In defence of my top 12 - part 6

6 The Godfather
All my favourite films seem to be very tricky to synopsinise, eh? It's the epic tale of the Corleone crime family. Family in very much two senses of the word.

What is there that this film hasn't got? Aside from the RSPCA movie award, what prizes are going that it can't win? Lets start with the acting. Everyone always raves about Marlon Brando, and they're right to do so. Somehow his regal aura that affects the other characters trancends the screen. I certainly love and respect him as much, and there are an awful lot of people in the world who insist he's not such a bad guy...

...which he certainly is, he just doesn't look it compared to One Other Character in particular. The fact that...Michael is actually the main character...may be the best kept secret in the world.

Bad acting is all around us, folks, there are far more bad actors than good. But you never really notice quite how many mediocre performances there are until confronted by somebody like Al Pacino. That's the one that really blew me away, and I've been dead picky ever since.

As for the rest of the family, I just like Sonny. An awful awful lot. Tom is also a sweety, to the extent that I actually find Robert Duval quite hard to watch in anything else. Fredo's OK, but he really doesn't get enough screen time.

The script deserves praise if only on account of the opening sequence. It conveniently introduces all the characters, and their relationships. We meet Anselm the baker, and Lucy Mancini, both of which pop up briefly later. It sets up every single plotlet; even the final scenes occour as a result of it. Even the party going on outside while business continues within the Don's shady office sets the tone for a two-sided family. And it manages all this, while remaining entertaining. Geniuswork! The formula was so successful they repeated it exactly in the two sequels, in a very annoying way. The plot is richly complex, making it rewarding on a second watch. That's a nice way of saying I didn't quite get what was going on until I'd seen it four or five times. Does it matter? Hell no!

Most importantly, it's very very brown. This film has some of the lovliest cinematography I've ever seen. Suddenly, the world is bathed in these lovely, lovely golden browns. It lends the plot an even more nostalic feel, transforming an average crime story into an epic, and unpleasant criminals into wuvvy human beings. In fact, when last faced with purchasing sunglasses, I picked my orange pair because they make things "go Godfather"...

Good music? Check! This is the other factor in making the movie beautiful. The minute that horn comes in on the black background, you're just hooked. The whole album streams at this site (which unfortunately is currently threatening to close)

Problems? Oh, the odd one or two. It's very serious throughout, and Michael's costumes are totally unflattering. And you could argue that it's "boring" (though personally, it could have done with being longer...) Most glaringly, though, this is one of those films which is so darn great, it spoils all other movies for a patch of time. Because there's a dreadful niggling possibility you may never see anything this fantastic ever again...

And despite what you may have heard, it is better than part 2.

Sum up the film in a moment: "Do you renounce Satan and all his works?" "I do renounce them." (oh you sweet liar...)
Best scene: "Do you think I'd make my sister a widow?"
Best line: "Luca Bratsi held a gun to his head, and my father assured him that either his brains or his signature would be on the contract."
Favourite character: ooooh, Michael...I've quite a history of falling in love with unsuitable and fictional guys...though I've got a lot of affection for Tom, Sonny and Vito too.
Special mention: for Michael's eyes. This, my friends, is proper acting. You can see his entire train of thought...then half way through, they just go cold. Absolutely dead. How the hell does he do it?!
Best watched: before you have to spend time with your extended family

That might be the worst written piece of work on this entire site ever. Oh well. It's made me want to see the film again now...It'd be great if all three were on the plane to New Zealand.

Me and me sister watched Ghostbusters last night. It's never as good as I remember it...we had it on more as background noise while we were unecessarily fangirly. She did Tamora Pierce and LOST art, while I continued my mini Guildenstern costume being made for an unforutante Ken which didn't hide fast enough. The costume looks fantastic. My only real problem is that Ken isn't quite...weedy enough? That sounds mean,

And now some shameless advertising. LOST ain't the greatest thing ever put on TV, but if you think it is then bookmark http://monsteratethepilot.blogspot.com/. It's my sister's new blog reviewing episodes and discussing the show- it hasn't quite cranked up yet, but she's a better writer than me so if you're interested, check it out.

!!!!!!!! (PS - now what?)

Well, it's been a hellava long wait guys. Spurred on by a pal who commented "Why haven't you actually watched your boxed set yet?!", I stopped being miss will-watch-anything and successfully ushered in Reservoir Dogs as the evening's movie.

YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It took some rather unsubtle hinting at my sister to get her out of the room for an hour and a half, and some even more unsubtle hinting to persuade my parents but anyway…The one condition was that I’d done my homework, so I bent the truth, said yes and then scooted down to my room and did two pieces in approximately as many minutes. And it was not without a little nervousness (after all, I’d probably have to lie blind to all my friends if I disliked it…) I sat down. I really need not have worried in the slightest…

There are two different ways I could use the phrase "worse than Rififi". The first: "Hannah is a billion times worse than Rififi.", a very likely occurrence. The second: "I've just spent an hour watching a film about the aftermath of a diamond heist; oh it's as bad as Rififi!" in terms of nerve-wrenching suspense. If you understand me. And this gets jolly close to the latter catagory.

All the characters are great, totally great. I'd like to make individual comments, but I'm having problems with anything more than "really great". I certainly couldn’t pick a favourite from the central four. Mr Blonde is just so chilled, you've got to have respect for his total lack of panic - and while the ear thing was nasty, at least it looks like he was enjoying it. Mr Pink gets all the good lines - the tipping scene is so funny, as is him complaining about his colour. And also, of the set he's probably the most like me - I wanted to cheer when I saw him crawl out from under the ramp. Mr Blue's tash is cool (what else is there to say?). Mr White was sweet, in the same way that Bruce Willis' character in The Sixth Sense is sweet. Both of them give the feeling things were safe when they were on screen - like nothing drastically awful was going to happen as long as they were there. He really should not have left Messrs Orange and Blonde on their own with Marv…

And then Mr Orange who is also very sweet, despite having the worst pair of sunglasses. He deserves a special mention for being so un-like himself. I've a history of getting uncomfortable seeing actors from great things in other things. After The Godfather, for example, seeing Robert Duvall in a western was actually quite hard. It seems to be totally random, but after R+GaD I was slightly worried I may have the same problem with this. Needn't have worried, really (on the subject, I was overjoyed watching the special features to see how overjoyed Tim was that QT had seen R+GaD. After all, I’m always happy to see people who love it as much as me…)

I also love the way they actually talk like real people. The opening scene at breakfast could easily have been me and my six chums over lunch. Only we don't swear so much...and Lauren would kill me if I ever so much as mentioned Madonna...

And now a bit of spoilervision:

A bit more for Mr O. and Mr W., both of which you need to feel a bit sorry for. Mr O was beyond fantastic - and it seems horribly unfair that he's the one to be badly injured. Not only because he's really a "good guy", but also he's shot by a woman and a woman that misses fairly badly (as Mr White points out comfortingly(?!), a stomach wound takes hours to die from...) You kinda expect the wound to be a little more noble than that. And he's got the mean knowledge that rescue is as far away as Jo arriving. He has the worst, worst luck.

He’s an interesting character too, because he is a goodie. But then, as the criminals are our heroes, teeeechnically he’s the bad guy. And then on the other hand, he rescues Marv (temporarily, at least. And out of the two, I'd much rather be shot by Eddie than burnt to death) which is a good thing to do. Lets put it this way - I'd be hard pressed to choose a fave, but I was certainly rooting for Mr O to aim well as opposed to Mr B succeeding in toasting the poor guy. Then Eddie comes back and extols Mr B as the best and most loyal guy in the universe - he's a sadist, but not a traitor like Freddie is, which is worse/better/just as bad(?). And the contradictions go on and on. Marv's a little bit of a hero really - he doesn't say anything, even though he knew Mr O was a cop and it would have been a good way to try and squirm off the hook. I love that scene between them - "We're just going to lie here and bleed".

I really don't envy him one bit. Besides the obvious reason. I mean, two people (Larry and Marv) actually give their lives for him, waste of time that it is. That's got to hurt. "A man's got to have rocks in his head the size of Gibraltar to work undercover" - damn right!

And Mr White? Aw...as I said, I got the feeling nothing truly terrible would happen when he was around - especially as he seemed to be the only one at all concerned that Mr Orange was making a bit of a mess of the floor. He says he'll take care of him, and you really think he's going to. And the end is a total killer, because they've developed this bond and he sticks his neck out against a pair of very old and good friends in his defence. As I've said so, so many times before, betrayal's a subject which gets me every time. As much as I like Mr O, I think Mr W is entirely justified in putting a third bullet in him because the knowledge must hurt...

