This movie can kiss my butt

 NATIONAL LAMPOON'S 

CHRISTMAS VACATION (1989)
Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

I was a huge fan of Chevy Chase for years, at least back in the 80's thru the 90's. I was also a fan of the first two "Vacation" films. I loved the sweetness of the Griswold family and the comedy of errors centering on their every move on their disastrous family trips. "National Lampoon's Christmas Vacation" has got the sweetness factor of the Griswold family, and hardly any laughs. 

Part of the problem of this movie, lazily written by John Hughes (based on a story of his called "Christmas '59"), is that the Griswolds do not actually go on vacation - they stay home! That wouldn't be such a detriment unless some farcical situations arose from Clark Griswold (Chevy Chase, looking more stiff and bored than in 1989's earlier sequel release, "Fletch Lives") and his insatiable need to light up the homestead so it can, I don't know, look like the Northern Star that can be seen from the International Space Station? Nevertheless, the gags are so shopworn, so obvious that nothing comes of them. Clark falls from the roof while stapling Christmas lights! Not a big laugh. Other gags include Clark getting hit with floorboards while locked in the attic, or racing on some makeshift sled down one too many snowy slope hills. There's also Clark setting up a humongous Christmas tree in the living room where all the branches break windows. Some gags are just mean-spirited such as a cat getting electrocuted, or a dog eating way too much food and making gurgling noises under the dinner table.

The film has no spark of inspiration - it is so lifeless and unfunny that it sits on the screen and we wait for something to happen. Chevy is at his best when talking to his wife, Ellen (Beverly D'Angelo), about having a nice Christmas at home - D'Angelo has one moment that gets a half a second of a chuckle where she grabs Chevy's crotch! But do we really want a Clark Griswold who is nice and winsome - when he starts to get erratic towards the end, it feels cheap and unearned compared to his wild antics at Wally World in the first film. Other than that, we get reliable pros like Julia Louis-Dreyfus as an irate neighbor, returnee Randy Quaid as as the uninvited Cousin Eddy, and some TV and film legends such as Diane Ladd, E.G. Marshall, Doris Roberts, Mae Questel (yes, Betty Boop's voice actor) and John Randolph appearing but they are mostly bereft of wit. And the Griswold kids (played by different actors in all these movies of alternating body size and shape) leave much to be desired (sorry to Juliette Lewis and Johnny Galecki but they are boring). 

"National Lampoon's Christmas Vacation" has inexplicably become a Christmas classic and many viewers seem to enjoy it. I see nothing here other than gags prepped for jokes without delivery or payoff. Like the film's climax involving a toxic sewer line and the kidnapping of a corporate boss, it is as stale as year-old fruit cake and as soporific as Chevy Chase's delivery of dialogue like "Kiss my ass." This movie can kiss mine.

We all want to believe in something

 THE MYSTERY OF D.B. COOPER (2020)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

There are at least two rare events in the annals of 20th century high-profile crimes that have yet to be solved. There is the identity of the Zodiac Killer and the mystery to end all mysteries - the actual identity of D.B. Cooper. The name almost approaches mythic status - essentially D.B. Cooper disappeared from an airplane as he jumped out with a parachute and bags of money back in the 1970's. His disappearance is more than a mystery at this point - it is nothing short of unbelievable and yet the kick you get out of this legendary air pirate is to consistently ask yourself: how did he do it and how did he get away with it. "The Mystery of D.B. Cooper" is not to meant to solve the mystery so much as deepen it - to extrapolate the truths of a legend whom we will probably never be able to identify. It is an all-consuming legend, the type of hijacking that remains the only unsolved one and that is the thrill of it.

1971 was the year and the icy winds of a frigid Thanksgiving night in the Oregon wilderness is the place where D.B. Cooper parachuted to. Or did he? Did he die while parachuting due to those 200 mph icy winds from a 727? Why was money later found 40 miles away from the projected parachute jump? Questions linger as we encounter three different possibilities. One involves a con man named Duane Weber who made a confession on his deathbed that he was Dan Cooper. His wife Jo had no idea what he was talking about yet she pieced together information from one happy photo where Duane had proclaimed victory over something, though it is not clear what exactly. Jo tells how he would pass the  woodsy areas by car, an area he was overly familiar with. Did he find his money that he had buried somewhere and not share it with her or what? 

Another involves an uncle who stopped coming over for family dinners at Thanksgiving and Christmas named L.D. Cooper. The niece Marla (who says she is often seen as a Laura Palmer-lookalike, you know the dead girl from "Twin Peaks") is certain without a doubt that he is the D.B. Cooper because her uncle allegedly discussed some plan before Thanksgiving while actively hunting for turkeys! Could Marla be wrong, though it turns out her father admitted the uncle was the man himself?

Another involves a transgender woman who admitted she was D.B. Cooper to Ron and Pat Forman, or least expressed concern over any criticism of the Cooper man. The Formans met this transgendered woman on an airstrip - her car would often be parked in the middle of it which raises lots of questions. She turns out to be an accomplished pilot so who knows.

"The Mystery of D.B. Cooper" does an excellent job of setting up the skyjacking itself along with interviews of flight stewardesses and airline pilots who lived through this hijacking (the college kid who observed Cooper sitting across from him is a fascinating bit of business and there is something eerie about his observations). Then it segues to the claims made by seemingly broken families about the real D.B. Cooper. Any one of these stories could be true (not to mention Richard McCoy, Jr. who hijacked a plane a few months after Cooper did yet got caught, escaped from prison a few times and later died in a shootout. He bares a likeness to D.B. yet it turns out the FBI ruled him out as the suspect). What gives the doco a major push towards some semblance of credibility is that director John Dower allows these alleged claims to come alive - any one of them could be a separate subject for a whole documentary. Whether you believe these people or not is not nearly as important as how they are conveyed - these are real people who have possibly encountered an extraordinary individual. 

I found no fault with "Mystery of D.B. Cooper." The film has a charge of urgency to it, of something potent about this unusual crime that still remains unsolved. Its potency is partially derived from its pre-9/11 context in its depiction of the ease by which passengers used to be able to board a plane (heck, Dan Cooper might not even have been this guy's name). Ultimately, the film is about searching for something, to prove one's worth and perhaps that is why there is such an indelible impression made by someone who everyone could identify with, if not necessarily the crime itself. Notable author and D.B. Cooper expert Bruce Smith ("DB Cooper and the FBI – A Case Study of America’s only Unsolved Skyjacking") says that we all want to be Cooper, to be tough enough to get away with it because there isn't much in the way of opportunity. Or as another writer puts it: "It gives us all a chance to believe in something."

Rituals, the Devil, oh, poor me, I am such a bore

 LOOK WHAT'S HAPPENED TO ROSEMARY'S BABY (1976)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

A TV-movie sequel to a classic, terrifying horror film about a coven of Satanists who conjure the Devil to rape poor Rosemary (Mia Farrow) is asking for trouble. After all, how can anyone even top what director Roman Polanski achieved when he mixed black humor and unimaginable (and imagined) unspeakable horrors in a first-class film of absolute restraint? Look no further than the 1976 sequel itself titled "Look What's Happened to Rosemary's Baby" which features good actors cast adrift in a movie that loses focus. 

Patty Duke is Rosemary Woodhouse (obviously replacing Mia), who is sheltering her son Adrian, now a young 8-year-old boy, from the Castavets who conjure the forces of evil to locate Rosemary. The Castavets first fail, then they succeed as they take the boy and Rosemary is left in a possessed bus never to be heard from again (Say what?) The Castavets are a strange couple played by Oscar-winning Ruth Gordon (reprising her Oscar win from the original) as the colorful Minnie and Ray Milland replacing the creepier Sidney Blackmer from the original as Roman - missing this time is their hideously gaudy outfits which made them seem initially less evil. 

