Who Cares About Cletis Tout?

WHO IS CLETIS TOUT? (2001)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

I forgot who Cletis Tout was. In fact, most of this movie is forgettable - a pastiche of Tarantino's own pastiche of cliches and nonlinear narrative in noirish crime pictures. It tries to be clever and quick-witted but most of the jokes, at least for film buffs, will be seen miles away.

Christian Slater is Trevor Finch, a forger who escapes from jail with a former magician (Richard Dreyfuss) by way of a projector - it is so convoluted that I laughed at the whole inanity of it and it reminded me of Lex Luthor's carefully orchestrated jail escape in "Superman II." The duo are on the run and somehow Finch is confused for some dead guy named Cletis Tout, who videotaped a mobster murdering a hooker. As we see from countless flashbacks, Slater's character needed a new identity so his morgue contact (!) (Billy Connolly) hands him this Cletis Tout identity, never realizing the mistake he has made. A movie-loving hitman (who speaks as if he was film critic Leonard Maltin) named Critical Jim (a badly cast Tim Allen) finds Cletis or so he thinks. Finch tells Jim he is not Cletis by recounting the story behind his jail breakout, a box of precious diamonds in a jail field that are whisked away by a carrier pigeon (talk about one of the oldest cliches from the WW II period), a magician's clever act of robbing jewelry, a femme fatale (a glum Portia de Rossi, miscast as well), other hit men who speak about "Deliverance" in Tarantinoesque terms, and so on.

After seeing "Who is Cletis Tout?", I thought that this film was too precious, too calculated. There are some distinctively good ideas strewn throughout but it all evaporates in your mind once it is over. Dreyfuss disappears from the film far too soon; Slater appears as if he is sleepwalking; Tim Allen looks too weasely to believe as any sort of hit man (Christopher Lloyd played a hitman in "Twenty Bucks" and was far more threatening) and Portia de Rossi hardly excites or provides any sort of luster. The movie is just overcrowded and overdone by featuring as many characters and subplots as possible without adding up to anything except stale air. It is a movie about movies, but it is barely a movie in the first place.

The Raging Bull of Cinema part 2

THE RAGING BULL OF CINEMA PART II:

A BRIEF REVIEW OF MARTIN SCORSESE'S FILMS FROM 1990-2019 and beyond...including Killers of the Flower Moon - scroll down

By Jerry Saravia

GOODFELLAS (1990) - The richest, finest gangster film ever made - an anthropological survey of a criminal's life. We see the elegant restaurants, the racketeering, the flood of money, the dirty dealings, double-crosses, brutal, sudden violence, stealing, drugs, marriage life, extravagant meals and, most importantly, how crime really does pay. There is no sense of redemption in the main character, Henry Hill (Ray Liotta), after being admitted to the Witness Protection program. His biggest worry is that he can no longer lead the fast-paced life of a gangster.

There is none of the  Godfather myth-making here - this is the most realistic depiction of the lives of gangsters as seen in the history of cinema. It also shows, for the first time, what these guys are really like: they are the scum of the earth. These are the people that Travis Bickle despises. Based on a non-fiction book, WiseGuy, by crime reporter Nicholas Pillegi (who later co-wrote Casino). One reviewer in "Film Comment" has said that this film makes critics nervous because it shows that crime really does pay. I couldn't agree more, yet it also shows that it can end in tragedy and death. Very moral if you ask me.
Trivial note: Francis Ford Coppola definitely liked the film, according to Cigar Aficionado.
GoodFellas full-length review  

CAPE FEAR (1991) - A rarity - a remake that is better than the original. De Niro is the frightening Biblical rapist, Max Cady, who is after the lawyer who put him away, Samuel Bowden (Nick Nolte). Cady will not only make Sam's life a living hell, but his sole intention is to save him and his family from their sins!

Suspenseful, terrifying, humanistic, pulpy, tension-filled in every frame, "Cape Fear" is the model for other thrillers to follow. The remarkable Juliette Lewis is the Lolita-like daughter, Danielle, whose scene with De Niro inside a theatre is as haunting and jaw-dropping as they come. Add to that a nail-biting climax set in a houseboat with one of the most fiercely emotional scenes De Niro has ever performed on screen. Nasty and bitter - not your standard issue mainstream thriller by any means. One of St. Marty's biggest hits at the box-office until The Aviator and The Departed. 

