Films That Deserved Better

Alien 3, probably the most underappreciated film in cinema history, has had just as depressing a reception from critics and audiences as the film is itself. The theatrical cut is a botched, hacked apart mess, but still manages to let some brilliance slip through. The two hour and twenty minute special edition version found on the Alien Quadrilogy boxset and two-disc edition DVD, however, is in my opinion the best film of the series. The special edition has some flaws of it's own, namely the ox burster is not as haunting or disturbing as the theatrical cut version, where the alien bursts out of a rottweiler. The end of the special edition is also weaker than the theatrical cut, but between the two versions lies a masterpiece. Everything following this sentence pertains to the special edition cut: A good candidate for 'most depressing movie ever made', Alien 3 is bleak down to it's nihilistic core, yet still manages to create some characters we really do like, even if many of them are, to paraphrase one of the convicts own words, 'murderers and rapists of women'. The film's faith-is-futile message may turn off some religious types, and Hicks n' Newt obsessed fanboys often get angry about how their two favorite stock characters die before the opening titles finish. Boo hoo. The series' focus is on Ripley, and she goes out in tragic, heroic style in a film that deserves a much better reputation.

****THIS REVIEW CONTAINS MAJOR SPOILERS****

As of the re-writing of this review, I have seen the film twice (both times in its opening weekend). The film failed miserably at the US box office, but when you take into account widespread campaigns of creepy misinformation like THIS, its failure doesn't seem all that surprising. Just more proof that the United States is a stunningly backwards country that is slowly retrogressing in time socially, while the rest of the world moves forward. As of this writing, the film has grossed $232 million outside the US, and is still doing very well in the UK and every other international market. As Roger Ebert said in his 4 star review of the film, "The books have been attacked by American Christians over questions of religion; their popularity in the U.K. may represent more confident believers whose response to other beliefs is to respond, rather than suppress."

The Golden Compass was, personally, the most anticipated film of my life. I first read the novel when I was twelve, and as I started to grow into the person I am today, it had a profound effect on me. It is hard for me to describe the books importance in shaping who I am today; growing up in the South, I lived in a deeply religious community, and though I was dragged to church every Sunday (and sometimes Wednesday), those fire and brimstone sermons just never took to me. I was extremely suspicious of all this Biblical stuff - after all, religion was supposed to make people "better", but so many of the deeply religious people I knew were hypocrites, bullies, and personality-less bores. Being a child, these critical thoughts never really came together in my mind to produce an "a-ha!" moment, and I only had a vague suspicion that all the people I knew were probably wrong. One day, as I was browsing my school library, I found a book with an interesting cover; it had a little girl riding on the back of a polar bear. "Bears are cool!", I thought, not knowing that they were indeed quite evil, as a certain Mr. Colbert would have you know. I checked the book out, and began to read. It was difficult to get into at first - the writing was very articulate and very English, but I had already read The Lord of the Rings trilogy (even though I had to force myself to continue at some points), and so I had confidence I would be just fine. I had never read a book like The Golden Compass before. It was remarkably intelligent. It said something meaningful and original. I had never encountered such complex themes before; for instance, the Church in the novel experiments on children (poor children, of course) in order to try and "save" their souls, when in actuality, due to their faith, they completely misinterpret a natural scientific phenomena, and then kill the children's souls in their misguided attempts to save them from "original sin". Factor in how Mrs. Coulter (Nicole Kidman), the Church's appointed agent to oversee the experiments, would never allow herself to be subjected to such an experiment -and actually gets off on watching the children suffer- and you have a portrait of how 'divine appointment' is just an excuse for sadists and psychopaths to assume positions of power, and then not have to answer for their crimes, whether it be torturing children in a fantasy novel, or raping altar boys in real life. Its religious themes aside, The Golden Compass is also remarkable for its none-to-subtle championing of feminism, and the acceptance of sexual and ethnic minorities. Whereas countless fantasy novels have paid vague lip service to such themes with limp allegory, Pullman dispells dancing around such subjects, and lays them bare. Lyra, the heroine, thinks of female scholars in her world as jokes, because that is the attitude held by the male scholars who run Jordan College, where she lives. When she comes to our world in the second book, she is surprised to find the scientist she seeks is a woman. That woman is Mary Malone, a former nun who abandoned that life when she realized it was sexually repressive to women, and denied her basic human needs and wants, such as love. Back in Lyra's world, Pullman insinuates that Mrs. Coulter is only able to ascend the ranks of power because she is extremely beautiful, and she uses this weapon to appeal to the priests in charge. With these examples, Pullman points out how patriarchal religious organizations are obsessed with, and try to dominate and control, the sexuality of women. And in a particularly daring move that has yet to be picked up on by fanatical Christian detractors, Pullman depicts an actual gay couple, kissing and deeply in love with each other. Oh, and they also happen to be angels, ratcheting the subversiveness up a few more notches. He even has the character Will, an adolescent boy, be admiring of the angels' deep love for each other. With these and other examples working their way throughout the trilogy, Pullman establishes himself as quite possibly the most accepting, progressive author of fantasy literature writing today. As if the themes of the novels weren't potent enough, the books themselves are exciting, disturbing, moving, and ultimately brilliant.

