Who Was Lee Blessing and How Did He Die?

All of the early Wes Craven films I have seen are very well-made horror/suspense stories. This applies to “Last House on the Left,” “The Hills Have Eyes,” “A Nightmare on Elm Street,” and “Deadly Friend,” yes, that “Deadly Friend,” the one with the robot and the basketball. Now that his 1981 film, “Deadly Blessing” is available on dvd and blu-ray in the United States, and will be available on dvd and blu-ray in the United Kingdom on March 25, according to amazon.co.uk, I took a look at that film.

“Deadly Blessing” tells the tale of a husband and wife who live near a Hittite settlement somewhere in the U.S. The state in which they live is never divulged, however, the closing credits of the film reveal that the film was made entirely in Texas. Craven, on the commentary track, tells us that it was filmed in Waxahachie, Texas, though, no mention is ever made in the film that the location of the action is Texas. Most of the exteriors of the film take place on farmland in large prairies, so it looks like it could be Texas, Kansas, Nebraska, eastern Colorado, or even eastern Washington State. The couple, Martha and Jim Schmidt (Maren Jensen, who played Athena on the 1978 version of tv’s “Battlestar Galactica,” and Doug Barr, who a year later would begin his time on the Lee Majors series, “The Fall Guy”), appear to live near Jim’s father, a strict leader of a Hittite sect and lawgiver of a farming community. Let’s get this out of the way first: According to the British Museum website, “Between 1400 and 1200 BC the Hittites established one of the great empires of the ancient Middle East. At its height, the empire encompassed central Turkey, north western Syria, and Upper Mesopotamia (north eastern Syria and northern Iraq).” I could get hung up on wondering how the Hittites lasted into the early 1980’s and became a group of people very similar to the Amish who lived somewhere in the United States, but I choose to just let that rest. The British Museum website does not give any indication that the Hittites ever found their way to Europe or North America. So, anyway, the three lead actresses in “Deadly Blessing” are gorgeous! Maren Jensen as Martha Schmidt, plays her character with the “calmness in peril” one might expect from the female character that we soon understand will be the Jamie Lee Curtis-esque character in the film. In the first 15 minutes of the film, her husband, Jim, is killed when a tractor runs him into the wall of a barn. He had discovered that the word “INCUBUS” had been painted on the a wood plank on the wall. Because Jim and Martha do not adhere to the strict standards of the Hittite ways, Jim has been shunned by his father, Isaiah, played very well by Ernest Borgnine. One of the townspeople, William Gluntz (Michael Berryman who you will recognize from Craven’s “The Hills Have Eyes”), calls Martha an incubus whenever he sees her. After the death of her husband, two of Martha’s friends, Lana (Sharon Stone) and Vicky (Susan Buckner) come to visit her. As the two women and Martha are not of the Hittite way and are feared to be possessed by demons, serpents, and the like, they are not made entirely welcome by the Hittite community.

Strange things begin to happen to them as will generally happen to characters in a horror film. The religious aspect of the film is a familiar one, but probably feels more familiar now since there seems to be a subgenre that has formed in the last ten years of horror films that incorporate religious zealots and their craziness into scripts. Kevin Smith’s recent film “Red State,” is just one example of this current trend. Thankfully, in “Deadly Blessing,” the religious zealousness aspect is not exploited as much as it could have been. It does form the basis for why the action in the film is occurring, but the Hittites, as presented in the film, are not presented as complete wackos. Their faith and ways do seem genuine and not simply a handy reason written into the script to sever heads and remove entrails from cows or other assorted animals or people. As well, in 1981, exposure to and accessibility to so many movies of the same genre with the same plot elements were not as available as they are now, even with the drive-in theater boom that was still present, but fading by the time “Deadly Blessing” was released. One could not, in 1981, attend a horror film convention at which one would find him or herself bombarded by many, many low budget horror films that seemed a bit like a case of “same movie-itis” had infested the room----like zombies. For this reason, even though religious fanaticism was, by 1981, a familiar trope in horror films, (“Carrie,” “Jennifer,” and other assorted films with “Devil,” “Satan,” or “Demon” in their titles) it likely did not seem as familiar to the casual moviegoer. Additionally, as alluded to earlier, Craven does not overexpose the viewer to the idea that these Hittites are completely insane. Their religion is simply very, very strict and unfortunately subject to the spirit of an incubus. The Hittites in the film do not engage in any strange devil worship, eat dead animals, or anything strange like that. Isaiah does inflict harsh punishment on males who are tempted by sins of the flesh, especially the flesh of the beautiful , Vicky whose flesh Isaiah’s son, John (Jeff East)is tempted by. This temptation is completely understandable. By the way, Jeff East played the young Clark Kent who lived in Smallville in the original “Superman” (1978). The gore factor in “Deadly Blessing” is quite low as Craven does a commendable job of creating a sense of fear without feeling the need to overly expose any characters to head wounds or beheadings. “Deadly Blessing” works and is a good film mostly because of the very good performances by the entire cast. The three female leads are good actresses. It helps a lot, especially seeing this film for the first time in 2013, when it is a lamentable truth that, if this film were to be remade today, the three leads would most likely be played by 19 year-old girls and not women. The three leads in “Deadly Blessing” are adults of perhaps 24-26 years. They look like normal women, as if they do indeed eat more than three times a week. The female leads are also written well. They are intelligent characters and are not at all written as ditzy, dumb, or otherwise unappealing. There is no useless dialogue in the film that slows down the action of the film. The pace of the film is just right, as every scene moves the plot forward. There are no superfluous characters who show up in the film only to be tortured or killed by a runaway John Deere. As he displayed in “The Hills Have Eyes,” Wes Craven knew, by this point, how to move a story along. “Deadly Blessing” is one of those films that ends up in the horror category, but it works as a drama with horror elements. It is not a slasher film, not a creature film, not a psychological horror film, not a blood and guts fest. The fact that it was filmed on location in actual big fields in a small town helps. The man who would, 18 years later, in “Music of the Heart,” team up with Meryl Streep and direct a good film about teaching music in an inner-city school, succeeds with “Deadly Blessing” in providing a strong story with solid performances. I give “Deadly Blessing” three ears of corn out of four.

