THE STREET FIGHTER – A REVIEW BY J.D. LAFRANCE

chiba12

Like many people of my generation in North America, the first exposure to The Street Fighter (1974), starring Sonny Chiba, was probably the brief clip shown in Tony Scott’s True Romance (1993), which was written by Quentin Tarantino, a big fan of Chiba, an actor who got his start appearing in science fiction and crime thrillers but is best known for his martial arts movies, chief among them The Street Fighter series. True Romance’s main character celebrates his birthday by going to see a Sonny Chiba triple feature at a local theater and there he meets the girl of his dreams. In explaining the allure of Terry Tsurgui – Chiba’s character in the film – he sums it up best by telling her, “Well, he ain’t so much a good guy as he is just one bad motherfucker. I mean, he gets paid by people to fuck guys up.” Based on the worldwide success of Enter the Dragon (1973), the Toei Company decided to release its own martial arts action films and the result was The Street Fighter. It would be this film that would make Chiba an international movie star. The film went on to garner a notorious reputation for its bone-crunching violence, which earned it an unprecedented X rating in North America – the first film to do so based solely on violence.

Terry Tsurgui (Chiba) is a mercenary hired by the Yakuza to free a convicted killer named Junjo (Masashi Ishibashi) from prison who is about to be executed. The man killed seven people with his fighting skills, which one prison guard says sarcastically, “He must think he’s Bruce Lee.” Terry enters the prison under the guise of a Buddhist priest (?!) and engineers quite a clever breakout by zapping Junjo with a move that induces paralysis thereby making him unfit for execution. It takes less than four minutes into the film and we get a pretty cool fight sequence in slow motion complete with funky sound effects that were the hallmark of 1970s era martial arts films. If that weren’t enough, a fantastic spaghetti western-esque theme song by way of Shaft-era Isaac Hayes plays over the opening credits sequence and off we go.

With his sidekick and comic relief Ratnose (Goichi Yamada), Terry hijacks the ambulance carrying Junjo en route to the hospital. When the man’s brother and sister are unable to pay up, Terry proceeds to mess them up, including sending the brother out a window to his death and selling the sister into prostitution. When Terry dares to ask for more money to kidnap a rich Japanese heiress in order to control her fortune, his employers decide to kill him because Terry knows too much. As we all know from these kinds of films that that is a fatal mistake and boy, does he make them pay.

Terry only really cares about money and asks a lot for his services. He is a gruff, no-nonsense kind of guy. The film wastes no time in establishing Terry’s badass credentials as he takes on more than six guys that stupidly try to ambush him in his apartment. There’s a wild-eyed intensity that is quite unnerving to his opponents. What Terry lacks in finesse, he more than makes up for in ferocity. Subtlety is certainly not his forte. For example, he attempts to tail his target in a car without caring about or knowing to follow from a discreet distance. For his troubles, the car he and Ratnose are in is grabbed by a construction vehicle and dropped off a bridge! However, Terry’s not invincible and gets his ass handed to him when he takes on the head of a karate school who knew his father. There’s no denying that Sonny Chiba has a unique screen presence and an intense stare that puts guys like Jean-Claude Van Damme and Steven Seagal to shame.

Goichi Yamada’s Ratnose is a character whose only purpose appears to be as comic relief (“Who do you think you’re talking to, Madame Butterfly?” he says to Terry at one point in reference to his lousy cooking skills), groveling and being endlessly insulted by Terry. However, he does get his self-sacrificing heroic moment in the sun and this selfless act draws a rare tear of emotion from Terry, which in a weird sort of way humanizes the film’s brutal protagonist.

The Street Fighter is chock full of great, cheesy B-movie dialogue intoned by a guy dubbing Terry’s voice trying to affect a gravely Clint Eastwood-esque vibe. One choice gem has Terry tell some assailants, “So I’m to die because I know who it is that controls the Yakuza here? Isn’t that mean and nasty?” Another gem comes when Junjo goes into an oxygen coma, collapses right before being executed and a prison official asks someone nearby, “You’re a lawyer – what must I do?” It is how this line is said – in stilted, badly done dubbing – that makes it funny. However, there are also some pretty cool lines, too, like when Junjo confronts Terry and tells him, “I’ve waited a long time to settle the score.” Terry replies dismissively, “Sorry, I’ve more urgent things right now.” How cool is that? Yeah, I’m not too busy completing a job to kick your ass right now… maybe later.

