Buster vs Robert

So, even though this is taking much longer than planned (understatement of the year), we are pushing forward trying to make this epic project something we can eventually tell people in 2050 that we've decided, once and for all, who our favorite director of all time (or from the early 1900's to 2010) is. And the post below will help to tell you who it definitely is not.

The General

To be completely honest, going into this film I was expecting to be unimpressed. It's a silent movie by the acrobatic Buster Keaton set during the Civil War. Keaton plays a train engineer who is turned away from signing up to fight for the South, which doesn't look so good to the Southern Belle that he fancies. To make a short story shorter, Keaton ends up saving the day--and the girl--using his train and his apparently bumbling self. The story isn't great, and everyone except Keaton doesn't really act, but I was absolutely blown away by the brilliance of his movement and facial expressions. I was laughing out loud during this 83-year-old film, loving the astounding stunts Keaton performs with the train. His physicality is magnetic and he uses his entire body to tell the story.

All the Kings Men

I was rather impressed by this biopic on a man who comes from meager beginnings and finds his inner politician, weaving a life story that moves and changes the man through different stages of politics: as a puppet, an empowered representative of the working man, a "justifiably" corrupt politician, and a lonely, fallen man with a tainted record and destroyed family. The acting was very good, except for the main character that the audience is meant to connect with and who narrates the film. I greatly enjoyed watching this movie and it reminded me of seeing Citizen Kane in the way that it gave birth to many film devices. 


Steamboat Bill Jr.

This movie was very similar to The General in the spectacular demonstration of Keaton's abilities as a slapstick, acrobatic performer and in the storyline of a down-and-out misunderstood loser trying desperately to impress and win the girl against the odds. Some of the key differences were in the props used by Keaton to perform his brilliant stunts and the apparent use of new technology. One of the most famous scenes of Buster Keaton's career takes place amidst a rather convincing storm. I wasn't as enraptured by this movie, possibly because after seeing The General my expectations were more appropriately set.



The Hustler

Oh, I loved this movie. I'm not sure if my adoration of the film is derived from Rossen's directing or if it comes from my instant affection for Paul Newman, but either way I drank up this wonderfully crafted film. Newman, as a pool hustler named Fast Eddie who is bouncing between a place of solid skill and living life as a "loser,"creates a character who is both spectacular and just like everyone else. The acting is very skillful, especially the performances of Fast Eddie's love interest played by Piper Laurie (who later shows up in Twin Peaks), his sly, evil manager played by George C. Scott, and his rival pool player Minnesota Fats played by Jackie Gleason (later of The Honeymooners fame). Gleason plays a cool, smooth character with consistency and accuracy, and Laurie is convincingly heartbroken and heartbreaking (the role landed her a nomination with the Academy). Anyhow, it was brilliant and you should just watch it now instead of reading this stupid summary. It's freakin' awesome.

So, after much, much much (3 months?) important deliberation, I've decided that I want to see more of Rossen, and as a movie watcher, that's the important part. I have seen much of what I believe Keaton has to offer, but I'd like to see more of Rossen's range. In the end it turns out that Keaton was beaten and Rossen is the boss...en.

Stay tuned for the next round in about six months!

Rossen V Keaton

It's been way, way, way, way too long. But here it is. Buster Keaton Vs. Robert Rossen...

Robert Rossen is an acclaimed film director of the late 40s to early 60's with surprisingly few titles to his name. We watched the Best Picture winning All the King's Men and Best picture nominated The Hustler. Buster Keaton is the fantastic Stunt man of the 1920's who apparently no one wanted to see again once they invented sound in films.


Robbert Rossen - All The King's Men -1949

This is the highly acclaimed period political drama loosely (but clearly) based on the life of Senator Huey Long. This film wowed me when I was a kid and the message in itself is clearly poignant if not completely prophetic towards everything that's happened since in American politics. The story is executed effortlessly and has become the blueprint for how to make a political drama in American films, which is not an easy thing to do. There's a lot of standing around and talking with people saying things they don't really mean and the audience has to understand key moments of the plot through intonation and emphasis. If you want to see how easily this can be screwed up watch the awful remake by Sean Penn, Jude Law, and Kate Winslet, who aren't exactly low-level actors.

But watching it again at a more mature age also reveals a lot of the movie's flaws. Firstly the characters, especially outside of the main role of Willie Stark (Broderick Crawford) and a compelling performance from Mercedes McCaimbridge, are pretty lacking in depth. They are mostly one-dimensional if not outright caricatures...I'm looking at you Joanne Dru. How many times do you need to be held by a man while you wail about uncontrollably before we realize you have no other way to convey you're upset?

And looking back at the politics of the time its hard to for me to fully accept a film that plays so well into the hands of HUAC. Apparently Robert Rossen, a former member of the communist party, had to prove to studio heads that he had no ulterior motives before he was allowed to direct... Look out everyone or the big bad Communists might control your brains!!!! I mean other than being ridiculously popular, having a political machine, and being a liberal politician there really wasn't much that Huey Long did to deserve this bleak portrayal. The man who ends up murdering him in cold blood was the son of a politician who was fired by Long after betraying him. You could have easily made Braveheart and been about as accurate on the man's life story. I mean the man wasn't Billy Hearst.

Genre- Political Drama 9/10
Characters - 4/10
Mood, Theme, Ambience - 6/10
Inventiveness - 5/10
Film Quality 6/10
Total 30/50


Buster Keaton - The General - 1926 

All props to Buster Keaton. This man has more talent in his worst performance than many modern day actors have in their best. Despite having no voice and short run times, this film is exciting, interesting, and compelling. Keaton does things on screen that one would insist had to be computer animated. Even the simplest gags in this movie are death defying, like the scene in which Keaton without noticing sits on axle of the train and gets picked up as it starts moving. Later in the movie Keaton stands on the front of the train engine and knocks debris off the tracks while the train is moving--which was done in real time!!! Real Time!!!! Like thirty people should have died in that scene alone.