Cape Fear Full-Length Review

THE AGE OF INNOCENCE (1993- A masterpiece unfairly ignored by those who favored the Merchant Ivory films. Daniel Day-Lewis is Newland Archer, a lawyer about to be married to the seemingly innocent and naive May Welland (Winona Ryder) until he meets and falls in love with his new cousin, the enchanting, rebellious Countess Olenska (Michelle Pfeiffer).

Set during New York in the 1870's, Scorsese considers this his most violent work. Huh? Well, because the emotions are so bottled in that the characters are threatening to explode with desire and passion at any moment. Taking a cue from Kubrick's masterful Barry Lyndon, this is one of the few period films in recent memory that correctly pinpoints how these people communicated and behaved through gestures, body language, subtleties in language, etc. Every move and every line of dialogue can indicate, imply, or destroy certain observations about others ("A world so precarious, it could be destroyed by a whisper"). Along with "Taxi Driver," "Raging Bull," and "GoodFellas," this is a voluptuous, beautifully composed work of art. It is the film that Orson Welles's Magnificent Ambersons could have been.

Look quickly for a cameo by Marty's parents, and there is long-time editor Schoonmaker's name emblazoned on a building in one shot. Previously made, unbeknownst to Scorsese until later, in 1924 and 1934 (the latter version starred Irene Dunne).
The Age of Innocence full-length review 

CASINO (1995): Scorsese's final take on the Mob, capping the end of his gangster trilogy that began with Mean Streets. Set in Las Vegas during the 70's and 80's, "Casino" is about a high-stakes gambler and casino operator, "Ace" Rothstein (De Niro), working and maintaining the tables at the fictitious Tangiers hotel under the guidance of the Mob. Unfortunately, his loose-cannon pal, Nicky Santoro (Joe Pesci), and his glamorous, alcoholic wife, Ginger (Sharon Stone), bring down his King Lear-like kingdom.
A hallucinatory, near-perfect film - both a documentary of how casinos were run, and an observation of how people were affected by all the money and hedonism. More sadistically violent than "GoodFellas," but you expected that (the film is excessive in its visual look, choice of top 40 tunes, voice-over narration, etc.) Beyond all the brutal beatings by mallet and bat and head crushings inside vises, "Casino" is a depiction of a lost world where pride and sinful vices resulted in the deterioration of humanity. Sharon Stone brings a certain depth and humanity to this amoral world - she rocks with excitement, vivid glamor, and fatalistic boorishness. "Casino" is like high-speed cocaine - it brings you up and, boy, does it ever bring you down emotionally. And that's that.
Casino full-length review 

KUNDUN (1997) - Another Scorsese picture that got lost in the shuffle of big releases thanks to former Disney president Michael Eisner. Based on the Dalai Lama's own memoirs, "Kundun" traces the life of the 14th Dalai Lama until his escape at the age of eighteen from invading forces in Tibet.

Peaceful, calm. slow-moving, extraordinarily shot, "Kundun" is a moving, visually enlightening tone poem. Although it is too reverential for its own good, "Kundun's" landscape of emotions cuts deeply to the heart. There are some moments in the film which are as awe-inspiring and emotionally heartbreaking as anything the director has ever done (the funeral for Kundun's father, the "Gone With the Wind" shot of dead monks). Philip Glass's melodic score contributes to the power of the film. The antithesis to Scorsese's usual melee of violent character studies on the streets. Compassion and non-violence are the key words. Check out In Search of Kundun on VHS for an insightful analysis on the making of this film.
Full-length review 
 

BRINGING OUT THE DEAD (1999)- It has been more than two decades since the world has witnessed the frighteningly prophetic "Taxi Driver," and director Scorsese and writer Paul Schrader revisit those same mean streets to tell us they are just as mean and almost as hellish.

The virtually gaunt-like Nicolas Cage stars as Frank Pierce, an exhausted ambulance paramedic who mostly works nights. He has not saved a life in months, and is starting to feel weary and sleepless - he cannot function in this crazed city anymore (this story is set in pre-Giuliani New York). He starts seeing visions of an asthmatic girl he could not save in the past - he feels he has killed her and sees her in the faces of others walking the streets.

