Review for Stalker

Director: Andrei Tarkovsky

Released: 1979
Genre: Science Fiction

The year 1979 saw the release of several impressive features. Ridley Scott churned out Alien, Francis Coppola finally released Apocalypse Now after three years of developmental delays, and Woody Allen produced the majestic Manhattan. These works were fairly well represented at that year's Academy Awards (though not well enough), and they are certainly worth a watch. But in my opinion, the greatest film of that year was Andrei Tarkovsky's Stalker. In fact, there is not a movie that I enjoy watching more, aside from David Lean's impeccable 1962 film Lawrence of Arabia.

Like many Tarkovsky's other films, Stalker is a very slow, cerebral work, and requires several viewings to understand the finer plot details. I have personally watched it four times now, and I still see something new with each showing. The film is set in a futuristic and urbanized dystopia; the main character is a "Stalker," someone who navigates through a desolate, forbidden zone thought to possess supernatural qualities. He brings others into the area, where there is a room that has the power to grant a person's innermost wish. "The Zone" is a very dangerous place, and the Stalker takes many seemingly pointless precautions, urging those he brings with him to obey what he says. In the movie, a disenchanted writer and a struggling chemist are brought to the mysterious locale, and are faced with the choice of either believing in what the Stalker says or following their own instincts- and whether or not to enter the enchanted room.

Everything about Stalker is refreshing; the cinematography is majestic (with an average shot length of around a minute), and the mesmerizing score possesses an oddly meditative quality, adding to the mystique of the striking visuals; nothing about the motives and actions of the main characters is thoroughly explained, but rather left to interpretation. Also, I have never seen a film that so effectively conveys a feeling of urgency through such a peaceful and leisurely paced style.

While making Stalker, Tarkovsky was almost unable to procure the funds necessary to complete the project. During post production, the film reels with the original footage were destroyed in a processing accident, and Stalker had to be re-shot from scratch with a drastically reduced budget. Although I would have loved to see what the movie originally looked like, the sheer minimalism, near complete lack of eye catching special effects, and an aura of omniscient dregadation in the redone version contribute to a master work unto itself.

Most viewers today will struggle to adjust to the style of acting and direction in Stalker. Those who are willing to do so, however, will have certainly expanded their perception of the science fiction genre in film.

4.00/4.00

Review for Evil

Director: Mikael Hafstrom

Released: 2003

Genre: Drama

Evil is a semi-autobiographical work, based on a best selling Scandinavian novel written by Jan Guillou. It is first and foremost an uncompromisingly righteous, Scandinavian feature, as well as Sweden's 2003 submission for Oscar consideration in the Best Foreign Film category- however, it was not released in American theaters until 2006. I randomly stumbled upon Evil while on my Netflix account, and decided on a whim to watch it.

The movie takes place in the year 1959, and centers around Eric Ponti, an aloof and rebellious but intelligent teenager. One day, he is expelled from the public school he attends for his vicious bullying. His mother, in a desperate attempt to keep Eric in school, sells off a good portion of the family's furniture to enroll him in a prestigious boarding institution. Eric decides to do away with his violent behavior, but soon discovers that the students at the private establishment cause more trouble than those in the state school he was expelled from. For staying true to his own beliefs and treating the upper classmen as equals, Eric goes against the established hegemony, and is the target of an extreme amount of harassment. He never gives in to the pressure to fit in, however, and eventually justice is served against those who tormented him.

As I stated before, Evil is uncompromisingly righteous; its unwavering sense of morality makes for a very heavy-handed film. The result is a work that favors sheer visceral power over depth. I would have loved to have been shown a more informative account on boarding school life during this time- how did such antiquated hierarchies within the school system survive for so long after World War II? Why was a former Nazi party member allowed to teach anthropology, and was he ever actively replaced? How long did it take for official Swedish law to overshadow the cruel hazing rituals and other deranged, unquestioned policies shown in the movie? Institutional violence is a very serious and intriguing topic, and I believe such a fascinating subject warrants more merit and consideration in that respect.

