Grumpy Old Man for good reason

GREEDY (1994)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

Comedies can either go the fast track or slow down to emphasize character definition. I always think of Howard Hawks or Billy Wilder when it comes to fast-paced and rapidly and increasingly witty lines delivered with pizzazz and finite comic timing. "His Girl Friday" is one of the very best, faster-than-thou comedies ever made and "Some Like it Hot," which runs almost two hours, also marches at a fast clip with its innovative situational pieces. I would not put too many modern comedies since the 1980's in the same company, yet "Greedy" (which is not a classic) does march along quickly and manages to induce many laughs and many truths in its wacky character ensemble - but it is Kirk Douglas who steals the movie with his curmudgeonly and manipulative manner that shows the class acts of yesteryear could deliver.

Kirk Douglas is Uncle Joe, a scrap-metal millionaire tycoon who apparently adores Jimmy Durante and his supposed mistress (Olivia d'Abo), who is actually more of a caregiver. Joe's relatives, the whole scheming rotten bunch they are, are waiting and hoping for Joe to take that long snooze into heaven. The lot of them are assuming that Joe will leave his 20 million fortune to the sexy girl. So Joe's relatives hatch a plan - bring the third-rate bowler Danny (Joe's nephew, played by Michael J. Fox) to Joe since Joe seemed to like the kid for his Jimmy Durante impressions. Only problem is that Danny is less interested in money (despite needing a loan) than in forging a relationship. 

Part of the fun of "Greedy" is watching Danny and Uncle Joe manipulate each other - the central idea is that Joe wants to know who loves him for him, and who loves him for his money. It is the oldest cliche in the book yet Kirk Douglas invests enough of that curmudgeonly humor and priceless double takes and endless long stares with a wisp of a smile to sell us a fun, spirited old man - more fun than the old geezers in "Grumpy Old Men." 

As wacky as the relatives are, most trip and fall over leaving precious few memorable bits. Ed Begley, Jr. and the delectable Phil Hartman usually stand out in any movie but Colleen Camp, Mary Ellen Trainor and Siobhan Fallon (as a silly drunk) merely exist as one-dimensional caricatures, overacting to the hilt which is at odds with Fox's and Douglas's underplaying. At least Olivia d'Abo brings a measure of sultriness and does it with relative restraint. It should've been more of a three-character piece than an ensemble.

"Greedy" still has enough laughs and a few comic surprises and choice moments of truth to eclipse its cartoonishly greedy relatives. As directed by Jonathan Lynn (who plays Joe's long-suffering butler), "Greedy" could have reached comic heights had it squarely focused on Douglas, Fox and D'Abo. 

TBN can make bad movies too

THE OMEGA CODE (1999)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia (Original review from 2000)

"The Omega Code" gets my vote for one of the best, cheeriest comedies ever made. It is often so damn funny that I could not hold back my laughter - a deliberate hark back to the kind of spoof that Mel Brooks used to make...only it is not a spoof.

The film stars Casper Van Dien as Dr. Gillen Lane, a mythology guru who believes he has unlocked the secrets of the Bible Code that tells of prophecies, past and future. Yes, these codes foretold of Princess Diana's demise not to mention the assassination of Kennedy, and so on. I wonder if any mention was made of the rape of the Central Park jogger back in the 1980's, or the recent Colombine massacre, or how about the Oklahoma bombing. But never mind, obviously, it dictates events among the rich and famous only.

Enter the wealthy businessman, Stone Alexander (Michael York), who wants to rule the world and needs to find the key to the ancient city of Jerusalem - Stone just needs the good doctor to unlock the remaining bible codes to determine the future. Or something like that. And what can we make of the two prophets, who appear and disappear at will? And will the overworked Dr. Lane fix his marriage to the sweet, lonesome Jennifer (Devon Odessa)? And is Alexander's trusted emissary, Dominic (Michael Ironside), intent on double-crossing his boss?

Okay, so "The Omega Code" is not a comedy, it is a timely biblical thriller that is too unintentionally funny to really score on a dramatic level. I knew the movie would not work as soon as Casper Van Dien's overacting began when he explains on a talk show, with his motivational speaking skills intact, the veracity of the Bible Codes. Amazingly, no one in this film questions whether such codes exist. Of course, there is controversy over such codes in today's world but wouldn't we be more interested in what those codes say about our future rather than the accidental death of Princess Diana?

"The Omega Code" is not humorous enough on a good bad movie scale to sit through, and hardly thrilling for one second. It is preposterous and dull with garden-variety special-effects that are equaled on the level of the defunct "Mystery Science Theatre 3000" show. The film also has the kind of hammy performances that would have delighted the "MST" crowd. The funniest thing about this movie is that it was financed by the Trinity Broadcasting Network - such funding should have been used for more worthwhile endeavors.

Stalking into transgressive waters

THE CABLE GUY (1996)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

(Originally reviewed in 1996)

Real-life stalkers are no laughing matter (I was stalked once. Trust me, no laughs were to be found). Naturally, I've never been stalked by a cable guy, especially one that looks like Jim Carrey. Ben Stiller's "The Cable Guy" is an attempt to make a dark comedy about a serious matter. No subjects should be taboo when it comes to skewering with a comedic bent. But when a film that pretends to skewer takes itself seriously then you know what you are in for: a truly uneven black comedy.

Consider the following for a moment. Jim Carrey plays a truly nutty cable guy named Chip, who becomes obsessed with his latest customer, Steven Kovacs (Matthew Broderick). Chip not only brings top-notch cable to Steven's living room, he also furnishes him with a spankingly expensive stereo system complete with built-in karaoke. Chip also takes Steven to a medieval restaurant where they are randomly chosen to joust. He also helps Steven get back with his ex-girlfriend, Robin (Leslie Mann), but not before Chip supplies him with a sexy prostitute. And the movie goes on and on with these predicaments, some of which are very funny. It is clear that Steven wants nothing to do with Chip, since Chip is too obsessive and clearly lonely. Steven almost loses his own best friend, wonderfully played by Jack Black.

It is here where the movie takes a drastic turn into heavy, murky waters. Chip is so upset that Steven has dumped him that he does everything he can to win Steven back. This includes giving a heavy beating to one of Robin's suitors (Owen Wilson), a scene that will make you cringe, not laugh. Then there is a prison sequence that pokes fun at "Midnight Express" but it will mostly make you feel unclean. And a kidnapping follows. And more beatings.

Subjects like stalking and kidnapping can be skewered for laughs, but it can fall flat on its face when the writer and director lose focus. Despite a decent, swiftly paced forty minutes, the movie switches gears and assumes that the very nature of stalking is funny. It is not, especially when it falls into "Fatal Attraction" waters. Despite one funny sequence at Steven's parents' house where they play Porno Password, "The Cable Guy" aims to be more sinister and less comedic in the second half. Beating up somebody to a bloody pulp is not funny. A jousting tournament turns vicious when Chip really tries to hurt Steven. And a kidnapping held inside a satellite dish is just not funny when the tone is not far off from the usual thriller.

