Van Damme plays Kurt Sloane, the younger brother to Eric (played by Dennis Alexio). When he sees Eric painfully defeated by the ruthless Tong Po (Michael Qissi), he swears to get revenge. Unfortunately, nobody will train him, and the idea of him becoming good enough to fight Tong Po is laughable to many. Until he is finally accepted as a student by Xian Chow (Dennis Chan). Before you can say "let's fill up the middle section of this movie with one montage after another" you start to get one montage after another showing Kurt progressing through his martial arts education. But will he get his shot at Tong Po?
Like many of the other enjoyable martial arts movies from this time, this is a simple underdog story that pits a talented student who needs guidance against a proper "boo, hiss" baddie. The script by Glenn A. Bruce hits all of the beats that you'd expect, with a lot of good humour here and there, and also makes some predictable mis-steps (the dialogue between the two brothers is pretty cheesy and bad, and a sexual assault is thrown into the script in a way that feels like nothing more than an extra motivator for our hero).
Directors Mark DiSalle and David Worth do good work (considering the filmography of both men, this may remain their best directorial effort) and they seem to know how to just follow the simple script, keep the pace moving along in between training and fight scenes, and let their star do what viewers have paid to see him do.
Van Damme has a lot of fun onscreen, not least of all in THAT dancing scene, and it's not surprising that he would spend the next five years being one of the big headline stars in the action genre. Dennis Chan is a lot of fun as the eccentric teacher, Haskell V. Anderson III is also enjoyable as Winston, a stranger who becomes a good friend to Kurt, and Rochelle Ashana does quite well as Xian Chow's niece, Mylee. Alexio and Qissi aren't anywhere near as good, but they aren't called upon to do much more than look mean and angry most of the time.
It may not be the very best from Van Damme but Kickboxer is definitely top-tier stuff for fans of the star. The fights, the montage sequences, the cheesy/wonderful soundtrack, the splits - this has all of the right ingredients to satisfy your cinematic fast food craving.
7/10
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
Tuesday, 5 June 2018
June-Claude Van Damme: Kickboxer (1989)
It's the same old story. You travel around the world, supporting your kickboxing brother, watch him rendered immobile and unconscious at the hands of a vicious Thailand fighter, and then beseech a little old man to train you to a level that will allow you to avenge your brother and become known to locals as "Nok Su Kow" (translation = "White Warrior"). Not forgetting to leave yourself a little bit of time for a few drinks and a dance.
Monday, 4 June 2018
June-Claude Van Damme: Cyborg (1989)
I always try to offer up my reviews of movies based simply on my own feelings, where I am whenever I watch (or previously watched) the film, and perhaps some context about the world at large, especially if the film is making a point about a certain time and place. These things may not seem obvious in any review, and are often unnecessary, but my approach remains the same. I try not to mention box office results or critical receptions, unless they feel relevant in terms of how others may already be feeling biased for or against the movie. Cyborg is no exception. I don't even know how it did when it was released, but I know how I reacted to it.
I was disappointed. Having previously seen Jean-Claude Van Damme in more standard "underdog does good" storylines (because I didn't see his films in order, I saw the crowd-pleasers before the rest of his work), I wasn't ready for Cyborg. I wanted more fights, I wanted a lighter tone, and I wanted Van Damme to more easily look like the hero I already knew him to be.
Thankfully, I have revisited this film a few times over the past few decades, and my opinion of it has only grown. Writer-director Albert Pyun may prefer that you watch his alternate cut, AKA Slinger, but I have only ever seen this version, and this version works for me.
It's the future. The world has been transformed by a deadly plague. Most people would hope for a cure, and one woman (Pearl, played by Dayle Haddon) may have it, but a marauding madman named Fender Tremolo (Vincent Klyn) likes things just as they are. He has his acolytes, gets to indulge in plenty of violence, and gets to wander around with a loyal band of like-minded followers. When Pearl ends up in, ummmm, peril, Van Damme becomes a reluctant hero. He cannot stop her from ultimately being snatched up by the gang of villains but he sets out to rescue her, and also the planet, accompanied by a young woman named Nady (Deborah Richter).
Although clearly a messy and flawed film, Cyborg remains one of the most interesting outings in the early years of Van Damme's career. It's tonally dark, it's choppy, and a number of scenes are poorly lit, but there's an unpleasantness to the violence that lends this an edge when compared to other movies starring The Muscles From Brussels. In fact, a few scenes feel more like horror movie moments than sci-fi action.
The acting isn't too bad. Van Damme isn't asked to do too much, Klyn is impressively menacing and cruel as the main villain, and Richter and Haddon are both okay. Haley Peterson does well, and deserves a mention here. She plays a character last seen by Rickenbacker when she was a child, and gives a silent performance that reveals her character in flashbacks contrasting with how she is in the present.
Pyun at least tries to give viewers something a bit different, while pleasing both JCVD fans and people who enjoy post-apocalyptic action adventures, and he largely succeeds (if you dismiss the initial opinions of demanding younger teens like me). I would, of course, have much preferred to see Pyun's take on He-Man and Spider-Man, which were the Cannon projects on the slate before deals fell through and this film was hurried into creation as a replacement, but I am now happy enough to have this as a dark and interesting sci-fi action movie.
7/10
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
I was disappointed. Having previously seen Jean-Claude Van Damme in more standard "underdog does good" storylines (because I didn't see his films in order, I saw the crowd-pleasers before the rest of his work), I wasn't ready for Cyborg. I wanted more fights, I wanted a lighter tone, and I wanted Van Damme to more easily look like the hero I already knew him to be.
Thankfully, I have revisited this film a few times over the past few decades, and my opinion of it has only grown. Writer-director Albert Pyun may prefer that you watch his alternate cut, AKA Slinger, but I have only ever seen this version, and this version works for me.
It's the future. The world has been transformed by a deadly plague. Most people would hope for a cure, and one woman (Pearl, played by Dayle Haddon) may have it, but a marauding madman named Fender Tremolo (Vincent Klyn) likes things just as they are. He has his acolytes, gets to indulge in plenty of violence, and gets to wander around with a loyal band of like-minded followers. When Pearl ends up in, ummmm, peril, Van Damme becomes a reluctant hero. He cannot stop her from ultimately being snatched up by the gang of villains but he sets out to rescue her, and also the planet, accompanied by a young woman named Nady (Deborah Richter).
Although clearly a messy and flawed film, Cyborg remains one of the most interesting outings in the early years of Van Damme's career. It's tonally dark, it's choppy, and a number of scenes are poorly lit, but there's an unpleasantness to the violence that lends this an edge when compared to other movies starring The Muscles From Brussels. In fact, a few scenes feel more like horror movie moments than sci-fi action.
The acting isn't too bad. Van Damme isn't asked to do too much, Klyn is impressively menacing and cruel as the main villain, and Richter and Haddon are both okay. Haley Peterson does well, and deserves a mention here. She plays a character last seen by Rickenbacker when she was a child, and gives a silent performance that reveals her character in flashbacks contrasting with how she is in the present.
Pyun at least tries to give viewers something a bit different, while pleasing both JCVD fans and people who enjoy post-apocalyptic action adventures, and he largely succeeds (if you dismiss the initial opinions of demanding younger teens like me). I would, of course, have much preferred to see Pyun's take on He-Man and Spider-Man, which were the Cannon projects on the slate before deals fell through and this film was hurried into creation as a replacement, but I am now happy enough to have this as a dark and interesting sci-fi action movie.
7/10
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
Labels:
action,
albert pyun,
cyborg,
dayle haddon,
deborah richter,
haley peterson,
jean-claude van damme,
sci-fi,
vincent klyn
Sunday, 3 June 2018
June-Claude Van Damme: Black Eagle (1988)
One of those films that would have been rightly forgotten if not for the fact that it could be repackaged and sold on Jean-ClaudeVan Damme's name, Black Eagle is one of those action movies from the '80s that is both a bit of a mess and, more unforgivably, quite dull.
The plot revolves around some secret device that has been shot down and is now lying beneath the lovely waters that surround Malta. The KGB are keen to get their hands on it, and have a handy tough guy (played by Van Damme) to help them. America, on the other hand, has a reluctant super-agent (Ken Tani, played by Sho Kosugi) who only ends up taking the mission when he finds out that his young kids have been taken to Malta already. They're being watched by an agent named Patricia Parker (Doran Clark), who seems to be remarkably chipper about her babysitting assignment.
Director Eric Karson only helmed a handful of features, and writers A. E. Peters and Michael Gonzalez only have this full film to their credit, and the reasons why become more and more obvious as the film plays out. This is bad. Not bad in an amusing way, and not bad but saved by the action sequences, it's just bad.
For something so simple, Peters and Gonzalez really get themselves distracted far too often. There are too many scenes featuring Kosugi interacting with his children (played by his real children, Kane Kosugi and Shane Kosugi) and not enough building of tension, or even direct confrontations between the goodies and the baddies.
Karson wastes the potential of his two "leads", although he cannot do much to lift the script anyway, and there are maybe two scenes that showcase some decent fighting moves, which is especially disappointing for those who know what the martial artists are capable of.
I can't say that the acting makes up for the failings elsewhere. Both Kosugi and Van Damme are better with their hands and feet than with their range of emoting, although the latter has shown some decent range in more relatively recent fare, and there aren't many other characters worth bothering about. Clark does well in her thankless role, the younger members of the Kosugi family are at least able to act naturally like the kids they are, and Dorota Puzio plays the villainous female counterpart to Clark (although she does little more than watch the violence occasionally and sleep with Van Damme).
It goes without saying that you can find much better films if you need some Sho Kosugi or Van Damme passing before your eyes, but I would also say that you can find much better films starring some people that you've never heard of, or people who have spent some time on the lower rungs of the fame ladder (Don 'The Dragon' Wilson, Mark Dacascos, Michael Dudikoff, etc).
3/10
Here's a disc.
Americans can get a special edition here.
The plot revolves around some secret device that has been shot down and is now lying beneath the lovely waters that surround Malta. The KGB are keen to get their hands on it, and have a handy tough guy (played by Van Damme) to help them. America, on the other hand, has a reluctant super-agent (Ken Tani, played by Sho Kosugi) who only ends up taking the mission when he finds out that his young kids have been taken to Malta already. They're being watched by an agent named Patricia Parker (Doran Clark), who seems to be remarkably chipper about her babysitting assignment.
Director Eric Karson only helmed a handful of features, and writers A. E. Peters and Michael Gonzalez only have this full film to their credit, and the reasons why become more and more obvious as the film plays out. This is bad. Not bad in an amusing way, and not bad but saved by the action sequences, it's just bad.
For something so simple, Peters and Gonzalez really get themselves distracted far too often. There are too many scenes featuring Kosugi interacting with his children (played by his real children, Kane Kosugi and Shane Kosugi) and not enough building of tension, or even direct confrontations between the goodies and the baddies.
Karson wastes the potential of his two "leads", although he cannot do much to lift the script anyway, and there are maybe two scenes that showcase some decent fighting moves, which is especially disappointing for those who know what the martial artists are capable of.
I can't say that the acting makes up for the failings elsewhere. Both Kosugi and Van Damme are better with their hands and feet than with their range of emoting, although the latter has shown some decent range in more relatively recent fare, and there aren't many other characters worth bothering about. Clark does well in her thankless role, the younger members of the Kosugi family are at least able to act naturally like the kids they are, and Dorota Puzio plays the villainous female counterpart to Clark (although she does little more than watch the violence occasionally and sleep with Van Damme).
