Change Your Image
pmccart
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Suture (1993)
Stylistically great, but with an Ed Wood touch.
Suture is a beautiful film... great B&W 2.35:1 (Super-35) photography and keen editing. The performances are excellent. Everything is great except for one thing: It relies on such a suspension of disbelief that becomes distracting throughout the film. Don't get me wrong. Dennis Haysbert has the best performance in the film. But I feel that it was a bad idea to make the whole plot hinge on everyone mistaking a black man for a white man. I understand the reason why it was done, but there's no motivation for this.
This gimmick ends up being as distracting as Bela Lugosi's stand-in for Plan 9 From Outer Space. There's no reason why the two would be confused with each other, obviously. However, it's never indicated WHY the use of two actors with opposite races would be confused with each other. I wouldn't have a problem with this if they didn't constantly show us how different they are. Vincent mockingly says they look the same (meaning they don't). The plastic surgeon watches a tape and views photographs of Vincent repeatedly. We basically have to let it pass that no one can recognize just basic features of the two (Vincent's gaunt face and receeded hairline). This gimmick was used perfectly in Luis Bunuel's That Obscure Object of Desire - two actresses play the same character for no reason. But that's a surrealist comedy. It almost feels like the directors put the gimmick in Suture just for the intent of being distracting. That's nice, but it's like keeping a hand over half of the lens for a whole reel to show blockage. It's nice, but it gets old.
The use of the making the actors completely oblivious to something obvious to the audience can only work in something like a comedy or at least a film that doesn't take itself seriously. This is why Weekend at Bernie's can work, because it's so silly. Suture doesn't seem to be a movie meant to be taken as a jokey film. Maybe it's a parody of art-house films and we just can't accept that.
This film basically shows that the switch of a driver's license is enough to switch identities. I really think that without this misfired gimmick, it would have been a great film. Or at least making it a comedy would have worked.
A King in New York (1957)
Chaplin's Anger Management a flawed gem
As evident in Chaplin's life, he was quick to make a reaction - often without thinking for the best. A King in New York feels a lot like Chaplin's temper being released in the form of a film. Surprisingly, though, his satire of 1950's culture is interesting considering when it was made.
The 1950's are still stereotyped as full of white people, no feelings, and patriotic. What's funny about "King" is that Chaplin hits the nail on the head with his parodies of 1950's mainstays. He turns the communist witch-hunts into a really bleak item. Most of the music was shockingly bad.
Chaplin really did a fine job of criticizing the McCarthy era, even if way too preachy. Among of the other highlights... the King going to see a CinemaScope movie. While I love the format, for someone who had been directing films since the teens... Chaplin probably thought it was a mess. To be honest, a lot of the early CinemaScope films really did make silly compositions.
The face-lift gags are hilarious. Chaplin looks hideous in the makeup and it makes way for the great restaurant scene with him struggling not to laugh.
The main problem is that a lot of extraneous plot was unnecessary. I think Chaplin tried too hard to pad out the film. There's a lot of preachy monologues... although, it's neat to see his young son, Michael do a monologue against McCarthyism.
I think at its base, Chaplin's films would be flawless post-Tramp if he allowed a co-director of some sort to help enhance the cinematic nature of post-Modern Times films. Considering that Orson Welles could have joined Chaplin in making "Verdoux", it makes me wonder if these lesser works would have been classics.