Western DVD Round-up 2 - By Ray

Conagher (1991)

110 mins

Directed by Raynaldo Villalobos

Based on the novel by Louis L'amour

Starring:
Sam Elliot as Conn Conagher
Katharine Ross as Evie Teale

Plot Summary from Amazon:

"Conagher is both a hard-riding actioner and a character-driven look at Western life. Katharine Ross plays Evie Teale, widowed after coming West and forced to prove her mettle in many ways. Sam Elliott plays Conagher, a cowhand who, when not tracking rustlers, drifts in and out of Evie's life. Something about that frontier woman keeps drawing him back. But can Evie ever keep him from drifting out again?"

Ray's Opinion:

Finally, a great Sam Elliot Western! I've always loved this dude but struggled to find a definitive Western that he starred in, I guess I avoided his TV Westerns thinking they would be low budget crap, but after looking at the positive reviews of Conagher I bought a copy and I'm glad I did.

Conagher is a man of few words and of high moral fibre. He is a man who always does the right thing and much of the conflict stems from this. When asked by a co-worker to turn a blindeye to some foul play, Conagher says "Take a man's money and do the job he payed me for. I don't know no other way." His good morals get him in a lot of trouble and cause much frustration for his conniving 'friend'. I think a lot of what the film is about is: What makes a man turn against their morals? After an attack on their range - when Conagher has been forced to kill a man - his old friend asks "What do you reckon it is that makes a man go to hell like that?", the young man replies bluntly "It's the money, Mr Tay." Conagher ponders this for a while and then says to himself "The money... God help us if that's all it is."

I have always been attracted to Westerns because of the whole 'loner' aspect. I love the whole concept of a man, his gun, his horse and the freedom to just drift from town to town, drinking whisky and playing cards. So I was surprised to find myself - for the first time ever - more interested in the romance aspect, which is a testament to how damn good the romance is in Conagher. Like any great screenplay that has the ability to touch you deeply there has to be a truth to it. Louis L'amour clearly understood the heart and soul of both men and woman, and it's this that struck me the most while watching. I'll admit it, I cried like a big baby at the end (it has to be the first Western to have that effect on me), the connection between Conagher and Evie was just so touching (enhanced hugely by the fact that Sam Elliot and Katharine Ross are in reality husband and wife). If the romance doesn't do it for you, don't worry, there is plenty of solid action to satisfy you (there is literally every Cowboy cliche covered - bar room brawls, long distance sharp shooting, horse chases, etcetera).

Overall I loved Conagher and can imagine myself re-watching it every few years. Sam Elliot and Katharine Ross are simply fantastic actors and are completely convincing in their parts. The children are good actors too, especially the daughter; the scene where she mourns the loss of her Father is very moving. The baddies are not painted as entirely evil - they are more conflicted and lost then anything - as a result the film manages to balance it's more romanticised aspects with a sense of reality. My only major complaint is the image quality - the picture is quite soft and the dark scenes are difficult to make out - I would love to see this film digitally remastered, but it's unlikely as it's a TV Film.

8/10

Tom Horn (1980)

Directed by William Wiard

98 mins

Starring:
Steve McQueen as Tom Horn
Linda Evans as Glendolene Kimmel
Richard Farnsworth as John C. Coble
Slim Pickens as Sheriff Sam Creedmore

Plot Summary from DVD:

"The saga of Tom Horn - a real-life "enforcer" of Old West days - held a particular fascination for another legend. Hollywood icon Steve McQueen starred in and executive-produced what would be his next-to-last movie, a gritty, exciting recreation of Horn's latter-day career in a turn-of-the-century West where gentler ways supplanted the law of the gun - and Horn would be an unwitting victim of that change. Linda Evans, Richard Farnsworth, Billy Green Bush and Slim Pickens head a strong cast in a film capturing the essence of a time when a man's word was only as good as his guns or fists. Shot on serenely beautiful Arizona locations, Tom Horn indelibly brings to life one of the West's truly unsung heroes."

Ray's Opinion:

Having just watched Conagher it was with some difficulty that I adjusted to Tom Horn - its tone couldn't be more different. It has a strange empty atmosphere - an almost dream like quality. This was Steve McQueen's second to last film before he died (in the same year it was released) from lung cancer. He was not looking too good, so they shot him almost entirely from wide and mid-shots - you will see no close-ups of McQueen's drawn and haggard face. I think this contributes to the strange mood in the film, you feel distanced from the protagonist which makes it difficult to empathise with him. Having said that, Steve McQueen was a charismatic man and is still very watchable even in his sick state.

The first thing that struck me when Tom Horn begun is "How come I haven't heard of this guy before!". This is a Cowboy who negotiated the terms of surrender with the aging Apache Chief Geronimo, won the world Championship in steer wrestling in Arizona, worked as a roving gun for the Pinkerton Detective Agency (apparently killing 17 men) and rode under Teddy Roosevelt's rough riders! His background alone makes him fascinating and this contributed greatly to holding my interest though out the film.

There are some pretty funny lines and a lot of cool moments for McQueen to shine in, yet I found the general atmosphere quite dark and depressing - but not in a good way like Unforgiven - however this is a film about a man who's going to be hung, so that's hardly a cherry subject matter. In fact it is this dark tone that makes the love interest all the stranger. The film cuts back to memories Tom Horn is having of an old lost love and I didn't feel these scenes melded very well with the buildup to his hanging. My other main peeve lay in the films structure, the first two acts are full of action - basically Horn roams around killing a hell of a lot of men - and then the third act totally shifts gear as we go through his trial for murder; a more graceful transition may have been possible.

Lastly, this film takes Tom Horn's side and suggests he was basically set-up and did not accidently shoot the boy in question. A small search in google and I found this: "Horn had been hired to kill the father, but mistook the son for him and killed him with two shots from long range. Horn was arrested after bragging about the killing to the deputy U.S. Marshall during a state of intoxication." So clearly opinions differ on Tom Horn's "hero" status.

Despite the negative aspects, Tom Horn has actually left quite an impression on me. It's just one of those films that I will need to see again some time to really decide how I feel about it. I'd still recommend it to fans of Westerns.

6/10

Read my last Western Round-up where I look at The Bravados, High Noon and The Desperate Trail.

NOTE: I have just placed an order at Amazon for Tom Selleck's recent TNT Westerns Crossfire Trail and Monte Walsh, and Sam Elliot's The Quick and the Dead (no, not the film by Sam Raimi). So expect those reviews within the next few weeks.

