The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (2003). A Review

THE LORD OF THE RINGS: 

THE RETURN OF THE KING

Editor's Note: This review is of the theatrical version.

And thus this massive Rings cycle conclude with The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King. The concluding part of The Lord of the Rings trilogy was richly rewarded come Oscar-time, winning eleven Academy Awards out of eleven nominations. As such, it not only tied the record for most Oscar wins with Ben-Hur and Titanic, but holds the record for the biggest sweep in Academy history.

Exactly how much its 11-for-11 record is due to the film itself versus that it was the last chance to reward this epic series is a subject of debate. Now, more than fifteen years after it concluded a massive epic, we can look on The Return of the King with a slightly clearer eye. The Return of the King is a massive film that perhaps throws in more than it can carry, but one that moves quite fast for its running time and concludes things on a strong note.

Keeping to the story established in The Fellowship of the Ring and continuing in The Two Towers, The Return of the King follows two intertwined stories. The first is the continuing journey of hobbits Frodo Baggins (Elijah Wood) and Samwise Gamgee (Sean Astin) into the forbidding land of Mordor to destroy The One Ring, a powerful object that will allow its former owner Sauron to rule over all Middle-Earth and plunge it in darkness and evil. They must go into Mordor for the One Ring can be destroyed only by being thrown into the fires of Mt. Doom. Guiding them is the creature known as Gollum (Andy Serkis), whose loyalty is dubious at best, with Sam thoroughly opposed and Frodo more accepting of.

The second story involves the actual war of conquest Sauron is fighting against Men. Aragorn (Viggo Mortensen), heir to Gondor's throne, calls upon Denethor, Stewart of Gondor (John Noble) to join with neighboring Rohan to fight against Sauron's forces. Denethor, however, is a bit bonkers at the moment: mourning his son Boromir and having little interest in his other son Faramir (David Wenham), sending him on a suicide mission then despairing over both Faramir's apparent death and the massive army besieging his city.

As the massive armies fight, two little hobbits and their conflicted guide push further on, facing many dangers including a crazed Gollum, set on retaking his 'Precious' from Frodo. Things culminate in massive battles involving an Army of the Dead, massive creatures, a warrior Princess defeating the Witch-King himself, and at long last the quest completed.

Now with Middle-Earth firmly in the Age of Men our four Hobbits return to their home in The Shire, though for at least one of them and his Uncle Bilbo (Ian Holm), one last journey awaits into the West.

I remember going to see The Return of the King in theaters and the reaction was enthusiastic, at least until the first 'ending'. By perhaps the time the hobbits got back to the Shire and the film seemed to not know if it would end, the audience turned hostile, with members shouting for it to be over. Perhaps in retrospect we see how director Peter Jackson, along with his co-screenwriters Fran Walsh and Phillipa Boyens, could not find a way to formally and finally end this massive concluding chapter of this massive trilogy. Just as one thought the film ended, something else popped up again and again, and the audience by this point was exhausted.

As I look back on The Return of the King, I thought that perhaps it could have been shorter and perhaps more blasphemous, both it and The Two Towers could have been shorter. This came to me when we had a brief visit to the ruins of Isengard, which played a large role in The Two Towers but added nothing in The Return of the King. It's as if by now Jackson really wanted to put in as much as possible and didn't know when to stop.

As a side note, the creeping bloatedness of The Hobbit trilogy prequels released a decade later seem to have a precedent in The Return of the King.


However, to its credit The Return of the King did an excellent job pushing the stories forward and an especially excellent job in pacing. The film moves quite well to where you barely notice how long it is, at least until after the fall of Sauron where it finally started lurching from one thing to another.

As another side note, the audience I saw The Return of the King burst out laughing when Arargon started his hymn, as if the King belting out a musical number was just too much to take.

The performances are exceptional. High credit goes to Serkis as the damned Gollum, with the film even giving him a chance to appear on-camera versus motion-capture. In his performance Serkis gave his character a mix of horror and pathos, where one felt sorrow for and anger at him. Wood had to carry so much on his shoulders as the main character, and in Return of the King he comes into his own. His Frodo is a haunted figure, driven nearly insane by both The One Ring and the arduous journey.

Frodo's darkness as portrayed by Wood is brilliantly countered by Astin's portrayal of the ever-loyal Samwise. He despairs but never gives into despair and hopelessness, maintaining a sense of hope however dim, in this painful journey.

It's both a good and bad thing that the rest of the cast from both Fellowship of the Ring and Two Towers keeps to how they started out. Credit should be given to Billy Boyd, Dominic Monaghan and Miranda Otto as Pippin, Merry and Eowyn respectively. Each had their 'warrior' moment where he/she showcased courage under fire. Mortensen too had bravura moments whenever he rallied armies living and dead to his cause.

However, Ian McKellen as the wizard Gandalf, Orlando Bloom as Elf warrior Legolas and John Rhys-Davies as Dwarf warrior Gimli basically did as they have before: either spout off words of wisdom or keep some running tab of kills. To be fair I did enjoy the softening of relations between Legolas and Gimli to where they were genuine friends versus adversaries due to their separate ethnicities for lack of a better term.

I think now that part of my issue with Return of the King, on seeing it again, revolves around a certain repetitiveness that stems from The Two Towers. Both Two Towers and Return of the King have leaders on thrones mourning their dead sons. Both Two Towers and Return of the King have massive battles as their centerpieces, with battering rams and storming hordes. Return of the King even has two characters who appear dead but are not (Faramir and Frodo).

And then there are the various 'endings', a major point of criticism then and now. One friend wisecracked that the Academy gave Return of the King an Oscar for each ending it had, and one of the film's major flaws is that it kept going long after the war was over. It didn't seem to know how to end, so it kept ending, throwing in one apparent conclusion after another until audiences grew frustrated. This series of unfortunate finales hampers the film.

However, on a visual and emotional level, with the craftsmanship and performances elevating it, The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King is an epic and exceptional, if albeit excessively lengthy, conclusion to one of the grandest epics in cinema.

DECISION: A-

2004 Best Picture Winner: Million Dollar Baby

The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers. A Review (Review #1280)

THE LORD OF THE RINGS: THE TWO TOWERS

Editor's Note: This review is of the theatrical version.

The Two Towers occupies a curious space in the Lord of the Rings trilogy as the midsection of this massive epic series. Neither beginning or end, The Two Towers has to serve as a bridge between The Fellowship of the Ring and The Return of the King. The questions become whether it stands on its own and whether it holds as said bridge while also working as a film independent of them. On the whole, The Two Towers holds up well, though it does give in at times to both some ill-placed comedy and a loss of focus.

Essentially picking up from The Fellowship of the Ring's ending, The Two Towers has two stories. The main story is of hobbits Frodo Baggins (Elijah Wood) and Samwise Gamgee (Sean Astin) continuing their journey to Mt. Doom in the forbidding world of Mordor to destroy The One Ring. That destruction would ensure the Dark Lord Sauron would be defeated and not destroy all Middle-Earth.

