Oct 091999
 
2.5 reels

A plotless, all singing episode of South Park, where the boys, their parents, school teachers, and even Satan, sing about the joy of the Christmas season.  22 min.

Yet another South Park Christmas episode, and creators Matt Stone and Trey Parker have hit a dry spell.  There’s a few clever ideas mixed in with some uninspired routines and a few bombs.  Over all, it comes out better than even.

The host is Mr. Hanky the Christmas Poo; the “talking poo” didn’t have enough comedy potential for one episode.  As this is the third where Mr. Hanky makes an appearance, it is just rundown filler.  As for the songs he introduces, some are standards while others were written for the show.  They are:

  • Mr. Hankey the Christmas Poo (Postman & Choir)
  • Dreidel, Dreidel, Dreidel (Kyle, Cartman, Stan, parents)
  • Oh, Tannenbaum (Hitler)
  • Satan sings “Christmas in Hell (Satan)
  • Carol of the Bells (Mr. Mackey)
  • O Holy Night (Cartman)
  • Merry Fucking Christmas (Mr. Garrison)
  • I Saw Three Ships (Shelley Marsh)
  • Christmas Medley (Jesus and St. Nick)
  • Have Yourself a Merry Little Christmas (Mr. Hankey and company)

The first and the last are a bust (unless you are still cracking up on the idea of talking poo) and the Shelley joke is worth about 10 seconds of time, but takes longer.  Mr. Garrison’s Merry Fucking Christmas, which attempts to insult every non-Christian, tries too hard to be shocking, and relies on the impact of saying “Merry Fucking Christmas” over and over.  Most of the others are worth a smile, though not much more, except for Jesus and Santa’s Christmas Medley, which is one of the episodes smartest segments (they trade songs about themselves back and forth till Santa finds he’s run out), and Christmas in Hell, which is prime South Park.  It could offend people (check out who’s in Hell), is really funny, and is actually a pretty good song.   You just might find yourself humming this one afterwards, which should get you kicked out of Grandma’s proper Christmas celebration.

All of the songs, along with a few others, appear on the Mr. Hankey’s Christmas Classics album, but I wouldn’t want to listen to Satan’s happy holiday number without seeing him decking the halls of hell.

Oct 091999
 
four reels

Philip J. Fry (voice: Billy West) is depressed because he’s away from his family at Christmas and because the holiday (now pronounced “ex mass”) has changed so much in a thousand years.  Now, Santa Claus is a highly armed robot that punishes the naughty, and he considers almost everyone naughty.  When Fry learns how sad Leela (voice: Katey Sagal) is at Xmastime because she’s an orphan, he feels guilty and goes out to buy her a present, ignoring that he needs to be in before sunset when Santa Claus starts his killing.

In 1999, with The Simpsons past its prime, creator Matt Groening turned his more creative impulses toward a new series, Futurama.  This frantic cartoon followed a slacker who was accidentally frozen for a thousand years, wakes, and becomes a delivery boy for a senile scientist.

Xmas Story is an excellent example of this off kilter show.  Fry, as always, makes one stupid move after another.  While trying to find a gift for Leela, he ends up at a pet store, and can’t decide between a high-end bird, and five hundred stink lizards.  (“Girls like swarms of lizards right?”).  Fry’s best friend, the amoral robot Bender, steals from robot bums, orphans, and old ladies.  And the hundred-plus-year-old scientist shows that he’s not influenced by now-defunct notions of modesty.

The jokes come fast and non-stop.  Most of them are pretty funny, but if you don’t like one, wait a second and there will be something new.  The humor leaps all over the board, from topical to character-driven, and from slapstick to wit.

While Xmas Story, with it’s executioner Santa (“Your mistletoe is no match to my Tow missile!”) can stand on its own better than the average episode, explaining who the characters are and what has happened to the world, it works better if you know the series.

Oct 081999
 
two reels

Another version of the Dickens’ story in which cruel Ebenezer Scrooge (Patrick Stewart)  learns the meaning of Christmas from three spirits.

