Heaven's Gate - make up your own mind

4/16/16 Heaven's Gate, 1980, #98 BBC

I am going to be perfectly honest -  Heaven's Gate did not suck. Yes, it was long and maybe the four editors could have cut a little more, but I have seen worse. Much worse. I was concerned because I remember when Heaven's Gate was released and it was eviscerated in the press for being too long (the version I watched was almost four hours long), too wandering in its story, and ego ride for writer/director/head narcissist Michael Cimino (Deer Hunter), and just not very good. Growing up on all of that, I was totally shocked to see the movie had made the BBC's 100 Best American Films (I have to say, I am putting less and less faith in this particular list, but I'm too far gone to quit).

The movie opens in 1870 in Boston, Massachusetts with a college graduation from Harvard University, focusing on two friends, Billy Irvine (John Hurt) and Jim Averill (Kris Kristofferson). There's a lot of laughing, not a lot of dialogue and then some unintelligible speeches (at least to me) from the serious and pious Reverend Doctor (Joseph Cotton) and the drunk Billy. The opening scene is about 10-15 minutes and I have no idea why it's there unless it's to show the privilege that produces Billy and Jim, but there is no need for the drawn out scene. We are then magically transported out West where we see a town flooded with immigrants from all over Europe, most of them not faring very well. I had a little problem with the geography because it sounded to me like they kept referring visits to St. Louis, which is in Missouri, but it turns out that most of the story is set in Wyoming; they are not close to one another. Anyway, once I left that distraction behind, I focused on the movie. Billy and Averill are both out in Wyoming; Billy is some kind of gentleman/businessman and Averill is the marshal. It seems the immigrants are stealing cattle to survive, either for food, or some believe for favors at the local brothel. This is spurring on a high level of anti-immigrant feelings, leading to killings and a plan for a mass execution, headed by Frank Canton (Sam Waterston) of the cattle association, and his orders are carried out by Nate Campion (Christopher Walken). Oh, and the woman who runs the brothel, Ella Watson (Isabelle Huppert in her American film debut), is having a relationship with Averill AND Campion (the good thing is she doesn't charge Averill, but she does charge Campion for her favors - apparently that shows she has more feelings for Averill). Most of the movie seems to drag on with fights, drinking, and a rolling skating music video at Heaven's Gate, the local roller rink owned by John L. Bridges (Jeff Bridges). Yes, the movie is named after a roller skating rink, or maybe it's the other way around. The last hour of the movie is actually the best, things start to happen, and it leads to this incredibly violent and crazy shootout with the immigrants and those against the cattle association go on the offensive against the cattle association and their hired hands. It's very chaotic, and not very organized; wagons weren't designed to run in tight circles over and over, so of course they tip and it seemed more people were killed because of runaway wagons or horses. Before this all transpired, Averill quit as marshal and was ready to head back East, but his conscience gets the best of him, and he joins the immigrants and helps them construct Roman inspired war machines and gives them a brief boost, but it's not enough.

Enough about the story. The movie has an incredible cast, many of them in the early days of their careers or just before they hit it big. Waterston is refreshingly evil and unlikable as Canton, he makes you forget his longtime role as Jack McCoy. Kristofferson was nominated for a Razzie for Worst Actor, but I didn't think he was terrible; I think the role required a restrained performance with a lot below the surface. Sometimes I thought the issue was more with the script than his acting. Isabelle Huppert was my favorite actor in the movie as Ella Watson; maybe it was the French accent, but I like to think I'm more evolved than that. She was tough, sensitive, funny, held her own with a mostly male cast. I'm not sure what Bridges character was for, except to create the roller rink, and maybe be Averill's pal. Walken was really good and showed a lot of depth as well: romantic, tough as nails, a good friend, and although sometimes it's hard to see, a sense of morality.

I think if the movie had been made in the last few years, and shown on the History Channel (it's sort of based on historical events), Netflix or Amazon as a two or three part series, it would have found an audience and maybe even been nominated for a Golden Globe or something. There is a bigger appetite for longer programs if it's over a couple of nights. Not to say that would have remedied everything, but it might have helped with some of the issues. Or not, it seems that Cimino was a huge control freak and there was a lot wrong, but I'm feeling optimistic. What's that? Are you asking me if you should see it? If you like action westerns and have four hours at the cabin when it's raining, yeah, I would say to watch it. Or a snowy weekend.

