Serenity:***1/2/*****

---

This is only the second time it has happened. By "it," I'm referring to the process by which a science fiction television show is canceled, becomes a cult hit after its removal from the air, and is brought back to life as a major motion picture with the original cast. Serenity, Joss Whedon's follow-up to his defunct TV project Firefly, thus enters rarefied territory. The only other franchise to make such a lofty claim is Star Trek. (To be fair, X-Files did something similar, although it was still on the air when the movie reached theaters.) The box office numbers will determine where the Firefly characters go from here: to a sequel, to a new TV series, or to the dusty part of a DVD shelf.

One question that's impossible to answer for a Firefly fan is whether the film works on its own. To that end, I have avoided the TV series for the sake of this review. I have been tempted to sample it (opportunities abound), but have avoided doing so. My goal with this review is to present the perspective of someone who appreciates science fiction but has never been exposed to Joss Whedon's universe (I never saw Buffy or Angel, either). Fan reviews have flooded the 'net. This is an opportunity for a different point-of-view.

Serenity is a fast-paced, engaging science fiction adventure tale. The emphasis should be on "adventure;" the "science fiction" just gives Whedon (making his directorial debut) an interesting canvas to paint upon. In many ways, the film is old-fashioned. The space-ships are not sleek and streamlined - they're hunks of junk being held together by paperclips and masking tape. The characters talk like they learned English in the 19th century Old West (with occasional Chinese curses thrown in for good measure). And guns fire bullets, not laser blasts. This is one of the key elements that separates the Star Trek camp from the (new) Battlestar Galactica one. Serenity falls in the latter, "retro" category.

The storyline is set up economically, albeit with a little too much starting exposition. A 17-year old telepath named River (Summer Glau) is being manipulated by this universe's version of the Evil Empire (called the Alliance) to become a weapon. She is rescued by her brother, Simon (Sean Maher), and the two seek refuge upon the mercenary ship Serenity. The ship is captained by Malcolm Reynolds (Nathan Fillion), a war veteran who is more compassionate than he lets on. His crew consists of his second-in-command, Zoe (Gina Torres); her husband and the ship's pilot, Wash (Alan Tudyk); Kaylee (Jewel Staite), an engineer who's prettier than Scotty; and Jayne (Adam Baldwin), a tough-talking bruiser. At first, having River and Simon on board doesn't seem to be a problem, but Simon's unwillingness to take orders and River's increasing mental instability generate friction. Then a real problem becomes apparent: River is being pursued by one of the Alliance's elite operatives (Chiwetel Ejiofor), and he will stop at nothing to eliminate her. This puts the crew of Serenity in the cross-hairs of a galactic showdown.

For a two-hour movie, the characters - even the secondary ones - are remarkably well-drawn. The ones with the most screen time and opportunity to establish themselves are Mal and River. Kaylee and Simon have a coy romantic subplot. Jayne gets all the good one-liners. Wash and Zoe don't have a lot to do, but I assume they had their moments in the TV series. The newcomer is the Operative, and he's about as interesting as villains get. This guy isn't your usual run-of-the-mill megalomaniac or battle-hardened warrior. His motives may be simple, but his characterization isn't. As played by talented actor Chiwetel Ejiofor, he is arguably Serenity's greatest asset.

The characters and circumstances reminded me of the late '70s/early '80s British science fiction series Blake's 7. There, as here, there's plenty of tension amongst the crewmen. Some are more in the crusader mold than others. Some are in it purely for the money. Some are affable, some are antisocial. And there's plenty of bitterness, anger, and resentment to go along. Comparing Serenity to Blake's 7 is compliment, since I consider the earlier TV show to be the best science fiction program ever to appear on the small screen. There are similarities, and those represent strengths for both franchises.

There are plenty of special effects, including an impressive space battle that, while not on the same level as the one that started off Revenge of the Sith, is nice enough in its own right. But Serenity isn't about effects. It's about narrative and characters, and it does a solid job in both areas. Whedon propels the story along at a breakneck pace, but keeps it smooth enough that we never get lost, and occasionally pauses to allow for character interaction. There are plenty of "fan moments," but they don't interfere with the overall viewing experience. And there are times when the unexpected occurs. Being space mercenaries harboring a fugitive can be a dangerous business, and Whedon doesn't shirk from bringing death into this movie.

The film leaves open the possibility of future adventures - whether they materialize remains to be seen. Whedon went all-out for the fans with Serenity, including going so far as to hold special pre-release screenings in the late spring. (The final cut was reportedly tweaked based on audience response.) For the average movie-goer, the movie may not have the same emotional resonance it achieves for Firefly aficionados, but those who enjoy science fiction adventure will find plenty to appreciate. It's self-contained and entertaining - arguably the two things most necessary for Serenity to soar.