There is a lot of sick irony running through the film. Mr Blonde is widely regarded as a psycho, but we don't actually get to see him kill anyone even though we know he took out a bunch of civilians. If I recall correctly, the only civilian we see get killed is shot by undercover cop Mr Orange, which is just twisted and mean. In fact, he just has the worst luck...similarly, Mr Pink the professional, is the only guy whose name we the audience don't learn. I'm sure that was deliberate.

The problem is, they're all so indecisive. They have to get Mr Orange medical attention, they've got to work out who's the rat and they frequently consider (with good reason) getting out of there, in case the location's been compromised. Which it has. They just never get around to any of it. Useless!

End spoilers.

The whole film was one long best scene, but the notable moment is during Mr Orange's story about the drugs in the toilet. The standing in front of that beautiful wall of graffiti, pacing in his room and then finally coming to the event...he's chatting away and suddenly, we're flashing back to the event within the flashback, and he's so in the moment he's standing in the loo but still talking about it. The camera circles him and the stationary cops, and he’s chatting away. It just produced a “wow” moment, even though it’s just a cut to a guy in a lav.

I liked the direction, it was really sedate but quite beautiful - lots of unbroken shots which really gave the actors a chance to show their stuff. The bits in the warehouse almost reminded me of a play - lots of talking on one location. We could call it "Waiting for Jo", and instead of Vladamir and Estragon considering killing themselves, they ponder killing each other and when Pozzo arrives, he beats Lucky up to pass the time. There were hardly any close ups - this sometimes made the dialogue hard to understand, but it did look very pretty.

The story is virtually flawless. I say virtually, because while it's pretty great it can't stand up to two days of uninterupted scrutiny (that's how long it took me to write this up, by the by) - in fact, I'm not sure anything can. Totally flawless then. It never felt forced. The flashbacks dissipated the tension somewhat, and it gave the whole thing a very unstudied, incidental feel. Frequently with flash back/forwards films, you get gripped on one plot and have to sit through the rest - thankfully, this was not one of them.

In Film Studies we're doing the difference between story (what happens) and plot (how it unfolds on screen). Just needed to add that, because it would not have been half so effective presented in chronological order.

As for the violence? Ok, this is not one for people with weak stomachs, but I didn't mind it. In fact, coming from the cuddly world of PG-13 when a bullet wound equates to an easily brushed off paper cut if it's a hero, or an instant life drain if it's a henchman, it was very refreshing. You'd be forgiven for thinking it didn't hurt. Although I continue to disagree that cutting away is more effective than holding the camera still (having said that, I watched all the deleted scenes apart from the alternate versions of Mr Blonde's big scene...) Interesting fact you may not have known - the type of fake blood they used was very sticky, and it set very hard - to the extent that some of the actors had to be peeled off the floor and hosed down after a days filming before they could move properly.

All in all, this must be the weirdest feel-good film ever. Yes, you heard me, feel-good film. I dunno, it could be the cheery soundtrack, or the light hearted dialogue - I don't think I stopped grinning throughout. Awfully good fun. To be fair, it was cinematic join-the-dots most of the way. All the major events I knew of several months in advance, but actually it didn't matter. It was almost like coming back to an old friend, like smiling before the joke in a comedy you've alreadt seen. My mum managed to remain awake all the way through - an occurrence I can only remember one other time this year.

Anyway, I’m weighing up how soon the laws of decency allow me to rewatch it. I've already devoured the special features - the most exciting thing is that Mr Blonde’s car is actually a yellow Cadillac Coupe de Ville. Should I be proud that a fictional psychopath happens to drive my dream car? I’ve loved that make for years, ever since I saw one in a colouring book. When I was 12, I bought a small 5 inch replica which sits on the shelf near my bed. And yellow is the only colour for a car...If I had enough cash and, er, a driving licence I’d want one of them more than anything else, though I’d also settle for the thing Mary Kate and Ashley drive in Sweet Sixteen, or a hippy bus like the one in Cars.

I'm gonna say this once - it sucks big time wanting to talk about something and not having anyone to talk with. It also sucks knowing you can only ever see something the first time once. And it sucks knowing that the only way to recapture the feeling is to make somebody else see it, when you're surrounded by people who'd attack you at the suggestion - and who you're totally unsure if they'd like anyway. Still, I've celebrated by reading all the things in various movie magazines and books I've (almost) managed to resist looking at all these months. And now it's just a wait until it hits me properly that I now no longer have anything to look forward to or complain about...

(PS - if you've seen it, check out this short. I particularly love the director's credit at the start. It's a mini triumph of great editing. OK, so who cares where the plot got plagarised from - it's still an entertaining little watch)

I also saw Man in the Iron Mask the night before. I borrowed it off a friend, and she refused to return my copy of Rosencrantz until I gave it back. Needless to say I went home that very evening and watched it straight away. It was ok, though I had some difficulty getting really involved. The costumes were very pretty, and Jeremy Irons had all the best lines. Or possibly it’s his delivery. “Sometimes there are more important things in life than a great pair of tits” sticks in my mind as especially funny. It’s a mess of accents, but it doesn’t really matter. What does is the cheesy moments – especially the end. I never managed to finish the book, but it almost felt like a death was a sacrifice demanded by Orson Welles (head in the pantheon of the Gods of Film, savvy?) to let them end the movie. It felt so cheap. Still…today she returned my baby, early in the morning. My pals asked me if anything was wrong, I must have been acting somewhat erratically (To start with, I was early, and my hair was neat…). I managed fifteen minutes before coming out with the news, and predictably nobody wanted to discuss it with me, hence the rant above.

(PS – my parties are the event of the year. OK, it’s an exaggeration, but they’re certainly a lot of fun. We still do party games, and always dress up. This year we’re gonna do film costumes, of course, though I’m tossing up who to come as. The most likely candidate is Shaun from Shaun of the Dead. I’ve got a cricket bat, and most of my friends have seen it.
On the other hand, I do have my excellent Frank costume lying around from last Halloween:

I had such fun making that mask, I'll post the instructions around Halloween. The downside is that my friends have already seen that costume.

I’m also considering Rosencrantz. Because I think his costume the most wonderful thing in the world, and I’ve got a combination of clothes almost exactly like his – I subconsciously bought a jacket which is similar, though not perfect. I only realised when I accidentally went out “in costume” and looked down. Plus, now I can make the biplane I’d have me props all done. But something else I’ve been mulling over for a while, and now I can actually in fairness do, is Mr Orange. I know – awful awfully bad taste, but it would be very easy. And pretty funny too…)

I just found this soundtrack site – it’s great! It’s a mp3 blog for soundtracks, without the guilt of downloading things and then wondering whether it’s really all that bad to keep them. Mostly, it’s the type of stuff I don’t like, but there’s the odd good one, and John Williams fans will have a field day.

Final word: is it OK to list films you haven’t actually seen as favourites on your ymdb.com account? I’m not asking this for myself, I’ve got a friend who’s put two I know she hasn’t seen. I’m just curious as to if this is acceptable?

This morning in film studies, we each had to present a few minutes of film and analyse it for the class. I toyed with the Godfather restaurant scene (too unfairly spoiler-y) and a bit of Rififi (foreign French classic - looks like I'm trying too hard) before settling on "get off the road" from Fellowship of the Ring. I forgot to do any preparation work; I barely remembered to bring the DVD, but I came out ok. I'm a pretty good public speaker, and I know the thing backwards - I'm one of those annoying fans who mouths the script while watching. So I commented on the change from comedy ("mushrooms!") to scaryness, the lack of music, the exaggerated sound, the point of view shots and of course the reverse dolly zoom.

It went down well I think. Especially in light of what happened next.

The second presentation was the first ten minutes of Ghost Ship - and those of you who've already seen it will know exactly what's coming next, and if you don't and don't want to then skip the next two paragraphs. It was a good sequence to choose though - light cheery music, a boat party, dancing on the deck. The credits came up in curly pink letters - certainly contrary to one's expectations. This went on for a pretty dull 7 mins or so, and I believe it is what they call "creating suspense". Then the music goes scary and someone mucks up the equipment. Unbeknownst to the dancers on the deck, a very taut thin metal wire has been stretched.

And then it snaps. Whooosh noise. First shot: the heads being lopped off flowers. The dancers freeze. Blood drips onto the floor. "Oh surely not..." is what I was thinking. But yes, the wire cut through about 25 people simultaneously. All of a sudden there are bodies falling in half, severed arms, a writhing red mess of women trying to find their lower halves. It was surreal - so over the top yukky that it was almost unbelievable. I've read that's what seeing blood is really like. They couldn't just chop the captain's head off. Oh no, the top half is allowed to slide down and off with a satisfactory plop.

