The Illusionist (2006)

illusionistcover01A Steven Millhauser twin spin!

The movie uses a flashback sequence to start in the same scene as the short story.  As a boy, Eisensheim encountered a traveling magician who performed miraculous tricks.  In the short story, he starts with coins from the boy’s ear; in the film, it is a frog, which is an improvement.

After a bit more conjuring and levitation, the wizard disappears, and by some accounts also the tree he was lounging under.  And maybe he also made off with the boy’s personality, because young Aaron Taylor-Johnson grows up to be the charisma-free star of Godzilla.

Paul Giamatti plays the role he always plays, Paul Giamatti.  In this case his character is Inspector Walther Uhl, who appears in both versions.  It is confusing to call Paul Giamatti by that other name when he is clearly Paul Giamatti, so lets just call him Inspector Giamatti.

The film and short story share the same early illusions.  As Eisenheim takes the stage, he removes  his black gloves, throws them in the air and they become ravens.  Both versions contain the Orange Tree illusion where Eisenheim plants a seed, grows a small tree and produces oranges in a few seconds.  The 2nd part of the trick has trained butterflies flying in with a handkerchief.  It is a callback to a handkerchief a volunteer gave him, but it just seems strangely separate from the Orange Tree trick part of the illusion.

illusionisttree01The film mostly stays with the source material as a large mirror is wheeled on stage, and a volunteer is taken from the audience.  Eisenheim directs the woman through a series of movements.  Naturally, the mirror image reflects those movements; until it doesn’t.  In both versions, but in slightly different ways, the volunteer’s reflection is stabbed as the actual volunteer watches motionless.  This miracle is disconcerting to the entire audience — the 5% at the necessary angle to view the illusion, and the 95% who fear they grossly overpaid for their seats.

Around this time, the film makes its biggest departure away from the short story.  True, the story as written might not have supported a feature-length film.  The filmmakers could have gone in at least two directions — playing up the fantastic elements of the story, or shoe-horning in a love triangle among Eisenheim, the Crown Prince of Austria, and the volunteer who was the Prince’s fiancee Sophie.  While still a great movie, I wish they had gone for option #1.

In the short story, the illusions get darker.  In Book of Demons, the titular book bursts into flames releasing “hideous dwarfs in hairy jerkins who ran howling across the stage.”  In Pied Piper, he causes a group of children to vanish.  When they return, some claimed to have been in a heavenly place, but others claimed to have “been in hell and seen the devil who was green and breathed fire.”  If there had been more of this, but still grounded by an abbreviated romance — GOLD!

The  rest of the film mostly plays out the love triangle which does not exist in the short story.   There is a murder, political intrigue, framing, suicide, more magic.  And mostly a happy ending.  Inspector Giamatti even turns out to be an OK guy.

illusionistjessicaThis is not the usual  blueprint for Steven Millhauser’s stories.  He frequently begins with a premise of something very big, or something very small, or something physically impossible and beats that premise to death.  But I mean that in the best possible way; examining the phenomena from many different angles, creatively tackling the implications.  It might be a town that maintains an exact duplicate of itself, women’s dresses that are as big as houses, paintings that seem to move, or an illusionist with who performs impossible feats.

The premise is the thing for Millhauser.  You don’t go in looking in for a love triangle with the Crown Prince of Austria.  I hope to cover more of his work later.

Post-Post Leftovers:

  • On Amazon, this is categorized as Movies & TV > Blu-Ray > Romance.  Such a lost opportunity.
  • Sophie’s name is mentioned exactly once in the short story.
  • Although in both versions, Eisenheim is clearly performing impossible feats, the short story makes more of a case for the supernatural.  The Orange Tree illusion, however, actually has an historical basis, even if it was tarted-up with the trained butterflies.
  • I read this in the collection We Others: New and Selected Stories.  I am happy to support the arts, but putting out a collection of 21 short stories where 14 have been previously collected is just effectively forcing me to pay 3 times as much for the new material.  Well, not forcing exactly, as I actually set foot in a public library for the first time in years.  Sorry, Steve-o.
  • And don’t get me started on the trade paperback scam.
  • I don’t generally give actors much credit for their craft, but you can pretty much depend on Edward Norton to be great in anything he does.
  • Handkerchief is a strange word; it is literally a hand kerchief.  But a kerchief is specifically defined as being a woman’s scarf.  It is one of those strangely literal words like fireplace that say just what they are with an almost caveman simplicity.  Ummm . . . . fire . . . place!

Trancers (1985)

trancerscover0220 horror movies for $5; what could possibly go wrong?  Part III.