It goes without saying that you can find much better films if you need some Sho Kosugi or Van Damme passing before your eyes, but I would also say that you can find much better films starring some people that you've never heard of, or people who have spent some time on the lower rungs of the fame ladder (Don 'The Dragon' Wilson, Mark Dacascos, Michael Dudikoff, etc).
3/10
Here's a disc.
Americans can get a special edition here.
Labels:
a. e. peters,
action,
black eagle,
doran clark,
dorota puzio,
eric karson,
jean-claude van damme,
kane kosugi,
michael gonzales,
shane kosugi,
sho kosugi
Saturday, 2 June 2018
June-Claude Van Damme: Bloodsport (1988)
*If you have deja vu, this review originally appeared on Flickfeast.co.uk*
Jean-Claude Van Damme was no overnight success, but audiences in the late ’80s and early ’90s may not have realised that. He’d gone from small parts in lesser movies (a couple of uncredited extra roles, including his scene from Breakin’, the part of "gay karate man" in a tame skin flick, and a villain – his biggest role – in the fun No Retreat, No Surrender) to ruling the action movie roost, mainly thanks to the one-two knockout of Bloodsport and Kickboxer.
Bloodsport is all about a martial arts tournament, The Kumite, in which various contestants use their various disciplines to try and defeat everyone else. It’s as simple as that. Each round is one on one, the last man standing wins. Van Damme is a man named Frank Dux (pronounced “Dukes”) who has taken leave from the military to participate. He wants to honour his master, much to the annoyance of the military folks who don’t want him to get majorly damaged. This means that Frank has to fight his fights while also staying out of the hands of the military men out to cut short his time in the tournament.
It’s hard to believe that it took three people – Sheldon Lettich, Christopher Cosby and Mel Friedman – to write this movie. It’s so simple, so by-the-numbers, that it doesn’t seem as if much effort was put into it at all. Of course, if it all seemed effortless then that would be quite a compliment, but that’s not quite what I mean. It seems as if a number of points had to be included in the story, but the structure is clumsy and lazy (with the flashbacks during the first third of the movie almost being enough to turn some viewers off, in my opinion).
Director Newt Arnold doesn’t have to break a sweat either, but he’s covered by the fact that he has Van Damme in the starring role. The man may have had his ups and downs over the years, but when he was near the top of the action star ladder he was damn good value. He’s given great support from Donald Gibb, playing a fellow fighter who becomes a friend, and the mighty Bolo Yeung is impressively villainous. Leah Ayres is the female reporter trying to get the scoop on the tournament, and Forest Whitaker and Norman Burton are the two army men assigned to retrieve our hero.
There’s a cheesy song or two on the soundtrack, one rousing track that’s actually quite decent, and at least three separate montage sequences (a training montage, a fighting montage and a “struggling with emotions externalised as clips from what viewers have just been watching” montage). But hey, despite these things, this remains a cracking action movie from the eighties, and one of the best star vehicles for the charismatic Van Damme.
Jean-Claude Van Damme was no overnight success, but audiences in the late ’80s and early ’90s may not have realised that. He’d gone from small parts in lesser movies (a couple of uncredited extra roles, including his scene from Breakin’, the part of "gay karate man" in a tame skin flick, and a villain – his biggest role – in the fun No Retreat, No Surrender) to ruling the action movie roost, mainly thanks to the one-two knockout of Bloodsport and Kickboxer.
Bloodsport is all about a martial arts tournament, The Kumite, in which various contestants use their various disciplines to try and defeat everyone else. It’s as simple as that. Each round is one on one, the last man standing wins. Van Damme is a man named Frank Dux (pronounced “Dukes”) who has taken leave from the military to participate. He wants to honour his master, much to the annoyance of the military folks who don’t want him to get majorly damaged. This means that Frank has to fight his fights while also staying out of the hands of the military men out to cut short his time in the tournament.
It’s hard to believe that it took three people – Sheldon Lettich, Christopher Cosby and Mel Friedman – to write this movie. It’s so simple, so by-the-numbers, that it doesn’t seem as if much effort was put into it at all. Of course, if it all seemed effortless then that would be quite a compliment, but that’s not quite what I mean. It seems as if a number of points had to be included in the story, but the structure is clumsy and lazy (with the flashbacks during the first third of the movie almost being enough to turn some viewers off, in my opinion).
Director Newt Arnold doesn’t have to break a sweat either, but he’s covered by the fact that he has Van Damme in the starring role. The man may have had his ups and downs over the years, but when he was near the top of the action star ladder he was damn good value. He’s given great support from Donald Gibb, playing a fellow fighter who becomes a friend, and the mighty Bolo Yeung is impressively villainous. Leah Ayres is the female reporter trying to get the scoop on the tournament, and Forest Whitaker and Norman Burton are the two army men assigned to retrieve our hero.
There’s a cheesy song or two on the soundtrack, one rousing track that’s actually quite decent, and at least three separate montage sequences (a training montage, a fighting montage and a “struggling with emotions externalised as clips from what viewers have just been watching” montage). But hey, despite these things, this remains a cracking action movie from the eighties, and one of the best star vehicles for the charismatic Van Damme.
Friday, 1 June 2018
June-Claude Van Damme: No Retreat, No Surrender (1986)
What do you get if you mix The Karate Kid with Rocky IV, add a few funky dance moves, and then risk the ire of Bruce Lee fans by having his ghost portrayed onscreen by . . . someone who looks quite Asian? You get No Retreat, No Surrender.
Jason (Kurt McKinney) is an eager karate student who sometimes gets carried away while fighting in his father's dojo. He idolises Bruce Lee and hopes to one day be on a par with the man. His father (Scott, played by Timothy D. Baker) is always trying to remind him that karate is a discipline, and not necessarily all about fighting like Bruce Lee, but that lesson is even harder for Jason to accept when his father is visited by mobsters and has a fair amount of damage inflicted upon him by a brutal and skilled Russian fighter named Ivan (Jean-Claude Van Damme). The family relocates to Seattle, Jason is befriended by a boy named R. J. Madison (J. W. Fails), and it's not too long until the ghost of Bruce Lee appears to teach Jason how to be a much better fighter, just in time for a grand finale that sees the mobsters, and Ivan, reappear.
If I spent this review listing the aspects of No Retreat, No Surrender that are absolutely ridiculous then you would end up reading an article of approximately 5000 words. Because it's nonsense from start to finish, and starts to get more nonsensical, and a lot more fun, once the main characters move into their new home. Whether it's R. J. busting out his breakdancing skills, interactions with a bully who rarely stops stuffing his face (Kent Lipham), or Jason working on his karate that he thinks is good enough until being shown how much he has to improve by "Bruce Lee", this is a film that at least ensures viewers are never bored.
McKinney, Baker, and Fails may not have gone on to become major stars but I hope they can be happy enough in the knowledge that they put the work in here to keep the likes of me and my friends happily entertained for many hours when we discovered, and shared, this on VHS.
The script, by Keith W. Strandberg (based on a story by Ng See-yuen and director Corey Yuen), is almost childishly simplistic in between the action moments. There are memorable characters throughout, even if they are amusing caricatures, but the villains really just seem to be there to motivate and develop our young lead, and the good guys are never as charismatic as evil, grimacing, Van Damme.
At least Yuen throws enough martial arts in the mix to please action fans, with every punch and kick accompanied by authentic sound effects (well . . . they would be authentic if everyone involved was made of wood). The fighting may be as silly, in many ways, as the rest of the film but at least it's enjoyably energetic and in line with a lot of other martial arts movie moments from this time.
6/10
This is the set to get.
American friends, get the blu here.
Jason (Kurt McKinney) is an eager karate student who sometimes gets carried away while fighting in his father's dojo. He idolises Bruce Lee and hopes to one day be on a par with the man. His father (Scott, played by Timothy D. Baker) is always trying to remind him that karate is a discipline, and not necessarily all about fighting like Bruce Lee, but that lesson is even harder for Jason to accept when his father is visited by mobsters and has a fair amount of damage inflicted upon him by a brutal and skilled Russian fighter named Ivan (Jean-Claude Van Damme). The family relocates to Seattle, Jason is befriended by a boy named R. J. Madison (J. W. Fails), and it's not too long until the ghost of Bruce Lee appears to teach Jason how to be a much better fighter, just in time for a grand finale that sees the mobsters, and Ivan, reappear.
If I spent this review listing the aspects of No Retreat, No Surrender that are absolutely ridiculous then you would end up reading an article of approximately 5000 words. Because it's nonsense from start to finish, and starts to get more nonsensical, and a lot more fun, once the main characters move into their new home. Whether it's R. J. busting out his breakdancing skills, interactions with a bully who rarely stops stuffing his face (Kent Lipham), or Jason working on his karate that he thinks is good enough until being shown how much he has to improve by "Bruce Lee", this is a film that at least ensures viewers are never bored.
McKinney, Baker, and Fails may not have gone on to become major stars but I hope they can be happy enough in the knowledge that they put the work in here to keep the likes of me and my friends happily entertained for many hours when we discovered, and shared, this on VHS.
The script, by Keith W. Strandberg (based on a story by Ng See-yuen and director Corey Yuen), is almost childishly simplistic in between the action moments. There are memorable characters throughout, even if they are amusing caricatures, but the villains really just seem to be there to motivate and develop our young lead, and the good guys are never as charismatic as evil, grimacing, Van Damme.
At least Yuen throws enough martial arts in the mix to please action fans, with every punch and kick accompanied by authentic sound effects (well . . . they would be authentic if everyone involved was made of wood). The fighting may be as silly, in many ways, as the rest of the film but at least it's enjoyably energetic and in line with a lot of other martial arts movie moments from this time.
6/10
This is the set to get.
American friends, get the blu here.
Thursday, 31 May 2018
Wish Upon (2017)
Here are some things that can almost guarantee I watch a film: zombies, sharks, time travel, Diora Baird, and wishes that are granted in deviously twisted ways. So I knew that I would see Wish Upon eventually, despite hearing plenty of negative opinions on it, and it was only the concept that sold me. I was unaware of writer Barbara Marshall. I wasn't exactly blown away by the filmography of director John R. Leonetti (who bagged the Annabelle gig, and scored a hit there). And although I recognise lead actress Joey King, I don't know her well enough to seek out or avoid anything that she stars in.
King plays Clare Shannon, a young girl who isn't doing too well in life. Her schooldays are quite miserable, her father (Ryan Phillippe) spends most of his days scavenging from bins for items to renovate or sell on (I guess), and she gazes lovingly at a hunky fella (Paul, played by Mitchell Slaggert) who hasn't looked her way in years. She does at least have two loyal best friends (played by Sydney Park and Shannon Purser) but not much else. But everything changes when she finds a magical box that grants wishes. Those wishes come at a cost, of course, but Clare has already been seduced by a better life by the time she realises the big picture.
