The Tree of Life Explanation

Posted on February 18, 2012 by admin

The Tree of Life is the oddest film among the 2011 crop of Oscar nominees. Director Terrance Malick tells a story similar to what we know of his own life story, growing up in Waco, Texas in the 1950s as the oldest of three brothers and having a brother who died at an early age.

Any Tree of Life explanation needs to guess what’s going through the mind of one of Hollywood’s most reclusive figures.

To guess the meaning of The Tree of Life is pretty simple, though.

The boy character is coming to grips with a senseless death and God’s role in that death, along with his role in people’s lives leading up to that death. This leads to a number of questions. Is God an uncaring, distant being? Do the lives of God’s many creations matter at all to him? Does he exist at all? Or is he so intimate in our lives that he’s too close to see, his manifestations so everyday and mundane that we look right past it?

To analyze these questions, look no further than the title of the film. Those reading this analysis shouldn’t assume I’m stating my theory on the meaning of life. Instead, I’m trying to interpret what Terrance Malick is showing us through his art.

The Tree of Life – Culture References

Tree of Life Meaning The term “Tree of Life” has been used as a symbol in religious, spiritual, and philosophical thought for thousands of years. References to a tree of life are found in cultures spread around the globe.

From ancient Egyptian and Chinese myth to Norse mythology to Jewish Kabbalism, a tree of life has been used to describe many different concepts.

In recent years, the term has even been used for a scientific theory involving the Earth’s ecology. The life tree or family tree has been used to describe ancestry and bloodlines for centuries.

In most cases, the term is meant to convey interconnectedness. Everything and everyone is connected in some way. In Norse myth, the world tree or Yggdrasil connects the nine realms together. The underworld are the tree’s roots, Earth is just a bit above, and the lands of giants and gods sit on its branches.

In Kabbalah, the tree of life includes ten levels, each associated with another aspect of God. At the bottom sits Malkuth (the Earth we know), while at the top sits the Kether (the glory of God). In either cases, it’s all part of one whole.

The Book of Job

The Tree of Life begins with a quotation from the Old Testament (Job 38: 4-7). The quote states, “Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth … when the morning stars sang together and all the angels shouted for joy?” This is a question God asks of Job, but it’s only the beginning of God’s longest speech in the Bible. Read through Job 37 through Job 41 and you’ll see imagery that appears in the movie again and again. I’ll point these out at several points during this analysis, but let’s talk about the light at the beginning of the film.

The swirl of light at the beginning of the film is Terrance Malick’s first depiction of God, but by no means the only one.

Much of the imagery of the movie’s first 30-40 minutes also depicts his God. Notice how the camera stays on the ocean waves as they swirl about in the surf. Notice the flock of birds as it twists and turns, contorts and swirls about in the sky over the city. Notice the puff of cigarette smoke and how it swirls about in the frame. By choosing several unconnected things which have the same characteristics, Malick is showing us that God is present in everything.

The Eye of God

This vision isn’t confined just to Earth, though. The scenes of the creation of the universe, the fiery plasma jets of the stars, the spiral galaxy, and the swirling colors of the nebula are all just other manifestations of the Biblical God to Malick. The director is showing us what God said in the quotation–the Creator laying the foundation of the Earth.

The nebula shown in the film is called the Helix Nebula, but after the Hubble telescope took pictures of this beautiful piece of space, people have begun calling it “The Eye of God“.

Tree of Life Interpretation

The film goes on to show the propagation of life on the Earth, including depictions of the dinosaurs (whose bones are later found by the boys) and even the primordial ooze where amino acids first began to combine into single-celled life.

One might think this is a creationist’s nightmare, but the point here is that God was there through every stage of evolution–even the moment the meteor hit and extincted the dinosaurs, paving the way for mammals to rule the Earth. You might think the point of the film is to say, “With such grand scope and so many millions of years in the making, what does the death of one little boy mean to God?”

That’s not the director’s point at all.

Go back to Job 37 and you’ll see what made God so mad that he appeared to contradict the mortals. The words immediately proceeding God’s appearance are: “The Almighty is beyond our reach and exalted in power…he (does) not have regard for all the wise in heart?”

This angers God, because men are assuming he’s beyond the veil, uncaring and unfeeling. You can imagine Job’s surprise when God appears to contradict these words.

Light in The Tree of Life

Cosmic Tree - World Tree Let’s return to the idea of interconnectedness. Once you start to see that Terrance Malick is depicting God as the nature around us, you start to see that God’s a vital part of every scene. The use of light to depict the Creator Being in the first frame of the film means that every time light is prominent in a scene (and that’s often in a Malick film), it’s meant to depict His presence.

Think about all the scenes where light is shining through trees, through the window, or on the faces of the congregation. Notice the light on the wall while the mother is holding her newborn baby. Notice the sunlight shining through the window as the child climbs the staircase. Notice how the sunlight draws your eyes in all those weird scenes of the attic. Each of these is meant to convey that God is there, whether people recognize it or not.

Tree of Light Final Scenes

Most of the middle parts of the story don’t need to be explained too much, as they’re for the most part literal and the meaning is clear. The final scenes of The Tree of Light might need to be explained, since you have that odd moment where Sean Penn walks through the stone doorway. Once again, this is taken from Job.

In Job 38:17, God asks, “Have the gates of Death been shown to you?” The full quote is this, “Have the gates of death been shown to you? Have you seen the gates of the deepest darkness?…What is the way to the abode of light? And where does darkness reside? Can you take them to their places? Do you know the paths to their dwellings?”

Sean Penn’s character, who’s obviously familiar with the Bible from his childhood, is imagining he’s walking through death’s door and emerging in the so-called “abode of light“.

One of the first ideas put forward (by the mother) is the thought there are two types of people: people of nature and people of grace. Brad Pitt is certainly a “man of nature” throughout the movie, while his wife is depicted as a “person of grace”.

You get the idea that Sean Penn, businessman that he is, must have been a man “of nature” throughout his life. One of the final scenes between Brad Pitt and his son acknowledges that the two are alike. But in that moment outside his office building in Dallas, where he imagines himself with his mother and brother and father in the land beyond, the son takes comfort in being a person “of grace”.

Tree of Life Interpreted

Tree of Life Interpretation The depiction of the eventual demise of the Earth might be troubling to some–but this inclusion raises God from some pagan nature symbol to something else.

We learn that the source of light and the symbol of God throughout the film isn’t really God, but just another manifestation of that being. A pagan movie would show the Sun to be eternal and all-powerful.

In The Tree of Life, the Sun is shown to be only another symbol of the Divine Being, no more eternal than dew on leaves after a rain or the wind blowing those same leaves when the fall appears. Like any other part of the cosmic Tree of Life, the Sun is just another branch of the great interconnected structure.

Mulholland Drive Interpretation

Posted on September 21, 2011 by admin

Mulholland Drive is often listed as one of the strangest or most confusing films in the history of cinema. Part of that’s because it’s a relatively new release and therefore more people sitting online typing about film have seen Mulholland Drive. Just about any David Lynch production is going to have its share of mysteries, but there are reasons Mulholland Drive defies logic more than others.

Mulholland Drive: The TV Series

First, Mulholland Drive was filmed as a pilot for a tv series. The television pilot was going to present a whole string of intriguing mysteries and interesting plot points to titillate the ABC network executives. These execs asked David Lynch what was going to happen next (after seeing everything before the blue box scene) and he said, “Buy the pitch and find out” (paraphrase). When ABC decided not to give the green light, David Lynch decided to film everything after the blue box scene and turn this ongoing storyline into a feature film.

You can see how this seems like a project that was written in two parts. That’s how it was created. It’s almost like the project was dropped by one writing team and picked up by another group of writers sometime later. In this case, the change in writers may indicate a change in David Lynch’s moods.

