White Diamond (2004)

I am a huge Werner Herzog fan. His early films filled me with a wonderful sense of what movies could do and hooked me, at a young age, on the most powerful of all drugs, celluloid. The fact that I haven't yet talked about a film of Herzog's before this is damn near criminal, but no matter the time has arrived. I am about to begin a week of talk about the documentary films of Werner Herzog.

More than his fiction films, I am a fan of Herzog's documentaries. There is something about the way he sees a subject that opens your eyes to things other than the subject at hand. Often his documentaries are almost something else, his Lessons in the Darkness about the oil well fires in Kuwait is structured as an aliens arrival on earth. Its a haunting film that is more magical and informative than the similar IMAX film Fires of Kuwait. I'm currently working on weekend double feature that will talk about that film as well as Wild Blue Yonder, which is an interesting film about an alien on earth talking about a trip by people from our planet going to his. Its a head trip. However I'm getting ahead of myself. Before that happens I'd like to ease into the films of Werner Herzog by talking about White Diamond.

The White Diamond, is on the face of it the story of the building of an airship to study the canopy of the rain forests. It is also, as Werner Herzog tells it, the story of the search for absolution for the death of the inventors friend. I will certainly buy the first part, but I highly doubt the second.

This is simply one of the most beautiful films I've ever seen. The shots of the balloon in flight, the waterfall, the birds that live by the falls and the life in the canopy make this the first time I ever wanted to own the biggest and best TV ever made just so I could see these images. I doubt that other than on a rare occasion you'll ever have seen anything as beautiful.

Herzog also introduces us to some real characters Dr Dorrington, the inventor of the airship is a man of great passion. Mark Anthony Yhap, a man hired to help porter materials is probably worthy a film himself. Also the rest of the crew are also intriguing characters for the brief period they cross the screen. It is the mix of people and image that make this film work as well as it does.

(I'm about to talk about the flaws of the film which will sound a bit harsh, and it is, mostly because this is such a good film I'm kind of bothered that the film has any flaws)

The trouble is that the film almost doesn't work. As a narrative the film is sloppy and unfocused. Herzog, as great a director as he is, can often get lost in how he's telling a story, which sometimes seems he has clearer picture in his head rather than on the screen.

For example we are told about the cave behind the falls where the birds live and where no one has ever gone.We see a camera lowered down to a climber so footage inside the cave can be shot, only to be told we will not be shown the footage. Why? It makes no sense and it is a (very) minor frustration. It is only sometime later that we are told why, what is in the cave is a legend and to reveal whats there could up set the belief of the population. Its an odd way round the subject and feels completely backwards, which is both a Herzog strength and weakness (Here you wonder why tell us about the cave if you aren't going to show us, but then he explains it and in a weird way its okay).

And sometime Herzog gets lost in a story of his own making. Here Herzog hammers away at Dorrington about the death of a friend some years earlier when a ship he had made got caught up in the trees. Dorrington was in no way responsible for the accident or the death (other than he built the ship that was involved) but Herzog trumpets the point over and over in order to give some dramatic tension to what would otherwise be a pretty straight forward test flight of the airship. There is no reason for it and it adds a false note that almost sinks the film...from which it recovers from when ever we see the ship in flight or get away from the morbid subject.

And take flight it does...very much like the titled gem in the sky.

Flaws aside this is a stunning film that really should be seen on a big HD screen. It will knock your socks off and make you see the wonder of the world around us.

Definitely worth seeing. This film is out on DVD.

New York Comicon and Anime Festival Day 3

It's all over now.

We've survived the crowds yesterday and made it to the calmness of Sunday. Sundays are always calm at the convention. They are the probably the best feeling day of the convention.

Ken and I used the day to pick up a few last things, get a few extra signatures, to connect briefly with my friend Dave and to see a few panels and screenings.

Actually we tried to go to two screenings but only on happened. The screening of what I was told was suppose to be the new Work by Katushiro Otomo, but when we got to the panel room nothing was going on just people were waiting.

We did make the panel for the new documentary Grant Morrison Talking with Gods. It was a panel with the producer, cameraman director and some other people connected with the production. Based on the clips it looks to be a stunning film, not just for comic lovers. Ken will be writing up the presentation in greater detail and once the film is released in a couple of weeks he will be reviewing the film and presenting an interview with the crew.

After that it was lunch and then some more laps around the floors for me as Ken spent some time with Comic artist Rick Leonardi who did a sketch for him.

Along the way I found the people at Patch Together. They had some really cool toys for sale. I was impressed and probably should have talked with them more and bought something but I was short on cash. I haven't really looked at the website, but it based on what I've seen it's worth a look see.

I want to mention that the potential interview with the people at Imaginism Studios never materialized. By the time I made it to their booth that had left. Still you may want to check their website.

Over all it was two good days on either side of a difficult one.

I was talking to Randi before I wrote this and I t and I'll need think she's right, more happened than I can process right now. I'll take a few days and go through all of the material I've collected and perhaps I'll post more in a few days.

And now-its a year and a week until the next convention. I can't wait...

Paprika (2006)

This is the final part of out Satoshi Kon tribute. It comes on a day that is the final day of the NewYork Comicon, The final day of the New York Anime Festival and the final day of the New York Film Festival. In order to celebrate the life of Satoshi Kon, film maker and cartoonist, I'm going to repost the review of Kon's Paprika which I posted a couple of hours after seeing it at the New York Film Festival. To me this is the best way to go since the review has much of the joy one feels when one gets to see a Kon film for the first time.

Just back from the New York Film Festival Screening of Satoshi Kon's Paprika.

Kon's new film is not the dark mind warps of Perfect Blue or Paranoia Agent, this is closer to blending of real and unreal of Millennium Actress and Tokyo Godfathers light and airy touches. Its got its darkness but its mostly a light thriller.

(I'm not going to go into a discussion of specifics concerning the plot, since I was told things by reviews I read prior to seeing the film which, while they didn't reveal a great deal, spoiled just enough to take the wonder off some of the story and images) The plot concerns a device called a DC Mini which allows people to enter other peoples dreams. It also allows your dreams to be recorded for play back. Three of the revolutionary devices are stolen before they could be encoded with a software that will prevent total access to anyone at anytime, which means that anyone with the devices can not only enter anyone's dreams at anytime, but also enter there mind and put them into a dream of their choosing. Unfortunately the head of the project suddenly begins spouting nonsense (the result of being dropped in the dream of a mental patient) and before anyone can stop him he leaps from a high window. The race is on, with our heroes getting the help of a mysterious girl named Paprika, who seems to be able to move with in dreams in ways that are completely unnatural.

