Showrogan

No new reviews. Rate some more movies.

• 
  TheReaperakaLordCorv...

  Hey - try this quiz and see how we compare
  
  what superhero is this

  posted 5 days ago
• 
  kubotai

  hi, nice profile!!! how are u!! :)

  posted 6 days ago
• 
  I recommend you see...

  [Rec]

  by Cal

  "Yesterday, we received a call from a vet who had a dog brought in with an unknown disease. The dog went into a coma and a few moments later came to, and was extraordinarily aggressive. He started attacking all of the pets at the clinic. We had to give him several tranquilizers and then put him to sleep. We followed the chip in his ear, which led us to this building."

  
  To most horror aficionados, the words "found footage" will bring back memories of 1999's The Blair Witch Project and the insurmountable hype surrounding this low-budget independent picture. Due to the popularity and cult following of Blair Witch, the "found footage" genre was swiftly established.
  [Rec] is a Spanish addition to the genre. It's a masterful mixture of Blair Witch and Danny Boyle's 28 Days Later... that, simply put, will scare the absolute hell out of you! [Rec] is a relentlessly scary, brilliantly conceived, marvellously executed and laudably effective horror film. It permits little respite, thus little chance for you to catch your breath. By the end you'll be gasping for air and begging for mercy. The movie is completely unyielding from the first frame 'til the last. It's riveting and utterly petrifying at a taut running time of about 75 minutes.
  
  Forget Cloverfield and Diary of the Dead (two other recent "found footage" flicks), as [Rec] is more focused and far more terrifying. In Cloverfield a group of party-goers brave the destroyed streets and subways of monster-torn Manhattan. Diary of the Dead follows film students roaming the back roads of Pennsylvania as they avoid a zombie plague. In [Rec] - as in the record button on a camera - the action is confined to a single claustrophobic apartment block and the nature of the threat is mysterious. The film is a deft combination of blatant gory genre thrills and terror of the unknown. Nothing is more terrifying than being trapped in a pitch black room struggling for light as eerie noises fill the air. It's a thrilling, enthralling, captivating experience and the best of its kind. You want nightmares? You'll get 'em for sure! This is the greatest horror film since Neil Marshall's The Descent.
  
  In tradition with similar films of the sub-genre, the entire flick is merely raw, unedited footage as if someone recovered a tape and viewed the contents. [Rec] opens with a fairly soft, gentle prologue as we're introduced to the crew of a late-night reality TV show called While You're Sleeping - invisible cameraman Pablo (Rosso) and presenter Ángela (Velasco). The two will be covering the activities at a local fire station for the duration of the night. Ángela (with trusty cameraman Pablo) tour the station; examining equipment and interviewing the squad. However boredom sets in as emergencies are scarce and the phone fails to ring. The monotony of the situation is soon broken when the team is summoned by a seemingly innocuous call: an old woman is trapped in her apartment. The news team accompany the fireman in the hope of getting an interesting scoop; instead they become trapped in the apartment building that's suddenly quarantined for mysterious reasons. An infection begins spreading throughout the building...and all hell breaks loose as everyone is soon fighting for their lives while Ángela records a running commentary.
  
  

  "It's nearly 2 A.M. and we're still sealed in this building that we came to with the firemen earlier this evening, to assist an elderly woman who later attacked a policeman and a fireman. They're both in critical condition. The police won't let us leave and are giving us no explanations."
  
  Cranking the tension up to 11, Spanish co-directors Jaume Balagueró and Paco Plaza utilise every tool at their disposal to frighten and disturb, from shutting out the lights to the sudden menacing presence of an "infected" individual. This is high-quality horror that terrifies on a truly primal level. This is perhaps the correct antidote to suppress the constant conventional horror outings of the early 21st century. [Rec] is already the stuff of nightmares, but the ingeniousness of the film is telling the story using the news team's hand-held camera. This device was used to great effect in the J.J. Abrams blockbuster Cloverfield, but [Rec] takes things to a whole new level. Cloverfield followed party-goers filming a monster attack on the city because they want to document the event. Diary of the Dead used the technique for the sake of using the technique. In [Rec] the characters have a genuine reason to keep the camera rolling - they're despondent, arrogant journalists sitting on the story of their lives. Beyond that, the camera becomes a method for the victims to record their testimonies and they believe it can be exploited as proof such an occurrence actually transpired.
  
  At about the 50-minute mark, the film's brilliance suddenly elevates once again. For the remaining 20 minutes the film is riveting and fast-paced. It builds to an absolutely incredible climax that refuses mercy to everyone.
  
  "There are incredible security measures in place. We know nothing. They haven't told us a thing. We saw special forces, health inspectors wearing suits and masks, and it's not very comforting."
  
  The film is carried by a remarkable screenplay. In order for us to feel emotionally connected to the characters during the catastrophe, solid characterisations are imperative. Regardless of the film's "found footage" style, the sprawling congregation of characters are adequately developed. Opening with straight-to-camera intros for Ángela's TV show, the writer-directors quickly sketch her character - a sassy, resourceful reporter - before locking us in the apartment block and tossing away the key. Playing the realism card, the journalists wish to interview the residents of the apartment building as the night grows more intense. These interviews function effectively as character development. However, the film is occasionally undermined by the sheer idiocy of the characters. While escape plans are devised late into the game, the most obvious exit is finally mentioned. Every so often it's problematical to connect with the characters on a truly human level as they act like clichéd, one-dimensional horror victims.
  
  The shaky-cam style employed for [Rec] has naturally been subjected to bitter criticisms. There are no prologues or epilogues in the form of text or narration. From start to finish, the zombie-type threat is obscured in anonymity. To be frank, text or voice-over explication would subdue the impact. The film is simply intended to be an unmolested copy of a tape recovered at the scene, and this illusion is never severely ruined. The shaky-cam style works effectively as we are deafened by each gun-shot and are shaken up by each attack or bone-chilling happening. The faux docu hand-held technique amps up the single-location claustrophobia brilliantly. Wobbly-cam shots add to the confusion as [Rec] reels out the customary zombie movie clichés: shouting supporting characters, a kiddie zombie and callous authorities failing to do anything useful (who, in an utter masterstroke, are glimpsed only as silhouettes as they tightly pack the building in biohazard plastic).
  
  The acting is uniformly excellent. This is naturalistic acting at its finest. Never do any actors strike an incorrect note, nor are they contrived. Velasco is particularly convincing as the gormless reporter and her subsequent terror is all the more infectious as a result. There's strong support from the surrounding actors, including Ferran Terraza, Jorge Serrano, David Vert and Vicente Gil. The filmmakers keep the dialogue largely improvisational, elevating the realism. The effective filming approach merged with such brilliant acting allows you to forget that this is just a movie. The edge-of-your-seat tension is sustained until the very last second. Films of this standard are few and far between.
  
  "There's something more to this place. Our cells don't work. Neither does the T.V. or radio. We're isolated."
  [Rec] is a consummate brew of high-class shocks and verité, generating one of the best horror films of recent memory. This is a rare cinematic treat - a horror film that relies on suspense created by fear of the unknown as opposed to geysers of blood and gore. This is a runaway rollercoaster of a fright flick that's so scary it'll leave you squirming in your seat. From the gentle opening to the shocking climax, I was riveted. Never did I even glance at my watch or allow my eyes to focus on anything other than the screen. Jaume Balagueró and Paco Plaza orchestrate a number of nail-bitingly suspenseful sequences as well as some genuine jump-out-of-your-seat moments. Suffice to say, nothing in the previous work of the joint directors could have prepared us for the nerve-shredding intensity of these 75 minutes of perfectly formed terror and peril. This is a sublime, well-done little flick that demands to be seen at the earliest opportunity. It's so good that Sony's Screen Gens snapped up the rights for a US remake entitled Quarantine. Highly [Rec]ommended!
  
