KEA Productions: DVD Movie Reviews

from the archives ofNuReel.com, The Berkeley Daily Planet, and Alameda Sun- written byKamala Appel
ratings: Plus(highest)-Neutral (okay)-Negatives (pass & omitted from archive)
P: Pearl Harbor,Pinero, Planet of the Apes, Pollock, Princess Monoke

PEARL HARBOR (PLUS/NEUTRAL)


Producer Jerry Bruckheimer and director Michael Bay team up with writerRandall Wallace to pay tribute to the people who endured the attack onPearl Harbor. Bruckheimer and Bay are best known for their summeraction collaborations like "Bad Boys", "Armageddon", and "The Rock".Unlike their usual testosteroney action adventures, "Pearl Harbor"focuses on the human component. Bruckheimer elaborates:

"This film is a departure for us," he explains. "Although it's a storyof friendshipand romance, overall it is a serious piece about the heartof the men and women, military and civilian, who lived through thisperiod. Pearl Harbor galvanized the American people. We were notprepared for war. Boys became men overnight and nothing would ever bethe same again. The Japanese as well were fighting for the survival oftheir homeland, " Bruckheimer further clarifies. "You cannot forgetthere was an overall oil embargo against Japan and they felt they hadto do something drastic. As is the case with many military expeditions,the Japanese soldiers did not know where they were headed until theirmission was well underway. Taking all this into consideration, wewanted to create an entertaining movie, but moreover we wanted tocapture the essence of that time in hopes of honoring those bravepeople." (Touchstone Press Notes 2001)

Bruckheimer and Bay brought in writer Randall Wallace ("Braveheart" and"The Man with the Iron Mask") to assist them in their efforts to payhomage to those who were at Pearl Harbor during the Japanese attack.Together, along with a long list of other talent people, they do anexcellent job of transporting the audience back to 1940s isolationistAmerica, setting the scene for how the eventsof December 7, 1941 robbedthe American people of their innocence.

Unfortunately, in their efforts to bring the people back to life formodern audiences, the filmmakers resorted to creating a ridiculous lovestory that was overly predictable, distracting, and downright annoying.Although I commend the filmmakers for trying something new bydeveloping a number of female characters, I think the female lead, KateBeckinsale, was miscast. A woman who had endured as much as she had, insuch a short period of time would have a been a lot tougher than thisdainty little lady. Beckinsale did an excellent job of dropping herEnglish accent, but that is not enough to pass herself off as a 1940sAmerican nurse. Furthermore, the modern-day anorexic look was not asprevalent in the pre-Twiggy days. Ironically, I found the brotherlylove between the two lead males (played by Ben Affleck and JoshHarnett) more interesting (and for those film theorists, no I am notalluding to homoeroticism in any way). The chemistry between theon-screen friends is more believable and captivating than that withtheir leading lady. Affleck demonstrates his acting ability to thefullest in this film; Harnett presents himself as a rising star withmany leading man roles in his future. In the end, I believe that thestory could have explored the joys and pains of love in general,without resorting to a love story with much too much drama and too muchscreen time.

So Bruckheimer and Bay may not be making another love story in the nearfuture. Let's think back to why these two make the big bucks, oh yeah-ALL STAR ACTION! Fortunately for the filmmakers, the battle scene inPearl Harbor during the Japanese air strike makes the movie worth theprice of admission. I have seen a few documentaries and other filmsabout Pearl Harbor and none of them have made me feel the impactfirst-hand like this film does. "Pearl Harbor" captures the mayhem andutter terror on a visceral level. My hat goes off to the Visual Effectscreators (Eric Brevig, Ned Gorman, Janet Lewin, Ed Hirsh, and Ben Snowsome of their credits include "Total Recall", "Hook", "Indian in theCupboard"; "Star Wars", "Ghost"; "101 Dalmatians", "Men in Black";"Mission Impossible", "Raiders of the Lost Ark", and "Star Trek" ), thedaring stunt people (coordinated by Kenny Bates ""In the Line of Fire","Die Hard", "Hook", "The Mask", "Bad Boys" and "Armageddon"),Production Designer (Nigel Phelps "The Bone Collector", "AlienResurrection", and "Judge Dredd"), Aerial Unit Director (David B.Nowell "The Perfect Storm", "The Rock", "Armageddon", "Air Force One","Turbulence", "Enemy of the State", and "Jurassic Park 1 & 2),and the Director of Photography (John Schwartzman "Ed TV","Armageddon", "The Rock", "Conspiracy Theory", and "Benny &Joon") for re-creating the horror with such realism that the audiencefeels the panic. Brevig describes:

