Crime School (1938)

Judge Clinton: "If I don't find out who the guilty boy is, you're all going to suffer."

By Lewis Seiler
With The "Dead End" Kids and Humphrey Bogart

Here's one more movie with Humphrey Bogart and the "Dead End" Kids, this seemed to cast them in a much similar role to Dead End (1937) and it had Bogie so I was interested immediately.

The gang of kids is once again disturbing the peace of a poor neighborhood but things get worse when one of them accidentally kills the local pawnbroker. Unwilling to reveal the true identity of the killer to the judge, the kids stick together and are all sent to reform school. The arrival at the reform school is quite a shock for them and Frankie, the leader of the gang, learns the hard way that this ain't gonna be so easy anymore. The ruthless warden teaching him lessons the hard way--but a new special officer in charge of the schools will start investigating in their case and will do his best to change the ways of a school that is acting more like a prison.

The "Dead End" Kids are not exactly playing different characters as they seem to carry their personality over from movie to movie while their surroundings and story changes. It actually works fairly well as we seem to follow their gang and get to know them personally. Their ways of talking and thick accent also gets better when we get used to them over the course of a movie or more movies.

The story is a classic prison tale of corruption and abuse of power. The real philosophical issue is more social and consists of whether the behavior of the kids is inherently wrong or whether their surroundings force them to act this way. The film offers quite an optimistic point of view and appears like such a feel good movie in the end. It doesn't seem to be the most realistic in its treatment of reform schools or the power one person has against a whole institution.

Humphrey Bogart doesn't disappoint in a role where he seems to drift away from the usual early gangster persona. The movie editing, scene cuts and sound is quite poor but I reckon this is due to the poor recognition of the movie and the loss of the original material or original quality. We don't learn much from the movie and there is no big moral to be learnt but it's quite entertaining and it does bring up some interesting issues. The duo Dead End Kids and Bogart does it for me.

I liked: A stand against physical disciplinary actions. Feel good movie. Lot of charisma.

I disliked: Quite predictable. The villains lack quite a bit of characters.

70/100
I enjoyed every minute of it even though it doesn't stand out as much as other prison movies or other movies with the Dead End Kids.

Osama (2003)

Mother: "I wish I had a son instead of a daughter. He would help me with work. I wish God hadn't created women."

By Siddiq Barmak
With Marina Golbahari

After I watched a few Afghani films, I decided to see a list of them. I saw that Osama was the first film made after the fall of the Taliban regime which had banned movies. The topic seemed quite up my alley.

An unnamed young girl is being pushed in every directions alongside her mother when the Taliban interrupt a women protest. The women are asking for the right to work. The girl's mother is a widow and a doctor but has no way of supporting her family if she cannot work at the hospital. In collaboration with the grandmother, they decide to disguise their young girl as a boy, cutting her hair and have him escort the mother, since a woman can't go out without a male. A friend of the late father even accepts to hire the girl turned boy in his shop, but things become perilous when the Taliban recruit all the young boys for indoctrination and military training.

Osama is a grim film and it depicts real life horror without any blood. We are just as lost as the girl in the streets and her fear of being caught is terrifying. She is alone and it's impossible for her to count on anybody. The movie is really good in most aspects: it's beautiful, the story draws the viewer in and there's as much suspense as in a thriller.

The colors are only seen on burqa, the rest being shared between shades of grey and brown. The young amateur actress is doing a really good job and her high pitched voice is really nerve wracking when we know she has to pass as a boy, facing a great deal of consequences if not. One has to wonder about the involvement of the mother and grandmother who do not seem to grasp the dangers of the situation they put their own daughter/granddaughter in. As much as they face troubles by being unable to work, what allows them to use their girl in such a way?

The movie makes no mention of any moral dilemmas they might have concerning this, even going as far as putting the blame on the girl when she becomes suspected. This isolates the girl even further and the downward spiral is all but ready to begin with.

