I had best friend named Kayleen. We were young and angsty and pretty twisted little teens. One might have even called us weird, though we were just confused kids who liked confusing things. Emily the Strange, Marilyn Manson, Tim Burton and hating on posers--these were our passions. Once, Kayleen introduced me to a little Japanese film called "Audition". She was always the bigger horror film fan and especially liked the Asian stuff. I had no idea what I was getting myself into, but eight years later images from the film from our giggly little freak night are still fresh in my mind. That's how scary this movie is.
Seven years after the death of his wife, Shigeharu (Ryo Ishibashi) is convinced by his teenage son to remarry. I expect it's a difficult process to be middle-aged and enter the dating scene again, especially when it was death and not divorce that separates you from your spouse. Shigeharu finds it difficult at any rate. But he works as a producer and a coworker gives him the idea to stage an audition for a film so that he might learn about certain girls and finally meet his future wife.
He does, and picks a quiet, beautiful girl with a troubled past. He doesn't tell her his true intentions, but a romance forms organically into something delicate and sweet. Troubling undertones begin to emerge though and soon it becomes clear that this girl is not all that she seems and by far a better actress than this producer expected.
It does take a very long while for the film to get going. You might even find yourself forgetting that it is a horror film as it takes about an hour to get through the setup. It isn't necessarily a bad thing. The first two acts are nice in their own right and would make a sentimental romantic tale of a man trying to cheat love. It is also acerbically witty making it perfectly reasonable to deviate from traditional horror plots.
The third act, however, is explosive and unforgettable. Its graphic intensity makes some moments too horrible to watch. Director Takashi Miike takes girls with daddy issues to a whole new level and makes it very clear that you can't short change the encounters between those you love. Its final 30 minutes are a fantastical set of memories and delusions woven around a nightmarish reality that will leave you white-knuckled. So long has passed since my initial viewing and I still remember quotes verbatim from those final moments.
I don't know if less back story would make this movie better or scarier. What we find at the end might have been cheapened if we weren't completely invested in two sad, lonely souls searching for each other. The final product, though, is gruesome and disturbingly awesome. Watch it and tell me you won't go to sleep hearing "Kiri, kiri, kiri, kiri, kiri!" over and over in your head.
3.5/4
Friday, October 12, 2012
Thursday, October 11, 2012
Them (2006)
In a style not dissimilar to "Halloween" a young French couple living in Romania are terrorized by a group of unknown assailants in the country home. Their reason is reasonless. It is simply a case of senseless violence inflicted on two complete innocents.
The film's credits open with a line stating that the story was based on real events and then we are immediately thrust into the death of a mother and daughter on a deserted stretch of road. It is simply blatant foreshadowing for what is going to come. As I watched the film I reminded myself that what happened was basically true, but it wasn't until the very end that I became conscious of the true gravity of the situation.
Clementine and Lucas emigrated to Romania three months prior to their one fateful evening. He is a writer and she is a French teacher of schoolchildren. Their lives don't seem to be particularly interesting, nor do they seem to be particularly interesting people. On a random night, however, their house is invaded by faceless shadows, invisible in the darkness. With minimal gore and almost unending tension the two must fight for their survival which ends at dawn.
There is little else to say as far as plot is concerned as that is pretty much the extent of the story. The movie completely abandons all conventions of narrative and character development, simply giving us a solid hour of a cat and mouse chase. No back story and almost no resolution is given. The end attempts to be haunting which it almost succeeds at, but instead it left me disappointed. Certainly, what we do learn about the attackers is extremely shocking, especially because it is true, but I couldn't help feeling cheated out of a far more impressive story for this simple scary movie.
If I were the family members of the two victims I certainly would never have consented to allow the story to be dramatized and certainly not in the genre that it was. Clem and Lucas are formless beings given a cliched evening of romance that adds nothing to who they are. After twenty minutes of this we are left with a merciless sequence of jumpy moments and an ending which does nothing to distinguish them.
The film's tactlessness aside, what it did offer was done well. The figures are not frightening once they are seen, but we are left blind to them for most of the movie. It is shot in a big, creepy house in a country which I already associate with bad happenings, and the film relies not so much on what is seen, but what is heard. Industrial noises and animal cries build a sense of dread that is relentless throughout. If anyone is to be praised here, it is the sound editor.
