Review for Mysterious Skin

Director: Gregg Araki

Released: 2004

Genre: Drama

Mysterious Skin is a difficult film to watch because it so intensely highlights the devastating consequences of sexual abuse. It effectively shows how such a horrifying act erodes the lives of its victims, and how different people react to it, both in the short and long term. Gregg Araki directed Mysterious Skin with great care and sensitivity- some moments are funny, others emotionally devastating, and we come to care for the characters that are worth caring about. He shows how effortlessly it is for some people to deceive others, especially when they deceive themselves.

The movie tells the story of two boys named Brian and Neil, portraying their lives from the time they were eight years old (in 1981) to the time they reach college age a decade later. Both were molested by their little league baseball coach as children- only Neil (played as a child by Chase Ellison and as a teenager by Joseph Gordon-Levitt) remembers this, as his abuse was repeated, whereas Brian (played by George Webster and Brady Corbet) was only assaulted once and does not initially recall the incident. As Brian matures, he becomes sullen and withdrawn, believing that he was abducted by aliens as a child; he experiences undiagnosed fainting spells and nosebleeds, which he believes are the effects of this encounter. Neil evolves into a polar opposite of Brian, becoming dangerously promiscuous and prostituting himself in his Kansas hometown, and eventually on the streets of New York City. After graduating from high school, Brian begins searching for Neil at the behest of a fellow extraterrestrial enthusiast, as the latter appears in his flashbacks of the event. Neil's mother tells Brian that he moved to New York City just hours before Brian arrived at her house. It isn't until Christmas that the two finally meet each other again, when Neil is given a plane ticket to fly back home for the holidays. What ensues is the final scene of the film, where everything both falls apart and falls into place.

On a technical level, Mysterious Skin is a little odd- the music exudes a sort of aural peace, even through the more traumatizing parts. Scenes fade in and out, providing a sense of disorientation, and are quite colorful despite the dreary subject matter. My guess is that such a presentation was intentional- it creates a dream-like sensation, much like the emotional detachment that plagues Brian and Neil.

Though distracting in parts, such stylistic oddities are forgiven by the sheer power many scenes hold. One particularly touching part involves a customer Neil picks up in a bar. The man's gaunt, weathered appearance is unnerving, and I suspected Neil was about to land himself in a lot of trouble. The pair arrive at the john's apartment, where both proceed to disrobe. It is apparent that the aged man is HIV positive- numerous lesions cover his arms, chest and back. Sensing Neil's hesitation, the client assures him no harm will be done: "this is the safest encounter you'll ever have." He then lays face down on his bed and requests nothing more than a back massage from Neil. The scene closes with Neil solemnly rubbing the man's shoulders.

Upon finishing Mysterious Skin, I felt extremely sad for both Brian and Neil, but hopeful that the two would be able to help each other cope with what happened to them. The characters are so genuine, I almost feel as if I'm referring to real people. It is a testament to how subtly refined the performances of the main actors and actresses are. This summer, Joseph Gordon-Levitt will be staring in a blockbuster titled G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra, and though I haven't yet seen it, I can pretty much guarantee that his part in Mysterious Skin will remain the more satisfying one, on all counts. The same will probably hold true for the two films as a whole.

3.25/4.00

Review for Quantum of Solace

Director: Marc Forster

Released: 2008

Genre: Spy Thriller

I'll begin this critique by saying that I am a die-hard fan of the James Bond series. Granted, none of the installments released after 1969 are very good, with the possible exception of The Spy Who Loved Me, but I'm sure many other Bond fans would disagree. I'll say that the first three films are the best and leave it at that. I've seen all twenty "legitimate" Bond films that were made before Daniel Craig assumed the role of the lovable and distinctly misogynistic super-spy, so I know what to expect in a Bond film if it is good- and if it is bad. Quantum of Solace left me thoroughly nonplussed- over the course of time, it will fall somewhere in the middle of the James Bond quality spectrum.

The worst Bond film in my opinion is 2002's Die Another Day. I watched that in theaters and was disgusted, hoping the Bond series would meet its demise on that day rather than at sometime in the future. I was so disenchanted with the franchise that I refused to watch Casino Royale when it came out four years later, despite the positive reception from fans and critics alike. It was with great reluctance that I watched Quantum of Solace. After seeing Craig's second attempt to match Sean Connery's instant likability, I can say that Quantum of Solace is an improvement on Die Another Day.

That isn't saying much, however. I didn't dislike Craig's performance (it sort of reminded me of Timothy Dalton in The Living Daylights and License to Kill), despite the low level of finess involved, but I detested the direction and cinematography. There are way too many "Bourne Identity-esque" action scenes, none of which I found very exhilarating; the average shot length throughout the film rivals Armageddon in terms of brevity. There was little sense of space or perspective, because the camera kept bobbing around, constantly switching angles. In the end stunt sequence, I wasn't even sure which characters were hanging off ledges and shooting at Bond because the camera work is so hectic. I think cinematographers should have a limit of two cameras to work with to prevent such a stylistic faux pas- a written request would have to be sent to the corporate bigwigs in Hollywood for more cameras when the situation truly requires it.

