Vidas Privadas (2001)

A Film Review

Copyright Dragan Antulov 2005

Thanks to American cultural imperialism, Hollywood doesn't have to provide historical, geographic or cultural background to plots set in particular times and places. Few American filmmakers have to bother with explaining who fought who in American Civil War or on Normandy beaches. This is a luxury non-American filmmakers can't afford, and one of good examples is VIDAS PRIVADAS, 2001 Spanish-Argentine co-production written and directed by Fito Paez.

Protagonist of the film Carmen Uranga (played by Cecilia Roth), Argentine woman who spent two decades in Madrid. She reluctantly returns to her native Buenos Aires in order to visit her ailing father and settle some inheritance issues. Carmen also has more personal problem in her inability to have normal sexual relations. Instead she arranges couples to have sex while she listens. One of the hired performers is aspiring male model Gustavo "Gana" Bertollini (played by Gael Garcia Bernal). After one "regular" session, Carmen hires him to read pornographic fiction, unaware that the youth will fall in love with her and that the relationship will ultimately with return of some painful memories.

VIDAS PRIVADAS is well-acted film, which isn't that surprising with Cecilia Roth, the most respected Argentine actress and Paez's real life wife, playing the lead role. She is also helped with a small but very good cast of Argentine actors and Mexican superstar Gael Garcia Bernal. Strong acting, however, won't compensate some serious flaws in script and direction. The beginning of the film, when audience meets characters in all their quirkiness, is the best, but the second half represents big disappointment with "surprising" plot twist that belongs more to telenovela than serious drama. Paez also has some problems with direction, making some scenes rushed and confusing. But the worst problem is in average viewers' inability to properly comprehend the film due to their lack of familiarity with certain tragic chapters of Argentine history. Those chapters are the very essence of the plot's resolution and without them film loses much of its impact. Argentine viewers probably won't have problem understanding what this movie is all about, but the rest of the audience will be at odds with its cryptic nature.

RATING: 4/10 (+)

Intacto (2001)

A Film Review

Copyright Dragan Antulov 2005

Spanish cinema industry is the most vital of all European cinema industries. One measure of such vitality is its current status of Hollywood's remake-fodder. Many Spanish films has recently caught the attention of critics and earned a lot of praise, especially those belonging to the thriller genre. One of them is INTACTO, 2001 directorial debut of Juan Carlos Fresnadillo, which also happens to be one of very few directorial debuts slated to be remade in Hollywood.

The films begins in a desert casino run by Samuel Berg (played by Max von Sydow), Holocaust survivor with an unusual luck and even less usual ability to steal other people's luck. One of Samuel's chief employees is Federico (played by Eusebio Poncela), earthquake survivor with the same gift, used to help casino when customers start winning too much. When Federico tries to start his own business, Samuel takes away his luck. Seven years later Federico tries to get back at Samuel by finding people with extraordinary luck and make them play against his former mentor. One of the candidates is Tomas Sanz (played by Leonardo Sbaraglia), bank robber who miraculously survived disastrous plane crash. Federico helps him escape from hospital and introduces him to the underworld of people testing their extraordinary luck through bizarre games of chances. In the same time, Tomas is being pursued by Sara (played by Monica Lopez), police inspector who miraculously survived a car crash that claimed lives of her husband and daughter.

INTACTO has very interesting idea that captivates the audience's attention from the very beginning. Even more important is Fresnadillo's decision not to tell whether the "gift" of his protagonist is indeed some sort of supernatural force or simply combination of statistics of self-fulfilling prophecies. This answer is left to the viewers, who also can enjoy the stylish atmosphere of a world which is surreal and banally realistic at the same time. Cinematography by Xavi Gimenez and Lucio Godoy's music help a lot in creating such effect. Fresnadillo also shows great talent in setting up some memorable scenes, showing great deal of admiration towards the works of David Lynch.

However, the most memorable element of INTACTO is Max von Sydow, veteran Swedish actor whose iconic presence could lift even the less accomplished film. His scenes, at the beginning and at the end of the film, are the best. The rest of cast is also good, especially Eusebio Poncela whose character is as pathetic as von Sydow's was formidable. Unforunately, by the end of the film it becomes apparent that Fresnadillo couldn't decide what exactly to do with such great premise. The plot resolution appears to be forced and unconvincing. But, the general impression left by INTACTO is still good. It is one of those European genre films that look much superior to Hollywood even when they are obviously below the standards of genre excellence.

RATING: 6/10 (++)

A Shot at Glory (2000)

A Film Review

Copyright Dragan Antulov 2005

Soccer is the most popular sport in the world today, but its popularity didn't manifest itself on the silver screen. There are relatively few soccer-themed films, and even fewer are those that involve use of American acting talent. Judging by A SHOT AT GLORY, 2000 drama directed by Michael Corrente, those films will continue to be rare.

The plot is set in Scotland, small country whose soccer league with sectarian-filled rivalry between Glasgow Rangers and Glasgow Celtic is well-known beyond British Isles. This rivalry doesn't affect FC Kilnockie, a lower division club whose American owner Peter Cameron (played by Michael Keaton) threatens to have it sold to Ireland unless the results are improved. For the old coach Gordon McLeod (played by Robert Duvall) the only way to avoid the disaster is national cup competition. The underpaid team is boosted with the arrival of a former Celtic player Jackie McQuillan (played by Ally McCoist) who also happens to be ex-husband of McLeod's estranged daughter Kate (played by Kirsty Mitchell).

Even at old age, Robert Duvall doesn't shy away from trying new things, and A SHOT AT GLORY is one of them. Like always, he gives more than solid performance and tackles Scottish accent convincingly. Real-life Glasgow Rangers player Ally McCoist is also very good in his acting debut. Unfortunately, Dennis O'Neill's script isn't that good when it comes to reconciling realities of European soccer with conventions of American sports movies. The plot is filled with clichés – athletes that have to learn important moral lessons, old coach who exercises ghosts of the past, underdogs fighting their way to the big final game, obligatory romance etc. Because of those clichés film is very predictable and even the "surprise" ending isn't that surprising. Wonderful Scottish scenery does help a little in alleviating those problems, but not enough. Characters played by Michael Keaton and Cole Hauser seem to be introduced only to have the film marketable in USA, thus depriving A SHOT AT GLORY of its realism. Corrente also can't solve the problem of having 90 minutes of soccer being realistically portrayed in feature film which also makes A SHOT AT GLORY look more like a standard Hollywood product than celebration of Beautiful Game.

RATING: 4/10 (+)

United States of Leland (2003)

A Film Review

Copyright Dragan Antulov 2005

For many Americans faced with the new and disturbing phenomenon of school shootings in 1990s, "why" was the first rational reaction. One of the films that attempts to give an answer to this question is UNITED STATES OF LELAND, 2003 drama written and directed by Matthew Ryan Hoge.

