P.S I Love You


P.S. I Love You is pretty grounded, affecting stuff as far as romantic dramadies go, a sorrowful story that’s light on sap and earns your tears. It’s sad, to be sure, but that’s a necessary element to balance out any otherwise happy-go-lucky narrative, which is something many forget when making these types of films. Jarringly soon after we meet adorable and slightly dysfunctional couple Gerry and Holly (Gerard Butler & Hilary Swank), Gerry passes away, leaving her bereft and broken, but not necessarily alone. Knowing of his illness beforehand, he’s left a series of love notes that lead her on a scavenger hunt, each new note and following action geared towards easing her pain, saying goodbye and trying to help her start a new life. Although consoled by her two caring friends (Gina Gershon & Lisa Kudrow) as well as her mother (Kathy Bates) this is Holly’s solo journey at heart, a meditation sent from the afterlife by the world’s most thoughtful husband, unconventional in his methods yet intuitive to his last breath. Losing a loved one, especially your other half, is a kind of pain one could never fathom unless, heavens forbid, we find ourselves in that situation one day. Holly and Gerry didn’t always work well, as we see in a few of the haughty flashbacks, but their love for each other was real, and the subsequent pain on her part is palpable in Swank’s performance, which must be no easy task. A trip to Ireland, an encounter with a handsome stranger there (Jeffrey Dean Morgan), flirting with a kindly potential suitor (Harry Connick Jr.), she circles many endeavours in her time after his passing, all part of a grieving process and a desire on deceased Jerry’s part that she live her life, remember him yet not fall into an abyss of chronic grief and let it stall her, which happens to some. It’s a sweet and good-natured way to tell a very grave, emotionally corrosive story, but like I said before, it’s never manipulative or deliberately mushy, it lets the story push your buttons naturally, until the floodgates on your tear ducts are opened by observing the story and characters, not connived by soap opera histrionics or tacky melodrama. A beautiful little film that makes you deeply sad, but also puts in an effort to cheer you up along the way, just like Gerry does for his Holly. 

-Nate Hill

Christopher Nolan’s DUNKIRK

Dunkirk

2017.  Directed by Christopher Nolan.

dunkirk.png

One of the first things that becomes clear, seconds into Christopher Nolan’s audacious thriller Dunkirk is that it is not a conventional war picture.  It may not even technically be a member of the genre.  Regardless, Dunkirk is Nolan’s crowning achievement.  A ferocious, tightly constructed tribute to one of the greatest acts of national heroism in the history of mankind.  Bordering on horror at times while exploring the darker side of survival and the effects of trauma, Nolan commands a cinematic arsenal in a symphony of destruction, balancing a pulse raising score, harrowing cinematography, and unparalleled practical effects.  These combine to form a living prison around the audience, forcing them to inhabit the souls of the combatants, both their acts of unthinkable courage and their primal need to survive at all costs.

400,000 allied soldiers are stranded on the beaches of Dunkirk.  What follows is a nonlinear recounting of the rescue operation that inspired the world to fight back against inhuman darkness.  The point of view is split between the soldiers on the beach, civilians mounting a rescue effort by sea, and the Royal Air Force pilots protecting the operation.  Nolan’s script is a showcase on minimalist storytelling, to the point that Dunkirk often feels like a silent film homage and this only furthers the oppressive feeling that pervades every frame.  There are no Nazis present on the screen; they are wraiths coming to reap the souls of the stranded.  There is no respite, no sanctuary, and from the first ear bursting gunshots, the film drops any sense of conformity with its predecessors.

kenneth-branagh-dunkirk.jpg

Some have commented on the film’s distinct lack of exposition and character development; however the lack of focus on a singular “hero” is what allows Nolan’s vision to truly shine.  Who these people were is not of interest to the master auteur, it is the sum of masses that is on display.  It would be unfair, however, to ignore the work of Tom Hardy and Mark Rylance.  Both of these talented performers have scenes that are so emotionally gripping, they manage to imprint on the viewer, despite the absolute bravura of everything else that is happening around them.  This was a day where men made the ultimate sacrifice for the many and where boys became men against their father’s wishes.

