RISE OF THE PLANET OF THE APES

(August 2011, U.S.)

Although they each contain a worthy moment or two, I have no great affection for the four PLANET OF THE APES sequels of the 1970s that followed the classic 1968 original with Charlton Heston. And Tim Burton's 2001 remake...well, let's not even talk about that worthless dud! That in mind, I was none too enthusiastic about another attempt at a reboot of this legendary film franchise. But because I try to be fair whenever possible, I gave RISE OF THE PLANET OF THE APES a look when it became available on DVD. The result? Well, here I am!

Despite my traditional prejudices against Hollywood remakes and reboots, I give this film credit for genuinely going back to the beginning to create an origin for a new story built on the foundation of a former tale. The story of how humankind came to be dominated by apes begins right here in the present day with the development of a new drug called ALZ-112 that could very well be the cure for Alzheimer's disease. The drug's creator Will Rodman (played by James Franco) believes in the drug's ability to not only cure the dreaded disease, but also in its ability to increase greater intelligence in the subject. The subject, an ape (of course) named Caesar, starts out as a household pet of Will's when he brings him home as a baby to save him from certain death by the California biotech company he works for. As the years progress, so does the relationship between man and ape, and with it, evidence of severe aggression by Caesar when he nearly kills an irate neighbor who threatens Will's gentle father (who appears to have been temporarily cured of his own Alzheimer's disease with the miracle drug, by the way). The terrible side effect of the drug, by the way, is that while it benefits the ape, it appears to kill humans when they're exposed to it and anyone else who has come into contact with the contagion. After the attack on the neighbor, Caesar is consequently locked away in a primate shelter where he is treated cruelly by the other chimps and the chief guard. As a result of his heightened intelligence, however, Caesar learns how to unlock his cage, gaining free access to the common area. With the assistance of a large gorilla, he not only confronts the other apes giving him trouble, but also claims position as leader of the entire bunch. Intelligence leads to anger, which leads to aggression, which leads to revenge and this is the moment where not just Caesar, but all the apes in all of San Francisco rise up against mankind. And very much like the original premise in CONQUEST OF THE PLANET OF THE APES (1972), it all begins with one ape (Caesar) declaring a single word against his enemy..."NO!" (this after being called a damn-dirty ape and told to take his stinking paws off the abusive guard - sound familiar?) The rising is followed by an awesome battle as the newly-freed ape army fights their way through the city of San Francisco and takes over the Golden Gate Bridge to make their way into the nearby redwood forest that they will inevitably call home. When the apes have finally arrived in the forest, there is an effectively-dramatic moment when Will arrives and begs Caesar to return home. In response, the ape hugs his former master and speaks to him for the first time, declaring, "Caesar is home." The look on Will's face when he comes to realize the total potential and consequences of his experiment-gone-wrong is astounding. The apes are free, but this is only the beginning. For it takes just one contaminated human being flying to another country to ultimately spread a deadly disease throughout the world via international flying routes that will one day bring the end of the human race, which is what we as the viewer are informed of as the end credits roll, setting up the premise for what will be the next film in the series. And so, unlike the climax of 1968 original, we do not "blow it up" in this film. Our final demise begins with the simple act of a human sneeze.

But wait, on the other hand...pay close attention to the film and you'll find two very quick moments suggesting that somewhere out in space, events are taking place that will eventually play out as part of the grand destiny of things to come. A quick flash of a television news broadcast shows us a glimpse of the Icarus space flight taking off and also of its crew inside the ship. Later, a headline in the San Francisco Chronicle adds that the ship has been "Lost In Space". There's no doubt that this is clearly a reference to the space flight that the original 1968 film began with, commanded by Colonel George Taylor. So what does this mean? Is one of the inevitable PLANET OF THE APES chapters of this modern reboot going to bring us right back to where we all started nearly fifty years ago? We can only hope that this newest franchise will not be so brazen as to try and copy (or re-copy) the original classic; that's pointless! There is no reference to the Icarus flight that I can recall in the film that followed, DAWN OF THE PLANET OF THE APES (great film, too!). We can only wait to see if things change in the next film due in July 2017, WAR OF THE PLANET OF THE APES.

