My Favorite Movies

"The Elephant Man" is my favorite film ever. When I first saw it though, back in 1982 I think, I was so much in love with "Eraserhead" that I wanted there to be more surrealistic, dreamlike sequences. But then as I became more human, and more Victorian, I gradually came to love the film more and more each time I saw it, which must be about twelve times as of today. Retrospectively, I realize this film probably contributed to making me an absolute opponent of abortion and euthanasia before I even thought about the subject. Joseph Merrick is definitely someone I want to meet in Heaven.

"Harlequin" is my second favorite movie of all time. Is it a coincidence if it was also made in 1980 like the first, "The Elephant Man"? I am surprised that it never became a cult movie, despite the awards it received around the world the year it was released. Is it because most of the people involved in it disappeared into limbo, with director Simon Wincer going on to direct much less brilliant scripts, mostly for TV, (including quite a few "Young Indiana Jones" episodes) and screenwriter Everett De Roche also moving to the small screen after a few other hits such as "Link" and "Razorback" (though he currently seems to be making a comeback) ? Or is it because the movie has not been released in widescreen in either the U.S. or the U.K. (it was shot in 2.35 : 1) ?

Whatever the reasons, this fictional retelling of the story of Rasputin in a modern (late 70s) Australian context boasts a top-notch script, much in the same vein as M. Night Shyamalan's later works, except perhaps more subtle, and an unforgettable interpretation of the lead character, ambiguous and charismatic guru Gregory Wolfe, by the brilliant Robert Powell, who was also in my opinion the best Jesus on screen, and would have deserved to make a much more brilliant career.

The only weakness of the film that I am aware of is its visual special effects, which are very poor, but fortunately very scarce : this makes it the very opposite of the usual Hollywood movie, which is strong on SFX and weak on story. The whole cast is good (including young Mark Spain as hemophiliac Alex Rast), the score by Brian May (of "Mad Max" fame) nicely supports the more dramatic moments, and the whole film casts a spell over the viewer with its mysterious atmosphere, strange imagery and moral dilemmas.

Unfortunately, if you want to see a decent copy, and not a defaced, 4:3 one, you will have to purchase the zone 2 version that was released by the French magazine "Mad Movies". To my knowledge, this is the only way to see the film as it was originally shot.

"Harlequin" definitely should not remain a sleeper.

As a convert to Catholicism who used to own some bondage material in my early twenties (including John Wylie's "Gwendoline", four volumes of Eric Stanton and a £5 album of Bettie Page photographs published by Taschen), I was perhaps the ideal spectator for this film, because it could affect me in so many ways, not the least of which was bringing me back in time about twenty years.

But even though I was drawn by the subject matter, I didn't expect the film to be so good. First, based on a few glimpses I had had of the film on TV, I thought Gretchen Mol was not a dead ringer for Bettie Page, and I expected some sort of comedy where they would get all the details of the period clothing -fetish or other- wrong (if Steven Spielberg can't even get cuban heels for Elsa Schneider, what could you expect of such a low budget film?) But I was wrong on all counts, and especially about Gretchen Mol, whom I had already appreciated in "The Thirteenth Floor." After a few minutes, she had completely become Bettie Page in my mind, and her acting was so perfect I was mesmerised by the character. Every single actor in this film is brilliant, but Mol is magnetic.

The period is also wonderfully recreated. Due to the budget restrictions, many of the establishing shots are stock from the fifties, and because they are grainier, you always can tell the difference. But I didn't mind. Apart from the grain, the transitions were seamless, and really brought the forties and fifties back to life.

What I also really loved about the film is that despite its subject, it is not a mindless pamphlet about the marvels of sexual liberation, the harmlessness of pornography and the evil repressiveness of religion. The judges and moral authorities portrayed in the movie are not caricatures of "stuck up victorians", or whatever cliche the sexual liberationists claim sexual moralists are, but genuine, three-dimensional human beings with a real concern for the consequences of sexual immorality. Christianity is not denigrated either, and in fact the film contains some of the most moving religious moments I have seen on screen since I can't remember when.

I don't know how reliable the film is as a document, and the absence of reference to Bettie Page's decade as a schizophrenic certainly distorts the picture of the character a little. But as a film, it works perfectly, creating a very powerful portrait of a complex, multifaceted woman. The black and white photography is superb, and some recreations of Bettie's black and white shorts reach an almost lynchian surrealism.

The USCB rated this film O for "full-frontal and rear female nudity, recurring sexually aberrant poses, the suggested sexual abuse of a minor, an implied gang rape, an instance of rough language and profanity" (the latter promptly chided by Bettie Page herself), considering the "treatment of Page's religious convictions... superficial." So this is definitely not a film for everyone.

As for me, call me a pervert (I suppose I am, however much I have tried to reform myself), but I was just enthralled by it.