There is a lot to admire in "Bringing Out the Dead," and actually a lot more to savor in repeated viewings. Moments like the impalement of the drug dealer or Rhames's brief interludes with dispatchers and Cage, or the final heavenly image of Cage resting on Arquette's shoulder evoke a power unprecedented in any film released in 1999. Though "Bringing Out the Dead" is the kind of film that makes you want to see a truly passionate Scorsese film that comes from the gut, it is as spiritual and moving as "Kundun." Still, for its subjective evocation of a man's lethargy and slow deterioration, it will be hard to take for many viewers (and reportedly, the Japanese walked out in droves during some screenings). But then what did anyone expect from a Scorsese film?
Bringing Out the Dead full-length review 

 

Thoughts on Scorsese's GANGS - 12/05/02: What is there to think about? I have been waiting for Scorsese's newest film for almost two years and, even if it is a disappointment, I will at least be fulfilled no matter what. Time will tell on December 20th, though reviews already indicate a disaster. Not from critics, mind you, but from audiences, such as the attendees at the Director's Guild screening. Apparently, people were bored stiff. Nevertheless, such mixed reactions have always greeted Martin Scorsese's films from the beginning. The fact that it is long and episodic is partly based on the amount of material in the story. It covers a time and place, a sense of history of New York during the Civil War era, and extreme violence. We are talking meaner streets than the ones shown in Scorsese's other films. We are talking about a character named Bill the Butcher (Daniel Day-Lewis) who plays the meanest man in film history, according to one of the producers of the film. Beyond that, we are also talking about a 100 million dollar budget for a film that is unlikely to win any awards and is further unlikely to win much enthusiasm from mainstream audiences. Scorsese is not meant for mainstream tastes, but Leonardo Di Caprio and Miramax honcho Harvey Weinstein are. This is the most unusual pairing of talents since Spielberg helped produce "Cape Fear" for Scorsese in 1991 ("Cape Fear" is still Scorsese's only major box-office hit). But the subject matter and the spectacle of violence (though Marty has said in a New Yorker article that he wishes not to show the graphic bloodletting of something akin to "GoodFellas") are also nothing to cheer about during the Yuletide season. How many people do you think will prefer to see DiCaprio in Steven Spielberg's Catch Me If You Can, which is supposedly far lighter fare and will be released five days after "Gangs"? The answer is simple - Spielberg has always commanded attention from audiences. Scorsese only knows how to shut them out with his ironic detachment and complex moral actions of his lead characters. Or to quote Scorsese: "Saving Private Ryan is morally sanctionable. My films are immoral." 

Gangs of New York Full-Length Review

THE BLUES: FEELS LIKE GOING HOME (2003)- A fairly dry and bland documentary by Scorsese (part of a mini-series he produced), though not without any choice moments. Seemingly all shot on video (a rarity for Scorsese), the film tracks the journey of a modern blues singer-guitarist Corey Harris as he travels from Mississippi to Africa to discover the roots of the blues.
There are great segments about John Lee Hooker, Leadbelly, Muddy Waters and a superb moment with Otha Turner, whose arrangement of "Shimmy She Wobble" with the Rising Star Fife and Drum Band is an electrifying moment, shown in black-and-white footage (this same arrangement was the central musical theme of "Gangs of New York"). Still, the film is curiously stilted at times and there is some superfluous voice-over narration. If nothing else, you get to hear great blues music.


Thoughts on THE AVIATOR (2004) 12/05/04 - Full-length review 

Scorsese's newest film focuses on the period of a young Howard Hughes (Leonardo DiCaprio) in Hollywood, making films and planes that fly faster than 400 mph. Cate Blanchett, Alec Baldwin, Kate Beckinsale, Alan Alda round out the extraordinary cast. The flying sequences are said to be the most thrilling ever committed to film.

So what will the response be to Scorsese's newest flick starring his "Gangs of New York" star, Leo DiCaprio? Critics are suggesting that St. Marty's latest is his most accessible by far and will win accolades at the Oscars. I find that assertion questionable since I have declared time and again that Marty will never win an Oscar, not even a Lifetime Achievement Award. Am I wrong? Consider the facts: Marty lost for "Raging Bull," "GoodFellas," "Taxi Driver" and the much maligned "Gangs of New York." We all know there was no way in hell he would get a Best Director award for the highly controversial "The Last Temptation of Christ." His films are too tough, too emotionally centered on the internal conflicts of his characters who can sometimes be immoral or amoral - whatever his leading characters feel, we feel it as well. Consider Henry Hill's coke-fueled paranoia in "GoodFellas" or Frank Pierce's lethargy and growing disorientation in the vastly underrated "Bringing Out the Dead" or Jake La Motta's own lack of love for himself as he goes on an eating and drinking binge in "Raging Bull," and so on. Since Marty's secrets are to be subjective and to dwell on such overwhelmingly internal emotional conflicts without a shred of sentimentality, then what will "The Aviator" be like? According to Marty on a recent Fall 2004 issue of Entertainment Weekly, there will be focus on Howard Hughes' own obsessive compulsive behavior, e.g, how he handles a doorknob, his mania over germs, etc. Maybe this will go further than Jack Nicholson's own OCD in As Good as it Gets. One person at a recent advanced screening said he felt "uncomfortable" watching the film. As we know of any Scorsese film in the past, we feel almost anything but comfort.