Starting off with an enjoyably twisted wish (Clare just wants someone to rot away), things start subtly enough to allow the film to build and build with each wish. The fact that the main characters go throughout approximately half of the movie just thinking everything is the result of an overdue deluge of good luck is ridiculous, and writer Marshall could have tried harder there, but it's easy to forgive the failings of the film as we start to watch one tease after another, wondering if people will live or die in sequences that wouldn't feel out of place in a Final Destination movie. Admittedly, tension is diluted while viewers can laugh at people sliding their hands into garbage disposal units, moving under cars that are jacked up while a tyre is being changed, or just helping someone go to work on a tree branch with the most unsafe chainsawing set-up possible, but it's all still good fun.
King is okay in the lead role, with Park and Purser both likable enough as her friends, and Slaggert does okay in a role that really sees him unwittingly under the spell of one of the wishes. Ki Hong Lee is also enjoyable enough, playing a student who ends up helping Clare try to solve the mysterious origin of the box. It's odd to see Phillippe in the dad role, despite the fact that he may have been in that age bracket for a few years now, but he does well enough, and Sherilyn Fenn gets some screentime too, which will always make me happy.
Leonetti keeps things pretty teen-friendly, neither elevating nor dragging down the average script, and the concept should please anyone who, like me, already thinks they might derive some pleasure from it. Once past the first third, which sets up the characters and shows the box starting off small before growing and growing, in terms of the price paid for wishes, this provides solid entertainment.
Oh, and if anyone ever makes a movie in which a time travelling zombie shark tries to entrap the soul of Diora Baird by offering her a number of wishes that won't pan out as she wants them to . . . . . . show me where to buy my tickets.
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
King plays Clare Shannon, a young girl who isn't doing too well in life. Her schooldays are quite miserable, her father (Ryan Phillippe) spends most of his days scavenging from bins for items to renovate or sell on (I guess), and she gazes lovingly at a hunky fella (Paul, played by Mitchell Slaggert) who hasn't looked her way in years. She does at least have two loyal best friends (played by Sydney Park and Shannon Purser) but not much else. But everything changes when she finds a magical box that grants wishes. Those wishes come at a cost, of course, but Clare has already been seduced by a better life by the time she realises the big picture.
Starting off with an enjoyably twisted wish (Clare just wants someone to rot away), things start subtly enough to allow the film to build and build with each wish. The fact that the main characters go throughout approximately half of the movie just thinking everything is the result of an overdue deluge of good luck is ridiculous, and writer Marshall could have tried harder there, but it's easy to forgive the failings of the film as we start to watch one tease after another, wondering if people will live or die in sequences that wouldn't feel out of place in a Final Destination movie. Admittedly, tension is diluted while viewers can laugh at people sliding their hands into garbage disposal units, moving under cars that are jacked up while a tyre is being changed, or just helping someone go to work on a tree branch with the most unsafe chainsawing set-up possible, but it's all still good fun.
King is okay in the lead role, with Park and Purser both likable enough as her friends, and Slaggert does okay in a role that really sees him unwittingly under the spell of one of the wishes. Ki Hong Lee is also enjoyable enough, playing a student who ends up helping Clare try to solve the mysterious origin of the box. It's odd to see Phillippe in the dad role, despite the fact that he may have been in that age bracket for a few years now, but he does well enough, and Sherilyn Fenn gets some screentime too, which will always make me happy.
Leonetti keeps things pretty teen-friendly, neither elevating nor dragging down the average script, and the concept should please anyone who, like me, already thinks they might derive some pleasure from it. Once past the first third, which sets up the characters and shows the box starting off small before growing and growing, in terms of the price paid for wishes, this provides solid entertainment.
Oh, and if anyone ever makes a movie in which a time travelling zombie shark tries to entrap the soul of Diora Baird by offering her a number of wishes that won't pan out as she wants them to . . . . . . show me where to buy my tickets.
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
Wednesday, 30 May 2018
Insidious: The Last Key (2018)
Look, even if you're a huge fan of Insidious (as I am), it's hard to argue against the idea that it wasn't a horror movie that felt designed to kick off a long-running series. The second film was good, although already felt at times as if it was repeating a few of the tricks that the original had done so well, and the third film, while enjoyable enough, was too far removed from the previous events to really win over fans.
So now we're at the fourth (and final?) instalment, and where does it sit in comparison to the other entries? Well, it's not bad. It's still a step removed from the first films, yet it feels closer to them than that third chapter.
Lin Shaye returns as Elise Rainier, the psychic who can battle ghosts and demonic forces most people cannot see. She's once again joined by Specs (played by writer Leigh Whannell) and Tucker (Angus Sampson), but she would much rather enjoy a quiet life than put herself through any more strain and horribly perilous "adventures". That looks unlikely, however, when she gets a call from someone (Ted, played by Kirk Acevedo) who believes that his house is haunted. It happens to be the house that Elise lived in when she was a young girl, and she knows how bad it is there. So she sets off to help Ted, perhaps looking for some closure at the same time.
The Insidious series certainly benefits from having Leigh Whannell writing each instalment. He's okay in front of the camera, but it's the writing that is clearly his forte. Like the best of these slick, modern, mainstream horrors, Insidious: The Last Key lays out plenty of details in the earlier scenes to pick them up again later, when the scares are being delivered. Learning more about Elise, how she was as a youngster when discovering her "gift", works very well, thanks to it being a character that viewers have now journeyed with for some time, and also thanks to the third act developments.
Adam Robitel is the director this time, and he does a perfectly acceptable job. This relies more on jump scares than the first couple of movies (I know they were accused by many of having no atmosphere, I disagree) but they're done very well, with one or two moments of impressively creepy imagery that may well stay in your mind long after the end credits have rolled.
As for the cast, forget about everyone else onscreen and enjoy Lin Shaye, a woman who has been in many horror movies over the years and has now been the unexpected lynchpin of this successful series. She never gives less than 100% in her portrayal of Elise, even in scenes that try to let Whannell and Sampson lighten things up a bit with some awkward comedy. Bruce Davison is also as good as ever, but is onscreen for about one or two minutes, and you get decent enough performances from Acevedo, Caitlin Gerard, Spencer Locke, Josh Stewart, and Tessa Ferrer, among others.
If you've seen the other films then you should give this one a watch. It's completely unnecessary, and could have been improved by removing a couple of the characters, but it's still solid entertainment.
6/10
You can buy this here.
Americans can buy it here.
So now we're at the fourth (and final?) instalment, and where does it sit in comparison to the other entries? Well, it's not bad. It's still a step removed from the first films, yet it feels closer to them than that third chapter.
Lin Shaye returns as Elise Rainier, the psychic who can battle ghosts and demonic forces most people cannot see. She's once again joined by Specs (played by writer Leigh Whannell) and Tucker (Angus Sampson), but she would much rather enjoy a quiet life than put herself through any more strain and horribly perilous "adventures". That looks unlikely, however, when she gets a call from someone (Ted, played by Kirk Acevedo) who believes that his house is haunted. It happens to be the house that Elise lived in when she was a young girl, and she knows how bad it is there. So she sets off to help Ted, perhaps looking for some closure at the same time.
The Insidious series certainly benefits from having Leigh Whannell writing each instalment. He's okay in front of the camera, but it's the writing that is clearly his forte. Like the best of these slick, modern, mainstream horrors, Insidious: The Last Key lays out plenty of details in the earlier scenes to pick them up again later, when the scares are being delivered. Learning more about Elise, how she was as a youngster when discovering her "gift", works very well, thanks to it being a character that viewers have now journeyed with for some time, and also thanks to the third act developments.
Adam Robitel is the director this time, and he does a perfectly acceptable job. This relies more on jump scares than the first couple of movies (I know they were accused by many of having no atmosphere, I disagree) but they're done very well, with one or two moments of impressively creepy imagery that may well stay in your mind long after the end credits have rolled.
As for the cast, forget about everyone else onscreen and enjoy Lin Shaye, a woman who has been in many horror movies over the years and has now been the unexpected lynchpin of this successful series. She never gives less than 100% in her portrayal of Elise, even in scenes that try to let Whannell and Sampson lighten things up a bit with some awkward comedy. Bruce Davison is also as good as ever, but is onscreen for about one or two minutes, and you get decent enough performances from Acevedo, Caitlin Gerard, Spencer Locke, Josh Stewart, and Tessa Ferrer, among others.
If you've seen the other films then you should give this one a watch. It's completely unnecessary, and could have been improved by removing a couple of the characters, but it's still solid entertainment.
6/10
You can buy this here.
Americans can buy it here.
Labels:
adam robitel,
angus sampson,
bruce davison,
caitlin gerard,
horror,
kirk acevedo,
leigh whannell,
lin shaye
Tuesday, 29 May 2018
Extreme Movie (2008)
Extreme Movie is a teen sex comedy that has one central, slim, storyline punctuated by a variety of sketches. I wanted to review it here, but I also knew that it would be a tough one to write about because, well, there really isn't that much to it. It's not even worth discussing the cast, who aren't really asked to do too much but do well enough by just going along with the many ridiculous ideas scattered throughout.
The main "plot" of the film concerns Mike (Ryan Pinkston), a shy young teenager who might just get his long-awaited chance to make his move on the lovely Stacy (Cherilyn Wilson) as the two spend time together in a sex education class being taught by Mr Matthews (John Farley), the kind of teacher who swears in his opening statement to prove that he is down with the kids and not like all of those other, stuffy, teachers.
Directed by Adam Jay Epstein and Andrew Jacobson, who also wrote some of the screenplay, Extreme Movie is competently put together. It feels strange when you get the first transition but once viewers are clued into the fact that this is a film made up of various sketches then it's all much easier to enjoy.
I am not going to mention all of the writers, there are about ten credited, but contributors include Will Forte, Andy Samberg, Akiva Schaffer, Phil Lord, and Christopher Miller. Some of those names may already let you know if you're going to like or dislike the film, but you may also be influenced by the fact that you don't have the same level of mental immaturity as I do.
The best skits are the more absurd ones. Highlights include a boy (Andy Milonakis) who goes through an entire relationship cycle with a, ummmm, super-realistic and anatomically-correct sex toy, a puppet appearing to talk to a horny boy about the need to deal with his blue balls, and the opening skit that shows Frankie Muniz and Ashley Schneider looking to take things to the next level in their relationship. And I'd better not forget to mention the hilarious skit featuring Michael Cera in a bit of roleplay that goes from bad to worse.
There are also fun interludes with Matthew Lillard giving the worst possible advice to young men, and a few "Street Corner Confessions" that lead to some good punchlines. It's puerile stuff, I'm not going to argue that point, but it made me laugh. Which is more than can be said about a lot of comedies with the word "movie" in the title.
6/10
Here's A disc you can buy.
Americans can buy it here.
The main "plot" of the film concerns Mike (Ryan Pinkston), a shy young teenager who might just get his long-awaited chance to make his move on the lovely Stacy (Cherilyn Wilson) as the two spend time together in a sex education class being taught by Mr Matthews (John Farley), the kind of teacher who swears in his opening statement to prove that he is down with the kids and not like all of those other, stuffy, teachers.
Directed by Adam Jay Epstein and Andrew Jacobson, who also wrote some of the screenplay, Extreme Movie is competently put together. It feels strange when you get the first transition but once viewers are clued into the fact that this is a film made up of various sketches then it's all much easier to enjoy.
I am not going to mention all of the writers, there are about ten credited, but contributors include Will Forte, Andy Samberg, Akiva Schaffer, Phil Lord, and Christopher Miller. Some of those names may already let you know if you're going to like or dislike the film, but you may also be influenced by the fact that you don't have the same level of mental immaturity as I do.
