Monthly Archives: September 2013

Top Ten Lists

Top Ten Movie Endings That Left Us Stunned

 

Thats_All_Folks
This weekend we say goodbye to one of the most unforgettable and cinematic television shows of all time; Breaking Bad.  But, like all great TV shows, there is enormous pressure on this one to deliver on what will be the final 60 minutes of the series, given how every episode before has led up to this.  So many great TV shows try to go out big and even take some risks with their finales, in order to put a final stamp on everything.  What is interesting is that while TV shows benefit from having multiple episodes available to build their story-lines over time towards a big, shocking conclusion, movies on the other hand have very little room to give us a similar unexpected ending. Movies deviate little from the standard three act structure and it’s almost inevitable that everything in them leads to a nice clean ending where good triumphs over evil.  But, every now and then, there are movies that decide not to play it safe and throw out all audiences’ expectations in favor of an ending that challenges the very idea of happy endings all together.
It’s a risky thing for filmmakers to pull of, given that you have to set everything in motion in the story towards a finish that may anger people.  Not only that, movies have only a two hour limit to make us invested enough in what’s going on in order for the ending to have any impact.  For an movie ending to leave an audience stunned, it usually ends up doing one of a handful of things:  it let’s evil win in the end, or has the main hero suddenly killed, or has a deus-ex-machina interference steer the story in an entirely different direction.  While many films have tried this over the years, I have chosen ten here that I think represent the best stunning endings to a movie ever.  These are the endings that left a chilling impact once the credits started rolling and while some came at me like a punch to the gut, there were others that took their time and still surprised.  But what they all have in common is that they took major risks and still ultimately satisfied.
10.
THERE WILL BE BLOOD (2007) – “I’M FINISHED”

You could say that this scene delivers on what the title promises.  But what’s surprising about it is the fact that it’s the note on which we leave this film.  Director Paul Thomas Anderson is known for his ability to throw in some way out-there endings to his movies, but this scene in particular is his most perfectly constructed and ultimately his most satisfying.  The movie There Will Be Blood follows the rise of an oil baron named Daniel Plainview (brilliantly played by Daniel Day-Lewis) who uses his intelligence and cunning to build a successful drilling operation, while at the same time running at odds with a local small town preacher named Eli Sunday (Paul Dano).  The ending finds Mr. Plainview old and alone in his opulent mansion and being visited by Eli who’s looking to start up a business deal with him.  Most other films would have Daniel Plainview see the error of his ways and repentant to the underdog Eli; but not this film.  Instead, the atheistic Plainview turns the tables on false prophet Eli and he takes out his revenge, beating him to death with a bowling pin.  It’s an inevitable conclusion given that it’s what happens when you put two horrible people in the same room together, but the surprising thing is the joy that we take in seeing this scene play out.  A bad guy learns nothing and commits murder in the movie’s final moments, and that makes for a happy finish to this film.
9.
2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY (1968) – “STAR CHILD”

Stanley Kubrick’s grand opus has so many big things going on throughout it’s 148 minute running time.  So, how does he end it all?  By confusing the hell out of all of us.  And as a result, it became one of the most unforgettable and most debated endings of all time.  The film concludes with astronaut Dave Bowman finding a mysterious Monolith floating in orbit around Jupiter which then leads him into a Star Gate and on an unforgettable, trippy ride.  He soon finds himself in an eerie white room where he ages rapidly; ultimately revisited once again by the monolith and then transformed into a “star child,” a supposedly next step in human evolution.  The whole of 2001 is a mind trip, but it’s these last few ponderous scenes that leaves audiences bewildered all these years later.  It’s a genius move by Kubrick to leave things unexplained; instead letting the journey there be the thing on which to conclude the film.  It’s both awe-inspiring and a little unsettling, as we see the evolved Dave floating down to Earth.  Is this new being going to be a gift to human kind, or a harbinger of the end.  Kubrick didn’t need to answer that question.  The other-worldly image is enough to go out on.  And a little help from Richard Strauss doesn’t hurt either.
8.

SEVEN (1995) – “WHAT’S IN THE BOX?”

Some of the most shocking endings come about when the filmmakers make the decision to have the villain become the victor in the end.  That was definitely the case in David Fincher’s crime thriller Seven.  At the end of the film, a serial killer who’s been choosing his victims based off of the biblical Seven Deadly Sins willingly turns himself in.  The detectives on the case (played by Brad Pitt and Morgan Freeman) make John Doe (Kevin Spacey) lead them to the location of his last murder.  What happens next is both shocking and unexpected; John Doe has planned this moment all along, having a package delivered to their very location containing the head of Pitt’s girlfriend inside.  John Doe wants the distraught cop to kill him as a fulfillment of his whole plan, which ends up happening.  It’s a challenging finale, because even though the villain is slain, he still got what he wanted.  The ending is one of the bleakest ever put on screen, defying most Hollywood conventions.  Few filmmakers would ever dare make audiences sit through a disturbing and often grim crime thriller only to deliver no peaceful resolution in the end; but Seven took that risk and gave us an unforgettable conclusion.  Given the right actor and a good build up, audiences can willingly accept an unforgiving ending like this.
7.

