Classic Movie Review Demolition Man Take 2

Demolition Man (1993) 

Directed by Marco Brambilla 

Written by Daniel Waters 

Starring Sylvester Stallone, Wesley Snipes, Sandra Bullock, Nigel Hawthorne, Benjamin Bratt, Denis Leary

Release Date October 9th 1993

Published October 11th, 2023 

Demolition Man is a desperate, sad, and pathetic attempt by Sylvester Stallone to cast himself as the 'cool guy.' There was this character archetype of the 80s and 90s, one pioneered by Eddie Murphy, for the most part. It's a character who is the smartest, funniest, coolest guy in any room that he's in. I call these characters Bugs Bunny types. Bugs Bunny was always one step ahead of whoever he was on screen with. Bugs was never the subject of the joke, he was the one delivering the punchline. No one got over on Bugs Bunny, he always came out on top by being funnier, smarter, and more dynamic than anyone else on screen. 

Whether Eddie Murphy was aware of it or not, his Beverly Hills Cop persona is an R-Rated version of a Bugs Bunny archetype. Axel Foley is Bugs Bunny. He's always three steps ahead of everyone in a scene. Axel is the funniest, smartest, and wittiest person in every moment. No one can keep up with Axel or Bugs Bunny and no one is allowed to get one over on Axel or Bugs Bunny. There is an element of the archetypal Simpson's character Poochie in Axel Foley as in the few moments that Axel is off screen, everyone has to be talking about Axel and wondering what he's doing at that moment. 

I don't mean this to demean Eddie Murphy or his performance as Axel Foley, it's merely an observation. Being like Bugs Bunny is a solid compliment. There is also the matter of coming timing and instinct that make Eddie Murphy such a comic icon. His bravado, that swagger, it's unlike anyone we've seen in this kind of role. Why am I lingering on Beverly Hills Cop, Bugs Bunny, and Eddie Murphy in a review of Demolition Man? Because Sylvester Stallone wants so badly to be as cool as Eddie Murphy. 

It's very clear that the lead role in Demolition Man was written with someone of Murphy's comic timing and instinct in mind. It's clear that the movie would benefit from having a fleet footed comic voice at the heart of the story. It's also clear that having Sylvester Stallone and his sad, desperate, egotism at the heart of the movie, drags the whole thing down. Stallone is not an actor with strong comic instincts. He's lumbering, he speaks slowly, and he's not cool, no matter how much he might want you to believer it. He's simply not believable as the smartest, funniest, most dynamic guy in any room that he's in. 

Thus, what should be a fast paced action comedy, becomes a flat, lumbering, lumbering, clumsy, testosterone heavy, bloated explosion-fest. In order to frame Stallone as the coolest guy in any room, the rest of the cast is forced to dial back their performances to match Stallone's slow, witless cadence. So, we have a character played by a young and lovable Sandra Bullock who is rendered almost unwatchable as she bravely battles her way through some of the worst dialogue in any movie ever. And you have a remaining supporting cast that is not allowed to have either screen time or presence that might compete with Stallone or make him look any less dynamic than he already appears. 

Only Wesley Snipes is allowed to shine opposite Stallone and thus why Snipes disappears for so much time in Demolition Man. Though Snipes' Simon Phoenix is the big bad of Demolition Man, his colorful villain is kept off screen for lengthy periods of time while the screenwriters desperately try to craft scenes to make Stallone look cool. The world building in Demolition Man might appear, on the surface, to be similar to any other sci-fi movie set in the future. But, look closer, if you do, you can see a series of innovations that are clearly inventions intended to make Stallone appear more relatable and especially cooler than anyone else in the movie. 

One example that stands out as the kind of gag that is written for an Eddie Murphy type comic actor that falls flat as delivered by Stallone, involves bathroom habits of the future. I'd rather not linger on the famed 'three seashells' of Demolition Man, but the gag is one that Murphy would have thrived in riffing on. There would undoubtedly be a fast paced, curse word laden rant that Murphy would riff off the top of his head about the 'three seashells.' In the hands of Murphy, it's a masterpiece of raunchy humor. In the hands of Sylvester Stallone, the bit dies an unmourned death that raises far too many needless questions that distract from the story being told. 

