The Dinner

Dinner is served.

(2017) Drama (The Orchard) Richard Gere, Laura Linney, Steve Coogan, Rebecca Hall, Chloë Sevigny, Charlie Plummer, Adepero Oduye, Michael Chernus, Taylor Rae Almonte, Joel Bissonnette, Onika Day, Miles J. Harvey, George Aloi, Stephen Lang (voice), Robert McKay, Patrick Kevin Clark, Seamus Davey-Patrick, George Shepherd, Emma R. Mudd, Laura Hajek. Directed by Oren Moverman

 

There’s nothing like a lovely, relaxing dinner with friends or family, particularly in a fine dining establishment. Great food, pleasant conversation, maybe a couple of glasses of a really nice wine…all the ingredients for a truly memorable evening. What could go wrong?

Paul Lohman (Coogan) is pretty sure not only that something could go wrong but that it inevitably will. A former history teacher, he’s working on a book on the Battle of Gettysburg, a historical event that carries much resonance for him. He’s always lived in the shadow of his older brother Stan (Gere), the golden boy who became a golden man. A United States Congressman, he’s mounting a campaign for governor with some considerable success. Stan is also working the phones to get a Mental Health bill through Congress.

Paul and his wife Claire (Linney), a lung cancer survivor, is gathering with Stan and his trophy wife Katelyn (Hall), Stan’s second wife, at one of those hoity toity restaurants where food is made to look like art and an obsequious waiter (Chernus) announces what’s in the dish beforehand. The conversation is pleasant enough if not congenial; there is clearly tension between Paul and Stan. But even with the constant interruptions of Stan’s assistant Kamryn (Almonte) there is business between them.

It has to do with Paul’s son Michael (Plummer) and Stan’s son Rick (Davey-Fitzpatrick). The two are, unlike their dads, the best of friends and one recent night the two got drunk and stranded at a party. They went looking for an ATM to get cab fare and instead found a homeless woman (Day). What happened next would be shocking and horrible and could not only ruin the lives of these young boys but that of their parents as well and as the meal goes on and secrets get revealed, we discover the fragility of Paul’s mental state and Claire’s health and the truth behind Stan’s first wife Barbara (Sevigny).

The film is based on a 2009 bestseller by Dutch author Herman Koch, only transplanted from Amsterdam to an unnamed American city in the north. Koch was apparently extremely disappointed in this version of his novel (it is the third film based on it) and walked out of the premiere and declined to attend the afterparty. I can’t say as I blame him.

I have to admit that I was disappointed with this film. It had everything it needed to be an artistic success; a compelling story, a terrific cast and a respected director, among other things. Unfortunately, Moverman chose to overload the film with flashbacks which disrupt the flow of the story and frankly become irritating – as an audience member, I wanted to see more of the dinner itself. However the extremely volatile situation leads to much storming away from the table in a fit of pique. This is the most childish set of adults (with the exception of Stan) that you’re likely to meet. In fact, one of the things I disliked about the film is that none of the main characters has anything resembling redeeming qualities. They are all so unlikable that I don’t think you could get through a meal with any one of them, let alone all four.

It’s a shame because it wastes four strong performances.  Linney in particular does some stellar work as the self-delusional wife who refuses to believe, despite all evidence to the contrary, that her little angel is a sociopath. Coogan, better known for comedic roles such as The Trip makes for a fine dramatic actor here and rather than playing a mentally ill man for laughs, he makes the role less rote. There is pathos yes and an element of humor but it is a realistic portrayal of a man whose demons are slowly winning the war inside him. Gere and Hall distinguish themselves as well.

The movie feels pretentious at times. There’s an extended sequence where Paul and Stan visit the Gettysburg Battlefield. It is a good looking sequence, shot through filters and utilizing collages and Stephen Lang narration of the various stops on the driving tour but at the end it feels almost like an addendum, not really part of the movie and certainly not needing that length. I get that Paul feels that Gettysburg is an analogy for his own life but it seems to be hitting us over the head with a hammer.