Now, after spending an eternity championing the books, how does the film version of The Golden Compass hold up? Remarkably well, as long as you are a little forgiving, and know going in that the theatrical cut is a butchered slice of studio interference. It is almost comical to watch early trailers for the film, in which nearly half the scenes shown are not in the film. In fact, one can gather from the snippets shown in trailers that Chris Weitz's original cut was remarkably faithful to the novel. The only reason the film went overbudget was due to New Line hacking the film down, wounding the narrative flow, and rendering much of the film nonsensical, which then required the need for reshoots to try and make the plot work. Originally, the film followed the book's sequence of events; one can see this in the trailers, which depict Lyra falling out of Lee Scoresby's balloon, as she does in the book, and this is what lands her in Svalbard. This entire scene was cut, which then required reshoots to somehow establish how Lyra got to Svalbard; cue a convenient Samoyed attack. Serafina Pekkala, the witch queen who aids Lyra in her quest, has several scenes cut which help to establish her character; Eva Green has stated that an entire scene was filmed where Farder Coram emerges from inside the Gyptian's boat, sensing her aboard, but she goes invisible to hide from him, and when she reappears to Lyra after he has gone, she is crying. Her first appearence in the film is also problematic; she simply appears, and basically says "Oh hi, I'm a witch!" This kind of rapid introduction plagues most of the characters in the theatrical cut. Also a problem is the ridiculous pace and the editing, most likely, again, a problem caused by suits hacking up the film. Some scenes lack basic transition shots, such as the first scene among the members of the Magisterium. We suddenly jump cut to a bunch of sinister priests sitting in total darkness - we don't know where we are at first, and the transition is jarring and annoying. As if that weren't enough, their expository dialogue is awful - another flaw that the film suffers from at times. Those instances aside, the film flows far too fast, but is still compulsively watchable. Chris Weitz's eye for visuals is genuinely impressive; this is certainly one of the nicest looking films to come along in quite some time. The production design is beautiful and immaculate, and the substantial bit of money that went into the film certainly shows up onscreen. Simply put, the locations and machines in the film are brilliantly realized to such a degree that the way they appear onscreen is virtually indistinguishable from the way I envisioned them as I read the novel. This perfection of design extends to the casting: Dakota Blue Richards is Lyra. Nicole Kidman is Mrs. Coulter (and the blonde hair makes sense, seeing as her daemon and wardrobe is all gold). The extensive supporting cast, including Daniel Craig as Lord Asriel (the beard works, but I like my Craig shaven, thank you), Eva Green as Serafina Pekkala, Sam Elliott as Lee Scoresby, Ian McKellen as the voice of Iorek Byrnison, and Freddie Highmore as the voice of Pantalaimon -just to name several- are all impeccably cast. Alexandre Desplat's score is suitably epic and grand, and he even manages to sneak that trademark undulating electronic bass of his in there at a few points. So, with all the technical aspects being spot on, the story elements have to satisfy at least on an equitable level. Unfortunately, this is not entirely the case with the theatrical cut. The story itself is a great one, but the way the present cut is edited, and the way the plot has been restructured, seriously lessens one's enjoyment and interest in the preceedings. That isn't to say the film is not enjoyable and interesting; it's still extremely entertaining. In an unexpected twist, the plot restructuring actually works in one instance: the fight at Bolvangar comes before the bear fight at Svalbard in the novel, but the events are reversed here, which makes sense on a cinematic level, as the battle at Bolvangar is bigger and a more fitting conclusion. However, had the original ending not been cut (causing reshoots for a very weak new epilogue), the film's original structure could have been preserved. It's infuriating to think that what is quite possibly a great fantasy film, and a fabulous adaption of a great novel, has been hacked apart by studio suits into something that is merely just 'very good'.

