Bustin' Vice Cops

BUSTING (1974)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

Amazing is the key word when you ruminate on how many terrific cop films appeared in the 1970's. Consider highly gritty fare like "The French Connection," "Serpico," "The Laughing Policemen," "Dirty Harry" and many more. "Busting" is slower, more methodical than most and not always a total success - its rhythms are too jagged - but it does have a realistic sense of time and place and shows the fatigue of being a cop.

In this case, the fatigue is in working for the vice squad. Two vice cops, Keneely and Farrel (Elliott Gould, Robert Blake), spend their days infiltrating porno shops, bathrooms, bars and other sordid locations where drug dealers and prostitutes can be found. The movie begins with the least likely location of prostitution: a dentist's office. The drugs take the duo to a homosexual bar (a controversial scene that raised the ire of homophobic groups). Sometimes there is a shootout at an outside supermarket - other times, Keneely and Farrel sit around impatiently waiting for the next bust. But then something arises that could change their careers. These common felons they are pursuing are in fact working for a mobster named Rizzo (Allen Garfield). Keneely and Farrel find a black book belonging to Rizzo that contains the names of numerous contacts, as well as people in the District Attorney's office and the police department (ah, the days when corruption seemed so shocking). The duo feel that bringing down Rizzo is all they need to elevate themselves. The best that can be said for them is they have the stamina that Serpico had.

"Busting" is unusual in its sense of pervading gloom. You get the sense that the ambitious Keneely and Farrel are unaware that capturing someone as seedy and powerful as Rizzo is a no-win situation - we know it, they don't. Though we are not afforded much of a look into their lives, we still sense the tiredness of their job - an interminable void of a job if there ever was one. This is where director Peter Hyams is at his best - capturing an atmosphere of emotional drainedness. It surrounds Keneely and Farrel who seem like good cops. But will anyone give them half of a chance to do real police work rather than pursue the so-called dregs of society? Isn't it time to quit when all you can do is wait for a pervert to show up at some unkempt bathroom?

Johnny Depp in uncharted waters

THE BRAVE

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

Reposted review from January 17th, 2001

Johnny Depp's directorial debut hardly caused much of a rift when shown at the Cannes Film Festival in 1997 and briefly at a film festival in Taos, New Mexico. It was cooly received at best. Ostensibly a snuff melodrama, "The Brave" is far more than that, and this elegantly snail-paced drama may not win any new Depp fans but those that appreciate this kind of Jim Jarmusch-style (or Antonioni stylistics) may want to check it out.

Depp not only directs but also stars as Raphael, an American Indian living in a depressing, garbage dump area with his wife and two kids. He is an unemployed drunk, having missed out on most of his kids' childhood . Trying to set himself straight, he decides to work at a job that pays $50,000 plus a cash advance. The catch is he will be murdered for the money, though how is not exactly clear. For a snuff film production? We are never sure and the film never makes it clear (the word snuff is never actually uttered). And why would Raphael go through with such a plan to support his family? How brave a man is he really?

"The Brave" works on a more fundamental level - it makes us see how Raphael changes his disorderly ways with his family once he gets his advance. He buys a crudely arranged playground, a big-screen TV and new clothes for his kids and his wife, who are at first dismayed by his sudden wealth. We are not sure of Raphael's intentions - will he actually go through with this literally dead-end job? Will he consider the consequences? And what about his pseudo partner, a local thug (Luis Guzman, of all people) who wants to share in Raphael's wealth?

"The Brave" merely rests on Depp's shoulders and as fascinating and watchable an actor as he is, I felt the character was far too thinly drawn. What possessed Raphael to take such an opportunity? Depp never brings us any real insight or depth to the character - we just see that his mind is at work and we observe the changes he starts to make, but to what end? Did he ever consider that his life is worth more than 50 G's?

