|It isn't a
great movie. It tells two stories of two special teens whose stories
eventually intersect. Some of the effects are high cheese, some of the
performances are over the top, and there is no subtlety in the
characterizations. It is simply a grade-b script filmed by a very good
director with a solid cast. An incredibly evil guy, probably
working with the U.S. government, is planning to use kids with special
powers as killers. Kirk Douglas is the father of one kid who has been
kidnapped by the evil guy. While Kirk looks for his son, another
subplot features Amy Irving as another special kid who is in some kind
of psychic contact with Kirk's son (Andrew Stevens!)
Amy Irving took it
all very seriously. The book "Easy Riders, Raging Bulls"
said it eloquently:
DVD info from Amazon.
Widescreen anamorphic, 1.85:1
there is a
stills gallery, but it is not impressive
Irving) was humorless and driven. A few years later, De Palma cast her
in the lead of The Fury, a Stephen King rip-off about a girl with
telekinetic powers. Several members of the cast, including John
Cassavetes, thought the picture was garbage, and made fun of Irving
for treating it like Shakespeare, like it was a big career move. She
worked on her character with a great earnestness. "You'd think
she was playing Joan of Arc," Cassavetes joked to another actor."
I said at the outset
that there would be a spoiler, and this is it. If you start to watch
this thing, you have to see the end of it, even if you can't make it
through the whole thing. Fast forward to the last minute. Amy Irving
uses her psychic powers to blow up Cassavetes, and the director shows
this scene over and over again from thirteen different angles! The
End. That is one amazing sequence. I don't know if it's good or not,
but it's certainly attention-grabbing.
guideline: 7.5 usually indicates a level of
excellence, about like three and a half stars
from the critics. 6.0 usually indicates lukewarm
watchability, about like two and a half stars
from the critics. The fives are generally not
worthwhile unless they are really your kind of
material, about like two stars from the critics.
Films under five are generally awful even if you
like that kind of film, equivalent to about one
and a half stars from the critics or less,
depending on just how far below five the rating
guideline: A means the movie is so good it
will appeal to you even if you hate the genre. B means the movie is not
good enough to win you over if you hate the
genre, but is good enough to do so if you have an
open mind about this type of film. C means it will only
appeal to genre addicts, and has no crossover
appeal. D means you'll hate it even if you
like the genre. E means that you'll hate it even if
you love the genre. F means that the film is not only
unappealing across-the-board, but technically
inept as well.
Based on this
description, this film is a C.