Quick Review: A garden-variety re-telling of A Christmas Carol, there are no huge mistakes, but also nothing to make it more than average.  The sets look a bit too much like a sound stage, but are acceptable.  The supporting cast does a fine job, but none of the members are worth recalling after the final credits roll.  The fx for the ghosts are glitzier than in most other versions (are there any big budget versions of A Christmas Carol?), but don’t make them scarier or more captivating.  Patrick Stewart plays Scrooge without any originality or humor, and with little drama.  It’s a Scrooge that it is impossible to care about.  Stewart transforms the character’s cruelty and self-involvement into stiffness, with few facial expressions and a nearly monotone delivery (he yells from time to time, but it would be nice if volume wasn’t the only change in his voice).  Again, this doesn’t make Stewart a horrible Scrooge, just an uninteresting one.  If this uninspired A Christmas Carol was the only one, I’d recommend it, but it isn’t.

Back to Ghost StoriesBack to Christmas

Oct 081999
 
three reels

Godzilla is back, and out-of-work scientist and partial comic-relief, Professor Yuji Shinoda and his daughter, calling themselves the Godzilla Prediction Network, want to study him.  They drive up and down the coast, joined by a full comic-relief reporter, because that’s how you study a giant monster.  Meanwhile, the head of a government crisis agency takes an ancient meteorite out of the sea, which comes to life in sunlight.  The alien wants Godzilla’s regenerating cells so that it can become a giant monster.  Is it any surprise that Godzilla isn’t going to let that happen without a fight, or that the scientists and military commanders aren’t going to do anything significant?

Yes, the big lizard is back, in the first movie of his third series of Toho produced films.  He’s big, he’s green (he’d always been gray), and he’s doing the same stuff he’s done so many times before: stomping on buildings and tussling with an alien.  There’s nothing new here.  The script could have been made with a scissors, paste, and five or six scripts from earlier films.  Godzilla appears.  He destroys some things, then disappears for awhile.  A reporter runs around trying to get the big story while a kid acts twice his/her age and a scientist does several things of no importance.  An alien spaceship appears and people try to deal with it non-violently before they remember that aliens are always evil.  Then an extraterrestrial monster (or a local one under alien control) starts destroying Tokyo just a little worse than Godzilla would.  Multiple missile attacks have no effect, leaving the big beasts to fight it out while the humans do color commentary.

Yes, it’s all been done before, but this time, it’s done a little better.  The effects are snazzier, the acting is less amateurish, the child is less annoying, the buildings and military vehicles are far more realistic, the monster fights are cooler, and the story…well, the story isn’t any stupider.  As a meaningless, fun Godzilla movie, this is one of the best.

Toho had killed off their star critter in 1995’s Godzilla vs. Destroyah, turning the reins over to Roland Emmerich and Dean Devlin for a big budget Hollywood take.  But they didn’t like the results, nor did diehard fans.  By some accounts, Toho made this movie as a response to the outcry, but other statements claim Toho was always planning to take back their lizard.  Whatever the motivation (I’ll guess money), the studio made a new rubber suit, and once again started from scratch, dumping the previous twenty-two movies.  All we’re told is that Godzilla is a radioactive monster that visits Japan from time to time to cause havoc.  From there they take off with no concern for contradictions.

Watching this brings back the kind of joy I felt as a young child when I first saw Godzilla vs. The Thing.  It’s joy with reservations, but it’s hard not to smile.  The cause of the reservations?  Poor acting, horrible characterizations, and way too much time spent with humans running about.  There’s little good to be found when the monsters are off stage, but that’s been true of almost every Godzilla film.  This time the main problems come in the stiffness of the “villain,” and the fact that the hero’s point of view is indefensible, yet we’re supposed to agree with it.  The villain is given that title because he wants to kill Godzilla while Shinoda wants him alive.  Ummmm.  You know, if an enormous monster was squashing my friends and loved ones time after time, I’d want it dead too.  To make the viewer side with the hero, we see no deaths.  None.  Zero.  One person falls off a building at the end (but we don’t see it).  But I’ve got an imagination.  I can picture all those people being splattered or fried, and kept hoping Shinoda would be next.

