Becket

1964
Directed By: Peter Glenville

Cast:

Peter O'Toole - King Henry II
Richard Burton - Thomas a Becket
John Gelgud - King Louis VII of France


Thomas a Becket, the second most powerful man in England is not even of Royal Blood - in a time when what lineage you came from meant what status you held. On the contrary he was a Saxon - a group that was defeated by the Normans when they invaded England. At the time of the plots setting a generation has past but there is still hatred and distrust of both groups by each other. Becket wasn't just an "ordinary" Saxon, however, he was the kings friend and most trusted advisor. Beket was smart, cunning and wise where King Henry II, played by Peter O' Toole is little more than an overgrown winey adolescent. I hope this is the description of the character becasuse O' Toole plays this part so well. We know that he knows that he is king and we fear that is all he knows.
Becket is so trusted by the king that he is given the official seal of England. He does his job well, almost too well and King Henry - seeing that there is no one else that he can trust, or at the very least think like him, makes Beket the Archbishop of Canturbury with the idea that the church will now be on his side. Beket is many things but if there is one thing he is not, he is not somebody's man. He is a persuer of truth and most of all honor - what honor had been up that point had come in the form of serving his "prince." This had left him empty though and now entrusted with serving a greater cause - that being God's - he throws everything he has into this new role. It seems though one can serve only God or Country and not both.
Richard Burton plays his role a little stiffly. There isn't much show of emotion. Though that may be in keeping with character I thought that it was still a little overdone. On the other hand there must be some balance to cantakerous King Henry. Besides a few seens, the acting isn't too theatrical that it becomes burdensome.
What is central to grasp though is not so much the acting but the relationship between the title characters of Beket and King Henry. Like two sides of the same coin they opperate like a well oiled machine when working together. When they are opposed the country divides itself. Both are freinds but both also see that they have higher obligations - one to God and the other to Country. They are thrust into their roles by forces which they have no control over and if they had lived as any other class we would expect that they could grow old together being the best of freinds. The film does the best job of shedding light on this conflict.
2 1/2 stars

The Life and Times of Andy Warhol

1991
Directed by: Chuck Workman

Perhaps there is no artist more ambiguous than Andy Warhol. It was not just that he was ambigous as a person - he seldom spoke about his art and he would only do so if directly confronted, even then it was vague - his art says almost nothing about the painter behind it unlike other works. Most of his works don't have a single discernable brushstroke unlike say VanGogh where every stroke is defined and an entity in itself. The subject matter also doesn't reflect him - it reflects the pop culture of the time; Campbell Soup Cans and Marilyn Monroe. So in painting a picture of Andy Warhol (excuse the pun) the focus must be more on the people he colloraborated with. The Life & Times of Andy Warhol does a good job of this. In this documentary you won't find critiques of his work. What you will find is views and opinions on Warhol expressed by the people he came into contact with.
The film itself tries to be sort of "popsy" itself with pop songs in the background and a quick and sometimes chatoic tempo. This is not to say there isn't any order however. The film progresses chronologically from Warhol's humble beginnings growing up in Pittsburg to his time in New York City - where he spent the rest of his life. And could we imagine Warhol living anywhere else? The high fashion and endless barage of new products influenced him immensly. His earliest jobs were of illustrating for fashion publications. His goal however always had been to be an artist - so he just painted what he found, common objects, like soup cans. Unbeknowest to him he was painting in a trend that would later be called pop art amongst such artists as Lichtenstein, Rosencrants & Jasper Johns.
Soon his work catapulted him into the spotlight and he frequently enjoyed hanging around celebrities that frequented NYC clubs. If there was a party going on Warhol was there.
Besides screenprinting his famous Marilyns & Elvis's he also worked in Film - specifically experimental film. People seemed to interst him most and many of these films contain minutes of people just staring at the camera or interactions between two people. It was at this time that he created "the factory" where most of his art was produced. He was always surrounded by an eclectic mix of people who I think just drew themselves naturally to him. He wasn't conventional and neither were they. In the documentary you hear fisthand from this eclectic mix (the ones who didn't die prematurely anyway) and you realize that Warhol was just as different if not more so than they were. He may have been aloof to outsiders but to those who knew him he had a fun personality.
I'ld definnitly recommend this film to anyone curious about the man behind the work. I know we've all seen them. You may not learn why he painted them but really I don't think he knew. Whatever the reason, he captured the mood of America in the 60's like few had and will forever remain a cultural icon.
2 stars

