Vicious, unsentimental wordplay

CLOSER (2004)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

Original Review from 2004

"Think of a euphemism for me."

"You are disarming."

"That is not a euphemism."

"Yes, it is."

These are such delicate words, powerfully acted by two lead actors, Natalie Portman and Jude Law, that you would think you were watching a very delicate romantic comedy. Not so. Mike Nichols' adaptation of Patrick Marber's play is vicious, unsentimental wordplay. Imagine watching an Edward Albee play adapted by Neil LaBute and you might get a rough idea of what you are in for.

The setting is modern day London. Jude Law is the failed novelist who writes obits. He notices a beaming young red-haired woman in the street. She is hit by a car but survives with minor wounds. He takes her to the hospital. He is late for work yet he is smitten by her. He goes to work and she leaves. Next scene shows Dan, having his photograph taken for a published novel he has written about Alice - the girl who was hit by a car. The photographer is Anna (Julia Roberts), who is more in love with her camera than with people. She takes her precious camera everywhere, including aquariums. Dan is easily smitten by Anna and asks her out after kissing her (a scene that is breathless in how long the take is focused on them). Anna refuses. And the scene ends with a moment of raw honesty, like most of "Closer."

Then we flash forward a few months later, sometimes a few years later, as Dan sets up a date with Dr. Larry (Clive Owen) by pretending to be Anna in an instant message chat. He asks the doctor to meet Anna at an aquarium and does, and the denouement is surprising for the doctor. Anna starts dating Larry and eventually marries him. Deceit continues despite the fact that Larry may be happily in love with Anna and vice versa. Same with Dan and Alice. Alice works at a strip club and has moved in with Dan. Dan is secretly having an affair with Anna. He admits this to Alice, who of course moves out briskly but not before asking if he ever loved her. Larry arrives back from a business trip and proclaims he had sex with a prostitute. Anna admits she has had an affair with Dan.

If this sounds like daytime soap opera, then it is the foul-mouthed version of it. Except "Closer" invites us to dig deeper, as about as deep as Neil LaBute can get on a good day, and doesn't just aim to shock and numb the audience with naughtiness. The characters aren't so much in love as much as they are in love with the truth - they are dishonest yet are arbiters of the truth when it comes to infidelity. Dan and Alice always get to the naked truth about whom they have been sleeping with, and why. Anna seeks to tell the truth but keeps delaying it. Larry is set in his ways, and plays games only to get what he wants - Anna as his wife. He even gets her to sleep with him to justify his signing the divorce papers. Mike Nichols makes this a modern-day tale of the lack of values and ethics in relationships and marriages. There are surprising and disturbing insights into how far people will go to hurt each other, though it is absurd to assume that Nichols is suggesting all relationships are like the ones depicted here. Instead, he chooses actors who infuse the characters with layers of humanity and heart so it makes it harder to pull away. Clive Owen shows what a bastard Larry is, but he also demonstrates the pain he feels not just in belaboring Anna's sexual preferences explicitly but also in knowing that she may not love him anymore. Julia Roberts shows the compassionate side of Anna, the observer of all, who may be more attuned to her feelings than anyone else. Still, she succumbs to deceit in the end. Then there is Jude Law who brings a morose puppy-dog look to Dan - he looks for truth in Alice and is resentful when she is honest. Yet he also resents doing the same. And the enigmatic Alice is looking for companionship and possibly love, but she may be as lost as anyone in the entire film. Can any of these people ever get along?

"Closer" is a cinematically rendered play, but a damn good one in every respect. Mike Nichols shows us frequent close-ups, examining the hurt and pain etched in each of his actors' faces (as he did in "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?") This is a movie of pure talk, one of the best reasons to see films nowadays. Of course, adapting a play to film can be tricky because you don't want to seem too talky - cinema has the capability to transfer small moments of observation with silence and gestures, tactics that are invisible in a play. Mike Nichols has the cinematic lure down pat, and consequently the words and gestures are magnified by the actors' divine, fascinating, introspective faces. There was a time when dialogue was as central to a film's success as any other aspect. The words in this film burn with such vitality that you'll be exhausted and yet enlightened. Sometimes, there are truly penetrating words referring to bodily fluids and sexual practices. But if you have seen "Carnal Knowledge," one of Nichols' earlier pictures, you will not be surprised that he is revisiting such roughly-hewn material.

