Yes, yes, yes, Ed Wood made movies that were "so bad, they're good." Well, not being a believer in this mantra, I watched this so I could have it out with the spirit of Ed once and for all.
The basic plot for this film reads like a rejected Rod Serling script idea. Poor misguided Don (Clancy Malone) is bailed out of jail by his sister Marilyn (Dolores Fuller). Their father is the world famous plastic surgeon Dr. Gregor (Herbert Rawlinson). Cops Johns (Lyle Talbot) and Lawrence (Steve Reeves) try to convince Gregor that his son is up to no good. Don confirms this by robbing a theatre with his mentor in crime Vic (Timothy Farrell). Don kills a night watchman, and Vic wounds a secretary, who later identifies them. Don wants to give himself up, but Vic has other plans.
I will never understand the worship of Ed Wood. His films were out-and-out lousy, whether he was a wide-eyed neophyte in Hollywood or a cross-dressing talentless drunk. The entire cast is bad. Wood's script is laughable despite a half-decent idea. He lets entire subplots come and go (the newspaper reporter), and has no concept about basics like camera placement or story. The title is a misnomer, the jail bait referred to is not a girl, but a gun.
Somehow, "Jail Bait" got made. It is truly terrible, and the mere vomiting forth of a bad film like this can no longer justify its existence or serve as an excuse to like it. Ed, you were one awful film maker.
Wednesday, August 27, 2025
Jake's How-To (2008)
I'm not quite sure what the Buckley Brothers were doing with this film. It's a mess, and frankly, all about the wrong characters.
Aaron (Neil Kubath) is partner and prodigy to Jake (Kevin Oestenstad), a conceited beach volleyball player. The two practice on the sun drenched beaches of Wisconsin, and Jake gives Aaron some hilariously bad advice on how to pick up women. Aaron has just split up with his girlfriend, and his best friend Jonny (Matthew Zeidman) is also hoping Aaron will score and return to normal. Aaron tries his best with assorted women, and does well, until he decides to use some of Jake's advice. A big volleyball tournament approaches, and Aaron finally comes to his senses about Jake, which affects both players' skills.
I'm sorry, but I often had no clue what was going on here. The sound is pretty bad, and the fun electronic score often drowned out the dialogue. The first two-thirds of the film drag, as Aaron is shot down every time he uses Jake's advice, yet stupidly goes back to it again and again. Also, for a sex comedy, sex is only talked about, and the only nudity here is shirtless guys and bikini-clad girls. Two peripheral characters had me laughing, and building their parts up may have made the rest of the film tolerable. Two friendly rivals to Jake and Aaron are The Christian Fury (the film's composer Kyle Buckley), who carries a cross and slaps anyone who uses God's name in vain, and Rick (Nick Doetsch), The Christian Fury's maniacal partner- rude and crude and often getting the only laughs. Plus, beach volleyball in Wisconsin? We couldn't milk a little more out of that? Instead, we have to watch Aaron getting hit in the forehead constantly, or ha-ha material like everyone thinking Jonny isn't straight.
"Jake's How-To" is a lost opportunity I wanted to like more.
Aaron (Neil Kubath) is partner and prodigy to Jake (Kevin Oestenstad), a conceited beach volleyball player. The two practice on the sun drenched beaches of Wisconsin, and Jake gives Aaron some hilariously bad advice on how to pick up women. Aaron has just split up with his girlfriend, and his best friend Jonny (Matthew Zeidman) is also hoping Aaron will score and return to normal. Aaron tries his best with assorted women, and does well, until he decides to use some of Jake's advice. A big volleyball tournament approaches, and Aaron finally comes to his senses about Jake, which affects both players' skills.
I'm sorry, but I often had no clue what was going on here. The sound is pretty bad, and the fun electronic score often drowned out the dialogue. The first two-thirds of the film drag, as Aaron is shot down every time he uses Jake's advice, yet stupidly goes back to it again and again. Also, for a sex comedy, sex is only talked about, and the only nudity here is shirtless guys and bikini-clad girls. Two peripheral characters had me laughing, and building their parts up may have made the rest of the film tolerable. Two friendly rivals to Jake and Aaron are The Christian Fury (the film's composer Kyle Buckley), who carries a cross and slaps anyone who uses God's name in vain, and Rick (Nick Doetsch), The Christian Fury's maniacal partner- rude and crude and often getting the only laughs. Plus, beach volleyball in Wisconsin? We couldn't milk a little more out of that? Instead, we have to watch Aaron getting hit in the forehead constantly, or ha-ha material like everyone thinking Jonny isn't straight.
"Jake's How-To" is a lost opportunity I wanted to like more.
James and the Giant Peach (1996)
When I was a kid, those big loud musicals of the late '60's and early '70's totally freaked me out. Bloated monstrosities like "Doctor Dolittle," "Chitty Chitty Bang Bang," "Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory," and even the much later "Annie" were torture for many kids to sit through, while smiling parents thought they had finally found something to keep their offspring entertained. Well, add this film to the list.
After his parents were taken by a giant snorting rhinoceros, young James (Paul Terry) must go live with his evil Aunt Spiker (Joanna Lumley) and Aunt Sponge (Miriam Margolyes). He is made to do all the work around the house, and the aunts treat him horribly. James meets an old man (Pete Postlethwaite), who gives him a magic bag filled with crocodile tongues. James wants desperately to leave this house of horror in England, and go to the Empire State Building in New York City. This was a dream of his parents' before they died, and James has been keeping hope alive. James accidentally spills the bag, and the magic tongues generate a giant peach that grows to the size of a house. James crawls inside it, and discovers giant bugs that have also changed thanks to the magic. The group roll the peach into the ocean, and set sail for New York, and immediately run into other fantastic, whimsical obstacles. The two aunts quickly pursue.
The film does start out live-action, then switches to the stop motion animation that made "The Nightmare Before Christmas" famous. In the animation scenes, Grasshopper (Simon Callow), Centipede (Richard Dreyfuss), Ladybug (Jane Leeves), Glowworm (Miriam Margolyes, again), Spider (Susan Sarandon), and Earthworm (David Thewlis) all become characters who contribute to the voyage. They also grate on the nerves as much as Randy Newman's hopelessly bland songs. The main voyage, with its undersea pirate ghosts and mechanical shark, is not all that interesting. I was reminded of "The Pagemaster" while watching this. There is no central villain, so the threats to the peach's voyage are predictably dealt with. Of course, this being a musical, the film comes to a complete stop so the cast can warble a tune and bore the audience. The terrifying corpse makeup sported by Lumley and Margolyes, and their mistreatment of James, added to my distaste. The rhino effects are impressive, and Terry turns in a good performance.
While the technology involved in creating this film is landmark and all that (which inflated people's enjoyment of this), Roald Dahl's original story is a letdown. Do not be bowled over by the bells and whistles, "James and the Giant Peach" is strange and cold. Go to bed, kids.
After his parents were taken by a giant snorting rhinoceros, young James (Paul Terry) must go live with his evil Aunt Spiker (Joanna Lumley) and Aunt Sponge (Miriam Margolyes). He is made to do all the work around the house, and the aunts treat him horribly. James meets an old man (Pete Postlethwaite), who gives him a magic bag filled with crocodile tongues. James wants desperately to leave this house of horror in England, and go to the Empire State Building in New York City. This was a dream of his parents' before they died, and James has been keeping hope alive. James accidentally spills the bag, and the magic tongues generate a giant peach that grows to the size of a house. James crawls inside it, and discovers giant bugs that have also changed thanks to the magic. The group roll the peach into the ocean, and set sail for New York, and immediately run into other fantastic, whimsical obstacles. The two aunts quickly pursue.
The film does start out live-action, then switches to the stop motion animation that made "The Nightmare Before Christmas" famous. In the animation scenes, Grasshopper (Simon Callow), Centipede (Richard Dreyfuss), Ladybug (Jane Leeves), Glowworm (Miriam Margolyes, again), Spider (Susan Sarandon), and Earthworm (David Thewlis) all become characters who contribute to the voyage. They also grate on the nerves as much as Randy Newman's hopelessly bland songs. The main voyage, with its undersea pirate ghosts and mechanical shark, is not all that interesting. I was reminded of "The Pagemaster" while watching this. There is no central villain, so the threats to the peach's voyage are predictably dealt with. Of course, this being a musical, the film comes to a complete stop so the cast can warble a tune and bore the audience. The terrifying corpse makeup sported by Lumley and Margolyes, and their mistreatment of James, added to my distaste. The rhino effects are impressive, and Terry turns in a good performance.
While the technology involved in creating this film is landmark and all that (which inflated people's enjoyment of this), Roald Dahl's original story is a letdown. Do not be bowled over by the bells and whistles, "James and the Giant Peach" is strange and cold. Go to bed, kids.
Raging Sun, Raging Sky (2009)
A three hour black & white Mexican film that celebrates true love and sex- why is this so good?
Ryo (Memo Villegas) meets a mysterious woman (Giovanna Zacarias) in a rainstorm, and takes her back to his place for a one-night stand. The woman foretells, or wills, Ryo to find his true love and then literally vanishes. In the meantime, Kieri (Jorge Becerra) is an answering service operator who hangs around a porn theater turning tricks. He soon realizes that casual sex is no substitute for love. The third point of this love triangle is Tari (Javier Olivan), a boxer who assumes the submissive role with his tricks before beating one of them senseless. He has something in common with the mysterious woman from the beginning of the film, and finds himself torn between Ryo and Kieri, who seem to be unable to find each other even though they were meant for each other- and don't get me started about the third hour of this thing- a mythic quest involving descent into the underworld. This is one strange flick.
Writer/director Julian Hernandez is known for his long paeans ("Broken Sky", "A Thousand Clouds of Peace"), but this is the first film I have seen from him. It runs an unbelievable three hours and thirteen minutes. The title credit doesn't appear until two hours into the film. Spoken dialogue from an actor's mouth is not heard until fifty-three minutes into the film. Hernandez makes this film unbelievably difficult, but in turn it's unbelievably interesting. "Raging Sun, Raging Sky" wears its inspirations on its sleeve. I saw some angles reminiscent of Lars von Trier's painterly compositions. Hernandez keeps the camera in constant motion, invoking French New Wave. Alejandro Cantu's beautiful cinematography sometimes resembles beefcake photography of the 1950's. The final hour, featuring desert locations and strange body makeup, recalls Alejandro Jodorowsky and Derek Jarman. We see actors plunging their faces into sinks, and I immediately started humming The Breeders' "Cannonball". It is amazing that all of these ingredients come together as a feast for the eyes, ears, and brain. There are only a handful of spoken lines in the film, but Hernandez is careful not to allow his cast to mug and over-emote. The settings are beautiful, from the opening shot of Zacarias framed by angelic circles walking through an underpass, to the sad adult theater with a creepy basement. Villegas and Becerra are good together, and although he might be seen as a villain, Olivan is completely sympathetic. There is a ton of nudity here, as almost every scene until the third hour has to do with sex or the pursuit of sex. Dream sequences are done in a washed-out color palette.
This is a hard film to sit down and explain, but I still liked it, even though I seem to have a penchant for slow-moving films like this ("Japon", anyone? No?). "Raging Sun, Raging Sky" challenged audiences all over the world, and challenged me, too.
Ryo (Memo Villegas) meets a mysterious woman (Giovanna Zacarias) in a rainstorm, and takes her back to his place for a one-night stand. The woman foretells, or wills, Ryo to find his true love and then literally vanishes. In the meantime, Kieri (Jorge Becerra) is an answering service operator who hangs around a porn theater turning tricks. He soon realizes that casual sex is no substitute for love. The third point of this love triangle is Tari (Javier Olivan), a boxer who assumes the submissive role with his tricks before beating one of them senseless. He has something in common with the mysterious woman from the beginning of the film, and finds himself torn between Ryo and Kieri, who seem to be unable to find each other even though they were meant for each other- and don't get me started about the third hour of this thing- a mythic quest involving descent into the underworld. This is one strange flick.
Writer/director Julian Hernandez is known for his long paeans ("Broken Sky", "A Thousand Clouds of Peace"), but this is the first film I have seen from him. It runs an unbelievable three hours and thirteen minutes. The title credit doesn't appear until two hours into the film. Spoken dialogue from an actor's mouth is not heard until fifty-three minutes into the film. Hernandez makes this film unbelievably difficult, but in turn it's unbelievably interesting. "Raging Sun, Raging Sky" wears its inspirations on its sleeve. I saw some angles reminiscent of Lars von Trier's painterly compositions. Hernandez keeps the camera in constant motion, invoking French New Wave. Alejandro Cantu's beautiful cinematography sometimes resembles beefcake photography of the 1950's. The final hour, featuring desert locations and strange body makeup, recalls Alejandro Jodorowsky and Derek Jarman. We see actors plunging their faces into sinks, and I immediately started humming The Breeders' "Cannonball". It is amazing that all of these ingredients come together as a feast for the eyes, ears, and brain. There are only a handful of spoken lines in the film, but Hernandez is careful not to allow his cast to mug and over-emote. The settings are beautiful, from the opening shot of Zacarias framed by angelic circles walking through an underpass, to the sad adult theater with a creepy basement. Villegas and Becerra are good together, and although he might be seen as a villain, Olivan is completely sympathetic. There is a ton of nudity here, as almost every scene until the third hour has to do with sex or the pursuit of sex. Dream sequences are done in a washed-out color palette.
This is a hard film to sit down and explain, but I still liked it, even though I seem to have a penchant for slow-moving films like this ("Japon", anyone? No?). "Raging Sun, Raging Sky" challenged audiences all over the world, and challenged me, too.
Japon (2002)
An unnamed man travels into the Mexican wilderness to end his life, and finds much more in this sometimes slow, sometimes shocking film.
Alejandro Ferretis plays the unnamed middle-aged artist with a limp and a cane who begins traveling from Mexico City. He is headed to a canyon in order to kill himself, carrying a pistol in his meager possessions. In a small village he learns there are no hotels but he can stay with an old widow named Ascen (Magdalena Flores), who lives in a remote hut on the rim of the canyon. Ascen insists she is too old to serve the man, and he sleeps in a stone barn, waiting for the right day to die. Soon, Ascen is helping the artist out, awakening some basic needs in the man. When Ascen's ne'er-do-well nephew Juan Luis (Martin Serrano) decides to take down the barn for the stones, the artist sexually propositions Ascen, and she accepts.
The film, written and directed by Carlos Reygadas, is a bleak but moving look at the lives of two lonely people. Ferretis is very good as the artist, a giant mystery in the film. We never get to know too much about him or his suicidal motives, but the pain he wears on his face is genuine. Flores is also good as the old woman, taking in this man and eventually giving up her home out of a sense of duty, as if she has no say in how she runs her life. Reygadas plays with his audience's mind, at one point blurring the line between cinema and reality. His use of widescreen is impressive. I cannot tell you why the film is titled "Japan," or why the artist is never named, or why the old woman, a devout Catholic, decides to sleep with him. It is as if Reygadas has let these characters act out their most basic instincts and need for calm and serenity, an idea discussed more than once, and the characters had free will over their actions from there.
"Japon" is another daring entry in Latin cinema, an artsy film that fascinates the viewer with its ability to hit raw nerve after raw nerve, but without getting brazen about it. It is slow, but rewarding, and has a final sequence you will not soon forget.
Alejandro Ferretis plays the unnamed middle-aged artist with a limp and a cane who begins traveling from Mexico City. He is headed to a canyon in order to kill himself, carrying a pistol in his meager possessions. In a small village he learns there are no hotels but he can stay with an old widow named Ascen (Magdalena Flores), who lives in a remote hut on the rim of the canyon. Ascen insists she is too old to serve the man, and he sleeps in a stone barn, waiting for the right day to die. Soon, Ascen is helping the artist out, awakening some basic needs in the man. When Ascen's ne'er-do-well nephew Juan Luis (Martin Serrano) decides to take down the barn for the stones, the artist sexually propositions Ascen, and she accepts.
The film, written and directed by Carlos Reygadas, is a bleak but moving look at the lives of two lonely people. Ferretis is very good as the artist, a giant mystery in the film. We never get to know too much about him or his suicidal motives, but the pain he wears on his face is genuine. Flores is also good as the old woman, taking in this man and eventually giving up her home out of a sense of duty, as if she has no say in how she runs her life. Reygadas plays with his audience's mind, at one point blurring the line between cinema and reality. His use of widescreen is impressive. I cannot tell you why the film is titled "Japan," or why the artist is never named, or why the old woman, a devout Catholic, decides to sleep with him. It is as if Reygadas has let these characters act out their most basic instincts and need for calm and serenity, an idea discussed more than once, and the characters had free will over their actions from there.
"Japon" is another daring entry in Latin cinema, an artsy film that fascinates the viewer with its ability to hit raw nerve after raw nerve, but without getting brazen about it. It is slow, but rewarding, and has a final sequence you will not soon forget.
Monday, August 25, 2025
Jesus (2000)
Although reviled by some and praised by others, this made-for-television mini-series works in getting the Christian message across while showing us a new side to the Savior.
Jeremy Sisto is excellent as a vulnerable Jesus, who was not immediately enlightened as to how to tell those around Him that He was the Son of God. Making Him a little more human shows us that if Jesus can be this way, we should find no problem in following what He says. In biblical epics of old, Jesus was a stoic, stone-faced prophet, but here He smiles and delights in others' happiness. Something other films have in common is the film makers' lack of characterization of the apostles. Some stand out and some are glossed over, like in the Bible, but director Roger Young is able to give us a sense of Jesus' story without overwhelming the audience with every single event in the Gospel. Gary Oldman is, without a doubt, the best portrayal of Pontius Pilate. He does not settle for a mere cameo, but he has a strong supporting part that he instantly makes his own. Debra Messing and G.W. Bailey make you forget "Will & Grace" and "Police Academy," respectively, playing Mary Magdalene and a Roman citizen. Jacqueline Bisset is Mary, the mother of Jesus, and also does a fantastic job. Kudos to Jeroen Krabbe as Satan, who tempts Jesus while wearing modern dress, and shows how men take Jesus' name while killing their fellow man. The scenes set during the Crusades and World War I are quite a change from the norm, and quite effective. I had wished that Messing had been given more to do as the saved prostitute. Her character stands on the sidelines and struggles internally, but there is no conversion moment that gives us something to latch on to. Messing is good, but the screenwriter does not do enough with her. Young's direction is epic in scope, with fantastic locations, and the pace is very brisk for an almost three hour film. Jesus' life as a child in wisely shown in flashback, and everyone should be congratulated for bringing a familiar story and putting a fresh twist on it.
Jeremy Sisto is excellent as a vulnerable Jesus, who was not immediately enlightened as to how to tell those around Him that He was the Son of God. Making Him a little more human shows us that if Jesus can be this way, we should find no problem in following what He says. In biblical epics of old, Jesus was a stoic, stone-faced prophet, but here He smiles and delights in others' happiness. Something other films have in common is the film makers' lack of characterization of the apostles. Some stand out and some are glossed over, like in the Bible, but director Roger Young is able to give us a sense of Jesus' story without overwhelming the audience with every single event in the Gospel. Gary Oldman is, without a doubt, the best portrayal of Pontius Pilate. He does not settle for a mere cameo, but he has a strong supporting part that he instantly makes his own. Debra Messing and G.W. Bailey make you forget "Will & Grace" and "Police Academy," respectively, playing Mary Magdalene and a Roman citizen. Jacqueline Bisset is Mary, the mother of Jesus, and also does a fantastic job. Kudos to Jeroen Krabbe as Satan, who tempts Jesus while wearing modern dress, and shows how men take Jesus' name while killing their fellow man. The scenes set during the Crusades and World War I are quite a change from the norm, and quite effective. I had wished that Messing had been given more to do as the saved prostitute. Her character stands on the sidelines and struggles internally, but there is no conversion moment that gives us something to latch on to. Messing is good, but the screenwriter does not do enough with her. Young's direction is epic in scope, with fantastic locations, and the pace is very brisk for an almost three hour film. Jesus' life as a child in wisely shown in flashback, and everyone should be congratulated for bringing a familiar story and putting a fresh twist on it.
