REVIEW: THE FRIGHTENERS (1996)

[Scott Renshaw]

THE FRIGHTENERS
A film review by Scott Renshaw
Copyright 1996 Scott Renshaw

(Universal)
Starring: Michael J. Fox, Trini Alvarado, Peter Dobson, John Astin, Dee
Wallace Stone, Jeffrey Combs, Jake Busey, Chi McBride, Jim Fyfe.
Screenplay: Fran Walsh, Peter Jackson.
Producers: Jamie Selkirk, Peter Jackson.
Director: Peter Jackson.
Reviewed by Scott Renshaw.

All those who worried that Peter Jackson's first big studio film
would be a sell-out, please step forward to receive your slaps on the
wrist. Yes, it is true that many independent and international directors
have found that their first steps into Hollywood left something foul on
the bottom of their shoes (see Kevin Smith's MALLRATS, Lee Tamahori's
MULHOLLAND FALLS or John Dahl's UNFORGETTABLE for just the most recent
examples). But none of them was as intensely and perversely original as
Jackson, the twisted mind behind HEAVENLY CREATURES and DEAD ALIVE.
Jackson's direction is still in top form in THE FRIGHTENERS, a
comedy-thriller which, amazingly, works as both. Unfortunately, his story
and casting choices are not quite up to the task.

THE FRIGHTENERS stars Michael J. Fox as Frank Bannister, a
psychically gifted resident of the seaside community of Fairwater with a
unique scam. Frank shares his residence with spectral cohorts Cyrus (Chi
McBride), Stuart (Jim Fyfe) and The Judge (John Astin), who help Frank out
by getting houses good and haunted so that Frank can step in and
"exorcise" them for a considerable fee. It's a cozy little arrangement,
but it soon becomes clear that there are other supernatural goings on in
Fairwater. Apparently healthy people are dying of mysterious heart
attacks, including the husband of new doctor Lucy Lynskey (Trini
Alvarado), and FBI paranormal expert Milton Dammers (Jeffrey Combs) begins
to suspect that Frank might be involved. Frank, however, can see the real
culprit: Death itself, sickle and all, has come to Fairwater.

Robert Zemeckis acted as executive producer of THE FRIGHTENERS, and
if you remember his DEATH BECOMES HER, you will have a good idea of what
to expect. The visual effects are wild and entertaining, and sometimes
decidedly creepy, like an ectoplasmic face which slowly drips down a
tombstone. Jackson fills the film with great comic characters, including
Combs as the only special agent in the FBI who makes "Twin Peaks'" Dale
Cooper seem normal, and a hilarious cameo by R. Lee Ermey, playing his
Sgt. Hartman character from FULL METAL JACKET as a ghost running a very
tight graveyard. The first half of THE FRIGHTENERS is a feast for those
with a warped sense of humor, particularly those who have no problem with
the idea of the decomposing Judge enjoying...ummm...relations with a mummy
in an Egyptian museum exhibit.

The main problem with the second half, quite surprisingly, turns out
_not_ to be the shift from comedy to horror; in fact, it's not so much a
shift as a gradual build-up. Bizarre comedy is a part of THE FRIGHTENERS
throughout, but the suspense elements become ever more significant, until
the conclusion becomes a sometimes rather bloody confrontation between
Frank and a pair of killers including a wonderfully unhinged Dee Wallace
Stone. Jackson knows how to make an audience giggle and shiver at the
same time, and it all blends into one creepy funhouse ride.

No, the problem, quite simply is Michael J. Fox, or rather the
decision to include a sub-plot for which Fox is really unsuited. In THE
FRIGHTENERS, we learn that Frank was once a happily married, happily
un-psychic architect who gained his powers and lost his wife in the same
car accident five years earlier. Other characters keep telling Frank --
and us -- that he is haunted by that event, but Fox never manages to make
Frank seem like anything more than a happily sleazy con man. His attempts
at showing emotional turmoil are sadly superficial; I don't think I've
ever seen someone look as thoroughly unconvincing while a glycerine tear
rolled down his cheek.

The back story for Frank is just one of many bits and pieces which
Jackson and co-writer Fran Walsh pile onto THE FRIGHTENERS, making it feel
like just that -- bits and pieces. With serial killers, gun-toting
ghosts, lunatic G-Men, snooping reporters and love interests all running
around, THE FRIGHTENERS sometimes gets far too busy for its own good. By
the time we get to a finale which includes visions of the afterlife (both
the good and bad version), it actually seems just plain silly. Peter
Jackson has a welcome quality in a director, which is that he always wants
to keep his audience on its toes, never quite knowing what to expect, and
he is ready to entertain them any way he knows how. THE FRIGHTENERS is
ultimately a satisfying ride which shows that Hollywood hasn't shaken the
life out of Jackson; now Jackson needs to shake some of the loose ends out
of his scripts.

