Please don’t ask me what “Eraserhead” is about because I’m still trying to make sense of it after all these years. Even David Lynch, who passed away on January 15, 2025 after battling emphysema, refused to tell anyone what it means as he prefers to let audiences come to their own interpretations. I finally got to see this surrealist body horror cult classic for the very first time at New Beverly Cinema back in 2012, and the theater was packed with fans of Lynch’s films as well as others who were also witnessing his cinematic work for the first time. We all came out of “Eraserhead” baffled as to what it all meant, but we were still endlessly mesmerized by the visuals and sounds Lynch came up with, all of which were done on a very low budget of $100,000.
When the movie’s title appeared on the screen, the audience burst into applause which gave me an idea of just how many at the New Beverly had seen “Eraserhead” before, and I imagine that have sat through it multiple times. We were sucked right in as Henry Spencer’s head floated in front of us while some weird looking guy was pulling at a bunch of levers as if he were pulling strings on a marionette. Then we got a visual of a sperm-like creature floating on the edge of Henry’s mouth which is suddenly shot forward into our world. Whatever this creature is, it was clear it would play a big part as the film unfolded before us.
It was fascinating to take in the audience’s reactions to “Eraserhead” that evening, but the most vocal reaction came when Henry Spencer (plated by Jack Nance) and his girlfriend Mary X (Charlotte Stewart) bring home their hideously deformed newborn baby. No one could tell if it was male or female, and its grotesque appearance both repulsed and enthralled everyone.
This very strange looking baby has a long pencil-thin neck, its head looks more like a giant snout, and it is limbless. To many, this is the kind of baby no parent ever hopes to have, but we feel sympathy towards this child because it breaks our hearts to see any baby suffer the way this one does. That it’s whining seriously got on the nerves of its parents is a testament to the meticulous sound design Lynch put together along with sound editor Alan Splet because it irritated us as well. Then again, we couldn’t help but laugh along with the baby when it let out a cackle as if it were belittling Henry and his feeble attempts at attending to it in a meaningful manner.
With Lynch’s films, there are times where we can’t help but laugh because the dreamlike state he invites and propels us into is at times hard to take seriously. But with every moment we laugh, there is another which has us so deeply enthralled to where we are at a loss for words and you can hear a bag of popcorn or a soda drop from someone’s hands in the theater (if it were a cellphone ringing, they would have been kicked out and banned for life). “Eraserhead” is no exception as it has many moments with a kind of beauty impossible to find in any other motion picture, and this makes Lynch an exceptionally original filmmaker.
This is especially the case with Laurel Near who played the Lady in the Radiator because, even with her horrifically bloated cheeks, she has us at hello with her rendition of the song “In Heaven.” While she may not exactly look pretty by any conventional standards, her singing voice is very sweet and gives us one of the more heart-warming scenes you might not expect this film to have.
While we came out of “Eraserhead” utterly baffled as to how to describe or interpret it, we could not say we weren’t enthralled by what Lynch presented to us. This was his debut as a movie director, and it led him to getting a career in Hollywood as one of its most daring filmmakers. I am eager to revisit this film again in the future because, like “Lost Highway,” I would like to think I can figure out what it all means. Lynch was never quick to give us any easy answers as he felt life was far too complicated and complex to do so, but I appreciate him for always bringing up some very interesting questions. Even as human beings all over the world desperately want everything spelled out to them, Lynch reminded us how we need to think about things for ourselves.
I have been around some of the neighborhoods featured in “One of Them Days” as they are not too far from where I live. They all seem to have a nice family vibe going on and are filled with all kinds of blue-collar workers who, like everyone else I know, are living paycheck to paycheck. I keep thinking a lot of people will look at these neighborhoods and apartment buildings as being very “ghetto,” but that is far too easy an assumption to make. Either that, or I am doing everything I can to not sound too white while writing this movie review.
Seeing the way the apartment buildings and inner-city areas are portrayed in “One of Them Days” helps to make this film stand out a bit. The story is old as they come, and we have seen it being done in so many movies of all kinds, but the way certain environments are shown here makes it feel a lot fresher than I ever could have expected. It also helps that the film has a strong cast who portray characters you want to follow from start to finish.
We meet best friends Dreux (Keke Palmer) and Alyssa (SZA) who share an apartment in a building off of Obama Boulevard, the kind that needs a serious visit from the Los Angeles Housing Authority. The ceiling is falling apart, the air conditioning units don’t work, and everyone has one roommate too many because, as we often hear, the rent is too damn high. And into this “jungle,” as the characters like to call it, is a young white woman named Bethany (Maude Apatow) who is all smiles and comes with a dog who clearly needs a lot more training.
To top things off, Dreux gets a visit from her landlord, Uche (Rizi Timane) who informs her if he doesn’t get the rent by six o’clock, she and Alyssa will be drop-kicked out onto the street. Dreux says Alyssa has already given him the rent money, but it turns out Alyssa’s good for nothing, live in boyfriend Keshawn (Joshua David Neal) has run off with it and into the arms of another girlfriend of his, Berniece (Aziza Scott). This leads Dreux and Alyssa to go on a desperate mission to get the rent money before it is too late, and the clock starts clicking like it does on the average episode of “24.”
In a lot of ways, “One of Them Days” is a version of the book “Alexander and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Day” and so many other stories dealing with missions needing to be completed before the clock strikes midnight. Dreux and Alyssa’s adventures involve parking in the wrong spot at the wrong time in Los Angeles (seriously, those parking enforcement officials are like ninjas), donating blood for money, and attempting to get a loan at one of those quick credit offices who are just waiting to overcharge their customers on interest payments.
Like many cinematic comedies, the jokes are hit and miss as I have seen some of them done better. The donating blood scene goes a bit over the top, and I remember a better example being done with Al Bundy on “Married With Children,” but the credit office scene is a hoot as it shows an employee laughing her butt off at a low credit score, something I have not seen before. But what keeps the movie together are Keke Palmer and SZA. Even as the comedy gets a bit too broad, they both nail their character’s individual strengths and vulnerabilities perfectly as they show how Dreux and Alyssa clearly want better futures for themselves, but life too often gets in the way.
In addition to making the rent, Dreux also has an interview with a corporate company for a job which will allow her to ditch her waitressing job and move up in the world. As for Alyssa, she is one of the many struggling artists out here in Los Angeles whose self-confidence is so low to where they hook up with people who can never truly value who they are.
Palmer is wonderfully energetic here as Dreux, a person eager to rise above her meager place in life, and I especially enjoyed SZA who takes Alyssa from someone lacking in confidence in herself and her work to one who has more than earned their newfound confidence in life. Even as their characters go through the usual routines of loving and hating one another to where they never want to talk to each other again, and we know they will quickly realize how much they need one another long before the story ends, both these actresses kept me wanting to follow their plight throughout.
