Month: May 2019

  • Gorky Park (1983)

    Gorky Park (1983)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On Cable TV, May 2019) It’s clear that we will never quite experience Gorky Park like Western audiences perceived it back in 1983 (or in reading the original thriller novel by Martin Cruz Smith two years earlier). 1983, after all, is the year where the world narrowly avoided nuclear war between the USA and the Soviet Union, in the middle of Reagan’s first term and the years before Gorbachev’s détente. Back then, the idea of a crime thriller set deep behind enemy lines was novel and interesting by default—how would familiar genre elements work under the Soviet regime? Now, of course, the number of Hollywood movies shot and set in Russia has exploded, so we’ll never quite see Gorky Park with the same extra-narrative interest as audiences upon its release. But what’s left today is a decent thriller—not spectacular, not terrible, but engrossing enough in its depiction of a multiple murder whose investigation quickly goes to the top, with side glances at an espionage subplot. The synth music occasionally feels modern and then almost immediately dated. John Hurt is not bad in the lead role, as a disgraced police officer getting embroiled in intrigue. After a remarkable first half-hour, Gorky Park then loses steam the longer it does on, ending with the expected shootout knee-deep in the snow. The romantic story is a bit dull, especially compared to the rich atmosphere—Gorky Park may not have been shot in Moscow, but it presents a credible approximation of it. One lingering question remains, though: Did it accurately present Moscow at the twilight of the Cold War, or is it a Westernized idea of it, complete with the blatant pot shots at the regime in place? It’s left to interpretation, although the solid nature of the film isn’t up for discussion.

  • Mr. Destiny (1990)

    Mr. Destiny (1990)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (In French, On Cable TV, May 2019) There’s a surprisingly strong subgenre of movies exploring what it would be like to rewrite your own history and see the outcomes of different choices. From the angels-driven plot of It’s a Wonderful Life to the more recent examples justified by quantum mechanics mumbo-jumbo, you can see the appeal of the plot device in order to deliver a statement on the human condition. But it’s the execution more than the premise that will determine the impact of the film, as Mr. Destiny clearly suggests. Clearly made for a mass audience, the film’s hackneyed approach to alternate realities for our everyman protagonist isn’t particularly impressive, nor is its cavalier approach to respecting the integrity of the parallel timeline (helpfully pointed out by the magical character, asking our protagonist if he isn’t behaving reprehensibly by wooing another woman than his now-wife). Moral issues aside (and it’s tough to put them aside, because they are significant and do lessen the impact of the lesson the film think it’s teaching us) Mr. Destiny’s biggest problem is the complete and unvarying predictability of the result as it goes through the expected paces. It doesn’t help that two of the headliners are Jim Belushi and Jon Lovitz, two actors who are obnoxious on their best days and actively irritating on all others. More fortunately, Linda Hamilton and Rene Russo are sights to behold, but they’re not quite enough to make the film interesting—and their place in the plot, as mere prizes to be juggled by the white male protagonist having a not-even-mid-life crisis, betrays some ugly scripting issues. Michael Caine is perhaps the only likable character, but he comes across as ineffectually pointing out basic problems caused by the protagonist’s selfishness before it doesn’t matter and we get out of the dream sequence anyway. There are some far better movies tackling more or less the same issues out there—there’s no need to even watch Mr. Destiny.

  • The Dreamers (2003)

    The Dreamers (2003)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (In French, On TV, May 2019) No matter which culture you’re from, Paris exerts this irresistible pull as a travel destination, or better yet as the place to go for a coming-of-age experience. I’ve now seen movies from countries as far away as America and China purring over French culture, and Anglo/French/Italian co-production The Dreamers certainly plays into that trend. Our initial anchor is a young American man travelling to Paris to study French in the late 1960s, during which he gets involved with very close twins that invite him to stay at their apartment, the arrangement eventually becoming a form of romantic triangle. They don’t do a whole of formal classroom study during the course of the film, going instead for lengthy discussions about life, love, cinema, politics and runs through Le Louvre. Right at the moment when it seems it won’t end well, the 1968 Paris protests begin and the film ends on a thoroughly romantic note. This heavily romanticized vision of studying in Paris has attracted a lot of attention for its copious nudity (much, but not all of it from Eva Green, who has since made it one of her trademarks) but is most interesting for its portrayal of three young cinephiles exchanging classic cinema references (many of them illustrated by clips) and living life in 1960s Paris. Writer-director Bernardo Bertolucci clearly wanted to create a belated French Nouvelle Vague movie, so specifically does it associate with this movement and quote its inspirations. The result does seem in the same vein, although (cinema having changed since the 1960s), some elements of The Dreamers would appear closer to titillation than homage. But that’s Bertolucci for you…

