I would bet most stateside moviegoers only know Jean Dujardin from his Oscar-winning performance in “The Artist”. It’s unfortunate because he’s a seasoned actor who has shown a dynamic range throughout his nearly 25 year career. The French actor has dabbled in nearly every genre, arguably shining brightest in the area of comedy. He’s a captivating leading man who can do some of everything.

His latest film “Deerskin” may not be the best movie to use as an introduction to Dujardin’s work especially for mainstream audiences. But man is it one entertaining and utterly bonkers ride. Writer-director-editor-cinematographer Quentin Dupieux isn’t up to much of anything nor does he have a lot to say. That’s crucial to understand because I can see “Deerskin” totally confounding those who scour its lean frame for any deeper meaning. Instead it’s 77 minutes of hypnotic deadpan absurdity –  a conscious-free black comedy with a wacky dash of grisly horror. Nothing more, nothing less.

Dujardin makes the entire thing work. He plays a middle-aged sad-sack named Georges who has recently separated from his wife. He drives out to an old man’s house in the hills and spends every dime he has to buy a used deerskin jacket. The old man (knowing he has scored big) tosses in a “slightly used” camcorder. Georges tries on the jacket, gazes into the mirror, and utters with unbridled satisfaction “Stoking. Killer style.”

Photo Courtesy of Greenwich Entertainment

One of the early signs that something’s not right with this man is in his belief that the jacket actually looks great. The dated brown suede with its fringed highlights seems perfect for a hippie from Woodstock or Daniel Boone. Georges, not so much. Aside from being a modern day fashion faux pas, it barely reaches his waist and tightly hugs his slightly chunky torso. But Georges is smitten, overcome with ecstasy and full of newfound yet thoroughly misguided confidence.

He stops at a small alpine inn to stay for a while. But with no money he’s forced to begin building his house of lies. It starts in the local tavern where he meets the impressionable Denise (Adèle Haenel, so good in the Dardenne brothers’ film “The Unknown Girl”). She’s stuck in a dead-end job as a bartender but aspires to be a film editor. When Georges proclaims himself to be a filmmaker who’s in the area to shoot his new movie, the naive Denise is instantly intrigued.

In the meantime Georges develops a ‘personal’ relationship with his jacket. The two begin carrying on conversations with Georges weirdly voicing each side. Turns out they both share similar dreams. The jacket wants to be the only jacket in the world. Georges want to be the only person in the world wearing a jacket. So they essentially set out on a mission to make both of their dreams come true, by any means necessary including violence.

Photo Courtesy of Greenwich Entertainment

Dupieux’s screenplay fully embraces the absurdity of its idea even as the goofiness eventually gives way to the macabre. Through it all, Dujardin’s straight-faced performance and complete conviction sells the humor and the unease. One minute you’ll be giggling at one of Georges’ ludicrous tall tales which grow more and more far-fetched. At the same time you’re taking a dip into madness, watching a man’s mid-life crisis turn him into a full-blown sociopath.

“Deerskin” will baffle some, probably bore others. It’s unquestionably weird and off-beat, pretty shallow when it comes to story, and has a twisted final act that could be seen as off-putting. But if you come to the movie on its own terms and just go with the nuttiness, you’ll find a wickedly entertaining and devilishly funny yarn that plays by its own bizarre set of rules. And Dupieux, a filmmaker who has a movie about a murderous car tire to his credit, is certainly no stranger to his own bizarre rules.

VERDICT – 4 STARS

I don’t remember if I felt it at the time, but “Darkman” is very much a superhero movie. Even more, it’s a superhero movie much in the same vein as those we regularly get today. Yet this was a whole decade before “X-Men” broke through; 18 years before the first MCU film. There had been the Superman movies of the 80’s and Tim Burton had just released “Batman”. But “Darkman” is uniquely its own thing despite fully embracing key elements of the genre.

