Recently in Drama Category

This movie is not what I expected when I first looked at the DVD cover. Make no mistake, Beyonce's presence in this one should not lead you to conclude its a romantic comedy or lighter fair. This is a dramatic story with some depth, and the three main characters all more than carry their weight in sustaining the suspense of the story, which doesn't exactly take you where you think it will.

Derek Charles ( Iris Elba American Gangster) is a financial analyst who is on the fast track and loving it at his firm. His wife, Sharon (Beyonce Knowles The Pink Panther) is his former secretary who is now a happy stay at home mother to their infant son. All seems well, even when Derek is introduced to a nice new "temp" worker at the firm, Lisa (Ali Larter Final Destination)   Lisa seems friendly, more than efficient at her job, and its obvious that she is just a little smitten with her temporary boss, Derek. But, who wouldn't be? And, a little innocent inter-office banter and friendliness on Derek's part when Lisa gets dumped by her boyfriend isn't that big of a deal. Or, is it? I won't play spoiler on this one, but the situation between the two soon ecalates into one of pasion, a heated and intense love affair between the two.

There is just one thing.

None of that actually happens. But, Lisa thinks its happening. And, soon, we the results of someone living in their own reality and how it effects everyone around her. Now, I told you earlier the flick would not take you exactly where you expect it to, and right now you might be thinking this will be an updated version of Fatal Attraction. Its not, either in intent or or result. I think that is mostly because Larter makes her character empathetic, if not sympathetic, and it is easy for us to see why it takes Derek, and everyone else, to see just how combustible this situation will be.

For you Beyonce fans, as well as those of you who might be skeptical of her acting "chops", understand that her character-Sharon- is not one dimensional, nor is she there just as eye candy playing the wife in the backround. Oh, no. Sharon is, in many respects including the climax of the film, the hero. The final conflict is between her and Lisa, so forget the sterotypical man coming in at the last moment to save her.

I can see how some might view the hand to hand combat scene between Lisa and Sharon as a little bit cmpy, but I disagree. Its just very seldom we see movfie fight scenes between women in a realistic fashion. They are either set up as superheroines (Kill Bill Vol II), or the quintessential male fantasy of two chicks ripping each other's clothes off. Now, speaking for most of the males out there, it would be fun to see that with Ms. Knowles and Ms. Larter, bu it would be beneath a film of this caliber so, for those of you hoping to see a little of that, you'll be disappointed.

What isn't disappointing is the way the emotional arc of each character is built up and presented to us in a beleivable way, which makes Obssessed more than worth your while if you decide to take a look at it.       

Directed by Eric Mandelburg. Drama, Action.

Starring: Thora Birch, Keith Carradine, Brendan Sexton, Dean Winters, Colleen Camp.

SYNOPSIS: DRAMA BASED ON TRUE EVENTS OF A SMART YOUNG WOMAN TURNED PROSTITUTE WHO SEDUCES TWO MEN INTO NAMING HER AS A BENIFICIARY ON THEIR LIFE INSURANCE, WITH BOTH ENDING UP DEAD OF CYANIDE POISINING.

This is a very interesting film, I'll start out by stating clearly. Despite being a true crime aficionado, I will confess to knowing nothing of the murders committed by Barbara Hoffman (Thora Birch) in the late 70's in the Madison, Wisconsin area. Having seen this flick, I'm very eager to do more background research on the events, which I think speaks well of the flick.

Having said that, I must say that this is a difficult film to follow the first time you see it...there is no simple chronological flow to the film. It starts in 1980 (the time of Hoffman's trial) and immediately jumps back to the 1977 (the time the events occurred) and keeps flashing back and forward from there. At times, it is difficult to fully grasp where you are in the story, which is a good one and, in my opinion, very well acted.