But the film outside of Keaton himself has its flaws. Firstly, the story is weak. A train engineer (Keaton) has his girl stolen by some evil union soldiers during the Civil War and he steals her back, assisting the Southern soldiers in winning a battle along the way. To anyone watching, the story is unimportant and serves as an excuse for Keaton to play around with a train. Also, the second most interesting character in the film is probably The General itself which if you haven't seen this movie is not some war General but Keaton's train. Keaton seems way more interested in it than in the love interest, as well he should because the train out-acts her. Plus, as in any Keaton movie, Keaton dominates every scene. Whenever the camera is not on him your simply waiting for it to get back to him. There is no other reason you're watching the film. There are no great story arcs, no amazing acting performances, no real interesting romances--just Keaton. I'm not sure if it's because nobody could keep up with him or because film making didn't have the techniques available to tell amazing stories (I'm leaning towards the former) but Keaton films are always about the same.

Genre- Stunt Film 10/10
Characters - 3/10
Mood, Theme, Ambiance - 3/10
Inventiveness - 7/10
Film Quality 5/10
Total 29/50


Rossen - The Hustler - 1962 

We've both said it before, but apparently Paul Newman does not make bad movies. He's like a batter who walks to the plate and hits each pitch out of the stadium. The Hustler is built around his performance as a hot shot pool shark. The film opens with Fast Eddie (Newman) going up against the best in the biz: Minnesota Fats (Jackie Gleason). The scene, which is shot amazingly by Rossen, turns the pool hall into a biblical battlefield and we watch as a David goes up against a Goliath and initially tears him apart only to have his character's flaws tear him and his bank roll apart. The nearly 25 minute scene is heart-wrenching and every pivotal theme throughout the film is set up in that scene. We later see Newman's character fall down and start to put his life somewhat back together with another down-and-out named Sarah Packard (Piper Laurie). She's a loser in love and he's a loser in life and the two feed off of each other until Newman is dragged back into his old life by Minnesota's manager Bert Gordon (George C. Scott). Each part is pivotal and played to perfection; the ending is inevitable but shocking. Everything in this film fits and shows just how lacking the other films in this Rossen-Keaton showdown have been.

Genre- Sports Drama 9/10
Characters - 9/10
Mood, Theme, Ambience - 10/10
Inventiveness - 7/10
Film Quality 9/10
Total 44/50

Keaton - Steamboat Bill Jr. - 1928 

Despite being far lower on the chain of Keaton films than The General, I found this to be the more enjoyable of the two films, but also less amazing at the same time. The story is about the same, but this time Keaton is a college grad back home for the summer and he has to work with a large boat rather than a train. Only with better side characters to help Keaton out, a more, but not significantly more, likable love interest, and some of the funny moments fall to other characters. This film also has just as impressive stunts. Keaton with the riverboat is predictably impressive, but truly shines during a wind sequence obviously created using some large fans off screen to blow him around. One of Keaton's most famous stunts appears in this film; a house wall falls down around him while he stands just in the right spot going through the window hole. I've probably seen this done by Wile E. Coyote a dozen times but never realized how much more impressive it is in real life.

Genre- Stunt Film 6/10
Characters - 3/10
Mood, Theme, Ambience - 3/10
Inventiveness - 9/10
Film Quality 5/10
Total 26/50

So with a average score of 37 to Keaton's 27.5 Robert Rossen will move on to round 2 to face Frank Capra.

Lord of the Dance

Peter Jackson Vs. Bob Fosse

This has got to be one of the strangest pairings we've had so far. Peter Jackson master of the big budget action packed epic vs. Bob Fosse the jazz hand musical god. But as they say in Highlander in the end there can be only one....

Cabaret -Bob Fosse - This film was one of the films that I was really dreading coming back to. Years ago I picked this film up off the classics rack at Blockbuster and had quite the horrible experience with it. The main characters are all extremely flawed and treat each other horrible, the whole film takes place in the early 1930's Germany with the Nazis very slowly coming to power, and the whole thing is narrated or rather lead around by the yellow teethed emaciated Joel Grey...very creepy. But as I'm a little older now I was less freaked by the bi-sexuality and appreciated the entirety of the film a lot more. Firstly this is a really ground breaking musical. The musical scenes rather than being built into the plot exist outside of it entirely with the film cutting back to a seedy underground theater in the heart of Berlin to introduce us to a song and dance that addresses the themes going on in the narrative. The musical numbers themselves are top notch. They have no flashy eye-catching movie stunts yet they were completely captivating. Especially the Joel Gray number with the gorilla or 'Goodbye Mein Heir' introduction to Ally Bowles (Liza Minelli). The story itself wasn't particularly memorable, pretty much a standard love story with a historical back drop and a non-traditional ending. The film really lacks a climax or a feeling of progression but perhaps it was aiming for a more realistic ending which I can appreciate. But one last thing that I want to point out before moving on was the one true moment of the film that I think stays with everyone that ever watches this movie the Aryan boy scene. Near the middle of the film Fosse introduces one of the major themes of the movie the rise a Nazism in Germany. The main characters who are taking a trip happen upon a small out of the way village restaurant to have a meal. There they watch a blond haired blue eyed boy singing a beautiful tune 'The Future Belongs to Me'. You watch as the audience initially not paying much attention all slowly turn and watch him then slowly one by one they take up the song until pretty much everyone in the restaurant is standing and singing at the top of their lungs. Eventually the camera pans back to reveal that the boy is wearing a Nazi uniform and that the song is some sort of Nazi propaganda tune. It truly is movie making at its best and in a single moment Fosse is able to completely capture the German takeover by the Nazi's.