  "We have to tape everything, Pablo. For fuck's sake.

  PvtCaboose91

  [Rec] is a terrifying horror film! Definitely one of the best horrors of recent memory.
  
  It's a "found footage" horror film, but this effect works tremendously well. It's scarier and more entertaining than Blair Witch, and it's more effectively subdued and claustrophobic than Cloverfield.
  
  Highly recommended! If you want a scary horror film that w[Rec]ks your nerves, look no further!

  posted 6 days ago
• 
  I recommend you see...

  High School Musical 3: Senior Year

  InfamousHugo

  How the hell did I get recommendations for that film ???
  I hate that 7 of my friends have seen it ... IN THEATRE.
  What the hell is wrong with you ?
  Im not seeing this ... ever.
  Yeah, you caught me on a wrong day.
  So what ???

  posted 11 days ago
• 
  I recommend you see...

  The Incredible Hulk

  by Cal

  "As far as I'm concerned, that man's whole body is property of the U.S. army."

  
  The first stab at a cinematic incarnation of the Marvel superhero The Incredible Hulk was Ang Lee's excruciatingly ponderous, self-indulgent 2003 production simply titled Hulk. The central criticism of Lee's original film is that it's too thoughtful and slow to deliver the popcorn goods. It was also a glacial pure drama that contained an atrocious final reel. Needless to say, Lee's Hulk received a negative reception.
  
  During initial development for 2008's The Incredible Hulk the film was planned as a sequel. Eventually it materialised into a total reboot of the cinematic Hulk franchise. The filmmakers promised it'd be more of an action-oriented blockbuster. While marginally superior to its forerunner, The Incredible Hulk is anything but incredible. It's disappointingly rushed, disjointed and fluffy. The sub-standard outcome of this flick has left me starving for a decent cinematic rendering of the Marvel superhero. Hollywood has yet to produce a truly iconic and memorable film featuring the big green guy.
  
  Bruce Banner (Norton) was in a laboratory accident, poisoning him with gamma radiation that damaged his cells and unleashed the unbridled force of rage inside him. Whenever Bruce gets angry, he transforms into the big green guy known as The Hulk. Bruce flees his home, cutting off a life he knew and the woman he loves: Betty Ross (Tyler). He lives life off the grid, constantly on the move to evade the obsessive pursuit of the US military that seeks to capture him and brutally exploit his power. Bruce works to find a cure for his genetic disorder, eventually travelling back to America to track down a certain "Mr. Blue" (Nelson) who has been Bruce's anonymous consultant for months.
  Enter British military specialist Emil Blonsky (Roth) who yearns for the power possessed by Bruce Banner. Needless to say, he develops into a Hulk-like character and a climactic showdown ensues.
  
  The Incredible Hulk skips an extensive origins tale. Zak Penn's screenplay opts to show Bruce Banner's back-story during the opening credits. It's a straightforward five-minute montage effectively conveying the story so far. This is an example of the script doing something correctly. In fact, in the first 20 minutes the film never strikes an incorrect note. The characters are given a fitting introduction and the script moves at a desirable pace. Instead of verbal exposition, Penn's script shows the story through visuals and even a brief conversation via computer. Beyond these opening 20 minutes, the script is immediately downgraded into cheese territory. Initially the film established a "less is more" approach, shrouding Banner and his alter ego in a cloud of secrecy. It's more intriguing and it provides a heightened degree of momentum. This approach, though, is soon jettisoned in order for the action to start. The Incredible Hulk then becomes nothing but a string of destruction, undermined by the dreadfully phoney CGI and zero depth. The film's structure is incoherent and jumpy. Choppy editing and uniformly corny dialogue are also key problems.
  
  The Incredible Hulk is the ideal cinematic representation of The Hulk for those desiring lots of action. The climax runs for approximately 10 minutes. Throughout the film there's adequate mayhem to keep one entertained. By all means, it is moderately entertaining. It's more fun than Ang Lee's 2003 picture. But where Lee's film succeeds (i.e. some thoughtful dialogue) this film fails. Ironically, where Lee's film fails (i.e. action) this film succeeds. If a harmonious blend of these two films was created we'd have the definitive Hulk adventure.
  
  Towards the end of the film's post-production period there was much discussion regarding the running time. The studio were pressuring for a film running at under two hours. Norton lobbied furiously for more characterisation and back-story, and general dialogue. As this was a summer blockbuster and the studio had more power, the film was trimmed down to its 110-minute length. 70 minutes were reportedly removed during the editing process. It's so painfully obvious that this is a longer film that's been far too compressed. The structure doesn't flow correctly. Various bridge scenes appear to be missing. The worst offender is Bruce Banner easily travelling from Guatemala to California with no money, official documents and his face plastered on every government watch list. A bulk of the film appears half-baked and underdone. Characters even disappear, such as Betty's current boyfriend who seems to be simply tossed aside upon Bruce's return. The removed 70 minutes could've redeemed The Incredible Hulk. Extended version please!!
  
  However, a number of the scenes present in the final product are quite awful. The worst scene in the entire film is an unnecessarily cheesy sequence during which The Hulk and Betty sit outside a cave at night in the pouring rain. It feels shamelessly copied from Peter Jackson's King Kong. It's a tender, corny scene to establish the love shared by Betty and Bruce. It comes off as a waste of time.
  
  In tradition with most Hollywood action fluff, the final climactic battle is all special effects and epicness without a shred of brains. Even after a few minutes of the battle people still appear to be running away from the action. Some civilians are even shown to be tossed around in the mayhem. Surely a few dozen people were killed, yet there's never an ounce of sentimentality towards them. Lots of cars blow up, lots of buildings are destroyed, and lots of people are killed. Millions of dollars worth of damage is inflicted without any backlash. It's all to make the most exhilarating viewing...and it doesn't even do that. The Incredible Hulk suffers from awful visual effects. The climactic action scene exhibits mortifying phoneyness, mirroring a video game cut-scene. Everything from the helicopters to the environment looks absurdly unconvincing. It's extremely off-putting due to the lack of polish in the CGI. It's been five long years since Lee's 2003 film, and director Leterrier was playing with a massive budget, but the special effects looks pathetically unfinished. The final battle sequence of Lee's film was nothing short of amazing (probably the best thing about the entire movie). The special effects were particularly stunning. In the case of The Incredible Hulk, though, the sweeping Hulk movement is accounted for, but the clarity is lacking. The creature lacks vital crispness. With the inclusion of such awful CGI it felt as if someone was tapping me on the shoulder, whispering "Hey, you're just watching a movie". The gift of total immersion is discarded, and it's very hard to get into. I'd give up all the thunderous explosions that litter this film for a single scene of awe. For a film titled "Incredible", the computer-generated Hulk is anything but.
  
  Performances are generally below standard. Edward Norton is a gross miscast. I've enjoyed him in several other movies (dramas like Fight Club, 25th Hour, etc) but as Bruce Banner he doesn't fit. Eric Bana was a far superior Bruce simply because he looked the part as both the big green dude and the scrawny scientist dude. Norton's appearance isn't sufficiently utilised for the CG creation of The Hulk as well. It looks as if his appearance was completely disregarded for the Hulk's computer generated image.
  Liv Tyler is emotionless and stiff. While sharing scenes with Norton or William Hurt, she's abjectly outclassed. Her delivery is flat and without emotion. We're never convinced she and Banner are former lovers or that they still have feelings for one another as it's not conveyed well enough.
  Tim Roth is the only actor capable of bestowing the film with what it truly needed. He's a sublime villain for sure. His part deserves further expansion.
  