Frodo and Sam are lost, but an unlikely ally comes in the form of Gollum (Andy Serkis), the One Ring's former possessor who is himself possessed by his 'Precious'. He knows the way into Mordor, but Sam does not trust him. Gollum's motivations are as conflicted as the creature himself, for he struggles between seeing 'Master' Frodo as a friend and as his enemy keeping him from his 'Precious'. On their journey, they are captured by Faramir (David Wenham), who takes them to Gondor to gain his father's approval. Faramir happens to be brother to Boromir, killed in The Fellowship of the Ring, but unlike Boromir, Faramir has the strength of character to eventually let Frodo, Sam and Gollum continue on to Mordor, where Gollum may be more foe than friend.

The other story involves the continuing search for two other hobbits: Merry (Dominic Monaghan) and Pippin (Billy Boyd). Aragorn (Viggo Mortensen), the dwarf Gimli (John Rhys-Davies) and elf Legolas (Orlando Bloom) search for them, encountering Orcs and The Rohirrim, fabled Riders of Rohan sent into exile by their king. In their search, they encounter the wizard Gandalf (Ian McKellen), now restored to life as Gandalf the White. The search ended with Merry and Pippin accounted for, they all now press on first to save Theoden (King of Rohan) from the power of Saruman (Christopher Lee), then to fight off Saruman's army at the stronghold of Helm's Deep.

Merry and Pippin, having encountered Gandalf previously, find themselves with Treebeard (voiced by John Rhys-Davies), a wise Ent (a sentient tree), who with his brother Ents does not appear interested in joining this war until he sees what Saruman has done to his fellow trees. Enraged, he lays siege to Isengard (one of the two towers).

Unbeknownst to both groups of hobbits, the Men at Helm's Deep, now joined by Elves in a last-ditch alliance, fight on. The only Elf that Aragorn thinks of is Arwen (Liv Tyler), the love of his mortal life who reluctantly agrees to join her fellow elves in exile at the urging of her father Elrond (Hugo Weaving). This causes a bit of a complication for Theoden's niece Eowyn (Miranda Otto), who has developed feelings for Aragorn. However, this Shieldmaiden of Rohan is conflicted both by her emotions and her efforts to save her people.

That's a lot of story for one film, yet the curious thing is that for all the Sturm und Drang in The Two Towers, story-wise we really don't move far. Frodo and Sam are closer to Mordor but not yet within it. The other members now move on to more pressing matters but are essentially in a prelude to the final confrontation with their enemy. Moreover, The Two Towers has a major issue: simultaneous stories.

It's interesting that Frodo and Sam disappear in a 35-minute gap, that gap filled by the Battle at Helm's Deep. That there is a gap of that length for ostensibly the main character isn't the problem. It's that when he does return one is almost surprised to remember he was there to start with. I found that a lot of The Two Towers has this jumping about that mostly works well but that also has us forget characters and situations until they come back.

Probably the worst was the transition between when Sam and Frodo avoid capture at Mordor's Black Gate and Merry and Pippin travelling with Treebeard. That jump jolted me, but at times The Two Towers seemed a bit unwieldy in trying to balance so much. For example, all of Arwen's scenes, though beautiful and tragic, did not seem to really fit well within the story. It wasn't wildly out-of-place but seemed a bit of a tangent.

Add to that that this is the first time I thought things did not look authentic. The dream/love scene between Aragorn and Arwen looked like a stage. A couple of the visual effects looked inauthentic. Then there was seeing Legolas essentially skateboard down a flight of stairs during the Battle. I figure viewers chuckled at that at the time but now, nearly twenty years on, it looked a bit too humorous.

I could have done without this little bit of levity as well as Gimli being the 'comic relief'. Again, it's not that comic relief couldn't work or even that Gimli could not be a funny character. It's just that too often Gimli's height was used as a source of comedy and it felt a bit forced for me.

I also think The Two Towers was far too fond of 'cliffhanger' moments when perhaps cutting them or changing them about could have worked better. At least twice did Legolas think a character was dead when he wasn't, and you can only suggest something so many times before people start questioning whether said character really is dead.

As a side note, I wondered if I was the only one who thought The Black Gates of Mordor looked like The Wicked Witch's Castle from The Wizard of Oz, down to its marching army all but singing "oh-WEE-oh, E-O-UM!"

To be fair The Two Towers has more positives than negatives. It introduced the entire Norse-like world of Rohan well, from its politics to its characters. Composer Howard Shore introduced a new theme for Rohan and what is exceptional about it is that while it's the same melody it can be both triumphant and tragic. When fully orchestrated the Rohan music can be stirring, but when left to a lowly violin it is deeply sad.

It also was a fantastic showcase for Gollum, this poor, sad creature so brilliantly performed. Serkis makes Gollum a creature of deep tragedy and sympathy, a fully realized and complex character. In turns frightened and frightening, Serkis' work is a credit to both his skills and Peter Jackson's directing.

It's a much better and stronger performance than Wenham's Faramir, who was almost blank to boring. Otto was strong as Eowyn, and Bernard Hill's Theoden too was strong in a wider performance: from the weak and defeated old man to a more vigorous (albeit slightly pompous) warrior king. I won't fault Rhys-Davies for making Gimli into a bit of a joke but I do wonder why he voiced Treebeard as well.

The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers is a very good film that sadly suffers from a bit too much weight and from being that bridge. It is not that it does not work but I would say that some things might have been better left off or reworked.

DECISION: B+

The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring. A Review (Review #1275)

THE LORD OF THE RINGS: THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING

Editor's Note: This review is of the theatrical version.

The Lord of the Rings is perhaps one of the Twentieth Century's most enduring literary epics, a sweeping tale of a fantasy world filled with extraordinary creatures. As such, a cinematic adaptation of this massive work would be daunting. The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring is the first part of a cinematic trilogy to J.R.R. Tolkien's masterpiece, and to its credit it more than meets the challenge of creating this universe while keeping to the novel's themes of loyalty and courage despite great dangers and odds.

After a prologue explaining the history of The One Ring and how it came to a Hobbit named Bilbo Baggins (Ian Holm), the film begins at Bilbo's 111th birthday. His nephew Frodo (Elijah Wood) and the entire of The Shire is waiting for this event as well as the wizard Gandalf (Ian McKellen), with whom Bilbo had an unseen adventure.

Bilbo's party is a wild success, culminating in his 'disappearing act' via the Ring, whose power he is unaware of. Gandalf fears it is The One Ring, and when he discovers that it is he urges a reluctant Frodo to journey to Rivendell, home of the powerful and ethereal Elves to see what can be done to destroy it. If it returned to its master, the Dark Lord Sauron, it would destroy all Middle-Earth.

Off Frodo goes with his gardener/friend Samwise Gamgee (Sean Astin), later joined by two other hobbits, Merry (Dominic Monaghan) and Pippin (Billy Boyd). Sauron's minions are hunting Frodo down, putting all their lives in danger. Gandalf is temporarily held prisoner by his frenemy, Saruman (Christopher Lee), another wizard who has fallen under Sauron's power.