Besides solid performances by all those involved, the special effects and the extraordinary contributions by actor Andy Serkis as Caesar truly make the film special. Caesar's prison conversion from passive house pet to violent revolutionist is an interesting exercise in filmmaking that is damn near silent, with simple and precise images depicting Caesar's commander-like personality and his organizational skills of a repressed group of primates from chaos to absolute order. As human's, we can't help but consider our tragic doom due to our ignorance of science and our stupidity in the mistreatment of animals. Did we deserve what we got in the end? Maybe. Either way, we've seen the apes rise and take over this planet before and now it's happening all over again.

Favorite line or dialogue:

Will Rodman: "Caesar, I'm sorry. This my fault. This has to stop. This isn't the way. You know what they're capable of. Please come home. If you come home, I'll protect you."
Caesar: "Caesar is home."

RING, THE

(October 2002, U.S.)

For nearly twenty years, somewhere between POLTERGEIST (1982) and THE SIXTH SENSE (1999), the horror film or any sort of scary movie, practically didn't exist for me. In fact, the only film during that period of time that really haunted or scared me in any way was Adrian Lynne's 1990 film JACOB'S LADDER, with it's frightening and creepy images of life, death and the possibility of alternate realities between them. Most of the 1980s and 1990s seemed to be dominated by a continuation of slasher films that went far over the top of what had originally started out as viable scary films, such as HALLOWEEN (1978), THE AMITYVILLE HORROR (1979) and FRIDAY THE 13TH (1980). I found it impossible to feel any sort of fear while watching Jason Voorhees or Freddy Kruger do their thing while they were accompanied by excessive (and unfunny) humor and even rock music. How is any of that scary?

Then, almost as soon as the new century began, somebody got the idea of getting back to the basics of scary movies which does not necessarily have to involve excessive blood, violence or profanity. What truly scares us? I believe it's the things we see that we don't understand and the impressions they leave on our minds and memories. Think of THE EXORCIST (1973) and the momentary images we see of the demon in white makeup during Father Damien Karras' nightmare. Despite everything we experience with Linda Blair and her little experience with the Devil, this is the image most fans of the film remember first. So with the new century came a new series of psychological and visual horror trips that included this film, THE GRUDGE, PULSE, DARK WATER and a bunch of PARANORMAL ACTIVITY movies (I only saw the first one and it was creepy!). When THE RING (based on the Japanese horror film RINGU - I haven't seen it yet. I promise, I will!) first begins, I must confess, I find the entire sequence of the two teenage girls and their discussion of the urban legend of the videotape that kills you seven days after you watch it not only a throwback to cheaper horror material that was provided by men like Wes Craven, but even juvenile. I suppose the film really begins when we only get a brief glimpse of the horror of the death of one of those girls, killed by the effects of the cursed tape, and the investigation of what really happened to her is conducted by her aunt Rachel Keller (played by Naomi Watts), a Seattle journalist who is seemingly perfect for a task that required a lot of questions. Like POLTERGEIST, the TV is our dreaded enemy, and as Rachel watches the videotape, we watch it, too, and taking in its disturbing images and its haunting sense of atmosphere is what's meant to get under our skin throughout the story, without relying on gore (no pun intended to director Gore Verbinski) to deliver the scares and the jumps...

Get the idea?

(Oh, wait! That last one of Naomi Watts in her black underwear is a good image and is likely to stay in your memory for a while, as well!)

SO faster than you can say high school audio-visual squad, the tape is meticulously examined by Rachel's ex-boyfriend Noah (played by Martin Henderson) and the father of her little boy Aiden (played by David Dorfman). They discover hidden footage on the tape of a lighthouse. Further research reveals the identity of a woman on the tape as Anna Morgan, a deceased horse breeder from Moesko Island who killed herself after her beloved horses all drowned from a mysterious ailment. It isn't long, though, before Aiden has watched the horrifying tape and the focus of all intentions is now to save his young life. Rachel travels to Moesko Island to continue to get her answers as time runs out for her, because remember, she apparently is destined to die seven days after watching the tape. The searching inevitably comes to an old well buried under the floor of a rustic cabin where they believe the body of the little girl Samara, the adopted daughter of Anna Morgan, lies. Samara was murdered by her own mother because she (and possibly the rest of the small town) believed she was the evil cause of all the death around them. We believe Samara is simply the innocent victim of a mother gone mad, even until the very end. But the accusations of evil against her are real...and she never sleeps!