It is not fair to single one actor out from the group. All perform as well as expected. Julia Roberts proves once again what a wonderful character actress she can be - it may help that she barely elicits that famous wide grin throughout. Jude Law is as perfect as he can be as the bookish, sad lover who is never satisfied with anyone. Clive Owen simply lacerates the screen with his roguish, haughty presence. Only Natalie Portman falls short of really pulling her character through - she seemed more at ease in "Garden State." Here, she seems unsure of herself, which may benefit the character though Alice remains too much of a cipher. Still, I admired many of Portman's scenes and consequently admire her for taking on such a risky role.

It is often said that audiences expect movies to uplift, to ease the cold, harsh realities of the world they live in. A dour picture like "Closer" will not make audiences sympathetic to the cold, harsh realities of love and the loveless that exist. And yet I found this film more optimistic than most dramas or romantic comedies about love - the closer you get to the reality of this movie, the better you'll feel that you may not have experienced the harshness, the pain, the guilt of loving someone. Or not.

Run, Julia, Run!

RUNAWAY BRIDE (1999)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia (Original Review from 1999)

Imagine Joan Cusack as a weird, wild and wonderful woman with certain insecurities about herself, living in a town not unlike Mayberry or Pleasantville. She falls in love with an older reporter (Hector Elizondo) who comes into town trying to verify rumors about a bride who runs from every wedding opportunity, hence Cusack. Cusack falls for the old tiger, but differences settle in about age and she confides in a therapist (Richard Gere) who is a bespectacled man with a mustache - somewhere within this stiff she finds an attractive man if he would only shave that mustache and remove the glasses. Unfortunately. Gere has an attractive sister (Julia Roberts) who tries to protect him from her wooing. Naturally, Cusack ends up with Elizondo but there is a sense of bitterness and sadness that she did not end up with Gere. Alas, "Runaway Bride," although be warned that the plot description I just offered is not the movie itself. This is simply something I thought of while watching and trying to stay awake with this stale, laughless stupidity of a movie.

In reality, Garry Marshall's latest romantic comedy confection stars Richard Gere as "Ike" Graham, a columnist for the USA Today who has trouble coming up with any fresh ideas. He resorts to going to the local bar and is inspired by a patron who speaks of a "runaway bride," a woman who leaves men at the altar. Almost immediately Ike writes the column based on the patron's testimony (though this is never really made clear). Women on the street berate Ike and hit him on the head with rolled-up newspapers before he discovers a snarling letter from the bride herself printed by the editor. Apparently, Ike misrepresented many facts and exaggerated many figures. He is fired by the editor, his former wife (Rita Wilson). Now, Ike goes to this picture-postcard, Mayberry-like town and confronts the snarling woman, Maggie Carpenter (Julia Roberts). She is about to get married again, and Ike senses that she will run like a rabbit again. Or will she succumb to Gere's charm and smooth-talking demeanor? And is it possible that good romantic comedies are a thing of the past?

Basically, the formula is set up for this movie, and all the cliches are in place and nothing else. This is one of the most charmless, dullest and periodically dumbest movies I have ever seen. How can a respected director like Marshall reduce Gere and Roberts to cardboard cutouts with about as much sex and romantic appeal as a pair of refrigerators? Roberts is actually boring to watch in this movie - her wide grins and "duckbill platypus" mugging is unflattering to say the least. Gere seems more stiff than ever, and shares no charisma or chemistry with Roberts. Interesting, considering what a solid pair they were in "Pretty Woman," also directed by Marshall. I never understood the latter's success but it had gobs of wit and real emotions unlike this scrap heap. Nevertheless, Gere and Roberts felt like real people in that movie - here they are sitcom variations.

