Recently seen...
Now Playing: in theatres or on DVD
BE COOL (2005, F. Gary Gray)- remember when JACKIE BROWN came out and everyone kept talking about how slow it was? Well, at least the plot of that Leonard adaptation had forward momentum to it, whereas this one just kind of idles most of the time. Oh sure, lots of stuff happens- characters enter, scheme, and sometimes die- but it never feels like something bigger is afoot. Instead, Gray and his cast took the title as their credo, and went for coolness over anything else. Travolta's marble-mouthed approach to Chili Palmer gets pretty distracting here- it works in PULP FICTION because he's not really supposed to be that smart, but when the character is as cool and calculating a customer as Chili, it feels like an affectation, and a fairly ineffective one at that. Most of the pleasure of BE COOL comes from the supporting performances, highlights of which include Cedric the Entertainer's ruthless (and Harvard-educated) rap mogul, Vince Vaughn's wannabe gangster routine, and especially the Rock, who lampoons his image hilariously by playing a gay bodyguard/aspiring actor (he gets nearly all the best moments). Had these characters been thrown into a vehicle that actually seemed to be headed somewhere rather than one that ambled before chancing upon a destination, this might've been worthwhile. Rating: **.

THE JACKET (2005, John Maybury)- think THE BUTTERFLY EFFECT (a protagonist uses an unexplained ability to change fate) meets ALTERED STATES (the plot revolves around a kind of sensory deprivation) and you're halfway there. Quality wise, it's closer to the excrable former than the inconsistent-but-solid latter, but eminently more forgettable than both. Part of the problem is that John Maybury relies much too heavily on cheap effects (jump-cuts, shock edits, an overbearing soundtrack) to jolt the audience, and such trickery has a way of losing its desired effect after a while. Another problem is that none of the characters really acknowledge what a unique occurrance it is to not only magically be transported from one time period to another (present or future) but to interact with life in this new time period, if only for a small amount of time. Imagine a conversation like this:

"I just traveled into the future and then came back."
"No, that's impossible."
"Really, I did."
"No you didn't. You're insane."
"I did, honest. You have to believe me."
"Okay."

Of course, the conversations to this effect don't go quite like this, but they might as well, largely because the plot depends almost entirely on the protagonist getting those around him to believe his claims. If a single character- just one- refused to believe that a mental patient who has been shot in the brain (not exactly what most people would consider a reliable source of information) had taken a round trip into the future, the plot would collapse. And folks, I guess that's a little too much suspension of disbelief to ask from a guy who has already grown impatient with this overdirected film even before the plot has kicked in in earnest. Also, let it be known that Keira Knightley isn't really my type (too skinny, no hips), and as such her much-hyped nudity had little effect on me. Rating: *.

THE RIVER (1951, Jean Renoir)- the kind of film you just let wash over you, no pun intended. The portrait of a British teenage girl living in India whose world is shaken when a handsome but damaged American veteran comes into her life is a small wonder to behold, all the more so because Renoir's direction is typically gentle and unassuming. The dynamic between Harriet (Patricia Walter) and the characters surrounding her is compelling stuff, but it's the moments that seem most tangential to the plot that linger- the bit about stairways, the painterly shots of family members napping, and especially Harriet's "Krishna story." Renoir's willingness to pause the main story for these tangents must have been bracing in its day- the closest period precedents I can think of are the production numbers in MGM musicals. Rating: ***1/2.