Monday, February 21, 2022

#24 The Cross

The Cross (2009)

directed by
 




In case you haven't been following along, Hallie & I are watching most of our DVDs in order to simply watch many we've bought and never put on (we mostly buy them cheaply in thrift stores) and then decide whether or not to keep them. Based on the way we've shelved them, we're watching 5 "regular movies", 1musical, 1 religious movie/documentary, 1 Hitchcock, 1 sci-fi, 1 Western, 1 war, 1 documentary, and then 1 music movie/video collection. We're on the third span of "regular" movies, but I've got a bunch of catching up to do.
We're not even sure where this film came from, maybe Hallie's aunt. It's a fascinating, if a little hagiographic, documentary about the life and travels of Arthur Blessitt. He was a charismatic preacher who set out to evangelize young people in LA in the late sixties. With a church next to a go-go club, he became known as the minster of Sunset Strip.

Starting on Christmas, 1969, he began traveling the world with a large, wheeled cross, preaching and talking to anyone and everyone. Since then, he's traveled to every continent, almost every country, and walked 43,000 miles.
His first international trip was to Northern Ireland. In 1982, he ended up in Beirut during Operation Galilee and prayed with Maronites and Yasser Arafat. From things he says he clearly made no political judgments - I'm not even sure if he has any sense of politics. His story of traveling through Central America is pretty nuts (and disgusting). He comes across as a modern version of the holy fools from medieval Russia, wholly dedicated to Christ and almost oblivious to the mundane world around him.
Verdict: keeper. I don't know when I'll ever watch it, but it's an interesting story. Also, that section is so small we probably won't ditch any of them.

Arthur Blessitt


#23 Kismet

Kismet (1955)

directed by 

written by 

This movie doesn't get a lot of love, but we love it. Famous for two songs, "Baubles, Bangles, and Beads" and "Stranger in Paradise" (like most of the music in the show it's adapted from original music by Alexander Borodin), it's got color, great sets and matte backgrounds, and above all, Howard Keel at his hammiest and Dolores Gray.
The plot is a bunch of fairytale silliness - a poor poet, because of the lies he spins to keep his daughter and himself fed, lead him to run afoul of first a bandit (Jay C. Flippen), and then the Wazir (Sebastian Cabot). His daughter (Ann Blyth) catches the eye of the Caliph (Vic Damone), and the poet himself and his wonderful lines of b.s. enthrall the terminally bored Lalume, wife of the Wazir.
Most of the other songs are solid, and, in particular Dolores Grays' two big numbers, Bored and Rahadlakum, are terrific. We're not the biggest musical watchers, but we do have a small, solid collection and this is one we're keeping there.
Verdict: a keeper

Howard Keel and Dolores Gray


#22 Ant-Man

Ant-Man (2015)

directed by  

Screenplay by


While I agree with Martin Scorcese that the Marvel movies are largely not much more than rollercoaster rides, I still dig 'em. The best of them are good fun. For me, that's Guardians of the Galaxy and Ant-Man. Too many of them are self-serious, but these two are solid comedies. They're well done to a degree that the serious bits work well without ever being too po-faced. We'll get to Guardias down the line, but this is about Ant-Man.

I've liked Paul Rudd since seeing him in Clueless. He's a solid comic actor. Aided and abetted in the comedy by Michael Pena (and T.I. & David Dastmalchian), Rudd is perfect in his deadpan funny delivery. Evangeline Lily and Michael Douglas are fine and Cory Stoll is good as the villain.
There's not much else to say about Ant-Man. The funny bits (whih are the best bits) are funny, the action is cool, and the caper-driven plot is better than most of the overblown stories of a bunch of the other Marvel movies. It's a good popcorn movie and something we throw on if we just want something silly to watch.
Verdict: keeper

