Act 1 Scene 1: The War

WAG THE DOG (1997)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

(Originally reviewed in 1997, hence all the Clinton references)

One of the ten best films of 1997

In light of the recent events involving President Clinton and Paula Jones, not to mention the recent reports of the reemergence of Saddam Hussein, "Wag the Dog" is as perceptive and realistic a satire as I have ever seen; a dark, edgily written treatise on politics, Hollywood and the media, and how they are all interrelated.

"Wag the Dog" starts with a momentous sex-scandal involving the President of the United States - he apparently had a sexual encounter with an underage Girl Scout in the Oval Office. Naturally, the nation is on its toes with this scandal that threatens the upcoming election. Facing a desperate hour, the White House enlists a spin-control doctor, Conrad Bean (Robert De Niro), to divert the nation's attention by inventing a war with Albania! To do this, Conrad gets assistance from a disbelieving presidential aide (Anne Heche) and a veteran Hollywood producer named Stanley Motss (Dustin Hoffman) - together, they have to create the appearance of a war by utilizing the power of the mass media. Motss orchestrates the production by creating a stage where a young girl (Kirsten Dunst) is supposedly running along the barracks of Albania carrying a kitten. "Get me a calico kitten," shouts Motss, admitting he's never had this much fun on a production before. Through a two-day process of computer animation, some "Anne Frank sirens" and a hand-held camera, a fake war is unveiled before the public's eyes. As Motss makes clear, "This is nothing. This is a walk in the park. Have you ever shot in Italy? "

And this is just the beginning. The catch is that for every deceptive performance they pull, the principals have to promise to never tell anyone, or they will be killed. The ambitious Motss wants some credit for his work, though: "The producer never gets any credit. How can you have a movie without a producer?" Even the young "Albanian" girl can't mention her performance on her resume - "It's just a pageant," declares Conrad.

"Wag the Dog" is based on the book "American Hero," a fictional chronicle of George Bush's attempts to create an unwanted war in the Persian Gulf. Is the movie outrageous and exaggerated, or is it speaking the truth? Considering the recent events surrounding Clinton's presidency, the movie is so truthful and acidly written, it is bitingly scary and sad to watch. The movie is basically saying that the media reports lies, not truths. Of course, we have seen dozens of movies that showed the corrupt amorality at the core of politics and the media - we see it every day, from the nightly news intent on reporting bloody crimes, to "The Jerry Springer Show" that advertises more and more fist fights, to the absurd overexposure of the Paula Jones case. What "Wag the Dog" does differently is to show how far politicians and the press are willing to go to sell their "product," basically yellow journalism, to the American public. The public will believe anything the media reports to them, so if there's a war going on with Albania, by golly, they'll buy it. Anything will work as long as it distracts attention from the President's sexual dalliances. In one of several attempts to prove their credibility, they concoct an old blues record called "Old Shoe," which becomes the nickname for a long-lost war hero (Woody Harrelson) who is actually a psychotic prisoner!

The wonderful cast is first-rate. Dustin Hoffman is excellent as the showy, nervous, fast-talking producer Motss who recalls the equally pretentious producer Robert Evans - it is a performance that ranks with Hoffman's best work in "Midnight Cowboy" and "Rain Man." Robert De Niro brings a smoothness and calmness that I've not seen him do since "Stanley and Iris"; note the calm precision by which he utters lines such as "I'm working on it" or "We'll have to kill you" with a smile. Watching De Niro and Hoffman perform together is as pleasurable an experience as I've had in all of 1997. Anne Heche has a less remarkable role as the presidential aide but she holds her own with these two heavyweights, especially during the conference scenes. Kudos must also go to Woody Harrelson's explosive cameo as the dumb, naive rapist with rotten teeth who pretends to be a war hero from Albania. It is equally delightful to see other memorable supporting roles including Willie Nelson as a singer trying to come up with a theme song for Albania; Denis Leary who is great fun as a slogan specialist; and there's William H. Macy (a Mamet regular) as an FBI agent who's curious about the credibility of this war.

"Wag the Dog" is as incisive and tragic a commentary on the amorality and lack of values in today's media frenzy as "Network" was about television. A brilliant script by David Mamet and Hillary Henkin, superb direction by Barry Levinson, typically "contrasty" cinematography by Robert Richardson, and expert performances by a game cast make for one of 1997's finest films. It's unforgettable, saddening, hilarious, and honest about the manipulation of the media, and how they report the news as if it was entertaining fodder for the dumb and dumber set. This is not a film to be ignored.