Of course, its easy to criticize from the cheap seats without offering an alternative solution and, since I don't want to be "that guy", I will say that I thought the movie would have been just a little easier to follow if it was shot in a straight "start to finish" chronological style or a conventional flashback style. Instead, we have flashbacks within flashbacks, accompanied by cutaways. Not to give too much away, but when one of the main characters meets his end early in the flick, don't despair, because you will see him again often in the ubiquitous flashback scenes.

Now that I'm done with my major complaint about this flick, I'm on to the more positive, and there is a good bit of that.

This is a very good film. Yes, its low budget, but I don't like to get too hung up on that aspect because those of us who love flicks know that the budget often is not the determining factor in whether or not a flick works or not. Here, you have what I've often said is the key to a good flick: 1) an interesting story 2) good acting 3) good direction. That's it. Notice nothing about CGI or SFX, though those things can certainly add to the movie, they don't make it good.

Enough proselytizing, I'm off the soap box. First and foremost, this is true crime, so if you like that sub-genre, you're already half way to becoming a fan of Winter of Frozen Dreams. Second, it is wonderfully shot. Those of us old enough to remember the 70's remember it as a very distinct time in terms of fashion, both clothing and personal, as well as language and, well, it had a special "feel" to it. This flick captures the feel of the 70's without going over the top or flirting with spoofing the era. I guess the best way to say it is I felt like I was watching a story unfold in the late '70's, as opposed to feeling like I was watching a movie that was trying to look like the 70's, and, inevitably, overdoing it with the wide ties, Afros, long hair, platform shoes, disco music blaring from everywhere and bushy sideburns.

Birch is really good here, her character extremely hard to peg and describe. She is both the protagonist and the antagonist, in a way. Will you, kind of, root for her-in a way, or despise her? Will you form the opinion that this former honor student at one of the U.S.'s finest universities couldn't have possibly done the things she was accused of, or will you have no doubt, based on the movie, that she is guilty as sin? Will you understand completely how she was able to seduce her victims or will you wonder just what in the world these men were thinking about?

I predict your answer to these questions just might be: yes to all of the above. Which makes it interesting, at least in my book. My superficial research into the actual Barbara Hoffman would seem to indicate that Birch nailed it.

Keith Carradine (Southern Comfort, Chiefs) is excellent as the hard bitten detective so close to retirement he's half way to Florida, but pauses to solve the riddle no one else even realizes has been posed. Brandon Sexton is also very good in his role as Hoffman's lover & victim (?)...to me he looks very much like a young...Keith Carradine. Also, kudos to Dean Winters (Oz) in his small but important role as Barbara's pimp. For me, the most notable thing with the supporting cast in this movie was a barely recognizable-to me anyway- Colleen Camp (Die Hard 3) as Birch's potential, if slightly looney, mother in law.

Winter of Frozen Dreams is a flick I think you have to give a shot if you like true crime or just a well acted drama. Yes, it has its flaws-just like almost every flick ever made-and the one I talked about earlier makes this the kind of flick I predict you'll have to watch twice to fully appreciate.

The good thing is, this is a flick I also predict you will want to watch again.

Winner of the Oscar for Best Picture. Starring Matt Dillon, Don Cheadle, Sandra Bullock, Ryan Phillipe, Brendan Fraser, Ludicris, Loretta Devine,Terrance Howard, Jennifer Esposito, Thandie Newton 

Synopsis: "Crash" is a movie featuring an emsemble cast dealing with events that transpire over a short period of time in Los Angeles, yet connects these people of differing backgrounds.

When I first saw Crash on dvd a while back, there was no question in my mind that it was the best movie of the year, and maybe one of the best of the last several years. Foremost, it touched on a very real and relevant overall topic, which is how citizens deal with each other in our ever diversifying culture. 

The best thing about the picture is that it gives us a look at the multi layered and sometimes ambiguous actions and behaviors of people we deal with who may be from different cultures or who we may perceive to be different from us.