The plot in Quantum of Solace is par for a post Connery Bond film; a villain with too much money, greed and imagination tries to destabilize world society for his benefit- in this case, an international network of villains (that MI6 hasn't even heard of) attempt to help a deposed Bolivian dictator regain control of his country in exchange for swaths of seemingly worthless desert. I won't reveal the plot twist related to the acquisition of this land, but needless to say it provides at best a minor revelation as to the true workings of the mysterious organization (referred to as Quantum).

Also, good Bond villains normally have a lot of character. The baddie in this film, Dominique Greene, is curiously lacking in this department. He's very violent and seems to have some sort of sexual infatuation with his work, but that's where his idiosyncrasies end- he doesn't have mechanical hands, he doesn't attempt to sever Bond in twain with a laser, and he doesn't kill his assistants in a pool of sharks or piranhas while listening to classical music. Since he doesn't have strange obsessions aside from environmentalism, or do anything to others that would be horribly painful in real life, but at once thrilling and funny to watch happen to someone else on screen, he just doesn't live up to Goldfinger. Overall it was very unsatisfying.

In conclusion, watching Quantum of Solace is like watching a Bourne movie, but with more color, faster cuts, even less realism and a few more women. The era when Hollywood thrillers become indistinguishable from one another is fast approaching.

2.25/4.00

Review for Evil Dead II

Director: Sam Raimi

Released: 1987

Genre: Horror-Comedy

Evil Dead II is an anomaly in the world of cinema. I have never seen a movie that is anything like it stylistically... it seamlessly blends campy effects, slapstick comedy, Lovecraftian demonism and imaginative camera work into a single, 80 minute long bloodbath that never slows down and never lets up. It defies the typical goals and expectations of filmmakers and moviegoers alike; bad acting and a lack of character depth almost enhance the viewing experience, allowing the kaleidoscopic, action packed material to take center stage. If the actors and actresses actually tried to provide an Oscar worthy performance, Evil Dead II wouldn't be nearly as engaging as it is; we know nothing about any of the characters, they're only there to sacrifice themselves for the audience's enjoyment. The work revels shamelessly in it's own unabashed excess, forcing you to shed your inhibitions and give yourself completely to the material or be left out of the loop.

Director Sam Raimi's work on the Spider Man series may have been what propelled him into the upper echelons of Hollywood's directing circle, but he got his start with the Evil Dead trilogy. The first film, titled The Evil Dead, was released in 1981 and shot on a small budget of $300,000. Raimi made good use of the money, producing a gritty work of horror that has since been extremely well received by critics. I felt it was only modestly impressive, but Raimi's directing talent and potential is evident considering the monetary constraints. The Evil Dead went on to gross over $3 million in theaters, allowing the aspiring filmmaker more wiggle room to work on additional projects. After directing 1985's Crimewave, a mediocre horror film written by the Coen brothers, Raimi returned to his pet project, producing Evil Dead II in 1987.

Evil Dead II is more of an over the top elaboration on the original The Evil Dead than a true sequel. It's also much more lighthearted, albeit in an extremely gory and somewhat terrifying manner. This time around Raimi had $3.5 million at his disposal, an amount that, although modest by 1987 Hollywood standards, allowed for a much more creative mash up of absurd, sidesplitting scenes to be produced.

The movie centers around a man named Ash, played by the instantly recognizable Bruce Campbell, who takes his girlfriend to a secluded cabin in the woods. He soon finds that the owner of the cabin is an esteemed archeologist who has discovered an artifact known as the Necrominicon, or Book of the Dead. By turning on a tape recorder next to the book, Ash unwittingly plays a summoning of the work's demonic powers by the archeologist. What ensues is both pure mayhem and unadulterated hilarity, as Ash is forced to decapitate his possessed girlfriend (only to be chased around by her chain saw wielding corpse), nearly killed by a possessed hand (his own), locked in a basement with the demonized remains of the archeologist's late wife, almost crushed by a rogue group of animated oak trees trying to smash in the roof and walls of the cabin, and sucked into an alternate dimension. This and much more is played out in the span of little more than an hour, with moments of both graphic horror and over the top physical comedy competing for the viewer's rapt attention. The fact that I'm not concerned about whether or not I've given too much away shows how jam packed Evil Dead II is with such ludicrous, off the wall moments.

Evil Dead II was a financial success at the box office, raking in almost double what it cost to produce. This enabled Raimi to direct a sequel called Army of Darkness (originally titled Medieval Dead) in 1992. Army of Darkness isn't a bad film, but I honestly don't think it stacks up to it's predecessor... it's more of a comedy than anything, and the endearing and intentionally cheesy dialogue isn't balanced out by macabre and disturbing elements of horror. That's what makes Evil Dead II work so well; not only is it a good horror film, it's one of the funniest I've ever seen- an achievement that movies such Scream and Shaun of the Dead feebly attempt to emulate. Even within Raimi's truly unique, oddball horror-comedy trilogy, Evil Dead II stands alone as a seminal masterpiece.

