Reviews

(On DVD, December 2002) Crossing Sliding Doors with Bridget Jones’s Diary, this gentle British romantic comedy features a woman who gets a glimpse (and then a full-blown part) in her alternate life thanks to a bit of fantasy wish-fulfillment. It’s cute. It’s funny. (Some scenes are humorous in a brutally frank way.) Rachel Griffiths is wonderful in the dual title roles; hot when she has to be, motherly when she must and adorably confused at all other times. The role-switching conceit is original enough, and the treatment works more often than it doesn’t. What doesn’t work as well is the extended second half, which seems a touch too long. (There is also one adultery plot twist too many that remains curiously unsolved whenever normalcy is restored.) The lack of resolution, choice or conclusion is a bit predictable when the point of the film is that you can be happy any way you chose (and yet be very curious about the path not taken.) Worth a look if you’re interested in a slightly offbeat look at single women’s bugaboos once they hit a certain age.

(On DVD, December 2002) Mixed bag that stuffs too many different things in one single container. Let’s run it down: Smart single art restorer with relationship problems: Okay, that works as far as I’m concerned (Monica Potter looks like a cuter Julia Roberts to me). China Chow as her lesbian colleague? More, more, more! The premise that she’s “forced” to take up residence with four supermodel room-mates? Funny stuff, that. Freddie Prinze Jr. as the center of female attention? I can deal with that. The slide from quirky romantic comedy to bathroom humor? Eh… not too sure. The further slide in comedic thriller territory? Eek. Ultimately, the writers throw together too much stuff. Some of it sticks (the supermodel humor) and some of it doesn’t (like the cops-and-gangsters plotline). Some of the humor is just too juvenile to be effective. But I’ve seen worse. This year. Heck, this month.

(On DVD, December 2002) Low-key, but effective supernatural thriller with a bunch of big stars (Cate Blanchett, good as ever, but also a surprising Keanu Reeves, Katie Holmes, Greg Kinnear and Giovanni Ribisi) used to good effect. Sam Raimi’s direction is also understated, yet effective. Interestingly enough, the “gift” isn’t nearly as important as how the characters react to it. I didn’t think a hillbilly drama about a clairvoyant would grab me as much as this one did. The resolution is predictable, but the technique is sufficiently well-handled that it doesn’t matter much. At a time where supernatural thrillers are dumb and plentiful, it’s somewhat of a relief to find one that actually looks as if it cares about the story it’s telling. A small film, but a pleasant surprise.

(In theaters, December 2002) I don’t worship at the altar of Martin Scorsese, but after seeing what he did with this script, I’m now quite willing to attend the occasional get-together. Gangs Of New York is a sumptuous re-creation of a fascinating historical period, when the infamous Boss Tweed’s Tamany Hall reigned over a city that actually deserved its corruption. Immigrants against so-called natives, rich against poor; if America was born in the streets (as the film’s tagline suggests), then it had a difficult gestation. This story is your good old revenge plot, as a son vows to avenge his murdered father. This 1860ish New York is grimy, lively and completely alien to us, as firefighters fight it out for the right to loot a house and gangs can hack at each other in complete impunity. Leonardo DeCaprio fares well in a good bad-boy role, but he pales in comparison to Daniel Day-Lewis, who delivers a great performance as an oddly endearing villain. The film is worth seeing more for the direction and the historical re-creation than for the rather simple story: cinema geeks will love it for the pleasure of seeing a true artist move a camera around, with plenty of budget to realize his vision. The abruptly political ending is initially hard to swallow (it doesn’t help that it cheats us of a dramatic climax after a long buildup), but it does make a point. Who even remembered such events taking place in New York City? Dust those history books…

(Downloaded, December 2002) Now this is the best Science-Fiction film of 2002 you won’t see. Shamefully under-distributed in theaters (and not at all in Canada, hence leading me to, er, “alternate” distribution systems), this science-fiction film brings together an Orwellian techno-fantasy with some of the most amazing action sequences of the year for a science-fiction experience that’ll bore you, then kick your eyeballs with split-second fight scenes that will make you gasp “Did I really see that?” Equilibrium mixes martial arts with guns and a whole lot of style. I’d describe it as “Gattaca with gun-kata”, if you want a ready-made blurb. Yes, the first hour is slow (neither dumb nor pretentious, though… and that’s already quite a recommendation), but that last forty minutes… watch out! It all culminates in a deliriously cool hand-to-hand fight scene where both fighters fires guns at each other point-blank. Damn! I guarantee you haven’t seen anything like it. Christian Bale turns in one of his best performances as the uber-cool priest who turns to the good side. A bunch of other known actors also pop up here and there: Sean Bean, Taye Diggs, William Fichner as well as Emily Watson (who looks positively hot with a long wig) have small roles in this low-budget film. Writer/Director Kurt Wimmer has done miracles with what looks like a tight budget and an even tighter schedule. I can only wonder about what he could accomplish with the means to execute his vision. In the meantime, don’t fret or delay; get a copy of Equilibrium by any means necessary and get fired up!

