TWO LANE BLACKTOP (1971)

CRITERION TOP TEN

Just for fun.  I included discs from all formats I've collected over the years and have included sentimental choices even though the quality may have been subsequently surpassed.  I wrote these down as they came to me and did not adjust rankings afterward.

08.  TWO LANE BLACKTOP (1971) - Blu-Ray (and DVD)

TWO-LANE BLACKTOP
Directed by Monte Hellman.  Written by Rudy Wurlitzer and Will Cory.
Starring Warren Oates, James Taylor, Dennis Wilson, Laurie Bird
1971, 102 minutes, Color, Rated R, 2.35:1

I saw this on television back in the 80's, or rather, since this is a widescreen film and it was shown panned and scanned, I only saw about half of it.  This is an elliptical movie that I find endlessly fascinating, for reasons I am usually unable to communicate.  Not much happens in the traditional movie sense — it's about a cross-country race between rival drivers, which sounds reasonably exciting.  However, the film ignores the obvious and ultimately drops the race aspect entirely, instead focusing on the characters.  There are four characters in the film, and no one is named.  James Taylor plays the Driver, Dennis Wilson is the Mechanic, Warren Oates is GTO and Laurie Bird is the Girl.  Are they symbols, or is their anonymity an intentional statement by the writers on the universality of their experiences?   The film ostensibly ends like it begins with Taylor doing what he is best at--the only thing he is good at, perhaps.  Except whereas the race at the start opens up the possibilities of the characters and story, the race at the close ends with a freeze frame that then warps and distorts until the image burns away.  Just what in the hell is that supposed to mean?  For a film I love I am distressingly short on theories.

Monte Hellman made this film largely in order, only giving his non-actors a few pages of the script at a time.  He says he did this to try and preserve spontaneity with the largely untrained cast--Taylor, Wilson and Bird had never made a film before.  I haven't seen all of Hellman's films--and there really are not that many of them.  Aside from RIDE THE WHIRLWIND (1966) and THE SHOOTING (1966) I don't think I've seen any of his other films.  Both RIDE and THE SHOOTING are superior works and BLACKTOP feels like a natural progression.  Oates and Hellman worked together a total of 4 times together--this, THE SHOOTING, COCKFIGHTER (1974), and CHINA 9, LIBERTY 37 (1978).

Wilson was in The Beach Boys when he made this film, and Taylor was just about to release the album that would make him a superstar, SWEET BABY JAMES.  Taylor has gone on record saying that he hated Hellman's approach to making the movie and even wrote a song about it.¹  For someone who hated the experience, Taylor ultimately delivers a good performance.  What he may lack in technique he more than makes up for with charisma--he just looks good on screen and has a certain undefinable something that makes him consistently interesting to watch.  Bird was a model before this and subsequently appeared in only two other films.²  She likewise gives a moving and effective performance.   Warren Oates is simply magnificent as GTO.  Truly, his performance is a thing of beauty, alternating between manic machismo and world-wearied self-reflection.  His nuanced, complex performance offers much to study and ponder, just as the film does overall.

I find myself playing the "guess the damage" game with the characters.  They are all reasonably damaged, and none of it is explained, so one is left to their own devices to try and determine motivation and history.  At one point, Oates' character tries to open up to Taylor, but Taylor abruptly cuts him off.  "I don't want to hear about it", he says.  The audience may well be muttering to themselves, "well, I wanted to hear about it."  Oates comes the closest to being someone the audience can fully relate to.  Wilson, Bird, and especially Taylor, not so much.  This isn't to say that there aren't riches to mine in their performances.  Taylor vividly portrays a man not quite in touch with his feelings, desperately trying to express something to Bird's character.  Bird is an enigma--does she care about anyone in the film or was it all simply a way to hitch a ride?