In their journeys to both Rivendell and later Sauron's land of Mordor, where the One Ring can be destroyed by being cast into the fires of Mount Doom, the hobbits are joined by others to form 'the fellowship of the ring' created at a Rivendell council by Elrond (Hugo Weaving). There is Gimli the Dwarf (John Rhys-Davies), Legolas the Elf (Orlando Bloom) and two humans, Boromir (Sean Bean) son of the Stewart of Gondor, and Aragorn (Viggo Mortensen), a wanderer who is the true heir to the Gondor throne and descent of Isildur, the man who defeated Sauron ages ago only to weaken at the thought of destroying the Ring.

Passing through several lands including that of the Elf Queen Galadriel (Cate Blanchett), the Fellowship falters before Gandalf falls at the mines of Moria. Boromir nearly kills Frodo to get at the Ring but pulls himself together long enough to save Merry and Pippin before he is killed by Sauron's minions. They take the two hobbits as instructed by Saruman, and Aragorn, Gimli and Legolas follow to rescue them, leaving Frodo and Sam to take the arduous journey to Mordor, quietly pursued by the Ring's former owner, the creature known as Gollum (Andy Serkis).

It's extraordinary that The Fellowship of the Ring has such a massive plot just in the first film, so much so that the theatrical release runs nearly three hours. However, it is to the credit of director Peter Jackson along with his co-screenwriters Phillipa Boyens and Fran Walsh that the film rarely if ever lags. Jackson keeps the film flowing smoothly to where one does not notice how lengthy the film is.

For example, the first seven minutes serve as a de facto history lesson about the One Ring and the following half hour is devoted purely to the bucolic world of The Shire. This is a pretty substantial time taken up before getting to the main gist of The Fellowship of the Ring. However, the care that the film takes in setting up this world allows us to more than just see this fantastical world.

It allows us to immerse ourselves fully in it, allows us to essentially be part of it. It also allows us to get to know these characters, and this is an element where Jackson really excelled. There is not a bad performance anywhere in Fellowship of the Ring. Each actor who plays an Elf is rather ethereal and mystical, punctuated by a slow and graceful speaking pattern. Liv Tyler as Arwen, Elvish princess and Aragorn's love interest, has a predominantly breathy delivery but here it makes sense. Even when in warrior princess mode her delivery is still in keeping with her Elvish roots.

Though their roles are smaller both Weaving and especially Blanchett are phenomenal. Galadriel comes across as a very mysterious figure: wise yet dangerous but ultimately helpful, not the feared Elf-Witch of terrible power Gimli imagines.

Lee is sensational too as Saruman, the wise and powerful wizard brought down by his own lust for power, matched by McKellen's more tender yet still fearsome Gandalf. Holm, while also in a smaller role, does wonderful as Bilbo: part bumbling innocent, part dangerous when tempted to keep The One Ring.

Bean's line about "one does not just walk into Mordor" may be the source of endless gifs but he too brings Boromir's basic decency mixed with the weakness of men into his performance. Mortensen's Aragorn has that mix of anger, fear and regret. Whether playing a fierce fighter or a tender lover with Arwen he does exceptionally well.

The four hobbits are in a class by themselves. So much rests on Wood as Frodo, and with his large expressive eyes and quiet manner he makes Frodo this reluctant warrior, decent, honorable and appropriately scared. Astin more than matches him as Samwise, loyal friend. Their double-act of the upper-class Frodo and working-class Sam compliment each other.

So does the double act of Monaghan and Boyd as Merry and Pippin: the latter being the naive, somewhat dimwitted fellow and the former the straight man forever putting the oblivious fellow down.

The Fellowship of the Ring also has some simply brilliant work on all technical levels. The visual effects still hold up nearly twenty years later. The set and costume designs do create this magical world that feels authentic and lived-in despite the fantastical nature of Middle-Earth. Andrew Lesnie's cinematography captures all aspects of Middle-Earth: the lushness of The Shire, the darkness of Saruman's stronghold of Isengard and of Mordor, the mystical worlds of Rivendell and Galadriel's Lothlorien. Howard Shore's score is almost brilliant in showcasing the innocence of the Hobbit's world in the Shire to the ethereal Elvish lands and the dangers the travelers face.

While the closing song May It Be got the lion's share of attention, I would say that the other Enya contribution of Aníron is better: the love theme between Aragorn and Arwen enhancing a beautiful moment and complimenting Mortensen & Tyler's performance along with Lesnie's visuals.

The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring is a massive undertaking and breathtaking in scope. It also manages an excellent cliffhanger and keeps the themes of love, loyalty and perseverance against overwhelming odds. I confess I got emotional at the end as the fellowship breaks up but in particular Frodo and Sam hold on. Quibble if you must about things being left off but on the whole the film more than manages to capture Tolkien's universe as well as could be thought possible.

The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring is an excellent way to begin this fantasy epic.

DECISION: A+

The Godfather Part III: A Review

THE GODFATHER PART III

"Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in".

This is one of the most quoted lines from whole of The Godfather saga, which is curious given how poorly most fans think of The Godfather Part III. That line could serve as The Godfather Part III's theme given how nearly everyone from the first two Godfather films was essentially roped into this. This film is a sad way to end the tale of Michael Corleone's fall. More a set of The Godfather's Greatest Hits, The Godfather Part III is a confused mishmash of plots and performances with only one genuine bright spot.

It's a bit hard to give a general plot summary of The Godfather Part III given that the film throws a lot at the viewer in terms of story and characters, but here goes. Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) is attempting to not just become a legitimate businessman but a respectable one, currying favor from the Catholic Church to metaphorically cloak his sins. He faces troubles all around him however.

Michael's son Anthony (Franc D'Ambrosio) wants to become an opera singer versus joining the family business. Michael's daughter Mary (Sofia Coppola) is essentially an unwitting front for the shady Vito Corleone Foundation. With Tom Hagen dead and his son Andrew (John Savage) a priest, Michael relies on his business manager Harrison (George Hamilton) and sister Connie (Talia Shire) for support.


And then there's Vincent Mancini (Andy Garcia), Michael's illegitimate nephew. Vincent wants to join the family business, but like his father Sonny, Vinnie has a fierce temper, especially towards Joey Zasa (Joe Mantegna), who is one of Michael's underlings running the old neighborhood into the ground. Aunt Connie has a soft spot for Vinnie and Michael, somewhat reluctantly, takes him under his wing.

Along with Vincent and Joey's war we have Michael's involvement with the Immobiliare real estate corporation, a major business run by the Catholic Church. Getting majority control to bail out a shady Archbishop involves getting the Pope's personal approval, but Paul VI is dying and unable to. Therefore, machinations involve getting their own Holy Father on the Throne of St. Peter. Fortunately, Cardinal Lamberto (Raf Vallone) is an honest man unaware of the nefarious deals going on, but his honesty puts the new John Paul I in danger.

In all this we also get the machinations of Don Altobello (Eli Wallach), Connie's own Godfather who is up to no good himself and Vinnie's romance with Mary. Never mind that they are first cousins: somehow only Michael, weak from a diabetic stroke, seems angry about this. The price for Vincent Mancini to become Vincent Corleone and take full power: the termination of his affair with Mary, a price he is most willing to pay.

The Immobiliare plot culminates at Michael's operatic debut in Sicily to perform Cavalleria Rusticana, where those plotting against Michael and Vincent pay a bloody price but so does an innocent, leaving a weak Michael to die alone.

