U is for...

Winner of four Academy Awards, including best picture, director, supporting actor, and best editing, Clint Eastwood's 1992 masterpiece stands as one of the greatest and most thematically compelling Westerns ever made. "The movie summarized everything I feel about the Western," said Eastwood at the time of the film's release. "The moral is the concern with gunplay." To illustrate that theme, Eastwood stars as a retired, once-ruthless killer-turned-gentle-widower and hog farmer. He accepts one last bounty-hunter mission--to find the men who brutalized a prostitute--to help support his two motherless children. Joined by his former partner (Morgan Freeman) and a cocky greenhorn (Jaimz Woolvett), he takes on a corrupt sheriff (Oscar winner Gene Hackman) in a showdown that makes the viewer feel the full impact of violence and its corruption of the soul. Dedicated to Eastwood's mentors Sergio Leone and Don Siegel and featuring a colorful role for Richard Harris, it's arguably Eastwood's crowning directorial achievement. (synopsis provided by Amazon.com)

released 1992

directed by Clint Eastwood

Top 5 Revenge Films*

It seems perverse to me to celebrate someone’s death – but I can’t help but feel good that we’ve finally got that asshole. So, with that in mind - I decided to do a top 5 on revenge films - but narrow it to the conclusion of the films; the final acts of vengeance*

I really enjoy me a good revenge film - and I could go up and down my favorite movie list and put down the first 5 revenge films that show up - but some don't seem to have the punctuation that others have. Such as PUNCH-DRUNK LOVE which has a great ending - and I consider a revenge film - but as much as I love the end – it feels anticlimactic in a way. The same goes for OLDBOY – which has a fucking great end – but turns you on your head so badly that it’s hard to say it’s satisfying solely as a revenge film as your focus shifts so much. Also films like SEX & FURY, MAN ON FIRE and KILL BILL – where the build up to the final act far surpasses the ending to a point where as good as it was – you feel a little jipped. Honorable mentions go out too many to mention as revenge classics - though they may or may not fit my criteria.

#5. INGLORIUS BASTERDS [2009, directed by Quentin Tarantino] – Now, I may find this film overly long, overly talkie and self-indulgent to the point of frustration – and even though it’s more of a “men on a mission film” – it really is hard to deny that ending as pure greasy fried delicious vengeance. With two very big Nazi killing porn exclamation points that act as the cherry on top of this sundae. Unlike Tarantino’s DEATHPROOF the ending justifies me wanting to watch all the casual conversation as way of building tension all over again to catch the final acts.


#4. MAD MAX [1979, directed by George Miller] – Long before SAW threw a hacksaw at our feet and told us our options – Max gave us one of the most chilling and most well deserved endings in revenge cinematic history. MAD MAX is also one of the greatest film paradigms of how destructive revenge can be. The once charismatic Max becomes despondent and empty – because the hole that was created by the biker gang that doesn’t fill itself back in once his mission of revenge is complete – as we can tell from the other films in the series. That’s what drives revenge though it’s the emotion of it all – the exacting of it – if we were to know what happens after – would we still do it? In Max’s case – I think he would. And what’s brilliant about the ending is it’s that emotion that’s left in the viewer when Johnny is given his decision – and Max walks back to his car.




#3. THRILLER: A CRUEL PICTURE [1974, directed by Bo Arne Vibenius] – After long, punishing, grueling sequences of repeated abuse, rape and torture – THRILLER gives us every drop of sweet pure revenge – by giving us super slow motion gun fights and action sequences so perverse – it could be viewed as almost as punishing as what she went through – and that would be the point.


#2. LADY VENGEANCE [2005, directed by Chan-wook Park] – Not as action packed as OLDBOY – or even as poignant in the idea that the act of seeking revenge is far more destructive than getting it - but certainly an ending that elicits a certain amount of justifiable satisfaction that OLDBOY doesn’t provide. There’s a certain element of disgust – but the brutality is in many ways left to your imagination – which makes it worse – because you imagine what he deserves and in your own way become a participant in the revenge.




#1. UNFORGIVEN [1992, directed by Clint Eastwood] – My favorite film of all time – but also happens to have my favorite scene of revenge ever put to celluloid. The entire film is in fact a revenge film – where Will, Ned and the kid all go after some cowboys who cut up some prostitutes – but it’s not until the final 20 minutes that the full destructive power and the demon that Will had become shows its face. It’s got the dialogue – it’s got the action – it’s got the bone chilling horror of everything one could ever hope for a scene of pure vengeance to ever witness. What comes walking into that bar to confront Little Bill is no longer of this Earth – its brutality is nothing any human could muster – the fear in the eyes of all the men tell you – the way they run, hide and refuse to shoot – tells you that if they fuck with the devil – the devil will not forget.