THE GODFATHER PART II (1974) – “FREDO SLEEPS WITH THE FISHES”

On the other end of the spectrum, here’s a case where the villain gets what he wants, and it destroys him.  Director Francis Ford Coppola concluded the first Godfather with another montage of slaughter, but this one has more of a sting based on who gets whacked in it.  In this one, we find Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) ordering his men to take his older brother Fredo (John Cazale) out into the lake to go “fishing.”  Inter-cut with the assassination of Corleone rival Hyman Roth (Lee Strasburg) and the suicide of turn-coat informer Frankie Pentangeli (Michael Gazzo), our final image of Fredo is of him quietly reciting the Hail Mary, which then cuts back to Michael staring out from his porch, lowering his head when the gunshot is heard.  This ending marks the complete disintegration of Michael’s soul and it’s a notorious conclusion to such an epic story.  While inevitable, it was still no less shocking to audiences to see a big movie end on such a grim note.  But that’s what makes the Godfather movies so memorable.  The fact that the once noble Michael became so ruthless that he would order the death of his own brother ruined any notion of redemption by film’s end and the final image of Michael sitting alone in his garden is a sad but suitable conclusion to the movie.  It’s a rare case where a bleak finish becomes the most satisfying.
6.

THE BIRDS (1963) – “LEAVING TOWN”

Alfred Hitchcock was no stranger to making his films dark.  Three years earlier he shocked the world with the murder thriller Psycho (1960).  But his bleakest ending would actually come in this follow-up.  While most Hitchcock movies have shocker endings, they almost always finish with the villain getting their comeuppance.  In The Birds, the antagonist is Mother Nature herself, so how does our cast of characters overcome this.  In the end, they don’t.  The final scene of the movie finds our main character Melanie Daniels (Tippi Hedren) scarred both physically and emotionally after an attack from a flock of birds in her lover’s (Rod Taylor) safe house.  The survivors in the house must quietly flee and leave the bird infested town behind in order to get Melanie the help she needs.  The helplessness of this scene is what makes it so chilling.  At this point in the movie, the main characters have no options left but to leave everything behind, effectively giving up.  Few movies in this period of time would let a movie end with it’s heroes defeated so thoroughly; even a Hitchcock movie.  But the master director had the confidence to pull it off and as a result gave audiences an effectively bleak conclusion.  You  can still see the impact this film has had to this day in the way that modern disaster films have tried to copy the resonance of this ending; albeit with less successful results.
5.

BONNIE AND CLYDE (1967) – “LOVERS AMBUSHED”

This ending isn’t surprising for anyone who knows the history behind the true life story.  Bonnie Parker (Faye Dunaway) and Clyde Barrow (Warren Beatty) are gunned down after a long string of notorious bank robberies that garnered them national attention.  What makes this scene so shockingly memorable is the unflinching carnage of the moment.  We feel the characters’ pain as they look into each other’s eyes the moment before the bullets begin to rain out, knowing that there is no hope left for them.  The gunfire is loud and impactful, just further enhancing the brutality of it all.  Audiences had never seen this level of violence in a movie before, and this also led to a backlash from critics, many of whom claimed that the film was reveling too much in the onscreen violence.  Director Arthur Penn never meant for this scene to be exploitative at all.  The extended slaughter was meant to be impactful, making the conclusion more true to life than what movies had done before.  The scene continues to be memorable to this day, even after modern movie violence has diminished the shock value of this scene.  Bonnie and Clyde may have not been shocking as a historical retelling, but it did stun audiences enough to leave an impression on cinema as a whole.
4.

THE USUAL SUSPECTS (1995) – “KEYSER SOZE REVEALED”

Once again, a shocking ending featuring Kevin Spacey.  Released in the same year as Seven, this became one of the most talked about movie twists ever.  Kevin Spacey’s character, Verbal Kint, tells his side of a story to Det. Dave Kujan (Chazz Palminteri) about how he was the only survivor in his group of crooks who were ambushed by a master criminal named Keyser Soze.  The whole film, we are left wondering who Keyser Soze is and if he will reveal himself by the end of the movie.  The answer comes at the end when Det. Kujan lets Verbal Kint out of his custody, confident that he’s gotten all he can out of him.  But moments later, Kujan realizes that everything he has been told was actually a lie, pieced together from things and names right there in his office. Verbal Kint, who’s been seen as a cripple for the whole movie is seen dropping his limp and we soon realize that he was Keyser Soze the whole time.  This ending takes the incredible risk of making the audience accept the fact that everything they have watched so far was a lie, which can put off an audience if executed poorly.  The scene manages to work on the strength of Spacey’s performance and the confidence in the story that director Bryan Singer had.  Audiences were stunned by this lie pulled on them, but it made learning the truth all the more satisfying.
3.
THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK (1980) – “LUKE…I AM YOUR FATHER”

You rarely see a big franchise picture take a big risk and end one of their films on a shocking and downbeat note.  But that’s what George Lucas and company did in Star Wars Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back.  In this movie, it seems like none of our main characters can catch a break in the unforgettable final act.  After being betrayed by his friend Lando Calrissian (Billy Dee Williams), Han Solo (Harrison Ford) is frozen in carbonite and taken off by Boba Fett as a reward for helping Darth Vader (voice of James Earl Jones).  On top of that, young Jedi Luke Skywalker loses his right hand in a duel with Vader himself and is cornered and defeated.  But the moment that left audiences more stunned than any else was the moment when Darth Vader reveals that he didn’t in fact kill Luke’s father in the past; he is Luke’s father.  This was a bombshell to drop on audiences who had thought they knew where the story was going.  After this ending, anything was possible in the Star Wars universe.  It was risky for Team Lucas to make their characters suffer so much in what was effectively the middle film of a trilogy.  Thankfully for them, it was a risk that paid off and it solidified the Star Wars franchise as one of the greatest story lines ever put on the big screen.
2.
PLANET OF THE APES (1968) – “DAMN YOU ALL TO HELL”