A bit like my last really good nightmare; I'd be lying if I said I didn't think it was gross. Although I bore it with better fortitude than some other people in the class. It certainly woke everyone up. The teacher commented that he should probably have warned us first. Anyway, then the guy pointed some things out...while playing it through again...

I saw Syriana yesterday, and while I am in no way claiming to understand it - I was utterly confused for 1/3 of the time - I did enjoy it, and thought it was fantastic. The cinematography has class written all over it - really naturalistic camera work. The script is jolly fast paced, it doesn't linger on anything but it still feels sedate.It truly is blink-and-you-miss it for major plot points. The screen never tugs at your emotions. Someone dies, someone gets hurt, bad things happen - but the music doesn't swell and it just lets you react naturally. And then it moves on to something else. The music is very good though - apart from the inclusion of a noise from the Donnie Darko soundtrack. It's a mix of pounding bass, Arabic drumming, entirely suitable for the understated tale they're trying to tell. The acting is ordinary in a good way - all the characters have superfluous families, little plotlets that are never expanded on. The film wastes no time on reminding you what's going on or even showing the characters travel from one place to another - you've got to be awake, and you've probably got to watch it more than once. It's remarkable that big companies keep going for written-by-an-idiot-monkey plots. What with their zeal for profit, I'm amazed they haven't realised clever storylines compell watchers to buy the dvd or visit the cinema more than once.

All in all, it's not one to watch when drunk or dozy, but even if it's confusing you can't help but admire the excellent work up there on screen.

That was the afternoon. And then in the evening we watched The Wicker Man. This is purely because I want to be able to march around vocally complaining about the remake. I would have done it anyway, but it feels more valid if I've actually seen the original...

That too was good - although I defy you not to think of Balamory when copper Howie first comes to Summerisle. I'd also liken the too-happy, creepy inhabitants to the Village in The Prisoner. Howie is very much like Holly Martins in The Third Man, entirely out of his depth - a devout Christian in a community of Pagans, who really needs a few more lessons in guile. The script is excellent ("They do so love their divinity lessons" is the dry comment on watching naked girls leap over a bonfire between standing stones) and the plot quietly gripping. Even if you know what's going to happen. Which most people now probably do. My one criticism would be the negative pagan stereotype - this film is probably responsible for a fair number of mistakes regarding neo-celtic culture - and this hardly dampens your enjoyment unless you are, of course, a neo-pagan in which case try not to be too offended.

I'd recommend it to music fans as well - there are Clannady bits, and the Medieval Babes covered one of of the tracks. The best song is definitely the one Britt Ekland's character sings while...er...that's not the reason I like it, I hope you understand...

I've got the afternoon pretty much off, and I intend to spend my time profitably watching Some Like it Hot in a free room...

A little more film education

Today we started on sound in Film Studies, which was pretty interesting. We started off with diegetic/non diegetic sound. We saw a clip from Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, a clip which in no way inspired me to watch any more. You know that thing when a character says something dramatic, strides off and then his partner makes a remark, character turns back and says something else even more dramatic before striding some more? Well we watched a scene between the captain and his first mate, and this happened five times in a row - no fooling.

Anyway, for those of you curious and dim enough not to know what those long words meant, diegetic sound is sound within the movie world - though not necessarily on screen. People talking, birds tweeting, cars passing...whereas non-diegetic is anything the characters can't hear, such as voiceover or music. Though not music from a radio. You mean to tell me you didn't know that? Well my my...shame on you...

The real dielemma comes when dealing with, eg, imaginary friends in imaginary friend movies (I could name some, but I've a spoiler free policy) which only some people can hear...or what about the accompaniment in musicals, like Moulin Rouge?

This made me particularly cheery because we watched a bit of Once Upon a Time in the West's opening - the dialogue-free opening until the train turned up. Which was great, but then I wanted to see the rest of the scene...

I was trying to untangle the infamous baptism montage in the Godfather earlier, which was a thorough mess. The music is obviously non-diegetic, but the priest's voice flickers between both depending on the screen and it's all too confusing...this one's easier...

So that's a wuvvy bit of Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid and it shows off the types of sound quite nicely - they chat (diegetic sound) and then the music kicks in, which I jolly hope they can't hear (non-diegetic sound). The scene I really wanted to find was the prologue from Fellowship of the Ring but unfortunately I wasn't prepared to wade through 400 pages of fan videos and bad parodies on youtube to find it. But that's an interesting one, with voiceover, music and diegetic sound - concurrent or consecutive.

We also learnt about sound bridges, which I'd never noticed before cos they're kinda dull. That's when you hear the sound of dogs barking a split second before you see the dogs on screen - it links scenes together, and is pretty clever but not as fun as the final thing we learnt - that's parallel and contrapuntal sound.

Parallel music is basically when the images and the music match up. Contrapuntal is when it doesn't. The clip above is 100% parallel music - it's a cheery, sunny scene accompanied by the most affable music imaginable. Whereas, for example, if somebody should choose to torture a policeman to, say, "Stuck in the Middle with You" *cough*, that would be contrapuntal music. Savvy? Now I'm pretty sure that clip would be relitavely easy to find, but I probably shouldn't seeing as it's probably cheating...though I already know what happens...and having seen half of it...(it was on one of these "top 200 scary moments" things; it also was the point at which I got sent out of the room and so the two seconds of knife not yet connecting with ear have engraven themselves rather deep. After all, you never forget a film you see half of...) but debate aside I'm not going to find it - instead, here's a bit from Shaun of the Dead which is also pretty much spoiler free, though the very brief flashes of zombie may freak some people out:

Zombies! Scary! Terror! Queen! That is the very essence of the contrapuntal soundtrack...now I think of it, lots of great scenes are made great by the odd but fitting choice of music. My review of The Third Man suffered greatly from the lack of the word contrapuntal - but now I can use it, may I add the slightly odd contrast of cheery zither/bleak noir works great.

My friend was pretty happy too, because they showed us a clip from Trainspotting, when he's preparing to quit heroin to the sounds of Carmen, and she loves it. So all in all, all was well.

The joy of film studies is it teaches you things you already know in principle; it just informs you that some clever chap has invented a long word for it.

In other news, a jolly nice person posted links to www.garyoldman.info on my friendly neighbourhood Rosencrantz and Guildenstern site (look, it's an active community of people just about as obsessed as I am (I have over 600 icons on my system...so in love...); I can overlook the slash side. Not that I mind, it's just...I'm a fan of the "they don't exist" school, called into existence and given no time for anything else. There's something not right about the way they communicate - they don't even articulate their friendship, let alone anything else. Plus...it's much sweeter when it's only implied...*sighs*...), in particular the interviews from the R+G dvd. Because they're jolly hard to get hold of, my copy's actually Dutch and came without extras. Woes! Anyway, here's the most interesting things gleaned from that:

--> originally, the interchangable sweethearts were actually cast the other way around - which is a hell of a mindwarp. I pride myself on my imagination, my unfailing ability to add bungee jumpers to the Argonath and actually nudge Robert Redford into the Godfather (which only a series of lucky accidents prevented him from being in). Well this is one scenario I simply cannot visualise, and believe me that's unusual. Still, interesting, eh?
--> To complicate things more, he adds he thinks he could have played Hamlet pretty well...
--> they had such a lot of fun that they did lots of rehersals. In their spare time as well. And sometimes when they were just hanging out at the pub etc. And sometimes when they'd actually already shot the scene, just because it was such fun. OK, so you guys might not quite sympathise with how utterly wonderful this is, but I certainly think it is very sweet...

In fact that's just about it...PS visit the Film Experience Blog, I just found it today and it's a nice site...

Be sure thy sins shall find you out: Godfather 3

Hot off the press, stunning news, remember you heard it here first: THE GODFATHER PART III IS NOT TOO BAD. In fact, I loved it. More than Part II. But I don't want to overload you with shocks all at once, so we'll take it a step at a time...

Spoilers for all three throughout.

As you may have gathered, last night I watched said film and enjoyed it exceedingly. It wasn't without it's share of problems - like the rest of the trilogy, it took me a while to get into it, I could hardly tell the supporting cast apart, and the mafia politics had me utterly confused. Like part II, I though it could have been browner and I missed the members of the family who were absent.

But as for Total Film's assertion that it was "misjudged", as for the general consensus that it is unworthy of the rest of the trilogy - fie on you fools! Perhaps after a 15 year wait it was a bit of a disappointment - from my point of view, seeing them all in the same year, it was a fitting end to a great trilogy.

