ramirocardozo

Three months ago I watched the original Manchurian Candidate on DVD. I was amazed on how good this movie is, and how well it holds up after 42 years of its release in movie theaters.

So, yesterday when I watched the 2004 version directed by Jonathan Demme it was impossible for me not to compare the two films.

Without the existence of the original, Demme's effort could be defined as a good (not outstanding) political thriller and it's easy to think that this definition is compatible with the general opinion of today's audiences.

But (a big but) in reality there is an original, and it is so good, so brave, and so well written that this new version almost feels pointless.

In adapting the story to modern day Jonathan Demme made more wrong choices than good ones diminishing the power and intensity of the original.

This remake took out some key dramatic elements that work marvelously in the original film inserting some new and poorly written plot twists changing and damaging the dramatic resolution.

This version is inferior in almost every level (the only exception is the acting). It is less powerful, less edgy, and less intelligent.

Fortunately for Demme the original picture is not as well known as classics like 'Casablanca' and this will allow his film to find a moderate positive acceptance.

At the time of its release, in the early 90s, 'Damage' was a very well reviewed film. The acting was highly praised, earning an Oscar nomination for Miranda Richardson in a supporting role. The story was sold as obscure, absorbing, and disturbing. I don't remember the particular reasons that kept me from watching this film, but until now I thought I was missing a great movie. I was wrong.

Certainly the story is dark and disturbing but the development is so slow, uninteresting, and boring that the movie feels distant and unexciting (even in the erotic scenes). The characters are poorly written making very hard to understand their motivations and the real forces that drive them to behave the way they do.

Jeremy Irons is painful to watch. His lack of intensity really hurts the piece. His character is supposed to be driven by a great passion and the actor is unable to transmit that passion to the screen. Juliette Binoche is a little bit better but her performance in this film is, by all means, forgettable.

Miranda Richardson has an amazing and unforgettable sequence that will break the heart of almost any viewer. The actress is absolutely phenomenal in this sequence and is the only remarkable aspect of this overrated film.

It's a shame that Richardson's marvelous outburst comes to late in the movie. The events that allow her character to truly move the audience are so badly handled that the actress great effort is not enough to prevent 'Damage' from being a flawed and unconvincing drama about the destructive side of human appetites.

If you are looking for an intellectual development of the meaning of life, or for a script full of spirituality that shows the depth of human behavior 'Dawn of the Dead' would be a wrong choice. But if you are the type of moviegoer that appreciates the different genres of movie-making and enjoys a good scare once in a while this movie won't disappoint.

The film tells the story of a group of people trying to stay alive and doing their best to avoid great danger. What is the great danger? Well, a very large group of former human beings turned zombies by a deadly virus are after them with the main purpose of eating their flesh. Not a very romantic notion and maybe not a very attractive one if you are thinking about serious cinema, but this is a very well made horror flick that manage to be tense, darkly funny, scary, and well paced.

The direction is agile allowing the movie to move with a very nice rhythm keeping the viewer involved for its entire running length. The level of gore is high (I watched the Director's cut) but is a type of blood fest that feels satiric, not sadistic.

The acting is good. Sara Polly as a nurse who lost her husband because of the virus and Ving Rhames as a tough but goodhearted police officer are worthy to highlight. The rest of the actors involved also give adequate and credible performances.

This movie is a remake of the 1970's horror cult classic of the same name directed by George Romero, and in my opinion is much better film than the original.

This remake maintains the B-Movie feel and the creepiness of Romero's film but does it with more technical skills and a more imaginative visual style. The acting is superior to say the less, and the action and suspenseful scenes are better crafted and richer in intensity.

In conclusion, this modern 'Dawn of the Dead' is a solid effort in the horror department, and a rare example of a remake outdoing its original source.