Hans Zimmer, who will hopefully garner awards gold this season, has created the best score of his prolific career.  Emulating the ticking doomsday panic that afflicts the soldiers, his ominous notes are relentless, taking the narrative into the depths of despair, only to then deliver the proceedings into hope.  The sound design is impeccable.  The viewer is there, on the beach when bombs cascade across the sounds, in the surf when ignited oil snatches away all hope of escape, and in the sky, where split second decisions decide the fate of thousands.  This is a film that requires IMAX viewing, if possible.  It is not only the reason these titanic theaters exist, it is a great example of the power of the big screen.

dunkirk-trailer-image-16.jpg

Hoyt van Hoytema’s pristine cinematography is breathtaking.  While the editing allows it to truly shine, there are a plethora of moments where the camera lingers on desolate beaches and aeronautical specters that enrich the three pronged approach with unflinching realism.  There are so many unique tactics employed, it seems daunting, but they flow together with a dangerous sense of truth.  While other efforts rely on tracking shots and shaky-cam trickery, Hoytema is interested in the soul of Nolan’s vicious poetry, and the result is a cold, omnipotent viewpoint that leaves everything on the table.  There are no favorites, no shining stars, and nothing but the events themselves matters.   This is a startling film, but one that is relentlessly human in its retelling and this is something that will either resonate with the viewer, or repulse.

In theaters now, Dunkirk is one of the few masterpieces of 2017, and the best film of Christopher Nolan’s fabled portfolio.  Every element of what mystifies and entices us to watch films is present.  There is tragedy and redemption, heroism and cowardice, and most importantly darkness and unyielding light.  If you see one film in the theater this year, this is the one.   If you’re looking for a traditional war film, look elsewhere.  Nolan’s masterful, tightly paced epic is an endurance test for the mind and heart.  Dunkirk is a retelling of history in a hands-off, brutally realistic manner that will leave you stunned for its duration, and long after the lights have come up.

Highly. Highly Recommend.

maxresdefault.jpg

VANISHING POINT — A REVIEW BY NICK CLEMENT

ABC’s FlashForward: here in a flash of brilliance and gone after one season 


ABC’s Flashforwad was a gripping psychological/supernatural epic with potential to run many seasons and provide us with solid entertainment for a long time a lá Lost (which it bears some similarities with), but the network mysteriously axed it after a single season, leaving a vacuum in the air as far as it’s story, and many viewers left stranded, wanting more. The show was built around a wicked concept: one day, every human being on planet earth simultaneously blacks out for a few minutes, and in that time has a precognitive vision of the future some months away from their present time, then promptly wakes up. This of course causes sheer chaos all over the globe, initially with millions of car crashes, disasters and planes falling out of the sky, and eventually the uncertainty, paranoia and confusion as to just what these flash-forwards are all about, and if it will happen again. An FBI task force spearheaded by the likes of Joseph Fiennes and Courtney B. Vance is commissioned to investigate the matter, and their mission takes them to some truly weird places, both geographically and thematically. There’s strange forces at work with this one, secrets that are kept close to the chest and gradually doled out over the expansive twenty three episode arc, a great length of run that should really be the standard for television. It’s similar to Lost in the sense that every week the mystery deepened as opposed to circling a resolution, clues and questions piled on top of the previous ones without a hint of finality or exposition to light the way, an audience tested, surefire way to keep people from flipping the channels mid episode and a great of garnering new viewers via word of mouth. The trick is to also add rhyme and reason to your bag of mysteries, provide a modicum of answers to keep the frustration just at bay, a formula which this one actually succeeds better at than Lost ever did. The scope and budget here are both enormous, giving new meaning to both the terms ‘globetrotting’ and ‘ensemble piece’, a truly vast attempt at long form storytelling. The cast is eclectic, other leads including John Cho as another hard-nosed Fed, Zachary Knighton as a doctor whose life is perhaps affected most by the incident, and brilliant turns from Jack Davenport, Sonya Walger, Peyton List, Dominic Monaghan, Brian F. O’Byrne and the late Michael Massee as nefarious, shadowy ultra-villain Dyson Frost, who serves as a sort of mcguffin during the first act of the show. Guest arcs included James Remar, Thomas Kretschmann, Rachel Roberts, Gabrielle Union, Shohreh Ahgdashloo, Annabeth Gish, Callum Keith Rennie, James Frain, Peter Coyote as the US President and so many more. The show looks amazing too, a brightly lit, well oiled mystery machine with all sorts of storytelling wizardry including nifty slow motion musical montages, trippy time jumps, non linear what-have-you and all manner of neat stuff. Gone way, way before it’s time, this one is well worth a watch and shouldn’t have been written off so soon. And remember: D. Gibbons is a bad man. 

