Do not touch Jodie Foster's hand puppet

THE BEAVER (2011)

Reviewed By Jerry Saravia

Mel Gibson with a hand puppet directed by forgiving star and friend Jodie Foster? I said heck no, especially after watching deliriously and unintentionally funny previews. "The Beaver" is not a complete mess but it is unfathomably ridiculous and so completely uneven and jagged that it is hard to relate to on any level.

A toy company owner, Walter Black (Mel Gibson), who is married and has two sons, has become a complete emotional wreck - he suffers from depression. His company is coming apart at the seams, his wife (Jodie Foster) is already planning to buy another house and move in with her two sons - all this after kicking Walter out. Walter stays at a motel and unsuccessfully attempts suicide. If you have the read the news of Mel Gibson's hateful rants in the last few years, you can't help but think this is a semi-autobiography. What we have not heard the actual Mel indulge in is using a beaver hand puppet that speaks with a Cockney accent! This is where the film lost me - the puppet speaks with this accent that comes out of nowhere. The film wants us to believe the hand puppet is almost speaking as an impulse and involuntarily, even though Walter has control of it. Bipolar much?

Once the beaver talks, Walter makes amends with his wife and his youngest son. When Walter has sex with his wife, he still needs the beaver! (No intentional puns here) Again, the film loses me when it resorts to the puppet. Walter still can't communicate with his eldest son, Porter (Anton Yelchin), a high-school student who is paid to write other students'  term papers and such. Guess who thinks he can make a difference with Porter...the beaver of course. Naturally, the toy company becomes a success thanks to the marketing of a novel toy designed by Walter - a beaver for goodness sakes!

One relationship stands out in "The Beaver" and that is Porter's relationship with the high-school valedictorian, Norah (another stunning performance by Jennifer Lawrence). When Porter is asked by her to write a valedictorian speech, he delves deep into her past. There are scars and some deep emotions are expressed - all thanks to actors who are not using beaver hand puppets.

I respect and admire Jodie Foster and I still think she had a remarkable directorial debut with "Little Man Tate." She is also an exceptional actress but she is lost in this film - a delicate flower who can't make head or tail about her husband's mental illness. "The Beaver" is clearly about mental illness but it is exceedingly outrageous in its conceit because it never cuts deep or rings true. It wants to be a black comedy with a dramatic pulse, or maybe the other way around. Maybe it is really about the impossibility of leading a suburban family existence without the aid of a puppet. Or maybe it is really the story of a mentally ill man. Or maybe I just didn't care.

Scorsese Rocks the Stones

SHINE A LIGHT (2008)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

"Shine a Light" is a smashing entertainment - an electrifying concert film that will rev you up and make your eyeballs pop out of your head. The fact that it is the Rolling Stones performing should be enough to keep you elated but the fact that Martin Scorsese directs it is more than just praise - it was inevitable these two forces of rock and roll would come together.

The film was shot over two nights at the Beacon Theatre in New York City in late October 2006, as a benefit for the Clinton Foundation (Bill and Hillary Clinton can be seen briefly). Reportedly, the theatre was so small for a filmed concert that certain seats from the front had to be cut out so the cameras could fit (someone who attended the concert told me this was the case and a matter of inconvenience for the patrons). Nevertheless, what was filmed is truly spectacular. The Stones come on stage with an unabashed fury and resonance that I didn't see before in any prior Stones film. The 63-year-old singer Mick Jagger struts and dances and runs across the stage and through a catwalk-of-sorts that is a sight to see - a man in his sixties doing such voluminous body language is actually inspiring. Keith Richards picks that guitar and plays it like a demon, as does Ron Wood who both admit they play badly when they are not playing together. And it is wonderful to see straight-faced Charlie Watts playing the drums and even winking slightly to the camera. These performances are awe- inspiring and proof that this band is unstoppable and as spry as ever. They have also maintained their humor, especially craggy-faced Keith who quips to the audience: "It's good to see you all. It is good to see anyone!"