"The use of miniatures or large set pieces was minimized because thescope of what we had to create was so huge," he further explains. "Wecouldn't have built enough things to film. We would make acomputer-generated model of a boat or plane and then duplicate it. Inthe case of planes, hundreds of times, in the case of the ships, adozen or so, so that we could fill the entire harbor. We also filledthe battleships with synthetic sailors, each of whom is a computergenerated character in a different costume doing some preciselychoreographed bit of activity."

Bay adds "Pearl Harbor" contains an immense amount of real visuals thatwere done in camera, but it also has about 190 digital effects shots.My concept was to make the digital shots huge and do less of them. Ifeel you need to have a lot of real footage shot through the camera,mixed in with a few digital effects to make it more visceral, make itmore realistic." (Touchstone Press Notes)

The only criticism I would have in terms of effects would be with thesound effects, and it is rare for me to say this, but turn up the bass!Normally, THX has too much bass for me and makes me feel like a cagedanimal freaking out before an earthquake; however, I think the lowerrange sounds would have increased the impact by making the theatershake as much as a ship hit with a bomb would (or what is reasonable toexpect without injury).

Many historians debate about why the US stayed out of the war for aslong as it did. Books like THE SHIP OF FOOLS allude to FDR'santi-semitism. The filmmakers do skirt the issue of how much FDR(played by Jon Voight, who gives a convincing performance) really knewby being extremely vague, probably to avoid controversy. However, thisfilm is far from being controversy-free. The last comment I want tomake is in response to the criticism that the film portrays theJapanese negatively and incites racism. I do not think so. Unlike manyother films about war or terrorism, "Pearl Harbor" takes the time todevelop some of the key Japanese characters, thus accounting for thedecisions the the Japanese government made and the ambivalence theirmilitary leaders felt. To be honest, I think it would be difficult tocapture the sentiments at the time without portraying the Japanese asthe enemy, and depicting the cultural differences.

Despite some weaknesses in the storyline, I think "Pearl Harbor" standsup to the test as an action film that captures a historical psychology,even if there a fewhistorical inaccuracies. (Cuba Gooding Jr. plays theone real-life character). "Pearl Harbor" is a must-see on the bigscreen since the full impact will not be felt on a television. Thisfilm opens wide Memorial Day weekend and promises to take the first boxoffice spot; my prediction, it will make $100 million in less than aweek.

PINERO (PLUS)

Leon Ichaso directs Benjamin Bratt, Rita Moreno, Talisa Soto, GiancarloEsposito, and Mandy Patinkin in this experimental biopic aboutpoet-playwright-actor Miguel Pinero. Although Pinero had made someappearances in well-known television series and films like MIAMI VICE,KOJAK, BARETTA, FORT APACHE: THE BRONX; he is probably best known forhis Broadway hit play, "Short Eyes". Pinero was a Puerto Ricanimmigrant who came to the New York's lower east side as a teenager withhis mother and siblings in the sixties. He spent much of his life inand out of trouble with the law, and the remainder writing about hisexperiences as a Nuyorican, a New York Puerto Rican. He dedicatedhimself to writing about what he knew best, and tried to encourageother Puerto Ricans and ex-cons to do the same. Unfortunately, drugsand criminal acts fueled his creative energies, while destroying hisbody and relationships.

