F. Poole

Comparisons to Terrence Malick, though always some-what appropriate, are now legitimized by Undertow. In this instance Malick is actually credited as a producer on the film (purportedly because he penned the original story idea). This makes sense, in any case, as Green, though more prolific, has reached a point where it is time for him to do his Badlands. Undertow certainly could be it. Here Green branches out (almost literally as the film progresses) toward structure and plot, from his typically brilliant and narrative-shy style of direction.

The acting is as incredible as ever. It sounds cruel, but I never thought Dermot Mulroney could be so great (particularly after About Schmidt). Josh Lucas is also totally incredible. Make-up and hair on this one deserve chops for these two guys. Also, as could probably be expected, David Gordon Green proves that he is one of the best actors of younger talent out there.

Tim Orr's cinematography, here in collaboration with Richard A. Wright's production design, only seems to grow better with time. His ability to capture the beautiful natural light in each location, particularly interiors early in the film, is outstanding. Perhaps by virtue of editing by Zene Baker and Steven Gonzales, even out of focus shots appear intentional and appropriate in the aesthetic environment of the picture. The only issue as far as image is concerned is that, due to the digital intermediate (or just my imagination on only one viewing), there seemed to be a graininess or noisiness to certain shots.

If there's anything to legitimately complain about on this one, it's that at certain points the typical Philip Glass score seems dramatically inappropriate to the themes of the movie or the actions taking place. I'm sure he hates the comparison but, during some parts of his composition I was half imagining shots from other films where Glass's score was perfect: a classic Ron Fricke time-lapse shot of New York City as cars fly through the streets, in Koyaanisqatsi, or Julianne Moore lying on a hotel bed waiting to die as the room fills with water, in The Hours.

Overall, this is an excellent picture and will hopefully mark a transition to something new with DGG.

Before I start citing better super-hero movies (there are several), I would just like to say that while I found this film to be highly derivative of its counterparts (as well as of other genres), I must say that I was totally impressed that the entire audience applauded when the picture ended. Of course, this was an afternoon matinee on a Saturday so seven tenths of the audience was under the age of ten which means that most people there were not old enough to remember how good Batman was (let alone Superman).

On only his third attempt to sell out, and even following a Kevin Costner vehicle, Sam Raimi has finally hit his crowd pleaser. Hell, if Ron Howard can go from Grinch to Oscar in just two pictures then just about anything you can imagine should be possible.

I'm going to keep this simple. I didn't hate this movie. At times I found myself enjoying it, thinking that things could be much worse. In fact, for all of its shortcomings (which follow) I must confess that the filmmakers did a fine job of establishing a mood and aesthetic for this super-hero movie that is all-together much brighter than most other super-hero movies. But after the picture let out, I couldn't think of one thing that I really liked about the film.

So what's wrong? A lot of the acting was bad though. Raimi's charm as a character director seemed absent save for Bruce Campbell's wrestling emcee. To any Raimi fan, this would come as no surprise. Dunst, who was brilliant in Jordan's Interview with the Vampire, was flat and managed to salvage nothing of an already terrible (and empty-headed) female character, Mary Jane. (Rachel True's Mary Jane was superior in the 1998's pot comedy, Half-Baked.) Tobey McGuire, and Willem Defoe are capable of much, much more. I shouldn't need to cite references here. Semi-newcomer James Franco's performance was probably the least disappointing of the lot, though his character was likely the weakest.

(WARNING *** SOME MINOR SPOILING AHEAD ****)

Several narrative elements seem to be drawing on and owing their success to other better movies with similar ideas. For example, Peter Parkers metamorphosis process may remind some viewers of David Cronenberg's most commercial picture, The Fly. In another sequence, Franco comes home to the sound of his father screaming upstairs in their cavernous home; a moment reminiscent of Kubrick's film, The Shining, when Wendy hears Jack screaming in the main hall.

(NO MORE SPOILING)

Then there's Elfman's score. Boy howdy! It was probably the most derivative element of the entire film! It sounded pretty much like EVERY OTHER Danny Elfman score, except for the ones where he rips off John Williams, like Good Will Hunting.

Lastly, there was simply too much CG. Hollywood action movies seem to have degraded to an intellectual level that sinks beneath 3-D light shows and firework ceremonies. The cynics will feel that this has always been true...but I contend that the richness of characters, performance, and story lines in Superman and Batman will forever be far superior to the CG smoke and mirrors that make attractions like Spider-man earn $41 million dollars on their respective opening weekends.

Enough said on Spider-man. Decide for yourselves...and before you take issue with my point of view on this piece, watch Superman.

It's so hard to find any of Kon Ichikawa's later films in this country that I wouldn't want to discourage anyone from watching The 8 Tomb Village, should the opportunity arise. Nevertheless I felt that it was sub-par for a director like Ichikawa whose mastery of the medium deserves a great deal more notice than it has received.

The Walt Disney influence definitely comes through in The 8 Tomb Village (as it does in Dora-Heita) and dominates the picture's aesthetic, particularly the mood. It also did not seem to be as sophisticated or complex as some of his other films like Enjo, Kagi, or even Watashi wa Ni-sei. This is not necessarily a bad thing, but since there is a twenty-five year gap in my familiarity with Ichikawa (from Tokyo Olympiad 'til now) perhaps there is something I'm missing. Also, I'm not sure that the transfer I saw (a dub of a Japanese DVD) was the greatest possible quality.

Nevertheless, Ichikawa's characters are typically quirky and a pleasure to watch as they inhabit their peculiar little world. A must for Ichikawa fans, but definitely not a place to start for those that are unfamiliar with this unknown (in the West) master.