Change Your Image
HonourableJudgeReinhold
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Lists
An error has ocurred. Please try againReviews
Head (1968)
An Experiment That's Also An Experience
A little while back, a friend of mine and I were talking about music. Our focus was on groups from the sixties. We touched on The Yardbirds, The Doors, The Who, Jimi Hendrix, The Beatles, all the essentials. But then, The Monkees were somehow mentioned and my friend was quick to dismiss them. He said something to the effect of "they were just a manufactured group whose only motive was to make money." This was some time ago, and I didn't really know much about the Monkees, and this information really turned me off of them. To quote my friend again, "they tried to cash in on the success of the Beatles except they didn't have a fraction of their talent." About a year later, Head came into my possession. Remembering my conversation with my friend, I was a bit skeptical of the film's quality. When I finally gave it a chance with an open mind, I was shocked by almost every aspect of this sixties gem.
Head is a film that definitely stays true to the word "experimental." There is no linear plot, no consistent style, and it provides a great example for genre bending. A case can be made in calling it a comedy, drama, war film, musical, documentary, political satire, or really any type of film. All of these categories are thrown into a blender to create something very unique, if not strange. But I feel the films greatest strength is its ability to be self-aware. It was made knowing who the stars were and anticipating that there were people like my friend ready to critique the band. The result is a surprising examination of the band's commercial image, and it pokes a lot of fun at the Monkees being constantly referred to as a piece of fluff. This film literally makes them as small as dandruff in Victor Mature's hair.
They are aware that their popularity is fleeting and despite their desire to be taken seriously as musicians, there is no escaping their polished commercial image and inevitable decline. It must be said that the Monkees do a great job playing themselves. I never did see the TV show that came before the film but on screen they have a great chemistry with each other and all of them are very natural performers.
Each band member has their chance to shine in many key scenes. They parody how they are perceived by the media and let their true personalities shine through. I really identified with Peter Tork; they make reference to his character on the television show and point out, "you're always the dummy, Peter." In the film, Tork is portrayed to be much more contemplative and deep thinking which really seems to fit his demeanor more. There is nothing to latch on to except, I believe, the film's attitude. It is key that the material doesn't take itself too seriously. It sprinkles interesting ideas and sometimes shocking imagery throughout the film, but the Monkees are having so much damn fun on the screen that it never feels preachy or overly philosophical.
One of my favorite scenes, for example, shows the band playing a Mike Nesmith penned song, Circle Sky. It is a fantastic song and performance by the Monkees, but interspersed with the live performance is disturbing footage from Vietnam. At some point during the performance you can't tell if the crowd is screaming for the band or screaming in horror from the Vietnam scenes. This was Bob Rafelson's first film and it is a great start to a great career. For Rafelson, this was more of a film school project than anything. He had the rare opportunity to make any kind of film he wanted with any sort of content that he wanted.
There are carefully structured long takes and relaxing musical interludes in some places and to counterbalance there are very quick cuts and fast paced scenes in other places. There are absolutely no boundaries and it makes for quite an experience for a first time viewer and it holds up very well to repeated viewings. To quote the Monkees themselves "you say we're manufactured. To that we all agree. So make your choice and we'll rejoice in never being free!" So what if the group was handpicked from a mile long list of actors, that doesn't change the fact that they had lots of charisma and were (and still are) genuinely talented people. This film gave me a whole new respect for each member of the Monkees. One thing I forgot to mention is that the camera crew is visible frequently throughout the film. Rafelson himself constantly pops up reminding you you're only watching a movie, don't take it too seriously. You're free to walk away with a message or just shrug your shoulders and say, "huh, that was weird."
The Wolfman (2010)
The Classic Movie Monster is Revamped, But Not Improved
"The Wolfman" follows in the tradition of classic studio monsters such as Frankenstein or Dracula, and it knows what its audience expects. The film is very bleak and shot with barely any light to fully see what we are being exposed to. The atmosphere works really well; it completely sweeps you into a classic monster movie, which tells a tale of the impossible and the horrific. With a film like this, atmosphere is tremendously important. The mood has to be set so you can fully grasp the terror in the images on the screen. Looking at pure visual style, the film accomplishes just that, it is like watching one of the Universal Studios classics revamped. But there were some qualities that removed me from the atmosphere, one of which is the violence. Body dismemberment may be grotesque, but the fact is, it is not scary. I found myself cringing at gore more than being truly scared. The original is frightening for the fact that you are witnessing a man turning into a monster, which, done well, can really inspire a great horror movie. But this film falls back into action, which is not in the tradition of the genre that this film is trying to be a part of. The film also has make-up wizard Rick Baker at its disposal, who has made countless jaw-dropping creatures and effects. However, he is not put to good use here as most of the scenes use CGI in place of make-up. It feels out of place seeing a smooth moving computer werewolf composite in 19th century England.
