Month: October 2019

The Final Conflict [Omen III: The Final Conflict] (1981)

The Final Conflict [Omen III: The Final Conflict] (1981)

ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

(On TV, October 2019) There’s something curious about how many of mainstream Hollywood’s portrayal of the Christian faith are often found in the horror genre. Things don’t get any wilder in this regard as Omen III: After two movies in which the Antichrist was born, got rid of his opponents, grew up a bit, got rid of more opponents; here we have a grown-up opponent (a genius businessman bringing good to the word) finally able to exert some real power. Except for … the rebirth of Christ, coming to destroy him in his ascendancy. It’s all very prophetic mumbo-jumbo talking about “the Nazarene” from a Satanist perspective, but the tables are turned and the result does have some entertainment to it. An early role for Sam Neill gives him ample opportunity to chew on scenery and ham it up as far as he can. Meanwhile, the deaths are alternately grotesque or overdone: it’s not enough for an avenging priest to be hanged by a freak TV studio accident: he must be set on fire for good measure. And the way the editing transforms a pack of adorable beagles into a bloodthirsty pack is nothing short of admirable. Then there’s the plot, which has the Antichrist killing every male child born in the United Kingdom during a certain amount of time. (And an assistant privy to his most insane reflections, but who doesn’t have the sense to run far away when his own newborn son is targeted. Guess who’s the anti-Antichrist?)  But what’s perhaps most surprising about The Final Conflict is its finality: by the end, the evil is thoroughly defeated in a way that seems even further sequels impossible. There’s even angelic music and scriptures quotes to make you feel better about the whole thing. I still don’t think The Final Conflict is a good movie: it’s far too scattered, occasionally ridiculous, and underdeveloped (supposedly taking place in a dystopian future, although you’d never know it once past the first few minutes) to be anywhere near good. But I will grant that it does have some decent entertainment value. Especially compared to its far dourer predecessors.

Path to War (2002)

Path to War (2002)

ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

(On Cable TV, October 2019) John Frankenheimer remains a major director even fifteen years after his death, and Path to War is noteworthy for being his last movie, a made-for-HBO production that nonetheless shows his consummate skills in putting together an interesting film. It’s easy to see why it wasn’t considered for the big screen: as a nearly three hours behind-the-scenes look at the way the United States gradually manipulated itself into launching the Vietnam War, it’s a cerebral topic that is best appreciated at home. Still, the flow of the film’s sequences and the care through which the actors are delivering their performance is clearly indicative of someone like Frankenheimer’s talents. The film itself is interesting in that it gives life to a geopolitical theory: the idea that Lyndon B. Johnston wanted to focus on his domestic agenda but found himself increasingly surrounded by people who all (regretfully) saw no way out of greater engagement, even those who had been forcefully opposed to the idea in the first place. There’s an interesting statement here about the inevitability of some processes once set in motion, and how powerless even the so-called most powerful people can be. Path to War may or may not reflect the entire truth about how the US got stuck in Vietnam, but it’s an unusual movie for even approaching the topic. Performance-wise, Michael Gambon, Donald Sutherland and Alec Baldwin all deliver subtle, strong and somewhat atypical performances acting as historical characters. It can certainly be amusing to spot the various historical characters populating the story—all the way to the appearance of Jack Valenti, who worked at the White House before becoming a Hollywood figurehead. All in all, this is prestige made-for-TV filmmaking, tacking serious topics in a competent fashion. There’s an interesting link to be made between Frankenheimer’s 1960s wild political thrillers and the reality-based story presented in Path to War. In a way, he got to revisit his own past filmography in presenting the real thing.

L’avventura (1960)

L’avventura (1960)

ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

(On Cable TV, October 2019) I should not be surprised at my less-than-impressed reaction to writer-director Michelangelo Antonioni’s L’avventura. For one thing, I don’t have a lot of sympathy for Italian neorealism, slow cinema or plotless drama and L’avventura comes close to being all of these. While it may at first appear that the film will be about the disappearance of a young woman on a small Mediterranean island, it turns out that this is just a hook and that the mystery is never resolved—much of the film is about the subsequent affair between the disappeared woman’s friend and boyfriend, except without anything looking like complications following the disappearance. No, much of L’avventura is about slow pacing, trips through circa-1960s Italy, nice landscapes, and two lovers talking through their relationship. There is a public for that (the film is often mentioned in various best-of lists), but I’m not part of it. Rather than regale you with how my attention wandered and I kept wondering with increasing exasperation when the entire thing would end (nearly two and a half hours after it began), I’d rather leave with the affirmation that L’avventura isn’t my kind of cinema and leave it at that.