In the Valley of Elah

(2007)
Directed By: Paul Haggis
Written By: Mark Boal & Paul Haggis

Cast:
Tommy Lee Jones - Hank Deerfield
Charlize Theron - Det. Emily Sanders
Jason Patric - Lt. Kirklander
Susan Sarandon - Joan Deerfield


Tommy Lee Jones stars as Hank Deerfield a man who is searching for someone. Instead of the usual fugitive however the person he is searching for is his son Mike - who disappears after coming home from Iraq. Hank, an ex military police officer, takes it upon himself to seek him out but when his remains are found singed and scattered in an empty field the case becomes one of looking for his killers.
(Charlize Theron) is an ambitious military criminal investigator who is assigned to the case. She proves throughout the film that she is not to be messed with, especially by any chauvinistic co-workers. Both will stop at nothing to find the killer(s).
The clear message of all this is that war changes you. You don’t return the same person you left as because your experiences make you and/or break you. Unfortunately a great many are broken by what they experience. This not only effects them directly but also their families as is the case in one scene where an ex-Iraqi soldier’s wife is drowned in the bathtub. In some ways the horrors of Iraq aren’t left there in the dust thousands of miles away but come home in the thoughts and/or actions of the soldiers returning.
Tommy Lee Jones does an excellent job playing a hardened veteran looking for his son. You can tell he has been trough a lot but there is nothing to prepare him for what he goes through in the story.
In the film he sees an immigrant man putting up the American flag upside down. He tells him, that its totally wrong - that a flag upside down is an international distress signal. At the end of the film we see Hank give the man a tattered flag that his son sent him from Iraq. He hoists flag into the breeze… and it is upside down. Perhaps this says it all.
3 1/2 stars

The Exorcist

Directed By: William Friedkin
Written By: William Peter Blatty

Cast:
Jason Miller - Father Damian Karras
Ellen Burstyn - Chris McNeil
Max Von Sydow - Father Lankester Merrin
Lee J. Cobb - Det. Lt. William F. Kinderman
Linda Blair - Regan Teresa McNeil


Based on a true story that happened in Georgetown in 1949, the story centers on the apparent possession of a girl, by demonic forces. When doctors can’t find a reasonable explanation to her split personality disorder they are forced to recommend a priest.
On a parallel course to their story we have a priest, Father Damian who originally studied psychiatry and is going through a crisis of faith. When he commits his mother to a hospital because she is all alone and can’t take care of herself, she soon dies alone afterward. He soon blames himself for this misfortune.
When he sees the girl he has reason to believe that there is something going on that is more than psychological. He takes his case to the church authorities who recommend someone with experience - Farther Merrin, who has looked evil in the eye before - literally. But can Father Merrin deal with the devil himself? Or more importantly can Father Damien wrestle a demon on the outside while wrestling with “demons” inside himself.
There are some beautiful shots early on in this movie but this is quickly replaced by an overall pervasiveness of evil. Most of the rest of the film takes place in the _’s bedroom where some of the most horrific scenes in all of any movie occur.
What stands out most to me is the ending, which is shocking not only because it is unexpected but because it lasts with you for so long after you’ve seen it. Indeed the movie still resonates with audiences today because it goes and goes well into an idea where so few movies dare venture - that good and evil are external to human beings and two very real forces in the universe.
3 stars

Apocalypse Now

Directed by: Francis Ford Coppola
Written by: John Milius

Cast:
Captain Willard - Martin Sheen
Colonel Kurtz - Marlon Brando
Colonel Lucas - Harrison Ford
Lieutenant Colonel Bill Kilgore - Robert Duvall
Dennis Hopper - Photojournalist
Frederic Forrest - Jay ‘Chef’ Hicks