For those that aren't familiar with Demolition Man, the story goes that Sylvester Stallone is John Spartan, a cop in 1996 Los Angeles. Spartan is a good cop who plays his own rules, a classic cliche of 80s and 90s action movies. John Spartan has been given the awkward moniker, Demolition Man, because his style of being a cop involves a remarkable level of property damage and death. In pursuing the violent criminal gang leader, Simon Phoenix (Wesley Snipes), Spartan is accused of getting a group of hostages killed and Spartan himself is convicted and placed in a cryo-prison. 

Frozen inside a giant ice cube, John Spartan is sleeping his life away until 2036 when his old nemesis, Simon Phoenix escapes from the same cryo-prison under strange circumstances. In 2036, there is no crime, no music, no salt, no sugar, and society is a pristine, plasticized bore. The Police still exist but they don't have much to do. Thus, when Simon Phoenix commits the first murders in more than 30 years, no one in the Police Department is prepared to deal with his level of violence. A young cop named Lenina Huxley offers an unusual solution, thaw out legendary cop John Spartan, reinstate him to the Police and have him track down Simon Phoenix. 

That's the plot of Demolition Man and there are the building blocks of a good idea in there. It's a classic fish out of water scenario in which a man from a different time suffers comical culture shock in a future he doesn't understand. It's a premise rife with easy culture clash gags that might be elevated by a comic mind like Eddie Murphy. Sadly, with Sylvester Stallone in the lead, the jokes basically devolve to dimwitted observations about how boring the future is without cool stuff we had in the past. 

Find my full length review at Geeks.Media 

Movie Review Love in the Time of Cholera

Love in the Time of Cholera (2007) 

Directed by Mike Newell 

Written by Ronald Harwood 

Starring Javier Bardem, John Leguizamo, Catalina Sandino Moreno, Benjamin Bratt, Giovanna Mezzogiomo

Release Date November 16th, 2007

Published November 16th, 2007

Gabriel Garcia Marquez's beloved novel Love In The Time Of Cholera has been a cultural touchstone for the faux intellectual since its publication in 1985. Since then anyone trying to prove their intellect might drop in a reference to Love In The Time of Cholera. Filmmakers have long coveted the book as an adaptation prize but most who have endeavored to adapt it had deemed it unfilmable.

Director Mike Newell is the first director unwilling to accept that the book was unfilmable. Despite the talking birds, fifty year span of time, and Marquez's unique dialogue, Newell felt he could make it work as a film. He was wrong. Newell's Love In the Time of Cholera is a mess as a film. Goofy, halting, unintentionally humorous, Love In The Time of Cholera has eluded yet another director, unfortunately this one actually filmed his failed attempt.

Set in Cartagena Colombia near the turn of the 20th century, Love In The Time of Cholera stars Javier Bardem as Florentino Ariza. A telegraph operator, Florentino is not the most desirable husband for a young socialite whose father has ambitions beyond his station. What Florentino does have on his side is the soul of a poet. So, when he falls for the young socialite Fermina (Giovanna Mezzagiorno) he wins her heart with his words, despite the protestations of her father (John Leguizamo).

Carrying on their affair in letters, Florentino and Fermina manage to fall in love even after she is spirited away to her cousin's (Catalina Sandino Moreno) home in the country. Then things get odd. Upon her return to Cartegena, Fermina rejects Florentino. No reason is given, she just decides she is no longer in love with him. Crushed, Florentino vows to love her forever and remain a virgin until she changes her mind and comes back to him.

In the meantime Fermina meets and is seduced by a successful doctor, Juvenal Urbino (Benjamin Bratt), who almost singlehandedly turned the tide on the Columbia's cholera epidemic. Handsome and successful, Urbino is exactly the husband that Fermina's father wants for his daughter. And once again, Florentino is crushed.  His vow to remain chaste is soon foiled while on a boat trip and his discovery of sex leads him to chronicle all of his conquests while he waits for the one woman who can fulfill him.

The script by Oscar winner Ronald Harwood (The Pianist) removes most of the magical elements of Gabriel Garcia Marquez's book. There is no talking bird for one. But, also gone is much of the magic of Marquez's words. His unique patois, the lyrical digressions into scenery description. Many of the things that made people, Mike Newell included, want to adapt Love In The Time Of Cholera into a movie are gone from the movie.

