All Quiet on the Western Front (1930)

For a 39-year old it is hard to judge a film by 100 year old standards. But let's give it a go nonetheless.

As is fitting for a film displaying the horrors of war, it starts of with a big parade and a fine march as the new soldiers are treated as heroes, leaving the town. The war is generally spoken of in big words and enlisting as the ultimate honour.

As is expected a bit of the acting is very theatrical and over-the-top by modern standards, but it serves to illustrate the development of films, and it's still better than watching actors from High School Musical or all the Vampire-crap made these days. The standout actor is Louis Wolheim, who strikes a note as an officer that only Bill Murray could play with more wry coolness. I doubt he would do callous as well, though. The film is not without decent extras either. John Wray as the local postman turned sergeant over the town's boys is particularly delectable.

Overall it's easy to see how many war movies have been inspired by this earlier instalment. The war seen as a picture of national pride, the young boys wanting to play heroes, the harsh reality of training, the even harsher reality of meeting the more experienced soldiers and the utter hell that is the actual fighting ("Full Metal Jacket" anyone?).

This film is made before special effects were a big thing, so they have to rely on the feeling of danger with other things than big cans of gasoline. Like in "Das Boot" they create a claustrophobic environment that it is impossible to leave (a couple panic and try. Immediate death awaits). And you can see the soldiers slowly (some actually extremely quickly, making the scenes less effective) lose their calm and later their minds as they sit weeks without food or decent sleep. That being said, the war scenes in the field are quite exquisite for their age, and gruelling at times.

And our protagonist soon learns: as much as you hate the war, it is better than being in your old life with your new knowledge. A cliché now, but in 1930 it was controversial and would be considered a modern piece of psychology and anti-establishment at its most disloyal. It does however, to a great extent, and with great skill, portray the friendship and comradery that arises between men in war.
For its time, this film is surprisingly insightful and critical of war, not only WW1, but in general. And as such, much of the criticism is based on the hierarchy in society as a whole.

Where the film doesn't quite hold up to modern standards is the thrills and excitement. Though in fairness, it does state in the pretext that that is not a value for a film such as this.

The ending though is so simple, serene and beautiful. Something for newer filmmakers to remember.

8/10

The Man from U.N.C.L.E (2015)

Let me start this review by stating that I never saw a single episode of the TV-show, so I guess readers will either feel I am not worthy of having an opinion, or see me as a breath of fresh air. For those of you who are now thinking "what TV-show?", I recommend "Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy" instead.

An original car-chase is  hard to come by, but using a pair of Trabants is actually a very cool set-piece to introduce your action-flick. Though you don't need to be an expert in these cars to realize that the artistic freedom is substantial. Apart from this the action is quite alright. Both quantity and quality are decent, without excelling.

Where this movie falls flat, is in the characters/casting. Henry Cavill is supposed to be a blend of Len Deighton's Harry Palmer and Ian Fleming's James Bond. With Palmer's background and ethics, Bond's suave demeanour and great dressing, and both agents arrogance and calm. The big problem is that his character is not British. He is an American trying very hard to be an Englishman. And with all the traits of the two most known British spies supposed to be in his arsenal, he falls shy on most. Vikander isn't much better. She is nowhere near credible as an East-German mechanic, and only slightly better as a British spy. And was there ever an actor that looked less like a Russian than Armie Hammer? The cast had to be blind (or blindly in love) to feel that he would make a great Russian agent. His acting is better than Cavill and Vikander, though. He's just very badly cast.

And so, ironically, the only eastern-European in a leading part is the best by a long shot. Elizabeth Debicki is delectable as she takes the style of Holly Golightly to a new level whilst adding great spices of smartness and callousness. One of the finest female villains in a long, long while.

So though you are rarely bored, you are never anywhere near fulfilled either. It seems Guy Ritchie still knows how to make cool scenes, but it would appear as if he has lost the ability to make a cool movie.

5/10

Maverick (1994)

Who loves dust more than Richard Donner? Seriously: whatever time and geography brings, there must be some dust. So why not do a western! Much more dust!

Let's start with the music for a change: There was hardly ever a better composer of comedic music than Randy Newman, and he delivers here as well. A perfect rendition of quirky, upbeat and humorous. Not unlike Basil Poledouris' score for "Quigley down under" 4 years earlier.

Gibson was of course born to play a character that has a constant need to talk and joke. However, it doesn't play to his strengths that in this movie, most of the cast are trying to screw him, and not the other way around. There are other actors who play befuddled, frustrated and mockishly angry better than him. When push comes to shove, Gibson isn't a comedian.

