1.85:1 Widescreen

Thieves Like Us was never one of Robert Altman’s better known films. It did rather poorly at the box office in 1974, and I suspect it will fare little better on DVD. Certainly there is a bit more interest in Altman’s films with his recent passing, but Thieves Like Us is not a great representation of his work. It is a wonderful period piece, but there isn’t anything worthwhile happening inside that marvelously created world. Altman admits there were extreme cuts, over 45 minutes, made to the film. Perhaps that foota...e might have made a huge difference. An extended cut might have been the better way to go here. I suspect with Altman’s death, no one wanted to be the one to change any of his films right now.

The film is based on the Edward Anderson novel of the same title. The book had been filmed with superior results in the 1940’s as They Live By Night. Altman’s film more closely follows the book, and this could be its undoing. There is a reason why even the greatest written works are modified somewhat for the screen. This almost exact telling ends up being quite the bore. It just seems to go nowhere, and very slowly at that. The story follows three bank robbers who manage to escape prison only to return to their criminal ways. Most of the film centers on Bowie (Carradine), one of the robbers who falls in love with Keechie (Duvall). The other two are in and out of the story sparingly. The film is often compared with Bonnie and Clyde, but I don’t see it. First off, Bowie is never joined by Keechie on his criminal adventures. The most significant similarity is the brutality with which Bowie is gunned down in the film’s climax. Unfortunately Altman has developed superb characters and excellent actors to portray them, but he never ends up doing anything with them. Altman addresses the pacing and lack of action in his audio commentary, but he never tells us why. He only mentions at least 50 times that you couldn’t make a film with this pacing today. I think he’d have been better off not to have made one even 30 years ago. His reasoning is audiences today have less patience. That may be true, but the film didn’t exactly set any records even in 1974.

Since Steve Carell broke into the comedic world with the film Anchorman, audiences have seemingly labeled him the new comedic genius with some comparing him to Jim Carrey. While I don’t completely agree with such a comment, Carell can definitely carry a film by himself, which is evident here with 40-Year Old Virgin.

The plot of The 40 Year Old Virgin can be summed up by a cursory glance at the title of the movie. In slightly more detail; Steve Carrell plays Andy Stitzer, a socially awkward fo...ty year old whose definition of a busy weekend is preparing an egg salad sandwich and changing the color of his figure’s pants. When Carell reveals (by accident one might add) to his colleagues that his virginity is still firmly attached during a poker game, they set about helping him lose it as quickly as possible. Naturally, this entails humiliation, comical misunderstandings and a fair amount of low-brow humor.

Synopsis

To Catch a Thief has a lot going for it. For starters, two of the most marketable faces of their time playing opposite one another, in a film directed by one of the greats of cinematic history. What’s so wrong about that? John Michael Hayes (Peyton Place) adapted David Dodge’s novel, which Alfred Hitchcock (Psycho) directed.

Mel Gibson has become somewhat of a character these days. Gibson has become a bit weary of the "Hollywood" way of doing things and so has struck out on a course of originality that can be both inspiring and controversial as the man is himself. His "The Passion" film was viewed by many as the ultimate depiction of Christ's suffering. At the same time just as many believed they were seeing a slant on Jews that was unfair. Just when a balance seemed to have been struck and his film was being accepted for what he claim...d it to be, Gibson the character mucks it all up. Unless you've been living in an isolated island somewhere with a mysterious bunker filled with corn flakes, you've by now heard quite enough of Gibson's arrest and related comments about Jews. Undeterred by such setbacks, Gibson again chose a controversial subject and proceeded to create another of his "masterpieces". This time the ancient Mayan civilization is the subject. Another film shot in an obscure language. These movies are overwhelmingly self-indulgent. That isn't to say they aren't any good. It just means that Gibson frankly doesn't give a damn what anyone else thinks.