One of the most famous twist endings of all time, this finale’s impact is still seen in Hollywood today.  This action thriller starring Charlton Heston was a bizarre ride when it was first released in the late 60’s, and while the ending fits well with the apocalyptic nature of the story-line, most audiences were still taken back by how impactful the final image was.  After crash landing on a strange planet run by intelligent, human-like apes, Astronaut George Taylor (Heston) escapes imprisonment from his militaristic captors and their leader, Dr. Zaius (Maurice Evans), only to discover that he can never go back to his home planet; he’s already there.  His trip through space has sent him thousand of years into the future and in that time, mankind has destroyed civilization through war, leaving only ruins behind.  One ruin in particular, the Statue of Liberty, is found by Taylor and his realization of what has happened leads to an unforgettable breakdown, which Heston milks perfectly.  The screenplay was co-written by Twilight Zone creator Rod Serling, and it shows.  This ending would feel right at home with any Twilight Zone episode given it’s bleak message and the hopeless state it leaves the character in.  Like most twist endings, it relies on the goodwill of the audience to work, and audiences accepted this ending as an appropriate conclusion to such a dark and weird film.  In many ways, it has gone on to become what most other twist endings strive to be, but few actually end up being.
1.
CHINATOWN (1974) – “FORGET IT, JAKE”
 
This ending may be one of the bleakest scenes in movie history, if not the most.  Private Detective Jake Gittes (Jack Nicholson) discovers some shocking truths about the case he’s studying; that not only has wealthy tycoon Noah Cross (a chilling John Huston) been illegally manipulating water supplies in Depression-era Los Angeles, but he’s also hunting down a daughter born out of an incestuous rape of his own legitimate daughter (Faye Dunaway).  Finding himself captive by the ruthless Cross, Gittes follows Dunaway’s Evelyn to the titular neighborhood, where lawlessness is rampant.  Evelyn tries to escape with her sister/daughter, but Cross’ men fire at her and the film concludes with Evelyn dead behind the wheel, Cross with possession of the girl she was trying to save, and Jake left helpless to stop all of this chaos.  Roman Polanski, the director, is a survivor of the Holocaust, so he knew too well how cruel life could be, but this was something few audience members were prepared for.  In a matter of minutes, this film goes from a loving homage of film noir to a Greek tragedy, and it’s a gut punch for anyone who expected things to be tied up all neat by the end.  It’s amazing to think that a Hollywood studio (Paramount) would give the okay to a film with this unforgiving of an ending, but in the end, it’s a commendable commitment that pays off. Jack plays the moment perfectly, looking as if he’s lost all hope in humanity, and I’m sure it’s a feeling likewise shared by many in the audience.  No other ending has really ever given an audience a shock to the system like this one, and there’s no other statement the film can say other than, “It’s Chinatown.”  Forget it?  No one ever will after seeing it.
And that’s my list of movie endings that left audiences stunned.  Some are definitive conclusions that can’t be topped (Chinatown, Bonnie and Clyde), while others blew open so many other possibilities that broke away from convention (Empire, 2001).  But, overall, these are endings that still resonate with us after the credits started rolling and have gone on to be influential as well as impactful.  Going out with a bang is something you can get away with more often in television, but it’s also pleasing to see a film take that big step as well.  Hopefully more films take a risk in the endings of their stories and break away from tradition in order to deliver something memorable.  It may not always be pleasant, but it will surely be memorable.
Focus on a Franchise

Focus on a Franchise – Indiana Jones

 

IndianaJones
New ideas come about and change the course of cinema on occasion, but what usually drives the engines of the film industry is their reliance on sturdy film franchises.  You’ll find within a given year that most of the movies hitting the market are either sequels or a sequel to a sequel.  Now while many films don’t necessarily lend themselves well to a becoming a franchise, there are some that have kicked off a series that continues on long after their initial start.  For good or bad, we see film studios invest a lot of money into building up a franchise, mainly because they are great at generating revenue from a devoted fanbase and are easy to replicate with each new installment. Some  franchises have become so popular that they’ve been more defined by their whole than by just any individual film.  The most memorable franchises usually revolve around one of two things; an iconic character whose exploits become grander in each new series installment, or a richly detailed world that builds its cast and geography the longer that its story can go on.  These franchises have become such a major part of the legacies of Hollywood studios that I want to focus on them individually in a new series of articles.  In these posts, I’ll look at each entry of a franchise and examine how they work individually and as part of the whole of their series; as well as the histories and the interesting aspects of each film.
Appropriately enough, the franchise that I plan to look at first is also one of my absolute favorites:  The Indiana Jones Series.  Following the adventures of Dr. Henry Jones Jr. (aka Indiana Jones), the films in this franchise have become some of the most beloved in the last half-century.  The brain child of Star Wars creator George Lucas, Indiana Jones was meant to be a throwback to the action serials of the 1930’s and 40’s; a long forgotten genre in cinema.  Star Wars was a similar throwback to the sci-fi serials of the 50’s, so George Lucas naturally saw the potential of the character as a central figure to build a franchise around this idea.  To help him realize it, George Lucas approached his colleague and friend Steven Spielberg to direct the introductory film, Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981).  Spielberg, coming off the disastrous premiere of his WWII comedy 1941 (1979), gladly accepted the project, given that he had the same kind of enthusiasm for old serials that Lucas did.  The casting of Harrison Ford as Dr. Jones seems like a no-brainer today, but would you believe that Harrison Ford stepped into the role only after Magnum P.I.‘s Tom Selleck turned it down.  This collaborative team up is both exceptional and unique, mainly because it has never changed over 30 years and 4 films.  Only the screenwriters and the supporting cast changes. Mr. Spielberg directed every entry, with George Lucas producing and Harrison Ford being the one and only Indiana Jones.  Knowing these details behind the films, lets now look at each one individually.
raidersofthelostark
RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK (1981)
 
