Updates, reviews, and more ... oh my!

Oh, where to begin? I know it has been awhile. (You know, it seems like I start almost every blog with that lately ... or not so lately, as it goes.)

Here's what you missed on Teej's Life:

Teresa's living in Bemidji, Mn, at her friend Sarah's house (for now) and working at Lueken's Villiage Foods North as a Cashier/Bagger/Service Counter/Bookkeeper, or as she likes to call it FESA (Front End Super Associate). She's making fair money, but with all the bills she has to pay, she's not actually making much ... oh well, that's life. In February, a boy that she kinda liked at work got her some flowers, and they started dating soon after. She met his family, and he's met hers, and no one got hurt, so that's good. For as little actual time as they have been together, they're pretty serious about each other, and it's a for sure that sometime down the line there will be wedding bells. Speaking of wedding bells - they are pealing, but they're for Teresa's sister, Stephanie, who will be marrying Christopher Manikowski on May 28th. Teresa is a bridesmaid, and she was asked to make a speech at the reception. She's crazy nervous about that, and has no idea what to say - suggestions, anyone?? Coming up soon, Teresa will be starting work at the Paul Bunyan Playhouse for the summer (which she has done for the last 6 years), but this might be her final year, and she's starting off the summer more than a little disappointed at taking a step backward in her job as she won't be able to Stage Manage a show this time. Major bummer, but what can you do? Despite that, the summer looks like it is going to be amazing.

And now you are caught up. At least, I think you are.

Here is where I insert a review of sorts - something to deflect from me for a little while:

The Fast and the Furious (all 5 ... yes, all 5!) So, I didn't think I was going to like these at all. Really. I am not all that into cars (mostly because I know NOTHING about what makes a car awesome. I mean it, when it comes to cars, all I know is how good the body looks :S) But, Ahren is really into cars and these movies, so I thought: what the hell, why not? Well, they aren't all that bad, actually. There is a story there. Nothing drastic or dramatic, but entertaining. Design is pretty great, considering most everything is about the cars. Although I will say this: the type of people they portray as being into cars are almost all alike: sluts and gangstas. At least, all but the actual main characters themselves. I was more than a little turned off by that kind of thing. But, it's a guy movie, so what did I expect? Booty shorts, cleavage, cars, muscles, and money. Anything I miss? Hmm - don't think so. That aside, I did enjoy the movies. I wouldn't watch them everyday, but once in a while. Acting wise: it's okay. Least Favorite: I would have to go with ... okay that one is actually tricky. I don't think I have a least favorite. They all kinda fall into a : 'meh' catagory. Just there, okay, but nothing amazing. However my Favorite: by far, number 5. No kidding, this movie is GREAT (as far as these movies go). It's like 'Ocean's 11' meets street racing, add a little bit of 'The Untouchables' and some of 'The Fugitive' combined with 'Rambo'. Seriously, I know that is a lot to take in, but trust me, when you see it, you'll get what I mean. #5 is by far the best. I loved it! And if you go to see it in the theatres, stick around - don't leave as soon as the actual movie is over, you'll miss a little bomb they drop on you. Totally caught me and Ahren off guard. Overall, the collection gets about a 3 1/2, but the last movie alone gets a 5 star salute from me.

On to other things: How about this: Ahren. Yeah, things are GREAT. I can't even begin to describe how good things are between us. After the summer is over we are going to be moving in together somewhere. Probably an apartment in town (for work sake). We've grown so close so quickly. I am completely in love with him. And, although sometimes I have to pinch myself over this, he is in love with me. I can not believe my luck. I don't deserve this, I know it. But I know that love is a gift from God, and I am treasuring it, and doing my best to deserve it. We're completely devoted to each other, without being overwhelming. We've gotten past the overtly giddy stage (almost. I mean, there are still times when he walks into the room and I get this ridiculous smile on my face), and now we're just utterly comfortable with each other. We've gotten approval from both our immediate families. Come Steph's wedding, he is going to be meeting a lot of my elongated family, and I couldn't be more excited about that. We're just waiting for the summer to begin. Just being able to get out more, and we both get to introduce each other to our passions: Cars for him, and theatre for me - and what is even better: we're both excited for that. I can not wait for him to take me to our first dirt track race, and he actually wants to jump right in and help out at the playhouse. I'm so lucky. He is the greatest thing to happen to me. He's always there when I need him, and most of the time, he is always there when I just want him to be there - and he doesn't mind that. Last night, I was feeling terrible, and he stopped over after work. He just came in, gave me a kiss and a hug and stayed with me. We cuddled together - something he actually doesn't mind at all - and there we were, just in each other's arms. It was bliss. Pretty much every day with him is.

