NEW IN THEATERS: Stay

STAY (2005)

My Rating: **** ½ (out of *****)
Starring: Ewan McGregor, Naomi Watts, Ryan Gosling, Janeane Garofalo, Bob Hoskins
Director: Marc Forster

My Review:

On the shelves for over a year, in theaters for about two weeks upon its eventual release, and generally panned by critics, one would expect Stay - a psychological thriller from the director of Monster's Ball and Finding Neverland - to be a first-class dud. Quite the contrary. Marc Forster's murky, dreamy, mind-bending enigma is absolutely magnetic from start to finish. Stay has that very rare ability to truly transport the viewer into another reality. After watching this film in a darkened theater, the bright, sunny day outside has rarely been so jarring. I felt as if I had been gone much longer than the film's brief 99-minute duration. And now, weeks later, I still haven't been able to get this mesmerizing fever dream out of my head.

The story is relatively simple, but the presentation is mysterious, tricky, and complex. Sam Foster (the ever reliable Ewan McGregor) is a "substitute shrink" for the morose Henry Letham (a brooding Ryan Gosling), a tortured young art student who survived a car crash on the Brooklyn Bridge. Sam is substituting for Henry's regular therapist, Beth (Janeane Garofalo, looking particularly disheveled and disturbing), who is "taking a break" for two weeks. Henry makes definitive statements about his intention to commit suicide in three days, and then proceeds to disappear. Sam frantically searches for Henry, and things go from weird to weirder, with people bleeding spontaneously from the head, multiple episodes of deja vu, the inexplicable appearance of several doubles and triples of people, and a miraculous healing. It's as if Sam and Henry's individual worlds are colliding, and the distinction between patient and therapist, stable and imbalanced, suicidal and hopeful, becomes increasingly blurred. Sam's girlfriend Lila (Naomi Watts, sterling as usual) - who survived her own suicide attempts in the past - plays a pivotal role that is not always clear until the film's final moments. Bob Hoskins also turns in a spectacular performance in his brief but crucial role as Sam's blind, chess-playing mentor.

The vague, ethereal approach of this film will undoubtedly turn a lot of people off. While clearly not for all tastes, Stay has a wealth of pleasures for moviegoers who are willing to take its abstract, nonlinear journey. On a philosophical and spiritual level, the movie offers a relevant, impacting look into the nature of guilt, at what it means to truly "let go" of the things that keep us in chains, and at the importance of choosing life instead of death.

Artistically, Stay is a masterpiece. The editing and cinematography are truly some of the best in recent memory, not simply due to their quality, but because the filmmakers take risks. In so doing, they give us a gift we have almost completely given up hope of receiving: the sense of something new - "I've never seen anything quite like this before!" The crafters of Stay help restore our faith in the ability of films to surprise and challenge us.

In terms of emotional content, Stay slowly, stealthily infiltrates. After the first viewing, we just need to step back and gather our bearings. The effect is more intellectual and less emotional as we seek to sort out what exactly happened. Then, as the latter becomes clearer, the ramifications of the story begin to impact our hearts. Sadness and humility in light of our fragile human condition appear at one end of the spectrum. At the other, a deep sense of love and beauty - even out of the most painful and unwelcome of circumstances - shines through.

You probably wont get to see Stay in theaters. This same sad fate meets many an improperly marketed art house flick. That said, I strongly encourage those who are willing to take a trippy, unforgettable head trip that will touch their hearts as well as their minds to grab this film as soon as it hits the DVD and video stores. It may very well be that, in the safety and limitless opportunities afforded by the home entertainment realm, Stay becomes a cult classic.

