Red (2008)

English/93 Minutes/2008/Rated R

I came to “Red” as a Lucky McKee fan. I enjoyed his bizarre horror film “May” and his Masters of Horror episode “Sick Girl.” The screenplay was also written by Stephen Susco (“The Grudge”) based on a novel by Jack Ketchum. I haven't read the book by Ketchum but another of his books adapted for the screen is “The Girl Next Door” about a teenage girl who is tortured to death. The story of Red is described on the box as being about Avery (Brian Cox) who's dog is brutally and senselessly murdered by some teen punks. When Avery finds that he cannot get justice for the killing he takes matters into his own hands.

I was all set for a nice tight revenge thriller ending with Avery going insane and opening some gruesome cans of whoop ass on the punks. After all Cox once portrayed Hannibal Lector in Michael Mann's “Manhunter.” McKee is no stranger to the red, red kroovy and the writer of the Grudge remake should make for something that at least tries to be chilling. Unfortunately the film ends up rather bland. After a good build up the film sort of sputters and fails in the final act. It effectively undoes all of the previous buildup and feels confused and overly pat, as if the film needed to end in a hurry.

I believe this is in large part caused by the fact that McKee did not finish the film himself. He has co-directing credit with producer Trygve Diesen. I did some research and while I couldn't find anything concrete it appears that McKee was let go during production. Filming stopped for almost six months before Diesen stepped in and completed the film. While there is consistency in the visuals of the film (although certain sections are both darker and warmer) the film is unable to come with the payoff. It neither gives us a thought-provoking downbeat ending or a good nasty exploitation ending.

Conceptually this is definitely the kind of film that McKee has made a career of. His characters are often physically and/or emotionally damaged and are outcasts. They are triggered into increasingly violent behavior by singular obsessions that culminate in some self-revelation. For reasons we'll probably never know he never got to see it through. The fact that Angela Bettis was announced as a cast member and does not appear in the final film seals the deal for me (she has an appearance in every McKee film).

While the visuals of the film are sometimes questionable, the acting in the film is uniformly impressive. The cast is filled with well-known names including Tom Sizemore, Robert Englund, Amanda Plummer and a long list of names you may not know but who's faces you certainly will. McKee is able to bring out great performances, especially from hams like Englund who is in only two scenes but is utterly convincing as an out of work, white trash dad. Sizemore is oily as Mr. McCormick but not arch or scenery chewing. The real star though is Cox as Avery.

Cox brings to Avery a quiet dignity and a completely believable escalating obsession. He is definitely damaged goods. He is a widower who is still in mourning for his wife and children. In one chilling scene he describes how they died and the camera never leaves Cox's face. He is positively riveting.

The greatest thing about his performance is that he is believable in his obsession. Not being a dog owner myself it was hard to understand the lengths that Avery goes to. But Cox as Avery shows that Red was the last vestige of his family and his loss is palpable. Every escalation comes naturally. But even a great performance can't sell some of Avery's actions. Many of his actions stretch credulity, especially in a highly litigious age. Avery coming around to the killers' houses borders on harassment and these days he'd have a restraining order slapped on him. It would have been more believable if Avery was more malevolent or secretive in his obsession.
But the character of Avery doesn't want revenge. All he wants is for his loss to be understood and acknowledged. He is like a ghost of guilt that is haunting the boys until they become as unhinged as him. Unfortunately the payoff does not honor that emotional arc leaving us feeling hollow and cheated.

The film seems lost. It doesn't work as exploitation and it doesn't have the chops to bring off something more significant. Thus while the acting is great and the story had promise, I can't really recommend “Red” unless you're a big Brian Cox fan. Those looking for a film like “May” and fans of McKee in general will probably be disappointed. Not Recommended.

NOTE: There is a scene of violence involving the dog but it is off screen. Later in the film we see the corpse of a dog that is worm eaten. Those who are upset by animal violence should take this into account.

Rated R for Violence and Language

Death Train (aka Im Auftrag des Vatikans)

English/104 Minutes/2006/Not Rated

"Death Train" is an average TV movie that is undone by a ridiculous ending and overdirection. With three words I can tell you whether or not you'd like this movie. If the words “Catholic Kung-Fu” sound like brainless fun have I got a movie for you.

“Death Train” tells the story of Matthais (Simon Dutton, who looks like James Van Der Beek), a former soldier in the war in Kosovo. He has come to a monastery to live out his days in peace. However, he is secretly being groomed by the society “Pugnus Dei” (roughly Fist of God) who work as “Catholic secret agents.” Matthais along with his friend Gladius (Stephan Bieker) along with their mentor Matthew are on the pilgrimage train to Lourdes, where all sorts of afflicted people come to pray for healing.

