Just what the doctor ordered

"Patch Adams"
Overall Rating: ****


Sometimes, usually when you receive a bill from a hospital with $60 aspirin tablets, you wonder who needs treatment more--the patients or the doctors. "Patch Adams" asserts that the medical establishment could stand to heal itself.

"Patch Adams" is about the old saying that goes "laughter is the best medicine." After the death of his wife, Hunter Adams (Robin Williams) commits himself because he is suicidal. In the mental hospital, he sees doctors who are so inattentive that the most outrageous statement will go right by them, and by communicating with patients, he discovers that by helping others he helps himself. Even before he leaves the hospital, he realizes he wants to be a doctor to help people. Yet when he gets to medical school, he encounters professors who don't agree with his belief that doctors should "treat the person and not the disease."

All the actors in "Patch Adams" are wonderful. As great as their performances are, Robin Williams owns the movie, again proving himself as one of the greatest living actors. In many respects, "Patch Adams" is like Robin Williams' earlier effort, "Good Morning, Vietnam." In both cases, you have an iconoclastic genius who sees a better way to do things, but runs up against the system and its bureaucrats. (Interestingly, both films are based on true stories and both Adrian Cronauer from "Good Morning, Vietnam" and Patch Adams are real people--Hollywood isn't really repeating itself so much as history is.) Similarly, in both films, Williams shines. In the comic scenes of "Patch Adams," Adams is about as funny as Cronauer, but Adams and the movie have something of a more serious tone underlying the comedy. Williams manages both the serious and the funny masterfully.

Lest Williams get all the credit for what was an excellent performance, the filmwriters provided good material for him to work with. "Patch Adams" is very funny in places; Adams discovers that a clown nose can accomplish more than any pill in many cases--and sets to work amusing patients and the audience. The movie is also very touching; Adams is there to comfort suffering patients. He also falls in love with Carin (Monica Potter), another medical student in his class, adding another dimension to the character and the film. Though Adams believes medical service should be free, the movie really focuses on Adams' attempts to change the system--almost singlehandedly at times; I was relieved that--however briefly it was handled--the problem of the high cost of medicine is acknowledged as being complex.

The script of "Patch Adams" does have some loose ends. Adams seems able to withstand a hostile bureaucracy's full weight better than he should--considering that he ignores advice from his allies in his cause. The film also glosses over a couple of things where he was in the wrong--most notably a theft. In both cases, the basis in truth may have limited what the filmmakers could do, and Adams' is singlemindedness accounts for both; but they are still weak points.

Since the film lacks any graphic on-screen sex or violence (the scene in the asylum where Adams and his psychiatric hospital roommate pretend to shoot imaginary squirrels could count as violent, but it isn't graphic), "Patch Adams" could be safer for children than some films. There is some partial nudity, and a moderate amount of strong language. How much children would enjoy "Patch Adams" is another issue. They'll get most of the jokes, (though not all); but the film becomes serious in places and kids may find more than one scene too low key.

On the whole, "Patch Adams" is an enjoyable movie. Though it is more serious in its tone, if you loved "Good Morning, Vietnam," you'll love "Patch Adams." In the end, I'd say that "Patch Adams" will make you feel better immediately.


Title: "Patch Adams"
Release date: December 25, 1998

MPAA rating: PG-13
Overall rating: ****

Aprox. run time: 115 min.
Director: Tom Shadyac
Writers: Steve Oedekerk (screenplay), Maureen Mylander (book), Hunter Doherty Adams (book)
Stars: Robin Williams, Monica Potter

Original URL: http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Mansion/7045/PatchAdm.htm

Added to blog site: 8/3/09

The "Cats'" meow

"Cats"
Overall Rating:***½


I had some hesitation about reviewing the video of "Cats." I generally love Andrew Lloyd Webber's work, and I loved the Broadway production of "Cats." The video, however, isn't a movie per se, but a modified version of the stage production. Filmed stage productions have a reputation for looking flat, while "Cats" leans heavily on spectacular sets and is absolutely dependant on dancing; I felt I had reason to worry. Seeing it to put my mind to rest.

The plot of "Cats" is simple: every year the Jellicle Cats gather, and pick one who will go to the Heaviside Layer--a sort of wondrous celestial waiting room for cats between reincarnations. The real appeal of "Cats" is, of course, Andrew Lloyd Webber's wonderful music. "Cats" takes T. S. Eliot's Old Possum's Book of Practical Cats, and uses those poems as catchy lyrics. The result is an exuberant pageant of music and dance that really must be seen to be fully appreciated.

