Sayonara Cinema

THE CITY OF VIOLENCE (2006)When retired gang leader Wang-Jae is murdered, detective Tae-Soo returns to his hometown for the first time in ten years after leaving to become a detective in Seoul. Tae-Soo reunites with his old high school friends to say farewell to Wang-Jae, but feels that something is not right about his death. With his fists and temper at his side, Tae-Soo uses the power of the law to stir up a few hornet nests trying to figure out just what happened. For his troubles, Tae-Soo is beset by multiple gangs, all trying to keep Tae-Soo from finding out too much. But with his friend Seok-Hwan at his side, whose fists are just as merciless, Tae-Soo starts tearing through the lies, deceptions, and criminal activity setting up shop in the tourist district. And when he finally gets someone to talk, he learns that it may just be their mutual friend Pil-Ho behind the murder.

The domestic release of The City Of Violence comes courtesy of Dragon Dynasty, a genre label under the newly formed Weinstein Company. The Weinsteins, who were once the targets of the seething wrath of Hong Kong fans for their Dimension releases of Jet Li and Jackie Chan films, which only featured English dubs and shortened versions of the movie, have finally come around and given the fans just what they want — original dialogue and subtitles, the uncut film, and plenty of extras. A quick look at the original CJ Entertainment extras looks like they’ve ported over the entire Region 3 release. As well as a Dolby Digital and DTS Korean soundtrack, an English dub is also made available on this DVD, for those that can’t deal with “reading” a movie. [Read My Full Review at Geeks Of Doom]

EXILED (2006)When Wo is discovered to be living in Macao, Boss Fay orders Blaze to kill him. Wo once attempted to assassinate Fay, and now he must pay the price. But Blaze and Wo were once friends, and Blaze is unable to pull off the job. Even more so, his friend Tai has pleaded for Blaze to spare Wo’s life. These three, along with their gangster friends Cat and Fat, conspire to pull off a highly risky assassination job of Boss Keung, and intend to give the money they earn from it to hide away Wo and his family. Their plot to kill Keung is quite tricky, and even the slightest deviation from their plan will alert Fay, and bring his henchmen down on them. And on top of all this, the clock is slowly counting down to the handover of Macao to the Chinese government, their lives and fates are up in the air as to what the future holds.

For fans of Hong Kong action with knowledge that goes past John Woo and Chow Yun-Fat, you have only to look at the laundry list of talent attached to this film to know that it will succeed on every level. Johnnie To directs, through his Milky Way Image production company. The script comes from the pen of two writers whose previous scripts include EXPECT THE UNEXPECTED, A HERO NEVER DIES, and BREAKING NEWS. And the cast is a perfect assortment of Hong Kong’s classic gangster actors including Anthony Wong, Simon Yam, Francis Ng, Lam Suet, and Roy Cheung, which coincidentally is most of the main cast for Johnnie To’s classic THE MISSION. [Read My Full Review at Geeks Of Doom]

PEEPING TOM (1960) Mark Lewis is a shy young man, who is always hiding behind either a camera at the movie studio he works at, or behind his small handheld camera wherever he goes walking. Recently, Mark has taken a further step in his voyeurism, as he leads women into a false sense of safety, and then films them as he murders them. Within Mark’s huge home, in which lets out many or the rooms to his tenants, he has an impressive array of camera equipment, film developing stations, and projection equipment. He spends his free time watching his own movies, that is, until he meets one of his tenants, a young and beautiful girl named Helen. Helen’s outgoing personality works as an opposite tangent to Mark, and the two start spending time together. Mark attempts as best he can to talk with her, though his introverted tendencies often thwart his attempts to show what he is thinking. The only way he can “talk” with Helen is to show her his films. Helen soon starts to learn just how Mark has come to be the way he is, while Mark starts to fear that he may be unable to hold back from showing Helen the true face of fear and terror.

Director Michael Powell, working from a script by playwright Leo Marks in his screenplay debut, takes a shocking and frightfully realistic view of a murderer in this character study that gives a depth to the history of the killer Mark, and how he has over years and years organically turned into a monster hiding behind a seemingly innocent face and soft-talking voice. The result is an unsettling dissection of the make-up of a killer, and much like the same year’s PSYCHO, unknowingly set the ground rules of serial-killer suspense and horror, with its for-the-time raw and shocking murder sequences, the blending of sex and violence, and tense atmospheric buildup.

