Neo-Noirvember Chabert Watch: The Pleasure Drivers (2006)

Watched:  11/29/2025

Format:  DVD

Viewing:  First

Director:  Andrzej Sekula

Editor's note:  we've decided to Thelma and Louise our way through the remaining Chabert filmography.  I've been looking to see if I can find the Chabert films I haven't seen yet via very cheap used copies or online one way or another.  This one set me back about $5.

Truly a product of a particular decade, somehow The Pleasure Drivers (2006) arrived about seven years after that decade.  It's another LA-based low-budget crime movie, with this one peppering itself with vague philosophical aspirations, but what they are saying lacks any insight and is dumb.  And, the movie is entirely populated by characters who take their cues from how human beings behave from other movies, leaving us with weird third-generation xeroxes of motivation instead of anything identifiable as human.  

Everything about the film feels late-90's, part of the post Pulp Fiction indie boom.  It's three stories that loosely intertwine, and, of course, collide at the end.  But none of the three stories is very interesting and none of the characters terribly watchable.  

HK Noir Watch: Hard Boiled (1992)

Watched:  11/08/2025

Format:  Criterion Channel

Viewing:  Unknown.  Probably fourth or fifth.

Director:  John Woo

Back in the early 1990's, JAL and others and I would head over to Hogg Auditorium on the campus of the University of Texas on the weekend.   One of the campus clubs would bring in prints of Hong Kong cinema action movies and, sometimes sober, sometimes not, we'd sit in the then 60-year-old auditorium with whomever else had the few bucks needed to get in.  

And, bats.  Austin is full of bats, and the Mexican Free-tailed Bats would flit about above us in the dark, occasionally throwing shadows in the screen.  

Anyway, that was my intro to all kinds of movies, and where I developed a huge crush on Michelle Yeoh during Police Story 3:  Super Cop, and then had it reinforced with Heroic Trio (and of course no one ever saw Michelle Yeoh again).

I considered myself a fan of action films, but, holy shit, I had never seen anything like Hard Boiled (1992) before that first screening.  It had elements of what I was used to from American-produced action films with a dash of what I was used to from what I'd learn to call Neo-Noir.  Chow-Yun Fat was so clearly a leading man, and Tony Leung an ideal up-and-comer.  But it would be decades before I'd get around to watching him in In the Mood For Love, probably his greatest success in the west until Shang-Chi.  

As a story, Hard Boiled has enough twists to keep you going, and not all of them add up.  It's also largely a backdrop for the kick-ass action that John Woo would deliver that would fundamentally change action cinema world wide.  As JAL pointed out, you don't get to John Wick without Hard Boiled.  And, it has the mix of action and bits of oddball comedy that would come to punctuate American action film (and confuse a generation that is very cross that moods can sometimes mix in a movie).  

In general, I feel like this is a movie that film fans should see at least once.  You may not even like it, but if you understand the flow of time and how influence works in cinema, this is one of *those* films.  Just be ready for more cartoonish violence than you ever thought could fit into a single minute of film occurring for at least 1/3rd of the movie's runtime.

Neo-Noir Waddingham Watch: The Woman in Cabin 10 (2025)

Watched:  11/07/2025

Format:  Netflix

Viewing:  First

Director:  Simon Stone

It's Noirvember, so I need to keep fitting in noir, neo or otherwise.  I also had foot surgery yesterday, so I am couch-bound and taking drugs.  So maybe all of my choices are not great in the moment.  I vaguely remember putting on like 4 Hallmark movies yesterday as I rode out a hydrocodone adventure.

Anyhoo...  I was pretty excited back when I heard Hannah Waddingham was going to be in an ensemble locked-room-murder-mystery.  She seems kind of perfect for being a little extra in a Murder on the Orient Express sort of movie.  And I like Keira Knightley well enough.  And I've been pulling for Guy Pearce since Memento.  

I was even planning to make time for this movie the weekend it dropped on Netflix.  And then the reviews hit.  Not great.   

And having had watched this movie, I am not surprised by this.

