Murder by Death (1976)

What. A. Cast! Let's start with the magic comical talent of Alec Guinness. As a blind butler, he provides mischief and laughs at most turn. Peter Sellers' character would definitely be labelled cultural appropriation today, but is funny as hell. His little quotes of wisdom mostly festive treats of comedy. And please don't forget to notice James Cromwell as a Frenchman. 

This is a silly film, and that means the silliness needs to be accompanied by good acting and some intelligence. As for the former, it's in abundance. The start is very enjoyable as the puns and wit fly across the room, and the parodies materialize themselves. The intelligence is a bit more hit and miss, though mostly hit.

As comedies tend to do, the jokes deplete about halfway through. "Murder by Death" does not quite escape this fate, but Sellers and Falk in particular are still able to provide some giggles and laughs. Director Robert Moore changes emphasis towards the murder story, and forgets to bring the jokes at the same pace. Which would be OK, had someone actually bothered to write a decent ending to that part of the story. 

There are some sloppy mistakes by the director that lead to some tedious glitches in the murder mystery. There are some good options, some silly (and not very funny), and some lazy. But the solution is really none of them. If you need 6 good endings to a murder story, make 6. Not 3. 

As a comedy, this is very much above average. There are plenty of laughs and an almost unbelievable array of comical talent. And such different actors, with different strengths. The film also has you intrigued with the murder mystery for a while, though the ending lets us down in a big way. But quite frankly, it's a comedy. It made me laugh more times than they usually do. And for that, I rate it a success.

8/10

Hugo (2011)

Martin Scorsese making a film for children, starring children. Surely not?

"Hugo" is wonderfully inventive in design, both the scenography and the details, not to mention the making of film as it portrays it. Scorsese lays heavy on with the filters to illustrate the different moods, particularly the illuminated yellow to emphasise how Hugo sees the world he feels he's not a part of but desperately wants into. 

For a children's movie, it's imperative to create a warmth without it becoming cheesy. Scorsese surprisingly excels at this, though a lot of the credit must go to the cast. Jude Law only has a few scenes, but he is pitch perfect here. Special mention to Michael Stuhlbarg as well. 

The children are truly wonderful, with Moretz a particular delight. She really was an outstanding actress from a young age. Such a range of emotion and ability to create feelings in others, are rare even for adult actors. Of course, they need to be good, as they are pretty much front and centre for the last two thirds of the film. Sacha Baron Cohen is the (forgettable) menacing threat that need to be a part of all films for the young. He steals a bit heavily from Crabtree in 'Allo 'Allo, but since that is a rather obscure character to most, I'll let that one slide. As for Ben Kingsley, he is stoically magnificent. 

Scorsese leaves a lot of the suspense to be a result of marvel and wondrousness. All helped by a just intricate enough script for the children to follow the breadcrumbs of the mystery. There's also the matter of his wonderful use of angles and sound (or more notably, lack thereof) to underline and deepen the emotions of some of the film's better scenes. None perhaps better than Kingsley crouching over his old drawings. 

As with most films for the younger crowd, parts of the plot are fixed with some nifty coincidences, and a few shortcuts. You'll probably be too busy feeling good and smitten by the marvelling of the actors, though.

The director's biggest achievement, however, is to make you marvel at the sight of very, very old technology. And that, as they say, is saying something.

8/10

What we do in the Shadows (2014)

Mockumentaries are, of course, no longer original. Gone are the days of Spinal Tap. But can one about four vampires living together bring some life to the genre?

Taika Waititi (who along with Clement also wrote and directed) is amusing as Viago, particularly his views on "dating" the women he's about to kill. He is quite one-dimensional, however. Clement as Vladislav is by far the best character, whereas the two others are just unfunny pains to have around. The characters as such are shockingly shallow (yes, even for a comedy) considering the writers had thousands of years of history to get something good out of. With large parts of the cast so uninteresting, the jokes had better be good.

There are definitely fun moments here, some of the jokes are excellent. However, the set-up really isn't. It follows the genre a bit too meticulously, meaning it comes off formulaic at times. They simply apply everyday life to vampires, and try to pass it off as smart and original. I understand that that is much of the premise for a mockumentary, but it's stale enough as a concept now for a film to need more. 

Another limitation of the mockumentary is the filming and the cut-in interviews. Both tedious and adding nothing in terms of humour nor cleverness. Having a camera crew "on site", means the angles will be bad and when the concept has been done to death over a couple of decades, it offers very little. The action-scenes are usually frenzied and accompanied by extremely annoying music, adding to the feeling of unwelcome editing-chaos. 

In single scenes, this flick is quite smart and extremely funny. But as a whole, it seems a bit of a diamond in the rough. Like a good idea worked too little on, or by the wrong people. 

