BALLS OF FURY
(First Vieiwng)

Dan Fogler was kind of a nice surprise and this is his only piece of work that I'm familiar with (even though he's listed as being in SCHOOL FOR SCOUNDRELS, I don't remember him). But why does George Lopez have to do a Tony Montana impersonation in every stand-up, sitcom or movie?

DRUKEN ANGEL
(First Viewing)

Too much symbolism and shots of the swamp. I've seen two Kurosawa noir films thus far (this and STRAY DOG) and while neither was horrible, I just personally didn't care for them. Maybe it's due to my apathy towards the genre in general but I'll take a Kurosawa samurai flick over a Kurosawa noir flick any day of the week.

I dunno, I'm not a film noir whore, but I loved STRAY DOG.

Just because a movie aint pimped to death as a masterpiece, doesn't mean its not a great movie on its own.

God forbid if you can stand any Scorsese movie outside of the mob.

He probably was too busy knocking up Spice Girls.

I am with RRA on this. Stray Dog is excellent.

There are lots of Beatles fans on this site. Did you know that Leo Gorcey was left off the cover of Sergeant Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band because his agent demanded a $400 payment?

THE LAST BOY SCOUT
(Nth Viewing)

Tony Scott's masterpiece pre-TRUE ROMANCE. Bruce Willis is once again at the top of his game. He worked extremely well with Damon Waynes. In my own opinion I think this is one of the most underrated films of the 1990s.

Considering Tony Scott's output before TRUE ROMANCE, is that really saying much?

Besides, KISS KISS BANG BANG is a better "off=beat" take on the buddy cop formula, though BOY SCOUT is good.

DEPORTED WOMEN OF THE SS: SPECIAL SECTION 1/2
(First Viewing)

For a grindhouse/women in prison/nazi sexplotation film it takes it self too seriously and tries to convey actual feelings of emotion and sorrow for the women. It didn't work but rather failed.

"It's Didn't work but rather failed"

Isn't that like someone saying: "We win, YOU LOSE!"

Saw I'm Not There today.

Best of 2007 so far.

Capo, it was that good?? I really do want to see it. I know I don't see many of the movies you've reviewed, so can't comment on them, but I do look forward to your review of this one, when you get a chance. I hope to see it on break.

TIS

Capo knows his shit, even when I disagree with him.

Which means, I've got to see I'M NOT THERE.

MR. WARMTH: THE DON RICKLES PROJECT (2007) - ***1/2

You all have no idea how the very concept of Don Rickles' very best friend being Bob Newhart just blew my mind away. I mean, Newhart the calm, relaxed smart person going on vacations to China with the Great Asshole Insult Comic himself? God damn.

Then again, perceptions we garner about performers based from their stage schtick are either somewhat true or totally false. People thought for years that in their cinematic team-ups that Gene Wilder had a great relationship with Richard Pryor, when in fact the latter was a coked-up crippled asshole that Wilder had to contend with.

That's probably why director John Landis had in mind with shooting this documentary about this friend of his. This documentary begins with Landis' original meeting with Rickles on the set of KELLY'S HEROES, where Landis was a page man for 20th Century Fox. Hey, sometimes coffee boys do end up being good directors, and others become has-beens like Landis.

Either way, Landis detailsthe stand-up and TV/movie career of "Mr. Warmth," cutting between a 2006 Las Vegas gig with interviews by Rickles' friends, family, and fellow comic artists.

Seeing current stand-up headliners like Chris Rock and Sarah Silverman gush over the greatness of Don Rickles is just odd in that they operate from a different approach than Rickles.

Both work gigs from a exoductive, carefully-planned routine of jokes and one-liners. Rickles though, in the great tradition of Groucho Marx, is very much an inductive smartass. He probes the hapless audiences for their ethnicities or nationalities, and promptly character assassinates them on the spot.

To slam such racist and prejudicial comments at people who enjoy being the targets of Rickles, is hilarious. Yet it is also rejuvenating in that to see a legend in his 80s still working out an exhaustive schedule around the continent at casino and gambling shows. He doesn't need to work this much anymore really, but what is a jester that doesn't jest anymore?

Probably a Jerry Seinfeld. Urgh

Still though, the documentary's highlights must be the clips of Rickles on Johnny Carson's THE TONIGHT SHOW. He was a perfect foil of an adversary for Carson to bounce off this side of Ric Flair to Dusty Rhodes, Joker to Batman, you name it.