The best skits are the more absurd ones. Highlights include a boy (Andy Milonakis) who goes through an entire relationship cycle with a, ummmm, super-realistic and anatomically-correct sex toy, a puppet appearing to talk to a horny boy about the need to deal with his blue balls, and the opening skit that shows Frankie Muniz and Ashley Schneider looking to take things to the next level in their relationship. And I'd better not forget to mention the hilarious skit featuring Michael Cera in a bit of roleplay that goes from bad to worse.
There are also fun interludes with Matthew Lillard giving the worst possible advice to young men, and a few "Street Corner Confessions" that lead to some good punchlines. It's puerile stuff, I'm not going to argue that point, but it made me laugh. Which is more than can be said about a lot of comedies with the word "movie" in the title.
6/10
Here's A disc you can buy.
Americans can buy it here.
Monday, 28 May 2018
Hackers (1995)
You know what all the cool kids were up to in the 1990s? They were showing off their computer hacking skills, whizzing around on rollerblades, listening to The Prodigy, and playing pre-release versions of Wipeout (not the gameshow, the classic Playstation game). How do I know this, despite not being one of the cool kids at that time? Because that's what every one of the leads does in Hackers, and this is a film populated almost exclusively by characters deemed to be cool.
There's a dangerous virus that threatens major harm to a big corporation, unless a payment of $25M is made, and things have been set up to pin the blame on a bunch of teenage hackers. Jonny Lee Miller is Dade, Angelina Jolie is Kate, Jesse Bradford is Joey, Matthew Lillard is Cereal, Laurence Mason is Nikon, and Renoly Santiago is Phreak. They're the good guys. Fisher Stevens is a man who works for the big company being threatened, and he likes to go by the name The Plague. He's not with the good guys. Nor is Agent Dick Gill (played by Wendell Pierce). To be fair, the hackers don't do much to make themselves look innocent as the authorities try to get to the bottom of this major, dangerous, security breach.
Hackers is ridiculous. It's a number of cool and funky moments strung together by an unbelievable plot that surely felt dated just a few years after it was initially released. The script by Rafael Moreu alternates between amusing and cringe-inducing, and director Iain Softley doesn't do anything in half measures, whether it's the fashion choices, soundtrack, or graphic design displaying the hacking sequences (main headshot of character, camera rotates around, and keystrokes and symbols are illuminated around them). But that's not necessarily the wrong way to treat this material, which is why the ridiculousness of it all ends up making it a fun viewing experience.
The relatively young cast helps, with a lot of likable performers on the cusp of reaching the next level in terms of success and recognisability (both Miller and Lillard would do very well just a year later, with Trainspotting and Scream, respectively). Miller is a lot of fun in the lead role, the cocky outsider who quickly gets in with the hacking clique, Jolie is some kind of ubercool cyber-pixie, and everyone else does their best to show that they're separate from the non-hacking plebicites that surround them. Fisher Stevens is also a lot of fun in his role, all arrogance and disdain for those around him, Wendell Pierce does well, and Lorraine Bracco is good with her underwritten role. And you even get a small role for Penn Jillette, and a fleeting cameo from Dave "Eurythmics" Stewart.
Although it's never going to be a film that you first think of when wanting something to watch for an evening, you could do a lot worse than this. It knows exactly what it is, it is very much of the time it was made, and it's difficult to hate. I enjoyed it, and I wouldn't rule out rewatching it at some point.
6/10
YES, I just pre-ordered this release.
Americans can pick up this one.
There's a dangerous virus that threatens major harm to a big corporation, unless a payment of $25M is made, and things have been set up to pin the blame on a bunch of teenage hackers. Jonny Lee Miller is Dade, Angelina Jolie is Kate, Jesse Bradford is Joey, Matthew Lillard is Cereal, Laurence Mason is Nikon, and Renoly Santiago is Phreak. They're the good guys. Fisher Stevens is a man who works for the big company being threatened, and he likes to go by the name The Plague. He's not with the good guys. Nor is Agent Dick Gill (played by Wendell Pierce). To be fair, the hackers don't do much to make themselves look innocent as the authorities try to get to the bottom of this major, dangerous, security breach.
Hackers is ridiculous. It's a number of cool and funky moments strung together by an unbelievable plot that surely felt dated just a few years after it was initially released. The script by Rafael Moreu alternates between amusing and cringe-inducing, and director Iain Softley doesn't do anything in half measures, whether it's the fashion choices, soundtrack, or graphic design displaying the hacking sequences (main headshot of character, camera rotates around, and keystrokes and symbols are illuminated around them). But that's not necessarily the wrong way to treat this material, which is why the ridiculousness of it all ends up making it a fun viewing experience.
The relatively young cast helps, with a lot of likable performers on the cusp of reaching the next level in terms of success and recognisability (both Miller and Lillard would do very well just a year later, with Trainspotting and Scream, respectively). Miller is a lot of fun in the lead role, the cocky outsider who quickly gets in with the hacking clique, Jolie is some kind of ubercool cyber-pixie, and everyone else does their best to show that they're separate from the non-hacking plebicites that surround them. Fisher Stevens is also a lot of fun in his role, all arrogance and disdain for those around him, Wendell Pierce does well, and Lorraine Bracco is good with her underwritten role. And you even get a small role for Penn Jillette, and a fleeting cameo from Dave "Eurythmics" Stewart.
Although it's never going to be a film that you first think of when wanting something to watch for an evening, you could do a lot worse than this. It knows exactly what it is, it is very much of the time it was made, and it's difficult to hate. I enjoyed it, and I wouldn't rule out rewatching it at some point.
6/10
YES, I just pre-ordered this release.
Americans can pick up this one.
Labels:
angelina jolie,
fisher stevens,
hackers,
iain softley,
jesse bradford,
jonny lee miller,
laurence mason,
lorraine bracco,
matthew lillard,
penn jillette,
rafael moreu,
renoly santiago,
wendell pierce
Sunday, 27 May 2018
Accident Man (2018)
If you look back through the filmography of director Jesse V. Johnson it doesn't really have anything that marks him out as someone you can rely on to deliver solid film fun. I might be being very unfair there, having not yet actually seen any of his other movies, but that's just how it is. But having now seen Accident Man, and enjoyed it, I may have to give some of his earlier movies a shot.
I decided to give this a go because of Scott Adkins in the main role. Adkins is a decent action star and I hadn't seen him in anything for a while. And it was a Saturday night with nothing planned.
Mike Fallon (Adkins) is a contract killer who specialises in making the deaths look like accidents, or sometimes suicides. He works for a firm that also employs other killers, all with their particular styles (one uses poison, one generally just goes mental with an axe, etc), and all is going well enough until Fallon's ex-girlfriend is murdered. It was obviously a professional job, although made to look like a random burglary gone wrong, and Fallon can't contain his anger, which leads to him questioning the people who work alongside him. And when I say questioning them I actually mean fighting them until he finds out information that leads him to fight someone else.
Based on a comic book, with a screenplay co-written by Adkins and Stu Small, this is an unpretentious little film that should keep action movie fans delighted from start to finish. The humour of the material doesn't always work, which is the fault of both the script and the delivery of the dialogue, and you have to kiss goodbye to any idea of believability, but none of that matters when the fights are happening.
As well as our leading man, you also get Michael Jai White, Ray Park, Ross O'Hennessy, Amy Johnston, and Ray Stevenson all impressing with their physicality onscreen. The most impressive moments involve Adkins, White, and Park, but everyone has at least one decent moment, and Johnston stands out as the lone female who is more than a match for the men around her. There are also roles for David Paymer and Ashley Greene, as well as a cameo for Nick Moran, and they're all decent, if a lot less involved in the punching and kicking sequences.
Johnson doesn't really do much to take this up another notch, although I'm not sure how much more he could do when you consider the limitations of the leading man (Adkins has got the moves but he sometimes falters with other aspects of acting like . . . well . . . acting), but it's also worth noting that he doesn't do anything to ruin the whole experience. Sometimes that is more than enough.
Accident Man has quite a few faults, undeniably, but they're easy to overlook if you're looking specifically for the kind of violent entertainment that this absolutely delivers.
7/10
There's a DVD here.
Americans can get a Blu here.
I decided to give this a go because of Scott Adkins in the main role. Adkins is a decent action star and I hadn't seen him in anything for a while. And it was a Saturday night with nothing planned.
Mike Fallon (Adkins) is a contract killer who specialises in making the deaths look like accidents, or sometimes suicides. He works for a firm that also employs other killers, all with their particular styles (one uses poison, one generally just goes mental with an axe, etc), and all is going well enough until Fallon's ex-girlfriend is murdered. It was obviously a professional job, although made to look like a random burglary gone wrong, and Fallon can't contain his anger, which leads to him questioning the people who work alongside him. And when I say questioning them I actually mean fighting them until he finds out information that leads him to fight someone else.
Based on a comic book, with a screenplay co-written by Adkins and Stu Small, this is an unpretentious little film that should keep action movie fans delighted from start to finish. The humour of the material doesn't always work, which is the fault of both the script and the delivery of the dialogue, and you have to kiss goodbye to any idea of believability, but none of that matters when the fights are happening.
As well as our leading man, you also get Michael Jai White, Ray Park, Ross O'Hennessy, Amy Johnston, and Ray Stevenson all impressing with their physicality onscreen. The most impressive moments involve Adkins, White, and Park, but everyone has at least one decent moment, and Johnston stands out as the lone female who is more than a match for the men around her. There are also roles for David Paymer and Ashley Greene, as well as a cameo for Nick Moran, and they're all decent, if a lot less involved in the punching and kicking sequences.
Johnson doesn't really do much to take this up another notch, although I'm not sure how much more he could do when you consider the limitations of the leading man (Adkins has got the moves but he sometimes falters with other aspects of acting like . . . well . . . acting), but it's also worth noting that he doesn't do anything to ruin the whole experience. Sometimes that is more than enough.
Accident Man has quite a few faults, undeniably, but they're easy to overlook if you're looking specifically for the kind of violent entertainment that this absolutely delivers.
7/10
There's a DVD here.
Americans can get a Blu here.
Saturday, 26 May 2018
A Fistful Of Dynamite (1971)
AKA Duck, You Sucker.
A film from Sergio Leone that manages to fit in a lot of his usual tricks while also feeling a step removed from his better-known works, A Fistful Of Dynamite is his most comedic movie, and yet it doesn't skimp on the moments of explosive violence (literally).
James Coburn plays John, the Irish "rebel" who is happily driving around Mexico on his motorbike until he crosses paths with a Mexican bandit (Juan, played by Rod Steiger). The initial encounter quickly reveals John's skill with explosives, something that Juan can see being very useful as he thinks about a particularly rich bank he has wanted to rob for some time. John is reluctant to help, to put it mildly, but the two soon form an unlikely alliance, leading them on a path that will get them more involved with the Mexican Revolution, to the apparent delight of John and despair of Juan.
