Movie Reviews

How bad does a film have to be for Joe Eszterhas to refuse to make it?  How silly is it for a 50 year-old woman to strut around in skimpy outfits like a horny teenager?  How untitiliating is it to see a nude 50 year-old woman pretending to be a 20 year-old woman, and how sad is it to watch?  How unnecessary is this sequel?  What does Sharon Stone’s pet project really have to offer?  These questions and more can be answered if you’re willing to watch one of the most ridiculous films in recent memory.  Or you could just read my review.

Basic Instinct 2
1 Star

In 1992 Sharon Stone broke into the big time with the lurid sex-thriller Basic Instinct.  After years of struggle the hit allowed Stone to carve out a niche as the latest slutty tramp vixen (only latter to be dethrowned by the likes of Elizabeth Berkley and Krista Allen).  Finally her career broadened and she moved away from those roles into some fine performances in good films (such as last year’s Broken Flowers).  Sadly however she’s returned to the role that made her a star.  Now at the age of 48 Stone loses both her clothes and dignity and shows us quite plainly that the studios were right to try to abort this baby before it ever saw the light of day.

Author and serial killer Catherine Tramell (Sharon Stone) is living it up in England seeking thrills, taking chances, and leaving bodies strewn in her wake.  After her bad choice of mixing sex and driving causes the death of her latest one-night stand Catherine is taken in by Scotland Yard Detective Roy Washburn (David Thewlis) who wants nothing more than to nail her to the wall.  He sends Cathrine to his friend Dr. Michael Glass (David Morrissey), who is hiding enough of his own skeletons for an entirely separate movie, for a full evaluation.  Glass of course falls for the femme fatale and his world slowly disolves into crazy-wacko-funland-time.

Stone was guaranteed the right to make a sequel to Basic Instinct (despite the fact no one else wanted one) and over the past few years went as far to sue for the studio to produce this film.  Problem is it took 14 years to get the film done and Stone is now 48 years-old and acting like no time has gone by.  It’s hard not to notice the age of the actress and the rather inappropriate (and unintentionally hilarious at times) storyline for one such as Granny Stone to be starring in.  Stone goes for all the same jokes: “arrest me for smoking?,” trashy outfits, spreading her legs (thankfully this time she straddles the back of a chair), performing various sexual acts in public for an audience, and seducing a troubled guy who actually has the power to stop her at any time but doesn’t because… she’s so sexy??  Problem is we’ve seen this before and the rehash never adds anything new to the stock formula nor works with an actress of Stone’s age.

From beginning to end the film is simply ridiculous.  Nothing believable happens and the officers at Scotland Yard are even more inept at their jobs than the San Francisco cops from the first film.  Seriously folks are you telling me the only competent cops are so mesmerized by her they just can’t stop her either?  Flimsy plot twists involving a tabloid reporter (Hugh Dancy) digging into Dr. Glass’s shady past involving a former patient and Glass’ appoinment to a new position are meant to add some much needed story elements to the film yet they never come together or amount to much.  And as for the sex and thriller aspects, they fail to obscure what is simply dreadful dialogue and writing; unlike the first film, this time when Granny Stone drops her clothes and writhes around it’s not sexy, it’s not titilating or erotic, it’s just plain icky and more than a little sad.

You into GILFs?  If not pass this ridiculous absurdly retarded film by.  It’s so lurid and seedy it makes softcore porn look respectable by comparision.  Miss Stone please keep your legs crossed and your clothes on from now on.  I’ve seen enough to know I’ve seen enough.  The first movie was forgettable enough but this one just oozes all types of badness.  Probles arise because director Michael Caton-Jones is no Paul Verhoven and writers Leora Barish and Henry Bean are no Joe Eszterhas (stop and think about that for a a second, realize I’m not saying this in a good way, and realize the imlications of this statement) and Stone simply isn’t the sexpot she was almost fifteen-years ago.  The film was obvioulsy an attempt by Stone to recapture the glory of her most profitable years but the actuality of it will make you yearn for The Specialist and Sliver.  The film is not entirely pointless as it reveals exactly how bad a film has to be for Joe Eszterhaus to refuse to make it – exactly this bad.