A weekend of Indiana Jones

4/9/16 Raiders of the Lost Ark, Best Art Direction, Best Film Editing, Best Sound, Best Visual Effects, 1981, #66 AFI, National Film Registry, #82 BBC

4/10/16 Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom, Best Visual Effects, 1984

4/11/16 Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, Best Sound Editing, 1989

I re-watched the first three Indiana Jones movies just in time to learn there will be a fifth coming to a theater near you. I intentionally skipped the fourth one, because it's not on any list and probably not relevant to this discussion. When I mentioned to a co-worker that I watched these movies last weekend, he cautiously asked if this was the first time. Unlike Dirty Dancing or Flashdance, I saw the first two Indiana Jones movies in the theater at the time of release. I'm not always late to the party. 

Indiana Jones, played so iconically by Harrison Ford, is an archeologist in the 1930s and 1940s, whose travels take him to the Middle East, Turkey and India in search of antiquities. He is often joined by a beautiful woman, they may be adventurers or not, and that determines the amount of screaming they do. In my opinion, the first movie, Raiders of the Lost Ark, starring Ford, Karen Allen as Marian Ravenwood, Paul Freeman as the suave bad guy, Rene Belloq and John Rhys-Davies as Sallah, is the best and it's my favorite (probably a redundant statement). I watched this thinking about the other movies I've watched recently, thinking about how they are too long and full of 'bloat', and that there is no bloat in Raiders. There is very little extraneous conversation, either it's moving the story forward - trying to locate the Ark, or witty repartee as some fight scene or crazy action scene. There is a lot of action, and Harrison Ford reminds us why we love him so much as Jones and Han Solo, he doesn't miss a beat. Steven Spielberg directed all of the movies in the series, and infuses them with energy and humor and action; the same characteristics that made me really enjoy Jaws, once I got done being a fraidy cat. George Lucas developed the stories, while a variety of writers worked on the different films. John Williams contributed another of his famous and integral musical scores. The Temple of Doom had some great action scenes as well, but I thought there was too much talking. I really wanted action, the back story about whatever was not that interesting to me (normally I'm not that mentally lazy, but I just wanted swinging and fighting and all that stuff). I watched and reviewed the Last Crusade about two years ago, but watched it again since my friends were kind enough to lend me the whole series. I liked it when I reviewed it before, and I still liked it. Sean Connery was a good fit with Ford. All in all, I think the movies have held up well 25-30 years later, and for the most part, the whole family can watch them (those scenes at the end are where you have to be careful with young kids - the Nazis getting their just desserts as the open the Ark, Dr. Schneider taking an awful turn after she doesn't listen to the Knight about the Holy Grail).

Next up this weekend: Heaven's Gate, which somehow made it onto the BBC's 100 Best American Films list. I will let you know my thoughts, although one thought you can take to the bank, I will bitch about it being 5 hours long (if the library gave me the director's cut edition).

The Night of the Hunter with Robert Mitchum, Shelley Winters and Lillian Gish

Koyaanisqatsi, 1982, #69 BBC, National Film Registry

I have 35 minutes left in this movie and since I don't think my opinion is going to change, I am writing as I watch. I can be pretentious; in fact, I'm sure there are moments when I am downright insufferable. That's kind of how I feel about Koyaanisqatsi, a movie directed by Godfrey Reggio with music by Philip Glass. I want to punch myself in the face, that is how much I hate this movie. Visually it is wonderful, great scenes from nature as well as city life; it is a look at man and our relationship with nature. You know, how we have basically ruined everything. Which means it's still relevant today, maybe more so, HOWEVER... It takes some beautiful images, speeds them up or slows them down, adds some repetitive music and feels like torture. In fact, if I was going to torture an enemy, I would just play the soundtrack; I'm pretty sure they would tell me everything I wanted to know. It just goes on and on and on. The movie goes on for 85 minutes, which is 50 minutes too long. This would have been a great candidate for a short film. It's just annoying, the music especially. Somehow this made it on to the BBC's list for the 100 best American films (seriously, NOTHING was better?) and the National Film Registry, which means someone felt it was important enough to be preserved for future generations. So, sorry about that.

