![]() I may not have loved this movie, but it's another good example of something I'm gonna end up going against the grain on. It actually surprised me to learn that this movie earned a Rotten Tomato average of 51.5%. To be fair, that's the masses meeting pretty much in the middle, but I definitely thought it would have been ranked a bit higher. Anyway, digressing. This film marks a pretty good point in time where the visuals of newfound CG animation really show. Stylistically, I feel like whether you like it or not, we can pretty much agree that it's beautifully filmed for 2001. The thing is, this is a CG test title following another CG test title, and a problem is generally presented when the style trumps the substance. And I'll admit that most of what I liked about this was how it all looked along with several characters - a few of whom I really liked. The story is admittedly pretty familiar, but I appreciated the execution. It all starts when a tsunami hits the city of Atlantis, sinking it, and leaving an abandoned child; Princess Kida behind. She's okay though because the Queen merges with a crystal that creates a protective dome over Atlantis before it sinks. There, the remaining Atlantians live in their lost city for 8,000 years. We then go to 1914 where we meet Milo Thatch (Michael J. Fox); a linguist working for the Smithsonian Institution, and a bit of an expert on the Lost City of Atlantis. He is interviewed and recruited by millionaire Preston B. Whitmore (John Mahoney) to decipher the Shephard's Journal, which is said to contain directions to the Lost City. Milo joins the expedition, along with a handful of colourful and mostly likable characters. Commander Rourke (James Garner) leads the expedition which also consists of the badass Helga Sinclaire (Claudia Christian), demolitions expert, Vinny (Don Novello), geologist, Molière (Corey Burton), medical officer, Dr. Sweet (Phil Morris), mechanic, Audrey (Jacqueline Obradors), radio operator, Mrs. Packard (Florence Stanley) and chef, Cookie (Jim Varney). Following a traumatic struggle, the group do eventually get to Atlantis and meet Kida (Cree Summer), her father (Leonard Nimoy) and a handful of others. However, as Milo thinks they're there to discover and explore, the team may or may not have different plans. Admittedly, the whole thing does come off as the typical 'Avatar' plot (with a twist or two), but much like 'Avatar', I can still appreciate this in its execution. I kind of wish I took the time to check this out upon its initial release. I think I could have had fun with this one on the big screen, considering how smooth and clean the CG action scenes are. But while I may have enjoyed it for what it was, I can see where a lot of the criticisms come from. Even I had a bit of a problem with how overly animated Milo's character seemed. I love Michael J Fox, but something about Milo just kinda bugged me. Other than that though, my criticisms of this are limited enough that it still gets a pass. If you ask me, it's kind of underrated. 3/5
0 Comments
![]() I think this is probably a good example of a "product of its time", but the controversy lies more behind the idea of the horrors that "cloning" could potentially bring to the world. It all starts with the film opening with a credit sequence, taking you through what "happened" since the cloning of the sheep, Dolly (a real-life occurrence that no doubt inspired this movie). It then brings us to "the near future... sooner than you think". So, almost instantly, we get a hint of "preachy" with this one. Cloning has become a sort of regular, everyday thing for people. Animals can be cloned, which can lead to plenty of food, but also, playing God and cloning your dying pets. Organs can be cloned for easy transplant surgeries, but so can entire human beings. Thus, the "6th Day Law" was put into place, where human beings are basically the only thing people aren't allowed to clone. Well, as any pot smoker will tell you, there are ways around laws... even if cloning a human isn't as simple as just finding a good hiding place. We are soon introduced to charter pilot Adam Gibson (Arnold Schwarzenegger) and his partner, Hank Morgan (Michael Rapaport). They are hired by billionaire Michael Drucker (Tony Goldwyn), who owns cloning corporation, "Replacement Technologies". The pilots are made to take blood and eye tests in order to prove they are good to fly. Eventually this all leads to the actual ski trip where something violent goes down, but Adam does manage to make it back home, only to see a clone of himself hanging out with his family (along with a horrendous doll that would give Chucky nightmares). Here, we learn that the dangerous thing about having a clone is having people try to kill you, as there should only be one of you. The other thing is, the idea of a clone retaining all of your own memories, so you start to question your own reality. Before he knows it, Adam is on the run from Replacement Tech. Security agents Marshall (Michael Rooker), Elsworth (Sarah Wynter), Vincent (Terry Crews) and Wiley (Rodney Rowland) as he tries to figure out what in the hell happened to his life. All in all, it's an okay movie for