REVIEW: “The Ridiculous 6”

RID SIX POSTER

Adam Sandler is an living, breathing enigma. He started as a young, fairly entertaining comedian on Saturday Night Live who eventually put out a couple of fairly entertaining movies. Since then has put out one painfully awful film after another. A quick gander at his embarrassingly bad filmography should leave you wondering how this guy is still making movies. Here is why he is an enigma – his movies make a lot of money. People go see his stuff and many find it funny. That is a mystery I may never be able to crack.

Sandler’s latest is the western spoof “The Ridiculous 6” and you have to give the guy this – he’s consistent. This has every bit of the stupidity, annoyances, and laziness identified with Sandler’s previous ‘comedies’. The Wild West offers a new setting but Sandler and company do nothing more than stain it with their brand of asininity. I only managed a few grins in this entire dopey and overly long slog.

RID6

Sandler plays Tommy who has been raised by the Apache after the murder of his mother. Tommy is given the name “White Knife” and is set to marry Smoking Fox (Julia Jones). A man named Frank Stockburn (Nick Nolte) arrives at the village claiming to be Tommy’s father. He reveals he is terminally ill and that he has $50,000 buried nearby. He wants Tommy and his village to have the money but before they can dig it up bandits arrive and take Frank away because of an outstanding debt. Tommy can’t find the buried loot so he sets out t0 swipe $50,000 in order to save his father.

Along the way Tommy finds that his father has been….active. He meets five different men claiming that Frank Stockburn is the father they have never met. They each join Tommy in his absurd quest to find enough money to pay off his father’s captives. Of course each have their on goofy quirk. Rob Schneider plays a Mexican with a gassy burro (it’s just as offensive as it sounds). Taylor Lautner is a village idiot with a strong neck. Terry Crews is a piano player who hides that he is black. Jorge Garcia is a hairy mute wildman. Luke Wilson is a guilt-ridden boozer.

Then there is the laundry list of cameos and brief appearances which Sandler movies are known for. Harvey Keitel, Jon Lovitz, Blake Shelton, Steve Buscemi, David Spade, Will Forte, Vanilla Ice, Chris Kattan, and John Turturro to name a few. Occasionally one of these will offer a mildly amusing moment, but most are just wedged in as a recognizable face. Why some of these guys signed on for such dumb roles and lame material is beyond me.

RID62

“The Ridiculous 6” is supposedly a satire of the western genre and all of the formulas and stereotypes they often used. I tend to give movies a lot of leeway and feel some people are often too easily offended. But this film doesn’t have the smarts to sell itself as convincing satire and it’s no wonder some have viewed the characterizations as offensive. When material is this poor it’s hard to accept it as good satire.

Ultimately “The Ridiculous 6” is more of the same from a guy perfectly content with delivering cheap overused gags and the same boring, unfunny formulas. I suppose Sandler is happy cashing the big checks and as long as people still flock to these things I don’t see him challenging himself or changing directions. So we can expect more films like “The Ridiculous 6” – juvenile, aimless, and consistently idiotic wastes of time. Lucky us.

VERDICT – 1.5 STARS

1.5 stars

REVIEW: “The Hateful Eight”

EIGHT poster1

Quentin Tarantino. A mere mention of that name sparks a fire in the hearts of his devoted and vocal fanbase. It immediately brings praises of excellence, grandeur, and eminence. It evokes a level of enthusiasm within fans that no level of criticism can quell. Quentin Tarantino is considered by many to be a cinematic master, the greatest working filmmaker, a peerless screenwriter, America’s premiere auteur. Considering all of that, why is it that I still haven’t bought into the Tarantino hype?

Make no mistake, Quentin Tarantino is an auteur. He has defined himself with such a heavy yet specific style of filmmaking that genuinely feels foreign to all other visions. He dabbles in all sorts of genres and his love for cinema, all kinds of cinema, finds its way into every one of his pictures. But he has such a strong allegiance to the aforementioned style and I often find his films rely too heavily on it. And the response to his style is overwhelmingly positive which leads to Tarantino often getting passes when it comes to his shortcomings particularly in his writing.

