Goliath wrote:@ PixarFan: Have you never seen an Oliver Stone movie?
Wow, Lazario, these lists keep coming fast! I do enjoy reading everybody's opinions and, unlike you, I've been shocked a few times reading the scores.
I try to do this twice a week. Once every 3-3.5 days.
You're right, I'm definitely not shocked. I debated JPA a few times in the Last Movie Watched threads and that braced me for his opinions here.
I actually haven't seen an Oliver Stone movie yet either. Though I have caught clips of both Born on the 4th and Natural Born Killers on TV/YouTube and am now
very hot to see the latter. Though I also know that's not going to be an easy pill to swallow.
Goliath wrote:The Exorcist (1973)
I turned this off pretty quickly. Not out of boredom or lack of interest, but because it was too much. Yes, I know I will live in infamy as a film scholar for admitting this, but it was too upsetting. I had convinced myself that it was "just a movie" and that you could see it was a bad puppet instead of a real girl, but whenever I watch a movie, I get so caught up in it... No, this was much too disturbing. I don't care if people will laugh at me for admitting this.
Actually, I find it highly refreshing that someone who isn't especially religious could be so affected by the movie. I'm almost afraid to say this, but- I wasn't disturbed by this at age 10 (which would have been 1992). Might make me look like a brick, but not at all. I just saw so many parodies first.
WARNING:
A few instances of explicit language below.
Roman Polanski:
The Tenant (1976) - 2
I'm so glad that I'm the only one commenting here who has seen this movie. It's by far one of his most acclaimed works and probably the #1 movie Criterion don't have yet and would kill to have on their docket. Well, I made sure to snag a copy for $5 in the WalMart bargain bins (I used to shop there- when their bargain bins used to have titles that interested me, I don't anymore). Boy did I feel as though I'd be had. Boring doesn't even begin to describe this. Pointless is another word that comes to mind. Also, what do you call it when you can't stand the fact that the director is also the star of the movie? If he's trying to portray the dullest human on the entire planet, he succeeded. Is this movie trying to disturb us or numb us? Again, it succeeds on the second one.
Rosemary's Baby (1968) - 10
The greatest horror film ever made. If I went into details, I'd be here all day.
Repulsion (1965) - 9
The rape scenes were repetitive and the very last scene - the minute or two with the rest of the people in the building coming into the room to stare at her - is really the same as the one in The Tenant (but the reason I gave that film a 2 is that that scene is actually good) which I think did it better. But the rest of the movie is fascinating and highly satisfying. Other people can analyze psychological films but I rate them based on how much I was able to become sucked into them. This is definitely an effective hoover.
-
John Waters:
Cecil B. DeMented (2000) - 6
Not at all bad. Just: again underwhelming for what Waters can really deliver. Like Pecker, Cecil is one of the weakest characters in the film (much weaker) and though Stephen Dorff really gets the joke (unlike Edward Furlong's unbelievably serious and strained performance), he lacks menace and true dementia. He tries to make up for what he lacks in comic darkness by screaming with that still youthful voice. He's a great screamer, but his costume has more character than he does. The rest of the cast fare much better. Especially(!!) Maggie Gyllenhaal (who steals the show in every scene she talks in) as a cutesy, bubbly Satanist, Adrian Grenier as an addict who does every illegal drug he can get his hands on, Michael Shannon as a gay truck driver, Alicia Witt - who goes a bit over the top in her bid to try shattering her 90's good-girl image but is also fully committed and seemingly tireless, Jack Noseworthy (the grunge-rocking son of The Dittmeyers' in The Brady Bunch Movie) as a straight hair stylist, and, the have-to-be-seen-to-be-believed Harriet Dodge as one seriously pissed off lesbian (even Susan Lowe's Mole McHenry would be terrified).
Pecker (1998) - 6.5
I believe I saw this for the first time on Thanksgiving weekend- 2000. And that's what this movie was made for. Something to watch while munching on turkey (the vanilla of meats) or reclining on the sofa in your grandparents' dimly lit living room. Is Waters'
trying to pad down his shock past? Apparently not- there's lots of uncomfortable moments here. Unfortunately- they don't have any social bite to them. Waters has plain run out of people to gut, so he turns in this lazy mockery of New York art culture. With some trade strippers tea-bagging and homeless bums swearing in the street thrown in for good measure. Poor Mink Stole and Bess Armstrong are really sent to the Ugly Expert (what is with this town's obsession for Quaker Chicks?). Christina Ricci - like Mink and Bess - is highly boring. So, it's up to the rest of Serial Mom's carry-overs Patricia Hearst, Tim Caggiano, and Scott Morgan to make up for them. But, since it's really a family movie, Edward Furlong and his family are the main point. He's... actually rather unbelievable as the character, but the rest of the family are great: mother (Mary Kay Place), sisters (Lauren Hulsey and Martha Plimpton- from The Goonies), and especially the father and grandmother (Mark Joy and Jean Schertler). Of course, they mostly play the parts too seriously. The New York scenes are, naturally, the best. The small town scenes... not so much.
Serial Mom (1994) - 9.5
Not Waters' most complete epic, but an epic nonetheless. An absolute masterpiece (I only took a-half point off for the gross-out closeup of the snot wad on the baby's head) and a highly ambitious, knee-slappingly entertaining satire of American Celebrity-Criminal Culture. From the media end, as opposed to Female Trouble's well-thought up but poorly executed underground nightclub scene (and I mean scene as in trend). And this time, HBO/Savoy gave Waters a budget (something like $10 million, I believe he said in the Pecker commentary)... And: Kathleen Turner. Not that it's that big a shock after Tab Hunter and Johnny Depp, but she turns in what is without-doubt the most important and hugest Dreamland performance since Divine in Pink Flamingos (only problem: sometimes her voice is too deep when she doesn't mean it to be). Just an absolutely stunning supporting cast: Sam Waterston, Matthew Lillard, Suzanne Somers, Joan Rivers, Ricki Lake, Traci Lords, and one of my favorite rock bands- L7. The dialogue is TO DIE FOR! The jokes are hilarious. The sense of outrageousness is so finely tuned: this is Waters' best comedy. And, refreshingly (since he's a fan of Hershell Gordon Lewis, The Evil Dead, George Romero, etc), there's a wonderful supply of gore and creative death scenes. The leg-of-lamb scene being the funniest and the telephone booth scene being the best (imo). A must-see black comedy.
Cry-Baby (1990) - 2
Wow: when Waters does something new, he always has to do it a second time right away, and it's always inferior. It's an utter chore to sit through. The only real novelty of the flick: the "bad" kids are really good and the "good" kids are so unbelievably annoying and sickening. Nobody really stood out- except by their costumes. Ricki Lake was boring (a first in Waters' films). Traci Lords was wasted. The dialogue wasn't anywhere near as funny as it should be. And I truly didn't like Depp's character. The music was terrible and the dance sequences were beyond painful. The 2 is for Patricia "Patty" Hearst as Traci's mom, "Hatchet-Face"s make-up, and the outdoor sets- some of them were great. Everything else about this movie was a write-off.