Paul Rudd

#21 Andrei Rublev

Andrei Rublev (1966)
 
directed by

written by
Andrei Konchalovsky and Andrei Tarkovsky




I knew a little about the cultural importance of Andrei Rublev, the 15th cent Russian icon painter from reading James Billington's cultural history of Russia, The Icon and Axe, but I had never heard of Tarkovsky's epic film until someone mentioned it online a few years ago.
It's not a real biographical movie. Little is known of Rublev's real-life or even which icons (save two) he definitively painted. Instead, as was Tarkovsky's intention, it recreates medieval Russia and portrays the struggle of creativity under oppressive circumstances. He also wanted to show Orthodox Christianity's central role in Russian history and culture.
Andrei Rublev is presented mostly in black and white, with a prologue, eight discrete sections spread over a twenty-year period, and an epilogue showing numerous icons attributed to Rublev. The icons, shown largely in close detail are in full color.
The opening sequence depicts a man attempting to launch a hot air balloon and fly, much to the fear of a crowd of people who try to stop him. It's meant to reflect the dreamer crushed by oppression. After that, we meet Rublev and two companions who have left the Andronikov Monastery to make their way as icon painters. As each new section unfolds, we see Rublev's evolution in regards to his art and Russia. We see him secure a position with Theophanes the Greek, a master painter, while years later we see him caught in the middle of a horrific Tatar raid on the city of Vladimir. Eventually, as an old man, he finds renewed inspiration from a young church bell caster. In between these sections, Rublev debates with colleagues (including the ghost of his teacher) on the purpose of painting icons, the intelligence of the Russian people, and the nature of Christ. Rublev also has an unsettling run-in with a band of pagans during a fertility ritual.
As a portrayal of Russia still partially under the Mongol yoke and the growing authoritarianism of Moscow, the movie is brutal. Boyars (nobles) imprison and torture those who mock them, innocent men are executed, artists blinded by jealous employers, and hundred raped and murdered by Tatars and their Russian allies. In particular, the Tatar attack is almost unbearable.
Rublev is torn over what purpose his art serves. For him, it should be loving and educative. One time he is instructed to paint the terrors from the Revelation, but refuses, as he doesn't believe Christ's message should be delivered through fear. When Rublev commits an act of violence, he rejects his talents and takes a vow of silence that lasts over a decade. Eventually, seeing the great joy and wonder brought about by another artisan's work, he returns.
The movie is beautiful. It makes magnificent use of some of the real locations, including the Andronikov Monastery and the Assumption Cathedral in Vladimir. The cinematography by Vadim Yusov seamlessly switches from quiet scenes to epic ones of violence and chaos. The balloonist's flight is especially fantastic. In the aftermath of the Tatar raid, where Rublev debates the ghost of Theophanes and the addle-minded Durochka braids a dead woman's hair, haunting and incredibly powerful.
As Rublev, Anatoly Solonitsyn is so good. His depiction of the monk's struggles, both interior, and exterior, is one of the more memorable performances I've seen recently. There's true dignity on display during the scenes where Rublev defends his beliefs, and the final scene with the bellmaker is one of great power.
Ivan Lapikov as the envious Kirill and Tarkovsky's wife Irma Raush as Durochka are both captivating. Nikolai Burlyayev as the bellmaker, Boriska, is fantastic.
This is a movie I will need to watch many more times before I think I will get everything Tarkovsky was doing. The Criterion Collection Bluray I own has several insightful documentaries and commentaries that provide some insight. There's also Tarkovsky's final student film, The Steamroller and the Violin, a beautiful and sweet story of the friendship between a steamroller driver and a 7-year old boy.
Verdict: Such an absolute keeper

Anatoly Solonitsyn


#20 Amadeus

Amadeus (1984)

directed by

written by



When I was at Baruch, probably in '86, two friends of mine were all excited that F. Murray Abraham was going to be speaking at the college. I sort of knew who he was, but I hadn't seen Amadeus, for which he had recently won the Oscar for best actor. Nonetheless, I went. He was fun, if I recall, discussing his decades as a struggling actor and his triumph.