Last Stand at Saber River - Ray's Review

NOTE: This was going to be part of a review of three Western DVDs but I liked it so much that it deserves a full review.



Last Stand at Saber River (1997)

95 mins

Directed by Dick Lowry

Based on the novel by Elmore Leonard

Starring:
Tom Selleck as Paul Cable
Suzy Amis as Martha Cable
Haley Joel Osment as Davis Cable
Keith Carradine as Vern Kidston
David Carradine as Duane Kidston

Introduction:

We all know Tom Selleck as Magnum P.I. but do you know him as a cowboy? If you like Westerns then you are in for a treat. Any memories of Tom in Hawaii shirts vanish when you see him as a man of the old west. He is incredibly suited to the role and has made several Westerns, many of which are based on books by the famous Western writer Louis L'Amour. According to IMDb Sellecks co-starred with Sam Elliot in his first Westerns: The Sacketts (1979) and The Shadow Riders (1982) - both highly respected TV movies. He had a break from the saddle then returned in 1990 with the offbeat Western Quigly Down Under (set in Australia where he is hired to kill aborigines, but of course has a moral issue with that and ends up helping them). In 1997 he made the first of his TNT Western trilogy: Last Stand at Saber River, followed by Crossfire Trail (2001) and Monte Walsh (2003) - neither of which I've seen but they are both regarded as quality Westerns also. So it seems old Magnum P.I. has found a niche where his laid back personality and charm fit right in and based on how damn good Sabre River is I hope he stays in the saddle a while longer.

Plot Summary from IMDb:

"As America recovers from the Civil War, one man tries to put the pieces of his life back together but finds himself fighting a new battle on the frontier. Cable is an embittered Confederate soldier who returns from the war to reclaim his Arizona homestead from rebel pioneers who sympathize with the Union war effort. Desperate to rebuild the life he once knew, Cable ultimately joins forces with Vern Kidston, his Union adversary to make a last stand for the one thing worth fighting for -- his family."

The Optimist:

Having recently watched such classics as High Noon and The Bravados I was quite looking forward to a modern Western - I often find old westerns feel far too staged, the music too pompous and the costumes ridiculous (I appreciate there are many exceptions). So it came as some what of a relief to see the more realistic tone and less clean cut characters in Saber River.

From the moment they introduced Tom Selleck as Paul Cable I knew this film was going to be good. He looked and sounded the part and the mood was just right. He is not as brooding and mysterious as Clint or as puffed up and proud as John Wayne - he is his own blend of hero: laid back and charming, yet tough and intimidating all at once. He looks right at home on a horse and comes across as very efficient with guns - crucial factors if you want a believable Western hero.

Being a TV Western I thought it would be 4:3 and was pleasantly surprised that the DVD claimed to be Anamorphic, however only the menu appeared to be widescreen - the film itself is, in fact, 4:3, but thankfully it's a clear and crisp image. The sound (while not 5.1) was aggressive and well mixed. Apparently after the demise of Western films in the cinema many veteran Western directors started making TV Westerns, hence the high quality of many of them. Western films only come along occasionally now and have never again found the level of popularity they had up until the 60's (though there were still many great 70's Westerns, but they didn't attract wider audiences like in the past). My other concern was that the violence may be toned down for TV, but this was not the case either - several shotgun blasts to the chest and a man being run over by six horses attest to that.

Other than Tom's engaging performance and the classy cinematography, the next thing that stood out immediately was the action; it was incredibly well staged - I always had a sense of where the fighters were in relation to each other and was completely engrossed through out every shoot-out (unlike many westerns where it just feels like they are going through the motions, unable to elicit excitement at something we have seen so many times before). The final shoot-out has a particularly cool moment where Tom is wounded and totally outgunned. First he tries to talk his way out of it by saying "Here's the plan. You take the rifles and clear out, let's end this now". The enemie's leader shouts back "No, here's the plan. We shoot you and take the rifles." Tom sighs, looks down at his rifle and says "Fine". Then he opens a can of whoop-arse and nails most of the bunch. Sensing defeat the baddie shouts back to him again "OK, we take the rifles." It's funny, exciting and just plain classic.

A large amount of credit must go to Elmore Leonard, who's savvy dialogue adds an immense amount of coolness and humour to a fairly typical western tale. Take for example a scene where Paul Cable and his wife and children are in a bit of a pickle. They are confronted by a large group of men who have every right to kill Paul Cable for being a deserter from the civil war (though the war is practically over). When things get tense Paul Cable whips out his pistol and aims at the leader of the bunch (David Carradine - always great in a western). The leader quips "You think you can shoot us all?". Cable replies with something like "I'm gonna shoot you first and then I'm gonna shoot your friend, you care much what happens after that?". Classic!

Also worth commenting on is the great Carradine brothers. These guys always look at home in a Western (check out The Long Riders for proof of that) and their natural performances add immeasurably to the quality of Saber River. It was especially nice to see the "baddies" not being painted as black and white as they often are in Westerns and for Keith Carradine to get a chance to redeem himself and ultimately help Cable save his daughter from another - slightly unexpected - enemy.

I could go into the plot more, but the plot is not responsible for making this a good film. What makes Saber River is the strong performances, clever dialogue, great action scenes, beautiful scenery and the excellent pacing. If you like Westerns I have no doubt that you will enjoy this. I for one can't wait to check out the two westerns Tom did after this.

The Pessimist:

Suzy Amis's character Martha Cable (Tom's Wife) is a little off. She is meant to be angry at her husband for enlisting in the army and deserting his family for a little adventure, and that is understandable. When he returns - much to everyone's surprise, as he is thought dead - she is on his back right up until the end of the film. She just complains and complains and seems to have absolutety no sympathy for what he endured in the war (yet he does his best to understand what she endured in his absence). Perhaps this element worked better in the novel - I'll never know - but I found it hard to like her at all, which detracted a little from all the time he spent risking life and limb for her and his children. If I liked her more - or perhaps understood where she was coming from more - I may have cared for her survival as much as Cable did. Yet I can overlook this because ultimately things are resolved between them and it is a satisfying note to end on.

Another character which rubbed me the wrong way was David Dukes character Edward Janroe. He is the pro-War type guy and has moral issues with Paul Cable being a deserter. Inevitably they end up butting heads in a major way. After how layered the other "baddies" were, Edward Janroe just seemed a little over the top - whether it's the actor's fault or the script is debatable.

