Recently in Biographical pg.2 Category

Directed by George Tillman, Jr. Starring: Robert DeNiro, Cuba Gooding, Jr., Charlize Thereon, Powers Boothe, Aunjanue Ellis, Hal Holbrook,David Keith, Michael Rapaport, Carl Lumbly, Lonette McKee. Drama/Biographical/Historical. Synopsis: The story of Carl Brashear, who enlisted in the Navy as a teen shortly after World War II and rose up through the ranks to become the first African-American Navy diver, Master Chief Diver, and also the first amputee to serve in that capacity.

Anytime you have a story that focuses on the true life triumph of the human spirit and shows the kind of determination that makes the impossible possible, you have a good chance for a good flick. Its not a given though, the film still has to be well acted and directed. Men Of Honor is well directed, and when you throw in a cast with multiple Oscar winners, past and future, the recipe for success is complete.

Cuba Gooding, Jr. (Wrong Turn At Tahoe)  plays Carl Brashear, Jr., a man who came from the fields of Kentucky, enlised in the Navy in the post WW-II years, and was determined to better himself in all ways through his time in the service. He had an indomitable spirit and never quit attitude, which he got from his parents (Lonette McKee Jungle Fever Carl Lumbly Pacific Heights The Alphabet Killer) in general and his father in particular.

As some may know, the Navy and its department (U.S. Marine Corps) were likely the most inhospitable branches of the service in the post military, pre-Civil Rights era and that is portrayed vividly throughout this film, with one memorable scene being where Carl decides to jump in the Pacific for a swim on a day when only whites were allowed off the ship and into the ocean. Of course, he is pursued but swims so fast he beats everyone to the buoy. After landing in the brig, his speed in the water leads the ship's Captain (Powers Boothe Southern Comfort) to make him one of the ship's rescue swimmers an unprecedented position for an African American. Brashear quickly decides his ultimate goal in the Navy is to become a Navy diver after seeing the rescue heroics of one such Master Chief Diver, Leslie Sunday (Robert DeNiro Casino), an elite position that, at that point in time.

And, through the magic of creative license, when Brashear finally is accepted at diving school, guess who his class instructor is? Give yourself a pat on the back if you said Chief Sunday who is, lets just say, less than enthusiastic to have an African American diving student in his course.

Brashear's time in the diving school is the heart of the film, as Tillman does a good job of making clear the hurdles he faced, not only because of racism, but due to his severe lack of education. We do have some stereotypical characters, likely composite characters like Deniro's Chief Sunday, but that does not mean they aren't effective. Michael Rapaport (Grilled) plays Snowhill, the 'liberal' sailor who offsets the bigotry and prejudice Carl experiences in diving school by befriending Carl and being the only sailor to stay in the barracks when the rest are urged to move out by Sunday.

Also standing out in a smaller role is the legendary Hal Holbrook (Magnum Force) as 'Mr. Pappy', the outwardly bigoted and near senile Commander assigned to the diving school whose distaste for Carl remains steadfast even as those around Carl, including Sunday, begin to soften with appreciation of Carl's work ethic and courage.

Neither Brashear nor his chief protagonist, Sunday, are shown one dimensionally, they both have love interests, Carl has his future wife (Aunjanue Ellis Freedomland) and Sunday has a much younger wife, Charlize Thereon (North Country) who is both the enabler and possible hope for his drinking problems. Its not a huge role for Thereon, but she knocks it out of the park, as does Ellis, an actress whom I've long thought was an underappreciated talent.

The film follows Carl's career in the Navy, going directly from his trying time in diving school to his assignment as a diver on a ship in which he becomes a national hero by recovering a lost Russian explosive from the bottom of the sea, and then tragically suffers a serious injury to his leg shortly thereafter which seems to put the end to his diving career. But, Carl demands his leg be completely amputated so a prosthetic can be attached so that he might continue his career. The reluctance of the Navy and the reemergence of Sunday into Carl's life mark the second portion of the film. Its hard to be a Navy diver with two legs, to see Brashear do it with one is nothing less than inspiring.