My verdict: Quite good, though not quite a great film. Still, the film's images and its vision of a wealthy man who could do anything still stay with me. Having read the Charles Higham biography which is startling and keeps you on edge, Scorsese's film does the same. Personally, I would have thought that Hughes's later years would be of utmost interest to Scorsese. Still, did I feel I was inside Leo's Hughes's head? Yes. Did I feel some level of discomfort? Absolutely, more so after it was over. Is there any chance the film will win an Oscar? No chance, and if you see the film, you'll know why (though it does have 11 Oscar nominations). I would put "The Aviator" on higher ground than "The Color of Money" and it comes close to the power of "Bringing Out the Dead," but it is not a great Scorsese flick. Still, a very good Scorsese film is better than no Scorsese film.

NO DIRECTION HOME: BOB DYLAN (2005) - St. Marty's latest documentary will focus on the five years from Bob Dylan's arrival in New York in January 1961 to the July 1966 motorcycle crash that sidelined him. The film will made its debut on September 26th-27th at 9pm on PBS. A combination of Marty and Dylan is a pure stairway to heaven, if you ask me. 

Review: Martin Scorsese was chosen to compile a 204-minute version out of hours of footage shot by Dylan's long-time collaborator, Jeff Rosen. The results are astounding. "No Direction Home" takes a deep, probing look at Bob Dylan in his prime, writing his own "protest songs" about the environment of the late 1960's, with regards to the Vietnam War, civil rights and assassinations. Songs such as "A Hard Rain's A-Gonna Fall,"  give way to his controversial use of the electric guitar to spin out tunes such as "Like a Rolling Stone." As Dylan states, the audience hated him for it and called him "Judas," yet his concerts were still sold-out.

"No Direction Home" also highlights Dylan's upbringing in Hibbing, Minnesota (where the local circus had performers in blackface, including a Napoleon Bonaparte) where he felt no sense of ideology or anything of interest to comment on, to his days in New York City where he practically became a legend and the reluctant "voice of a generation." There is a poignant moment where the late beatnik, Allen Ginsburg, claims that he understood a new voice had literally taken over from his own revolutionary "Howl" heyday. 

"No Direction Home" also has some rarities, including test screen footage shot by Andy Warhol, and color footage shot by D.A. Pennebaker ("Don't Look Back") of Dylan and the Hawks performing onstage at the Manchester Free Trade Hall where the boos became rampant. Also worth noting is Dylan performing during the famous Martin Luther King speech at Washington Memorial.

The interviews with Dylan's former girlfriend, Joan Baez (a wonderful singer in her own right), are very revealing as she insists that he was a complicated man who was difficult to work with and expresses disappointment that he never asked her to perform on stage. This is where the film really delves into Dylan's personality and his own reluctance at being something he felt he was not. The rest of the interviewees show adulation at Dylan's singing and express disapproval when he moved away from so-called "protest songs" and performed with electric instruments that, according to Peter Seeger, made it hard for the lyrics to be understood. And there is the press asking idiotic questions at endless press conferences such as, "Why do you perform music?"

"No Direction Home" is fluidly edited and consistently fascinating but it may leave some with questions about Bob Dylan, the eternally enigmatic singer. "Don't Look Back" gave a behind-the-scenes glimpse. This film makes us see a Dylan who is aware he made a difference but is still uncertain what it all means, or if it indeed is part of some lasting legacy. That may be the way he would like it to be.

THE DEPARTED (2006) - Scorsese's newest film is a remake of the Hong Kong police thriller, Infernal Affairs. Matt Damon, Leo DiCaprio (in his third outing with Marty), Martin Sheen, Ray Winstone and Jack Nicholson round out the cast. Look for further info at this forum.