In The Street Fighter, Terry punches, kicks and viciously gouges his way through a series of brutal encounters. Among the scenes that earned the film an X rating are one in which Terry castrates a would-be rapist with his bare hands, which still manages to shock with its intensity and graphic nature even by today’s standards. Guys are punched so hard they spit out mouthful of teeth and spew judicious amounts of blood. But the film saves the best (and nastiest) move for the final showdown, an impressive battle as Terry proceeds to single-handedly decimate a tanker boat full of henchmen with a climactic fight on deck in the pouring rain.

Shigehiro Ozawa’s direction is appropriately dynamic with plenty of skewed camera angles, slow motion, black and white flashbacks and even an X-ray shot of Terry crushing a guy’s skull with his fist. How badass is that? He makes excellent use of the widescreen frame, especially during the fight scenes, letting them play out along the entire length of the frame.

When New Line Cinema picked up the film in North America, it was renamed The Street Fighter from its original title, which translated into the infinitely cooler sounding, Clash, Killer Fist! It earned an X rating for the gory violence and the studio re-edited the film significantly, cutting out 16 minutes in order to get an R rating. The Street Fighter was an international hit spawning two sequels, Return of The Street Fighter (1974) and The Street Fighter’s Last Revenge (1974) as well as a spin-off film, Sister Street Fighter (1974). None of them hold a candle to the one that started it all – a cult film that dispenses with niceties like political correctness and restraint for an unbridled romp through the criminal underworld led by Chiba’s unrepentant mercenary. For fans of down ‘n’ dirty martial arts movies, this one is pure catnip and a potent reminder of how good a decade the ‘70s was for the genre where you could have a mainstream masterpiece like Enter the Dragon along with no-holds barred carnage on display in The Street Fighter.

ANDREW DOMINIK’S KILLING THEM SOFTLY — A REVIEW BY NICK CLEMENT

5

Lethal. Cold. Innovative. Andrew Dominik’s wildly underrated crime thriller Killing Them Softly was one of the best movies from 2012, and it stands as a personal favorite in this well-travelled genre. I love sleazy stories about disreputable characters and this film lovingly explores the criminal underworld with dark humor, graphic (and scary) violence, and a ruthless and impactful message about capitalism that perfectly serves the savage material. Based on the novel Cogan’s Trade by George V. Higgins, Dominik went for the throat with this spare and brutal piece of crime fiction, presenting a bleak worldview that feels appropriately cynical. Brad Pitt went extra mean in this film as a deadly mob enforcer who lives by a very strict code of conduct. His tack-sharp performance feels like a spiritual cousin to his work and character in Ridley Scott’s brilliant, diamond-cut thriller The Counselor; I love how Pitt seems unafraid to shred his pretty-boy image with degenerate scum such as these guys in these particular films, going with ungainly facial hair and allowing his great looks to be repeatedly upended. He’s been one of my favorite actors for the last 20 years for many reasons; I can think of so few films that he’s starred in that I haven’t enjoyed. And coming after The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford, Dominik yet again switched gears and styles, but presented no less of an all-encompassing atmosphere and cinematic world.

8

In Killing them Softly, Pitt is called in to handle a relatively straight forward situation after two drug-addict losers (the fantastic pair of Scoot McNairy and Ben Mendelsohn, grimy and glazed-over and lovingly desperate) knock over a mob-controlled poker game being supervised by a low-level hood (Ray Liotta, perfectly pathetic). Richard Jenkins lays on the smarm as Pitt’s casually funny criminal world contact who serves as the middle man, and James Gandolfini brilliantly subverts his own gangster visage with a sad and delicate portrayal of an alcoholic, depressed hit-man who doesn’t have the physical energy or mental strength to do what’s asked of him. The scene with Gandolfini, Pitt, and a tired prostitute who takes no shit is one of the sharpest, funniest bits of cinema in recent memory, totally vulgar and grotesque and beautifully acted by the trio; just watch Pitt’s genius facial expressions during this entire back and forth. This is a nasty movie about nasty people doing nasty things, with lots of vulgar discussions of sex by low-class hoodlums, and more than one instance of punishing, crushing violence. And I love the ferocious final moment of the movie with Pitt and Jenkins at the bar – it’s note perfect how this movie finishes up. Dominik’s terse dialogue is grim and masculine and poetic, and the obsessive detail he takes with each character makes for an extremely rewarding viewing experience. Greig Fraser’s dynamic, beyond stylish cinematography is always finding new and interesting ways to visually convey ideas and themes, with the wonderfully attuned editing in perfect synch with the style of the imagery. And the way Dominik uses sound is nothing short of show-stopping, as numerous scenes take on an extra, ominous edge due to the sonic quality.

