Talk Movies To Me

Author

William Morris - page 4

William Morris has 30 articles published.

Resident of Salt Lake City, Utah. Some favorite movies of mine are Chinatown, Drive, Whiplash, The Fugitive, Unbreakable, and Raiders of the Lost Ark.

My Weekend With Kubrick: Looking Back at “Lolita” and “Barry Lyndon”

in Reviews by

With almost 20 years since Kubrick’s passing, his filmography remains a consistent topic of discussion among film lovers. His work has been analyzed time and time again for more than 60 years, influencing many films that we love and appreciate today. I am the proud owner of the Stanley Kubrick: The Masterpiece Collection blu ray set, which contains his last 8 movies from Lolita to Eyes Wide Shut. With only two of these eight movies remaining to be seen, I finally had time one weekend to knock them both out. Long story short, they both reaffirmed in my mind that Kubrick is one of the greats. 

Lolita is based off the 1955 novel of the same name, written by Vladimir Nabokov. It tells the story of a middle-aged European man named Humbert Humbert who has secured a job as a professor at Beardsley College in Ohio. He decides to spend the summer in New Hampshire where he is recommended to stay at the home of Charlotte Haze, a middle-aged widow of seven years. As Humbert is not impressed with the house and is about to decline the invitation to stay, he sees Charlotte’s 14 year-old daughter, Dolores Haze (Lolita), sun bathing in the backyard. Humbert has a sudden change of mind and decides to stay with the Hazes. He is immediately infatuated with Lolita. A complicated, and controversial story ensues as Humbert seeks to have Lolita for himself by any means necessary.

Sue Lyon (Left) James Mason (Middle) Shelley Winters (Right)

This film is a masterpiece. Despite its very controversial subject matter by any standard, Kubrick is able to effectively sell this movie in 1962. James Mason deserves high praise for taking on such a role and really bringing a sense of sympathy to such a deranged human being. Throughout the film you are torn between feeling hate and disgust with Humbert and taking pity on him. His obsession with Lolita takes over his life and all other ambitions go by the wayside. There are times where he is truly pathetic and times where he is a scheming sleaze. He is in every scene of the movie and he carries this film through its two and a half hour run time at a steady pace. Sue Lyon also gives a performance that rivals some of the best acting ever given by a minor. She gives some depth to Lolita and successfully portrays multiple sides to her character. I found her to be on par with everyone else in all of her scenes.

No one could have pulled this off the way Kubrick did. He even plays to the comedic side of some scenes, despite there being nothing funny about an adult trying to seduce a minor. He is able to perfectly convey the relationship in a way that we can fully understand what has happened between the two without anyone explaining it. It is a master class on how to tackle such a dark subject without being outright explicit. When talking about Kubrick’s masterpieces, this film should always be in the discussion.

Ryan O’Neal (Center)

Barry Lyndon is based on a fictional 1844 novel written by William Makepeace Thackeray titled The Luck of Barry Lyndon. The story depicts Redmond Barry (Ryan O’Neal), an Irish rogue who is sent away from his home town for dueling a British Captain. We follow him through his various run-ins with the locals, bandits, and the British and Prussian armies during the Seven Years War. His journeys eventually lead him to marrying a rich widow, where he assumes a position of power in 18th century England. 

This is not a movie with a particularly intriguing narrative and interesting characters. If anything else, this is Kubrick’s best looking movie in his filmography. As seen above, a majority of the shots in this film could pass for a painting if you paused the screen at any given moment. It is transcendent in its cinematography, lighting, and production design. I was glued to the screen admiring the beauty of each constructed shot, rather than intrigued with the narrative and story.  With that in mind, the narrative does move rather slowly. Even the battle scenes felt slow, leaving any sense of urgency or tension at the door. But even then, it’s hard for me to hold that against the film. 

At just over three hours, you would think that you’d want a fast-paced story with a nice character arc or two to keep your attention. You will not find that here. Rather, Kubrick chooses to focus all of his energy in capturing the time and feel of the 18th century. Once again, I don’t think anyone could have done it better. The only question that was left hanging over me afterward was why did Kubrick not make his Napolean movie instead of this? He could have had the majestic beauty of Barry Lyndon combined with an interesting historical figure. But who am I to question Kubrick?