Unlike his time on television's LAW & ORDER, Bratt is well castin this film and finally has the opportunity to demonstrate his actingability in a role that he is well suited to play. Bratt's performancecaptures the highs and lows of the artist's life: from convict, to Obiewinner, to street junkie, and back in and out of a self-destructivecycle. The Ichaso's decision to present the Pinero's life in afragmented, non-linear fashion works to capture the disjointed memoriesthat one would have after years of drug abuse. The non HollywoodClassical Cinema style also supports the storyline that revolves aroundan experimental poet.

In addition to the innovative presentation of story, the film hosts apowerful soundtrack that promises to make Puerto Ricans and non PuertoRicans want to buy the CD. If you like Latino music, you will dance inyour seat while watching PINERO. I think it would also benefit thelicensing efforts, if the studio had a release with the poetry readingsas it plays in the film.

If you are looking for a film with authentic latino flavor, then Pinerois for you. Let's face it, there are not a lot of films about LatinoAmericans, so if you seek a little diversity in the theater, thensupport this film. If however, you do not enjoy films that have a loosenarrative and a non traditional presentation of story, then you may notappreciate what the film has to offer. This film would be equallyenjoyable on video, and will probably have an interesting DVD. PINEROopens in a platform release starting January 25, 2002.

PLANET OF THE APES (NEUTRAL)

PLANET OF THE APES marks yet another attempt by Hollywood big wigs tocreate a summer blockbuster, and another attempt to recreate the magicof a former hit. Unfortunately, the filmmakers do not succeed at eitherattempt. This is not to say that PLANET OF THE APES (2001) is not a funfilm to watch, but it lacks the magic to make it a memorable hit or afuture classic.

A-list director Tim Burton directs an A-list cast in PLANET OF THEAPES. The cast of characters includes Mark Wahlberg as Leo Davidson, agutsy, self-centered, marooned military man; Tim Roth as a scorned,vindictive, megalomaniac, General Thade; Helena Bonham Carter as Ari, acompassionate human rights activist; Michael Clarke Duncan as Attar, anambivalent ex-military soldier, unsure of whom to trust: his owninstincts or the gut feeling of Ari; Kris Kristofferson as Karubi, oneof the rebelling humans and father of one of Wahlberg's on-screenadmirers; and a brief appearance by Charlton Heston as a gun-hating ape(Wow! there's irony for you...). The story takes off when Wahlbergtravels through time and crash lands on a planet ruled by "civilized"apes, but fueled by the slave labor of demoralized humans. The "rulethe planet" tag line alludes to the fight for control of thedecision-making position versus the role of pet and servant. As onewould expect, Wahlberg spends most of his time trying to figure out howto get back to his original time and planet, so he can be part of theruling class. Despite the strong performances and Burton's trademarkvisual creativity, PLANET OF THE APES fell short of meeting thisaudience member's expectations.

I cannot help but explore what made the first film a big enough hit forthe studio to make five sequels and a modern-day remake. In my opinion,what made the first film so successful was its narrative depth. Thefirst film had a lot going for it in terms of action (low budgetthough, so it will look pretty primitive to modern audiences), acting(including Charlton Heston), and make up (in fact the first one of theseries had more sophisticated make up than its successors whichfeatured masks). It is worth noting that the original PLANET OF THEAPES won a special Oscar for achievement in the area of make up beforemake up had its own category. However, I think what appealed toaudiences more than the surface entertainment value was the underlyingmessage that explored freedom and discrimination, a theme heavilyexplored by Americans in their real lives since the original films hittheaters during the Civil Rights and Women's Movement in the late 1960sand early 1970s.