The introductory film of the franchise is also the one that people regard as the best.  Everything that makes an Indiana Jones movie what it is can be seen laid out in this film.  The swagger and resourcefulness of the main character; the mystery surrounding the central artifact; the international conspiracies and villains that Indiana Jones must battle against; and most importantly, the franchise’s sense of fun.  The story finds Indiana Jones on a quest to seek out the biblical Ark of the Covenant before a group of Nazis can get to it and unleash the God-given power it holds.  Making matters worse, Dr. Jones arch-rival, French archaeologist Belloq (Paul Freeman) is aiding the Nazis in their search.  With the help of an old flame, Marion Ravenwood (Karen Allen), and an Egyptian handyman named Sallah (John Rhys-Davies), Indiana Jones finds himself in a globe-trotting adventure to keep the Ark safe from evil forces.  It’s a straight-forward adventure that keeps things simple, and that’s the film’s greatest strength.  It’s an escapist adventure that relies upon the strength of it’s characters and the excitement in it’s action scenes.  It’s that timelessness that makes the film resonate 30 years after it was made.
There are so many iconic moments in this film; the most famous probably being the scene where Indy is chased by a giant boulder.  Spielberg’s direction plays a large part in making the film so memorable, because few other directors can make extra-ordinary moments like that one feel so believable; he’s also very good at creating iconic moments.  The writing, done by Lucas and Phillip Kaufman, is also well balanced; earnest when it needs to be and tougne-in-cheek silly at just the right times, much like the serials it’s trying to emulate.  It’s no surprise that Harrison Ford owns the role he plays.  From the first moment he steps into frame to the final scene, he is Indiana Jones.  He manages to keep the character intimidating and rugged all throughout the story, even in the lighter moments; I especially like the way he freaks out when he finds a snake in his lap (“I HATE SNAKES.  I HATE THEM”).  The rest of the cast is also just as strong.  Karen Allen makes Marion Ravenwood one of the strongest heroines in any action film.  She is no damsel in distress (though she does need saving in some instances) and is Indiana’s equal in almost every way.  Paul Freeman’s Belloq, while not too intimidating, is still an effective villain for this film and his ability to outsmart Indiana Jones does provide the movie with some extra tension.  Also, there is a memorable turn by actor Ronald Lacey as the creepy Nazi agent Toht; a character that has little to do with the overall plot, but is a welcome addition nonetheless.
Raiders of the Lost Ark is a perfect example of how to kick start a franchise.  It stands on it’s own as a great adventure, but it also leaves room to continue the adventures of Indiana Jones beyond it’s running time.  Raiders is briskly paced and very satisfying, which helps to give the audience an appetite for more.  It was a huge success upon it’s initial release, grossing $212 million (which is over $600 million in today’s money), and it even received an Oscar nomination for Best Picture. I’m sure that Lucas and Spielberg had a sequel in mind long before they had the success of the first film, but it would prove to be a shakier road than they realized.
templeofdoom
INDIANA JONES AND THE TEMPLE OF DOOM (1984)
 
Three years after Raiders, Spielberg and Lucas released what is definitely the darkest entry in the Indiana Jones series.  Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom first finds Dr. Jones escaping a Shanghai crime lord, accompanied by a pampered night-club singer named Willie (future Mrs. Spielberg, Kate Capshaw) and an orphaned Chinese pick-pocket named Short Round (Ke Huy-Quan).  After escaping a sabotaged plane in the Himalayan mountains, they find themselves in an impoverished Indian village, which has had a mystical stone stolen from them, along with many of their children.  Dr. Jones agrees to help the village find the stone and the children, which they track down to Pangkot Palace, home of the titular Temple of Doom; where a Thuggee cult hold their secret ceremonies.  Their leader, Mola Ram (Amrish Puri), is amassing more sacred stones in an attempt to gain mystical power and he holds Dr. Jones and his companions captive; even brainwashing Indiana in the process.  All of this makes Temple of Doom a very dark and sometimes disturbing film, especially when the villain has the power to rip a still beating heart out of a living person.
The movie had a mixed reception in it’s first release.  Both Spielberg and George Lucas also have misgivings about their finished film.  According to the making-of documentary on the film’s DVD, George Lucas blames the darker tone of the film on the fact that he was going through a nasty divorce at the time.  The film also made a lot of people angry because it received a PG rating despite the graphic violence on display.  The backlash actually led the MPAA to create a brand new rating (PG-13) in direct response to this movie; a legacy that I’m sure the filmmakers didn’t expect or want.  Also, feminists were outraged at the way the character Willie Scott was portrayed, saying that she was an ugly stereotype of a “kept” woman and “damsel in distress.”  The controversies surrounding the film ended up overshadowing the movie itself, and while it still made a lot at the box office, it was still seen as a fall-off from Raiders.
Despite all of this, it might surprise you that this is actually my favorite film in the series.  Temple of Doom was the first Indiana Jones film that I saw as a kid, so it’s probably why I have such a strong attachment to it.  Harrison Ford is in top form here and he takes the character to new levels of awesomeness.  While Willie Scott as a character is obnoxious, and a big step down from Marion, I don’t think that it’s Kate Capshaw’s fault and she tries her best to make the character entertaining. Some people hate Short Round, but I think he makes a wonderful character and he works well in the movie.  But what I love best in this movie is the villain, Mola Ram.  He is the best antagonist in the series and actor Amrish Puri steals every scene he is in.  The film also features one of John Williams’ best and most complete scores, which is saying a lot.  One particular track called “Slave Children’s Crusade” is probably one of my all time favorite musical themes.  And the final 30 minutes of the film is what I believe to be the best continuous action scene in movie history.  While Spielberg and Lucas have reservations about the movie, I for one love this film completely and it remains my favorite one to this day.
LastCrusade
INDIANA JONES AND THE LAST CRUSADE (1989)
 
