Alice Cooper- Brutal Planet (2000)

 I haven't blogged an album in a while, so here we go.

There's a tendency, with long-established artists, for their early work to be popular and their later work neglected- sometimes justifiably so, sometimes not. It's true that the Rolling Stones haven't done anything interesting since 1972, but the likes of the late lamented David Bowie and the thankfully still with us Neil Young have released albums of varying quality over the years, some of them very good and others not so much. Quite often, though, even the failures are failures for interesting reasons and, well, I'll never stop defending Bowie's jungle period in the '90s.

Alice Cooper, while some albums are better than others, has been consistently good. His hits of the '70s and '80s are justly perennials of rock radio. But Vince is, at heart, an album artist, with both the alchemy required to move with the times and the sureness to remain himself, regardless of whom he collaborates with. This album, for instance, heralds a shift to a harder style of metal which is more or less retained from this point.It does not feel out of place in 2000. Yet nor does it feel so much of its time as to feel dated today, or pandering to fashions. It is simply a confident, quality, contemporary heavy metal record. No more, no less.

In a sense, then, the fact that "It's the Little Things"- Mrs Llamastrangler's favourite Alice Cooper track ever- makes blatant lyrical references to his past hits in the context of moving on stylistically, is revealing. The esteemed Mr furnier does not reject his past, nor does he wallow in it. The title track may be the one that has grabbed the most attention here, yet this is an album without filler.

It's an album worth listening to. And so are its successors.

Snatch (2000)

"You know... fish and chips, cup of tea, bad food, worse weather, Mary fucking Poppins... London!"

I once saw this film, back in uni, and I watched it properly- i.e, after I'd seen Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels. Sadly I've yet to blog Mr Madonna's acclaimed debut, and am probably blogging things in the wrong order. Well, soz, but I haven't got either on DVD and it's Snatch that happens to be on Netflix. So here we are.

Anyway, I loved it. It's very of its time, very much trying to be a Cockney version of Tarantino, and not much different in style or theme to its predecessor. And no, it doesn't come close to Tarantino- it doesn't have the depth, wit or cinematic literacy, but not many films have. But it nevertheless manages to be funny, cool, and make a complex and non-linear plot easy to follow, which is not exactly an easy feat of writing or directing. And both the cast and direction are top notch. No, it may not be Pulp Fiction, much as its trying to be that kind of film, but it oozes charm and gets away with being derivative through its sheer Cockneyness. Bloody southerners.


I'd single out Jason Statham and a menacing Alan Ford for their performances, while Brad Pitt's performance is certainly unique. Is it racist in how it portrays Irish Travellers (not Roma)? Well, arguably they're eventually shown to be, if anyone is, the goodies, and we still live in a world where racism towards travelling peoples still seems to be seen as ok in a way other kinds of racism aren't- the film is probably no more racist in this area than the society that spawned it.

Aside from that, and a dodgy America-friendly reference to non-existent "social security numbers", the film is a splendidly enjoyable way to spend 100 odd minutes. Mr Madonna done good.

O Brother, Where Art Thou (2000)

“I slaughtered this horse last Tuesday. I'm afraid she's startin' to turn."

I've blogged close to 600 films but, to my shame, nothing by the Coen Brothers until now. Yes, I know. And I’m suitably rebuked by how extraordinarily wonderful this film is. It manages to work both as a magnificent piece of art and as splendidly entertaining drama.

So yes, the sepia-tinged cinematography is impressive, and yes, the influence of The Odyssey is obvious- Big Dan is a hostile one-eyed giant, there are literal sirens, there may not be literal transmogrification but Delmarvis convinced that Pete has been turned into a frog, and of course (Ulysses)- who arrogantly refuses help, especially from (the) God(s), is desperate to get back home before a suitor marries his wife.

But the film is really a splendid mix of picaresque encounters and ongoing character development which shows the grim, Depression-era state of Mississippi in all its deeply racist, superstitious and corrupt barbarism. This depressing setting is leavened by lots and lots of wonderful humour, hiding a pessimistic message under its sugar; the evil, Ku Klux Klan cultist politician is the reformer, and his downfall leads to the corrupt incumbent cynically using the Soggy Bottom Boys to continue his cronyism, pardoning then at a stroke but not necessarily improving the lives of his constituents. But that evil secret society is still there and still lynching, prison conditions are abhorrently barbaric, with convicts breaking rocks pointlessly all day while the black ones are called “boy”, and desperate poverty pervades everything.

