Archive '04 - Fight Club (Movie Review)

FIGHT CLUB

Warning, this review contains MAJOR SPOILERS for “Fight Club” that WILL ruin the movie for you if you have not seen it.

A few weeks ago, a co-worker with conventional movie taste suggested to me that I go see the new Meg Ryan film Against the Ropes. I explained to her that it did not look like my kind of movie and she assured me that it was not one of Meg’s typical romantic comedies. I then proceeded to describe the plot in great detail from beginning to end. She told me that I was correct in every detail and shocked that I had garnered it all just from the commercial. Hell, I garnered it from the poster! Most movies are that predictable.

On the other end of the spectrum, I saw Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind last week, which was just wonderful and treated its audience to one surprise after another. It made me reflect how much I love films that feature clever twists and revelations that change our reaction to everything that came before. Memento, Vanilla Sky, Unbreakable, and The Truman Show are recent fine examples of this mini-genre. I purposefully leave out The Sixth Sense because I guessed its secret after the first 20 minutes.

I believe that the two best and most intense film twists are the revelations regarding the true familial natures of the villains in Psycho and The Empire Strikes Back. My other favorite is the one I want to gush about here, David Fincher’s 1999 masterpiece Fight Club.

Watching Fight Club is like watching 5 different movies. It’s constantly shifting in structure and tone. It begins as the story of our narrator who, in order to fight insomnia, joins various support groups for diseases he does not have. Edward Norton’s deadpan narration is nothing short of hysterical. It’s dark humor, but laugh out loud funny. We never do get to know our narrators name. At the support groups, his name tags are all either Robert De Niro characters in Scorsese films or apes from Planet of the Apes.

Gears are shifted as Brad Pitt shatters his pretty boy image forever and plays Tyler Durden as nothing less than a force of nature. It’s like no other performance he has given before or since. The second movie focuses on Tyler and our narrator forming organized fight clubs as a way to rebel against yuppie norms. Graphic fight scenes (actually more graphic in sounds than visuals) are sure to disturb those who don’t get the joke. The film now seems to be a satire on male aggression and violence.

Of course, Pitt turns his fight clubs into a semi-terrorist organizations who’s crimes are more mischievous than dangerous. Here’s where a usually perceptive critic like Roger Ebert got very confused. He called the film fascist and gave it a negative review. He didn’t get that Fincher was doing a satire on a satire on a satire. The whole philosophy that Durden espouses cannot be taken seriously. It becomes more ludicrous as the film goes on but it’ all just an excuse for Fincher’s true goal. To completely mind-fuck the audience.

It’ like a whole new movie when it is revealed (BIG SPOILER HERE) that Pitt’s Tyler Durden is actually a figment of Norton’s narrator’s imagination. Fincher has played the audience perfectly and I for one was blown away. The puzzle is not obvious and nobody I know was able to guess ahead of time. On the other hand, watching Fight Club for the second time, it truly becomes a new movie. Turns out just about every scene was peppered with clues that our two main characters were one and the same.

Look at the character of Marla, played as a Goth nihilist by Helena Bonham Carter. After horning in on Norton’s support group as another “tourist”, she apparently begins an affair with Pitt’s character. On first viewing it seems as if Norton is either jealous or frustrated that this women keeps inserting herself into his life. Their stormy relationship makes sense on face value.
Now watch the movie a second time and see it from Marla’s point of view. When she seems to be with Pitt she’s actually having this intense affair with Norton. Then, when we see her interact with Norton, he’s treating her like an intruder. Notice how she will never see both actors at the same time.

There are a lot of clues. The narrator says things like, “I know this because Tyler knows this.” Then there are the subliminal Brads. A number of times Fincher inserts a single frame of Pitt before his character is introduced. You may miss them on first viewing, but not on second. This joke is taken to the next level when we see that Tyler enjoys splicing subliminal pornography into family movies (leading to one of the biggest laughs in the movie.)

In the end, Fight Club seems to be a message movie about nothing. Turns out the message was a diversion. It’s one of the great puzzle movies and one of the darkest of comedies.