In theory, there is nothing wrong with the idea for a Godfather Part III, but watching it again I sense that no one had any enthusiasm for the project. From director/co-writer Francis Ford Coppola (with Mario Puzo) to everyone returning from the first two Godfather films, it seems that no one wanted to be there. So much seemed rote, almost methodical in its mechanical nature.

I could not shake the idea that Coppola in particular felt that he needed to just hit some of the same notes to try and give viewers what they supposedly liked about the first two films. It was essentially watching a cover band perform all the hits except that the cover band was made up of the original players.

Echoing Don Fanucci's death with Joey Zasa with the religious festival felt sad, especially given that having a John Gotti-like character opened up so many possibilities in terms of showing the old versus the new. Again and again The Godfather Part III could have done so much more but kept stopping.

Fine, so Robert Duvall refused to take part in the film. Why not have his son Andrew Hagen be the new consigliere? Fine, so they decided to somewhat introduce a new character, Harrison, to fill in that role. Why not have Father Andrew Hagen be part of Vatican backroom politics, aiding to help the unwitting Cardinal Lamberto ascend the throne or deal with this meddlesome Archbishop?

Instead, you have this thoroughly useless character introduced, who has no purpose or reason to be here. Same with Grace Hamilton (Bridget Fonda), a reporter attempting to uncover the truth of the Corleones. We see her at the opening party, then in bed with Vincent, and then she disappears whole-cloth from the film altogether. It was only at the opera that I realized, "Wow, Bridget Fonda hasn't been seen in well over two hours".

The Godfather Part III essentially had two plotlines: Joey Zasa and Immobiliare, either of which would have worked for a whole film. For reasons I cannot fathom Coppola opted to ram both of them but never made clear which was the one to bother with.

Plotwise the film is such a chaotic jumble one really wonders not so much what was going on but why time was taken up with one story to simply lurch to a whole new story sans rhyme or reason.

Acting-wise The Godfather Part III is a nearly universal embarrassment. Many people have singled out Sofia Coppola for blame. According to my late friend Fidel Gomez, Jr., the audience actually applauded when Mary got killed accidentally. It is true that Coppola gave a terrible performance, and that her death scene would elicit more howls of laughter than horror, but I am not going to bash Sofia Coppola for her effort.

She was put in an impossible situation. Stepping in at the last minute when Winona Ryder dropped out, Sofia was asked to do something she had little to no training for up against veterans who knew their roles inside and out. On the whole I think Sofia Coppola gave as good a performance as she could under difficult circumstances. It does not absolve her of a genuinely bad performance: her scene with Pacino asking the perhaps too-close-to-home questions "Why are you doing this? Why am I doing this" particularly stiff and uncomfortable to watch.  However, it is, in retrospect, grossly unfair to single her out when just about everyone was horrendous.

As a side note, at least three times in my notes I wished that D'Ambrosio's Anthony would be the one that ended up whacked. I found his performance flatter than Sofia Coppola, even when he was in the opera. I though his character more annoying than Mary and his performance emptier.

Eli Wallach's performance was equally if not more hilariously bad. Playing Don Altobello as this tottering old fool whom the film keeps pushing as some kind of Machiavellian mastermind, his final scenes at the opera are simply too funny to be serious. It is a more laughable performance than that of Sofia Coppola. Same goes for Mantegna as Joey Zasa, so wildly camp one almost expected him to call himself "Fat Tony".

Pacino and Diane Keaton as his now-ex-wife Kay looked so bored, as if they were just saying thing while waiting for the check to clear.

The film comes alive only when Andy Garcia is on the screen. You can believe Vincent is the combination of the three Corleone brothers. He has Sonny's fiery temper and violent streak. When whacking his hated rival Joey, we see Michael's methodical ruthlessness and intelligence. When playing love scenes with Grace and Mary or in his fondness for his Aunt Connie, a little bit of Fredo's warmth comes through. Garcia was compelling, intense and magnetic as Vincent Mancini-Corleone to where a film built solely around him could have reached the heights of the first two Godfather films.

Shire, to be fair, did well as Connie to where I wish she had more time as the de facto Godmother. Hamilton too did well as the business manager Harrison.

The film does have a couple of flashes of brilliance. The whacking of Joey Zasa, while not great had potential and Pacino had one good moment when he confesses his sins to Cardinal Lamberto. Oddly, what was meant as a climatic scene when assassinating the heads of the major families via a helicopter felt almost boring, a sign of how weak the film overall was.

On the whole however, The Godfather Part III is a sad and sorry mess. Jumbled, confused, with too much going on and nearly universally bad performances save for Garcia, The Godfather Part III is a case of going to the well once too often, hitting the same beats as its predecessors but not finding their melody or rhythm.

Speak Softly Love but see this film unless it's for Garcia or for completion's sake.

DECISION: D+

The Godfather Part II (1974): A Review (Review #1272)

THE GODFATHER PART II

The Godfather Part II is really both sequel and prequel to The Godfather, a sweeping tale of the rise of mob boss Don Vito Corleone and the fall of his son Michael. A massive epic running almost three and a half hours, The Godfather Part II chronicles the American dream in vivid albeit dark colors.

The film ebbs and flows between turn of the century New York and 1958 Nevada, so a plot summation requires a little dexterity. In the pre-Godfather sections we see young Vito Antolini forced into exile due to a longstanding vendetta. Coming through Ellis Island, his name is changed to that of his hometown, Corleone.

As a young Vito Corleone (Robert De Niro) attempts to raise a family and keep to an honest life, he finds circumstances force his hand into a life of crime. Joining with neighbor/small-time hood Clemenza (Bruno Kirby), Vito now takes on the local boss, Don Fanucci (Gaston Mochin) for control of the area. Vito is generally a good man, using his 'influence' to help those in need but not afraid of using the full force of his powers.

He returns to Sicily one last time for a final confrontation with elderly mob boss Don Ciccio (Guiseppe Sillato). Vito took his whole family to Sicily, though given their ages it is unlikely that toddler Michael or baby Connie would remember. Perhaps if they did, Michael would see how he echoes his father.

In the post-Godfather section family head Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) faces a host of trouble. There are the minor problems such as his sister Connie (Talia Shire), now a bitter mob princess running around from man to man. Then there are major problems. Longtime Corleone caporegime Frankie Pentangeli (Michael V. Gazzo) is furious that Michael appears to side with Jewish mobster Hyman Roth (Lee Strasberg), who is funding Frankie's rivals for control of his territory. Michael survives an assassination attempt at his home, and now he is determined to smoke out whoever is the mole working for Roth, whom Michael knows is behind the attempted hit.

Pentangeli is himself set up for assassination but the attempt is accidentally thwarted. Frankie thinks Michael sold him out, so now he's going to sell Michael out to the government. In reality, Michael's older brother Fredo (John Cazale) was the rat, though whether he was duped or not is a subject of debate. As he faces enemies on all sides, Michael's cunning and coldness helps him survive but at a high cost.

Michael's long-suffering wife Kay (Diane Keaton) takes shocking steps to ensure there will be no successor to Michael's bloody throne. As for Fredo, he like Roth and Pentangeli pays for his sin of treachery, with the cost being Michael's soul.

