Going where Trek has already gone before

STAR TREK (2009)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

One of the joys of "Star Trek" throughout the years were the philosophical musings and logically sound statements made by Spock and his linguistic quarrels with Captain Kirk and Dr. Bones. This is what made "Star Trek" a notch above a space opera B movie like "Star Wars" (though that did have discussions on the Force, it was really an updated version of a Flash Gordon serial). The last few "Star Trek" films have not held my attention and practically seem recycled out of antique spare parts from "The Next Generation" TV series. If you want me to distinguish between "First Contact" and "Generations" (which was not half-bad), all I could tell you was that Kirk appeared briefly in one and not the other. J.J. Abrams has brought back a level of fun to "Star Trek" - he has also beamed back our favorite Enterprise team which includes a younger Spock, a younger Kirk and a far more alluring Uhura than we remembered. Is it a total success? Not quite since it dispenses with the philosophy and ups the ante on the fun factor with razzle-dazzle special-effects and various action scenes. Not a bad decision overall, but this movie resembles a souped-up "Star Wars" flick than a genuine entry in the Trek universe.

J.J. and his writers also dispense with some signature characteristics of Trek lore. For one, Jim Kirk (Chris Pine) is now a drunk hothead who likes to get into bar fights and quarrels with Spock over command posts in the Enterprise ship. At another point, a mad-as-hell Spock nearly chokes Kirk! This seems uncharacteristic of Kirk and Spock from back in the day (though forgive me if I cannot recall such an episode). Another odd change is seeing Spock and Uhura in a romance - I know Spock is half-human and half-Vulcan but he is supposed to keep his emotions in check, yes? The introductory flashback showing Spock as the victim of Vulcan bullies had me gagging a bit. And what is it with the very young Kirk racing his stepfather's car and crashing it near the site of the construction of the Enterprise ship? And did we really need a scene of Kirk in bed with a green-skinned woman while Uhura, the green chick's roomate, almost walks in on them? We all remember Kirk and his green-skinned girlfriend from back in the day but it seems J.J. just wants to cavort in nostalgia waters for the hell of it.

The villain in this revamped Trek universe is a Romulan commander named Nero from the future (Eric Bana) who is searching for Spock Prime (Leonard Nimoy), who has been banished to some ice planet. This has something to do with Nero's family and his birth planet, Romulus, getting destroyed by a supernova that Spock failed to save in time. A red matter substance can form black holes that can also be injected into a planet and cause it to implode. But I am confused by Nero - he does not (SPOILER ALERT) kill Spock Prime yet he wants to vanquish the younger Spock when in fact, if he can time travel through this black hole, Nero could save his family from destruction. That would sound logical, yes? Or maybe I should have studied astronomy more closely when it came to sci-fi film narrative.

For the most part, despite narrative inconsistencies and plot holes big enough to fit through J.J. Abrams' nebulous imagination, "Star Trek" is often a blast to watch. It looks and sounds like a supernova ready to thrill you at every second, and it succeeds. Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto, Zoe Saldana (a knockout in more ways than one) fill the iconic roles with ease and panache, though part of me still misses the delicious wit of William Shatner's Kirk and the pronouncements of logic by Nimoy's Spock. Simon Pegg's Scotty and Anton Yelchin's Chekov verge on the surface of self-parody, while John Cho's Sulu injects his own personality. I love the scenes with Nimoy's Spock, the thrilling fight on top of a drilling platform, the moments of tension between Kirk and Spock, and the final supernova climax which is awesomely staged. "Star Trek" is a big-budget Republic serial with tons of cliffhangers, but little emotional resonance. I also venture to guess that Trekkies will not accept anyone else filling these iconic roles. 

The Demons from Hell at James Franco's house

THIS IS THE END (2013)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

If "This is the End" had been released in the 1980's, I would have thought "Geez, Dude, this is like totally rad!" Actually, no, I did not use that kind of language in the 80's but I would have been impressed by it. Nowadays, in light of superior, over-the-top supernatural concepts with no boundaries like the "Bill and Ted" films or Kevin Smith's own "Dogma," nothing here will seem new. "This is the End" is fitfully enjoyable and frenetic and zany but, like rheumatic fever, you also want it to end.