Marks’ script takes a deep look into the psychological creation of Mark Lewis, with his obsession with voyeuristic filming and examination of fright in his victims stemming back to his father’s work as a child psychologist, who used Mark as his constant subject and filmed him growing up. This is turn forced the audience to examine the often debated “nature versus nurture” aspects of humanity’s villains, murderers, and hate-filled supremacists. Without Mark’s father’s interference and objective observation of his life, Mark would most likely have turned out to be a well adjusted adult. Bringing Mark believably to the screen was a vital part to making the film work. The part fell on the shoulders of German actor Carl Boehm. Boehm’s naturally boyish looks, sympathetic eyes, and soft voice with just a hint of an accent created a harmless looking individual. He projects a deep and powerful performance that resonates still today in performances by those in roles where the murder is compelled or drawn against their will to kill, rather than having a desire to willingly kill.

Powell incorporates voyeurism onto the screen in a quite compelling way as he draws the audience into Mark’s world. In the opening sequence, in which we are introduced to Mark and his first victim, we see most of the scene through the viewfinder of Mark’s camera, as identified by a framing cross that cuts the entire screen into four quadrants. This shot is repeated multiple times throughout the film, whenever Mark is using his camera. Arguably, these are the most important shots of the film, as we are in a way seeing through Mark’s eyes and what he believes to be the most important things worth remembering. Through these shots, we become active participants in Mark’s obsession. However, when these shots are being played back on Mark’s projector, with either Mark watching them, or showing them to others, Powell focuses his camera on the character rather than the projector screen. This plays especially important when Helen is subjected to Mark’s horrific film collection. We watch her recoil in terror, but we do not know what she is watching, thus we become voyeurs to Helen’s frightful emotions.

Halfway through the film, a police investigation subplot is introduced as Mark’s victims are found and a correlation between the murders is discovered. Mark becomes intrigued with the police investigators, and films them unaware as they do interviews on the film set that Mark is working on. Mark fully believes that they will catch them, and Mark seems to want to be captured, even offering up evidence to the investigators without them realizing it. When Mark becomes a suspect, he is tailed and thus becomes the subject of voyeurism himself. It is a role reversal that works exceedingly well. Leo Marks’ script gives the investigators some decent screen time, and their detail oriented attempt to solve the mystery would help to pave the way to the police murder mysteries later that decade.

Powell’s final product is a visceral piece that was destroyed by critics, and generally hated by audiences not quite ready for such a personal introduction and relationship with a killer. The film essentially destroyed Powell’s thirty-plus year film career. PEEPING TOM was well ahead of its time, and can be looked back upon now a groundbreaking entry into the modern horror thriller. The recent documentary GOING TO PIECES even gave the film a proper nod as a precursor to the slasher. Before getting approval by the BFCC, many of the film’s more grotesque shots were cut out and forever lost. The Criterion Collection has released the most complete version available, including a brief nude shot that was redone with the actress clothed for the American theatrical release. But whether it is the stigma of the title, or that the film is just too “British”, PEEPING TOM has still yet to gain its proper place in the lexicon of classic cinema.

SOUNDLESS (2004) Viktor is a perfectionist hitman, who is on his current job. After killing his target, he sees a young woman sleeping in the target’s bed. Viktor becomes instantly smitten with her, and uses his skills as an assassin to watch and learn about her. When the young woman tries to kill herself, he saves her from drowning. Viktor and the woman, Nina, begin to see each other, and though Viktor believes he has found a way to win his soul back, and find happiness in retirement with her, he is hesitant to divulge too much. Meanwhile, an obsessive and expert profiler named Lang has been assigned to track down Viktor, and as Viktor’s last target was an undercover officer, Lang becomes increasingly bent on discovering his identity.

From THIS GUN FOR HIRE to LE SAMOURAI, from THE KILLER to LEON, and even GROSSE POINTE BLANK, women offer a way for professional killers to find redemption for their criminal action, and that by saving their new found “love”, they can in essence save themselves. German director Mennan Yapo, who came up with the story for SOUNDLESS, continues that thematic arc here, with assistance from the team behind THE PRINCESS AND THE WARRIOR to give the story a soft and personal edge.

