Reservoir Dogs

Title: Reservoir Dogs

Year of Release: 1992

Date Viewed: February 4th, 2011

MPAA Rating: R

Some of my blog subscribers already know this, but I'd like to confess something to the rest of the world that will probably hurt my credibility. I am not a fan of Quentin Tarantino's work.

It's not that I have anything against the guy personally. In fact, we actually have a lot in common. Our youth was largely spent browsing through video rental shelves for obscure films before becoming the geekiest video store employees at our respective neighborhoods. We share many of the same tastes in entertainment, namely martial arts flicks, senseless violence and Three Stooges routines. Movies rule our lives and without them we would have no identity. Yet I have such a difficult time immersing myself into the work of an Academy Award winner who is practically a peer, seemingly for the same reasons that he is so beloved by his cult fanbase.

Like I stated before in the introductory post, my movie opinions often go against the grain, but I'm not ashamed of that. Independent critical thinking can sometimes get lost when surrounded by self-righteous know-it-alls. They're everywhere on and off the net. So my thoughts regarding Tarantino are not meant to be provocative. (I'm looking at you, Armond White.) Rather it's simply an exercise in brutal honesty. As the saying goes: It's better to be trusted than to be liked.

Tarantino has earned my respect for having a successful self-made career in ultra competitive Hollywood. I say this now because many future comments regarding his projects will be negative. And again, it's not because I'm out to get him. I'll continue to give him chances for as long as he's willing to make movies.

Now that we've got that out of the way, on to the review of his feature-length directorial debut: Reservoir Dogs.

Six strangers are recruited by a mob boss (Lawrence Tierney) to conduct a most meticulous heist at a diamond warehouse. The plan is set up perfectly, but the result is far from it. The loot is successfully stolen, but the police are hot on their trail. What was intended as a slick getaway has turned into a paranoid investigation for a possible traitor within their ranks. Or perhaps the boss had set them up from the beginning.

The group retreats to their warehouse rendezvous point to attempt rationalization and tend to their comrade Mister Orange (Tim Roth) who had been shot during the getaway. The name is color-themed just like all the others in this story. Alter-egos to cover real identities. The less personal information that could be shared between them, the less likely they are to grow close and compromise the mission. Uncovering the perpetrator (if he even exists) could be the robbers only chance of escaping prison or death.

I'll give Tarantino this. Sometimes he really knows how to set up a scene. And he may be one of the very best at depending on imagination for ultimate impact, strongly supported at the film's conclusion. He doesn't even bother to show the actual heist. All the drama unfolds in the aftermath within the gritty interior of the warehouse. The characters don't know what to make of the situation. And neither do we because we haven't witnessed it. Bringing this much anticipation into who will walk through the door and why takes brilliance. The most pivotal events occur within the filthy warehouse. With contention behind limited locations, Tarantino almost can claim to have reinvented the action genre. It feels fast-moving without actually going anywhere.

Everything else truly doesn't go anywhere. There are scenes outside of the warehouse, most of them designed to elaborate on characters. For whatever reason, these end up far less interesting. Whereas the warehouse events never stop pushing the plot forward; the background scenes stop it dead in its tracks. It's like two writers were trying to tell the same story and the scripts were pasted together without revisions. I guess I should have expected this. Tarantino is known to abruptly change tone whenever he feels like it. His inconsistency irritates me to no end. Take the opening scene for example. The characters are having breakfast together in a restaurant shortly before the big heist. After a rather random conversation, it concludes with a popular quoted speech by Mister Pink (Steve Buscemi) explaining his belief that servers shouldn't be tipped. Although amusing, the speech doesn't serve any later relevance nor does it help him stand out amongst his comrades. The robbers are all crazy enough to do anything that it makes neglecting dining customs small fry. Maybe Tarantino had a newspaper column he wanted to publish but couldn't find anywhere else to place it. I'm amazed at how half-convincing the speech was.

A few standout moments have helped Reservoir Dogs stay memorable. The friend that showed me this movie claims to have difficulty listening to Stealers Wheel's "Stuck in the Middle With You" without thinking of Mister Blonde's (Michael Madsen) sadistic torture. I will remember it simply for the great ideas that were brought to a very small table. Some story arcs were given a little too much attention while others were begging for more. I'm left undecided over whether the movie went too far or hadn't gone far enough.