5/10

Gosford Park (2001)

 

As always with Altman, you get a full ensemble, and Gosford Park is a particular treat. Maggie Smith is naturally pitch perfect as an aristocratic bitch, particularly revelling in the small misfortune of Ryan Phillipe. Helen Mirren is wonderful as the subdued head of the servants doing all things in accordance with the old traditions. Michael Gambon and Kristen Scott Thomas could of course play aristocratic hosts from the 20's blind. And just the look in Charles Dance's eyes brings glee and excitement of the arrogance to come. Richard E. Grant is also worthy of a special mention. 

Altman lets the story centre around Kelly McDonald a lot of the time, which isn't the best option. Not because she's bad, but she has a rather demure and uninteresting character, despite the directors best attempts at giving her a background story. Generally, the casting and acting is one of the more solid of the decade, and there's hardly a flaw to be found. 

Gosford Park pays particular notice to the servants, a feature missed entirely by Stephen Fry as a disappointingly bumbling detective, and that is quite clever. The director does a wonderful job at portraying the idle gossip amongst them, the small joys of eavesdropping to the music played by the higher classes, and the imagined hierarchy amongst them. With all that involves in terms of suspicions and envy, even among those who have little. Sort of a poorer mirror of their masters. 

The film takes a long time getting started, setting up little controversies all around the manor. I do love little, smart breadcrumbs, but there was perhaps room for some editing. The murder doesn't occur until well into the second half. And here lies the film's greatest weakness. Altman is a bit too busy with his actors and all the pieces of information to pay attention to the actual murder story

The scenery is British as can be and quite lovely in all respects. Though, grey and always raining of course. As for the inside, it's very lavish and with minute attention to details.

If you want an Agatha Christie, you might well be better off with, well Agatha Christie. The murder in Gosford Park isn't really what Altman wants the film to be about. So it isn't. It's about the fates of some key characters, and the dynamics of the people in a manor. As a stylistic study, and an ensemble film, it is quite delectable. 

7/10

The Good German (2006)

Ah... Voiceover. A true mark of pretentious and lazy directing. Shame on you, Soderbergh. 

Another mark of the former, is unnecessary black and white. Sometimes a genius move, most of the time not. Soderbergh does strive to make it authentic, but the fact that he uses documentary footage, makes the difference in style noticeable in a way that draws far more attention than it otherwise would have done.  

As for the casting, Maguire is perfect as the eager beaver in his workday mask, and more average as a wannabe-trickster and gangster. The voiceover also lets him down, as it distracts from his otherwise half-decent character, explaining unnecessarily for those too busy to actually watch the film. Another problem with his character is that that there is zero believability in the relationship between him and Cate Blanchett. On all levels. She is, I suppose, meant to be some sort of femme fatale here, but really doesn't cut it. Apart from the black and white and her "hard to love" theatrics she is leaps and bounds from the true great women who've pulled that off. Besides, her Russian accent is almost half as bad as Connery's was in "The Hunt for Red October". Clooney doesn't really add much to the story apart from being the protagonist it is told around. It's impossible to see much of a motivation for his actions. 

Another weakness is Soderbergh trying to introduce a political drama, but leaves it almost an hour into the film before even implying much of it. From there on, there is a clear improvement of both intrigue and suspense for a while. Unfortunately, director Soderbergh drops that ball rather quickly, and we're back in a bit of a mess. At least it never gets boring to see Clooney beaten up by half the cast.

There is a twist with a bit of cool irony to it, but the story is muddled and the characters uninteresting. There are none you really care about the faith of, and the Macguffin is as muddled as the story. And to practically steal the ending scene from the far better war-film Casablanca. Sacrilege. And not a comparison that Soderbergh should have made.

5/10

See no Evil, hear no Evil (1989)

Gene Wilder and Richard Pryor. 2 geniuses. Though this was the 80's. It could still suck. Most things were bad back then.

Firstly, the comedy. The fight-scene is the stuff of legend, and there are plenty of laughs around. Mostly in the first 45 minutes, unfortunately. Pryor is the pure-bred asshole with a big mouth, and Wilder has his trademark wiseassery. And when he gets irritable and sarcastic, he's even better. Nobody did sarcasm better. It would have been an advantage if they'd written a dialogue worth having for some of the other characters too, though. 

Pryor isn't particularly good at playing blind, but he has great chemistry with Wilder. The latter is the true star of this film, however. He brings a warmth and vulnerability to the film that is much needed to avoid that it becomes a simple spoof with one-dimensional characters. And for the completionist, there is a rather young Kevin Spacey as a buffoonish criminal. 

Like most comedies from this decade, it is a bit hectic at times. That doesn't really suit it, as most of its better scenes are the two main characters interacting when the script is good. Oh. And since it's the 80's, there is of course a car chase on pavements that wreaks havoc on much food.  

So, it does have a good concept, and some great laughs. Still, the limitations of the horrid decade are there to see, and unfortunately they keep the film from being the true classic it could have been. Though there were always titties in those years. However, the jokes drown and disappear in the frantic need to have car-chases and some rather contrived suspense. Apart from the scene with two blind men with a gun each, trying to shoot each other in a closed room of course.

7/10