60/60 Review #47: The Godfather Part III.

I only knew 2 things about this movie going into it. 1) It's considered "the worst of the best" (i.e. the worst film in one of the best trilogies) and 2) Sophia Coppola was a big reason for that. Well... I wasn't lied to. Michael (Al Pacino) is trying to go legit, though they "pull [him] back in." Particularly, his nephew Vincent (Andy Garcia), a hot-head, is ruining things for him. So while he's dealing with business deals that involve the Vatican, Michael is also trying to deal with his nephew's affairs, including a more literal one with his daughter (and Vincent's own cousin), Mary (Sophia Coppola).

So... let's start with the incest. Tis a bit strange only 1 person in this movie finds the relationship at least moderately strange. But even then, I'm not entirely certain it's because the two are related and more that one is Michael's daughter and the other a wannabe-gangster. There's really only one line in the movie that makes note of the fact they're related. But anyway, that's not really the problem with Sophia Coppola--at least in my opinion.

So while on the subject of what is wrong, let's look at the acting. Yeah, she's pretty rough in it. There are a couple others who could use some help, too, but she's the worst. Pacino is fine, though--just as with the previous film--I couldn't care much about him or his character. I maybe liked his arch a little more in this film than the last one. He seemed more vulnerable and human this time out. Ironically, I liked Andy Garcia the most... and he was essentially playing a classic Pacino-type character.

You could probably easily guess my opinion of this film. The first is most enjoyable due to the character of Vito. The second's best bits are the Vito flashback sequences with De Niro. There is no Vito in this film, flashback or otherwise. If you need it a little more spelled out, I didn't particularly fall for this movie. The best parts are with Pacino acting more human and Andy Garcia acting more like Pacino. I couldn't care less about all the Vatican stuff or any of the politics of the businesses. Like the whole of the film, it just wasn't all that interesting. It was capable and overall well-made, but nothing "great."


Stop Saying OK! OK.

(P.S. That wraps up Crime Month Part 2! And now I'm done with all the crime stuff all together! I think the rest of the year is pretty much downhill from here. October is going to be insanely awesome. Why? Just look at what's coming up first to give you an idea. I'm moving from "The Worst of the Best" to "The Best of the Worst" next week with Troll 2. It's time for Horror Month. Oh my Goooooodddddddd!)

60/60 Review #46: The Godfather Part II.

I've only seen The Godfather once, and it was a few years ago, hence why only the second and third are on this list. Now, I'm not sure if the fact I haven't seen it in a while adds or detracts anything from the viewing of its sequel. I'm also not sure if it even matters. The majority of films on this 60/60 List are reviewable because while they might universally be considered classics or essentials, they aren't all necessarily universally loved and adored--if that makes sense. However, there are a handful of films on this list that surpass opinion. So far, such have been films like Citizen Kane or Casablanca. The Godfather Part II is not only considered one of the best sequels of all time, but one of the best films ever made (generally found in most film snobs Top 5s and/or 10s), and some argue it even better than the original. Even as of this review, it's in the #3 spot on the imdb Top 250 (whatever that means to you). Long story short, it's damn pointless to review this film.

But I'm gonna do it anyway. Just because.

This is both a prequel and a sequel, giving us two parallel stories juxtaposed against each other. First is the rise of Vito Corleone (Robert De Niro) and how he inevitably became The Godfather. The second is of his son, Michael (Al Pacino), and his fall as he tries to take hold of and control the family business. The film co-also stars Diane Keaton, John Cazale, and Robert Duvall.

The best way to look at this is to look at the two segments separately and then together. I found the De Niro flashback segments to be the best parts of the film. It was the more interesting half by far, and I actually cared about his rise to power (despite knowing his fate from the first film). De Niro is pretty excellent in the role, especially imitating Marlon Brando's voice from the first film... while simultaneously speaking almost entirely in Italian. But I suppose he did win an Oscar for this role for a reason. Part of me wishes more of the film (or even the majority of it) would have followed this part of the story instead.

The Pacino segments were decent in their own right, and he definitely gained back some of the respect and credibility I'd lost from him over the last couple films (granted, this one came before it, but still). He did very good. That being said, this side of the film wasn't really that exciting to me. I didn't care about the characters or what was going on. The family drama was dull (except for the whole "who betrayed him?" part, but that was only near the beginning. Also, the "abortion" scene was very well done and intense and heartbreaking). And unfortunately, there was more of this part of the film than the other. It wasn't bad or poorly done or anything--it just wasn't for me.