Palmer and SZA are also supported by a strong cast which includes Katt Williams as a man named Lucky, and this is even though this character is not having any luck at life in the present. You also have Vanessa Bell Calloway whose character of Mama Ruth doesn’t get much screen time, but who remains a very strong presence nonetheless. And there is no forgetting Patrick Cage who plays the interestingly named Maniac, and he is a human being who almost dares you to judge a book by its cover. While his outward appearance might have one thinking he is that kind of a person, the reactions others have to him, let alone to a certain object of hardware he has in his car, are quite telling of those around him. In the end, Cage makes Maniac into a resilient character who gas been through a lot and has evolved a lot in the process.
I also got to say that I love how strong the women are as presented here. I say this because this relates to all the women I have worked with in life, and they often prove to be much stronger than us men for many reasons. “One of Them Days” proved to be a reminder of this for me, and this is not just because many of the male characters are such babies here. Heck, Keshawn is such a man child that you just want to smack him silly. Some out there might say that the female characters are made to look strong to help satisfy certain demographics, but I prefer to believe they simply reflect a reality we should not be the least bit surprised by.
“One of Them Days” is not going to go down as a classic motion picture, but that’s okay because I enjoyed it for what it was. If you are looking for a nice diversion from your problems for an hour or two, I think this one will do the trick.
The following review was written by Ultimate Rabbit correspondent, Tony Farinella.
When it comes to 1990’s cinema, it’s difficult to find a film as popular or as well-received as “Se7en.” It became part of the pop-culture zeitgeist when it was released, and it still is a film which elicits a strong reaction from audiences today. Whenever people talk about it, they instantly quote Brad Pitt’s famous line of, “What’s in the box?” The film also served as inspiration for the “Saw” franchise and was ahead of its time in terms of the true crime genre. Now, the film is celebrating its 30th anniversary on 4K from Warner Brothers Home Entertainment. This is sure to be one of the most popular 4K releases of the year.
“Se7en” opens up by introducing the audience to Detective Lieutenant William Somerset (Morgan Freeman) who is one week away from his retirement before he is thrown into a case which captures his attention. It starts off with a man who is found dead after being forced to eat spaghetti over and over again until he perishes. Somerset teams up with a hot shot detective named David Mills, played by Brad Pitt. He recently moved with his wife Tracy (Gwyneth Paltrow) to the city, and he’s looking to make a name for himself. Somerset and Mills could not be more different in how they approach their jobs.
Mills has a short fuse and is ready to fly off the handle at anyone who gets in his way. He also doesn’t play by the rules. Somerset is even-keeled, a deep thinker, and someone who believes you have to look at these cases as more than just black and white, crazy and sane. Before long, more murders are occurring, and the serial killer is murdering people based on the seven deadly sins. For Mills, he simply thinks the killer is a crazy person and writes him off as someone who is going to get caught and isn’t thinking straight. Somerset, on the other hand, sees there is a clear motive and agenda by the killer.
“Se7en” was one of my favorite films growing up. I was 10 years old when it was released, and I saw it when I was 15. It was very much ahead of its time with its gritty, down and dirty filmmaking style. When I watched it in 2025, I liked the film a lot and I admire the craft and precision which went into making it, along with the incredible performance by Freeman. However, I do see some flaws in the film, such as Pitt’s performance. Of course, his “What’s in the box?” scene has become a legendary meme, but he’s way too over-the-top here. After a while, it becomes hard to spend too much time with his character.
I also wanted to learn more about Tracy, played by Gwyneth Paltrow. Paltrow is a terrific actress, and her scenes with Freeman, especially at the diner, give the film some much needed levity. Her character isn’t given enough to do though, besides stay at home and just be written as a one-note character. She and her character deserved better. Going back to Pitt for a moment, I understand what he was going for with his performance, but he plays it too big. In a serious movie like “Se7en,” it almost feels like his character doesn’t belong here. Freeman makes it look easy, and he’s able to portray all of his emotions on his face perfectly. I understand the film was showing the contrast between the two characters, but it doesn’t work as well as I remembered it.
When it comes to films like “Se7en” which rely on a twist, they don’t always hold up as well on multiple viewings because the element of surprise is gone. I still think it is a really good film though, and I enjoyed revisiting it on 4K. The atmosphere and the sense of dread is on full-display from David Fincher. The film also has a lot to say when it comes to its views on the world and the people in it. While Mills believes he can make a change and clean up the world, Somerset is more realistic on what he can do and what the world is capable of as a whole. It’s a film with some brainy ideas, but those ideas sometimes get lost in the middle of trying to solve the crime.
Overall, I still like “Se7en,” even though this might sound like a negative review. I’m just not as enthusiastic about it as I was 10 or 15 years ago. I see more of the film’s flaws than I did in the past. The second half, especially the big reveal, is still as powerful as it was upon its release. The film works best when it allows its actors room to show off their acting chops and really get into the meat and potatoes of their characters. I found the police work and the case itself not as interesting or multifaceted as I remembered it being in the past. “Se7en” is still a film worth revisiting and owning, despite some new flaws I’ve noticed along the way.
* * * out of * * * *
4K Info: “Se7en” is released on single-disc 4K Digibook or Steelbook from Warner Brothers Home Entertainment. It comes with a digital copy of the film as well. It has a running time of 127 minutes and is rated R for grisly afterviews of horrific and bizarre killings, and for strong language.
4K Video Info: “Se7en” is a dark and grisly film, and this specific visual aesthetic is perfect for the 4K format. I don’t think anyone is expecting the film to look crisp, clear and colorful in 4K. The 4K is not as washed out or bright as the Blu-ray, and this is a good thing. It has a more film-like look to it, which is what I was hoping for with this 4K release. 4K is supposed to bring out the best elements of what the director was looking to achieve with the picture, and “Se7en” is a solid 4K release.
4k Audio Info: “Se7en” comes with a DTS-HD Master Audio soundtrack for the film, which is consistent and steady throughout the course of the film. This is a pretty quiet film with moments of loud and intense dialogue, but it never feels like it’s too much. Subtitles are included in English, Spanish and French.
Special Features:
Commentaries –
The Stars: David Fincher, Brad Pitt, Morgan Freeman
The Story: Richard Dyer, Andrew Kevin Walker, Richard Francis-Bruce, Michael De Luca, David Fincher
The Picture: Darius Khondji, Arthur Max, Richard Francis-Bruce, Richard Dyer, David Fincher
The Sound: Ren Klyce, Howard Shore, Richard Dyer, David Fincher
Deleted Scenes
Alternate endings
Still Photographs (featurettes) –
Production Design (featurette)
Mastering for the Home Theater (featurette)
Exploration of the Opening Title Sequence: Early Storyboards (featurette)
Exploration of the Opening Title Sequence: Rough Version (featurette)
Exploration of the Opening Title Sequence: Final Edit (featurette)
Exploration of the Opening Title Sequence: Stereo Audio Commentary One – The Concept – Designer Kyle Cooper (featurette)
Exploration of the Opening Title Sequence: Stereo Audio Commentary Two – The Sound – Brant Biles & Robert Margouleff (featurette)
Theatrical EPK
Should You Buy It?
