Blood and Wine

In Blood and Wine, Jack Nicholson plays the likable antihero he plays so well. He's married to Judy Davis, but is having an affair with Jennifer Lopez, and although he seems like a respectable wine merchant on the surface, he's actually planning to steal a diamond necklace from one of his clients, with the help of his partner Michael Caine. But, since it's Jack Nicholson, we forgive him.

Blood and Wine isn't your typical heist movie, because there are more elements to the plot than just the robbery. There are family tensions, a love triangle, and character development, which helps make this a highly enjoyable movie to watch. When you care about the characters, you care about the movie. The performances are very good, and Alison Cross's and Nick Villiers's script is pretty riveting.

So often in films, the actors who play children don't even think to adopt the mannerisms and inflections of the actors who are playing their parents. In real life, you can see an enormous amount of similarities through the generations, from gait to speech pattern to the frequency and timing of brow raises, to the tiniest of facial expressions. Stephen Dorff, while playing Jack Nicholson's stepson, took the time to do his homework. When he speaks, it's clear he grew up in an environment where Jack's mannerisms were influential. He's not giving a Jack Nicholson impression, though, and that subtle distinction makes all the difference in the world.

Without doubt this film has great performances from Caine, Nicholson and Davis (though hers' is a short role in comparison). The violence is uncalled for. The script has some great lines (e.g., Caine's lines on burial vs cremation) but the script does not hold you for long. If Rafelson wanted to make a trilogy progressing from son to brother to father--why choose a stepfather role for the "father"? Is there no difference for Rafelson? There are times when the "family" within the film son, mother and stepfather emerges as an interesting triangle but for some reason Rafelson does not invest time on this aspect except for a few flashes--(e.g., mother to son "I would have done the same" or Nicholson protecting his stepson's friend from brutality or Nicholson covering Davis' with blankets as she sleeps). Had he delved more into relationships, this film could have been a wonderful modern day Hamlet-like tragedy.

The team of Bob Rafelson and Jack Nicholson made two of the strongest movies of the 1970s, 'Five Easy Pieces' and 'The King Of Marvin Gardens'. It would be unrealistic to hope that 'Blood And Wine' would be as memorable as those two, and of course it isn't. But it is an excellent piece of modern film noir, one of the most underrated Hollywood movies of recent years, and the best thing Rafelson has made since the early 1980s. Nicholson is perfectly cast as a dissatisfied and greedy wine merchant who hatches a plot to steal a client's valuable necklace. He is assisted by a slimy British crook (a superb turn from Michael Caine in his best acting role in years) and his sexy young girlfriend (Jennifer Lopez, who is surprisingly good). Things get very complicated very quickly when their plan goes belly up, and Nicholson's estranged wife (Judy Davis) and his stepson (Steven Dorff) get into the picture. This is a well acted, interesting and unpredictable thriller with some real depth among the plot twists. I thoroughly enjoyed it.

"Five Easy Pieces" is closed to one of the best movies ever made. I never finished watching "The King of Marvin Gardens" (It got too ponderous and uninteresting)and "Blood and Wine" is no improvement. Rafelson was much better off when he didn't get influenced from other directors and just stuck to what he did best like in F.E.P., which was about genuine characters facing genuine problems.

The characters in Blood and Wine are not realistic. They're a cliche. They weren't interesting enough to be sympathied with, even Stephen Dorff, who is supposed to be portrayed as the film's hero. Charmless, humorless, and overall bleak movie lacking any style or substance.

Jack Nicholson is typically brilliant. Judy Davis is positively compelling. Michael Caine does what he does when given a great script: exceptional work. Stephen Dorff is a great young actor, and Jennifer Lopez is stunningly beautiful, if at times out of her league here.

The script is good, the direction is excellent, and the film, in total, is a solid 8.5 on the 10 scale. Those who complain that the film is too violent shouldn't watch movies about crime. Crime is typically violent. (Despite the way it's depicted in most films.)

See this movie. Ignore the idiots.