The Godfather Part II is more than a simultaneous continuation and remembrance of the Corleone family saga. It really is a story about family, particularly fathers and sons. We see how Michael is in many way's Vito's son. Both hold long resentments and enact cruel vengeance on those who injured them. It does not matter that one was a virtually senile old man or one's own somewhat senile older brother. It was their need to 'defend their family & family honor' that motivated their brutality.

Director Francis Ford Coppola curiously had Vito take Michael's hand after both his murders (Fenucci and Ciccio). I do not think it was intentional but one can see perhaps symbolically how Vito was passing on his bloody legacy to the one son he hoped would not carry on the tainted family legacy.

The film is absolutely fantastic about having you empathize with Vito yet recoil with Michael. We see Vito in many ways as a victim, particularly when he arrives alone and silent to America. As so many of us are either immigrants or children of immigrants, we can identify with Vito and the hope of a new life away from the burdens of the old country.

However, we see in The Godfather Part II the dark side of the American dream: the Corleone family did indeed find prosperity in America, but one built on crime, brutality and death.

The film is also a sly critique of capitalism. Note that Michael and Roth, these two mobsters who built their empire on crime, are sitting at the same table with industrialists who essentially rule Cuba. As the Revolution heats up we see only Michael realizing the danger his empire faces while everyone keeps dancing. Note that Roth and his partners metaphorically cut Cuba among themselves via Roth's birthday cake with a map of Cuba as the frosting. They are essentially businessmen, but whose industry involves criminality up to and including murder.

The corruption of the Cuban government is more brazen than that of the American government, embodied by the WASP Nevada Senator Geary (G.D. Spradling). He actually provides a humorous moment when he essentially flees the Senate committee meeting on organized crime when Michael is perjuring himself like crazy. In his flustered declarations that 'not all Italian-Americans are mobsters', Geary shows the pomposity and stupidity of those in power. We know Geary is amoral and corrupt to where Vito's dreams of a 'Senator Corleone' look rational, even hopeful. Michael is right: both are part of the same hypocrisy.

The Godfather Part II is exceptionally acted. De Niro affects Marlon Brando's raspy voice from the first Godfather and speaks almost exclusively in Italian. That isn't a distraction however, as DeNiro makes Vito a very sympathetic character: competent and decent who was basically forced into this brutal world. Gazzi and Strasberg were also exceptional as the emotion-driven Pentangeli and the cold-thinking Roth, almost balancing each other.

While all three were nominated for Best Supporting Actor (with De Niro winning), I am surprised that Cazale was not for his Fredo. It was an equally strong and moving performance. Your heart breaks for Fredo when he stumbles into his explanation as to how he ended up as Roth's stooge. In his mix of clumsiness, hurt, rage, ineptness but genuine sweetness and pathos Fredo is extremely sympathetic. You leave knowing that he did not deserve his fate.

Shire also excelled as Connie, going from angry at Michael to loyal to him. Keaton had a bravura moment when she confesses the truth about their lost baby to Michael. It's shocking and heartbreaking, Kay's pain and fury and desperation all exploding simultaneously. Robert Duvall too was strong though I think his role as Tom Hagen was diminished.

Now we go to Al Pacino as the Corleone patriarch. His performance is brilliant whether he calmly signals that Fredo's time is up or slapping Kay for destroying his dreams of a dynasty. We see Michael has destroyed what he insists he loves most: his family. That we can find even an ounce of humanity within Michael's now-dark heart is a credit to Pacino.

The last shot of him is simultaneously heartbreaking and chilling. As he remembers all his siblings long before he assumed power, we can see so much and so little in his cold eyes. Does he regret? Does he feel pain to now being the undisputed king? He is a sad and pathetic figure, alone and damned. Michael has reached the summit but still has nothing to show for it.

The Godfather Part II echoes The Godfather in many ways. Both essentially begin with religious festivities that mask nefarious goings-on. Both have the conflict of betrayal and loyalty at their center. Both touch on the struggle between doing what is right and what is necessary. It was necessary to wipe Roth out. Was it right to wipe Fredo out?

Every element in The Godfather Part II works: the performances, Gordon Willis' cinematography, Carmine Coppola and Nino Rota's score. If there is a quibble it might be that some might find the jumping between the past and present a bit jarring and/or confusing. Some may find the length a difficulty, particularly with certain parts that might have been cut without affecting the overall flow. I find those minor quibbles.

There is debate whether The Godfather Part II is superior or inferior to The Godfather. I am firmly in the former category. The Godfather Part II, this tale of corruption both external and internal, of the price of loyalty is chilling and tragic. The sins of the fathers do taint their sons, and sometimes what we do for our family may end up damning them in the long run.

DECISION: A+

1975 Best Picture: One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest

The Godfather (1972): A Review (Review #1237)

THE GODFATHER (1972)

I know people who are obsessed with The Godfather, who can quote every line and know the family ties of the Corleone family better than their own family tree. The Godfather is an epic: a story of family and loyalty and the darkness that lurks beneath them.

Vito Corleone (Marlon Brando) is the powerful head of a Mafia crime organization, one that holds immense power and sway over government officials, judges and underworld activities. Vito's heir apparent is his oldest son Santino, better known as Sonny (James Caan). Sonny is hot-tempered and easily antagonized, unlike Vito's consigliere (lawyer/adviser) Tom Hagen (Robert Duvall), Vito's informally adopted son, who is calm and methodical.

Vito's second-oldest son Fredo (John Cazale) is generally ineffective and weak, his youngest son Michael (Al Pacino) is kept out of the 'family business' and has returned from World War II as a war hero. Michael returns from the war in time for his sister Connie's (Talia Shire) wedding to Carlo Rizzi (Gianni Russo), bringing along his very WASP girlfriend Kay Adams (Diane Keaton).  After the wedding and addressing a subplot where Hagen puts the squeeze on film producer Jack Woltz (John Marley) to cast Vito's godson, crooner Johnny Fontane (Al Martino) in a war film, we get to the main plot.

Vito is offered a chance to break into the narcotics business by Virgil "The Turk" Sollozzo (Al Lettieri) in exchange for financing and protection. Vito sees drugs as the downfall of the Mafia and politely declines, but Sonny lets it slip he would be interested. Vito is angered that Sonny would share his opinions with others outside the family but Sollozzo sees an opportunity.

He puts a hit on Vito to get Sonny to be the new Don so they can do business, but he only ends up igniting a mob war, one that gets Michael fully immersed in the family business when he kills both Sollozzo and Captain McCluskey (Sterling Hayden), Sollozzo's corrupt right-hand man.

Sent into exile for his protection, Michael goes to his roots in Corleone, Sicily where he woos and marries Apollonia (Simonetta Stefanelli). The war however, goes on, ultimately claiming both Sonny and Apollonia.

Vito, seeing how things have devolved and mostly recovered from his assassination attempt, meets with the heads of the Five Families to formally end the war. He now goes into semi-retirement, putting Michael as the de facto head. Michael, deciding to become legitimate, goes to Las Vegas to make their casino partner Mo Greene (Alex Rocco) an offer he can't refuse. Greene is incensed and thinks he can push Michael around the way he does Fredo, but he's in for a surprise.

