Showing posts with label melanie griffith. Show all posts
Showing posts with label melanie griffith. Show all posts

Friday, 24 April 2026

Working Girl (1988)

Although I am taking my sweet time in doing so, my attempt to finally get around to watching more Melanie Griffith films is continuing. She was someone I never really rated while actually delivering some of her best work (I was too young to fully appreciate most of her movies, and I mistakenly equated her choice of projects not tailor-made for me with a lack of talent), but looking back on the heyday of her career is an interesting experience. Not only did Griffith pick some great projects, it's fascinating to watch her own the screen and be treated like the beauty she so clearly is, yet also look at how she represents the kind of female sexuality and presence that is so rare to see onscreen in more modern movies, after years of developments in the world of fillers, implants, sculpting, and physical training regimes.

Working Girl is probably the biggest star vehicle for Griffith, certainly in the way it keeps her front and centre for most of the runtime, and allows her to work alongside a couple of star names comfortably leaning into their star status. The fact that it's a more adult reworking of The Secret Of My Success (which I'm sure was probably based on at least one or two previous tales) is neither here nor there. The main thing is that it's very enjoyable stuff. 

Griffith plays Tess McGill, a secretary who works for her boss, Katharine Parker (Sigourney Weaver), under the mistaken impression that she will be recognised and rewarded for all of her hard work. Seeing how she has been betrayed when her best idea is passed along by Katharine without giving her any credit, Tess decides to make some major moves when Katharine has to be absent for a while. She moves into the main office, upgrades her wardrobe, and starts seriously impressing Jack Trainer (Harrison Ford).

Working Girl has a decent script by Kevin Wade, which remains arguably the best he ever wrote, and solid direction by Mike Nichols. It's a great snapshot of the time, and makes a nice companion piece to the much more testosterone-heavy Wall Street, which was released the year before. The two films show people striving for great success, but with very different ideas of just what exactly that success looks like, and they both feature main characters who seem equal parts inspirational and monstrous, depending on how well they maintain their charming facade while holding on to their power and position.  

It's the cast who really make this shine though. Griffith is perfect in her lead role, and her transformation works as well as it does because they're only aesthetic choices that help her in her "fake it until you make it" mission. Weaver has a lot of fun as the big boss, enjoyably selfish and narcissistic, but deflecting any criticism by using a fake bond of feminist sisterhood and talk of long-term plans. Ford is playing the straight man to the two leading ladies, and he's well-suited to being someone as charming and charismatic and laconic as Ford can be. There's also room to have fun with Alec Baldwin, Joan Cusack, Nora Dunn, and Oliver Platt, and the likes of Kevin Spacey, Olympia Dukakis, and Timothy Carhart are scattered throughout the supporting cast.

I'm happy to have revisited this film for the first time in a looooooooong time, but I'm even more excited to eventually make time for a number of lesser-known titles that starred Griffith in a main role. Few may hit the same heights as this, but I hope they all at least showcase someone I am finally appreciating onscreen almost four decades after they were at the peak of their career.

8/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews

Monday, 13 April 2026

Mubi Monday: Something Wild (1986)

Despite the wealth of new movies to discover (as well as the wealth of *urgh* content out there), it can do you good to revisit films that you haven't seen for quite some time. That gives you an opportunity to either change your opinion on something or, hopefully, reaffirm your love for it. You might sometimes also reaffirm your dislike of something, but films that you majorly dislike are probably least likely to be at the top of any list of potential rewatches. 

I don't think I've seen Something Wild in about twenty years, and I first saw it after hearing from many other films about how great it is. I enjoyed it, but was slightly put off from loving it by the ever-darkening tone that creeps in as things start to spiral. Rewatching it today, that commitment to the danger of many moments is what I like most about it.

Jeff Daniels plays Charles Driggs, a successful young man who has no idea what a turn his life is about to take when he decides to leave a diner without paying for his meal. This brings him to the attention of Audrey (Melanie Griffith), currently spending some time going by the name of Lulu. Audrey/Lulu sees someone dipping their toes in the water of recklessness, and she decides to immediately drag him into deeper waters. The two might be able to have a good time, depending on how long they can keep the real world away from their little bubble. And how long they can avoid the intense and dangerous Ray (Ray Liotta).

