Angels With Dirty Faces

Synopsis: A gangster returns to the neighborhood from his childhood days after 15 years in jail. He finds his old friend is now the priest in the area, and is trying to lead the "Dead End Kids" away from a life of crime.

I love efficient story telling, and that's often what you get from these classic films from the 30's and 40's. Angels With Dirty Faces is certainly no exception. Michael Curtiz directed, and he gives a good pace to the movie. With just the scenes necessary for the plot of the movie, Curtiz is able to develop characters who have depth. There might have been a little too much of the Dead End Kids in the middle part of the movie, but that's a small qualm.

To help Curtiz with the character development, James Cagney gives a signature performance as Rocky Sullivan, a gangster returning to the neighborhood of his youth. Cagney is able to portray this gangster as a very likable character, where most of the audience will be pulling for him. But Sullivan is also intimidating and unafraid to commit terrible acts. It is thanks to Cagney's performance that Rocky Sullivan is a complex character and this movie succeeds.

The movie follows Rocky Sullivan and his return to gangster life. He becomes a celebrity among the local youth (The Dead End Kids), which troubles Father Connolly. Connolly and Sullivan are long time friends, and their friendship is refreshing to see on screen - each looking past their moral difference. In most movies we would see the priest judge the criminal, or perhaps the criminal feel inadequate to be friends with a priest. Angels with Dirty Faces does not dive in to that black & white world. It instead remains in a complex world where we don't have all the answers.

The end of the movie is powerful, and honestly one of the better endings to any movie. The death of Rocky Sullivan is a powerful scene that draws real emotion from the viewer. Thankfully Curtiz didn't overdraw the emotion by giving us closeups of Cagney suffering. I think he actually draws more emotion from viewers by not showing Cagney at all, but instead giving us shadows and shots of people watching him.

This particular scene gives us an interesting look at redemption and sacrifice. I don't know if God forgives Rocky Sullivan at the end of this movie. But I do know that Rocky Sullivan denied himself, and in a sense sacrificed his life on earth. That in itself is not cause for redemption with God, but it seems like something that would be done by a redeemed soul. I guess like Jerry Connolly, we have hope.

Angels With Dirty Faces - 8 out of 10

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan

The Star Trek series is often about alien life, rather than human beings.  And that is obviously part of the appeal of Star Trek.  It is fun and interesting to "explore" the universe and see how other life forms might behave.  But it is when a Star Trek show or movie rises above this superficial appeal, and focuses on the humanity of its characters (even in the alien life forms), that is when Star Trek can become great.  And it does so with The Wrath of Khan. 

Wrath is especially unique because it doesn't just hit on the concept of humanity at one or two points in the movie.  It is a continual theme from beginning to end.  Largely, the movie is about life and death, and how we approach each of them.  It encourages us to face the realty of death, and become better people from it, living with a purpose and without fear.

I think the more enticing human emotion that really draws the audience into the movie is revenge.  Often in television and movies we'll see villains who are out to get revenge for one reason or another.  But rarely do we see raw emotion from these villains.  With Khan we see a man bent on destroying his nemesis.  He is willing to risk everything, including the lives of his crew, to pay back Kirk for leaving him on a desolate planet.  Yet his character manages to retain depth, as we sense a smart and caring man behind the rage.  It is raw and it is beautiful.  And it is the character of Khan that really brings life to the battle between him and Kirk.



It is interesting to see sacrifice as the opposing force to Khan's revenge.  Khan is willing to risk everybody to kill Kirk.  And Kirk&Spok are willing to risk themselves to save everyone. In the end we see sacrifice play out to the ultimate end.  It is a fitting ending to a movie about life and death.  And also a convenient ending to continue the next installment of the Star Trek series.  Unfortunately until 2009's Star Trek, no other Star Trek movies took humanity as seriously as The Wrath of Khan.

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan - 7 out of 10.

Made

Jon Favreau wrote and directed Made on the heels of the highly successful Swingers.  So it's no surprise that Favreau wrote nearly identical characters for him and Vince Vaughn to play in Made.  But instead of playing the dating game in Los Angeles, Favreau and Vaughn enter the world of organized crime in New York City. 