After the backlash from Temple of Doom, it would take a few years for Lucas and Spielberg to return to the franchise.  In 1989, they decided to return the series back to it’s basics with Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade.   In this film, Indiana Jones once again finds himself racing against time to beat the Nazis to a religious artifact; this time, the Holy Grail.  Also on the trail, we find, is Indy’s own father, Dr. Henry Jones Sr. (played by 007 himself, Sean Connery).  Their search leads them through the catacombs of Venice, the mountains of Bavaria, to the heart of Nazi-led Berlin, and then finally the Turkish deserts.  Along the way, the two Joneses are betrayed and blackmailed by both a former colleague named Donovan (Julian Glover) and a sexy Austrian double agent named Elsa (Alison Doody).  The movie feels more like Raiders in tone and structure, but not in a way that it makes it feel like it’s ripping the former film off.
While I do like the film a lot, to me it feels weak in comparison to the previous two movies.  The film is just too uneven in tone and suffers greatly in it’s characterizations.  The most problematic problem for me is the villain, Donovan.  He is by far the weakest antagonist in the series, and that is mainly due to the way he is written.  There is no depth to the character; he’s merely there to service the plot whenever it needs a bad guy present to foul things up.  Julian Glover is a fine actor (check out his great work on Game of Thrones), but he’s completely wasted here.  Alison Doody brings a little bit of sizzle to her duplicitous Elsa, but the character is likewise underwritten.  Also, the film shamefully takes the character of Marcus Brody (Denholm Elliott), Dr. Jones’ intelligent and loyal fellow professor from Raiders, and turns him into a absent minded cartoon simpleton.  So, what’s good in the movie?  Pretty much every scene with Indy and his Dad.  The pairing of Harrison Ford and Sean Connery works so well in this film, and their on-screen chemistry is a delight to watch. The movie also features some excellent action set-pieces, especially a show-down with a German tank in the desert.  While it is flawed, the movie does stand on it’s own as an action film, and I can see why so many other people consider this as one of their favorites.
crystalskull
INDIANA JONES AND THE KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL (2008)
 
Despite the success of Last Crusade, it would take 19 years before we saw another Indiana Jones film on the big screen.  With a gap in time like that, it’s almost inevitable that a film would fall short of expectations, and Kingdom of the Crystal Skull certainly fell victim to this.  The movie is derided as the weakest in the series, to the point where some critics have called it the “franchise killer.”  The film finds an older Indiana Jones living in a post-war world where the Nazis have now been replaced by the Soviets, and old-age archaeological discoveries have been replaced with space age inquiries.  The film has Dr. Jones investigating the mystery surrounding the discovery of a Crystal Skull in the jungles of the Amazon.  At the same time, he runs afoul of Soviet agents, led by clairvoyant Agent Irina Spalko (Cate Blanchett), who hopes to use the Crystal Skull’s powers for mind-control programs against the Americans.  Indy is assisted in his search by a cocky young student named Mutt Williams (Shia LaBeouf), who we soon learn is the offspring of both Indiana and Marion Ravenwood, who makes her return to the series.  The movie is probably the most self-aware of the franchise due to all the references to Indy’s past adventures; the opening scene reveals that Area 51 is the location of the warehouse from Raiders.  The more over-the-top nature of the movie is also what probably turns a lot of people away from this film, and it is undeniably flawed.
So, it may surprise more people that I actually like this one.  After hearing from a lot of other fans of the series, I think I might be one of the few people who does support this film.  I recognize that it is flawed, but like I said, so is Last Crusade.  Probably the fact that my favorite film in the franchise is the similarly divisive Temple of Doom has played a factor in my less critical opinion of the movie.  One thing that I like in this film is Cate Blanchett’s performance as Agent Spalko; a significant upgrade of a villain compared to Donovan.  Also, Harrison Ford, even in his advanced years, is still in top form as Indiana Jones.  I also love the return of Karen Allen as Marion; let’s face it, she’s the only woman in Indy’s life that matters.  While the film has a lot that I do like, there are things that still weaken it.  Mainly, the character of Mutt Williams, who is not believable in any way as the son of Indiana Jones.  Also, the action scenes are a mixed bag.  We get some great scenes like a motorcycle chase through Dr. Jones’ college and a fight around an army of killer ants, but they are book-ended by weaker action scenes, like a heavily CGI-ed chase through the Amazon jungle.  But the sum of the whole works for me as a movie.  I even don’t mind the much derided “Nuking the Fridge” scene.  I also like the fact that the series moved forward to reflect the time period.  While some people hate the inclusion of aliens and UFO’s in the Indiana Jones series, I understand that by placing a throwback to classic serials in the Sci-Fi driven 1950’s, it seems natural to have them included in this story-line.  I’m an unapologetic defender of this film, and I believe that it has a deserved place with the others in the series.
The future is uncertain for the Indiana Jones franchise, due partially to the mixed results of Crystal Skull, and also due to the fact that the principal people involved are getting older.  Despite this, George Lucas and Steven Spielberg eventually want to make another one, and Harrison Ford has expressed interest in putting on the fedora for at least one more time.  Whether or not it will happen remains to be seen, but for right now, this appears to be it for the Indiana Jones film franchise.  The series is still one of the most successful of the last half-century and has left a lasting legacy over the years.  Long before the Disney Company bought Lucasfilm from George Lucas, you could easily find the character at home in the company’s theme parks all over the world; including a popular ride in Disneyland and a stunt show in Disney World.  Also, there was a successful series called the The Young Indiana Jones Chronicles that aired on TV from 1992-93, which helped to flesh out the character’s back-story.  To this day, Indiana Jones is still considered one of the most beloved action heroes in movie history, and he definitely stands as one of my favorites.  Interesting enough, as far as a George Lucas film series goes, I actually hold this one up higher than Star Wars.  I enjoy each film, warts and all, and I never get tired of them. I still regard Temple of Doom as one of my absolute favorite action films, and that will probably never change.  In the end, that’s what marks a great franchise; where you enjoy it so much that you’re willing to return to it over and over again as it continues to grow.
Editorials