What remains is part weepy chick flick and part goofball male fantasy. Florentino pledges eternal love to Fermina and waits for more than 50 years for his chance to be with her. That kind of romantic devotion certainly won over a few fans. Of course that fifty year wait in the book was built on the foundation of Marquez's unique writing style.

Minus Marquez, Love In The Time of Cholera the movie offers a weepy, whiny hero who actually pales in comparison to the man who actually gets the girl. Watching the film I couldn't help but wonder why any woman would, for a moment ,want Javier Bardem's creepy Florentino over Benjamin Bratt's handsome, successful Dr. Urbino. Indeed, Fermina must have wondered the same as she chose Urbina and stayed with him for 50 years.

Yet we are to believe somehow that Florentino is the hero of this story? All apologies to lovers of the book, but as rendered in the film Love In The Time of Cholera, Florentino is a loser. He's a complete tool. As written by Ronald Harwood, directed by Mike Newell, and played by the very talented Oscar nominee Javier Bardem, Florentino is a drip and a dope and a character who makes even the brilliant and handsome Javier Bardem look like a tool. 

Love In The Time of Cholera is a literary classic for its magical realism and Gabriel Garcia Marquez's fanciful ideas and dialogue. Mike Newell's take on the material is straight and melodramatic and goofy as all get out. Material that Marquez treats with a light satirical passion are given deathly serious takes on film. Poor Javier Bardem is left to carry heavily pained, dramatic moments that audiences are more likely to chuckle at than sympathize with.

Dull, weepy and way too serious about one goofball character, Love In the Time of Cholera is the kind of daft disaster that only a big Hollywood ego can turn out. Well done Mike Newell, well done.

Movie Review: Catwoman

Catwoman (2004) 

Directed by Pitof 

Written by John Brancato, Roger Ferris, John Rogers 

Starring Halle Berry, Sharon Stone, Frances Conroy, Benjamin Bratt 

Release Date July 23rd, 2004 

Published July 23rd, 2004 

I don’t know what your opinion is, but for my money Michele Pfeiffer’s Catwoman in Batman Returns rocked. She was sexy, she was funny, and she and Michael Keaton’s Batman had a fiery chemistry. If ever there was a chance for Catwoman to be made into a stand-alone film character, it was with Pfeiffer and director Tim Burton about 12 years ago.

Of course, timing and good buzz do not mean much to dunderheaded studio execs whose arrogance tells them they can sell anything at any time. That arrogance is what gives us this new Catwoman movie without Pfeiffer and Burton and without any connection to Batman. Halle Berry and someone called Pitof are behind this Catwoman and while Berry fits the costume that is about all that fits in this lame repackaged comic book misfire.

Patience Phillips (Berry) is a mousy wannabe artist who works in advertising because she’s too scared to be a real artist. While working on a big project for a new cosmetics line, Patience comes across a chilling secret; the company’s newest product is an addictive face-destroying disaster. Before she can do anything about it she is found by the evil cosmetic company henchman and killed.

Yes indeed, Patience died, but is reborn when a gaggle of Cat’s discovers her body and one special cat delivers some kitty CPR. The strange cat called Midnight is owned by an even stranger woman, a crazy cat lady played by Six Feet Under star Frances Conroy. The crazy cat lady explains how Patience was brought back to life as a Catwoman and that she will now have all sorts of new powers and odd cravings.

Before Patience became Catwoman she met a guy, a cop named Tom Lone (Benjamin Bratt). Tom happens to be the cop on the case when Catwoman is accused of robbing a jewelry store and eventually multiple homicides. The idea that Tom doesn’t recognize Patience is Catwoman is suspension of disbelief stretched to its breaking point. Catwoman must prove her innocence and stop the evil cosmetics company led by Laurel Hedare (Sharon Stone). If your thinking catfight, well duh.

Here is the amazing thing. Most, if not all of this mindblowingly-ridiculous plot is played straight. Anyone with half a brain could sense the camp potential of this material. Anyone that is, except for director Pitof who thinks he’s making a straight action movie. Pitof also convinced his star Halle Berry to play this material with a straight face which sinks any chance she had of succeeding in this role.