The Tree of Life, 2011, #79 BBC

Speaking of pretentious and movies that I had a hard time watching, let me talk briefly about The Tree of Life by Terrence Malick starring Brad Pitt, Sean Penn and Jessica Chastain. I'll be brief even though the movie was not, and if I had been blogging at the time I would have said something like, "Well that's three hours of my life I will never get back." The opening was visually beautiful, kind of like something from the Discovery Channel with scenes of volcanoes erupting and blood coursing through veins; kind of like a look at how life begins. Great, cool. The next 2 1/2 hours are about a family who struggle with the sudden death of a son/brother and the silences that inhabit their lives. There is very little dialog, just pouting, moping, sorrowful looks, and then some bizarre ending. Many people found deep meaning, the complexity of our relationship with our parents, when we are children and then when we grow up. All great stuff, but this movie left me cold and disengaged. I'm sure I am in the minority, but I did not think it was a masterpiece, as some called it. Terrence Malick has another movie that has recently been released, and I'm sure it will get some nomination or other, and I'll have to watch it, but from what I've read, I am not going to like it.


The Night of the Hunter, 1955 #92 BBC, National Film Registry

Um, I liked this better the first time I saw it, which was over ten years ago, way before the blog. Maybe it's not fair to say I liked it less, but I noticed the flaws a little more. Since The Night of the Hunter is a suspense film, I don't want to provide too much information, because the suspense is one thing that is a huge plus for this film. Let me back up a little bit. Reverend Harry Powell (Robert Mitchum) is a man of highly questionable character, and he gets arrested for stealing a car. In prison he meets Ben Harper (Peter Graves), a husband and father who was arrested and sentenced to hang for murder and robbery. The stolen money was never found, and Powell learns that Harper left behind a wife and two young children. Powell woos Willa Harper (Shelley Winters looking stunning) to try and find the money. John Harper (Billy Chapin), the oldest of the two children, takes an immediate dislike to Powell, but Pearl, the young daughter is very fond of him. Let's just say not everything is as it seems. There is a slow speed chase throughout the countryside as Powell is determined to find the money. The children meet up with an older woman, played by Lillian Gish, who is not as weak as she may appear. Seriously, I am afraid to tell you too much because the wrong move could ruin it. The movie is all about the suspense. The acting, on the other hand, is uneven to the point that I was laughing, but Charles Laughton directed and I know people think he was great, but in my opinion, he had some uneven moments as well. The dialog wasn't all the great in parts either. Billy Chapin was surprising as young John Harper, going toe to toe with Mitchum and seasoned actor James Gleason who played Uncle Birdie. Are you wondering if you should see this movie? Yeah, I would say so. Seeing it for the first time, you're more focused on the suspense and not some of the other, quirky things. This may be one of Mitchum's more iconic roles; Winters is good (she really played some different roles in her career); Gish was an American treasure; and it's better than the first two movies in this entry.

Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice

Is it just me, or are people just rude and clueless? Both? My brother and I went to see Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice at 4:00 in the afternoon last Monday. I like to sit up high, so we went to those seats, until we were surrounded by, what I can only, people who will be subject to Darwinism. However, that did not address the problem of the moment, which were total asshats playing on their phones and talking. Eventually we moved to one of the very front rows and that put enough distance between us and the social defects, but nothing solved the issue of the crying five year old (apparently mom couldn't be bothered to take the kid out of the theater). Morons. This easily could have easily ruined the movie, but it didn't. That may have been because I didn't have high hopes for the movie in the first place - I thought that director Zack Snyder was trying to cram too much into one movie; it was too soon to reboot Batman; I wasn't sure of Ben Affleck as the new Batman; and DC was trying to out-Marvel Marvel and would not succeed.