One of the joys of rewatching “Darkman” was remembering all the things I had forgotten. First on the list – Sam Raimi. I had forgotten that Raimi directed and conceived the story. It was his first film following the success of his “Evil Dead” pictures and it was a completely original project. There was no adaptation to follow, no franchise obligations, no interconnected cinematic universe to fit into. Raimi had creative freedom to tinker with archetypes and create characters befitting of the world he was creating.

Photo Courtesy of Universal Pictures

The film stars Liam Neeson and who would’ve thought he would make a great avenging angel? He plays Peyton Westlake, an ambitious and seemingly self-employed scientist on the verge of a major breakthrough. His life’s work has been creating a viable cellular-based synthetic skin. But his inability to stabilize the cells results in the skin melting after 99 minutes. Still he presses on knowing that success would reverberate throughout the medical and science communities.

The only thing Peyton loves more than his work is his attorney girlfriend Julie (Frances McDormand). While doing some legal work she discovers a memo linking a corrupt real estate developer named Louis Strack (Colin Friels) to payoffs to zoning commission officials. Strack sends his strong-arm, the dastardly Robert Durant (played by seasoned movie bad guy Larry Drake), to retrieve the memo which is in Julie’s possession. Peyton ends up caught in the middle, dumped in a vat burning chemicals and left for dead in his ransacked lab as it is blown up by Durant and his goons. What a way to go!

Believed to be dead but miraculously alive, a severely disfigured Peyton sets up shop in an old condemned factory. He rekindles his experiments, this time with personal motivations – to be with Julie once again. But he’s not the same man. Besides the charred skin, he has elevated strength, heightened emotions, and the inability to feel physical pain. This leads to episodes of uncontrollable sorrow but also burning rage against those who took his life from him. His new thirst for vengeance gives birth to Darkman.

While this plays out much like a superhero origin story, Raimi has other things on his mind. For example, he has fun playing with the idea of secret identities and coexistence. Can Peyton and Darkman co-exist within the same person? Is Peyton still there or did that side of him die in the blast? Is Darkman his new true identity?

Photo Courtesy of Universal Pictures

And Darkman doesn’t fit you standard superhero mold. He’s a tortured soul driven by fury rather than some upright moral code. The black trench coat, bandaged face and fedora look cool but they tell more about the person underneath than you may think. He’s smart and highly intelligent. But he’s also a pained, violent man as evident from the R-rated revenge he doles out on the thugs who wronged him. Again, it’s Raimi developing a character, not strictly from a comic book blueprint, but with his own identity and demons.

You could consider “Darkman” to be a lot of things: an action flick, a love story, a horror film, even a tragedy but with a sense of humor. It all fits. And to think Sam Raimi concocted this subversive and thrilling superhero movie thirty years ago. After all that time I still find myself loving it for its fresh storytelling, big action, even bigger Danny Elfman score, and characters so in tune with the world they exist in. Oh, and that’s not even counting one terrific cameo near the end. But I’ll leave it for you to discover yourself.

VERDICT – 4.5 STARS

There was a time when the inspirational new teacher trope found its way into a lot of movies. “Stand and Deliver”, “Lean on Me”, “Mr. Holland’s Opus”, “Dangerous Minds” are all films that came out within the same window. Add to that group Peter Weir’s “Dead Poets Society”, an Oscar-winning drama about self-discovery, free-thinking, and the unfortunate costs that sometimes comes with them.

The story comes from screenwriter Tom Schulman and earned him the Best Original Screenplay Oscar. It’s set in 1959 Vermont at the fictional Welton Academy, a prestigious private prep school for boys. The film stars a restrained Robin Williams (who nabbed an Oscar nomination) and a cast of relative newcomers, most notably a young, baby-faced Ethan Hawke.

Williams gets top billing playing John Keating, the academy’s charismatic new literature teacher and a Welton graduate himself. His eccentric nature and unorthodox teaching grabs the attention of his students (and a few faculty heads). Rapid quoting Whitman, Tennyson, and Thoreau. Holding class in the hallways, the courtyard, or on a soccer field. Urging the boys to focus on feeling rather than form. Keating’s methods invigorate his students while rubbing some of his colleagues the wrong way.