As they're juxtaposed, it works pretty well. And the pacing is pretty good. For the most part, it's kept pretty even. You'll get a long segment of one, then a long segment of the other; a short for one, a short for the other. But there are times when it's not so even and you can tell (and, as you can probably figure, it's usually in favor of the Pacino segments).

I'm not going to review the quality of this film. As an understatement, it's good. The music, cinematography, acting, etc... as I've said before, it's considered one of the greatest films ever made and it won 6 Oscars. There's a reason for all of that. Films of poor quality don't typically reach those standards. So instead, I can only review it on entertainment level, and as we know... entertainment value changes on a person-to-person basis. So for me, I enjoyed half the movie quite a bit; the other half of the movie... was alright. And the length (oh yeah, you knew I wasn't gonna let that slide)? 3 and a half hours... I'd actually say it's not too far off the length it should be. I'd say it could probably lose 30-45 minutes, most of it in the first half. But that's a bit too long for an adequate evening enjoyment. All of that being said, my scoring based on my personal entertainment level would be...


I Am McLovin!

(P.S. Let the hatred begin.)

60/60 Extra: Carlito's Way.

This is the third Brian de Palma film in a row for this month, and it seems they've been decreasing in my favor as they went. I loved The Untouchables. Scarface was alright, though overrated. And then there's Carlito's Way. The film follows Carlito (Al Pacino), a man who has recently gotten out of jail thanks to some info that his lawyer, David (Sean Penn), found about his arrest. But instead of getting into trouble again, Carlito wants to keep clean and go straight. But with people like Benny (John Leguizamo), Pachanga (Luis Guzman), and Lalin (Viggo Mortensen), he finds it harder and harder to keep out of things.

I'm probably going to get some flak for this, but I really did not care for this film. Everything just felt... wrong. Let me try to explain what I mean. It almost seemed as if this film was a joke. The overall tone I took from the film was... goofy. The acting, the music, the costuming and characters... it just felt silly. Don't even get me started on that horrid voice-over narration.

The acting was painful, at least to me. Sean Penn was good, I suppose, but Pacino drove me crazy. His accent was bizarre, and the way he delivered his lines was just strange. I know I'm sounding repetitive, but that's the best way I can describe it. And then there was Viggo Mortensen. It wasn't until halfway through his scene that I even realized it was him... he was so unrecognizable. And it was that scene when I first realized how ridiculously goofy the movie was.

As for the music... I suppose the songs themselves were good, but their use was more cheesy than anything. The best example of this is a love scene between Pacino and the main female... set to Joe Cocker's "You Are So Beautiful." I'm not kidding. It was so painfully bad. I couldn't stop thinking about how much of a joke everything seemed.

If I were to give a compliment to this film, I'd say the last 15-20 minutes. The climax of the film is tense and nicely done. And the whole scene on the escalator (what is it with de Palma and escalators?) was fantastic. But otherwise, the movie was, again, goofy and came off like a joke. The voice-over was bad, something about Pacino was off, the use of music was cheesy... and, yes, the movie was too long for what it was. Needless to say, it wasn't one of my favorites. There were some things in it I liked, and I didn't hate it or anything. It was just... not for me.


Stop Saying OK! OK.

60/60 Review #45: Scarface (1983).

Well, 2 out of 3 ain't bad. So it turns out that I have three Brian De Palma films in a row. Yesterday was The Untouchables, now this, and next up is Carlito's Way. Of course, I know all about Scarface by now, including its famous line (and I promise... no "little friend" puns in this review). What I wasn't aware of was that it's a nearly 3-hour film. And we all know how I like my lengthy "classics."

For those not in-the-know, this is a remake of a 1930s film. It's about Tony Montana (Al Pacino), a Cuban refugee who rises in the ranks of the drug trade. Along the way, he falls for his boss' girl, Elvira (Michelle Pfeiffer). We follow his rise and fall. The first hour is basically Tony Montana's beginnings... from his starts in a holding camp to starting in under the visage of a Miami drug lord. During this time there is also a very interesting standoff that involves a chainsaw, and he handles it... well. The second hour is his rise in the ranks. People start to respect him and appreciate him, though some (like his boss) believe he's too rash and needs to be dealt with. Of course, this leads Mr. Montana to further take charge and end up running the show. And the final hour is when things starts slipping away.

There's an irony surrounding the legacy of this film. The film essentially preaches the dangers of excess and ego. However, the ones who cherish and praise this film the most? Rappers who make millions on songs about excess and ego and then boast their accomplishments and unnecessary home editions and bountiful cars on MTV's Cribs. You also have teenagers of low socio-economic background who completely miss the point and see it as a tale of a man who starts out in a similar place as them who rises in power, gets and does whatever he wants (the freedom they wish to have at that age), and goes down in a blaze of glory--something they believe is possibly the highest of importance. So truly, those who have brought this film to the heights it has attained have utterly missed the point, which simultaneously nearly nullifies its status.