The film begins when Leland P. Fitzgerald (played by Ryan Gosling), a quiet, seemingly sensitive teenager, commits unspeakable crime of knifing autistic boy to death at school playground. He is arrested and brought to juvenile detention centre to await trial. There he meets history teacher Pearl Madison (played by Don Cheadle) who is fascinated with boy and wants to discover what made him do such a horrible thing. Pearl's motives aren't exactly educational – he wants to become a writer, and since Leland happens to be estranged son of famous novelist Albert T. Fitzgerald (played by Kevin Spacey), a book based on conversations with Leland is bound to be bestseller. Leland, despite not remembering his crime, has less problems coming to terms with consequences of his action than Becky Pollard (played by Jena Malone), his former girlfriend and victim's sister, as well as the rest of her family.

Hoge had very good idea - to explore some post-Columbine issue from an existentialist perspective. At first, it looks that UNITED STATES OF LELAND will succeed in doing that. Ryan Gosling is great in a difficult role of character who must win audience's sympathies despite bloodiness of his actions. The character of Pearl – his spiritual councillor with issues of his own – is also fascinating and well-played by Don Cheadle. Unfortunately, Hoge squanders this wonderful idea with poor script. Use of flashbacks is confusing enough, but the audience is really at odds with too many characters and too many unexplored subplots. Kevin Spacey, who produced the film, is wasted in completely unnecessary role. What was supposed to be profound comes as pretentious, especially at the end with the surprise twist which wasn't a surprise at all. UNITED STATES OF LELAND begins with a question "why", but after the end credits that question will be asked by viewers who witnessed a missed opportunity.

RATING: 4/10 (+)

The Motorcycle Diaries (2004)

(DIARIOS DE MOTOCICLETA) (2004)

A Film Review

Copyright Dragan Antulov 2005

No Communist icon has filled so many capitalist coffers as Ernesto "Che" Guevara. Youthful look of that Latin American revolutionary leader, forever preserved by his martyrdom, as well as total irrelevance of his questionable ideas and revolutionary methods in post-Cold War world, turned him into the most convenient icon for rebellious youths in developed Western countries. His face is ubiquitous thanks mostly to the T-shirts made in Third World sweatshops by multinational corporations – the very embodiment of evil Che Guevara tried to fight. There are, however, better ways to pay homage to this great and controversial historical icon, and one of them is THE MOTORCYCLE DIARIES, 2004 biographical drama directed by Brazilian filmmaker Walter Salles.

The film deals with the event that preceded Che's revolutionary career. It starts in 1952 Buenos Aires where Ernesto "Fuser" Guevara (played by Gael Garcia Bernal), 23-year old medical students a semester short of graduation decides to spend few months travelling across South America with his best friend, 29-year old biochemist Alberto Granado (played by Rodrigo De la Serna). They start with an old motorcycle they would have to ditch and continue on foot. Their path leads them through Argentina, Chile and, ultimately Peru. Along the way they experience all kinds of adventures, but young Guevara is becoming less thrilled with the adventure and more affected with the poverty, injustice and oppression he had witnessed in various countries. Two of them finally come to volunteer as physicians in leper colony where Guevara's idealism and political ideas start to take shape.

Some critics accused THE MOTORCYCLE DIARIES of glorifying a historical character of a questionable reputation that includes brutal elimination of political enemies, advocating terrorism as justifiable tool of social change and, which is even more important, giving bad example to the thousands of his gullible supporters whose futile revolutionary attempts only made oppression and injustice bloodier. But this criticism isn't valid. THE MOTORCYCLE DIARIES doesn't glorify Che nor endorses his politics. Instead it only shows what made Che into revolutionary. The film portrays Che not as a revolutionary superhero, but as a normal human being who sees his trek as an wonderful opportunity to explore new lands, pick girls, live without job or parental authorities and do all the things carefree young people like to do.

Walter Salles, who gained road movie credentials with CENTRAL STATION, makes this formative journey look fascinating. The movie is shot on authentic locations, all being wonderfully captured by Eric Gautier's cinematography. Local people are used as extras and actors in small roles, underling the film's authenticity. On the other hand, one of two actors playing the protagonists of this saga proved to be somewhat more questionable choice. Rodrigo De la Serna, Argentinian actor and real-life cousin of Che, is very effective as the older and seemingly wiser character who has little understanding for Che's newly found idealism. He also provides a lot of humour in many charming little vignettes. On the other hand Mexican superstar Gale Garcia Bernal appears to be chosen for this role less because of his acting ability and more because of his immense popularity among cinema audiences – a popularity which is supposed to match Che's charisma. Bernal tries hard, but he lacks physical resemblance with Che and sometimes, in an effort to be worthy of such formidable character, tries too hard. As a result, his Che is at times too solemn and too serious.

Yet, despite that little flaw, for most of the viewers, regardless of their political beliefs, THE MOTORCYCLE DIARIES is a journey worth taking.

RATING: 7/10 (+++)

Stander (2003)

A Film Review

Copyright Dragan Antulov 2003

"Opportunity turns honest man into thief" is an Italian proverb that could be applied to the protagonist of STANDER, 2003 crime drama directed by Bronwen Hughes. The plot takes place in 1976 South Africa where men like Andres Stander (played by Thomas Jane) had it all. As a member of privileged Boer family and son of highly respected general (played by Marcus Weyers) he rose in the ranks of South African law enforcement, became the youngest police captain in history and married beautiful Bekkie (played by Deborah Kara Unger). But this idyll is crumbling when the oppressed black majority start to demand the end of apartheid regime and Stander has to take part in bloody suppression of demonstrations in Soweto. This traumatic experience gives him an idea – if police is busy fighting demonstrators, it wouldn't have resources to deal with regular crime. Stander begins the series of audacious armed robberies that would end with his capture three years later. Sentenced to 75 years of prison, he befriends career criminals Lee McCall (played by Dexter Fletcher) and Allan Heyl (played by David O'Hara) and after successful escape starts even more spectacular series of robberies, becoming some sort of folk hero in the process.

Based on the true story hardly known outside South Africa, STANDER is surprisingly accomplished film. Thomas Jane gives very good performance, successfully tackling both the complex character and South African accent. The action scenes are wonderfully directed, while the cinematography of Jess Hall and effective use of 1970s soundtrack give the film a proper period atmosphere. The film does a credible job in showing how the different worlds clashes in apartheid South Africa – not only the affluent whites and oppressed blacks, but also the highly regimented social system with 1970s hedonism and individualism. Hughes, responsible for utterly disappointing romantic comedy FORCES OF NATURE, took a great risk by entering this unfamiliar territory and the risk paid off.

STANDER deservingly gained a lot of praise, but it also had some flaws. The major problem is in Bima Staggs's script which tries too hard to put Stander's story in broader social, historical and political context. The film argues that Stander became criminal because he was disgusted with the brutality of the regime whose laws he had to protect, as well as guilt-stricken about his own role in such brutality. This is explicitly presented in almost surreal scene which is supposed to moving, but comes out as Hollywood invention rather than something based on fact. What STANDER fails to present is an answer why the protagonist chose bank robbing as a way to exercise those demons when other options – emigration, resigning from police or joining anti-apartheid movements – were open. Another of the film's problem is the obligatory romance which manifests itself in a steamy but completely unnecessary sex scene.