-Nate Hill

Derek Wayne Johnson’s JOHN G. AVILDSEN KING OF THE UNDERDOGS

JGA Underdogs

 

19225757_10102471107188568_2867561815267919866_nJoining Frank is filmmaker Derek Wayne Johnson whose film JOHN G. AVILDSEN KING OF THE UNDERDOGS premiered in February at the 32nd Santa Barbara International Film Festival. It is a fantastic film, chalked full of interviews with Sylvester Stallone, Martin Scorsese, Talia Shire, Ralph Macchio, Burt Young, Carl Weathers, Burt Reynolds, Bill Conti, and John Avildsen himself. Derek is currently going into production on his next two films, STALLONE: FRANK THAT IS and 40 YEARS OF ROCKY: THE BIRTH OF A CLASSIC. For those who tuned into our SBIFF podcast, you should remember my red carpet interview with Derek. 

The film hits theatres, blu ray, DVD, and VOD on August first. Please, pre-order the film at Chassy.

To order on iTunes, please click here.

OUT OF ORDER: FIVE NONLINEAR FAVORITE FILMS

pearce-memento-wallpaper-1784482100.jpg 

The art of storytelling has developed over the years and although there are only so many ways to tell a story, there are no rules as to how we as an audience witness a protagonist’s journey unfold.  D.W. Griffith experimented with nonlinear presentation with Intolerance in 1916, while Goddard branched out in the late 1950’s to this technique.  Quentin Tarantino modernized it with Reservoir Dogs and other directors have continued to expand the influence of in medias res to this day.  In celebration of Christopher Nolan’s Dunkirk, Ben and Kyle talk about five of their favorite nonlinear narrative films.

Pulp Fiction

1242911076001_3839236617001_hulu-et-pulpfiction-101414.jpg

BEN: Though he introduced a modernized version of the nonlinear narrative with his first film, Quentin Tarantino’s Pulp Fiction cemented its revolution.  The year was 1994, just before the dawn of the World Wide Web (in today’s parlance, the Internet). Buzz about films traveled at a snail’s pace, which is funny considering that this film won the Palme d’Or at that year’s Cannes Film Festival.  Okay, the joke’s not that funny, yet Tarantino’s sophomore film, a black comedy and a modern neo-noir was responsible for not only reigniting John Travolta’s career, but also for changing the way stories could be told, something that he and writing partner Roger Avary won a Best Original Screenplay Oscar for in 1995.  It was the first film that Miramax fully financed and distributed, altering the way independent films were distributed.  And then there’s the nonlinear way that Tarantino tells his story.  The way the sequences are edited together, we’re never jolted out of the moment, which is why this film works so very well.  I think the key to his success here is in the characters and the settings.  I remember seeing the movie on VHS and in widescreen and being blown away by the change in perspective that it created.  At the time, it was one of the more unique movies that I had seen.  I think I’ll watch this again soon while enjoying a Royale with cheese.

KYLE: It’s an amazing film that has held up well over the years.  As you mention, the script, with respect to perspective is what has allowed it to endure.  Yes, there are endlessly quotable lines, but the magic lies in the well-defined characters and the unique presentation. Knowing the fates of certain characters increases the impact over other scenes when they transpire, which I think is one of the benefits of nonlinear storytelling and why so many carbon copy rip offs failed during the crime flick heyday of the 90’s.  Most auteurs tried to cash in on Tarantino’s ideas but failed to grasp the importance of the story as well as the characters.  There is a rotating door of VHS cult gems that each have memorable characters or scenes of violence, but they pale in comparison to Pulp Fiction because they don’t weave them together into a complete picture.  It also continued the tradition of building a stable of performers that Tarantino continues to use to this day.

