The Verdict

From my Sidney Lumet marathon, part 7 of 8.



The Verdict, 1982. A washed-up lawyer takes a suit to trial that he should have settled out of court.

Directed by Sidney Lumet. Written by David Mamet, based on a book by Barry Reed. Starring Paul Newman.

Concept: 1/4 (Bad)
Story: 3/4 (Good)
Characters: 3/4 (Good)
Dialog: 4/4 (Great)
Pacing: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Cinematography: 3/4 (Good)
Special effects/design: 3/4 (Good)
Acting: 4/4 (Great)
Music: 4/4 (Great)
Subjective Rating: 8/10 (Great, 4/4). One of the best movies you've never heard of. As far as I can tell from the internet, everyone who's seen it regards it as a masterpiece; the problem is, almost no one has seen it. Which is understandable. An 80's legal drama about a medical malpractice suit? Who cares? I sure never would have watched it if I hadn't done a little research into Lumet's filmography for this marathon. But it's one of his (and Newman's) best films.
Objective Rating (Average): 3.1/4 (Very good)

"Aeroplane Flight and Wreck"

"Aeroplane Flight and Wreck (Piloted by M. Cody)" (short), 1910. A plane is taken out of a garage, drives across a field, and crashes.

Unknown Director. Starring M. Cody.

Concept: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Story: 1/4 (Bad)
Characters: n/a
Dialog: n/a
Pacing: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Cinematography: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Special effects/design: n/a
Acting: n/a
Music: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Subjective Rating: 5/10 (Indifferent, 2/4). You really get a sense of the workings of the crazy, kite-like design of early airplanes - which is not at all an interest of mine, but I still found it interesting.
Objective Rating (Average): 1.8/4 (Eh)

"The Dog and His Various Merits"

"The Dog and His Various Merits" (short), 1908. Some dogs are used for physical labor.

Unknown director.

Concept: 0/4 (Terrible)
Story: 0/4 (Terrible)
Characters: n/a
Dialog: n/a
Pacing: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Cinematography: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Special effects/design: n/a
Acting: n/a
Music: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Subjective Rating: 2/10 (Terrible, 0/4). Um... okay. Those are dogs alright. Doing stuff.
Objective Rating (Average): 1.0/4 (Bad)

Halloween

Halloween, 1978. An escaped mental patient kills teenagers.

Directed by John Carpenter. Written by Carpenter & Debra Hill. Starring Donald Pleasence & Jamie Lee Curtis.

Concept: 3/4 (Good)
Story: 3/4 (Good). It keeps its focus much better than most movies of this sort.
Characters: 2/4 (Indifferent). The monster is the only interesting character, and he's just a vacuum.
Dialog: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Pacing: 2/4 (Indifferent). You can only slowly zoom in on something so many times before I start to lose patience.
Cinematography: 3/4 (Good)
Special effects/design: 4/4 (Great). Mostly a typical B movie, but I've got to give full points for the iconic mask.
Acting: 3/4 (Good)
Music: 4/4 (Great)
Subjective Rating: 6/10 (Okay, 2/4). It's an important landmark, and there are a couple of very cool bits. But mostly I was unimpressed.
Objective Rating (Average): 2.8/4 (Good)

Dark City

Dark City, 1998. A man wakes up with no memory, apparently a murderer; oh, and aliens control the world.

Directed by Alex Proyas. Written by Proyas, Lem Dobbs & David S. Goyer; story by Proyas. Starring Rufus Sewell.

Concept: 4/4 (Great)
Story: 3/4 (Good)
Characters: 3/4 (Good)
Dialog: 3/4 (Good)
Pacing: 4/4 (Great)
Cinematography: 4/4 (Great)
Special effects/design: 4/4 (Great)
Acting: 2/4 (Indifferent). What the hell is Kiefer Sutherland even doing?
Music: 3/4 (Good)
Subjective Rating: 9/10 (One of my favorites, 4/4 5/4). Comic-book adventure-serial science fiction, in noir style. Granted, it takes itself too seriously. And Kiefer Sutherland is really awful in it. And the ending (while satisfying) is a bit of an easy way out for the writers. But damn this movie is awesome.
Objective Rating (Average): 3.4/4 3.5/4 (Very good)

(update of a previous post - original is here)

Doctor Who #59: The Daemons

Doctor Who: "The Daemons," 1971 (the last story of five from season eight). A pagan cult summons the devil, who is a space alien.

Directed by Christopher Barry. Written by Robert Sloman & Barry Letts. Starring Jon Pertwee, Katy Manning & Roger Delgado.