Then the film flash-forwards to a twenty-something Adrian who works at a casino where he sings and plays guitar with a third-rate rock and roll band! This weary, gaunt Adrian is played by the amazing Stephen McHattie who always holds the screen with his steely gaze but he's not asked to do much other than gaze and appear weary. At one point, he goes berserk after being subjected to a ritual by the Castevets and is seen in whiteface makeup and red painted dashes on his eyelids as he takes control of the stage and the band to do nothing other than...gaze. A cross is burned into his skin earlier in the film and perhaps that may be the reason why (SPOILER ALERT) he might not be the Devil's Son and can't be subjected to rituals, though this is a dangling plot hole at best. 

All the actors are adequate (including Donna Mills as a far too concerned nurse) yet there is nothing to gravitate towards, no character to identify with and not enough story. The Castavets had already set their sights on Adrian since his conception so what more is there to say? That they can't control him yet he is the Devil's Son? McHattie is wasted here, seemingly lost and uncertain to resonate as a guy who realizes he is the Spawn of Satan. Sometimes you are not sure if he realizes it and quickly the film becomes more than a chore to sit through. And an anticlimactic ending leaves more questions than answers and practically negates the entire film not to the mention the original film. The film "Rosemary's Baby" sent a fervent chill to the bone that burned through the screen in its famous last scene. This one will make you wish Rosemary's Baby did not grow up to be such a jaded bore.

High Five on Yuk-Yuk and Still Funny for Benefit of Audience Sequel

 BORAT SUBSEQUENT MOVIEFILM (2020)
Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

Borat is a racist caricature designed by Sacha Baron Cohen to make audiences uncomfortable with a should I/shouldn't I laugh at the most inopportune moments. We laugh along with Borat because he is a sweet and profoundly ignorant individual from Kazakshtan, who loves America and their racist and, in the case of this delayed sequel, anti-feminist ideals. The first "Borat" film was an explosion of laughs and near-comic hysteria that could leave you nonplussed at how people (often real-life figures) responded to Borat. In those days, Borat was a cult figure on television and Sacha could get away with not being recognized. In 2020, Borat is his most famous creation and it is harder to hoodwink people. This insanely funny sequel is almost as crass and sick a joke as the original and it has many laughs, though it can't quite outclass the once freshly minted original. 

Borat is back in America ("HIGH FIVE!") and has to get his 15-year-old daughter Tatur, (played by a pitch-perfect 24-year-old Maria Bakalova) married to a wealthy gentleman like either Vice President Mike Pence or President Trump's lawyer and former NYC Mayor Rudy Giuliani (oh, the horror). If Borat doesn't accomplish this mission as issued by the country's premier, he will be executed in his own country of Kazakhstan. Borat, the simpleton who is hated in his own country, keeps his daughter in a bubble from what he deems as western culture realities like a woman owning her own business, a woman driving a car or, worse yet, being kept in a cage! In fact, in one of many uncomfortable moments, Borat buys a sturdy cage for her (and the owner doesn't see an issue with this). In another instance, he buys her a cake with an anti-semitic phrase. In yet another instance that has to be seen to be believed, he dances with her at a Georgian debutante hall where she discloses prior to the dance that she has, um, "moon blood." Scenes like this made me feel a little nauseous, perhaps more so than expected even though I knew gross humor was forthcoming. The nausea works overtime because the other attendees of this ball have no idea this is all a prank. Funny, yes, uncomfortable to the point of covering your eyes? Yes, indeed.

Yet there are even more moments that will make you wince and shake your head in disbelief, especially at how Borat often gets away with it. A CPAC gathering with Vice President Mike Pence as a speaker has Borat entering the building wearing a KKK hoodie, and then he dresses up in a Donald Trump costume carrying Tutar on his back as he offers her to Pence! Ironically, entering the CPAC wearing a KKK outfit is okay (despite some side-eyed glances) yet calling out Pence while dressed as Trump will have you escorted out of the building! In fact, the last half of this Borat sequel has several hijinks involving Trump loyalists, some who are armed with AK-47's, at a March-For-Your-Rights rally and two Qanon believers - Borat is in disguise as a country singer singing about the "Wuhan Flu" to a crowd who chants along since it advocates giving the flu to Dr. Fauci or President Obama. Scary, discomfiting, unsettling, and hilarious.

“Borat Subsequent Moviefilm: Delivery of Prodigious Bribe to American Regime for Make Benefit Once Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan” (this was its original title) is not for everyone nor is it meant to be (I am not sure it is for me though I love what Sacha does). These "Borat" films and the controversial "Bruno" are created by a wild satirist with a hint of madness whose sole purpose is to wake people up out of their doldrums in America and see that their racism and sexism are practically inherent. Some early scenes with Tatur depicted as a caged animal who looks like a werewolf from a 1930's circus was too much to bear for me and not very funny. But that is early on and trimmed thankfully before getting to the good stuff. Despite some jerky moments, "Borat Subsequent Moviefilm" still hits its intended political targets with a few belly laughs and some yuk-yuks for good measure. What is fascinating is that Sacha also sees the growing change in Borat's beliefs and that he feels his daughter should not be exploited for anyone's benefit, especially Kazakhstan. Either you see this mockumentary as a semi-brilliant satire with a touch of humanity or an elongated sick joke preying on unsuspecting folks. I see it both ways. 

It is Flame on and Lights out at a Catholic School

 THE POSSESSED (1977)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

In the opening frames of the mildly-accented riffs of spooky goings-on of this TV horror film, James Farentino is a priest who seems indifferent to the pulpit. That is because he is an alcoholic, nursing that bottle closer to his heart than his own religious faith. Some of these shots of him leading the congregation mirror the exact composition of shots from "The Exorcist" (not excluding his pale face and bloodshot eyes). A tragic car accident ensues leaving Farentino dead. Then his spirit arises as he outstretches his arms. Good God in heaven, what are we in for? If this sounds like a third-rate, bottom-of-the-barrel "Exorcist" clone, you'd almost be right except the rest of the film is actually a low-key and quietly absorbing horror film with uniformly unsettling atmosphere and theatrics that do terrify.

Something's rotten to the core or should I say there is a burnt smell emanating from the Helen Page School, a Catholic private girls' college in Salem, Oregon, and it isn't bad piping or a grill being used by the janitor in the basement causing it. No, objects like paper mysteriously burn into flames. Sometimes an entire room goes up in flames. Sometimes a student's graduation gown not only goes up in flames but burns her legs (Diana Scarwid plays that one student, suffering worse pain than she did as Joan Crawford's daughter in the semi-camp classic "Mommie Dearest). A biology schoolteacher (Harrison Ford, in one of his most gentlest performances pre-"Star Wars" fame) secretly meets one of his students at night and, you know, flame on is around the corner. What on earth is causing all this? 

What sets this TV movie of the week above the rest are the sincere, layered performances. Ford, as aforementioned, shows a smitten side that was rarely seen in a Ford performance even in those days. Farentino is effectively subdued in his pursuit of whatever is causing the ignition of flames in and around the campus and giving everyone the third degree. Claudette Nevins playing a teacher, Ellen, shows a remarkable sensitivity as a mother of one student, Weezie (Ann Dusenberry), and her worries about the odd occurrences. Also worth noting is Ellen's stepsister, Helen Page school's headmistress (Joan Hackett), who may harbor more than a few secrets - we fear for her safety and also feel she is coming apart at the seams.

The chilling finale where a confrontation at the school's pool between demon and exorcist occurs is fraught with some tension because, believe it or not, I had no idea what was going to happen next (I didn't even think that Farentino was an exorcist though clearly he is more than human). For a Devil picture concerning a rather askew and radical setting for a possession, I felt my skin crawl and begin to shiver. A creepy film for an evening screening around Halloween time. WARNING: Make sure your candles are not lit! 

