American Made

Back in 1972, a commercial airline pilot called Barry Seal lost his job since he was arrested for smuggling. In time he created a huge smuggling operation, flying cocaine for the Medellín Cartel. He smuggled drugs, weapons and anything he could fly around in a small fast plane. He was also apparently working for the CIA, although that has been denied by the agency. It seems to be one of those cases where everyone knows he freelanced for the CIA, but since they deny it, there is no official evidence for it.

The reason I'm bringing up Barry Seal is that I watched American Made (2017).

American Made is directed by Doug Liman who said of the movie “it is a fun lie based on a true story”. This is absolutely correct, both the lie and the fun part. Also I guess the true story part...

Tom Cruise stars as Barry Seal and does an amazing job. The movie starts when he is still a pilot for TWA, then he gets an offer from the Agency and seeing as he is incredibly bored being an airline captain he takes it and never looks back. Soon enough he is also freelancing for the cartel and starts to make stupid amounts of cash. Something in the vein of $60 million in and around 1980. At this time he is also collecting intelligence from Noriega and before you know it, he is involved with the whole Contra-Sandinista catastrophe. Like all such rags to riches stories, things inevitably goes down the drain. It is worth noting that both the manner of his death and its location is how it happened in real life.

The cinematography is amazing in this film. The shots of the breakneck piloting, of which there are plenty, are so nice and the general way in which it is shot is solid and highly entertaining to watch.

Cruise gives American Made the same intense commitment he gives all his movies, he even flies the planes as he can actually fly. I'm sure the crazier stunts were done by stunt pilots, if for no other reason than to appease the insurance companies. Then again, Cruise is known for doing a lot of his own stunts, so what do I know...

The other actors are all good as is everything else in here. I can actually not point out a single thing to complain about. As long as you remember the “entertaining lie” part, you're going to have a great time. Sure, Seal didn't have a brother in law called JB who was a complete screw-up and he was not arrested by four different agencies at the same time, but it doesn't matter. The movie is actually really funny and charming, which is no mean feat considering the subject matter touches on things like the Medellín Cartel and the war between the Contras and the Sandinistas, and those things aren't funny!

If you watch or have watched American Made and want more, the Netflix show Narcos deal with the same stuff at the same time. In fact the crew for American Made kept bumping in to the Narcos crew as they both filmed a lot in Colombia. Just remember that Narcos is definitely not trying to be funny.

So do I recommend this movie? Yes, absolutely. I had a blast from beginning to end and have nothing to complain about. If you haven't seen it and what I said above doesn't seem like a complete snooze then go watch it. You can even amuse yourself by spotting all the American Presidents (present and future) that are either shown or mentioned in the film. There are more than you might think.

 

 

That's that and all that. Join me again next time and until then, have a great and safe week!

A simple bit of fun

I just had one hell of a weekend, thanks to a stomach bug, but the less said about that the better.             

It has however left me short on time to work on this blog, so this week I'll have to keep it short and sweet.

Presenting Lonely Ialand:

 

Created and starring  Andy Samberg, Akiva Schaffer and Jorma Taccone. They all have acting/writing experience on Saturday Night Live, and Andy is well known from Brooklyn 99. 

Anyway, Lonely Island is a comedy music act that sometimes guest-stars some very big names. Content warning though, some of the song are very racy, so don't listen to it in public without headphones.

Here is the channel: https://www.youtube.com/user/thelonelyisland/featured

I'll embed a couple of songs below for you to get started with. That's that and all that. Join me again next time and until then, have a great and safe week!

 

 

  

 

The Heroes of Telemark

During the week I decided to watch another war movie, this time:

The Heroes of Telemark (1965).

Based on real events, The Heroes of Telemark stars Kirk Douglas and Richard Harris as Rolf and Knut, both members of the Norwegian resistance against the German occupation during WWII. Other cast members include Ulla Jacobsson and Michael Redgrave (father of Vanessa Redgrave).

