Category: Reviews

  • ‘Pretty Persuasion’

    Evan Rachel Wood (left) and Jane Krakowski star in 'Pretty Persuasion'
    Evan Rachel Wood (left) and Jane Krakowski star in ‘Pretty Persuasion’

    I usually cringe when going to see feature film debuts from directors who have been previously limited to music videos. So I was more than just a little surprised by the quality of Pretty Persuasion, the debut film from Marcos Siega. It is the best feature directorial debut I have seen since Rod Lurie’s “Deterrence” over six years ago. While Siega had help in the form of a sharp script from writer Skander Halim, Siega’s final product is the work of a director who will be around for the long haul.

    Persuasion stars Evan Rachel Wood (Thirteen, The Upside of Anger) as Kimberly Joyce, a 15-year-old student at an expensive and exclusive private school in Beverly Hills. And while she may look as sweet as a Wonka Bar, she is anything but. The sole child of a divorced couple, and currently living with her father, Kimberly is determined to make it as a professional actress and achieve fame and fortune at any cost. Her best friend Brittany shares the same dreams but perhaps not quite the same level of determination, and the newest student in the school, Randa (newcomer Adi Schnall), an hijab (headdress) wearing Arab transplant who dreams only of passing English and pleasing her parents, who are spending a fortune to keep her in the upscale academy. However, all three of the girls are having issues with their English and Drama teacher, Mr. Anderson (Ron Livingston), and just how serious those issues are becomes clear when the trio file a sexual harassment lawsuit against him.

    A lawsuit of this type, at a high-priced Beverly Hills private school, would draw massive media attention even if the Michael Jackson and Martha Stewart trials were going on at the same time, and this is no exception. This trial gets particular media interest since there was a reporter doing a fluff feature on the school present when the lawsuit was filed, and that reporter (Jane Krakowski) immediately senses this is the kind of story that leads to promotion and opportunity for someone like her.

    The question here is who is exploiting whom. Kimberly doesn’t discriminate. She exploits everyone she can. Maybe not equally, but that is only because she is able to manipulate some people further than others, and she will use them all to accomplish her goals. Yes, goals. She has more than just the achieving of fame and fortune as goals. Kimberly is complicated and has several agendas and plans.

    Will the lawsuit succeed? Will it fail? Whatever happens, it is Kimberly who is manipulating the players involved, much like a master puppeteer — and all of the marionettes are going to move exactly as she has planned. This is all part of a master plan and while all three of the girls have a stake in the outcome, the only certainty is that you know Kimberly will get what she wants. Will the other two girls be as successful is a question that can be answered only by being there when all of Kimberly’s plans come to completion.

    Siega is the kind of director who manages to let the actors actually perform and act while on-screen, something some directors can’t manage to do because they are too busy focused on getting the action just right. While this is not an action film, that did not relieve Siega of the challenge of maintaining tension while allowing the actors to shine and he achieves both goals. The result is a taut 104 minutes of film where you are either laughing at the dark humor of Halim’s script, marveling at how it attacks and skewers things that go way beyond the politically correct limits of most films, and yet all seems plausible in the world of high-priced private education. I found it believable and I worked in a very expensive private school near Beverly Hills for more than 15 years.

    Evan Rachel Wood delivers a breakout performance as Kimberly, the maniacal manipulator who will do anything and everything to get you to do her bidding. James Woods will have your sides splitting in his all too brief appearances as her father with his acerbic, acid wit. Is he bigoted or does he just hate everyone? Go and see for yourself, but don’t sip from your soda when he’s on-screen or you might end up spitting on your neighbor.

    This is a must-see movie. One of the best movies I’ve seen all year. Persuade yourself to stop off and see Pretty Persuasion.

  • ‘The Great Raid’ is the story of a little-known, amazing military mission

    ‘The Great Raid’ is the story of a little-known, amazing military mission

    The soldiers getting into position for ‘The Great Raid’ on Cabanatuan

    John Dahl is the last director I would have expected to have been behind The Great Raid, Hollywood’s homage to one of the most heroic and least well-known stories of World War II — the rescue of 510 American and British prisoners from a Japanese POW camp in the Philippines. None of his prior films had any connection with war or the military, and he didn’t have a lot of experience with big “action” sequences.