I wanted to like this movie and in some ways I did, but one cannot simply abandon structure, narrative, characters and etiquette and expect to get away with it. With a proper script directors David Moreau and Xavier Palud could do good things, but I still want to give them a slap on the wrist.
1.5/4
The film's credits open with a line stating that the story was based on real events and then we are immediately thrust into the death of a mother and daughter on a deserted stretch of road. It is simply blatant foreshadowing for what is going to come. As I watched the film I reminded myself that what happened was basically true, but it wasn't until the very end that I became conscious of the true gravity of the situation.
Clementine and Lucas emigrated to Romania three months prior to their one fateful evening. He is a writer and she is a French teacher of schoolchildren. Their lives don't seem to be particularly interesting, nor do they seem to be particularly interesting people. On a random night, however, their house is invaded by faceless shadows, invisible in the darkness. With minimal gore and almost unending tension the two must fight for their survival which ends at dawn.
There is little else to say as far as plot is concerned as that is pretty much the extent of the story. The movie completely abandons all conventions of narrative and character development, simply giving us a solid hour of a cat and mouse chase. No back story and almost no resolution is given. The end attempts to be haunting which it almost succeeds at, but instead it left me disappointed. Certainly, what we do learn about the attackers is extremely shocking, especially because it is true, but I couldn't help feeling cheated out of a far more impressive story for this simple scary movie.
If I were the family members of the two victims I certainly would never have consented to allow the story to be dramatized and certainly not in the genre that it was. Clem and Lucas are formless beings given a cliched evening of romance that adds nothing to who they are. After twenty minutes of this we are left with a merciless sequence of jumpy moments and an ending which does nothing to distinguish them.
The film's tactlessness aside, what it did offer was done well. The figures are not frightening once they are seen, but we are left blind to them for most of the movie. It is shot in a big, creepy house in a country which I already associate with bad happenings, and the film relies not so much on what is seen, but what is heard. Industrial noises and animal cries build a sense of dread that is relentless throughout. If anyone is to be praised here, it is the sound editor.
I wanted to like this movie and in some ways I did, but one cannot simply abandon structure, narrative, characters and etiquette and expect to get away with it. With a proper script directors David Moreau and Xavier Palud could do good things, but I still want to give them a slap on the wrist.
1.5/4
Tuesday, October 9, 2012
Dumplings (2004)
Aunt Mei cooks dumplings in her apartment. She cooks very special dumplings with very special properties that only very discerning customers want to purchase. She tells us one of these very discerning customers and the audience that the dumpling has been a centerpiece in Chinese cuisine for over 1,400 years. It has been a part of the cultural food fabric of her people--so too, apparently, has cannibalism.
The aging film star, Mrs. Li (Miriam Yeung Chin Wah), lives with her neglectful, unfaithful, egomaniacal husband and suffers severe insecurity. Her fame has all but vanished, her husband has all but left her. She hears of Aunt Mei and her dumplings which are said to have restorative powers, and her vanity compels her to sample them. Indeed, the dumplings reverse age. Aunt Mei is 64 years old, but looks no older than a girl in her late 20's. But the magic of the food comes at a horrible price: the secret ingredient to her recipe is cooked human fetus.
This concept very nearly turned me off from watching the film at all, but I was intrigued to see how this sort of story would play out and was surprised to find that it is a very well-crafted film with strong performances from its two leads. October is a month for horror films; I wouldn't necessarily classify this as "horror" (though it did have one opportunity to place itself there) as much as I would cinema of the grotesque. Still, it may not be horror, but it is horrifying.
Mrs. Li tries Aunt Mei's concoction, and it seems to work on her too. Soon, however, her appetite for the food begins to grow leading to unseen and particularly unsavory consequences. As if the premise weren't disgusting enough, another layer of dreadfulness is mixed in. I won't spoil it, though I will say it is very compelling. Unfortunately, the story did not take us down the incredibly dark path it promises which I found strangely disappointing. I'm not sure how much more nauseating I hoped it would get, but I do know one very big issue was never resolved.
Yeung does a great job as the vainglorious actress fallen to a deed beyond reprehensible. The way she turns from disgusted to a steely resolve as she swallows the aborted babies is seamless and convincing. The performance by Tony Leung Ka Fai as Mei is also very sharp. The black market abortionist has such an easy charm that she almost convinces you that what is happening is no big deal. I found both women compelling.