All of the actors in the video play their parts well; however, a few outshine the rest. Ken Page as Old Deuteronomy is absolutely magnificent; the character needs a regal presence, and he is regal. John Partridge as Rum Tum Tugger is very entertaining--he rises to the challenge of a character that's almost outlandish. John Mills is also wonderful as Gus, an aged stage-door cat. I should also note that Jacob Brent, who plays Mr. Mistoffelees, was excellent, though his part was only a dancing part, and involved no singing.

The wonderful performances of all the actors could have easily been sabotaged if video production fell short. Fortunately, it works pretty well. A couple of scenes towards the beginning are a little flat, but most of the time, the production is good when it comes to capturing the energetic dance and music of "Cats." Some visual special effects in the second act (or what would have been the second act in the stage production) also add flair. Mostly, what the makers of this video did was to rely on camera angles and close ups to avoid monotony; this was effective. When you consider that this is an adaptation of the stage production, and therefore had only one set, the adaptation becomes very impressive. Though, unlike the stage productions, the actors can play to any direction, the set could have easily been a limiting factor, but wasn't.

There is one major problem with the video production; the musical number "Growltiger's Last Stand" has been cut. "Growltiger's Last Stand" is one of the best songs in the show, and everything that's wonderful about "Cats" (clever sets, dynamic dance, and exciting music) is present in that song. Worse still, since Gus the theater cat played Growltiger, Mills' magnificent performance was severely undercut by the omission. When you also consider that "Growltiger's Last Stand" is one of the few songs referenced later in the show, the decision to cut it comes up as a tremendous mistake.

In the final analysis, this video suffers a little from the problem of all filmed stage productions: it retains the limits of the stage, but loses the energy and spontaneity you get from live theater; however, as dependant as "Cats" is on that energy, and seeing how much is kept in the video, the effort is admirable. I'd have preferred a full movie production. I'd also definitely take the Broadway production over the video any day. However, not everyone can just go to the Winter Garden Theater in New York, and the video of "Cats" gives you some of the flavor of the live show. I'd say it's definitely worth a look; it's enough to purr about.

Title: "Cats"
Release date: 1998
MPAA rating: N/A
Overall rating: ***½
Aprox. run time: 120 min.
Directors: David Mallet, Trevor Nunn (original stage production)
Writers: Andrew Lloyd Webber (Music), T. S. Eliot (Lyrics adapted from poems)
Stars: Elaine Paige (plays Grizabella), Sir John Mills, Ken Page


Original URL: http://www.geocities.com/reviewsbyjohn/Cats.htm
Added to blog site: 7/27/09

An uplifting movie

"The Boy Who Could Fly"
Overall Rating: ****½


Believe it or not, as recently as 1986, Hollywood was still producing nice films. "The Boy Who Could Fly" feels like a film that was made 40 or more years ago. It has no explosions, nobody gets shot, and nobody runs around naked. It is charming, funny in many places, and touching in many others.

Milly Michaelson (Lucy Deakins), along with her younger brother Louis (Fred Savage) and her mother Charlene (Bonnie Bedelia), are a family in crisis. With the recent death of Millie's father, the family must move to a new neighborhood, and Charlene must return to work for the first time in many years. Soon after moving day, they start learning about their new next door neighbor, Eric (Jay Underwood). Eric's parents were killed in a plane crash some years ago and he's being raised by his alcoholic uncle Hugo (Fred Gwynne) and, to a certain extent, his high-school English teacher Mrs. Sherman (Coleen Dewhurst). Making things tougher, Eric is apparently autistic: he has never spoken a word, and has a habit of sitting on window ledges and rooftops and pretending to fly. The strange thing is that some people, albeit generally unreliable sources, claim he actually can fly.

"The Boy Who Could Fly" is a charming movie. The pace isn't all that fast, especially in the beginning, but the film wouldn't work if it were. Still, the movie flows smoothly from one scene to another; the connection between Milly and Eric grows slowly, but effectively. The story is intriguing--there's no way Eric can fly, and yet, you wonder. A nice subplot is also introduced right away, and carried through right to the end: Louis is a third-grader who just wants to get around the block--though he's thwarted by the neighborhood bully; the subplot serves nicely as an echo for the emotional level of the story. Nick Castle's writing and directing are very effective. It would have been very easy for the story to become either silly or boring, but it doesn't. About all I can really say is that it works.

