Change Your Image
Eli-11
Reviews
Red Dragon (2002)
Red Dragon and Manhunter
Red Dragon is my favourite Thomas Harris book, and has been since it came out, back when that just meant it was better than Black Sunday. Since then it's proved a better story than sequels Silence of the Lambs or Hannibal. Red Dragon is more of a chase, a real detective story, and one of the best novels of its kind. It was turned into a movie called Manhunter in 1986.
Manhunter -- the original adaptation of the book -- was one of my favourite film adaptations, even with Michael Mann's heavy-handed, studio-induced Miami Vice stylings. Casting was perfection. Brian Cox played a chilling Lecter, more natural than Hopkins by a mile. William Peterson as FBI Agent Will Graham was bang-on reserved, focused, inspired when he found insight, all that. The killer (Tom Noonan) had the height, physique, and oddness about him to be the monster the book created. It was a terrific movie. A lot of people who know Manhunter rolled their eyes when they heard the remake train a-comin'.
I did not like Silence of the Lambs. It did capture the ambience of the Harris books better than Manhunter but between Hopkins' lack of subtlety and Jodie Foster's ongoing determination to act manly it failed. Where they veered from the book, they did so for Hollywood, standard-suspense gimmicks, and not to further the story (night-vision goggles anyone?). Julianne Moore was a better Starling in Hannibal, Hopkins more at ease, but the story just wasn't all that and not even Ridley Scott (Blade Runner, Black Hawk Down) could make it all better. And personally, they either chickened on Starling's path at the ending or didn't know how to get there convincingly, even though Harris makes it a natural destination.
This time, the amazing thing is that with a Hollywood cast and all that history they managed to get it right all around. Phenomenal writing (Ted Tally) and direction (Brett Ratner), and I suspect editing (Mark Helfrich) had a hand in this brilliance as well. This is the best story of the bunch and they stuck close to it, and where they didn't I think they actually improved it. Like the opening sequence of Graham's capture of Lecter, a tale only told in allusions in the books, fleshed out here as though written by Harris himself. Amazing writing.
The direction was transparent, and with the over and underactors involved it couldn't have been easy to make it look that easy. Even truer to the ambience of the book than Silence, the sets chill. The view of the scrapbook through the credits chills. The Dolarhyde house really chills. It's like I imagined.
The casting (Kathleen Driscoll Moller and Francine Maisler) isn't flawless. They're stuck by default with golden goose Hopkins who overacts to the best of his ability, not in a Shatner way, more like a trying-too-hard-to-do-what's-expected way like a stereotypical Guilgud Shakespearean role. He's great as a typical Brit socialite doctor (or the professor in Hannibal) but when he's playing the cold killer or caged animal he's a sandwich short of a picnic. Compared to Fiennes, all bark and no bite. Good thing he's supporting cast and not the villain.
Ralph Fiennes looks too normal to be taken as a marginalized freak, but wow, this guy is such a great actor that it don't matter. He's the bad guy, bad guys make or break a movie, and he nails it. The guy in Manhunter might look more the role, but Fiennes is the abused-human-turned-monster, as caught on film. Wow.
Ed Norton plays a terrific Graham, maybe great. He underacts, as though his technique to shield Graham's dark emotions from his friends and family is to turn off all emotion. The danger is that there's an arrogant confidence about Norton that seeps through when he's at rest, its not appropriate here, and thankfully rare. Back to the the lack of emotion -- the result is that you either think he's sleep walking or a genius. If he played the moments of inspiration with more fire I'd say genius, he does come real close. These are small nitpicks about Norton's own "becoming."
Keitel is ideal as Graham's boss. Lecter's guardians Dr. Frederick Chilton and nurse Barney Matthews are bang-on book-perfect as reprised by Anthony Heald and Frankie Faison. Sleaze reporter Freddy Lounds (Philip Seymour Hoffman) musta been picked up right off the Chicago streets. I don't know why they make Reba (Emily Watson) up to look like a child's doll but what the hey, she's blind and maybe that's how hair & makeup (Julie Pearce) thinks blind people do their hair and make-up.
Final nitpicks. Manhunter did a better job of raising the sense of urgency while narrowing the chase down to Graham vs. Dolarhyde. It gave the movie momentum, and the final success didn't seem a random break. In Manhunter the sequence to walk the letter through forensics was a real cool urgent race against time, here the urgency was strangely downplayed. Against those minor items, Red Dragon stays truer to the book in form and content even if it gets its energy elsewhere. If I'm gonna be honest with myself, it's more substance and less candy.
The writing, direction, editing, sets, props, acting, everything comes together so damn well. This movie deserves awards. It deserves seeing. It's the best since Hitchcock of a genre that includes Se7en, Silence of the Lambs, The Killer (okay I have a soft spot for John Woo), Blow Out, and a truckload more from Jennifer Eight to Kiss the Girls.