This is a movie I would have loved to at least like but ended up not even able to admire. Moverman would have been better off spending more time at the dinner table than away from it; certainly some context was needed and I’m sure he wanted to stay away from making the movie feel stagey but at the end of the day it ended up shredding the movie like it had been through a cheese grater. This is a bit of a hot mess that can well take a back seat to other movies on your must-see list.

REASONS TO GO: The film is organized by course which is nifty. Good performances by the four leads.
REASONS TO STAY: None of the characters have much in the way of redeeming qualities. The overall tone is pretentious and elitist.
FAMILY VALUES: There is some disturbing content of violence and cruelty, adult themes and a fair amount of profanity.
TRIVIAL PURSUIT: This is the third onscreen collaboration between Gere and Linney; Primal Fear and The Mothman Prophecies are the other two.
CRITICAL MASS: As of 5/5/17: Rotten Tomatoes: 48% positive reviews. Metacritic: 59/100.
COMPARISON SHOPPING: Carnage
FINAL RATING: 5/10
NEXT: Colossal

Advertisement

Bridgend

Deceptive beauty.

(2015) Drama (Kimstim) Hannah Murray, Josh O’Connor, Adrian Rawlins, Patricia Potter, Nia Roberts, Steven Washington, Scott Arthur, Aled Llyr Thomas, Elinor Cawley, Jamie Burch, Mark Charles Williams, Adam Byard, Natasha Denby, Leona Vaughan, Liam Dascombe, Josh Green, Rachel Isaac, Phil Howe, Martin Troakes, Jane Davies, Rob Page, Judith Lewis. Directed by Jeppe Rønde

When a teenager dies, it’s a tragedy. With their whole life ahead of them cut short, it’s devastating to their family and their friends. When a teen takes their own life, it can feel even more tragic. Those left behind can feel like they’ve failed somehow. But what happens when teens kill themselves in droves?

That’s what really happened in Bridgend County in Wales. Starting in 2009 and through 2013, more than 75 teens took their own lives – most by hanging – without leaving a suicide note. To this day, what prompted these mass suicides remains a mystery. There was an excellent documentary in 2013 about the case but this is a fictionalized look at the affair.

Sara (Murray – fans might recognize her from Game of Thrones) and her policeman dad Dave (Washington) who is widowed have moved from Bristol to Bridgend to start a new life. As a policeman, Dave is investigating a rash of teen suicides. At first, Sara doesn’t really feel like she fits in with the working class kids in town but her beauty and compassion catch the eye of Laurel (Cawley) who invites her to the local reservoir to hang out with a group of kids, led by co-alphas Jamie (O’Connor) and Thomas (Arthur).

As Sara gets more involved with the group, her father begins to get terrified. Sara is already at that age where she’s distancing herself from her dad, and drifts closer to the disaffected teens and further from her father. And as her friends begin to die off one by one, her romance with Jamie takes on a more intense tone.

Speaking of tone, that’s one thing this movie has plenty of. Cinematographer Magnus Nordenhof Jønck films things through a blue filter, underlighting interior shots to give things a more menacing and darker look. The blue serves to give the movie an overall depressing feel. That’s sight; as for sound, Mondkopf, an artist specializing in electronic trance, gives the score a dreary electro feel, instilling a sense of foreboding throughout.

There are two ways a movie like this can be made palatable; one is to give insight as to why a group of teenagers would all fall into lockstep and kill themselves. To be honest, Rønde doesn’t really address this. There are all sorts of theories as to why the real kids did this and to be fair, I can imagine that the filmmaker didn’t want to tread on the graves of the dead by putting motivations that weren’t necessarily there. You don’t get a sense that there was any peer pressure going on, only that these kids were essentially unhappy.

Secondly, the characters could be interesting people that you care about what happens to them, but again, that proves not to be the case here. These are kids who most adults wouldn’t want to spend even five minutes with. They come off as spoiled, whiny and full of angst and ennui. There is a melancholia sure, but with the rituals that these kids use to honor their dead it begins to come off as creepy posturing. The kids don’t come off as anything other than people who simply fell into line like sheep and gave up far too soon.