Once again, Leone shows that he knows who to pick for his leading roles. Although I have limited exposure to both Coburn and Steiger (sad, I know), both men quickly beguile viewers here with their laid-back acting styles and natural charisma. Coburn possibly edges ahead, but Steiger features in more of the comedic moments, and plays them wonderfully. This is very much a mismatched "buddy" movie and therefore relies on the chemistry of the leads, both individually and as they interact with one another, so the casting of Coburn and Steiger plays a huge part in how enjoyable this is. The rest of the cast are decent enough, although there's a lack of some of the memorable supporting players who populated the "Dollars" trilogy. Romolo Valli has some good moments, David Warbeck is an important figure in a number of flashback sequences, and Antoine Saint-John is the main villain of the piece (although there is really more than one, and just how bad they are is relative to your own views on morality and treachery).
Despite the focus here being on explosions rater than gunshots, the structure is similar to what we have seen from Leone in his other movies. Each set-piece seems to feel a bit bigger than the previous one, culminating in a grand finale that supercedes everything that came beforehand while still taking the time to reveal some more about one of the central characters, and what has motivated them throughout the entire film.
It looks very good, as you would expect, and many people enjoy the Ennio Morricone score (although I wasn't all that taken with it), but there's nothing here that puts it on a par with any of the other masterpieces from Leone. Not to say that the film is bad, it just doesn't reach the ridiculously high standards set by the man in charge. I absolutely recommend people give it a watch, it's probably the least-seen of Leone's filmography, and it's one that I can also see as an easy choice to revisit and enjoy. It's just not a classic, but they can't all be classics.
7/10
Here's a nice disc release.
American amigos can get a blu here.
A film from Sergio Leone that manages to fit in a lot of his usual tricks while also feeling a step removed from his better-known works, A Fistful Of Dynamite is his most comedic movie, and yet it doesn't skimp on the moments of explosive violence (literally).
James Coburn plays John, the Irish "rebel" who is happily driving around Mexico on his motorbike until he crosses paths with a Mexican bandit (Juan, played by Rod Steiger). The initial encounter quickly reveals John's skill with explosives, something that Juan can see being very useful as he thinks about a particularly rich bank he has wanted to rob for some time. John is reluctant to help, to put it mildly, but the two soon form an unlikely alliance, leading them on a path that will get them more involved with the Mexican Revolution, to the apparent delight of John and despair of Juan.
Once again, Leone shows that he knows who to pick for his leading roles. Although I have limited exposure to both Coburn and Steiger (sad, I know), both men quickly beguile viewers here with their laid-back acting styles and natural charisma. Coburn possibly edges ahead, but Steiger features in more of the comedic moments, and plays them wonderfully. This is very much a mismatched "buddy" movie and therefore relies on the chemistry of the leads, both individually and as they interact with one another, so the casting of Coburn and Steiger plays a huge part in how enjoyable this is. The rest of the cast are decent enough, although there's a lack of some of the memorable supporting players who populated the "Dollars" trilogy. Romolo Valli has some good moments, David Warbeck is an important figure in a number of flashback sequences, and Antoine Saint-John is the main villain of the piece (although there is really more than one, and just how bad they are is relative to your own views on morality and treachery).
Despite the focus here being on explosions rater than gunshots, the structure is similar to what we have seen from Leone in his other movies. Each set-piece seems to feel a bit bigger than the previous one, culminating in a grand finale that supercedes everything that came beforehand while still taking the time to reveal some more about one of the central characters, and what has motivated them throughout the entire film.
It looks very good, as you would expect, and many people enjoy the Ennio Morricone score (although I wasn't all that taken with it), but there's nothing here that puts it on a par with any of the other masterpieces from Leone. Not to say that the film is bad, it just doesn't reach the ridiculously high standards set by the man in charge. I absolutely recommend people give it a watch, it's probably the least-seen of Leone's filmography, and it's one that I can also see as an easy choice to revisit and enjoy. It's just not a classic, but they can't all be classics.
7/10
Here's a nice disc release.
American amigos can get a blu here.
Friday, 25 May 2018
There's Always Tomorrow (1955)
Although the treatment of the material shows the restraint and sensitive handling dictated by the era in which it was made, this Douglas Sirk movie is yet another timeless classic that focuses on love and infatuation, and shows how these things can be damaged or nurtured, depending on the circumstances.
Fred MacMurray plays Clifford Groves, a toymaker who is blessed with a lovely wife (Joan Bennett) and children who seem to be turning into fine young adults. Clifford is content, and his family are in that happy space which leads to them taking a lot of their situation for granted. Things start to change when Clifford reconnects with a childhood friend, Norma Miller Vale (Barbara Stanwyck), and it looks like our leading man could be heading down a slippery slope towards temptation, and the ruination of his marriage.
I don't care who you are, or how consistently blissful you have been in the main relationship of your life, There's Always Tomorrow resonates just as much today as it must have when first released back in the mid-1950s.
Sirk directs with his usual capable touch, working from a screenplay by Bernard C. Schoenfeld (better known for TV fare that tends to focus on thrills and/or action), which was developed from a story by Ursula Parrot (previously made into a movie in 1934). Considering how effective the film is at showing how easily cracks can start to spread through a contented family household, I'd be interested to read the source material. There's no doubt that everyone involved does their part to sell the film but it's so full of little moments of truth that I have to assume the novel reads even better.
MacMurray is wonderful in a role that allows him to play a relatively average guy. He's not made out to be devastatingly handsome, nor is he shown to be any kind of ladies man. He's just quite a sweet, hard-working, man who takes umbrage at people casting aspersions on his friendship with a woman before starting to consider the other roads his life could take. Stanwyck is also very good, also not being sold as a beautiful seductress. Her appeal is based on her obvious affection for her friend, and a lifestyle that's a step or two removed from the everyday "humdrum" family life. William Reynolds and Gigi Perreau play the older children who start to suspect the behaviour of their father, and Joan Bennett does a marvellous job in what could easily have been a thankless role. She's a loving, caring wife who just isn't always to schedule things in a way that gives her more time with her husband.
Unlike so many other films that have wandered through similar territory, there are no villains here, no easy moments for viewers to point to and really declare "aha, that is the cause". No, what you get here is a steady build up of sadness, perceived neglect, and a questioning of love: how much effort does it take, is chemistry any real alternative to a full life made together, and does finally considering loss make it easier to appreciate what you have? Things many of us go through at least once during a serious relationship.
8/10
This is NOT in this lovely set. But buy that set anyway.
Americans may wish to try out this disc, but there's a better UK version available here.
Fred MacMurray plays Clifford Groves, a toymaker who is blessed with a lovely wife (Joan Bennett) and children who seem to be turning into fine young adults. Clifford is content, and his family are in that happy space which leads to them taking a lot of their situation for granted. Things start to change when Clifford reconnects with a childhood friend, Norma Miller Vale (Barbara Stanwyck), and it looks like our leading man could be heading down a slippery slope towards temptation, and the ruination of his marriage.
I don't care who you are, or how consistently blissful you have been in the main relationship of your life, There's Always Tomorrow resonates just as much today as it must have when first released back in the mid-1950s.
Sirk directs with his usual capable touch, working from a screenplay by Bernard C. Schoenfeld (better known for TV fare that tends to focus on thrills and/or action), which was developed from a story by Ursula Parrot (previously made into a movie in 1934). Considering how effective the film is at showing how easily cracks can start to spread through a contented family household, I'd be interested to read the source material. There's no doubt that everyone involved does their part to sell the film but it's so full of little moments of truth that I have to assume the novel reads even better.
MacMurray is wonderful in a role that allows him to play a relatively average guy. He's not made out to be devastatingly handsome, nor is he shown to be any kind of ladies man. He's just quite a sweet, hard-working, man who takes umbrage at people casting aspersions on his friendship with a woman before starting to consider the other roads his life could take. Stanwyck is also very good, also not being sold as a beautiful seductress. Her appeal is based on her obvious affection for her friend, and a lifestyle that's a step or two removed from the everyday "humdrum" family life. William Reynolds and Gigi Perreau play the older children who start to suspect the behaviour of their father, and Joan Bennett does a marvellous job in what could easily have been a thankless role. She's a loving, caring wife who just isn't always to schedule things in a way that gives her more time with her husband.
Unlike so many other films that have wandered through similar territory, there are no villains here, no easy moments for viewers to point to and really declare "aha, that is the cause". No, what you get here is a steady build up of sadness, perceived neglect, and a questioning of love: how much effort does it take, is chemistry any real alternative to a full life made together, and does finally considering loss make it easier to appreciate what you have? Things many of us go through at least once during a serious relationship.
8/10
This is NOT in this lovely set. But buy that set anyway.
Americans may wish to try out this disc, but there's a better UK version available here.
Thursday, 24 May 2018
Written On The Wind (1956)
Another Douglas Sirk movie must mean another selection of simmering tensions and moments of heated drama, and that's exactly what you get with Written On The Wind.
The plot sees Rock Hudson and Robert Stack playing two good friends, Mitch and Kyle. Mitch is a decent and dependable guy, Robert . . . not so much. But Robert has the money, and has been used to passing blame along to his friend as he has encountered various problems over the years. Both men find themselves smitten with a young woman named Lucy (Lauren Bacall), and things really start to become problematic when she opts to marry Robert. Meanwhile, Robert's sister (Marylee, played by Dorothy Malone) despairs as she finds herself constantly spurned by Mitch.
First of all, Written On The Wind is a very good film. I have now seen about half a dozen Douglas Sirk movies and not had a bad experience yet. This ticks a lot of the same boxes as both Magnificent Obsession and All That Heaven Allows. Yet it doesn't QUITE work as well as those films, mainly because it feels a bit more forced in the way that all of the characters are moved into place.
The script by George Zuckerman is fine, particularly when it comes to highlighting the damaging behaviours of some of the main characters while staying on just the right side of tastefulness (obviously essential for the box office prospects when it was first released). With a bit of harsh editing and streamlining it would be easy to imagine this as a very simple chamber piece but Zuckerman, and Sirk, try to open things up a bit to take in more of the local environment, and also the past lives of all involved.
I have to say that, until very recently, I was as unfamiliar with Hudson as I was with Sirk. Whether he was always such a dependable lead or whether Sirk brought out the best in him, he delivers yet another winning performance. Stack gets to deliver more histrionics than anyone else in the cast, which he does well, although it can be very hard to keep a straight face if you know him best (as I do) from his superb comedic turn in Airplane! Malone is both sweet and potentially dangerous, in a way that is obvious in almost every scene she has. The only weak link is Bacall, who doesn't do a bad job but just never really feels like the desirable, amazing, woman that she is obviously supposed to be, at least in the eyes of her male co-stars.
It's well-paced, with a portentous atmosphere throughout that makes the whole thing feel as if thunderstorm clouds are literally gathering over the heads of the leads, and fans of Sirk won't be disappointed. It just doesn't rank up there with his best, but that's more a comment on the consistent greatness of his filmography than any condemnation of this work.
8/10
This is, once again, an easy choice for shoppers.
The plot sees Rock Hudson and Robert Stack playing two good friends, Mitch and Kyle. Mitch is a decent and dependable guy, Robert . . . not so much. But Robert has the money, and has been used to passing blame along to his friend as he has encountered various problems over the years. Both men find themselves smitten with a young woman named Lucy (Lauren Bacall), and things really start to become problematic when she opts to marry Robert. Meanwhile, Robert's sister (Marylee, played by Dorothy Malone) despairs as she finds herself constantly spurned by Mitch.