Among the passengers is Sandra and her son Joey who has a rare blood disease that the insurance won't pay for. Also among the passengers are Lennart (Arnold Vosloo), Jurek (Mario Irrek), and Zandi (Michelle MacErlean), gangsters who have stolen a killer virus. Once the police discover who is aboard they refuse to stop the train and the only ones who can save the day are Matthais and Gladius.

Matthais is a typical suffering hero, like Cain in Kung Fu who always tries to avoid combat and killing people to leave his past behind. But like any typical action movie he is forced by circumstance to fight the gangsters one by one, hand-to-hand, usually on top of the moving train. It may sound ridiculous and it is but the fights are well filmed and much of the stunt work (car chases, explosions, helicopter crashes) is straight from the Joel Silver playbook (something has to happen every 10 minutes).

The film has above average writing for most of the picture. The solutions for innoculating the passengers and some of the plot twists and resolutions are clever and for the most part feel organic to the story. Again, if you can get past the silly premise the movie plays like “Under Siege 2” meets “The Da Vinci Code.” It's just unfortunate that it falls apart in the final reel.

In the last 10 minutes the story and the characters' actions are physically impossible, not even feasible and turn out to be just plain silly. I can deal with one dimensional villains and silly plot conceits (what I call a “gimme” every movie gets one) but once a film crosses the line into utter impossibilty then I can't enjoy it.

The film's other great black mark is the over editing and direction of the film. There are several great moments of direction (note the flashback scene where we get a dutch angle from the ground. But for everyone of these comes something really boneheaded like the constant use of ramp up and ramp down of film speed. Also every explosion is shot from 10 different angles and cut and recut so we see it over and over, sucking out any coolness or pleasure that comes from these stunts by becoming overlong and irritating.

If you're looking for a fun Friday night film you could do better, but you could also do worse. The film is predictable and derivative but fun and the acting and writing are above average for a TV film. If it wasn't for the ending it might have been worth watching. I can't say I recommend “Death Train” but if you're looking for some decent hand-to-hand fights and don't mind the concept it's a lot of fun.

Not Rated: Contains Violence and Brief Language

Death Race

English/2008/106 Minutes/Unrated

Some kinds of movies are review proof like the Friday the 13th sequels or the 90s Batman movies. They exist as cinematic candy, guilty pleasures, and empty calories. Death Race is such a movie. It makes no pretense of being a good film and is technically deficient in many areas. It is by far the least of the films in Paul Anderson's oeuvre (if you're allowed to use such a fancy word in a review of a movie like this).

The story is very basic and certain elements strain what little credibility the movie has. Jensen Ames (Jason Statham in full beefcake mode) is a former race driver who is framed for the murder of his wife and sent to prison where he is recruited by Hennessey, the wicked warden (played by an icy Joan Allen), to compete in a “Death Race.” The race is essentially a demo derby version of Nascar with guns. Players compete for their freedom (as every prisoner has since “The Running Man”) by winning the race and/or killing all the competitors. All of this is streamed live to the viewing audience who, even in a collapsed economy, can afford the $250 to watch the pay-per-view special

There are even “power ups” to collect that are basically sensors drivers run over to activate their weapons. It all sounds very video game like (in a rudimentary way) but I think it would probably be an accurate version of what a game show of this sort would resemble. The races themselves are competently filmed but none of the compositions stand out. It feels haphazard in much of the film. The directing shines in small moments like the detailed assembling of a bomb (which brought back memories of the opening of “Resident Evil.”)

The cast is excellent although some are perhaps surprising to see in a movie of this sort. Joan Allen as the warden plays mean but one dimensional as a woman who is out to keep high ratings and kill anyone who gets in her way. In fact, hearing Allen say “cocksucker” is perhaps a highlight of the film (it is even repeated at the end of the credits).

Another surprise face is Ian McShane. He of “Deadwood” fame and an actor I really like to see. He plays the stereotypical role of the old convict who doesn't want to leave the prison. He makes the most of the role and lends some gravity to the proceedings that keep reminding me of what the movie could have been. Between McShane and Allen there is a lot of potential here, but it's mostly wasted.

As for Statham himself I enjoyed his performance and in the early scenes we got to see some more of the spectrum of his range instead of the cool detachment he's banked on since “The Transporter.” Statham is a good genre actor but when put face to face with McShane or Allen he just doesn't seem to rise to the occasion.

