The Greatest Trick

To my mind, The Abyss is one of James Cameron’s best films. Made between the impossibly brilliant Aliens and Terminator 2, it often gets forgotten about, but has no right to be. Forget Titanic (oh, how I wish I could!), this is underwater film-making at its most gruelling and brilliant. Not only is it visually beautiful in many, many places, but it has characters you can believe in and root for, groundbreaking CGI special effects, and a villain who doesn’t chew scenery. All unlike the aforementioned watery bum (and brain) numb-er.

The workers of an underwater oil-drilling rig are shocked to find out that a nuclear submarine has gone down near them and that they are being commandeered by a SWAT team to investigate it. No more so than Bud Brigman (Ed Harris - is there a more solid actor in Hollywood?), whose ex-wife Lindsay (Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio) is accompanying the team just to make sure they get everything right. While disconnected from the surface by a tropical storm, however, they discover that they are not alone in the deep. Contending with this and the effects of pressure is SWAT team leader Lt. Coffey (Michael Biehn, who no-one seems to use well apart from James Cameron), whose slide into paranoia provides the backbone of the drama, and whose refusal to believe in anything but Russians as the source of all their problems leads to some violent conflict.

The qualities of the film (and I’m talking about the extended version here, with a extra half hour’s footage re-inserted, mainly towards the end, which is why I won’t describe it!) are many. It is a character-based piece, unlike many sci-fi films these days, and Cameron builds a wonderful picture of the tight relationships among the rig workers at the start of the picture, which carries through the whole film and helps you understand their motivations very clearly. The relationship between Bud and Lindsay is also intricately-crafted, and the aftermath of the battle with Coffey brings a tear to my eyes - again, if you haven’t seen it yet, you’ll thank me for not telling you why it’s so emotional. The use of early CGI, particularly in the ‘Pseudopod’ sequence (a vast tentacle of water expores the inside of the rig and impersonates the staff), is just enough to give you a sense of wonder, but not so intrusive as to become boring or even distracting.Also, death is presented as horrific and sudden, and not played down at all; Heidi and I were talking the other day about how easy it can be to watch things and pay no attention whatsoever to the minor characters’ deaths - The Abyss doesn’t let you do that.

The film’s message is very similar in tone to The Day The Earth Stood Still, and some people have said that the extended version is heavy-handed with this. I disagree, personally. There’s nothing radically new in what Cameron is saying through the film, and he repeated it in T2, but there is never anything wrong with reminding people why peace is vital.

This was a big disappointment. Well, in a way; I’m well aware that the Muppet heyday has been and gone - and I enjoyed it - but other Muppet movies that have been made in the past 15 years have been more than acceptable. The Muppet Christmas Carol is extremely moving, well-made, with superb use of the Muppets and one of the best performances I’ve seen by Michael Caine. This, however, was an unfunny shambles from beginning to end.

Well, perhaps that’s a little harsh. The first ten minutes saw me laugh quite a bit (especially Gonzo being refused entry onto the Ark by Noah because there was only one of him). Then it stopped and didn’t really come back at all. There were no songs by the Muppets (criminal), just a funky soundtrack and a boring, predictable kiddie message - home is where your friends are, yaaawwwn.

The plot, for what it’s worth, sees Gonzo searching for his true family, and he gets a series of bizarre messages from breakfast cereal, sandwiches and other odd sources which lead him to believe that he is an alien and his family are coming to Earth for him. At the same time, a covert government organisation have picked up the same messages, and want to intercept Gonzo too. Rescues and no hilarity ensue.

Heidi and I both found it distracting not to have the correct voices for many of the characters (Kermit, not done by a Henson? What were they thinking?), and many of the trusted performers had a poor script to work with and therefore gave less-than-inspired performances. I was shocked to notice that it actually was Frank Oz doing his regular characters of Miss Piggy and Fozzie Bear; when you watch his work on The Muppet Show from years ago over and over again (as we have had to in the past year!), you begin to appreciate just how talented a puppeteer he is. Fozzie had next to nothing to do in this movie, and Miss Piggy had none of her usual sharp lines, just some stupidly over-violent fights (when watching with a 2-year-old who is already exhibiting undesirable violence at times you start to notice these things).

Skip this totally. Actually, having said that, watch the outtakes on the DVD: better than the whole of the film - all the Muppet performers making their mistakes in character is well worth seeing!

Yawn. Another ‘widely acclaimed’ movie that contains some interesting ideas but is ultimately a load of gobbledygook, Wings of Desire was another film we’ve wanted to see for a while, and were disappointed by. Sorry, anyone out there who loves it!

Damiel (Bruno Ganz) and Cassiel are two angels who move around Berlin, astounding themselves at the richness and variety of human existence, and collecting ’spiritual’ thoughts/experiences. They come alongside people in despair, and their mere presence calms people (but not always enough to stop them taking their own lives). They are envious of human life, though, and dissatisfied with knowing the answers to everything, and Damiel in particular hankers after true contact with humans, one female circus-performer in particular. So at a certain point, he just decides to become human, and discovers what life is like for real.

The problems with the film are many: you hear people’s thoughts all the time, through the angels’ ears, and sometimes it’s fascinating, at others totally dull. In Berlin, people seem to think in very logical, rational sentences about concepts and ideas the average person doesn’t give a moment’s thought to in the tube on the way home. The black and white/colour device is fairly obvious in my opinion, and doesn’t really add anything to the viewing experience, especially as the majority of the ‘colour’ section is very darkly-lit. The romance between the central characters is totally unromantic - even though they desire each other, they don’t know each other, and when they finally do get together there is so much meaningless talking that you just switch off.

