Niagara Niagara - * 1/2*

Posted on March 20, 1998 by Madeleine Williams

Niagara Niagara is a road movie that shouldn’t be one. Telling the story of two loners tossed together by fate, the film survives only on the basis of one strong performance.

Seth (Henry Thomas) and Marcy (Robin Tunney) are shy outcasts. They come from different worlds (Seth is poor, Marcy rich), but neither has felt love. The two loners literally run into each other while shoplifting at the same store, and immediately hit it off. Before they know it, the couple begin a road trip to Canada in search of an elusive black Bobbi head.

Marcy isn’t like other girls, however. She has Tourette’s Syndrome. At first she tries to restrain her tics and unintentional vocal outbursts, and Seth is too timid to ask her about it. But eventually, she informs him about her condition. It turns out there is a prescription drug which could help her, but she left her prescription at home. Rather than simply contacting her doctor, or getting a new prescription, she and Seth decide to try every pharmacy the run across during their road trip. Surely some nice pharmacist will give her the drugs, no questions asked.

Robin Tunney delivers a good performance, even if the premise is a bit forced. She delivers the various tics and idiosyncrasies with natural ease, making them seem to emerge from the character, rather than the actor.

Yet, the movie seems trapped by its own conventions. What might have been a touching love story is shackled by being forced to conform to its preconceived “road movie” standards. The movie is pointlessly filled with bizarre characters, such as the psycho druggist, or Walter (Michael Parks), the chicken-obsessed tow-truck driver. None of these characters seem to flow with the story. Rather, they are artificial constructions which are meant for amusement, but only serve to disappoint.

At any time when the relationship between Seth and Marcy seems to get interesting, all of a sudden the movie’s MacGuffin raises its ugly head (or Bobbi head as the case may be). The goal of the pair’s quest is only interesting to the audience to the extent that it motivates the action and reveals the characters. In Niagara Niagara, the trip is more about the trip than Seth and Marcy.

Overall, the only reason to see this film is the performance by Robin Tunney. It definitely fails as a road movie, a crime spree, or even as much of a romance.

Posted in 1998, Movie Reviews | Tagged , | Comments Off on Niagara Niagara

Wild Things - * *

Posted on March 20, 1998 by Madeleine Williams

Wild Things is a movie that prides itself on its deviations, both from sexual norms as well as a plot as we know it. This thriller is overflowing with sex, violence, twisting relationships, and double-crosses to the point that it becomes a mere parody of itself and loses any lasting impact.

Sam Lombardo (Matt Dillon) is the guidance counselor at the high school in the rich Florida yachting town of Blue Bay. He is beloved by most of the students, until one of them, rich girl Kelly Van Ryan (Denise Richards) accuses him of rape.

Two cops, Ray Duquette (Kevin Bacon) and Gloria Perez (Daphne Rubin-Vega) are assigned the case. Kelly’s mother, Sandra (Theresa Russell), who has had her own relationship with Sam in the past, is out for blood, bringing in lawyer Tom Baxter (Robert Wagner) to ruin Sam’s life and career. She also uses her considerable influence to pressure Ray and Gloria to find Sam guilty.

Ray, however, seeks for the truth in an unlikely place. A white trash girl, Suzie Toller (Neve Campbell), with whom Ray has tangled in the past, may hold the key to Sam’s guilt or innocence. But are her motives pure?

There are so many twists, turns, and double-crosses in Wild Things that the movie becomes unintentionally hilarious. It reminded me of the cartoon in which predator and prey keep unzipping their costumes, reversing the situation ad infinitum. The audience can only take so much of this before abandoning the suspension of disbelief and any sense of seriousness about the film. Then again, any movie which stages a crucial courtroom showdown with Bill Murray as one of the attorneys doesn’t take itself all that seriously.

The film is chock full of predators (a fact which the film hammers in with repeated gator sightings in the Florida swamps). Each character, though, is a predator, and (like in the aforementioned cartoon) it is up to the audience to determine who is the prey. This gives nearly every main character a chance to play both the good guy and the bad guy, so, while the audience may get lost, the actors sure look like they’re having a good time.