Archive '03/'04 - Tarantino Reviews

PULP FICTION

In anticipation of Friday’s KILL BILL opening, I needed a Tarantino fix. Once again, I put in my PULP FICTION Collector’s Edition DVD and, once again, I was completely fixated on every frame of this brilliant film. Having seen it so many times, I thought I might just watch my favorite scenes. Turns out, they were all my favorites and I couldn’t skip any of it.

The plot of PULP FICTION is beside the point. It’s about a director so in love with his medium that he has taken the care to make every performance, line of dialogue, and visual setup unique and interesting. In many ways it reminds me of CITIZEN KANE, and not just because of the unconventional story structure. Orson Welles once said something to the effect of filmmaking being the greatest toy train set that a boy ever had. Quentin Tarantino seems to have the same sense of fun and freedom.

How great is it that a movie with a major plotline about a fighter throwing a match has not one scene in the boxing ring. If you had told me that an extended dialogue scene of a couple at a diner on a first date could be as fascinating as the one in this film, I wouldn’t have believed you ($5 milkshakes). Tarantino’s use of dialogue has already revolutionized the movies, so I will not belabor that point.Every character is perfectly cast to the point that I could see an entire movie being made about any of them.

The standout among standouts is Samuel L. Jackson as the hit-man, Jules. At first glance, he seems to be playing the ultimate bad ass, which he is. At the same time he seems to be going over the top, Jackson is subtly building an internal struggle that provides PULP FICTION’S moral center. This is not an exploitation film as its critics contend. All the violence and comedy reveal very moral message about choices and consequences. (Those critics also don’t seem to understand that this movie, like FIGHT CLUB, is a comedy.)

Tarantino’s use of popular music is also justly famous. The opening PULP FICTION logo over the frantic surf tune “Miserlou” send more chills up my spine than any title sequence not beginning with “A long time ago, in a galaxy far far away.” Another sequence has John Travolta’s heroin addict hit-man waiting for Uma Thurman, his boss’s wife, while Dusty Springfield’s “Son of A Preacher Man” plays on the soundtrack. This scene about nothing is so effective that Quentin has said that is if he couldn’t get the rights to the song, he would have cut the whole scene from the movie.

I could go on about every scene (haven’t even mentioned the needle through the heart thing) so I’ll just stop here. Damn, I can’t wait for KILL BILL.


KILL BILL VOLUME ONE

I will occasionally see a movie twice, just to catch the reaction of the people I’m with, who are seeing it for the first time. With KILL BILL VOLUME ONE, Quentin Tarantino seems to be doing the same thing. Instead of showing us the blaxploitation, and Asian kung-fu/samurai movies that shaped him, he has made a loving homage to them. Because he’s one of the most talented directors ever to make films, this movie is much better than its influences.

Quentin would probably disagree with that, but his love of grindhouse or exploitation films is shared only by a small but dedicated cult. I respect this cult, but I’m not part of it. I regard both my favorite blaxploitation and kung fu films, FOXY BROWN and ENTER THE DRAGON respectively, as entertaining, but silly guilty pleasures. (For the record, I don’t consider CROUCHING TIGER or Jackie Chan films in this genre.)

Back to KILL BILL. This movie just rocks! The visuals are unforgettable and, though not as prominent as in the past, the dialogue remains clever and smart. For the first time, Quentin shows what he can do with extended action scenes. As a love letter to the seventies, there’s no CG allowed, just amazing fight choreography and stunt work.

Uma’a performance allows Quentin to be as wild and crazy as he needs to, by providing a strong and sympathetic center to the film. The other notable performance was by martial arts cult hero Sonny Chiba as the wise old sword maker. It’s the one sequence where the audience is allowed to catch their breaths and its very charming. His relationship with The Bride reminded me of Yoda and Luke in EMPIRE STRIKES BACK, but I may be alone in that observation.

I guess you can’t discuss this movie without talking about the gore. There is a lot of blood in this movie, but it’s so cartoony and over the top that it’s not the least bit disturbing. A couple of the friends who I saw this with felt that the violence was no where near as intense as the “ear” scene in RESEVOIR DOGS. It’s to Quentin’s credit that many people think they saw the ear removed, when, in fact, it took place off-screen. (Same with TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE, despite the title and intensity – no gore.)

The music is completely out of left field and cool as hell. It’s mostly instrumental stuff that reflects the same influences as the film. Can’t wait to see that Japanese girl band on tour!


