NEW ROSE HOTEL (1998)

Directed By: Abel Ferrara

Written By: Abel Ferrara and Christi Zois

Based on a short story by William Gibson

Cinematography: Ken Kelsch 

Editor: Jim Mol and Anthony Redman

Cast: Willem Dafoe, Christopher Walken, Asia Argento, Annabella Sciorra, Victor Argo, Gretchen Mol, John Lurie 

In the not-too-distant future, two New York businessmen plot to play two multinational rival corporations against each other, with a little help from a shady Italian street woman, to obtain an important Japanese businessman for the company they work at, only things are not always as they appear.


Abel Ferrara is a talented writer and director who always seems to dip his toe into things that could be seen as shocking. It might be that is just his interest in the stories that he wants to tell. Nowadays he makes more personal, dramatic, artistic films, but for a time he seemed to be a provocateur when it came to cinema stories of the streets of New York, in particular, starting out with more horror films, then seemed to have a period where it was mostly crime related films.

He is a filmmaker of interest who is very unapologetic, though I will admit since his movie, BAD LIEUTINENT, and his one studio-made film a remake of INVASION OF THE BODY SNATCHERS, his films have been for me at least hit or miss. Unfortunately, it feels like they usually miss or fail to make a connection. Though he’s a filmmaker where you can always find something of interest in his films or his filmmaking.

I remember at the time being interested in this movie, more to see Asia Argento and I felt because she looked very enticing, and the story sounded somewhat interesting. Not to mention liked the cast of it mostly being her Willem Dafoe and Christopher Walken, even though at the time it seemed like Willem Dafoe and Christopher Walken were almost in everything so seeing them in yet another film wasn’t that enticing but with her as the added attraction. 

As I had only seen pictures of her and not really seen her in a movie, not to mention with Abel Ferrara directing, I knew it would be dark and troubling, but reading the synopsis of the story and plot it never quite gelled with me, especially from people who have seen it They just didn’t seem like it was worth going to movie theaters to check this movie out.

Watching it now. Almost 25 years later I’m kind of glad I didn’t see it in theaters. It’s not a bad movie, but I would’ve been greatly disappointed and it would’ve probably been more forgettable to me. I would’ve seen it as more experimental and artistic, so it would also show how the story could be told more on a limited budget, especially one that is set in the future and kind of cyberpunk. As after all, it is based on a short story by William Gibson. This might be why the film seems so rebellious and Avant Garde or striving to be different. 

The film has a lot of cutaways of digital video and photography that we come back to throughout the story.

There is a lot of eroticism and a few scenes of sex on display. One of the themes of this film seems to be fantasy and how much you let it take over especially as you know the truth but you want to believe.

It seems like the film is more about all these vipers being hustlers on their own, being brought together to take down a big fish, and slowly turning on each other, as at the center of it one makes the dangerous decision of not only trust, but love, especially with somebody who works as a professional seductress were acting is their professional, so you never know when they’re being genuinely Trust or telling you what you wanna hear to their own satisfaction

It seems like the camera is as captivated with Asia Argento as much as The characters are as it always seems to be exploring and exposing her allure, so while it doesn’t provide her an acting exercise where we see her day-to-day. this is a goddess movie. Where it seems the allure and the strength of the film is on the femme fatale and how the audience feels about her as a film and its own wife fetishizes her to a degree, making the film and the protagonist see her more as a goddess.

There is Something about Asia Argento, her films, and her career. I’ve always been kind of in awe, but she rarely got a chance to shine or have that career-defining performance. It was more she was in hit movies, but you don’t, in particular, remember her performances or character, because you could point out movies like LAND OF THE DEAD or MARIE ANTOINETTE or XXX, yes she was in those films as a cast member, but none of her performances stand out.

Even when she directed her own films such as an adaptation of the book THE HEART IS DECEITFUL ABOVE ALL THINGS. which were more controversial and shocking, she made a little impact, but never long-lasting unfortunately, as they were artistic, but seemed more poised to shock. so I always look at her career as a kind of example of promises made, but never quite capitalizing on all the talk, hype, or Fame. there might’ve been more personal reasons as to why her career stalled at a certain point, but I still find her talented, beautiful, and stunning and half the time when I watch some of her movies. It was just to see her in it And she looked sensational and in most of them captivating. 

It’s also interesting that the film has great actress Gretchen Mol featured in a small but important role throughout as at the time she was also considered an ingenue in the acting world, the next big thing or flavor of the month at the time, though she is displayed for less in this film.

The film comes across as a futuristic tale that had an idea that was original but did not have the budget for the ambitions of the script so it feels like the third act is made to put the story of what actually happens or happens from scenes we’ve seen earlier as flashbacks or memories to explain it all.

It’s an interestingly constructed film with a good soundtrack. that uses a lot of it looks to be handheld video and a bunch of scenes, or at least the beginning of digital video being used and more professional films.

Offering a third-act explanation of everything by pointing out what was evident in playing sight from before now that might be because I just didn’t have enough money to finish and film. Actually, it is very creative but can be seen as frustrating to someone in the audience who is traditional filmmaking or is used to having, their hands held to end to the end

Does it have an ending? Strangely it feels somewhat unfinished. This would be a film that definitely could stand the case of being remade.