In the end, Rachel and Aiden do not die, and the reason I find a little disappointing, if not a cheap cop out - apparently if you personally make a copy of the videotape after watching it, your life is spared because it seems the tape must always be copied and passed on to ensure the survival of the viewers. Whether you buy that one is up to you, but I suppose something had to ensure the survival of mother and son so they could continue things in THE RING TWO (it sucked!).

Favorite line or dialogue:

Aidan Keller: "What happened to the girl?"
Rachel Keller: "Samara?"
Aidan: "Is that her name?"
Rachel: "Mm-hmm."
Aidan: "Is she still in the dark place?"
Rachel: "No. We set her free."
Aidan: "You helped her?"
Rachel: "Yeah."
Aidan: "Why did you do that?"
Rachel: "What's wrong, honey?"
Aidan: "You weren't supposed to help her!"

RIGHTEOUS KILL

(September 2008, U.S.)

Al Pacino and Robert DeNiro, in my opinion, are two of the best screen pair-ups since Robert Redford and Paul Newman, and neither team actually did more than two films together (Pacino and DeNiro were in THE GODFATHER-PART II, of course, but never appeared in a scene together. The chemistry that Pacino and DeNiro have together, both in dialogue (especially dialogue!) and in physical action, well...frankly, I'd spend two hours listening to them both read the damn phone book aloud, if that's what they chose to do. Most fans of both actors feels as I do. Unfortunately, many fans and critics did not welcome RIGHTEOUS KILL very warmly, which really puts me in the minority of this one. I suppose every one but me else would have actually preferred the phone book.

Pacino (known as "Rooster") and DeNiro (known as "Turk") are New York City police detectives and long-time partners (this would be Pacino's sixth time playing a cop, by the way. The man is good at it!) in search of a serial killer known as the "Poetry Boy" killer. The killer has earned this title for his modus operandi of murdering scumbag criminals who have beaten the justice system and leaving short poems that rhyme with their dead bodies. While working with a pair of younger detective (played by Donnie Wahlberg and John Leguizamo), the evidence of each murder inevitably leads the team into believing that the killer is an ex-cop. As the bodies continue to pile up, and they include a Catholic priest and child molester, tensions build between the cops, and the younger team begins to suspect "Turk" as the ex-cop killer, while "Rooster" is determined to defend his partner's innocence. When "Turk" finally stumbles upon and reads a journal that "Rooster" has been keeping, it's revealed that "Rooster" is the killer as he takes the life of a drug dealer while "Turk" is there to witness it. "Turk" is then forced at gunpoint to read "Rooster's" journal in front of a video camera as if it were his own. The reading of the journal serves as the film's narrative in which, up until this point, we were lead to believe that "Turk" was actually the killer offering his confession. The truth inevitably brings both partners and friends to face off against each other. As one might expect, the good shall prevail...though good may be considered from one's point of view in this film.

While the final twist ending may be considered a satisfying one that keeps us off guard (or at least one that doesn't cheat us too badly), the bulk of the film's plot line and action is rather predictable. In fact, much of the action and drama we see may be highly comparable to, say, a two hour episode of LAW & ORDER. But since I don't watch LAW & ORDER (or much of any TV, for that matter!), I can be a little more open-minded with what this film has to offer. Because it seems that RIGHTEOUS KILL is not offering its audience much of anything new, I suppose it's easy to understand the negative reactions toward the film, despite the re-teaming of two major stars like Pacino and DeNiro. This is perhaps where I'm just more of a die-hard fan of these two legendary actors and am willing to accept whatever they choose to do together. Still, it's always exciting to see these two play tough guys in just about any movie, Pacino especially, being my favorite actor, and all. Despite my appreciation for RIGHTEOUS KILL, I hope it shall not be the swan song for a Pacino and DeNiro screen partnership. The two are perfect together, and despite the negative reception of this film, I believe they still have much to offer us while they're still tough enough to offer it. Keep it going, boys!