  I rather hated Ang Lee's 2003 Hulk and yearned for a better movie. While The Incredible Hulk was in development I prayed for an antidote to suppress the damage caused by Lee's prior film. As it is, this reboot of the film franchise is an incredible failure (pardon the pun). It's more fun and enjoyable, and it's an easier viewing experience, but it's too nonsensical, fluffy and corny with special effects that look incomplete and cartoonish. The first 20 minutes are terrific, as are the final few minutes. In between there ain't much to get excited about. It's intense, fun and somewhat entertaining, but it's much too flawed.

  PvtCaboose91

  I feel it is my duty to warn everyone about the tragic outcome of thise once-promising blockbuster. Before the film's trailer I expected good things...then the trailer lowered by expectations and I waited until the DVD release.
  The Incredible Hulk is an incredible pile of shit. It's tragic this film turned out the way it did after all the problems behind the scenes and the effort to revive a Hulk cinematic franchise.
  
  Another reboot would be too ludicrous. They've had two attempts and couldn't pull it off. Leave the big green guy alone.

  posted 15 days ago
• 
  I recommend you see...

  Sick Nurses (Suay Laak Sai)

  by Duncan

  It's like And Then There Were None meets Ju-On: The Grudge as directed by Quentin Tarantino.
  
  Considering that it's a horror movie, I guess the fact that the scares are few and far between is kind of a drawback. Still, a surprisingly sexy antagonist toy around with the lives of a bunch of vain nurses and the pig of a doctor they work for is surprisingly fun to watch.
  
  File Sick Nurses under "Guilty Pleasures".

  DuncanRR

  Before I head back to facebook, I figured I'd send out one more recommendation.
  
  People I'd recommend this for:
  *Fans of J-Horror (real J-Horror, not the American remake crap)
  *Fans of slasher flicks
  *Fans of B movies and/or Grade Z flicks
  *Fans of black comedy
  
  People I'd NOT recommend this for:
  *Squeamish parsons, or people who get bored with gore
  *People who want a deep story and character development
  *People looking for a good scare (unless you thought the recent remake of Prom Night was scary, this ain't gonna set your teeth a-chattering)
  *People with eating disorders or poor self-esteem when it comes to their bodies (one of the nurses is a fitness freak, and another one's bulimic)
  *Homophobic parsons (the twist at the end is -and I mean this in the least derogatory way possible- pretty gay)
  
  So, if you fit the criteria, give Sick Nurses a rent.
  
  Have a Happy Halloween everybody. And remember kiddies, have your parents check your candy for poison or razor blades.

  posted 17 days ago
• 
  I recommend you see...

  Sleepy Hollow

  by Duncan

  If you're expecting a faithful re-telling of the classic short story, look somewhere else. If you're expecting darkly lit, mildly humorous, entertaining Halloween fare that's not too gory for the little ones but still packs some grizzly scares, then you're in for a treat.
  
  The names of people and places are the same, but that's where any connection to Washington Irving's tale stops. Ichabod Crane, masterfully played by Johnny Depp, is a skeptical forensic scientist in this incarnation, rather than a superstitious schoolteacher. The Headless Horseman is an actual vengeful ghost rather than an envious Brom Van Brunt in disguise, and the Van Tassel's ... well, to prevent giving anything away, let's just say they aren't quite what they seem.
  
  Yes, boils and ghouls, this isn't Washington Irving's legend. This is Tim Burton's tale, and although it's not quite as good as some of his other work, it's still a helluva lot of fun. The cast is superb, the cinematography is gorgeous, and the music is excellent. Throw in the occasional "Nightmare Before Christmas" homage and a straightforward plot rife with witty dialogue (or, in one characters case, a monologue), and you got yourself a nice little fairytale for a Hallow's Eve night...

  DuncanRR

  Hello again, everyone. Just want to wish you all a happy and safe Hallow's Eve, and let you all know that I'll be managing all my flixster stuff from my facebook profile from here on out.
  
  So, if you want to send me movie recommendations (and vice versa), add me as a friend on facebook if you haven't already. And once you do, make sure that you add the "flixster movies" application so that you can still send me recommendations.
  
  http://www.facebook.com/people/Duncan_Ryan-Ross/630579507

  posted 18 days ago
• 
  I recommend you see...

  Kenny

  by Cal

  "It takes a certain kind of person to do what I do. No-one's ever impressed; no-one's ever fascinated. If you're a fireman, all the kids will want to jump on the back of the truck and follow you to a fire. There's going to be no kids willing to do that with me. So, I don't do it to impress people - it's a job, it's my trade, and I actually think I'm pretty good at it."

  
  There is one undeniable, inescapable bona fide fact regarding humans that we rarely like to discuss or even mention: everybody poos. Generally speaking, mainstream movies exercise this fact for brainless comedy. Modern comedies usually toss in a fart gag or a diarrhoeic outburst in a desperate attempt for a laugh. From such scenes in Harold & Kumar Go to White Castle or Dumb and Dumber, to dramatic shit smearing in North Country...even to German hack director Uwe Boll whose films are pure cinematic semi-liquid nuggets of week-old vindaloo proportions.
  
  Kenny serves a potent yet valuable reminder regarding everybody's need to poo. At first it most likely seems like a daft single-joke comedy overflowing with scatological humour. During its marketing campaign and preliminary hype, there wasn't much to convince anyone otherwise. But Kenny is something radically different. This is a hysterical, enormously entertaining mockumentary featuring an impeccable blend of humour, pathos and heart-warming moments. It delivers a poignant and effective snapshot of a forgotten cog in society who's frowned upon due to the nature of his trade. The character of Kenny (played by little-known actor Shane Jacobson, who won an AFI award for his performance) is commonly alienated from family and friends due to his job. But with this mockumentary we're reminded that he performs an essential public service: if the "Kennys" of the world didn't exist, where would we take a dump at a big festival? It's a trade no-one wants to think about, yet someone needs to do it.
  
  The Jacobson brothers themselves were sceptical as to whether this concept would actually work as a film. Kenny was originally a short that debuted at a major Aussie film festival. Astonishingly, the audience reaction was enormously positive. Due to massive demand, Splashdown (the toilet company which the character of Kenny works for) persuaded the Jacobson brothers to develop the concept into a feature-length movie...and Kenny was eventually born.
  
  Kenny Smyth is a typical Everyman trying to make a living. He works at a Corporate Bathroom Rental company known as Splashdown. Kenny is a knight in shining overalls, taking care of business with his faithful Splashdown crew by his side. The film follows Kenny as he tackles all troubles great and small...from the biggest festival to smallest social gatherings; Kenny confronts every septic challenge that comes his way. He also battles his way through personal problems, dealing with his bitter divorce during which he lost custody of son Jesse (played by Shane Jacobson's real-life son), and he also must tend to the blossoming romance between himself and an airline hostess (Bibra). Every challenge in Kenny's life he faces with charm, humour and unflinching dignity.
  