Hairspray (1988) - 9
A feel-good movie about dancing and an unrealistic 60's vision of racial harmony. It isn't ambitious but it's a lot of fun. The songs are great, there's a lot of style, the characters are likable enough (both the good and bad people). A guaranteed good time.
Polyester (1981) - 8.5
Waters' first mainstream movie. Benefits from a formal cast (most of Waters' regulars are given very small roles as nuns, church singers, and patrons in a grocery store), greatly improved cinematography, original music, and a better story than any of his previous movies. Especially Female Trouble, which could be seen as a Douglas Sirk satire / parody. This is much closer, much funnier, and more uproarious. The only real problem is the ending, where the story goes completely haywire. Think that's not possible? Watch it and see. Anyway, the dialogue is some of Waters' best. Especially Lulu's anti-pregnancy rants: "I'm getting an abortion and I can't wait!" "I can feel it inside me like cancer- getting bigger and bigger like The Blob. One day, it'll rip me open. And it'll be there in my life: ready to rob me of every bit of fun I deserve to have!"
Desperate Living (1977) - 5.5
As another follow-up to Pink Flamingos, this one is noteworthy for having Waters' first story and a sick fairy tale theme. The Cinderella story of a black lesbian maid who eventually kills both her employers and a war film about a Princess, the victim of germ warfare, who is avenged by the citizens of the kingdom of Mortville after the evil Queen Carlotta forces them to put their clothes on backwards. Must be seen to be believed. Divine is missing, but Mink Stone (as usual) is a holy HOOT as insane housewife Peggy Gravel ("Trying to kill me in my OWN HOME! Don't tell
me I don't know what Vietnam is like!!"). Nastier than Female Trouble, and yet, less gross and more arty (as Waters' himself points out on the audio commentary during the scene where Liz Renay kills her husband). Great costume design and sets.
Female Trouble (1974) - 4
Since it pretty much stars everyone from Pink Flamingos, it's worth noting that it feels too much like a sequel. With that in mind, none of the characters are improvements. If anything- Divine's second incarnation of a star criminal is just not as believable as the character from Pink Flamingos. The dialogue is every bit as clever and interesting, but it's just a matter of: what felt new? Aunt Ida (and her crusade to turn her gross straight hippie son gay) and Taffy. That's it. Edith Massey is horrendous as Aunt Ida (best heard in the Thunderpuss Remix of a quote montage from the movie - I want to YouTube link you but there's full nudity in the clip). Mink Stole easily steals the show as teenage-Taffy, the only fun character in the movie. The first 10 minutes (that Christmas tree scene is one of the most wonderfully surreal and anarchic scenes in comedy history - if this is why I sat through Imitation of Life, finally I'm grateful) and the trial-jail-electric chair ending are fantastic, though.
Pink Flamingos (1972) - 10
One of the worst films ever made. But that's the point. The ultimate midnight movie. A highly clever journey into creative depravity. Truly one of a kind. Which is why I was never As in the mood for Female Trouble or Desperate Living afterward. This one just goes
all the way.
-
Paul Verhoeven:
Basic Instinct (1992) - 7 (Rating based on R-rated cut)
I haven't seen the world-infamous Showgirls yet and, so, I can't speak for writer Joe Eszterhas (who some have actually called a genius of some sort). But this is a highly visually stimulating film (my #1 thing). It's a dream in widescreen- no other way to put it. Breath-taking. Jerry Goldsmith's music score is also insanely beautiful. As for the real meat-&-potatoes: the mind-fucking story... it's both clever and kinda childish at the same time. The male characters are all idiots and the women are really sophisticated and cunning. Which of course makes the claims of sexism against the movie fairly ironic. Sharon Stone's character is basically using the man's rules in a male-ruled system to prey upon... men. So, obviously, the fact that she does anything mean or nasty makes her a target of certain feminists. At the same time, the film drummed up some anger from the gay community as well who were unhappy with the lesbian character. I, personally, don't see it. If anything makes her the way she is (all the people Stone's character socializes with are killers of one sort or another), it's her history of abuse. The story is actually as good as all the top-notch technical and creative production elements. But, it's the characters that are maybe the one significant problem. Most of them couldn't be more obvious pawns in Stone's game. Especially all the cops, agents, detectives, etc- the law enforcement side. It's better than just a superficial, attractive mystery. Though it can certainly be enjoyed just for that.
Total Recall (1990) - 7
I still love the old 80's-early 90's Arnold Schwarzenegger movies. Whether it be for the ridiculous characters he plays or the dizzying heights of absurdist violence, a pre-Last Action Hero Ahhnold film is never boring. This one is mostly known for the fighting scenes. Of course, in a film about a team of hired hitmen trying to kill him and chasing him all over the various planets in the solar system... all the fighting scenes are, unlike Kindergarten Cop, really killing scenes. This one tries to be Videodrome and can't, but for shock value- it's actually pretty silly (the Johnny Cab scenes are a highlight, and who could ever forget "Twoooo...weeks! Twoooooo...weeks!"?) and easily out-rages, out-sleazes, and out-chuckles Back to the Future Part II. The last 35 or so minutes drag a lot, but up 'til that point- it's more fun than this stuff has any right to be. Stunning visual design, as usual from Verhoeven. Still looks incredible.
-
William Friedkin:
The Exorcist (1973) - 8
I usually hate Hollywood drama. They all try for reality and I never feel it. But this is legitimate right here. These filmmakers wanted to tell a story with very emotional human suffering and you believe Ellen Burstyn's sadness and desperation. If it weren't for the, also high quality, shock scenes- this would fail to be a horror film. Remarkably well-shot, visually. Good atmosphere and excellent mood. It's really amazing to see that, truly, most of the mood is set with sound design. Little music at all. Whispering, wheezing, and whistling (perhaps possessed-Regan was an inspiration for Helena Markos, aka: the Directress, in Suspiria), mostly. For me, the movie is greatly enhanced by a couple of scenes in the extended 2000-theatrical version of the film, namely: the doctor's visit (with Ritalin discussion) and Chris in the attic trying to find out what's making the noise. The 2 points subtracted are due to the ultra-long and boring Iraq opening.