"Hiroshima, Mon Amour" Is An Interesting Look at the Past

Having seen the exceptionally brilliant 2012 film, “Amour,” I now find myself interested in watching past films starring the two leads, Emmanuelle Riva and Jean-Louis Trintignant. So far, my Netflix queue contains films in which Trintignant appeared, including “A Man and a Woman” (1966), “Z” (1969), and “The Conformist” (1971). I have recently watched “Hiroshima, Mon Amour,” a 1959 French film starring Emmanuelle Riva. “Hiroshima, Mon Amour,” a French-Japanese co-production, available as part of the Criterion Collection, and available from Netflix, was Riva’s first film. It may be of some interest at this point to note that the Japanese film studio which took part in the making of this film was Daiei, the same studio that produced the Gamera films, five of which were featured on the great Mystery Science Theater 3000. Gamera was the flying turtle that appeared in several films from the 1950's to as recently as 2008. If this is not of any interest, then simply continue on reading. It may get better from here.

Riva plays Elle, a French actress who is making a film in Hiroshima, 14 years after that city was bombed by the United States. Elle has a brief one day romance with a Japanese architect named Lui, played by Eiji Okada. The film is about several things. The most interesting aspect of the film is to ponder the effects of having an atomic bomb dropped on a city. “Hiroshima, Mon Amour,” does open one’s mind to the effects on a population of having such mass destruction done to it, whether those people lived in an enemy country at the time or not. We see that Hiroshima is in the process of rebuilding itself and that Lui is proud of his city and his country. The love story in the film is a fleeting and shallow one, more of a tale of lust than of love. The lovers know each other for only one day so the angst expressed by Elle throughout the course of the film is a bit shallow and sometimes ponderous. If one were to read into the thoughts of both characters, I believe the truth about both is that they feel trapped in marriages that are, on the surface, stable, but in reality are completely unfulfilling physically and, perhaps, emotionally. Though it is implied within the dialogue, this idea in the film is not explored fully, only more of a part of both characters, characteristics of both Elle and Lui, based upon their actions in the film. This would have been a very interesting subject to explore, however, perhaps because of when the film was made, this plays as subtext, which, in the end, is probably best. As a result, more interesting is Elle’s sympathy toward Lui, not as a lover, but as a citizen of a city that has found itself rebuilding for 14 years. The opening 15 minutes of the film document the destruction done to Hiroshima and if one distances oneself from any political or historical facts and focuses on the loss of life, perhaps he or she can appreciate the inhumane and simply insane, psychopathic thing that is war.