Weekend Viewing - April 23-24, 2011

I watched BIRDEMIC & TROLL 2 on Saturday night – details of which I posted on Sunday. We were going to watch my blu-ray of HARRY POTTER & THE DEATHLY HALLOWS PT. 1 but obviously – it got a little late for a 3 hour film (or half a film).

Sunday – it was HEREAFTER and THE LAST OF THE MOHICANS – both fairly solid films – with flaws on both.

HEREAFTER is another absolutely magnificent directing effort by Clint Eastwood – he lets his characters work their story. Clint is an actor’s director – he appreciates what it was like for him to be in front of that camera – and knows what it takes to pull the performance of the actors out of a solid story. The story is what kind of lets down HEREAFTER – it is good – but there’s not as strong of a thread connecting everyone – and the kind of hidden epiphanies that they go through didn’t work for me.


THE LAST OF THE MOHICANS was all right – certainly not as good as I thought it would be. The film probably suffers from the fact that I’ve seen a lot of films that followed and copied it – and that simply made me feel like this film was weak. Daniel Day Lewis is a great actor – but I wanted more scene chewing. (C’mon – take a big bite, Danny! Nom nom nom!) The action was pretty good – fairly intense – yet disjoined in parts that made me just not enjoy the film for all that it was. It’s something I will probably rent later to take a second glance – as it’s one I will probably think about for a little while.

This is the Zodiac speaking...

I’m currently reading ZODIAC UNMASKED by Robert Graysmith – I finished his first ZODIAC book a couple months ago – and I’m gearing up to watch David Fincher’s ZODIAC film. The books are very well written and interesting to see from the first hand – and it’s easy to see how Graysmith got so wrapped up in the mystery of it all. Reading the books is also bringing to light – how very well made Fincher’s film is.

Fincher captures not only the mania surrounding the ZODIAC killer – but also the obsession of Graysmith – and how it ate away at Avery, Toschi and Armstrong – the lack of cooperation between the various jurisdictions not realizing the fact that the killer was planning on them to not cooperate so it would make his secrets easier to maintain.

You’d naturally think that in a serial killer film – it’s the crimes, the killer and the cops that take center stage – and the investigation is only a by-product of all of those things – a way to fill the middle of the film. What’s really interesting about this case is that the killer shows up – taunts everyone - and then disappears – leaving everyone to wonder and the complexity of the entire investigation is what is interesting.

As I’m reading the second book – I keep flashing to the scenes in the film – it’s beautiful how the two are really playing off each other so very well. Fincher’s capturing the era of the late 60’s/early 70’s – is outstanding – the constant doubt if they are on the right path.

Graysmith goes on in the books to link various unsolved murders in Northern California to the lead suspect and his habits – and draws a much thicker stronger line in the sand saying that his suspect IS the killer. The evidence all points to it – and it’s hard to argue – but the fact that there hasn’t been a definitive swab of DNA or finger print makes it remain a mystery still.

Guns, bombs, articles on Zodiac, articles on how to successfully plea an insanity defense, recipe cards that have the same misspellings as do the Zodiac letters, a Zodiac divers watch the only other place than the letters that feature word Zodiac and the crosshair symbol – all pulled from the main suspects home in a search warrant weeks before his death. The suspect’s psychiatrist claims to have heard his confession in session over and over. The suspect’s brother, sister in-law, friends and former associates all claiming to suspect him for various reasons – up to claiming he wants to hunt humans and call himself Zodiac – or bragging that he IS Zodiac. The fact that the suspect was one of the first interviewed as a suspect in one of the early murders – only to be ruled out by a “gut feeling” – and no note remains as to why he was fingered.

This is all interesting and damning – but hardly a court case to be made to be a serial killer.

Fincher keeps the mystery going until the very end – then even at the end gives us a bit of an ellipsis – a cute little wink by saying that the suspect died before he was brought in or charged – which is enough to place a little doubt.

I’m willing to argue that ZODIAC is Fincher’s best film. I think it’s fair to say that Fincher’s best film is generally regarded as SE7EN. Don’t get me wrong - SE7EN is a really good film – it has solid acting – an interesting plot - it’s dark and gory and interesting - and has a really strong twist ending that wraps the story – but ZODIAC doesn’t have all that the powerful ending – but it remains AS strong missing those “shocking” elements. I think if you strip out the shock elements out of SE7EN – it doesn’t hold up.