As with any prison film you have a colorful assortment of villains each having his own particular gimmick including a guy named Grim who calls himself Grim Reaper (I think there must be a clause in the book about movies like this where you have to have a guy called “grim” or “reaper”). There is the on track villain of the piece Machine Gun Joe (Tyrese Gibson) who carves a notch in his face every time he kills someone. You get the idea.

For a love interest (or lust interest) the drivers are always paired up with beautiful ladies from the women's prison who act as navigators and handle some of the weapons (like the classic oil slick). Of course there are no fat or ugly women in prison so our hero gets hooked up with a well tanned nicely endowed hot girl (Natalie Martinez). I don't think it's coincidence that the hero loses a kind and attractive loving wife for a “bad girl” that looks like she stepped out of a men's magazine. Ultimately I think that's what is most offensive about the movie. The implication that somehow the hero is better off for all of this. His revenge while cinematically interesting feels rather hollow and the ending is tacked on.

The emphasis on spectacle, graphic kills and blatant misogyny and homophobia (one racer has a male copilot and it is implied he is gay) make this perhaps the most offensive and least pleasing of Anderson's films. The movie is edited in a way that rarely lets your eyes rest and the soundtrack while sonically interesting just hammers away from the opening credits and we never get a moment of silence until the end of the credits. The movie has no sense of moderation, the tone always being full tilt.

The movie ultimately doesn't work as a prison film (too little prison), fails as a racing film (the races are so chopped up it's hard to tell the locations and status of the drivers), and is rather thin as a revenge flick. That being said it's still a lot of fun and I would list as a guilty pleasure. So while the official word is Not Recommended, I have to say watching shit blow up for 90 minutes is a lot of fun and in that department, Death Race delivers.

Unrated: Mature Audiences, Strong Violence and Language

Cache (aka Hidden)

French/118 Minutes/2005/Rated R

“Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.” - Sigmund Freud

The literal English translation of the title “Cache” is “Hidden,” a better title and a more apt description. For just as the characters have hidden things from each other, so has Haneke hidden the real drama from the viewer.

The story is supposedly about a well-to-do French couple, Georges and Anne (Daniel Auteuil and Juliette Binoche) who are terrorized by someone sending them tapes of the outside of their house. The tapes are accompanied by child-like drawings of violence. These pictures draw to mind an unresolved guilt of Georges' and when the tapes lead him to a childhood friend things start to unravel.

In “Cache” Haneke has intentionally made a film that is difficult and ambiguous. He shoots in excruciatingly long takes (as long as 3 minutes of a static shot) that force us to focus on what is occurring within the frame. Characters come and go within the frame and many times in wide shot where their encounters have no sound leaving us to make what we will of them. The viewer is made to feel as much the voyeur as the spy sending the tapes. Perhaps that is Haneke's intent.

Indeed many times we are unsure if we are watching the film itself, one of the tapes sent to Georges and Anne, or the filming of one of the tapes. In fact the first scene is a static shot of their house from the outside that lasts for three minutes before the characters start talking off screen and begin fast forwarding through the video. The film is very ambiguous and plays with the fourth wall in a similar way to Haneke's movie Funny Games.

“Cache” is not a movie to be watched but rather to be absorbed and thought about. When the film first ended and I sat down to write this review I was very unimpressed, however, the longer I thought about it (and admittedly trawled the message boards) the more the film seemed to bloom, peeling away layers that revealed the film that I did not think was there.

On the down side we are drawn almost too far outside the drama, the characters too isolated. In many ways Haneke's film is less a dramatic film than an observance. And the presence of some dramatic forward motion, some conflict that grows and is then resolved, is what differentiates a film from an assembled home movie. Unfortunately “Cache” falls closer to home movie than good movie and that is ultimately its undoing.

While “Cache” may grow upon reflection there is still much that could be done to make it less abstract and more engaging. The film forgets that film is a “show me” medium and would rather keep things so open to interpretation that the film ultimately says nothing significant. There is an interesting movie in here somewhere, but it feels too unfocused to make its mark. Not recommended (unless you're a film student).

Rated R for Brief Strong Violence (also contains brief nudity and language)

Return to House on Haunted Hill

English/2007/79 Minutes/Unrated

The original House on Haunted Hill starring Vincent Price is a cult classic produced by my favorite showman William Castle. Castle always included a gimmick in his shows. For Mr. Sardonicus there was a vote to see what would happen to the villain at the end. For The Tingler it was little electric shocks in the seats. For House it was pulleys that sent skeletons flying over the heads of viewers. The movies were all great fun and I recommend them highly. Unfortunately the same cannot be said of Return to House On Haunted Hill.

