Documentary Review: Seduced and Abandoned (dir by James Toback)


I recently watched James Toback’s 2013 Seduced and Abandoned on HBO.  This documentary failed to seduce me but it certainly left me feeling abandoned.

Seduced and Abandoned follows James Toback and Alec Baldwin as they wander around the Cannes Film Festival, interviewing filmmakers and attempting to raise money for Toback’s latest film.  That film, incidentally, is a remake of  Last Tango In Paris.  Though neither Toback nor Baldwin goes into too much detail about the film (and I’m not exactly convinced that they’re all that serious about it to begin with), we do learn that this remake would be set in Iraq.  Alec Baldwin would play a right-wing CIA agent while Neve Campbell  would play a leftist journalist.  We watch as Baldwin and Toback pitch this film to a countless number of potential producers and ask for twenty million dollars.  Without fail, every producer replies that he loves Alec Baldwin but he’s not willing to spend that type of money on him because Baldwin is not a bankable star.  As Baldwin and Toback frequently lament, nobody seems to care what the film is about.  Instead, they’re only interested in making money.

And this brings us to this documentary’s main problem.  It would be easier to agree with them about businessmen sacrificing art for greed if not for the fact that the movie that Toback and Baldwin are talking about making sounds like perhaps the worst fucking film ever pitched.  A remake of Last Tango in Paris starring Alec Baldwin, directed by James Toback, and taking place in Iraq?  Are you freaking kidding me?  I would never pay money to see a movie that sounded that pretentious.  I would never ask anyone else to buy me a ticket for this movie.  If I saw this movie on HBO, I would cancel my cable subscription.  Seriously, no way.

And yes, I do understand Baldwin and Toback’s point.  They’re arguing that a politically-themed, Iraq-set remake of Last Tango In Paris could not be made today because the system has been set up to silence the voice of artists. The industry is more concerned with making money than making an artistic statement.  I happen to agree 100% but that still doesn’t change the fact that Toback and Baldwin’s film sounds terrible.

Toback and Baldwin interview everyone from Ryan Gosling to Jessica Chastain to Martin Scorsese to Francis Ford Coppola and the one thing that every interview has in common is the sound of Toback’s braying laughter.  It’s a very forced and calculating laugh, one that seems almost as fake as Toback’s pseudo-intellectual persona.  And that’s the other big problem with Seduced and Abandoned.  Toback and Baldwin never really come across as being the rebels that they obviously believe themselves to be.  Even when Toback is talking to the financiers that he and Baldwin appear to blame for ruining the movies, it’s obvious that Toback wants us to impressed by the fact that he knows so many fabulously wealthy people.  In the end, the film feels self-congratulatory in the most undeserving of ways.

And yet, there are occasional moments where the film, almost despite itself, manages to escape from the suffocating egos of James Toback and Alec Baldwin.  The section of the film that deals with the history of Cannes Film Festival is fascinating and Martin Scorsese is such a lively and sincere artist that it’s impossible not to enjoy his interview.  (In many ways, Scorsese seems to be the anti-Toback.)  For a few seconds, Alec Baldwin stops being insufferable long enough to do a reasonably humorous impersonation of Woody Allen.  If you’re a student of Italian cinema, you’ll be happy to see a brief appearance from Mark Damon, a former actor turned producer who appears in several Italian spaghetti westerns in the late 60s.  Damon is the first producer to have to sit through Toback’s pitch and its fascinating to watch just how indifferent he is to idea of remaking Last Tango In Paris with Alec Baldwin and James Toback.

Mark Damon aside, Seduced and Abandoned is a documentary that fails to do the former and will probably inspire many viewers to do the latter.

A Quickie With Lisa Marie: Gammera The Invincible (dir by Noriaki Yuasu and Sandy Howard)


Late night every Saturday, the Late Night Movie crew and I gather over in the SyFy Designs chat room and we watch an old movie.  Last night, we watched the 1966 killer turtle film, Gammera The Invincible.

Gammera The Invicible began life as Gamera, a Japanese monster film that was made in an attempt to rival the popularity of the Godzilla films.  Gamera is a giant, prehistoric turtle who, after being awakened by an atomic bomb, proceeds to attempt to destroy the world.  (And, when you think about the way the world works, who can really blame him?)  Unlike the small, passive turtles that live in the creek next to my house, Gamera can not only fly but breathe fire as well.  He’s one hell of a turtle.