First:  all the acting is fine to good.  You cannot blame Ms. Knightley, Mr. Pearce or Hannah Waddingham (especially not Ms. Waddingham).  

The directing is... fine?  The script is awful.  The cinematography is beyond dreadful.  Who even knows about the editing...

But the movie feels like it has no idea why people find these movies interesting.  

Parker Watch: Play Dirty (2025)

Watched:  10/09/2025

Format:  Amazon

Viewing:  First

Director:  Shane Black

Between 1962 and 2008, author Richard Stark (real name: Donald Westlake) delivered 24 Parker and Grofield novels.   Between sometime around 2010 and 2017, I read all of the Parker and Grofield books, mostly in order.  And I've re-read some since, including this year.  That's not a guarantee of anything for you, but it is a sign of something that this was the series I actually stuck with it.

Over the years, the books have been adapted here and there, but during Stark's lifetime, he had a rule that the studios not use the name "Parker" in their adaptations.  Likely because the studios always made changes, and he was protecting the essence of his character.

With Stark/ Westlake's passing, his wife allowed the studios to try another go at an adaptation, this time using the Parker name.  And, thus, we got the 2013 mid-tier film, Parker, starring Jason Statham and Jennifer Lopez.  We talked about it here and here. 

But now we have a new take... and I do not know who this is for.

35th Anniversary Re-Watch: Miller's Crossing (1990)

Watched:  09/27/2025

Format:  Criterion Disc

Viewing:  Unknown

Director:  Coen Bros.

In late summer 1990, I saw the trailer for Miller's Crossing (1990) at my local cinema in Spring, Texas.  I don't remember what movie I saw that day, but I remember seeing the lush, lyrical trailer for a movie that seemed to jump off the screen with its imagery, language and violence.  Coming off of my first high of mob movies with The Godfather around that time, as well as seeing the guys who had made Raising Arizona were behind the movie, I was ready to see the film on opening day.  

But the Coen Bros. were not yet famous, and Fox, which had distribution rights, didn't really push the movie.  I kept looking for it in show listings.  But it played downtown Houston, not out in the 'burbs, and I was still something like eight months away from my license.  And, so it was that I missed the film until it came out on VHS.  

New Parker Movie Trailer: Play Dirty

One of the only book series I've read in its entirety, and re-read multiple volumes, has been the Parker series of books by Richard Stark (aka: Donald Westlake).  I tend to think of Parker as a criminal project manager, and that works for me in my world.

A while back I'd read of the casting of Robert Downy Jr. for the role of Parker in the Shane Black helmed film, but that seems to have gone away with Avengers stuff back on RDJ's slate.  To my surprise, the role here is occupied by Mark Wahlberg.  I'm not anti-Wahlberg, but after spending 20-something books with Parker, I was of the opinion that RDJ could do it, but he wasn't my first choice.  Look, Parker is supposed to be a towering figure and RDJ Is like 5'9".  I am a bit baffled by the casting of Wahlberg, but no one asked me. We have a whole Dave Bautista out there.

There have been many adaptations of Parker books to film, and all of them make the mistake of wanting Parker to have... feelings.  He does have feelings, like anger, mild-irritation, general crankiness...   but he's not a joker or hugger.  He does not quip.  And that's hard for folks writing him or playing him, and why Lee Marvin's take in Point Blank was probably closest.  He's largely amoral, and will put a bullet in you if you cross him, even if he's known you for years as a colleague.  He *does* have unspoken feelings and maybe even what he considers friendships, if Butcher's Moon is any indication.  

So, long story long, the trailer doesn't reflect the novels.  

Nor is it, exactly, one of the books.  It seems to be melding elements from The Handle and another book or two. But it's its own thing, in the end.

But what I have heard twice now is that the movie is not the Ocean's 11-vibe that I'm getting from the video above.   In my humble opinion, the closest to the vibe of the books is probably Payback with Mel Gibson, or the aforementioned Point Blank.  

