MISS ME?

THE CONJURING (2013)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

"The Conjuring" is a grandly virtuoso haunted house piece - an elegant, supremely scary picture designed to keep your stomach knotted, your hair standing on end, and your palms sweaty. I will not say this is the scariest film I've ever seen but it is, hands down, among the scariest in a long, long, really long time. Almost too long.

It is 1971. We have a house in Harrisville, R.I. where a new family has moved in, the Perrons. Roger (Ron Livingston from the cult hit "Office Space"), a mild-mannered type of guy, is married to Carolyn Perron (Lili Taylor) and they have five young daughters. Apparently this house, unbeknownst to the Perrons, was the site of a woman accused of witchcraft during the time of the Salem Witch Trials who hung herself on a tree branch outside the house proclaiming to be one of Satan's disciples. There is more here that chills the bone involving multiple suicides and satanic rituals where babies are sacrificed. The Perrons get a taste of these ghosts who haunt their home. Doors are slammed, loud knocks are heard, something pulls the legs of the girls while they sleep, and there is that hide-and-seek game the girls play where they clap when they are in their hiding place while one blindfolded girl has to find them. Would a ghost partake in this game? There is also a doll named Annabelle but I rather you discover its importance on your own.

Eventually, two real-life Demonologists,  Ed and Lorraine Warren (strikingly played with complete assurance by Patrick Wilson and Vera Farmiga), are summoned to the house to rid its evil spirits (The Warrens, by the way, were best known for their involvement in the Amityville haunting). Still flash cameras and microphones are installed to capture the spirits' essence (do not worry: this is all far more compelling than TV's "Ghost Hunters" and its infinite imitations). These spirits mean business, however, and somehow attract birds to fly into the exteriors of the house and kill themselves. Then there is the issue of the clocks stopping at 3:08 am! More doors fling open and the creepy factor settles in - director James Wan makes good use of dark basements and dark crawlspaces. Oh, never look under the bed either. Plus, maybe unexplained bruises are the lack of iron in the body, or something else. As Lorraine Warren states, "Most haunted houses have a simple, rational explanation." Not this house.

"The Conjuring" is a fast-paced haunted house story that gave me goosebumps and, at the end of the cinematic horror day, that is all that counts. It does it with zero gore and tunes up its thrills and chills to 120, all courtesy of director James Wan who previously helmed 'Insidious" and the original "Saw." Yet the movie does break for an unnecessary finale that smacks of "The Exorcist" and, frankly, I would have preferred a more imaginative conclusion. Still, with an expert cast and an expert director at crafting genuine suspense (and a superb use of sound by sound designer Joe Dzuban), "The Conjuring" will bring up good old-fashioned memories of "The Haunting." Not the 1999 remake, mind you, but rather the 1963 classic. Oh, FYI, Lili Taylor, you have redeemed yourself from the crass "The Haunting" remake you appeared in. Many thanks.

Three Diamonds in the rough

THE SCORE (2001)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

(Original review from 2001)

Heist dramas are fashionable again. David Mamet has his own upcoming drama aptly titled "Heist." Ben Kingsley's riveting performance in the film "Sexy Beast" also involves a heist. Now, director Frank Oz ("Bowfinger") and three major stars, Robert De Niro, Edward Norton and Marlon Brando, combine their strengths to create their own caper flick. "The Score" is a more thrilling caper picture than a character study, depending more on specifics related to the heist than with character. Still, it is as relaxing and comforting a film as you are likely to see in a mindless, mind-bogglingly dumb summer.

De Niro stars as Nick, a Montreal jazz club owner who masquerades as an efficient burglar. Nick is one of the best in the business, usually performing jobs for others in places outside of what he refers to as his own backyard. He has a stunning girlfriend (Angela Bassett), an airline stewardess, who visits him infrequently ("I'll see yah when I see yah.") Everything is in place for Nick but he looks like he is ready to quit too. That is until a shady, Sydney Greenstreet character named Max (Marlon Brando), an old friend of Nick's, offers Nick one big job in their own backyard. It turns out that the Montreal Customs House has a rare 17th century French scepter in the basement, its value higher than Brando's last paycheck. The scepter is so valuable that it is placed under strict surveillance, namely video cameras and an invisible laser display. There is also a little snag and an inconvenience for Nick: Max has hired a cocky, seemingly sociopathic thief named Jackie Teller (Edward Norton) to help infiltrate the Customs House. It turns out Jackie works at the Customs House as a janitor named Brian, mimicking and fooling the employees into believing he is mentally challenged. He is in place already, it only takes Nick to perform the actual heist with Jackie's help.

