Reviews

  • Oliver Twist (1948)

    Oliver Twist (1948)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On Cable TV, August 2020) There’s something to the faithfulness of David Lean’s adaptation of Oliver Twist that simply makes it feel generic to me. I’m using “generic” in a somewhat unusual sense here – I have seen so many Classic Hollywood adaptations of classic English Literature novels by now that I almost know what to expect before the film even starts playing, and that was Oliver Twist from beginning to end. There are the historical sets, the black-and-white cinematography, the well-mannered theatrical acting from the actors and the loose adaptations in order to make it more of a movie than a book. The only thing that stands out from this Oliver Twist is Alec Guinness’s hideous anti-Semitic makeup as Fagin, a design decision from Lean that has been criticized even since the pre-production of the film and is likely to be criticized forever. Otherwise (and I’ll admit that it’s a big “otherwise”), the film itself feels like an EngLit class brought to motion. Great if you’re illustrating the classics, not so great if, like me, you’ve overdosed on them.

  • Southbound (2015)

    Southbound (2015)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (In French, On Cable TV, August 2020) I’ve been on the lookout for Southbound for years, ever since encountering Radio Silence’s short film in the V/H/S anthology. They hit commercial and critical success with last year’s Hide and Seek, but Southbound remained more difficult to track down. Having finally seen it thanks to a French-Canadian cable TV horror channel (where it was highlighted at the Friday evening movie of the week), I’m simultaneously intrigued and disappointed. There are certainly plenty of things to like in Southbound: As an anthology film from different directors, it’s surprisingly cohesive on both a thematic and visual level. Much of it takes place on or near the lonely roads of the American southwestern desert, as characters undergo horrifying hardships. The entire film is structured like a loop, easily reinforcing the idea that this is akin to purgatory and leading itself to repeat viewings. (Indeed, the film’s Wikipedia page gives a whole list of things to watch for.) The lead creature’s visual design is terrific, bringing to mind a macabre guardian angel. The segments themselves have interesting ideas and usually play with more ambitious concepts than simple horrific devices. (How would you like it if 911 operators weren’t really interested in helping you?) Alas, there’s a built-in limit to how much I can like the result. The idea of a purgatory means that tales don’t have neat beginnings or, crucially, ends. It doesn’t help that Southbound’s visual polish is uniformly flat: handheld, bleached by the desert sun or plunged into darkness. You can feel the grime coming off the screen. Pacing-wise, some conventional elements (cultists, home invaders) could have been trimmed in favour of the more unusual material. Southbound is still a cut above most horror films: it’s ambitious, unusually structured and often unnerving. But it lays out bold ideas that are only half-realized – crucial material is missing, and cannot be included because the filmmakers have something else in mind. Too bad – but it’s still worth a watch with low-expectations for anyone looking for something slightly different from the usual horror fare.

  • The Big Parade of Comedy (1964)

    The Big Parade of Comedy (1964)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On Cable TV, August 2020) Anticipating That’s Entertainment! by a decade, The Big Parade of Comedy is director-anthologist Robert Youngson’s idea of a comedy clip show, digging in MGM’s archives to present a few choice bits. The clips limit themselves to the 1920s-40s and take a star-centric structure to present its material. Youngson favours lengthier excerpts rather than montages, which makes sense whenever the clips have gags that build upon the previous ones. Les Tremayne narrates the film in the characteristic fashion of the times. I was surprised to see no less than three fairly long excerpts from the somewhat lesser-known Hollywood Party, one of them (with Abott and Costello, as well as Lupe Velez), I actually appreciated more upon a second viewing due to the nodding between Abbott and Costello. Obviously, your taste for comedy will dictate what segments are funniest – I can watch the Marx Brothers and William Powell as Nick Charles all day long, but the Three Stooges and Laurel & Hardy are a harder sell. Still, comedy is comedy, and watching The Big Parade of Comedy is almost more fun as a reminder of great comedies I’ve seen lately, whether it’s Two-Faced Woman, The Cameraman or The Philadelphia Story. It won’t replace the original films, but it’s decently entertaining.

  • The Heavenly Body (1944)

    The Heavenly Body (1944)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On Cable TV, August 2020) Star vehicles have been a feature of Hollywood forever, and for all of the flak they can get, they’re often a direct delivery vehicle to see likable actors doing what they do best. Taking this into account, there are two reasons to watch The Heavenly Body, and they’re Hedy Lamarr and William Powell. They play a disaffected couple – he, an astronomer, spends far too much time at the observatory, making her feel neglected. When an astrologer portends that she will find happiness with someone else, she loudly declares her intention to leave the marriage, leaving him frantic to resolve matters. Things are complicated by the arrival of a handsome air-raid warden, hastening his efforts just as the culmination of his professional career is coming fast. Powell is in a class of his own as the protagonist, his obvious gift for sophisticated comedy outstripping the somewhat loose script. There’s some fun in exploring astronomy as a plot driver — there’s even a nice special effect shot featuring a comet crashing into the moon. The rest of The Heavenly Body is a bit of a paint-by-number production, although it does harken to the late-1930s comedies of remarriage in pulling apart a couple only to have them reunite at the end. Not a great movie by any means, but a good show for Powell and Lamarr fans.