Alternate Futures are what we make of them

 TERMINATOR: DARK FATE (2019)
Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

When I head there was yet another "Terminator" sequel headed to cinemas, I thought that the sci-fi thriller series had to eventually lose steam, right? How many more times will terminators be sent from the future to kill someone related to Sarah Connor? There may not be any limits because "Terminator 3" was fitfully exciting and "Terminator Genysis" found some new wrinkles that still made it watchable even though they came up short next to the masterful, towering achievement that was "Terminator 2" - still the very best sequel and a great movie in its own right. Still, I am a fan of the "Terminator" mythology so when word came out that Sarah Connor was not only returning but that she would be played by the original actress, Linda Hamilton, I felt something was clicking and they might come up with a good, time-twisting story. In many ways, "Dark Fate" might be the same-old, same-old but it is so deeply impactful in its own right because the characters rise above the machines and the wow factor of tremendous, eye-filling, thunderous action scenes. "Dark Fate" is the true sequel to the original "Terminators" according to James Cameron (who said the same thing about "Genysis" but never mind) - this is the titanic movie sequel I've been waiting for. Holy cinematic hell, this "Terminator" movie is a blast of cyberkinetic thrills and characters of emotional heft whose future is on hold.

This time, we got an advanced liquid metallic terminator known as the Rev-9 that can split into two separate cyborgs, the other is its cyborg endoskeleton. We got a female half-human, half robotic (or augmented) future soldier of a different resistance, Grace (Mackenzie Davis) who travels through time to save and protect a young Mexico City woman. Oh, wait, there has to be more to this right? Naturally, the return of the one and only Sarah Connor (Linda Hamilton, tough-as-nails and hard-bitten) whose mission is to track down terminators and destroy them. Wait a minute, and we also got Arnold Schwarzenegger back as a different kind of terminator, one whose mission was to once kill someone Sarah loves (you might all know this spoiler by now) and then live the rest of his cyborg days as a loving family man who runs a drapery business! Say what?

Let's backtrack: Sarah Connor is alive and well because this sequel ignores all previous entries after Part 2 (Part 3 indicated she died). Secondly, there is no more Skynet but some alternative Resistance that has spider-like Terminators and, showing how bleak futures can still exist, a post-nuclear holocaust thanks to nuclear strikes against an AI known as Legion. And yet we learn that the T-800 terminator from Part 2 who protected Sarah and her future leader of a son was not the only one out and about - several T-800 terminators were sent to actually kill her son, John Connor (obviously at different points in time, though if they destroyed the nuclear holocaust future then how are terminators still being sent from that future post-"Terminator 2." Oh, hell, whatever, contrived but still a fun thought). 

Nevertheless, the main focus of "Terminator: Dark Fate" is not been-there-done-that Sarah Connor but rather the developing bond between Grace and Natalia Reyes as Daniella "Dani" Ramos, the target of the REV-9 terminator. Dani suffers a lot of emotional trauma between the deaths of her father and her brother, and Grace has had trauma in her, um, past which is really her future. Abandoned child from that alternate future who became a hell of a soldier, Grace is saved from imminent death by getting augmented. Dani works at an automobile plant though nothing, not even her brother being replaced by a self-contained robot, will begin to compare to being hunted by the deadliest terminator in the entire series. This REV-9 is a shapeshifting marvel of a killing machine that can split itself and conjure deadly weapons with its hands. It will take this these three women, not to mention the family-friendly T-800 Arnie, to combat and destroy the machine of the future.

There are many surprises in "Terminator: Dark Fate" - just when I thought I had seen enough of these elongated chase scenes in this series, the opening chase had me riveted. I don't know the secret other than the human characters were more realistic and vulnerable so I felt for their safety when being chased by the REV-9. The special-effects are tremendous and super-duper awesome in their staging and breathtaking thrills - you get your money's worth for sheer spectacle of explosions and hand-to-hand-to-machine combat. What is most surprising about "Dark Fate" is the depth of emotion given to Dani (Natalia Reyes is amazingly good as a family-oriented woman who begins to develop the backbone of a warrior) and Grace (a touching performance by Davis), two women facing insurmountable odds against their future and their past. Linda Hamilton adds the sparkle of cynicism as a warrior herself, she drinks heavily and loves potato chips but her past still clings to her and, thus, she identifies with Dani's unfortunate predicament. 

"Terminator: Dark Fate" might occasionally give you pause with story elements that seems askew (Schwarzenegger's T-800 plotline will either make you laugh or wince) and obviously it is a formulaic picture yet the formula still works. Mexico and the implied political points about that country and immigration add the icing to the cake. Unlike some sequels, this one engages as much with its heart and emotion as it does with thrill-happy action spectacles. 

Gently poking small-town politics

 IRRESISTIBLE (2020)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

Satirizing politics in a nation overcome by radical division and incessant divisiveness further caused by social media is a tough nut to crack. For one, there are too many comedic political TV commentators who focus and pounce on the ridicule set forth by everyone at 1600 Pennsylvania. How can you lampoon a politician when, in the age of Trump, they are kind of lampooning themselves. Jon Stewart, former TV's host for "The Daily Show," attempts to lampoon the politics of a small, forgotten town that nobody cares about except every four years. Admirable as a comedy of restraint that doesn't reduce townsfolk to stereotypical buffoons, Stewart's "Irresistible" is still fairly mild though consistently funny taking potshots at how elections are run. 

After the Democratic Hillary Clinton loses in the 2016 Presidential race, some time has passed and Democratic Party campaign consultant Gary Zimmer (perfectly cast Steve Carrell) is struck by a viral video of a stubborn Marine Colonel Jack Hastings (also perfectly cast and highly underrated actor Chris Cooper) who speaks out at a town hall meeting against the new immigration policies. We first see the actual town hall meeting and then the viral video and Zimmer has his A HA! moment. In order to win back voters and show Democrats have values that extend to small towns like Deerlaken, Wisconsin, Zimmer wants Colonel Hastings to run for mayor against Republican incumbent Mayor Braun (Brent Sexton). Never mind that the RNC is funding Braun and that Zimmer's ruthless rival (Rose Byrne) is ready to start a showdown of Fox News propaganda proportions.   

There is a nostalgic factor running through "Irresistible" and it is in the minutiae of a small town. Everyone goes about their business, not looking to fight each other but rather accept each other wholeheartedly (when Zimmer is first introduced to the local townsfolk, he tries to curry favor by saying he had once been in Madison. Their response: "Madison is not Wisconsin"). The local coffee shop has prepared sweets and coffee with two sugars and milk for Zimmer every morning (that is not how he takes it). The Colonel's upbeat daughter (Mackenzie Davis) has a winsome quality about her - she can hold her own against this Washington left-winger without much help. Even the Colonel is not too hard-bitten about life, though he suspiciously has little to say in his campaign speeches other than big money rules (that suspicion figures in an ending that had me surprised). The Braun and Zimmer supporters are not angry, divisive folk - they just want their town to thrive during increasingly difficult times. Director and writer Jon Stewart is not so much taking a page from 1972's "The Candidate" - he's crossing into the small town idealism of the "Welcome to Mooseport" variety where strength follows by example of loyalty to family.

"Irresistible" is hard to dislike, it has ample charm and a sweet innocent quality to it (even the Fox news reporters are not so unappealing as much as they are clueless). Yet the movie is never aiming to be sharp and incisive in its skewering - it pokes at the demonized politics run by financial interests but it never cuts it and leaves it as an open wound which we all know it is. From any other director, I might have expect a gentleness but not from abrasive Jon Stewart. Or maybe Stewart is just casually saying as he did when he finished his last "Daily Show" episode many years back: "Bullshit is everywhere."

Not bad yet Jack Black and Zooey Deschanel would've launched a better movie

FAILURE TO LAUNCH (2006)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

(Reviewed in 2007)

Sometimes there is a movie that pops up that doesn't work on any level, yet it still surprises you in the

end. Hollywood has its share of such passable follies, such as "Boys and Girls" (yes,

that Jason Biggs comedy). Notably romantic comedies can fall under such a pattern. "Failure to Launch" looks like a cookie-cutter, cut-and-paste romantic comedy that shouldn't work because

it looks like any other romantic comedy. Yet, for some reason unbeknownst to me, this movie got under my skin. Who knew?