The cast is absolutely wonderful. Lucy Deakins is very good as Milly. The supporting cast is also generally very good. Fred Gwynne and Mindy Cohn (who plays Milly's obnoxious friend Geneva) are excellent, and Fred Savage positively steals the show. The real star is Jay Underwood; Eric is disturbed and melancholy, yet not hopeless; if that combination weren't difficult enough, Eric is also mute. Jay Underwood pulls off the role brilliantly.

Though it isn't really intended as a children's movie, on the whole, "The Boy Who Could Fly" is generally safe for the whole family. There is a little bad language (including some used by Louis), but not that much. There is also an episode where Milly and Geneva get drunk, though both of them are teenagers--but not without consequences: Milly's mother catches them, and the next morning, Milly is apparently in trouble and definitely hung over.

A couple of things bothered me slightly about "The Boy Who Could Fly." Louis goes through a rather sudden character transformation at one point, and I'm not sure it works. Further, while the film's slow pace is necessary and generally works, there are some places where I felt it was a little too slow.

Yet, as Milly's family recovers from its loss, "The Boy Who Could Fly" recovers from its problems. "The Boy Who Could Fly" will lift you up.

Title: "The Boy Who Could Fly"
Release date: 1986
MPAA rating: PG
Overall rating: ****½
Aprox. run time: 108 min.
Director: Nick Castle
Writer: Nick Castle
Stars: Lucy Deakins, Jay Underwood

Original URL: http://www.geocities.com/reviewsbyjohn/Boy_Fly.htm
Added to blog site: 7/26/09

Mule scores field goal, film scores touchdown

"Gus"
Overall Rating: ****


I suppose I'm taking a big chance with my credibility by telling everyone on my list to go out and see, and perhaps even buy, a kids' movie, especially when said movie is a beloved piece of my childhood which I almost certainly can't deal with impartially. Nevertheless, almost two decades after I first saw "Gus," I still love it.

When Hank Cooper (Edward Asner), the financially strapped owner of the completely inept California Atoms football team, learns about Gus, a mule who can accurately kick soccer balls (and therefore, presumably, footballs) 100 yards, he sees a halftime show that might draw crowds. This also presents an oportunity for Andy Petrovic (Gary Grimes), Gus' young owner, who can't escape from the shadow of his illustrious brother, a Yugoslavian soccer hero. However, when Cooper makes a bet (his last resort to refinance the team) that he can turn the perennial losers into Super Bowl material, he uses a technicality in NFL rules to send the mule in to kick field goals.

The plot of "Gus" isn't just thin, it's emaciated. I sincerely doubt that the NFL's official rules would permit a mule to play as a kicker, for instance. That's really part of the point; the whole movie is silliness, so stretching things here isn't so bad. While wisecracks do abound, most of the comedy is slapstick. "Gus" has as many football bloopers in its first ten minutes as most expansion teams have in their premier season. As if the players weren't bad enough, the cheerleaders are clumsy making for even more pratfalls. The attempts to kidnap the mule or otherwise sabotage his efforts always produce hilarious results. The final mulenapping causes a chase through a supermarket that's easily one of the funniest scenes in any movie I've seen.

Most of the perfomances are decent. The real highlights are Tom Bosley and Tim Conway, who play the villains Spinner and Crankcase; they manage to avoid being too scary for kids, but still remain menacing. Asner is also pretty good as the wisecracking team owner. Another smaller part worthy of mention is Bob Crane as the overblown sportscaster Pepper. Whether the animal training counts as a performance or special effects, the mule does a wonderful job as well; kicking, fainting, running, and nodding on cue, "Gus" takes an animal peformance about as far as a film can without animation and/or voice overs.

"Gus" also remains in safe territory for children. There is no graphic violence, no real nudity (the locker room scene is filmed at chest level), and no strong language (I'm not sure there's even anything as strong as "damn"). Coming from Disney before Disney was controversial, it shouldn't be surprising that we have a movie that the "G" rating was meant for.

On the downside, however, some aspects of the film such as cinematography and sound are adequate, but not much more. Theme can also be included on this list; "Gus" is shallow. Psychologically, there's nothing deeper than sibbling rivaly and puppy love. If you're looking for lofty philosophical ideas, or even an accurate Super Bowl prediction, you'd be looking at the wrong movie. Still, finding the silver lining on this cloud, at least kids won't missanything.