"The Brave" has some strange characters such as the father-son junkmen (Frederic Forrest, Max Perlich) who are trying to drill a hole through the ground to get oil; Clarence Williams III as the concerned priest; Marlon Brando in a short cameo as a wheelchaired boss who explains the meaning of death to Raphael, and a throwaway cameo by Iggy Pop who attends Raphael's big fiesta for the poverty-stricken community. Finally, there are scenes in a bar populated by geeks and freaks that seemed to have stepped off the set of Lynch's "Wild at Heart."

Beautifully photographed and generally decently acted, "The Brave" is nothing if not a fluffy time-waster. Its haunting ending, however, will leave you thinking for days as to the nature of Raphael's purpose in getting himself killed. Perhaps he is not as brave as he thought he was.

Joey Ramone slithers pizza into his mouth

ROCK 'N' ROLL HIGH SCHOOL (1979)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

"Rock 'n' Roll High School" is pure rock and roll juvenilia, an upbeat, spirited musical comedy that ends with an explosive rock and roll ending. Though the ending might be scoffed at by some, the rest of the movie is more wholesome and kinder than you might think.

P.J. Soles ("Halloween") is cheerleader Riff Randell, the biggest fan of the Ramones, who has served detention more than any other high-schooler in history. All Riff wants to do is sing to the Ramones, play the music in her hand-held tape recorder, and dance like a maniac. All the high-schoolers at Vince Lombardi High are prone to rock and roll and not much else, thus causing the school to have the worst academic standing in California. Enter Miss Togar (Mary Woronov), the newly elected principal who wants to burn all rock and roll records, including albums by the Ramones, and wants to stimulate the kids to learn. Togar refers to the burning of LP's as her "Final Solution."

The student body is full of goofy students, some smarter than others. Eaglebauer (Clint Howard) is a relatively laid-back student who occupies an office in the boys' room (and has a secretary) and can get the students anything they want. Football player and ashamedly virginal Tom (Vincent Van Patten) wants to get laid as soon as possible, and is hoping for a date with Riff in a tricked-out van that could only belong to the 1970's period. Kate Rambeau (Dey Young) is a bright student (and also a virgin) who is hoping for a date with Tom. And we get two obedient monitors, Hansel and Gretel (Loren Lester and Daniel Davies), who are appointed by Miss Togar to spy on the classmates and make they sure are learning and not singing and dancing.

Most of "Rock 'n' Roll High School" is harmless fun and is roughly as innocent as "Grease." Gone is any of the bawdy, gross-out humor (by late 1970's standards, anyway) of "Animal House." In fact, these teenage kids have no ambitions or desires except to get laid and listen to the Ramones. They are not idealists - they just want to party. And the parents of these kids are unseen - the only adults seen are the teachers at Vince Lombardi High.

That is what makes the ending a bit vexing. Riff and her high-school peers rename the school "Rock 'n' Roll High" and get the Ramones to play, thus forcing the staff and faculty out and maintaining their independent spirit. So why blow up the school? Yep, it is a punk and rock and roll thing to do (and I can safely say that such a scene could not appear in 2012, especially post-Colombine, and without repercussions) but why does Miss Togar have to be committed to a mental institution?

As I said, "Rock 'n' Roll High School" has a jolly, festive frame of mind and has a few comedic bits that made me laugh. The Ramones give us full-frontal, locked and loaded punk music designed to shatter your eardrums (Riff gets her own composed song by them, hence the title of the film). P.J. Soles is a dynamo on screen, exuding the qualities of a lively girl who wants to have fun. Mary Woronov is a campy delight as Miss Togar, as is the late Paul Bartel ("Eating Raoul") who has a priceless scene as a seemingly strict, Beethoven-loving teacher who decides to attend a Ramones concert. But the blowing up the school bit seems to come out of nowhere. It is depicted as a shallow, meaningless act with no hint of real rebellion or aggression - the explosions occur on cue and the band keeps playing. It is saying, "Aw shucks, these silly kids today."

Comic Books are bad for yah

COMIC BOOK VILLAINS (2002)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

 

There is only one reason in the world to sit through the overcooked, overstuffed "Comic Book Villains" and that is Donal Logue. He is one of those unsung journeyman actors who pop up to give an otherwise mediocre film a lift. When he is the lead, as was the case with the cutesy yet diverting "The Tao of Steve," we fans, we precious few, are delighted that an actor like Donal Logue is allowed the chance to headline a major film.