Rønde is a little self-indulgent with his direction, doing so many cutsie things that the audience is drawn out of the movie and paying more attention to the moviemaker. I call this “Look, Ma, I’m Directing syndrome” and Rønde has a nasty case of it. And the ending. Oy vey, the ending. I won’t go into details here, but it’s a colossal cop-out.

The events in Bridgend are apparently still taking place to this day, and quite frankly I think there is an important movie that could be made here. Certainly this is in many ways a cautionary tale for parents that their teens are at risk, but the filmmakers don’t say anything much beyond that. I found this to be a frustrating movie that at the end of the day, was enormously unsatisfying when it didn’t have to be.

REASONS TO GO: Some beautiful cinematography and along with the electronic score creates a foreboding mood.
REASONS TO STAY: Too much self-indulgence and spoiled behavior. Never really gets into the psyche of the “gang.” Too many scenes in which you’re conscious that the director is “directing.”
FAMILY VALUES: Adult themes, some violence, sexual content, nudity and profanity, all involving teens.
TRIVIAL PURSUIT: Filmed entirely in Bridgend County, Wales where the events that inspired the film actually took place.
CRITICAL MASS: As of 6/10/16: Rotten Tomatoes: 88% positive reviews. Metacritic: 53/100.
COMPARISON SHOPPING: Paper Towns
FINAL RATING: 4/10
NEXT: The Family Fang

Aftermath (2012) (Poklosie)

You can’t beat Ireneusz Czop’s performance with a stick.

(2012) Drama (Menemsha) Ireneusz Czop, Maciej Stuhr, Zbigniew Zamachowski, Danuta Szarflarska, Jerzy Radziwilowicz, Zuzana Fialova, Wojciech Brzezinski, Danuta Borsuk, Andrzej Mastalerz, Anita Podderbniak, Magdalena Gnatowska, Ryszard Roncziewski, Zbigniew Konopka, Elzbieta Romanowska, Lech Dyblik, Jaroslaw Gruda, Zbigniew Kasprzyk, Robert Rogalski, Maria Garbowska. Directed by Wladyslaw Pasikowski

We really don’t know what darkness lurks in the hearts of our neighbors. Even in the nicest, most bucolic towns there can be absolute horrors beyond imagining. Some people will go to the most extreme of measures to keep those secrets hidden.

Franck Kalina (Czop) has flown to Poland from Chicago. His destination is a pretty remote one; to get there he has to take a plane, a train, a bus and then walk the rest of the way. He is there to visit his brother Jozef (Stuhr) who runs the family farm.

Franck has been in America nearly 20 years and has been estranged from his brother at least for that long but when Jozef’s wife Jola shows up at his door with their kids and without explanation, he returns to the land of his birth to get to the bottom of things. There he finds Jozef has been essentially ostracized by the town. Why? Because he’s unearthing old Jewish tombstones that were repurposed by the Nazis during World War II as flagstones, pavement and other uses. He can’t really explain why he’s doing it other than it seems right; there’s nobody left to look after them.

Franck soon becomes embroiled in the controversy as the incidents escalate from rocks thrown through windows to anti-Semitic graffiti on their barn to physical violence directed against Jozef and his dog. Only the retiring village priest (Mastalerz) and a kindly medic (Fialova) seem to have any sympathy for them at all. Franck’s dogged determination to discover what the reason is for all the hatred over stones for people nobody can remember leads to a shocking discovery.

This movie took nearly a decade to secure the financing to make it to the screen. The movie is inspired by a real incident in the village of Jedwabne during the Second World War. The controversial non-fiction book Neighbors by Princeton scholar Jan Gross (which was denounced as anti-Polish and inflammatory) about the subject inspired the filmmakers to make Aftermath. Even now the events are a sore subject with the Polish people; even reviews of the film in American newspaper have inspired some passionate posts both pro and con; some look at the filmmakers as brave men who have become the first Poles to directly acknowledge the events in Jedwabne and in other places like it in the Arts. Others have condemned it as furthering vicious slander against the Polish people.