There has always been a shadow over Michael. No, not his vast catalogue of sins (though they hang pretty heavy, and heavier here than ever), but his father's memory. All the way through people keep mentioning Vito and reminding us that they conduct their business very differently (see below for my opinion on that...). The most effective moment, I think, is the very beginning of Part II where the name Godfather is immediately applied to the deceased Vito instead of his son - setting the tone of the film. But I thought the flashbacks were a bit heavy handed, and they didn't really enlighten me at all. That's not art, that's obvious. FFC and Total Film agree the stories are better told togather than on their own - I heartily disagree. No, I was far more touched by the more subtle effect produced in part III. Discussions with mob bosses over a table, getting tubed to a hospital bed, developing a charming rasp (yes I know it's due to alchohol abuse on the actor's part, but it doesn't make it any less of a curious character point) and having to deal with the loss of a child.

This film's all about him (yay!) looking back on his achievements - and taking a peep at his flashbacks, there obviously isn't very much there he feels proud of.

Of course, as with the first two, it does all comes back to Michael - and there are too many good moments to count. Anthony singing the in Sicilian was wonderful - a pretty song, bringing bad memories for a Don losing his nerve to the extent he now relies on sunglasses to keep his emotions locked behind bars. Whether quietly inquiring of a corpse what he's done wrong, being invited to confess by an unsuspecting priest or screaming his brother's name during a fit, he's still as elusive as ever. I mean, no one expected him to turn into a monster in the first film (except me, damn spoilers). No one expected him to turn into that much of a monster in the second film (I think you know what incident I'm referring to - not that it surprised me, damn spoilers) And the resulting character arc in this film is about as astonishing. He gets more smiles here than the first two put together.

Sofia Coppola was gorgeous - ok, her acting was a bit limp, but no way as bad as I'd been lead to believe. She was hardly in it for goodness sake - certainly not enough to "ruin it" as people say. Vincent is lovely, in every possible way. Though he's definitely from Sonny's side of the family, he has got a pinch of Michael's quietly psychotic personality - and he looks like Robert De Niro when you squint. Of course, the very suggestion of a Godfather IV would have me in spasms of terror, but it'd be curious to see what sort of a Don he turned out to be. Kay was good in the first two, but here she's really really good - near on destroyed by her experiences from the previous films, which leaves her in a wonderfully fragile state just in time for the mess which is the last five minutes. The real revelation here, though, is Connie - transformed from victim to victor by her various troubles. I wanted to cheer for her once or twice, finally getting a say in Family business. Sweeping in and giving the final word on whether to hit Joey Zaza - tee hee - one wonders what sort of a don she'd have made...

FFC hasn't lost his touch either - it's hardly as good as the baptism sequence, but the opera house montage is still excellent - and while the end came as no surprise, thanks to the same internet rat who let me know who Keyser Soze was (damn you!), it still packed a punch.

One criticism would be the feeling of samey-ness went through both sequels - the plot ran itself through holes to get a party scene at the beginning, some violence during a religious occasion and a montage of hits at the end. It irritated me in II, but seeing it happen again in III was unforgivable.

Overall? Well, I'll be watching my back for assasins after this, but I actually enjoyed this more than Part II. I'm not saying it was better - in terms of greaty-ness they seemed pretty much equal below the unmatchable Part I. For me, it's all about the character arc. Part II doesn't have much more to say about Michael - just confirms a few things which were obvious in his personality from the end of part I. Part III picks the journey up again, and takes it in a whole new direction.


Just a few odd thoughts which don't really fit anywhere else:

I've always adored Tom. Somewhere in the back of my mind was a little voice that said, if something nasty happened to Michael it'd be just comeuppance and probably for the best, wheras Tom was different...(though not necessarily a better person. Just because he's calm and rational, doesn't make him nice. After all, I'd say Mike was very calm and rational. And he didn't seem too horrified standing near the body in Senator Geary's room. Considering he was donning at the time, who's not to say it wasn't his idea?) Thus I found his absence particularly distressing. Especially as it involved actors and their pecuniary matters.

Michael tells Anthony to have the car picture "for luck". Bad move. I have very vivid memories of just what luck it brought Michael when he first set eyes on it.

And I jolly well hope Sollezzo's disembodied spirit saw all of this - I hope he regrets what he did in part I, and I hope he feels bad for unleashing Don Michael on the world. If not for that unfortunate misunderstanding, our hero may have remained a civilian and true to his resolve not to get involved and everything would have been better.

And now, for a bit of a rant. Vito and Michael - forever to be measured by each other. There's an assumption that Vito is a "better man" than Michael (especially at imdb), and I can see why some people think so. Well here's my take on it

The difference between them is merely their beginnings. Vito saw Don Fannuci, a nasty swagger who bullied the neighbourhood, and transformed accordingly to a benevolent don who was willing to grant favours and help his fellows out. However, Michael started half way up. He was born into the mafia world, it was with him all his life and thus he got a different perspective on it - he never sympathised with the "little man" because unlike his dad, he never was one. But who did Mike learn donning from? Where did he get the idea that vengeance implies more than "kick me" signs? It's all perspective. Who didn't love The Don in part one? Kind grandparent, benevolent friend, a great politician - all because we didn't see him do anything evil. But who's to say he didn't, off screen? Every other don did and I think it's fair to assume Vito did too, to cement his power and keep things running smoothly. He's been through gang wars before, he shot Fannuci - his kingly bearing is just a thing he has developed, like the way they insist it's a "business", to cover in his own mind the fact he's a criminal. The idea Vito is nicer is merely an impression. It's all a matter of personality - Vito's a bon viveur, Michael a little more introverted, which is why he seems evil. "Why were you so loved and I so feared" Mike asks Tomasino's corpse, though he could equally have been addressing his father - it's not the things they do, but the way they do it. And a biased camera allows the actions of one to seem worse than those of another. Perhaps running for weapons wasn't Vito's first reaction, but Mike being a very rational and logical thinker (too rational and logical...) probably ran through the other options first. Vito forgive's Sonny's death for political reasons; Michael allows the Risotto brothers to get away with bad stuff scot free, for similar reasons.

But wait, I hear you say...what of the inevitable Fredo question. I wish Mike hadn't done it - it's brought up in answer to all inquries. Almost any discussion of the trilogy can be ended with the words "He had Fredo killed". Vito had a great life. Sonny died, which must have stung, but it was nowhere near the horrible position Michael found himself in. Michael was only trying to protect his family, like his good ol' dad the family came first. But at the end of II, he'd lost his wife, his children and his brother (I mean before the boathouse incident. Everyone always falls on Fredo's side in this - but personally, if my sister's actions had lead to me being attacked I'd be a little cross too. Not only had Fredo inadvertantly put his kids in danger, when called upon to account for his actions Fredo launches into a personal attack. When he says "I've always taken care of you", he means it -all his hard work evidently isn't appreciated by any of them.) all due to his actions. I've heard a thousand different people assert that Vito would never have done such a thing, but in protection of his family...? I'm not so sure...I think that given the right circumstances, he could have had his brother scrubbed. We never really get close to Vito the way we do with Michael. We only ever see Vito's persona, his public side - the side that inspires undying loyalty to characters and audience alike. Before you dispute it, he wears his public side in private as well as in public (tries to quote Connie from II, when she mentions "Dad being strong for all of us") Peverse as it may seem, Michael is far more human. Think about it for a moment...when do you ever know what the Don was really thinking? Perhaps it is just me, but Vito was only ever approached and appreciated from a distance. Vito was so family orientated, and so into the karma-aspects of favour granting that I think that given such a situation he'd do it.

Let's clarify. Pretend that Paulo didn't die, but teamed up with some bad guys and hit young Vito's house instead, putting his family in danger. And as a result, Mama Corleone walked out with baby Sonny, Fredo and Tom (after having an abortion - that'll be no baby Michael then) and left him all on his own. It's terrible just thinking about it - I get mental images of him nuking his brother's house and running around with semi-automatics, I think he would have been devastated. I even think he'd do it himself instead of sending a henchman. Vito really loved his family (don't believe anyone who tells you Mike loved his less...), and while circumstance lead him to forgive Sonny's murder, there was nothing in the way of Theoretical-Paulo's death

Verdict: don't let yourself be blinded by Vito's obvious charisma - just because he covers his tracks with a smile, doesn't make him any less of a baddie.






PS - over the weekend, me and four friends went on an adventure. We wandered randomly around the area, caught every bus we saw, attempted to get horribly lost and ended up where we'd started. All in all, we were lucky not to fall foul of a madman and get murdered in increasingly ukky ways. Especially as we all agreed that I, as the dim blonde, would be the first to be eaten. Anyway, eventually we wound up at a friends house and we decided to get bikes. Only problem - she had but four bikes. "Don't worry!" quoth I, "I've seen this film! It's possible for two people to ride on one bike!" Well, my friends, Paul Newman is either a blooming genius, or or Katherine Ross was tied on there with wires. We spent about 15 minutes trying to work it out, by which time the mother of the friend of the house we were at had produced cake, and everyone mysteriously decided not to use the bikes after all...