Update 08/15/06: Martin Scorsese's "The Departed" was previewed in Chicago during the summer. The movie received mixed reviews from audiences and critics alike, but it is still too early to comment since it is not fully completed. The movie does, apparently, begin with the familiar opening chords of the Rolling Stones' "Gimmie Shelter," though I believe that may be temp music (Dropkick Murphys appear on the soundtrack for sure. UPDATE: "Gimmie Shelter" is in fact used in the final print). As everyone can plainly see from the recent trailer, this is an astounding cast. And Jack Nicholson as the devil incarnate, Frank Costello, seems like a truly evil character (probably not as brutal as Bill the Butcher). With the likes of DiCaprio, Matt Damon, Mark Wahlberg, Martin Sheen, Ray Winstone, Alec Baldwin, and others, including cinematography by Michael Ballhaus and always spectacular editing by Thelma Schoonmaker, this is sure to be a hell of a crime thriller. And don't be surprised if the tension is unbearable considering that Marty recently said that it is about the nature of identity. I can't wait for October. 

UPDATE: I saw "The Departed" finally. Great thriller, supercharged and thoroughly intense. Full-length review

THE KEY TO RESERVA (2007) - Full-length review

SHINE A LIGHT (2008) - Full-length Review

SHUTTER ISLAND (2010): A relentlessly bleak and emotionally powerful psychological thriller. Leo DiCaprio is a federal marshal sent to investigate the disappearance of a mental patient in an insane asylum on Shutter Island. Questions arise: is a patient really missing? Would the stormy weather and generally cloudy skies be strong indicators of foreboding doom? Is Leo's partner (Mark Ruffalo) really a marshal? And who is the mysterious woman in the cave?
The film is tough as nails to watch, almost unnerving enough to give anyone restless leg syndrome. From the opening musical chords (echoing Kubrick's "The Shining") to disturbing WWII flashbacks, to an array of unhealthy and ghastly-looking patients and barely lit cells, "Shutter Island" is thick on atmosphere and tension and an unreliability from Leo's point-of-view. Your teeth will chatter, your motor impulses will quicken, your heart will beat faster as the film leads to a finish that will either have you in awe or more perplexed than before. Nobody makes these films better than Martin Scorsese. 

PUBLIC SPEAKING (2010) - Full-length review

LIVING IN THE MATERIAL WORLD (2011) - Martin Scorsese fashions an expansive, in-depth look at the former late Beatle, George Harrison's career from his early days in Liverpool, to the enormous success of being a Beatle, and his travels to India and its influence on his music. A review is forthcoming.

HUGO (2011) - One of Scorsese's finest achievements -a miracle of pure cinematic novelty. Although a bit of a box-office disappointment (despite kids' being the prime audience, the marketing was all over the place), the movie is a hark back to the days of silent cinema and the neglected works of Georges Melies (Ben Kingsley), not to mention an orphan living in a train station . Please read my Full-length review

THE WOLF OF WALL STREET (2013) - As of 9/5/2012, Martin Scorsese has started shooting his newest film, based on Jordan Belfort's bestseller, "The Wolf of Wall Street." The book focused on Belfort's own experiences as the owner of a brokerage firm that served as a "boiler room" - Belfort himself eventually was convicted of fraud and much more. There is not much more to say about this film except that Leonardo DiCaprio and Matthew McConaughey have been cast, in addition to Jonah Hill and Rob Reiner. 

Some may scoff at the prospect of yet another film about a greedy, drug-addicted hound from Wall Street but under Scorsese's direction, it might be well worth catching. I am presuming the film will deal with wealth, money and power and how it corrupts in a world with no limits, themes that have followed Scorsese from the days of "GoodFellas" and "Casino" to "The Aviator." The first week of shooting has shown that Scorsese is in fact shooting on film (an Arricam LT camera) so perhaps he may also shoot on HD cameras for other scenes. The trailer itself, set to Kanye West's overpowering "Black Skinhead," is wild and energetic. Clearly, the film will have a no-holds barred approach to the decadent lifestyle and wild partying of its amoral protagonist (endless shots of money flung at people and thrown in garbage cans). My Wolf of Wall Street review   In the book "Conversations with Scorsese" by film critic and historian, Richard Shickel, Scorsese describes working on the script of the film prior to working on "Shutter Island." He describes having "wasted five months of my life" without getting a green light on production dates by the studio Warner Brothers. The reviews are in and they so far seem uniformly praiseworthy, even from Rex Reed who loved "Hugo" and little else from Scorsese since "Kundun."