“I love the smell of Napalm in the morning.” Well, really I don’t, I have no idea what Napalm smells like (Nor do I want to) but Colonel Kilgore surely does. He is just one of the many colorful characters that make up Francis Ford Coppola’s masterpiece - Apocalypse Now. A film that explores the senselessness of murder and the breaking point that exists in everyone.
The movie is set in Vietnam during the war where special agent Captain Willard is sent to eliminate, “with extreme prejudice” a Colonel Kurtz, who has, judging from field reports and audio tapes, gone insane. He is deep in the Cambodian jungle and operating under is own jurisdiction. He has killed hundreds of innocent people and has a devoted following.
Captain Willard accepts the mission though not without hesitation as he states: “charging a man with murder in this place was like handing out speeding tickets at the Indy 500.” He goes up a river to his destination escorted by a few ‘kids’ and a boat captain.
As we go further up the river we progress like in Dante’s Inferno, deeper and deeper into hell. Man is back in his primordial element - it is kill or be killed. But it is more than just defense. There is also a deep senselessness in it all. The scenes can best be described as nightmarish. There is plenty of smoke and just that right balance of light and dark that makes for a particularly uneasy feeling. I couldn’t help but think if Rembrandt was the cinematographer he would have worked on this movie.
Everything comes to its climactic finale, the lowest circle of hell, or the end of the world, whichever you prefer, when Captain Willard meets up with Colonel Kurtz, who has become nothing less than a God to a tribe of natives and a few defected soldiers. The question soon becomes who will do the assassinating.
All in all, Apocalypse Now is a burning testament to the horror that is war. Perhaps the most horrific thing of all is what it can do to a perfectly normal human being and the idea that there might be a Colonel Kurtz buried in us all.
4 stars

Hot House

2006
Directed by Shimon Dotan

I went to see this film because it offered what I thought would be a unique perspective on a conflict that has stretched decades and ignited passions throughout the world - the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Call it a war, call it a conflict, call it an occupation, whatever you call it I’m sure you will agree that both sides know their side is right and more often than not, they won’t give an inch in the other’s direction. We usually see this conflict from one source - the media; whether it be newspaper or newscast and not from the people who are at the “frontlines” so to speak - those incarcerated in Israeli jails. But Shimon Dotan, does just that. In the film Palestinian “freedom fighters” are interviewed and we get to see conditions and social structure inside the jails itself. It could be said that the jails are a microcosm of the world outside. There are various cell blocks that prisoners share and each cell blocks occupants are either members of Fatah, Hamas or PLO. And if prison is supposed to be a demoralizing factor, these inmates certainly don’t show it. In fact many consider going to prison to be an education in itself. While there they learn from other men who where also part of crimes against Israel. They read the news extensively and learn more about the opposite side and world opinion than they would have on the outside. When they get out (if they get out, many interviewed had consecutive life sentences (one was 16)) they will almost surely be politically active again.
In fact, you could say they are politically active while in jail. There are free elections within the jail and even between jails.
The filmmaker, even though he is Israeli, doesn’t appear to take any side. Though I think it is perhaps equally hard to pick a side as a viewer. Many of the people we see don’t seem to be your typical “killers” but this is what they are charged with. Many are men with families and they are religious. Then there is also the side that says these people are murderers and would do so again in an instant to liberate their people.
Do they regret what they did? Not one interviewed did nor did they regret having contributed to the deaths of innocent civilians. But to many people these people are martyrs to the cause. I only hope that someday both sides can see that violence is not the answer to their trouble. As an old saying goes - an eye for an eye will leave everyone blind.
2 ½ stars

Murch

Directed by David Ichioka & Edie Ichioka

When everyone hears the name Francis Ford Coppola they know immediately who he is and even what films he directed. However, have you heard of Walter Murch? Probably not but if it was not for me such films as The Godfather and Apocalypse Now would most likely not be the cinematic masterpieces that they are. You see Walter Murch is the editor of films like these and other notable works like Breathless and The Conversation.
Most people may not think an editor’s job is that important but the next time you look at a film note each and every cut and you will find the editors mark there. They choose not only which shots juxtapose other shots but also they have a hand in how the sound relates to the images. Walter Murch composes with images and does so, surprisingly, standing up much like a conductor at the podium to his orchestra.
In the film I learned what a lengthy thought process it is to compose a sequence of a film and about the great amount of power the editor has in the creation process. I found it interesting that when Murch wants to make a cut from shot to shot he will not cut on an action as is the textbook norm but will try to get inside the head of the audience and make the cut long enough or short enough as to allow the audience to have a thought about that actor before the next image appears on screen. If an editor cuts too short on a piece of dialogue that holds clues to that character the audience is likely to feel that they were ‘shortchanged.‘ Another interesting technique Murch employs is editing without sound. He says it gets in the way and that a soundtrack is just “steroids” for a movie. Which is true if you think about it - if the images aren’t getting the message across to the audience, the soundtrack isn’t really going to help, it will actually hurt in the long run.
As a person who has edited video myself I took away a lot from this informative documentary and learned a lot about a man who has shaped cinema as much as any great director out there.
2 ½ stars