Needless to say, "The Score" fits the description of any heist thriller since the days of the Production Code. How many heist thrillers have had the same basic premise? How many have dealt with a character like Nick who sees this score as his last job, for good and ever? How many involve a virtually silent climax where the thief performs his sweat-inducing work amidst false alarms? The difference is in all the details, and there are enough to entertain and jolt audiences out of their seats.

De Niro is one of my favorite actors, ranging from explosive portrayals of sinful men in "Taxi Driver" and "Raging Bull" to comedic highlights of minimalistic strength in "Wag the Dog" and "Meet the Parents." Lately, he has been saddled with mediocre fare such as "Fifteen Minutes" but what can you say about a man of his stature to keep himself from repeating past roles? Well, Nick is not unlike the ice-cold killer thief De Niro played in "Heat." This time, though, De Niro brings a world-weary sense to the role and one can't help but feel that Nick enjoys his job as well - he is in command and refuses to take orders except from his boss.

Edward Norton continues to impress me. Here he seems like an extension of the duality he prominently displayed in "Primal Fear" and "The Fight Club." It is a frightening performance in the sense that his character Jackie seems explosive yet reserved at the same time, willing to listen to Nick yet just as ready to rebel from the old-timers. His cockiness and energy are, in effect, part of his own undoing. How can Jackie feel superior to thieves who have far more experience than he ever will?

Marlon Brando is a whole other matter. Brando seems intent on doing riffs of Sydney Greenstreet and the resemblance is amazing not to mention intentional. But there is that glee and weariness he brings that fills the screen with delight. His scene with De Niro is wonderful to watch, but not quite as potent as say the unique pairing of De Niro and Pacino in "Heat." Still, watching Brando mingle with De Niro and Norton is a pleasure to behold. And Brando's scene at an empty pool where he confesses to De Niro the truth behind the heist is exquisite.

Director Frank Oz is a strange choice for this kind of material since his background is in the comedy genre and, of course, the Muppets. Still, he proves to be a master of tension and suspense in some notable scenes, particularly the heist itself which is among the most electrifying since "Topkapi." It is so good that my palms were sweaty while watching it. It is on par with the climactic underwater heist in "Sexy Beast."

Oz's work with these acting giants also proves to be superlative (Despite rumors to the contrary, Brando seems effortless on screen thanks to Oz, even if he didn't want to be directed by Miss Piggy). One misguided exception in the casting is the underwritten role of Angela Bassett as Nick's girlfriend - a character that exists merely as a reason for Nick to quit. Only Bassett is too strong a presence for such a throwaway role - either eliminate the role or hire Halle Berry, for goodness sakes'! There is strong evidence that Bassett's role had been severely cut which is a shame since it would have shed some light on Nick's priorities in life.

"The Score" is as pleasant and diverting a surprise as one can expect. It is absolutely nothing new but the acting, script and the heist climax makes it more than worthwile. It is not as character-driven as "Sexy Beast" or Michael Mann's powerful "Thief," nor as wire-tight as Kubrick's fast-paced "The Killing." Nevertheless, it is still watchable, tense and sweat-inducing as any good heist thriller should be. Unless you believe that all films should have digitally created characters, nothing beats a score like three diamonds in the rough - De Niro, Brando and Norton.

Leatherface on sensory overload

THE TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE (2003)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

Sequelizing the original fright classic "Texas Chainsaw Massacre" might have seemed fruitless, but remaking it is cruel and unusual punishment. You only need to think back to 1998 to recall such a glaring error in filmmaking standards - Gus Van Sant's recreation of Hitchcock's "Psycho." "Texas Chainsaw Massacre" is Michael Bay and company's dreadful, spiritless remake of a film that has since been deemed the ultimate experience in terror (sorry "Evil Dead" fans).