"Failure to Launch" stars Matthew McConaughey as Trip, a 35-year-old boat broker who seems to have everything he wants in life. He is carefree, loves the idea of being in love, has his
own house, his parents cook his meals and do his laundry for him and, wait a second. No, he does not own his own house at all. He lives with his parents (played by the charming Terry
Bradshaw and Kathy Bates)! Trip has never moved out! When he brings a date over to his bedroom, he has sex before being interrupted by his dad and, well, the date is supposed to be horrified that Trip still lives with his parents. It is an easy maneuver for a break up.

Trip's parents, however, are tired of their son living at home. So they hire a "professional interventionist," Paula (the always electric Sarah Jessica Parker) to date Trip and pretend to fall
in love with him so he moves out! Of course, this movie has an idea that hasn't been considered - what if the parents just told Trip to move out! Ah, but that would be a different movie altogether and would effectively delete the Parker character and her offbeat, kill-a-mockingbird-with-no-shame roommate
(Zooey Deschanel)!

"Failure to Launch" is hardly anything but a completely formulaic and foreseeable comedy at its every turn. A little surprise here or there would've been welcome, including more scenes with Paula's kooky roommate. Too many scenes focus on Trip's buddies' who of course, well, get wind of what Paula is really up to. There are also scenes of mammals biting Trip...I know why they exist in terms
of the main character's evolution but they nevertheless feel distracting. And McConaughey, a handsome, charismatic actor, seems miscast in the role of a 35-year-old slacker (at first glance, the part seems tailor made for Jack Black). That is until you discover why he lives with his parents.
Plus, his timing is impeccable when he utters the only F-word in the entire PG-13 movie.

"Failure to Launch" has a few funny lines, some ideal chemistry between McConaughey and Parker, a hysterical butt shot with Terry Bradshaw, and a sappy finish that seems earned, no matter how many times you have witnessed it in the past. It is an agreeable, pleasing comedy that leaves me with a certain impression. It is Zooey Deschanel (who was wonderful in "The Good Girl"). Give this girl a chance to make a romantic comedy with Jack Black, and you really might have something than the normal romantic confection.

Us usses got to save the world

 BILL AND TED FACE THE MUSIC (2020)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

Although the first two "Bill and Ted" films were enjoyable in their own spirited, upbeat way, I never expected them to return. 1991 was the last time we saw the dim-witted pair of would-be musicians who are supposed to change the world with their music and, in those days, sequels were frowned upon. Look at it this way - it took 12 years before there was a Terminator 3. Most other sequels ended up straight to VHS doom past a number 2 or 3 (Friday the 13th and Nightmare on Elm Street were the exceptions). So I was surprised to hear the most eminent return of the bogus musicians returning to cinema screens with their trademarked air guitar solos in 2020. Of course we are going through a pandemic so they are only in a few screens, mostly streaming online. Yet here we are and it is fittingly called "Bill and Ted Face the Music," an even more upbeat and funnier entry in this now Holy (?) trilogy. Most stupendous yet not quite excellent - there are a few lulls yet it never fails to entertain and share in Bill and Ted's joy of writing the perfect song even if they have to cross through time and space to do it.

In this less than excellent suburban world of Bill and Ted, they are now middle-aged dudes with wives and daughters living in a nice house! Sounds excellent yet not quite. Their wives, formerly princesses from the year 1408 (must see the original to understand all this), are unhappy and the nonintellectual duo of Bill and Ted believe in couples therapy where the word "we" is included in their love for their respective spouses. Meanwhile, while singing pretentious songs that even hair metal bands or Air Supply would find most discomfiting dude at a wedding, the world is about to collapse with the space time continuum losing its footing. Jesus, for example, walks on water while George Washington is crossing the Delaware and other notable historical figures end up in periods of time where they don't belong. Bill and Ted have got to write their most precious, prophesied song that will save the world, God willing, and it is Rufus's time-traveling daughter, Kelly (Kristen Schaal), arriving in an egg-shaped time machine, who tells them they have 77 minutes to write it or the world vanishes. So this means the bodacious pair have to get in their phone booth time machine and run into their future selves to steal the song from themselves! (Note: if none of you have seen the original Bill and Ted flick, Rufus was the cool dude from the future played by the late George Carlin). Why 77 minutes I am not clear and since they are time-traveling, oh, hell, I do not watch these movies for logic. Most illogical to think that way, dude.

Meanwhile Bill and Ted's daughters, who certainly have a knack for music history, Billie and Thea, travel in Kelly's time machine and procure the talents of Jimi Hendrix, Louis Armstrong, Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, Ling Lun, and a prehistoric woman playing drums with bones! There is a twist here but I won't reveal it. There is fun to be had here though I wish I saw more of these musicians on screen - not enough is done to exploit their appeal. I couldn't help but laugh at Jimi Hendrix trying to one-up Mozart's piano-playing with his electric fingers touching the guitar, but I wish there were more scenes like that. In fact, the film falls a bit flat getting to the all-star performance of the song that will change and make for a better world. We do get an extended Hell sequence that has some comical bits, especially the return of William Sadler as Death playing the guitar, and yet having the gang all die and turn up there feels a bit out of tune with the rest of the film. Hell and Death were more engaging in "Bill and Ted's Bogus Journey." 

"Bill and Ted Face the Music" is still definitely fun and, in key moments such as the couples therapy sessions or Bill referring to himself and Ted's future selves as "usses," funnier than the first two films. Keanu Reeves can still play a dim-witted fool better than anyone and yet we laugh with him, not at him, Same with Alex Winter who is a colorful scene-stealer especially when he and Keanu play their future counterparts which range from musclebound prisoners to Brit-accented, spoiled musicians. Keanu and Winter bring a sense of joy and zest with their energized performances - it is actually mind-blowing how much fun it is so see a less sullen Keanu Reeves. Almost as good (and you can almost smell a future spin-off) are Samara Weaving as Thea and Brigette Lundy-Paine as Billie and their mannerisms perfectly encapsulate the expressions of Reeves and Winter yet still developing their own personalities - they turn out to be smarter than their dads! That's progress, well done dudes.

Remarkable yet undernourished saga conclusion

STAR WARS: 

THE RISE OF SKYWALKER (2019)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

"Star Wars" fandom will exist for as long as it wants to - it will never die. It did not die after 1983's "Return of the Jedi" nor did it wither in the wind after 2005's "Revenge of the Sith." So, despite the glaring flaws and lack of proper continuity in this latest "Star Wars" flick, "The Rise of Skywalker," never assume that the fandom will disappear after this film is long gone from our consciousness because it won't be. It can't die - you know "Star Wars" fans (like myself) will still ponder what might have been with Episode IX - the last film in the Skywalker saga that finalizes the saga but not as satisfyingly as it could have been. 

Speaking of not dying, any dead Jedi or Sith Lord can speak and materialize and physically interact with the real world. Since when? Since this movie. So we get the reemergence of Emperor Palpatine (Ian McDiarmid) who is now some Phantom Emperor attached to an electrical apparatus that keeps him alive. Did he not die at the end of "Return of the Jedi"? Yes, he did, in blazing swirls of lights thanks to Darth Vader. It is never clear if the Emperor was cloned or just simply resurrected, though by whom? I can't say, nor will the Emperor. He wants to start the Final Order, in other words retcon the First Order. Huh? Well, this monstrously evil Sith Lord has somehow created a fleet of Star Destroyers that emerge from underneath the ground. Needless to say, the equally evil Kylo Ren (Adam Driver) wishes to destroy the Emperor but not kill the lovely and fiercely powerful Rey (Daisy Ridley). Rey is now being trained by Governor Leia (the late Carrie Fisher, shown in brief glimpses culled from "Force Awakens" footage) although, I must ask, what kind of training does Rey need? This young woman is a powerful Jedi as she runs and jumps across chasms, races across desert fields and flips over Tie-Fighters dismantling them with her lightsaber and, in a new use of the Force, can actually stop a spaceship from taking off!!! Training? I should think not.

