864. Hsi yen/The Wedding Banquet (1993)

Running Time: 106 minutes
Directed By: Ang Lee
Written By: Ang Lee, Neil Peng, James Schamus
Main Cast: Winston Chao, Mitchell Lichtenstein, May Chin, Sihung Lung, Ah-Leh Gua

ANG LEE WEEK: STAGE 1

Popped in "The Wedding Banquet" tonight in an effort to get things rolling on "Ang Lee Week" and was pleasantly surprised by a very simple, yet very good film. Let's dive right in.

Our main character is Wai-Tung Gao (Chao), a gay man living in Manhattan with his physical therapist boyfriend Simon (Lichtenstein). Wai-Tung regularly corresponds with his "Ma" and "Pa" who still live in Taiwan and is constantly hounded (mostly from Ma) about settling down and getting married. You see, Wai-Tung has yet to tell his parents that he is a gay man and is shacking up with a white boyfriend and doesn't plan to. Wai-Tung owns an apartment building, where he tries to collect rent from one of his few tenants, Wei Wei (Chin). When Wei Wei is in need of a green card, Simon convinces Wai-Tung to marry her, so that they can get his parents off his back, help Wei Wei out and get a little tax break. Wai-Tung gives in, announces the news to his parents, who fly to the United States and moves Wei Wei into house, where she begins to study Wai-Tung's behavior for her immigration exam. When Wai-Tung and Wei Wei announce that they plan to marry at city hall, this upsets his parents, who hoped for a big wedding banquet. Wai-Tung, wanting to please his parents, especially his ill father, gives into the plans for a wedding banquet and the Gao family goes all out to celebrate the union of Wai-Tung and Wei Wei. When Wei Wei becomes pregnant on the night of the wedding banquet, complications occur and the pot is stirred up even more vigorously, adding to the madcap nature of this really fun comedy.

POSSIBLE SPOILER ALERT!

I wasn't looking forward, not not looking forward to my first Ang Lee film, "The Wedding Banquet", but that proves my theory: When one doesn't look forward to a movie, the possibilities are endless. I loved this movie! It was nice to get a little break from the serious, artsy films, some of which resemble doing homework and have a little fun with a very light hearted little comedy. I thought it was great how they threw in so many different little elements and just let everything play out. First off we have a gay couple living in New York, then you add in a woman/friend of theirs who needs a green card. Then you add in the fact that Wai-Tung's parents are traditionalists and want him to have a formal wedding and settle down with a nice girl. You throw those things together and that's really enough to get you through an entire film. But then you also get some bonus story lines, ie. the pregnancy of Wei Wei, the possible lust that Wai-Tung holds for Wei Wei and the ever growing combustible nature of the Wai-Tung/Simon relationship.

I also liked the ending, how no one really knew what was really going on, but happiness still prevailed and the aging parents of Wai-Tung got to experience one last journey in their long lives and get some joy out of it. I think the ultimate message of the film (or at least one of them) is that life has a way of throwing you a curve ball and while things may not work out the way you planned them, they'll always work out. I think the film also says that plans are never concrete and no matter how you plan for a situation, things can go astray. With a good script, good acting and a few brief images of great cinematography, it's easy to see that we're not just dealing with any other film maker and that Ang Lee was headed for great things.

RATING: 10/10 Maybe I'm being too generous or maybe the film just put me in a really good mood, but I'm going the distance on this one and leaving it at that. Next up: "The Ice Storm".

MOVIES WATCHED: 192
MOVIES LEFT TO WATCH: 809

November 18, 2010 1:07am

982. Fahrenheit 9/11 (2004)

Running Time: 122 minutes
Directed By: Michael Moore
Written By: Michael Moore
Main Cast: Michael Moore, George W. Bush, Donald Rumsfeld, Osama bin Laden, Geroge H.W. Bush

NOTE: For those of you who missed the "Coming Soon" post this past Sunday, I apologize. I had Sunday off and planned to squeeze in more than one movie, but that afternoon I came down with a pretty wicked little bug, resembling the flu, and couldn't muster the strength to even get to the computer to put the "Coming Soon" post up. I'm feeling better now though and prepare for some Ang Lee films in the days to come.