If you've never been anywhere close to the kind of situation that Daniels finds himself in here then you may well find Something Wild to be a film that starts off light and fluffy, albeit with some added petty crime and handcuffs, before turning into something sharp and toothy. Those who have made some mistakes on their way through life will start to worry very early on, however. The lead character is worryingly innocent, making it very easy for many viewers to see how far he's about to fall way before he comes to that inevitable conclusion. This is someone who thinks that committing a dine 'n' dash is the height or acceptable craziness and immorality. It's someone who thinks that they can enjoy a bit of party time. It's someone, in other words, who quickly finds himself out of his depth when encountering people who live in territory that he has tried to tiptoe through as a tourist.

E. Max Frye really came out of the gates at a hell of a pace, this was his first screenplay turned into a full feature, and it helps that director Jonathan Demme has the confidence to play around with every scene in a way that keeps upping the temperature while one or two of the characters remain as oblivious as the fabled frog placed in a pot of cold water that is then incrementally raised to boiling point. 

Daniels is very good in his role, managing to stay well-intentioned and easy to like, despite the relatively privileged life that his character has clearly enjoyed. It's Griffith who gives the star turn though, and every time I see one of her more celebrated film roles I always remind myself that I should explore more of her filmography (I will, I will, honest, this time I will). As for Liotta, he comes into the film at just the right time, delivering a shot of adrenalin that keeps everything charged up all the way to the end credits. Other familiar faces to keep an eye out for include Charles Napier, John Waters, and Jack Gilpin.

Something Wild is a film that could have been presented in any number of different ways. We have seen those other movies. They're usually not quite as good, nor quite as interesting, as this. We should be thankful that Frye and Demme set out to make something so unique, even if there are a number of films that could be considered close touchstones around it, and thankful that the three main cast members were so perfect for their respective roles.

9/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews

Tuesday, 15 November 2022

Noirvember: Night Moves (1975)

While I often spend my time trying, hopelessly, to catch up on many of the bigger movie titles that I have somehow avoided over the years, some of those films feel a bit more notable than others. Night Moves was something I have been aware of ever since knowing the term “neo-noir”, but I just hadn’t ever got around to watching the thing. That has finally changed now, and (as is so often the case) I wish I had seen this years ago.

It’s an absolutely classic premise, in many ways. Gene Hackman plays Harry Moseby, a detective tasked with locating a young woman named Delly (Melanie Griffith). This brings him into contact with Delly’s troublesome boyfriend (played by James Woods), a couple of stunt performers, before he eventually finds her living with her stepfather, Tom (John Crawford), and his girlfriend, Paula (Jennifer Warren). Things become more complicated as Harry investigated further, and the case he has been hired for may actually lead to him stumbling on to something much more dangerous.

Written by the immensely talented Alan Sharp (I haven’t got time to list everything in his filmography but I highly recommend the two most recent feature films that he worked on, for starters), Night Moves is an entertaining crime drama that leads viewers, slowly but surely, into increasingly dark waters. The first half is full of cynicism and bitterness laced with humour, but the finale removes any of the mirth. Viewers will root for Harry, mainly because it is always easy to root for Gene Hackman (even when he isn’t being a very nice guy), but it’s also easy to see that things may not lead to a satisfying conclusion for many, or any, of the main characters.

Director Arthur Penn also has a filmography well worth your time, although maybe focus on the ‘60s and ‘70s when exploring his back catalogue, and he makes great use of all his assets here. The script, the cast, the cinematography that moves between sunshine and shadows with equal clarity, the pacing of the unfolding plot, and a third act that cuts through everything that preceded it with unwavering commitment.

Hackman has always been superb onscreen, but this is one of his best roles. He’s a smart man who may sometimes be too smart for his own good, but he’s also quite selfish and blinkered (in a way that he feels is necessary for his job). Griffith is a delightful presence in her few scenes, and Warren has a chemistry with Hackman that has you sensing an extra complication due to arise. Crawford is fine, Woods perfectly embodies the kind of young guy that Hackman would dismiss as a punk, and there are excellent supporting turns from Susan Clark (playing the neglected wife of our “hero”), Anthony Costello and Edward Binns (two stuntmen who may be involved in something suspicious), and Janet Ward (the woman who hires Harry to find her daughter).

One of the films often mentioned by people who revere the seventies as the greatest ever decade for cinema (it’s undoubtedly great, and with a notable sea change at certain points, but every decade has highs and lows), Night Moves is a gritty classic, more effective because of the lightness of touch throughout the first half of the movie. I would highly recommend it to everyone, but I also suspect that everyone else has already seen it.

10/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews

Monday, 14 September 2020

Mubi Monday: Lolita (1997)

I am not familiar with the tale of Lolita, having somehow never seen the film by Stanley Kubrick, or even read the source novel by Vladimir Nabokov. All I knew about it is what most people know about it. There's something at the heart of it that involves an older man and an underage girl. Yeah, if you've spent the past week or so getting upset about Cuties then you may want to stop reading now.