Schwarzenegger fans, but I personally consider it a sort of "nail in the coffin" for Schwarzenegger's prime. While one can appreciate a lot of the fun clichés we have come to expect from an Arnie flick, there's quite a bit here that overshadows all of that, and in a kind of negative way. First, it just seems like a clear project meant as a message to forewarn the world of the dangers of cloning. Nowadays (22 years later) all of that seems sort of irrelevant. Is cloning real? Sure. But we don't seem altogether worried about making full clones of ourselves as opposed to cloning things we really need for ourselves. I should also point out that I'm no scientist, and have no idea what the limits of cloning are, as it's surprisingly not a whole matter I've paid much attention to. I'm still sitting here thinking "duplicator tech from 'Star Trek' would be neat. Now that I've probably made myself out to sound not so bright about sciencey stuff, let's get to my final word on the film itself. I think that the film is perfectly passable IF you watch it as a product of its time as opposed to a present-day thriller. You might look at it a lot like someone like me would look at an 80s movie these days - you kind of need to watch it through special lenses in order to enjoy it. I'll also point out that there are MUCH better Schwarzenegger titles out there, if you're on the lookout for that classic Arnie action. My personal favourite is still 'True Lies', but his library is a lot of fun to go through if one is looking to have a good time. This is just on the lower end of it. 2/5 ![]() As far as I'm concerned, Schwarzenegger's last really good film was probably 'True Lies' (1994). But that doesn't mean one shouldn't appreciate the effort Arnold still put forward in giving us the action hero we all love him as, despite the quality of some of his more recent action films. I would probably consider 'Eraser' to be right around the time we were seeing a tipping point. It's fun, but at the same time, it felt like it was about time to make way for a new action hero. Here, Arnold plays John "The Eraser" Kruger. Working for the Witness Security Protection Program (aka "WITSEC"), he "erases" the identities of high-profile witnesses by faking their deaths, protecting them from anyone who might get to them before they are able to testify in court. John is assigned by his boss, Chief Arthur Beller (James Coburn) to protect a Cyrez Corp. senior executive named Lee Cullen (Vanessa Williams). Cyrez is a defense contractor, wherein top executives have developed a top secret weapon, and Cullen has warned the FBI that they plan to sell the weapon on the Black Market. Cullen delivers the disc with the weapon's data to the FBI, and is soon put under Witness Protection with Kruger's help. However, the disc is replaced with a fake by a mole who works for a man named Daniel Harper (Andy Romano), who happens to be the Deputy Secretary of Defense. Long story short, it's not long before John finds himself stuck between protecting Cullen, and battling sources of conspiracy from within his own company. And to make it perfectly clear, this was another action flick I found somewhat hard to follow, so if my description is a bit broad, I apologize for that. I think in some ways, this feels somewhat typical for the time. There's not a whole lot of substance to the film, but it's largely dealing with conspiracy, corruption from within and of course it all adds up to some over-the-top action. But let's be fair, it's Schwarzenegger - we WANT that over-the-top action, complete with his ever-famous one-liners. Look no further here than the scene in the zoo, involving a couple of killer crocodiles. So I think if you're a die hard Schwarzenegger action fan, this can still be fairly solid, if only a little typical. This was 1996, so the box office was starting to get a little more "disaster movie" than "shoot-em-up", making this one film that sort of dangled there during the change-over. I think, however, I only have a couple of small, maybe even insignificant criticisms to give to this movie. I can be far more forgiving than others, considering this seems to be a low-ranking movie, critically. I think it's a bit complicated (although, I tend to get confused easier than others), I think it could be considered a little too "shoot-em-up" at times, and it's often quite over-the-top with its violence. But having said all of that, this is a Schwarzenegger flick, and he's a well-established action hero. I might say it's equivalent to me buying a coffee and being a little disappointed that it wasn't actually a mocha. It's decent for what it is, there are better Arnold movies out there, but there are certainly much worse. 