The movie is set in the early 70's as we witness a van carrying young people on their way to a Skynyrd concert - they listen to Skynyrd's own "Sweet Home Alabama" on the radio so we don't forget what time period it is. A woman is walking on the road, having just survived some ordeal. The compassionate women in the van (including Jessica Biel) pick her up. This scared, comatose passenger suddenly picks up a gun from under her dress and shoots herself in the head. Why? Because she couldn't take it anymore? She suffered too much? No. Because music video director Marcus Nispel and producer Michael Bay want to provide a sensory overload of pumped-up images and music so that the audience never grows restless. The rest of the story focuses a great deal of time on these young, heartless people and their decision on what to do with the corpse and the bloody brains in the backseat of their van (accent on the brain matter). I might believe young people would act in such a way today, but in the 1970's? To be fair, the women are more caring than the men who just want to go to the concert. They do the right thing and call the sheriff (R. Lee Ermey), who proves to be as creepy as the family of savages that live nearby. But never fear my young horror enthusiasts, Leatherface and his buzzing saw are near.

Despite using the cinematographer of the original film, Daniel Pearl, nothing in this "Massacre" is likely to scare you or thrill you. The movie has lots of screaming and running and jumping and some loud chainsaw sounds, nicely amplified by the DTS soundtrack. What is missing is whatever soul the original film had - there was a sense of growing dread cultivated by our hopes that the young victims would walk away from inevitable death. The original "Massacre" was new for showing what depths humanity had sunk to when you would find a house with human bones, skin masks and meathooks. If nothing else, it was a documentary of horror, a living nightmare one couldn't wake up from. Oh, and they were cannibals but this movie barely considers that for a moment - the family in this retro, souped-up version is simply nuts.

"Texas Chainsaw Massacre" is, as correctly mentioned by Roger Ebert, a geek show where frigid close-ups of slimy, bloody fluids and hand-held camera footage of people running suggest hysteria, not fear. These young people seem to have ample opportunities to run away from these crazy folks, thus the urgency is missing. There is mostly sadism for the sake of having sadism (and maybe someone can explain Biel killing a guy who keeps sliding into the same meat hook he is hanging from. I know the guy is suffering and asks to be put out of his misery, but did she need to use a big knife and thrust it into his gut?) The buzz in this new "Massacre" may be loud but the thrill is gone, folks.

Check out early from this motel

MOTEL HELL (1980)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

I am always up for a wicked black comedy about cannibalism but "Motel Hell" is not my cup of tea. The film is thankfully not gory or over-the-top, but the humor is so shallow and uninspired that it is likely to cause more groans than chuckles.

Rory Calhoun, the former Western cowboy star of yesteryear, is Farmer Vincent, the owner of a motel and acres of farm land. He is also legendary for producing meat with a distinctive taste (and keeps free beef jerky in his motel lobby). His motto is: "It takes all kinds of critters to make Farmer Vincent's fritters." But this is no ordinary meat from cows or other animals, they are from humans! Vincent's tactics include planting bear claw traps in the middle of a road when he can trap an incoming vehicle, thus the vehicle can lose control and crash into a wooded area (the film seems to assume that no car ever comes through this road except at night. This also means that Vincent is something of a psychic since he can smell when a vehicle is coming). Afterwards, Vincent gasses the victims, removes their vocal chords, and keeps them buried up to their necks, feeding them until they are ripe for butchering. Eventually, he strangles them and then smokes them, thus making his famous tender meats with no preservatives. Mr. Vincent does not work alone. His plumpish sister (the late Nancy Parsons) assists in smoking out humans for high-quality beef.

I must say I cringed throughout "Motel Hell" but not because of the unsavory subject matter. Frankly, I think I can stomach a gross horror comedy but nothing in "Motel Hell" is fiendishly funny or clever. For example, the young female victim that Frank saves from one of his deliberate accidents grows to like him enough to marry him! Meanwhile, Frank's sister attempts to kill the poor, naive girl. By the end of the film, we see Frank inexplicably wearing a pig mask! And how can one small town only have one sheriff!

Nothing that transpires aims to satirize the genre or poke fun at it. Rory Calhoun is easily the best thing in the film and does what he can to maintain our interest. Still, when Vincent's motto is the only witty idea in the entire movie, you know you're in trouble (I could have lived without the S & M couple). I like my horror served straight up, "Texas Chainsaw Massacre"-style.

Jigsaw has got more than severed fingers in mind

SAW II (2005)

Reviewed By Jerry Saravia

Though bloodier and nastier, "Saw II" is a fairly tightly-coiled, suspenseful if somewhat overwrought sequel to the surprise sleeper of 2004. Though it has less black humor and has more hysterically violent theatrics, it can still stand as a chilling movie in its own right.