The script and the acting were large reasons for the success of Swingers, and the same tools are what give Made a life of its own.  The dialogue feels real and lends itself to efficient character development.  It doesn't take long for us to understand who Bobby (Favreau) and Ricky (Vaughn) are and what motivates them.  In only a few short scenes we see that Bobby loves his girlfriend Jessica and her daughter Chloe, and that he doesn't like what he or Jessica are doing for a living.  Not only do we understand this, but we believe it.  There is a great scene probably less than a minute long where Bobby cooks dinner for Chloe, and it's a wonderful little scene that pays dividends as the story comes back to Chloe later in the movie.

Ricky is hilarious, much like Vaughn's character in Swingers.  He is a ladies man who is quite talkative and selfish, but he also loves his best friend.  There is a small stretch in the middle of the movie where I was beginning to get tired of Vaughn's character.  The lack of self-awareness and considerateness were a bit too much.  But perhaps Favreau recognized that, because it's at this point where the movie gives us a rest from Ricky's colorful personality.

As the plot of the movie played out, it definitely held my attention and I was interested to see what would happen next.  But it is the characters that make this movie.  I cared about Bobby and Ricky, about their friendship and what was going to happen to them.  So as the climax of the movie comes and goes, the plot material was trivial compared to how the characters behaved and how the climax changed things for these two characters. 

The movie wraps up by showing us what happens to Bobby's relationship with Jessica and Chloe, and it's this scene that really makes this movie.  We see another side of both characters (Bobby and Ricky), but it's a side that we always knew was there for both of them.  It's a satisfying and heart-warming scene, which is impressive considering the movie is largely about these guys cussing at each other. 

Made - 7 out of 10

The Librarian: Quest for the Spear

I love a good adventure movie.  Indiana Jones, National Treasure, The Neverending Story...even Journey to the Center of the Earth with Brendan Fraser (yeah, seriously).  So you can understand my excitement when I got to the end of the adventure rack at Blockbuster (I know, Blockbuster is terrible) and came across this DVD cover. 

"The Librarian: Quest for the Spear".  Awesome!  You have jungle in the background.  Noah Wyle from ER is holding a cool spear that has a mystical glow.  Kyle MacLachlan from Twin Peaks is curiously peering at us behind Noah Wyle's shoulder.  I'm thinking, what are you up to, Kyle MacLachlan?  Don't dare try and double cross the librarian!"  Then you have the brunette on one side showing her back tattoo, and that one woman from Lost trying to be sexy on the other side.  Okay Librarian, I think I'm excited that this is the Extended Version! 

Then I saw the movie, and… I'm not so excited anymore.  It's not a terrible movie.  It's just not good.  I think one of the problems was that it was too over the top.  For example, the library where The Librarian works holds a secret room that protects the earth's greatest treasures.  And when we first get a look at this secret room, they show us the most incredible items, one after another, and some of them are from fiction literature!  I can understand the Ark of the Covenant and the Holy Grail, but Excalibur and Pandora's Box?  It took the film out of reality and into a fantasy land.  But for this adventure, I didn't want fantasy land.  It was kind of like Indiana Jones 4 being about aliens.  It just didn't fit with the adventure of this particular film. 

Also, the story was quite inefficient with building character.  The movie took a while to really start, because we kept hearing about Flynn Carsen's (Noah Wyle) fear of joining the real world.  He's in his 30's and still in college, blah blah blah.  It shouldn't take more than five minutes to build that part of his character.  Then when he's in the jungle with Nicole (Sonya Walger), they are walking and talking for like 15 minutes!  I think the writer knew that this would be boring, because in the middle of all the talking the two characters have to cross a rotting bridge (obviously they had to cross one of those during this movie) and they almost fall to their death.  But right after the bridge falls hundreds of feet, Flynn continues to ask about Nicole's feelings and motivations. 
 
Despite the movie's problems, I was entertained.  There was an adventure, some intrigue, and a few exciting moments.  I might even consider watching the rest of the trilogy.


