Dave's Thoughts on Nashville (1975)

Nashville (1975)

One of the ways I consider a movie to be a success is if a character from the film is able to be so fully defined and interesting that they stay with me well after my initial viewing of the movie. There are certain films where the character is so well developed within the world of the film that you can't possibly see them existing anywhere except in the confines of that story. Some of my favorite examples of this include Travis Bickle in Taxi Driver and Uncle Charlie in Hitchcock's Shadow of a Doubt. Even genre films can be elevated to higher levels by featuring an iconic character for the movie to lean on, such as Freddy Krueger in A Nightmare on Elm Street or The Joker in The Dark Knight. For Nashville, that iconic character is the city for which the movie is named.

Robert Altman's Nashville is like taking a peak into a world that you believe existed before the movie began and continues to exist long after the closing credits. The film boasts a roster of over twenty characters, but in all honesty the only one that matters is Nashville itself, along with the music that is the slow and rhythmic heartbeat of the city. In fact, one benefit of having so many characters is that we never spend too much time with just a single person to really get a full handle on their inner thoughts and motivations. Instead, by keeping a bird's eye view of the proceedings, we are able to simply watch these people live their lives over the span of a few days. Focusing on one character would be the equivalent of walking up to a beautiful clock and only admiring a small little cog within it's inner workings.

That's not to say that there are no interesting stories being told. In fact, I believe Nashville can work as a litmus test for someone's personality based on who they consider to be the more interesting characters. For me, I found myself mainly invested in the story of Mr. Green, as he dealt with his dying wife while trying to reign in his visiting niece from L.A. (played by Shelly Duvall in what was for me a fairly confusing "I can't tell if I'm attracted to her or not" role). It may be that I'm a sucker for a movie about old love near the end of life (typing this makes me think of the opening montage from Up, which in turn makes me want to cry) but it was this character that I felt led to the most emotional response in the movie, which is when he finds out his wife had died overnight in the hospital. For a movie that up to that scene had rode the line between broad comedy and slightly serious drama, it helped solidify my feeling that this was less a film with a definable genre and more a sampling of life itself.

I'll admit that the runtime of Nashville was a bit straining at times, especially for someone who did not enjoy most of the country music that takes up a good amount of screen time. But by having the movie feel like a series of vignettes with intertwining characters, I was never bored or disinterested for long. Going in I had hyped the movie up as a seminal classic and will admit that during the first half of the film I was growing slightly annoyed at how uninteresting the movie actually was. But as it moved along towards the finale, I slowly began to realize the purpose of the film and what makes it so important today. The movie creates a documnentary-like feeling by having the city seem like a living, breathing creation that we have the pleasure of watching for a few hours. By not ending the movie on any real resolution for any of the characters, it creates a heightened feeling that these characters continued on well past the point of our departure as viewers. Whatever those characters are up to today, I just hope it involves Jeff Goldblum's character still riding around in that amazing motorcycle.

You're Welcome,

Dave

How Had I Not Seen This Movie!? Part 15: Phantom of the Paradise

Phantom of the Paradise

Phantom of the Paradise is Brian De Palma's rock opera take on the Phantom of the Opera. Released in 1974, it updates the location from an old Opera house to the modern setting of a rock club, smartly satirizing the sleazy ways that music producers gain fame and fortune in the business. De Palma's style fits perfectly with clever homages to classic horror movies while also being steeped in 1970s fashion. 

In the film, an unknown composer named Winslow (William Finley) has his beloved music stolen by a satanic-like music producer named Swan (Paul Williams, who also scored and wrote lyrics for the music heard in the film). Winslow is driven mad by this abuse and ends up jailed after trying to break into Swan's palace in order to be recognized for his work. He eventually escapes from jail, and in an attempt to destroy all the pressings of his stolen work, ends up shot and disfigured. He slowly drags his body into a river where officials consider him dead. However Winslow later emerges, and donning a cape and mask, sets out to get his revenge by terrorizing the artists in Swan's new club The Paradise, especially those who dare to perform his stolen work. That is, everyone except for Phoenix (Jessica Harper), a young and beautiful singer who Winslow (now The Phantom) feels is perfectly suited for his work.

