Yoda kicks ass, Anakin's anger slowly forms

STAR WARS: EPISODE II 

ATTACK OF THE CLONES (2002)

Reviewed By Jerry Saravia

(Original Review from 2002)

Just to show you the evils of the Internet, the naysayers began their proverbial attacks on George Lucas's anticipated second chapter in the "Star Wars" prequel trilogy long before he shot a roll of film. Questions abounded like "What kind of title is 'Attack of the Clones'? Are we watching killer tomatoes again? Why bring back Jar-Jar Binks, if ever so briefly? A 'Star Wars' love story? George Lucas has the temerity to write and direct it again after failing miserably with 'The Phantom Menace'?" Forget the naysayers. Forget the hype. If you love "Star Wars" at all, you could care less what anyone else thinks about it. I'll say this: "Attack of the Clones" is the best damn "Star Wars" picture since "The Empire Strikes Back," though not nearly as explosive or as entertaining. It is, however, more souped-up, dazzling and character-oriented than "The Phantom Menace" and far more involving in every way.

The future Darth Vader, Anakin Skywalker (Hayden Christensen), is now older than his youthful counterpart in "Phantom Menace." He has been under the tutelage of Obi-Wan Kenobi (Ewan McGregor), a Jedi Knight who is teaching Anakin to be patient before learning the more mature ways of the Force. Anakin does have a way with his lightsaber. He finally meets with former Queen of Naboo, Amidala (Natalie Portman), now a Senator, who is still negotiating peace with other galaxy systems. No sooner is an attempt made on her life that we learn peace is not under advisement at the moment. A separatist movement has begun, notably under the leadership of an evil Jedi, Count Dooku (Christopher Lee), who is building an army of clones for an apparent war. Nevertheless, Anakin is asked to protect Amidala from danger, while Obi-Wan is in hot pursuit of an assassin, Jango Fett (Temeura Morrison), which leads to the planet where the clones are being assembled by the thousands.

"Attack of the Clones" eschews the cutesy theatrics of "Return of the Jedi" and "Phantom Menace" for a far more serious and sinister tone. It makes sense since Anakin is slowly developing feelings of hate, not to mention unduly love for Amidala. Love, fear and hate - a Jedi craves not these things. When Anakin finds that his mother, Shimi (an underused Perilla August, returning from the original), has been killed by the Tuscan Raiders (Sand People to the rest of you), this Jedi begins a rampage and the seething anger and roots of violence begin to take shape (even Amidala is shaken when she hears of his exploits). We are talking about a man who will eventually cause the death of many Rebels in the future, and it is a sometimes grim experience witnessing Anakin's slow transformation. As Lucas has mentioned, "Episode III" will not have a happy ending.

If writer-director and creator George Lucas is still deficient in any department, it is in the romance angle. Han Solo and Princess Leia always had great chemistry, but that was largely due to Lawrence Kasdan's witty writing in "The Empire Strikes Back." In this film, a romance slowly develops between Anakin and Amidala and, though it is bittersweet, it is not half as romantic or as juicy as any scenes between Solo or Leia. Anakin gives Amidala those beatific smiles and looks but it is too sour to really evoke fireworks (there must be more than a gleam in the eye and cascading waterfalls in the background to elicit any romantic interest. One must remember these are the parents of the future Luke Skywalker and Princess Leia). Yet Hayden Christensen is a charismatic performer, alluding to an edge that is bringing him closer to Darth Vader's character. And Natalie Portman is at least not too stately as in the last film, showing a little more liveliness and some athleticism. She seems to actually move about more, rather than sitting like a zombie in her throne.