“Se7en” is a must-own for physical media enthusiasts out there, but there is one problem with this release: the packaging. If you are going to get the digibook, you should know the film is housed in a sleeve, which makes it very hard to take the disc out without touching the back of it. As many of you know, 4K’s are easier to scratch and damage than Blu-rays. While I appreciate the fact they tried something different with this packaging, they should have at least thought about the overall health of the disc. I would recommend you pick up the Steelbook release instead. I’ve noticed a lot of people are unhappy with the lack of updated special features, as these are the same special features that came with the Blu-ray. Special features on older films are not as prevalent in today’s releases as they were originally done during the height of DVDs and Blu-ray releases, and I think it’s important to remember that. It costs money to interview the actors, and it’s not always easy to track them down for new interviews regarding older films they have done. While it would have been a nice addition to the 4K release, I understand it isn’t cost effective. The film looks sharp and the soundtrack is impressive. For the film itself, as stated in my review, it didn’t hold up as well as I remembered it, but it’s still a really good flick. This is a day-one purchase despite the less than stellar packaging options.
**Disclaimer** I received a copy of this film from Warner Brothers to review for free. The opinions and statements in the review are mine and mine alone.
The following review was written by Ultimate Rabbit correspondent, Tony Farinella.
“Joker: Folie à Deux” is an ambitious film to say the least. It’s a musical, a courtroom drama, a character study, a love story, and a thriller all-in-one. Before I even put the film in my 4K player, I was well aware of how poorly it was received by critics and audiences alike. I was also well aware that some people considered it a misunderstood masterpiece. I tend to fall somewhere in the middle with “Joker: Folie à Deux,” as I thought there were individual moments in the film which were powerful, well-acted and intense. There were also moments where I was shaking my head and wondering what the hell was going on, and why they decided to go in this particular direction. Overall, it’s a mixed bag, but I would say there is more bad than good in here.
I was a big fan of 2019’s “Joker” which surprised me, as I’m not usually a fan of comic book films. I liked it because it didn’t feel like a comic book movie, and it was more of a character study. I know film critics and fans like to criticize and call it a “Taxi Driver” rip-off, but I thought it was an impressive film with a standout performance from Joaquin Phoenix. I was excited to watch the sequel, even with all the negative press it had received, because I thought the character was interesting, layered and complex. I wanted to see what they would do next with Arthur Fleck/Joker and what he’s been up to since we last visited him.
When “Joker: Folie à Deux” opens up, we see Arthur adjusting to life in Arkham State Hospital. He’s become a local celebrity because of the TV movie on his life, and the guards and fellow patients alike are fascinated by him. While in the heavily guarded hospital, he’s awaiting trial for the five murders he committed. Arthur’s lawyer, Maryanne Stewart, played by Catherine Keener, is not exactly sure what to make of him. Her case is going to center around the fact that she believes Arthur suffers from dissociative identity disorder, which means his Joker persona is responsible for the murders. I found this part of the film to be the most intriguing, especially when Arthur is interviewed by a reporter, played by Steve Coogan.
One day, Arthur meets Lee Quinzel (Lady Gaga), and it is love at first sight. They connect over their love of music, and she’s also a fan of Arthur. She tells Arthur she’s watched the TV movie about his life twenty times and reveals they have a lot in common. Arthur is smitten with Lee, and they hit it off right away. This gives him new life as he prepares for his upcoming trial. He trusts anything that comes out of Lee’s mouth and believes she knows what is best for him. His lawyer, on the other hand, is looking out for Arthur’s best interests and warns him to keep his guard up.
Let’s start with the positives—”Joker: Folie à Deux” has a lot of big ideas. I enjoyed the exploration of mental health. I thought the way they presented it was done in a way that was compelling and multifaceted. I also liked the way the film dealt with how society becomes obsessed with fame and how villains and killers are worshipped by the public. I thought the film had a terrific cast. The performances were nuanced and believable. All of this made this sequel even more frustrating because there are true moments of brilliance on screen from the actors and the people behind the scenes.
Whenever the film started to get interesting or capture my attention, it would seem to have a moment where it felt like the director and the screenwriter were messing with the audience. It was almost as if we entered another film. I didn’t understand why they didn’t have the conviction and nerve to just make this a straight-up sequel without all of the random musical scenes and gimmicks. I have nothing against musicals, but these scenes made me lose my focus because they didn’t add to the story and instead took away from what was happening on screen. Again, I felt like the director and the screenwriter were just messing with the audience and playing games.
Overall, I can’t recommend “Joker: Folie à Deux” because the film is all over-the-place and wildly inconsistent. It’s even more infuriating because, like I stated previously, there are some really, really powerful and well-acted scenes throughout. However, they are not in the film nearly enough to recommend it. Lady Gaga, for example, is great, but she doesn’t have enough screen time. I was hoping she would have just as Phoenix did, but she’s in and out of this film far too often. This is one of the most disappointing films of 2024. I didn’t hate it, but I sure was disappointed by it.
* ½ out of * * * *
4K Info: “Joker: Folie à Deux” is released on a single 4K disc from Warner Brothers Home Entertainment. It also comes with a digital copy of the film. The film has a running-time of 138 minutes and is rated R for some strong violence, language throughout, some sexuality, and brief full nudity.
4K Video Info: Much like 2019’s “Joker,” this is a top-notch visual experience. It is crystal clear from start-to-finish. The film also has deep blacks which really set the moody and atmospheric tone of what unfolds. From a visual standpoint, this film gets an A. The Dolby Vision transfer is perfect.
4K Audio Info: The Dolby Atmos track is also perfect. This is a theatrical movie in every sense of the word, and the audio is perfect. It’s perfect for your at-home theater set-up. Subtitles are included in English, Spanish and French.
Special Features:
Everything Must Go (Four Part Longform Documentary)
– Can I Have a Cigarette?
– Finding Lee
– A Hundred Films in One
– King of Nothing
The Character of Music
Live! With The Joker
Colors Of Madness
Crafted With Class
Should You Buy It?
This is going to be a hard pass from me unless you loved the film and thought it was brilliant. I know John Waters and Quentin Tarantino have praised it, and it has been a source of controversy in the film community. Overall, I didn’t think it was great, and I also didn’t think it was one of the worst films of the year either. I think it’s below average, but it’s watchable, despite its lengthy running time. Joaquin Phoenix gives another top-flight performance as Arthur Fleck, and it’s hard to keep your eyes off him on screen. As mentioned earlier, I wish they would have given Lady Gaga more to do, as I thought she was fantastic when she was on-screen. Overall, I’d say watch it on Max and see how you feel about it. If you do like it, you will be very happy with this 4K release.