    Of course when Miramax makes a movie; logic is not always involved in the choices being made, so why not Dahl?  What might have seemed a suspect choice before shooting began, the final result shows Dahl was the right person for the job.

    The Great Raid is based on not one, but two books that chronicle the true story of the rescue of the 500 plus survivors of the Bataan death march who ended up at the Japanese POW camp at Cabanatuan. They had to be rescued because the Japanese government had ordered they be murdered before the Allies could free them from the POW camp. When the Allied forces commanded by Generals Douglas MacArthur and Walter Kreuger landed on Luzon there was a strong possibility the POWs might be liberated, so the order to kill them was about to be implemented. When General Kreuger learned of this, he ordered a rescue mission be planned and carried out.

    The Great Raid begins by saying it was “Inspired by true events” and gives a bit of a history lesson. It remains fairly faithful to the actual history of the rescue itself. Benjamin Bratt plays the real-life officer who commanded the battalion that was given this mission, Lt. Col Henry Mucci, commander of the 6th Ranger Battalion. Bratt bears a strong resemblance to the man who he gives a fairly accurate portrayal of.  Colonel Mucci was a man who could motivate his soldiers in spite of daunting odds and overwhelming obstacles.  James Franco portrays Captain Robert Prince.  Prince was a non-career officer who wanted nothing more than for the war to end so he can go home to his wife.  In spite of that desire, he planned and lead one of the most daring and successful military rescue operations in the history of warfare. 121 Rangers, aided by several hundred Philippino guerilla soldiers carried out the operation. They suffered only two American and 21 Philippino casualties while rescuing every single prisoner in the camp and killing over 800 Japanese soldiers in the process.

    Connie Nielsen in ‘The Great Raid’

    We see the planning of and then the carrying out of this operation, done in spite of required changes made on the fly, and some nice additions made in the field that enhance the plan, while inside the camp we witness the horrific conditions the prisoners are forced to live under. Acts of bravery under fire and the military genius of the planning of this operation are demonstrated as the invaders quickly overwhelm and destroy the camp’s guard force, which fights to the very last man.

    Connie Nielsen gives a strong performance as Margaret Utinsky, an American nurse in the Philippines at the time.  She was helping the Filipino Resistance in supplying medicines and food to the prisoners at Cabanatuan.

    Unlike modern techno-war films where we see the wizardry of weaponry, smart-bombs, fuel-air-explosives, this is war fought in the old style, mano-a-mano. The Great Raid is the kind of war movie that John Wayne used to make (not counting that propaganda statement entitled The Green Berets or the kind of war that George C. Scott’s Patton talked at length about throughout that masterpiece.

    Dahl’s work deserved better than to sit on a shelf for two years and it deserves more than a limited, poorly-timed release. It is worth seeing.

  • ‘Cypher’ may be direct-to-DVD, but that doesn’t mean it’s bad

    Jeremy Northam in 'Cypher'
    Jeremy Northam in ‘Cypher’

    I like bad sci-fi. Low budget, direct-to-video sci-fi is like eating a chocolate bar — you know it’s bad for you, but it’s so sweet you forget that it’s damaging your stomach and rotting your teeth. But every once in a while you manage to stumble across a direct-to-video sci-fi flick that isn’t that bad.

    That’s Cypher. It’s not great, but its entertaining and features some fun science fiction thrills.

    Morgan Sullivan (Jeremy Northam) is a mild-mannered guy applying as a freelance spy for a tech company. His assignments are simple — attend conferences throughout the country and record the meetings and seminars. He’s given a secret identity, and soon becomes entranced by his new job, so much so that his marriage falls apart as he flies all over the country from one meeting to another.

    Things become complicated, however, when he is approached by a mysterious woman who tells him to take special medication if he wants to save his life. He soon learns that the very tech company he has been working for is trying to brainwash him, and he must make them think they succeeded if he wants to survive.