Despite my misgivings, I still greatly enjoyed Evil- it exudes this sense of absolute justice, which seems to be director Mikael Hafstrom's ultimate intention. In that sense, Evil is a lot like movies such as Rocky: it is a wonderful, feel-good showing, if you can stomach the initial acts of cruelty... so long as you do not read too much between the lines.

3.00/4.00

Review for Falling Down

Director: Joel Schumacher

Released: 1993

Genre: Pitch Black Comedy/Drama

Years ago, I would routinely peruse the shelves of video cassettes in a now defunct Blockbuster outlet. One time, I came upon the sleeve for Joel Schumacher's 1993 film Falling Down. I remember being mesmerized by the cover image; it had Michael Douglas wearing horn rimmed glasses and a nicely pressed business suit, standing atop a pile of rubble, and holding a briefcase in one hand and a shotgun in the other. Such an awe inspiring sight immediately piqued my interest, and I asked my parents if we could rent that instead of Tremors. They gave me a resolutely negative response, and I soon gave up trying to watch it- but that mental picture of Michael Douglas being a badass never quite left my mind.

Well, over a decade later, I have finally taken the time to see Falling Down- and I must say, the film is not as memorable as the indelible poster art that so successfully promoted it. Granted, my expectations were fairly high; I expected Schumacher's film to be a cult gem, something along the lines of Stanley Kubrick's The Killing, but was instead shown a somewhat superior version of the first Death Wish movie. Honestly, I was somewhat disappointed.

Falling Down opens with a very dapper looking Michael Douglas stuck in a horrendous traffic jam. Flies are buzzing around, people are yelling at one another, and his air conditioning has just given out. After looking around and sizing up the situation, Douglas just snaps- he leaves his car where it is and walks into the adjacent bushes. We soon find out that he is on his way to his daughter's birthday party, as he embarks on a treacherous walk from East Los Angeles to Venice Beach. 

Along the way, Douglas becomes more and more violent, and gradually upgrades his weapons stash as he lashes out at perceived injustices. First, he assaults a convenience store clerk, and takes the man's baseball bat; soon after he uses the bat to attack a pair of menacing gang members, and takes one of their switch blades. The gangsters eventually track Douglas down and commit a drive by shooting, but accidently kill everyone on the street except him. As they flee the scene, they crash into a row of parked cars, and Douglas takes their gym bag full of guns. From there the conflicts escalate until an intrepid police officer (played by Robert Duvall) finally tracks Douglas down.

Falling Down is not a bad film, just a conflicted one; it is not sure if it wants to be a pitch black comedy or a humanizing drama. During the first half of the movie, Michael Douglas is just an average joe who has had enough- anyone could snap in the same situation, and then rationalize their acts of violence as they go on some pseudo moralistic rampage. That is exactly what Douglas initially does in Falling Down, and the movie manages to be funny without providing any reason for him going nuts. Later on, however, we are shown Douglas' family, and eventually the motives behind his irrational actions- Schumacher tries to put a face on the gratuitous violence, showing Douglas as a good person that was just wronged by society. It does a lot to cancel out the visceral force the previous scenes carried; a good amount of character development should have been provided in the beginning, or not at all- either decision would have resulted in a much different, but more cohesive work. 

Personally, I would have preferred Douglas going vigilante for no definable reason but to lash out at society's ills. Everything would be left to interpretation as to why he went bonkers; he did not need to be human for Falling Down to work. Still, seeing Douglas in a suit and tie as he shoots up a fast food restaurant for not serving him breakfast is unarguably priceless.

2.75/4.00

Review for Destroy all Planets

Director: Noriaki Yuasa

Released: 1968

Genre: Japanese Monster Movie

i

Destroy all Planets is a typical entry into the "giant Japanese monster" movie genre. Everybody knows about the massive creatures battle each other, and the city of Tokyo often suffers as a result. Hundreds of such movies exist, most of which are either sequels or spinoffs of the original Godzilla franchise. Despite the near universal awareness and mockery of such features, I doubt many people have seen such a work in its entirety.