Just as demonic and ferocious in his fast-talking, humorous ways is Martin Scorsese. Seen briefly in the opening backstage scenes, trying to figure out what the playlist selections will be so he knows where to position the cameras (or knowing something as important as when Keith Richards will start riffing on his guitar in any opening number), Scorsese seems nervous yet cocksure - this is the Stones and he has used their music in his films. He has many cameras (sixteen of them) that will swoop up and down and come from the sides as furiously as the Stones will be on stage. "Shine a Light" is not a meditation on a band like Scorsese's "The Last Waltz" was on The Band. In fact, whereas "Last Waltz" was melancholic and had the occasional energy of a depleted band performing one last hurrah, "Shine a Light" is quixotic and a huge rush of caffeinated energy, with dazzling, dizzying camera shots from overhead and at low-angles, all cut together seamlessly. Not one inch of the stage is uncovered, not one performer is left out, not one close-up is omitted - this film is highly energized in its filmmaking, and it is actually up to the Stones to catch up with the cameras.

Occasionally, the film cuts to old documentary footage of the band, especially to some prophetic words from Mick Jagger as to whether they will be performing in their sixties. "Shine a Light's" chief concerns are with the glorious Stones and showing them perform with gusto and verve. I would not say this film is better than the chilling "Gimme Shelter" or that it is as awesome in its staging as in "At the Max" (if you have never seen it, do check it out, preferably in IMAX format). And yet, because of the show-stopping tunes and the showstopping band giving it 110% in ways never quite captured before on film, and using the intimate Beacon theatre as its stage, "Shine a Light" may well be the definitive, modern Rolling Stones concert film.

When Fresh Meadows was once Twin...

WHEN FRESH MEADOWS WAS ONCE TWIN...

By Jerry Saravia

I was a mere 9 years old when I lived in Fresh Meadows, NY in the Queens borough in 1980. I used to live on 194th St. and right across the street was the Queens Fresh Meadows Public Library. A block or two south took me to the one and only Fresh Meadows Twin Theaters. Price of admission for afternoon matinees were two dollars and with my weekly allowance, I would frequent the theater on a weekly basis. The films I had seen there were "Popeye," "Raiders of the Lost Ark," "Rad" (God, why did I see that? Just because I had a BMX bike?), "The Sword and the Sorcerer," "Ferris Bueller's Day Off," "Hercules," "The Natural," "Misunderstood," "Supergirl," "Nightmare on Elm Street 4," "Terms of Endearment," "A Christmas Story," "Victor, Victoria," "Star Trek II: The Wrath of Kahn," "Who Framed Roger Rabbit," "Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom" (about four times), "Always," "Breakin'" I and II, "Hook," "Rambo: First Blood Part II," "Another 48 HRS.," and on and on.

Inside the Fresh Meadows theater (ahhh, the days of balconies)

The inside of the movie theater looked like a palace and the actual screening room was vast, plus the sound system was excellent. It is interesting to note the films they played there because it was only a twin theater until sometime in 1987 or 1988 where they began showing 5 films and it became a Cineplex Odeon Theater (they would include the revolting "Cocktail," the action masterpiece "Die Hard" and the controversial "Mississippi Burning," not to mention "Madame Sousatska"). This may be because further south on the adjacent Horace Harding Expressway they had a multiplex (The Cinema 5 which had a beautiful mural outside of it) where they would show films that the Fresh Meadows theater would not show. For example, the "Superman" flicks were never shown at the Twin, nor were "Star Trek III" or "Star Trek IV" (those two were at the Cinema 5) nor any Elm Street sequels except for Part 4, or Kubrick's "The Shining" or "Full Metal Jacket" (at least this was all true from 1980-1989 when I eventually moved and only visited up until 1991). "The Last Temptation of Christ" may not have made it anywhere in Queens, to the best of my knowledge, since it was playing at one or two exclusive theaters in Manhattan. In fact, I don't think any Martin Scorsese flicks were shown at the Twin during that period except for "Raging Bull."