As with any great film, there are several iconic scenes, the standouts for me being the bar room challenge between Brashear and Sunday to see who could hold his breath the longest, with the stakes being Carl's spot in the diving school versus the readmittance to diving school of Carl's buddy Snowhill (I read an interview with the real Carl Brashear in which he said the scene was true, except they did not use the water filled apparatus shown in the film, but merely dunked their heads into fish tanks); Carl's final test in diving school in which there were deliberate steps taken to ensure his failure and he remained underwater for twenty hours until his task was complete; and the stirring finale, when Brashear, with Sunday as his coach, demonstrates his physical prowess with his prosthetic leg before a high ranking Naval board.

The film follows 20 + years of Brashear's life and Gooding is believable both as the teen aged character and as a 40 year old navy veteran. With all due respect to his Oscar winning peformance in Jerry Maguire , to me this is his outstanding peformance to date. As for DeNiro, what can I say that hasn't been said? Incredible as Chief Sunday.

Understand this genre, though it shows both the ugly side and honor in our military, its not a military movie per se , but the story of an incredible man who happened to live his life in the service.

Great story, great acting, great film.        

Directed by Ryan Murphy. Starring Joseph Cross, Annette Bening, Brian Cox, Alec Baldwin, Evan Rachel Wood, Jill Clayburgh, Gwyneth Paltrow, Joseph Fiennes. Comedy/Drama/Historical.  Synopsis: The story of real life writer Austen Burroughs chaotic childhood with his supremely dysfunctional parents and his ultimate adoption by the psychologist treating his mother, who is clearly descending into his own unique madness.

Running with Scissors is a very unique kind of dark comedy mixed with drama, it was not until the end of the flick and the special features on DVD that I realized that it was supposed to be based on true life events of Augusten Burroughs, author of a book by the same name in the form of a personal memoir.

There is a line in the voice over narration towards the end of the film that indicates that the Burroughs character (Joseph Cross) doesn't believe that anyone else would believe what he says about his childhood. Well, he is right about that. Not that I am accusing the filmmakers of producing a fictional piece and calling it "true", but you have to think there is some embellishment and/or dramatic license going on, though it is clear that real people are depicted in the film.

Augusten Burroughs is the  child of a paranoid mother (Annette Bening The American President) who has visions of her own impending poetic greatness and a detached father (Alec Baldwin The Departed) who gets away from the growing madness in his own home via the bottle. Their marriage is laughably horrible, with their verbal fights and put downs that you laugh at, even though you know you shouldn't, being played out right in front of the teen age Augusten.

They make an attempt to salvage what is left of their "family" by going to the obviously unstable Dr. Finch (Brian Cox Last Shot at Glory). To say that Cox steals the show would be an understatement, and is in no way a slap at the other members of this fine cast. Dr. Finch who, with the blessing of Augustus' mom, adopts the teen ager into his own dysfunctional family, is stark raving mad in a quiet, learned kind of way. You have to see it to complete understand how brilliant Cox is in this hilarious and poignant role (poignant when you realize that this is a real person or if you have known someone with mental illness; hilarious because you can't help but laugh at some of his antics and you realize that he is a doctor), my words won't do it justice.

The Finch family is interesting, too. Mrs. Finch (Jill Clayburgh) might be the only completely sane and stable member. The youngest daughter (Evan Rachel Wood) is sane, but not stable, and she immediately buddies up with Augustus, both teens sharing in the dysfunction and madness of their favorite parent. The older sister (Gwyneth Paltrow Seven), Dr. Finch's self professed favorite daughter, is simply insane in her quiet beauty.

All of these good actors carry their own weight and more, in the case of Baldwin and Paltrow, you have a couple of heavyweight actors lending themselves to relatively minor, but important, roles. That's good because it helps make this flick a little better than good. Joseph Cross needs some "props", as the young kids say, for holding his own onscreen with major players like Bening, Clayburgh, and Cox.

