Now Playing: The Manchurian Candidate, Catwoman, and The Bourne Supremacy
A remake, a spinoff, and a sequel. Welcome to late July, folks. Still, I've made a promise to myself to review at least every film I see in theatres, if not every single thing I watch. So, computer-caused hiatus aside, that's what I'm doing.
THE MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE (2004, Jonathan Demme)- This movie is actually quite a solid piece of work, once you get past the whole remake thing. Most of the adjustments feel less like dumbed-down details for complacent audiences than modern-day takes on what the original had to offer, which is a nice surprise. Changing the nature of Shaw's mother, here played by Meryl Streep, from an shadowy figure to a more policially active woman pays off nicely, although thankfully Demme keeps the incestuous overtones in the film. The film is astute in regards to the modern political climate, not least in the way it centers around the Democratic party and then makes most of its higher-ups wishy-washy and easily manipulated (sadly, Demme doesn't seem to be too far off). Demme also has a real knack for maximizing the impact of close-ups- the tension of at least three dialogue exchanges is heightened by his precise framing of the actors' faces. What keeps it from scaling the heights of the original is that it lacks the bizarre moments that really made an impact- the garden party, the solitaire business, that crazy dialogue between Sinatra and Janet Leigh. The third act feels strangely muted as well, compared to the punch packed by the original's wrap-up. Still, if all remakes could be this good, I wouldn't be so against them.
Rating: ***.
CATWOMAN (2004, Pitof)- yikes. Is this movie ever dumb. I don't think I would have minded the stupidity if it wasn't relentless as well, but no luck. The director used to do effects work, and oh man does it ever show- the first hour of the film bombards us with needless visual "flair"- for example, the guy can't even do a simple establishing shot without whooshing between buildings or whatnot. Strange then, that the effects aren't better, in particular the CGI movements of the title character, who becomes a blurry mess when she hops around and defies any laws of physics, presuming of course that the movie even bothered to define what laws would govern her at all, which I'm not sure it did. And Halle Berry's pretty much all wrong in this role- she doesn't have the feline bearing or the purring voice to pull it off. Most of the supporting cast flounders as well, especially Sharon Stone, who used to be able to pull off bitchy roles but is wholly unconvincing here. The only performance that really works here is given by Frances Conroy, who at least realizes how ridiculous the character is and stylizes her turn accordingly. This movie's like SPIDER-MAN 2's evil twin, and hopefully we won't have to worry about a follow-up.
Rating: *.
THE BOURNE SUPREMACY (2004, Paul Greengrass)- the previous BOURNE film was an adequate spy thriller, but in its best moments was effective as a more commercial take on THE SPY WHO CAME IN FROM THE COLD. Like that film, BOURNE was a de-glammed portrait of a secret agent's life, taking place mainly in drab locales. If anything, SUPREMACY is even less polished than its predecessor in the series, with Greengrass using mostly handheld setups and a muted color palette. There is no joy or satisfaction in the life of Jason Bourne (Matt Damon), and his low-key performance fits the character well, as he turns over mossy and forgotten intelligence-related rocks strictly for his own benefit rather than for a higher calling like, say, his country. I enjoyed this film more than the original mostly because Greengrass more successfully (though still not entirely) avoided the perils of turning the film into a globetrotting adventure film, as well as racheting up the tension in the chase and escape sequences here (though there's nothing here quite as good Bourne's level-by-level drop down the side of a building in IDENTITY). It's still not great, but it's a step in the right direction.
Rating: **1/2.
Posted by hkoreeda
at 2:24 AM EDT
Updated: Saturday, 24 July 2004 1:25 AM EDT