Rabid (1977)
Cute couple Rose (Marilyn Chambers) and Hart (Frank Moore) are involved in a horrible motorcycle accident that leaves them maimed. Luckily, the accident occurred within sight of the Keloid Clinic, a plastic surgery retreat run by Dr. Keloid (Howard Ryshpan).
Rose is in worse condition than Hart, and Keloid does some experimental skin grafts on her. He takes skin from her thighs and grafts them on other parts of her body, where the skin genetically alters itself from thigh skin to what ever skin might be surrounding it. Everything is a-okay. A month passes, but Rose is still in a coma, and Hart is sent home to Montreal. Rose wakes up and suddenly attacks another patient Lloyd (Roger Periard), who does not remember the attack later. Rose slips in and out of a coma, leaving the clinic to attack a nearby farmer. In a great action sequence, an infected Lloyd attacks a cab driver, and the rest of the film has the population of Montreal and surrounding suburbs succumbing to a rabies-like disease that is being carried by Rose, and Hart's efforts to find her before she can do more harm.
This was one of Cronenberg's early films, and it shows. The first half of the film is great, building suspense and featuring some pretty impressive makeup and gore effects, including the now-infamous probe that pops out from Rose's armpit. Once Rose, and the film, leaves the clinic, the story quickly degenerates into a series of predictable attacks as smiling extras run for their lives. Adult film performer Chambers is very good in her role: Cronenberg has her get dressed an awful lot, and it is too bad she could not parlay this into other mainstream roles. The rest of the supporting cast is okay, no one really stands out except the always reliable Joe Silver as Murray, Keloid's business partner who eventually helps Hart. Because the last half is so much worse than the first half, my rating will have to fall in the middle of the spectrum as well.
"Rabid" is one of those films you have always heard about, and one I finally saw, and now I can go on with my life. Followed by a remake.
Rose is in worse condition than Hart, and Keloid does some experimental skin grafts on her. He takes skin from her thighs and grafts them on other parts of her body, where the skin genetically alters itself from thigh skin to what ever skin might be surrounding it. Everything is a-okay. A month passes, but Rose is still in a coma, and Hart is sent home to Montreal. Rose wakes up and suddenly attacks another patient Lloyd (Roger Periard), who does not remember the attack later. Rose slips in and out of a coma, leaving the clinic to attack a nearby farmer. In a great action sequence, an infected Lloyd attacks a cab driver, and the rest of the film has the population of Montreal and surrounding suburbs succumbing to a rabies-like disease that is being carried by Rose, and Hart's efforts to find her before she can do more harm.
This was one of Cronenberg's early films, and it shows. The first half of the film is great, building suspense and featuring some pretty impressive makeup and gore effects, including the now-infamous probe that pops out from Rose's armpit. Once Rose, and the film, leaves the clinic, the story quickly degenerates into a series of predictable attacks as smiling extras run for their lives. Adult film performer Chambers is very good in her role: Cronenberg has her get dressed an awful lot, and it is too bad she could not parlay this into other mainstream roles. The rest of the supporting cast is okay, no one really stands out except the always reliable Joe Silver as Murray, Keloid's business partner who eventually helps Hart. Because the last half is so much worse than the first half, my rating will have to fall in the middle of the spectrum as well.
"Rabid" is one of those films you have always heard about, and one I finally saw, and now I can go on with my life. Followed by a remake.
Sunday, August 24, 2025
Jesus of Montreal (1989)
Lothaire Bluteau is Daniel, a mousy actor who is drawn into a new version of The Passion play- the crucifixion of Christ.
The local priest wants to freshen it up a bit, and Daniel brings in a small cast to reenact the scenes and play all the parts. In addition to two veteran actors, he brings onboard Constance (Johanne-Marie Tremblay), who happens to be sleeping with the aforementioned priest. He also finds the absolutely gorgeous Mireille (Catherine Wilkening), a Parisian model who uses her body in commercials to sell products. Already the parallels between Daniel and the actual Jesus Christ are hinted at, as the actor travels and assembles his "apostles." The troupe rewrites The Passion, opening it up to include recent revisionist history, and the play is performed to an awestruck audience- then the trouble begins. The priest did not want THAT kind of updating, complete with nudity and the suggestion that Jesus was the son of a Roman soldier, not God. Daniel attends an audition for a beer ad with Mireille, and after seeing her humiliated in the name of a cheap beer, he destroys the television equipment. He is later arrested, while hanging on the cross in the play, and booked. His lawyer is not a criminal lawyer, but an entertainment lawyer who would love to further Daniel's career. As secular forces begin to affect the play's cast, the troupe decides to give one last performance despite the priest's ban. In a rather silly fight, Daniel is injured, and the various reactions at his two different hospital visits also shows similarities to his greatest role.
My main complaint here is not the obvious- that some film makers strayed from the Gospel to tell Jesus' story. It is the fact that the film makers try to equate theater with church, which have more differences than similarities. I minored in Communication Arts in college, and appeared in my fair share of stage productions and local television commercials. However, as Arcand takes a rather ham-fisted approach to theater as church, he forgets that church is a matter of faith and belief, not a matter of free speech. One can argue that church can be theatrical, but that cannot be reversed to mean the theater is church. The entire film shut itself off to the FAITH of Christianity. The priest dismisses his flock as people who cannot afford psychoanalysis, so they confess their sins to him instead. This might be true for some, but definitely not for all, but you would not know that here. I once read an interesting statement about faith: "Truth is stranger than reason." This film will not convince the faithful to lose their beliefs. It is better when it shows the crass commercialism and emptiness of many people's lives. Seeing the critics say the same things after the performances of two entirely different plays spoke more than the priest's obvious "people are gullible" scene. He wants The Passion play changed because of pressure from higher up in the church bureaucracy, not because it defiles his beliefs. The film makers even come up with a way for the actor to heal the sick, but that also seems convenient. I liked the cast and direction, but the film's ignorance of Faith- is something I could not overcome.
The local priest wants to freshen it up a bit, and Daniel brings in a small cast to reenact the scenes and play all the parts. In addition to two veteran actors, he brings onboard Constance (Johanne-Marie Tremblay), who happens to be sleeping with the aforementioned priest. He also finds the absolutely gorgeous Mireille (Catherine Wilkening), a Parisian model who uses her body in commercials to sell products. Already the parallels between Daniel and the actual Jesus Christ are hinted at, as the actor travels and assembles his "apostles." The troupe rewrites The Passion, opening it up to include recent revisionist history, and the play is performed to an awestruck audience- then the trouble begins. The priest did not want THAT kind of updating, complete with nudity and the suggestion that Jesus was the son of a Roman soldier, not God. Daniel attends an audition for a beer ad with Mireille, and after seeing her humiliated in the name of a cheap beer, he destroys the television equipment. He is later arrested, while hanging on the cross in the play, and booked. His lawyer is not a criminal lawyer, but an entertainment lawyer who would love to further Daniel's career. As secular forces begin to affect the play's cast, the troupe decides to give one last performance despite the priest's ban. In a rather silly fight, Daniel is injured, and the various reactions at his two different hospital visits also shows similarities to his greatest role.
My main complaint here is not the obvious- that some film makers strayed from the Gospel to tell Jesus' story. It is the fact that the film makers try to equate theater with church, which have more differences than similarities. I minored in Communication Arts in college, and appeared in my fair share of stage productions and local television commercials. However, as Arcand takes a rather ham-fisted approach to theater as church, he forgets that church is a matter of faith and belief, not a matter of free speech. One can argue that church can be theatrical, but that cannot be reversed to mean the theater is church. The entire film shut itself off to the FAITH of Christianity. The priest dismisses his flock as people who cannot afford psychoanalysis, so they confess their sins to him instead. This might be true for some, but definitely not for all, but you would not know that here. I once read an interesting statement about faith: "Truth is stranger than reason." This film will not convince the faithful to lose their beliefs. It is better when it shows the crass commercialism and emptiness of many people's lives. Seeing the critics say the same things after the performances of two entirely different plays spoke more than the priest's obvious "people are gullible" scene. He wants The Passion play changed because of pressure from higher up in the church bureaucracy, not because it defiles his beliefs. The film makers even come up with a way for the actor to heal the sick, but that also seems convenient. I liked the cast and direction, but the film's ignorance of Faith- is something I could not overcome.
The Suburbans (1999)
The year was 1999. Will Ferrell was making a name for himself on "Saturday Night Live." Ben Stiller was a rising star, fresh off of "There's Something About Mary." Why did they sign on to this thing?
The Suburbans were a fictional one-hit wonder band from the early 1980's. They appeared on "American Bandstand," but rejected the idea of a cable channel that played nothing but music videos, and their careers were over. Almost twenty years later, the former bandmates are attending bass player Gil's (Will Ferrell) wedding. Danny (director/co-writer Donal Lardner Ward) is a lifeguard and part-owner of a small club. Rory (co-writer Tony Guma) sells insurance and is dating a pregnant Lara (Bridgette Wilson-Sampras), who has two horrible children and plenty of stories about her bastard ex-husband. Mitch (Craig Bierko) is a skirt-chasing podiatrist who still dreams of rock stardom. Danny is dating photographer Grace (Amy Brenneman), who wants marriage (it's been fifteen years already), and children. The group reunites to belt out their hit song, and are approached by Cate (Jennifer Love Hewitt), a young successful executive at a huge conglomerate record company. She is on a winning streak, and decides to pluck the band out of obscurity, set them up in a rehearsal house, have their every move videotaped by MTV, and get them ready for a huge pay-per-view television comeback. The guys decide to sign to Cate's record company, owned by father and son cameos Jerry and Ben Stiller, and then the drama begins. Everything that can go wrong does. Relationships are on the line, alcoholics falter, Cate's true motive is exposed, and the film makers don't let Ferrell do anything funny.
This is one of those comedies that had to have read funnier on paper. While the characters are all stock, this could have been the manic cousin to Tom Hanks' "That Thing You Do!," but instead, it just sits there. Obvious scene follows obvious scene, and what should have been a can't-miss satire of the music industry instead tries to involve us in Danny and Grace's relationship problems. Guma and Ward took a winning idea and stumbled with it. Ward's direction is stale, as if he is afraid to move the camera or try anything different. Of all the band members, Ferrell's character gets the least amount of screen time. The few lines and scenes he has are hysterical, and it is too bad no one recognized this in editing. The same goes for the Stillers' extended cameo- they flub lines, sleepily go for laughs, and have no sense of timing, but every second of them possibly shot seems to be included on the off-chance someone would find them funny. While The Suburbans' pretend one-hit is kind of catchy, the band itself is a little boring. The weird thing here is that half the cast is actually pretty good- Bierko is funny, Brenneman has some good scenes, Wilson tries as an underwritten harpy, and Hewitt is sexy and watchable in an awful role that mostly calls for her to stand around and be sexy and watchable. For every moment that works, there are "wha'?" cameos from the Stillers, Robert Loggia, Antonio Fargas, Kurt Loder, Dick Clark, and even A Flock of Seagulls- who reminds everyone what a good one-hit wonder was.
"The Suburbans" does exist, I watched it on a DVD that was available in most stores. Ferrell and Stiller went on to be megastars, and the rest of the cast and crew have moved on to bigger things as well- did I mention this was produced by one J.J. Abrams, who cameos as well? The viewer, however, will just wonder how this misfire was made to begin with.
The Suburbans were a fictional one-hit wonder band from the early 1980's. They appeared on "American Bandstand," but rejected the idea of a cable channel that played nothing but music videos, and their careers were over. Almost twenty years later, the former bandmates are attending bass player Gil's (Will Ferrell) wedding. Danny (director/co-writer Donal Lardner Ward) is a lifeguard and part-owner of a small club. Rory (co-writer Tony Guma) sells insurance and is dating a pregnant Lara (Bridgette Wilson-Sampras), who has two horrible children and plenty of stories about her bastard ex-husband. Mitch (Craig Bierko) is a skirt-chasing podiatrist who still dreams of rock stardom. Danny is dating photographer Grace (Amy Brenneman), who wants marriage (it's been fifteen years already), and children. The group reunites to belt out their hit song, and are approached by Cate (Jennifer Love Hewitt), a young successful executive at a huge conglomerate record company. She is on a winning streak, and decides to pluck the band out of obscurity, set them up in a rehearsal house, have their every move videotaped by MTV, and get them ready for a huge pay-per-view television comeback. The guys decide to sign to Cate's record company, owned by father and son cameos Jerry and Ben Stiller, and then the drama begins. Everything that can go wrong does. Relationships are on the line, alcoholics falter, Cate's true motive is exposed, and the film makers don't let Ferrell do anything funny.
This is one of those comedies that had to have read funnier on paper. While the characters are all stock, this could have been the manic cousin to Tom Hanks' "That Thing You Do!," but instead, it just sits there. Obvious scene follows obvious scene, and what should have been a can't-miss satire of the music industry instead tries to involve us in Danny and Grace's relationship problems. Guma and Ward took a winning idea and stumbled with it. Ward's direction is stale, as if he is afraid to move the camera or try anything different. Of all the band members, Ferrell's character gets the least amount of screen time. The few lines and scenes he has are hysterical, and it is too bad no one recognized this in editing. The same goes for the Stillers' extended cameo- they flub lines, sleepily go for laughs, and have no sense of timing, but every second of them possibly shot seems to be included on the off-chance someone would find them funny. While The Suburbans' pretend one-hit is kind of catchy, the band itself is a little boring. The weird thing here is that half the cast is actually pretty good- Bierko is funny, Brenneman has some good scenes, Wilson tries as an underwritten harpy, and Hewitt is sexy and watchable in an awful role that mostly calls for her to stand around and be sexy and watchable. For every moment that works, there are "wha'?" cameos from the Stillers, Robert Loggia, Antonio Fargas, Kurt Loder, Dick Clark, and even A Flock of Seagulls- who reminds everyone what a good one-hit wonder was.
"The Suburbans" does exist, I watched it on a DVD that was available in most stores. Ferrell and Stiller went on to be megastars, and the rest of the cast and crew have moved on to bigger things as well- did I mention this was produced by one J.J. Abrams, who cameos as well? The viewer, however, will just wonder how this misfire was made to begin with.
The Tuxedo (2002)
I do like Jackie Chan. And I do like Jennifer Love Hewitt. Both performers are often under-appreciated in their respective roles- an action hero and an ingenue. In "The Tuxedo," the two combine and generate no chemistry but a few chuckles.
Jimmy Tong (Jackie Chan) is a reckless cab driver hired by Steena (Debi Mazar, speaking of underappreciated) to be the chauffeur to one handsome Clark Devlin (Jason Isaacs, trying on that James Bond role he did not get). Jimmy loves working for Devlin, who takes the driver under his wing, until one night when Devlin is almost killed in a bomb explosion. Del (Jennifer Love Hewitt) is an underling at the CSA, a fictionalized CIA full of leering male coworkers...and Steena. She is assigned to investigate bottled water company magnate Banning (Ritchie Coster), who plans on world domination by engineering his water to make a person thirstier, if it doesn't dry up their insides and kill them in the process- his plans are let on right away, so don't think I just spoiled something. Del has never seen Devlin, and meets him (as Jimmy) when they must spy on a secret meeting being held by Banning. Jimmy has become such good friends with Devlin, he assumes his identity when Devlin is hurt and in the hospital. He also assumes a technically advanced tuxedo that can turn the wearer into a killing machine or a lover, all depending on what the user programs into a remote control watch. As Del and Jimmy investigate Banning, with Del unaware of Jimmy's real identity, the tuxedo plays important and highly implausible roles in the action.
"The Tuxedo" does score on a few levels. There are some funny action scenes, courtesy of Chan, which might work better if you have never seen one of his films before. Chan still had a problem with English pronunciation, as evidenced by the end credits bloopers, so his line readings are all wrong as he emphasizes the incorrect words consistently. Jennifer Love Hewitt's Del is terribly written, with the viewer never knowing if she is a butt kicking super agent hiding behind a nerdy lab coat, or really a nerdy lab assistant who is in over her head. Hewitt scores some laughs here and there, but her character is a complete mess. Debi Mazar and Peter Stormare are wasted in supporting roles, although Jason Isaacs is fun as Devlin.
The plot is thoroughly telegraphed throughout, and makes little sense when contemplated on. Banning's motivations are right out of a James Bond film, but all the characters seem to be in on the plot's thrust, appearing in places they should have no business knowing of, all to satisfy the story's action sequences- a story and screenplay credited to four different writers. Even the script's tone varies, going bawdy one minute, then (PG) the next. Throw in an embarrassing James Brown cameo, and you have a mixed bag of a film. Kevin Donovan's direction is good enough, although a swooping camera following swooping fight scenes might give the viewer swooping seasickness. The cinematography is beautiful, the special effects are okay, and the music complements nicely.
I am not sure if "The Tuxedo" was meant to be the first film of a new franchise, but on its own merits, it is kinda good. Unless you are a pessimist, then it is kinda not good. All those involved have done worse, but have done better as well.
Jimmy Tong (Jackie Chan) is a reckless cab driver hired by Steena (Debi Mazar, speaking of underappreciated) to be the chauffeur to one handsome Clark Devlin (Jason Isaacs, trying on that James Bond role he did not get). Jimmy loves working for Devlin, who takes the driver under his wing, until one night when Devlin is almost killed in a bomb explosion. Del (Jennifer Love Hewitt) is an underling at the CSA, a fictionalized CIA full of leering male coworkers...and Steena. She is assigned to investigate bottled water company magnate Banning (Ritchie Coster), who plans on world domination by engineering his water to make a person thirstier, if it doesn't dry up their insides and kill them in the process- his plans are let on right away, so don't think I just spoiled something. Del has never seen Devlin, and meets him (as Jimmy) when they must spy on a secret meeting being held by Banning. Jimmy has become such good friends with Devlin, he assumes his identity when Devlin is hurt and in the hospital. He also assumes a technically advanced tuxedo that can turn the wearer into a killing machine or a lover, all depending on what the user programs into a remote control watch. As Del and Jimmy investigate Banning, with Del unaware of Jimmy's real identity, the tuxedo plays important and highly implausible roles in the action.
"The Tuxedo" does score on a few levels. There are some funny action scenes, courtesy of Chan, which might work better if you have never seen one of his films before. Chan still had a problem with English pronunciation, as evidenced by the end credits bloopers, so his line readings are all wrong as he emphasizes the incorrect words consistently. Jennifer Love Hewitt's Del is terribly written, with the viewer never knowing if she is a butt kicking super agent hiding behind a nerdy lab coat, or really a nerdy lab assistant who is in over her head. Hewitt scores some laughs here and there, but her character is a complete mess. Debi Mazar and Peter Stormare are wasted in supporting roles, although Jason Isaacs is fun as Devlin.
The plot is thoroughly telegraphed throughout, and makes little sense when contemplated on. Banning's motivations are right out of a James Bond film, but all the characters seem to be in on the plot's thrust, appearing in places they should have no business knowing of, all to satisfy the story's action sequences- a story and screenplay credited to four different writers. Even the script's tone varies, going bawdy one minute, then (PG) the next. Throw in an embarrassing James Brown cameo, and you have a mixed bag of a film. Kevin Donovan's direction is good enough, although a swooping camera following swooping fight scenes might give the viewer swooping seasickness. The cinematography is beautiful, the special effects are okay, and the music complements nicely.
