Pet Sematary: Bloodlines (2023)

Although I didn’t feel optimistic about Pet Sematary: Bloodlines, I figured that it didn’t have to do too much to be an improvement upon the previous instalment in what has become another unnecessary expansion of a Stephen King property. Look, we all know that nobody was crying out for a prequel, but the premise always has potential for macabre fun.

Set decades in the past, of course, the tale focuses on a young Judson Crandall (Jackson White). Of course. He is keen to leave his home town, set to start life anew with his girlfriend (Norma, played by Natalie Alyn Lind), but things conspire against him. There’s a grumpy dog, to put it mildly, and a very grumpy young man who has recently returned from war (Timmy, played by Jack Mulhern).

Directed by first-timer Lindsey Anderson Beer, who also co-wrote the screenplay with Jeff Buhler, a lot of Pet Sematary: Bloodlines is easily enjoyable as a standard riff on the central idea. Unfortunately, as soon as you start to think about everything fully, about how the situation would affect the central character of Jud, the whole thing falls apart. The main idea of Pet Sematary can be reworked, but it feels wrong when viewers are shown a character that we know ended up voluntarily putting himself in the same dire situation more than once in his adult life. Fool Jud once, shame on you. Fool Jud twice, shame on Jud. The other big problem that the film has is the fact that a fair chunk of the final sequence is filmed while someone forgot to get the lighting right. I peered at one dark and murky scene after another while I tried to maintain consideration for characters who might be in peril. Or they might have gone off to do their weekly grocery shopping. I don’t know. Because I couldn’t see a damn thing.

There’s nothing else that stands out, for better or worse. The rest of the visuals, the effects, and the score are all perfunctory. Nothing feels cheap or rushed, nor does it feel like a nervous debut (I hope Beer is given a better opportunity with her next project), and it is helped by a cast that would all shine if the film around them was better.

White and Lind are both easy to root for, although we already know certain facts about their fate already, and there are also good turns from Forrest Goodluck and Isabella LaBlanc, two other “youngsters” who end up in serious danger, while Mulhern has to look mean and moody as everyone around him starts to realise how much he has changed. There are welcome supporting turns from Pam Grier, David Duchovny, Henry Thomas, and Samantha Mathis, each one doing their best to distract you from the flaws inherent in the screenplay.

Those flaws are unavoidable though, ensuring that this could never be viewed as a great film. If it wasn’t connected to other films then it might have fared a bit better, but it is, and it subsequently suffers from the connection that undermines it. It’s still better than the last film to have Pet Sematary in the title though, which allows it to be both disappointing and also a very minor success.

4/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share

The Adventures Of Pluto Nash (2002)

Famous for being a massive flop when it was released, The Adventures Of Pluto Nash is a film that you cannot help going into with low expectations. If you ever decided to watch it. So it's perhaps inevitable that it exceeds those expectations, but only does so by being generally watchable throughout. Not good. Watchable.

Eddie Murphy starts as Pluto Nash, an ex-prisoner who ends up owning the hottest nightclub on the moon. Having already been relatively famous for his criminal life, Nash is now a very big fish in the small pond that he swims around. He has a robot bodyguard, Bruno (Randy Quaid), and a buyer who really wants to buy his club for a lot of money. He also ends up with an employee named Dina Lake (Rosario Dawson) who ends up on the run with Nash when the lively nightclub is blown up. Someone really wants that club, and they also want Nash dead.

The last film written by Neil Cuthbert, I'd assume the phone stopped ringing after this was released, this is a comedy that isn't very funny, a sci-fi film that doesn't do enough for sci-fi fans, and a family film that won't satisfy any family who sits down to watch it. There's not enough of anything to make it of interest to any one demographic, and I struggle to think about who it was aimed at. There are no satisfying action beats, the jokes that feel more like adult humour feel out of place, and even the final sequence feels like something that just limps along to the end credits.

