Jacob Destree’s Movie Blog

“The Devil And Daniel Johnston” (2005) tells the inspiring, tragic story of a brilliant songwriter hindered by severe bipolar disorder.

With access to an astounding array of resources– ranging from home audio and video recordings to personal interviews– the filmmakers have crafted one of the most memorable character studies of recent years. Like “Crumb” and “Grizzly Man,” this documentary paints a portrait of a man doing what he loves in spite of great personal problems.

The details of Daniel Johnston’s life are downright mythic. To see the film is to understand how to conquer MTV while working at McDonald’s. Or how to negotiate an album deal with Elektra Records while living in a mental institution. Or how to first cause a plane to crash, and then survive the crash you caused.

Through it all, one thing is clear: Daniel Johnston is an amazing songwriter. He may not have a great voice, but he makes up for it in spades. The quality of his words and music eclipse the often poor production values of his recordings. He is a musician’s musician, inspiring the likes of Kurt Cobain, Sonic Youth, and the Butthole Surfers.

Daniel Johnston’s personality has been compared to that of Brian Wilson. I would add Syd Barrett to the list. The raw, out of tune brilliance on display in such late-career Barrett as “Dark Globe” anticipates Johnston’s similar struggle to make great music while battling mental illness.

If you like underground music, this movie is for you– but be warned:

Viewing “The Devil And Daniel Johnston” may result in purchasing multiple CD’s featuring out-of-tune singing and poor production values. In severe cases, starting a collection of cassette tape bootlegs may result.

Grade: A-

Does Daniel remind you of Brian Wilson? Of Syd Barrett?
Post your thoughts.

There are good cop movies (like “Lethal Weapon 2″).

There are bad cop movies (like “Cobra”).

And then there are GOOD bad cop movies, like “Tango & Cash” (1989).

The distinction is often a fine one. What sets “Tango & Cash” apart is that it is so obviously self-aware, comedic, and spoof-like. This movie has a sense of humor, and does not for one moment take itself too seriously (like the dreadful “Cobra”).

“Tango and Cash” lives and dies by two things: the jokes and the casting. It succeeds on both counts, making this bad cop movie into a good one– although barely.

First, the casting:

Kurt Russel plays Gabe Cash, the crazy loose cannon. Sylvester Stallone plays against type, as the refined playboy cop Ray Tango. They are so named, no doubt because it makes a good movie title. Their nemesis, the incomparable Jack Palance, hams it to the hilt as crime boss Yves Perret. This was the same year Palance appeared in “Batman,” and was memorably murdered by The Joker. A good year, for an aging star.

Add Teri Hatcher to the mix as Kiki, and you’ve got a pretty good cast for 1989. But that’s not all! Film buffs will enjoy the steady stream of character actors whose faces you remember but names you don’t. To mention a few, there’s James Hong, the go-to-guy for Asian villains who played Lo Pan in “Big Trouble In Little China” and the maitre de in The Chinese Restaurant Episode of “Seinfeld.” There’s also Michael Jeter (who delivers the Margaret Mead speech in “Fear And Loathing In Las Vegas”) and Clint Howard (a frequent collaborator with brother Ron).

Second, the jokes:

Some are clever, others are corny, but the jokes are as integral to the success of “Tango & Cash” as the casting is. From the very first scene, this movie is out to make you laugh.

Here’s a one liner:

[Tango has just stuck a grenade down a bad guy's pants.]
RAY TANGO: My contribution to birth control.

And a typical exchange:

GABE CASH: You know it’s a free country, Tango.
RAY TANGO: Yeah.
GABE CASH: And people are free to do whatever they want.
RAY TANGO: So?
GABE CASH: Well, your sister is very, very free.
RAY TANGO: I’m going to kill you.

Notice the simple set up/punchline technique?

GABE CASH: This is the tape that’s gonna clear our names, courtesy of our friend Jumbo the Forgerer. What do you got?
RAY TANGO: I got a quarter of four.

That last one is straight out of vaudeville, and “Tango & Cash” essentially coasts by on the vaudevillian level all the way through the picture. The strategy is a simple one. Throw in plenty of stunts, jokes, and likable characters and maybe the audience will forget they’ve seen this all before. You can get the same dog and pony show just about anywhere, but this one has the right mix to win over the crowd.

Grade: C+

Does “Tango & Cash” exemplify the “GOOD bad movie”?
Post your thoughts.

In the current cinematic landscape, action movies tend to abide by the “faster is better” way of doing things.

Just look at “The Bourne Identity” series, including “The Bourne Supremacy” and recently “The Bourne Ultimatum.” The action is frantic, quickly-cut, filmed from many angles. The shaky camera movements are designed to make the viewer feel as if they’re right there in the middle of the scene. For many viewers this ratchets up the tension and makes for a truly visceral experience.

But some of the best action scenes of recent years fly in the face of this conventional wisdom. Instead of the constant cutting seen in the “Bourne” pictures, movies like “Oldboy” have wowed audiences with something called the “long take.” In this style, a fight scene is filmed with one continuous, unbroken shot which may last up to several minutes in length.

Here’s an example from “Oldboy” (2003). Please note, a few short takes precede the long take:

Most filmmakers shy away from this for obvious reasons. A single take lasting several minutes requires more choreography, rehearsal, and trial and failure than several shorter takes pieced together.

However, the advantages are numerous. The fighting feels more “real” in a long take because there are no edits– just like in real life. What you see was filmed in real time, lasting exactly as long as the shot does. Time has not been compressed or altered for effect, so the shot stands on its own merits.

Here’s an even better example to top “Oldboy.” Taken from “The Protector” (2005), this shot is a real tour de force:

Whereas “Oldboy” used a tracking shot to move the camera horizontally from left to right, “The Protector” employs the more versatile “Steadicam.” This allows the camera to really penetrate the film space. It is attached to a camera operator who can move the camera up stairs, around corners, or anywhere a person can go.

Notice what a sense of spacial geography this technique imparts to the viewer. After watching “The Protector” clip, you can describe the hotel lobby where it takes place as if it’s somewhere you had been personally. The “Bourne” films, with their quick cuts, never achieve that same sense of space.

The “long take” is often a mark of a great director, or film. Orson Welles, Brian De Palma, and Max Ophuls have all applied the technique, but not in fight scenes. It’s good to see some of Asia’s up and coming directors have adapted the “long take” for action movies. It really stands apart from the “Bourne” style which has become all too common.

Is “The Bourne Identity” style the best way to film an action scene? Seen any good “long takes” lately?
Post Your thoughts.