rate the last movie you saw

[Monterey Jack]

-Poltergeist (1982): 10/10

-Poltergeist II: The Other Side (1986): 6/10

Seriously...screw the remake. Even the mediocre sequel is likely to be better (at least it had ILM, Goldsmith and Julian Beck). The original remains tops, though...a top-flight scare machine that's also tremendously moving (maybe losing my mother a few months back adds to the movie's effect...Beatrice Straight's warm description of "The Light" is certainly what I would hope is waiting for us all beyond this life ). It's pretty much the high water mark for F/X heavy haunted house movies, and by keeping the focus narrowed on a compelling family unit, the film generates an emotional throughline that makes the scares and thrills actually mean something by the end (which the recent Mad Max: Fury Road, exciting as it was, clearly lacked). The sequel plays even worse for me this time around, though...compared to the original, it's logy (despite running a half-hour shorter!), not especially frightening (killer braces! cheesy zombies right out of Michael Jackson's "Thriller" video! Floating chainsaws! OoooOOOOOooo!) and the scene where a possessed Craig T. Nelson essentially attempts to rape JoBeth Williams comes across as tastelessly sensationalistic and something that never would have been tolerated had Steven Spielberg still been calling the shots. And Brian Gibson's pokey, made-for-TV direction doesn't help. It's only the presence of the majority of the original cast (save Dominique Dunne, for obvious reasons) and Beck's cadaverous turn as Reverend Kane that makes it mildly watchable at all (plus Goldsmith's classy score).

[AndyDursin]

Still haven't seen III yet? II will look much, much better to you once you do.

[Monterey Jack]

Still haven't seen III yet? II will look much, much better to you once you do.

I've no doubt it will...that still doesn't make II very good...that's like saying The Lost World is better because Jurassic Park III exists. Yeah, it's better, but it's still pretty crummy.

[AndyDursin]

that's like saying The Lost World is better because Jyarassic Park III exists. Yeah, it's better, but it's still pretty crummy.

Still have that reversed!

I think II is flawed but it's a lot better than "crummy." And it holds much more in common, stylistically and artistically, with I than it does III if you had to compare them all. So until you've seen III -- again, you can't comment on how bad it is.

On serious thing on II -- the running time was also reduced because they removed a slew of scenes from the beginning. I believe Geraldine Page's sequences were mostly excised from the first half-hour though I may be wrong.

Anyway, you think I'm overrating it -- I should dig up the Boston Globe's review of II. The guy gave it 4/4 stars and thought it was better than the original! Not kidding.

[Monterey Jack]

Every time I watch the original Poltergeist, I'm struck anew by the WORST JUMP CUT IN MOVIE HISTORY, when the movie cuts abruptly from JoBeth Williams and Craig T. Nelson in mid-conversation in the kitchen to them awkwardly talking with the neighbors on their porch while getting eaten alive by mosquitos. Always wonder what was taken out there, because it's distracting as hell.

Also, the dog is named "E-Buzz". Huh?!

[AndyDursin]

Every time I watch the original Poltergeist, I'm struck anew by the WORST JUMP CUT IN MOVIE HISTORY, when the movie cuts abruptly from JoBeth Williams and Craig T. Nelson in mid-conversation in the kitchen to them awkwardly talking with the neighbors on their porch while getting eaten alive by mosquitos. Always wonder what was taken out there, because it's distracting as hell.

Apparently there was a line where Steve says "I hate Pizza Hut" or something along those lines, so the cut was a last-minute band-aid (I'd imagine) in removing the line. At least, that's how the story goes -- from everything I've read, that jump-cut has been in every release of the film, including how it played in theaters originally (though I was too young to see it originally)

BTW the running time on the remake? 93 minutes. Yep, I'm sure it's good. lol

[AndyDursin]

THE TRAIN ROBBERS - 7/10

CAHILL US MARSHAL - 6/10

A couple of entertaining, late John Wayne westerns come to Blu-Ray on June 2nd from Warner.

