Author Archives: Ben Gould

The Train (1964).

This director made some fucking belters, Seconds (1966) and Ronin (1998) your blogger’s personal faves from Frankenheimer’s treasure trove of thriller goodies.

The Train (1964) belongs in the wee basket of bantz. It features a train, didn’t you know? It’s a riot, with sublime cinematography replete with anachronistic experiments that somehow manage not to retract from the drama, the thrills, big Burt Lancaster, the rarely seen Paul Scofield as an art-loving Nazi, Jeanne Moreau, and lots of steam. Good steam.

John Frankenheimer made the type of movies that Brian De Palma couldn’t accomplish.

Interiors (1978).

Interiors (1978) was so ghastly in every conceivable way I almost thought I had turned on a parody of a movie named Interiors, or a low-rent version of a really bad Bergman movie, and there are plenty of those. 

The behaviour of the ‘characters’ – the nebbish, narcissistic blabbering lot with therapists – in this joke of a film had me reaching for the cyanide. The lack of purpose wasn’t what vexed me the most, it was the prevailing smugness, the tightly-wound dialogue so concocted and so unlike how humans interact that it’s immediately begging you to quit. The Brechtian Effect in cinema works when it’s done right, but I don’t think this movie even does it on purpose, it’s that far up its own arse.

Interiors is horrible and everyone in it is infuriating. 

Just horrible. 

But if you want to be irritated, this is the one for you.

Brazil (1985). I regret this revisit. A lot.

Terry Gilliam movies are generally a mess, and with extended periods of boredom, meandering subplots that are entirely unnecessary. Only in cinema could he get away with such self-indulgent behaviour; a novel of his I would use as a coaster at best.

This movie has nothing going for it aside from four fabulous shots.

It’s pointless as a film and is thoroughly infuriating in its Monty Python-ness, which consists of ostensibly serious things happening but characters oblivious to them and faffing around with something else in the frame.

These very non-talented folk made entire careers out of this subset of weak comedy and they are still dining off it.

I hate Monty Python and everyone associated with it. Because it’s not funny, not clever, and defines an era when Britain seems even more cruddy and just plain stupid than it is today.

And that’s not good.

I despised this movie.

Bye for now.

The Quiet American (2002).

An unsubtle grand metaphor for imperialism and the passing of the torch from one empire to the next, the personal and the political both intertwine in The Quiet American (2002) as they always inevitably do in these world-weary yarns.

It’s a fabulous thriller with all the prerequisite delicate human minutiae, and Michael Caine is extraordinary.

He always has been – even in The Swarm (1978).

The Dogs of War (1980).

Walken doesn’t need to explain anything in this one – why should you have an insight into his inner sanctum? He plays chess and that’s all you need to know. He’s an extremely cool lad, even when channelling his evident PTSD through some heavy weaponry in the fictional state of … Zangaro. No-one can do haunted like this actor, yet stay seemingly aloof and in control at the same time. The movie has a clinical, procedural quality about it, that Day of the Jackal (1973) disciplined narrative. The similarity is not a coincidence (Frederick Forsyth).

Fabulous film and it should be more … out there.

Tagged , , , , ,

Arlington Road (1999).

The opening credits sequence in this middling, moderately entertaining thriller were so fucking annoying in their aping of the classic Kevin Spacey-free Seven (1995) titles that I almost turned it off out of disgust.

It ends up being okay, if as predictable as it gets. It does take on a certain contentiousness with its theme of domestic terrorism and anti-government radicalism.

Worth a bash, even if Jeff Bridges is rubbish. He’s always rubbish.

Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves (1991).

How to describe Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves (1991) to someone yet to have ‘the experience’ – it’s nuts.

Kevin Costner is in it with a receding hairline/mullet combo. He leads a gang of Midlands-based Bolsheviks with American accents who spend their time chilling in Sherwood Forest and robbing successful people of their hard-earned cash – it’s an unintentional allegory.

Morgan Freeman is also in it, and he seems to have adopted an accent that’s straight outta Cool Runnings (1994). The best bit of the yarn is when they get from Dover to Nottingham, Alan Rickman’s domain, via Hadrian’s Wall.

It’s an insane movie and looks like it was made merely to test whether an insane movie could be a success.

Tagged , , , , ,

Snake Eyes (1998).

After a grand opening sequence shot that showcases all of Brian De Palma’s predilection/fetish for needless aesthetics with an absence of characterisation or an acknowledgement of any world outside his own wee wanky technical exercises, this descends into a non-movie student project.

Apologies for the length of that sentence.

The most intriguing aspect of this legit pile of crap is that the excellent character actor Kevin Dunn is in it and interacts with a character named ‘Kevin Dunne’ played by Gary Sinise. But once again this is De Palma being all clever and self-referential instead of crafting a story.

Avoid.

Tagged , , , , ,

The Break-Up (2006). The pain was real.

I watched this in its entirety to marvel at the stupidity on display.

You don’t believe a thing in it, every line a concoction, every utterance a glib metaphor. The worst – the wee friends they have, these quirky one-dimensional supportive sock puppets who supply witty quips to the leads, just to remind the audience that this stock couple are popular.

Their pals exist merely for them, to boost their egos, to provide uncanny psychological insight. Personally, I’d rather be pals with a squirrel than any of the unbearable cunts mugging it in this sickly romcom, the most abysmal of its ilk.

0/5.

Trading Places (1983).

A comedy with … you know, wits … that even has a bit of a brain. This was 1983, though, when you were allotted a bit of ‘lolz’.

This is a scattershot sociological satire (accidental alliteration), The Prince and the Pauper (1881) meets a raucous, but never annoying Eddie Murphy. The lad was on fire back then, a veritable motormouth meteor on stage and screen.

I ran out of metaphors.

There are spooky harbingers here: one’s dependence upon financial institutions, and how easy one can be ‘cut off’ from access to ‘legit’ money, the speed of the downfall from mansion to slum dwelling.

I found some of it quite disturbing in its foreboding, and the unfunny periods at least have these serious elements.

Top movie.

Tagged , , , , , ,