Jeremy Irons plays Humbert Humbert, a gentleman who ends up residing as a lodger in the home of Charlotte Haze (Melanie Griffith) and her young daughter, Dolores "Lolita" Haze (Dominique Swain). Swiftly growing infatuated with the child, Humbert eventually marries Charlotte, all the while scheming to do the minimum he has to do, in terms of his husbandly duties, and keep himself available to Lolita. Things do not go well in the marriage, of course, but that leads to a period of time during which Humbert and Lolita can give in to their distasteful urges.

I'm struggling to fully balance out my thoughts on Lolita. It is not a film I enjoyed, not one bit, and I am struggling to figure out the appeal of the source material, which perhaps makes some points lost in the adaptation from page to screen by Stephen Schiff (in what seems to be his first credited writing role). I guess, considering the third act, it's about a man so oblivious to how wrong his behaviour is that he needs to find someone worse than himself to help him find some kind of redemption.

Everyone involves deserves credit for giving it a try, even in 1997 this wasn't exactly something that moviegoers would be rushing to see, and the fact that it tries very hard to walk a tightrope between the intriguing and the disgusting is enough to remind you that no small amount of effort was exerted to get this done.

Director Adrian Lyne shoots things in a way that is either passive or, worse, lingering from the POV of Humbert. He places you alongside the main character, who has the benefit of being so well portrayed by Irons, and gives you nowhere to hide, even as things become darker and more sordid.

As well as a top-notch performance from Irons, Swain does well in the titular role. Her character is often very annoying, and treats the people around her quite appallingly, but she's a child being a child, even when she has moments of trying to act like a woman. She never is, and that point is emphasised at every turn, even when viewing her through the eyes of Humbert, who views her in a different way from everyone else. Griffith has a limited amount of screentime, but does well with it, and there are a couple of scenes stolen by Frank Langella.

The more I think about Lolita, the less I like it. That's not really the fault of the film though. I found the central idea too disturbing, as it was intended to be, but I also appreciated watching something that proved to be such a strong challenge. Not to sound too pretentious, but that can happen sometimes with art. A strong averse reaction can be just as rewarding, in some ways, as a strong connection to the material. The worst thing that any art can do is leave you disengaged, and Lolita certainly doesn't allow you to view it without becoming engaged.

The technical side of things is generally decent enough, and the performances give it a boost, but I hope to never watch this again. I will, however, check out the Kubrick film one day. And I may see how the novel presents things.

5/10

https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews


Monday, 8 January 2018

Stormy Monday (1988)

A 1980s British crime thriller that puts a man unwittingly in the middle of escalating events between some violent gangsters and American businessmen. And the title incorporates a day of the week. I'm not saying that Stormy Monday seems designed, in places, to ride along on the coat tails of the legendary The Long Good Friday, but there are certainly some interesting similarities, although the whole thing being set in the North of England, as opposed to London, is enough to give it quite a different general flavour.

Young Sean Bean is the man who ends up in the middle of a messy situation. He's working for a man named Finney (Sting), he ends up entangled with a woman named Kate (Melanie Griffith), and he's really a spanner in the works for people like Cosmo (Tommy Lee Jones), a VIP from America, and a pair of thugs (one played by James Cosmo).

This is the feature debut from Mike Figgis, who both wrote and directed the movie, and it's an interesting and strange piece of work. While it is perhaps a bit too beholden to the film it hews closest to, Figgis also shows a confidence in his own material, never feeling an urge to rush things along or make the infrequent moments of violence feel too cool or glamorous. He takes his time with all of the main characters, good and bad, and keeps a lot of different parts moving smoothly as the plot winds towards the finale.

Unfortunately, due to the deliberately slow pacing, the film doesn't really ever feel as tense as it should. Nothing really builds up, instead simply moving from one event to the next. To use a clumsy metaphor, Stormy Monday shows you a lot of separate explosions without ever showing you the fuse burning down.

The cast help to make things better though. Sean Bean is believable as the fresh-faced new lad in town, willing to take any job going as he gets back on his feet. Griffith is appealing enough, I've never been her biggest fan but the moments between her and Bean show just enough chemistry to make their relationship believable. Tommy Lee Jones is solid, Sting is okay, and everyone else does just fine, particularly a youngish Cosmo exuding a real sense of menace.

