The Grim Cellar

2007, US, Directed by Sam Raimi

Colour, Running Time: 139 minutes

Cinema screening, Image: 2.35:1 Super 35 (VistaVision for FX), Audio: English language

On the run from the police a hapless crook escapes into a scientific test facility where his molecules are accidentally fused with those of sand - it later turns out that this is the same guy that may have shot Peter Parker’s uncle several years ago, rather than the villain Spider-Man allowed to die. Simultaneously, a meteorite hits Earth releasing a symbiotic alien entity that latches on to Parker, a malevolent life form that integrates with its host and begins influencing it. Facing mounting personal problems with his separation from Mary-Jane, attacks from an unforgiving Harry Osbourne (AKA the new Green Goblin) and wrestling an angry inner drive for revenge against his uncle’s killer, now affectionately known as Sandman, the mutated hero begins to realise that his behaviour has been changing for the worse and manages to rip the alien from his body, only to find later that it has crawled onto another victim, a rival photographer whose dishonesty has been exposed by Parker, to give birth to the monstrous Venom. Venom and Sandman both want Spidey dead and join forces to destroy him.

Well I’ll make myself unpopular: it seems there have been a lot of internet opinions suggesting Spidey 3 is a mess but I enjoyed the latest chapter. It certainly is a little long and could have done with the removal or trimming of one or two obtrusive scenes (there is probably too much emphasis on Parker’s romantic life). But as superhero story combined with soap opera (which the Spider-Man comics effectively are) it generally works well enough - the story contains multiple parallel threads, most of which gradually come together. I would complain about the liberties taken with the Gwen Stacy character (a subplot designed to cause a rift between Parker and MJ) - Stacy died at the hands of the Goblin in the original comic story and her implementation here is unfaithful. Non-readers of the comics, however, wouldn’t find a problem with this, but as a big fan of the comic through the 70s and 80s it does make me wonder why she was used in this way.

The action sequences are exciting (though I do wish Raimi would stop having Spidey fight unmasked), particularly on a cinema screen, and again the violence is a little excessive for smaller kids. With most of the relevant cast and crew involved from the first two movies there is suitable continuity that helps blend it with the other films. I think people probably want to dislike this film partly due to the widespread popularity of the series but, aside from a few unnecessary minutes (I couldn’t quite get my head around the extent to which Parker’s Venom-influenced ostentatious activities were exaggerated), it’s a nice continuation of the character’s adventures. Oh, and Bruce Campbell has another great cameo!

2006, US, Directed by Gil Kenan

Animation, Running Time: 87 minutes

DVD, Region 2, Sony, Video: Anamorphic 2.39:1, Audio: Dolby Digital 5.1

In an American suburb the local kids are terrorized by a bitter old man whenever they step on his property or let their toys fall on to his lawn, causing a real stink on Halloween when kids like to go trick-or-treating. One boy in particular, DJ, is suspicious of what goes on in the old man’s spooky house, setting up a telescope in his bedroom and generally becoming obsessed. As his parents shoot off for holiday, er, sorry - vacation, and the old man himself is taken away by ambulance, DJ enlists the help of his fat friend and the local babe (if you’re 13 or under of course) as they begin to realise that the house itself seems to have a mind of its own, apparently ‘eating’ anything that it can. The police understandably don’t believe a word of it, so the youngsters decide to take the matter into their own nicely modelled hands - they start formulating a plan to break in.

Coming across as a modern mix of The ‘burbs and The Goonies, Monster House is a fairly creative CGI movie showcasing advances in technology to quite astounding effect. The story itself is not groundbreaking but the characters are a joy to watch. The script is executed at a slower pace than expected by the usual roundup of ’stars’ who do an adequate job with the material. Rendering has reached such heights that the visuals could almost pass for stop-motion photography if the character movements themselves were not so smooth, which almost makes one wonder if the film could just have been shot as live-action utilising CG special effects (especially considering the extensive use of motion capture, which is not true animation). Made using an innovative 3D process for its original theatrical screenings, the technique has stimulated plenty of inventive virtual camera work that helps draw the viewer into the action even in 2D. There seems to have been a little influence from Tim Burton here also, the score itself coming across as a Danny Elfman imitation on occasions. An acceptably delightful film.

