Stoker (2013)

Director Park Chan-wook (2003’s “Oldboy”) makes his American debut with “Stoker,” a gorgeous, nasty domestic drama turned serial killer thriller that takes Hitchock’s “Shadow of a Doubt” and cranks up the violence and perversion to skin-crawling affect. As with the 1943 classic tale, a girl (Mia Wasikowska) suspects her romantic/handsome/suave Uncle Charlie (Matthew Goode) of murderous deeds after her father mysteriously dies and the uncle -– father’s brother -– moves into to help comfort the mother (Nicole Kidman). The line “We don’t have to be friends, we’re family,” sums up the story: There is no love here. This familial lot is as creepy and somber as the house they reside in. That is a double edged sword. Park and writer (and openly gay actor) Wentmorth Miller start in crazy town and stay, banging you in the head with a frying pan from frame one. Hitchcock served a fine dinner first, then took to swinging. Such is life. Hitchcock would dig the dark path of our central heroine. Wasikowska (“Alice in Wonderland”) owns the film, against the cool Goode and Kidman, who cooks up an acting storm from a role blankly stamped “frigid.” Watch it twice. Squirm. B+

Trespass (2011)

“Trespass” is a clichéd home-invasion thriller ransacked by such bad acting, inane dialogue and crap pacing that made me wish the invading thugs out to steal diamonds and cash would just pop the miserable husband and wife played by Nicolas Cage and Nicole Kidman. The film – dumped in theaters and put on DVD within a single month -- vibes wrong from the start as Cage, wearing a ridiculous suit and sporting a ridiculous car, pulls into a driveway of a mansion so ridiculously ugly-ass-retro, it can mean only one thing: Joel Schumacher is directing. And he is. When the four villains arrive, we get a potluck of dysfunctional hilarity: Mommy issues, sibling rivalry, a crush on the Mrs., missed meds, steroidal rage, and a meth addict with a ball gown fetish. Cage and Kidman are so lacking in chemistry, they can’t even fake a miserable marriage. It’s not shocking to see Cage starring in junk, but one wonders if all the onscreen crying by Kidman – in a weak role -- isn’t really her mourning a wayward career. D+

Just Go With It (2011)

Looking for a film to signal a breakup with your S.O.? “Just Go With It.” And “The Break-Up.” Hey, both star Jennifer Anniston. Why does she choose such awful projects? Here she plays a single mom and receptionist/ assistant/Jiminy Cricket to a smug plastic surgeon (Adam Sandler) who fakes being married to bed marriage-wrecker college girls. When doc falls in love with one of his scores, he bribes Anniston to play his greedy ex-wife, and her kids to be his offspring. This is one of those con shell games where the lies pile high for no other reason than to keep the plot going, and I stopped caring who hooked up with whom. Everyone on screen is an idiot or cruel or both, and the women are made to be especially gullible. You can see Anniston’s dread, and when Nicole Kidman (!?!) pops by as a snob, you can see her regret. Dennis Dugan made the awful Sandler flick “Grown-Ups,” and this is just as sloppy. Sandler hates his audience. Anniston deserves better. Nick Swardson, a Sandler apprentice, plays a vile, dumb character as an extra F.U. to the paying suckers on ... date night. D+

Rabbit Hole (2010)

Pitched as the most depressing film of the year – a New York yuppie marriage crumbles after the death of the couple’s young boy – “Rabbit Hole” actually is darkly funny, and finally redeeming. Nicole Kidman and Aaron Eckhart are the couple, barely existing in a bleached life of grief and memory. She wants to wash away all evidence of the boy. He clings to every video and memento. Based on a play and directed by John Cameron Mitchell, “Rabbit” could have hit every cliché in the book – the hubby flirts with another woman (Sandra Oh), while the wife befriends the shattered teen (Miles Teller) who faultlessly ran the child down -- but it avoids pitfalls. The pain is real and grisly. But those dark laughs, and the trace of light at the end of the tunnel are huge. I wish we had more background on the couple, and ended sooner then its 90 minutes. As well, Kidman’s inexplicably technophobe wife’s Queens accent comes and goes. But, this is fine filmmaking. B+

The Stepford Wives (1975 and 2004)

More than 30 years on, the 1975 version of “The Stepford Wives” packs a huge punch. Unless you were raised under a rock or you actually are a Stepford Wife, you know the plot to this classic pitch-black Ira Levine satire: A married couple (Katherine Ross and Peter Masterson) and their children move from New York City to a seemingly perfect Connecticut suburb known as Stepford.