My memory of the twin theaters was of seeing those big, bright red letters on the marquee which gave me goosebumps every time I passed by there or went to see a film. My favorite memories are of "Raiders of the Lost Ark" and "Rambo: First Blood Part II." I had no desire to see "Raiders" at that time because it looked like a western to me and not very exciting - of course, once I sat down to watch it, the film thrilled and spooked me to such a degree that I was literally grabbing the arms of my seat. Now I can't say I had the same experience with "Rambo" but I do remember my own classmates asking adults to pay for their ticket since it was restricted. Those were the days.

Below are pictures I located online of the various changes Fresh Meadows Twin went through since 1949.

1949 (Note the Meadows sign adjacent to the marquee)

Aerial view, 1951

1976 (Meadows sign still intact although "Rocky" seems to be the only film playing. I could not find any pics from 1980-1989 of the theater but I do remember that they did away with the Meadows sign. Also the Fresh Meadows neon letters from the top of the building were yellow. My apartment faced the back of that theater and had the same letters in yellow).

Today (No longer the twin and the neon letters above are now white which is not as striking) Another interesting change is that "Indy 4" is playing and it is simply called "Indy 4." Back in 1984, "Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom" took over that whole side of the marquee with, again, bright red letters.

Where's my pot of gold?

LEPRECHAUN (1993)

Reviewed By Jerry Saravia

"Leprechaun" is a lethargic bore of an alleged horror movie. Alleged because there is no real horror in it at all. The idea of taking an Irish fairy and turning him into a slasher villain might appeal to those who like Frosty the Snowman and Santa Claus as deranged killers, but not me.

Warwick Davis plays the leprechaun who wants his precious pot of gold, a bag of a hundred gold coins. At the beginning of the film, a man named O'Grady has stolen the leprechaun's gold from Ireland and has relocated to a house in North Dakota. Leprechaun finds him, curses him with a heart attack (though the old Irish coot doesn't die) yet the little fairy finds himself encased in a crate with a four-leaved clover on the lid that imprisons him for a decade. Flash forward one decade and a mentally-handicapped painter (played by Mark Holton, whom you might remember from "Teen Wolf") inadvertently pushes aside the clover, lets the leprechaun loose, and finds his bag of gold. All the action takes place in the dilapidated O'Grady house where a young woman (Jennifer Aniston) and her father move into the house that needs to be painted. Of course, Aniston finds herself attracted to one of the painters, and blah, blah, blah.

Davis does the best he can do with a one-dimensional cretin but the filmmakers opt to introduce the character so early on (as in the opening sequence) that there is no level of surprise. Plus, the script never makes it clear how you can kill a Leprechaun - bullets do no harm but a four-leaved clover aimed inside his mouth might, provided the clover has a green glow. The body count is low for a slasher pic of this kind, which is fine by me, but why not make the leprechaun solely mischievous, rather than a monster who can use a pogo stick as a weapon! The best scene is when the leprechaun careens down a main road in a toy race car with the police in tow, asking him to pull over. But the rest of the movie is full of automatons rather than actors and an annoying leprechaun who keeps screaming, "Where is my pot of gold?" And to think there are five sequels to this movie simply makes the mind spin around and wonder how many gold coins the filmmakers got away with. I say stick with "Troll 2."

Coppola raises a humanized Count from the Dead

 BRAM STOKER'S DRACULA

 Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

The 1922 silent masterpiece "Nosferatu," and its 1979 remake by Herzog are clearly the most lucid, atmospheric interpretations of the famous novel by Bram Stoker. There have been several remakes and sequels in their wake, so why keep remaking the oft-told story? We all know it by heart. Francis Ford Coppola's "Bram Stoker's Dracula" is a visual symphony of horrors and an overblown, campy knock off of the legend. That's not to say that it isn't fun, it surely is, but scary? Not at all but it still compelling.