Thank You, FilmStruck!

in Essays by

Streaming services are a dime a dozen these days. From Netflix, to Amazon Prime, to Hulu, it seemed like every movie buff out there could find what they want. No generation in history has had as much access to films at the click of a button than we do today. But just when I thought I had seen it all and all of my movie needs were met, FilmStruck came along. 

FilmStruck was a unique streaming service that gave movie lovers access to classic cinema from around the world, including select films from the Criterion Collection. With the ability to watch the special features, commentary, and interviews with most of the movies, it truly offered a unique and thoughtful experience.

Unfortunately, FilmStruck has been shut down. With only around 100,000 subscribers, that wasn’t enough to impress the new management of the AT&T/Time Warner merger. There are talks of a Warner Brothers and Criterion Collection streaming service to launch within the next year and hopefully those will turn out to be solid substitutes. But as a movie lover, this news hurts.

  • The Fallen Idol (1948)
  • Body Heat (1981)
  • The Third Man (1949)

I never had much exposure to films that came out prior to the ’60s. It’s no surprise that Netflix or Amazon isn’t using their home page to promote a black and white film noir from 1948. Or that Walmart and Best Buy aren’t stocking their shelves with Blu Rays and DVDs of remastered works of a foreign director from the 50s. It seems that the big streaming services care about pumping out original content and acquiring the license to stream all of the latest and most popular content. While that isn’t a bad thing in and of itself, it also simultaneously creates a gap for an entire generation of people. We are constantly exposed to new content and this makes it difficult to discover an entire history of film that has helped to shape the movies we love today.  FilmStruck filled a void that I believe most people (including myself) don’t think about often, if at all. 

It was because of FilmStruck that I discovered my love of film noir. The Big Sleep, The Fallen Idol, Touch of Evil, The Third Man, Body Heat, Night Moves, the list goes on. FilmStruck offered something that the other streaming services don’t – a gateway to an entire genre of classic movies that enhance your appreciation of film in ways that most modern day movies can’t. FilmStruck ultimately helped me to gain an appreciation for a different era of film and as a result, has deepened and refined my love for movies. So for that I thank you, FilmStruck. You will be missed. 

You might be interested in

We Few, We Happy Few

FilmStruck was perfect; we are saddened to see it go. Regardless of what the future brings, we will look back

“Chinatown” Neo-Noir Sequel Is A Mixed Bag

in Reviews by

Chinatown is one of the greatest films of all time. But you know this already. When I discovered there was a sequel with Robert Towne directing his screenplay and Jack Nicholson reprising his role, I was all in. The film went into production roughly ten years after Chinatown. Unfortunately, it would see years of development hell. Production ceased when Towne had a falling out with the producer. Nicholson, eager to see this story through, took over as director and even personally funded some of the project. Despite its flaws and its rough production, The Two Jakes still has a lot to offer to those who hold its predecessor close to their heart.

The year is 1948 in postwar Los Angeles, and private investigator (and now, celebrated war veteran) Jake Gittes is settling in. He has a fiánce, he’s working on his golf game, and business is good. He’s even gained a few pounds. For 11 years, Gittes seems to be moving on from his past after the events that took place in Chinatown. The film opens with him in the middle of a new case helping out a new client of his, Jake Berman (Harvey Keitel). Gittes discovers that Berman’s wife is cheating on him with his real estate business partner, so they set up a sting operation at a motel to catch them in the act. Things go awry when Berman, unbeknownst to Gittes, has a gun and shoots his business partner in cold blood. With no witnesses in the room except for an audio recording of the event, both the L.A. police and Berman are hassling Gittes for the tape recording, all while Gittes suspects there is more to Berman’s case than meets the eye. He discovers a conspiracy involving oil, one which evokes memories from 11 years earlier. Gittes must face his past once again in order to get to the bottom of the truth.