Other character-oriented areas to nitpick in "Rise of Skywalker": the resourceful Finn (John Boyega) with a penchant for firing lasers from gun turrets is reduced to someone who merely cares about Rey and Rose (though in "The Last Jedi" a relationship seemed to be blooming between Finn and mechanic/Resistance fighter Rose but thanks to twits on twitterverse, Kelly Marie Tran who played Rose suffered a huge, foolish backlash thus limiting her role in this film). The one character who I expected to learn more about is this sequel trilogy's Han Solo-type, the resourceful and enigmatic fighter pilot Poe (Oscar Issac), who is given less character details than Han (seriously, aside from "The Force Awakens," how much did anyone really know about Han Solo?) I thought Poe was just a heroic Resistance pilot but it turns out he was also a smuggler of spice - hmm, Han Soloing it much? There is also the welcome return of Lando Calrissian (Billy Dee Williams), that smooth-talking gent and scoundrel and a heckuva pilot of the Millennium Falcon and, yet, his appearance in this film makes precious little sense and is far too limited  And, oh, why go on. Of course, aside from certain other characters, Williams imbues this film with a sense of joy, recalling his past exploits and his charm in the original trilogy.

There are some tremendously thrilling cameos by Mark Hamill as Force Ghost Luke Skywalker (speaking of a Force Ghost's physical interaction, he holds a lightsaber and levitates the X-Wing fighter) and Harrison Ford as Han Solo, relegated as a memory of Ben Solo/Kylo Ren's. So much nitpicking, is the film good? Of course! Daisy Ridley takes her character Rey and makes her come into her own by the final reel - a very moving last scene that ties up all memories of previous Star Wars flicks in one stunning shot and one stunning admission which will not be revealed. Ridley fascinates because we also wonder what she is thinking and sometimes we get scared for her, such as her vision of the Dark Side of Rey. Adam Driver is hell on wheels as Kylo Ren and I love how he fixes his helmet and tries to threaten the Emperor and just about everyone else, though the resolution between him and Rey that invokes "Return of the Jedi" feels more imitative than conclusive. 

The special-effects are naturally terrific. I like the ominous lightning strikes on the planet of Exegol where the Emperor resides - a sort of gloom-and-doom throne of the forbidden with his hooded followers looking on. The star destroyers that litter the night sky of Exegol is also a great image. Kylo fighting Rey on remnants of the Death Star in a rampaging sea is suspenseful (note how she can cure deathly wounds, a new wrinkle on the mystery of the Force). "Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker" is visually splendid and remarkable to watch - it has the sonic sweep of images and the tremendous action scenes of what one expects from Star Wars. There is something soulful and fundamentally deep about Rey's discovery of her ancestral lineage, her complex feelings about Kylo and her need to find her own identity. It makes the film special enough to linger despite how severely undernourished the rest of it is.  

Smug Brat Packers who somehow keep things lit

ST. ELMO'S FIRE (1985)

Revisited by Jerry Saravia

When I think of the occasionally MTV-flashy style of director Joel Schumacher, who died after a year of battling cancer in June of 2020, I think of films as diverse as 1983's marijuana-stoked, hazily comedic "D.C. Cab"; the diverting if far too romanticized-with-death thriller "Flatliners" with Julia Roberts; the humorous, incredibly entertaining (and glamorous-looking) "The Lost Boys"; the incredibly foolish and contrived cartoon called "Falling Down" with a loony Michael Douglas, and his garish-colored sequel "Batman Forever" and the ill-advised "Batman and Robin" that destroyed the Caped Crusader's cinematic interpretations for almost twenty years. Schumacher always presented, with certain exceptions, good-looking actors in artful poses for a magazine spread rather than a movie, though he has maintained some consistency in knowing how to direct actors. The one Schumacher film that gnaws at me, the first one I thought of when his unfortunate death was announced, is 1985's "St. Elmo's Fire," the last major Brat Pack movie (the only other one was "The Breakfast Club" released the same year). Yes, the one about college graduates from Georgetown that starred equally flashy, glamorous movie stars such as Judd Nelson, Ally Sheedy, Demi Moore, Emilio Estevez, Andrew McCarthy and Rob Lowe. Well, they were movie stars to some degree yet it was really Demi Moore who branched out and made a startling movie career headlining lead roles (the others did well on their own but the most financially successful was Moore). Nevertheless, something still gets to me about "St. Elmo's Fire" because it is not a good movie yet it is a watchable one with flashes of something humanistic. The dialogue, despite sounding artificial, is memorable in its own way. The actors are not at their best yet they still shine through along with top pros like Mare Winningham and Martin Balsam. Nothing in the film is believable, not one note or characterization excepting by Winningham and Balsam, yet I accept the unbelievability, the degree to which these actors somehow make it seem real enough, I suppose. Or not, I am not sure. What is it about "St. Elmo's Fire" that still makes me want to revisit it? Let's dig.

Judd Nelson is Alec, the sole Republican of the group, wanting to marry architect Leslie (Ally Sheedy) so that he can stop cheating on her. This relationship, by the way, is not the least bit credible though I suppose it is understandable because what the hell does she see in Nelson (nope, it has nothing to do with Alec's political party choice). At the start of the film, saxophonist and womanizing husband (Rob Lowe, who is about as suitably cast as Michael J. Fox was as a working-class rock singer in "Light of Day") is arrested for drunk driving, woos a female paramedic, apologizes to his girlfriend-of-sorts Wendy (mousy-looking Mare Winningham) and is egged on by Alec and his friends. Then we shift to the lives of this group of college graduates facing a mid-life crisis of one sort or another. Kirby (Emilio Estevez) works at the favorite hangout of these yuppies, St. Elmo's Bar, abandoning medical school in his future since he might be interested in law school, or vice versa. In the meantime, after losing his waiter job, Kirby really wants to impress a doctor (Andie MacDowell) who is on call 24 hours a day. How does he impress? He arrives in a limo, showing off as an attache to a Korean businessman. Kirby is all about money and thinks that is all the doctor ordered. Meanwhile, we got the writer Kevin (Andrew McCarthy), roommates with Kirby, who believes love sucks yet is hopelessly infatuated with Leslie - though everyone falsely believes Kevin is actually in love with Alec! Kevin wants to publish an article on the meaning of life at the Washington Post - I don't think they would care but somehow he miraculously gets published! Oh, Demi Moore plays a flirtatious banker named Jules who drinks too much and is obsessed with her grandmother's funeral arrangements. Last but not least is the virginal Wendy (Mare Winningham) who pines for Billy, though this relationship in hindsight doesn't make much sense either.

Yet "St. Elmo's Fire" still manages to be entertaining fluffy nonsense. The ending is moving in its own way despite it not being warranted (Billy shows a more compassionate side when he is not drinking). I like the film technically - it is well-made and has stunning close-up shots particularly of Sheedy. Schumacher clearly loves his actors and often frames them as a group - I think he also likes these characters though some are smug and self-satisfied. Wendy is the one character who wants to break free of her family's wealth and help people as a social worker - she wants responsibilities and wants to be a mature adult. Except for Leslie, the rest of the group is eager to party, cheat, and lie and generally make fools of themselves. Materialism and money are considered attainable virtues and what would you expect from an 80's movie like this one? The ending seems to suggest that maintaining friends is more important. I hate to say it but the artfully glamorous way in which these yuppies are presented still sucks me in - it is entrancing though I am not sure the movie works at all. This is the first guilty-pleasure movie I can think of where I feel ashamed, not guilty, for liking it.

Chucky as a killer Internet device

CHILD'S PLAY (2019)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

A Vietnamese worker at a doll factory has to make Buddi hi-tech dolls, designed to be lifelong friends for their "masters." The worker is fired by his irate boss, told to finish making the doll before his exit. Then the worker decides, out of spite, to remove all the safety protocols of the doll. Interesting opening until the worker commits suicide by jumping from a window and landing on a car. Why? I don't know. I don't look for much logic in a Chucky movie but this movie, an unnecessary remake of the 1988 film of the same name, has lots of moments that make you go, "huh?" 