Amongst the February dump of really bad films (released exactly one month ago in a limited release, out today in wide release), comes Tsotsi a film with more quality than most of the streamline Oscar Nominees. Beautifully shot and clear storyline, Tsotsi takes the audience through 6 days of a young gang leader’s transformation in the ghetto of Johannesburg. South Africa’s foreign film Oscar nomination is violent and gritty, but in the same form it’s very graceful and pure.

Tsotsi
3 & 1/2 Stars

From the production notes:
“The word “tsotsi” means a black urban criminal, a street thug or gang member in the vernacular of black townships in South Africa. Its origin is possibly a corruption of the Sesotho word “tsotsa” meaning to dress flashily, zoot suits being originally associated with tsotsis. A male is called a tsotsi and a female tsotsi is called a noasisa. Tsotsis are usually part of the urban youth gang society that grew up on the streets of the ghetto. Their history goes back to the famous youth gangs of the 1930’s in the Soweto township area outside Johannesburg.”

Following the tracks of a young thug as he makes one bad choice after another, leading to a catch 22 he can never escape, or can he? Tsotsi (Presley Chweneyagae) is a leader of a small group of young men who spend their time robbing, drinking and playing the dice, their way of leading the life that was dealt to them. Tsotsi starts to realize his need to escape the destruction that is controlling his life and destroying others, but not until he car jacks a lady and ends up with her baby. Almost abandoning this child with the car, he goes back and carries him home in a paper sack. Tsotsi makes an attempt of taking care of the child on his own, as if it’s a pet, but realizes he cannot provide adequate food or shelter. He holds a local girl at gun point to breastfeed the child and goes back to rob the home he stole the car from to gather up the child’s belongings. In that moment, he shoots one of his “brothers” to save the father’s life and thus a big leap in his transformation. In a slow progression to doing what’s right, but still doing it wrong, Tsotsi begins to come into his own and starts to take on responsibilities for his own actions. Before he blamed a poor childhood, a mean father and living in concrete tubes outside of the township, poor and destitute, as his crutch for reasoning. Tsotsi now realizes, that it’s his own actions that can create a better quality of life for himself and others around him. He has a good heart and has taken care of all of his “brothers” at one time or another, but still wreaks havoc on society. Still robs, thieves and treats others around him with little to no regard.

Progressively he cares for the child and starts to find a fondness towards the young widowed mother, Miriam (Terry Pheto), who eventually talks him into returning the baby. The ending of the film is the most moving of all. He returns the child, but gets caught between the mother and father he stole him from and the police. Giving up the baby with tears in his eyes and the hope for a second chance is a very powerful moment, does he get a second chance or is there no changing what life has handed to you?

Capturing a young audience with both rich and humanistic characters and a hip South African Kwaito artist, Zola, producer Peter Fudakowski played his cards right. Intriguing and luring, Tsotsi, keeps the audience completely attached to the character. Creates a sense of empathy for a thug that should deserve no forgiveness, but rises above it all and earns forgiveness and hopefully a second chance. Based on the novel by Athol Fugard, Tsotsi is set in modern times for expense reasons and to prove even a post apartheid South Africa still has it’s problems, but can rise above it all just like the character. Tsotsi was written in 1980 with a setting in the South African apartheid and a character that isn’t given a second chance at the end, a producer choosing to take the meaning of the story more over the exact story makes a more successful film. A few shots too close to the eye line to keep the audience tide with the lead character are a little over done, but can be forgiven for the richness surrounding those shots. The film is much about poverty vs. wealth and violence vs. compassion; the production design gives us the contrast even in the ghetto between Tsotsi’s dark rich and bare shack compared to Miriam’s warm, soft and inviting surroundings. The music compliments every scene and the actors bring out their best over coming some very rough and emotional moments.

Tsotsi is a rich and powerfully emotional film that will move the audience and aspire even those who may not agree with the quality of story.