Just about everything in the film worked for me. It has a great sense of humor, especially when it comes to Beef, a menacing singer that Swan sets up to be his newest star. The reveal of how Beef behaves when not on stage is fantastic and helps give the film a witty edge instead of falling in too dark territory. I find myself saying this a lot about De Palma's work but the film feels very ahead of it's time. The film could be released today and other than some needed fashion updates, it would seem just as biting as it did back then. There are even nods to the use of technology to enhance someone's singing voice, something that must have been fairly "sci-fi" back in the 1970s. 

It's interesting going back and watch these De Palma films out of order. As I jump back and forth throughout his career, I can start to see growth in his work as he quickly became more confident and focused in what he wanted to do as a director. Phantom of the Paradise was released only 4 years after Hi, Mom! which still seemed very rough around the edges. However, with the back-to-back release of Sisters (1973) and this film, De Palma really stepped up into becoming what I consider to be one of the most innovative directors of the modern era. As with every other film I've seen by him so far, I highly recommend watching Phantom of the Paradise.

You're Welcome,

Dave

Valuable Life Lesson Learned: The Music Industry is run by the devil.

Upcoming Titles:

- Carlito's Way

- The Manchurian Candidate

- Murder à la Mod

- To Catch a Thief

How Had I Not Seen This Movie!? Part 14: Scarface

Scarface

I had a feeling that Scarface would end up being my least favorite Brian De Palma movie to date. Released in 1983, Scarface is the story of Tony Montana (Al Pacino), a Cuban refugee who quickly rises to the top of the Miami drug trade. Respected by the higher-ups due to his hot temper and willingness to always say what's on his mind, Tony works his way up until he is the most powerful kingpin in town. However, as is expected of all movies focused on a criminal rising through the ranks, Tony's quick rise is cut short due to his increasing paranoia and desire to always want more. As a remake of a 1930s Gangster movie, Scarface is an excellent update to a quintessential American morality tale. However, while the movie itself works as a satire on 80s excess and flashiness, I ironically found the film to be just a bit too pedestrian, lacking the uniqueness that I've come to expect in De Palma's movies.

You're Welcome,

Dave

Valuable Life Lesson Learned: Don't get high on your own supply.

Upcoming Titles:

- Carlito's Way

- Phantom of the Paradise

- The Manchurian Candidate

- To Catch a Thief

How Had I Not Seen This Movie!? Part 13: Hi, Mom!

Hi, Mom!

Hi, Mom! is a hard film to review since I'm still not entirely sure what it's supposed to be about. Released in 1980 and directed by Brian De Palma, Hi, Mom! follows Jon Rubin (Robert De Niro, reprising a role first seen in De Palm'a Greetings from '68) as he attempts to make a living in the film business. As with most satirical content from De Palma, Hi, Mom! is pitch black to the point where it becomes hard to gauge where the actual target is. It begins with Jon trying to break into the movie business by working for a big time porn distributer in New York City. Jon tries to convince the man that he can film people in the apartment building across from his room because people love watching others who don't know they are being filmed. Once he finally convinces him, I was ready for the type of basic Rear Window style Hitchcock homage that De Palma seems to love so much. The film however takes a few hard turns along the way that makes it one of the more experimental films I've seen in a while.

De Palma shoots the film in a very unique way, changing up the style to always match another device that someone can use to view others. It's a neat trick that I found fairly innovative for a film released in 1970. For example, when Jon is looking across the building using a telescope, the image on screen is reduced to a small circular area in the center of the screen. When he then upgrades to a video camera, the frame opens up a bit while also having the speed of the characters on screen increased to mimic the sped up look of most old films. Lastly, for scenes meant to mimic a TV show being watched, the images are larger but remain "boxed in" and become black and white, thus differentiating them from the usual scenes where we are not looking at something from the perspective of another character.

Another touch from De Palma was framing certain sections of the movie as if they were a TV show staring Jon Rubin as the main character. Scenes are given theme music and we sometimes come back to Jon Rubin with an onscreen recap in the manner of "meanwhile, back at Jon's apartment..." It's a funny device and furthered the feeling that Hi, Mom! was made much later than 1970. The whole film feels very ahead of it's time technically, despite having a story that's steeped in the turn of the decade culture from 1970. I couldn't help but keep thinking that this movie was an '80s production that was meant to evoke issues from 10 years prior, instead of it being what it is, which is an incredibly timely movie that must have been extremely controversial upon release.

