21, dir. Robert Luketic (2008)

STEVE says:
So far this year we've had no luck with poker-cheat movies. From Lucky You to Shade, they've been boring, lame, and predictable. I don't know why we'd think a movie about blackjack cheats would be any different, but for some reason we did, and it wasn't, and we're the wiser for it. Or so we tell ourselves. It makes it easier to get through the day.

Our young hero, Ben Campbell (played by Jim Sturgess, who is so boring I was convinced he was actually Tobey Maguire) is interviewing to get into Harvard Med. While most kids grow up wanting to be cops or astronauts or something, Ben's dream as a kid was to grow up and go to Harvard. So he's not exactly career oriented. He wanted to grow up and go to school. The dean, nice guy, lets him down easy, tells him that many kids have the desire to go to Harvard, but what he's looking for is "dazzle".

That point right there, the "dazzle" bit, is where the movie let itself down. It tries to dazzle us with glitzy shots of Vegas and clever card-cheats, fails to offer anything other than the standard Vegas card-cheat story.

Ben gets involved in a card-counting ring, run by his math professor, Mickey Rosa (Kevin Spacey doing Kevin Spacey), because he needs $300,000 to pay for Harvard in case he doesn't get the free ride he's banking on. Under Spacey's wing, Ben starts winning a lot of money, squirreling it away above the ceiling in his dorm. "We don't gamble," Spacey tells him. "We count cards." Of course Ben gets caught up in the lifestyle and starts gambling, loses it all, gets Spacey pissed at him, Laurence Fishburne out to kill him, he turns his back on his nerdy friends, but it all comes out okay in the end when Ben gets the free ride to Harvard based solely on the "dazzle" inherent in the standard card-cheat story we just watched.

Using Mr. Blonde's theory of deduction ("Either they're dead, or they're not, or the cops got 'em, or they don't."), this movie was about as easy to read as the instructions on a shampoo bottle; you don't bother reading them because how many times do you have to read "wash, rinse, repeat" before the outcome becomes inevitable.

21 reckons it's doing something different, but it's not. I've seen Vegas, and I've seen card-cheats. What else y'got?

2/5

What Happens in Vegas, dir. Tom Vaughan (2008)

NIKKI says:
It was an impulse buy, like getting a Freddo at the supermarket. You don't need a Freddo, you had no intention of buying a Freddo, but when you see it there in its shiny Crunchie-flavour-emblazoned wrapper, suddenly you've just got to have a Freddo.

What Happens in Vegas was just sitting on the counter, looking like candy. So we did it. I think the conversation went like this:

Me: "What Happens in Vegas"
Steve: "Absolutely not. But okay."

See, he was feeling it. Sugar-craving.

UH... I guess I'd better talk about the movie. Well, it was everything I expected and so much more. Predictable, tacky, slapstick-y, unrealistic, over-the-top, and entirely un-romantic. Still, I had a few hearty laughs, courtesy of Rob Corddry and Zach Galifianakis as the weird best friends.

Let's look at each of these issues individually shall we?

PREDICTABLE: Obviously, they fall in love. But this was worse. Not only did they hook up at the end, but they did so at the very place we expected, with speeches to give each other that Steve and I practically mimed along with them. I understand there are only seven stories, but you can individualise them a little, can't you? Cameron and Ashton were such carbon copies of every other romantic comedy duo that their journeys here are laid out from the start. The movie is just a by-the-numbers path to that lighthouse.

TACKY: Cameron doesn't want to eat popcorn that's flavoured with the sweat of Ashton's ball sack. That's her worst line since "I swallowed your cum!" in Vanilla Sky. And as funny as it was to see Ashton peeing in the sink, well... Ashton pees in the sink. This is the depth of these characters. I hate you because you stink and leave the toilet seat up, not because you show any sort of human complexity whatsoever.