    Sullivan then finds himself caught in a deadly game of cat and mouse, and he doesn’t know who to trust — even himself.

    Normally Northam plays darker roles. At least, I remember him from Sandra Bullock’s thriller, The Net. But here he’s somewhat comedic, at least at the beginning. And he’s actually quite likeable, which really surprised me. As things get dark and he discovers what the evil high tech company has been doing to him, he slips into the more dramatic moments well. There isn’t much to say about Lucy Liu, as she really does very little. The movie belongs to Northam, and he really does carry it well.

    One of Cypher’s best scenes is when Sullivan attends a conference. During the meeting, the attendees are all drugged while special devices are attached to their heads. Sullivan is the only one not drugged, but has to fake it as doctors examine him and put on the devices. There are other similar good moments throughout the film, which helps elevate this direct-to-video movie.

    That’s not to say the movie is perfect. It drags a bit at times, and some of the visuals are a little distracting. Yet its story remains fun, with plenty of twists and turns to make the ride worth the hour and a half. Unfortunately, the DVD has no special features, which isn’t unexpected but proves disappointing because the movie isn’t half bad.

  • ‘When Billie Beat Bobby’ is a well produced, true life story with strong performances

    Ron Silver and Holly Hunter in 'When Billie Beat Bobby'
    Ron Silver and Holly Hunter in ‘When Billie Beat Bobby’

    I actually wasn’t too jazzed about watching this movie. Looking at the DVD cover, and the goofy artwork and look of Holly Hunter and Ron Silver in their 70s looks was really silly. But the film actually turned out to be quite interesting, even though the ending is pretty well known — and heck, its in the darn title.

    When Billie Beat Bobby isn’t about the suspense of who wins, even though I think it may have benefited had they tried a little, it’s about how this simple tennis match affects women all over the country. Sure, the match was laughed off by many as nothing more than a gimmick. A mere publicity stunt, perhaps, but at the time the idea of a woman athlete beating a male athlete really meant something. Women’s liberation was at its apex, and the aroma of “revolution” was still sweet in the air.

    As the title suggests, this film is based on the highly publicized tennis match between Billie Jean King and Bobby Riggs in 1973. King was a female champion, having just won Wimbledon. Riggs was an aging tennis star who decided to challenge the top female players to tennis matches, proclaiming that a woman couldn’t possibly beat him.

    King reluctantly agrees to play Riggs after watching him beat his first female, and the high-profile “battle of the sexes” began. But the mounting pressure almost proved too much for King, who feared that if she lost it would humiliate women everywhere. But, as the title suggests, she did beat Bobby — and sports have never been the same.

    Well, not really. Nothing like this really happened afterwards, and the sexes have been kept separate (just look at how teen golf star Michelle Wie has been touted and jeered for her efforts to get onto the men’s PGA tour). But the King/Riggs match wasn’t about showing that women can beat men at sports, so much as it was about showing that women had the same value as men.

    And, if you believe the movie’s ending, this match helped inspire women of all ages.

    When Billie Beat Bobby is a well produced, true life story with strong performances, which does a good job of establishing the world of the early 1970s. The atmosphere for women at that time, and what this match meant to them. But what it does best is show you how the two players approached the match, for better or for worse.

    Holly Hunter does a good job as King, but its Ron Silver that really shines here. He does a great job of portraying the larger-than-life personality that was Bobby Riggs. Over the top one minute, but in the smaller moments, Silver gives it just as much emotion.

    What When Billie Beat Bobby does successfully is show the people involved as real human beings, with real issues, wiping away the hype that surrounded the match — and perhaps marginalized its importance.

  • ‘Momentum’ is a nice bit of sci-fi fluff

    Grayson McCouch and Teri Hatcher in 'Momentum'
    Grayson McCouch and Teri Hatcher in ‘Momentum’

    I sat down to watch the DVD of Momentum with a bit of strange coincidence. I was away for a few days about two weeks ago, and one of those days this movie was on the Sci-Fi channel. I only got about twenty minute into the movie before I had to go out, but I thought it was interesting.