Still, the film would have been better if it declared its intentions (without necessarily untangling its twists) as to whether it’s trying to be serious or not. The film straddles the fence on this issue, and as it stands, it is either a mistimed comedy or a poorly staged drama.

Posted in 1998, Movie Reviews | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Wild Things

Primary Colors - * * * 1/2*

Posted on March 20, 1998 by Madeleine Williams

Primary Colors

In 1994, an insider’s look at a scandal-ridden run for the Democratic presidential nomination (closely based on Clinton’s 1992 campaign) was written anonymously (former Newsweek writer Joe Klein later claimed true authorship). Now, the book, Primary Colors, has been made into a movie, directed by Mike Nichols, and, in light of recent presidential scandals, seems to be more relevant than ever. But the film is more than a diatribe against, or a paean in praise of, the president. It is a fascinating look at the political machinery, and the ethical quagmire, that surround modern politics.

Jack Stanton (John Travolta) is the governor of a small southern state running for the Democratic presidential nomination. He is charismatic, but has several flaws which threaten to doom his campaign, and strains his relationship with his wife, Susan (Emma Thompson).

The film is told from the point of view of Henry Burton (Adrian Lester), grandson of a civil rights leader, who is swept away by Stanton’s ideals and helps to organize the campaign. He joins political strategist Richard Jemmons (Billy Bob Thornton, looking an awful lot like James Carville), and campaign advisor Daisy Green (Maura Tierney).

Governor Stanton’s past repeatedly pops up to haunt him, a fact that his chief rival, Lawrence Harris (Kevin Cooney), consistently uses to his advantage. To help clean up the Stanton campaign, Jack and Susan bring in an old friend, Libby “The Dustbuster” Holden (Kathy Bates).

The acting throughout Primary Colors is superb. It would be worth seeing the movie for Bates’ wild performance alone. She enlivens the atmosphere with energy in a truly boisterous performance. Travolta does a fair Clinton impersonation as Governor Stanton, although his accent does stray a little. Emma Thompson delivers a strong performance as his suffering wife who can’t let anything show that might hurt the presidential run.

The problem with political movies is that they tend to alienate over half of their audience by promoting one side or the other, or else the movie is vague to the point of boredom. Primary Colors treads lightly on this issue. Though Stanton is clearly portrayed as a Democrat, and there are a few minor barbs thrown in the way of Republicans, the movie touches on few actual political issues. In fact, most of the “bad guys” are fellow Democrats on the same road to the White House.

Rather than issues, the film is primarily concerned about scandals and spin control. Although the film strays into some obviously non-Clinton territory, it is difficult to completely separate it from reality (particularly when certain scenes seem to highlight the President’s current troubles).

Primary Colors’ chief problem is its length. It runs about 15 minutes too long. There are some scenes which could have easily been cut. For example, midway through the film, the candidate gives a speech to an assembly of laid off machinists. The scene’s only apparent purpose is to establish Stanton’s character, which has already been done in similar scenes earlier in the film. The extra length isn’t long enough nor tiring enough to be annoying, but it mars an otherwise excellent film.

Republicans, Democrats, and political agnostics should all be able to find something to like in Primary Colors. It’s a funny, and at some times shocking, look at the modern political process.

Posted in 1998, Movie Reviews | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on Primary Colors

Mr. Nice Guy - * 1/2*

Posted on March 20, 1998 by Madeleine Williams

Mr. Nice Guy is the latest Jackie Chan film, so you should know what to expect. A weak plot, terrible dialogue, very little acting ability, but some jaw-dropping action sequences that nearly make the rest of it worthwhile. However, Mr. Nice Guy lacks the sparkle of Jackie’s best efforts, and its weaknesses are more glaring than ever.