Away from the speaking characters, things are generally in good shape.  The addition of  CGI helps, giving Godzilla 2000 the best effects in a Japanese Godzilla film to date, even if they are uneven.  The flying saucer often looks like a cartoon, but that’s a small quip.  Godzilla’s opponent has the best design of a new monster since Ghidorah.  Is it coincidence that he resembles Gamera (a flying turtle whose films are made by a competing studio) mixed with the American Godzilla?

For a change, the dubbing doesn’t harm the picture because the English lines are penned with a sense of humor.  Dialog from classic American pictures pops up when the flick needs a boost.  It’s always a good idea to steal from Dr. Strangelove.

If you’ve never seen one of the Big-G’s films, then this isn’t the place to start.  If you’ve seen a few and hate them (and they weren’t all the late ’60s/early ’70s disasters), this isn’t going to change your mind.  But if you’ve liked any of them, then you’ll enjoy the green guy’s rebirth.

Oct 061999
 
two reels

After receiving the rosary of a deeply spiritual priest as a gift from her globetrotting mother, a Pittsburg woman (Patricia Arquette) begins bleeding from her wrists and taking on the other torments of Jesus. A scientist-priest (Gabriel Byrne) is sent by the Vatican to investigate, not knowing that Rome’s interest is only to keep an ancient secret.

Biblical horror films have a troubling theology in general, but in Stigmata, it’s just weird. Apparently, priests can possess people and the effect is much the same as if demons did the possessing. The girl is possessed by a priest who in turn has the Holy Spirit in him, and it really sucks. She suffers. She screams. She is tortured by having nails driven through her wrists and ankles, thorns imbedded in her head, and she is whipped, and this is somehow a good thing. How, exactly, is this any better than what Regan goes through in The Exorcist?

To go with the odd behavior of God, there is the odd behavior of the Catholic Church. Not only is it suppressing the true word of Jesus, but every miracle on the planet (couldn’t a church gain power by using those miracles?). I can’t fault the acting, and while a bit too MTV, the film looks good. I kept waiting for it all to come to something, something interesting and original. But it doesn’t come to anything at all. The girl suffers, and then stops. The great secret comes to nothing. The peculiar similarity between receiving the Holy Spirit and being possessed by a demon comes to nothing. This is a well-made film, that runs for a while, and then stops. To say it is unsatisfying is an understatement. The way it was headed, it looked like God was going to be the villain, which would give the church a pretty good reason for keeping his real gospel a secret. But I guess messing with God is still taboo. I just hope the God of Stigmata doesn’t bless me; I couldn’t stand the pain.

Oct 051999
 
one reel

A sequel to 1992’s Universal Soldier, ex-cyborg soldier, Luc Deveraux (Jean-Claude Van Damme), must stop the next generation of powerful “Unisols” and the renegade computer (Michael Jai White) that leads them.

Stating my bias clearly: there are no good Van Damme movies.  But a few of them don’t completely suck.  A few are fun.  This isn’t one of those.  I don’t expect brilliant acting, deep themes, or a complex plot in any kick-boxing movie.  I realize I need to approach it with lesser expectations: excitement, acting that is a touch above painfully bad, a plot that doesn’t distract with its incredible stupidity.  Maybe a touch of humor.  But none of those are evident here.

There is fight after fight, all without purpose or vitality.  Van Damme, who could pull off an emotionally empty dead man in the first film cannot handle this one’s limited acting requirements.  And that brings up another little problem.  I like my sequels to link up with their predecessors.  In the earlier film, Luc was dead.  Now, he’s alive.  I think that kind of change deserves an explanation.  As for the plot, SETH needs Luc alive to enter a code that only he knows, or a self destruct will take out the computer.  SETH knows this and says it repeatedly.  Then he attempts to kill Luc.  Then he mentions needing him.  Then he has Luc shot at.  Is SETH supposed to be an absentminded computer?

There’s also the whole problem of the Unisols, who are made from human bodies, standing up to explosions and fire, and then dying when expedient for the plot.  The last fight with  Michael Jai White is pretty good, but one decent fight in a martial arts film is a bit low.

