Movie Review

(In theaters, February 1998) Somehow, great things spring up from nowhere. Last year, low-budget lower-impact movie Gattaca managed to be the best SF movie of 1997, appearing out of the blue and sinking almost as fast. This year (so far), Dark City can claim to the same distinction. It’s not a “warm”, “easy” or “fun” movie, but it’s certainly cool, impressive and tremendously exciting. Dark City is a riff on the unusual themes (for cinema) of memory and identity, well-mixed with a good old-fashioned mortal-against-gods story and a very stylish noir atmosphere. Not your run-of-the-mill SF flick, but possesses terrific editing and visual effects. It’s not without faults, of course (said editing is often over-the-top, premise more “Science-fantasy” than otherwise, parts of the ending are disappointing, some visual effects are uneven) but it’s likely to be some of the best stuff this year.

(Second viewing, In theaters, July 2000) Ironically for a film about memory, I had nearly forgotten how good a film Dark City was. Decently scripted, wonderfully directed and amazingly designed, this is a film that will endure, most probably because it was designed from the onset to be timeless, which its quasi-retro look and atmosphere. A second viewing reveals wonderful small details that may be missed on first viewing (such as the protagonist’s fish fascination, or a shot where a rock thrown through a window flips over a sign from “Closed” to “Open”) Best of all, this is a film that’s enthralling for its whole duration. Most assuredly one of the best genre films of the decade, Dark City is a must-see-again.

(In theaters, February 1998) I began 1998 with the firm resolution to go only to worthwhile movies. It’s a downer to find that my first movie of the year is so very ordinary. The Blues Brothers still stand in my mind as one of the best musical comedies ever, but this sequel doesn’t even approaches the 1980 original in terms of coolness, musical energy, plotting, general fun or even coherence. Despite having seen the man in person, I’ve been less and less of a fan of Dan Aykroyd ever since his shameless propaganda for paranormal phenomenon, and he sinks even lower after the markedly mercenary intent of this film. (It’s probably no coincidence that it features an explicit Revelation From God and a witch temporarily turning the heroes into zombies.) The musical numbers are so lousily integrated in the movie that we almost expect the little MTV logo to appear in the corner at the beginning and end of each song. Finally, if everything else wasn’t depressing enough, the movie isn’t even very funny, and has no real conclusion to speak of. On the other hand, Joe Morton, John Goodman and the few female roles are somewhat enjoyable. There are also a lot of blues in-jokes you won’t understand.

(In theaters, January 1998) Let’s face it: January’s a rotten month for first-run moviegoing. It’s either shlocko-B-Grade-late-night-TV fare dumped by the studios in the middle of the winter because there’s got to be something on the screens during the month, or else a few Oscar hopeful released late in December in a few major markets for academy consideration, and who get wider release in January. Among them… Wag The Dog. An American president is accused of sexual misconduct with a young female. One crack spin doctor gets on the case and diverts the attention of the public with threats of war. A Hollywood producer is hired. It ain’t real-life, although in Mid-January 1998, we could almost feel ourselves being pulled slowly in a Phil K. Dick novel where current events were being uncannily predicted by Hollywood. Wag The Dog will probably pass into history as being at the right places at exactly the right time, but fortunately the movie remains decent on its own terms. Unfortunately, the script isn’t as good as it could have been. The unlikeliness of the described situation -despite the above paragraph, I stand by the word “unlikeliness”- is such that a deliberately over-the-top treatment (à la, heh-heh-heh, The Producers) would have been vastly more successful. To put it simply, Wag The Dog‘s premise is neat but doesn’t have a lot of relevance. So why try? On the other hand, Dustin Hoffman is quite funny after a while, and Anne Heche does a fine bit of window-dressing. If Robert DeNiro is a bit dull (intentionally), Dennis Leary and William H. Macy are great during their short screen time. I liked it, but it’s far from being one of my favorite films of 1997.

(In theaters, December 1997) 200$M movie worth every penny. Director James Cameron proves once again that he’s one of the best film-makers around with this -mostly- seamless hybrid of romance and disaster genre. Despite a disappointing script (still better than most of what we’ve seen this year), Titanic is tremendously moving, and never bores despite lasting 3h15. Exceptional special effects and unforgettable shots highlight one of the first movies to use digital effects in a truly mature fashion. This might not be my favourite movie of the year (even though it’s close) but it’s certainly one of the best.