3.75/4.00

Review for Cool World

Director: Ralph Bakshi

Released: 1992

Genre: ???

Cool World is a 1992 film directed by Ralph Bakshi and starring Brad Pitt, Kim Basinger, and a man who eerily resembles Sean Penn but is actually named Gabriel Byrne. The movie portrays characters and worlds both animated and real, a format that requires immense technical skill (and, I would imagine, near infinite patience) to pull off convincingly. Who Framed Roger Rabbit?, directed by Robert Zamekis and released four years prior to Cool World, was a seminal release in which such a presentation works; the result is an enjoyable film that is once funny and enthralling, appealing to people of all ages. Bakshi intended to direct a more risque and edgier response to Roger Rabbit, but instead of building on the successes of its predecessor, Cool World became a sort of anti-matter to it instead; where the former succeeds, the latter fails. Immensely. In fact, the word "immensely" itself does not convey the magnitude of Cool World's shortcomings. I don't think any word in the English language does.

I honestly don't know where to start... Cool World begins like it just might go somewhere; Pitt's character returns from his service in World War II to a then desolate Las Vegas, and takes his mother for a ride on an Indian motorcycle he supposedly bought in Italy. Predictably, they get in a horrible accident with a drunk driver by a small casino. The mother dies, Pitt has a flashback, and then an ambulance arrives. Pitt seems fine, but for reasons I still don't understand despite watching the film twice, he is suddenly sucked into a horribly animated world by a bald, lilliputian scientist in what may be one of the most abrupt scene transitions I've ever witnessed in a movie. From this point on, most of the story takes place in the "Cool World," a comically two dimensional realm that resembles the bowels of hell more than anything... cinematic hell, that is.

I'm not even sure if I should continue explaining the plot; I could spend hours trying my best to make sense of it, but I would wind up with a bad headache and an uninterested reader. I'll try to give as short of a summary as I can: after Pitt leaves the real world for "Cool World," we flash forward to Las Vegas in 1992, where we see a prison inmate, played by the Sean Penn lookalike, drawing Kim Basinger's character, "Holli Would." Yes, that's her name. As one of my friends put it, she looks like Tinkerbell's slutty cousin. As Penn draws her in his cell, she comes to life (in a horribly drawn, laughably bad cut-scene) and beckons her creator to follow her into "Cool World." An instant later, he falls into a bar with a bunch of identical, flatly drawn wolf characters dancing to club music. He looks up and sees Holli dancing grotesquely on the dance floor in front of him, flaunting her inked curves for all to see. It's terribly awkward to watch, and not sexy in the least. In fact, it's downright traumatizing. For the next half hour the scenes switch hurriedly back and forth between Pitt, Penn, Holli and a bunch of nameless and interchangeable animated characters. Eventually, Pitt, who is a "Cool World" detective, confronts Penn, the only other human in the land. The advice Pitt provides can be summed up in a single declaration, the most disturbing in the film: "Noids don't have sex with Doodles." It is explained that Noids are humans, whereas Doodles are cartoons. Eventually, Penn does have sex with a doodle- Kim Basinger's cartooned incarnation to be exact. This repulsive act of inter-dimensional lovemaking results in catastrophy, breaking down the barrier between the "Cool World" and the real world and threatening to turn the Earth into a badly drawn comic book. What ensues is absolute nonsense as Penn and Basinger, who are both real at this point, begin to wreak havoc on Las Vegas in search of the animated professor's doohickey, which for some reason will help separate the two universes and put an end to the debacle. In short, everything is a mess.

Any potential for this film to redeem itself is quashed by the massive technical faults throughout. The animation is choppy and out of perspective; when Pitt smokes one of Holly's animated cigarettes, it looks like he has Parkinson's Disease worse than Michael J. Fox. The sets in "Cool World" are not even hand drawn, but are instead consist of flat wood panels for furniture that look wholly unconvincing when the camera pans anywhere. They are so pervasive that, at the end of the film, Pitt is laying at the base of a set of stairs that are spray painted on a wooden board. You can even see his shadow on the panel he leans against. Of course, by the time that part came around I had stopped caring about Cool World, and just wanted something to eat.

In conclusion, the only reason I would ever recommend this film to anyone is if they are prepared to berate it with a group of friends for fun, as I did. Never have I seen a movie that was so difficult to follow yet so unrewarding as a whole. David Lynch's Mulholland Dr. may have been impossible to piece together, but at least I was infuriated with the lack of that "aha!" moment, because it meant I was invested in the plot and characters. Cool World, however, just left me listless and drained, as if I had been the victim of degrading emotional abuse. I challenge someone to compile a complete list of continuity errors and plot holes, because as far as movie disasters go, this one rivals Battlefield Earth!

0.25/4.00

Here's a short clip of Holli Would's uninspired appearance in Cool World, set to the soothing, classic tune, "Lollipop": http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=io4YtSAeGoE&feature=fvw