Photo Courtesy Buena Vista Pictures

While Williams is the bigger name, the movie is really about the boys and their thirst for individuality. Mr. Keating may trumpet the mantra “carpe diem: seize the day”, but it’s the boys search for its meaning that drives the story forward. For Todd (Hawke) it’s in finding his voice. For Knox (Josh Charles) it’s in winning the heart of a local girl. For Neil (Robert Sean Leonard) it’s in following his own dream and not the one defined for him by his rigid authoritarian father (Kurtwood Smith).

The boys learn that Mr. Keating was a bit of a free spirit during his student days and was a member of the Dead Poets Society. It was a clandestine club that met in a cave just off campus where members would take turns reading excepts from classic poets. Using Thoreau, Mr. Keating described it as a bunch of romantics “Sucking the marrow out of life“. Naturally the boys put together their own secret version of the Dead Poets Society. But poetry soon takes a back seat to newfound self-expression and their budding desires to take life by the horns.

The acting is delightful throughout, especially from Williams who puts aside his frantic, quip-a-second routine for a much more contained performance. He quietly embodies a character full of empathy and compassion. The one shortcoming is that he is essentially a blank page outside of the classroom. Schulman’s script doesn’t seem as interested in him as Weir’s camera so we’re left with only tidbits of information about who he really is. But it reenforces that the story is truly about his students.

Photo Courtesy Buena Vista Pictures

Hawke is fun to rewatch especially in 2020 now that he is an established star. In “Dead Poets” you can see an up-and-comer with some real chops. But I was just as impressed with the other young actors who mostly avoid the pitfalls that often accompany these roles. Leonard is especially strong, playing the character with the most complexity and layers. Neil is the definition of the dutiful son, inescapably tethered to his father’s strict vision for the future. Leonard really sells us a young man repressed and pained despite his happy facade.

Weir and his cinematographer John Seale use their camera to portray a stuffy, buttoned up New England campus but a beautiful one nonetheless. There is an ever-present taste of autumn as golden leaves tumble across the sidewalks and the gorgeous stone masonwork feels plucked out of time. But there are also those Weir flourishes like the stunning wide shots of the boys, barely more than silhouettes, heading off to their secret cave. Or when his camera spirals up a staircase as noisy students cascade down.

There’s a good chance “Dead Poets Society” won’t satisfy those looking for a deeper dive into poetry or a more in-depth representation of classroom education. But that’s not what Weir and company are going for. This is about seven boys coming of age just as the world is about to get a lot more complicated. Yes things start to get a little predictable and I do wish Mr. Keating had more outside-the-classroom depth. But for the most part “Dead Poets” hits its target and it still leaves an impression some twenty-five years since I last saw it.

VERDICT – 4 STARS

When a movie opens with a fish dangling on a hook it’s a safe bet that the audience is meant to be the fish. Such is the case in the Canadian feature “Disappearance at Clifton Hill”, part crime drama, part detective story, part psychological thriller. We even get a splash of neo-noir. It’s fittingly set in the enigma that is Niagara Falls, a city as antithetical as the movie itself.

The film stars Tuppence Middleton who’s terrific playing Abby, a troubled young woman returning home after the death of her mother. In a gripping prologue we learn that a 7-year-old Abby witnessed the violent kidnapping of a boy while on a fishing trip with her family. In the years since Abby has had a turbulent life which has driven a wedge between her and her sister Laure (Hannah Gross). The two come together to settle their mother’s affairs, most notably what to do with the family owned Rainbow Inn.

PHOTO: Elevation Pictures

While in town Abby is reminded of what she witnessed years earlier. She goes to the cops but they aren’t interested in her story. Her sister thinks it’s another one of her wild made-up tales to get attention. But Abby meets Walter Bell (David Cronenberg in a rare acting appearance). He’s an eccentric local podcaster who dabbles equally in city history and conspiracy. Walter encourages her to dig deeper into the mystery, all but assuring her there is more to it than meets the eye.