Okay, okay, enough gushing, I guess. Just so you know, I could say so much more. :D

Other thing: health. Going through some problems again. Same thing as before: some gallbladder problems. Can't eat after a certain time, can't eat a lot, lost a lot of my appetite. But this time, I had Ahren. No, I am not back to gushing, I'm serious. His dad went through problems with his gallbladder, and Ahren shared some suggestions. Papya. Apparently it is great for your digestive system. Enzyme tablets after every meal, and juice occassionally. It's not a miracle worker, but it certain helps A LOT! I'll look forward to when this starts to go away again. It's more under control than it was before. but it's still there. Another small thing Ahren introduced me to: the hot towel. No kidding, I didn't think about this before. I don't have a heating pad, and I needed one the other night, so Ahren grabbed my towel and threw it in the dryer for a little while. Oh My Gosh, it was AMAZING! So soothing,. Eased my tense muscles and the pain. Didn't end it, but certainly allowed me to relax a lot more. So, word to the wise: hot towels do wonders.

Shoot ... I had a lot more to say. But time is running out and I have to get ready for work. More on that later, I am sure.

Sorry to leave you so soon! But, hopefully I will come back soon with a better post that is less update, and more current substance.

Love and Hugs!

Teej

review: Way Down East

Apparently this movie is a 1935 remake of an earlier, silent film by DW Griffith. This is one of those "lost treasure unknowns" It's sweet, sad, and melodramatic.

But it is still good. This is one of, if not the earliest leading roles Fonda had - and he is wonderful.

Story: a young woman turns up at a small town farm looking for work. Despite some reservations, the family takes her on as a houseworker. Slowly but surely the son falls in love with the girl. But she has a dark past - and it is haunting her.

I was surprised by the seriousness of some of the issues in this film. Overall, it was a little corny - kinda sentimental (but in my world, that is not a bad thing) - still it did make its moral views known. A little too plainly. The forgiveness lesson was almost too much for me, but it made a point, and I could never fault a movie (or anything) for making such an important point.

The acting was okay - again, a little on the corny side at times, but oh well. Some of the photography was nice, but nothing spectacular.

Overall, a nice little film.

3 and 1/2 stars

review: The Sorcerer's Apprentice

Interesting. Not the best movie I have ever seen - but not the worst. I guess I am easy to please sometimes, but I did like this movie a lot. Maybe it was the company. But I do think this movie can stand on its own.

Yes, there were some"Really?" moments, all movies are bound to have some. But it was entertaining, and I needed something I didn't have to analyze too much.

Best parts: (PLOT SPOILER a little) The use of the original Sorcerer's Apprentice music and concept from Fantasia. I was going to be incredibly disappointed if that was not used - and not used well. The other great moment was realizing that the Morganians was Abigale Williams. BRILLIANT!

It's fun, its Nicholas Cage, its a little corny, it's magical, its sweet, and it's Disney. Everything you would expect is in those words.

One thing I will say about Cage: even though he has become a type, he is a type well. He's a good enough actor to not take everything too seriously, and therefore, he will take some of these kinda corny roles and throw his persona into it. He's legit and I totally respect him. Not to mention, that even if his movies can be a little corny, they, again, are entertaining.

3 and 1/2 stars.

review: The Ringer

I will admit, I expected to hate this movie. And I did at first. Johnny Knoxville is not exactly a person I admire on principal - and it takes a little while to get to the good parts of the movie. So, my best advice is just to stick it out. You'll be kinda glad you did.

