A pretty thrilling piece of film noir, Double Indemnity brings a high stakes insurance scam to the big screen. A lowly insurance salesman is seduced by a beautiful but unhappy housewife with murder on her mind. She takes out a lucrative insurance policy on her husband and uses the hapless salesman to help do the deed and claim a highly unlikely double indemnity clause in the policy.
Along their attempts to carry out the plot, its aftermath and ensuing investigation, the film carries you on a pretty tight wire. It gets a little long in places and its pacing may seem slow, given the last few generations demanding action, action, action! But it is a classic and an exciting little thriller that performs well to the final reel.
Did we really need a sequel? Aside from the fact that the first Pirates film raked in an unexpected $300+ million in the US alone, and besides the fact that Johnny Depp plays the least creepy and most commercially acceptable performance of his career and is absolutely hysterical while doing so, and besides the fact that the first Pirates film was a down-right fun movie experience, did we really need a sequel?
The correct answer is “No” but when you get all the above mentioned items to align in a single film, money becomes more important than art. Dead Man’s Chest is a rousing popcorn pleaser, but it can't live up to the success of the original. Even longer than the overlong Curse of the Black Pearl, Dead Man’s Chest outstays its welcome, only to inform you at the end that there will be no resolution until you cough up $8 next summer for the third and “final” installment. Trying to force a sequel like this is dangerous. It can work out well, like Star Wars or Back to the Future, or it could blow up in your face, like the second and third Matrix movies.
The story is stretched far too long, and there are too many subplots, but the most disturbing thing for me about Dead Man’s Chest is that the music, which was so iconic and superb in the first film, has little punch or flair whatsoever. A few recycled bits and pieces here and there, but there was never a moment where the music swept you up and carried you through the action as wonderfully as in the original. That let me down a great deal.
The comedy is played up a little too corny and recycled sight gags made me snicker more than laugh. Orlando Bloom hasn’t improved as an actor in five years, but Keira Knightley is smoking hot and Johnny Depp is still largely funny. The only way for Dead Man’s Chest to become an essential in your DVD collection is if the third film, At World’s End is as good as the first. All in all, a fairly decent popcorn adventure flick.
I don’t find Katherine Hepburn attractive, so it’s hard to watch her in films where she is a romantic lead. This is an early romantic comedy, a genre which was quite popular in the early days of film. Light-hearted, goofy tales that would leave an audience perked up a bit was essential during the 30s, as America struggled to get through the Great Depression. While I can acknowledge the wit and humor in The Philadelphia Story, I thought it was on the boring side.
Again, as happens when watching old films, there was a nagging sense that I had seen this sort of thing before. With her wedding day fast approaching, Hepburn is bombarded by other would-be suitors, including her ex-husband (Cary Grant) and a magazine reporter (Jimmy Stewart). Hilarity is supposed to ensue when she starts wondering whether she wants to marry who she’s supposed to and all sorts of wrong perceptions lead us to her ultimate decision.
Perhaps the film is dated, and perhaps it’s just because I’ve seen too much that is similar (in terms of the comedy, not so much the plot). Whatever it is, it kept me from caring too much about The Philadelphia Story. A good “classic” comedy, but not my cup of tea.
This film helped further solidify Robert DeNiro as a Hollywood powerhouse actor. Ironically, while Raging Bull is quite a good movie, it is hardly an enjoyable one. DeNiro plays real-life boxer Jake LaMotta as he rises up the boxing ranks and spirals downward in the ranks as a decent human being.
While at first, LaMotta’s talent and rising fame simply goes to his head. He talks tough and acts tough because he thinks he’s the best. Anyone who thinks otherwise is just a chump. His pride in his own abilities as a boxer soon takes its toll on him. He becomes genuinely egomaniacal, thinking that everyone might as well kiss the ground he walks on. Paranoia sets in as his abilities decline. He doesn’t see it, so he assumes that everyone else has a problem but him. He begins to suspect his wife is cheating on him. At one point he accuses his brother of sleeping with her. He becomes violent, abusive and repugnant. He’s one unlikable guy.
The film gets deeper and deeper into LaMotta’s wretchedness, but eventually he loses his wife and kids, and his brother. He apologizes to his brother towards the end, but I wasn’t left feeling convinced that his apologies and attempted turnaround was sincere.
Probably the most infamous aspect of this film is DeNiro’s decision to gain over 60 pounds to resemble LaMotta later in life. It’s truly shocking to see how much different he looks, and it seems like DeNiro never could quite shed that weight back off. Raging Bull is a tough film to watch and certainly won’t leave you in a cheery mood, but its refusal to spare the ugly details makes it very good.
This chick flick happens to be one of my girlfriend’s favorite movies, which made me wary of seeing it because I knew she’d want to know how I rated it. I’m a guy, and guys just don’t dig chick flicks. Sure, there are some really good ones out there, but this isn’t one of them.
Keanu Reeves plays a young man returning from World War II and struggling to get a good job. He’s married and desperately wants to hold a respectable and dignified job. He ends up as a traveling candy salesman. He happens upon a pregnant woman who is afraid to go home to the family vineyard because she is unwed and will be viewed as a disgrace. Reeves decides to help her out and pretend to be her husband until things smooth over with her family. Things predictably come unraveled and the family isn’t so fond of Reeves, but he wins back their trust in the end when he helps them rebuild their vineyard crop after a devastating fire.
The film includes some typical elements of the chick flick genre, so I needn’t list them here. However, the fact that most of the movie takes place under circumstances I consider unethical (helping someone by having an affair with them) and a disastrous fire that defies the laws of science (green plants do not catch fire like dried pine needles) combined to destroy my suspension of disbelief. The fact that the whole affair thing is fixed up neatly by a convenient dues ex machina (Keanu’s wife was cheating on him the whole time) destroyed any chance of the film had of landing a 3 or higher on my scale.
Although it doesn’t give in to too many conventions, A Walk in the Clouds is another run of the mill chick flick that won’t likely be remembered by too many people.
WARNING: SPOILERS AHEAD!
Did we really need a sequel? Aside from the fact that the first Pirates film raked in an unexpected $300+ million in the US alone, and besides the fact that Johnny Depp plays the least creepy and most commercially acceptable performance of his career and is absolutely hysterical while doing so, and besides the fact that the first Pirates film was a down-right fun movie experience, did we really need a sequel?
I don’t find Katherine Hepburn attractive, so it’s hard to watch her in films where she is a romantic lead. This is an early romantic comedy, a genre which was quite popular in the early days of film. Light-hearted, goofy tales that would leave an audience perked up a bit was essential during the 30s, as America struggled to get through the Great Depression. While I can acknowledge the wit and humor in The Philadelphia Story, I thought it was on the boring side.
WARNING: SPOILERS AHEAD!
WARNING: SPOILERS AHEAD!