15

At this point, I’ll happily follow Dominik anywhere he goes as a filmmaker. His searing debut, the Australian prison film Chopper, showcased a then-unknown Eric Bana in a performance that sits alongside Tom Hardy in Bronson, Michael Fassbender in Hunger, and Jack O’Connell in Starred Up. His second film, The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford, was one of many masterpieces released in the crowded 2007 season, and it never truly got the attention it deserved. And much like Jesse James, Killing Them Softly was another effort that came and went with barely a mention from critics at zero attention from the Academy, a movie that was well received but that died a quick commercial death. Granted, it’s not a happy-go-lucky little movie or an easy to digest studio potboiler with at least one sympathetic character, but it deserved to do better at the box office, and it’s a movie that seems to have slipped by a great number of people. If you like your crime films to be unsentimental, menacing, and distinctly funny thanks to a sick sense of humor, look no further than this edgy, volatile effort that seems delighted by the sordid lives of low-class reprobates.

11

RICHARD LINKLATER’S FAST FOOD NATION — A REVIEW BY NICK CLEMENT

1

 

All Richard Linklater has done throughout his stellar if often overlooked career is make one excellent film after another. He’s worked in a variety of genres but always with that effortlessly casual style, and Fast Food Nation easily ranks as one of his best, and most curiously least discussed pieces of work. It’s sort of like The Insider in that, take something that a vast majority of the American populace is addicted to, in this case fast food instead of cigarettes, and nobody is going to really want to hear about it from a cinematic entertainment standpoint. This film is fantastic, topical, and purposefully alarming, featuring an insane cast of stars and character actors including Patricia Arquette, Luis Guzman, Bobby Cannavale, Bruce Willis, Greg Kinnear, Kris Kirstofferson, Wilmer Valderrama, Paul Dano, Lou Taylor Pucci, Ashley Johnson, and Catalina Sandino Moreno, with Linklater basing his scapel sharp screenplay on Eric Schlosser’s best selling novel, and taking no prisoners at any point during his tapesty style narrative. The bloody and disgusting sequences inside of the cattle slaughterhouse are painful to watch, Cannavale is absolutely fantastic as an evil letch taking advantage of a seriously corrput system, and the “There’s shit in the meat” sequence between Kinnear and Willis is absolutely hilarious. This is a very dark satire and all too honest indictment of American life and it’s ridiculous how low of a profile this film has.

Girl, Interrupted: A Review by Nate Hill

image

James Mangold is a director who takes nothing but top shelf scripts and spins them into gold, and Girl Interrupted is a shining example of this. It’s based on a book by Susannah Kayson in which she outlines an 18 month stay at a mental ward sometime during the 60’s. Mangold adapts her book for the screen, gathers an excellent cast of talented gals and a couple guys, and makes a film that holds up today like it was still it’s release week in 1999. Winona Ryder plays Susanna, a reckless girl who is labeled wayward and unstable by her parents, committed to a facility by her stern psychiatrist (Red Forman himself, Kurtwood Smith). She’s a little rough around the edges, but one senses the innate sensibility to her that perhaps has been buried under turbulent behaviour not by anything within her, but by the constricting nature of the time period she has been born into. In any case, she finds herself thrown into an environment she didn’t expect, with many other girls, some of which she clashes with, some of which she ends up befriending, and one that.. well, defies classification, really. The girl in question is Lisa, played by a fantastically fired up Angelina Jolie who nearly combusts upon herself in her furious performance. Lisa has been dubbed nearly unable to treat, yet simply has the kind of soul that doesn’t fit into a box, let alone lend itself to scholarly dissection. Ice cool one moment, a raging typhoon the next, and holding a dense riot shield over any trace of her true emotions every second, she’s an enigmatic, elemental wild card. It’s the best work I’ve ever seen from Jolie, getting her a well earned oscar nod. She teaches Susanna some lessons that only people on that side of the glass can comprehend, confounding the facility’s head doctor (Vanessa Redgrave) and puzzling a kind orderly (Whoopi Goldberg), two rational people who simply can’t understand the kind resolution and companionship that often comes out of irrational, unconventional interaction that almost always is seen as ‘unstable’. Ryder is pitch perfect and carries her share of the load, but despite being the protagonist, it’s Jolie’s show all the way. She’s unbelievably good and will break the heart of both first time viewers and veterans who put the dvd in every so often for a tearful revisit. The late Brittany Murphy is great as Daisy, another complicated girl, and Clea Duvall scores points as Georgina, the shy and reserved one. There’s also work from Jared Leto Elizabeth Moss, Angela Bettis, Bruce Altman, Mary Kay Place, Kadee Strickland, Misha Collins and Jeffrey Tambor. Tender, patient and non judgmental are qualities which are essential in films of this subject matter, as well as empathy from both viewer and filmmaker, to take a look at these girls and even though we may not understand what is going on with them or their beaviour, to simply bear witness, and be there for them. Mangold knows this and acts accordingly, leading to a beautiful film of the highest order. Viewers are sure to do the same, completing the artistic ring full circle.

