kalismandaniel Reviews

The General Died at Dawn (1936)

Dark and wonderful

[8/10 · 6 October 2011]

I was surprised at the low rating for this film at IMDb, 6.7 as of this writing. I found it a very enjoyable film. I'm a sucker for strong, moody visuals, and this film sure has them. In fact, about half way through I began to wonder, with all the shadows and fishing nets, if this were a Von Sternberg film. The script, which some reviewers found too wordy or too preachy, I found very engaging. The pacing was excellent.

Some reviewers have taken offense at the two main Chinese characters being played by occidentals who spoke pigeon English. Well, that's how films were made back then. Sure it seems unfair to modern viewers. It was unfair. Is that reason to trash the whole film? The Asian actors who had speaking roles came across as intelligent and well spoken.

If you're in the mood for some dark, exotic espionage, I definitely recommend this.

The Batman (2004–2008)

I gotta say I like it.

[8/10 · 27 December 2010]

After reading all the negatives I had to pitch in with a yea vote. I have only watched seasons 3 and 2, (in that order) but I liked 3 and liked 2 even more. I am a casual fan of superhero comics. I don't know the whole history of the franchise. I don't know who wrote this or who voiced that or what forms all the past stories have taken. So I don't have strong opinions about what things should or shouldn't be done in a Batman show. Frankly, it seems rather silly that some people have such a 'holy relic' view of the issue. I think artists should do whatever they want as long as they do it well. These guys did what they did very well. The new takes on the characters are refreshing and exciting. I love the artwork. It has a fast pace that keeps my interest. And while the stories aren't as deep or adult as in BTAS, they aren't mindless or kiddy either. No Batman is ever going to live up to BTAS because it was just brilliant and one of a kind. Even the BTAS people couldn't keep up the quality through the whole run of the series. And personally, I feel that every series has gone downhill as soon as Batgirl came aboard, including this one. (Even Robin seems to herald the beginning of the end as far as I'm concerned.) But I would advise anyone just checking this out to forget all the graphic novels and forget BTAS and just enjoy this for what it is; a kids show that is much better than the average, and a fun new way to see Batman.

I Died a Thousand Times (1955)

Aww, come on. It's better than that.

[8/10 · 15 December 2010]

People love to trash movies that are re-makes of classics. They seem to think that there is some disrespect intended if the remake is anything less than a masterpiece. I'm sure that the makers of this film only intended to revive an excellent story, and had no idea that a lot of armchair cinephiles, 50 years later, would consider them audacious for doing so. After watching I Died A Thousand Times, I read all the negative reviews and decided to watch High Sierra again so I could compare them. I decided that each film has it's strengths.

B&W vs Color: I love black and white. 8 out of 10 films I watch are in B&W. So, if I have a prejudice, it is against color. But when a color film is beautiful, it's very beautiful. This film definitely has its moments. Its palette ranges from subtle, (lighting in a hotel hallway) to glaring, (pumps at a gas station). All gorgeous. The shots of mountains are stunning.

One thing about color film which applies to this comparison, is that it is harder to make a good drama in color than in black and white. There is less in B&W to detract from the actors' performances. Orson Welles said that there were no truly great performances in color, and that's why he shot in black and white well into the 1960's. Comparing a B&W drama to a color is a little like apples and oranges. Color films just have a lot more to deal with, and this film does a good job of it.

Performances: In the 14 years that separate these films, there was a shift in popular acting styles. In crime dramas of the 30's and 40's characters were drawn in broader strokes. The characters were almost more "types" than individuals. When Bogie played Philip Marlowe he was playing an archetype of the hard boiled detective, and personality took a back seat. The fact that characters tended to be more 2 dimensional, made any glimpse into their personalities more effective when it came. It also gave the films an almost mythic or operatic feel. But color films of the 50's and 60's had to have more depth to the characters. Winters and Palance succeed in this. A good example is the scene in the car when Roy Earle is telling Marie about Velma. When Palance tells Winters that Velma is a pretty girl and that she is "decent", you plainly see the underlying shame and heartbreak in Winter's face. The same statement seems to just roll off of Lupino. I'm not trashing Ida Lupino, or Bogart. I love them both, and Lupino does a great job and looks fantastic, in that screen goddess way. But I was more engrossed by the performances of both Palance and Winters than by their earlier counterparts. Where Bogie was aloof and cool, Palance was a snarling madman with a tender underside.

I think that goes to the core of why I liked the later version. It just had more impact for me. I was pulled in from the first scene by the beautiful photography, and was more engrossed throughout than I was with High Sierra. That's not to say I preferred it to High Sierra. I feel that, even though they were exactly the same story, they were very different kinds of films and each had their differing strong points.