THE TRAIN ROBBERS is an agreeable story written and directed by Burt Kennedy that finds Wayne’s veteran cowboy teaming up with some of his friends (including Rod Taylor and Ben Johnson) to retrieve a stash of gold at the behest of a widow (Ann-Margret) trying to clear her late husband’s name; meanwhile, a mysterious man (Ricardo Montalban) tails the group as they cross the border into Mexico. Impressively shot in widescreen by William Clothier, “The Train Robbers” never overstays its welcome with its 90-minute running time and offers a satisfying “twist” ending that’s a lot of fun. Dominic Frontiere’s score is lively enough despite including a main theme that’s a thinly-veiled “variant” on Alfred Newman’s “How the West Was Won.”

Both “The Train Robbers” and CAHILL, U.S. MARSHAL were produced after Wayne’s memorable turn in Mark Rydell’s western “The Cowboys” – each offering somewhat “darker” material for The Duke, though neither becomes as violent as certain sections in “The Cowboys.” “Cahill,” in particular, is an interesting variation on some of the themes from Rydell’s picture, with Wayne starring as an aging U.S. marshal whose sons – left to cause trouble while he’s chasing varmints out of town – get mixed up with a bank robber (George Kennedy) and his gang. Frequent Wayne collaborator Andrew V. McLaglen helmed “Cahill,” which like “The Train Robbers,” includes excellent scope cinematography by Joseph Biroc and a terrific supporting cast. Neville Brand is a particular standout as a half-Comanche tracker named Lightfoot, while other familiar faces – from Marie Windsor to Royal Dano – abound, albeit briefly, in support. Elmer Bernstein’s fine score lends a sturdy assist to it all, though the ending is limp.

Both “The Train Robbers” and “Cahill, U.S. Marshal” include recent, highly detailed 1080p (2.40) AVC encoded transfers from Warner, in line with their typically strong catalog presentations of late. Fine grain, warm colors and a lack of heavy DNR grace both transfers, while DTS MA 1.0 mono audio and light supplements, including trailers and archival featurettes, are on-hand for both titles.

[Jedbu]

SILVERADO: 7/10

Back in the early summer of 1985, a good friend who was a film booker for the (now-defunct) Plitt Theater chain came from an exhibitor’s screening of this film full of excitement…”opening scene with great shootout and the sound of a rifle whooshing through the air and heroic music and all the good stuff in a western…” and I was looking forward to it, being a western fan from way back but also feeling let down after Eastwood’s PALE RIDER had been released just before. Went to see this opening weekend at the Mann Village in Westwood with 70mm 6-track Dolby, and to see it on a huge screen in a 1200 seat theater with a pretty good sized crowd with that sound mix was quite an event. The performances and characters were terrific for the most part (more about that later), the photography was gorgeous, the sets (especially the Midnight Star) just right and the score by Bruce Broughton was incredible. In fact, I scoured the music shops for months for the OST to this film, which was mentioned on the advertising and at the end of the film and had to wait years for it to finally get released, which I think was one of the major factors in Broughton’s losing a well-deserved Oscar to John Barry’s OUT OF AFRICA that year.

Now there were some hitches in the film’s giddyup when I first saw it-the whole wagon train/settlers subplot felt very underdeveloped and really given short shrift in the second half, Jeff Goldblum looked like he was wearing another outfit from BUCKAROO BANZAI and acted like he was in not only a different movie but a different time zone, the Kasdan brothers really were in love with repeating lines as if to say “We really want to make sure you get why this western cliché is in here” and Linda Hunt’s character was alluded to as being in danger and in fact, towards the end seems to put herself in harm’s way for no reason other than to make the audience scared that something will happen to her, which it does not.

Not having watched the film all the way through in years I gave it a complete look-see this evening on the Sony Blu-Ray and discovered that many of the things I loved about this film 30 (erk!) years ago I still love: Linda Hunt and Brian Dennehy give my two favorite performances in the film and have the best lines (I still think Dennehy was robbed of a Supporting nod for either this or COCOON that year-he probably split the vote) and John Cleese is a hoot as a British western sheriff-too bad his intro to the Criterion CAV LD was not ported over for the extras; Scott Glenn was born about 40 years too late and would have been a huge western star during its heyday (I still think if they would have considered remakes of THE GUNFIGHTER, THE OX-BOW INCIDENT or THE WESTERNER he would have been the first one I would have cast in the leads); Kevin Kline is a hoot as a very laid-back gunslinger and is still fun to watch; Kevin Costner gives a performance that shows how much fun he must have been having while making it and rarely got to show as much again-it also seems hard to believe that just 5 years later he would make the first western to win the Best Picture Oscar in 60 years, DANCES WITH WOLVES; Danny Glover is almost a black John Wayne character with some of the lines he has (“Now I don’t wanna kill you and don’t wanna be dead!”) and technically the film is still gorgeous to look at and to hear.