  • Number Seventeen (1932)

    Number Seventeen (1932)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On Cable TV, August 2020) As I’m digging deeper and deeper in the Hitchcock filmography, I’m starting to reach the bottom tier of his work, and Number Seventeen is clearly one of them. Despite a few intriguing moments, this is a film that doesn’t quite cohere. It looks, at first, like one of the single-setting style exercises that Hitchcock would keep exploring later in his career: the action is mostly centred around a staircase in a large house. But this isn’t true for the entire film, as things eventually move toward a speeding train. Throughout, we’re left mystified by poorly motivated characters, a tone that half-heartedly reaches for comedy at times but not at others. Number Seventeen lacks the spark that distinguished Hitchcock thrillers, even early ones, from most other contemporary thrillers. Oh well – they can’t all be first-rate, and it’s not as if he hasn’t done much better after that…

  • Huang jin xiong di [Golden Job] (2018)

    Huang jin xiong di [Golden Job] (2018)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On TV, August 2020) I was in the mood for an action movie, and Golden Job delivered on that itch. The story of five “brothers” carrying off dangerous assignments as a team, the film quickly twists the dynamic inward as one of the men betrays his ersatz family for the sake of a very large gold shipment. The narrative arc is very melodramatic, but it’s not a bad backdrop for the action scenes that are the film’s raison d’être. While Golden Job is not a great action movie, it’s a good enough one. Using rough CGI for demented stunts and more successful seamless shots, it’s a film that has a charge of action every ten-to-fifteen minutes, and has sufficiently different ones so that things don’t fall into a morass of undistinguished movement. (A common failing of many martial arts films.) There are a few good stunts and shots here and there, although it firmly upholds the tradition of action movies giving very little thought to the collateral damage of the smashed or exploded cars along the way. Some of the film is directed a bit too bluntly, but veteran action choreographer Kar Lok Chin doesn’t do all too badly. Acting-wise, it’s an ensemble cast, but Ekin Cheng does have the plum role as “Lion,” while Jerry Lamb is distinctive as “Mouse.” (I’m told that much of the main cast is the same as an earlier action film series, but I don’t think that this is an explicit sequel, despite the expansive backstory suggested. And, of course, the casting coup doesn’t quite work if you’re not aware -or don’t remember—the earlier series.) Visually, Golden Job does travel around the world for its set-pieces, adding slightly to the interest. Still, it probably doesn’t reach out of the action genre – I have a feeling it’s going to be one of those films that works well enough during its running time, but quickly decays in memory. Still, I’d rather have my action movie itch scratched for the moment than to be left wanting.

  • All Fall Down (1962)

    All Fall Down (1962)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On Cable TV, August 2020) While director John Frankenheimer is best known for his action movies, he does have an almost-parallel filmography of character-driven drama films. Take, for instance, All Fall Down, released the same year as the far better known The Manchurian Candidate – it’s a relatively low-stake family drama, featuring a charismatic but self-destructive young man who drags down his family into misery. Unusually enough –and you can credit the literary origins of the film –, All Fall Down rarely revolves around that young man, inelegantly named Berry-Berry (the repetitiousness of it becoming an unintentional gag at some point in the film) and played by a very young and charming Warren Beatty. Much of the film is clearly from the point of view of his younger brother, undertaking a journey to the realization that his older brother is to be pitied rather than idolized or harmed. We also have their parents, divided over their older son’s behaviour, and an older woman who becomes the crux of the brothers’ irreversible rift. There is some intense melodrama to the twists and turns of All Fall Down that hasn’t aged particularly well, and having a handsome but dangerous central character is always a cause for mixed impressions. There are some good performances here – aside from Beatty, there’s Angela Lansbury as a misguided mother, Eva Marie Saint as the girl that divides the brothers, and Karl Malden as a father drinking himself to death. For all of Frankenheimer’s skills in directing, he couldn’t quite manage to improve on the screenplay’s least believable elements enough to improve the credibility of the film – it all seemed like an elaborate plotting exercise, moving pieces around without quite thinking about whether it made sense. I eventually tired of Berry-Berry, and wanted him unable to hurt any more people ever again, no matter how we got there. All Fall Down does hold more interest than expected as drama, but it does feel a bit hollow when all is said and done.

