Quartet

Generally mediocre literary adaptation from those literary guru's, Merchant Ivory. Takes place in Paris in 1927 and features a "love square", thus the title. The acting is strong all around from Alan Bates, Isabelle Adjani, Maggie Smith, and Anthony Higgins. If you like Merchant Ivory, they've done better, but this may be your kind of film. If not, then it's nothing to worry about missing.

The Satanic Rites of Dracula

Oh, get over it, it's not as bad as you think. It's a Hammer film for crying out loud. As Nate has repeatedly pointed out, anything with Peter Cushing is worth watching, and Christopher Lee is an added bonus. Dracula is alive (sort of) and well in modern day London (1972 modern) and heads a Satanic rite composed of renowned scientists, politicians, military leaders, and land owners, with the promises of power and innovation. But you never can trust the father of lies. Fortunately, the Van Helsing family has been on Dracula's trail for generations. It's not great Hammer, but it's not bad either. In fact, I found myself rather enjoying it at times. Cushing and Lee probably make it feel more intelligent and reputable than it really is, but who cares? It just goes to show, you can't go wrong with a good vampire flick.

Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1978)

Philip Kaufman's 1978 remake of the Don Siegel classic is every bit as creepy as the original, and in some ways even more so. This time, rather than Small Town USA, the pods land in San Francisco (of course, most people from San Francisco acted like this before the pod attacks). Donald Sutherland, Jeff Goldblum, Brooke Adams, and Leonard Nimoy are among those trapped in world where you can't trust anyone. Paranoia has rarely been finer. This is the second of the three "body snatchers" film, and I'm having difficulty deciding which I like best. Kevin McCarthy, from the orginal film, makes an amusing cameo.

Dopamine

What is love? Is it nothing more than a complex chemical reaction within the brain? I think this movie says, probably not. This was a Sundance film, that came to light completely through the Sundance Institute. It's kind of interesting and reminiscent of Primer which would come later. It's talky, it's short (80ish minutes), it's shot on HD, and it's got ideas. Unfortunately, I don't think this film does its ideas justice, but like I said, I found it interesting just the same.

Sister Helen

It's always interesting to find a 70 year old nun that I'm fairly certain could beat me up. This documentary is about one such nun. She's an ex-alcoholic that now runs a home for recovering male addicts in the South Bronx. These men know not to mess with this broad. Her methods are stern and she shows tough love, but in some ways seems to become a mother and the last hope for a handful of desperate people. This film has some very moving and honest moments, but at the same time feels more exploitive than your average documentary.

The Wrong Man

This film begins with Alfred Hitchcock explaining that unlike his other films, this is actually based on true events. Henry Fonda plays a man wrongly accused of robbery and the rest is Hitchcock magic. This doesn't feel like his other films, yet the director's stamp is clearly embedded in every frame. At times, it borders on feeling like Kafka's, The Trial, as Fonda gets dragged away without knowing why. I can't call this one of Hitchcock's very best, yet his direction is as sure as I have ever seen. It's clear that his mastery of photography and editing was second to none and this is probably as well crafted a film as he ever made. The revelation of "the right man" is excellently eerie, and a moment that Bergman must have rewatched when making Persona.

Kiss Me, Stupid

No, really, that's the title. This Billy Wilder comedy was once famous for being the first film condemned by the Catholic Legion of Decency since Elia Kazan's, Baby Doll. Dean Martin stars as a lecherous singer who is forced to make a detour on his way to Los Angeles and gets stopped in Climax, Nevada. Like most of Wilder's comedies, the plot is very complicated and well scripted, just leaving you with a smile on your face as you eagerly await the inevitable. The first half hour or so of the film was fairly dull and didn't leave me wanting more, but once Kim Novak entered the scene, it started getting significantly better. She provides the heart of the film. Also like many of Wilder's later comedies, this film features a questionable moral stance, but is generally entertaining none the less.

Pale Rider

...and hell followed with him. Who but Clint Eastwood could play the angel of death? Or maybe he's not; maybe he's just a mortal man. This ranks alongside, his later Unforgiven as the only good Western of the last 25 years. The story borrows heavily from the superior Shane, but it's clear that Eastwood is one of the few living filmmakers that understands the Western and how to utilize landscape. It's also clear that Eastwood the director understands himself as an actor and uses it wonderfully. The photography by Bruce Surtees is also worth mentioning.

Que Viva Mexico!

Along with Griffith and Welles, Sergei Eisenstein is basically responsible for inventing the film form and technique that we understand today. As a filmmaker and theorist, he was an innovater and a genius. This is an unfinished film he made for Hollywood in 1931, but had to abandon due to lack of funds. It's strikingly similar to Welles' later, It's All True. Forty years later, one of his colleagues armed with the footage and Eisenstein's extensive set of notes and memos about the film, edited it together as the director probably would have wanted. The result is fascinting. What Welles did with South America, Eisenstein first did with Mexico. There's even a climactic sequence that Sergio Leone would be proud of. It's still not one of Eistenstein's masterpieces, but from the opening frames, it's clear that a master craftsman is behind the lens.

A Brief History of Time

Errol Morris is probably the finest documentarian working today. With this film he adapts Steven Hawkings book of the same name. About half of it consists of biographical informaion on Hawkings life and the other half on some of theories in physics and cosmology. It's not one of Morris' best films, but it's a topic that fascinates me so I still managed to enjoy it. Unfortunately, it doesn't really attempt to probe the depths of Hawkings theories, just asks some key questions and gives some surface information that only leaves you wanting more.

Powwow Highway

Native American's, like the Eskimo's have precious few films that deal with their cultures. And this is described as "the first Native American road movie." Well, I guess it is, and it works well. Gary Farmer is the go to actor for Native American's, and for a reason: he's very good. He has a way of completely becoming his characters and bringing them alive. He adds the most memorable elements to this interesting character and cultural piece.

Last Year at Marienbad

Alain Renais' Last Year at Marienbad makes an excellent companion piece to his 1959 masterpiece, Hiroshima, Mon Amor. I say companion piece because they both seem to compliment each other. If you were to play one after the other, in some ways, it would be difficult to tell when one ends and the other begins. Thematically they are both very similar in their dealings with the frailty and even unreliability of the human memory. It's a fascinating and very calculated film. The interesting thing about his films, though, is that, it seems, in order to fully understand one, you have to see some of his others, but I'm not sure in which order you should start.