I would not describe Phantasm as a masterpiece, but it's one of my all-time cult favorites. I discovered it back when I was about as old as the protagonist and could identify with him. I watched it twice the same day, and then listened again and again to the soundtrack, which I had taped. I now own the "sphere edition" of the four movies, which is great, and a copy of the novel signed by Coscarelli. This is truly one of the films that have become part of my life.

The first time I saw "They Live", I found it ridiculous and boring. I've seen it quite a few more times since then, and it has become one of my cult movies. I know I will return to it again and again.

This is another movie I discovered recently and have seen only once. Once more, it deals with the loss of one's beloved, and how difficult it is to live again without that person. Reincarnation is just a gimmick to explore these feelings, so if you are a Christian, don't shun the movie because of its apparently "new age" premise. You would be missing a very powerful experience.

As a weird person myself (I've even been told so this very morning), I thoroughly empathize with the protagonist of this movie. This is a true film (as opposed to a Hollywood ride, for instance), with beautiful black and white cinematography, and a true love of its subject. Moreover, it has what I consider to be the most beautiful declaration of love ever filmed.

"Downfall" is a lesson in how to make historical movies. Instead of concocting caricatures to support some simplistic ideological discourse, or taking liberties with the truth to fit a Hollywood formula of dramatic structure, it seeks to depict the events as they took place, as faithfully as possible. The result is a total immersion in this sordid but gripping moment in history, filled with the real drama of life.

Also recommended, though of course weaker, is Christian Duguay's "Hitler: The Rise of Evil", and the brilliant six-hour TV docudrama "Speer and Hitler: The Devil's Architect", starring Sebastian Koch ("The Lives of Others.")

This is a highly enjoyable film by one of Hong Kong's best directors ever, King Hu. It has a great cast and feels almost like a "Mission: Impossible" movie of the Yuan dynasty. I am not too fond of several of Hu's movies released more recently, but this one is definitely one of his best.

This is another film I have seen about a dozen times, strangely enough, as I am not a very virile person (to put it mildly.) Maybe at some level I can sense that Howard himself was just a tender-hearted person. I love the music, the philosophical themes, and the rather realistic texture of the early iron age setting. Milius stole a scene from a Sammo Hung movie, though.

Of course this is not a cinematic masterpiece, but it is the movie I have seen the most times, simply because I am (or used to be) a hopeless trekkie (the Star Trek universe used to be half-real in my mind), and because it featured the only acceptable Vulcan female until T'Pol, and I was in love with her, as a half-Vulcan myself. So I have watched the film 18 times or so, and I might even see it a few times more. I think every good movie should end on planet Vulcan. For me that's even better than the hero getting the girl.

Jean Delannoy died yesterday at the age of 100, depressed that his films were no longer shown on French television. I hope where he is now he knows he had a fan who liked some of his movies enough to have asked for their inclusion in the Flixster database.

Delannoy was 80 when he directed this film, which, together with its sequel, "La Passion de Bernadette" is in my opinion the best depiction of holiness on screen. And the reason why it is so good is that it is simple and neither tries to go for artsy, modernistic pathos, nor for cheesy hagiography, nor for the dechristianized watering down common with such films.

In terms of screenwriting and filmmaking, "Bernadette" and its sequel are probably inferior to "The Song of Bernadette", but as a sincere document on a remarkable woman and her encounter with the miraculous, I think it is even better.

If you are interested in learning more about the story of the apparitions in Lourdes, the best source is Rene Laurentin's exhaustive research.

"The Passion of Bernadette" is the rather anticlimactic sequel to Delannoy's film "Bernadette", which depicts the Marian apparitions in Lourdes. Because of compatibility problems with my DVD player, I happened to see it before the latter, and found it a wonderful film in its own right. Holiness is not about visions and miracles: it is a way of being, living and loving, day after day, often in the most ordinary circumstances, which is exactly what this film portrays.

Director Jean Delannoy died yesterday (Wednesday June 18) at the age of 100. I hope he will eventually get the recognition he deserves, if only for these two films.

This is a classic from my childhood I have seen again and again over the years. The question the film asks is: Can science and technology protect us from our sinful nature and from the demonic? And courageously for such a technophile-looking film, it answers no, which I think is correct.

This is an excellent black and white movie about the apparitions in Lourdes, based on the book by Franz Werfel (a Jew who became Alma Mahler's husband.) Bernadette Soubirous is portrayed by an actress I particularly like, Jennifer Jones, and the script is quite brillant. For accuracy, I think the two films by Jean Delannoy are better though. I also have them both.

Another highly enjoyable King Hu movie set in a mountain monastery where several disreputable martial artists are trying to get hold of a priceless buddhist scroll. With some of the mysticism of "A Touch of Zen", I consider it one of King Hu's best three movies.

