MurderSlimPress
अग॰ 2010 को शामिल हुए
नई प्रोफ़ाइल में आपका स्वागत है
हम अभी भी कुछ प्रोफ़ाइल सुविधाओं को अपडेट करने पर काम कर रहे हैं. इस प्रोफ़ाइल के लिए रेटिंग ब्रेकडाउन और पोल देखने के लिए, कृपया previous version. जाएं.
बैज3
बैज कमाने का तरीका जानने के लिए, यहां बैज सहायता पेज जाएं.
समीक्षाएं22
MurderSlimPressकी रेटिंग
Abel Ferrara is the director behind the excellent KING OF NEW YORK (1990) and BAD LIEUTENANT (1992). He's often wound up folks in Hollywood, refusing to fit into the respectable facade that directors are supposed to project. In NOT GUILTY (taken from a French TV documentary series) we see Ferrara in all of a glory, a hulking guy with messed up teeth and a bottle and cigarette always in his hands. He carries something of the charm of Bukowski... a lumbering, likable and talented rogue who pulls other people along with him.
But Ferrara hasn't made a truly notable feature film since the superb THE FUNERAL in 1996, and has often ended up making shitty sleaze, music videos, documentaries and short films. He's been attached to various projects that he's pulled out of - like GAME OF DEATH - and failed to get funding for grand visions like JECKYLL AND HYDE because - as he says - he "refuses to kiss the feet of Hollywood" Ever since he burst onto the scene with his low-grade horror DRILLER KILLER, Ferrara has been considered eccentric and untameable. NOT GUILTY captures this side of Ferrara very well. He talks - often very interestingly - to anyway who takes his fancy. He describes a chase scene to a guy in a music shop (who says - after Ferrara leaves - that the first time he came into the shop he had to throw him out), flirts outrageously with some gals in the street, directs a music video, and gives some wisdom on New York life as he cruises around with his buddies. And all this is in what is essentially a 24 hour snapshot of Ferrara's life.
The snapshot nature of the film is a positive in some ways. In fact, you can almost see Ferrara slowly sober up (then get drunk again) and it captures Ferrara's hectic, fun but often shambolic life. The bullshit he spouts to girls is frequently hilarious and - somehow - he almost seems to be winning them over....
But the character of Ferrara is so wacky that you'd prefer to see more. A proper documentary following him for a longer period of time, ideally taking in how he behaves on a full film set. It's little wonder Harvey Keitel's version of the "Bad Lieutenant" is so loopy with Ferrara at the helm, probably stripped naked and making aeroplane noises to show Keitel exactly what he wants.
NOT GUILTY is a fun watch. It's one that will play much better for fans of Ferrara's (good) movies, but should also appeal to fans of lovable drunks.
But Ferrara hasn't made a truly notable feature film since the superb THE FUNERAL in 1996, and has often ended up making shitty sleaze, music videos, documentaries and short films. He's been attached to various projects that he's pulled out of - like GAME OF DEATH - and failed to get funding for grand visions like JECKYLL AND HYDE because - as he says - he "refuses to kiss the feet of Hollywood" Ever since he burst onto the scene with his low-grade horror DRILLER KILLER, Ferrara has been considered eccentric and untameable. NOT GUILTY captures this side of Ferrara very well. He talks - often very interestingly - to anyway who takes his fancy. He describes a chase scene to a guy in a music shop (who says - after Ferrara leaves - that the first time he came into the shop he had to throw him out), flirts outrageously with some gals in the street, directs a music video, and gives some wisdom on New York life as he cruises around with his buddies. And all this is in what is essentially a 24 hour snapshot of Ferrara's life.
The snapshot nature of the film is a positive in some ways. In fact, you can almost see Ferrara slowly sober up (then get drunk again) and it captures Ferrara's hectic, fun but often shambolic life. The bullshit he spouts to girls is frequently hilarious and - somehow - he almost seems to be winning them over....
But the character of Ferrara is so wacky that you'd prefer to see more. A proper documentary following him for a longer period of time, ideally taking in how he behaves on a full film set. It's little wonder Harvey Keitel's version of the "Bad Lieutenant" is so loopy with Ferrara at the helm, probably stripped naked and making aeroplane noises to show Keitel exactly what he wants.
NOT GUILTY is a fun watch. It's one that will play much better for fans of Ferrara's (good) movies, but should also appeal to fans of lovable drunks.
VISITING HOURS is a largely laughed-at serial killer flick starring Michael Ironside. I suppose many of the laughs generate from William Shatner being in the film, playing a concerned boyfriend. I've never understood the fixation with Shatner as a comedy figure. Shatner is OK in his role, playing it completely straight and not completely terribly. It seems in getting fixated on the (in my view, non-existent) laughs from Shatner, viewers seem to have a blind spot to a lot of good things that VISITING HOURS achieves.