ANT-MAN: A Retrospective by Joel Copling

Rating in Stars: ***½ (out of ****)
Cast: Paul Rudd, Michael Douglas, Evangeline Lilly, Corey Stoll, Bobby Cannavale
Director: Peyton Reed
MPAA Rating: PG-13 (for sci-fi action violence)
Running Time: 1:57
Release Date: 07/17/15

Ant-Man contains all the usual ingredients of the superhero movie (Indeed, it also contains many of the same things that have made the so-called Marvel Cinematic Universe so creatively tired lately), but it’s in the way screenwriters Edgar Wright, Joe Cornish, Adam McKay, and Paul Rudd rearrange and, in a roundabout way, mock them that the movie finds its pretty considerable success. This is the best introduction to a hero we’ve seen yet in this universe (and, if you’re into ranking things, the second-best movie overall that Disney and Marvel have overseen these past seven years). Mark it down to a mixture of the kind of wacky fun that most of these movies have been missing and a serious approach to the mythology that, finally, is starting to feel lived-in.

But yes, all the usual plot elements are here. We have the Everyman with a hero complex and a unique past: Scott Lang (Rudd) was the well-meaning dad to daughter Cassie (an impossibly cute Abby Ryder Fortson) before wife Maggie (Judy Greer, one of our brightest comic actresses again semi-wasted here in a wife role) remarried to policeman Paxton (Bobby Cannavale) and Scott himself became a career criminal, ending up in the slammer for three years. The film begins as he is finally released–only to procure and then lose a job with a popular ice-cream chain.

We have the Hero’s Destiny, which is here for Scott to be an expendable soldier/guinea pig for Dr. Hank Pym (Michael Douglas), a billionaire scientist who, in 1989, was attempting to discover how to shorten the distance between the atoms (or something). In the present, he is emerging from what seems to be reclusive period in solitude, having handed the company down to his protege Darren Cross (Corey Stoll) years ago; Hank’s daughter Hope van Dyne (Evangeline Lilly) is some sort of head of research, too. Cross has perfected shrinking technology that Hank gave up on years ago, except without the knowledge that Hank’s suit, which shrinks its wearer to the size of a bug, is still active.

Enter Scott into this whole thing, because Hank thinks the technology is dangerous and simply wants to fight fire with fire. From here, we get the usual superhero shtick: Scott trains to become a hero dubbed “the Ant-Man” much to his chagrin by “communicating” with the counterpart insect, which does give us a cool sequence where he fights with another, cameoing Avenger. When the climax comes, director Peyton Reed’s shifting perspective of big-vs.-small takes over in creative ways (such as the battleground of Scott’s final encounter with someone in a different, also-tiny suit called the Yellowjacket being a Thomas & Friends train set or a particularly thrilling battle with a suitcase that turns LifeSavers hard candies and an iPhone into deadly weapons).

This all combines to make this one of the better films in this dominating franchise and just simply an enormously clever ride on its own terms (Even the sequences juxtaposed into the end credits, a phenomenon that has now dominated the franchise’s way of imparting important plot details regarding the whole she-bang, are better than they’ve been in ages). The actors all gel rather wonderfully with their characters (Rudd in particular has a way of making Scott’s abrasiveness likable, and who knew the actor we needed in these movies was Douglas, who hasn’t been this strong in years), and even when the pieces of the puzzle connect exactly where one expects them to, Ant-Man succeeds rather hugely at making us grin too much to care too deeply.

AVENGERS: AGE OF ULTRON: A Retrospective by Joel Copling

Rating in Stars: ** (out of ****)
Cast: Robert Downey Jr., Chris Evans, Mark Ruffalo, Scarlett Johansson, the voice of James Spader
Director: Joss Whedon
MPAA Rating: PG-13 (for intense sequences of sci-fi action, violence and destruction, and for some suggestive comments)
Running Time: 2:21
Release Date: 05/01/15

It’s not that this so-called cinematic universe about myriad superheroes is, perhaps, growing too large for its own good (The knowledge that the final installment in the series will be split into two parts, releasing in 2018 and 2019, might be nirvana for its fan base, but for the rest of us, it’s a worrisome thought, given the number of characters with which it will, by then, need to deal). It’s not that the films themselves have, with a single exception, followed the same basic formula of “Well-meaning hero + generic villain = finale in which they inevitably face each other.” It’s that the stakes in writer/director Joss Whedon’s Avengers: Age of Ultron feel almost entirely insular.