The biggest issue for me with this film, since the first announcement of it's production, has been the excising of the religious themes to appease the lunatic Christian fringe. In the weeks leading up to the film's release, I had read numerous reviews for the film, all of which would say things such as "it's completely sanitized." People who had read the novel and seen the film also even complained that the it was watered down, and they didn't have a clue as to how the next two novels would be adapted. To this, I must say: were you watching the same film I was? The men of the Magisterium dress like priests. They talk about heretic. Mrs. Coulter has a religious mural depicting the Kingdom of Heaven on her ceiling. The "Magisterial office", where Iorek's armor is kept, has paintings of saints and angels on it. Well people, if it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck...

One thing several critics have also pointed out is that the film has seemingly replaced the theme of totalitarian religion with just "authority" in general. They cite this as a fault, saying Lyra's battle against "the authority" is watered down and contrived; just a simple "follow your dreams" message. This simply shows their ignorance of the source material, or how ridiculously inattentive they are. When Mrs. Coulter says the word "authority" near the end of the film, it's "The Authority", capitalized, ie *GOD*. The Magisterium is The Church in this film. The speech about Adam & Eve and original sin is still here, it's just not fleshed out. Weitz has not sanitized the themes of the novel; he has disguised them so that they can be explored in full in the sequels.

In its present form, the film is better than the first installment in the Lord of the Rings trilogy, and if there is any kind of justice in the world, The Subtle Knife and The Amber Spyglass will be adapted to film as originally planned. The His Dark Materials trilogy has the potential for greatness - but only if the sequels are even greenlit, and New Line backs off from making any artistic decisions, while Chris Weitz lays off the expository dialogue. If the trilogy is left incomplete, it will be tragic missed opportunity.

CLICK HERE to read my review of The Invasion at DVDVerdict.com!

Baz Luhrmann and his muse, Nicole Kidman, re-team for this sweeping, magnificent, absorbing piece of wonderfully shameless entertainment. Luhrmann crams every kitschy by-gone film genre he can into his sprawling three hour run-time: screwball comedy, old fashioned epic, western, war movie and, of course, epic romance. It's a massively silly mess, but its so earnest and uncynical and gosh-darn eager to please that resisting it is only denying yourself its many pleasures. Kidman and Jackman are perhaps the only approximations to glamorous old Hollywood marquee names, and both commit to their roles with a giddy pleasure that carries over to the viewer: Kidman dances through each genre stereotype required by her character flawlessly, and Jackman is a man's-man actor who was born to be sexually objectified by an auteur like Luhrmann--it's easily the sexiest male performance in decades, self-conscious bathing scenes and all. With all its influences and winking homages, Australia cements Baz Luhrmann as the crazy, flamboyant, bisexual Aussie answer to Tarantino. Believe me folks, that's a compliment.

One of the better "family" films.

Kathy Bates, Jennifer Jason Leigh, and Judy Parfitt are all brilliant. Powerful, even though the ending stumbles a bit.

'Have you heard the word of God? It's the greatest gift of all time. You have to trust completely in God. He'll forgive you of all your sins.'

'Who forgives God?'