However, despite those flaws, STANDER deserves recommendation as fascinating film that confirms the old adage of truth being stranger than fiction.

RATING: 6/10 (++)

Assault on Precint 13 (2005)

A Film Review

Copyright Dragan Antulov 2003

Many critics have valid arguments when they lambaste modern Hollywood for the increasingly annoying practice of remaking any successful film of the past. In case of ASSAULT ON PRECINT 13, Jean-François Richet's 2005 version of John Carpenter's 1976 cult classic, this arguments aren't so strong, because the original ASSAULT was itself a remake of Howard Hawks' 1959 western RIO BRAVO. Richet's film is, therefore, an original variation of a theme much older than most of the cinema treasure being so savagely and ineffectively plundered by contemporary studios.

The plot is set in Detroit on New Year's Eve. Precint 13, the oldest such police building in town, is about to be closed down next day, and it is manned only by burned-down Sergeant Jake Fornick (played by Ethan Hawke), veteran policeman Jasper (played by Brian Dennehy) and foul-mouthed secretary Iris (played by Drea de Matteo). Their routine is interrupted when bad weather forces prison bus to make detour and policemen now have to deal with prisoners, including Bishop (played by Laurence Fishburne), gangster who killed undercover police officer. Soon after that phone lines are down, cell phones are jammed and masked gunmen attack the precint. At first Fornick believes that the assailants are Bishop's men who want to set their boss free, but it turns out that the assailants' leader is Maurice Duval (played by Gabriel Byrne), corrupt leader of elite police unit who worries that Bishop's trial would expose him and his men. Bishop must die, together with everyone in the precint. This forces Fornick to make difficult decision and make temporary alliance with despised criminal in order to ensure mutual survival.

Equipped with bigger budget, Richet easily succeeded in making his version of ASSAULT OF PRECINT 13 look more spectacular than Carpenter's. The action scenes are more intense and the violence is more graphic. The cast is made of stars and plenty of recognisable faces, including rapper JA Rule. However, the large budget also made the film less interesting – with so many stars and their position within on the cast list it was easy to predict what would happen to each of the characters. James De Monaco's script also brought too many character development compared with Carpenter's ascetic original. Too often this drags movie's plot, especially in the case of police psychologist, played by Maria Bello. On the other, this also provided for some fine acting, for which good example could be found in John Leguizamo and his character of drugged-out ranting prisoner. Gabriel Byrne, on the other hand, doesn't provide anything in his role of corrupt policeman, who is less convincing than Carpenter's army of zombie-like gang bangers.

James De Monaco's script also represents disappointment because it, unlike Carpenter's original, has some serious plot holes – too many important things in this film happen by accident, while some scenes defy continuity. Subversive politics of the original and Carpenter's near-dystopic comment on 1970s nihilism is replaced by cheap formula and Hollywood "political correctness". Yet, despite all those flaws and unavoidable disappointments for any fan of the original ASSAULT ON PRECINT 13, Richet's film provides more than enough entertainment in its 109 minutes and deserves recommendation.

RATING: 6/10 (++)

Elvis Has Left the Building (2004)

A Film Review

Copyright Dragan Antulov 2005

Hollywood seems to be running out of interesting or original ideas these days. This I sad, but even sadder thing happens when Hollywood does find interesting idea only to have it wasted. One of such examples is ELVIS HAS LEFT THE BUILDING, 2004 black comedy directed by Joel Zwick.

The protagonist of the film is Harmony Jones (played by Kim Basinger), a woman whose life revolves about travelling and trying to convince women to buy Pink Lady cosmetic products. Two things are going to change her life. First is encounter with Miles Taylor (played by John Corbett), bored and soon-to-be-divorced ad executive who falls in love with her. The other is tendency of Elvis impersonators to accidentally die in her presence. Harmony now has to run, while the deaths are investigated by FBI.

ELVIS HAS LEFT THE BUILDING probably looked very good on paper. Although this isn’t the first Hollywood movie to exploit Elvis mythology, few had such a quirky premise. The talent involved was also promising – director Joel Zwick made a huge hit with MY BIG FAT GREEK WEDDING, while the cast included the likes of Kim Basinger and Angie Dickinson. Basinger is actually very good in film, using one of the rare opportunities to show comedic abilities. Unfortunately, she is the only one to provide some humour in the film. The script by Michell Ganem and Adam-Michael Garber is simply terrible – it provides many talented actors with atrocious dialogues and utterly unfunny jokes. A good example is writer’s apparent opinion that the sight of Denise Richards as Elvis impersonator is enough for audience to roll on the floor laughing. What is even worse is Zwick’s inability to comprehend those problems; his direction is inept, making the film looking cheaper than it actually is. When it comes to Hollywood’s ability to pay homage to one of the world’s greatest icons, Elvis has really left the building.

RATING: 3/10 (+)

Blueberry (2004)

(RENEGADE) (2004)

A Film Review

Copyright Dragan Antulov 2005

Just like Europe produces their own comic book heroes very different from those created in America, so the Old Continent creates their very special screen adaptations of those comic books. But, although their comic books and comic book adaptation are different, Europe and America share one thing – most of comic book heroes usually disappoint their avid fans whenever appear on screen. BLUEBERRY, 2004 French western directed by Jan Kounen, isn’t exception.

The titles say that the film is “loosely based on” the famous comic book series by Jean “Moebius” Giraud. The plot starts in 1870s Arizona boom town of Palomito where young Mike Blueberry (played by Hugh O’Connor), a Louisiana Cajun, comes to live with his tyrannical uncle (played by Tcheky Karyo). Mike falls in love with local prostitute Madeleine (played by Vahina Giocante), but one night in her bed goes disastrously wrong with the arrival of her abusive boyfriend/customer Wally Blount (played by Michael Madsen). The confrontation leaves Madeleine dead and Mike, wounded and psychologically scarred, escapes only to be adopted by Apache tribe. Years later, older and wiser Mike (played by Vincent Cassel) is a sheriff of Palomito, and his mission is to maintain peace between settlers and Apaches. But this balance is shattered when Prussian geologist Prosit (played by Eddie Izzard) finds old Spanish map indicating gold deposits in Apache-populated mountains. Among various characters in search of fortune is Mike’s old nemesis Blount, who appears to know that mountains hide something more precious than gold.

At first, it looks that BLUEBERRY has anything that film worthy of such highly respected source material should have – a diverse and truly talented cast (which includes veteran Ernest Borgnine and Juliette Lewis playing with her father Geoffrey Lewis), beautiful cinematography and exotic locations. But, somehow Jan Kounen, Dutch director who cooperated with Vincent Cassel in ultra-violent DOBERMANN, fails to put any of those resources to some sensible use.