Dream Movies and Mulholland Drive

David Lynch Explanation - Film Explained Viewers also have to remember that Mulholland Drive is a dream film. Movies about dreams tend to have an abstract, surreal quality to them. Dreams and nightmares are abstracted and surrealist by their very nature, so David Lynch isn’t trodding on new territory in his handling of the subject. But there’s something more going on here.

Mulholland Drive Explained

This story isn’t just about the dreams and sexual fantasies of a dying woman, though. Mulholland Drive is an exploration of thought, emotion, experience, and memory–it’s about how these four facets of the brain interact and intermingle to form our identity. Mulholland Drive is an exploration of “identity” itself.

Think about that for a minute. How we think is affected by our emotions and our experiences. Our memory of the past is (also) affected by our emotions and experience, but this is a two-way street. Memories aren’t the same as experience. Our memory gets clouded. Our emotions often cloud our thoughts of the past. Dwell enough on bad thoughts and your memories warp–psychological scars appear from the strangest incidents. Small slights become terrible crimes, if you dwell on those slights enough. Yet some people ignore the worst injustices and live a happy life. So though can affect emotion and experience, too.

Put them all together and they become our self-identity, how we see ourselves. A person’s identity is a swirling tide of thoughts and emotions, experiences and memories. Much of the time identity is about how the world acts upon us, but also how we react to the world around us. But identity is also about how we think about ourselves.

Mulholland Drive and Fantasy

David Lynch takes us even deeper. Mulholland Drive isn’t about real experiences. It’s also about fantasies and how they help form our identities. Some part of every human being is that unspoken, introspective side that focuses on how we would like the world to be. These thoughts are often irrational, fantastical.

What if the person who spurned our love suddenly lost their memories and fell in love with us? That’s a perfectly irrational, fantastical thought, but David Lynch explores that idea. What’s more, he explores that idea by invoking classic Hollywood tropes. David Lynch mixes that thought with the Hollywood he grew up watching, making the first two-thirds of the movie a neo-noir mystery story. A woman loses her memory in a car crash, yet instinctively knows she was in physical danger at the moment of the crash. She happens across a naive young actress wannabe who’s just come to the big city looking for adventure and excitement. They fall in together and begin to solve a mystery…along with their mutual attraction.

In other hands, this might turn into an homage to Old Hollywood. Certainly, David Lynch gives a nod to several old films, but he uses Hollywood as a metaphor for fantasy itself. Remember, there’s no band. The illusionist in the theater makes that clear. Hollywood is about creating illusions–sometimes happy illusions and sometimes monstrous ones. Whether to scare, delight, or titillate, the film industry is about using song and images to lead a person down the path of “what if”.

That’s why the story of “Betty the Actress” works better than the story of “Betty the Waitress” would.

Betty’s Fantasy World

Think about the character of Betty (Naomi Watts). Betty is a bright-eyed, golden, and perky. That weird aunt and uncle of hers appear to be so elementally cheery that they’re alien-seeming. These are Diane’s happy images. This is the idyllic life she wishes she had. Instead, she’s a spent Hollywood figure in love with the wrong woman.

Think about the character of Adam Kesher (Justin Theroux). In Diane’s life, Adam is a wealthy and famous director and the successful rival for Camilla’s affection. In the first two-thirds of Mulholland Drive, Adam’s a noted director, but nothing else goes right. Adam’s forced to compromise to produce his movies. He’s pushed around by dark forces greater than himself, just as Diane appears powerless (in real life) to thwart Adam.

In Diane’s dreams, her rival Adam is cuckolded, thrown out of his own home, loses his wealth, lives in hiding from shadowy forces, and given a brow-beating by the Cowboy. Ultimately, he loses everything he values and has to give in to regain some of it. Adam has his eye on Betty/Diane, but he must settle for Camilla while Betty runs off to be in the arms of the “real Camilla”, Rita, completely shorn of her memories and therefore unburdened by anything but her passion and raw emotions. Rita is Camilla if she didn’t care about power and money.

Fantasy versus Reality – Mulholland Dr Explained

You might dismiss Mulholland Drive as a simple fantasy tale, but if you do, you’re missing the question: if fantasy dominates a person’s thoughts, then does it become reality? That’s the heart of Mulholland Drive, the question of what’s real and what’s imagined. But if the imagination completely dominates your thoughts, then isn’t that the real you.

Maybe people think they knew Diane, but I’m guessing the Diane behind closed doors, the one who fantasizes about nailing the audition and solving mysteries in a vague film noir setting alonside her lesbian lover, is more of the real person than the one seen by Adam and Camilla and friends at the dinner party. This is a person dominated by the fantastical side of her personality. Paradoxically, this is the real Diane–or at least what Diane wishes was real.

Hollywood Fantasies

“There is no band.” Since this is a movie about Hollywood, that phrase applies equally well to the film industry. All that shadowy stuff about the producers and movie execs pushing around the director becomes a commentary on the movie making process. David Lynch has said the one thing a director can’t do is compromise. He turned down an offer to direct Return of the Jedi because he knew the studio interference would be too great. (God, imagine how bizarre “Return of the Jedi” would have been. It would have been great!)

The creative process of filmmaking is made to look as chaotic and many-faceted as the subject of “identity”. Once again, you have a swirling miasma of competing factors–some real (creative vision), some imaginary (nepotism)–which ultimately combine in the finished product: the silver screen production. Or did I get it backward? Is the back-room dealing and the forced compromises what’s real? Is the creative vision the illusion? It hardly matters. Despite the parallels, Adam’s story is a sideshow. All of it is nothing more than Diane’s warped fantasy of what Hollywood film production is like, right down to the eerie cowboys living in the hills and serving as Hollywood strongmen, or that wheelchair-bound puppet-master who’s thoughts and motivations must be divined by their corporate underlings. This borders on the realm of schizophrenia.

Mulholland Drive: The Death Scene

The way Mulholland Drive wraps up particularly interests me. This is where David Lynch’s tale becomes transcendent. We not only see Diane’s inner thoughts as she lives and suffers. We see her thoughts as she dies. Perhaps the first 2/3rds of Mulholland Drive are Diane’s dying thoughts. I like to think these are her post-mortem thoughts, what the spiritual side of Diane dwells on throughout eternity.

These are profoundly happy thoughts for a David Lynch movie, too. Think about what we see. We see Betty and her strangely happy aunt and uncle bathed in a white nimbus. They are happy, eternally happy. Presumably, these are the last thoughts of Diane, after she’s hounded to her death by the monster. We even see the tiny little aunt and uncle walking across the floor. When the lady in the balcony calls out, “Silencio”, Diane isn’t dwelling on the rejection or any other memory that drove her to comtemplate murder and suicide. Diane is dwelling on the fantasies of what might have been in a happier world, a better world.

So is this how David Lynch perceives the afterlife? Maybe our identity is nothing more than our memories. But if it is, do those memories have to be real? Or if our life is wasted away by pointless fantasies, do those suffice? Apparently, in the universe of Mulholland Drive, they do.

Mulholland Drive: A Personal Meaning

I tend to ruminate. I’m not using the term “ruminate” like I chose it out of a thesaurus and I really mean “think”. I’m talking about the psychological condition where you tend to dwell on certain moments or memories, often memories of an unpleasant nature. These can consume your thoughts to the exclusion of all else. Tiny incidents from years ago might suddenly start to be on the top of your brain for no good reason. In short, it’s a real pain in the ass.

Over the years, I’ve found ways to cope with rumination. I tend to avoid conflict. If I get around negative people too much, people who thrive on conflict and want to draw other people around them into arguments, I’m out of there. When you tend to dwell on controversies and emotional outbursts for days on end, you figure out it’s best to just stay out of those situations. Ultimately, it’s the only way to stay sane.