Coppola's "Dracula" starts off very promisingly and maintains an eerie, fairy-tale tone with nightmarish overtures from start to finish, complete with silhouettes, shadows, old transitional wipes such as irises, beautiful if ostentatious imagery and really fancy camera tricks, especially when we first visit Dracula's castle. Some of this represents Coppola's best directorial work ever and every image is stunning and truly remarkable with dissolves that are truly hypnotic.

The acting is uneven throughout. Gary Oldman ("J.F.K") plays Dracula fairly straight with an astonishing array of body movements and language (he's a bloodsucking, white-haired, venemous creature in the beginning) - I initially thought back in 1992 that his performance lacked passion and verve. It doesn't - he truly loves his Mina, the reincarnated love of his days as Vlad the Impaler. Keanu Reeves as Jonathan Harker is merely incompetent and unbelievable in a period setting - he reminded me too much of his Bill and Ted antics. Sir Anthony Hopkins overacts to the hilt as Professor Van Helsing, and has a moment where he smells Mina's fragrance reminding one of Hannibal Lecter. Winona Ryder, however, steals the movie as Mina (Harker's sweetie) and she is appropriately passionate and sexy, especially in the love scenes. She has that chemistry with Oldman that makes for some very erotic love scenes, in and out of the bedroom.

This "Dracula" is something of a technological marvel and a touching love story, more so than I had thought. It somehow works in the big egostistical way that some of Coppola's lesser efforts have. At times resembling more of a horror spoof, it is extraordinarily well-made and the snowy climax at Drac's castle is terrific, suspenseful stuff. Dear old Francis still leaves so little to the imagination and the gore is piled on scene after scene with none of the cold, chilling atmosphere of "Nosferatu" or Lugosi's "Dracula." The scene with the vampiric Lucy (Sadie Frost) approaching her tormentors as she carries a human child is not nearly as horrific as a similar scene in John Badham's 1979 "Dracula" version with Frank Langella.

Over-the-top, overstuffed, overdone and undernourished in certain character details (especially characters played by Cary Elwes, Bill Campbell and Richard E. Grant), Coppola's "Dracula" is never boring and somehow fun in a crude way. This Count does not suck and is given a measure of peace and humanity that has escaped many previous versions (and it practically tears away at Stoker's Victorian conventions with sexual acts galore). This is also one of those films that stays with you with its visual grandeur, gorgeous costumes and practical special-effects and a truly sympathetic Dracula.

Keep the Air Alive with Hard Harry

PUMP UP THE VOLUME (1990)

Reviewed By Jerry Saravia

 

When Hard Harry speaks in front of a microphone in his own pirate radio show, people listen. Hard Harry is in fact a teenager, and his listeners are largely teenagers (or so he assumes). "Pump Up the Volume" is a movie struggling to find answers in a new decade that was as empty as the 1980's were greedy. There were no easy answers, but there were tough questions that need to be asked.

Christian Slater is Hard Harry aka Mark Hunter, the disillusioned and quiet teenager from back East. He had friends then but his father (Scott Paulin), a district superintendent at the new Hubert Humphrey High in Arizona, decided to move the family to this new, anonymous town. Mark can talk to his friends in New York by way of a ham radio signal. Instead Mark decides to use his transmitter to communicate with his peers, whom he can't otherwise communicate with. A Goth girl named Nora (Samantha Mathis, who appears less Goth-like than Fairuza Balk) does notice Mark and suspects he is the DJ speaking to the masses when he returns a library book on the controversial Lenny Bruce. She follows him one day to find him taking out his mail from his P.O. Box - this is where he receives his letters that he reads on the air (especially if they come with phone numbers which he promptly calls).

His peers gather around parking lots and listen attentively to his show, broadcast every night at 10 pm. Things get awry when Hard Harry calls a suicidal listener - this one guy is ignored in school and kills himself. Of course, Harry doesn't expect this to happen, not to mention an ongoing revolution at school that raises the ire of parents and the teaching faculty. Meanwhile, Harry resists going on the air yet Nora eggs him to go on - he started this mess and he has to continue.