This is an incredibly moving film which is on one level the bond between two very different brothers. Franck is taciturn and confrontational but at the same time he didn’t have the decency to return home for the funeral for his parents. Jozef is stubborn and unforgiving but has a curious soft spot for the underdog. Both men, surprisingly, are what I’d call environmental anti-Semites. They habitually refer to Jews as “Yids” and often say things that convey their low opinion of Jews in general and Polish Jews in particular. Franck even intimates that the troubles Poles have getting decent jobs in the U.S.is due to Jewish interference.

They do make the unlikeliest of righteous men but yet they are. It works making them so un-heroic in many ways. These aren’t American action heroes who use their fists to get themselves out of sticky situations; they get beat up and they often seem to go out of their way to avoid conflict but who can blame them – at every turn they are attacked verbally and physically by the townspeople and the new rector (Radziwilowicz) arrived to replace the retiring priest for some odd reason is stirring the town up to do so.

Czop and Stuhr deliver raw, honest performances that depict the brothers as deeply divided and unsure how to bridge the gulf between them until this common cause unites them. They are dogged more than brilliant and stubborn more than compassionate. Perhaps the problem that some conservative Poles have with the film is that none of the Poles in the movie come off as good guys.

This isn’t a movie for the faint of heart. It tackles the issues of hatred, greed and suspicion in the real world and it does so in a real world way. While I saw this movie at the Central Florida Jewish Film Festival, there are no living Jews in the movie until the final scene – and yet the ghosts of the Jewish dead in the Holocaust hang heavy over the film itself. This is the kind of movie that will leave you speechless and is much worth seeking out if you can find it (the official website has a list of theaters playing the movie if you want to click on the picture above and find out if it’s playing near you). It is another contender in what is turning out to be a very strong year for independent films as one of the best of the year.

REASONS TO GO: Czop and Stuhr deliver powerful performances. Raw and emotional.

REASONS TO STAY: May be too intense for some.

FAMILY VALUES:  Some disturbing images and thematic content. There’s also a little bit of violence and some foul language.

TRIVIAL PURSUIT: Received the Yad Vashem Chairman’s Award at the 2013 Jerusalem Film Festival for excellence in depiction of the Holocaust.

CRITICAL MASS: As of 11/19/13: Rotten Tomatoes: 76% positive reviews. Metacritic: 62/100.

COMPARISON SHOPPING: Schindler’s List

FINAL RATING: 9.5/10

NEXT: The Attack

Eden Lake

Kelly Reilly gets a different kind of facial.

(2008) Horror (Third Rail) Kelly Reilly, Michael Fassbender, Tara Ellis, Jack O’Connell, Finn Atkins, Jumayne Hunter, Thomas Turgoose, James Burrows, Thomas Gill, Lorraine Bruce, Shaun Dooley, James Ghandhi, Bronson Webb. Directed by James Watkins

We are trained from birth to jump at things that go bump in the night. We give form to our fears in all sorts of monsters from Godzilla to Dracula. The true horror however lies in the human heart.

Jenny (Reilly) and Steve (Fassbender) are a couple who are taking a weekend trip to an idyllic lake in rural England, a place Steve has happy memories of from his childhood. However when they get there, they discover that an impending development has closed off the lake. Disregarding the “Keep Out” signs, Steve drives into the park-like setting.

The lake doesn’t disappoint – it’s beautiful and placid. However, the couple’s peace and quiet is shattered by a group of teen hoodlums. Led by Brett (O’Connell), they’re mostly obnoxious and a bit intimidating. Rather than moving elsewhere, Steve decides to stay because “they were there first.” Not very mature and not very smart.

Things begin to escalate. The kids steal their car and their things. There are confrontations. They get physical. Brett’s beloved dog is accidentally killed. Things are about to get seriously ugly, and it will be up to Jenny to save them after Steve is seriously injured. Between her is a pack of rabid dogs in kid’s bodies that are baying for her blood.