    Then, what do you know, the good folks at Buena Vista sent it over to me. As I understand, they are pumping out a series of films on the Miramax and Dimension shelves as they shift gears from the reign of the Weinsteins, and this was one of Dimension’s properties. Either way, it was kind of funny to find this in my mailbox a few days after my return.

    Momentum focuses on a college professor, Zach, who carefully hides special telekinetic abilities. However, a convenient store robbery forces him to reveal his powers, which are captured on security cameras. Shortly afterwards, as he prepares to skip town, he is approached by a shadowy government agent named Addison (Louis Gossett, Jr.). Threatening to reveal his powers to the world, he blackmails Zach to help him with a potentially dangerous task: infiltrate a group of telekinetics who are robbing banks and armored cars.

    Zach reluctantly agrees, but soon finds himself stuck in the middle of a blood feud, as he learns that the leader of these telekinetics was part of a government program in the 1970s led by Addison. Now Addison is out to wipe out everyone who has the power. With the help of an FBI agent (Teri Hatcher), Zach much walk the line between both sides in order to survive.

    Now that I got the opportunity to watch the whole movie, I thought the concept was far greater than the movie itself. Not so much because Momentum was bad, but it suffered from the low budget, which didn’t allow it to really push the story to its fullest. The lead star, Grayson McCouch, doesn’t really have the chops the carry the movie that well, either. He isn’t a bad actor, but his expressions seemed pretty limited and after a while stopped being effective. I’m not sure Hatcher was really trying all that hard either, but while the movie touts her she really doesn’t play that big a role. In fact, her part serves very little purpose, and isn’t explored or explained nearly enough to make it interesting.

    The best performance comes from Carmen Argenziano, who plays Hatcher’s partner, Frank. His one-liners are great, and he delivers them with smart precision. He usually plays the tough smart-ass, and does it well. And having just come off the heels of watching Michael Massee in Revelations, he does a similarly strong job here (although the role is nowhere near as vicious or interesting as Haden.

    The DVD itself offers nothing. There isn’t a hint of a special feature, and on a low level production like this, I wouldn’t really expect any.

    Momentum is only 92 minutes, so its no skin off your nose to give it a viewing. It manages to be entertaining, without slowing down into needless subplots or melodrama. Perhaps if it were given a bigger budget, it could have been something better.

  • Hilarious ‘Dodgeball: A True Underdog Story’ is just as good ‘unrated’

    The team takes to the line in 'Dodgeball: A True Underdog Story'
    The team takes to the line in ‘Dodgeball: A True Underdog Story’

    Who’d have thunk that a moronic and demoralizing school-age sport could make such a funny movie?

    Dodgeball is probably one of the funniest movies I’ve seen in years. Vince Vaughn hasn’t begun to annoy me just yet, and here he’s probably at his most charming. Ben Stiller is funny, even if he’s doing one of his oddball type characters, most of which I find stupid. I can’t think of any better compliment to give a comedy than to say that it’s just plain funny, and that’s what Dodgeball is from beginning to end.

    But as much as I like this movie, I have to say this new “unrated” edition is a bit of a joke. It’s pretty much the exact same thing as the original DVD release, except the language is slightly raunchier (for example, Rip Torn’s line about a “poop” flavored lollypop was altered in favor of a special male body part), and there’s an extra feature that has three different versions of the dodgeball cheerleaders dancing in skimpy outfits. Not much to really justify this marketing trick of selling an “unrated” version.

    The story centers on a collection of “losers” led by Pete La Fleur (Vaughn), the owner of a rundown gym. He discovers that he must raise $50,000 or lose his gym to the comically pompous, White Goodman (Stiller), owner of a neighboring gym that is sleek and polished. In order to raise the money, Pete’s “Average Joes” compete in a major dodgeball competition in Las Vegas. But White learns of their plan and enters the competition, as well. The two teams then face off in the final match, and the winner takes all.