The Usual Suspects

 the usual suspects.jpg

BEN: Bryan Singer’s sophomore feature film is the electrifying The Usual Suspects which took the world by storm with the famous ending and the line, “Who is Kaiser Söze?” Based on the Oscar-winning screenplay by Christopher McQuarrie who also wrote Public Access for Singer, would use the nonlinear format to tell “Verbal” Kint’s version of events that would lead to a drug deal gone bad for the police involving a severely wounded Hungarian mob boss.  Throughout the story, McQuarrie and Singer lay clues as to who the mastermind is, resulting in one of the most celebrated plot twists in cinematic history.  The film works because of the sublime cast including Gabriel Byrne, the cool and collected one, Stephen Baldwin, the balls-out nut job, Benicio del Toro, whose broken English plays well into this collection of misfits.  Kevin Spacey plays “Verbal” and his Oscar-winning performance is the highlight of the film.  Chazz Palminteri does an exceptional job grilling “Verbal” and Pete Postlethwaite is pitch perfect as the ominous courier.  This is another one of those films that I saw in college on home video (I didn’t get to the theater as much as I do today for obvious reasons.)  Seeing this film on VHS was an eye opening experience.  Interesting note:  the title came from an issue of ‘Spy’ Magazine which lifted it from a famous line spoken by Claude Rains in “Casablanca”.

KYLE: While I don’t think it has held up as good as some of the others on this list over the years, Singer’s film is a masterclass in narrative construction.  Yes, the clues are easy to parse and in plain sight, but the totality is a precise formula that toys with the neo-noir genre to ultimately produce an inverted whodunit.  Palminteri, and his scenes with Spacey are the main event, while the lovable cast of rogues moves the story from one point to another.  The infamous line-up scene is my favorite sequence, because not only it is continually quoted by film lovers everywhere, it’s evident that the cast are having a good time filming it, which always enhances the mood of a film.  While this one is not necessarily nonlinear in the same manner as Fiction, it uses the fractured narrative as a device to explore perspective and truth with narrators who may be unreliable, one of the best attributes for a mystery.

 Memento

memento_image_3.jpg

BEN: I think we’re on a role with sophomore directorial efforts.  Our third film is another sophomore effort, this time by Christopher Nolan.  Starring Guy Pearce and Matrix co-stars Carrie-Anne Moss and Joe Pantoliano, this film is a look at anterograde amnesia, where the protagonist is unable to form new memories while suffering from short-term memory loss.  The way Nolan visually interweaves and ultimately intersects the two side effects of the amnesia is breathtaking.  In addition to interweaving the various vantage points, he differentiates the two side effects with color and black & white images supporting the deteriorating condition of our protagonist and his world. The narrative is cohesive in its progression, no matter which way you go.  While Nolan had a clear direction, Guy Pearce did such an exceptional job at conveying the events he experienced that we suffer right along with him until the last minute.  I expect we’ll see a similar style of storytelling in Nolan’s upcoming Dunkirk.

KYLE: Let’s hope!  I know a lot of readers are saying, it’s just told in reverse!  While this is true, linear stories are about going from A to B.  Memento goes from B to A in a puzzlebox presentation that requires multiple viewing to grasp all of its intricacies.  I remember seeing it in the cinema and being blown away by the implications of the ending, as well as how disturbing the mood is for the duration.  This flirts with psychological horror, dipping a toe into Lynch’s end of the pool, but then quickly reverts into a gritty neo-noir. Speaking off, our first three films have all been neo-noir.  Ben, do we have films from a different genre on the list?