-
John Landis:
Masters of Horror: Family (2006) - 5
Conceptually strong. No lack for ideas. But nearly everything about it is boring or underwhelming. The violence has no punch (if you've seen it: the pun is intended). The images have no grostesque quality to them (just incredibly clean bones with black wires). CGI. The characters are dull. As is the music and, frankly, the look of everything. Which means- the bulk of the work is on the actors. George Wendt is only okay. Matt Keeslar might as well not even be there. The killer's "family" are all lame. Which should leave you wondering: what's up with the 5? In case any Dawson's Creek fans are reading this- the reason for the 5 is Meredith Monroe (aka- the skinny blonde chick who was friends with Kerr Smith). She's excellent as a believably irritated (and irritating) smoking housewife. No...I mean: she smokes constantly. For that, I've noticed in life - observing smokers, as I know too many of them - that there's a certain quality they have. She's got it. And yet, she snaps out of it in the show/movie's other saving grace: jump cuts into the killer's bizarre fantasies of her startling aggressiveness and sexual forwardness. What kind of holy man is this?
Masters of Horror: Deer Woman (2005) - 5.5
A little better than Family because of several cheap but classic and always welcomed animal gags. Don't come in expecting to be scared. Expect extraordinarily weak characterization and boring performances - except for, another adorable blonde: Sonja Bennett, playing a much improved version of the unbelievably annoying Abby (Pauley Perrette) from NCIS. But, it looks and sounds amazing- for a TV production. The monster is very feminist: only killing dumb, horny guys, or attacking people who won't stop following her. Stay away from her and you'll be totally safe. It's a fairly lively show/movie anyway, when it's not inside office buildings- which it is a good 9-minute chunk at least (of the hour's running time). But, again, the deer gags are funny. (At one point, Landis wanted the monster to grow into a giant killer deer, ala- Mighty Morphin Power Rangers, but his son - also the screenwriter - shot him down.)
Innocent Blood (1992) - 9.5
I've heard some talk about the story being flawed because it's a gangster film, with all the obvious Italian stereotypes that go with it, that takes place in Pittsburgh. I clearly don't know anything about the mafia, and I freaking loved this movie. Of course, it's not a serious film about mob crimes, etc. It's a horror film about a vampire who preys upon gangsters because they're so stupid, but unfortunately she lets one of her victims go and re-produce before she has time to kill him. That guy is Robert Loggia in pre-Lost Highway psycho mode: a lot more calculated, maniacal, even-handed, and threatening. This movie might have been scarier if she hadn't cared, but she's a very moral and tidy vampire who only feeds on bad guys and always cleans up after herself. Instead, it's a redemption love story about the guilt-ridden, burnt-out hunky cop (an excellent performance by Anthony LaPaglia) whose way she gets in by feeding on the mob boss he's trying to arrest. Well, it's not love so much as an intimate romance that turns sensual with bondage and several reversals on bottom and top positions. But it's an excellent comedy and a relentlessly fun action-thriller with a KILLER cast, some excellent special effects sequences (Don Rickles' ashy, cigarette-y hospital meltdown especially) as well as some bad, great camerawork, warm music, and a few genuinely disturbing scenes- some intended to be funny (Frank Oz's cameo, especially). One of the most criminally (no pun intended) underrated Hollywood comedies ever made. And a wickedly entertaining horror film. Dig the cameos! : master of Italian horror
Dario Argento (Suspiria, Deep Red, Tenebre, Opera), Sam Raimi (The Evil Dead), Linnea Quigley (The Return of the Living Dead), and others.
Michael Jackson music video - "Black or White" (1991) - 4.5
If you've seen it, you've seen it. I just had to stop off and say the Macaulay Culkin intro is not the same as the audio on the actual song / CD. It's, in fact, weaker.
Oscar (1991) - 8.5
John Landis was one of the screenwriters on one of my favorite films of all-time, Clue. But he didn't direct it. This is the Clue he directed- an early-1900's America-set spoof of soap operas / morning-TV melodramas, every bit as clever and funny, an amazing cast (everyone else's favorite: Chazz Palminteri; my favorite: split between Peter Riegert and Kurtwood Smith), energetic music. It's a little too long, and by the time Linda Grey walks in- I think everyone's ready for it to be over (I don't know what they were trying to do by sticking the leftover "you had a child with the new MAID!?" more than 20 minutes after the whole "Who's Nora?"/"Our maid!"/"EX-maid!"/"You fired the maid?!" (...) rapidfire, where it belonged). Too many things I could say here, but I just want to focus on one thing. I stilll haven't figured out the bag situation; which, if you get into this movie like I did, will drive you insane. Where the HELL did the other bag go? Did Nora have both the Money Bag and the Jewels' Bag at the end of the movie? If she knew the Money Bag wasn't hers when she had it in "The Kaiser"s car... why did she bring BACK the Underwear Bag, since that was the one she was trying to get??? As the movie stands right now, she picked up the Money Bag by mistake, brought it back, then "The Kaiser" drove back a 2nd time and took it again from Aldo. So... now, the Money Bag is at her new place. It must be, because otherwise it's vanished into thin air. However, for some reason, he drives back a 3rd time- I know Snaps ordered him to, but instead of having the Money Bag, Nora has the Underwear Bag and then just STEALS the Jewels' Bag, leaving the Underwear Bag in its' place. I think the big problem is: who drove her? If it was the German guy, he knows she already has the Money Bag. She needs the Underwear Bag, which she already has. Good luck following that bit. The whole movie is up on YouTube.
Coming to America (1988) - 7 (TV version, so some of it was edited)
I didn't laugh, but likability is the most important thing for me and I wasn't able to change the channel. Had to find out what happened. I liked it and it was just smart enough. Good acting. But- I didn't like the famous barbershop scene at all.
¡Three Amigos! (1986) - 6.5
A lot of embarrassing moments (
especially the "My Little Buttercup" scene) and dud gags, jokes, etc. But I enjoyed it anyway. Mostly for the production values. And I remember several scenes which I liked (Chevy Chase having water when the other guys didn't, the singing bush, and the animals during the moonlight song sequence). I am definitely due for a re-watch (is the DVD out of print?). Rating could change if I ever get to see it again.
(Michael Jackson's) Thriller (1983) - 8
The last time I saw it was on YouTube, in terrible quality. When I know Vevo has changed that, I'll watch it again. Scared me TO DEATH as a kid!!! Especially the scene in the old house.
Twilight Zone: The Movie (1983) - 7
JPA is right- Landis's and Spielberg's sections of the movie blow. I can't even watch the Dan Aykroyd intro scene anymore. But Joe Dante easily redeems it with the 3rd segment, and George Miller KNOCKS IT OUT OF THE PARK with the John Lithgow plane story. The tension here is better than Poltergeist!