**Disclaimer** I received a copy of this film from Warner Brothers to review for free. The opinions and statements in the review are mine and mine alone.
And so, it has finally arrived: the first trailer for the long-awaited sequel, “28 Years Later.” Like another sequel, “Beetlejuice Beetlejuice,” it was stuck in the deep, dark and despairing pit known as development hell. But like said sequel, this one finally emerged from its depressing depths and looks to promise us another round of infected zombies running way too fast and devouring everything in their path, and it looks to be a creative reinvigoration for Danny Boyle, the Oscar winning director of “Slumdog Millionaire.”
The story so far indicates that almost thirty years have passed since the Rage Virus was unleashed upon the world after a group of animal rights activists naively released an infected chimpanzee from its cage (the road to hell is always paved with good intentions). After what looks like a prologue in which a harried parent locks a group of children into a room where they watch the Teletubbies before blood starts flying everywhere, we are taken to an island where humans can find peace as they are surrounded by water which acts as a much-needed border between them and the infected. Like those characters from the “Dawn of the Dead” remake, they think this island will offer them a safe haven, but we all know this will not last very long.
This first “28 Years Later” trailer promises an especially visceral and bleak time at the movies as humanity still struggles in a post-Rage Virus world. But then again, remembering how “28 Weeks Later” ended with dozens of infected running towards the Eiffel Tower, we could not have expected things to get much better. And keep in mind, the tagline for this sequel states, “Time didn’t change anything.” With Boyle returning to this franchise as a director for the first time since “28 Days Later,” and Alex Garland returning as screenwriter, it will be interesting to see how life has evolved (or perhaps devolved) for the characters we see here and the virus.
Movie trailers for the longest time have been using special remixes of popular songs to get the audience’s adrenaline pumping as excitement is always promised for eager film buffs, and the hopes of a huge first weekend opening at the box office is always in the air. With “28 Years Later,” we instead get an old recording of Rudyard Kipling’s war poem “Boots” read by Taylor Holmes. Holmes’ increasing the intensity of Kipling’s words makes the images thrust at us here all the more horrifying, and it makes this one of the best and most memorable movie trailers I have seen in some time.
The big question I have, however, is this; where is Cillian Murphy? After winning the Best Actor Oscar for his role in “Oppenheimer,” it was said he would be reprising his role of Jim and also be serving as an executive producer on this sequel. While actors such as James Bond front-runner Aaron Taylor Johnson, Jodie Comer and an especially beat up Ralph Fiennes dominate this trailer to where no infected person could easily upstage them, I kept waiting to see Murphy somewhere in here. Rumor is, there is a corpse which rises up from the grass that looks a lot like him, and it makes me wonder what will become of Jim this time around.
“28 Years Later” is said to be the first of a trilogy, and the next film, “28 Years Later II: The Bone Temple” is currently being shot with “Candyman” director Nia DaCosta at the helm. Boyle’s sequel, which said to have been shot mostly on an iPhone 15 Pro Max, will be released on June 20, 2025.
Back when I saw it in 2009, Spike Jonze’s take on Maurice Sendak’s “Where the Wild Things Are” proved to be one of the few movies which I felt really dealt with real kids instead of the cliched ones which inhabit far too many motion pictures. Here, we get a young boy who has quite a vivid imagination which he retreats to when the real world becomes too scary to deal with, and who comes from a broken family where the father is not present. It was nice to see kids, one in particular, treated as intelligent and capable of learning more than they knew, and it combines them with things which are real, imaginary and, of course, wild.
The kid here is Max, and he is played by Max Records in one of the best performances I have seen from a child actor. Seeing him build an igloo out of a snow pile or making a spaceship in his bedroom with his stuffed animals as willing passengers brought back great memories from when I was a kid. But reality rears its ugly head when other kids thoughtlessly destroy his igloo, not thinking of what it meant to him. Then we see him in elementary school as his teacher explains how the sun will die one day. This is one of the funnier moments as the teacher just can’t stop talking about all the different ways our planet will die. Granted, this won’t happen for another billion years, but when you’re a kid, this can feel like it is just around the corner.
Everything comes to a head as Max becomes very resentful of his mother (the always terrific Catherine Keener) when she brings home a new boyfriend (played by Mark Ruffalo). The bond Max shares with his mother is very strong, but when he is no longer the center of her attention, he rebels and ends up biting her on the shoulder. Horrified at what he did, Max runs away from home and sails to a distant island where he does indeed come across the Wild Things of the title, and this is where the rumpus truly begins…
The Wild Things are a combination of puppetry and CGI effects, and it makes them all the more real as a result. The visual effects are used to give them facial expressions which vividly captures their happiness and sadness. As a result, it never ever felt like I was just watching a whole bunch of special effects. It really felt like I was watching creatures I could actually interact with.
Of all the monsters, the one with the most recognizable voice is the late great James Gandolfini who plays the most prominent Wild Thing, Carol. We first see Carol destroying some dwellings he had just built. For Max, breaking things has a wonderment to it, and Carol links on to this with the upmost enthusiasm. Gandolfini is wonderful, and at times truly heartbreaking as he takes Carol from utterly enthusiastic highs to downright angry lows. This is not him doing Tony Soprano as if he was all covered with fur. Also, Carol’s last scene is one which really choked me up, and Gandolfini sells it for all it is worth.
Among the other voices are Catherine O’Hara’s, and she plays Judith, the one monster who is very mistrusting of Max. Paul Dano plays the ever so sensitive Alexander, and he captures the painfully shy nature of this monster in a very truthful way. Forest Whitaker portrays Ira, and I barely recognized his voice here which is pretty impressive. Lauren Ambrose voices KW, and the moments she shares with Max form some of the movie’s best moments.
You know the saying of how we have met the monster, and the monster is us? Well, that is very much the case here. The Wild Things clearly represent the different parts of Max’s personality, and he soon comes to see himself in all of them. As a result, Max manages to see things a little more clearly in relation to his own family, and especially his mother. By becoming the monsters’ king, he realizes he has become much like his mother.
I really mean it when I say Records gives one of the best child actor performances I have ever seen. The whole movie really rests on his shoulders, and that is a lot to put an 11-year-old through. Jonze really lucked out getting him to play this part as the young actor makes his character’s transition from being just a kid to someone who is more mature and understanding very believable, and this really shows in the movie’s last half.
Jonze shot a good portion of the action with handheld cameras to give the proceedings more of an immediacy, and he thankfully does not overdo it. Some filmmakers fail to reign this camerawork in a lot of times to where it is hard not to feel sea sick. This was only his third movie as a director, following the creative triumphs of “Being John Malkovich” and “Adaptation,” and his directorial vision remains a very original one.