This is another movie that is hard to discuss at length without resorting to spoilers. I will say however that the centerpiece of the film is something very unexpected and also very hard to watch. Using a cinéma vérité styled approach, we are forced to watch a drawn out sequence of an unsuspecting group of people becoming part of a anarchist group's plot to show what it's like to be a black person in America. For a film that starts off as a sly satire on how we view others, it takes an awfully abrupt turn to much darker territory that in itself ends up being used to setup what I feel is De Palma's main point for making the film. 

I was surprised when seeing this film that I hadn't heard about it sooner. It certainly has a lot of cool ideas and setups. It's also interesting to see how many of De Palma's usual themes are present but not yet fully cooked. I recommend this for anyone who hasn't seen it, but easily consider it a must see for fans of De Palma's work.

You're Welcome,

Dave

Valuable Life Lesson Learned: Never go see experimental theater in New York City.

Upcoming Titles:

- Carlito's Way

- Phantom of the Paradise

- Scarface

- To Catch a Thief

How Had I Not Seen This Movie!? Part 12: Body Double

Body Double

Body Double is the movie where I finally decided that after it was over, I wanted to see everything that Brian De Palma has directed. While movies like Body Double may (rightfully) not be lumped in with De Palma's best work, it has a very specific style that I completely fell in love with. The movie works as a wonderful satire of the perception of his work being sex and violence obsessed. Every scene is layered with overtly sexual subtext, which seems to be goading on the critics who consider his films to be too violent again women. Luckily, the plot doesn't get too lost in the style, as the film ends up being a fairly successful story about a man who was born to play the witness.

The basic story of Body Double is that working actor Jake Scully (Craig Wasson), recently homeless after finding his girlfriend having sex with another man in his apartment, is asked to help housesit for fellow actor Sam Bouchard (Gregg Henry) while he is off on an acting gig in another city. The apartment is an extremely lavish example of 80s excess, but the best part (as pointed out by Bouchard) is the view from the living room window. It seems that every night around midnight, the woman in the house across the way does a sexy striptease in her bedroom while keeping the blinds open, allowing our men to get a perfect view with the help of a strategically placed telescope. As Bouchard leaves for his acting gig, Scully begins to spend his nights watching the woman from afar, becoming obsessed with her every move.

What follows is a very Hitchcockiam thriller as Scully becomes entwined in a plot much larger than he bargained for. De Palma takes many of the strengths seen in Hitchcock's Rear Window and Vertigo and adds a healthy dose of sexual innuendo to make for a very interesting take on Hitchcock's "Everyman in danger" motif. While some say that De Palma simply steals too much from Hitchcock to be taken seriously as an original filmmaker, I disagree and would consider De Palma more of the heir who carried Hitchcock's love of suspense and terror and brought it up to date for a modern audience. Unlike Hitchcock however, De Palma's films seem to fall more into the style category whereas Hitchcock always seemed to balance style perfectly with story. However, considering that Body Double was released in a time when movies were becoming more about spectacle than substance, it's no surprise that De Palma went this route.

There's lots to chew on in Body Double as everything has a comically layered sexual subtext. One perfect example being Scully's claustrophobia that comes up at crucial moments in the film. On the surface, this seems to stem from a traumatic experience of getting stuck behind a freezer as a child. But within the context of the film's plot, it's obvious that this fear of deep dark spaces is another way that De Palma emasculates Scully by pointing out his subconscious inability to please other women. It's fascinating how De Palma frames these shots, making it almost a mockery of the way other movies use sex as a subconscious plot driver.

It's difficult to examine the rest of the film without diving into spoiler territory so I'll conclude by saying that I really liked this movie. I think it's a great example of a master of style being able to elevate a film that would otherwise be a fairly straightforward thriller. The acting may be a bit weak at times, but  everything else about the movie was so enjoyable that it didn't detract from my enjoyment. I also felt the film had a fairly convoluted ending, but considering the target that De Palma was aiming for, I think what may appear to be a near miss is in actuality a well executed hit. If you think the movie wants to be taken seriously, then simply look no further than the final scene played over the credits and you can easily picture De Palma gleefully toying with his critics.

You're Welcome,

Dave

Valuable Life Lesson Learned: Watching porn will help you solve murders.