Jim Carrey is often hysterical and sometimes scary, but his pitch is set way to high when a minimum of exaggeration would've been preferred. Matthew Broderick has some fine understated moments, though he looks confused as to what kind of movie he's in. Leslie Mann plays yet another token ex-girlfriend thrown into the mix for no real purpose except to be used as a pawn.

"The Cable Guy" pokes fun at everything from "Goldeneye" to "Waterworld" to high-profile court cases, but it neglects to tickle the funny bone. It never dwells into Chip's personality (despite a contrived ending that assumes he's not as bad as he seems) and since the conflict is only in seeing how far Chip will go to harass and control Steven's life, we never sense there is anything to be engaged by. Sinister goings-on and dark humor are not mutually inclusive.

I am on bad terms with this soap-opera

THE EVENING STAR (1996)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

(Originally viewed in 1997)

Aurora Greenway is one of those colorful, larger-than-life characters who exist only in Southern novels, particularly those by Larry McMurtry ("The Last Picture Show"). In "Terms of Endearment," coincidentally based on a novel by McMurtry, Aurora (Shirley MacLaine) arose as a tender, full-blooded, fiercely emotional creature. In the excruciating "The Evening Star," she is depicted as a bloodless caricature, as if she drifted in from the latest soap opera series.

"Terms of Endearment" is one of the great movies of the 1980's - it is captivating, unsentimental, brilliantly acted, and superbly directed by James L. Brooks. The heart of that film was Aurora's troubling yet loving relationship with her daughter Emma (Debra Winger). The trials and tribulations they endure evoked a nice balance between humor and heartbreak. For example, Aurora dates a swinging, hard-drinking bachelor and astronaut (Jack Nicholson), and a tender love affair begins and ends abruptly between them. Emma marries Flap (Jeff Daniels, who's been typecast ever since), a professor who teaches English and has affairs with co-eds. In retaliation, Emma has an affair with a banker (John Lithgow), and so on.

"Terms of Endearment" has a wonderful ensemble of actors at their best, and honest, vibrant writing. The beauty of the film is Brooks's careful balance between comedy, seriousness and tragedy. "Terms" also never steps into caricature or droll exaggeration resulting in a film that transcends its soap opera origins.

"The Evening Star" is at the opposite end of the pole. It is grossly exaggerated, wildly uneven, contains numerous caricatures not characters, and takes an eternity to end. This time, the eccentric Aurora (Shirley McClaine, again) has Emma's sexy teenage daughter (Juliette Lewis) to contend with, a grandchild in prison, and Emma's rich, snobbish friend (Miranda Richardson) who is trying to buy Aurora's granddaughter's love. In addition, there's Aurora's loving, loyal maid (Marion Ross) who seems more like an intrusion in her life than anything else. Oh, and there's the local psychiatrist (Bill Paxton) who has a brief, unbelievable fling with Aurora.

"The Evening Star" suffers greatly in every department when compared to "Terms." For one, the casting is actually awful. MacLaine overacts to the hilt of all hilts - she's actually annoying and boring to watch. Juliette Lewis does better with her role as a troubled teenager, but it is something she can play in her sleep. Marion Ross and the late Ben Johnson, in his last role, seem to be sleepwalking throughout.

The one actress who is wrongfully cast, and an indication of what's wrong with some sequels, is Miranda Richardson as the snobbish friend of the late Emma - she spews seemingly delectable witticisms with a crooked drawl that brings out the worst in Southern stereotypes and accents. Interestingly, her character was played by Lisa Hart Carroll in "Terms" with complete restraint - a far cry from Richardson's manic fits. Where's the dignity of Southerner Billy Bob Thornton when you really need him?

"Terms" was a real human drama and completely unpredictable and truthful from beginning to end. "Evening Star" is utterly formulaic nonsense done with none of the vigor or honesty of the original (and with a high mortality rate to boot). The film is so desperate that it even brings back Jack Nicholson for an unnecessary, heavy-handed cameo. Where's Jim Brooks when you really need him?

Max Cady makes the Bowdens suffer

CAPE FEAR (1991)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

Shared with Oliver Stone's JFK as Best Picture of 1991
(Originally viewed in 1991)

The original "Cape Fear" (1962) is not a great thriller but it is expertly done and an appropriately lurid melodrama. It is amazing then that someone like Martin Scorsese would see fit to remake it. And it is doubly amazing how terrific the remake is - one of the most tense, superbly frightening thrillers in years. It shows Robert De Niro and most of its cast at the top of their form under the hands of a real master.

"Cape Fear" begins with a very young Juliette Lewis staring right into the camera as she tells us the story about fear and danger in a beautiful place of nature, the Cape Fear river. Lewis plays Danielle Bowden, the precocious, pot-smoking teenage daughter of the Bowdens. The Bowdens include her father, Sam Bowden (Nick Nolte), a righteous lawyer who is having an affair with a law clerk, and Leigh Bowden (Jessica Lange), the mother who knows her husband is up to no good. It is a typical dysfunctional family that somehow functions despite such problems. All it takes is for someone like Max Cady (Robert De Niro), a vicious, tattooed, Bible-spouting rapist to bring the family to the surface with its problems.

It turns out that Cady has some history with Sam. Sam was Cady's former lawyer who buried some evidence that would have got Cady out of jail sooner than a fourteen year term. The formerly illiterate Cady has learned how to read in jail, to weight-lift but more importantly, to know the law as well as Sam has learned it (not to mention keen knowledge of Biblical passages). Since Cady is aware of Sam's indiscretions, he is ready to make Sam's life as miserable as possible. Cady savagely rapes the law clerk who knows Sam (well-played by Illeana Douglas), kills the family dog, teases Leigh and, in the most controversial and jaw-droppingly breathless sequence, seduces Danielle with a marijuana cigarette, talks of Henry Miller and kisses her. It is a scene to stop time, as many have declared, and Lewis and De Niro make it startling as well.

"Cape Fear" is a jittery experience, full of fear and anxiety in equal droves. No one ever seems to stand still for one moment, nor does the camera. Even a relatively simple scene between Nolte and the law clerk has them anxious to move on, as if standing still and talking were a nervy thing to do. The whole film is like that. When the Bowdens go to the local movie theater to see "Problem Child," Max is in the theatre laughing as hard as anyone else and smoking up a storm. There is not a single moment where anyone behaves or moves quietly. Scorsese is determined to keep you on edge and uneasy, going so far as to have certain characters walk right into the screen. We see X-ray shots of the Bowdens making love. Fireworks erupt outside as Max looks on sitting on the ledge. Thunderous clouds, sometimes reddish in color, are in abundance throughout. Phones ring when least expected (as in most thrillers). Books mysteriously appear underneath geranium pots.