The story is far fetched, but most comedies are. Knoxville plays a man named Steve who desperately needs to make some money. He enters somewhat reluctantly into a hairbrained scheme with his crazy uncle to fix the Special Olympics. Pretending to be "Johnny" he enters the compitition. Long story made short: there is a girl, a counselor of sorts, he is found out by some of his other competitors, and they decide to help him.

You don't watch this movie for the romance, the acting, or the meaning. You watch it because of the writing. There are some hilarious one liners in there. Its one of those incredibly quotable movies - "Ice Cream? When the f*^#k did we get Ice Cream?"
I give it a solid 3 and 1/2 stars.

review: 2012

Hmmm.
The jury is still kind of out on this film right now. Hopefully by the end of this blog I will be able to give it a proper rating.
The plot is rather obvious. It starts about 2009 and with a couple of quick flashes through the years you learn that the government is preparing for something. Of course, you have an idea what it is. This is where science and prophecy meet. The Mayan calender predicts an event of cataclysmic proportions. We learn that this is true because the sun is putting off exra ... waves (don't ask me what kind) This is causing our core to heat up, which is causing something a lot like a land shift. The earth is essentially exploding on itself.
Obviously there are a lot of different stories weaved into this - as with all disaster movies. The main focus is on a down and out writer and his family - estranged wife, son, and daughter, as well as his wife's new boyfriend. But we also are introduced to the scientist who brought the problem to the attention of the government (it is worth to note that he is NOT the person who first discovered the problem though - I thought that was a nice change up) Add a couple of politicians, a freak, a religious man, and their families and you have the general core of characters.
I liked the movie. It isn't something I would want to own, but I would watch it at a friend's house or on tv once in a while. Acting is pretty good. I'm a sucker for John Cusack, I am. There wasn't any really fantastic performances, though. Good, adequate, but nothing mind blowing.
The plot - while typical had some good points. It started off kind of slow. The first wave of disaster was detached somehow. It was more spectacular than I really cared for. However, I will say that I understand why it was that way. The ending half of the movie is incredibly emotionally charged. So, I think the first wave of city destruction was designed to be more for the wonder aspect than for a feeling for all the suffering. It also held the concentration of the family, which made sense too.
There were some cheap shots though, in the plot, and at one point I did start thinking - when are they going to reinvent the pattern? Why is there always a good scientist, a dirty politician, a bad man who somewhat redeems himself in the very end - and why, why, is the main family always somewhat broken? I'd like to see something different.
Still and all, it was pretty good, and there was some amazing camera work. Obviously, a lot of special effects were used - and it was pretty effective. I was on the edge of my seat for a lot of it. I was most intrigued by watching the different types of people dealing with the end of the world crisis.
You know what bothered me the most? It has nothing to do with the movie, though, so pardon the hiatus here. I was watching it with Barry - who has a big problem with organized religion. Okay, fine, that is his beliefs, and I respect that. But I got really irritated when they showed the Vatican and he cheered the destruction. I got mad really. And I feel bad that I did, because there was no reason to. But it bothered me that he could only see the Church as false hope. It really bothered me. It was not the time to have a religious discussion, and I am the last person who should even get into such a discussion. I am not a good Christian, and I know little about world religions - but I wanted so badly to make him understand. I know every religion has its downfalls, and too often people use religion as an excuse for intolerence (which makes me SO MAD). Religion is there to comfort people - to guide them - to teach them to be good. Organized religion is simply a community of believers. It is simply a group of people who agree and who worship together. It is a beautiful thing really. I'm not Catholic and I don't believe exactly as they do, but I respect their faith - and watching the symbol of that faith crumble is powerful and sad. It is just as sad to see a Jewish temple bombed or guards having to stand outside a Mosque. I wish I could get him to understand - but I don't want to be disrespectful to him, so I say nothing.
Back to the movie: I think I have made a decision.
3 and 1/2 out of 5 stars - borderline on 4 stars.
I recommend it for at least a one time watch.