Director Albert Shin and his co-screenwriter James Schultz do a great job of building suspense without tipping their hand. In a way Abby is our representative, full of questions and uncertainty just like us. But at the same time Shin and Schultz are baiting us, and just like the fish in the opening shot, once we’re on the hook they reel us in. I’ll leave it there because the less you know the better.

Shin makes great use of his setting, showing a shade of Niagara Falls that many people may not be aware of. Casinos, cheap tourist traps, seedy motels, all bathed in a neon glow – it’s the perfect vibe for a city that could be harboring a dark and dirty secret. Tip of the hat to cinematographer Catherine Lutes who captures the moody ambiance and helps convey a tone rich with unease. Other cool visual touches include the use of Polaroids, old VHS tapes, and even Microfilm.

PHOTO: Elevation Pictures

Through Abby’s obsessive search for answers we meet several interesting players. Marie-Josée Croze plays the female half of a local husband/wife magic act. She’s fantastic and almost steals the show in a particularly great diner scene. Eric Johnson embodies all of the slime and smugness you would want from a pampered rich kid from the city’s most powerful family. And I mentioned Cronenberg who always pops up at just the right time. He brings a certain gravitas to a wacky but fun role.

Despite a couple of lulls in the middle, “Disappearance at Clifton Hill” keeps you in its grip in large part thanks to Middleton’s strong lead. Her performance is raw and organic, always working at the right temperature. And while the clever story may not neatly tie up all of its loose ends, the ending left me satisfied and with a smile across my face. In other words, it was well worth the ride.

VERDICT – 4 STARS

On one hand “Dolittle” seemed like the kind of family movie primed for success. It was based on a once beloved children’s book series. It featured talking animals, a grand adventure, an enormous and talented cast, along with a popular lead actor known for his charisma and wit. On the other hand there were causes for concern – numerous delays and development woes, a so-so first trailer, and of course the dreaded January release date.

It turns out the box office wasn’t kind to “Dolittle”. It fell well short of its break-even estimates. Critic reactions haven’t been much better (it currently sits at an abysmal 15% on Rotten Tomatoes). So the movie along with its $175 million budget sank fast as did its obvious franchise aspirations.

It’s a shame because the very idea of Dr. Dolittle is the kind of childlike fantasy that almost any youngster can latch onto. History proves it. Creator Hugh Lofting wrote over twenty books and short stories based on the animal loving eccentric. There have been stage musicals, a radio series, television shows, and movie adaptations. But this latest effort from director Stephen Gaghan never seems sure-footed in its vision or execution.

Photo: Universal Pictures

Robert Downey, Jr. stars and it’s hard to tell just how engaged he really is. He soaks his dialogue in a funky Welsh/Scottish accent that you eventually get used to despite it never sounding quite right. Set in the mid-19th century, the movie starts with the good doctor in full recluse mode: shaggy, unkept, and brokenhearted following the death of the love his life Lily. Unable to cope, he has shut himself off from humanity, choosing to stay confined in his walled-in estate/animal sanctuary. Fluent in every form of animal-speak, Dolittle chooses to spend his time with his furry, feathered and four-legged friends rather than those pesky humans.

His closed-off existence is rattled when two young teens seek his help for much different reasons. A tenderhearted local boy Stubbins (Harry Collett) brings a squirrel in desperate need of medical attention. The cause – Stubbins accidentally shot it himself. Lady Rose (Carmel Laniado), an emissary from the gravely ill Queen Victoria (Jessie Buckley), brings a message summoning Dolittle to the dying royal’s bedside. The Doctor reluctantly agrees and after examining his Majesty surmises that the only cure comes from the fruit of the mysterious far-away Eden Tree. But finding it will be no easy task.

So Dolittle sets sail to find the tree but first he rounds up his amazing zoo crew voiced by a star-studded group of Academy Award winners, comedians, wrestlers, and singers. Emma Thompson plays a Macaw, Rami Malek a gorilla, Kumail Nanjiani an ostrich (my favorite), Octavia Spenser a duck, Tom Holland a studious dog, John Cena a polar bear, Marion Cotillard a fox, Selena Gomez a giraffe, and so on. And tagging along against the Doc’s wishes, young Stubbins who is determined do be Dolittle’s new apprentice.