The Best of the Worst – Why We Have a Good Time Watching Bad Movies

 

manos
If there was ever a place where the word “bad” could be considered a relative term, it would be in the movies.  Over the course of film history, we have seen Hollywood and the film industry at large put out an astounding variety of movies, and not all of them have hit their targets the way that the filmmakers had intended.  If you produce hundreds of products within a given year, the odds are that some, if not most of them are not going to be good.  But like most things, one man’s trash can be another man’s treasure, and that has led to a fascinating occurrence in the film community.  Some “bad movies” have actually earned a fanbase all on their own, finding an audience in some unexpected ways.  This has been the case with films that have built a reputation over time, but nowadays, we are actually seeing intentionally bad movies become phenomenally successful upon their initial releases, as was the case with the premiere of Sharknado on the SyFy Channel earlier this summer.  How and why “bad movies” find their audiences is still a mystery to many, but what I love about this trend is that it shakes up our preconceived notions about the film industry, and makes us reconsider what we find entertaining in the first place.
So, what is it about these “bad” movies that makes them so entertaining to us?  The truth is that there is no “one thing” that defines the success behind these films, and usually it’s all relative to each individual movie.  Sometimes it’s the incompetency behind the making of the film that we find so entertaining.  Sometimes it’s because the film is so out-of-date that it becomes hilarious.  Sometimes it’s the lack of self-awareness and ego behind the director’s vision.  And sometimes it’s the filmmakers just not giving a damn what other people think and just going all out with their material. The formula has no consistency, and yet we see many film’s fall into these many different categories of “bad” films.  Usually the best of the these are the ones that fulfill the criteria of a “bad” movie so perfectly, that it becomes memorable and re-watchable.  Only in rare cases does this work intentionally, and usually the best “bad” films arise from an unexpected accident.
Some of the best “bad’ movies have come out of turmoil, which makes their existence all the more fascinating.  Usually this is attributed to movies that were made despite the fact that their filmmakers didn’t know what they were doing.  One of the most notorious examples of this was the 1966 cult classic, Manos: The Hands of Fate.  Manos was the creation of Hal Warren, a fertilizer salesman from El Paso, Texas who made a bet with a screenwriter friend of his that he could make his own movie without any help from Hollywood.  Making good on his wager, Mr. Warren wrote and directed this schlocky horror film centered around a cult leader named the Master (pictured above) who holds a family hostage in his compound, which is watched over by a lecherous caretaker named Torgo.  Hal Warren shot the film with a camera that could only shot 30 seconds of film at a time with no recorded sound, and most of the movie was shot at night with set lighting attracting moths in almost every shot.  The finished film is a convoluted mess and it ended any shot for Hal Warren to pursue a career in filmmaking.  However, many years later, the film was rediscovered by the producers of the show Mystery Science Theater, who then featured it on their show and created a renewed interest in this odd little film that no one outside of Texas knew about.  Manos became a hit afterwards because people were fascinated by how silly this poorly made film was, something that the MST crew had a hand in.  Since then, Manos has earned a reputation for being among the worst films ever made, and that in itself has made it a favorite for people who gravitate towards that.
While Manos represents an example of a disaster turned into a success, there are other bad films that have become fan favorites just out of being incredibly dated.  These movies usually make up the majority of what people consider good “bad” films, since most films are a product of their times.  Whether people are entertained by these because of their “out-of-date” nature or merely because of shear nostalgia, there’s no denying that time has a way of changing how we view these kinds of movies.  The 1950’s has become an era that many film fans find to be full of some good trash, mainly due to the rise of the B-movie in this period of time.  Some cult hits like The Blob (1958), Creature from the Black Lagoon (1954), Attack of the 50 ft. Woman (1958), and The Thing from Another World (1951) all rode the surge of a sci-fi craze of the post-war years, and while everything from these films, like the visual effects and the acting, feels antiquated today, they still have a camp value that makes them watchable all these years later.  The “cheese factor” plays a big role in keeping these films entertaining long after their relevance has diminished.  You can see this also in the beach party movies of the early 60’s, which are charming despite their paper-thin plots. The one other era that has produced it’s own distinctive set of dated films would be the 1980’s, with it’s collection of dated fantasy pictures and culturally infused fluff, like He-Man inspired Masters of the Universe (1987) or the E.T. wannabe Mac and Me (1988).  By all accounts, these films would have long been forgotten outside of their era, and yet they have lived on with audiences who still find something entertaining in them.