This was not so in 2012’s “The Avengers,” which, for all its difficulty rallying a troupe of disparate heroes together and maintaining a singular personality, at least embraced those many personalities and giddy action sequences into an infectious blend. Here, things are more functional, purposed to push forward a plot that, miraculously, at least makes some sort of sense but feels entirely existent within itself until the end of the third act (and, of course, excepting the usual, mid-credits sequence with the end-game villain against whom these quirky characters must work when all is said and finally done). The result is a slight confection of diverting action sequences that lead to other diverting action sequences and rarely pause long enough to hear what the characters are saying (another stark difference from the first film, which basically simmered in its appealingly written and performed exposition dump).

The Avengers themselves have grown into their roles as world-savers and chemistry as bickering, friendly rivals, and each has his or her own issue this time around. Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) is still sort of suffering PTSD from his previous adventures with this group as Iron Man; he and Bruce Banner (Mark Ruffalo), who becomes a hulking rage monster when rankled, have been dabbling with Loki’s scepter, which exhibits artificially intelligent behavior, and accidentally create Ultron (voice of James Spader, who is wonderfully vindictive and sarcastic in this role) in the process (He wants to control the world by eradicating it of humans, because that makes sense). Bruce and Natasha Romanoff (Scarlett Johansson), aka Black Widow, start up an entirely inconsequential romance that goes nowhere and serves no purpose. Clint Barton (Jeremy Renner), aka Hawkeye, has a secret family (Linda Cardellini fills the Concerned Wife role, but at least it’s Linda Cardellini).

Whedon’s screenplay fails to do that for characters like Thor (Chris Hemsworth), who is just a big, lovable demi-god with a hammer, and Steve Rogers (Chris Evans), who has almost always been as dull as his Captain America alter-ego. Returning but smaller characters (Don Cheadle and Anthony Mackie appear briefly as Tony and Steve’s compatriots, James Rhoades/War Machine and Sam Wilson/The Falcon, and Samuel L. Jackson has another extended cameo as Nick Fury, head of the now-dissolved S.H.I.E.L.D. organization) receive even less to do, and new ones (Ultron might be a curious contradiction at first, but he’s ultimately just a metal brute with an evil plan, while Aaron Taylor-Johnson and Elizabeth Olsen’s appearances as a set of oddball twins with their own, supernatural powers are entirely because of the plot) suffer, as well.

Only some of the film’s attempts to deepen the characters beyond the face value of the thing for which they stand really work. The action sequences are only as fun as they’re allowed to get when Tony, in the famed Hulkbuster suit, and Bruce, in glorious, green form, duke it out as a kind of dueling machismo takes over. The climax is mostly underwhelming (though a new hero excites both in his Frankensteinian creation and in the way he makes everyone else completely redundant) and certainly derivative of the first film’s blowout. Avengers: Age of Ultron does very little that is distinctly wrong; it just reeks of not being very distinctive.

A BETTER TOMORROW II – A REVIEW BY J.D. LAFRANCE

abettertomorrowii02

After the smash box office success of A Better Tomorrow (1986) in its native country of Hong Kong and other Asian territories, the film’s producer Tsui Hark convinced its director John Woo to quickly crank out a sequel imaginatively titled A Better Tomorrow II (1987). The two men had a contentious relationship during production and this spilled over during the editing phase where they argued over the length of the film. It got so bad that a mediator had to step in, allowing Hark and Woo to each edit a half of the film. The end result is a flawed yet fascinating mess of a film that divided Woo fans but helped popularize what became known as the Heroic bloodshed movie, a genre of Hong Kong cinema distinctive for its overtly stylized action sequences often involving excessive gunplay and melodramatic themes consisting of brotherhood, honor, duty, and ultimately redemption.

A few years have passed since the events depicted in A Better Tomorrow. Sung Tse Ho (Ti Lung) is recruited from prison to infiltrate and bust an international counterfeiting operation in Hong Kong. His target is Lung Si (Dean Shek), his former mentor. He’s asked to go undercover and investigate Lung but Ho refuses out of loyalty and the belief that his friend has retired from the business. So, his younger brother Sung Tse Kit (Leslie Cheung), now a police lieutenant, takes the job instead. He manages to impress Lung by helping his daughter in a dance contest.

