Monday, August 1, 2011
update
Obviously, I haven't been reviewing any 80s movies recently. I figured this would happen. My next step then is to try, try again, only with a new theme. (I may come back to the 80s at some point.) I'm considering going back to the (wait for it...) 70s! More to come.
Thursday, June 16, 2011
Back to the 80s: Prizzi's Honor
We're now up to the second week of June 1985. At last, something for the grown-ups!
Prizzi’s Honor
A hit man for the mob falls in love with a woman, who turns out to be a hit woman. It seems like a good match until they’re ordered to kill each other.
How did it play in 1985? It did fairly well at the box-office but it was more successful at receiving multiple Oscar nominations, including Best Picture, Actor, Supporting Actor and the award it won, Best Supporting Actress which went to Anjelica HustoN in a role directed by her father John Huston.
Did I see it then? No way. I saw very few R-rated movies in 1985 and probably wouldn’t have been interested in this one anyway. This is the first time I’ve seen it.
How does it play today? Summer movies are usually full of action, comedy and special effects, so it must have been refreshing for a movie aimed at adults to open up alongside the likes of The Goonies and Rambo. Prizzi’s Honor is a mob movie with lots of black comedy. It’ s similar to The Godfather and GoodFellas although it isn’t quite as good as either of those two. I’m sure if it came out today, it would be compared to The Sopranos (a show I never warmed up to).
The film’s main strength is the performances. As mentioned above, Anjelica Huston won an Oscar for her role as the manipulative outcast of the Prizzi family. She’s very good and I wish she’d had more scenes. Also good is William Hickey (better known to some of you as Uncle Lewis in Christmas Vacation) who plays the patriarch of the family. He was only 58 when he made this, but thanks to good acting and makeup he looks twice that age. Jack Nicholson and Kathleen Turner are also good in the leading roles.
I always have a difficult time with mob movies, mainly for the relative morality of the characters. Almost every person is violent and unpleasant. So what’s the attraction? I think audiences are fascinated by the family dynamics of these characters. They struggle to deal with their family, just like everyone does, except their differences are often resolved with guns and knives. The humor, as dark as it is, certainly helps. The most intriguing element of Prizzi’s Honor is the moral choices faced by Nicholson’s character. Will he uphold the Prizzi family honor, or go his own way? Will he remain loyal to his adopted family or will he kill his own wife? Without saying too much, let me once again refer to the film’s moral relativism which is the main problem. The viewer is forced to “root” for one group of immoral people against another. Making a rationally moral choice isn’t an option. The ending left me frustrated.
Next time: A science-fiction movie that was very popular and a fantasy movie that no one saw.
Prizzi’s Honor
A hit man for the mob falls in love with a woman, who turns out to be a hit woman. It seems like a good match until they’re ordered to kill each other.
How did it play in 1985? It did fairly well at the box-office but it was more successful at receiving multiple Oscar nominations, including Best Picture, Actor, Supporting Actor and the award it won, Best Supporting Actress which went to Anjelica HustoN in a role directed by her father John Huston.
Did I see it then? No way. I saw very few R-rated movies in 1985 and probably wouldn’t have been interested in this one anyway. This is the first time I’ve seen it.
How does it play today? Summer movies are usually full of action, comedy and special effects, so it must have been refreshing for a movie aimed at adults to open up alongside the likes of The Goonies and Rambo. Prizzi’s Honor is a mob movie with lots of black comedy. It’ s similar to The Godfather and GoodFellas although it isn’t quite as good as either of those two. I’m sure if it came out today, it would be compared to The Sopranos (a show I never warmed up to).
The film’s main strength is the performances. As mentioned above, Anjelica Huston won an Oscar for her role as the manipulative outcast of the Prizzi family. She’s very good and I wish she’d had more scenes. Also good is William Hickey (better known to some of you as Uncle Lewis in Christmas Vacation) who plays the patriarch of the family. He was only 58 when he made this, but thanks to good acting and makeup he looks twice that age. Jack Nicholson and Kathleen Turner are also good in the leading roles.