But against that is music, which makes life worth living, and so we have one of the greatest soundtracks in cinematic history. It is everywhere, giving much-needed colour to everyone’s lives. And so this film, about deeply desperate and suffering lives, which offers little hope, manages to be uplifting in spite of it all. A truly great film.

Final Destination (2000)

“In death, there are no accidents, no coincidences, no mishaps, no escape."

 I was a little wary to see a "horror" film with so many cast members and so many signifiers from all those godawful teen "comedy" movies that so blighted the turn of the millennium: if there's one film I can assure you I will never, ever blog, it's There's Something About Mary, the worst film I've ever seen. And yet this film, by not trying to be funny, manages to simultaneously be pretty decent, if not great, and feature Seann William Scott. I never imagined such a thing would be possible.

The concept is excellent, though; seven survivors of a plane crash have dodged their appointment with the Grim Reaper, but death s after them, inexorably, suspensefully and, on occasion, hilariously. My favourite death is Mrs Lewton's, delightfully thorough though it is. Yours may differ. But there's plenty of thrills suspense, just about enough of it to justify the inclusion of a character called "Billy Hitchcock".And I wouldn't particularly expect to see this as an in-flight movie.

For a film with no real stars and with a pretty obscure director this film did pretty well and, although it has no real stars and no great budget, it holds up passably well today. Death itself is certainly a pretty good horror villain, and the whole concept is sufficient excuse to give us a parade of deaths the like of which we hadn't seen since The Omen. This is a solid and entertaining horror which doesn't quite fully ex[loit a great concept but makes a decent stab.

X-Men (2000)

"Well, what would you prefer- yellow spandex?"

I've blogged so many Marvel films but, Deadpool aside, no X-Men ones. The reason is simple, of course: my film-watching life didn't start when I started doing films for this blog back in 2011, and by that point I'd already seen the first three. But I now remember very little of them and it's time to go back to what was arguably, with Blade not being seen by the general public as a superhero film, the beginning of the Marvel cinematic age we live in.

And it's good, faithfully showing both the premise and the characters from the comics  Patrick Stewart is an obvious choice for Professor X, although it's odd that he doesn't adopt an American accent, but Ian McKellen was born to play Magneto. But what really works, I think, is the decision to use Rogue and Wolverine as POV characters to justify all the exposition, odd though it is to see a very young Anna Paquin as another Southern belle so soon after marathoning True Blood.

The film keeps the plot simple and allows the characters to breathe, benefiting, I think, from the fact that Chris Claremont's run on the title set a style of almost soap opera, with characterisation a strong point. In that sense, I suppose, you can argue that the franchise is more suited to TV than film, but the richness of the characterisations cannot be other than a benefit. Wolverine and Rogue are well-sketched here, and it's noticeable that there's only time to hint at the depths of the likes of Storm or Cyclops.

It's an interesting choice for Magneto's character to have an early Holocaust flashback, evoking Schindler's List by use of monochrome, but it adds texture. And the treatment of bigotry against Mutants is designed well to evoke homophobia rather than the original Civil Rights era metaphor for racism. It's gruesomely fascinating to see Senator Kelly get his heavily CGI comeuppance, mind, and turning him into a kind of mutant evokes the creepy conclusion of Freaks. But it's a solidly constructed film, with a suitably visual finale at the Statue of Liberty and a sequel-hunting coda with Xavier and Magneto. It's a fine beginning to the franchise.

Oh, and on an actor-spotting note... the Toad is played by the same actor as Darth Maul!!!

Little Nicky (2000)

"Remember you have to shove a pineapple up Hitler's ass at 4pm..."

Every so often I just have to blog an utterly crap film to provide balance and, well, this "comedy" is as awful as they come and completely unfunny. It stars Adam Sandler. Oh, wait... that's a tautology.

Literally the only funny joke in the entire film concerns the turning of Coke into Pepsi, and that was only worth a mild titter; how this ever got made with any serious expectations of at all being funny is utterly beyond me. And, even more incredibly, beyond the awful Sandler this turd of a script actually managed to attract a decent cast who would all, doubtless, have been more gainfully employed elsewhere. It's a shame, as the central conceit- a power struggle on Earth between the three sons of Satan- is a good one.

