On The Boulevard: P.R.C.

Not a real star on walk of fame

We're moving a few blocks south of Hollywood Boulevard to Santa Monica Boulevard. What you see below is what was once one of the more famous studios of Poverty Row. See, in days of yore, Hollywood wasn't just the dream factory for big budget musicals or epic landscapes. It was also where tons of smaller production companies pumped out low budget fare that was looked at as disposable money makers.

PRC Productions (Producers Releasing Corp) was one of these studios. It may have been small, but in the 30's and 40's it held enough dough to produce, distribute and even import movies from England for U.S. distribution. They specialized in westerns, noir and horror films. Back then, much like now, genre films were an easy way to make a quick buck. Emphasis on the word "quick" since most of their movies were shot in about a week.

PRC Studios 1941

But it was these small budgets and a lack of supervision that allowed filmmakers like Edgar G. Ulmer to experiment and make movies with themes and stories that the big guys at Warners or MGM wouldn't touch. Ulmer would make three of his better known films for PRC. Bluebeard (1944), Strange Illusion (1945) and the noir geeks totem Detour (1945). Other fun titles produced by the company were Crime Inc. (1945), Thunder Town (1946), Nabonga (1944), and The Devil Bat (1940) starring Bela Lugosi. Overall they'd make 280 films in 13 years. Just under 22 movies a year, not too shabby.

PRC Studios 2009

In 1947, PRC would be bought up by Eagle-Lion Films Inc. and fade away into the larger myth of Poverty Row. It may not be as well known today to film geeks like Monogram or Republic Pictures, but PRC has left an indelible mark on B-movie history and has earned star (from me) on the boulevard.

Review: The International

The International (2009)
starring: Clive Owen, Naomi Watts, Armin Muller-Stahl, Ulrich Thomsen
dir. Tom Tykwer

Considering the pedigree in this film, it's kind of underwhelming. I'm not saying it's bad, it has some interesting ideas and solid directing, but it just seems rather plain. I keep going over in my head the order of events and scenes are already slipping from my mind. It really is too bad, I wanted this to be a great movie even if it fails at the box office. Instead it's a mediocre movie, that failed at the box office.

As for the interesting ideas, I was impressed they didn't have a love story. You've got two good looking people like Owen and Watts and it is kept professional the entire time. There is a nice moment of compassion, but it's all about these two people going after a global banking conspiracy and not stopping until they expose it. It's kind of refreshing that a romance wasn't forced and then exploited as a late plot point.

The other is an assassination that becomes quite important to the concluding actions of the film. It's not the results that are good, they seem like a bit of a cop out, but the assassination itself has a fascinating execution (pun intended). The audience is given only glimpses of information and are taught to put it together as later scenes take place. The set up and pay off are rather fascinating even though it relies on a coincidence that sort of screws the entire concept.

Everyone in it is solid, Owen delivers a few clunkers but the script as a whole is pretty clunky. It could have been a total disaster but Tykwer directs with an assured hand and has a grasp of sound that borders on genius at moments. His choreography of the shootout at the Guggenheim is outstanding. He moves away from the typical shaky-cam and gives a fluid and tense gun fight that is fun to watch as a museum get blasted to pieces.

The ending does leave a little to be desired, it's the cop-out I mentioned above. In an attempt to keep our lead characters morally upstanding, the ideas behind how far would a person go to expose world corruption flitters away. All I ended up walking away with is something I've known from watching gangster films. Don't mess with the Italians, they're a vindictive bunch.

6.8 out of 10

The Eclectic Choice: Edgar Wallace Collection Vol.2

Edgar Wallace Collection Vol. 1 (1959/1963)
dir. Harald Reinl/Edwin Zbonek


Edgar Wallace was one of the more prominent mystery/thriller writers in the early 20th century and is best known to film geeks today as one of the original writers on King Kong. But in post war Germany, there was a resurgence of his fiction being turned into film. Most of these were championed by producer Artur Brauner who worked effortlessly to reestablish the German film industry in the 1950's. He succeeded mostly in creating a treasure trove of genre pulp ranging from the disposable to the lost classic. In the first volume of these Edgar Wallace based films, we get to see two of the better offerings.