Concept: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Story: 0/4 (Terrible)
Characters: 0/4 (Terrible)
Dialog: 0/4 (Terrible)
Pacing: 0/4 (Terrible)
Cinematography: 1/4 (Bad)
Special effects/design: 0/4 (Terrible)
Acting: 1/4 (Bad)
Music: 0/4 (Terrible)
Subjective Rating: 2/10 (Terrible, 0/4). It's hard to say (since I've been watching them over such a long stretch of time), but this may be the worst Doctor Who I've ever seen. Yes, I think it probably is.
Objective Rating (Average): 0.4/4 (Terrible)

Looper

Looper, 2012. Time-traveling gangster vs. his younger self.

Written & directed by Rian Johnson. Starring Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Bruce Willis & Emily Blunt.

Concept: 4/4 (Great)
Story: 4/4 (Great)
Characters: 3/4 (Good)
Dialog: 3/4 (Good)
Pacing: 3/4 (Good)
Cinematography: 4/4 (Great)
Special effects/design: 4/4 (Great)
Acting: 3/4 (Good)
Music: 3/4 (Good)
Subjective Rating: 8/10 (Great, 4/4). Balls-out awesome, in a clever sort of way. It doesn't have much in the way of pathos, and, while the action is great, there isn't all that much of it. But as far as science fiction goes, it's absolutely wonderful - the best since Moon.
Objective Rating (Average): 3.5/4 (Very good)

The Wiz

From my Sidney Lumet marathon, part 6 of 8.



The Wiz, 1978. A New Yorker is thrown by a blizzard/tornado into an urban fantasy world.

Directed by Sidney Lumet. Written by Joel Schumacher, from a musical by William F. Brown, based on a book by L. Frank Baum. Starring Diana Ross, Michael Jackson, Nipsey Russell & Ted Ross.

Concept: 4/4 (Great)
Story: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Characters: 1/4 (Bad)
Dialog: 1/4 (Bad)
Pacing: 0/4 (Terrible)
Cinematography: 0/4 (Terrible). It literally hurt my eyes trying to see what was going on. The way it's lit, it's like someone is shining a light on your screen.
Special effects/design: 3/4 (Good). A lot of it is great, but it comes up short on the technical side sometimes.
Acting: 1/4 (Bad)
Music: 2/4 (Indifferent). Great singing, of course. Great arrangements (by Quincy Jones). Terrible songs.
Subjective Rating: 2/10 (Terrible, 0/4). Everything about this movie should have made for greatness, but it just doesn't work. It's joyless and tedious. Exhaustingly tedious.
Objective Rating (Average): 1.4/4 (Bad)

"Bad Ol' Putty Tat"

"Bad Ol' Putty Tat" (short), 1949. Tweety fends off Sylvester from a birdhouse.

Directed by Friz Freleng. Written by Tedd Pierce. Starring Mel Blanc.

Concept: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Story: 1/4 (Bad)
Characters: 1/4 (Bad)
Dialog: 1/4 (Bad)
Pacing: 3/4 (Good)
Cinematography: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Special effects/design: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Acting: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Music: 4/4 (Great)
Subjective Rating: 6/10 (Okay, 2/4). It starts off with a few great gags, but most of the cartoon is just typical Sylvester and Tweety fare. And Tweety is at his most catch-phrase-spewing obnoxious.
Objective Rating (Average): 2.0/4 (Indifferent)

Beauty and the Beast

Beauty and the Beast, 1991. Stockholm syndrome in an enchanted castle.

Directed by Gary Trousdale & Kirk Wise. Written by Linda Woolverton & Roger Allers (with 10 others). Starring Paige O'Hara, Robby Benson & Richard White.

Concept: 2/4 (Indifferent). Is it just me, or is this particular fairy tale horribly inappropriate for a kid's movie?
Story: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Characters: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Dialog: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Pacing: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Cinematography: 3/4 (Good)
Special effects/design: 3/4 (Good). Nowhere near as good as classic Disney, but good.
Acting: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Music: 2/4 (Indifferent). Some of the songs have good lyrics, and none of them are outright obnoxious (except of course for the Celine Dion version over the credits). That's pretty good for Andrew-Lloyd-Webber-style Broadway musical crap.
Subjective Rating: 6/10 (Okay, 2/4). Over-rated, but painless.
Objective Rating (Average): 2.2/4 (Okay)

Network

From my Sidney Lumet marathon, part 5 of 8.



Network, 1976. A television network keeps a disgruntled news anchor on the air as he loses his mind.

Directed by Sidney Lumet. Written by Paddy Chayefsky. Starring Faye Dunaway, William Holden, Peter Finch & Robert Duvall.