Reese Witherspoon deserves praise as Nicky's valley girl Angel mother, and Harvey Keitel is good even when phoning it in as he is here, and rightly so. But no amount of polishing can save this turd.

This is the worst film I've seen in 2016. Yes; worse even than The Black Knight.

Memento (2000)

"I have to believe in a world outside my own mind."

This film still blew me away sixteen years later. The concept- the story of an amnesiac told in reverse- is an ingenious use of both form and content and a story that can only be told through the medium of cinema. The twist is staggering. Christopher Nolan well and truly announced his arrival with this superb piece of cinema.

Credit also goes to Guy Pearce, given the heavy burden of carrying the entire film, all of which is told from his perspective. The film works because of the ingenious script, however and, while I'm not going to simply recite the plot.. SPOILERS!

The film is gripping, a very clever puzzle that it's fun to see unfolding, but it's also tragic. Leonard's "system", as we see, simply doesn't work, and he is constantly being cruelly manipulated by the likes of Natalie (particularly nasty) and Eddie. But, worst of all, as we see the twist, we learn that he's manipulating himself to give himself a continuing mission. He is simultaneously the villain and one of his own victims.

He's a truly tragic figure, though, a Sisyphus sentenced to never-ending labours by himself. This is a mind-blowing film on many levels and one of the finest I have ever seen.

Dr. Seuss' How the Grinch Stole Christmas! (2000)

"Blast this Christmas music. It's joyful and triumphant!"

Ok, I'll admit I never encountered Dr Seuss as a kid (he's quite popular in the UK, but not as ubiquitous as he is in America), and I essentially watched this because my wife has fond memories of it. But I rather enjoyed it, much as it may not be a great film. I'm no fan of Jim Carrey but here's a film where he really works (and you can recognise his distinctive facial mannerisms through all the layers of make-up), and it's pleasingly random to see a young Taylor Momsen from the Pretty Reckless, a band I'm a little too old to appreciate. Give me Hole, L7, Bikini Kill and Daisy Chainsaw any day.

Apparently we get most of the original verse spoken aloud, which is a good thing, as is the dreamlike look of the film, overseen by the not-always-reliable Ron Howard. The weird hairstyles are great.  And yes, it's fluffy and kid-friendly, but the Grinch is funny, with Carrey getting some fantastic lines, with just enough cynicism to undercut the sentimentalism of the message.

I enjoyed this film. And that's a good thing; very imminent fatherhood means I will be seeing many more like it over the next few years!

Book of Shadows: Blair Witch 2 (2000)

"You know, there are a lot of naysayers who say nay..."

Before I started blogging movies I tended to avoid films with bad reputations, as you do. But at least the prospect of reviewing a bad film after watching it offers the consolation prize of being able to administer a good spanking after the ordeal of watching it. This is one of those times.

I went into this film with predictably low expectations and, inevitably, this film slightly exceeded them- the ending, with reality shifting nightmarishly around our protagonists to make them guilty of terrible crimes that only they know they did not commit, is a good idea that would perhaps have worked well in a better film. Likewise, I enjoyed the metatextuality of the beginning, with all the characters having seen the first film and tourists flocking to Burkittsville as a result; it may be a trick as old as Cervantes, but it works.

Thing is, though, the only thing that works about this film, other than the snippet of Queens of the Stone Age's splendid Feelgood Hit of the Summer, is the meta stuff, and it should have been obvious why. The first film (itself arguably far less well-regarded now than at the time) worked, to the extent that it did, because of it's form, not it's content. If you took away the "found footage" aspect, you'd have a rather pedestrian film. So what do they so for the sequel? They do exactly that. The results are predictable. Literally the best thing about the film is the beginning, promising a metatextuality that doesn't materialise.

I suppose we have a slight commentary on the first film through the character of Tristen, a Wiccan, objecting to the idea of nature being evil, but the characters are generally annoying, forgettable and vaguely annoying all at once; it's hard to emphasise much with the film's protagonists, who are not particularly nice, charismatic or interesting. I didn't even like the female goth character, and that's saying something.

I suppose I enjoyed the sight of the tape of the missing hours, which rather resembled a music video by Tool or Marilyn Manson in its style, and the ending is moderately better than the preceding dullness, but this is very much a film worth skipping.