Favorite line or dialogue:

Dr. Prosky: "How do you feel when You've fired your weapon?"
Turk: "Dirty Harry said there's nothing wrong with a little shooting, as long as the right people get shot."

RIGHT STUFF, THE

(October 1983, U.S.)

Is it me or does it feel as if the American space program doesn't even exist anymore? It seems as though ever since we decommissioned out space shuttle program after the last flight on July 8, 2011, the only news of space exploration we ever hear about anymore are cute, little probes that land on Mars and shuffle around. Not exactly too exciting to the average person who's not a scientist, yes?. Ah, but there were times, however, when space exploration meant everything to this country, and I'm not necessarily speaking of only the infamous Space Race and the Apollo 11 moon landing of the 1960s. For my generation, the 1980s were also a defining era when it all began with the launching of the Space Shuttle Columbia on April 12, 1981, for which I awoke early on that Sunday morning to watch on television. I was in junior high school back then and it was easy to feel how every kid and every adult was gripped by the new technological time period we were entering in our space program (prior to that morning, I'd only seen a space shuttle in the James Bond movie MOONRAKER). Perhaps it was no accident that THE RIGHT STUFF, based on Tom Wolfe's best selling book, was released in movie theaters at a time when each space shuttle launch still had meaning and could truly resonate with many of us who cared.

Even as a kid, which I still felt like in 1983, it was impossible for me to imagine how America's future in space began with just one man, World War II hero Captain Chuck Yeager (played by Sam Shepard) and his test pilot mission of the rocket-powered Bell-X1 aircraft which enabled him to finally break the sound barrier. Were it not for this film, I never actually would have ever heard of Chuck Yeager. Anyway, it was this breakthrough that got things started in our quest toward rocket design and seeing just how far we could take it. That, and our need to compete with the Soviet Union during the height of the Cold War. In 1957, when they launched their satellite Sputnik, America and NASA went apeshit to stay ahead of them in the quest for space. The search for America's first astronauts began with a vengeance. This is when we meet the new heroes of the film, including John Glenn (played by Ed Harris), Alan Shepard (played by Scott Glenn), Gus Grissom (played by Fred Ward), Scott Carpenter (played by Charles Frank), Walter Schirra (played by Lance Henrikson) and Don Slayton (played by Scott Paulin). Again, until this film, I'd only previously heard of John Glenn and Alan Shepard. I was also unaware of the rigorous, if not sometimes silly, training program that these future-men-of-space were required to endure. It's rather comical, and I suppose the film intentionally makes it so, that the men, even after all that training and sacrifice, are substituted for a chimpanzee when it comes time to actually launch some sort of life form into space after many failed tests of our rocket design finally comes to a successful conclusion. Back in the era of the Space Race, enthusiastic Americans only got to see their space heroes in the shining light that the media was able (and willing) to offer them. THE RIGHT STUFF (both film and book) attempts to show these men as they were when they weren't in front of the camera with their wide, positive smiles and their encouraging statements. They appeared to be faulted men of ego, fear, stupidity and even infidelity. Whether it was true or not, John Glenn assumes the role of the honest, wholesome, do-no-wrong American hero who insists on keeping up the healthy, heroic images for the American public, even when it means hiding the fact (whether or not it's deliberate, I'm not sure) that his wife suffers from a stutter.

Alan Shepard is the first American to reach space on a 15-minute sub-orbital flight. Later, Gus Grissom makes a similar flight, but the capsule's hatch mysteriously blows open and quickly fills with water and sinks. Grissom escapes and is criticized by many for potentially panicking and opening the hatch prematurely. John Glenn becomes the first American to orbit the Earth completely and receives a ticker-tape parade (I remember reading about that in elementary school). Even while all of this history in space is taking place, the test pilots, all but forgotten back at their base in the desert, cannot escape the reality that they're no longer the fastest men on Earth, even as they seemingly mock the entire space program, using phrases like "Spam in a can". Chuck Yeager recognizes it, and in a final act of bravery and defiance, attempts to set a new altitude record at the edge of space in the new Lockheed NF-104A aircraft and is nearly killed in a high-speed ejection when his engine fails. The aircraft is destroyed, but he survives, proving that he still has the "right stuff" (Chuck Yeager is still alive today).