This is a very odd film, but that needn't be stated. There are lots of movies about what women will do to stay young and beautiful forever, but I don't believe that there are any others who take this approach, nor would I want them to. They say love is only skin deep. Or is it beauty? Is there a difference? After watching this, I'd have to say no, there isn't.
Don't watch while you're eating.
3/4
The aging film star, Mrs. Li (Miriam Yeung Chin Wah), lives with her neglectful, unfaithful, egomaniacal husband and suffers severe insecurity. Her fame has all but vanished, her husband has all but left her. She hears of Aunt Mei and her dumplings which are said to have restorative powers, and her vanity compels her to sample them. Indeed, the dumplings reverse age. Aunt Mei is 64 years old, but looks no older than a girl in her late 20's. But the magic of the food comes at a horrible price: the secret ingredient to her recipe is cooked human fetus.
This concept very nearly turned me off from watching the film at all, but I was intrigued to see how this sort of story would play out and was surprised to find that it is a very well-crafted film with strong performances from its two leads. October is a month for horror films; I wouldn't necessarily classify this as "horror" (though it did have one opportunity to place itself there) as much as I would cinema of the grotesque. Still, it may not be horror, but it is horrifying.
Mrs. Li tries Aunt Mei's concoction, and it seems to work on her too. Soon, however, her appetite for the food begins to grow leading to unseen and particularly unsavory consequences. As if the premise weren't disgusting enough, another layer of dreadfulness is mixed in. I won't spoil it, though I will say it is very compelling. Unfortunately, the story did not take us down the incredibly dark path it promises which I found strangely disappointing. I'm not sure how much more nauseating I hoped it would get, but I do know one very big issue was never resolved.
Yeung does a great job as the vainglorious actress fallen to a deed beyond reprehensible. The way she turns from disgusted to a steely resolve as she swallows the aborted babies is seamless and convincing. The performance by Tony Leung Ka Fai as Mei is also very sharp. The black market abortionist has such an easy charm that she almost convinces you that what is happening is no big deal. I found both women compelling.
This is a very odd film, but that needn't be stated. There are lots of movies about what women will do to stay young and beautiful forever, but I don't believe that there are any others who take this approach, nor would I want them to. They say love is only skin deep. Or is it beauty? Is there a difference? After watching this, I'd have to say no, there isn't.
Don't watch while you're eating.
3/4
Sunday, October 7, 2012
A Tale of Two Sisters (2003)
Five years after the Japanese horror sensation "Ringu" caught the attention of global audiences, South Korean filmmaker Jee-woon Kim created something equally as horrible (in the best sense of the word), but a story a bit more grounded in reality making it all the more frightening. Its premise isn't exactly novel, but this is certainly a piece to chill you to your core.
A family is torn apart following the death of a mother. Two sisters, their father and their new stepmother return to their beautiful, secluded house where they try to cope with a new life and deal with their grief. But demons, new and old, plague the family and the two girls, Soo-mi and Soo-yeon must contend not only with their domineering, abusive stepmother, they must also face spirits haunting their rooms.
Kim has taken the tradition of the classic, Asian ghost story of specter girl in white and brought it to a level to contend with "Ringu". This is an intensely creepy film not simply because of the ghosts that torment the two loving sisters, but also because this is a story of the imbalances of the mind. Soo-mi and Soo-yeon, the eldest and the protector, spent time recovering from the shock of their mother's death in a mental institution. Their imbalances, however, seem paltry when compared to stepmother Eun-joo.
When the horrid reality of the night becomes indistinguishable from the maniacal goings on of the day, the film becomes one continuous nightmare. Reality begins to blur and this psychotic newcomer becomes as awful--if not more--as the contorted woman wrenching herself from the inside of closets and under sinks.
This movie has a complete grasp of the rules of horror film making. It is never about the moments when the slasher or the ghoul jumps out and grabs you, it is all about the moment just before. Here, every moment intended to be psychotic is explosively believable, and every moment of ghostly horror is almost stiflingly tense. I can say that I was genuinely frightened by this film and there were moments when I was afraid to watch. Eli Roth, director of "Hostel", has said that the biggest compliment a horror film director can receive is when an audience member says they couldn't watch the movie. I don't necessarily believe that that applies to him, as he has capitalized on the cinema of torture which is not at all the same kind of film, but the essence of what he says is true, and is certainly the case here.