Yapo who makes his feature-length directorial debut here, opts not for wild shoot ‘em up set pieces here, but instead a precise and calculating patience on both the parts of Viktor and Lang. He takes a slow and detailed look at the methods and time devoted to both Viktor’s accumulation of information on his targets, and then waiting for that perfect and clean shot. Lang spends just as much time using his expertise to whittle down a list of potential killers that Viktor could be, before choosing the only man who could possibly be the man he is looking for, and concentrating solely on that individual. It is these laborious scenes that provide a key look at the make up of each man. Such scenes would most likely become cutting room fodder in an American version, but here they are the engaging scenes that make the film so interesting.

Joachim Krol, who takes on the role of Viktor, has just the right screen presence for this non-descript assassin. Krol, who normally is cast as next door neighbor types or in comedy, uses these roles to his advantage. He does not operate like your typical Hollywood assassin. He blends right into the crowd, moving steadily, confidently, and silently, much like Jef Costello. Nadja Uhl, who plays Nina, while quite beautiful, does not seem unapproachable or even unreal. Yapo goes to great lengths to make sure she seems like a real person, fragile and unsure of herself. It is this vulnerability that allows her character to remain grounded in reality. And though there are several key plot devices to move along their relationship, Viktor and Nina never seem forced in their growing connection. They are merely two people unsure if they can love, or even deserve to be loved.

During few tense action sequences, Yapo keeps the film at mid-tempo, and firmly based in a proper and procedure following reality. This is perfectly exemplified in the final showdown, as the cool as ice SEK (German SWAT) stick to trained tactics to keep control of the situation, and never reduce themselves to cannon fodder.

Yapo and company have set up an introspective tale of an assassin on the verge of retirement and a cop out to catch him. And though Viktor may be the protagonist of the tale, as we follow around, but Lang easily avoids the pitfalls of the classic antagonists. He is just doing his job, with no secret ties to Viktor or grudges to settle or personal vendetta to get him. He is simply a cop, and a very good one at that, doing his job. And that is what makes this film work in the way that Yapo wants it to - these are just characters doing their job. No more, and no less.

VANISHING POINT (1971) Kowalski. He’s a man on the edge of society, who’s love affair with speed has landed him a job transporting cars from one city to another. His latest job is to deliver a white super-charged Dodge Challenger from Denver to San Francisco. Although he has two days to deliver, he makes a double or nothing bet with his friend that he can do it in fifteen hours.

With a handful up uppers, Kowalski takes to the highways, and quickly becomes the target of the police. As he zips from Colorado to Nevada and into California, he ditches one state police armada for the next. With him in spirit, is the blind DJ Super Soul, who has picked up the story and taken to Kowalski’s cause. Super Soul sees him as the “last free American spirit”, and divulges information to Kowalski about the police on the air waves. Along his journey, Kowalski meets others like him on the fringes of America, trying to live out their lives and days as they see fit, and rallying to what very well may be Kowalski’s last run against the wind.

Much like EASY RIDER, VANISHING POINT remains in the minds of those that were around to see it upon its initial release as a document of a bygone time, of a world filled with order and chaos, where sometimes just trying to disappear is the only logical choice of action and the only side to choose was your own. Within Kowalski, played with a quiet intensity by Barry Newman, the viewer sees that the only side to choose that does not bring disappointment or heartbreak is your own, and that solitary is the only place where you can truly be free. During Kowalski’s drive, flashbacks flesh out his character, that shows him both on the side of law enforcement and the fading hippie counter-culture, and the disappointment he finds in both.

However, in the today’s age, VANISHING POINT remains as the best damn car chase film out there. Sure, there are films which have one or two intense chase scenes, BULLITT and THE FRENCH CONNECTION come to mind, and even the under-appreciated Charlie Sheen headliner THE CHASE and this year’s DEATH PROOF (which is more than just an homage to this film) that attempt to rival the throne, but for sheer fuel-injected excitement from beginning to end, VANISHING POINT arguably remains at the top. As to why no other film in over thirty-five years has taken the crown, it comes down to the brilliance of director Richard C. Sarafian who goes to great lengths to show the speed of the vehicles, and the risk the drivers are taking. And in what could very well be seen as a “fuck you” to all previous chase/racing movies, Sarafian’s opening chase sequence to set the pace of his movie would have easily been seen as the “final chase” of any other movie.

