Month: Dec 2023

Blackadder’s Christmas Carol, 1988 – ★★★★½

A soft spot of the season, ‘Blackadders Christmas Carol’ turns the ‘Scrooge’ story on it’s head in a silly and entertaining manner.

Studded throughout with the cream of the British comedy crop (and a couple Doctor who Alumni) its a pleasent spin on the classic and while it’s not one I catch every year. It’s one I always *try* to make time for.

Wonderfully written, and perfectly paced. I’d absolutely check it out 🙂

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/blackadders-christmas-carol/

by tytdreviews

Lisztomania, 1975 – ★★★★½

The Anti ‘Barry Lindon’, ‘Lisztomania’ is Ken Russell’s affectionate and aggressive “Biopic” of the late composer Franz Liszt, arguably one of the greatest piano players and composers of all time.

And the word ‘Biopic’ is certainly doing some heavy lifting here as really, it’s more a platform for Ken to express his feelings towards Liszt (portraying him as the 19th centuries answer to a rock star) but really? this is all a front for Ken’s main goal with this film, which was to (quite rightly) rip the absolute SHIT out of Richard Wagner.

Okay; so maybe thats a *bit* of an oversimplification, Basically the plot follows Lizsts various rises and falls over his career, from being Hungary’s golden child, through his various womanizing exploits (complete with a scene in which he’s portrayed as having an 8 foot long artificial penis which is put through a guillotine) to his eventual spate in the catholic church…

Liszt’s relationship with Wagner was a fractious one, due to Wagner basically spending a good chunk of his career relying on Liszt as a means of promotion and financial stability…made all the more fractious by the fact that Liszts daughter Cosima married Wagner. Richarad Wagner for those in the dark, was a renowned (and somewhat mid) composer who’s main legacy seems to have been that he was a rabid anti-semite and helped lay the core foundations of what would go on to become Hitlers Nazi Party (Cosima lived to promote Wagners work…both in music and racism WELL after his death…Hitler was a genuine and sincere friend of the family…)

Russell is many things…subtle is not one of them. And when I tell you that its clear that he utterly detested Wagner and all that he stood for. Well…if you’ve seen ‘Tommy’ or ‘The Devils’ you’ll pretty much understand that when Ken has the backing of a major studio and an axe to grind…you’re going to be in for a HELL of a viewing experience.

And, for me? ‘Lisztomania’ delivers that in spades, a psychadelic swirl of a reimaging of Liszts life, its colourful, manic, over the top, INCREDIBLY horny AT ALL TIMES. Its a non stop rip-roarer of a production that barely stops for breath across its entire hour and 43 minute runtime. Which works both in its favour, and it’s detriment.

Im just gonna say right off the bat, DO NOT expect historical accuracy here, while there are some key beats that ACTUALLY did happen, this is Liszt’s and Wagners life as viewed through an almost fantasy driven prism. As such, theres a LOT of symbolism, a LOT of implied double meanings and a LOT of ‘creative liberties’. I just wanna make sure noone here leaves a viewing of Lisztomania thinking that Liszt had an 8 foot penis.

The scripts breakneck. Which is great because that sense of restless, manic, unwavering dedication to showcasing a vision is refreshing, engaging and absolutely delighted me. Tonally its camp as christmas and utterly unrelenting in trying to drown the audience in a vat of sequins, prog rock and Elton John-esq set design. Its an utter delight to sit through…if your in the right headspace.

If you’re not in the mood for an aggressive assault on the senses, I imagine it could get pretty insufferable pretty quickly, because its essentially presenting the life of a composer in the style of the ramblings of a time traveller who has 20 seconds to explain an entire 70 year history before being destroyed, a LOT of key information gets left out, a LOT of the film relies on the audience just ‘going with it’ and a LOT of the film is running more on the passion of the film maker, than on actually trying to turn out something that is easily accessable. In that sense, I completely understand why 90% of peoples initial reaction to this is of utter rejection and border disgust.

I however (an ADHD sufferer) reveled in its total disregard to moderate pacing and coherency, I LOVED being thrust from scene to scene like I was being thrown through a series of plate glass windows. I relished the constant swings between over the top hypercolourful set pieces, full frontal nudity and totally random cameos, such as Ringo starr playing ‘the pope’.