An American Werewolf in London (1981) - 7.5
I've always loved this movie. But I've seen it 9 or 10 times, at least. It wears down on re-watches. It's intense, has great mood (all great horror movies must have at least one amazing creepy scene: for me, it's the Jack and David scene on the couch), and most important to me- it isn't short on ideas. It's a zombie film as well as a werewolf film, dips into Nightmare on Elm Street territory years before that film was made, the porno theater scene is so much fun (rather than sleazy, like Innocent Blood's pointless strip club stuff- one of that film's only flaws), it actually uses some British humor to balance out the American frat guy stuff left over from Animal House (which starts to rear its' idiotic head in the opening dialogue scene), and I liked the ending. Some people really hate its' abruptness- but I've seen very few movies daring enough to do something like that (and it minimizes the tragedy angle of the source material- Universal's Wolf Man and the whole "oh please, watch me and make sure I don't become a monster and hurt people!" thing inherent in the human-monster subgenre of horror). And, of course, big points for the unapologetic and surprising (from a straight director) abundance of male nudity. Anyone else will go on and on about the special effects and the transformation scene- but my thing is camerawork and music. Creepiness and atmosphere. This movie sacrifices some of it for pop / rock music (Credence Clearwater Revival, Van Morrison, like- 2 or 3 versions of "Blue Moon," etc) tunes. Is the monster scary? When you see it- no. When you don't see it- YES! As for the famous transformation scene, I've always found it a complete failure (save for the nudity, naturally). It was ugly, loud, and not scary. Not cinematic. More like: homework. Get out your pad and pen and take notes. I felt nothing watching it.
Animal House (1978) - 3.5
Didn't laugh. Wasn't very amused. And I don't care for John Belushi. But at least it's better than Porky's (R.I.P., Bob, but- what
HAPPENED to you...?!).
-
James L. Brooks:
Terms of Endearment (1983) - 6.5
Don't remember almost anything about it. Except that it at least stirred some emotions. Mostly in the scene toward the end where... Shirley McLaine(?) slaps the kid. I cheered when Roman Polanski slapped the kid in The Tenant (it's only amusing the first time you see it), this one I felt a little more uncomfortable about.
-
Tim Burton:
Corpse Bride (2005) - 5
Count me as one of the people who was not amused. I didn't care for the story. I was bored by the look of it. I liked Nightmare Before Christmas for a year and then, I quickly ran out of passion for it. There were parts of it that started to get me but, then I think the musical aspect kicked in and I went:
ulch... Typical for the new-millennium: lots of flash, no substance.
Charlie and the Chocolate Factory (2005) - 5
Speaking of musical numbers... When you see a bad parody of something, you have an urge to say it indicates how bad the original is too. I'm of course talking about wacko Crispin Glover's little nut-cracker suite from Epic Movie. And with this movie, I'm inclined to say: bad source material begs for bad parodies. And this movie is awful. Points for Johnny Depp's Carol Burnett-isms, and of course it's an expensive and luscious movie. But, it also marks perhaps the first time a really stylish movie turned me off. Not only does it lack the darkness of the 1971 version, but it's full of agonizing musical numbers- the movie is disturbing for the wrong reasons. It's nauseating. It's OBNOXIOUS as hell. And all the money in the world can't buy character sympathy or entertainment value. The kids are way too bland, which of course makes the dispatching scenes all the more unpleasant. I'm sorry, but nobody can replace Julie Dawn Cole. And zero of Depp's lines come off as well as at least 4 classic Gene Wilder readings (especially "there's going to be a lot of garbage today"). I'd give it a 3 for raping my childhood, but some of the additions were okay. Especially Christopher Lee and Missi Pyle (who actually gives lookalike Bridgette Wilson a bit of a run for her money).
Sleepy Hollow (1999) - 7.5
6 years older than Charlie, yet it looks twice as good. This is style done right! It's also perhaps the best period horror film of the 90's. It never slows down (though you can go make a sandwich during the middle section - Ichabod and Katrina's romance - and not miss anything). I just can't say it enough / say it once and drop it: this looks so good! Since everyone else will go on about Depp, I just want to say I was most impressed by Miranda Richardson- who is the only one riding that R-rating for all its' worth. Speaking of which, this is so PG-13 it's not even funny. I've only ever half-love the movie. Because there's little creativity in the decapitations and Casper Van Dien could never improve upon or match Disney's Brom Bones. But there are a lot of great touches here and there.
Ed Wood (1994) - 5
Obviously, if I saw it again, I could change my mind. But I was bored stiff. Not that I care that much about being bored. My cardinal movie sin isn't boredom, it's badness. And this was well-made. Just... boring.
Batman Returns (1992) - 8
Too long (the group fighting scenes and endless explosions are the biggest flaw in general) and very depressing, but unlike so many strange horror films and psychological thrillers- I actually really felt sympathy for the "bad guys." Not Christopher Walken, of course. He was George W. Bush-evil. But, Michelle Pfeiffer's and Danny DeVito's characters. Like in the first film, Batman's love interest is the inside of Michael Keaton's hollow hero. So, it's no surprise that she's the best thing about the movie. Not only does she go all out in the physicality, but she just nails the many ice-cold one-liners. Want to know how to do one-liners, Hollywood? Look at Pfeiffer! DeVito is a little trickier, because he uses loudness a few too many times to emphasize deviousness instead of just letting the costume and makeup do all the work; his best moments are in the cave (especially the death scene and the moment where he has to throw Walken's past in his face), where if he has to scream- at least his voice travels and echoes.
Edward Scissorhands (1990) - 10
Emotionally draining. Touching. Tragic. Relentlessly, painfully beautiful. Epic. Makes me cry. Wynona Ryder's best performance, easily. Perhaps Depp's best as well (though that's hard to say since he's so heavily made up). I can only watch this once every 7 or so years because it's so powerful. One last thing- I noticed there's a real John Waters' influence to the look of the movie. It's hard to explain, but: see Polyester. In turn, I think the look of this film's town (along with Waters' Cry-Baby) influenced the ultra-weird Meet the Applegates (sort of the test-run for Third Rock from the Sun) (directed by Heathers' Michael Lehmann).
