Your browser does not support or blocks cookies. The site will not function properly. Do not ask for support.



High Noon
certainly the classic it is said to be. the best part is that they trimmed out all the fat, down to a lean, mean 85 or so minutes. usually i want more meat on the bones, but in this case it works perfectly as it more or less takes place in real time. Gary Cooper (who i haven't seen in much else) is really excellent, and Grace Kelly.. oh my. she has to be one of the most classic beauties there ever were, plus she could really act too. such a shame she left acting so quickly. anyway, great film, and Will Kane is a true hero. i totally cheered when he threw down his tin star in disgust. ****
High Noon

I can see why this western is so revered. Gary Cooper is great as Will Kane, the definitive one-man army. Hearing that the man he put away to hang, Frank Miller, has been bailed out after 5 years, Kane runs away with his new pacifist Quaker wife, only to return shortly, knowing he must do his duty. After everyone refuses to join him take on Frank Miller and his 3 cronies, he does the job himself.....sort of. The shootout was disappointing but it is still a great film nonetheless.

Dodgeball: A True Underdog Story

Low brow comedy at its best. Hilarious one liners mixed with cameos that make you burst out in lauhter the moment they appear. Its predictable what is going to happen, and the film seems to know the same thing, and uses that to create more comedy.
I must say that this film is absolutely brilliant. So simple yet it brings forth such complex emotions with such ease. Gary Cooper is wonderful and Grace Kelly is absolutely gorgeous. Definitely recommend this film.
Comments pending.

High Noon was great. It puzzles me how much Grace Kelly looks like a duck.

But what I really came to say is, that I already finished reading Sputnik Sweetheart. Only took me one day. Odd.

Well now, If there ever was a person clearly unqualified to review a book, any book, certainly that person would be me. Still I had every intention of writing a review earlier today, but ran out of time because I had to go to work. And now, as I'm back home after a hard day's work, I of course no longer feel at all in touch with what the book was about, or even remember the central themes properly. But luckily I was able to scribble down a few random thoughts down before I left, while waiting for the bus. So I'll try to string them together into understandable sentences and that'll be what I have to offer.

You could break the book down into 3-5 sections, depending on how you count. Anyhow it starts off very pleasantly with this good bubbling jive. Kind of a...I don't know what it's called, like post-modern art-pop, you know whatever. Urban swing. With many...sort of... smart little gems. But very easy-flowing and comfortable to read. Then it rans into problems. You could roughly say that chapters 5-11 are for the most part very uninteresting, and maybe could've been edited down to something more worthwhile. That's how I felt. But that's really the only negative thing I have to say.

The plot then turns to investigate certain things, and one can't help getting the feeling that the writer has gotten inspiration from reading about some multiverse theories or Schroedinger's cat perhaps. Also I like the fact that these sequences remind me of my favorite David Berman poem, the one with the mirrornauts and a long hard-to-remember title. Not important. So let's see...*goddamn, my notes are a big mess of single words*...

Well basically the themes it revolves around are such as dreams/reality, loneliness/longing, connection/disconnection. To search and not quite attain. And mmm...different mental environments, like when the guy returns to tokyo at the end, it's interesting to compare what he first suspects what it'll be like, and then what it is like. That part with the supermarket and the kid is quite fantastic, and how well Murakami employes all the accumulated atmosphere, that's pretty great.

And the two main characters, both sort of writer-types. The narrator a more traditional scholar and observer, and Surime this Jack Kerouac-extreme-doer kind, although she hasn't experienced much. The narrator raises Surime as a kind of a mythical figure, sort of an Einstein-like absent-minded messy-haired genious character. He feels she is the only one who he sees to have the power to keep him connected both with reality(successful everyday life), and with completion(his dreams).
*goddammit, I think I had some more cohesive thoughts about this, but I really don't remember*. Nevermind then, screw it.

Finally there's a little section at the very end, where Murakami weaves it all back home and returns to the style of the beginning, so it has gone a full cycle and the book is complete. A really good and satisfying ending I would say. Funny, but the best reference I can think of for that style in the beginning and the end, is Chungking Express, something similar about that approach. Of course, had i any knowledge of literature whatsoever, i'm sure there'd be more fitting comparisons to be made, but the best I can really do is to resort to a movie.

Even though this turned out as the shittiest review the world has yet seen (well maybe not THE shittiest, but saying that makes me feel better), the book was great and I really liked it. Apart from chapters 5-11 which were shit.

A fine western, but I also feel it is an overrated film. Gary Cooper is very good, the screenplay is excellent, nice pacing. It has some tense moments. It's hard to believe that theme song won an Oscar.
I apologize once again in advance for not having the energy/time for giving decent write-ups. I've just been drained the past few weeks, but have been seeing quite a few films.

It's wonderfully directed, edited, photographed, and suspenseful due to it's real-time construction. Still, I can't figure out how I want to read it. Is Will Kane a hero for sticking it out and fighting his former nemesis instead of running? Is Will Kane selfishly putting his fellow townsfolk at risk? Should the townsfolk stand up for him no matter how personal his fight may be?

When I look at the film working as a direct response to McCarthyism I appreciate it quite a bit, but it feels a bit off to only really dig a film when putting it into a setting you accept. I can look at the film and see people wanting to liken Kane's stance to that of the US currently and that just turns me off to his character, which logically I keep telling myself is foolish to do, but how can one watch something and not place it within their personal sphere of beliefs? Maybe the film is simply brilliant because it can be anything to anyone?

**7.5 for both**
Revenge. A ticking clock. More bad guys than good ones. A town divided. A last stand. An over-ambitious sidekick. A promise to give up an old way of life. And the girl who's played both sides. All these forces cast a shadow on "High Noon."

The director, Fred Zinneman, stripped down the usual Western motif and added aspects of social and civic responsibility. It doesn't play like other cowboy shoot-'em-ups (even though the screen is graced by four baddies - including the menacing Lee Van Cleef!), trading the struggle from without for the struggle within. Even the bad guys are part of the thread woven by screenwriter Carl Foreman, who left the country soon after due to the HUAC blacklisting debacle.

The movie's minimalist style rushes you from 10:40 to high noon, adds a few twists along the way (can't say enough about Foreman's script), and follows Gary Cooper - looking agonized as the man targeted for revenge on his wedding day - in a rough approximation real time as noon approaches.

Physically Cooper wasn't up to the task - he had health problems on the set and suffered through a divorce while filming - but the anguish and grit he brings to the character of Will Kane carries the movie beyond cliches into personal complexity.

My one knock? Zinneman's action sequences are passable but not particularly adept. At the same time, the varied characters, clever foreshadowing, and combination of social forces at play make "High Noon" a compelling tale that stands up to repeat viewing.

John Turturro + the Coens = instant 7. The reason I can't quite decide if I'm rating it 7 or 8 is because it's pretty episodic and uneven. Since George Clooney kicked ass in it, I gave it an 8. I mean, making George Clooney kick ass, that's worth something.
Report a problem