It appealed to me on a quite profound level, and the final act (in which the ‘biopic’ angle goes almost COMPLETELY out of the window, as we transform into a ‘Hammer’ movie in which Wagner is a literal Vampire commanding an army of blonde haired blue eyed german children into wanting to destroy Jews) is just astounding. and really quite has to be seen to be believed!

Thats probably the thing I like most about this film, you really cant try to second guess it. Even if your an avid historian, Russell here has managed to create a work where, just as your getting into a groove, he’ll pull the rug from under you with a HARSH veer out of whatever was being progressed into just…some fantastical whimsy thats totally unrelated to what was at hand…again; I totally understand why some would find that frustrating…But I adored it for its total disregard for convention in that sense.

The direction is rich, lavish, with a clear creative drive behind it. Russell here is firing on ALL cylinders and clearly had an itch to scratch. Its a hyperfocussed production that seemed to have all aspects of the cast and crew enthused and ready to pour their souls into it. A decedant piece, I adore the way this thing looks. it’s a constantly evolving work that even at it’s lowest points, is still a total vision to behold.

The cine is sumptuous too, richly dressed sets that have detail for miles are excellently composed with solid sequence building on the editing front that helps deliver a totally unique experience. Every time I rewatch this film I always notice something different. and the amount of ‘phallic’ symbols hidden across every scene of this thing is eyewatering to say the least!

The performances are astounding also! Roger Daltrey is NOT my cup of tea, but as 19th century rock god Liszt, he’s perfect, bringing a cheeky, but thoughtful energy to proceedings throughout, hes animate, vibrant and frankly; I dont WANT to imagine anyone else in the role. Paul Nicholas also delights as Wagner, camping it up RIGHT good and proper, he’s demented for most of the runtime in the BEST possible way. The rest of the cast are solid as a rock, the cameos from the likes of Starr and Rick Wakeman are more than welcome and only further enhance this…UTTERLY bizarre work.

Throw in a score by Rick Wakeman too, which partially runs on his own compositions and partially reimagines Liszt and Wagners works as prog rock electric visions…So good I went and nabbed the soundtrack on Vinyl shortly after catching this for the first time. Its rich, complex and a gorgeous auditory experience.

‘Lisztomania’ gets a lot of negative attention for its total disregard of ‘the rules of cinema’ and its audience. But I find its defiance of those rules, really part of its charm. The fact that Warner Bros are TERRIFIED of re-releasing this film (I own a bootleg Bluray) both confuses and astounds me.

This is rock and roll in every sense of the word, probably one of my favourite Ken Russell pictures, and a MUST SEE for ANY cult cinema enthusiast. its a wild time guarenteed. just…maybe keep Liszt and Wagners Wikipedia articles open while your watching!

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/lisztomania/

by tytdreviews

It’s Christmastime Again, Charlie Brown, 1992 – ★★½

Well…thats a thing that exists I guess…Given how festive and warm and comforting the first Peanuts Christmas Special was, I wasnt expecting a match in quality for it’s 90s follow up…But I also wasnt expecting it to underperform my LOWEST expectations for it either.

It could not feel more ‘vacant’ as a holiday special if it tried. With 22 minutes dedicated to random subplots with weak to poor humour dotted throughout and next to non of the charm, it feels like someone watched the last Peanuts christmas special and figured the thing people liked the most about it was ‘Variety’ and very little else.

The ‘main’ plot (if you can call it that, because it gets name dropped a couple of times across the special, but doesnt actually get picked up till 4 minutes off the end) revolves around Sally preparing for her christmas concert. A good chunk of this film doesnt even take place at christmas…it happens before Thanksgiving has even happened!?

The animations fine enough, its technically sound and ‘of standard’, but theres not a lot of range of emotions on the peanuts characters, Charlie Brown is AWOL for a good chunk of it…The best joke in the thing is when Marcie and Peppermint Patty go to see a performance of Handel’s ‘Messiah’ for a book report, but neither know what Handel’s first name was…So they guess with ‘Joe Handel.’ That was the one and only point I stifled a laugh.