"Gus" is good for an hour and a half worth of laughs. Children will almost certainly love "Gus" (even if they don't understand football--they'll know, for instance, that you're not supposed hand the ball off to the referees). I also suspect that even adults who didn't grow up with it will enjoy "Gus." I still have a soft spot for him.


Title: "Gus"
Release date: 1976

MPAA rating: G
Overall rating: ****

Aprox. run time: 96 min.
Director: Vincent McEveety
Writers: Arthur Alsberg, Don Nelson, Ted Key (story)
Stars: Edward Asner, Gary Grimes

Original URL: http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Mansion/7045/Gus.htm
Added to blog site: 8/3/09

Go "North by Northwest"

"North by Northwest"
Overall Rating: *****


Going north by northwest this time of year [the review was originally written in December] may make you shiver--and so will Hitchcock's film of the same name. "North by Northwest" achieves a perfect blend of comedy, romance, and suspense, and is easily among the greatest films ever made.

As "North by Northwest" opens, we get a look at the suave Roger Thornhill (Cary Grant). He's a stylish advertising executive. He goes to the theater with his mother. He lies to get cabs quickly. He also makes one tiny mistake--calling a waiter to his table while the waiter is paging Mr. Kaplan. When two spies see him interact with the waiter, they assume he is Kaplan--who they want to murder.

A huge part of why "North by Northwest" works is the casting and acting. Cary Grant is perfect for his role as the debonair Thornhill; I'd be hard pressed to name an actor--then or now--who could muster the grace under fire that the role requires. This is not to disparage the efforts of Eva Marie Saint, who elegantly plays the femme fatale who saves Thornhill from the police, or those of James Mason, who is deviously wonderful as Van Damm, the leader of an espionage ring. The many actors with smaller parts, such as Martin Landau as Mr. Leonard, and Jessie Royce Landis as Thornhill's mother, complete the picture and add dimension.

As wonderful as the actors are, the story is even better. There is a perfect irony: Thornhill--who is a compulsive liar (in advertising no less), is thrust into a situation where he tries to tell the truth, but not even his own mother believes him. As you would expect in a good suspense film, from start to finish, Thornhill is one step (if that much) ahead of both the spy ring and the police--who'd be quicker to arrest him for crimes he didn't commit than to help him. Throughout the film, you're wondering what's going to come next. One moment, he's being chased by police; the next, he's dining with a beautiful woman on America's most luxurious train. It would have been easy for the danger to become unbelievable--but just as that's about to happen, Thornhill blunders onto a way to get help from the authorities--though it could hardly be called a complete accident. Hitchcock has been called the "master of suspense;" he earns that title with "North by Northwest."

Even the greatest movies have a few flaws. "North by Northwest" is no exception, with such trivia as the child who covers his ears early, before the gun is shot. The flaws are few and far enough between that they don't hurt the film.

At the risk of being entirely too sensitive, "North by Northwest" has a surprising amount of innuendo and a fair amount of violence. None of the violence is terribly gory and the sexual content is limited to kissing, so I'd still say the film is safe for older children (and perhaps younger ones--though I'd have greater reservations as to whether they'd enjoy it); it is easily as safe as most PG films of today--but it isn't really meant as a family film.

I can't do justice to Alfred Hitchcock's masterpiece. In every way, "North by Northwest" goes in the right direction.

Title: "North by Northwest"
Release date: 1959
Not MPAA rated; Hays Code compliant
Overall rating: *****

Aprox. run time: 136 min.
Director: Alfred Hitchcock
Writer: Ernest Lehman
Stars: Cary Grant, Eva Marie Saint, James Mason


Original URL: http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Mansion/7045/N_by_NW.htm

Added to blog site: 8/3/09

Don't let this movie go

"The Prince of Egypt"
Overall Rating: ***½


"The Prince of Egypt" faces a serious problem; as one radio commentator put it, "Moses action figures will be a tough sell." To a certain extent, he was right. Most biblical epics are extremely serious; biblical miracles lend themselves to grand special effects and exciting cinema--but are, perhaps, too cerebral for children. "The Prince of Egypt," however, is an animated film. Though older kids will almost certainly enjoy it, I'm not sure it's fair to call it a children's movie.