Released on DVD first by Anchor Bay in an edition that featured a 5.1 remix and a commentary by director Monte Hellman and Producer Gary Kurtz.  It also came in a spiffy tin box with an oversized booklet of groovy pictures of an impossibly young and coiffed James Taylor.  That commentary was actually very good.  When Criterion released the film on DVD it featured the same 5.1 remix but dropped the commentary in favor of an all-new commentary by Hellman alone.  I've still never listened to it.  The Criterion DVD release also featured the original shooting script as a DVD-sized book.  (Some of Criterion's more recent releases have also included books like this, namely PICNIC AT HANGING ROCK and RED RIVER.) The Blu-Ray release features a noticeably improved image transfer, lossless sound, and new supplements, including a great hour-long conversation between James Taylor and Hellman.  The screenplay was not included with the Blu-Ray, which is a shame because it is fascinating.  Hellman claims in the intro for it that he shot the entire script and that seems accurate, as everything in the film is there in the script.   There is more detail in the script, but it tells the same story, so it doesn't change the story as much as make it somewhat clearer what is happening..

1. "Riding On a Railroad", Mud Slide Slim and Blue Horizon, 1971, Warner Records.

There's a man up here who claims to have his hands upon the reins.
There are chains upon his hands and he's riding upon a train.
We are riding on a railroad, singing some else's song

EDIT:  It's since been clarified that Taylor had written this song prior to his experience making the film.  Still, the lyrics closely parallel the filmmaking experience.

2. Bird had a reasonably unhappy life.  She died in 1979 while romantically involved with Art Garfunkel, possibly as a suicide, possibly accidentally.

THE HOSPITAL (1971)

Directed by Arthur Hiller.  Written by Paddy Chayefsky

Starring George C. Scott, Diana Rigg, Barnard Hughes, Richard Dysart, Katherine Helmond, Frances Sternhagen,
1971, 103 minutes, Color, Rated R, 1.85:1

Spoiler Alert!

George C. Scott is great in this, and any movie that features a young(ish) Diana Rigg is good with me.  This movie is about bureaucracy and the dehumanization inherent when hospitals become more concerned with profits than with saving lives.  Although now more than 40 years old it hasn't lost any of its punch.  Actually, it may be more relevant than ever, a testament to the writing and to our dysfunctional United States health care system.   It is a DARK movie, with dark grungy visuals and an even darker sense of humor.

The film is rated PG, but ideally should have been an 'R' as it is too constrained by having to hold back at various points. There's an obvious re-looping of the word 'fuck' at one point by a VERY young Stockard Channing, for instance, and some optical zooming to avoid nudity in another.  Do either of these things cause irreparable harm to the story?  Not at all, but the optical zooming occurs on Diana Rigg so the logical conclusion is that if the movie was rated 'R' we would have seen her or parts of her naked.  Case closed.

The movie ends with Scott's character not running away with Rigg, choosing to stay to try and fix the system. That ending wouldn't happen today.  Today, it simply wouldn't be believable that someone would believe in the system that much so as to deny themselves the pleasure of being with a young Diana Rigg.  For that matter, the film's casting wouldn't happen today--just look at ARTICLE 99 (1992) which aspires to be similar in tone and concept but is populated by actors in their early 30's instead of their 50's.  THE HOSPITAL is staffed realistically and this ultimately dates it more than anything else in the movie.

A BRIDGE TOO FAR (1977)

A BRIDGE TOO FAR
Directed by Richard Attenborough.  Written by William Goldman
Starring Dirk Bogarde, James Caan, Michael Caine, Sean Connery, Edward Fox, Elliot Gould, Gene Hackman, Anthony Hopkins, Hardy Kruger, Laurence Olivier, Ryan O'Neal, Robert Redford, Maximillian Schell, Liv Ullmann.
1977, 175 minutes, Color, Rated PG, 2.35:1