It is easy to write off Scorsese's "Cape Fear" as simply a thriller exercise, a moment of respite between the weight of his "GoodFellas" and the "Age of Innocence." But Scorsese and writer Wesley Strick are after more than making average Hollywood schlock. Most writers would make Samuel Bowden and the family happy and clean cut with no inner flaws, thus making the evil that haunts them far more savage than needs be. Only Sam has committed an unethical act - he simply did not do everything he should have to protect his client. Leigh would normally be shown as the dutiful, respectful wife with no complaints. Boy, is she full of them, and she is even attracted to Max (a character trait in the original that was only hinted at). Danielle, the daughter, also has her share of problems and tries to escape from them. She has parents who are always arguing and shouting with each other. Max seems like a nice escape from her home life but, well, she should know better than to go in a empty, ominous-looking theatre.

De Niro is nothing short of perfect as Max Cady, a psycho who is only interested in saving the Bowdens, not destroying them. He just wants them to suffer as if he was some avenging angel cleansing them of their sins. The final conclusion in a raging river inside a houseboat where Max wants Sam to tell the truth is harrowing, powerful stuff. It is not a Freddy Krueger finale where the killer comes back from the dead (he is burned but manages to come back into the houseboat for one last confrontation). In these scenes, De Niro shows the pain he suffered because of Sam's indiscretions and it is as nerve-jangling and as intensifying as the actor has ever been since.

Nick Nolte restrains himself nicely as Sam Bowden, the lawyer with hardly any ethics or values left. His transition from reserved and pathetic to angry and resilient is brilliant to watch (look carefully at the scene where Sam witnesses the attack on Max by hired men - a scene not found in the original). Jessica Lange is exceedingly good in every scene she is in and holds her own with Nolte and De Niro. And the star-making performance of Juliette Lewis is a stunner - a girl with sexual inhibitions about ready to burst at any moment (the movie can be approached as her story judging from her opening and closing narration). Her final stare at the end of the film is unforgettable. Kudos also go to Joe Don Baker as a private detective who has a peculiar drink to stay awake and the three principal actors from the original, Gregory Peck, Martin Balsam and Robert Mitchum, make swift, brief impressions.

"Cape Fear" is not for average audiences for many reasons, notably because there is no one to root for. And the bitter, nasty climax will leave you stunned into shock and out of breath. But its morally complex issues and full-bodied characters and incredible, unbridled tension make for one of the best thrillers of the 1990's and a remake that actually outdoes the original. Scorsese said he wanted to make a film about fear and anxiety and he has succeeded admirably.

Postulating saints

THE THIRD MIRACLE (1999)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

(Originally reviewed in 2000)

Finally, we witness a film about priests and miracles that does not condescend to the audience by featuring superfluous special-effects or a demonic Patricia Arquette. "The Third Miracle" is a bloody miracle, an extremely well-acted and thematically rich film by notable director Agnieszka Holland ("Europa, Europa").

Ed Harris stars as Father Frank Shore, a postulator known by many as the "miracle killer," who is seen at the start of the film working at a soup kitchen. He is called back into duty to investigate a woman who may or may not be a saint but is loved by the people of a Chicago community all the same. Every November, the people gather to see a statue that weeps blood - this is coincidentally the month in which Helen O'Regan (Barbara Sukowa) - the supposed saint - died. There is talk that she cured a young girl of lupus by simply touching the girl.

Father Shore has his doubts but the blood is discovered to be real, and the girl, now a drug-addicted runaway, was cured of lupus. But can there be some doubt that this is all highly coincidental? Is Father Shore the right priest to investigate since years earlier he had debunked the myth of another saint and thus destroyed the faith of an entire community? There is also the question that a saint would never leave his or her children behind to pursue faith. Such is the case with the late Helen, who abandoned her daughter, Roxanne (Anne Heche). Roxanne is angry at her mother and feels her mother could never be deemed a saint.

"The Third Miracle" asks lots of questions and justifiably answers very few of them. Father Shore may have doubts about his own faith (as most priests do in the movies nowadays) but this is a job, and it is one he where he must be nonjudgmental. He has his own emotional flaws, such as the possibility of falling in love with Roxanne. He also has to fight against the devil's advocate, Archbishop Werner (Armin Mueller-Stahl), a ferociously stubborn man who feels the world has no need for more saints or miracles. But sainthood is a tricky judgment, it has to be proved and tested and Father Shore goes against all odds in pursuing the truth and, thus, waiting for another miracle.

Ed Harris does solid work (as always) as the dubious Father Shore, one of the few actors on the silver screen whom you can tell when his mind is at work. He has a very touching, effective scene with Heche, as she visits her mother's grave and they talk about the good Father's flirtations and loss of virginity in high school. Some of this was also featured in the horrible "Stigmata," but here Harris makes it all credible and believable. Anne Heche is sprightly and alive as always...and she shares lots of emotionally implicit scenes with Harris.

"The Third Miracle" is not a great film (I am tired of seeing statues weeping blood, for one, and the ending is abrupt) but it is richly rewarding and tastefully done. It leaves you thinking about what the church constitutes as miracles nowadays, and what a saint's credentials should be. Ultimately, it is a fascinating look at the nature and question of faith in the church. And thanks to Ed Harris, we almost come close to believing that any miracle may be possible.

Lethargic Murray in Coppola's lively rom-com

LOST IN TRANSLATION (2003)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

(Originally reviewed in 2003)

Bill Murray is an actor, even if you think he hasn't proven it yet. His trick is one that comes from all great actors - he never lets you know he is acting. Others may say Murray is only playing himself, but being yourself is not easy either. In "Lost in Translation," Murray has one of the best roles of his career, playing and defining a character so perfectly that you might forget Murray is acting at all. Akin, though less emotional, to Jack Nicholson's own weary-brand-of-loneliness character in "About Schmidt," Murray has a role that is easily the life force of the movie.

Murray is Bob Harris, a famous actor who's being paid millions to do a whisky commercial in Tokyo. He'd rather be doing a play but the money is good, and he does have a family to support back in California. The problem is Bob is not sure where he should be. When he isn't acting or taking incomprehensible directions from a Japanese director, he is in his hotel room watching TV, sometimes clips from some of his early movies. Sometimes a hooker is sent to his room and asks him to rip his stocking, though it sounds like lip. Other times, when he can't sleep, he is drinking at the hotel bar. And when he is relaxing in a pool or in bed, his wife calls asking what color the carpet fabric should be in his study.

One day, however, he meets an angel of wonderment, a miracle that could change his life. Her name is Charlotte (Scarlet Johansson), a twentysomething girl who is married to a photographer (Giovanni Ribisi) and doesn't know why. As she exclaims in a phone conversation about her wedding, "I felt nothing." Her husband is always on shoots, never in the room with her (and he snores loudly too). Charlotte is forced to fend for herself, parading around the streets of Tokyo shopping and looking, perhaps looking to be engaged by something. Sometimes she frequents the hotel bar, and that is where she meets Bob. The two have a huge age difference but that doesn't stop them from sharing stories and anecdotes. They go shopping together, walk around the streets, sing karaoke, and eventually end up in the same room together. Don't raise your eyebrows just yet, though, because writer-director Sofia Coppola is more interested in their personalities and their quirks than seeing them making love. Why the director felt obliged to show Charlotte's posterior in close-up in the opening shot remains a mystery, but this is still no ordinary romance.