One way to avoid dwelling on bad experiences is escapism. If I can escape into movies and tv shows and sports and games and history books, that keeps me from worrying about the bad stuff. I tend to have a big imagination and, while I stopped having Diane-type fantasies when I was 13 or 14, I still tend to have whole worlds mapped out in my brain (and the dust bins of my computer). The fact is, I have a pretty detailed imaginary world that my mind tends to focus on year after year. I don’t mean to say I’m a recluse–I have friends, coworkers, family, and romance–but it’s often eclipsed by what I have going on in my own head. One psychological profile I found instructive described me as “dreamy”–and not like Dr. Dreamy.

All that’s to say I can see where Mulholland Drive is coming from. There’s more to the human being than just our experiences. There’s more to our memories than just what happened in the real world. The human psyche is also composed of our fantasies. It’s a small part of some of us. Fantasies are a big part of some of us. Sometimes those thoughts are dark, but sometimes they aren’t. But the idea that ones soul or spirit might live on after this life and our memories might be more than just our experiences, but also our crazy fantasies, seems like a happy thought to me. So Mulholland Drive makes perfect sense to me. I even find Mulholland has a happy ending…in it’s own twisted way. You just have to ignore that Diane’s fantasy world left her a broken woman, an attempted murderer, hallucinatory, and a corpse.

Mulholland Drive Explanation – No Meaning at All

I don’t know that David Lynch would agree with my interpretation. Lynch was quoted as saying, “Psychology destroys the mystery, this kind of magic quality. It can be reduced to certain neuroses or certain things, and since it is now named and defined, it’s lost its mystery and the potential for a vast, infinite experience.”

Still, it’s also said David Lynch takes delight in hearing people’s wacky theories about the meaning wrapped-up in his films. Remember, David Lynch began as an artist. Modern art is more about evoking an emotion than it is about giving answers. Plastic art is more concerned about implied meaning than film art is. Movies are about literal meaning–or at least, most movies are.

Once again, David Lynch has discussed this tendency in filmmakers and movie-goers: “In Hollywood, more often than not, they’re making more kind of traditional films, stories that are understood by people. And the entire story is understood. And they become worried if even for one small moment something happens that is not understood by everyone.”

So if you’re looking for one simple interpretation for Mulholland Dr or you’re searching for some concrete deep meaning, you may be looking in the wrong place. I’m guessing here, but I think David Lynch has his meaning of the film, but he wants you to come up with your meaning and me to come up with mine, and so on. I have my interpretation of Mulholland Drive, so what’s yours?

Dogtooth – Movie Review

Posted on August 8, 2011 by admin

In the immortal words of Inspector Harry Callahan (Clint Eastwood) from The Dead Pool, “Opinions are like assholes. Everybody has one.” Never was this more true than in the case of Dogtooth, the 2009 Greek comedy/drama/train wreck from director Yorgos Lanthimos.

What a shame, then, that most of the opinions on this movie are so far out of whack.

You see, this cinematic turd in the punch bowl didn’t get laughed out of theatres when it debuted. Instead, critics heaped wave after wave of praise on Lanthimos and the boys. Dogtooth won the Prix Un Certain Regard at the ever-pretentious Cannes Film Festival, was nominated for Best Foreign Language Film at the Oscars, and it currently holds a 92% freshness rating from critics over at Rotten Tomatoes. Even more puzzling is the general audience rating of 72%, although most of these are likely the same folks who patted themselves on the back while watching Black Swan and Inception.

I felt bloodied and battered myself after sitting through Dogtooth.

Peter Bradshaw of The Guardian hailed the film for its “intentionally skewiff framings.” I don’t know what “skewiff” means, and I have no intention of looking it up (screw you, Bradshaw). What I do know is this: Dogtooth is a meandering flick that gleefully plays to the stereotype of the weird foreign film ill-suited to Western eyes. While it may delight those who routinely write with a death grip on their thesaurus, it also serves to drive away the casual viewer who might otherwise be exposed to the works of true international visionaries such as Park Chan-Wook and Michael Haneke. A few critics may get their blurbs on a DVD case, but the industry suffers as a result.

Dogtooth is set in a walled countryside home located somewhere in Greece, although the vague locale could take place anywhere in the world. Living inside the compound is a nuclear family on the verge of a meltdown, with strict discipline and non-stop brainwashing being carried out by the mother (Michelle Valley) and father (Christos Stergioglou). Their post-pubescent children, two girls (Aggeliki Papoulia and Mary Tsoni) and a boy (Christos Passalis), have never journeyed into the world, and their only contact with the outside is a factory security guard named Christina (Anna Kalaitzidou) who the father pays to satisfy his son’s sexual needs.

These effed-up kids are fed a steady diet of misinformation, such as cats being the most dangerous predators lurking beyond the high walls of their well-maintained prison. The mother also teaches them new words on a regular basis, but these tutoring sessions are twisted to render the children incapable of communicating with anyone outside of the family unit. There’s also plenty of licking, incest, barking, and the most laughable dance sequence since Chris Farley competed against Patrick Swayze in a skit on Saturday Night Live. And all the while, we witness the fantasy realm constructed by the parents beginning to crack and crumble.

The Dogtooth sisters prepare for the world's most ridiculous dance routine.

It’s obvious that director Lanthimos has something to say about obsessive parenting, home schooling, and blind obedience, but he takes too damn long to get to the point. A scene involving a stray cat and a pair of garden shears should have come much sooner than the 40-minute mark, and even the ironically serene cinematography by Thimios Bakatatakis fails to make up for too many moments that seem inspired by some hellish mockery of Wes Anderson.

And don’t get me started on the emotionless dialogue and listless delivery. Yes, I realize that it’s done for effect, but that doesn’t mean I have to like it. Boring with a purpose is still boring.

Patient viewers will find themselves chuckling in places, but I’m frankly baffled as to whether or not this was the desired reaction. Dogtooth is enigmatic filmmaking at its finest, although that’s like saying Charlie Sheen is Hollywood weirdness at its best. Skip it and watch Oldboy instead.

Lars von Trier Movies

Posted on August 5, 2011 by admin

If you’re looking for a director who’s both experimental and controversial, you’ll be hard-pressed to find a better candidate than Danish filmmaker Lars von Trier. When he’s not dealing with his multitude of phobias or being kicked out of the Cannes Film Festival for sympathizing with Hitler, he makes films that punch the mainstream square in the nose and often take a decidedly critical look at the United States.

While I was familiar with Lars von Trier movies by reputation, it wasn’t until I wrote this article that I realized that I had yet to see one. I intend for that to change in the near future, and I’ve devoted this post to looking at those titles I’m most likely to place into my queue. If you have your own recommendation for Lars von Trier movies, be sure to chime in under the comments section.

Lars von Trier movies are often controversial.

Films Directed by Lars Von Trier

The following Lars Von Trier films are being given serious consideration:

The Element of Crime (1984) – This was Von Trier’s first feature film, and it tells the story of a detective in Cairo who’s being put under hypnosis in order to remember his last case. As the dark memories come flooding back, he recalls a deranged serial killer who preys on girls selling lottery tickets, a helpful Asian prostitute, and a controversial method for catching the killer that requires our protagonist to become intimately familiar with the mind of a serial murderer. I’ve always been a fan of crime films, and something tells me that Von Trier’s version will be noticeably distinct.

Breaking the Waves (1996) – After her husband becomes paralyzed and is no longer able to perform sexually, a young woman (Emily Watson) is urged to seek out new partners for lovemaking and then share the details with her hubby. Winner of the Grand Prix at Cannes, it has also been listed as one of the best films of the 1990s by director Martin Scorsese. Just don’t watch it with the kids. For that matter, keep your youngsters away from any Lars von Trier project.