Anyway, when Gamera was released in the States, it was retitled Gammera The Invincible*.  Director Sandy Howard shot some new scenes (featuring American actors like Albert Dekker) and that footage was crudely mixed with scenes from the original Japanese film.  The Japanese actors were badly dubbed and the end result was disjointed, to say the least.

But, disjointed or not, Gammera The Invincible is a lot of fun.  Why?  Well, first off, Gammera is a lot cuter than Godzilla.  How can you go wrong with a giant turtle?  Secondly, Gammera is that rare Japanese monster film that invites you to dance.  I dare you to listen to the Gammera theme song and not be happy!

For me, everything great about Gammera can be seen in the scene below.  As that nameless actor quite correctly puts it, who cares about monsters when you can dance?

If you have 89 minutes to kill, feel free to enjoy Gammera The Invincible!

—-

* Apparently, the extra M was added to keep people from mispronouncing the turtle’s name.

The March Edition Of Lisa’s Way Too Early Oscar Predictions


foxcatcher-trailer-hd

Is it ever too early to start trying to predict what films will be nominated for Oscars next year?

In a word … yes.

After all, it’s only March.  Grand Budapest Hotel has just now been released in New York and Los Angeles.  Whiplash and Boyhood were acclaimed at Sundance.  But otherwise, this is the time of year when the studios release films like The Legend of Hercules and Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit. 

Yes, it’s way too early and, quite frankly, a bit silly to try to predict anything right now.

But, a lot of us are still going to try.

Below you can find my way too early predictions for the 2015 Oscar nominations.  Needless to say, these are blind guesses and should not be taken too seriously.

Some may notice that three films that are very popular with other award watchers are not listed on my list of best picture predictions.  I have not listed Grand Budapest Hotel because the Academy, in the past, has not exactly been receptive to the films of Wes Anderson.  As for David Fincher’s Gone Girl, I’m predicting it will have more in common with his rehash of The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo than The Social Network.  Finally, I’m looking forward to seeing Paul Thomas Anderson’s Inherent Vice but I think the material will be too quirky for the Academy.

Best Picture

Birdman

Boyhood

Foxcatcher

Get On Up

The Imitation Game

Interstellar

Unbroken

Whiplash

Wild

Best Director

Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu for Birdman

Angelina Jolie for Unbroken

Richard Linklater for Boyhood

Morten Tyldum for The Imitation Game

Jean-Marc Vallee for Wild

Best Actor

Chadwick Boseman in Get On Up

Steve Carell in Foxcatcher

Benedict Cumberbatch in The Imitation Game

Brendan Gleeson in Calvary

Timothy Spall in Mr. Turner

Best Actress

Amy Adams in Big Eyes

Jessica Chastain in A Most Violent Year

Rosamund Pike in Gone Girl

Emma Stone in Magic in the Moonlight

Reese Whitherspoon in Wild

Best Supporting Actor

Robert Duvall in The Judge

Idris Elba in Beasts of No Nation

Mark Ruffalo in Foxcatcher

J.K. Simmons in Whiplash

Christopher Walken in Jersey Boys

Best Supporting Actress

Viola Davis in Get On Up

Amy Ryan in Birdman

Kristen Scott-Thomas in Suite Francaise

Meryl Streep in Suffragette

Jacki Weaver in Magic in the Moonlight

Those are my predictions for now.  Come April, I’ll sit down and make (and post) another collection of blind guesses.  If nothing else, these way too early predictions will give everyone something to laugh about when, next year, the actual Oscar nominations are announced.

Agree?  Disagree?  Let me know in the comments.

reese-witherspoon-wild-slice

Film Review: Diary of a Hitman (dir by Roy London)


Diary of a Hitman

I’ve been on a mission to see as many obscure and forgotten films as possible, which is why, last night — via Movieplex OnDemand —  I ended up watching a 1991 film called Diary of a Hitman.