Being a French film, “Hiroshima, Mon Amour” is obviously a French point of view of what happened in Hiroshima. Even though France was one of the Allies during World War II, the film still feels as if it is an outsider’s view of that time in history. This is not a criticism of the film. It is merely an observation that has no effect positively or negatively on the film. “Hiroshima, Mon Amour” was probably a difficult film to consider in one’s mind in 1959. Japan was an Axis Power during WW2, so the natural reaction for audiences in the U.S, the United Kingdom, and France may have been to feel indifference towards the destruction of Hiroshima, a brief 14 years after WW2 had ended. The film dares the viewer to look past the viewers’ prejudices, those likely still felt by many Americans in 1959, and face the reality of the suffering that occurs as a result of any war. For this reason, the film succeeds as a work of substance, substance that delves beyond the love story contained within. The love story can be seen as simply a plot device used to lure people into the theater. The performances by the beautiful Riva and Eiji Okada are very good, even if their characters lean towards the melodramatic. I am glad I watched "Hiroshima, Mon Amour and I recommend it to anyone interested in seeing more of Riva's films and anyone interested in recent Japanese history.

The Best Bad Movies

What turns a well-meaning movie, or at least a movie that initially was intended to fall into a particular genre and be at the very least decent, into something more enjoyable and worthy of the esteemed pantheon of the world’s finest awful movies can be difficult to describe. Sometimes just seeing these movies and noting where things went wrong is necessary.

What is also necessary is an above average sense of humor and a personality that enjoys watching the out of the ordinary. This same personality also enjoys watching movies that are not at all bad fims but are usually labeled “weird,” and are, rather, unique films such as David Lynch’s “Eraserhead,” Werner Herzog’s “Strotzek,” Pier Paolo Pasolini’s “Salo,” or Bigas Luna’s unique horror/suspense film, “Anguish.” What I have described, I suppose, is a different kind of pretentiousness than the kind typically associated with movie buffs, or in this case, “movie snobs.” To appreciate true badness in a movie is the same as appreciating a well-respected, high-minded foreign film. The following are my ten favorite delightfully terrible movies, one’s I have copies of, copies I treasure just as much as my copies of “Sideways,” “Slingblade,” and “Blade Runner.”

1. Samurai Cop (1988)—The misplaced, awkwardly delivered vulgarity, Samurai Cop’s hair, Samurai Cop’s partner’s reaction shots, it’s all just genius! Samurai Cop’s boss is always pissed off. Samurai Cop’s lady friend has excellent hair. Give Samurai Cop some ridges on his forehead and he could be a Klingon.

2. The Room (2005)—Tommy! Who doesn’t enjoy a game of 3 feet away from each other catch? The same awkward sex scene is repeated twice in the first ten minutes of the movie. Danny! The majestic music used as if we are watching a sweeping epic! Put yourself in The Room and you may never want to leave….or be able to leave.

3. Birdemic (2009)—Horrible, horrible CGI birds in 2010! It looks intentionally bad, but it’s not. I don’t think it is. The gorgeous Whitney Moore as Nathalie and her dirty feet. Pho!! Delicious. Coat hangers used as weapons of avian destruction! Don’t forget the gasoline!!

4. Troll 2 (1990)—Remember. “You don’t piss on hospitality!” There is no greater advice than this. Holly’s awesome dance in front of the mirror. I want to join in the fun! Wasn’t Julia Louis-Dreyfus in the first “Troll?” Holly (Connie Young) was in the better than expected Mormon movie, “The Single’s Ward” in 2002.

5. R.O.T.O.R. (1988)—Coldyron!! That song! “We’ve got to find our Hideway.” Oh,yes. “R.O.T.O.R.” was flmed in Dallas. I want to take the “R.O.T.O.R.” tour of Dallas which includes going to that house at the corner of Calculus and Haydale and then cap that off by going to eat at Crockett’s. The title is an example of the rare film title that is an acronymnal palindrome. I don’t know if “acronynmal” is a real word. Why are there a bunch of chairs set up in the parking garage? Let’s find our hideway.

6. Silent Night Deadly Night Part 2 (1987)—If you have not seen the first film, the first 30 minutes of SNDN Part 2 will catch you up. That’s what you do when you only have an hour’s worth of new stuff. Billy will take your trash out for you. Billy gets mad very easily, but it’s funny. Billy does not like tape recorders.

7. Gymkata (1985)—“Gymkata” is like if Michael J. Fox was cast to play a gymnast who fights bad guys using his gymnastic skills. Instead, they got a real gymnast, Kurt Thomas. Kurt Thomas is not very believable as the gymnast/badass. “Gymkata” has a difficult time deciding what time period it is set in. Thomas wears jeans and a casual button-down shirt, but the bad guys look like they are from feudal Japan. Tetchie Agbayani, the Filipino actress who plays Princess Rubali is extremely easy on the eyes! The name of the country in “Gymkata” is Parmistan, which I understand is great with linguini or on bed of saffron rice.