Batman (1989) - 9.5
I gather the temptation for most people is to say Tim Burton's real classics are Beetlejuice and Edward Scissorhands (stopped right there, there's a lot to that theory) and that's enough for one director - so, why shouldn't we just give the Best Batman Award to Christopher Nolan. Well... I don't
just give anything to anyone. And in the new-millennium, cinema quality has so sold itself out for quantity, that of course Nolan's okay-at-best films look like masterpieces. Well, kiddies, 20 years ago- Tim Burton actually made films as good as the hype so much worthless new-millennium factory product gets. Burton's Batman actually earns every bit of praise it ever received, and somehow, manages to still come out underrated. After all the Adam West silliness, Michael Keaton's soulless drone is refreshing. Kim Basinger is a knockout who isn't a zombie. And... Jack Nicholson... After his disastrous performances in The Shining (I know no one else agrees, but I'm right- they're wrong) and The Witches of Eastwick (oh, the over-the-top sleazebag thing is okay for 1 hour, but hour #2 was torture), here's a character that rewards him for all his insanity. And- more makeup. Obviously, a Tim Burton recurring theme. I loved Nicholson's Joker. No room in my heart for 2 Jokers, sorry. Nicholson's Joker (and I thank the writing, too) isn't just a lousy street criminal with some psychosis and smeared powder on his face. He's an over-the-hill punk with delusions of grandeur
who becomes a beautifully crazed, demented madman with aristocratic, high society tendancies. And DAMN if the camera doesn't know who the star of the show is. All of Burton's Joker's business (yeah, ha-ha, his business is crime) adversaries are shown to be clear inferiors to Nicholson in a way that leaves no questions who will be the victor in every conflict. Which might be another thing leaving viewers puzzled (a puzzled audience member may also be the kind of person who is looking for a more traditional Batman movie), but not me. I've always been overly pleased with the shocking darkness in this movie. Violence is one thing. But the myriad of creative deaths and attack scenes recalls the old Dr. Phibes flicks without taking over the film's thriller-lite tone. And, most importantly, Nicholson's Joker was, as he puts it, "the world's first fully-functioning homicidal artist." That idea alone was edgy for PG-13 (and I'm shocked Nolan didn't want his film to be R- that's the only way his Joker could be the big badass everyone says he is). Not to mention they were keyed to an aesthetic. Occasionally, Nicholson took this series right into horror- the ultimate sign of awesomeness. He was a real boogeyman who looked more like a clown (instead of Ledger, who looked more like some pathetic professional wrestler trying to butch-up the sport; that's actually kind of a reference to the wrestler Billy Kidman who used to perform in a preppie look and then one day came out with his hair long and scraggly and wearing tattered clothes- white trash to some people seems scarier than a weirdo in a suit, but I think a psycho who looks organized is a little more impressive than one who makes everything up as they go along: both can surprise you, but one can actually build up dread because you know they've come prepared- basically, it's a gun-fight and Ledger brought the knife). And he used Gotham city's own greed and vanity against the people- completely inspired ideas, all around. In a way, he even became a Devil. Everyone we saw him kill had sort of entered a contract with him. The street jerks who lapped up his money like water in a dog's bowl were like Prince Prospero's court of desensitized farts who would do anything for his scraps (reference to: Masque of the Red Death). The business associates (I like to call them that just because they all sat at a conference table and wore suits) actually attended a meeting with him instead of ignoring him outright. Alicia was his kept woman, also taking hand-outs from Grissom. Bob was his right-hand man (I don't want to know what he got out of the deal). And Grissom used Jack to do his dirty work, take the blame for him. But of course, most importantly is that they were all guilty of doing something bad. Which takes the guilt off of us for enjoying seeing people at the TV station fall to their deaths or the stuffy people at the museum keeling over. It was fun. Stiff, but surprisingly fun.
Beetlejuice (1988) - 9
Since Burton takes influence from horror films, it's worth mentioning that 1979's Phantasm and 1985's Re-Animator also had a bone to pick with the business of death in America. This one is my favorite, of course, because it looks at the social implications: you will be waiting on a couch with a number to see a lawyer with her throat slashed, seated between a burnt-black corpse and an alluring woman's severed legs... Why? Because, like life, your death isn't your own. Comforting thought, right? Well, perhaps- if you look at it as a unique literal interpretation of the belief in an afterlife. Unique because it takes the form of a fairly ghastly purgatory, rather than hospital-white heaven or fire-red hell. For the 80's, this rules. The morbid creativity and eccentric imagination are what make the movie special. As well as its' cast- Davis and ABaldwin born to play the 30-something (realistic) Ken and Barbie couple (naive but not treated with disdain, exactly, by the writers), Keaton playing the demonic voice of a person's conscience (you know- the two sides of a person's personality, sitting on either shoulder, giving them advice) in ghost-zombie court jester form, Ryder being the intelligent alienated, cynical teenager with angst but no traceable source from wence it's sprung (years before anyone knew about the dressing-in-black trend, before Roseanne's Darlene or Mtv's Daria), and a veritable who's-who of scummy, but well-heeled and trendily dressed, opportunists looking to make a buck off anyone and anything they can acquire. Further flattering the concept of the movie: would you rather die with a nagging old harpy telling you you can't do anything right (a cinematic incarnation of the sitcom disapproving mother who doles out criticism faster than affection, or another mean movie grandmother- ala, Maggie's mother in The Parent Trap? Your call) and sit on a couch with a witch doctor and his latest victim... or go live with the freaks you
know you can't trust. Oh yeah; AMAZING visual everything. Did this movie win any Oscars for visual effects, cinematography, set-design, costume(s)? Tim Burton was SO ahead of his time!!
Pee-wee's Big Adventure (1985) - 7
On some level, it's so wrong to enjoy the whole Manchild sub-genre of film (and TV) comedy. It's sort of like a none-too-subtle passive way to live out your own second childhood. At least it is when a guy with a routine like Pee-Wee gets his own TV show and becomes a national treasure (until the 90's, when he becomes a guilty treasure). But I think this production really knows there's something wrong with Pee-Wee and chooses not to try and correct it. Which, for the PSA-crazy, Hypocritical-80's, was charming (though, in the 90's, it became flat-out wrong and sad: Clifford, Jack, Tommy Boy, Billy Madison, Forrest Gump... one exception: Mr. Bean). It's just refreshing to see Pee-Wee walk into a biker bar with a look like 'there could be trouble' and walk out with a crowd of admirers, hooting and hollering with him instead of against him. Or hitch a ride with a criminal who looks like he could be a macho psycho, and instead be moved by Pee-Wee's Pollyanna routine to actually adopt him as a wife (in their hoax to fool the cop). It isn't without its' unfortunate moments (is there any way to
not be disturbed by the pool-tub fighting scene?). But the clever and fun ones outnumber those, by far. That and a wonderful supporting cast of characters as well as actors, make this a great experience.
-
Ron Howard:
A Beautiful Mind (2001) - 1
I was the one who posted the critic's negative review on this one. Not a fan. I'll give credit for the money Hollywood put into the movie and that's it. But as someone who usually gets his kicks from low-budget films, that don't impress me much.
Far and Away (1992) - 6.5
Now, this one I liked. Nothing like a historical drama that expects us to get teary-eyed over the trials and tribulations of a prettyboy beefcake. Though I suspect, most of the time, it didn't. I enjoyed it knowing Tom Cruise is not the hero of the people. More appropriately, he's like the Marky Mark of Hollywood (and has the famous pants-dropping and briefs-promoting scenes on his resume to prove it). Did he set any precidents or break any boundaries for onscreen nudity? No (that was Richard Gere and Kevin Bacon's jobs). But, still, I think the film had the right attitude, managed to get made, and I much enjoyed the view in lieu of what we didn't see.