  

  "I'd love to be able to say "I plumb toilets" and have someone say "Now that is something I've always wanted to do"."
  Kenny lifts the lid on the very real issues in contemporary society. No-one is ever impressed or fascinated with what Kenny does. Kenny even expounds on the glories of his craft. It isn't as glamorous as being a fireman but it's also more secure than a desk job. ("It's not like my business is ever going to dry up overnight!") In addition, he's treated badly by the members of the general public he's forced to interact with. Barely anyone will shake his hand, his own father (played by Shane and director Clayton Jacobson's actual father) orders him to remove his work overalls before sitting down, and people shun him at social gatherings. When Kenny's son assists in cleaning the port-a-loos, members of the public complain indignantly and inquire "What kind of diseases could he get?". This film presents us with disillusionments and misunderstandings in relation to Kenny's trade. For its brutal honesty and realism, the filmmakers deserve to be lauded.
  
  Director Clayton Jacobson (who gets a very small role as well) lensed the movie using suitable digital photography. It feels like a home movie at times, which is the desired effect. Lots of people (myself included) were under the false impression that Kenny was a real person, and that the events were real. Make no mistake: 95% of the film is staged and rehearsed, with the fantastic naturalistic acting generating the ingenious illusion that we're watching genuine documentary footage. The cinematography is extremely accomplished with its fly-on-the-wall style.
  
  "There's another classic example of someone having a two inch arsehole and us having installed only one inch piping."
  
  Shane Jacobson earned an AFI award for Best Actor. His acting can only be described as faultless. In real life, Shane doesn't have a lisp. I, like many others, was under the impression that the lisp was genuine. This is a testament to the masterclass of acting offered by Jacobson. Kenny Smyth is the best Aussie character to hit screens since Michael Caton's Darryl Kerrigan in The Castle and Paul Hogan's Mick Dundee in Crocodile Dundee. He presents the essential Australian: simple, hard-working and looking forward to having a beer at the end of the day. Kenny's naivety is emphasised by his family's simplicity. He's the first person in his family to fly out of Australia, and he's utterly curious about the workings of an aeroplane. When he arrives at Nashville, Tennessee in America for the International Plumper and Cleaner Expo - i.e. "Poo HQ" as Kenny affectionately calls it - he's bewildered by the size of the expo. Kenny is also your typical Aussie using ockerisms and slang that may appear pretty peculiar to an international audience. His similes are particularly amusing. "Sillier than a bum full of smarties", "Mad as a clown's cock", and so on. Kenny is irresistible and charming, humorous and kind-natured. He's part philosopher, part comedian and all heart. Shane Jacobson gives the film the gusto and momentum it needs.
  The other actors deserve a brief mention. It was a family and friend affair, with Shane Jacobson's real father playing Kenny Smyth's father, and Shane's real son played Kenny's son. Ronald Jacobson was nominated for Best Supporting Actor at the AFI awards. He's brilliant, witty and quotable.
  
  The Jacobson brothers may have built the film's premise around toilets and poo, yet a brown log is never actually shown at all throughout the entire film. They never cross the line...the "mud biscuits and apple juice" are merely referenced instead of being shown. The humour of the film is in Kenny's delightful matter-of-factness in his observations. He cleverly describes his trade and things going on around him...and it's hilarious. Better yet, it's all done with a straight face. At the beginning of the film Kenny is interviewing a potential client via phone. As he asks whether this client will be serving food or drink at the event, the implications of his questions are hilarious. "Are there any Indonesian foods or curries?" The opening 30 minutes are probably the strongest part of the movie. We are offered a very intimate insight into the life of Kenny Smyth. Kenny is developed as a three-dimensional human, and in his personality fragments we see ourselves. From start to finish, it's a mosaic of hilarious and quotable lines with an adequate dosage of pathos and heart. The concoction works incredibly effectively!
  
  "There's a smell in here that is gonna outlast religion."
  
  When all's said and done, Kenny simply reminds everyone that in the age of big-budget adventures and CGI spectacles, engaging characters and a good story are all that matter. Kenny has both. This is a little-known film that scored big at the box office. It remained in cinemas for roughly a year. Even after the DVD was released, selected Australian cinemas were still showing it. As a character study so singularly focused on its central character, a film like this relies on its central character for its success. Shane Jacobson delivers a delightful performance. Kenny is a man with good intentions, and this comes across very powerfully. Shane has impeccable comedic timing as he deadpans a series of hilarious lines in expert fashion. Aside from being consistently laugh-out-loud funny, the terrific script generates real affection for Kenny in order that we desperately root for him to succeed. The character makes several valid observations about family, work and the value of human dignity.
  
  Kenny is a masterpiece for its expert amalgamation of great comedy, pathos and terrific touching moments. This is a hysterical movie that holds up admirably no matter how many times you watch it. I still laugh at every joke after 50 viewings. It's a very entertaining movie, and I absolutely love it. At first I had no interest in seeing this picture. But on a firm recommendation I attended a screening (which required a lot of searching to determine which local cinemas were showing it), and it was the best cinematic experience in my entire life. It was a full house, and every single person in the cinema was crying with laughter. It was the most entertaining two hours of my entire life, and now I constantly revisit the movie. This is the greatest mockumentary in history! Yes, it's better than This is Spinal Tap!!
  
  Followed by a spin-off TV series entitled Kenny's World.

  PvtCaboose91

  Kenny quickly joined my Favourite Movies list following a screening I saw in Adelaide back in 2006. The entire cinema were in fits of laughter. Even old crones and middle-aged folk were having a gut-bustingly terrific time.
  And then there was me...an adolescent laughing his head off and getting little breathing time in between.
  
  When the screening finished, the entire cinema applauded and gave it a standing ovation for a number of minutes. I've never seen anything like that. I've also never had as much fun in a cinema before or since.
  
  Kenny deserves to be seen. It also deserves to be seen with an audience. These days it acts as anti-depressent medication to me.
  
  Do not judge the book by its cover. It's a film about someone who works with toilets...but it's so much more. It's a poignant film about family, work and the value of human dignity. It also stocks so many clever laughs!
  
  SEE IT NOW!

  posted 21 days ago
• 
  ePHOR

  Hey - try this personality test and see how we compare
  
  YOUR MOVIE LOVE STORY

  posted 25 days ago
• 
  I recommend you see...

  12 Angry Men (Twelve Angry Men)

  by Cal

  "It's always difficult to keep personal prejudice out of a thing like this. And wherever you run into it, prejudice always obscures the truth. I don't really know what the truth is. I don't suppose anybody will ever really know. Nine of us now seem to feel that the defendant is innocent, but we're just gambling on probabilities - we may be wrong. We may be trying to let a guilty man go free, I don't know. Nobody really can. But we have a reasonable doubt, and that's something that's very valuable in our system. No jury can declare a man guilty unless it's SURE. We nine can't understand how you three are still so sure. Maybe you can tell us."

  
  Based on a teleplay by Reginald Rose, 12 Angry Men marks Sidney Lumet's magnificent film debut. This masterpiece is a dynamic, intense, searing, spellbinding morality study and a brilliant portrayal of our justice system at work. 12 Angry Men was first released decades ago in 1957, yet this potent social microcosm still feels as relevant as ever.
  
  On paper this straightforward courtroom drama probably wasn't much to get excited about - a single room setting (with little to no exceptions), a dozen old-timers arguing, and a first-time feature film director. But when preserved on the medium of film, 12 Angry Men is transformed into a consummate fermentation of acting prowess and dynamite direction. This is a movie that could stand as a screenwriting masterclass in the development of character and plot without resorting to big stunts, grandiose locations or special effects. From start to finish the film is just the story of twelve men on a hot, stuffy afternoon in a single room debating the guilt of a teenager on the wrong side of the tracks. The fact the film kept me riveted and entertained for its entire length is a gratifying testament to everyone involved. In an age dominated by summer blockbusters and teenagers merrily chatting about the latest action fest, 12 Angry Men serves a simple yet powerful reminder that a solid script, a good story and vividly-drawn characters are all that matter at the end of the day.
  