“Where The Wild Things Are” was originally supposed to be released in 2008, but Warner Brothers had considered reshooting the whole thing. It turned out Jonze’s vision was a lot darker than they expected it to be for something they thought would be an average family movie. The fact that Jonze’s take on this classic children’s book did make it to the silver screen and was not buried in a deep dark dungeon like “Batgirl” feels like a miracle. While it was not the box office hit the studio hoped it would be, it continues to have a long shelf life.
It also has a wonderful soundtrack done by Karen O and the Kids. It’s one of those soundtracks which has really great songs which are never easily forgotten, and it adds vividly to the strong emotions generated throughout.
Is this movie appropriate for kids? Well, it depends. If they are 6 years or younger, you may want to see it before they do. I was sitting near a boy and his mother, and the boy did get a little freaked out at times. Still, it is nowhere as traumatic as “Watership Down” or “The Neverending Story” was. If your kid can handle “Bambi,” they can handle this one as well.
One of my favorite scenes comes when Max and the monsters are jumping all over the forest, and Carol was creating big dust clouds when he landed. This all leads to a wonderfully heartwarming moment where the wild things pile on top of each other and fall asleep. Seeing Max befriend the somewhat alienated KW is especially great because their individual differences just evaporate at that point. These are two who can relate and sympathize with one another as they both come from worlds where they feel like outcasts.
If there is one weakness to be found here, it is that the plot does not always hold together. There are some moments which drag, and it takes a bit for the pace to recover. Then again, this movie is based upon a book that is only ten sentences long. The fact Jonze and co-writer Dave Eggers were able to craft a story for a feature length movie out of it is pretty amazing. But when you read or re-read the book, I think you will find that there is more to it than its simplicity of story might imply.
There was a bookstore next to the theater I saw the film at, and I dashed in there to read the book. I can’t even remember the last time I read this Caldecott award winner, and there is a lot of different ways you can look at it. You can see it as a story of how kids do not easily separate from their parents, and of how the further away from home they get, the more they realize the importance of a home. Or maybe you will see it as a story of the one person who becomes king and gets what he wants, but then finds it deeply unfulfilling and bereft of love and family which we largely thrive upon.
I think Jonze saw “Where the Wild Things Are” as a story which clearly take in a child’s point of view. Just about everything in this movie made me feel like I a child again, and of how we become shaped by the things which make us happy and sad. It is not meant to break down the imaginary worlds we create for ourselves, but of how they can make us understand the world around us and the people who figure most prominently in our lives better. Max comes to see why his mother treated him the way he did, and he grows up a lot quicker than most others his age do in the process.
For me, this film was something of a godsend when I first watched it. We see kids treated like real kids, and there is a wealth of genuine imagination and emotions throughout. While it doesn’t always hold together, it is a much more accomplished film than many others which get passed off as “family entertainment.” Too many movies then and now are dumbed down for audiences, and they often don’t treat children like the intelligent creatures they can be,
Indeed, no one could have brought this classic book to the silver screen the way Jonze did. And after all these years, it is definitely worth another look.
“Bad Teacher” so desperately wants to be a devious black comedy like “Bad Santa” but for teachers. Depressingly, it doesn’t even come close to reaching such devilishly hilarious heights. Despite some good laughs sprinkled throughout, this movie is a surprising bore with few surprises up its sleeve. You can see things coming long in advance, and the punch line deflates very quickly. Cameron Diaz, Jason Segel, Justin Timberlake and a talented cast do their best with a severely underwritten script, but the movie wears out its welcome within the first ten minutes.
Cameron Diaz stars as the teacher of the movie’s title, Elizabeth Halsey. She is dumped by her rich fiancé at the start as he figures out that she is only with him for his money, and this forces Elizabeth to go back to her teaching job which she claims is “the only thing I’m good at.” Her teaching style, however, consists of showing her students movies like “Stand and Deliver” and “Lean on Me” before moving on to the R-rated stuff. While they watch, she’s either nursing a hangover or working towards one with tiny little bottles of Jim Beam whiskey stashed in her desk. But while Jack Black played a somewhat similar character nursing a hangover in “School of Rock,” Diaz comes up short here.
The thing with movies like “Bad Santa” is that, as deplorable as the lead characters were in their actions and demeanor, there was something which made me want to keep watching what they went through, and in the hopes that they would reach some sort of evolution or catharsis. Whether they were likable or not, they were interesting. Billy Bob Thornton succeeded in “Bad Santa” in painting a complex portrait of a man who was as pitiful as he was cruel to others.
This brings us to a really big problem with “Bad Teacher;” Elizabeth Halsey is not an interesting character. She is essentially a shallow human being looking to manipulate those around her to get what she wants. Through schemes like school car washes and, as it is described, “extra tutoring,” Elizabeth works towards raising money to get breast implants as they seem more important than anything else. Aside from that, there’s not much to the character here. She comes across as one-dimensional without much to work with in terms of complexity or a back story, and this just sinks the film even further down into the muck.
Regardless of what has been said, I believe Diaz is a very good actress. She is endowed with great comedic talents which were put to good use in movies like “There’s Something About Mary,” and she has proven to be a strong dramatic actress in “Any Given Sunday” and “Being John Malkovich.” While she is game in making Elizabeth a despicable teacher, she never becomes like the ones everyone hated during school years, and the lack if any interesting and redeeming qualities makes this a waste of her talents. With a better screenplay, she would have been fantastic here.
“Bad Teacher” does pick up a little as it goes on, and it scores some great laughs when Elizabeth discovers that the teacher whose class gets the highest scores on the state exam gets a bonus of around $5,000. Seeing her switch her class from movie watching to reading the first 100 pages of “To Kill a Mockingbird” in one night for a quiz the next day is comedic gold. It gets even better when she uses unorthodox methods to make the students learn like standing them in a line and hurling balls at them when they give the wrong answers. Unfortunately, these are some of the highlights, and they all happen at the movie’s midpoint.
Other scenes like Elizabeth getting revenge on faculty members becomes anticlimactic as I could see long in advance how her vengeance would end. When she is running the school car wash and dresses scantily, it’s funny for a minute. I have seen so many movies over the years which have utilized this sight gag, sexy women at a car wash barely dressed, and it’s so old now. We have been there and done that, and nothing is done to make this particular gag look the least bit fresh.
One actor who fares better in this movie is Jason Segel who plays gym teacher, Russell Gettis. His humor is unforced, and he never strives too hard in making us laugh and succeeds in sneaking jokes when least expected. If only “Bad Teacher” had more of this humorous magic… I mean, I can dream, can’t I?