I love this movie. It takes a while to get going but once it does its really good (it has a gangbusters last third). Kon blends the real and the dream in ways that can only be done through animation (see his earlier films for how good he is at it). Its wonderfully done, so much so that you can never be sure whats real and whats not, as one character says late in the film, "is this real or is it a dream?" In the end you can not tell, especially as the worlds begin to overlap. I know for some, myself included, the plot line may seem a bit of been there and done that (ie Dreamscape) but Kon's visual sense pushes the film from a run of the mill retread into something worth going out and seeing.(As I said I'm not going to go into some of the wild things that Kon has cooked up for his dream world since somethings should remain a surprise.) For those looking for some of the darkness of Kon's Perfect Blue or Paranoia Agent, its not really here, actually the movie is frequently very funny. Certainly some of the dream imagery can be frightening and disturbing in a not normal (dream)) sort of way, but other than one moment where a villain shows how he can control anything in the dream world, there isn't anything thats mind twistingly scary. (Though that one moment is sure to send shivers up and down most peoples backs) This is just a good little fantastical thriller.

At this point I have to make a confession. This movie reduced to tears a couple of times. There are a couple of moments when this movie is like a shot of pure joy. The title sequence with its J-Pop ear worm of a song had the tears rolling down my face. Later when Paprika dives into a dream and rides a cloud the marriage of music and image, however fleeting had me blissed out. Best of all the films exploration of who we are underneath it all will make everyone grin from ear to ear.

See this movie. Its a good little thriller. Its not the best thing that director Satoshi Kon has done, but its a good time in the movies (which it celebrates).

I want to add that this is one of the truly great films that plays better the more you see it. I've seen this any number of times and with each viewing I keep finding things that make me go "Oh Wow" as I connect up bits of plot and story.

New York Comicon and Anime Festival Day 2 -A heads up on Imaginism Studios

The story of today was the crowds.

They were HUGE.

It was at times unpleasant. Mostly because there were a few nudniks who did things like stopped in the middle of the aisles to text or take a call or something they could have done from the side of the aisle. I mean there was one parent who had his stroller across the aisle causing a bottle neck and didn't care cause it was the easiest thing for him.

The crowds were so exhausting that I blew off the last film I had at the NYFF and just went home.

Made it to the Sushi Typhoon panel. Actually it was Marc from Subway Cinema and the New York Asian Film Festival talking about the up coming films at Sushi Typhoon. He showed lots of trailers and primed us for the next year or so of releases. I'm hoping my friend Dave- who made the whole panel- will post something detailed since I'm hoping to be able to link to it. He retained more of the details than I did so he'd be the better one to talk about them.

Ken and I have set up one definite interview for the near future. It's with artist David Mack who has graciously agreed to let Ken talk to him about the documentary and interview DVD that has come out about him.

If I can get the fan boy gush out of my system the people at Imaginism Studios have agreed to let me talk to them. Truth be told you should forget my chatter about an interview and just go look at their website and the images contained there in. They did work for Tim Burton's Alice in Wonderland, and it's easy to see why they were chosen. As good as their Alice stuff is their own work is wondrous and almost miraculous in the way that the best art is. Think Pixarish and Disney like but truly and marvelously their own. Trust me they are their own creatures in the best way possible.

They rock my world and I really want to buy more than their book and the two prints I have already. These people are going to be HUGE I mean HUGE and you really will want to become acquainted with their stuff now and start buying it before the world discovers them and the prices increase. Actually we need to get them a movie deal of their own so they can take their wonderful creations and make them live and breath of the the big screen.

I love these people.

And trust me you will too.

Frankly I want to see the little girl and the Dragon pictures made into a movie and I want to know more about the cute fairies...

Anyway you need you go to their site now and look around.

I think that's it for now. I know I'm forgetting something, I know there is a Geof Darrow being wickedly funny story needs to be told, but I'm too tired.

(Actually I'm not that tired I want to go look at the pictures at Imaginism)

Tokyo Godfathers (2003)

Today is the second part of our Satoshi Kon Tribute. We now look at Tokyo Godfathers, a version of a story that goes back to the early days of film, usually as a western (John Wayne stars in one version).

Tokyo Godfathers is probably Kon's least impressive film...meaning it's still better than most. This isn't to say that there is a problem with the film; it's kind of like trying to pick out which is greater among Michelangelo's works, The Piata, the Sistine Chapel or the Statue Of David. You really can't do it. It's also not fair since each of those works of art have their own merits. This film is like those works of art; it's the least of a group of masterpieces.

I know that when I saw the film for the first time I was kind of shocked that I wasn't really blown away. Kon's earlier films HAD blown me away, and this film didn't. It also didn't completely make me feel that the story needed to be animated. Other than a few magical realistic moments there are very few others needing animation.

The plot of the film is simple. It has three outcasts (a young girl, a transvestite, and a bum), living on the streets of Tokyo finding a small baby at Christmas. With the barest of information the trio begin to try and reunite the baby with its parents, and to come to terms with their pasts.

The film is for the most part a conventional drama or comedy drama. I know that kind of throws people who wanted something on the order of Perfect Blue and Millennium Actress. Compared to those films this is a trifle light. If you can accept the film for what it is it suddenly comes into stark focus; it may be a trifle, but it's a masterfully done one. How many filmmakers can move between the light and the dark like this? If Kon wanted to show he shouldn't be pigeonholed, this was the film that did it. For me the fact that Kon could move from light and dark subjects (or heavy and light ones) with ease and have the films work from start to finish is a sign that he is a master.

I'm going to get into a bit of trouble here and say that Kon is probably a better storyteller than the recognized master of animation in Japan, Hayao Miyazaki. I'm not going to argue the art of Miyazaki or his ability to make moments that bring tears to your eyes. I will argue that Miyazaki's feature work more often than not gets into trouble when it comes to the plot of his films. If you look at Kon's output, all of his films work from start to finish, and tell complete stories. Miyazaki certainly has better moments, but if you look at his films there is always a moment or two where the plot falls apart. I would argue that Spirited Away, Porco Rosso, and Princess Mononoke (with the Ghibli subtitles), are the only ones of his films that work from start to finish. All of his other films (My Neighbor Totoro, Ponyo, Kiki's Delivery Service, and Howl's Moving Castle , amongst others) all have points where the films go off the rails to various degrees. For the most part I find I watch Miyazaki films for the moments, or for the treats (anything with the Totoros, or the eye candy in Ponyo, for example), but not, with rare exception, for the entire movie. I watch Satoshi Kon movies because I want two hours of entertainment, not a ten-minute pick-me-up.

