In West Hollywood, Detective Chandler Manning is faced with a string of killings that are identical to those conducted by Alonzo Rodriguez who he arrested seven years ago and sent to the death chamber.
As Manning and his new rookie partner Street Wilkenson investigate, Manning realises that the murders are mimicking the m. Manning goes out on a limb, determined to pursue the case. Meanwhile, Ellen Bunting, a housewife with a history of mental disorder, and her husband Joe are struggling financially. To bring more money in, they try to rent out the bungalow at the back of their house. Ellen meets the charming but mysterious Malcolm Slade who says he will take the room, although is insistent that he be given absolute privacy.
Soon however, evidence begins to indicate that Malcolm might be the killer. Register so you can check out ratings by your friends, family members, and like-minded members of the FA community. Do you want to report a spoiler, error or omission? Please send us a message.
If you are not a registered user please send us an email to info filmaffinity. For US ratings information please visit: www. We are an independent movie lovers club worldwide with Manning and his rookie partner Det.
Street Wilkerson, Shane West, going around in circles trying to catch the illusive killer. As things are soon to turn out the killer is in fact copying not only "Jack the Rippers" cut im' up tactics but also his victims, prostitutes, and even the geography of the landscape, the Whitechaple-Kensington of London, where he committed his crimes!
That the area of West L. A fits perfectly! Were shown that an innocent man was sent to his death for a crime that he didn't commit that had the real killer go free to continue to kill again. That with the police a bit shy in apprehending him in order not to reveal that they screwed up in the first place in letting the killer, by executing someone else's in his place, get off not only Scot-Free but to be able to continue killing!
And that has to be explained to the audience and police by police profiler Dr. Jessica Westmin played by Rebecca Pidgon. It's Mrs. Pidgon who had previous as well as first hand experience in her dealing with psycho killers from her experience of being the jilted wife of that crazed and homicidal lunatic "Edmond" in the psycho-thriller of the same name. Ed-Shullivan 15 November I will say that The Lodger kept my attention to the very end and that I was pleasantly surprised by the ending.
But most of the story line in the middle was your typical old crime mystery. Of course Hope Davis takes Simon's cash advance of three months rent and accepts the good lucking Simon Baker as her new tenant. The mutilated murders of streetwalkers start appearing in a similar fashion of the murders that took place seven years earlier.
These previous murders were thought to have ended when Detective Chandler Manning played by Alfred Molina arrested the presumed guilty suspect that was put to death seven years earlier. Now the movie viewers realize that Detective Chandler Alfred Molina put away the wrong guy for the crimes. So the viewers have a few suspects to consider who may be committing these recent murders of streetwalkers that appear to be duplicating the documented murders of the notorious Jack the Ripper.
I was not impressed with Alfred Molina's performance as the lead detective Chandler Manning. What kept my interest in the film was the interactions between the lonely and disturbed performance of the landlord played by Hope Davis and her new lodger played quite well by Simon Baker.
Of course no suspense film is complete unless the lead detective is suspended from his position in the biggest case in Los Angeles history for his inability to solve the case. Will he be vindicated? Well for me I just did not feel Alfred Molina was convincing enough as the dejected lead detective, whose daughter and wife were also turning their back on their father and husband respectively.
Without spoiling the ending I will say that I found the ending to have a few twists in it that I expected and some twists that I was not expecting. I rated the film a 5 out of 10 because the plot was generally predictable and Alfred Molina's performance as the lead detective a bit disappointing.
If not for a strong performance by Hope Davis and Simon Baker the film would have my thumbs down. I have an undying love of true crime movies. There is something automatically fascinating about a disturbing story of true crime when there is the added effect that it is at least loosely based on real events. It's one of the most important things that makes me love movies like Zodiac or In Cold Blood or Dog Day Afternoon or even Silence of the Lambs, even though the real life element of that one is, ah, a little less specific.
The Lodger, as you know, was Alfred Hitchcock's first major film, made in , well before sound. The new Lodger has a tough time justifying itself, but it is not entirely without effect. The movie tells the story of a mysterious recurrence of Jack-the-Ripper-style murders, although it takes the crimes out of the London fog and replaces it on the wet streets of Los Angeles. A series of brutal prostitute murders have been determined to be exact replicas of very specific Ripper murders, even positioning the bodies the same places and making similar efforts in geography.
Complicating matters is the fact that a man has already been jailed and executed for the murders, which unfortunately start happening again. Meanwhile, an unhappy housewife across town is routinely abandoned by her deadbeat husband, who repeatedly tells her basically to take her medication and leave him alone, and by the way, why can't she make herself useful and find a lodger for that old shed in the backyard.
Money doesn't grow on trees, woman. She does find a lodger, one who acts sufficiently mysterious and suspicious, and for a while the movie turns into your standard murder mystery thriller, although I was glad to see the addition in the third act of the clouding issue of an unstable mind.
It's a story-telling technique that is very easy to screw up, but when it's used right it can add a whole different experience to an otherwise straight-forward and uninteresting story. It is not used here as well as I've seen it used before at least in originality , but it's true that it adds a much-needed extra layer to an otherwise insufficient story.
Unfortunately, because the rest of the movie is a murder mystery the style of which is far too familiar by now, the instability idea seems like an effort to add something to an otherwise weak movie, and it's just not enough to make the movie at all memorable.
In fact, some moviegoers will find it outwardly laughable. Alfred Molina plays a detective who is striving to solve the case, although I would expect an actor of his caliber to be spending his time on better movies than this. Unfortunately, despite his performance and a number of other mildly impressive roles, the movie is also peppered with horrible acting and ridiculously badly written characters.