The Librarian: Quest for the Spear - 5 out of 10

Unforgiven

Unforgiven (1992 - Clint Eastwood)

I typically love dark movies, and Unforgiven is no exception.  It is a cold movie about the harsh realty of death.  This is true from the very first shot of the movie, when we see William Munny digging his wife's grave.  Munny was a thief and a killer back in the day...a bad man.  But it was his pious wife who died before him.  There is no justice with death.  As Munny says at one point in the film, "we all have it coming, kid."

Munny was supposedly a changed man because of his wife.  He had not killed a man in 11 years.  Despite this, he joins a young cowboy in a mission to kill two "bad" cowboys for $1000.  Is it okay for him to kill these "bad" cowboys, because supposedly they cut up a defenseless whore?  Is he still a good person, or is he a bad guy like in his earlier years?  These answers are debatable, and this is why it's a great film.  There is no black and white, no good guys and bad guys.  It matters when people die, whether you perceive them as good or bad.  When Munny shoots the first of the two cowboys, the scene doesn't end with the successful shot.  Instead the scene is drawn out, and we see him hurt, thirsty & vulnerable.  Eastwood wants the viewer to see his humanity, that death is real for everybody. 

The film is also about the stories about the wild west.  The view of people as not being good or bad, and showing us the reality of death...they lend themselves to this film being a real portrayal of the "wild west."  We see English Bob (aka the "Duke of Death") and the author that follows him around.  We hear Little Bill's different version of the English Bob's stories.  We know about the "legend" of William Munny, and how he was such a great killer.  The film is littered with supposed legendary wild west stories.  But it seems that all the stories are hyperbole's.  None of them are real tellings of real stories.  And as we see the film play out, we get a front row seat of a real western story - the showdown between William Munny and Little Bill.  There is no honorable duel between the two.  It isn't about the one who has the quickest draw.  Instead it's a real picture of one man killing another man. 

Unforgiven - 9 out of 10

Donnie Darko

Donnie Darko (2001 - Richard Kelly)

Thanks to the magic of Digital Video Recording, I finally saw the infamous movie, Donnie Darko.  Rightly so, people would always be very surprised when I said I had not seen the movie.  They would tell me that I need to see it, preceded by "That movie is wicked," "That's a messed up movie," or something about a creepy bunny.  So I was expecting to see a different kind of movie.  But there are three thoughts I had while watching the movie that I wasn't quite expecting:
(1) Donnie Darko was the main character, and the creepy bunny was named Frank - not the other way around. 
(2) The movie is largely about life and God
(3) It is an extremely good movie

There is a particular scene in the movie where Donnie and Frank finally have a conversation, and the following dialogue takes place...

Donnie: "Why are you wearing that stupid bunny suit"
Frank: "Why are you wearing that stupid man suit"

Donnie asks the question that everyone in the audience is curious about.  What is the deal with the creepy bunny costume?  We don't get a straight answer because it is a superficial question and the movie is anything but superficial.  The question we should be asking, which Frank does ask, is "Why are you wearing that stupid man suit?"  This is a question for us, for you and me.  Why are you wearing that stupid man suit.  Who are you?  Where does your identity lie?  Why are you trying to hide your iniquities?  Stop judging other people and start looking at your own life. 

One thing that makes this movie great is that it subtly asks those questions to the audience, and simultaneously gives us an example.  Look at the character of Jim Cunningham.  His job is to help people get closer to the love end of the fear-love scale that he created.  He supposedly empowers people by overcoming their fears.  And he gives the impression that he has no problems because he has overcome his fears.  Then his house burns down and he is forced to share his personal life…we see that he is into child pornography.  Jim Cunningham, why are you wearing that stupid man suit? 

In addition to the depth of Donnie Darko, it is an entertaining movie.  It keeps the audience curious about what will happen next, and especially what will happen in 28 days, 6 hours, 42 minutes and 12 seconds.  The occurrences of Frank are each creepy and intriguing.  And the combination of Donnie's schizophrenic tendencies and time travel ideas stop you from forming an indefinite idea of where this movie is going.  It could easily go either way and be a believable and acceptable way for the movie to go. 

Many great movies make you think by asking deep questions without actually asking them.  This is what Donnie Darko does, and that's why it's not just a good movie, but a great movie. 