I say that because in the movie, I was thinking that the Persian store owner and the Latino locksmith had much more in common on an everyday basis than differences due to ethnicity. Likewise, I felt that the same way about the "good" police officer (Ryan Phillipe, Five Fingers  Stop-Loss) and Terence Howard's character. As you saw in the movie, there was a big clash between both of these pairs as we see almost everyone in the film forming opinions, attifudes, and actions towards others based on their beliefs as to that person's ethnic or socioeconomic group.

Two of the characters who exhibit the most overt prejudice in the film, Matt Dillon and Sandra Bullock, also show exceptional empathy or feelings for members of the very same groups that they were loudly prejudiced against in the film. Some might say that the film is pie-in-the-sky or Hollywood trying to impose its "values" on those of us who want to be content with our prejudice But, I don't think this was the intent of the film, which is why it resonated so well.

For many of us with similar real life experiences to some of the characters in the movie, it is not surprising that the racist cop character played by Matt Dillon could have a father who was unusually kind to people of color before it was fashionable, then display incredible courage to help an African American woman who had earlier been the victim of his racism. It is not surprising that Sandra Bullock's character, after a traumatic experience with a couple of non-whites, could rail loudly, and in the presence of her Hispanic locksmith, against Hispanic "gang members" and then realize and accept that her best friend is a Hispanic.

Those are only two of the many instances within this excellent film, but, to me, it has the ring of truth and reality. Certainly, the movie's Los Angeles setting provides a setting for the intersection of cultures that many people might not experience on a day to day basis. But, ,there is something there for everyone, even within cultures, as we see with Don Cheadle's character as opposed to his family in the film.

I think Crash is one of the most important films to come out in some time and, no, I'm not one who thinks all films need to have some life changing meaning. To me, its fine if a film is just a two hour escape or a good time. But, when a film does have something to say or, more importantly, make us think about, its all the better.

And I would not classify this film as controversial, just real. For all of the criticism-much of it deserved-about the type of films that Hollywood produces for us, it needs to be congratulated when it makes a concerted effort to gives us a superior effort like this movie.

The Oscar was well deserved and, frankly, no other film of the year was even close. 

Written and Directed by Sean Penn. Starring Jack Nicholson, David Morse, Priscila Barnes, Piper Laurie, Anjelica Huston, Robin Wright Penn, Richard Bradford. Drama

SYNOPSIS: A man struggles with his deep hatred and desire for revenge on the drunk driver who killed his young daughter and has just been released from prison.

I've often said that all you really need for a good movie-even in this day of CGI and almost no limit what can be presented on screen-is a good story that is well acted and well directed. The Crossing Guard is just one more bit of evidence of this. (Of course, I'm not the first guy to say this, probably not even the millionth, but I'm claiming it)

Almost unbelievably, I had not ever seen or even heard much about this (relatively) low budget indie film chock full of A list actors, if not celebrity. The big draw here, of course is the one guy who is A list in every category, Jack Nicholson (A Few Good Men, Hoffa), who plays Freddy Gale, a middle aged jewelry store owner who has barely kept it together after the death of his young daughter at the hands of a drunk driver seven years before. As if the pain of losing his only child weren't enough of a cross to bear, his marriage to the child's mother (Anjelica Huston, Gardens of Stone, Iron Jawed Angels) has long since lay in ruins, to the point where his ex-wife is now (relatively) happily remarried.

Throw onto this fire a little gas in the form of the release drunken louse who took his child's life, and Gale is ready to go completely over the edge...not to mention that he wants to kill the man and isn't shy about sharing his feelings with his ex-wife.

And, as for the antagonist in this story, let me give you (I'm not making this up, the only thing I did not like about the story), newly freed state inmate John Booth (David Morse, Disturbia, The Negotiator). Not to nitpick such a great movie, but the choice of name was just a little too "out there" for me, I mean why not go all the way and give him the middle name of "Wilkes"? In fairness, the movie was based on a novel-which I have not read-so I'm sure the character names come from there.