Another title that prompted my $5 investment in this package. Like Prom Night, I had heard of this one, but had no knowledge of it, good or bad.  It just seemed like one of those Up All Night denizens that I never saw.

The scene opens in a hazy and heavily neoned 2247 where Jack Deth tells us he finally “singed” Martin Whistler on one of the rim planets.  Now he is hunting down the rest of his murderous cult, the titular Trancers.  In a diner of the future which still looks as much like the 50s as they did in the 80s, he dukes it out with an elderly waitress who turns out to be a Trancer.  Soon she is a dead Trancer as he kills her and we learn that they disintegrate when killed.  Hence the “singeing” of Martin Whistler.

As in every anti-hero cop movie since Dirty Harry, the “suits” don’t appreciate his zeal for his job, and he ends up tossing away his badge.  As in every anti-hero cop movie since Magnum Force, he gets right back on the job.  His boss tracks him down at the beach where he is treasure hunting.  Not sure whether this was due to a war, or climate change, but LA (now called Angel City) is mostly underwater.trancers02a

While this is a pretty bad effect, that’s OK by me in a low-budget movie.  If you’re paying Matt Damon $20M to star in some sci-fi joint, those effects better be awesome.  If you’re scraping by just trying to get your movie finished, I’m willing to meet you half way.  Of course if Matt Damon is in an indie phase and works for free, I’m out again.  Just not a fan.

His boss, McNulty, tells him that Whistler is still alive, so Deth agrees to talk to the council which runs things now.  Whistler has already killed one of the members, and fled to the past.  The two surviving members (including George Costanza’s boss Wilhelm) play a hologram of Whistler describing his plan to murder their ancestors, clearing the way from his triumphant return.

Seems like a lot of trouble since not-Wilhelm has just said that their fortress was “like paper” before this killer.  Why not  just kill them in 2247?   Obviously, there is just one man who can time-travel to the past and prevent an unstoppable killer from destroying mankind by assassinating it’s leaders’ ancestors.  Unfortunately, Michael Biehn was filming Aliens, so we got Tim Thomerson.

Deth sees the council has Whistler’s body on ice, and he blasts it.  This strands Whistler in 1985 because, as we know from the underrated Switch in The Matrix, you’ve got to have a body to come back to (i.e. home is where the heart is).

trancershelen01Whistler and Deth both download into ancestors’ bodies circa 1985.  Deth gets the better of this deal as his ancestor happened to be banging Helen Hunt at the time.

They go to Helen’s job as Santa’s Helper in a mall where, naturally, Santa is a Trancer forcing Deth to shoot him in front of some kids.  It will be another 10 years before Helen Hunt wears that great wife-beater in Twister.  In 1985, though, she was pretty cute rocking that red Santa’s Helper suit.

Deth and Whistler converge at a tanning salon run by Wilhelm’s ancestor Chris Lavery.  Of course, he turns out to be a Trancer and locks Deth in a stand-up tanning booth the size of my first apartment.   Bad news for him as back in 1985 they still made these models with a cremation setting — what were they thinking?  Sadly off-screen, Whistler arrives and kills Lavery.

Outside, Whistler — a detective in this era — catches Deth and Helen.  He and his men open fire, but Deth has been issued a special watch that briefly slows down time for him.  Or, rather, he remains in normal speed, and everything else slows down.  I assume everything.  Whistler.  The police.  The bullets.  Gravity.  The earth.  The sun.  The universe.  There are so many things wrong with this that blah bah blah.  Again, though, I’m willing to roll with it in a fun little movie.

And it is fun.  I appreciate the little touches — Deth’s gruff boss McNulty has to transport back to 1985, but the only relative he can find to download into is a little girl.  Not only does she exhibit his gruff persona, she sticks around to peep through the window at Deth & Helen making out.

Deth and Helen track down not-Wilhelm’s ancestor on skid row.  With his help, they beat Whistler, and send him back to the future; even though Deth had destroyed his body, so that was supposed to be impossible.

Deth stays in 1985 with Helen Hunt.  No mention is made of the poor sap whose body he downloaded into, who is now probably in the Phantom Zone with General Zod for eternity.  Jake Gyllenhall also pulled this crap in Source Code so he could stay with a hottie.  Not cool, guys.

This was the 3rd movie watched out of this $5 set.  I started with the cream, but so far I have gotten my $.75 out of those 3 movies.  Definitely a product of its age (1985, not 2247, although shoulder pads were big in each), but a fun movie with a good cast. In honor of Helen Hunt in Twister, I give it an F3 on the Fujita Scale — OK, but no Finger of God.