My issue with romances like this is when we learn about the prospective others, the people whom the newly loving couple are married to. Charlotte's own husband seems to either deliberately ignore or is blissfully unaware of his wife. Since his character is shown to be more edgy or anxious than expected, we quickly think he is wrong for her. But tell me how any man could be blissfully unaware of someone like Charlotte? And Bob's wife? We just hear her voice on the phone, saying everything and telling us nothing. She doesn't admit her love for him, and seems almost pained to hear he has a day off from shooting a commercial. It is simply too easy and lazy for the screenwriter to assume that people often use the cliches we expect to hear so we can admonish them and root for the real couple to be together. "Sleepless in Seattle" has this annoying screenwriting problem, among countless other romantic comedies.

Where Coppola proves her worth is in the visuals. This is a kinetically framed romance, often filmed with a hand-held camera and with a lens that shows us a soft-focus world of Tokyo - the movie has the effect of looking through a fog. What it lends is an intimacy that makes the love story almost a documentary of how two different people can meet accidentally. All I can say is that, like cinematic love stories that make Paris look inviting, I would love to visit Tokyo based on what I saw in this movie. We feel like tourists in a strange land, just like Bob and Charlotte.

Bill Murray has a role that defines what he can bring to the screen better than anybody - laziness and lethargy crossed with humor. It is almost like Murray sort of enjoys the lethargy, in a strange way, and he has never played as full-bodied a character as Bob. Those droopy eyes and thin lips make Bob as sad and funny as we can expect Murray to be. Along with his colorful supporting roles in "Rushmore" and "Ed Wood," Murray is as exquisite and as restrained as one can expect - he could make Robin Williams blush on a "Good Will Hunting" day.

Scarlett Johansson also has pizzazz, delivered in a low-key manner. She is sad and funny too, but we sense that she would rather be with someone like Bob who understands her loneliness. Johansson makes the character so endearing and so real that I'd be surprised if there wasn't any man who would fall in love with her on first sight. That dreamy, low-toned voice certainly helps.

The last sequence of "Lost in Translation" doesn't end with the typical happy ending, a requirement of this virtually exhausted genre. Coppola has invested too much in these characters to make easy solutions come to surface. With Bob's own lackadaisical energy and Charlotte's own lost sense of self, they are like lonely lovebirds singing the hymns of lost romantic souls. They search for something, only to find each other and discover there is more to learn about love. It is a romantic notion but Murray, Johansson and Coppola make it come alive in a melancholy way. A sweet film.

Barbie Dolls masking the truth

THE VIRGIN SUICIDES (1999)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

(Originally reviewed in 1999)

I don't think I have heard a more blunt title in ages but for the most blunt summary of a film's content, you can't do better than "The Virgin Suicides." This is Sofia Coppola's brilliant debut film, a searing, intelligent drama of innocence destroyed by the overprotective ruling hand of parents.

The film opens with the title filling the screen from every corner, as if it was scribbled by overzealous teenage girls. Then the film gradually reveals one particular family, the Lisbons, five luscious-looking Catholic girls living in Michigan during the 1970's. The overprotective parents include the nerdy-looking father, a math teacher (James Woods), and the domineering, stuffy mother (a largely unrecognizable Kathleen Turner). Kirsten Dunst (in perhaps the best role of her career) plays the main Lisbon girl, Lux, whom every adolescent male pines for including those who live in the neighborhood. These girls seem perfect but everything is on the surface - they are like Barbie Dolls with masks to hide the real problems. At the beginning of the film, a thirteen-year-old Lisbon girl (Hanna Hall) fails a suicide attempt, and then successfully makes another attempt. Nobody knows why, and the parents seem unaffected as if it was a temporary setback. The father keeps thinking he sees his dead daughter, and so do the other girls. But the question is: why did she kill herself? Could it happen to the others?

The main focus in "The Virgin Suicides" is Lux and she is pursued by Trip Fontaine (Josh Hartnett), a cool dude, for no better description, who is pined for by all the girls for his smoothness and seductive quality - he is a like a young Don Juan. Lux avoids him but his charm eventually gets to her, to the point where she is asked to the prom as are all her sisters (they all end up wearing the same dress). Coppola also makes good use of songs by ELO and others to accentuate the mood, and the prom scenes are especially good at evoking a constrained innocence that is likely to be broken any time soon.

The prom is the central climax of the film where everything goes downhill. The mother gets so fed up with Lux's disappearance after the prom that she keeps everyone locked up in the house, confined by Lux's unconstrained behavior. Week after week, the girls are kept inside, restricted from ever leaving the house except to pick up the mail. The father seems to go slightly insane, resorting to talking to the plants at school. The mother throws out all rock n' roll records and anything else that might corrupt the girls' innocence.

"The Virgin Suicides" basically gives away what will happen to the girls - it is even foretold in the film's opening voice-over, narrated by an older Trip played by Michael Pare. There are no easy answers or conventional explanations to their suicides, but we can only surmise by the strange behavioral interaction between the girls and the parents (communication is notably absent). The beauty is that Coppola captures the essence of adolescence, and shows how fragile the Lisbon girls were within their confinement. They were easily corruptible, but were incapable of dealing with emotional pain and duress - instead, they dealt with it through an easy path, an escape, by ending their lives.

More furballs, zero story

CRITTERS 2 (1988)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

Question: what sequel has none of the humor, wit, scares or horror of the original cult film "Critters"? Answer: "Critters 2." Easy enough. There have been bad sequels but none as excruciating to sit through as this one, which only shares one aspect of the original's flavor - the title with a number in front of it. It not only recaps the original film with nary a story, but it also lacks any substantial purpose other than to cash in on the original's brand name.

"Critters 2" has also has the distinction of being the most contrived of all sequels. It is so contrived that it has almost no reason to exist as a movie. Consider the plot for a moment. This time, the lovable Brad Brown (Scott Grimes, with an earring) is back, having helped to extinguish all those furball creatures from space years earlier. He returns to Grover's Bend, visiting his grandmother for Easter. Amazingly, he hardly spends any time with her and instead peruses through some old photographs and a useless slingshot. But what do you know? The Critters' eggs that were left open for a sequel at the end of the original film are now hatching. I recall they were hatching already in the original's closing shot but never mind. Some of the local residents use them as Easter eggs, sold to them by an antique dealer! The new sheriff in town has to dress up as the Easter Bunny! And before you can say the words "unintentional comedy," the sheriff is killed by those mean little furballs with razor sharp teeth, and the local residents stay indoors at the local church. And Brad is blamed since his appearance in town coincides with the hatching of the Critters's eggs!!! Can the filmmakers be serious?

