Cul-de-sac

Here's what can only be described as a bit of dark fun from Roman Polanski (1967). Its the story of an unlikely couple being held captive by an even more unlikely invader in the form of Lionel Stander's bumbling gangster, Dickie. He and his doomed partner are on the run from some misdeed that has evidently gone horribly wrong. His partner, a completely surreal looking Jack MacGowran, dies from a "belly full of holes" shortly after arriving at the gloomy and inhospitable Rob Roy castle. Donald Pleasence, with a shaved head, plays George, the utterly emasculated husband of the delicious and very young Teresa (Francoise Dorleac). George has sold up his factory and moved with his new young wife to this forbidding and remote castle, where they are subsisting on a diet of eggs from the chicken house and where George is slipping slowly into madness. Teresa is so bored that she takes to drinking her home made vodka with Dickie and helps him to bury his partner in crime. As can be expected it all ends rather badly. Despite a rather bleak premise, Cul-de-sac is quite funny in parts and certainly sustains your interest. The cinematography is clever and some scenes are head-spinningly surreal.

Knowing

Knowing is one of the best, most gripping, suspenseful and unusual films I have seen. The pace and style with which the story unfolds reminded me of Hitchcock at his best. Very few critics agree with me on this - notably the ones that do agree are the real veterans of the industry whom I most admire, such as Ebert and Stratton. I believe the negative criticism that we are seeing for this movie says not so much about the merits of Knowing, but of the dross that we have come to expect and accept at the box office. Sure, the story is preposterous but the whole point of this type of movie is to get us to suspend belief and convince us, at least for the duration of the movie, that what we are seeing, however far fetched, could actually happen. Knowing does this in spades. It takes its time to tell a story, build suspense and does not just careen from one action sequence to the next. I suspect that this is what the negative critics are missing. We have become accustomed to the thriller as virtual funpark ride - all action and no time for contemplation. Others are down on Nicolas Cage's performance. Sure he's morose, but that is what the character calls for. Is there any suggestion that he is unconvincing? - no. Those who claim that he has limited range have short memories and have clearly forgotten Wild At Heart, Leaving Las Vegas and Con Air. Never mind, I'm here to remind them. I understand that many of the Sci-Fi classics were poorly received when they first appeared, including 2001 and Bladerunner. So I believe it will be with Knowing - destined to become a classic.