KILL BILL VOLUME TWO

To me the most striking thing about Quentin Tarantino is his sheer audacity. He is utterly unafraid to make films that reflect his vision and passions. If anyone else likes it, bonus, but Tarantino makes the films he wants to see. Each of his films are complete departures from their predecessors and Kill Bill Vol. 2 is no exception.

The first Kill Bill was a non-stop assault of mayhem and violence, part blaxploitation film and mostly derived Asian kung fu / samurai cinema. The stroke of genius in Volume 2 is that he has completely abandoned the first film’s style and turned the sequel into a spaghetti western. Anyone who has seen Segio Leone classics like The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly or Once Upon a Time in the West knows that spaghetti westerns (called so because they were filmed in Italy) are morally ambiguous, highly stylized, and very deliberately paced.

Quentin does not hide his influences. Whereas Vol. 1 had a crazed mash of musical gems, Vol. 2 is dominated by some lesser known works of Leone’s favorite composer, Ennio Morricone. Time is given for character development, but also to study the contrast between close ups of faces (specifically David Carradine and Michael Madsen) and landscapes, just as Leone did. Tarantino has set a bit of a higher bar because Vol. 1 was superior to its influence, but Vol. 2 cannot hope to be better than the Leone masterpieces. It is, however, worthy of being considered in the same class.

Specifically, Kill Bill Vol. 2 reminds me of Once Upon a Time in the West. Both film attempt to define the role of women in society. In the earlier film, Claudia Cardinal’s Jill McBain breaks out of Leoni’s usual view of passive women to aggressively use her intelligence and sexuality to avenge the murder of her family. That was 1969. In 2004, Uma Thurman’s Bride is a full-fledged warrior who need not hire gunmen to take revenge for her. It’s interesting to note that both films come to the same conclusion – a woman’s highest purpose is to be a mother (of a community or a child.) I also see a bit of Henry Fonda’s cold, but charming malice in David Carradine’s engaging read on Bill. That these similarities are deliberate I believe is proven by an exact camera move replica. As the assassin’s enter the church, the camera cranes up in a way very reminiscent of the Leoni shot of Jill entering the developing town.

There are still touches of the Asian influence left. The training sequence with Gordon Lui as a harsh samurai master struck a cord with me. Shortly after seeing Vol. 1, I decided to check out a Shaw Bros. Kung Fu festival playing at a local art-house. I chose wisely. It was 36th Chamber of Shaolin, an extremely fun film about training to be a samurai master and staring Gordon Liu as the student.

Archive '03 - Nashville (Movie Review)

I always hesitate when I am asked what my favorite movie is because I know that my answer will lead to confusion and skepticism (that is when I'm not changing my mind on the subject.) That’s because my favorite film is usually Robert Altman’s NASHVILLE (1975) and, unless you are a total film buff, you have probably never seen or barely heard of it.Watching it again on DVD, I have lost none of my affection for this movie. No other film has ever involved me as deeply as NASHVILLE and it speaks to me in way I can’t really define.

It’s magic is not just in its ability to manipulate the viewer’s emotions. Hitchcock and Spielberg do it all the time. Altman does it so subtly that it’s easy to forget that you are watching a movie.NASHVILLE focuses on 24 characters in and around the music scene of Nashville. There is no lead and no big star dominates. The dialogue is mostly improvised and the performances are real. There is literally not a false note in the film. Each character is invested with such vivid traits that they become memorable in their first few minutes of screen time.

Many of the characters are country singers of varying abilities and we get to hear a number of songs all the way through. Much of the music is wonderful, but Altman uses the songs to further our empathy for the singers. He does this by having the actors write their own songs, which reflects the role they are playing. Eventually it becomes clear that the huge cast is meant to represent a microcosm of the city and the country as a whole.

In a nutshell, NASHVILLE is about our obsession with celebrity and our willingness, as Americans, to let hero worship lead us into apathy. Music and politics are the connecting themes. Altman never states these themes explicitly, but by the end, the message is so clear that a shot of the American flag becomes haunting in its context.Altman uses a number of devices to tie everything together. Everyone is in some way attached to the homecoming of a Loretta Lynn type country star or the presidential campaign of an independent candidate for President who seems to have predicted Ross Perot.. The candidate is never seen, but Altman reveals in his commentary that he had a real campaign team created and told them to “invade” his movie and just show up to interrupt the improvisations.