On the whole, the story stays surprisingly true to the Bible; though from the promotions for the movie, you'd never know it. The really big difference, however, is central to the movie; "Exodus" says little about Moses' upbringing; only that he was rescued by Pharaoh's daughter (the movie implies that the character is his wife, but doesn't say explicitly). "The Prince of Egypt" goes further; in the movie, Pharaoh's son Rameses (sic) and Moses (voices of Ralph Fiennes and Val Kilmer respectively) are raised as brothers. Tensions arise when Moses learns the truth from his natural sister Miriam (Sandra Bullock). After Moses kills an overseer for brutally beating a Hebrew slave, he flees Egypt. Later, when God commands him to return to Egypt to free his people, he must confront his stepbrother, now on the throne.

"The Prince of Egypt" has some pretty spectacular animation. Egypt looks grandiose in this movie, and the biblical miracles portrayed in the second half of the movie are also spectacular. It's not all overwhelming. The hieroglyphic dream sequence is clever, and baby Moses is extremely cute. Further, the movie refrains from the vice of inappropriate singing animals and objects. In "Bambi," it may be appropriate; but previews of dancing gargoyles kept me away from the Disney's recent "The Hunchback of Notre Dame." In "The Prince of Egypt" a few camels slobber here and there, but, thankfully, they don't sing.

Not that the songs are bad. On the whole, they're just fine. The two highlights are the Egyptian clerics' number "Playing with the Big Boys" and Moses' natural mother's last lullaby. The voice performances of the various actors are also good. Ralph Fiennes and Val Kilmer are both very good in their roles; the all-star supporting cast (which includes Jeff Goldblum as Aaron, Patrick Stewart as the pharaoh Seti, Michelle Pfeiffer as Tzipporah, Danny Glover as Jethro, and Steve Martin and Martin Short as the clerics Hotep and Huy) makesthe show.

In terms of story, "The Prince of Egypt" is very well executed. There are some good light moments early on--Rameses' and Moses' jocular chariot race is very enjoyable. Even better, the emotional impact is quite strong when Moses must return to face Rameses and demand that his stepbrother free the Hebrews.

"The Prince of Egypt" does have a serious flaw. The film sends some mixed messages on responsibility; Moses takes the blame for damage caused during the chariot race, claiming that he goaded Rameses on--which is true--and subsequently, he admits that he was closing his eyes to the plight of the Hebrews, and takes responsibility for leading their Exodus. While he does make some good statements about responsibility, he also sets up Rameses to be blamed for a prank he plays (though Rameses joins in), and after that, flees when he kills the overseer. I should mention the situation with the overseer is further complicated by the facts that Rameses pardons him legally, that the episode is biblical (though somewhat reworked), and that what is portrayed may have been an accident, rather than murder. All told, however, the message on responsibility is a bit muddled.

Additionally, pharaoh's massacre and the plagues God brings on Egypt might be too intense for some children, especially younger ones. The deaths aren't portrayed in a gory manner, the impact is primarily emotional, and the biblical origin may be a mitigating factor. Still, it's clear that children die, and we do see a couple of dead bodies. I'd be concerned that some young children may find this extremely frightening--though I don't imagine older children would have any problems.

All said, "The Prince of Egypt" is a good show. Maybe I'm misreading its target audience, but it seems to have more for adults than children, but I think older children will get plenty out of it. In the end, "The Prince of Egypt" is not a plague, but rather a movie fit for a pharaoh.


Title: The Prince of Egypt
Release date: December 18, 1998
MPAA rating: PG
Overall rating: ***½
Aprox. run time: 99 min.
Directors: Brenda Chapman, Steve Hickner, Simon Wells
Stars: Val Kilmer, Ralph Fiennes

Original URL: http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Mansion/7045/Pr_Egypt.htm
Added to blog site: 8/4/09

May "Star Trek" live long and prosper

"Star Trek: Insurrection"
Overall Rating: ***½


In the early 1500s, Ponce de León searched Florida in vain for the fountain of youth, believing it existed because the natives grew to be around six feet tall and sometimes lived into their 70s. He didn't find it, but some 800 years later, in "Star Trek: Insurrection," the Federation and an alien race called the Son'a do--and are all too willing to forcibly transplant or kill the natives who are in the way.