  • Invasion U.S.A. (1985)

    Invasion U.S.A. (1985)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (In French, On Cable TV, May 2019) It’s not really fair to say that every Chuck Norris movie is terrible —there are a few mild exceptions. But Invasion U.S.A. is not a likely candidate for the honour: Made to lowest-common-denominator purposes by B-movie factory Cannon Films, it takes anti-Soviet paranoia to new depths by supposing an invasion of the United States by Soviet and Cuban guerillas intent on causing as much damage as possible. I’m told that the novelization actually transforms the film’s ludicrous premise into a workable terror plan, but none of this is apparent in the movie. Instead, we have unseen attackers acting like mischievous gremlins, doing not-so-lethal things at random while being constantly thwarted by that rascally Chuck Norris. It even takes places at Christmas for those heartwarming seasonal moments where communists blow up family Christmas trees. No, but really: Invasion U.S.A. was badly conceived from the start, and executed even more badly. Norris is a wooden block of anti-Soviet action, stuck in incompetent filmmaking—it’s so incredibly stupid from beginning to end (wait until you see the school bus sequence) to the point of not being all that much fun. While it gave the world the iconic image of Chuck Norris brandishing Uzis submachine guns, Invasion U.S.A. doesn’t even qualify for so-bad-it’s-good status.

  • The Rite (2011)

    The Rite (2011)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On Cable TV, May 2019) Any movie that takes on Catholic exorcism is measuring itself against the obvious heavy-hitter in the genre — The Exorcist. Fortunately, The Rite is aware of that precedent, and seems built to go beyond the tropes of the 1973 film. Featuring a young priest protagonist asked to undertake exorcism training, the film takes us in an enjoyable conspiratorial view of the Catholic Church in which demonic possession is seen as something to be managed through rigidly defined protocols. While Colin O’Donoghue is bland as the protagonist, it doesn’t matter very much given that Anthony Hopkins is the real driving force of the film. He hams it up as a renegade priest who happens to be the best in dealing with possessed souls—until, predictably, he is possessed himself. As a horror film, The Rite is merely serviceable at best—the horror is small-scale, the frights are familiar and the entire thing does live in the shadow of many similar films. But it does have its share of good moments as well: a protagonist written as having his doubts, a relatively credible portrayal of the Vatican’s most extraordinary people and quite an anchor in Hopkin’s portrayal. I suppose it could have been much worse.

  • Singles (1992)

    Singles (1992)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (In French, On Cable TV, May 2019) It’s remarkable what difference a few years can make at some crucial junctions. If you’re not a kid at a time when a kid’s movie is released, the film will not reach you in quite the same way. The same goes for other movies aimed a very specific age group even later on. As a late and reluctant member of the Gen-X generation (my parents were boomers, so I’m clearly obviously “Echo” rather than the forgotten cohort in between Generation X whose definition keeps changing … but don’t get me started on generational cohorts), I often feel as if I was slightly too young to fully appreciate the classic Gen-X movies as they were released. Singles, for instance, features actors ten years older than me playing characters roughly five years older than me—and that can be a significant difference as a teenager if you’re using university as a significant dividing line. All of this to say that I never saw Singles in theatres, and never had any real desire to see it since then. But now that I’m systematically investigating 1990 movies, Singles stands as a beacon of sorts—widely recognized as a major movie of its generation (I can effortlessly find no less than five “defining movies of Gen-X” lists that mention it, usually in the top ten). It certainly captures a defining time and place—Early-1990s Seattle, with grunge set against an endless backdrop of coffee stores. Our titular “Singles” means both the ensemble cast and a central apartment building not geared toward couples or families. The plot is conventional in the romantic comedy vein, but more interesting than usual in its execution. Writer-director Cameron Crowe was hitting his peak cultural relevance at the time, and his eye for hipness certainly carries throughout the entire film from fashion to musical choices. Obviously, it’s all romanticized, almost fetishized—but at least it’s absorbing enough to keep our interest throughout. It helps that the film features pretty actors—Kyra Sedgwick is Julia-Roberts-level good-looking here, and in between a very cute Bridget Fonda, Campbell Scott, and Matt Dillon the film has enough eye candy to catch anyone’s eyes. There is a place for movies that firmly (even consciously) mark a definite time and place, and I suspect that the specificity of Singles, having crossed over to period-piece status, will keep acting as a time capsule of sorts for a specific generation … even if it happens to be not quite mine.