Vito's last piece of advise is that after his own death a traitor within the Corleone family will plot to kill Michael at the bidding of whoever was behind Vito's assassination attempt, as they see Sollozzo as part of a larger plan. Michael has decided to settle all family business, once and for all, in a brutal bloodbath that will make them the undisputed masters of the underworld, though with a terrible price both personal and moral.

The Godfather has achieved a mythic status, particularly from mob aficionados who look upon the world of the Corleone Family as something if not necessarily to emulate at least to admire. Unlike other gangster films such as the original Scarface, Angels with Dirty Faces or White Heat, this group is elegant, charming and wealthy. There's nothing overtly sordid or tawdry in their world apart from infidelity and spousal abuse, two things that sadly plague non-mobsters.

I think it is fair to say that The Godfather somewhat romanticizes a very brutal world where killing and other nefarious criminal enterprises take place, but the film is more than that.

It is an extraordinary piece of work artistically, a highly intelligent adaptation of Mario Puzo's novel. It is also a rich tale of family and loyalty, of how your roots both shape and sometimes bind.

On the artistic side, director Francis Ford Coppola crafts such a visually rich film where the symbolism and foreshadowing pop out. Right from the beginning at the wedding we see the juxtaposition: the brightness, joy and frivolity of the wedding countered by the darkness of the various requests the guests make of Vito. This is shown especially by Gordon Willis' cinematography: the wedding bathed in sunshine, Vito's office in almost satanic darkness.

At the famous 'leave the gun, take the cannoli' scene, note where Coppola sets the scene. Out in the distance you see the Statue of Liberty from behind, metaphorically turning her back on these immigrants and their sordid acts.

Before Corleone assassin Luca Brasi (Lenny Montana) gets killed (or whacked as the Mob term goes), you see the glass windows have a fish design, foreshadowing that soon Luca Brasi 'sleeps with the fishes'.

Coppola uses foreshadowing often. When Michael tells Kay the story of how his father helped family friend Fontane through violence, he tells her calmly "That's my family, Kay. That's not me". We can see that despite himself, Michael (the only Corleone child with a thoroughly American name versus his siblings' names of Santino and Fredo, with Connie probably being short for Constanzia) will end up as perhaps the biggest part of both 'families'. After Michael tells his father in the hospital, "I'm with you now", the double meaning of that line is clear.

As a side note, it's interesting that among themselves the Corleone siblings go by more "American" nicknames like Sonny, Freddy and Connie (Mike or Mickey being Michael's nicknames), reflecting again their own desire to be more integrated versus their parents who still hold fast to their Italian roots. Michael, if one notices, struggles with Italian, speaking it slowly, sometimes struggling with the language, again reflecting his more integrated life.

That theme of 'the sins of the fathers coming upon the sons' is reflected in Vito and Michael's final conversation, where Vito speaks of his aspirations for his sons (an old school man, he'd never consider having Connie as head of the family). He recognizes Sonny was not fit to lead due to his short temper, his unofficial son Tom Hagen was not Sicilian, and Fredo was intellectually and spiritually weak. Michael, he hoped, would have achieved greatness separate as perhaps "Senator Corleone, Governor Corleone", but there just wasn't enough time.

The tragedy of their collective failure dooms both men to this life of supporting their family at a high price.

In the climatic purging of the Five Families, the intercuts between the holiness of the baptism and the brutality of the various killings, punctured by the organ music that ties them both, reflects Michael's loss of his soul so extraordinarily well. He can claim to renounce Satan, but we now that the one least involved in the family business has given himself fully to Satan under the guise of said family.

Coppola deserves major credit for drawing simply perfect performances out of his entire cast. Brando displayed his old powers as Vito, a man who rarely broke emotionally and remained calm and mannered even when angered. Only twice does he break out: when he slaps and berates Fontane for crying and when he turns to the undertaker Bonasera (Salvatore Corsitto) to prepare Sonny's body and make him presentable given the ferocity of his killing.

"Look how they massacred my boy," the old Don almost wails, the old man as close to breaking as he ever has.

Brando's performance, much imitated and spoofed now with that soft, raspy voice and jowls, is really one of extraordinary skill. He is compelling, where he dominates every scene he is in.

Pacino also does extraordinary work as Michael, the man slowly corrupted by loyalty to his family. His performance is equal to Brando's in showing how Michael came to slowly, coldly and fully embrace the darkness. You see how Michael went from that war hero chasing after his WASP dreamgirl to the man who does not flinch from having his brother-in-law killed.

Caan, despite not being Italian, is ferocious as Sonny, the 'shoot-first-ask-questions-later-if-at-all' temporary Don who let his emotions overtake his reason. Hagen counters him brilliantly as Hagen, the cool, rational member who thinks things out rather than storm in the way Sonny does.

Though his role was smaller, Cazale was excellent as Fredo, the most sensitive of the Corleone brothers. He shows this at the attempted assassination of his father: first he bungles trying to pull his pistol out then starts weeping over his father, screaming "PAPA!". This more than anything captures Fredo's inept but gentle nature. Keaton too as Kay, the long-suffering and ultimately betrayed woman and Shire as the tormented sister are also quite excellent.

The film also has the benefit of Nino Rota's iconic score, which brings in the tragedy and romance of the story so well.

The Godfather even has at least one moment of humor. When Woltz is raging to Tom Hagen about how he wants to destroy Johnny Fontane's career, he says it's because Fontane had an affair with one of Woltz's proteges. "She was beautiful! She was young! She was innocent! She was the greatest piece of ass I've ever had and I've had'em all over the world!" Far be it for me to know the ways of the world, but how someone can simultaneously be "innocent" and "the greatest piece of ass (one has) ever had" I don't know.

As a side note, if as Godfather fans maintain Johnny Fontane is based on Frank Sinatra and his alleged Mob connections, then we can speculate that the "war film" Fontane is desperate to be in would be the equivalent to From Here to Eternity. Fontane tells the Don that the character he wants to play "is a guy like me, I wouldn't even have to act". In From Here to Eternity, the character Sinatra plays is pretty much like Sinatra: a skinny, scrappy Italian kid.

Moreover, in real life Sinatra was in a downward slide in his career, much like Fontane was in The Godfather. Both the real Sinatra and his alleged doppelganger Fontane knew 'the war picture' would put them back on top.

Sinatra at the time was also in a tempestuous relationship with movie star Ava Gardner. Could she have been 'the greatest piece of ass' a Woltz-like figure ever had? That's doubtful, as Gardner's career was riding high when she was with Sinatra, but she did lobby hard to get Sinatra cast in From Here to Eternity, with the end result that Sinatra did revive his career and win an Oscar for Best Supporting Actor for the film.

I'm in now way saying Fontane was Sinatra or that he got the role in From Here to Eternity via Mob ties and a horse's head. People can make that connection if they wish, that is all.

I think part of the appeal to The Godfather is that a viewer can relate to the Corleones because we all have family issues in the same way they do: the love for your parents and siblings, the struggle between keeping to our heritage and integrating into the more dominant American culture, the aspirations for our children which can also be terrible burdens for them.

We all know the burden of family and conversely the call to stay loyal to the family. I don't think one person doesn't relate to Michael's warning to Fredo when he sides with Mo Greene: "Fredo, you're my brother and I love you, but don't ever take sides against the family again". I doubt one person hasn't felt a sense of betrayal when a family member sides against the family.