Before watching Destroy all Planets, I had not seen one of these movies all the way through, aside from Ishiro Honda's original Godzilla film, Gojira. Destroy all Planets is certainly no competition to Honda's seminal work in terms of quality, but it is by no means the worst movie I have ever seen. It tells of an attempted alien invasion of Earth, thwarted by the beloved creature Gamera, a massive sea turtle capable of flying in space. The extra terrestrial force delves into the memories of Gamera (which allowed for director Noriaki Yuasa to splice in a half hour's worth of action scenes from previous Gamera films) and decide to prey on the monster's kindness- they kidnap two boys, threatening to kill them if Gamera attacks the spaceship. It all leads up to an intense (and somehow exciting) final conflict.

Now, despite my somewhat lighthearted recap on the plot of this movie, I must reiterate: Destroy all Planets is nonetheless a terrible movie overall. Granted, it was rerecorded for its American release, which I will account for in my rating, as I assume the original sound and dialogue is superior, but it is no wonder that one of its prequels was featured on an episode of Mystery Science Theater 3000. The pacing is terrible, the cinematography only occasionally interesting, and the soundtrack unmemorable.

Destroy all Planets is a better viewing experience if you watch it with other people, but even then it probably will not hold your attention very well; by the time the final battle scene came around, one of my friends was reading the comic section in the newspaper instead of watching the film. That all changed, however, when a giant alien squid creature decided to attack the gargantuan Gamera- seaborne and airborne attacks are launched, model landscapes are destroyed, and the whole spectacle is guaranteed to produce a few laughs... but surely Akira Kurosawa and similar directors would have scoffed at the general lack of quality evident in nearly every other department of production.

1.50/4.00

Review for This is England

Director: Shane Meadows

Released: 2006
Genre: Drama

Back when I was a senior in high school, I read about This is England in the show section of my newspaper. The writer of the article had a lot of good things to say about the film, which was written and directed by Shane Meadows. This is England is a semi autobiographical account of Meadows' childhood, and takes place in a small coastal town in northern England during the summer of 1983. The movie focuses on the main character, a 12 year old boy named Shaun, and his desperate struggle to fit in. Such a premise has been played upon countless times before; what sets This is England apart is Meadow's inspired portrayal of the social and political turmoil his country was experiencing at the time.

At the time in which This is England is set, Great Britain was seen by many as a conflicted socialist state within, engaging in seemingly petty conflicts to maintain the small fraction of overseas territories it once possessed. The number of unemployed in the nation had soared to over three million, and a large portion of the working class felt disenchanted with the policies instituted by the newly elected Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher. Also, the British army was engaged in a struggle with Argentine forces over the Falkland Islands. This is England captures this perfectly, opening and closing with wonderful montages depicting the national and foreign dilemmas facing the country.

In This is England, Shaun has been unwillingly thrust into this chaos by the death of his father, who a year prior was killed in action in the Falkland War. Shaun is constantly made fun of by his peers for not identifying with any one schoolyard clique; after a fight with a classmate, he is let out of school early, and comes across a gang of older teenagers. One member of the group asks Shaun to hang out with them, and makes the boy feel better by poking fun at the classmate he picked a fight with. Soon, Shaun becomes close with the gang, which provides him with a much needed sense of identity. While his new friends engage in questionable acts of vandalism, they are not malicious people; they even decide resolve a conflict between Shaun and another member with a group hug, in between their ransacking of abandoned flats.

Everything with the new social arrangement seems fine, until one of the group's acquaintances, a white supremacist named Combo (played brilliantly by actor Stephen Graham), is let out of jail. He decides to take the gang in a new direction, effectively splitting up its affiliates. Combo is a very violent and unpredictable man, but immediately takes a liking to Shaun; the two become mutual best friends, despite their age difference. Combo begins to impose his radical doctrines on the group, aligning himself with the ultra conservative British National Front. Eventually, very bad things begin to happen because of Combo's impulsive and confrontational behavior, and Shaun must decide for himself who he should associate with.