What does this digression mean to the talk of Kon's Tokyo Godfathers? Only that as a complete film it's better than many of the classics of Hayao Miyazaki.

I like this film a great deal. It's a magical film that has surprised me each time I've seen it. The surprise comes from the fact that the complexity of it is the sort of thing that only is apparent when we see it a second or third time. Like tomorrow's Paprika, there are moments in this film where what you see the first time plays one way, but once you see it again you understand the depth of what's going one. If you want an example, watch how you view our three heroes the first time you see the film and then, when you watch it a second time, watch how you react to things in the early part of the film knowing the characters back story. You will be touched more the second time.

This is a great little film that's worth your time.

Out on DVD

New York Comicon and Anime Festival Day 1

Ken and I have been at New York Comicon.

Ken appears to be the only one of the Unseen Films Crew who is in one piece. I'm hobbling about because of my back, Randi and Bully have their issues as do some of the people I'm trying to rope into covering some of the panels for the blog. What this means is we're a bit behind in what we wanted to do in covering the convention.

For what it's worth the convention this year is huge. They have taken over all of the Jacob Javitts Convention Center and Ken and I have not managed to get very far through the convention. We made no panels, traveled through only part of the sales floor and wandered the Artists Alley. We've seen the Fox display which had Avatar and RoboCop wandering about, and had some hibernation chambers where visitors can experience the terror of Alien.

However for better or worse we have been working on new material for the blog. Ken and I have made some gestures about getting some interviews set up with a few of the guests. I don't want to spoil anything or promise something we can't deliver, but if it works out right we may have fun stuff for you to read. While this not be breaking news, it hopefully will be more informative then a headline about the next blockbuster.

Keep an eye out over the next few days and weeks as we see how it all comes together.

---

I'd also like to ask you all to bear with us and the roughness of some of the recent posts. Normally Ken would go over the posts before they go up. Unfortunately Ken has been on a well deserved vacation which unfortunately corresponded to my spending some time going to the NYFF so several recent posts maybe rougher than they should be. It's all my fault since I have been posting way too much. Rest assured that as soon as Ken gets home with the turtles and things calm down we'll get back to having posts that don't look like they have been posted by a madder man then than is usual.

Okay, off to bed- there are panels and movies (The NYFF is still running) to see.

Perfect Blue (1998)

As many of you know, master filmmaker Satoshi Kon died of cancer back on August 24th. In the wake of his death Eden posted a review of his Millennium Actress , and I posted a few remarks as well, promising to do more at a later time.

Now with the New York Comic Con and New York Anime Festival going full swing at the Jacob Javits Center here in New York, Unseen Films is pausing to take note of the three remaining (released) feature films by Kon.

Up now is Kon’s first feature, Perfect Blue.

Based upon a novel by Yoshikazu Takeuchi, Satoshi Kon took this tale of obsession and turned it into one of the best films Alfred Hitchcock never made. The story, full of mistaken identity, hallucinations, and murder, is exactly the sort of thing that Hitchcock would have loved. I’m told that Kon shifted things around for his own reasons and in the process created one of the best thrillers of the second half of the 20th century.

The first time I saw this film I was sitting in my living room, reluctantly putting the film on because there was really no other choice that night...and ending up being blown away. I thought it was going to be a film that I had on as background noise; instead I found myself sitting bolt upright wondering what in the hell I was seeing. It was clear from the outset that there was a very good reason that it garnered reviews on the local TV stations when there were plenty of other major releases that weren't being covered.

The story concerns a woman who is trying to move away from being known as a pop singer. However, her choices include roles in films depicting rape and other unpleasantness. In the process her grip on reality begins to crack, more so when a super-fan begins worming her way into her life.

The reason this film works as well as it does is that the tale of identity and perception is perfect for animation. Because the film is animated, the shifts in reality are seamless. We are in the minds and eyes of the characters, and what they see, we see, and the effect is enthralling and disorienting. Kon uses our acceptance of animation to bend our minds. Sure the story is more or less a real world thriller; but when he gives us moments like a girl leaping from lightpost to lightpost we’re left wondering how long we’ve been out of Kansas, and why we never noticed.

What made Satoshi Kon one of the greatest filmmakers ever was simply that he knew what medium to use to tell the story he wanted to tell. If he wanted to create a world where anything is possible (say in Sunday’s film Paprika), he had to use animation. Yes the computer generated effects of today’s films are amazing, but at the same time you know they are effects. We may believe the dinosaurs in Jurassic Park, but at the same time we know they aren’t real. Kon’s use of animation circumvents that. EVERYTHING isn’t real...so everything is.

Kon’s genius is he tells the story the best way to tell the story. I suspect that had he needed to tell the story in some other manner he would have.

And I do mean that he tells the story the best way possible, since the same source story was used a few years later to make a live action film. That adaptation loses much of the complexity and coherence because of the limitations of shooting live action. That film, released in 2002, is just an incoherent mess that seemed more interested in skin than scares. (Forgive me if I’m wrong in the details, its been almost a decade since I’ve seen it and I didn’t feel the need to go back and see it again)

This film is a masterpiece. It was clear watching that film a decade or more ago that I was watching the calling card of a filmmaker who was out to take no prisoners.

You need to see this film. If you love thrillers or just damn good movies you have to see this film.

Currently on DVD

New York Comicon and New York Anime Festival

New York Comicon starts today. Its running in conjunction with the New York Anime Festival and it runs through Sunday.

The convention doesn't just have comic books, it also covers movies and TV and other related subjects.

This year Unseen is going to be there on a large scale with myself, Ken, Randi and possibly Bully attending. If there is anything of interest happening we will report it to you.

NYFF Day 5 Mysteries of Lisbon, Black Venus and audience death threats

It was a long day at the NYFF today.

I was on the train at 6:50am so I could catch two LONG films at the festival.

First up was the press screening for the film Mysteries of Lisbon. This is the 4 and a half hour version of a six part TV film where each part runs 55 minutes.

The film is based upon The Homonymous Novel by Camilo Castelo Branco. It was written in a serial fashion in I believe they said weekly installments. When it was put together the book filled well over one thousand pages.

The film is like being trapped in a pinball machine filled with mayo. The story and film immerse you deeply into the time and place that the film takes place but it's construction pings you around constantly from pillar to post as character after character stops the present story to tell you a story about the past. It's wheels with in wheels and stories with in stories.