The first is The Mad Executioners (1963) about a hooded group of gents who put London's criminals on trial and then execute them with a certain level of pomp and circumstance. It's moody and atmospheric and has a bizarre subplot that ties into the cavorting hangmen, but feels slightly out of place. If I say it concerns mad doctor cutting the heads off of women to keep them alive on an artificial body, it sounds like a different movie entirely, but it's not. It does become a bit of a brow scratcher, but still fun with some production design that hearkens back to the good old days of expressionism.

The second was not produced by Brauner, but directed by a director he used often, Harald Reinl. Reinl would direct many of the Brauner produced Dr. Mabuse films as well as the cult documentary Chariots Of The Gods (1972). Here, Reinl gives us Fellowship Of The Frog (1959). This one concerns a group of thieves lead by "The Frog" who runs around in a covered face mask with bulbous eyes and brands members of his syndicate with a frog tattoo. This one is a little more corny and has some plotting issues, but one of the oddest character cameos in movie history. It comes to light that The Frog is none other than Harry Lime from The Third Man (1949)! Really? Interesting. Wallace's story was written years before Reed's film and the character was created by Graham Green in 1948. So it seems like one of those gimmicks to bring in some ticket sales. The actor who plays Lime looks nothing like Orson Welles accept for bulk weight and may not have been named Lime in the original German version. Both of these films are dubbed, so who knows if the original character was Lime or not. It' s a good gimmick though, I perked right up when I heard the name and it earned a few more points for having the balls to say it was a Harry Lime crime scheme.

The prints are not the best quality, sometimes downright awful, but it adds a little something. It's like finding a lost relic covered in dust, but seeing the beauty underneath. Overall they are an easy view and quite enjoyable as camp or even a studious look at the German film industry when they were stumbling around trying to find a voice again. With the exception of the dubbing, you'd never know they were foreign at all. They maintain the same level of quality, if not better, than some of the Hollywood B-movies of the era.

Well worth renting or a purchase to revisit an era that has been long brushed aside for artier fare.

Review: Friday The 13th

Friday The 13th (2009)
starring: Jared Padalecki, Danielle Panabaker, Amanda Righetti, Derek Mears, Willa Ford
dir. Marcus Nispel


I'm not going to say I am ashamed to have seen this movie, as a matter of fact I suggested to a friend we check it out. See, I am of the age where the Friday The 13th franchise actually means something. I remember the advertising for almost all of them. I think I may have even owned the Alice Cooper single for Part 6: Jason Lives (1986). Go ahead and laugh, I also bought the Ramones single for Pet Cemetery (1989) when it came out and can probably sing all the words if you give me a minute. All of that being said, I know what should and shouldn't be expected from one of these puppies and I enjoy them for the sheer revelry of blood, boobs and bad to mediocre acting. Yes, it is a very high standard that I require from a Jason movie, but their have been several that disappoint on all levels, so there was a chance this reboot could be a big letdown.

So is this a breakthrough of the horror genre? No. Is it the best film in the series? No. Does it deliver everything that one could want from a Jason movie? In spades. There is nothing new or breakthrough here, as a matter of fact the biggest criticism for such a film is how safe it does play it, but it works. Anyone who goes in knowing abut the franchise or wanting to see what the movies are about, you get it here.

There is a quick little intro that explains Jason's origins and then a lengthy prologue that sets up the rules of the slasher film while showing off Jason's machete skills on a group of high and horny 20 somethings. We then get into the movie where it takes the rest of the running time to knock off a new batch of high, horny or just plain douche baggy 20 somethings while kindhearted and empathetic characters look for a missing sister. (She was in the original group slain in the prologue.) We hold out little hope for her and I won't spoil how or what condition she's found in, that would be no fun.