I am not sure if "The Tuxedo" was meant to be the first film of a new franchise, but on its own merits, it is kinda good. Unless you are a pessimist, then it is kinda not good. All those involved have done worse, but have done better as well.
Temple Grandin (2010)
Temple Grandin (Claire Danes) is just out of high school and sent to her Aunt Ann's (Catherine O'Hara, fitting into dramatic character roles very nicely) Arizona ranch. Her initial reaction to the climate and awkward way of behaving shows us that Temple has Asperger's Syndrome and/or autism. Asperger's is a milder form of autism, where the subject has better communication skills like speech, but is still unable to connect with our view of normal behavior. Temple grows to love the ranch, working with the animals and inventing an automatic gate that can be opened with the pull of a brass rod. She is very smart and detail-oriented, but must go to college. Temple's mother Eustacia (Julia Ormond, also maturing nicely into character roles) has been dealing with Temple's outbursts all of her life, and knows what it takes to calm Temple down. Unfortunately, college life is tough for Temple, who builds a machine that calms her but horrifies other students (it's a version of a cattle hold). Temple is thrown into this collegiate setting in the days before special services, yet she manages to make it through, and goes on to get her master's degree in animal husbandry back in Arizona. Again, Temple runs into obstacles- in the form of the cattlemen who don't want her around studying such silliness as what the cows' mooing mean- plus she is a woman, and they just aren't allowed. Temple designs and implements a new way to send cattle through a medicinal dip that is more humane to them, and then goes about rethinking the way cattle are slaughtered. Temple feels that animals were put on this earth for the service of man, but there is no reason we cannot be kind to them as part of their use as food and other products, and it makes good business sense.
Temple is headstrong, but she does not see the world like you and I do. She sees everything as a picture, and takes puns and jokes literally. When she hears the term "animal husbandry," her mind calls up a person marrying an animal, and so on. Death is a foreign concept, too, for both animals and humans. When a major character dies, she wonders where they went, and doesn't understand saying goodbye to them at a funeral, since she just told them goodbye when she saw them alive last. Somehow, Grandin went on to write for technical ranching journals, before becoming an autistic advocate, and the screenplay is based on two books- both of which she authored. Mick Jackson's direction is fantastic. Using special effects appropriately, he shows the viewer how Grandin is able to picture things in her mind. These scenes are a great learning experience without overwhelming the screen with technical wizardry, and tell us that autistics are not mentally deficient; they are different, not less (a line from Temple's mother). While the screenplay jumps back and forth in time too often (college, and then boarding high school?), it does not lose its focus on Grandin. While the supporting cast gets to use their onscreen time, the film has one central character who is fascinating enough to watch without any melodramatic gristle to get in the way. O'Hara is great as Aunt Ann, who knows her niece so well. Her reassuring phone calls and scenes with Temple's worried mom are well-played. Ormond is phenomenal as Temple's mother. I could completely associate with her, watching her offspring doing something strange, and blaming themselves for their child's condition. Eustacia is no screaming battleaxe, telling everyone where to stick their assorted diagnoses. She has the patience of a saint, deciding to teach Temple to speak with flash cards, and hesitantly accepting that her child is not able to show love and affection. David Strathairn is also wonderful as Temple's science professor at the boarding school, recognizing that Temple is brilliant if the coursework is changed to fit her learning style. Danes is a revelation. She has been simply good in "Romeo + Juliet" and the third "Terminator" film, but her googly-eyed emoting in the overrated "My So-Called Life" drove me batty. I have seen interviews with the real Temple Grandin, and Danes doesn't just do a good job, or master some observed mannerisms, she becomes Temple Grandin. She nails it from the very first scene, and consistently got it right. The viewer doesn't need someone to come out and explain every one of Temple's quirks; her fear of automatic doors and lashing out physically when she feels threatened are all embodied by Danes. She is so good, I forgot I was watching a performance. This is one of the best pieces of acting I have ever seen, and I have been reviewing films in one way or another since elementary school.
I loved "Temple Grandin." I could associate with it thanks to a family situation, but many more can find inspiration here. Not only will Temple's story inspire autistics and their families, this work might demonstrate to emerging artists what a powerful medium film can be.
Temple is headstrong, but she does not see the world like you and I do. She sees everything as a picture, and takes puns and jokes literally. When she hears the term "animal husbandry," her mind calls up a person marrying an animal, and so on. Death is a foreign concept, too, for both animals and humans. When a major character dies, she wonders where they went, and doesn't understand saying goodbye to them at a funeral, since she just told them goodbye when she saw them alive last. Somehow, Grandin went on to write for technical ranching journals, before becoming an autistic advocate, and the screenplay is based on two books- both of which she authored. Mick Jackson's direction is fantastic. Using special effects appropriately, he shows the viewer how Grandin is able to picture things in her mind. These scenes are a great learning experience without overwhelming the screen with technical wizardry, and tell us that autistics are not mentally deficient; they are different, not less (a line from Temple's mother). While the screenplay jumps back and forth in time too often (college, and then boarding high school?), it does not lose its focus on Grandin. While the supporting cast gets to use their onscreen time, the film has one central character who is fascinating enough to watch without any melodramatic gristle to get in the way. O'Hara is great as Aunt Ann, who knows her niece so well. Her reassuring phone calls and scenes with Temple's worried mom are well-played. Ormond is phenomenal as Temple's mother. I could completely associate with her, watching her offspring doing something strange, and blaming themselves for their child's condition. Eustacia is no screaming battleaxe, telling everyone where to stick their assorted diagnoses. She has the patience of a saint, deciding to teach Temple to speak with flash cards, and hesitantly accepting that her child is not able to show love and affection. David Strathairn is also wonderful as Temple's science professor at the boarding school, recognizing that Temple is brilliant if the coursework is changed to fit her learning style. Danes is a revelation. She has been simply good in "Romeo + Juliet" and the third "Terminator" film, but her googly-eyed emoting in the overrated "My So-Called Life" drove me batty. I have seen interviews with the real Temple Grandin, and Danes doesn't just do a good job, or master some observed mannerisms, she becomes Temple Grandin. She nails it from the very first scene, and consistently got it right. The viewer doesn't need someone to come out and explain every one of Temple's quirks; her fear of automatic doors and lashing out physically when she feels threatened are all embodied by Danes. She is so good, I forgot I was watching a performance. This is one of the best pieces of acting I have ever seen, and I have been reviewing films in one way or another since elementary school.
I loved "Temple Grandin." I could associate with it thanks to a family situation, but many more can find inspiration here. Not only will Temple's story inspire autistics and their families, this work might demonstrate to emerging artists what a powerful medium film can be.
Johnny Be Gone (2011)
There are bright shiny happy films, and then there is "Johnny Be Gone."
Johnny (Devlin Wilder as Erik A. Williams) is a confused young man in St. Louis, Missouri. When he isn't sleeping with his constantly high, narcoleptic roommate Logan (Joe Hammerstone), Johnny is being bullied by just about everyone he meets. Johnny wants to be a woman, and is referred to as "she" often enough. (S)he decides they want to work at the local sandwich shop run by jerk Jeff (Kevin Stroup), but keeps getting thrown out of the place because they only hire females. Johnny tries dressing up like a girl, but he isn't very good at it, and is humiliated and beaten up. Hurt, he goes to the house of one of the sandwich shop's employees (Katie Deerest), and she shows him some kindness after abusing him earlier in the film. However, Johnny's life is one giant complication, and at the end of the film, he commits the biggest complication of them all.
Writer/director Trevor Juenger does not let his Midwest location stop him from making a nightmarish little film. I live in North Dakota, and if I had a nickel for every "artist" who complained their chosen home in flyover country was all that was holding them back, I could retire. The short film is literally dark, and Juenger somehow got his cast to go through some pretty tough scenes. The three main performers deserve praise for completely throwing themselves into Juenger's vision. This is an experimental film, but I never got any sense of smugness that I have seen in several other underground films. Juenger tells his story his way, and the viewer eventually accepts Johnny's lot in life. We may not understand why he puts himself into situations that we know will end badly, that is simply what he does. Wilder is very good in a role I am not sure other actors would have taken. Likewise with Hammerstone. Deerest is great, although I wish Juenger would have fleshed out all three characters a bit more, even if the story is not your average linear screenplay. Johnny's warped conscience seems to be portrayed by his pet rabbit, who warns him that what he is doing to himself is wrong. This is not a "Donnie Darko" man in a rabbit suit, but an actual rabbit with the voice of Carrie Lax, and these scenes are both uncomfortable and creepy. The music score is also good and off-putting, especially the opening scene, and the dank cinematography is a bit grainy and sometimes blurry. This was Juenger's second directorial effort, but with "Johnny Be Gone" I thought he secured a place in the underground film making world. This was definitely one of the weirdest films I had seen the year it came out.
Johnny (Devlin Wilder as Erik A. Williams) is a confused young man in St. Louis, Missouri. When he isn't sleeping with his constantly high, narcoleptic roommate Logan (Joe Hammerstone), Johnny is being bullied by just about everyone he meets. Johnny wants to be a woman, and is referred to as "she" often enough. (S)he decides they want to work at the local sandwich shop run by jerk Jeff (Kevin Stroup), but keeps getting thrown out of the place because they only hire females. Johnny tries dressing up like a girl, but he isn't very good at it, and is humiliated and beaten up. Hurt, he goes to the house of one of the sandwich shop's employees (Katie Deerest), and she shows him some kindness after abusing him earlier in the film. However, Johnny's life is one giant complication, and at the end of the film, he commits the biggest complication of them all.
Writer/director Trevor Juenger does not let his Midwest location stop him from making a nightmarish little film. I live in North Dakota, and if I had a nickel for every "artist" who complained their chosen home in flyover country was all that was holding them back, I could retire. The short film is literally dark, and Juenger somehow got his cast to go through some pretty tough scenes. The three main performers deserve praise for completely throwing themselves into Juenger's vision. This is an experimental film, but I never got any sense of smugness that I have seen in several other underground films. Juenger tells his story his way, and the viewer eventually accepts Johnny's lot in life. We may not understand why he puts himself into situations that we know will end badly, that is simply what he does. Wilder is very good in a role I am not sure other actors would have taken. Likewise with Hammerstone. Deerest is great, although I wish Juenger would have fleshed out all three characters a bit more, even if the story is not your average linear screenplay. Johnny's warped conscience seems to be portrayed by his pet rabbit, who warns him that what he is doing to himself is wrong. This is not a "Donnie Darko" man in a rabbit suit, but an actual rabbit with the voice of Carrie Lax, and these scenes are both uncomfortable and creepy. The music score is also good and off-putting, especially the opening scene, and the dank cinematography is a bit grainy and sometimes blurry. This was Juenger's second directorial effort, but with "Johnny Be Gone" I thought he secured a place in the underground film making world. This was definitely one of the weirdest films I had seen the year it came out.
Drum Struck (1992)
This twenty-four minute short film concerns two drummers auditioning for what seems to be a lounge singer.
The skinny drummer gets the gig, and the other drummer attacks and kills him. The skinny drummer's friends bring him back to life, and the drummers have a pretty funny fight involving drumsticks and flying cymbals.
While the music is pretty cool, this short is a family affair that has no real focus. The direction and editing are fine, and the climactic fight did make me chuckle. The film tries too hard to be David Lynch-ish when the material is more black and comic than surreal and strange. There are some funny scenes, but the auditions take too long and the whole production seems depressed.
"Drum Struck" is a one joke short film that shows up, plays, and departs without leaving any sort of lasting impression. It will not make my callback.
The skinny drummer gets the gig, and the other drummer attacks and kills him. The skinny drummer's friends bring him back to life, and the drummers have a pretty funny fight involving drumsticks and flying cymbals.
While the music is pretty cool, this short is a family affair that has no real focus. The direction and editing are fine, and the climactic fight did make me chuckle. The film tries too hard to be David Lynch-ish when the material is more black and comic than surreal and strange. There are some funny scenes, but the auditions take too long and the whole production seems depressed.
"Drum Struck" is a one joke short film that shows up, plays, and departs without leaving any sort of lasting impression. It will not make my callback.
The Vibrating Maid (2000)
Paired on the DVD with "Lust in the Mummy's Tomb," Erin Brown, using her old softcore name Misty Mundae, is home, pretending to read, when she hears the moans of her French maid (Lilly Tiger). We know the maid is French because she continually mutters "ooh-la-la" and "oui, oui," the only expressions taught to the actress. Misty finds the maid in a closet, using a shiny vibrator the size of a child's forearm. Misty promises the maid she will not tell but only if the maid shows her how things work...and by "things," I mean putting foreign objects perilously close to your junk while unconvincingly writhing in ecstasy.
These "films" are on the DVD together because neither is feature length on their own. "Lust in the Mummy's Tomb" is about forty minutes, while "The Vibrating Maid" runs twenty-five. Lilly Tiger is about as French as her Halloween maid's outfit and her accent is hilarious. The supposed direction by William Hellfire consists of turning the video camera on and off. No screenwriter is credited, since I believe the entire story meeting and read-through consisted of "take your clothes off and dry hump this."
Just a rant on the old Seduction Cinema and After Hours Cinema's hard softcore sex videos. If you have a cast willing to do all of this sexually explicit activity on camera for all the world to see, then why not back it up with some semblance of a story or script and semi-professional production values? Film makers, challenge yourselves to actually write and shoot something watchable, instead of a bunch of scenes? Even though I found many faults with "Shortbus" and "The Brown Bunny," at least these writer/directors were trying to be provocative, not lazy. Sorry, Misty, but I need to break off this relationship. I also made the mistake of watching "Erotic Survivor" the same night decades ago, a film so bad I could not put into words the grief I felt when it was done. I need more out of my video vixens, since I am no longer sixteen years old and sneaking peeks at Cinemax. Everyone involved is better than this, and frankly, so am I.
These "films" are on the DVD together because neither is feature length on their own. "Lust in the Mummy's Tomb" is about forty minutes, while "The Vibrating Maid" runs twenty-five. Lilly Tiger is about as French as her Halloween maid's outfit and her accent is hilarious. The supposed direction by William Hellfire consists of turning the video camera on and off. No screenwriter is credited, since I believe the entire story meeting and read-through consisted of "take your clothes off and dry hump this."
Just a rant on the old Seduction Cinema and After Hours Cinema's hard softcore sex videos. If you have a cast willing to do all of this sexually explicit activity on camera for all the world to see, then why not back it up with some semblance of a story or script and semi-professional production values? Film makers, challenge yourselves to actually write and shoot something watchable, instead of a bunch of scenes? Even though I found many faults with "Shortbus" and "The Brown Bunny," at least these writer/directors were trying to be provocative, not lazy. Sorry, Misty, but I need to break off this relationship. I also made the mistake of watching "Erotic Survivor" the same night decades ago, a film so bad I could not put into words the grief I felt when it was done. I need more out of my video vixens, since I am no longer sixteen years old and sneaking peeks at Cinemax. Everyone involved is better than this, and frankly, so am I.
Friday, August 22, 2025
The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (2003)
Producer Michael Bay steered this remake of the infamous 1970's horror flick without bringing in anything new. When I first saw the trailer for this version of the story, I thought it looked a lot like a hurried sequel to the contemporary silly release "Wrong Turn."
Five youths on their way to a Lynyrd Skynyrd concert pick up a young hitchhiker who commits suicide in the back of their van. Looking for help, and a little common sense, they stumble upon a weird family and their chainsaw wielding offspring. Much violence and such ensues.
While the first TCM was not perfect, I eventually learned to love the shaky camera, lousy sound, and cheap look. One reason that film worked for me was the fact that much of the horror took place in blinding daylight, the cast was hot and uncomfortable, and it showed. In this version, even with the original's director of photography, most of the shots are too calculated. The horrors in the dark are not all that horrifying. This might be the rantings of a jaded horror film fan, but I never got the same feeling of unease as I did in the first film. Much of the original's story has been changed as film makers tried to keep the audience guessing by not doing a shot by shot remake, like Gus Van Sant's "Psycho." The absolute lunacy of the first film's family was strange enough, here the members are more dimwitted than scary. This lessens the impact of Leatherface's scenes. You know he is the worst it can get, you don't have an equally sick family to fall back on.
One disappointing scene involves the heroine Erin (Jessica Biel) running to a trailer and meeting two women who will obviously not help her. Instead of being a tense moment, where mind games involving drinking a seemingly harmless cup of tea could be played out, the women are there for nothing more than exposition, blaming Leatherface's penchant to kill on being teased when he was younger for a degenerative skin disease.
The five victims all meld together, Nispel's direction is okay, but the cinematography is too nice for this type of horror film. The black & white scratchy scenes recall TV's "Millennium" or "The Blair Witch Project." If I would compare "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre" to anything, it would be the terrible sequels that came out after the original "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre" to that point. Just one was watchable, "Leatherface," but with the exception of Part 2, they were all simply remakes of the original film. Most direct-to-video and streaming sequels do that now, and while this film tries to be something different, it is simply a remake that cannot match the original.
As Leatherface and the clan entered a new millennium, their wrinkles were showing. Followed by a prequel: "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning."
Five youths on their way to a Lynyrd Skynyrd concert pick up a young hitchhiker who commits suicide in the back of their van. Looking for help, and a little common sense, they stumble upon a weird family and their chainsaw wielding offspring. Much violence and such ensues.
While the first TCM was not perfect, I eventually learned to love the shaky camera, lousy sound, and cheap look. One reason that film worked for me was the fact that much of the horror took place in blinding daylight, the cast was hot and uncomfortable, and it showed. In this version, even with the original's director of photography, most of the shots are too calculated. The horrors in the dark are not all that horrifying. This might be the rantings of a jaded horror film fan, but I never got the same feeling of unease as I did in the first film. Much of the original's story has been changed as film makers tried to keep the audience guessing by not doing a shot by shot remake, like Gus Van Sant's "Psycho." The absolute lunacy of the first film's family was strange enough, here the members are more dimwitted than scary. This lessens the impact of Leatherface's scenes. You know he is the worst it can get, you don't have an equally sick family to fall back on.
One disappointing scene involves the heroine Erin (Jessica Biel) running to a trailer and meeting two women who will obviously not help her. Instead of being a tense moment, where mind games involving drinking a seemingly harmless cup of tea could be played out, the women are there for nothing more than exposition, blaming Leatherface's penchant to kill on being teased when he was younger for a degenerative skin disease.
The five victims all meld together, Nispel's direction is okay, but the cinematography is too nice for this type of horror film. The black & white scratchy scenes recall TV's "Millennium" or "The Blair Witch Project." If I would compare "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre" to anything, it would be the terrible sequels that came out after the original "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre" to that point. Just one was watchable, "Leatherface," but with the exception of Part 2, they were all simply remakes of the original film. Most direct-to-video and streaming sequels do that now, and while this film tries to be something different, it is simply a remake that cannot match the original.
As Leatherface and the clan entered a new millennium, their wrinkles were showing. Followed by a prequel: "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning."
There's a Caterpillar in My Bok Choy (2003)
Plot? Well, Delila is being stalked by Bill. Plot done.
Katharine Leis takes a silly concept, some silly actors, and creates a silly film. Leis is Delilah, a bored young lady who has an obvious stalker, Bill (Gustavo Flores- who bears more than a passing resemblance to John Leguizamo). As Delilah watches TV, and Bill watches Delilah, she fantasizes about what she sees. The audience goes inside her head, and gets some funny stuff. I laughed at "Playtime With Puppy" as much as the cute hostess did. The Rick Steele lawyer ad was good, so was the Ab-Doo-Doo. Putting duct tape on all the products in the film to avoid getting permission from the companies involved is a stroke of genius. Dude and Pitts, the cops called in on the stalking case, could warrant their own video, arguing over who gets to wear a plastic fireman's hat. On the other hand, the scenes with Bill's mother, and a flat ghost chase near the beginning of the film, should have been tightened.