On the Renshaw scale of 0 to 10 supernatural born killers: 6.

--
Scott Renshaw
Stanford University
http://www-leland.stanford.edu/~srenshaw

[Chuck Dowling]

THE FRIGHTENERS
[Spoilers]
A film review by Chuck Dowling
Copyright 1996 Chuck Dowling

(1996) ** - C:Michael J. Fox, Trini Alvarado, Jeffrey Combs, Jake Busey,
Dee Wallace Stone, R. Lee Ermey.

"The Frighteners" tries to be too many things all at once. It's part comedy,
part horror, part thriller, and sadly, only partially entertaining.

The film stars Michael J. Fox, a con-man who enlists the aid of two spirits
to haunt people's houses. Then he shows up to "exterminate" them and
collects from the homeowners. Sounds good so far. The town that he lives in
however, has had a recent history of people dying mysteriously. Mainly,
their hearts have been crushed with no signs of outside force used. Sounds
good too. Then, Fox is able to see one of the murders take place. It's
committed by a grim-reaper type spirit that just reaches into people and
rips the life out of them. Also very interesting. So what's the problem?

Well, the main problem with "The Frighteners" is that there's no depth into
anything. The paragraph above gives as much information as the movie gives,
which is hardly any. Fox is working with two spirits, a stereotypical black
man and a wimpy white guy, to help him scam money. How does he know these
spirits? How did he meet them? How did they decide to do this? What exactly
do they do during these cons? No details available. At one point, the
spirits are haunting a rich woman, making her small children fly around the
room. When Fox shows up to exterminate them, she waves a newspaper in his
face which states that he is a local con man who bothers people at funerals.
So she throws him out. Now, did the newspaper state that he works with two
spirits to con people? No, of course not. If it had, ever newspaper in the
world would be hounding him. All it said was that he bothers people at
funerals. So she just dismisses the fact that her children were FLYING
AROUND THE ROOM. Yeah, ok. Anyway, this interesting plot line is dismissed
15 minutes into the film.

So now we're onto the mystery of what is killing all the people in town.
Well, early on in the film we are treated to footage from a documentary
about a vicious killing spree at a hospital in town. The murders were
committed by an orderly there (Jake Busey, who looks and sounds so much like
his father Gary that it's frightening) who wanted to kill more people than
one of his mass murderer idols. We are then told that the orderly was
executed for his crimes. Now, why are we watching this? Well, one of the
Laws Of Movies is that you will hardly ever be given information in a film
that doesn't have anything to do with the story (unless you're watching
Michael Mann's Heat). So obviously it's this guy's spirit who's doing all
the killing. But the film treats the discovery of this like some sort of
revalation, like we're supposed to be so surprised by it. I can't stand
watching a story where we the audience know everything that's happening but
have to watch the characters on screen figure it out for themselves. That's
why I can't stand TV's "Columbo".

The biggest problem I have with the film is that nothing about the spirits
or the spirit world is given any detail. For example, the two spirit friends
of Fox have to ride in his car to get from place to place, yet other
spirits, like the demon, just fly around. These spirits walk without any
problems, but pass through walls and fall in holes and other things. Then
why does the ground support them? R. Lee Ermey (the drill sergeant from
"Full Metal Jacket") has a great bit part here as a drill sergeant spirit
who's in charge of the graveyard and keeps the other spirits in line. He
can, at will, change outfits and suddenly produce big machine guns from thin
air. So why can't the other spirits do this as well? The black spirit
complains early on that he wants a new outfit. Well, Ermey can change his
clothes with ease, so why can't the black guy? Later, Fox's two spirit
buddies are fighting the demon, basically just by holding on to it. Yet,
when Ermey fights with the demon, he magically produces heavy artillery to
fight the beast. Again, why can't the other spirits do this? What are these
levels of the spirit world where you can do different things? It's bad
writing, that's what it is.

Late in the picture, Fox's character realizes (how he realizes this I have
no idea) that the only way he can fight this demon is by fighting it in the
spirit world, so he basically kills himself to go fight it. Then, 20 minutes
later he's brought back to life and after resting for about three minutes,
he proceeds at full strength, alive, to go and fight the demon again. So
what was the point of killing himself in the first place??? Ten minutes
after coming back from the dead he gets shot several times, falls 5 or 6
stories through many floorboards, dies again, but is still ok by the end of
the final scene, which can't take place more that two days after the ordeal.
The police, who were not witnesses to the film's outcome, seem completely ok
with the explanation that Fox must give them, about demons and ghosts
killing everyone. Also, the romance that develops between Fox and Alvarado
is so phony that it's annoying. These people fall in love in a matter of
minutes, which also happens to be a matter of minutes after Alvarado's
husband dies. Truly ridiculous.