Its a fairly souless affair. Not offensive, I didnt come away angry that this thing wasted my time…More confused about how on earth this thing made it past test audiences given how light and ‘nothing’ filled it really is.

Even Snoopy struggles for air time in this thing…Its just…such a waste…

OH! and they screw around with the ‘peanuts’ sound. It all sounds like its been composed using an old Windows Midi soundcard. everything sounds and feels wrong.

I caught this as an extra on one of the Peanuts ‘Holiday’ collection DVD sets…I probably wont watch it again. Stick with the original if you want heartwarming festive cheer. This is reheated leftovers from an unrefridgerated doggie bag.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/its-christmastime-again-charlie-brown/

by tytdreviews

Home Alone 3, 1997 – ★★★½

For the longest time, ‘Home Alone 3’ was my favourite ‘Home Alone’ movie…I realise that may raise the blood pressure of some readers, but I have no regrets about this decision. I was younger, less film literate and loved a good ‘Hit in the Butt/Crotch’ joke as much as the next person.

As with the first two films, it has to have been AT LEAST 15 years since I last saw this one, and…as I continue to get older, my enthsiasm for this entry *is* starting to cool a little. I dont think its *quite* as good as the first two films…But it definitely has a lot going in it’s favour!

Starting with the plot! Which actually breaks with tradition (with the first being a straight ‘burglars V kid’ home invasion pic, and the 2nd basically being a higher budgeted, more polished run through of the 1st again) Here? We’re introduce to ‘Alex’ a new kid and a bit of a tech whizz.

Alex is the youngest child of 3 in a family household that seemingly never stops. His mum and dad work full time and his siblings are all of school age and have their various ‘things’ going on. When Alex comes down with a case of Chicken Pox, his family find enough time to make him comfortable, but arnt able to stay with him through the day to ensure his recovery…So! they set him up a TV in his bedroom, and a contact list of who to call in case of an emergency…Only this time, he may need a better contact than the little old lady across the street!

As a group of hired agents are put on a job by the korean mafia to steal a US Airforce computer chip that could put the Koreans ahead in an arms race. They’ve hidden the chip in a remote control car, only…At the airport theres a mix up at baggage and Alex’s neighbour ends up taking the car home instead of her luggage. She gifts the car to Alex in exchange for an *attempt* at clearing out a driveway…the agents figure this out and start systematically working through the neighbourhood houses looking for the car…And Alex clocks on to this at the EXACT same time that the agents realise which house its in…Hilariaty and slapstick shenanigans unfold.

And honestly? Im a bit confused as to exactly what fans of ‘Home Alone’ really wanted from the franchise after ‘Lost in New York’ Leaving ‘Kevin’ at home once was bad, twice was awful. They couldnt have done it a 3rd time without it being an outright parody of itself (something ‘Lost in New York’ came dangerously close to at times) Equally; just doing ‘burglars’ again after the last 2 films both did burglars…and did them so well!..well; It’d be setting itself up for a direct comparison right out of the gate for sure!

So! they shook things up a bit, hired agents on a mission is a bit of a stretch on reality admittedly…But not a completely unreasonable one, I actually really appreciated that they took the story in a bit of a different direction for most of the runtime because I think it would have been flogging a dead horse to rerun it all again.

The script’s pretty tight, at an hour and 42 minutes long it’s maybe a *smidge* longer than I would have liked…But feels pretty nippy all the same, the tone here is now basically a ‘Family comedy’ which I DO feel is probably this films biggest issue. It’s written by John Hughes…and I can ABSOLUTELY see moments in this where, had Hughes directed it too, it would have had that schmaltzy heartwarming goodness that the first two had. But here, thats played down in favour of a stronger comedy element and a heavier emphasis on the period this film was made (the late 90s were ‘radical’…’dude.’)

In a way, im glad they picked a lane, because juggling the two, in the past, has kind of made it a bit harder to really clarify what the film is trying to be….But at the same time, I cant deny that the usual Hughes ‘heart’ just wasnt in this one…or at least wasnt as strongly imprinted as with his previous work.

