Movies (so far)”.

Alzheimer’s is a terrible affliction, but if I have to start losing my memory, I want want it to be somewhat selective.  Here is a list of the top ten things I hope to forget if I ever come down with Alzheimer’s.

1. The 5th grade. Yes, I have my reasons – I don’t want to get into it.
2. The 6th grade. Ditto.
3. How to drive. If I never have to drive again, I wouldn’t complain.
4. Everybody’s birthday. I’m just not good at shopping, and I need a good excuse.
5. I would like to forget that I saw Memento, and Pleasantville, and some of my other favorite movies. That way, I can enjoy watching them again for the first time.
6. I would like to forget that I saw Supernova and Battlefield Earth and some other of my least favorite movies – except that I would probably end up watching them again.
7. The guitar chords to all the songs that I hate but people are always wanting me to play. The problem with that however, is that I may also forget that I hate them and have to learn them all over again.
8. I forgot what I was going to write for #8.
9. To pay taxes – and have a good excuse for it.
10. Fahgettaboutit!

Get AWAY FROM HER (you cad!)

and Enjoy.

view trailer