"Pump Up the Volume" is written and directed by Allan Moyle, who crafted the wonderful, dreamlike "Times Square" and also helmed the flawed yet unremarkably entertaining "Empire Records." Moyle listens to his teen characters and to Hard Harry - they suffer so much alienation from an adult world that can't and won't listen to them. Christian Slater is stunning in scenes where he talks about the world, the lack of imagination and that "all the great themes have been used up and turned into theme parks." He really comes alive as the DJ who listens to Leonard Cohen (two different versions of "Everybody Knows" are heard), Stan Ridgway and the Beastie Boys, and so amazingly forlorn and shy as Mark who can't say two words to Nora who is drawn to him. It is the adult characters who come across as indifferent and cliched, especially Annie Ross as the cartoonish principal who expels students for reasons that have nothing to do with academic records. We even have James Hampton as the head of the FCC who is nothing more than a political stooge who stays inside his limo.

When Moyle sticks to the disaffected teens and to Hard Harry's ramblings, the movie has power and is vital. Nothing can beat Cheryl Pollak as Miss Pretty Girl who decides to throw her cosmetics into a microwave and watch it explode! If the film had focused just on the teens without seeing it from the blander-than-thou point-of-view of the adults, "Pump Up the Volume" might have become a pop masterpiece. Interestingly, in the decade that followed, slackers were the new voice (sort of) and reality shows and grunge music took over signalling a catchphrase that had little to do with reality - Generation X. For all its flaws, "Pump Up the Volume" was pointing at some truths that never got addressed or put in any context in the strange, commercial 1990's. It is a shame. So much for, as Hard Harry puts it, "keeping the air alive."

Brainless Home Alone clone with a Cruel Twist

DON'T TELL MOM THE BABYSITTER'S DEAD (1991)

Reviewed By Jerry Saravia

I confess: I love the title of this movie. I thought for sure it was going to be a delightful black comedy about a nasty incident that could leave everyone in deep trouble. Alas, as often the case with movies that have great ideas, it all goes to hell, leaving us with a disposable teen comedy about maturing. Dead on arrival is more appropriate.

Christina Applegate has the lead role as Sue Ellen "Swell" Crandell, who at first is left to care for her three brothers and two sisters after Mom leaves for Australia for a new job! Of course, they are not left to their own devices when Mom surprises them with a mean babysitter (Eda Reiss Merin) who calls the children maggots. Well, before one starts to figure all the complications and comic frenzy that will ensue, the babysitter dies in the first ten minutes! Before you can say, well, how are these kids going to cope with this situation, the babysitter is left in front of a mortuary and cruelly placed in the luggage! And then the movie forgets there was even a babysitter as we see Sue applying for a designer job so she can take care of the family for the rest of the summer. Um, so what about the title? Why not call this "Home Alone" for the thoughtless MTV generation that, I believe, has outgrown the John Hughes formula for all it is worth by a different title? Originally, it was called "The Real World," and speaking of MTV...you see where I am going with this.

Applegate doesn't hold the big screen that well (yes, I had a crush on her at one time thanks to "Married With Children" but times change). There is one performance that works, though, and that is Joanna Cassidy as the vice president of the clothing manufacturing company that Sue works for. Cassidy is bright, elegant, engaging, but what the hell does her role have to do with the rest of the movie? Same with reliable actors like Jayne Brook, Josh Charles and David Duchovny in such thinly veiled roles that make no impression.

"Don't Tell Mom..." is the kind of movie with a solid premise that is abandoned for the sake of making yet another teen comedy about growth and maturation. The ending will be enough to make one gag at how incredulous the whole affair is. Keith Coogan, by the way, is the miscast stoner brother who, by listening to Julia Child and cutting his long hair, becomes wholesome and appealing. What universe does this movie think it belongs to?