American Gigolo (1980, Paul Schrader)

"American Gigolo" really is slick and stylish. As slick and stylish as any film could be, so you really wonder whether this is Schrader's film or Jerry Bruckheimer's? If you look solely at the screenplay, it almost fits into the typical Schrader exploration of any given 'seedy underworld'. You could even argue that Julian and Michelle are in a way similar to Travis and Betty. Looking at the final product, however, I see a slick Hollywood mystery-thriller that's actually far more interesting for its romantic sub-plot than for any of the suspense parts.

Don't get me wrong, in places "American Gigolo" is a quality character study, and the romance is as well-written as you could ever expect from a major, mainstream Hollywood production, but the suspense thriller portion is just so banal, expected, and predictable that it really takes away from an otherwise very good film. Perhaps most worthy of praise here is Richard Gere who gives one of his best performances here, and I certainly cannot even begin to imagine John Travolta in the lead role.

It sounds like I'm criticizing how stylish this film is, I'm really not. It's pulled off pretty darn well in comparison to how many films of this sort have ended up, and you have to admit Gere's wardrobe is impressive. The film is well-shot and well-acted and for the most part quite well-written (although this is far, far from Paul Schrader's best work as a screenwriter). My comments on the film's slickness are really just a natural reaction to this film coming right after "Hardcore". Indeed, it seems like this film is a signpost for the early 80's (the dud of a score proves it) where in Hollywood even homicide cases with a Gigolo as the main suspect are glamorous rather than gritty.

A lot of people hate this film, but it has also gained a large cult following and a respectable following from film critics and aficionados, even landing a spot on the 'They Shoot Pictures, Don't They?' top 1000 list, and I can't really understand why anyone would have such extreme feelings about a film that is just watchable and entertaining. I don't think Schrader did his best work here, but it's not his worst either and the film as a whole is so unimposing and forgettable that I find it hard to believe it has so many fans and so many detractors.

Risky Business (1983, Paul Brickman)

"Risky Business" may ultimately be a well-liked film but it is now perceived by many as a dated relic, remembered more for Tom Cruise dancing to "Old Time Rock and Roll" than for its sharp satire, excellent dialogue, and stylish visual sensibility and use of music. Thankfully it remains a widely-praised film among critics (there is not one negative review on Rotten Tomatoes) who seem to appreciate it more than modern audiences, specifically younger modern audiences. Most insulting of all the dismissals is the suggestion that this is little more than a male fantasy flick.

Paul Brickman (also responsible for writing Jonathan Demme's greatest film, "Handle with Care") achieved something truly great here- he took the much-maligned, generally moronic high school sex comedy and turned it into something much more, a surprisingly effective romance with some really dark, contemplative moments, as well as a healthy dose of irony and symbolism which elevates the script to a whole new level. Moreover, this is more of a movie about 80's materialism and suburbia (and the satire here is wonderfully understated and played just right, just obvious enough for the less intelligent or less focused among us to notice but not heavy-handed at all) than about teenagers having sex. Even the large part of the film that deals with call girls, pimps, and the teen male fantasy is loaded with irony and satire. Only in its most superficial elements is "Risky Business" a teen sex comedy.

Of course one could say that Brickman is having it both ways- "Risky Business" was a massive hit within the exact same capitalist system he's satirizing here, but that doesn't harm the finished result of the film itself, which is still as sharp and bitter as it always has been. I know nothing about Brickman but I assume that he's either lazy, disillusioned, or just as rich as he wants to be because his lack of a lengthy career as a director is surprising; "Risky Business" boasts fine cinematography but also a dark, dreamlike style full of what Dave Kehr of the Chicago Reader describes as 'sinuous camera movements and surrealistic insinuations'. Brickman's handling of tone is also superb- the movie is never too dark, never too sunny, always maintaining a tone of 'haunting, lyrical satire' to quote Dave Kehr yet again (because his capsule review says all there is to be said about the film in a short paragraph, go search for it). Also contributing to the atmosphere is the amazing Tangerine Dream score and the effective use of popular songs.