Jackie Chan plays, who else, Jackie. This time out, he’s a famous chef who hosts an Australian cooking show. Not that it ever makes a difference in the plot. There are only two scenes of him cooking. For the rest of the film, somehow he mutates into Jackie Chan, Supercop. It never does explain why his character has such superb martial arts skills…perhaps he was in the same cooking class as Steven Seagal in Under Siege?

A TV newswoman, Diana (Gabrielle Fitzpatrick), covertly tapes a drug deal involving kingpin Giancarlo (Richard Norton) and a local gang of toughs, The Demons. Although she only has one camcorder, somehow the result is full of close-ups and multiple angles…hmmm, shades of Broadcast News??? Anyway, the goons discover Diana, and will do anything to recover the tape. Here lies another crucial flaw in the story: doesn’t anyone realize you can copy a tape? Oh well, no one ever said Jackie Chan movies had to make sense.

As luck would have it, Diana runs across Jackie, and, wouldn’t you know it, Jackie accidentally ends up with the tape. This leads to countless chase and/or fight scenes which look like they could have been lifted from Rumble in the Bronx or nearly any other Jackie Chan movie.

In a move apparently designed to woo American (and other English-speaking) audiences, the film uses English as its primary language. However, that doesn’t mean an end to the atrocious dubbing that has afflicted Jackie’s recent Americanized releases. Strangely, many of the characters speaking English are overdubbed with English, and poorly too. Whether this is just a very bad case of looping, an effort to minimize accents, or a simple case of nostalgia, it does achieve the same level of distraction present in all of Jackie’s dubbed films.

The plot in Mr. Nice Guy is negligible, merely an excuse to have Jackie on the run from various goons. But even though plots have always been second to the action in Jackie’s films, it seems odd that the filmmakers have stuck us with this tired retread. Look, if you have Jackie Chan playing a chef, why not use that to your advantage? Watching Jackie doing his stuff in a kitchen, beating the bad guys with foodstuffs sounds like the perfect setup for innumerable comic stunts.

The action is a mixed bag here. There’s really only one no holds barred fight scenes that have become the trademark of Jackie’s films. It takes place in the arbitrary location of a construction site, apparently for the sole reason that there are lots of nifty things lying around that can be useful ala Jackie Chan. The action in the film is neither Jackie’s best nor worst, but you long for some more inspiration in the scenes.

The film’s gratuitous use of slow motion is distracting. Once or twice, it may be useful to highlight a spectacular stunt sequence. But to slo-mo Jackie running? Either this is a nod to the Six-Million Dollar Man, or a pathetic attempt to disguise the fact that Jackie may be slowing down.

If you’ve seen all of Jackie’s films and are in need of another fix, go ahead and see Mr. Nice Guy. However, if you’re just in the mood for some good action, you’d be better off hitting the video store for some of his better work, such as Supercop.

Posted in 1998, Movie Reviews | Tagged , | Comments Off on Mr. Nice Guy

Chairman of the Board - [No Tickets]

Posted on March 13, 1998 by Madeleine Williams

Chairman of the Board

Used as a joke in Austin Powers, the infamous Carrot Top movie finally sees the light of day, and the world is much worse for wear. A gimmicky prop comic, Carrot Top (aka Scott Thompson), lacks even the range of thespian Pauly Shore, and the film’s meager compliment of jokes fails to even be amusing in a bad way.

Carrot Top stars as Edison, a misunderstood gadget genius. He lives with his two surfing buddies (Mystro Clark and Jack Plotnick), in a shack filled with his failed ideas. One day, he meets an old man (Jack Warden) with a shared love for inventions and surfing.

Little does Edison know that the man is really Armand McMillan, chairman of McMillan Industries, and sooner than you can run screaming from the theater, Armand kicks the bucket and leaves his company to Edison. Of course, this doesn’t sit well with Armand’s nephew, Bradford (Larry Miller), who has been scheming to sell off the company to a competitor (Raquel Welch).

Soon, Edison is using the company to produce his wacky ideas while he romances his co-worker, Natalie (Courtney Thorne-Smith). Meanwhile, Bradford does his best to eliminate Edison and destroy the company.