If I may... Amazon is doing the wrong thing here in general, and should just make 3 Parker movies per year for maybe 3 years, and just stick to the books, setting the movies in the era in which the novels were released.  Stop at The Rare Coin Score, I think.  Bring in Claire and then decide if it's worth continuing.

French Noir Watch: Le Cercle Rouge (1970)

Watched:  07/27/2025

Format:  4K disc

Viewing:  First

Director:  Jean-Pierre Melville

So, there's a whole bunch of Criterion movies on sale on Amazon, and I wasn't doing much this weekend, so I got silly and justified the expense on this movie.  Because.  

Leave me alone.  Sometimes I do things.

If you've never dipped your toe in French noir, or only watched Breathless, the French noir movement is fascinating as it's so clearly done with love for and homage to American noir (which the French coined - we just called them crime movies).  I assume American culture was imported via Hollywood in the post-war years as American GI's rambled around Europe and France took a minute to get its film industry fired up again.  But the American movies are refracted through the lens of a nation crawling out from occupation, and maybe contain the spirit which gave us Camus.  

I mean, one of the French noir films I'd rec is called Elevator to the Gallows.  Fate vs. freewill and existential dread hangs heavy on the minds of these movies - more so than American films mostly being about "don't pursue the wrong dame".

Le Cercle Rouge (1970) is a crime/ heist movie in which we're told at the outset, before we meet any characters "these people will come together, and it will go very badly, indeed".  And, that is what happens.

2010's Watch: Bad Times At The El Royale (2018)

Watched:  06/29/2025

Format:  Prime

Viewing:  First

Writer/ Director:  Drew Goddard

It's possible in fifteen or twenty years, this movie will be found and puzzled over as featuring folks who are now established stars, mixed with longtime stars.  Bad Times at the El Royale (2018) features Cynthia Erivo in what I will say should have been a break-out performance and her entree into film stardom, rather than her having to wait until Wicked.  She's clearly already a star.  Lewis Pullman is here.  As are Chris Hemsworth, John Hamm, Jeff Bridges and a not-50 Shades-ing Dakota Johnson.  

But this movie came out and tanked.  That's neither here nor there, but it has meant that it's not exactly on the forefront of people's minds as few eyes saw the movie in the theater and it's not found an audience on home video. 

What's odd is that Metacritic comes in at a mid-range-ish 60, and the audience score is a generous 71.  And yet... no one saw this.

However, maybe in the same way of The Last of Sheila from 1973, it will find an audience that will make sure it has a cult following.  Or not.  (I heartily recommend The Last of Sheila.)

Chabert Watch! Shadow of Fear (2004)

Watched:  05/17/2025

Format:  Prime

Viewing:  First

Director:  Rich Cowan

The cast in this thing is absolutely wild.  James Spader.  Peter Coyote.  Aidan Quinn.  Robin Tunney.  Alice Krige.  Matthew Davis.  and, of course, Lacey Chabert.  

I am guessing this was a straight-to-DVD movie.  It's a kind of throwback to 1940's post-war melodrama that might have been categorized as noir, but does feel decidedly 00's.  And, once again, I see the idea here, even if the execution left me mostly flat.  

I can see all of the casting as being spot on.  But the movie's plot itself is insane and absurd.  Maybe it could have worked with a different director.   Lighting.  Something.  What's weird is - they have the sets, they have the talent (mostly), but it feels like it was shot as a TV movie that happens to contain actors doing a pretty good job with a pretty ridiculous movie.  There's one scene where a guy - I think nameless, but impacted by our villain - is *acting* and I want to be, like, my guy... it's okay.  You can dial it back.  You care more than the director.  And that may be true of everyone in the cast.

Chabert Watch: In My Sleep (2010)

"genuinely suspenseful"

Watched:  04/25/2025

Format:  Tubi

Viewing:  First

Writer/ Director:  Allen Wolf

Oh my.  Spoilers.

This is an entire movie about a guy who should have done very obvious things when confronted with monumental problems.  But then we would not have a movie.