(On VHS, December 1997) There is a cathartic need for stupid action movies where the down-on-his-luck tough guy hero gets to know a wisecracking sidekick, regain the affection and admiration of his rebellious teenage daughter, make his adulterous wife beg for forgiveness (and call her a slut with her full approval), indirectly kill all bad guys by the end of the movie, throw punches to everyone not even remotely sympathetic and play with big guns ‘n fast cars. That this one stars Bruce Willis is a bonus. (There’s also a cathartic need for two-line reviews that include an obscenely long phrase…)

(On VHS, November 1997) Utterly, utterly forgettable movie about yet another cover-up at the highest level of the government… yawn. In fact, only a few days after seeing this movie, I was unsuccessfully trying to remember the ending, at no avail. Suffice to say that this movie reminds one of the term “preposterous”, and that the usually dependable Linda Hamilton is unexpectedly weaker here than usual. Try this for a quote: Shadow Conspiracy redefines an entirely new level of blandness.

(In theaters, November 1997) Calling this a bad movie would be too generous, even though it’s not that bad. One of the few things this film manages to make look good is the original, which was at least a decent example of tremendously entertaining mind-candy (Paul Anderson’s exciting direction, missing here, might be a factor.) If you can make it through the horrible fifteen first minutes, the remainder isn’t so horrendous. But unless you’re really in the mood for this kind of stuff, avoid.

(On VHS, November 1997) Everyone has a few guilty pleasures, and sappy Anime Romances are one of the best around. Pretty potent teenage fantasy material (A video girl materializes, and tries to help her “owner” get the girl he’s lusting after before herself falling in love with the guy) simultaneously undermined and enhanced by the usual Anime tics. Unexpectedly moving at times, but then again I cry at Saturn commercials… The first two episodes are a laugh riot, the second third is effective melo-romantic material but the final hour manages to make a muddle of everything. (Pretty cool symbolism, though.) Once again (see Ghost In The Shell), this manga adaptation feels like half of the relevant material has been left in the original source.

(On TV, October 1997) I wasn’t really familiar with the whole Nightmare On Elm Street series, so my enjoyment of this movie was affected in consequence. What’s so special about Freddy? Who’s that girl anyway? Why should I care for her annoying kid? There’s one scary sequence (the death of the babysitter, predictable but still spooky) and one chilling scene (the script-on-the-computer-screen), but the finale is average (My, it seems we’re knee-deep in phallic symbols, here!), the remainder only shows blips of interest. The shock tactics are predictable (oh no! It was a dream!) and the meta-story element isn’t even near of the much more enjoyable In The Mouth Of Madness. Not good, not bad, not even bad enough to be good.

(On TV, October 1997) Exceptional movie, superb acting, groovy visual style. The initial situation is preposterous, but once past the premise, 12 Monkeys becomes one meanly effective motion picture. Of course, the script is great; how could it have been otherwise from the pen of the Peoples (re: Blade Runner, Unforgiven…)? I see it as an answer to the in-comparison almost-jovial tone of both Terminator movies. It would have been an interesting thing to read, (my criteria for good media SF) and it is certainly an interesting movie to watch. Doesn’t insult the audience, take its time with the characters, packs some impressive emotional power. One of the best SF movies, ever.

(In theaters, October 1997) Average techno-thriller, but any average techno-thriller is better than no techno-thriller at all. Clooney and Kidman are delightful in their respective roles, and a few scenes are just too good to be missed: This is the first movie I’ve seen that more or less has a good grasp of what it takes to correctly disarm a nuclear bomb. Greatly benefits from being one of the most “realistic” (read: mean-spirited) movie in recent memory. Good direction by Mimi Leder, nice “invisible” special effects. Worth a matinee, and certainly the video rental.

(Second viewing, On TV, March 2001) While this film received mixed critical attention upon release, a second look reveals an efficient action film backed up with a solid post-cold-war plot that’s nothing to be ashamed of. George Clooney’s first film breakthrough (well before Out Of Sight) shows him in full command of his trademark mix of easy cockiness and hard confidence. Nicole Kidman is irreproachable as the analyst suddenly plunged out of her depths, without the usual clichés associated with these characters. It’s a shame that director Mimi Leder hasn’t followed up on the dynamic direction exhibited here; the action scenes are models of clarity and sustained tension. The Vienna car chase/demolition derby alone is worth a rental by its nastiness alone. A few budget-induced problems (the unseen opening explosion, mostly) still annoy me, but while The Peacemaker doesn’t really aspire to be more than a good technothriller, it does so exceedingly well.