Key Largo (1948) *****

Key Largo is a film noir piece set in the Florida Keys where Frank McCloud (Humphrey Bogart) arrives to visit the family of a fellow soldier that died during the war (Lionel Berrymore and Lauren Bacall). Problems arise when the gangster Johnny Rocco (Edward G. Robinson) has holed up the hotel run by the family, waiting to sneak back into the country after being deported. Add into this the hurricane that will be making a direct hit on the south Florida island.

Whenever you get John Huston and Humphrey Bogart together you’re going to get something special and Key Largo isn’t any different. The film has a deep noir feel, yet it transplants itself from the typical locale of seedy neighborhoods of the inner cities to what was a more quiet area that becomes isolated even further by the hurricane hitting. Bogart is the reluctant hero, beaten down by the war and the post war world that wanders into this situation by accident. He’s not looking for trouble, but is prepared to deal with it if necessary. There is an attraction between McCloud and Nora (Bacall, the groomless fiancé), but nothing really comes to fruition due to the situation they’re in, giving us believably that wasn’t seen in films of this era. There’s too much going on for this people to become romantic. Other circumstances may allow it, but not this set. Of course, Edward G. Robinson playing an egocentric gangster is his calling card. He’s great in the role and plays it over the top when needed, but still has the ability to tone it down when the situation requires.

Key Largo is a movie that builds onto itself, with a kind of snowball effect that compounds itself as the film goes on. There is a sense of claustrophobia when the film begins, that opens up as the film rolls on right along as Johnny Rocco loses control of the situation. And yes, the hurricane represents a huge character in the film is the boss over all that it surveys. Huston plays this card, but doesn’t over play it, a great move by a master. Key largo is one for the ages, a great noir piece that paces great with wonderful acting. A testament to all of those involved in the film.

Class of 1984 (1982) **

In the early 1980’s high schools in the United States had a reputation of being filthy, violent places that were overrun by gangs of rebellious students that can’t be expelled for one reason or another (why these hardened criminals would want to hang out a high school all day is beyond me). Films such as Teachers, 3 O’Clock High, and others regurgitated that idea throughout the early part of the decade. Class of 1984 is another member of that genre. The formula follows and idealistic teacher (Perry King) that represents a young go getter, ready to change the world by teaching. You need a leader of the thugs (Timothy Van Patten) who gets into a conflict with the idealistic teacher and drags that person down to his level in the end. The idealistic teacher has to have a spouse (Merrie Lynn Ross) that is semi oblivious until the danger appears at the front doorstep. Finally, you must have the older, fed up teacher (Roddy McDowell) that serves as a mentor to the young, idealistic teacher, but will probably end up a sacrifice to fuel the revenge fire.

Class of 1984 is an average film from this genre. Very predictable if you’ve seen any film like this from the 1980’s. The only standout in the film is the performance by Roddy McDowell, who pushes his character beyond its generic function. Otherwise, the film doesn’t really stand out from any high school centered version of Death Wish. Class of 1984 serves its purpose more as a time capsule of the era than delivering anything new. This is a totally forgettable film.

Big Trouble In Little China (1986) ****

Big Trouble In Little China is a film where our perceived hero Jack Burton (Kurt Russell) isn’t really heroic at all. He’s actually a buffoon that’s pulled into an extraordinary situation with Wang Chi (Dennis Dun) being the true hero of the film. Jack acts like he knows what he’s doing, but he’s as clueless as anyone thrown into this situation, making a refreshing look from this fantasy/karate hybrid.

The film opens with Jack accompanying his friend Wang to the airport to pick up Wang’s love of his life. In the hectic arrival of a loaded airplane, she is kidnapped and after running into Gracie (Kim Catrall), who has some kind of involvement in the situation, Jack and Wang travel to Chinatown in an attempt to save his love, but stumble onto an otherworldly fight by Lao Pan (James Hong) to use the green eyed girl to restore his flesh. A mishmash of kung fu and fantasy follows as they attempt to stop Lao Pan’s misuse of Wang’s lady.

Big Trouble is a fun movie to watch. The film has a great flow to it, even though when examining just the plot itself leaves a kind of clunky feel as you run it through your head. John Carpenter smooths over the rough edges by giving us great visuals (even by today’s standards) and very nice acting work, particularly from Russell. As I said before, Jack Burton is not the hero of this film. He’s more of a loud mouth that is lost in this underworld of Chinatown and it’s a wonderful look at how the presumed hero may not be the sharpest knife in the drawer. It really is a great performance from Russell, cementing his trilogy of John Carpenter films.

After revisiting this film a thought occurred to me. With all of the movies that are making a return after being defunct for 30+ years Big Trouble in Little China is a film that I see that could succeed by doing something like this. After 30 years I was still left wanting more from this story and these characters. This is one of these films that makes its own kind of definition and really makes a good impression on a viewer. A fine ‘80’s ditty.