The Idiots (1998) – In order to thumb their nose at society and overcome their inhibitions, a group of adults spend their time acting as though they’re mentally disabled. A bizarre premise to be sure, and the first film to adhere to the Dogme 95 Manifesto, a style of filmmaking co-created by Von Trier. In case you’re wondering, this movement requires filming to be done on-location with hand-held cameras and no special effects. A number of other rules are also present, with each designed to emphasize story and character over technology.

Dancer in the Dark (2000) – Never one to stick to a particular genre, Lars von Trier tries his hand at a musical with this tale of a Czech immigrant (Bjork) who struggles to save enough money to keep her son from going blind. Winner of the Palm d’Or at Cannes (along with Best Actress for Bjork), the film was both hailed for being a stylistic breath of fresh air and condemned for its sentimentality. I’ve never seen Bjork act in anything except for music videos, so I’m curious to witness the results. As with most Lars von Tier movies, the supporting cast is all kinds of terrific. This one includes Catherine Deneuve, David Morse, Peter Stormare, and Stellen Skarsgard.

Dogville (2003) – A bizarre and graphic film about a woman (Nicole Kidman) on the run from mobsters who seeks refuge in a small town named Dogville. She makes herself useful by performing simple chores for the citizens, and both sides slowly come to appreciate one another. But things take a darker turn in the second half of the film, resulting in cruel degradation and mass murder. The climax has become notorious for its violence, which is enough of a reason for me to see it. The superb supporting cast (John Hurt, Lauren Bacall, Paul Bettany, Stellan Skarsgard, James Caan, Ben Gazzara) doesn’t hurt, either. Just be warned that the project was shot on a stage, with many of the objects and building only denoted by a sign.

Some Lars von Trier movies have caused viewers to faint.

Antichrist (2009) – Following the death of their child, a grieving couple (Willem Dafoe and Charlotte Gainsbourg) head to an isolated cabin for an intense therapy session. The wife is particularly affected, and it’s not long before her grief and fears begin to manifest in increasingly nightmarish ways. Featuring self-disemboweling foxes and genital mutilation, this Lars von Trier film caused a great uproar at Cannes and resulted in four people passing out from the extreme violence. Any movie that causes Europeans to faint is immediately placed on my list of must-see titles.

Melancholia (2011) – Lars von Trier takes on the sci-fi genre with this tale of a young woman suffering from depression (Kirsten Dunst) who must cope with family problems and a planet on a collision course with Earth. Dunst captured the Best Actress award at Cannes, and her supporting cast includes Charlotte Gainsbourg, Kiefer Sutherland, John Hurt, Stellan Skarsgard, Udo Kier, and Alexander Skarsgard. Since the director also suffers from clinical depression, I’m interested to see how he depicts this malady on the big screen.

The next time you’re in the mood for foreign films that will challenge your intellect and possibly your sanity, be sure to give the Lars Von Trier movies listed above a try. While they’re not for everyone, fans of the controversial Danish director will find them a refreshing change that’s about as far away from a Michael Bay films as possible.

Richard Linklater Movies

Posted on July 31, 2011 by admin

Films Directed by Richard Linklater

Thanks to the Slacker movie poster featuring ugly-ass Teresa Taylor of the Butthole Surfers, I’ve always associated director Richard Linklater with dirty hippies. Turns out that’s not the case at all, as Linklater has made a number of films that don’t involve pretentious and perpetually stoned residents of Austin.

This article details my experience with Richard Linklater movies, as well as discussing those that I might consider viewing in the future. While he’s far from being my favorite director, I’d still rather watch one of his films than a preachy piece of shit like Syriana.

Richard Linklater movies aren't just for hippies.

If you happen to be a Richard Linklater fan, be sure to share your favorite movies and scenes in our comments section. And if you’ve never experienced his work, I urge you to try at least one of the movies below and form your own opinion.

Movies I’ve Seen by Richard Linklater

At this point, I’ve seen three movies that have been directed by Richard Linklater. Here’s a brief discussion of each:

Dazed and Confused (1993) – I’ve never been big on movies centered around the sub-par culture of the 1970s, although this Linklater film does boast an impressive cast that includes Milla Jovovich, Matthew McConaughey, Ben Affleck, and an uncredited Renee Zellweger. Fans of ‘70s rock music will want to check it out, as it features tunes from Foghat, Rick Derringer, Alice Cooper, and more. I saw it once, and that was enough (especially since I wanted to slap Ron Slater through the whole film).

The Newton Boys, one of the many Richard Linklater movies currently available on DVD. The Newton Boys (1998) – Filmed in the southern part of Texas, this crime film stars Matthew McConaughey, Skeet Ulrich, Ethan Hawke, and Vincent D’Onofrio as bank-robbing brothers from the 1920s. While the cast was filled with starpower, I recall being unimpressed by the overall product. Get a load of Dwight Yoakam as a guy named Glasscock.

School of Rock (2003) – When he gets kicked out of his rock band, Dewey Finn (Jack Black) winds up masquerading as a substitute teacher at a prep school and helping a group of fifth-graders compete in a Battle of the Bands contest. A little Jack Black goes a long way, and this film pushed my tolerance for the mugging comic to the breaking point. The presence of a Stevie Nicks song didn’t help things.

Richard Linklater Movies I Might Consider

While I’ll never see Richard Linklater movies like Before Sunrise and Waking Life, there are a few that might make it onto my queue.

Slacker (1991) – Linklater’s breakout film about a day in the life of quirky Austin residents. I’ve always considered Austin to be the most pretentious city in Texas, so I’m in no hurry to see a bunch of faux-cool losers shuffle about. Still, it’s a landmark film that drew major critical acclaim, so it’s only a matter of time before I break down and watch it.

Bad News Bears (2005) – Billy Bob Thornton plays a great on-screen jerk, which is probably made easier by his real-life disposition (see his disastrous Boxmasters interview). In this comedy, he takes over the Walter Matthau role of a drunken lout forced to coach a kid’s baseball team.

Richard Linklater movies often feature big stars like Keanu Reeves.

A Scanner Darkly (2006) – Using rotoscope technology, this trippy and oppressive sci-fi flick marks the 198th Philip K. Dick novel to be brought to the big screen. That’s an exaggeration, of course, but it sure seems like Dick has had that many adaptations made. With dystopian themes and a cast made up of Keanu Reeves, Robert Downey, Jr., Woody Harrelson, and Winona Ryder, A Scanner Darkly is loitering around the edges of my Netflix queue.

Me and Orson Welles (2009) – Zac Effron tries to convince viewers he’s not just another pretty face in this period drama about an aspiring teen actor who has a chance encounter with Orson Welles (Christian McKay) and winds up being cast in Julius Caesar. By all accounts, McKay is wonderful in the role of the egotistical genius, which is enough to put it on my list.

When Richard Linklater movies first started coming out, it looked like he would specialize in films about reefer-addicted teens. But always one to defy expectations, he soon started dabbling in the mainstream and bringing the comedic stylings of Jack Black to the masses. Since then, he’s presented stories about Orson Welles, made a sci-fi film, and even gave Julie Delpy a job. Given the talent level of the latter, Linklater at least deserves a pat on the back for his sense of charity.

Mel Brooks Movies

Posted on July 30, 2011 by admin

Films Directed by Mel Brooks

Long before the Wayans brothers hit paydirt with the Scary Movie franchise, Mel Brooks movies were leaving audience members rolling in the aisles with his subversive and edgy take on the parody genre. While Brooks hasn’t directed a film in over 15 years, his legacy as a comedic pioneer is assured.

The man (and moustache) behind the Mel Brooks movies.