I get it.  This is a movie that started as someone's desire to create a "Hitchockian" mystery thriller, found a premise, and worked backward from there.  The premise no doubt started as "how do you tell a story about a guy who needs to solve a murder, but he may have committed said murder himself?"  Ah ha!  I saw cartoons. Sleepwalking.  Sleep driving.   Sleep sexing!  This guy does it all!

The first obvious thing - He kinda/ sorta begins to seek treatment for this condition with medication at the beginning of the film - but only after he somehow sleep-sexes his best friend's wife.  Btw, she's far from the first woman he's apparently had luck with whilst sleepwalking, we're told.*  Also: He's been driving.  He's been wandering around in his undies.  He is a mess.  He keeps waking up in odd places.  With 0% bodyfat.

After a birthday party, attended entirely by his married pal and women he has slept with (I mean... honestly... why?) Our Hero learns the best friend's wife was murdered and found by his father's grave.  Kinda sus.

Neo-Noir Watch: Collateral (2004)

Watched:  03/30/2025

Format:  Criterion

Viewing:  First

Director:  Michael Mann

There's half of an amazing character driven neo-noir in this film, and then half of an okay thriller.

I think it's the schizm of the two that makes for a frustrating viewing experience where one would be a delight and the other a pleasant enough film, but when the film shifts gears back and forth - and I usually don't mind tonal changes - it just feels like there's missed opportunity on that character study and the better film.  Collateral (2004) does get to sail on Michael Mann's slick directing and visuals (look, you can hire whatever DP, but it's Mann), and stellar performances from Jamie Foxx and Tom Cruise and a kick-ass set-up that feels rooted in some classic noir.

The movie also co-stars a wide array of names.  Jason Statham appears for about twenty seconds.  Debi Mazar as well (in our book, there's never enough Mazar).  Jada Pinkett-Smith appears.  Mark Ruffalo plays an LA cop uncovering what's going on in real time.  Javier Bardem.  Bruce McGill.  Peter Berg.  

Our set up is that Jamie Fox plays Max, a cabbie, who picks up a fare, who seems like a charming guy but is actually an assassin, Vincent (Tom Cruise) flown in from points unknown to take out a series of people.  Max just wants to squirrel away money for his dream of starting a limo company.

At the first hit, Fox is waiting in his cab for Vincent when he's suddenly involved in the proceedings.  Under threat by Vincent, he begins driving him from hit-to-hit.  And that could have been enough.  The relationship building between the two could have made for a taught thriller driven by the desires and motives of each - and the movie plays with that as they reveal more about themselves and get real about the weaknesses of the other.  

Neo-Noir Watch: A History of Violence (2005)

 

Format:  Max?

Viewing:  First

Director:  David Cronenberg

Watched:  03/01/2025

Back when A History of Violence (2005) was in theaters, I was scheduled to see it as it’s based on a comic from a briefly lived DC Comics adult-oriented imprint. I’d read and quite liked the comic, but at showtime, one of us got sick, and we didn’t see it. And then, I never got back to it.

And that’s a shame, because 20 years later I liked it. But had I seen it back then, I doubt I would have understood how much this movie reads like a 1940’s film noir, maybe something like The Killers or a Goodis novel or movie.  It kind of reflects some of that post-War noir grit where we didn't slot people into "good guy" and "bad guy" so readily.

SPOILERS  

Viggo Mortensen stars as the smalltown café owner, Tom Stall, married to Maria Bello. The pair share kids aged around 16 and 5. Like many noir films, it’s about what happens when the unbridled viciousness of organized crime intersects with the mundane lives of ordinary people - and what happens when someone among the normal people isn't so average. 

 In a different decade, the William Hurt role is played by Raymond Burr in a B picture or Richard Conte if they had more money. Ed Harris would be played by Robert Ryan, and you can imagine Burt Lancaster in the lead role.

Michael Mann Watch: Heat (1995)

Watched:  02/25/2025

Format:  BluRay

Viewing:  at most, my third viewing

Director:  Michael Mann

I saw Heat (1995) in the theater, and I am pretty sure I watched it again the next year on VHS.  But, friends, it's a three-hour movie - I have not watched it at all in this century.  Fortunately, Jamie had never seen it and was up for it this week.  