SLAPSTICK-Y: The couple argues by throwing tomatoes at each other. They have an all-out Three Stooges-like war through NYC, pushing each other around and slipping over. It's meant to be really funny, only it isn't. And Cameron falls all over the place, which was cute when she was younger. Now, at, like, 40 or however close to that she is, kinda looks odd and pathetic.

UNREALISTIC AND OVER-THE-TOP: A judge forces the two to make something of a drunken wedding in Vegas or they lose their money? It was a drunken wedding in Vegas, why should they be expected to care at all about each other? Why not agree to separate and split the money? And then they go on to fight and bicker for the time they have to pretend to love each other where they should have just agreed to live together in some kind of harmony until the end of the agreed upon period and just split the money then. So many people read this script, and still, it got made. Boggles the mind.

ENTIRELY UN-ROMANTIC: Young and spunky Ashton works in a role like this. Older, sinewy Cameron does not. Kate Hudson maybe -- someone fresh, who should be in that phase of her career where she's falling down for a man. Cameron is way past it. And her face is so tanned that any freshness left there has disappeared behind years of Malibu-roasting. I didn't see this couple as anything but conveniently thrown together for name value. They thought we wouldn't notice Cameron being six years older than Ashton when he's married to someone nearly 15 years older than himself in "real" life. Sorry, filmmakers -- it was just as weird.

So, there you have it. A play-by-play of this film's faults. Now, to conclude, the funniest line in the movie:

Zach: "Do you even know how to drive an automatic?"

Ninety minutes of lame for that? It's like the unnecessary but exciting candy bar amid all the boring weekly groceries.

2/5

Impact Point, dir. Hayley Cloake (2008)

NIKKI says:
For a crappy TV movie about stalkers of professional volley ball players starring Brian Austin Green, this actually wasn't that bad. I mean, it was bad, but it wasn't lame bad, just slightly silly bad. We watched it because we were both tired and wrecked from a particularly horrible day. We didn't even want zombies to kick back to -- we wanted something worse. Steve wanted hard bodies, I wanted BAG who I have been enjoying since seeing him in the Terminator show. So, it was a fair trade-off. I think.

Well, BAG was good. He deserves better roles, though. Only, surprisingly, this was actually written sort of well for this sort of film. The development was actually quite good, and the twists were okay, too. Maybe we were just tired and hazy from the day? But I actually think this was an A-grade B-grade film. Has that happened before?

I'm not going to worry too much about discussing the plot, it's all very simple -- stalker at volleyball finals. Who is BAG really? Is he the reporter wanting to interview the pretty lead player? Or is he something more sinister? No wait! Is he something more sinister still!?

And who will win the volleyball?!?! And will David Silver finally deflower Donna Martin?!? Wait a minute... I joke, Brian Austin Green, because I love.

2.5/5

Brutal Massacre, dir. Stevan Mena (2007)

NIKKI says:
Almost.

It tried very hard, but it didn't quite pull off the Spinal Tap-style mocking of the horror film director giving his career one final push. The movie is a mockumentary about Harry Penderecki, who has made a string of shoddy horror films, one of which was a huge success. He hasn't had a success for a while and is back to the drawing board making Brutal Massacre, in the hopes he will be re-crowned a horror king.

But, as we all know, low-budget filmmaking comes with a range of headaches and issues. And those are made worse when the cast and crew are downright amateurs. Even the director, in this case, doesn't seem to know what he's doing. This is where the film falls down. There are so many cliches and obvious jokes that we've seen before in these sorts of films. And the comedy is far too broad with inane gags that make the characters look stupid and therfore hard to root for or really care about. And when you look at Spinal Tap, which is the touchstone for these sorts of enterprises, you absolutely adore each and every member of the band for their idiosyncracies and stupidities because of an earnestness built around them. They are developed so well, whereas the characters here are really just playing off stereotype -- naive director, dumb blonde cast members, bored casting agents, bossy ADs, bitchy producers, etc.