Yes, there are some lulls in the pacing. Yes, Lucas doesn't always trust his visual eye completely and cuts away a little too quickly from his beautifully crafted images of landscapes and cityscapes. Yes, the dialogue is often clumsily written (as it always has been). Yes, the annoying Jar-Jar Binks makes a guest appearance, and almost ruins the momentum. However, never has a "Star Wars" movie had such a sonic sweep. This movie swishes and swooshes before our eyes in a way not seen since "Empire." There are so many marvelous sequences, particularly the 40-minute finale, that are guaranteed to give the audience the thrills they have been longing for all along. We are talking multitudes of dueling lightsabers (even the crafty Yoda handles one), spaceships with strange, sonic motor sounds, fantastically grotesque creatures in a gladiator-style tournament, cavernous castles, a rainy city where creatures with elongated necks (reminding one of "A.I." and "Close Encounters of the Third Kind") talk about the clones, bounty hunters with rocket packs, the bantering of old favorites like C-3PO and R2-D2 (both still played by Anthony Daniels and Kenny Baker), droid factories with lots of furnaces and smoke, "Metropolis" cities with thousands of ships in the skies, Samuel's Jackson's Mace Windu actually sporting a purple lightsaber, asteroid fields, and so on. No one will walk away from "Attack of the Clones" without the look of astonishment from these incredible visuals. Yet Lucas is not entirely interested in visual candy. All of the technical mastery of special-effects and CGI effects in the world mean nothing unless it is in the service of a story. They certainly are. The most striking image is of Anakin, hot on his tail for revenge, on a speeder traveling at super speeds across the desert of Tatooine. Anger is leading closer to the Dark Side of the Force, and by the end of the film, you will certainly feel the darkness settling in. This "Star Wars" is not a festive walk in the park - it is as somber as one expects with occasional flashes of humor.

An ambiguous, open-ended finale (essential as a lead-in to "Episode III") and some of the most stunning visuals in eons, "Attack of the Clones" is damn good fun if overlong and cluttered with one too many speeches on the Republic. Yes, it is necessary exposition but I'd just as soon learn more about Anakin and his relationship with Padme Amidala and Obi Wan Kenobi. Nothing quite beats the chemistry of the Han Solo-Princess Leia-Luke Skywalker camaraderie of the initial trilogy, but this film has enough appeal and an ominous tone that will leave viewers breathless for more.

Darth vader built C3PO

STAR WARS: EPISODE I - THE PHANTOM MENACE (1999)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

(Original review from May, 1999)

I can't even begin to tell you what a big Star Wars fan I used to be. The "Star Wars" movies were terrific entertainments, full of sound and fury and encompassing great characters who, by the end of "Return of the Jedi," became our own best friends - we knew them as if they were family. Han Solo, Princess Leia, Luke Skywalker and those two witty robots have become a permanent fixture in our pop culture psyche. "Star Wars: The Phantom Menace" has to be the most anticipated blockbuster event in the last decade or so. It also has been, since its release in the summer of 1999, the most reviled sequel or prequel in history. My prognosis: It's thrilling but never truly involving.

"Episode I" marks the beginning of the "Star Wars" saga, and it is a world only Lucas could have conceived. During the rousing title sequence following the familiar 20th Century Fox logo, we learn that the Trade Federation wants Queen Amidala (Natalie Portman), ruler of the planet Naboo, to sign a peace treaty. Her refusal sparks a war between her planet, which includes the Galactic Republic, and an Empire-of-sorts regime ruled by Darth Sidious and his apprentice, a red-devil-faced, anti-Jedi named Darth Maul (Ray Park). It is up to two freelance ambassadors (!) named Qui-Gon Jinn (Liam Neeson), a Jedi master, and his apprentice, good old Obi-Wan Kenobi (Ewan McGregor) with a ponytail, to rescue the Queen and take her to the relatively safe planet of Tatooine. It is there where the fate of the Jedi lies with a young, precocious boy named Anakin Skywalker (Jake Lloyd), the future Darth Vader, who has a way of repairing machines such as pod racers and creating droids like the unfinished C-3PO! He also has this dream of becoming a Jedi.

The movie unfolds with one amazing sequence after another. We see vast landscapes of different planets and underwater cities. We watch in extreme derision an explosive pod race, presided by good old Jabba the Hutt, where these flying race machines make accelerated turns through rock formations and narrow tunnels resembling Monument Valley - these pod racers are too fast for the eye to catch. We see dozens of digitally created creatures, including wildly ferocious sea animals, and there are the bland-looking battle droids that easily come apart. The most distracting of the creatures is a floppy-eared, amphibious Gungan animal named Jar-Jar Binks, who speaks with a Jamaican accent. We witness many battle sequences, and the most electrifying is a lightsaber duel between Darth Maul and the two Jedis that is pulse-pounding and superbly staged and edited.

George Lucas certainly went out of his way to create a world unlike anything we have ever seen before, even as far as the previous "Star Wars" films. This time, however, he has invested less interest in the human characters. Lucas may have never been a great storyteller but he always paid great attention to character details and nuances. The most profound and memorable character is the Jedi Master Qui-Gon, nicely underplayed by Liam Neeson, who resorts to having too much faith in the young Anakin - he wants to train him despite the Jedi Council's objections. MacGregor's Obi-Wan mostly nods and obeys his master, but he may be a more prominent character in "Episode II" since he reluctantly becomes Anakin's trainer in the Jedi arts. Portman's Queen Amidala is to be the future mother to Luke and Leia, yet here she seems cold and distant - very uncharacteristic of her future daughter's stubbornness or sex appeal. And there are fleeting cameos by Samuel L. Jackson as Jedi council member, Mace Windu; Ian McDiamid as Senator Palpatine, the future evil Emperor; Terence Stamp as a Supreme Chancellor; and the exquisitely restrained Pernilla August (from "The Best Intentions") as Anakin's mother, a slave to some floating bug named Watto. These characters are so noble and fascinating that you wish Lucas gave them more screen time, and less to all the sluggish, superficial exposition given to the Trade Federation and their plans. And I would have loved to seen more of the nefarious Darth Maul - one of the best, most enigmatic villains since Boba Fett.

"The Phantom Menace" is still one helluva show and definitely a treat for all Star Wars fans, including myself. I loved the experience of watching it, and it was great to see brief appearances by C-3PO and R2-D2 again, not to mention the great Yoda and the hysterical cameo by Jabba the Hutt. But the movie does not have the freshness, sense of wonder or magic that the other films had - some of it is too plodding and superfluous. You'll come away wanting more (and wish there was less of Jar-Jar Binks). Perhaps that is what Lucas had in mind all along.

A Kubrick Love Story on a shoestring budget

STRANGERS KISS (1983)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

What must it have been like to be on the set of Stanley Kubrick's "Killer's Kiss"? Matthew Chapman's sobering if ineffectual film, "Strangers Kiss," dares to ask the question of where fiction and reality lie in the face of low-budget moviemaking.

Set in Hollywood, 1955, Peter Coyote plays Stanley, the director of a low-budget film set in New York City about a low-rent boxer who gets mixed up with a blonde femme fatale and gangsters. It is so low-budget that nobody in the crew is likely to get paid. Stanley and his producer, Farris (Dan Shor), are searching for their leading man, a boxer type. Many actors audition but one stands out, a funny, cocky actor named Stevie (Blaine Novak). He looks funny and strange and has a wild head of curly hair, but he fits the bill. Their leading actress, Carol Redding (Victoria Tennant), has already been cast. Filming is underway until Carol and Stevie start to slowly develop feelings for each other. This could destroy the production considering that the financier is Frank Silva (Richard Romanus), a rough gangster type who is too worried over his investment, and too preoccupied with Carol.

Viewed today amidst the countless movie-within-movie treatments we have been privy to, "Strangers Kiss" is most unusual and offbeat. Some of it is almost whimsical and some of it seems forced, but it is a fascinating foray into the artistic process of making something out of nothing. The noir B picture itself is nothing extraordinary but it does have some natural beauty, and it is fun seeing Stanley directing his actors to play scenes naturally without any obvious tics. The best scene is when Stevie has to kiss Carol, and keeps screwing it up so he can keep kissing her. It is a magical moment to witness.

The problem is that the real-life story of these characters is barely interesting. Romanus, taking a cue from his work in "Mean Streets," seems like a typical gangster who is jealous of his girlfriend's cinematic ambitions and her love for the lead actor. Romanus doesn't overplay it but there is nothing here that is special or daring about the role. Victoria Tennant is also bland as Carol, again she has more energy when she is on the film set than in her lazily written scenes with Romanus. The Stevie character is also bland in a strange way, exuding far more liveliness when we do not see him romantically wooing for Carol's attention. Maybe that was Chapman's intention - real life is not half as fun as the movies- but the "reality" scenes feel sterile at best.

Though Peter Coyote does not look anything like Stanley Kubrick, the master's obsessive attention to detail is certainly evoked. Coyote has never bored me as an actor and here, he delivers authority and presence - something most of the film actually lacks. As a curio for Kubrick film fans (and the references to Kube's own "Killer's Kiss"), "Strangers Kiss" is often illuminating and captivating but it does fall short of its expectations.

Saving Private Joey in No Man's Land

WAR HORSE (2011)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

"War Horse" as a play is probably more magnificent and emotionally draining than as a film or a novel. The play itself used advanced, life-size puppets for the horses which would make for a stirring play. But for a movie that runs nearly two and a half hours, using real horses in the face of the reality and horror of war, it makes for a curiously remote and rather unrewarding experience thanks to cardboard and underwritten characters.

The film, set before and during World War I, begins in the English county of Devon where Albert Narracott (Jeremy Irvine) is the farmboy who lives with his drunk father, Ted (Peter Mullan), and his tough mother, Rose (Emily Wat­son). Ted is to buy a horse at an auction and spends nearly thirty guineas on a colt! Rose is upset but it is Albert who sees potential in the striking mane of this new horse named Joey. Albert trains the animal to plough the land and save the farm from being bought by Lyons (David Thewlis), a greedy landowner. Before one can say that we are treading in "Babe" waters (and thank goodness the horse can't talk), World War I has begun and Ted sells the horse to the English Army, to be taken care of by a cavalry officer (Tom Hiddleston).

The story shifts from cavalry officers who use the horses to fight the Germans, to a little vignette involving two young German brothers who are officers who hide out in a farmhouse, to a young girl and her grandfather tending the horses, shifting back to the German Army who need the horses to tow their cannons, to the horse running in No Man's Land and getting injured by barbed wire, and so on. Hard to say which vignette works best but the one involving the German brothers is the shortest and most powerful. It ends with a scene that is remarkably strong and abrupt - a scene that would be more at home in "All Quiet on the Western Front" than in this film.

Director Steven Spielberg knows how to craft scenes of picturesque countrysides, soldiers fighting in the trenches and in cavalry formation as they charge to the German guns, and he knows how to direct horses! "War Horse," however, never quite establishes any real connection with its thin characters. Jeremy Irvine is as bland a farmboy as I have seen in a long time. Emily Watson occasionally elicits a smile when showing how proud she is of her son's strength. Peter Mullan merely looks angry or indifferent. The picture comes alive with Tom Hiddleston's sympathetic cavalry officer who works on drawings of the horse to send back to Albert. Aside from Hiddleston, I didn't feel any emotional attachment with any of the human characters, though certainly anyone would feel bad for the horses Joey and Tophorn, the latter a black stallion who befriends Joey.

Spielberg sentimentalizes Joey's plight - we feel his pain, his need to be close to Albert, and his exhaustion when dragged through miles and miles of mud while strapped to a cannon. But by the end of the film, with its dramatically red sunset hues and silhouettes that scream "Gone With the Wind," I didn't feel emotionally drained by the experience. I just felt emotionally empty.

Footnote: Kids, parents, veterinarians and PETA members should steer clear of this film - many horses die in battle, Tophorn dies from exhaustion, and Joey endures way too much pain.

Johnny Blaze is back! HELL, YES!

GHOST RIDER: SPIRIT OF VENGEANCE (2012)

Reviewed By Jerry Saravia

The critics despised "Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance." I didn't hate it or love it - it is what it is. What it is is merely 90 minutes of hellfire and brimstone and plenty of one-liners but no real panache. I'll say that I admired the first "Ghost Rider" more than this one but both do have their detractors, so whatevs.

"Spirit of Vengeance" has Johnny Blaze aka Ghost Rider (Nicolas Cage) getting summoned by a wine-loving French mercenary and former (?) monk (Idris Elba) to help locate a gypsy child, Danny Ketch (Fergus Riordan) and his mother, Nadya (Italian beauty Violante Placido). Both are being hunted by Satan himself (the magnetic Ciaran Hinds) and his minions headed by the cold-blooded Ray (Johnny Whitworth). Satan needs a new body vessel and who better than this little kid whom he fathered with the help of Nadya. This was a deal with the Devil to help save Nadya's life - a deal that the Ghost Rider understands all too well. It's Johnny Blaze meets "Rosemary's Baby" mixed with some lethal fiery chains and a charred black leather jacket.

Nicolas Cage is his fervent, over-the-top, theatrical self - he is always entertaining as long he yells and does his erratic double-takes. Gone are the days of Cage's restraint in films like "Leaving Las Vegas" and, to some degree, "Bringing Out the Dead" or "Peggy Sue Got Married," etc. Cage is the new anarchic cult figure of the B-movies but he seems to have cast adrift the serious work he used to do. Still, Cage rocks as a heavy-metal actor delivering his lines with as much vigor as possible. I cheered for him (gasp!) and for Idris Elba who could make a whole film where he presses vinyl albums and I would be entranced. Ditto the slightly underused Violante Placido, a more stunning woman than Eva Mendes in the original (though there is no romantic relationship between her and flaming skull, there should be for "Ghost Rider 3").  I also thoroughly enjoyed the decaying presence of Ciaran Hinds's Roarke, the Devil Incarnate, and Johnny Whitworth who is reincarnated as Blackout, an albino demon who can create a dark field which dampens all visible light in a given area. He can also burn everything to toast with his hands, though a Twinkie proves indestructible. I laughed at that scene.

"Ghost Rider 2" is enjoyably fast and furious (thanks to the "Crank" filmmakers Mark Neveldine and Brian Taylor) with plenty of self-parodic gags (such as the image of Jerry Springer as the human manifestation of Satan). I also love the animated breaks in the action with Cage's voice-over. Most of all, this is also an excuse to see the incredible sight of the charred, flaming skull of Ghost Rider in action. As I mentioned, the movie falls short of the devilish charms of the first "Ghost Rider" and, considering the character is an anti-hero of the Marvel Universe and something of a monster, it will not appeal to those who love "The Avengers" or Spider-Man, comics and otherwise. Cage gets to show some real emotion at the end, but the film lacks the support of someone like Sam Elliott (and the mythology hardly follows the canon of the comics or the original film). For cult movie buffs and fans of "Highlander," you can't go wrong though with the appearance of Christopher Lambert. Cage defines anarchy, and anarchy defines this movie. Hell, yeah!

Jesus Christ's Lust For Glory, Or How We Learned that Brian was a Fake Prophet

LIFE OF BRIAN (1979)

Reviewed By Jerry Saravia

Monty Python's style of comedy doesn't hit you in the head with a ton of bricks - it is more like a delicate slap on the face. Their inarguably most famous work, "Monty Python and the Holy Grail," is uneven in spots, has many bloody gags and yet has a great many comic lines. The definition of Monty Python, for me anyway, is complete absurdity. That is probably why "Life of Brian" caused some controversy back in the day - it poked fun at the Biblical epics. Of course, that is what people may have missed - it doesn't poke fun at the Bible itself, only the Bibical epics that somehow escaped criticism of sacrilege. Not to say there isn't one or two digs at the Holy Book itself.

"Life of Brian" focuses on Brian Cohen, one who was born a few stables away from Jesus's manger. The three wise men follow the star to Brian's stable, showering the mother with gifts. Once they realize their mistake, they take their gifts back. Brian later grows up to become a vendor at those bloodthirsty games selling Wolf Nipple Chips, Dromedary Pretzels, Jaguar Ear Lobes, Tuscany Fried Bat and Otter Noses. He overhears a group called The People's Front of Judea (headed by John Cleese) as they chatter in their seats about the Roman occupation of Judea. Brian wants to make a change, joins the group and, as part of his entrance into the group, paints Latin phrases on the walls that a Roman guard corrects - I know that the correct tense of Latin phrases is very important especially when you are exclaiming that the Romans need to leave Judea.

The People's Front of Judea spend all their time chattering and plotting but not actually doing. Brian inadvertently becomes a fugitive and is seeking refuge from the Roman guards. At one point, he climbs a pillar (in true "Simon of the Desert" fashion) only to fall and land in a spaceship! Eventually Brian is back in Judea, faces Pontius Pilate (Michael Palin) who speaks with a lisp that makes the guards uncontrollably laugh, and is sentenced to a crucifixion. Prior to the eventual crucifixion, Brian mistakenly spouts some jibber jabber that listeners take as the New Gospel from the New Messiah. And where is Jesus in all this? Delivering his Sermon on the Mount that few can hear from a distance.

"Life of Brian" is pretty damn close to my favorite Monty Python film. There are many classic scenes, not the least of which is the Sermon on the Mount (which may be more accurate in theory since Jesus had no megaphone in those days). I also love the stoning sequence with female onlookers and stone throwers wearing beards - in those days, you would get stoned if you mentioned the name of God. We just can't say it here. No, seriously. Oh, Jeh---nope. Moving along, I also love the whole notion of Brian being followed by hundreds of people who give significance to every word he utters as if it was a profound message. When Brian says, "F*** Off!," the followers merely ask, "How shall we f*** off, O Lord? " And I can't leave out the "Spartacus" crucifixion climax that ends with Eric Idle singing the poignant song, "Always Look on the Bright Side of Life." A pure howler of a scene is when one man is carrying his cross and a passerby lends a hand only to have the man originally carrying it to run off!

"Life of Brian" is not for all tastes but it should be. It is really an inoffensive, hardly crude and extremely funny movie. I came away from it with a deeper respect for Monty Python's satire and their acerbic lampooning of their targets. It also chooses not to have the cliche of a character stepping on feces - the character avoids it.  Always Look on the Bright Side.

Raising Killer Kane

NEW YORK DOLL (2005)

Reviewed By Jerry Saravia

If you were caught unawares by the New York Dolls in their prime, you could be forgiven after seeing the morose, tragic and highly illuminating documentary, "New York Doll." This film is really the story of a genuine talent who lost what he had and is aiming and hoping to get it back.

Arthur "Killer" Kane was the New York Dolls' bass player and shortly after the group broke up, his career went downhill. Kane played in one band after another but never got the attention he deserved and desired. The film alludes to the fact that the New York Dolls singer, David Johansen, was partly responsible. Johansen's career track was far different as he chose an alias, Buster Poindexter (heaven help us and the song "Hot, Hot, Hot"), and had some supporting roles in films like "Scrooged" and "Car 54, Where Are You?" By contrast, Kane only managed to be an extra in "Innerspace." When Kane saw Johansen on his television screen in a scene from "Scrooged," he became a raving maniac and nearly committed suicide.

In later years and through the 2000's, Kane became a Mormon and worked at the church's Family History Center in L.A. In a truly riveting and touching scene, Kane reveals that he discovered his father's death by checking his name at the Center. But this film does not purport to sentimentalize Kane's suffering - it is the story of his determination to play, at least once, as the bassist for the New York Dolls (never mind that there are only two other survivors of the former band). And when Kane actually manages to rehearse with the band, thanks to singer Morrissey, we wait in anticipation for the arrival of David Johansen. Will Johansen and Kane continue their bitter feud, or was it really ever a feud in the first place?

"New York Doll" is only 75 minutes long yet it is an engrossing documentary, fully embodying Kane's trials and tribulations with the essence of a tragedy, thanks to some priceless interviews with the surviving Dolls; Morrissey; Blondie drummer Clem Burke, and even some affiliates of the Mormon church (including a funny scene with Kane's new "groupies"). Despite Kane's mental disorders and failures with relationships, this is nevertheless that rare optimistic documentary of a man whose passion and steadfast determination to communicate with music far outweighed everything else. It is nothing less than inspiring.