One of my favorite types of “bad” film is the kind that comes from a complete lack of control from either the director or the performer.  There have been some directors that have actually gained their reputation as an filmmaker by staying within the B-Movie community.  The most famous of these filmmakers has become Ed Wood Jr.; a person who some have claimed to be the worst director in history.  Ed Wood’s notable contributions to cinema have been the cross-dressing comedy Glen or Glenda (1953), the Bela Lugosi-starring Bride of the Monster (1955), and what many consider the director’s “masterpiece,” Plan 9 from Outer Space (1959).  Whether or not Ed Wood was earnest in his vision or whether he made his film’s intentionally bad is still debated, but there is no doubt that Plan 9 is a special kind of “bad;” a movie so aggressively cheesy, that it is hard not to be entertained by it.
Other filmmakers who were more aware of their B-Movie status have still gained an honored reputation with audiences.  Roger Corman, a man who prided himself in making movies both fast and cheap, has actually become influential to a who generation of blockbuster filmmakers.  His Little Shop of Horrors (1962) even inspired a Broadway musical.  Also, sometimes a way out there performance can often make a “bad” movie worth watching.  I would argue that this is the case with most Nicolas Cage films, like Vampire’s Kiss (1988) or Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance (2012).  One film that has become a cult classic mainly due to one “out-of-control” performance was 1981’s Mommie Dearest, where Faye Dunaway chews the scenery in a good way as a way over-the-top Joan Crawford.  Usually a lack of restraint by the filmmakers can sink a film, but these movies actually prove that it’s not always the case.
While many films usually become a cult hit over time, there a select few that attempt to achieve cult status right away by being intentionally bad.  Like I stated earlier, Sharknado became an instant hit when it premiered on cable, and having seen the film myself, it’s clear that the filmmakers behind it knew what kind of movie they were making.  Rarely do you see filmmakers try to aim for that intentionally “bad” gimmick for their movies, because obviously if audiences don’t accept it, then you’ve just made a bad movie.  Director Tim Burton tried to create a homage to B-Movie sci-fi with his 1996 film Mars Attacks, but the film was an odd blend of tounge-in-cheek mockery with earnest storytelling, and the end result doesn’t achieve what it set out to do.
But, one example of an intentionally bad film that did click with audiences is the campy musical The Rocky Horror Picture Show (1975); a movie that pays homage to campy horror and sci-fi, while mixing in 50’s rock music and trans-sexual humor.  Rocky Horror tries so hard to be so bad, you would think that the whole thing would be a mess; and yet, it remains entertaining and it has one of the most dedicated fanbases in  the world.  I think the reason why a movie like Rocky Horror works is because of the fact that it just doesn’t care what people will think about it.  It is what it is, and that’s why people gravitate to it.  It’s a one of a kind.  A movie like Mars Attacks didn’t click as a throwback, because it didn’t have that same kind of assured belief in itself, and that shows why it is hard to make a bad movie feel good.
When it comes down to it, “bad” movies are usually determined by the tastes of the people who watch them.  We have made some of these “bad” movies our favorites because of the value we find in their chessy-ness, or by our fascination with how badly it gets things wrong.  For a movie to be all around bad, it has to lack any kind of entertainment value in the end.  For those who are wondering, the worst movie that I have ever seen, and one I see no redeeming value in, is the 1996 film Space Jam.  To me, it was the worst experience I have ever had watching a movie, mainly because I saw it as a blatant self-serving production piece for a sports super star (Michael Jordan) and it ruined three things on film that I love dearly: NIKE, Looney Tunes, and Bill Murray.  But, I do recognize that the film does have its fans, so in the end it all comes down to taste.  But, it is fascinating how our tastes leave room for something as poorly made as a Manos or even the more recent Birdemic: Shock and Terror (2010), a movie that needs to be seen to be believed.  There is certainly value in seeing something that we find entertaining, and perhaps that is why these films live on the way they do.
Collecting Criterion