If Carson acted sincere as the calm MC, Rickles was was the party crasher who spiked the punch for the hell of it. Except the MC can raise some hell of his own if the intruder smashes his precious cigar box.

The documentary excels at these points, and detailing Rickles' encounters with a drunken Jackie Gleason and the Rat Pack. Apparently Rickles was the only guy in America who could mock Frank Sintra about his womanizing without getting his legs broken. Now that's impressive.

However, MR. WARMTH drags this side of an Ellen DeGeneres stand-up routine when Landis gets off-topic and goes on and on about great the old Mafia days of Vegas were. I know surely Landis was trying to set-up the conditions for Rickles' days in "Old Vegas," and its a good topic, but couldn't all this have been cut and be used for a whole other documentary about this rather huge subject?

That said, I think there is a prime moment in MR. WARMTH when Rickles is going over pictures of his old Hollywood associates from Sinatra to John Wayne, pointing out who is dead and who's barely hanging on for dear life.

Sounds solemn doesn't it? Yet the way Rickles goes through this morbid roll call, I grinned. He knows he doesn't have many years left probably, but he'll go out swinging on the stage, mocking more Asian people, to the very end.

Now the thought of this did make me feel very warm in the inside, and I'm laughing in the outside.

I only recently heard of this movie. After just checking I find it's an HBO special. I hope to see it on the 29th when it's on next.

When Rickles first hit the scene, I thought he was so rude to people. After seeing him a few times I found him hilarious. Sometimes, I wonder if he went too far, but for the most part he made me laugh.

He would make fun of absolutely everyone. One comment in particular that I remember (most likely because it was aimed at Italians)was on a tv show. It's been many years ago, so the quote may not be 100 per cent accurate, but you'll get my drift.

He was talking back and forth to audience members making fun of them really. He asked one guy his name and then asked "are you Italian?". The guy said "yes" and Rickles says, "let me make you feel at home" and imititates a mafiosi shooting a machine gun. He went to the black guy, the Jewish guy, the Irish guy, etc. He wouldn't pick on just one group, he'd pick on everyone, which is what made him so funny.

Thanks for the heads-up on this Ronnie. I do plan to see it.

Btw, Rickles was on quite a few of Dean Martin's "Celebrity Roasts" if I'm not mistaken. He was hilarious there as well.

TIS

It was great, TIS! I have to find out if there's gonna be a dvd because it's a keeper!

PB,

Funny you mention DVD. When I did a search to find out more about the program, there was an Amazon link in which you can preorder a DVD. I didn't read on to see when it would be available but imagine within the next year.

TIS

Btw, yes, Rickles and Newhart do seem like an "odd couple" when it comes to friends don't they?

Cool, TIS.

Thanks!

The thing with I'm Not There is it's so difficult to review without referencing all of the external events which the film relates to - Dylan, the politics and changes he's lived through, the person itself and what it has come to represent for a finger-pointing, headline-hungry society - and equally difficult to recommend to anyone who isn't a) a passionate fan of Cinema as a medium, or b) a passionate fan of Dylan.

I say "a" because Haynes has created - make no mistake about it - an intellectually rich tapestry unique to cinematic form. There's no linear narrative, no cause-and-effect progression, and as it goes on it becomes what people might say is a "trippy movie" - Dylan himself (Blanchett as "Jude Quinn") as a character is on drugs for much of its second half, and you've got to be really patient in order to relate one scene to another. A lot of it's grounded in self-reference and intertextuality too - referencing other works, and not just Dylan's music, but the movies which were being made at the time, such as Fellini's Eight and a Half and Tarkovsky's Mirror (a lot of art cinema, and this is far from mainstream stuff itself).

It's intellectually rich because, half way through I thought to myself that this could really be about anyone, in the same way that Gus Van Sant's Last Days (a film inspired by the final days of Kurt Cobain) could have been about any alienated rock star. I'm Not There is, thematically, primarily concerned with Time and Identity (as indeed much of Dylan's oeuvre is, with many albums such as Times They Are A-Changin', Time Out of Mind, Modern Times, or old American legend and myth and how identity is constructed, maintained and deconstructed in a society obsessed with fame).