The Lost Weekend (1945) *****

Looking  at the films of the 1940’s. many of these films featured high society types in zany situations, gallivanting between set up and set up and setting up the lunacy of life as something to mesmerize by the viewing public. Movies were kind of like TMZ is today. In The Lost Weekend director Billy Wilder gives us a look into the fall from grace of writer Dan Birnam  (Ray Milland) caused by his raging alcoholism. The title of the film has a double meaning when watching the film. It could refer to the weekend holiday planned for Dan and his brother Wick (Phillip Terry) that Dan ruins by alienating his brother with his alcoholic ways or, the more obvious answer, the fact that this weekend ends up lost to Dan in an alcoholic haze. Even after all of the turmoil and disheartening that’s caused by Dan’s dependence of the bottle, his best girl Helen (Jane Wyman) still holds out hope that Dan can be saved from his affliction, going so far as sleeping on the steps outside his apartment that is financed by his brothers charity.

This film is really about the fall and rise of one man. Dan has been an alcoholic for six years and even though we haven’t followed him that entire time, other than flashbacks to watershed moments in his relationship with Helen that always include a bottle or two, it’s this weekend that represents the fork in the road that Dan has been working towards all of his life. The film depicts how desperate a person can be in any addictions, not just alcohol. Eventually the addiction even kills Dan’s dreams and wants to the point where all he cares about are the rings left on the bar top by his whiskey glass. Dan has pathetically hit rock bottom.

Ray Milland deservedly won the Academy Award for Best Actor for his portrayal of Dan. It’s a real haunting performance that becomes the focus throughout the film. Everyone else is reacting to Dan’s behavior and each of the personality types are represented. The brother who gives up. The girl that stands with him no matter what. The disagreeing, yet enabling bar tender. This film is as much about following Dan’s story as it’s an examination of how people react to an alcoholic, almost comparable to the stages of grief if we compared it to anything at all. Some people can take it and some can’t. This is Ray Milland’s film though and he creates a presence where the audience feels those same feelings that those in relationships with Dan feel. Anger, disgust, sympathy, maybe a little guilt. It’s all there for us to dissect in our heads.

Director Billy Wilder (who also won an Oscar, as did the film itself as Best Picture of 1945) achieves a remarkable feat when making this film. Dan, who is surrounded by the people in his life and living in New York City is hopelessly alone in his addiction throughout the film. There are times, especially when we’re in the apartment, that Dan feels like he’s a million miles away locked in a claustrophobic filled tomb of alcoholism. This really pushes the film over the top into being a great achievement. Instead of hazy shots and wobbly cameras, Wilder opts to go with the feeling of being an alcoholic. Not the surface feeling of being tipsy, but the never ending alone feeling that no drink can every wash away.

The Lost Weekend is one of the best films to come from the 1940’s. It’s a tale about alcoholism and addiction, but it doesn’t talk down to the audience. This is not a temperance sermon, but an exploration into the soul of a man darkened by drink. A true masterpiece.

Black Mass (2015) ***1/2

Black Mass is Scott Cooper’s bio-pic about the legendary Boston gangster Jimmy “Whitey” Bulger (Johnny Depp) and his reign as the most feared man in Boston. Bulger takes an unconventional route to the top by not only being the brother to State Senator Billy Bulger (Benedict Cumberbatch), but he is also an informant for F.B.I. agent John Connolly (Joel Edgerton). The film follows the two decades of Bulger using his law enforcement contacts to protect himself and his business. Whitey may have been a rough and tough guy, but he was far more intelligent than he is given credit for.

Depp plays Bulger with a kind of resolve and immersion that we haven’t seen from the actor in a long time. To rob Breaking Bad, he becomes the danger. People fear him and he knows it with Depp playing the role perfectly. It also turns out that this story also belongs to Edgerton’s character, who feels the link to South Boston, but unwittingly falls into the corruption of the Bulger organization without even himself realizing it. The film is not so much a cat and mouse film as it’s seeing what Bulger can get away with next, and he gets away with quite a bit. Most of the performances in the film are spot on and give the film a richness it needs.

The issues that come with this film are in the presentation of the story. For a quarter of a century people have tried to reinvent the vibe from Goodfellas (even Martin Scorsese is a known offender). Black Mass is no different and it pulls you from the story because it feels like the director is trying too hard to recapture past gangster film triumphs. There’s a reason why we never see films attempt to repeat The Godfather’s karma- many have failed and are lost to our memories. Black mass may go beyond going down the drain of films forgotten, but it still feels forced. Add to that the connections between this film and Scorsese’s The Departed and you add to the issue.

A word of warning when watching this film. If you have seen The Departed you will be reminded of bits and pieces from that film. Of course The Departed is a re-make of the Asian film Infernal Affairs and the broad premise of the film is based on Bulger’s life, which doesn’t help in the matter. It will take the first forty minutes of the film to go by before you stop comparing it to The Departed, taking away from the experience I’m afraid. Overall the film is a well acted piece that really tries too hard to be a classic gangster film. This will probably be a forgotten piece in five years time, reminding you of its existence on late night television. This is really a shame because Depp’s performance is one of his best in recent memory and shouldn’t be thrown away and forgotten. A well acted film that fails to really capture the audience because none of the characters are very sympathetic. A missed opportunity.