Upcoming Titles:

- Carlito's Way

- Phantom of the Paradise

- Scarface

- To Catch a Thief

How Had I Not Seen This Movie!? Part 11: Kiss Me Deadly

Kiss Me Deadly

Kiss Me Deadly is a fantastic film. I went in knowing almost nothing about it, except that it was a quintessential film noir and was also the inspiration for the famous Glowing Briefcase in Pulp Fiction. It begins with standard fare, Private Eye Mike Hammer (Ralph Meeker), picks up a hitchhiker (Cloris Leachman in her debut role) who says she escaped from a mental hospital. Eventually, thugs catch up to them and when Mike wakes up, the hitchhiker is dead and he's been in the hospital for quite some time. Being a private eye, Mike can't help but try to solve the mystery of why those men were after her, despite the trouble it starts costing those around him. 

The film surprised me in just how exciting it ended up being. What began as a normal noir tale ended in one of the more thrilling endings I've seen from a movie released in the 1950s. Similar to Hitchcock's Notorious from a decade early, it takes a basic thriller plot and blends it with the current fears of nuclear attacks. Only Kiss Me Deadly takes it a few wonderful steps further by making it more of a science fiction yarn than just basic bad guys out to make atomic bombs. I highly recommend checking this out.

You're Welcome,

Dave

Valuable Life Lesson Learned: Never open the box.

Upcoming Titles:

- Carlito's Way

- To Catch a Thief

- Body Double

- Battle Royale

Important Movies Part 1: Pulp Fiction

Welcome to the first in a new series for Dave's Constant. I still plan on keeping the focus on movies that I go back and finally see, but I thought it might be fun to throw one of these up now and again. This series will be a little more personal as they won't focus on the movie itself. Instead, I wanted to share how I discovered some of the films that are most important to me as a movie geek. An important movie can mean many things. To me, it's the films that had the biggest impact on my life, whether as a life changing moment (2001: A Space Odyssey) or simply for the fact that it led me down a path I have since never left (Scream). These aren't the best movies ever made (and not even my favorite). They are simply a collection of the ones that have helped mold me into the person I am today. I hope you enjoy.

Pulp Fiction

I distinctly remember the first time I saw Pulp Fiction. Well, not the whole movie, but a part of it. I was about 9 or 10 years old and I was at my Grandparents' house. They had one of those TV black boxes* so I typically would see what movies were on Pay-Per-View when I was there to help pass the time. (It was either that or play with their electronic poker machine. They may have had a gambling addiction.) At that age, I would be on the look out for two types of movies, dumbed down comedies for kids or anything that had the possibility of including a boob.** I knew about Pulp Fiction and figured it had a pretty good chance of passing my second criteria for movies. 

Now before the onDemand days, the Pay-Per-View channels were setup so one channel would play the same movie on loop all day. So my plan was to wait until I was alone and "mistakenly" flip to that channel, hoping to see something cool.  When that time finally came, I put the channel on hoping to see something that explained why so many adults were talking about this movie. What I ended up seeing was John Travolta jamming a giant needle into some woman's chest. What the hell!? I had no idea what to do. I changed the channel back, but I couldn't stop replaying the image in my head. What was this movie anyway? Was it some weird sex scene I didn't understand yet? Was he killing that woman? The only thing I knew was the I wanted to see the rest of the movie.

Unfortunately, that moment didn't happen for quite some time. I sadly can't even pinpoint the first time I finally got to see the movie from beginning to end now. It was surely well before I could appreciate it though. However, I have seen it multiple times since and easily consider it one of my favorite movies of all time. In high school, Pulp Fiction was the movie that really became the jumping off point as far as me becoming a movie geek for life. At the time, it simply meant watching all of the current movies that were out in theaters, but as I grew older, that love grew into something much bigger. Now, I view movies as something much more important than a simple 90 min. mental break. Movies are now a part of my everyday life. I like thinking that the seed for all this was seeing John Travolta shove that needle right into Uma Thurman's chest.


You're Welcome, 
Dave

*Please don't arrest my entire family!

**Side note: This was also around the age where I would get excited every week to get the TV guide so I could figure out what movies on HBO had "N" or "AC" next to their titles. I would usually get excited but then not be able to stay awake that late to see the movie. I had a sad childhood.