Cult Movie Rant 2: the Superflous and Badly Spelt Sequel

The debate continues. The current approach in the fight to prove Star Wars is not a cult film is a Venn diagram. For the uninformed, forgetful or just plain dim, a Venn diagram contains three overlapping circles, each with a bit of criteria. So films in the middle will agree with all three. You'll get the hang of it, my description is lame.

Here are the three circles:

Twelve Monkeys factor - odd, dark, mind bending, confusing, disturbing or plain bad taste. If it feels like a cult film. Also known as the films my mum didn't like.

Blade Runner factor - died at the box office, resurrected through video or midnight showings. Also applies to taccyness, floppyness, so bad-it's-good-ness, cheapness, ever-so-slightly-rubbishness,badly over budget-ness, smallness or indieness. Also known as no-blockbusters.

Star Trek factor - If it's quotable, causes dressing up or drinking games, inspires devotion and leads people to claim "Jedi" as a religion on public census records.

Yup, you spotted it. Star Wars does fit into one of the catagories. Whatever. The point of the venn diagram is this - everyone's definition of cult is different (it's just mine happens to be right...) but on the diagram all factors are equalled out, and thus the more culty the film, the more circles it'll be in. Savvy? For example, Once Upon a Time in the West died at the cinema and was resurrected on video, but nobody's claiming that as cult (see below)

So the question you are doubtless all asking - What DOES fit into the circles. Well, let's have a look....



Little red spots indicate films I haven't actually seen, so may be wrong about. RHPS stands for the Rocky Horror Picture Show, BR is Blade Runner, R+G is Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead, DD's Donnie Darko and W+I is Withnail & I. It's all objective anyway. Or subjective. One or the other - I know what I mean. If I gave this challenge to somebody else, they could get completely different results.

(You'll notice SoaP is not a cult movie. Because it's not. Hype does not equal cult, it's a virtual nemesis. Web hype created the Arctic Monkeys, and they're hardly an underground phenomenon. Yeh, it's called SoaP and guess what it's about! Ha ha! How clever! How funny! They're making a self-consciously awful movie! How post-ironic! It's not even very good at being bad, it's not half awful enough - just tediously subpar. See my review, which is a tad less harsh.)

While on that note, let me introduce you to my new best friend - The A-Z of Cult films and filmmakers, a far better book than the rough guide to cult films I reviewed last month, for several reasons. Lets start with the fact it only contained cult movies. No Godfather. No Pirates of the Carribbean. No Zulu. No Star Wars. Take that!!!!!!! Although there are one or one I disagree with - Once Upon a Time in the West...a nice touch though is it justifies its controversial decisions, such as The Matrix and Alien, which are defended pretty well.

The book is larger, but with far less entries so the films get a lot more space. Each has an entire page with a box of basic details and an extra colomn for MEMORABLE DIALOGE!!!!!!!!! Yes, an area celebrating cult quotability. OK, many of the quotes will mean very little unless you've seen the film ( I've seen Brazil several times recently, and I don't recognise all of them...), but it shows willing. Plus it adds yet more varaity to the ever-growing list of things I know about films I haven't seen.

The rest of the page is text- part synopsis, part discussion, and it's interesting even to those who haven't seen the film and mostly blissfully spoiler free! OK, not entirely. Quadrophenia, Brazil, the RHPS and a few more I've forgotten - but crucially it didn't give anything away about anything I wanted to see.

It also contains minibiographies of culty directors. I knew this to be accurate because I'd only heard of five of them. But the bit on Terry Gilliam was interesting, if erronious (the Good Omens project vanished). There's the occasional photo too, mostly black and white copies of the film poster.

And plus, another five-or-so films have piled onto my must-see list. So all in all, a good read - a book filled with films I'd never heard of, surely the final indicator that these films are truly culty.



This week has been the dolly zoom week. For those of you uninformed, thats a fun camera effect caused by walking backwards while zooming in or vice versa. It's famously used in Vertigo, and you'll also spot it in the "get off the road" scene in Fellowship of the Ring. I always keep a look out for them, cos they're cool - this week, an all time record of four. Two in Twelve Monkeys, one on Robert Redford's head in Spy Game and one during a cut scene for the Lara Croft computer game...

Finally, we need to congratulate the bright spark showing The Descent on a large screen underground. It could start a spate of location-inspired cinema. Titanic on a boat. Jaws on a beach (they actually did this last year; I didn't go). The Blair Witch Project in a dark forest. Airplane! on an, er, airplane...ok, a practical question now which possibly skirts tastelessness - do you think they'll show United 93, cos you know Hollywood never misses a trick...

My IMDB top 250

I saw someone do this on the filmwise site, and thought it had meme potential. So here we go, taking into account my age and the fact I live in a small area with bad dvd shops and my parents get suspicious of internet ordering drumroll please...


So far I’ve seen movies from the IMDB top 250.

5 movies that I think should not be in the IMDB top 250. (Random Order)
1 Vertigo (I'm sorry, but you know how I feel...)
2 Finding Nemo (The visuals were absolutely great. Just like Underworld. The stunning water effects did not make up for the slightly lame plot, dull script and charmless characters. Unlike, for example, Toy Story which not only was very impressive, but had spark as well.)
3 The Pianist (good, but not that good...)
4 The Incredibles (Pixar grudge? Nah...)
5 I'm getting desperate now (I haven't seen all that many after all), and I'm gonna go with Million Dollar Baby. I saw it on a plane, which never helps, and though I quite enjoyed it...it was a bit...like The Pianist it just didn't have that stunning factor some of the others have. Occasionally you just see a film, and you know you're in the hands of a master. This is not one of them.
6 Thought of another one - Finding Neverland. It's not even all that good...

5 movies that I think should be in the IMDB top 250 but are not. (Random Order)
To be honest, I can't think of any. Wait, is Moulin Rouge in there? Should be...

The best 5 movies that are in the IMDB top 250 are: (Random Order)
1 The Godfather (part 1)
2 L.A. Confidential
3 Once Upon a Time in the West
4 Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid
5 er...er...well there's Memento, Eternal Sunshine, Twelve Monkeys and Brazil all on that list and I can't choose...ok, as I can't decide and they're all a similar sort of film, I'm gonna go with something entirely different - Hero, or whatever the Mandarin translation is.

The last 5 IMDB top 250 movies I’ve seen.


The next IMDB top 250 movie I am going to see.
No idea. Probably Harvey - I've got it on video, and I may get around to seeing it sometime in the next...year...

The most disappointing IMDB top 250 movie I’ve seen.
Vertigo. As you've been told so many many times before. And Seven Samuri, but I don't really want to talk about that.

IMDB top 250 movie I really have no interest in seeing:
The Shawshank Redemption and Schindler's List. Both at the top. What a tragedy for me.

11 IMDB top 250 movies I really want to see (virtually random order)
1 Reservoir Dogs (duh...)
2 Fight Club (ditto)
3 The Third Man (Just because. There was a really good reason why this has lodged itself in my mind as a must-see, and I cannot remember what it is...)
4 OK, now what. Well those are the three I reeeeally want to see, lets have a look at the rest of the list. Well I've cut it down to a shortlist of 8 more...ah hell, I'll list 'em all. The Usual Suspects (Kevin Spacey, right?)
5 American Beauty (Kevin Spacey. Agan.)
6 The Good The Bad and The Director Who Just Can't Handle Tiny Titles (The also irritatingly titled Once Upon a Time in the West is responsible for this. Gotta see more of his films!)
7 Once Upon a Time in America (ditto!)
8 Leon (Gary Oldman and 5 separate "for your consideration" posts on the Empire board, when every other film had one or less)
9 Strangers on a Train (Friend-who-likes-12-Angry-Men recommended it)
10 The Big Lebowski (Er, I dunno. The tagline is v. cool)
11 8 1/2 (Partly so I can say I've seen it, and partly so I can understand the "My Life in Film" episode based on it)
(oops forgot Das Boot and Seven Samuri)


I'll have to update this in half a year. Oh well. I'm going on holiday tomorrow, to France. I've been told I'm not to touch the new family video camera and I'm not allowed to direct the holiday film. Which sucks. We're going to Dinard's medieval fayre - the entire town dress up, apparently. My dress is absolutely fab, and it'll be two wonderful days of quoting Robin Hood and Excalibur at anyone who'll listen. Au revoir, mes cheres amis!*



*Cinecism&co. are not responsible for the foul quality of the French found in said blog, and disown all bad uses of the masculine plural whether they are being bribed or not.