R, for some disturbing images involving violence and bloody injuries, moments of strong language, thematic material, and a scene of sensuality with semi-nude exotic dancers

DVD/VIDEO: The Amityville Horror (2005)

THE AMITYVILLE HORROR (2005)

My Rating: ** ½ (out of *****)
Starring: Ryan Reynolds, Melissa George, Philip Baker Hall, Jesse James, Jimmy Bennett, Chloe Moretz, Rachel Nichols, Isabel Connor
Director: Andrew Douglas

My Review:

The Amityville Horror, an MTV-generation remake of the 1979 horror film starring James Brolin and Margot Kidder, opens with the ominous claim: "Based on the true story." Notice that it says the true story, not a true story. The reality is, Amityville is based upon a series of ill-supported (and in many respects thoroughly refuted) rumors that seem to point to publicity-hungry shysters playing on people's love of all things scary in order to make a name for themselves (and a few dollars). If you can get past this dubious motivation, The Amityville Horror is actually a nifty little shot in the arm for horror fans.

The story is familiar. In the early 1970's, George DeFeo murders his entire family while they lie asleep in their beds. He tells the police that they were demons and needed to be eliminated. One year later, the unwitting Lutz family, headed by recently widowed Kathy (Melissa George, in what is easily the film's best performance) and her new husband George (Ryan Reynolds, quite convincing), move into the DeFeo estate. As with all good horror films, creepy stuff starts to happen almost as soon as the Lutzes step foot in the forbidding old Dutch Colonial.

Considering its truncated 89 minute running time, Amityville doesn't waste any time in getting to the scary stuff. This is good in some ways, because it keeps the film going on what is essentially a very thin plot. In other ways, the characters - particularly George - could have used more development before things go all Shining on us. And indeed they do. Anyone who has read Stephen King's novel or seen the movies about a man who becomes possessed by an evil place will recognize George's descent into murderous madness, Kathy's desperate attempt to keep her family together, and little Chelsea's "I see dead people" schtick. All of these elements were done better in The Shining and in various other horror classics from which this movie borrows (or steals, depending upon how you look at it). And, as might be expected from the producers of 2003's insidious Texas Chainsaw Massacre remake, the gore factor is high, and certain scenes seem to thrive on being revolting just for the sake of being so. The segment with a trashy teenage babysitter who makes suggestive comments to her employers' 12-year-old son is also unnecessary and offensive.

The question at this point might be: What's to like about Amityville 2005? As mentioned, for horror fans, this is an easy sell. Brisk direction, several truly terrifying sequences, a deliciously creepy and disturbing tone, and decent performances (veteran Philip Baker Hall makes a brief but welcome appearance as an investigative minister) help to compensate for the character development problems, excessive gore, and unfair, overused, mean-spirited "evil religious leader" scenario. Moments of convincing family drama and some memorably haunting images also make the ride more enjoyable.

Taking a broad look at the film, we find some nice ruminations on the nature of evil: 1) it produces blindness in those who succumb to it, and 2) sometimes the only thing you can do with evil is run from it. On the other hand, no indication is given that there might be a power greater than evil. The family's love for one another is strong, and helps them escape with their lives, but it all feels rather hollow with yet another "evil just keeps on going" conclusion (a la The Ring, The Grudge, Darkness, Final Destination, etc.) that makes one almost long for a tidy and uplifting resolution. Alas, our franchise-hopeful makers can't allow for that, and what we are left with is a troubling, get-under-your-skin-and-stay-there horror flick that, while likely to satisfy those looking for a good scare, gets diluted by the tiresome trappings of uncreative filmmaking.

R, for moments of strong bloody horror violence, torture, and gore, disturbing images, strong language, some sexual content (including references and an interrupted marital sex scene with partial nudity), and brief drug use

CLASSICS CORNER: The Searchers

THE SEARCHERS (1956)

My Rating: **** (out of *****)
Starring: John Wayne, Jeffrey Hunter, Ward Bond, Vera Miles, Natalie Wood
Director: John Ford

My Review:

It is sometimes difficult to see a film out of the context in which it was first released. Being born in 1978, I am particularly disadvantaged in that I did not get to experience legendary director John Ford's The Searchers when it first appeared in 1956. So, for those who saw this great film in its original context, consider my handicap, be gracious and open-minded, and continue.

