The Neverending Story

The Neverending Story (1984)
Director: Wolfgang Petersen

It has always been difficult for me to believe that a 10 year old is a great warrior. I'm sorry; it just doesn't ring true to me. It works on paper (it always seemed plausible in C.S. Lewis's Chronicles of Narnia books) but on screen I can never believe that a little kid can kill a shark or a dragon or in this case a giant killer wolf. Good thing this little kid came around to save this castle full of cowardly adults.

The acting was pretty bad. The kids were consistently overacting (if you ever see a kid yell in anger at a book he is reading I will give you a dollar). I found the whole ending a little disturbing too. The Childlike Empress? Holy cow was that creepy. I don't know. They were talking about this Empress the whole time, I was picturing someone statuesque, grand and regal. But it was just another kid.

If you look on the IMDB it has very high ratings. Why is that if it isn't a very good film? I would guess it is because all the viewers saw the film when they were younger and fondly remember it even though they haven't seen it since they turned 12.

I love a good fantasy film; Willow, The Princess Bride, The Wizard of Oz, and Labyrinth are great (to name a few), but this film doesn't hold a candle to those ones. I feel like a film or book should be able to appeal to kids and adults too (Pixar movies always do a very good job of this) but this movie doesn't. Kids may like this film, but if you are over the age of 9 (or a youngster with a very discerning cinematic taste) I would skip it.

My rating: 2 out of 5

Fahrenheit 9/11

Fahrenheit 9/11 (2004)
Director: Michael Moore

He sharpened his propaganda sword in "Bowling for Columbine". Then he gained 700 pounds and made "Fahrenheit 9/11". If this film carried a fraction the weight of Moore himself it would be a substantial film indeed.

"There is no terrorist threat!" That is a direct quote from Michael Moore. I swear I am not making that up!!! I have seen him on TV saying those exact words; if you have doubts check out his biography on the IMDB. They credit that quote to him as well. To be fair, I don't know whether he said that before or after 9/11 but it really doesn't matter. Either way it shows a profound disconnection with reality, and you can be sure that this film is entirely colored with the same type of rhetoric.

Here is another typical Moore quote. "The Iraqis who have risen up against the occupation are not 'insurgents' or 'terrorists' or 'The Enemy.' They are the Revolution, the Minutemen, and their numbers will grow, and they will win.'' Its almost impossible to believe he actually said that. If stupidity was a sport he would be Olympic champion. They are not insurgents or terrorists!? What are they then?!?!? If I were a terrorist and I had to pick my campaign manager, Moore would be my first pick.

What Moore is doing in this film is nothing new and its really very simple. His film uses tricks that date back even before the great Nazi propagandist Leni Riefenstahl. Moore is merely using clever editing and movie magic to completely manipulate the truth. Moore has theories but no facts to back them up; so what does he do? He goes out and completely fabricates the facts. What you as the viewer has to decide is: Do I care that Moore gets his point across, even if it's in a dishonest way? I personally don't like to be lied to; you may feel differently though.

Jean-Luc Godard the famous French filmmaker and founding member of the French new wave said of Moore: "Post-war filmmakers gave us the documentary, Rob Reiner gave us the mockumentary and Moore initiated a third genre, the crockumentary." I didn't say that; a French filmmaker did. Now if a Frenchman can see this film for what it really is, it shouldn't be a problem for any American to do the same.

Don't get me wrong, "Fahrenheit 9/11" is a pack of boldface lies and manipulations but if you know anything about filmmaking technique you will see upon closer inspection that Michael Moore is, in fact, enormously fat.

I am not saying that a strong case cannot be made against the Bush administration, I am just saying that Moore doesn't do it. This film is cleverly edited for sure; you have to give Moore credit for that. But it is not honest in any way.

I can hardly wait for "Fahrenheit 9/11 ½"

My rating: 1 out of 5

Easy Rider

Easy Rider (1969)
Director: Dennis Hopper

This is one of those movies that is on the AFI's "Top 100 films of all time" list. In my opinion that list is bogus. Only about a quarter of the films on that list deserve to be there. I don't think Easy Rider is anywhere close to one of the top 100 films of all time. Easy Rider seems fairly pointless. Billy(Dennis Hopper) and Wyatt (Peter Fonda) drive around on their choppers, pick up a hippie, and drive around some more. That sums up the first half of the film. Don't get me wrong, it isn't exactly boring, but it isn't exactly a great story either. To be honest this movie doesn't really have a story.

Dennis Hopper directed this film and the word is that he was completely stoned out of his mind. I can believe that. There is a scene at the end where the Billy and Wyatt drop some acid and go on a little trip with two hookers in a cemetary. To me it seems pretty easy to shoot an acid trip. Just shoot random stuff, cut it together randomly and voila! You have your scene. Or better yet, give the camera to a monkey. The out of focus shots and frenetic animal jerkiness will only add to the overall aesthetic of the scene. Its ok for the first 20 seconds, but anything longer than that gets monotonous.

Jack Nicholson is amazing as usual. He is so good, so convincing, and has such presence that he completely steals every scene that he is in. The other actors are good too in their own ways; Dennis Hopper made me laugh several times, but then again watching stoned guys do stupid things will usually make you laugh anyway.

The cinematography is very good. László Kovács does good work and he captures the scenery very well. God knows there is plenty of time for that during the course of the movie. There is a little incongruity towards the end when they try to match 16mm footage with the rest of the 35mm film, but other than that the picture is good. There are some weird things done with the editing that I didn't really understand or care for. There is a reoccuring theme of stuttering images before cutting to a new scene. It kind of seems like a film student experiment that was left in the film accidently.

I'll bet this movie was great back in the days of hippies and woodstock, but now it just comes off flat. It does give some insight into that time period, but there are many other better films that can do the same thing and tell you a story at the same time.

My rating: 2 out of 5

Kundun

Kundun (1997)
Director: Martin Scorsese

Even though he is very hit or miss, I always try to keep an open mind while watching a Scorsese movie...but HOLY BORING MOVIES BATMAN!!!! I think I would have to qualify this as the most boring movie I've ever seen. And I've seen a lot of movies.

This movie was sort of a biography of the 14th Dalai Lama and his dealings with the Chinese oppression of Tibet. At about 1h 40min this film begins to get marginally interesting, but by then it is just too late. If you can't interest your audience in the first hour and a half then your film has problems.

One of the problems with this film is that it showed a lot of traditions, ceremonies, rituals etc. In the beginning I thought, well this is fine they will explain it all later. They did not. Any time you are seeing something on screen that is confusing but will never be explained...skip it. Just don't bother. One of Scorsese strengths is that he focuses on detail. In this case though it turned against him. Sure, these are the ceremonies they perform in Tibet but you have to know when more detail is important and when it is just boring and superfluous.

There were some amazing shots in the film. I always liked Roger Deakins cinematography and he is one of the few things that make this film even tolerable. There is an absolutely brilliant shot revealing the Dalai Lama standing in the middle of a mass of dead bodies.

I did learn a little history. Before this movie I knew nothing about the Dalai Lama, Tibet, the Chinese oppression, etc. I know a little now, but not enough to make the movie worth watching. It is interesting to note that after this film was released Scorsese was banned from ever entering Tibet.

I really wish I hadn't watched this movie. I lost 2 hours of my life to boredom and I'll never get that back.

My Rating: 2 out of 5