Andy is now a 13-year-old hearing-impaired kid (Gabriel Bateman) who has trouble associating with the new kids on the block. His mother, Karen (Aubrey Plaza,) works at ZedMart (I suppose a knockoff of WalMart) which happens to sell those Buddi dolls. Karen loves her son and tries to spice up his days with a new Buddi doll that somehow works by being connected to the Internet and all other working WI-FI devices - think of this new Chucky as the demented doll version of Amazon's Alexa except with spooky eyes that turn red. Chucky wants to please Andy which means that without the doll's safety protocols, it is inspired by watching clips of "Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2" (!) and the doll kills anyone who makes Andy irate. This includes the cat (watch out animal lovers); Karen's bastard of a boyfriend who happens to be married; the maintenance guy who installs surveillance cameras and some in people's houses (not to mention keeping an eye on Karen when she disrobes in the bathroom), etc. We are also introduced to Andy's new friends, an unremarkable bunch of teens, and a curious cop who lives with his mother down the hall from Andy.

Wait a doggone minute - why have so many characters who are barely given much depth? Take Karen's indifferent boyfriend - he's a bastard to her and Andy. That is all there is so it is easy to accept his comeuppance by Chucky, but did it have to be that grisly? The poor guy falls from a ladder, breaks his legs, is practically strangled by Christmas lights and gets his face torn off (thanks to Chucky's imitation of similar grisliness in the Texas Chainsaw Massacre movie.) Then there is the maintenance guy, a sexually deviant creep to be sure, who is stabbed by Chucky on the chest and the legs and then gets sliced up as ground meat by a table saw. Was this necessary? I won't even talk about the cop's mother in a scene that might make anyone squeamish about taking a driver-less Lyft ever again. 

"Child's Play" has able support from Gabriel Bateman as Andy though his actions are often questionably dumb (the severed head as a birthday gift for the cops' mother that can only be opened on his birthday is one for the slasher film books of unbelievably stupid situations). Aside from him, everyone else in this film exists as fresh kills for Chucky except for (SPOILER ALERT) Andy's poor mother. But why would a corporation install safety protocols for a doll that could turn murderously violent if those protocols were not installed? That is a deep question for a movie that is already overcooked in just about every way imaginable. The Chucky doll is creepy (with an added dimension of subtle malice from Mark Hamill's voice) and the film perhaps does the job of a serviceable bloody slasher film. I prefer the tongue-in-cheek attitude of the 1988 original.

Unwatchable one-dimensional Bruce as the shark

JAWS 3-D (1983)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

The original title for what was going to be an actual spoof of "Jaws" was "Jaws 3, People 0," an appropriate title. This stupid, senseless sequel shot in poor 3-D with poorer special-effects and, even worse, a shark with little to no mobility not only moves at a snail's pace it also has no energy. Every shot is static, and that goes for the actors.

There is one scene of vibrant energy between Bess Armstrong, Dennis Quaid and John Putch. Dennis Quaid is one of the engineers of Sea World, Bess plays his girlfriend, a marine biologist, and John Putch plays Quaid's younger brother (the brothers are the Brodys, supposedly the offspring of Chief Brody from the first two films). Putch arrives at Sea World, greets his brother and his girlfriend - it is a scene of harmonic bliss, a sense of real mutual love between them. Other than that, there is an inspired bit where we see a victim struggling inside the mouth of the shark! That is all folks.

"Jaws 3-D" is not a movie - it is a series of scenes searching for a movie. Its only justification for its existence is that, along with the "Amityvilles" and the "Friday the 13ths" of that year, it is in 3-D. Leaving aside three dimensions of its one-dimensional story and characters, the infrequent shark attacks are less fearsome than usual, just minor bloody affairs that wouldn't scare a 9-year-old (the big cut on Lea Thompson's leg, her feature debut by the way, is about as gory as this film gets). Looking back, the first "Jaws" was a sensational thriller with great, colorful characters like Quint (Robert Shaw) who was as crazy as the shark was. "Jaws 2" was a snoozer with occasional support from Roy Scheider who had to carry that inferior sequel on his shoulders. This movie is so lazy, so clumsily patched together that you forget what Lou Gossett Jr.'s role is supposed to be, other than staring with a deadpan look at monitors in a control room. The effects are so shoddy that it all looks dark and murky in the  underwater scenes thus making it hard to decipher one character from the other. In some instances, you can't tell the difference between a shark and a dolphin! Skip this addle-brained sequel and watch the Spielberg classic all over again.

Andromeda Strain with a shot of Rambo

OUTBREAK (1995)

A 2020 Look Back by Jerry Saravia

"Outbreak" is one of those Hollywood earthbound-virus-threatening-humanity flicks that looks a little silly today, in light of the worldwide threat of the Coronavirus. Though based on the book "Crisis in the Hot Zone" which dealt with the horrors of the Ebola virus, the movie starts strong and then segues into some last-minute rescue attempts and incredible foresight from its lead character, a hero with amazing intuitive powers played by none other than Dustin Hoffman. The whole affair is somehow contrived, underwhelming and a bit cheap - trivializing real-life horrors when it comes to an airborne virus that nearly decimates an entire town and threatens to go worldwide. We will get into the silliness that seeps in after some established early scary scenes.

Hoffman is an Army Colonel who is also a disease expert. He gets wind of a virus outbreak in Zaire (the virus is known as the Motaba virus considering its proximity to Motaba River Valley of Zaire), the location of which a similar outbreak had happened 20-plus years earlier and, while wearing a hazmat suit and tracking the area  with a group of scientists, he discovers it is not airborne. Daniels is convinced it will spread like wildfire yet his superior (always a pleasing presence by Morgan Freeman) doesn't want to cause alarm. Nevertheless, the virus does spread through its cute little host, a frosty-haired monkey. First, the virus spreads in a ship headed to America, then some foolish guy (Patrick Dempsey) sells the monkey after already contracting the virus, then a pet store has the monkey, and then the virus enters a movie theater and eventually an entire California town where martial-law is instituted. People get sick with too much expediency and the horror becomes palpable and frightening, at least for a while. The virus is deadly beyond belief, though it has been proven scientifically to be inaccurate, and it not only causes bleeding from the eyes, ears and the mouth but it also liquefies internal organs! This is Ebola times 100. It also develops in your cells within an hour, though again such a virus would take longer (Check for the science behind "Outbreak" and "Contagion" at https://www.thedailybeast.com/how-contagion-pushed-hollywood-to-get-science-right).

The first hour of "Outbreak" is electrifyingly exciting, tense beyond belief and scary. We see how this virus travels and,  through the magic of notable cinematographer Michael Ballhaus ("GoodFellas"), the deadly paths it takes on unsuspecting people as the particles travel through the air infecting everyone is infectious (pardon the pun) cinema. This virus mutates and becomes airborne and even if the science is faulty, the effect these scenes had on me back then resonated and still do today, in light of the respiratory Coronoavirus we have to contend with. Seeing people wearing masks in the town of Cedar Creek brings the realism home, especially all the makeshift hospital beds where patients are dropping like flies. 

"Outbreak," unfortunately, still has the same problems it did 25 years ago - it is "The Andromeda Strain" with an adrenaline shot of "Rambo" action scenes. Yes, Hoffman gets to be an action hero-of-sorts as he improbably convinces two Army pilots not to bomb the town of Cedar Creek to kingdom come. I am sorry, what? How he convinces them is laughable (and I will not divulge it here). We have a few action scenes where Daniels and a daredevil pilot (Cuba Gooding, Jr.), who scoffs at the devastation the virus has wrought, are chased and shot at by Army pilots under the command of  Major General Donald "Donnie" McClintock (Donald Sutherland, who oozes menaces as he always can). McClintock's evil nature is resolved in a scene by Morgan Freeman as Brigadier General Billy Ford, MD that strains credibility. Even further straining credibility is Daniels' amazing ability to generate an antiserum from Brigadier General Ford, who has handily kept the original serum from the Zaire incident of 25 years earlier, and mix it with the monkey's antibodies. All this is done in an hour to save Daniels' former wife, also a disease expert (played with grace by Rene Russo). Logically speaking, this could take longer than an hour (see above article) and the contrivance of tracking down that damn monkey in record time is almost too unbelievable. This would probably take years to do everything that is accomplished in the shortest time span imaginable.