I'm not sure what you will take from Running with Scissors, but I'm sure that you will take something from it, which is more than you can say for most films you've ever seen, right?    

 

Directed by  Laurence Dunmore. Starring Johnny  Depp, John Malkovich, Susan Morton, Rosamund Pike. Drama/Historical Synopsis: A frank look at the last few years of the Earl of Rochester, John Wilmot, a 17th century poet who was both a friend of King Charles and one of the more influential authors of the Restoration.

This film starts with Johnny Depp as John Wilmot doing a monologue that is shocking in its sexual suggestiveness (considering our modern view of the 1600's) and includes John Wilmot telling us that we will not like him.  

Well, I have to beg to differ. I liked the character and the film quite a bit. I got this one solely because of Johnny Depp (Secret Window, From Hell), who will become a legend if he keeps reinventing himself from role to role. Though I'm a history buff, I had never even heard of John Wilmot and, as usual, I did my background research after seeing this flick. I'm happy to report that, so far as I can tell, the movie stays pretty close to the written history of this talented writer and social agitator who, almost literally, drank and fornicated himself (in a manner of speaking) to death by the age of 33.

The story does not waste much time with a lot of historical background or explanation. Whether this was calculated with an eye to a primarily British audience or not, I don't know but I think that it is a good thing, as the social and political affairs of the time in Britain are going to be outside the knowledge of most viewers. Plus, the story stands fine on its own. John Wilmot is a privileged man in search of nothing other than self pleasure. His taste for the excess is, in no way, dimmed by his station in life or his friendship with the King (John Malkovich Burn After Reading, Mary Reilly). We see from the first moments of the movie that Wilmot is not one to deny himself and, I must say, the sexual innuendo and suggestion might surprise some of you. 

Wilmot is a writer, obviously talented but maybe viewed as underachieving at a time and in a place where literary people wielded much more influence than is comprehensible for us today. He also has a love of the theater, where he sets out to mold a struggling young actress (Susan Morton), with whom he, of course, has an affair. It should be mentioned that Wilmot is married at this time and, in fact, was married until his death, notwithstanding his sexual excesses (including a strong implication of bisexuality).

Wilmot has success in helping his protege become the toast of London, but he is soon in the middle of controversy as he takes a request from the King to pen a play and turns it into a suggestive and lewd satire of the King and his court. Needless to say, this does not go over, as they say, real big and Wilmot is soon on the lam, his relationship with his girlfriend in the tank and estranged from his, for whatever reason, loyal wife.

During this time, Wilmot's physical condition starts to completely deteriorate and the film is quite graphic in depicting the effects of his alcoholism and "social disease" (probably syphilis). Believe it or not, you will see Johnny Depp literally rot before your eyes. Not pretty, but effective cinema that is necessary for the story and also accurate history. To me, you can't help but like Wilmot even as you despise his lifestyle. Maybe he was just a couple of hundred years ahead of his time in attitude, but understand that the film makes no attempt to romanticize or glamorize his sexual conquests or hedonistic lifestyle. Wilmot paid a huge price for this, believe me.

On the other hand, I think the real success of this flick is showing us a little known historical figure whose ideas would not be so far out of step with those of the late nineteenth or twentieth century. An unforgettable scene is a horribly disfigured Wilmot addressing the King's Court and supporting the future succession of the throne from the King (now an enemy of Wilmot's) to his brother who is, hold your breath now, a Catholic.

Johhny Depp is fantastic in this role, disturbingly likeable and completely believable in this role. For those of you who have seen this movie, how many actors of his stature would play a role that is so visually unappealing? Susan Morton is wonderful as well, playing a liberated woman who, like Wilmot, is centuries ahead of her time. And, it will be no surprise that I tell you John Malkovich is great, though almost unrecognizable as the King.