Beyond the multiple car chase sequences that make up this film, is the characters that inhabit the movie and what they each symbolize. If Kowalski’s almost dialogue-less character, who lives by a “action speaks louder than words” philosophy, than Super Soul is the yin to his yang, whose non-stop and energetic vocal broadcasting is what defines him. Super Soul is a blind DJ, who immediately recognizes the importance of what Kowalski is, even if Kowalski himself does not. Super Soul acts as both a spiritual guide for Kowalski’s lost soul and a narrator for the viewer, as he gives us clues to what makes Kowalski who he is, and also provides the soundtrack to the movie. The other important character that drifts into Kowalski’s world is motorcyclist Angel, who comes it at the end of the movie, who would have easily been accepted into the arms of Peter Fonda and Dennis Hopper. His assistance in helping Kowalski can be seen as a passing of the torch from one hero of anti-establishment to the next. Angel has made his peace with the road, and now it is Kowalski’s time to make his.

Part of the charm and staying power of VANISHING POINT is its ability to transcend its own time. Although it remains as an important piece of early 70’s cinema and a document of the time, it’s general points about freedom of the individual are timeless, and each generation that follows can find undertones within the film they can interpret for their own rebellion. But VANISHING POINT can also just be one hell of an adrenaline rush, and said undertones are subtle enough that they do not weight down the ride. You can read as much as you want into Kowalski’s Challenger outrunning a police helicopter on an open stretch of desert highway, or you can just sit back in amazement at the real-time speed to took the stunt driver to pull off that feat. And that is the simplistic brilliance found within Malcolm Hart’s story and Guillermo Cain’s screenplay, and what keeps VANISHING POINT in the pole position of chase cinema.

DEATH WISH (1974) Amongst the rampant crime rates, countless poor and piling trash, meek Paul Kersey (Charles Bronson) makes it day by day working for a housing development company and spending time with his loving wife. His peaceful life is destroyed though, when a gang of hoods breaks into his home and attacks his wife and visiting daughter. After the attack, Paul attempts to hang on to his life by keeping busy and constantly checking on his daughter’s health. When the police are unable to apprehend the unknown criminals, Paul finds his thoughts turning to vengeance.

Taking to the streets at night, Paul sets himself up time and time again as easy prey for would-be muggers. But when the muggers make their move, Paul instead pulls his hidden gun and kills the muggers. His actions quickly spread through tabloids and he becomes a media sensation. The police begin a citywide manhunt for the vigilante, hoping to stop him from killing again, before the entire city populous churns into a murderous frenzy in the name of self defense.

Based on the book of the same name, DEATH WISH takes a very harsh and real look at what drives a man to turn to vigilantism as a way to cope with pain, loss, and a sense of helplessness. Director Michael Winner spends over half the movie building up Paul Kersey before letting him lose into the streets. Before Paul turns to the gun, he tries using the cops, turns to escapism as he flies to Tucson for a business trip, and even to the bottle. It is only when all else fails, and he sees his family crumble away forever that he finally loads his revolver.

The film itself, though running just over ninety minutes, tries to encompass a rounded view of vigilantism and how people cope as victims of crime. Paul’s daughter runs from her pain within herself, and eventually becomes catatonic. Paul’s son-in-law offers a cowardly “cut and run” excuse. The mayor even get a piece of the action when he secretly learns that mugging rates have gone down significantly during Paul’s midnight outings. The police are even reluctant to arrest him, partially due to not wanting to create a martyr, and more so because they secretly admire what he is doing.

Charles Bronson, in arguably his greatest role, which would also typecast him for the rest of life, brings a depth and pain to the screen that is heartbreaking to watch unfold even when he finds solace in the gun. It is perhaps even more painful after he resorts to the gun. It is a slow transformation, taking almost thirty minutes, and incorporates not just an emotional range that allows the viewer to gain a true understanding and compassion for him, but takes the time to explain both his hesitation and proficiency with firearms. Bronson, though not quite the everyman as originally written in the book due to his stocky frame, is given weaknesses such as glasses to differentiate him from the more rugged Bronson characters in THE DIRTY DOZEN and ONCE UPON A TIME IN THE WEST. It is no mistake though that he is given a six-shooter, as he takes down the lawless thieves one by one like a gunslinger in the wild west.