"Outbreak" is entertaining to a fault yet its strong start is diminished by contrived scenes and action elements that do not mesh with what should have been a disturbing, eye-opening thriller.  It assumes that nobody wants to see a deadly airborne virus destroying humanity as a doomsday thriller as the action heroics are brought in to save the day. Who would've thought that it would take a Dustin Hoffman character to save the world. Not this movie critic. And with our current pandemic and the race to find a vaccine that could logically take a year if not years, "Outbreak" seems redundantly harebrained in comparison to real-life.

Return of Navarone-style WW2 stories

THE SEA WOLVES (1980)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

Prepare yourself for one of my favorite war movie genres - the WW2 escapist stories involving spies, double-crosses and a motley crew of heroes. Sure, by the time "The Sea Wolves was released in 1980, such stories seemed to escape the fancy of most. How can anyone though resist the charms of Gregory Peck, David Niven, Trevor Howard and Roger Moore? I can't. 

Based on actual events in 1943 (complete with actual photos during the end credits), British Intelligence officers get wind of a Nazi radio ship that is stationed off the coast of India, specifically Goa which is a neutral Portuguese colony. Neutrality means no British ships can attack the German ship which is transmitting top secret information to U-boats. A mission spearheaded by Col. Lewis Pugh (Gregory Peck) and Capt. Gavin Stewart (Roger Moore) called Operation Creek calls to action the efforts of the Calcutta Light Horse. These retired British, pot-bellied officers who play polo are members of the Calcutta Light Horse and, without special mention, compensation or even commendation, will covertly attack a German merchant ship by taking off on a dirty riverboat and pretend to be drunks. The Calcutta Light Horse brigade is led by Col. W.H. Grice (David Niven), who adds some spice to this already classy production. Trevor Howard, by the way, plays an officer who arranges for brothels to be free of charge to the Nazis during this raid.

"The Sea Wolves" has everything you'd expect from a World War II yarn, including a villainous British woman/German agent (Barbara Kellerman, icy to the core) who romances Moore's Capt. Stewart, who pretends to run a coffee business; an explosives expert (Patrick MacNee, who has too few scenes); the strategies involving the attack which I always find fun; the diversions that include an exclusive party and fireworks display, and much more. The difficulty of maintaining the riverboat allows for sporadic humor - it always looks like the boat is about come apart like paper while the engineer does his best to fuel it with often limited success.

"The Sea Wolves" is often exciting with a doozy of a climax involving the attack, though none of this comes close to the power and vitality of say "The Guns of Navarone" (which Peck and Niven starred in). Still, it is engaging, the heroes are a colorful bunch (Peck's line readings always rivet the attention) and the cast makes it work even if we have seen it all before. Hooray to the Calcutta Light Horse!

Amen to a dismal Armageddon

THE FINAL CONFLICT (1981)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

In the early 1980's, we started receiving cable TV channels such as Cinemax and HBO (Home Box Office as it once was called). I recalled reading our cable guide of upcoming theatrical releases headed to one of those channels. I saw the ad for "Omen III: The Final Conflict" with a close-up of a smiling Damien Thorn as played by Sam Neill (seen above). It freaked me out and I knew it just might be too intense for this viewer. I did not see it till much later and let's say the scare factor was solely depicted in that ad. The movie is insanely dumb, almost as bad as "Damien: Omen II" which had only one good scene (young Damien being tested of historical war dates). Sam Neill never comes across as threatening and the story goes from inspired to bombastically stupid within the first interminable hour.

Damien Thorn is now the Ambassador to Great Britain, just like his father in the original film. He gets the job by throwing just a little pressure on the President of the U.S. (Mason Adams, who could've used more scenes) though Damien realizes he might have to relinquish control of Thorn Industries. "Oh, don't worry about that," says the President though little else is mentioned about Thorn Industries. The rest of the film focuses on seven priests each armed with the daggers of Meggido, ready to assassinate Damien the Antichrist. However, despite a couple of moments of vague suspense like the elongated fox hunt sequence where two priests try to trap Damien with a dead fox that brings the hounds together, the movie has few payoffs even with such sequences, especially the opening involving the former Ambassador who offs himself with the help of...oh, why bother saying it. Also, the plot involves a constellation that signals the Second Coming so Damien wants every child born between certain hours on March 24th to be killed. This all leads to a silly anticlimax where Damien looks for Jesus: "Come on out Nazarene!" Wow, how devilish of him considering this could lead to Armageddon. Sadly, no.

None of the killings, of which include killing babies offscreen thankfully, merit much in the way of shock or the most rudimentary thrills. It all feels very neutered, very safe, nothing of which I would expect from an "Omen" flick. Sam Neill is far too bland (though I like his speech to a congregation on the hills, sort of a sick joke on the Sermon on the Mount) and the whole film lacks urgency, danger or any degree of involvement. It is all so hopelessly boring and blah and disconnected, including the priests who look like bargain basement scavengers (Rossano Brazzi is a solid choice to play a priest but he's given nothing to do). In the original "Omen," you had Gregory Peck as the determined father who sought to destroy the Antichrist despite his own doubts - you rooted for him. There is no one to root for in this movie.

 You might get a little chill from one scene involving a future disciple to Damien (who becomes some sort of detective!) who dutifully does the Antichrist's bidding. A few little chills sprinkled in infrequent doses is hardly worth the effort. Amen.

Stallone goes to head-to-head with Terrorist Hauer

NIGHTHAWKS (1981)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

"Nighthawks" is an incredibly over-the-top though occasionally diverting movie that could've used tighter pacing for a cop thriller - put it this way, "The French Connection" and "The Taking of Pelham One, Two, Three" are far tighter and better paced. This film is exciting in spades but too often, the build-up is not quite there to sustain some incredible looking stunts.

"Nighthawks" has a chilling villain at its core, an international terrorist a la Carlos the Jackal named Heymar Reinhardt, alias Wulfgar (Rutger Hauer who sends chills to the bone). In an early scene, he bombs a London department store. Children are killed during the bombing and this irks some of his associates in the terrorist world.  

Enter Sylvester Stallone and Billy Dee Williams as New York undercover cops who become part of a team to thwart Wulfgar, who has moved to New York and changed his appearance through the divine art of plastic surgery. Stallone and Williams are briefed on Wulfgar's personality, his expensive taste and his need to live with women and run around in nightclubs. For some odd reason, Wulfgar keeps an arsenal of explosives in his girlfriend's apartment...could he not hide them somewhere else like a locker at Penn Station? The point is for these two supercops to think like him and this process is fascinating yet never explored in much depth. All we know is Stallone doesn't want innocent people killed.

"Nighthawks" unfolds with a more or less a steady rate of suspenseful scenes but Wulfgar is too enigmatic to understand - he is a terrorist who kills without much provocation (ditto his partner in crime played by Persis Khambata who is even more underwritten). At first Wulfgar bombs a few banks in New York at night and calls the media to glorify his position, but to what end? When he holds UN delegates in a Roosevelt Island cable car, he predictably kills one of them but his purpose is more sadistic than political. Of course, we root for the cops to nail him yet this could easily have been an extended episode of either "Dragnet" or "Adam-12" only with a lot more grit.