As good as the movie and story are depicted, there is something that is amiss. There is not a single glimpse of hope, all the smiles are powerless. I usually enjoy sad and depressing movies but this is on quite a particular level. The only comfort there is to be found is the fact that the Taliban regime had fallen once the film came out and the only hope is to believe that it got better. This movie will not teach you anything of the sort, in fact, the only lesson to learn from this movie is that if you have to get born in Afghanistan you have to be a boy.

I liked : Good story. Powerful acting. Unforgettable.

I disliked: Abandon all hope. No teaching, nothing to learn. What is there beyond all this sadness?

67/100
A powerful film in a forsaken place. Dark and grim, the loss of human rights.

The Incredible Melting Man (1977)

Sheriff Neil Blake: "You better tell me what's going on around here before there's nobody left in this town."

By William Sachs
With Alex Rebar, Burr DeBenning and Myron Healey

The title of the movie felt so silly I wanted to see it. I have to say I was quite intrigued by the poster and also to witness how they pulled off the make up and special effects of a melting man.

In a near future, three astronauts are on a mission to Saturn. However, when they are about to see the sun through the rings of Saturn there is a malfunction and two members of the crew die instantly while the other is recovered but has suffered heavy radiation. When he wakes up in the hospital he is covered with bandages but he realizes his skin is horribly affected by the radiations and he appears to be constantly melting. His first reaction is rage but then instead of seeking help, he attacks the nurse and runs out in the wilderness...

Overall, the movie is pretty silly as the title might suggest. The story is quite simple and straightforward, the acting is quite poor and there are tons of inconsistencies. The movie has a few good scenes and the make up for the melting man is really well done, in a very gooey, slimy, gross way.

It is interesting how this substance of slime for what we assume to be bodily fluids, blood or skin is gross in itself. We found ourselves disgusted simply because of that substance that stains everything the melting man touch, whether it's on the ground or on a window. It's not really rational, but it works on a most human level.

This was well done, however the rest of the melting man wasn't up to par and sometimes he'd leave slime all around him and sometimes he wouldn't. His forearm gets cut off and he then walks with an arm from the shoulder down, while we can clearly see the actor's arm under a shirt.

The dialogues are quite weak, but there are a few scenes that are funny, especially the ones with the elderly couple, they were so hilarious. The movie clearly had a cheap budget and it shows, fortunately the make up didn't cost much but it shows in everything else and while a lot of movies manage to really captivate you despite being low budget, this one uses cheap tricks like slow motion scenes to make up for it and it doesn't work. The story can't save the film.

I liked: The slime gore horror. The make up.

I disliked: Poor dialogues. Annoying music. Lots of goofs and inconsistencies. Weird scenes transitions.

30/100
It's real value resides in the cheap and bad which for some allows a lot of movies to become golden. I know I've had that feeling with some other movies but it didn't happen here for me.

Society (1989)

Bill Whitney: "I don't think about them, they don't think about me. We're just one big happy family... except for incest and a little psychosis."

By Brian Yuzna
With Billy Warlock, Devin DeVasquez and Evan Richards

When I came across Society and saw the cover I was quite intrigued as it is really a disturbing cover. I wasn't sure what to think as the synopsis didn't seem to involve much horror but then I clicked on the director and realized he made Bride of Re-Animator which is cult classic just for its quotes, so I decided to see it.

Bill Whitney is a popular kid living with his parents and his sister in a rich house in Beverly Hills. Bill doesn't really feel at home though and has paranoid ideas and consults a therapist for it. Bill thinks there is something really wrong with his family and that they might not be what they seem which also makes him think he was possibly adopted. His doubts amplify when a friend who has information on his family gets killed in an accident. Despite everything Bill witnesses, they always seem to evaporate before he can produce them to anybody, therefore it's unclear whether it's all in his head or if there is a consensus that cover their step.