There are a few bright spots in the film. Jeffrey Combs plays a truly
whacked-out FBI agent who's in charge of investigating "weird cases". Combs
("Re-Animator" and "From Beyond") always plays this type of character
flawlessly, and he's very entertaining here. The special effects are also
excellent, but just as with another Robert Zemeckis production Death Becomes
Her, the special effects are all there is. "The Frighteners" is a major
disappointment.

--
Chuck Dowling
Please visit my movie reviews web site at http://users.southeast.net/~chuckd21/
You'll be glad you did.

[Larry Mcgillicuddy]

THE FRIGHTENERS
A film review by Larry McGillicuddy
Copyright 1996 Larry McGillicuddy

****(out of 4)
Directed by Peter Jackson
Starring Michael J. Fox, Trini Alvarado, Dee Wallace Stone, Jeffery
Combs, Peter Dobson, John Astin, Chi McBride, R. Lee Ermey

Review- Peter Jackson's The Frighteners has received some notice for
setting the record for most computer effects ever in a movie, and still
coming in at the extremely cheap $30 million price tag. But for those
who were dismayed by this year's blockbusters like Twister and
Independence Day, The Frighteners has much more to offer than special
effects. And for those worried wether or not Peter Jackson would
compromise to Hollywood you can rest easily. The Frighteners is as far
removed from Hollywood as a high-profile movie can get.

Michael J. Fox stars as Frank Bannister, a con artist who can speak to
ghosts. He uses this ability to set up a scam in a small town where his
ghost buddies scare the hell out of people, then he comes and pretends
to get rid of them. This is how he has made a living ever since his
wife died in a car crash 5 years ago.

Frank's latest customers are a young couple, played by Trini Alvarado
and Peter Dobson. When Dobson ends up dead, Alvarado starts to take an
interest in Fox. But Dobson's spirit is still around as he refuses to
beleive he's dead. This leads to a very awkward and amusing dinner date
between Fox and Alvarado, with Dobson tagging along as a ghost.

Things start getting complicated for Fox when he is accused for a
series of murders taking place in the town. Fox sees someone named The
Soul Collector crushing the heart of the victims, but noone else can
see that. So when Fox shows up to try and save each victim, naturally
people suspect he is the killer. Fox sees that Alvarado is next on The
Soul Collector's hit list, and the last half hour of the movie deals
with Fox's attempts to save her from this evil spirit.

There are many wonderful twists and turns in the screenplay written by
Peter Jackson and Frances Walsh. The movie starts off as a black
comedy, and ends up a horror-action film. The mix between these genres
are perfect. No laughs are sacrificed in the name of horror, and vice
versa. One point of contention might be a lackluster score by Danny
Elfman. But that hardly seems like a flaw when you have such a diverse
cast all in top form. Michael J. Fox delivers one of his best
performances to date as a man who hides the sorrow of his wife's death,
and then is forced to confront this later on. Alvarado, looking like
Andie MacDowell, makes a great frightened, tough, and smart heroine.
And Jeffery Combs, as a paranoid FBI agent, is brilliantly bizaare.

The Frighteners never once feels like it is running long. The first
hour is as funny as any comedy this year, and the last half hour is as
thrilling as any of the big budget blockbusters. This movie is probably
what Casper would've looked like if David Lynch directed it. It's
easily the best film of the year, so far.

[Jean Loiselle]

THE FRIGHTENERS
A film review by Jean Loiselle
Copyright 1996 Jean Loiselle

Ok, when I went to see Frighteners, I thought I'd get another movie where
they're too busy putting special effect that they forget to put in a
plot, like Twister. I was pretty surprised that it included some type of
a plot. I am a big fan of comedy-fantasy-horror movies (like Army Of
Darkness by Sam Raimi). I thought this movie would be more like a horror
movie with some funny cliches like most horror-comedy movies. But
actually, it was a lot like a supernatural thriller. While watching it,
you'll ask yourself all the classic serial-killer questions like: Who did
it? Who the hell is this guy?

The special effects are really cool but some are not for the weak at
heart. One thing that I really disliked about this movie is that you keep
asking yourselves questions about plot mistakes and such. For an hour and
a half I kept wondering things like:
Where did that spirit get that cape and blade thingie?
What happens to the spirits when the Reaper "kills" them?
That one got me going for a long time...I found some stuff quite
disturbing like the fact that people can avoid going to hell simply by
not going in a light funnel.

Also, some spirits were just too dumb to remember they could FLY! Like
the guy who's getting buried and needs help, why doesn't he just FLY OUT?
HELLO?!?!?! You can FLY!!

All in all, it was pretty cool. The super indestructible hero (who dies 2
times in the movie but always manages to come back to life) is played by
Michael J Fox. He does his role well, but in some parts he just doesn't
convince me.

So if you want to see a movie about a con-man shooting holy water from a
water pistol, you know which movie to watch.

Eric Loiselle
jloi...@infobahnos.com