I don't want to sell the film short on its superficial merits either; it you want to laugh this is a very, very funny film, and it works fine on the basic level of a comedy (though it's not anywhere near as raunchy as some fans of the genre would probably want it to be). Tom Cruise makes for an excellent lead and the supporting characters and actors are all memorable as well (who doesn't love Guido the Killer Pimp?). "Risky Business" is perhaps the only truly great film that can be called a 'teen sex comedy', and remains a completely worthwhile film so many years after its release.

The War Game (1965, Peter Watkins)

For some reason nuclear war has come to be viewed as a dated threat, a relic of the cold war paranoia. Let's take a look at some of the countries currently possessing nuclear weapons: Russia, the United States, Israel, Pakistan, India... Not exactly some of the most historically peaceful states. I still view nuclear war as a possibility; it is not likely, but it is still possible and still worth being afraid of. The thought of a few states having leverage over the rest of the world as a result of possessing nuclear weaponry is a frightening reality.

Legendary British TV and film director Peter Watkins' hypothetical 'documentary' on the results of a nuclear attack on Britain in the 1960's won the Academy Award for Best Documentary, even though the Academy knew very well that it was fictional. Still, I would argue that it deserved the award, not only for its unquestionable quality, but as it is frighteningly, terrifyingly educational on the known, scientifically accurate facts it presents on a nuclear attack's effects on the human body and on any given city- even if the attack took place at a distance.

Watkins' film is brilliant. It is all the more effective now as the world slowly forgets Hiroshima and Nagasaki, slowly forgets the scale of the horror and destruction which can result from the use of such weapons. The film is an expertly constructed, brutally effective drama, filmed as a documentary and, aside from the events 'documented' being hypothetical, is completely accurate on all of its details, with information taken directly from experts and from nuclear test sites. As much as it is not a real 'documentary', it is one of the most frighteningly realistic ones ever made. The film is so horrifying, so disgusting, so disturbing, that it was not shown by the BBC, who originally commissioned it, until the 1980's, following the success of the similar but fully dramatized "Threads", a film that is possibly even more effective in its portrayal of the horror of nuclear war.

"The War Game" is an undisputed classic and completely deserving of its reputation. It's 46 minutes of pure, undiluted horror, and is one of the best 'horror' films ever made. While the dumb, self-satisfied gorehounds are looking for obscure Chinese films which focus on faked or real torture, while they are praising the stupid, braindead "Cannibal Holocaust", this terrifying pseudo-documentary on a very real and very scary subject is left relatively neglected. One of very, very few films which are actually 'scary'.

Gone Baby Gone (2007, Ben Affleck)

Adapted from the (very good) novel by Dennis Lehane, "Gone Baby Gone" is a powerhouse of a directorial debut from Ben Affleck, and is an unexpectedly excellent, powerful crime drama with, thankfully, a sense of realism and authenticity required not only for the film to be good but for the subject matter to feel deserving of dramatization as opposed to ending up as mere sensationalism.

Although Dennis Lehane is quite a talented author I find much of his work suffers from long passages of prose which ultimately prove to be purely masturbatory and do nothing to enhance the novel. If you're going to do that sort of thing you better be darn good at it but a lot of his work ends up coming off as sub-Elmore Leonard. On the other hand he can boast a brilliant sense of character, setting, pace, and the ability to write stunningly realistic and involving dialogue. One doesn't need to look past his episodes for television masterwork "The Wire" to see this. All that's needed to adapt one of his novels well for the screen is a talented, intelligent screenwriter and as much as "Mystic River" was praised to the high heavens, and as much as I love Clint Eastwood's work as director, "Mystic River" was simply a flat, bland screenplay filled with flat, bland characters which was adapted from a novel with nothing but involving, interesting characters. Do Ben Affleck and Aaron Stockard succeed in not only staying true to the novel in style and sensibility, but bringing the characters, the dialogue, the sense of authenticity to the screen?

