Released: June 1, 2007 (USA, limited)Director: Timur Bekmambetov
Day Watch
*****
According to legend, two great armies fought to a standstill on a bridge. Their leaders, Gesser and Zavulon, forged a truce which would survive the generations: neither side could actively recruit members to their side and both groups would watch each other to maintain the truce. These sides, Day Watch and Night Watch, remain in Russia to this day.
Such is the backstory for "Day Watch," the second film in a trilogy based on Sergei Lukyanenko´s novels. Actually, that exposition takes place in "Night Watch" (the first film), yet it is rehashed at the beginning of this entry. And for anyone who missed the first film in it´s entirety, "Day Watch" handily recaps where we´ve been before. Still fuming at the loss of his son Yegor to Zavulon, Anton has fully embraced his role with Day Watch. He is also training a recruit thought to be a the Great Other, a woman who will tip the balance of the war end it forever. However, Svetlana and Yegor can never meet, or else the apocalypse will rain down on the Earth. It may be inevitable, when Anton is framed for murder and Zavulon is bent on bringing him to justice.
There are a lot of similarities between both installments in this trilogy, not all of them positive. First and foremost, the entire cast from the first film return to reprise their roles, as do the creative talent. This simple fact helps the in-story continuity tremendously, especially in the misguided second act. If a story ever goes off the rails, the actors should know the characters well enough to sell the events to the audience, as insane as they may seem.
For example, in order to protect Anton from justice, Gesser switches his body with fellow Night Watcher Olga. Of course, Anton-in-Olga stays with Svetlana…whom Anton has a crush on. So, for twenty minutes in the middle of a movie about vampires, the supernatural and the end of the world, we get slapstick comedy about a man learning how to be a woman. He forgets to go in the "right" bathroom! He has a hard time walking in heels! He can´t keep his eyes off of Svetlana in the shower! Please, this is borderline offensive and hardly relevant to the story. Moreover, how many times have we seen this type of plotline? It´s never done right or to anyone´s satisfaction. Honestly, the only reason this sub-plot is included is to pad the run time. Without it, the film would be a full twenty minutes shorter. (As it is, "Day Watch" clocks in at 132 minutes.)
"Night Watch" suffered the same fate with a wholly uninteresting and nearly coma-inducing second act. What it doesn´t have, though, is the Chalk of Fate. Yes, stop laughing. I did say the Chalk of Fate. Apparently, whomever holds the chalk is able to write down whatever they want and it comes true. There´s another flashback to olden times where a conqueror is killed, only to come back to life with the use of the chalk. And the chalk is the great maguffin in "Day Watch," the object everyone has their attention on while they should be looking somewhere else. It seems as though with the competing plotline of Svetlana vs. Yegor, Yegor vs. Anton and the general good vs. evil, everyone forgot about the chalk. It makes appearances throughout the story, but it isn´t the focus of any one person. It speaks to the lack of a unifying force behind the film as well, or, at least the feeling of no unifying force.
That one person who could bring "Day Watch" together would have also foreseen the des ex machina rubbing audiences the wrong way. I´ll allow for the script adhering to the original novel and that this is the second part of a three part story. But what we get here is nothing short of scandalous and, before seeing the next film, sloppy. It´s called a reset button and fans have howled for ages about a situation being reset to square one through magic or technology. In this case, it´s the Chalk of Fate.
And let´s talk about the grand battle which ends the film for just a minute. One word describes it: anticlimactic. Maybe we´re spoiled with American movies which pull out all the stops and deliver the slam-bang end battle built up and teased for the entire film. "Day Watch" threatens the apocalypse if Svetlana and Yegor meet; without spoiling what actually happens, let me just say by this point, we´re just wishing for the movie to wrap up. Cut to black, the projector to break, the production running out of money…just end "Day Watch." This isn´t the apocalypse we´ve all been led to believe is coming.
Suffice to say that when some of the more unfavorable elements of the first film got carried over, small touches were also brought forward, lending as added sense of continuity to "Day Watch." For instance, since this is a Russian language film, subtitles are mandatory. These subtitles appear on the screen like they normally would. Some words and whole sentences, though, disappear from the screen in unconventional fashion. Sometimes a word disappears before the words around it; other times, a phrase turns a certain color. It all depends on what is happening inside that particular scene. This is a case of style over substance, no doubt, but most appreciated.
Like a whole host of other films, "Day Watch" simply sits on the screen, putting its characters through their paces, valiantly trying to keep the narrative running smoothly despite any number of ways it could turn into a mess. And it succeeds in that regard, at the very least. A straight forward plot which doesn´t try to pull the rug out from under the audience and several nods to the original film (like the Dark Witch and the return of Anton´s neighbors) all try to lift yet another supernatural film out of the shadows and into the light.
They don´t succeed.
"Day Watch," on the scale of 1 to 10, rates a 5. Competently produced and more polished than an American would expect a Russian film to look, the script lets down the entire production. Reign in the comedy aspects in the second act, loose those twenty minutes and this could be a great trilogy of foreign films for American audiences. As is? The middle will make everybody laugh…and, for once, that´s not a good thing.
(spout.com)
Released: October 2005Director: Christian Calson
Flirting with Anthony
Warning: This DVD review will contain explicit language of a sexual nature. If you are offended by this type of talk, do not continue.
A funny thing happened as I progressed farther into the 2005 smorgasbord of sex and violence that is "Flirting with Anthony": I was drawn into the nonsensical plot and the characters who exist solely to show off their penises or vaginas. The story-held together with duct tape and ***-has nothing to say about the characters and, I suspect, was a thinly veiled excuse to ask actors to disrobe in the casting sessions.