How Had I Not Seen This Movie!? Part 10: After Hours

After Hours

After Hours feels like some mad experiment in filmmaking. It's very rough around the edges and never really seems to find solid footing, but I have to admit that I loved pretty much every minute of it. While on the surface, the movie is about a man who just wants to go home and sleep, it has far too many quirks to be boiled down in such simple terms. To me, the movie is about nightmares, literally. I view the whole film as a dream sequence for Paul Hackett (Griffin Dune). There are far too many links between each section of the movie to be seen as some simple "bad night." Instead, every obstacle that Paul encounters is simply a projection of his own dissatisfaction with his own life.

It's odd how instantly I admired After Hours once I viewed the movie as a dream and not a dark comedy of errors. I typically dislike any movie that portrays something as real and then later turns around with the "It was all a dream..." twist. But the beauty of After Hours is that we never see him wake up. I like that you have to think about the movie a bit after you've seen it in order to slowly put the pieces together. Perhaps my interpretation comes from the fact that the closest I have to a recurring dream is the concept of me trying to get somewhere, but never being allowed to arrive at my desired location. After Hours was the closest I've ever seen a movie portray a dream world in a realistic manner (including the fact that we rarely see him in transit to a new place, he simply seems to "appear"), almost to the point where it was uncomfortable to watch due to how much I could relate to that dream. Obviously my dreams are never as extreme, but the thought of trying to get somewhere (and the constant roadblocks that I encounter) hit very close to home.

Looking at the women Paul interacts with throughout the film helps us to further get into his mind (taking the assumption this is all a dream he is experiencing). Starting with Marcy (Rosanna Arquette), as she is the one who sets the whole movie in motion. While sitting in a diner, she starts a flirty conversation with him that ends with him getting her number. Marcy represents his past love life, whether as an amalgamation of his former flames or simply the idea of being free to meet women to have flings with. Marcy represents a period that was fun but a little dangerous. Paul knows subconsciously that this part of his life is over, as he never feels completely comfortable with her and quickly leaves. But since he has not come to terms with that part of his life being fully over, he has to go back and see Marcy dead, a symbol of the fact that he can never go back to those days.

Marcy's roommate, a punk/artist named Kiki (Linda Florentino), can be viewed as Paul's response to the mundane life he has chosen to live. Kiki is dangerous and sexy but always just out of reach. At one point, Paul gives Kiki a massage but she falls asleep just as he is about to make his move. By the time she wakes up, Marcy has returned, leading to an exchange between Paul and Kiki where it is implied that if it weren't for Marcy coming back, they would have been able to have a lot more fun. It's important to note that Paul never leaves Kiki on his own will, implying that despite his desire to be with her, the lifestyle she represents is far beyond his reach even if he tried to infiltrate it.

Paul next meets up with bar waitress Julie (Teri Garr), a stand-in for his current love life. She represents the tired middle-aged woman who just wants to settle down. She even writes him a note asking to be "saved" from her boring job. But Paul is still trying to come to terms with losing women like Marcy and is not ready to commit. He finds her eagerness oft-putting and therefore feels he has no option but to leave her. Paul is now stuck between knowing his old life is gone but not ready for the next step. It's this anxiety of not knowing where he belongs that really connects with his inability to just "go home."

As he escapes, he next runs into Gail (Catherine O'Hara). If Marcy is his past and Julie is his present, then logically Gail would be his future and therefore represent his desire (or mainly lack thereof) to have children. There is a certain childlike vibe from Gail's character. She plays little games with him such as shouting random numbers while he tries to remember a phone number. She also drives an ice cream truck, which is almost a too on-the-nose symbol for childhood joy. He knows children are in his future though and that he cannot escape it, similar to how he literally cannot seem to escape the mob trying to track him him, led obviously by Gail from said ice cream truck.

All of this leads to Paul hiding out from the mob and bumping into June (Verna Bloom), an older woman who Paul decides to bare his soul to, in hopes of finally finding the support he needs. She takes him to her apartment where he gently rests his head against her chest, in his first moment of peace that we've seen since he lay on the couch in the beginning of the film (where I argue we see him fall asleep, leading to the rest of the movie). June represents Paul's mother, his one point of support his whole life. The bartender where he meets June even says that she is always there, though most people don't pay attention to her. Perhaps this is a subconscious line about how Paul (like most people) feels that he doesn't notice his Mother in his life anymore, despite the fact that she will always be there for him. June is eventually the one who saves Paul from the mob, by literally encasing him in plaster, so the world can't hurt him. Paul is then led on one last adventure until he arrives at work to start his next day. I can only assume that he then finally woke up.