But low and behold, the bounty hunters, who are pursuing those furry creatures known as the Cripes (or is the Krites as indicated on the video cover box?), are back at the same damn town to blow them away with their perhaps unintentionally phallic, futuristic shot guns. This includes the return of actor Terrence Mann (as the long-haired Ug, the strongest of the bounty hunters) and Don Opper (the village idiot Charlie, who has become a bounty hunter himself), appearing as if he was sleepwalking through all this.

The original instilled some sense of dignity with Brad's family trying to protect themselves and their home from the Critters. This time, the human interest level is kaput - in fact, there is not one solid characterization throughout except for the fabulous character actor Barry Corbin (replacing M. Emmet Walsh from the original) as the colorful retired sheriff. Corbin, like Gene Hackman, could never give a lifeless performance if his life depended on it - if he were the main character, this cruddy, lazily patched together sequel might have had some substance. The townspeople and the town remain anonymous with no real visible locale threatened except for the local church. There is a laughable, forced romance between Brad and a local reporter that makes after-school specials seem positively sultry by comparison. The critter action scenes are cut far too frantically, and the best the film can do is to show rolling furballs along the dusty roads. As it stands, "Critters 2" is as inert and undignified as they come.

Footnote: The most interesting thing to say about "Critters 2" is the scene where one of the bounty hunters tries to shape-shift their appearance into Freddy Krueger from "A Nightmare on Elm Street" ad. Fitting since "A Nightmare on Elm Street Part 3: Dream Warriors" showed a clip from the original "Critters" just before a TV addict met a demise from dear old Freddy.

Furballs from outer space

CRITTERS (1986)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

(Originally seen in 1986)

In the wake of "Gremlins" and its myriad rip-offs came this very funny horror comedy, for a lack of a better description. It is quick (at a full-throttle 86 minutes), clever, self-parodic, and just plain delightful from first frame to last.

The story begins in outer space on some floating prison ship, housing fugitives known simply as the Cripes, who are to be transported to some asteroid. The Cripes somehow escape on the ship and head for Earth (aliens just love our home planet), while two bounty hunters dressed in almost Western garb, a combination of long trenchcoats and pointed boots, search for them. They also have to change their nondescript appearances to human form.

Flash forward to the typical American farmlands of Kansas where a nice American family live, consisting of the farmer, Jay Brown (Billy Green Bush), his housecleaning wife, Helen (Dee Wallace Stone), the presumptuous son, Brad (Scott Grimes) who loves using his slingshot, and the sister he constantly fights with, April (Nadine Van Der Velde), who has the hots for the local handsome teen male, played by none other than Billy Zane! The town is full of the usual cast of denizens, including the local sheriff (the terrific M. Emmet Walsh) and the village idiot (Don Opper), who believes aliens will invade Earth (he of course was once attacked by an alien). But an invasion is imminent as a spaceship lands in the farmlands, and a host of furballs start killing livestock, and basically they try to eat their way through dear old Kansas. They are of course the Cripes, a crew of furball monsters that have razor sharp teeth and use sleep-inducing (or perhaps poisonous) darts that shoot from their heads. They attack the farmer's family, and most of the town itself. Naturally, the bounty hunters finally land on Earth and cause their own havoc with their enormous guns blasting everything in sight (including churches and bowling alleys) as they search for the Cripes.

"Critters" is lots of fun, inducing more laughs than scares but of course, this is no serious horror flick. In a comical scene, Brad spots a silhouette of a Critter growing to mammoth proportions. I also like how one of the Critters utters the F curse, or how one plucks the eyes off of an E.T. doll.

The scenes at the beginning are the best as we see how this oblivious American family lives. I love the moment where Dee Wallace smiles in recognition as her daughter speaks to her boyfriend, which leads to a dinner scene with the family and the boyfriend. As the sweet couple leaves for literally a romp in the hay, the patriarch Jay asks his wife: "Have you ever told April about...you know?" She responds: "Years ago." Moments like that, and there are several featuring the sly Grimes, gives a sense of humanity to the characters. They are not cartoonish types, though the movie is one big cartoon spectacle.

It also helps that veteran character actor M. Emmet Walsh (the slimy, corrupt detective in "Blood Simple") and Don Opper (memorable as the title character in "Android") were cast, lending plenty of humorous asides throughout. "Critters" is a guilty pleasure, but full of smiles and knowing references to the B-movies of the past. It would make a great double-feature with "Mars Attacks!"

De Niro's existential hero is back

CITY BY THE SEA (2002)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

(Originally reviewed in 2003)

Robert De Niro playing yet another New York City cop? Can we say "15 Minutes"? Well, let's not get too hasty. "City By the Sea" is an exceptional thriller giving us the De Niro that I kind of missed in the last few years. You know, the dramatic De Niro - the angry, ebullient De Niro playing the kind of existential antihero we had thought disappeared from cinema.

Set in Long Beach and Manhattan, De Niro is Vincent LaMarca, a rugged homicide cop who goes to work at the crack of dawn, watches TV, visits his girlfriend, Michelle (Frances McDormand) who lives downstairs from his apartment, and not much else. His partner, Reg (George Dzundza) is a family man yet Vince is not comfortable with visiting Reg's family - "Too much love," the man says. His reasoning is understandable - Vincent walked out on his family many years earlier. His estranged son, Joey (James Franco), who drives a blue Chevy Nova, is a junkie living on the boardwalk of Long Beach, sometimes residing in an abandoned casino building. One night, while drugged out on crank, he kills a neighborhood drug dealer. Now Joey is wanted by the police, and guess who has to lead that investigation. Vincent's own past has come back to haunt him, including dealing with an understandably bitchy ex-wife (Patti LuPone) and Joey's ex-girlfriend (Eliza Dushku), who has a kid. There is also the drug dealer's big boss (William Forsythe), who is about as vicious and snarly as one can expect in a movie of this type.

Okay, so we have heard all this before. The difference is that "City By the Sea" is based on true events, emanating from a 1997 Esquire article by Michael McAlary. Truths aside, the movie works because the characters are believable and three-dimensional. Rather than subjecting to overdone car chases and endless shootouts, director Michael Caton-Jones ("This Boy's Life") keeps the pace lively and the character studies sturdy. This movie is not about action but about words. It is about people who are affected by the downward spirals in their lives, and about families broken apart by unforeseen tragedies.

De Niro is as good as he can be as Vincent LaMarca, showcasing the character's strengths and flaws. He abandoned his child and he may abandon his grandchild. Will he be a father again to his son or just another cop? "I am a cop and a father," says Vincent to Joey. This is a standout sequence in itself, again focusing more on their relationship than the actual plot. And what of Vincent's relationship to Michelle (Frances McDormand)? Vincent has kept her in the dark about his family, including his father who was electrocuted for murdering babies. Can Michelle handle his family history and his inability to hang on to whatever family he may have left?

"City By the Sea" is often sensational entertainment, briskly directed and acted. The ending suffers a bit from either straining too hard to be emotional or not enough. I also could have learned more about William Forsythe's expendable character - he is nothing more than a meanie with a shotgun. On the plus side, De Niro and James Franco rise above the melodrama and provide the poignancy that might otherwise be lacking. A fine film, unjustly ignored by audiences.