OH! THE CONTROVERSY

I'm going to try to keep my personal opinions on this one to a minimum, because while I do realize that there isn't a mass of people reading this blog, I'd still like to avoid angering anyone who does read it. "Fahreneheit 9/11" was the 2004 film from the controversial filmmaker Michael Moore, where he had some very unkind things to say about the Bush administration.

The film starts out by giving some short detail on the 2000 election and the circus that erupted in Florida following that controversial election. George Walker Bush is eventually deemed the winner of the election and named the 43rd President of the United States. Moore suggests that the voting controversy in Florida was basically fraud and uses sarcasm to tear apart President Bush for the many months of vacation he took following his inauguration. We then get to September 11, 2001 and we all know what happened on that day, so don't allow me to remind you of the gory details. Moore focuses mainly on the aftermath of the attacks and examines the relationship between the Bush family and the bin Laden family. Moore alleges that 24 members of the bin Laden family were evacuated out of the United States just days following the attacks, when all other air traffic was stopped. Moore then discusses the Patriot Act and finds out that most members of Congress don't actually read the bills that they vote on, prompting Moore to rent an Ice Cream truck, drive through Washington D.C. and read it to them. Moore also talks with alleged victims of the Patriot Act. We then delve into the Iraq War as the film closes out and examine the life of the Iraqi people before and after the war. Moore suggests that because the war was based on a lie, atrocities will occur, prompting him to discuss possible abuse to Iraqi prisoners via U.S. soldiers. Moore also follows two Marine recruiters and talks with a fellow Flint, Michigan native, Lila Lipscomb, about her feelings on the war before and after the loss of her U.S. soldier son. The film concludes with George W. Bush stumbling to get a grip on the "Fool me once..." quote.

My political views are basically nonexistent, as I am not a registered voter, rarely watch the news and do not do any following of any politics. Do I agree with Michael Moore and his documentary? Well, I kind of hesitate to say whether I agree or disagree with him, but I will admit that he made a powerful documentary in "Fahrenheit 9/11". He proposes some interesting opinions and facts and you almost hope they're not true, because if they are, it's a scary thought. I don't think Michael Moore seems like the type of guy to make a documentary based on false facts and totally slander the Bush administration. Moore SEEMS like a guy who loves his country and wants the best for it and becomes angry when someone swerves it off the path of being as great as it can be. This is just the way things SEEM to me and assuming those thoughts are correct, then I guess I tend to agree with Moore...call me an un-patriotic S.O.B., if you will, these are simply my opinions. Going back to the film itself, I think it's a well made documentary, that has a powerful message and I think EVERYONE, even the most conservative of Republican, will want to see this movie, either to hail it or point out its inaccuracies. Let's just leave it at that, shall we?

RATING: 8/10 Maybe we'll try to squeeze in "Roger & Me" before the end of the week, which is also in the "1001" book and on my DVD shelf.

MOVIES WATCHED: 191
MOVIES LEFT TO WATCH: 810

November 16, 2010 8:56pm

758. Der Himmel uber Berlin/Wings of Desire (1987)

Running Time: 127 minutes
Directed By: Wim Wenders
Written By: Peter Handke, Wim Wenders
Main Cast: Bruno Ganz, Solveig Dommartin, Otto Sander, Peter Falk, Curt Bois

"I CAN'T SEE YOU, BUT I KNOW YOU'RE HERE"

"Wings of Desire" proves my theory: When you have high hopes for a movie and look forward to a film with great excitement, you're likely to be disappointed. I have wanted to see "Wings of Desire" for literally years, but have just never gotten around to it...until today. I didn't hate it, but I was certainly a bit disappointed in the end.

Damiel (Ganz) is an angel, hovering above the city of Berlin with his angel pals, notably Cassiel (Sander). The film's dialogue is so elegant and so innocent, as the movie asks the questions usually reserved for a child, like "Why am I me and not you?" and "Why am I here and not there?" The angels can't interject themselves into the lives of humans and can only lend a glimmer of hope when things look dark. Therefore they are forced to sit idly by, crying as people take their own lives and fatal accidents happen. Damiel falls in love with trapeze artist Marion (Dommartin), who herself, resembles an angel as she flies underneath the big top on her trapeze, dazzling the eyes of the watchers below. Especially the eyes of Damiel, who longs to hold her in his arms and feel the nape of her neck and her ears. Not only does he want to experience that, but also to experience the taste of an apple and a cup of coffee and experience what it feels like to be cold and rub your hands together vigorously to warm them. When Damiel encounters actor Peter Falk (playing himself), he is spotted...or sensed rather by Falk, who states: "I can't see you, but I know you're here." Falk continues to tell Damiel about the joys of human life and raise Damiel's desires to the point of no return.