 Cyberpunk, Reviews Tagged with:
Oct 051999
 
four reels

Hannon Fuller (Armin Mueller-Stahl) has created a virtual reality world too well. The computer generated people in it think, feel, and care.  Fuller, who has been entering the “simulation” to enjoy the highlife, leaves a note for his friend and employee, Douglas Hall (Craig Bierko), with a VR bartender, and then is murdered in the real world. With the police suspecting Douglas of the crime, he must find the note.

Timing is everything. A year earlier and everyone would have been saying how innovative The Thirteenth Floor was. A year later, they would have been saying how derivative. But The Thirteenth Floor came out the same year as the The Matrix so few even noticed it (also the same year as eXistenZ, but it was swamped in The Matrix’s wake as well). At that time, the ideas in it were unusual enough that critics stated it was complex and confusing. Now, the complaint is that it’s too simple and predictable. It is neither, but it shows how one movie can change society’s perspective.

So, what is it? It is a beautifully filmed, well acted mystery that asks: What is the essence of a person? How different would you be if your environment were different? And how important are the things you do in life?  These aren’t the same questions brought up by The Matrix, but the VR wrapping is similar. Craig Bierko mixes charm, desperation, and menace to make Douglas Hall. He is a more interesting character than his counterpoints in the other VR films of ’99, but then he better be as this is a more character driven film.  Bierko, whose Timothy in The Long Kiss Goodnight was one of the great villains of the ’90s, pulls off the difficult role with ’40s style and a millennium cynicism. He rarely gets the acclaim or the roles he deserves and I would love to see more of him in substantive parts.

The Thirteenth Floor has undergone a great deal of criticism from people who thought it would, or should, be The Matrix B. If that is your expectation, you’re in for a disappointment. There aren’t huge super-powered fight scenes.  But if you want an intelligent film that carefully develops both its characters and its concepts, and leaves you something to think about, you’ll want The Thirteenth Floor. Buy it and keep it on your shelf next to that copy of The Matrix, but don’t watch them as a double feature.

 Cyberpunk, Reviews Tagged with:
Oct 041999
 
five reels

Two groups of treasure-seeking archeologists awaken the mummy of Imhotep.  The creature seeks to resurrect his ancient love by sacrificing a beautiful librarian and only an American adventurer and his comrades can save her and the world.

Quick Review: Blade and The Mummy began a new movement, adventure films masquerading as horror.  In each, a classic monster type is given a new veneer.  Frights are almost non-existant, but one-liners abound, as do exciting fight scenes, beautiful sets, and big budget FX.  Costumes are as important as the plot and it isn’t uncommon for characters to stop to pose.  Other films in the movement include Blade II, The Mummy Returns, Resident Evil, Underworld, and Van Helsing.  What is surprising is how good several of these films are.

The Mummy, which owes far more to Raiders of the Lost Arc than to its 1932 namesake, works on every level.  Brendan Fraser is properly heroic, romantic, and glib.  Rachel Weisz displays innocence and sexuality, fulfilling the film’s requirement of a girl to be rescued while also being a modern woman.  John Hannah is funny as the sidekick (and how often are sidekicks actually funny?) and the monster is impressive, both as actor Arnold Vosloo and as CGI.  The Mummy is spectacle, with impressive art direction, and a dramatic, orientalist score by Jerry Goldsmith.  There’s a few questionable plot points, but nothing that interrupts the flow of the film.  This is what Saturday afternoon at the movies is all about.