The main point of the story is the sabotage efforts against the German production of heavy water at the local hydroelectric plant. The Germans needed it for their atomic weapons research program. Obviously the Allies were very worried about this and helped however they could. If you want to read about what actually happened, here is the Wikipedia link:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norwegian_heavy_water_sabotage

The movie isn't exactly accurate even though it does follow most of the major points fairly well. I found it to be a compelling movie rather than a fun or exciting movie. For being two hours long, it does unfortunately plod along quite a bit. There are several scenes between Rolf and his ex-wife Anna that aren't really necessary. Yes, it is important to build up the characters in order to help the audience connect with them, but the overall balance of the movie is a bit off. A common element is the fear and paranoia of the German occupiers. In a sense this is more of a spy movie than a regular war movie, but they don't really lean in to this aspect enough.

That said, there are several really exciting moments throughout the movie, including a really good ski chase. The commando raid on the plant was good, but interestingly enough the end of it is fictional. In the movie, guards shoot at the escaping commandos, but in reality they couldn't find the switch to turn on the lights and the commandos escaped easily in the dark.

The Nazis are interestingly enough fairly believable. General Terboven is a bit bombastic and shouts a lot, but they aren't over the top villains or mustache twirling cartoon villains. It feels real and that's a plus.

Prop wise, there are some issues with clothes and skis that weren't available in the 1940's but unless you are eagle eyed you can't tell. What you can tell is that none of the women have accurate hairstyles. Much like Hogan's Heroes, all the ladies have 60's hairstyles which is a shame. It can't have been that hard to get a hair stylist to create the right styles. The men's hair is fine. Short hair is pretty much short hair whether slicked back or flattened by a woolen cap.

The most important “prop” has to be the landscape. It is filmed in Norway and it shows. If they had chosen to pretend to be in Norway it would have been immediately apparent and that would have ruined the feel of the movie.

Finally, a lot has been written about the Nazi atomic research program with different opinions on how far along they were. The consensus seems to be that they were far away from successfully creating an atomic bomb. This would make the heroic efforts to stop the manufacturing and transporting of the heavy water a lot less important. However, no one knew how far along they really were, and with the technological advances they did possess, the fears of the Nazis creating an atomic bomb were very real indeed. This is why it was so important to stop them from getting the heavy water.

So do I recommend this movie? Hard to say. There isn't really anything wrong with The Heroes of Telemark, but it isn't that great either. Where Eagles Dare is completely fictional and over the top at times, but it is a much better 60's war movie. I'm not sure I can really recommend Telemark, but I won't warn anyone away from it either.

That's that and all that. Join me again next time, and until then, have a great and safe week!

Fury

When I watched Dunkirk, it was a toss up between that and another war film. This week I watched that movie:

Fury (2014)

Fury is set during WWII and concerns a tank crew invading Germany. We have Don 'Wardaddy' Collier played by Brad Pitt as the tank commander. His driver, Trini 'Gordo' Garcia played by Michael Peña, the gunner Boyd 'Bible' Swan played by Shia LaBeouf and the loader Grady 'Coon-Ass' Travis played by Jon Bernthal. They are veterans who started in North Africa and via D-Day are now in Germany proper. Early on, they are joined by Norman Ellison, a rookie clerk who for some reason has been assigned to their tank as their new assistant driver and front gunner.

The title of the movie comes from the name of their tank, 'Fury', a modified Sherman sporting a 76mm main gun.

On the surface, Fury is a powerful movie. It is extremely grim and gory at times and does a good job at illustrating the unbelievable horrors of war. The battle scenes are dramatic and the acting is fantastic. The director, David Ayer did a good job and the props are spot on. Fury is in fact the first movie to feature a genuine Tiger tank since They Were Not Divided (1950). All the uniforms are authentic reproductions, the vehicles are real museum pieces. The Tiger is in fact the only functional Tiger left in the world. So lots of kudos there, as this is what sells the reality of the film.