A few highlights, though, include every single line Brian O'Halloran speaks because I love him. And the only true Leatherface, Gunnar Hansen, as a crazy former property owner saying "motherfucker" a lot. Hilarious.

Otherwise, the film just did not know where its humour was, and became a jumbled mess of potentially interesting ideas.

2/5

How She Move, dir. Ian Igbal Rashid (2008)

NIKKI says:
And here we are again. Steve goes out for the night, and I sit down with a dance movie. They're everywhere lately. I'm barely keeping up.

So, this one has exactly the same story as all the others -- girl has something to prove to herself, her family, and those around her because of the struggles she's endured and continues to endure. And how best to do it? By dancing her ass off. If only life were so simple.

This stands apart, however, for two reasons. First, the dancing is hardcore stepping, which I don't think I've seen in one of these before. Maybe Stomp the Yard? But, still, this dancing looked and felt different. Whereas in Stomp the Yard it was about creating unity, here is seemed to be about releasing aggression. Dunno, a subtle difference? Not that I know the first thing about the intricacies of step dancing... anyway, that's how it felt to me.

Secondly, this one dealt with some fairly hefty issues like heroin abuse, and the family breakdown surrounding that. I felt early on in the film that it had something personal to say. It felt like more than a standard build to a big step-freak-out at the end. I mean, it was that, but it tried to be something else, too. I got right into Rayanne's struggle for acceptance. It might have had much to do with the lead actress being so good, and seeming so much deeper than the usual perky Step Up girls.

For me, this was a cut above as far these movies go, and while I don't understand stepping at all, I loved watching these bodies just flick and flip and pulse. How do they do that? WHY do they do that? It doesn't look like dancing. Sometimes it looks like self-exorcism. Which may just be what it is. That's where the release ideas comes in, I guess. It's most apparent when the dancers work alone, but in groups, when they're all doing the same pulsing, pumping moves, they look fucking sensational. The cheoreographers are amazing, and the dancers are just -- I can't even describe it. The timing, the discipline, the body-control -- stepping should be in the Olympics.

So, yeah... let's see if Feel the Noise can top this in a few weeks.

3/5

Steve did not view.

Invasion of the Body Snatchers, dir. Don Siegel (1956)

Death Defying Acts, dir. Gillian Armstrong (2007)

Hell Ride, dir. Larry Bishop (2008)

The Fisher King, dir. Terry Gilliam (1991)

The Onion Movie, dir. XXX (2008)

NIKKI says:

One word: Cockpuncher. What's with all my favourite jokes lately featuring the word "cock"? I blame Frisky Dingo. And Will Ferrell.

Beautiful timing with this one. I was in the mood to just sit and laugh at something ridiculous, and this turned out to be perfect for that. I actually thought it had a plot, but it turned out to be sketches loosely tied together to make sort-of connections. This turned out to be a good thing, too, as with my scattered head these days, five minute segments were just what I needed.

So, the ultra-loose plot involves old news anchor Norm Archer fed up with the corporate sponsorship of the news. It's all very Network, and a bit like Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip, so the politics of the situation is a bit tired. Still, The Onion is funny enough that even though the jokes are old (Britney Spears' is really singing about sex, for instance), they're still funny. Norm tries to make do, but he eventually cracks and goes off at TV Land while on air.

I have to say, I was probably expecting the satire to be a bit more biting, but this felt like a strung-together series of greatest Onion hits, like the Internet outage that increased productivity all over the US; the bank robber who wanted a job instead of money, the "Area Man" with the missing socks. I guess, though, the Onion's job isn't hit my brain, but just to make me laugh at the ineptitude of the entire universe. And it does that again with this movie.

And Michael Bolton is in it.

The best Onion story ever: "A Shattered Nation Longs to Care About Stupid Bullshit Again".

