This is not a movie, not really. It is part “Alien” imitation, part (believe it or not) nostalgia. The nostalgia is for those who can enjoy reminders that help them remember the video game back when it was new and they liked it.
The granddaddy of this chase and shoot-em-first spin is “Wolfenstein.” It might make a better movie. After all, there actually were Nazis. Trouble with “Doom” is that it is uninventive, dull, slow (slow?!) shallow and boring. Stay home. Watch a shopping channel.
Did I say it hit top of the chart last week at the box office? That only shows how many people liked the game, how many were fooled by the trailer, and how many will watch anything they’ve heard of before.
All right.
Now comes Nicholas Cage in his second attempt this season to turn a lemon into lemonade. Ha ha, he’s an unhappy TV weatherman, a not too smart guy for whom things seldom turn out right. As he did earlier in “Lord of War,” Cage can make us stay with this sort of less than likable character.
There are some actors you can watch in just about anything, and Cage is just about one of them. This is not, repeat, not a comedy. Not exactly. It is a man overcoming self doubt, especially hard when audiences are apt to think his self-doubt is justified.
“Saw II” — like “Saw” of course — is gory, grisly, blood-spattered grim-tertainment. If you like that kind of thing (I hate it) you might like most of this. For the rest of us, it is less than grand Guignol.
Now for the good stuff:
See “A History of Violence” even if you have to drive to Sanford. It’s not that this picture is brilliant, or really, really good. It is just that Cronenberg’s latest is better than anything else opening this weekend.
Yes, it is drawn from a graphic novel (pun intended) which, as we all know, is basically a $20 comic book. But at that, at least the first hour of its hour and 35 minute running time is interesting, very interesting.
“A History of Violence” is a question of identity, explored psychologically and philosophically. Though the picture dissolves (betrays?) its original complexity whirling down the drain toward a standard resolution — still, it is more than worth a look. After all, you could have paid to see “Doom” instead. There’s that. With interesting turns by Vigo Mortensen and Ed Harris, how far wrong can you go?
Well, you could see “Stay.”
There is a film that hits most of the unimportant targets (plot, perspective) in interesting ways while failing to make us very interested in the characters whose lives drive the story. Simple rule: if you don’t care, you won’t care.
Somehow Ewan McGregor and Naomi Watts cannot pull us into director Marc Forster’s movie, despite directorial cleverness: tricky transitions, repeated sequences. Nifty, but who’ll care?
It may be that Ben Younger will hit the mark in “Prime,” which opens today.
After all, he has Meryl Streep and Uma Thurman. If Streep can keep from fidgeting in that distracting way of hers so we can actually get into the picture, Younger may pull it off.
Without seeing it, and even as a longtime fan of the Zorro legend, my advice is to pass on seeing Banderas and Jones in the latest serving. They were way too camp in the last one, and campiness never diminishes.
Finally, important questions. Where is “Proof” (except on a poster in the lobby) and where is “Capote?” Well, “Proof” is playing in Raleigh, Cary, and Chapel Hill. “Capote” is at the Varsity in Chapel Hill. If only they were here…
Finally, when, oh when is Good Night, and Good Luck” coming? And will it?
As of this writing, if you want to see this movie in North Carolina you have to drive to Charlotte. Are they short on prints or what?
John Chappell may be reached at jchappell@thepilot.com.