There are also some wonderful ideas: for example, when in the library, people’s spirits soar, so there are hundreds of angels camped out there waiting to pick up thoughts and experiences and encourage people to seek further enlightenment.

Overall we were bored and disappointed. Also, we recently watched Der Untergang (Downfall), which starred Bruno Ganz as Hitler: hard to watch Hitler as an angel!

I really want to get into seeing all the classic Universal horror movies, for a few simple reasons. They’re not like horror movies these days - they might be unsettling and a bit creepy, but the times did not allow for blood and gore like we see on the screen these days. And on the whole, they’re actually tragedies about misunderstood or misfortunate people rather than all-out horror: Frankenstein, The Invisible Man, Phantom of the Opera, The Mummy - the names are synonymous with horror, but if you watch the films you find they’re a whole different kettle of poisson. Anyway, back to The Bride of Frankenstein.

It is highly acclaimed as one of the most intelligent and multi-layered horror films ever, and one of the only sequels to surpass the original film. I liked the original for its simplicity of story-telling (which the source novel really doesn’t have - in fact, if you get Heidi going on the book by Mary Shelley she will let you know how bad it is), and I liked this one too. You can tell that director James Whale had a lot more money to play with on the sequel, and he uses it to great advantage.

The story begins right where the first film ends, as the pitchfork brigade who thought they had done away with Dr Henry Frankenstein’s hideous monster are being sent home, but we discover he, of course, didn’t die in the fire in the mill. He emerges, scarred but sympathetic, and searches for a human to engage with who doesn’t scream when he sees him. He comes across a blind hermit in the woods, who offers him friendship and teaches him rudimentary speech, and this encounter gives the monster the idea that only someone like him could ever really love him. Running in parallel to this storyline is that of the good doctor who created him, who is trying to get away on honeymoon with his new bride, only to be blackmailed into helping the eccentric Dr Praetorius (a marvellous Ernest Thesiger) bring more dead flesh to life, in the form of a woman.

There are layers and layers to this film, if you know enough about its director to see them. James Whale was a lonely homosexual who achieved fame through these films but didn’t enjoy it (see Gods and Monsters for a moving portrayal of his final days, and a very interesting film to watch in parallel with ‘Bride’), and the comments he makes about companionship, rejection and human warmth go a long way to show his own feelings. There are very subtle references to homosexuality in the character of Dr Praetorius (he, as it were, seduces Dr Frankenstein away from his wife into ’scientific’ pursuits), and a very creepy scene with him in a crypt. On the surface there are some fantastic things to watch out for too: the flashy and effective editing and lighting in the final few scenes, the miniature bell-jar-people (just watch it to find out!) and, of course, the iconic figure of the Bride herself. Elsa Lanchester, who plays her, does a great job, injecting the creature with quirky jerks and uncomprehending looks that just make her magnetic to watch.

I enjoyed this film a lot, but Heidi did not. I’ll let her express herself separately…

Heidi says:

I haven’t seen the first Frankenstein movie coz, as Marks says, I think the book is wildly overated, so I can only comment on ‘Bride’ as a stand-alone film. The two best bits from the book are in this one: the river rescue and the monster’s time with the blind man. The first is unconvincingly done, and rushed. The second matches up much better to my memory of the book, and is quite affecting in places (despite some lousy ‘blind’ acting.) Otherwise, apart from the odd visual flourish, I completely disliked this film. I hated the operatic score (very of its time!) Didn’t engage with any of the characters, felt Karloff’s portrayal of the monster was heavy-handed, and the methods and the character of Dr. Praetorius- though an excellent performance- were much too dark for my tastes. I disagree that there are many levels- the subtext is all blindingly obvious, and attempts at showing the monster as child-like are ham-fisted.
The bride herself is outstanding, but underused and the film comes to a very abrupt close. What a waste of a brilliant concept, and a missed opportunity to inject the bland source novel with some heart.

This’ll be short, because I’ve spent the whole evening working, but must review this film before all memory of it falls out of my head. Bearing in mind previous comments that have been left on the site, this post might take some flak, but that’s fine - we like a healthy difference of opinion. We didn’t like Hero. We found it to be all style over substance, and that by the end of the film you came away with no sense of satisfaction about the proceedings.

The king of Qin, who is trying to unite ancient China by conquering all the other territories, welcomes an assassin into his court who claims to have killed the three fastest and most dangerous warriors in the region. This unnamed ‘hero’ (Jet Li) tells his story to the king, which involves betraying and setting against each other two lovers, Broken Sword and Flying Snow. There is, of course, much balletic sword-wielding and sleeve-flapping in the name of beautiful imagery. But then the king decides that the hero is lying to him, and offers two alternative versions of the same story.

Colour is used to excess, characters change their motivations continually (of course, being part of different versions of the same story) which means you can never get a true handle on them, and so you end up not really caring what the true story was anyway. There are some amazing visuals, but unless married to a good story they don’t make a satisfying film on their own. And we had no idea what reason Zhang Ziyi had for taking the (minor and irritating) role that she had in this film. After Crouching Tiger and Flying Daggers she could have gone anywhere, but chose this? Doesn’t make sense.

Watch the two films just mentioned instead.