First of all, Written On The Wind is a very good film. I have now seen about half a dozen Douglas Sirk movies and not had a bad experience yet. This ticks a lot of the same boxes as both Magnificent Obsession and All That Heaven Allows. Yet it doesn't QUITE work as well as those films, mainly because it feels a bit more forced in the way that all of the characters are moved into place.
The script by George Zuckerman is fine, particularly when it comes to highlighting the damaging behaviours of some of the main characters while staying on just the right side of tastefulness (obviously essential for the box office prospects when it was first released). With a bit of harsh editing and streamlining it would be easy to imagine this as a very simple chamber piece but Zuckerman, and Sirk, try to open things up a bit to take in more of the local environment, and also the past lives of all involved.
I have to say that, until very recently, I was as unfamiliar with Hudson as I was with Sirk. Whether he was always such a dependable lead or whether Sirk brought out the best in him, he delivers yet another winning performance. Stack gets to deliver more histrionics than anyone else in the cast, which he does well, although it can be very hard to keep a straight face if you know him best (as I do) from his superb comedic turn in Airplane! Malone is both sweet and potentially dangerous, in a way that is obvious in almost every scene she has. The only weak link is Bacall, who doesn't do a bad job but just never really feels like the desirable, amazing, woman that she is obviously supposed to be, at least in the eyes of her male co-stars.
It's well-paced, with a portentous atmosphere throughout that makes the whole thing feel as if thunderstorm clouds are literally gathering over the heads of the leads, and fans of Sirk won't be disappointed. It just doesn't rank up there with his best, but that's more a comment on the consistent greatness of his filmography than any condemnation of this work.
8/10
This is, once again, an easy choice for shoppers.
Labels:
dorothy malone,
douglas sirk,
drama,
george zuckerman,
lauren bacall,
robert stack,
rock hudson,
written on the wind
Wednesday, 23 May 2018
The Fall (2006)
There's a good idea at the heart of The Fall, but it's not an original one. In fact, it's an idea that has been done many times over, including in the 1981 film, Yo Ho Ho, that it's based on. It's all about the power of stories, the ability of fantasy to help us cope with our reality, and you would assume that director Tarsem Singh is just the right person to deal with that material. It turns out that he isn't.
The basic tale concerns a depressed hospital patient, a bed-bound stuntman (Roy, played by Lee Pace), who ends up whiling away some hours telling a fantastical tale - featuring warriors, bandits, and revenge - to a young girl named Alexandria (Catinca Untaru). As the two patients bond, Roy tries to trick his new friend into helping him with a planned suicide attempt, which leads to tension that bleeds into the story being told.
You cannot fault The Fall for the visuals, unsurprisingly enough. This thing looks consistently gorgeous when delving into the realm of the fantasy tale. It even looks fine when in the more drab reality that is framing the fantasy. It's just a shame that the script undermines all of that good work.
Written by Dan Gilroy, Nico Soultanakis, and Singh, the screenplay for The Fall veers between the disappointingly underdone and the borderline tedious, which is something I never thought I would experience with these ideas and this director at the helm. It feels as if he indulged his own excesses while writing the screenplay and then held back when it came to visualising everything, sadly, and the end result is much the worse for it.
Pace is decent enough in the lead role, and that's all the more impressive considering the fact that most of his scenes have him working opposite a child actress who is quite terrible for most of her screentime. I won't go on, mainly because I don't want to be accused of being unduly harsh, but let's just say that I spent a lot of time wishing that someone, anyone, else was in that central role. The rest of the cast are given very little to do, with Justine Waddell particularly wasted in her role, and it's almost saddening to watch them try their best when actually allowed.
It's impossible to watch this and not think of how things would have been handled by someone like Terry Gilliam, Tim Burton, Jean-Pierre Jeunet, or any other director able to put their own stamp on unique visions. And that's why I end this review by encouraging fans of Tarsem Singh to revisit, and reappraise, The Cell instead. It's the much better option.
4/10
You can buy the film here.
Americans can buy it here.
The basic tale concerns a depressed hospital patient, a bed-bound stuntman (Roy, played by Lee Pace), who ends up whiling away some hours telling a fantastical tale - featuring warriors, bandits, and revenge - to a young girl named Alexandria (Catinca Untaru). As the two patients bond, Roy tries to trick his new friend into helping him with a planned suicide attempt, which leads to tension that bleeds into the story being told.
You cannot fault The Fall for the visuals, unsurprisingly enough. This thing looks consistently gorgeous when delving into the realm of the fantasy tale. It even looks fine when in the more drab reality that is framing the fantasy. It's just a shame that the script undermines all of that good work.
Written by Dan Gilroy, Nico Soultanakis, and Singh, the screenplay for The Fall veers between the disappointingly underdone and the borderline tedious, which is something I never thought I would experience with these ideas and this director at the helm. It feels as if he indulged his own excesses while writing the screenplay and then held back when it came to visualising everything, sadly, and the end result is much the worse for it.
Pace is decent enough in the lead role, and that's all the more impressive considering the fact that most of his scenes have him working opposite a child actress who is quite terrible for most of her screentime. I won't go on, mainly because I don't want to be accused of being unduly harsh, but let's just say that I spent a lot of time wishing that someone, anyone, else was in that central role. The rest of the cast are given very little to do, with Justine Waddell particularly wasted in her role, and it's almost saddening to watch them try their best when actually allowed.
It's impossible to watch this and not think of how things would have been handled by someone like Terry Gilliam, Tim Burton, Jean-Pierre Jeunet, or any other director able to put their own stamp on unique visions. And that's why I end this review by encouraging fans of Tarsem Singh to revisit, and reappraise, The Cell instead. It's the much better option.
4/10
You can buy the film here.
Americans can buy it here.
Labels:
catinca untaru,
dan gilroy,
justine waddell,
lee pace,
nico soultanakis,
tarsem singh,
the fall
Tuesday, 22 May 2018
Deadpool 2 (2018)
It's a running joke with people who know enough of my general movie opinions that I tend to be Mr 7/10. I can't really deny this, and yet I don't see anything too wrong with it either. Because, despite trying to see every movie that I can fit into my busy schedule, I will always tend to a) prioritise movies I think I am going to enjoy, and b) look for the good in any film I am watching. What the hell does this have to do with Deadpool 2, you may be wondering, apart from the obvious foreshadowing of exactly what my rating might be. Well, I rated the first Deadpool movie a 7/10 and felt the need to mention it here. It is, in a number of ways, a better film than this sequel, but it also had enough drawbacks to knock it down a few points. Not least among them was the fact that I'd seen the best sequence of the film in a rough version that was used to get the project support and traction, which it very much did.
Basically, you will know a lot of people who rate Deadpool higher than I did, but don't think that I disliked it. I laughed quite a lot. And I laughed quite a lot while watching Deadpool 2 (the biggest laughs involving some brilliant cameos and a mid-credit sequence that may well be the best superhero sting yet). It's a very good sequel . . . but it also has enough drawbacks to knock it down a few points.
Assuming you know the merc with the mouth, what's the story this time around? Well, DP (Ryan Reynolds again, of course) ends up trying to protect a young lad named Russell (Julian Dennison) from a time-travelling badass named Cable (Josh Brolin). There are still only a few X-Men allowed to join our (anti-)hero, budget allowing, but it's obvious that the success of the first film has made it possible to have even more fun this time around.
A lot of the main names return, with the notable exception of director Tim Miller, and that shows in the final product. This is a film that tells an interestingly different story from the first movie while maintaining a consistent tone and style, a "same but different" approach that is exemplified by the hilarious opening credit sequence. David Leitch is no stranger to the character, having directed the wonderful short film "No Good Deed" that showed Deadpool taking far too long to change costume while his help was needed, and he seems comfortable directing what we all know is essentially the chance for Ryan Reynolds to act like a kid in a candy store. If the kid was foul-mouthed and fast-talking and the candy store was full of dismembered limbs, drugs, and objects that could be used as improvised sex toys.
It goes without saying that Reynolds is superb again in the lead role, bagging all the best lines from the script (which he had a hand in, alongside Rhett Reese and Paul Wernick). Dennison gives another fantastic performance that has a number of nods to his previous star turn (in Hunt For The Wilderpeople) and Josh Brolin gives a "supervillain" performance that only comes second to the other main antagonist that he has portrayed recently. Karan Soni returns as taxi-driving Dopinder, Morena Baccarin is the love of Deadpool's life, Brianna Hildebrand still isn't allowed to smile much as Negasonic Teenage Warhead, and T. J. Miller manages to bag some of the better lines not being kept for Reynolds. Zazie Beetz is very enjoyable as a newcomer, Domino, with luck as her superpower, Eddie Marsan is enjoyably horrid, and there are some other people I won't mention because spoiler-free is the way to be.
You get the witty dialogue, another lively soundtrack, and some excellent action set-pieces, but it's interesting that Deadpool 2 falters when it slows things right down and attempts to show some proper emotional depth. It's interesting because it doesn't need to do that. There are some moments that work, judged perfectly between the comedic and the dark and the potentially cheesy, and some that really don't (the finale features a couple of them), but the fact is that the movie was doing a bloody good job before it started to show just how hard it was trying. Throughout most of the runtime, Deadpool 2 is an interesting look at personal responsibility and consequences, whether the actions are good or bad. It looks at cycles of violence and how the abused may damage themselves as they set out to damage their abusers, and there are times when it effortlessly does this better than any of the other superhero movies we have had over the past couple of decades (with the exception of Logan perhaps, ironically enough). But it doesn't do it in a way that interferes with the action or comedy . . . unlike some of the other emotional beats that are crammed in there.
Deadpool 2 - go along for the laughs, stay for the sheer entertainment, and leave while thinking about what they managed to slide inside you while you weren't even noticing (oo-er). Things may not feel as fresh this time around, inevitably, and there's a lack of REAL villainy, but I'm already looking forward to a third film. And everyone should try to see this one before some idiot blurts out some of the best gags.
Can you guess my rating?
7/10
Get it, when available, here.
Americans will be able to get it here.
Seriously, if you use either of those links, even to buy other stuff on Amazon, I get the pennies. Give me the pennies. All the pennies.
Basically, you will know a lot of people who rate Deadpool higher than I did, but don't think that I disliked it. I laughed quite a lot. And I laughed quite a lot while watching Deadpool 2 (the biggest laughs involving some brilliant cameos and a mid-credit sequence that may well be the best superhero sting yet). It's a very good sequel . . . but it also has enough drawbacks to knock it down a few points.
Assuming you know the merc with the mouth, what's the story this time around? Well, DP (Ryan Reynolds again, of course) ends up trying to protect a young lad named Russell (Julian Dennison) from a time-travelling badass named Cable (Josh Brolin). There are still only a few X-Men allowed to join our (anti-)hero, budget allowing, but it's obvious that the success of the first film has made it possible to have even more fun this time around.
A lot of the main names return, with the notable exception of director Tim Miller, and that shows in the final product. This is a film that tells an interestingly different story from the first movie while maintaining a consistent tone and style, a "same but different" approach that is exemplified by the hilarious opening credit sequence. David Leitch is no stranger to the character, having directed the wonderful short film "No Good Deed" that showed Deadpool taking far too long to change costume while his help was needed, and he seems comfortable directing what we all know is essentially the chance for Ryan Reynolds to act like a kid in a candy store. If the kid was foul-mouthed and fast-talking and the candy store was full of dismembered limbs, drugs, and objects that could be used as improvised sex toys.