When Kit’s wife Jackie (Emily Chu) visits Ho in prison upset and worried about her husband’s “secret mission,” he reconsiders the deal offered him. Ho is quickly reunited with Lung and finds out his mentor really has gone straight despite crippling debts and pressure from rival mob boss Mr. Wong (Ng Man-tat) to buy Lung’s shipyard. However, at a meeting with Mr. Wong, Lung is framed for the crime boss’ murder and so Ho puts his mentor on a boat to New York City. However, Lung’s beautiful young daughter is killed on orders from crime boss Ko Ying Pui (Shan Kwan), which, coupled with seeing the kindly priest that took him in and a little girl get killed by assassins, drives him off the deep end. Just how much more trauma can this guy take?

Before he’s about to be given electroshock therapy at a mental institution, Lung is sprung by Ken “Gor” Lee (Chow Yun-fat), the twin brother of Mark who was killed in A Better Tomorrow. It takes approximately 20 minutes before we’re introduced to Ken in a ridiculously drawn out scene where he rants about a plate of rice that a customer doesn’t like. It is a shameless bit of overacting even by Hong Kong cinema standards and I suppose is intended to show that Ken is just as wild and unpredictable as his brother. However, the scene goes on and on into self-parody and one has to give Chow Yun-fat credit for fully committing – or something like that. The overacting continues as Ken tries to get Lung out of his catatonic state. Of course, just as Ken makes a breakthrough they are attacked by assassins. Only in a Woo film would a bloody shoot-out snap a character out of his catatonia. Having survived yet another attack, Ken and Lung go back home to Hong Kong, team up with Ho and Kit and exact unholy vengeance on Ko and his army of crooks in what proves to be one incredible action set piece after another.

In keeping with the tradition of Heroic bloodshed movies, A Better Tomorrow II is essentially a soap opera for guys, albeit a bullet-ridden one. It features incredibly heightened emotions (see the rice scene) as the main characters constantly make life or death decisions. Their lives are continually in danger, which creates an intense bond – the hallmark of many Woo films, especially his Hong Kong ones. Around the one-hour mark the slow motion mayhem really kicks into gear as the Chow Yun-fat action hero we all know and love manifests itself when a gang of bad guys tries to kill Ken and Lung at a flophouse they’re hiding out in. Among the beautifully orchestrated carnage we get a breathtaking shot of Ken sliding down a flight of stairs while dispatching an anonymous baddie with two guns – an iconic image that perhaps best encapsulates what the Heroic bloodshed genre is all about. This stunt was also a warm-up for a similar one that would be pulled off in Hard Boiled (1992), Woo’s Hong Kong swan song.

The rice rant aside, Chow Yun-fat demonstrates why he was such a super star in Hong Kong. He gives off an air of effortless cool as the unstoppable action hero and Woo’s cinematic alter ego. He has loads of charisma and the camera really picks up on it in a big way. Ti Lung is also quite good as the conflicted ex-con that risks his life by going undercover to protect his brother. Leslie Cheung plays the tragic cop with everything to lose. His character has a pregnant wife yet constantly risks his life in order to take down Ko. Finally, Dean Shek is excellent as the father figure of the group and shows considerable chops as Lung goes from honest businessman to catatonic victim to ruthless avenger.

After the financial success of A Better Tomorrow, the film’s producer Tsui Hark wanted to capitalize on it by quickly making a sequel. Originally, the film’s director John Woo agreed but only if it was a prequel set in Vietnam. To him, it didn’t make sense to make a sequel because Mark, A Better Tomorrow’s most popular character, was dead. Woo came up with a story that depicted how the main characters in the first film became friends and got to where they were in life. This was ultimately rejected and he later used it in one of his most personal films Bullet in the Head (1990).

One of Woo’s good friends, actor Dean Shek was going through a rough patch in his career. He was no long popular with audiences and had gone to the United States with the intention of retiring. So, Hark and Woo met with Shek in America and convinced him to come back and make another film with them. This inspired Hark to come up with an idea for a sequel with Shek’s character Lung being coaxed back into action by his friends. Hark also came up with the idea of Mark’s twin brother Ken living in New York City. Woo wasn’t thrilled with these ideas because it ended any notion of his prequel idea but he wanted to help out Shek.