    What makes Dodgeball work so well are the characters, as well as the actors who embody them. Rip Torn is perfect as Patches O’Houlihan, the cantankerous coach and former dodgeball star. He delivers his foul-mouthed one-liners with perfection. Justin Long as… well, Justin, is great as the uncomfortably geeky high schooler. I mean, the scene where the overweight cheerleader falls on top of him is priceless — with the wet suction sound adding just the right amount of “ewww”. Stephen Root’s Gordon is the perfect adult geek, and Christine Taylor manages to be super hot, but just as odd as the other “Average Joes”.

    As I said earlier, this new “unrated” Dodgeball DVD isn’t really much different than the original DVD they put out of this film. It’s mostly adjustments to dialogue. Torn’s raunchy tirades are a bit more raunchier. But I suppose the new bonus of the cheerleaders dancing in pink bikinis, and blue and black lingerie, is the biggest addition. Three different dance sequences, each in the different outfits, are highlighted by a hilarious introduction by the film’s writer/director, Rawson Marshall Thurber.

    The other selection of featurettes are all pretty funny, and thankfully sans the usual Hollywood fluff that pollute so many DVDs. The extended and deleted scenes are interesting, and the gag reel is funny. The commentary is also entertaining, with Thurber, Vaughn and Stiller.

    Although this obvious “unrated” marketing trick is pretty… well, obvious, it doesn’t take away from the fact that Dodgeball is one funny movie.

  • ‘Ice Princess’ is gracefully charming

    Kim Cattrall and Michelle Trachtenberg in 'Ice Princess'
    Kim Cattrall and Michelle Trachtenberg in ‘Ice Princess’

    I’m really not a fan of figure skating. Just wanted to get that out right from the start. I really have no interest in it beyond Katarina Witt. But that didn’t stop me from liking Ice Princess.

    Sure, it’s a little formulaic, but I think they crafted it so well that you can go with it. The well-told story has good characters, people you can feel for that are played well. Michelle Trachtenberg doesn’t really look like a high school senior, but is believable as the impish science geek with a love for figure skating. Unlike other actresses who are clearly too attractive to be the homely nerds the movie tries to convince you they are, Trachtenberg is very pretty but in a way that works for the role.

    Ice Princess is about Casey Carlyle (Trachtenberg), a straight-A senior in high school whose working to get into Harvard. As a science project, she decides to study the physics of figure skating, a sport she has loved since childhood. When she works on the project, however, she discovers a hidden talent that she never realized was there. But her attempts to pursue her dreams of becoming a professional figure skater get hampered by her academically-obsessed mother (Joan Cusack) and a succeed as all costs — both honest and dishonest — ice skating coach (Kim Cattrall).

    The one thing that I liked the most about this film was Cattrall’s Tina Harwood. The movie is filled with characters that may seem bad at first glance, but turn out to be good and decent people inside. In Cattrall’s case, she isn’t necessarily a “good” person, but becomes less hostile as the film progresses. A bitter and angry woman whose past mistakes continue to haunt her, she doesn’t apologize for her actions, largely because it is the nature of the sport she loves. And on a more shallow level, Cattrall looked really beautiful in this film. More so than she has in years, I think. Perhaps it’s because she’s no so glammed up, like in Sex in the City.

    Anyway, back to the movie.

    If anything, I’d say that Ice Princess takes a somewhat negative look at the sport of figure skating. Most likely the result of the Kerrigan/Harding debacle, the backstabbing and unsportsman-like attitude of many of the participants is highlighted greatly throughout the film, especially when it comes to the parents of the different skaters. This really gets drilled in with the character of Nikki, played by Kirsten Olson, who you may think is nice but is actually quite frighteningly self-centered and arrogant.

    Ice Princess moves at a great pace, with fine performances throughout. That is until the climactic skating competition. Much of this portion is nearly ruined by the horrible voice over performance by Michelle Kwan and Brian Boitano. Aside from the fact that much of what they say is completely unnecessary, their deliveries are so dry that is seems as if they are reading off cue cards. I get the cameos, which are often par for the course with movies like Ice Princess, but this really causes what was I think a wonderfully produced film to stumble. It’s almost like during a beautiful routine, the skater fell while trying to perform a combination spin. Ultimately it doesn’t hurt the film as a whole, but it loses points regardless.