8. Carnival Magic (1980)—This movie has some of the best awkward audience reaction shots ever filmed and I love Al Adamson for that. It is a good example of the 70’s melding with the 80’s, probably only possible in North Carolina. A talking monkey never hurts things. I think Spielberg really missed the boat when he did not think about this obvious fact. “Lincoln” would have been that much better with a talking monkey.

9. Star Crystal (1986)—This film may have the best bad song in film history. “Crystal of a Star” is a masterpiece of sound. That voice, the voice of Stefani Christopherson, who I have discovered thanks to the webbernet, was the voice of Daphne on the original Scooby-Doo show in 1969 and was on an episode of M*A*S*H*. “I want to find out what you are. In all the world, you ARE the only oneaaaaaahahhhaaaahahahaaaaaaa!!” The other great thing about “Star Crystal” is that during the first hour it is an “Alien” rip-off, violent, bloody, worthy of it’s R-rating. In the last thirty minutes, the dart on the screenplay dart board landed on “family film with a cute alien in it.” Then we get the awesome song. It all adds up to something the Lord made.

10. Mac and Me (1988)—Six years after “E.T.” was released, “Mac and Me,” evidently a co-production of Columbia Pictures and McDonald’s was given to us. Grab a filet-o-fish and some of their delicious coffee and enjoy the show! I wonder if McDonald’s still allows guys dressed as football players to come in and dance in their restaurants.

11. The Pit (1981)—The star of the Canadian tv series, “Huckleberry Finn and His Friends,” Sammy Snyders IS Jamie in “The Pit.” Some more expertly crafted horrid acting can be found here. This film features a teddy bear that communicates with Jamie, the young boy who kills people by luring them into a pit in the woods. Instead of just adding one new song in the new film version of “Les Miserables,” why not also introduce a telepathic teddy bear into the mix? It worked in “The Pit.”

It Was Easy to Fall in Love with "Amour"

If you are one who is given to wanting desperately to talk to somebody about a great film you just saw or write online on your internationally world-renowned blog about a film you just saw, then your fingers will be busy after you see “Amour.” My fingers are definitely busy at the moment. I keep going back and forth in my mind as to whether I think “Amour” or “Argo” is the best film of the ones I saw in 2012. Thank goodness both films have short titles and do not take long to type so , as a result, I can type on all day incessantly about how good they both are, making sure to type the name of the film I am writing about every third or fourth sentence so as to steady the flow of my craftsmanship of excellent writing to which you are currently a witness. That last sentence may not have been so great, but, as I have learned in life, not everything you want in life is truly achievable, no matter what some posters in offices may say.

I do not know if I will be able to successfully put into words how beautiful a film “Amour” is and how emotionally effecting it is, but at this point, I will begin my attempt. The main characters in “Amour,” the French-German co-production, directed by Michael Haneke, a husband and wife living in Paris, appear to be a very loving couple who share mutual interests. Anne (Emmanuelle Riva in a brilliant, hopefully Oscar-winning performance) is a retired music teacher and a concert pianist. Georges (Jean-Louis Trintignant, also in a brilliant performance), Anne’s husband, is also retired. They live comfortably in their very nice Paris apartment. At the beginning of the film, as they are sitting at breakfast, Anne blanks out for about 3-4 minutes. She stares blankly into space and does not react to any of Georges’ questions or actions. Obviously, this is concerning to Georges and he schedules an appointment for Anne to see their doctor, one we learn they have seen for several years. As the film progresses, Anne’s health deteriorates little by little. Georges, though frustrated by what is happening to his wife, remains as calm as possible and as tender to Anne as he can. There are a few moments in the film in which both Anne and Georges display brief anger about what is going on and their frustration overwhelms them, however, the viewer is left with genuine compassion for both Anne and Georges as they try best to do what they can as Anne’s body and mind deteriorate. The performances by both Riva and Trintignant, as mentioned, are brilliant. I now feel that kind of compulsion that movie buffs love. I now want to see more films with these two performers. Trintignant has starred in many acclaimed films such as "A Man and a Woman,"(1966),"Z,"(1969),and "The Conformist"(1971). Riva was in the first film of Krzysztof Kieslowsi's Three Colors series, "Blue." One film in particular in which he starred sounds intriguing--"Hiroshima, Mon Amour" (1959), in which she plays a French actress, making a film in Hiroshima, who is married to a Japanese architect. This film is available from Criterion. There are several beautiful scenes in “Amour,” one of which is, while he is listening to a cd of a classical music piece in their music room, Georges imagines Anne is playing at the piano, playing what he is listening to on the cd. The final scenes in the film are stunningly beautiful as well. The film does not linger on anything. The audience knows what the film is about and how it will end. The opening scene of the film even gives the audience an idea of how the action of the film will end. It is structured wonderfully. Every scene is important. There is not a wasted bit of screen time in “Amour.” Each scene progresses the story and even when we watch a few scenes involving a pigeon that enters the apartment through a window, those scenes, though at first, seem odd, are found to be important scenes as well. There are not any moments in the brilliant screenplay that suggest infidelity, deceit, or any other indiscretions that may have easily derailed the film. “Amour,” as the title suggests, is about love. The film focuses on the love between Anne and Georges and what the husband and wife, the two lovers, go through as they age. There is never any doubt that Georges in love with Anne. Some of the realities that he faces as he cares for her may not be easy to watch for some, but there is nothing gratuitous or “gross” about those scenes. The screenplay assumes that the audience is intelligent enough to understand what has happened. The audience learns a lot about the relationship between Anne and Georges from the subtlety of the performances and from the audience’s own life experience. It is not a film that has to or feels the need to spell everything out for the audience. One goes into the film with the knowledge that it will be about how a loving elderly married couple handles one or the other’s approach towards the end of life.