The primary focus of the story is a young boy named Pedro daSilva who living in an orphanage that is run by a Father Dinis. As the film unfolds we are primarily following his story, but with long detours into the lives of everyone around him, all of whom have multiple identities and some connection to nobility. There are love affairs, duels, death, revenge, convents,rescues and several other things I'm forgetting.

Is it exciting?

Not particularly. The trouble is that the story is so fractured that it never seems to build up a real head of steam. Honestly I was bored for much of the first hour. It finally clicked, I think because it was throwing so much out it had to hit the mark eventually. The blame is partly the source novel which was written on the fly to fill a page count and had to keep readers interested. This leads to weird turns and some inconsistencies in the story (The time frames are messed up).

The film is also very silly. I know some of it, like the servant who is a refugee from The Ministry of Silly Walks was intentionally put in there, other things I'm not too sure about. A suicide of an unnamed character brought chuckles from the people behind me.

I'm not sure what director Raul Ruiz was up to at times since listening to the screenwriter talk he said that the director added bits to make things memorable. However other things like long takes that don't seem to end or serve a point confuse me since they seemed more like filler.

The film itself ends on a note of uncertainty, at least as far as I'm concerned. Its one of those was it real or was it all a fevered dream sort of things that feel like a cop out. I don't know how the book ends so I can't say. What I can say was that the ending kind of sent the film crashing down for me. I think I could have taken the numerous WTF moments that pop up here and there during the preceding four hours and twenty five minutes had the ending lead to something. It doesn't and your left with a story that just sort of hangs there with all of these odd moments that make no sense (the previous mentioned suicide).

I know the problem with the incestuous nature of all of the characters somehow knowing everyone in a manner that is way too neat comes from the book, but the rest of it...is just weird.

I know that I could have forgiven the film had the film been about something, other than the notion of identity which is obvious and too small a notion to fill five hours of screen time. It would have worked in a 90 minute movie, but almost five hours was too much to ask. Had the film not had an aire of being about something more it could have worked, I mean the old movie serials run about as long and are about nothing but motion. This film is touted to be about something, but I find it's about...nothing.

This film also raised several questions about what the programmers at the NYFF have been up to this year since the films I've seen have been disappointments. But I'll leave that for a later post since I want to jump into a review of Black Venus, which had many in the audience plotting to kill the director.(The line, my favorite piece of criticism I've ever heard in a theater was "We should find who ever is responsible for the film and kill them")

The film is about the Hottentot Venus, an African woman with a big bottom and enlarged genitals, who was a sensation and a scandal around 1810. She was portrayed on stage as a savage, however she really wasn't. The British people tried to put a stop to it, but it didn't happen and she eventually ended up in France where things took a turn for the worse.

The film concerns her time in London through her death and dissection (yes you read that correctly). The film begins with a French scientific discussion of Saartjie Baartman after her death during which her pickled body parts (privates included) are passed around.

I'm going to tell you if that paragraph upset you it only gets worse on any number of levels.

From the lecture the film flashes back to 1810 when Saartjie is in London, having come from South Africa. She is gaining notoriety as an attraction. She pretends to be savage as the crowd oogles her. He partner/lover lets people touch her which she hates and they fight. Mostly she drinks. For the first hour of the film we see her time in London which consists mostly of the act, her sulking, the act again and again and again as she gets drunk. Eventually they end up in court .

The next 45 minutes of the film the group is in Paris. Its more variations on the act and getting drunk.

Then the film shifts gear. The scientists want to see her and they pay big bucks to study Saartjie. They strip her, the measure her and they try desperately to see her privates, which she won't show them. We've gone from the public abusing her to science doing it.

Since she won't show her privates her "partners" have to give the money back and their chances of playing for the crowned heads of Europe are gone. So what do they do? They do a variation of the old act but its turned into a sex show.

Yes boys and girls we're well past the two hour mark and the nonstop abuse has just gotten worse and worse.

But it's not over, oh not by a long shot....

The sex show tanks because Saartjie still has dignity left, but that quickly goes by the wayside as she ends up in a brothel, until she is discovered with VD and is turned out. She then becomes a streetwalker until she dies.

But wait there's more.

It's at this point one of her friends and a former lover sells her body to the scientists who wanted to study her. They then make a cast of her before dissecting her.

as the end credits role we see news footage of Saartjie's remains finally going home for burial a few years ago.

At this point almost three hours have passed and the monotony of the abuse has taken it's toll.

In Alice Tully Hall earlier tonight the audience applauded politely before walking out (those that didn't leave during the film). People around me wanted to find the director and kill him. Everyone else I talked to or overheard couldn't believe how awful the film was. The refrain I heard over and over again was "it would have at least been a good film if..."

I don't quite hate the film with the passion that many did. I have lots of reservations.

The one thing I don't have a problem with is the cast, especially Yahima Torres who was amazing as Saartjie. I only wish the director had given her more to do then get drunk, do the act, and be humiliated. The performance is great, but any notion of a character as a most basic human being is lacking. We end up knowing almost nothing about our heroine, we just watch her debased for THREE HOURS.

Why is this film three hours? I don't know.

Frankly there is nothing but the graphic and ever worsening debasement of Saartjie. What are we suppose to get from it? I don't know. Worse the sequences are so repetitive, other than the worsening nature of the torment, that you turn off. I was dead to the film twenty minutes in as one London show bled into another and another.

The film is often like watching paint dry.

The story could work shorter but you'd need less repetition and some form of characters that develop. Unfortunately the film is structured in such away that the film can't be cut because the long nasty bits can't really be cut down.

I'm told the film has no US release. I'm guessing that the film's sexuality which is extremely strong but not graphic is part of the reason. The other reason is I think the film is bad. Only so many people would want to see this film, and most of those would just want to oogle the films star.

I had been told by a critic earlier in the day that most people at the press screening last week HATED the film. This fellow, who shall remain nameless, said that for the film to work you have to work with the film and react to it and think about what its doing. Frankly he was out of his mind since there is nothing to react to, just three hours of abuse. I think that the people who hated it had the right idea, maybe not the right ball park, but the right idea.

And in the aftermath of seeing the film and being with a pissed off crowd of people I have to ask what have the NYFF programmers been thinking?

Hold that thought. I'll come back to it next week once I've gotten through the next five days.

Initial D (2005)

Takumi is a high schooler who often delivers his father's tofu late at night. His late night trips have made him adept at the winding downhill run of Mt. Akina, which is a course used by the street racers of the area as the ultimate test of skill. When an unintentional race brings him to the notice of the racers, his life changes as he has to field numerous offers to actually see who is the best driver.

