#40- Who Framed Roger Rabbit

Quick recap: Roger Rabbit, a toon, has been framed for the murder of Marvin Acme and it’s up to Eddie Valient, PI, to help crack the case.

zany, I tells ya!

Fun (?) fact: This movie marked the first time Warner Brothers cartoons and Disney cartoons were together. Warner Brothers agreed to allow its most famous characters to be shown as long as they were given equal time as the Disney characters. This explains the scenes with Daffy Duck and Donald Duck playing piano and later on, Bugs Bunny and Mickey Mouse skydiving. It does not explain the 50 year old baby because where can you even begin?

This disturbed me way more than it should have

My thoughts: So. I have a confession to make. I don’t like Looney Tunes. I don’t know if this has always been the case and come to think of it, I don’t think it has. I remember owing a VHS of 50 Bugs Bunny cartoons or something like that when I was younger. But now there is no love lost between me and Warner Brothers. I’m going to blame ugly 90’s fashion on this one because at some point, someone decided it would be a good idea for cartoons to be used as a fashion statement.

NO. Also, I’m wondering if there was a crossover between Looney Tunes fashion and those awful No Fear t-shirts

With that out of the way, I can honestly say that I didn’t hate this movie. Yay! From a sophisticated adult perspective, I appreciate the homage to 40s detective movies as well as to the classic cartoons everyone grew up with. I was also impressed with the way the director balanced out well known characters with new ones. It helped secure the image of ToonTown as a place where all cartoons live, big and small.

I also enjoyed seeing the way humans and cartoons interacted with each other. This had been going on for years but a lot of time and effort was put into making the interactions even more believable. In fact, Disney animators coined the term ‘bump the lamp’ from this movie. The term refers to a scene in which Valient hoists Roger Rabbit into the air while his head repeatedly bumps the lamp. As the lamp swings side to side, it casts realistic shadows on both the human and cartoon. The point is that even though 98% of the audience wouldn’t notice this, it added to the movie’s authenticity. That’s why Disney and Pixar have always been ahead in the animation game, this attention to the most minute things. I’m sure I didn’t catch all of the little jokes in this movie, but I could tell how much work was put into the process.

more of an easter egg, but this attention to detail in the movie Aladdin is a great example of ‘bump the lamp’

The one part that bothered me about this movie is that I could never figure out who the film was geared towards. I mean, the movie is chock full of classic cartoon characters that children love but on the other hand, there is a lot of violence, language and innuendos. So, I guess the demographic was for adults after all, but then I looked online and found Happy Meal toys tied in to the movie.

Final review: 3/5. I don’t think I would watch this again and I don’t know when I would show it to my son. But I can still appreciate how well this movie was made and how much thought was put into it.

Up next: El Topo

6 Comments

#38- Frenzy

Quick recap: A serial killer is loose in London, this time raping his victims and then strangling them with a necktie. It is revealed who the killer is early on so the movie becomes more of a mystery as to how the killer will get caught. Two men, Bob Rusk and Richard Blaney, are in the center of this series of murders- the killer and the man accused of all of the crimes, respectively.

Fun (?) Fact: Alfred Hitchcock had originally planned to do his cameo at the beginning of the movie as a dead body floating in the river, but it was later changed to a nude female because no one wants to see a naked Hitchcock.

Hitchcock and a koala

My thoughts: This was my second Hitchcock film, the first being North by Northwest. I was excited to see ‘Frenzy’ because it is the style he is so well known for. This would end up being one of Hitchcock’s last films and it is also one of his dirtiest, receiving an ‘X’ rating at the time of release. An example of the well earned ‘X’ comes from a joke at the beginning of the movie as a woman and man are discussing the murders and the woman mentions that the victims are raped before they are strangled. The man replies, ‘ There is a silver lining to every cloud’. Lovely. There’s also a surprising amount of nudity in this film, which doesn’t necessarily bother me except in the case that it is being used for shock value.

The plot itself is an interesting one and reminds me a bit of SPOILERS Gone Girl, because the main character acts so incriminating but is in fact innocent. There is a lot stacked against him seeing as how both his ex-wife and current girlfriend are murdered. The case seems like an open and shut one, except not really because the other 9 or so murders are never mentioned once Blaney is fingered as the serial killer. He looks guilty of murdering the two women but he must’ve certainly had an alibi or evidence in his favor for the the others. Rusk, the true murderer, came off as fake to me from the start but I don’t blame the police for not investigating him.