“Amour” is not without a sense of humor as well. Throughout the film are bits of humor that show us the witty sense of humor that both Anne and Georges own. Even Anne,while she is nearing death, retains her wit. Georges, while on the surface, appears to be a man with a serious countenance, is written as a guy who enjoys the company of his wife and bounces his sense of humor off of her’s. One fantastic line in the film is spoken by their daughter, Eva, (wonderfully played by Isabelle Huppert). She tells her father that, when she was a child, she would listen at the door to Anne and Georges make love because the sound of it told her that her parents loved each other. There are few films that engage me as emotionally as did “Amour.” As I write this, I want very much to talk about the film with others who have seen it and feel as I do about the film. I even would like to discuss the film with anyone who was not as emotionally touched by the film. If you have ever been married or been in a committed relationship, you will surely love this film and be able to relate to the core ideas of the film. Anyone in a successful committed relationship has, at some point, considered and wondered about how the lives of both will end. Some may fear death and what is to come in the future as age lurks behind all of us. “Amour” is not about the fear of death or the acceptance of aging. It is about the love between two committed individuals and what Georges will do for Anne, the person he has loved and considered his best friend for life. It is a beautiful film, one I would have no problem watching again. My decision has been made! “Amour” is my favorite film of 2012. “Argo” is brilliant as well, but as “Amour” is a film about death that is full of life, life that stems from an outstanding, sad, and sincere screenplay and from flawless performances by Riva and Trintignant, I feel a stronger bond to it than to “Argo.” Both films are more than worthy of your time. “Amour,” I hope, will be considered a classic as it ages and will be seen as one of the best films about marriage and commitment in the history of film.

Not One Dissonant Note in "The Sessions"

“The Sessions” is the kind of film I love. Not only is it story, dialogue, and performance driven, but it also deals with difficult subject matter in a blunt, honest, and humorous fashion. It never sidesteps anything in it’s approach to telling the story of writer and poet, Mark O’Brien (John Hawkes), a man who, due to polio, is confined to an iron lung with the exception of 3-4 hours during the day in which he is able to be out of his confinement. Mark is a 38 year-old man who deeply wants intimacy with a woman in his life, especially sexual intimacy. He gains some amount of unintended fulfillment from his female nurse, Amanda (Annika Marks), however circumstances create uncomfortable tension between Mark and Amanda so she resigns her job as one of his nurses.