Problems arose during production when Woo came up with the idea of shifting the focus of the film to the two younger brothers – Ken and Kit – because he felt that they had a lot in common. The director shot several scenes with them working and talking together. However, when the film’s original cut ran almost three hours, Hark felt that the film was too long and that the focus should be on Lung. He wanted all of these additional scenes removed. Woo refused to make these cuts and so Hark secretly made edits only for Woo to then put the footage back in afterwards. A mediator stepped in and gave Hark and Woo one week to each edit a half of the film. The end result is a version of the film that neither men were happy with, especially Woo who considers it his least favorite of anything he’s done (Really? Has he seen Paycheck?).

Like many Woo films, A Better Tomorrow II examines themes of honor and loyalty. Ho goes to great extremes in protecting his mentor and his brother Kit as well. These guys are willing to face insurmountable odds and die for each other all in the name of friendship. But it is more than just friendship. When you’ve come so close to death as these guys have there is an unbreakable bond that connects them in a way that clearly fascinates Woo as he has explored it so many times in his films.

Sure, he lays the angst and melodrama on thick but in doing so raises the stakes in the action sequences. This was a pretty novel notion at the time. It makes the climactic showdown – where Ken, Lung and Ho are decked out in black suits (anticipating Reservoir Dogs by a few years) – that much more memorable because these guys have sacrificed so much that they’re due for some well-deserved payback and man, do they ever dish it out by staging a full-on assault on Ko’s compound with automatic weapons, grenades and, in one memorable bit, a samurai sword. But it is Woo’s trademark dual handgun action that is used the most and to greatest effect. A Better Tomorrow II takes the first film and ups the ante with more bloodshed and more melodrama for an installment that some prefer over the original. For a film that had such a troubled production, it is surprisingly coherent and in terms of its action sequences a classic of the genre. Woo would improve greatly on this template with The Killer (1989) and the aforementioned Hard Boiled before trying his luck in Hollywood with mixed results.

BILLY RAY’S BREACH — A REVIEW BY NICK CLEMENT

1
I always thought this was an excellent piece of work, a topical and paranoid political thriller that valued character and logic over needless action and manufactured heroics. Billy Ray is a smart and talented storyteller, and as usual, Chris Cooper and Laura Linney were both absolutely great. Cooper in particular turned in an anguished performance, and was robbed of Academy consideration. Why was this film released in February and not in October or November? But the biggest surprise was how good pretty-boy Ryan Phillippe was at playing a sketched-out, low-level office clerk who gets in way over his head with his secrets-stealing boss. The film has an appropriately ice-cold visual atmosphere (the brilliant Tak Fujimoto was the film’s ace cinematographer) and fleet pacing due to Jeffrey Ford’s tight editing, while the crispness of Ray’s intelligent screenplay, which he co-wrote with Adam Mazer and William Rotko, favors words over bullets as the ultimate weapons.
2
Ray has had a great career as a writer, with the underrated WWII drama Hart’s War and creepy serial killer thriller Suspect Zero ranking as two cool screenplay credits, while recently, he contributed to the underappreciated State of Play remake by Kevin Macdonald and penned the riveting Captain Phillips for action auteur Paul Greengrass. He’s also responsible for writing and directing one of the best journalism thrillers of all time, the highly engrossing Shattered Glass, which is woefully undervalued, and features conclusive proof that Hayden Christensen is capable of a great performance. Breach tells a true story and does it with confidence and smarts, taking the audience into a shadowy world of government mystery and personal betrayal, and with Cooper’s sturdy performance anchoring the entire piece and an emotionally wrenching finale, this is a ripped-from-the-headlines thriller that truly deserves a Blu-ray upgrade – get on it Universal!
3