Genre- musical 8/10
Characters - 6/10
Mood, Theme, Ambience - 6/10
Inventiveness - 6/10
Film Quality 6/10
Total 32/50

Fellowship of the Rings- Peter Jackson - This is probably the best book adaptation of all time. I'll say probably because obviously I haven't seen all of them but I really haven't seen anything that has really come close. The level of difficulty in what Jackson did here is really quite breathtaking and the result is nearly unbelievable. The story which takes place in a Fantasy world known as Middle Earth in which Hobbits, Dwarfs, Elfs, and Orcs battle over the magical powers held in rings is not typical Best Picture material but I think after seeing you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who claims that this is not some of the best films of the decade. The true Jackson skill shines brightest not in his story-telling ability but in how he brings this beyond this world material to the screen while filming a majority of the material without CGI. Sure quite a bit of the more mythical creatures require CGI support but its really quite remarkable how much Jackson is able to do without computer support. The story is beyond imagination and can really only be compared to other such epic Sci Fi and Fantasy films and with the exception of the original Star Wars Trilogy is clearly head and shoulders above them. If there is a downside to the trilogy it would be in the lack of character development in the film and the general woodiness of the acting but this does not really detract much from the amazing nature of the film.

Genre- Epic Fantasy - 9/10
Characters - 6/10
Mood Ambiance Theme - 8/10
Inventiveness - 9/10
Film Quality - 9/10
Total - 41/50

All that Jazz - Bob Fosse - It's clear from the opening sequence of this film that Bob Fosse can reinvent the musical with ease. The story is a behind the scenes look at Fosse's life and theater in general and is told from the perspective of Joe Gideon (Roy Schneider) a top notch musical director attempting to atone for his horrible family life by creating a hit musical for his ex-wife. We see Gideon struggle with perfectionism and an inferiority complex as he creates what he doesn't know will be the final show of his career. Schneider puts on an amazing performance, especially once you consider he has had no formal dance training prior to this role, and we watch him slowly careen out of control and into the hospital where he continues to drive himself into a frenzy until his heart finally gives out in one of the strangest musical numbers I have ever seen. One the whole the film has very good parts and some fantastic musical numbers and performances. Some of the musical numbers do go a ways over the top and there is a rather tedious section of the film that involves a movie that Gideon is working where for some reason Fosse decides we need to watch the same portion of film over and over again. In the end Fosse is clearly aiming for a heartfelt goodbye to the main character but for the most part its hard to feel sorry for someone with so little redeeming value. I mean the main character is pretty much a terrible father, boyfriend, husband, friend, also mean, pretentious, and pill addicted. So I feel while overall the film was of high quality failed to hit on that note.

Genre- Musical 8/10
Characters 7/10
Mood Theme Ambiance - 6/10
Inventiveness 7/10
Film Quality - 7/10
Total - 35/50

The Two Towers - Peter Jackson - This is the second in the Lord of the Rings Trilogy and is probably where Jackson has the most trouble keeping the pace of the film up. The first film has all of the cool introduction to the characters and the final film gets the true feeling of finality to it. But here in the middle Jackson has a long drawn out battle sequence and a rainy maudlin set of scenery. But he still manages to pull it off. We get introduced to many more fantastical characters including large tall walking trees and Jackson does an amazing job bringing these characters to life. One CGI'd character that truly deserves all of the praise that he gets for this film is Gollum (Andy Serkis). his performance here is truly the first entirely CGI character that felt complete in any film that I have seen and could easily have won best actor of the year without any complaint from me. Also Samwise Gamgee (Sean Astin) and Frodo Baggins (Elijah Wood) do amazing jobs as well pushing through pretty heartfelt scenes with another actor whom they can't even see. The rest of the film is trilling in the battle sequences but to anyone who knows that there is a third book know that obviously none of the main characters are going to bite the big one and that tends to hurt the more complicated battle sequences in my opinion. So in many ways this is clearly the hardest of the three films to make and Jackson works his magic perfectly.

Genre - Epic Fantasy - 9/10
Characters - 6/10
Mood Theme Ambience - 7/10
Inventiveness - 9/10
Film Quality - 9/10
Total - 40/50

So in the end we have Bob Fosse with a strong showing but coming up short to the epicness of Jackson. Jackson moves on to face King Vidor in the second round.

Round Seven - Musical Lord of the Rings

This match up pitted two directors who are masters in very different fields against each other: Bob Fosse is one of the most prolific musical directors and Peter Jackson brought Tolkien's epic Lord of the Rings series to brilliant life. So it's song and dance versus battle and glory, so with feet kicking and swords flailing, LET'S GET IT ON!

Cabaret

I had seen this movie before and there are several aspects of it that are very impressive, including the singing and acting of Liza Minelli. Some people have issues with the apparent hatred in the movie, which takes place in Berlin as the Nazis are coming into power. The compelling scenes of violence coupled with the unsettling beauty of a young male Nazi officer singing a German pride song evokes a powerful, conflicted picture of the city at the time. Fosse skillfully cuts between the general circumstances of the city and the strange, dramatic stories of the individual characters. Their conflicts mirror some of those occurring on a more widespread basis, and throughout the film relevant musical numbers interject into the commentary. It's a stunning film, well-edited and interestingly told, but doesn't impact me emotionally the way that it does other people.

The Fellowship of the Rings

I remember seeing this film in the theater and since it came out, I've seen it over and over again. Watching it critically for this project did not lessen the impact of seeing this compelling story come to life, and the special effects are still impressive. What is more impressive is the fluid acting and fresh feel of an old story. I love this trilogy, and the introductory film sets the tone perfectly for the rest of the story.


All That Jazz

This autobiographical musical by Fosse is an interesting example of the product of his perfectionism; the editing is nearly flawless and communicates the emotion and pacing of the story very well. The music and dancing are spectacular, and Roy Sheider performs awesomely as the Bob Fosse-esque intense director. Again, while the emotions were communicated in the film, they didn't evoke a tangible response in me like most high-caliber films do. 

The Two Towers

Again, not to reiterate or be repetitive, this film is still engaging, visually stunning, and exciting to watch after repeated viewings. I'm sure that nostalgia has something to do with it, but the Lord of the Rings series has excellent staying power. Even though it tends to drag at times, overall the action is invigorating and the story is always moving.