Other than the above two characters grating with me, my only other problem is it's too short! I was enjoying Paul Cable's company and didn't want to leave so soon.

Conclusion:

Last Stand at Saber River is well paced, well acted and well written. A damn fine western! Just don't go into it expecting Unforgiven or the Dollars Trilogy, Saber River's tone is nothing like those, it is much more laid back.

9/10

If you watch it and enjoy like I did, then look out for Tom's other recent Westerns Crossfire Trail and Monte Walsh. You go Tom!

Western DVD Round-up - By Ray

The Bravados (1958)

Directed by Henry King

Starring Gregory Peck


PLOT SUMMARY FROM IMDb:
"Jim Douglas has been relentlessly pursuing the four outlaws who murdered his wife, but finds them in jail about to be hanged. While he waits to witness their execution, they escape; and the townspeople enlist Douglas' aid to recapture them."

RAY'S OPINION:
Having enjoyed Peck and King's previous collaboration The Gunfighter I had fairly high hopes for The Bravados. Its premise sounded promisingly dark and overall it delivered. Peck's character Jim Douglass doesn't say much, but he doesn't have to, his eyes do all the talking. I appreciated his intensity but must say he was a little too stoic for me. Peck doesn't engage me as much as say Clint, but Peck certainly looks the part and has a formidable build. On face value the plot seems simple but in fact it is quite unusual and you will probably be surprised by the ending - which helps to make it stand out from the crowd.

Good Points:

Some beautiful scenery.

Dark, brooding tone.

Moral ambiguity.

Twist ending.

Bad Points:

Religious aspect may annoy some viewers.

Some silly costumes (particularly for the lead lady Joan Collins).

Average action scenes.

7/10

Hign Noon (1952)

Directed by Fred Zinneman

Starring Gary Cooper

PLOT SUMMARY FROM IMDb:
"A retiring lawman about to leave town with his new bride seeks allies among the fearful townspeople when an outlaw he put in prison returns with his gang to take revenge in this classic western."

RAY'S OPINION:
I have been meaning to see this classic for a long, long time and I'm glad I did. While not blowing me away as I'd hoped, I was still fairly involved, all thanks to Gary Cooper. This is the first time I have seen a Gary Cooper film and he made me a fan quickly. He is an incredibly emotive actor who totally engaged me from his first moment on screen. After being dumped by the woman he married minutes earlier, our hero spends almost the entire film strolling around his little town trying to enlist help to deal with an outlaw from his past and basically gets laughed at and ignored by the very people he has protected for many years. It's all about "doing the right thing" and he seems to be the only guy around with any honour. You could easily swap the guns for swords and you'd have a classic Samurai film. Also of note is that the film plays out in real-time, constantly cutting to clocks as noon approaches increasing the tension as things just get worse and worse for our unsupported hero.

Good points:

Gary Cooper plays a great "sensitive hero".

Real-time pacing.

The film has a memorable look, very sparse.

Good shoot-out at the end.

Grace Kelly and Katy Jurado are babes!

Bad Points:

It's not widescreen (it was never shot in widescreen, so it's not the DVD's fault).

The pompous score detracts from the atmosphere.

I can't take Lloyd Bridges seriously after Hot Shots.

It could be considered a little lacking in action by some (nothing really happens until the very end).

8/10

The Desperate Trail (1995)

Directed by P.J. Pesce

Starring Sam Elliot

PLOT SUMMARY FROM IMDb:
"After years of suffering under her abusive husband, Sarah decides to no longer take any humiliation or battery - and kills him. For that, Marshal Speakes - her father in law - sentences her to the Gallows. During a failed hold-up on the coach she escapes - but Jack Cooper manages to snatch away the transported $2500 from her, which she would have needed to start a new life. So she follows him to get it back. Soon they have to team up against the Marshal, who wants her dead so badly, he doesn't mind breaking the law himself..."

RAY'S OPINION:
I really like Sam Elliot and he was the only reason I checked this TV Western out (don't worry it's in widescreen). Unlike his other westerns he plays the bad guy in this one and he's quite intimidating. I enjoyed The Desperate Trail overall and thought some of the action was well above average for a TV film, the only real weakness is the lead male actor Craig Sheffer - I have no idea who he is (a glance at his profile on IMDb shows he has been in a lot of crappy films), he looks like a strange mix of Christian Slater and Bill Paxton, but minus the talent and brandishing one of the ugliest moustaches in screen history! It was good to see a Western where a woman isn't just there to be saved by a man and actually gets to do some shooting (though she does have to be saved a few times too).

Good Points:

Sam Elliot rules as a baddie!

Well shot action scenes.

Looks very cinematic for a TV film.

Bad Points:

Average acting other than Sam Elliot.

Not enough Sam Elliot!

Forgettable plot.

6/10 - But it's still worth seeing if you're a big Western fan.




STAY TUNED FOR ANOTHER WESTERN ROUND-UP WHERE I WILL LOOK AT:

Last Stand at Sabre River (starring Tom Selleck).

Conagher (starring Sam Elliot).

Tom Horn (starring Steve McQueen).

The Machinist - Ray's Review

The Machinist
2004
102 mins

Directed by Brad Anderson
Written by Scott Kosar

Starring:
Christian Bale as Trevor Reznik
Jennifer Jason Leigh as Stevie
Michael Ironside as Miller
Aitana Sanchez-Gijon as Marie
John Sharian as Ivan

Intro:

Before he made Batman Christian Bale went on a diet and made The Machinist. Directed by the fairly unknown Brad Anderson (Session 9) and written by Scott Kosar (The Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2003), this is a dark tale about an insomniac called Trevor Reznik, a man who hasn't slept in a year and is slowly going insane... or is he? The Machinist has been likened to Memento meets Fightclub and I guess that is a fairly accurate comparison. I did feel confused at times (much like in Fightclub and Memento) but this film isn't nearly as slick as Memento or as hip as Fightclub. It's not trying to be either which is why I like it so much.

The Optimist:

The Machinist could be considered a companion piece of sorts to American Psycho - perhaps Bale will make a third psycho themed film to complete a psycho trilogy? This film is nothing like American Psycho in any way except that it deals with a man who has major mental issues, but as a case study of someone losing the plot it is no less powerful (having said that, if I had to pick a favourite it would still easily be American Psycho, possibly because it is so funny and far less dreary).