The cast of TV's cancelled "Freaks and Geeks" and "Undeclared" and various other Judd Apatow productions are all here, playing alternate versions of themselves. James Franco has a bitchin' party at his house where Rihanna doesn't like getting her butt smacked, and Michael Cera is a coke-sniffing douchebag who gets oral pleasure and likes to smack Rihanna's butt. The thinnest plot this side of James Franco's bearded follicles has Jay Baruchel picked up at an L.A. airport by Seth Rogen - both friends have been on the outs for a while. Baruchel hates L.A. and James Franco, and senses Seth Rogen bought into the L.A. lifestyle by always partying and smoking copious amounts of pot. Baruchel only likes to play video games and has no interest in art and, in one of the most sidesplittingly funny scenes, Franco explains that art is everything, including Baruchel's birth into this world! Before long, a calamity strikes L.A.! Fires erupt in the Hollywood Hills, people are being beamed up into Heaven by some ethereal blue light, cars crash into buildings, the earth shakes, and winged demons sprout everywhere! It is the Rapture I tell yah and, as Jonah Hill exclaims, the actors will be saved first...and then Jay Baruchel!

The entire movie has the survivors, including Franco, Rogen, Baruchel, Craig Robinson and Jonah Hill, holed up in Franco's house, trying to get by on bottled water, booze and a Milky Way bar! Meanwhile, Danny McBride eats almost all the food, blissfully unaware of the fiery apocalypse! If you can stand all these guys cursing, discussing a sexual run-in with Emma Watson, and referencing their own movies and comparing their sexual prowess by imagining jerkin' their own chains to a Playboy magazine, then "This is the End" is the movie for you. Sometimes, the movie drags a little, even at 1 hour and forty minutes, and some of it will ring familiar memories of Kevin Smith's own oeuvre. Only Smith knew when to take a time out and pause for some reflection. "This is the End" has no limits and throws away nuance and comic timing for the sake of some nifty special-effects and an endless barrage of insults, screaming matches and cliched movie parodies (an Exorcist parody is merely tired). Not that I object to foul language and rampant raunchiness, and it is fun watching these actors whom I do admire playing alternate versions of themselves (Baruchel and Rogen at least provide an emotional center), but after a while I just wanted them to quit.  

Captain Jerry's Log: Wrath is super sequel

STAR TREK II: THE WRATH OF KHAN (1982)

An Appreciation by Jerry Saravia

Watching "Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan" in theaters back in 1982 filled with me dread. After all, I had seen the atrocious, sleep-inducing "Star Trek: The Motion Picture" in theaters three years earlier and it just about destroyed any love I had for the television series, almost but not quite. The surprise was seeing just how damn good "Star Trek II" was and how it beats most other sequels in developing its characters and featuring a solid, menacing villain resurrected from an old TV episode. Trekkies rejoiced, and I found myself loving our favorite Enterprise crew all over again.

The story could have used more depth. Essentially, a ship called the USS Reliant is traveling through the galaxy to find dead planets and instill them with the Genesis device, a device that breathes life and creates a whole environment in a planet (this is a rather amazing invention that no past or present scientist could have ever envisioned). One dead planet still vibrates with some life forms and when former Enterprise member Chekov (Walter Koenig) and Captain Terrell (Paul Winfield) investigate, they find the villainous, resentful Khan (Ricardo Montalban), a man of super strength who wants revenge on former Captain Kirk who banished Khan to the deserted, barren planet. Khan wants Kirk's whereabouts and the line of questioning involves icky eels inserted into our heroes' human ears - a scene that was quite shocking and violent by 1982 standards.

Meanwhile, middle-aged Kirk (William Shatner) has retired and oversees computer simulations of attacks on the Enterprise. When false word leaks that Genesis' research materials are to be transferred to Reliant by Kirk, while Chekov and Terrell are used as spies by Khan, a war begins with Kirk resuming his old duty of guiding the Enterprise. Half-human and half-Vulcan Spock (Leonard Nimoy) is also on board, along with Uhura, Scotty, heck, you know them all. There are also newbies to the Enterprise, and we also get wind of Kirk's former girlfriend, Dr. Carol Marcus (Bibi Besch), who developed the Genesis device, and Kirk's son, Dr. David Marcus (Merritt Butrick) who looks like he is ready to go surfing.