The film reminds me of a big, overstuffed sofa-it looks comfy and for a while it feels the same way, but after a while you feel yourself kind of sinking into it and fighting to keep from getting lost in it. As I mentioned earlier the Kasdans have a tendency to have characters repeat lines as if to tell us that we are watching a “post-Modern western”: “I’m good for it,” “Where’s the dog?” “I haven’t had a drink or slept in a bed in ten days,” “That ain’t right” and my favorite-“They took the little boy,” all of these said as if they are lines that a western has to have to be a western-if they are not in there, then, you just don’t care.

I mentioned the wagon train subplot feeling left behind-the only things missing are an Indian attack, a lone stranger coming into town with a feeling of violence around him (probably what Goldblum’s character was supposed to have but he comes off as someone who came to visit the set and Kasdan threw the costume on him and made up his part as it went along) and a cattle drive, but then the film would have been twice as long as it is. I think another pass at the script to eliminate the wagon train but contain that tension about cattlemen vs. settlers might not have seemed so haphazard. Like with Spielberg’s 1941, there is just too much crammed in but not so much as to make it terrible. What is nice is that it feels familiar but does not feel snarky, like the films SHANGHAI NOON or LUST IN THE DUST.

The film did not do great business when it was released-it c cost $23M and grossed $33M domestically so it more than likely did not go into the black until it was released on home video and it wasn’t until Criterion released it on laserdisc (both CAV and CLV versions) that it was available in widescreen the way it should be seen. I am proud to say that I have an original one-sheet-gorgeous Bob Peak artwork-which I was lucky enough to get Brian Dennehy to sign years back. All in all still entertaining if not the film that saved the western from fading away-that would have to wait a few years for Costner and then Eastwood to come along.

By the way, Andy-THE TRAIN ROBBERS is a nice chamber western that deserves rediscovery, as I also believe Burt Kennedy does, as well.

[mkaroly]

MAD MAX: FURY ROAD - 6/10. To be honest, I am not a fan of the series. I remember watching MAD MAX and THE ROAD WARRIOR on DVD a long time ago, but I don't remember the films very well. I never saw THUNDERDOME either. Having said all that, I will echo the sentiments others have expressed here: I really enjoyed the visual spectacle of the whole thing. On that level the film was outstanding. The score left a lot to be desired. And finally, I did wish that there was more character development/story to the whole thing and that a little more attention was paid to Max. It seemed like the movie was more Furiosa's than Max's. I doubt I will ever watch it again, but for what it was I wasn't really disappointed.

[Monterey Jack]

Spy (2015): 8/10

Breezy comic riff on espionage clichés thankfully downplays the incessant vulgarity that marred the last Melissa McCarthy hit, The Heat (a movie that would have been a lot funnier with a third of the constant profanity eliminated from the screenplay). If you like McCarthy, this is one of her best roles to date, where she thankfully spends time building a character instead of spewing F-Bombs every second she's on screen (at least for the first half...once her character gets "into the field" and goes undercover, the swearing starts up in earnest). Jason Statham is very funny taking the piss out of his tough-guy persona, and Rose Byrne is every bit as funny as she is lovely. Even Theodore Shapiro's score is pretty good, with a faux-Shirley Bassey/Maurice Binder title sequence that's better than a lot of actual 007 title songs in recent memory (although that ain't saying very much). Good fun, it should make a mint in the following weeks.

[AndyDursin]

Still playing catch up since getting home Sunday.

JURASSIC WORLD
5.5/10
See review in this week's column -- http://andyfilm.com/2015/06/17/6-23-15- ... l-edition/

KINGSMAN
6.5/10

Matthew Vaughn’s latest is a wild and woolly, hyper-James Bond affair based on a comic book about a clandestine British espionage unit, spearheaded by veteran spy Colin Firth. He adds a young kid from the wrong side of the tracks (Taron Egerton) as a recruit just as an American billionaire (Samuel L. Jackson) threatens the world in Vaughn and Jane Goldman’s colorful, fast moving romp, which has as much energy as their “Kick-Ass” and visual inspiration to match. Regrettably, it also carries a bit of its excessiveness along with it, resulting in some jarringly violent moments that didn’t need to be as extreme as they are – particularly given the material. For the most part, the picture is still entertaining with pitch-perfect performances from Firth and Jackson (and boasts a number of funny scenes), but this time, Vaughn’s juvenile tendencies get the best of him, capped by an inexplicably gratuitous church massacre that’s especially miscalculated.