Concept: 4/4 (Great)
Story: 3/4 (Good)
Characters: 3/4 (Good)
Dialog: 4/4 (Great)
Pacing: 3/4 (Good)
Cinematography: 3/4 (Good)
Special effects/design: 3/4 (Good)
Acting: 4/4 (Great)
Music: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Subjective Rating: 8/10 (Great, 4/4). Funny, tense, bizarre, and just plain awesome.
Objective Rating (Average): 3.3/4 (Very good)

(update of a previous post - original is here)

Dexter: Season Four

Dexter: Season Four, 2009. The serial killer who kills other killers learns to balance his family and his personal interests.

Created by James Manos Jr., from a novel by Jeff Lindsay. Directed by Marcos Siega (2 episodes), John Dahl (2), Keith Gordon (2), Brian Kirk (1), Romeo Tirone (1), Tim Hunter (1), Ernest Dickerson (1), S.J. Clarkson (1) & Steve Shill (1). Written by Scott Buck (3 episodes), Melissa Rosenberg (3), Wendy West (3), Charles H. Eglee (2), Tim Schlattmann (2), Lauren Gussis (2), Scott Reynolds (2) & Clyde Phillips (1). Starring Michael C. Hall & John Lithgow.

Concept: 1/4 (Bad). Whoever comes up with the ideas for this show clearly does not understand what made the first season great.
Story: 1/4 (Bad). Horrible writing. Truly horrible.
Characters: 1/4 (Bad). The supporting characters are reduced to walking cliches. Dexter doesn't even make sense anymore. The villain, though, is actually very interesting.
Dialog: 0/4 (Terrible)
Pacing: 3/4 (Good)
Cinematography: 1/4 (Bad)
Special effects/design: 3/4 (Good)
Acting: 3/4 (Good). Lithgow is very good. I feel a little sorry for these actors; they are much better than this show.
Music: 3/4 (Good). The spontaneous mambos are back! But only a couple times, so they didn't overstay their welcome.
Subjective Rating: 6/10 (Okay, 2/4). I don't know why I'm still enjoying this show. The writing is so very awful. But it didn't have the pacing problems of season 3. And after two mediocre seasons, I didn't have any high expectations. And the writing fails are so glaring and numerous that they don't really bother me the way they would in an almost-well-written show. Disposable fluff.
Objective Rating (Average): 1.8/4 (Eh)

Dog Day Afternoon

From my Sidney Lumet marathon, part 4 of 8.



Dog Day Afternoon, 1975. Inept bank robbers end up taking hostages.

Directed by Sidney Lumet. Written by Frank Pierson, based on an article by P.F. Kluge & Thomas Moore. Starring Al Pacino.

Concept: 4/4 (Great)
Story: 4/4 (Great)
Characters: 4/4 (Great)
Dialog: 4/4 (Great)
Pacing: 4/4 (Great)
Cinematography: 3/4 (Good)
Special effects/design: 3/4 (Good)
Acting: 4/4 (Great)
Music: 4/4 (Great). There's no score, and no room for improvement there.
Subjective Rating: 9/10 (One of my favorites, 4/4 5/4). Continuously intense, but also a lot of fun - a rare combination.
Objective Rating (Average): 3.8/4 3.9/4 (Great)

(update of a previous post - original is here)

Murder on the Orient Express

From my Sidney Lumet marathon, part 3 of 8.



Murder on the Orient Express, 1974. Whodunit on a train.

Directed by Sidney Lumet. Written by Paul Dehn, based on a book by Agatha Christie. Starring Albert Finney.

Concept: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Story: 2/4 (Indifferent). Works well as far as the mystery is concerned, but not so well dramatically. The fact that those are two separate things pretty well sums up why I'm not an Agatha Christie fan.
Characters: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Dialog: 4/4 (Great)
Pacing: 1/4 (Bad)
Cinematography: 3/4 (Good)
Special effects/design: 3/4 (Good)
Acting: 3/4 (Good). With a great but small performance by Ingrid Bergman. Most everyone else is very good as well, but no one has much material to work with apart from comedy.
Music: 1/4 (Bad). And still in my goddamn head.
Subjective Rating: 6/10 (Okay, 2/4). It's amusing and fun when the plot is moving, which it often isn't.
Objective Rating (Average): 2.3/4 (Okay)

"San Francisco: Aftermath of an Earthquake"

"San Francisco: Aftermath of an Earthquake" (short), 1906. Footage of destruction.

Unknown director.