This probably doesn't come as a surprise: Peter Jackson is the winner! Although I enjoyed seeing more of Fosse in All That Jazz, and his talent is evident in these two films, the Lord of the Rings epic definitely moves me, and continues to do so after years.

The Tie Breaker

So I've made my decision on how to handle tie breakers. I'm going to take the highest scoring film of the four of whatever round I am in and just go with that director. So in this round that would be Out of Africa for Pollack. Thus pushing Pollack on to meet Robert Altman in the next round.

Round Six - the most nail-bitey of the nail-biters

The competition thus far has not presented me with extremely difficult choices. This will be the first review that I begin without knowing who the winner is. I will have to find out based upon how I write about the two directors, both extremely talented and well-loved directors: George Hill and Sydney Pollack.

Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid

I loved this movie. It was fun, exciting, interesting, and layered. I enjoyed the character interactions, the effortless humor, the subtle sadness and interesting shots. We experience a good guys/bad guys dynamic without ever getting a glimpse at the bad guys chasing our heroes. It's as if there's a more typical western taking place at their end of the chase, framing them as wholesome and honorable lawmen. In the view of Butch and the Kid, they are invisible, powerful ghosts threatening to end their outlaw way of life. Redford and Newman work seamlessly together and manage to fit perfectly into any era they represent in their films. In terms of timelessness, this movie scores big time because I felt excited to be watching it throughout the film.

Tootsie

I appreciate that Pollack is exploring feminism through this film and attempting to articulate a message. Dustin Hoffman plays an intense, committed actor (not such a big stretch) who dresses as a woman to gain a role on a soap opera (much more of a stretch). Hoffman is delightful to see playing a "woman" and as he experiences life as a woman, he begins to notice the subtle and experience the more blatant forms of sexism present in our society. The film brings attention to some interesting challenges women face, including high expectations regarding normative beauty, the use of names like honey, sugar, doll, and toots instead of a woman's name, and judgments of strong, powerful women as masculine. But on many other more serious issues, they miss an opportunity to address and fully investigate the power dynamics affecting these exchanges. For example, one of the men interested in "Tootsie" waits outside of her apartment and manipulates his way inside. There alone with her, he professes that "he's never wanted a woman so much" and begins to try and kiss her. Hoffman jumps on a couch, the older man grabbing him from behind as he struggles. The cross-dressing actor's male roommate (played excellently by Bill Murray) shows up and inadvertently saves the day. After the other man has left, Hoffman (taking off his wig) explains, "No, I was in real trouble...you didn't see the look on his face, if you hadn't shown up I would have been a headline tomorrow." Basically, this piece of dialogue shares that Hoffman was almost raped or possibly killed when the man found out that he was - OH FUCK- actually attracted to a man. This brings up another important point that I feel the movie fails with; homophobia is rampant in the movie from characters we are meant to care for and respect. In order to keep this post shortish, I'm going to only point out one more flaw in this otherwise well-crafted film: Hoffman's character never resolves the terrible things he did to the friend he begins sleeping with over the course of the movie. He realizes, very obviously, that men treat women like shit by lying to them and then lets his friend find out the truth on television (and then never interacts with her again for all we know). He apologizes and makes up with the woman he fell in love with (the one he treated very well as another woman) and never even shows great remorse or concern for the woman he screwed over and lied to as a man. If he made this great realization that men shouldn't do this, isn't it sort of strange that he still does?

The Sting

Again we see Redford and Newman paired up in a brilliantly executed film about those living outside the boundaries of lawful society. As two con-men, the duo again slips comfortably into another time period, building a believable and meaningful relationship with ease. Hill weaves a story for the audience that is intricate and complex, surprising the first-time viewer and delighting the repeat viewer. Similar to Butch Cassidy, the story of the Sting is broken into clear parts (in Butch Cassidy each part was divided by a happy musical montage), each named with a title of the con the partners are undertaking. The music in this film is perfect, the acting excellent, the sets incredible, and the story flawless. If this film has set out to capture your imagination and thrill you, it has succeeded with amazing brilliance. If it strives to convey a deep life message, the only one I can find is that friendship is valuable. It's an original bromance, a buddy comadventure that everyone can enjoy.

Out of Africa

I'm not usually very interested in romantic dramas, but this movie was spectacular. It manages to tell the story of a powerful, important woman through her relationship with a man without devaluing her individuality and impact on the story. Meryl Streep is absolutely stunning in every way in this film; she is gorgeous, compelling, believable, and impressive. She is an incredibly deft actress, and she completely fills the role of Karen von-Blixen and charges through the movie with force that cannot go unnoticed. I am so glad that it was filmed on location in Africa, because it captures the deeper layer of the love story of the film. We fall in love with the beauty of Africa just as Karen does, we see the wild, vibrant, and precious Africa that the characters love and though frightening at first, it becomes the most perfect setting for the movie. As Karen grows more comfortable and touches the land more often, we are glad that she was a part of Africa, though eventually forced to leave. It is important to have told the story of this amazing woman, and her love of Redford's character is secondary to the message of who she is and what Africa meant to her. It is a story of lost love, of lost home, and of telling stories that are worth listening to.

The major dilemma with this choice is that I want to see more movies from both of these directors. I was so impressed and fascinated with the movies I hadn't seen before (Butch Cassidy and Out of Africa) and had a great time more closely considering the ones I already loved (The Sting and Tootsie). This is also the first time that we are unsure whether or not we agree on the outcome of the match-up. This could potentially be the turning point of this venture, when we need two separate BIG BOARDS.

So who is it, Batgirl, who wins this round? Whether it's completely fair or not, I'm going to have to go with Pollack. I feel that he did two very different types of films very well while what we saw of Hill were two very similar films (that were amazing), showing us that as a director he is very good at one thing. I'm hesitant in this decision because of the issues I have with Tootsie's message, but I appreciate Pollack's intentionality in his films. I will have to find time to see George Hill's other films (between the 500 or so films that we've committed to watching in this showdown). Sorry, Mr. Hill, you impressed me and delighted me as a movie-goer, but the director who has me really wanting to see more is Pollack.