From Brett Ratner, the director also responsible for Rush Hour, Rush Hour 2, and Rush Hour 3? Who knew there was a Coppola waiting to break out of that shell. At least David Fincher did that cool "Janie's Got a Gun" Aerosmith video before springing Fight Club on us. Ratner did Mariah Carey's "Heartbreaker." Whatever. Just see the movie. Now I can't wait to see what that Air Bud guy comes up with, perchance the next Scorsese?
Xue di zi (1975)
Great story, no really.
I found this on DVD -- some sort of low-budget or bootleg pan-and-scan transfer -- and since it wasn't marked very well hoped it might be the Yu Wang film. Alas it wasn't but this, I suppose the first of the three films involving the flying beekeeping hat of death, stands out on its own terms.
We meet the inventor of the flying guillotine, complete with an origin scene involving a lot of chin scratching. The basic premise is that an evil emperor has a few grudges and trains a crack team of assassins who use the deadly decapitator to carry out his will (complete with a decent training sequence). A few guys on the team get hit in the conscience (with shades of Macbeth) and the story gets moving. A hero emerges, the villains reveal themselves, it's a whole lot more shaded than I expected.
Be forewarned that this isn't a film of great fight scenes. Yu Wang brought those to the flying guillotine genre later. This is an HK action flick with a plot -- more like a grainy, overdubbed Die Hard. Perhaps a shot at emulating Kurasawa or Leone without the budget and great equipment, plus an awesome metalworker with a blade fetish. There are great fights but the first kill without a clean separation of mind and body happens around the 40 minute mark.
You'll also see some nice early wire work -- the assassins bound silently atop buildings in ways that would evolve to Crouching Tiger. The fight scenes are there, they just aren't the whole point of the movie and the guys fight more like real grunts than Bruce or Jackie. The guillotines might here have been like seeing light sabers for the first time.
It may not have the reputation or sense of humour of its successor, aside from the weapon itself you'll barely need to suspend disbelief, but it's heads and shoulders above most other HK films being produced at the time. In fact it's probably the reality-factor that I liked so much and I swear it reminded me of a Shakespearean plot way more than it should have. Add that up with great early effects, terrific editing, and the coolest gadget to behead a censor or two at 100 yards and you've got yourself a winner.
Le Cinquième Élément (1997)
A nice hit turns to an infield out.
A friend wrote this: I liked Fifth Element only because of its excess. A good comparison is Water World. When the French blow 200 million dollars, you get a crappy film with a lot of style (great clothes), beautiful expansive scnenery and some kind of cool music. When the American blow 200 million, you get Kevin Costner.
My reply: I actually liked Fifth Element until around Jovavitch's big fight scene. Suddenly the film took a left turn, lost whatever focus on style it had, and became an embarrassment on the level of Tank Girl.
Chris Tucker was fine for his first scene. But to keep him on screen for more than five minutes was a huge mistake that derailed the movie. Father of the Bride did it right with Martin Short as the wedding planner -- five minutes then out. If the performance sucks then no harm no foul. Every second past that is unpaid overtime.
That whole last third from the departure to the fantasy planet onwards was as though Besson said " I can't make up my mind between sci fi and forced camp." If there's a hell below intentional camp I'd like to know what it is. It began subtly with the jewish mother jokes and the General's crew stuffed in the freezer, by the fight scene it was outta control. Bruce Willis had a great action sequence, overshadowed by Tucker's shrill-bitch running commentary. He's not saving the world anymore, he's saving the girly-man from burping aliens.
Like fake boobs, you get less pleasure staring at them right after watching the operation. Not only is it false advertising, but now you know you're being taken for a sucker. I kept watching with the hope Tucker would drop out of sight or a plot twist might keep it interesting, but got the feeling by the end that the Besso didn't give a damn anymore either.
Magnolia (1999)
A well-shot film covering several topics which tend to make people cry.
As E.T. was formulated to send children through the emotions, Magnolia is Cry-ence Fiction for adults. This wonderfully shot, beautifully scored and well-directed film weaves together several stories which tackle the question "What makes people cry?" (and its precursor, "What fills theaters and makes people feel clever at Oscar(R) time?" Magnolia covers all the bases -- terminal illness, lost childhood, regrets over missed opportunity -- without ever moving in to score back at home plate.
Speaking of scoring, the two real stars here are Tom Cruise (figuratively) and Aimee Mann (musically). Mr. Cruise turns in some of his best acting to date and Ms. Mann has never sounded better (I still have a soft spot for her vocals on Rush's "Time Stand Still").
If you're a fan of manipulative tear-jerkers, this one's for you. If you want to think you're smarter than you are (bet you loved Rushmore), this might be for you. If neither of these matter and you have a strong stomach for self-indulgence (Note: more useful to empty your mind than open it), then you will certainly enjoy the visual design, performances, cinematography, and soundtrack.