Solaris (2002)

 

lsn6ddg5cf.jpg

BEN: As a matter of fact, we do.  This is also where we end our sophomore directorial efforts; however this film’s director is linked with another director we’re celebrating.  Soderbergh who has been established in Hollywood since the late 80’s when he broke out with Sex, Lies, and Videotape worked with producer James Cameron to bring a reimagining of the celebrated Solaris to modern audiences.  Featuring one of his mainstay actors, George Clooney, the story is centered around Dr. Chris Kelvin, a clinical psychologist who is called on by the DBA to review a disturbing message from a colleague, who along with a crew of astronauts is on a space station orbiting Solaris.  Kelvin travels out to the space station to determine why they stopped communicating.  Soderbergh’s script remains close to the original novel where he uses flashbacks to create a nonlinear story.  Solaris is capable of something greater than the human mind, and it is this existentialism that allows Kelvin to reconnect with his dead wife.  Cited as a love story in space, which Stanislaw Lem didn’t agree with, the 2002 version failed to connect with audiences, which is a shame.  It is an exceptionally well done film where we get to see Viola Davis in as strong a performance as she gave us in last year’s Fences. Jeremy Davies was amazing as Snow, one of the scientists on the station and although he has a small role, Ulrich Turkur had a lot of fun as Gibarian.  McElhone lit up the screen as Kelvin’s doomed wife Rheya.  What I liked most about this is its ambiguousness.  Is it a love story?  Is it a Sci Fi film?  Roger Ebert, who loved it, called it “the kind of smart film that has people arguing about it on the way out of the theater . . . . it is essentially a psychological drama.” I still revisit it and long for the day it is released in high definition.

KYLE: I’m a huge fan of both this and the original by Tarkovsky.  I actually find myself returning to Soderbergh’s version more often because I think he strips away everything but the raw connections at the heart of the story.  Tarkovsky’s dreamlike masterpiece is a lifetime on film, while Soderbergh’s version is a fading memory, and both of them have merit.  With respect to the 2002 version, I think the nonlinear presentation is essential in order for the release of the finale to impact the viewer.  Themes of love are actually a large part of the science fiction genre and Soderbergh keys into essential, base human emotions in this film.  It’s devastating, terrifying, and ultimately unforgettable because the viewer is treated to the gambit of not only the cycle of grief, but how love and loss filter differently through different kinds of minds.  Davis (who I also love in this) plays against Clooney so perfectly, I often feel her performance is undervalued.  You have science vs. psychological theory and both are plagued by the inevitable baggage we all bring to the table.  Davies, in the middle, is the film’s best surprise, bringing home the startling actions of Clooney during the first act.  Soderbergh’s Solaris is an organism connected by the fabric of mankind and I hope more viewers give it a chance after reading this.

Arrival

 

16465387_1774490656212224_2951863673158631424_n.jpg

BEN: Denis Villeneuve, who always wanted to do a science fiction film, gave it to us in spades with 2016’s Arrival.  Based on Ted Chiang’s Story of Your Life, Eric Heisserer delivers a top notch sci-fi film featuring Amy Adams, Jeremy Renner, Forest Whitaker, Michael Stuhlbarg and Tzi Ma.  Part Solaris, part Contact, part The Day The Earth Stood Still, Heisserer uses the nonlinear narrative to sew together a story of grief, love, passion, and empathy as Adams’ Elizabeth Banks races to develop a language database that the military can use to communicate with an alien race whose spaceships have settled above our most populous cities.  The structure of the story keeps you guessing what the true nature of the film really is, which is a beautiful thing.  Adams gave an Oscar-caliber performance as the emotionally wrecked and passionately driven Elizabeth Banks.  Villeneuve’s direction is exemplary here, and is the key reason why Heisserer’s story works as well as it does.

KYLE: Could not agree more.  I was shocked Adams was overlooked for an Oscar nomination. This is another…non-traditional choice.  The nonlinear narrative is integral to the story, but its reason for inclusion is the film’s most challenging revelation.  One of my favorite aspects of this film is how the scientific and military sequences are interspersed with intimate scenes of familial life.  This sets the stakes for the viewer, reminding them of the countless souls that hang in the linguistic balance.  Communication is the central theme, both in how we interact with the extraterrestrials, but also with each other as a species.   Given the divisive last couple of years, Arrival was a breath of fresh air that showed (not preached) love, mutual respect, and most importantly, tolerance.  I think it’s important to mention that Bradford Young was the first African American to be nominated for the Oscar for Best Cinematography.  It was some of my favorite imagery from last year’s awards season.

 

ext.jpg

BEN: That’s about right, Kyle.  Oh!  I forgot to mention the connection that Soderbergh has to another of the directors we mentioned – he was one of the producers of Insomnia by Christopher Nolan.  We really do live in a small world.