Halle’s Patience is a female Steve Urkel who, when she becomes Catwoman, is never believable. Delivering awful cat puns and mimicking cat behaviors, Berry comes off as something akin to a furry, minus the proper furry costume. She's got the cat cosplay down but any trace of anti-hero turned superhero is distinctly lacking. Part of the joy of Catwoman is her villainous side that softens ever so slightly via the tempting attraction to Batman. Since there is no Batman in this universe, Catwoman is forced to rely entirely on a badly contrived plot and the aforementioned and awful cat puns. 

There is the romance aspect, yeesh! Halle Berry and Benjamin Bratt spark the chemistry of two good friends or perhaps cousins who are a bit too close for comfort. But they never connect as potential bedmates. Benjamin Bratt has never been this bland on screen even on TV's Law & Order which didn't require much personality to begin with. Bratt is almost catatonic in Catwoman, his expressions rarely change. It doesn’t help that he’s saddled with a detective character more clueless than Clouseau.

The only member of the cast with any awareness of the camp material they’ve been given is Frances Conroy who tosses her dignity to the wind as the crazy cat lady. Conroy has to deliver the films most laughable dialogue as she explains what a Catwoman is and how it came to be. She deserves some kind of award for delivering her monologue with a straight face, though it likely took a few takes.

Pitof a former visual effects supervisor on films like Alien Resurrection and Luc Besson’s Joan Of Arc flick Messenger, he learned a little on those films as he does show some visual flare. However as a novice director he also has an unhealthy obsession with closeups and flashy unnecessary camera movement. The guy has some talent and with time he could round into a pretty good director but he is very raw and much too raw for such a high-profile project.

Though his background is reportedly in special effects, director Pitof comes off like an amateur when it comes to CGI. The Computer Generated Images in Catwoman are absolutely abysmal. Part of the problem could be that many of us have recently seen great CGI work in Spider-Man 2 and or I, Robot, two tremendously accomplished special effects spectaculars. But, the real problem is the seeming lack of care and ability behind the CGI in Catwoman. Just look at the way Halle Berry's Catwoman glistens when she becomes a special effect. She becomes shiny and rubbery and obviously not a person. She could be a character in a Pixar movie, that's how damningly obvious the special effects of Catwoman are, it's as if a Toy Story character emerged in real life but remained animated. 

The problem with Catwoman is the fact that it was made at all. There was a clamor for a female Superhero franchise but not this one. Wonder Woman has been gestating for awhile with a number of actresses and directors attached and unattached at various times. Catwoman had its moment in time back in the nineties on the heels of the success of Batman but that time has passed,

This Catwoman was doomed from the moment it was greenlighted. Doomed by executive overkill, businessmen whose only concern is printing money off of well-known properties. They put this film on the fast track, rushed the production, went cheap on a young, inexperienced director and maybe thought casting one of Hollywood’s hottest actresses would guarantee box office even if the quality film wasn’t there.

They were wrong. Very, Very Wrong!

Movie Review Pinero

Pinero (2001) 

Directed by Leon Ichaso 

Written by Leon Ichaso

Starring Benjamin Bratt, Michael Wright 

Release Date December 14th, 2001 

Published March 1st, 2002 

On TV's “Law & Order,” Benjamin Bratt showed himself to be a capable dramatic actor. In 1999' Next Best Thing, co-starring with Madonna, he showed himself to be an actor who makes poor decisions. In his most recent work, Pinero, Bratt shows himself to be a future Oscar contender.

Pinero is the biography of the brilliant Puerto Rican writer and poet, Miguel Pinero. Born in Puerto Rico in 1941, Miguel and his family moved to New York City when he was 8 years old. Soon after arriving in New York Miguel's father walks out, leaving his mother to raise five children on her own. Without a father, Miguel quickly falls into a rough crowd and hooks up with his partner in crime, Tito Goya, played by Nelson Vasquez.

After a series of petty thefts and drug busts Miguel and Tito end up at Sing Sing prison where an inmate named Edgar, portrayed by Michael Wright, inspires Pinero to write a play called Short Eyes. After being released from prison, Pinero brings Short Eyes to Broadway and receives multiple Tony nominations. Pinero however is a volatile genius, who balances his good fortune with self-destructive behavior. Drugs and crime were the fuel of Pinero's creativity.