3/5

Friday the 13th Part II, dir. Steve Miner (1981)

NIKKI says:

It was a toss-up, but I think after watching Friday 1 and 2 back to back, Amy Steel has stepped out as the best Jason Girl. Man, she kicks some ass. And I know Adrienne King has the greatest villain-kill in cinematic history, but there's just something about her that screams innocence and naivete, whereas Amy has guts. And she has to actually kill big and scary Jason, not his aging mum. So, Amy wins.

I still love Part 2. I don't know if I like it more than the first one, because Mrs. Voorhees' head on the table, though, freaky and weird is not nearly as icky as the woman herself faking saving Alice in the first one only to throw her to the ground in the dirt paddock thing like the two of them are mud-wrestlers. Still, number two has some cool characters, fun situations, and no-one is running around in a headdress. Though Stu Charno comes close with his creepy monster outfit and speer.

There are some major plot issues with this one, too. Jason lies in wait for people that he can never know are actually going to go where he is waiting. Also, Amy, at the bar, comes up with the whole scenario for why Jason is out killing in the woods, but as far she knows it's all just a myth and the boy died at 12. How did she figure it all out with absolutely nothing to go on? Her child psychology course can't be that good.

Whatever it's faults, though, it's a good sequel. It and part one are awesome. Everything that follows is complete shite. And I still think Jason should have kept the hessian sack. It's just scarier.

2/5

Friday the 13th, dir. Sean S. Cunningham (1980)

NIKKI says:

Steve asked me while we were watching this: "Do we like it because it's good, or because of what it represents?"

It's a hard question to answer, because the truth is hard to admit. Yeah, it's not a great movie. People are underdeveloped, the timing is all over the place, the scares are few and far between, there's a problem with the logic of the killer stalking some and not others to no real end. But it's Top Five in the list of horror history-makers and genre-definers (with Texas Chain Saw, The Howling, Elm Street, and Halloween) and you can't fault that, regardless of how ultimately crap it kind of is.

Still, it's a fucking cool movie and way fun to revisit. I reckon I've seen it more than most other movies in the collection. I've definitely seen it more than any of those other classics I mentioned. Why? Is it Kevin Bacon in the tiny blue togs? Possibly. But I just think it's the most accessible, the easiest to escape to. Chain Saw creeps me out and makes me ill; Elm Street shits me with its cartoonishness at times, Halloween is too serious, and The Howling doesn't feature kids, so it wasn't so easy to relate to.

Friday just does the simplest thing -- takes some nice kids, puts them in paradise, and starts offing them one by one. It's not that complicated. And then it goes and twists at the end to feature one of the awesomest killers ever in film. It's like a good song -- you can just keep going back because it's familiar, it's fun, and you can chill out to it.

My only complaint? Too many A-cups. What's with all the tiny boobs? Were they trying to save on bikini material? Thank god we get Marta Kober in Part 2, or the early Friday series might have been entirely boobless.

3/5

Inside Monkey Zetterland, dir. Jefery Levy (1992)

NIKKI says:

About 15 years I'd waited to see this movie. An absurd comedy starring Martha Plimpton was pretty much how I remembered hearing about it. When it finally came in the mail, I was slightly excited. So, how annoying that it turned out to be terrible. I can see what the guy was trying to do -- kind of -- but it just didn't work. It was one of those quirky dramas about young people trying to get by in the world -- maybe -- and they're just discovering art and poetry and light in the world.

But it can't be anything great, these sorts of flicks, when the writers themselves are just discovering all those things, too. I bet if the writer had set pen to paper today, he'd have something far more interesting to say.

Still, I had an element of fun, only because watching Martha Plimpton takes me back to the several years in my early teens when I was convinced I was a lesbian. What is it about this woman that did that to me? Her, Sherilyn Fenn and Madchen Amick -- they just don't make chicks like that anymore.

1/5

The Last Winter, dir. Larry Fessenden (2006)

NIKKI says:

The trailer looked really good. And anything with Ron Perlman's not going to be a total loss. It's another case, though, of something starting out really good, and just falling apart as the story goes on because they're got this really cool idea that is kinda just that. Story of my life, so I know how they feel. But still. They have the money and the stars -- they should come up with the good endings.