Anyway, lest you think from my early intro that this flick is a revenge/action type of story, let me tell you that, to me, its simply a story about people in a difficult set of circumstances doing the best they can with either: 1) the hand they've been dealt by fate or 2) the bed they've made for themselves.

You feel some sort of empathy, if not outright sympathy, for all of the characters at some point. Yes, even the ne'er do well Booth, who we soon realize is not so much a bad man, but a man who did a bad thing and, well...you'll probably kind of like him. Not in the "I'd like to have a beer with him" sort of way, but in appreciation of a man who has done wrong, and knows he's done wrong, and really isn't expecting or looking for any sympathy.

He's even somewhat surprised at the love still shown him by his parents (Piper Laurie, Carrie; Richard Bradford, The Untouchables) The story kind of unfolds with the parallel lives of both Booth and Freddy as they progress after Booth's release from prison and Freddy's simmering rage. The two men are on a collision course and we know it. What makes the story so interesting and compelling is the depth that both the two main characters have as well as the supporting cast, with a bunch of heavyweight performances.

We all know how good Nicholson is and he doesn't disappoint here (has he ever?) With every word and in each scene, we feel Freddy's unrelenting pain, his anger, his disappointment, his sense of utter hopelessness. But, we also wish, in some cases, he would just act a little bit better. O.k., much better. This is no more evident than in the scenes with his ex-wife. Hutson and Nicholson have such good chemistry in these electric "love-hate" scenes that you are going to jumping back to these scenes a couple of times. Wow.

Now, I'm raving about Nicholson and Huston, and me telling true movie fans that they do great jobs in their roles is about as surprising as my report to you that it gets cold in Chicago in January. Throw in some excellent supporting performances from Robin Wright Penn and Priscilla Barnes (The Devil's Rejects) and you've got more good acting in this flick than you'll see in an entire summer of blockbusters.

But, you know what? For me the standout here is David Morse. Booth is the key to the story because if you don't identify or feel for him, at least a little, this story loses some of its power. Not to mention, he has to go toe to toe in some critical scenes with maybe the greatest living actor and not get blown off the screen. And he does it. He

more than does it, trust me. If you've seen some of Morse's work (and how can you not have if you're a movie buff? The Green Mile, John Adams, The Rock, 16 Blocks, the list goes on) then you know what a solid character/supporting actor he is. Make no mistake, he can carry a film and he nearly does here. Never seen him better.

As for how this ends, you know full well I'm not a spoiler and its difficult to talk too much in detail without giving it away, but I will say it's a powerful film that provokes a lot of thought. The ending is also powerful, not so much a shocker as it takes you somewhere you probably didn't think you were going to go, and-like real life-its kind of ambiguous and everything is not wrapped up in a nice neat bow for you.

Sean Penn might be, like Clint Eastwood, the kind of director that is as good a director as an actor, which is really saying something. Those of you who check this out on DVD will hear the actors rave about how he makes it easy for them, i.e., brings out their best performances. Sounds pretty much like the main job of the director to me.

This is an excellent film.

Sorry for the wordiness, but that is really all I've been trying to say.

Directed by Robert Lee. Starring Jeff Fahey, Erika Eleniak, Jessica Amlee, Britney Irvin. Synopsis: A scientist and his young pair of researchers determine that there is going to be a catastrophic shift in the Earth's atmosphere, resulting in a shift of the polar extremes and resulting in absolute zero in most balmy and tropical places near and south of the equator...and it is going to happen soon.

When a campy, made for TV cable flick has a title like Absolute Zero, its almost too easy to make a lot of wise a** and cutting put-down remarks on how cheesy the movie was by incorporating several variations of the term "zero" into the review. To do that would be low brow, insensitive, and kind of juvenile in the pursuit of a chuckle or two at the expense of a serious, well thought out review.

So, I guess I'll just get started.