A BRIDGE TOO FAR tells the story of operation "Market Garden", an audacious plan devised by Montgomery to end the war with Germany quickly and decisively.  The plan involved parachuting a large number of Allied troops behind enemy lines, securing a number of bridges, and then ramming a large task force over all of the bridges right into Berlin (eventually).  It was 90% successful in that they captured and held all but one of the bridges.  The last bridge—in the city of Arnhem in the Netherlands—was not captured and that negated the entire operation.  The operation was planned in merely seven days and depended on nothing going wrong, but of course things did go wrong.  Some of the things that went wrong were outside of anyone's control--like the weather--but other things were the fault of the short turnaround time and a willingness by the planners to overlook anything that might call into question starting the assault.  A prime example of this is the decision to ignore evidence of a stronger German presence around Arhem that older intelligence didn't show.  Ultimately, not only did it not help end the war more quickly, it has been argued that it may have in fact helped prolong the war. More than 15,000 Allied troops lost their lives in the operation; the exact number varies depending on which source you look at.  However, it still remains the largest airborne assault ever carried out.

 

The film is based on the book of the same name by Cornelius Ryan, published in 1974.  Ryan had previously written the definitive story of D-Day called The Longest Day which was released as a film in 1965.   It was produced by Sam Levine and financed out of his own pocket, and it proved to be a safe bet because distribution deals in place before the movie's start covered the cost of the film.   This was done by securing an international cast.  And truly, this movie has an impressive cast.  To be truthful, most of the cast qualify as supporting roles and a couple qualify as cameos. With the possible exception of Olivier and Ulmann, however, I have always felt that the cast is well-used.  For so many people being involved the majority get at least one moment in which to leave their mark.  This is both a testament to the writing, direction and acting, of course.

This movie was made solely because Levine wanted to. He put up his own money to get it started, he hired all of the principal talent, he secured distribution deals, and perhaps most importantly he wanted to make the film in the first place. BRIDGE was Levine's biggest film by far, both from a logistical and budget standpoint.  To direct it he chose Richard Attenborough, a man who had made only two other films, and both of those were small scale in nature.  The book was adapted by William Goldman who was reasonably busy as a screenwriter in this time period--MARATHON MAN and ALL THE PRESIDENT'S MEN were also written and released in the same time period.
.

I've always thought highly of A BRIDGE TOO FAR, which is not a popular opinion.  It's reputation is slowly becoming more positive as the years pass, but much of the critical literature out there is still pretty dismissive of it.  Leonard Maltin's Movie Guide¹, for instance, gives it two stars out of four and says it is "lifeless and dull".  Roger Ebert likewise gives it two stars, though this time out of a possible five.  His review refers to the movie as an example of "wretched excess"².  Time Magazine suggested that the filmmakers were in the wrong line of business³. Vincent Canby in the New York Times concedes that it has some powerful scenes, but that it is also shapeless and confusing⁴.  The Economist called it a "costly mistake"⁵.  New York Magazine called it "an all-star martial disaster, and almost an insult to the dead."⁶ As recently as 2009 Goldman was still saying that he was puzzled by the film's failure⁷, though to be clear he is talking more about the critical failure rather than the financial failure--the film grossed $50 million dollars against a budget of $26 million⁸.  Not a runaway hit but not embarrassing either.  In his book Adventures in the Screen Trade, Goldman says that "Until the reviews came out, A Bridge Too Far was probably the best experience I've had in films."  Once the reviews came out he found himself blindsided by criticism that the film was hard to believe.  He was surprised by this because he had worked very hard to present the story as truthfully as was possible in a movie.

It helps, I suppose, that I am not at all disinclined to liking depressing movies, for if BRIDGE is anything it is certainly depressing.  However, the story depicted in the film is based on fact, and just because the real-life events are somewhat depressing I see no reason to hold it against the film.  Aside from some narrative condensation, it is one of the more accurate films ever made about World War Two.  It does a very good job telling a complicated story clearly, although many period reviews claim to have been confused on what was happening.