Mark seeks counsel from his priest, Father Brendan, played by the excellent William H. Macy. Mark tells Fr. Brendan that he is interested in seeing a sex surrogate, someone who may be able to assist Mark in finding some way to satisfy his need, a need all human beings have, for sexual intimacy. Fr. Brendan, understandably, is not, at first, comfortable with what Mark tells him, however, it is thought that God may provide special dispensation for somebody in Mark’s condition. Fr. Brendan does not necessarily approve of Mark’s decision, but he does not condone it either. Mark, too, is a bit conflicted by his own decision to see a surrogate, as he was raised Catholic. Helen Hunt, in an outstanding performance, enters the film as Cheryl, a sex surrogate who agrees to see Mark as a client. Her performance in the film is fearless as she shows fantastic courage to appear nude several times in the film. In a film such as “The Sessions,” it is very important to note that the nudity in the film is integral to the story and is not meant for ogling eyes to lust over. Having said that, it would be fallacious of me to not point out that Helen Hunt is quite attractive and I admire her bravery and her performance in the film. Her performance and the performance of John Hawkes as Mark are perfect and the scenes between the two of them are blunt and quite beautiful in as much as they present the honesty of what these sessions entail. Though the film is based on a magazine article written by O’Brien entitled, “On Seeing a Sex Surrogate,” I was reminded of the outstanding 1986 Kirby Dick documentary entitled, “Private Practices: The Story of a Sex Surrogate,” in which the subject of the film, surrogate Maureen Sullivan, is shown through the course of several sessions counseling two men through their difficulties with sexual intimacy. “Private Practices” is also very good as it presents it’s subject matter in an honest and respectful manner. It is on Netflix streaming. Many of the elements I appreciate in a film are present in “The Sessions.” It deals with subject matter which is usually not handled in films. It deals with the subject in a delicate, blunt, and funny way. Mark O’Brien is a sarcastic and self-depricating man, but not overbearingly so. He does not feel sorry for himself. The screenplay does not ask the audience to feel sorry for him outright, however, through Hawkes’ brilliant performance and the intelligent script, I did feel sorry for him and wished him all the happiness that he could possibly gain. I liked Mark O’Brien. It is very important to note that Hawkes’ performance is such that he is able to represent O’Brien in such an endearing way thanks to his flawless performance, original source material, and the film’s screenplay. Daniel Day-Lewis is flawless in “Lincoln,” however, and he will surely win, but it is a shame that Hawkes was NOT EVEN NOMINATED for his performance!!! Hence, my zeal for this year’s Oscars is a bit lessened, though, definitely not erased completely. Helen Hunt is justly nominated in the Supporting Actress category so I will be rooting for her to win. To argue for her to be in the Lead Actress category would be a valid argument indeed, however, it is known that the Academy will put lead actors and actresses in the supporting categories so that they have a shot to win. Go Helen Hunt!

There could have been plenty of opportunities in “The Sessions” for the screenplay to deviate from the crux of the story that it, thankfully, does not choose to pursue. The relationship between Cheryl and her husband (Adam Arkin) is honest and not without tension, however, the screenplay does not allow this relationship to become one of the main points of the film. This would have been a mistake as the film is about Mark and Cheryl, not Cheryl and her husband. It is important to point out her and her husband’s relationship, just not to make their marriage a subject of the film. In the same way, I was relieved to know that Cheryl’s son is not highlighted in the film. Jarrod Bailey’s performance in the film as her son was fine, but, as with the character of the husband, it was pleasant to find that the film did not incorporate any forced or unnecessary drama involving those characters. I think that would have been a mistake and could have been used as a story crutch had the screenplay not been as outstanding as it is. “The Sessions” never loses it’s focus. There are very good performances by the supporting actors, including Moon Bloodgood as Vera, the nurse we get to know the most about in the film, Jennifer Kumiyama, an actress who suffers from arthrogryposis and is wheelchair-bound, as one of Mark’s friends, and Robin Wiegert as Susan, a character of importance near the end of the film. “The Sessions” never loses focus and does not get distracted by distracting, silly subplots, silly characters, or unrealistic scenarios. The performances are outstanding, and the screenplay, again based on Mark O’Brien’s article is blunt, funny, and touching. It is one of those movies that makes you feel great and makes you want to watch more movies in hopes that the other films you watch will be as good as the one you just saw that excited you so. “The Sessions” is not only about Mark O’Brien’s desire for intimacy, but could also be viewed as a film about the desire in most people to have, at the very least, a few times in their life the experience of intimacy with someone with whom he or she has developed a bond. I hope I have heaped enough praise upon this film, sparking anyone kind enough to be reading this to see it when it is released on dvd and blu-ray on February 12.

Nearly Seduced by the Furtive Glance of a Laserdisc Player

Back in 1995, I almost bought a laserdisc player. I was at Best Buy and I knew about the current technology which made watching movies in one’s home a more memorable experience. Since 1990, Siskel and Ebert had been telling me every week about how they were expanding their laserdisc collection. They told me about the miracle of letterboxing, which was and continues to be a most welcome process. “Why would I not want to watch the letterboxed version,” I have, in the past asked the DVD menu. Yes, give me the letterboxed version.

I did not purchase a laserdisc player in 1995 or in any other year. For some reason, I had it in my brain that the laserdisc player is not where technology will end. I had the money to buy a player and even a movie or two, but I was persuaded by my mind not to do so. It is fun to watch old episodes of “Siskel and Ebert” on which they extol the greatness of the laserdisc, which, back then, was something which deserved their extolments. As it turns out, I wish I would have allowed myself to be enraptured by and purchase a laserdisc player, as I do enjoy collecting old video equipment, equipment which can still be used, but only in a nostalgic, "look I have and is still working" way. I have a working betamax player and an RCA videodisc player (different from a laserdisc) which worked for a while but no longer functions, as will, at some point, be said about all of us. I did, in the mid-90's, have vhs copies made for me of the laserdisc versions of "The Abyss" and "Pulp Fiction," the latter from a Japanese disc which was available for rent at Blockbuster. The clarity was impressive compared to the image on the best of vhs tapes.