Leis makes no bones about the fact that this is a cheap production. Producer's disclaimers permeate the film, the off-camera crew often appear on camera, rendering the outtakes reel on the DVD obsolete. I even liked the couple of songs by the band Agent 99. Make no mistake about it, "There's a Caterpillar in My Bok Choy" held little promise when I first started it, but it grew on me. Leis filmed an essentially hour and a half inside joke, but she let the audience in on it. Leis herself has some facial expressions and droll looks at the camera that had me laughing out loud. She is definitely entertaining, and the film never resorts to the gross-out joke for the cheap laugh. If anything, the video keeps an edge but contains less than half a dozen mild curse words, and no nudity or sex. Until Leis does something else, I can still enroll in Dorsk Academy, put on my Ab-Doo-Doo, and wonder what happened to Katharine Kissingford half way through the film.
If you want your cheap video productions surreal, this film is your cup of bug contaminated vegetable soup.
Katharine Leis takes a silly concept, some silly actors, and creates a silly film. Leis is Delilah, a bored young lady who has an obvious stalker, Bill (Gustavo Flores- who bears more than a passing resemblance to John Leguizamo). As Delilah watches TV, and Bill watches Delilah, she fantasizes about what she sees. The audience goes inside her head, and gets some funny stuff. I laughed at "Playtime With Puppy" as much as the cute hostess did. The Rick Steele lawyer ad was good, so was the Ab-Doo-Doo. Putting duct tape on all the products in the film to avoid getting permission from the companies involved is a stroke of genius. Dude and Pitts, the cops called in on the stalking case, could warrant their own video, arguing over who gets to wear a plastic fireman's hat. On the other hand, the scenes with Bill's mother, and a flat ghost chase near the beginning of the film, should have been tightened.
Leis makes no bones about the fact that this is a cheap production. Producer's disclaimers permeate the film, the off-camera crew often appear on camera, rendering the outtakes reel on the DVD obsolete. I even liked the couple of songs by the band Agent 99. Make no mistake about it, "There's a Caterpillar in My Bok Choy" held little promise when I first started it, but it grew on me. Leis filmed an essentially hour and a half inside joke, but she let the audience in on it. Leis herself has some facial expressions and droll looks at the camera that had me laughing out loud. She is definitely entertaining, and the film never resorts to the gross-out joke for the cheap laugh. If anything, the video keeps an edge but contains less than half a dozen mild curse words, and no nudity or sex. Until Leis does something else, I can still enroll in Dorsk Academy, put on my Ab-Doo-Doo, and wonder what happened to Katharine Kissingford half way through the film.
If you want your cheap video productions surreal, this film is your cup of bug contaminated vegetable soup.
Johns (1996)
Lukas Haas, the little kid from "Witness," was all grown up and taking some serious adult roles. "Johns" is his film, and he does a great job here.
David Arquette plays John, who will be turning 21 on Christmas Day. He is a hustler who is looking to spend his birthday in a fancy L.A. hotel. Haas is his best friend, the new guy working the street. His father is a doctor, but kicked him out for being gay. Most of the film concerns John's efforts to collect money he owes a drug dealer. His shoes are stolen in the opening moments of the film, and we find out that was where he stashed his cash. This opening also sets up a failed, forced surprise ending. The film's sparse plot meanders through John's encounters, some with other men named John, hence the film's title, until the end. Haas and Arquette are ready to leave for Branson, Missouri on a bus but Arquette wants to do "one last date." You can probably see where that is going.
The film has enough quirky characters to make a "Northern Exposure" fan drool: Richard Kind is a kind hotel clerk, Keith David is a mysterious homeless man, John C. McGinley is a Hollywood producer, Arliss Howard is a stuttering Bible beater, Elliott Gould plays a rich client, and John's drug dealing nemesis cannot add or subtract. All of these actors have little quirks and tics that I think the film maker wanted us to find endearing. You only have sympathy for Haas, so I felt the film wasted too much time showing us all the other scenes. Arquette is five years too old for this role, and except for Haas, everyone goes through the motions of a story that liberally borrows from "Midnight Cowboy." The film wants to make a moral point, but try to have fun doing it at the same time, and this does not work. Silver's direction is better than his script, and you have to give him credit for coming up with one of the most eclectic soundtracks I have ever heard, but eventually the film fails both Haas, and us.
If you want to see a real film about street children, watch the documentary "Streetwise" or the Brazilian film "Pixote." Those films make "Johns" look like "Sesame Street."
David Arquette plays John, who will be turning 21 on Christmas Day. He is a hustler who is looking to spend his birthday in a fancy L.A. hotel. Haas is his best friend, the new guy working the street. His father is a doctor, but kicked him out for being gay. Most of the film concerns John's efforts to collect money he owes a drug dealer. His shoes are stolen in the opening moments of the film, and we find out that was where he stashed his cash. This opening also sets up a failed, forced surprise ending. The film's sparse plot meanders through John's encounters, some with other men named John, hence the film's title, until the end. Haas and Arquette are ready to leave for Branson, Missouri on a bus but Arquette wants to do "one last date." You can probably see where that is going.
The film has enough quirky characters to make a "Northern Exposure" fan drool: Richard Kind is a kind hotel clerk, Keith David is a mysterious homeless man, John C. McGinley is a Hollywood producer, Arliss Howard is a stuttering Bible beater, Elliott Gould plays a rich client, and John's drug dealing nemesis cannot add or subtract. All of these actors have little quirks and tics that I think the film maker wanted us to find endearing. You only have sympathy for Haas, so I felt the film wasted too much time showing us all the other scenes. Arquette is five years too old for this role, and except for Haas, everyone goes through the motions of a story that liberally borrows from "Midnight Cowboy." The film wants to make a moral point, but try to have fun doing it at the same time, and this does not work. Silver's direction is better than his script, and you have to give him credit for coming up with one of the most eclectic soundtracks I have ever heard, but eventually the film fails both Haas, and us.
If you want to see a real film about street children, watch the documentary "Streetwise" or the Brazilian film "Pixote." Those films make "Johns" look like "Sesame Street."
They (2002)
You have probably seen the plot summary a hundred times before, and if you haven't, then you have seen scenes from this film in other films a hundred times before.
Julia (Laura Regan) is a Master's degree student in psychology. A troubled childhood friend, Billy (Jon Abrahams), contacts her, meets her, rambles incoherently to her, and then shoots himself in front of her. The viewer has already seen Billy, as a young boy (Alexander Gould), grabbed by monsters in the night, so he probably had some problems even Julia could not help him with. At Billy's funeral, Julia meets Billy's other friends Sam (Ethan Embry) and Terry (Dagmara Dominczyk). The friends have had night terrors as children, and they now bear strange markings on their bodies that seem to say "hey, mysterious computer generated creatures, come and get me!" Julia goes to former childhood psychiatrist Dr. Booth (Jay Brazeau), who does the shrink thing. Julia's boyfriend Paul (Marc Blucas) doesn't really get it all, either. Come to think of it, neither did I.
The basic flaw with "They" is the lousy execution of the premise. Childhood monsters coming back for adult victims is a good idea, but the script was given the go-ahead without any explanation as to where the creatures come from, why they mark certain victims, etc. This is huge in a film that is otherwise not very compelling. The cast is fine, acting scared at just the right moments. The instrumental score is terrible, it sounds like incidental music for "The Music Man." Director Harmon's talents are wasted on the screenplay. He needs a script that will not fail his eye. The screenplay borrows from tons of other films like "Jacob's Ladder," "Phantasm," the remake of "The Blob," and "The Sixth Sense," to name a few, and thinks nothing of ripping off the pool scene from "Cat People." Sure, the DVD has the alternate ending, which is a ripoff of "The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari," but that ending was better than the one that made the final cut. The special effect monsters are wisely kept out of view through most of the film, they look like giant bats. They do deliver a few scares, but in context with the mindless script, it is not enough. Eventually, you will figure out that most of the special effects here consist of some poor grip flicking light switches on and off.
"They" had a promising director, nice cast, and a low budget. The script is what never should have seen the light of day. Also known as "Wes Craven Presents They."
Julia (Laura Regan) is a Master's degree student in psychology. A troubled childhood friend, Billy (Jon Abrahams), contacts her, meets her, rambles incoherently to her, and then shoots himself in front of her. The viewer has already seen Billy, as a young boy (Alexander Gould), grabbed by monsters in the night, so he probably had some problems even Julia could not help him with. At Billy's funeral, Julia meets Billy's other friends Sam (Ethan Embry) and Terry (Dagmara Dominczyk). The friends have had night terrors as children, and they now bear strange markings on their bodies that seem to say "hey, mysterious computer generated creatures, come and get me!" Julia goes to former childhood psychiatrist Dr. Booth (Jay Brazeau), who does the shrink thing. Julia's boyfriend Paul (Marc Blucas) doesn't really get it all, either. Come to think of it, neither did I.
The basic flaw with "They" is the lousy execution of the premise. Childhood monsters coming back for adult victims is a good idea, but the script was given the go-ahead without any explanation as to where the creatures come from, why they mark certain victims, etc. This is huge in a film that is otherwise not very compelling. The cast is fine, acting scared at just the right moments. The instrumental score is terrible, it sounds like incidental music for "The Music Man." Director Harmon's talents are wasted on the screenplay. He needs a script that will not fail his eye. The screenplay borrows from tons of other films like "Jacob's Ladder," "Phantasm," the remake of "The Blob," and "The Sixth Sense," to name a few, and thinks nothing of ripping off the pool scene from "Cat People." Sure, the DVD has the alternate ending, which is a ripoff of "The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari," but that ending was better than the one that made the final cut. The special effect monsters are wisely kept out of view through most of the film, they look like giant bats. They do deliver a few scares, but in context with the mindless script, it is not enough. Eventually, you will figure out that most of the special effects here consist of some poor grip flicking light switches on and off.
"They" had a promising director, nice cast, and a low budget. The script is what never should have seen the light of day. Also known as "Wes Craven Presents They."
Jude (1996)
*This review is a little stilted since it started out as an essay for an college English class. I've turned it into a review, I got an A.*
Over a century ago, author Thomas Hardy experienced critical backlash against his novel Jude the Obscure, and never wrote another one. This film version is also controversial, but definitely worth a look, with one performance undermining an otherwise excellent adaptation.
Jude (Christopher Eccleston) is a stonemason who yearns for higher learning and a better life. Eccleston's portrayal is excellent in that he is no Hollywood pretty boy. His ears are big and his face is sallow, but his expressions and gaunt look help his performance immensely, especially in the latter half of the film. Too bad the audience is left in the dark about what exactly makes his character tick. Jude's cousin, Sue, is played by Kate Winslet. She brings a professionalism to her role that almost overshadows Eccleston. Every nuance of her performance does not seem calculated, but very natural. Jude's wife is Arabella (Rachel Griffiths), who leaves him, but keeps popping back into his life over and over again, a character who is a major flaw in the film.
Gothicism was fading in the time this novel was written- readers were experiencing more realistic situations in novels by the likes of Charles Dickens, or fantastic situations in novels by H.G. Wells. Arabella seems old hat in a period film. When she is introduced, the scene is full of sunshine and Utopian bliss. Throughout the film, she appears in black widow's wear, striking a contrast against gray backgrounds and the forced happiness of Jude and Sue. This role screamed for a more intense actress along the lines of Nicole Kidman or Emily Watson. Griffiths does not have the presence needed. Any other actress would have taken the part and sunk her teeth into it, but Griffiths comes across as a pitiful old maid without a thought in her head. In the beginning of the film, in her cutesy courtship with Jude, another actress may have appeared whimsical and innocent, Griffiths plays Arabella like a moron.
The director is well known in British and art house circles. His direction is expert, and different from other adaptations of long English novels. Winterbottom uses filmed captions to let the viewer know where Jude's travels take him. The film opens during Jude's childhood, and Winterbottom shoots the entire sequence in black and white, evoking antiquated romantic memories. The screenwriter, Hossein Amini, and Winterbottom load the film with too much sex, after a while it almost overshadows the plot and characters. The musical score and set design are marvelous and I would highly recommend this film to others, but maybe not as a study aid for Thomas Hardy-reading high school students.
"Jude" has plenty of raw emotion, including the stinging fate of Sue and Jude's children, but Jude's character remains, pardon the pun, obscure. There is something great here, despite the flaws.
Over a century ago, author Thomas Hardy experienced critical backlash against his novel Jude the Obscure, and never wrote another one. This film version is also controversial, but definitely worth a look, with one performance undermining an otherwise excellent adaptation.
Jude (Christopher Eccleston) is a stonemason who yearns for higher learning and a better life. Eccleston's portrayal is excellent in that he is no Hollywood pretty boy. His ears are big and his face is sallow, but his expressions and gaunt look help his performance immensely, especially in the latter half of the film. Too bad the audience is left in the dark about what exactly makes his character tick. Jude's cousin, Sue, is played by Kate Winslet. She brings a professionalism to her role that almost overshadows Eccleston. Every nuance of her performance does not seem calculated, but very natural. Jude's wife is Arabella (Rachel Griffiths), who leaves him, but keeps popping back into his life over and over again, a character who is a major flaw in the film.
Gothicism was fading in the time this novel was written- readers were experiencing more realistic situations in novels by the likes of Charles Dickens, or fantastic situations in novels by H.G. Wells. Arabella seems old hat in a period film. When she is introduced, the scene is full of sunshine and Utopian bliss. Throughout the film, she appears in black widow's wear, striking a contrast against gray backgrounds and the forced happiness of Jude and Sue. This role screamed for a more intense actress along the lines of Nicole Kidman or Emily Watson. Griffiths does not have the presence needed. Any other actress would have taken the part and sunk her teeth into it, but Griffiths comes across as a pitiful old maid without a thought in her head. In the beginning of the film, in her cutesy courtship with Jude, another actress may have appeared whimsical and innocent, Griffiths plays Arabella like a moron.
The director is well known in British and art house circles. His direction is expert, and different from other adaptations of long English novels. Winterbottom uses filmed captions to let the viewer know where Jude's travels take him. The film opens during Jude's childhood, and Winterbottom shoots the entire sequence in black and white, evoking antiquated romantic memories. The screenwriter, Hossein Amini, and Winterbottom load the film with too much sex, after a while it almost overshadows the plot and characters. The musical score and set design are marvelous and I would highly recommend this film to others, but maybe not as a study aid for Thomas Hardy-reading high school students.
"Jude" has plenty of raw emotion, including the stinging fate of Sue and Jude's children, but Jude's character remains, pardon the pun, obscure. There is something great here, despite the flaws.
Wednesday, August 20, 2025
The Thin Blue Line (1988)
In November 1976 in Dallas, Texas, Police Officer Robert Wood was shot and killed while making an otherwise routine traffic stop. One man was arrested and sentenced to death for the crime, based on the testimony of a sixteen year old acquaintance. These basic facts are covered in one of the most brilliant films to come out of the 1980's. Randall Adams was no drifter. He was moving from Ohio and was staying in Dallas with his brother. He found a good job, and planned on living there a while. Then he met David Harris, a punk from a Klan-infested small town in southern Texas. The officer is murdered, and Harris blames Adams, even though Harris gloated about shooting the young cop to his friends. Adams was railroaded into prison while Harris embarked on a petty crime spree. He continued his misdemeanor ways until he actually killed a man during a botched kidnapping. Now Harris was in jail, and Adams was still appealing his conviction. Witnesses came forward claiming to have seen Adams shoot Wood, yet none of them had a gleam of credibility. Finally, Adams gets some decent lawyers, who begin working to get him out. He is granted an appeal by the U.S. Supreme Court, but as of the making of the film, he was still serving life in prison. A little research shows what happened to Randall Adams.
Errol Morris goes where few documentary makers go. He films convincing reenactments of the crime. These are not "Unsolved Mysteries"-type reenactments, Morris has a real director's eye, and gives the audience every detail needed- from a tossed milkshake to the number of people spotted in the killer's car. Philip Glass adds a haunting musical score that gets under your skin and hypnotizes you. The convict Adams is a sincere man, and the film makers are obviously rooting for his cause. Harris is an ignorant punk, enjoying playing games with people's lives. If the Dallas County prosecutors had done their job, Harris would not have committed his second murder: food for thought. Harris' final interview, done on audio cassette, is chilling, and will make a believer of anyone who otherwise thought "this could never happen to me." The three "witnesses" to the slaying are a joke, two in it for the reward, and a salesman who boasts of his photographic memory but cannot recall if Wood's patrol car was in front of or behind Harris' stolen vehicle.
"The Thin Blue Line" is more than talking heads, this is a searing story that puts to shame any fiction that tries to cover the same ground. For this kind of thing to happen to an innocent man, it is also very scary.
Errol Morris goes where few documentary makers go. He films convincing reenactments of the crime. These are not "Unsolved Mysteries"-type reenactments, Morris has a real director's eye, and gives the audience every detail needed- from a tossed milkshake to the number of people spotted in the killer's car. Philip Glass adds a haunting musical score that gets under your skin and hypnotizes you. The convict Adams is a sincere man, and the film makers are obviously rooting for his cause. Harris is an ignorant punk, enjoying playing games with people's lives. If the Dallas County prosecutors had done their job, Harris would not have committed his second murder: food for thought. Harris' final interview, done on audio cassette, is chilling, and will make a believer of anyone who otherwise thought "this could never happen to me." The three "witnesses" to the slaying are a joke, two in it for the reward, and a salesman who boasts of his photographic memory but cannot recall if Wood's patrol car was in front of or behind Harris' stolen vehicle.
"The Thin Blue Line" is more than talking heads, this is a searing story that puts to shame any fiction that tries to cover the same ground. For this kind of thing to happen to an innocent man, it is also very scary.
Jurassic Park III (2001)
I figured I saw the first two, I might as well see this one as well. Dr. Alan Grant (Sam Neill) is tricked into going to the second island by Amanda (Tea Leoni) and Paul (William H. Macy) Kirby, who are looking for their missing son Eric (Trevor Morgan). A few supporting players also go to provide food for the dinosaurs with the viewer not caring about the loss of their characters. There is lots of running, a climax that never happens, and the promise of another sequel that wouldn't come, replaced by a reboot a decade and a half later.
Forgive the short synopsis, the truth is this story steals tons from the first two films. There is a "dinosaur poop" scene, and another character supposedly dies and we must waste our time watching for him to appear hurt but alive. I would compare this film to the awful "Back to the Future Part II." It was also released to kind of tie-in the future episodes, but does not stand well on its own. If you are going to continue a major action franchise, you would think the third film would be even bigger than the first two. No such luck here. The special effects run hot and cold. Good dinosaur graphics, but what is with the script? The film makers decided the audience wants nothing but dinosaur attacks, and throws in all sorts of them. These do not seem to take on any sort of breakneck speed, this just looks like a resume tape for Stan Winston's special effects. This is a greatest hits compilation of people getting chased, attacked, and eaten, in all its (PG-13) semi-gory glory, without any sort of suspense or scares. Action scenes would start, like the dinosaur at the steel fence, then end as the humans would run away, talk, then get chased again. Would everyone stop teaming Sam Neill with children? The teenage boy here is better than the lovey-dovey cutesy-wutesey duo from the first film, but I was sick of seeing his heart melted by youth. Speaking of youth, I literally cannot remember anything about Neill's young protege, Billy (Alessandro Nivola). His character is so vacuous and laid back, he disappears from the screen. I kept thinking "who is that? oh, yeah, Billy with some stolen raptor eggs." Macy and Leoni are okay, but better than this material.
If you have seen the first two, you might as well see "Jurassic Park III." It is not any good, but when has that stopped a major motion picture studio from shoving a middling franchise down our throats? Followed by "Jurassic World."
