"Interview" With a Vampire....from the L.A. Times!

If you want to read somebody suck the life out of the "art" of cinema criticism, read no further than the L.A. TIMES, where house lackey CARINA CHOCANO (sounds like an exotic coffee flavor to me) singles out some great acting in what is evidently an incompetent movie. That film is INTERVIEW, a remake of a Dutch film by a controversial filmmaker crafted by director-star Steve Buscemi. Here's what Chocano had to say about this latest flick by our generation's closest thing to a Peter Lorre-meets-Don Knotts. See for yourself why, after slogging through her review, you'll want to go Dutch the next time you purchase the Friday edition of the Times.

'Interview'
Premise of the Dutch film's remake seems less believable here, but the acting is compelling and believable.

By Carina Chocano, Times Staff Writer

The late Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh (great-grandson of Vincent's brother Theo), was murdered by Islamic extremists in 2004 before he could realize his idea of remaking three of his films in a New York setting with American actors. A trio of American actor-directors teamed up with producers Gijs van de Westelaken and Bruce Weiss to realize the triptych of remakes now called "Triple Theo."

Chocano fails to point out the painfully obvious here...that the remakes, instead of "Triple Theo," should've been called "Threo." Get it? "Theo" meets "Trio"? How could she let such a bad pun roll right past her? Bad puns are the bread and butter, the meat and potatoes, the "pad buns," if you will, of every critic's movie review. For a movie critic to not utilize a bad pun is like a state senator not blowing taxpayer money on prostitutes....it's just not heard of!

"Interview," directed by Steve Buscemi and starring Buscemi and Sienna Miller, is the first of the three to be completed. Like "Blind Date," which is slated to be directed by Stanley Tucci and "O6," a phone sex comedy to be remade by John Turturro, "Interview" centers on an intense, one-on-one conversation between a man and a woman. In this case, it's a veteran war and political correspondent and a young television and B-movie star named Katya (Miller).

[snip]

For a film that unfolds mostly in a single location, "Interview" manages not to feel like a stage piece. But the premise, which may have worked in Holland, gets a little lost in the American translation.

How does she know it "may have worked in Holland?" Was she there when the original INTERVIEW came out in Amsterdam? Is she implying that one needs to be stoned on reefer to understand this remake? If the latter, what is she saying about Steve Buscemi, one of the best American actors working, star of everything from MYSTERY TRAIN to IN THE SOUP to CON AIR to BIG LEBOWSKI? Is she implying that perhaps Mr. Buscemi was stoned out of his mind while lensing this version? Just what are you driving at, Chi Chi Rodriguez?

It's not that you absolutely can't see these two engaging in a high-stakes, cat-and-mouse I'll-tell-you-my-biggest-secret-if-you tell-me-yours showdown (though it's very hard) — it's just that you really can't imagine her publicist allowing it.

More Hollywood babble. You left out her stylist, baby!

Still, if you can get past the total absence of handlers from the big star's life, there's enough peril and potential for betrayal involved in the situation to keep you interested.

Hmmm....I CAN get past the total absence of handlers from the big star's life. Guess I'm not a jaded Hollywood fuckhead like some reviewers I know....with the initials "C.C.".....working for a paper with the initials LAT....in Los Angeles....California. Catch my drift?

And Miller is quite good at playing the actress people underestimate at their own peril. Wonder why?

Is there really any worse way to end a critique than with a rhetorical question?

-- Karry Ling, reporting for CRITICIDE