So, what's to like in the film?  It has the feel of an epic, gorgeously photographed by Geoffrey Unsworth and scored by the reliably British John Addison.  It tells its story clearly and directly.  Attenborough puts the camera everywhere — epic vistas are intercut with "you are there" shots to remind you that these are people.  Every act of war heroics is balanced by scenes showing the true human cost.   It tells a depressing story but does so honestly.  There is no pandering to the audience, and the whole thing reeks of an intellectual approach--rather than playing up the emotional nature of some of the more harrowing scenes the film plays them out matter-of-factly.  Upon repeated viewings the subtlety on display takes deeper hold and the film becomes enormously moving.  This emotional distance is more than likely the reason critics were less than kind to it.  Could a different director have done a better job with the material?  Perhaps, but who?  John Sturgess made THE EAGLE HAS LANDED at roughly the same time and arguably did a worse job than Attenborough.  For my money, I like Attenborough's approach just fine.  It tells the story it means to, and if you can go along with it you will find it a rich and rewarding film that stays with you for quite some time afterwards.

What else is there to like?  Edward Fox has a rousing speech right before the attack commences that really gets the blood pumping--it's really perhaps the best "rally the troops" kind of speech ever committed to film--outside of STRIPES, of course.  It's such a great dramatic moment that it doesn't really matter that it's one of the film's few pure inventions.  Gene Hackman, for the most part, pulls off a Polish accent, Sean Connery is charming and commanding as always, but it is his acting in the penultimate scene, where Browing tells him that "Monty" is proud that Market Garden was 90% successful, that is his best moment.  In real life the character he plays was haunted by the operation for the rest of his life, and Connery sells that perfectly.  Schell invests his German officer with a humanity not typically seen in war films, and Redford is solid as an American Major ordered to cross a river in the daytime in manually rowed boats (it goes about as well as expected).  If the movie is "stolen" you could make an argument that it's stolen by James Caan.  He plays an American sergeant who goes back to a battlefield to get his Captain who was left for dead.  This is complicated by the fact that the Germans have re-taken the battlefield.   In a film full of effective vignettes, this 10-minute sequence is superior filmmaking and culminates in Caan ordering a surgeon at gunpoint to examine the Captain.  A close second might be Eliot Gould who plays a profane engineer.  Dirk Bogarde and Michael Caine also register strongly.

The idea of a large cast of stars in a war film was not new, of course, as THE LONGEST DAY famously did the same thing.  THE LONGEST DAY is a more “Hollywood” war film than A BRIDGE TOO FAR and doesn't feel quite so realistic as a result.  BRIDGE strives for realism and showing the horrors of war, and tries to do this not through gore but by concentrating on the emotions of the people involved.  Given the cast and scope of the film, it's commendable how "small" it feels at times.  Of course, at other times it is as huge as a David Lean picture.  The parachute drop sequence is very impressive with a seemingly impossible number of people being dropped at the same time.   As the operation was comprised of multiple small, strategic battles there is not really an opportunity for huge scenes of battle, but we do get some large explosions.  The only sequence that feels like a "war" movie is the assault on the second to last bridge, where we get Robert Redford running around and shooting Germans with aplomb.  Shortly after this, we treated to a somber scene where we find out just how much of a failure the operation was.

A BRIDGE TOO FAR was photographed by Geoffrey Unsworth and the film bears his trademark filtered look that usually looked horrible in NTSC.  It was released on laserdisc in the early 1990's in a widescreen edition that preserved the film's scope, but largely missed the subtleties inherent in the soft photography.  It subsequently appeared on a special-edition DVD that featured improved image transfer and loads of historical features, such as interviews with actual participants in Operation Market Garden, a commentary by William Goldman, and a trivia track that provides further detail on the events in the film.  The special features really enhance the movie--of course, when the film was released on Blu-Ray it included none of them.  The Blu-Ray was released in the early days of Blu-Ray and as was the case for most of the early MGM/UA Blu-Rays uses the MPEG2 codec.  Now, technically MPEG2 can handle 1080P but from a compression standpoint other codecs (AVC, VC-1) usually produce better results.  That said, the Blu-Ray is clearly the best the film has ever looked on home video and one can't really complain about any aspect of the image.   The laserdisc referenced above was missing the on-screen text that established settings, which was disconcerting.  The special edition DVD added the text back, and I am happy to report that they are likewise back on the Blu-Ray.   The sound is a rousing 5.1 mix that presents John Addison's rousing score to great effect. Battle scenes likewise have plenty of surround activity.