The best part of this film is its premise. The story is all there. It’s complicated, even if a tad convoluted, but plays well off the events of Chinatown. It reiterates the fact that Gittes is always forced to revisit a past that he is constantly trying to forget. The bar was high for a sequel and I think this was the story to tell to hit that bar. I love the idea of Gittes “settling in” so to speak. He’s trying to live a normal life and go about his business, even trying to start a family. Only the resurgence of a case from his past could disrupt this new lifestyle, and it does. Nicholson’s narration throughout the film is a nice touch, adding some insight to the way he is thinking and going about the case. Some people fault the film for its messy narrative, but I actually like having a story with so many moving pieces. It’s smart, and in the end it all comes together.

As for its faults, the film does tend to drag at times. Nicholson might not have been the right choice to direct, but if not for him this film may have never been made. Some scenes just felt like they would linger for no real reason. Seconds would feel like minutes as we observe Gittes going through old files and going about the case. With almost a two and a half hour run time, the pacing should be better. I found myself checking my watch throughout the movie. There is also an uncomfortable love scene of sorts involving Gittes and another main character. It felt out of place, weirdly staged, and didn’t really add anything to the story or to its characters. This movie doesn’t stand on its own, nor does it appeal to a broad audience. And maybe it doesn’t have to. But a key plot point in the movie doesn’t really work unless you’ve seen Chinatown. It’s ending definitely strays away from a typical noir ending, but the mood and story elements certainly make it a neo-noir. But hey, it’s just good to see Gittes back on the screen. 

Overall, I liked the movie. I recognize its flaws; admittedly, I want to like this movie more than I actually liked it. I love that I can follow up with one of my favorite movie characters. It has a great premise and has some great elements to it that do add to the character of Jake Gittes. Unfortunately, it falls short in its execution. We could have seen a much more refined final product had there not been any production issues and if Towne (or even Polanski) had directed it. In the end Jake Gittes is, and forever will be one of the coolest characters to hit the screen, and this movie doesn’t change that. 

 

You might be interested in

The Future of Horror is Bright With Netflix’s “The Haunting of Hill House”

in Television by

Director Mike Flanagan has been slowly making his mark on the horror genre. With movies like Hush, Oculus, and Oujia: Origin of Evil, he has shown off his talent behind the camera, especially in the horror department. People took notice of his talent and he landed the gig to direct an adaptation of Stephen King’s Gerald’s Game for Netflix, which is currently one of their best horror films on its streaming service. With all of this success, Netflix decided that a movie was not enough for Flanagan to spread his wings and hired him for a 10-episode horror TV series called The Haunting of Hill House. Here is my full review, spoiler free, of course.

Based on Shirley Jackson‘s 1959 horror novel of the same name, this series revolves around a family of seven dealing with consequences from their past in the present. In the past, the father remodels and flips houses for a living. Hoping to make one last big score before building their permanent dream home, the family moves into a mansion located somewhere on the outskirts of Massachusetts, where they soon find out that this is no ordinary mansion. As adults in the present day, the family is brought back together when one of the siblings goes back to visit the mansion for reasons unknown. Each episode jumps back and forth from past to present, revealing how the haunted happenings of Hill house have affected each character, for the mansion has many spine-chilling secrets.

Flanagan once again shows us that he knows how to craft a tight horror narrative. Every episode is a mixture of high tension, jump scares, and creepy imagery, spread between interesting characters and an intriguing plot. Despite being scared straight at the end of some episodes, my desire to see what came next outweighed my fear of what I was going to experience. I was really impressed with the way the structure of the narrative was handled. Jumping back and forth between timelines can be jarring at times. This show did it seamlessly.

I do have to single out the 6th episode, which might be Flanagan’s greatest technical accomplishment of his career. The entire episode is comprised of four long, unbroken takes. The episode unfolded as if I were watching a play. The staging of the actors and the way the camera moves around to keep the tension present was very impressive, and definitely shakes things up from a technical standpoint in the series.

The child acting in this series is also something to behold. About half of this series takes place in the past when the five siblings are all little children. With much of the story being told from their perspective, Flanagan had to rely heavily on five child actors to help the show succeed. I am always impressed what little kids are able to accomplish on screen. All of them shouldered some weight to pull off some of the more frightening, as well as tender moments of the series. While I am always skeptical about a show with kid actors, their performances reassured me that when given the right director, they really are able to sell their scenes.