3/5 ![]() Here's another one that I confess I've actually seen a few times. The thing is, it has been quite a while since I've watched it, and I had to wonder if my opinion changed. Until now, this has always been "just okay" to me. I was never as harsh on it as other critics, but I didn't think it was all that special either. The fact remains, Schwarzenegger has a lot of better titles under his belt. However, it IS those better titles that end up making this movie so good, and frankly, underappreciated. For those unfamiliar, a teenage boy named Danny (Austin O'Brien), who lives with his widowed mother, Irene (Mercedes Ruehl), seeks comfort in the cinema. He is friendly with the theater's owner, Nick (Robert Prosky), who shows some of the best action movies, including that of the 'Jack Slater' series, featuring Arnold Schwarzenegger. At one point, Nick gives Danny a golden ticket, allegedly owned by the legendary Harry Houdini, which will allow him to see 'Jack Slater IV' early. Why he needs a magical golden ticket for this is anyone's guess, but I always took it as Nick just having a bit of fun with him. But then, we learn that the ticket really is magic. While watching the film, the ticket teleports him into the film's fictional world, right in Slater's back seat, during a car chase. Slater takes Danny to LAPD HQ, and there, Danny tries very hard to convince Slater that the whole thing is a movie, but Slater just brushes him off, and accuses him of having an overactive imagination. However, perhaps with his knowledge of Slater's past, Danny can help him on his assignment to try to take down Mafia Boss, Tony Vivaldi (Anthony Quinn), along with his seemingly much smarter henchman, Mr. Benedict (Charles Dance). And with that, Lt. Dekker (Frank McRae) partners them up. Now, with this golden ticket between the movie world and the real world, there are a couple of dimensional crossover scenes here, as we do a "reality to fiction to reality" thing. In my humble opinion, the best chunk of this movie is while they are in the movie. When they come back to the real world, it does tend to get a little silly with things like Arnold talking to himself as Jack Slater, and more celebrity cameos than you can shake a stick at. Even Ian McKellen shows up here! Although it is interesting to see how each character reacts to each world. When Slater comes into the real world, for example, he learns he's not necessarily invincible like the action hero he believes himself to be. Going vice-versa, Danny in the movie world is more fun, pointing out a whole bunch of action tropes along the way. It's pretty fourth-wall breaking stuff for 1993, and although one could call this a "guilty pleasure" of sorts, I don't see it as all that "guilty". It's not a masterpiece or anything, but what I do like about it goes beyond it just being a fun action movie that points out tropes (which is something I'm already a sucker for, as it is). On a deeper level, I see this as a sort of metaphor for "movie magic". The golden ticket transports Danny into a movie, experiencing it first hand. Sometimes, there are those titles that we're so attached to (as Danny is with the 'Slater' flicks) we can't help but get lost in them in a very similar way. And that's kind of why I tend to like the "in-movie" stuff better. Imagine being a die hard fan of something like 'Star Wars' and being thrown in there ABLE to do something like warn of the destruction of Alderaan! Anyway, I'm just geeking out now. The bottom line is, I see this movie as a sort of love letter to cinematic escape than just a silly action movie with a silly premise. For me, it's one of Schwarzenegger's last good ones. 3/5 ![]() This is one of the few Disney animated films I've actually never seen until now. At first, I was kind of surprised about how under the radar this was to me, considering it was the first of these to be released after I was born (missed 'Fox and the Hound' by about a year). Disney animated features take a big jump here, from 1981 to 1985, and this late-to-the-game, very non-Disney-like feature is often considered one of the worst of the bunch. But is it really that bad? After all, this has developed a cult following over the years. I further have to admit there was a little something about this, and I can't honestly say I found it all that horrible. We meet a young boy named Taran (Grant Bardsley), an assistant pig-keeper at the home of Dallben the Enchanter (Freddie Jones) who dreams of becoming a bigshot warrior. One day, Dallben learns about the evil Horned King (John Hurt) seeking out the "Black Cauldron", which will grant him the ability to raise an invincible army of the dead. Since Dallben's pig, Hen Wen, has oracular powers, Dallben fears the king may come after Hen Wen to use him, locate the Black Cauldron, and set his plan into motion. Dallben then has Taran take Hen Wen to find a place to hide and stay safe. Taran epically fails, however, and Hen Wen is nabbed by Gwythaints - dragon-like creatures working for the Horned King. Now it's up to Taran to keep his promise to protect Hen Wen, and go after him. Along his way, Taran meets a few interesting characters, but perhaps most interesting was a dog-like creature (not a dog though) named Gurgi (John Byner). He's just a lonely critter who wants a friend, and sounds exactly like Gollum from 'Lord of the Rings'. He evn talks like him, saying things like "poor miserable Gurgi deserves fierce smackings and whackings on his poor, tender head". I even paused the movie to check to see if it was Andy Serkis before he got famous. He further meets (mainly) Princess Eilonwy (Susan Sheridan); the princess who the Disney