Reply to Topic
Heheh, I watched this like 2 weeks ago and never got around to writing on it ... 
______________
"Watch This?"
Review, Miriam M. Wynn
The Watcher, 2000.
Directed by: Joe Charbanic
Starring: James Spader, Keanu Reeves, Marisa Tomei
SUMMARY:
Burnt-out ex-FBI Agent Joel Campbell (Spader) has become a physical wreck since his cat and mouse game with friendly serial killer David Allen Griffen (Reeves) ended badly years ago. Now dependent on meds and the tired kindness of his shrink Polly (Marisa Tomei), he struggles to survive in a new town when Griffin kindly FedEx's photos of his next victims. Forced to play along with Griffin, Campbell struggles to pull both himself and Polly out of one last dark dance.
Star Quality: 3 out of 5. Not crap but not worth going to the theater for, either.
REVIEW:
Alright, let me just say it -- Keanu should stick to action movies. I know he's trying and he wasn't bad but seriously, when a man like Keanu grabs a woman and threatens her with piano wire, I just don't buy it.
First off, let's start with the premise of the story. It's interesting, and simple. Hero hunts killer, killer offs hero's girlfriend, hero is devastated and moves away. Killer then follows hero in a narcisstic killing spree to get some attention and love. It works.
The variation here is that Spader gets to be heavily depressed and sickly, which adds some depth to him -- is he sickly because he's making himself sick or did the ordeal with Griffin really do this to him? He is tangibly and physically scarred by the entanglement with Griffin, so we understand why he ran away. We also understand why he's so eager to just hibernate and suffer in a dark corner rather than face the real world.
So when the real world invades and Keanu is right next door grinning at some girl who doesn't suspect his oh so misguided aims, we hope Spader can pull himself together and finally empty the garbage. The cool thing is, there's no unnatural transition to super-hero mode. Spader remains crippled and worn-out and never changes - in fact, this is not a film about beating the bad guy and going on over the rainbow, it's about closing the chapter for good.
Polly (Tomei) is just window dressing here, a nice worn-out old couch for Spader to sit on. No offense but seriously, she's like a cushion and basically is the couch as she plays the shrink. Campbell comes and mumbles for a bit, she nods at him with puppy-dog eyes and serious tire lines, and he goes home. Then Griffin figures out she means something to Campbell and oops, Campbell is forced to save her.
So I have no real problems with Spader or even with Tomei. It's Mr. Reeves I'm worried about. I just hope he doesn't go and make any more of these types of movies without a friend pulling him aside and warning him.
In this character, Reeves is simply not believable. It's not even by association with his other films. It's cause he's a very stiff actor and when he makes an effort at anything, it's visible. Hence the grand gesticulations that always come with a serial killer -- they were obvious cliches and his doing them just made that more obvious. It's good he didn't growl or snarl but at the same time, all those cheesy smiles and that hair tossing wasn't necessary either. Instead of silly and fun couldn't they have made the guy something else? I get that they were going for something new but that mode just doesn't fit in a thriller, particularly with Campbell's heavy depression. You want to be afraid of what this guy could do, not shrug when he pulls out the piano wire. Sure, keep the guy next door attitude but hey, create some intensity, make his badness feel real.
Sad. My best friend and I just grinned and shook our heads in about every scene Reeves did. Not good news. I hope he never has the bad fortune to come across this article, but I really mean every word of it.
As for the character in relation to the film, the movie is basically wishy washy with Griffin. While there is depth and meaning to Campbell and there is no need to know about Polly, why are we shown near nothing about Griffin? I mean basic things that give some kind of occasion for why he is the way he is. I don't need to know if he was beaten as a child but I DO need to know why he uses piano wire. Why does he dance with his victims? Why does he refuse to actually have sex with them? Why choose to kill them the way he does?
The method of murder for a serial killer is the way to know him. It's his signature, it's who he is. If you're going to make a movie with him and he's a major character, you are going to have to delve deeper than superficial tactics to make him an "interesting" killer. I'm no forensic psychologist but dang, don't show me a serial killer and then explain nothing about his killing other than the fact that he did it. I won't care about him, I won't particularly worry for his victims, and I won't feel a thing when he philosophizes and threatens Campbell.
There IS an interesting turn though, and that's Griffin's fascination with Campbell and Campbell's complete disinterest in Griffin ("You're a JOB," he tells him). But it turns out Griffin's best buddy could have been anyone and he just happened to be the one who got close. They could have made it far more deep than that -- shoot, make them both love bowling, I don't care.
A lot lacking in this film but visually, it was fine. Some very obvious computer animation in the end scenes and good use of grey/dreary lighting to show how bad off Campbell is. You will get tired (or be amused, as I was) by the killer's particular mode of vision -- "The Watcher's" eyes function like poor quality amateur video, apparently.
Overall, RENT this video if 1) You want to see Spader succeed or 2) You want to see Keanu umm ... not do so good.