In Diary of a Hitman, Forest Whitaker plays Dekker, a professional killer.  Despite the film’s title, Dekker does not keep a diary.  What he does do is talk.  A lot.  The film is framed by scenes of him telling his story to somebody on the phone.  (I was never quite sure who he was supposed to be talking to.)  Over the course of the film, he talks to a psychiatrist.  He talks to his agent (Seymour Cassel).  He talks to a dominatrix.  He talks to a corrupt police officer (James Belushi).  He talks to a born-again Christian (Lewis Smith) who hires Dekker to kill his wife and a baby that he may or may not be the father of.  Eventually, he ends up talking to Jain (Sherilyn Fenn), the woman that he’s been hired to kill.  He even has a very brief conversation with Jain’s sister, Kiki (who is played, in a shrill cameo appearance, by Sharon Stone).

With all of the constant talking, it’s not surprising to discover that Diary of a Hitman was based on a stage play.  That’s especially obvious during the film’s second act, which almost entirely takes place inside of Jain’s apartment and basically consists of Fenn and Whitaker delivering dramatic monologues about life and death.  Director Roy London was an acting teacher (among his students were Sharon Stone and Sherilyn Fenn) and it’s perhaps not surprising that he never found a way to make such obviously stage-bound material feel cinematic.  Instead, London directed the film as if he was filming an acting exercise.  Just consider the scene where Kiki drops by the apartment unannounced.  While watching this scene, I kept having flashbacks to high school theater.  I could literally hear one of my old teachers saying, “Okay, for this scene, your motivation is to get her to leave the apartment and your motivation is to stay in the apartment no matter what.  And…go!”

That said, Diary of a Hitman is not a total waste of time.  Playing the agoraphobic Jain, Sherilyn Fenn (who can be seen playing a far more villainous character in this year’s Raze) gives a sympathetic performance, even managing to redeem a potentially distasteful scene where she attempts to seduce Decker.  (I’ve included that scene at the bottom of the review, mostly because — along with Sharon Stone’s cameo — it’s the only scene from Diary Of A Hitman that’s currently available on YouTube.)

And then there’s Forest Whitaker.  It’s hard to say whether Whitaker gives a good performance here or not, largely because the character of Decker makes little sense to begin with and he’s required to have a massive change of heart that seems to come out of nowhere.  (Whitaker has made a credible killer in several other films, just not this one.)  However, what Whitaker lacks in credibility, he makes up for in eccentricity.  In the role of Decker, Forest Whitaker gives one of the oddest performances that I’ve ever seen.  Delivering the majority of his dialogue in an occasionally incomprehensible rasp and flashing a wide smile at the most inappropriate of moments, Forest Whitaker is a force of misdirected nature in this film.  Again, it’s hard to say whether Whitaker actually gives a good performance here but he does make Diary of a Hitman worth seeing.

What Lisa Watched Last Night #100: How To Stuff A Wild Bikini (dir by William Asher)


Last night, I watched the 1965 beach film, How To Stuff A Wild Bikini.

Why Was It Watching It?

Last night, I was in a motel room in San Antonio.  Now, as I’m sure we all know, one of the great things about staying in a motel is that you get a chance to discover all sorts of strange television stations that you otherwise may not have known existed.  It was while flipping through these odd  stations that I came across the final ten minutes of Dr. Goldfoot And The Girl Bombs.  Dr. Goldfoot was followed by How To Stuff A Wild Bikini.

What Was It About?

Oh Lord, where to begin?

Okay, so Frankie (Frankie Avalon) is serving in the U.S. Navy and has been assigned to Tahiti.  However, he’s worried that his girlfriend Dee Dee (Annette Funicello) might not stay true to him while he’s gone.  Why he thinks that is a good question because, seriously, Dee Dee really doesn’t seem to be the type to cheat.

Frankie goes to the local witch doctor (played by Buster Keaton) who casts a spell that causes a magic bikini to appear on the beaches in California.  “Man,” one surfer says, “dig that wild bikini!”  “A bikini ain’t nothing without the stuffing!” his girlfriend replies.  Suddenly, Cassandra (Beverly Adams) appears, providing the “stuffing” for the magic bikini.  Cassandra has been sent to the beach to keep an advertising executive (Dwayne Hickman) from stealing Dee Dee from Frankie.

Oh!  And the witch doctor also turns Frankie into a pelican so Frankie can fly back to the beach to keep an eye on Dee Dee.