There are however some real problems as well. Most battle scenes feature tracer rounds, e.g. rounds that glow brightly in flight so that the gunner can see where he is shooting. This glow can only be seen from behind the bullet, but in Fury it often looks from the side like they're shooting lasers. It genuinely looks like a Star Wars battle at times.

The second big problem is a famous tank fight between Fury and it's three sister tanks vs. a German Tiger. It is very dramatic, but completely idiotic. It is a commonly held belief that it took four or five Shermans to kill one Tiger due to the Tiger only being vulnerable to the Sherman from behind, while its own 88mm main gun could chew through the Shermans like paper. David Ayer either ignored or was ignorant of the fact that Fury's 76mm gun could easily have destroyed the Tiger at a long distance, so the entire duel is pointless as it stands. In fact, the remarkable length of the 76mm gun compared to the regular Sherman gun meant that they were always singled out by Tiger crews for fear of being killed. I'm not spoiling the scene, but beyond its drama, it is really dumb.

Some people have criticized the final main fight as completely unrealistic, but there is precedent for similar things happening in real life. The fight contains multiple factual errors, but ultimately it's not a big deal. The rest of the movie is pretty much a paint by the numbers story, not bad, not great.

When I was done, I felt pretty overwhelmed and it took a day or two of quiet reflection to figure out what I really think about Fury. As I said, it is a powerful piece of cinema, but it ultimately has nothing to say. War is an exercise in soul crushing horror, but we already knew that. Beyond this simple message Fury has nothing to say at all. I'm not one to insist that every movie has to have depth and meaning, it can be pure entertainment, and I was entertained to be sure, but I kind of have a hard time getting why this movie was made. It is too depressing to be fun, it doesn't portray anything significant from a historical point of view. It's hard to explain, but compared to Dunkirk which was an important event in WWII, Fury is mostly just fighting. Is it only meant to be dramatic action with little else behind it? I'll leave it up to you to decide.

So, do I recommend this movie? Yes and no. Fans of war movies should watch it, fans of gore and mayhem could enjoy it, but beyond that maybe think twice.

That's that and all that. Join me again next time and until then, have a great and safe week!

The First Vampire of Cinema

On March 4^th 1922, F.W. Murnau released Nosferatu, and now it is one hundred years old. So, I decided to re-watch it.

I originally saw it in the 90's, and had a somewhat favorable opinion of it. I thought it was okay, and with that in mind I sat down and gave it a good watch. What do I think of it now? It is still okay.

Fair warning, this movie is now over 100 years old so damn the spoilers. I can actually link the entire movie below, so if you want to you can watch is first and read this later.

First off, it is a silent movie. All the dialogue is text cards and all the sound is a soundtrack. In this case it is a bombastic and upbeat German classical music soundtrack. Secondly, all the body language is very over done. This is just how it was, take it or leave it. Thirdly, it is essentially a rip off of Bram Stoker's Dracula.

Murnau changed some things around as he did not have permission from Stoker's estate to make Dracula into a movie. Thus it takes place in Germany and Transylvania, not England and Transylvania. The main character is Hutter not Harker. Mina is called Ellen and instead of Professor van Helsing, there are Professors Bulwer and Sievers. Neither of the learned men do anything worthwhile in any case. The biggest change in character is that Renfield is missing and instead we get Knock who is Hutter's boss, but he is the one who goes mad and is locked up in an asylum ranting about the Master. Also, Knock is one of the most sinister looking dudes I have ever seen.

Finally we have the vampire. Elegant and sophisticated Dracula is changed to the creepy, rodent like Count Orlok. Orlok is tall and painfully thin. His ears are long and pointed, his nose long and crooked and his fangs are not incisors, they are located in the middle of his mouth. Imagine long rat teeth but needle sharp instead of square. He is one creepy dude.