The Triple Redford

Well that title sounds kinda dirty. In our 6th round we have the match up of George Hill and Sydney Pollack. For George Hill we have Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid and for Pollack we have Out of Africa and Tootsie. Needless to say based on these films this is no Tarrantino vs. Michael Bay. In fact this has easily been the hardest round we've had so far. Both of these guys are top notch and produced two great and I mean great films.

Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid - This was the first of the two great Hill, Redford, Newman match-ups and it is near pitch perfect. It's the story of two of the wild west's greatest outlaws and their struggle against a society that tries to get them to play by their rules. Early on you can see a clear connection between the outlaws and the 1960's culture that this film was born out of. The allegory is almost palpable. Newman and Redford are perfect as a duo with Newman playing the funnier easy going quick talker and Redford playing his strong silent straight man. The two quickly get into a showdown with the railroad's richest financier J.P. Morgan who takes a personal affront to their train robbing and sends the world's greatest collection of law men after them. This leads to one of the best chase sequences in any film I have ever seen and soon it becomes obvious that for Newman and Redford there is no escape. This is probably the strongest sequences of the film: two perfectly played characters running from situation to situation getting more and more desperate and Newman always being able to diffuse the tension with a hilarious line. The tension only breaks after the pair make a desperate plunge off a cliff and then run off to Argentina. They bring with them the love story of the film and we get introduced to one of the most clever and complex love triangles I have seen in any movie. The end sneaks up on you but makes perfect sense and the actual ending is one of the most shocking and violent I have seen so far in the contest. The one last thing I want to mention about this film is the music, which was amazing and brought each scene up to a new level that was near perfect and I doubt some of the longer sequences would have been as effective without it.

Genre - Western 9/10
Characters - 7/10
Mood, Theme, Ambiance - 8/10
Inventiveness - 9/10
Film Quality - 9/10
Total: 42/50

Tootsie - This was the only film that I hadn't seen prior to this round beginning and I certainly enjoyed it. It's a comedy starring Dustin Hoffman as an out of work actor trying to find work wherever he can get it. Through a turn of events he manages to get a part on a soap opera after he dresses like a woman to prove a point to his agent. This sets off a series of events that leads to Hoffman being stuck in a ridiculous love pentagram. The entire films works as a way for Hoffman who is a bit of a stereotypical womanizer to remove himself from his normal treatments of women and allows him to connect with a more equal feminist approach to relationships. This is seen most clearly in the men who become interested in Hoffman when he's dressed as Tootsie. The first is the Director of the soap opera Ron Carlisel (Dabney Coleman) who treats women very similarly to Hoffman himself mainly as sex objects spurred on by his position of power over them this treatment becomes bad enough that his girlfriend and love interest of Hoffman in the movie (Jessica Lang) eventually is driven to near alcoholism. Then there is the completely oblivious John Van Dorn (George Gaynes) who can't seem to notice how woman are simply not interested in his advances and leads him to near rape. The final of the trio is the love interest's father Les Nichols (Charles Durning) who is old fashioned and sees woman mainly as complementary to the male role this leads him to propose to Tootsie after their first date. These three experiences lead Hoffman to see the error of his ways and makes him a better man. Needless to say the plot is nearly perfect and hilarious at times. But the overall message of the film is a bit lacking when the more feminist messages get lost is Hoffman's change. A few of the characters and more serious situations are in the end dealt with by one liners and laugh situations which when dealing with topics like rape doesn't really work.

Genre - Comedy 8/10
Characters 8/10
Mood Theme Ambiance 6/10
Inventiveness 7/10
Film Quality 8/10
Total: 37/50

The Sting - The sting is a fantastic movie. A period gangster piece set in 1930's Chicago that reunites Hill, Newman, and Redford. While similar in style and quality this film is far more light hearted then Sundance Kid. Redford and Newman unite to play a big scam on a notorious mob boss who rules all of Chicago after a good friend of theirs is slain. But their adversary is overbearing and murderous and the two need to find a way to escape with their lives. The plot similar to Tootsie is near flawless with each moment finely crafted. The mood and ambiance of the film while for the most part superficial does say a bit about the nature of good and evil and friendship under pressure. The music manages to be even better than Sundance which I didn't think possible and manages to push the film along through the slower sequences and tie together the quicker moving parts. There is not much else to say about the Sting. Every part is well crafted and the plot while self contained manages to hide the twists from the audience in a near perfect way that never feels dishonest. You feel in on the whole thing from the beginning only to learn that the director is effortlessly ahead of you at every point. This film basically becomes the blue print for every plot driven thriller that follows it.

Genre - Crime Thriller 8/10
Characters - 8/10
Mood Ambiance Theme - 7/10
Inventiveness - 8/10
Film Quality - 8/10
Total - 39/50

Out of Africa - This is the most epic of epic romances. Meryl Streep plays a Danish baroness whose heart has been broken by a heartless lover in Denmark so she decides to marry his friendly brother and run away with him to Africa to start new life. There are not enough words in the English language to describe the beauty of Africa and Pollack uses every gorgeous location to its fullest advantage. Streep is near perfect in for what will for me become the measuring stick for every other film she is in. The film trails her perspective and just as Africa feels dangerous, beautiful, and erotic the audience feels each moment emanating from her. Her counterpart in the film is Robert Redford who plays the only man who can match wits with Streep's character and she falls madly in love with him. The only problem is that Redford refuses to be held by any woman. The harder she tries the further it drives him away. Each character is played accurately and neither is given an advantage in the audience's perspective. The inevitable confrontation comes when the rest of Streep's life begins to fall apart and we she that she is looking for someone to lean on unfortunately for her Redford will not be that man. After their break up her life spirals further out of control and eventually she must leave Africa. The end is sad as most romances end up being but perfectly toned and unexpected. The story plays upon the interesting topic of possession and Africa as the perfect garden of Eden landscape that all the countries of Europe fight war after war to control . Streep can't keep Redford and have him remain what he is meant to be just as Africa can't be conquered and remain what enticed so many to come to Africa.