The film is not as linear as my description of it. Writer Director Leon Ichaso employs time shifts marked by changes from color in the present to black and white flashbacks to show what drove Miguel's genius and madness. The time shifts often make us in the audience a little off balance, and that’s appropriate in that Pinero himself is always off balance. The stylistic distorted narrative shifts help to bring the audience into Pinero's unapologetic perspective.

Of course the driving force behind Pinero is Benjamin Bratt whose performance singes the screen. The poetry sequences are mind blowing. With Pinero's words and Bratt's delivery every word has an impact. The use of metaphor and music is what made Pinero's poetry so distinctive and despite his addictions and behavior he still comes off as very intelligent, even brilliant.

Leon Ichaso's most well known piece before Pinero was 1992's Sugar Hill with Wesley Snipes, one the best gangster films of all time. In Sugar Hill, Ichaso showed his great ability to coax actors into great performances; he does so once again with Benjamin Bratt in Pinero.

Movie Review: Abandon

Abandon (2002) 

Directed by Stephen Gaghan

Written by Stephen Gaghan 

Starring Katie Holmes, Benjamin Bratt, Charlie Hunnam, Zoey Deschanel, Gabrielle Union 

Release Date October 18th, 2002 

Published October 17th, 2002 

The cast of Dawson’s Creek is going to have a tough time shaking their TV characters. As James Van Der Beek showed in Rules OF Attraction, even working with a great filmmaker doesn't allow him to him escape from his TV alter ego. Roger Avery appeared to enjoy using set pieces that traded on the Dawson persona in little winks to the audience that practically screamed "you wouldn’t see Dawson do this!" 

Katie Holmes has a similar problem, her Joey Potter is the picture of cherubic teenage innocence and even stripping in The Gift or going Goth in Disturbing Behavior hasn't separated her from the character that made her famous.  In the new movie Abandon, writer director Stephen Gaghan uses Holmes' TV persona in ways that bring the character a little more depth and makes the film's surprises a little more effective.

In Abandon, Holmes plays Caty Burke an ambitious college senior with a big money job waiting for her when she graduates. Things are not that simple however. Caty is still longing for an ex-boyfriend who disappeared two years previous. The boyfriend, Embry (Charlie Hunnam), vanished without a trace and now is being investigated as a missing person. The company that holds Embry’s million dollar trust wants him to be declared dead so they can move in on his millions. 

The investigation into Embry's disappearance is turned over to a recovering alcoholic cop named Wade (Benjamin Bratt). Wade’s investigation immediately leads him to Caty, the last person to have seen Embry alive. While she isn’t considered a suspect, Wade is suspicious of what she isn’t telling him. The investigation is bringing back a lot of memories for Caty, memories that are keeping her up at night and are beginning to effect her work. Caty is convinced that she has seen Embry recently, and that he is following her with intent to harm her. Not surprisingly she turns to Wade.

It’s not difficult to see where this is going, but director Stephen Gaghan has a few tricks up his sleeve, tossing out red herrings right and left and a brilliant clue early on that makes you feel stupid when it pays off later in the film. Though one too many flashbacks makes the film a little tedious, Gaghan develops enough mystery to keep your attention.

Embry, as played by Charlie Hunnam (best known for TV’s short lived and underappreciated "Undeclared") is such a great character. Embry is this totally self involved artist, the kind of guy every college woman dated for a semester despite the fact that he treated them terribly. Embry is the type of guy who picks up girls by promising to paint their portrait. Hunnam does a fantastic job of portraying the horrible qualities that every woman knows they shouldn’t want but can’t resist. 

Holmes and Bratt don’t have much chemistry, but it was interesting to see a male character as a functionary to a female. Normally in Hollywood it is the female character that is thrown in as a plot point. In Abandon however it is Bratt’s Detective who is the plot point. This is Katie Holmes’s show and while I still can’t get past Joey Potter on the big screen, I’m sure others will be able to put aside the Dawson’s Creek association and enjoy this popcorn thriller. 

Writer-Director Stephen Gaghan, an Oscar winner for his screenplay for Traffic, steps behind the camera for the first time with Abandon and delivers a first-rate Brian De Palma impression, and I mean that in a good way. Abandon is the kind of trashy popcorn flick DePalma made in the 80s with movies like Dressed To Kill, Body Heat and Obsession. While it may not be as memorable as those films, Abandon is nearly as skillfully made and a sign of good things to come from this first-time director.