The characters too are a little bit of a mixed bag, I actually prefer ‘Alex’ as a character over ‘Kevin’, in the first film I found ‘Kevin’ to be a bit one note, he sort of…swung between being a border obnoxious kid and being sad…in the second film he’s basically all overly polished charisma and very little else…’Alex’ by contrast feels like a kid, he feels like a complex character who gets a good range of emotions to work through across the films runtime as he tries to warn the grown ups about the incoming danger. Then takes matters into his own hands when they ignore him. ‘Alex’ feels like a kid in control of the narrative and I saw the appeal in placing the kid as the story maker both as a kid and even now. While this film may be missing the ‘Hughes’ heart, it does pull a lot of that energy back into the frame with ‘Alex’ as a character.

The other characters however…are all about on the same par as ‘Harry and Marv’ were in the originals…just less charismatic. Which sounds like a problem at first…But actually isnt terrible. they’re all a bit one note, most of them seem annoyed by Alex simply existing…But non of them are irritating and most of them (across the runtime) do get a bit of a character arc to work with which is nice.

Of course, one of the main reasons to watch a ‘Home Alone’ movie is the booby traps that litter the 3rd act. Its a bit of a come down after ‘Lost in New York’ (a film in which Kevin pretty much obliterates a 3-4 story New York town house) But quality wise? I’d actually put the traps ahead of ‘Home Alone’ in terms of quality. With the ‘Fake Swimming Pool’ and the ‘mega blocks roller skates’ being two of my favourites.

What is a bit dissapointing however is they do repeat a few jokes (the electrocution gags are basically the same from ‘Lost in New York’ and the scene where a guy gets hit in the crotch because theres a mouse there is basically Marv with the tarantula from the original) and there are a couple that DO fall a little flat for me personally…But I’d definitely say theres more hit than miss here for me.

The directions pretty nice, again I kind of wish Hughes had picked this one up, just to help it keep in line with the other two films. But Raja Gosnell does a fine enough job here, Stepping up from Editing ‘Home Alone 2’ to full on directing this one (this was their first directing credit, and they’d go on to direct ‘Big Mamas House’ and the two live action ‘Scooby Doo’ movies)

Its a solid creative base, it maybe lacks the flare that Hughes could have brought to the production, and its a little slower paced than I’d have liked personally. But, its clear, compitent, it has moments where it really shines. Direction of the cast too is, actually in my opinion, stronger than the first two home alone films. I think the cast are stronger actors (Burglars aside) and to me, it feels like a lot of clear communication was had on set as to exactly what was needed from them.

The cines fine enough too…it’s a studio pic, so at minimum everythings going to be shot relatively coherently, and edited fairly tightly. I absolutely feel they could have done more to give this film a bit more personality, especially compared to previous entries. But whats here is more than fine enough and it has quite a few iconic moments to boot!

The edits tight, with well crafted sequences that use a decent amout of Broll and do get to experiement here and there. I do feel one more pass through just to get it under an hour and 40 probably would have *just* pushed it a little bit higher quality wise for me…But thats a nitpick honestly.

Cast wise, while I wont comment on the child actors, I thought the agents were all decently charismatic, with a great physical presence that managed to raise at least a couple laughs on that alone, the rest of the cast are naturalistic, fluid with their line deliveries and blend into the comedy elements almost seamlessly, which was really a delight to see.

‘Home Alone 3’ absolutely isnt as iconic as the first 2 films, a drop in budget and Hugheses departure from the directing chair has left a noticeable change on the franchise. But just because something isnt ‘iconic’ doesnt mean it cant be ‘good’ or ‘enjoyable’ and I really quite enjoyed ‘Home Alone 3’ It has a charm and tone that appeal in different ways than the first 2 movies, it looks good, sounds good and plays out about as well as a film 3 entries into a series could play out. I never really got the hate for this one honestly. That being said, this is probably about as far into the ‘Home Alone’ films as i’d be willing to go, as having seen ‘Home Alone 4’ many MANY years ago. It was a viewing experience I wouldnt wanna repeat. Stick with the first 3 though, and you cant go far wrong!

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/home-alone-3/

by tytdreviews