The lodger himself, first of all, is of the variety that acts extremely suspicious in ways that could only possibly happen if he were really the killer. When the wife accidentally discovers him burning clothing in the barbecue, he calmly explains that he was just trying to dry them. In a good mystery, perfectly normal behavior is made to be suspicious by the context of other actions, the music, the performances, etc. Who the hell dries pants on a barbecue?
There is also the issue of a psychologist who analyzes the police's evidence about the mysterious killer, and offers an explanation that is little more than a lot of wordy nonsense that sounds like it was thrown together by a Psychology undergrad at UCLA with no other purpose than to sound impressive.
Sadly, it doesn't. The ex-wife of Molina's character is also a mental case herself who, for reasons that I won't reveal, is unable to stand the sight of her husband.
When she does at one point in the film, she descends into a hysterical fit of screaming which, had it gone on for about another three seconds, would have been enough for me to give up and fling the DVD out the window.
But the movie's biggest problem is that it comes off as a standard mystery, the first half of which is designed to show why everyone is a suspect and the second half designed to deliver a thrilling finale that, when it comes, just isn't all that thrilling.
The murder investigation is full of movie-miracles like a footprint which is leaked to the press and printed "actual size" on the front page of the newspaper but the real letdown doesn't come until the final scene, lifted directly out of Psycho and full of psychobabble nonsense. And the psychologist's analysis, believe it or not, takes place before the actual arrest.
Fastest mental analysis ever!! But it's not so much that the psychological explanation doesn't make sense as much as the fact that the reasons given may send your palm s flying rapidly to your forehead. So be advised. A little background first. His very presence in any scene in any of the few films he made he was only 28 when he passed on commanded attention from the audience.
This version was directed by John Brahm who was at the time made suspenseful movies 'ala' Hitchcock. It was a big hit and considered one of the better films of that year.
Now we come to the current version. The acting was good by a talented cast; headed by Alfred Molina and Shane West as the 2 detectives assigned to the case. We do not learn who the killer is until almost the end of movie, It is a slight but not unexpected surprise. Now for what I did not like. They changed the location from a slimy section of London Eng. The area is far from slimy,some parts are rundown but not like in the movie. They have a few scenes in pouring rain, we rarely ever have such rain as depicted.
Maybe because I may have seen too many films of this nature, I was not impressed. It had a very brief run in Jan. IMDb Samiam3 11 August As a neo-noir, The Lodger is pretty familiar material, but If I'll remember it for anything, and that's a big 'if' it would be the body count, which is among the highest of anything I've seen in this genre. I'll give the Lodger a bit of credit for its ability to keep you guessing, but that's just about all that the film is committed to doing.
The story is shallow, and much of the dialogue sounds recycled. The acting isn't very good either, and screen time which should have been spent on more intellectual character interaction is wasted on unnecessary montages of time-lapse photography which looks like something from television.
Overall, the movie is watchable, but it could've amounted to more. Writer director, David Ondaatje puts a new spin on the Marie Belloc Lowndes' story, which has been filmed a number of times before, most notably by Alfred Hitchcock and John Brahm. Although the basics are there, the story has shifted to modern day West Hollywood, which is in the grip of a serial killer emulating the Ripper killings of 's London.
When a lodger, Simon Baker rents a secluded room from a couple, Ellen and Joe Bunting Hope Davis and Donal Logue , near where the killings have taken place, our suspicions immediately fall on him. However the movie shifts the suspect focus around. Chandler Manning Alfred Molina , the detective who investigates the case, has a few secrets of his own, as do the Buntings.
As the murders keep happening, Ellen Bunting becomes dangerously attracted to the lodger. Ondaatje brings a psychological twist to this retelling because we are never sure if Ellen is merely imagining the lodger. The film has a surprise ending - clever, but maybe a little too clever.
The film updates the story; we didn't need a straight remake - Hitchcock's silent version did it well with that famous glass ceiling shot of the lodger pacing his room, and John Brahm did a classy job with the 's remake starring Laird Cregar. Another period piece just wouldn't have cut it. Although the movie works pretty well for the most part, and is made with care, Ondaatje overdoes the Hitchcock homage - it didn't need it. Surely we are past the point, thanks to Brian De Palma and others, where deliberate references to the Hitchcock touch are remotely fresh or novel.
Here we have the telescoping camera technique from "Vertigo", the emphasis on the word knife from 's "Blackmail", and at least half-a-dozen others. They are in-jokes that detract from the story. Simon Baker brings some of his "Mentalist" charm to the role and is a disarming villain - if he is indeed the villain. Alfred Molina and Hope Davis deliver powerful performances: he as the conflicted detective, and she as the conflicted wife of a husband who also seems to have another side to his character.
The performances save the film. The lodger works well enough for what it is, but I don't think there is much danger of it replacing the Hitchcock or Brahm versions in the memory of anyone who has seen them.
It could be that I missed something and that I need to re watch this movie. But honestly I already know that I won't do it. It has just enough to make it interesting. A good cast,great cinematography and another take on the Jack the Ripper mythos. Only it suffers greatly from the lack of real suspense and tension. To the point that every obvious circumstance starts pointing to another.
The case is soon discovered to be in actual copycatting the famous Jack the Ripper murders of the 19th century. The murders so in detail that they are reenacted down to the original historical reports. Detective Manning is determined to find the perpetrator while he deals with a broken family, wife in the psych ward and a police force that adds him to the suspect list.
For horror fans, the feel of Lodger rings alot closer to a Silence of the lambs type horror that anything else. Though really some dead bodies and some prostitute slayings are the extent of it.
0コメント