I grew up watching a number of Mel Brooks movies on this list, and I’ve continued to revisit them over the years on television and the home video market. From racism to Hitler, there was no subject that Brooks was scared to tackle. And the fact that his films are being talked about decades later is a testament to his broad appeal and ability to make complete strangers void their bladder while laughing.

The following list includes all the Mel Brooks films I’ve seen over the years, as well as a bit of commentary about each. I’ve also written about those Mel Brooks projects I’ve skipped, intentionally or otherwise. Fans of Brooks are invited to share their memories or opinions in our comments section.

Mel Brooks Movies I’ve Seen

The following make up the list of Mel Brooks movies I’ve seen over the years:

The Producers (1968) – Brooks’ debut movie went on to a successful Broadway run and a modern Hollywood remake, but none of that removes the fact that it was overrated. I first saw the film a few years ago, and its reputation had me expecting an instant comedy classic. Gene Wilder was surprisingly obnoxious as Leo Bloom, and even the entire “Springtime for Hitler” play seemed desperate to draw a laugh. While the formula worked, it’s not among my favorite Mel Brooks films.

Mel Brooks movies were always loaded with hot women.

Blazing Saddles (1974) – My favorite Mel Brooks release, this Western parody stars Gene Wilder and Cleavon Little as a mismatched pair of gunfighters who must rally the town of Rock Ridge to resist the schemes of a crooked politician (Harvey Korman). In the process, the first on-screen fart is heard, racism gets knocked down a peg or two, and the fourth wall is broken so many times that you can still see the duct tape holding it together. Alex Karras knocking out a horse with his bare hands remains an iconic movie image, and it became only the tenth film in history to exceed the $100 million mark at the box office.

Young Frankenstein (1974) – Gene Wilder headlines in this singing, dancing parody of classic horror films from the 1930s. But the real star is Peter Boyle, who gives his misunderstood and well-hung monster a distinctive personality amidst the sight gags and juvenile puns. Gene Hackman is effective in a small role as a blind hermit, and who hasn’t tried to walk like Marty Feldman’s Igor on at least one occasion? And I’d almost forgot how fine Teri Garr was in the ’70s and ’80s.

High Anxiety (1977) – The Gene Wilder/Mel Brooks collaboration continues in this entertaining parody of Hitchcock films and suspense movie in general. It’s been over 20 years since I last watched it, but I remember liking it at the time. Now that I’ve got a few more Hitchcock films under my belt, I’m betting I would enjoy it even more.

History of the World, Part I (1981) – Narrated by Orson Welles and featuring Brooks in roles ranging from Moses to a guy responsible for carrying a container for King Louis of France to pee in, this irreverent parody takes on the history of the human race from caveman times to the French Revolution. The usual cast of actors (Harvey Korman, Madeline Kahn, and Cloris Leachman) appear, and my favorite part remains the scene where King Louis blasts peasants from the sky during a lethal game of human skeet.

Mel Brooks movies parodied numerous genres, including science fiction.

Spaceballs (1987) – The last solid parody movie that Mel Brooks ever made, Spaceballs pokes fun at a George Lucas franchise that sort of writes its own jokes these days. Bill Pullman co-stars in the Han Solo role, while John Candy steals a few laughs as his Chewbacca-like companion. Since Star Wars geeks are pretty forgiving (they have to be considering the quality of the second trilogy), I remember a lot of my pals were Spaceballs fans upon its release.

Robin Hood: Men in Tights (1993) – Despite Cary Elwes in the title role and Dave Chappelle in his first major part, this parody of Robin Hood movies was just plain awful. Unlike previous films from Brooks, every joke labored to find a laugh. I’d rather watch Ridley Scott’s Robin Hood for a second time, which is an indication of just how unfunny this “comedy” was.

Mel Brooks Movies I Haven’t Seen

I haven’t seen all the Mel Brooks movies currently available. Here’s a list of those films, as well as my reasons for skipping them:

The Twelve Chairs (1970) – Just before an aristocratic old woman passes away, she reveals that a fortune in jewels are hidden in one of the family’s twelve dining room chairs. This instigates a madcap race for riches between her son-in-law (Ron Moody), a con-artist (Frank Langella), and a Russian Orthodox priest (Dom DeLuise). One of the rare non-parody movies from Brooks, I wasn’t aware of its existence until I started researching this article.

Silent Movie (1976) – Brooks parodies the silent movie era. While I’ve seen a few silent films that I enjoyed, it’s not a style that I’m immediately drawn to. So even a modern parody is going to be low on my list of priorities. I’m sure I’ll see it one day, but the presence of overrated fattie Dom DeLuise isn’t making me hurry.

Life Stinks (1991) – Brooks strayed from parody territory in this comedy-drama about a slum lord who prepares to spend 30 days as a homeless man to win a bet. When you hear the name Mel Brooks, you’re expecting a comedy, and I remember the trailer for this film looked decidedly unfunny. I wasn’t the only one who felt that way, as box-office numbers were pitiful, and the film holds a Rotten Tomatoes freshness rating of under 20%.

Dracula: Dead and Loving It (1995) – After the train wreck that was Robin Hood: Men in Tights, I had pretty much given up on Mel Brooks movies. Even with the presence of deadpan comedy genius Leslie Nielsen, I couldn’t muster up the energy to see this parody of Dracula and several other vampire flicks.

If you’re in the mood to laugh, give one or more of these Mel Brooks movies a try. Fans of Curb Your Enthusiasm should be especially delighted, as there are more Jewish jokes and performers than you can shake a dreidel at.

Nicolas Winding Refn Movies

Posted on July 29, 2011 by admin

Films Directed by Nicolas Winding Refn

Danish director Nicolas Winding Refn debuted on the scene in 1996, and he’s made eight feature films as of this writing. Some have been critically acclaimed, others have been box-office flops, and his most recent, Drive, won him the prestigious Best Director Award at the Cannes Film Festival.

If you’re looking for sentimentality and mushy love stories, Nicolas Winding Refn movies are not for you. His cinematic landscape is populated with violent drug dealers, tormented husbands, and even one-eyed killing machines from the age of Vikings. But in spite of all the bloodletting, Refn manages to reach deeper levels of his characters and present complicated individuals seeking to make their way in a chaotic world.

Nicolas Winding Refn movies

I’ve only seen three Nicolas Winding movies to date, but I’ve been impressed with his visual style and storytelling ability. His first major American release will be hitting theatres soon, and I’m excited for audiences who’ll get to experience his vision for the first time. If you’ve yet to hear of this dynamic filmmaker, now’s a perfect time to delve into his works.

Nicolas Winding Refn Movies I’ve Seen

The following titles make up the list of Nicolas Winding Refn movies I’ve seen so far:

Pusher (1996) – Refn wrote and directed this debut film that’s been hailed as the first Danish-language gangster movie. Kim Bodnia is powerful as Frank, a complicated drug dealer whose life falls apart due in part to a hooker girlfriend, inept pal (Mads Mikkelsen), and Serbian drug lord who loves to bake. Bodnia would deservedly become a major star in his home country after the release of the film, and Refn would be off and running on his big-screen career. Fans of Martin Scorsese are urged to check it out, and I was pleasantly surprised after stumbling across the film on Netflix.

Nicolas Winding Refn movies always feature a few tender moments.

Bronson (2008) – Alternating between dark humor and relentless brutality, this Refn film tells the real-life story of Charles Bronson, a UK criminal who’s one of the nation’s most notorious inmates. Scenes of Bronson in prison are broken up by the character’s fictional appearance in a stage play about his life, and lead actor Tom Hardy gets to mug, menace, and meltdown. After seeing his performance, I’m looking forward to seeing what he does with the character of Bane in Christopher Nolan’s upcoming The Dark Knight Rises.