And Mickey Rooney is in this movie!

And there’s a motorcycle gang!

And … it’s a musical!

What Worked?

This was exactly the type of mid-1960s youth film that I like almost despite myself.  Plotwise, it was pretty incoherent.  Acting-wise, it was nothing special.  The songs were not memorable.  The attitudes were sexist.  The entire film felt cheap.  And yet, it was so weird and energetic and sincerely silly that there was no way I couldn’t like it.  If nothing else, watching this film is probably as close as I’ll ever get to experiencing 1965.

What Did Not Work?

After having seen several of his silent films on TCM, it was a bit sad to see how Buster Keaton ended his career.

“Oh my God!  Just like me!” Moments

Cassandra had red hair, just like me!  Redheads unite!

Plus, I’ve been told that I look good in a wild bikini.

Lessons Learned

A bikini ain’t nothing … without the stuffing!

Film Review: California Scheming (directed by Marco Weber)


California Scheming got an extremely limited theatrical release in January and it’s currently available via On Demand.   I have to admit that the only reason I ended up watching it is was because of the film’s title.  Having now seen the film, I still think it could definitely use a better title but the movie was still a lot more memorable than I was expecting.

California Scheming opens with a few scenes that seem like they were almost lifted verbatim from a 1969 film called Last Summer.  (Last Summer shows up occasionally on TCM and you really should watch it.)  Much as in Last Summer, California Scheming opens with an attractive but apparently sociopathic teenage girl (Gia Mantegna) discovering a wounded sea gull on the beach.  The girl recruits two teenage boys (played by Spencer Daniels and Devon Werkheiser) to help her both nurse the gull back to health and teach it how to fly again.  All three of them are pretty, shallow, and rich and quickly become close friends.  However, they end up meeting a shy girl (played here by Rachel Seiferth) who objects to the way they treat their pet sea gull.  The shy girl and the more sensitive of the two boys end up becoming a couple.  In Last Summer, this leads to the shy girl being raped.  In California Scheming, it leads to Mantegna convincing her three friends to break into a house with her, at which point the film’s plot takes a uniquely disturbing turn of its own.

California Scheming has been getting some terrible reviews but I rather liked it.  The film looks great, the cast is pretty enough that it really doesn’t matter that they’re not great actors, and director Marco Weber does a good job at creating and maintaining a persistent atmosphere of both suffocating ennui and impending doom.  The most frequent complaint that I’ve seen about California Scheming is that, up until the final few minutes, nothing really happens in the film but I think that’s the point.  California Scheming is a portrait of people who, as a result of having everything, are doomed to accomplish nothing.  As a result, California Scheming may not be entertaining in the conventional sense of the word but, when taken on its own terms, it’s something of a minor existential masterpiece.

 

Scenes That I Love: The Opening of the 1989 Academy Awards


Hi everyone!  Do you know what today is?

That’s right — it’s Oscar Day!

In order to prepare for my favorite holiday, I figured that I would go on YouTube and look at a few old Oscar production numbers.  In doing so, I came across the infamous Rob Lowe/Snow White dance number that opened the 1989 Academy Awards.  I was only three years old when this was first broadcast but I still like to think that, as this endless dance number was broadcast live across the world, I was sitting in front of the TV and telling myself that I could have done a better job with the choreography.

Incidentally, Snow White was played by an actress named Mary Ellen Bowman.  I have no idea if she’s a relative.

 

 

 

6 Reasons To Watch I Am A Fugitive From A Chain Gang


I am so thankful for TCM.  This wonderful network has allowed me to discover so many old films that I might otherwise have never seen.  Among those films, 1932’s I Am A Fugitive From A Chain Gang.

As you might guess from the title, I Am A Fugitive From A Chain Gang was something of a low-budget B-movie.  It’s also one of the few films that can legitimately claim to have changed society.  The fugitive of the title is James Allen (Paul Muni), a veteran of the First World War who, feeling uncomfortable in peace time and unable to find work, finds himself in Georgia where he unintentionally becomes involved in a robbery and then ends up being sentenced to 10 years on a chain gang.  After suffering months of inhumane treatment, Allen finally escapes.  He makes his way up north and, much like Jean Valjean, attempts to start a new life for himself.  However, even as he find success, he knows that he could be exposed and sent back to prison at any moment.