Society is quite unique in its genre. It seems to start as a typical 80's movie about a teenager trying to fit in and facing issues about his parents expectations but the events take this turn where we almost feel like watching a thriller where the hero has to uncover the truth about some powerful organisation.

During the first part of the movie, we really don't know whether it's a parody, a comedy, or just over-the-top. I think the movie is a classic example of a film you have to take at the 3rd degree, if you watch Society and take it seriously you will probably get bored. If you decide to see it as a comical take on social issues and behaviors then it is actually hilarious.

The dress code and haircuts of the 80's (and the famous mullet) are priceless and add a lot to the entertainment. The true undertone of the movie shines through sparsely in the first part with some characters that can't be taken seriously and a few very out of place quotes that made me laugh.

The movie however will mostly be remembered for its ending and what I could only describe by a delightfully disgusting orgiastic flesh feast. That scene is absolutely disgusting, possibly brilliant in its own right, but probably shocking to any normal audience. Again, I had to remind myself of the context, the overall metaphor, the symbolism and more importantly, the overall tone of the movie to see it as something actually enjoyable. It is, when taken at the 3rd degree, a pretty funny scene. One must not forget to note the sound effects, they are brilliant.

Sadly, even when considering the movie as a comedy, there are some flaws that makes it less enjoyable. We have this vague feeling of a Rosemary's Baby (1968) rip-off while never really getting what the evil people want, which makes the thriller part of the movie fail. Also, we have no clear distinction to identify someone and it impends on our ability to follow the pressure rising around our hero. The hero undergoes some changes but they are mostly left unexplained: what happened at the hospital? Are Clarissa and Milo good? Is anyone being framed? These are questions that I couldn't wrap up and even though I loved the over-the-top social critic it seemed incomplete.

I liked: The most graphic of body horror. The 80's teenagers feel. The paranoia and doubts.

I disliked : Unclear. Has three very different tones. Does the metaphor still work if everything is taken into account?

64/100
Definitely not for everyone but it holds its funny moments. I can't think of anyone I'd recommend it to but if I heard someone saw it I would probably laugh about it with them. 

+1 (2013)

Angad: "I told you tonight would be full of surprises."

By Dennis Iliadis
With Rhys Wakefield, Logan Miller and Ashley Hinshaw

+1 looked like an interesting experimental film but I wasn't sure I wanted to see it until I saw that it was directed by Dennis Iliadis and I've been a huge fan of his movie Hardcore (2004).

When David goes to meet his girlfriend Jill who is away at college things turn bad as he just happens to kiss her opponent who just beat her at a fencing competition. On the verge of breaking and eager to make things right, David goes with his friend Teddy to the biggest party. Heavy drinking, loud music and loss of various articles of clothing happen as it is to be expected, but what is less expected is the power going out randomly and everytime it does it seems to create bizarre events which will have the partygoers ponder whether they are seeing double.

I have to admit that I enjoyed +1 a lot visually and I felt the concept was quite interesting. However it is one of those cases where I would say it was clearly style over substance. The movie fails to deliver an interesting unfolding which is sad considering the fact that the viewer is really eager to see the clash that should happen when the events finally converge.

Instead, we seem to have a few morals on people learning more about themselves in adversity and trying to change the past. This is quite sad, especially the focus on the cheating boyfriend trying to make up for it during the entire movie. I can't say whether the characters development was lacking or if it was simply the wrap up of the story but something definitely felt amiss when the credits rolled.

I think the movie could have been seen as a metaphor and the paranormal events would have just served the purpose of putting the characters under pressure but this path was not explored. The visuals are good though and the movie is filled with action while the plot keeps you wondering about the possibilities. Although I enjoyed the mind games of the film I felt quite disappointed.

I liked: Interesting and proactive. Fresh look.

I disliked: No likable character. Cheap and disappointing ending which fails to deliver.

51/100
If you enjoy party movies this is quite good, but sadly if you're in for the thriller part you might be disappointed.