After reading my first paragraph, it's a wonder I stayed to watch the movie at all. But, I bought a t-shirt for the occasion (my brother insisted I needed one) and we were there, and I love watching movies with him. And hey, the movie was not terrible. I realize that is not the best endorsement I could give a movie, but I think I am still processing it. I may like it a lot more in a week or so; Cris (my brother) liked it a lot and wants to see it again, so take that for what you will.

The movie opens shortly after the events of The Man of Steel, with Superman (Henry Cavill) performing life saving acts, seemingly without concern for any collateral damage. This does create a backlash, led by Sen. June Finch (Holly Hunter), and some bad feelings from Bruce Wayne aka Batman (Ben Affleck). There is a little bit of a flashback to a young Bruce Wayne and the night his parents are killed, the obligatory shot of bats circling, but otherwise, not much info about the Dark Knight. Clark Kent and Bruce Wayne meet at an event hosted by Lex Luthor (Jesse Eisenberg) where they poke each other about what is happening in the other's city. Meanwhile, Diana Prince/Wonder Woman (Gal Gadot) appears and is interested in Bruce Wayne, or rather, his sneaking around (Wayne discovers that Diana/Wonder Woman is a metahuman and gets a glimpse of The Flash, Aquaman, and Cyborg, just a glimpse, enough to tease us). Eventually, Superman and Batman are forced to confront one another, with Batman putting up a good fight, using a little well-placed kryptonite to weaken the man of steel. In the meantime, Luthor has gotten access to the body of General Zod, for research purposes and creates Doomsday, a being more powerful than Superman alone. So, it's a good thing he's not alone, and that Batman and Wonder Woman, and Lois Lane (Amy Adams) are close at hand. Does this all seem convoluted? It does to me. There's a lot going on, and yet, not a lot. I want the action that came in the last forty minutes or so of the movie.

I liked Ben Affleck as Batman; once I got over Christian Bale not being Batman, I just let it go. Affleck was a different kind of Batman (I can't really explain it) and he was good. He also had great gadgets (loved the Bat Cave and the Batmobile). A different Batman needs a different Alfred; nobody could be Alfred like Michael Caine, right? Jeremy Irons is less refined than Caine; he's tough, relentless in his teasing and haranguing of Wayne/Batman, he is also very technically and mechanically inclined, repairing equipment, even donning what appears to be a sweater from the British Army as he remotely helps Batman in a fight. He's kind of like Alfred and Mr. Fox (Morgan Freeman from the Batman trilogy). I thought Irons was fun and brought a little cynical humor to the movie. Jesse Eisenberg as Luthor? I thought this was either bad casting, bad directing or bad writing. Those were my thoughts when I saw the trailer; it seemed like Eisenberg was channeling Heath Ledger as The Joker, which was fine back then, but Luthor and The Joker are two very different characters.  I also got very tired of the 'god versus man versus superman' rants. It was as if the writers were trying to teach an intro to philosophy class, and if the audience at my showing is the 'average' audience, they do not care about that stuff. Amy Adams is wasted here, if we're honest. That's what happens when you have two big characters, introducing a third character, four if you include Luthor. I'm guessing she isn't in the Justice League movie because there will already be a full house. I am looking forward to the Wonder Woman movie coming out in the next year or so; saw the preview for Suicide Squad and Cris asked what I thought - I think it looks stupid.

Staying with the superhero theme, Cris has been nagging me to watch the Daredevil series on Netflix. For no particular reason, I have been avoiding it - too many movies and other television shows to watch, I guess, and I wasn't impressed with the first episode. AND (most important) he has not kept up his end of the bargain. Will public shaming work? I doubt it. Anyway, while I was home for a visit, we had some bonding time and watched three episodes. I still don't love it, but I told him I would finish the first season. In case you don't know, Daredevil/Matt Murdoch is a blind attorney who has honed his remaining four senses and developed some incredible fighting skills. He practices law in Hell's Kitchen in New York City and protects the poor and under-served of the community. Vincent D'Onofrio practically steals the show as Wilson Fisk/Kingpin, the socially awkward, but wealthy and powerful enemy of Daredevil. Time will tell.