The Lovely Bones (2009)
Visually Stimulating, but Lacking Heart
"The Lovely Bones" sets an example for a creative concept, but it is executed poorly. Jackson was the wrong person to direct this film. He is entirely swept up in the story of catching the girl's murderer, and he seems to lose interest in the afterlife of Susie, which comprises the most stimulating and inventive scenes in the movie. Jackson brings an imaginative visual style to the scenes involving the journey to heaven. The design of Susie's personal heaven presents a very artistic and visceral experience. This film is undeniably well made, and the actors should really be commended for their devoted performances, including Wahlberg and Weisz as Susie's parents and a very notable role from Stanley Tucci as Susie's killer. A lot of work and effort was put towards this film to create a unique story that is somewhat controversial. The film should be applauded for that reason, but for a film that tries to take risks, it goes in an awfully mainstream direction. The film falls into a murder mystery story instead of studying how the family copes with death and Susie's afterlife journey and acceptance of her own death. Creative scenes are balanced out with horribly cliché moments. The film would be much stronger if it had cared more about its characters instead of using them as puppets toward visual style.
Zombieland (2009)
"Zombieland"
Watching the film was a surprise to me. Being in a genre which I thought had already been fully explored with Shaun of the Dead (zombie-comedy), "Zombieland" was actually surprisingly funny. The writers, Paul Wernick and Rhett Reese, have a sharp wit when it comes to the jokes; they are able to balance absurd situations with clever dialogue from the four central characters remarkably well. Ruben Fleischer's directorial debut is also an impressive effort. He is very stylistic when it comes to the visuals of the movie, creating some inventive sight gags in the film. Something that was brought to my attention is that gore and comedy do not mix. It makes the audience a little uncomfortable when they are supposed to be laughing at body dismemberment. Some situations are fueled by the gore gags, but this film is at it is strongest when the comedy is derived from the personality of the characters.
The Men Who Stare at Goats (2009)
"The Men Who Stare At Goats"
A film like this is hard to figure out. It is undoubtedly clever and funny, but near the opening of the film, a line appears on the screen reading, "More of this is true than you would believe." It really makes the viewer question how much of what one is watching is the truth throughout the film. While doing research on the film, I found out a surprising amount of the facts presented in the film are true. Yes, there are psychic spies, and yes, there is a so called "Hippie Army" division of the military. The plot of the story, however, is false. I was not disappointed when I found this out. The film works much better as a dramatization than a retelling of these odd events. Everyone in the film is obviously having a great time in their roles. Clooney, in particular, carries the film with his portrayal of Lyn. He always has a focused gaze on whatever he does, and a brilliant speaking tone, making the most outrageous points somewhat believable. Bridges gives a notable performance as well, almost reprising his role as the iconic character "The Dude" from the 1998 film "The Big Lebowski." The only exception is that he has somehow been stuck into the head of a military movement, passing out flowers and telling his troops to "let the dance out." The film's cast is superb. They all understand the tone of the film and know how to deliver the material in the most effective way.
Brothers (2009)
"Brothers"
The main trio of actors, Maguire, Portman and Gyllenhaal, are what really makes this film work. They each understand their role and what it requires of them. Sam is completely disturbed by what he has seen in imprisonment, Grace has to be accepting of her husband's change as she is concerned with what her children are going through and Tommy cares for his brother, but obviously has feelings for Grace. This love triangle is the main cause of conflict in the film. Sam, after returning from Afghanistan, is dramatically changed. He has forgotten how to live his life, and the love from the family steadily decreases. The film asks its characters questions that are very difficult to answer, with every character facing an event that completely changes their life, whether for better or worse. My only complaint about the film is that the writing gets a little bit weak sometimes. The film attempts to be a completely convincing character examination, but some of the dialogue does not really seem to fit, especially with scenes involving the children. Nevertheless, its situations are mature and powerful, and the performances craft the film to create scenes that are truly effective.