Carrot Top has managed to create a film rarity: a good guy you want to throttle every time he appears onscreen. His only saving grace is that the film is chock full of characters nearly as annoying. Of the cast, only Jack Warden and Courtney Thorne-Smith survive with only their dignity stained.

The plot of Chairman of the Board is familiar and tired. There’s not a single twist that you couldn’t see coming from the opening credits. That leaves the jokes. Even in a film as hopeless as this one, a few moments of humor could have been hidden here or there. Nope. That’s not the case. The film’s pathetic attempts are so brainless that they’re too stupid to be considered stupid-but-funny.

If you feel a hankering to run out and see Chairman of the Board, you ought to swallow a handful of thumbtacks. It will be less painful in the long run.

Posted in 1998, Movie Reviews | Tagged , | Comments Off on Chairman of the Board

The Man in the Iron Mask - * * 1/2*

Posted on March 13, 1998 by Madeleine Williams

The Man in the Iron Mask

Braveheart screenwriter Randall Wallace makes his directoral debut with this adaptation of Alexandre Dumas’ further adventures of the Three Musketeers. While not as good as his earlier film, The Man in the Iron Mask is entertaining.

The three musketeers have, at this time, retired and gone their separate ways. Aramis (Jeremy Irons) has returned to the priesthood, Porthos (Gerard Depardieu) has devoted himself to earthly pleasures, and Athos (John Malkovich) has contented himself with raising his son, Raoul (Peter Sarsgaard). Their protégé, D’Artagnan (Gabriel Byrne), remains in the service of the King, Louis XIV (Leonardo DiCaprio).

King Louis is a young king, and not a very good one. His people are starving, his armies are fighting unjust wars, and he is more concerned about chasing the skirts of Raoul’s fiancee, Christine (Judith Godreche). However, King Louis has a secret: one whose very identity is so threatening that he has been imprisoned deep within the Bastille and forced to wear a mask of iron.

What’s the one thing you expect out of any movie starring the Three Musketeers? Swordplay! But, for some reason, the movie’s halfway over before any true swashbuckling gets done. When it finally arrives, it is mostly chaotic, and makes you yearn for the better days of Fairbanks or Flynn.

But, luckily there’s more to the story than simple swordplay. The drama in the film is handled well, even though the themes are a bit broad. The weakest part of Wallace’s script is the dialogue, which starts out very poorly, but, thankfully, does get better as the film progresses.

And the film is helped by a fine cast. DiCaprio is in fine form here, given more to do than he was in Titanic. The musketeers are also good, with only Gerard Depardieu (strangely, the only true Frenchman among the bunch) seeming out of place. His Porthos is used primarily for comic relief, which is mostly neither comical nor a relief.

There are a few moments when the film stutters, particularly in its first hour, but as its dense plot is given a chance to unfold, the lure of the story manages to capture its audience. The Man in the Iron Mask is far from being the great epic it strives to be, but it is ultimately enjoyable, and delivers entertainment for the dollar.

Posted in 1998, Movie Reviews | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on The Man in the Iron Mask

Men With Guns - * *

Posted on March 6, 1998 by Madeleine Williams

John Sayles tackles his next subject in his new film Men With Guns. The trouble is, I’m not sure what his subject is…and I’m not sure he knows, either.

Dr. Fuentes (Federico Luppi) is a city doctor in an unnamed Latin American country. His wife has recently died, and he is coping with the issue of his legacy. The one thing he has done which gives him the greatest pride is a program he started to bring medicine to the Indians. He taught several medical students and then sent them out to the Indian villages in the mountains. However, he hasn’t heard from them, and so he begins a quest to track them down.

The journey takes him into the remote regions of his country, where people are tryannically ruled by Men With Guns: be they soldiers, guerrillas, or thieves. Along the way, he is joined by several fellow travelers: a parentless young boy (Dan Rivera Gonzalez), an outcast soldier (Damian Delgado), a priest (Damian Alcazar), and a mute girl (Tania Cruz). They are all searching for something, yet none quite know what it is.