This is England shows how good people get caught in with the wrong crowd, and how unemployed, disaffected men tend to gravitate towards the extreme in times of desperation. The dreary atmosphere of the region is perfectly shot- the shabby apartment buildings and overgrown weeds set against a dull gray sky exude a sense of gloom and hopelessness. Meadows perfectly captures a crucial moment in both his own childhood and in the history of his country in one fell swoop.

You can rent This is England on Netflix, or watch it for free on the Sundance Channel if you have Cox Cable (like I do). You will not be disappointed.

3.50/4.00

Review for Coraline

Director: Henry Selick

Released: 2009
Genre: Animation

I have recently decided to review only one movie per director as I post entries for this site. After finishing my last entry, I realized that I have yet to critique two movies from the same director- something that was heretofore completely unintentional. Now, I am going to try to see a hundred films from a hundred directors. I will call it the "Hundred Movies Campaign." Such a directive will require me to be much more discerning when it comes to watching features- for a good while, I will have to settle for less than fantastic movies from second rate directors (such as Chris Columbus), third rate directors (such as Zack Snyder), and fourth rate directors (such as Uwe Boll).

When I was offered to see Coraline last night, I was hesitant; I immediately remembered that Tim Burton was possibly involved in the project. Many people, including me, have assumed that Burton directed Coraline, based on its somewhat creepy but approachable visuals, since Burton has forever typecast himself in that regard. However, Henry Selick directs this time around- though he may as well be a metaphysical extension of Burton, as the two have worked on several claymation/stop motion films together, such as The Nightmare Before Christmas and James and the Giant Peach.

The movie tells the story of Coraline, a young girl who is dissatisfied with her droll life and distant parents. When Coraline's family moves into an impressively large and grimy Victorian era mansion, things seem to take a turn for the worse- that is, until Coraline discovers a small door that leads to another world, filled with everything the girl wants but does not have. Everything seems wonderful in this "other world," until Coraline's "other mother" reveals her true, less than wonderful self. From that point on, Coraline must do everything in her power to return to her normal life, which makes for some pretty exciting action scenes, or as the MPAA would say, "scenes of mild peril."

Technically speaking, Coraline is a landmark picture, and has many firsts to its credit; it is the first stop motion film to be shot entirely in 3-D; it is the the first movie to feature a stop motion animated morphing sequence; it is the longest stop motion film to date, at 106 minutes in length; the list goes on and on. The team of animators involved in this project have this style of animation down to a fine science, and needless to say, the result is impressive.

That being said, Coraline sets more of a stylistic benchmark than anything- the story is interesting and the pacing surprisingly relaxed, but I feel the plot takes a back seat to the finely crafted and intensely detailed world in which Coraline exists. Selick has yet to trump his own directorial magnum opus, The Nightmare Before Christmas. It is still a good feature, though... just is not as endearing as it should be.

3.00/4.00

Review for Tokyo Gore Police

Director: Yoshihiro Nishimura

Released: 2008
Genre: Tokyo Shock

Director Martin Scorsese was once asked why he shot the notoriously violent work Raging Bull in black and white. His reason for doing so was this: he did not want to show so much blood in a color picture. This response came from the man who directed films such as Taxi Driver and Mean Streets, which are two extremely violent features set in the gritty underbelly of pre-Guilani New York City. So, even if you have not seen Raging Bull (which I highly recommend you do at some point in your life), I am sure you can understand how incredibly graphic it is, based on such a reactionary decision from Scorsese himself- after all, it is about boxing and stars Robert De Niro, how can it not be violent?

I mention this because I wonder what Scorsese would think of Tokyo Gore Police. Probably nothing positive. Why? Because this movie easily shows ten times the blood featured in Raging Bull (or, for that instance, even Sweeney Todd), and for no reason but to shock. Tokyo Gore Police is far and away the most detestably gory, over the top movie I have ever seen. In dozens of scenes, gallons of blood are sprayed from from the appendages of average people, police officers, and their genetically mutated assailants. And when I say appendages, I mean all five appendages. I am pretty sure the body parts of those killed in the film could form a pile that dwarves Mount Fuji.