We barely saw the killer in the original "Saw" - now he is seen in full-closeup as the Jigsaw Killer (Tobin Bell) who wears a black and red hood and speaks in a deep voice. He lives in some abandoned warehouse and keeps a house somewhere with its own Rube Goldberg contraptions (apparently, he doesn't clean up the bloody mess left over from previous victims). Donnie Wahlberg is Eric, a cop who plants evidence on his criminal suspects. He has his own headaches to deal with, including a son who is in and out of jail. Nothing can compare to the latest scenario - Eric's son has been kidnapped and held in a room with other victims of the Jigsaw Killer. They have to find the clues to get out, though there are traps one must be wary of including a gun trap behind a locked door, a Syringe Pit, an incinerator, and several other grisly contraptions that might give the characters in "Pit and the Pendulum" nightmares. Some of these rooms contain syringes that can save the group from a deadly, noxious gas. Of course, time is a factor, and there are those mini-tape players with instructions. If you have seen the original "Saw," you know what you are in for.

The group locked in the room are not the most entertaining bunch to be around. There is a muscular, selfish, unsympathetic idiot (Freddy G) who spends a lot of yelling - you want to see him dead before the final reel. There is also Eric's son (Erik Knudsen); a young, frightened girl (Beverley Mitchell); and returnee Amanda (played once again by Shawnee Smith). Excepting Amanda, the rest of the characters are anonymous and one only hopes they can get out alive, except for that hulking idiot.

"Saw II" does have a little more character exposition, notably with the Jigsaw Killer. He explains why he does what he does - he is trying to make his victims appreciate life more with what they have. Amanda, for example, was a heroin addict who survived a bear trap, and now she has thoughts of suicide which is why she is back in his lair. Most pressing question: how does the Jigsaw Killer choose and keep track of all of his victims? Email? MySpace profiles? Or does he have access to police files? Maybe we will find out in "Saw III."

"Saw II" has those frantic cuts from every camera angle that sometimes work (particularly in the death scenes), other times they are distracting (the numerous flashbacks). The movie, though, is unnerving, gory, and makes your bones chill. Tobin Bell is an impressive actor who makes the Jigsaw Killer a sympathetic monster by making us think he might have just cause for what he does, no matter how demented. You may forget the supporting characters but you won't forget the Jigsaw Man.

A true shocker in a jaded age

SAW (2004)

Reviewed By Jerry Saravia

(Originally viewed and reviewed on 10/31/04)

After suffering through the monotonous "Suspect Zero," I was ready to say that serial killer films were a thing of the past. How many more variations can one find in the confines of a serial killer story? Even Hannibal Lecter was reduced to cartoonish size in "Hannibal" and "Red Dragon." The best film on serial killers is still "Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer" for its grim reality and lack of irony, and also for not sticking close to the genre's penchant for unrelenting gore. "American Psycho" was an antiseptic joke on consumerism, but an entertaining joke nonetheless. "Saw" is nothing new but it is feverishly intense and in-your-face. Gory, yes, but its setting and performances raise it a notch above the usual claptrap.

"Saw" begins with two protagonists in an isolated setting. The two protagonists are Dr. Laurence Gordon (Cary Elwes) and a young photographer, Adam (Leigh Whannell). Both men awaken to find themselves chained to the walls with leg irons in a grimy looking bathroom. Two saws are available but they are too rusty and feeble to cut through anything, except their own ankles. They also have mini cassetes in their pockets with instructions, giving them potential clues to their escape. A corpse is in the middle of the room, drenched in blood in an apparent suicide and holding a mini cassette player. There is a dilemna: Dr. Gordon must kill Adam to save himself and his family. The serial killer remains unseen, perhaps hiding behind a two-way mirror observing their actions. Sometimes we catch a glimpse of a puppet with a hideous clown face marked with red spirals riding a tricycle! What in the name of "Seven" and "Silence of the Lambs" is going on here?

Most of "Saw" rests on flashbacks and flashbacks-within-flashbacks. Dr. Gordon recognizes that the killer may be the Jigsaw Killer, who doesn't exactly kill his victims - he places them in deliberate mazes and contraptions of death where they are forced to kill or kill themselves. One truly grisly flashback shows a heroin addict (Shawnee Smith) with a contraption attached to her head with a timing device that will spring open and destroy her jaws. She has to save herself by obtaining a key in the stomach of a corpse, a scene that will make gore-laden aficionados squirm. We also see a man trying to break through razor-sharp barbed wire. "Saw" is like a modern Grand Guignol remake of the "The Pit and the Pendulum" and "The Raven" with shocks to the system delivered with ugly punches to the gut. This is definitely the kind of movie where you cringe and avert your eyes more than once.