I always have a difficult time with mob movies, mainly for the relative morality of the characters. Almost every person is violent and unpleasant. So what’s the attraction? I think audiences are fascinated by the family dynamics of these characters. They struggle to deal with their family, just like everyone does, except their differences are often resolved with guns and knives. The humor, as dark as it is, certainly helps. The most intriguing element of Prizzi’s Honor is the moral choices faced by Nicholson’s character. Will he uphold the Prizzi family honor, or go his own way? Will he remain loyal to his adopted family or will he kill his own wife? Without saying too much, let me once again refer to the film’s moral relativism which is the main problem. The viewer is forced to “root” for one group of immoral people against another. Making a rationally moral choice isn’t an option. The ending left me frustrated.
Next time: A science-fiction movie that was very popular and a fantasy movie that no one saw.
Monday, June 6, 2011
Back to the 80s: The Goonies
Continuing my series on the summer movies of 1985.
The Goonies
A group of kids try to save their homes from being turned into a country club and have the adventure of a lifetime involving escaped convicts and a pirate treasure in this movie directed by Richard Donner that has become a cult classic.
How did it play in 1985? Very well. It opened in second place behind Rambo and became the ninth highest grossing movie of 1985. It’s continued popularity has led to numerous rumors of a sequel involving the original cast.
Did I see it then? Yes, and I loved it.
How does it play today? This is tough. A large part of my enjoyment of the movie today depends on nostalgia, which makes it difficult to be objective. It’s fun to see actors like Sean Astin and Josh Brolin looking so young. The sense of adventure so critical to the story survives (the many booby-traps are fun in an Indiana Jones sort of way and the pirate ship is still pretty cool) but some of the flaws are more apparent now. It’s much too long and the kids (and some of the adults) yell and talk over each other throughout the film. I doubt an adult who never saw the movie as a kid would get much out of The Goonies and I wonder if today’s kids would enjoy it. I guess it would be fine for kids too young to see the Pirates of the Caribbean movies.
The other movie that opened up in the first week of June 1985 was the box-office bomb Perfect starring John Travolta and Jamie Lee Curtis. I’m not opposed to seeing bad movies, but this sounds so awful it’s not worth it.
Next week: An Oscar nominee for Best Picture.
The Goonies
A group of kids try to save their homes from being turned into a country club and have the adventure of a lifetime involving escaped convicts and a pirate treasure in this movie directed by Richard Donner that has become a cult classic.
How did it play in 1985? Very well. It opened in second place behind Rambo and became the ninth highest grossing movie of 1985. It’s continued popularity has led to numerous rumors of a sequel involving the original cast.
Did I see it then? Yes, and I loved it.
How does it play today? This is tough. A large part of my enjoyment of the movie today depends on nostalgia, which makes it difficult to be objective. It’s fun to see actors like Sean Astin and Josh Brolin looking so young. The sense of adventure so critical to the story survives (the many booby-traps are fun in an Indiana Jones sort of way and the pirate ship is still pretty cool) but some of the flaws are more apparent now. It’s much too long and the kids (and some of the adults) yell and talk over each other throughout the film. I doubt an adult who never saw the movie as a kid would get much out of The Goonies and I wonder if today’s kids would enjoy it. I guess it would be fine for kids too young to see the Pirates of the Caribbean movies.
The other movie that opened up in the first week of June 1985 was the box-office bomb Perfect starring John Travolta and Jamie Lee Curtis. I’m not opposed to seeing bad movies, but this sounds so awful it’s not worth it.
Next week: An Oscar nominee for Best Picture.
Saturday, May 28, 2011
Back to the 80s: Memorial Day Weekend 1985
It's time for the first segment of Back to the 80s. If you went to a movie theater on Memorial Day Weekend 1985, what could you have seen?
A View to a Kill
Super-spy James Bond attempts to keep super-villain Max Zorin from creating a massive earthquake that will flood Silicon Valley, thus leaving him with complete control f the world’s microchip market.
How did it play in 1985? Fairly well. It was the 13th highest grossing movie of the year and the 14th (out of 23) in the Bond series. It was the last Bond with Roger Moore in the lead. The critics didn’t think much of it and now it has a reputation as one of the worst Bond films.
Did I see it then? Yes. I don’t recall much about it though.