The rise and rise of the Sundance Kids.

Last night I had a dream. And the reason I'm telling you this is because absolutely nothing film-related has happened to me for ages and I feel I should post something, and plus - it might be important.

I was in a room, the walls were covered with shelves of Japanese films and it was all in all a very nice place to be. Anyway, I gather it was a fancy dress party because a pair of chaps had dressed up as Jules and Vincent from Pulp Fiction. I grinned at them and said "So, what's in the briefcase?" and the chap holding the briefcase, for some inexplicable reason shook his head. I nodded my head in reply. And then the dream ended. I think it's an omen. Just don't ask me what of.
Update: that brings the total number of dreams about films I haven't seen over the last few months up to 3. Which is really pretty disturbing. And one of my friends (another one, this is Friend 5) reports she's been dreaming about Reservoir Dogs, presumably because I mentioned it once or twice.

Empire came yesterday, containing a double sided poster - the history of influential 70s movies on one side, and influential 90s movies on the other. Well I decided to put the 90s side up so I rearranged my existing posters and it now has pride of place. It was the first thing that I saw when I woke up yesterday, so that made me very happy. I haven't got anything really intelligent to say about it, so if you're expecting a critical analysis of the 100 films selected then sorry. And as I've only seen 11 of them...I'm working on it!

More news...last night me and two companions went to a restaurant, were seated at a round table and I was the only one to visit the bathroom. This trip was made worse by the fact neither of them has seen anything, and everyone's sick of me talking about films. So I had to keep my mouth shut...

And finally, I've sent Casablanca back to the library along with my father and instructions to bring back either:
1 - Ingmar Bergman's Persona. Because the title says it all.
2 - 2001:A Space Odyessy. So I can say I've seen it. And so I can say I've seen Kubrick, and no other reason. On the other hand, my mum said "oooh, that was strange that was - I'm not really sure I quite understood it", so it sounds like my sort of thing.
3 - 1/3 of the Dollars trilogy. I loaded up my playlist with absolutely fab Ennio Morricone music, and it's really got me in the mood.


Sorry it's just chat today, I haven't really done anything interesting recently.

Otherworld and Casablanca

Just finished watching a pretty loveless animated rendition of Welsh myths called Otherworld. The premise was pretty weird - three Welsh teens get turned into legendary characters, which helps them to make informed choices about how they want to live their lives when they get back. The modern day stuff had all the charm of one of those made-for-schools educational videos. "Growing up Gay" is one I recall particularly well, and just a few weeks ago we had to watch one on teen pregancy starring a whole load of untalented Irish schoolkids. You'll see why it reminded me of those...

The animation was by turns horrible and wonderful. It bore all the hallmarks of rotoscope - effectively tracing, for those of you confused by the term. The CGI was painful and I wish they hadn't bothered. But some of the backgrounds were pretty, and the shading on the costumes lovely.

But goodness knows who they were aiming at! I know the BBFC allow nudity from U upwards, so perhaps that can be overlooked, but the violence certainly can't! A tad graphic for the kiddies. And the plots were complicated too - they chop someone's head off and it stays alive, people turn into owls and all and I never felt the weirdness was satisfactorily...explained. Pardoned, maybe, would be a better word. And the real-life bits that framed the stories were most certainly aimed at teens.

All in all a bit of a mess. So here's how I would have improved it. Remove the CGI monster because it was painful. Make the characters more recognisable. And make the faces nicer to look at, and either chopped the animation or the real life sequences. The first few minutes of the film were really nice (i.e. the colours were pretty), but to be frank the morality tales in the real world were painfully scripted and undermined by the typically loose morals in the mythical world.

It also throws up several unpleasant philisophical questions about, for example, how long they seemed to be there and what emotional scarring the poor people would go through. Don't try to think about it in too much detail, fast forward the beginning and skip the end. Unless you want to have a good giggle that is.

Here's the site: http://www.s4c.co.uk/otherworld/e_index.shtml



What of Casablanca then? Well I really had no need to worry - it was wonderful! Rick was incredibly sweet, in a cynical way. When Ugarte asks him to hide him from the police, and he says no - well, he had my undivided attention from then onwards. You absolutely feel his pain. And hers. But not quite so much...though perhaps its just because I'm female.

I can't say I didn't know where it was headed. It would be like being surprised when Vader reveals his little secret, or when Marion Crane doesn't come back out of the shower (I'm sure you all know that one, but I've a friend who insists she has no idea what I mean by "shower scene" so I'm gonna black it out anyway). But I had no idea how it was going to get there. There was a little map in my mind, like with The Godfather, of all the famous lines I already knew, joining the dots as we went along - but it wasn't intrusive, and actually when I look back I really knew very little about it. I made a joke a few months back about Ilsa being a spy for the French Resistance. Doh!

The shot of the film? Undoubtedly the letter in the rain, the words running but it doesn't matter, as we all know what it says.

I really liked the scenario - no one in the film is perfect. They lie, they're bribable, selfish, murderous or just a tad unpleasant. Everyone is out for themselves. A wonderfully morally ambiguous place. The script is razor sharp, and the whole final sequence was entirely compelling. The background music is overblown and melodramatic (see my plan for rescoring old movies halfway down that page) but not as intrusive as it could have been.

And of course, it's black and white - the colour scheme is perfect, and unlike other old classics, not ruined by garish glorious technicolour (I'm not talking about Vertigo. Honest. Whatever gave you that impression?). Though I'm not going to be returning my Casablanca layout anytime soon, I did like it a lot and it thoroughly deserves its classic status.

Otherworld:2.5/5
Casablanca:4/5
It's sacrelidge to discuss them on the same page, really...

PS - today I discovered http://www.the-editing-room.com/. Go, laugh yourselves silly. If you've seen it, then I recommend the abridged script for Underworld. I quote: "I am a vampire, one of many involved in an underground war. When not killing werewolves, I go to raves that play industrial rock, buy new trenchcoats, rip holes in my mesh stockings, and post to my livejournal." *massive snigger*

Paradise...a review of The Beach

What do we do when we wake? Groan? Yawn? Swear? Keep one eye on the sky (as anyone who has ever seen Reign of Fire should know). Well this morning I heard my door open and I replied "Rio Bravo". Because it's been written on my hand since Sunday, just above the words "Remember Sammie Jenkins" just so I can't possibly forget that it's on today.

My desire to see this film came at precicely the same moment as my unconditional and irrational admiration for Quentin Tarantino. He was quoted in Empire speaking about this film: "When I'm getting serious with a girl, I show her Rio Bravo, and she better ****ing like it"

He most definitely has his priorities in the right order.

Anyway, if that's not enough to inspire curiosity, I don't know what is. Anyway, I spent an entire day of mustnotforgetmustnotforget and then guess what happened? Missed it. By half an hour. I was furious, absolutely vase-smashingly irritated. So rather cross at missing my classic (it's also on the Total Film top 100 list, and considering a different friend than the one in the next paragraph has somehow seen twice as many as me and still thinks that Van Helsing wasn't so bad I really need to catch up! [PS, dude if you're reading, no offence right?]) I sat down rather apprehensively to watch this=

The Beach

A thrill seeking, dope-smoking backpacker on the search for experience discovers the heart of darkness in the guise of paradise. My, didn't that sound catchy!

So on the face of it this seemed like a recipie for disaster. A book I liked as a film - nay, a book I was positive couldn't be adapted, into a movie starring Leonardo diCaprio. Oh my. What a hell. But I have pursuasive friends and difficulty refusing people anything, and so rather grudgingly I agreed to borrow the dvd.

And thank God for that!

Absolutely fantastic! I mean, if you have or ever do read the book, you'll see what I mean - it's a first person narration of a meandering plot, lots of psyched out stuff and yet somehow it actually worked on screen. They stayed perfectly true to the tone of the novel, even if not entirely to the plot.

The cinematography was inventive and pretty - the shots of the beach. The speeded-up camera sunset. The glowing prawns underwater. The colours in the evening, in Bankok, on the Beach, in the jungle - all perfect and a joy to watch.

I also think the music was excellent. I didn't like it - I would have no desire, for example, to buy the album. But in the context of the film it was perfect - unintrusive, yet unsettling.

And what about the doped-up, Vietnam-guilt, (there's a lot about Vietnam in the book, not quite so much in the film, or at least not as obviously - though I was amused to note they're watching Apocalypse Now in the lobby before cutting to a shot of our Richard on his bed beneath a spinning fan) bloodsoaked flashbacks and general surreality? All present and correct. Shocked? Well I was. Particular mention must go to the scene when our hero is transmorphed into the hero of a tacky gameboy game. Excellent!