The first problem is the script. To say that the plot and characters don’t make any sense is an understatement. The audience will need a lot of patience and ability to spot tiny details in order to have some basic idea what is actually going on in the film. Kounen’s rapid editing style, which served him so well in DOBERMANN, completely ruins BLUEBERRY.

However, it soon becomes quite apparent that BLUEBERRY was took less inspiration from the works of Giraud than the works of Carlos Castaneda. Because of that a large section of the film deals with Apache shamans (with almost unrecognisable Temuera Morrison as Don Juan-like character), while almost two hours of film’s length could be explained with the scenes describing protagonist’s psychedelic visions. Those scenes, made with CGI, are fascinating – for about two seconds. After that they become so tiresome that the average viewer gets impression of watching a screensaver instead of feature film.

Although BLUEBERRY at times comes close to the “it is so bad that it is so good" point, most of the audience would be wise to spend two hours on something better than this colossal waste of cult comic book’s reputation.

RATING: 2/10 (-)

Heart of the Beholder (2005)

A Film Review

Copyright Dragan Antulov 2005

The author of this review has few subjects as dear to his heart as the freedom of expression. This is one of the most important achievements of the modern civilisation – without which these lines would never be written. It is also one of the least appreciated achievements of modern civilisation. I tend to believe that I’m more aware of its worth because I vividly remember the times when this freedom didn’t exist in my country. I also remember the times when this freedom was introduced only to be gradually suppressed together with other freedoms.

A good illustration for this is the strange fate of THE LAST TEMPTATION OF CHRIST in my home town. The film was shown in theatres during the last days of Communism. A year or two later it appeared in one of the local video stores, being prominently displayed in catalogue. Some time later I went to rent it only to find baffled clerk who claimed not only that such film couldn’t be rented, but that it “never been in the video store” despite the catalogue pointing otherwise. It became quite clear that the disappearance of the film had little to do with property rights or economics – its content was unacceptable for new rulers just like the films questioning Communist dogmas had been unacceptable for apparatchiks of the past. But its “mysterious” disappearance was followed by some other disappearances in the town – this time families began to disappear from their homes overnight. It was just another reminder of the Albert Einstein’s words about burning of books ultimately leading to burning of people.

Because of that I was pleasantly surprised to find the film dealing not only with the subject, but also with the events that have certain macabre similarity with the events I had witnessed. That film is HEART OF THE BEHOLDER, 2005 drama written and directed by Ken Tipton and based on Tipton’s own experiences in 1980s St. Louis.

The plot of the film begins in 1980 when Mike Howard (played by Matt Letscher) leaves his job of computer technician and invests all of his family’s savings into the very first video store in St. Louis. After a slow start, the business is booming and Howard begins to live American Dream. Unfortunately, some of the titles available in store bring attention of Citizens For Decency, fundamentalist Christian group led by Reverend Brewer (played by John Prosky). The group begins to put pressure on Mike, especially when his store becomes the only place in St. Louis where people can rent THE LAST TEMPTATION OF CHRIST. The store is subjected by endless picketing, and the campaign escalates into threats and acts of vandalism. Howard doesn’t want to yield to the pressure so Brewer and his group blackmail City Attorney Erik Manion (played by John Dye) into prosecuting Howard on obscenity charges. Howard wins in court, but the legal fees and pressure lead to his business going bankrupt and Howard loses family in the process. When Howard learns the truth about the way he was ruined, he is determined to have revenge.

Based on true events and originally envisioned as TV movie, HEART OF THE BEHOLDER is a very personal film. Ken Tipton, who, apart from appearing in various small roles had very little experience behind the camera, invested a lot of passion in this project and it could be felt on the screen. Great deal of effort is made in order for film to look authentic despite its low budget – there are many interesting period references and some entertaining anecdotes give a lot of charm to the film. The acting is also good, with some notable names like Michael Dorn and Tony Tood making cameo appearances (the latter being almost unrecognisable in the role of Chuck Berry). The most pleasant surprise is Arden Myrin who steals the show in the role of Howard’s store clerk.

However, the very issue which film is all about – freedom of speech and its frailty in even such traditionally democratic countries like USA – is at odds with the light-hearted tone of the film. There is nothing wrong in presenting the important messages through comic ways, but it requires right balance and talents which Ken Tipton apparently didn’t have. The villains in the film look like buffoons and are played over the top. This occasionally turns HEART OF THE BEHOLDER in unintentional parody of itself. The most problematic is the attempt to provide neat Hollywood ending, which ultimately shatters film’s credibility.

However, despite all those problems, HEART OF THE BEHOLDER succeeds in telling a compelling story in an entertaining and interesting way that won’t prevent some of the audience to think about certain important issues.

RATING: 5/10 (++)

Cherish (2002)

A Film Review

Copyright Dragan Antulov 2005

Too many times interesting ideas become sorry excuse for the mediocrity of Hollywood “high concept” movies. Occasionally, same phenomenon can be observed in independent low-budget films like CHERISH, 2002 comedy written and directed by Finn Taylor.

Protagonist of the film is Zoe (played by Robin Tunney), San Francisco office worker who tries to improve her miserable love life by fuelling it with alcohol any time she goes out. One night, upon return from a brief date, mysterious man kidnaps her and takes her car, which results is a traffic incident leaving one policeman dead. Carjackers runs away, leaving Zoe to face vehicular manslaughter charges. Her attorney manages to get her out of jail and arranges that she awaits trial in house arrest, having an electronic bracelet, regularly maintained by kind-hearted police technician Daly (played by Tim Blake Nelson), at her ankle. Zoe must never leave her apartment and that becomes a problem when the mysterious man starts to stalk her. Zoe now must find a way to escape and find the evidence that would clear her name.

CHERISH had everything a successful low budget film should have – simple but brilliant idea that was made for low budget films, very good and diverse cast, excellent 1980s pop soundtrack and plenty of quirky characters and situations. Unfortunately, Finn Taylor forgot to connect all of those elements into a coherent whole. The most important reason why the film ultimately fails is the decision to make it not as a thriller, but as a comedy. The problem is in Taylor not having enough sense of humour to make the jokes funny, while the “serious” sections of the film look too odd to be taken seriously. Although fans of Robin Tunney – who shows enormous talent in difficult in ultimately thankless role – and 1980s pop music will like this film, the rest of the audience will, at the best, see CHERISH as nothing more than interesting failure.

RATING: 4/10 (+)

Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow (2004)

A Film Review

Copyright Dragan Antulov 2005

Hollywood is currently drowning in the sea of mediocrity and this is a really sad state of affairs. But even sadder thing is when Hollywood does produce something original and refreshing only to see it tragically underappreciated and misunderstood. One of such examples is SKY CAPTAIN AND THE WORLD OF TOMORROW, 2004 science fiction adventure written and directed by Kerry Conran.