After all these years, I’m glad Justin Timberlake has singing career to fall back on as he has not had the greatest luck in movies despite his inspired turn in “The Social Network.” Watching him opposite Diaz is interesting in part because we all know they were once a couple, but the chemistry they had in life doesn’t quite translate to the silver screen. His character of substitute teacher Scott Delacorte is a rich guy who Elizabeth courts as she selfishly wants someone wealthy to pamper her for life. But it becomes far too obvious how this relationship will turn out, and while Timberlake does what he can with the material given to him, he can only do so much.
Other actors who have their moments include Phyllis Smith who steals scenes as the shy Lynn Davies. Her muted ways make for amusing moments as she argues about certain things bothering her at a very subdued level. Stealing even more scenes though is Lucy Punch who plays Elizabeth’s arch nemesis, Amy Squirrell. Punch fills her character with a certain joy brought on by an innocence which masks a deep resentment that eventually gets the best of her.
The director of “Bad Teacher” is Jake Kasdan who is of course the son of famed filmmaker Lawrence Kasdan, Jake’s a good director, and his movie “Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story” remains one of the most vastly underrated comedies of all time. But here, he is unable to find the balance between comedy and character. If the characters in this here movie were a little more down to earth and nowhere as contrived, he could have made this film truly work and give it a spark few comedies could have.
Many may watch “Bad Teacher” with high hopes that it will be a deliciously nasty comedy along the lines of “Observe and Report” or “World’s Greatest Dad,” let alone “Bad Santa.” The problem is this one is nastier than it is funny. Doing comedy is hard work, but making a black comedy is even more difficult. Hopefully, Jake will have more luck in the future with this kind of film, as he has done good work in the past. And I also say this because the recently released “Red One,” which he directed, is, like this one, far from ever being a critical darling.
Actor and filmmaker Edward Burns comes from a family of cops, and he always relishes the opportunity to play one in a movie. In “Alex Cross,” he got to portray Detective Tommy Kane who is partner and childhood friend to Dr. Cross (played here by Tyler Perry), and the boyfriend of Detective Monica Ashe (Rachel Nichols). While at the movie’s press conference which took place at the Four Seasons Hotel in Beverly Hills back in 2012, he talked about what drew him to the role.
Burns said he was aware of James Patterson’s Alex Cross books and that he had read a few of them. The character he plays, however, is not actually in any of Patterson’s books and was an original creation for this movie. He ended up getting a call from the movie’s director, Rob Cohen, who was determined to make this particular Cross film more of an action picture than a police procedural.
Edward Burns: Rob told me that he wanted to develop this new character opposite Alex that’s sort of a best friend. He said we’ll be working on this script up until we shoot and that he’d love to have some input from me. Anytime a filmmaker says they want you to collaborate with them that gets an actor excited, so I jumped in.
When it came to establishing the relationship between Tommy and Alex, Burns said there are two scenes in the movie that give viewers insight as to when these two met and how their relationship has evolved over the years.
Edward Burns: The thinking was we became friends as kids, and when we were little, I was a little more of the protector of him. When we got older, bigger and smarter, he then became the guy that looked after me. That’s what the tone of the relationship is between these characters in the film, and in our last scene together in the car we reminisce about how our roles have changed over time.
For Burns the one fun thing about playing cops in movies is that there’s always that period of when you have to do tactical police training.
Edward Burns:We had a great time working with the guys from the Detroit SWAT team and police department, and that’s always a lot of fun. It’s amazing because you always have to keep relearning that stuff (sweeping a room and proper weapons procedure).
Some actors hate being typecast as cops, but Edward Burns appears to be happy to play as many of them as he can. We look forward to him playing as many more cops in the future, and we applaud him on his continued dedication to the realm of independent film.
“Alex Cross” is now available to own and rent on physical media and digital.
WRITER’S NOTE: This interview took place back in 2012 and may contain outdated information.
Born and raised in Los Angeles, California, filmmaker David Twohy has left a strong impression on moviegoers everywhere. He got his start as a screenwriter on “Warlock,” “The Fugitive” and “Waterworld,” and he eventually proved himself to be an effective director with the underrated “The Arrival” which starred Charlie Sheen as an astronomer who discovers evidence of intelligent alien life, and the equally underrated submarine supernatural horror film “Below.”
But the movie Twohy is still best known for is “Pitch Black” which had him joining forces with “The Fast & The Furious” star Vin Diesel who played the dangerous criminal, Riddick. Its budget was only $23 million, but Twohy and Diesel created a movie that was intensely exciting and which made the most of its modest budget. So strong was the cult following for “Pitch Black” that the two later made “The Chronicles of Riddick” which had a budget of over $100 million. While the sequel was not a commercial success, fans were still craving another Riddick movie and kept pushing at Twohy and Diesel to bring this anti-hero back to the silver screen.
Fans got their wish when “Riddick,” the third movie in the “Pitch Black” franchise, opened in theaters on September 3, 2013. After dealing with a big budget and a Hollywood studio, Twohy and Diesel ended up raising the money independently to make this particular sequel a reality and maintain full creative control over it. It follows Riddick as he is left for dead on a desolate planet and ends up being sought out by bounty hunters who are prepared to bring his head back in a box. But soon they are stalked by vicious alien predators, and they are forced to join forces with Riddick in order to survive the long dark night.
I was lucky enough to attend the “Riddick” press conference at the Four Seasons Hotel in Los Angeles, California just before this sequel was released back in 2013. Twohy talked about the challenges of making this particular movie as well as what it was like working with Diesel who had just received his star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame.
Question: How did the final film compare to what you originally envisioned, and were there any big challenges you faced in terms of the look of the film?
David Twohy: Did the finished product end up like we had imagined it? Yeah, it does because really, as a responsible filmmaker, I have to imagine the whole movie. After I script the movie, I have to storyboard it out, I have to budget it, and I have to understand if I can afford all those visual effects or not. So more than anybody, it looks like the movie I had imagined, sometimes better, sometimes not quite as good depending on how we execute the visual effects. But yeah, I’m not surprised by it because it’s what I do and it’s what I set out to make. Sometimes Vin, who is not privy to everything that’s in my head and all the work that I’ve done with the concept artist (and he likes it that way), is surprised, but I don’t have the luxury of being surprised. I can’t be surprised by anything in the filmmaking process if I’m doing my job right. So, it’s very much the movie we set out to make, and we set out to make something that would fit into the budget that we had ($38 million). I think you all know that this was an independent movie this time out instead of a studio movie. So, knowing that we would have limited resources, Vin and I sat down in his kitchen and we came up with a story that would fit that budget. It couldn’t be as grand as the last movie, and it had to be more contained. It feels more like “Pitch Black” to some people. It probably is more like that at least in its tone and scope (we limited it to one world), but it’s very much the movie we set out to make, and there were not that many surprises for me along the way.