Review: Rooster Cogburn (& the Lady)

Wow. John Wayne and Katherine Hepburn. Wow.
I'm buyist, but I love it. I've seen bits and pieces of this, but never the full thing. I'm glad I did too. And there is nothing like watching a John Wayne film with my Daddy.
So, the first thing I noticed was a bit of a similarity between this and The African Queen. Just a few generalarities in the plotline. This movie is a sequal to the Oscar-winning, True Grit.
It was recieved ... moderately at the box office and critics didn't think too much of it, but it is a nice film. There are several moments which are quite funny. Hepburn and Wayne are both wonderful, but there is something missing from this movie.
Still, it is quite fun. A good watch, although I don't think it is one I would see over and over and over again. It's definately a "once in a while" movie.
I'd have to say - 3 and 1/2 out of 5 stars

review: The Bride Came C.O.D.

That was cute. I love screwball comedies. They take the edge off a day and are just fun entertainment.
This one is about an heiress (Bette Davis) who makes a rather rash decision fly to Las Vegas to elope with a man she has only known for 4 days. Much to the detriment of her father (Eugene Pallette). The pilot for the couple (James Cagney) convinces her father to hire him to bring the girl to Amirillo, unmarried, for the price of $10/lb - which will about cover the overdue amount left on the plane he owns. So he kidnaps her - but because of her wild antics, they crash by a ghost town with only one occupant (Harry Davenport).
It is quite delightful. Screwball comedies are not Cagney or Davis' strong points, but they are both delightful in this. Best part of the movie is a rather difficult car ride, and watching Cagney react to it.
It's nothing amazing, but a whole lot of fun :D
3 and 1/2 out of 5 stars

review: My Boy Jack

I can not stop crying. It seems like with each war movie I see, I become more and more anti-war. I know that sometimes it is neccessary, but it is also senseless.

That aside, this is an amazing movie. It is like All Quiet on the Western in the fact that it tackles the disillusionment with romantic war notions. It is about the Kipling family just before and in the beginning of WWI. Rudyard Kipling (David Haig) was a very outspoken in support of the upcoming war. He doesn't bully his son, Jack (Daniel Radcliffe), but he certainly drives his son to join. The problem is that Jack is very nearsighted. After several attempts, Kipling manages to pull some strings and get Jack accepted. He goes and becomes a leader, then is sent to war. I will go ahead and tell the rest because, its historical fact, I won't ruin anything. In his first battle charge, he is listed as missing. The family begins a search for, I believe, two years to find him. Unsurprisingly, they learn that he died.
As a side note: they never found their son's body. While a part of me thinks that it is somehow not a big deal, a much larger part of me can not imagine having to deal with that. No marker, no grave, no idea where his final resting place is, which usually means that he was thrown into a goup grave or some sort after the battle was over. It is just so tragic. I can never imagine going through something like that and on top of which never having the satisfaction of where his mortal body is.

But the story is more than that. It is about a family in war time. The best part, I believe is after they learn of his death. The scene between Rudyard and his wife Carrie (Kim Catrall) is so heartbreaking and brilliant. Which leads me to the acting, which is wonderful. I like seeing Daniel Radcliffe's work outside of HP - and I think he is good. It is interesting seeing him portraying this young man who grows up while we are watching. Once he gets promoted, it is amazing the change that comes over him. So mature at such a young age. That is not easy to portray as an actor. Radcliffe does it wonderfully. The other person I very much liked was Kim Catrall. The only way I knew of her was through Sex & the City - which is a far cry from this. And she was delightful without being too sentimental and overdramatic.

I like this story because it takes on disillusionment with what war is - and I think that is very important. Sometimes it amazes me how we romanticize war. And nothing has changed, we're still doing it. We did in in WWI, it was very much apart of our culture in WWI, we shunned those who were against it in the following wars - and even look at what our country was like after 9/11. What makes this worse was that no one was prepared for a war like WWI. It was considered the first modern war - and we had to sacrafice a lot before we knew how to fight a war like that. I mean think about all the horrors of that first world war. Gas bombs, tanks, machine guns - they all came from The Great War. And it was supposed to be the War to End All Wars. Sadly, it wasn't.