In its way, The Godfather is very relatable to the viewer: that pull-push between the individual and our family ties.

The Godfather, this tale of love, loyalty and loss, enraptures viewers, perhaps a bit too much in presenting these criminals as elegant people. However, underneath the criminality of the Corleones we see a story of family, tradition and the high cost of them all. Expertly written, acted and directed, The Godfather truly is a triumph of cinema.

One final note on The Godfather, and it relates to the myth of the orange. I don't know how the orange became this harbinger of death and I'll take Coppola's claim that it was a coincidence that oranges were mere props that found their way at certain points. However, for those who enjoy juicing their orange myths, they can be found all over The Godfather if one wants to look for them:

Tessio (Abe Vigoda) handles an orange at Connie's wedding (he gets whacked at the end).
Woltz's dinner table has oranges when he declines Don Vito's request to put Fontane in his movie (his horse gets whacked and Woltz wakes up with its head on his bed)
Vito buys oranges right before he's shot (he almost gets whacked)
Carlo wears a bright orange suit when Sonny beats him up for beating his sister (Carlo gets whacked)
The restaurant where Sollozzo and McCluskey get whacked is bathed in orange neon light
Sonny passes a billboard for oranges as he races to rescue Connie (Sonny gets whacked)
There are oranges at the unofficial Board Meeting of the Five Families (the heads of which get whacked)
Vito stuffs orange slices into his mouth before dying in his garden

Curiously, there are no known oranges seen when Apollonia bites the dust, but there it is.

DECISION: A+

1976 Best Picture: The Sting

The Last Emperor (1987): A Review (Review #1235)

THE LAST EMPEROR

Pu Yi, the subject of the biopic The Last Emperor, is pretty much a pretty forgotten figure in history, a footnote in that vast expanse of Chinese civilization. His biopic too has suffered a similar fate: despite sweeping the Academy Awards by winning all nine of its nominations, few people remember it. That is a terrible shame, for The Last Emperor is more than a history lesson on an obscure figure, but a story of a man caught in history's maelstrom, majestic but powerless, forever doomed to be a puppet.

Manchuria 1950. A group of Chinese war criminals arrive to be imprisoned and/or reeducated by the Chinese Communists. Among them is Aisin-Gioro Pu Yi (John Lone). He, however, is no ordinary collaborator. He is the last emperor of the Qing Dynasty, still recognized by others. The Last Emperor goes back and forth between his imprisonment and interrogation by fierce The Interrogator (Ric Young) and the more moderate Prison Governor (Ying Ruocheng), as "Prisoner 981" remembers his life.

Peking 1908: little Pu Yi is snatched from his own palace and swept into the Forbidden City, where the three-year-old is placed on the throne. His every whim is catered save one: the desire to go home. His only real friend is his wet-nurse Ar Mo (Jade Go), though later he is joined by his younger brother Pu Chieh. A monarch in name only, he floats in an unreal world: lavish, elaborate but empty.

In comes a new tutor, Reginald Fleming Johnston or R.J. (Peter O'Toole), who brings a window into His Majesty's life. Despite this and a marriage to two women (an Empress and a Secondary Consort), Pu Yi's life is still summarized essentially to two phrases: "I do not understand" and "Open the door", the latter being the one command that is never granted.

Finally forced out of the Forbidden City in 1924, he is taken in by the Japanese in more ways than one. While his secondary consort Weng Hsui (Wu Jun Mai) leaves him, "Henry Pu Yi" and the Empress "Elizabeth" Wan Yung (Joan Chen) continue their dance with the Japanese, in particular with the mysterious Mr. Amakasu (Ryuishi Sakamoto). Wan Yung also falls under the spell of Pu Yi's cousin Eastern Jewel (Maggie Han), a spy and Japanese collaboratrix against her own Chinese people.

Pu Yi accepts the throne of the puppet state of Manchukuo but tragedy strikes all, in particular Wan Yung. Captured by the Russians, the former emperor is eventually sent back to the Chinese, where he takes the blame for everything, even things he was not involved in. Eventually, after 'rehabilitation', Pu Yi is released and lives as a gardener, where he dares to confront the Red Guards during the Cultural Revolution when he sees his former Prison Governor held for mockery.

Pu Yi makes one last visit to the Forbidden City, where he metaphorically disappears from history, dying in 1967.

The Last Emperor has a very traditional but well-structured series of flashbacks and forwards, where one moment or question triggers a memory. As the film goes on, it never falters in either feeling long or in having the time shifts interrupt or collide. We flow from 1950 Manchuria to 1908 Peking so smoothly, and it's a credit to the editing that these events flow so well.

It's also a credit to screenwriters Mark Peploe and Bernardo Bertolucci (who also directed) that Pu Yi's life is chronicled in such a way that we can follow the story and even get hints about the themes in The Last Emperor. During his early childhood, Ar Mo tells Pu Yi a story that ends "and when the tree fell, the monkeys were scattered", foreshadowing how when he (the tree) fell, his court and in particular the army of eunuchs (the monkeys) were scattered. Later on, as he remembers when he expelled the eunuchs, he says, "The Forbidden City had become a theater without an audience, so why did the actors remain on the stage? It was only to steal the scenery piece by piece".

Pu Yi's entire life was a puppet theater where he was the puppet, never the master. Even the one time he tried to be the puppeteer with his collaboration he found himself directed by the villainous Mr. Amakasu and Eastern Jewel, the Empress' frenemy and opium supplier.

I would say the themes in The Last Emperor are those two repeated phrases: "I do not understand" and "Open the door". Pu Yi was perpetually caught in circumstances he did not or could not comprehend, from his enthronement to his inability to leave the Forbidden City after he abdicated to his eventual lack of comprehension about his true powerlessness. He was a very tragic figure, some of it not of his own making but some of his.

The powerlessness of those who seem all-powerful is captured in the repeated refrain of "open the door". Pu Yi demands this often but he is not obeyed either out of tradition or contempt. Moreover, the one time the request is granted it is in prison where he has no choice. If one thinks about it, Pu Yi was always in some kind of prison.

The Last Emperor showcases perhaps the best prison ever. It is the first Western film permitted to shoot inside the Forbidden City, and the film makes the most of the imperial palaces and grounds brilliantly captured by cinematographer Vittorio Storaro. It is if nothing else a lavish-looking film. Storaro not only enriches the vastness and lavishness of the Forbidden City, but bathes certain moments in breathtakingly beautiful colors. For example during his exile, we see the occupied city of Tiensin in amazing blue that reflects both the night and the mood of sadness.

We also see the lavish and opulence of the Qing court and retinue in James Acheson's costumes and the set designs that blend so well with the majesty and power of the Forbidden City. The opulence and tragedy of Pu Yi's life was also so beautifully captured in the score written by former Talking Heads frontman David Byrne, Chinese composer Cong Su and Sakamoto, who did double-duty as the villainous and mysterious Mr. Amakasu.

As one sees The Last Emperor, it is astonishing now to think that despite its nine Oscar nominations/wins not one nomination went to any of the actors. I am simply amazed that such great performances so well-directed by Bertolucci were passed over.

