I'm sure no one needs a summary of the story of Beauty and the Beast. This was the 1946 French version by Jean Cocteau. There are some really amazing touches to this version. The effects are really well done, especially for the time period. The photography is usually very enjoyable. The design for the Beast is excellent. But there are some weaknesses. I don't care for the dialogue too much. Some of it seems more hammy than it should be. And I had a big problem with the way that the ending works. Beauty's brother attempts to break in to the house that holds the Beast's treasure, as the Beast lay dying. A statue near the treasure shoots the brother with an arrow, turning him into a Beast. Suddenly, the original Beast is perfectly fine, and is back to being his human self. The implication is that there is only one Beast at a time. So… Beauty's love has nothing to do with turning Beast back. Even though this is talked about in the dialogue, it seems that the message is that greed turns people into being a Beast, and only letting go of that greed allows them to regain their humanity. Love has little, or nothing, to do with it.
In the near future, an unusual assassin runs into the older version of himself, who wants to prevent his wife from getting killed. From there, things get more complicated, and more difficult to talk about without spelling too much of the movie out. The plot of the movie is nowhere near as complicated as I thought it would be. It does involve time travel, and the effects that events in the present have on the future, or on future versions of specific people. But there's some dialogue near the middle of the movie that addresses this, when Bruce Willis tells his younger counterpart not to talk about it. It's just a big distraction from getting things done. There are a few interesting things to consider about this movie. First, it involves the murder of a child. Second, because of that murder, the audience is put into an unusual situation regarding who they are supposed to root for. I found this to be an interesting ambiguity. Every character has reasonable motivations, so their conflicts make perfect sense. And since no one seems to have a broader plan than achieving their immediate goal, it's hard to say that any character achieving their goal would fix things. It's rare that movies write conflicts this well. If it doesn't seem like anyone is being unreasonable, everything plays naturally.
The world building of the movie is handled really well. It's much more familiar than a movie like Blade Runner is, but it's also got just enough small twists and details to suggest that a lot of things happened in the meantime. I noticed a detail late in the movie, that a truck has a hose connected to the gas tank, which runs around the back bumper. It isn't clear what this does, but it implies that there was some innovation. I was very happy with this movie, but I also wonder how well it holds up to repeated viewings. I think I might like to see it every now and then, as I forget about how it plays out.
The last several days of World War II, told primarily from Hitler's bunker. I didn't see the extended version, but this was still a massively long movie. I only saw one that was about 2:40. The longer version is about 20 minutes longer. It's a good movie. It's well made, but the adherence to chronology and the facts of the event make this movie an unusual structure. We follow several different characters, and not just in the bunker. In some cases, paths cross, but never in a very meaningful way. The huge cast, combined with a lot of characters not being named in an explicit way, makes following every story a difficult task. But the real reason to watch this movie is Hitler. A clip of this circulates heavily online, with altered subtitles to show Hitler flipping out about a variety of things. But the portrayal, and handling of Hitler here is fascinating. He's erratic. He's prone to ignoring bad news. He tends to blame other people for not being able to carry out orders. Most of his actions could be taken as him just being in too deep of a situation to get out. But he doesn't try to get out of the situation. Throughout the movie, he gets constant advise to leave Berlin. He refuses to do this. He contemplates a variety of other actions, all of which are absurd. He acts as though armies that no longer exist are under his control. He considers that he can make the Allied attack more difficult by destroying Germany's resources. While he's completely irresponsible as a leader, he's not as cold and calculating as he tries to be. There are a few instances of him showing genuine appreciation for a few people, and being surprisingly gentle and easygoing with some people. But Goebbels is the one who comes out looking really nuts. He's devoted to Hitler beyond question, to the point where he refuses to recognize facts. After Hitler dies, he and his wife poison their children, then leave the bunker, where he shoots her, then himself. Prideful suicide is all over the last forty-five minutes of this movie. And it always seems a little puzzling. Their conviction in feeling that they were right would normally preclude this kind of thing, and suicide seems like more of an admission of guilt.
