I_Ailurophile

Hot on the heels of Peter Bogdanovich's tremendously funny 'What's up, Doc?' I don't know why I ever doubted the prospects of this award-winning film that I've heard name-dropped again and again. Once one begins watching it takes no time at all for 'Paper moon' to utterly delight, and I'm aghast, now, that it's taken me this long to watch. I can't speak to the novel it's based on, but this is a fantastic, vibrant picture that's as rich now as it was fifty years ago, and frankly it puts to shame the preponderance of all pictures that have been released in the time since.

What here is not to love? The black and white cinematography of László Kovács couldn't be more crisp and vivid, nor more aesthetically pleasing in a more subjective sense; some shots are downright brilliant. Bogdanovich's keen eye and intelligence as a director draws out all the possibilities of any given moment, whatever the mood, capitalizing on the sharp wit and ingenuity of the tableau - and allowing the cast, namely reliable Ryan O'Neal and his young daughter Tatum, to unreservedly explore each beat, scene, and character and bring them to life with all due vitality. I don't know what parity there is with Joe David Brown's book, but screenwriter Alvin Sargent whipped together a fabulously engaging, fun trip of a road movie as silver-tongued con man Moses finds himself tied together with precocious little Addie, and between that screenplay and the vision and skill of filmmaker Bogdanovich, the result is a total blast!

Moses is a world away from the straitlaced straight man Ryan played the year before, and his performance of pluck and zest is a terrific joy through and through. Yet for all the range, nuance, and energy he carries with him in this role, I wonder if Tatum doesn't outshine him as bright nine-year old Addie. It's no wonder that Tatum stepped away with accolades for her portrayal, for her acting is the stuff that dreams are made of, putting other child actors to shame with her spunk. It may be the case that the pair get a boost from their relationship in real life, but one way or another the dynamics between these characters are marvelously engrossing, and the actors' work as scene partners is a gift for all viewers across the years. And with the players working with a director as great as Bogdanovich, and with scene and narrative writing and dialogue so marvelous as what Sargent supplies, there's no way this feature could be any less than an essential classic of a comedy-drama.

All that's to say nothing of the outstanding filming locations, fetching production design, lovely costume design, or the stunts and effects we get along the way. But there's no mistaking where the lasting value of 'Paper moon' truly lies. And for all the strength that it bears in the most important ways, ultimately it feels less like a product of the 70s and more like the revered treasures of iconic filmmakers like F. W. Murnau, G. W. Pabst, or King Vidor of the 20s or 30s. Through to the very end it can't be overstated what a pleasure this is, and I can't help but think that it's one of the best movies I've ever seen. I can't recommend it highly enough - this is a gem that I'd happily suggest to one and all, and it's well worth going out of one's way to see!

Sights unseen I thought I might have something to say about the film's relation to the short story that shares its name, but then I learned that it bears such scant resemblance to Stephen King's text that the novelist successfully sued to have his name removed. Sights unseen I thought I might have something to say about the presence in culture of this film, but then I realized I was mistaken and had been thinking of the ads for the 1996 sequel that once cycled among others on the TV Guide Channel's predecessor, the Prevue Channel. Sights unseen, I assumed I would readily find myself lambasting the outdated computer-generated imagery in this film - but in fairness, the gauche, gawky digital visuals are part and parcel of the story on hand, are more or less on par for contemporary computer graphics, and are kind of appropriate in their own way as they depict another world, and this instance is also well removed from the vacuous proliferation of pseudo-realistic "special effects" we've seen in the past twenty years or so as studios seemingly think that because CGI can do anything, it should do everything. (Nevermind that with fleetingly rare exception, digital falsehood ages very rapidly and looks worse the more we see of it.) Why, some of the CGI herein is kind of brilliant in its own way.

With all these assumptions, and the reality I was met with, well in mind, I do have problems with 'The lawnmower man.' I find Alan Baumgarten's editing to often be choppy, brusque, and overzealous, and between both this and Brett Leonard's direction, I find the pacing to be tawdrily rushed both within scenes themselves, and in the sequencing of shots and scenes. Beats rarely manifest, breathe, and resolve in a manner that allow them to fully resonate, and the sum total feels a little sloppy. (Maybe the issue would be resolved with the director's cut, but I'm skeptical.) That rushing and sloppiness extend to the flashes of imagery we see of Angelo's virtual reality, commonly resulting in sensory overload not just for test subject Jobe but for the viewer, too. While not as severe a fault, I also think the audio is imbalanced, for there are times when sound effects, Dan Wyman's ambient original music, and/or dialogue blur together into a slurry that's as unwieldy and cumbersome as the visual onslaught. I further believe that there are some ideas broached in Leonard and Gimel Everett's screenplay that are arguably not given all due treatment, thus losing out on some of the potential that the concept had.