Director Ron Underwood does nothing to help, although I suspect that he was hampered by his star (Murphy seems to have a tendency to not listen to those who don't want to do things his way). He is at least helped by a supporting cast full of welcome faces, but that's about the only main positive. Don't even start me on the soundtrack, which put my back up from the very beginning with a horrible rendition of "Blue Moon".

Despite not being on top form, Murphy isn't terrible in the lead role. Make his character a bit more worthy of the attention that he receives and you could have a fun person you want to spend time with. A fast-talking hustler who made it big? Yes. And that's how the character is meant to be, but it doesn't really come across that way, certainly not after the first scenes. Dawson is a fine addition, because Dawson is a fine addition to most movies that she's involved with. It may be far from the best thing that Randy Quaid has ever done, but he has some mildly amusing moments throughout. Elsewhere, Jay Mohr is a club crooner, and annoying for almost every minute that he's onscreen, Joe Pantoliano and Victor Varnado are the main villains (both working for a mysterious boss figure), Peter Boyle and Pam Grier have a couple of good scenes, Illeana Douglas is a lot of fun as a doctor with shady ethics, and there are roles for Luis Guzmán, James Rebhorn, Burt Young, Miguel A. Núñez Jr, and John Cleese.

In much the same way that most films people rush to call the latest "best thing ever" don't actually end up being the best thing ever, most films that people rush to call the "worst of all time" aren't usually anywhere near as bad as the very worst of all time. The Adventures Of Pluto Nash isn't good, and it's not one I'd recommend anyone to watch, but it's not irredeemably bad. It's just bad, and mostly dull. The latter is quite an impressive feat, considering all of the stuff thrown around onscreen.

3/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews

Scream Blacula Scream (1973)

Blacula was a big success when it was released in 1972. So, as expected, a sequel was quickly created. And it is, also as expected, not quite as good as the first film. It's not bad though. Not bad at all.

William Marshall returns to the title role, once again bringing such a great presence and certain dignity to the role. He's resurrected by a young man (Willis, played by Richard Lawson) who wants to become a leader in his voodoo circle. That doesn't go to plan. Willis is instead almost immediately bitten and ordered to stay within the confines of his own home. Meanwhile, Mamuwalde (AKA Blacula) starts to venture out into the night once more, quickly falling for the lovely, and voodoo-wise, Lisa Fortier (Pam Grier). Perhaps the magic that brought him back to life can cure him of his vampirism.

Writers Joan Torres and Raymond Koenig also return, joined this time around by Maurice Jules, and they continue to use the main character in a mixture of traditional vampire moments and also scenes that let him angrily call out situations that he sees around him (specifically when it comes to how people treat one another, as well as how valuable heritage and history are).

It's Bob Kelljan in the director's chair, taking over the role from William Crain, and he does a decent job. Although the film lacks the freshness of the first film, obviously, it makes up for that with the added voodoo elements and a handful of vampire moments that come very close to being genuinely creepy. This may be due to the fact that Kelljan had already given audiences the Count Yorga movies (which, as of this moment, I have yet to watch - sorry, not enough hours in each day). The third act is also almost on a par with that of the first film, walking a familiar path, but with just enough of a twist to avoid it feeling like a carbon copy.

Marshall is just as good here as he was in the first movie and, having recently rewatched that film (before getting to this one), I wouldn't expend too much energy arguing with anyone who wanted to hold him up as one of the best incarnations of Dracula, even if he's a successor to the title rather than the, ummmmmm, original fangster. Grier is good enough in her role, although she's not at her very best (the really good stuff is saved for her leading roles in this era). Lawson suffers from the script making him too weak and whiney, but Don Mitchell manages to even things out with his fine turn, playing the man who puts two and two together and comes up with a batty result.

I was tempted to rate this even higher, placing it much closer to the first film, but I ultimately realised that there's not much in the first hour of the film that comes close to some of the great moments in the finale. There's a lot to enjoy, here and there, but it's only the last 10-15 minutes that show how much more could have been done with the premise. Well worth a watch if you enjoyed Blacula, but it doesn't really avoid many of the standard sequel problems (especially when it comes to the plotting, which is copied almost beat for beat).