While desperately trying to stay awake, I noticed a couple of nods to "Pretty Woman," a cameo by Garry Marshall at a baseball game, and a video copy of "The Graduate," one of my favorite comedies of all time. There also is one good line about Fed-Ex trucks, and a couple of briefly delicious moments by the droll Elizondo. Outside of that, this "Bride" is of little merit. Even the quirky Joan Cusack (not weird as she is described by Roberts) is often excruciating. Jean Schertler as Grandma supplies a couple of chuckles but nothing more. And for trivia buffs, there is Julia's sister, Lisa Roberts, as "Elaine from Manhattan" in one scene.

Forget the silly "Pretty Woman," "Notting Hill," released earlier this year, was one of the best films of Julia's career - she carried the film with grace and subtlety and had the good sense of co-starring with the daffy Hugh Grant. They had sweet chemistry and had a solidly good script to boot from "Four Weddings and a Funeral" scribe, Richard Curtis. "Runaway Bride" has none of those virtues and seems to have been made in a rush. My advice to Ms. Roberts about future romantic comedies is to follow Lola's example: Run Julia Run!

20 Years Ago, in that nasty little wood chipper...

FARGO (1996)

An appreciation by Jerry Saravia

Best film of 1996 (Shared with Breaking the Waves)

20 Years Ago, in that nasty little wood chipper...

For better or worse, the Coen Brothers remains the most wildly original filmmakers in the cinema world right now. Being an advocate of their edgy, brilliant films like "Blood Simple" and "Barton Fink" and less of an admirer of "Raising Arizona" and "The Hudsucker Proxy," I always look forward to their next project. Their few failures are more interesting than the mediocre Hollywood movies that succeed. "Fargo" is another brilliant film in the Coens canon and a pleasant (or unpleasant) return to the dread and pessimism that "Blood Simple" wrought with an added sharp edginess and deliberately black comic humor that can make one wince. Twenty years later, it is still their most memorable effort, a delectable blend of black comedy, satire, blanc noir (white noir to the rest of you), family values and mayhem. 

"Fargo" stars the remarkable William H. Macy as Jerry Lundegaard, a Minnesota car salesman who is in deep financial debt. To get himself out of debt, he schemes to have his wife kidnapped by a couple of scummy lowlifes so that he can acquire the ransom demand from his wealthy father-in-law. Once Jerry gets the money, he can split it with the lowlifes for a percentage and pay off his debt. This is easier said than done and in the world of the Coens, nothing ever works out as it should.

"Fargo" is directed by Joel Coen and written by Ethan and Joel Coen, and the film certainly benefits by not being as simplistic or inane as any murder-of-the-week TV movie. "Fargo" has gobs of wit and malicious black humor but its main strength is derived from its sense of humanity. The humanity comes from Frances McDormand ("Blood Simple") as the local police chief, Marge Gunderson, who is very pregnant and is confronted with a triple homicide in the icy, cold, dour town of Brainerd. Marge is a strong-willed woman married to an almost sedate husband and would-be artist whose biggest concern is to paint pictures of mallards on three-cent stamps. Marge tries to solve the homicide case on her own (most of the police department is quite incompetent), and the trail of corpses leads to Fargo, North Dakota and back to Brainerd where she runs into a wild assortment of characters. They include bimbos who describe one of the killers as "funny-looking"; a lonely long-time admirer of Marge's; overly friendly waitresses and hotel employees; a tough-as-nails Native American who vouched for the kidnappers, and eventually the sneaky Lundegaard. They all speak in a high-pitched Minnesota twang that includes phrases like, "yah, sure," "ah, jeez," "you darn' tootin," and "well, yah."

Most of the truly black humor in "Fargo" centers around the two inept lowlife kidnappers (both played by Steve Buscemi and Peter Stormare). Everything goes wrong from the start when they kidnap Lundegaard's wife and kill three people along the way, not to mention a reversal in Lundegaard's plans with the kidnapping. Buscemi is the "funny-looking man" trying desperately to get the ransom and threatens Lundegaard by asking for more money. The reticent Stormare kills a police officer and just about everyone else who gets in the line of fire. These nitwits both altercate and fume with the kind of erratic energy that you can only find in a Coens film.