    There are a few deleted scenes, as well as a pair of music videos, along with an audio commentary featuring the four main young stars (Michelle Trachtenberg, Hayden Panettiere, Trevor Blumas, Kirsten Olson). It’s funny to listen to, but I actually got a little confused which voice was which actress.

  • ‘Charlie and the Chocolate Factory’ is a sweet treat

    ‘Charlie and the Chocolate Factory’ is a sweet treat

    Freddie Highmore as “Charlie Bucket” staring at the last Golden Ticket in ‘Charlie and the Chocolate Factory’

    It seems that everyone who is reviewing the new movie Charlie and the Chocolate Factory feels compelled to compare it to the 1971 film Willie Wonka and the Chocolate Factory. There’s no need. They are different films and no comparisons are required. They stand apart and separate and should remain so. This work, directed by Tim Burton and staring Johnny Depp, Freddie Highmore, David Kelly and Helena Bonham Carter, is worthy of being evaluated on its own merits.

    Like the Roald Dahl novel, this is Charlie’s story and we should all be grateful to Johnny Depp for insisting that Freddie Highmore be cast in the role of Charlie. Depp had worked with Highmore in the critically acclaimed Finding Neverland and was so impressed with his effort there that he convinced Burton to cast him. It was a wise move on both their parts as he was the perfect choice for this critical role. Highmore brings the right amount of innocence, wonder, excitement and maturity beyond his years to the part that is required by John August’s adaptation of Dahl’s book.

    The story is, of course, little changed from Dahl’s brilliant tale. Charlie lives with his parent and four grandparents in a little wooden house on the edge of the big city where the gigantic candy factory of the great Willie Wonka is located. They are very poor, but happy in their poverty. While the factory is still operating and candy is being shipped out, the gates were shut and locked years earlier, after Mr. Wonka grew tired of his competitors sending in spies to steal his secret recipes. No one knows how he is continuing to operate; it is one of the great mysteries of the world.

    Deep Roy as all of the Oompa Loompas in ‘Charlie and the Chocolate Factory’

    Then suddenly without warning comes the announcement that the Wonka factory is going to be opened to five and only five children, accompanied by one adult guardian, and that the children will be those five who are the lucky finders of golden tickets which have been hidden inside Wonka candy bars. Soon, four of the most unlikable children you can imagine, Augustus Gloop, Veruca Salt, Violet Beauregarde and Mike Teevee, have found golden tickets and there is only one left. Charlie wants a golden ticket, but his annual birthday bar of candy didn’t contain one, nor does an extra bar he buys with a hidden stash of cash he gets from Grandpa Joe. However, as the story is told in the book, Charlie finds some money in the street, buys more candy and finds that last golden ticket on the day before the factory is to be opened up and so he and Grandpa Joe (who arises for bed for the first time in years) head off and they and the others get to meet the man, Willie Wonka.

    I liked Johnny Depp’s take on Wonka. He was a bit off-center, a bit odd, and at times, seemed to enjoy the fates of the four rude children as they toured his wonderful, magical factory, filled with amazing sights and tastes that are almost too much for even a child’s mind to comprehend. This telling of the tale doesn’t follow the book in lockstep fashion, adds things that actually enhance the story, and in the end gives the viewer a pleasing and enjoyable experience.

    The visuals were as close to perfect as they can be in this kind of film, with great use of color and contrast, particularly in the Wonkavision and Nut sorting rooms. Danny Elfman’s musical scoring fits the film better than a tight dress on a fashion model.

    Don’t miss Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. Just be sure to take something sweet into the theater with you.