When I finally saw Amadeus, not long later, I understood my friends' enthusiasm. Abraham is absolutely magnificent as Antonio Salieri, the patron saint of mediocrities.
Taken from the play of the same name by Peter Shaffer (and expanded here by Shaffer and Forman) and set largely in the palaces and opera houses of late 18th cent. Vienna, Amadeus is built from rumors that Salieri poisoned Mozart out of jealousy (a legend that Pushkin presented in his short play Mozart and Salieri). Driven by resentment over his ability to appreciate the genius of Mozart to a higher degree than perhaps any of their contemporaries, but not possessing genius of his own, Salieri took out his revenge on the universe and God by killing Mozart.
Amadeus is not a biography. The musical historians who took the film to task for twisting aspects of Salieri's and Mozart's lives and leaning into a nonsense theory miss the point of the film. Amadeus is a beautifully filmed and acted story of the struggle between the average and genius. Salieri must work hard to achieve success, which he does, composing amiable tunes that the public consumes readily enough but, it seems, with no great enthusiasm. Mozart, on the other hand, composes with eases, preparing whole scores in his head. His work is recognized at once as brilliant and is largely successful. Salieri has a more successful career and makes more money. The former is presented largely as the result of Salieri and the other Italian court composers conspiring against Mozart and the latter the outcome of Mozart's lavish and impetuous lifestyle. While there appears to be truth in these two points, there is no evidence Salieri hated Mozart to the point of murder.
The movie is called Amadeus, and Tom Hulce is tremendous navigating between the giddiness of playful Mozart and transcendentally gifted composer Mozart (he even learned how to play the pianoforte upside down like Mozart). Salieri, though, is the protagonist/antagonist of the story. I suspect the title reflects Salieri's impression of himself standing in the shadow of Mozart. He can't even get the play he narrates about his own machinations named after himself.
As Salieri, Abraham is flawless. When he watches Mozart replay and improvise on one of his own marches, hears Don Giovanni, and finally helping Mozart transcribe his requiem, his reactions are heartbreaking. He conveys astonishment and awe, and an almost desperate desire to approach Mozart's talent to such a degree it becomes painful.
Abraham and Hulce were nominated for best actor with Abraham winning. The rest of the competition that year was Jeff Bridges for Starman, Sam Waterston for The Killing Fields, and Albert Finney for Under the Volcano. Of those three, I think only the third one might have been competition, but it's been ages since I've seen that, so I can't really remember. Waterston is fine, but the power in that movie comes from Haing S. Ngor.
The initial reaction is to sympathize with Salieri. He is the man who has worked hard, done all the right things, made proper obeisance to all the right parties, and then an ill-mannered imp appears and instantly outshines him. It's only when he begins his campaign against Mozart, first speaking against his music or not recommending him for court appointments, then attempting to drive him mad, that he becomes a villain. Abraham again succeeds, not in making him sympathetic, but in presenting how jealousy twists and warps him. Of course, filled as it is with Mozart's music (Academy of St Martin in the Fields, conducted by Neville Marriner), it's easy to understand Salieri's envy. In this day and age, where no one is better than anyone else, a story about bloody-minded envy of someone vastly more talented hits home with an even greater resonance than it did nearly forty years ago.
The movie is beautiful. With Prague standing in for Vienna, superbly detailed costuming by Theodor Pištěk, and cinematography by Miroslav Ondříček, Forman seems to have recreated Salieri's and Mozart's time perfectly. There's a wonderful mix of opulence and, if not quite squalor, a grubbiness, that looks perfect. Twyla Tharp did a load of research in attempting to recreat the dance styles of the day, and Marriner ensured Mozart's music was performed unaltered. Simon Callow (who played Mozart first in the original stage production) as Emanuel Schikaneder and Jeffrey Jones as Joseph II (even if it maligns him unfairly at times), are both great. Elizabeth Berridge as Constanze Mozart is beautiful, but mostly relegated to suffering from her husband's inability to constrain himself.
VERDICT: Amadeus is a keeper. There's the original theatrical release and a longer, R-rated director's cut available on DVD. We have the original.

Jeffrey Jones, Tom Hulce, F.Murray Abraham, and Elizabeth Berridge


#19 All the President's Men

All the President's Men (1976)