A Histor Of Violence

Rating:***1/2/*****

David Cronenberg says his title "A History of Violence" has three levels: It refers (1) to a suspect with a long history of violence; (2) to the historical use of violence as a means of settling disputes, and (3) to the innate violence of Darwinian evolution, in which better-adapted organisms replace those less able to cope. "I am a complete Darwinian," says Cronenberg, whose new film is in many ways about the survival of the fittest -- at all costs.

The movie opens in a small Indiana town. Tom Stall (Viggo Mortensen) runs one of those friendly little diners that acts as the village crossroads and clearing-house. He's the kind of guy everybody likes, married to a lawyer named Edie (Maria Bello), father of the teenager Jack (Ashton Holmes) and young Sarah (Heidi Hayes). He has one of those middle American accents in which every word translates into "I'm just folks."

So persuasive are the opening scenes that we wonder if Cronenberg has abandoned his own history of violence and decided to make a small-town slice of life: a Capra picture, perhaps, with Viggo Mortensen as Jimmy Stewart. Then all hell breaks loose. Two tough guys enter the diner to try a stickup. They have guns, mean business, threaten the customers and a waitress. Moving so quickly he seems to have been practicing the scene as choreography, Tom Stall takes out the two guys and ends up on the local front pages as a hero.

He makes a shy hero. He doesn't want to give interviews or talk about what he has done, and there are strained moments in his household as his wife worries about a seismic shift in his mood, and his son can't understand an unstated change in their relationship. Read no further if you want to preserve the reasons for these changes.

Tom Stall, as it turns out, has a secret he has been guarding for 20 years. He is not named Tom Stall but Joey, is not from Indiana but from Philadelphia, has tried to start a new life in a small town and failed because of this unexpected publicity. Soon more strangers arrive in town: Carl Fogarty (Ed Harris) turns up with two hard men in his employ. Something really bad has happened to Carl earlier in life, and we don't want to know how his face got that way.

Tom Stall has transformed himself so completely into a small town family man that maybe there were years when he believed the story himself. The arrival of Fogarty makes that an illusion impossible to sustain, and he must return to Philadelphia and to an extraordinary scene with a man named Richie Cusack (William Hurt), whose role in Tom (or Joey's) life I will leave for you to discover. Let me say that Hurt has done a lot of good acting in a lot of intriguing roles, but during his brief screen time in "A History of Violence" he sounds notes we have not heard before.

Another important element in the plot involves the Stall family, especially Edie the wife and Jack the son. What do you do when you discover that your husband or father has concealed everything about his early life? Was he lying to you, or protecting you? Did you love someone who did not really exist?

Cronenberg is a director with a wide range, usually played by the left hand. He has ventured into horror, the macabre, science fiction, satire and the extremely peculiar. In his 2003 film "Spider," he starred Ralph Fiennes as a mental patient in a halfway house whose reality balances between everyday details and haunting memories of his past. "Dead Ringers" (1988) has Jeremy Irons in a dual role as twins, one not so nice, the other not so nice, either. "Dead Zone" (1983) has Christopher Walken losing five years of his life and becoming a different kind of person. These shifts in personal reality seem fascinating to Cronenberg.

But what is Cronenberg saying about Tom, or Joey? Which life is the real one? The nature of Joey's early life was established by the world he was born into. His second life was created by conscious choice. Which is dominant, nature or nurture? Hyde, or Jekyll? Are we kidding ourselves when we think we can live peacefully? Is our peace purchased at the price of violence done elsewhere? In "A History of Violence," it all comes down to this: If Tom Stall had truly been the cheerful small-town guy he pretended to be, he would have died in that diner. It was Joey who saved him. And here is the crucial point: Because of Joey, the son Jack, makes discoveries about himself that he might not have ever needed (or wanted) to make.

"A History of Violence" seems deceptively straightforward, coming from a director with Cronenberg's quirky complexity. But think again. This is not a movie about plot, but about character. It is about how people turn out the way they do, and about whether the world sometimes functions like a fool's paradise. I never give a moment's thought about finding water to drink. In New Orleans a few weeks ago, would I have been willing to steal from stores or fight other people for drinkable water? Yes, if it meant life for myself and my family. But I would have made a pitiful thief and fighter, and probably would have failed.

Since I am wandering, let me wander farther: At the Toronto Film Festival I saw a screening of "Nanook of the North," the great documentary about Eskimos surviving in the hostile arctic wilderness. They live because they hunt and kill. Of the three levels "A History of Violence" refers to, I think Cronenberg is most interested in the third, in the survival of the fittest. Not the good, the moral, the nice, but the fittest. The movie is based on the graphic novels by John Wagner and Vince Locke. It could also be illuminated by The Selfish Gene, by Richard Dawkins. I think that's why Cronenberg gives his hero a son: To show that Jack inherited what he did not ever suspect his father possessed.