  • ‘Hide & Seek’ predictable but well done otherwise

    Dakota Fanning in 'Hide & Seek'
    Dakota Fanning in ‘Hide & Seek’

    Hollywood, and filmmakers in general I think, have become obsessed with the concept of “the flip”. That’s what I call it when a movie has a twist within the last five minutes that is supposed to shock and surprise the audience.

    Hide & Seek sort of has two such “flips”, the main one being pretty darn obvious. Well, to me anyway. Either I’m getting to smart for these kinds of “flip” movies or their just not being done that well. Either way, I’m tired of “the flip”. It’s nearly impossible to pull off effectively, and almost always gets ruined because ultimately “the flip” is what everyone who’s seen the movie will talk about. And once it’s known that a movie has a “flip”, well, the “flip” is pretty much ruined.

    The only thing I remember hearing about Hide & Seek was its “terrible” ending. Having now seen the film, which gets its DVD release today, I’m not really sure what they’re talking about. As I mentioned, there are two flips, a big one and a minor one. Which of these made the ending so terrible? I really haven’t a clue. I thought both were interesting, even if the main one was ultimately predictable.

    The story follows a psychologist, David (Robert DeNiro), who struggles to care for his emotionally struggling daughter, Emily (Dakota Fanning), after his wife and her mother commits suicide. Taking her out of the city and away from a mental institution to the country, David hopes for a quiet, peaceful life to reconnect.

    But when Emily develops a strange bond to an imaginary friend named Charlie, things start to go wrong. And when signs of violence arise, David is forced to confront a dark truth about himself and his daughter.

    To be honest, when I started watching Hide & Seek, I realized that it was sort of a rip off of What Lies Beneath, starring Harrison Ford and Michelle Phiffer. The two have a lot in common, including similar kinds of red herrings and flips. That’s kind of when I started to realize just what the flip of the movie was going to be.

    De Niro does a good job, but seems a little out of place. Perhaps it’s because I just recently sat through Casino, but it’s kind of weird watching De Niro be the nice guy. Fanning is just outstanding, as always, even if her character is a bit of a one-note type. My wife is a big fan of hers, and here she’s dark and brooding, with dark hair that actually seems natural for her. In some cases, dark hair on a normally blonde actress seems fake, but not with Fanning.

    It’s hard not to talk about a “flip” movie like Hide & Seek without discussing the flip itself (one of the reasons why I think “flip” movies don’t work well). So, for those of you who have seen the film, read along. But if you haven’t, skip ahead.

    *SPOILER WARNING*

    About twenty minutes into the film, maybe sooner, I realized that De Niro was actually the crazy one. Not so much because the movie tipped its hat, but because of the nature of the film. You know when watching one of these kinds of thrillers that the person you think is the bad guy is not really the bad guy. In this case, you’re lead to believe that Fanning is crazy, but since there has to be a twist, that only left one possible answer — that De Niro was actually the one with the problem.

    Of course, that’s the main “flip”. But Hide & Seek has a minor flip at the very end: the simple suggestion that Fanning also has a split personality is expressed in her drawing. Now, I’m not sure if this is what critics were complaining about when they attacked the movie’s ending, but I thought it was good. A nice little capper that wasn’t surprising exactly, but a good “flip”.

    *END SPOILER*

    The DVD of Hide & Seek sports an interesting commentary with the film’s director, John Polson, screenwriter Ari Schlossberg, and editor Jeffrey Ford. There are also 14 deleted and extended scenes, as well as a behind the scenes featurette and more. But what’s highlighted prominently are the four alternate endings. Basically, the alternate endings are the last two to three minutes of the film. They aren’t really all that different, just slight variations on the same theme.

    What I thought was interesting was how the DVD provides you options where you can watch the entire film and pick which version you want it to end with. That was a different take on the alternate ending feature that I hadn’t seen before.

    Overall, I liked Hide & Seek. Can’t say it was the greatest thriller in the world, but I honestly can’t say I disliked it either. It has some good performances and moves at a quick pace. Sure the “flip” is predictable, but that’s nothing unique to this film. “Flips” just don’t work, except in rare cases. And even if you do figure Hide & Seek out in advance, you may still enjoy it.