As a side note: watching the special features interviews, I was happy to hear the writer/actor of the play/film stop and take a minute to think about the effect of the loss of a human life. For every soldier there is at least one entire family whose life is changed forever - not to mention their friends as well. And then Kim Catrall mentioned that a single death has a ripple effect. Every human action does, but when you think in the finite terms of human life, it takes on special significance. Since each person's life circumstances are so different from anothers, we will never be able to fully realize the significance that the loss of so many lives means. This is what history is to me. A series of ripples reach out and effecting the course of human lives. Except that, in reality, it would be like adding another drop of water for each ripple produced that would, in term, start a whole other set of ripples, which would be the origin of an entire other set. Interconnected ripples. Now that is history.

Not an easy film to get through without a box of Kleenex - but a really good one with a touching story.

3 and 1/2 out of 5 stars

review: Merchant of Venice movie

A Shakespearean Comedy (?)

Shows you what time can do. Time and social change.

You know, I do not have much of a problem with this story. Except two things: the trick in the law naming Shylock an "alien" of the city and the cruel judgement that he should convert. That sickens me a little.

Actually, I do not like this story very much. It's sickening to be called a comedy. Most of the time I just want to slap the people. Especially Jessica. How could she do that to her father? Just leave him? I can not like any of the characters. No one is trustworthy.

That aside, I do like the actors in this movie. They are wonderful. Pacino and Irons are amazing! The design/art direction is wonderful. Can I say it again? Pacino is amazing!!

But it is the story that stays with me this time. It sticks with me and just makes me so MAD!
Still and all, it is a good movie.
3 and 1/2 out of 5 stars

review: Mr. Deeds goes to Town

Oh Frank Capra - how I adore the work you do! Capra is a director for the "real man" - most of his work is about real people in extraordinary circumstances. This is no exception.
The basic plot is that a small town man inherits $20mil from a distant relative. Suddenly everyone has heard of this local yokel and everyone wants a piece of him. Enter a cynical newspaperwoman who goes undercover to write sensational articles about the man. As par, she falls in love with him. Then things take a turn for the worse and ... well you'll see.

The thing about Capra's films is that they are not considered artistically beautiful. More like, simplisticly beautiful - in every aspect. No outshining stars, no overtly complicated anything - but simple, honesty with a small touch of realistic fantastic.

There is not much to this movie. It's just fun - and you find yourself rooting on the little man. Which is the genius of Capra's work. Especially in the 1930s when it was so important for the common man to feel a little good about who they are and what they do. During the Depression, movies like these brought people hope. It took them out of their troubles, gave them some good times and much needed laughter, gave them someone to identify with, to cheer for. - gave that someone onstacles, and showed them triumphing. It was inspiring.
Sorry, I realize that was a little dramatic, but I have a soft spot for Depression era culture and the effect it had on people.
It was reviewed reasonably by critics and box office, won 2 of the 5 Oscars it was nominated for. It is also honored on 2 AFI lists.
Good watch; real cheer value!
3 and 1/2 out of 5 stars

The Talk of the Town

Considering it was nominated for 7 Oscars and was incredibly popular in its day, I was rather surprised to I had never heard about it or read about it.

Its a comedy - but you wouldn't have been able to tell that by the beginning montage of the movie. I thought it was going to be a rather serious courtroom kind of drama.

But, once you get into it, you can see that this is an interesting comedy mixed with a nice hint of a drama.

But I can see why I haven't heard of it: its not incredibly memorable. Not compared to the classics. However it is a pretty good movie. A nice lesson on law mixed with a little romance.

I don't quite know why I don't like this more. I love Cary Grant and I like Jean Arthur, but this movie is just ... forgettable. I just watched it the other night and already I am lukewarm about it.