Genre -Epic Romance 9/10
Characters - 9/10
Mood Ambiance Theme - 9/10
Inventiveness - 8/10
Film Quality - 9/10
Total: 44/50

So that brings an average score of for 40.5 Hill and an average of for 40.5 Pollack. Well shit now I've got to figure out how to handle a fucking tie.

Reservoiarmageddon

Round five presents to us a David and Goliath type confrontation, but I don't think that the special effects Bay has in his slingshot are going to knock down Tarantino. I'm going to try and go through this quickly, Trojan Horse already did a thorough job of criticizing Michael Bay.

The Rock

I've seen this movie so many times and never really considered it's quality. I don't go see Michael Bay movies to get high intellect, but just for a fun action flick. The movie stops being fun once you start to notice Nick Cage's terrible acting (ugh, most annoying voice ever), the incredibly contrived and ridiculous plot devices, and the over-the-top dramatic scenes and screen-shots. The car chase sequence reminded me of a level in Burnout (the aim of that game is to cause as much monetary damage as possible with a car crash). The nostalgia factor of this movie was high, but other than laughing at a few lines, I didn't enjoy it when I paid too much attention.

Reservoir Dogs

When I saw this movie the first time I was overwhelmed by the violence. Watching it closely, the violence still shocked me, but I noticed more of the fascinating aspects of the dialogue and length of non-violent scenes. Tarantino is adept at creating interesting characters and then allowing them the space to talk, and the choice of actors was fantastic as well.

Armageddon

I realized when closely watching this film that it is simply a series of overly dramatized versions of what WOULD NOT HAPPEN if a meteor were headed towards Earth. This movie did nothing original and interesting for me, and again, I'd watched it a lot when I was younger and it first came out. I used to love this movie, a child drunk on over-saturated film and knee-jerk trained emotional reactions to trite images. I've realized that this movie was a very preemptive campaign advertisement for George W. Bush. That is all.

Pulp Fiction

I have loved this movie since I first saw it at the likely inappropriate age of 12 (or maybe 11, I'm not sure). The changed sequence of events captivated me, the characters enchanted me, and the entire movie gave me striking images that wouldn't leave me. The red marker on skin, the gold light shining from the case, the intensity of Samuel L's eyes, and the cab driver's lips when she said "Butch." It's still engaging for me after multiple viewings and growth in maturity.

Michael Bay produces BIG FUCKING MOVIES. But he hides the lack of substance and novelty with special effects. And like so much makeup, it begins to rub off and reveal the plain skin underneath and we discover we were looking at someone trying to be someone else. I'm interested to see how Quentin Tarantino will hold up against John Huston in the next round. Thanks for playing, Bay. Better luck next time.

3 Buschemis and a Connery

Quentin Tarantino vs. Michael Bay... ok so not the hardest to predict match up. We decided to include Michael Bay so that we had more action directors and popular films in the contest but needless to say it went pretty much where you would expect.

Reservoir Dogs- This film brought back some memories. Back in the good old days of the early 90s before CGI and massive budgets Tarantino managed to make a gripping, graphic, Hong Kong action film on a tiny budget for the American audience. Man what a great film this is. If your able to get past the fact that a lot of Tarantino's style is now well trodden in his later films (like mobster characters, dialog too cool for real people, and gratuitous shocking violence) then your going to be blown away the first time you see it. You can almost feel the love of Asian cinema pouring out of the film. The mastery of characters is one of Tarantino's trademarks and here it is on full display. Each of the film's main characters is identified only by a color ( Mr. Green, Mr. Blond, Mr. Pink, etc.) and each where's a nearly identical black suit with a skinny tie yet you have no trouble distinguishing between their motives and back stories. The fact that 90% of the film takes place in a warehouse and still manages to hold you attention for 2 plus hours is also amazing. The tightness of the plot felt early on unravels perfectly and ends in bloodbath that feels perfect despite the obviousness. And man I still think that dancing torture scene is perhaps one of the best scenes in all of film.
Genre- Crime Drama 9/10
Characters - 9/10
Mood, Theme, Ambiance - 9/10
Inventiveness - 8/10
Film Quality - 9/10
Total - 44/50

The Rock- OK so I'm not going to spend too much time on this because I'm not really sure how much time Bay spent making it. The plot involves a former Green Beret General conquering Alcatraz (because despite it being out of use for 50 years its still an impenetrable fortress?) so that he can threaten San Francisco with ballistic missiles and deadly chemical weapons capable of killing everyone in the city, forcing the US to pay a ransom to the families of dead soldiers in his former brigade who got no service pay after they died. The only solution to the problem is Sean Connery (the only man to escape from Alcatraz) and Nick Cage ( FBI chemical weapons expert) to break in and stop them. Then the plot gets ridiculous. That's about as far as I'm going to summarize and needless to say its filled with constant action sequences, car chases, shootouts, and smash cuts that make Bay's work the trash that it is. Each character is beyond unrealistic, the plot has the logic of a Frank Miller comic book, and unlike Tarantino nothing is ironic. One last point and I'm not sure how much time people wanna spend working on the logic of a Bay film but aren't prison's built to keep people out not prevent them from coming in?
Genre -Action 1/10
Characters 2/10
Mood, Theme, Ambiance - 1/10
Inventiveness - 1/10
Film Quality - 2/10
Total - 7/50

Pulp Fiction - This is the film that brought Tarantino to national attention as far as I can tell. It blew away audiences (me included) in the early 90s and secured itself a best picture nod in a time when far more obvious Oscar bait was winning on a consistent basis. Again as is always the case with Tarantino the strength of the film is in its characters here anchored by Samuel Jackson and a reemerging John Travolta (everything that Travolta did both decent and horribly tasteless after this film is due entirely to this casting). The film unlike Reservoir Dogs and more similar to Tarantino's future films is really a series of vignettes that string together an out of time plot of again murderous mobsters and various other underworld criminals. Once again Tarantino makes some of the strangest characters seem perfectly relatable to an average audience and the out of time nature of the plot hides perfectly what in order would be just an average film.

