Taking Lives

Serial killer genre takes a hit with ‘Taking Lives’

Warner Bros.
TCHEY KARYO and Angelina Jolie in “Taking Lives.”

There’s nothing quite like a good a good serial killer film.
There just aren’t that many around. Maybe they have reached the saturation point.
Such is the trouble with 2004’s “Taking Lives.”
It starts out with promise several years ago.
Two young men sit together on a bus, headed for Canada. But it breaks down so the two visit a raggedy shop and buy a junker to take them on their journey.
When a tire goes flat, one man has never changed a tire, so the other takes over. That doesn’t mean the young man who can’t change a tire wasn’t busy. He spends the time pushing the new friend into the path of a speeding truck. It causes the truck to flip over, obviously killing the driver. The young friend needs a bash with some asphalt to finish him off.
Fast forward to the present where an excavation site reveals a body and we learn a serial killer is on the loose in Quebec.
There to help investigate is the lovely-lipped Angelina Jolie, playing the role of FBI agent Illeana Scott.
So you wonder why an FBI agent is investigating murders in Canada? My theory is it’s because it is cheaper to film there.
There are some intriguing aspects to the film. First off, there’s the talented Gena Rowlands who informs police the son she thought had died years ago is still alive. She says she spotted his eyes in a crowd and she’s positive it is him. Oh yes, and he’s very dangerous. That statement comes back to haunt her.
That brings a sense of wasted foreboding to the plot.
Another highlight is we see Jolie’s breasts in a rather graphic sex scene. Hey, you gotta take what you can get in a pedestrian film like this.
Finally, while the ending, what might be described as the epilogue, is satisfying and suspenseful, it is also highly predictable.
The rest of the film is pretty much void of originality. Honey, this isn’t any “Silence of the Lambs:”
An apparent witness to a killing is Costa, an artist who tried to rescue a victim. By the time he got there, the serial killer did his work and things weren’t pretty.
So Costa, played by Ethan Hawke, is grilled by police who ask questions like, Why do you have blood on your shirt? The Hawke character replies when you are trying to save someone’s life who is bleeding to death, you get some blood on your shirt. Yeah, you get the idea, this film is stretched a bit.
Hawke at least does well in a difficult role.
Jolie seems a bit too subdued part of the time. We get a $1.95 explanation as to why she does what she does. I guess it replaces a real character.
Also, she likes to sit and lie at a crime scene, complete with photos of the blood and gore, maybe in hopes information will simply flow to her. It doesn’t work to solve the crime and it doesn’t work for the plot.
Besides Jolies’ um, anatomy and a few flashes of suspense, the best this has going for it is the theatrical release was only 103 minutes. The unrated version, with the decent sex scene, is 109 minutes.
So the film isn’t terrible and remains relatively short.
Not a whole-hearted endorsement. But then, this is a half-hearted kind of film.

TAKING LIVES • Directed by D.J. Caruso • Written by Michael Pyle and Jon Bokenkam • Rated R for strong violence including disturbing images, language and some sexuality • Runtime: 103 minutes, unrated version 109 minutes • 2 stars out of 4

Indictment: The McMartin Trial

Movie plot difficult to believe but true

HENRY THOMAS plays an outcast wrongly accused of child molestation in "Indictment: The McMartin Trial."

