The Lodger Movie
Storyline
TAGLINES
Everyone Is Suspect
The tale of a serial killer in West Hollywood has two converging plot lines. The first involves an uneasy relationship between a psychologically unstable landlady and her enigmatic lodger; the second is about a troubled detective engaged in a cat-and-mouse game with the elusive killer, who is imitating the crimes of Jack the Ripper.
| Michael Agostini | Deputy Sheriff |
| Michael Albala | Forensic Expert |
| Simon Baker | Malcolm |
| Donnell C. Barret | Street Pimp |
| Gerry Carbajal | L.A. County Sheriff Deputy |
| J.P. Foster Jr. | Timmy |
| Kirk Fox | Officer 3000 |
| Paul Joyner | Detective |
| Ernie Grunwald | Gregor |
| Philip Baker Hall | Captain Smith |
| Jamison Jones | Officer Bittner |
| Donal Logue | Bunting |
| Mocean Melvin | Young Detective |
| Alfred Molina | Chandler Manning |
| David Ondaatje |
5.80 out of 10 (1409 votes)
Visitor Reviews
Not really a remake, but a pretty good thriller...
posted on 02 Jul 2009This is not really a remake of the previous movies concerning a mysterious lodger at an Inn that might be Jack the Ripper. This takes place in modern Los Angeles, and concerns a couple that need to rent their guest house, and the Wife (Hope Davis) rents to a mysterious stranger that might be responsible for a series of Jack the Ripper type murders occurring. Alfred Molina is the detective in charge of the murders who brought a suspect to court 7 years earlier, who was then executed for similar murders, but now the murders appear to be exactly the same as the executed guy. In fact, as the investigation goes on, the killer is following exactly the Jack the Ripper killings. This is a good one, the whole premise is very interesting, especially to fans of Jack the Ripper movies. Simon Baker plays the mysterious lodger, but then again, nobody has seen him except the Wife, and when an investigation takes place, developments dictate, everything is not as it suggests. Good mystery, check this one out.
disappointing to say the least.
posted on 14 Jun 2009A little background first.In 1888, In London Englamd Jack The Ripper savagely killed 6 ladies of the evening. Even though there were many suspects, & many theories, we never found out who he was or why this happened.In about 1925 Maria Belloc Loundes wrote the novel THE LODGER. It was a success, In 1926/7 Alfred Hitchcock who was starting to create a name for himself in Movies, made the silent version of the novel. We know what happened to Mr Hitchcock & his career,In 1944, the next version of The Lodger was made, starring Laird Cregar.Mr.Cregar was a huge man, only in his 20's very tall & very heavy. 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. First, what was good in the film,the settings & costumes were very good,The killing were not seen in total, You hear victims scream & limbs moving.(this is the way they did it in both earlier versions). The acting was good by a talented cast; headed by Alfred Molina and Shane West as the 2 detectives assigned to the case. Hope Davis & Donal Logue as the couple who rent the guest house to Simon Baker, Philip Baker Hall as an FBI agent.Rachel Leigh Cook & the ever reliable, Rebecca Pidgeon also have major roles.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. in 1888 to modern Los Angeles, West Hollywood. The area is far from slimy,some parts are rundown but not like in the movie. I KNOW because I call the West Hollywood area my home.They have a few scenes in pouring rain, we rarely ever have such rain as depicted.This version was written & directer by David Ondaatje.Maybe because I may have seen too many films of this nature, I was not impressed. It had a very brief run in Jan.2009 & released to DVD in March 2009,.There are some nice extras on the DVD<Ratings: **1/2 out of 4..73 points out of 100.. IMDb 6.. out of 10
Entertaining low-budget mystery, but don't expect too much
posted on 03 Apr 2009Based off the same book as Alfred Hitchcock's 1927 adaptation, this version of 'The Lodger' yields a surprisingly strong cast in Alfred Molina, Rachel Leigh Cook, Philip Baker Hall, Donald Logue, Simon Baker, and Hope Davis. It tells the tale of a not-so-happy couple that rents out a room to a mysterious young man and begin to discover deeper secrets about him. . . like that he may be involved in a series of local murders.When I first saw the IMDb page for this film, I was stunned that such a strong cast and solid idea didn't make it very far into theatres, especially with as successful as horror has been so far this year. Unfortunately, low-budget horror re-adaptations tend to have some pretty bad stigmas associated with them ('I Am Omega,' 'The Raven'). . . because they're usually pretty terrible. It's even more difficult to follow in the footsteps of Alfred Hitchcock, one of the greatest filmmakers of all time. Nevertheless, feature-rookie David Ondaatje ignored those dangers and went along with the film anyway. I'm pretty glad he did. This adaptation of 'The Lodger,' while it doesn't compare to Hitchcock's in the least, is very entertaining and keeps a solid amount of mystery throughout. It's cheap and it shows, yes, but the great cast, who does a reasonable job, does manage to raise it above the level of low-grade, straight-to-video horrors (like the above mentioned films) to, at least, a respectable and worthy quality. Ondaatje's direction is apt enough, though David A. Armstrong's cinematography and William Flicker's editing do seriously ruin the mood sometimes with random shakicam and MTV-style cuts. The re-adapted script flows well, but the dialogue is a bit awkward sometimes and really needed another edit. Another problem with the script is the overly forceful attempts at creating red herrings. I love mystery as much as the next guy (actually, moreso), but when you're trying to shove false leads down the viewers' throats, you're going to be making it less mysterious and more annoying. Also, it was pretty hilarious that they would send 55-year-old Alfred Molina, who is at least 100 pounds overweight, running after a a murderer instead of 30-year-old Shane West, who's in perfect shape. So logical. Anyway. . . if you're looking for an entertaining mystery-thriller, or if you're a big fan of Jack the Ripper (like me, which is why I at least found it interesting) or previous adaptations of 'The Lodger,' give this one a look. It's not great, but it's an okay time-passer.Final Verdict: 6/10.-AP3-