Action painter at work

POLLOCK (2000)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

The most innovative of the Abstract Expressionists was Jackson Pollock whose surrealist paintings gave way to "action paintings," the idea that paint could be dripped onto the canvas and create vivid splashes of color. Pollock created the drip technique and thus, a sense of freedom within the canvas was born where space became largely ambiguous. Pollock is world renown, so much that American film directors like Martin Scorsese or Oliver Stone are often referred to as the "Jackson Pollocks of cinema" for their often seemingly free form styles. Such an innovator is given a fairly conventional though often harrowing treatment by Ed Harris in his directorial debut.

Naturally, Ed Harris plays the tortured, neurotic, manic-depressive Jackson Pollock. The film begins in New York City in the postwar era of the 1940's where Pollock is still an unknown. He meets with another painter, Lee Krasner (Marcia Gay Harden), who hears of Pollock through word-of-mouth and becomes interested in his work. After all, if you are a painter in New York who is talked about in circles, you must make your appearance through the proper channels. Lee Krasner knows the proper channels. She is acquainted with Peggy Guggenheim (Judith Ivey), the owner of the Art of This Century Gallery, who is ticked off when climbing five flight of stairs to find Pollock is not home. Nevertheless, she sees his work and commissions it to be shown in her gallery.

Pollock also finds a willing romantic partner in Lee Krasner who knows of the man's faults and still decides to be with him. Pollock is an alcoholic and usually finds himself sleeping outside tenements. His solution is to get away from the city, and so Krasner offers him an option - get married and move or she walks. They move to the Hamptons near the beach for tranquility. This is also beneficial for Pollock who can find himself locked in his work rather than in alcohol. As time goes on, Pollock eventually discovers his drip technique and becomes a sensation in New York and around the world. And when does Pollock know that his work is finished? "How do you know you are finished when you are making love," asks Pollock when interviewed by Life magazine.

"Pollock" occasionally finds the painter at work in his studio but the film's screenplay devotes more time to his turbulent relationship with Lee Krasner. Lee puts up with Pollock through his affairs and endless drinking bouts because she wants him to be the great painter that he is. It is clear that Lee is devoted to him and tries to help him, thus putting her own career on hold for his sake. They frequently have their arguments, some more harsh than others, but they still manage to stay together for several years.

By the 1950's, Pollock grows into a bearded, fat, obnoxious, unlikable man. He retreats from his "drip" style to his original abstract paintings. He also has an affair with a luscious art groupie (Jennifer Connelly) and largely detaches himself from Lee. The brief romance is mostly dull as compared to his emotional bond with Lee, and the film meanders a bit whenever Connelly shows up, whom I do admire as an actress overall.

My complaints of the film are largely relegated to the depiction of Pollock's own status in the art world. The recent "Before Night Falls" did not dwell on why the famous writer, Reinaldo Arenas, became a writer, it only showed his surroundings and how they affected him. But Pollock is a more complex, larger-than-life character. He seems to lack communication with his mother (Sada Thompson - the matriarch from the 70's TV show "Family") or his brother and his family - they attend his gallery shows but they never speak to each other, particularly at the dining table. Pollock's family life is given so little shred of introspection that we never understand why they ever visit him in the first place - consider that almost every scene with his family ends in a violent disruption. Does Pollock's temperamental personality and his seclusion in his work cause his family to be silent or are they unhappy with his artistic life? Whatever lack of communication exists may hint at Pollock's own troubled nature but the film never makes that connection.

The two fantastic lead performances rescue whatever character limitations exist. Ed Harris is powerful and harrowing as the troubled Pollock - he even looks like the painter judging by recent photographs I have looked at. Marcia Gay Harden is the strong, sympathetic, tough and direct Lee Krasner (she deservedly won an Oscar for Best Supporting Actress for her work here). They have several great scenes together but my favorite is when he asks her if "they can make a baby." She says no, claiming that fulfilling his needs is enough and all she ever wanted. It is indeed.

If "Pollock" had dwelled on the artist's personal, familial side and if the fleeting world of Abstract Expressionists had been developed, the film might have been a stunning masterpiece. As it is, it is a hellish, demanding work with two ball-of-fire performances that will rattle your nerves, shake up your senses, and largely disorient you. Just like Jackson Pollock did.

Run-of-the-mill snuff thriller

15 MINUTES (2001)

Reviewed By Jerry Saravia

(Originally written in 2001)

Something shocking happens in "15 Minutes." It is so shocking and unexpected that it will leave you coming up for air wondering why the filmmakers went through such lengths to shock the audience. And yet its shocking twist results in a final half-hour of ridiculous implausibilities squandering its initial premise.

Robert De Niro plays Eddie Flemming, a New York City homicide cop who loves to be surrounded by the media (he also dunks his head in ice water to sober up). Eddie is a celebrity cop, having had his hide splashed on the covers of People magazine. The latest murder in town involves arson, and Eddie is there ready to mingle with the press while solving the crime. Trouble is that an arson investigator, Jordy Warsaw (Edward Burns), has solved the crime first, realizing it was actually a homicide than an accidental arson case. Eddie knows it too and gets all the credit. You do not have to be a film buff to know that Eddie and Jody become partners in what appears to be a buddy-buddy cop flick, only Jody is no cop and realistically, he would not have been allowed to follow Eddie everywhere since the subsequent murders do not involve arson! We will allow logic to be suspended for now since their banter is occasionally intoxicating.

The latest string of murders are committed by two European thugs. One is Olgen (played by Olgen Taktarov), a bald-headed man who grins uncontrollably and his partner, Emil (Karel Roden), who also grins and shoots their murders with a stolen digital camera. Their motives remain unclear at first but afterwards, their intent becomes clearer - they want to publicize their snuff videos on television and become celebrities. Olgen's idea is that in America, nobody is blamed for what they do and everyone is a celebrity for at least fifteen minutes. Andy Warhol might have wished his words were not used synonymously with murder.

"15 Minutes" is nothing new, and its theme of how amoral and devalued our country (and the media) has become has been explored in everything from Sidney Lumet's "Network" to Martin Scorsese's "The King of Comedy" to Oliver Stone's "Natural Born Killers" to the blackly comical "Man Bites Dog," which this film so closely resembles. But what the film says is that someone crazy enough would be willing to create a snuff film and try and sell it to the media in return for some exposure. Sure, there is jail time served but who can say no to book rights, movie rights and the right lawyer who can negotiate a percentage of the profits (Olgen's lawyer is played by real-life Gotti lawyer Bruce Cutler).