But that's not to say the film in and of itself isn't worthy of any kind of praise. Al Pacino gives an outstanding performance here. Not everybody is up to his level, however, but he holds the movie on his shoulders pretty damn well. And despite rarely smiling, he does bring a humor and humanity to the character. And I know it's more in the writing than his performance, but I was surprised by the angle that Tony Montana likes and wants children. Pacino plays him very human--though he still has some major faults, as well.

His performance, or even the story, doesn't make me feel like sitting through three hours, though. There are some scenes that could have been trimmed or even cut out all together. In the end, maybe an entire hour could have been cut out. At the end, I was left with the great performance and an iconic ending... but just a slightly above average film. I probably won't watch it again (except maybe the ending), but it is well made. If you haven't seen it, do so for Pacino's performance, but just know you're in it for a decent chunk of time.


I Am McLovin!

(P.S. I was just waiting for an "Ello... my name is Inigo Montoya..." etc. Such a similar accent!)

60/60 Review #39: Heat.

PLEASE WATCH BEFORE READING. THANK YOU.



So what a better way to start a month of heists, cops, and robbers than with Heat? It's more a movie of themes than one of structured story, so it's difficult to give a plot synopsis. The best I can give is that Neil McCauly (Robert De Niro) is a professional criminal who is continually pulling big heists. Lt. Hanna (Al Pacino) is the cop hot on his trail. And there are over a dozen other characters, almost all with their own subplot, it seems. I know that doesn't give the story justice, but it's the best I got.

First, we have to look at this cast list. Besides this being the first time De Niro and Pacino were on screen together, we have a cast that also includes the following: Val Kilmer, Jon Voight, Tom Sizemore, Ashley Judd, Ted Levine, Dennis Haysbert, William Fichtner, Natalie Portman, Tom Noonan, Hank Azaria, Danny Trejo, Henry Rollins, Mykelti Williamson, Tone Loc (seriously), Jeremy Piven, and Xander Berkeley. Now that's a freakin hardcore cast right there.

My biggest complaint on the movie is that it's way too damn long. It's just shy of 3 hours. This is mostly thanks to subplots that really didn't need to be there. Sure, you could argue that they add a more human element to the story and the characters. However, there are so many of them that all you get is surface level stuff and aren't left with enough time to truly explore the intimacies of each one. Natalie Portman has daddy issues--we get about 3 scenes letting us in on it before a climactic moment near the end, but we're never given anything beyond the point of him never being there for her. A lot of these guys have marital or relationship issues, but outside of some arguments in the home, it's never explored within the psyche of each character. It's left at the scene and just waits until they're together again before they argue some more. It's almost like it's there just for the sake of being there, not to affect the characters in any personal way (the closest it gets is at the end when De Niro has to make a choice, but that's about it). And there are so many other little subplots that do nothing but take up time and don't add much. Don't even get me started on Dennis Haysbert's character, who only seems to be there for thematic purposes.

I suppose in this sense, the film tries to be grander than the box it puts itself in. It wants to be a size 14 shoe in a size 10 box--it almost fits, but it needs to shrink a few inches in order to do it. And I'm not saying it should remove them completely... just choose more carefully and expand on what you have left. Really, I feel the film is easily an hour too long (at the least). It also says a lot that while there were times I was distracted on my laptop, I could look up at the scene and know exactly what was going on without even hearing dialogue. Most times I'll get lost and have to rewind or something to catch what I missed. But I was easily able to follow this film even while not paying close attention (don't worry, I only did that for no more than 20 minutes of the whole film, and sporadically). You can take that how you want--as a sign of good film-making or a sign of being clearly formulaic.

But I personally don't find that really to the detriment of the film. Besides some slow pacing here and there, there are some fantastic scenes in between. The shootouts and robberies are fun and loud and adrenaline-filled. But the best scene, hands down, was (obviously) the diner scene. Sure it might not have been as long as you wanted it to be, but it portrayed some of the finest acting between De Niro and Pacino inside or outside of this film (definitely Pacino's best moment in this film, as I was otherwise trying not to laugh at his over-the-topness throughout the rest, particularly the first half of the film. But that's just Pacino).

The last thing I want to mention is the soundtrack. It was strangely quiet through the majority of the film. I noticed while watching how low the music was, even during an action scene where it was heavier music that would normally be cranked up to increase your adrenaline and get you going. To me, it was almost non-existent. That being said, it only increased my reaction to the music of the final scene of the film. Not to spoil anything, but as we're given our final shot, we hear this haunting music playing at an actual normal level, which leads us into the ending credits. It's a fantastic number, and it really elevates the mood of the closing.