  To the untrained eye, the plot of 12 Angry Men probably appears pretty straightforward and quite boring. Do not be fooled by the apparent simplicity of the plot. Instead of being single-note, it's a multi-faceted and deeply provocative examination of the flawed nature of the justice system. There are twelve main characters altogether (this is usually a recipe for cinematic suicide); however the complex story and dynamite dialogue allows an audience to get to know each and every main character in the picture. Even more amazingly, the characters are never given names (until the very end when two men introduce each other). As an audience member, you will never realise that the characters are nameless. The proceedings are so mesmerising to the point that character names don't even matter.
  
  The central narrative of 12 Angry Men focuses on a jury's intimate deliberations on a capital murder case. The case concerns a teenage Latino accused in the stabbing murder of his father. The defence and prosecution have rested, leaving only the jury to contemplate the facts and reach a verdict. A guilty verdict means an automatic death sentence. To the inexpert eye, it seems like a straightforward open-and-shut case: the defendant has a weak alibi, the key body of evidence points to the defendant's guilt and eyewitnesses have come forward, claiming to have seen the murder taking place.
  
  Rather than chronicling the happenings of the trial and the pomposity of the attorneys, the film commences as the jurors are being released into the deliberation room. This sole location is where the film will remain for almost its entire length. As the twelve-man jury file into the cramped jury room of a hot afternoon, the men seem willing to take the case at face value and lock in the "guilty" verdict. The men are more concerned with getting to a ball game on time, and aren't even prepared to spend five minutes discussing the matter. However, the guilty verdict can only be reached if all twelve men agree on it. During the initial vote, eleven vote "guilty" whereas one member of the jury (Fonda) opts for the "not guilty" verdict. After the customary disparaging "there's always one!" comments are elicited, this juror begins to defend his decision: the boy may be guilty of murder, and probably is, but there is a sufficient amount of reasonable doubt to consider the "not guilty" verdict as the more appropriate decision. The rest of the film follows the escalating apprehension in the room, and the conflict between the jurors as they endeavour to reconcile their divergent beliefs concerning the guilt of the defendant.
  
  In this day and age, 12 Angry Men is a forgotten gem overlooked by the current generation of movie-goers who tend to view the latest action/adventure flick in lieu of the classics. This is also a film with a fairly unexciting premise. It's also fairly offputting to set an entire film in the confines of a single room! Only three minutes in the film's 96-minute running time transpire outside the jury room. Needless to say, it'd take a filmmaking team of remarkable skill to achieve the desired result. Director Sidney Lumet was up to the task. He managed to have this film in the can after only 21 days of shooting! The director employed a number of subtle cinematic techniques to enhance the claustrophobic atmosphere of the jury room. As the film progressed, the camera levels kept descending. At first moderately higher than eye level, the camera steadily moves downwards to below eye level. In addition, the initial stages of the movie were achieved using wide shots. The shots progressively move further inwards as the film draws closer to its enthralling conclusion. Different lenses were also applied to elevate the claustrophobia levels. This approach serves the film well. One can almost feel the heat of the non air-conditioned room and the intensifying emotions of the jurors.
  
  

  "Well, I'm not used to supposin'. I'm just a workin' man. My boss does all the supposin' - but I'll try one. Supposin' you talk us all out of this and, uh, the kid really did knife his father?"
  
  Lumet does a commendable job of building tension. The director also manages to deal effectively with the social issues (including racial bigotry) which arise in the course of the heated discussions in the jury room. Lumet accomplishes a dreadfully gruelling task here; by sticking to the format of the play and allowing almost all the events to transpire within one room, while still managing to keep things fresh and rattling along at a brisk pace.
  
  The film's script explodes like twelve sticks of dynamite. Snappy dialogue and realistic human depictions are the highlights of the screenplay. It's also a multi-faceted tale, unfolding on various different levels. On the first level it's a mystery. The interplay between the jurors throws up several feasible scenarios for the crime. Although differing theories as well as inconsistencies in the official statement are raised, we're left to draw our own conclusions. On another level the film is a deep scrutinisation of human character as revealed by the actions of the twelve grouchy men in dealing with their dilemma. On top of this, 12 Angry Men is a study of the failings of the justice system which relies on imperfect human beings to determine its outcome. These small-minded humans are left to judge who should live and who should die. The film acts as a worthwhile reminder that our justice system is based upon the phrase "innocent until proven guilty" and that all have the right to a fair trial. The suitably idealistic message of 12 Angry Men is pure and simple, yet it offers so much more. We witness our own personalities as fragments in the twelve jurors, often times letting personal biases and impatience cloud our judgment.
  
  One of the most stirring parts of the film is when the provocative question is asked: "What if it were you that were on trial?" If my life was in the balance I'd hope a juror like Henry Fonda would be sitting in the jury box. It's disturbing to contemplate the fact that so many men are willing to dismiss the case within five minutes because of other priorities on their mind. What about the poor boy whose life is in question? What if he isn't guilty and is consequently executed on false charges? It's easy to put oneself into the place of both defendant and juror, which demonstrates the potency of both the story and the performances.
  
  Henry Fonda leads the cast as the juror who reminds us that we shouldn't be afraid to go against the herd. His character opposes the opinions of eleven others! The cast is a powerhouse. All twelve members of the cast (there are a few other minor cast members, but they aren't on screen for any more than a minute each) are impeccable. They bounce off each other's lines naturally and credibly. Each actor is brilliant and serves a purpose. The cast is a mosaic of the typical Average Joes compelled to do jury duty. There are the younger ones, the elderly ones, the impatient ones, the foreigner, the old crone, and the smart one. Just simply sit back and enjoy the scorching performances of Henry Fonda, Lee J. Cobb, Ed Begley, E.G. Marshall, Jack Warden, Martin Balsam, John Fleder, Jack Klugman, Edward Binns, Joseph Sweeney, George Voskovec and Robert Webber.
  
  "Nobody has to prove otherwise. The burden of proof is on the prosecution. The defendant doesn't even have to open his mouth. That's in the Constitution."12 Angry Men has been classified as a "legal thriller". It's also known as a courtroom drama. Sidney Lumet's directorial debut is a sizzling courtroom drama done right: easy on the courtroom, heavy on the drama. Lumet went on to make such films as Dog Day Afternoon, Network and The Verdict. Not many of the world's greatest directors can boast a debut of this quality. Not even Alfred Hitchcock got it right the first time...neither did Steven Spielberg or George Lucas or Martin Scorsese. Even M. Night Shyamalan tried unsuccessfully before receiving critical acclaim with The Sixth Sense. 12 Angry Men is a lesson on the perfect film debut. No first-time director has ever done it better. 12 Angry Men is a masterpiece. It's an engrossing film that consumes you in its happenings. Filmed in less than a month on a measly budget, this shining example of efficiency has held up amazingly well for more than 50 years. I consider this an absolute must-see movie that's being overlooked far too often.

  PvtCaboose91

  12 Angry Men wears the substantial honour of being one of the mere 51 films that have earned a 5-star rating from me (out of about 1200).
  This is an absolutely incredible film. It holds a high place on the IMDb Top 250 (#10), it still ranks highly on the AFI's Top 100 lists, etc. It's just so damn perfect!
  
  It's a wordy film (all of it is dialogue with little respite) yet it's amazing and riveting. It's set almost entirely in one room, but it's so consuming that the confined setting never matters.
  