Lone is in turns arrogant and tragic as Pu Yi, a man driven and repelled by power, desirous to take control but incapable of it. Lone plays Pu Yi as a haunted man, one who yearns for freedom but is also terrified of it.

Chen was beautiful and tragic as Wan Yung, an innocent corrupted by those around her into becoming a sad, pathetic and tragic figure. Her final scene where she returns to the palace as Manchukuo is about to fall is heartbreaking: totally bereft of mind, knowing her child was assassinated right after birth and destroyed by drug addiction, she can only stare at her husband, half-knowing half-unaware.

Han as the villainous Eastern Jewel, Dennis Dun as the loyal but long-suffering valet Big Li, Victor Wong as the honest and Cassandra-like High Tutor, and Ruocheng as the wise Prison Governor were also worthy of consideration.

Also high on the list for consideration should have been Peter O'Toole as Mr. Johnston. In turns compassionate and angry, one who could speak truths to His Majesty while also in his own way coddling Pu Yi's vague dreams for imperial restoration, O'Toole more than held his own. He even brings a touch of comedy when he finds himself unable to answer why he never got married himself.

The Last Emperor is a sweeping epic of a most inconsequential historic figure. Pu Yi did not impact humanity in any tangible way. Instead, he was just a cog in the wheel of time, a figure trapped by the machinations of those around him.

He did not shape history. He was instead a victim of it.

1906-1967

DECISION: A+


1988 Best Picture: Rain Man

Schindler's List (1993): A Review

SCHINDLER'S LIST (1993)

There are probably fewer film subjects both difficult and in a way routine as the Holocaust. No narrative film, however well-crafted, can truly capture the horror, the evil of the Shoah. Even documentaries such as Night and Fog or Shoah can fully document the monstrosity of this most horrific barbarism. Schindler's List, the story of how one man saved over a thousand Jewish lives, comes as close as possible.

Oskar Schindler (Liam Neeson) is generally apolitical and interested only in making as large a fortune as possible while doing as little work as possible. Buying influence with Nazi officials in occupied Poland, he sees an opportunity to enrich himself, particularly with the plight of Krakow's Jewish population which has forced into a ghetto.

He surreptitiously gets Jewish financing and has account Itzhak Stern (Ben Kingsley) run his enamelware factory. Schindler also gets help from black marketer Poldek Pfefferberg (Jonathan Sagalle), another Jew. Things couldn't be better for Schindler: a life filled with mountains of money, free labor, booze and broads despite being married to Emilie (Caroline Goodall). 

However, as the antisemitism takes on a more murderous form in the shape of Amon Goeth (Ralph Fiennes), a Nazi commandant fully committed to the Final Solution, Schindler starts slowly evolving from apathetic Nazi to determined savior of 'his' Jewish slave labor. Continuing the bribes, Schindler now is committed to keep those in his factory alive while keeping his dance with Goth going.

Through his efforts, over a thousand souls were spared.

Schindler's List is an intensely difficult film to see as it revolves around the worst act of man's capacity for evil against his fellow man. There are sequences that elicit powerful emotions within the viewer, and it would be all but impossible to not find oneself crying. For me it was the liquidation of the Krakow Ghetto, a set of horrors that chill when shown.

The entire sequence was brilliantly filmed. Director Steven Spielberg shot this in a jumbled and chaotic manner to underscore the madness of the liquidation. We jump from scenes within the ghetto of mass shootings and rounding up of people to Schindler's point-of-view above the ghetto. Here, as his newest mistress rides away we see that Oskar has focused on a little girl in a red coat, an innocent lost and unaware of just what satanic evil is taking place. It's at this moment when we see the slow change in him.

Unlike his mistress, he cannot turn away.

His evolution is complete when later on he sees the same girl, now dead, about to be incinerated. Schindler, by no means a good man, rallies to do the one good thing he is in position to: save lives.

As a side note, I held it together until the Liquidation, but it was when a little boy led Mrs. Dresner (Miri Fabian) and her daughter Danka (Anna Mucha), whom he seemed smitten with, to 'the good line'. To place such a monstrous burden on a child is beyond comprehension.

The Auschwitz sequence is terrifying, particularly because we the audience expect it to go one way only to have that upended. As the characters have already discussed what happens in other camps, they expect things to go a certain way too. As we go through this with them, we too are placed within the fear of agony and death. Even though they do live, we still get shown that for some, there was no way out.

We see Schindler's evolution in a brilliant performance from Neeson. He starts out as almost a wolf, calculating how to take his prey. As the film progresses, we see that he not a moral man if by moral we mean honest, fair and faithful. In certain ways he does not change: at one point he rescues Stern more out of necessity than altruism. However, bits and pieces of a genuinely moral man emerge in how Neeson plays Oskar. He maintains a perfectly straight face when presented with a one-armed old man at his factory, then anger at being put in what he sees as a dangerous position as some kind of savior. Once he learns that same old man had been shot, he echoes to the commanding officer Stern's words about that man being 'essential'.

In Neeson's performance, we see Oskar Schindler embrace his reluctance of morality without making him a saint. He is a deeply flawed figure but one who takes on his goodness at the end with almost a childish glee.

To counter him is Fiennes as the psychopathic Goeth, whose grasp on anything good is almost nonexistent. The only moment where one sees that there may actually be a soul is when he has a one-sided conversation with his Jewish maid Helen Hirsh (Embeth Davitz). Goeth seems to actually struggle with the idea that Helen is human, one he may be attracted to, only to end up reverting to his Nazi training. At one point in Steven Zaillian's adaptation of Thomas Keneally's novel Goeth says "I want to grow old with her" almost offhandedly when Schindler negotiates who will be on his list. It's subtle but an insight into Goeth's very diseased and conflicted mind.

Kingsley too was excellent as Stern, a man both scared and courageous in working as much within the system as he could to save those around him. Davitz's Helen Hirsh also gives a strong performance of a woman doing her best to survive a volatile man.

Schindler's List is also complimented by John Williams' haunting score, moving and elegant and tragic and uplifting, just like the film itself. Janusz Kaminski's black-and-white cinematography also works beautifully, more so when Spielberg uses a few bursts of color when candles are lit. The film opens and closes in color, taking us from a pre-Holocaust past to a post-Holocaust present. The candles still maintaining a brightness in the film are symbolic of the stubbornness of hope, light that will not be consumed by darkness.

Here perhaps I find my one major criticism on Schindler's List. It is at the end in the "I Could Have Saved More" scene. Having seen the film three times now I still cannot shake the belief that it was over-the-top: the acting, the scene, it all combined to if not completely take me out of a movie at least to remind me it was a movie. It does not take away from the power and importance of Schindler's List but it just felt as if they were gilding the lily.

However, minus that Schindler's List is more than an excellent film: well-crafted and well-acted. It is an important and necessary film, one that I wish were shown annually to truly keep to the slogan "Never Again".

Oskar Schindler was no saint and in many ways a failure and a fraud. Only once in his life did he demonstrate any morality, but would that we all have that ability at such an hour to demonstrate that kind of moral clarity.

1908-1974

DECISION: A+

1994 Best Picture: Forrest Gump