Still, no one can deny that a new Tarantino release is an event filled with pomp and pageantry and that brings me to “The Hateful Eight”. It’s Tarantino’s eighth or ninth feature film (depending on how you look at it) and his second western in a row. As with every one of his pictures “The Hateful Eight” draws inspiration from all directions. Where “Django Unchained” drew from the spaghetti western genre, Tarantino says this film takes more from the television westerns of the 1960s although I would say very lightly.

EIGHT1

The story is broken up into six  chapters although that is more of a stylistic choice. Individually each chapter is more or less the same. It opens shortly after the Civil War with a rough and surly bounty hunter named John ‘The Hangman’ Ruth (Kurt Russell) on a stagecoach escorting his prisoner Daisy Domergue (Jennifer Jason Leigh) to the Wyoming town of Red Rock to be hanged. Along the way he meets an old acquaintance and fellow bounty hunter Major Marquis Warren (Samuel L. Jackson). Once the two meet Tarantino wastes no time developing a racial tension that will permeate his entire film. It is only magnified when they pick up Chris Mannix (Walter Goggins) a Yankee-hating Confederate renegade claiming to be Red Rock’s soon to be new sheriff.

With a strong blizzard approaching, the three men, the prisoner, and the stagecoach driver (James Parks) take shelter in a remote lodge called Minnie’s Haberdashery. Inside are four other characters seeking refuge from the storm. A Mexican named Bob (Demián Bichir) is watching over the place while Minnie is visiting her mother. Oswaldo Mobray (Tim Roth) is a chatty Englishman who also happens to be the territory’s hangman. General Smithers (Bruce Dern) is a cranky old Confederate officer. And then there is Joe Gage, a soft-spoken cowboy on his way to see his mother for Christmas.

The title is a reference to these eight men trapped in the lodge together until the storm blows over. It’s here the story becomes somewhat of a mystery after John Ruth randomly discerns that someone in their company is there to rescue Daisy. The film then begins its looooong trek to discover who isn’t the person they claim to be. And when I say long I do mean long. The majority of the film is confined to this big one-room lodge so Tarantino can’t fall back on his vivid visual style of storytelling. Therefore his script has to carry much of the load and, as with some of his other films, that is the movie’s greatest weakness.

EIGHT2

In a nutshell “The Hateful Eight” is insanely overwritten. Tarantino can undoubtedly write good dialogue and there are exchanges here that are fantastic. At the same time he bogs his movie down with pointless and sometimes repetitive back-and-forths that drag the movie to a halt. I didn’t see the full 187 minute roadshow version, but the 167 minutes I did sit through definitely had its lulls. Even more surprising were some fairly obvious plot holes particularly in a pretty important flashback segment.

And some of his dialogue is certainly suspect. Again, I’ll grant that Tarantino wants to make some kind of statement on racism, but frankly his constant flippant use of the N-word didn’t offer me any meaningful commentary and what may be there is thinly represented. I give filmmakers a ton of room for expression, but I can easily see where his use of such incendiary language could be offensive. Same with the brutality towards the main female character some of which is played for laughs.

Also QT’s obsession with jarring, over-the-top content is here as well which in this case isn’t a positive. We get it through sudden bursts of gratuitous violence some of which was just too silly to appreciate. And the worst comes in one absurd flashback sequence narrated by Major Warren. It’s a bizarre and over-the-top scene that felt much more at home in “Pulp Fiction” than “The Hateful Eight”. It took me out of the moment and felt terribly out of place.

EIGHT3

But so as not to completely slam the movie it’s worth noting the positives. The film looks really good. Again, I didn’t get to see the 70mm roadshow but this version had plenty of nice visual flare even though the majority takes place in a one big room. I also loved what we got of Ennio Morricone’s original score. Unfortunately he isn’t allowed to score the entire film, but what he does is superb. And despite my misgivings with much of the script, Tarantino gives us some wonderfully unsavory characters that each have their moments.