The Machinist is not a particularly cinematic film, it is clearly low budget and appears to be filmed on video (at least that's how it looked in the theatre I went to). The look of the film is very washed out - in fact it almost appeared to be black and white at times. The cinematography creates a strong brooding atmosphere, yet is never particularly dynamic. The music complements the visuals well.

Don't go into this expecting a traditional thriller. This is more of a mindfuck in the vein of a David Lynch film. You will be confused and angry at times but that's the point - this film puts you firmly into the shoes of Trevor Reznic, a man falling apart at the seams. As a result you feel Trevor's emotions as if they are happening to you - creating a very intimate atmosphere.

The thing that most people seem to talk about in relation to this film is all the weight Bale lost for it. Yes it is disturbing seeing him look like this - he really does look like he is starving to death and at times he is truly quite disgusting to look at. It definitely adds a creep factor to the film, but it also makes you pity him more which helps one to empathise a little more with a character who is fairly unlikable.

One thing I was worried about as I watched this was that it may be like some dumb artsy films which have no clear cut resolution and just meander pointlessly to some vague - and apparently deep - conclusion. Thankfully this was not the case, as much as the film is ambiguous and scrambled it is actually heading somewhere and the resolution I found to be quite fascinating, if a little lackluster. But as I've said, this film is not trying to blow you away and that's what I admire about it.

Overall I liked The Machinist because of it's strong atmosphere, it's non-linear structure and the central, riveting performance by Bale - aptly supported by seasoned actors Jennifer Jason Leigh and Michael Ironside. This is a film that knows what it is and tells its tale confidently and thoroughly - though it may not ultimately go in the direction you expect.

The Pessimist:

The intimate, intensely personal style of the film could be considered quite claustrophobic by some. At times I found myself feeling like I needed a little breather as the gloomy atmosphere got to me, but can that really be considered a bad thing when it appears to be the filmmakers intention anyway? I think they wanted me to feel what Trevor feels - discomfort, confusion and sadness - and they succeeded.

This is a film full of symbolism and hints to the stories true nature. While it is cool seeing all these clues scattered around, at times I found it distracted me from the central plot. I could have done with perhaps a little less symbolism, but then the film may not have worked. I'd have to see it a second time (now that I know where it is heading) and see if it needs all the breadcrumbs.

Ivan the bald headed mystery man drove me crazy with his toothy grins and cackling laugh. Enough with the bloody laugh man! I get it, he is a creepy dude, enough already! Move on!

I am of two minds about the ending. In some ways I admire that it has a credible ending rather then some over the top shock ending, but it may seem quite anticlimactic to some. If you are a savvy viewer and you have some idea of where it is heading it shouldn't be a let down - it wasn't for me anyway.

Conclusion:

The Machinist is a lean film which knows what it is and knows how to manipulate the audience without being condescending or relying on cheap gimmicks. It is an intimate and dark tale about a sad, sad man on the edge of sanity, who is unable to reach out for the help he so desperately needs. If that sounds interesting to you then you will probably enjoy it, if that sounds depressing and awful to you then... well you know where I'm heading.

7/10

SIDE NOTE: I found The Machinist quite similar to Fear X starring John Turturro, but unlike that pretentious David Lynch wannabe The Machinist didn't cop out and give us the "what the fuck?" ending, it actually had something tangible to say. Though I guess you can always argue that in life things aren't always clear cut and perhaps that's what Fear X was getting at? Personally I like endings that I can actually grasp, call me simple if you will.

Sin City - Ray's Review

Frank Miller's Sin City
2005
124 mins

Based on the graphic novels by Frank Miller
Shot and Cut by Robert Rodriguez
Directed by Frank Miller and Robert Rodriguez
Special Guest Director - Quentin Tarantino

Starring:
Mickey Rourke - Marv
Bruce Willis - Hartigan
Clive Owen - Dwight
Benecio Del Toro - Jackie Boy
Jessica Alba - Nancy Callahan
Nick Stahl - Roark Jnr/Yellow Bastard
and many, many more!

Intro:

Up until now I felt Robert Rodriguez was an extremely overrated filmmaker. People seem to be fixated on his ability to shoot things fast and cheap. While he is a multi-talented and enthusiastic film maker I never felt this necessarily translated into very good films. Don't get me wrong, I think the guy is great and loved his book Rebel without a crew. I just think his films so far haven't delivered the goods.

El Mariachi (1992) was made on a tiny budget (he raised the money being a lab rat in Mexico!) and put Rodriguez on the Hollywood fast track. He has an impressive ability to stretch a tiny budget a long way, possibly helped by his extremely likable personality - hell, he talked the Mexican police into giving him their guns for use in El Mariachi!

In 1995 he made Desperado, essentially a big budget remake of El Mariachi. I recall being very excited by the advertising for this film. The posters and trailers made it look just too cool for school, but when I finally saw it I was disappointed. The first half hour or so was brilliant. The characters were strong and shoot-outs in the bar were very well staged, but then when the other Mariachis turned up to give Banderas a hand, the film fell apart. I don't believe Rodiguez possessed the skill to stage the larger scale actions scenes at that point in his career.

From Dusk till Dawn and The Faculty were OK, but still weren't as good as I thought Rodriguez was capable of. Don't even get me started on the Spy Kids franchise. I've watched all three and I just don't feel he captured the magic that good children's films have, not to mention they get more and more messy as he goes on. Spy Kids 3D was just plain awful, the 3D was painful to watch and the plot was utter crap. I understand I'm not the target audience in this case so I'll let it slip. However, he has no excuse for the absolute disaster of a film Once Upon a Time in Mexico (how dare he allude to Sergio Leone's classic films). I thought the action was a step back from what he did with Desperado and the plot was just a bloody mess. When it was over I turned to my friend in the theatre and we just went "huh?".

I always knew Rodriguez was a talented dude I just felt he never really knocked one out of the park... until now that is. Sin City is an absolute blast and is far and away the best thing he has ever done.

The Optimist:

Watching Sin City is a unique experience. It is like nothing else I have ever seen. That alone makes this a film worth seeing in these days of crap sequels, remakes of crap TV shows and crap American remakes of Japanese horror films.