This is probably one of (if not THE) most beautiful movies I have ever seen, in every sense of the word. The dialogue is even beautiful, as everyone seems to talk in poems and has deep thoughts about almost everything that they encounter. The cinematography is also quite breathtaking and if ever there was a movie to make you appreciate black and white photography, then this is the one. I recall a scene where we're peering at the skyline of Berlin, in glorious black & white. It was breathtaking. I noticed that the clouds looked so defined, as if they weren't even real clouds, but just smudges of black pencil markings...but they were real all right. It was then that the color snapped on and neon lights and natural color ruined the beauty of the shot. This is probably one of the most beautifully shot films I've seen, since Fellini week, back in September. The acting was fine too, and I especially enjoyed Peter Falk playing himself, a possible nod from Wenders, as he tells us that everything we're seeing is real, even the characters.

I mentioned above that the dialogue was like a poem and in fact, the entire movie was like one long poem put to action. That was one of the things I didn't like about "Wings of Desire", as it seemed way too poetic and deep. As we heard the characters thoughts, they almost all seemed to be thinking about very deep and meaningful things. It just didn't seem real. How often does one think so deeply and so poetic, as the characters in this film? There were so many scenes that dragged on and on, as the characters and their thoughts seemed to be talking what amounted to nothing at all, in what seemed like forever.

RATING: 5.5/10 Not a terrible rating, but not the rating that I've had pegged for it, for so long.

MOVIES WATCHED: 190
MOVIES LEFT TO WATCH: 811

November 14, 2010 6:52pm

483. if... (1968)

Running Time: 111 minutes
Directed By: Lindsay Anderson
Written By: David Sherwin, John Howlett
Main Cast: Malcolm McDowell, David Wood, Richard Warwick, Christine Noonan, Robert Swann

'ZERO FOR CONDUCT' - THE LONG VERSION

Wrapping up Hitchcock and leaping back into the great randomization, has me watching "If..." tonight. For the readers who have been following me for a while, you may remember my thoughts on Jean Vigo's "Zero for Conduct"...well this one wasn't much better.

Malcolm McDowell makes his film debut as Mick Travis, a non-conforming student at an all male boarding school. The plot itself is pretty straight forward, so we won't spend a lot of time harping on it. The professors are referred to as "Whips" and are painted as cruel oppressors to the students. The senior boys are given more leeway than their juniors, and the first-year students are called "Scum", basically taking on the role of servants to the "Whips", serving them tea, helping them bathe and other demeaning practices. Mick Travis and his two roommates are the biggest rule breakers at the school, smoking cigarettes and drinking alcohol in their room, when they're alone. Throughout the film they are punished and as the film progresses, the punishments get worse, until the boys eventually snap and are forced to revolt.

SPOILER ALERT!

On paper, the movie sounds like something I'd like to watch. I loved Malcolm McDowell in "A Clockwork Orange", so why wouldn't I love him in the film that inspired his Alex DeLarge character? While I didn't like "Zero for Conduct", the idea of a group of boarding school boys being mistreated to the point of revolt also appealed to me. Add in the fact that the film was made in the late 1960s, when more risque films were being produced and you have a sure hit maker on your hands and a strong candidate for my upcoming "TOP 20" list. WRONG!

Maybe my hopes were a little too high and I was hoping for a really breakout, fabulous piece of film making, but that is certainly not what I got. I really wanted to like this film, but somewhere in the middle my connection to the film was cut and I began to bore with it. Maybe this isn't the type of film you look at in the simplest of terms, but I did (in a way). In looking at the film in simple terms, I found that there was a lack of direction. Going into the movie, we know that there will be an inevitable battle between the students and the teachers, so that's a given. We get a good setup in the beginning, introducing us to the main characters, getting nestled into our setting and learning the basic plot of the film. But then somewhere between those first and last ten minutes of the movie (outside of the corporal punishment scene, which I thought was very well done), I get lost, bored and very uninterested, as we get scenes that may or may not be actually happening, characters that may or may not actually exist and a lot of malarkey that does nothing to tie the plot together and give us a cohesive storyline.