Su-jeong Lim as See-mi gives an incredibly promising first performance in what I imagine would have been a very exhausting role to play. A mentally unstable teen who is torn between fear, resentment, guilt and pride is no small feat.
The film ends in a confusing way and with content that will shed more light on the story while adding to the depth of her performance, though I am not sure it would pass a second viewing without gigantic plot holes emerging. I figured out its twists early on, but it didn't detract in the slightest from what I was watching. This is a very scary film, but an unusually smart addition to the genre as well.
3/4
A family is torn apart following the death of a mother. Two sisters, their father and their new stepmother return to their beautiful, secluded house where they try to cope with a new life and deal with their grief. But demons, new and old, plague the family and the two girls, Soo-mi and Soo-yeon must contend not only with their domineering, abusive stepmother, they must also face spirits haunting their rooms.
Kim has taken the tradition of the classic, Asian ghost story of specter girl in white and brought it to a level to contend with "Ringu". This is an intensely creepy film not simply because of the ghosts that torment the two loving sisters, but also because this is a story of the imbalances of the mind. Soo-mi and Soo-yeon, the eldest and the protector, spent time recovering from the shock of their mother's death in a mental institution. Their imbalances, however, seem paltry when compared to stepmother Eun-joo.
When the horrid reality of the night becomes indistinguishable from the maniacal goings on of the day, the film becomes one continuous nightmare. Reality begins to blur and this psychotic newcomer becomes as awful--if not more--as the contorted woman wrenching herself from the inside of closets and under sinks.
This movie has a complete grasp of the rules of horror film making. It is never about the moments when the slasher or the ghoul jumps out and grabs you, it is all about the moment just before. Here, every moment intended to be psychotic is explosively believable, and every moment of ghostly horror is almost stiflingly tense. I can say that I was genuinely frightened by this film and there were moments when I was afraid to watch. Eli Roth, director of "Hostel", has said that the biggest compliment a horror film director can receive is when an audience member says they couldn't watch the movie. I don't necessarily believe that that applies to him, as he has capitalized on the cinema of torture which is not at all the same kind of film, but the essence of what he says is true, and is certainly the case here.
Su-jeong Lim as See-mi gives an incredibly promising first performance in what I imagine would have been a very exhausting role to play. A mentally unstable teen who is torn between fear, resentment, guilt and pride is no small feat.
The film ends in a confusing way and with content that will shed more light on the story while adding to the depth of her performance, though I am not sure it would pass a second viewing without gigantic plot holes emerging. I figured out its twists early on, but it didn't detract in the slightest from what I was watching. This is a very scary film, but an unusually smart addition to the genre as well.
3/4
Friday, October 5, 2012
House on Haunted Hill (1959)
What a career Vincent Price made for himself as the king of the horror film. From his extraordinary amalgam of an accent to his pristine mustache to that calm, easy grace, it's no wonder directors liked him as the eccentric master of the macabre. Playing one of his usual roles, Price is a millionaire intent on throwing a "haunted house" party for a seemingly random group of strangers on Haunted Hill. Each person will receive $10,000 at the end of the party. The catch? They must survive the night.
A pilot, a typist, a journalist, a psychiatrist, a member of the family and heir to the house, plus Mr. Loren's fourth wife consist of the guest list. They all share one common attribute: besides none of them really knowing their host, they are all in desperate need of the cash. Locked inside of the fortress of a manor, they must not only endure the ghosts of residents past, but must also contend with their growing hysteria.
There is something so archaically endearing about a good ol' fashioned ghost story, for their is something so primitively frightening about the idea of spirits. All civilizations have their ideas of an afterlife and so many of them center around the thought that our essence--our soul--is something as real and tangible as our flesh. It doesn't take much more than a trick of the mind in a spooky house full of cobwebs and squeaky doors in order to make those apparitions appear.
