#385- Sabotage

Quick recap: A movie theater owner somehow gets involved with a terrorist group who want to SABOTAGE London. His wife and her little brother get dragged into the mess as well, which is usually how these things go.

The opening scene is a ‘Webster’s dictionary defines…’ trope

Fun (?) fact: Sabotage is not to be confused with the title ‘The Secret Agent’, the book the film is based off of. And also not to be confused with The Secret Agent, also directed by Alfred Hitchcock the same year but about something completely different.

Not many dames in this movie and only one spinning newspaper

Thoughts and observations:

This feels like my millionth Hitchcock film and although there were several director tropes I recognized, Sabotage still feels novel. I think what sold me is that the audience knows who the bad guys are from the very beginning so the tension comes from finding out when they will get their comeuppance. I really enjoyed the characters although I never really understood the relationship between Mrs. and Mr. Karl Verloc. They were married, obviously, but the two didn’t seem to match at all. Plus, there’s the dirty business of not knowing that her husband was a wannabe terrorist.

The best part of Sabotage is how dark it goes for a movie made in the 1930s. SPOILERS AHEAD. YOUVE BEEN WARNED.

I connected with Stevie, the little brother, early on in the film and appreciated how he could bring light into some really dark scenes. When Verloc told him to drop off the film canisters (along with the bomb) at Piccadilly Circus, I wasn’t worried because Hitchcock is known for building suspense. I actually just assumed that the bomb would be a dud so I audibly gasped when it went off and blew the bus up (as well as Stevie). Hitchcock said he regretting killing a character the audience had learned to sympathize with and promised to never to do it again. Until Psycho, that is.  It’s a dirty trick but really effective.

The end of the movie was also a whirlwind that I’ll keep from spoiling except to say that although there is a resolution, people were still killed and harm was done. I appreciate when the main characters don’t live happily ever after but are instead left to pick up the pieces.

Watchability score: 4/5

Up next: Alice

 

#384-The Naked Gun

Quick recap: Detective Frank Derbin is on the case to catch the person trying to assassinate Queen Elizabeth II.

Fun (?) fact: Queen Elizabeth II did attend a real baseball game years later and thankfully was not assassinated.

Thoughts and observations:

What a true delight! This was my first time watching a Leslie Nielsen film ( I KNOW! Not even Airplane) and I can’t wait to watch more because this kind of humor is right up my alley. It reminded me of doing art projects as a kid- you throw glitter on everything and shake off the excess to reveal something truly beautiful. That’s Nielson in this film- throwing all the jokes and puns and visual comedy he can into every scene and the audience will pick something to love. It goes without saying but there were so many gags and one-liners I missed because I was focusing on some other joke. There isn’t much of a plot here but there doesn’t need to be. As is usually the tradition with comedy films I review, here is a list of some of my favorite scenes and jokes:

  • The first scene as the cop car light goes into the home and eventually on a roller coaster

 

  • The student driver scene

 

  • ‘Anyone catch the license plate?’ after Derbin’s own car drives away without him and causes a lot of damage

 

  •  The sex scene between Derbin and Jane Spencer

  • The baseball montage

Watchability rating: 5/5

Up next: Sabotage

 

#370- Pierrot le Fou

Quick recap: Ferdinand Griffon is tired of his bougie lifestyle so he takes off with ex-girlfriend, Marianne, who is maybe wanted by terrorists or something. Whatever the case may be, the two of them leave a trail of dead bodies in their wake and enough symbolism to last me the rest of this list.

I wish I knew how to quit you, French New Wave cinema

Fun (?) fact: Here is what director Jean-Luc Godard said about his film, in the most French way possible :  “it is not really a film, it’s an attempt at cinema. Life is the subject, with [Cinema]Scope and color as its attributes…In short, life filling the screen as a tap fills bathtub that is simultaneously emptying at the same rate.”

My thoughts: As I sit here drinking my canned wine after a full meal of hot dogs and potato chips, I cant help but feeling a little offended that Godard hates American culture. To be fair, it is American cinema he hates, although I doubt he felt anything sentimental towards the actual citizens. And so Godard set out to make a film that both satirized and showed his love for all things America. Which I think he did. Or did not. Hell if I know, actually.

Pierrot le Fou is the weirdest film to describe because although it has a linear plot about two lovers on the run, I never understood what they were running from or why they were killing so many people. But then I read up on trivia and saw that it was a satire and it kind of reminded me of the first time I saw Austin Powers. I thought the movie was hilarious but I only understood about 40% of it because I had never watched a James Bond film before. That’s what this movie is. If I had watched the films Godard was referencing, I think I would’ve understood what was going on a little better but since I didn’t, I just kept waiting for something to make sense. There are a few funny elements in the film but many of them are dark  I wasn’t sure if it was French humor or something else. I like to imagine audiences back in the 60s watching Pierrot le Fou and cackling every time Ferdinand reads a book or when Marianne pulls out her dog purse. But I felt left out of the joke.

That’s not to say that I was bored to tears or anything by this movie. The colors are gorgeous and so are the actors. I kept watching to see what would happen, even if I didn’t understand every little thing going on. The dialogue spoken was also confusing, like watching the Thin Red Line again. If I had turned off subtitles and just watched the action, I think I would’ve walked away from this with a much higher regard for Godard.

Final review:2/5

Up next: Toy Story

#368- Project A II

Quick recap: Having not seen the first Project A, I have no idea why Dragon (Jackie Chan) has so many enemies. I also have no idea how he was able to go from the Navy to Police Sergeant but that’s also a thing, apparently. Maybe it’s his ridiculously good martial arts skills?

 

It’s easier just to name who doesn’t want Dragon dead

Fun (?) fact: The peppers Dragon ate and then spit in his hands to rub in his attackers’ faces were real

My thoughts: I absolutely love discovering subgenres within a genre. My first realization of this came very early on in this list when I learned ‘foreign’ isn’t a genre, except as an Oscar category. And now I’ve expanded my horizons to learn that there are different kinds of Martial Arts films. Before this list I had only ever seen Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon, which is so vastly different than this movie that they shouldn’t be mentioned in the same realm.

Project A II was a lot more fun for me to watch than previous films of similar fighting plots. There is an underlying humor I didn’t always understand but still very much enjoyed, especially during the fighting scenes. It’s one thing to film people punching and kicking people but Jackie Chan adds all these elements that show he is enjoying himself but is also a master. My favorite scene was when Dragon went to confront the big mob boss that ran the district he was policing. He had a few friends with him and it was obvious how outnumbered they were. Yet that didn’t stop Dragon from trying to kick as much ass as possible and also have time to show off. The restaurant they fought in became a sort of playground for both sides as they used everything from couches to the bar to the walls to attack.

This movie is about as straightforward as it gets: good guy comes to town to defeat bad guys. Yet I found myself getting lost in the new characters and trying to figure out who was really the villain. At some point I gave up and just enjoyed the ride. I’m fairly sure events in the film take place in the early 1900s but some of the costumes look like something out of Miami Vice and the soundtrack is full of synthesizer. Jackie Chan knows what we are here for though and he delivers exactly that over and over. Just don’t think too hard and you will love this movie.

Final review: 4/5

Up next: Kiss of the Spider Woman