In my opinion, the film tried to hard to be artistic and tried ever harder to get its message across. I took the film as a never ending, though mostly non-existent, war between youth and elders, past and future, a clash of cultures. To me, that was the message of the film and if I'm right in assuming that that is the message (or at least one of them), then the film could've easily benefited in being a straightforward film, with a straightforward plot and straightforward characters, instead of adding in a bunch mumbo jumbo, artistic stuff, that left me scratching my head and searching the Internet for answers to unanswered questions. For example: Some scenes in the film are shot in black & white, but most of the film is shown in color. I wondered about this element as I watched and then later came to realize that the explanation for that, was not artistic at all, but merely that the production was running out of money and couldn't afford to shoot those scenes in color. Come on! A seemingly artistic element added to the film turns out to be lack of funds? Other things that seem to go unanswered are: Did the girl (Noonan) exist? Why was the school chaplain kept in a drawer? Why were we given a seemingly gratuitous and meaningless nude scene with Mrs. Kemp (Mary MacLeod)? Did the final battle even happen?

Too many unanswered questions, not enough intrigue to form my own answers and not enough substance to "If..." for me to really get into it. Like I said, I wanted to like it, but in the end I didn't and that, my friends, is that.

RATING: 4/10 A '4' for some successful scenes and for Malcolm McDowell, but that is as high as I can possibly go.

MOVIES WATCHED: 189
MOVIES LEFT TO WATCH: 812

November 13, 2010 3:08am

ANG LEE WEEK Begins Monday

November 11, 9:39pm

A Word (or Two) About Hitchcock

Well, on November 11, 2010, "Hitchcocktober Fest" has come to an end...finally. I say "finally" because it was supposed to come to an end in October and not because I'm glad that it's over. I had a really good time experiencing and re-experiencing Hitch's work.

They way I see it, Hitchcock's films were unique in the fact that he knew what viewers wanted to see, while at the same time he was making movies that he would want to see. Hitchcock seemed to have his fingers on the pulse of his viewers and each and every time he made a film, he appealed to wider fan base, until he became, probably, the greatest known film director to ever live. His films were so much fun to watch and each time I popped a Hitch' DVD into my DVD player, I knew I was in for another wild ride. Whether I was following the exploits of the Necktie Murderer, staring out the window with L.B. Jeffries or watching innocent Manny Balestrero be jailed for a crime he didn't commit, I was having a good time. Hitchcock's films seem to produce an air of self indulgence, in the fact that you can almost tell just by watching them that he put everything he had into these pictures and he loved them just as much as us. At the same time, they weren't self indulgent at all, because we, the viewer, loved every minute as well.

Not only did Hitchcock appeal to millions of his fans/viewers, but he also left a mark on future filmmakers and to an experienced eye, we will continue to see traces of Hitchcock films live on forever in the work of the directors who Hitchcock rubbed off on. In fact, according to his IMDB page, the following filmmakers cite him as an influence: Steven Spielberg, Brian De Palma, John Carpenter, Sam Raimi, M. Night Shyamalan, Martin Scorsese, Geroge A. Romero, Peter Bogdanovich, Dario Argento, William Friedkin, David Cronenberg and Quentin Tarantino, all director's who appear in the "1001 Movies..." book.

I'll stop talking now and leave you with a ranked list of the eighteen Hitchcock movies from the "1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die" book.

18. Sabotage

17. Notorious

16. Spellbound

15. North by Northwest

14. Rebecca

13. The 39 Steps

12. Rope

11. Vertigo

10. Marnie

09. Psycho

08. Frenzy

07. Blackmail

06. Strangers on a Train

05. The Birds

04. The Man Who Knew Too Much

03. The Wrong Man

02. Rear Window

01. Shadow of a Doubt

NOTE: Of course, the key to that list is #18 being the worst and #1 being the best, in my opinion. It should also be noted that I really liked 12 - 1, reiterating the fact that Hitchcock was a fabulous director and shooting him straight into my Top 10 Directors. Also, that list is a bit rough and some of those rankings are quite possibly interchangeable.