Watkins makes a film that is a worthy successor to Straw Dogs and other 70s survival movies. Once things get rolling, you will be cringing in your seat and almost begging for the couple to make it. Steve and Jenny are extremely likable and the kids so utterly horrid that there is an easy rooting interest.

Fassbender has come on in recent years to be poised on the edge of stardom, but this movie was made before his higher profile roles of late. His role here is much more of a supporting part; for most of the second half of the movie he is essentially immobile and has few lines. Still, he has an innate likability and it shows onscreen here.

Reilly is really the star of the movie. Jenny is really put through the wringer here – dragged through the mud, burned, stabbed, beaten and betrayed – she is pushed to the limit and beyond. Reilly plays her as a fragile woman who has an inner strength that comes roaring out when cornered. She’s a likable heroine who can also be fierce, pushed to do things that are she must in order to survive.

O’Connell makes for a vicious and brutal gang leader, one of the nastiest to ever be seen on screen. When things get violent, he gets out of control, savaging his own gang members when he doesn’t get his way. O’Connell doesn’t make him sympathetic but he does make him human and not just a cartoon character. The brutality may be extreme but it comes from a realistic place.

This may be an extreme case but there have been reports of incidents of people being set upon by youth gangs in Britain. As things escalate to their conclusion, we can view this as a morality tale that leaves us with a few lessons. First, never underestimate the danger that comes from a pack of people; no matter how young they are. Second, it is a bad idea to stay somewhere when there are clearly dangerous people around, no matter how much it wounds your macho pride. Finally, never come between a boy and his dog. It can only end badly.

WHY RENT THIS: An excellent thriller that keeps you on the edge of your seat throughout. The leads are attractive.

WHY RENT SOMETHING ELSE: The brutality can be off-putting.

FAMILY VALUES: There is a great deal of brutal violence, some nudity and sexuality, a whole lot of foul language and a brief bit of drug use.

TRIVIAL PURSUIT: Turgoose first gained critical notice for the movie This is England.

NOTABLE DVD EXTRAS: None listed.

BOX OFFICE PERFORMANCE: $4M on an unreported production budget; I’m thinking this probably made a little bit of money.

FINAL RATING: 6/10

TOMORROW: The Other Man

Exit Through the Gift Shop

The mysterious Banksy.

(Producers Distribution Agency) Thierry Guetta, Banksy, Shepard Fairey, Rhys Ifans (voice), The Space Invader, Swoon, Cheez, Neckface, Coma. Directed by Banksy

Street art is a phenomenon that grew out of the tagging and graffiti movement. Some have described it as “guerilla art” and that might not be a bad tag for it. The practitioners operate under cover of night and ply their trade with spray cans, stickers and mosaic tiles, among other mediums.

Some see it as a valid form of self-expression; others see it as blatant vandalism. Needless to say, there is a polarizing element to the art form and that can’t be a bad thing. Art, after all, is supposed to invite discussion.

French expat Guetta lives in Los Angeles. He moved there in the late ‘80s, opening up a vintage clothing store that often had big stars browsing in it. He was known in the city for constantly filming everything on his video camera. On a visit to his native land, he hooked up with his cousin, who had a quirky hobby of his own; he liked to put mosaic tiles of space invader-like figures in public places. Calling himself The Space Invader for obvious reasons, he had become a leading member of the highly cliquish street art scene which kept their anonymity with an almost jealous zeal.

Thierry grew fascinated with this scene – the dangerous aspect of it (the adrenaline rush of avoiding cops and security guards) appealed to him. Through his cousin he was introduced to Fairey, who also based himself in L.A. and Guetta videotaped his street art. The feeling among the street artists was that their art was very transitory by nature; it wouldn’t last long before someone took it down. In order to document their art, they turned to Thierry who was only too happy to oblige.