3 and 1/2 out of 5 stars

Transformers & Transformers 2

These are my guilty pleasures. I gotta say it: I love these movies. I'm pretty sure that a lot of it has to do with my first experience of seeing both of these films. But nonetheless, I have watched them a couple times on my own and I still like it.
Which leads me to a confession:
I refused to see this movie at first. I was wrong. I admit it.
What is it that I like about these movies? I really don't know for sure. It taps into a certain part of me that loves action movies. They're thrilling. Also: Shia LaBeouf. I hated him in what little I saw of 'Even Stevens' but then I saw him in a Disney movie and I was impressed. And when I say him in these movies, I was surprised at how he grew up. I could take or leave Megan Fox - but the surprise of the film was John Turturro. I love him as an actor. He doesn't always take great roles, but he does great in them.
There are a lot of downsides to this movie. Some of the characterizations are a little too stereotypical. Kinda pathetic. Which makes some of the language a little corny, but overall, not too distracting. But, in defence, it also has some very awesome moments of dialouge too. But the overall star of these movies is the sound. Holy cow, the sound designers/editors/mixers are fricken geniuses! Sadly, it was only ever nominated for Oscars - how they didn't win for visual/sound effects is beyond me.
Despite some of its failings - I really do like them - they're my sci-fi, action-adventure geek out movies.
3 and 1/2 out of 5 stars

review: An Affair to Remember

This movie is a remake of a 1939 movie called 'Love Affair' by the same director, Leo McCarey. It was a success, then they made this one almost 18 years later, and then it was made again, using the original title in 1994. It also is said to have been the inspiration for 'Sleepless in Seattle'
So, it is obviously a popular story.
I haven't seen either the original, or the remakes. This one is quite charming. I mean, it has Cary Grant. And I love Cary Grant movies. I don't mind at all that he often plays the same kind of roles. He is just so charming in them. Deborah Kerr is also quite nice. I have only ever seen her in 'The King and I' so I don't know much of her work, or how to judge her.
The movie is a little bit of a tearjerker near the end. The story is about a man and a woman who meet on a boat and, naturally, fall in love. The problem is that both of them are engaged or attached to another person. Sounds like a Astaire/Rogers movie right? Except no dancing and no singing. Which is not entirely true because there is some dancing and some singing. Anyways - they agree to meet in 6 months if they are unattached and in a economical standing to get married. Sadly, they do not meet and from there, the story goes.
All in all, a lovely story - and so touching. It is listed as #5 on AFI's 100 Passions list.
3 and 1/2 out of 5 stars

review: Lullaby of Broadway

This movie is just cute. Good songs, good dances, good acting, good comedy. Nothing extravagant or gound-breaking. Just fun. The cast is pretty good, and full with some wonderful characters.
So yeah, I like it a lot.
I've never really counted Doris Day as one of my favorites. I'ne only seen her in, I think, one other film. But her simplicity, I kind of like. Her characters are smart and funny, but not extravagant. She is dubbed as "the girl next door" and she really is. She's not a knockout beauty or extremely glamorous. She seems like the kind of person you could know. And so, you root for her.
This is a nice little movie. And I would love to see more of Doris Day and Gene Nelson.
3 and 1/2 out of 5 stars

review: The Gay Divorcee

Yet another lovely example of magic.
It is not as funny as the others I have watched, and a little racy in the subject matter for the 1930s,
It was based on a stage musical at the time called The Gay Divorce (the censor board insisted on the change, since divorce was not to be considered happy. The story is about a married woman (Rogers) who is trying to get a divorce from her husband. With a plan put together by an inept lawyer (Edward Everett Horton), she is going to be "caught" with a correspondant. Mistaken identities again play a role, and she mistakes the lawyer's friend, a dancer (Astaire), for the correspondant (actually played by Eric Rhodes). All works out in the end, of course, and everyone is happy.
As usual, a wonderful supporting cast is enlisted. Horton, Eric Rhodes, Eric Blore, Alive Brady, and making an early appearance is Betty Grable.
This was the first movie starring Fred and Ginger as the lead attraction. This movie established the glamor that was to be associated with all of their movies: exotic locale, decadent sets, gorgeous costumes, and wonderful music. Featuring one of the best by Cole Porter: "Night and Day" I love Astiare's rendition of the song - so simple, so true, and so sweet. And the dance - oh, the dance. They are magic together in this sequence. Astaire so dashing, and Rogers is so wonderful at expressing so subtle changes is her face. It's mesmerizing. The ending flourish is prefect - as he sets her down on a couch as the dance is finished - she just stares at him, captived, and at once in love.
Kind of the way I feel about every Astaire/Rogers film.
3 and 1/2 out of 5 stars