I purposefully haven’t described any specific sequences because each scene has resonance due to its context. In a traditional movie, the folk singer seducing a married woman is a plot point. Here, it’s a moment of great drama because of what we already know about the singer and the woman. There are no Hollywood clichés here.There is a “surprise” ending that’s well telegraphed, but its implications make you rethink everything that has come before. Altman has practically forced the viewer to care deeply about these characters and the effect of them all being drawn together at the end and singing “You may say that I ain’t free, but it don’t worry me,” is stunning.

I may have made this sound like a somber art film, but its also very funny and entertaining. NASHVILLE is a film like no other. I can’t see anyone who loves movies not loving this one.

Archive '03 - ...A Torch to Light the Way

Nobody has ever made me laugh as much as Mel Brooks. The "Springtime for Hitler" number in THE PRODUCERS may be the funniest single scene I have ever seen. As far as belly laughs throughout a film, nothing can top BLAZING SADDLES. There may not be a moment in this film that’s not funny. It’s a satire on Westerns, but no target is safe. The anarchy of it all is right up there with the Marx Brother’s greatest moments.

Gene Wilder, Cleavon Little, Madeline Kahn, Harvey Korman, Slim Pickens, and Brooks himself are all at the top of their game. (And the title song is awesome!)Kahn especially steals every scene she’s in as a German saloon singer who sounds like Elmer Fudd. Of course, there’s also the famous farting scene. I personally love all the jokes dealing with everyone in the town being named Johnson.

BLAZING SADDLES is clearly meant to be appreciated as a comedy, but there’s another level here. Mel Brooks has made a statement about the role of race in America with an honesty that has only been equaled by ALL IN THE FAMILY and Spike Lee’s DO THE RIGHT THING. The N word is used liberally in this story of the first black sheriff in a backwards western town. The ugliness of racism is not compromised as we see in an early scene where black workers are considered less valuable than a horse.

Its to Brooks' credit that the humor does not pause for the social commentary, but is integrated into it. Watch the scene where the Sheriff rides into town to meet the “welcoming” committee to see what I’m talking about. Rightly, the humor is always at the expense of the bigots. Co-writer Richard Pryor’s black perspective, combined with Brooks' Jewish sensibilities make this the ultimate minority perspective take on the all American Western. It’s no accident that the one Indian we see in the film speaks Yiddish.

Archive '03 - All Too Human (book review)

George Stephanopoulos: ALL TOO HUMAN

If you’ve ever wondered what it would be like to work for the President of the United States, look no further than George Stephanopoulos’ 1999 book, ALL TOO HUMAN: A POLITICAL EDUCATION. Stephanopoulos , you may recall was one of Bill Clinton’s chief campaign aides during the 1992 election and served as his spokesman and adviser during Clinton’s 1st term. There's a very "West Wing" feel to his book.What makes it unique is that Stephanopoulos takes an unusually frank approach to his own shortcomings and insecurities.

The first few chapters focus on the campaign, but it really starts to get interesting once they’re in the White House. Inside strategy discussions on gays in the military, The Brady Bill, Haiti, and just about every other issue that made the news in Clinton’s first term are reviewed. Stephanopoulos began in the administration as Press Secretary, but proved so inept that he was quickly switched to the more nebulous position of advisor to the President. I’m not being critical. He tells us he was inept. In fact, he spends most of the book in some kind of hot water. While he remains one of Clinton’s most trusted advisors, Hillary and Gore seem none too fond of him. After he gains the reputation of a serial leaker (he denies the charges), even Clinton seems to distance himself. Stephanopoulos blames no one, but himself for these episodes and its clear how much he respects and looks up to Clinton.