The landscape that Michael Winner paints of New York is a frightening image, still to this day. Upon its theatrical release, it must have been a shocking sight for both urban viewers, and even more horrific to suburbia to witness what had be fallen the Greatest City On Earth. Winner pulls no punches here as he takes his time to paint the small details in his concrete jungle. His attack sequence in the apartment, a vital element to the story, is portrayed with an especially visceral touch as he shows the true and very real evil that lurks the streets. Taken as a period piece today, it is among the top films of its time to give an honest portrayal of just what New York City was like in one of its darkest times, and should prove as a warning of history repeating itself, should crime once again take a vice-like grip on the Big Apple.

DEATH WISH still elicits the same gut emotional reactions now as it did over thirty years ago, and is still a top contender in the vigilante subgenre due to the time it takes to hone the main character into an all too believable person in an all too real situation. He is flesh and blood and not invincible, and Winner takes time to show us that as well. It also remains relevant even in today’s debates and conversations, as it brings up universal thoughts and conflicting opinions on how to deal with crime, criminals, and punishment. No one would ever want to be in Paul Kersey’s shoes, but deep down inside us all, there is a part that would all too willingly lace up those shoes and walk the shadowed sidewalks if need be.

ROBOCOP (1987) It is the late nineties in Detroit. Crime has reached an all-time high. The police, try as they might, are powerless to put a dent in the downward spiral of the city. OCP, a corporate conglomerate, who has recently taken charge over local law enforcement, takes the next step in an attempt to reclaim the city and puts into operation RoboCop, an experimental officer that uses the mind of recently killed officer Murphy and puts it into a hulking robotic body. RoboCop is sent out into the streets to clean it up, but when he comes face-to-face with the psychopathic criminals who executed him, it begins to fire up memories of his past. From RoboCop’s data crunching CPU comes the faces and dreams of Murphy, which were thought to be erased. As the rest of the police force goes on strike, RoboCop sets out on a one man war to put an end to the corruption that plagues Detroit.

Audiences were lured in to the theatres with the tag line “part man, part machine, all cop” and the expectation of highly-stylized violence. What they got was a cynical look, gingerly sprinkled with dark humor, at the future of America - a future littered with big business, unstoppable crime, complete corruption of the system, and shallow consumers eager to eat up whatever they were told to buy. Most successfully made movies will hint at what it will be about within the first five minutes of the movie. Director Paul Verhoeven, working from a script and story by first time writers Edward Neumeier and Michael Miner, chooses to spend his first five minutes watching television and in the boardroom of OCP.

Verhoeven, using a plot not unlike FRANKENSTEIN as a creation struggles to find independence and free thought for the backdrop, completely skewers the media here, as violence is sensationalized by an almost inhuman and completely unsympathetic broadcasters, and spoonfed in easy to digest sound and video bites. The plot is also moved along via interspersed news broadcasts of RoboCop’s exploits. And what news broadcast would be complete without commercials? Verhoeven takes time to look at products of the future, which includes an American car that proudly gets 8.2 MPG (”big is back!”) and the Battleship-esque game Nukem (”get them before they get you!”). What is truly frightening about this look into the future is that present-day television has far surpassed Verhoeven’s jaded take on it.

However, ROBOCOP does offer its viewers the base violence and gore that viewers eagerly expected from the hedonistic and blood-drenched action pictures of the 80’s. It is ironic that while the film condemns those attracted to violence it also serves up some of the most graphically grotesque effects to come out of the era. These were so graphic that ROBOCOP was threatened with an X unless it was trimmed. These now legendary shots, which include Murphy’s decimating murder by multiple shotguns wounds and a chillingly real bullet to the head, and the extended slaughter of a boardroom executive by the hulking robot ED-209, were almost completely erased during the film’s theatrical run. Whispers of these rumored full scenes floated through had to wait to be seen until home release on laserdisc and later on DVD courtesy of Criterion and currently MGM (pick up the current release at Amazon). And even after twenty years, these have hardly aged, thanks to the superior efforts of film’s special effects team.