The other thing that stood out to me the most, other than the incredible visual style was the level of sex and violence. It was so fricken awesome seeing a film with some damn balls for once! It reminded me of why I watch so many films from the 80's, when it was OK to show tits for no reason and to beat the living crap out of people for our amusement.

I felt refreshed and inspired after Sin City, something I haven't felt for quite some time. It also gave me that feeling that great action films give you - you walk out of the theatre feeling like you could just kick all kinds of arse, last time I felt like that was after the first Matrix.

As you know the film is based on a series of gritty graphic novels by Frank Miller. Rodriguez convinced Frank Miller to make these into films by showing him a small demo, proving that capturing the cartoon look is possible with todays technology. Frank was obviously happy with the demo and a partnership was formed (in fact Rodiguez had to leave the directors guild of America so that he could co-direct this film with Frank Miller). Sin City has been described by some as a "panel translation", as in they have literally translated each panel from the cartoon into a live action scene, retaining the same composition and design as the graphic novels. No other cartoon to film translation has ever been this accurate.

The film tells three different stories which overlap one another slightly. The first and best is the tale of Marv (Mickey Rourke). A massive hulk of a man who is framed for the murder of a beautiful hooker and who exacts his revenge in a series of incredibly violent encounters. Rourke - even under masses of make-up - manages to make Marv an incredibly likable guy, even when he's grinding someone's face on the road while driving. I found myself captivated by his commanding performance, helped no end by all the other great actors. Carla Gugino (Spy Kids) plays Marv's parole officer and all I can say is hot damn! Her nude scenes are something else, who knew this woman had such curves. I will never look at her in Spy Kids the same way ever again! I don't want to spoil anything but it's safe to say Elijah Woods ain't playing no cute little hobbit in this film, he is one sick mofo!

The second and weakest tale stars Clive Owen (from King Arthur), Benicio Del Toro and Rosario Dawson (Alexander). This is another story in the vein of a noir revenge and I found it too similar to the first tale (but I'll talk about that later). Basically he gets mixed up in a war between hookers, the Police and the mob. Needless to say things get very ugly fast. You will see a lot of gorgeous woman playing scantly clad hookers in this and believe me, it's the icing on the cake of something already so visually alluring.
The third story is about Bruce Willis's character Hartigan, an aging cop close to retirement who gets framed for the rape of a small child whom he tried to save from a sick pedophile killer. After eight years in prison he is released and you guessed it, excessive amounts of fantastically over-the-top violence ensues. Even more sexiness arrives in the form of the now grown up little girl played by Jessica Alba - how many babes can one film have?

This is a difficult film to discuss as I don't want to give away any of the great moments, but believe me this film is absolutely packed with memorable scenes and vivid characters - not to mention it's very funny in places too. You will be shocked, sickened, scared and excited all at once. Oh my, what a great feeling.

The Pessimist:

As I said above, the second chapter in this bloody opus failed to impress me as much as Marv's tale. For me, it didn't have enough to distinguish itself from the first story. As a result Clive Owen's character just seemed like a less exciting version of Marv. Britney Murphy has the uncanny ability to pull me out of the movie experience and remind me none of it is real - also I didn't think she was 'on the same page' as the other actors, effectively ruining the scenes she was in (which thankfully weren't too many).

As much as I love film violence, I did find myself becoming a little immune to it's effect by the end, but that's hardly a big problem. If you are the wimpy type you will definitely not appreciate the face mashing, dismemberment and penis ripping (yes, you heard me right). One's got to have a stomach for this level of depravity and it will certainly put off some people.

Sin City didn't really feel like a traditional film. It felt like three short films combined. As a result it's not quite as fulfilling as traditionally structured action films.

I'm searching for negatives here and coming up blank. For whatever failings this film has , they are so outweighed by the sheer amount of inspiration and love that's gone into it, that it's impossible not to come out impressed.

Conclusion:

If you miss the balls of 80's films (lots of nudity and violence) and are bored with generic Hollywood films, Sin City should feel like a breath of fresh air. It's inventive, daring and an absolute original (if you don't count it's noir influences). However, if you are easily offended this film is clearly going to upset you. It is full of unrelenting violence and makes absolutely no apologies for it. I say, good on them. Oh and if you liked it you have something to be happy about - they are currently working on the script for Sin City 2.

9/10

Previous reviews by Ray:

The Island

Land of the Dead

Batman Begins

War of the Worlds

Fantastic 4

The Island - Ray's Review

The Island
2005
136 mins

Directed by Michael Bay
Written by Caspian Tredwell-Owen

Starring:
Ewan McGregor as Lincoln Six Echo/Tom Lincoln
Scarlett Johansson as Jordon Two Delta/Sarah Jordan
Sean Bean as Merrick
Steve Buscemi as McCord
Djimon Hounsou as Albert Laurent

Intro:

[If you don't know the plot of this film and intead on seeing it, do not read this review. The less you know going in the better. I can assure you, if you like big, fun (and semi-intelligent) blockbusters you will have a great time with this flick.]

I'd like to avoid spoiling the plot for you but then that would be difficult considering the studio has already managed to give away pretty much everything in the promotion of The Island. This is a shame as it detracted from several key plot points in what- on a pure entertainment level - is my favourite blockbuster film of the year so far.

The Optimist:

Many reviewers have spoken of this really being two films in one. The slow, thoughtful sci-fi first half followed by the blow-up-everything second half. While the second half is clearly running at a different tempo to the first half I in no way found this to be a bad thing. The two halves are not opposed to one another, they merely create contrast. It's called having a build up to the action and it works.

The first half (or thereabouts) is set in a sterile futuristic facility where the inhabitants all wear white and believe they have been saved from the 'contaminated' outside world. Lincoln Six Echo's (Ewan) day starts with the computer noting that he had a disturbed REM sleep and needs to go to some type of mental evaluation at 0800 hours. He then urinates and high levels of sodium (or something) are detected and his diet is adjusted accordingly. It's all very fascinating and I found myself captivated by the whole scenario even if I did already know it was some dodgy cloning facility thanks to the damn trailer! It would have been so much more effective going into this film with no knowledge of the plot.

The inhabitants of this facility are encouraged to play nice "A healthy person is a happy person" the disembodied voice tells them. We learn they are educated to the level of fifteen year olds. The one thing they all hope for is to win the lottery so they can go to the island - the last natural refuge on earth (apparently) that is free of contamination. Jordon Two Delta (Scarlett) wins the lottery on the same day that the curious Lincoln Six Echo (Ewan) discovers the facilities big dirty secret. Then it's action time as Lincoln and Jordon are hunted down in the real world by incompetent mercenaries, hired by the facilities head doctor Merrick (played by the reliably evil Sean Bean).