Notes:
1. Leonard Maltin, Leonard Maltin's 2015 Movie Guide (New York, Signet, 2014)
2.http://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/a-bridge-too-far-1977 (originally published June 17, 1977)
3. Time Magazine, Monday, Nov. 27, 1978
4. New York Times, June 16, 1977
5. A Budget Too Big, The Economist, 29 May 1976, 96.
6. Movies Around Town, New York Magazine, July 18, 1977, 12
7. http://www.theguardian.com/film/2009/apr/25/william-goldman-screenwriter-interview
8. A. T. McKenna (2011): Joseph E. Levine and A Bridge Too Far (1977): A Producer's Labour of Love, Historical Journal of Film, Radio and Television, 31:2, 211-227

THE FISHER KING

CRITERION TOP TEN

Just for fun.  I included discs from all formats I've collected over the years and have included sentimental choices even though the quality may have been subsequently surpassed.  

10.  THE FISHER KING (1991) - Laserdisc

THE FISHER KING
Directed by Terry Gilliam.  Written by Richard LaGravanese
Starring Jeff Bridges, Robin Williams, Mercedes Ruehl, Amanda Plummer
1993, 137 minutes, Color, Rated R, 1.85:1

Terry Gilliam collaborated with Criterion for a number of special edition laserdisc and DVD releases for many of his films in the 1990's.  He almost made my list three times, which for a top-ten would have been pretty sweet for him.  In the end, however, I decided to limit him to just one film in the top ten.  While the other two films--BRAZIL and THE ADVENTURES OF BARON MUNCHAUSEN--were actually more impressive Criterion special editions, FISHER KING was more meaningful to me as a collector.  Since this is all really about me anyway, I went with this one over those two.  For the record, Criterion also released special editions of THE TIME BANDITS, FEAR AND LOATHING IN LAS VEGAS, as well as special editions of MONTY PYTHON AND THE HOLY GRAIL, and MONTY PYTHON AND THE LIFE OF BRIAN.

THE FISHER KING was one of the few current movies I ever bought from Criterion.   Meaning, it wasn't a critical rescue of a forgotten classic but was a full-blown special edition of a movie that had not long before played first run in a theater.  The Criterion Collection began on laserdisc in 1984 to celebrate "classic" films. Their first two releases were KING KONG and CITIZEN KANE. Subsequent years saw releases like THE 39 STEPS, HIGH NOON, and THE SEVENTH SEAL. Criterion pioneered the concept of special features for home video releases--they were the first to include a commentary which appeared on their KING KONG disc.  So when they started releasing current films and adding special features to them it was news.  Criterion ultimately released a number of current releases--films that were more POPULAR than CLASSIC--and it also almost always engendered the same response from certain folks.  Responses like,   "ARMAGEDDON is a classic? Really?"  Still, they also put out films like SHINE, BOOGIE NIGHTS, THE GAME, CHASING AMY, CRASH, SLING BLADE, THE ENGLISH PATIENT, EVITA, TRAINSPOTTING, DEAD PRESIDENTS, DAMAGE, BRAM STOKER'S DRACULA, THE PLAYER, BOYZ N THE HOOD. While some of these films never interested me, I appreciated the fact that they were out there.

At the start of the movie, Bridges is a DJ in the mode of Howard Stern who makes a living by putting people down and saying outlandish things.  He makes an offhand comment to a caller that yuppies should be killed and the caller takes him seriously.  One of the people he kills is Robin Williams' wife, and seeing her killed in front of him snaps him.  Later when Bridges,  disgraced and drunk, is saved by Williams who now lives on the street drifting in and out of reality, he finds a path to redemption.  He at first tries to help Williams' character as a way of trying to make himself feel better but grows to like him.  A quest for the holy grail figures into the plot, as does a "red knight", both parts of Williams' elaborate alternate reality.  The red Knight is more or less a depiction of the reality of his wife's death, and every time Williams sees it he runs away in terror.  Oh, and did I mention it's also a love story?

