Before Sunset (2004)

Magnum's review-

I first caught this film at a special screening at SXSW 2004 down in Austin, Texas and just watched it again via my favorite thing ever (Netflix) with Wendibular the other night. Of course at SXSW the film was introduced by Linklater himself and actress Julie Delpy, so there really is no comparison. This is without a doubt a very amazingly good film, not just because of its entertainment value, but because it is so simple. It's basically an 80 minute walk and talk and it never ceases to be interesting. While watching it for a second time, I was expecting the bubble to burst considering the kick ass circumstances in which I first saw the film (hello...Linklater sitting there introducing it). But it never did, the film was just as solid and entertaining the second time around. No car chase, no explosions, no sex, just two people who haven't seen each other in years, reuniting and chatting for over an hour. Its' so good though, I'm telling you, see this film!

First I suppose we should get the summary out of the way. This is a sequel to Before Sunrise (1995) where a grad student (Ethan Hawke) meets a young French woman (Delpy) on a train ride and they spend a day and night in Vienna before they have to part. Instead of exchanging phone numbers and falling into the usual long distance relationship, they agree to meet again in Vienna later that year without any contact info in case something happens. They will leave it to fate. Before Sunset picks up about a decade later in a bookstore in Paris where Hawke is promoting his latest novel which happens to be about his fling with the French beauty. The two spend about two hours on a beautiful late Paris afternoon, walking the streets, parks, sipping coffee at a cafe and riding the river boats, just catching up and chatting about everything and anything. They never miss a beat and neither does the film.

The converstations are very realistic and fluid, not in a flawless Sorkin way but very fly on the wall. In part I think due to Linklater bringing Hawke and Delpy in on the scripting process early on to create the believable cadence. Techically the film is basic, mostly steadicammed, simple lighting setups, warm colors, good location scouting. I believe is was a very short shoot, like just over two weeks and they could only film for like 4 hours each day so that late afternoon lighting always matched. Interesting behind the scenes tid bits. The acting was superb but I expected it to be as Linklater gets so much out of his cast in every movie.

Magnum's grade: A (94)

The Candidate (1972)

Magnum's review-

I've been meaning to check this movie out for a long time as part of research for our EvansAmerica show. The film stars Robert Redford and was made to coincide with the '72 Presidential election campaign. The film follows Peter Boyle who plays Marvin Lucas a Democratic strategist who recruits Bill McKay (Redford), the son of a legendary California politician, to run for the Senate. The film is less an inspirational underdog story and more of a unflattering portrayal of the mechanics of politics.

Summary out of the way I have to say I found myself underwhelmed throughout the whole film. While alot of the scenes were amusing, that's about as good as it gets. You never connect with any of the characters because everyone in the film on both sides of the political aisle come off as self absorbed, cold figures who are cogs in the political machine, who sleepwalk through the motions. Not even McKay seems passionate about what he's doing, even though he starts out saying he's going to run his campaign as part of a crusade for the truth, talking about the issues he wants to. By the end he's spewing the same one liners like the rest of them with no heart. There's a scene towards the end where McKay is in the back of the car mocking himself and his speeches, his driver thinks he's lost his mind as McKay tilts his head down, his eyes growing dark and gives the Nixon 'peace' pose. I'm sure that killed with liberals back in '72.

Now the satire and the inside look at the political machine was a very bold choice for this film. Rather than go with the uplifting everything works out for the hero movie, this had guts, it was unique. And that is what I did like about it, however I think it was more effective for its time. Remember this movie came out pre-Watergate, before the nation lost faith in its officials and reporters starting uncovering the corruption in the beltway. I think that cynical look at government is still just as strong now, which is why the impact of this movie just didn't work on me. Politicians are corrupt, they make broad statements, they don't care about much more than their own personal gain and making friends with whoever will get them elected again. What's new? Seen it. Living it. That was the overall theme the filmmakers weren't shy about, you claw and fight so hard to win, losing yourself and your ideals in the process and then once you win, what then? Redford's last line of the film sums it up, he's in a back room of the campaign's hotel. The crowd is chanting for him and Boyle is smiling but Redford is shell shocked, he barely is able to mutter some simple words, "What do we do now Marvin, what do we do now?" That's a pretty damn good ending.

Magnum's grade: B (85)

High Tension (2005)

Magnum's review-

The US version of "Haute Tension". A French thriller/slasher picture. One which I would really like to see the unrated French version with subtitles. This version was a mix of dubbing and subtitles that got under my skin. The US release was apparently edited down to get the all important "R" rating even though it was still a very brutally violent and gory film.

This movie really mind-fuck handcuffed me, and the more I spend time analyzing it, the more it plummets in my ratings. First of all, I'm getting sick of the twist endings, it's all the rave now and it's not being done right, this coming from me who's last movie had a twist ending of its own, so I know. Especially this twist that just makes you groan when it happens. It feels like a cop out and actually ruined the mood of the film instead of helping it. Up to that point, the film was a very tense, brutal French slasher film that blended a nice touch of homage to the American slasher film. Nothing very deep, just simple gore and scares, which is fine, but instead of sticking with it until the end, Director Alexandre Aja veers us off into the higher brow thriller genre for no reason whatsoever. The twist reveals huge gaps in the plot and requires vast lapses in reality and also limits the movie to a one watch flick wonder. Watching it a second time won't reveal any new clues, just more confusion.

Now the positive aspects of the film, namely technical, although the performance by Cecile De France as Marie was brilliantly done. The cinematography and sound design were very stellar for basically a slasher flick. The shot selection was very thorough and well planned. The framing was tight, the angles very interesting, the lighting was always top notch with nice color tone. Although this one damn shot bugged the hell out of me. Marie is walking around outside the farmhouse smoking, she walks towards an old swing that is lit by an overhead spotlight. It's a cool looking shot, but there is no motivation for the lighting and is just laughably out of place.

*WARNING: SPOILERS BELOW*

Here are my concerns that arose once the twist is thrown upon us. Where did the van come from? Is everything with Marie really just delusions and part of her imagination? There is no reasoning or payoff for any of this. If Aja didn't care that a lot of the plot wouldn't make sense, then why even put the twist in there? It was really frustrating to know that most of the tense moments involving Marie never really happened, just cheap scares?

Here's my ending that I would have done rather than the twist: Marie had already mentioned in the car about her dream in the woods and the masturbating scene before the carnage starts would have been a great bookend for the bloodbath. She puts on her headphones and slips into her sexual bliss, what ensues in the film is part of her dream that she uses to get off. When the carnage is done, we cut back to the bed where she is coming down from her climax. She rolls over towards the camera with a wicked and satisfied grin on her face as we hang for a while before cutting to black and rolling end credits. But that's just me.

Magnum's grade: C (76)

About this blog

Is this just another movie review blog? Yes, but it will be much better than all others. Why should we care what you think? Because we know what were talking about.

This blog:
The main purpose of this site is to create the Top 100 movies of our lifetime, ala 1979 to the present. We have been inspired by the lack of creativity or pretentiousness of the numerous Top 100 lists as of late. More details about the criteria we will use at picking these films will follow shortly. We will also be reviewing other films outside of the list as well. New in theaters, new on DVD, and films we've just happened to have caught recently on IFC or HBO or from Scotty's library o' movies.