THE DUFF
7.5/10

Mae Whitman’s winning performance sells this agreeable, if unsurprising, trip back to John Hughes land. Josh Cagan’s adaptation of Jody Keplinger’s book follows Whitman as Bianca, a smart high school senior who finds out she’s really a “Duff” – a front for her friends to use as a means of landing a good looking guy. Ari Samuel’s film is high on energy and good humor, though the picture ultimately isn’t anything you haven’t seen before – just carried along by Whitman’s superb central role.


CHAPPIE
4/10

It’s always tough when a talented filmmaker – especially in this day and age – strikes out with original material, but alas, it’s two strikes running now for Neill Blomkamp. The South African director who made a name for himself thanks to the terrific “District 9″ followed that genre triumph with the meandering “Elysium” and now the severely misguided “Chappie” – a film that recycles elements from “Short Circuit” and “Robocop,” as South African police droids patrol the decrepit streets of Johannesburg. A pair of gangsters decide to kidnap the AI’s designer (Dev Patel) and demand that he reprogram one of the automatons, resulting in a child-like robot with a conscience whom the duo force to help pay out a debt to a local thug.

Veering uneasily from a reworking of Paul Verhoeven’s 1987 sci-fi favorite to would-be heart-tugging scenes involving “Chappie” (the robot’s nickname) learning about the world around him, Blomkamp’s film never settles on a consistent tone. It also offers Blomkamp lecturing from the pulpit again, this time about mankind’s relationship with A.I., its dangers and consequences – but the film is ultimately so silly and unbelievable – not to mention critically overlong – that it’s hard to take any of it seriously.

“Chappie” co-stars a mullet-wearing Hugh Jackman and Sigourney Weaver, who apparently struck up enough of a relationship with Blomkamp that the director successfully lobbied to make his own “Alien” film, presumably with the actress (we’re still awaiting official details) returning to her iconic role. That kind of familiar genre material might be the best recipe to get Blomkamp back on track after this commercial misstep, which was quickly jettisoned from theaters last winter.

[Jedbu]

One correction to your review of SATAN MET A LADY, Andy-this was the second adaptation of Hammett's book. There was a version from 1931 (available only in the deluxe DVD set from WHV-not in the Blu-Ray, sadly) starring Ricardo Cortez and Bebe Daniels that is quite a good version and even more adult in its approach to the novel than Huston's masterpiece.

[AndyDursin]

Thank you Jeff, I will correct that!

[Monterey Jack]

-Inside Out (2015): 10/10

Pixar's best film since Toy Story 3, richly emotional and imaginative and all-around wonderful. Maybe a bit too cerebral for the youngest kids (I'm sure that the forthcoming Minions will be more up their alley), but for the twelve-and-up set, it's terrific family entertainment, with beautiful animation and a lovely Michael Giacchino score.

-Jaws (1975): 10/10

First time seeing this on the big screen (on my birthday, no less ), and seeing it with an appreciative crowd (both long-time fans and soon-to-be-traumatized kids ) made every jump-scare, punchline and visual flourish all the more effective, with a round of applause when Brody and Hooper start paddling towards shore. They truly don't make 'em like this anymore, and no matter how much money Jurassic World Hoovers up this summer, it will never have the kind of efficient narrative structure and rich character work that will make Jaws continue to function as the ultimate big screen thrill machine for another forty years.

[AndyDursin]

SPY
7/10

Meant to mention this before, but we finally caught up with this one. Funny stuff but runs a bit long and I think they made a major mistake not better use out of Statham. The scenes he's in are hilarious (the whole bit about the "Face Off" machine in particular), but it's almost like an extended cameo: he shows up for a few minutes, disappears for a half hour, returns for a few minutes. Never actually gets involved in the story, which is a shame because McCarthy played great off him. The movie could've used more of him, because while it's funny and entertaining, it lacks the tandem McCarthy and Sandra Bullock had going in THE HEAT and never quite reaches the same level of hilarity for me.