When Data (Brent Spiner), an android, goes berserk during the course of an away mission to study the Ba'ku, Admiral Dougherty (Anthony Zerbe) calls Captain Picard (Patrick Stewart) to get technical information about him. Picard, however, doesn't want to see his friend Data destroyed, so he quickly abandons the boring diplomatic mission he's on, and flies off to round up Data personally. Over the course of investigating what happened, he learns that the Son'a seem to have more in common with the Romulans or the Borg than they do with the Federation, that the Ba'ku are a peaceful and advanced but technophobic and xenophobic race who chose their planet because the natural conditions give anyone living there immortality, and that the observation mission wasn't benign research.

"Star Trek: Insurrection" has more than its share of special effects. Phaser fights on the planet, a fight between two Son'a ships and the Enterprise in the middle of a nebula, and the invisible "duck blind" from where the Federation-Son'a "observation" mission takes place all make for impressive visual effects. It's a far cry from Kirk and Spock falling out of their chairs.

Yet, despite the strong special effects, the movie has more than just special effects. The latest "Star Trek" movie is far more humorous than other recent efforts. One of the jokes is in the preview--Data comments that the crew, except for him, may be more inclined to aggression because of the conditions on the planet; when one of the crew asks him what they should do, he replies in his android-style deadpan they should proceed. There are, however, jokes whose subjects range from age (Anij, Picard's Ba'ku love interest played by Donna Murphy, is more than 300 years old), to Riker's beard, to the Klingon version of acne. The movie also plays up the characters' romantic interests more than the other recent efforts, not only Picard and Anij, but also Riker and Troi. Additionally, the movie expands on Data's desire to become more human--when he interacts with a Ba'ku child and learns to have fun.

The biggest downside of the movie is the ending. I hate to give it away, but like many of the episodes of the TV shows--especially the recent ones--the ending is just too good to be true. This is especially disappointing since the recent "Star Trek" shows, have made the Federation less perfect: "Star Trek: Deep Space Nine," has revealed sentiments against genetically engineered people (including that show's Dr. Bashir), and Section 31--Starfleet's secret police--while "Star Trek: Voyager" featured an alliance with the new arch fiends, the Borg. The idea that the Federation would associate with the likes of the Son'a would make the 24th-century Federation less saccharine, but the film doesn't follow through.

Another flaw for some is that "Star Trek: Insurrection" is for trekkies/trekkers only. If you haven't watched the shows, particularly "Star Trek: The Next Generation," about all you'll get out of this movie is confused over how a Klingon got on the bridge (or even what a Klingon is); I'm sure the half dozen or so Klingon warriors in the theater lobby bewildered some clueless soul bound for "Psycho" or "Ringmaster." If you've been keeping up on the "Star Trek" franchise, however, you'll enjoy "Star Trek: Insurrection" much more than "Star Trek: Generations" or "Star Trek: First Contact," and it's definitely worth a look.


Title: "Star Trek: Insurrection"
Release date: December 11, 1998

MPAA rating: PG
Overall rating: ***½

Aprox. run time: 100 min.
Director: Jonathan Frakes
Writers: Rick Berman (Story), Michael Piller
Stars: Patrick Stewart, Jonathan Frakes (as Cmdr. Riker), Brent Spiner, Donna Murphy

Original URL: http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Mansion/7045/STrek9.htm

Added to blog site: 8/5/09 (Spoiler alert added and minor editing)

One they couldn't quite pull off without a Hitch.

"Psycho" (1998 Gus Van Sant version.)
Overall Rating: **


Right now, if Gus Van Sant and company had decided to remake "Rear Window" or "North by Northwest," you'd probably be reading a fairly good review. Unfortunately, Van Sant remade "Psycho," which is one of my least favorite Hitchcock films. Like some of the characters, the new film doesn't quite make it.

When Marion Crane (Anne Heche) is asked by her boss to deposit $400,000 in the bank, she sees the chance to embezzle a fortune. On her second night on the run, she encounters bad weather, and must stop at the out of the way Bates Motel. When she gets a chance to talk to Norman Bates (Vince Vaughn), the motel proprietor, on the subject of personal "traps," her conscience finally catches up with her. Norman, however, has his own personal trap.

If the story sounds familiar, that's because the script is almost exactly the same as the one used for the Hitchcock version. A reference to a Walkman has been added, all references to money have adjustments for inflation, and a line that was supposedly taken out of the original for being too lurid (a reference to bed being a "better playground" than Las Vegas) has been restored. Something must have been removed, because the new version is about five minutes shorter than the old. Beyond that, there just isn't that much difference--and that's the big problem.