I would loved to learn more about Genesis overall, and why Khan is wanting to possess the device - what does he hope to gain from possessing it except to make Kirk mad? Still, for a special-effects space opera, "Trek II" offers just a few action scenes - the story takes hold and offers enough drama, just like the TV series. There are some wonderful passages of dialogue where Dr. Bones (DeForest Kelley) argues with Spock over the morality of creating life on a planet, or when Bones tries to cheer up Kirk on his birthday. The last sequence is a strong emotional conclusion that involves Spock risking everything to save the Enterprise during a nebula storm. It reaffirms our own attachment to these characters, thanks to solid direction by Nicholas Meyer and writers Jack B. Sowards and Harve Bennett.

Montalban steals the show as the fierce Khan, showing just as much presence and volatility as he did in that old "Space Seed" episode - he is the most fascinating villain in the Trek universe. Shatner and company do their roles justice and play them straight with just a touch of humor, never veering into self-parody. "Star Trek II" is no doubt the best Trek movie of all time, though it had strong contenders in "Trek III" and "Trek IV" where they saved the whales. After part IV, I kinda lost interest in that universe when Kirk and company sang "Row, Row, Row Your Boat" and faced even more Klingons in the Undiscovered Country. "Star Trek II" is proof positive that when Hollywood uses its imagination, it can crank out superior entertainment.

Who's Afraid of Liz and Burton?

LIZ AND DICK (2012)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

I can't say I am knowledgeable of Elizabeth Taylor's marital woes with Richard Burton, or whether Burton was insanely jealous of Liz's Oscar wins or how fed up he really was of never winning the coveted Oscar. Critics excoriated this Lifetime movie biography "Liz and Dick" and, though I am hardly a stringent contrarian, I hardly agree with the bashing and wonder what the critics saw. That is not to say that "Liz and Dick" is an awesome achievement in the Hollywood biography genre, it is not, but it is entertaining and fluffy and often fun to watch despite the marital woes.

Many Taylor fans probably skipped viewing this film in light of Lindsay Lohan's casting but that would be a shame...because she is terrific. Lohan is the Liz of the 1960's, at the height of "Cleopatra" fame where she meets the hard-drinking Richard Burton (Grant Bowler) who admires her beauty. They don't get along, then they do, and then they start banging each other at her trailer every chance they get. Burton's own wife divorces him as a result, not to mention Liz's own divorce with Eddie Fisher (another love affair resulting in a scandalous marriage that could use its own Lifetime treatment), and thus begins a torrid love affair and two marriages that results in more drinking, popping pills, extravagant spending on yachts and parties, etc. Liz works on certain films only if Burton is cast and we get a sneak peek at "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?" - a triumphant film in its own right that could have used more insight. I mean, do I really care to see the behind-the-scenes drama of "The V.I.P's"?

"Liz and Dick" is largely episodic and has many abrupt transitions - sometimes a line of dialogue is leading to a punchline or a bigger truth only to be obliterated by an abrupt cut to the next scene. The last half-hour fast-forwards through their lives so rapidly that you are left with nothing to chew on. Despite some poor editing and odd casting choices (Brian Howe as film director Joseph Mankiewicz without a shred of sarcasm?), the movie lives and breathes by the empathy that Lindsay Lohan imbues Liz Taylor with - that is a plus. Grant Bowler might lack the hard-edginess of the real Richard Burton but he is a watchable enough screen presence. I also liked how the film shows the birth of the paparazzi (mostly thanks to Fellini) and how they followed Liz and Taylor everywhere. "Liz and Dick" is trashy television dramatics, yet Lohan and Bowler give it a lift.

Flat-Out Funny Disaster at Cannes

MR. BEAN'S HOLIDAY (2007)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

Mr. Bean is certainly an acquired taste, and so is Rowan Atkinson who plays him. I can't imagine American audiences warming up to a man-child like Mr. Bean, who mugs for the camera mercilessly (of course, only in France is Jerry Lewis admired as a genius). 1997's "Mr. Bean" did not find its core audience in America and this mindless yet quite engaging comedy sequel, "Mr. Bean's Holiday," found even less of an audience. It is a shame because Atkinson has crafted a character whose simple-mindedness can serve as a reminder of Charlie Chaplin.