For all the praise this show deserves, it is not without its flaws. The only material part of the show that upset me in the end, was in fact, its ending. Without giving spoilers, the last episode is not only the least scary of them all, but it also dampens its re-watch value. I feel that any great horror story will still be able to terrify you, despite knowing its ending. This series was unable to do that for me. I didn’t hate the ending, but I felt that the ultimate reveal, in retrospect, somewhat diminishes a lot of the terrifying sequences in the previous episodes. Maybe it’s the cynic in me, but I just feel that it wrapped up a little too nicely and should have ended on a different note. Not every horror story needs to have an ending like Hereditary, but I also don’t expect to be left with a nice, tender feeling inside me either. The ending may not bother most people, but for me, it just didn’t hit home.

Despite my minor misgivings regarding the ending, this series is not one to be missed. If you are looking for a solid show to get your horror fix, or you are just looking for some good TV, you will find it here. As I said, maybe the ending hits home for you. But even if it doesn’t, your time will not be wasted giving in to the story and investing in these characters. Flanagan might be one of the best horror directors working today and I can’t wait to see what he does with Doctor Sleep, the long-awaited sequel to The Shining. Until then, sink your teeth into this series. You won’t regret it.

You might be interested in

The Claustrophobic Horror Film You May Have Overlooked

in Reviews by

Nothing sets the tone for a horror film like a nicely contained, claustrophobic environment. Movies like The Thing, Saw, and more recently, Don’t Breathe, are prime examples of how to use a contained environment to a film’s advantage. There is something about limiting a story to a confined space that heightens the tension of the characters’ situation and, in turn, puts us as the audience on the edge of our seat. Despite not getting a wide release in theaters, I was fortunate enough to discover one of the great, underrated claustrophobic horror films to come out in recent years: The Autopsy of Jane Doe.

Directed by Andre Overdal, the story centers around an unidentified corpse in pristine condition found in the basement of a home where the owners have committed suicide. Police on the scene conclude that the owners tried to escape, even though the doors were unlocked. The corpse is brought to a family-run coroner’s office run by Tommy (Brian Cox), where he examines it. As he and his son Austin (Emile Hirsch) begin the autopsy procedure, strange events begin to take place. They find themselves locked inside the basement and unable to escape, all while they unravel the unsettling mystery that surrounds the corpse. Every time the coroner duo peels a layer of skin back or cuts deeper into the body, we learn something new. Everything the characters learn, we learn with them.

Cinematic cliches that were avoided, which I appreciate. For one, the son mentions to his girlfriend early in the film that he might not want to follow in his dad’s footsteps and take over the family business. One might think that this would allude to some drama and point of contention later in the film between the father and son. Thankfully, that moment was only limited to that one conversation with his girlfriend and merely revealed more about his character.  Another cliche that this film managed to dodge is the “idiocy-of-the-character’s-decisions-in-a-horror-movie” cliche. Far too many times do we find ourselves screaming at the screen during a horror film and roll our eyes at the actions of the characters. Not here. There is a scene where the son makes an impulse decision in an attempt to destroy the corpse, and it was satisfying to actually see smart characters make some realistic decisions in a horror film.

Finally, I like the way the director chooses to end the movie. He keeps it consistent with everything that we come to know about the corpse and does not necessarily tie things up nicely. There is enough ambiguity to hold discussions of what may or may not have happened, as well as discussions of some possible underlying themes that are present throughout the film. The finale is great, and contains a scene that gives me the willies every time I watch it.

This film is one of the most unique horror films of the decade. For a film with smart characters, an intriguing mystery, and frightening sequences, it will surely satisfy your horror movie appetite. The plot summary alone is enough to whet your whistle. It is rare nowadays that you read a plot summary for a horror film and not be able to compare it to a premise that has been done before. If you are in need of an original and somewhat fresh take on horror, look no further.  You’re welcome.

You might be interested in

1 2 3 4 5 6
Go to Top