Rating: 4

The Muppet Christmas Carol

Title: The Muppet Christmas Carol

Year of Release: 1992

Date Viewed: December 25th, 2010

MPAA Rating: G

Last month was the first time that I had diagnosed myself with Christmas burnout. It was inevitable. I blame commercialism and the media hype machine. November 1st is the first calendar date where Christmas themed music is played nonstop on radio airwaves. You can't go to any public place without hearing the 378,368,487th cover of Santa Claus is Coming to Town. Houses are decorated in bright colors. Elf and A Christmas Story are aired on basic cable television almost every day. Store employees and customers become grouchy. Everyone forgets how to obey the rules of the road. These are all the signs of the holiday season and they do not go away until December 31st. That's two months of Christmas. One-sixth or seventeen percent of the year. Crazy, isn't it?

When November 1st came around, my usual reaction of excitement was replaced by bewilderment. "Didn't we just do this last week?" Nobody wants to be the Grinch when everyone else is having fun. But for the first time, Christmas no longer felt special to me. It felt too common. I was tired of unpacking decorations and setting up the trees. I was tired of watching Ebenezer Scrooge become a better person every year. I was tired of hearing Schroeder's piano solo. Yet I went along with it because it's the social polite thing to do.

And then came my annual viewing of The Muppet Christmas Carol. Despite everything I had just complained about, this movie managed to help me forget all that frustration and love Christmas once again. At least for eighty minutes.

This was the first Muppets theatrical film produced since their godfather Jim Henson passed away. This set the bar very high. The project needed to accomplish two things. It had to create a new yet loyal take on Charles Dickens' classic "A Christmas Carol" novel and pay a proper tribute to Jim Henson's legendary career. Writer Jerry Juhl and director Brian Henson went above and beyond the call of duty here. The Muppet Christmas Carol offers the best of two worlds. The finest character study set during the Christmas season and a sideshow of humor that only the creativity of Jim Henson's company could provide. The only sad part is after this movie's release, neither Juhl nor Henson were involved in anything that matched this level of quality.

By sheer fate, Henson's Muppet universe seemed tailor made for Dickens' tale. Most of the characters didn't have to change their personality for the sake of the story. Kermit the Frog as mild mannered Bob Cratchit and Fozzi Bear as good-natured Fezziwig (renamed Fozziwig) were natural fits. Other characters had to be rethought a little. The normally frightening Jacob Marley is turned comical by Statler and his partner-in-crime Waldorf. And The Great Gonzo (as Charles Dickens) serves as our charismatic narrator.

But this Muppets fare is no farce. Brian Henson treats Dickens' work with the utmost respect and stays true to the necessary dramatic themes. The power of greed, true family values and redemption are still the focus point. It even had to turn dark when it had to. After a steady hybrid of drama and comedy, the movie turns completely serious during the final act. At this point, Gonzo breaks the fourth wall and tells the audience, "You're on your own, folks. We'll meet you at the finale."

One of the few characters not represented by a Muppet is Ebenezer Scrooge himself, with Michael Caine in the role. Caine's strategy appeared to be not portraying Scrooge as a heartless monster, but rather as a hurt soul. As the opening number suggests, "Look closely and there must be a sweet man inside." His actions are still as appalling as ever, yet there's a hint of sadness behind his face that made me wish better for him instead of the worst. There is a history of Scrooge actors overcompensating to act evil. Caine's performance is different because he mostly lets the actions speak for themselves. And besides, there are only so many ways to wear an angry face.

The musical numbers are written by longtime Henson contributor Paul Williams. They vary in tone depending on the chapter of the story. The most serious number "When Love is Gone" was deleted from the theatrical cut because it was deemed too somber for a Muppets film, a sentiment I agree with. However, it came at a cost. Instead of providing Scrooge's love interest, Belle, with a written background, her history was summed up in a musical number instead. A mistake. When the number was cut, the character ended up baring very little relevance to the story. A vital part of Ebenezer Scrooge's path to redemption is supposed to be his realization of past mistakes. Sacrificing the theme of lost love was a real shame, especially since the movie did such an exceptional job with the other ones. (The number was re-inserted into the movie for the pan-and-scan VHS release.)