Initial D is a live action Chinese film that's based on a Japanese manga (comic book and cartoon) that's broken box office records across Asia. Despite being a huge anime fan I've never seen the animation nor have I read the comic. I'm not sure if that's a good thing or a bad thing, but seeing how many fans of the source material are unhappy with the film I would say it's a good thing.

Flat out I liked this movie. It did take a while to warm up to, but once I began to take it for what it is I thoroughly enjoyed it.

Is it a great film? In someways yes, and in others, no. As I said this takes a bit to get going. The lead, Jay Chou (who is playing Kato in the new Green Hornet film), is a bit too close-mouthed for my taste, barely uttering a word for the entire two hours. It's a bit too teen-angsty. Still, you have great characters and great performances by pretty much everyone in the cast (even if everyone was speaking three or four different languages when this was filmed).

The racing is excellent. It mostly seems to have been done without CGI enhancement. I like that there are no horrific crashes, police chases, or other clichéd events that are so rampant in American movies. And while I was initially apprehensive by the fact that the racing is always on the same stretch of road, I eventually warmed to the idea, since by doing that we really got to see who was best. (If you want American style racing in many different environments stay away)

Definitely worth a look-see, especially if you want to see a race film that is not like all of the rest.

NYFF Day 4:Mike Leigh:Filming London

Mike Leigh was at the New York Film festival in connection with his film Another Year. The film festival people also talked Leigh into being interviewed in connection with his use of London as a location in all but two of his films.

The talk is going to be impossible to summarize. Leigh's answers were long and detailed and I simply got lost in the answers (ina good way). The best I can do is summarize but a small portion of the talk and hope that the talk, which was filmed ends up on a DVD somewhere.

Leigh said that he came to London in 1960 and has been living there for the last 50 years. He said that the use of London as a location for all of his films has been purely a budgetary thing and not because of anything else. When Leigh writes a film he concentrates on the characters and what he wants to get across and not the location. Often the location comes out of where they are rehearsing and putting the film together.His films are not about the city rather about the characters.

All of his films are set in the time he made them, with the exception of the Gilbert and Sullivan film Topsy Turvy and Vera Drake and all of his films are there for products of when he shot them. He costumes and set decorates the films based on what the characters actually would wear of have in their homes. He will often have the actors wear the costumes and handle the props so they feel comfortable with the items.

The productions for the two period films were originally planned to have more extensive location sequences but the budgets wouldn't allow for it. With Topsy Turvy most of the film was shot on an abandoned estate and grounds, which included a gym and school which they converted into a de facto studio. The French restaurant and brothel sequences were filmed there with only a few people and props brought in from France.

There was a discussion of how film making in London has changed over the last 40 years. From there being no film councils and having to struggle to make films in the city because the police, and in one case a politician wanted no part of it; now there are councils in every borough of London. He added that the fact that people are now using shooting more films in London is both good and bad. Good because it means that its easier to do many things because people are used to film crews. It's bad because when a small production follows a big Hollywood production into an area they often find themselves priced out because the people in the area thing they also have the ready cash of a Hollywood blockbuster.


There was more but I really didn't remember much of it other than one of Leigh's last questions. A person in the audience mentioned that Eric Rohmer never used music unless it came from something the characters would hear or play. The person wanted to know, why,since Leigh's characters and situations are so real that he uses added music and doesn't go the route the same was a Rohmer.

Leigh's answer was that his first few films didn't have music, but that after three or four films he decided to experiment. He said that using the music was liberating for him. Since films are ultimately contrivances anyway why not use music? He pointed out that by using or not using music you can manipulate mood better. Some scenes simply play better with it while others better with out it and that by not ruling it out he can do what is best for the film.

It was an excellent talk, though to be honest I wish it hadn't been tied to London and had been allowed to wander farther a field.

Zuma (1985)

Today’s matinee review is a film called Zuma. It’s based on a Filipino comic book about an awakened snake god and his interactions with his daughter and other people. Zuma is very much the villain of the piece. I discovered the film through the book Mondo Macabro by Pete Tombs. It's about all of the weird and wild cinema that is off the radar of most English speaking or Western film fans. The book is a must read for anyone who wants to go off the beaten track of films. (If you do get the book you’ll need the websites in the side bar like Shocking Films, Video Search Of Miami, and Yes Asia, because they are the sort of places you’ll need to turn to in order to be able to find them) The book spawned a TV series on the films, as well as line of DVDs which has only a tiny fraction of titles listed.

I’m mixed about Zuma. There is a strong central story, and a great looking title character, but the film is a pure soap opera and goes on way too long. I’m so mixed on the film I’ve never tried to track down the sequel that was made. Regardless of my mixed feeling I do think that the film is worth searching out if you like the weird and the wacky. For a better explanation, the following is my IMDB review which I wrote up right after seeing it.

I was drawn in by the sight of the title character in pictures in the great book Mondo Macbro. He's a tall bald guy with a snake on either shoulder...or is it a two-headed snake wrapped around his shoulders? Sometimes I should just not be so curious.

The plot has some people discovering a buried pyramid. A group of them go in to explore. A woman in the group, off on her own, sees something get out of a crypt and leave the pyramid. When the group investigates they find nothing, only bodies outside. Soon after this Zuma, the guy from the crypt (the tall bald green guy with really big snakes on his shoulders), comes across a camping couple. He sets poisonous snakes on the man and then rapes and makes a slave of the woman. Bodies begin to pile up as the woman and Zuma, sporting a trench coat and a very large straw hat, begin to eat their way across the country side. Zuma is captured and the woman is thrown into prison. The military, not standing on ceremony, locks the green man in a cage and then fires several hundred rounds from a machine gun at him. When that doesn't work, they blast him with cannon fire and end up burying him in an avalanche. Where most movies would fade out at that point Zuma is only getting started; its only been 35 minutes and there are still 90 more to go.

Truly one of the wildest movies I've ever seen, this is a long movie that never seems to end. Zuma returns, there's a child, years pass, and we get to see one of the worst wigs in movie history. It's a dense, often talky movie that wears out its welcome after a short time. As I watched this I kept hoping that there would be a commercial or two to break up the monotony. I'm completely unfamiliar with the comic it's based upon, but I'm forced to wonder if it was really necessary to compress the entire run into 125 minutes.

Zuma has an interesting look. The snakes on his shoulders are clearly mechanical, however considering when and where it was done it's actually quite good.

Overall this is not something you really want to waste your time on. If you run across it take a pass. If you really must see Zuma in action then see if you can find the trailer on line or if you can talk your way into borrowing it from some sucker who owns a copy.