Will keep your attention and guessing until the end
posted on 01 Apr 2009This I have to admit is a very B-movie. If it were not for the actors in it I wouldn't even call it a C-movie. However the storyline is very engaging. I wouldn't dare compare it to any other movie however and most of the critics have already slammed it because "Hitchcock's version was better" (although this movie has been made by several others as well).The director has done a fairly good job with the budget he has and has made some very good decisions at least in casting the actors in their roles. The movie is mostly a "copycat" film, but the concepts are still the same. Obviously it is not possible to follow the storyline of "jack the ripper has left England and is now in the United States" as in the original Lodger story because it is now 2009, which in the end doesn't really help or hurt the film at all. It was also nice to see Rebecca Pidgeon in a film again although her character is mostly just thrown in to "tie" the ending together in a "Psycho-esque" kind of way. Donal Logue seems like the typical husband who doesn't SEEM to understand his wife, played by Hope Davis, who may or may not be imagining things. And finally Alfred Molina is basically cast as himself, stubborn, difficult, and determined.Everyone is a suspect and Ondaatje does a very good job keeping the pace while switching seamlessly between the detectives investigating and the Bunting residence where "The Lodger" is. However, whether or not you feel "cheated" by the end of the film is up to you. I however was not very surprised by the modern day twists that are thrown at the audience in the end. Definitely worth seeing in the theater if you can.
Disappointing!
posted on 30 Mar 2009It 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. "The Lodger" is not a bad movie. 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. The mystery is there. There are several questions raised you want to be answered. The fact that only a fraction of those questions get explained make it a frustrating affair. Misdirection is a tool often used in thrillers in order to surprise us. And I must admit that the movie does promise a wonderful twist. However the twist is set up in such a way that it leaves too much room for different interpretations which destroys the desired effect. You won't be shocked or surprised,maybe a little bit confused. And such an ending could have been forgiven had the movie been fun to watch. "The Lodger" takes it self so seriously that it undermines the efforts of the cast to make this movie more interesting than it is. At one point you just know how events will play out. The lack of tension,humor and drama only are compensated by your drive to solve the mystery. And the hope that the director succeeded in fooling us in creating one big surprise at the end. But when the credits start to roll you can't shake the feeling that you wasted your time.
Rethink of a classic story gets lost in directorial touches and clichés that are more laughable than anything else.
posted on 24 Mar 2009Updated and rethought story of the strange lodger in a home that may or may not be Jack the Ripper. However in this new version the question is the nice man, Simon Baker, renting a room from Hope Davis responsible for the Jack the Ripper like killing in Los Angeles . Alfred Molina is the cop on the trail of the killer. A very well acted film, with everyone hitting the right notes for their parts. The film really isn't a strict retelling of the story, rather it uses bits of the original to launch off in new directions, certainly Hope Davis's damaged landlord never came from Victorian London. Unfortunately the film collapses thanks to two errors in judgment. The first is the script is too much into the realm of cliché when it comes to Molina's story arc. He's the good zealous cop who ends up becoming a scapegoat for the failures of the rest of the police. The material isn't bad, but for a film that is so desperately trying to break the mold of a well worn story that to have him be the only one who understands what's going on and that he gets blamed like almost every other cop drama is too much to ask. It brings everything down. The other problem with the film is that the director is a bit too gimmick happy. Take for example the early sequence where Hope Davis is eating breakfast and the TV is on and you get fancy camera angles through her glass or an increase in volume when the work knife is heard on TV. You also have fast motion and slow motion sequences and shots designed to look cool. The best tricks are the ones we never see, unfortunately with this film every one is revealed as if with a neon sign and fireworks. I spent more time watching the director attempt to be clever then I was watching the police try to figure out who the killer was. This is a film with very good part that are hurt by some very bad ones. Worth a look but only if you don't pay for it.