Nor is Jodie Foster, and though her chemistry with Gibson is far from bad, we don't get the constant grin that a better pair would have provided. The reason I bring up that none of the actors on display here are comedians is that this is a comedy. It doesn't take itself seriously enough at anything else, be it action, suspense or drama. It's all in a jovial, good-humoured way. Which is fine, but if you're making a comedy we really should be laughing more.

Not surprisingly, the best acting comes from Alfred Molina. As he is portraying a rather vicious and cruel cowboy, it is quite spectacular to not look stupid and out of place, but Molina always was underestimated. Gibson has some of his better scenes in this flick playing off Molina.

And anyone who is good at making comedies knows that 80-90 minutes is perfect. "Maverick" clocks in at 127. There is nowhere near enough script for that. Not to mention jokes.

So this is a light-hearted and charming as all films Gibson played in during this era, but it doesn't really bring anything else to the table. And as good as Gibson was at that in the 90's, it isn't quite enough.

5/10

Spaceballs (1987)

Was there ever a more loveable spoof than Mel Brooks? Of course not. At least not that managed to maintain any kind of fun for the viewer.

This is from his more straightforward period where he simply made a parody out of another film (or in this case, a franchise). Not as flexible as the concept of "Blazing Saddles", but Brooks was always quick with a joke and for anyone who actually saw "Star Wars", they will find much to muse at in this flick.

First a problem though, and it is a directorial one: Someone should have noticed that Pullman and Zuniga in the leads have different thresholds of parody in them. Whereas Pullman finds a certain balance, Zuniga is a full-fledged parody, making their interactions lacking to the point of confusing in a lot of their scenes. It should have been fairly easy to adjust, but alas. Their time together on screen is limited, and therefore, so is the damage. And as a rugged parody of Harrison Ford, Pullman works brilliantly.

The parody of Star Wars itself is fairly funny but not very imaginative. As usual Brooks hurls puns and gags at the viewer at an alarming pace, and that guarantees a certain amount of laughs. Some of them are more subtle though, so paying attention will be rewarded. The best gag is actually quite without both sound and facial expressions. Genius. Brooks knows the entire spectre of comedy. From the embarrassingly simple and stupid to the brilliantly clever.

This comedy suffers from the same fault as most, though: The simple fact that it has a funny premise, a funny start followed by some good jokes, but then falls into the trap of keeping too much focus on a story that wasn't too good to begin with.

As a the top-billed comedian here, John Candy knows his place perfectly as the highly enjoyable Barf. Other than him, there is limited talent, though Brooks has 2 small parts and Rick Moranis stars as Dark Helmet, nicely flanked by George Wyner.

All in all, Brooks provides more than enough gags for anyone to laugh. As always. And that really is the key thing for a comedy

7/10

Stripes (1981)

Ah! The uneven talent of Ivan Reitman. But he was never better than in the 80's and Stripes surely offers a lot of the best comedians of the decade

This movie has all the necessary features of a comedy of its time. Losers finding strength, titties (even mud-wrestling), women as props and some guns to boot.

Having used up and coming Bill Murray two years earlier in "Meatballs", Reitman knew he could depend on the young comedian. Teaming the misanthropic and impulsive Murray with the smart, careful Harold Ramis, was such a smart move, he did it with even greater success when producing Ghostbusters three years later. 


It's quite obvious that "Police Academy" has stolen its entire first third from this flick, as most elements from the enrollment are similar. There are also, particularly in the early stages, huge similiarities between Murray's Winger and Gutenberg's Mahoney (even the many push-ups in the rain as punishment). Though naturally, Murray has more strengths to play to. His misanthropy, opportunism, shameless flirting and bottomless insolence really is enough for any comedy to survive with honors. He is very nicely flanked by Harold Ramis, John Candy, John Larroquette and Warren Oates (he died only six months later at the age of 53) who all add laughs, smirks and snickers. And some extra credit to Sean Young who really has a dazzling smile to charm everyone present.

The music by Bernstein is brilliant, and the two themes perfectly fitted for the two main phases of the film. Firstly "all goes to hell" at the beginning and later the military phase. Elmer Bernstein certainly was the king of comedies.

The first hour or so is quite funny, and the characters are good. Ramis is a bit more on offence than he was allowed later in his career, so look for his mimics and facial expressions a lot of the time. They seemed to have two scripts and didn't do a good job editing. Hence, the movie is half an hour too long and the last part of it isn't particularly interesting nor funny. The prospect of a war-Winnebago is of course not without promise, but the gags are spent earlier and it adds litle to the whole. If anything. Generally Stripes feels like a lot of good ideas and fun for all involved, but a lack of discipline and structure strips it of status as a classic. It still is a good representative for comedy of its time.