The movie can easily be described as Mr. Bean goes on a holiday to Cannes, thanks to a winning ticket. Disaster strikes from the beginning after arriving in Paris, he marches across streets and everything in between according to the lines of a map, including walking over any obstacle in his path (this is similar to a Levi's commercial from a year ago). At a French restaurant, he orders lobster and has no idea of how to eat it (some of the gags will remind one of Daryl Hannah's mermaid eating a lobster dinner in "Splash"). Before boarding a train, he asks a passenger to take pictures of him with his Sony mini-DV camera as he is approaching the train (there is one take after another). Naturally, the passenger's son ends up leaving the train without him thanks to Mr. Bean.

The rest of the movie follows Mr. Bean and his adventures with the passenger's son, Stepan (Max Baldry). Stepan is headed to Cannes as well since his father, the passenger who missed the train, is a member of the jury at the Cannes Film Festival. In the midst of one mishap after another, Bean loses his passport, his money and his train ticket. He tries to steal a motorbike, and fails. He wanders into a movie set where an arrogant, egocentric director (Willem Dafoe, who plays the part with perfect comic pitch) is making some sort of pretentious thriller (accent on the pretentious). There Mr. Bean dresses up as a Nazi extra, and meets the lovely Sabine (Emma de Caunes), an actress who is also on her way to Cannes to see the world premiere of Dafoe's film.

"Mr. Bean's Holiday" does drag slightly in the mid section, but it picks up at the Cannes Film Festival climax which features some of the movie's best comic setpieces. Mr. Bean may be too much to bear for some, but I enjoyed his incessant mugging and his inability to be anything but clumsy and a poster child for Murphy's Law. The movie is fun in all the pratfalls and comical blunders the character commits, though nothing is as funny as when he performs Puccini's famous "O mio babbino caro" on the streets for money, using nothing more than a caftan and a boom box!

As I said before, either you're with "Mr. Bean's Holiday" or you are not. I was and I saw a joy in Rowan Atkinson's performance that can be described as inspired and flat-out funny - he is like a silent comedian, especially when he never says anything and mostly grunts. And any movie that features the "Hawaii-5-0" theme and Puccini has got to be a little bit special.

The mutants strike back

X2 (2003)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

(Original review from 2003)

Comic books are such a hot property now that it was only a matter of time before someone decided on a sequel to "X-Men." The original "X-Men" made comic-book movies a hot property and since then we have been saddled with "Spider-Man," "Daredevil" and a "Blade" sequel, not to mention a full-scale "Hulk" film. "X-Men" had the advantage of looking and feeling like a comic-book come to life, thanks to the extravagant superpowers of its mutant supermen. "X2" is more of the same, but falls short of whatever real value the original film had.

As you recall from the original film, the mutants are discriminated in a society that dislikes anything different. Wolverine (Hugh Jackman) has blades in his knuckles, curious to find his roots of which he has no memory of. There's Professor X (Patrick Stewart), the leader of the X-Men who has virtually god-like powers. We have the return of the supervillain Magneto (Ian McKellen), who is being kept in a highly secure glass prison with every intention of escaping. And for those keeping score, there is the telepathic Jean Grey (Famke Janssen), her loving beau, the laser-eyed Cyclops (James Marsden), the teenaged Rogue (Anna Paquin), who has the ability to kill by merely touching someone, the weather-permitting Storm (Halle Berry) and so on. Magneto's trusty sidekick is Mystique (Rebecca Romjin-Stamos), a blue-scaled shapeshifter who has a key line of dialogue relating to mutants that may sum up both movies. There is also some nonsense involving General William Stryker (Brian Cox), a man who dislikes mutants and intends on destroying all of them by brainwashing Professor X (Patrick Stewart), who can communicate and control all of them.

"X2" has enough fireworks and special-effects on display to please every comic-book fan. We see Mystique shape-shifting into any human being (most witty example is when she changes into Stryker); Storm's weather-controlling tactics, usually involving rainstorms and tornado-like effects; Wolverine's climactic fight with Deathstrike, another talon-bearing mutant; the inside of Professor X's mindscapes; and a new mutant named Nightcrawler (Alan Cumming), who can teleport from one area to another and fight anyone in his path, includes scores of Secret Service agents.