The Searchers opens magnificently with a breathtaking shot of sweeping red desert (Monument Valley, Utah). The image is seen from inside a darkened cabin, and this framing adds to the absolute awe and grandeur of the experience. The spectacle of this particular shot sets the standard for the rest of the film, which sports what could arguably be called the finest Wild West cinematography in movie history. Yes, it's that good. Earth or snow, field or forest, day or night, the wilderness becomes a character in its own right, living, breathing, and expressing at least as much as any of the humans with whom it shares the screen.

Those humans, led by Ford standby John Wayne (in an unusually complex and compelling performance), act out the simple story of a grizzled cowboy and his nephew who, after some of their close kin are brutally slaughtered by Comanche Indians, embark on an increasingly obsessive search for one family member whom they believe to be alive.

While the plot is relatively straightforward, the motivations and development of the characters are wonderfully textured. As mentioned, Wayne gives the performance of his career as Ethan Edwards, a mysterious and solitary man who clearly cared for his murdered family, and seems neither to stop at nothing or be deterred by no one in his quest to find his neice Debbie. As the story progresses, however, Ethan's intentions become increasingly sinister, and we begin to see that he is driven more by revenge than by love. Ethan's hatred for the Comanches runs so deep that he will slaughter grazing buffalo just to rob them of necessary food. At one point, Ethan admits that he will murder Debbie if the Comanches have turned her into "one of them." As it turns out, there is very little to like about Wayne's character in this film, and yet, we are drawn to Ethan as he descends deeper and deeper into madness. Wayne makes him repulsive and magnetic at the same time, and as such, does not allow the viewer to perform an easy dismissal.

The remaining cast members are more or less compelling, sometimes more, sometimes less as the case would have it. The ever-reliable Ward Bond easily walks away with every scene he is in as the region's crusty minister who doubles as an army captain, depending upon the situation. A handful of character actors and Ford staples (including Hank Worden and Harry Carey Jr.) also pepper the landscape with colorful village idiots and seedy outpost operators. Jeffrey Hunter - as Ford's nephew, fellow traveler, and last shred on conscience - is by turns solid and annoyingly goofy. Vera Miles, as Hunter's constantly thwarted love interest, is a feisty, refreshingly bold heroine (for the times), but she too suffers under the weight of the broad (almost silly) humor that Ford sometimes chooses to use in this film. More on that in a moment.

The Searchers is undoubtedly a great movie. It is also a singularly bizarre one. Ford took incalculable risks with this film in terms of tone, style, and subject matter. The film is surely groundbreaking, but alas, all of Ford's generally masterful strokes do not work. Following the aforementioned cinematography and acting, Ford's subject matter (racism, revenge, hatred, murder, rape, obsession) and shades of gray are his strongest suits. While not as sympathetic as most of the film's white characters, Ford's Comanches aren't simply one-note villains. The movie actually encourages us to feel for a group of massacred Indian women and children, and we admire the Indian chief's wit, even as he is clearly presented as a "bad guy." Also, Wayne's largely unsympathetic turn as Ethan brings welcome nuance to the proceedings. What was commonly black and white in earlier cowboy movies is presented, at long last, in the beginnings of Technicolor.

Tone and style are where Ford makes most of his missteps. The movie jumps rapidly between moments of dark, brooding intensity, high melodrama, sharp wit, and broad humor that borders on caricature. The intensity and wit are always successful. The melodrama, while a popular and often successful moviemaking style during the 1950s, is rendered more hackneyed than usual when viewed next to the realism it sometimes accompanies in this film. The movie's broad humor rarely flies, and actually takes away from the strength of the other elements due to its often abrupt and seemingly indiscriminate placement. Finally, the largest flaw comes in the film's final moments, when Ethan's character has a sudden change of heart that is a complete turnaround from all that has come before. The movie gives us no indication whatsoever as to what might have effected this change in Ethan, and thus his reunion with Debbie, which could have been powerfully moving, rings totally false.