In the book there's an awful lot more of Daffy - I understand why there had to be less in the film, but it was still a shame. He's pretty ace though, with the limited time he had. As I've said, I had my doubts about Leo diC, and they're still not entirely shaken. I'll admit he can act, and act well - and in certain lights he's even good looking. But (and it's a big but, like mine) as soon as the lad opens his mouth...monotone. 'Tis a shame, because they give him a voiceover and he does have some interesting things to say, it's just irritating to listen to.

The only thing I think could have been improved (and the friend who lent me the DVD is about to disagree with me very loudly) was Tilda Swinton's role. Now she's good in Constantine, absolutely great in fact. But she puts virtually the same saintly-but-scornful performance in here, and it just doesn't work. Nothing I can add to that statement, really. Just wasn't... convincing.

I also prefered the "alternate ending" on the dvd to the actual one. Isn't odd how in films, everyone remembers precicely what everyone else said? Like in Godfather Part II, when Kay parrots back exactly the same thing to Michael about the family turning legitimate as he said in Part I and then comments that that was five years ago. Sure, perhaps it stuck in her memory as vitally important, but I don't think so. And I certainly don't think Francoise would have remembered the "parallel universe" thing. And this goes for every other film which utilises this annoying quirk.

And things learnt from this film? I will NEVER judge a movie by its cover ever again.


I went into town today to protest at the police that they hadn't recovered my dvd yet. I also popped into the library, where they have a nice classic-movie rental shelf. They can be borrowed by 18+ people only, but luckily I'd dragged my father along too and he let took Casablanca out for me. I'll watch it in a few days, it'd better be good. I'll lose all faith if it's another Vertigo experience...

While there I visited Oxfam. I always go when I'm in town, to check if anyone's donated interesting records, look lovingly at the trash on the video shelf and buy a bar of fair trade dark chocolate. Today I found a fun game. It was only £3, it was practically unopened and, as I said, it was in Oxfam so the money was going to a good cause. It's called Screen Play, and it's the type of thing our family plays all the time - two teams, miming words on cards. And plus, it's a subject I can win at! The mime-a-movie charades look pretty easy, but somehow I think trying to guess Warner Herzog in under a minute may prove tricky. I mean, how would you mime Warner Herzog? The only thing I know about him is that he chased his actors back on set with a gun when they went on strike. How about Claude Chabrol? I mean, I've heard of him but apart from that...those are the odd few impossible ones however, and I'm sure that "name a film with the word Red in it" and it's ilk will be simpler.

Just chat

Lots of stuff today.

First things first, I GOT MY BOXED SET BACK!!!!!!!!!!!I carried it around all day hugging it, and put it on the moment I got home. Which was wonderful. I only got as far as the Sicily trip, but it all goes downhill after that anyway, and I'd seen the band leader speech and my fave scene in the hospital, so all in all wuv. And I'm actually starting to understand it too. I mean, I never didnt understand it, but it's a deep confusing plot with pretty mumbly dialogue and I'm bad at getting complex things (not entirely true, actually. I can get stuff like Memento and Donnie Darko, I can't get early James Bond. It's a different sort of comprehension.) But now I know what's happening, I'm picking up on all the details and working out what the minor characters are called. I watched the deleted scenes too, which really deserve a paragraph to themselves. In fact, let's do that.

The New Paragraph. I really liked the extra stuff with Sonny and Tom. I've always felt genuine love and respect for them radiate towards the screen, and I'm not entirely sure why. Anyway, the two extra Sonny scenes absolutely made my year. And you know what, I think I saw a shadow of a tear in Mike's eye...in another scene, just a shadow but definitely there. The other scene I like was a G2 scene, the one from an entirely deleted segment in which Fabrizio (remember him?)...well, lets just say it was poetic justice and I cheered.

It's father's day tomorrow, yay etc. Yay, good for my dad, yay good for me because Heat, Get Carter and Unforgiven are all on a special father's day discount (see below). But who's the best movie dad? Well, I'm gonna be honest with you, I can't think of any. I'd nominate Vito "a man's not a real man who doesn't spend time with his family", but being a Godfather nut you wouldn't believe me.

Film watching's been pretty dire really. I saw Ladyhawke last week, which is about as good as fantasty movies get. Absolutely ridiculous soundtrack, but kinda cool also. The obligatory rogue was sweet, well rounded and had noticable talent. The romance was wuvvy, and although I guessed the plot pretty quick (not something I do often), it was still sweet. And also Tom Horn, a friend of Buffalo Bill whose museum we saw in Wyoming. Steve McQueen was good, but the plot was lame. I mean, I know its a true story, I'm not criticising that. It's more the way it was presented. The girl and the flashbacks were uncecessary. The betrayal wasn't half devistating enough. Not interesting, exciting or attention holding enough. On the other hand, can you trust any of this? My parents did requisition the tv off me to watch this last night, while I was using it. And films watched straight after the Godfather always seem to be dire.


Finally, Woolworths has a massive sale in which all the films I want are going cheap. I bought Being John Malkovitch and The Fisher King for under £10, but some mean sod pinched the bag with the latter in. It also contained my purse and bank card, but I know which one I'm most sore about...

It's war!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Let's put the music on before we start, cos I'm gonna get CROSS!

That does it. That absolutely does it. I declare war on Roger Ebert.

It's been quite a while coming, and I did have respect for him, like, when I recommended his website two months ago BUT that has all changed now.

And it's not like I don't mind people having their own opinion.

But he is too small minded. Far far far.

http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/19910315/REVIEWS/103150304/1023

Hmm. Read it, do not believe it. In fact, don't even read it. The gist is he doesn't like Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead, which is fair enough. You either love it or you hate it (or, as someone on imdb said, you either love it or havem't heard of it).

But he has no excuse to give it 0 stars. o stars?!. A bit extreme...he says he likes the original play, the script's virtually the same and that's worth a star at least.

"No, I think the problem is that this material was never meant to be a film, and can hardly work as a film."

A moral objection? True, it's a play about a play, which contains a play. Indeed in the film there's the play of Hamlet, then there's the play of R+G, there's the Murder of Gonzago, there's the play in the Murder of Gonzago and there's the other play the Tragideans do. So five plays in total. Hmmm. And I can see where he's coming from. I get het up about adaptions which I deem to be "morally" wrong. So I allow him that.

But he also contradicts himself pretty badly, and is unfairly harsh with the rating. He claims to like everything about it, the script, direction and acting, accuses Richard Dreyfuss of scene stealing and after all that still gives it 0 stars over a moral objection. If there are some good things, at least give it half a star.

I for one think they get the feeling of "behind the scenes" very well. Peering in on minor scenes through small, barred windows; light drifting in at strange angles; arriving at highly similar but definitely different rooms in an utterly confusing manner. Even on the boat at the end, they are separated from Hamlet by yet another barred window.

Ah well. To tell you the truth, I can understand how someone could dislike it. On the other hand, one I do not understand is this one:

http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/19691013/REVIEWS/910130301/1023

I genuinely thought no one could dislike this film...disappointing and slow? Are we even watching the same movie? He's evidently got some taste, he thought The Godfather was good...though that's not a very glittering recommendation, as it's a "classic" he's bound to enjoy it...my problem is the tone of the review isn't consistent with the rating. BC+SK got 2.5 stars (I can't bear to type it!) and he slaughtered it. Unbreakable he praised and was quite enthusiastic about, and gave it only half a star more. One of those ratings evidently isn't right - um, he's lying. (By the by, this is not an attack on Unbreakable - I loved that film. I simply mean that if he hated one and loved the other they should be further than a star apart...)

I don't know how he can criticise the tone either. The cheerily anachronistic script is what gives it much of its charm. He likes the script of the first half, yet a few paragraphs later he says he gets bored in the quiet bits. And then at the end he says the film would have been more engaging if they spoke like they were from 1910 instead of 1967. Make your mind up!

Lets see what he thinks of Signs....my God he likes it! OK, so I forgive him a little, I was starting to believe I was the only one who liked it.

I said a little. I'm still mad. Very mad...hey, I haven't used my Angry-Al blinkie yet! Gosh, I can't believe I didn't think of that! Ah well, I've calmed down a bit now anyway...grrrr.

On a lighter note, and one including helicopters, http://www.rotaryaction.com/ is a cool site. It's run by a helicopter-movie nut, who lists films with helicopters in and reviews the biggies, like Apocalypse Now. They were overjoyed with Black Hawk Down...