Halloween 5: The Revenge of Michael Myers (1989)

Halloween 5: The Revenge of Michael Myers (1989)

ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

(On TV, October 2019) It doesn’t take two minutes in Halloween 5: The Revenge of Michael Myers to rewrite the ending of the previous film in the series, audaciously inserting material in between the frames of the previous film in order to absolve its young heroine, juice up Myers’s upcoming presence and introduce a strong supernatural element in the whole thing. Which is almost inevitable when you run out of ideas. Indeed, other than the slightly better direction, what follows is pretty much the usual for that kind of movie: an unstoppable killer, an innocent victim (once again too young for this to be good fun), a small town’s graduating class of teenagers being murdered throughout the film. It’s all quite dull. There is a flicker of interest at the very end of the film as a mysterious force ensures the possibility of a sequel, but otherwise this is very familiar material—even the various hints of the supernatural aren’t capitalized upon, leaving an unfinished, unsatisfying impression. Granted, I’m no fan of the series nor of the slasher subgenre in general, so my grain of salt is not particularly sympathetic to the film from the beginning. Still, Halloween 5: The Revenge of Michael Myers feels like one dull movie, barely worth watching unless, like me, you’re committed to filling out the blanks in the series.

Halloween 4: The Return of Michael Myers (1988)

Halloween 4: The Return of Michael Myers (1988)

ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

(On TV, October 2019) In the grand scheme of the Halloween series, Halloween 4: The Return of Michael Myers is the one that trashed the idea of a series of unrelated Halloween-themed movies—as much as I like Halloween 3’s crazy approach to the theme, Halloween 4 is indeed the return of Michael Myers as the unstoppable, possibly supernatural serial killer with a fascination for the Stroud family. If you’re even remotely familiar with the concept of a slasher horror movie, you know what to expect: an evil killer, innocent victims, ineffectual police forces (through no fault of their own, as even gunshots at close range aren’t the kind of stuff that will stop this killer). The twist here is that the intended victim is a very young girl, introducing a not-so-cool, not-so-fun element in the template. There’s an extra twist at the very end, but it feels more distasteful and a mockery of any attempt at characterization—though I’ll note that both Halloween 4 and Friday the 13th 4 (four years apart) ended on similar notes, Halloween 4 being a bit more sadistic about it. There’s something almost interesting in the character of the doctor (Donald Pleasance) being driven mad by the idea of pure evil returning over and over again, but if you’re thinking meta-commentary about the nature of such movies, then think again: Halloween 4 really isn’t interested by such shenanigans. As the flat writing and direction suggest, this is a pure cash-in. If you’re a fan of slasher horror, this is a film for you. If you’re not, this is clearly not the film that will convince you otherwise.

Green Book (2018)

Green Book (2018)

ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

(On Cable TV, October 2019) Considering our increasingly sophisticated understanding of (North)American racism, it’s getting obvious that the approach of previous eras isn’t quite enough today. At a time when the Oscars are being awarded between Black Panther, BlacKKKlansman and Green Book, well, it’s infuriating when the Academy ends up picking the absolute safest choice. Green Book, is, in many ways, a throwback to the comfortable anti-racism message of previous decades: White people should be nice to “The Other” so that they should feel better about themselves. In this simplistic message, the inner lives and culture, agency, and aspirations of “the Other” are irrelevant to showing the evolution of the white person. That’s not enough today: “The Other” deserves a full personality, deserves to be the heroes of their own story. In that context, Green Book isn’t all that impressive: as the story of a white protagonist driving around a black musician across the deep south and keeping him out of trouble, it’s clear that the film is more interested in making white audiences feel superior to the cartoonishly racist antagonists of the film. Not to take anything away from the performances of Viggo Mortensen (as the driver) and Mahershala Ali (as the musician, a character of such welcome complexity that the film short-changes him by shoehorning him in a simple story), nor a welcome supporting role for Linda Cardellini, but the result has its limits when comparing it to other best-of-the-year movies. I’d be lying if I didn’t confess to enjoy much of Green Book: there’s a straightforward propulsive quality to the screenwriting that makes it an easy movie to watch and enjoy. I do have the white privilege of liking the film’s reassuring message. But coming off the movie high of BlacKKKlansman, which confronts racists in its ugliest contemporary forms and refuses any easy comfort by making the point that the fight is still ongoing, well Green Book looks like thin soup. There’s a bit of Spotlight Rot at work here, in that a perfectly good genre piece wilts when examined by sustained attention from audiences outside its comfort zone. But at this moment, with the top echelon of the American government not even hiding its inherent racism, I have little patience by comforting lies when “The Others” are not being merely marginalized or harmed but often killed. Green Book may be a feel-good fable, but I want more.