Jason is a classic character of the slasher genre. When he's not on screen, he can be anywhere at any moment. You never know where he's going to pop up. It's part of his other worldliness that can be used to great effect. He's like Jack Bauer in 24, traveling great distances in unrealistic time frames. It's illogical, but adds to the tension because we know he could be around the next corner even though we just saw him back down the street. We chuckle at it, but would miss it if it wasn't there.

The kills start off a little shaky, but keep getting better as the movie goes on. There is one real shocker with a bow and arrow as well as a classic axe kill. It delivers all of the gore and blood that the franchise is famous for. It's odd that I (maybe we as a society) could find a certain nostalgia in movie violence, but we must otherwise they wouldn't have made the movie the way they did. There are all sorts of views on movie violence. I could go into an entire diatribe about violence in the cinema, but that is for a different time and post. For now we'll just say this is a movie that is supposed to be entertaining the audience through violence. It is violent and I was entertained, so check-plus on the report card for that.

I'm not going to say director Marcus Nispel delivers a better visual style than previous films. He delivers the modern style just like the ones in the 80's did. I'm sure in 5-10 years it will look just as hokey as the originals do now. He does the job making sure the camera points in the proper direction and delivers a movie that he can be commended on for not letting us down.

The acting is all over the place, but never any good. The women are there for looks, which works. Three sets of breasts are shown and it proves that real one are always nicer then fakes. Every guy is forgettable. The only one I recognized was Ryan Hansen from Veronica Mars (2004-07) and he receives the best death of the bunch. Other than that, I'm sure we'll see plenty more of the guys when we go to buy a car in a few years and plenty more of the women in a centerfold.

My scoring here is going to seem odd, but it gets the ranking that it does because it's good for what it is and Platinum Dunes, the production company, didn't fuck it up like they did with other remakes of horror classics like The Hitcher (2007) or The Amityville Horror (2005). If you like the Jason movies, you'll enjoy it. If you've never seen one, it's a good primer. If you never liked them, it's not worth wasting you time.

8.2 out of 10

Everyone Is A Critic: Jedi Knight

One of the things I love about Netflix are the member reviews. When I find someone who interests me I add them to my followers list and keep an eye open for any new reviews.

This week we say hello to Jedi Knight. He's even cool enough to include a picture of himself and a cinematic philosophy on his profile.

JEDI KNIGHT




"I watch a lot of movies. I don't listen to film critics or other people. I make my own judgment. I'm against piracy."


Here are some highlights from a few of his seven hundred plus reviews:

Gran Torino
"Gran Torino has Oscar written all over it. Clint Eastwood gets better and better with every film he has ever done. This film does have racist innuendos, but it didn't stop me from seeing this film. I'm not a racist or prejudice in any way. I live in a town where people like me is racist against. I'll watch anything with Clint Eastwood. I hope that he wins a Best Actor Oscar and a third Best Director Oscar." Rating: 5 star

The Day The Earth Stood Still (2009)
"I'm so glad that I ignored the evil film critics. This remake is great. It is similiar to the 1951 original. I did watch the original before I saw the remake. Keanu Reeves was great at Klaatu. I liked GORT in this version a lot better than the one in the original. I recommend that you see this film." Rating: 4 star

88 Minutes
"88 Minutes is a wonderful suspense movie. Al Pacino is a great actor. It is also very fast-paced. If you are into all of the CSI and Law and Order shows, you need to watch 88 Minutes. I recommend it." Rating: 4 stars

The Bank Job
"This would have been a really good movie if it didn't have any sex and nudity in it. It had a good story, but the sex and nudity didn't need to be in it. Stay away from this movie." Rating: 2 stars

Walk Hard: The Dewy Cox Story
"This is one sick movie. Fans of Ray Charles, Johnny Cash and every artists that this movie parodies should stay away from this movie. This film has way too much nudity. I wanted to throw up after watching this movie." Rating: 1 star

And of course...