THE FISHER KING was, at the time, an anomaly in Gilliam's filmography for two reasons.  First, all of his previous films had originated with him meaning he had co-written everything he had filmed up to that the point this film was made.  After the Sturm und Drang of MUNCHAUSEN--that film had a fascinating and depressing production history that I won't get into here--he was handed a script so good that he couldn't turn it down.  The way Gilliam tells it, he was given two scripts--one was a big surefire hit, the other was THE FISHER KING.  He says he gave up on the first script and started reading KING fully expected to give up on that as well.  Two hours later he knew he had to make the movie. Whether this is really how it happened I don't know, but regardless is sounds good.  Gilliam brings considerable exuberance to the making of this film that makes it a joy to watch.  True, on paper KING sounds like an immense downer, and perhaps in lesser hands it may have turned out that way. In Gilliam's hands, the depressing aspects give the story dramatic weight that helps elevate it rather than weigh it down.

This leads us to the second anomaly that THE FISHER KING represents in the Gilliam filmography:  it is much more emotionally realistic than many if not most of his other films.  True, it has an   exaggeration of style typical of Gilliam films, employing wide angles, cluttered production design, and a childlike sense of wonder in certain scenes.  It also has Robin Williams riffing like only he can while still playing the "serious" moments very well.  We have grief, anguish, cross dressing singers, mythical (imaginary) knights and true love co-mingling very successfully.  In many ways, THE FISHER KING is unlike any other movie I have seen, and I mean that in a good way.

The acting in this film is way above average, a testament perhaps to the way above average script. Jeff Bridges gives a great performance--one of a series of great performances he gave in the early 90's*.Robin Williams gives a deeply rendered performance that is not diminished in any way by his subsequent fate.  It is a performance of gentle playfulness and full-on heart-rending despair. Rounding out the cast is Mercedes Ruehl and Amanda Plummer.  All shine brightly, in part because of the wonderful writing, but also from what they bring to it.

I don't think this was ever re-issued on Criterion DVD and for a while was only available in the U.S. on a bare-bones Blu-Ray.  Criterion has subsequently released the film on Blu-Ray, but I have not seen it.  At the time the laserdisc was released it was still reasonably new and director Terry Gilliam was excited to talk about it so his commentary was quite good.  Also included were some deleted scenes, some costume tests, and some still frame galleries.  Criterion spent some time in the 1990's helping affirm Gilliam's status as a serious filmmaker by producing great editions of his films.  Note, these screen captures are not from the laserdisc.

* AMERICAN HEART, THE VANISHING and FEARLESS if you are wondering.

HD Roundup

Quick blurbs about things I recorded from a variety of HD channels...

CAPOTE
Directed by Bennett Miller.  Written by Dan Futterman
Starring Philip Seymour Hoffman, Clifton Collins, Jr., Catherine Keener
2005, 114 minutes, Color, Rated R, 2.35:1

Long and reasonably engrossing, but I didn't enjoy it.  Can you still admire films you don't enjoy?  I guess so.  I mean, where is it written that you have to enjoy what's good for you?   Trouble is, I can't see how this was good for me.  Still, Philip Seymour Hoffman was really good at playing the little guy.