Valhalla Rising (2009) – This is not an action movie, so don’t go into it with that mindset. Sure, there are some quality scenes of grown men killing one another, but the rest is something akin to a surrealistic journey into the underworld with a one-eyed warrior (the wonderfully stoic Mads Mikkelsen) acting as our guide. I’ll confess to preferring the first half of the film over the second, although the Morten Soborg cinematography gives the entire movie a harsh, melancholy beauty.

Nicolas Winding Refn Movies I Plan on Seeing

I haven’t seen all the Nicolas Winding Refn films available, so the following list includes those I intend to watch in the near future:

Fear X (2003) – Refn described the movie as a tale of an idealist confronted with reality, but that didn’t make anyone want to see it. This film about a man (John Turturro) driven to learn the truth behind his wife’s death was a huge box-office bomb, and Refn’s production company was driven into bankruptcy as a result. This forced him to turn out a couple of sequels to Pusher, and I’m curious to see if it was as bad as the dollar signs would indicate.

Mads Mikkelsen has starred in numerous Nicolas Winding Refn movies.

Pusher 2 (2004) – Mads Mikkelsen returns as Tonny, the hard-luck pal of Frank from the first film. This time Tonny is just getting out of prison, and he’s forced to learn about fatherhood while resuming his life of crime. I enjoyed Pusher, and I’m a Mads Mikkelsen fan, so this title is currently sitting in my queue.

Pusher 3 (2005) – Serbian drug lord Milo (Zlatko Buric) was featured prominently in the first two films, but now he gets to headline. While trying to kick his drug habit and cook for his daughter’s birthday party, this friendly-yet-lethal crook manages to evoke humor and brutal terror as he deals with the underbelly of society. Milo was one of my favorites in the original, so I’m eager to see him have the spotlight to himself.

Drive (2011) – This action film is set to hit U.S. theaters in September of 2011, which is still over a month away as of this writing. I’m excited about it, though, as all signs point to a high-octane flick that’s a throwback to grindhouse films and cop movies from the 1980s. Ryan Gosling gets to try his luck as an action hero while playing a Hollywood stuntman who serves as a getaway driver for criminals in his spare time. Carey Mulligan, Ron Perlman, and Albert Brooks co-star, and the positive reaction at Cannes included a standing ovation. Maybe this will be the spark that reignites the action genre.

While Danish films may not be at the top of the list for most American moviegoers, I urge you to give these Nicolas Winding Refn movies a try. They’re every bit as gritty as movies like Reservoir Dogs, and they possess an entertaining mixture of action and black humor. The next time you want to think outside the box for an evening of movie rentals, you could do a whole lot worse.

Sam Raimi Movies

Posted on July 29, 2011 by admin

Films Directed by Sam Raimi

If you enjoy horror and the Three Stooges, Sam Raimi movies may be just what you’re looking for. That’s because the director has a love for violent and often terrifying subject matter, but he’s never afraid to inject a healthy dose of black humor.

However, unlike Kevin Smith, Rami isn’t a one trick pony. He’s helmed sports movies, supernatural thrillers, Westerns, and the successful Spider-Man trilogy. But no matter what film he’s working on, you can usually spot a Sam Raimi movie by looking for the following trademarks: the presence of actors Bruce Campbell and Ted Raimi; the camera adopting a POV perspective as an object hurtles through the air; quick dolly shots; and Raimi’s 1973 Oldsmobile Delta 88.

The mastermind behind the Sam Raimi movies.

I’ve been a Sam Raimi fan ever since I saw Evil Dead in the heyday of Fangoria and VHS tapes. His willingness to fill the screen with blood, guts, and unpredictable camera angles has always been appreciated, as well as his ability to work in other, lighter genres. I can even boast of having seen every episode of Xena: Warrior Princess, where Raimi served as executive producer.

Sam Raimi Movies I’ve Seen

I’ve seen the majority of Sam Raimi movies, and here’s a list with my thoughts on each one:

The Evil Dead (1981) – The horror film that launched the careers of Sam Raimi, Bruce Campbell, Robert Tapert (who would marry Lucy Lawless), and composer Joseph LoDuca. The Coen Brothers would also begin a longtime association with Raimi when Joel served as an editor for the film. The simplistic story follows a group of friends as they journey to a cabin in the woods, accidentally unleash supernatural forces, and then struggle for survival against insane odds. Despite the primitive effects and low budget, Rami’s visual flair and Campbell’s charisma helped elevate the film.

Crimewave (1985) – A bizarre comedy that marked Raimi’s ascension to the big time (a studio film), it’s also an uneven mess that looks cheaper than its $3 million budget. Brion James, one of my favorite character actors co-stars, as does Bruce Campbell. I saw this one over 20 years ago, and I’ve never had the desire to watch it again.

Sam Raimi movies often feature a blend of horror and comedy.

Evil Dead II (1987) – Essentially a remake of the first movie, but with a bigger budget and more ambitious script. Bruce Campbell and his iconic chin work in slapstick comedy while going temporarily mad and getting covered in blood and other bizarre fluids. Ash replacing his severed hand with a chainsaw is especially cool, as is Rami’s over-the-top camerawork. Don’t call yourself a fan of horror movies until you’ve seen this one.

Darkman (1990) – Raimi wanted to adapt The Shadow, but he turned to his own superhero creation after failing to obtain the rights. Liam Neeson played the title role, and it did well enough to inspire a couple of straight-to-video sequels. I never saw it more than once, though, so it failed to make much of an impression on me.

Army of Darkness (1992) – My least favorite of the Evil Dead movies, primarily because Raimi abandoned the more terrifying elements and focused on the comedic. It’s still worth a look, though, as Ash (Bruce Campbell) is hurtled into the past and must team with knights from the Dark Ages to battle infernal forces.

The Quick and the Dead (1995) – Of all the Sam Raimi movies I’ve seen, this Western starring Sharon Stone, Gene Hackman, Russell Crowe, and Leonardo DiCaprio remains my favorite. Stone plays a mysterious female gunfighter who rides into a dusty Old West town for a quick-draw competition, and she’s pitted against a bizarre cast of cutthroats, gentleman adventurers, and Swedish champions. I could quote this film for hours, and Raimi’s unique visual style helps to create a non-traditional genre film. It’s also a chance to see Crowe and DiCaprio before they were stars, and the fine supporting cast includes Keith David, Pat Hingle, Lance Henriksen, and Tobin Bell.

A Simple Plan (1998) – Think of this like a Coen Brothers movie, but without all the quirky characters and moments of dark humor. Bill Paxton and Billy Bob Thornton stars as a pair of brothers who find a bag filled with cash inside the wreckage of a plane, and, along with a friend, agree to keep quiet and later split the money. That plan doesn’t work at all, and soon the group is fighting with one another and digging a number of graves. The film’s gloomy tone was a bit unexpected, and I never felt the need to revisit the film after the initial viewing.

Spider-Man (2002) – The best beginning to any superhero franchise, Spider-Man features a likable cast, lively direction, and special effects that adequately capture the feel of the comic books. Willem Dafoe is appropriately menacing as the Green Goblin, although Kristen Dunst borders on annoying as the poor girl who ignores the nice guy (Peter Parker) in favor of rich dudes. Cliff Robertson was perfectly cast in the role of Uncle Ben, and the wrestling fan in me geeked out when Randy Savage popped up as Bonesaw McGraw (“Bonesaw is reeeeaaadddyyy!”). Far better than Christopher Nolan’s Dark Knight films, none of which featured an upside-down kiss.

Sam Raimi movies

Spider-Man 2 (2004) – The first film remains my favorite, but the consensus seems to be that this one is the best of the series. Alfred Molina dons the cybernetic tentacles of Dr. Octopus, while Peter Parker pal Harry Osborn (James Franco) takes over his father‘s company and a bit of his madness. My favorite scene comes after Dr. Ock disables the brakes on an elevated train, and Spidey pushes himself to unconsciousness to halt its progress (finally being assisted by a hoard of stereotypically noble New Yorkers).