Tokyo Gore Police takes place in the near future, in a city that has privatized its entire police force. Depicted is a war occurring between law enforcement and modified criminals known as "engineers." Engineers can only be killed by destroying a small, key shaped tumor situated deep within their body. All other injuries they sustain will only enhance their combative capabilities. Obviously, this premise automatically negates the possibility of creating a family film, but even I was put off by the absurd level of distinctly Japanese violence and perversion- and I enjoyed Tetsuo: The Iron Man. (I will review that latter movie some time in the coming months.)

I understand that Tokyo Gore Police intends to satirize the current political and social situation in Japan (read: less than optimal). For instance, the entirety of Tokyo's police force eventually declares war on all engineers, vowing to slay anyone who looks the slightest bit suspicious to them- an obvious attack on the repressive homogeneity of Japanese society. The baseless assault on Chinese immigrants, however, does nothing but reinforce the nation's suppressed element of racism- I say this because the film's protagonist mercilessly kills a pair of caricatured Chinese criminals, something I see not as biting satire but genuine animosity.

Tokyo Gore Police could have been a derivative but clever horror movie, were it not for the gross stylistic excesses. It basically plays like a two hour episode of Power Rangers, if said episode was directed by Quentin Tarantino during a week long bender. Literally, there is so much blood, I would not be surprised to learn that fire hoses were used on set. I love movies that are too outrageous to be taken seriously, but Tokyo Gore Police goes too far; it is too repulsive to be enjoyed.

1.00/4.00

Review for Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street

Director: Tim Burton

Released: 2007
Genre: Musical

I will begin this review by confessing that I am not a big fan of musicals. With the exception of Oliver, The Sound of Music, Fiddler on the Roof, and a few older Disney films, I typically do not like staring at a film involving nothing more than a bunch of dancing, singing, and a wire thin plot around which the cast gleefully revolves. That being said, I almost brought From Justin to Kelly to my friend's musical movie night yesterday evening, but in my defense, I have heard that From Justin to Kelly possesses an entertainment value that far transcends the musical genre.

For this musical night, our group voted for Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street, which was fine with me, as I have yet to review a movie directed by Tim Burton. I have seen Sweeney Todd and several other Burton films before, so I was aware beforehand of the typical 21st century Burton trappings: Johnny Depp and Helena Bonham Carter play the lead roles, the plot is "dark" in nature, and everything about the movie exudes a sort of air-brushed, commercialized gothic feel, watered down just enough to reach a wide audience. I should call him the "Hot Topic director;" he has been stuck in a stylistic rut ever since 1994's Ed Wood.

Burton's contrivedly bizzare showing takes place amid the decaying back alleys of 19th century, industrialized London, with towering smokestacks eschewing soot and adding to the dreary atmosphere. Depp plays Sweeney Todd, who has returned to the city after a fifteen year hiatus, vowing to take revenge on a prominent judge who forcefully took his wife and child. Todd is a skilled barber, and decides to wreak vengeance on those who have wronged him in his shop. He soon amasses a large number of kills in his pursuit of the judge, and establishes a joint operation with the owner of a pie shop underneath him named Nellie Lovett (Helena Bonham Carter) in which he supplies fresh victims for the meat in her pastries. In the end, justice is served to nearly everyone involved, however gruesome said justice may be.

Sweeney Todd is accomplished in several respects; Burton's movies are almost always well plotted and orchestrated, something I will admit to despite my misgivings about his stylistic rigidity. Unfortunately, none of the songs in this film are catchy, and as a result, Sweeney Todd lacks a certain "if I were a rich man" quality. Most of the musical scenes are comprised of a somewhat melodious, conversational dialogue, instead of entire songs that are separated from the transitional scenes. Of course, the gallons of blood that are sprayed, oozed, dripped and pooled by Todd may distract you from the shapeless numbers- it certainly distracted me, and almost prompted me to forgive most of Sweeney Todd's shortcomings. Almost.