  • ‘The Lords of Dogtown’ rule skateboarding

    ‘The Lords of Dogtown’ rule skateboarding

    Lords of Dogtown
    Lords of Dogtown

    Lords of Dogtown begins by saying it is “Inspired by a true story”, and it definitely is. The film is loosely based on the true story of the legendary Z-Boys who changed the face of skateboarding forever in the mid 1970s. The true story was told several years ago in a terrific documentary film written and directed by one of the Z-Boys, Stacy Peralta. That 2001 documentary Dogtown and Z-Boys won a slew of awards including the 2002 Independent Spirit Award for Best Documentary. This time out Peralta is content to merely be the screenwriter and Catherine Hardwicke moves from Production Designer to Director for a second time.

    Lords of Dogtown really struck a familiar chord with me. However, that makes sense because in early 1975 I was only 15. Like the Z-Boys, I grew up south of Wilshire Boulevard in Santa Monica, California (if you’ve seen the documentary you’ll get the reference). So please forgive me in advance if I’m a bit biased in reviewing this particular movie, but it definitely resonates with me for good reason.

    The true story is in the documentary and not Lords of Dogtown, so if you want the truth, this isn’t the film for you. But if you want to be entertained, enthralled and excited by some good filmmaking then you need to get into the multiplex to see Lords of Dogtown. Hardwicke’s use of a single, hand-held camera during the skating sequences makes them almost seem more than they are, even if the actors in the lead roles can’t do their own stunt work. That flaw, and the fact that the skaters are working without the protective gear that the real skaters used back in the day when they were exploring the very edge of the envelope of what was physically possible, are easily forgiven in light of the quality visuals that Hardwicke delivers.

    The late Heath Ledger stars in 'Lords of Dogtown'
    The late Heath Ledger stars in ‘Lords of Dogtown’

    Skip (Heath Ledger) runs the Zephyr surf shop where the Z-Boys hang out when they aren’t surfing or skating. When a vendor brings in a technological improvement for skating known as urethane wheels, he gets the idea of forming a team of skaters. Jay (Emile Hirsch) and Tony (Victor Rasuk) make the team immediately along with a number of others, but Stacy (John Robinson) is left off because he is busy working at a job and doesn’t have time for mandatory team practices.

    The team storms onto the scene at the 1975 Del Mar Skateboarding National Championships. Stacy shows up and competes without a team and after that, things accelerate. The Z-Boys quickly begin changing the very nature of the sport and what was once fun and games rapidly becomes high finance and corporate sponsorship. In this arena the Z-Boys and Skip face a rough road going forward.

    One of the developments of the era was a severe drought in the region that forced many pool owners to drain their pools and among their other excesses (drugs, drinking, vandalism, etc), the Z-Boys began scouting out and sneaking into homes with dry swimming pools to refine their skating techniques on these smooth surfaces that duplicated waves for skaters to use surf-like movements on the skateboards.

    Each of the three main Z-Boys goes in a different direction after the team breaks up, but somehow they will come together in the end to skate a particular empty pool one more time, for a very special purpose.

    What makes Lords of Dogtown work? One thing is its music. Each of the songs chosen for the film fits just right in the place where it is played. Not just tempo, but lyrical content as well. In addition, Elliot Davis’s cinematography combined with Chris Gorak’s production design does a very credible job of recreating the 1970s era P.O.P. and surrounding area. The actors aren’t brilliant, but as an ensemble they get the job done. The skaters who portray the groundbreaking brilliance of the Z-Boys are just plain fun to watch as they dazzle us with their performances in the pools and on the concrete.

    A side note to those who love the music and want to run out and pick up the soundtrack, beware. Some of the tracks in the movie have been omitted from the soundtrack, so look it over before you buy it.

    A lot of film critics panned Lords of Dogtown and in doing so, said it just didn’t measure up to the documentary version of the story that had already been done. I grant that, but the comparison isn’t fair. One film is a documentary and the other is an attempt to entertain. If you view it as that, then Lords of Dogtown definitely barks up the right tree.