The digital transfer, while not as sharp as expected (probably due to the fact that they deliberately added ‘film grain’ in post-production), is delectable - the images created by the Sony team are often quite stunning and they are well represented here. The surround mix is equally absorbing making the disc a good demonstration piece for your system whether you enjoy the film or not. Should you be brave enough yet it’s also available on superior Blu-ray Disc but on either format Monster House is quite a fun ride.

2001, US, Directed by Pete Docter

Animation, Running Time: 88 minutes

DVD, Region 2, Disney, Video: Anamorphic 1.81:1, Audio: DTS

Monstropolis is an alternate dimension that is powered by children’s screams, these being collected by factories that employ the most competitive creatures to enter the human world via closet doors to scare kids (who are reputedly poisonous to monsters), notching up points and positioned on a league as an incentive to do better. Sulley is an especially revered monster and, accompanied by his perpetually argumentative assistant, Mike, they inadvertently bring a human child into Monstropolis and from there begins a frantic race to return ‘Boo’ to her homeland before the paranoid boss finds out who’s responsible. But they face problems from the likes of Sulley’s primary competitor: the chameleonic, mischievous Randall, who may be even more sinister than he first appears.

Continuing in the established tradition of Pixar this is a meticulously well-planned story with identifiable characters in imaginatively executed situations. Technically there were clear progressions from Toy Story and Bug’s Life (the implementation of realistic hair being the most notable) but Pixar are intuitive enough to have this almost relegated to background detail as the story itself captures viewer attention - technical mastery can only stimulate awe for so long and Pixar are well aware of this. The narrative techniques are occasionally ingenious but often obvious (for example, Sulley and Mike being such an odd couple is a joke that goes back to the Laurel and Hardy days), though this is admittedly a product aimed at the whole family. Animation itself is exemplary and Pixar are masters of their art, although subjectively I marginally prefer PDI’s (Shrek, etc.) slightly more adult approach (Disney’s influence over Pixar seemed to have become more noticeable by this stage). Kids aside, there’s enough humorous material here to entertain just about anyone. If more live action film-makers put in this much effort these days the movie world would be a healthier place.

The 2-disc set is first-rate in almost every respect. The film presentation is reference standard (direct digital transfers eliminate the print/negative problems of footage shot on ‘film’), being sharp and dazzlingly colourful. The DTS sound mix gives a sweeping surround workout. Among the many extras are two short films well worth owning - the Oscar winning For The Birds, and Mike’s New Car, the latter using characters/settings from Monsters Inc. itself. Pixar basically built themselves up during the 80s with short films and the gradual inclusion of all of them on their feature DVDs is nice incentive to collect. Superb package.

1965 / 1967, UK, Directed by Robert Day / Cliff Owen

Colour, Running Times: 101 / 97 minutes

DVD, Region 2, Optimum, Video: Anamorphic 1.78:1 / 1.66:1, Audio: Mono

She: A group of academics/budding explorers travelling in India hear of an ancient city and head off into the desert to find it. There they find a despotic woman ruling over the lost kingdom, the mighty Ayesha, who has been expecting the arrival of one of the explorers because he is apparently the descendant of a primordial love of hers. There she expects him to take her side on the throne to rule eternally (with the help of an immortal-life-giving fire).

Vengeance of She: After having put an end to a yacht party, the drunken owner finds a rather attractive stowaway that he and his companions (understandably) decide to adopt for the duration of their journey into distant waters. Unknown to them she is possessed by the spirit of Ayesha and uncontrollably beckoned into the hands King Killikrates of the lost city of Kuma, who wants his reincarnated love for himself once more. One of the crew members however has fallen in love with her already and, not entirely empathic about Killikrates’ ideas, plans to take her back.