The Lodger Murders Movie Audiences
posted on 14 Mar 2009"The Lodger," now on DVD develops a storyline involving a tenant living with a lonely landlady and serial killings in the West Hollywood area of Los Angeles. The film seems to involve two separate stories, with different characters who meet in the final climactic finish; however, no closure is given to the story as the killer within "The Lodger," escapes capture. Alfred Molina, the lead in the film begins the story at the scene of a grisly murder and the picture revolves mostly around this character's attempts at tracking down an anonymous serial killer. The settings are primarily shot in the downtown Los Angeles area with several scenes from an urban neighbourhood contrasting the busyness of the city. The characters and lives of Detective Manning (Molina) are given an early initial reveal while the back stories of the landlady and the lodger are not given even a partial reveal until midway into the film. Near the end of the film the life of the lodger is given a partial reveal, which seems slightly disappointing.The original musical score that haunts the picture throughout really adds an entire dimension to the film that enhances the movie watching experience. The soundtrack begins early in the film, subtly and hovers in the background during many of the scenes. Composer John Frizzell produces an excellent composition that adds to the overall intensity of the film while highlighting certain climactic scenes. The musical score, while not taking center stage in the film makes "The Lodger," a more fulfilling visceral experience.Lighting, acting, and story development are each well done, but director David Ondaatje's use of Los Angeles city streets, in fast forward mode seems overly mysterious in tone. The movie begins with a CGI image of blood, in veins that transforms into the city streets of Los Angeles, and during the film several shots of traffic moving exceptionally fast break up the pacing within "The Lodger." Possibly symbolic of the transitory nature of the killer the streets of Los Angeles are shown throughout the movie to ease the pacing at certain key points in the film. As well, overhead shots of the sky, with clouds are meant to show the transition of time, but their symbolic interpretation seems ambiguous. On the acting side the portrayal of Rachel Leigh Cook as a somewhat distraught, lonely housewife is done with subtly and a flair for the under dramatic, that keeps the viewer's attention on the believability of the story. Other actors including; Alfred Molina as an over-worked detective, and Donal Logue as a potential suspect are especially well done and deliver realism to the story. In addition, the lighting, which takes place primarily in natural daylight, gives "The Lodger," an eerie feel as shots of alleyways and streets are shot in partial darkness.Director David Ondaatje, nephew of writer Michael Ondaatje delivers a strong film, surprisingly after only directing two previous feature films. Ondaatje switches often between the use of stead-cams and a hand held 35mm to display various shots of the Los Angeles landscapes and characters within the film. Often using medium shots at the beginning of a scene and then slowly rotating left or right as the director moves in for a close-up, Ondaatje's manages to keep the visuals interesting while keeping character interactions short. Many of the dialogue scenes between the landlady and tenant are kept to less than a minute, and often to less than thirty seconds. The quick changes between scenes and characters can be somewhat distracting, but Ondaatje is quickly moving the story along as the killer's vile habits are slowly given a reveal. Focusing on the killer's view or a knife blade the killer utilizes a mysterious quality, which while frustrating at times does manage to make the film slightly more intense. Another directing quirk from Ondaatje seems to be his love for filming feet as several frames are shot exclusively of women's feet and rarely of the killer's.The sets, actors, and filming techniques each do their part in delivering an excellent psychological thriller, that while overly sparse on the action scenes manages to hold the viewer's full attention throughout. The light musical compositions along with experienced actors are a bonus and both elements are able to develop a very intriguing story that delves into the motivations of a serial killer. "The Lodger," from relatively new director David Ondaatje does not give closure to the story, but the film, overall is very entertaining to watch.7 Creepy Skulls out of 10.
Bed and breakfast
posted on 27 Jan 2009Marie Belloc's novel, serves once again as the basis of this 2009 treatment that doesn't go anywhere. Partly, the fault lies with the treatment of its well intentioned writer/director, David Ondaatje. His inexperience, perhaps, was the factor that this movie probably went into DVD right away, as it appears the commercial run didn't go anywhere since it must have come and gone without much publicity, or word of mouth.The locale of the story has been changed from London to a rainy Los Angeles, seen mostly at night. The serial killer who is killing prostitutes in a seedy part of town is following in the steps of Jack the Ripper, the famed English killer. This sick man finds digs in what appears to be an uninhabited garage in the back of a house that has seen better days. The mysterious lodger catches the landlady's fancy; this woman is stuck in a bad marriage. She looks as though she is not dealing with reality, but the attraction the new renter has upon her proves to be too much.When the dead women begin to surface, detective Chandler Manning has to face guilty feelings because the present killer has the same M.O. as the man he has sent to the electric chair a short time before. Manning has a suspicion the murders follow the same logic as the ones committed almost a century ago in London. His obsession gets the best of him, making him lose perspective.The picture fails because the way Mr. Ondaatje presents the story. There is no suspense in most of the action. If the viewer happens to be a fan of the genre, he would notice things that will spoil the fun for him. The director doesn't create enough atmosphere to do justice to what he tried to do.The talented cast is totally wasted. Alfred Molina and Hope Davis are excellent actors, but the way they were asked to portray their characters is not believable. For one, the detective of Mr. Molina, or the vapid landlady of Ms. Davis, will not add anything to their brilliant careers.
The best "lodger" mystery since Wallace & Gromit and The Wrong Trousers!
posted on 15 Aug 2009I 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 1927, 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…