There is plenty more to discuss regarding After Hours but I feel that reading any more of my take may turn into a nightmare of your own. I'd love to look at this movie from the standpoint of religion, as you could also read his trials as a interpretation of Job (with June portraying God), but I'll save that for another day. Needless to say, After Hours is a movie worth seeing and will leave you wanting to talk it out with someone right after you finish it. It may not be anywhere near Scorsese's best films, but the excellent style shown on screen makes for a very interesting movie. Scorsese is so good that even his misfires end up better than other director's best work.

You're Welcome,

Dave

Valuable Life Lesson Learned: Always keep an eye on the current subway fare.

Upcoming Titles:

- Kiss Me Deadly

- Battle Royale

- Carlito's Way

- To Catch a Thief

How Had I Not Seen This Movie!? Part 9: The Untouchables

The Untouchables

People always said I would love Brian De Palma. As much as I hate to say it, they were right. Everything I've seen by him so far has been excellent, with The Untouchables being my favorite so far. Staring Kevin Costner as Elliot Ness, the movie follows Ness' attempt to put Al Capone (played perfectly by Robert De Niro) behind bars. At the beginning, Ness is discouraged by the seemingly inescapable corruption within all city offices of Chicago. However, he soon meets Jimmy Malone (played by Sean Connery, who won an Oscar for his role), an older cop who encourages Ness to take a more dramatic approach to cleaning up the city. They enlist the help of rookie cop George Stone (Andy Garcia) and Accountant Oscar Wallace (Charles Martin Smith) and begin raiding the offices that no one else would dare touch for fear of having the whole city strike them down. 

What follows is a great story with lots of style (no surprise to fellow De Palma fans). The movie has many classic set pieces, the most famous of which takes place at the steps of a train station. The entire sequence was masterfully shot and brought to mind the usual comparison of De Palma being the heir to Hitchcock's Master of Suspense. De Palma also pulls great performances from the entire cast, especially Connery and De Niro, who seem to be having a lot of fun playing such large characters. Kevin Costner isn't given much to chew on, being the story's straight man, but that actually seemed to play into Costner's strengths as an actor. Overall, The Untouchables is a fantastic film and one that makes me want to dig even deeper into De Palma's work.

You're Welcome,

Dave

Valuable Life Lesson Learned: Pay your taxes.

Upcoming Titles:

- Kiss Me Deadly

- After Hours

- Serpico

- Battle Royale

How Had I Not Seen This Movie!? Part 8: The Passion of Joan of Arc

The Passion of Joan of Arc

The Passion of Joan of Arc is an intense movie. Released in 1928, it tells the condensed story of the heresy trial of Joan of Arc from 1431, which ultimately led to her being burned at the stake. The film does not give any backstory though regarding what led to her trial. Instead, it focuses only on the trial itself, using the actual transcripts that were saved to supply the dialog shown on the screen. This movie, which consists mainly of extreme close-ups, is a testament to the power of the human face, as it proves you don't need sound (or even words) to fully express the emotions that Joan of Arc must have gone through during the course of her trial.

I'll admit that the movie posed a bit of a challenge at first. I've still only seen a couple silent movies, but even the ones I've seen (Metropolis and Modern Times) were much more geared towards an entertaining experience. Watching The Passion of Joan of Arc feels like watching performance art mixed with a history lesson. This isn't to say watching the movie is hard to watch, it just takes a certain focus that is no longer needed with 99% of the movies that are released nowadays. 

The enduring legacy of The Passion of Joan of Arc is mostly attributed to the title performance by Maria Falconetti. Much has been said about how she endured a trial of her own during the filming of this movie, being made to perform take after take while her knees slowly ground into the stone floor beneath her. It's hard to justify personal pain for a great performance but it's simply amazing what Director Carl Dreyer was able to capture. The title cards shown on the screen become almost superfluous due to how precisely accurate Falconetti's performance matches what she is supposed to be saying. It's unfortunate that Falconetti never made another film after this (she passed away in 1946) but the one performance she did leave us is enough to have her considered one of the best actresses of the silent era.

You're Welcome,

Dave

Valuable Life Lesson Learned: Only the devil could make a woman dress like a man.

Upcoming Titles:

- The Untouchables

- Kiss Me Deadly

- After Hours

- Serpico