Ironside is strong as the killer (Colt Hawker), whose desire to kill comes from a terrible childhood and an abusive father. He identifies with his father, and loathes women because his mother threw boiling water over his Pa's face. Seems a bit of a stretch, but it wouldn't be the first time sometimes chosen the abuser over the person they abuse.
Colt becomes a misogynist, and turns his attention onto Deborah Ballin, who speaks out against violence towards women. She's a little militant about it and annoys a few people, so it's hard for the cops to figure out that Colt is the one hunting her down.
Some of the kill scenes are genuinely affecting. Colt likes to takes pictures of his victims as they're dying, and one - where he pulls a breathing tube from an elderly lady - is harrowing. Don't forget that Ironside was great in STARSHIP TROPPERS and brilliant in TOTAL RECALL as the supremely slimy Richter, and he excels in a similar role here. It's pretty baffling why Ironside ended up in TV series/movie hell given his excellence in playing the bad guy. Just the luck of the draw.
But the main plus of VISITING HOURS is that it's incredibly well shot. It's wildly voyeuristic, with lots of uncomfortable close-ups and point-of-view shots... and lots of lingering on people's suffering. The director - Jean-Claude Lord - has made nothing else of note. Even his name rhymes in a comedic way. Lord started out in France, then ended up doing US TV movies. But VISITING HOURS has a slight Hitchcock vibe and the level of voyeurism that makes you feel a little grubby just watching the damn movie.
I'm not saying VISITING HOURS is a classic. It's not up there with HENRY, and it's not up there with the next rung of excellent serial killer movies... say something like ANGST or HIGHWAYMEN. The pacing is a little laboured, and there are passages of ropey dialogue. But VISITING HOURS is a very good movie. It certainly is stupidly underrated, and is definitely worth checking out for a well-directed slice of slimy horror.
Ironside is strong as the killer (Colt Hawker), whose desire to kill comes from a terrible childhood and an abusive father. He identifies with his father, and loathes women because his mother threw boiling water over his Pa's face. Seems a bit of a stretch, but it wouldn't be the first time sometimes chosen the abuser over the person they abuse.
Colt becomes a misogynist, and turns his attention onto Deborah Ballin, who speaks out against violence towards women. She's a little militant about it and annoys a few people, so it's hard for the cops to figure out that Colt is the one hunting her down.
Some of the kill scenes are genuinely affecting. Colt likes to takes pictures of his victims as they're dying, and one - where he pulls a breathing tube from an elderly lady - is harrowing. Don't forget that Ironside was great in STARSHIP TROPPERS and brilliant in TOTAL RECALL as the supremely slimy Richter, and he excels in a similar role here. It's pretty baffling why Ironside ended up in TV series/movie hell given his excellence in playing the bad guy. Just the luck of the draw.
But the main plus of VISITING HOURS is that it's incredibly well shot. It's wildly voyeuristic, with lots of uncomfortable close-ups and point-of-view shots... and lots of lingering on people's suffering. The director - Jean-Claude Lord - has made nothing else of note. Even his name rhymes in a comedic way. Lord started out in France, then ended up doing US TV movies. But VISITING HOURS has a slight Hitchcock vibe and the level of voyeurism that makes you feel a little grubby just watching the damn movie.
I'm not saying VISITING HOURS is a classic. It's not up there with HENRY, and it's not up there with the next rung of excellent serial killer movies... say something like ANGST or HIGHWAYMEN. The pacing is a little laboured, and there are passages of ropey dialogue. But VISITING HOURS is a very good movie. It certainly is stupidly underrated, and is definitely worth checking out for a well-directed slice of slimy horror.
LE TROU is based on the series noir novel by real-life ex-crim Jose Giovanni. Giovanni escaped from prison in 1947 (and was quickly re-captured) and LE TROU is an account of the break-out. It even goes as far as to cast one of Giovanni's fellow escapees in one of the parts - as "Roland" - in the movie.
LE TROU starts with four guys holed up in a jail cell built for just two, when yet another prisoner is shoved in with them. They're surprisingly friendly to the guy and the guards, eagerly accepting such exciting jobs as folding up cardboard boxes. Claude, the new guy, is a little uneasy... and begins to question them about it. They eventually reveal that they are planning an escape. The stacks of unfolded cardboard boxes are designed to cover the hole they intend to dig.
Other than Claude, the film is played by non-actors... which is often seen as a weird badge of honour with films (SOMERS TOWN etc.). Truth is, casting real people in roles often leads to disastrous movies. For every classic you remember (such as the real folks in WISE BLOOD) there's tens of terrible movies. Well, put LE TROU with one of the classics that pulls it off. Roland is particularly fascinating and apparently he was cast because he's really dexterous. He makes up a little mirror on a toothbrush in seconds, and that allows them to spy out of their cell's peephole to see if any guards are approaching.