Yet no matter how much one may be inclined to scrutinize this movie, or how cynical and jaded one may be, I'd be plainly lying if I said I weren't very pleased with how good it actually is. There are some elements that we see only partially represented, perhaps, but even at that the plot is rich with tantalizing exploration of key concepts. Nevermind the dabbling with modern videogame ideations, including violence and influence on impressionable minds: there is a strong psychological undercurrent to the tale as Jobe grows, and loses himself, and becomes increasingly unhinged, yet also aspires to further greatness. In addition to the major science fiction roots there are surprisingly substantial strains of King-like horror on hand as Jobe gains astonishing new powers, and reinvents himself, and freely exercises his will in terrible ways. This is to say nothing of the deeply unethical machinations of Angelo, who then completely loses control of his creation; the involvement of dubious shadow organizations with deep, ugly motives; or the more esoteric and abstract notions at play, culminating in fantastical extrapolation of the burgeoning digital age. 'The lawnmower man' has troubles, yes, but not so much in the writing, and they are ultimately fairly minor compared to the ingenuity the picture mostly boasts.

'The lawnmower man' has troubles, but in so many ways that matter most, it's simply terrific. These include the production design and art direction, practical stunts and effects, and the eye-catching costume design, hair, and makeup. These include Wyman's original music, and the cinematography of Russell Carpenter. The CGI outwardly presents as an eyesore on a subjective basis, yet the world created in these 100-odd minutes engrosses us more and more as its reach grows, mostly in horrific ways. And the cast is pretty darn great, too, uniformly giving committed performances (if sometimes, arguably, overly spirited) befitting the developing sobriety and darkness of the saga. Above all, the latter is really the key: critique the execution as we may, including the most overdone visuals and the most conventional story ideas, more than not it's a stupendous ride - and the foundations in the screenplay are outstanding. I sat to watch with mixed expectations, and I am all so pleasantly surprised and happy with just how excellent the whole is when all is said and done.

For any number of reasons this won't appeal to all comers, and alongside flaws or shortcomings there are parts that maybe haven't aged well - or which, conversely, have aged too well in the past thirty years. All the same, through to the very end there is so much that this flick does splendidly well, and I'm now remiss that it's taken me this long to watch for the first time. I'd stop short of saying it's a must-see, but 'The lawnmower man' is fantastic overall, and if one is open to all the wide, weird possibilities of cinema, then this is a modern classic that's well worth checking out.

I'm rather lukewarm on the first film. It's modestly enjoyable, above all with firm foundations in the noir-esque narrative - but it tries to hard to be funny, especially with the protagonist's unending quips and changing personas to answer every line, happenstance, and scenario. Could a sequel improve this so-so formula, or would it stagnate in the same waters that made its predecessor so tiresome? Unfortunately, we begin to get our answer within mere minutes, and not only is 'Fletch lives' cut from the same cloth, but in some ways I think it readily shows itself to be even more irksome. I suppose there are folks who earnestly enjoy this, but I'm just not particularly impressed.

Whether the blame rests mostly on the shoulders of screenwriter Leon Capetanos (taking over from Andrew Bergman), author Gregory McDonald, or returning director Michael Ritchie, the quips to greet us again and again struggle to so much as allow a single happy neuron to fire off, let alone Chevy Chase's costume changes. There are facets of cleverness, yes, including some gags amidst the predominant strains of intended amusement, and sly skewering of corrupt, despicable institutions and awful people. There is also homophobia, transphobia, sexism, a questionable mean streak, and a general tendency toward punching down, and the comedy that fails to land works against the comedy that otherwise would. There are fair storytelling roots in the plot and scene writing as private investigator Fletch finds himself on a new case, and there are good ideas here. Once again, however, the picture just tries to hard to be funny, and if it had significantly pared down the would-be wit then each remaining instance might have counted a lot more to garnish the tale at hand.

Richard A. Harris' editing is overly brusque, and Harold Faltermeyer's synth-driven score is again quite overused, but overall this is pretty well made. This includes gorgeous filming locations, nice cinematography and use of lighting, swell stunts and effects, and fetching production design, costume design, and hair and makeup. The supporting cast is a pleasure, again, now including Hal Holbrook, R. Lee Ermey, Julianne Phillips, and Cleavon Little, among others, as they handily outshine Chase. Ah, but if only the humor were sharper, and more carefully considered. The story is splendid - and the proliferate efforts to dress it up with frivolities are too often ill-advised, with few points of real success. There's just enough worth here to keep the whole afloat among the lesser bits, and unlike the antecedent, this even managed to earn a single laugh. At length, the good news is that 'Fletch lives' is modestly enjoyable, pretty well on par with its forebear. The bad news is that 'Fletch lives' is only modestly enjoyable, pretty well on par with its forebear. I suppose I'm glad for those who like this more than I do; one viewing was enough for me.