A bit disappointing but creative. Its artistic flourishes seem born out of not having the budget that was expected and making the best out of the situation. Though definitely a film where the camera is in love with Asia Argento. As much as the main character.  As it spotlights her almost fetishistically. 

Grade: C

FALSE POSITIVE (2021)

Directed By: John Lee
Written By: John Lee & Ilana Glazer 
Story By: John Lee & Alissa Nutting 
Cinematography: Pawel Pogorzelski
Editor: Jon Philpot 

Cast: Ilana Glazer, Justin Theroux, Pierce Brosnan, Gretchen Mol, Sophia Bush, Josh Hamilton, Sabina Godecki, Zainab Juh 

As if getting pregnant weren’t complicated enough, Lucy sets out to uncover the unsettling truth about her fertility doctor.


There seemed to be a trend in cinema. Where a film labels itself a horror and tries to sell itself as one but, in reality, it is more a drama with thriller elements that might get violent. So it labels itself something else. 

Whereas once you watch it, it feels like it is selling the audience false goods hoping they will come around, but the films are never quite crafty enough to win the audience over.

Especially when a film is familiar with the story. This one Might be seen as a more modern rethinking of ROSEMARY’S BABY though with a different kind of theme and ending but similar enough. luckily this film carved out enough of its own identity to stand on its own two feet.

The film keeps the audience at arm’s length and feels more clinical throughout, but then wants us to feel and identify with a character we never really got close enough to or learned enough about other than the basics.

The film Also instead of keeping us guessing. Give up answers way too soon. As it tries to keep us guessing still but is more middle ground once it offers up reveals. That in its Own way cheats itself but is understandable that it doesn’t want to copy and paste the whole is it real? Is it all in her head? Cliche 

This is one of those films that was so close to making it through with its Premise but falls short as it nears the finish line. As it gets more interesting the more outrageous it gets. A small before feels safe though at least it feels like it has some things to say 

The film has the bones of a sturdy and good movie but the follow-through unfortunately isn’t as strong. No matter how assured it believes itself to be.

The most memorable character ends up being the nurse played by Gretchen Mol. Who is in the film just enough to intrigue and make you uncomfortable but also the more you learn and see her the more you want to know about her

Creepy but tries to set itself apart from what inspires it by trying to tie in modern issues but leaves them by the wayside when it comes to its third act and explanation though in that sale act then tries to become surreal.

One interesting aspect is brought up as well as the ever-annoying line and blame of mommy brain

This feels like a film where the filmmakers wanted to say something to go along with their thriller. Which works but also feels a bit out of place or too on the nose. It also takes itself seriously while seeming to be entranced with itself that it forgets the audience. As it comes off as smug

Grade: D

CELEBRITY (1998)

Written & Directed by: Woody Allen 
Cinematography: Sven Nykvist
Editor: Susan E. Morse 

Cast: Kenneth Branagh, Winona Ryder, Famke Janssen, Leonardo DiCaprio, Gretchen Mol, Greg Mottola, Charlize Theron, Judy Davis, Douglas McGrath, Joe Mantegna, Andre Gregory, Sam Rockwell, Adrian Grenier, Michael Lerner, Melanie Griffith, J.K. Simmons, Famke Janssen, Becky Ann Baker, Issac Mizrahi, Anthony Mason, Kate Burton, Debra Messing, David Marguiles, Tony Sirico, Bebe Neuwirth, Patti D’Arbanville, Ingrid Rogers, Jeffrey Wright, Hank Azaria, Karen Duffy, Aida Turturro, Allison Janney, Donna Hanover, Celia Weston, Wood Harris, Donald Trump 

Lee Simon, unsuccessful journalist and wanna-be novelist, tries to get his foot in the door with celebrities. After divorcing his wife Robin, Lee gets to meet a lot folks of the rich and/or beautiful, partly through journalism, and partly because he has a script to offer. But life amongst those from out-of-this-world is hard, and his putative success always results in defeat. Meanwhile, Robin meets a very desirable television producer and takes the first steps in the world of celebrities.


This seems to be more of a moralistic take more than a character piece. filming in black and white the film does come off looking beautiful and Classic but just like the characters, it’s empty.

This isn’t a typical woody Allen film. This feels more aggressive and verbose than usual a bit more hardcore. Where you can’t tell if he is angry or trying to fit in with the cinematic trends and language of the time. As this film and DECONSTRUCTING HARRY have that in common. 

While we have the typical Woody Allen type surrogate lead character played here by Kenneth Branagh. Here he feels disposable and never quite makes a mark. As he is just one of the many unlikeable characters throughout the film.

The characters are all physically beautiful but seem to be grotesque internally. As it seems only the lead character seems to know better. As he constantly cheats on his wife as his profile seems to rise, but as he slowly gets his comeuppance his suffering wife seems to become famous herself and finds love and good fortunes. 