Yes, they do. This screenplay is a triumph. It's about as good as it possibly could have been, and considering the subject matter and all that could have gone wrong, how much of it could have felt sensationalist, how the twists and turns in the tale could have felt like a cheap soap opera rather than proper drama, it's just an incredibly intelligent and tasteful script. Similarly Ben Affleck's debut effort as director (er... not counting a certain short from the early 90's...) is quite excellent, showing not only the quality handling of actors which you might expect from an actor-turned-director, but a wonderful ability to use shots to their full effect, a real sense of position and narrative place, a real sort of naturalistic style. There's one wide, far-away shot late in the film, coming after an especially claustrophobic scene, which is just beautifully-shot.

The Kinzie/Gennaro novels are Lehane's attempt at hardboiled genre fiction. They usually contain more humor, more self-conscious style, and more general light-heartedness than "Gone Baby Gone" did. Lehane successfully created a hardboiled crime novel which dealt with very touchy subject matter (an investigation into the potential abduction/molestation of a child) but never felt like a genre piece unworthy of its subject matter. It never felt sensationalist, and being Ben Affleck's favorite novel it's not all that surprising that he manages to bring the same sort of sensibility to the film version of the story- it's both a tremendously effective genre piece and a powerful piece of drama. This is genuinely good, exceptionally well-acted stuff, featuring one of two excellent Casey Affleck performances from 2007.

Quarantine (2008, John Erick Dowdle)

"Quarantine" is a remake of the Spanish film "Rec", which has gained a large cult following and even plenty of critical appreciation. I unfortunately was busy during "Rec"'s only screening in my city so I went into "Quarantine" without being able to compare it to the original film. I imagine the original film is fairly similar, given that the film is shot from the perspective of a news crew, but the acting and writing may very well be quite different, and perhaps better.

I suppose it would be incorrect to call "Quarantine" a zombie movie, as the 'zombies' are still technically alive, but considering what the 'zombies' do in the movie they are still basically zombies. They bite, they groan, and do other zombie-like things. The movie opens with a news crew shooting a special on the local fire department. Late that night the department gets a call, they respond, the news crew and the firemen enter the building where there is some rabies-like disease spreading and end up trapped in there, 'quarantined' if you will. The first few scenes at the fire department have already been compared to the similarly uneventful opening scenes in "Cloverfield", but Drew Goddard's script for that film was far, far superior to this one, which is packed with stilted, unrealistic dialogue. Of course, people complained about the characters in "Cloverfield" being annoying, because they could have been real people, they talked like real people, and were annoying like most real people are, so I imagine those people will be pleased that we get CHARACTERS here. Yep, CHARACTERS defined by the character outlines. Simply not very good writing.

All that said, the first stages of the film are actually quite engaging and suspenseful, and the development of the events at the quarantined building is very intriguing, and the first few kills are pretty surprising and fun. Of course, the camera does shake quite often in "Quarantine", but other than the last half hour which sees the movie degenerate from suspenseful horror thriller to what a faithful "House of the Dead" movie might have looked like (it literally largely consists of zombies randomly appearing in front of the camera, and at one point I instinctively pressed on my coke bottle; I must have been subconsciously reminded of the experience of playing that game at arcades), with all the motion you can expect from that sort of perspective, the camera is relatively un-shaky compared to "Blair Witch" or "Cloverfield". The most relevant comparison is to "Diary of the Dead" (both zombie movies shot this way), and there's really no question that "Quarantine" is superior in almost every way imaginable to Romero's latest (disappointing) effort.

"Quarantine" gets off to a reasonable start, picks up some real momentum, then turns into a live action video game, and as everyone knows it's no fun watching others playing a video game, and the lead actress' histrionics get quite aggravating. The movie on the whole is short enough to be harmless and entertaining, but given the quality of the concept and the middle section of the film, I'm disappointed that the director and writers missed the chance to make this a genuinely chilling and claustrophobic film, and it really ends up being more an action film than a horror film.

Oh, and there's an absolutely shameful ripoff of the greatest 'jump' moment of all time from Robert Wise's 1963 film "The Haunting".