(In theaters, December 2002) Yikes. I can understand that black comedy isn’t a familiar genre in French-Canada (where the preference goes more to crude popular comedy), but it’s not an excuse to mess up this film so badly. While the film enjoys a relatively flawless second quarter (which compares more or less with such films as Snatch), everything goes to hell as the movie advances toward its conclusion. This simple tale of kidnapping can’t be bothered to maintain an even tone throughout, nor to respect the intelligence of the audience: The staging become more and more ludicrous, the finale is extended beyond anyone’s reasonable patience and the whole thing ultimately ends in a muddled mess. Headliner Stéphane Rousseau grandstands without any adult supervision and Véronique Cloutier is allowed to torture viewers through two musical numbers. (On the other hand, she’s pretty cute… but not enough to make us forgive everything.) The stereotypes are unworthy of existing in a movie released in 2002, and so are some of the plot shortcuts used in lieu of clever plotting. (Can you believe the “lost glasses” shtick? Me neither.) Oh, it’s not as if the entire film is unpleasant, but the tremendous waste of potential here is almost offensive. We’ve got enough stupid American movies up here; we don’t need to make our own.

(On DVD, December 2002) Now here’s a good film destroyed by inappropriate casting. Hubris, even, as the miscasting in question is writer/director Woody Allen giving the protagonist role to himself. Awful choice, especially where we’re to believe that he’s lusted after by none other than, oh, Elizabeth Berkley, Kaili Vernoff and the divine Helen Hunt. Yikes. What, Bruce Campbell wasn’t available? In any case, if you close your eyes and manage to convince yourself that this isn’t Woody Allen they’re lusting after, the film isn’t too bad: The atmosphere successfully evokes the war-years period, and so does the witty dialogue between Hunt and Allen. Yes, the whole hypnotism shtick is profoundly silly, but never mind that: it’s all in good fun. In the end, this sense of fun (oh, and the girls; I’m that shallow) is what sort of saves The Curse Of The Jade Scorpion from total failure. But I can’t wait until we’ve got the technology to replace Allen out of this picture…

(In theaters, December 2002) By the end of the very first musical number, it’s obvious that this is a triumphant return of the classical musical. Chicago isn’t as audaciously post-modern nor as self-conscious as Moulin Rouge!, but whatever go-for-broke edge it lacks doesn’t really matter when it’s so well-done. This ultra-cynical tale of profitable crime isn’t particularly complicated, but it’s told with plenty of style. Even the outrageous musical numbers are carefully integrated as being part of the characters’ imagination with what’s certainly the best editing of the year. Renee Zellweger, Catherine Zeta-Jones and Richard Gere sing and (tap)dance and yes, they’re believable. What’s not so obvious are the other great supporting performances, from Queen Latifah to John C. Reilly to Colm Feore’s non-singing part. The result is pretty amazing. I wanted to clap at the end of some sequences. Who could have guessed that a musical written in the thirties would contain such biting social commentary even today? The ventriloquism/puppetry sequence alone is worth the price of admission, not to mention the “had it coming” tango, the court-circus piece or even the preposterously appropriate tap-dancing around legal arguments. No doubt about it; Chicago is a superior film that makes an effort at showing us far more than what is required to tell a good story. It’s remarkably funny, paced like an action film and surprisingly memorable. See it. Now.

(In theaters, December 2002) Everyone loves to see a deserving hero get away with something, and that’s exactly what this Spielberg film delivers. This is the loose biography of con man Frank Abagnale, who spent the late sixties impersonating airline pilots, doctors and lawyers and forging checks to great profit. Constantly outwitting authorities, he was eventually captured… but still managed to beat the system. This delightful film announces its colors from the onset, through a deliberately retro credit sequence that plunges us back in the time period. Leonardo DeCaprio is convincing in the variety of roles Abagnale chooses to play, and the direction is comfortably laid-back. This film could have been done at any time over the past twenty years; there is nary a “modern” technique in sight. A cursory glance at interviews with Abagnale is sufficient to uncover significant deviations from reality (there was, for instance no single FBI agent pursuing Abagnale through all these years), but the fiction is a compelling, entertaining piece of entertainment. Spielberg is a consummate professional, and he knows how to create a feel-good piece of cinema. Even the too-long ending is built to show how one could see Abagnale simultaneously becoming a law-abiding citizen while beating the system even more outrageously than as a criminal. Catch Me If You Can isn’t a particularly deep or challenging film, but it’s a lot of fun. A terrific criminal procedural enhanced by a compelling cat-and-mouse story, it’s pretty much designed for maximum entertainment. Enjoy!

(On DVD, December 2002) It’s not because it’s French that it’s good. In this case, this particular take on the classic monster story is interesting because it stars the adorable Sophie Marceau and takes place in Paris, but as for the rest, well… Apart from the striking visuals, it’s strictly a run-of-the-mill supernatural thriller. Possession clichés are trotted out one after another, and if the Egyptian lore is cause for a good frisson or two, those shivers remains overwhelmingly based on potential alone. Belphégor has too much visual pizzazz to be considered boring, but on the other hand it’s nothing particularly striking.