Friday the 13th: The Final Chapter (1984)

Friday the 13th: The Final Chapter (1984)

ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

(On Cable TV, October 2019) It’s been decades since I last saw the first Friday the 13th film trilogy and considering my distaste of slasher film, I probably could have gone on the rest of my life without seeing the other film in the series. But this is October and the cable channels are cranking up their horror movie schedule and I figure that this may be as good a time as any to record the rest of the series and make it an endurance contest. First up is the fourth entry The Final Chapter (which was a lie, considering that it was succeeded by no fewer than eight other movies). Made at a time when the slasher craze was fully defined and getting familiar, this Final Chapter is very much in-line with the previous instalments: Here, once again, we have teenagers (some locals and some out-of-towners looking for a cottage vacation) having sex and getting killed by the killer’s nigh-omnipotent craziness. It’s all surprisingly boring despite the deaths accumulating at a fast pace. There isn’t all that much nudity, the deaths are gory without being as disgusting as they would become in later instalments (well, by my jaded 2019’s blood-soaked standards, anyway) and only the presence of a younger boy helps distinguish the film from the usual template. Trying to review these movies is a challenge when there’s so little to say. I won’t bring myself to comment on the quality of the on-screen slashing, and there isn’t much to the rest of the film to comment once you’re bored with those interludes. (Some of the stunts are good, though—there’s a length slow motion falling-though-the-windows-and-then-to-the-ground shot that’s spectacular in its own right.)  The 1980s flavour is there but it’s not going to cause any nostalgia along the way. Whatever special marketing hook this film may have had as “a final chapter” has been thoroughly nullified by the endless follow-ups. As a Friday the 13th film, The Final Chapter is pretty much what this series is about—meaning that it ties in a piece with the first three films in the series (indeed picking up moments after the third) but that it certainly won’t make any new fans of the franchise by that point. You already know if you’re going to like it.

Buzz (2019)

Buzz (2019)

ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

(On Cable TV, October 2019) I watched HBO’s Buzz because it presented itself as being about Buzz Bissinger, author of the really good book Friday Night Lights and I wanted to check what he was up to. Well, it turns out that I had missed quite a bit in the past few years. As the film shows, long-form journalist Bissinger spent much of 2015–2017 with Caitlyn Jenner, accompanying her through a much-publicized gender transition, writing the Vanity Fair cover story that marked her coming out and the book that followed. But that’s only half of it—as we gradually piece together, Bissinger’s time with Jenner led him to feel freer to reveal more of his own true nature. Cross-dressing and enthusiasm for BDSM are big parts of it, but the freedom comes with a price as his gender-bending photoshoot raises questions from his very understanding wife, a strain that is further tested when he admits having had a session with a professional dominatrix. Much of the last fifteen minutes of the film are about whether the marriage will survive (it’s touch and go and while the film remains noncommittal about the issue, recent beauty product articles from Bissinger suggest that they’re still together). There’s a heartfelt message here about staying true to oneself, but tempered with how that balances with the demands made by others in our lives. I’m not entirely happy with the documentary itself, but it has far more to do about the way it’s executed (no voiceovers, very few title cards, mostly captured footage during the Jenner/Bissinger collaboration period and a few interviews), leaving a lot to piece together in between fragments of evidence, and missing many opportunities to dig into related themes. The result is cinematographic, though, and the subtlety does speak volumes at times. The other thing that leaves me less than comfortable isn’t as much Bissinger’s gender-fluid leather-heavy wardrobe (surprisingly expensive, as we learn—he does look cool in it) or BDSM preferences, but the exhibitionism on display in the film, which feels far more like a bit TMI videoblog than an actual documentary presenting its subject dispassionately. There’s enough evidence here to understand that this isn’t Bissinger’s first foray into transforming personal events into journalism (hence the detour in discussing his book Father’s Day) but the result does feel like a self-promotional piece more than an attempt at understanding what’s going on. What I really, really liked about Buzz, though, is indissociable from that naked display of personal issues—what readers may portray in their minds from reading a book (such as Friday Night Lights) is a very incomplete portrait, and if Buzz does something for casual Bissinger fans such as myself, it’s to add a few layers of dimensions to him. You do what you do, Buzz—and keep writing.