Latest news: As of 12/29/13, "Wolf of Wall Street" has fared with more than 30 million on its first five days of release, met with a Cinemascore of "C" by audiences, met with some critical hosannas and some critical drubbing, and is causing a little firestorm on the imdb boards with the film's graphic sexuality. Also, it has been announced that the real Jordan Belfort has gotten his own reality show! "Wolf" will probably end up as a slight box-office failure since it is difficult to beat an Anchorman or the Hobbits. 

The 50 Year Argument (2014) - Full review

Silence (2016) - Scorsese's newest film

REVIEW COMING SOON!

THE IRISHMAN (2019) 

Full review: It is What it is

Killers of the Flower Moon (2023) REVIEW

Review of SCORSESE ON SCORSESE (2004)

An Alternate Sequel Universe (a definite first)

SUPERMAN II (1980)

THE RICHARD DONNER CUT

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

For years, we have heard that an alternate cut by director Richard Donner ("Superman") existed of "Superman II." As many of you know, Richard Lester ("A Hard Day's Night") took over the directing reins of the sequel (thanks to the Salkinds, the producers of the films) and reshot 50% of the film, excluding much of Donner's footage. So here we have "Superman II: The Richard Donner Cut" and, though it is entertaining, it is not quite as good or as sharp and fast-paced as the Lester cut. One must tread carefully when reviewing this film because it has many rough edges and some of the editing could've been tightened. Where there was flair in the Lester cut, the Donner cut suffers from abruptness in cuts and transitions. (Beware: this review contains spoilers).

Before we get to what is flawed, let's discuss what is right. The opening sequence is even better (though I still miss the scene where the Krypton guard has his neck snapped), showing returnee Marlon Brando as Jor-El who sentences three Krypton criminals, Zod (Terence Stamp), Non (Jack O'Halloran) and Ursa (Sarah Douglas), to eternal damnation by imprisoning them in a mirror-like prison called the Phantom Zone. What's nice about the scene is that we see Brando, who was edited out of the original Lester opening thanks to studio financial problems mainly Brando's exorbitant fee, and it leads to seeing Superman throwing a rocket from the original film into space where it breaks the Phantom Zone and frees the three criminals. In the Lester cut, Superman saves Lois from a hydrogen bomb in Paris and hurls the bomb into space where it breaks the criminals free.

Another noteworthy improvement is a remarkably silly and superb scene where Lois discovers Clark Kent is Superman by drawing glasses and a suit on a newspaper picture of Superman. What follows is truly ingenious and hilarious on so many levels that it tops the Niagara Falls footage from the Lester cut. And I should mention that I enjoy Brando's appearance at the Fortress of Solitude where he explains to his son how the son becomes the father, and the father becomes the son. Jor-El disappears forever helping Kent, who had become mortal, to regain his super strength.

But I must say that I prefer Lester's version overall. Donner's cut surprisingly leaves the Superman/Lois relationship in the dust. The scenes that amplified the chemistry between the two - the two confession scenes, particularly the cigarettes and orange juice scene where friendship is discussed - are eliminated and give the relationship less focus. For myself, Lester's "Superman II" was as much a love story as anything else, and it was the sweeping romance between Superman and Lois that gave that film a mark of humanism that has since been eclipsed in the latter sequels. We do have a scene, basically a screen test, where Lois fires a gun at Clark and where Clark admits he is Superman (of course, the gun has blanks). But the Niagara Falls confession from the Lester cut seemed richer and more dynamic, mainly because more was at stake (remember the saving-Lois- from-Eiffel-Tower footage that is gone from this version), and the dialogue was crisper (Lois from the Lester cut: "Maybe you didn't want to with your mind, but maybe you wanted to with your heart," in reference to Clark's admission he is Superman).

In another noteworthy yet uneven change, Superman has sex with Lois before he is changed into a mortal. In the Lester version, Superman becomes mortal first before taking Lois to the cozy Solitude bed. My question is: did that explain how Jor-El shows up in the new version - he heard them boinking and said to himself, no immortal son of mine can have sex with a mortal? Also strange is Lois's appearance - she is seen from above in a long lens wearing a Superman shirt! Since we don't see Lois's expressions in close-up after learning that her man is giving up immortality, the scene suffers. In the Lester version, we see close-ups of Lois and she says those famous words: "You did all that for me?" This was before Superman takes her to bed.

And there is the deus-ex-machina ending, (basically lifted from "Superman I") where Superman turns back time and restores Metropolis to what it once was before Zod and his two leather-strapped "hippies from Los Angeles" came into town. I definitely prefer the Lester ending where Clark kisses Lois and hypnotizes her into forgetting all the events she has been involved in. The kiss, preceded by Lois breaking down in tears ("I didn't sleep all night"), was more emotionally true and quite touching. Superman reversing time was more powerful in the original film - here, it seems like a cop-out.