So James LeGros, who I forgot was so fucking cool, is this scientist/reporter guy and he makes this discovery that sour gases have leaked up through the floor of the Arctic where an oil company is making exploratory roads because, I think, they want to set their business there. Well, big Ron is the leader of that group and he doesn't like no namby-pamby enviro dude coming along to tell him that Arctic is melting even if there is pelting rains during the night.

So, conflict arises. Meanwhile, the younger folks on the dig are going a little bit nuts. So, what's happening? A mysterious video shows up of a big creature attacking one of the workers and all hell breaks loose. So, it's a matter, then, of people going mad and getting killed while the smart ones figure out how to get free of the tundra and get help.

It's a good little story ad it kept me interested, but, ultimately, the tension and the scares are left hanging on a pretty boring conclusion.

2/5

Rushmore, dir. Wes Anderson (1998)

Desert's Edge, dir. Rob Lowe (1997)

NIKKI says:

Rob Lowe's debut as a writer and director was not all that great for me. I wanted to like it, because I really like Rob, and he appears to me to be quite smart and informed. But he's clearly not a writer -- or at least at this point in his career he wasn't. But I suppose I don't expect him to be for any other reason that he elected to pick up a pen and write something. He might have given it to Aaron Sorkin or someone to go over because there are a lot of character inconsistencies and character-related plot issues, and the ultimate message left me way cold, especially after seeing what Robert Harmon did with China Lake with a similar setting and running time.

Still, I guess props to Rob for having a hearty go. I just didn't see anything in it that made me want to see more.

The gist is this: You've got a known violent guy and a wannabe actress travelling together as to a photo shoot involving guns. Much of the film is taken up with car ride to the location where the girl alters her personality about five times in order, I assume, for the audience to see the different sides of the guy, played with regular over-the-top-ish-ness by Matt Frewer. One minute the girl wants to blow him, the next she hates his guts and thinks he's a creepy old man, and then she's happy to pose around on the rocks for him pointing a gun at her head. So, who is she and why do I care about her? And he's an asshole, so why do I care about him?

The gun goes off, and Frewer must pick up the pieces. All this time, he's been talking to his lawyer about the situation, and we see flashbacks from all perspectives, even though the whole story is one long flashback of his, so that causes issues.

Ugh -- there's a story in there, but no one really knows what it is. Least of all, it would seem, the one who should -- the writer.

2/5

Cast a Deadly Spell, dir. Martin Campbell (1991)

Scarlet Street, dir. Fritz Lang (1945)

Black Christmas, dir. Glen Morgan (2006)

NIKKI says:

Sigh. Someone eats an eyeball in this movie. It's fucking gross. That's so all I want to say about this movie, and even that was forced.

It's just another pointless remake that does nothing to enhance the story, further the genre, or make us want at all to look at its predecessor. It's just a sorry excuse for some bullshit writing, some bullshit effects, and some bullshit storytelling that could not have been less effective had the dialogue all been dubbed by chirping geese.

My god, Lacey Chabert. Go talk to the Playboy editors -- there's legitimate work out there.

Fucking hell.

But I have only myself to blame.

.5/5

Sex and Breakfast, dir. Miles Brandman (2007)

NIKKI says:

Well, this was a surprise. I was expecting a titillating story of young people and their ultra-standard sex lives. In other words, a movie I would not at all have picked up had Eliza Dushku not been in it.

Points again for Eliza, because this was an interesting meditation on what happens when the sex lives of pretty young people gets a bit on the boring side. And nothing that happens is really all that standard. Clearly, the writer has a bit of real-time experience with this because the dialogue and the situations felt genuine.

The movie is basically about two young couples. One is suffering from basic sexual boredom. Eliza says at one point, "I don't want us to become masturbators." In the other couple, the girl can't come with Macaulay Culkin, so they're looking for some adventure, too. Both couples end up trying out group sex therapy, which is kind of extreme, but both have their reasons -- excitement, adventure, something different.