  Don't judge the film by its cover (i.e. old, b&w, 1950s, one-room setting, lots of talking, etc). I implore you to at least give it a try. You will not regret it.

  posted 25 days ago
• 
  I recommend you see...

  Psycho

  by Cal

  "Oh, we have 12 vacancies. 12 cabins, 12 vacancies."

  
  Produced during the period when Alfred Hitchcock created his most gripping work, Psycho is the original archetypal horror movie and an essential piece of filmic history. It's the ultimate spine-tingler, the definitive slasher, and the perfect chiller. In the decades prior to helming Psycho, Hitchcock had delighted in astonishing and scaring audiences. However, never had Hitchcock engaged in full-on, straight-up horror until this macabre riposte to the schlock frighteners of the late 1950s.
  
  Psycho has been imitated often, but never surpassed. This is suitably evidenced by almost 50 years of slasher flicks (like John Carpenter's brilliant original Halloween and the crappy Friday the 13th series) including the film's own sequels (that varied in quality), a TV movie spin-off and, in particular, Gus Van Sant's utterly woeful 1998 remake. Furthermore, this Hitchcock masterpiece is a reason why people these days lock the bathroom door while having a shower.
  
  Psycho is more than the great granddaddy of all slashers; it is also an excellent thriller, a quality black comedy, and a valuable lesson in filmmaking. It's a landmark movie for its application of realistic violence, shock, subtle humour and surprise. Virtually every modern horror film and thriller owes its allegiance to Psycho.
  
  Back in 1959, no-one could believe that the Master of Suspense was going to direct a movie with a mere $800,000 budget in a measly thirty-day period (seven of these days were spent shooting the shower scene, which is packed with 87 cross-cuts in its frenzied 45 seconds) using the crew from his TV series, Alfred Hitchcock Presents. People also couldn't understand why Hitchcock was helming a filmic adaptation of a pulp novel by Robert Bloch which was influenced by the gruesome career of the Wisconsin serial killer Ed Gein. The audience reaction at the time must have been quite similar to the mutual bewilderment when news broke out that Gus Van Sant intended to direct a shot-for-shot remake of this very masterpiece.
  
  Upon release, Psycho was panned by quite a number of critics across the country. Nevertheless people lined up for the movie for blocks (there are stories of queues as long as three miles at drive-in cinemas), it became popular among audiences, and within a few months most critics had changed their opinion. Before long Hitchcock was nominated for an Academy Award, and Psycho was considered one of the best films of the year. In the subsequent decades it was being featured on lists of the best shockers, best suspense thrillers, and, eventually, best films of all time.
  
  All and sundry should be familiar with the straightforward plot of Psycho. If you're unaware of the storyline, surely you've witnessed at least one of the thousands of lampoons and parodies of the acclaimed shower scene. It's hard to imagine anyone not knowing the plot of this masterpiece. For the sake of this reviewer's writing traditions, I'll provide a reasonably brief synopsis.
  Marion Crane (Leigh) works as an assistant at a real estate agency in Phoenix, Arizona. She's a struggling working girl, and she's fed up with the way life is treating her. The only way she can see her lover Sam Loomis (Gavin) is if she sneaks out during her extended lunch breaks. Marion wants to marry Sam, but they have insufficient funds to commence a new life together. On a seemingly regular Friday afternoon, Marion's employer entrusts her with an enormous cash sum of $40,000. She's instructed to deposit the money at the bank. However, Marion's instinct tells her that this money could be her last chance at a new life. She steals the money and leaves town. On a fiercely stormy night, Marion stops at the Bates Motel. At this enigmatic location Marion encounters Norman Bates (Perkins): the shy-but-kind manager who's happy to offer her a room for the night and a sympathetic ear. But too long has the Bates Motel been under the authority of Norman's mother, and this night concludes with the immortal shower scene. In the weeks following Marion's murder, her family and friends grow worried and suspicious. Unfortunately for Norman Bates, things escalate when the investigation begins.
  
  Plot-wise, Psycho isn't anything extraordinary. The film's true ingeniousness lies in its edifice. Director Hitchcock and screenwriter Joseph Stafano developed this masterpiece in such a way that it constantly defies expectations and eliminates any sense of predictability. There are two key surprises: the shower scene murder and the final shocking revelation (this ending still shocks me even after watching the film countless times). A viewer who watches Psycho for the first time without any knowledge about either surprise will experience the full impact of Hitchcock's intentions. In fact, the impact is weaker these days because the shower scene is so frequently discussed and so well-known. The greatest shock for a first-time audience member is the early exit of Marion Crane. This is doubly unanticipated because up to this point the script has tricked us into accepting Marion as the main character. When events dispel that illusion, and the point-of-view shifts to Norman Bates, viewers are justifiably baffled. In order to keep this aspect of the film secret when Psycho opened in theatres in 1960, no advance screenings were held, no-one was admitted to a showing after the feature had started, and Hitchcock purchased every copy of Robert Bloch's novel he could find.
  
  To this day, audiences never forget how scary and disturbing Psycho truly is. People still have trouble taking a shower because of it (Janet Leigh reportedly never took a shower ever again after filming concluded). If you're looking for blood and gore, look elsewhere. The Texas Chainsaw Massacre or a Friday the 13th entry will be more to your liking. Psycho has a grand total of about two minutes (if that!) of actual violence in it. Yet these are the most unforgettable two minutes of violence in film history. Alfred Hitchcock was a magician and a director. The violence was done with mirrors, trick shots, and general illusions. The viewer comes away swearing they've witnessed more than they've actually seen. For example, at no point in Psycho do we ever see a knife penetrate the skin. The murders are done with quick flashes, expert editing, and realistic sounds (the stabbing noises were actually a recording of Hitchcock stabbing melons with a kitchen knife).
  Let's not forget about the music. The film is offered an absolutely riveting score courtesy of Hitchcock regular Bernard Herrmann. Without the chilling sound of Herrman's music the film would lose about half its intensity. Psycho is probably the best instance in cinematic history of music effectively strengthening action and intensity.
  
  Hitchcock purposely made the film in black & white because he thought it'd be too gory in colour! Hitchcock dabbled in cinematic taboos and pushed the censorship envelope with Psycho. In fact this was the first American motion picture to feature a toilet being flushed (up until then movies didn't even acknowledge the existence of toilets). Janet Leigh is also shown in her underwear on more than one occasion, and it's possible to see hints of flesh (mainly belonging to a body double) during the shower scene. The script also features a character speaking the word "transvestite" - a line that survived the censor only after a Herculean struggle on Stafano's part.
  
  Anthony Perkins' perfect performance as Norman Bates is a brilliant mix of sincerity, charisma and impenetrable insanity. In the Robert Bloch novel the character of Norman Bates was a fat and balding middle-aged voyeur. To make the character more sympathetic, screenwriter Stafano reworked Bates in order for Perkins to suit the role.
  Janet Leigh was nominated for an Oscar. Her performance is also quite extraordinary.
  According to various actors who worked with the Master of Suspense, Hitchcock was a director never particularly concerned with the acting in his movies. Apparently he was more of a technician. Hitchcock (known more affectionately as "Hitch" to his collaborators) knew precisely what he wanted actors to do, and he expected them to do it. Most of the acting in Psycho is in fact quite perfunctory. Janet Leigh was the one who got an Oscar nomination, but it's Anthony Perkins' indelible performance that everyone remembers. Perkins delivers one of the cinema's most frightening and extraordinary performances. Perkins became so identified with Norman Bates that it changed the trajectory of his career. For years following Psycho, Perkins shunned talking about the part until he finally made peace with Norman in the 70s, and at long last returned to play the role in sequels.
  