It's a 90's film nerd's star-studded affair, famous upon release for having both Robert DeNiro - riding high on Scorsese at this juncture - and Al Pacino - still hot from his Scent of a Woman* Oscar win (hoo-AH!).  But it also has Val Kilmer, Jon Voigt, Ashley Judd, Amy Brenneman, Wes Studi, Mykelti Williamson, Ted "Buffalo Bill" Levine, William Fichtner, Henry Rollins, Dennis Haysbert, Tom Noonan, Tom Sizemore, Danny Trejo, Hank Azari and a tweenage Natalie Portman.  With a sprawling cast and not a ton of exposition, it doesn't hurt to be able to identify all of the characters easily by which actor we're looking at.

The movie follows a group of  professional heist-men performing a string of robberies in Los Angeles, starting with an armored car robbery that goes sideways when a new member of the team decides to shoot one of the security guards because he doesn't like his face.  This turns the heist from a robbery into murder charges (not wanting witnesses, they take down all three guards) and gets the attention of Pacino's relentless crusader of a cop.

70's Noir/ Parker Watch: The Outfit (1973)

Watched:  02/22/2025

Format:  DVD

Viewing:  Second

Director:  John Flynn

I'd watched The Outfit (1973) back in 2016.  But recently I re-read the book it's based on - an early Parker novel by Richard Stark - and decided it was time to watch the film again.  

Most of what I say in my original write-up from 9 years ago is true.  The movie is a pulp-crime movie fan's movie.  It's based on a famed series of books, and features appearances from 50's-era noir mainstays like Robert Ryan, Timothy Carey, Marie Windsor, Jane Greer, Elisha Cook Jr. - and even singer Anita O'Day.  This generation is paired with the 1970's stars like Robert Duvall in the Parker-role, Karen Black as his galpal, Joe Don Baker his buddy, Richard Jaeckel as a supplier, and Joanna Cassidy as Ryan's trophy wife.  And, of course, more.  Army Archerd even has a walk-on as a butler.  

The story does loosely follow *parts* of the novel, but The Outfit is the third novel in a series (of something like 24 books), and the story wraps up the events of the first two books.  So, pulling it out and making it it's own thing is kind of an odd choice.  Further, the point of the novel is to show the world of thieves versus the world of the overly organized mob.  Spoilers on a 60 year old novel - Parker directs all his heist-buddies to start hitting all the Outfit-owned places at once, essentially draining the mob of resources overnight and not letting them know where to direct their attention.  It's pretty good, fun stuff.

This isn't what the movie does.  To keep things simple and linear, the movie foregoes a lot of what would become Richard Stark staples in shifting POV's - all in third person, but caring a great deal about who we were now tracking.  We're sticking with Duvall through most of the film, giving he and Joe Don Baker all the heists instead of introducing a flock of crooks, thieves and heist-men who would appear across the Parker novels for the next thirty years.

Nor does it contain the passionless inner workings of a mob that feels like it was designed by an MBA, where the boss's removal  can be negotiated - this isn't the Corleones.  And I kinda wish it had.  Stark has a sense for what it takes to actually find closure, and this movie supposes everything is over with the murder of a single guy.  Stark would know - no, that's bad for business for the mob.  They're going to keep going at you - and it eventually does come to a head in the novel Butcher's Moon, that is kind of the opposite of the happy ending of The Outfit as both novel and movie.  

I like the movie in its way.  It's cool to see all these faces on the same screen.  In general, I like seeing the book to screen, but the pacing is a little deadly at times, and since its just our Parker stand-in and Cody, it seems less likely they'd pull all of this off.  I dig the back-roads feel of the movie, and that Duvall seems to get that his character is maybe wired unlike more sympathetic characters.  But I just don't think it's easy to love this movie.  It's absolutely a product of 1970's filmmaking, but it's also not making connections for the audience as well as it could - and feels meandering.