The Island was made for something like 120 million and has absolutely tanked at the box office - it's already been knocked back to 10th place after only 3 weeks and has made little over 30 million (a disaster by Hollywood standards). I feel bad for Michael Bay. No I really do. While I'm not a fan of Bad Boys, Armageddon or Pearl Harbour I enjoyed The Rock and can appreciate his skill at on screen destructive mayhem. This is his best film to date and the most fun I've had at the cinema this year. It is rated at 40% at Rotten Tomatoes (with 96 negative reviews and 63 positive) and that is just not fair! Even without the solid sci-fi build-up the action set-pieces alone elevate this film to a level way above other over-rated sci-fi films like Minority Report and War of the Worlds. I was literally ducking for cover and smiling like a crazy bastard during Bay's scenes of destruction. He totally blew me away! Just wait for the highway chase followed by the scene on the high rise - it is pure action bliss.

And then there is Scarlett Johansson. Oh my goodness. I am in love. She really doesn't have much to do in this film other then stand around looking hot, but damn does she do a good job! I'm not one to usually be excited by Hollywood starlets but Scarlett is the exception. I found myself so drawn to her that at times I realised I was neither listening to the characters or following the plot in any capacity. Can you blame me?



Ewan found his eyes kept drifting downwards uncontrollably.


Good points:

Two likable and attractive leads.

Great sci-fi build up to an outrageous series of action scenes that will blow you away!

Solid supporting characters by Steve Buscemi and Michael Clarke Duncan.

Very slick look with great cinematography.

Pumping soundtrack that compliments the on-screen action admirably.

A plausible and fairly well developed sci-fi plot.

Excellent blend of practical and CGI effects.

Ewan McGregor acting opposite himself is a hoot!

The Pessimist:

Even in a film that you have thoroughly enjoyed one always has the capacity to tear it to shreds. So with that in mind...

I can sympathize to a certain degree with many reviewers that it is somewhat of a letdown when the smarter side of the story is pushed aside in favour of the action. As much as I loved the action-pursuit, another side of me was missing the slow thoughtful build up. But I can live with it seeing as the action was so damn good. If the action had been weak (like Minority Report for example) this would have been far less forgivable.

Casting Sean Bean as the baddie is just a dumb move. It means you instantly know that he is not what he seems. Using a less type cast actor would have meant we'd have some element of surprise when he turns nasty. Also I felt like his performance was a little too by-the-numbers for my liking. A more complex baddie could have improved things considerably. Still, Sean Bean is always an amiable fellow, even when portraying an antagonist.

Steve Buscemi's character McCord- while very funny and well played - was an exposition tool. He was there to give plot information to the audience and to the lead characters. I felt some of his scenes could have been a bit less 'on the nose'. Subtle, is not how I would describe the screenwriter's skill at scattering exposition. But I have to hand it to the screenwriter, Buscemi did have some great lines. I particularly liked this exchange between the naive Lincoln and the world weary McCord:

Lincoln Six Echo: Who is "God"?
McCord: You know when you really want something, you close your eyes and wish for it really hard? God is the guy that ignores you.

Scarlett Johansson's character was great eye candy for sure, but you could have practically removed her from the film, tweaked the script a little and you would have never known there had once been a romantic side kick.

Even if you hadn't seen the trailers it would not have been hard for one to guess most the major plot points. It is a fairly predictable film, but I didn't feel that detracted much from my enjoyment and I fail to imagine how I would have injected more originality into what is a very well worn sci-fi story.

The military team hired to capture/kill Lincoln and Jordon are laughably incompetent. These guys can't drive, shoot or fight to save themselves! As for their leader played by the intense black dude Djimon Hounsou. What can I say? His character arc was contrived, sudden, predictable and unnecessary. But these baddie characters come with the territory.

The ending was unfulfilling. It felt sudden and unresolved. Helped in no way by how big and fun the middle action scenes were, the ending seemed a little pedestrian as a result.

Overall, The Island is a great example of a huge Hollywood film and I recommend it highly. If you can forgive the shift in emphasis from the sci-fi to the action then you should have a good time at the movies. But if you are the type to scrutinize the scientific aspects of a sci-fi film you better look elsewhere. Personally I'm looking forward to owning the DVD.

8/10

And for your viewing pleasure gentleman:

Land of the Dead - Ray's Review

George A. Romero's Land of the Dead
2005
93 mins

Written and Directed by George A. Romero

Starring:
Simon Baker as Riley
John Leguizamo as Cholo
Dennis Hopper as Kaufman
Asia Argento as Slack

Intro:

As I kid I loved gore flicks. Peter Jackson's Bad Taste was where my love began and Land of the Dead marks the end of that love affair. Watching LOTD I realised no matter how good the plot, characters, effects or anything tried to be (emphasis on tried) I am just over zombies and gore films in general (but I can't make that an absolute rule, there is an outside chance an exceptional horror flick may still excite me sometime). I just needed to clarify this before I delve in. My attitude towards this genre that I once loved has shifted, I feel so utterly desensitised to the 'horror' on screen that I am unable to be effected by it any longer. So with that in mind let's get on with it.

The Optimist:

George A. Romero can basically be credited with creating the zombie genre, or perhaps that's over simplifying things. Of course other zombie films existed before his landmark black and white 1968 film Night of the Living Dead, but Romero made the genre incredibly popular and begun a trend in film that is obviously still going strong (as evidenced by the success of 28 Days, the Dawn of the Dead remake and Shaun of the Dead).

Land of the Dead is part 4 in his 'dead' series. As I mentioned it all started with Night of the Living Dead (1968) in which a few people utilise a house as their last defense against the undead. Then in 1978 (exactly a decade later) he made Dawn of the Dead in which people survive by holding out in a mall instead of a house. People talk about all the underlying themes like Romero's jab at consumerism (such as the image of the brain dead zombies walking repeatedly into glass, trying to get into the mall - obviously a jab at mindless shoppers buying crap they don't need). But Romero's 'social commentary' never felt very relevant to me. Maybe all the flesh eating and exploding heads distracted me from how deep it really was?

