KNOCK AT THE CABIN

 

KNOCK AT THE CABIN =  B- 


A director that has relied so heavily upon twist endings, it was only a matter of time before M Night Shyamalan finally took the direct approach. No gimmicks, no shocks, no surprises, just a straight forward, predictable plot with a predictable ending. Perhaps in essence, Shyamalan's greatest twist ever, in that one would come into this film expecting a great reveal, only to leave empty handed. 

As I felt with READY OR NOT, I do feel that practicality would have served this film better than the "this was all real" approach.  For a brief moment the film leaned towards Eric & Andrew perhaps convincing the cult of four into other beliefs.  I think that would have made for a better, more interesting film.  Andrew & Eric, as well as Wen coming together in order to manipulate & brainwash their way into defeating the others. I feel that the direct approach instead feeds into the crazy, insane conspiracies we already have way too much of on this earth.  I don't think that is a good thing. 

Yet taking my disdain for the film's overall approach & looking at it for what it is, rather than what I would have had it rather have been, I conclude that it was told well. The acting in the film was pretty good & I have to say I was thoroughly impressed with Dave Bautista.  From Terry Funk, to Roddy Piper, to Hulk Hogan and  The Rock, pro wrestlers have never been known for their dramatic abilities.  I thought he did a superb job.  I actually think he's a better actor than he was a pro wrestler & I am glad that he was given the opportunity to showcase his skills.  Kudos to Shyamalan for not automatically disqualifying him because of his physique.  Their has been progress within the theater! 

This is a "what will happen next?" mystery/suspense that really throws you for a loop by doing exactly what it says it will do, when you're instead expecting the unexpected.  In THE SIXTH SENSE we find out that Bruce Willis has actually been dead the whole time.  In THE VILLAGE we find out that what seemed to take place long ago, is actually in the present day.  In THE VISIT we find out that they really aren't their real grandparents. 

In KNOCK AT THE CABIN what we get is what we see.  

A NIGHT TO REMEMBER

 

A NIGHT TO REMEMBER - B 

In the modern era of movies it can be rather difficult to fairly assess a film that is 65 years old. To compare it to it's predecessor TITANIC released nearly 40 years later would be petty and unfair.  In many ways A NIGHT TO REMEMBER was every bit as good as TITANIC & in many ways far more historically accurate. A plot driven story, there was little focus on the characters & their backgrounds and a stronger focus on the event & the responses to it. 

Like TITANIC Bruce Ismay was made out to be at fault for the disaster but he wasn't painted anywhere near the coward. Instead they portrayed him to accurately be concerned about the passengers getting as many of them on to the lifeboats as he could.  It's very subtle, but him looking around seeing no one else & asking, "Is there not anyone else" added a strong context that was not their in the 1997 version. 

A NIGHT TO REMEMBER also laid heavily into the Californian none to afraid to call the captain & crew out for their incompetence and mistakes. 

I will say that this film took a while to get started. The first hour felt more like an historical piece or a documentary. Something you'd watch in history class with names, facts and dates.  It wasn't until the ship actually struck the ice berg that you felt a since a urgency.  That's when the film began to pick up & the action really began to start.  

Considering that special effects were still in their infancy at the time, the actual sinking of the ship was done quite well.  I appreciate an attention to detail of Officer Lightoller and the efforts he went to in saving as many passengers as he could.  

There were many brave & heroic individuals the night that Titanic went down & I feel A NIGHT TO REMEMBER showcased that quite well.  If you're a Titanic buff the way I am, this is a must see.  If anything, for the second hour especially.  

HOUSE

 

HOUSE =  C+


This was a rather odd film, yet interesting enough to hold my attention for the full run time. Normally ambiguity leaves me with a feeling of well done, satisfaction or a feeling of resentment against unanswered questions, but I'll be if I wasn't middle of the road here.  I never quite knew exactly what was going on or why, but never really needed to either. 

In many ways this film reminded me of one of my favorite horror films, Oculus.  As if House were the original rough draft & after many revisions, Oculus the final product.  Was the house truly haunted? Was Roger simply crazy?  Was this all within Roger's plot for his new novel?  If the house was haunted, was it the house that controlled Ben or was it Ben that controlled the house?  What was real? What wasn't?  Did Harold in the end realize that Roger had been telling him the truth or was that all in Roger's head too?  Did Roger really end up saving Jimmy?  So many questions that seem to have answers until you take everything into consideration.  Well it could be this, but it could also be that.  This particular happening points to this, while this other happening points to that.  