Collecting Criterion – Seven Samurai (1954)

 

SevenSamurai
The Criterion Collection has many selections of classic Stateside films, but what I like is that Criterion is the go to place for home video releases of movies from across the world.  This is helpful if your favorite filmmakers are international and have limited access to the American film markets.  Famed directors like Jean Renoir, Ingmar Bergman, Sergei Eisenstein, and the like are found almost exclusively within the Criterion Collection here in America, which makes it likely that any discerning film buff will have one or more Criterion title on their shelf.  As a fan of certain directors, I am among those who collects movies according to someone’s distinctive body of work. While it is easy to collect the films of say Spielberg or Scorsese here in America, foreign filmmakers’ movies aren’t exactly published for the mass market here in the same way, unless they are an internationally successful filmmaker like Hayao Miyazaki or Lars von Trier.  Hence why I gravitate towards the Criterion Collection when I want to include foreign classics in my film collection, particularly when they come from a one of my favorite directors.
In this article, I want to highlight one such filmmaker who stands out as one of my favorites, and whose films have become staples within the Criterion Collection.  I am speaking of legendary Japanese director Akira Kurosawa, a filmmaker whose influence is without comparison in world cinematic history.  Kurosawa, over the span of his career, directed 32 films from 1943’s Sanshiro Sugata to 1993’s Madadayo.  Some of his films have become world renowned classics and in some cases, considered among the best ever made.  Some of his most influential films would be his movies depicting the era of the Samurais in Japan’s cultural history.  Two of these, Yojimbo (1961) and Sanjuro (1962) would go on to be remade as Westerns by Italian filmmaker Sergio Leone in his A Fistful of Dollars (1964) and For a Few Dollars More (1965).  Given that Akira Kurosawa was heavily influenced by John Ford westerns in his youth, I’m sure he would have found these remakes appropriate.  Yojimbo and Sanjuro are available in the Criterion Collection, but the title that I wish to focus on is one considered to be Akira Kurosawa’s masterpiece, and one of Criterion’s best titles to date.  That film is 1954’s Seven Samurai (Criterion Collection #2).
The story of Seven Samurai (Shichinin no samurai) is set in the 1600’s, during the Feudal period in Japan.  The start of the film finds a small village of farmers tormented by a group of bandits who raid their food supplies and kidnap their women nearly every year.  The fed-up farmers make the decision to hire Samurai to protect their village, which is a plan made with some reservations because of the fact that some Samurais are just as bad as the bandits that are attacking them.  Still, a group of farmers set out for the city where they run across a veteran Samurai named Kambei (Takashi Shimura), who sympathizes with their plight and agrees to help the farmers in their search for more Samurai.  In the end, Kambei finds Seven warriors willing to fight on behalf of the farmers, even for the limited offerings that the peasant farmers can give them.  Among the Seven is a hot-head with a giant sword named Kikuchiyo (Toshiro Mifune), whose Samurai lineage is questionable and who’s more likely to start trouble than prevent it.  The remainder of the film follows the Samurai as they fortify the village and help train the farmers to protect themselves for the bandits return. Once the battles begin, it becomes a memorable fight for survival for both the Samurai and the farmers.
If the story sounds familiar, it is because it was remade a few years later by director John Sturges as the Western The Magnificent Seven (1960), a rare example of a respectful Hollywood remake of an international classic.  Thankfully, the original has stood the test of time and still works just as well today as when it was first released.  I should state that Seven Samurai actually stands as one of my absolute favorite movies.  To me, it represents the absolute pinnacle of cinematic storytelling. The film’s narrative is very basic, and yet is executed to absolute perfection in both the writing as well as in the pacing.  The movie runs 3 hours and 27 minutes, but you would never tell because it holds your attention so completely.  The cinematography is both stunning and influential.  Many people have often called this the first modern action film, because of Kurosawa’s use of slow-motion and hand-held photography to heighten some of the action scenes; techniques that are still being used today.  You also see some of the most iconic uses of Kurosawa’s trademarks in this film; in-particular, the use of rain.  The downpour seen in the movie’s legendary final battle is a sight that needs to be seen, and will often leave the viewer wondering how it was all accomplished.
The performances are also what makes this film so beloved, even all these years later.  Toshiro Mifune was already a popular actor in Japan when Seven Samurai was released, but this film is what turned him into an international movie star and put him on the radar of many Hollywood filmmakers as well.  Mifune is simply magnetic in the role of Kikuchiyo, and steals pretty much every scene he is in.  He balances both the humorous moments in the film with some of the heavier ones, and makes the character feel wholly three-dimensional in the process.  Mifune and Kurosawa would make 16 films together; a partnership unmatched in all of film-making.  Takashi Shimura also lends considerable weight to the role of Kambei, the Samurai leader.  The remainder of the cast too are also strong.  One of the things that I love so much about the movie is the surprising depth that you find in each character, both large and small.  Even the many farmers get special treatment in the film’s screen time.  It all contributes to one of the most enriching and complex screen stories ever brought to life.
The Criterion Collection’s edition of Seven Samurai is also nothing short of a masterpiece.  The film comes in a special two-disc blu-ray set, with the film taking up the entire first disc.  The film’s restoration is a perfect upgrade for the film; bringing out every little detail in the nearly 60 year old picture, while still maintaining it’s intended look.  The black and white photography is razor sharp and the sound is appropriately mixed to retain the film’s original sound design.  For a movie as old as this one, Criterion’s restoration makes it feel both consistent and revelatory to longtime fans of the movie.
The extras are also top-notch and worth delving into if you’re a fan of the movie.  First there is a trio of documentaries, related to both the film and Kurosawa himself.  The first one is titled, My Life in Cinema, and it is a two-hour interview with Kurosawa himself, done in 1993 with fellow filmmaker Nagisa Oshima.  The documentary has Kurosawa looking over the works of his career as he films one of his final movies, Rhapsody in August (1991).  The second documentary is It is Wonderful to Create, which is part of a Japanese TV series documenting Kurosawa’s filmography, movie by movie.  This 50-minute entry of course documents the making of Seven Samurai, and remaining episodes of the series can be found on Criterion editions of each corresponding Kurosawa film.  The last documentary, Seven Samurai: Origins and Influences, details both the inspirations in Japanese culture behind the film as well as the influences it made on pop-culture after its release.  A gallery of production stills and poster art round out the extras, helping to make this a well rounded special edition.
Seven Samurai has earned it’s place in cinema history, and that makes it a no-brainer entry into the Criterion Collection.  There are many more Kurosawa classics in the collection, but this is the one that I believe deserves special consideration for any fan of cinema.  Criterion’s edition of the film is appropriately top-notch and no one would expect less.  It is worth revisiting again if you have seen the film before, just so you can take in the remarkable restoration.  And if you’re a first-timer, you’ll be in for a treat.  It’s a movie that really transcends cultural and language barriers and can be appreciated by just about everyone.  Kurosawa had that special gift as a filmmaker to make films that were undeniably Japanese, and yet universally appealing.  This is a worthy addition to your collection of Criterion films and it certainly holds a sacred place in my own collection.
 ssbluray