The performances are faultless to a tee, particularly Frances McDormand who gives Marge humanity, a wry sense of humor and an emotional control that is both calm and cautious, even when she sees a body being shredded in a wood chipper. It is clearly the role of her career (she won the Best Actress Oscar for it). Steve Buscemi is as always gleefully riotous as one of the hired kidnappers who becomes too frantic when he talks. Peter Stormare ("Damage") plays the other kidnapper who is silent and eerily menacing. Kudos must also go to William H. Macy ("Oleanna") who shows both fecklessness and cowardice with equal skill.

"Fargo" has everything a great film should have - great writing and great cinematography. The sharp characterizations and ostensibly playful dialogue, full of misunderstandings, stupid mistakes and accidents, brings a creepy veneer to the whole film. It is also fascinating how the film shifts beautifully from Lundegaard's predicament to Marge's investigation with terrific balance. The cinematography by Roger Deakins superbly employs the use of pure white (snowy landscapes, cloudy skies) thus evoking the ironic twists and turns of this chilling noir tale - a sort of film blanc steeped in the trappings of noir. There's one dazzling overhead shot where we see Lundegaard fiddling and banging the windshield of his car with an ice scraper and all that surrounds him is the frozen hell of Minnesota. Shots like these are abundantly used and reinforce an emotionally blank feeling to the audience - after seeing the film, you'll literally feel cold as ice. That may explain why hordes of audience members fled the screening I attended as soon as the credits rolled up. 

"Fargo" does leave you feeling cold but it is never less than enthralling, chillingly violent, sharply funny and entertaining. Marge and Lundegaard are two of the most original characters I've seen on the screen in quite some time. The brilliance of "Fargo" as a satire and black comedy is that it never steps too far over the line into exaggeration and comic buffoonery. In that respect, Marge and Lundegaard could have been presented as eccentric caricatures. The Coens have found a way of humanizing the oddest of people in the oddest of situations.

Flung out of space

CAROL (2015)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

The most heartrending aspect about Todd Haynes' "Carol" is that a passionate love between two people is slowly diminishing, yet it is also getting stronger. So ultimately we feel a love has been lost due to foreseeable circumstances only to be deemed everlasting. Such is the beauty of this most stellar film and, although love between two women is not a novelty in 2015, it is the depiction of it that rises above most any other films. Fact is that, aside from Haynes' masterpiece "Far From Heaven," I do not recall seeing such elegance and beauty in romantically engaging strokes with a modicum of passionate love set during such a turbulent time like the 1950s. "Carol" has all that.

Modicum of passion is expected in a tale set in the 1950's. A timid, introspective, aspiring photographer who works at Frankenberg's department store, Therese (Rooney Mara, remarkable in every sense of the word), has her sad Santa hat on as she works during the hustle and bustle of the Christmas season. She spots one woman in a fur coat, Carol (Cate Blanchett), who makes eye contact with Therese. A moment is exchanged. A gift is purchased, that being a train set for Carol's daughter. Phone numbers are exchanged. Not much ensues, and yet so much has happened. Therese and Carol are intrigued by each other because they dared to notice each other. Before you know it, Carol wants to show her appreciation for Therese's helpful customer service by inviting her to her country home. Carol is going through a tough divorce, and Therese is merely unsure if she wants to be with her beau who is asking her to travel with him to Europe. When Theresa is invited to go on a road trip with Carol, there is no hesitation.

"Carol" is sublime in its absolute restraint and its exquisite study of manners and implicit body language. Only Cate Blanchett could give another woman the impression of romantic interest without saying a word. Carol is going through severe turmoil over her divorce and whether she can have joint custody of her precious daughter. In some ways, Cate's performance reminds me of her brilliant role in "Blue Jasmine" only this wealthy woman can't show much weakness or vulnerability, except when she is in Therese's company. She reminds her soon-to-be ex (Kyle Chandler) that she can take a stand for herself, and reminds her former in-laws that a psychotherapist is not a doctor. Carol finds her footing whereas Jasmine's strength dissipates.