You will find the plot of “Indictment: The McMartin Trial” difficult to believe.
Imagine, a day care center where the children are routinely molested, where animals are killed in front of the children.
A seemingly upright family, the oldest in her 70s, are arrested amidst the bright lights of television and hauled into court.
There is so much hatred toward this family, the day care is burned. There are reports at other day care centers of molestation and cruelty.
The case lasts seven years and costs Los Angeles County $13 million. And the whole story is a hoax.
Yes, hard to believe. But sadly, it is true.
This movie stars James Woods as Danny Davis, an attorney who agrees to take the unpopular case. Wife and others are disturbed he would agree to represent such perverts, but Danny says they deserve a defense like anyone else.
The defendants include Henry Thomas, who you may remember as the little boy in “E.T.” He is Ray Buckey, a reclusive young man who lives with his mother and likes to look at nude photos of women and relieve himself.
When authorities find cut up nude photos he tries to flush down the toilet, it is a sure sign he is guilty of molesting kids.
Lolita Davidovich plays Kee McFarlane, a self-proclaimed social worker without any training. She is alerted to possible child abuse after a woman whose child is at the center reports her son has been sexually abused.
McFarlane records each of the sessions she has with the children. She uses puppets to make the interviews less traumatic for the kids.
The recordings show at first the children deny they were molested. But slowly, the McFarlane character tires them out. Her puppets ask the children’s puppets if they won’t “join” the others and agree they were molested. The children, wishing to please the woman, finally agree they were molested.
Now the prosecutors don’t view all of the tapes. McFarlane writes down the VCR numbers so they can forward to the parts where the kids describe being “molested.”
This case goes on for years and elderly day care owner must submit to sick cavity searches in prison. Yet so much about the children’s stories don’t jive.
First off, they say they were molested in closets. But there are no closets.
The Thomas character, who spends more time in prison than any person in California in history without being convicted, is accused of actions before he even worked at the center. That didn’t stop the case from being prosecuted.
The children, used to lying, sit on the witness stand and tell bizarre stories. One child says they were taken to a church where animals were killed on the altar and the children were molested. But a priest at the church says the doors are always locked. There is no way anyone can bring children there and kill animals.
One child describes being molested in a carwash, but then changes his story. They were all taken to the airport and placed on a plane so they could be molested. But the plane doesn’t leave the ground.
The Woods character learns the mother who initially filed charges of molestation later says the child’s father also molested the boy, as did a neighbor and finally her brother. She eventually ends up in a mental institution. But the prosecutor maintains she went crazy AFTER making the initial charges against the day care center.
Yes, lives are ruined and money wasted. It is a compelling but so sad of a story.
You can watch it unfold over 135 minutes on DVD. Prepare to be appalled.

INDICTMENT: THE McMARTIN TRIAL • Directed by Mick Jackson • Written by Abby Mann and Myra Mann • Runtime: 135 minutes • Rated R for graphic language and disturbing visuals • 3 1/2 stars out of 4

Panic in the Streets, Pinky and Splendor in the Grass

Elia Kazan’s films ahead of their time

BOTTOM: NATALIE WOOD and Warren Beatty in “Splendor in the Grass.”

CENTER: JACK PALANCE in “Panic in the Streets.”

TOP: JEANNE CRAIN plays African-American “Pinky.”

I always liked director Elia Kazan’s movies.
A few years ago I found myself engrossed in “A Face in the Crowd,” in which a not-so-nice, narcissistic Andy Griffith plays a musician who is nothing like his alter-ego on “The Andy Griffith Show.”
I must have ordered a bunch of Kazan films on Netflix back when and have been enjoying film after film after film as they appear in my mailbox.
The first of the Kazan films was “Panic in the Streets” from 1950. Richard Widmark is a low-paid military doctor who must find people infected with the pneumonic plague.
While he is out trying to save the world from a major catastrophe, his wife, played by the under used Barbara Bel Geddes, is trying to negotiate with their grocer because she doesn’t have the money to pay the bill.
The story begins with Jack Palance, as vicious hoodlum Blackie, who kills an illegal immigrant who made too much money playing cards.
When authorities examine the body, they find it filled with the plague and the race is on.
Given the times, it looks like Kazan is using the plague as symbolism, equating the plague with the communist scare.
Kazan was excellent at bringing important issues into the plots of his films.
A year before, Kazan directed “Pinky,” starring Jeanne Crain as Pinky Johnson, who returns to her backwater town with a nursing degree and a professional demeanor. What we don’t realize initially is Pinky is African-American and by not mentioning the subject, passes herself off as white.
Her granny, played in real mammy style by the great Ethel Waters, says it’s a crime against God to not mention she is black or well, “colored.”
Now what is amazing about this film is it tackles the question of racism head-on, even though it was filmed in 1949 when discrimination was still well established.
You have to wonder how “Pinky” made out in the deeply-segregated South of 1949.
Pinky gets jolted into remembering she is a woman of color when she is nearly raped by two men who try to track her down and grab her in their car. After all, raping a black woman was OK.
In another scene, a white woman puts up a fuss and demands satisfaction from a store manager when a clerk asks the woman to wait a second until she rings up a sale for Pinky. White women do not wait for blacks, even if their skin is almost the same color.
After the near rape, Pinky decides to leave, but agrees to stay to nurse a dying Miss Em, the stern old lady who helped granny out and lives in the big house. She is played wonderfully by the great Ethel Barrymore.
The film tackles racism at a time when racism was perfectly acceptable and legal.
The third film was “Splendor in the Grass,” a rich, beautiful-looking film starring Natalie Wood and Warren Beatty.
The film tackles raging teen hormones and societal norms. It takes place in the South in the late 1920s. Boys will be boys and handle their teen desires with a certain kind of girl. Yet another type of girl was used for marrying purposes.
Beatty, as Bud, came from a rich family headed by loud, obnoxious Pat Hingle. Bud is head-over-heels in love with the lovely Natalie character and doesn’t really want an alternate girl.
Hingle pushes the idea of finding a less moral extra girlfriend, not realizing his own daughter is fulfilling the same role, sometimes with married men.
Teen sex kicks in to high gear as Wood finds herself consumed with love or, um, the like and ends up in a mental hospital, after his father cashes in bonds to pay for it. (The bonds wouldn’t have been worth much soon anyway, as October 1929 approached.)
While Wood struggles in the mental hospital, Beatty blows his chances at success at Yale. He would rather run the family ranch.
It is a compelling film of almost epic proportions, shot in beautiful Technicolor. Again, Kazan tackles issues you rarely saw discussed in motion pictures at the time.
Kazan definitely didn’t dodge controversy during his years of directing. You would be amazed at how contemporary his work plays today. His last film was “The Last Tycoon,” which came out in 1976. He died in 2003.
You might know him by other pictures, including “On the Waterfront,” “A Streetcar Named Desire” and “East of Eden.”
He’s well worth revisiting.