Getting back to my own generation's experience with space exploration, it's impossible not to mention two other historic moments that took place in the 1980s following the successful inaugural launch of Columbia. The first (and I'm sure this is obvious enough) was the explosion of the Space Shuttle Challenger on January 28, 1986. I didn't actually see it happen on television when it did, but I was returning to my freshman dorm at college after a morning class and found nearly every kid on the floor gathered in front of the TV. I barely even had to ask the question of what had happened. Somehow, I just knew they were going to tell me that the shuttle was destroyed and all the astronauts on board were killed. Well, after repeatedly watching the horrible image of the shuttle explosion on the news and listening to (then) President Ronald Reagan make the necessary speech, it was impossible not to feel the overwhelming sorrow and setback of the entire space program. The second moment was the "Return to Flight" mission of the Space Shuttle Discovery on September 29, 1988, the first mission following the Challenger disaster. I must confess, there's a certain wonderful feeling from watching the local New York newspaper go from this...

...to this in less than three years...

As I said before, the American space program, like many other parts of our history, is often dependent on our own generation's memories and experiences. For myself, I never got to watch Neil Armstrong walk on the moon in 1969. I merely watched space shuttles take off into orbit and land on the ground like a conventional aircraft in the '80s. Today, I hear on the news about silly probes on Mars examining the surface. I hope that's not going to be as good as it gets from now on. I'd like to think that the visions of Stanley Kubrick and Arthur C. Clarke shall one day have its possibilities.

Favorite line or dialogue:

Narrator: "There was a demon that lived in the air. They said whoever challenged him would die. Their controls would freeze up, their planes would buffet wildly, and they would disintegrate. The demon lived at Mach 1 on the meter, seven hundred and fifty miles an hour, where the air could no longer move out of the way. He lived behind a barrier through which they said no man could ever pass. They called it the sound barrier."

RIFIFI

(June 1956, U.S.)

The heist film, or I should more accurately say, the heist-gone-wrong film, is practically a genre all its own. From Stanley Kubrick (THE KILLING) to John Huston (THE ASPHALT JUNGLE) to Quentin Tarrantino (RESERVOIR DOGS), it's been done, redone and repackaged in so many forms, it's become challenging to decide which stories are worth our time and which ones are worthless. Now I wish I could say that the French have done it better with this black and white film noir classic called RIFIFI, but in this case, the director Jules Dassin was an American (go figure!), and blacklisted during the era of McCarthyism, as well. The film tells the story of aging and recently-released-from-prison gangster Tony "le Stéphanois", Jo "le Suédois", Mario Farrati, and César "le Milanais". The four men band together again to commit an almost impossible theft, which is the burglary of an exclusive jewelry shop on the Rue de Rivoli in Paris. This, of course, shall be their last job together before finally settling down to the straight life of love, marriage and the basic pleasures that stolen money will buy, including a sensuous bath given by a large-breasted and nearly topless wife...

(now that's what I call a devoted wife!)

For the main character Tony, the prospect of this new heist comes with dramatic issues, including a former girlfriend who is now the property of a rival gangster and popular nightclub owner Pierre Grutter. The rival gangster is also a rival for the jewels after they've been stolen, but that comes later. The centerpiece that truly drives RIFIFI is an intricate thirty minute scene depicting the actual heist in detail, shot in near silence, without any dialogue or music whatsoever. One cannot understand and appreciate the brilliance of this sequence without watching it for themselves. The drama of the traditional background score or mindless chitter-chatter is replaced with the dramatic danger of maintaining absolute silence during a crime-in-progress in which anything can go wrong if the men involved are not careful. This fictional burglary, popular that it is, has apparently been copied by real criminals in real crimes around the world. And so once the break-in and the theft are (presumed) successful, the thieves appear to get away clean without having revealed their identities. However, as typical greed and stupidity would have it, one of the criminals makes a mistake by pocketing a diamond which he gives to his lover who happens to work at the club owned by the rival gangster (starting to put two and two together here?). Now we're faced with one criminal gang versus another in a battle of wits that will either win one of them the rich rewards or get themselves killed. By the time one of the heist men has had his son kidnapped and Tony has risked his life to get the boy (and the diamonds) back, all have failed and nearly everyone ends up dead (except the boy, of course!). We're left with the satisfying irony that after so much planning and so much detail involved, it's all gone to Hell and the suitcase filled with cash goes unclaimed.