With all of these characters searching for a common unnamed goal, the film has a strong allegorical feel. But what is the film trying to represent? The movie’s message is clouded by its lack of specificity. Is it yearning for simpler times? Crying out against the use of violence? Deploring the conditions in Latin America? Pointing out the futility of altruism against chaos? All of the above? None of the above? The movie is so vague and open to interpretation, the message could be any or none of these. Somehow the message of the film seems as pointless as the hero’s quest.

Men With Guns is at its strongest during its flashback sequences. The appropriately haunting sections are more moving and tragic than the central quest plotline.

Mandy Patinkin and Kathryn Grody make a few brief, but amusing, appearances as an American tourist couple who effortlessly bounce along on a parallel journey to Dr. Fuentes, visiting ruins in a never-ending search for atrocities.

Overall, watching the film, I get the feeling that Sayles was more interested in creating the moods and textures involved in the film than in telling any particular story. The end result is detachedly interesting, but could have been strung together to be a much more interesting movie.

Posted in 1998, Movie Reviews | Tagged | Comments Off on Men With Guns

Love and Death on Long Island - * *

Posted on March 6, 1998 by Madeleine Williams

An obsessive stalker seems an unlikely comedic hero, but the recent comedy Love and Death on Long Island actually manages to pull it off, to a little extent. Though it gets awkward at times, the film is mildly amusing.

Giles De’Ath (John Hurt) is a reclusive London author who has eschewed most modern conveniences in favor of a simpler life. However, a disruptive set of circumstances sets Giles off to watch the latest E.M. Forster film when he stumbles upon a trashy teen flick, Hotpants College II. Dismayed at first by his mistake, Giles is soon transfixed by the actor in one of the film’s smaller roles: teen heartthrob Ronnie Bostock (Jason Priestley).

At first it seems just a passing fancy, but soon Giles’ desire to know all things Bostock turns into an obsession. He sets out for Long Island, where he begins to stalk (though with good intentions) the teen idol and his supermodel fiancee, Audrey (Fiona Loewi).

John Hurt gives a delightful performance of a confused man faced with an inexplicable obsession. He has two wellsprings of humor: his unfamiliarity with the modern conveniences of life, as well as the convolutions he must go through to self-justify his crush (watching him expound on the artistic merit of such Bostock classics as Tex-Mex and Skidmarks is a hoot).

For his part, Jason Priestley gives a richer performance than you expect, even though he’s playing a vapid teen idol with little talent beyond his looks. His Ronnie Bostock is a limited actor who doesn’t quite understand his limitations, and yearns for more. Priestley adds subtlety to a role which could easily have been a simple stereotype.

The script, written by director Richard Kwietniowski, is at its best when it is light and comical. But, given the subject of a film like this, you know it can’t end well. Given that, Love and Death on Long Island pulls out a better ending than you might expect, but it is still an uncomfortable one.

But, though it has its share of faults, there are several amusing moments throughout the film. It’s probably not worth hunting down in it’s limited release theater, but as a second-choice video rental, this one might fit the bill.

Posted in 1998, Movie Reviews | Tagged , | Comments Off on Love and Death on Long Island

U.S. Marshals - * *

Posted on March 6, 1998 by Madeleine Williams

U.S. Marshals

Whatever happened to the art of the sequel? OK, I know that, with a few exceptions, sequels have rarely been as good as their predecessors. But at least sequels used to be sequels. These days, you’re more likely to get a simple, pale remake of the original. Look at Home Alone 3, Blues Brothers 2000, or Scream 2 for a few recent examples. Or even more currently, look at U.S. Marshals.

U.S. Marshals is a sequel (or, as the publicists are calling it, a “spin-off”) of The Fugitive. Tommy Lee Jones is back in his Academy Award winning role as U.S. Marshal Sam Gerard. This time around, he’s on the trail of a fugitive who has escaped in a spectacular transportation accident. The fugitive goes on the run to prove his innocence while the methodical Gerard and his crackerjack team of agents proceed to track him down. Sound familiar? U.S. Marshals even goes as to duplicate The Fugitive’s signature surrender-or-jump to certain death action scene.