Amour (2012)

Amour (2012)

ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

(In French, On TV, October 2019) The real horror movies aren’t always marketed as such. In Amour, for instance, we’ve got a near-intolerable depiction of a realistic and heartbreaking situation: an elderly man having to take care of a severely disabled partner at the very end of their lives. There’s no way it will end well, as either the premise or the opening moments of the film suggest. Much of the two-hour film is a steady descent into the inevitability of death and there’s nothing remotely fun about it. In Michael Haneke’s usual style, the camera lingers long before, during and after the main point of a scene has been made: there isn’t much of a plot despite the film’s running time, and that makes the experience even more harrowing. Emmanuelle Riva and Jean-Louis Trintignant are heartbreaking as a committed couple who end up suffering through no fault of their own except for the breakdown of human bodies. Despite the straightforward plot, Amour is a lot to take in because it deals in inevitabilities. No genre element, no fantastic creature we can deny: just what happens to a lot of us as we age. If the film has any upside, it’s to make the thought of dying alone seem almost like a happy ending considering the alternative.

Stage Door (1937)

Stage Door (1937)

ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

(On Cable TV, October 2019) The links between Hollywood and Broadway remain an enduring source of fascination, especially in the early years of sound cinema where stage shows could finally be portrayed on film with some fidelity. Consider Stage Door, which takes us to a 1930s boarding house dedicated to young women trying to find a place in showbiz: an ideal environment to feature many young actresses, and to riff on themes of interest to movie audiences without quite talking about movies. To modern viewers, much for the initial attraction of the film will be its cast. Not only do we have Katharine Hepburn, Ginger Rogers, and Lucille Ball in leading roles, but Ann Miller (who was, amazingly only 14 at the time) is unmistakably recognizable in a smaller role. But as Stage Door begins, it’s the quality and the snark of the free-flowing dialogue between the ensemble cast that holds our attention. The women here have fast wits and some of the film’s best moments consist in merely hanging out in the building’s foyer with them as they chat about their careers, their dates and their shared dislike of the house’s food. Hepburn is magnificent as a haughty upper-class girl wanting to make it as an actress and becoming far more sympathetic in the process. She’s not the only one that changes quite a bit along the way, as the film goes from fast-paced comedy to drama somewhere around the beginning of the third act. Despite the sobering (but not entirely unpredictable) shift, that change of pace works rather well and provides to the film a dramatic heft that a purely comedic approach may have lacked. It certainly improves the ultimate impact of the result, with Stage Door surviving admirably well even today.

The Hunchback of Notre Dame (1939)

The Hunchback of Notre Dame (1939)

ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

(On Cable TV, October 2019) I’m clearly showing my age when I say that it’s weird to see a big-budget live-action version of The Hunchback of Notre Dame when it’s so readily compared to the Disney version. I know—it’s an unfair comparison, especially to the original Victor Hugo novel or the 1923 silent film. But it’s not entirely without foundation: The 1939 version, after all, codified many of the elements that even the 1996 Disney version reappropriates for its own use. There are a few other interesting things as well: Charles Laughton is quite good as the titular hunchback, even in the grotesque makeup he has to wear for the entire film. Meanwhile, Maureen O’Hara is spectacular as Esmeralda. Then there is the lavishness of the production, which doesn’t skimp on the massive crowds and the expansive sets that its premise requires, revolving around Notre Dame Cathedral and the rest of Paris as it does. (It was, at the time, one of the most expensive movies ever made by RKO studios.) There’s a little bit of weirdness in having the story interrupt itself to explain the power of the printing press, but that’s forgivable in its own way. This 1939 version of The Hunchback of Notre Dame is a big-budget spectacular in all senses of the word, and that quality does make it watchable even today.

Jaws: The Revenge (1987)

Jaws: The Revenge (1987)

ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

(On TV, October 2019) As I’ve mentioned before, every Jaws sequel gets worse and worse, and Jaws 4: The Revenge is a bad movie even on the bad movie scale. Not content with having a mere white shark on the prowl, this one has a roaring white shark tracking down surviving family members of a shark opponent all the way down from the northeast United States to the Bahamas. It’s … something all right. Built on such shaky premises, the rest of the film doesn’t go far. In between the incoherent plotting, lame character development and dull sequences, Jaws: The Revenge is an inglorious end to the series. And you won’t believe that inept ending. The best thing the film may have produced is the following quote about lead actor Michael Caine: “I have never seen it, but, by all accounts, it is terrible. However, I have seen the house that it built, and it is terrific!”  What else can we add?