I'll relent and give it a modestly positive rating.

2.75/4.00

College film review segment

Today I bring to you, my admittedly small collection of readers, a review on a selection of college projects from Chapman University. There has been a DVD copy of the institution's 2007 collection of student films sitting around my house for a year or so; I finally decided to give the shorts a watch and see how well done they were. I was very surprised at the level of production that went into the five segments featured on the disc- they certainly outperform certain "professional" outputs (such as the previously reviewed Strange Case), and I look forward to seeing what comes of the talents of those involved in future endeavors. I will not rate these works on the typical 4.00 scale I do with more professional projects, but instead will provide my overall opinion, be it positive, neutral, or negative.

The Line

Director: Kent Basset

The Line was the first of the five movies I viewed. It follows a migrant and his son crossing the border from Mexico into Arizona. The son forgets to bring the water he was carrying after the pair finish resting underneath a tree, and wanters onto the property of a ranch owner in an attempt to fill up the bottles they have left. The rancher's son, who is acquainted with several Minutemen in the area, confronts the trespasser, shooting him unintentionally as he flees. What ensues is a trip to the hospital in an attempt to save the migrant's son.

Of the group, I liked The Line the most- it tells of the current struggles facing both migrant workers in search of a better life, those living near the Mexican border who resent their presence, and how the two clash with one another. The soundtrack is a little amorphous, but the cinematographer captures the majestic landscape of southern Arizona very well, which does a lot to enhance the atmosphere and mood of the movie.

My opinion of The Line is a definite positive.

Mamitas
Director: NIcholas Ozeki

Mamitas is a 24 minute short set in the urban environment of downtown Los Angeles. In it, a young latino man provides advice on how to pick up women to his friend- very sketchy advice that astonishingly pays off for the latter. This occurs when the two boys begin flirting with one of their female acquaintances (who is the desired target of their advances) and her cousin (who is initially focused on as a ploy to make the other woman jealous). From here on, Mamitas turns into the same sort of sappy romantic comedy/drama that is so often played out for a cheap sort of emotional satisfaction; the "player" turnes out to be an actual human being with feelings, and in the end winds up with the geeky cousin. Overall, it was unsatisfying, though fortunately not on the momentous scale movies like Gigli manage to invoke.

The soundtrack is of the hip, urban, beat oriented variety, which was not too bad. But the dialogue was at times very difficult to hear- sometimes it was just right, other times it was lost in the ambiance. The camera work was not as satisfying as that in The Line, either. Overall, I felt Mamitas was a much less impressive show of talent. How ironic that it has the best rating and the most votes of the five on teh Internet Movie Database.

I would give it a slight negative.

Eater

Directors: Matt and Ross Duffer

Eater is the over the top, gory horror flick of the group. It is based on a short story written by a man named Peter Crowther, and takes place inside an absurdly grimy police station. It centers around a rookie officer who is supposed to watch over a recently caught killer that eats his victims (hence the somewhat cliched title of the movie). It seems that everybody in the station is out to either pull a prank on the new guy, or kill him- and it is never made clear who the "Eater" really is. In fact, it could very well be the rookie himself- but I was never sure what was real and what was a paranoid, schizophrenic delusion. Surely that was the intention of the film's directors, but I just do not think 18 minutes is enough time to build up an atmosphere for such a premise to be effective.

Technically speaking, I would say that Eater is the most accomplished of the pack- but I would expect as much, seeing as it was based on a story somebody else wrote. It falls into the trap of every jolt-oriented work of terror made in the past twenty or so years, but it replicates the claustrophobia well, mostly with tight camera angles an dim overhead lighting. The soundtrack is par for the course, with the typical sonic buildups and screeches that try to entice the viewer to jump out of their seat at anything that appears on screen.

All in all, I felt pretty neutral about Eater.