Splash (1984) - 5.5
There are just a lot of movies a person needs to re-watch. But... why? It was an okay movie. And should only be watched if you're in the mood to watch an okay movie. Nothing too memorable about it.
-
Quentin Tarantino:
Jackie Brown (1997) - 9
Everyone else may regard it as a mildly entertaining but weak 90's wannabe-reincarnation of the 70's blaxploitation flicks, I thought this was an emotionally powerful (however laidback) film about something I personally can relate to: feeling like you have nothing to show for your whole life's drudgery, yet- not being ready to give up yet. Pam Grier's performance here is the best thing Tarantino's ever gotten out of an actor. Though she's matched very well by Robert Forster, and yet- the movie never gives them a real romance. Even though it sure takes its' time building feelings between them, they really are equal partners in understanding the crime. From a perspective the "villain," Ordell, cannot. This is one of my all-time favorite dramas, though some of the conflict is not very good. De Niro's whole presence here is kind-of wasted. Fonda isn't that great either, but the two of them together become a strange team that work. The real reason to see this is Grier (who kills in that blue jacket) and Forster. Their scenes and discussions about getting old, doubts / regrets (in symbolic language) is done more matter-of-fact than artistic or dramtic.
Four Rooms (1995) - 7.5
It's a bad movie, especially the 2nd story. But it's also, by far, the best thing I've seen with Robert Rodriguez's name on it. By the end of the 2nd story (which I still kinda liked, despite its' poor dialogue logic), the movie greatly improves. Of course, Tarantino's is last. But, again Rodriguez's is a mini-masterpiece. I still laugh when I merely think of Tim Roth on the phone while the girl screams at him not to call the dead prostitute a whore. The funniest farce I've ever seen. "Did they misbehave?" Not sure who directed the Marisa Tomei / Kathy Griffin scene, which is stuck in-between Rodriguez and Tarantino's stories, but I think it was Tarantino. And bravo, after Pulp Fiction, that he gave Griffin a part worthy of her talent (probably took him as long, a year, to realize how damn funny she is!). Tomei is amazing too. Tarantino's 4th story is good (though Willis's "fucking bitch" rant interrupts the flow for no good reason), the ending is great.
Pulp Fiction (1994) - 8
It lacked anything that I felt was just for-me. I like my Asian chicks tough, my hopeless addicts to come to a hopeless end, and the dumb young white guys to be completely unaware that they're being preyed upon- even Kathy Griffin walked into this movie with her personality whited-out; though Bruce Willis in boxing gloves was on-its'-way to being a fantasy, it's just the robe that got in the way. This one's definitely an ode to the straights. But I can't lie and say I was bored. For a movie obsessed with badass (and probably in love with the sort of thing I'm not sure John Carpenter always did well- he certainly failed with They Live in my book: this would come back in Grindhouse, which I haven't seen yet, so I consider it relevant), this is definitely the real deal. Amanda Plummer (Freeway, Needful Things) more than makes up for Willis's wimpy girlfriend, Tim Roth is the kind of Leonardo DiCaprio type I can stand, Samuel L. Jackson may be religious- but he doesn't wait for a God to make his judgments or his mind up for him, John Travolta for once says to-hell with his image, Uma Thurman is dynamite (and to intimately rule a conversation is a skill I personally admire seeing in others), and if I were going to worship at the altar of a straight man's mans'-man: it's Harvey Keitel (though, again I'm not going to lie: it's his pro-nudity policy that closes the deal which earns him my respect). His only real American competition was Robert De Niro and two Analyze movies will take the wind out of a person's sail (sadly, I saw both of them). He walks in with a suit on and doesn't pretend to be Yul Brynner. He talks the situation out, doesn't have to yell, sorts through people with a friendly and calm deneamor, yet comes off as the toughest person in the film even though he's playing a therapist - getting others to clean themselves up - completely removed from any action or fighting. It takes a lot to impress me and I was impressed.
-
David Fincher:
Zodiac (2007) - 5
I didn't get the point. I thought it was weak. And, again- pointless. It's mostly a comedy, really. Very light tone and attitude throughout, dealing with incredibly serious subject matter. Now, that I could take. If the movie didn't also feel the need to go into Saw territory. I know what you're thinking: torture. Not really. I'm talking about the killer holding victims' lives in palm-of-hand and we have to see them break down before dying, all the while knowing they're going to die. Yet, again- it's done in a very light manner. But it isn't funny. Or intense. So... what's the point? To feel the victims' pain, put us in their position, show the situation up close rather than judge it from afar? Countless movies already tried to do that, some of them successfully. Yet, several serious critics have lauded this a masterpiece. They're nuts. The characters were okay, but the serious moments weren't serious enough and I didn't so much as crack a smile during the obvious jokes.
Fight Club (1999) - 5
It was too freaking long. Naturally, I say that as someone admittedly used to low-budget films. With those movies, I think the money runs out before they have a chance to shoot a 2.5 hour-long movie's worth of individual scenes (though, I understand that's not true in the case of Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer). I believe they were trying to cram the movie full of as much stuff as was in the book. But I'm all for the movie that understands a book should be read, not filmed. This one did not. Which is fun for the people who want to live in this movie. I was skeptical from the start. And this is an experience for people who feel like they're someone else's slave, by order of society. I've purposefully lived most of my life by my own terms and ignored rules whenever possible. It's not easy. But I didn't see incarnations of the people I hate, people who've socially oppressed me, anywhere in this movie. Never had a boss from hell. Though I
have had psycho friends. Either way, 2 and a half hours of this makeshift UFC, video-game / computer tech stuff is a waste of my time (no matter how vastly superior to The Matrix it may be).
Se7en (1995) - 7
This has nothing to do with the twist- I was somewhat surprised. But, Brad Pitt's character was incredibly obvious. Blame the writing or the acting, I don't care. But I can't stand him. I get tired of him incredibly quickly (and the only thing that separates his character from frickin' clowns like DiNozzo on NCIS and Marty Deeks from NCIS: Los Angeles is a little bad language). Then, we have John Doe. I never got the edgy-critic's extreme dislike for Kevin Spacey, though I certainly don't love him. I just blame the parts he plays. Anyway, except for the bizarre religious motivation with the killer, he's really a rip-off of Hannibal Lecter- who would make this guy eat
his own liver and with fava beans! And, you know what? We also have this dipshit to blame for Saw's Jigsaw. Thanks a lot, Andrew Kevin Walker!! I don't think this guy appreciated how good a character Hannibal Lecter was. Anyway, Spacey does a great job, though he makes the guy as pathetic as his questionable motivation. This movie seems like another offshoot of the whole 90's serial killer fame trend, which Serial Mom already savaged (and made funny) a whole year prior. I think we might also have this film to blame for TV like C.S.I. and all the shows that followed in that one's footsteps (none of which are good enough to validate this movie). Yeah, I have a lot of little bones to pick with the movie, but I agree with most people that it is an incredible thriller. Mostly because it's so damn nasty, dirty, dark, and the stench of the disturbing quality to the grotesque imagery is thick and will stay with you for days after this is over (if you watch it right: not on a TV channel, see it on home video). But I just can't let this film off the hook for being probably the film that single-handedly dictated the future death of the horror genre. I know this isn't a horror film, but apparently, all the moronic college hot-shot directors who should have been directing videos on Mtv yet ended up being the guys who remade nearly every 70's and 80's cult classic under the sun didn't.