Commercial Plug-in for Breakin' 3: Ghetto Blast Energy

MAC AND ME (1988)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

"Mac and Me" is one of the most egregious examples of commercial plug-ins in a movie I've ever seen. It is not a movie - it is a blatant commercial for Coca-Cola and McDonald's. Period. It also serves as a desperately thin clone of Spielberg's "E.T," which in an odd maneuver might serve as a poor commercial plug-in for Spielberg's classic tearjerker. Yeah, I know, E.T. ate Reese's Pieces in that movie but the candy did not save his life when the poor alien's health suffered. Also, E.T. never danced a jig at McDonald's while young customers breakdanced to synthetic, synthesizer pop music that even Debbie Gibson would not have played in her walkman. But why stop there? Was that breakdancing bit a plug-in for the "Breakin'" movie that never was - "Breakin' 3: Ghetto Blast Energy"?

Mac and Me hilarious wheelchair fall

"Mac and Me" has actors dressed in beige-colored, seemingly latexed alien costumes with middle-aged pot bellies, and little Mac (Mysterious Alien Creature) is the largely inanimate bug-eyed alien who ends up in suburbia and resides with a kid in a wheelchair (Jade Calegory). Why did this uncommunicative alien decide to live with this family? All it can do is whistle to communicate. Then there is the single mom (Christine Ebersole) as the Dee Wallace clone who works at Sears! How do they afford the house in Sacramento? My wife asked that one as we watched and I can't answer that - show me the family's financial records! Meanwhile, why on God's Good Earth do these aliens need to sip Coca-Cola to live? Why are Mama, Papa and Sister Googly-Eyed Alien Family out in the middle of the desert where there are no Coca-Cola vending machines and no Skittles? I am guessing the Death Valley location resembles their barren planet, which can only mean that the planet and desert scenes were shot on the same day. "Mac and Me" is the kind of idiotic E.T. clone where the FBI agents run at Flash speeds while chasing a kid on a wheelchair in the middle of freeway traffic! I now have a deeper respect for another "E.T." clone, "Short Circuit," a movie I found deplorably dull.

"Mac and Me" features a host of unintentional laughs but my favorite is the fact that the aliens are sucked into a vacuum hose twice. Too bad the movie was not sucked into the vacuum and blown out and buried in the New Mexico desert. I mean, look at those Atari E.T. video games they found out there.

Hollow and underimagined Irving adaptation

SLEEPY HOLLOW (1999)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

(Original review from 1999)

An elderly man sits in a carriage at night, watching the silhouetted trees in the darkness and hearing strange noises. Suddenly, something dashes through his carriage and the driver's head is gone. The man is scared and leaps out of the carriage. He walks up to a scarecrow with an ominous, eerie pumpkin for a head. He hears a noise, turns around and his head is lopped off too. A nice start, but what a shame that the whole movie is like that - it makes decapitation seem as matter-of-factly as those "Friday the 13th" movies. We have come a long way since Disney's scarily amusing classic short, "The Legend of Sleepy Hollow."

Back at Sleepy Hollow, a dreary town saturated in fog, the bland, easily bewitched constable Ichabod Crane (Johnny Depp) arrives from New York City to investigate a series of puzzling decapitations. Puzzling to Ichabod, but not to the townspeople who are certain that a supernatural figure on a horse, known as the Headless Horseman, is responsible for the murders. "We have murders in New York without benefit of ghouls or goblins," mutters Ichabod, in one of the movie's few clever lines. Eventually, Ichabod discovers that this superstition is fact, but the reasons for the Headless Horseman's rampage may leave viewers wishing that director Tim Burton would have had the demonic imagination to reinvent this fable with more juice than is allowed.

"Sleepy Hollow's" ad campaign is absolutely correct - heads do roll but with little pretense or justification. We see the nocturnal horseman galloping through the narrow roads raising his sword and ax with all his might and severing each and every head (he even battles Ichabod in a duel that had me laughing unintentionally). You see a decapitation once and it is threatening, albeit somewhat scary. Second time is still thrilling with the music score by Danny Elfman pumping through the speakers even louder. The third and fourth time, you are left wondering if Tim Burton did nothing more than create a big-budget slasher film with a headless Jason Voorhees!