Spider-Man 3 (2007) – While it was still entertaining, Spider-Man 3 marked a major step down in the franchise. Peter Parker (Tobey Maguire) becomes evil, which inevitably leads to dancing. Mary Jane continues to act like a wishy-washy bitch, and enough villains pop up to start a convention. I wish Raimi would’ve come back for one more movie to redeem himself, but I doubt he felt he had anything to prove after the trilogy’s box office totals.

Drag Me to Hell (2009) – Sweet little Alison Lohman gets on the bad side of an elderly woman (Lorna Raver) with the power to curse people, and soon she’s counting the days until a malevolent spirit arrives to drag her to Hell. There are plenty of horrifying moments to keep viewers on the edge of their seats, but Raimi also works in his trademark dashes of black humor (the séance scene with the goat comes to mind, as does the parking garage brawl between Lohman and her geriatric tormentor). If you’re searching for a horror movie that doesn’t take itself too seriously, give Drag Me to Hell a try.

Sam Raimi Movies I’ve Missed

I’ve managed to see 11 Sam Raimi movies, but there are still a couple that I’ve overlooked (mainly because I didn’t realize he directed them until later). They include:

For Love of the Game (1999) – A friend of mine raves about this movie all the time, but I still haven’t got around to seeing it. There’s no ulterior motive, either, as I’m a huge Kevin Costner fan. Here he plays an aging pitcher reflecting on life and love while throwing a perfect game in perhaps his final career appearance. The next time I get on a sports movie kick, this one is going in my Netflix queue.

The Gift (2000) – I’m guessing that a lot of people haven’t heard of this film. That‘s at least my excuse for not having seen this supernatural thriller. Oddly enough, it’s based on the psychic experiences of Billy Bob Thornton’s mother (no kidding), The Gift features an all-star cast that includes Cate Blanchett, Keanu Reeves, Hilary Swank, Katie Holmes, and Greg Kinnear. The cast is tempting, but the subject matter sounds hokey.

Zack Snyder Movies

Posted on July 27, 2011 by admin

Films Directed by Zack Snyder

Zack Snyder movies are easy to pick out from the crowd. First, there’s the distinctive Larry Fong cinematography. Second, there’s the tendency for music and action to work hand-in-hand with stunning results. Third, there are the slow motion fight scenes. Lastly, his subject matter tends to be of the fantasy, horror, or comic book variety. In short: Zack Snyder is like a gift sent down from the gods of geekdom.

There would be no Zack Snyder movies without this guy.

Prior to directing feature films, Snyder cut his teeth with television commercials and music videos. This helped him craft his unique visual style, as well as the ability to break the narrative down into easy-to-swallow chunks of action. Think of him like David Fincher, but without all the critical acclaim and Oscar nominations.

Since I’m a confirmed fanboy, I’ve been a supporter of Zack Snyder films from the beginning. The following list includes all of his works so far, and I even touch on upcoming projects. Whether you’re just discovering his action-packed style or looking for titles to round out your Blu-ray collection, I hope my observations will prove helpful.

Current Zack Snyder Movies

Zack Snyder has directed five films in a seven-year period. Call him the anti-Terrence Malick. These films include:

Dawn of the Dead (2004) – I wasn’t expecting much from this remake of the classic George Romero zombie movie, but I walked out of the theatre with my jaw hanging open. The first scene shows the world descending into an undead hell, and the opening credits are accompanied by the unforgettable strains of Johnny Cash’s “When the Man Comes Around.”

But the movie doesn’t take its foot off the gas for a second, as our heroes are quickly thrown into a mall, surrounded by the ravenous dead, and brought into conflict with one another. Ving Rhames is the badass cop trying to reach his brother, while Sarah Polley is the nurse who just manages to keep from being eaten by her husband in the opening minutes. Jake Weber rounds out the primary good guys as Michael, the most level-headed member of the cast.

My favorites, however, are a pair of assholes played by Michael Kelly and Ty Burrell. The former is the chief mall security guard who’s not keen on letting strangers inside, while the latter is the epitome of yuppie scum. Both guys are doomed, of course, but they provide plenty of laughs before becoming zombie snacks.

Snyder passes on all the social commentary that Romero found necessary to shoehorn into his version, and he instead replaces it with more action and a respectable amount of gore. The soundtrack is also off-the-charts cool, with tunes from Disturbed, Johnny Cash, and a lounge singer named Richard Cheese.

While I hold the Romero version in high regard, there’s only one Dawn of the Dead that I have in my DVD collection. This is it.

A staple of Zack Snyder movies are slow motion battle sequences.

300 (2007) – A brutal, chest-thumping adaptation of Frank Miller’s comic series about a group of 300 Spartans who valiantly hack and slash their way through thousands of invading Persian soldiers. Larry Fong’s sepia-toned cinematography lends an elegance to the carnage, while Snyder has plenty of opportunities to engage in slo-mo bloodletting.

I recall walking out of the theatre slightly disappointed by this one, as I originally deemed it to be a series of action pieces linked together by little in the way of emotional depth. The hunchback and his ridiculous hat didn’t help things, either. I’ve since revised my position, though, and 300 has become a favorite option when I’m looking to watch something while eating.

Watchmen (2009) – People had been trying to adapt Alan Moore’s legendary comic book limited series for decades, but each proposal would get mired down in the planning process. Then Snyder came along, fresh off his triumphs with 300 and Dawn of the Dead. Years of frustration were suddenly washed away, and pre-production began in earnest.

The finished product makes you wonder what all the fuss was about. Not only does Snyder capture the essence of the story, but he makes it look easy in the process. And all the tiny details are there for hardcore fans, including business signs that look like they’re drawn by Dave Gibbons himself.

Snyder throws in several slow motion fight sequences, including an excellent battle between The Comedian and a shadowy assailant to open the show. Music is drawn from the ‘60s and ‘70s, with Hendrix’s “All Along the Watchtower” being among the most effective.

As for the cast, it’s solid from top to bottom. Jackie Earle Haley is tops as the obsessive vigilante crimefighter named Rorschach, and Jeffrey Dean Morgan is a close second as the world-weary hero/soldier/assassin dubbed The Comedian.

If you’ve already read Alan Moore’s Watchmen, this makes an excellent companion. If you’ve yet to experience either one, clear your schedule for a day and fit them both in.

Legend of the Guardians: The Owls of Ga’Hoole (2010) – A computer-animated tale adapted from a series of fantasy books about owls engaged in war, intrigue, and heroism. I’ve never read the books, and I suspect the film was aimed at an audience much younger than myself. To date, it’s the only Zack Snyder movie that I haven’t watched, and I don’t plan on that changing in the near future.

Girls and guns. Can you really beat that combination?

Sucker Punch (2011) – The trailer promised girls, guns, World War I trenches, and giant monsters dressed in samurai armor. I went to the midnight showing to see it as soon as possible, but I walked away less than impressed thanks to a weak script and not-so-hot heroine (Emily Browning). When the supporting cast–including Abbie Cornish, Jamie Chung, Jena Malone, and Vanessa Hudgens–is 50 times more boner-inducing than the lead, you know you’re in trouble.

And while there was plenty of action to be had, it felt thrown together at random. I was reminded of watching a video game cutscene (without having played the actual game), and even the presence of Scott Glenn couldn’t whip this film into a winner. A major step back for Snyder, but I’m going to give him a mulligan and hope for the best in 2013.