House of Wax (1953)

Prof. Henry Jarrod : "The morbidly curious. Heh, I won't cater to them."

By André De Toth
With Vincent Price, Frank Lovejoy and Phyllis Kirk

Well, I saw the remake House of Wax (2005) about the time it came out so when I came across the old one I decided to give it a try.

A wax sculptor, Henry Jarrod is unable to fight off competition of other wax museums that portray macabre scenes, as he focuses on depicting historical events. His partner who is mostly interested in the revenue decides to burn the place down in order to cash in the insurance money. This is what he does as Henry Jarrod watches his work and artistic creation burn to the ground, so much so that a few months after his body has been missing and the partner gets all the money of the insurance. However, it is about the same time that an horribly disfigured man starts killing people and take their bodies away.

I was slightly disappointed by the movie, it started off with a great premise but it failed to capture my interest after that. I was maybe expecting too much from it. The artist who seemed very passionate about his work becomes obsessed by his inability to create due to burnt hands. While this is a good idea, it wasn't exploited at all and it seemed to have more interest in the botched police work and woman in shock.

The most scary part in my opinion is the young Charles Bronson's appearance. The wax creations are quite interesting but we don't see much of the process.

I liked: The main concept. The guillotine and historical murders.

I disliked: Stumbles upon itself in the second half. Filling scenes of dances.

58/100
I wouldn't call it a classic horror film but it has an interesting core story.

Casualties of War (1989)

Lt. Reilly: "You can't expect any different in the combat zone. Is that clear?"

By Brian De Palma
With Michael J. Fox, Sean Penn and Don Harvey

I think I heard about Casualties of War from my parents maybe because it was on television or because they watched it or simply while I was looking for movies.

After a tormented night in the war of Vietnam where Sgt. Meserve saves Eriksson's life, the squad is quietly resting in a little village when their friend Brown is shot. When the squad comes back to base they are allowed one day of leave and given a new soldier to replace Brown. They drink heavily and decide to visit the local brothel but they are denied access which irritates the sergeant Meserve so much that he decides that they will leave early for duty the day after, pass by a village, kidnap a girl and use her as a sex slave during their mission. While some soldiers don't believe they will really do it, the sergeant, helped by the caporal Clark proceed and kidnap a girl. Eriksson has moral issues with such activities and let the others know but it puts him in opposition of the leader of the squad and could have heavy consequences.

As with many of Vietnam wars movies of the 80's, this grim painting of the war is scary and seems quite realistic. We once again see men transformed by war and violence to reveal their true nature. They are all really young and have seen a lot of horrors already. This feeling is omnipresent and the first part of the movie sets the mood in a really well crafted way. The facts are pretty dark, especially considering it is based on true events. There are a lot of moral dilemmas exposed and we don't have much choice but to see their consequences.

There are some explosions and machine gun firing to remind us that we are in a war with opponents, but the war depicted here is mostly internal. The behavior of those who disagree, those who don't dare to disagree and those who can't wait to disobey. The army appears as a scary machine that swallow youths whole. In its ideology, the movie flourishes beautifully. However, it appears quite sketchy at times, for example with the idea of telling it through a flashback. Or the quick trial which comes almost as a surprise. Sean Penn does what he does best which is play screw loose violent characters with emotions.

I liked: Powerful war story. Group and army behaviors are scrutinized.

I disliked: The violence seems to have no answer. Builds up well and wraps up hastily.

72/100
Definitely not an easy movie but a worthy experience. Looks like Rescue Dawn (2006) meets Platoon (1986) but lacks that extra thing to make it as memorable as these two.

Des hommes et des dieux / Of Gods and Men (2010)

Frère Jean-Pierre: "Partir c'est fuir et abandonner le village aux terroristes."

By Xavier Beauvois
With Lambert Wilson, Michael Lonsdale and Olivier Rabourdin

I met Des hommes et des dieux after watching Le passé (2013) and browsing through its cast. I liked the synopsis and it seemed to have gotten nominations as well as being the French submission for the Foreign Language Film Award.