Overall, the plot is the same as Dracula. Hutter goes to the Count's castle for a real estate deal and ultimately has to escape. By the way, Orlok, unlike Dracula has no sexy wives floating about, there is no one but the vampire himself. In the mean time, Orlok sails away and arrives in Hutter's home town Wisbourg, where he bought a house. There the final confrontation takes place (sort of), instead of a chase back to Transylvania. The end.

Overall, Nosferatu is a good movie, but it is unbalanced by some scenes that should have been longer and some scenes that make little sense to move the plot forward. We follow Hutter as he enjoys the sunlight at Castle Orlok and writes a letter to his wife, Ellen. Long scenes follow Ellen as she pines for her husband and suffers mentally through some kind of psychic connection with him. This does little to move the plot along. There are also scenes that I assume are meant to show the vampire's supernatural powers so they are shot in high speed, but sadly it just looks silly now. Finally the score is incredibly uneven. There are scenes, especially in the beginning when everything is happy and positive where the almost pompous music makes sense, but when Orlok has butchered an entire ships crew and the so called “Death Ship” floats into town, the same music sounds ridiculous.

Finally Orlok himself is a study in contrast. At times he is actually comedic, and at times he is one of, if not the creepiest vampire in film history. It's just that you don't know which Orlok you are getting from scene to scene. Overall he is cadaverous, stiff like he is suffering from rigor mortis and completely animalistic. There is nothing charming or seductive about him. He is a walking corpse hunting for blood. Your blood.

So do I recommend this movie? Every serious horror fan owes it to themselves to see this movie. Casual horror fans might want to skip it, but I urge you to try. I'll link it below.

 

 

That's that and all that. Join me again next time, and until then, have a great and safe week! 

Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dCT1YUtNOA8&ab_channel=BestClassics

 

Dunkirk

I was in the mood for something different so I mentally went through the list of movies I intend to watch and decided to see:

Dunkirk (2017).

This is in many ways a weird war movie. Do not go into this expecting dramatic battle scenes and plucky and courageous Allies fighting Nazis like so many other war movies. This is not Saving Private Ryan. Christopher Nolan went an entirely different route with Dunkirk.

First a little bit of background. So when WWII broke out, the British sent a bunch of soldiers to France to fight the Germans, but they together with the French and Belgians dropped the ball. They got surrounded and pushed back into the French town of Dunkirk. The German general in charge, von Rundstedt, issued an order to halt the attack. Instead of loosing lots of troops assaulting the desperate Allies, they opted to let the Luftwaffe (air force) bomb them to pieces instead.

British High Command realized that in order to have a fighting chance later on, they needed to get their boys off the beach and back to Britain. The biggest problem was that the harbor wasn't very big and could only accommodate one larger ship at a time. In response, the call went out to every boat owner in SE Britain to sail across the channel with whatever they had in order to bring back as many men as they could. All while the German Air Force did their best to stop this from happening.

So back to the movie. Dunkirk is all about the evacuation. It is told from the perspective of land, sea and air. Each part has its main characters, but it's as much about the evacuation effort as it is about the people. In a sense the people come second to the event itself. The movie is also somewhat non-sequential which is a bit confusing, at least at first.

I have to say that Nolan did an amazing job. Dunkirk is one of the most beautiful movies I have ever seen, even though the subject matter is incredibly grim. The cinematography is first class all the way and his use of CGI vs. practical effects is masterful. It all blends seamlessly together and really drops you down in the middle of the conflict.

The soundtrack merits a special mention. There is essentially no music only sound. Sound designed to heighten your anxiety and help you feel the panic the desperate soldiers feel. Pounding ticking and unpleasant screeches are common here and it really works. Amazing work by Hans Zimmer.

But as always, you can have the best techniques in the world, but without good actors you fall apart. Luckily the actors knocked it out of the park. Entire scenes go past with no dialogue, only wordless acting that never the less speak volumes. The cast list is huge and everyone did a great job. Dunkirk is painted thick with fear, exhaustion, desperation, anger, shame and even some rare humor. All mixed up to make a masterpiece about the will to survive.