"Comic Book Villains" has Logue as Raymond, a comic-book collector and store owner who is more knowledgeable about comic-book minutiae than anyone else. He learns from Conan (not O'Brien but Danny Masterson) that a certain Mr. Creeswell has passed on and left his precious comic-book collection to his mother. It is so precious that it includes early comics about the Human Torch, Captain America's first appearance, and a lot more . It is a virtual gold mine which would save Raymond's faltering comic-book store. Unfortunately, a rival money-hungry comic-book owner (Michael Rapaport) and his money-hungrier wife (Natasha Lyonne) are also interested in getting their hands on these comics, thanks to Conan who fesses up the information about Creeswell to them.

At first, "Comic Book Villains" is comical, pardon the pun, and light on its feet. It is fun seeing these characters trying their best to impress the unimpressed Ms. Creeswell (Eileen Brennan) in the hopes of persuading her to sell the comic-book collection. It is also fun listening to the comic-book enthusiasts discussing sex lives of various comic-book heroes. But then director James Dale Robinson changes the tone from comedy to black humor to nearly sadistic claptrap. We are entering Tarantino waters here, sort of, but all sense of fun is lost when Cary Elwes is introduced as this macho-istic, dangerous criminal-type who has a pole-dancing girlfriend (oh, and his name is J. Carter, no doubt a nod to you know what). Carter's purpose is to help Raymond rob the Creeswell residence. Oh, yeah, and Carter is also a home fixer-upper.

Donal Logue makes it worthwhile somewhat by giving us a Raymond who was bullied and wished he became interested in something other than comic-book trivia. Of course, he blames this on Carter. Cary Elwes is occasionally convincing but he seems to have drifted in from another movie. Michael Rapaport's finely-tuned comic delivery is lacking in a film with stilted dialogue. Lyonne's smile is memorable but she could have really given the film a shot of adrenaline if her role had been magnified.

The one film that successfully mined and mixed comedy with film noir was Jonathan Demme's "Something Wild," a tough, violent and also exceedingly sweet movie. "Comic Book Villains" has characters who are sweet-tempered and innocent until they suddenly become amoral sadists. We have two movies here, and they do not merge.

The colorless Superman

MAN OF STEEL IS BACK...again?
(Commentary on teaser/trailer)

By Jerry Saravia

I suppose it is a broken record on my part and I promise to let this remake-reboot topic die, for the time being. But my Spidey-Film-Critic Sense is nagging me after watching a teaser for the new 2013 flick, "Man of Steel." Why in the hell do we need another live-action remake (forget the word: reboot) of Superman? I understand a "Justice League" film might indeed be a good idea but a new "Superman" flick? The last time we had Superman flying the skies was in the thoroughly unpleasant, humdrum and sickeningly joyless "Superman Returns," a disaster with lame casting and dull conflict. The only actor who delivered in that film was Kevin Spacey as the bald-headed Lex Luthor. So Warner Brothers decided it was time to do it all over again, as if it hadn't been done right the first time around with Christopher Reeve in the nearly flawless 1978 charmer, the highly entertaining "Superman." WB now has some British actor named Henry Cavill to play the Man of Steel, Russell Crowe as Jor-El, Kevin Costner as Pa Kent (is the studio serious?), and I refuse to mention any of the other oddball casting choices. The studio's reasoning: (I am quoting) "Just treat Superman Returns as the Ang Lee Hulk." I am one of a minority that happened to enjoy Ang Lee's "Hulk," far more than the repetitious and numbing experience of 2008's "The Incredible Hulk." Of course, that is just me.