  • The Story of Mankind (1957)

    The Story of Mankind (1957)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On Cable TV, August 2020) Oh, what a mess. Any movie that punches so hard through my suspension of disbelief that I start asking why it exists has already lost. In the case of The Story of Mankind, here we have a science-fictional “alien judgment” framing device looking at the history of humanity as an excuse to have small historical sketches conveniently casting as many known actors as possible. It’s hard to resist a film that had Hedy Lamarr, three of the Marx brothers, Vincent Price, Peter Lorre, Dennis Hopper (!) and Cesar Romero, but just wait until it begins and you’re served sketches that are neither funny nor profound, skipping ahead history to serve the usual bromides, with stunt casting that doesn’t really use the actors to their fullest extent – even the Marx Brothers appear in different scenes, and don’t play to their strengths. (I was waiting for the Groucho scene… I should have skipped it.) The film being directed by Irwin Allen, I half-suspect that the idea was for a grandiose statement with state-of-the-art special effects. Instead, we get sketches comparable to a high-school production, and a constant back-and-forth between trying to make a statement and trying to make jokes. The Story of Mankind is almost fascinating in its hideousness, but I really can’t recommend it as anything but a curio.

  • May (2002)

    May (2002)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (In French, On Cable TV, August 2020) While I can’t say that I loved May, I can recognize in it an attempt to deliver something like a slasher horror movie without necessarily wallowing in the same clichés as most movies of the genre. The base story will be familiar to horror fans, as a lonely young woman snaps after heartbreak and starts killing out of a lack of affection. But under writer-director Lucky McKee, the execution is somewhat different. For one thing, it does take a long time for May to fall into horror. Despite a bloody opening shot and several portentous moments, much of the film’s first half focuses on its lead character and her crippling loneliness – it’s an affective character study in that it creates sympathy for the (eventually) mass-murdering heroine that lasts long after she has settled for violence. Angela Bettis can be cute as the lead character, and there’s Anna Faris in a small role for those who enjoy seeing actors in pre-stardom roles. There’s some affection for the protagonist throughout, and a final shot that actually brings some comfort to her… and to the audience that still somehow cheers for her. May is not revolutionary or transcendent, but it’s different enough to be worth a look for those jaded, disaffected horror fans.

  • Les Boys (1997)

    Les Boys (1997)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On TV, August 2020) In the universe of French-Canadian movies, Les Boys is practically an institution. It’s not a great movie, but it’s close to the reality of its audiences, studded with local stars and was an immense commercial success. Not only was it the highest-grossing Canadian film of 1997, it was followed by no less than three sequels and a five-season TV series featuring more or less the same cast. You can call it essential viewing for French-Canadian fans… which makes it embarrassing that it took me 22 years to watch it. The film does start well, as it introduces the members of an amateur hockey team the likes of which pepper French-Canadian cities. Our characters work during the day so that they can play once a week at night: Hockey is their third place, and it wouldn’t be complete without a trip to the local brasserie after the game. Whatever plot is in the film takes the form of a high-stakes wager between the team sponsor and a local mob boss – leading to a match where either the sponsor gets his $50,000 debt erased, or he signs away the ownership of the brasserie to the mob boss. But that’s a mere pretext for following our ensemble cast, as they have romantic issues at home and come together to play. When Les Boys ends (with the expected victory, don’t worry), it feels like half of a movie: the cast is so large and so top-heavy in local celebrities that it spreads itself thin: We’re introduced to all the members of the team, and even just showing them all at home takes somewhere like fifteen minutes. Unable to focus, Les Boys ends up with half a plot, and an immensely predictable one at that. Of course, this is not a film to be watched for narrative intrigue – the point is the portrayal of characters not unlike their audience, and the triumph of victory that erases a number of their ongoing personal issues. Les Boys is not refined, but it’s quite a good time – While I’ve never played hockey, the people feel like people I’d know, doing familiar things and speaking in the thickest joual imaginable.

  • Cleopatra (1912)

    Cleopatra (1912)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On Cable TV, August 2020) I admit that I didn’t watch the 1912 version of Cleopatra for the plot. I was far more interested in what a state-of-the-art feature film looked like at the time – this is almost certainly the oldest feature film I’ve seen so far (Un voyage dans la lune is older but much shorter) and it also ranks as one of the first American feature films ever produced. There are, obviously, two ways to see it: Either as its own thing, or insisting on comparing it to what came after. When measured against current movies, this Cleopatra couldn’t be more technically primitive: The acting is as broad as pantomime, the static camera never moves or zooms (although there are a handful of close-ups later during the film, as it attempts to film around the idea of a sea battle) and there are no less than 106 numbered title cards in an 88-minute film. The 2000 restoration is fine, except for the jarring inclusion of songs with lyrics. On the other hand, the film does remain impressive for what it tried doing at the dawn of the movie age: present a full narrative at a time when short films were the norm, and recreate a historical setting through costumes, outdoors shooting and the adaptation of a theatrical play. Cleopatra does remain far more interesting as an illustration of how far we’ve come in nearly eleven decades of movie innovation, but I can see why it wowed the crowds back then.