The Woman in the Window

‘Woman in the Window’ offers ending with twist

EDWARD G. ROBINSON and Alice Reed in "The Woman in the Window."

Edward G. Robinson plays Professor Richard Wanley from Gotham College.
As the film “The Woman in the Window” opens, he is giving a lecture on crime and murder. At the time, we don’t realize just how little he knows.
The professor is middle aged and leads an uneventful life. His dowdy wife and son live in the country. He spends his time in his club, one of those places that only exists in the movies.
There he and his friends sit in their suits and ties, with brandy and cigars, discussing such weighty subjects as the photo of the beautiful woman in the adjoining storefront window.
This is one of those clubs with the English butler types in their tuxedos, serving drinks.
It’s a way for the good professor to pass time after bidding good-bye at the train station to wife and son.
Later, as he leaves the club, he passes the portrait of the woman and gazes again at her beauty. Except suddenly she appears in the reflection behind him.
Played by Joan Bennett, she invites the learned professor back to her apartment for a drink. Mmmm, lucky for him, especially since the film was made in 1944.
Ah, but the Bennett character has been, um, friendly with others besides the Robinson character.
Suddenly, a jealous boyfriend played by Arthur Loft barges in the room, slams his fist into the Bennett character’s face and soon is in a struggle with Robinson.
In fact, he begins choking Robinson to death. Bennett saves the day by giving him a pair of scissors he can nicely plant in the assailant’s back.
As quick as the attack begins, it is over. The boyfriend is dead on the floor. Robinson and Bennett are shaken.
But let us remember, Robinson is playing a professor who knows all about crime. The assailant has no connection with the Robinson character. There’s no link. So why not drag the corpse into his car, drive him to an out-of-the-way place and dump him?
Veteran director Friz Lang knows how to build suspense, as Robinson has a couple of close encounters with the law on the way to his body dumping, not to mention a toll road worker. (The toll is 10 cents.)
Raymond Massey plays the district attorney and a member of the club, who gives Robinson inside information, never dreaming he is the murderer.
In fact, Massey invites Robinson to the scene of the crime. This results in some funny scenes, such as when Robinson unintentionally leads the group to where the body was found. Everybody laughs, figuring it is a good guess.
Robinson also learns he left incriminating evidence, like part of a torn sleeve of a jacket, blood from a pricker bush, shoe prints and tire tracks.
But the laughs quickly stop when the bodyguard of the murdered man, a rich industrialist, shows up on Bennett’s door, seeking blackmail money.
Suddenly the cushy life of Professor Wanley has fallen apart.
This is a well directed, well acted film noir piece, with special kudos going to Dan Duryea as the blackmailer.
You feel sympathy for the good professor, who does little but defend himself against an attacker.
But in the movies, especially back then, those who sin must be punished.
But there’s a twist and turn along the way.
Lang uses suspense, music and a bit of comedy to keep this fun and suspenseful. For once, Robinson plays a good guy who just does one bad thing and may pay dearly for it.
It’s a great example of 1940s filmmaking and worth taking a look at. If you are a Netflix subscriber, you can watch it tonight via streaming.

WOMAN IN THE WINDOW Directed by Fritz Lang Runtime: 107 minutes May be too intense for young children 3 stars out of 4

CHLOE

‘Chloe’ has interesting beginning, ending

JULIANNE MOORE (left) and Amanda Seyfred in "Chloe."