I also think all of the performances hit the right notes. Jennifer Jason Leigh is getting a lot of awards buzz and she’s really good despite mainly serving as Tarantino’s physical and verbal punching bag. Kurt Russell is a surly hoot sporting the burliest of handlebar mustaches and Walter Goggins is surprisingly great in what is one of the film’s meatier roles.

It may not sound like it, but I do appreciate many of the ideas Quentin Tarantino plays with in “The Hateful Eight”. Unfortunately those ideas are weighted down by an indulgent and overblown script that wastes too much time trying to be clever and edgy. Even Tarantino’s signature humor misses more than hits its mark. I’m sure Tarantino die-hards will love it, but for me “The Hateful Eight” comes across as an hour’s worth of good material stretched well beyond its limits.

VERDICT – 3.5 STARS 

REVIEW: “The Look of Silence”

LOOK POSTER

In 2012 Joshua Oppenheimer made a stunning and often grotesquely surreal documentary focused on the perpetrators behind the Indonesian mass killings of 1965-1966. The slaughter spawned from a military overthrow of the government. Death squads made up of community leaders but protected by the military killed nearly one million supposed ‘communists’ – men and women. In “The Act of Killing” Oppenheimer allowed the killers to stage their recollections of the state-sanctioned atrocities without an ounce of remorse.

Now Oppenheimer gives us “The Look of Silence”, a companion piece for his previous picture which offers a subtler but equally terrifying perspective. Where the first film put a spotlight on (and strategically set up) the killers, this one lends its voice to a 44 year-old man whose brother was brutally murdered in 1965 during the ‘communist’ purge. For his and his family’s protection, his identity is hidden even in the end credits since many of the killers are neighbors, local community leaders, and considered heroes by the government.

look2

We only know him as Adi, man deeply moved by Oppenheimer’s previous exposé. Born two years after his brother’s barbaric murder, Adi feels the pains through his elderly parents. His father is blind, feeble, and unable to remember his son’s death. But the 50 year-old wounds are still fresh for his mother who laments her dead son through her vivid memories. The moments between Adi as his family serve to show the genocide’s deeper lasting personal effects.

Perhaps the film’s most harrowing scenes are interviews Adi has with the perpetrators themselves while under the guise of a traveling optometrist. He strikes up conversations getting these men to speak openly of their atrocities all while fitting them for new glasses. These visceral exchanges burn with Oppenheimer’s piercing metaphor of blindness verses sight. These men are perversely blind to their crimes, their guilt, and their responsibility. Adi wants them to see.

“The Look of Silence” is rich with shocking, uncomfortable moments and memorable scenes that will stick with you. As when Adi asks his mother “How do you feel surrounded by your son’s killers? You see them every day…”. Or a school teacher indoctrinating a class of small children on the heroism of the death squads. Or scenes of Adi watching footage from “The Act of Killing” that deal specifically with how his brother was butchered. Oppenheimer moves through all of this  emotionally heavy material with the sophistication of a master storyteller but also as someone deeply connected to his subject matter.

LOOK1

Oppenheimer has developed another important piece of cinema that is as illuminating as it is shocking. I can’t tell you how many times I sat, mouth open and covered by my hand, in utter silence overwhelmed by what I was seeing. This film is far more focused and personal than “Killing” but no less potent or disturbing. It’s told with such strength and clarity whether through sympathy for powerless and helpless victims hoping for justice be dealt in the afterlife or appalling disgust at the unrepentant attitudes of the killers.

The ominous cloud of danger loomed over this entire picture. Adi, Oppenheimer, and his small film crew operated under a perpetual threat which often times showed itself in the interviews. They were constantly told that “the past is the past” and people were content to leave it there. But they would also be warned that what happened in 1965 and 1966 could easily happen again. That chilling reality kept coming to mind as I made my way through the film and it has lingered with me well after. That’s a testament to the power of the storytelling and the bravery of those willing to tell it.