 Mummies, Reviews Tagged with:
Oct 041999
 
one reel

Tsukiko is a regular girl with amnesia.  She doesn’t worry much about the loss of her memories, but she’s none-to-happy about her bouts of insomnia, so she’s started visiting a laconic hypnotherapist who’s office looks suspiciously like a quickly built and non-dressed set.  In a trance, Tsukiko repeats the name “Tomie,” which is the summoning call for Detective Exposition.  He’s been obsessing about a closed case and questions the doctor by giving out far more information than he gets.  For no particular reason, he explains that Tsukiko wasn’t in a car wreck, but really conspired with classmates and her teacher to kill a girl named “Tomie” who’d swiped her boyfriend.  Even though no body was found, everyone turned themselves in and were promptly sent to an asylum.  Tsukiko was released to wallow in her repressed memories and the wacky teacher has recently escaped.  With his job of stating everything the movie wasn’t showing done, the detective takes off, never suspecting that the teacher has taken the apartment below Tsukiko and carries a living severed head that’s growing itself a new body.  But wait, there’s more.  After nothing happens for a while, Detective Exposition reappears to giveaway the rest of the story.  He believes that Tomie has been killed many times (because hey, if two victims have the same name, they must be the same person) and is really a demon that drives all men insane with desire and jealousy.  Eventually, they either kill for her or kill her.  If the second, she just regenerates and repeats.  Again, with his job of telling way too much completed, he’s off to do nothing more of consequence.

Have I given away too much of the plot?  You’d think so, but Tomie tosses all this out early just to make sure there’s not a speck of mystery or suspense.

Tomie is the first film in a series that numbers eight and growing.  They all were inspired by a manga, which makes some sense because this first film couldn’t inspire a poorly focused Polaroid.  Paced to match a wounded snail, Tomie isn’t surprising, shocking, exciting, frightening, or interesting.  It isn’t even shot well.  It’s hardly a movie.  It’s people talking about a movie.

The concept is intriguing: A beautiful girl drives all men crazy until one murders her.  This amuses her and she comes back to do it again.  Think what a good movie could do with that.  A confused girl could try to uncover the mystery while her friends begin to kill each other.  Great stuff, but none of that’s here.  There’s no mystery.  Nada.  Nor does any character ever discover anything.  It’s all just dropped in our laps.  Instead of action or plot and character development, we get to see Tsukiko riding her bike and taking a few pictures.  Then she smokes a cigarette with her doctor.  Then there’s some more bike riding.  Oh, did I skip that she ate dinner after taking some more pictures?  Yes, that kind of riotous entertainment just keeps coming.  Tsukiko and company also chat.  They don’t discuss things relevant to murders and an undying succubus.  Nope, they just chat.  That is except for the detective, one of the worse characters in recent Asian cinema.  I kept expecting him to do something important to progress the story.  But he has no part in the tale.  He shows up to tell us what the film should have shown us, and that’s it.  He doesn’t catch Tomie or deal with Tsukiko.  He never even sees them.

For Occidental viewers, the pathetic subtitles add another layer of incompetence.  I doubt the people involved had a thorough understanding of English.  At least this creates one way to have fun with the movie: guessing what the proper words should have been.

Tomie has an above average, horror-movie concept, but nothing else.

Oct 031999
 
five reels

Ichabod Crane (Johnny Depp) is sent to Sleepy Hollow to investigate a series of murders.  There he discovers secret plots, a beautiful girl (Christina Ricci), and stories of a headless horseman (Christopher Walken).  But the horseman isn’t a legend, but a ghost, and he has more heads to chop off before he’s done.

Quick Review: With any Tim Burton film, it is a competition between his poor sense of plotting, lackluster climaxes, and on-and-off casting with his innovative production design, beautiful art direction, and lush, dreamlike cinematography.  When the first wins, he gives us Planet of the Apes.  When the second, Sleepy Hollow.

Nothing in Sleepy Hollow looks real, nor does it look fake.  It is a bewitching world a step or two sideways from our own where even a beheading looks elegant.  The sky is forever overcast, tinting everything a radiant blue-black, not the gray we would expect.  Nothing is ugly and the grotesque is alluring.  This is a great picture to look at.  The story is surprisingly intriguing, and if it falls into a simple Hollywood finale, at least it’s been a ride.  Johnny Depp and Christina Ricci have no chemistry together, and the script gives no reason to accept the required romance between the asexual Ichabod and the overly soft spoken Katrina, but both are good on their own, as delicate statues in Burton’s strange world.