BENNETT MILLER’S FOXCATCHER — A REVIEW BY NICK CLEMENT

1
Foxcatcher is as chilling as true crime cinema can get. The vice-grip direction from the extremely erudite filmmaker Bennett Miller in tandem with a supremely cogent screenplay fashioned with scalpel-sharp dialogue from Dan Futterman and E. Max Frye creates a film that is unshakeable and grim. Funereal in tone and sad to the core, Foxcatcher is a richly textured masterpiece of filmmaking and storytelling, daring to explore America at its worst, never cheapening anything during its all-consuming, slow-burn runtime. This film will be massively off-putting for many people – a true bitter pill – but for those who have cinema running through their veins, this is the equivalent of a five course meal at a Michelin rated restaurant. With the clear and clean screenplay at his disposal, Miller captures the dark, rotted soul of the corrupted male psyche, utilizing a cold and detached directorial aesthetic that fully absorbs the audience. Greig Fraser’s quiet, measured, and totally unassuming cinematography unfolds in a deliberately patient fashion, and when paired with the creepy and subtle musical score by Rob Simonsen, this becomes a movie that uses its sly visual and sonic strengths to amplify the exactitude of its words.
2
Every time I watch the film I’m blown away by its power and ability to unnerve, as Fraser and Miller use empty visual space to convey the alienation of everyone in the narrative. The performances are astounding with the big-three trio of Channing Tatum, Steve Carell, and Mark Ruffalo providing transformative work, anchoring this exceedingly gripping tale of obsession, paranoia, ritualistic sport behavior, and blunt, psychological turmoil. Carrell imbues self-professed “patriot” John Dupont (ex-heir to the Dupont family fortune who hosted the 1988 wrestling team at his estate) with a staggering false sense of importance and pride; his consistent uttering that he’s “helping America” is one of the creepiest elements to the character of Dupont, and something that Carell does so well in the film. The fact that when you see Carell in this film and you never once think of Michael Scott from The Office – that’s a testament to how deep Carell went in his portrayal; the rest of his work as an actor will be judged against his menacing turn in Foxcatcher. He’s a sociopath to the extreme, bordering on outright psychopath. Yet, nobody calls him on it, none of his handlers or business managers or associates. Had they raised the obvious concerns than many clearly felt, they wouldn’t have gotten paid, but a life might not have been lost.
3
That’s one of the many key themes of Foxcatcher – how much is a person’s life worth? It’s a crime that Tatum wasn’t talked-up for Best Actor because, for me, he was Carrel’s equal in every way. Using his already physically intimidating body to maximum effect as 1984 Olympic wrestling gold medalist Mark Schultz, his jaw jutted out with a shuffle of a walk, Tatum forces the viewer to confront this socially awkward character head on. He’s a man in the shadow of his brother, the gold medal winning wrestler Dave Schultz, having never grown up with the love of a father, always looking for something – anything – to latch onto. Ruffalo plays Dave Schultz as a good and decent family man, and as always, is astonishingly natural, never hitting a false note, always nailing the little details just as much as the big scenes.
foxcatcher_ver11
As the film progresses, you watch as he begins to possibly understand the madness that he’s allowed himself to become a part of. The scene with Ruffalo being coached by the documentary filmmaker to say that he loved Du Pont and that Du Point was his mentor has got to be one of the more upsetting movie moments of the year. As Foxcatcher builds towards its inevitable conclusion, one is left with the impression that Miller wants us to examine the very fibers of what it means to be a “winner” and an American society obsessed and consumed with “winning,” and how people of high-net worth and little actual talent delude themselves into thinking that they are somehow entitled to greatness, without having to earn it. This is a phenomenally layered piece of work that cuts to the bone.
foxcatcher

GARETH EDWARDS’ MONSTERS — A REVIEW BY NICK CLEMENT

1

With a nifty premise and a low budget, the independent sci-fi drama Monsters plays around with the genre and has some serious fun, and clearly served as a major calling card for its creator. Written, photographed, designed (both visually and physically) and directed by then first timer Gareth Edwards (Godzilla, the upcoming Rogue One), Monsters is more of a romantic drama than the next Cloverfield or District 9, though the influence of both of those films can certainly be felt from time to time. But whereas Cloverfield was a hectic and adrenalin-pumping action picture and District 9 was a social and political allegory cleverly disguised as a buddy-action film, Monsters plays it quiet and small for the most part, allowing its two lead actors (the excellent Scoot McNairy and easy on the eyes Whitney Able) to develop solid chemistry and pull the audience into their predicament. What sets this film apart from the rest of the genre competition is that for as much excitement that was shown for the monsters themselves, the human side to the story was never skimped out on, and because of this, the emotional investment is that much richer.

2

The narrative hook of Monsters is that a NASA space probe has crashed in Mexico and now there are various extraterrestrial lifeforms running amok all over the country, with the military fighting them to the death. Andrew (McNairy, one my favorite actors) has been tasked with delivering his boss’s daughter, Samantha (Able), back to the states, but in order to do so, the two of them have to risk their lives and trek through the “infected zone” where anything at any moment could pop out and eat them. Edwards was clearly working on a shoe-string budget for this type of material but was still able to deliver superb visual effects in a few key sequences; it’s amazing what home computers can do these days as most of this ingenious little film was crafted in his living room. But what made Monsters really stand out was its finale – I absolutely loved the final moments of this movie and where the story went and how it totally upended your expectations. Instead of going for the easy and the bombastic, Edwards went poetic and thoughtful, and in doing so, created a monster movie unlike any other.

3