These lines of dialogue can best sum up what The Rapture is best at saying: if God exists, he has some serious sins of his own to atone for.
Although its low budget shows (and during the finale, does it ever), the film manages to overcome this with its fabulous performances, eerie musical score, and most of all, its ideas.

Mimi Rogers plays Sharon, a telephone operator who hates her job, has nothing in her life, and spends her evenings cruising for couples sex with her partner Vic. Eventually, this unfulfilling existance causes her to have a breakdown, and after attempting suicide, Sharon turns to fundamentalist Christianity.

The Rapture contains one of the most profound and conceptually brilliant endings in cinema history. ***SPOILERS AHEAD*** Sharon's faith in God is put to the test constantly througout the film - not her faith in his existance, of which she is always certain after her conversion, but her faith in his goodness and promises. After recieving a message from God to wait for the title event in the desert, Sharon obeys, but the rapture does not come as they were promised, and she is forced to kill her daughter, who can not physically stand to wait around any longer with no food. After sending her daughter to Heaven, Sharon despairingly turns the gun on herself - only to angrily fire shots into the sky, as she remembers that killing herself will send her straight to Hell. It's a powerful scene, and from then on until the silent end titles roll, The Rapture transforms from an interesting study of religious fanatacism, to a profound look at whether God, should he exist, deserves the love he demands from humanity. The ending, in which Sharon, standing in a kind of limbo between Heaven and Earth, refuses to tell God she loves him. Her daughter pleads with her to accept God back into her heart. After all, he did give her the gift of life. But Sharon counters that if God gave the world the "gift" of life, he also gave it the "gift" of suffering, and after all God's rules about love and caring - rules he himself does not abide by, considering his indifference to the suffering in the world - Sharon cannot say that she loves him. After her conversion to Christianity, Sharon married her loving husband and had her daughter, but both were brutally taken from her; her husband gunned down by a mentally deranged man, and her daughter killed by her own hand due to God's disregard for their survival in the desert. The Lord giveth, and the Lord taketh away. Sharon's final line, 'forever...', is devastating in its implications, but also powerfully triumphant; one soul's defiance of eternity and an indifferent, patriarchal deity.

Thank goodness the film is so well-written, because it lends itself to multiple interpretations, including the one above. What is probably Tolkein's own intent is a significant disappointment: a devout Jew, Tolkin is essentially critiquing how fundamentalist Christianity views God. So basically what we have here, if we subscribe to his view, is a big, cinematic cry of "you worship God the wrong way!" It seems slightly ridiculous how Tolkin goes on a full-out character assasination of the fundamentalist Christian God, raising several valid points about the dubious righteousness of a creator who demands love and obedience from his creations at all cost, but it mystifies me how he fails to see that these damning characteristics apply to his Jewish interpretation of God as well. Thankfully, his script does not explicitly trumpet this message, and is actually very subjective - many people even see this as a "tragedy", in which Sharon's main flaw is that she can't fully accept God into her heart. Yeah, whatever.

While Tolkin's script is brilliant, his direction is rather lacking. This was his debut film as a director, and his inexperience shows in the dull, static way the events of the first half unfold. He improves as he goes along, though, and there are several powerful moments and haunting visuals in the film's second half, most notably the shot of bars falling away in prison cells as the rapture comes, while an inmate sharing a cell with Sharon begins to sing Amazing Grace.
As Sharon, Mimi Rogers is fantastic, delivering a performance so strong she carries the entire film. David Duchovny is fine (in all senses of the word; he looks hot even with a mullet). Thomas Newman's musical score is subtle, yet haunting, and despite the film's flaws (of which there are several), this remains one of the most inexplicably underrated films of the past twenty years.

Beautiful. The first half plays out like another one of those lame 'love conquers all' movies, but thankfully, the film isn't that stupid, and goes in a rather smart direction toward the end.

An intelligent thriller for grown-up audiences, this sequel to the series is better than the also-good Fight the Future. Great performances from Duchovny and especially Anderson, with gorgeous cinematography by Bill Roe and an excellent score by Mark Snow. A brilliant prologue gives way to a film that moves at a leisurely pace, never giving into blockbuster excess or audience patronizing. Indeed, this may be why the film bombed so terribly at the summer box office: in the shadow of the disgustingly over-praised The Dark Knight, I Want to Believe, a subtler film about the different lengths and moral depths people will go to to preserve the lives of their loved ones, simply hadn't a chance.