The movie follows the life of a handful of monks in a monastery in Algeria. Their peaceful and quiet life is soon disturbed when a group of Islamist fundamentalists starts killing foreigners. The army decides to protect the monastery but the monks dismiss them. There becomes a struggle to live with the fear, the faith and everyone's opinion on the question of whether to leave or stay.

I really enjoyed the context and until the end I wasn't able to place it in time and to know whether it was a true story or not. It turns out it happened in 1996. The dilemma is very strong and the dialogues between the monks as well as their beliefs are extensive. The movie follows the rhythm of life of a monastery and is therefore quite slow with a lot of religious rituals. I have to say those scenes annoyed me, at first I thought they were necessary in order to set the tone and pace but as they grew longer and longer I started disliking them, particularly the religious chants.

The acting is really good and the range of emotions is wide, the two stars, Michael Lonsdale and Lambert Wilson (who are both famous bilingual French/English actors) give amazing performances. The movie which came out in 2010 couldn't have been more contemporary as the so called Arab Spring was about to start and the eternal quarrel would be on everyone's mind once again. I like to think that a non-religious person should be able to enjoy a religious movie and the other way around. Despite its heavy religious theme I think the movie reaches out beyond that while trying to dig deeper in a fragile peace.

Although most of the music annoyed me, the scene playing Swan Lake was absolutely amazing.

I liked: The discussion of martyrdom. Absolutely relevant. Acting. True story.

I disliked: Very slow. Religious chants and rituals.

68/100
I think the movie has a lot to say but it won't say it in the way you expect it to. The experience is slow but worth it.

Dead End (1937)

Policeman: "Well, there ain't no profit in chasing kids."

By William Wyler
With Sylvia Sidney, Joel McCrea and Humphrey Bogart

I heard about Dead End after watching the movie Angels with Dirty Faces (1938) which also featured the "dead end kids" and, most to my liking, Humphrey Bogart.

In a poor neighborhood of New York, the poor have to cohabit near the fancy buildings that host rich tenants. This proximity isn't going too well and the dead end kids, a gang of young criminals in the making, are always ready to pick a fight. This new generation is observed by two old kids of the neighborhood, Dave a man who went to high school and 6 years of college to become an architect but down on his luck and lives by painting windows while dreaming of living with one of the rich girl from the fancy building. The other grown up from the neighborhood is "Baby Face" Martin earning his nickname for having gone through extensive plastic surgery in order to avoid the police as he is a notorious killer. The two opposites find themselves stuck in a place full of contradictions while witnessing the growth of a new generation that might end on their paths.

The similarities with Angels with Dirty Faces are legion and it really feels like a prototype of it. Where Angels with Dirty Faces involved the quarrel of good and evil, through a priest, Dead End is mostly about rich and poor--both displaying at times good and evil behaviors.

Sadly, where Angels with Dirty Faces had really good behavioral analysis and moral considerations, Dead End seems to end in confusion whether to take the analysis further or not. Much like its title, we seem to hit a wall in terms of reflection past the movie.

The movie has really good sets to recreate the slums of New York and the filming makes a great use of shadows, giving out this very criminal, film noir vibe. I wouldn't be surprised to learn that Frank Miller had this movie in mind when he wrote Sin City as its neo-noir genre seems directly inspired by Dead End. 

I found the actresses to be very strong while their characters were the less deep. The dead end kids as an ensemble work well and give out a pretty good sense of what we'd imagine street kids to behave like back in the 30's. Their individual characters are quite shadowed by the group, except for Tommy who appears to personalize the fate of such kids.

I liked: The handling of social issues. Noir filming.

I disliked: There are no memorable lines or thought. Sketchy dialogues at times.

72/100
A pale comparison to Angels with Dirty Faces (1938), we see Humphrey Bogart building his gangster skills once again, en route to the stardom he would achieve.