Now that I have seen the teaser, I see what Warner Brothers is up to. Director Christopher Nolan is one of the producers who came up with the revamped story. No details have been revealed thus far but the dreary, overcast Smallville seen in flashes tells me that director Zack Snyder ("Watchmen") and Nolan are casting a serious tone on this one. How much more serious can it be than to have Superman flying at incredible speeds to turn back time to save a dead Lois Lane in the original and best version ever with the late Christopher Reeve? Anyone that considers the first two original Richard Donner-directed "Superman" flicks to be campy hasn't really seen them. They are fun and have a sense of wonder, like all comic-book movies should. Seems like filmmakers today are taking a cue from Nolan's Caped Crusader and anything post-"Sin City" and making every thing look dark, dreary and foreboding, nary a trace of humor or wit. Not all comic-book films have this pale, subterranean look - consider "Iron Man," "Thor" and "Captain America" which are fun-filled and pretty damn good films in their own right. That is not to say that "Man of Steel" might not be fun (I am hoping it is superior to "Superman Returns") but the colorless Superman outfit seen in behind-the-scenes photos indicates that we have entered a Bizarro world. Once again, I fail to see the point.

My name is...Linda Lee

SUPERGIRL (1984)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

There was hope with the first known screen version of "Supergirl" that lightning might strike twice with a different franchise in the vein of Superman. My hope was that "Supergirl" would be more fun and engaging than the dreary "Superman III." Well, it certainly is but the film sank fast to the ground and nothing could keep it afloat, not even my best friend at the time who detested the film. I still like it, certainly far more than "Superman III," but it has a camp value that rates it as a late Saturday night viewing.

Helen Slater, in her first starring role, plays Supergirl, also known as Kara, who has fled in some orb from her dying planet, Argo City, to retrieve a precious power source known as the Omegahedron on Earth. Her planet exists in innerspace, which means she comes flying out of the water dressed in her Supergirl costume! Yes, we are talking a skimpy red dress, red boots, blue shirt with the famous S emblazoned on it and a red cape, not to mention striking blonde hair. Supergirl has a mission: to retrieve this crystal with magical powers and save her planet. Lo and behold, she has to deal with stereotypical truck rapists, Lois Lane's sister (Maureen Teefy, who has Margot Kidder's sarcasm intact), a lovey-dovey Jimmy Olsen (Marc McClure), a flamboyant witch named Selena (Faye Dunaway), schoolgirl bullies and pranksters, a huge monster that resembles the Nothing from "The Never-Ending Story" (another cinematic charmer from 1984), and a pure hunk of a mechanic (Hart Bochner). Oh, yes, and I forgot to mention that Kara aka Supergirl can't be seen flying around the Illinois area so she conceals her identity as a high school student at a private all-girls' school and calls herself Linda Lee (based on a photo she spots of Robert E. Lee!)

"Supergirl" is flat-out silly and incomprehensible at times, but never less than funny and campy. Slater is wonderful as Supergirl - she makes the part her own and imbues it with enough charm and heroism to come across as anything but ludicrous. She has many priceless moments, including some hysterical reaction shots when talking to Bochner's character who has fallen in love with her secret identity. I also found Dunaway quite funny and regaling, giving the role every ounce of humor she can muster. She is not as over-the-top as in some of her later work, or her famous villainess, Joan Crawford, in the criminally underrated "Mommie Dearest." Brenda Vaccaro plays second fiddle to Dunaway, and is equally delightful. Peter Cook and Hart Bochner can get on your nerves, and Mia Farrow's cameo as Kara's mother leaves a lot to be desired.

On the plus side, the special-effects are well-done and the flying sequences are convincing (including Supergirl's somersaults in the air). The storyline could have used more development (and this concept of innerspace was not very clear to me). Still, it is nice to see the Phantom Zone for once, which looks like one grimy, depressing place! How Selena manages to send Supergirl there at one point, let alone hear of it, is baffling to me. It is all fluffy nonsense that could have led to some sequels had the original not bombed so badly with audiences and critics. I say remake the film and bring back Helen Slater! The time is right considering all these comic-book heroes are coming out of the woodwork and entering our cinema screens. She could be our own darling Superwoman all over again!