The film, though mostly a fun little fright fest in an old school kind of way, has a bit more substance to it which I won't go into for fear of spoiling the plot. Watching this, one might think that there really is no story besides the ghost and that this idea of a "party" is nothing more than an impetus to get these random people into one haunted place. Rest assured, there is a plot, though it isn't something that makes a whole lot of sense and as it continues the dots don't really connect. I suppose dots aren't really the issue, however, when we are dealing with giant vats of acid in the wine cellar and blood that drips from an ancient stain.
The film is short, running at barely 75 minutes, but that is still too much time for what we've got. Certain characters don't really play any part of the story, like Julie Mitchum as the columnist and Elisha Cook Jr. as the relation to the dead specters (though he does offer a lot of "spook talk", and even insinuates that the ghosts will come for the audience next! Aaaahhh!). All in all, it's a movie with a lot of screaming and a jab at a story towards the end.
Even still, if you're looking for something to get you into the Halloween spirit and if you're not into gotcha! moments or lots of gore, like I'm not, then maybe this will be something to get you in the mood. There really is nothing like a big, scary house shot in black and white, and who wouldn't be at least a little unnerved by party hosted by Price?
2.5/4
A pilot, a typist, a journalist, a psychiatrist, a member of the family and heir to the house, plus Mr. Loren's fourth wife consist of the guest list. They all share one common attribute: besides none of them really knowing their host, they are all in desperate need of the cash. Locked inside of the fortress of a manor, they must not only endure the ghosts of residents past, but must also contend with their growing hysteria.
There is something so archaically endearing about a good ol' fashioned ghost story, for their is something so primitively frightening about the idea of spirits. All civilizations have their ideas of an afterlife and so many of them center around the thought that our essence--our soul--is something as real and tangible as our flesh. It doesn't take much more than a trick of the mind in a spooky house full of cobwebs and squeaky doors in order to make those apparitions appear.
The film, though mostly a fun little fright fest in an old school kind of way, has a bit more substance to it which I won't go into for fear of spoiling the plot. Watching this, one might think that there really is no story besides the ghost and that this idea of a "party" is nothing more than an impetus to get these random people into one haunted place. Rest assured, there is a plot, though it isn't something that makes a whole lot of sense and as it continues the dots don't really connect. I suppose dots aren't really the issue, however, when we are dealing with giant vats of acid in the wine cellar and blood that drips from an ancient stain.
The film is short, running at barely 75 minutes, but that is still too much time for what we've got. Certain characters don't really play any part of the story, like Julie Mitchum as the columnist and Elisha Cook Jr. as the relation to the dead specters (though he does offer a lot of "spook talk", and even insinuates that the ghosts will come for the audience next! Aaaahhh!). All in all, it's a movie with a lot of screaming and a jab at a story towards the end.
Even still, if you're looking for something to get you into the Halloween spirit and if you're not into gotcha! moments or lots of gore, like I'm not, then maybe this will be something to get you in the mood. There really is nothing like a big, scary house shot in black and white, and who wouldn't be at least a little unnerved by party hosted by Price?
2.5/4
Thursday, October 4, 2012
The Conversation (1974)
I would hope that most of us follow global news, and if that is true then it is probably safe to assume that we know at least a little bit about the Patriot Act, Wikileaks and Julian Assange, not to mention the phone-hacking scandal of Rupert Murdoch. As technology plays a greater role in all of our lives ethical questions begin to emerge about when, where and how the power it gives us can be used. Francis Ford Coppola's subdued thriller tackles these issues and does it nearly 40 years before these questions would reemerge with voracity.
Gene Hackman does amazing work as Harry Caul, an independent wiretapper who must ask himself these questions when he fears a conversation he has recorded might put two people's lives in jeopardy. Harry is almost painfully reclusive. He has friends and a woman he sees from time to time, but his life is an enigma to those closest to him. Extra padlocks, alarms and no phone keep the outside world from entering his life. All he does is listen to people speak, but work is work and he never hears anything.
One tape, however, catches his attention, and the ramifications of it are immense. In broken clips we hear this dialogue he recorded of two people in a public square. They don't say much of anything, talking about Christmas and a homeless man on a park bench. But in their conversation there is something more, something hidden whose repercussions, if they're made known might kill them. When the smooth-talking and dangerous secretary to Harry's employer (Harrison Ford) helps bolster his suspicions Harry takes the tapes and runs.