The film seems more like a commentary on modern life at that time. The nature of celebrity web tabloids. A kind of acid commentary on it all. While feeling like a tabloid itself how it jumps around from character to character and tale to tale. Though it also feels like with this film though not surreal Allen seems to try to emulate Fredrico Fellini’s LA DOLCE VITA to a degree. While it tries to feel like that movie it never quite rises to that level. 

Using the nature of having a lot of big names in his cast. They are here for a reason. While this little is a commentary the film seems scattershot and ultimately lost because it never seems to come to a point. Just cruelty  As the Lead and the movie goes on many misadventures on his way to trying to achieve being a great writer and screenwriter. He finds the romantic entanglements prove to be as artificial as the proper and the world he is trying to enter. Even if all are around him are supposed to be artists and of such depth and passion. Showing all to be more in the moment and inauthentic with a love of self More than anything. 

Falling in love with the image in which others see them and list after them. Loving their own image More than anything else. 

The most noteworthy thing about this movie is that it has Leonardo DiCaprio in it. Mirroring his TITANIC fame of popularity but this was filmed before that film’s release. So it seems like life imitating art. Though some of the films revolve around him, he isn’t actually in it much. 

While not a classic the film is admirable in it’s own ways. It is beautifully shot and tries to say something overall it just has a funny way of showing it. 

Grade: C

ROUNDERS (1998)

Directed By: John Dahl 
Written By: Brian Koppelman & David Levien 
Cinematography By: Jean-Yves Escoffier 
Editor: Scott Chesnut 

Cast: Matt Damon, Edward Norton, Martin Landau, Gretchen Mol, John Malkovich, John Turturro, Michael Rispoli, Famke Janssen, Josh Mostel, Melina Kanakaredes, Lenny Clarke 

A young man is a reformed gambler who must return to playing big stakes poker to help a friend pay off loan sharks


The Film takes you into the backroom parlors and other places around the city where gambling and illegal gaming is going on.

The film puts you in the right atmosphere of a certain kind of elegance and well as an underground network of con men and illegal activities. Which the film tries to come off as cool and slick, but comes off as stiff. The confines though feel illustrious and classic. Like age-old traditions which help give the film a richness. All the scenes seem to filtered with deep dark reds.

By all means, considering the talent involved in the film, this should be a better film. The way the film plays, it acts like it’s a better film then what it is. While it has a pedigree, the film hasn’t earned that right yet.

While it has it’s share of surprises the story feels fairly predictable. The thing that keeps you watching is wondering when and how what you know is going to happen.

Though he is good Edward Norton seems to be coasting through this film. While Matt Damon seems to be taking it seriously while that works for him. It’s not too much of a stretch. While Norton seems to be trying to create a character with very few details. But seems to be going for classic gritty scumbag.
The film at least gives him an important decision to make but either way it is looking up for him whichever decision he makes. only one is more dangerous and uncertain. While the other he is good at but has no passion for.

At the time Hollywood’s it girl Gretchen Mol has what passes for a female leading role, though in the end, it comes off as a typical girlfriend role. There isn’t a real character there just a point in the script to give the lead something to be working toward and pulling him in one direction while the other direction entices him.

It’s fun to see John Malkovich hamming it up in his role. Where he gets to be a character and a heavy. While also getting to be funny

The film seems to have an attitude like it’s supposed to be or going to be a classic New York tale, yet comes off as mediocre and a story that feels familiar that is not necessarily better but isn’t worse than how we have seen it before.

It’s entertaining and a disappointment only because you go in thinking about the possibilities that it never achieves. One of the problems in this film is that we understand the bonds of friendship, but these guys are hustlers and poker players a game of not only skill but smarts. Now he realizes his friend is a screw-up which almost anyone except for him can see. So that when a betrayal does eventually happen He is so shocked. Yet expects loyalty even though they are not family.

I know I am hard on this film, it’s not a bad film. Maybe it’s just the fact I have seen so many films this one does little to distinguish itself. It’s a good film that is enjoyable yet there is nothing too special about it. I remember seeing this in theaters on opening night with a small audience. I expected a bigger more appreciative crowd. Yet the theater was nearly empty. The film is entertaining and as long as you don’t expect much it’s good. It’s just watching it and thinking of how much better it could hurt a little. It does set an intoxicating mood with it’s elements. Giving it a feeling of warmness in treacherous times.

GRADE: B

LAGGIES (2014)

laggies

Directed By: Lynn Shelton
Written By: Andrea Seigel
Cinematography By: Benjamin Kasulke
Editor: Nat Sanders 


Cast: Keira Knightly, Chloe Grace Moretz, Sam Rockwell, Ellie Kemper, Jeff Garlin, Mark Webber, Gretchen Mol, Daniel Zovatto, Sara Coates, Kaitlyn Dever

Megan’s approaching 30 with a good degree and a boyfriend in hand, but when he proposes at her friend’s wedding and everyone seems to think that the best way to advance in her career is to take a seminar where you find out what animal you are, Megan’s understandably feeling lost. After meeting teenagers who want her to buy them beer, Megan is drawn into 16-year-old Annika’s simpler life. She ends up moving in with Annika and her single father, juggling the life of a teen and that of an adult, two romantic interests, and the feeling of lagging behind.

Continue reading “LAGGIES (2014)”