  Alfred Hitchcock's name has become synonymous with Psycho. If Hitch's name pops up in conversation, people will usually associate him with Psycho or Rear Window or Vertigo or The Birds. Hitchcock's Psycho is so incredibly influential and unspeakably brilliant. Many believe that John Carpenter's Halloween was the mother of the slasher genre. It became responsible for the Scream films and many other modern slashers. Yet, as important as Halloween was to the horror genre during the 80s and 90s, John Carpenter's thriller didn't invent this brand of terror...it re-invented it by paying tribute to one of the most frightening films of all time: Psycho. Not only did Halloween star Jamie Lee Curtis (Janet Leigh's daughter) but the character name of "Sam Loomis" was re-used.
  
  Visually rich, unbearably intense and absolutely terrifying, no-one has ever done it better than Hitchcock and no-one ever will. As the film's shocking revelation is revealed, I always get goosebumps. These are the consequence of a combination of several elements: the shocking imagery, the sound, and the haunting music. Several argue that Psycho is Hitchcock's best movie. In my opinion that honour goes to Rear Window, although it's incredibly close.
  Today, Psycho still holds up amazingly well. With the possible exception of Halloween and perhaps Scream, no latter-day horror/thriller has been capable of generating as many goosebumps as Psycho. The black and white photography is perfect for the film's tone and mood - colour would have blurred the nightmarish quality. The painstaking way in which Hitchcock composed every scene is evident in the quality of the final product. This is the most notorious title in the Hitchcock canon. It moves from one memorable scene to the next. It rattles along at a brisk pace, and before you know it the film is over. This was my introduction to Hitchcock and I've been viewing more of the director's work ever since.
  
  

  "A boy's best friend is his mother."

  PvtCaboose91

  It's difficult to imagine meeting someone who has never seen Psycho. This is an extremely inflential and unforgettable movie, and it's always been an addition on my Top 10 for as long as I've had a Top 10! (First time I wrote a Top 10 was on July 4th, 2005. Psycho sat at #6 where it remained for over a year. It was then pushed temporarily to #7, then down to #8 before shooting up to #6 again. It now resides at #8)
  
  I first saw this movie 5 years ago. It still amazes me and I've seen it more times than I can count.
  
  If you haven't seen Psycho, then see it the first opportunity you get. I can't put it clearer than that.

  posted 30 days ago
• 
  I recommend you see...

  The Brave

  by Cal

  "The final measure of bravery is to stand up to death."

  
  The Cannes Film Festival of 1997 was a devastating period for Johnny Depp. The actor had directed, co-written and starred in The Brave, but his efforts were hardly rewarded when he presented the film to audiences at Cannes. Depp's film was subsequently panned severely by critics. This criticism profoundly disheartened Depp, who was so upset he refused to have The Brave released in the US. To this day the film has been buried and forgotten. Some people even exclude the film from the résumés of Depp and Marlon Brando. Not many people are even aware of the film's existence, except for die-hard film buffs and epicentres of Depp devotion. One will unquestionably find it taxing to unearth a copy of this film. It was released on DVD, but limited copies were distributed. Now you'll only find the DVD floating around on eBay or other online stores if you're lucky. If you ask me, this is a true pity. (Why couldn't this instead happen to a more deserving title, such as that dreadful teen sex romp Private Resort? That's a Johnny Depp film that deserves to be removed from existence and get buried for eternity.)
  
  By no means is The Brave a masterpiece, but it's a poetic and expressionistic film that marks a very important entry to the résumé of Johnny Depp. It's admirably unconventional and gripping, with a brutal sense of reality permeating every scene. The film's depiction of the American Indian community is unflinching. Instead of creating a feel-good film, Depp directed a deeply depressing, emotive and powerful drama that deserves much more acclaim and attention.
  
  The story is derived from Gregory McDonald's novel of the same name. This is a sincere and touching story that poignantly explores themes of bravery, veracity, and strength of character, but above all delves into the lengths a father will travel to in order to protect his family.
  Depp plays an unemployed, alcoholic American Indian named Rapheal. He was recently released from gaol, and had returned to his family who reside in a shanty-town near a garbage heap. His family is devastatingly stricken by poverty, to the extent that they're struggling to put food on the table. Down on his luck and with little choice, Rapheal investigates a job prospect. At a grotty old warehouse he encounters an enigmatic and creepy cripple known as McCarthy (Brando, in a very brief cameo appearance). Rapheal is offered the chance to star in a snuff film. He will be tortured and killed on film a week hence, and in return his family will receive a hefty $50,000. Thinking solely about his family, Rapheal agrees. From there the film chronicles Rapheal's final 7 days. He reforms relationships with his two children and falls in love with his wife all over again. As Rapheal was given a bit of money upfront, he begins to give his family gifts to ensure he has a magnificent final week.
  
  This intriguing premise of sacrifice is worked into a plot about prejudice, social injustice, human corruption and poverty. To an extent his efforts pay off. However, with such a long running time and so little actually going on during these two long hours, the messages are weakened. Johnny's directing and acting are fine by all accounts, but it's the writing that denotes the film's lethal fault. The middle of the film is overlong and narratively inept, with a deficiency of key plot points and general happenings. Unfortunately a few of the stronger scenes are drawn out to abject monotony. It's also worth noting that the film never blatantly tells the viewer that Rapheal will be featured in a snuff film. The best guess of a viewer will have to suffice.
  
  The central criticism endured by The Brave was in regards to how unbelievable the story is. If a father allowed himself to be sacrificed in order for his family to live a better life, wouldn't they be mentally scarred for life? However, this is a character flaw as opposed to script flaw. The character of Rapheal is meant to be so daft that he never considers the long-term except for the financial benefits. It also shows Rapheal was willing to give up anything, even his own life, just to ensure his wife and kids could escape poverty. The gripping conclusion depicts an unforgettable, symbolic and ambiguous final image. If you expected Rapheal to break out a gun and dispatch his enemies in slow motion before walking off into the sunset with his girl and his money, then you'll be disappointed. The Brave never strives to be a clichéd Hollywood fare. Instead it stays true to its convictions from the first shot 'til the last. The anticlimactic finale will leave you stunned.
  
  Johnny Depp's direction is first-rate. It's obvious he's drawn inspiration from his previous collaborators, such as Jim Jarmusch (Dead Man) and Emir Kusturica (Arizona Dream). Depp keeps the pacing careful and ponderous, albeit slightly sluggish during the middle section. For the most part I was riveted at the drama being offered. Authentic locations and sets are among the film's strengths. The final 5 minutes are particularly artistic. It's clear Depp worked passionately both behind and in front of the camera.
  The music by Iggy Pop elevates the film to incredible heights. Particularly powerful are the last few minutes as a doomed man heads towards his inevitable fate. The poignant music is emotive and powerful. I will be perfectly frank: when the credits started to roll, tears wet my eyes and I sat completely astonished. This is a film that defies Hollywood clichés and challenges an audiences' notion of a happy ending. Overblown Hollywood bullshit this is not...The Brave is a drama firmly set in reality.
  
