Watch An Occasional Hell For Free

A lot of fun.

A different way of telling a story

It's hard to see any effort in the film. There's no comedy to speak of, no real drama and, worst of all.

I wanted to like it more than I actually did... But much of the humor totally escaped me and I walked out only mildly impressed.

BUT - I wanted to thank John Gartner of Portland for his hilarious (and sometimes educational) comments! I'm not sure which Berenger film I saw first, but he has warmed the cockles of my heart (to be genteel) from the first. In this flick, the shot where he reveals to his lover the dirty little secret underneath his shirt was worth the whole movie! - See, we gals can salivate over just a hint of the rest of what's there - or maybe it's just me, I'm an easy mark for a certain type of... ahem... torso, shall I say? But I'll never understand why guys are even attracted to that Daisy Mae-type critter - so obvious, so over-the-top; and here, she was really, really annoying, and just wouldn't go away! I, for one liked Berenger's deceptively easy-going southern man characterization. It doesn't have to be revolutionary if it works. As for his crying scene, I didn't think it was bad at all, as it was sudden and unexpected. To me, it was his lover's reaction that came across as forced and unconvincing.What I like about this actor is that he often plays roles as what I consider a real man - he's a man's man, yet fully capable (sooner or later, often gradually) of connecting with a woman in a palpably tender way. If you think about it, there aren't many actors who can achieve this. They're either too intense at being tough to switch gears believably, or they're too obsessed with being proper at all times...sorta like a lot of actual people...So, I guess I'll not heartily defend the script or the plot, etc., but I will vouch for Tom Berenger. In my book, he reliably adds quality to any film.

This will be a "Why" review which will then provide some "Answers". Why: does the college teacher teach a class from an elevated proscenium stage? Answer: The location manager of the film forgot to book a classroom on the day the scene was to be shot. College graciously allowed them to use their theater for a couple of hours. Why: are some of the students in their thirties? A: The "main" student in the scene, an older man, was chosen because he's related to one of the producers. The director, seeing him at lunch with his producer friend, realizes that he will stick out like a sore thumb and therefore tells her casting person to cast most of the class with, errrrh, older actors. Why: does the Berenger character, a former cop for god's sake, act like a virginal nincompoop when he speaks to almost anyone else in the film? A: B., without a strong director, he directed himself and decided to play dumb-naive Southern. Why: does the missing waitress appear from time-to-time as a fantasy-image? A: to show audiences that the prof is a "famous writer" who desperately needs a muse......to write true crime crap yet! Why: does the scene with the muse, riding on the external front of prof's car, have the background moving backwards? A: because the director, cinematographer and script supervisor forgot or didn't know that when you have a camera axis change from scene to scene what appears forward-going will project backwards. Why: does the color of the prof's car change on a car surveillance sequence? A: See previous answer and add property master, teamster and key grip to the answer. One of these people should have caught the error Why: and how could the town's newspaper know, the day after the murder, that "the waitress" was in the car with the victim? No one saw them together. A: a thing like this will happen to a hack writer grinding out a script under time pressure. Why: does the prof. keep injecting a yellowish fluid into his arm? A: Maybe his body doesn't provide enough urine for his every six hour evacuations and so he has to add it to his system. Why: didn't the savvy ex-cop, investigating a missing person who was present at a murder, make the connection that a huge hole being dug by two retards (set in the South so of course common folk are all perverted, repressed morons) near the site of the crime scene take days if not weeks to think that it might be a place to bury another murder victim. (This burial site is next to the murderer's house which is located near huge swamps which would be perfect to get rid of a body; oh the inbreeding that takes place Down South and the damage to the intellect!.) Much, much more but only time for one more Why. Why was this movie made? A: They thought with Berenger in it they could market it into profitability. As if that would be enough given the illogical script they were planning on filming. Too, he probably got more money than they wanted to spend and started cutting costs in many ways that unfortunately turned up on the screen.

I've seen Valeria Golino in comedies, but till now not in such a film. In this film she shows what an allround actress can. I was deeply impressed by both of the players, Tom and Valeria. It's a pity that I didn't see the full length of the film, but it held me in my chair from the beginning to the end. My advice: See the movie.

This is not a stellar performance by Tom Berenger. This obvious low-budget movie does not make an impression. The plot seems to have many holes and the story line never really comes together. Berenger, a former cop, and now college professor is lured into finding the killer of a woman's husband and also tries to find the husband's lover. The movie's flashbacks are confusing and never make things that clear. The movie jumps around too much and it never gives the viewer a chance to get comfortable with any one character or situation. This movie falls short of expectations and is one of Berenger's saddest roles and performances. He never seems to be comfortable with his character and it seems way too obvious in this movie.