In 1985 Romero made Day of the Dead which was set in a military style bunker in which basically all the same stuff happens - a bunch of misfits band together to survive. They run around making stupid mistakes and kill a few zombies when they get their act together. I always thought these films were really dumb but that never distracted me from the sheer visceral thrill I got watching all these grotesque things taking place. I was totally fascinated and couldn't get enough of it. Which leads me to Land of the Dead. Romero meant to make this in the 90's (one zombie film for each decade you see) but only just got it together now (due to the resurgence in popularity of the genre), to be frank I really don't know why he bothered. I'm really struggling to come up with good points here now in 'The Optimist' section. For me the only good points in these films were the special make-up effects and now that I am totally desensitised to the gore there is nothing left except some low-budget, crappy Mad Max type film without a strong male lead (like Mel Gibson) and without any really good action.

Come on Ray, list some good points you rambling fool! Right, OK... good points. Ummmm.

Asia Argento (who plays the heroine called Slack) is hot. See:


One thing I did like and that I consider to be the only really new concept in Romero's screenplay is that the zombies are learning to be human again. Such as the main zombie character who used to pump gas and stands around at a gas station fiddling with the pump, unable to fully grasp what exactly he used to do. He ends up learning how to use a machine gun (through firing it accidentally) which leads to other zombies imitating him and using weapons too. This is a cool development that adds some depth to the film, but it's too little too late.

I can tell Romero is trying to make some comment on the state of the world (such as thousands of people dying needless deaths in pointless wars), but having a character say something like "This isn't war, this is slaughter!" after killing countless, defenceless zombies feels out of context with all the gratuitous gore. Is this genre really the place to comment on the state of the world?

The main story of rich folks living some luxury lifestyle in a high rise while all the scumbag humans live in a shitty wasteland is meant to resonate on some deeper level too I think, but didn't work for me either. It just didn't make much sense. How did they have all these luxury items when the world is overrun with the living dead? Where did they continue to get all this stuff from (and no, showing some characters raiding a supermarket and getting a truck full of cans does not convince that this luxury lifestyle would be sustainable). Also why wouldn't all the 'scumbag' humans attack and destroy this luxury high rise out of pure resentment? It's not like they have much to live for anyway, so why not make life suck for the privileged folks too? The luxury high rise building was protected by a big electric fence - am I meant to believe this and a few guards would keep thousands of people out?

OK Ray... settle down and try to list a few good points. Ready?

The zombies coming out of the water was very cool visually.

The bit where Dennis Hooper said "Zombies man, they creep me out!" was laugh-out-loud funny.

Did I mention Asia Argento is hot? For those of you who don't know, she is the daughter of Italian horror film director Dario Argento (Suspiria).

A few of the kills were pretty inventive (such as the flip-top head dangling from a flap of skin).

The Pessimist:

Simon Baker (the Australian actor from The Shield) is apparently the main hero in this film. Well at least that appears to be the role he is attempting to fill. I don't know if it's the script or him but he is neither commanding nor charismatic.

'Let's get Dennis Hopper to play another bad guy role'. Yay how inspired! Seriously why? There are so many newer, better actors that could have filled this role, but I guess he did lend some credibility to the cast even if he is mainly relegated to direct to video films these days.

Fancy special effects are not enough to get by on. This film needed characters that I cared about and these generic, quasi futuristic tough guys and gals sucked! I'm sorry, I'm usually more literate and constructive with character descriptions but these actors were all so crappy that I am overwhelmed with mediocre descriptions such as 'sucked' and 'crappy' (maybe I'm being a bit harsh, John Leguizamo was pretty entertaining - even if he was doing his usual schtick).

The 'Dead Reckoning' truck was meant to be cool. It was just like the armoured truck at the end of Clint Eastwood's The Gauntlet, except it could shoot fire works. The characters all looked embarrassed when they had to refer to it by it's full name, as opposed to saying 'the truck' as you probably would in real life.

The 'deep' commentary about the pointless deaths of humans and social hierarchy was contrived and simplistic.

There is no grand scale to the film. You have no sense that the zombie thing is happening on a world scale. Just a few shots of other countries filled with zombies could have helped (but obviously their budget was restrictive).

Let's put things in perspective. The remake of Dawn of the Dead was better than this as a sheer horror experience. Shaun of the Dead handled the social commentary aspect more skillfully. Peter Jackson's zombie masterpiece Braindead (aka Dead Alive) is both scarier and funnier, and it came out 13 years ago! Sorry Mr Romero but your disciples have learnt from your mistakes and have raced ahead leaving you in the dust!

LOTD is not a bad film, it is merely an adequate continuation of the series, nothing more, nothing less. If you grew up on horror films they probably have a special place in your heart and you should see LOTD as you will appreciate how far special effects have come and will enjoy some of the inventive kills. But if like me, you used to love horror films but are now desensitised to gore in general, avoid it, it has nothing substantial to add to the zombie genre and you will be under whelmed and bored like I was.

[But hey, I'm a minority on my poor rating. LOTD has a 73% 'fresh' rating at RottenTomatoes.com - where they take hundreds of reviews into consideration and come out with an overall rating.]

6/10

Ray's Top 50 Arcade Games - Part 2 of 2

Now I will list my remaining 25 favourite Arcade Games:



Ninja Spirit (1988)
Action Platformer
What better game to start the second half of my Top 50 Arcade Games with than another Ninja game! This one is very good though. It could be considered as a sequel to Legend of Kage as it feels quite similar. You can swap between various weapons during play which is a nice touch.




Pacland (1984)
Platformer
This is Pacman's only Arcade platformer outing to the best of my knowledge and what a change of scene for him. Maybe I was just a sucker for the colourful graphics when I was a kid but I played this quite a bit. Basically you need to get across town which means avoiding all the ghosts and leaping over swimming pools (with the help of small diving boards). The weird thing in this game is that you continuously tap the joystick in the direction you want to go in, strange at first but you get used to it.



Pang (1989)
Puzzle
This was quite popular when it came out. Simply destroy all the bouncing balls but watch out because when they are hit they split up into many smaller balls. The trick is to handle things one ball at a time otherwise there will be so many balls on screen that you will be overwhelmed by balls. I like balls.




Puzzle Bobble 2 (1995)
Puzzle
Speaking of balls - here's some more! Another great puzzle game. Match the ball in your launcher with 2 or more of the same colour and they will explode. In 2-player mode, the more you destroy on your side the worse it gets for your opponent. This game is sort of a demented take on Tetris.