The simple idea behind the film proved to be too complicated to some reviewers when they tried to describe the plot. The story begins in New York, which looks very much like the New York in late 1930s, but some details point to alternative history universe. Polly Perkins (played by Gwyneth Paltrow) is newspaper reporter investigating the mysterious disappearances of renowned scientists. Those disappearances coincide with the arrival of giant robots that are raiding major cities of the world in search of power and other strategic resources. The only force that could stop the robots is mercenary army called Flying Legion, whose leader and best pilot is Joe Sullivan a.k.a. Sky Captain (played by Jude Law). He reluctantly agrees to join Polly in her investigation, when the clues begin to connect missing scientists with mysterious Dr. Totenkopf, who might have something to do with the robots.

The author of SKY CAPTAIN AND THE WORLD OF TOMORROW took inspiration from the sources similar to those that led Lucas and Spielberg to create STAR WARS and INDIANA JONES trilogy – pulp literature, comic books and movie serials that characterised much of the popular culture in 1930s America. Those forms of popular culture were often branded as escapist, because they provided people with images of exotic lands and futuristic technology, thus helping them to forget the harsh realities of Great Depression. Conran took such escapism very seriously and transformed it into a fascinating fictional universe in which the present day is looks exactly like the future imagined in 1930s pulp culture. Intercontinental travel depends on zeppelins, countries of the world aren’t preparing for world war, British Empire is global policeman, USA doesn’t have a strong army and has to rely to mercenaries for the protection.

Unlike other films inspired by 1930s popular culture, like THE SHADOW and PHANTOM, that approached their anachronistic subject superficially, SKY CAPTAIN AND THE WORLD OF TOMORROW delivers a rich tapestry of details that require repeated viewings in order to be properly enjoyed. Many of those details are taken from the popular films of the period, while the architecture and fashion gives unmistakable influence of 1930s. Even the cinematography by Eric Adkins with its sepia tones provides almost surreal experience of 1930s film. To make things even more fascinating, almost entire film was made on computer, with actors brought to camera only later, almost without a single prop or set.

The film is visually fascinating, but so much care about its look and atmosphere was brought at the expense of plot and characters. Jude Law and Gwyneth Paltrow, who play the protagonists, work very hard in order to resurrect 1930s movie archetypes, but their efforts are doomed because of the one-dimensional nature of their characters and uninspired dialogue. Other actors are wasted in even less memorable roles, including Angelina Jolie whose brief and not particularly memorable appearance leaves little doubt that her casting was motivated by strictly commercial considerations. Jolie is easily overshadowed by much briefer, although more memorable appearance of Sir Laurence Olivier, whose image and voice were digitally manipulated to bring the great actor to his first posthumous acting role.

Yet, even with those flaws that were, in a way, unavoidable this delightfully anachronistic piece of digital mastery deserves full recommendation as one of the most important films of our times.

RATING: 7/10 (+++)

The Chronicles of Riddick (2004)

A Film Review

Copyright Dragan Antulov 2005

In 2000 David Twohy enjoyed a degree of success with PITCH BLACK, his science fiction horror film that was compared with Ridley Scott’s ALIEN and turned Vin Diesel into charismatic action star. The latter was the reason for PITCH BLACK to get a sequel that would deal with Diesel’s character. The sequel, named THE CHRONICLES OF RIDDICK, was directed by Twohy in 2004.

The plot begins five years after the events of PITCH BLACK. Riddick (played by Vin Diesel), multiple murderer on the run from authorities, is tracked by bounty hunters only to be brought in touch with his old friend Imam (played by Keith David). Imam’s home planet Helion Prime is threatened by Necromongers, militant religious sect that converts everyone to its cause and destroys those who refuse to do so. Riddick would have to confront not only Necromongers and their Lord Marshall (played by Colm Feore), but also his past.

THE CHRONICLES OF RIDDICK could serve as a good argument for all those who consider large budgets as the main reason for the decline of quality in Hollywood films. Unlike the original, it was made under market-friendly PG-13 rating, thus depriving audience of the language and violence that made PITCH BLACK look believable despite far-fetched premise. And, just like in many summer blockbusters of that particular genre, THE CHRONICLES OF RIDDICK is filled with the spectacular action scenes that often serve no purpose other than show film’s CGI budget. Script was, just like in many similar films, of little consideration. The only exception was made with Necromongers and its leader who were made to look like futuristic version of George W. Bush during invasion of Iraq, in an apparent attempt to pander to rising anti-American sentiments in global markets.

Needless to say, all this commercial calculation didn’t pay off. There are few entertaining moments in the film and Nicholas Chinlund is very effective in the role of a bounty hunter. But most other actors, Diesel included, are wasted in tragically underwritten and stereotypical roles. The main problem for THE CHRONICLES OF RIDDICK, however, is in the plot, which is simply too complicated and too ambitious. Twohy apparently mistook the larger budget of this film for the opportunity to replace simplicity of PITCH BLACK with the epic scope worthy of STAR WARS saga. As a result, there are many scenes and subplots that don’t make much of a sense and the plot of THE CHRONICLES OF RIDDICK could be properly understood only after watching DVD extras. Failure to tell a coherent story means the failure of the film in its entirety, so THE CHRONICLES OF RIDDICK should be seen as a failure.

RATING: 3/10 (+)

Pitch Black (2000)

A Film Review

Copyright Dragan Antulov 2005

Science fiction is often described as "a genre of ideas". Science fiction films, on the other hand, speak against this definition. Ideas behind those films are often not particularly original or in any connection with common sense. It is in the way they are presented that make for the quality in science fiction films. PITCH BLACK, 2000 science fiction written and directed by David Twohy, is good example.

The plot is set in distant future when a passenger space ship gets hit by meteorites and makes emergency landing on the surface of an unknown desert planet with three suns in the sky. Only a handful of people have survived the crash and Fry (played by Radha Mitchell), pilot who volunteers to become group's leader, has to deal with two problems – lack of water and Riddick (played by Vin Diesel), convicted murderer who was being taken to prison by his guard Johns (played by Cole Hauser) and who took the crash as an opportunity for escape. While Johns tries to talk other survivors in tracking him down, Fry discovers apparently abandoned human colony with conspicuously preserved space ship that could fly after minimal repair. Fry and others will soon discover the reason why there aren't any colonists – a total eclipse, which happens every 22 years, leaves the planet in complete darkness and brings some forms of the local fauna from the underground. The creatures can't stand the light but the darkness allows them brief opportunity to enjoy some exotic food on the surface.

After its premiere PITCH BLACK was hailed as the new ALIEN, a SF horror classic in the same category with Ridley Scott's masterpiece. Although such praise wasn't justified, PITCH BLACK deserves to be recommended as a solid piece of genre entertainment. Twohy managed to overcome relatively low budget with ingenuity and good use of Australian locations. But the most important factor is human – Twohy learned a lot from Scott's film. The script allows audience to start caring for the characters and action scenes even allow for some minor glimpses into future world, which is in a way distant reflection of our own, with all of gender, race, religious, social and other differences. There are some interesting plot twists and many characters aren't what they are supposed to be. The acting is, of course, very good. Vin Diesel is very effective in almost iconic role of a "cool" but lovable rouge, while Radha Mitchell does nice job as Ripley-like pilot. Keith David, however, steals the show in the role of Muslim pilgrim.