In common with the first, this summer's version ends with the leadcharacter in awe of a famous American icon. By contrast, the 2001remake does not benefit from a largely politically-oriented audience,instead this PLANET OF THE APES releases into an atmosphere of apathy.In my opinion, Americans are not as politically oriented as they werethirty years ago. America does not have a prevalent issue that unitesand divides the population to the degree that the Civil Rights Movementdid. As a result the message in PLANET OF THE APES (2001) comes acrossas somewhat corny and its presentation as too blatant and insincere,and less persuasive as a result. The film attempts to look at whatdefines humane behavior by reversing the roles of primates and people.I think the filmmakers may have been better off going totallyover-board and creating a campy remake like THE BRADY BUNCH, at leastthen the humor would have been intentional.

As most pre-days-of-video films, the 1972 version makes tremendous useof the entire cinematic space, giving audiences a lot to look at andenjoy. Personally, I enjoy secondary action and think that a goodfilmmaker takes advantage of the full cinematic space. Yet, since theon-set of video, many directors have filmed their movies with therestrictive space of television in mind, and as a result they decide tocenter all the action. The excessive use of close ups and completelycentered primary action disappointed me. One of the aspects I enjoymost about Tim Burton's films is how imaginative and creative his filmslook. (He is arguably one of the most visually innovative directorsever). Unfortunately, the shortage of wide shots robs the audience ofthe opportunity to enjoy the full lookand feel of the larger set. Theclose ups also reduced the impressive nature of the crouching tiger,flying ape action sequences. I think the decision to use close ups mayhave been made to capture the characters' expressions and highlight theextraordinary make up by a long list of make up artists including Oscarwinner, Rick Baker (THE GRINCH WHO STOLE CHRISTMAS, MEN IN BLACK, NUTTYPROFESSOR II: THE KLUMPS, FRIGHTENERS, and WOLF). I can almostunderstand the temptation since the make up was stellar (and the Oscargoes to...)

I do think that PLANET OF THE APES (2001) did a better job in terms ofcapturing the physical aspect of ape behavior, to the degree that youcannot recognize any of the stars. Although the cast does an impressivejob of imitating primate movements (except for Bonham Carter whoswitches back and forth from walking like an ape and a debutantehuman), I wish the filmmakers would have tried harder to capture thepsychological behavior of an ape. I do not think that a living beinghas to wear clothes, live in a constructed house, and eat at a table tobe "civilized". In one scene a young ape expresses his distaste bybeating on his chest and sticking out his tongue in a defiant manner(but different than a human would). This sequence struck me because theemotion was clear (rebellion and disagreement), even though the mode ofcommunication was not human. I found this scene more moving than sceneswith humans in cages or serving food because this scene captured theemotion behind the actions that have nothing to do with a humandefinition of civilization or civilized behavior. I think the writer(William Broyles: ENTRAPMENT, CAST AWAY, APOLLO 13, and CHINA BEACH)made a mistake when he decided to personify every aspect of the ape'sbehavior. Instead, I wish the filmmakers had explored the essence ofhumane behavior instead of merely swapping roles by putting humans incages and apes in the government (which given our current politicalleadership, might not be such a bad idea).

If you do decide to see PLANET OF THE APES, I would recommend seeing iton the big screen with good sound to enjoy the full effect. The film isfun to watch for its unintentional campy elements, but it is far fromclassical. PLANET OF THE APES opens wide on July 27th.

Pollock (neutral/plus)