Stallone and Williams (sporting a Superman shirt) are well-cast yet their characters are severely underwritten. Stallone has a girlfriend who works in the fashion district (Lindsay Wagner in a blink-and-you-will-miss role) - either beef up her role or cut it out, one of the most thankless woman roles of the 80's (and I am not including those sex-starved Fort Lauderdale-type comedies). Still, the film deliver its action quota though, at times, it feels as if it needed more lubrication in its motor to keep it running (the cable car footage goes on way past the tolerable meter). The ending is a nail-biter and a keeper and Hauer is memorably chilling. The movie just needed more pizzazz.

There is more than meets the camera eye

LAKE MUNGO (2008)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

"Lake Mungo" is not a straight horror film nor is it in the found footage category. It is more of a domestic drama of grief over the loss of a young woman, someone who may or may not be lurking in the homestead as a ghost.

Ghost stories always enthrall me but this one is on some other level - it is about the humanity of a family that is trying to work its way through a grave loss. The young woman is Alice Palmer (Talia Zucker), a sixteen-year-old who has a boyfriend and several friends and loves to hang out and have fun. Nothing unusual about that until she is found dead in a lake, an apparent drowning. Her parents, June Palmer (Rosie Traynor) and Russell Palmer (David Pledger) try to move on yet Alice's brother, Mathew (Martin Sharpe) who loves photography, begins setting up video cameras in the house at night. When reviewing the footage, it is clear that Alice appears in fuzzy form, sometimes in a mirror reflection or walking around in shadow form from one room to the other. The parents consult a local, sympathetic psychic named Ray Kemeny (who initially records conversations with people under hypnosis) and they set up a seance that is recorded by Mathew. It turns out, thanks to Mathew, that this whole scenario with Alice's ghost is a hoax, or is she lurking in areas of the house we least suspected?

"Lake Mungo" is a straight-laced mockumentary yet it is so exceedingly well acted that I believed this family really was enduring an unimaginable ordeal. Both Rosie Traynor and David Pledger make this all believable, including Mathew who's unsure of how to deal with his sister's death. We understand his need to continue making us believe she exists in spirit. Even Steve Jodrell as Ray Kemeny is a bit skeptical yet he grows fond of the family - he is also uniquely credible as the psychic.

"Lake Mungo" unfolds with a few revelations that I did not anticipate, and a bone-chilling scene that is completely unforgettable. Shot in Australia, the film has stunning shots of the desertscapes at sundown and some amazing time-lapse photography of the night skies (Sure, we have seen that before but the Australian skies are something to behold). The interiors of the house are welcoming yet eerie, even after we discover the hoax which may not be fully manufactured. It is a film about seeing the unbelievable and then finding that there is more than meets the camera eye. "Lake Mungo" is a treasure worth visiting. 

The Force is Strong yet Lumpy With this one

ROGUE ONE: A STAR WARS STORY (2016)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

Something strange happens in the first third of "Rogue One" that normally doesn't happen in a "Star Wars" film, a curious lack of engagement. The characters are a crossbreed of different nationalities and genders and they are exciting characters only after we get through some expanded exposition. It is too much exposition (reminding one of the heavy load of exposition in "The Phantom Menace") though once the film picks up its motor and engages, it is a thrill-happy, justifiably entertaining popcorn picture but it is still no "Force Awakens."  

Something is afoot in the Star Wars universe beyond characterization - there is no scroll (and no 20th Century Fox fanfare or logo but you knew that when Disney bought the rights years back). And, for whatever reason, a young Jyn Erso holds a Stormtrooper doll!!! Say what? That has got to be a new, relatively askew detail for "Star Wars" in general. Leaving that aside, Jyn is the daughter of Imperial weapons researcher, Galen Erso (Mads Mikkelsen, magnificent in "Casino Royale"), who is reluctantly commissioned to complete a destructive new weapon (you know what that is since this prequel directly precedes the events of the original 1977 "Star Wars"). Jyn escapes, mom is killed, and we flash forward to several years later when Jyn (Felicity Jones), now working in an Imperial work camp, is rescued by the Rebels and agrees to work for them on a mission to obtain the Imperial plans for  the "planet-killing" Death Star. No surprise that Jyn's father is actually working on completing the Death Star, and wait till her motley crew finds out who she is related to. What is fascinating about Jyn is that she is not loyal to either side technically, but allows herself to help the Rebels nonetheless - think of her as a Han Solo only less witty yet just as bad-ass. 

The motley crew who accompany Jyn on this Rebel Mission are Rebel Intelligence officer Captain Cassian Andor (Diego Luna) who thinks nothing of shooting an informant (a new wrinkle for Star Wars); a pilot with Imperial connections who turns to the good side, Bodhi Rook (Riz Ahmed); a blind warrior named Chirrut Îmwe (Donnie Yen) who can knock down three or four Stormtroopers with ease, and a mercenary named Baze Malbus (Jiang Wen) who seemed to have been hatched from a Kurosawa movie. There is also a new, tall droid named K-2S0 who is full of wisecracks and actually knows how to use a blaster! Imagine if C3P0 could've done that or, on the other hand, don't! (Apologies to reminding prequel trilogy haters of odd disturbances in the Force such as Yoda with a lightsaber).

The charismatic Forest Whitaker appears and disappears too soon as Saw Gerrera (he has a breathing apparatus), leader of the rebel allied militia known as the Partisans. Saw helped Jyn escape when she was young and then abandoned her. Great colorful character but why not include him in the central conflict. Aside from Felicity's Jyn, he is the most interesting of this whole bunch. The other characters, all warriors and Rebel fighters, do not stir the imagination - they are more rugged than colorful, more fighting machine and less individualistic.

"Rogue One: A Star Wars Story" has a lumpy start yet it succeeds as an exciting, involving adventure story. The laser-battle action scenes do not disappoint but, then again, when do they ever? You've got a powerful yet far too small reappearance by Darth Vader and an insidiously evil Imperial Director Krennic (Ben Mendelsohn) with a spanking white suit and cape. The return of Grand Moff Tarkin and Princess Leia are fine, though the CGI can leave a lot to be desired (The return of two ugly Cantina pilots from the first "Star Wars" is actually hysterical). Ultimately Felicity Jones is the best thing in the movie and holds one's interest with her ambivalence and her whip smart abilities. "Rogue One" serves her right, front and center. The rest is loosely focused baggage.

You are the victim of boredom in this 3-D snoozefest

AMITYVILLE 3-D (1983)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

I will say the "unrelated" sequel in the endless "Amityville" series has a nifty start. Tony Roberts and Candy Clark are trying to debunk the horrors of that infamous Long Island house with the creepy attic windows. They pretend to be parents of a dead child ghost and participate in a seance. A blue orb appears but the whole thing is a hoax. Roberts is a reporter who goes after urban legends, and Candy Clark is a photographer and that is about as nifty as "Amityville 3-D" gets.

This alleged haunted house movie is not gimmicky horror fun, not even at the level of a William Castle picture. As a matter of fact, there aren't too many manifestations of hauntings at all, save for a hot water faucet that is impossible to turn off; a bottomless well in the basement where an evil creature resides; a bee followed by a host of bees that kill a realtor, and not much else. The movie can't even follow its own rules, especially when the manifestations occur beyond the surroundings of the house. Roberts needs a cool drink of water as an elevator descends at alarming speeds while he hangs on to the railing as if he was in some Warner Brothers cartoon. Oh, and there is a doozy involving Candy Clark who is almost frostbitten by frigid temperatures at that house and then loses control of her car in special-effects that look as hokey as anything in "Exorcist II." There is also a boating accident that is merely alluded to - we don't see the accident so who knows how it happened or why other than the house made it happen?

For some good laughs, it is a treat to see early performances in their careers by Meg Ryan and Lori Laughlin, but what on earth possessed Tony Roberts and Tess Harper to appear in this godawful mess involving flying frisbees, flying skeletons and sheer ineptitude? "Amityville 3-D" has apathetic reactions to almost everything, thus nobody cares about the characters (especially Candy Clark's fate) or the nonexistent story. Did the skeptical Roberts character even once question what is happening in this dreaded house that he buys? Apathy is the name of the game - all too common in 1980's rotten horror movie sequels.