How does it play today? It’s passable entertainment, more so if you are a fan of the Bond movies. I liked the widescreen cinematography and the John Barry score provides the perfect sonic mood for a Bond film. Unfortunately, most everything else is sub-par. The plot is a retread of previous Bond films and Max Zorin is no Goldfinger. Tanya Roberts is terrible as the leading lady. Only Grace Jones, who plays the requisite villain’s henchmen (henchwoman?) has an impact, although her character is just as underwritten as everyone else‘s. The action scenes are OK, except for a ridiculous chase involving a stolen fire truck and lots of police cars that seems more appropriate to The Blues Brothers.
Rambo: First Blood Part II
The big hit of Memorial Day 1985 was Rambo: First Blood Part II, the action-packed, ultra-violent sequel to the 1982 film First Blood. The plot, such as it is, has Sylvester Stallone’s title character sent into Vietnam on a covert mission to find out if American POWs are still there. He is soon betrayed and must use every weapon in existence to fight his way out and blow as much stuff up as (in)humanly possible.
How did it play in 1985? Huge. It was the number one movie at the box office for 4 weeks in a row and was the second highest grossing movie of he year.
Did I see it then? No. I wanted to, but my parents were pretty strict about letting me see R-rated movies. I didn’t see it until much later.
How does it play today? It’s quite ridiculous and a little offensive. I know this is the kind of movie you’re not supposed to analyze but it’s hard not to roll your eyes at it. The action gets increasingly improbable as the movie goes on as Rambo becomes an unstoppable one-man killing machine.
The script was co-written by Stallone and none other than James Cameron, who had directed The Terminator a year earlier. There are certainly parts of the movie that are quite exciting if you can suspend your disbelief. Perhaps the best thing about Rambo II is the score by Jerry Goldsmith. Using ostinato, odd-metered rhythms, the score pulsates with kinetic energy. The elegiac theme “It’s a Long Road” from the same composer’s score to First Blood, makes several appearances and is masterfully transformed into an action fanfare.
Two other movies opened up in late May 1985. First, was the Richard Pryor/John Candy comedy Brewster’s Millions about a baseball player who must spend $30 million in 30 days without telling anyone why. If he succeeds, he gets $300 million. I remember my sister and I watching this a lot when it was on HBO, but I’m not interested in seeing it again. The Chevy Chase comedy Fletch was a popular movie about an investigative journalist who used multiple disguises to catch the bad guys. It spawned a sequel and there have been several attempts to remake it. I saw it in the theaters and several times thereafter but haven’t seen it recently.
Next week: An infamous bomb and a popular kid's movie.
A View to a Kill
Super-spy James Bond attempts to keep super-villain Max Zorin from creating a massive earthquake that will flood Silicon Valley, thus leaving him with complete control f the world’s microchip market.
How did it play in 1985? Fairly well. It was the 13th highest grossing movie of the year and the 14th (out of 23) in the Bond series. It was the last Bond with Roger Moore in the lead. The critics didn’t think much of it and now it has a reputation as one of the worst Bond films.
Did I see it then? Yes. I don’t recall much about it though.
How does it play today? It’s passable entertainment, more so if you are a fan of the Bond movies. I liked the widescreen cinematography and the John Barry score provides the perfect sonic mood for a Bond film. Unfortunately, most everything else is sub-par. The plot is a retread of previous Bond films and Max Zorin is no Goldfinger. Tanya Roberts is terrible as the leading lady. Only Grace Jones, who plays the requisite villain’s henchmen (henchwoman?) has an impact, although her character is just as underwritten as everyone else‘s. The action scenes are OK, except for a ridiculous chase involving a stolen fire truck and lots of police cars that seems more appropriate to The Blues Brothers.
Rambo: First Blood Part II
The big hit of Memorial Day 1985 was Rambo: First Blood Part II, the action-packed, ultra-violent sequel to the 1982 film First Blood. The plot, such as it is, has Sylvester Stallone’s title character sent into Vietnam on a covert mission to find out if American POWs are still there. He is soon betrayed and must use every weapon in existence to fight his way out and blow as much stuff up as (in)humanly possible.
How did it play in 1985? Huge. It was the number one movie at the box office for 4 weeks in a row and was the second highest grossing movie of he year.
Did I see it then? No. I wanted to, but my parents were pretty strict about letting me see R-rated movies. I didn’t see it until much later.