Is Amanda Seyfried in every movie filmed these days?
Not that I am complaining. Amanda is very beautiful as well as talented.
And watching her in “Chloe,” I noticed she has the fullest, reddest lips since Mick Jagger.
“Chloe” is dramatic, erotic, entertaining but misses the mark of being a great motion picture.
Julianne Moore plays Catherine Stewart, a successful physician, if you judge her on her spacious, swanky home.
She has a handsome husband, David, played by Liam Neeson, and a musical son, Michael, played by Max Thieriot. Michael, like a few other teens, has an attitude about his parents. Oh yes, and he’s also horny.
Directed by Atom Egoyan, the film opens with the Neeson character lecturing in New York City. He is a college professor who is often hit upon by his female students. A girl, during the discussion, raises her hand and asks if he would be interested in a drink afterward.
Wife Catherine (Moore) meanwhile has a houseful of guests waiting for him in their Toronto home for a surprise party. We see Neeson on the phone with the girl in the background. He’s sorry, he missed his flight, he says.
So the expensive party goes on without the honored guest. But the Moore character is suspicious of hubby. She sees the way his students react to him and how he flirts back, not to mention the texting.
When she sees a photo of an unknown student on his phone, she gets really suspicious.
Often harried at work, seeing all of her patients, she suddenly has a break where she can look down on the city and sees a beautiful, high-priced call girl, played by Seyfried.
Moore arranges a chance meeting in a restroom and engages in conversation. The Moore character wants to know just how far her husband will go with a student.
When you have lots of disposable income, you can do things like hire a hooker, er, escort girl, to come on to your husband and see what happens.
Soon the lovely lipped Seyfried agrees to the plan and reports back. She talks about how she borrowed sugar from his table at a diner and he strolls over to her table to talk to her some more. He’s flirting. The Moore character is intrigued.
So the Seyfried character continues the experiment. She tells of fondling him in the back of a building, a visit to a hotel.
She gets pretty graphic.
Moore is taken back. She decides it has gone too far. She wants it all to stop. But the Seyfried character seems more in control and aware than the much older Moore. She has plans of her own.
The characters are interesting and fully developed. The side story of son Michael is brought into the fold. He has a girlfriend whom Dad allows to spend the night. When they break up, son doesn’t want to hear from Mom.
Ah, but a visit from Chloe would be all right, wouldn’t it?
There are some twists and turns in the plot and Seyfried is showing herself to be a really subtle, first-rate actress, the way she looks, the way she darts her eyes. The way her eyes glint. And to think I used to think of her as just the daughter in HBO’S “Big Love.”
But at some point all of that dirty talk gets a bit repetitive. The escort tells wifie about the latest hubby exploits. She reacts. Lots of restaurant scenes. A good amount of white wine. And lots of mirror, too.
While the film has twists and turns you won’t see coming, the plot could have included a few more subplots or the story trimmed a bit, even though it is only 96 minutes.
But the filmmaker certainly makes the opening and ending of the film interesting and compelling, so I guess we can forgive if the middle sags a bit.
Especially when you can look at Seyfried’s lips.

CHLOE Directed by Atom Egoyan Written by Erin Cressida Wilson and Anne Fontaine Runtime: 96 minutes Rated R for strong sexual content including graphic dialogue, nudity and language 3 stars out of 4

The World's Fastest Indian

Hopkins unlikely speedster in ‘Fastest Indian’

ANTHONY HOPKINS in 'The World's Fastest Indian'