6/10

The double-pack can be bought here.
Americans can get the movies here.

Bill & Ted's Bogus Journey (1991)

The boys are back, and this time they're going to Hell. The original title of this film was, in fact, originally going to be "Bill & Ted Go To Hell" but, apparently, many Americans are put off by anything that uses the word Hell so that was changed. Thankfully, most of what made the first film so enjoyable was kept the same.

Alex Winter and Keanu Reeves reprise their main roles as, respectively, Bill S. Preston Esq. and Ted Theodore Logan. This time the future is jeopardised by the wicked De Nomolos (Joss Ackland), a man who has had enough of people being excellent to each other and enjoying rock 'n' roll music. He decides to crash the party in spectacular fashion, by using the time-travelling phonebox to send back evil robot versions of the boys, killing the real pair and then ruining their lives and musical career. It's a cunning plan, and one that looks as if it will work when Bill and Ted are killed off pretty quickly. But death doesn't have to be the end.

It may be a new director at the helm in the shape of Peter Hewitt, but writers Chris Matheson and Ed Solomon (whose name is reversed for the name of the villain) are back and clearly out to do their best for two characters embraced so readily by audiences the first time around.

Winter and Reeves slip back into their roles as easily as any of their casual clothing. They have some fun playing the bad robots, but always seem more at ease being the optimistic, naive, good guys. Rufus (played by George Carlin) returns, as do the princesses from the first film, although they are now played by Annette Azcuy and Sarah Trigger and they have slightly more screentime. Great support comes from Amy Stock-Poynton, Chelcie Ross, Pam Grier and many others (including Hal Landon Jr. and Roy Brocksmith, two men who at one point have to bravely attempt to act as if their bodies have been inhabited by the spirits of our leading dudes). But the highlight of the movie is William Sadler, hilariously deadpan - no pun intended - in the role of the Grim Reaper. The film moves along nicely before he appears, but as soon as his character starts to interact with Bill and Ted the whole thing is lifted slightly, putting it on a par with the first film.

People expecting more time travel shenanigans may be slightly disappointed, but the main premise IS based on altering timelines and the finale has some fun with the familiar phonebox. There are lots of great characters, all of them in the shadow of the Grim Reaper (suitably enough, I suppose), and a rousing rock song or two on the soundtrack, including the mighty God Gave Rock 'N' Roll To You. If you enjoyed the first movie then you'll enjoy this movie.

Station!

8/10

 http://www.amazon.co.uk/Bill-Teds-Bogus-Journey-DVD/dp/B00005KIVU/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1370204606&sr=8-1&keywords=bill+and+ted%27s+bogus+journey

Escape From L.A. (1996)

People have been getting quite worked up over the past few days after hearing news that the mighty Escape From New York has been lined up for the remake treatment. I can see why that news would be upsetting, but I also think that most people seem to be forgetting that Escape From New York has already been remade on at least two occasions now. The first remake was set in L.A. and directed by John Carpenter. The second one, off the top of my head, was directed by Neil Marshall and called Doomsday.

I know, I know, Escape From L.A. isn't a remake, it's a sequel. Of course it is. It just happens to hit almost every beat from the original movie in exactly the same order. The opening, once again, tells viewers about the disintegration of America and how a certain area of land has been made into a point of no return for most citizens. The danger, once again, comes from the daughter of the POTUS and the one man who may be able to get the job done is, once again, the mighty Snake Plissken (Kurt Russell effortlessly reprising the role 15 years after the original film). Snake is, once again, given very little choice in the matter and ends up using a one-man vehicle to get into L.A. before wandering around and meeting a variety of oddballs as he tries to reach his goal.

The fact that everything is so familiar is both a big positive and BIG negative for the film. Russell is great, in one of his best roles, and the supporting players all bring some fun to the proceedings but the old familiarity breeding contempt adage starts to come true as each scene clearly plays out as a pale imitation of good stuff from the original movie. There are no surprises here for fans of Escape From New York.