I was hoping with four sequels that maybe one of them might be more definitive as to what exactly is going on, but from what I was able to gather without viewing them yet, they are standalone films without reference to the original. 

As to other elements of the film, I found the situation with the neighbor and her son to be extraordinarily bizarre. I think this is where the "comedy" or the horror-comedy was supposed to be but I found it more disturbing than I did funny.  The special effects were down right cheesy, but was this done purposefully, tongue in cheek or was it "Ed Wood" serious? Hell, even trying to figure out the film from a production standpoint is rather ambiguous! 

The score wasn't anything too spectacular, but it was fitting. William Katt really seemed to buy into the material & the film was better as a result of his genuine performance.  George Wendt a character similar to Norm, which might explain why he went to the bar so much.  If the experience were real for his character, I think that would drive anyone to drink.  Richard Moll, a fun performance, similar to his small roll in the Highlander  series. 

This film isn't going to hold a special place in my heart, but I do feel it was worth the one time viewing I gave it. If you're into absurd horror films that care more about entertaining you than offending you, I would check this one out. 

RAISE THE TITANIC

 

RAISE THE TITANIC - C

I remember first hearing about this film when I was in high school.  It took me 20 plus years to finally get around to watching it, but I finally did.  I think two things hurt this film. First and foremost for 1980, this premise was just way too far out there. I think people today might be intrigued but 43 years ago, I think they were confused more than anything.  Honestly it is an interesting idea.  The concept of a rare element that can be used to create a forcefield or build the ultimate bomb being left aboard the Titanic is rather gripping. Add in the moral dilemma of what this could mean & suddenly you have captivating drama. However, it was told too matter of fact, with little action & absolutely no comic relief.  The pace was slow, the sense of urgency rather a snail's pace. I think people might have gone into this film thinking that it actually had something to do with the Titanic, when in reality Titanic was a mere background for a story about politics, & the lines that should or shouldn't be crossed in militaristic measures. 

That's not to say that the film didn't have its highlights.  The cast did quite well. Jason Robards as he usually is was quite good. David Selby had the most amount of energy, giving the most realistic responses. Richard Jordan seemed to be a bit more of a character that what the role called for, but still a decent performance. At times it seemed that the cast was rather bored with the material, which I'm sure transgressed to the audience. The moments of levity were few and far between, with the strongest being the white star line flag being raised once again on the Titanic. 

I also wonder if the ending didn't hurt this film as well. So much emphasis, time & money was spent to raise the Titanic off of the ocean floor, only to discover in the end that it didn't even need to be done in the first place. Then once the characters discover where the element actually is, ultimately deciding to keep it hidden. I think the overall message was one of putting humanity ahead of government, but I'm not sure if it came across that way. 

In the end I'll conclude that this average film bombed so poorly at the box office because titles can be rather misleading. I'm sure as we didn't have internet back in those days, people went to the theater expecting a Titanic film, and left vastly disappointed to discover that it wasn't.  Again, only a guess, but this is why I would think the film did not do well. 

A Man Called Otto

 

A Man Called Otto: A 

A simple story that hits upon some of the most complicated parts of life. A story of loss & yet a story of gain. I was told before going into this film that it was very sad, but I beg to differ.  It started off sad & depressing but it ended on a very high note. It's difficult to review a movie like this as just a movie because it hits on such a personal & emotional topic. A topic that we all seem to be well aware of, yet at the same time very quiet and private about. 

Rather than write this movie review right away, I instead found myself writing about the actual topic of suicide when I got home from the theater.  The film moved me to open up about a topic that is so hard to talk about with others. A topic that is so hard to be honest about. To be vulnerable about.  

Some say that a film's sole purpose is to entertain.  That a film's job isn't to move you & that it certainly isn't to get you to act.  I didn't find A Man Called Otto to be didactic or preachy.  Yet I did find it to be motivating.  I did find it to cause me to think & to cause me to act. 

The performances were good.  Tom Hanks has been and continues to be one of the greatest actors of our generation. Yet the story here is what was so compelling.  People don't just wake up one day and want to end their lives for no reason.  It's usually because of a sense of loss & furthermore a sense of no hope, nothing left to go on for. A sense that all that is left in life is pain & suffering.  