Finally, do you like the new banner? I thought so too...and the name? Genius!

I don't want to kill everybody, Tom. I just want to hurt them ALL, VERY VERY MUCH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Well, this morning I was going to scream at you all about just how PISSED OFF I am, because half an hour ago I really really was. My head was filled to bursting with thoughts, I was getting a headache and my mind was trotting in very evil circles. I was at a "Don't-fret-I'll-sit-down-and-watch-the-G" stage. Followed by a "I-bet-there's-clips-on-youtube"

I have since put calming music on (It's Hayley Westenra, don't tell anyone! I don't listen to her normally, but this means I don't associate her with anything, and it's pretty relaxing) so you will now be subjected to stress by an unstressed person. actually, to you it'll be more or less the same but I assure you it feels weird...I'm going to scream at you all now to save me the trouble later, to get the vitrol out. Then I may go have a relaxing bath and listen to Classic FM.


Three things annoy me with the movie industry. One's the studio system (Fox in particular. How on earth could they cancel Firefly? It's one of the funniest, original, uncliched series I've ever seen and they cancelled it...didn't they even watch the show?!).

One's voiceover man. Occasionally I'm sane enough to laugh at him, but generally he just annoys me. The worst advert is A Good Woman, which makes me want to puke every time. Although it's not entirely his fault...it's the fault of the scriptwriter who thinks calling Lord Darlington an "international playboy" is either funny or correct, and the entire advert which lasts for two minutes and despite being based on an Oscar Wilde play, contains only half an Oscar Wilde line. Incedentally that line is "Crying is the refuge of plain women..." which the inspired writer tacks "pretty ones go shopping". Screams and spits in an abstract listening-to-easy-listening way. If they can fit that much of the original in the trailer, what can the film be like? I sincerely hope it's not representative.

And the last are movie spoilers. And this really annoys me. There was once a film I really wanted to see that now fills me with self loathing? Why? Because it makes me despise a friend? Why? Because despite reminding her not to spoil it several times, she felt the need to add "And it's really pretty at the end because she's dying and he...." thanks, mate.

That one wasn't worth losing a friend over. But in general I rank my food just below my films, and both above my friends, and I can very vivdly imagine falling out big time over some things. Like the three implied below:

There are 3 films which are above the normal want to watch catagory. These are absolute obsessions, and I know it's insane, but I've got to the dreaming about them stage and everything. Mad, but unavoidable. Did you know that one of them contains a twist ending? Some kind person told me what that was...unavoidably stumbling over a spoiler for the second while on an entirely unconnected site told me what was in store for the only two characters I know are in there (incedentally, thank you Empire for spoiling big time not one but two Godfather movies in under five words. Not just "so-and-so-does-this" but making an entire shock character arc...unshocking.) And the third? Well, folks, this one gets me the spitting maddest. I admit that it's a bit like knowing the horses head in the bed, or the shower scene is coming, but that doesn't make it acceptable? This film only has four characters, and I know what happens to the sum total of three of them!

It's really not fair...

Death warrant of the year goes to the random, evil LJ user who irresponsibly decided that no one would mind a screenshot of a major character bleeding to death on their user icon...

Hey, dude? I hate you big time...

Facibo ipse praebeo hic non est nego...

Been doing much hard revision, between pining for my missing boxset. My kind friend who is currently taking good care of it (I think...) keeps sending me ransom letters, containing photos of it in perilous situations. She's even started on shredded bits of black paper. Of course, I don't believe for an instant it's actually from my precious DVDs...not one bit...not worried at all...if she puts a scratch on it, she's going to be in trouble...




Apart from introducing her to my little friend, she'll regret it anyway...I bought her a present for when I get it back. Nothing big, but I think she'll like it. After all, I know how to repay a favour...

Luckily enought, I've been saving up programs such as "Hollywood Greats: Marlon Brando" and "The Godfather and the Mob", which I'm clinging to for short, out of context clips.
Both were interesting. I know think Mr Brando 4 million times cooler than I did before. The man seems to despise Hollywood, doing consistently crappy films purely for the cash. Waste of talent? Whatever, I admire him for it...they also included a film of him flirting with a journalist. She was entranced, as was I - he is very...very good.
"The Godfather and The Mob"was ok too, only they evidently couldn't afford the rights to the music, which meant we had to sit through a torturous substitute. Imagine the main theme with the horn, only change random notes so you can't be sued. Horrible...the content was OK though, some very interesting stuff. Luca Brasi was played by a real hit man, for example, who wanted a change of career. And James Caan got under police supervision because he was seen hanging around with real mobsters.

In fact, I've got an awful lot to chat about today. But as I'm meant to be revising, I'll save it as it's pretty unconnected. Most of it. Apart from this bit.
http://www.jgeoff.com/godfather.html
Nice website, eh? Timelines, the tree from part two, a map of the Don's office...Christ, the man's even more obsessive than me. None of that, however, was what got my pulse going. What sprung out at me was an address: "Luna Restaurant located on White Plains Road just off Gun Hill Road in The Bronx, New York. "

Which is pretty convenient for my sister, because she wants to visit NY as her favourite author lives there, and she's known for going to dinner with fans. And it's pretty convenient for me, because if I have to listen to the two of them discuss those awful books for a few hours, I might be ready to come out of the loo with a gun in my hands...

Hypothetically, of course. I've almost certainly told you the story about the first time I visited a restaurant after watching said film. If I haven't, you can probably guess my reaction. Needless to say I said nothing for the entire meal, and I didn't eat much of my pasta either...I'm a self-confessed coward, and I'd probably have a heart attack if I came within a meter of the place, and you didn't see me last year when we did the Lord of the Rings locations which was my idea of torture, but still...*makes waving motions with hands, as if somehow that will make explaning easier*


Final word - I've now got a radio.blog playlist of movie music. It's great! From the sweeping Last of the Mohecans and Out of Africa tunes, to the panifully cool Matrix and Kill Bill, through the electro cheese of Highlander and Top Gun to a version of "Raindrops keep Falling on my Head" sung in Japanese and French (I know...). And the Godfather theme tune. Of course. Anyway, here's the link to it: http://www.radioblogclub.com/fav/0/687015/0

It's a seriously cool list of music...

Lead us not into temptation...

So this week, the next, the next and the next is study leave. Only it's not really, as the last two weeks are really exams. I've been revising solid (hehehe), and have just finished a rather tacky poem about the Nazi party.

Film watching is, of course, at rock bottom. I saw Withnail and I two nights ago (I liked it, but I'm not sure how to rate it...) and I may be watching Three Kings on Friday.

Of course, being alone at home for 4 weeks does produce some interesting dielemmas. Such as "There are a lot of hours in the day and I've plenty of revision time left and no one will mind if I just sit down and..."

To prevent against such an occourance, I've leant my precious Godfather Boxed set to a friend for the duration of the period, which so far has worked wonders. It means I revise, instead of giving in to temptation. And if you can recall, watching those films produces an alarming reaction in which I think about nothing else for several weeks, which is hardly a good state of mind.

I couldn't possibly ask for it back. It's only been gone three days.

Number of times missed (so far): 5. On Monday I invited a friend for a filmwatch over the weekend, and realised I'd have to show her something else. Tuesday was the third anniversary of the worst event in my life ever and I damn well wanted to be distracted. This morning I just wanted to watch it. Sad, isn't it...

Bitter poetry

So now I've calmed down a bit about this, let's be rational. It's only in the pipeline and may never happen.

You know, I spent quite a long time casting the Godfather remake for my own bitter, twisted amusement (Clooney is Vito! Bloom as Michael!), but it was rather petty and didn't really work.

I also turned to poetry, but it wasn't very good. Though as nobody reads my blog, it wouldnn't hurt to reprint it here:


While you're at it, also see the plans for Citizen Kane
Orson Welles' is a bad director
and it's so dull! Lets add a car chase, a few fart gags
and make Rosebud a siren in a red dress.

Casablanca's next in line
It's pretty dated too
She's a secret agent for the French resistance!
Let's add lots of steamy sex scenes!

I'm thinking about marketing
What about a special edition very expensive Battleship Potempkin pram?
A limited run pampering gift set with Fight Club soap?
A "here comes the Bride" Kill Bill Barbie for the kids?

Lets remake Zulu with Americans!
The Mission with Satanists!
The Birds with Aliens!
Schindlers List has such great comic potential...

You know, if we cut the fights, the force
The Death Star and the Jedi
Star Wars might be a half decent film.



OK, so it doesn't rhyme and I've seen only three of the movies referenced. However, I was in pain at the time and it was this or the vases hitting the wall. In retrospect, mass destruction might have been a better idea.

Hmmm...



Much better...