It goes without saying that Reynolds is superb again in the lead role, bagging all the best lines from the script (which he had a hand in, alongside Rhett Reese and Paul Wernick). Dennison gives another fantastic performance that has a number of nods to his previous star turn (in Hunt For The Wilderpeople) and Josh Brolin gives a "supervillain" performance that only comes second to the other main antagonist that he has portrayed recently. Karan Soni returns as taxi-driving Dopinder, Morena Baccarin is the love of Deadpool's life, Brianna Hildebrand still isn't allowed to smile much as Negasonic Teenage Warhead, and T. J. Miller manages to bag some of the better lines not being kept for Reynolds. Zazie Beetz is very enjoyable as a newcomer, Domino, with luck as her superpower, Eddie Marsan is enjoyably horrid, and there are some other people I won't mention because spoiler-free is the way to be.
You get the witty dialogue, another lively soundtrack, and some excellent action set-pieces, but it's interesting that Deadpool 2 falters when it slows things right down and attempts to show some proper emotional depth. It's interesting because it doesn't need to do that. There are some moments that work, judged perfectly between the comedic and the dark and the potentially cheesy, and some that really don't (the finale features a couple of them), but the fact is that the movie was doing a bloody good job before it started to show just how hard it was trying. Throughout most of the runtime, Deadpool 2 is an interesting look at personal responsibility and consequences, whether the actions are good or bad. It looks at cycles of violence and how the abused may damage themselves as they set out to damage their abusers, and there are times when it effortlessly does this better than any of the other superhero movies we have had over the past couple of decades (with the exception of Logan perhaps, ironically enough). But it doesn't do it in a way that interferes with the action or comedy . . . unlike some of the other emotional beats that are crammed in there.
Deadpool 2 - go along for the laughs, stay for the sheer entertainment, and leave while thinking about what they managed to slide inside you while you weren't even noticing (oo-er). Things may not feel as fresh this time around, inevitably, and there's a lack of REAL villainy, but I'm already looking forward to a third film. And everyone should try to see this one before some idiot blurts out some of the best gags.
Can you guess my rating?
7/10
Get it, when available, here.
Americans will be able to get it here.
Seriously, if you use either of those links, even to buy other stuff on Amazon, I get the pennies. Give me the pennies. All the pennies.
Labels:
action,
brianna hildebrand,
comedy,
david leitch,
deadpool 2,
eddie marsan,
josh brolin,
julian dennison,
karan soni,
morena baccarin,
paul wernick,
rhett reese,
ryan reynolds,
superhero,
t. j. miller,
zazie beetz
Monday, 21 May 2018
The Good, The Bad And The Ugly (1966)
The action, the characters, the humour . . . how do you even begin to write a review of arguably the greatest, and most famous, Western ever made? Probably very, very badly. And it would certainly be superflous, compared to the many essays and tributes and articles already devoted to this masterpiece. But anyone who knows me already knows that I never let that stop me from adding my own witterings to the pile.
Clint Eastwood is the good, Lee Van Cleef is the bad, and Eli Wallach is tagged as ugly in this epic tale of bounty hunting, treachery, and a quest for a buried fortune. And that's all you need to know.
Although downright zippy compared to many other films from director Sergio Leone, this is another grandiose affair that allows the director plenty of moments to stretch out certain shots and scenes to almost unbearable degrees. It runs for just under 150 minutes, and if you're not grinning for at least 140 of them then I don't even know how to speak your language, because this is as rewarding and wonderful as cinema gets. It may not be sci-fi but you still feel transported to another world. It's live-action that sometimes feels wonderfully cartoonish. You get comedy, thrills, action, and some wonderful lines of dialogue alongside the standard Leone style of telling so much through actions and reactions. I tend not to mention the writers as much when reviewing Leone movies, because of how much is said without really being said, but the script here
Eastwood does some of his best work, as does the brilliant Wallach, while Lee Van Cleef seems to enjoy sinking his teeth into a role that is much more dastardly than his previous appearance in the trilogy. The supporting cast is bigger than in any of the previous films, but that doesn't mean there are many other central characters. This is all about our lead trio, even if we do also manage to get a fine, fleeting, turn from Luigi Pistilli.
And what would the lead performances and all of these gorgeous visuals be without an accompanying score from Ennio Morricone? They would still be gorgeous, no doubt, but Morricone's iconic music (can music be iconic? I am going to say yes) brings everything together with a score that is nigh on perfect. It doesn't matter how many times you hear it, "The Ecstasy Of Gold" should rightfully give you goosebumps, and that's only one section of a score that never puts a foot wrong.
For the artistry of it, and the themes explored, I only slightly prefer Once Upon A Time In The West, but I wouldn't argue with anyone who picks this as their favourite Western of all time. It is a classic, and a fitting swansong to one of the greatest cinematic trilogies ever made (and, yes, that even includes The Mighty Ducks).
10/10
I recommend buying this set.
Americans might want to try out this set.
Clint Eastwood is the good, Lee Van Cleef is the bad, and Eli Wallach is tagged as ugly in this epic tale of bounty hunting, treachery, and a quest for a buried fortune. And that's all you need to know.
Although downright zippy compared to many other films from director Sergio Leone, this is another grandiose affair that allows the director plenty of moments to stretch out certain shots and scenes to almost unbearable degrees. It runs for just under 150 minutes, and if you're not grinning for at least 140 of them then I don't even know how to speak your language, because this is as rewarding and wonderful as cinema gets. It may not be sci-fi but you still feel transported to another world. It's live-action that sometimes feels wonderfully cartoonish. You get comedy, thrills, action, and some wonderful lines of dialogue alongside the standard Leone style of telling so much through actions and reactions. I tend not to mention the writers as much when reviewing Leone movies, because of how much is said without really being said, but the script here
Eastwood does some of his best work, as does the brilliant Wallach, while Lee Van Cleef seems to enjoy sinking his teeth into a role that is much more dastardly than his previous appearance in the trilogy. The supporting cast is bigger than in any of the previous films, but that doesn't mean there are many other central characters. This is all about our lead trio, even if we do also manage to get a fine, fleeting, turn from Luigi Pistilli.
And what would the lead performances and all of these gorgeous visuals be without an accompanying score from Ennio Morricone? They would still be gorgeous, no doubt, but Morricone's iconic music (can music be iconic? I am going to say yes) brings everything together with a score that is nigh on perfect. It doesn't matter how many times you hear it, "The Ecstasy Of Gold" should rightfully give you goosebumps, and that's only one section of a score that never puts a foot wrong.
For the artistry of it, and the themes explored, I only slightly prefer Once Upon A Time In The West, but I wouldn't argue with anyone who picks this as their favourite Western of all time. It is a classic, and a fitting swansong to one of the greatest cinematic trilogies ever made (and, yes, that even includes The Mighty Ducks).
10/10
I recommend buying this set.
Americans might want to try out this set.
Sunday, 20 May 2018
For A Few Dollars More (1965)
Clint Eastwood returns as a man with no name (who is, this time around, named Monco and is apparently not the same character from the first movie) and finds himself grudgingly teaming up with Lee Van Cleef as the pair of them, both bounty hunters, try to capture an infamous baddie and his unruly gang. The motive is money but there is more to it than that for Van Cleef's character and all will be revealed before a finale that will, inevitably, feature bullets under a boiling sun.
In the second instalment of the highly regarded "Dollars" trilogy we get all the same kind of fun we received the first time around plus a major bonus in the shape of Lee Van Cleef. The interplay between him and Eastwood provides a much more satisfying dynamic than we had the first time around. And the "hat duel" scene is both brilliantly entertaining and absolutely perfect in establishing the moral compass of both characters.
Also featuring another great score from Ennio Morricone, this is yet another treat for Sergio Leone fans, although most fans have surely seen the trilogy numerous times by now.
Where things fall down ever so slightly is in the pacing and the characterisation. The movie packs a fair bit in but somehow still feels like it's dragging in a few places, cramming more in than is needed and lacking that energetic economy that suffused the first movie. It also sacrifices any drama/tension for entertainment and, while this isn't always a bad thing here, it makes for a negative point as Eastwood and Van Cleef never seem in any real danger, especially during a finale that features some strange decisions by the main villain (Gian Maria Volonte, also returning, and also playing a different character than the one he played in the first film). It's also fair to say that the lead characters are so thinly sketched that it requires some real effort on the viewer's part to continue to identify with them, archetypes of the "Old West" as they pretend to be, but that's how Leone works. He shows the essence of a man by how he shoots, how he reacts under duress, and what code of conduct he decides to live by.
Still, nobody really does lively, entertaining, sun-scorched, cheroot-chewing Westerns like Leone and this is another classic for many fans of the genre.
Can you guess what instalment I am going to attempt to write about tomorrow?
9/10
I recommend buying this set.
Americans might want to try out this set.
In the second instalment of the highly regarded "Dollars" trilogy we get all the same kind of fun we received the first time around plus a major bonus in the shape of Lee Van Cleef. The interplay between him and Eastwood provides a much more satisfying dynamic than we had the first time around. And the "hat duel" scene is both brilliantly entertaining and absolutely perfect in establishing the moral compass of both characters.
Also featuring another great score from Ennio Morricone, this is yet another treat for Sergio Leone fans, although most fans have surely seen the trilogy numerous times by now.
Where things fall down ever so slightly is in the pacing and the characterisation. The movie packs a fair bit in but somehow still feels like it's dragging in a few places, cramming more in than is needed and lacking that energetic economy that suffused the first movie. It also sacrifices any drama/tension for entertainment and, while this isn't always a bad thing here, it makes for a negative point as Eastwood and Van Cleef never seem in any real danger, especially during a finale that features some strange decisions by the main villain (Gian Maria Volonte, also returning, and also playing a different character than the one he played in the first film). It's also fair to say that the lead characters are so thinly sketched that it requires some real effort on the viewer's part to continue to identify with them, archetypes of the "Old West" as they pretend to be, but that's how Leone works. He shows the essence of a man by how he shoots, how he reacts under duress, and what code of conduct he decides to live by.
Still, nobody really does lively, entertaining, sun-scorched, cheroot-chewing Westerns like Leone and this is another classic for many fans of the genre.
Can you guess what instalment I am going to attempt to write about tomorrow?
9/10
I recommend buying this set.
Americans might want to try out this set.
Labels:
clint eastwood,
ennio morricone,
for a few dollars more,
gian maria volonte,
lee van cleef,
sergio leone
Saturday, 19 May 2018
A Fistful Of Dollars (1964)
In a tale familiar even to those who have not already seen this classic movie (based, as it is, on Yojimbo, which itself was based on previous material which has since been recycled and revamped in so many different incarnations that it's almost impossible to keep track . . . . . . if ONLY there was some kind of website to make things easier . . . hmmmmm), Clint Eastwood stars as the famous Man With No Name (although a couple of the characters call him Joe, and he is listed here as such) who rides into town and begins clearing up a big mess by making a bigger mess. he does this with great ingenuity and balls of steel, putting himself in between two warring families and playing one off against the other while pretending that his loyalties are beyond question.
Everything is present and correct here that would go on to be improved upon and made completely iconic in Sergio Leone's future movies: the camera moving in for those close-ups of the eyes, the dusky damsel in distress, the gruff and economic speech from Clint, the sharp-shooting and moments of intermittent brutality. From the very beginning, with some lively animation and the first sounds of the wonderful Ennio Morricone score, you just know that you're in for a treat.