-
Sam Raimi:
Army of Darkness (1992) - 5
I watched this movie for the first time coming off the EPIC disappointment of Evil Dead II. I really, REALLY disliked that film. So, the fact that this was different than that film made me like it enough to get through it. However, after re-watching this again and Evil Dead II about 3 times more, I've come to the conclusion that this is easily the weaker of the sequels. Because it's even goofier (which I didn't like in Evil Dead II) and there's no real work on characterization. People are types here. Which is fun for a little while (especially during the "Boomstick!" scene). But after the whole forced romance between Campbell and Embeth Davidtz, I started to tap my foot. The movie improved shortly during the wonderful forest chase scene. But then took a turn for the agonizing as Ash sprouted an evil twin (ala- How to Get Ahead in Advertising, I suspect- haven't seen that film yet), which gives him the opportunity to go John Lithgow in Raising Cain and talk to himself in different inflections. Which is... annoying. Here's an unfortunate example:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BTsES7PYMK4 . Is the whole movie
that bad? Mercifully- no. Some of the action is good. It's never, ever funny. But Bruce Campbell is an excellent screen presence
most of the time. The only real problem (which works hand-in-hand with the poor characterization) is that the ending feels like it's 50 minutes long when it's probably only 20, max.
Evil Dead II (1987) - 5.5
Way too goofy. And except for some jumps and the mere idea that the dead / the unnamed force is outside the cabin, it's not scary at all. And when it starts to build up tension, it gives us nothing. Yes, it's very creative. But when you're a sequel to one of the scariest movies I've ever seen, and it's made by the same person who did the original, I don't want the director doing what Tobe Hooper did to The Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2 and try to make it a comedy. More than 90% of the music score is terrible, but some of the special effects are great. The scene with Ash purposefully going down into the cellar is good (though, it's frighteningly reminiscent of Steve Miner's House in this scene as well as at least 2 others) but the opening re-shoots scenes from the original. Yeah yeah, I've heard about why that is. But the problem is that Ash is now trying to play some kind of hipster with the new Linda (who's not bad) and he's a huge dork. I don't object to re-shooting it, as long as what they shot new was good. It wasn't.
The Evil Dead (1981) - 9
As said above, it's one of the scariest movies I've ever seen. And that's really because the great spooky music, revolutionary camerawork (there are shots here even Dario Argento must've been jealous of), lack of characterization, and batty ideas actually work together to try to make the audience scared rather than laugh. And damned if they don't. Two minor flaws: the tree rape scene is pointless (and it's pretty much because of this that the sequel was so ridiculously silly and watered down) and some of the special makeup effects don't work. This doesn't exactly bother me, but there's a good chance that once zombie Shelly shows up that audiences now will be annoyed rather than scared. Other than that, it's not what they look like when they show up, but the unbelievably thick and spine-chilling atmosphere while they're away that puts the viewer in a state of terror.
-
Chris Columbus:
Rent (2005) - 1
Pure garbage. Other than the money they poured into the budget.
Stepmom (1998) - 6.5
In need of a re-watch, BIG TIME. Haven't seen it since maybe '04 (except for pieces on TV). But I remember liking it enough. That could change.
Nine Months (1995) - ... 6.5
I can't tell where this movie's loyalties lie. Either: it's trying to punish the artistic non-breeder types, Hugh Grant and Jeff Goldblum, and say Joan Cusack and Tom Arnold's unbelievably stupid little family is the way it should be. Or: it's mocking them, showing them for the idiots they are, and doing a little terrorism number on the preciousness of baby birth, etc(.) by applauding Grant's and Goldblum's various sarcastic cracks at them. It would seem the answer is obvious. But... not to me. You see, the movie keeps going into Terrorism Mode. Robin Williams' doctor is a nightmare, Cusack is a terrible mother and that nasty little daughter is the perfect argument for birth control, and Grant and Mr. Ex-Roseanne can't shop for baby toys without being accosted by some evil bi/by-product of Spoiled Child Consumerism overload. It could very well be making a slight observation on the mid-90's state of "let's return to family values" crap. Or, it could be pandering to the sheep that Cusack and Arnold are being used to represent. Anyway, the guilt-tripping everyone doles out on Grant is suspicious. But, even if he is being victimized- it's often fun to watch. If you hate his smugness, you'll enjoy watching him get smacked around (which happens a lot). And... the last 35 minutes are frickin' hilarious. Especially the speeding car scene and the black nurse ("A PEDICURE? This ain't no goddamn beauty parlor!").
Mrs. Doubtfire (1993) - 6
Though, again, Robin Williams is poison for a comedy, and I don't die laughing at cross-dressing gags, this is actually a decent Hollywood movie. Not because it's important or hard-hitting drama, but because it's actually okay comedy. Hit-or-miss, naturally. But I legitimately love the stuff between the kids and Mrs. Doubtfire when they don't know "she's" their father. As well as the scenes with him and Pierce Brosnan. As a woman, as this character, Robin Williams is actually fantastic. And Sally Field is great too. I could use a re-watch but I've seen it at least 4 times and remember it fairly well. You just can't tell how smoothly it runs unless you watch it again, paying strict attention to the pacing and how the film edits dialogue scenes, etc. That is important to know when you rate something, but I remember scenes like Field talking to the character during their tea in the kitchen being very good. And the moment with the face in the pie being well-cut together. Any of that is subject to chance on a re-watch, but I'll never take back loving the "run-by fruiting" bit. That's classic, right there.
Home Alone 2: Lost in New York (1992) - 5.5
I agree, it's bad. But it's the kind of Hollywood bad that I still enjoy. And greatly prefer to new-millennium bad. It's amazing after all the great booby traps in the first movie how they could fall so hard on all the traps here (I feel like I'm talking about Saw again: scary). I re-watch this very infrequently, but every time I do, it's like an old familiar blanket or something. It's only as bad for me now as it was when I was a kid. Is it weird that I'm about to say Rob Schneider, who is bad in almost everything he's ever done, steals the show here? (In a way that nobody all throughout The Beverly Hillbillies Movie did.) Well, I am: he did. Not enough scenes with him. I was also hoping for a way they might bring back the two telephone cops from the first movie- just because they managed to get Catherine O'Hara to scream-talk even more than usual. Something like that. Instead, they just bring back the whole family (almost- I think two of the older girls were missing). And... they changed the character of that little girl, the one with glasses ("does Santa Claus have to go through customs?!") to give her a one-liner (the one about Buzz). You know what you're getting into/in for.