But what will the ramifications be? Is it ever just sex? Can couples share and still be happy? What does it mean to share? What does it mean to consider sharing in the first place? All these questions come up, and the paths the couples and the movie take are not quite as expected. It was also good to see young couples going through these things rather than just boring old ones.

I really enjoyed it. I thought it was very smart, quite funny, and it finally allowed me to see Macaulay Culkin as possibly a good adult actor. Who knew?

3/5

Sleeping Dogs Lie, dir. Bobcat Goldthwaite (2006)

NIKKI says:

I still can't believe they went there. What has happened in Bobcat's life that brings him to this space? To writing and directing a film about a girl with a very weird sexual secret involving, well, going down on a pet dog? And how on Earth did the whole thing turn out to be so not awful?

It wasn't awesome, but it was definitely successful on certain levels. The movie is well-written, funny, and clever. The characters are likable and easy to relate to, and the drama is affecting, even after a shaky start involving some stereotypically annoying parents and other family members. The notion of letting a partner in on your deepest, darkest secrets is interesting. Amy lets us know she once blew her dog in a moment of teenage experimentation and craziness. She wants so badly to tell her fiance, just to have it out there, so that no secrets lay between them.

Of course, I'm thinking not everything needs to be disclosed and that revealing this is going to be a massive error. It is, and the relationship struggles.

So, what does it mean to be "completely honest" with a partner? I'm of the opinion that honesty is good, but full disclosure? Utterly unnecessary, especially concerning the things you did before you and your partner were together. If you're asked, sure, you can tell. If you feel like discussing, why not? Because I also think judgement is a bad thing, so if your partner can't handle the fact that you stripped for a football team when you were 16 or something like that, then that's their issue. Still, bestiality is something again and I agreed with the boyfriend that it was hard to look past. Full disclosure? You'd have to be mad, right?

But Amy needs to reveal, and her life falls apart. So, are we the product of our past choices? And what does it really mean to keep secrets? The movie does well to explore those themes, and while it was amusing and heartfelt, it was ultimately a bit easy as far as the wrap-up went. Amy decides not to disclose to her next partner and life goes on. But in order to not tell, she ends up lying, and there's a whole new kettle of worms right there.

2.5/5

The Heart is Deceitful Above All Things, dir. Asia Argento (2004)

NIKKI says:

I said to Steve after this one -- if we're going to continue to support Asia through all these bizarre aspects of her career, she's gonna have to start giving something back. But then, I don't think it's entirely her fault that this one runs off the rails as much as it does. Perhaps she thought she was making a true-to-life film about JT LeRoy's terrible upbringing. For all she knew, and the rest of the world, LeRoy's story was true. It came out a while back that it was all bogus. JT LeRoy was really Laura Albert. And watching it with that knowledge, it's very hard to relate or sympathise with any of what goes on.

And I have just discovered that Asia was not angry with Leroy when she discovered the hoax. She is quoted: "If the literary world wanted to believe Leroy was real, it's not Laura Albert's fault. She just wanted to have her novel published."

Isn't that like saying, it's okay to perjure yourself for your own ends? Why does Laura Albert get to suck out my sympathies with these horrendous lies about this poor, neglected child just so she can be a published writer? I'm shocked an artist like Asia, who must know what it means to strive for truth and authenticity in one's art, could simply overlook Albert's deception.

And that makes the movie less of an accomplishment for me. So here's the story of these fake people doing awful things. Why do I care? By the end, Steve and I were picking out the next level of pain for the kid -- Well, now he's been abused, he'll have to get into drugs... Now, he's done drugs, he'll have to shoot someone... It was just blow-by-blow every sob story you've ever heard rolled into one big one. Snooze. 