The major problem for PITCH BLACK is in this science fiction film, like so many recent Hollywood examples of the genre, not taking "science" very seriously. Too many elements of the plot are too convenient to bear serious scrutiny. Most of them deal with the bizarre ecology of the planet that is hard to reconcile with fauna described in the film. On the other hand, those who don't care much about little details are going to be entertained by superb acting, excellent action scenes and credible drama. At least for a while, PITCH BLACK brightened the prospects for all those who like quality science fiction in Hollywood.

RATING: 6/10 (++)

Buffalo Soldiers (2001)

A Film Review

Copyright Dragan Antulov 2005

Attacks of September 11th 2001 had profound effect on American film industry, because after them many important or popular films could not be seen without, in one way or the other, being compared with real life. But the effect of that fateful day wasn’t limited to the past films. Some of the films that were supposed to be released were put on hold, because the studios were worried about their tone or subject matter being inappropriate for prevailing mindset in America. One of such films was BUFFALO SOLDIERS, 2001 black comedy directed by Greg Jordan. It took few years and a certain change of political climate for this film to be available.

The plot, based on the novel by Richard O’Connor, is set in West Germany at the end of Cold War. With Soviet invasion becoming less likely, American troops guarding the Free World are becoming bored out of their minds and engage in all kinds of misbehaviour, like abusing drugs and crushing cars of hapless West German civilians with their tanks. Specialist Ray Elwood (played by Joaquin Phoenix) decides to spend his time more constructively – he and couple of soldiers set up their own heroin production and arms smuggling racket. All this happens under the eyes of Colonel Wallace Berman (played by Ed Harris), kind-hearted but clueless battalion commander, who is blissfully unaware even of Elwood having an affair with his wife (played by Elizabeth McGovern). Things change when the new, tough Sergeant Robert K. Lee (played by Scott Glen) arrives to base and begins to hamper Elwood’s illegal activities. Elwood tries to retaliate by starting an affair with Lee’s daughter Robyn (played by Anna Paquin) but this only leads to personal conflict escalating to almost surreal proportions.

BUFFALO SOLDIERS had its premiere on September 7th 2001. It isn’t hard to understand why Miramax chose not to distribute the film after the whole social climate in America changed four days later. In a country which went to great pains to describe “men and women of armed forces” as noble and heroic defenders of democracy it was hard to accept the film where those same men and women are portrayed as murderers, drug dealers and other examples of human filth. Thankfully for Miramax, war in Iraq created enough of anti-military sentiment in USA for BUFFALO SOLDIERS to become acceptable for American audience and later enjoy even greater acceptance abroad.

If BUFFALO SOLDIERS is indeed “anti-American” or “anti-military”, it is only in a sense that it shows some unpleasant truths that aren’t limited to the world’s greatest superpower or its current government. The sorry state of US military depicted in the film is even explicitly explained through the protagonist’s opening narration – after Vietnam War and abolition of draft, there was very little chance of military being the reflection of American society in general. In other words, when prosperous industrial nations make their militaries professional, they are bound to be faced with militaries comprised of those people who are marginalised in those societies because of their skin colour, low education, low income, low intelligence, criminal tendencies or all of that. And, as Robert Aldrich implicitly suggested in THE DIRTY DOZEN, certain qualities that make a good soldier would be completely unacceptable for individuals in civilian life. This heretical thesis is explicitly stated in BUFFALO SOLDIER – the more humane and scrupulous character is, the less likely it is that he would make a fine soldier and vice versa.

One of the greatest achievements of BUFFALO SOLDIERS is in the way it delivers such ultimately depressive content in humorous fashion. Even more important is ability of screenwriter Eric Weiss to avoid some of Hollywood clichés, especially those related to the protagonist. Elwood, brilliantly played by Joaquin Phoenix, is anti-hero whose actions might look despicable, but they are only reflections of a society; in other words, Elwood might be corrupt, but he isn’t better or worse than the very system to whom he belongs. What is even more important is his humanity – the film suggests that Elwood might have something of a conscience, but, unlike conventional Hollywood films, he doesn’t get one great epiphany at the end.

Unfortunately, BUFFALO SOLDIERS did succumb to certain Hollywood conventions. The most noticeable is obligatory romantic subplot involving Sergeant Lee’s daughter – although Anna Paquin again shows his great acting ability, the whole romance is too distracting and blunts the satiric edge of the film. Even more annoying is heavy-handed symbolism at the very end of the film. However, even with such flaws, BUFFALO SOLDIERS is a dark, entertaining and thought-provoking film that could be recommended to pacifists and militarists alike.

RATING: 7/10 (+++)

Bad Santa (2003)

A Film Review

Copyright Dragan Antulov 2005

The author of this review is among those people who are getting increasingly troubled with the whole concept of Christmas in modern world. What used to be a time of joy is now turning into unbearable emotional and financial burden, as well as ultra-commercial travesty which has little to do with people’s religion or culture. Hollywood has contributed a lot to those trends, so I was pleased to learn about at least one Hollywood film that treats Christmas subversively. Unfortunately, BAD SANTA, 2003 black comedy directed by Terry Zwigoff, turned out to be a disappointment.

Protagonist of the film is Willie Stoke (played by Billy Bob Thornton), man who earns his living working as a Santa Claus in department stores. He is, however, far from the usual image of Santa Claus – he drinks heavily, even on job, uses foul mouth while talking to children and has a habit of engaging in unorthodox sexual practices with overweight women. His latest job brings him to Phoenix where Bob Chipesca (played by John Ritter), the store manager, doesn’t dare firing him because Willie’s partner and best friend happens to be Marcus (played by Tony Cox), black midget whose removal might bring bad publicity. Gin (played by Bernie Mac), department store’s security chief is much more perceptive and he learns about Willie and Marcus being duo of career criminals who use their disguise to rob department stores on Christmas. While Gin wants to get some of their loot, two new characters enter Willie’s life – Sue (played by Lauren Graham), barmaid with Santa fetish and retarded 8-year old boy (played by Brett Kelly) who somehow looks into Willie as surrogate father and invites him into his luxurious albeit parentless home.

The concept behind BAD SANTA is simply brilliant. Character of Willie embodies the complete anti-thesis of everything Christmas was supposed to symbolise – goodness, family values, charity. And the plot itself is metaphorical condemnation of the vulgar materialism that hijacked what had used to be deeply spiritual holiday. Unfortunately, by the middle of the film BAD SANTA loses most of its subversive value because writers Glen Ficcara and John Requa don’t know how to finish story, at least not without succumbing to all-too-familiar Hollywood clichés. So, the despicable protagonist falls in love in beautiful woman and befriends little child who serves as tool of his ultimate redemption. The promising start of the film is ruined by weak and predictable ending.