Genre- Crime Drama 9/10
Characters 10/10
Mood, Theme, Ambiance 9/10
Inventiveness 9/10
Film Quality 9/10
Total: 46/50

Armageddon - I remember being in high school and having this film come out at and everyone loving it. By everyone here I mean all of my ADHD Mountain Dew caffeinated jock friends and looking back on it I hope this affected my high school opinion of finding this film at all enjoyable, because this is a piece of trash. As Batgirl pointed out this is merely a series of things that would not happen if an asteroid was hurtling toward earth. First of all the idea that an asteroid coming toward earth could in fact be unnoticed by NASA would be laughed at by any college student who has taken an Intro to Astronomy course. The rag tag group of everyday heroes and giant capitalists who come together to save humanity comes across like something out of a CPAC wet dream. And every part of this story feels well trodden and almost a caricature of itself. Most of the actors were so wooden that they were out acted by the asteroid. And then of course there are the endless smash cuts, close ups, one liners, and sudo-physics that seem to be the basis of every Bay film that make the rest of the it pointless to watch. The saddest thing of all is the fact that this film has somehow managed to spawn a endless series of similar films since its release that are each in themselves somehow worse.

Genre - Apocalyptic Action - 1/10
Characters - 1/20
Mood, Theme, Ambiance 2/10
Inventiveness - 2/10
Film Quality - 0/10
Total 6/10

Tarantino just managed to squeak by Bay here with an average of 45 to Bay's 6.5. Whew that was a nail biter.

Round Four - Welles v Scott

Even at the beginning of this showdown, before having seen any of Orson Welles' movies, I knew that Tony Scott winning was a longshot. We even tried to use his best work and threw out our viewing of Enemy of the State because we didn't think it was a good enough example of Scott's ability. This was my first time seeing Citizen Kane, and even though the end twist had already been revealed to me, it was one of the most enjoyable movie watching experiences I've had. Good luck, Mr. Scott. You're going up against one of the masters.


Citizen Kane

As I said, one of the best times I've had watching a film. I had planned on watching this movie a few times before and have heard that there isn't much point, the film is basically long and boring, and the secret of the end isn't all that exciting. It's also interesting to watch a film that has been parodied and referenced in television and film culture for my entire life; it's like retroactive explanation of a thousand jokes happening in one fell swoop. Maybe I was so impressed by this film because I spent a lot of my childhood watching old black and white movies with my mom and the slow pace of the scenes and early technology weren't something to overcome for me. Actually, almost completely opposite to this reaction, I found myself blown away by the impressive and risky format of the movie story (starting a biopic with a fabricated news reel and then moving into flashbacks through interview without overlying narration) as well as the incredibly prophetic use of technology. Welles, who came from the realm of theater, broke into film direction with this masterpiece in a way that made plain his genius; the revolutionary uses of film exposure, set transitions, and sequences changed film forever. I couldn't believe that this was his first movie and I found myself yearning to have been alive at a time when I could have seen his acting on stage with nothing but distance and air between us. The story was engaging and brilliant, the characters complex and the acting graceful, and the breakthroughs in film technology evident and impressive. This has been one of the movies in this competition that makes the entire enterprise worth undertaking and has just blown me away.

True Romance

I had seen this movie before it showed up in our competition and enjoyed it very much. Despite the intense violence and apparently twisted messages about what love, commitment, and heroism entail, I had loved the bald nature of the characters, the apparent passion and devotion and the willingness for the film to display its own ridiculousness. I've decided that the way I like to interpret the movie is as a critique on Hollywood and the movie industry. In the course of the film, we see each character act out the scripts that have been supplied to them through pop culture (mainly movies). Our lead man kills someone for his new love, the devoted father provokes a mob boss to protect his son, the new wife allows herself to be beaten rather than betray her love, and all the tough guys (body guards, cops, and criminals) refuse to back down. In all of these situations, the easier, more logical option is completely ignored, even though the painful and often deadly results of these "ideal" acts of bravery and love end up doing nothing to prevent the force each character finds themselves up against from getting what they came for.

Touch of Evil

We watched the director's cut of this crime drama, and I can see that Orson Welles had an idea of what kind of message he wanted his movie to make. The story of crime which occurs between and crosses borders is one of corruption and sacrifice, and we see (a much larger) Welles as the main character once more: a cop near the end of his career who has found that treachery often works better than truth in the space between right and wrong, the border between doing what is right for the sake of right and creating a "just" outcome through unjust means. Charlton Heston was entirely distracting throughout the movie as the younger Mexican officer who still perceives the law as justice and has not yet been affected or poisoned by his position on the border. I'm certain they could have chosen from among the very competent Spanish-speaking actors instead of using the overtanned white dude with no attempt at an accent. One controversy that may have caused this choice in actor is the fact that Heston's character was married to a white woman in the film, and while she is bustled around during the conflict between the lawmen, it becomes clear that she has difficultly making sane decisions. Overall the film was interesting and worthwhile, even though at times the choices of the director and studio seemed questionable.

Crimson Tide

As far as submarine dramas go, this one isn't bad. I love Denzel Washington and Gene Hackman and they spark when they meet in this film as ideologically opposed naval officers managing the possible need for nuclear missile use when communication with command is impeded. The film is dramatic and action-filled, and we see the characters clash and disagree as powerful forces with convincing conviction. Viggo Mortensen is brilliant in a supporting role, but this film didn't really do anything new for me. It had suspense and action, politics and moral dilemmas, sweaty dudes and danger, but I found myself bored and disconnected. There are a huge amount of movies with all of these things to choose from, and this one didn't rock my boat at all.