At some indiscriminate time in the past, a man-Anthony-is chased and abducted by two other men. He´s then brought to a residential garage, tied up and beaten until he´s bloody. Apparently, all these men are part of a not-important-enough-for-explanation mob…or crime ring…or something. Anyway, a well dressed associate-Jack-enters the garage and beings to caress and lick Anthony, eventually turning his gun on Bruno, the guard. Fast forward a couple years (presumably) and Anthony live with a girl he doesn´t have sex with and her gay brother, who works as a big gorilla. Anthony and Donna-the girl-set off when her father dies…
Know what, forget it. The problem is giving any kind of plot synopsis for "Flirting with Anthony" is the film defies any kind of explanation. Plot elements are thrown in for no good reason; Anthony and Donna have sex with a laundry list of people on their journey (two of them are even old ex´s…one of whom is shot, leading Anthony to run around a motel in a jock strap…); Jack´s van conveniently breaks down on the side of the road where the two travelers are passing; pointless sidetracks with a psychic and two drag queens.
The one thing that mesmerized me was trying to form a rational storyline based on the material presented on the screen. The problem with that, as you might have guessed, is there is no storyline, at least no storyline worth repeating or dissecting. "Flirting with Anthony" doesn´t have anything to say on any level, nor does it even pretend to be pretentiously experimental. It´s just an excuse for fucking, sucking and full frontal nudity. There´s nothing wrong with any of those things separately or together; any porn worth it´s weight employs all three and a whole host more of un-family friendly actions. But this isn´t porn. This is a legitimate film.
Everything about "Flirting with Anthony" is juvenile, from the way absolutely no plot point makes a lick of sense to the reactions from each and every character. For starters, Anthony and Donna continuously pin her younger brother Leroy and tickle him. Yes, I said tickle. Further, they dress up while doing it, all the while forcing the audience to wonder if a sex scene between the three is coming. This shouldn´t come as any surprise, since Anthony´s break out in the beginning of the film is followed by both Jack and Anthony getting naked and taking pictures with Bruno which would suggest man-on-man sex blackmail.
Outside of 20 minutes, does Leroy figure into the plot? Nope. And, in what must have been a disappointment for actor Ryan A. Allen, he is the only "main" character not to show off his privates. If you´re going to be in a piece of trash, you might as well go all the way, right?
Later-and this is a spoiler for anyone really interested in seeing the movie-Donna has the gall to become angry with Anthony and Jack when they have sex in a bathroom stall. This, after two separate instances of hookers and whores on the road trip. I can´t figure out what she´s so upset about: that her "boyfriend" is gay or that he had sex in a place she couldn´t watch and finger herself. It´s that kind of logic-rather, the lack of-which permeates through a maddening 88 minutes.
Ostensibly, there is a lesson stuck in the mud and muck about being truthful to your loved ones. It gets lost somewhere near the end of the film when the only thing it still has going to for it is the tease of another full frontal sex scene between, I´ll admit, two guys who aren´t bad to look at. But even that puerile pleasure can´t overcome a scatterbrained script written by director Christian Calson and equally inept camera work.
As a director, trying to be new and experimental is one thing, but asking the audience to buy rotating the camera as a revolutionary concept is insulting. At least have the production values to back up whatever it is you´re "trying" to do. Here, it just looks like the cameraman got tired with the two actors, pointed the camera out the car window and rotated. Over and over and over again. Until he vomited from vertigo, of course.
Some kind of commentary or interview with anyone involved in the making of "Flirting with Anthony" would have been appreciated. What was Calson thinking when putting the story together, how did the actors respond to the script, why did anyone sign on for this production? There can´t have been any pretension of creating a film which would play in a mainstream theater or get picked up for limited theatrical exhibition at a film festival.
VIDEO: The 2.35:1 image is unenhanced for widescreen televisions and, if there is a film the anamorphic process is left off of, I guess this one is as good a candidate as any. There´s nothing particularly wrong with the transfer-it actually looks good, the various issues in filming notwithstanding. Early on, the areas of light in a dark room smear over the screen, distracting your attention from what is going on. That is a problem with the way the movie was shot, not the transfer. Otherwise, the video is clear of major problems and turns out to be the high point of the theatrical presentation.
AUDIO: Well, the audio is a completely different story. "Flirting with Anthony" is saddled with a soundtrack intent on drowning out every bit of dialogue it can anytime a character opens their mouth. It´s the sound mix which is the problem here, considering the actors sound as though they are in a tunnel and no one has heard of looping before. It´s hollow and tin-sounding, not to mention suffocated by a horribly inappropriate techno score. Again, as with the video, this is an issue with the actual sound design in the film, not with the audio mix on the DVD. On that count, the 2.0 stereo track is comparable to the look of the film.
EXTRAS: And this is where the ball was dropped. A paltry selection of three trailers ("Another Gay Movie," "Beverly Kills" and "FAQS") and twelve promotional shots in the photo gallery. That´s it. If it´s any indication, "Flirting with Anthony" doesn´t even rate a trailer of its own.
PARTING THOUGHTS: Part of the Guilty Pleasures Collection, "Flirting with Anthony" lives up to the precedent set by "The Longing," the previous entry in the series. There are no redeeming features, critically speaking, in the film. Mercifully short (88 minutes), is the definition of how not to make an experimental film for any niche audience. With zero chance of getting recognized in the mainstream and even less of a chance to garner a devoted cult following, "Flirting with Anthony" might keep your attention because of the boys and morbid curiosity of how much worse it can get.