"Pollock" provides a close psychological study of one ofAmerica's most original and renown painters, Jackson Pollock. EdHarris, better known as an actor (including his performance in "TheTruman Show" for which he won a Golden Globe and received an Oscarnomination, and "Apollo 13" for which he won a SAG award and wasnominated for both the Golden Globe and the Oscar), stars and directsthis film. Harris does an excellent job of playing Pollock andconveying Pollock's internal struggles that stemmed from his externalchallenges. Opposite Harris, Marcia Gay Harden ("Space Cowboys", "MeetJoe Black", "Flubber", and "Miller's Crossing") plays Pollock's biggestsupporter, his wife and fellow painter, Lee Krasner. Harden also givesa stirring performance. She and Harris have both received recognitionfor their performances by the Academy with two Oscar nominations. Thecast also includes: Amy Madigan, Harris' real-life wife (the two havealso collaborated on TNT's RIDERS OF THE PURPLE SAGE, "Places in theHeart", and "Alamo Bay"), as Peggy Guggenheim; Jennifer Connelly ("OnceUpon a Time in America", "Requiem for a Dream", "Waking the Dead", and"The Rocketeer") as Pollock's young mistress, Ruth Kligman; JeffreyTambor ("How the Grinch Stole Christmas", "Girl Interrupted", "Meet JoeBlack" "Mr. Mom" and numerous television series) as art critic ClementGreenberg; Bud Cort ("Harold and Maude" and "M*A*S*H") as HowardPutzel, the scout for Guggenheim; and Val Kilmer has a small part asWillem DeKooning a contemporary artist and quasi rival of Pollock.

Despite the fine acting and the high level of emotion they communicate,the film drags. This may sound strange, but on some level Harris'immersion into the character may have clouded his objectivity thatwould have reminded him how important a storyline beyond a merecharacter study is. Personally, I would have liked it if the film hadprovided more historical information. Helen Harrison, the Director ofthe Pollock-Krasner House and Study Center, explains:

Pollock was the first American abstract painter to be taken seriouslyin Europe, where Guggenheim exhibited his work from her collection..Even in the early 1940s, synthesizing influences from such diversesources as Mexican murals, Native American pictographs and universalarchetypes identified by psychologist Carl Gustav Jung, combined withmodernism's rejection of literal representation, Pollock was alreadyexploring new territory.. Greenberg's (art critic) forceful opinionsinspired Life magazine's 1949 feature article- its first on an abstractartist- which made Pollock the most celebrated painter of hisgeneration... Not until Andy Warhol in the 1960s would another Americanartist receive so much attention in the popular press. (press notesSony Picture Classics 2001)

Unfortunately, the film lacks historical background beyond Pollock'sindividual history which to some degree takes his struggle out ofcontext and reduced the impact for me. I also think the film would havealso benefited from some character development with scenes withoutPollock; just because the film is about him does not mean that everyscene has to revolve around him.

"Pollock" presents some examples of fine acting, but alsoself-indulgent and self-conscious directing. If you are a Pollockzealot you will probably find the film quite interesting. If however,you are interested in Pollock's place in American history or as anartist of the 1950s, then you may be disappointed. "Pollock" hasalready opened in a few cities for Oscar consideration and willcontinue to platform starting February 23rd.

*Marcia Gay Harden won an Oscar for Best Supporting Actress for this film.

PRINCESS MONOKE (Plus)

The artwork in this animated feature demonstrates why Japaneseanimation is the craze. So, needless to say the film is estheticallypleasing from a visual perspective. The plot is quite intricate, butthe dialogue helps explain the storyline so that it is not tooconfusing (yet, you really do have to pay attention). The story is veryallegorical, so you will definitely have to suspend belief for theduration of the film, which is actually quite easy to do, due to thefact that the dialogue is believable (in other words, when an animalspeaks, its words seem to be what a wolf would say, that is if you arean animal lover). A lot of celebrities do the voice overs, so if youare a star gazer, you might have fun trying to match the voices to thefaces (hint: some of the voices include Claire Danes, Billy BobThorton, and Minnie Driver). The film is long though, so plan onsetting aside about 2 1/2 hours to watch it. I would recommend seekingit out in theaters and pick one with a good sound system because thesound track (music and effects) really adds to the drama. Despite itslength, the film does move well and you will be sutured into thenarrative, so you probably won't mind. The best part of this film isthe use of strong female leads without it seeming like PC lip service.I would recommend this film on the big screen or at least on DVD, sinceI don't think VHS will do the art or sound track decency. It is out intheaters now.

back to Reviews Directory

back to home