Every great story needs a great villain and ALL TOO HUMAN has a doozy. Dick Morris was Clinton’s top secret advisor who advocated a policy of “triangulation” as the key to reelection. Clinton would embrace Republican legislation and run against, instead of with, the Congressional Democrats. His tenure at the White House ended when he was caught in a “toe sucking” incident with a prostitute.Stephanopoulos fancies himself the liberal conscience of the White House and hates Morris with a passion. (“Spare me the unctuous bullshit, you insincere prick!”) I’ve read much outside this book that makes me concur the Morris was quite psychotic. Upon meeting Stephanopoulos for the first time he says “Thank you for winning the last election, so I can win the reelection.” During a staff meeting, he allegedly jumps on the couch and yells, “The next statement I want to hear on Bosnia is broom!….broom!….broom!” (To be fair to Morris, Clinton was reelected under this strategy.)

When the Monica scandal hit, Stephanopoulos was already a commentator on ABC’s This Week program. He became very critical of Clinton during this period and was accused by many of being a disloyal backstabber. One can understand how he felt, but he offers no real excuse for his lack of loyalty, other than journalistic duty. The book's title is very appropriate.

Archive '03 - Guilty Pleasures

FLASH GORDON

I can’t think of any film that more fits the definition of a guilty pleasure than 1980’s “Flash Gordon.” It’s just an awful movie, but how come I enjoy every minute of it? There’s no waiting for the cheese. Queen’s theme song tells you all you need to know. (“Flash! Ahhhhh – He’ll save every one of us!”) Sam Jones, who seems to have graduated from the Ed Wood School of acting, plays Flash. His main character trait is that he has the word FLASH printed on his t-shirt. The great Max Von Sydow is Ming the Merciless, whose ring seems to have an orgasmatron function. This is used on one of the two hot babes that run around the universe in their underwear. One’s good and ones evil, but it really doesn’t matter because there are hawk people flying around!I also love that Topol plays the mad scientist who helps Flash. Of course, he was Tevye in “Fiddler on the Roof” and he hasn’t changed much, so at times it seems like Fiddler in Space. Have I mentioned the bad special effects? How about Timothy Dalton in a Robin Hood costume? Or the aliens with bright blue blood? This is the rare case in which a movie that was meant to be so bad its good actually succeeds. When it doesn’t work, you get something like “Mars Attacks." BTW my other favorite sci-fi guilty pleasures are Dreamscape, Enemy Mine, Meteor, and the Omega Man.


ORCA

The charm of “Orca”(1977) is that, despite the fact that they are making an inane killer whale movie, the filmmakers seem to honestly think that they were making “Citizen Kane.” The plot is simple. Fisherman’s crew accidentally kills whale’s wife and child. Whale seeks revenge. The acting and the tone are so deadly serious that it comes off very funny.Richard Harris is the crusty fisherman who spends the whole movie shouting, “I’m gonna kill that fish if it’s the last think I do!” Charlotte Rampling is his marine biologist love interest and spends the whole movie explaining to Harris that whales are mammals, not fish. I spent the whole movie rooting for the whale.My favorite scene is after Orca destroys the town and eats Bo Derek’s leg (Bonus!) He starts doing celebratory flips out of the water as the town burns. Throughout, you get to see just how pissed off the whale is by about two dozen close ups of his eye. To get an idea of how bizarre this movie really is, I will need to describe the ending (Spoiler ahead.) Orca has lured Harris and co. out to sea for a grudge match. After dispatching most of the crew via iceberg, only Harris and Rampling are left, though adrift on ice. A night of romance, punctuated by the love theme from “Orca”, ends with Harris and the whale going mano e fin. Jaws it ain’t, but I’ll take Orca over Free Willy any day.