You can look around and find many better movies than this one, whether you want a better Figgis film, a better British thriller, or even a better film featuring a performance from any of the leads. But that doesn't make this film unworthy of your time. It's an interesting, fun, curio that places these names alongside one another, and also features some Roger Deakins cinematography.

6/10

Pick Stormy Monday up on bluray here.
Americanos can get it here.


Saturday, 19 April 2014

April Fools: Cecil B. DeMented (2000)

John Waters is a fun guy. His career spans decades and he remains defiantly subversive and independent. In fact, Waters himself might agree that the fact that he HAS such a lengthy career defies the odds. He doesn't make movies for the mainstream, but instead aims squarely for the awkward, the odd, the unbalanced, the outsiders, and the fiercely individual. AKA the cool people. Bizarrely, the mainstream sometimes picks up what he lays down. I'm thinking mainly of the stage show and movie remake that stemmed from Hairspray. There was also no small amount of love shown for Serial Mom when it came out, but maybe I was just finding more friends who appreciated Waters at that point.

Anyway, I should really start talking about Cecil B. DeMented. It's a film that, in some ways, seems perfectly designed to appeal to the mainstream, hence my opening ramble, but in every other way it's quintessentially Waters (who has Hollywood squarely in his sights).

Stephen Dorff is Cecil, a young artist frustrated with the entertainment world around him. Blockbusters rub shoulders with lame remakes and lame sequels, and that needs to change. Which is why he kidnaps the famous Honey Whitlock (Melanie Griffith). Forcing her to act in his movie, Cecil explains his aim and Honey eventually starts to come around to his way of thinking. But will anyone else, aside from his small group of loyal followers?

With a lot of great, albeit easy, gags and a cast that mixes a couple of well-known names with some relative "unknowns" such as Jack Noseworthy, Adrian Grenier, Maggie Gyllenhaal and Michael Shannon, Cecil B. DeMented is unlikely to be anyone's favourite John Waters movie, but it's one that I can happily revisit and never tire of. The slim runtime helps - it barely edges over the 80 minute mark - and the rest of the cast, including Alicia Witt and Lawrence Gilliard Jr, also do their bit, with plenty of enthusiasm making up for any failings in actual acting expertise. Dorff is great in the lead role, but Griffith also deserves some credit for putting herself in the midst of such madness.

Despite the thin layer of polish on everything, this is still a biting, anarchic, and interesting work from a writer-director who rarely, if ever, lets me down. The fact that he's only given us one more movie since this one in the last fifteen years is a great shame, and I hope that he's not finished warping our minds just yet.

8/10

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Cecil-Demented-DVD-Melanie-Griffith/dp/B006C0TX8M/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1397077920&sr=8-1&keywords=cecil+b+demented



Monday, 25 November 2013

Mulholland Falls (1995)

A decent thriller written by Peter Dexter and directed by Lee Tamahori, Mulholland Falls is one of the best films I've seen recently without having heard any praise for it beforehand. It has some nice period detail, decent plotting and one or two good set-pieces, but the whole thing is made well above average by the superb ensemble cast.

Nick Nolte is the main character, a man investigating the death of a beautiful young woman (Jennifer Connelly). Unfortunately, that young woman was caught on film having sexual relations with one or two men, one of them being a very important General (John Malkovich). And the other being Nolte, which puts him in a bit of a compromised position, especially as he tries to keep his infidelity hidden from his wife (Melanie Griffith). As the investigation continues, moments of violence punctuate the proceedings while Nolte heads on a path that may not end well for him.

As I have done before, let me just sell this movie to people by reeling off the names from the cast list. Nolte, Connelly, Griffith, Malkovich, Michael Madsen, Chris Penn, Chazz Palminteri, Treat Williams, Bruce Dern, Daniel Baldwin, William Petersen, Rob Lowe, Louise Fletcher and Andrew McCarthy. A few of those people only appear for a moment or two, in an uncredited cameo role, but that's still a mighty fine selection of talent.

Everything is in place, with the look and feel of the movie perfectly capturing a bygone era, but it's also not spectacular in any way, with the exception of the cast. The script sadly leaves a couple of the main characters just lingering in the background of many scenes, while Tamahori deals with the material in a clean, unshowy manner, relying on the story and the characters to hold the interest of viewers. Well, although I know that many others will feel differently, that worked for me.

Not one to easily recommend to people, I will still take the plunge and . . . . . . . . . . recommend it to people. It oozes quality from start to finish, and I hope that more people like it as much as I do if/when they give it some time.

8/10

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Mulholland-Falls-DVD-Nick-Nolte/dp/B00004W4H6/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1385375171&sr=8-1&keywords=mulholland+falls