So I'm glad I've finally seen Heat, and if you wanna talk about it (I'm not a loser!) and/or argue why I'm wrong about everything, feel free to comment below. It's a fine crime film with an outstanding cast. It just could have used some trimming. I'll probably revisit it someday, but probably not for a while. So until then, I'll just leave it by saying I enjoyed it.


A Keanu 'Whoa'

(P.S. This rating is ironic considering Keanu was apparently originally up for Kilmer's role in the film, which I find really funny after-the-fact since I kept thinking early on how the role would have fit Keanu nicely.)

DVDs Or Death!

By God, it's been a month, but I will post a freakin DVDs Or Death!

88 Minutes.

Brief Synopsis: College Professor Gets Death Threat And Must Solve It In 88 Minutes Or Die.

Comments: Already saw this about a year before it even hit theater (no hyperbole there, folks. This movie was pushed back like nobody's business... which is exactly what it got in theater).

Viewing Option: Skip Altogether.

Young@Heart.

Brief Synopsis: Documentary About Old Folks Singing Rock/Punk Songs.

Comments: It looked... what's the word... cute. I might check it out at some point just for a few giggles.

Viewing Option: Rent or T.V.

Speed Racer.

Brief Synopsis: Live-Action (Sorta) Movie Version Of Classic Anime.

Comments: I was one of the few who saw this in theater... and as I said then, the only people saying bad things about this movie were people who didn't bother to see it. Every review I read from people who actually saw it have been incredibly positive (stuffy professional critics notwithstanding). This movie was freakin awesome.

Viewing Option: Buy.

Made Of Honor.

Brief Synopsis: Male Best Friend Becomes Maid Of Honor At Secret Love's Wedding.

Comments: Interesting concept, though it didn't get a bunch of good reviews. My mom and sister saw it and enjoyed it, though, and the only movies they ever turn their noses up at are, you know, good ones that require more than 'no brain'.

Viewing Option: T.V. or Skip.

Avatar: The Last Airbender - Complete Book 3 Collection.

Brief Synopsis: The Final Season Of Great American Anime Series.

Comments: I wish I owned the first two seasons on DVD. Alas, no time or money. But yeah, this was one of my favorite shows ever, and it was actually fully completed within 3 seasons. Forget those shows nowadays that have to drag everything out for 8 seasons in which not much happens and every other season is only so-so... this show actually knows how to please and everything is done absolutely right. It only got better with every season, and with only 3 seasons, you don't have to wait forever to get the full story.

Viewing Option: T.V. Re-Runs or Eventual Buy (whenever I have time/money).

P.E.S.T.

I really do apologize that y'all aren't receiving much lately. This would have been a good movie-viewing weekend, too... had it not been for stupid Hurricane Ike heading directly for us. But alas, even though I shall be in the evacuation process by the time you read this, I shall still give you it anyway... and that 'it' is none other than... Pre-Emptive Strike Thursday! (No hurricane/evacuation pun intended... or 9/11 pun, either, as I just realized that it'll be 9/11 when this is posted. Anyway...).

-----------------------

Title: The Women.

Pre-Thoughts: ...Come again? I've never even heard of this movie... at least, I didn't until one of the teachers at the high school randomly brought it up last week. I haven't seen a trailer or heard anything about it. But it has the following people in it: Meg Ryan, Annette Benning, Eva Mendes, Debra Messing, Jada Pinkett Smith, Bette Midler, Carrie Fisher, and Cloris Leachman. It probably should have been re-title "The Women... Without Huge Careers Anymore All In One Movie." So... yeah, probably not gonna see it.

Pre-Score: Uh... couldn't tell you even if I wanted to.



Title: Burn After Reading.

Pre-Thoughts: The next big Coen Brothers movie, and one of the big two coming out this weekend. Personally, even though the trailer doesn't give too much information on what the hell the movie is actually about (except a computer disc, a disgruntled and slightly awkward John Malcovich, and a dancing Brad Pitt), I think it'll be pretty good. The Coen's are great directors, especially in their comedies (gotta love The Big Lebowski). And amazingly enough, it will be coming here, so that's awesome.

Pre-Score:

A Keanu 'Whoa'



Title: The Family That Preys.

Pre-Thoughts: On the one hand, it's a clever pun in the title. On the other hand, it's Tyler Perry... yet again.

Pre-Score:

The Zed Word



Title: Nothing Is Private.