directed by 
screenplay by 


I can't attest to the accuracy of the source material or the film. I do know, if it's examined in the light of the knowledge that Mark Felt, aka Deep Throat, acted as much out of pique at being passed over for director of the FBI as integrity, it would have been a different story. The outcome for Richard Nixon would've been the same, but still, a different story.
As to the movie, well, we love it. It's a procedural story with whole scenes given over to Carl Bernstein (Dustin Hoffman) and Bob Woodward (Robert Redford) questioning people in detail or going through records. The case building is done slowly and methodically, the way real reporting needs to be done. Berstein might be biased, but Woodward is clearly letting the facts link together, one after another. It's not fast-paced or action-packed and I find every moment riveting. Hoffman and Redford are good together. As they play them, Bernstein is more experienced, but also a smug cynic and willing to be a shit to get his story, and Woodward is more straitlaced and a nicer guy. Again, I can't speak to the real men, but it is sort of how they've always come across when they show up as talking heads.
The film is largely shot naturalistically, and scenes are filled with background noise. There's a real fly-on-the-wall quality that lends to the movie's verisimilitude.
One of the things I'm impressed by with the movie is that so much of it assumes an informed audience. There are things heard in the background about other political events going on that never get explained, particularly the exposure of Democratic VP candidate, Thomas Eagleton's mental health and withdrawal from the race.
All the President's Men is the third of Pakula's paranoia trilogy. The first, Klute (1971), is about a detective searching for a missing friend, and the second, The Parallax View (1974), is a conspiracy movie about shady goings-on behind political assassinations. The seventies were definitely a paranoid time, what with assassinations, terrorism, government scandals, and what not the seeming norm. Coupled with a fragmenting society in the face of all sorts of social and cultural changes, it was an era fraught with fear and uncertainty.
AtPM shifts this feeling from the fiction of the first two films to reality and of the three, it's the one that feels the most believable. I don't believe there was a conspiracy behind JFK's murder, but I do know politicians do stupid, illegal things and then try to cover them up all the time. When it's done by the president, especially one as smart and popular as Nixon (he got 60% of the popular vote in both '68 and 72), it's downright unsettling. The scenes where Woodward and Deep Throat (a great, self-important Hal Holbrook) thing they're being spied on and when Woodward and Bernstein think they're being bugged are downright spooky and feel absolutely believable.
Verdict: A keeper. We both love procedurals, and this is one of the best. For that reason alone we'd probably keep it.

Note: for a real excursion into paranoid, someways down the line we'll be rewatching Coppola's The Conversation w/Gene Hackman. It's one of the real masterworks of the era.

Dustin Hoffman and Robert Redford


#18 All of Me

All of Me (1984)

directed by

written by


This is the movie that made Steve Martin palatable for me. I found his seventies standup unfunny, and his first, slapstick movies irritating (I've since come around to liking most of them). Martin has said he considers this the start of his more "serious" film career, and I can't disagree.
Roger Cobb (Martin) is an unhappy lawyer - he's got an overbearing fiancee and wants to be a musician - who gets sent to work with an obnoxious, rich client, Edwina Cutwater (Lily Tomlin). She's been sickly her whole life. To escape her impending death, she's brought a Tibetan mystic, the hilarious Richard Libertini, who will transfer her soul into the body of a beautiful woman, Terry Hoskins (Victoria Tennant) and that woman's out into some higher dimension.
It's an old-fashioned screwball comedy with plenty of shenanigans. When they kick in, Cobb ends up with Edwina's spirit piggybacking in his body. There's plenty of good physical comedy from Martin playing female with one half of his body and male with the other. Even better is the constant back and forth between Martin and Tomlin. It's not as sharp as anything from the thirties, but it's better than most of its contemporaries. The growing affection between the two is done well and legitimately very sweet.
Martin isn't much of an actor. The character he plays here is pretty much the one he plays in most of his movies: witty, fairly urbane, and reserved - until events force him to blow a gasket at which point he can go nuts. Still, this is the first time he really plays it so that's fine by me.
Tomlin was someone who wasn't on my radar at all. While I liked her in The Late Show (1977, dir Robert Benton), I hated her on Laugh-In. Here, she's great as a woman insulated by wealth and illness from almost every aspect of life. She has no idea how the world works and how men work. Edwina is introduced as a condescending, obnoxious woman, but gradually she's revealed as a lonely, sad woman. Mostly, though, she's just quite funny. Her reaction when Cobb tries to sleep with Terry is hilarious.
As mentioned, Libertini is terrific, as are Selman Diamond and Dana Elcar. It's definitely worth finding (it's only been released as crappy DVDs).
Verdict: So, yeah, it's a solid keeper.

Steven Martin, Lily Tomlin, and Judy Nagy