KYLE: Most assuredly.  Thanks, once again for the engaging conversation.  I look forward to our next topic!

We hope you enjoyed this brief look at our linear list of nonlinear narrative films. As you’re venturing out to your nearest IMAX film to catch Dunkirk this weekend, what are your favorite nonlinear films?

rs-216690-MSDMEME_EC005_H.jpg

Robot Cops, Giant Bugs and Big Snakes in the Jungle: An Interview with Ed Neumeier by Kent Hill

 

 

I remember vividly the first time a saw RoboCop. Watching it with the cousins in my bedroom and my mother walking past, hearing a flurry of coarse language, then sticking her head through the door to see what we were viewing. My cousin Rick, was good at putting spin on such incidents, so that we might avoid reprisal and be allowed to keep the movie going. Needless to say, that first time, I was pretty much doing what Rick told my mother I was doing – I was waiting for RoboCop to show up and not listening to the foul language at all. Well, maybe just a little.

Then we have Starship Troopers for which I blew off a lecture at university to go see. The prospect of this large-scale, B-movie flavored extravaganza was too good to pass up. I walked out of the picture exhilarated and so glad I skipped an hour long spiel on The Trojan Women to partake in this, the third time a director named Paul Verhoeven had blown my joyous, cinema-obsessive brains out.

 

But there’s another character responsible for this pair of uber-cool films and that is their scribe, Ed Neumeier, who as a young man wanted nothing more than to make movies. He, at that time his his life, had had his own mind blown when he learned that in his home town of Marin County a man named George Lucas was making movies. “It is possible,” he said to himself and thus took off for California. Once there, after finishing college, spending time as reader for the studios and a short time as an executive, he had an idea for a story that would eventually become a cinema classic. He joined forces with another filmmaker by the name of Michael Miner and together they got down to writing RoboCop.

 

The film would go on to become a phenomenon, spawning two sequels, a remake, and TV series and even an animated series (and a it-looks-really-cool documentary, RoboDoc). The film gave Ed the start he was looking for and introduced him to the director (Verhoeven) with whom he would mount his next assault at cinematic glory. It would take place beyond the stars on planets menaced by giant insects in their hundreds and thousands. Based on the Robert Heinlein novel of the same name, Ed would bring his love of science fiction and personal blend of humor and action to Troopers, and, for the second time, he and Paul were on a winner which would have sequels, Troopers 3 which he himself would direct, as well as animated films, Traitor of Mars is set to be released, comics and games.

 

Yes folks, Ed Neumeier is indeed a world builder and he’s working in the movie business and living the dream. He is cooking up a new film, and we that have grown up watching and loving the movies he has thus far penned, (yes, I kinda like Anacondas: The Hunt for the Blood Orchid) look forward to see where this talented screenwriter is going to take us next. Whether it be alien bugs, cyborg cops or those oversized killer serpents you don’t want to have lunch with, I think it’s a pretty safe bet to say, we’re in good hands.

Here he is folks, the man, the one and only . . . Ed Neumeier.

 

Playing Cowboys and Aliens: An Interview with Scott Mitchell Rosenberg by Kent Hill

 

The dreams we have when we are children don’t often materialize into reality. We make-believe we are the heroes of the books, comic books, films that we hold dear. They inspire us to move forward; to go on and build new worlds. We stand on the shoulders of those giants so that we might become gods – the creators of fantastic realms and legendary heroes. That flame we carry within us during those early years, often falls prey to the winds of change. It is ever whipping across the fabric of our dreams, trying to collapse that once impenetrable shield of our imaginations.

 

Now, there are many who simply let that flame flicker in the wind until it finally sputters out. They put aside childhood wonder and move on. But, then there is the few, the happy few, the small band of us that for whom such a notion is not only unacceptable, but impossible. Our dreams are that which fuels us. Our dreams are our lives. Scott Mitchell Rosenberg is one of these dreamers. His childhood games of cowboys and aliens have become so much more than fun and plastic ray-guns. He told me he ‘stumbled’ into the movie business, and the journey to bring Cowboys & Aliens to the big screen was not unlike pushing a boulder up a hill using only your nose.