The story is rather convoluted and poorly told but a simple synopsis would be that a relative of a survivor from the House On Haunted Hill remake is forced to head back to the house after her sister's mysterious suicide. Apparently this ties in with an ancient evil artifact that competing treasure hunters (or are they archaeologists) are chasing. They kidnap the hero and force her to come along. Think of it as Indiana Jones meets The Grudge by way of any splatter flick without the imagination of any of the above.

The film has not a single original idea and makes sure to present every possible cliché in the slasher book. The plot is messy, the writing is poor and the acting is strictly z-grade. Characters constantly state the obvious and make leaps on logic that are bizarre to say the least. For example, the characters find out that the building has a crematorium, therefore the evil artifact must be hidden in there.

The production values are also low. The chamber that contains the artifact is supposed to be organic but it looks like somebody wrinkled up a fleece blanket and glued it in place. The monsters are generic, including the “long haired ghost” and the “evil nurse” ghost. There are no surprises, no interesting twists and no suspense. The kills are very basic, poorly shot and not very interesting. The supposed sex is basically a couple of lipstick lesbians getting naked for all of 30 seconds. It's probably in there just so they can put “sex/nudity” on the box.

The acting ranges from tolerable to horrible with the villain mugging for the camera and the heroes looking afraid. Of course the writing is terrible and so the actors admittedly didn't have much to work with. The story is illogical, convoluted and overwritten. Characters monologue to the point that it feels almost like an audio tour.

Finally the ending is silly. The characters' solution for getting rid of the evil artifact would be hilarious if it wasn't so serious. At least Castle knew he was making pulp. No such luck here. This movie is definitely not recommended.

Unrated: Mature Audiences, contains Strong Bloody Horror Violence, Language and Brief Sexuality/Nudity

The Counterfeiters (aka Die Falscher)

German/99 Minutes/Rated R/2007

The Counterfeiters joins a respected list of both Holocaust survivor stories and prison camp anti-heroes. This film took home the 2007 Academy Award for Best Foreign Film as well as several international awards. That aside we've been told this story before, and much better.

The film, based on the book “The Devil's Workshop” puts us inside the largest counterfeiting scam ever documented. During WWII the Nazis wanted to ruin the economies of Britain and the US by flushing them with forged bills. To this end a group of artisans, printers and forgers were brought together in a concentration camp and forced to produce these bills. In return they were given privileges such as soft beds, better food, and (in one strange case) entertainment.

Our lead character is one Salomon “Sally” Sorowitsch the greatest counterfeiter perhaps ever. He lives high and well and is only caught when he falls into lazy dalliance with a client's wife. After he is captured he is sent to a concentration camp where he ingratiates himself with his captors by drawing portraits of them and their families. Eventually he is moved to Sachsenhausen where he is brought in to perfect the counterfeiting of Pounds and Dollars.

Sally is an adapter and prizes himself for his ability to survive. More than once we are treated to sequences that show that Sally is smart and perhaps low on scruples. He doesn't care that his work may lengthen the war and aid the Nazis, he just wants to eat well.

Sally finds his moral counterpoint, nemesis, conscience in Burger an expert printer who is determined to undermine Sally at every turn in the name of some higher cause. He's perfectly happy to sacrifice himself and the others in the project to deny the Nazis their collusion and aid. The battle of wits between Sally and Burger and Sally's machinations attempting to play the Nazis are the central stories here.

Unfortunately, while the film is well made and acted (with a great performance by Karl Markovics as Sally), it feels hollow. We never get the sense of guilt the counterfeiters are supposed to feel at their better position in the camps. In fact, very little of the outside is shown, perhaps a stab at realism, but the drama is the lesser for it. The film is brisk but never builds any real tension. Burger comes across as selfish and self-righteous. The end of Sally's arc feels forced the writer bestowing on him emotions that he has not shown throughout.

The film holds itself out as a story of survival which asks the question “is just surviving enough?” This has been addressed in many better films. One example that kept coming to mind was Lina Wertmuller's “Seven Beauties (1975)” where Giancarlo Giannini plays a pimp who must struggle to survive in a concentration camp and how his decisions reshape him. Also there's the great POW drama "Stalag 17" directed by Billy Wilder, starring William Holden as a Sally type of character. Both are much better than this one.

Ultimately “The Counterfeiters” fails to engage and never really gives us the tension, revelation or pay off it seems to think it gives. Back to film school for these guys. Not Recommended.

Rated R for Some Strong Violence, Brief Sexuality/Nudity and Language