Frazetta: Painting with Fire (2004)

Frank Frazetta, who died this past May, was an incredibly talented artist who probably gained most of his notoriety from his paintings of Conan for paperback book covers in the 1960's and 1970's. He did many other fantasy bookcovers, paintings for movie posters, covers for horror magazines, comics, and even had an animated movie based on his art directed by Ralph Bakshi (Fire And Ice, which came out in 1983). But it is an interesting treat to see what artists have to say about Frazetta's art, and indeed hear what Frazetta has to say about the subject as well.

The documentary is a splicing of clips from interviews with contemporary fantasy and comic artists, along with a biography of Frazetta. Frazetta himself is one of the interview subjects, along with members of his family. Many of Frazetta's peers are interviewed as well, and there are also scenes of him wandering around Brooklyn reminiscing about the days of yore with some of them. We even follow him into his mother's home in Brooklyn.

A diverse range of people comprise the interview subjects, from actress Bo Derek, to musician Glenn Danzig, to the creator of The Rocketeer (and the man responsible for the late 20th Century revival of interest in 1950's pin-up model Bettie Page), Dave Stevens. Each relates their own personal way in which either the art, or the man, or both, affected their lives. It's an interesting testament to see how one man had such an effect on a broad range of talented human beings.

The Collector's Edition 2 DVD Set version that this review is based on comes with a large amount of bonus material on the second disc. There are many deleted scenes, outtakes, and additional stories to be told that were cut out of the actual feature to make it flow better. The first disc includes many extended interview segments as bonus material as well. But perhaps the most unique extra feature is at the beginning of the second disc, which shows Frazetta drawing a panther left-handed. After a series of strokes left him unable to draw right-handed, as he had naturally done all his life, he just taught himself how to do it with his other hand...a truly stunning achievement, especially when you consider he was in his 70's when he re-learned how to draw, and could still do it amazingly well.

Again, this review is based on the 2 disc version of Frazetta: Painting With Fire. There is a 2 disc Special Edition of the movie based on his art, Fire And Ice, which comes with the Painting With Fire main feature as the biggest bonus on the second disc...but then you don't get any of these great extras in this set. If the thought of a documentary of perhaps the greatest artist of the second half of the 20th Century seems interesting, you may as well go all out and get the version with all the goodies, and get Fire And Ice as a separate purchase.

Cave of Forgotten Dreams (2010)

Cave of Forgotten Dreams is a film Werner Herzog had to be talked into shooting in 3D. The film, a record of the cave paintings at Chauvet in France doesn't sound like the sort of thing that you'd expect to see in 3D. Cave paintings are flat right? Actually no, and it wasn't until Herzog saw them that he realized that the film needed to be in 3D.

Okay, let me step back and start again. This past Saturday night I had a ticket for a talk with Werner Herzog that was being held as one of the events at the New Yorker Festival. This is a festival held in Manhattan once a year where all sorts of interesting people come to town, under the sponsorship of the New Yorker Magazine, and are interviewed by many equally clever people. There are panel discussions, walking tours and scavenger hunts. Its generally a lot of fun. Over the years I've seen Clint Eastwood, Ricky Jay and a kick ass panel on acting in Shakespeare with Ethan Hawke, Liev Schreiber, Martha Plimpton and Kristen Johnson.

Waiting on line outside the Directors Guild Theater a person from the festival told us that the movie would be 90 minutes or so. It was in 3D and that we would have to give the glasses back. We were also told that there would be a very brief Q&A afterward. This confused everyone on line since none of us knew anything about a movie. As for the 3D part I remembered reading about a film going into production but I couldn't recall what it was suppose to be about.

Inside I ended up sitting 2 rows behind Mr Herzog. I wanted to say something to him but there was a din of activity around him and I never got the chance.

The project, to make a film record of the cave paintings at Chauvet, was suggested to Herzog by the producer. Herzog said that he instantly said yes because he knew that this was probably going to be the one time the paintings would be filmed (they are behind a bank vault like door and access is restricted. )They had only four hours on each of five days to actually film the paintings and had to follow certain strict rules: stay on the 2 foot wide path, use only a crew of 4, use only non-heat producing lights, and a few others.

Herzog starts the film with lo-res video footage of the first trip into the cave. They had exactly one hour to go in and see what was there so they could make plans. The 3D footage here is a bit odd due to its low quality, there is an occasional odd bending of the image, however that is a minor annoyance since we are instantly in the cave and marveling at the sights. Pristine paintings are on the wall and it's as if they were painted yesterday. They are truly beautiful.

Herzog introduces us to some of the scientists studying the paintings and artifacts. And he cuts back and forth between this first trip into the cave and interviews outside of the cave. As time goes on a certain tension is built up as we begin to ache to really see the cave and the paintings in their full glory, since during these early scenes we only getting brief looks at the art.

Then finally this "first" trip is done and Herzog says that he was then allowed to go in and film. From this point the images spring to life in beautiful high resolutio, and if you're like me your jaw hangs wide open at the magic.

Horses, Rhinos. Mammoth. All sorts of creatures line the walls. There are no people (well there is a half human creature), just animals in motion.

What master artisans these people were. The beauty and wonder of what was put on the walls makes us, as Herzog wishes as to, wonder at what point did we, as a species, become human? At what point did we develop the need to create? The paintings here 30 thousand years old and possess a clarity and a vision and a use of space that wouldn't really be matched for thousands of years.

Seeing this film in 3D blows you away because the paintings are not on flat surfaces, the walls of the cave protrude out or bow in and by moving the 3D camera you get a better idea of what the walls really look like. Added to that is the fact that Herzog moves his lights around as if they are torches so we see the images closer to what they would have looked like in torch light. It's amazing and makes the case for a scientist's suggestion that some of the paintings are a sort of "proto-cinema".

I don't know what to say.

This film just blew me away with what it showed. The beauty of it all really moved me. Its as if we are reaching back 300 centuries to hear a small voice in the wilderness... and I think that 3D was the way to go simply because it makes us feel as though we really are in the cave.

My feelings toward 3D are mixed. I really love the effect, but at the same time I know that its rarely used correctly. Almost never is it used to add to a film, rather its used like a sideshow gimmick. That's not the case ;here the film needed to be in 3D because it's documenting a real place that isn't 2D. This is one of the few rare occasions where the effect of seeing the film in 3D or 2D will be different (at least I think so).