Photo: Universal Pictures

Hot on their heels is Dr. Blair Müdfly, an old rival of Dolittle with a vested interest in the Queen’s condition. He’s played by a wildly over-the-top Michael Sheen who does provide a much needed laugh or two. He’s rarely funny as a result of the material. It’s comes mostly from simply watching Sheen and his wacky, neurotic delivery. It certainly provides more laughs than the animal banter (which we get a TON of). Outside of Nanjiani, whose laidback pessimism lands well, none of chatter leaves much of an impression. The voice work is good, the dialogue – not so much.

“Dolittle” isn’t a total disaster. Downey, Jr. has an infectious manic energy and the actor’s inherent likability is an asset. The CGI is generally well done including the many animals and the locations. And later we get Antonio Banderas as an evil Jack Sparrow-like king along with his ferocious tiger played by Ralph Fiennes. How could that be bad? But none of it can make up for for the movie’s biggest issue – its lack of any emotional resonance. You can count on one hand (and have fingers to spare) how many times the movie actually shows some form of feeling.

The similarities between “Dolittle” and the original 1967 movie adaption are striking. That film starred Rex Harrison in what was (as with Downey, Jr.) a peculiar choice for him. Its plethora of production issues have been well-documented plus it too ended up taking a beating at the box office. While “Dolittle” might be a slightly better movie than Harrison’s mess, it’s still hard not to see this as a sad case of history repeating itself.

VERDICT – 2.5 STARS

I make no bones about it, I love Guy Pearce and have always considered him to be underrated and underappreciated. He’s a talented actor who has tackled a broad and impressive range of roles throughout his 30 year career. Sure, a handful of his movies have wildly missed their mark, but none quite as badly as his latest “Disturbing the Peace”. How he got wrangled into this sure-fire early candidate for the worst movie of 2020 is beyond me.

This small indie action flick from director York Alex Shackleton feels yanked from a different era and I don’t say that as a compliment. Everything about “Disturbing the Peace” feels outdated: the story, the dialogue, the characters. Even worse its budget restrictions are evident in practically every shot. From cringe-inducing supporting performances to production values on par with a bad high school play.

Pearce deserves credit for at least giving it his all even though he isn’t asked to do much. He plays Marshal Jim Dillon (I’m not making this up), a former Texas Ranger still haunted by an accidental shooting that left his partner paralyzed from the neck down. That was ten years ago and Marshal Dillon now serves and protects the small Kentucky town of Horse Cave with his one deputy (Michael Sirow).

One day two roughneck bikers ride into town looking mean and stirring up trouble with Catie (Kelly Greyson), the owner of the local diner and the Marshal’s uninspired love interest. Soon the rest of the gang arrives led by the hilariously named Diablo (Devon Sawa) who waxes not-so-elegantly about Pavlov’s Dog and killing townsfolk basically in the same breath. And with henchmen names like Pyro, Spider and Big Dog you know these guys mean business. They hold the entire town hostage which is surprisingly easy considering the majority of the population shrinks to about ten people in the span of one scene.

“Disturbing the Peace” is essentially a rural heist thriller minus the thrills and without a single character we can empathize with. The filmmakers make an attempt by throwing together several town locals hoping we’ll find some of them interesting. But you’ll remember them more for their excruciating line deliveries rather than anything of value they bring to the story. And you know what to expect when your second biggest cast member is Barbie Blank, aka ex-WWE wrestler Kelly Kelly (or was it Kelly Kelly Kelly). No offense to Ms. Blank, but….never mind.

None of the things that make “Disturbing the Peace” watchable are intentional. The cheap production, the cliche-riddled script, the laughably bad dialogue. Even Guy Pearce can’t make us buy some of his lines and his MacGyver-styled action is an even harder sell. He seems utterly bored throughout the entire proceedings which is completely understandable. Nothing about the movie is even remotely original and it wasn’t for the accidental hilarity it would be a tough 90 minutes to endure.

VERDICT – 1 STAR