November 11, 2010 8:23pm

555. FRENZY (1972)

Running Time: 116 minutes
Directed By: Alfred Hitchcock
Written By: Anthony Shaffer, from the novel Goodbye Piccadilly, Farewell Leicester Square by Arthur La Bern
Main Cast: Jon Finch, Barry Foster, Alec McCowen, Anna Massey, Billie Whitelaw

HITCHCOCKTOBER FEST!: PART XIV - THE CONCLUSION

Well we've finally made it to the end of our journey with Alfred Hitchcock. Last night I was finally able to watch my last "1001" Hitchcock movie, "Frenzy" and I must say, that while it didn't altogether feel like a Hitch film, I enjoyed it very much.

The film takes place in London and this time around we're focused in on Dick Blaney (Finch), who's just been fired from his bartender job for being suspected of stealing booze. We follow Blaney around London as he counts his losses and bumps into some acquaintances, including Bob Rusk (Foster), a very nice fellow who runs a fruit and flower market and who offers to help Blaney in any possible way that he can. Following his encounter with Rusk, Blaney calls upon his ex-wife, who runs a matchmaking service. She's pleased to see him, even after he gets abusive with his language, and they have dinner together that night, where she slyly slips fifty pounds into his coat pocket. Not knowing about the fifty pounds, Blaney takes refuge in a Salvation Army center. Meanwhile, much more important things are going on in London, as the Necktie Murderer is on the loose, as the police search frantically, before more victims turn up with necktie's wrapped around their throats. All signs point to Blaney as being the vicious Necktie Murderer, especially when Blaney's ex-wife turns up as the latest victim of the killer. What the police don't know and what we, the viewer, do know is that the murderer is not Dick Blaney, but rather the "nice on the outside, vicious on the inside" Bob Rusk.

I must say I was a bit taken aback when I started to hear cursing and see nudity in an Alfred Hitchcock film. Not that I'm a 'G' rated movie watcher, I just didn't expect that kind of thing from jolly old Alfred. I eased into it fairly quickly though and was able to really enjoy myself and go out on a high note with Alfred.

SPOILER ALERT!

I thought that the three male leads were all excellent, with Jon Finch being the lesser of the three. I quite enjoyed Barry Foster and what a creep he was, huh? The character of Bob Rusk immediately receives a pass into the creepiest and cruelest of all Hitchcock villains. I loved the mixture of humor and suspense Hitch' was able to create, when he throws our villain into the back of a potato truck, with the corpse of his latest victim and has him fishing about her body, looking for his "R" pin. I also really enjoyed Alec McCowan as Inspector Oxford, and actually would probably peg him as my favorite character in the film. I thought he was a brilliant actor and I loved the running gag of his wife being completely incapable of cooking gourmet meals, which leaving him to scarf down breakfast at the office and sneak hideous looking soup back into the bowl when she's not looking. Also, as it pertains to Rusk, I love how Hitchcock made you really like the guy at first (before we found out he was the killer) and then totally turns the tables on us and makes us despise him.

The ending was hit and miss with me, as I could've seen it going a few different ways, but ultimately I wasn't totally displeased with it and it worked. Blaney ends up going to prison for the Necktie murders, but later, Oxford realizes that Blaney is innocent and that Rusk is the guilty one. Before Oxford can get him pardoned, Blaney escapes and makes his way back to Rusk's place, where all three of the main male leads have a final encounter. Oxford mentions something at one point about Blaney possible getting monetary compensation for the time he had to spend in prison. They never touch upon it, but they could've done a "blessing in disguise" kind of ending, where Blaney does have to spend a few days in prison, but gets a handsome reward, thus getting him out of the poor house. I also wouldn't have minded it too much, if Blaney ended up getting re-caught at the end and thrown back in prison, as kind of an "anti-revenge" theme.

All in all though, the film was highly enjoyable, with great acting coming from several different sources and a very engaging plot. Hitch captures London very nicely too and we can feel the city looming over us throughout the movie.

RATING: 8/10 Well Alfred, I had a lot of fun revisiting your pictures, old boy. I may be back with a little Alfred Hitchcock retrospective later on tonight. Stay tuned.

MOVIES WATCHED: 188
MOVIES LEFT TO WATCH: 813

November 11, 2010 12:58pm