BAD SANTA is ultimately disappointing film, but this can’t be said of the acting performances in it. Billy Bob Thornton is fascinating in the role of loser who is anything but lovable, but whose character glues audience to the screen. Tony Cox is also good, as well as John Ritter in the last film role of his life. But this fine acting, and occasional good joke at the beginning, can’t hide the fact that BAD SANTA is one of those few Hollywood films that live to their names.

RATING: 4/10 (+)

Shattered Glass (2003)

A Film Review

Copyright Dragan Antulov 2005

Recent outing of Mark Felt as Deep Throat brought some sort of closure to Watergate scandal. But the scandal had already died, simply by losing every bit of relevancy to today’s world. The real nail to the coffin was the end of the myths Watergate created – myths embodied in Alan J. Pakula’s ALL THE PRESIDENT’S MEN. Generations were being told the story about two intrepid reporters who uncovered the dangerous conspiracy, saved the democracy and established the media as the most effective check on every government. But this myth began to crumble long time ago, only to be completely wrecked in November 2004. Not only the power of media failed to have its desired impact at the polls, but one of the most decisive events of the campaigns – leaking the fake memos – showed the media being as arrogant and ultimately corrupt as the Presidents they were supposed to bring down. The latest scandal was, however, just one of many. Similar events happened before and one of them is a subject of SHATTERED GLASS, 2003 drama written and directed by Billy Ray.

The plot begins in 1995 in the editorial offices of “New Republic”, one of America’s most respected and influential weekly magazines. Stephen Glass (played by Hayden Christensen) is a young journalist who quickly becomes one of the most popular members of staff. This is due to his charming personality and due to the exciting and saucy articles he writes. Glass quickly becomes magazine’s star and because of that editor Michael Kelly (played by Hank Azaria) chooses to ignore certain questionable details in one of his stories. In 1998 everything changes after Glass’ article about teenage hacker being hired as security specialist for a software company. The article brings attention of Adam Penenberg (played by Steve Zahn), investigative journalist for “Forbes Digital”. When Penenberg’s attempts to find any confirmation for the claims made in the article fail, he concludes that the story is bogus and confronts “New Republic” with its findings. New editor of “New Republic” is unpopular Chuck Lane (played by Peter Saarsgard), a former colleague of Glass. At first reluctant to go against the magazine’s star and editorial staff’s darling, he starts investigation of his own, while Glass desperately tries to prove that he didn’t make up the story.

It isn’t that surprising that SHATTERED GLASS was made in the realm of American independent cinema. It deals with some serious issues in a very serious manner and, what it is even more important, it shatters the illusion – the very core of the business mainstream Hollywood is based on. The film’s pace is excellent, direction is solid, as well as dialogues. The only little bit of criticism could be found in the framing device – fantasy scene during which Glass, as a now highly member of journalistic aristocracy, gives lecture to awestruck high school students. The scene gives too much foreshadowing and the revelations in the film have less impact because of that.

The acting is also very good. Role of Glass is so far the best in Christensen’s career – he is much more convincing in the role of real-life pathetic loser than tragic hero of Lucas’ fictional universe. Peter Saarsgard as troubled editor is much more effective, while Zahn gives uncharacteristically subdued, yet adequate performance as Glass’ nemesis. Other actors are also fine, although their roles – like Glass’ office cheerleaders played by Chloe Savigny and Melanie Lynskey – are there more in order to provide some big names on posters rather than serving dramatic purpose.

Some commentators criticised SHATTERED GLASS for its alleged lack of objectivity and the fact that Chuck Lane served as film’s advisor. But the film can clearly be seen as an explicit criticism of the whole journalistic establishment to whom Lane belongs. The self-righteous guardians of liberal democracy and public interest were allowed themselves to be duped by not particularly distinguished individual, simply in order to maintain the illusion of the professional integrity. By having few Monicagate references, creator of SHATTERED GLASS suggests that such self-deluding mindset can flourish even in utopian times of peace and economic progress; just as Clinton allowed himself to be tarnished because of the personal arrogance, so did American media. And in a way, the affair behind this film was just one crack in the construction that would collapse on September 11th 2001. If Billy Ray tried to explore that angle, SHATTERED GLASS could have been much better. But even in its present form this film deserves to be recommended as cautionary tale for future generations.

RATING: 6/10 (++)

Not Another Teen Movie (2001)

A Film Review

Copyright Dragan Antulov 2005

Thanks to SCREAM, late 1990s witnessed the renaissance of teenage slasher films, so it didn’t take much convincing for Hollywood to try exploiting 1980s nostalgia with the another genre specific for that period. The result was the deluge of teen-themed comedies. And just like teenage slasher horrors in SCARY MOVIE, those comedies became the subject of parody in NOT ANOTHER TEEN MOVIE, 2001 comedy by Joel Gallen.

Like in many contemporary Hollywood parodies, the plot, based on the script written by five different screenwriters, is just an excuse for the series of gags. However, main narrative is modelled on SHE’S ALL THAT and is set in one Los Angeles high school. Its most popular student is typical jock Jake Wyler (played by Chris Evans) who makes a bet that he could seduced the ugliest girl in school and have it elected for prom queen. He decides to seduce Janey Briggs (played by Chyler Leigh), a mousy rebel artist, who is at first reluctant to answer to his advances but gradually sees that she is in love with him just as he is in love with her.

Parodies gained an unenviable reputation in last few years, mostly due to be perceived as just another manifestation of Hollywood’s unoriginality. NOT ANOTHER TEEN MOVIE, on the other hand, seems to be more faithful to its title despite taking inspiration from each and every teen film produced in Hollywood in late 1990s. The main reason is in filmmakers’ decision to have it R-rated, which allowed that some of the gags, characters and situations from original PG-13 films now look refreshing. Another, even more important reason why NOT ANOTHER MOVIE works is in broadening the scope of parody. While most of today’s Hollywood parodies don’t bother to take inspiration from anything older than eighteen months, screenwriting committee did its homework for this film and had paid homage to the early 1980s classics. This homage reflects not only in jokes, but also in many interesting cameo appearances, including Molly Ringwald. Filmmakers showed great affection for the material they parodied and this is always an important ingredient for any successful parody.

The young, relaxed but very talented cast obviously contributed to the success of NOT ANOTHER TEEN MOVIE. Many of them had performances that easily outshine those that they were supposed to parody. One such example is Sam Huntington in an incredible cover version of Chris Klein’s character from AMERICAN PIE. Of course, not all jokes in the film – whether the audience is familiar with early 1980s teen films or not – work and on occasions Gallen succumbs to the temptations of gross-out humour. But, in general, NOT ANOTHER TEEN MOVIE gives impression of being the product of certain intellectual effort, while being entertaining at the same time, and in modern Hollywood this is an achievement worthy of recommendation.

RATING: 6/10 (++)

Wuthering Heights (2003)

A Film Review

Copyright Dragan Antulov 2005

Quarter of century after MTV was founded, there is a growing consensus about that institution being responsible for the decline of rock music. Film critics who experienced two decades of MTV-educated film directors share the same sentiments. Now it seems that the destructive appetites of MTV aren’t limited to the music or film. Other aspects of culture, including classic literature, seem ripe for ruin. At least this is the impression you might get from WUTHERING HEIGHTS, 2003 film adaptation of Emily Brontë’s novel, directed by Suri Krishnamma.