review: My Darling Clementine

I like the movie, and I like the title - but not together.
This movie is about the famous gunfight at the OK Corral with the Earps and Doc Holliday. It's an interesting (fictional) view of the story. But it is the same, basic idea. So what makes this movie good: Well John Ford, for one. Henry Fonda and a supporting cast that includes Walter Brennan and Ward Bond, among others.
It's a wonderful old classic. A good old-fashioned western in all its glory and beauty. The acting is wonderful (the first time I have seen Brennan as the bad guy - and he is good at it!) Fonda is Fonda - sweey and easy going, but strong and firm.
Like I said, the only problem I have with it is the title, which refers to a character who is only minimally connected to the main plot of the story.
I knew this movie mostly from the episode of M*A*S*H called "Movie Tonight" where Potter, to boost morale orders this film (his very favorite) for the camp to watch. It is one of my all time favorites.
3 and 1/2 out of 5 stars

review: Double Idemnity

This is about as classic film noir as you can get. So classic that is has almost become the essence of the cliche. But, still incredibly delightful. This movie is a lot of interesting. Take the stars: Stanwyck and MacMurray - both of whom were mostly known at the time for their comedies. Then there was Robinson - first and foremost a leading male in gangster films - most of the time as the bad guy. AND - it was directed by Billy Wilder - and all I know of his work is his terrific screwball comedies. So yeah, this was completely different.
The story is based on a true life crime involving an insurance man, a gorgeous woman and the planned death of her husband. The title refers to a insurance term in which the reciepiant recieves 2x the amount of a settlement after an accident or death.
The movie is not only praised for the content and the acting, but also for the great photography. There are many moments of just beautiful camera work. Especially the tight frame on Stanwyck's face as her husband is killed. That moment is a perfect marriage of a shot and a darn fine actress. It's wonderful.
This is one of those films that you just need to see at least once in your life. This is one of the best fim noirs and almost a guidebook on how to do it right.
3 and 1/2 out of 5 stars

review: the Caine Mutiny

Again, a story about a slightly mad officer in the Navy. Two in a row - what are the odds?
While one is more of a comedy, this is quite the drama.
It follows the story of a young navy officer assigned to a down-and-out boat near the end of WWII. Once the serving officer is relieved of duty, the boat gets a new commander: Queeg (Bogart). He is strict, to the book, and also seems to suffer from paranoia. Needless to say, there is a mutiny (not like the one in mutiny on the bounty) and a trial.
This movie is quite interesting, but not exactly a wonderful film. You don't quite know who to cheer for. Queeg is a pain in the ass, but he is also suffering from something. He asks for help, so you can't really blame him. The exec. officer is honestly doing what he thinks is right, and he has to care for the crew, so he's in the right. In the moment of the mutiny, everything seems clear, but the trial tears everything up. People lying, twisting the truth, and so forth. Only at the end, during a party scene, does everything go right, and everyone gets his right way.
Bogart is fantastic. His portrayal of this man has to keep you wondering if he is crazy or not - and then once you know, he has to hold you as a sympathetic character. Not easy, but Bogart certainly is up to the task. The young man, who the story centers around, was played by Robert Francis. His portray is believable convincing, and he does a good job at being the medium man between the audience and the world of the movie. This was his film debut, and he was being groomed for stardom, being a young hotshot at the time - unfortunately, he died in a plane crash in 1955 before his career ever would reach a star status. Jose Ferrer is sublime. He is only in the film a short while (as Maryk's lawyer) but his ending speech maked the whole movie work. Van Johnson (as Maryk - the exec officer) is kind of the conflicted hero. He doesn't like or want to do what he does, but his concious leads him. It is interesting to see him in this movie as I only know him from a couple of musicals. Quite a different role for him. Fred MacMurray is very good at keeping the audience off-balance. Through most of the movie, you really like him. He's smart, witty, and a little bit of a rebel. Then something happens and suddenly, he makes you unsure of him. Then, next thing you know, you're completely at the opposite. It takes talent to make an audience go off-balance, and he does it well.
All in all, a pretty good movie.
3 and 1/2 out of 5 stars