Forgive the short synopsis, the truth is this story steals tons from the first two films. There is a "dinosaur poop" scene, and another character supposedly dies and we must waste our time watching for him to appear hurt but alive. I would compare this film to the awful "Back to the Future Part II." It was also released to kind of tie-in the future episodes, but does not stand well on its own. If you are going to continue a major action franchise, you would think the third film would be even bigger than the first two. No such luck here. The special effects run hot and cold. Good dinosaur graphics, but what is with the script? The film makers decided the audience wants nothing but dinosaur attacks, and throws in all sorts of them. These do not seem to take on any sort of breakneck speed, this just looks like a resume tape for Stan Winston's special effects. This is a greatest hits compilation of people getting chased, attacked, and eaten, in all its (PG-13) semi-gory glory, without any sort of suspense or scares. Action scenes would start, like the dinosaur at the steel fence, then end as the humans would run away, talk, then get chased again. Would everyone stop teaming Sam Neill with children? The teenage boy here is better than the lovey-dovey cutesy-wutesey duo from the first film, but I was sick of seeing his heart melted by youth. Speaking of youth, I literally cannot remember anything about Neill's young protege, Billy (Alessandro Nivola). His character is so vacuous and laid back, he disappears from the screen. I kept thinking "who is that? oh, yeah, Billy with some stolen raptor eggs." Macy and Leoni are okay, but better than this material.
If you have seen the first two, you might as well see "Jurassic Park III." It is not any good, but when has that stopped a major motion picture studio from shoving a middling franchise down our throats? Followed by "Jurassic World."
Killer Shorts (2009)
Taking its cue from "Tales from the Crypt," "Creepshow," and other horror anthology series, "Killer Shorts" and its creator, Michael Wade Johnson, bite off more than they can chew.
The film is "hosted" by Count Balazar (Ricky Long, looking like what would happen if Meat Loaf had ever joined KISS), and his shapely assistant Elormie (Misty Simmons-Poteet). They are squatting in a cemetery, Balazar is telling her of the neighboring dead, and this leads to three short filmed stories.
"Puncture" has Dale (Matthew Turner) and Gwen (Nichole Buck) going to a party at the invitation of Gwen's sister Nicky (Misty Simmons-Poteet again). There, they find tons of dead bodies, all killed by two puncture wounds in the neck. They decide to leave and collect vampire-killing supplies, and then return to do battle with the undead. The one stand-out scene here involves an angry priest blessing bottled water. "The Last Rendezvous" is the best of the three stories. Rubin (Chet Williams) is cheating on his girlfriend Samantha (Shauna LaFever) with Angela (Misty Simmons-Poteet again) who is in an unhappy relationship with Wendell (Nick Mathis). Rubin and Angela meet at an abandoned house, where a masked killer waits for them. Finally, "Navstar" is the story of an evil GPS system that is leading unsuspecting travellers to their doom at the hands of a monster. Caden (Matthew Turner again) survives his attack, but insists on going back to rescue his girlfriend, and kill the beast.
Shot entirely on location in Tennessee, writer/director/editor/producer/and more Michael Wade Johnson pays lovingly inexpensive homage to the anthology film, but fails to flesh out his own film. While the bones and initial structure are intriguing, the microbudgeted gore does not work. The suspense is almost nonexistent, getting killed off after a promising start in "Navstar," becoming predictable in "The Last Rendezvous," and being used as part of a jokey punchline in "Puncture." I was never sure if what I was watching should have been taken tongue-in-cheek or not, but either way, the film would only appeal to hardcore horror fans who must watch everything, or the director's friends and cast- who appear in the short films, or had a hand in it technically. Finally, the sound here is absolutely horrendous. I saw this on DVD, with one hand holding my pen for notes, and the other to work the remote control's volume button. Very quiet scenes with unintelligible dialogue are followed by screaming that almost blew my speakers out.
It's a nice try, but ultimately, I'll have to pass on "Killer Shorts." Followed by a sequel.
The film is "hosted" by Count Balazar (Ricky Long, looking like what would happen if Meat Loaf had ever joined KISS), and his shapely assistant Elormie (Misty Simmons-Poteet). They are squatting in a cemetery, Balazar is telling her of the neighboring dead, and this leads to three short filmed stories.
"Puncture" has Dale (Matthew Turner) and Gwen (Nichole Buck) going to a party at the invitation of Gwen's sister Nicky (Misty Simmons-Poteet again). There, they find tons of dead bodies, all killed by two puncture wounds in the neck. They decide to leave and collect vampire-killing supplies, and then return to do battle with the undead. The one stand-out scene here involves an angry priest blessing bottled water. "The Last Rendezvous" is the best of the three stories. Rubin (Chet Williams) is cheating on his girlfriend Samantha (Shauna LaFever) with Angela (Misty Simmons-Poteet again) who is in an unhappy relationship with Wendell (Nick Mathis). Rubin and Angela meet at an abandoned house, where a masked killer waits for them. Finally, "Navstar" is the story of an evil GPS system that is leading unsuspecting travellers to their doom at the hands of a monster. Caden (Matthew Turner again) survives his attack, but insists on going back to rescue his girlfriend, and kill the beast.
Shot entirely on location in Tennessee, writer/director/editor/producer/and more Michael Wade Johnson pays lovingly inexpensive homage to the anthology film, but fails to flesh out his own film. While the bones and initial structure are intriguing, the microbudgeted gore does not work. The suspense is almost nonexistent, getting killed off after a promising start in "Navstar," becoming predictable in "The Last Rendezvous," and being used as part of a jokey punchline in "Puncture." I was never sure if what I was watching should have been taken tongue-in-cheek or not, but either way, the film would only appeal to hardcore horror fans who must watch everything, or the director's friends and cast- who appear in the short films, or had a hand in it technically. Finally, the sound here is absolutely horrendous. I saw this on DVD, with one hand holding my pen for notes, and the other to work the remote control's volume button. Very quiet scenes with unintelligible dialogue are followed by screaming that almost blew my speakers out.
It's a nice try, but ultimately, I'll have to pass on "Killer Shorts." Followed by a sequel.
Ed Gein (2000)
In Plainfield, Wisconsin, a local oddity put the town and state on the map. He was the inspiration for "Psycho" and "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre," and although his body count was small, Ed Gein has reserved a place for himself in the history of crime in this country.
Ed (Steve Railsback) lives alone in a filthy farmhouse in the middle of nowhere. Years of abuse from a drunken father and religious fanatic mother (Carrie Snodgress) have socially retarded Ed to the point that he has few friends. Any companionship he needs, he digs up from the local cemetery, trying to resurrect the dead before turning their remains into horrific household items like bowls from skull caps and a suit made completely of female skin. Soon, Ed tires of digging up the dead and decides to find a victim. Mary (Sally Champlin) is the local tavern bartender who likes to joke with her regular customers. Ed's now-dead mother tells Ed of Mary's sin, and Ed decides to take vengeance by shooting and kidnapping Mary. She is still alive and tied up in Ed's isolated home, but the investigating sheriff doesn't think Ed is much of a danger. Mary dies from her injuries, and Ed's mother's spirit breaks free from her boarded up room, egging Ed on into locating a second victim, the town saint and local hardware store owner Collette (Carol Mansell). As some around the tiny town become suspicious, Ed seems propelled by outside forces to do God's bidding, in his twisted way.
Ed Gein is typical of a lot of people in small towns in the upper Midwest. No, not all isolated farmhouses have bodies hanging in the basement, but Gein's case makes more sense to people who have witnessed the isolation firsthand. Steve Railsback resembles Ed Gein so much, it is creepy. Actual footage of the killer is shown at the end of the film, and the resemblance is there. Railsback plays Gein like I imagine Gein really was- no criminal mastermind, no silent hulking Jason Voorhees or Michael Myers, just a certifiable nut molded from parental abuse. If you ever check the case histories of Ottis Toole or Henry Lee Lucas, you will find the same thing, and how adults can treat any children, much less their own, like this is a question that will never be answered but will always be dealt with. Carrie Snodgress, an actress who peaked early in her career with an Oscar nomination, then seemed to fizzle out, is very good as Ed's mother, Augusta. Her performance is what true character actors do. She immerses in the part and does not turn it into her own personal showcase. Parello's direction is effective, the set design for Gein's house is a triumph. The final discovery of Gein's last victim is chilling. I wish the film makers would have been able to shoot some winter scenes since cold and desolate isolation is a big part of Gein, and life up here (the real footage also features snow).
So why am I only giving "Ed Gein" three stars? My all-time complaint about most of the films I review- the screenplay. While showing the audience Gein's childhood in flashback, there is no build-up to the murders he committed. We know he killed, so editing the film by putting the events in the order they occurred may have resulted in some suspense. Slasher fans may be disappointed, there are no nubile pot-smoking teens getting hacked to death, a straightforward telling may have been more effective. Also, the gore effects are gross and work, but the "visions" Gein sees do not. The burning bush, the television that shows him murdering his brother, are all poor attempts. Also known as "In the Light of the Moon."
"Ed Gein" is an average film, perhaps coming too late in a country where every slasher franchise movie reboot is eagerly awaited. I wonder what Gein's reaction would have been to a movie world that has become more violent that its own inspiration could have imagined.
Ed (Steve Railsback) lives alone in a filthy farmhouse in the middle of nowhere. Years of abuse from a drunken father and religious fanatic mother (Carrie Snodgress) have socially retarded Ed to the point that he has few friends. Any companionship he needs, he digs up from the local cemetery, trying to resurrect the dead before turning their remains into horrific household items like bowls from skull caps and a suit made completely of female skin. Soon, Ed tires of digging up the dead and decides to find a victim. Mary (Sally Champlin) is the local tavern bartender who likes to joke with her regular customers. Ed's now-dead mother tells Ed of Mary's sin, and Ed decides to take vengeance by shooting and kidnapping Mary. She is still alive and tied up in Ed's isolated home, but the investigating sheriff doesn't think Ed is much of a danger. Mary dies from her injuries, and Ed's mother's spirit breaks free from her boarded up room, egging Ed on into locating a second victim, the town saint and local hardware store owner Collette (Carol Mansell). As some around the tiny town become suspicious, Ed seems propelled by outside forces to do God's bidding, in his twisted way.
Ed Gein is typical of a lot of people in small towns in the upper Midwest. No, not all isolated farmhouses have bodies hanging in the basement, but Gein's case makes more sense to people who have witnessed the isolation firsthand. Steve Railsback resembles Ed Gein so much, it is creepy. Actual footage of the killer is shown at the end of the film, and the resemblance is there. Railsback plays Gein like I imagine Gein really was- no criminal mastermind, no silent hulking Jason Voorhees or Michael Myers, just a certifiable nut molded from parental abuse. If you ever check the case histories of Ottis Toole or Henry Lee Lucas, you will find the same thing, and how adults can treat any children, much less their own, like this is a question that will never be answered but will always be dealt with. Carrie Snodgress, an actress who peaked early in her career with an Oscar nomination, then seemed to fizzle out, is very good as Ed's mother, Augusta. Her performance is what true character actors do. She immerses in the part and does not turn it into her own personal showcase. Parello's direction is effective, the set design for Gein's house is a triumph. The final discovery of Gein's last victim is chilling. I wish the film makers would have been able to shoot some winter scenes since cold and desolate isolation is a big part of Gein, and life up here (the real footage also features snow).
So why am I only giving "Ed Gein" three stars? My all-time complaint about most of the films I review- the screenplay. While showing the audience Gein's childhood in flashback, there is no build-up to the murders he committed. We know he killed, so editing the film by putting the events in the order they occurred may have resulted in some suspense. Slasher fans may be disappointed, there are no nubile pot-smoking teens getting hacked to death, a straightforward telling may have been more effective. Also, the gore effects are gross and work, but the "visions" Gein sees do not. The burning bush, the television that shows him murdering his brother, are all poor attempts. Also known as "In the Light of the Moon."
"Ed Gein" is an average film, perhaps coming too late in a country where every slasher franchise movie reboot is eagerly awaited. I wonder what Gein's reaction would have been to a movie world that has become more violent that its own inspiration could have imagined.
Monday, August 18, 2025
The Thomas Crown Affair (1968)
They don't make 'em like this anymore, and that might be a good thing.
Millionaire Thomas Crown (Steve McQueen) hires a bunch of D.B. Cooper look-alikes to knock over a bank and give the money to him. He jets to Geneva with cash in tow, and opens a secret account that he uses to pay off his gang in installments. Fine, except for Erwin (Jack Weston), one of the crooks who you know is going to screw everything up. The Boston Police are stumped, led by the lead stumped detective Malone (Paul Burke). There are no prints, no one seems to be able to give an accurate description of the gang, and the cops are at a dead end. Enter, over half an hour into this, Vicki Anderson (Faye Dunaway). Vicki is stylish, comes off as kind of dumb, and the perfect insurance investigator. She and Malone spend about three minutes deducing Crown is behind the robbery. Vicki is in this for the money, she gets ten percent of the more than two million dollars stolen as her salary. Vicki goes to the extraordinary means of kidnapping Erwin's child in order for him to get a large amount of money for ransom and prove he had something to do with the robbery. Vicki also makes herself available to Crown, under the watchful eye of Malone's cronies. Crown and Vicki fall in love, or is Vicki taking this investigation into even more questionable territory?
This film premiered in 1968, and was the basis for the 1999 superior-in-every-way remake starring Pierce Brosnan and Rene Russo. I, too, premiered in 1968, and felt ancient while witnessing what the fashion and interior design worlds were forcing onto my young mod parents. McQueen is cool and confident, Dunaway is cool and confident, and the film is cold and aloof. The viewer does not care one iota for these people, and I think the director senses this. Jewison pulls out every cinematic trick available- thank God as a nation we were able to reject the split-screen process and recognize it for what it was- stupid. The investment made in these two characters is so minimal, I knew every move they would make. Watching this is like watching an episode of "Columbo." The crime occurs, we know who did it, and we are supposed to be entertained by the process of detecting, except that "Columbo" was smart and entertaining. In this film, the sexual byplay and tension is supposed to be the entertainment, and it is not. The chess scene is cutesy, the long kiss does not seem that long, and is concluded with another of Jewison's tricks. "The Windmills of Your Mind" is one of the worst Best Song Academy Award winners ever. It sounds like it was written in a recording studio bathroom while the singer cleared his throat and the orchestra tuned their instruments. Composer Michel Legrand cannot decide if this film is a Hollywood romance from twenty years earlier, or a modern film defying those old conventions. His score is all over the map.
In the end, Crown's motive for all of this is that he was bored- I knew how he feels. As Dunaway chokes back a sob at the end of the film, and shows the only emotion in "The Thomas Crown Affair," I choked back my popcorn and pressed the STOP button on the remote. As of this 2025 update of this review, there is another remake in the works.
Millionaire Thomas Crown (Steve McQueen) hires a bunch of D.B. Cooper look-alikes to knock over a bank and give the money to him. He jets to Geneva with cash in tow, and opens a secret account that he uses to pay off his gang in installments. Fine, except for Erwin (Jack Weston), one of the crooks who you know is going to screw everything up. The Boston Police are stumped, led by the lead stumped detective Malone (Paul Burke). There are no prints, no one seems to be able to give an accurate description of the gang, and the cops are at a dead end. Enter, over half an hour into this, Vicki Anderson (Faye Dunaway). Vicki is stylish, comes off as kind of dumb, and the perfect insurance investigator. She and Malone spend about three minutes deducing Crown is behind the robbery. Vicki is in this for the money, she gets ten percent of the more than two million dollars stolen as her salary. Vicki goes to the extraordinary means of kidnapping Erwin's child in order for him to get a large amount of money for ransom and prove he had something to do with the robbery. Vicki also makes herself available to Crown, under the watchful eye of Malone's cronies. Crown and Vicki fall in love, or is Vicki taking this investigation into even more questionable territory?
This film premiered in 1968, and was the basis for the 1999 superior-in-every-way remake starring Pierce Brosnan and Rene Russo. I, too, premiered in 1968, and felt ancient while witnessing what the fashion and interior design worlds were forcing onto my young mod parents. McQueen is cool and confident, Dunaway is cool and confident, and the film is cold and aloof. The viewer does not care one iota for these people, and I think the director senses this. Jewison pulls out every cinematic trick available- thank God as a nation we were able to reject the split-screen process and recognize it for what it was- stupid. The investment made in these two characters is so minimal, I knew every move they would make. Watching this is like watching an episode of "Columbo." The crime occurs, we know who did it, and we are supposed to be entertained by the process of detecting, except that "Columbo" was smart and entertaining. In this film, the sexual byplay and tension is supposed to be the entertainment, and it is not. The chess scene is cutesy, the long kiss does not seem that long, and is concluded with another of Jewison's tricks. "The Windmills of Your Mind" is one of the worst Best Song Academy Award winners ever. It sounds like it was written in a recording studio bathroom while the singer cleared his throat and the orchestra tuned their instruments. Composer Michel Legrand cannot decide if this film is a Hollywood romance from twenty years earlier, or a modern film defying those old conventions. His score is all over the map.
In the end, Crown's motive for all of this is that he was bored- I knew how he feels. As Dunaway chokes back a sob at the end of the film, and shows the only emotion in "The Thomas Crown Affair," I choked back my popcorn and pressed the STOP button on the remote. As of this 2025 update of this review, there is another remake in the works.
Killer Tongue (1996)
*Looking at the video box or movie poster, you might think this is going to be another spoof of those silly 1950's horror films involving radiation poisoning gone wrong. You are so wrong.
In a nutshell, a meteor crashes to earth and a chunk is ingested by Candy (Melinda Clarke), a former nun waiting for her boyfriend Johnny (Jason Durr) to be released from prison. Her tongue grows to about ten feet long, and eventually talks to her. Hijinks of the most offensive order ensue.
This is such an off-the-wall surreal nightmare that you must see it to believe it. So many scenes can only be mentioned by their generic names because this somehow escaped with an (R) rating but watch out for the port-a-potty scene, the bathtub scene, the confessional scene, and the super glue scene. While this has a lot of material that kids should not see, this is also one of the funniest horro films out there. Robert Englund, as the prison director, gives a better performance here than in all the "A Nightmare on Elm Street" films combined, showing that his acting genius did not have to include fright makeup, and he should have been allowed to do more of these over-the-top horror comedies. The entire cast looks like they were having a lot of fun here, and it rubs off on the viewer in the right mood.
Sometimes hard to find in the wild, I loved (and was mostly aghast) at "Killer Tongue." There needs to be a decent version of this released on physical media of this, I have heard the DVD is terrible quality and cut. Also known as "Tongue Girl."
In a nutshell, a meteor crashes to earth and a chunk is ingested by Candy (Melinda Clarke), a former nun waiting for her boyfriend Johnny (Jason Durr) to be released from prison. Her tongue grows to about ten feet long, and eventually talks to her. Hijinks of the most offensive order ensue.
This is such an off-the-wall surreal nightmare that you must see it to believe it. So many scenes can only be mentioned by their generic names because this somehow escaped with an (R) rating but watch out for the port-a-potty scene, the bathtub scene, the confessional scene, and the super glue scene. While this has a lot of material that kids should not see, this is also one of the funniest horro films out there. Robert Englund, as the prison director, gives a better performance here than in all the "A Nightmare on Elm Street" films combined, showing that his acting genius did not have to include fright makeup, and he should have been allowed to do more of these over-the-top horror comedies. The entire cast looks like they were having a lot of fun here, and it rubs off on the viewer in the right mood.
Sometimes hard to find in the wild, I loved (and was mostly aghast) at "Killer Tongue." There needs to be a decent version of this released on physical media of this, I have heard the DVD is terrible quality and cut. Also known as "Tongue Girl."
Sunday, August 17, 2025
Dillinger (1973)
Warren Oates walks like bank robber John Dillinger, he talks like Dillinger, he shoots like Dillinger, and he is one of the best things about "Dillinger."