He also reminds me of Rex Manning, another jerk

The murders themselves are quite gruesome and made me feel extremely uncomfortable watching them. Like everyone else, I watched the body of the ex-wife and she was breathing SECONDS after he had just killed her. She could’ve at least practiced holding her breath while the camera was on her. It kind of ruined the moment for me. The most disturbing scene for me was when he took Babs, pictured above, up to his apartment to murder her. She of course has no clue what he will do and as he closes the door, all sound is cut off and there is a gorgeous long tracking shot as the camera leaves the door, goes down the stairs and into the busy market street. It was so much more unnerving knowing what he was doing and that no one would be able to jump in and save her. Apparently this is a trademark of Hitchcock’s to do a long tracking shot and I can see its effectiveness.

There are a few parts of the film that were humorous, like the subplot of the investigator’s wife serving him awful food because she was in culinary school. It was a nice contrast to all the grisly details the audience was having to see. Another oddly humorous scene comes when Rusk has just murdered Babs and puts her in a potato sack only to discover she died with a handful of incriminating evidence. The scene itself wasn’t funny, but the idea that the serial killer had managed to survive this long, only to get stopped by a sack of potatoes.

Final review: 3/5 Hitchcock knows the genre and practically invented it, but this wasn’t the best example of his work.

Where I watched it: Alamo Drafthouse!

Up next: The Best Years of our Lives

3 Comments

#30- Clerks

Quick Recap: Dante Hicks works at a convenience store, which seems awful enough. The story starts with him being called in to work after closing the store the night before. Thus begins the day from hell. His buddy Randal, who works next door at the video place, frequents the shop throughout the day to keep company and sometimes make things worse. There are also a wide variety of customers to add to the hellscape that is the Quick Stop. I mean, the movie is called ‘Clerks’. It’s about Clerks. I don’t know what you were expecting.

Kevin Smith is ok in my book because he understands the greatness of Degrassi.

Fun (?) Fact: Knowing how this movie was produced made me appreciate it a little more. For example, the movie is filmed in the same convenience store Smith worked at, and he was still working there throughout the movie’s production. That’s rather impressive.

My thoughts: I’ve always seen this movie as more of a ‘guys movie’ rather than actual good cinema. Maybe it’s because almost every guy I have dated has attempted to get me to understand how profound this movie was. In fact, the first time I watched ‘Clerks’ was with a boy I had a major crush on in high school. Admittedly, I paid less attention to the movie and more to my feelings towards said boy. Moving on. At its surface, this is very much a guys movie, just as most romantic comedies are marketed to women. There is plenty of sexual humor and Star Wars philosophical discussion to tide almost everyone over. And that sort of thing just doesn’t appeal to me. I’m not a prude by any means, but I just didn’t find the discussions all that funny or enlightening. Especially the last scene which I won’t spoil here, but I just found gross. Unless Kevin Smith wasn’t trying to be funny and this was something he has dealt with and in that case, hats off to you, sir.

So one would think I just hated this movie based on the previous paragraph, but that’s not true. I felt a little guilty realizing all that I had missed the first time I watched it. But like I said, I was 18 and with a boy I liked and I had absolutely no experience in life as of yet. But now I’m older and although my minimum wage jobs weren’t as dire, I worked with people who had these experiences. People who were wonderful to talk to and smart, but they were either in a rut or had just enough to get by and enjoy life. I have no idea if that was the ‘point’ of the movie and I have no desire to look it up, but when presented with obstacles, everyone either falls into the ‘Dante’ camp or ‘Randal’ camp. I absolutely loved the fight between the characters at the end of the movie as Randal calls Dante out for all his melodrama. As he says, ‘I wasn’t even supposed to be here today!’, Randal has to remind him how much he brought on himself either through bad choices (cheating on his girlfriend) or being too uptight about things. Throughout the movie I saw Dante’s viewpoint of hell but after Randal talks to him, I realized that we create our own version of hell. Randal seems to be in just as much a dire situation as Dante, but he is aware of that and is happy enough with the situation. Maybe happy isn’t the best word to use, but he has made peace. After all, he’s just a video store clerk and and Dante is a convenience store clerk. Monkeys could be trained to do their job. So, you either stress over it or survive the shift and go out and be happy. That’s a pretty good lesson for a ‘guy movie’.