Alas, I decided to eschew the purchase of a laserdisc player in favor of waiting for what I hoped at the time would be better in a matter of a few years. In a few years, the dvd player emerged. My first dvd player was in an IBM computer I bought in 1998. I do not intend to infer that I am one who can see into the future of technology, however, I am partly glad and partly disappointed that the sultry silver-encased piece of video technology did not entrance me. I remember thinking that video media would likely continue to get smaller as you could, instead of watching a movie on a bulky tape, watch it on a thin disc, the size of a record. Now, with digital downloads, a movie can be on no media at all. It's just sent from one big computer thingy to your tv, blu-ray player, or computer. How newfangled is that? Anyway, I sometimes wish I had given in to my desire for a laserdisc player, but my regret is not of a serious nature. It is exciting to think about and will be exciting to see what video and audio technology has for us in the future, or is digital downloading the perfect way, for those without my need for nostalgia, to consume movies and music? It is a question. Is it?

"Django Unchained" Could Have Used More Restraint

 It didn’t help that Newtown happened. It didn’t help that the movie theater shootings in Colorado happened. In the past, I probably would have liked Quentin Tarantino’s new film, “Django Unchained,” a little more than I did, however, with our society able to access more information about the day’s news, hearing about random acts of violence that happen in real life seems to make films with an overuse of violence more and more unwelcome, or at least scenes in such films more and more unwelcome. I have cringed more than once while watching the trailer for the upcoming film, “Gangster Squad,” even the post-Colorado version of that film’s trailer sans gangsters shooting up a theater full of people portion.

Having said all of this, I think “Django Unchained” is a good film, with the exception of about twenty minutes that occur in the film’s third hour.

As in his 2010 film, “Inglorious Basterds,” Tarantino sets up the main characters of the film perfectly. As in “Inglorious Basterds,” Christoph Waltz plays the main character we initially encounter. As in “Inglorious Basterds,” Waltz gives a flawless performance, though in “Django Unchained,” his character is much more likable. Tarantino does not build the same high level of tension in the first reel of “Django” as he did in the first reel of “Basterds,” however, he does prove once again that he certainly knows how to engage the audience in the first reel of his films. Tarantino is an expert storyteller. He sets up who the main characters are going to be and why they are in the situation they are in early on and he is able to keep an audience interested in his films which tend to run around the 150 minute mark, and in the case of “Django,” a film that runs 170 minutes. I love long movies, especially if the filmmakers can hold my interest for the entirety of the running time. Even if for a few minutes my mind wanders,  if a long film is interesting, I enjoy it quite a bit.

 I do not know if it was Tarantino’s intention, but one of the aspects of “Django Unchained” I enjoyed was the spacing out of cast members I was looking forward to seeing. As you watch the opening credits, you know that you will see Jamie Foxx as Django and Christoph Waltz as Dr. King Shultz, a dentist who we learn wants to help Django become a free man and help Django find his wife. The opening credits also reveal that we will see Don Johnson, Leonardo DiCaprio (in a Tarantino film!), Samuel L. Jackson, and Franco Nero (!!), the original Django from the 1966 Italian film. The original Django was not about a slave as is “Django Unchained.” In the 1966 “Django, “ the title character is a man who enters a town overrun by bandits. The original “Django” is a fantastic film. It is available on dvd in it’s original Italian language. You may also enjoy Franco Nero in one of the many other films in which he as appeared such as “Enter the Ninja,” the brilliance of "Shark Hunter," or in Giulio Paradisi’s 1979 film, “The Visitor,” in which Nero has a few scenes in which he plays Jesus. You can’t beat that!

As another additional homage to the original film, Tarantino uses the theme song from the 1966 film in the opening credits. That was a great touch. 

The performances in “Django Unchained” are great. As mentioned, Christoph Waltz gives a wonderful performance. Leonardo DiCaprio is excellent as the plantation and slave owner, Calvin Candie. Kerry Washington is great as Django’s wife, Broomhilda, one of Candie’s slaves. Her elegance does not seem at all out of place for her character. Jamie Foxx is very good as Django. His performance is understated even in the violent scenes. I could sense in the character of Django that he did not particularly enjoy what he must do but he knew that such an outcome is, for the purposes of this story, inevitable.