Mr. Burton leaves little to the imagination, an ironic gesture on his part since he is a man borne of vivid imaginings. Remember the wonderful creation of Johnny Depp's sad-eyed, clownish, fragile Edward Scissorhands! The wondrous surrealism of "Pee Wee's Big Adventure"! The comical belching of Michael Keaton's Beetlejuice! And what do we have in "Sleepy Hollow"? An angry, elliptical horseman who huffs and puffs and not much else (oh, yes, he loves to steal heads). This may be because the monster is from Washington Irving's novella, not an original creation of Burton's.

The other characters are barely magnified beyond paper-thin caricature types. Johnny Depp is not as wild-eyed as he was in "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas," but his Ichabod is too bland and not eccentric enough to stimulate interest. Christina Ricci is the blonde-curled Katrina whom Ichabod falls in love with (Winona Ryder was also mistakenly blonde in "Edward Scissorhands"), but they don't have an iota of chemistry together. Ricci is supposed to be some kind of witch but the script glosses over this characteristic in favor of more beheadings. The other actors show up merely as window dressing - Michael Gambon, Miranda Richardson and Michael Gough appear like blocks of wood in Burton's world with no sense of urgency. In fact, if this horseman is so dangerous and people are so afraid of him, why don't they all move to another town? Or is there a conspiracy involving an inheritance and doomed love? We can never be sure.

"Sleepy Hollow" is both sleep-inducing and hollow, showing us nothing more than numerous beheadings and bleeding tree trunks. Save for Christopher Walken's frightening cameo, beautifully captivating cinematography and a couple of dazzling dream sequences, this Gothic wannabe fable is charmless, joyless, frenetic junk. It is time Burton sets his eyes on the vivid, imaginative power of his own creations.

Rom-Com should've been spiked with Huevos de Chivo

LAWS OF ATTRACTION (2004)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

When you cast two attractive movie stars in a romantic comedy, you should have sparks flying in every direction. A spikingly witty script would help and a decent director. These are qualities you would expect when casting Julianne Moore and Pierce Brosnan as the stars. Unfortunately, as is often the case with romantic comedies, there is not much wit and hardly any sparks.

Julianne Moore plays Audrey Woods, a ditsy divorce attorney who eats junk food. Pierce Brosnan is Daniel Rafferty, a competing divorce attorney with stained ties who lives in an apartment in Chinatown. The two of them often end up on the same cases. The judge is always played by Nora Dunn. Audrey tries to dig up dirt on the opposing clients by rummaging through Daniel's belongings. But Daniel has a miniature camera that catches her in the act in his apartment. Daniel is not as keen on digging up any dirt, or so it seems. Both Daniel and Audrey decide to eat out at restaurants and on three different occasions, they get drunk and end up in bed together.

Meanwhile, their latest case is a divorce settlement between a womanizing rock star (Michael Sheen) and his desperately shrill wife (Parker Posey). This subplot involves a nice visit to Ireland and to a roomy castle, though scenic shots last merely a few seconds which can mean that footage could've easily been shot in Canada to substitute for Ireland. If you are going to shoot in Ireland, by all means shoot Ireland in all its natural beauty!

There is not much more to "Laws of Attraction" I am afraid. And don't get me started on saying the same old negative things about stale romantic comedies (Norman Jewison's "Only You" is far better than this, okay?) As for Julianne Moore, she was more convincing playing a ditz in "Evolution" than in this movie. Brosnan can effortlessly play off his charisma but he seems like he rather be drinking Huevos de Chivo (Goat's Balls) and partying in Ireland than starring in this movie. He shares no real chemistry with Moore because the director Peter Howitt and the screenwriters have not allowed for such scenes. The movie is so inert that the foreseeable climax doesn't register any honest emotion whatsoever. Considering that this is the classic boy-meets-girl, girl-breaks-up-with-boy and then they live happily ever after tale, the crucial girl-breaking-up-with-boy scene would've lead to something other than what is actually delivered.