This film won't be for everyone, nor was it intended to be, as an art period piece. If you think you like that kind of thing, I'm sure you will like the Libertine.   

Directed by Matthew Bright. Starring Michael Reilly Burke, Doti Bliss. True Crime/Historical Synopsis: A biopic of Ted Bundy, one of the most notorious serial killers in U.S. history.

I was genuinely excited to receive this movie on DVD as a gift and deeply regret having to come to such a negative conclusion, but there is really no other alternative. As a movie lover and a true crime buff, I have quite a bit of familiarity with the Bundy case and, especially, enjoyed the made for TV adaption of the mid-80's, "The Deliberate Stranger".

I expected a movie version, updated with current developments (e.g., at the time of the making of the "Deliberate Stranger", Bundy had not been executed, his appeals had not been exhausted, nor had the immense psychological profiling or his eleventh hour shenanigans to save his life-such as his siring of a child while on death row or his conversion to Hinduism or his last minute appeals to exchange information to save his life- been completed) and not restrained on such a macabre subject as this by network TV parameters to be truly compelling, thought provoking, and informative.

Bright's movie, while visually compelling at times, falls far short of the mark and is, at times, inappropriate and tasteless. Other reviewers have indicated that there is poor character development and they are absolutely correct. There is no, absolutely NO, attempt to develop ANY of the characters past their cartoonish roles as set forth by this script and Bright.

Moreover, many of the historical facts of the case are simply misrepresented in this film. Even a casual follower of the Bundy case knows that, incredibly, many of his known 30 victims who have been identified (not all have been), bore a striking resemblance to each other. Generally brunette with long, straight hair parted in the middle; which fit the description of the high society woman Bundy was long infatuated with and even engaged to for a time. (Not to be confused with his OTHER girlfriend at the time of the beginning of his killings, whom is depicted in both movies referenced herein, and in Bright's adaptation is misrepresented and slandered, despite a strong performance from the actress playing her with such a limited script). By contrast, the victims in Bright's adaption are mostly blond and further details of their murders are made up and presented as "fact".

There is no mention or illusion to Bundy's family, especially his mother, whom he beleived to be his sister until early adolescence, nor his self described life long shame at being born out of wedlock. Clearly, well known facts such as these are important to give the viewer, whether familiar with Bundy or not, grounds to answer the most compelling and unanswerable questions: WHY and HOW?

Instead, Bright presents a disjointed tale in which Bundy (played fairly well with limited options by Michael Burke) does not even speak until 20 minutes into the movie, despite being depicted in almost every scene of the movie. We are treated to much more violence than is necessary in showing the horror of this man, and also to many vignettes of him supposedly acting out similar fantasies in lovemaking with his girlfriend. Further, Bright takes the time to provide several scenes referencing Bundy's necrophilia, something that was never confessed to or proven, albeit suspected by the investigators in the case.

For those of you looking for information about this case in addition to being entertained, you will be sadly disappointed. There is almost no reference to time, date, place of this killing nightmare that spanned almost ten years, and absolutely no creative reference to the investigation and/or trial(s) of Bundy. (In the director's commentary on the 'features" portion of the DVD, Bright tells us that he simply "wasn't interested in shooting that stuff") Perhaps to make up for his evidently intentional lack of character development, factual accuracy, and story line, Bright spices in some footage of the real Bundy being led into court and transferred to jail; along with contemporary newscasts and community reaction. This brief snippets tell us more about what happened and compel us to form our own opinions than anything Bright does in the rest of the piece.

Other reviewers have remarked in the apparent attempt at dark humor in this movie. I believe that Bright did attempt this, although for the life of me I cannot find dark humor in the real life story of a man who murdered at least 30 women (investigators and profilers close to the case unanimously believe the actual count is much more and some feel that it could have well been more than 100);physically and emotionally maimed other victims for life, and psychologically shattered some others who knew, in hindsight, that they could have been and/or were intended to be his victim. As such, the ridiculous scene, and others like it, where Bright's Bundy is depicted as a tween sport jacket and bow tie wearing nerd while sitting in 70's style disco's and doing an intentionally poor parody of John Travolta's famous pose from the cover of the album "Saturday Night Live" don't strike me as funny.