  • Ghoulies (1984)

    Ghoulies (1984)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On Cable TV, August 2020) There are a few good ideas in Ghoulies (a young man inheriting a house of evil power, notably), but they are certainly not given any justice here. An awkward blend of horror and ineptness, Ghoulies can’t even depend on low-budget limitations for its issues. Nothing works here — whether it’s a script that doesn’t know how to do even the simplest things, the substandard actors or the blunt directing. The script is so bland that it struggles to keep our attention. I know that some reviewers have called this film a comedy, but that’s being overly indulgent over something that just doesn’t work. I did like Lisa Pelikan as the voice of reason / possessed girlfriend, and the creature effects do seem to belong in a (slightly) better movie. But Ghoulies isn’t it – not much to see here, although I suppose that when it comes to horror, I will always enjoy a monster feature crossed with a satanic cult story over a straight-up slasher.

  • Killer Workout aka Aerobi-cide (1987)

    Killer Workout aka Aerobi-cide (1987)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (In French, On Cable TV, August 2020) The 1980s were a low point for many things, including made-for-video horror movies and exercise tapes. Now here’s Killer Workout doing its best to fuse the two. The premise is nothing more complicated than a serial killer selecting victims inside an aerobics workout studio. As with similar slashers, it’s schematic in its construction – clearly imitating better movies along the way. It doesn’t take a long time to realize that this is not going to be a good movie, whether it’s the primitive opening credits (displayed in VHS blurriness even on a high-definition channel – the film cannot be remastered in HD), the opening tanning bed that somehow catches fire, or the establishing shots of the workout studio that showcase an embarrassing amount of T&A. The rest isn’t much better, with a strikingly incompetent policeman investigating the murders, the attractive black girl dying first, a ludicrous murder weapon (an oversized safety pin!?!), action sequences thrown carelessly as filler between the slasher horror and a baffling conclusion that holds absolutely no surprise. Looking at writer-director David A. Prior’s biography is informative, as he spent his entire career churning out cheap straight-to-video features starring his brother. If Killer Workout is representative of the rest of his filmography, here’s nothing further to see there – it’s strikingly inept filmmaking, cheap and boring at the same time. Fans of terrible movies may get a kick out of it, but there are really much better, much funnier movies out there.

  • Nan ji jue lian [Till the End of the World] (2018)

    Nan ji jue lian [Till the End of the World] (2018)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On TV, August 2020) Sometimes, a film has to choose between romance and adventure. Till the end of the world ends up picking romance, and that does not mean a happy ending. The premise of the film couldn’t be more evocative, as a shallow businessman and a serious scientist crash-land in Antarctica with scarcely any hope of being rescued. Making their way to an abandoned cabin, they set out to engineer their own return to civilization… but will they manage it in time? Impressively enough, the film resists the indulgence of flashbacks showing how we got there. A good portion of the film was shot in Antarctica itself, and the plot keeps focus on the characters as they learn to trust each other and fall in love along the way. When the third act comes rolling in, we’ve already seen all of what the southernmost continent has to offer in terms of dangers and wonders. All that’s left is the final rescue, but as I said – the film has to pick between adventure and romance, and goes for full-bore romantic tragedy. I felt that it was the wrong choice after so much hardship– but then again, it’s not my movie. Shot with impressive technical credentials (even though the special effects are, typically for Chinese movies, not always polished), it’s an adventure film not too dissimilar to The Mountain Between Us, if it wasn’t for a somewhat more tragic approach. I liked the film on a purely visual level (and had no choice at times, since the subtitles were often too small and impossible to read against a white backdrop at standard TV resolution) even despite the catalogue approach to the Antarctic features and some very unlikely scenes. (That whale skeleton on the beach? A bit too tidy.) There’s an admirable purity is keeping the focus on the two characters and the Antarctic continent itself… almost enough to forgive a disappointing conclusion.

  • Jason and the Argonauts (1963)

    Jason and the Argonauts (1963)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On Cable TV, August 2020) It took a remarkably long time for Jason and the Argonauts to deliver what I was expecting from it. Renowned for its Ray Harryhausen stop-motion animation, I was expecting a fantasy adventure with wall-to-wall special effects, or at least a continuous string of them. I was not prepared for a first half-hour of tedious Greek mythological babble, almost entirely absent any fantastic element. It starts building midway through, first with disappointing special effects (that bronze statue… ugh), but then with increasing confidence. It culminates in a captivating skeleton battle sequence that is easily worth the bother of watching the film. I probably overdosed on Greek mythology a while back and couldn’t appreciate much of Jason and the Argonauts, but the film gets better and better as it goes on, and has the good sense of culminating on a classic special effects sequence that’s still worth a look today.