VERDICT – 4.5 STARS

4.5 STARS

2016 Blind Spot Lineup

BLINDSPOT LINEUP

After seeing so many people participate in these Blind Spot things I decided to give it a try for the first time last year. I’m so glad I did. It was a load of fun so naturally I’m ready to give it another go. Today I’m sharing the lineup of movies I’ll be watching throughout the coming year. These are films that are glaring omissions from my personal movie watching history and are generally held in high regard either by film critics or audiences. Some of these are films that I’ve seen bits of but have never watched them through. Others will be completely new experiences. So here they are…

JANUARY – “The Killing” [REVIEW]

1956, THE KILLING

FEBRUARY – “Paths of Glory” [REVIEW]

PATHS

MARCH – “Ace in the Hole” [REVIEW]

ACE

APRIL – “Red River” [REVIEW]

F-CT1977

MAY – “LA STRADA” [REVIEW]

la strada1

JUNE – “A Man Escaped” [REVIEW]

MAN ESCAPED

JULY – “Rio Bravo” [REVIEW]

RIO

AUGUST – “Touch of Evil” [REVIEW]

TOUCH

SEPTEMBER – “Cléo from 5 to 7” [REVIEW]

CLEO

OCTOBER – “Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf” [REVIEW]

WOLF

NOVEMBER – “The Candidate”

CANDIDATE

DECEMBER – “The Last Picture Show”

LAST PICTURE

What are you thoughts on this year’s lineup? Any particular movies catch your eye?

The 5 Worst Movies of 2015

BAD MOVIE
Well, it’s an imperfect world so I guess it makes sense that not all movies are perfect. Some are merely very good, fair, or downright crap. Today we’re looking at the dregs of the 2015 movie year, the bottom feeders, the lowest of the low. Overall it was a good year for movies particularly in the last quarter, but that didn’t stop these abominations from staining the year that was.

#5 – “The Gunman”

GUNMAN

There was something off about “The Gunman” going all the way back to its first trailer. I think it was the idea of Sean Penn playing a gun-toting action hero. Well whatever it was I call it prophetic. The entire movie is ‘off’ and that’s being kind. Penn is never convincing. He seems more interested in showing off his freshly carved physique than telling a good story. And he never looks interested in what he’s doing. Instead he has an ever-present sour facial expression that looks like he ate some bad sushi. Penn is boring. The action is boring. The so called political message is boring. “The Gunman” is boring.

#4 – “The Boy Next Door”

BOY NEXT

Another year and another crappy J-Lo movie. I’ve always thought Jennifer Lopez was a better actress that her movies suggest, but I’m honestly starting to second guess myself. “The Boy Next Door” does her no favors. This ‘thriller’ starts off with a tingle of promise but it squanders it within minutes becoming a predictable and dumb exercise in tedium. It’s too absurd to be taken seriously and too serious to be good campy fun. The ending is the cake topper – a completely idiotic finale that leaves more gaping plot holes than answers. A total waste of time.

#3 – “The Ridiculous 6”

RID62

What would a ‘Worst of’ list be without an Adam Sandler movie? This serving of Sandler’s annualized cinematic slop ventures into the Old West, but aside from that there’s no difference between this and the normal garbage he churns out. Sandler and his usual cronies follow the same formula of dopey characters, overused juvenile gags, and general lazy humor. The sad thing is “The Ridiculous 6” will have a following. It will make a profit. Some people will think it’s funny. And ultimately that will be enough to encourage another movie of this type for next year. Ugh!

#2 – “Fantastic Four”

FANTASTIC FOUR

Talk about a trainwreck from its inception. The Fantastic Four aren’t exactly box office gold to begin with, but this was a film riddled with odd decision-making from the start. The casting intrigued some but felt terribly off to me. I also wasn’t big on Josh Trank who I feel gets too much credit for his overpraised “Chronicle”. Both concerns proved to be valid. None of the cast feel comfortable or even engaged and Trank’s direction is all over the map. And then there is the story itself, a clumsy and painfully dull slog. Hardly anything works in this series death knell.

#1 – “Mortdecai”

Leave it to Johnny Depp to give us something worse than any of the above disasters. You would think his career would be bruised by the number of painfully bad film choices he has made, but I’m not sure that’s the case. “Mortdecai” is probably the worst of the bunch. From start to finish “Mortdecai” feels like some kind of weird disjointed in-joke and the audience are never let in on it. The gags are appallingly unfunny, the dialogue is  lifeless, and Depp’s attempt at quirky humor is inane and frankly quite embarrassing. There are some talented people in its cast, but when the material is this dreadful it just doesn’t matter.

