mambubukid Reviews

A Few Good Men (1992)

Strone male leads save A Few Good Men from being a standard Hollywood courtroom affair.

[8/10 · 13 October 2000]

The courtroom is an ample and inexhaustible well that provides Hollywood with enough dramatic material just, just in case movies scribes run out of good ideas. But it seems that the writers of this genre themselves have run out of good ideas for this genre, turning courtroom drama into melodrama.

The formula has often gone this way: defendant has no case, long and overdrawn character cross-examination, vital witness and/or evidence pops up, accused is found guilty, case close and everyone lives happily ever after.

It is no different in Rob Reiner's A Few Good Men. We knew Lt. Caffey's clients' backs are against the wall. We know that during the course of the next fifty minutes or so, we will be shocked at every evidence that surfaces and, refusing to believe anything we see firsthand, we will be on an emotional and mental tightrope till the jury's out. We see Col. Nathan Jessep's face and we suspect. We see Col. Markinson's face and we're very certain the devil's just around.

The film's contrivances though, are in relation to plot, which doesn't mean a lot in this film genre so A Few Good Men atones itself handsomely through top-notch acting. (Dialogues are also A-grade in poetic sarcasm but I don't know if it is to the writer's credit or to the actor's delivery.)

There's nothing more anybody could say about how the actors fit perfectly well in their roles. Among the three defense attorneys, nobody essays that unworded reluctance better than Kevin Pollack. The usually nasty film villain, J.T. Walsh convinces us to offer his guilt-stricken character sympathy this time, and we do. Two of the bratpackers are given acting baptisms of fire here, too. Sutherland's shady lieutenant and Bacon's 'strictly business' gentleman/lawyer are welcome transition from their boy-next-door images. Unfortunately, the lone female lead played by Moore doesn't really shine in this testosterone-saddled film. Either the role wasn't so difficult to cast or there were just too many excellent performances.

Now, for the two leads. At the onset, there's nothing really new for Cruise to work here. Boyish arrogance, huge chip on his shoulder, wisecrack, we've seen Tom do this before and even an intelligent script doesn't really save him from the thought of being stereotyped on this film. Everything changes however, when he gets into the ring to trade barbs with Nicholson. If Caffey stunned the court audience while he systematically leveled Jessep to submission, Cruise stunned the movie audience with a never-before-seen onscreen bravado. If Caffey proved he deserved to play in the big league, Cruise proved his acting deserved to be paid notice. Remember, in the history of Hollywood, being in Jack Nicholson's face is not an enviable position, let alone getting into his head but only a few, like Cruise's Caffey, tames the beast Jack and convinces the jury -- the audience -- that he can overcome.

As for Jack, his colonel appeared in only a third of the film but the kind of phobia his role induces is a toast to the kind of ubertalent Nicholson is. If anybody has any doubt about Cruise's acting in this film, look at Tom's lieutenant slugging it out with Jack's colonel. One has to be an exceptional actor not to flinch at Nicholson's evil eyes or his sick grin.

Who says Mr. Nice Guy can't look straight into the devil's eyes?

The Matrix (1999)

The benchmark for all sci-fi films to come

[10/10 · 19 September 2000]

The story of a reluctant Christ-like protagonist set against a baroque, MTV backdrop, The Matrix is the definitive hybrid of technical wizardry and contextual excellence that should be the benchmark for all sci-fi films to come.

Hollywood has had some problems combining form and matter in the sci-fi genre. There have been a lot of visually stunning works but nobody cared about the hero. (Or nobody simply cared about anything.) There a few, though, which aroused interest and intellect but nobody 'ooh'-ed or 'aah'-ed at the special effects. With The Matrix, both elements are perfectly en sync. Not only did we want to cheer on the heroes to victory, we wanted them to bludgeon the opposition. Not only did we sit in awe as Neo evaded those bullets in limbo-rock fashion, we salivated.

But what makes The Matrix several cuts above the rest of the films in its genre is that there are simply no loopholes. The script, written by the Wachowski brothers is intelligent but carefully not geeky. The kung-fu sequences were deftly shot -- something even Bruce Lee would've been proud of. The photography was breathtaking. (I bet if you had to cut every frame on the reel and had it developed and printed, every single frame would stand on its own.) And the acting? Maybe not the best Keanu Reeves but name me an actor who has box-office appeal but could portray the uneasy and vulnerable protagonist, Neo, to a T the way Reeves did. But, come to think of it, if you pit any actor beside Laurence Fishburne, you're bound to confuse that actor for bad acting. As Morpheus, Mr. Fishburne is simply wicked! Shades of his mentor-role in Higher Learning, nobody exudes that aura of quiet intensity than Mr. Fishburne. His character, battle-scarred but always composed Morpheus, is given an extra dose of mortality (He loves Neo to a fault.) only Mr. Fishburne can flesh out.

People will say what they want to say about how good The Matrix is but the bottomline is this: finally there's a philosophical film that has cut through this generation. My generation. The Wachowski brothers probably scribbled a little P.S. note when they finished the script saying: THINK FOR A MOMENT ABOUT YOUR EXISTENCE. What is the Matrix, you ask? Something that's closer to reality than you think.

Either that or it's my personal choice for best film of all-time.