Burt Munro was a quirky but likable kind of guy.
He lived in southern New Zealand. He was a bit, well, strange.
For instance, when the grass in back of his and his neighbor’s house got too long, he poured gasoline and burned it. He was shocked when the fire department arrived to put it out.
But Munro was a fascinating guy and became the topic of a pretty compelling, fun film, “The World’s Fastest Indian.” Munro is played by the always versatile Anthony Hopkins.
It’s a true story about a guy who overcomes countless odds to achieve and go beyond his original goals.
Munro had a motorcycle, a 1920 Indian, that he enjoyed modifying and racing. His dream was to take it to the Bonneville Salt Flats.
But he had limited funds and angina, a particularly painful heart malady.
One day, he mortgaged his home and shipped himself and his motorcycle to America to attempt to fulfill his dreams.
He really doesn’t know the country, doesn’t know the currency and is soon ripped off from his limited funds by a cab driver and prostitute. He decides to stay at a cheap motel best rented by the hour, not the week.
Munro isn’t fazed by much. He doesn’t blink an eye when he discovers the friendly girl who helps him from the hotel is actually a cross-dressing guy.
He befriends a used car dealer who sells him a lemon of a car, but Munro’s mechanical talents quickly turns it into a winner. The car dealer asks him to stay and fix his other vehicles.
Along the way his cycle trailer falls apart, he is pestered by police and has similar troubles.
Burt is also befriended by a widow who misses her deceased husband, so he must fill in the best he can.
When he finally gets to the race, his motorcycle is ripped apart, figuratively.
It doesn’t have a chute, no brakes, no safety features. It isn’t even registered!
But Burt keeps his cool and plods along toward his goal.
Hopkins is such a good actor in everything he does. He is a chameleon in his various roles and becomes his characters. This is no exception.
His smiles, his mannerisms, his sighs. It’s all part of the character.
This film is a solid lesson on how to fulfill your dreams, how to overcome adversity when problems continue to mount.
Because of what the real Burt Munro accomplished in his life, the speeds he attained on his motorcycle are nothing short of extraordinary.
Yet he was a congenial guy who people liked to help.
Hopkins makes this movie, which came out six years ago but never got the publicity it deserves.
This is a great film for younger people to learn from. And even though it is 127 minutes long, you will be sorry to see the film end.
So if you haven’t seen “The World’s Fastest Indian,” it’s time to add it to your Netflix que. In fact, it is available for streaming. Watch “The World’s Fastest Indian” fast!

THE WORLD’S FASTEST INDIAN • Directed and written by Roger Donaldson • Rated PG-13 for brief language, drug use and a sexual reference • Runtime: 127 minutes • 4 stars out of 5

Petrified Forest

‘Petrified Forest’ kicked up careers of Bogart, Davis

BETTE DAVIS, Leslie Howard (center) and Humphrey Bogart in “Petrified Forest.”

“The Petrified Forest” started as a stage play and became a celebrated film in 1936.
Imagine, this film stars Leslie Howard three years before “Gone With the Wind.”
Bette David is a young, upcoming actress.
Humphrey Bogart had bit parts and appeared in unimportant pictures before this. Howard insisted on Bogart appearing in this make-it-or-break-it picture.
Without this film, Bogart may have given up on a motion picture career. So indebted, Bogart named his daughter Leslie after Howard.
Davis plays Gabrielle Maple, who works in her father’s restaurant and gasoline station out in the desert. She sort of flirts with an employee and ex-college football player, played by Eddie Acuff.
She was born in Paris but left after only a few days. Still, she enjoys poetry and dreams of returning to France. She’s not your typical country girl.
Howard is Alan Squier, a depressed hitch-hiker and author who indeed spent time in France. He’s making his way to the Pacific coast.
Squier enjoys a meal with Davis. She charges only 30 cents for the food, but he can’t even pay that. She feels sorry for him and gives $1 “change.” She even arranges a ride with a rich family.
Unfortunately, out on the road the family meets up with cold-blooded Duke Mantee (Bogart) and his gang of killers.
They end up hold up back at the restaurant where the film turns, well, a bit too conversational.
This is where it gives away its stage-play origins. The earlier scene between Davis and Howard seems to go on forever, a sort of precursor to “My Dinner with Andre.”
A highlight is character actor Charley Grapewin, who plays an old man who Billy the Kid allowed to live and who met Mark Twain.
It’s easy to see why this is a breakout film for Bogart, with his pompadour haircut and grizzled, unshaven look. He’s a mean hombre with no scruples, ready to blast away at any moment.
One victim offers to pay for his freedom, to the tune of $200. Duke takes the money, but keeps him in captivity. He’s not such a bad guy though. Duke lets him keep his loose pocket change.
Two African-Americans play minor but interesting parts. One is a liberated gang member who looks down on the black servant of the rich family.
So depressed is the Howard character he signs over his life insurance policy to Davis’ character. He then asks Duke to kill him, since Duke has already killed, another victim won’t make a difference.
Gabrielle’s father is part of a cartoonish militia that meets regularly. The group is a holdover from the Great War but is fumbles its way until captured by Duke’s gang.
There’s a pretty good shootout with the cops at the end.
The whole tone of the film and the ideas exchanged seem far more contemporary than the Great Depression, when the film was made.
It also spotlights a diverse group of great actors early in their careers.
If you get the DVD, it includes an MGM night at the movies, with newsreel, short subject musical and a cartoon.
A little too talky, it is still worth watching 74 years later.

THE PETRIFIED FOREST • Directed by Archie Mayo • Written by Charles Kenyon and Delmer Davies • Runtime: 82 minutes • Not rated by violent shootout may be too intense for youngsters • 3 starts out of 4