But this time, instead of Harrison Ford, the fugitive is Wesley Snipes. Instead of an emotionally involving crime, as we were given in The Fugitive, Snipes is embroiled in a rather dry government conspiracy. All of this adds up to a dry and pasty recreation of the original.

On the plus side, the film brings back Gerard’s enjoyable team, including Joe Pantoliano and Tom Wood. In addition, his seasoned crew is joined by a shady government agent of questionable ability, John Royce (Robert Downey Jr.).

When it’s not busy being overly derivative, U.S. Marshals does contain several serviceable action sequences. However, for the most part, they lack an emotional core. Hence, they’re never as gripping or thrilling as they try to be.

On the acting side, Jones is good, but doesn’t add anything new to his role of Sam Gerard. Snipes suffers in comparison to Harrison Ford, but on his own, he does a decent, if not outstanding job. A talented supporting cast, though, this time is misused. The film adds two unnecessary characters: Kate Nelligan as Sam Gerard’s boss, and Irene Jacob as Wesley Snipes’ girlfriend. They’re given little to do, and reek heavily of filler.

Director Stuart Baird, who did an excellent job with his debut film, Executive Decision, can’t help but have his work be overshadowed by the strong sense of deja vu that permeates this film. The film’s action sequences are well handled, but the transitions are a bit jumpy and confusing.

Rather than simply rehash The Fugitive, why not follow the title’s cue and put the focus on Sam Gerard and his band of merry men. The film would have been much more interesting, and invited much less comparison with its superior predecessor, if it had struck off into new territory, rather than revisiting the wrongfully accused fugitive angle.

Posted in 1998, Movie Reviews | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on U.S. Marshals

Twilight - * * *

Posted on March 6, 1998 by Madeleine Williams

Twilight

Robert Benton has assembled a stellar, mature cast for his latest feature, Twilight, a film noir mystery set amid the fading stars of Hollywood.

Paul Newman stars as retired detective Harry Ross. Harry has spent the last couple of years doing odd jobs for Jack and Catherine Ames (Gene Hackman and Susan Sarandon), a pair of married actors who have fallen from the limelight.

When Jack sends him on a routine delivery job, however, the old instincts kick in. Soon, Harry is wading through a mystery where friendships and lives are on the line, and he no longer knows who to trust.

There are plenty of familiar faces throughout Twilight, in addition to Newman, Hackman and Sarandon. James Garner plays Raymond Hope, a former cop and one of Harry’s best friends. Stockard Channing plays Verna, Harry’s former partner, and possibly a former love interest. Reese Witherspoon is Mel, the distrustful daughter of the Ames’, and Liev Schrieber is her scuzzy boyfriend. Giancarlo Esposito appears as Harry’s bumbling detective protégé, and John Spencer is a suspicious police captain.

With a cast like that, it’s almost worth watching Twilight just to stargaze. Luckily, there’s more to the film than some sort of actor’s recognition ceremony. Twilight has a solid film noir-ish plot. It may not have as many twists and turns as some of the classics, but it has much more than a lot of what passes for film these days.

The major cast members all deliver strong performances, as can be expected of their caliber. However, none of them have that little extra oomph which would make them memorable. The supporting cast is enjoyable, if a little underdrawn. Stockard Channing’s character, in particular, is a cipher. There’s more to her character than the film takes the time to describe. It’s a minor, but irritating, flaw.

With a solid cast, and a good plot, there’s a lot to recommend about Twilight. It’s biggest flaw is actually its short running time. At a slim 94 minutes, there’s a lot of stuff that’s packed into an awfully small package. Still, the chance to see Newman, Sarandon and Hackman working together is worth a cramp or two.

Posted in 1998, Movie Reviews | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Twilight