FIRE IN THE SKY
Directed by Robert Lieberman.  Written by Tracy Torme
Starring D.B. Sweeney, Robert Patrick, Craig Sheffer, Peter Berg, Henry Thomas, Noble Willingham, James Garner.
1993, 1109 minutes, Color, Rated R, 2.35:1 (Super 35)

This looked good in HD, but I didn't get much out of it this time around. Robert Patrick was good in it, though.  It deals with an supposed alien abduction.  Seems pretty tame and silly now compared to things like DARK SKIES and the PARANORMAL ACTIVITY flicks.  Additionally, the movie overtly cheats with the facts--Robert Patrick's character passes a lie detector test in the movie that the person in real life failed.  Good sound mix, though.  Filmed in Super 35, which usually means shot full frame and matted for theatrical presentation.  For this viewing it was matted to a 2.35:1 ratio, but I have seen it at other times opened up (that is, not widescreen).

SURVEILLANCE
Directed by Jennifer Lynch.  Written by Kent Harper and Jennifer Lynch.
Starring Julia Ordmond, Bill Pullman, Pell James
2008, 97 minutes, Color, Rated R, 2.35:1

Directed by Jennifer Lynch and starring Bill Pullman and Julia Ormond.  I saw where this was going about 10 minutes into it.  Ultimately, I didn't think it made sense.  It's a low budget film that tried to be a mind-fuck but it just doesn't work.  It's always a pleasure to see Ms. Ormond, however.  She was great in SMILLA'S SENSE OF SNOW.

TROPIC THUNDER
Directed by Ben Stiller.  Written by Justin Theroux, Ben Stiller & Etan Cohen
Starring Robert Downey, Jr., Jack Black, Ben Stiller, Steve Coogan,
2008, 107 minutes, Color, Rated R, 2.35:1

This was funny for about five minutes but is much too long and convoluted.  Robert Downey, Jr. was a hoot, however.  Tom Cruise is not funny, though.  I never need to see this again.  I'm not sure if I saw the longer unrated version, but if I did maybe the shorter theatrical version would have been better for me.

WILD, WILD WEST
Directed by Barry Sonnenfeld.  Written by S.S. Wilson, Brent Maddock, Jeffrey Price, Peter S. Seaman
Starring Will smith, Kevin Kline, Kenneth Branagh, Salma Hayek, M. Emmet Walsh, Ted Levine
1999, 106 minutes, Color, Rated PG-13, 1.85:1

I wanted to see if this was as awful as I remembered it.  It is.  As much as I like Kevin Kline, he was incredibly wrong for this.  Will Smith is okay.  Kenneth Branagh is technically good, but the character he plays is so off-putting it's hard to enjoy it.  For that matter, the entire film and setup is pretty painful so maybe no one could have made it work.  Very unfunny and not very exciting to boot.  Pointless special effects.  The best part of the movie is Salma Hayek's ass, one cheek of which is briefly shown unadorned of clothing.  I know, I know--politically incorrect to say but it's really quite nice.

AMERICA'S SWEETHEARTS
Directed by Joe Roth.  Written by Billy Crystal & Peter Tolan
Starring Julia Roberts, John Cusack, Billy Crystal, Catherine Zeta-Jones, Hank Azaria, Stanley Tucci, Christopher Walken, Alan Arkin, Seth Green, Rainn Wilson
2001, 102 minutes, Color, Rated PG-13, 2.35:1

Billy Crystal, Julia Roberts and Catherine Zeta Jones from a few years ago. I dunno, I liked it but I already forget what it was about.

BABYLON, A.D.
Directed by Mathieu Kassovitz.  Written by Mathieu Kassovitz, Eric Besnard, Joseph Simas
Starring Vin Diesel, Michelle Yeoh
2008, 90 minutes, Color, Rated R, 2.35:1

Pointless.  ELYSIUM reminded me of this movie.

GET  SMART
Directed by Peter Segal.  Written by Tom J. Astle & Matt Ember
Starring Steve Carell, Anne Hathaway, Dwayne Johnson, Alan Arkin, Terrence Stamp, James Caan, Bill Murray,
2008, 110 minutes, Color, Rated PG-13, 1.85:1

Had a couple of chuckles, but pretty painful.  Anne Hathaway is watchable, as always.