The crime film, I suppose, can be approached in different ways, depending on what you're looking for. If it's just the thrills and suspense of the crime that intrigue you, then I suppose even crap like TOWER HEIST (2011) will do it for you. RIFIFI, with all of it's French subtitles, offers intelligence that breaks away from the traditional crime film - intelligence in its story, its actors, it's dialogue, its music and its final resolution. It offers a certain degree of humanity and sincerity, particularly in showing us the private side of some of the criminals and the love they feel for their women and their families. These emotional elements only matter, however, if you consider them relevant to a crime film. I say, why not!

Favorite line or dialogue:

Mario Ferrati (to Tony about Cesar): "For a job with you he'll come. Cesar! There's not a safe that can resist Cesar and not a woman that Cesar can resist!"

REVENGE

(February 1990, U.S.)

Despite being a film by Tony Scott and starring Kevin Constner, I suspect that REVENGE, based on Jim Harrison's original novella, went relatively unnoticed twenty-six years ago and has likely been all-but-forgotten today. For the late Tony Scott, it was a film in a small string of less-than-blockbuster films he made in between TOP GUN (1986) and CRIMSON TIDE (1995), though in all fairness, I loved BEVERLY HILLS COP II (1987) and I still do. For Kevin Costner, it was the middle film in between a succession of three back-to-back hits that began with THE UNTOUCHABLES in 1987 and ended with JFK in 1991. I suppose anything that happens to fall in the middle of anything can easily become lost in a massive shuffle. Too bad, because in my opinion, REVENGE is a highly worthwhile film of not only, well...revenge, but also love, devotion and loyalty.

In a manner that practically picks up where TOP GUN left off four years earlier, the film begins with the final wild flight of United States Naval Aviator Jay Cochran (Costner) just before retiring to a relaxing civilian life. He travels to Mexico, accepting an invitation from his wealthy crime boss friend Tiburon "Tibey" Mendez to spend time at his hacienda. He meets a beautiful young woman riding a horse who is Tibey's wife, Miryea (played by Madeline Stowe), who lives in lavish surroundings but is very unhappy because her much-older husband doesn't want children. Believing himself to be a guest of Tibey's rather than a common employee, Jay easily says no to his powerful friend and acts very independently, which rubs Tibey's suspicious right-hand man Cesar (played by Tomas Milian) the wrong way. After a dinner one evening, Tibey conducts a private meeting with business associates (in which one of them is murdered) while Miryea gets acquainted with Jay. Of course, she becomes attracted to him and the feeling is mutual. Jay cannot ignore the situation, both the attraction and the danger, or as he puts it, "Who we are and where we are!" Still, the attraction and the tension persistently grows until they can no longer control themselves and end up having passionate sex in a coat closet during a party with Tibey among the guests outside. Two words - NOT GOOD! On the other hand, if you have the opportunity to fuck Madeline Stowe (back in 1990, anyway!) in a coat closet, you likely take it, right? However, the film is more about the love between them and the betrayal of loyalty against his long-time friend that Jay struggles with more than anything else. Jay knows he's a dead man for what he's done, but still can't resist the forbidden fruit, whether it's getting distracted by Miryea's delicious-looking legs while driving his jeep on a deserted road or stopping to swim naked with her...