There is another montage with some upbeat 70's style disco music (don't get me wrong, I LOVE 70's era tunes...this just wasn't the place)blaring happily while Bright shows us successive scenes of women being dumped into ditches and by the sides of roads as well as a particularly disturbing one with Bundy enjoying a smoke after (presumably) sex with two corpses.

I realize that Bundy was a disgusting, revolting character, and any honest portrayal of him will contain some elements of this. However, Bright focuses solely on the crude parts, which cheat the viewer, in my opinion, of the full chilling effect of this predator who was, although in some respects fraudulently so, a law student, suicide crisis counselor, aide on the campaign to the Governor of Washington, and admired within his community. Mark Harmon's Bundy in the Deliberate Stranger was played with these dimensions in mind, so effectively that, at times, depending on which "Ted" we are seeing, Harmon actually seems to look different. And, most importantly, we are given an indication of HOW so many nice and intelligent women were lured to their demise. Bright's Bundy is a ridiculous and revolting figure, obviously out of place and literally walking up to women on the street and striking them and then carrying their bodies to his VW, in one scene in full view of four people who are walking right by and don't seem to care.

For those who do feel compelled or interested in seeing this movie, don't waste your extra bucks on the DVD version unless you just have to see it in that visually format. There are no additional features other than Bright's appalling director's commentary. This rates special mention due to its revelation about the thought that went into this movie. Bright makes little or no mention of the actors, motivation, or though that went into making this picture. His comments are semi-moronic musings such as "can you believe this guy", "ladies, dump your boyfriend if he is like this", "don't so that Ted", and the like. He misstates on several occasions actual Bundy events and repeats throughout that "hey, this actually happened", even in scenes that require some dramatic license (e.g. conversation between Bundy and a victim who did not survive)

However, the most disturbing parts of the DVD feature are Bright's almost incessant reference to the actresses playing the roles of victims in this movie. Such beauts as "this girl is a wrestler in real life and I wish she would have met Bundy, she'd have kicked his butt" and "I can't remember her name (reference to a blond actress playing a cheerleader uniform wearing victim of Bundy-a victim not based in the facts of the case)...but, she's 'jailbait' and she knows she's 'jailbait'"

The most disgusting is in the commentary during the "interrogation scene" of Bundy (again, we are given no who, what, where, etc.) when the detective is withering Bundy with questions and begins to read a list of names of his victims (again, not factually accurate, at the time of Bundy's initial arrest in Utah, he was a suspect in three unsolved kidnapping of young women,bodies had not been found and one survived and ultimately identify him) containing about 20 names. Bright tells us that "he didn't use the real names of the victims in respect to the families" (what a guy) and then goes on, unbelievably, to tell us that "...the names used are the names of every girl I have slept with since the eighth grade..." and then goes on to tell us when and how on some of the women. Seriously.

There are other false and tasteless treats from his commentary "...people saw this guy, but nobody said anything and nobody cared...", "Bundy easily could have been Governor or a Senator", and "Bundy was a REpublican...I don't mean to slam Republicans, but most serial killers are Repblicans."

As if that is not enough, this movie ends with a succession of four children (?)smiling at the camera and yelling "I am Ted Bundy", the last of which is a cute little girl who says this line while appearing to be holding a dead cat.

Bottom line, stay away from this unless you just like mindless and gratuitous movies that are a succession of unrelated and unexplained shocking scenes like the ones mentioned above and many other beauties such as Bundy masturbating outside of windows and putting lipstick on a decapitated corpse.

If you are interested at all in this subject matter or just curious and don't need to be grossed out while someone who thinks this is a little humorous puts in tasteless scenes to try and make you laugh, skip this and find "The Deliberate Stranger" on VHS or wait until it comes around again on cable.