The original "Psycho" had plenty of elements that didn't add up. For instance, Sam (Marion's lover, played by Viggo Mortensen) doesn't know about the worst crime in the history of his home town, and he can fly around the country freely, even though he has little money; it didn't work then and doesn't now. The new version only adds more problems. In this day and age, Marion would probably get far more than $400,000 if she sued Lowery for sexual harassment because of how Cassidy treated her, and she buys a car with cash--even though modern laws to impede drug dealers make large cash transactions difficult and thousand-dollar bills are uncommon. What worked in 1960 often just doesn't work in 1998.

The use of the original script also shoots any suspense in the foot--at least, it does for those who have seen the original. All the way through, I kept thinking "this is like the Hitchcock version." It's hard for anything to sneak up on you when you already know the next line. This is especially a problem for many of the actors. Watching Vince Vaughn, William H. Macy (who plays Arbogast), and James LeGros (who plays the car dealer), for instance, I was thinking "he isn't quite as good as so-and-so." They weren't really bad, just not as good. On the other hand, Viggo Mortensen was terrible--his bad southern accent is not only totally out of place in California, but it makes half his lines incomprehensible.

The new "Psycho" isn't a total loss. It has a few nice touches not in the original: sounds from the next room in the opening scene make an amusing counterpoint to Sam and Marion's discussion of marriage, a much clearer view of Sam's letter in the hardware store adds emotional impact, and what replaces Hitchcock's cameo (which includes a man I take to be Gus Van Sant) works very well. Anne Heche is brilliant--I'd say even better than Janet Leigh--as Marion; she is very convincingly nervous and wages an effective battle with her conscience. Julianne Moore, who plays Marion's sister Lila, is also very good; she is more active in her role than Vera Miles was, and it works very well.

Nor is Gus Van Sant an incompetent director. I knew that from the fact that I thoroughly enjoyed "Good Will Hunting," his film last year about a prodigal prodigy. As a whole, beyond the script and Mortensen's acting, there isn't too much wrong with the new "Psycho." A few extraneous sound effects (many times, when characters' lines are merely in their heads, there is an echo effect) and camera shots (weird shots interspersed with every murder) are distracting, but not too badly so--and I'm not really sure Van Sant is to blame for these anyway.

In all honesty, I expected to really hate "Psycho." I only mildly disliked it, which probably indicates a decent job on the part of the filmmakers. The new "Psycho," however, isn't nearly as good as the old--and that's its main weakness. In the end, as Norman never quite escapes the shadow of his mother, the new "Psycho"--from the identical opening credits to the dedication at the close of the final credits--never quite escapes the shadow if its superior earlier version.

Click here for a review of original, "Psycho," directed by Alfred Hitchcock.


Title: "Psycho"
Release date: December 5, 1998

MPAA rating: R
Overall rating: **

Aprox. run time: 104 min.
Director: Gus Van Sant
Writers: Joseph Stephano, Robert Bloch (novel)
Stars: Vince Vaughn, Anne Heche, Viggo Mortensen, Julianne Moore

Original URL: http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Mansion/7045/Psycho98.htm

Added to blog site: 8/4/09

Not crazy about "Psycho"

"Psycho" (1960 Alfred Hitchcock version.)
Overall Rating: ***


Many critics are wildly enthusiastic about Hitchcock; usually, I'm one of them. I wouldn't hesitate to give "North by Northwest" five stars overall, and four to four-and-a-half stars for many of his other films. But while quite a few people say "Psycho" is his best picture, I am not one of them.

"Psycho" opens with Marion Crane (Janet Leigh) having a Friday afternoon rendezvous with her lover, Sam Loomis (John Gavin). There, they rehash things they've been over before--he is deep in debt, and they can't get married until he's on his feet financially; he can't even stay around because he must return to Fairvale, and she has to go back to work. Resigned to waiting, she returns to the real-estate office just in time for a client to flash $40,000 in her face, claim that he doesn't carry more than he can afford to lose, and talk about money buying-off unhappiness. As if that weren't enough temptation, her boss asks her to put the money in the safe deposit box--her last task before the weekend. The temptation gets to be just too much.

Leaving Phoenix with her stolen fortune, she decides to head to Fairvale. The first night, she pulls over to the side of the road, and sleeps in her car. When a highway patrolman (Mort Mills) stops to see if she's all right, she becomes nervous, and he becomes suspicious. The next night, in the rain, she feels she can't go on--but not wanting to attract another patrolman, she stops at the out of the way Bates Motel. There, she meets an extremely meek Norman Bates (Anthony Perkins), with whom she dines. But, she wants to get to bed, because she has decided to return to Phoenix and return the money. When she fails to return home, someone is bound to come looking for a missing woman with $40,000.

