Milk review

 Number 624 on the top 1000 films of all time is Gus Van Zandt's biopic Milk.

Milk tells the story of Harvey Milk (Sean Penn) the first openly gay publicly elected official in California. Emile Hirsch, Josh Brolin, Diego Luna and James Franco co-star.

As a rule, I'm generally not interested in biopics especially when I have no interest in the person being portrayed. I thought that would be the case when Harvey Milk, but I was proven wrong. Clever narrative framing and an Oscar-winning performance from Sean Penn was enough to change my mind.

A problem I have with biopics is generally they're just boring and try to include too much. You sometimes need a corkboard and a mile of string to keep track of everybody. However, Gus Van Zandt employed the clever framing device of Milk transcribing a letter that should only be read in the wake of his assassination (considering this is stated in the first few minutes I don't think that it's a spoiler to say that Milk was indeed assassinated.)

But this letter was a great way to frame the narrative and keep the audience grounded in the real. Of course, it helped that you had seen Sean Penn in the lead role. He rightly won his second of three Oscars for his portrayal. This is saying a lot as he was up against some stiff competition like Mickey Rourke in The Wrestler and Richard Jenkins in the Visitor. However, it was Penn's ability to give a performance that was funny, serious but also inspirational to the right people that netted him acting gold.

I also really enjoyed James Franco. As a comedy actor, he can often be over-the-top, but as Milk's boyfriend and later campaign manager Scott Smith, I thought he had excellent chemistry with Sean Penn. Alas I cannot say the same for Diego Luna who played a later flame of Harvey Milk: Jack Lira. Lira was less formed as character and he felt more extraneous to the plot.

However, I think the film was initially missing a tangible villain. Sure you had Milk fighting an anti-gay system, but this isn't manifested in any one character. Not at first anyway. Sure you had the evangelist Anita Bryant who ran a rival political campaign on an anti-LGBTQ message, but she always felt too peripheral to be a true villain.

The film's true villain was Dan White (Josh Brolin) a fellow conservative city supervisor who often butted heads with Milk. Yet he doesn't appear until almost halfway throughout the film. Sure, Josh Brolin is always good, but it would have been better if he had appeared earlier in the film.

All that, notwithstanding, I thoroughly enjoyed Milk. Considering it was a biopic, I enjoyed it far more than I thought I would. 

Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1956) Review

 Number 454 on the top 1000 films of all time is the science-fiction horror film 'Invasion of the Body Snatchers.'

Miles Bennell (Kevin McCarthy) is a doctor in LA who soon starts to be convinced that everybody around him has been replaced by copies. This includes everybody except for his girlfriend Becky (Dana Wynter.) However, as things start to become more serious, Miles struggles in getting anybody else to believe him. He endeavours to prove the truth no matter the cost.

I think it can be all too easy to dismiss films like these as just another science-fiction flick capitalising on the Red-Scare panic of the 1950's. And while Don Siegel certainly captured the paranoia of McCarthy's America, this film is certainly more than your average B-movie sci-fi film.

Although it was initially forgotten by critics, it has since grown into one of the pre-eminent science fiction/horror films and for good reason. Despite having a minimal $400,000 budget and a paltry 80 minute runtime, it grossed over seven times that. Probably due to the small budget, it was simple, but incredibly effective. Siegel did well to really convey a fearful atmosphere. 

Perhaps that's because he deliberately under-played things. Despite hearing throughout about the pod people who have replaced the town, we only see glimpses of the pods themselves and never anything of the actual aliens. Instead, they these people look like the average person on the street, again showing the paranoia that was rampant at the time. It was the simplicity that, I think, made this film stand out against some of its contemporaries like Forbidden Planet.

Kevin McCarthy - no relation to Joseph McCarthy who gave his name to the anti-communist policies that dominated the 60's - was very good as the lead Miles Bennell. He brought an everyman quality as we see Bennell trying desperately to expose the truth while not falling to hysteria. And, best of all, unlike most science fiction, Bennell was actually an interesting character that you want to root for.

If I were to criticise the film for anything, it might have been the overly-optimistic ending. It was far more hopeful than I would have expected for a film as bleak as this. Although Miles' and Diana's relationship was every bit as a cheesy as I would expect for a film like this.

I enjoyed Invasion of the Body Snatchers. Although it was low-budget, this by no far impacted it quality. And it was certainly more than your average 1950's sci-film which exploited the McCarthyismesque paranoia of the time.

American Graffiti review

 Number 777 on the top 1000 films of all time is George Lucas' directorial debut and coming-of-age drama 'American Graffiti.'

Curt Henderson (Richard Dreyfuss,) Steve Bolander (Ron Howard,) John Milner (Paul Le Mat) and Terry 'Toad' Fields (Charlie Martin Smith) are four high-school graduates preparing to go their separate ways in life. Across one summer night, we see how they spend their last hours of adolescence.

It's hard to believe this is the same director who created Star Wars and produced Indiana Jones - two of the most action-packed, fun-filled, entertaining franchises in movie history. Francis Ford Coppola also produced this film. And he directed the legendary Godfather films. But American Graffiti was so boring. Once it gets going it's okay, but it takes so long to get going.

The first half of the film, which is roundabouts an hour, nothing much really happens. The four main characters spend most of the time just driving around Modesto, California. They all have their own personal goals: Curt is trying to find a beautiful girl he saw in passing while Toad schemes and plots to impress another girl called Debbie. But none of these goals were particularly interesting or relatable. And I think relatability is one of the most important parts of a coming-of-age drama. But American Graffiti was sorely missing this key aspect.