All that aside, Asia's style is tremendous. I can forgive her only because she is such an artist. Her blending of styles, her attention to detail (the images of Americana seen throughout the film are effective), her ability to fully immerse herself in a character. She is incredibly skilled. But, man, what a waste of all that this story was. The story was so awful, the characters so stupid, the situations so standard, that even the artistry could not redeem it.

.5/5

STEVE says:

The controversy of the JT LeRoy/Laura Albert thing was lost on me, I'll admit. I don't follow the literary world that closely, and what news I get is generally filtered through Nikki. I remember when this all went on, all the Oprah controversy, and I remember being mildly annoyed by it, but not enough to make a federal case out of it.

This movie, though, is something else. I don't care if it's true or not, or how many people in the film and publishing worlds were duped by the whole thing. What bothered me was how poorly constructed the story was. Cliche after cliche heaped one upon the other does not make a story. 

I mean if you're going to make something up, at least make it believable.

.5/5

Riot-On!, dir. Kim Finn (2004)

NIKKI says:

There are some things that go in the world I just don't need to know. One of those things involves the media company Riot Entertainment's sharing around of a porno featuring members of staff. Apparently, it's not weird at all for orgies to take place during work hours, or for people to film those orgies and release them on DVD. Am I shocked the business went under?

God, to live in Finland, where office Christmas parties could get you pregnant.

So, this company that has no technology, no money, no business prospects aside from a handful of ideas manages to create the facade of prosperity on fumble into $21 million dollars from Nokia to develop mobile phone games. This movie is about how the company did that, and how eventually it all fell apart. It's a fascinating story that makes you wonder how the world manages to turn they way it does if this kind of stuff goes on.

The movie itself is really funny, and clever, and the cartoon sequences are great and give it a style all its own. It fell apart for me in the last half because I already had the gist of the story and the fall out wasn't have as thrilling as the build up. Still an enjoyable movie that makes me kind of cringe now every time I open my phone.

2/5

Someone to Watch Over Me, dir. Ridley Scott (1987)

STEVE says:

More and more, I'm convinced by this project that I've lived with some sort of bizarre Total Recall implanted memory for the first 30-odd years of my life. I had seen Someone to Watch Over Me before, and I remembered it as being a good movie, a suspenseful neo-noir with a dash of sex... Sadly, none of that was to be the case this time around.

In my memory, Mimi Rogers witnesses a murder and Tom Berenger is assigned to protect her. During the course of this, the murderer makes several attempts on her life, as she and Berenger become romantically linked, therefore compromising his ability to protect her. In the broadest sense, that's pretty much what happens. But I remembered nothing about Berenger having a wife and kid, nothing about the underdevelopment of the Berenger/Rogers relationship, and nothing about the drawn out stretches of "drama" between the attempts on Rogers' life. I did remember the final confrontation between Berenger and the killer taking place at a swanky indoor pool, but it turns out that was the inciting incident where Rogers witnesses the killer killing her friend, and Berenger wasn't yet involved, so only half points for remembering that.

Had this been a Movie of the Week, or some direct-to-video thing, it might not have been so bad. Replace Berenger with Michael Nouri (or, you know, not), up the skin quotient, and you got yourself a Cinemax fave. But this is a Ridley Scott movie. This followed Legend, Blade Runner, Alien and The Duellists. Why would he lower himself to this level of late-night melodrama? Sad, really.

1.5/5

NIKKI says:

Amen to all that. It was just lame, and it felt like it was going to be from the opening few minutes. It all felt really Andrew Stevens-y. I was like Steve -- this is Ridley Scott? Is it because people were just so coked up in the '80s? It made very little sense, and the character development was just so poor as to be non-existent. I kinda spent the last two thirds just waiting for it all to be over with. And I'm sorry but whoever cast Mimi Rogers as this irresistible, beautiful femme fatale was doing more coke than anyone else because anyone of sound mind can see Lorraine Bracco is far hotter.

1/5

The Strangers, dir. Bryan Bertino (2008)