Question: It was interesting to see that Dahl (played by Katee Sackhoff) was not a love interest in this movie. Usually, the girl ends up being the love interest of someone, but instead she was this independent woman who can hold her own. Can you talk about casting Katee and why you chose to make her this independent woman who can take care of yourself?
David Twohy: I remember Ridley Scott telling me this story about the original “Alien;” Ripley was scripted to be a man, and he decided to make her a female thinking that these parts should be gender-neutral. I’ve always remembered that, and the women in my movies do stand up on their own two feet and are not pieces to anybody, and I like that. In terms of Katee, she was the first person to read for the role of about a hundred actresses, and that I remembered her throughout the whole process speaks highly of her. So finally, I said, “Who was that girl who came in the first day, she had blonde hair and she kind of killed it? Who is she?” They said, “Oh that’s Katee Sackhoff from ‘Battlestar Galactica.'” Well, I didn’t really follow “Battlestar Galactica,” so I didn’t even know her from that, so I’m not casting or for that. I just thought she was the best available actress so we cast her like that, and I’m so glad we did because she was a joy to have on the set. And clearly, like the character, she holds her own amongst the men and swears worse than any of them. Her off-screen lines are just as good.
Question: What made you bring this franchise back to R-rated territory after the PG-13 “Chronicles of Riddick,” and is there going to be another “Riddick” anime, game or ride?
David Twohy: (laughs) A Riddick ride? Well, actually we are doing some D-Box seats in theaters, the motion platform seats. I just experienced them for the first time and it’s the closest thing to a Riddick ride as you’ll get. It’s watching the movie, but it’s motion based. I don’t know what that in between thing will be, but we embrace them, and I would like to do more. We published the motion graphic novel as well which helped with the back story of how Riddick went from King of the Necromongers to a man alone on a planet. We embrace those things, and it would be great to get another game off the ground, but those things are very hard to launch. They are costly and they need a lot of lead time, so it’s hard to sync those games to the release of a movie. But we would like to do another one and we are talking about it. The R-rated movie was important to us because, as a filmmaker, I have the flexibility I need to do what I want. With PG-13 I feel like I’m pulling my punches either in the script or working with my actors on the set and coming up with stupid analogues for the word “fuck.” I’m getting tired of that. It gets to the point where people aren’t talking like people talk anymore. Just because I don’t want to pull my punches anymore, I felt this was important to me. It also plants a flag in the ground for our fans as well and lets them know we are true to the character and the nature of the series. The reason for PG-13 last time is obvious. It was because we were a big studio movie funded by a big studio, and to minimize their risk they wanted to branch out to what they think is the widest possible audience and they think that’s PG-13. There is actually a sound reason for that, but Vin and I feel more comfortable back in the R-rated universe.
Question: In “Riddick” you deal with the Necromongers briefly and just move on from there. Do you plan on going back to that story thread if this movie is successful enough to merit a sequel?
David Twohy: Yes. If it is successful and if we have a flexibility to go wherever want for the next movie, and Vin and I are talking about two more movies and probably just that (it would be good to do a closed ended franchise rather than a franchise that just keeps spitting them out just to spit them out), we would like to get back to the Necromongers. I am currently cutting the director’s cut DVD right now which includes more of an epilogue which has Riddick returning to the Necromonger empire and actually setting things right there in terms of the guy who abandoned him on this planet and left him for dead, and his search for Vaako (played by Karl Urban) who he thinks has the answer to where his home world lies. The next few weeks will be telling for us, and we want to pay off the fans who have stuck with us all this time. They have never stopped talking about this movie to us, and it was them who made us open our eyes and say it will be honestly irresponsible to leave it like it was and not make another movie.
Question: How did you and Vin get back to the savagery of the “Pitch Black” with this one and made it look like “Conan the Barbarian” as opposed to “Conan the Destroyer?”
David Twohy: That was important too, and it was also part of the character who thinks at the story’s outset that maybe he feels that he is gotten a little slow, a little soft, who has dulled his own edge as King of the Necromongers and wonders what happened to him. Did he commit the greatest crime of all? Did he get civilized? So, the exploration of him trying to get back to basics to find his edge again, to get back to the lean thing he was, it’s a good evolution for Riddick and it’s also sort of a parallel to what the franchise has undergone
Question: What do you like most about collaborating with Vin Diesel?
David Twohy: That he doesn’t shut up (laughs). He’s a guy who aims high and pushes me to aim high. He’s a guy who dreams and thinks that anything is possible, and me I’m more of a practical guy. I try to be a responsible filmmaker, living with the constraints of what I’m given to make a movie with, but Vin doesn’t think like that. Vin thinks like anything is possible and he thinks big. Sometimes that’s almost a folly but other times it can be inspiring and it can open up my ideas to other ways of doing things. What’s great about it is that he’s a guy who has all the confidence in the world and always has ever since I cast him as just a guy, an actor, in “Pitch Black.” But he had an unshakable confidence in himself even back then, and he just seems to see the future or will it into being (laughs) so that he can say “hey I was right all along!” He’s great like that and he’s inspiring like that. Just about the time you think that Vin Diesel is a guy with big muscles and a big head and your kind of willing to dismiss him as that, you realize that this is a guy with a big heart too. He dreams no small dreams, and that’s good and that rubs off on everybody else he works with.
Question: Can you talk about crafting Riddick’s voiceover in the movie?
David Twohy: Here’s how I craft it, I sit in front of my computer screen and I write it. Then I’ll rewrite it, I’ll tweak it, I’ll rewrite it and then I’ll show it to Vin and he’ll say I’m digging this or I’m digging that. When he gets in front of a microphone, he’ll say 90% of it, but every once in a while, he’ll just stick in a line. I later find out it’s because it’s too similar to something else he said in another movie. We just work it out and then I’ll spitball three alternatives and when something pops up that he likes we’ll just lay it down. We’ve built a good level of trust with each other lately. As opposed to the voiceover in “Blade Runner” where it was just filling in stuff that you needed to know about the world and it wasn’t character-based, the one in “Riddick” is character-based and it comes with Riddick’s voice and how he sees the world. It takes a while to get it right.
Question: Riddick’s relationship with the puppy is one of the best things about this movie…
David Twohy: By the way, every woman who has interviewed me today talked about the damn puppy (laughs). I cut a trailer of this movie that was all about Riddick and his relationship with the dogs and I gave it to Universal and said, “Hey maybe we want to broaden our audience a little bit and make sure we get the women in here, you know?” Then they go, “It’s a little soft for a Riddick movie Dave.” God, I wish the marketing people were listening to this! I’ve been trying to tell Universal, I’ve been trying…
Question: Since the puppy was created with CGI effects and has a lot of interactive scenes with the actors, what did they have to work with on the set?