Under the guise of making a documentary about the street art scene, Guetta was given access to almost all of the leading personalities in the street art scene – all save one, the most notorious one of all. In London, the name of Banksy is well-known, particularly for his images of mice doing odd things. Banksy’s art was bold, caustic and full of a biting wit, too clever by half you might say. He was known for strictly preserving his identity, working only with people he knew well. To this day, the general public and the authorities have not a clue who he is.

At last, through Shepard Fairey, Thierry and Banksy were introduced. Thierry was very much taken by the brash young Englishman and for his part Banksy grew to trust Thierry, allowing him to film in his inner sanctum. On a visit to Los Angeles, Banksy notoriously put a figure of a hooded and bound figure alongside the Big Thunder Mountain Railroad ride at Disneyland with Thierry filming the whole thing. However, while Thierry was arrested by Disney security, Banksy got away scot free.

However, with years and years of shooting street artists and thousands of hours of footage to winnow through, Thierry’s subjects were becoming restless waiting for the documentary to be made. Thierry knew he had to at last make the film he had never intended to make. Knowing nothing about editing, scoring or anything in fact about filmmaking other than pointing a camera at his subjects, Thierry set out to create his masterpiece.

With Banksy being the subject he most admired, he screened it for him first. Banksy was mortified; the documentary was just terrible. Banksy figured that he could do no worse, so he took the footage and gave Thierry the instructions to “go make some art and put together a show.”

This documentary is the result of Banksy’s efforts and it takes a total turn at this point. Thierry adopts the persona of Mr. Brainwash and decides to put together a major event show in Los Angeles, despite knowing nothing about art or installing a show. He does know a thing or two about self-promotion and manages to capture the attention of the L.A. Weekly who give him a cover story which whips up a frenzy among modern art collectors, despite the fact most of the work is really awful and lazy; Mr. Brainwash takes existing images from the Internet and spray paints eye-patches on them, or Marilyn Monroe wigs.

We see Banksy as a narrator, but his face is always obscured by a hood and his voice distorted electronically; he really is serious about maintaining his anonymity. He wisely turns this from a documentary on street art to one about Thierry who is one of those magnificent eccentrics who give life some flavor. In many ways, he’s more interesting than the artists he was documenting. For his part, Banksy feels at once chagrined and pleased at the creation of the Mr. Brainwash persona; the artwork is somewhat atrocious but at the same time Banksy seems to admire Thierry’s fearlessness.

One gets a feeling throughout this film that we’re being conned a little bit. For example, Thierry proclaims that he had erased all the Disney footage from his camera when he was being interrogated by the security guards, but we are shown footage of Banksy crossing the fence and placing the figure alongside the track, and the trains being stopped shortly afterwards.

If it is a con, it’s a fascinating one and I don’t personally mind being conned in that way. The movie has a wicked sense of humor and there is a slickness and slyness to it that is refreshing and charming in its way. It also makes tremendous use of a great and sadly underrated song – Richard Hawley’s “Tonight the Streets Are Ours.”

There is a lot of ego involved here, from Thierry to Banksy to the artists themselves who take the stance that art outweighs all else. That’s like a blogger saying the most important things in the world are blogs and I, for one, would never assert something that preposterous. It sure as heck ain’t brain surgery…but is it art? That’s for you to decide.

REASONS TO GO: While initially slated to be a documentary about street art, it morphed into something completely different.

REASONS TO STAY: There’s a whole lot of ego involved in this project and quite frankly I’m not sure if the viewer isn’t the butt of the joke.

FAMILY VALUES: Some fairly blue language and smoking. There is also a fine line between art and vandalism here and it should be noted that those who find the lifestyle alluring might not know the difference.

TRIVIAL PURSUIT: Fairey would later go on to design the Barack Obama “Hope” image that figured so prominently in his campaign.

HOME OR THEATER: Definitely more suited to home viewing than a big theater.

FINAL RATING: 7/10

TOMORROW: Afghan Star

Noise

William Hurt can't take another Celebrity Apprentice story from Billy Baldwin.