Only the Lonely (1991) - 6.5
I've always liked this movie a lot. It's very well-written, just romantic enough, the supporting cast is excellent, no Macaulay Culkin mugging for the camera's attention. Maureen O'Hara gives a typical knockout performance. My one big problem... John Candy. Every time I watch this movie, I like him less. His performance lacks something. Yes, even Jim Belushi (with his little vibrator story) is doing a more consistent, skilled job. And his dialogue is really bad sometimes. Don't ask me what that whole scene is for- where he apologizes to the funeral-goers in the street after leaving the mortuary.
Home Alone (1990) - 7
That rating shocks me too. It's actually still a bad movie, like the sequel. But, they got the feeling right with this movie. It always feels like an idyllic setting. It feels like good memories of Christmas- which can be few and far between at times. Christmas is my favorite holiday (despite it draining my available funds for months to come and the fact that I'm not at all religious and known to be a very negative person usually) and it's the time of year when bad movies are the easiest to enjoy. So, that gives this movie an unfair advantage. The dialogue is not very good. The movie is sappy. Etc. But the cast is great. The pacing is great. And everything is shot so beautifully. It's like a junk food movie. It's not good or good for you. But you enjoy it anyway.
-
John Frankenheimer:
Seconds (1966) - 5.5
Way too Twilight Zone-y for my tastes. It may have an amazing story with lots of important and subversive stuff going on. But I just didn't see it. I was quite bored and the ending didn't really work for me. Nor did all Hudson's scenes of trying to find someone on a piece of paper. A room, like a business office. Also, his drinking bothered me. He seemed like he was drunk a lot of the time. I couldn't find his emotions. He did everything too fast. Moved too fast, talked too fast. Or, in a slovenly manner. If any of that makes sense. Also- HATED the grape vat scene.
Man, was that stupid!
-
Billy Wilder:
Some Like It Hot (1959) - 6
There's only one movie I ever enjoyed where men dressed in drag to fool other people. And this one ain't it. It was okay. It was well-made but I didn't laugh at all. I didn't like any of the characters. And I wasn't bowled over by any of the performances. Marilyn Monroe was terrible, that's all there is to it. And I walked away being most impressed with Tony Curtis's butt. Which goes to show you how much fun I had. Not much.
Sunset Blvd. (1950) - 7
I already talked about this one on Aviator's board. I thought it was a good idea. But in execution, though it was easy to watch, it didn't get to me or grab me. I didn't have any strong reactions (to anything other than William Holden with his shirt off-
very impressive!). I thought Gloria Swanson was wooden and Holden's character was remarkably boring. Better still- he was a straight-shooting guy who was the movie's cynical voice. I wouldn't have a problem with that if he weren't so BORING. He loves his car and getting paid. That's it. And he condescends to other people too. And he has the same attitude dead as he does alive. And I didn't get a sense that he was made this way by anyone. So, the movie's a hard-hitting look at Hollywood? Hardly. It's just stuffed with dialogue, most of it not particularly flattering. Really sounds like I'm hacking at the movie a lot, but I actually don't mean to. I liked Betty, I liked the pool scenes (especially the very last one and the very first one). And I liked Max a lot. Here's a compliment the movie deserves: though I think Carol Burnett was way better than Gloria Swanson was in the movie, I thought Erich von Stroheim's Max was more amusing and funny than Harvey Korman's parody of him.
-
Robert Wise:
Audrey Rose (1977) - 3.5
Haven't seen it since I was maybe 15, but I remember the feeling of watching it vividly. I'll never forget there is an excellent with fire and snow that is very cool. And, the girl was a great actress. But it feels more like watching her being tortured. To anyone who hasn't seen it- it's The Exorcist meets Sybil, both excellent films on their own and negate the need to see this. Though the girl never turns into a demon, so her suffering can be felt through several very intense therapy / hysteria scenes. Of course the real problem with the movie for a kid is that it's sappy and panders to religious people.
The Sound of Music (1965) - 6
For a musical, it's not bad. But it's just nowhere near as good as its' reputation suggests. Julie Andrews, Christopher Plummer, the nuns, and the kids are great (oh, alright- and so is Rolfe the albino German). Oh; forgot the Governess. And the songs are great. And the film looks great. Wait a minute... where's the flaw I'm thinking of? It'll come to me...
The Haunting (1963) - 5
Agreed with JPA. It's a bore. But I really need to see in widescreen, which I'm actually down for and I hear makes a difference. One scene (which obviously inspired The Exorcist during the "power of Christ compells you!" sequence) bumps this up from a 4 to a 5.
West Side Story (1961) - 3
Did I ever mention that I hate musicals? Don't know when it started (maybe it was my mother forcing me to watch My Fair Lady and Funny Girl with her as a child- both of which I was only able to stay awake during once out of 3 times each). This one may or may not have the most unintentionally gay dance sequence in the history of film- a gang of well-coiffed (ish) young men in tight jeans singing in the streets. Singing to intimidate the other gangs. I've never been a stickler for realism, but some things are just too embarrassing. This is one of them.
The Day the Earth Stood Still (1951) - 10
I hate science fiction, overall. But this movie is INCREDIBLE. By far, the best science fiction film I've ever seen. Highly intelligent. Well-made and surprising in every aspect. Not boring in the slightest. Yet, not an action film either.
The Curse of the Cat People (1944) - 7
I only saw this 2 years ago but already, I've almost forgotten it completely. I do remember that it is painfully dull and overbearing for the first 40 minutes, about. But it gets
A LOT better as it goes along. The last half hour or so is just remarkable. The original Cat People was a Val Lewton horror film but this sequel is not in the slightest bit. It's a complete art-film fantasy-drama about a girl with an imaginary friend. The one link to the first film of course is that the girls' parents and the imaginary friend were all in the first Cat People. Which is SHOCKING- let me just paint you this picture: the killer, her love interest, and the girl he chooses over the killer in a horror film do a sequel and it has no horror in it. I'm not kidding. The only spooky thing in the entire film is a sad old woman who lives in a house with her daughter and she threatens to kill the little girl. That's it. There's not even any spooky music. Anyway, I recommend it. It's very pretty in the Christmas scenes. And you feel for the characters. Not the parents so much. More the little girl, the women in the house, and the imaginary friend.
That's nice, but you oughtta do it for you! 
Scarlett <3