David Twohy: All the actors have plenty of reference whether its concept art which they can paper their trailers with or I’ll show them on the morning of the shoot. The puppy has stand ins. For the puppy, I got a 12-pound silicone puppy that looks like the real puppy. It’s furred, it’s got glass eyes and everybody wants to hold it, and it just feels right. The puppy made it into the movie in a couple shots. Plus, Vin has big dogs too, so more often than not he’s telling me how to greet the dog and how to pet it (I’m a cat guy, Vin’s a dog guy). So, he says, “No you don’t pet it like a cat. If you want to say hello to your big dog, you slap it on the shoulder.” So that’s what we do in the movie.
Question: What were the differences, both positive and negative, that you found making this movie independently versus working on a studio movie?
David Twohy: Mostly positive. We shot it in 48 days which was pretty streamline. During postproduction I showed it to an audience of 50 or 60 people and didn’t score it, didn’t test it. I just wanted to know what confused them so I could go back and clear up the confusions. I showed one or two cuts to Vin and then I locked the picture. That is as atypical as it gets in the professional filmmaking world because a lot those movies you saw this summer were focus grouped, tested, scored, recut, reshot, recut, tested, scored, and after a while there is a factory-made feel to those movies. So hopefully something this simple, streamline and filmmaking pure results in something that’s at least different and maybe better just in the handcrafted sense of it.
Question: So, would you say you had more fun with less money in some ways?
David Twohy: Yeah, we did, and I’m sure most independent filmmakers will tell you that. The downside is that we staggered to the starting line. We were up, we were down, we were up, and we were down. It all comes down to, is the paperwork closed? Is the bond closed? You have to close the bond to get the bank loan. It’s a lot of stuff I don’t know much about, and I wish it didn’t affect my life but it does. We started and we were shut down, kicked out of our studios, the doors locked. We had to come back three months later and pay our bills and start over. So those are the vicissitudes of independent filmmaking.
“Riddick” is now available to own and rent on DVD, Blu-ray, 4K UHD and Digital.
As this interview was conducted in the past, it may contain outdated information.
The following review was written by Ultimate Rabbit correspondent, Tony Farinella.
When it comes to comedy, it’s all a matter of opinion. Comedy, even more than film criticism, is subjective. For example, I’m not an Adam Sandler fan and I find his films terribly unfunny, but there is a reason why his films keep getting released by studios. There is really no right or wrong when it comes to comedy. With “Blazing Saddles,” I heard all of the praise surrounding it and how some critics considered it one of the funniest films of all time. While watching the film for the first time, I understood what they were going for and what they were looking to achieve. It wasn’t as though the film went over my head or I didn’t understand the style of comedy they were putting on screen. I just never laughed.
My first issue with “Blazing Saddles” was its lack of plot. It seems this is mostly a movie filled with random gags and one-liners that are intended to make the audience laugh. They throw everything but the kitchen sink at us. It must be said the film is filled with the N-word along with other racial and homophobic slurs. I understand this film was made in 1974, which was fifty years ago, but it’s still uncomfortable to watch. The film is not funny and the jokes don’t land. There is a way to be offensive and also be funny, but this movie did not accomplish that goal. With comedy, you can go almost anywhere if you know what you’re doing. We have seen films that pushed the comedic envelope in the past, but they have been done in a smart and clever way. This is just flat-out lazy.
The plot involves a railroad being built through the town of Rock Ridge, a railroad that will make a corrupt politician a lot of money if he is able to force the residents out of their town. One way he is hoping to do this is by having a black sheriff named Bart (Cleavon Little) come in and make some of the local residents uncomfortable. The sheriff is called Black Bart. Subtlety is not this film’s strong suit. Bart’s deputy is played by Gene Wilder. Even though they are hoping to get the locals out of Rock Ridge, they end up staying and fighting for their town. Bart must also deal with Lili Von Shtüpp, played by Madeline Kahn, who is looking to find a way to sink her teeth into him.
“Blazing Saddles” features performances from Mel Brooks, Alex Karras and Richard Collier, to name a few. However, no one can save this movie from its awful screenplay and bad jokes. It is unwatchable from start-to-finish. It took every ounce of strength in my body to not only watch this movie, but to finish watching it. I absolutely hated it in a way I haven’t hated a movie in a very long time. I understand they were trying to make a film that would be a satire on Westerns and how certain demographics view African Americans. It shows how they are exploiting African Americans because the money men are only focused on the bottom line. I know what the message was and what they were trying to do in this film. I just didn’t find it funny.
In the end, “Blazing Saddles” is considered a comedy classic and one of the funniest films of all-time. I wouldn’t be doing this film any justice if I didn’t acknowledge its reputation and its three Oscar nominations. It has clearly reasoned with a lot of people. With this being its 50th anniversary, I know a lot of people are very excited about this 4K release. One of the worst things you can do as a critic is to say a movie should not be watched by anyone, and if anyone likes this movie, they are a moron. I would never dream of doing that. I acknowledge the reputation of “Blazing Saddles,” but I simply shrug my shoulders and say, “This was not, at all, my kind of comedy.” As stated previously, comedy is subjective. If you love the film, you will love the 4K.
ZERO out of * * * *
4K Info: “Blazing Saddles” is released on a single 4K disc from Warner Brothers Home Entertainment. It also comes with a digital copy of the film. It has a running time of 93 minutes and is rated R. You can purchase either the 4K slipcover or the 4K steelbook.
4K Video: The 4K HDR transfer from Warner Brothers is fantastic and looks terrific. Westerns, when done right, can look great on 4K. This is a visual feast for the eyes, and I imagine fans of the film will be quite pleased with this 4K transfer.
4K Audio: The Dolby Atmos track is also right on cue, as it’s a strong audio mix throughout the film that hits all the right notes.
Special Features:
Inappropriate Inspiration: The Blazing Saddles Effect
Scene-Specific Commentary by Mel Brooks
Blaze of Glory: Mel Brooks’ Wild, Wild West
Back in the Saddle
Additional Scenes
Should You Buy It?
I imagine some readers might call me too sensitive or say the film went over my head. I’m a huge fan of standup comedy, and I believe just about anything in the world is fodder for comedy when it’s done right. I understood exactly what Mel Brooks was going for in this movie, and I know that one of its writers was Richard Pryor. It is my job to give my honest assessment of this film, and I thought it was painfully unfunny and wanted to turn it off after twenty minutes. Because I was reviewing it, I felt obligated to watch the entire film. If this style of comedy is not for you, you won’t find a whole lot to laugh about in “Blazing Saddles.” If you enjoy the film and it fits into your comedic sensibilities, you will be very happy with it. This is another top-notch 4K release from Warner Brothers. They are doing a great job with releasing 4K’s from their massive library. Overall, if you loved this film, buy it. If you haven’t seen it before, I’d recommend watching it and seeing how you respond to it.
**Disclaimer** I received a copy of this film from Warner Brothers to review for free. The opinions and statements in the review are mine and mine alone.
The Ultimate Rabbit 