I have two issues with “Django Unchained.” While I stated that I enjoy films that are 2 ½-3 hours long, in the case of this film, I wish it would have been a bit shorter. I began to feel the length of the film during the third hour. It probably could have been shortened by about ten or fifteen minutes and felt more satisfying, creating a more impactful ending. My other issue is that, though it is expected in a Tarantino film, the overuse of violence in “Django” was more cringe-inducing than exciting. One problem is that you know what you are rooting against before you sit down in your seat in the theater. Slavery is horrible and you know that revenge will be enacted in some way in some fashion during the film. There are not many incidents during the course of the film that are surprising or that make you any angrier as a viewer at a character and start your blood boiling,creating an emotional spark that make you more interested in the film than you might already have been. In other words, Tarantino lays down for you, by the very nature of the subject matter, what you are going to see. Samuel L. Jackson’s character, we discover, is more than we think, however, as played by Jackson, his character, Steven, is more funny than anything else. Steven is intended to be funny, however, as events unfold in the film, we do learn more about Steven.

Though flawed, I did like “Django Unchained,” however, it would not be among a group of films I would want to see again soon. I appreciate Tarantino’s style of filmmaking. He is a brilliant filmmaker who sometimes, can use a bit of restraint. As his films become more and more mainstream and are under consideration for major awards as is this one and was “Inglorious Basterds,” I hope he will be able to use violence in his films as more than a sideshow attraction, as if he is asking us to come inside and watch the guys get the guts shot out of them in slow motion. I am not sickened by this. I just roll my eyes a little bit as it seems he can graduate from this usage of violence. I am not saying he should abandon using violence in his films, but rather, use violence to make stronger points as Sam Peckinpah did in some of his films. Sure, show us the violence, but have better reasons for doing so. Make a political statement, make a statement about the state of our nation, etc. As well, as I stated earlier, violence in the real world has made me feel a bit more resistant to films that contain a high level of violence. Gun violence, in particular, seems to be more prevalent in real life, so films depicting gun violence for no reason other than to titillate whoever may be titillated by extreme violence have become of lesser value to my movie-watching desire. Maybe I am just becoming more prudish. I do not think so, as I know I still enjoy action films and horror films as much as I always have. It is likely just bad timing for me to be as interested in Tarantino’s film or any other film with as much violence as is contained in “Django Unchained" as I once may have been. I enjoyed the film, but with more restraint, it could have been a lot better.

Video Holy Grail #1: The Day Santa Claus Cried

There are some films that one learns about and wants very much to find. Such searches and eventual discoveries make movie collecting fun. In the same way, those who collect records and books enjoy the same kind of quest. Over the last 10-15 years, more and more once rare or obscure films have been released to dvd and even blu-ray. Such films include Al Adamson's masterpiece of craziness, "Carnival Magic," the 1977 Japanese horror film, "Hausu," and Sam Fuller's controversial 1982 film, "White Dog." Sometimes these rare films even make it onto an American cable network such as Turner Classic Movies. Such was the case of the 1974 Marcel Marceau film, "Shanks" and the 1973 film, "Wicked, Wicked," originally filmed in an all split-screen format called Duovision.

The 1978 film, "Questo Si Che e Amore," or "The Day Santa Claus Cried," or "Last Touch of Love," has not made it yet to dvd in any country and I am not aware of it's play on television in the U.S. at any time. The film appeals to me as it contains some elements that would seem to go well together. It appears to be about a dying boy whose parents are having marital problems. The parents of the child both work in the children's television industry, hence star, Christopher George, holding a puppet in the clip included in this blog post. Thank you, You Tube. The aforementioned presence of Christopher George, a regular in Italian films of the late 1970's and early 1980's holds some interest as well. From 1969-1971, George starred on a tv show called "The Immortal" about a man who could not die, hence the name of the series.
A search on Amazon, Ebay, and various websites specializing in aiding one to find hard-to-find films has proved fruitless. Ten years ago, I thought that finding "Carnival Magic" would be a difficult proposition, however, it not only eventually aired on Turner Classic Movies, but also, a few months later, was released on dvd and the greatness of blu-ray. At one time, only one print of "Carnival Magic" was thought to exist, that being in the possession of the Alamo Drafthouse in Austin, Texas. I, along with a friend, attended a screening of this film and had a great time. It was a treat to see it on film in a theater. It was a bonus to learn of it's eventual dvd release thanks to discovery of camera negatives.
So there is hope that "The Day Santa Claus Cried" may be released on dvd or I may discover an oddball vhs copy of it that nobody online knew existed. That is known to happen. I have a copy of Al Adamson's "Sunset Cove" on vhs from an early 80's Canadian video release. The search for rare films is an exciting pursuit to engage oneself in and finding films you thought were impossible to find makes said pursuit even more interesting.