The movie is full of little moments of clever touches and realism. One scene features their food packages being searched by a silent twerp with a knife on a bit of string. He slices open their care packages, their cheese, their bread, their pate (one guy gets fois gras!) to make sure there isn't anything inside them. In another scene the head guard turns a blind eye as the prisoners dispense a little justice to some prison plumbers who've stolen some of their food.
Even the bashing of the hole is very well handled. It won't be to everyone's taste - there's a lot of bashing and digging for much of the movie - but I loved that all the walls are very hard to break through. As with the guys breaking into somewhere in RIFIFI, the process is painstakingly real. And because it's so deafening and time-consuming (especially at first), you get involved with the fears of the escapees. Will the guards hear? This noise is then contrasted with incredibly quiet scenes as they try to hide from guards, magnifying the impact of each state.
The prisoners are very sympathetic. Monsignor is the funny one, Geo the tough one, Manu the leader, Roland the brains. But each character's depth grows throughout. Only Claude - as the new guy - is a little shifty, but - as he starts to pull his weight - he gradually becomes more likable. Apart from Claude's crime (accidentally shooting his wife in the shoulder), the others never reveal what they've done... you just know they're pulling long stretches. But what's also interesting - and maybe this is why they're likable - is that they never bitch that they're innocent. They accept the situation they're in, and their own fault in it. They don't want forgiveness... they just want to escape.
I watched this off the back of watching Becker's equally strong TOUCHEZ PAS AU GRISBI, and it's worth putting these (slightly lesser known) films up there with some of the other great French 50s classics... RIFIFI, DIABOLIQUES, WAGES OF FEAR etc. These French guys were really chugging out some movies in the 50s that were the match of the great American noirs of the era. Go on, get your reading glasses on and give a chance to subtitled noir classics like LE TROU.
LE TROU starts with four guys holed up in a jail cell built for just two, when yet another prisoner is shoved in with them. They're surprisingly friendly to the guy and the guards, eagerly accepting such exciting jobs as folding up cardboard boxes. Claude, the new guy, is a little uneasy... and begins to question them about it. They eventually reveal that they are planning an escape. The stacks of unfolded cardboard boxes are designed to cover the hole they intend to dig.
Other than Claude, the film is played by non-actors... which is often seen as a weird badge of honour with films (SOMERS TOWN etc.). Truth is, casting real people in roles often leads to disastrous movies. For every classic you remember (such as the real folks in WISE BLOOD) there's tens of terrible movies. Well, put LE TROU with one of the classics that pulls it off. Roland is particularly fascinating and apparently he was cast because he's really dexterous. He makes up a little mirror on a toothbrush in seconds, and that allows them to spy out of their cell's peephole to see if any guards are approaching.
The movie is full of little moments of clever touches and realism. One scene features their food packages being searched by a silent twerp with a knife on a bit of string. He slices open their care packages, their cheese, their bread, their pate (one guy gets fois gras!) to make sure there isn't anything inside them. In another scene the head guard turns a blind eye as the prisoners dispense a little justice to some prison plumbers who've stolen some of their food.
Even the bashing of the hole is very well handled. It won't be to everyone's taste - there's a lot of bashing and digging for much of the movie - but I loved that all the walls are very hard to break through. As with the guys breaking into somewhere in RIFIFI, the process is painstakingly real. And because it's so deafening and time-consuming (especially at first), you get involved with the fears of the escapees. Will the guards hear? This noise is then contrasted with incredibly quiet scenes as they try to hide from guards, magnifying the impact of each state.
The prisoners are very sympathetic. Monsignor is the funny one, Geo the tough one, Manu the leader, Roland the brains. But each character's depth grows throughout. Only Claude - as the new guy - is a little shifty, but - as he starts to pull his weight - he gradually becomes more likable. Apart from Claude's crime (accidentally shooting his wife in the shoulder), the others never reveal what they've done... you just know they're pulling long stretches. But what's also interesting - and maybe this is why they're likable - is that they never bitch that they're innocent. They accept the situation they're in, and their own fault in it. They don't want forgiveness... they just want to escape.
I watched this off the back of watching Becker's equally strong TOUCHEZ PAS AU GRISBI, and it's worth putting these (slightly lesser known) films up there with some of the other great French 50s classics... RIFIFI, DIABOLIQUES, WAGES OF FEAR etc. These French guys were really chugging out some movies in the 50s that were the match of the great American noirs of the era. Go on, get your reading glasses on and give a chance to subtitled noir classics like LE TROU.