ROCKY III

Its difficult to keep in mind what a wonderful film the original Rocky was for a number of reasons. First are the varying levels of atrociousness of its four sequels. Then we have Sylvester Stalone’s subsequent career averaging about 2 decent movies a decade. Finally are the hundreds of mind numbing rip offs of the “lovable loser comes from behind to win the big prize” theme. Probably the nadir of this movement was Stalone’s own Rocky goes arm wresting fiasco, Over the Top.The Rocky sequels range from redundant (Rocky II) to ridiculous (Rocky IV) to just plain wrong (Rocky V). Only Rocky III retains affection from me. Not that it a great movie like the original or doesn’t rip off its themes. Its just that Rocky III has two things going for it that the others don’t: “Eye of the Tiger” and Mr. T.“Eye of the Tiger” is simply one of the great one hit wonders ever. I realize they actually did have a couple more tunes that got airplay, but frankly, I can’t remember them. (At some point Survivor began to merge with Mr. Mister.) Normally using an “inspirational” song to illustrate the struggle of our hero coming up from behind is an invitation to cheese, but somehow they found the perfect song to transcend the cliché. If I’m ever running a marathon (unlikely) and I need a song to take me to the finish line, I’d choose “Eye of the Tiger in a second.” Then we have Mr. T. Those of you who did not see Rocky III on its original run may not realize that Mr. T was not always an eighties nostalgia joke (he now seems to occupy the same place in our culture as Pac man.) For one year in one movie, Mr. T actually reflected the intensity and menace of a truly great villain. His Clubber Lang was a palpable threat to Rocky in a way that Carl Weathers never was. I’m not saying he would have been appropriate for the realistic tone of the original, but in the heightened world of the sequels, when Mr. T. says “pain” I believe him.Unfortunately, Mr. T. soon traded menace for mass acceptance. By the time he appeared on Different Strokes, none would fear him again. He could have been Lee Marvin, but he ended up a Cabbage Patch Kid. Even Mohawks have lost their menace. I remember the one guy at my Jr. High with a Mohawk always have plenty of room when he wanted to pass. The other day I saw that the guitarist for one of those mall chick pop bands had one. I guess you just can’t freak people out like you used to.


1941

There’s no doubt that Steven Spielberg’s 1941 is a bad movie. Based on the questionable premise of a lost Japanese sub attacking Los Angeles in the days following Pearl Harbor, the action quickly deteriorates into incoherent comic set pieces. When I first saw it on TV in the early eighties, I had no use for the film and was shocked that Spielberg, John Belushi, and Dan Aykroyd would be involved in such a mess.Seeing it again last weekend, I now see what they were going for and have built up a bit of affection for it. It seems to me that Spielberg sought to combine the black humor anti-war esthetic of Dr. Strangelove with the anarchic late ’70’s comedy epitomized by National Lampoon’s Animal House. This seems an impossible mix and, as great a director as he is, Steven Spielberg cannot make a John Landis movie. Still, there’s some funny stuff in 1941. I enjoyed the bits with Slim Pickens as a prisoner in the Japanese sub using toilet humor in his efforts to escape. There’s also a sly tribute to Jaws. Some have argued that blowing up stuff and destroying property are not funny. That’s true about 90% of the time in this film, but that means there’s 10% of good laughs left to be found in all this chaos. Landis himself may have been taking notes as he was planning to destroy Chicago in The Blues Brothers. There’s quite a cast assembled here. In addition to Belushi, Aykroyd, and Pickens; we have John Candy, Robert Stack, Tim Matheson (basically as Otter), Ned Beatty, Lenny & Squiggy, Joe Flaherty, Treat Williams, Nancy Allen, Warren Oates, Christopher Lee, and Toshiro Mifune.Dignity is the last word you would expect to read in a review of 1941, but the screen presence of two giants is enough to keep the experience from being a total waste. The first is John Belushi who was one of the only comic actors that can be funny by just being there. He has little to do, but every moment he was on screen, he had my complete attention. Picture Bluto as a bomber pilot. What a treat seeing Toshiro Mifune as the Japanese sub captain. Those of you fortunate enough to have seen the great films of Akira Kurosawa (The Seven Samurai, Rashomon, ect.) know that Mifume stars in most of his classics. For those unfamiliar, he is Japan’s John Wayne, with similar stature and mystic. He plays his role straight and brings just about the only depth to any character in the film. Loved the scene where he throws Christopher Lee’s Nazi overboard 1941 is bad, but never boring. Of Spielberg’s stinkers, I’ll take it over Always and Hook any day. FYI, its also better than Pearl Harbor.