Chiles

Director: Tyrone Huff

The 14 minute long movie Chiles is a classic tale of cultural conflict that predominantly takes place in the house of a devoutly Catholic, Latino family. The daughter brings over her boyfriend, who is most assuredly not Latino, to meet her parents. At first, he is not very successful in winning over his girlfriend's father, especially when said girlfriend announces to her parents that she is pregnant. Fortunately, the pair begin to bond over a contest involving a large bowl of jalepeno chilis and a mutual refusal to drink water, and all is well in the end.

Technically, Chiles was produced in a similar manner to Mamitas, in that it looks like a cross between an early '90s music video and Pedro Almodovar's masterpiece All About My Mother. I would wager that both Nicholas Ozeki and Huff have seen several of Almodovar's films, since, like Almodovar, their works focus on race and gender relations- and use very bright colors and muralistic motifs. It is an honorable (and surely personal) motive for making a film, but I hope that both aspiring directors expand beyond what they have exhibited here.

Consensus: neutral.

Negotiations
Director: Ethan Cushing

In my opinion, Negotiations was the weakest showing of the five films, as it has a premise that only becomes more muddled and absurd as the story reveals itself. It centers around a police negotiator who is called to a hostage situation, only to find that his son is one of the gunmen. An initially routine operation eventually devolves into a therapy session between father and son, set to a background of police lights and the noise of sirens outside. I honestly found the plot to be too whimsical for a short crime drama.

Technically, Negotiations was nothing extraordinary- it is outshined by the four other films in one department or another, and the ending is a little odd, and aggravatingly inconclusive.

I would give it the strongest negative of the pack. Better luck next time!

So there you have it: my first college film compilation. I wish the best of luck to all of the people involved in the creation of these works, as none of them were so awful that I wanted to end it all, or at the very least do away with cinema entirely- like I did with, say, Cool World. Hopefully there will be more on the way in the coming months- but now I have to get back into the routine of reviewing a movie a day.

Review for Benny and Joon

Director: Jeremiah Chechik

Released: 1993
Genre: Romantic Comedy

Benny and Joon was released in April 1993, and grossed over $23 million in theaters. It was shot in Spokane Washington, and as a result most of the characters have a very high "grunge" factor about them. Featured during the opening and closing credits is a song by The Proclaimers titled, "I would walk (500 miles)," that was largely popularized by its inclusion in this film. There really is not much else I can say about Benny and Joon, except that it is a quaint, modest romantic comedy above all else.

The film stars Aiden Quinn, Marry Stewart Masterson, and most notably, Johnny Depp. It is Depp who provides the bulk of the laughs (and substance) in Benny and Joon. He plays the part of Sam, an ardent cinephile and Buster Keaton impersonator who is staying in town with his cousin Mike. Sam's eccentric personality soon grates on Mike, and the latter forces his friend Benny to take Sam in after winning a poker bet with Benny's mentally ill sister, Joon. Sam and Joon soon become inseparable; they each allow the other to grow through their own faults and rigidity. Eventually, they fall in love, Joon does not have to be institutionalized, Benny romances a local waitress, and everybody is happy.

Watching Benny and Joon is sort of like seeing a marathon of the TV show Gilmore Girls- the characters are overly contrived and uniformly odd (but ultimately likable), and the story takes a back seat as a result. Director Jeremiah Chechik tries admirably to scrape by on a flimsy premise for a feature length film. I believe he would have failed, were it not for the surprisingly impressive performance of Johnny Depp. All of the best scenes in Benny and Joon are the ones in which he is the focal point, often with him performing whimsical, flawless silent film era gags. Depp did all of his own stunt work in this movie, which included several mid air summersaults and swinging from ropes on the sides of buildings, and I have a newfound respect him after seeing this movie. It is unfortunate that he only really appears halfway though- Chechik sure takes his sweet time trying to build up the small town characters and atmosphere, and Depp's refreshing antics were what staved off my mounting boredom.

Ultimately, I would recommend Benny and Joon to most, if it was playing on cable TV... especially to those Depp fans who have yet to branch out from watching Tim Burton films. Most others would probably agree when I say that Benny and Joon is a poor man's My Cousin Vinny- and that Aiden Quinn is no Joe Pesci.

2.50/4.00