It's a fascinating movie, and it's well made, but it needs a little more of a focus to make the jump to greatness. And I leave you with my favorite Hitler video. Enjoy.
Iron Man, Thor, Captain America, Black Widow, Hawkeye, and the Hulk are brought together by Nick Fury, to address the threat caused by Loki stealing the Tesseract.
I didn't want this movie to be the one that I matched last year's record with, especially since I've been trying to watch more movies for the first time. But Downfall, which will probably be next on my list, Cathy wants to watch as well. So I substituted this.
And man, it's better than I remember. For a movie of this scale, there are usually some parts where it's easy to just tune out, and not actually pay attention. On a second viewing, I found that this was still packed very tightly. There's no fat on this one. At least, no fat that isn't delicious.
I also watched the gag reel, the deleted scenes, and listened to the commentary on this. All of those are worthwhile. Stan Lee had a different cameo that was trimmed, but I really loved that one. I found the commentary smoothed over some of my doubts about the movie. Whedon is a nerdy guy, but he's also remarkably clear about how little responsibility he has for the quality of the movie. He tosses out a lot of praise for a bunch of editors for handling the story, and making it come together in a way that made sense. He doesn't take credit for things that other people did that he kept. He also reiterated how awkward the process for making the movie was - that they had to start filming before they finished a script.
I'll probably see this again before the year is out. It's so much fun.
A bunch of teens are driving to some touristy spot, and they get a flat tire. They wind up finding the destination, and a run down gas station. They're greeted by the resident. Gradually the teens are being dispatched by a masked, telekinetic killer, who uses mannequins to do his bidding. I wasn't expecting too much from this, but I've been pleasantly surprised. It's not bad. In fact, it's kind of interesting. That isn't to say that it's especially good, but it is memorable. This movie has a 6.1 on IMDB. That's very good for a horror movie - especially for a horror movie from 1979! Even better for a cheap horror movie from 1979! The performances from the teens are generally fine. No one stands out. The villain is handled very well, and he seems just creepy enough for most of the movie, before cranking things up for the last reel. The telekinetic angle is very interesting. They don't try to explain it at all, but it provides a great explanation for mannequins moving on their own. And mannequins are creepy enough without moving. There are plenty of really creepy bits, where the mannequins have jointed mouths, and they drop open and scream. Most of the movie has this very strange feeling, like the whole thing is a nightmare. It's a very detailed nightmare, and it's the sort of thing that would have a really powerful impact on younger viewers. And another peculiar detail about the movie - it's rated PG! There's a fair amount of blood. No real gore. There's an asphyxiation, as well as a death by knife to the back of the head, as well as another with an axe.
John McClane returns. This time, he protects a white-hat hacker as they try to deal with a cyber-terrorist who takes over traffic, communications, and utility networks. This one doesn't have the same buddy cop vibe that Die Hard With a Vengeance had. But this one is much more pleasing. The guy that McClane has following him around is surprisingly likable, and there's a nice odd couple feeling going on. None of the racial elements of the 3rd one, they've been replaced with a generation gap. There was a strong sense of terror during the 3rd one, when the subway station is taken out. In this case, this movie almost exclusively uses moments like that. The prospect of losing all utilities, and not being able to communicate is much more serious. In contrast though, the action seems campier than before. As is shown in the trailer, he uses a car to jump a ramp, hitting a helicopter. This is just hilarious, and it's hard to take that kind of action seriously. There's a sequence near the end, when he's driving a truck and trying to deal with an airplane that's shooting at him. That's even sillier. The villain is a little more interesting. He seems less comfortable. Even though he's confident in his plan, his mannerisms seem a little strange. I want to point one thing out - and this is a spoiler. McClane beats the villain by taking the gun being held to his chest, and shooting through his own shoulder to hit the villain. This is very similar to how Darth Vader beat Darth Maul in one of the Star Wars comics.
One other minor detail. Something about the lighting in this movie really looks artificial to me. It isn't constant, but the light reflected off Bruce Willis's head doesn't look right.