For pure special-effects and mindless escapism, "X2" works but it falters when introducing too many characters and too many gimmicks. Unless you are an ardent fan of "X-Men" comics and can recollect the original film without hesitation, most of this sequel will come as a mystery to anyone who doesn't know the original characters. Even the tragically wasted Patrick Stewart's X-Man, a hugely titanic presence, is short-shrifted in favor of action galore. Most of these characters possess the most rudimentary exposition so that you may lose track of who they are and what they stand for. Halle Berry's Storm is also left in the rain without benefit of any personality except for those glowing eyes. At least the grand, awesome Ian McKellen transcends his Magneto role through his shrewd wit and expressive gestures - aside from Sean Connery, no other actor makes scenes of incredulity so incredible. Brian Cox, one of the best, most prolific character actors, also transcends his villainous role through his quiet charisma.

"X2" is entertaining and colorful, but it is also overlong and fraught with too much of everything. It is the newest example of sheer overkill in sequels where one presumes more of the same equals a better movie. In this case, it just means more is more of the same.

Mutants want inclusion in society

X-MEN (2000)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

(Originally reviewed in 2000)

I find that the trick to superhero movies is to let the audience in on the joke, otherwise you wind up with disasters like "Batman and Robin," which turned the Batman franchise into such a sex-plagued travesty that all of its noir origins dissipated as a result. On the other hand, there are superhero movies that make you gasp in wonder at all the wondrous sights, and also make you identify with the protagonists, namely the superheroes. Superman and Batman are two classic examples. "X-Men" is a close second - the first comic-book movie since Tim Burton's "Batman" that not only feels like a comic book yarn, it looks like one too. While watching it, I got the feeling that every sequence, every shot, was unspooling before your eyes like the dynamic sights of color and information that often leap from comic books. Stan Lee should be proud.

The X-Men, for those who have not read the comic books, are essentially powerful mutants - men and women with extraordinary powers that they seemed to have been born with. There is Wolverine (Hugh Jackman), who has metal claws that elongate from his hands when he gets mad; Cyclops (James Marsden), who has deadly laser vision protected by a visor; Storm (Halle Berry), who can conjure rainy weather when necessary; and Rogue (Anna Paquin), who can turn people to stone if she touches them (she is not popular on the dating scene). These are the good mutants, presided by Professor Charles Xavier (Patrick Stewart), who has the ability to read minds.

The evil mutants are presided over by Magneto (Ian McKellen), a former Holocaust survivor who wants the world population to be converted into mutants so they can be accepted into society. His minions include the tongue-lashing Toad (Ray Park), a human frog-of-sorts; the shape-shifting Mystique (Rebecca Romijn-Stamos), covered in blue-colored scaly skin; and finally Sabretooth (Tyler Mane), a growling animal, not unlike Wolvering though not as beastly.

The plot concerns an anti-mutant revolt started by a senator (Bruce Davison), who feels mutants present a danger to society. One can't quarrel with his view when witnessing the deadly emotions of Wolverine, seen at the beginning to be a bare-knuckled fighting champion for some kind of fight club, or the tragic, existential Rogue whose lips and mere touch warrant a coma-like paralysis or even death. Naturally, Magneto is at odds with the senator, as is Professor Xavier, though Magneto's plans are more dastardly - at least the kind-hearted professor is a believer in hope for his race.

"X-Men" rivals other recent comic book extravaganzas in its character-driven story - these mutants are suffering because of their condition and unfortunate deviance from society. I tend to quarrel with people when they say entertainment is just sheer entertainment - even in something as hackneyed as "The Matrix," there is the sense that the filmmakers are sharing their thoughts about the world of today and how it is envisioned in these trying times. The best character in "X-Men" is Wolverine - an almost half-werewolf mutant with the ability to heal himself. He has a great line (that could sum up most of the mutant characters) when asked if the retraction of the blades from his knuckles hurt: "Every time," he says.

My main quibble with "X-Men" is that it is simply an introduction to these characters - they come across as more than character types but they only seem defined by their powers. I know that it is too much to ask a blockbuster for some insight but consider what might have been. Wolverine is the most full-bodied character, but where does that leave Rogue and her emotional connection to him? What about Cyclops, Storm, the Professor or Jean Gray (Famke Janseen), the smart doctor who may have a thing for Wolverine? They are fun characters to watch, but who are they? And what about Magneto and his plans? He somehow does not seem to be such a major threat after all the sound and fury of the special-effects on display here.

Still, "X-Men" is sheer fun to watch, and every moment gives us something to look at. The fights, the battles, and the characters (particularly the titanic Ian McKellen) contribute highly to the sense of fun it instills. And if this is what it takes to get the rumored "Spider-Man" movie rolling, then I am all for the "X-Men."