A few years ago, I bought a copy of the Visual Bible?s "Gospel of Matthew", which is a word for word reading of the original text with a voice over reading the narrative parts and actors mouthing the dialogues and monologues. I was not very enthusiastic about it, and the DVD has remained mostly unwatched on my shelves since then. So it took quite a lot of persuading by many Internet reviewers to convince me to give this adaptation of the Gospel of John a chance.

For me, so far, there have been three excellent Jesus movies (and I may have seen a couple you haven?t even heard of) : Zeffirelli?s "Jesus of Nazareth", Hayes and Sokolov?s "The Miracle Maker", and Mel Gibson?s "The Passion of the Christ". The rest I would consider to range from mediocre to abysmal. (My perfect Jesus movie would be an adaptation of Anne Rice?s "Christ the Lord" series by Hayao Miyazaki, but I don?t see that happening.)

Well, I am pleased to report that I consider "The Gospel of John" to have joined the small circle of brilliant Jesus movies. Of course, it is not perfect. The main problem is that the text the producers chose is that of the "Good News Bible", a modern English translation that is far from being the most accurate or the most literary. Then the actress chosen to play Mary is too old, not half as beautiful as she should be, and devoid of any spiritual aura (it takes a Catholic to get Mary right, maybe because Protestants tend to forget Luke 1, 48 while we pray the rosary), Jesus doesn?t walk right (he reminded me of Tony Robinson on a Time Team dig, and occasionally of a belly dancer) and is a bit too sexy (twice women seem about to kiss him), Mary Magdalene (Gormenghast?s Linsey Baxter) wears too much make up... but these are relatively minor squabbles, and when you think of all that can go wrong in a Jesus movie (and usually does), it is quite a relief to see that virtually all the rest goes from good to perfect (including the walking on the waters scene, which usually makes me cringe.) And if the violence of Gibson?s Passion was too much for you, then you will probably be pleased to learn that the flogging is just shadows on the wall and the nailing to the Cross and the breaking of the legs of the thieves are performed off-screen. Jesus is also much less austere and much more engaging than he seems to be on the movie poster, though he is not as supernatural and ascetic as Robert Powell?s.

What I loved most about the movie was perhaps the acting, which I would describe as the best I have seen outside of "Battlestar Galactica". Three scenes in particular stand out in my mind : the meeting with the Samaritan woman (Nancy Palk) was particularly moving (even though I imagined her as slightly younger and more flirtatious) ; the cure of the blind man (Stuart Fox) was also very well acted ; and I was touched by the inner radiance of Mary of Bethany (Miriam Hughes, who by the way is also very cute) : when the two sisters Mary and Martha are shown for the first time, you don?t need to be told which is which, the casting is that good. And I am only mentioning actors who have only a few minutes of screen time.

The score was also very beautiful, so much so that I am considering buying the CD. Perhaps not all the credit should go to Jeff Danna, the composer, however, as he didn?t write the orchestrations, and there seem to have been borrowings from other sources, mostly from Psalms, Christian aramaic chants and other vocal pieces sung by Esther Lamandier (whose work I intend to investigate) but also from a symphony by Valentin Silvestrov (who seems to have written some beautiful music for piano, though his orchestral work sounds a bit too modern to my ears.)

Fans of 24 will be also be pleased to recognize Carlo Rota (Chloe?s boyfriend) hidden under the helmet and beard of the lead Temple Guard, and trekkies will enjoy the perfect narration by Christopher Plummer, though they probably would have preferred the original Klingon.

A few years ago, I bought a copy of the Visual Bible's "Gospel of Matthew", which is a word for word reading of the original text with a voice over reading the narrative parts and actors mouthing the dialogues and monologues. I was not very enthusiastic about it, and the DVD has remained mostly unwatched on my shelves since then. So it took quite a lot of persuading by many Internet reviewers to convince me to give this adaptation of the Gospel of John a chance.

For me, so far, there have been three excellent Jesus movies (and I may have seen a couple you haven't even heard of) : Zeffirelli's "Jesus of Nazareth", Hayes and Sokolov's "The Miracle Maker", and Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ". The rest I would consider to range from mediocre to abysmal. (My perfect Jesus movie would be an adaptation of Anne Rice's "Christ the Lord" series by Hayao Miyazaki, but I don't see that happening.)