Chabert Lifetime Noir Watch: Imaginary Friend (2012)

Watched:  01/19/2025

Format:  Amazon

Viewing:  First

Director:  Richard Gabai

After running through something like 10 Lacey Chabert movies during the holiday season, Amazon is now offering up additional Chabert content - which has not helped when I pondered "what if I drove everyone nuts by making 2025 the year I watch and discuss *every* Lacey Chabert movie?"  Because, friends, she has 183 credits already, and is, like, 42.  That's not 183 movies - she's voiced several cartoons (including Supergirl on Harley Quinn), and been on a few TV series.  A glance at her IMDB suggests she's doing like 10-12 projects every year - and a heap of those are 90 minute TV movies.

Anyway - I'm not going to cover all of that.  But I'm also not going to not do it.  Who else will be the chronicler of Lacey Chabert's career arc?

Imaginary Fried (2012) is about eight years after Mean Girls.  It's a Lifetime movie, and part of the "someone close to me is trying to kill me" fantasy that characterized a lot of Lifetime's programming at one point.  Lifetime is a weird bastion of noirish programming that gets overlooked, but if these movies were black and white and the characters spoke with Mid-Atlantic accents, we'd just shrug and include them in the category as maybe B's.

De Palma Watch: Blow Out (1981)

Watched:  11/21/2024

Format:  Criterion 4K

Viewing:  third

Director:  Brian De Palma

De Palma is a fascinating subject himself in so many ways.  He bows at the alter of Hitchcock, he works within frameworks that are uniquely his own - and *boy howdy* are they on display here.  He seems to think the only way to get people to show up for the movie on time is a surplus of nudity before the action begins.  I'm not sure he writes great characters, but he does keep you engaged with plot and ideas.

Here in 2024, I don't know if I like watching his movies because I like a thriller, or if I like watching De Palma do his thing and try to puzzle it out.  Why not both, I guess?

I've started getting 4K discs, and... holy cats, was this a good movie for that.  Shot by Vilmos Zsigmond (check out this IMDB page), and with a healthy dash of De Palma's weirdo split focus (via bioptic lenses) and split screen stuff...  but, the depth of field, the gorgeous lighting, wild camera angles...  

JLC Neo-Noir Watch: Blue Steel (1990)

Watched:  07/06/2024

Format:  Criterion

Viewing:  First

Director:  Kathryn Bigelow

Criterion Channel is showcasing Neo-Noir films this month, and I absolutely remember this coming out and not understanding what it was at the time, and then never hearing from anyone who ever saw it.

But here at The Signal Watch, JLC is one of our patron saints, and I was curious.

The movie is a curious mix of genres - certainly an homme fatale noir, but 100% a thriller.  And sets itself in the New York of the late 1980's where finance-dudes were of interest to audiences, as were blue-collar types.

Jamie Lee Curtis plays a young woman literally right out of the police academy who, on day 1, stumbles onto a hold-up occurring at a grocery, where she's forced to shoot the gunman.  Which she does in 1980's style, emptying her gun and sending the guy reeling through the front window.

Unfortunately for her, the gun the guy had goes missing, and no witnesses say they saw a gun.  And there's no tape?  In 1990 in New York?  But ok.  

She's on administrative leave when she meets a commodities exchange fellow who woos her.

But, uh-oh, he was at the scene of the crime, took the gun, and is now murdering people with the gun after carving her full name into the casings, that he leaves behind after killing innocent people.

One good cop (Clancy Brown) believes her while everyone else just wants to fire her or make her go away, but Eugene (Ron Silver) ups the ante, and eventually she figures it out just pre-coitus.  And then things get really nuts as she fights for anyone to believe her and he lawyers up while also murdering her friend (Elizabeth Pena, RIP) in front of her.  

On the whole - my take is this: 

Neo-Noir-Comedy Watch: Hit Man (2023)

Watched:  06/15/2024

Format:  Netflix

Viewing:  First

Director:  Richard Linklater

As a good Austinite, I feel extra pressure to watch Richard Linklater movies, and still miss half of them.  But this one took literally no effort to watch as I have Netflix thanks to my T-Mobile service.  