There is, however, still plenty of fun. Carpenter, who wrote the script with Debra Hill and Kurt Russell, may not be at the top of his game when it comes to the visuals (a lot of these mid-1990s effects look worse than the stuff in the 1981 film, which at least has a certain retro charm to it nowadays) and makes one huge mis-step with a scene featuring some surfing that has to be seen to be disbelieved, but he throws enough good people onscreen to guarantee that movie fans will at least spend most of the movie with a smile on their face.

Cliff Robertson plays the president this time around, Stacy Keach and Michelle Forbes are the people who give Snake his instructions and try to keep tabs on him, Peter Fonda is a wise old dude, Steve Buscemi is slippery Eddie AKA Map To The Stars Eddie and Bruce Campbell is a creepy surgeon. Valeria Golino has a small role as a woman who enjoys the freedom that living in dangerous L.A. provides and Pam Grier is enjoyable as Hershe Las Palmas. A. J. Langer is the daughter of the president and Georges Corraface is the revolutionary type that she falls in with, but both are overshadowed by the supporting cast, which also includes the great Al Leong and Peter Jason in small roles.

While certainly not as bad as it was made out to be when initially released, Escape From L.A. just isn't a patch (pun possibly intended) on the first film, but it has plenty of enjoyable little moments throughout and shows some strong ideas at its core as it weaves the basic plotline through an America that Carpenter shows to be horribly restrictive and in need of adjustment. It's set in 2013, but it's a 2013 where personal freedoms are kept in check by the government, American citizens are treated like a foreign invader once a judgment has been made and people are controlled by a mixture of lies and misinformation. Thank goodness it's only a movie, eh.

6/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share 

Larry Crowne (2011)

When I sat down to watch Larry Crowne I admit that I wasn't expecting to like it. It just seemed as if it was something a bit too safe and twee and uninteresting. And, in a way, it was all of those things. Yet it was also quite enjoyable in an old-fashioned way, a vehicle for Tom Hanks to star in, direct and also write (with Nia Vardalos). He even finds a role for his wife, Rita Wilson.

Hanks is the titular character, a man who finds himself at a bit of a loss when he is fired from his job. Times are tough but Crowne hopes for the best when he enrols in some further education classes. One of those classes is being taught by Mrs Tainot (Julia Roberts), a woman who doesn't really have much enthusiasm for her job any more. Thankfully, Larry Crowne brings out the best in everyone. His teacher starts to properly teach, his classmates start trying to actually learn what they're being taught and the lovely Alvarez (Roxana Ortega) enjoys a new pet project when she decides to help "Lance Corona" make himself a bit more socially active and cool.

Larry Crowne is actually, for almost 3/4 of the runtime, a good film. Hanks is as likeable as ever, Roberts is okay and the support from Roxana Ortega, Wilmer Valderrama, Pam Grier, George Takei, Cedric The Entertainer, Bryan Cranston and others (including a fun couple of scenes for Rob Riggle) really help to lift what is, essentially, average material. At best. From the opening titles, accompanied by a lively ELO track, to about the halfway point, I was able to overlook many of the negatives and enjoy myself. However, once it gets to the halfway point, the negatives start to become harder to overlook.

The biggest failing that the movie has, and that builds and builds up to an end credit sequence which involves characters actually waving to the audience, is a certain smugness. It's almost as if the movie makes the assumption that everyone will find the main characters so endearing that they'll be sad to see the end credits roll. Hanks does well as director, nothing flashy but he keeps everything nicely paced, though he's not as talented in the writing department, which piles up cliche after cliche.

I saw the trailer for this movie, as did many people, and thought "well, that's probably not for me". As the first half of the movie kept moving nicely along I started to change my mind. Maybe I'd been too cynical and the fact that this was just a decent movie with a bit of a sweet, soft centre wasn't all that bad. But as the sweetness started to build up to levels threatening to give me dental problems and/or put me into a diabetic coma I was able to see that my first impressions were correct.