  Performances are consistently excellent. Johnny Depp is surprisingly convincing as an Indian. This is a versatile performer who continues to tackle new and exciting things. From eccentric performances (Charlie and the Chocolate Factory) to a gunslinger (Once Upon a Time in Mexico) to an Irish playwright (Finding Neverland), Depp is undoubtedly one of today's finest actors. Depp appears to immerse himself into the role of Rapheal. He delivers his lines with such conviction and passion. His striking good looks are just a bonus.
  The Brave was one of Marlon Brando's final films. The actor is most recognised for films such as The Godfather, Apocalypse Now and A Streetcar Named Desire. In the 90s he was past his prime, but still spending his twilight years acting (no matter how small a role). I liked Brando's performance immensely. At one stage he delivers a seven minute monologue of the exquisite challenge of death. The dialogue itself is somewhat nonsensical (almost an unintended parody of his soliloquies from Last Tango in Paris), but if you just watch Brando's expressions and listen to the intonation, the actor is truly breathtaking.
  
  It's a genuine pity that The Brave was so pasted and criticised. This won't ever be hailed as a masterpiece, nor should it be, but you can most certainly do worse. How can Uwe Boll's awful movies be released globally on DVD while this underrated gem continues to rot? Every year there are dreadful blockbusters that still see the light of day while The Brave is unfairly ignored. Needless to say, if you're a fan of Johnny Depp then you can't go past this one. As a first-time director Depp succeeds. That said, however, the film does have its faults. Occasionally the film is dramatically empty. An unfortunate lack of exciting events is disappointing as well.
  Be that as it may, The Brave is a film I truly love for its poetic imagery and the courage to avoid a clichéd happy ending. I recommend it if you can find a copy.

  PvtCaboose91

  Everyone loves Johnny Depp for his acting skills and striking good looks (*slightly dribbles at the thought*), but it's a little-known fact the man directed a film called The Brave back in 1997.
  
  Unfortunately, the awful reception at Cannes ensured this film wasn't going to be released globally, as I detail in my review.
  
  The Brave is powerful, compelling, unrelenting and unforgettable. I loved the film very much. Not flawless by any means, but it rises above the image depicted by the critics.
  If you do get the chance to watch it (methinks YouTube has it...) then take the chance without delay. It took me months to find a copy of the film, and I finally did. My mission was definitely worth it.
  
  Watch it!!!

  posted 34 days ago
• 
  PvtCaboose91

  I've seen those career counsellors in movies and stuff. Surely they aren't too hard to find.
  
  I mean come on...so many jobs are around. A cop for example. Just don't think small...think of a straightforward job that could keep your bank account fed.
  
  ~Cal

  posted 38 days ago
• 
  I recommend you see...

  Rio Bravo

  by Cal

  Nathan Burdette: "I don't like that kinda talk. Now you're practically accusing me..."
  John T. Chance: "Let's get this straight: You don't like? I don't like a lot of things. I don't like your men sittin' on the road bottling up this town. I don't like your men watching us, trying to catch us with our backs turned. And I don't like it when a friend of mine offers to help and twenty minutes later he's dead! And I don't like you, Burdette, because you set it up."

  
  Rio Bravo is the quintessential Howard Hawks Western. Although patronised by reviewers at the time of its release, Rio Bravo is now regarded as an American classic and one of the greatest cinematic Western in history. The film is primarily recognised for its slick shootouts, masterful atmosphere and a congregation of characters as warm as toast. Not since 1952's High Noon had a Western been so influential. In fact, contemporary cinema still draws blatant inspiration from this timeless classic. John Carpenter's remarkable 1976 actioner Assault on Precinct 13 was a fundamental remake, transplanting the story into a cold, isolated urban location. The 2005 remake of Assault on Precinct 13 was likewise influenced by this timeless 1959 masterpiece. Even Hawks himself helmed two variations of his film with El Dorado and Rio Lobo.
  
  However, Rio Bravo is the furthest thing from your customary clichéd Western. Gone are the extensive vistas, scenes that involve roaming the countryside on horseback, and not once did John Wayne utter the word "pilgrim". Additionally, the "damsel in distress" cliché is far removed. Also, the archetypal invulnerable protagonist is replaced with a character that gets scared, bleeds and makes mistakes. The atmosphere of pure tension is also lightened by humour. The wonderful screenplay encompasses witticisms as sharp as a dagger, and a group of characters that are well-written and acted wonderfully. This is utterly classic stuff. Although long, the film is undeniably fun.
  
  John Wayne is in top form as the rugged, tough man's man known as Sheriff John T. Chance. Chance is faced with a dilemma: he has to hold murderer Joe Burdette (Akins) in his gaol until the U.S. Marshall can pick him up in roughly six days. The trouble is that Joe's brother Nathan (Russell) plans to spring Joe from prison by any means possible. Nathan is a local cattle baron who commands an army of paid professionals numbering in the 40s. Sheriff Chance needs to hold out until the Marshall arrives, but he only has two deputies by his side: a disgraced drunk known as Dude (Martin) and a cantankerous, albeit extremely spirited old cripple named Stumpy (Brennan).
  
  Pat Wheeler: "A game-legged old man and a drunk. That's all you got?"
  John T. Chance: "That's WHAT I got."
  
  Howard Hawks was reportedly quite dissatisfied with the highly acclaimed 1952 Western High Noon. Hawks was quite disturbed due to how unrealistic the film was. In High Noon, Marshall Will Kane (played by Gary Cooper) was so afraid of his impending adversaries (a mere four men) that he spent most of the film's duration looking for help...only to be rejected by his supposed allies. Hawks decided to make a movie which would depict a more accurate response to the dilemma face by Kane. In this case, Wayne as Sheriff John T. Chance has an abundance of men willing to help him. The trouble is that he prefers to only have the best men fighting for him. High Noon is a decent flick, but Rio Bravo is far superior due to its more realistic handling of the scenario and its higher entertainment value.
  
  Howard Hawks is no stranger to the Western genre. Prior to Rio Bravo, Hawks had helmed Red River. His direction here is utterly perfect. Each frame shines with impressive attention to every conceivable detail. Like most Westerns, the period depiction is wonderful. Costumes and props are difficult to fault. Most of the interior scenes were filmed in studio sets; however Hawks' transcendent direction creates an ideal atmosphere. The script, as well, is superlative. Dean Martin even sings a melancholy tune at one stage. It's this variety that makes the film anything but an ordinary Western. There's catchy music mixed with hysterical dialogue, great shootouts and plenty of moments that'll make you smile.
  However, there are a few excessive red herrings that could have been removed. Even with these unnecessary additions, the film provides solid entertainment. Many have criticised Rio Bravo for being too long and with too many uneventful scenes. To me, the film isn't long enough. I adored being in the company of these characters. If anything I was disappointed when the credits started to roll. The filmmakers have definitely performed their duties appropriately if one of my only criticisms is that the movie had to end!
  
  The acting is first-class right down the line. John Wayne delivers one of the best performances in his career. When it came to making Westerns during the 1950s and a few decades beyond, Wayne was the essential go-to guy. After all, this is John Wayne doing what he does best. As Sheriff John T. Chance, he's right at home with the material. The 6'4" actor was a physical presence that dominated the screen, and was the definitive incarnation of a cowboy. Throughout the entire movie, Wayne is extraordinarily convincing and very watchable. Quintessentially, John Wayne is John Wayne in spades.
  Dean Martin also proves an accomplished actor. At the time Martin was known for hard living and hard drinking, and his experience pays off as he is a credible drunk in this film. When his character of Dude is convalescing and trying to make amends for the various years of drowning in alcohol, the sincerity of Martin's performance is readily apparent.
  However, while Wayne and Martin are both fantastic, it's Walter Brennan as Stumpy that steals the show. He provides delightful comic relief; lightening the somewhat dreary disposition of a number of scenes.
  Ricky Nelson as the young gunslinger Colorado is yet another welcome addition to the cast. Just one week into shooting, Nelson celebr