Coppola has fashioned here something that is both quiet and extremely tense. As Harry puzzles his way through these two mysterious people's lives he must contend with the fact that his own personal well-being is at risk. Not only that, does he remain a morally sound Catholic if he relinquishes the tapes, or is he one if he does not? His soul, then, is also put on the line by a young couple which he has never met.
This film is full of beautifully written and directed scenes about a world unknown to us without the microphones. Our lives feel much smaller when watching this movie as there is no telling who knows that we are watching it. It is a frightening look at the power granted to some when a locked door and private conversation mean nothing anymore. Although I suspect that much of the technology employed in the film was science fiction at the time, there is no doubt in my mind that that it is now reality.
Harry's world is one of false faces and unseen ears. He isolates himself because he has entered a profession of duplicitous people each out for that next great scoop. Money makes the world go round and nobody is off limits in this circle.
There are those of you who will figure out the motives and therefore the ending, but this does not diminish the film's ability to horrify and to absorb. These shadowy figures hover just outside of the light of Harry's knowledge and we are left guessing in the dark with him. This is by far my favorite Coppola film not only because it is such a well-crafted movie, but its acute relevance today is something extraordinary.
4/4
Gene Hackman does amazing work as Harry Caul, an independent wiretapper who must ask himself these questions when he fears a conversation he has recorded might put two people's lives in jeopardy. Harry is almost painfully reclusive. He has friends and a woman he sees from time to time, but his life is an enigma to those closest to him. Extra padlocks, alarms and no phone keep the outside world from entering his life. All he does is listen to people speak, but work is work and he never hears anything.
One tape, however, catches his attention, and the ramifications of it are immense. In broken clips we hear this dialogue he recorded of two people in a public square. They don't say much of anything, talking about Christmas and a homeless man on a park bench. But in their conversation there is something more, something hidden whose repercussions, if they're made known might kill them. When the smooth-talking and dangerous secretary to Harry's employer (Harrison Ford) helps bolster his suspicions Harry takes the tapes and runs.
Coppola has fashioned here something that is both quiet and extremely tense. As Harry puzzles his way through these two mysterious people's lives he must contend with the fact that his own personal well-being is at risk. Not only that, does he remain a morally sound Catholic if he relinquishes the tapes, or is he one if he does not? His soul, then, is also put on the line by a young couple which he has never met.
This film is full of beautifully written and directed scenes about a world unknown to us without the microphones. Our lives feel much smaller when watching this movie as there is no telling who knows that we are watching it. It is a frightening look at the power granted to some when a locked door and private conversation mean nothing anymore. Although I suspect that much of the technology employed in the film was science fiction at the time, there is no doubt in my mind that that it is now reality.
Harry's world is one of false faces and unseen ears. He isolates himself because he has entered a profession of duplicitous people each out for that next great scoop. Money makes the world go round and nobody is off limits in this circle.
There are those of you who will figure out the motives and therefore the ending, but this does not diminish the film's ability to horrify and to absorb. These shadowy figures hover just outside of the light of Harry's knowledge and we are left guessing in the dark with him. This is by far my favorite Coppola film not only because it is such a well-crafted movie, but its acute relevance today is something extraordinary.
4/4
Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Breakfast at Tiffany's (1961)
Is it any wonder that Audrey Hepburn was cast to play the beautiful, airy, impish socialite in the film adaptation of the claim to fame of Truman Capote, the socialite of all socialites? Elegant and whimsical, the slender girl with the doe eyes steals the screen in an otherwise mildly unimpressive film.
She is Holly Golightly, a chatterbox and a mess of a human being with no sense of purpose other than the preservation of family. This is flimsy purpose though, for if it wasn't she would have the sense not to drink her money on the rocks or obviously yet unwittingly get herself mixed up with a mobster named Sally Tomato (any other would be fine, just nobody with the last name "Tomato"). The money she scrapes together isn't anything more than a few hundred dollars and never seems to amount to any more than she had the year before.
Life gives her the possibility for change, however, when a soft spoken and handsome young man moves into the room above hers at her apartment complex. Paul Varjak (George Peppard) is a writer and someone unhappy with a mediocre life. He is level headed and not particularly interesting, but his blue eyes and impressive physique should be enough for any woman to love. Indeed, the one thing both he and the spunky Holly have in common is their line of work. Paul is a writer to be sure, but the books aren't selling he pays his rent through the oldest profession in the world.