Once things do get going, there are moments of humour and poignancy, but these are few and far between. When Toad tries asking an older man to buy alcohol for him and his date, the man instead buys wine and sneaks out of the back of the store. A second man robs the store, but at least buys the alcohol for Toad. 

When Curt scratches the car of a group of greases, they coerce him into joining them for the night and force him to engage in petty crime like robbing arcade machines. If he refuses, they'll beat him up. It was entertaining if not the most realistic. Surely the greasers would just beat him up in the first place.

I also could have done without the ending epilogue revealing the fates of the different characters. These aren't real people. We don't need to know where they end up. That can be left up to the viewer to decide.

Although American Graffiti had its funny and touching moments, it was too slow and took too long to get going. How was this the same director who did Star Wars?

The Birds review

 Number 510 on the top 1000 films of all time is Alfred Hitchcock's 1963 horror-thriller 'The Birds.'

Melanie Daniels (Tippi Hendren) is a socialite who meets lawyer Mitch Brenner (Rod Taylor) in a San Francisco bird shop. later, she drives to his home in Bodega Bay where she, him, and the towns people start being attacked by the local bird population.

What struck me most about this film was one of Hitchcock's most intentional decisions. He chose to direct the film without a conventional film score. And with next-to-none incidental music. And this worked brilliantly. It made a scary film even scarier. And this was a scary film. The lack of music made the tension go through the roof. The seeming lack of motive behind the birds' attacks made them even more terrifying.

However, I think the bird attacks being so random- they indiscriminately attack anybody regardless of time or location - proved to be the film's biggest shortcoming. as there is no discernible reason for why they could be attacking although a drunk bargoer speculates it is the end of the world, there is also no strategy for how to defeat them. When the townspeople do meet to discuss the issue, a birdwatcher is sceptical of the attacks, and even more sceptical of any preventative measures. But this lack of plan leads to a sagging of the narrative that culminates in an anti-climatic conclusion. *Spoilers* Melanie, Mitch and his family, drive away into an uncertain future. As nothing is resolved, it's all very unsatisfactory.

The character of Melanie was also unsatisfactory. She was just so useless. the Birds was released in 1963. but Melanie had none of the agency I might expect from the female characters of the time. When she foolishly goes off on her own to investigate strange noises, she discovers a whole room of birds. They attack her, and she doesn't even call for help. How Mitch ever knew she was in there to rescue her was the film's biggest mystery. But I also knew that Hitchcock and Hendren had a less than harmonious relationship behind the scenes, so maybe that was a contributing factor to Melanie's poor writing.

This notwithstanding 'The Birds' is still a very scary horror film. And Hitchcock is damn good at horror films.

Changeling review

 Number 498 on the top 1000 films of all time is Clint Eastwood's mystery drama Changeling.

Based on a true story, Changeling follows the trials of single mother Christine Collins (Angelina Jolie) whose nine-year-old son Walter goes missing in Mira Loma, California. A few months later, the LAPD claim to have found Walter. But Christine is insistent that this is the wrong boy. However, her claims are dismissed and she is made to look like an unfit mother. Together with Reverend Gustav Briegleb (John Malkovich,) vocal critic of the LAPD, Christine begins building a case to challenge them, but the police have her imprisoned in a psychiatric institution.

This is an insane story, made even crazier by how it is based on real life. Yes, the film does play fast and loose with some of the finer details, but the core plot is the same. Christine Collins' son disappears. The police claim to have found the boy but Christine is insistent they are wrong. Rather than admit their mistake and face the ensuing negative publicity, they silence her by sending her to a mental hospital. If it wasn't so horrific, it would be funny. And it really is a case of fact being stranger than fiction.

It's a tale of women being dismissed in a patriarchal society by arrogant men, as well as the corrupt nature of the LAPD. During this time, they had received intense negative publicity after failing to solve other missing children cases. They desperately needed a win and were determined to get it even if that meant ignoring the truth. Eastwood created an atmosphere that was hostile and tense all at the same time. Police captain J.J Jones is an arrogant villain who is too proud to dare admit he was wrong. Instead he attacks Christine for daring to question his authority. 

And it's difficult not to feel for Christine at this point. All she wants is her son back yet she is ridiculed and mocked by the very people who were supposed to help her. Jolie makes her into the most sympathetic protagonist. But Malkovich was also great as the Reverend Briegleb portraying a character that was brave enough to fight against the police department. He was powerful enough to get Christine freed from prison and was the driving force she needed to take justified legal action against the police.

So what really did happen to Walter Collins? Well, like I said, Eastwood played fast and loose with history but he got the main facts right. Collins was kidnapped and murdered by Canadian serial killer Gordon Northcott (Jason Butler Harner) on the Wineville chicken coop. He is caught and sentenced to death, but refuses to admit whether he ever killed Walter. Harner was formidable as Northcott - he was unhinged enough to make him scary, but not so much he becomes a cliche. When he is about to be hung and he has the hood over his face, he starts singing Silent Night. As monstrous as he was, it was difficult not to take pity on him. In real life, Northcott was only in his early twenties - little more than a misguided kid himself. 

As for Walter's imposter, he decided to pose as him, so he could travel to Hollywood and meet his favourite actor Tom Mix. He also wanted to escape the abusive clutches of his step parents, but this was omitted. And as for the LAPD? They were punished but not really - as is often the case for corrupt members of authority. Captain Jones was supposed to pay Christine $10,800 but he never did. And even though he was fired, he was later re-instated. Why am I not surprised?

But this was a great effort from Eastwood. Although it wasn't 100% accurate, it was a fascinating depiction of a horrendous true story. You do wonder if Christine Collins had been a man, would the police have been more likely to have believed her?