Surprisingly She was a massive success for Hammer; Vengeance… conversely bombed. My theory is that everyone flocked to see the first film thanks to Hammer’s usual great advertising campaign (their posters were often gorgeous works of art) combined with the inclusion of the chiselled Ursula Andress as the titular character, then, not exactly enjoying the laborious fantasy adventure, nobody was really interested in seeing the sequel produced as a result of the financial success of the first. While these films have their fans I find them somewhat unengaging and a chore to sit through. Despite an entertaining opening sequence in She with Cushing and his friends having a good night out in an Eastern bar, the film becomes difficult to sit through. I marginally prefer the sequel - starting off with a lovely European aura (and supported by quite a nicely written score throughout), it unfortunately rapidly loses appeal, although there is quite an exciting car/horse chase across the desert. And Olinka Berova (Olga Schoberová) is a particularly alluring, nubile Czech beauty (as you’ll notice most of them are if you visit the culturally rich land); though a fairly talentless thespian at least she decorates the screen.

The first film is a bit of a mess on DVD: shot in ‘Hammerscope’ it originally had a ratio of 2.35:1; here, following an opening credit sequence roughly of 2.00:1 the remainder is presented in 1.78:1, therefore severely cropped. Further to that, there is some kind of video noise evident throughout and detail is not exactly a strength. Out of Optimum’s Hammer collection, this is the worst transfer apart from The Reptile (though everything else in the box looks fine to be fair - see the reviews elsewhere in The Grim Cellar). Vengeance… is much better, looking quite cinematic and accurately featuring a pillar-boxed ratio of 1.66:1. Buy these films if you know you already like them and then only if you can get them cheap, but I wouldn’t try them on spec.

1971, UK, Directed by Sam Peckinpah

Colour, Running Time: 117 minutes

DVD, Region 1, Criterion, Video: Anamorphic 1.78:1, Audio: Mono

A social horror tale based on a novel by Gordon Williams, Straw Dogs introduces us to a married couple who have moved into a rural house in an almost backward Cornish village. American mathematician David Sumner (Dustin Hoffman) and his English wife, Amy (Susan George), are immediately at odds with the locals for one reason or another - David as the ultimate outsider is constantly embarrassed by his inability to integrate, and Amy as a source of sexual enticement (the first shot we see of her is her clothed but visible nipples). A series of events gradually escalate to levels of hostility, then rape, then all-out violence and murder as a suspected paedophile ends up in David’s house while a lynch mob forms outside as he refuses to surrender the man to the undiplomatic bunch. As the mob become increasingly aggressive the overly conditioned intellectual David is pushed further and further until he is finally forced to descend to the only means of communication that they will understand: violence.

A pretty shocking portrayal of human primordial instincts stubbornly existing in a world where they have been all but swept under the carpet - David is a person who will shy away from aggression at all costs, until he is finally backed into a corner and there is no other option. This is illustrated very early on when a minor fight breaks out at the pub and he kind of worms his way into the background not entirely sure what he should be doing (apart from avoiding conflict). The film caused problems with the censors in England (rejected for a video certificate as recently as 1999), mainly due to the rape of Amy - initially her obligatory refusal of the attacker (someone she had a relationship with years earlier) turns to some sort of instinctive acceptance (i.e. part of her actually enjoys what happens), but this is followed by a more brutal and terrifying attack by someone else that leaves her emotionally ruined. David’s absolute denial of his own innate aggression presents him as a spineless weakling but really he is not so different to how most ‘decent’ people today have been conditioned against surrendering to the lower cerebral functions. A gripping and historically significant film that almost makes for a psychological study on the animal still residing somewhere in most humans. On a more technical level, I think Peckinpah’s visual compositions (particularly as the events of the film become increasingly chaotic) are amazing, as are some of the employed editing techniques. It’s a great piece of work all round.