Concept: 3/4 (Good)
Story: 0/4 (Terrible)
Characters: n/a
Dialog: n/a
Pacing: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Cinematography: 3/4 (Good)
Special effects/design: n/a
Acting: n/a
Music: 3/4 (Good)
Subjective Rating: 4/10 (Eh, 2/4). Some interesting footage. Not an interesting film, but it has interesting footage.
Objective Rating (Average): 2.2/4 (Okay)

"Sky Scrapers of New York City from the North River"

"Sky Scrapers of New York City from the North River" (short), 1903. The camera floats by New York.

Unknown director.

Concept: 1/4 (Bad)
Story: 0/4 (Terrible)
Characters: n/a
Dialog: n/a
Pacing: 3/4 (Good)
Cinematography: 3/4 (Good)
Special effects/design: n/a
Acting: n/a
Music: 3/4 (Good)
Subjective Rating: 4/10 (Eh, 2/4). It's somewhat interesting to see what New York looked like before it had any buildings that we would call skyscrapers today. And the DVD editors' choice of stock music is particularly nice.
Objective Rating (Average): 2.0/4 (Indifferent)

"Pack Train at Chilkoot Pass"

"Pack Train at Chilkoot Pass" (short), 1898. A long pack train walks along a mountain path.

Unknown director.

Concept: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Story: 0/4 (Terrible)
Characters: n/a
Dialog: n/a
Pacing: 1/4 (Bad)
Cinematography: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Special effects/design: n/a
Acting: n/a
Music: 3/4 (Good)
Subjective Rating: 3/10 (Bad, 1/4). Boring. Unusually scenic for a film from the 1890s, but boring.
Objective Rating (Average): 1.5/4 (Eh)

"President McKinley at Home"

"President McKinley at Home" (short), 1897 (or 1896?). McKinley walks through his yard and is given a telegram.

Unknown director. Starring William McKinley.

Concept: 0/4 (Terrible)
Story: 0/4 (Terrible)
Characters: n/a
Dialog: n/a
Pacing: 1/4 (Bad)
Cinematography: 1/4 (Bad)
Special effects/design: n/a
Acting: n/a
Music: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Subjective Rating: 4/10 (Eh, 2/4). At least it's a noteworthy subject... who happens to be doing nothing interesting, at a blurry distance.
Objective Rating (Average): 1.0/4 (Bad)

Dr. No

Dr. No, 1962. A British intelligence agent investigates a colleague's disappearance.

Directed by Terence Young. Written by Richard Maibaum, Johanna Harwood & Berkely Mather, based on a book by Ian Fleming. Starring Sean Connery.

Concept: 3/4 (Good)
Story: 2/4 (Indifferent). The plot starts to fall apart in the last 15 minutes or so. For instance, why does a tube that carries large amounts of water lead to the lobby? And why does no one care that almost all of the bad guys got away?
Characters: 2/4 (Indifferent). I couldn't help noticing that the only details about Dr. No's character that were kept from the book (where he's a fairly interesting villain) are his physical appearance. This despite his being played by a white guy.
Dialog: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Pacing: 3/4 (Good). I like how it's relatively light on action. It has room to breathe and build.
Cinematography: 3/4 (Good)
Special effects/design: 4/4 (Great)
Acting: 3/4 (Good)
Music: 4/4 (Great)
Subjective Rating: 7/10 (Good, 3/4). I loved most of this movie. It's loaded with beautiful mid-century pulp-book-cover-illustration style, the score is crazy fun, and of course Sean Connery is cool. Unfortunately, it's also riddled with racism.
Objective Rating (Average): 2.9/4 (Good)

E.T.

E.T. the Extra Terrestrial, 1982. A lost alien befriends a boy.

Directed by Steven Spielberg. Written by Melissa Mathison. Starring Henry Thomas.

Concept: 1/4 (Bad)
Story: 3/4 (Good)
Characters: 3/4 (Good)
Dialog: 4/4 (Great)
Pacing: 2/4 (Indifferent)
Cinematography: 3/4 (Good)
Special effects/design: 4/4 (Great)
Acting: 3/4 (Good)
Music: 2/4 (Indifferent). Some great music, used very poorly.
Subjective Rating: 8/10 (Great, 4/4). My wife and I hadn't seen this since we were kids, and we were both very surprised by how much of the movie had been over our heads. I didn't really like it back then, and it's no wonder; I didn't know what was really going on half the time. In a way it's good that Spielberg messed it up in 2002 by turning it into a cartoon; not being able to see it for ten years meant that I was able to come to it fresh now. It's a wonderful movie. Too heavy-handedly Spielberg-y in places, but still wonderful.
Objective Rating (Average): 2.9/4 (Good)