I like Black Panther, but I didn't like this movie.

Blending excellent reporting and strong storytelling, this is a disturbing film truly stranger than fiction

Great story, amazing characters, superb action, enthralling cinematography. Yes, this is something I am glad I spent money on.

Story: It's very simple but honestly that is fine.

The Most Terrible Time In My Life is quite simply a real oddity of a film. The film is a hodgepodge of influences (namely Seijun Suzuki and Mickey Spillane), genres (Japanese '60s B-movies, film-noir, and comedy), and ideas. Really, the film should feel like a mess as it shifts on the drop of a dime from trying to appear like a serious noir to being a wacky comedy, but surprisingly it all manages to work.Kaizo Hayashi, the director, even gets to work in his heavy influence from Seijun Suzuki without it feeling derivative (that right there, you have to admit, is a feat worthy of notice!). It is strange to watch a Japanese movie from 1994 that simultaneously feels like it is a mid-'90s Japanese film and an early '60s B-movie shot by Suzuki on one of his much less abstract and experimental endeavors.But see, right there is one of the most charming and endearing characteristics of The Most Terrible Time In My Life; that the film feels old and new, original and old-hat, that it acts serious and then suddenly goofy and then back to being serious, that it can be hip and carefree and then gritty and a downer and back again--and all of this throughout the film somehow works.This film is incredibly entertaining and interesting, and immensely enjoyable (plus the cameo by Jo Shishido *AS* Jo Shishido, who seemingly is not an actor in the world of the movie but instead the long-standing P.I. mentor to the protagonist, is mind blowing to anyone who is a fan of "Cheek's" films or his work with Suzuki). If you can get a hold of this film, you really should, it is well worth your time if you have any interest in film noir/neo-noir, Mike Hammer, Seijun Suzuki, or left-field Japanese cinema.

Okay, so we begin with the Mike Hammer parody, the office in a movie theater, and the detective (wildly overdressed) drives a Rambler. Then the mood turns serious and we're supposed to take this clown seriously after all. There was either a bad script or a director who didn't understand the script. The results are a few moments of humor, some pretty gory violence, and almost total incomprehension on my part. There may have been clever curve balls the director was throwing, and I couldn't pick up the spin of the ball. If so, ah well. But if I'm correct, this confection just isn't worth the time it takes to watch it. Good cinematography and clever "cute" ideas start the film off, but they wear out their welcome about halfway in.

This one caught my eye in the foreign section of Hollywood Video. I've heard it said that noir is a dead type of film, not so. Though in many ways this parodies the noir films of the 40s and 50s, it had its strengths and comes across as a noir pretty well.The lighting was amazing, as was the framing framing; every shot was perfect and the plot wasn't half bad.When the film started, I thought it was set in the 50's or thereabouts, with the protagonist driving a Nash Metropolitan and the theatre featuring Cinemascope. But at one point a character suggests that fingers can be reattached now, and then more modern cars were shown parked on the street, stuff like this can get to you.I loved this, I would definitely recommend it.

Please do not mistake this film for pulp. Pulp is by definition tawdry, which this film is not. It isn't greasy. Or slapped together. Or sensational and passing and cheap. This film wasn't made to be read through like a paperback and discarded. The style, beautiful. The lighting, meticulous. The mood made the hair on my arms stand up. Watch this film.