Werner Herzog isn't a fan of 3D. During the talk after the film he admitted to seeing Avatar, but he added that" porno films should be in 3D but romantic comedies shouldn't" because the the 3D takes away a layer of engagement and doesn't allow our imaginations to fully connect to the film we are seeing. He feels we play along less with a film in 3D than a 2D one; we don't full engage with it since the extra dimension takes away the desire to ponder where it's all going. (I'm explaining it badly, forgive me his explanation took up a large portion of the post film talk and my trying to get it into two or three lines which doesn't do it justice.) I think Herzog used 3D here because there was no story to get short circuited, its simply real life.

I'm floored by the film. Its not that its perfect film, it's not, it's probably ten minutes too long, rather its a film that makes you wonder at man and life and the world we live in. There is a form of "ecstatic truth" that Herzog aims for in his films. This truth is a greater truth beyond the images and the films.

Frankly this is a film that should have been at the NYFF because its one that breaks boundaries and forces us to think and consider and really experience something.

See this film. See it in 3D if you can, in 2D if you can't. This was produced by History Films an off shoot of the History Channel so I'm guessing it will be eventually on cable. I know it's the opening night film at DOC NYC in November so look for it after that.

ADDENDUM:
Herzog admits that he's played with things a little bit, adding that he always plays with things since he picks the shots, chooses the music (which in this case is hauntingly beautiful) and everything else. He says that he is looking for a greater truth. To that end he openly states that the asking for quiet scene was staged for effect. He also said the end piece about the a albino crocodiles isn't true. The place is real but they are albino alligators from the US and are used with his comments for effect and to get at his truth.

I mention this because the question of what is real and what isn't is raised during next weeks week long look at the some of the documentaries of Werner Herzog.

And in the interest of full disclosure on my part the week was prepared way in advance, long before I sat in the theater seeing Cave. To that end keep in mind that when I mention not covering Herzog's films before that I really meant it at the time. It was only a happy accident that allowed me to see and review this film.

Riki-Oh: The Story of Ricky (1991)

If you hate blood and guts (literally) stop reading now because this movie is in no way for you.

On the popcorn scale of fun-with-brain-removed films this is on the top rung for laugh out loud enjoyment.

The plot has Ricky, a kid with super strength, being thrown into prison for killing the man responsible for raping and killing the girl he loved. This is a corrupt, privatized prison of the future where the prisoners are nothing more than cheap labor. Ricky instantly gets under the skin of the wardens, the guards, and the leaders of the prison population. Cartoon violence (what do you expect from a Chinese film based on a Japanese comic book?) with bloody, gory consequences ensue. Body parts go flying as Ricky fights to stay alive and help his fellow prisoners.

This is one of the bloodiest movies I've ever seen. Think Monty Python's Salad Days sketch...but for 90 minutes. There is blood and limbs everywhere. The effects run from very good to god awful, with most just okay. None of it is really "real". There's no way you could do this film realisticly (assuming the plot allowed for it), without having the audience throwing up all over the place. I'm assuming they are done the way they are for effect; we see the effect of the violence and laugh at the silliness of it all while keeping our lunches.

As the film spins more and more out of control, with plot holes that are more like stellar voids, you find yourself staring and laughing at it all, disbelieving that grown people put this together. It's a 12 year-old's action figure dream come true, but somehow it all works on an adult level since the filmmakers seem to be winking and nodding at those watching it.

High camp? Low brow? There is nothing in this film that seems to be serious except for the way that pretty much everyone plays it dead nuts straight to wonderful tongue-THROUGH-cheek effect.

Not a movie you want to see on a first date (or any date), this is a movie to watch with some loud friends...with strong stomachs and a great sense of the absurd. It's not a great film as such, and I doubt it was ever intended to be, however on the "throw your mind out of the car on the way to the video store" scale, this film rates at the top.

And I can't stress enough that this film lives up to its rep for blood and guts. If you don't like to see them flying in every direction stay away stay away stay away.

Captain America serial (1944)

Yes, it's the Captain America of the comics, but only in regards to the suit (and even then it's missing the wings on the mask). Instead of a super soldier fighting Nazi's, here we have a district attorney fighting the Scarab, who is killing off the members of an archaeological expedition using a gas that leaves purple blotches.

Starring Dick Purcell as the Captain and Lionel Atwill as the Scarab, this is a neat little serial. Neat as in fun, not in regards to story. Well acted and well filmed, the story is a complete nonsensical mess. Nothing makes any real sense; your brain will go into knots if you try to take it seriously, even on its own terms. Mostly you watch it because of the cast having such a great time, and because the action is some of the best in any serial. The action scenes are huge explosions of chaos that seem bigger and more dangerous then almost any other chapter play. Usually they end in wild cliffhangers that are so daunting that the only way for the hero to escape is for the filmmakers to cheat.

And cheat they do.

There is a reason that the documentaries I've seen on serials use footage from this film to illustrate how the serials cheated; almost every cliffhanger involves a cheat. Even though it makes no sense and the cliffhangers cheat, this is still a blast to watch.

This is something to put on when you want some mindless (and wholesome) action. Recommended.

Currently out on DVD.

Serial: Spy Smasher (1942)

This is probably considered a close second to The Adventures Of Captain Marvel as the best of all serials. This too is a comic book adaptation, but of a comic almost no one has seen in 60 years. It was a war related comic that died a painful death when the "enemy" went away and Spy Smasher was forced to fight regular criminals.

The plot has Spy Smasher (a reporter who faked his own death so he could fight the enemy on their own terms) returning to America to stop The Mask from flooding the country with counterfeit money, as well as doing other terrible things.

It's a rip roaring adventure that moves like the wind. Republic spent a nice chunk of change on the film and it shows with production values that seem a little more substantial than normal.

If there is a flaw it's that the film is so action packed that, watching it in one or two sittings, you become aware of how little plot there is. Yes, it moves like the wind, yes it's the perfect serial to be seen one chapter each week; but as a DVD to watch it one sitting it's almost too much motion. Granted, this was never intended to be seen in one sitting, so it's understandable that there are "problems" (and minor ones at that).

Action film and comic nuts really should see this. It's a blast and a half, especially if you like to watch the old wartime films from the 1940's.

Currently out on DVD

NYFF-Day 3.5- Social Network, Nuremberg and a tease at the New Werner Herzog film

Today was a make up day in regard to films from the NYFF. Basically I'm behind where I wanted to be with the number of screenings for a couple of different reasons. However today I went into Manhattan and tried to make up for lost time.

The first film I saw was Social Network. This is the story of the creation of Facebook. I'm not going to go into the film because it's playing everywhere and is being lauded as one of the best of the year and the decade....All I can say is look for a On Further Review entry down the road.