HANCOCK
Directed by Peter Berg.  Written by Vincent Ngo & Vince Gilligan
Starring Will Smith, Charlize Theron, Jason Bateman,
2008, 92 minutes, Color, Rated PG-13, 2.35:1

This was a weird movie.  It has almost NO energy and just sort of lumbers along.  It seemed much longer than its short running time would suggest.  There was probably a good idea for a movie somewhere in here.

YANKS
Directed byJohn Schlesinger.  Written by Colin Wellan & Walter Bernstein
Starring Richard Gere, Lisa Eichorn, Vanessa Redgrave, William Devane
1979, 138 minutes, Color, Rated R, 1.85:1

Richard Gere movie from 1979.  It was, um, I guess 'boring' would be the word I'm looking for.  I was interested because it was a Schlesinger film and I'm now attuned to Lisa Eichorn, but it didn't do much for me.  However, thinking about it now I want to watch it again so I guess it did something right.

THE PRINCESS DIARIES
Directed by Garry Marshall.  Written by Gina Wendkos
Starring Julie Andrews, Anne Hathaway, Hector Elizondo, Heather Matarazzo, Mandy Moore
2001, 115 minutes, Color, Rated G, 1.85:1

Ostensibly I recorded this as a movie we could watch with our young daughter, but truth be told I like Anne Hathaway.  It helps that the movie was well-made and legitimately funny.

AFTER DARK, MY SWEET
Directed by James Foley.  Written by Robert Redlin, James Foley
Starring Jason Patric, Rachel Ward, Bruce Dern
1990, 114 minutes, Color, Rated R, 2.35:1

Jason Patric, Rachel Ward, Jim Thompson story. Dark, noir-ish, and generally well made if you're in the right mood.  Murky cinematography, which is entirely fitting to the story.

THE COCA-COLA KID

Directed by Dusan Makavejev.  Written by Frank Moorhouse & Denny Lawrence
Starring Eric Roberts, Greta Scacchi, Bill Kerr, Chris Haywood
1985, 98 minutes, Color, Rated R, 1.85:1

This is one seriously odd movie, from Eric Roberts' VERY strange lead performance (which grows on you the more times you see the film) to the blunt use of black comedy in the oddest places, this movie would seem to be the definition of "acquired taste".  Still, parts of it are quite funny and it's never boring.  Greta Scacchi gets fully nude several times, which is sure to allow many to overlook the film's faults.  The film never lives up to its initial promise, as it loses steam and focus as the plot progresses.  It also has one of the most patently bizarre endings for a relatively mainstream movie that you will find.

It's hard to say what this movie is really "about".  Maybe it's not supposed to be about anything.  Roberts plays a Coca Cola salesman/marketing specialist trying to increase sales in Australia.  He meets some strong opposition from a local soft drink maker--T. George McDowell--who has successfully kept Coca-Cola out of his region for many years.  Roberts looks upon it as a challenge and becomes determined to win the soft drink battle at any cost.   The film doesn't ultimately develop this storyline, however.  In fact, it kind of peters out after a while and the film slowly becomes more interested in a love story between Roberts and Scacchi.  

It strikes a somewhat uneasy balance between wacky comedy and endearing drama.  At times, it seems like it will work better than it ultimately does.  During my most recent viewing, I noticed continuity issues that may indicate some juggling of scenes during editing.   Of particular note is the musical number that was obviously intended to be earlier in the proceedings.  Also, Roberts' character gets into a fight at one point and his injuries come and go for a bit, although this may simply be sloppiness in the filmmaking process.

Perhaps the fact that it is based on two short stories accounts for the lack of overall cohesiveness. There are some wildly idiosyncratic moments that come from left field that ultimately do more harm than good--including a very strange coda.  It's also possible that I entirely missed the point of the movie the five or six times I've watched it.  I dunno.  The film features attractive actors and a few laughs.   I probably will watch this again sometime, however, so that should stand as my recommendation.

Viewed more recently, Robert's performance seems almost like a template for Matthew McConaughey's performance in THE WOLF OF WALL STREET.  Just saying, is all.