Batman v Superman: Dawn Of Justice (2016) ***

Hot on the heels of Marvel, Batman v Superman is a planned set-up/reboot film to launch the DC cinematic universe, because we need more comic book based films. What better catalyst than having your two most iconic figures at each other's throats for 2 plus hours while throwing in other characters to slowly build the Justice League.

In the aftermath of Superman's (Henry Cavill) battle in Metropolis the country has become town between those that worship the visitor and those who see him as a menace. Bruce Wayne (Ben Affleck), who witnessed one of his buildings filled with employees destroyed in the epic fight and grows to loathe the power that Superman wields. This animosity builds to the point that they are bound to battle each other at some point in the film. Throw in the mysterious Diana Prince (Gal Gadot) and the evil mastermind Lex Luthor (Jesse Eisenberg).

To address the topic, I had my reservations about Ben Affleck playing Batman. Daredevil still lingers on every one's minds and I feared that the choice for the Caped Crusader would pull the film down. Much to my surprise, Affleck steps into the role of Bruce Wayne/Batman and actually does a great job with it. His cynical, middle aged take on the Dark Knight is different from Christopher Nolan's vision of a panther-like Batman. Affleck is like a tank with some sweet moves. Paired with Alfred (Jeremy Irons) Batman segments of the film are fun.

As for Cavill, he plays Superman the same as the last movie. I can't really complain, but he seems to brood more than Batman, causing a real dislike to develop of the character. We'll get to the writing in a moment.

I wish I could say more about Gal Gadot, but she only has a few scenes and a few lines. When she is on screen she gives an Amazonian presence that is needed to project Wonder Woman. She is probably the most under utilized talent in this film. 

This brings me to Jesse Eisenberg as Lex Luthor. I'll say it, this is one of the worst casting decisions since John Wayne played Genghis Khan. This role was wasted on him. There's no other way to describe it. When he was on screen he took me out of the movie.

Probably the biggest flaw in this film is the story structure. There is way to much going on, making me wonder why this wasn't split into two films. Two admissions equal twice the $, so let's do it. The early sequences with Batman are great and during the length of the film I kept thinking that this would make a great Batman movie. When we cut to Superman plot points the film drags, like putting the brakes on. Where we had fun with Batman, we were in the doldrums elsewhere. Slowly, as the film begins to blend the two together the film dissolves into basic writing bordering on camp. The first half of the film is much stronger than the second half. Wonder Woman's role gets no real explanation and Lex Luthor's motivation is so convoluted that you wonder what the point of it all happens to be. The script is a definite take the good, take the bad moment.

Adding it all up, Zack Snyder's Batman v Superman is an acceptable film. There are worse films and there are better. This would have been a wonderful picture if the film had been consistent in quality, but that really denigrates the experience for the audience. Walking out of the theater the crowd was a mixed lot. Some people enjoyed the film, others hated it and let their opinion be heard. I have to say the movie is OK. Just OK. Too bad it could have been so much more.

Guess Who's Coming To Dinner (1967) ****

Representing the swan song of Spencer Tracy and solidifying Sidney Poitier’s resume, Guess Who’s Coming To Dinner is an examination of the changes going on during the mid to late 1960’s. The film has a very basic premise in which young Joey (Katherine Houghton) comes home from a trip to Hawaii with John Prentice (Poitier) to meet her parents (Tracy and Katherine Hepburn). What follows is the conflicted feelings that go along with the changing times of the 1960’s. John will not marry Joey without the consent of her parents. Her parents are unsure about giving consent, not due to their own racism, but due to the fear of how difficult their life will be as an interracial couple. Added in are the two cents of everyone around the family. True, this can be a comedy at times, but it’s more a look at the old guard facing the new guard.

Directed by the legendary Stanley Kramer, the film represents a kind of social experiment. Let’s drop ‘60’s progressivism on the nuclear family of the 1950’s (although the privileged life of the Drayton’s is far from nuclear). The Drayton’s are not conservative minded individuals, but very left leaning. Still, they fear for their daughter and how that current state of the world would react to them. Tracy delivers his final performance with a flourish and considering his death was imminent brings even greater power to his role. Add to the fact that this is one final pairing with Katherine Hepburn makes it even more bitter sweet. Hepburn also mesmerizes on the screen as the mother giddy over her daughter’s upcoming nuptials, yet fearful at the same time. Once again Poitier proves that he is one of the greatest actors of this era, a witty and likeable presence that thinks things out for the protection of others. The only real negative of the film is Houghton’s performance as Joey, which comes across as very snotty and annoying. Whether it was written this way or not, you can almost feel like maybe John would be better of with not being tied to her in some instances.

I asked myself a question while watching this film. Have we moved forward in the last half century compared to our ideals? In some ways we have. Interracial marriage is not illegal in seven states, as the film reminds us. There’s very little stigma related to it anymore, other than the old school and uneducated. The thing is that it feels like where we have progressed as a society, we’re still slipping in other areas. To avoid making this review an ideology discussion I’ll stop there. Guess Who’s Coming To Dinner is a time capsule of the ‘60’s and represents one of the greatest psychological battles of all time. When your ideals come home how are you going to react?