Most of "15 Minutes" has a jazzy, immediate feel to it, and there are some terrifically choreographed scenes. One involves a gruesome murder seen from a witness's point-of-view. Another involves a shootout on the streets near Central Park that is hair-raising and frenetic. I also liked a long scene involving an escape from a burning building. But "15 Minutes" lacks much thrust or purpose. It seems to evolve from one type of genre to another. First we get some harrowing scenes of violence from a camcorder's point-of-view. Then we get the buddy shtick of De Niro and Burns at odds with each other. Then there is a developing romance between De Niro and a reporter (Melina Kanakaredes from TV's "Providence"). Then there is the brief satire of the media (such a cliched attack at best) where Mr. Frasier himself (Kelsey Grammer) plays a famous TV tabloid reporter whose sole purpose in news is summed up in one line, thanks to actress Kim Catrall: "If it bleeds, it leads." At this point, I was confused since the film doesn't stick close to any consistent tone or style.

De Niro has some bright, lively moments but it is mostly a thankless role for someone of his stature. He does have a touching scene, however, where he fills out a card to his possible bride-to-be written in a different language. Edwards Burns is not always up to the task and I had a hard time believing him to be an arson investigator (ironically enough, De Niro did wonders with a similar role in "Backdraft"). The two thugs are so inhuman, callous and pathetic that nothing registers them as anything but cartoonish, jocose villains whom I did not care for in the slightest.

"15 Minutes" has that unexpected twist in the middle (which will not be revealed here) that leaves the rest of the film without much soul or interest. Let us just say that another pile of cliches follow, including the obligatory turn-in-the-badge scene and a host of other predictable scenes from the "Dirty Harry" school. And the ending is so melodramatically silly and over-the-top (similar to the finale of the remake of "Shaft") that it ruins its thought-provoking premise. This is the kind of film possibly written by one person that is then run through a full-scale committee turning it into your average Hollywood run-of-the-mill thriller, satire, commentary, or whatever the heck it is.

This Peek-a-Boo is a boo-boo

HIDE AND SEEK (2005)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia
(Originally reviewed in 2006)

When a new movie arrives in theaters that stars Robert De Niro, I get a little excited. After all, De Niro is one of our great actors, a man who gave us many inspired, complex performances. So for him to appear in a horror thriller, it is exciting news. The news, unfortunately, is precisely where the excitement ends.

De Niro plays a psychologist named David who has just suffered a tremendous loss - his wife (Amy Irving) has committed suicide by slitting her wrists in a bathtub. Now he has to console himself and his young daughter, Emily (Dakota Fanning), so they move upstate from all the noise and chaos of New York City. This is seen as a hindrance to Emily by David's close friend and colleague (Famke Janssen) but hey, David feels the openness of country living might be therapeutic. So much for that idea. Before you know it, Emily starts exhibiting odd behaviors. She claims to have an imaginary friend named "Charlie," she dresses in a black dress for dinner, she visits a cave where she deposits dolls she destroys, she uses a bug as fish bait, shall I go on? Naturally she is hesitant to accept anyone new in her father's life, including Elizabeth (Elisabeth Shue), so Emily's behavior may be symptomatic of all that.

But then, a drowned cat is found in the bathtub and, twice, words are sprawled across the bathroom walls that serve as ominous warnings. Is "Charlie" the culprit? If so, how can David stop it? And if a cat drowns in your bathtub and you suspect your daughter is responsible, then wouldn't you consider taking your daughter out of the country setting and seek professional help? The plot thickens.

All this leads to the inevitable surprise ending, which will not come as a surprise to anyone who has read good mystery novels and is a film buff. The problem with "Hide and Seek" is that after a remarkably solid thirty minutes, it slides into the trite and bleak world of nothingness and emptiness. In other words, the filmmakers decide to abandon the two strong characters of Emily and David and subject them to pointless thrills and chills that ride high on the implausibility meter. This leads to more pointless scenes of David's neighbors, David's extremely brief fling with Elizabeth (and their initial encounter has got to be the speediest request for a date ever), endless scenes of David wandering the hallways and basement of his house, the cliched teapot hissing, etc.

De Niro handles the task of playing a bespectacled psychologist respectably but that is because he is Robert De Niro - unfortunately, he barely tries. He inhabits the role in a dreamlike state with no inner tension. Anyone could have played this role and that is not true of De Niro's other incarnations such as Travis Bickle or Jake LaMotta. On the De Niro meter of bad films, this is far better than "The Fan" or the dreadful and painful "Meet the Fockers" but that isn't saying much.

Dakota Fanning has the right look as the big-eyed, pale Child of the Damned, or so it seems (she looks like she could be in a remake of "The Bad Seed"). Save for the occasional smile, this kid could grow up to be a Stepford wife - an emotionless doll. I understand that her Emily character is upset over her mother's death but Fanning appears geared to be in a goth rock band.

The last half-hour of "Hide and Seek" is so incongruous to the rest of the story that I felt cheated and hoodwinked, but not in a good way. I always say that the only director who can come up with a surprise ending is David Lynch because he works in the logic of a dream. To a certain extent, it is difficult to surprise an audience when we've seen most surprise endings by now. "Hide and Seek" seems to be heading in the direction of nightmare or dreamlike logic but it goes for broke, culminating in an ending that one can see miles away since no other logical conclusion is possible. The biggest insult is how one movie can make Robert De Niro, Dakota Fanning and poor Elisabeth Shue so damn enervated. Now that's surprising.

Rob Zombie's Clownish Chainsaw Massacre

HOUSE OF 1000 CORPSES (2003)

Re-Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

There have been so many variations on the stranded-kids-in-the-middle-of-nowhere scenario that, well, you can only come up with so many variations. Rob Zombie's directorial debut film, "House of 1000 Corpses," is stylish and even if it adds nothing new to the scenario except more of the usual cruel humor and occasional gory highlights, it works on your nerves like a punch to the solar plexus. It is far more of an improvement on second viewing.

The typical scenario has four young foolish people travelling on the road to discover the urban legend of Dr. Satan. Supposedly, Dr. Satan performed experiments on human guinea pigs involving dismemberment, disembowelment and who knows what else. So they stop at a chicken-takeout/gas station/haunted theatre called Captain Spaulding's Museum of Monsters and Madmen (the owner is wonderfully played by Sid Haig). They are lured into a ride of horrors that include wax figures of real-life murderers such as Ed Gein, Lizzie Borden and, naturally, the fictitious Dr. Satan. After the amusement ride is over, the four agree to go the woodsy area where Dr. Satan was supposedly hanged. They pick up a blonde hitchhiker (Sheri Moon) who has a knack for heavy rock and roll. Of course, their car gets a flat (thanks to a shotgun blast during a rainy night which nobody hears) and they end up at the blonde girl's residence, a spooky house occupied by the blonde's flirtatious mom (Karen Black), a deaf, deformed giant named Tiny (Matthew McGrory) and a blonde madman wearing spooky contact lenses and sporting a "Burn the Flag" T-shirt named Otis (Bill Moseley).