Therese is the quiet woman who has trouble making connections with others. She turns down a romantic fling with a New York Times wannabe writer. She can't fathom why her boyfriend will not sleep with her despite his admittance he has had anonymous sex with two other women. A curtain of loneliness surrounds Therese especially when she is her darkroom, or sitting in a rain-drenched car. The saddest image of all is watching her in the department store with her Santa hat - nobody seems to notice her. An early flash-forward scene of Therese with Carol at a ritzy restaurant shows Therese growing more and more disconnected, at least to other people but not to Carol. What is most remarkable about Rooney Mara is that she conveys her observations of others through acute glances, once again proving that less is more. I expect Academy Award wins for both actresses - their work is a master class in how much one can convey without words.

"Carol" is based on a partly autobiographical novel by Patricia Highsmith (she initially used a pseudonym when it was published) and, though there are some slight changes, the film bravely echoes a deep secret where two women have to keep their passion guarded yet can't resist each other. It is the repressive 1950's and, not unlike Haynes' "Far From Heaven" set during the same era and also depicting a secret love affair that is likely to burst the moral code of the times, "Carol" gives us a glimmer of hope, not necessarily a sunny disposition with a pseudo happy ending. Haynes, one of our giant national treasures of cinema, foreshadows something glorious between Therese and Carol, mostly through the hint of the color red (note the traffic stop red signals and the red lampshades in the final scene). To these two women, lesbianism is not their phrase, it is society's. For Carol and Therese, love is their higher calling. 

Re-awakening the original Star Wars is only half the fun

STAR WARS: THE FORCE AWAKENS (2015)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

Director Kevin Smith described the latest Star Wars film as the equivalent of being transported back to 1977. I have heard other fans describe the experience the same way. Being 44 years old, I do not expect to feel like a rambunctious adolescent or to repeat the experience of seeing "Star Wars" back in 1977 the same way now. We all grow up, we mature, and we can still look back with nostalgia if we happened to love "Star Wars." I have and once I sat down to watch "Star Wars: The Force Awakens," the seventh installment in the franchise, and saw the famous scroll telling us a new story (though no 20th Century Fox logo this time) about the disappearance of Luke Skywalker, I was hooked but not sold. No, not until we saw Stormtroopers killing a bunch of villagers with flame throwers, seeking a droid called BB-8 with information on Luke's whereabouts in some planet. Then we see a cloaked figure named Kylo Ren (Adam Driver), armed with an evil-looking lightsaber equipped with a hilt, who has such an overpowering voice that it is sure to send chills to your spine. And when this Kylo freezes a laser beam shot from a blaster, then I was sold. I felt like I was seeing Star Wars back with some measure of glory, something more epic and threatening than what we have seen since 1983.

But was I completely sold? No, the film critic in me still has to watch the rest of the movie. John Boyega is a reluctant stormtrooper who is not too keen on how the First Order operates, call it the Empire 2.0. This First Order also has a massive weapon at Starkiller Base that can destroy several planets at once! Death Star 3.0, sort of (well, we had two Death Stars in the original trilogy), except its massive weapon operates with power from the Sun and it is actually in a hazardously snowy planet (call it Hoth 2.0). The stormtrooper has a conscience and decides to save a daredevil Rebel pilot named Poe (Oscar Issac), who is actually with the Resistance (the Rebel Alliance 2.0). Why the sudden change in the stormtrooper with a blood-stained helmet? Well, the stormtrooper sees how fearsome and relentless Kylo Ren is, especially when ordering the decimation of a village. The stormtrooper is eventually named Finn by Poe and they escape in a Tie-Fighter before crash-landing in a desert planet called Jakku (Tatooine 2.0). Finn survives but he can't locate Poe, which leads Finn to a junk shop of sorts where spare parts from presumably the former Empire's destroyed Imperial Cruisers are sold for food portions. The fearless scavenger, Rey (Daisy Ridley), is a loner who lives inside a destroyed AT-AT (nice touch) and she can take care of herself against anyone. Rey befriends BB-8 and Finn (who is wearing Poe's jacket). Before one can say it is "A New Hope" all over again, First Order's Tie-Fighters attack our new heroes before fleeing in a "piece of junk" called the Millennium Falcon (amazingly, Rey has no idea it is the famous ship Han Solo once commandeered).