2015 Blind Spot Series: “Sweet Smell of Success”

SWEET POSTER

Lying at the cold calloused heart of “Sweet Smell of Success” is an acidic but thoroughly intriguing relationship. There are a number of things that set this film apart and distinguish it as something special. I’m talking in front of and behind the camera. But the driving force and its lasting aftertaste comes from the pungent and destructive relationship between a powerful New York newspaper columnist and a smarmy press agent.

The film is based on a story by Ernest Lehman that first appeared in Cosmopolitan magazine. Film rights were acquired by Burt Lancaster’s production company and Alexander Mackendrick was brought in to direct. By that time Lancaster had a lot of pull in the film industry and was considered an intimidating presence. Lehman had turned down an offer to direct the picture because of Lancaster. Even Mackendrick found filming to be stressful.

Lancaster plays J.J. Hunsecker. The character is said to be inspired by renowned syndicated columnist Walter Winchell. The film came out while Winchell still held considerable persuasive power. His daily columns were read by over 50 million people and were carried by over 2,000 newspapers. But Lancaster also had clout and wasn’t afraid to push the project. The film unquestionably stresses the bad side of Winchell by giving us a character so intensely self-centered and morally repugnant. 

SWEET1

Tony Curtis plays Sidney Falco, a small-time struggling press agent who basically lives on whatever scraps Hunsecker feeds him. In Hunsecker eyes Falco is an expendable source for information; a desperate and disposable puppet. Hunsecker knows that Falco isn’t above shady deals or unethical practices and he uses that to his advantage. Falco looks at Hunsecker as his meal ticket. At times he shows what looks like puppy dog admiration, but in reality Falco is just as devious, just as opportunistic, and just as unlikable.

As the film starts Falco is upset because Hunsecker has left him out in the cold and refuses to take his calls. We learn that Hunsecker’s sister Susan (Susan Harrison) has fallen in love with a local jazz guitarist Steve Dallas (played by Martin Milner). Falco has been tasked with breaking up the relationship but so far has failed. Hunsecker has refused to promote Falco’s clients in his column until Dallas is out of the picture. This simple thread of plot makes up the main story, but the true focus is on the relationship between two repugnant individuals.

Lehman and Clifford Odets wrote the screenplay which is as brilliant as it is toxic. The dialogue is rich with razor-sharp discourse and verbal jousting. The characters talk with a twisted poetic flow especially Hunsecker. He constantly speaks as he writes – in cruel and piercing metaphors. Lancaster gives us so many memorable lines my favorite being “I’d hate to take a bite outta you. You’re a cookie full of arsenic.”

sweet2

This was a big film for both Curtis and Lancaster. Up to that point Curtis had made his way as a Hollywood pretty-boy. He fought hard for the role of Falco in hopes that it would earn him respect as a dramatic actor. That’s exactly what happened. Lancaster’s films had given him the reputation of a true all-American boy. “Sweet Smell of Success” was a striking departure much like Henry Fonda’s vile, villainous turn in “Once Upon a Time in the West”. It left audiences shocked.

Watching the film you notice so many impressive touches and striking details. It was shot by James Wong Howe who utilizes the city in a variety of ways. Howe incorporates strategic lighting, clever camera tricks, and an amazing visualization hectic New York City life. Much was shot on location during extremely busy times and also at night which adds to tone the story is shooting for.

There is nothing pretty or uplifting about the story “Sweet Smell of Success” is telling. There is nothing redeeming and respectable about its cruel and shameless lead characters. But in terms of wickedly smart and thoroughly compelling filmmaking “Sweet Smell” is top of the line. Even more impressive, the film is nearing 60 years-old yet it’s still as potent today as it was then. The performances, the direction, the cinematography, the script – they all still sparkle which is a testament to the film’s greatness.

VERDICT – 4.5 STARS 

4.5 STARS