Pocket Gal (1987)
Pool
This is not the definitive pool game. You have minimal precision when taking a shot but it's not exactly a hardcore simulation of the sport. Get those balls down in sequence and then you get to see some cartoon boobies... yay! What more could you want from a game?



Rally Bike (1988)
Racing
Go fast and try to qualify, but watch that fuel or you'll never make it! This is a fun and deceivingly simple racer. Aim for the ramps and jump onto the back of the pig truck, then you can steer it and take out your opponents!



Rampage (1986)
Action
No Top Arcade Games list would be complete without this classic! Take control of a famous monster and destroy some buildings. It's simple, well designed, attractive and fun. But I'll admit, after playing through 20 or so levels it can become monotonous.




RoboCop (1987)
Action
This is one of the best (if not the best) movie tie-in arcade games. Robocop the game manages to capture the cold and brutal tone of the film perfectly. It puts samples from the film to good use - adding to its authenticity. Nice graphics and just enough level variation help you stick through to the end. Excellent music too.



Rolling Thunder (1986)
Action Platformer
It may not be from Sega but Rolling Thunder has always felt like Shinobi's gun totting half-brother to me. This game was very polished for it's time - with it's fluid animation and stylised characters. An interesting feature is the ability to select a chapter at the start effectively meaning you don't have to play through levels you have already beaten - a fairly unique feature for an arcade game. An absolutely classic soundtrack too.



Rygar (1986)
Action Platformer
Yet another great game from the 1984 - 1988 time period (I think this is the golden era for me). Rygar stood out for its strange look and even stranger baddies. The ability to shoot in several directions with your grappling hook thingie helped it stand out too, not to mention the amount of weapon upgrading available too. This is one of those games that just has a great feel to it. Watch out because it has a steep learning curve.




Shoot out (1985)
Action
Practice in the shooting range then take to the streets and open a can of whoop-arse! This game is unique in that you don't have an aiming reticle (like Cabal for example) but simply 'feel' the aiming more naturally and point in the general direction of the baddie and fire. Strange at first but quite addictive once you get the hang of it.



Smash T.V. (1990)
Shoot-em-up
Whoah... this is one crazy shoot-em-up. This stood out for 3 key reasons when it was released. Firstly the controls. Each player had two sticks, one for walking and one for shooting, which was great as it meant you could comfortably walk in one direction and fire in another. Two, its unique T.V. show scenario (with over the top presenter included - not unlike the guy from The Running Man). Lastly, the action is absolutely unrelenting and blood filled. You will have literally killed over 100 baddies within 30 seconds of play!



Snow Bros (1990)
Platformer
Apparently there is some connection between this and the much older classic Bubble Bobble (in which you capture baddies inside bubbles instead of snowballs), but this isn't a Taito game so I can't imagine there's any connection other then this essentially being a re-make. This is one of the best two-player games around and is highly addictive. Cover the baddies in snow then smash them into each other for bonuses and weapon upgrades. Fun times!



Strider (1989)
Action Platformer
From the first moment I saw Strider it was apparent that it was in a league of it's own. Everything from the graphics to the gameplay is extremely polished and inventive. If you like platformers with plenty of action you must play this!



Time Pilot (1982)
Shoot-em-up
Travel through different time periods and shoot everything down! Simple, well made and with a nice control feel - this is a classic 'must-play' from yesteryear.




Toki (1989)
Action Platformer
Let me guess. Your girlfriend has been captured and now you need to get her back? Um, yes that is the startlingly original plot of this rather average platformer. I'm not entirely sure why I played this one a lot when I was young, but I spent heaps on it so I must have had a good reason... right? Maybe I just liked being a monkey?



Truxton (1988)
Space Shooter
This was easily my favorite in the very full 'Vertical Scrolling Space Shoot-em-up' genre. For one simple reason - the weapons were the absolute coolest and biggest out of all the other contenders. A solid and fun 2-player space shooting experience. Get that blue laser gun and toast some space scum!




Neo Turf Masters (1996)
Golf
What's there to say? This is the best arcade style golf game I have ever played. Simple controls, great graphics and possibly the most annoying soundtrack of all time! If you like golf games get this now, you will not be disappointed.



Vigilante (1988)
Beat-em-up
Vigilante can be considered the sequel to one of my all time favourites Kung Fu Master. Except this is meaner, faster and harder. Madonna (WTF?) has been kidnapped and you need to get her back, so it's time to crack some skulls! Check it out if you like this genre, it's a fine specimen.




Violence Fight
One on One Beat-em-up
I would call this more of a brawler then a beat-em-up. I like how brutal the fighting is and how you are not restricted to simply walking left and right. In one of the bonus stages you have to beat up a Tiger! Funny stuff! This is sort of like a decent version of the very crappy Pit Fighter.




Wardner (1987)
Platformer
Wardner is a slow moving but attractive platformer that stood out at the time for it's atmospheric graphics and the ability to purchase upgrades and health between levels. Nothing really exceptional about it really, it's just a decent platformer.



Wonder Boy (1986)
Platformer
This game almost made it into my Top 10 as it is simply an absolute classic! I assume that your girlfriend has been kidnapped etc? Whiz along on a skateboard (if you can handle the speed) and chuck stone hammers at the natives (this game is not PC at all). An essential platformer, plain and simple.


WWF Superstars (1988)
Wrestling
What can I say? If you grew up in the 80's you watched WWF. So what could be better then actually controlling the likes of Hulk Hogan and The Ultimate Warrior? This is addictive, fun and highly amusing, nuff said.




WWF Wrestlefest (1991)
Wrestling
Just like it's predecessor except a little slower and with absolutely huge sprites! This is the bomb! Great 2-player tag-team fun!



Xain'd Sleena (1986)
Action Platformer
Possibly the strangest named game in history. Nevertheless this is a pretty cool space themed game with good level variation (you visit 5 very different planets and wipe out everything!). It also features some side scrolling action in your spaceship too. This game almost made my Top 10 until I re-played it and realised I used to have far more patience.


Well there you have it. These are the Top 50 arcade games from my youth. Some I just feel immense amounts of nostalgia for while others I still play to this very day. I hope somewhere in here you are reminded of one of your old favorites and you seek it out to re-live the glory days. One golden era of gaming has passed let's hope another one arrives soon!

Previous Top 25 Arcade Games