No, seriously, this is not a very good movie, although some of you may have seen it in your local video store with multiple copies available in the new release section, which can-sometimes-indicate that it might not be too, too bad. Well, not in this case, although I want to go on record right now and say its not completely horrible, so yours truly will not relegate it to the "Duds" category, because the seasoned movie watchers among you might just have an idea going in that you are not going to be watching top tier stuff and, if you go into not expecting Citizen Kane, or even The Towering Inferno, you might be able to enjoy some aspects of the film.

As you will suspect from the box cover, this is one of those catastrophic-in-nature movies that reflects the unthinkable change in nature. The more cynical among you will think that this is just a low budget rip off of The Day After Tomorrow, and I will admit that the thought crossed my mind as well. They are careful in the film not to refer to the coming calamity as another Ice Age, referring to it as that theoretical scientific condition known as "absolute zero". I don't know if this is legitimate science or not, it made for o.k. theater. (Although I'm quite sure that this condition, if it could occur, wouldn't happen over the period of a couple of days)

Jeff Fahey plays the scientist who first sounds the alarm, based on his observation of some curious weather patterns and his findings on a research trip to the North Pole (in which all of his buddies were killed due to an extreme and deadly shift in the weather, and Jeff was last seen huddling up with his dying pal in a cave when a terrifying CGI storm that destroyed the command post was rolling in. My thought in this scene was "I wonder how he is going to get out of this one?". Well, we fade to black and in the next scene he is back in his office in sunny Miami. You've got to love a script that doesn't sweat the small stuff in details)

Well, when he gets back he sounds the alarm but, as will surprise no one, the higher ups don't believe him, or if they do, they think this big shift is centuries in the future and every one is more worried about securing government funding in the present to ward off this disaster.

Sorry, guys, absolute-freakin-zero is not coming in the 23rd century, its coming later today, and boy does it hit Miami hard. The only people listening to Jeff and his two student researchers are an old professor buddy of his and the prof's wife (Erika Eleniak. Under Siege ), who just happens to be an old flame of Jeff's.

Ah, yes, the tried and true formula of boy meets girl/boy dumps girl/girl marries boy's best friend without boy knowing it/boy meets girl again/girl's hubby gets killed in scientifically impossible catastrophe/boy, girl, and girl's daughter survive in boy's office which is somehow built to withstand a condition no one thought possible two days before it happened/boy gets girl for good/ has been done many, many times, but never better than in Absolute Zero. 

By far, the standout performance in this one is Jessica Amlee, who plays the little girl and has an obvious screen presence and natural talent. That's not to put down the other actors, the script and ridiculous settings did not give them a whole lot to work with.

You might expect some awesome FX in this one like you saw in The Day After Tomorrow. Well, you will be disappointed. Although some of the CGI is not bad, there are others that are cheesier than a Wisconsin dairy farm. In addition to that, at times when they are not using CGI when showing us the devastation coming to Miami, they use the trick of a local newscast footage, which looks suspiciously like some of the footage you might see during the first snowstorm of the year in Albany. Clearly not Miami.

Look, if you've got nothing better to do or have an end of the world complex or love improbable reunions of lost love or if you are a member of that segment of the population who enjoys seeing Erika Eleniak no matter what...then check this out and be prepared to be slightly amused for a while. Otherwise, don't feel bad if you give this a pass, you haven't missed much.

Starring Josh Lucas, Jon Voight, Derek Luke, Austin Nichols, Damsine Radcliffe, Al Shearer. Drama/Historical/Sports. Synopsis:The story based on the 1966 Texas Western (now theUniverstiy of Texas-El Paso/UTEP) University basketball team and its coach, Don Haskins, who became the first major college team to start five African-American players en route to its national championship victory over the Kentucky Wildcats in the final. Directed by James Gartner.

This one was certainly up my alley from the beginning: sports, history, and in a film, three things I love dearly. The first thing that you should know is that it is not a completely accurate historical rendition. Some of you know that I have railed against this typical Hollywood practice before, but I did not have a problem with it in Glory Road , as none of the ultimate facts are changed, nor are things simply made and/or attributed to specific real life people in a false fashion, and then passed off as fact. What the film does do, however, is take some dramatic license, not necessarily changing any facts or general themes, but either embellishing them or making them more dramatic in typical movie fashion.