Post-Post Leftovers:

  • Art LaFleur plays McNulty.  Richard Erdman (credited here as Drunken Wise Man) played a character named McNulty on The Twilight Zone.  If that dude from The Wire shows up, I’ll shit.   Anyways, the McNulty in TZ had a watch that did exactly the same thing as Deth’s.  Coincidence or homage?
  • Not-Wilhelm’s name is actually Ashe.  Her 1985 ancestor is named Ashby.  Why?  Why make the name so close, but different?
  • Deth claims not to be able to return to 2247 because the syringe with the time-travel drug was broken, but it has been demonstrated earlier that anyone could shoot him with a laser and transport him back.
  • The beach above looks like Point Dume where they filmed the end of Planet of the Apes, but I can’t confirm.
  • The 20 Movies box helpfully refers to this as Trancers I, lest anyone be disappointed thinking they were buying the classic Trancers II, III, IV, V or VI.
  • Any movie that works in Theme from Peter Gunn is OK with me.

Prom Night (1980)

promnightcover0220 horror movies for $5; what could possibly go wrong?  Part II.

This movie was one of the reasons I bought this set.  Not that I had any love for it, but I had at least heard of this title; and of course Jamie Lee Curtis gave it some gravitas.

Like every horror movie made in the 80s, this one starts in the 70s.  A pack of brats is bullying one of their schoolmates, Robin, in an abandoned school.  What starts as a hide & seek game devolves into them chasing her yelling, “kill, kill!” like those punks on Triacus.  As always, it’s fun and games until someone puts an eye out.  In this case, the eye and the rest of the body are put out of a 2nd story window.  The kids, wise beyond their years, react just like adults — by fleeing the scene and not telling anyone.

At this point, we can already predict who the killer is going to be, even though he was barely seen.  Of course Alex, the brother of the dead girl, can be expected to have a motive.  But when you are trying to predict who is going to grow up to be the serial killer, a stronger indicator might be the kid who dresses like his sister.  promnightstripes02Cut to 6 years later.  A mysterious caller — OK, it’s Alex —  starts calling the posse from 6 years ago.  But we still have to go through the usual suspects:

  • The groundskeeper – Why are groundskeepers always the first red herring?  The sharp implements?  If this took place today, we would know it isn’t the groundskeeper because the killer speaks English.
  • The Child Molester – Leonard Murch is only seen in bandages, and doesn’t even get a screen credit.  Despite the Lieutenant going all Sam Loomis, he is a no-go; the Screen Actors Guild would never allow it.
  • Lou, the boorish 25-year old high school student in the black ski mask?  Ninja, please!

Finally at the 1 hour mark, we get another kill.  As I am a firm believer in Survival of the Cutest, it is disappointing that it is Mary Beth Rubens.  It takes a mere 7 minutes to get the next kill, so we’re off!  We get a fun pursuit in a van (leading to a great fiery crash), and another good chase with an axe.

Clearly being Advanced Placement students, these prom-goers deduce there might be a problem after seeing a decapitated head on the dance floor.  As usual, JLC comes through, and unmasks the killer.  Surprise, it is Alex!

It was never boring, but the pressure was really on the last 30 minutes to redeem the first 60 minutes.  Overall, it worked for me.  On the Pass / Fail scale: Pass.

Post-Post Leftovers:

  • Released the same year Leslie Nielsen starred in Airplane; and in between Jamie Lee Curtis’ 2 Halloweens.
  • Michelle Scarabelli is here somewhere uncredited.  Sadly I did not see her.
  • Screenwriter William Gray wrote the classic The Changeling starring George C. Scott, also released in 1980.
  • I was stumped as to whether the van crash was an excellent model or a fake looking real van.  No matter, it was a great crash, great shot and great fireball.
  • Actually the opening is pretty effective as the kids really do seem menacing, and the old building is used well.
  • Its sequel title Prom Night II: Hello Mary Lou is right up there with Breakin’ 2: Electric Boogaloo.  Who is naming these things, Jesse Jackson?  Sadly, I know of no rhyming 3rd installments.  Star Wars III: Return of the Jediii?, Back to the Future III: Cowboy Marty?, Godfather III: WTF Sofi . . . uh?
  • Really, this is all we get for our R-rated 90 minute investment?promnightshower01

 

Godzilla (2013)

godzillacover02What is wrong with you people?  By “you people”, I mean the 72% of critics and 77% of normal people on Rotten Tomatoes who liked this.

I actually dozed off more than once during this fiasco.  Does that disqualify me from giving a review?  Or is that the review?  And this was after starting off with a 128 ounce Coke.