Final Review: 3/5. I’m glad I rewatched this when I was older but it doesn’t endear itself enough to me to watch it again.Then again, this is a favorite movie of my husband so I might not have a choice.

Up next: Splendor in the Grass

1 Comment

#22-It Happened One Night

Quick recap: Socialite Ellie Andrews has married a man her father disapproves of. When he annuls the marriage, she runs away to be with her husband. Andrews embarks on a journey to New York by bus that proves difficult because she is rich and also a woman. Peter Warne, a journalist, steps in to help her manage her money and not get taken advantage of because she is rich and also a woman. At some point Andrews falls in love with Warne and of course everyone lives happily ever after. Except Andrews because she is rich and also a woman.

he’s teaching her how to dunk her donut properly because she can’t even do that right

Fun (?) Fact: The next time someone mentions that they love this movie, I’m going to respond with, “Do you know who else loves this movie? HITLER.” Because he totally did. Apparently.

I think I just wanted to mention Hitler so I could post this.

My thoughts: If there is 0ne genre of movie I detest, it would have to be the modern ‘Romantic Comedy’. I can’t quite pin down why I hate them so, but it might have to do with the fact that the woman always seems desperate for a man and falls in love with him in some zany way. And then when I read the description for this movie, I realized that THIS is where it all began and for some reason that gave me hope. Maybe the original romantic comedy is delightful and really funny and sweet and the modern genre has just lost its focus.

NOPE.

As a disclaimer, if I look at this movie in the correct context of 1930’s American culture, I can see why it was such a big hit. It’s an interesting premise to have love blossom on a bus and the main characters are gorgeous. But I’m watching this in 2013 and the plot just doesn’t hold up as well. Ellie Andrews is supposed to be this hard headed woman who will do what she pleases, but what she wants is a man. She needs a man. And she has absolutely no idea how busses work. She seems so strong in the beginning, but by the very first night of running away, she is leaning on Warne’s arm for comfort. She misses the bus the next day and Warne is there to rescue her. At one point he even takes away her money because she isn’t using it properly. She becomes even more helpless as time passes. There is one scene when the two of them try to get some rest in a haystack. Warne walks away for a minute to find food and Andrews FREAKS out. I know that the scene is important to show that she is in love, but she seemed more like a child than an ‘independent woman’. I suppose the two are perfect for each other as one needs constant rescuing and guidance and the other is perfectly happy to fill that role.

And then there is the violence and threatening of violence. I get that that sort of thing was hilarious a long time ago, but it just makes the movie seem dated now. 10 minutes into the first scene, Andrew’s father is slapping her for being silly. In one of the most important scenes where Warne declares his love for Andrews he says, ‘She needs a guy who’d take a sock at her once a day whether she deserves it or not.’ That’s true love, right there.

Plot aside, I really did enjoy the bus scenes with all of the colorful characters and I also fell in love with the motel houses (?) that they stayed in each night. It made me want to buy a bus ticket right then and there, although I don’t think I would have as grand a time. This movie was also set in the 30’s and you know what that means….. spinning newspaper montage!!! No classic film is complete without it.

And Clark Gable, we can’t forget about him. He was the sole reason I found myself drawn to this movie more than I expected to. He was charming and funny and I think I fell in love at some point. The one scene I found truly hilarious was of Warne undressing himself in front of Andrews in an attempt to persuade her to stay with him. I can see why everyone went crazy over him back then.

yet another novel way to threaten a woman

Final review: 3/5. This was a tough one to settle on. I disliked the helplessness of Andrews but on the other hand, CLARK GABLE.

Where/how I watched it: Netflix DVD

Up Next: Ariel, my first foray into subtitled foreign films. Oh boy.

1001 Movie Nights

Tag Archives: 3/5

#40- Who Framed Roger Rabbit

#38- Frenzy

#30- Clerks

#22-It Happened One Night

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: