Remarkable yet undernourished saga conclusion

STAR WARS: 

THE RISE OF SKYWALKER (2019)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

"Star Wars" fandom will exist for as long as it wants to - it will never die. It did not die after 1983's "Return of the Jedi" nor did it wither in the wind after 2005's "Revenge of the Sith." So, despite the glaring flaws and lack of proper continuity in this latest "Star Wars" flick, "The Rise of Skywalker," never assume that the fandom will disappear after this film is long gone from our consciousness because it won't be. It can't die - you know "Star Wars" fans (like myself) will still ponder what might have been with Episode IX - the last film in the Skywalker saga that finalizes the saga but not as satisfyingly as it could have been. 

Speaking of not dying, any dead Jedi or Sith Lord can speak and materialize and physically interact with the real world. Since when? Since this movie. So we get the reemergence of Emperor Palpatine (Ian McDiarmid) who is now some Phantom Emperor attached to an electrical apparatus that keeps him alive. Did he not die at the end of "Return of the Jedi"? Yes, he did, in blazing swirls of lights thanks to Darth Vader. It is never clear if the Emperor was cloned or just simply resurrected, though by whom? I can't say, nor will the Emperor. He wants to start the Final Order, in other words retcon the First Order. Huh? Well, this monstrously evil Sith Lord has somehow created a fleet of Star Destroyers that emerge from underneath the ground. Needless to say, the equally evil Kylo Ren (Adam Driver) wishes to destroy the Emperor but not kill the lovely and fiercely powerful Rey (Daisy Ridley). Rey is now being trained by Governor Leia (the late Carrie Fisher, shown in brief glimpses culled from "Force Awakens" footage) although, I must ask, what kind of training does Rey need? This young woman is a powerful Jedi as she runs and jumps across chasms, races across desert fields and flips over Tie-Fighters dismantling them with her lightsaber and, in a new use of the Force, can actually stop a spaceship from taking off!!! Training? I should think not.

Other character-oriented areas to nitpick in "Rise of Skywalker": the resourceful Finn (John Boyega) with a penchant for firing lasers from gun turrets is reduced to someone who merely cares about Rey and Rose (though in "The Last Jedi" a relationship seemed to be blooming between Finn and mechanic/Resistance fighter Rose but thanks to twits on twitterverse, Kelly Marie Tran who played Rose suffered a huge, foolish backlash thus limiting her role in this film). The one character who I expected to learn more about is this sequel trilogy's Han Solo-type, the resourceful and enigmatic fighter pilot Poe (Oscar Issac), who is given less character details than Han (seriously, aside from "The Force Awakens," how much did anyone really know about Han Solo?) I thought Poe was just a heroic Resistance pilot but it turns out he was also a smuggler of spice - hmm, Han Soloing it much? There is also the welcome return of Lando Calrissian (Billy Dee Williams), that smooth-talking gent and scoundrel and a heckuva pilot of the Millennium Falcon and, yet, his appearance in this film makes precious little sense and is far too limited  And, oh, why go on. Of course, aside from certain other characters, Williams imbues this film with a sense of joy, recalling his past exploits and his charm in the original trilogy.

There are some tremendously thrilling cameos by Mark Hamill as Force Ghost Luke Skywalker (speaking of a Force Ghost's physical interaction, he holds a lightsaber and levitates the X-Wing fighter) and Harrison Ford as Han Solo, relegated as a memory of Ben Solo/Kylo Ren's. So much nitpicking, is the film good? Of course! Daisy Ridley takes her character Rey and makes her come into her own by the final reel - a very moving last scene that ties up all memories of previous Star Wars flicks in one stunning shot and one stunning admission which will not be revealed. Ridley fascinates because we also wonder what she is thinking and sometimes we get scared for her, such as her vision of the Dark Side of Rey. Adam Driver is hell on wheels as Kylo Ren and I love how he fixes his helmet and tries to threaten the Emperor and just about everyone else, though the resolution between him and Rey that invokes "Return of the Jedi" feels more imitative than conclusive. 

The special-effects are naturally terrific. I like the ominous lightning strikes on the planet of Exegol where the Emperor resides - a sort of gloom-and-doom throne of the forbidden with his hooded followers looking on. The star destroyers that litter the night sky of Exegol is also a great image. Kylo fighting Rey on remnants of the Death Star in a rampaging sea is suspenseful (note how she can cure deathly wounds, a new wrinkle on the mystery of the Force). "Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker" is visually splendid and remarkable to watch - it has the sonic sweep of images and the tremendous action scenes of what one expects from Star Wars. There is something soulful and fundamentally deep about Rey's discovery of her ancestral lineage, her complex feelings about Kylo and her need to find her own identity. It makes the film special enough to linger despite how severely undernourished the rest of it is.  

Smug Brat Packers who somehow keep things lit

ST. ELMO'S FIRE (1985)

Revisited by Jerry Saravia

When I think of the occasionally MTV-flashy style of director Joel Schumacher, who died after a year of battling cancer in June of 2020, I think of films as diverse as 1983's marijuana-stoked, hazily comedic "D.C. Cab"; the diverting if far too romanticized-with-death thriller "Flatliners" with Julia Roberts; the humorous, incredibly entertaining (and glamorous-looking) "The Lost Boys"; the incredibly foolish and contrived cartoon called "Falling Down" with a loony Michael Douglas, and his garish-colored sequel "Batman Forever" and the ill-advised "Batman and Robin" that destroyed the Caped Crusader's cinematic interpretations for almost twenty years. Schumacher always presented, with certain exceptions, good-looking actors in artful poses for a magazine spread rather than a movie, though he has maintained some consistency in knowing how to direct actors. The one Schumacher film that gnaws at me, the first one I thought of when his unfortunate death was announced, is 1985's "St. Elmo's Fire," the last major Brat Pack movie (the only other one was "The Breakfast Club" released the same year). Yes, the one about college graduates from Georgetown that starred equally flashy, glamorous movie stars such as Judd Nelson, Ally Sheedy, Demi Moore, Emilio Estevez, Andrew McCarthy and Rob Lowe. Well, they were movie stars to some degree yet it was really Demi Moore who branched out and made a startling movie career headlining lead roles (the others did well on their own but the most financially successful was Moore). Nevertheless, something still gets to me about "St. Elmo's Fire" because it is not a good movie yet it is a watchable one with flashes of something humanistic. The dialogue, despite sounding artificial, is memorable in its own way. The actors are not at their best yet they still shine through along with top pros like Mare Winningham and Martin Balsam. Nothing in the film is believable, not one note or characterization excepting by Winningham and Balsam, yet I accept the unbelievability, the degree to which these actors somehow make it seem real enough, I suppose. Or not, I am not sure. What is it about "St. Elmo's Fire" that still makes me want to revisit it? Let's dig.

Judd Nelson is Alec, the sole Republican of the group, wanting to marry architect Leslie (Ally Sheedy) so that he can stop cheating on her. This relationship, by the way, is not the least bit credible though I suppose it is understandable because what the hell does she see in Nelson (nope, it has nothing to do with Alec's political party choice). At the start of the film, saxophonist and womanizing husband (Rob Lowe, who is about as suitably cast as Michael J. Fox was as a working-class rock singer in "Light of Day") is arrested for drunk driving, woos a female paramedic, apologizes to his girlfriend-of-sorts Wendy (mousy-looking Mare Winningham) and is egged on by Alec and his friends. Then we shift to the lives of this group of college graduates facing a mid-life crisis of one sort or another. Kirby (Emilio Estevez) works at the favorite hangout of these yuppies, St. Elmo's Bar, abandoning medical school in his future since he might be interested in law school, or vice versa. In the meantime, after losing his waiter job, Kirby really wants to impress a doctor (Andie MacDowell) who is on call 24 hours a day. How does he impress? He arrives in a limo, showing off as an attache to a Korean businessman. Kirby is all about money and thinks that is all the doctor ordered. Meanwhile, we got the writer Kevin (Andrew McCarthy), roommates with Kirby, who believes love sucks yet is hopelessly infatuated with Leslie - though everyone falsely believes Kevin is actually in love with Alec! Kevin wants to publish an article on the meaning of life at the Washington Post - I don't think they would care but somehow he miraculously gets published! Oh, Demi Moore plays a flirtatious banker named Jules who drinks too much and is obsessed with her grandmother's funeral arrangements. Last but not least is the virginal Wendy (Mare Winningham) who pines for Billy, though this relationship in hindsight doesn't make much sense either.

Yet "St. Elmo's Fire" still manages to be entertaining fluffy nonsense. The ending is moving in its own way despite it not being warranted (Billy shows a more compassionate side when he is not drinking). I like the film technically - it is well-made and has stunning close-up shots particularly of Sheedy. Schumacher clearly loves his actors and often frames them as a group - I think he also likes these characters though some are smug and self-satisfied. Wendy is the one character who wants to break free of her family's wealth and help people as a social worker - she wants responsibilities and wants to be a mature adult. Except for Leslie, the rest of the group is eager to party, cheat, and lie and generally make fools of themselves. Materialism and money are considered attainable virtues and what would you expect from an 80's movie like this one? The ending seems to suggest that maintaining friends is more important. I hate to say it but the artfully glamorous way in which these yuppies are presented still sucks me in - it is entrancing though I am not sure the movie works at all. This is the first guilty-pleasure movie I can think of where I feel ashamed, not guilty, for liking it.

Chucky as a killer Internet device

CHILD'S PLAY (2019)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

A Vietnamese worker at a doll factory has to make Buddi hi-tech dolls, designed to be lifelong friends for their "masters." The worker is fired by his irate boss, told to finish making the doll before his exit. Then the worker decides, out of spite, to remove all the safety protocols of the doll. Interesting opening until the worker commits suicide by jumping from a window and landing on a car. Why? I don't know. I don't look for much logic in a Chucky movie but this movie, an unnecessary remake of the 1988 film of the same name, has lots of moments that make you go, "huh?" 

Andy is now a 13-year-old hearing-impaired kid (Gabriel Bateman) who has trouble associating with the new kids on the block. His mother, Karen (Aubrey Plaza,) works at ZedMart (I suppose a knockoff of WalMart) which happens to sell those Buddi dolls. Karen loves her son and tries to spice up his days with a new Buddi doll that somehow works by being connected to the Internet and all other working WI-FI devices - think of this new Chucky as the demented doll version of Amazon's Alexa except with spooky eyes that turn red. Chucky wants to please Andy which means that without the doll's safety protocols, it is inspired by watching clips of "Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2" (!) and the doll kills anyone who makes Andy irate. This includes the cat (watch out animal lovers); Karen's bastard of a boyfriend who happens to be married; the maintenance guy who installs surveillance cameras and some in people's houses (not to mention keeping an eye on Karen when she disrobes in the bathroom), etc. We are also introduced to Andy's new friends, an unremarkable bunch of teens, and a curious cop who lives with his mother down the hall from Andy.

Wait a doggone minute - why have so many characters who are barely given much depth? Take Karen's indifferent boyfriend - he's a bastard to her and Andy. That is all there is so it is easy to accept his comeuppance by Chucky, but did it have to be that grisly? The poor guy falls from a ladder, breaks his legs, is practically strangled by Christmas lights and gets his face torn off (thanks to Chucky's imitation of similar grisliness in the Texas Chainsaw Massacre movie.) Then there is the maintenance guy, a sexually deviant creep to be sure, who is stabbed by Chucky on the chest and the legs and then gets sliced up as ground meat by a table saw. Was this necessary? I won't even talk about the cop's mother in a scene that might make anyone squeamish about taking a driver-less Lyft ever again. 

"Child's Play" has able support from Gabriel Bateman as Andy though his actions are often questionably dumb (the severed head as a birthday gift for the cops' mother that can only be opened on his birthday is one for the slasher film books of unbelievably stupid situations). Aside from him, everyone else in this film exists as fresh kills for Chucky except for (SPOILER ALERT) Andy's poor mother. But why would a corporation install safety protocols for a doll that could turn murderously violent if those protocols were not installed? That is a deep question for a movie that is already overcooked in just about every way imaginable. The Chucky doll is creepy (with an added dimension of subtle malice from Mark Hamill's voice) and the film perhaps does the job of a serviceable bloody slasher film. I prefer the tongue-in-cheek attitude of the 1988 original.

Unwatchable one-dimensional Bruce as the shark

JAWS 3-D (1983)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

The original title for what was going to be an actual spoof of "Jaws" was "Jaws 3, People 0," an appropriate title. This stupid, senseless sequel shot in poor 3-D with poorer special-effects and, even worse, a shark with little to no mobility not only moves at a snail's pace it also has no energy. Every shot is static, and that goes for the actors.

There is one scene of vibrant energy between Bess Armstrong, Dennis Quaid and John Putch. Dennis Quaid is one of the engineers of Sea World, Bess plays his girlfriend, a marine biologist, and John Putch plays Quaid's younger brother (the brothers are the Brodys, supposedly the offspring of Chief Brody from the first two films). Putch arrives at Sea World, greets his brother and his girlfriend - it is a scene of harmonic bliss, a sense of real mutual love between them. Other than that, there is an inspired bit where we see a victim struggling inside the mouth of the shark! That is all folks.

"Jaws 3-D" is not a movie - it is a series of scenes searching for a movie. Its only justification for its existence is that, along with the "Amityvilles" and the "Friday the 13ths" of that year, it is in 3-D. Leaving aside three dimensions of its one-dimensional story and characters, the infrequent shark attacks are less fearsome than usual, just minor bloody affairs that wouldn't scare a 9-year-old (the big cut on Lea Thompson's leg, her feature debut by the way, is about as gory as this film gets). Looking back, the first "Jaws" was a sensational thriller with great, colorful characters like Quint (Robert Shaw) who was as crazy as the shark was. "Jaws 2" was a snoozer with occasional support from Roy Scheider who had to carry that inferior sequel on his shoulders. This movie is so lazy, so clumsily patched together that you forget what Lou Gossett Jr.'s role is supposed to be, other than staring with a deadpan look at monitors in a control room. The effects are so shoddy that it all looks dark and murky in the  underwater scenes thus making it hard to decipher one character from the other. In some instances, you can't tell the difference between a shark and a dolphin! Skip this addle-brained sequel and watch the Spielberg classic all over again.

Andromeda Strain with a shot of Rambo

OUTBREAK (1995)

A 2020 Look Back by Jerry Saravia

"Outbreak" is one of those Hollywood earthbound-virus-threatening-humanity flicks that looks a little silly today, in light of the worldwide threat of the Coronavirus. Though based on the book "Crisis in the Hot Zone" which dealt with the horrors of the Ebola virus, the movie starts strong and then segues into some last-minute rescue attempts and incredible foresight from its lead character, a hero with amazing intuitive powers played by none other than Dustin Hoffman. The whole affair is somehow contrived, underwhelming and a bit cheap - trivializing real-life horrors when it comes to an airborne virus that nearly decimates an entire town and threatens to go worldwide. We will get into the silliness that seeps in after some established early scary scenes.

Hoffman is an Army Colonel who is also a disease expert. He gets wind of a virus outbreak in Zaire (the virus is known as the Motaba virus considering its proximity to Motaba River Valley of Zaire), the location of which a similar outbreak had happened 20-plus years earlier and, while wearing a hazmat suit and tracking the area  with a group of scientists, he discovers it is not airborne. Daniels is convinced it will spread like wildfire yet his superior (always a pleasing presence by Morgan Freeman) doesn't want to cause alarm. Nevertheless, the virus does spread through its cute little host, a frosty-haired monkey. First, the virus spreads in a ship headed to America, then some foolish guy (Patrick Dempsey) sells the monkey after already contracting the virus, then a pet store has the monkey, and then the virus enters a movie theater and eventually an entire California town where martial-law is instituted. People get sick with too much expediency and the horror becomes palpable and frightening, at least for a while. The virus is deadly beyond belief, though it has been proven scientifically to be inaccurate, and it not only causes bleeding from the eyes, ears and the mouth but it also liquefies internal organs! This is Ebola times 100. It also develops in your cells within an hour, though again such a virus would take longer (Check for the science behind "Outbreak" and "Contagion" at https://www.thedailybeast.com/how-contagion-pushed-hollywood-to-get-science-right).

The first hour of "Outbreak" is electrifyingly exciting, tense beyond belief and scary. We see how this virus travels and,  through the magic of notable cinematographer Michael Ballhaus ("GoodFellas"), the deadly paths it takes on unsuspecting people as the particles travel through the air infecting everyone is infectious (pardon the pun) cinema. This virus mutates and becomes airborne and even if the science is faulty, the effect these scenes had on me back then resonated and still do today, in light of the respiratory Coronoavirus we have to contend with. Seeing people wearing masks in the town of Cedar Creek brings the realism home, especially all the makeshift hospital beds where patients are dropping like flies. 

"Outbreak," unfortunately, still has the same problems it did 25 years ago - it is "The Andromeda Strain" with an adrenaline shot of "Rambo" action scenes. Yes, Hoffman gets to be an action hero-of-sorts as he improbably convinces two Army pilots not to bomb the town of Cedar Creek to kingdom come. I am sorry, what? How he convinces them is laughable (and I will not divulge it here). We have a few action scenes where Daniels and a daredevil pilot (Cuba Gooding, Jr.), who scoffs at the devastation the virus has wrought, are chased and shot at by Army pilots under the command of  Major General Donald "Donnie" McClintock (Donald Sutherland, who oozes menaces as he always can). McClintock's evil nature is resolved in a scene by Morgan Freeman as Brigadier General Billy Ford, MD that strains credibility. Even further straining credibility is Daniels' amazing ability to generate an antiserum from Brigadier General Ford, who has handily kept the original serum from the Zaire incident of 25 years earlier, and mix it with the monkey's antibodies. All this is done in an hour to save Daniels' former wife, also a disease expert (played with grace by Rene Russo). Logically speaking, this could take longer than an hour (see above article) and the contrivance of tracking down that damn monkey in record time is almost too unbelievable. This would probably take years to do everything that is accomplished in the shortest time span imaginable.

"Outbreak" is entertaining to a fault yet its strong start is diminished by contrived scenes and action elements that do not mesh with what should have been a disturbing, eye-opening thriller.  It assumes that nobody wants to see a deadly airborne virus destroying humanity as a doomsday thriller as the action heroics are brought in to save the day. Who would've thought that it would take a Dustin Hoffman character to save the world. Not this movie critic. And with our current pandemic and the race to find a vaccine that could logically take a year if not years, "Outbreak" seems redundantly harebrained in comparison to real-life.

Return of Navarone-style WW2 stories

THE SEA WOLVES (1980)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

Prepare yourself for one of my favorite war movie genres - the WW2 escapist stories involving spies, double-crosses and a motley crew of heroes. Sure, by the time "The Sea Wolves was released in 1980, such stories seemed to escape the fancy of most. How can anyone though resist the charms of Gregory Peck, David Niven, Trevor Howard and Roger Moore? I can't. 

Based on actual events in 1943 (complete with actual photos during the end credits), British Intelligence officers get wind of a Nazi radio ship that is stationed off the coast of India, specifically Goa which is a neutral Portuguese colony. Neutrality means no British ships can attack the German ship which is transmitting top secret information to U-boats. A mission spearheaded by Col. Lewis Pugh (Gregory Peck) and Capt. Gavin Stewart (Roger Moore) called Operation Creek calls to action the efforts of the Calcutta Light Horse. These retired British, pot-bellied officers who play polo are members of the Calcutta Light Horse and, without special mention, compensation or even commendation, will covertly attack a German merchant ship by taking off on a dirty riverboat and pretend to be drunks. The Calcutta Light Horse brigade is led by Col. W.H. Grice (David Niven), who adds some spice to this already classy production. Trevor Howard, by the way, plays an officer who arranges for brothels to be free of charge to the Nazis during this raid.

"The Sea Wolves" has everything you'd expect from a World War II yarn, including a villainous British woman/German agent (Barbara Kellerman, icy to the core) who romances Moore's Capt. Stewart, who pretends to run a coffee business; an explosives expert (Patrick MacNee, who has too few scenes); the strategies involving the attack which I always find fun; the diversions that include an exclusive party and fireworks display, and much more. The difficulty of maintaining the riverboat allows for sporadic humor - it always looks like the boat is about come apart like paper while the engineer does his best to fuel it with often limited success.

"The Sea Wolves" is often exciting with a doozy of a climax involving the attack, though none of this comes close to the power and vitality of say "The Guns of Navarone" (which Peck and Niven starred in). Still, it is engaging, the heroes are a colorful bunch (Peck's line readings always rivet the attention) and the cast makes it work even if we have seen it all before. Hooray to the Calcutta Light Horse!

Amen to a dismal Armageddon

THE FINAL CONFLICT (1981)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

In the early 1980's, we started receiving cable TV channels such as Cinemax and HBO (Home Box Office as it once was called). I recalled reading our cable guide of upcoming theatrical releases headed to one of those channels. I saw the ad for "Omen III: The Final Conflict" with a close-up of a smiling Damien Thorn as played by Sam Neill (seen above). It freaked me out and I knew it just might be too intense for this viewer. I did not see it till much later and let's say the scare factor was solely depicted in that ad. The movie is insanely dumb, almost as bad as "Damien: Omen II" which had only one good scene (young Damien being tested of historical war dates). Sam Neill never comes across as threatening and the story goes from inspired to bombastically stupid within the first interminable hour.

Damien Thorn is now the Ambassador to Great Britain, just like his father in the original film. He gets the job by throwing just a little pressure on the President of the U.S. (Mason Adams, who could've used more scenes) though Damien realizes he might have to relinquish control of Thorn Industries. "Oh, don't worry about that," says the President though little else is mentioned about Thorn Industries. The rest of the film focuses on seven priests each armed with the daggers of Meggido, ready to assassinate Damien the Antichrist. However, despite a couple of moments of vague suspense like the elongated fox hunt sequence where two priests try to trap Damien with a dead fox that brings the hounds together, the movie has few payoffs even with such sequences, especially the opening involving the former Ambassador who offs himself with the help of...oh, why bother saying it. Also, the plot involves a constellation that signals the Second Coming so Damien wants every child born between certain hours on March 24th to be killed. This all leads to a silly anticlimax where Damien looks for Jesus: "Come on out Nazarene!" Wow, how devilish of him considering this could lead to Armageddon. Sadly, no.

None of the killings, of which include killing babies offscreen thankfully, merit much in the way of shock or the most rudimentary thrills. It all feels very neutered, very safe, nothing of which I would expect from an "Omen" flick. Sam Neill is far too bland (though I like his speech to a congregation on the hills, sort of a sick joke on the Sermon on the Mount) and the whole film lacks urgency, danger or any degree of involvement. It is all so hopelessly boring and blah and disconnected, including the priests who look like bargain basement scavengers (Rossano Brazzi is a solid choice to play a priest but he's given nothing to do). In the original "Omen," you had Gregory Peck as the determined father who sought to destroy the Antichrist despite his own doubts - you rooted for him. There is no one to root for in this movie.

 You might get a little chill from one scene involving a future disciple to Damien (who becomes some sort of detective!) who dutifully does the Antichrist's bidding. A few little chills sprinkled in infrequent doses is hardly worth the effort. Amen.