There are many other people who will enjoy this much more than I did, people who want something that's slightly removed from every other comic book movie, zombie flick or shoot 'em up, and I can see the appeal. I've actually rated the movie as slightly above average because there were a number of little moments, even if they were covered in cheese, that I enjoyed. I laughed, I wanted the lead character to do well, I was won over. The film succeeded. For that first half, at least.

6/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share 

Nico AKA Above The Law (1988)

A Steven Seagal movie in which the wooden one bumps up against rough bad guys and does his slap-happy chopsocky schtick. No different from any other Steven Seagal movie then. Don’t let that put you off though, this is Seagal’s first movie and, alongside the next four, remains one of his best. It’s actually worth revisiting the man’s early works to remember just how good he once was.

Directed by Andrew Davis, from a script that was developed from a story by Davis and Seagal, the movie is all about tough cop Nico Toscani (Seagal). Nico was a special covert agent in Vietnam but left in disgust as he saw the war being used as a cover for profiteering from drug money. He doesn’t tolerate hypocrisy and doesn’t care who he upsets, until the day when he runs up against a major baddie who targets his family and those around him.

While it’s not the best of Seagal’s first five movies, Nico holds up as a solid action flick with a decent plotline and enough action beats spaced throughout to keep things moving briskly along. The direct, powerful fighting style that Seagal uses helps things feel fresh and a step apart from a hundred and one other, more stylised martial arts movies.

It also helps that the supporting cast includes an on-form Pam Grier, Sharon Stone, Henry Silva, Chelcie Ross and numerous other folk recognisable to viewers of this type of unpretentious entertainment.

 

Davis handles directorial duties well but both director and star would go on to peak elsewhere (Davis with The Fugitive and Seagal with Under Siege). Nico certainly remains an enjoyable option for the action movie fan though.

6/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share 

Class Of 1999 (1990)

Director Mark L. Lester (who also wrote the story for this) was worried about kids in 1990. He had, of course, been worried about them ever since he gave us the enjoyably nasty Class Of 1984 but things had simply been declining since then. Which is obviously why he envisaged a future where military robots could be reprogrammed to be used as schoolteachers. Of course.

Lester uses Class Of 1999 to pose many questions. Just how far will kids go if the escalating teen violence is left unchecked? How many schlock-tastic stars can be crammed into one glorious b-movie? And just WHY would a robotic humanoid smoke a pipe?

The plot sees a particularly troubled school (run by Malcolm McDowell) used in a trial that involves three robo-teachers (Pam Grier, Patrick Kilpatrick and John P. Ryan) bringing the students into line and improving the entire education system through . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . zero tolerance and the threat of major robo-violence. Death soon occurs and it becomes clear that the military programming is overtaking the educational programming but it’s hard to tell a deranged robo-teacher that it’s time for them to leave. That means that saving the day is up to bad boy Cody (Bradley Gregg), Christie the principal’s daughter (Traci Lind) and all of the other warring gang members, as long as they can stop fighting each other long enough to realise that they now have a common enemy.

Class Of 1999 is ridiculously implausible, slightly dated and hampered at times by it’s budgetary constraints. It’s also a heck of a lot of fun with an enjoyable tone and “message” that seems to veer from the conformist to the complete antiestablishmentism of the finale.

The acting is very much a mixed bag. Gregg and Lind make for a decent young couple that you want to see survive, Joshua John Miller has a character who is a lot more annoying here than the one he played in Near Dark, Malcolm McDowell is solid, Grier and Kilpatrick and Ryan have fun in their robo-roles and Stacy Keach plays an entertainingly demented scientist overseeing the trial.

Action sequences are lively enough and there’s plenty of destruction throughout but the movie really pulls out all of the stops in a final reel that pits the kids against the seemingly-indestructible teachers. It feels like a cross between The Faculty and Class Of Nuke ‘em High and I’m the kind of person who considers that no bad thing. Another “class act” from Lester. Yeah, sorry about that – couldn’t resist the pun.

7/10.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Class-1999-DVD-Bradley-Gregg/dp/B000HN31F6/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1390335292&sr=8-1&keywords=class+of+1999