Once Otto discovered through fate or intervention that there was more to go on for, he no longer wanted things to end and that's why this film isn't a sad one.  That's why I beg to differ with those that argue that it was. 

Had he succeeded in any of his suicide attempts, he would have died a lonely, sad, bitter & depressed old man.  Instead, he died happy & at peace. That's how I walked away feeling. 

THE RETURN

 

THE RETURN:  D+ 

While many films have suffered from too much exposition, The Return suffered from a lack of it. It was a very difficult story to follow. Show, don't tell is the language of film, but in this case the visuals didn't make up for a lack of dialog. While they were appealing, they did not help to tell the story, fill in the gaps or answer the questions. Instead if anything, they left us more confused. The one saving grace this film did have is strong performances. Sarah Michelle Gellar, Adam Scott, Sam Shepard, Peter O'Brien, I saw no flaws within the cast who did their best despite a screenplay that spun its wheels just shy of two hours. This film asked a lot out of its audience. You had to do a lot of guessing. What's happening? Why is it happening? How is it happening? There are times when films hold your hand throughout the entire experience. In this case they blindfolded you, dropped you off in downtown Manhattan, deprived you of GPS or a map & wished you the best of luck.  Film had potential to be good, but sacrificed what could have been a good story in an effort to be edgy.  It did not pay off. 

DREAMHOUSE NIGHTMARE

 

DREAM HOUSE NIGHTMARE : C 

Although it was not a Lifetime Movie Network film, it could have easily passed as one. Based on a true story, this film would have benefited sticking to the actualities of the real life situation & would have been better off to have omitted the made up parts. What really happened was already interesting enough, it didn't need all of the doctoring up that it received. The old saying "Sometimes less is more" really applies here as DREAM HOUSE NIGHTMARE illustrates exactly what that is countless times throughout the entire film. 

Not that there weren't elements of the film that deserve praise. For one the opening was extremely gripping & uniquely clever.  We are at first introduced to the antagonist set up as if she is the protagonist. We are immediately introduced to her situation as we empathize with the struggles she has endured. Her house was destroyed by Hurricane Katrina, her husband suffered a bad injury & is addicted to pills & she has the burden of raising an autistic daughter.  Then suddenly when the other couple shows up, it dawns on you that THEY are the protagonist and that she is the antagonist. It was a very well done reversal & it deserves to be recognized for how well it was shot. Unfortunately it's also the highlight of the entire film. 

I appreciate how the character of Madison portrayed by Terese Aiello was multi-dimensional.  While you don't empathize with her sociopathic behavior & all of the horrible things she does to the Wade family, you at least get to dive into her psyche and understand what drove her to the point of insanity.  Aiello did a great job of portraying the character & giving a realistic portrayal of such a person in a situation. 

Also props to Tenea Intriago. Playing someone with a mental disability is perhaps one of the hardest roles an actor can be given. I've seen some very well known, talented actors struggle with it in the past. Even some that just plain weren't able to do it. Juliette Lewis couldn't pull it off in THE OTHER SISTER & for that matter neither could Giovanni Ribisi. Intriago's performance was every bit as good as was Sean Penn's in I AM SAM or John Malkovich in OF MICE AND MEN. She nailed a very difficult part & she should be recognized for it. 

As to Rachel Whittle, her performance as Theresa Wade was 100% Lifetime Movie Network award winning worthy. She felt very unrealistic, written to the page and unnatural. Not sure if that was the way the character was written or if that was just the way she played the part. While blame wonders where exactly to be placed, the fact is, the performance felt odd and abnormal.  

Where this film really suffered was within the last 20 minutes. Had the film ended where Madison had gotten arrested & the credits rolled upon her being placed in the back of the squad car, the film might have earned a C+ or even a B-.   The film's focus was on Madison and the horrors she put the Wade family through. That was the entire focus of the film & then suddenly the last 20 minutes shifted to Madison's husband & her daughter. I think what the film was trying to go for, was to show how Autistic individuals can be heroes. While I appreciate the sentiment, it was out of place here & it robbed us from the reward of seeing Madison get her due. Furthermore it cheapened the heroic save made by her daughter.  Subplots should be woven into the main plot of a story and that wasn't done here. Instead it felt like two different films. The one ending definitively & the other rushed to be told in the last 20 minutes. 

It could have been worse though & that fact isn't lost on me.  It wasn't good, it wasn't all that bad, it was in many ways just ok.  If you're hard up for something to watch, you could do a lot worse.