Apocalypto is as complicated as the man who created it. The first observation I had was that the film was often best when it was at its simplest. Unfortunately Gibson doesn't allow these moments to dominate with the impact they actually possess. There are inexplicable moments of slapstick that can only be explained by Gibson's love for Three Stooges comedy. While that kind of buffoonery was welcome in the Lethal Weapon franchise, it is painfully out of place here. There is also a trend toward modern translations and phrases that are equally out of place. I'm obviously not learned in the Mayan language, so I can't be sure if these phrases are actually what is spoken or simply misrepresentation in the subtitles. There is no question that the cinematography here is outstanding. The lush Mexican locations were well scouted and serve a great purpose in the overall realism of the film. Still, these beautiful locations provide a stark contrast to the brutality and violence often on display. The musical cues are also outstanding. The exotic rhythms and tones invite the viewer to become emotionally involved in the story. Finally, the cast is an excellent group of relative unknowns. Most of the actors are true native American descendents from as far north as Canada and into Mexico. Everything about this production gives you a startling visceral experience that I admit I haven't felt in very many films I've seen. I missed this one on the big screen. I was admittedly put off by the Mayan language of the production. So my first experience was this DVD, which still gave me a relatively large screen experience.

Synopsis

In the late ‘70s and early ‘80s, Robert De Niro may have taken on some more famous roles (like The Deer Hunter and Raging Bull), but he wasn’t shy to experiment in roles with directors like Bernardo Bertolucci (1900), to name a few. And in his first film after playing Jake LaMotta, De Niro plays Des, a monsignor who runs into his brother Tom (Robert Duvall, The Apostle), a police homicide detective.

Synopsis

Peter O’Toole plays Maurice, an actor now reduced largely to playing corpses (or near corpses) and watching his days fade away in the company of his similarly elderly friends. Enter Jessie (Jodie Whittaker), the grand-niece of one of those cronies. Maurice is taken with her, and the story then takes a decidedly Pygmalion-esque turn as sullen young woman and ageing Lothario learn from each other.

Following the success of back-to-back hits Forest Gump and Apollo 13, Tom Hanks wanted to shake things up. His project of choice? Writing and directing his first feature film.

The result was That Thing You Do!, a light, enjoyable comedy about a 60’s pop band that makes it big on the strength of one hit song. Barely together a few weeks, The Oneders (pronounced “Wonders”) win a small-town talent contest, which lands them their first gig, playing at a local bar. Before they can adjust to ...heir first taste of success, they land a touring deal with Play-Tone, a record label. Just like that, they’re on a whirlwind tour that echoes the success of The Beatles. But can they handle the big-time, or will fame tear them apart?

The Pang brothers, twins Oxide and Danny, are most well-known for co-directing the hit horror film The Eye back in 2002, and its 2004 sequel, The Eye 2. The Messengers marks their first Hollywood studio effort, and despite it being panned by critics, the brothers have already moved on to more.

The story here is simple. A family buys a house in the middle of nowhere, hoping the move will turn around their fortunes and heal their bonds, which are strained after some big, emotionally traum...tic event. Too bad for them the house is haunted. I could have told them, if they’d only asked. One look at the place and it screams “enter if you dare.” Plus, I had the benefit of seeing the film’s intro, which depicts the horrible, violent deaths of a mother and two children at the hands of some mysterious, unseen force. In the same house.

Synopsis

Stereo-typing is a nasty business and unfortunately happens a lot in Hollywood. Certain actors play certain types of characters, certain movies always have the same themes, certain Uwe Boll movies (all) get bad ratings, etc. One of those unfortunate stereo-types is african-american movie making. Quite often you see an urban setting, a rise from the ghetto, or something related to basketball or football. Dominant african-american stereo-typing at what everybody thin...s they do best. Sometimes however there are films that try to steer away from that by portraying them in a different light; one we aren't used to (but should be). It is the only hope that it is still a good film when all said and done.

Synopsis

After the apprehension of a rogue general results in the death of his mentor, officer Dan Chupong accompanies his sister and her team of athletes on a charity visit to a rural village. As luck would have it, the general’s forces attack this very village, threatening to slaughter all the villagers is the general is not released. What these villains fail to mention is that they have a nuclear missile which they plan to fire at Bangkok no matter what happens. Chupong leads the villagers and ath...etes in a desperate resistance.