Well, as predictability would have it, Jay and Miryea are inevitably caught and all hell breaks loose. Tibey slashes his wife's face and commits her to a local whorehouse to spend the rest of her life getting drugged, abused and "fucked fifty times a day". Jay is beaten senseless by Tibey's men and left for dead somewhere in Mexico. Through some good Mexican Samaritans and a few local contacts looking to get their own revenge against Tibey, Jay recovers and braves a path of determination and violence against those who beat him and eventually comes face to face with Tibey. At this point, it would be easy to say that REVENGE could end in the traditional manner of a good get-even kill, but the film takes a surprising turn at the climactic moment. Rather than end up with one or two dead bodies, Tibey suddenly recalls what the two men once meant to each other, and in an inspirational moment of manly honor, asks Jay to formally ask him (Tibey) for forgiveness for taking his wife away from him. The end can go either way now, but Jay suddenly also realizes the importance of friendship and honor and lowers his gun to ask for that forgiveness. It's such a simple idea, yet so different by way of the traditional ending of any revenge film. Although the two men will never be friends again, they both survive and Jay is directed to the convent where Miryea is dying. Now, call it corny sentimentalism or just plain, old sappy mush, but I still believe nothing is more tragic and effective when telling the story of true love than having one person die in the arms of the other. I suppose the writers of REVENGE understand that, too, because when that sort of moment takes place in the face of Miryea's death, we can't help share the sorrow that Jay experiences in not only having lost the love of his life, but the valuable friendship of Tibey Mendez, as well.

I'll mention again that the year 1990 was (and still remains) the worst year of my adult life. That in mind, I tend to examine the films of that year that I post with just a little more sensitive scrutiny and memory. To reflect upon that year and the strong love I felt for a girl who did not return that love leaves me wondering what I was thinking at that time having gone to see such a strong-spirited love story in the first place. Perhaps I expected more thrills than love...who knows. I do remember walking out of the movie theater feeling like real shit, despite having enjoyed the film. Decades later, I've clearly gotten over the love crap of that time of my life, but still hold REVENGE with a certain degree of extra sensitivity regarding who I was back then and who I've become since. A better and stronger person, I hope...most of the time, anyway.

Favorite line or dialogue:

Cesar: "You looking for someone, Mr. Cochran?"
Jay Cochran: "No. Is someone looking for me?"
Cesar: "No, sir."
Jay: "Cesar, let's get it straight. I don't like you, you don't like me, right? So if I'm looking for someone, it's none of you business! You understand?"

RETURN OF THE PINK PANTHER, THE

(May 1975, U.S.)

There are, according to my research, a total of eleven Pink Panther films since the first one, simply called, THE PINK PANTHER, graced the big screen back in 1963 (one of them, the third one released in 1968 called INSPECTOR CLOUSEAU stars Alan Arkin in the title role instead of Peter Sellers), including three that were released after the great Sellers died and two remakes with Steve Martin in the title role (I haven't seen those and I won't!). That’s a whole lot of slapstick comedy that I can only call, in my opinion, quite redundant. In my vast collection of DVD and Blu-Ray titles, THE RETURN OF THE PINK PANTHER is the only film in the entire lengthy franchise that I have deemed worthy of my time and my ownership. This is not only because I still find myself laughing with much enthusiasm at the antics of the late, great Mr. Sellers in his comedic stunts and pitfalls that I think greatly outsoar the other films, but also because I think this film carries with it a more intricate plotline in terms of the details behind the theft of the Pink Panther diamond itself.