Upcoming Zack Snyder Projects for 2013

Zack Snyder’s next project is Man of Steel, the latest attempt to restart the Superman franchise. Scheduled for a June 2013 release, this will be yet another reboot. The cast is shaping up nicely as of this writing, with Henry Cavill (Superman), Amy Adams (Lois Lane), Michael Shannon (General Zod), Kevin Costner (Pa Kent), Diane Lane (Ma Kent), and Russell Crowe (Jor-El) signing on. While Superman Returns was a huge disappointment, here’s hoping that Snyder can get things turned in a positive direction.

Zack Snyder movies are colorful and violent, and his background as a music video director allows him to combine sound and visuals to create some impressive sequences. While a few of his recent releases have been box-office disappointments, his star continues to shine brightly for fanboys around the globe. If you’re a fan, I suggest heading out in 2013 to support Man of Steel. Otherwise, Snyder might find himself back directing Morrissey videos.

Wes Craven Movies

Posted on July 27, 2011 by admin

Wes Craven directed his first feature film in 1972, and he’s been behind the camera for over 20 movies as of 2011. He’s also served as a writer on 13 projects, as well as being the executive producer of many more. Whether you like Wes Craven movies or not, you have to respect the man’s work ethic.

Fans of horror movies should also respect his contributions to the genre. The Last House on the Left and The Hills Have Eyes both assisted the rise of contemporary terror in the 1970s, and Craven is responsible for creating one of the “big three” (Freddy Krueger) of modern movie maniacs. And don’t forget about Scream, the self-referential flick that raked in big bucks at the box office, paid homage to previous slasher movies, and helped resurrect an otherwise flagging horror industry.

Wes Craven movies

I’ve seen 16 of Craven’s directorial efforts, and most have delivered at least a few memorable moments. This article is dedicated to looking back on those movies, with an emphasis on recalling what I liked and what I didn’t. If you’re discovering the films of Wes Craven for the first time, allow my ramblings to serve as a guide through the labyrinth of modern horror.

The Wes Craven Movies I’ve Seen

The Last House on the Left (1972) – I’ve never been partial to movies that interject pointless comedy scenes into an otherwise tense narrative. It irritated me when John Ford did it in The Searchers (the wacky courtship and wedding scenes), and this Wes Craven debut isn’t anywhere near the level of the John Wayne classic. For every moment of rape, murder, or penis biting, there’s a scene of bumbling cop Martin Kove accompanied by goofy music. A highly controversial film for its time, but one of Craven’s weaker efforts.

The Hills Have Eyes, one of the earliest Wes Craven movies.

The Hills Have Eyes (1977) – The father of the deranged mutant hillbilly sub-genre, The Hills Have Eyes features Dee Wallace and co-stars stranded in an RV in the Nevada desert and pursued by a family of cannibals. An effective tale of isolation and terror, especially when a baby gets abducted as a potential late-night snack for Papa Jupiter and his kin. The contrast between the civilized and wild families elevates the film into more than a simple hack ‘n slash flick. Michael Berryman would become a horror fan favorite with his portrayal of Pluto. By this point, Craven must have been building up a reputation as a misogynist thanks to two films about women being raped and murdered.

Deadly Blessing (1981) – Sharon Stone and Ernest Borgnine make for an acting dream team in this tale of three young women hounded by a deranged Amish cult. Michael Berryman once again adds his unusual looks to the proceedings, and it provides one of the more compelling arguments for why the peaceful-seeming Amish can’t be trusted.

Swamp Thing (1982) – Stuntman and TV vet Dick Durock gets to play the hero for once in this adaptation of the DC Comics title. I saw Swamp Thing at the drive-in as a kid, and I was thrilled by all the bizarre creatures and outlandish battle sequences. Louis Jourdan didn’t make much of an impression at the time, but Adrienne Barbeau’s magnificent breasts sure did. Not a great film by any stretch of the imagination, but kids today should still get a kick out of it.

A Nightmare on Elm Street (1984) – Armed with a striped sweater, hat, and clawed glove, Freddy Krueger (Robert Englund) made his bid for horror movie immortality as a horribly disfigured child molester who kills off teenagers in their dreams. A young Johnny Depp was one of his victims, and Freddy is still racking up victims over 25 years later. Still the best entry in the series, although a Dokken soundtrack was sorely missed.

Deadly Friend (1986) – I was always a sucker for Kristy Swanson, and here she’s a 17-year-old hottie who’s routinely beaten by her father. When he goes too far and leaves her near death, her geeky neighbor steals the body and implants a computer chip in her brain. From there, she goes on a rampage and delivers one of the cooler-looking kills I’ve seen in a horror film (it involves Anne Ramsay and a basketball). The rest of the film is kinda boring, though.

The Serpent and the Rainbow (1988) – Before he was elected President of the United States and helped save the nation from aliens, Bill Pullman was a scientist who went to Haiti and got caught up in all manner of voodoo hijinks. Co-star Zakes Mokae made a career out of playing mysterious figures with knowledge of the supernatural, and the scenes with Pullman being buried alive should scare the hell out of anyone who’s claustrophobic.

Shocker (1989) – A serial killer (Mitch Pileggi aka Skinner from The X-Files) gets the electric chair, but that doesn’t stop his rampage. My favorite part about this film was Megadeth’s cover of Alice Cooper’s “No More Mr. Nice Guy.”

Not all Wes Craven movies have guys with firearms and gimp outfits, but this one does.

The People Under the Stairs (1991) – A bizarre film about an incestuous couple who live in a former mortuary and keep inbred mutants chained in the basement. The image of actor Everett McGill dressed in full bondage gear and wielding a shotgun has stuck with me through the years, as well as an early appearance by Ving Rhames. The film was uneven, but it made enough of an impression for me to be able to write a few lines about it.

Wes Craven’s New Nightmare (1994) – Craven delivers an interesting twist to the Nightmare on Elm Street franchise, as actress Heather Langenkamp comes to believe that Freddy Krueger is stalking her and her child in real life. Craven co-stars as himself, as do John Saxon and Robert Englund. While the original still remains my favorite, those hankering for an innovative metafilm are urged to check it out.

Vampire in Brooklyn (1995) – This Eddie Murphy vehicle couldn’t decide if it wanted to be horror or comedy, and it suffered because of it. Skip it at all costs and watch Scream Blacula Scream, instead.

Scream (1996) – With its repeated use of horror trivia and the “rules” of the genre, Scream reinvigorated the box office potential of scary movies and ensured Craven of continued work for years to come. Courteney Cox will blow your mind with her good looks, and Rose McGowan’s rack has never looked better. Despite Neve Campbell’s blandness, the film succeeds thanks to a clever screenplay, excellent supporting cast, and a refreshing new killer in the form of Ghostface. Witness the birth of a franchise.

Scream 2 (1997) – Not as good as the first film. Cotton Weary remains one of the best character names in the history of cinema, though.

Scream 3 (2000) – Not as good as the first or second film. However, it does have Lance Henriksen.

Not all Wes Craven movies fall into the horror genre.

Red Eye (2005) – A so-so thriller about a hotel manager (Rachel McAdams) who gets caught up in the plot of a terrorist (Cillian Murphy). Murphy has the looks to effectively play crazy, and McAdams’ hotness kept me distracted throughout the 85-minute runtime. Brian Cox has a small part as her father, although he fails to wear any crazy hats like he did in Troy.

Scream 4 (2011) – Not as good as the first, second, or third film. The “killer uploads to the Internet” angle was especially lame. It’s also depressing when recurring cast members start to show their age (and not in a cute, Harry Potter sort of way).

I hope you’ve enjoyed my look at the Wes Craven movies that I’ve seen over the years, and readers are encouraged to head to Netflix or your local video store and check out the works of one of horror’s elder statesmen. At an age where many of his contemporaries have slowed down or retired, Craven continues to do his part to keep the masses scared silly. While every trip to the plate may not be a homerun, at least he still has the desire to step into the batter’s box.

Odd Films Blog

A blog about weird movies