7/10

Spectre (2015)

Of all the heroes with all the lives, none have more than 007, and he sheds a few in every instalment. But is there anything to enjoy this time around?

I still keep Connery as the all-time greatest Bond, but Craig is a good second. He really is a cold-hearted bastard at times, and has no qualms with being a brute and a thug. I like that. I also like that after "Skyfall", a good film that never really felt like a Bond-flick, Sam Mendes finds back to a lot of the formula here. There is an exciting intro, a spectacular set-piece, a God-awful song so lacking testosterone that it will make the skin crawl on anyone who ever loved music, and straight to the plot we go. Via a gorgeous female of course. And the puns! All is as it should be.

Christoph Waltz is beautifully set up as a looming, all-seeing shadow in the dark. A worthy nemesis, as Blofeld should be. Even with the scar (eventually) that Donald Pleasance made his own. Thought Waltz makes for an eerie character, he isn't the most enthralling, nor believable villain in the series by far. Léa Seydoux is as average as Bond-girls come, though Bond annoyingly fails to see it. For all his toughness and callousness, Craig's 007 is idiotically soft when it comes to women. Ralph Fiennes is quite exquisite, though. Looking weary, worn down and every single year of his 54, though heart-strong and resilient. I didn't miss Judi Dench for a minute, and that says a lot about his contribution here.

The plot is as modern as ever, and as non-consequential as most instalments since Goldfinger. Ironically, the parts that feel stupid and unnecessary are where they try to make this a "family matter". Someone should have recognized that as a terrible idea already before they started shooting, and surely in the editing-room. But alas, such brains were not present.

Where this film really excels though, is the spy-banter. Particularly the opening scene with Fiennes, Craig and Andrew Scott. Such crisp dialogue, such fantastically restrained acting. Not a single air-conditioner on the planet could keep a decent temperature during their little conversation. There is so much going on between the lines, every subtlety counts. A rare sight in modern films, and most welcome.

For hard-core fans there are plenty of small (and some less subtle) nods to earlier Bond, be it garments, tête-à-tête with the main villain. So I really have no problems with the level of detail or the loyalty to the fans here.

Mendes fails to hit the really high notes though. The most suspenseful scene is about midway, with Bond searching for the lost Mr. White. It also lacks the chemistry Craig had with Eva Green and the aforementioned ultimate villain (not to mention henchman), thus making it a solid Bond-film, but nowhere near the classics, and a bit short of Craig's best as well.

7/10

The Fisher King (1991)

Ah. The lovely weirdness of Terry Gilliam combined with the outright wackyness of the late, great, Robin Williams.

Let's start with the images. Gilliam has plenty. Perfectly using different locations and filters to enhance the viewer's experience. Not to forget the outright absurd, such as Michael Jeter (another that left us too soon) as a homeless person in a drag singing showtunes. Though there are plenty of outrageous scenes here, it never takes focus from what this film is really about: Fate and the people affected by it.

Though Gilliam has quite a few tricks up his sleeve visually, the brilliance of this film is very much down to the three lead actors. Bridges delivers a stunning performance as the self-loathing Jack whose life goes into turmoil when a radio-listener of his goes on a shooting spree. Staggering drunkenly (guess what he drinks) about his life, with an utter disdain for his own existence, treating those around him as total garbage (line to his girlfriend as to how they met: "Suicidal paranoiacs will say anything to get laid"), he really is at rock bottom. Apart from the beginning, where his well-known swagger shines.
Robin Williams combines what was to become his trademark here. Utter madness with an exceptional warmth and underplayed wisdom, combined with the ability to make others see their lives from a different angle. Both as characters and actors the two are perfectly matched.
Mercedes Ruehl won an Academy Award for her part here, and though she is very good, it's her interaction with Bridges that comes across as such a highlight. The hidden bitterness, the slight flirtation at times, and, not least, the looks and expression between the two adds so much without taking any real space at all. Kudos to all three.

Gilliam has a knack for being sentimental without overdoing it, and is even better at leaving a little something for the viewer to ponder, instead of painting with broad strokes. The scene where Williams walks Amanda Plummer to the door is so well-written, perfectly executed and timed, it is nothing less than a fullblown treat. He's also underestimated at dialogue and some of the lines from Williams and Bridges really are brilliant. Not to mention the perfect cameo for Tom Waits who works as the cynic and realist just when we need it the most.

Is this a classic? No, but it really is a fantastic view, with some truly breath-taking performances from the leads. Besides, it is very funny at times, and how could it not be when Williams is given a good script and a treat of a character.

And whatever Gilliam is, he's never boring.

8/10