______________
"Watch This?"
Review, Miriam M. Wynn
The Watcher, 2000.
Directed by: Joe Charbanic
Starring: James Spader, Keanu Reeves, Marisa Tomei
SUMMARY:
Burnt-out ex-FBI Agent Joel Campbell (Spader) has become a physical wreck since his cat and mouse game with friendly serial killer David Allen Griffen (Reeves) ended badly years ago. Now dependent on meds and the tired kindness of his shrink Polly (Marisa Tomei), he struggles to survive in a new town when Griffin kindly FedEx's photos of his next victims. Forced to play along with Griffin, Campbell struggles to pull both himself and Polly out of one last dark dance.
Star Quality: 3 out of 5. Not crap but not worth going to the theater for, either.
REVIEW:
Alright, let me just say it -- Keanu should stick to action movies. I know he's trying and he wasn't bad but seriously, when a man like Keanu grabs a woman and threatens her with piano wire, I just don't buy it.
First off, let's start with the premise of the story. It's interesting, and simple. Hero hunts killer, killer offs hero's girlfriend, hero is devastated and moves away. Killer then follows hero in a narcisstic killing spree to get some attention and love. It works.
The variation here is that Spader gets to be heavily depressed and sickly, which adds some depth to him -- is he sickly because he's making himself sick or did the ordeal with Griffin really do this to him? He is tangibly and physically scarred by the entanglement with Griffin, so we understand why he ran away. We also understand why he's so eager to just hibernate and suffer in a dark corner rather than face the real world.
So when the real world invades and Keanu is right next door grinning at some girl who doesn't suspect his oh so misguided aims, we hope Spader can pull himself together and finally empty the garbage. The cool thing is, there's no unnatural transition to super-hero mode. Spader remains crippled and worn-out and never changes - in fact, this is not a film about beating the bad guy and going on over the rainbow, it's about closing the chapter for good.
Polly (Tomei) is just window dressing here, a nice worn-out old couch for Spader to sit on. No offense but seriously, she's like a cushion and basically is the couch as she plays the shrink. Campbell comes and mumbles for a bit, she nods at him with puppy-dog eyes and serious tire lines, and he goes home. Then Griffin figures out she means something to Campbell and oops, Campbell is forced to save her.
So I have no real problems with Spader or even with Tomei. It's Mr. Reeves I'm worried about. I just hope he doesn't go and make any more of these types of movies without a friend pulling him aside and warning him.
In this character, Reeves is simply not believable. It's not even by association with his other films. It's cause he's a very stiff actor and when he makes an effort at anything, it's visible. Hence the grand gesticulations that always come with a serial killer -- they were obvious cliches and his doing them just made that more obvious. It's good he didn't growl or snarl but at the same time, all those cheesy smiles and that hair tossing wasn't necessary either. Instead of silly and fun couldn't they have made the guy something else? I get that they were going for something new but that mode just doesn't fit in a thriller, particularly with Campbell's heavy depression. You want to be afraid of what this guy could do, not shrug when he pulls out the piano wire. Sure, keep the guy next door attitude but hey, create some intensity, make his badness feel real.
Sad. My best friend and I just grinned and shook our heads in about every scene Reeves did. Not good news. I hope he never has the bad fortune to come across this article, but I really mean every word of it.
As for the character in relation to the film, the movie is basically wishy washy with Griffin. While there is depth and meaning to Campbell and there is no need to know about Polly, why are we shown near nothing about Griffin? I mean basic things that give some kind of occasion for why he is the way he is. I don't need to know if he was beaten as a child but I DO need to know why he uses piano wire. Why does he dance with his victims? Why does he refuse to actually have sex with them? Why choose to kill them the way he does?
The method of murder for a serial killer is the way to know him. It's his signature, it's who he is. If you're going to make a movie with him and he's a major character, you are going to have to delve deeper than superficial tactics to make him an "interesting" killer. I'm no forensic psychologist but dang, don't show me a serial killer and then explain nothing about his killing other than the fact that he did it. I won't care about him, I won't particularly worry for his victims, and I won't feel a thing when he philosophizes and threatens Campbell.
There IS an interesting turn though, and that's Griffin's fascination with Campbell and Campbell's complete disinterest in Griffin ("You're a JOB," he tells him). But it turns out Griffin's best buddy could have been anyone and he just happened to be the one who got close. They could have made it far more deep than that -- shoot, make them both love bowling, I don't care.
A lot lacking in this film but visually, it was fine. Some very obvious computer animation in the end scenes and good use of grey/dreary lighting to show how bad off Campbell is. You will get tired (or be amused, as I was) by the killer's particular mode of vision -- "The Watcher's" eyes function like poor quality amateur video, apparently.
Overall, RENT this video if 1) You want to see Spader succeed or 2) You want to see Keanu umm ... not do so good.