Here’s 6 reasons to watch I Am A Fugitive From A Chain Gang.

1) It’s based on a true story.  I Am A Fugitive From A Chain Gang was based on a book written by a man named Robert Ellis Burns.  Burns actually had served time on and escaped from a Georgia chain gang.  At the time the movie came out, Burns was still a fugitive.  The movie was such a success and was so effective that when Burns was later arrested in New Jersey, the governor refused to extradite him.  Burns was finally pardoned in 1945 and lived the rest of his days as a free man.

2) I Am A Fugitive From A Chain Gang got results.  Alone among the major studios in the 30s, Warner Bros. specialized in making films that dealt with social issues.  While other studios either celebrated wealth or invited audiences to escape the Great Depression through fantasy, Warner Bros. was unashamed to be on the side of the oppressed.  I Am A Fugitive From A Chain Gang is a perfect example of this.  Not only did the film lead to Burns receiving a pardon but it also helped to end the chain gang system.

3) Director Mervyn LeRoy directs the film as if it were a film noir.  By the end of the film, it’s impossible not to empathize with the main character’s growing sense of paranoia.

4) Do you know who Paul Muni is?  You will after watching I Am A Fugitive From A Chain Gang.  Paul Muni is largely forgotten today but, back in the 1930s, he was considered to be one of the best actors around.  Watching him in this film, you can see why.

5) The film’s final scene is a classic.  You can watch it below (and yes, this video does count as a spoiler).

6) I Am A Fugitive From A Chain Gang was nominated for best picture.  It lost to Cavalcade, a celebration of the British upper class.

12 Reasons To Love 12 Angry Men


Everyone already knows that the 1957 Best Picture nominee 12 Angry Men is a classic.  We all know the film’s story — a teenage boy is on trial for murdering his family.  11 jurors want to convict.  1 juror doesn’t.  Over the next few hours, that one juror tries to change 11 minds.  Some of the jurors are prejudiced, some of them are bored, and some of them just want to go home.  And, as the film reminds us, all 12 of them have a huge  responsibility.  You don’t need me to tell you that this is a great movie.  Therefore, consider this to be less of a review and more of an appreciation of one of the best movies ever made.

1) The film is the feature debut of director Sidney Lumet.  As any student of American film can tell you, Sidney Lumet was one of the most important directors in the history of cinema.  After beginning his career in television, Lumet made his film directing debut with 12 Angry Men and he was rewarded with a much deserved Oscar nomination for best director.

2) The film’s story is actually a lot more complex than you might think.  12 Angry Men is such an influential film and its story has been imitated so many times that it’s easy to forget that the film’s plot is a lot more nuanced than you might think.  Despite what many people seem to think, Juror Number 8 never argues that the defendant is innocent.  Instead, he argues that the state has not proven its case beyond a reasonable doubt and, as a result, the defendant cannot be convicted.  That’s an important lesson that is too often forgotten.

3) The movie celebrates the power of one person determined to do the right thing.  Again, that’s a lesson that remains very relevant today.

4) As Juror Number Eight, Henry Fonda makes human decency believable.

5) As the angry and bullying Juror Number Three, Lee J. Cobb is the perfect antagonist.

6) As Juror Number Ten, Ed Begley makes Cobb seem almost reasonable.  To be honest, the scene where Begley’s racist ranting causes all of the other jurors to stand up and turn their back on him feels a bit too theatrical.  But it’s still undeniably effective.  Alone among the jurors, Juror Number Ten is the only one without any hope of redemption.  It’s a bit of a thankless role but Begley does what he has to do to make the character believable.

7) E.G. Marshall makes the wealthy Juror Number Four into a worthy opponent of Fonda without crossing the line into prejudice like Cobb and Begley.  In many ways, Marshall’s role is almost as important as Fonda’s because Marshall’s performance reminds us that not all disagreements are the product of ignorance or anger.

8) As the Jury Foreman, Martin Balsam is the epitome of every ineffectual authority figure.

9) As Juror Number Seven, Jack Warden is hilariously sleazy.

10) As Juror Number Nine, Joseph Sweeney grows on you.  The first time I saw the film I thought that Sweeney went a bit overboard but, on more recent viewings, I’ve come to appreciate Sweeney’s performance.