No romance, no comedy, no sparks, no movie - it just coasts along relying on the charisma of the two stars to give it weight. Yes, they are attractive but so were Katherine Hepburn and Spencer Tracy in their comedies - nobody would've ever accused them of coasting along on their looks alone. But there is one good line delivered with expert comic timing by Julianne Moore. Brosnan responds to her theories on marriage by saying, "I see. I see a lot." He then asks her if she is dating anyone. She says: "You see a lot? Am I dating anyone? What kind of a segue is that?" There are a few other good lines in that one sequence but that is still no reason to recommend this stifling huevos de chivo of a movie. Case closed.

The Fighting Ortegas

PRICE OF GLORY (2000)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

(Originally written in 2001)

In the last five years, independent films have become more and more like Hollywood films in terms of genre, formulas, and general sappiness. Consider "The Tao of Steve," a low-budget film that resembles a corny Hollywood romance with a neat and tidy happy ending. "Price of Glory" falls under the same category: a boxing film full of cliches and a wishy-washy ending. The big difference is that "Price of Glory" aims to be something more, and heads for a wrongheaded climax with no payoff.

Jimmy Smits is Arturo Ortega, a former boxer who wants his children to become boxers. He wants them to have the life he never had. In the opening black-and-white flashback, we see a young Arturo beaten to a bloody pulp in what was ultimately a fixed fight. Since then, he lost the passion and nerve to continue boxing - he knew when to quit.

The problem is that Arturo doesn't know when to quit when it comes to his sons. Nevertheless, as the boys grow older, Sonny (Jon Seda), Jimmy (Clifton Collins, Jr.) and Johnny (Ernesto Hernandez) become the "Fighting Ortegas" yet it is Johnny, the youngest and meanest of the bunch, who becomes the likely prizefighter to become heavyweight champion. This means a lot to his father, and naturally to the Latino community in their hometown of New Mexico. But when opportunity knocks, family squabbles take over. Arturo is their trainer and their promoter, but an outside fight promoter, Nick Everson (Ron Perlman), wants to represent the promising Johnny and the other boys. Will Arturo let go, or will the sons follow the glitz from Nick's promotion?

"Price of Glory" has one major flaw and that is the character of Arturo - he is a man trying to live his dream through his sons. The sons know this but it takes Arturo a long time to come to this realization. And when tragedy comes between them, Arturo continues to be naive and hurtful. Even his wife, Rita (Maria del Mar), can't reason with him. Arturo's personality is enough to cause the audience to lose their patience.

"Price of Glory" benefits from the fine, truthful performance by Jimmy Smits but the screenplay avoids dealing with some larger issues. Since Arturo refuses to sell out his sons, which is really for their own benefit, and since he feels he can redeem himself through their success, then why does he feel he can still bond with them and make them forget his harmful emotions after the tragedy that takes place prior to the climax? In fact, it is no surprise that the climax is headed for a "Rocky" finish, but why deny Smits' the expected payoff scene where his character can learn the error of his ways? The drama and tension peter out to some heavy melodrama that would seem at home in any daytime soap opera than in a real film about real people. Even the villainous promoter, Nick, seems more sympathetic and understanding than Arturo.

"Price of Glory" has some wonderful flavor to it in its cinematography and scenery, and I liked the sporadic depiction of a Latino family trying to come to terms with their troubles. The boxing fights are also well-directed but they do lack the thrust of "Raging Bull," which set the standard for all boxing movies. Still, "Price of Glory" is the kind of film that tastes good on the surface yet leaves a bitter after taste once you consider how the ingredients were mixed.

League has an Invisible Story

THE LEAGUE OF EXTRAORDINARY GENTLEMEN (2003)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

Originally reviewed in 2004

Sean Connery reportedly turned down roles in "The Matrix" and "Lord of the Rings." Apparently, he did not understand them (what is so blindingly complex about "Lord of the Rings"?) So instead of turning down "League of Extraordinary Gentlemen," which he also did not understand, he takes on the coveted role of Alan Quatermain. That's understandable since Connery is perfect for that role, but the movie is a lumbering bore with the most infrequent sparks of excitement.