"Star Wars: The Force Awakens" dovetails into various action scenes of explosions and blaster fights and, on occasion, a couple of lightsaber battles. We also get the rousing return of that reliable space smuggler, an older, spry Han Solo (Harrison Ford), and his co-pilot, an older, grumbling Chewbacca (Peter Mayhew). Han still owes money to others but he wouldn't be Han if he didn't. The plot eventually deals with Luke's lightsaber and the search for Luke, heck, everyone in this movie is looking for Luke Skywalker! Where is Luke? I will not tell. General Leia Organa (Carrie Fisher) also returns and there is a family crisis I will not reveal here. Suffice to say, it is a crisis on par with past revelations from the original Holy Trilogy.

But the best surprise about "The Force Awakens" is that it is a rousing, applause-worthy lollapalooza of an epic and it is so much adrenalized fun that you pretty much feel Star Wars has returned to its most basic fundamental raison d'être - to wow us with pure entertainment. Still, it doesn't mean it is all fun and games without touching on the Dark Side of the Force. Adam Driver makes the most of a tortured Kylo Ren who keeps Darth Vader's burnt helmet nearby to refocus his energy on the Dark Side and not be intimidated by the light - when Kylo's helmet is taken off, we see a troubled young man who has gone astray (thankfully, not as wooden in characterization as Hayden Christensen's Vader). For the light side, John Boyega and Daisy Ridley make a formidable team against Kylo Ren, giving us much needed buckets of humor and flashes of emotion and humanity that this series has been lacking for some time. Speaking of humor, it is a distinct pleasure to see the return of Ford's Han Solo who has many of the best one-liners in the film. Ford proves he is still the Han Solo of our cinematic past, giving us that gleam in his eye we haven't seen in a while. But it is really Daisy Ridley who moved me the most, delivering a tough, sympathetic heroine from the wrong side of the Bantha tracks who doesn't need a man to hold her hand when evading incoming stormtroopers. Her final elegiac scene is so beautiful and tender, it will make most jaws drop.

For spectacular, large-scale action and terrific escapism minus all the political intrigue of the prequel trilogy, "Star Wars: The Force Awakens" ranks high. And for peak moments of emotional intrigue and its firm understanding of that mysterious Force and its implications in the hands of those who treat it with restraint and those who misuse it, "Star Wars" gives us ample story with new touches on familiar material and refreshing new characters that dazzle and involve us. The film is joyously surefooted, has scary villains (look out for that Supreme Chancellor Snoke), is thrillingly divine in every department and has a level of tragedy that will give the most jaded Star Wars fans goosebumps. J.J. Abrams, the director and co-writer along with Lawrence Kasdan (who co-wrote "Empire Strikes Back" and "Return of the Jedi"), has made Star Wars into a treasured piece of escapist movie history all over again. 

The First Amendment can protect me, it can protect all of you

THE PEOPLE VS. LARRY FLYNT (1996)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

(Original Review from late 1996)

It is rare for Hollywood, especially in these politically correct times, to pursue controversial biographical figures who leave a bad taste in societal and political terms. Bad taste could be the title of director Milos Formas's unequivocally great film biography on the king of bad taste - the controversial Hustler magazine publisher, Larry Flynt.

Woody Harrelson plays the flashy Larry Flynt (always wearing loud disco suits) who starts out in Ohio running a plethora of strip clubs with his patient brother (played by Harrelson's real-life younger brother, Brett Harrelson). Flynt loves the job because he can sleep with any woman he wants. He decides to start putting nude pictures of women in newspapers and eventually magazines. At one of these strip clubs, he meets Althea Leasure (Courtney Love), a 17-year-old stripper who becomes Larry's wife and business associate. They have an open marriage - Althea is bisexual and has many male and female lovers, and Larry can screw every woman he meets as long as he doesn't kiss them. Their love and commitment is deep, and their relationship reminded me a lot of the two lovers in "Leaving Las Vegas" where two people can fall in love despite who they are and what they do for a living.

