The Writer's Poke

This movie had people crying in the theater at one point. I heard multiple people trying to control their sobs.  * When I was looking to buy tickets last weekend, I knew I wanted to see this film in IMAX, but the closest IMAX theaters were already almost fully booked. So, I thought, surely there will be less demand midweek. But it turns out that even the Tuesday 10 p.m. screening, the one I went to, was packed. Who are all these people? I wondered. And why are they so interested in The Odyssey? I still remember being a Graduate Student at the University of Mississippi 25 years ago. One of my jobs then was to assist a Professor with his World Literature class. This is when I first really studied The Odyssey, and while I loved it, I don't remember the undergrads in the class being overly thrilled about it. The story was there on the page, but it doesn't as easily "come to life" as Nolan's vision of it does.  And so, my thoughts about the audience I was watching the ...

Thirteen years before he played Odysseus, Matt Damon was somehow playing Liberace's loveboy, Scott Thorson. As I watched the movie, I was into the story, but I felt like the movie was only scratching the surface, just telling us part of the story. But since the script is based on Thorson's memoirs, that makes sense.  Who was Liberace? Well, I'm still not sure I know, really, but Michael Douglass's performance is amazing. He has the look and mannerisms. Everything about Liberace's relationship with Thorson, and apparently all the boys who came before him, is so incredibly wrong. The age difference, the power difference. Liberace doesn't come off as a "groomer," but he definitely took a vulnerable young man and "trapped" him in, what? A relationship of some sort -- Liberace himself didn't seem to know what he wanted -- to be a dad, a friend, a lover. Somehow, he thought it was okay to be all of the above, but he also must have known what he...

This one came out in December 1986, and I remember watching it in the theaters. I would have been about 13, and I had no idea that it was a musical. Needless to say, I hated it, and although I'm okay with watching musicals now, I haven't watched it since.  What's it like watching it now, 40 years later? Well, I love it. Specifically, I enjoy Steve Martin as Orin, the evil dentist. Martin is a weird Elvis/Jerk hybrid on giggle juice. And the best scene is when he's working with Bill Murray, who plays a bizarre dental patient (Arthur) who gets off on the pain. Orin doesn't know exactly how to handle Arthur, as the dentist lives to dish out the pain, but not to patients who like it.  As far as I know, this is the only film to feature Murray and Martin on screen together. I read that Murray did film scenes for The Jerk, but those scenes were cut.  It might seem weird, but I have sensitive ears when watching Little Shop of Horrors. That is, for whatever reason, the uses ...

When I was writing my review about Platoon (1986) this week, I noted that a lot of American war films do not present both sides of the battle; so, with that freshly in mind, I was interested that this film does include at least a bit of the German perspective. And to be quite honest, the Germans are portrayed quite decently, or at least as no better and no worse than the Allies.  At one point, the Germans try to surrender to Lt. Col. Frost (Anthony Hopkins), but he tells them to go to hell. In response, the Germans act shocked. They were trying to play by the rules of war, and the Allies refused to follow those rules. It was only then that the German Field Commander said, Fine, destroy the city.  Until that point, you get the idea at least that Germany occupied The Netherlands, but they didn't turn it into a parking lot or rubble.  At another moment in the film, a German commander gave Allied prisoners chocolate. I mean, it's small things like that humanize the Germans, b...

Give Quentin Tarantino $30,000 and a 16mm camera and see what he can do.  The budget was ultimately more than $30,000, but this has a very low-budget movie feel, not that that's a bad thing. In fact, it's almost exclusively shot in a warehouse.  As I was re-watching it, I thought about how this movie might work even better as a play. It's dramatic, sure, and it works as a film, but the focus to a single location would work very well on stage.  For the most part, the power of the film relies on the actors and the intensity in which they deliver their lines. We might not have known it in 1992, but this film includes many of what will become "Tarantino Guys" -- Tim Roth, Michael Madsen, and Harvey Keitel. The only "Guy" really missing is Samuel L. Jackson, who I understand auditioned for the part of Holdaway -- not a very big role, but a role that probably would have popped more with Jackson.  The movie is odd in that there is absolutely no female presence....

Compared to Castle in the Sky (1986), Howl's Moving Castle feels like Hayao Miyazaki at his full power. What makes the film for me is the characters, in particular, Calcifer (the fire) and Turnip Head (the Scarecrow). Good English voice casting, too, if you like listening to the English audio: Billy Crystal as Calcifer -- my favorite line: "She likes my spark!" (very Mike Wazowski-like in delivery) --, Christian Bale as Howl, Lauren Bacall as the Witch of the Waste, Jean Simmons as the old Sophie, etc.  Sophie is an interesting character. She's supposed to be a little Jane Eyre-like, plain and unlovable. But she's cursed by the Witch of the Waste even so. None of that matters. Howl is still her true love, and even though she kisses a Prince (under a spell) in the end, she still ends up with Howl. That's a little odd, as the Prince promises he will be back later because she is his true love, and he knows how love is capricious -- in other words, he's nice a...