The jolting, overly tidy conclusion of Ethan's journey notwithstanding, The Searchers still manages to pack a punch in its closing moments. The film's opening shot is revisited, and this time, instead of coming out of the house to greet Ethan as he arrives, the characters enter into the house, each with his or her individual level of hope and resolve. Through the door frame, we see Ethan hesitate. As the music swells and the screen fades out, we are left with the haunting question of Ethan's fate. Will he enter in? Will he continue on as an embittered loner? This grand cinematic moment is, in a word, sublime.

The Searchers is a marvelous film, and a history maker. Regardless of how the film strikes you, it will undoubtedly arouse stimulating reflection. While not perfect, it's rewards are rich and plentiful.

Not Rated; contains violence (including suggested rape) and mature thematic elements

ART HOUSE OFFERINGS: Proof

PROOF (2005)

My Rating: **** (out of *****)
Starring: Gwyneth Paltrow, Anthony Hopkins, Jake Gyllenhaal, Hope Davis
Director: John Madden

My Review:

Films based upon plays can be a very risky venture. They can take the power and emotion of a stage drama and bring it to cinematic life, or they can squelch it with awkward staging, using the medium to mute the original rather than to enhance it. Proof, as it turns out, takes the raw material of David Auburn's award-winning play (who adapted the screenplay along with Rebecca Miller, Arthur's daugther) and creates something fresh, edgy, and moving, making its transition from stage to screen one to celebrate.

Catherine Llewelyn (Paltrow) is the youngest daughter and primary caregiver to her father (Anthony Hopkins, superb as usual), a brilliant mathematician who is suffering from an unnamed mental illness. At her father's passing, Catherine's older sister Claire (the remarkable Hope Davis, who works wonders with a largely thankless role) comes to town to help her sort through the aftermath. Hal (Gyllenhaal), an academic assistant to Catherine's father, also appears on the scene, connecting with Catherine in an intimate way while also scouring her father's work in search of material he can publish.

The real tension centers around Catherine's fear that she has inherited her father's madness as well as his genius, Claire's assumption of the former, and Hal's uncertainty about the latter. The story unfolds in a clever construction of flashbacks, adding an element of genuine suspense as the true nature of Catherine's condition (and that of the other characters as well) is examined and, at last, revealed. John Madden (who also helmed the overrated Shakespeare In Love and the underseen Ethan Frome) exhibits a masterful hand at getting the most from his actors while avoiding the majority of pitfalls that come with translating intense, talky melodrama into kinetic yet literate cinema.

Though the direction and writing are skillfully done, the performances by the four actors are truly what make Proof work. As mentioned, Hopkins is in fine form as the demented father. Though the script doesn't create any sympathy for Claire, the transcendant Hope Davis brings her as close to being human as she can. Gyllenhaal makes Hal extremely likable, sometimes a little more than he should be, but his presence gives a little lift to the sometimes heavy and somber proceedings. However, Gwyneth Paltrow is the real revelation here. She infuses Catherine with a palpable fear, anger, grief, and brokeness that spill out in every scene and draw us to this terrified young woman, even as we see all of her flaws. This is clearly Paltrow's best work to date. She gets every note right. Her work is a pure joy to watch, and this time, the actress deserves that Oscar nomination that she'll probably get.

The subject matter is yet another of Proof's great assets. As a social worker who deals closely with family caregivers on a regular basis, I am very pleased to announce that Proof brings some bracingly truthful insights into the lives, pains, and joys of these underappreciated and largely unrecognized persons. As with 1996's Marvin's Room, the film takes us into the isolation, the guilt, the anger, and the selfless love and compassion of these remarkable human beings. Also, the message that childlike trust is much more important and meaningful than gaining impirical evidence is a simple but incredibly profound one, and Proof (the title's irony completely withstanding) conveys this truth with firm conviction and remarkable grace.