What's missing in the Donner cut is the emotion and the gobs of humanism that Lester lent to the theatrical version. We can nitpick about some fun scenes from Lester's cut that are deleted from this version (the cellophane S, the battle at the Fortress of Solitude, Superman kicking Non in the face in mid-flight, Superman returning the flag to the White House, the defacement of Mount Rushmore) but the fact is that despite all the changes in this new version, we never feel as grounded about Lois and Superman as we did in Lester's cut. Overall, "Superman II: The Richard Donner Cut" is entertaining and should not be missed by film fans and Superman fans (the extra Lex Luthor and Miss Tesmacher scenes are priceless). It is just missing some of the heart. Footnote: What the hell happened with Miss Tesmacher anyway?

Supe said 'Drop Dead'

SUPERMAN IV: THE QUEST FOR PEACE (1987)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

The summer of 1987 was littered with dozens of sequels and remakes yet the one sequel that did not satisfy expectations and basically destroyed its original predecessors was "Superman IV: The Quest for Peace," a campy, bizarre movie that gave Superman a bad name. No longer were truth, justice and the American way terms with which the public were interested in seeing anymore (Two years later came the dark Batman movie, a huge hit). I'll admit this fourth entry in the series is tired and unimaginative yet it is never boring, just plain stupid. It is so stupid and unintentionally funny that it rates as a guilty pleasure.

This time, the Daily Planet is in the middle of a takeover by a corporate giant run by a tycoon (Sam Wanamaker) and his sexy daughter, Lacy (Mariel Hemingway). It is up to Clark Kent (Christopher Reeve), Lois Lane (the witty Margot Kidder) and Jimmy Olsen (Marc McClure) to stop this tycoon from turning the Daily Planet into a sensational tabloid with headlines that read "Is the World at Brink?" Problem is Lacy has the hots for poor old Clark and wants him to explore the night life of Metropolis and other social events. Then there's the fantastic double date between Lacy, Clark, Lois and Superman (!) that has got to be seen to be believed, and is an absolute classic.

Superman has problems of his own, though. His archenemy, Lex Luthor (the reliable Gene Hackman), is up to his old tricks again with the help of the "Dutch Elm disease of the family," his dim-witted nephew (Jon Cryer). Since Superman is ridding the world of nuclear weapons, Lex gets the brilliant idea of becoming a black-market arms profiteer, and creates a Nuclear Man. This new villain is so strong that he can even tear Superman's skin and make him sick.

The plot is dense and exciting enough to create a dazzling new Superman adventure. Alas, it was not to be. "Superman IV" was directed by Sidney J. Furie, a director below-par when compared to the formidable talents of Richard Donner and Richard Lester. The special-effects are amazingly atrocious and third-rate after witnessing the spectacular effects of the first three films. For example, there are exploding volcanos spewing what looks like tomato juice; a Statue of Liberty carried by Nuclear Man where the statue seems to be of greater width than the city of Metropolis; the astonishingly bad model of the Great Wall of China; and Superman's outfit during the flying sequences that seems to turn from turquoise to a muddy green color, probably due to bad color processing and poor blue screen projection. Wait, there's more! The obligatory Superman/Lois flight above the clouds is as hokey as you can imagine - one minute they are flying by the Brooklyn Bridge and the next second, they are in Upstate, New York (!) - a result of bad editing. Or they took a cue from the rear-screen projection of the Bogie classic Casablanca, which has one scene where Bogie and Ingrid Bergman are driving and the background changes from one location to the other. If any film needs a Special Edition renovation, it would be "Superman IV." The effects here are a mix of the George Reeves style with a dose of Ed Wood thrown in.

Despite those gaping flaws, "Superman IV" occasionally works. The cast makes the characters as sincere and believable as ever before. Christopher Reeve continues to make the dual personality of Superman vivid and credible. Margot Kidder is alluring as always, and adds subtle hints of humor to Lois's character, especially when she is trying to learn French fluently. Her scenes with Reeve sparkle with a deep humanity and sense of love. Gene Hackman's return as the hefty Luthor is this movie's biggest surprise and he enlivens the proceedings with his trademark repartee - his first confrontation with Superman atop the Empire State Building is sheer magic and funny as hell ("Why don't you stop and smell the roses, huh? Get yourself a pet. A kitten, A puppy.")