The short version is that the film is about a Mark Zuckerberg, who is best described by his soon to be ex-girlfriend in the first scene as an asshole. He's a socially backward genius of the sort that I grew up around in high school. Actually I know versions of all of the characters, sans the money, and I really didn't like them all that much. Any way Zuckerberg takes the idea of Face Book from a couple of rich guys who need his expertise and turn it into what we know today. Lawsuits result.

For me it was kind of hard to care about anyone in the film when everyone is either a jerk or incredibly shallow. I couldn't fathom why I would want to watch this film other than out of a feeling of obligation.

Don't get me wrong it's not a bad movie, its good, its just that it's hard to feel anything about a bunch of clever guys who are incredibly shallow. In its way the film is as shallow as the people it portrays...all of whom live in a shallow time. The fact that some has called it the film of the decade kind of makes it clear these are shallow times...and wonders what took the reviewer until this movie to notice it?

As I said, it's not bad, its just not as clever as it thinks it is.

People who love mistakes in films will have a field day of sorts as its clear from the poorly added breath mist that the film was not filmed in the dead of winter.

(I should also mention that Jesse Eisenberg nails the tics of an uber geek- however his mannerisms may annoy you, one person at the screening I saw liked the movie but Eisenberg made her nervous and she left.)

I also saw Nuremberg a restoration about the war and the trials that resulted. The film was never shown outside of Europe and the film elements have been lost or destroyed and it was only by careful searching that some of the elements were brought back together.

A good film, but not a great one, the film is very much you are there sort of thing. Its a good film to see if you keep it in the historical context, however if you are expecting something as gripping as a PBS special or a something from the History Channel you'll be disappointed. Its just not that exciting or interesting.

Worth a look but wait for cable.

Lastly I want to mention that I also attended the New Yorker Festival today as well. It was suppose to be a conversation with Werner Herzog. It ended up being a special screening of his new 3-D movie Cave of Forgotten Dreams. It's about the recently discovered cave paintings in Chauvet France. Its amazing and the 3-D actually has a reason to be there since it puts you in the cave. I want to do a full review later, if not this week then next week as part of the week long trbute to Herzog's documentary work.

That's it for now, its late and I have things to do in the morning.

Serial: The Adventures of Captain Marvel (1941)

Considered the pinnacle of all serials, this is certainly a grand, epic adventure. The serial tells the story of how Billy Batson becomes Captain Marvel in order to save the members of his archaeological party. It then continues on with him having to use his newfound powers to prevent the villainous Scorpion from using the scorpion statue that the party found for evil.

When I got into serials this was always held out to be the greatest of them all. I was repeatedly told by collectors that I was going to love it. When I finally did see it I wasn't all that impressed. However several years later I sat down and watched the film on its own terms and I really liked it. Honestly, seeing it again (divorced of the hype with which I watched it initially), I found it's a much better serial than I first took it for. It's action packed with lots of neat cliffhangers and all the things you think of when you hear "serial". It is one of the best cinematic translations of a comic book to the big screen ever.

And as you watch this keep in mind that if the adventures seem a tad familiar it's because movie makers and comic artists have been raiding this film for the sixty plus years since it was made. You've seen this before because everyone has subsequently stolen from it. How many cliffhangers in the Indiana Jones films are lifted from this and other serials? Almost all of them.

Unfortunately, it also shows the perils of having a superhero as a serial lead; how do you make it exciting when the hero can't be hurt? It was a problem Columbia wrestled with when they did Superman several years later.

A must see not only for the history but also for the adventure. This is, when taken as one film, one of the truly great adventure films of all time...it just happens to run four hours.

Currently out on DVD.

Fantastic Four (1994)

For the next ten days Unseen Films is going to the funny pages. In honor of the weird occurrence of two back to back comic conventions in New York (today is Wizard World’s Big Apple Convention, and next weekend is New York Comic Con and the New York Anime Festival), we’re going to do ten days of films that came from comic strips and comic books. I’m going to begin with the Fantastic Four.

This is not the big budget version that starred Michael Chiklis and Jessica Alba, this is the version that was made in 1994 and was never released. Seriously, the film was never released to theaters, because the point of making the film wasn’t to make a movie for release; rather it was to make a movie that fulfilled the terms of the contract that gave the producer the rights to make a screen adaption. The rights were about to go away when Hollywood and Chris Columbus went knocking on Marvel Comics' door. If a movie wasn’t made by a certain date, the rights to the characters would revert to Marvel. So the rights holder hooked up with Roger Corman and produced a quickie film. A nominal release was planned, promotional articles were written, and I know that Alex Hyde White (the actor portraying Reed Richards, leader of the Fantastic Four) was due to appear at comic book store Jim Hanley’s Universe in Manhattan to promote the film (I was planning on attending the in-store). Just before White's appearance, word reached him, and the world, that the release was cancelled and that the film was to be buried because the producers didn't want to release it; the film only had to be made, not released, for the rights to remain in the producer's hands.

No one was ever supposed to see the film, yet somehow it escaped onto the collector's market. I have no idea why no home video was ever attempted; even after the two recent big screen adaptions, this film simply is still buried.

I find its premature burial kind of sad because most of the movie is actually a pretty good comic adaptation.

The film basically covers the origin of the superhero group and of the masked Dr. Doom, starting with their time in college and going onward from there. The scenes with the Fantastic Four and Doom are wonderful. In all honesty most of it plays better than the big budget things that Hollywood cranked out. Sure the special effects are low rent and bordering on not so special, but at the same time they are part of a film that has heart. If you watch the film it's clear that everyone actually cared about what they were doing.

The story runs parallel with the story of a gnomish guy who lives in the sewers and loves jewels. He gets his hands on some space jewel that's important to the FF and Doom, but for the most part his story is kept separate from the superhero stuff (bear with me I'm doing this from memory). The scenes with this pint sized character are really, really bad. They're so bad that when I do watch the film I scan through those parts of it and just concentrate on the heroes.

Yes I know this film has a bad reputation, and on some level it kind of deserves it. On the other hand think about it, if the film was truly as awful as everyone says it is, why would it still be circulated and talked about twenty years after it was made and never released? It just doesn't make sense.

No it's not even close to being one of the greatest films, or even greatest superhero films, ever made. It's just a nice little film that has unfairly gotten shunted on the road toward oblivion.

It's a film that is worth taking the time to see (allowing you know it has limitations).

Currently officially unavailable from any source, the film is readily available from a variety of collectors and grey market dealers.