By the way, seeing what a film nut I am (emphasis on the word "nut"), I saw the director's cut version of "Supergirl" and the 124 minute cut, which is precisely twenty minutes longer than the theatrical cut. The discrepancies of the plot and other sweet scenes (like Supergirl practicing her kissing on a mirror) are in the director's cut, though there are deletions of other lines or transitions (for instance, the word "retarded" is omitted, which is a stupid idea). But I do think there is too much of Selena and her ritual acts in this cut, so I'd say stick with the 124 minute cut, by far the better version.

The existential Batsignal has been tainted

THE EXISTENTIAL BATSIGNAL HAS BEEN TAINTED

By Jerry Saravia

07-22-12
Movie theaters, particularly packed movie houses, are supposed to generate thrills and anticipation especially with a big, epic summertime blockbuster film. The mood in a movie theater has always been about generating excitement - it is a communal experience and the most that should ever happen is that someone speaks too loudly on their cellphone, throws popcorn at the screen and occasional belligerence. A movie theater is a place where people yell, holler, laugh, cry and exhibit a range of emotions. The last thing that anyone ever expected was for a man wearing bulletproof gear and a gas mask to shoot randomly at people watching a film, as he entered from an emergency door and threw tear gas.

Violence has occured at movie theaters before, more often than not in the outside of the theater than the inside (such was the case of the Westwood, L.A. riots outside a movie theater showing "New Jack City", though there were reports of gun violence in other cities). Few probably remember a 45-year-old security guard who shot a woman in the back as he sat behind her while watching "Schindler's List" in a theater, back in January of 1994 (Read this fascinating and eerie firsthand account from a witness http://www.fright.com/edge/realshooting.html). Fortunately, the woman survived and no one else was hurt but panic did ensue with all patrons leaving the theater en masse. Colorado's tragic incident, however, is a sickeningly senseless act of murders that crossed the line between the patrons watching a film and the reality of the world they were eager to escape from for a couple of hours. Only that line has been blurred with regards to the film that was screened, "The Dark Knight Rises."

Though I have not seen the film, it is pretty close, judging by reviews, to the other two Christopher Nolan-directed Batman installments. I love "Batman Begins," possibly the best Batman flick ever made with equal doses of heroism and noir firmly placed in unison and it had the most full-bodied and developed Bruce Wayne interpretation by far. "The Dark Knight," as great a film as it is, is not really a Batman film - it is a nihilistic nightmare about the Joker painted as a malicious, malevolent and ugly terrorist who has no sense of humor. I liked the ambiguity of the finale and the idea that the hero has to escape from Gotham to preserve himself and the city. In other words, the Joker won and the reality of what was seemingly a comic-book film was, in fact, perilously close to the world we live in.

I am not suggesting that the killer, who has not given a motive for the shootings, has been inspired by the latest Batman flick or the previous Batman flicks (though reports are flooding in that his booby-trapped apartment was full of Batman paraphernalia). In fact, I believe the killer would have used any big-screen event premiere with a huge crowd to carry out his deadly attack (though he did tell police he was the Joker while being apprehended). This 24-year-old college dropout had methodically planned this crime, systematically killing any and everyone at random. In the end, 12 people thus far are dead and 58 or more have survived, some with critical injuries. I am suggesting, however, that an existential reality has infected some escapist, post-9/11 films, notably the revisionist Batman films. Director Christopher Nolan has no doubt used our currently troubled, economically recessive climate to dictate the morally hazy environment of Gotham City. The previews for "Rises" indicate a film that is far more sinister and darker than anything ever attempted before with the title Batman, particularly with clips showing exploding football fields, gunfire at a stock exchange and much more. But this terrible tragedy has infected the film forever and anytime anyone mentions "The Dark Knight Rises" in the future, this Aurora, Colorado tragedy will be alluded to or referenced.

Though the media hasn't quite made the connection between the film's subject matter and the killer (and let me be clear, I could care less if the killer uses the Twinkie defense, murder is murder), I myself might not have made such a connection had it been a Katy Perry concert film. I say pray for the victims of this unspeakably atrocious act and, speaking for myself, I am uncertain if I can bring myself to see "The Dark Knight Rises" anytime soon.