I'd never recommend it for people wanting to get into Dylan - for that try Pennebaker's Don't Look Back (1967) or Scorsese's epic (in length, not in biographical selection) No Direction Home (2005). Instead, this - made by someone (Haynes) passionate about their subject, and how that subject (Dylan) fits into an overall thematic preoccupation - sort of assumes a common ground between subject matter and audience. I think the sort of people who might be fascinated by the aforementioned Mirror, and the self-contained masterpieces of Julio Medem (Lovers of the Arctic Circle or Sex and Lucia) will be thoroughly captivated by the worlds-within-worlds on show here... one character (Richard Gere as Dylan at his most mysterious and forbidden, during his Basement Tapes years with The Band in Woodstock) reflects late on that life is like having the past, the present and the future together all in the same room; and the film very much plays out like that. It's very liberating, very experimental, and it's not just the narrative - Haynes's visual and audio aesthetic matches this invigorating, challenging need to both leap out and perform and yet create some sort of coherent universe.

Ultimately, I was taken in by it. It's funny at times and extremely poignant at others - though that latter point may depend, I suppose, on certain memories by which you connect to Dylan's music. There's a scene early on, for instance, in which Dylan (a black boy called Woody) performs "When the Ship Comes In", and I started crying out of nowhere. It's a terrific song to begin with, but there's some sort of humbling tone in this film throughout - I was very much reminded of, inspired by and moved by its sense of mortality. Most mainstream cinema is an example of excessive escapism in which people are made to believe the grand illusion that life is immortal, that good forever conquers evil and what goes round comes round. But this film dispenses (like Dylan) of all that, of all those clichéd, common-ground morals that Cinema itself has taught us to believe as true and representative of reality.

I could write more (especially on the Dylan aspects), but just thinking about the film in retrospect is exhausting me. It's by no means a perfect film (whatever that means), but it struck as strong a chord with me as Fincher's Zodiac did in the summer - that film requires a rewatch, but for now, Haynes's film reigns supreme as Best Film of the Year.

I'll be seeing it again.

Thanks Capo. I, for one thought it was more a biography of sorts of Dylan. From what you've described it sounds like, although aspects of Dylan's life are portrayed, that the film itself covers the atmosphere (historic and/or cultural) of that particular period of his life.

You mentioned Blanchett's portrayal (btw, how was her performance?), but how about the others who portrayed him?. I assume they all played Dylan at different ages. Also, at what stage of his life, or in what year did this film end? Current day?

Thanks for, as usual, such an in depth review, even if you feel there is so much more to say.

TIS

NATIONAL TREASURE (2004) - **

Years ago, I remembered when this project was in development hell for Bruckheimer, and when it had a nice premise: Modern treasure hunters find out about the lost and buried "National Treasure" gold of the Founding Fathers, used during the American Revolution to help bankroll the successful insurgency against the British. Simple but interesting.

Then comes THE DA VINCI CODE, and NATIONAL TREASURE gets greenlighted with a more complicated goof-up: That same American gold was simply part of, and belongs to thousands of years worth of treasure accumulated by the Knights Templar and the Masons or whatever stupid nonsense.

I could ask futile questions of how such great treasure cared for then promptly was forgotten and lost deep down below New York City, or the 3-D hologram on the back of the Declaration of Independence, or of the foreign policy implications of returning prized items to countries and kingdoms that don't exist anymore.

Do the contents of the Library of Alexandria go to Egypt or to Greece? Which artifacts were Roman and are outright American? All this mess would take decades to settle, by which time the finders themselves become too old and senile to fully reap the financial windfall.

Now some of you will write of how hypocritical I am in that I gave a positive review to an equally outlandish fortune & glory-seeking popcorn picture in SAHARA, which is a fair point, since that movie had the sillyness of an assault helicopter taken down by a 19th century cannonball.

The difference though is simple. One, I bought Matthew McConaughey and Steve Zahn as adventurers and their good chemistry as partners who've had many adventures before, and would have many more after SAHARA. Second, the treasure premise is a macguffin to get the heroes involved with the realplot.

Third, I enjoyed it in spite of the insanity. I can't say the same though for NATIONAL TREASURE.

I've written before how I have never bought Nicholas Cage as an action figure, and that continues with NATIONAL TREASURE. But now, a historian? Maybe of Superman comics, but of American History? Yeah right, and I also buy Tom Cruise as a sane psychiatrist.

Then there is the fact of how the dynamics is pretty funny, with the very English Sean Bean being the dastardly villain going after the precious yankee document that is the Declaration of Independence. I know this worked with the Nazis trying to capture the Jewish Ark of the Covenant in RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK, but this is ridiculous.

Then again, it could be worse...he could have been French.