A couple of interesting details: You don't see a single German until the very end, and even then, they are more shadows in the dark than soldiers. Also there is a scene where a Spitfire without fuel manages to shoot down a Stuka dive-bomber. This is recorded fact and worked as the Stuka was a sitting duck when diving. It looked silly, but sometimes the truth is kind of silly.

So do I recommend this movie? If you haven't already figured it out from all the gushing, then yes! Unless you hate war movies, or just can't stand the subject matter in general, do please watch Dunkirk. It completely blew me away and sucked me in completely. I absolutely need to watch it again some day.

That's that and all that. Join me again next time and until then, have a great and safe week!

Revolver & Almost Human

Soon after having watched my first poliziotteschi movie I found a list from tasteofcinema.com called The 10 Best Poliziottesci Films. This week I watched the two final movies on the list and I want to talk about them today.

Here's the list if you're curious: http://www.tasteofcinema.com/2020/the-10-best-poliziotteschi-films/

We begin with Revolver (1973).

Oliver Reed stars as Vito Cipriani, the vice warden of a prison. Someone kidnaps his wife and instead of a ransom, they demand that he springs the freelance criminal Milo Ruiz (Fabio Testi). Soon thereafter they realize that Milo doesn't know who it is that wants him free, and the unlikely duo gets pulled into something much bigger and more dangerous than they were expecting.

All in all Revolver was a really enjoyable movie. Reed is intense as always and Testi knew his stuff, so the acting is on point. The locations are gorgeous, the shots are nice, basically it's all good. Except for one thing. The story drags on quite a bit at times towards the end. There are a couple of scenes that are superfluous, and a tighter script could have elevated Revolver from a good and tense movie to the next tier.

In essence, Revolver is a bit of a buddy cop movie with elements of the odd couple. The officer of the law who has to cooperate with a criminal wasn't new in 1973 let alone now, but it works well enough.

Filming was problematic due to Reed's alcoholism. At about two or three in the afternoon he was drunk and became abusive and aggressive which lead to the fact that the director had to tell the crew that filming would stretch three days longer than it did. Otherwise they would have kicked the crap out of Oliver for his behavior.

 

 

Our second movie is Almost Human (1974).

Almost human is essentially a reverse poliziotteschi. Tomas Milian expertly portrays Giulio Sacchi, a low life, eternal screw-up thug. Tired of being kicked around he snaps and together with two accomplishes kidnaps the daughter of a wealthy businessman. Along the way he commits several brutal murders, fueled by a combination of his own lack of self esteem, drugs, alcohol and a hatred for those above him socially.

The inspector chasing him, Commissario Walter Grandi is played by Henry Silva who appears twice on the list, both times as a heartless killer. I was keen to see him portray a cop, but I ended up somewhat disappointed. I mentioned that Almost Human is a reverse poliziotteschi and it is true. Most of the movie is about Giulio with the police being present here and there. So Silva was a bit wasted, unfortunately. He is good, but totally overshadowed by Milian, who went on to have an excellent career in film and TV.

The movie is well made, I have no complaints. The score by Ennio Morricone is good if a little weird. Definitely a product of the 70's. The story isn't really all that interesting, it is Milian's performance that is the stand out. Sacchi is completely reprehensible and vile yet somehow fascinating. He is actually surprisingly intelligent and if he could get over himself, he could have gone far either as a career criminal or in an honest field. As it is, he is his own worst enemy and you can't outrun yourself.

 

So, do I recommend these movies? Yes. Both are solidly in the middle of the poliziotteschi genre. Not as great as Caliber 9 or Goodbye & Amen but not as mediocre as The Big Racket. Fans of the genre or thrillers should have a good time here.

That's that and all that. Join me again next time, and until then, have a great and safe week!