Blood & Wine

BLOOD & WINE (1996) *** Jack Nicholson, Michael Caine, Stephen Dorff, Jennifer Lopez, Judy Davis, Harold Perrineau. Fine devious neo noir and serpentine twists along the way with slick wine salesman Nicholson partnering with chronic, oily Caine (gleefully enjoying his scumbag role) for a get rich quick diamond necklace heist that only gets botched (natch) when his stepson Dorff starts to add up the heinous acts they've committed. Nicholson's attack on Caine is scarily funny. Directed by long-time Jack Packer, Bob Rafelson.

The team of Bob Rafelson and Jack Nicholson made two of the strongest movies of the 1970s, 'Five Easy Pieces' and 'The King Of Marvin Gardens'. It would be unrealistic to hope that 'Blood And Wine' would be as memorable as those two, and of course it isn't. But it is an excellent piece of modern film noir, one of the most underrated Hollywood movies of recent years, and the best thing Rafelson has made since the early 1980s. Nicholson is perfectly cast as a dissatisfied and greedy wine merchant who hatches a plot to steal a client's valuable necklace. He is assisted by a slimy British crook (a superb turn from Michael Caine in his best acting role in years) and his sexy young girlfriend (Jennifer Lopez, who is surprisingly good). Things get very complicated very quickly when their plan goes belly up, and Nicholson's estranged wife (Judy Davis) and his stepson (Steven Dorff) get into the picture. This is a well acted, interesting and unpredictable thriller with some real depth among the plot twists. I thoroughly enjoyed it.

Without doubt this film has great performances from Caine, Nicholson and Davis (though hers' is a short role in comparison). The violence is uncalled for. The script has some great lines (e.g., Caine's lines on burial vs cremation) but the script does not hold you for long. If Rafelson wanted to make a trilogy progressing from son to brother to father--why choose a stepfather role for the "father"? Is there no difference for Rafelson? There are times when the "family" within the film son, mother and stepfather emerges as an interesting triangle but for some reason Rafelson does not invest time on this aspect except for a few flashes--(e.g., mother to son "I would have done the same" or Nicholson protecting his stepson's friend from brutality or Nicholson covering Davis' with blankets as she sleeps). Had he delved more into relationships, this film could have been a wonderful modern day Hamlet-like tragedy.

"Five Easy Pieces" is closed to one of the best movies ever made. I never finished watching "The King of Marvin Gardens" (It got too ponderous and uninteresting)and "Blood and Wine" is no improvement. Rafelson was much better off when he didn't get influenced from other directors and just stuck to what he did best like in F.E.P., which was about genuine characters facing genuine problems.

The characters in Blood and Wine are not realistic. They're a cliche. They weren't interesting enough to be sympathied with, even Stephen Dorff, who is supposed to be portrayed as the film's hero. Charmless, humorless, and overall bleak movie lacking any style or substance.

Jack Nicholson and Michael Caine are so good in this movie. The temptation to chew up the scenery must have been overwhelming, but neither did. Neither grandstanded, and each played their vastly unappealing characters right down to the last detail.

Caine plays an aging and ill thief looking for that last big score on which he can retire. Nicholson plays a middle-class wine distributor locked into an unhappy marriage, failing business, and a young girlfriend to support. They unite to rob one of Nicholson's clients, an act they feel will solve all of their problems. Of course it doesn't and everything that can go wrong, does. And then things begin to turn ugly.

Dark, noirish, this is not a feel-good caper flick. It's definitely not "The Sting". What it is is well acted, directed, and filmed. Highly recommended, I'm just puzzled why it was overlooked at the Academy Awards.