I wanted to enjoy NATIONAL TREASURE as a popcorn action ticket, but the little stuff rolled up into a giant ball of mediocrity.

There is Cage's sidekick who is pretty damn useless save for the one-liners. The ancient ice-trapped ship that explodes as a very nice orange fireball(!) and the father of the hero who doubts the existence of the treasure because the script says so.

Oh and how can I forget about the ancient wooden staircases and platforms that still operated in spite of the termites and natural decay?

Certainly the basis for a nice fun picture is there, with Jon Turtletaub's competent direction, but like 1408 earlier this year, the movie suffers because the plot is too over-developed for its own good.

Plus, I have pet peeves with pictures that alot of great actors involved, but they're wasted by doing nothing. If you have the likes of Christopher Plummer, Harvey Keitel, and Jon Voight, milk them for their worth.

Then again, Jerry Bruckheimer isn't loved in Hollywood for the quality of his productions. I'll give the man respect in that he sure knows how to make assloads of cash year after year. Now that's a real treasure chest right there.

Same here. This movie had lots of elements I like; history, suspense, a good story. The movie never realized any of the possibilities and I was disappointed in the outcome.

Yesterday afternoon i had the great pleasure of taking my godaughter and godson to see enchanted

My god daughter enjoyed it,i didnt and my godson hated it its definetly a little girls film and i can see why they would enjoy it,but i dont think i could ever bear to watch that movie again

plus i had a little black kid at the side of me that did nothing but repeat every word they said,fart every ten seconds and half through the movie,he decided it might be fun to lay on me!

Bahahahahahahaha!

Sorry, I couldn't resist. At least one of you had a good time.

Thats what i said to my auntie and uncle,she really enjoyed it so it was worth going

It's about Dylan just as much, TIS, but deals with him in such a way that, as I said, the film could be about anybody, in a way... What you get out of it depends what you're able to put in; and what you're able to put in depends on how much you know about Dylan, or how much you connect with him.

Difficult to say; I'd say it takes us up to and includes his return to folk music at the beginning of the nineties (as on the album World Gone Wrong), with "Man in the Long Black Coat" playing during Richard Gere's segments. Really, though, although I didn't find overt reference to his more contemporary stuff, Dylan's character hasn't changed all that much since the nineties (if ever), even though his public persona/mask has. I think the film tackles this, actually: the notion that, for all the different faces he's had, he's fundamentally the same person (as personified by Gere's seemingly underrated segment).

Blanchett's awesome and will be the actor by whom the film is remembered by... but that's only because the Dylan she plays also happens to be the most iconic 'face' he's had (mid-sixties, the same period covered by Pennebaker's and Scorsese's documentaries). Heath Ledger is great as the love-torn Dylan during the period of Blood on the Tracks and Desire (my favourite Dylan period); Christian Bale is as reliable as ever; young black actor Marcus Carl Franklin plays Dylan as an up-and-coming "fake" folk artist; Ben Wishaw plays a Dylan under questioning (very brief role, but his accent is spot-on, and his dialogue is witty as hell), and Richard Gere plays Dylan at his most mysterious, a role certain to perplex many.

I, for one, loved all of them. Wishaw isn't even mentioned in many of the synopses, but as he's a sort of narrator to the film (and is very good, too), I'd never discard him.

I look forward to hearing any thoughts you have on the film, TIS, once you see it.

I'm about to begin watching it. I'm excited.

Just watched "Blood in blood out"I remember growing up and watching this every weekend when I'd get home.Watched it recently and it's a fucking comedy for me now.The acting cracks me up.I found my self laughing out loud quite a few times.I also realized,it's a pretty long film also.About 3 hours.
I found it lame when they tried to portray Miklo, as a Michael Corleone type mastermind,when he sets up the prison gang war and takes out his boss.

A good movie for a laugh and if you want to kill time.I actually like the film despite how this reads.

I really have no clue where to begin or how to begin describing what I'm Not There did to me. It was just...magic I suppose. All I have to say is that if you're interested in seeing it, do not go in with any assumptions about ANYTHING. Just keep your mind clear and go in with an appreciation of Dylan. Umm, I've really just been rendered speechless by the film.

EDIT: Wait, I'll say this; This film has stretched, torn, stomped, etc. on how the story of any person's life should be portrayed on a screen.

That's it!

You, Capo, Mike Sullivan...all you guys have raved on and on about the greatness of I'M NOT THERE.

Well, now I'm convinced, DRIVEN to watch the movie now.