Clint is quintessentially Clint in a role that (alongside Dirty Harry) firmly established an iconic image for him. He may not have everything perfected yet (there's still a freshness to him and a slight hamminess in his laid-back manner) but he gets it almost spot-on and, of course, would just get better and better with the trilogy. The rest of the cast? Well, I would be lying if I said they were all memorable and how much I adored each performance but they all do a very good job at playing, essentially, ducks ready to be shot in a barrel. The friendly barman and eager coffin-maker are definite highlights but nobody really disappoints, despite maybe not searing themselves onto your psyche.
With a grandiose landscape just hovering by the edge of every framed moment, this starting point for (arguably?) the greatest Western trilogy ever made actually impresses all the more thanks to its ability to overcome any limitations with a smart, economical approach. It's clear in the scripting, in the moments of action and in the general details that the resources were definitely limited but that in no way detracts from the fun to be had while Clint smokes cheroots and cleans up the town.
The only real negative points here are, as already mentioned, Clint's growth into the role, the mixture of baddies (some are great, some aren't), and a child who appears just enough to annoy in the first half of the movie and who wouldn't seem out of place wailing amidst any Manga cartoon. Which marks this movie down from perfection. Which, ironically, kind of makes it better while you tag along for the ride.
9/10
I recommend buying this set.
Americans might want to try out this set.
Everything is present and correct here that would go on to be improved upon and made completely iconic in Sergio Leone's future movies: the camera moving in for those close-ups of the eyes, the dusky damsel in distress, the gruff and economic speech from Clint, the sharp-shooting and moments of intermittent brutality. From the very beginning, with some lively animation and the first sounds of the wonderful Ennio Morricone score, you just know that you're in for a treat.
Clint is quintessentially Clint in a role that (alongside Dirty Harry) firmly established an iconic image for him. He may not have everything perfected yet (there's still a freshness to him and a slight hamminess in his laid-back manner) but he gets it almost spot-on and, of course, would just get better and better with the trilogy. The rest of the cast? Well, I would be lying if I said they were all memorable and how much I adored each performance but they all do a very good job at playing, essentially, ducks ready to be shot in a barrel. The friendly barman and eager coffin-maker are definite highlights but nobody really disappoints, despite maybe not searing themselves onto your psyche.
With a grandiose landscape just hovering by the edge of every framed moment, this starting point for (arguably?) the greatest Western trilogy ever made actually impresses all the more thanks to its ability to overcome any limitations with a smart, economical approach. It's clear in the scripting, in the moments of action and in the general details that the resources were definitely limited but that in no way detracts from the fun to be had while Clint smokes cheroots and cleans up the town.
The only real negative points here are, as already mentioned, Clint's growth into the role, the mixture of baddies (some are great, some aren't), and a child who appears just enough to annoy in the first half of the movie and who wouldn't seem out of place wailing amidst any Manga cartoon. Which marks this movie down from perfection. Which, ironically, kind of makes it better while you tag along for the ride.
9/10
I recommend buying this set.
Americans might want to try out this set.
Friday, 18 May 2018
Gholam (2017)
Director Mitra Tabrizian, who also came up with the original idea and developed the script with writer Cyrus Massoudi, has crafted an impressive debut feature here, giving viewers a film that is part character study, part look at how people choose to embrace or reject their past and culture while making a new life in the UK, and part look at certain elements of PTSD.
Shahab Hosseini plays Gholam. There are other people who come in and out of his life but this is very much Gholam's story, and very much Hosseini's film. He works hard for little reward, seemingly content to pay some kind of self-imposed penance when it becomes clear that he could be making his situation more comfortable. He doesn't like to accept gifts that are offered to him, and they are offered often (in terms of free food/drink anyway), and he spends a lot of his time quietly observing the people around him, seeing the good in some people and the very bad in others.
As trite as it may sound, this is a film in which nothing seems to be happening while so much is said. Gholam is an interesting, and not unlikable, character, and seeing what he goes through on a daily basis is a fascinating snapshot, at times I am sure quite representative of what many people have gone through after giving themselves a fresh start here in Britain.
Hosseini is superb in the role. His inability to accept gifts or favours always comes across as an issue of pride rather than ingratitude, and his quiet way of observing and weighing up every situation is a constant, essential, part of who he is, encouraging viewers to also look closer at everyone around him. Tracie Bennett, Nasser Memarzia, Amerjit Deu, and Armin Karima also deserve to be mentioned, playing the main people who come in and out of Gholam's life in major or minor ways, and the actors playing some of the more loathsome characters should receive due credit for their performances.
It's perhaps not as clean or satisfying as some film fans might like but not every film is best presented in that way. This certainly benefits from the style. Everything is laid out from the opening scenes, and only the most optimistic viewer would expect everything to pan out nice and neatly.
Tabrizian is a name to keep an eye on, this is a film you should seek out, and I'll be looking forward to whatever she does next, as well as hopefully working through the extensive filmography of Shahab Hosseini.
8/10
There doesn't seem to be any disc release for Gholam yet so just treat yourself to a free trial at MUBI for now.
Shahab Hosseini plays Gholam. There are other people who come in and out of his life but this is very much Gholam's story, and very much Hosseini's film. He works hard for little reward, seemingly content to pay some kind of self-imposed penance when it becomes clear that he could be making his situation more comfortable. He doesn't like to accept gifts that are offered to him, and they are offered often (in terms of free food/drink anyway), and he spends a lot of his time quietly observing the people around him, seeing the good in some people and the very bad in others.
As trite as it may sound, this is a film in which nothing seems to be happening while so much is said. Gholam is an interesting, and not unlikable, character, and seeing what he goes through on a daily basis is a fascinating snapshot, at times I am sure quite representative of what many people have gone through after giving themselves a fresh start here in Britain.
Hosseini is superb in the role. His inability to accept gifts or favours always comes across as an issue of pride rather than ingratitude, and his quiet way of observing and weighing up every situation is a constant, essential, part of who he is, encouraging viewers to also look closer at everyone around him. Tracie Bennett, Nasser Memarzia, Amerjit Deu, and Armin Karima also deserve to be mentioned, playing the main people who come in and out of Gholam's life in major or minor ways, and the actors playing some of the more loathsome characters should receive due credit for their performances.
It's perhaps not as clean or satisfying as some film fans might like but not every film is best presented in that way. This certainly benefits from the style. Everything is laid out from the opening scenes, and only the most optimistic viewer would expect everything to pan out nice and neatly.
Tabrizian is a name to keep an eye on, this is a film you should seek out, and I'll be looking forward to whatever she does next, as well as hopefully working through the extensive filmography of Shahab Hosseini.
8/10
There doesn't seem to be any disc release for Gholam yet so just treat yourself to a free trial at MUBI for now.
Labels:
amerjit deu,
armin karima,
cyrus massoudi,
drama,
gholam,
mitra tabrizian,
nasser memarzia,
shahab hosseini,
tracie bennett
Thursday, 17 May 2018
Deep Blue Sea 2 (2018)
I have just finished watching Deep Blue Sea 2 and I am already struggling to write this review, mainly because I have immediately forgotten everything that happened. That is not a comment that reflects my memory, even if I do have my occasional moments of forgetting where I placed my headphones that are still lodged at my ears. No, it's a comment on just how absolutely forgettable this film is. It's also quite dire, but just not in any memorable way.
You may disagree with me, I cannot even recall the general consensus at this point, but Deep Blue Sea was/is an excellent shark movie. It was Renny Harlin before he went off the boil, and he had a hell of a run, it was a decent enough cast, and it had that great idea of sharks coming in to an indoor environment.
Which makes this sequel, really just an inferior retread, all the more disappointing. They even directly lift a number of moments from the first film, all of them done far less effectively.
Danielle Savre plays Misty Calhoun, a shark expert taken along with some other people to a base in the middle of the sea that is doing some important science stuff with sharks. The experiments are continuing thanks to an amoral rich guy named Carl Durant (Michael Beach) and it's not long until things go wrong, prompting the rich guy to become more and more outright evil as he attempts to save face, and his own skin.
Director Darin Scott already has a number of features under his belt, a number of them TV movies, but you wouldn't know it from this amateurish effort. Okay, to be fair, there's a very basic degree of competence here, overshadowed by the weak script (by Erik Patterson, Hans Rodionoff, and Jessica Scott - who all clearly just watched the first film and then set out to make it worse, and cheaper), but it's nowhere near the level that it should be. I'm used to watching cheap shark films with dodgy CGI, and I have been spoiled recently with some great shark films that have excellent effects in them. This sits somewhere in the middle. Some of the FX work is decent enough but too many moments just feel rushed and lacking, especially when being displayed in the scenes that should be highlights.
I started this review by mentioning how forgettable the film is and that is emphasised by the cast, none of whom make any impression whatsoever, good or bad. Savre is left adrift, no pun intended, while Beach is given a character so one-note that you're just waiting for him to meet his obvious fate. As for everyone else? Nope. I couldn't even pick them out of a line-up right now. Which might work in their favour when they move on to future projects.
When an entire movie manages to be more wooden and boring than the performance from Saffron Burrows in Deep Blue Sea then you know that's not a good thing. This is definitely one to avoid.
2/10
Available on various streaming services, here is the DVD for American shark fans.
You may disagree with me, I cannot even recall the general consensus at this point, but Deep Blue Sea was/is an excellent shark movie. It was Renny Harlin before he went off the boil, and he had a hell of a run, it was a decent enough cast, and it had that great idea of sharks coming in to an indoor environment.
Which makes this sequel, really just an inferior retread, all the more disappointing. They even directly lift a number of moments from the first film, all of them done far less effectively.
Danielle Savre plays Misty Calhoun, a shark expert taken along with some other people to a base in the middle of the sea that is doing some important science stuff with sharks. The experiments are continuing thanks to an amoral rich guy named Carl Durant (Michael Beach) and it's not long until things go wrong, prompting the rich guy to become more and more outright evil as he attempts to save face, and his own skin.
Director Darin Scott already has a number of features under his belt, a number of them TV movies, but you wouldn't know it from this amateurish effort. Okay, to be fair, there's a very basic degree of competence here, overshadowed by the weak script (by Erik Patterson, Hans Rodionoff, and Jessica Scott - who all clearly just watched the first film and then set out to make it worse, and cheaper), but it's nowhere near the level that it should be. I'm used to watching cheap shark films with dodgy CGI, and I have been spoiled recently with some great shark films that have excellent effects in them. This sits somewhere in the middle. Some of the FX work is decent enough but too many moments just feel rushed and lacking, especially when being displayed in the scenes that should be highlights.
I started this review by mentioning how forgettable the film is and that is emphasised by the cast, none of whom make any impression whatsoever, good or bad. Savre is left adrift, no pun intended, while Beach is given a character so one-note that you're just waiting for him to meet his obvious fate. As for everyone else? Nope. I couldn't even pick them out of a line-up right now. Which might work in their favour when they move on to future projects.
When an entire movie manages to be more wooden and boring than the performance from Saffron Burrows in Deep Blue Sea then you know that's not a good thing. This is definitely one to avoid.
2/10
Available on various streaming services, here is the DVD for American shark fans.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)


