"The People vs. Larry Flynt" is not just a love story, it is a hybrid of events in Larry Flynt's life. It includes the lurid, loathsome porno magazine he created, which has sparked dissent among feminists and the like; the eventual tragic circumstances of the attempt on his life; Althea's death from AIDS, and the Supreme Court ruling centering on his right to Freedom of Speech - the right to mock any politician without being sued for hurting his/her feelings.

Firstly, Forman concentrates deeply on the emotional bond between Flynt and Althea, it is a relationship based not only on respect but also mutual honesty. For example, there's a crucial scene where Flynt decides to become a born-again Christian and attracts the attention of Jimmy Carter's evangelist sister, Ruth Carter Stapleton (Donna Hanover). Afterwards, he decides to make Hustler a "safer" magazine by eschewing misogynistic, violent pictures of women and replacing them with religious symbolic collages. Althea can't and won't accept his moralistic and religious stance - she doesn't want him to stop being the avaricious publisher he is.

The second half of the movie becomes a springboard for Flynt's Freedom of Speech defense as he is sued for libel by Moral Majority leader Jerry Falwell (apparently, Falwell was offended by Hustler's depiction of an incestuous relationship with his mother). As Flynt memorably retorts, "If the First Amendment can protect a scumbag like me, then it will protect all of you. Because I'm the worst." He is persecuted by all kinds of moral watchdogs, prosecutors, protesters, and political affiliates. Flynt is a hard man to keep down - he continues to fight even after being shot and paralyzed, enduring never-ending trials, and jail. He doesn't stop for a second after being released from jail - he wears an American flag as a diaper to court, throws oranges at the judge, and becomes a political freedom fighter defending his pornographic magazine all the way to the Supreme Court.

Woody Harrelson gives the boldest, most liberating performance of his career - he growls, he spews, he laughs in the face of every judge, and generally offends everyone because he has the right to do so. Harrelson delivers to the fullest extent with verve and a wonderful sense of humor - it is impossible to hate Flynt based on Woody's emphatic, likable performance. Ditto the trashy Courtney Love who brings a fuller sense of empathy and humanity for the smart, vivacious Althea - she is the film's soul and it is a performance on par with Elisabeth Shue in "Leaving Las Vegas" and Sharon Stone in "Casino." Love also has that rare gift for an actress where she doesn't seem to be acting - she is giving us a long look at this woman's tragic, frail human soul (and unlike some naive critics, it isn't due to Love's similar addictive background that gives the performance fire and dynamic energy). Kudos must also go to Edward Norton as Flynt's long-suffering lawyer.

Director Milos Forman has crafted a rich, penetrating, entertaining tapestry of Larry Flynt's life with the help of screenwriters Scott Alexander and Larry Karaszewski (who helmed the similarly ironic "Ed Wood"). What the movie is most successful at is making Larry Flynt into a national hero for all liberals out there. The screenplay, however, omits the most obvious aspect of Flynt's life - he is notorious in this country for his controversial magazine, and not so much for the Falwell case. Throughout the film, we never really see what drove or even inspired him to create such a magazine - the movie opts to present a balanced viewpoint on the issue of censorship but it is a mistake not to include the pictures of bestiality, violence, masochism and, arguably, sheer hatred of women included in his magazine (A brief shot of the infamous cover where a woman is being fed into a meat grinder barely skims the surface). And where are all the feminist characters such as Gloria Steinem who decried Flynt? Perhaps I am being a bit too harsh but in order to see why so many people hated Flynt, we have to see what drove them to hate him. He is essentially protecting the entire magazine (as he does through the movie) from censorship and libel, and not just the political cartoons. It is his vision he wishes to protect.