John Milius wrote and directed this 1973 action packed biopic about the infamous bank robber. It acknowledges Arthur Penn's "Bonnie and Clyde" a couple of times, but Milius' script is not as good as the eye-wow he shows us. The story may be familiar, it has been told on dozens of true crime documentaries. John Dillinger and his gang terrorized the Midwest with violent bank robberies. He was captured in Arizona, brought back to Indiana, and escaped from jail using a bar of soap carved into the shape of a gun and blackened with shoe polish. Hot on his trail was the FBI's Melvin Purvis (Ben Johnson), who made it his own personal vendetta to kill all of these criminals, smoking cigars over their dead bodies. The gang have their own loving bad girls to hunker down with, and Dillinger had prostitute Billie (Michelle Phillips). Dillinger was killed outside the Biograph Theater in Chicago while seen with the infamous lady in red, Anna Sage (Cloris Leachman).
While "Bonnie and Clyde" was a historic entry in the crime film genre, I thought the film makers in that situation glorified the duo a little too often. "Dillinger" does the opposite, making the bank robber as mean as we imagine he was. Milius' efforts to portray Dillinger as a villain backfire, since we see him in the couple of years before his death, never finding out how he got into crime in the first place. His family is briefly shown, but nothing comes from the scene. Milius throws us into Dillinger's exploits immediately, but without any background, there is not sympathy, empathy, and eventually interest invested with the man. The beginning of the film is an exercise in choppy editing and stiff scenes until we get to the actions sequences. It makes me wonder what was left on the cutting room floor.
Ben Johnson plays a great Melvin Purvis, a wonderful character name if I didn't know the person existed in real life. While he should be our hero, Purvis is shown to be just as violent as Dillinger. Milius plays with us, with Purvis showing no mercy for some criminals, yet sparing others, without any kind of explanation. We know Purvis as well as we know Dillinger. What does Milius leave us with? Incredible shootout sequences. There is a giant gun battle at a house that takes forever and is worth every minute of film. The film is violent and does not flinch when it comes to showing the death and destruction done by both sides of the law. Milius' direction is good, and his fuzzy Depression era vistas are pretty to look at. The cinematography is great, as is the set design and costuming. The rest of the supporting cast is fine, and full of some recognizable names: Phillips is okay as Billie although this moll type part is old hat, Harry Dean Stanton is funny as gang member Homer, his final scene is one of the best in the film. Leachman, then a recent Oscar winner, has just two scenes as Anna, I would have liked to see more. Oates is the best Dillinger ever portrayed on film. Tons of character actors populate the rest of the cast: Geoffrey Lewis, John P. Ryan, Steve Kanaly, Frank McRae, Richard Dreyfuss as Baby Face Nelson, all good.
With "Dillinger," you get a mixed bag. On the one hand, you have incredibly violent shootouts that took many lives. On the other hand, you have no reason to care about these characters or their internal motivations. Maybe we know how Purvis felt about Dillinger after all.
John Milius wrote and directed this 1973 action packed biopic about the infamous bank robber. It acknowledges Arthur Penn's "Bonnie and Clyde" a couple of times, but Milius' script is not as good as the eye-wow he shows us. The story may be familiar, it has been told on dozens of true crime documentaries. John Dillinger and his gang terrorized the Midwest with violent bank robberies. He was captured in Arizona, brought back to Indiana, and escaped from jail using a bar of soap carved into the shape of a gun and blackened with shoe polish. Hot on his trail was the FBI's Melvin Purvis (Ben Johnson), who made it his own personal vendetta to kill all of these criminals, smoking cigars over their dead bodies. The gang have their own loving bad girls to hunker down with, and Dillinger had prostitute Billie (Michelle Phillips). Dillinger was killed outside the Biograph Theater in Chicago while seen with the infamous lady in red, Anna Sage (Cloris Leachman).
While "Bonnie and Clyde" was a historic entry in the crime film genre, I thought the film makers in that situation glorified the duo a little too often. "Dillinger" does the opposite, making the bank robber as mean as we imagine he was. Milius' efforts to portray Dillinger as a villain backfire, since we see him in the couple of years before his death, never finding out how he got into crime in the first place. His family is briefly shown, but nothing comes from the scene. Milius throws us into Dillinger's exploits immediately, but without any background, there is not sympathy, empathy, and eventually interest invested with the man. The beginning of the film is an exercise in choppy editing and stiff scenes until we get to the actions sequences. It makes me wonder what was left on the cutting room floor.
Ben Johnson plays a great Melvin Purvis, a wonderful character name if I didn't know the person existed in real life. While he should be our hero, Purvis is shown to be just as violent as Dillinger. Milius plays with us, with Purvis showing no mercy for some criminals, yet sparing others, without any kind of explanation. We know Purvis as well as we know Dillinger. What does Milius leave us with? Incredible shootout sequences. There is a giant gun battle at a house that takes forever and is worth every minute of film. The film is violent and does not flinch when it comes to showing the death and destruction done by both sides of the law. Milius' direction is good, and his fuzzy Depression era vistas are pretty to look at. The cinematography is great, as is the set design and costuming. The rest of the supporting cast is fine, and full of some recognizable names: Phillips is okay as Billie although this moll type part is old hat, Harry Dean Stanton is funny as gang member Homer, his final scene is one of the best in the film. Leachman, then a recent Oscar winner, has just two scenes as Anna, I would have liked to see more. Oates is the best Dillinger ever portrayed on film. Tons of character actors populate the rest of the cast: Geoffrey Lewis, John P. Ryan, Steve Kanaly, Frank McRae, Richard Dreyfuss as Baby Face Nelson, all good.
With "Dillinger," you get a mixed bag. On the one hand, you have incredibly violent shootouts that took many lives. On the other hand, you have no reason to care about these characters or their internal motivations. Maybe we know how Purvis felt about Dillinger after all.
FAQs (2005)
*Get "FAQs" on Amazon here*
This odd film is a touching and frustrating look at gay bashing victims, and the bashers themselves. India (Joe Lia), fresh from getting ripped off by a local porno director in L.A., is attacked by Guy (Adam Larson) and Quentin (Joshua Paul). India is saved by a pistol-packing drag queen named Destiny (a sensational Allan Louis), who takes India home. India, Destiny, and troubled lesbian Lester (Minerva Vier) form an odd family unit, continually haranguing the straights who always seem to be lurking around with an insulting comment or threats of violence. India takes in Spencer (Lance Lee Davis), a very troubled young man obsessed with killing his abusive parents with a homemade bomb. India follows through on a theory that Guy and Quentin are gay, while Destiny falls for a neighborhood police detective (Vince Parenti), and the family find themselves tempted with the same violent impulses they have been subjected to in the past.
Writer and director Everett Lewis delivers an allegory that draws moral lines in the sand before quickly blurring those borders. The quasi-family see themselves as victims, not aware of what they are capable of. Lewis tells the story, only standing on a soapbox in the last few scenes. The cast is good, with Louis' Destiny a stand out. The film's look is heavily saturated and dark. I was never sure where Lewis was going with his script, expecting both "The Last Supper"-type murderous satire, then "To Wong Foo..."-type tolerance messages. I did feel many of the characters were written too broadly. India and Spencer look too handsome and healthy for the streets, and Quentin's over-the-top trailer redneck seems out of place in a West Hollywood setting. I am still wondering why the character Lester is even here, as she always seems to be "at work," never becoming a major player in the plots. Many, many of the climactic lines fall flat- declarations of love that are forced.
Lewis does enough to slightly recommend "FAQs" (terrible title), from the creepy Texas Republican Party platform opening crawl, to speaking out against violence from bashers and their victims alike. With this willing cast, I guess I wanted to see more focus in the script.
This odd film is a touching and frustrating look at gay bashing victims, and the bashers themselves. India (Joe Lia), fresh from getting ripped off by a local porno director in L.A., is attacked by Guy (Adam Larson) and Quentin (Joshua Paul). India is saved by a pistol-packing drag queen named Destiny (a sensational Allan Louis), who takes India home. India, Destiny, and troubled lesbian Lester (Minerva Vier) form an odd family unit, continually haranguing the straights who always seem to be lurking around with an insulting comment or threats of violence. India takes in Spencer (Lance Lee Davis), a very troubled young man obsessed with killing his abusive parents with a homemade bomb. India follows through on a theory that Guy and Quentin are gay, while Destiny falls for a neighborhood police detective (Vince Parenti), and the family find themselves tempted with the same violent impulses they have been subjected to in the past.
Writer and director Everett Lewis delivers an allegory that draws moral lines in the sand before quickly blurring those borders. The quasi-family see themselves as victims, not aware of what they are capable of. Lewis tells the story, only standing on a soapbox in the last few scenes. The cast is good, with Louis' Destiny a stand out. The film's look is heavily saturated and dark. I was never sure where Lewis was going with his script, expecting both "The Last Supper"-type murderous satire, then "To Wong Foo..."-type tolerance messages. I did feel many of the characters were written too broadly. India and Spencer look too handsome and healthy for the streets, and Quentin's over-the-top trailer redneck seems out of place in a West Hollywood setting. I am still wondering why the character Lester is even here, as she always seems to be "at work," never becoming a major player in the plots. Many, many of the climactic lines fall flat- declarations of love that are forced.
Lewis does enough to slightly recommend "FAQs" (terrible title), from the creepy Texas Republican Party platform opening crawl, to speaking out against violence from bashers and their victims alike. With this willing cast, I guess I wanted to see more focus in the script.
Friday, August 15, 2025
The Toolbox Murders (1978)
This infamous little slasher flick with the infamous little title is full of blood, violence, and nudity. It is everything you expect from something of this ilk.
Supposedly based on a true story, four women in an apartment building are brutally murdered by items normally found in a toolbox. The killer (and the film makers do not hide this fact) is Vance (Cameron Mitchell), the building owner. Vance is a religious nut who recently lost his daughter in a car accident and begins punishing "sinful" women. The last third of the film sees the deaths of two major characters, and wraps things up nicely with the end credits crawl describing what happened to the "survivors" of this "real life" crime spree.
Although rated (R), this is some very violent stuff. The first half hour, when the majority of the crimes take place, is unpleasant. One of the first murders includes the now infamous killing of a model taking a bath. The blood flows freely, and the murders are punctuated by some truly bizarre country and love tunes. The film makers build up a subplot between Laurie (Pamelyn Ferdin) and Joey's (Nicolas Beauvy) mom (Aneta Corsaut) and the standard driven police detective that never pans out. Ferdin and Eure were mainstays on television in the 1970's and they do well, considering the material. Donnelly's direction is pretty basic, a camera shadow can be seen here and there. Gary Graver, the cinematographer, is better known as Orson Welles' cameraman later in the great director's career. Graver seems to have made a career of this kind of film, his involvement usually sets you up for what to expect.
I cannot explain why I am recommending this film. Genre fans might appreciate the gore effects, and the reputation this film now celebrates. This is a serial killer film before the term "serial killer" was coined. The events are watchable, however. "The Toolbox Murders" is not "Scream" or "Urban Legends," this is the type of film that no more motive than to scare and disgust its viewer. If that is all they wanted to do, they succeeded.
Supposedly based on a true story, four women in an apartment building are brutally murdered by items normally found in a toolbox. The killer (and the film makers do not hide this fact) is Vance (Cameron Mitchell), the building owner. Vance is a religious nut who recently lost his daughter in a car accident and begins punishing "sinful" women. The last third of the film sees the deaths of two major characters, and wraps things up nicely with the end credits crawl describing what happened to the "survivors" of this "real life" crime spree.
Although rated (R), this is some very violent stuff. The first half hour, when the majority of the crimes take place, is unpleasant. One of the first murders includes the now infamous killing of a model taking a bath. The blood flows freely, and the murders are punctuated by some truly bizarre country and love tunes. The film makers build up a subplot between Laurie (Pamelyn Ferdin) and Joey's (Nicolas Beauvy) mom (Aneta Corsaut) and the standard driven police detective that never pans out. Ferdin and Eure were mainstays on television in the 1970's and they do well, considering the material. Donnelly's direction is pretty basic, a camera shadow can be seen here and there. Gary Graver, the cinematographer, is better known as Orson Welles' cameraman later in the great director's career. Graver seems to have made a career of this kind of film, his involvement usually sets you up for what to expect.
I cannot explain why I am recommending this film. Genre fans might appreciate the gore effects, and the reputation this film now celebrates. This is a serial killer film before the term "serial killer" was coined. The events are watchable, however. "The Toolbox Murders" is not "Scream" or "Urban Legends," this is the type of film that no more motive than to scare and disgust its viewer. If that is all they wanted to do, they succeeded.
Treasure Island (1934)
I lucked out in high school. I had a good streak of English teachers. While other classes were reading The Great Gatsby, The Pigman, and "Hamlet," I was entrenched in Frankenstein, In Cold Blood, and "Macbeth." Another classic I got to avoid was Treasure Island. After watching the 1934 film version, I kind of get the feeling Robert Louis Stevenson's book was better.
Jim Hawkins (Jackie Cooper) and his mother (Dorothy Peterson) run a small inn in England. One night a creepy paranoid drunk named Billy Bones (Lionel Barrymore) checks in, demanding Jim watch out for a one-legged man who wants to get Billy and the secret he carries in his ship's chest. Billy does call attention to himself, and drinks himself into an early grave, just as mysterious men descend on the inn, looking for Billy's secret- a treasure map. Jim has taken the map, shown it to the local magistrate/doctor Livesey (Otto Kruger), and the local squire Trelawney (Nigel Bruce) funds an expedition to the Caribbean to find Billy Bones' treasure. The ship, the Hispaniola, is being captained by Smollett (Lewis Stone), but the hired crew keeps disappearing before they set sail. A one-legged local tavern owner named Long John Silver (Wallace Beery) is hired on as cook, and he conveniently fills out the crew with friends of his. Silver goes about befriending the boy, all the while picking up clues on where Bones' treasure is.
Beery and Cooper teamed before, more successfully I have heard, in "The Champ" a couple of years earlier. In that film, Cooper's incessant crying had the film audiences of the day in tears themselves, and from clips I have seen of the film, I can understand why. He was incredibly good, not overly cute, and very believable. Here, as Jim, he cries again at Silver's doings, but it does not come off as well. As Silver continuously manipulates Jim, and is caught and called out on it, Jim sobs, then goes right back to the well for more. It comes to the point where Jim's naivete becomes Jim's irritating stupidity, as he doesn't seem to learn a thing- from the very beginning of the film to the strange final scene. And oh, what Jim sees! Director Fleming was more an action director, making his "The Wizard of Oz" and "Gone With the Wind," his best known films, notable in that he took over from another director on both. "Treasure Island" is violent, even for the mid-1930's. One man is run over by a wagon, and we see him scream and writhe. Murders occur around Jim at an alarming rate. Jim is threatened and grabbed, and even forced to kill, yet, he keeps seeing the good in the murderous Silver, and Fleming fills the screen with bloody mayhem- accompanied by light sea shanties, and comic relief from Charles "Chic" Sale as Ben Gunn, a man who has been on the treasured island for three years without human contact. The tone is so off, and so weird, I watched to see what horrors Jim would experience next, and bottle up inside. Someone should write a sequel where Jim ends up in an insane asylum like Bedlam, a quivering mass of jelly expecting drunkards and one-legged men to pop out and attack him.
Beery and Cooper don't try English accents, and while well-shot, the film is stagy. The ship scenes work, and some of the supporting performances are great- Barrymore especially- but you can often see poor Beery's leg merely bent up to look absent, thanks to some lousy editing. While this outing of "Treasure Island" isn't all bad, coming from the Golden Age of Cinema, it is a disappointment. I'll give the superior "Mutiny on the Bounty" and "Captains Courageous" another look next time I feel the need for big boats and bigger water.
Jim Hawkins (Jackie Cooper) and his mother (Dorothy Peterson) run a small inn in England. One night a creepy paranoid drunk named Billy Bones (Lionel Barrymore) checks in, demanding Jim watch out for a one-legged man who wants to get Billy and the secret he carries in his ship's chest. Billy does call attention to himself, and drinks himself into an early grave, just as mysterious men descend on the inn, looking for Billy's secret- a treasure map. Jim has taken the map, shown it to the local magistrate/doctor Livesey (Otto Kruger), and the local squire Trelawney (Nigel Bruce) funds an expedition to the Caribbean to find Billy Bones' treasure. The ship, the Hispaniola, is being captained by Smollett (Lewis Stone), but the hired crew keeps disappearing before they set sail. A one-legged local tavern owner named Long John Silver (Wallace Beery) is hired on as cook, and he conveniently fills out the crew with friends of his. Silver goes about befriending the boy, all the while picking up clues on where Bones' treasure is.
Beery and Cooper teamed before, more successfully I have heard, in "The Champ" a couple of years earlier. In that film, Cooper's incessant crying had the film audiences of the day in tears themselves, and from clips I have seen of the film, I can understand why. He was incredibly good, not overly cute, and very believable. Here, as Jim, he cries again at Silver's doings, but it does not come off as well. As Silver continuously manipulates Jim, and is caught and called out on it, Jim sobs, then goes right back to the well for more. It comes to the point where Jim's naivete becomes Jim's irritating stupidity, as he doesn't seem to learn a thing- from the very beginning of the film to the strange final scene. And oh, what Jim sees! Director Fleming was more an action director, making his "The Wizard of Oz" and "Gone With the Wind," his best known films, notable in that he took over from another director on both. "Treasure Island" is violent, even for the mid-1930's. One man is run over by a wagon, and we see him scream and writhe. Murders occur around Jim at an alarming rate. Jim is threatened and grabbed, and even forced to kill, yet, he keeps seeing the good in the murderous Silver, and Fleming fills the screen with bloody mayhem- accompanied by light sea shanties, and comic relief from Charles "Chic" Sale as Ben Gunn, a man who has been on the treasured island for three years without human contact. The tone is so off, and so weird, I watched to see what horrors Jim would experience next, and bottle up inside. Someone should write a sequel where Jim ends up in an insane asylum like Bedlam, a quivering mass of jelly expecting drunkards and one-legged men to pop out and attack him.
Beery and Cooper don't try English accents, and while well-shot, the film is stagy. The ship scenes work, and some of the supporting performances are great- Barrymore especially- but you can often see poor Beery's leg merely bent up to look absent, thanks to some lousy editing. While this outing of "Treasure Island" isn't all bad, coming from the Golden Age of Cinema, it is a disappointment. I'll give the superior "Mutiny on the Bounty" and "Captains Courageous" another look next time I feel the need for big boats and bigger water.
Scanner Cop (1994)
The producers of the "Scanners" series decided to take the series in a whole new direction.
This time out, young scanner Samuel's birth father goes insane, and Samuel is adopted by an understanding cop. Years later, his adopted dad is police commander and Samuel Staziak (Daniel Quinn) is a rookie cop on drugs to keep his scanning under control. He helps out his dad after a bunch of cops are shot by usually normal people. It seems Karl Glock (perennial villain Richard Lynch) is programming people to kill cops as revenge for his being shot by the commander.
The whole plot is just fine and dandy, but this film feels like one of those old syndicated TV action shows like "VIP" or "Silk Stalkings." Better action has been witnessed on "T.J. Hooker." It seems all the budget was spent on the special effects by John Carl Buechler, which are fine except for a hilarious finale involving a defibrillator. The film makers also do not remember their own mythology, as we see the scanner cop chase someone in an elevator by taking the next elevator that comes along. As we know, and the film shows us, scanners can "control" machines, so why doesn't he just scan and tell the elevator with the criminal in it to stop?
In the finale, as the scanner cop is running all over a hospital looking for his injured dad, he scans everyone he comes in contact with. The facial contortions and scanning take longer than just using his mouth and asking where his father is. I had the same reaction to this that I did with "Scanners" I and II. Fine, I have now seen them, time to go outside.