Donnie Darko - 8 out of 10

Vertigo

Vertigo (1958 - Alfred Hitchcock)

It is difficult for me to understand the so called "greatness" of the film, Vertigo. Let me go through step-by-step why Vertigo is a bad movie:

1. The movie has the wrong tone. The story is extremely dark, but the movie does not have a dark tone to it. All elements of this film (music, lighting, cinematography, etc) are played out as either a thriller or an epic romance, and Vertigo is really neither of those things...it's a dark drama with a mystery plot twist.

2. The characters are unlikable. Scotty falls in love with 'Madeleine', who he thinks is married to his friend - yet he doesn't seem to have any guilt or remorse about it. Then he meets Judy, who he thinks is a different person, and he basically wants to turn her into 'Madeliene'. That is quite obsessive and unhealthy, to a point where I don't think the audience should be sympathizing with his character. On the other hand we have Judy. She collaberated with Gavin to kill the real Madeleine. And the only regret she seems to have is losing Scotty - not the fact that she helped murder a person. So the two characters in this movie that we are supposed to sympathize with are both unlikable characters with no redeeming value. It seems that the movie is trying to give them redeeming value by them being in love with each other - which not only is bad logic, but doesn't work anyway.

3. The romance is unromantic and unrealistic. Watching the first part of the movie, it appears to be a mystery. The movie directs the viewer to be thinking about this mystery involving Madeleine being taken over by the ghost of Colette. So the romance that develops between Scotty and 'Madeleine' is secondary. Additionally, this romance dies to the viewer after 'Madeleine' is thrown off the tower. It only lives in Scotty, which seems strange and obsessive, as is explained above. We don't really see any romance that happens between Scotty and Judy, all we see are his obsessions of him wanting her to look like Madeleine. So this romance never really takes hold of the film - in the first part it is secondary to the plot and in the second part it is an obsession and not a romance.

4. Bad storytelling - poor development of plot & characters. If Vertigo is to be used in any film courses, it should be used as an example of inefficient story telling. This movie drags on for over 2 hours, yet the characters and plot are under-developed. Look at the scenes where Scotty is following 'Madeleine' - there are many unneeded and lengthy shots to portray a few pieces of information. We don't need to see the cars driving and parking to and from every place; we don't need to see a bunch of facial expressions on Scotty's face; we don't need a couple of minutes at every scene. It was just so long, and there are 2 or 3 sequences like that! As a viewer, we gained some information to the plot and that's about it. Then when Scotty gets out of the mental ward, he goes to every one of these same places and mistakenly sees 'Madeleine' like 3 or 4 times! I mean that whole sequence wasn't even needed considering that Scotty's friend verbally said that he was still in love with 'Madeleine' when she was leaving the mental ward. It's just so redundant without any point of being redundant other than to hit us over the head with simple information such as "He is following her" or "He's still in love with Madeleine".

5. The music is horrible. I hate the music, although I will admit many classic films have bad scores in my opinion. But even if you like the music, some of it completely doesn't fit. It has overly dramatic, sweeping epic romance music for scenes between Scotty & Madeleine/Judy. That is totally uncalled for in this movie where the romance is very unlike the sweeping epic romances like in Gone With the Wind. It's not even a romance, like I explained above. I mean, are we really supposed to buy into the idea that Scotty and Judy are in love after he makes her dress up exactly like 'Madeleine'? It is ridiculous.

6. Poor motivation/closure for the end scene. At the end of the movie, Judy jumps off the tower. I could understand it if she jumped because she can't live with herself for being responsible for someone's death and never being able to gain the love of Scotty. But she doesn't jump for these reasons, at least the movie didn't portray it that way in my opinion. She seemingly jumps out of fear from someone walking up the stairs. The person walking up turned out to be a nun, which has nothing to do with the movie. Additionally, there really wasn't anybody that should have evoked such fear in Judy - the only person she could have been fearful of was Scotty, who was right there, obviously not about to kill her. And how does jumping and killing yourself help anything...if anyone was going to kill her up there, it would have likely been by pushing her off the tower. It is just so mind boggingly stupid that she jumped off that tower! But the ending alone wasn't bad, the entire movie was bad.

Vertigo - 2 out of 10