TOMMY

I wasn’t sure if I wanted to include TOMMY in the guilty pleasures category because I really do think it’s a great movie, however, considering that one of it’s highlights features Ann Margret seductively rolling around in a room full of baked beans that had just spewed from the TV set, it seems more at home here.TOMMY (1975), director Ken Russell’s take on The Who’s brilliant 1969 rock opera, literally defines the concept of over-the-top filmmaking. The entire movie is wall-to-wall songs and music with no dialogue at all. The plot revolves around the growth of little Tommy, who has become deaf, dumb, and blind, due to the trauma of seeing his mother’s lover kill his (assumed already dead) father. We follow his parent’s search for a cure to his becoming a pinball champion to his being declared a new messiah. Ken Russell specializes in bizarre and surrealistic visuals (also on display in Listzomania, Altered States, Crimes of Passion, and Gothic.) Some highlights here include Tina Turner’s Acid Queen turning Roger Daltrey’s Tommy into a snake-infested skeleton, Eric Clapton leading a congregation of Marilyn Monroe worshipers, and Elton John in gigantic boots as the Pinball Wizard. To say that Ann Margret approaches the role of Tommy’s mother with gusto would be an understatement. She was nominated for a Best Actress Oscar and, image be damned, attacks her role with absolute unapologetic melodrama. She rolls around, wearing a white evening gown, in baked beans! Oliver Reed is damn cool as well in an out of tune kind of way.Despite all the insanity around it, the highlight of TOMMY remains Pete Townshend’s amazing music. The soundtrack doesn’t stand up the Who’s 1969 album (Too many synthesizers / Jack Nicholson singing.) Of course the minute after I finished my first viewing of the film I went out and bought the original album (I was 14) and became a lifelong Who fan. It also opened my mind to more experimental and non-conventional films.

Archive '03 - Favorite Films of 2003

By the end of the summer of 2003, it seemed like we were in the midst of a very mediocre year for movies. So far, the only truly essential film was a computer-animated fish story. The last few months have changed all that with one success following another and culminating with the conclusion of a trilogy masterpiece. While I can easily recommend A MIGHTY WIND, X2, WHALE RIDER, AMERICAN SPLENDOR, MATCHSTICK MEN, BUBBA HO-TEP, and MASTER AND COMANDER; I’ll always remember this year for five amazing films that I believe will stand the test of time and deserve repeated viewings.

5) MYSTIC RIVER – This is the best ensemble-acting piece since Glengary Glen Ross. Sean Penn and Tim Robbins are the standouts and absolutely lose themselves in their roles. Like Clint Eastwood’s last great work, Unforgiven, MYSTIC RIVER takes a hard look at violence and its long lasting effects. The performances are augmented by the haunting way that Eastwood films their faces in shadows.

4) FINDING NEMO – Pixar continues its perfect batting average and has exceeded even its own standards. I’ve always been fascinated by the ocean and have never seen it so delightfully visualized as in FINDING NEMO. Its message of facing your fears and accepting uncertainty resonates for both children and adults. It’s got enough excitement, laughs, and drama to rank it among the best of Disney’s animated features.

3) LOST IN TRANSLATION – It’s the rare film that becomes more meaningful in the weeks after a viewing, but this one keeps coming back to me. It’s truly unique and defies any Hollywood categorization. Its kind of a love story, but it digs so much deeper than most. Japan is filmed like its not just another country, but another planet. The emotions that Bill Murray and Scarlett Johansson (who should both win Oscars) bring are so real because they're never made obvious. Director Sofia Coppola seems to have the family gift and I can’t wait to see how she follows this up.

2) RETURN OF THE KING – I was hesitant to compare the Lord of the Rings to the Star Wars trilogy until seeing this last installment, but now its clear that this is a Star Wars level event for a new generation. RETURN OF THE KING gives new meaning to the word epic. The special effects and set pieces are unsurpassed (even compared to the first two films.) So much so that it will set the standard for many years to come. While I admire the whole series, this film makes the audience more invested in the characters than its predecessors. The best thing I can say for it is that this three and a half hour movie seemed to go way too quickly.

1) KILL BILL: VOLUME ONE – Pure adrenaline! This roller coaster ride of a movie is a non-stop delight. Quentin Tarantino has taken everything that’s great about seventies exploitation films and made the ultimate version. There is a lot of violence and blood, but the fights are so well directed that the effect is stunning. While beginning in the blaxploitation mode, its his loyal take on the samurai film that leads to perhaps the greatest sword battles ever filmed. Uma Thurman is so rock solid in the lead that Quentin can create the wildest environments and we never question the reality and we can enjoy the ride.