It starts out great — the montage under the opening credits is fascinating.  Then people start talking.  No movie I have covered on this site has had more lackluster dialogue than Godzilla (the movie, not the monster).

OK, no one went to this expecting My Dinner with Andre.  But just compare scenes from Jaws or Close Encounters or Independence Day to similar scenes in this movie.  The dialog  is constantly clunky or too wordy, never artful, and rarely effective.

I first noticed this when Bryan Cranston was being detained.  It instantly reminded me of Richard Dreyfuss being held in a small trailer by the Army in CE3K.  That short non-action scene in Close Encounters was made interesting and suspenseful in just a few sentences.  Even an actor as good as Cranston could not sell the terrible words he was given in his comparable scene.  I wish I could find the script online to give many more examples.

And thank God I did not find a bootleg DVD in the street, so I am not tempted to even just skim this movie again to make notes.  I will never watch this movie again.  I wasn’t even planning on writing about it, but the spent time and money are buggin’ me, man!  Where to start?  How much time is worth wasting on this movie?

  • It is kind of a bait & switch to show Bryan Cranston so prominently in the ads.  He really is killed off pretty early.  And maybe I was already getting drowsy, but somehow I missed him dying.  I saw him strapped to gurney with a neck support.  Was he already dead?  Was that even him?
  • I always like Elizabeth Olson, but she is completely wasted in this film (and not in the good way).
  • Kick-Ass, where art thou?  Aaron Taylor-Johnson is a colossal bore as Cranston’s son.  A problem since he is arguably the lead character.  He reminds me of Bruce Willis’ son in Die Hard 5 — the movie is already crap, and one of the leads is an absolute non-entity.  I would have paid an extra buck to see Jesse Pinkman as his son.
  • David Strathaim — another good actor totally wasted.  And what is this obsession with shooting the back of his head?  Marcellus Wallace got more face-time.
  • When Cranston removes his haz-mat helmet and takes a breath, are they suggesting that he can smell that there is no radiation?
  • Another CE3K comparison: the discovery of the ship in the desert vs the discovery of the Russian sub in the forest in Godzilla.  Fun, mysterious, beautiful vs zzzzzzzz.
  • When Cranston was ranting, “that was no earthquake, that was no typhoon . . .” I expected him to continue, “this is not a boat accident, and it wasn’t any propeller!”
  • And if that Hiroshima story was supposed to be as effective as the USS Indianapolis story in Jaws.  Just no.
  • Add Aliens to the homage list for the burning of the egg-sac.
  • I remember Roger Ebert saying one time that Heaven’s Gate was so poorly filmed that even the primary act of looking at the screen was a chore.  Same here.  In most of the scenes, it is either night, or there is a nuclear winter sized dust cloud which grays out the entire shot.  Some shots were so washed out, that they would have actually been more colorful in black & white.
  • The bit with the lost little boy on the train was so quickly contrived, then immediately resolved in an absurd coincidence that it is laughable in its attempt to manipulate the audience.
  • The design of the MUTOs was distracting.  For a while, I thought they were mechanical due to the shape of the head, and the red lights.  I liked them more when I initially thought they were named MOTOs.
  • Didn’t understand the thing with the bus on the bridge, and the dog scene was just weird.  Again, maybe I was resting my eyes.  Something was off about that opening birthday riff also.
  • How do these 300 foot monsters so often manage to sneak up on people?
  • And why was Godzilla fighting for humans anyway?  Didn’t we nuke him 60 years ago?

Memories were fading before leaving the parking lot.  I need to start taking a notepad to the theater.  And a good pillow.

Lastly.  When buying tickets online, I was very surprised that the 3D show starting in an hour had sold out, but the 2D show starting in 30 minutes was only 1/3 full.  This movie is already so dark, it seems like it would be disastrous for the always-too-dark 3D option.

Inside (2006)

insidecover0220 horror movies for $5; what could possibly go wrong?

I started with Inside because it was the first movie I found in this collection that did not get uniformly dreadful reviews.

It starts out with a nice switcheroo as a kid is eavesdropping on a couple who are talking about him.  At the cue of a toilet flushing we realize that they were not talking about him, but about the guy in the bathroom.  About to be busted, interloper Alex quietly flees the house.

Alex (Nicholas D’Agosto) has an interesting hobby: intruding, lurking, spying, staring.  Just generally being on the outside looking in.  Or in the first scene, on the inside looking further in.  And then in the park, on the outside still looking out.  He had seen Josie (Leighton Meester) in the library where she busted him for staring at another couple.  He then follows her to the park where he is busted again, this time for staring at her.