Reviews were initially pretty good for Hit Man (2023/24?), as near as I can tell.  But I think the wider audience response has been more mixed.  And I get it.  The movie feels like it has a bit of a genre pivot or thematic pivot half-way through, and that's a pretty good way to lose people.  Arguably, it goes from a sort of goofy comedy to a dark-comedy neo-noir.  And that turn in the middle is some YMMV territory.

The basic set up is that we have our public college prof (people keep saying Community College, but he seems more adjunct at a full university.  TERMS MEAN THINGS.), teaching philosophy and psychology.  But - He moonlights for the New Orleans PD making surveillance equipment for catching people who are trying to hire a hit man,  So, when the NOPD gets a tip someone is looking for a contract killer, they send in an undercover cop posing as a hit man.  

One day, the main undercover cop can't do his thing, so they (Retta!) send in the tech, Gary Johnson (Glen Powell).  Turns out he has a real knack for sliding into the role, and as he tries again and again, finds he can be the hit man to meet the profile of the contractee.  

Neo-Noir Watch: Femme Fatale (2002)

Watched:  04/07/2024

Format:  DVD

Viewing:  First

Director:  DePalma

A while back I was watching some DePalma movies, and enjoying them, and made a mental note to watch Femme Fatale (2002) sometime.  And, then, whilst watching Star Trek: Strange New Worlds, which stars one Rebecca Romijn as Lt. Commander Una Chin-Riley, I was once again reminded to watch the film, and bought it on DVD via eBay for, like, $4.  

And then promptly forgot to watch it.  

Well, no more!  I have now finally seen Femme Fatale, and...  this is a tough one to discuss.  

DePalma is a curious film maker.  I genuinely like some of his work, and, at minimum, find stuff like Body Double at least worth a watch.  He's like a film studies book come to life, but he also isn't afraid of every day adult things like "people get naked" and "have sex" and gets those are pretty major motivations for people, and so can be for characters.* But he's also usually telling a thriller/ neo-noir crime story (see: Dressed to Kill or Blow Out) and so there's something to hang that on.  

Femme Fatale plays all of DePalma's greatest hits.  It has the most breathtakingly bizarre use of the concept of "doubles", it absolutely makes our kinda hero (Antonio Banderas) a voyeur, it goofs on identity, fate and concept of a femme fatale.  Heck, it opens on Romijn watching Double Indemnity.

Romijn was still a bit green when she took on the role, and I note that she was nominated for an off-brand Raspberry type award for this, but if the past few years have taught me anything, it's that those awards tend to age badly and generally show more about the awards' intolerance for anything not fitting into neat categories of that year or talent stretching beyond what the committee *thinks* they should be doing for a living (Romijn had been a model - which will shock no one watching this movie).  

I think Romijn is actually *pretty good* in this.  The character is a bit of a cypher, by necessity, and when the woman behind the face pokes her head out, it's interesting and buyable.  She's not as good as she's been on Star Trek, but - again - early days, and dealing with some material that works as an academic exercise as much or more than a coherent film.

SPOILERS

Neo-Noir Watch: Sexy Beast (2000)

Watched:  03/05/2024

Format:  Criterion

Viewing:  First

Director:  Jonathan Glazer

Selection:  Me

I had a budding interest in noir and neo-noir when this movie came out, but I remember having no interest in the film.  I suppose it was a trailer or write-up or word-of-mouth that did the trick, but I couldn't say.  Now it's on Criterion, and my tastes have ebbed and flowed over the years, and as I couldn't recall why I didn't want to see this movie, I gave it a shot.

In some circles, this movie is a bit of a classic, enough so that there is a television show coming in short order (or arrived already in England, I don't know) that tells the story of the early lives of the main characters of the movie.  

The movie is a weird mix of a single-location character drama and crime movie, and I... didn't think it worked.  Which is a tough thing to say about a beloved movie with famed actors like Sir Ben Kingsley, Ray Winstone and Ian McShane and which still gets referred to a lot.  But I just... didn't buy it.

SPOILERS