 

Lucky for us his nose held up, otherwise he might not have been there for the gathering of such illustrious talent, both in front and behind the camera, that would merge to bring Scott’s graphic novel creation to life. With the likes of Ron Howard, Brian Grazer, Steven Spielberg, Robert Orci, Alex Kurtzman, Damon Lindelof and John Favreau, it makes me think of the fabled Dream Team of ’92 that boasted Jordan, Bird and Magic. Combine those ingredients with Han Solo (Harrison Ford) and the new Bond (Daniel Craig) – along with an impressive supporting cast which featured Dano, Brown, Carradine, Rockwell and Wilde – the live-action treatment Cowboys & Aliens would receive is something of a marvel.

 

I told Scott that my initial viewing had been sullied by a bad day, but subsequently I was able to go back and re-watch it with fresh eyes. I admit that I prefer the extended cut to the theatrical release, but really,  when you break it down, I just really love Cowboys & Aliens and have done so since I read the comic when it first came out. It was a real thrill to finally sit down and chat with its creator, a great gentleman and I feel in some ways a kindred ‘creative’ spirit. For this movie speaks to those out there that of course (A), love a really cool movie but also (B), those creative few, those happy few, that band of dreamers still reaching for the stars. Let the journey of Scott Rosenberg be an example to you. Don’t quit, toughen up your nose and give that boulder hell!

Enjoy…

 

Michael Mann’s Luck: A short lived masterpiece 


Michael Mann’s Luck was a painfully short lived HBO original series with reach-for-the-stars potential, a mind blowing cast and a terse, eccentric script from David Milch, all fuelling a brilliant ensemble storyline set in a pristine Los Angeles horse racing track. I’ll get the elephant out of the room right away: the series was cancelled due to a few of the horses dying on set, for whatever reasons. Had it been allowed to continue though, I imagine it would have gone on to become one of the network’s, and Mann’s, most hallowed and heralded works. Dustin Hoffman is the centrepiece of the cast as Chester ‘Ace’ Bernstein, a sharp witted Jewish mobster who’s recent stretch in the joint has somewhat dulled his edge. Nevertheless, he slyly takes a stab at playing his hand with horse ownership, joined by his charismatic driver Gus (Dennis Farina, reliably wonderful). There’s all kinds of other hoopla going on, and it’s cool to see the story focus on both the upper crust elite doing their shady deals as well as everyday joes tossing their money into these worshipped games. Kevin Dunn is terrific as a disabled firebrand of a gambler, joined by his two scrappy pals (Ritchie Koster and Jason Gedrick) as they try out their own brand of luck. Jill Hennessy is a determined horse trainer who clashes with a belligerent owner (Yul Vasquez), and there’s two ominous crime kingpins played by Michael Gambon and Ted Levine who hover in the shadows as well. Further still is a heartbreaking turn from Richard ‘Bing Bong’ Kind as a stressed out jockey manager, Nick Nolte as a crusty, broken-down horse trainer, Joan Allen, Alan Rosenberg, Spencer Garrett, Don Harvey, Ian Hart, W. Earl Brown, Shaun Toub, Bruce Davison, Frank Collison, Mercedes Rhuel, Tony Curran and a cameo from Jurgen Pröchnow as the stern owner of the whole track. How’s that for a cast. I must say that the dense, peculiar dialogue from Milch takes some time getting used to, but once you tune in to it’s jive, it’s pure poetry being rattled off by every character, and a gorgeously structured, meticulously layered script at that. The actors are all on a plane of pure excellence as well, many of them turning in career best efforts and bringing their roles vividly to life. The cinematography from various artists is pure spun gold too, every sparkling irrigation sprinkler, glistening horse coat, careful closeup and crop of dirt kicked up by hooves captured succinctly and smoothly. This seriously is as near to a perfect season of television as one can get, and it kills me that it got cut down before it had a chance to really get going, because just think of the places it could have gone. At least we still have this first glorious season to admire, and I recommend every minute of it. 

-Nate Hill

NETFLIX’S GLOW — A MINI-REVIEW BY NICK CLEMENT