Fireproof
"Fireproof is a movie that every married and engaged couple should watch. You might learn something from watching this. It might help save your marriage or relationship." Rating: 5 stars

Review: He's Just Not That Into You

He's Just Not That Into You (2009)
starring: Ginnifer Goodwin, Ben Affleck, Justin Long, Jennifer Aniston, Jennifer Connelly, Kevin Connolly, Scarlett Johansson, Drew Barrymore, Bradley Cooper
dir. Ken Kwapis

I'm not going to say I was dragged to this movie. It was a bargaining chip. I saw this, so my friend would go to see Coraline. Guess which one I preferred? If you guessed this one, you're wrong.

In all honesty, it's not awful. It's predictable, it's manipulative, it's derivative, it is way too long for its own good, but I got exactly what I was expecting. Apparently some of the ladies sitting in the theater got more out of it as they audibly gasped at certain points. Men, we're such jerks. But face it ladies, the female characters we're just as bat-shit crazy as the guys were. If you can't admit that, then don't look around the room to search for the crazy chic, you're it.

Now for the good news, there could have been a good movie there. It's a real shame that nobody saw the potential. This could have worked like gangbusters if they had treated it more like Everything You Always Wanted To Know About Sex* (1972). I found out afterward that it was based of of some self help book, itself inspired by a Sex & The City episode. Sounds like the material Woody Allen worked with to adapt into his film, right?

The first few minutes are cute as a little girl learns that men who act like jerks secretly like them. Then a montage of women in different cultures yak back and forth about why the guy hasn't called back. It's a cute bit and has some chuckles. Then throughout the film there are monologues into the camera by random people about relationships. It's a little too When Harry Met Sally (1989), but they are funnier than anything else in the movie. A vignette angle making fun of, while pointing out realities about the ins and outs of relationships might have created a much more enjoyable film.

Of the main stories, there were two moments that stood out. One was fascinating, the other infuriating. The fascinating came when Bradley Cooper's character confesses an affair to Jennifer Connelly's wife character. (I don't even know or care what the names are.) It takes place in a Home Depot and her reaction was something that I have never seen before on screen. It is an interesting moment of self denial, on both character's parts, and makes for something that is a breif moment of reality in a very unrealistic film.

The second comes at the end when a nice idea about how a real relationship doesn't need to fall into the cliche of marrige is obliterated when a proposal comes. It's the biggest moment of bullshit and made me want to spit. Two people had matured to the point of accepting each other and deciding to be with eachother, personal vows versus public, then shot gun it with no real reason other than to manipulate the audience to an "Awe, how sweet!" moment. It was the sugar candy on top of the sugar frosting on the sugar coated cupcake. Even the cupcake sounds easier for me to swallow than most of this movie.

But the biggest crime was the missed opportunity.

3.5 out of 10

*But were afraid to ask

The Eclectic Choice: Perfume

Perfume: The Story Of A Murderer (2006)

dir. Tom Tykwer

Director Tom Tykwer broke through in America with the wild Run Lola Run (1998). Since then he remained his own man and made such diverse fair as The Princes And The Warrior (2000), Heaven (2002) and the Clive Owen thriller The International (2009). No one could predict one project leading to another and no one could predict how successful he'd be in adapting the book, Perfume: The Story Of A Murderer.

This was a novel that was claimed by many to be unfilmable. Even Stanley Kubrick said it couldn't be done! But Tykwer proved everyone wrong by creating a thrilling, humorous and scent filled movie that doesn't even require smell-o-vision to attack your olfactory lobe. Tykwer found visual and musical patterns that help create a sense of smell and a main character with motives so unique it's hard to tell if you are for him or against him.

Ben Wishaw turns in a marvelous performance as Grenouille. He moves from situation to situation encountering scent after scent until he becomes so obsessed with creating the most incredible perfume, that he resorts to a series of killings. The outcome if this adventure could never be guessed and the ending is pretty damned divisive. It's so out there I still remember saying, "What the fuck?" out loud in the theater.

Some of the acting is uneven and there are small moments with pacing problems, but it is an overall satisfying ride and very original. Derivative is a word that does not exist in this movie.

Buy it now, but don't expect this to smell pretty to everyone.