Neither of them are exactly prostitutes--more of a gold digger and a boy toy. She goes for the ugly, eccentric millionaires, while he keeps up a long term fling with a rich married cougar. What they do doesn't bring them happiness, but we know loving each other will.
Capote is a man of many, many, many words, but I'm not sure how many of them I particularly want to see acted out before me. I have not read Breakfast at Tiffany's, but I have read In Cold Blood, and judging from that I would have to say that Capote knows how to write exceedingly well. The adaptation of his novella here shows the work of an exceedingly well-connected, flamboyantly gay man who likes to listen to himself talk. I could barely understand what was going on for all of the talking that was being done. Unfortunately, this is a film where people talk incessantly but never say anything.
Hepburn is lovely, but I began to tune her out as I watched as she spoke about anything and everything without interruption. This is not a sign of wit, but rather tedious egotism on Capote's and scriptwriter George Axelrod's part. The loose plot that there is does not appear until the halfway mark and until then we are left with nothing but decadence and a whole lot of fluff.
The film is endearingly quirky throughout as is it's lead, but there is so little substance by way of story that these highly developed characters seem to do nothing at all. I should also make a note of one glaring flaw: Mickey Rooney. Holly's landlord is a Chinese man name Mr. Yunioshi, who is portrayed in one of the most abject displays of racism I have ever seen in a movie. Using massive, crooked fake teeth, scrunching up his face and doing a horrible Chinese (?) accent, Rooney bumbles around the set making a fool of himself in an objectionable and embarrassing way. I might be inclined to give the film a higher ranking if this ugly display wasn't apart of the film.
Even still, it's a classic and if you're a Hepburn fan this isn't one to miss.
2/4
She is Holly Golightly, a chatterbox and a mess of a human being with no sense of purpose other than the preservation of family. This is flimsy purpose though, for if it wasn't she would have the sense not to drink her money on the rocks or obviously yet unwittingly get herself mixed up with a mobster named Sally Tomato (any other would be fine, just nobody with the last name "Tomato"). The money she scrapes together isn't anything more than a few hundred dollars and never seems to amount to any more than she had the year before.
Life gives her the possibility for change, however, when a soft spoken and handsome young man moves into the room above hers at her apartment complex. Paul Varjak (George Peppard) is a writer and someone unhappy with a mediocre life. He is level headed and not particularly interesting, but his blue eyes and impressive physique should be enough for any woman to love. Indeed, the one thing both he and the spunky Holly have in common is their line of work. Paul is a writer to be sure, but the books aren't selling he pays his rent through the oldest profession in the world.
Neither of them are exactly prostitutes--more of a gold digger and a boy toy. She goes for the ugly, eccentric millionaires, while he keeps up a long term fling with a rich married cougar. What they do doesn't bring them happiness, but we know loving each other will.
Capote is a man of many, many, many words, but I'm not sure how many of them I particularly want to see acted out before me. I have not read Breakfast at Tiffany's, but I have read In Cold Blood, and judging from that I would have to say that Capote knows how to write exceedingly well. The adaptation of his novella here shows the work of an exceedingly well-connected, flamboyantly gay man who likes to listen to himself talk. I could barely understand what was going on for all of the talking that was being done. Unfortunately, this is a film where people talk incessantly but never say anything.
Hepburn is lovely, but I began to tune her out as I watched as she spoke about anything and everything without interruption. This is not a sign of wit, but rather tedious egotism on Capote's and scriptwriter George Axelrod's part. The loose plot that there is does not appear until the halfway mark and until then we are left with nothing but decadence and a whole lot of fluff.
The film is endearingly quirky throughout as is it's lead, but there is so little substance by way of story that these highly developed characters seem to do nothing at all. I should also make a note of one glaring flaw: Mickey Rooney. Holly's landlord is a Chinese man name Mr. Yunioshi, who is portrayed in one of the most abject displays of racism I have ever seen in a movie. Using massive, crooked fake teeth, scrunching up his face and doing a horrible Chinese (?) accent, Rooney bumbles around the set making a fool of himself in an objectionable and embarrassing way. I might be inclined to give the film a higher ranking if this ugly display wasn't apart of the film.
Even still, it's a classic and if you're a Hepburn fan this isn't one to miss.
2/4
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)