When the topic of Christmas movies arise in conversation, The Muppet Christmas Carol is almost never talked about, probably because it's not aired on television very often. It's an overlooked classic and Brian Henson's best work since his father's passing. Various other crossover movies involving the Muppets and classic works of literature would come in the future. The filmmakers, however, lost sight of what made the Charles Dickens' project so charming. The lesson that should have been learned was: There is room for noisy slapstick humor, but it needs to stay in the back seat so that the original story can drive us home peacefully.

Rating: 8

Army of Darkness

Title: Army of Darkness

Year of Release: 1992

Date Viewed: October 30th, 2010

MPAA Rating: R

My friends like to reference my love for Army of Darkness as proof that I am a very strange human being. This is the only film from my guilty pleasure collection that I do not feel the least bit guilty about. Packaged in this twisted narrative is a story that doesn't make any sense, characters that do not act realistic, dialogue that nobody would ever dare to use in real life and special effects that aged worse than milk. I wouldn't want it any other way.

Army of Darkness is the third installment in director Sam Raimi's cult-popular Evil Dead trilogy. Picking up almost precisely where Evil Dead II left off, Ash Williams (Bruce Campbell) continues the worst weekend of his life by accidentally transporting himself and his Oldsmobile back to England's Medieval age. The evil spirits known as "deadites" that have been haunting Ash back in the present time seem to be running rampant in this timeline as well.

Lord Arthur (Marcus Gilbert) initially mistakes Ash as a soldier serving under rival Duke Henry (Richard Grove). Ash escapes captivity by defeating a pit monster and then impresses the locals by easily thwarting a possessed witch. The castle's Wise Man (Ian Abercrombie) informsAsh that his only hope for returning home is to venture off in a quest to find the Necronomicon a.k.a. The Book of the Dead. Located in its pages is a time-traveling spell and enough supernatural power to deflect future evil from Arthur's castle. But due to an error in judgment, a massive army of deadites awaken in the woods. They are hellbent on getting the book for themselves, jeopardizing the future of mankind. Ash has no interest in playing hero until things get personal. An evil clone of himself kidnaps Shelia (Embeth Davidtz), his romantic interest. An epic battle commences between humans and deadites to determine the fate of the world.

Just as it was with Evil Dead II, Bruce Campbell is practically a one man show. The supporting characters are really just cannon fodder for Ash's ridicule. Campbell is one of those actors that can probably read a phone book and still manage to be funny. And he's the only actor I can think of that can rival Jim Carrey and Jim Varney in a funniest facial expression contest.

But even with Campbell's charisma and the movie's self awareness of the ridiculous, there are some lines of dialogue that are cringe worthy and probably sounded better on paper. When Shelia is possessed by the deadites, the first line spoken by her evil persona is "I may be bad but I feel good." For every person that laughs at that statement, there is someone who facepalms.

Sam Raimi isn't exactly one of the most innovative directors. But he has a style of his own and it's easy to recognize here. Camera shots pan back, forth and sideways for comedic effect. Homage is paid to his low budget roots by continuing a running gag where Ash is chased through the woods by an unidentifiable creature or spirit. We only know the creature is where when the movie switches to its point of view, so we are left to our own conclusions. Raimi's sense of humor is a bit self-depreciating and doesn't ever attempt to be high class. Each situation that Ash finds himself in is more bizarre than the last. Just when you think you've seen it all, the movie dares to reach inside its bag again for another twisted imaginative joke, usually at the expense of Ash's pain.

Declaring a favorite among the three Evil Dead films is a good test for discovering what your tastes most appreciate. Each one has vastly different attributes and its own identity. The first movie is straight up horror. The second movie blends horror and comedy. This third movie doesn't try to scare anyone and only goes for the laughs. Ironically, it's the laughs that will scare away a crowd that comes in unprepared. Watching Army of Darkness is a Halloween tradition in my household and I decided this was the year to introduce it to my mother. She can appreciate ridiculous humor as much as I can but we were divided over this one. While I was laughing and pointing at the screen, she sat silently and had the look of someone that wanted to say "This is too weird for me." There is no definitive test for finding out if the movie works for you or not. You just have to experience it for yourself. At the very worst, it's only eighty minutes of time risked to lose. At the very best, it'll be the most fun eighty minutes of your day.

Rating: 8