It is this crew that also brings the heroic RoboCop to the screen, and what a fantastic job they do. In an age where a Commodore Amiga was used for digital effects, in-camera practical effects were what was needed to bring science-fiction to life. Created by wizard Rob Bottin, who previously worked on THE THING and would later go on to TOTAL RECALL and FIGHT CLUB among others, the RoboCop suit is a marvel to look at, and has a real-world functionality to it that does not seem that far-fetched. The results of his hard labor would land him several award nominations, and a win for special effects from the Academy Of Science Fiction, Fantasy and Horror Film.

But without the physical acting and presence of star Peter Weller, it is just a costume. Weller, who only spends about ten minutes of the film as a human, ties the entire world the film takes place in together. If he is not believable, everything else falls apart. Fortunately, Weller pulls off an amazing performance, evoking emotion, expression and thought process through gestures and facial expressions. When his face, which is cover for most of the film, is finally revealed, Weller turns his eyes into heartbreaking wells of sadness. He has been forced into this role, and must come to terms with what he has become.

The blending of science-fiction, graphic violence and social commentary would become a trademark of the Netherlands imported director, who was previously known only for his erotic outings in the 70’s, if he was known at all. The director even turned down this movie at first, only later reconsidering at the behest of his wife. It is strange to think where, if at all, the ROBOCOP phenomenon and even Verhoeven’s career would be had he not listened to her. Thankfully, the final outcome has left the world a thoroughly entertaining slice of cinema that is as relevant today in the middle of a media-obsessed culture with corporate-government hybrid running things as it was when first released in the midst of Reagan’s years. The more things change, the more they stay the same.

DEAD MAN’S SHOES (2004) Richard has returned to a small North England town to exact revenge in the name of his mentally challenged brother, Anthony. His targets are small group of drug-pushers and half-wit drug dealers. Richard makes his presence known to his soon-to-be victims as soon as he gets into town, and makes it quite clear that he is not leaving. The group, who basically shit themselves when they all realize he is “Anthony’s brother”, make the rash decision that they’ll have to kill Richard. But Richard, who is cold, calculating and some military experience, waits patiently to make his next move as the lowlifes scrounge for weapons and something that resembles a plan.

Bad revenge thrillers are churned out the world over year after year. Most share a common thread of undeveloped characters, poor plot points and poor overall filmmaking. It takes a special breed though, to make a boring revenge thriller. Director Shane Meadows, working from a script by Paddy Considine, who plays Richard, is such a breed. Even taking into consideration the dramatic film styles of the UK, which generally take time to move the plot along and develop their characters, this is boring, boring, boring.

Meadows can’t decide here if he is making a horror flick, a character-study drama, a bumbling criminal comedy, or a psychological thriller. The film contains elements of all of these, yet fails to pull off any of them successfully. Scenes that should be suspenseful, where you are not sure where Richard is and if someone is about to be killed, come off as purely amateur. The film also spends way too much time with the criminals, watching them get stoned, fooling around, generally coming off as a bunch of harmless thugs. And any sense of pacing or build up is completely destroyed as the camera follows Richard walking… through fields… for minutes at a time.

The film unfolds as it spends time in the present and via flashback, showing what the petty dope addicts do to Anthony in Super-8 style grainy black and white footage. What we are shown for a majority of the film does not constitute the murder of seven people. Sure, they all deserved a major ass-kicking for what they did, but none of them deserved to die. And it is within this context that the film’s ending-twist should be able to be deciphered within the first twenty minutes of the movie by anyone that completely paying attention. The saving grace of the film could have been the death sequences, but even these are a let down. One would think that there’s going to be some intense bloodletting considering Richard’s choice of an army parka and gasmask as his outfit, but no, that is certainly not the case.

To his credit, Paddy Considine does a solid job portraying Richard. His attempt to channel DeNiro’s Travis Bickle or perhaps even the FIRST BLOOD version of John Rambo is successful, and certainly the scenes involving Considine are the best of the film. However, the rest of the cast, who shouldn’t have been allowed to rise above background work in Danny Boyle films, perform with so little conviction that Considine can’t help but look good when compared to them. And for anyone without a keen ear that can understand thick British accents, half of the dialog is lost in a jumbled mess. Some of the film’s more subtle (and probably key) revelations are missed because of this.