review: Julius Caesar

I feel kinda bad about this. I watched the movie last night. And I really liked it.
I just don't have much to say about it.
Acting was good to wonderful, with Brando turning in a Fantastic performance.
Costumes, set, design, all well done.
But that is about it.
3 and 1/2 out of 5 stars

review: The Libertine

This is one of the ugliest films I have ever seen.
I mean that as a compliment.
The opening line of the monolougue stands for the entire film. By the way, the opening and closing of the film is ... perfect. For a movie that centers a lot of its plot around the theatre, it is a perfect thought to have a prolougue and an epilougue. Not to mention, that they are delievered flawlessly by Johnny Depp.
The story is about the last great leg of the short life of John Wilmot, 2nd Earl of Rochester (Depp). He was ... unconventional. This tells the tale of his meeting Elizabeth Barry (Samantha Morton), the play he wrote for King Charles II (John Malkovich), and his subsequent downfall.
This movie is steeped in mud, piss, rain, fog, candles, sex, and theater. That about sums it up, except to say that it is brilliantly seeped in those things. I think this movie is to be a guilty pleasure. It is full of the debauchery that I usualy really dislike in films - but this movie needs it.
Like I said, it is not a beautiful film. I encourage the young to see it as part of a sex-ed class. Kinda of a warning. Compliment to the make-up crew of this film - Rochester with syphillis is a disgusting sight.
But for all of it's vices, there are just as many virtues. You don't feel as though you are watching a costume drama. This movie is so real, it's disturbing. The acting is fantastic, the direction and cinematography is key, and the artistic design is so perfectly done. Oh, and the writing. Oh yes, the writing. This movie has some of the most intricate and witty writing. A perfect reflection of the wit of the Restoration period. People don't think that the past is as steeped in sex as we are now, but the Restoration was marinaded in sex. Overt, yes, and certainly grotesque.
Of course, my very favorite parts were in the theatre. What I wouldn't give to step on to a stage like that. What was most drawing to me was Rochester's admirtation for the theatre, which is interesting because he likes nothing else - not even the whores and wine he is so fond of. He carries a distaste for almost everything he does with him. Both the character and the actor. Depp is once again, fascinating in his role. A perfect measure of sex, disgust, wit, honesty, and treachery. As he says in the opening, you do not like him, but you, like everyone else, can not help but be fascinated by him - you can't look away.
Malkovich is as interesting as he is in all of his roles. Again, like Depp, here is an actor of great variety. I haven't seen a lot of his works, but what I have seen I admire, if I do not like. He doesn't always play the likeable character, in fact, usually the opposite. His characters usually seem hard, but somehow endearing... no, endearing is the wrong word, but I can't think of what I mean, so you get the just of the idea. Morton is perfectly apt for the role. I don't know what to think of her as an actress. Something tells me that I have seen her in something before, but I can't place it. She is fitting to the role without being extraordinary. It could also be that I am blinded to her by her character, because I REALLY did not like her character. As much as she loves the theatre, and is good; she is also a selfish artist who wants nothing but her fame, and she is also a traitor, although not a very successful one. The one person that really caught my eye was the person who played Rochester's wife (Rosamund Pike). Later I realized that she was in the new Pride and Prejudice movie. She was quite powerful - but again, I might have been mostly taken by her character. Small though the role is, the character is one of the few "good" things in the story. And her devotion (despite her hatred of her husband's vices) for her husband is so touching (and a little raunchy, considering their beginning).
All in all, I praise the film, but it really isn't my type of thing. Again, brilliant, but ugly.
3 and 1/2 out of 5 stars