Regardless of these significant oversights, "The People vs. Larry Flynt" is director Milos Forman's finest film since "Amadeus." Forman has managed to bring a vivid, penetrating portrait of the most infamous magazine publisher of the 20th century. His film biography is witty, humanistic, honestly emotional, three-dimensional, acutely written, and marvelously acted and directed. Forget "Michael Collins." Based on the film and the renewed interest in this man, Larry Flynt is an individual who will be talked about for decades.

I am old, not obsolete

TERMINATOR GENISYS (2015)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

There are so many alternate timelines in the "Terminator" series that I kind of lost count. The first movie created an alternate timeline, as did its first sequel and the second sequel, which had a darker outcome. So I am guessing at least 4 or 5 timelines exist although the filmmakers associated with this new "Genisys" are ignoring the second and third sequels, "Terminator 3" and "Salvation." No matter because I am not sure about the continuity of these timelines and I could care less - "Terminator Genisys" is an enjoyable sequel that interlocks itself with the first two installments and still manages to be creative and somewhat fresh enough to keep us glued to the screen. Sure, much of it may seem recycled but the various time travel paradoxes and the sincere performances help a lot.

In a rather prolonged opening half-hour, we learn that John Connor, the leader of the resistance against the machines (those cyborgs, those damn terminators), is ready to send his most trusted soldier, Kyle Reese (Jai Courtney, ably cast) to 1984 to protect Sarah Connor from the Terminator. So what we are getting seemingly is a retread of the original James Cameron 1984 classic, "The Terminator." We see the original T-800 Terminator model (played by Schwarzenegger, with a touch of CGI so he can look younger) confronting those 80's punks (minus Bill Paxton) until suddenly...POW! "I've been waiting for you," says another T-800 model in a hoodie. And just when events unfold as one expects with Kyle running from the police and taking a homeless man's pants, Sarah Connor (Emilia Clarke) arrives to save Kyle from a new T-1000 model (the T-800 model was crushed by another T-800 also played by Schwarzenegger in the earlier scene with the punks)! So now there are three Terminators in 1984 and one of them is the good cyborg whom Sarah calls "Pops." Awwwwww...wait, what? Well you see this Terminator has been protecting Sarah since she was a tot in 1973! Talk about convoluted, but I went with it. There is also some business about a Genisys mainframe operating system that is about to go online in 2017 - it is actually Skynet, the artificial intelligence that started Judgment Day. Terminator fans should be well aware of all Skynet - others, you may have to catch up on the other films.

"Terminator Genisys" follows the hallmarks of the earlier films - explosive action scenes, extra banter between Kyle and Sarah, T-800 giving us exposition - and the surprise is that it still maintained my interest. Directed by Alan Taylor ("Thor: The Dark World"), the movie has plenty of high-octane thrills and a nonstop, heart-pumping rhythm to it. But it also pauses for some reflection between Sarah and Kyle, the heart of this story, and that gives it an edge over the histrionic "Terminator 3" or the needless "Salvation" sequel. Emilia Clarke gives us a three-dimensional Sarah Connor, nicely balancing humor with pathos (though she can't quite beat Linda Hamilton for ultra-militant toughness). This Sarah not only takes charge, she also gives commands like some millennial Army general (women in the sci-fi, fantasy world of 2015 cinema have definitely proven to be more powerful than ever before, showing their self-worth with men as the second banana).

There is a major twist involving John Connor (played by a hypnotic Jason Clarke) that the trailers gave away, which I will not reveal here (it is a doozy). It also gives much needed oomph to a series that probably should run out of gas a decade ago. "Terminator Genisys" has a silver-haired Arnold (still as steely-eyed as ever, though the infrequent forced smile may induce some cringing) and a formidable team with Kyle and Sarah (admit it, despite being played by different actors, it is great seeing them again), and several action scenes that can make your skin crawl. At its best, this new "Terminator" waxes some philosophy about meddling with the past and the future and how far one's passion and love for another human being, knowing the consequences, should go. I want to say that this movie seems to close all the loopholes and alternate timelines of all existing "Terminator" films but that is wishful thinking. Where there is one alternate timeline, there is always another.