Now for a slight digression: a friend of mine liked "LXG" (a suitable abbreviation used in ads for this movie) but he hated "Highlander 2: The Quickening." I liked "Highlander 2" for its witty exchanges courtesy of Sean Connery. But there is nothing to take away from "LXG." The characters are filled with no inner life or distinctive personality. For example, we have Connery as Alan Quatermain, the aging adventurer who will do anything for the British Empire (as he proclaims early on, "Long Live the Queen!") But he still has reservations because he lost his son to the Empire. Nevertheless, Quatermain joins a league of gentlemen that includes former pirate Captain Nemo (Naseeruddin Shah); the Invisible Man aka Rodney Skinner (Tony Curran); Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (Jason Flemyng); the sophisticated Dorian Gray (Stuart Townshend); a mature Tom Sawyer (Shane West), who fires a gun like an American (thank you, Mr. Quatermain); and vampire Mina Harker (Peta Wilson). Wait a doggone minute! Mina is no gentleman!

Based on a graphic novel, "LXG" begins with a hint of promise. After a while, all promise is thrown to the winds when Quatermain fights with his bare fists and a rifle against machine-gun-toting villains! Now this tale is set in 1899 so where do these machine guns come from? But what really bothered me is that the gunfight is right at the beginning of the movie - it is saying something when 1985's "King Solomon's Mines" (featuring Richard Chamberlain as Quatermain) had more pizzazz and subtlety than what transpires in all of "LXG." For action, we get the requisite explosions (including a series of dirigibles exploding in unison), a futuristic looking "automobile" that looks more like Connery's limo, a humongous looking ship called the Nautilus that seems to occupy more space than it should (especially when traveling through the canals of Venice), and one too many whizzing bullets.

To make matters worse, we have some unintended laughs from the humongous Mr. Hyde, seen at first galloping through the rooftops of the Rue Morgue with his tuxedo ripped apart and hat intact. Ha! Then Mr. Hyde fights a bigger hulk at the climax! Then the curious Mr. Gray is apparently immortal (or dead, take your pick) because bullets pass through him like flypaper! I am sure some of you know that the literary Mr. Gray made a deal with the devil where he would stay young forever while his portrait would age. Okay, but where is it written that it also makes Gray impervious to bullets? Perhaps readers of the comic can enlighten me. And Mina Harker has a knack for biting necks - does that mean she is also powerless like the literary Dracula during daylight? And why the rambunctious Tom Sawyer comes to the rescue of this league when he is uninvited still vexes me.

Of course, none of this would matter if the movie was fun on some escapist level. What we get are a series of unrelated action setpieces with no sense of urgency or level of adventure. Since the adventure is ambiguous at best (we never know what is really at stake outside of the destruction of Venice) and the characters are thinner than paint thinner, we are left with a whole lot of nothing. It is the League of The Invisible Story.

The Messiah might be back, to warn us

BROTHER JOHN (1971)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

"Brother John" is such an intriguing, fascinating film of such ambiguity that its running time of an hour and a half seems too short. It is another of Sidney Poitier's racially charged films but it has less to do with race than with its warning of impending doom by its main protagonist.

Poitier is Brother John who returns to his hometown of Hackley, Alabama after learning of his sister's death. Nobody has communicated with John so how he learns of her death is a mystery. Will Greer is the kind town doctor who helped give birth to John, and senses something at odds about him. So does the town sheriff and the doctor's own son, a suspicious prosecutor (Bradford Dillman). Suspicion grows when it is assumed that Brother John may be trying to help union organizers during a strike, but that is not the case. John's childhood girlfriend, Louisa (Beverly Todd), senses the aloofness yet she is ready to rekindle what they once had. But when some of the racist cops and a former suitor of Luisa's (Paul Winfield) try to strong-arm him, John is more than capable of fighting and weakening them in ways they can't fathom.

"Brother John" never makes it clear who John is, or why he is able to enter any country without question such as Cuba. Is he a politician, a Communist sympathizer, or maybe the Messiah? Why does he keep journals with empty pages? Why is he so aloof to the town that needs him desperately? What is his mission? Is he there to warn the town doctor of the Second Coming in the form of hazardous winds, or is just bad weather heading their way? Hard to say and the film never bothers to give us a clue. He is a mysterious stranger who only visits when a family member dies.

"Brother John" is not a great film nor does it have a tenth of the grit or racist allegorical tones that "The Defiant Ones" or "In the Heat of the Night" had and yet, for all its peculiarities and ambiguities, it is often powerful and compelling and Poitier has an unmatched screen presence that is intoxicating. It is a good film, exceptionally well-acted, but I can't say for sure what the heck it is all about.