This is average in the purest sense of the word, and I wish the film makers had taken more chances with this by-the-numbers production. Followed by Scanner Cop II.
This time out, young scanner Samuel's birth father goes insane, and Samuel is adopted by an understanding cop. Years later, his adopted dad is police commander and Samuel Staziak (Daniel Quinn) is a rookie cop on drugs to keep his scanning under control. He helps out his dad after a bunch of cops are shot by usually normal people. It seems Karl Glock (perennial villain Richard Lynch) is programming people to kill cops as revenge for his being shot by the commander.
The whole plot is just fine and dandy, but this film feels like one of those old syndicated TV action shows like "VIP" or "Silk Stalkings." Better action has been witnessed on "T.J. Hooker." It seems all the budget was spent on the special effects by John Carl Buechler, which are fine except for a hilarious finale involving a defibrillator. The film makers also do not remember their own mythology, as we see the scanner cop chase someone in an elevator by taking the next elevator that comes along. As we know, and the film shows us, scanners can "control" machines, so why doesn't he just scan and tell the elevator with the criminal in it to stop?
In the finale, as the scanner cop is running all over a hospital looking for his injured dad, he scans everyone he comes in contact with. The facial contortions and scanning take longer than just using his mouth and asking where his father is. I had the same reaction to this that I did with "Scanners" I and II. Fine, I have now seen them, time to go outside.
This is average in the purest sense of the word, and I wish the film makers had taken more chances with this by-the-numbers production. Followed by Scanner Cop II.
The Snowman (2017)
This infamous flop is a pretty-to-look-at mess of confusion, tension, and some very good performances.
In Norway, Detective Harry Hole (Michael Fassbender) and his new bright-eyed partner Katrine (Rebecca Ferguson) are investigating a series of disappearances that have been going on for years, some centered around philanthropist Arve Stop (J.K. Simmons). A calling card, the titular snowman, is left at the crime scenes, and are the signature of some anonymous letters Hole is starting to receive. Harry and Katrine go through the motions, taking advantage of the police department's new piece of technical marvel equipment. Harry also involves himself in his former girlfriend Rakel's (Charlotte Gainsbourg) life, and the couple seem to be pining for each other once again.
It's never a good sign when your film's director admits that he only had time to shoot 85% of a screenplay he was handed after being brought on when the original director, Martin Scorsese, dropped out. There are a couple of scenes in the trailer that didn't make the cut of the film simply because there was nowhere to insert them in this incomprehensible story. Oscar winners Claire Simpson and Thelma Schoonmaker were credited as editors, but their expertise can't salvage this mess. The film takes place in Norway, with travels to Bergen in Germany, but all the performers speak English. The setting and character names are Scandinavian, try to stop laughing at the name "Harry Hole," but the film makers oddly went with this cast instead of moving the setting to Canada or Alaska, or hiring a Norwegian cast.
On the positive, and I don't know how, the cast is great. Fassbender is seen waking up from a drunken stupor a few too many times, but his performance is very good. Ferguson is okay, but Gainsbourg turns her ex-girlfriend character into something special, and I wish we could have had more of her. Karlsson as her new boyfriend is achingly polite and naive, not quite picking up on the chemistry between Harry and Rakel. Aside from a few iffy special effects shots, the true locations are gorgeous, cold, and snowy. Based on a series of novels by Jo Nesbo (why start shooting your franchise with the seventh one?), this should have been a series starter, but the box office returns took care of that idea. From what I have read online, the screenplay strays from the novel on key plot points and kills off a couple of major characters who would return in later novels.
It's too bad this didn't work, I would have liked to see more of this character in less convoluted, confused cases. "The Snowman" left the viewer, and apparently the film makers, cold.
In Norway, Detective Harry Hole (Michael Fassbender) and his new bright-eyed partner Katrine (Rebecca Ferguson) are investigating a series of disappearances that have been going on for years, some centered around philanthropist Arve Stop (J.K. Simmons). A calling card, the titular snowman, is left at the crime scenes, and are the signature of some anonymous letters Hole is starting to receive. Harry and Katrine go through the motions, taking advantage of the police department's new piece of technical marvel equipment. Harry also involves himself in his former girlfriend Rakel's (Charlotte Gainsbourg) life, and the couple seem to be pining for each other once again.
It's never a good sign when your film's director admits that he only had time to shoot 85% of a screenplay he was handed after being brought on when the original director, Martin Scorsese, dropped out. There are a couple of scenes in the trailer that didn't make the cut of the film simply because there was nowhere to insert them in this incomprehensible story. Oscar winners Claire Simpson and Thelma Schoonmaker were credited as editors, but their expertise can't salvage this mess. The film takes place in Norway, with travels to Bergen in Germany, but all the performers speak English. The setting and character names are Scandinavian, try to stop laughing at the name "Harry Hole," but the film makers oddly went with this cast instead of moving the setting to Canada or Alaska, or hiring a Norwegian cast.
On the positive, and I don't know how, the cast is great. Fassbender is seen waking up from a drunken stupor a few too many times, but his performance is very good. Ferguson is okay, but Gainsbourg turns her ex-girlfriend character into something special, and I wish we could have had more of her. Karlsson as her new boyfriend is achingly polite and naive, not quite picking up on the chemistry between Harry and Rakel. Aside from a few iffy special effects shots, the true locations are gorgeous, cold, and snowy. Based on a series of novels by Jo Nesbo (why start shooting your franchise with the seventh one?), this should have been a series starter, but the box office returns took care of that idea. From what I have read online, the screenplay strays from the novel on key plot points and kills off a couple of major characters who would return in later novels.
It's too bad this didn't work, I would have liked to see more of this character in less convoluted, confused cases. "The Snowman" left the viewer, and apparently the film makers, cold.
Thursday, August 14, 2025
Scooby-Doo! and the Reluctant Werewolf (1988)
Hanna-Barbera worked hard to find new things for their cash cow Scooby-Doo to do, and that explains this silly 1980's full-length animated film.
Shaggy, Scooby-Doo, Scrappy-Doo, and Shaggy's girlfriend Googie race cars in auto races. A group of monsters meet in Transylvania for the Monster Road Race, and must replace the now-retired werewolf. Luckily, the moon is right to create a new werewolf in the form of Shaggy. Count Dracula sends a duo known as the Hunch Bunch to change Shaggy into a werewolf, and then kidnap him and his friends back to Transylvania to drive in the race. As the werewolfed Shaggy and Scooby drive the race car, Scrappy and Googie follow behind them and the four try and outsmart the other cheating monsters who are competing. Count Dracula and Vanna Pira are commentators, and are also trying to get Shaggy to lose.
This thing clocks in at over ninety minutes, and that is too long. The original Scooby-Doo gang is jettisoned for this forced comedy. The screenwriter, trying to make this as long as possible, fills the last half hour with the car race, which may test even the most patient Scooby-Doo fans. There are some funny lines: Vanna's idea of color commentary is to name the colors she sees, and the local townspeople are forced to cheer for the monsters, but the film makers think this is so original they repeat those jokes non-stop- the first time is amusing, after that, it is desperate. The animation is Saturday morning mediocrity. The film has a hurried rush to it, as if they knew kids would buy it no matter what, so why put any effort in to it? This is like Disney's old straight-to-video sequels to their better theatrical films. I am not reluctant in not recommending this.
Shaggy, Scooby-Doo, Scrappy-Doo, and Shaggy's girlfriend Googie race cars in auto races. A group of monsters meet in Transylvania for the Monster Road Race, and must replace the now-retired werewolf. Luckily, the moon is right to create a new werewolf in the form of Shaggy. Count Dracula sends a duo known as the Hunch Bunch to change Shaggy into a werewolf, and then kidnap him and his friends back to Transylvania to drive in the race. As the werewolfed Shaggy and Scooby drive the race car, Scrappy and Googie follow behind them and the four try and outsmart the other cheating monsters who are competing. Count Dracula and Vanna Pira are commentators, and are also trying to get Shaggy to lose.
This thing clocks in at over ninety minutes, and that is too long. The original Scooby-Doo gang is jettisoned for this forced comedy. The screenwriter, trying to make this as long as possible, fills the last half hour with the car race, which may test even the most patient Scooby-Doo fans. There are some funny lines: Vanna's idea of color commentary is to name the colors she sees, and the local townspeople are forced to cheer for the monsters, but the film makers think this is so original they repeat those jokes non-stop- the first time is amusing, after that, it is desperate. The animation is Saturday morning mediocrity. The film has a hurried rush to it, as if they knew kids would buy it no matter what, so why put any effort in to it? This is like Disney's old straight-to-video sequels to their better theatrical films. I am not reluctant in not recommending this.
Infected: The Darkest Day (2021)
What starts out as a cross between "28 Days Later" and a Jason Bourne movie quickly turns into a stomach-churning chore to sit through, thanks to some atrocious camerawork.
Dan (director Dan Rickard) washes up on a British beach with no memory of how he got there or where he came from. He is also ignorant of recent history, as a virus has decimated half the population, turning victims into bloodthirsty (running) zombies. Groups of people are immune, no one knows how the virus is spread, and Dan takes up with a houseful of angry young people who steal food during the day and hide indoors wiling the hours away. Group leader Sam (Chris Wandell) is onto Dan right away- not only is the group hunted by the zombies, but suddenly military personnel are after Dan as well.
Also known as "Infected" and "Darkest Day," this movie could easily have fit into the "28 Days Later" cinematic universe. The practical gore effects are very good, as is the makeup. The acting is hot and cold across the board, with Wandell coming off best as the hotheaded group leader. Unfortunately, most of this film is almost impossible to watch. The sound is terrible enough, but Rickard's constant shaking of his camera had me ill. Entire scenes of film would blur out of focus. The editing makes "Transformers" look like "Barry Lyndon," as I had no clue what was happening in half of the action scenes. It's shot so badly, I wasn't sure who lived in the safe house until some of them escaped to a camp, and a few were killed along the way. We are never given any clues as to Dan's real story and motives, so the big reveal about his identity is dead on arrival- I didn't care, I was trying to settle my stomach from screen time that looked like someone nailed a digital camera to a hardware store paint can shaker. Do not adjust your televisions, this film was seriously shot and edited this way. I suggest taking a day's break halfway through, like I did, you'll end up thanking me.
Dan (director Dan Rickard) washes up on a British beach with no memory of how he got there or where he came from. He is also ignorant of recent history, as a virus has decimated half the population, turning victims into bloodthirsty (running) zombies. Groups of people are immune, no one knows how the virus is spread, and Dan takes up with a houseful of angry young people who steal food during the day and hide indoors wiling the hours away. Group leader Sam (Chris Wandell) is onto Dan right away- not only is the group hunted by the zombies, but suddenly military personnel are after Dan as well.
Also known as "Infected" and "Darkest Day," this movie could easily have fit into the "28 Days Later" cinematic universe. The practical gore effects are very good, as is the makeup. The acting is hot and cold across the board, with Wandell coming off best as the hotheaded group leader. Unfortunately, most of this film is almost impossible to watch. The sound is terrible enough, but Rickard's constant shaking of his camera had me ill. Entire scenes of film would blur out of focus. The editing makes "Transformers" look like "Barry Lyndon," as I had no clue what was happening in half of the action scenes. It's shot so badly, I wasn't sure who lived in the safe house until some of them escaped to a camp, and a few were killed along the way. We are never given any clues as to Dan's real story and motives, so the big reveal about his identity is dead on arrival- I didn't care, I was trying to settle my stomach from screen time that looked like someone nailed a digital camera to a hardware store paint can shaker. Do not adjust your televisions, this film was seriously shot and edited this way. I suggest taking a day's break halfway through, like I did, you'll end up thanking me.
Kill Plan (2021)
A CIA operative tries to stop a deadly virus from killing millions of people, a fate I would welcome as opposed to watching this seventy-one minute monstrosity again.
Agent Nash (Jason Toler) is recovering from brain damage sustained in Iraq. He is partnered with Mara (Sarah Brine), when the deadly chemical XZ-9 is stolen from a lab. There are a couple of turncoat agents in Nash's department, Winston (Chris Spinelli) and Dexter (Adam Weston Poell), who are after the stuff, plus crime boss Wan (Benny Tjandra)...I apologize, I had no idea what was happening throughout this film.
Forget about the lack of budget and terrible performances for a moment. The screenplay makes no sense. I had no idea who characters were, what XZ-9 was (chemical? virus? laundry detergent?) although it is mentioned about a hundred times in the film, and after a hilarious opening sequence set in Iraq, I gave up trying. This is the kind of amateurish film where half the cast served in other roles behind the camera, but not in a noble or admirable manner. One minor character mispronounces "emeritus," and the gaffe made it to the final cut. The story is intercut with stock footage of large cities to try and give this some epic scope, but sometimes the aspect ratio doesn't match, or the city footage is repeated in later shots. The sound quality is terrible, and even the subtitle generator I had running couldn't understand what some characters were saying, substituting the word "(mumbles)" instead. The action scenes are boring and comical, pay no attention to that kinda cool poster because none of that is in this movie, which features more footage of our hero sitting at a desk instead of standing or trying to save the world. I can appreciate making the most of your modest budget as much as the next person, but this is ridiculous, as if the film makers wanted to hurry up and finish this because of a deadline to get it onto Amazon Prime Video, which seems to specialize in terrible films like this. This isn't a poor man's James Bond ripoff, this is a poor man's poor man's ripoff of a poor man's James Bond ripoff.
Speaking of James Bond, the scariest item awaits the few brave souls who make it through the end credits, where there is a promise that this Nash character will return in a sequel absolutely NO ONE wants.
Agent Nash (Jason Toler) is recovering from brain damage sustained in Iraq. He is partnered with Mara (Sarah Brine), when the deadly chemical XZ-9 is stolen from a lab. There are a couple of turncoat agents in Nash's department, Winston (Chris Spinelli) and Dexter (Adam Weston Poell), who are after the stuff, plus crime boss Wan (Benny Tjandra)...I apologize, I had no idea what was happening throughout this film.
Forget about the lack of budget and terrible performances for a moment. The screenplay makes no sense. I had no idea who characters were, what XZ-9 was (chemical? virus? laundry detergent?) although it is mentioned about a hundred times in the film, and after a hilarious opening sequence set in Iraq, I gave up trying. This is the kind of amateurish film where half the cast served in other roles behind the camera, but not in a noble or admirable manner. One minor character mispronounces "emeritus," and the gaffe made it to the final cut. The story is intercut with stock footage of large cities to try and give this some epic scope, but sometimes the aspect ratio doesn't match, or the city footage is repeated in later shots. The sound quality is terrible, and even the subtitle generator I had running couldn't understand what some characters were saying, substituting the word "(mumbles)" instead. The action scenes are boring and comical, pay no attention to that kinda cool poster because none of that is in this movie, which features more footage of our hero sitting at a desk instead of standing or trying to save the world. I can appreciate making the most of your modest budget as much as the next person, but this is ridiculous, as if the film makers wanted to hurry up and finish this because of a deadline to get it onto Amazon Prime Video, which seems to specialize in terrible films like this. This isn't a poor man's James Bond ripoff, this is a poor man's poor man's ripoff of a poor man's James Bond ripoff.
Speaking of James Bond, the scariest item awaits the few brave souls who make it through the end credits, where there is a promise that this Nash character will return in a sequel absolutely NO ONE wants.
Anna Nicole Smith: You Don't Know Me (2023)
*Get "The Anna Nicole Show- Season One" on Amazon here*
This tell-all surface Netflix documentary profiles one of the most famous women of the 1990's and 2000's, and covers the exact same material that I, a non-fan, have seen before. Think of it as "The E! True Hollywood Story (Now with Bewbs!)."
Vickie Lynn Marshall was from Mexia, Texas (which is filmed like it's one of Dante's Circles of Hell). Born in 1967, she was a beautiful child who attracted attention almost immediately. She married early, had a child, and ran away from an abusive homelife, ending up dancing in strip clubs in Houston. She met another stripper there who would become a lover, and Vickie changed her name to Nikki. Pictures of Smith (her married name) made their way to Playboy and Guess Jeans, and a model was born. Now known as Anna Nicole Smith, she descended on Los Angeles, taking modeling gigs and an occasional film role (she was offered only $50,000 to appear in "The Mask"?!), and becoming more and more famous for not doing very much. Behind the scenes, she married an oil billionaire sixty years older than her. Drugs became a part of Smith's life, starting out as pain medication for her breast augmentation surgery. Her son, Daniel, was by her side as she saw billionaire J. Howard Marshall, and the stripper friend, before her life began to spiral out of control- which was caught on camera by ever-present paparazzi, and eventually her own infamous "reality" show. She died after giving birth to a daughter in 2007, but her life made tabloid headlines even years after she was laid to rest.
One of the many flaws in this documentary is an odd one- it's not long enough. We get six hours on serial killers and their "unheard" audio tapes, but less than two hours on a household name who was in the public eye for fifteen years? Smith had a rough upbringing, and an hour could have been spent on her parents alone, instead of a gotcha moment that seems tacked on to the end of the film. The film makers could not get some important interviews that could have opened up the documentary, so Howard K. Stern and Larry Birkhead are relegated to "archive footage" roles. Smith seemed to be surrounded by enablers, some of whom do talk, but she's as much a mystery after the documentary as she is before. Talking about her deep love for Marshall while she was having a fling with her stripper friend is given a pass, as is footage of Smith presenting a giant, inappropriate semi-nude picture of herself to the old man while her toddler son is standing there. Was Smith a pathological liar, an innocent, a narcissist? I don't know, and neither do the film makers. Instead, we unironically get old footage of shamed newsman Brian Williams lecturing the mainstream media and public for treating Smith's death with so much attention before playing video from other news outlets. It's a fine balance between giving the public what they want, and shoving this exposure down our throats. We finally got rid of hanging on to Paris Hilton's every move, yet she still tries to get back in the spotlight every couple of years. Is it any better today? No, one of the last articles I saw on Fox News' website before writing this review was about Demi Lovato's difficulties sticking to preferred pronouns. It's all about the clicks, baby. How many hours did people waste watching Smith's show, or news stories about her daughter's paternity? Or the case that went all the way to the Supreme Court about her husband's estate? What did you do with that knowledge? Just like me after watching this, you hopefully cracked open a book and moved on with your life.
I never saw her "reality" show, or paid much attention to her when she was in the news. I don't hate her, I think it's sad that a person would go through all of this to become rich and famous, and to have that same fame completely destroy her life and the lives of those around her. This isn't a cautionary tale, because very few celebrities today are taking this caution and leading fulfilling lives. I hope her daughter is being raised "normally," and everyone caught in the hurricane existence of Anna Nicole Smith has moved on as well- including the producers of this documentary.
This tell-all surface Netflix documentary profiles one of the most famous women of the 1990's and 2000's, and covers the exact same material that I, a non-fan, have seen before. Think of it as "The E! True Hollywood Story (Now with Bewbs!)."
Vickie Lynn Marshall was from Mexia, Texas (which is filmed like it's one of Dante's Circles of Hell). Born in 1967, she was a beautiful child who attracted attention almost immediately. She married early, had a child, and ran away from an abusive homelife, ending up dancing in strip clubs in Houston. She met another stripper there who would become a lover, and Vickie changed her name to Nikki. Pictures of Smith (her married name) made their way to Playboy and Guess Jeans, and a model was born. Now known as Anna Nicole Smith, she descended on Los Angeles, taking modeling gigs and an occasional film role (she was offered only $50,000 to appear in "The Mask"?!), and becoming more and more famous for not doing very much. Behind the scenes, she married an oil billionaire sixty years older than her. Drugs became a part of Smith's life, starting out as pain medication for her breast augmentation surgery. Her son, Daniel, was by her side as she saw billionaire J. Howard Marshall, and the stripper friend, before her life began to spiral out of control- which was caught on camera by ever-present paparazzi, and eventually her own infamous "reality" show. She died after giving birth to a daughter in 2007, but her life made tabloid headlines even years after she was laid to rest.