So apparently hot teen girls like to go with dweeby voyeurs back to their place after they are caught staring at them in the park.  That has not been my experience.  She did, however, try to steal his wallet.  OK, this is starting to ring true now.

The next day he follows the couple from the library to their home.  As he is peeking in the window, the woman catches him.  She believes she saw their dead son, who Alex does resemble.  Alex lets himself in and listens to them argue about their inability to cope with their son’s death.  There is something disconcerting about the simplicity of the scenes where Alex has intruded, and passively observes without the residents seeing him.  Then they see him.

Rather than calling the police or bringing out the Louisville Slugger, they invite him to dinner.  He is a dead ringer for their son who died a year ago.  Alice (Cheryl White) shows Alex a picture of her ex-son Timmy.

insidenotpictured01This not a nit-pick site because I don’t care about the length of cigarette ashes, positions of water glasses, what year cars are made, etc.  But I am baffled by obvious errors that slip through.  On the cover, Alex has a mole just above his lip on the left.  In the movie, Alex has that same mole, but it is on the right.  OK, when Alice brought out the picture of Timmy, I thought maybe he was the one on the cover; but no, he also has the mole on the right.  I could produce photographic evidence, but frankly all this talk of moles is making me a little sick.

Alice asks him to stay and just watch TV with her like Timmy.  He falls asleep and wakes up the next morning.  As he is leaving, Alex is hit by a car, and the Smiths take him in as a replacement for Timmy.  Soon they are having family movie night, gardening together, tossing around the football, playing Monopoly.

Alex begins to realize that the Smiths’ problem is not just depression or neediness, but a delusion that he really is Timmy.  This is especially true of Alice, as Mark (Kevin Kilner) still seems to have a connection to reality, seeing Alex as more a surrogate than resurrected Timmy .

The suspense deepens when the family is visited by their priest and later a therapist, neither of whom know that Timmy died (what did they do, bury him in the backyard?  oh).  Alex is a close enough match that they suspect nothing, and his protests are taken as tinsidealice02een angst.

Alex, needy in his own way, is partly complicit in this, but eventually realizes that he needs to go home.  When he tries to tell Alice he is not Timmy, she washes his mouth out with soap, and eventually she goes all Annie Wilkes on him.  Luckily he was already hobbled in the accident so no ankles were harmed in the filming of this scene.

And by the way, what happened to the driver?  Luckiest hit and run perp ever.

Alex tries to escape in a squeaky  wheelchair one night.  Alice stops him, but in the struggle, he falls, hits head, and they bury him in the garden.  He regains consciousness in the suspiciously illuminated grave and begins calling out for help.  The camera pans down to show Timmy a couple of feet further down, now just a skeleton.  Not sure that is decompositionally accurate, but it works.

Josie goes to the Smith house, but I am not clear on how she knows about them.  Jose digs Alex up while the Smiths are out shopping.  A twist is revealed that explains why Alex has allowed this to go on.  Of course, they are busted trying to leave and there is a confrontation.

Overall, I liked it.  Inside deserves better than being $.25 of a $5.00 DVD.   The performances were almost all very good.  Alice is given the heavy lifting, and handles it like Vasiliy Alekseyev.  It was a little disconcerting that Mark constantly reminded me of a hybrid clone of Huey Lewis and David Puddy, but he was also good walking the line between delusion and clarity.  Unfortunately, every time I saw Alex, I thought of Toby McGuire; but he gave a good subdued performance.

insideleighton01Josie seems a little over the top, but no more than I have seen in real people.  I wouldn’t call her the comedy relief, but she does at least raise the pulse of the film.  Her big problem is that the screenplay has to really strain to keep her in the story.  Not being a Gossip Girl guy, Leighton Meester has only shown up on my radar through her role as Behrooz’s girlfriend in 24 S4 where she was less obnoxious, did not drop F-bombs, and was very cute.  So they killed her.

I rate it just a little bit inside.

Post-Post Leftovers:

  • Good, but not to be confused with the very good French movie Inside.
  • In addition to the apparent flipped image on the cover, I also have to call them out on Leighton Meester’s photo which is terrible.  And unless the tag line is “Stars of the first season of Heroes . . .”, I’m not sure it helps.
  • Still thinking about how good Cheryl White was.  She was plain, beautiful, nurturing, crazy, whatever she needed to be.
  • What is with this sign in the library?  Are they really thinking that some Authors’ last names are going to start with DK?  Is this part of the Dkewey Decimal System?

    insidelibrary02

    Spidey-sense is tingling!