This movie is, in many respects, two movies. In the first half, we focus on Marion's battle with her conscience, and her inept but effective attempts to avoid the law. The rest of the movie is about the attempts locate her--which very quickly home in on the Bates Motel. This split presents one of two major problems with the film's story; either half the film is only an introduction for the main story, or half the film is resolution. The movie also depends too much on the psychiatrist in the final scenes; we don't see the case solved, we hear a lecture on it.

There are also just too many loose ends in this film. Since Sam seems to have lived in Fairvale for a while (he knows the sheriff and owns a store which seems to be inherited from his father), why doesn't Sam know the Bates Motel is the sight of the worst crime in town history? Also, while incompetent police seem to be a trademark of Hitchcock, here he just goes too far: the highway patrolman knows Marion is nervous, and watches her trade in her car in a hurry--but he doesn't follow her despite her strange actions. For that matter, how can Sam--who is apparently a deeply indebted hardware store owner--afford to fly to Phoenix, and why does he fly back to Fairvale just before the weekend, when he could see his girlfriend. Even if the trip were business, why is he in such a hurry to return home? (The possibility that he doesn't care isn't an explanation--if it were, why would he see her at all?)

Yet, with all the problems with the script, Hitchcock manages to build suspense. There's still a part of you that thinks (and perhaps, even hopes in a sneaky way) that Marion will get away--even though nearly everyone in a contemporary audience has seen--for a dozen times--what happens to her. After that, you spend the whole rest of the movie wondering if her loved ones find out what happened. They're close, but they don't have the solution. There is plenty that doesn't add up until the end of the film--so even having seen what happens, the audience doesn't know what happened.

The whole feel of the movie is supported by the use of light and shadow. There are little touches, like one scene where Sam and Lila (Marion's sister--played by Vera Miles) are looking for evidence and they're in the dark--figuratively and literally. When she's driving away from Phoenix, frequently, if the car isn't completely dark, shadows are cast across her face. In the shower scene, we see the victim in the light, and her killer is in shadows. Though the use of light and shadow is generally good, and the filmmakers avoid having any important action in light that would make it hard to see, too often there are shadows across even good characters' faces, so one wonders how much is simply an attempt to create a dark film (not that there isn't reason to make the film dark, considering that it's about various crimes).

The performances are also excellent. Anthony Perkins is wonderfully convincing as the ill-at-ease Norman--and the final scene, even though he doesn't speak a word in it, makes his a master performance. Janet Leigh is also marvelous in her role, waging a convincing battle of money versus fear and conscience. John Anderson, Mort Mills, and Pat Hitchcock add dimension to their smaller parts, too.

The shower scene in "Psycho" is possibly the best-handled murder in any movie. Considering just how many crime-dramas, war films, and bloodbath horror films have been made, there is a great deal of competition. Sharp music, frequent cuts to different shots (there are about 90 in the sequence, according to the Internet Movie Database), and the use of light, shadow, and silhouette combine to make it shocking even when you know what's going to happen. It makes a horrid crime horrifying--there is nothing that glamorizes murder here, nor is there excessive gore. The scene is so shocking that it alone is probably what caused the film to be rated R (this is the only "Hays Code" film I can think of that isn't rated G--though, as I understand it, the shower scene would have been a Hays Code violation). I'd say it's worth it to see the film just to see that scene in context. However, as well done as it may be, the one scene can't carry the whole movie.

The story I've heard about "Psycho" (and I wish I could remember who I heard this from) is that Alfred Hitchcock chose the novel because he wanted to see if he could make a good movie from a bad book. Many other critics say yes. Personally, I'd say so; though with Hitchcock, I expect great--not simply good.

Click here for a review of Gus Van Sant's remake of "Psycho."


Title: "Psycho"
Release date: 1960
MPAA rating: R (though arguably Hays Code compliant)
Overall rating: ***
Aprox. run time: 109 min.
Director: Alfred Hitchcock
Writers: Joseph Stephano, Robert Bloch (novel)
Stars: Anthony Perkins, Janet Leigh, John Gavin, Vera Miles

Original URL: http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Mansion/7045/Psycho60.htm
Added to blog site: 8/4/09