Alice Doesn’t Live Here Anymore (1974)

Alice Doesn’t Live Here Anymore (1974)

ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

(On Cable TV, October 2019) The 1970s were a melodramatic time for everyone, including directors better known for straight-up genre fare. In Alice Doesn’t Live Here Anymore, here we have Martin Scorsese tackling a romantic drama, looking at lower-class Americans through the eyes of a new widow trying to make it as a singer. Of course, money is scarce, there’s her son to consider, and new romantic relationships are a path fraught with peril. As befit a New Hollywood film, it’s all dirty, grimy, realistic and depressing. We’re stuck around Phoenix, Arizona for most of the duration. Scorsese’s usual sense of style is muted here (well, other than a very stylish opening and a long tracking shot) but considering that he took the job in order to bolster his credentials as an actor’s director, he over-succeeded at his ambitions at the moment Ellen Burstyn (looking impossibly young here) won an Oscar for the role. Other than Burstyn, there’s a fun number of famous actors in the cast, from Kris Kristofferson to Diane Ladd to Harvey Keitel to Jodie Foster (plus Laura Dern in a cameo if you know what to look for). Still, the star here is Scorsese, who delivers a very atypical film by his later standards but was able to parlay his experience here in later more memorable projects.

Hollywood Party (1934)

Hollywood Party (1934)

ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

(On Cable TV, October 2019) I have an increasing fondness for some movies of the early 1930s, a time when sight and sound were available, the repressive Production Code wasn’t yet in effect and Hollywood hadn’t yet ossified in its traditional forms. Anything and everything was possible, and narrative cohesion wasn’t yet the all-ruling norm. That’s when you ended with films such as Hollywood Party, which weren’t much more than theatre variety shows put on film, taking advantage of available celebrities, the power of multiple takes to present fully polished material, and going quickly from one number to another. Hollywood Party does have a framing device as sorts, as a forty-something Jimmy Durante plays a movie star best known for Tarzan parody “Schnarzan the Conqueror.” Throwing a lavish party in the hope of securing a new gimmick for his film series, he ends up hosting comedians and singers in a series of numbers. Some of them are more amazing than others: Laurel and Hardy both drop by to engage in an egg-cellent battle of wits with the luscious Lupe Velez (it’s actually kind of gross). The Three Stooges are hit on the head musically. Mickey Mouse is there to introduce a colour animated musical number about a war between sweets that would be horrifying if it weren’t so oddly charming. The title song is a standout dance number featuring a fantasy version of glitzy telephone operators in form-fitting metallic outfits. Polly Moran and Charles Butterworth play an older couple hilariously eager to have extramarital affairs. Musical number “I’ve had my moments” is slyly suggestive of two promiscuous people coming together. (Pre-Code Hollywood is so cool.)  Durante has visions of his nose on various characters and animals (there’s a lot of phallic imagery even in the cartoon). Lions eventually wreak havoc on set. Hollywood Party is not what I’d call a terrific musical, even by the era’s standards—it’s a collage of various segments from various directors and it’s suitably inconsistent. (The ending is the only logical one that fits.)  But even as a loose collection of musical and comedy sketches (which are invariably more interesting than the rare musical moments), it brings together a bunch of then-known stars, and still offers an intriguing glimpse in early Hollywood. I enjoyed it quite a bit even despite its issues.

Hollywood Party (1937)

Hollywood Party (1937)

ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

(On Cable TV, October 2019) Closer to a technical demonstration than a real movie, the 1937 version of Hollywood Party (there’s a far better known 1934 Hollywood Party featuring Laurel and Hardy) is dull, infuriating, intriguing and charming at once. Plot-wise, it’s nothing more than an east-Asia themed variety show, with more stereotypical, fake accents and cultural appropriation costuming (Charley Chase doing a lame Charlie Chan impersonation … ugh) than modern audiences can tolerate. But here’s the thing: It’s filmed in bright Technicolor, generally set outside, and features a number of moderately well-known actors of the time. Modern audiences will be captivated by a far too-short appearance by the legendary Anna May Wong showing off a few wardrobe pieces, and exasperated by lame comic sketches. The song and dances are an often-uncomfortable mix of adequate and overdone (a white man playing an accordion while dressed in Chinese robes is … special), not wowing anyone compared to the best standards of the time but coming across as an amiable short film. Still, it’s the bright colours and sometimes-daring cinematography (through the use of Venetian blinds) that holds our attention today despite the often-dodgy content. A curio more than an essential viewing, Hollywood Party disappeared from public viewing for sixty years until it was rediscovered in an archive in 2000, and even despite the outdated stereotypes it’s good to have this historical document with us still.