The story is told from the point of view of legendary Hall of Fame coach Don Haskins (Josh Lucas), a young coach still in his early 30's whose previous head coaching experience was as a girl's high school coach. Haskins proceeds to start to recruit black players, fairly controversial at a time when no major college programs in the Deep South has a single black player, and many other schools across the country had only one or two. The movie gives the incorrect impression that the story unfolds over one year and also that the seven black players on the '66 team were the first at the school. In fact, Haskins had been coaching at Texas Western for three years before the championship team, and had black players on the roster prior to '66. (One of whom was Nolan Richardson, coach of the '94 champion Arkansas Razorbacks). This, however, is a common compression/composite tactic used in many historical movies, especially sports movies such as Eight Men Out.

The movie jumps right into the story, dealing with Haskins' single minded approach to building a successful basketball team, and it is clear that racial/social change is not the sole or even primary objective, either of the coach or the players. I especially appreciated the depiction of the players, both black and white, though the black players' characters were much more developed in the film. The players are not shown as one dimensional civil rights martyrs or jealous bigots, which would have been very easy to do. We see the players probably as they were in 1966: aware of the world and its realities and changes, but also young men who loved a sport, having fun, music, girls, and worried about their classes. This,  to me, made the film more real and I empathized with them even more than I knew I would going into the picture.

All the young actors playing the team do a good job, you will find something in most of them that will remind you or yourself or someone you know/knew at a similar age, whether that was last year, 10 years ago, or  30 years ago. Probably most recognizable is the character of Bobby Joe Hill (Derek Luke. Antwone Fisher, Friday Night Lights) a key player from Detroit who is the only member of the team, if I'm not mistaken, who is deceased.

Jon Voight (Midnight Cowboy) makes an appearance as the legendary Adolph Rupp, a giant among college coaches who was long thought to be a racist and did not integrate the Kentucky team until the 1970's. The movie does not dwell on the racism or problems the team faced, in fact, in my opinion, it could have been dealt with much more. Instead, we see good side story lines about the health and commitment to academics of the players and their families.

Josh Lucas is superb as Don Haskins, the only drawback being that he is obviously much, much smaller than the real Haskins. His portrayal of the coach grabs you from the first scene, and his intensity does not let up. 

The film is fast moving, with no lulls in the story or wasted scenes. The finale against the Kentucky is well shot and basketball fans will appreciate that the action passes as legitimate major college action. Gartner takes some license especially in the final, the film has it going down to the wire with Texas Western staging a comeback in the final two minutes, while in reality Texas Western led by double digits through most of the second half and the game did not go down to the last minute.

If you see this on DVD, there are some wonderful special features on the real players, as well as Coach Haskins who consulted on the film. A nice feel good, sports movie with a story that many of us already know, or can figure out as we've seen similar things before. But, the reason that sports films are so often winners is because we like to see the struggle that leads up to the ultimate victory (or heartbreaking defeat), and it works again here. You'll see shades of Miracle, Hoosiers, and Remember the Titans here. If you love basketball at all, you owe it yourself to check this out, even if you are not into the old time stuff. (The presence of Pat Riley-the current Miami Heat President-as a character in the film as the Kentucky star will make it more modern to you).

I don't know that Glory Road is the best sports movie you'll ever see, but it will be in most people's top ten.

Synopsis: A successful, yet troubled psychiatrist accepts a temporary residential position in a mental health facility for the purpose of around the clock coverage of his controversial method of treating patients. There he encounters a friendly, but disapproving head doctor as well as the most challenging patient he has ever encountered as he comes to grips with what he is really running away from in his own life. Directed by Eriq La Salle. Starring Eriq La Salle, Michael Beach, Ronny Cox, Tia Texada, John C. McGinley, Sinbad.  

