Every year I have to do at least one post that feels like homework. Not because the movie itself isn’t fun or entertaining but because of how much its production and story entails. Ran is an epic period-piece inspired by Shakespeare’s King Lear and the life of famous Daimyo (feudal lord) Moro Motonari. At 11 Million, Ran was the most expensive movie ever produced in Japan at that point in time. Hundreds of costumes and sets of armor were made, castles built, horses were everywhere. It’s staggering how much went into this movie. Which is probably why this movie feels staggering to write about, but I’ll try.

Continue reading →

This is my favorite kind of Criterion acquisition because there are a lot of classic dramas, noir thrillers, and westerns in the collection. There are underseen international and arthouse films as well, but there isn’t nearly enough shlock. That’s why anytime Criterion announces a new John Waters or Alex Cox flick, I can’t help but flash a wide Grinch smirk. Just because a movie is trashy doesn’t mean it’s not art. Movies don’t have to have stars, effects, or an impressive budget to be important. Personally, I find these films most valuable, which means Eating Raoul is like finding buried treasure.

Continue reading →

As long as we’ve had edgy, paranoid, cool spy thrillers, we’ve needed punchy satires of them to keep us all in check. All work and no play makes us all MAD. There were a lot of these movies post-Watergate, so we needed a big swing by 1980. Hopscotch wants to be that movie. It almost is that movie. The only problem is it’s a bit too caught up in the genre it should be dismantling. And that’s not just coming from me, a huge Hot Shots! Part Deux fan. Even Roger Ebert wrote, “Hopscotch is a shaggy-dog thriller that never really thrills us very much, but leaves a nice feeling when it’s over… It’s a strange thing to say about a thriller, but Hopscotch is… pleasant.”

Continue reading →

It’s June and I’m looking through my Blu-rays for any Criterion movies I hadn’t seen yet. That’s when I’m reminded of my prize jewel, my greatest shame: Ingmar Bergman’s Cinema. A 30-disc monster containing 39 movies – arranged as a film festival – and a 248-page book, I bought this tome years ago. I was so proud at the time because I was able to take advantage of both half-off plus a pair of coupons I had earned as a Criterion Channel charter member. It carries a hefty list price of $300 and I managed to only pay $130 plus tax. But $130 is a lot of money to spend just to fill space in my IKEA bookcase.

Continue reading →

Ah, the awkward allure of a low-budget debut feature film. The Criterion Collection is so rife with debut films from directors who would go on to direct movies with bigger stars and bigger budgets that John ended up doing exclusively these types of films one year. It’s a genre of movie that has a certain scrappy appeal to it, where not everything is as fine-tuned as you’d expect from a big studio film with set decorators and costume designers and make-up artists. But there’s still something very pure and honest about it, even if the film is imperfect in many ways. And when a debut film of this sort happens to be made by a director who never got to go on to direct bigger movies, due to the all-encompassing power of Hollywood sexism, the film becomes something you want to grab onto and give a big hug, not unlike you’d do to an old dependable friend. Continue reading →

Last March, I watched a 1981 Filipino martial arts flick called “The One Armed Executioner” about an Interpol agent who seeks revenge after losing his arm. The movie was poorly dubbed, melodramatic, and cheaply produced. I liked The One Armed Executioner more than Enter the Dragon. Now this isn’t meant as a slight against the 1973 classic. What I’m trying to say is that I believe that Enter the Dragon’s influence over the genre might be outweighing the actual quality of the film.

Continue reading →