"Saw" also uses the muscular work of a film director utilizing every camera trick in the book. There are plenty of hand-held camera shots, roving cameras that pan around the intended victims in practically time-lapse motion, and subliminal cuts galore. These distancing effects are often detrimental in horror thrillers. Here, they heighten the suspense and the gore. First-time director James Wan often uses such devices when necessary instead of exploiting them - the grainy footage of that clown mask will make you shudder. The washed-out look of the grimy bathroom, lit by fluorescent lights, will make you want to use clorox and make the room spankingly clean.

"Saw" does have its share of forgivable gaping holes in the plot, including one involving Danny Glover as a cop whose partner is killed by the Jigsaw Killer. Glover is certain that the good doctor is the killer but since Glover's character is not developed, it is difficult to see what the connections are or how he finds the killer's lair (though his apartment is even more unkempt than Denzel Washington's in "The Manchurian Candidate" remake). There is also another head-scratcher involving the placement of a gun in the bathroom, though it is somewhat resolved in the climax. If nothing else, I wished I knew more about Dr. Gordon and his infidelities, or the brash photographer Adam and his proclivity for taking snapshots. I can only guess that the filmmakers initially thought of only using the bathroom setting minus the cop character and some of the flashbacks, which would have made this film as claustrophobic as last summer's "Open Water."

"Saw" is an efficient, effective thriller, utilizing every trick in the suspense book for maximum fright. With its dark conclusion, unyielding scares and ominous score, not to mention a decaying atmosphere, "Saw" will thrillingly remind one of how these movies used to be made. Think "Texas Chainsaw Massacre" without the irony and the humor of the post-"Scream" thrillers. "Saw" is a true shocker in a jaded age.

Mel Brooks' worst film - he had it coming

ROBIN HOOD: MEN IN TIGHTS (1993)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

I hated, hated, hated, and despised, despised, despised "Robin Hood: Men in Tights." I first saw it in theaters in 1993 and, despite occasional chuckles, I was deeply disappointed and felt the whole thing was a laughless affair. I saw it again recently, perhaps thinking I was unfair back then, and I am only partially right the second time around.

"Robin Hood: Men in Tights" mostly pokes fun at the Errol Flynn classic from 1938, and there are a few precious digs at the underrated "Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves." What is striking is how few gags parody the Robin Hood legend. Cary Elwes is dashing, romantic and plays Robin Hood to the hilt, wearing a feather cap and green tights just like Errol Flynn. He has fun with the part and is madly good at fencing. He plays the part straight, which is fine and expected. However, Brooks directs the film far too straightly, with only mild comic exaggerations.

Excepting future comic star Dave Chappelle and the always funny Dom DeLuise, the rest of the cast is a disaster. Richard Lewis looks and acts like a complete fool as Prince John; Amy Yasbeck plays Maid Marian far too sweetly; and Roger Rees seems to ache for an Alan Rickman impersonation as the Sheriff of Rottingham and fails miserably.

Another problem may be that many of the gags and punchlines are simply uninspired and fairly dumb, especially for someone like Mel Brooks. The Sheriff of Rottingham? A character named Ahchoo? Another character named Will Scarlett O'Hara? Are you kidding me? And there is the final scene between the Sheriff of Rottingham and a witch (Tracey Ullman) that is so badly and flatly executed, you'll wonder how a scene like that got lifted from the cutting room floor.

There are some gags that do work. I love the Robin Hood/Little John standoff scene where the bridge extends over a little puddle in a ditch. I also like the rap song of "Men in Tights." It is also a pleasure seeing Mel Brooks playing a Jewish rabbi who offers "half-off" for circumcisions (though this character plus DeLuise's Don Corleone imitation have nothing to do with Robin Hood). There is a delightful surprise of a cameo at the end that mirrors a similar cameo in "Prince of Thieves." And there is one superbly funny bit involving a movie camera as a peeping tom!

The rest of "Robin Hood: Men in Tights" is merely a blandly and monotonously staged retelling of the basic legend of Robin Hood. Sections of the film transpire without a single laugh, some with an occasional chuckle. I didn't completely hate the film but coming from the man who brought us "Young Frankenstein," "Blazing Saddles," "The Producers" and so much more, it is a major flop and still a laughless affair. I think there were better, funnier gags in Kevin Costner's "Robin Hood."