How does it play today? It’s quite ridiculous and a little offensive. I know this is the kind of movie you’re not supposed to analyze but it’s hard not to roll your eyes at it. The action gets increasingly improbable as the movie goes on as Rambo becomes an unstoppable one-man killing machine.
The script was co-written by Stallone and none other than James Cameron, who had directed The Terminator a year earlier. There are certainly parts of the movie that are quite exciting if you can suspend your disbelief. Perhaps the best thing about Rambo II is the score by Jerry Goldsmith. Using ostinato, odd-metered rhythms, the score pulsates with kinetic energy. The elegiac theme “It’s a Long Road” from the same composer’s score to First Blood, makes several appearances and is masterfully transformed into an action fanfare.
Two other movies opened up in late May 1985. First, was the Richard Pryor/John Candy comedy Brewster’s Millions about a baseball player who must spend $30 million in 30 days without telling anyone why. If he succeeds, he gets $300 million. I remember my sister and I watching this a lot when it was on HBO, but I’m not interested in seeing it again. The Chevy Chase comedy Fletch was a popular movie about an investigative journalist who used multiple disguises to catch the bad guys. It spawned a sequel and there have been several attempts to remake it. I saw it in the theaters and several times thereafter but haven’t seen it recently.
Next week: An infamous bomb and a popular kid's movie.
Monday, May 23, 2011
Back to the 80s: Introduction
Are you a child of the 1980s? Do you love going to the movies but find you don’t enjoy the summer movies as much as you used to? Were movies really better back then, or is it more a matter of maturity that makes today’s movies, especially those released in the summer, look bad in comparison? I’m sure it’s a little bit of both. As an experiment, I plan to recreate a summer movie season from my childhood and see how the movies stack up today. What effect does nostalgia have on my reaction to certain movies? And what about the more mature movies I never saw?
Here’s how it will work. Each weekend, I’ll post a new entry summarizing the movies that came out the same weekend in the past. Due to time constraints, I won’t be able to re-watch every single movie. Plus, there are some I don’t feel all that inclined to revisit. (Do I really need to watch European Vacation again?)
I’m going to begin with the summer of 1985. I was 14 years old, the perfect age for spending way too much time at the movie theater watching special-effects laden movies and enjoying my usual large popcorn, cherry Coke and a bag of Skittles. A wide variety of movies were released that year. There were blockbusters like Rambo 2 and Back to the Future, box-office bombs like The Black Cauldron and Return to Oz (both Disney films) and movies aimed at adults like Prizzi’s Honor and Pale Rider.
Memorial Day Weekend is coming soon. Are you ready to go Back to the 80s?
Here’s how it will work. Each weekend, I’ll post a new entry summarizing the movies that came out the same weekend in the past. Due to time constraints, I won’t be able to re-watch every single movie. Plus, there are some I don’t feel all that inclined to revisit. (Do I really need to watch European Vacation again?)
I’m going to begin with the summer of 1985. I was 14 years old, the perfect age for spending way too much time at the movie theater watching special-effects laden movies and enjoying my usual large popcorn, cherry Coke and a bag of Skittles. A wide variety of movies were released that year. There were blockbusters like Rambo 2 and Back to the Future, box-office bombs like The Black Cauldron and Return to Oz (both Disney films) and movies aimed at adults like Prizzi’s Honor and Pale Rider.
Memorial Day Weekend is coming soon. Are you ready to go Back to the 80s?
Friday, May 13, 2011
Triumph of the Lamb - Book Review
Triumph of the Lamb by Dennis E. Johnson
There was a time when it seemed like the only Christian books I read were on the subject of eschatology. I read books that compared the different views on how to interpret the millennium and read a commentary on Revelation written from an amillennial perspective. I thought that was sufficient until I joined a Bible study earlier this year. The next book on their agenda was a book on Revelation. I initially had the rather cynical thought, “But I’ve already read a commentary on Revelation!” (That book was More Than Conquerors by William Hendriksen.) But of course, no Christian who is serious about learning everything they can about the Bible should be content with reading only one commentary on a particular book. It came as no surprise then, that I truly enjoyed Dennis Johnson’s book Triumph of the Lamb.