In the UK there was a pretty good special edition on DVD, later followed by the bare-bones budget disc that you can get today. That’s okay but the definitive release remains the Criterion two disc set put out several years ago. The transfer is stunning and it is complemented by just about anything that can be a considered worthwhile bonus including a feature-length documentary on Peckinpah himself, onset footage and interviews from 1971, a neat booklet, isolated music score, etc. Cinema fans should own this.

1999, UK/USA, Directed by Stanley Kubrick

Colour, Running Time: 153 minutes

DVD, Region 2, Warner, Video: 1.33:1, Audio: Dolby Digital 5.1

Dr William Harford (Tom Cruise) is a prestigious Manhattan practitioner, married to a beautiful woman (Nicole Kidman) with whom he has produced the perfect daughter - everything appears to be rosy. One evening the couple are smoking pot and enter into an unexpected argument, initiated by an evening before where both of them were the subjects of attempted seductions at the high class party of one of his patients (Sydney Pollack). Harford, living his life wearing rose-tinted spectacles, is dismayed to learn that his trusted wife would have been willing to be unfaithful to him had she had the chance several years previous. Receiving a timely call from a patient’s daughter he sets off alone to officially confirm a death. From that point on his perception of the world and his life has changed and there is sex everywhere and sexual intention where he once would have overlooked its latent possibility - for example, the daughter of his dead patient reveals that she’s in love with him before her fiancée walks in oblivious to her feelings for another man, just as Harford had been with his wife. Meeting an old acquaintance, Nick, in a jazz bar he is intrigued to find out about an event taking place at a secluded mansion and persuades Nick to tell him the password for entry. Obtaining a costume he gets into the place to find some sort of perverse mass ritual where masked people are mating with each other without regard for social conventions. But he has not managed to fool them with his anonymous presence…

Kubrick delivered the final cut of Eyes Wide Shut days before his death and it proved to be a controversial piece for a couple of reasons - firstly it contained an abundance of soft-core sex scenes and nudity (the likes of which tends not to go down too well with American audiences), and secondly some people were disappointed with it on a critical level. It was a pretty big budget film (around $65 m) but Kubrick is an auteur more than anything and it’s always risky giving that amount of cash to someone who is primarily concerned with making truly great works of cinematic art in today’s business. Based on a book by Arthur Schnitzler the film was once intended to be made by Kubrick back in the seventies and one can only wonder how different it would have been. As it is, he has created what I feel to be a near perfect slice of pure cinema - Cruise and Kidman perform quite brilliantly (though I find her character to be somewhat obnoxious) and the imagery is almost always striking. A dream- (or nightmare) like world is constructed around people that are in one way or another obsessed with sexual issues, and the film’s centrepiece (the mansion ritual/orgy sequence) is hypnotic and tense. It’s an intriguing story that can envelope the viewer like few films today. The extensive production itself, as had become commonplace for Kubrick movies, proved to be arduous for all.

Due to the sex scenes some of the shots were digitally obscured in post-production with cloaked figures generally - for the US cut. Thankfully, here in the UK, we get the Full Monty. Unfortunately Warner broke with politically correct weakness when a particularly prominent Eastern religious group present in the UK complained that parts of the soundtrack contained elements of divine music (Bhagavad-Gita) - they removed the ‘offending’ part of the soundtrack (though the film remains intact). It doesn’t have a great impact but I can never agree to that kind of rubbish - if someone is offended by something then they simply need not watch it. Anyway, other than that the Warner R2 DVD presents the film in roughly the correct aspect ratio of 1.33:1 (wrongly projected theatrically at 1.85:1) with beautiful image quality and an excellent 5.1 track (truly coming to life for the distinctive and potent score). There are some insightful interviews contained on the disc making up a nice package for a rare modern cinematic treat that we should be thankful ever got made, but avoid the US disc.  There has since been a Blu-ray version Eyes Wide Shut but I understand it is once again cropped to 1.78:1 - extra resolution or not, this is not the way to see such a meticulously composed film, hence until they respect the director’s wishes I’ll hang on to this DVD forever.