DEAD MAN’S SHOES had to potential to find greatness amongst the bleak and dreary cinema that Brits pull off so successfully. But in the end, Meadows didn’t just drop the ball, he had it in his hand and decided to throw it away. So don’t be fooled by the cool poster, don’t believe the unfathomable high rating on IMDB, and whatever you do just don’t bother.

Buy Dead Man’s Shoes
from Amazon.com

MEMORIES OF MURDER (2003) It is 1986, in South Korea. In a small village, a young woman is found raped and brutally murdered. The local police force is completely caught off guard, and have no idea how to handle the situation. Then another body is found, and they realize they are dealing with a serial killer, which they are completely unequipped to deal with. Detective Park (Song Kang-Ho, of SYMPATHY FOR MR VENGEANCE and JOINT SECURITY AREA) and his partner resort do what they do best - hauling in suspects on the slimmest of evidence and “interrogate” them endlessly hoping to get a confession.

When Detective Seo arrives from Seoul, he brings with him a more sophisticated set of police skills, and quickly dismisses the suspects captured based on a little real investigating. However, the damage has already been done, and the village citizens know all about the interrogation tactics being used to try and find the suspect, which makes their job even harder. As months pass, and other women fall victim to the killer, small yet crucial clues focus the police squad’s eyes on a local factory employee. But they find in this suspect an adversary that will not submit to a few threats, and proclaims his innocence. Is this the man they’ve been after, or merely another faux-suspect that merely matches their shaky evidence?

Based on the true serial killings in South Korea that took place between 1986 and 1991, MEMORIES OF MURDER is a gritty, downbeat detective film that rivals SEVEN for its intelligence and character analysis. Director and co-writer Bong Joon-Ho (whose current film THE HOST is tearing up cinemas worldwide) carefully and slowly unfolds this tale that focuses on the pressure and stress of Detectives Park and Seo as they struggle against each other in terms of tactics and struggle to find common ground that will allow them to finally capture the killer. He uses subtle camerawork to capture the progressing story, and slips into a Cops-documentary style to get the more frantic scenes. This particular style culminates in a spectacular and spinning nighttime foot chase through the village.

Bong tackles some hard topics, as he focuses on the slightly-inept police force who simply want to find a suspect and close the case, the all-too-familiar interrogation room tactics used. These are some of the more disturbing scenes of the film, and certainly the most graphic in terms of violence. The film is decidedly anti-police brutality, as important and valuable time is lost as the characters take the easy route in kicking and torturing innocent suspects, which leads to more victims being killed. The actual killings are all done off camera, with only the aftermath shown briefly, which creates the huge grey area that the film lives in. Here, there is no black and white, and even the best intentions by the protagonists are bruised with bloodied knuckles.

Song Kang-Ho and Kim Sang-Kyung (who portrays Detective Seo) fully immerse themselves in their respective roles. While at first Park is the time-bomb cop who does what he needs to get results and Seo stays even-tempered and calculating, as the film progresses the dynamic roles slowly reverse. Park matures his style as he realizes what a real detective is supposed to be, while Seo becomes unhinged dealing with hopeless frustration. The character switch completes itself during the film’s climax, as Seo falls from grace with a single pistol-whip while Park redeems himself as he finally puts his full trust in lab paperwork.

At over two hours, the film does take its time to get to each of its destinations. For those that have become fully acclimated to Hong Kong and Korean pacing, there should be little difficulty waiting out the slower scenes. There is little action to be had during the entire picture, and even the “adrenaline” pumped scenes barely get above a steady jog. This is 100% conversation-based cop drama. The only main problem, which is purely subjective, is the film’s lack of time pacing and the immense criminal investigation. There are no dates given as the film progresses to present the length of passed time - the movie starts with the first murder in 1986, but no way to tell how many years into the investigation the film goes, nor is there any scope to the epic scale that the case covers. According to the film’s trailer, over 3000 suspects where checked and thousands of police officers where involved, however the actual film give the assumption the suspects and police involved are centralized to the village area the murders take place in.

For Eastern Asian crime-and-investigation junkies, this is a no brainer to watch. Past that, it becomes a crap shoot. The film is not very enjoyable, due to the harsh subject matter, and if you enjoy your cops with a healthy dose of pulp-action this should probably be skipped. Suffice it to say, if you liked SEVEN and can take the grimmer episodes of Law & Order: Special Victims Unit, definitely keep this one in mind.