It’s such an subjective argument though – so arguing that it’s a “better” film is not really valid. You can’t strip out part of a film and then really judge it as a film because the film is an entire work. I could judge the films more easily based on my “liking” one better than the other – and ZODIAC is certainly becoming my favorite of Fincher’s films and that’s more what I’m about than judging which is “better” for reasons of which I have to inflict on the film.

When I finally finish ZODIAC UNMASKED going to pair Fincher’s film up with DIRTY HARRY and make it a double feature – as it’s a bit of an homage to the Zodiac case – but in the end Harry gets his Zodiac (Gemini killer).

So much for due process, huh, Toschi?

[27-Apr-2011 edit: of course I meant Scorpio not Gemini - I was thinking of the Exorcist film (the 3rd) that had the homage to Zodiac in it and THAT homage was named Gemini - not the Dirty Harry homage which was Scorpio]

F is for... [part 2]

A Fistful of Dollars launched the spaghetti Western and catapulted Clint Eastwood to stardom. Based on Akira Kurosawa's 1961 samurai picture Yojimbo, it scored a resounding success (in Italy in 1964 and the U.S. in 1967), as did its sequels, For a Few Dollars More and The Good, the Bad and the Ugly. The advertising campaign promoted Eastwood's character--laconic, amoral, dangerous--as the Man with No Name (though in the film he's clearly referred to as Joe), and audiences loved the movie's refreshing new take on the Western genre. Gone are the pieties about making the streets safe for women and children. Instead it's every man for himself. Striking, too, was a new emphasis on violence, with stylized, almost balletic gunfights and baroque touches such as Eastwood's armored breastplate. The Dollars films had a marked influence on the Hollywood Western--for example, Sam Peckinpah'sThe Wild Bunch--but their most enduring legacy is Clint Eastwood himself. (synopsis provided by Amazon.com)

directed by Sergio Leone

released 1964

Weekend Viewing - Feb 19-21 (part 2)

Play Misty for Me [1971, directed by Clint Eastwood]

A radio disc jockey (Clint Eastwood) has a stalker (Jessica Walter).

I liked this film – it was pretty well made – a fine script – and a good build up of tension. My problem with it was that Clint didn’t get sufficiently pissed off with this woman who’s ruining his life – Clint is far too cool for school for the shit she pulled on him. In his feature directing debut – Clint was pretty good with certain elements – and fairly standard for the time the film was released in others. I’ll go out on a limb and give it a 4 out of 5.

Futureworld [1976, directed by Richard Heffron]

In the sequel to Westworld [1973] – the Delos Corporation has reopened their adult oriented theme park after 150 people got snuffed out by killer robots just years before. This time they invite some higher profile reporters to a free visit in hopes they would promote the park – or do they have something up their sleeves?

The fun of Westworld really didn't come over with it to the sequel. This felt more like a dull investigation/conspiracy story that could've been about anything - not just about robots. The relationship between the two reporters felt like love via default - and the relationship between Harry and Clark was disturbing to say the least. They also brought back Yul Brynner in the worst way - in an unnecessary dream sequence that mad you wonder - why is Yul in her dream if they never met? I give it a frustrating 2 out of 5.

Weekend Viewing - Feb 19-21 (part 1)

Shutter Island [2010, directed by Martin Scorsese]

A patient has escaped from the mental hospital on Shutter Island – and two US Marshals are brought in to investigate. The more they investigate – the more questions they raise as to what’s really happening on the island.

Shutter Island is a good film if you want to be taken for a ride that will tease your brain – and at times frustrate you. I’m really not quite sure how I want to rate this film – on it’s surface and looking back – I’d give it a 4 – but I’m not sure if that 4 would last under more scrutiny.

On a side note – my dad told me he had a dream about the movie (which he hadn’t seen) – and basically told me what my thoughts were half-way through the film on what was happening. If he only knew how right he was.

Kelly’s Heroes [1970, directed by Brian Hutton]

Kelly got wind of $16 million in gold behind Nazi lines – and hatches a plan to go and get it.

This film has aged badly – the humor – the soundtrack – the direction – the pacing – all doesn't really work in today's eye. Donald Sutherland’s Oddball character – felt completely out of place – I know he was supposed to be a gypsy or something – but came off as a hippie – which in WWII felt wrong. All that said it was kind of fun – and I liked it just a tick more than I disliked it – I’m stretching out and giving it a 3 out of 5.

Happy Valentine's Day, Clint!