1976, France, Directed by Barbet Schroeder

Colour, Running Time: 113 minutes

DVD, Region 1, Criterion, Video: Anamorphic 1.66:1, Audio: Mono

Two door-to-door ‘art book’ salesmen (well, this is France), manage to get into the apartment of Ariane, an apparently normal woman whose bath is overflowing. Later on they’re snooping around the floor below (which Ariane claims is empty) and are perplexed to find some strange paraphernalia: 10 inch heel boots, rubber masks, gas masks, whips, rubber suits, a naked man in a cage (believe it or not, this isn’t Elton John’s place), etc. They’re interrupted by Ariane, all dressed up and ready to beat the caged guy - she seems to keep the lower level as some kind of dungeon. Trapped by her large and hungry looking dog the hapless pair are tied up and forced to watch an S&M spectacle unfold. She obviously likes Olivier (Gerard Depardieu) because she gets him to lend a hand by pissing on the face of her willing victim. Quite quickly Olivier and the Maîtresse (i.e. mistress) are pretty much falling in love and it’s not long before her double life as a dominatrix is causing all kinds of trouble between them.

An expertly shot film and obviously quite notorious given its subject matter. I find the characters difficult to identify with and therefore it leaves me a little cold, plus, the S&M scenes, whilst most would believe them to be incapable of being sexually stimulating anyway, are presented to the viewer in a rather cold and clinical way. Obviously this was Schroeder’s intention but it doesn’t help the film to find much appeal outside of critic circles. There’s also the genuine onscreen slaughtering of a horse which anyone who has any concern for animal welfare will want to forward through: Depardieu watches the killing, then walks over to the local horse meat shop, buys a slice before going home to cook and eat it - this doesn’t facilitate any love for the man. Overall a critically relevant film that’s difficult to enjoy.

Criterion present a digitally remastered, anamorphically enhanced 1.66:1 version of the film that looks amazingly sharp, clean, and boasting perfect colour schemes - it’s difficult to imagine an improvement; this is what you call a restoration. Extras are thin, with a 15 minute interview and a booklet containing an essay. Surprisingly the BBFC passed this uncut in 2003 when BFI submitted it, and not only that but the transfer was almost as good as the Criterion disc (albeit replacing the extras with inferior choices), so it will probably just come down to cost when choosing between them.

2007, UK/USA, Directed by Michael Apted

Colour, Running Time: 118 minutes

Cinema screening, Image: 1.85:1 Spherical, Audio: English language

In 18th Century England the slave trade is prosperous for the country and politically sensitive as a result. One man, William Wilberforce, who is questioning his spiritual place in the universe decides to take on the system in order to bring about an abolishment of slavery, facing seemingly insurmountable odds in the process. Along the way he has to deal with increasing personal illness, the arrival of a woman who equals his views with her own passion and intelligence, and politicians that initially refuse to budge from their narrow minded attitude.

Based on apparently true accounts of how England’s part in the slave trade was finally brought down by the moral drive and relentless passion for doing what’s right by a small number of people, this is a film I wouldn’t normally have watched due to becoming a bit sick of hearing about slavery, the reported atrocities of Nazi Germany, things like that. Obviously I personally have never been involved in slavery (and don’t agree with keeping thinking organisms captive unless they’re wrong-doers) and feel insulted that modern day politicians are apologising on my (i.e. as a native of Britain) behalf for ‘our’ part in the slave trade a hundred or so years before any of us even existed. A person can only apologise for what they themselves have done as far as I’m concerned and this makes the PC actions of councillors and politicians rather redundant considering they were not actually involved. In light of that Amazing Grace works well as a historical drama rather than a piece of political preaching (which I hope it’s not intended to be), constructing what appears to be a well balanced story, perhaps even educational, and can therefore be considered to be of value as a film.