11) As Juror Number Twelve, Robert Webber is hilariously shallow.  Juror Number Twelve is in advertising and Webber seems like he was right at home on Mad Men.

12)  Though they don’t get as much of a chance to make an impression, John Fiedler, Jack Klugman, Edward Binns, and George Voskovec all do good work as the other jurors.  If there’s ever been a film that proves the value of a great ensemble, it’s 12 Angry Men.

Film Review: My Name Is ‘A’ By Anonymous (dir by Shane Ryan)


One of the best things about being an independent film critic is that I occasionally get a chance to take a risk and recommend a film that audiences might not otherwise get a chance to discover.  Even better is when I get the opportunity to defend a work of art that I know some other critics will dismiss out of hand simply because they either don’t appreciate or understand the film’s subject matter.

Case in point: My Name Is ‘A’ By Anoynmous.

My Name Is ‘A’ is inspired by a disturbing true story.  In 2009, a nine year-old girl named Elizabeth Olten was brutally murdered in Missouri.  The police investigation eventually led to the arrest of Elizabeth’s 15 year-old neighbor, Alyssa Bustamante.  Alyssa confessed to the crime, explaining that she simply wanted to know what it felt like to kill someone.  After having killed Elizabeth, Alyssa wrote in her diary: “It was ahmazing. As soon as you get over the ‘ohmygawd I can’t do this’ feeling, it’s pretty enjoyable. I’m kinda nervous and shaky though right now. Kay, I gotta go to church now…lol.”  Alyssa later pled guilty to 2nd degree murder and is currently serving a life sentence with the possibility of parole.

When we read about the crimes of Alyssa Bustamante, our natural instinct is to look for a reason why.  There’s been speculation that she was sexually abused.  Needless to say, some people have decided that she was a part of some sort of Satanic cult.  As a former cutter, I immediately focused on the red marks on her wrist that were visible in some of the pictures that she posted online before committing the murder.  As observers, we need a reason because, in theory, a definite reason would also mean that there is a definite solution as well.  What we do not want to hear is that Alyssa Bustamante killed Elizabeth just because she felt like it.

Told in a deliberately disjointed fashion, My Name Is A follows four teenage girls in the days leading up to the death of Elizabeth.

Alex Damiano plays a bulimic who rails angrily against both the father who abandoned her and a God that she doesn’t believe in.  Damiano gives perhaps the film’s bravest performance and both she and director Shane Ryan deserve a lot of credit for the realistic way that they present and deal with bulimia.

Teona Dolnikova dreams of being a star but, instead, has to deal with her own sexually abusive stepfather.  About halfway through the film, Dolnikova gets an opportunity to star in a surrealistic music video.  It’s an unexpected moment but one that works.

And finally, there’s Alyssa (Katie Marsh) and her mostly silent friend, played by Demi Baumann.  In many ways, Alyssa and her friend seem like normal teenagers.  They spend a lot of time playfully giving each other a hard time, making silly videos with their phone, and generally just trying to find something interesting to do.  Indeed, during the film’s first few scenes, it’s easy for the viewer to relate to Alyssa.  (Not surprisingly, that’s why some viewers are going to have issues with My Name Is A.)  It’s only as the film progresses that we start to catch glimpses of what lies behind Alyssa’s facade of normalcy.

Who the girls are in relation to each other and how their separate stories will eventually lead to a shocking murder is the question that lies at the heart of My Name Is A.  To his credit, Shane Ryan doesn’t provide any easy answers.  He provides plenty of clues but it’s up to the audience to find those clues and to put the pieces of the puzzle together and then to decide whether any of those pieces can properly explain the actions of an Alyssa Bustamante.  In this way, My Name Is A reminded me a lot of Gus Van Sant’s Elephant, another film about teenage murderers that provided clues but was smart enough to avoid giving the audience the comfort of an easy answer.

The film’s director has described My Name Is A as being a “love it or hate it” film.  I can understand why.  My Name Is A refuses to give audiences the easy answers that they’ve come to expect and, even more  dangerously, suggests that monsters can also be human.  My Name Is A is not always an easy movie to watch but it is a movie that dares us to think and consider questions that we might not otherwise consider.

What more can you ask from a movie?