One of the many flaws in this documentary is an odd one- it's not long enough. We get six hours on serial killers and their "unheard" audio tapes, but less than two hours on a household name who was in the public eye for fifteen years? Smith had a rough upbringing, and an hour could have been spent on her parents alone, instead of a gotcha moment that seems tacked on to the end of the film. The film makers could not get some important interviews that could have opened up the documentary, so Howard K. Stern and Larry Birkhead are relegated to "archive footage" roles. Smith seemed to be surrounded by enablers, some of whom do talk, but she's as much a mystery after the documentary as she is before. Talking about her deep love for Marshall while she was having a fling with her stripper friend is given a pass, as is footage of Smith presenting a giant, inappropriate semi-nude picture of herself to the old man while her toddler son is standing there. Was Smith a pathological liar, an innocent, a narcissist? I don't know, and neither do the film makers. Instead, we unironically get old footage of shamed newsman Brian Williams lecturing the mainstream media and public for treating Smith's death with so much attention before playing video from other news outlets. It's a fine balance between giving the public what they want, and shoving this exposure down our throats. We finally got rid of hanging on to Paris Hilton's every move, yet she still tries to get back in the spotlight every couple of years. Is it any better today? No, one of the last articles I saw on Fox News' website before writing this review was about Demi Lovato's difficulties sticking to preferred pronouns. It's all about the clicks, baby. How many hours did people waste watching Smith's show, or news stories about her daughter's paternity? Or the case that went all the way to the Supreme Court about her husband's estate? What did you do with that knowledge? Just like me after watching this, you hopefully cracked open a book and moved on with your life.
I never saw her "reality" show, or paid much attention to her when she was in the news. I don't hate her, I think it's sad that a person would go through all of this to become rich and famous, and to have that same fame completely destroy her life and the lives of those around her. This isn't a cautionary tale, because very few celebrities today are taking this caution and leading fulfilling lives. I hope her daughter is being raised "normally," and everyone caught in the hurricane existence of Anna Nicole Smith has moved on as well- including the producers of this documentary.
TerrorVision (1986)
This horror/comedy features some familiar faces, as well as a completely laughless and scareless script.
Stanley (Gerrit Graham) has bought a do-it-yourself satellite dish system and wired his garish house with TV from around the world. Swingers Stanley and Racquel (Mary Woronov) depart to meet another couple, and leave Gramps (Bert Remsen) and their son Sherman (Chad Allen) alone. The satellite is invaded by a monster that was being disposed of from the planet Pluton, can turn itself into energy, and travel from television to television. When the monster kills, it can regenerate the heads of its victims, fooling the really dumb members of the cast. Stanley and Racquel return with Cherry (Randi Brooks) and Spiro (an embarrassed looking Alejandro Rey). Soon, the monster is on the loose in the house, and Sherman is tracking it with Gramps' machine gun stash.
John Carl Buechler, the special effects guy, does the monster here. It is terrible. The film was executive produced by Charles Band, who has almost two hundred producing credits, and has completed maybe six good films. The cast is awful and the humor is juvenile, making "American Pie" look like "Twelfth Night," yet the gore and violence are adult in nature. There is not a lot of blood here, every time the monster attacks, the victim oozes green slime- something never explained. Everyone tries to be very funny, but there is not one laugh. Not one guffaw. Not one smile. Not one half-smirk. There is nothing funny in this film. Absolutely nothing. What does that leave? No reason to seek this out.
"TerrorVision" is just that. Eighty five minutes of bad acting, bad special effects, and bad scripting. I find it hard to understand the cult following this has received.
Stanley (Gerrit Graham) has bought a do-it-yourself satellite dish system and wired his garish house with TV from around the world. Swingers Stanley and Racquel (Mary Woronov) depart to meet another couple, and leave Gramps (Bert Remsen) and their son Sherman (Chad Allen) alone. The satellite is invaded by a monster that was being disposed of from the planet Pluton, can turn itself into energy, and travel from television to television. When the monster kills, it can regenerate the heads of its victims, fooling the really dumb members of the cast. Stanley and Racquel return with Cherry (Randi Brooks) and Spiro (an embarrassed looking Alejandro Rey). Soon, the monster is on the loose in the house, and Sherman is tracking it with Gramps' machine gun stash.
John Carl Buechler, the special effects guy, does the monster here. It is terrible. The film was executive produced by Charles Band, who has almost two hundred producing credits, and has completed maybe six good films. The cast is awful and the humor is juvenile, making "American Pie" look like "Twelfth Night," yet the gore and violence are adult in nature. There is not a lot of blood here, every time the monster attacks, the victim oozes green slime- something never explained. Everyone tries to be very funny, but there is not one laugh. Not one guffaw. Not one smile. Not one half-smirk. There is nothing funny in this film. Absolutely nothing. What does that leave? No reason to seek this out.
"TerrorVision" is just that. Eighty five minutes of bad acting, bad special effects, and bad scripting. I find it hard to understand the cult following this has received.
Forgive Us Our Trespasses (2022)
This way-too-short film has its heart and moral outrage in the right place, but its execution is all wrong.
In Nazi Germany, Peter (Knox Gibson) is a young boy missing part of his arm. During prayers one night, Peter questions his mother (Hanneke Talbot), who is also his school teacher, as to why they should forgive the Nazis. By chance, soldiers stop at their house to take Peter because of his disability, and Peter must fight back.
This didn't feel like a short film, it felt like some footage that was shot in order to get financing to make a feature-length film based on Peter's story. The cinematography is breathtaking, and Gibson is perfectly cast- physically looking like the Nazi-ideal German male, except for the missing limb. Much has been made in other reviews about the historical inaccuracies of the film, especially in the closing coda. I'm not familiar with this part of World War II history to argue it, but this is a perfect example of not taking everything you see onscreen as historical truth, whether it be in a film, television show, or online.
The main problem here is the climax. I don't want to spoil it too much, but there is a physical altercation that has little bearing in reality. I didn't believe it could happen for one second, and Peter's reaction to it is puzzling. Although this is arguing against punishing people for their disabilities, something I think we can all get behind, the film makers make a strong pro-life argument at the beginning of the film during a classroom scene, which is a little surprising coming from the profoundly Liberal entertainment industry. I'm not sure if that was intentional or not. I saw this on a streaming service, so finding a physical copy of it might prove difficult, but it is out there.
(TV-14)- Physical violence, some gun violence, mild gore, adult situations
In Nazi Germany, Peter (Knox Gibson) is a young boy missing part of his arm. During prayers one night, Peter questions his mother (Hanneke Talbot), who is also his school teacher, as to why they should forgive the Nazis. By chance, soldiers stop at their house to take Peter because of his disability, and Peter must fight back.
This didn't feel like a short film, it felt like some footage that was shot in order to get financing to make a feature-length film based on Peter's story. The cinematography is breathtaking, and Gibson is perfectly cast- physically looking like the Nazi-ideal German male, except for the missing limb. Much has been made in other reviews about the historical inaccuracies of the film, especially in the closing coda. I'm not familiar with this part of World War II history to argue it, but this is a perfect example of not taking everything you see onscreen as historical truth, whether it be in a film, television show, or online.
The main problem here is the climax. I don't want to spoil it too much, but there is a physical altercation that has little bearing in reality. I didn't believe it could happen for one second, and Peter's reaction to it is puzzling. Although this is arguing against punishing people for their disabilities, something I think we can all get behind, the film makers make a strong pro-life argument at the beginning of the film during a classroom scene, which is a little surprising coming from the profoundly Liberal entertainment industry. I'm not sure if that was intentional or not. I saw this on a streaming service, so finding a physical copy of it might prove difficult, but it is out there.
(TV-14)- Physical violence, some gun violence, mild gore, adult situations
Wednesday, August 13, 2025
Stiffed (2011)
This short film, found on the DVD release of "Cannibal Claus" from Gatorblade Films, is pretty awful.
Two young men are stabbed to death in the opening minutes of the film. We are then taken back in time where we see how and why they were murdered, but mostly the viewer has to suffer through footage of a bunch of random dudes going to a bar and drinking, which is absolutely NEVER entertaining viewing. This is a short and simple little slasher flick, and should have stuck to its one-joke, three-minute-long premise. Donohue would go on to make many small horror films, I pray they are better than this one.
Two young men are stabbed to death in the opening minutes of the film. We are then taken back in time where we see how and why they were murdered, but mostly the viewer has to suffer through footage of a bunch of random dudes going to a bar and drinking, which is absolutely NEVER entertaining viewing. This is a short and simple little slasher flick, and should have stuck to its one-joke, three-minute-long premise. Donohue would go on to make many small horror films, I pray they are better than this one.
Sublime (2022)
This coming-of-age story about an Argentinian teenager is universal and cautious, which turns out to be a small detriment.
Manuel (Martin Miller) is a typical high schooler. He has a girlfriend- Azul (Azul Mazzeo), a lifelong best friend Felipe (Teo Inama Chiabrando), plays in a small town band with Felipe and two other friends (Joaquin Arana, Facundo Trotonda), and has a moderate homelife with his parents (Javier Drolas, Caroline Tejeda). Manuel also has braces, and shares a bedroom with his younger sister, so life isn't perfect. Felipe has lifted Manuel's spirits since they were kids, but now that he is in his teenage years, Manuel discovers that he doesn't just love his best friend, he's in love with his best friend. This realization begins to affect Manuel's relationships with everyone in his life, and he tries to sort out his feelings as the band gets ready to play at a birthday party.
Writer/director Biasin does an astounding job of presenting Manuel's story without any of the tropes you would normally find in this sort of plot. I would describe the film as quiet and careful. There are no explosive, emotional scenes ready to beat the viewer over the head about how they should feel. Manuel is just like ninety percent of us who went to high school- the anonymous rest-of-the-class who couldn't be confined to a stereotype or get films made about us. We don't need a sequence with Manuel's parents screaming at each other to know there's something wrong, and Biasin wisely leaves that out. An almost-sex scene between Manuel and Azul is awkward and halting, but not for the reasons you might think. Felipe is always around Manuel, but he's not stupid about Manuel's feelings toward him, he honestly doesn't know. I would say that Manuel's story is told in glimpses, not showy scenes, and this is helped by excellent performances all around. The film's style is so naturalistic, it plays like a documentary complete with handheld camerawork. The band's songs are also good without being too good.
However, the film isn't for everyone because of the way the story unfolds- there are some lags that creep in unnoticed until I found myself looking at the running time. I don't know if Biasin scripted everything, but I luckily didn't have to sit through a bunch of eye-rolling improvised scenes of teenaged angst, and I was grateful for that. The cinematography is wonderful, and the sound recording is realistic- the band rehearsals aren't polished and clean- the band's vocals were recorded on set and not dubbed in later.
"Sublime" isn't sweet, or dumb, or even intense. It has a charming reality that makes it familiar to many viewers, no matter their preferences.
Manuel (Martin Miller) is a typical high schooler. He has a girlfriend- Azul (Azul Mazzeo), a lifelong best friend Felipe (Teo Inama Chiabrando), plays in a small town band with Felipe and two other friends (Joaquin Arana, Facundo Trotonda), and has a moderate homelife with his parents (Javier Drolas, Caroline Tejeda). Manuel also has braces, and shares a bedroom with his younger sister, so life isn't perfect. Felipe has lifted Manuel's spirits since they were kids, but now that he is in his teenage years, Manuel discovers that he doesn't just love his best friend, he's in love with his best friend. This realization begins to affect Manuel's relationships with everyone in his life, and he tries to sort out his feelings as the band gets ready to play at a birthday party.
Writer/director Biasin does an astounding job of presenting Manuel's story without any of the tropes you would normally find in this sort of plot. I would describe the film as quiet and careful. There are no explosive, emotional scenes ready to beat the viewer over the head about how they should feel. Manuel is just like ninety percent of us who went to high school- the anonymous rest-of-the-class who couldn't be confined to a stereotype or get films made about us. We don't need a sequence with Manuel's parents screaming at each other to know there's something wrong, and Biasin wisely leaves that out. An almost-sex scene between Manuel and Azul is awkward and halting, but not for the reasons you might think. Felipe is always around Manuel, but he's not stupid about Manuel's feelings toward him, he honestly doesn't know. I would say that Manuel's story is told in glimpses, not showy scenes, and this is helped by excellent performances all around. The film's style is so naturalistic, it plays like a documentary complete with handheld camerawork. The band's songs are also good without being too good.
However, the film isn't for everyone because of the way the story unfolds- there are some lags that creep in unnoticed until I found myself looking at the running time. I don't know if Biasin scripted everything, but I luckily didn't have to sit through a bunch of eye-rolling improvised scenes of teenaged angst, and I was grateful for that. The cinematography is wonderful, and the sound recording is realistic- the band rehearsals aren't polished and clean- the band's vocals were recorded on set and not dubbed in later.
"Sublime" isn't sweet, or dumb, or even intense. It has a charming reality that makes it familiar to many viewers, no matter their preferences.
Hellraiser: Revelations (2011)
When your option on continuing a once mildly successful horror film franchise is running out, do you let the series die a quiet and dignified death, since you haven't contributed anything to it in five years, or do you come up with a quickie entry that might make a buck or two on the video and streaming market? If you are Dimension, you crank out the garbage that is this film.
Nico (Jay Gillepsie, who looks like a young Val Kilmer) and Steven (Nick Eversman, who does not look like a young Val Kilmer) are two buddies who escape their privileged lives to Tijuana with a video camera along to record their adventures. The film begins jumping back and forth in time as we find out the boys end up missing and presumed dead, but their luggage made it back home along with the video camera (which wasn't kept by any authorities as evidence, despite footage of a possible murder) and a strange puzzle box. Nico's parents (Sebastien Roberts, Sanny Van Heteren) come over to dine with Steven's parents (Steven Brand, Devon Sorvari), and Steven's sister, and Nico's girlfriend, Emma (Tracey Fairaway). Got all that? In my notes, I had to construct a crude pedigree chart to keep the characters straight, especially since the parents all acted the same.
Dinner is tense since the parents ignore what happened to their sons until finally the ice is broken on the exact same night that Steven comes back home, bloodied and in a state of shock. The group is trapped in the isolated mansion, their cars mysteriously disappear, there is no phone service, and the viewer is treated to double doses of mayhem and murder as the story switches back and forth between what happened to Nico and Steven in Mexico, and what happens to their families now.
It had been over a quarter of a century since the original "Hellraiser", and despite a couple of better than average direct-to-video sequels, the overall series turned into a convoluted mess where some screenplays were injected with Pinhead and his Cenobites just to put them into a film and make it part of the "Hellraiser" franchise. Even Doug Bradley, who portrayed Pinhead in the preceding eight films, didn't see fit to return here- which isn't saying much, I guess, considering he did appear in the worst of the series before this film, as well as the best.
The film is dark and ugly. The screenwriter goes overboard (this is from the Dimension EXTREME label after all), and we get lots of gore, shootings, incest, murdered prostitutes, a baby killed offscreen, tequila shots, and bad story structure. The film runs only 75 minutes, with five minutes of that being opening and closing credits, yet the DVD's bonus feature is almost ten minutes of deleted scenes, which I couldn't bring myself to watch. Victor Garcia's direction is alright, after a stomach churning opening involving the two friends filming themselves on the trip. I didn't get sick from any gore, just the jolting camera movements that had me wishing I bought motion sickness medication the last time I was out. The majority of the action takes place around Steven's parents' house, with a dirty disgusting set standing in for Tijuana, which seems to be oddly populated by Asian prostitutes.
The performances here are pretty bad, but I am blaming the script. What used to sound so scary coming out of the mouth of Douglas Bradley sounds ridiculous coming out of Stephan Smith Collins'. There is a voice credit for Pinhead, and it sounds like Bradley a little, but Collins is stuck in this iconic role with nothing to do. The story pops in a vagrant character (Dan Buran) who happens to have the puzzle box that unleashes the demons, drops the vagrant character, then brings him back, and then drops him again. No explanation of Pinhead and the Cenobites is ever offered, and while having some mystery in a film is nice, even hardcore viewers like me have forgotten their origins. Simple questions like how long were the boys missing, and who actually controls the puzzle box and the summoning of the demons are left unanswered.
This made nine films in the franchise (which kept chugging along), and I had reviewed all of them, aside from some short fan films out there. "Hellraiser: Revelations" was the worst of the series to this point.
Nico (Jay Gillepsie, who looks like a young Val Kilmer) and Steven (Nick Eversman, who does not look like a young Val Kilmer) are two buddies who escape their privileged lives to Tijuana with a video camera along to record their adventures. The film begins jumping back and forth in time as we find out the boys end up missing and presumed dead, but their luggage made it back home along with the video camera (which wasn't kept by any authorities as evidence, despite footage of a possible murder) and a strange puzzle box. Nico's parents (Sebastien Roberts, Sanny Van Heteren) come over to dine with Steven's parents (Steven Brand, Devon Sorvari), and Steven's sister, and Nico's girlfriend, Emma (Tracey Fairaway). Got all that? In my notes, I had to construct a crude pedigree chart to keep the characters straight, especially since the parents all acted the same.
Dinner is tense since the parents ignore what happened to their sons until finally the ice is broken on the exact same night that Steven comes back home, bloodied and in a state of shock. The group is trapped in the isolated mansion, their cars mysteriously disappear, there is no phone service, and the viewer is treated to double doses of mayhem and murder as the story switches back and forth between what happened to Nico and Steven in Mexico, and what happens to their families now.
It had been over a quarter of a century since the original "Hellraiser", and despite a couple of better than average direct-to-video sequels, the overall series turned into a convoluted mess where some screenplays were injected with Pinhead and his Cenobites just to put them into a film and make it part of the "Hellraiser" franchise. Even Doug Bradley, who portrayed Pinhead in the preceding eight films, didn't see fit to return here- which isn't saying much, I guess, considering he did appear in the worst of the series before this film, as well as the best.
The film is dark and ugly. The screenwriter goes overboard (this is from the Dimension EXTREME label after all), and we get lots of gore, shootings, incest, murdered prostitutes, a baby killed offscreen, tequila shots, and bad story structure. The film runs only 75 minutes, with five minutes of that being opening and closing credits, yet the DVD's bonus feature is almost ten minutes of deleted scenes, which I couldn't bring myself to watch. Victor Garcia's direction is alright, after a stomach churning opening involving the two friends filming themselves on the trip. I didn't get sick from any gore, just the jolting camera movements that had me wishing I bought motion sickness medication the last time I was out. The majority of the action takes place around Steven's parents' house, with a dirty disgusting set standing in for Tijuana, which seems to be oddly populated by Asian prostitutes.
The performances here are pretty bad, but I am blaming the script. What used to sound so scary coming out of the mouth of Douglas Bradley sounds ridiculous coming out of Stephan Smith Collins'. There is a voice credit for Pinhead, and it sounds like Bradley a little, but Collins is stuck in this iconic role with nothing to do. The story pops in a vagrant character (Dan Buran) who happens to have the puzzle box that unleashes the demons, drops the vagrant character, then brings him back, and then drops him again. No explanation of Pinhead and the Cenobites is ever offered, and while having some mystery in a film is nice, even hardcore viewers like me have forgotten their origins. Simple questions like how long were the boys missing, and who actually controls the puzzle box and the summoning of the demons are left unanswered.
This made nine films in the franchise (which kept chugging along), and I had reviewed all of them, aside from some short fan films out there. "Hellraiser: Revelations" was the worst of the series to this point.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)