I came across this dvd in the "for sale" bin of the video store, and I am glad I did. Its the dream of the serious movie buff, to find a movie (preferably for free or a real good price), that you don't know anything about, have never heard of, but get it and find you really enjoy it and will watch it again and again over time.

I picked it up, like so many do, because of the intriguing cover and the fact that two really good movie character actors, were the leads in this one. Its not a horror film nor does it pretend to be, although the DVD covers in some instances might lead one to believe that it is. Its a psychological drama (notice, I did not say "thriller")  

This is the quintessential low budget film, shot almost entirely on one location, with only a couple of forays outside. The film starts with psychiatrist Dr. Ty Adams (Michael Beach Internal Affairs) awakening suddenly from a gruesome nightmare. He then proceeds on to the Sedah State Mental Hospital, where he is going to display his controversial treatment methods in residency while being filmed around the clock.

There, he meets a friendly but reluctant head Dr. Delaszo (Ronny Cox Deliverance, Total Recall), a humorous orderly (Sinbad), a sensuous cafeteria worker (Tia Texada Nurse Betty), and the most confounding patient he has ever encountered: a suave, enigmatic, and articulate man who calls himself "Satan"(Eriq La Salle Coming To America) and seems much more interested in Dr. Adam's troubles than his own.  

There are some side stories in addition to this main progression, of course. Dr. Adams, we learn as the film goes on, has recently lost his wife and daughter to suicide in the wake of his failure to adequately treat his own schizophrenic child. There is also the other problematic patient, in addition to Satan, a young woman with extremely violent tendencies who never speaks. Dr. Adams takes a special interest in her case, although he doesn't eschew his practice of ignoring medication for therapy.

The movie is carried, however, by the scenes between Beach and La Salle and Beach and Cox. These are the heart of the movie and central to the twist at the end of the movie. Curiously, Cox and La Salle, interestingly, never appear on screen together. Michael Beach has long been a solid, if unheralded, character actor (Internal Affairs, Waiting to Exhale, Bad Company) and its nice to see him get the opportunity to carry an entire movie as the lead, as he is in almost every scene.

Also deserving mention are John C. McGinley, who plays the head of the film crew employed to capture every moment of Beach's actions at the facility. Tia Texada simply heats up the screen in her few important minutes with the perfect blend of smoldering, but subtly understated, sultriness.

Eriq La Salle has a great presence, as always, and he accomplishes his goal of making his character unsettling. La Salle also directs this film, and those of you who see the DVD version will enjoy his director's commentary, talking start to finish about the movie, and what he was trying to accomplish and why. This is a pleasant contrast to many director's commentaries, which focus on telling unrelated stories, fawning over the actors, or complaining about the lack of financing they had for the film. La Salle is trying to show us his vision of ultimate questions and issues that all of us must face at some point. Whether or not you agree with La Salle's interpretation, you will see it clearly, at least in the end, and it will give you something to seriously think about.  

As I said earlier, Crazy is Hell, despite its title, is not what you might think it to be on the surface...which is the whole point of the movie, as you will see in the ending.  The film never tries to be what its not, and you won't see any weak attempts at gratuitous gore or awkward CGI. It is high on symbolism. Its low budget and it never pretends that its not. Almost everyone will suspect that there is a twist coming, the trick will be in guessing what that particular twist is. There are a couple of different ways the movie could go, and the way that it does go is not surprising...if you pick up the clues.

Sound cryptic? Well, its meant to be, especially for those who have not seen the film. One good thing is that this will hold up upon a second viewing as La Salle doesn't cheat in the build up to the conclusion.

This is a solid film that will be enjoyable and the kind of movie you watch over again as time passes since its message, as it were, are timeless. At worst, this will be a film that you can talk about, think about, and discuss with someone else who saw it as well.

Not too shabby, huh? Do yourself a favor and pick up Crazy as Hell if you get the chance.