I suppose this is a horror film.  There’s plenty of gore, violence, and ghosts and witches.  There’s even a few scares for the young or easily rattled.  But this feels like a gentle fantasy, a little gothic in nature, that makes a repulsive setting look inviting.  If only I had Burton’s eye when I look around me.

Oct 021999
 
two reels

American Jack Woods (Randy Quaid) travels to a village in Ireland to buy up property, and falls in love with local girl Kathleen Fitzpatrick (Orla Brady).  He also saves the leprechaun king,  Seamus Muldoon (Colm Meaney).  While Jack and Kathleen begin a stormy relationship, Mickey (Daniel Betts), the son of the leprechaun king, and Princess Jessica (Caroline Carver), the daughter of the trooping faerie king (Roger Daltrey), are reenacting Romeo and Juliet.  Although The Grand Banshee (Whoopi Goldberg) warns of dread consequences to nature, the two groups go to war.

I have the same thought when watching any of the too few leprechaun movies that exists: it isn’t very good, but its all we’ve got for St. Patrick’s Day.  The Magical Legend of the Leprechauns is overlong, silly instead of funny, saccharine instead of romantic, and routine instead of exciting.  But you can only watch Darby O’Gill and the Little People so many times, and it isn’t all that good either.  So, until someone makes five or six good movies for the holiday, this will have to do.

Going for a non-hip, 1950s-era family audience, there are some touching moments.  The story of the two fae lovers works, although it follows the plot of Romeo and Juliet point by point.  They are likable and a fair amount of sympathy is built for them.  While too generic to carry the entire show, they are charming for their portion.  Unfortunately, as they are part of a dramatic romance, much of the slapstick and broad (though not funny) comedy undercuts any emotions their situation invokes.

Randy Quaid is believable as an everyman.  It is odd he doesn’t play this kind of part more often.  However, he has little chemistry with Orla Brady.  Why should these two get together?  Well, she’s beautiful and there aren’t many other options available in the area for her.  I guess those are reasons, but not ones to get me involved in their plight.

Colm Meaney makes an acceptable leprechaun, although his King Muldoon isn’t substantially different than the standard rogue he’s played in multiple films.  The rest of the actors are woefully miscast.  Daltrey (once the lead singer for The Who), purses his lips and speaks with the kind of puffed up bluster that children manage when imitating people they don’t like.  It is embarrassing.  The extraordinarily non-Irish Whoopi Goldberg (who doesn’t attempt an accent to everyone’s relief) does her wise Guinan routine from Star Trek, and I can’t think of anyway she could have been less like a Celtic spirit.  However, I’m sure screenplay and directing had more to do with their pathetic performances than their abilities.

The special effects do their job, but nothing more and have no “wow” factor.  The expansive Irish hills and fields (filmed in England) look attractive so if you want a travel log (to the wrong country), this will suffice.

The Magical Legend of the Leprechauns strikes the wrong note.  It needed to drop the drama and insert some honestly funny moments, or pull back on all of the absurdities, and give us an action-adventure fantasy.  As it is, I can’t imagine who it could satisfy.  But, in a supply and demand world, there is still a place for it in mid-March.

 Holiday Films, Reviews Tagged with:
Sep 271999
 
one reel

With his sister hanging on the Christmas tree, the Angry Kid (voice: Darren Walsh) is filmed giving the Queen’s traditional Christmas address, but he can’t get it right.  2 min.

The Angry Kid series of short-shorts have gotten a wide distribution via the Internet.  While you can pay for them (a DVD is available), I doubt anyone would have seen them (or seen more than one) if they weren’t easy to get for free.  At a cost of nothing, they are still overpriced.

Created at Aardman studios, which is also responsible for Wallace and Gromit, Angry Kid displays none of the wit of its more famous cousin.  The animation technique is interesting (involving live actors with ever-changing masks filmed in stop motion), but without a script, or a funny joke, technique doesn’t mean much.

Queen’s Speech is below average for the series.  The Kid flubs his lines in various ways while sitting on a couch.  That’s all there is to it.  Running under two minutes, it somehow manages to drag.  There are better things to spend zero dollars on.