"Superman IV" was severely truncated before being released by Warner Brothers, and it definitely shows (its $40 million budget was trimmed to $17 million). There are too many loose ends and inexplicable moments where the laws of gravity are defied. Can the mortal Lacy really survive in space without the aid of a helmet or a ship? Come on. And since when is it windy in space? And how exactly does Superman survive imminent death when he's severely struck and beaten by Nuclear Man who tears his skin? And why is Nuclear Man so interested in Lacy? Business or pleasure?

Several advance screenings for critics were not held, especially in Chicago where Siskel and Ebert did not view it prior to its release. Gene Siskel had mentioned on "The Tonight Show" (with Johnny Carson) that he had not seen it, and that was not a good sign.

Despite these and many other flaws, "Superman IV" is still decent enough (though many comic-book fans will cry foul, if they haven't already), and it does offer a chance to see Reeve in his final incarnation as Supe baby before he became paralyzed. It is a vast improvement over the dreadful "Superman III", and it brings back the characters with some measure of respect and poignance.

Doesn't he even own a shirt?

THE TWILIGHT SAGA: ECLIPSE (2010)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

This is not supposed to happen. Ordinarily, a series of sequels are not supposed to improve with each subsequent chapter. "Eclipse," the third chapter in the "Twilight" Saga, is the best by far, alternately sleek, adventurous, romantically heightened, dramatic and consistently surprising. I can say that I cannot wait to see how this all ends with "Breaking Dawn," an unusual ringing endorsement on my part.

Bella Swan, when we last saw her, was adamant about living a life with Edward (Robert Pattinson), the century-old vampire stuck in brooding James Dean mode. It seems she chose Edward over Jacob (Taylor Lautner), a werewolf sans T-shirts, yet she loves them both so what is a girl going to do when choosing between a vampire and a werewolf? Well, it turns out that marrying a vampire means she has to die, and living with a werewolf means she can live and breathe as a human. Weighing life and death options of this fantastical nature seems a bit much to carry on the shoulders of an 18-year-old girl.

Record high disappearances of young folk are occurring in Seattle. These youths are bitten by vampires and become undead fang-ready monsters, "newborns," collectively killing other folks in what looks like flash mob killings. These newborns are headed for Forks, the cloudy Washington town where the sun barely flickers and where Bella and the whole gang, who are ready to graduate high-school, reside. Edward's clan, the Cullens, reluctantly join the werewolf pack of shirtless Situations, along with Jacob respectively, to stop the newborns who have a potential leader in, geez, I will not give it away. "Twilight" fans know who I am referring to. Added to all this is the swooning between Bella and Edward, and the jealous Jacob whose love for Bella is strong. It is so strong that she wants her to choose him because he feels there can be no future with people whose skin glitters when the sun is out.

Kristen Stewart once again proves what a fantastic actress she is. As with "Adventureland" and "The Runaways," Stewart dazzles the screen with her minimalist expressions - she is so damn good that we wonder what she is really thinking. She conveys brilliantly the choice and the morality of a grave decision that she is so naive and yet so intelligent in pondering - how can someone so young be so willing to die for someone's love whom she still has not had sex with? Stewart somehow makes Bella appear as if she has lived a long life, just like a vampire, and the upshot is that not even Edward wants her to make this fatal decision. After all, the vampires in these stories didn't choose to become vampires.

Robert Pattinson still has a limited role at best, conveying enough poise as Edward but the character is so intriguing and mysterious that I wanted to learn more. Taylor Lautner has improved greatly as Jacob and I almost want to say I am in the Team Jacob camp. Something tells me his character didn't choose to be a werewolf but I guess we will find out in the future installments.

"Eclipse" is swift, superbly acted and remarkably directed (the scene in the tent in freezing temperatures is hypnotic). I am not always a fan of close-ups but these faces of Bella, Jacob and Edward are unforgettable, wondrous, lovely faces - you do not want to turn away from them. I'd be okay with ten more movies about this forlorn love triangle of such improbable proportions, over the period of, well, the rest of their lives. Some might think I am crazy but "Eclipse" is (wait for it, wait...) one of the most emotional, mature and endearing of all teen love stories I have seen. Call me insane as someone who should be subjected to a mental asylum on Shutter Island for even liking this series, but I didn't want it to end.

Cinematic Vampire Note: From what I have seen, I also like the HBO series, "True Blood" and my favorite vampire films are the 1922 and 1979 versions of "Nosferatu, " just so you know where I am coming from.