Now if you remember the first Pink Panther film at all, you'll recall that the precious diamond had been stolen by the notorious thief known as "The Phantom" (played by Christopher Plummer in this film and previously played by David Niven in the first film) before and it was Inspector Jacques Clouseau (Sellers) who recovered it, though, somehow during the course of the film, he was suspected of being the "Phantom" himself. By the second film, A SHOT IN THE DARK (1964), Clouseau's prison term seemed to have been conveniently discarded, as he was back on the job, trying to solve a murder this time. By the third film, this one, he's after the Pink Panther diamond and the "Phantom" all over again. Interestingly, although this is a goofy comedy, the film begins with a somewhat suspenseful theft as we watch the mysterious thief carefully make his (or her?) way into the chamber where the diamond rests and skillfully removes it without setting off any of the security alarms. I have to admit, I actually find myself sitting in suspense as I watch the thief at work. After that little bit of seriousness, the film is off and running its trail of silliness with our re-introduction to Inspector Clouseau and his bumbling idiosyncrasies and thick-accented French dialogue. Like James Bond himself, Clouseau travels the world to exotic locales to track down the solution to this great crime and along the way, we can't help suspect that were he not such a bumbling idiot, he might actually score with a woman or two. Certainly, he thinks he can if he wishes to. There's a particularly funny moment when he's attempting to charm the "Phantom's" wife, Lady Claudine Lytton (played by Catherine Schell) in a nightclub. Holding up his drink, he proposes a toast and utters the classic line from CASABLANCA, "Here's looking at you, kid." Okay, that doesn't sound too funny on paper, but try to imagine it with an overly-thick fake French accent and it sounds more like, "Here's-a-looking-at-a-you, kid." Trust me, it funny! Look carefully at Catherine Schell and you'll see that the actress is having trouble containing her genuine laughter while working this scene with Sellers. Many of the traditional clichés and schticks that became repetitive in the many Panther films to follow still seem fresh in this film of 1975, including Clouseau's ongoing physical battle-of-wits with his faithful servant Cato (played by Burt Kwouk, who, by the way, my friend Richard K. in California will remind you that he also played Mr. Ling in the 1963 James Bond film, GOLDFINGER), and my personal favorite, Clouseau's police chief Inspector Dreyfuss (played by Herbert Lom) who is constantly hell-bent on killing the naive detective. Never do I enjoy someone's misery and frustration more than when I'm listening to Dreyfuss' desperation and laughter when he's trying to not only kill the poor man, but also explain to others just how much he hates Clouseau.

As for the cloak and dagger criminal element of this comedy, it's innocent enough for a G-rated film, despite moments of gun fire and explosions (the final resolution of who actually stole the Pink Panther diamond is actually quite boring and anti-climactic). But like Bugs Bunny and Daffy Duck, Clouseau only walks away with a dirty face and torn clothes when an exploding bomb nearly takes his life (the bomb sent to his house by Dreyfuss, by the way!). However, I do challenge the "G" rating of today if no other reason than there is actually some dialogue that would likely be considered racist by today's standards and that's when Clouseau repeatedly refers to Cato as his "little yellow friend". During the 1970's, a time when Archie Bunker was saying whatever the fuck he pleased on network television and people were loving it, such a reference to an Asian man on film probably went unnoticed. Today, someone out there would have a reason to go apeshit over it (everybody's always pissed off about something!). A little bit of racist dialogue is, perhaps, a small and questionable price to pay for the comedic talents of Peter Sellers in this particular film. While those talents may never have been able to live up to the madness and genius of his talent in the Stanley Kubrick films LOLITA (1962) and DR. STRANGELOVE (1964), it still remains a high level of entertaining silliness that I continue to enjoy to this day. As for the Panther films that followed...well, I remember really wanting to see THE PINK PANTHER STRIKES AGAIN (1976) as a kid and finally did see it on TV four years later. Back then, I have no doubt that it made me laugh. Today, while still possessing a funny moment or two, the plot of Inspector Dreyfuss turning evil in the tradition of a James Bond villain just to kill Clouseau once and for all is, frankly, just too stupid to make the film worthwhile. REVENGE OF THE PINK PANTHER (1978) was a film whose only appeal for me were two; the first being a movie poster that featured comical version of the famous JAWS 2 tagline, "Just When You Thought It Was Safe to Go Back to the Movies" and the second being a black leather dominatrix...

You know, until this film, I never even knew these women existed (bless them!)! Beyond this smokin' lady, the film sucks! After Sellers died in 1980, I gave up on all Panther films forever. What little bits and pieces of TRAIL OF THE PINK PANTHER (1982) that I happen to catch on HBO at the time was pathetic. I mean, really, trying to salvage a popular franchise by cutting and splicing unused footage from previous Panther films to make it appear that Sellers is alive and well for a new film two years after his death? Seriously??? Anyway, there you have it - eleven Pink Panther films and I stand by just one...and it's all mine!

Favorite line or dialogue:

Chief Inspector Dreyfus: "The beggar was the lookout man for the gang!"
Inspector Clouseau: "That is impossible. How can a blind man be a lookout?"
Dreyfus: "How can an idiot be a police officer?"
Clouseau: "Well, all he has to do is enlist..."
Dreyfus: "Shut up!"