(THINKfilm) Tim Robbins, Bridget Moynahan, William Hurt, William Baldwin, Margarita Levieva, Gabrielle Brennan, Maria Ballesteros, Chuck Cooper. Directed by Henry Bean

Those of us who live in a small town as I do, or in a suburb as I did don’t have an idea of the everyday assault of noise for those who live in a city, as I also did. For the most part, you simply tune it out but some things become too much to ignore.

David Owens (Robbins) is a lawyer (methinks) who has begun to be driven wiggy by car alarms, alarms that wake him up in the middle of the night or interrupt his lovemaking sessions with his cellist wife Helen (Moynahan). At first, he contents himself with minor vandalisms against offending vehicles that leave him with a sense of partial justice but soon that becomes insufficient. He begins to smash windows with baseball bats, rip out wiring and so on. Until, that is, he gets arrested.

Helen, becoming increasingly concerned with her increasingly more obsessive and unstable husband, manages to get him to agree to a plea bargain in order to keep him out of jail. At first, he complies in order to keep the peace in his family but the ever-present assault of noise drive him farther and farther around the bend. He takes on the guise of the vigilante figure The Rectifier, leaving calling cards whenever he disables an alarm system.

Surprisingly (although frankly not to David) the exploits of The Rectifier capture the imagination of New Yorkers who cheer the vigilante’s one-man fight against noise pollution. This in turn captures the attention of Mayor Schneer (Hurt), who wants The Rectifier caught. Increasingly this becomes a battle of wills between the clearly not-quite-paddling-with-both-oars-in-the-canoe David and Hizzonner, who seems to take it as a personal affront that there is a man defying the law in his city. When a beautiful Russian lobbyist (Levieva) discovers David’s alter ego, she convinces him to try and get a ballot initiative banning car alarms in the five boroughs of New York City. That’s when the war really begins.

Director Henry Bean, who was last seen helming The Believer which featured Ryan Gosling as an anti-Semitic Jew does a good job of creating the feeling of aural assault that David Owens is surely feeling. However, he takes what was an interesting concept to begin with and tries to get fancy with his storytelling. The story bounces back and forth from the present to various points in a ten-year period, often with little or no way to tell where in the story events are taking place. None of the characters change physically in the ten year time span; you’d think one of them would at least get a different haircut from time to time, or maybe grow some facial hair but we are left trying to guess where in the story you are which leads to the musical question “Does anybody really know what time it is?” which of course begs the unwanted follow-up question “Does anybody really care?”

Robbins does a nice job of making a character who is essentially obsessive, self-righteous and a little bit around the bend remain likable enough that you don’t wind up being without anyone to identify with. Moynihan is also solid in a role that is essentially little more than an exasperated wife cliché. Sadly, Levieva gets a part that really doesn’t have a reason to be in this movie unless its for the titillation aspect.

Occasionally, the writing gets a little bit preachy and self-righteous but to be fair, there is some good, intelligent stuff that indicates that someone a fair amount of thought into this. There are also some moments of black humor that hit without warning, making those scenes all the more effective.

Ultimately Noise is an uneven effort that has just enough to make it worth a DVD recommendation (it also shows up on cable from time to time). It’s too bad it wasn’t a little bit better; Robbins deserved a better movie for his performance.

WHY RENT THIS: There is some black humor that comes out of left field from time to time. Robbins plays a whacko with enough wit and charm to make the character relatively palatable. Movie has a thoughtful air that is refreshing.

WHY RENT SOMETHING ELSE: The storytelling conceit of jumping back and forth throughout a ten year timeline is often confusing. The writing occasionally gets preachy and not in a good way.

FAMILY VALUES: Vandalism is presented as justifiable throughout the movie; there is also sex, nudity and frank discussions about female genitalia as well as a scene depicting drug use. Although the movie went unrated, parents should think hard before letting their kids see this one.

TRIVIAL PURSUIT: Director Bean based the character of David Owens on himself; as a younger man he was arrested and jailed for breaking into a car and disabling the alarm.

NOTABLE DVD EXTRAS: None listed.

FINAL RATING: 6/10

TOMORROW: Deja Vu