Lawns are perfectly manicured, houses impeccably clean and orderly, fantastic casseroles are the norm, even the sunlight is perfect, and almost every wife does nothing – literally nothing – but please their husband’s every single whim. The men laugh about it. Something’s wrong, and it ain’t the water.

Like “Rosemary’s Baby” – another Levine book turned film, and my favorite horror movie of all time – “Stepford” is a tale of women suffocating under the rule of men. Ross (“The Graduate”) is a brilliant heroine – she loves her family without question, but like any person who loves herself, or himself, she wants to be fulfilled in her own right, to be remembered. And she will bust your head with a fireplace poker if pushed too far. Even if she loves you.

The soul-killing husbands are scary because they are so matter-of-fact. As the film marches toward its dark ending, Ross pleads, “Why are you doing this?!?” The cold reply: “Because we can.” If it doesn’t boil your blood – woman or man – then you need to check if you still bleed. A-

I vividly recall the 2004 remake. Like a bout of tuna-inspired food poison. This version trades in the dark nature of the original for an ungodly fluffy comedy topped by a script so awful and contradictory, I still can’t believe I watched it to the end. A career worst for Nicole Kidman, who takes the role played by Ross in 1975, as well as director Frank Oz. F

The Golden Compass (2007)

"The Golden Compass" failed in theaters late last year because many right-wingers accused it of anti-Christian rhetoric. But, they miss the point. The film (I haven't read the book, but desperately want to now) attacks the corrupt Catholic Church that is more interested in its own wealth than God's work, not religion itself. Hell, ever check out the Vatican? Pepsi is the official drink of the place. How's that for God's work?

So, yes, this film plays into my liberal Christian views, and I like it for it. Too bad the story seems rushed, almost too afraid to truly take aim at its target. The film follows orphan Lyra (Dakota Blue Richards) in a parallel universe as she interacts with her uncle (Daniel Craig) and a mysterious mentor (Nicole Kidman). There's much magic, gypsies, and talking, armored polar bears along the way, and not all of it flows well.

Craig's screen time is more of a cameo and Christopher Lee has a two-second appearance as a conspirator, so there's no character development here. The ending isn't as much a cliffhanger as it is simply missing.

It's a fascinating film that has me thinking a thought I rarely ever have, "Where's the director's cut?" I'll read the book. The special effects, by the way, are amazing, as is Kidman as a fascist named Coulter. A reference to the American right wing fascist/bigot named Ann? Maybe, maybe not. Funny nonetheless. C+

Birth (2004)

"Birth" is a drama about a 10-year-old boy (Cameron Bright) who insists, and believes to his core, that he is the reincarnation of Sean, the late husband of Anna (Nicole Kidman), who is about to married to businessman Joseph (Danny Houston). The kicker: Anna not only believes the boy, but soon falls in love with him.

This isn't for anyone who remotely likes children or laws protecting children from sexual exploitation. In a scene that had me squirming like never before, the boy, also named Sean, strips and gets into a bathtub with a naked Kidman. Elsewhere, Joseph attacks Sean in a rage, as does another character.

Never dull by a long shot, this film begs too many questions to succeed: Why do young Sean's parents simply vanish without a care, leaving their child with clearly distraught strangers for days on end? For that matter, where are Cameron Bright's parents? I can't give away a scene involving Joseph and Anna toward the film's ending, but I found it to be ludicrous. C