PG-13, for language, mature thematic elements, and a scene of sexuality

NEW IN THEATERS: A History Of Violence

A HISTORY OF VIOLENCE (2005)

My Rating: **** ½ (out of *****)
Starring: Viggo Mortensen, Maria Bello, Ed Harris, Ashton Holmes, William Hurt
Director: David Cronenberg

My Review:

So much can be said of director David Cronenberg's latest film, A History of Violence, that it is tough to know where to begin. For those who have witnessed any of the Canadian filmmaker's other works (eXistenZ, Naked Lunch, and The Dead Zone being among them), you have some idea of what to expect: dark, frightening, bizarre images; gruesome, over-the-top violence; spare cinematography; bleak and troubling visions of humanity and the future; aggressive sexual content. All of these Cronenberg staples are present to one extent or another in History. However, this mesmerizing look at the effects of violence on a small-town American family contains one element previously unseen (at least by this reviewer) in a Cronenberg film: redemption and hope. Intrigued? Read on...

Tom Stall is clearly a family man. He and his wife Edie are deeply in love. They run a cozy diner in small-town Indiana, and care for their two children, teenage Jack and little Sarah. Cronenberg goes to great lengths - almost bordering caricature at times - to show us how much these family members love one another, and how upright, God-fearing, and "normal" they are.

Things get creepy when two menacing strangers (who we see committing brutal, cold-blooded murder at the outset of the film) come into the diner and threaten one of Tom's staff members with an attempted rape. Tom acts instinctively, easily and brutally killing the heartless criminals. The town cheers. Tom is a hero.

From here on out, it's clear that something has gone very, very wrong. Jack (a searing and perceptive performance by Ashton Holmes) has been bullied at school, and up to now, has avoided confrontation with clever words and self-deprecation. Now, perhaps inspired by his father's reaction to being threatened, Jack retaliates with uninhibited rage. Even worse, more strangers come looking for Tom, and two unsettling realities begin to surface: 1) Tom has a dark, violent past, and 2) it isn't about to let him go.

The film's roots in graphic novel/comic book territory become clear as the story unfolds. Sam Mendes' magnificently heart-wrenching Road to Perdition comes to mind. However, History is much more devastating and realistic in its depiction of the widespread, long-lasting, truly ravaging effects that violence and deception can have upon people. The darkness that Tom has tried to suppress and deny for so long begin to leak out in all sorts of cunning and damaging ways. Peace and trust decay, and lives are obliterated left and right, sometimes physically, sometimes spiritually, sometimes in a horrifying combination of the two (consider a graphic sex scene that borders on spousal rape, which this reviewer chose not to witness).

"Where's the hope and redemption?" you might ask. Following the Stalls' journey through to the end is a must. In fact, the final sequence of the film is so rich in symbolic imagery and restrained yet heartbreaking emotion that it easily qualifies as one of the year's most unforgettable cinematic moments. Is forgiveness possible in the face of the most atrocious of acts? Yes, the film subtly but profoundly exclaims. It is interesting and ironic that Cronenberg, a professing athiest, has provided us with an incredibly powerful portrayal of forgiveness and grace in the face of horrendous, willful sins - the very essence of Christianity.

On a technical and artistic level, the film is one of 2005's most rewarding. The cinematography and music (a reliable Howard Shore) are spare, bleak, and evocative, even when depicting the early, idyllic life of the Stall family. The cast also provides some of the year's best work, especially a smoldering, multilayered Viggo Mortensen as Tom, William Hurt as a perversely witty mobster, and the aforementioned Ashton Holmes as Tom's son. But it is Maria Bello who almost steals the film as Tom's bewildered wife. Her journey from confusion, to terror, to disbelief, to rage, and finally to disillusionment, is shattering, palpable, and utterly magnetic.

I would not recommend this film to many people. But, for those who can handle its gruesome displays, A History of Violence is one of the most spiritually affecting offerings of the year. It will haunt you, disturb you, and hold you in its brutally hopeful grip for days and weeks to come.

R, for strong bloody violence and gore, two scenes of graphic sexuality with nudity (one involving aggressive, violent behavior), strong language, and mature thematic elements