Most of "House of 1000 Corpses" is blackly comical and often too hyperbolic. It is the equivalent of a rock music video with interspersed clips of superior horror movies (including "The Old Dark House"), grainy footage and other film stocks, not unlike what Oliver Stone might have done had he directed this. None of it is remotely scary, and maybe it isn't meant to be. Even the cliched false alarms and the "who's there" shenanigans aren't very well executed but perhaps that is on purpose. The two young couples are the most innocent and annoying of victims, and they hardly merit any sympathy. The black humor runs too high and the gory killings, played against rock music and asynchronous Satanic readings, feel out-of-date and repetitious. I know this is set in the 1970's and that this is Rob Zombie's zany homage to those splatter flicks but he could have benefited from the most tried-and-true rule of horror - less is infinitely more.

The best thing about this movie is Sid Haig, last seen in various cult films and blaxploitation fare. He has fun with his role and brings it the relish and humor one might expect from an atypical clown character like Captain Spaulding. Bill Moseley seems to be treading on his "Chop Top" character from "Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2" (which this movie clearly resembles), yet he has a menacing stare. Karen Black and Sheri Moon run the gamut of overly theatrical to highly overly theatrical and may grate the nerves after a while, yet they still chill the bone. However, Sheri Moon's lip-synched rendition of "I Wanna Be Loved By You" is hysterically gaudy stuff.

"House of 1000 Corpses" is occasionally frightful and moodily photographed (though the zoom lens is overused), but it is just a maniacal, cartoonish, out-of-control carnival rather than a horror movie. High octane doesn't always translate as unruly intensity but it has the icky spirit of the best "Chainsaw Massacre" films. On that level, it is worthwhile but it is too hyperbolic for the average horror fan.

Warriors for hire

RONIN (1998)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia
(Originally reviewed in 1998)

The element of surprise has disappeared in modern action thrillers. We see the usual thunderous explosions and gunfights bereft of any decent plot or character exposition. Mostly, we get thrill rides that aim mainly to please the eye, not unlike the summer of 1998's experiment in overkill, "Armageddon." "Ronin" is not exempt from the aforementioned expectations of your average action thriller, but it is executed with a finesse in its strategy to thrill us - it does it without CGI effects or special-effects of any kind. That in itself is commendable.

The term Ronin refers to Japanese legend where the Japanese samurai, left with no leaders to lead them, roamed the countryside acting as warriors-for-hire. This legend was prominently featured in Akira Kurosawa's great "The Seven Samurai" and "Yojimbo" - the latter remade as "A Fistful of Dollars." "Ronin's" version of the story deals with a band of mercenaries who are looking to be hired, and find work courtesy of an IRA honcho named Deirdre (Natascha McElhone). The job is to obtain a mysterious briefcase, which is in the hands of "five to eight men." That's the slim plot in a nutshell, and the mercenaries set out to find the briefcase braving one shootout, car chase and double cross after another. Who ever said you could trust mercenaries who just want to make a quick buck?

The international group of macho warriors-for-hire includes Sam (played by Robert De Niro), who may be ex-CIA and has a way with a cup of coffee; a psychotic Russian computer expert named Gregor (Stellan Skarsgård); a hulking Frenchman named Vincent (Jean Reno playing virtually the same role as in "Mission Impossible"); and a very fast driver named Larry (Skip Suduth), who has a way with the narrow roads and tunnels in Paris (shades of Princess Di's death come to mind).

"Ronin" could almost be a James Bond thriller considering its numerous locations (Nice, Paris) and assortment of artillery (machine guns, bazookas), but it fits more squarely in the tradition of the espionage thriller genre. Examples of this type of genre extend from Hitchcock's "Sabotage" to "The Day of the Jackal." "Ronin" is directed by the exciting John Frankenheimer ("The Manchurian Candidate") and he milks the formula for all the atmosphere and intrigue you can get. At times, "Ronin" is vaguely European in its steely attitude and tough-as-nail characters, including the deadly Gregor who has no qualms of shooting a child in an open playground, or the Irish female leader who may not be quite what she seems.

"Ronin" is filled with car chases galore but it is at its best during its calm moments, some vaguely humorous. I liked the scene where Sam and Deirdre pose as a couple at a hotel so they can snap shots of one of the "five to eight men." I thoroughly enjoyed the camaraderie between the members of the group, who size each other up uncovering one's weaknesses and one's strengths. But there are two sequences that must be seen to be believed: one is an elaborate setup involving a Parisian bistro that is as perfectly timed and edited as anything Hitchcock might have attempted, and the other is when the wounded Sam is giving instructions to Vincent on how to retract a bullet lodged on his side. This one sequence features the brilliant British actor Michel Londsdale ("The Bride Wore Black") as a doctor whose hobby is designing samurai figures.

"Ronin" has too many chase sequences, and a scantily designed plot, but it's always enticing, breathtaking, and watchable. The cast is watchable, too, and De Niro's commanding presence (playing an action hero for the first time) and Frankenheimer's alert direction make up for the brief lapses in plausibility.

Exorcising a mental illness

THE EXORCISM OF EMILY ROSE (2005)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

"The Exorcism of Emily Rose" is trying to make the case that possession might indeed be real. I understand that the fictional "The Exorcist" wanted to show possession as a nightmarish reality (and it made its case as harrowingly realistic as it could be, even though I do not believe in possession) but "Emily Rose" is supposedly based on real events, and therein lies the rub.

Father Richard Moore (Tom Wilkinson) has been accused of negligent homicide in the death of Emily Rose (Jennifer Carpenter), a college student who may have been possessed by demons. Her death happened during the exorcism, but was she actually possessed or did she suffer from some form of psychosis and epilepsy? Most people who suffer from such horrid conditions don't suddenly have their eyes turn black or contort their bodies in ways that could result in spinal breakage, nor do they utter foreign languages they have never spoken. Aye, but therein once again lies the rub. Emily has learned other languages, especially German, so there is the distinct possibility she is going through a psychosis. That is what agnostic defense lawyer, Erin Bruner (Laura Linney), is initially trying to prove until she decides to prove that Emily really was possessed. Father Moore believes so, and maybe Erin wants to believe it. The prosecution feels otherwise.

"Exorcism of Emily Rose" is not a full-throttle, quaking-in-your-boots horror flick but it does have its nailbiting moments (it is based on the true case of Anneliese Michel). Mostly, it is your basic courtroom drama with consistent flashbacks to Emily's condition (and only fleetingly before the madness began). But the movie never makes a distinction between the possession and the epilepsy - it is assumed Emily was definitely possessed. I wish the movie gave us a choice and it is hard to counter the notion that six demons took possession of her body. When Emily jumps out of a window from the second floor of the house and runs into a barn, we can't assume it is anything but. When Erin Bruner hears the tape recorder play itself or her watch stops at 3 am (the devil's hour), there is no mistaking the Devil is at play here.

Fascinating and intriguing and often intensely frightful minus any gore (unless you can't handle Emily eating bugs), "Exorcism of Emily Rose" is a decent horror flick and an absorbing courtroom drama (unusual mix for this kind of schlock). Jennifer Carpenter delivers a sonic boom to the nerves - she is startlingly effective and made me have goosebumps. I only wish that since this is based on true events, we got a more evenhanded exploration of any medical condition that could explain Emily Rose's outbursts.