The novel was set in 19th Century England but MTV producers decided to make their adaptation more “accessible” to their targeted audience, so the setting was changed into the only one average MTV consumer might envision – present-day California. So the Yorkshire estate becomes lighthouse where old Earnshaw (played by John Doe) lives with his children and adopts young street urchin who would grow up and become Heath (played by Mike Vogel). Heath and his foster sister Cathy (played by Erika Christensen) fall in love with each other, but their romance is doomed. Cathy ends up with kind-hearted rich neighbour Edward (played by Christopher Masterson) while Heath uses all his frustration to become successful rock star.

What looked like a good idea in ROMEO+JULIET – transporting classic literature into modern setting – turns into monstrosity in WUTHERING HEIGHTS. The characters and plots of Emily Brontë’s novel were not only richer and more complex than in Shakespeare’s dramas, but also more connected to the time and place where they were created. Some situations and events that make sense in 19th Century rural England look ridiculously anachronistic in modern California. However, there is little opportunity to poke fun at this, because Max Enscoe’s and Annie de Young’s script is shallow and boring. Suri Krishnamma’s direction doesn’t help, because too much time is spent on California scenery and actors whose looks are supposed to compensate for the apparent lack of acting talent. To make things worse, since this is MTV movie, a large section of the film is dedicated what MTV tries to sell as music, making WUTHERING HEIGHTS into even less bearable experience to any viewer with some taste. Erika Christensen with her un-Hollywood looks is the only truly human element of the film, but her efforts aren’t enough for WUTHERING HEIGHTS to sink into well-deserved oblivion.

RATING: 2/10 (-)

Wuthering Heights (1992)

A Film Review

Copyright Dragan Antulov 2005

There comes the time when the author of this review has to admit that there are holes in his “general culture”. In other words, there are some Great Books I haven’t read nor I’m familiar enough to consider myself as much erudite as I would like to be. One of those examples is WUTHERING HEIGHTS, novel by Emily Brontë and one of the classics of English literature.

Having little time to read the novel, I watched Discovery Channel documentary series dedicated to Great Books. One of the episodes was dedicated to WUTHERING HEIGHTS. I was slightly disappointed with it. The documentary went to great lengths in order to provide as much details about life of Emily Brontë as possible. As result, there was very little to time to deal with the novel itself. What little information I received about plot and characters led me to believe that the novel was not as great as it had been cracked up to be. Some of my suspicions were proven correct with the WUTHERING HEIGHTS, 1992 film adaptation directed by Peter Kosminsky.

The plot, set in rural Yorkshire in early 19th Century, describes the conflict between individual passion and strict norms of English society. Two major protagonist are Heathcliff (played by Ralph Fiennes), a poor gypsy adopted by landowning family, and landowner’s daughter and Heathcliff’s foster sister Catherine Earnshaw (played by Juliette Binoche). Two of them grow up and fall desperately in love with each other, but, since Heathcliff doesn’t have proper background, she marries wealthy landowner Edgar Linton (played by Simon Shepherd). Hurt and humiliated, Heathcliff leaves the manor only to return years later as a very rich but still embittered man with terrible vengeance on his mind.

WUTHERING HEIGHTS is a very dark film, and this might come as a shock to those viewers who based their perception of rural 19th Century England on the novels by Jane Austen. Vision of Emily Brontë is much more realistic and shows how people’s happiness can be destroyed both by social pressure and their own personal demons. While the novel was referenced as best known Gothic romance, the film is more Gothic than romantic and the protagonists often commit violent and morally questionable acts. This is a problem for WUTHERING HEIGHTS, because viewers are forced with sympathise with people who couldn’t tolerate in real life.

While the costumes, production design and cinematography is great – as it was the case with most classic literary adaptations in 1990s – that can’t be said of acting. Ralph Fiennes is, to a certain degree, effective as troubled Heatchliff, but he lacks chemistry with Juliette Binoche who is too cold as film’s heroine. Matters aren’t helped with the decision to cast Binoche in dual role of Catherine Earnshaw and Cathy Linton. Music score by Ryuichi Sakamoto makes this film sound good, but the general impression is still mostly disappointing and WUTHERING HEIGHTS could be recommended only to those already interested in the novel.

RATING: 4/10 (+)

Casino Royale (1967)

A Film Review

Copyright Dragan Antulov 2005

Remakes became not only very common, but also very depressing practice in contemporary Hollywood. Too many times great films of the past have their reputation scarred by the incompetence of present-day hacks. There are few instances when connoisseurs of classic films can have hopes of new version being superior to the original. One of those examples is CASINO ROYALE, 1967 action comedy directed by Val Guest, Ken Hughes, John Huston, Joseph McGrath and Robert Parrish.

CASINO ROYALE is a James Bond film, which happens to be the least known and the least appreciated of all James Bond films. It was one of two Bond made outside regular Bond franchise. Based on the very first Ian Fleming’s novel (itself adapted for television in 1954), it was supposed to rival of YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE. The movie did have some commercial success, but it quickly sank into oblivion, being either ignored or despised by most of Bond fans.

While all Bond films are, to a certain extent, products of their times, few try so hard to convince audience in it as CASINO ROYALE does. What was envisioned as mere parody of Bond films soon deteriorated into a desperate attempt to look “hip” or whatever average Hollywood executive thought to be “hip” in mid to late 1960s. This reflected not only on film’s content, but also on its structure and narrative techniques. Five directors were hired and worked independently from each other, often without any clue what the others were doing and with very vague idea of what the script – written by three different people – was about.

As a result, CASINO ROYALE doesn’t have anything resembling a coherent plot. There are some bits and pieces about retired Sir James Bond (played by David Niven), British secret agent (played by Peter Sellers) using “James Bond” as alias, Bond’s nephew “Jimmy” Bond (played by Woody Allen), Sir James Bond’s daughter Mata Bond (played by Joanna Pettet) all being involved in something resembling joint effort by British, American, French and Soviet secret services to thwart SMERSH and its evil plans. At the end, few people will know or care of what the film was really about. This will be the aftermath of the series of spectacular but ultimately pointless scenes marked with atrocious dialogue.

Of course, there are few entertaining scenes, especially in the section where Ursulla Andress in a way spoofs her role in DR. NO. But most of the audience is going to be bored – only a very small minority of those acquainted with the more arcane aspects of 1960s cinema are going to have some appreciation for CASINO ROYALE. And even they are going to use CASINO ROYALE as a cautionary tale about the effects of psychedelic drugs. The commercial success of the film is more the product of a mental state of the audience, produced by certain substances that later went out of fashion, taking the film into the path to oblivion. Some aspects of it – including the excellent musical score by Burt Bacharach – proved to be more enduring. And today CASINO ROYALE gives a hope that Hollywood will finally produce a remake better than original.

RATING: 4/10 (+)