On Saint Patrick’s Day, in a South Boston bar, two Irish brothers, Connor and Murphy,  are having a few rounds with their friends, when a few Russian mafia soldiers step in and threaten the good time.  The next morning, FBI agent Paul Smecker (Willem Dafoe) is brought in to investigate two dead Russian mafia soldiers found in an alley. As he makes his way through the evidence, almost clairvoyantly piecing together what happened, he is unaware that Connor and Murphy, who until the previous night were just meat packers, have taken the spontaneous barfight as a message from God, to begin a vengeful elimination of the evil men in the world, starting with Boston’s criminal underground.

With help from their friend Rocco, a low level delivery boy in the Italian mob who has just been betrayed by his boss, the two brothers begin to target the higher-ups.  Italain boss Poppa Joe, who now fears for his life, calls in Il Duce (Scottish comedian Billy Connolly in a chilling reverse typecast) a merciless killer who has just been released from jail to eliminate the two brothers.  All the while, Smecker, who has finally figured out who his mysterious killers are, becomes torn between upholding the law or standing aside to let the two brothers continue to purge the city of villains.

Seven years before Martin Scorcese took a baseball bat to the kneecaps of South Boston’s ethnic organized crime syndicates, an unknown writer and director, Troy Duffy, gave it a few good pistol whips with this debut film (and at the time of this writing, his only movie). Unfortunately, as the film was being prepared to be released, two brats in Colorado decided it would be a good idea to storm their school armed to their teeth with guns. In the ensuing aftermath, THE BOONDOCK SAINTS was practically shelved due to its graphic violence and vengeful themes. The film was released quietly on a few screens, and then dumped onto DVD almost three years later. For lesser films, this would be its final death toll. However, great films will find their audience no matter the circumstances, and after several years of churning in the waters and building up word-of-mouth, this movie has found its embracing audience.

Troy Duffy, along with some helpful flare from b-movie cinematographer Adam Kane, brings to life some unusual characters in some very unusual circumstances, which play out in a stylish and non-linear timeline, that seems new and exciting even in the midst of the “Tarantino-influenced” 90’s crime-action movie glut.  Much of this credit though is due, not from the time-jumping itself, but from the performance from supporting actor Willem Dafoe, whose FBI character Smecker is tracking the citywide crime syndicate slayings.  The movie follows a back and forth pattern, as it chronicles the two brothers up until just before they begin their rampage.  Time then jumps forward to the aftermath, where Smecker deduces what he believes has happened.  It then jumps back in time and divulges what actually happened.  It is an interesting timeframe setup, made all the more enjoyable by Dafoe, whose already off-kilter Smecker slowly creeps into absurdity as he attempts to piece together the increasingly bizarre crime scene.

While Dafoe does steal the show here, the two main heroes, Connor and Murphy, played by Sean Patrick Flanery (of THE ADVENTURES OF YOUNG INDIANA JONES fame) and Norman Reedus pull off a commendable job as the two lovable, multi-lingual Catholic killers, who eloquently quote the bible scripture, Irish family prayers they are given, and portray a brotherly love and bond that most siblings would be jealous of.  Their devilish good looks may also get some of the more squeamish female viewers through the graphic violence, which delivers in spades.  The rest of the cast is pulled right out of every other mob movie made in the past twenty years.  They know their lot in movie acting and do a fine job a cannon fodder.  Also, keep an eye out for the Hedgehog himself, Ron Jeremy, in a brief cameo.

Beneath the surface layer of the brutal, yet somehow beautiful, action and the splattering of blood that is the very essence and base for the argument against glorified violence, lies an even more dangerous open-ended question that will be inescapable for even the most casual viewer of the film - can there be justifiable homicide?  Wrath, being your reviewer’s favorite sin, and the judgment of God plays a key role in the brothers’ decision to do what they do, and when a loose code of honor is created amongst the two to murder only bad guys, it creates an additional layer of questioning.  The film is smart in that it does not try to answer the question, and even puts doubt within Connor and Murphy even as they release soul after soul to the afterlife.  In a post-script to the film, under the closing credits, passer-bys on the street are asked what they think of the media dubbed Saints, which range from placing them on pedestals to condemning them to damnation.  Within the film broad strokes are made for both sides of the argument, and it’ll be up to you to put the fine touches on the canvas.