Pre-Thoughts: ...except the advertising on this film, which I haven't seen. I've heard of it, of course (under it's other name, Towelhead), but I haven't really kept up much on it. Though I've heard it's really good. I'll keep an eye out for it, though I don't think it's coming here.

Pre-Score:

A Keanu 'Whoa'


Title: Righteous Kill.

Pre-Thoughts: Earlier this year, we were blessed with the pairing of Jet Li and Jackie Chan in one film. Now that we're later into the year, we have a movie that, after 20 or 30 years, has re-united Al Pacino and Robert DeNiro. I think it looks good, though with the potential of becoming overrated. But I'll have to check it out before I say anything. It's number two on my list (Burn After Reading comes first). Otherwise, yeah, I'd check it out.

Pre-Score:

I Am McLovin!

2 In 1: Chaos and Dog Day Afternoon.

Alrighty. After watching The Bank Job this past Friday, I got in the mood to check out some more heist movies, so I went to rent Dog Day Afternoon. While there, I rented some other movies, one of which was a movie called Chaos with Jason Statham, which could also be considered a heist movie (and better, I thought, than The Bank Job, also starring Jason Statham). Watching both, I felt I could turn this into a 2 in 1, so here we go.

Chaos.

Chaos has an interesting take on the heist film. It actually reminded me a bit of my last novel (without the supernatural/religious elements). The plot of Chaos is thus: After a disastrous hostage situation on a bridge in which both hostage and hostage taker die, Detective Conners (Jason Statham) is suspended and basically blacklisted, while his partner is fired. But when a bank robber who calls himself Lorenz (Wesley Snipes) takes hostages and seemingly tries to rob the place, he only has one request: to have Conners be the negotiator in charge. So Conners is brought back in and is partnered up with the young Detective Dekker (Ryan Phillippe). But when the robbers escape and people start dying randomly, the two detectives believe it has to do with the Chaos Theory—a bunch of seemingly unrelated events are all connected somehow.

The movie is just plain fun, really. The acting is alright… it’s basic thriller-genre acting (and Jason Statham). The plot is really cool, I thought, though highly predictable (though that could be a bad thing, considering the point of the plot is to be unpredictable). I figured out way too much early on, but that honestly didn’t stop me from enjoying the movie. Even though I figured out the final twist before it happened, I was still able to enjoy it with a smile on my face as it was revealed.

I think this is really the first time Jason Statham hasn’t really done his thing in one of his movies. He does kick some ass at one point, but its more cop-type brawling than anything. But I don’t think that’s a drawback or anything. And Wesley Snipes plays a pretty cool bad guy. He just has this “Oh, I’m cool, I’m a badass, I’m totally big pimpin. Look at my hat!” air about him every time you see him. And all the characters were more than just one-dimensional. They each had some kind of backstory to deepen their characters (at least to a degree).

So yeah, really, this is just one of those movies you have to not look too much into, but just sit back and enjoy it. But you also gotta pay attention toward the end, or it might go too fast for you to keep up (I know my dad started trying to talk to me during this point, and I was trying to pay attention to the movie, too. But I got the basic gist of what was going on; plus, I had already figured it out by that point, anyway).

I Am McLovin!

Dog Day Afternoon.

So I just saw it for the first time last night. Better late than never, right? Dog Day Afternoon is based on the true story of a simple bank robbery gone bad. Sonny (Al Pacino) and Sal (John Cazale) go to rob a bank, but being the down-on-their-luck overall nice guys, they take too long and attract police attention. The day lingers on with the employees no longer feeling any threat from the two men (except maybe Sal), and some even refusing to leave when they have the opportunity (by the way, just a random bit of trivia: this is known as Stockholm Syndrome, when the hostages begin to become attached to their hostage takers). Anyway, it gets all over the news, and the two men (moreso Sonny) start getting many fans. The only question left is… how are they gonna get out of this?

I thought this movie was excellent. Its two hours flew by. It was hilarious, sad, and dramatic. The acting was phenomenal, especially by the then young Al Pacino. The subtle performance by the late John Cazale was good, too, making you feel both frightened of and worried for him. The twist about halfway in when you find out exactly why Sonny is robbing the bank was unexpected (at least for me). But it worked (I’d hope so, considering it actually happened that way).

Afterwards I read an article from the real ‘Sonny’ and said he loved the movie, but was highly upset at how some of the things were portrayed and “Hollywood-ized,” and that the movie was really only about 30% true. Still, the movie version of the events was great in its own right. I just rented this movie, but I have a feeling I’m gonna end up going out and buying it. Let’s all go to the country of Wyoming!

Royale With Cheese