It's a tragedy this film isn't seen as the wonderful masterpiece it is. Superior to the first Babe, it is also a touching, occasionally heartbreaking, richly imaginative film, and doesn't condescend to it's audience. It also has perhaps the most haunting moment in any 'kids' film; while being pursued by a vicious pit bull, Babe stops, turns to face his attacker, and asks 'Why?' If only the characters in stupid, vapidly-violent action films would ask this simple question.

Witty, utterly charming, and Sigourney Weaver is fabulous as always (and looks great as a blonde!).

Julianne Moore delivers another superb performance as a 50's housewife (for what seems to be the umpteenth time) struggling to support her large family by entering jingle contests. Really the only thing that makes the film so compelling is Moore - had any other actor been cast in her role, the film would have suffered tremendously. A large cast of child actors all acquit themeselves admirably - which is somewhat shocking considering the usual performance ability of children in films. Woody Harrelson as the alcoholic husband does go a bit over the top at times, but Moore balances him out. Consistently funny, sweet, sad, and ultimately quite touching, the film is well worth a viewing, and Moore's performance was very deserving of the Oscar nom it didn't recieve.

Addams Family Values is - and I know this is risking my arthouse cred :P - a comedy masterpiece. Paul Rudnick's script is so witty, so consistently hilarious, so downright bitchy, that it practically transcends any kind of flaws in story or plot structure. And the performances... all are incredible. Especially Joan Cusack as the psychotic nanny.

Asia Argento's 'The Heart is Decietful Above All Things' is a relentlessly horrifying panorama of disturbing child abuse, made indescribably harrowing by Argento's incredible direction and her monstrous, riveting portrayl of Sarah. The film is an acting tour de force, with some of the greatest child actor performances ever committed to film by the three young boys portraying Jeremaih, and a rock solid supporting cast including Winona Ryder and Marilyn Manson. As grotesque as it sounds, this is probably the most visually entrancing film about child abuse ever seen; Argento and her cinematographer come up with an astounding number of hauntingly beautiful shots, especially for a film with this kind of gritty subject matter. There is no denying that this is a flawlessly crafted film; it is as good as it could ever be. Well worth a viewing by those with a strong stomach - and those who want to see a film about REAL horror.

Another excellent film from Todd Solondz. Contains probably the most profound 'moral' message you'll ever hear in a film.

The acting is first rate all around, and Tennessee Williams' dialogue is predictably wonderful, though the film does feel a bit slow at times. The story itself is excellent. To imagine this was released in the 50's!

Inferior to Capote, unfortunately, but still quite strong, and thankfully, this version doesn't view Truman as a scumbag. The talking head thing doesn't really work, that is until the end when Sandra Bullock as Harper Lee gives a moving speech about expectations. The romance between Truman and Perry Smith could have been handled a bit better; it just spontaneously appears 3/4's into the movie, but it does end on a touching, deeply sad note. Plus, Sigourney Weaver and Isabella Rossellini are still super fabulous.

At times, this film is almost painful to watch, due to John Hurt's touchingly lonely performance. Thoroughly excellent.

Not as good as Dogville, but still very worthwhile. Excellent performances all around, and Bryce Dallas Howard makes an excellent Grace (though I do miss Nicole Kidman). Like Dogville, the film is open to many interpretations, making it prime material for multiple viewings to sort it out and discover new details. Manderlay also has a surprising emotional depth in some scenes. This was missing from Dogville, and one scene nearly brought me to tears. Fantastic.

Roger Ebert's four-star review is 100% accurate. Angela Bettis' performance elevates this to the level of a great horror film.

Surprisingly well done, and undeserving of a lot of the negative reviews it gets.

One of the most uplifting endings ever. A great film.

Charming, sweet, fun, and features some great songs.

Reese Witherspoon should have won her Oscar for *this* film.