Johnson’s book is a concise, exegetical look at the last book of the Bible. After an introduction and an overview of Revelation, he presents it in a more or less verse by verse format, explaining what each verse means. Readers who are aware of the various schools of interpretation regarding Revelation will instantly recognize Johnson’s take as the idealist view. This view sees the many visions as symbolic of events and ideas that recur throughout the time between Christ’s advent and his return. Many of the visions show the same event from different perspectives (or “camera angle” as Johnson likes to put it.) The idea that the visions in Revelation are not presented in chronological fashion may be strange to some, but Johnson points out over and over that this is the only view that truly makes sense.
There are many strengths to the book. Johnson’s exegesis is solid. He offers sound interpretations not only of Revelation, but of the many verses from the Old and New Testaments that directly influence the text of Revelation. The Old Testament in particular is extremely important. I thought I was familiar with OT prophetic literature but I was amazed at just how much of Revelation is taken directly from such books as Isaiah, Ezekiel, Daniel and Zechariah. Johnson also remains consistent throughout the book. He frequently points similarities in Revelation’s visions and shows how they relate to one another and the overall picture of the book.
In addition his main points, Johnson also provides many interesting tidbits on subjects that might be of only passing interest to the casual reader. For example, he makes note of grammatical issues and how they relate to the proper translation of Revelation. He even points out which translations do a better job. (The NASB doesn’t fare so well.)
I enjoyed Johnson’s conclusion and felt it probably should be read first. (The appendix which explains the various views on Revelation is also useful and should be read at the start) He points out what the book should mean for Christians. It’s more than just a series of puzzles to solve. Revelation is primarily a book of hope. It comforts the people of God whether they are believers in the 1st or 21st centuries. Revelation shows that God hears our prayers and that the time is coming when evil will be completely wiped out. There will be no more tears and no more suffering. God lets us know that even though we must endure hardships now, He has promised to rescue us through the work of His son Jesus. Our ultimate destiny is eternal union with God in the new heaven and new earth.
I already lean strongly toward the idealist view but I’m sure that people who do not agree with it will still benefit from Johnson’s excellent presentation of this view. All four views (historicist, futurist, preterist and idealist) are orthodox and Christians should not be divided over them.
There was a time when it seemed like the only Christian books I read were on the subject of eschatology. I read books that compared the different views on how to interpret the millennium and read a commentary on Revelation written from an amillennial perspective. I thought that was sufficient until I joined a Bible study earlier this year. The next book on their agenda was a book on Revelation. I initially had the rather cynical thought, “But I’ve already read a commentary on Revelation!” (That book was More Than Conquerors by William Hendriksen.) But of course, no Christian who is serious about learning everything they can about the Bible should be content with reading only one commentary on a particular book. It came as no surprise then, that I truly enjoyed Dennis Johnson’s book Triumph of the Lamb.
Johnson’s book is a concise, exegetical look at the last book of the Bible. After an introduction and an overview of Revelation, he presents it in a more or less verse by verse format, explaining what each verse means. Readers who are aware of the various schools of interpretation regarding Revelation will instantly recognize Johnson’s take as the idealist view. This view sees the many visions as symbolic of events and ideas that recur throughout the time between Christ’s advent and his return. Many of the visions show the same event from different perspectives (or “camera angle” as Johnson likes to put it.) The idea that the visions in Revelation are not presented in chronological fashion may be strange to some, but Johnson points out over and over that this is the only view that truly makes sense.
There are many strengths to the book. Johnson’s exegesis is solid. He offers sound interpretations not only of Revelation, but of the many verses from the Old and New Testaments that directly influence the text of Revelation. The Old Testament in particular is extremely important. I thought I was familiar with OT prophetic literature but I was amazed at just how much of Revelation is taken directly from such books as Isaiah, Ezekiel, Daniel and Zechariah. Johnson also remains consistent throughout the book. He frequently points similarities in Revelation’s visions and shows how they relate to one another and the overall picture of the book.
In addition his main points, Johnson also provides many interesting tidbits on subjects that might be of only passing interest to the casual reader. For example, he makes note of grammatical issues and how they relate to the proper translation of Revelation. He even points out which translations do a better job. (The NASB doesn’t fare so well.)