Cinematography is very good with well composed and lit imagery casting a sepia tone on many occasions, this being supported by an appropriately emotional score and combined with excellent acting and script work. I found the jump from Wilberforce’s exploits by two years towards the end to be notably jarring and clumsy, plus the film is somewhat slowly paced so I feel that some tighter editing would have been in order (it’s interesting to note that foreign cuts are about seven minutes shorter so I’m wondering how they differ). It’s a good piece of work anyway.

2006, Czech/USA, Directed (and screenplay written) by Neil Burger

Colour, Running Time: 110 minutes

Cinema screening, Image: 1.85:1 Super 35, Audio: English (in foreign accents…)

Adapted from a short story Burger’s film focuses on a magician around turn-of-the-century Vienna who runs into the childhood sweetheart that he was forced to leave behind years earlier thanks to a class divide and the narrow minded authorities who thought it was a relevant point. As an adult she’s about to marry a reputedly violent Crown Prince, who has his own political agenda based on the initiation of his proposed marriage. The magician finds himself being pushed away from the one he loves once again and, as far as he’s concerned, he’s not about to let it happen again. But he’s up against overwhelming forces in the shape of corrupt police and amoral royalty (hang on, we are still in Vienna here aren’t we….?).

It’s a good film and the performances are generally great, Norton as the eponymous protagonist and particularly Rufus Sewell as the Crown Prince. In fact I didn’t recognise Sewell for a while. The visuals are especially attractive, my favourite sequence from an aesthetic point of view being the flashback to Norton’s youth - shot almost in silent movie style visually. Philip Glass, probably one of the greatest living composers, provides the beautiful score (string heavy, as can be expected). The story is an interesting one and enough to keep the attention throughout. Avoiding general Hollywood conventions in many ways, this is worth checking out at the cinema.

2006, France/Italy, Directed (and written) by Michel Gondry

Colour, Running Time: 105 minutes

Cinema screening, Image: 1.85:1 spherical, Audio: English, French, plus some Spanish

It takes a while to get used to, being completely manic and apparently insane, but once you become accustomed to the strange universe of The Science of Sleep it becomes a magnetic experience. The story weaves through the mind of Stephane, a Mexican guy who’s lost his dad, moving to France to join his mom - she gets him a job in this boring office gluing bits of paper together (he wanted something creative) and he meanwhile falls for his neighbour, the geeky but endearing Charlotte Gainsbourg.

Stephane (I know, it sounds like a girl’s name to us ignorant Brits…) has a problem (or a gift?) of finding it difficult to separate reality from his dreams and they often intertwine, becoming blurred at the edges. This is where the film is really unique because Gondry obviously has let his imagination run riot with optical tricks and strange stop motion animation to depict Stephane’s inner cerebral workings. It’s a surreal experience. Gainsbourg is not the protagonist’s first choice of girl - he is initially attracted to her sexy friend but finds the less obvious artist to be a much more interesting individual. She grows on the viewer too (or at least in my case she did). But his mind is such a chaotic place that he can’t help forcing the relationship that develops to meander between one apparently satisfying occurrence to another chaotic one, kind of resembling life. Sometimes it’s difficult to tell what’s really happened and what is part of one of his dreams, but that kind of ambiguity makes this a more satisfying watch. Sort of like Videodrome but without the horror.

An interesting idiosyncrasy is the tendency of the dialogue to switch rapidly between English and French (primarily because Stephane has a problem with French) - quite unusual but I liked it as it helps keep the brain active. In the end it’s up to a viewer’s subjective opinion what they take from a film like this. In my opinion it’s a reflection that dreams and sleep are often far more satisfying than what’s actually happening in the supposed ‘real world’ itself.