So, I'm sure it's entirely evident (if simply based upon the two names being next to one another in a competition) that Orson Welles beat Tony Scott in this match. Good game, guys. Sorry we didn't get to see Man on Fire, Mr. Scott, it didn't rate as high as Crimson Tide on Rotten Tomatoes. And Mr. Welles, welcome to the ranks of tier two in our honorable director showdown!

Crimson Kane

Ok so it's been a while...I know. But the good news is that while we have not been writing reviews that does not mean that we have not been watching movies. So for a bit here we're gonna be playing a little catch up in the writing department.

So that begins with the first of our catch up installments of Orson Wells vs. Tony Scott. For Orson Wells we watched Citizen Kane and Touch of Evil. For Tony Scott True Romance and Crimson Tide.

Citizen Kane - Citizen Kane is nearly a perfect movie. It bridges the gap between two genres Film Noir and Biography and kicks ass the whole way through. To the modern eye stylistically the film looks cool and interesting using a ton of filming tricks not seen in many modern films. But if you spend just a few minutes looking up a few of the filming techniques invented by Wells for this film you will be blown away. The first transition from a model building to a live shot and double exposures on film so that foreground and background are in focus at the same time in the same shot just to name a few. The characters are amazing but few and mainly focus around the near perfect performance of Wells himself playing a larger than life version of William Randolf Hearst. Joesph Cotten puts in a great performance as his disillusioned colleague. The film feels epic in scale but intimate in nature. Telling the individual story of a single person but also the symbolic story of a generation that has long passed but still feels true today.
Genre - 10/10
Characters - 9/10
Mood, Theme, Ambiance - 10/10
Inventiveness - 10/10
Film Quality 10/10
Total - 49/50

True Romance - This is the sort of story that I am naturally not very into. It comes across as cool and hip but kinda ends up feeling kinda empty to me. But for the sake of the contest I gave it an honest try. You can just feel this movie is written by Quentin Tarrentino and while Scott definitely puts his own spin on it Tarrentino should have done the thing himself. The film to me has one too many illogical leaps that I can't get over. Firstly for the sake of the story your supposed to accept that "True Love" exists, which I normally find sloppy writing but can get over, although in this film apparently "true love" seems to be not much more than wanting to have sex with someone with whom you share a couple of mutual interests. But then they expect you to believe despite being newly in love and on the verge of a happy ending the characters are instead willing to put themselves in life threatening peril that can easily be avoided not once but over and over again. I understand that this film is playing off of standard movie tropes and in the end a statement is being made about the nature of films and the film making process (Hell half the characters work in films). But the storyline was too much for me.
Genre - Drama 6/10
Characters - 5/10
Mood, Theme, Ambiance - 6/10
Inventiveness - 6/10
Film Quality 6/10
Total - 29/50

A Touch of Evil - I have never seen a Wells movie other than Citizen Kane before so I had really high expectations for this and was a little let down. The story is a Crime Thriller exploring the nature of cops and gangsters on the border of Mexico and California. Wells explores the nature of cops being on the metaphorical border between lawful and unlawful society and shows you both what you consider initially to be a corrupt cop (Wells) and an honest one (Charlton Heston). In this film Heston plays an honest Mexican cop whose marrying a white American (Janet Leigh) and looks ridiculous doing it. They used some weird tanning makeup on him and Heston looks about as comfortable speaking Spanish as I do, which is not comfortable at all. They get wrapped up in a murder on their honeymoon that literally crosses the border when a bomb is placed in a car's trunk and the victim drives into America. The film plods along awkwardly from there making prophetic points about Wells and Heston's nature until the inevitable confrontation. Leigh's character is confounding and feels strangely comfortable in situations that would freak me the hell out. Like a scene where she is being held hostage by a Mexican biker gang in a rural hotel only to calmly fall asleep instead of lose her shit. The film nonetheless is shot well and Wells at the helm still manages to make what in the end is a pretty ridiculous plot interesting but misses the mark enough to make it disappointing.

Genre Crime - 7/10
Characters - 6/10
Mood Theme Ambiance 7/10
Inventiveness - 7/10
Film Quality - 7/10
Total - 34/50

Crimson Tide - In this film Scott is clearly attempting to have a conversation over how comfortable we are as a society with having the decision to fire nuclear weapons in the hands of a single individual. This is not really hidden in any way as the conversation is had literally throughout this film between the opposing forces of Lt. Hunter (Denzel Washington) a young, attractive, worldly, intellectual and Capt. Ramsey (Gene Hackman) a surly, crotchety, sea captain. These two are in odd couple like duo in charge of a nuclear submarine and inevitably end up in an ambiguous war scenario where the decision to fire or not to fire a nuclear bomb is left in their hands. I'm not sure if there is a segment of the population that would identify with the Hackman's character or if this film is designed to have the audience favor Washington but the point is made over and over again that neither is right or wrong but rather acting based on the information present and their respective world views. Which of course leads crotchety Hackman to feel they need to fire the nuc and intellectual Washington to feel they need to wait for clearer orders. Needless to say the plot is contrived and designed at every turn to push the characters even further into the abyss of decision based on gut instinct. For me though the idea that anyone based on this little information would consider firing a nuclear weapon makes me think that being intrigued by this film's plot should probably disqualify you from being in command of a nuclear submarine. I also kept wondering why the hell Scott kept having the characters pulling larger and larger guns on each other, I mean did nobody else notice that the film is set on a submarine and that firing the smallest pistol hundred of meters under water would probably be a bad idea. Not to mention the fact that there are nuclear bombs within shooting range. Then after the film is concluded Scott goes so far as to inform the audience in post script that entire contrived scenario can't even happen anymore as there have been changes in the chain of command with regards to nuclear weapons on submarines. Well thank god for that!

Genre - War Thriller 5/10
Characters - 5/10
Mood Ambience Theme - 6/10
Inventiveness 4/10
Film quality 5/10
Total 25/50

Well there you have it. Orsen Wells managed to pull it out with an 41.5 average to Scott's 26.5