Well, I am pleased to report that I consider "The Gospel of John" to have joined the small circle of brilliant Jesus movies. Of course, it is not perfect. The main problem is that the text the producers chose is that of the "Good News Bible", a modern English translation that is far from being the most accurate or the most literary. Then the actress chosen to play Mary is too old, not half as beautiful as she should be, and devoid of any spiritual aura (it takes a Catholic to get Mary right, maybe because Protestants tend to forget Luke 1, 48 while we pray the rosary), Jesus doesn't walk right (he reminded me of Tony Robinson on a Time Team dig, and occasionally of a belly dancer) and is a bit too sexy (twice women seem about to kiss him), Mary Magdalene (Gormenghast's Linsey Baxter) wears too much make up... but these are relatively minor squabbles, and when you think of all that can go wrong in a Jesus movie (and usually does), it is quite a relief to see that virtually all the rest goes from good to perfect (including the walking on the waters scene, which usually makes me cringe.) And if the violence of Gibson's Passion was too much for you, then you will probably be pleased to learn that the flogging is just shadows on the wall and the nailing to the Cross and the breaking of the legs of the thieves are performed off-screen. Jesus is also much less austere and much more engaging than he seems to be on the movie poster, though he is not as supernatural and ascetic as Robert Powell's.

What I loved most about the movie was perhaps the acting, which I would describe as the best I have seen outside of "Battlestar Galactica". Three scenes in particular stand out in my mind : the meeting with the Samaritan woman (Nancy Palk) was particularly moving (even though I imagined her as slightly younger and more flirtatious) ; the cure of the blind man (Stuart Fox) was also very well acted ; and I was touched by the inner radiance of Mary of Bethany (Miriam Hughes, who by the way is also very cute) : when the two sisters Mary and Martha are shown for the first time, you don't need to be told which is which, the casting is that good. And I am only mentioning actors who have only a few minutes of screen time.

The score was also very beautiful, so much so that I am considering buying the CD. Perhaps not all the credit should go to Jeff Danna, the composer, however, as he didn't write the orchestrations, and there seem to have been borrowings from other sources, mostly from Psalms, Christian aramaic chants and other vocal pieces sung by Esther Lamandier (whose work I intend to investigate) but also from a symphony by Valentin Silvestrov (who seems to have written some beautiful music for piano, though his orchestral work sounds a bit too modern to my ears.)

Fans of 24 will be also be pleased to recognize Carlo Rota (Chloe's boyfriend) hidden under the helmet and beard of the lead Temple Guard, and trekkies will enjoy the perfect narration by Christopher Plummer, though they probably would have preferred the original Klingon.

I had already seen the BBC adaptation thrice, and the cartoon once or twice (when I was much younger), not to mention listening to the BBC audio drama (which I have on videotape), so I was extremely happy when they did this version. Tilda Swinton is a great Snow Queen.

So far, I have only seen this film once, and I don't like giving such high marks to movies I have not had the time to really grow into. But I read Matheson's book back when I was in high school (and loved it), I already knew the soundtrack from back then too, and when I saw the movie, it felt like all the good, romantic bits of "Body Double" without the power drill in the tummy and the sleaze. Being a great time traveller myself, I thoroughly enjoyed the film, which also deals with a theme I am particularly sensitive to: the inaccessibility or loss of one's beloved.

When I read the story of this destitute Catholic recluse from Chicago who died leaving a 15,000 page children's novel about an endless war between Christian nd anti-Christian nations (oh, plus a 5,000 page autobiography, and another 10,000 page novel), I knew I had to see the documentary. I am fascinated by creative eccentrics who manage to design a counter-cultural world of their own, and Darger was no disappointment.

Of course, his art is very derivative. Even before the voiceover got to explaining it, I could see that he had no talent for drawing and he was just tracing illustrations from children's books. As for his writing skills, they were harder to judge, despite the samples read in the voiceover, but it is obvious that Darger engaged in some rather immature self-glorification (portraying himself as a six-foot tall general in his fantasy), a fair amount of silly storytelling (such as his seven Vivian girls releasing mice to scare the enemy onto tables and chairs) and probably as much creative borrowing as in his visual art (recycling
characters from the Oz books, among others.)

However, I couldn't help but be fascinated by the working capacity of this single-minded man. Though the term is never used in the documentary, he may have been a savant, with his extremely ritualistic, obsessive lifestyle, his tiresome appetite for figures and facts (as evidenced in his ten year weather diary and the casualty lists for his fictional battles) and his childlike, autistic behaviour (he seems to have been very similar to the savant twins, Flo and Kay Lymna.)

What put me to shame the most was how pious a man he was. An almost exact contemporary of that much more famous
and probably much more talented Catholic world builder, J.R.R Tolkien, he was incredibly more explicit about his faith, saturating his writings with an
unflinchingly Catholic outlook that makes Tolkien look like a closet Christian.

Some commentators feel shocked by the amount of violence in his work. My own impression is that he probably internalised the Church's long history of persecution, as represented most vividly in his mind by the massacre of the Holy Innocents. His tortured children are a metaphor for the Christians' two thousand year history of persecution, projected onto a kind of eschatological battle, itself visualized as a kind of American Civil War writ large.

By being so graphic in his depiction of violence done to children (with images of evisceration in particular), I think Darger was being uncannily prophetic: he died in 1972, a year before Roe v. Wade legalised abortion, and made his visions a reality.