I enjoyed Johnson’s conclusion and felt it probably should be read first. (The appendix which explains the various views on Revelation is also useful and should be read at the start) He points out what the book should mean for Christians. It’s more than just a series of puzzles to solve. Revelation is primarily a book of hope. It comforts the people of God whether they are believers in the 1st or 21st centuries. Revelation shows that God hears our prayers and that the time is coming when evil will be completely wiped out. There will be no more tears and no more suffering. God lets us know that even though we must endure hardships now, He has promised to rescue us through the work of His son Jesus. Our ultimate destiny is eternal union with God in the new heaven and new earth.
I already lean strongly toward the idealist view but I’m sure that people who do not agree with it will still benefit from Johnson’s excellent presentation of this view. All four views (historicist, futurist, preterist and idealist) are orthodox and Christians should not be divided over them.
Wednesday, May 4, 2011
Ugetsu
“For where jealousy and selfish ambition exist, there will be disorder and every vile practice.”
James 3:16
“For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evils.”
I Timothy 6:10
My previous post was about the 1953 movie Tokyo Story. Next is another Japanese movie from the same year. Ugetsu is set in 16th century Japan during a time of civil war. Two brothers and their families want to avoid the horrors of war but their greed and ambition get in the way and tragedy results.
Genjuro, one of the brothers, makes pottery using a homemade kiln. He’s fairly good at it and is excited when he is able to bring home money from selling his wares. His brother Tobei wants nothing more than to become a great warrior, even a samurai, although he is hardly qualified to be either. Both men’s wives would rather stay home and try to be safe from the approaching war, but the men leave, insisting they will return soon. While selling his pottery, Genjuro is approached by a mysterious woman and her lady-in-waiting. He is enchanted by her and for good reason. We soon learn that she is a ghost. Enticed by her, he forgets all about his wife and even agrees to marry the woman! Back home, his wife and son are forced from their home and can barely find food while avoiding marauding soldiers.
Meanwhile, Tobei’s wife is soon forgotten by him and ends up turning to prostitution to earn money. Despite his incompetence, he does in fact become a samurai. Both brothers seem to have achieved their goals of money and power but at the cost of their own families. The men are eventually reunited with their wives, but in unusual ways, which I won’t spoil here.
Ugetsu may not be a Christian film, but the Bible verses quoted above are aptly demonstrated. The love of money and selfish ambition both cause great harm to the film’s characters.
I don’t usually listen to DVD commentary tracks but I often make an exception for foreign films. The commentary for Ugetsu is full of interesting details that I missed while watching the movie, especially regarding Japanese history and culture.
James 3:16
“For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evils.”
I Timothy 6:10
My previous post was about the 1953 movie Tokyo Story. Next is another Japanese movie from the same year. Ugetsu is set in 16th century Japan during a time of civil war. Two brothers and their families want to avoid the horrors of war but their greed and ambition get in the way and tragedy results.
Genjuro, one of the brothers, makes pottery using a homemade kiln. He’s fairly good at it and is excited when he is able to bring home money from selling his wares. His brother Tobei wants nothing more than to become a great warrior, even a samurai, although he is hardly qualified to be either. Both men’s wives would rather stay home and try to be safe from the approaching war, but the men leave, insisting they will return soon. While selling his pottery, Genjuro is approached by a mysterious woman and her lady-in-waiting. He is enchanted by her and for good reason. We soon learn that she is a ghost. Enticed by her, he forgets all about his wife and even agrees to marry the woman! Back home, his wife and son are forced from their home and can barely find food while avoiding marauding soldiers.
Meanwhile, Tobei’s wife is soon forgotten by him and ends up turning to prostitution to earn money. Despite his incompetence, he does in fact become a samurai. Both brothers seem to have achieved their goals of money and power but at the cost of their own families. The men are eventually reunited with their wives, but in unusual ways, which I won’t spoil here.
Ugetsu may not be a Christian film, but the Bible verses quoted above are aptly demonstrated. The love of money and selfish ambition both cause great harm to the film’s characters.
I don’t usually listen to DVD commentary tracks but I often make an exception for foreign films. The commentary for Ugetsu is full of interesting details that I missed while watching the movie, especially regarding Japanese history and culture.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)