princesses didn't seem to let into their club, and a bard named Fflewddur Fflam (Nigel Hawthorne) who is meant to be a source of comedy relief, but doesn't really deliver many laughs. Taran also comes across a sword that allows him to fight a little better - almost like a cheat code as opposed to him having to learn through trial and error on his journey. So remember way back in the opening paragraph when I said "I can't honestly say I found it all that horrible"? Well, to set the record straight, I still think this is pretty bad. I found it a little boring at times, thought a lot of the journey was sort of handed to our hero (ie the sword, and the fact that Princess Eilonwy basically walks them both out of a prison at one point) and some of the dialogue is a bit tedious. But the film does have its merits as well, like the first time Disney animation tried out that early CG, making a lot of the backgrounds look pretty awesome. Along with that, this is very Bluth-like animation, though he had little to do with this, aside from a few uncredited scenes (he also worked uncredited on 'Fox and the Hound'). It is, honestly, pretty cool to see just how dark this gets, especially for a Disney film. Now, this film does have a pretty big cult following, as I mentioned before, and I can actually understand why. If you were to ask if I recommended it, I would say it depends on the type of thing you're looking for. If you wanna see a Disney animated movie as you know them, I'd say avoid it. But if you wanna see a bit of Disney dark, and appreciate the risks that a film like this can take, then I'd say it's worth checking out. What's far more interesting than the film itself is the film's overall history, but I could be here all day dissecting it, so here's a simple link (some of this, I covered, but there's more). For yours truly, it's not making a favourites list any time soon, and I definitely felt like the bad outweighed the good here. This is similar to so many other things I've seen that have just done it a little better, and I didn't exactly fall into the cult following with it. Although if you did, I can actually understand why, and wouldn't question your choice. 3/5 ![]() Unlike the other movies I have reviewed this month, '48 Hrs.' is a title that I remember once seeing, but this particular viewing may very well have been my first. In other words, I didn't remember a damn thing. Having said that, it's unfortunately a bit easier nowadays to claim this as a pretty dated piece of work they may not be able to get away with these days - much of it having to do with race. So fair warning before going into this, it is another one of those 80s flicks that's sort of stuck in its time. As the film opens, we are introduced to convicted criminal Albert Ganz (James Remar) as part of a road gang. He meets up with a Native American man named Billy Bear (Sonny Landham) who stages a fight with him, and in the process, eventually escape the situation, killing a few cops in the process. Meanwhile, Inspector Jack Cates (Nick Nolte) is sent with two other detectives to investigate a man by the name of G.P. Polson. This results in a shootout that kills the two associate detectives, reveals Polson to really be Ganz, and makes things a touch more personal for Cates. This is when fellow cop, Ben Kehoe (Brion James) informs Jack about Ganz former partner in crime, Reggie Hammond (Eddie Murphy); a criminal serving three years for armed robbery with just six months left. With the cooperation of the department, Jack gets Reggie out of prison on a 48-hour release so that he can assist in taking down his former partner. What results is what is widely recognized as the first in a long line of buddy cop movies. Being 1982, it predates pretty much anything else I can think of in the category. Although the technicality here is that Reggie really isn't a cop, providing us with another "tomayto/tomahto" situation, like 'Die Hard' being a Christmas movie (don't argue, we see it as we see it, and I am of the Christmas mind). Anyway, the first in a subgenre (whether one agrees or not, it is highly credited as such) is a pretty big deal, as it sets the bar for something new. The problem in going back to this, and having it be so fresh in my head, is that I've seen so much more I would deem a lot better, a lot funnier, and the bar has really just been set higher in the years since. When we think of buddy cop movies now, the first ones to spring to mind are titles like 'Lethal Weapon' or 'Rush Hour', where this may not even really be in the game anymore. That said, it still makes for an interesting bit of cinematic history, all things considered. This is another one of those titles I remember being looked at very fondly back in the 80s. I can still remember a lot of grownups talking about it (this came out the year I was born, so the memories are definitely very hazy), and I can still remember a lot of laughter associated with it. I admit to a few giggles here and there, but not a whole lot stood out to me in any way. By the ends, one thing remained very clear - that this is most definitely a product of its time, and we've come a very long way since. But here I am, making it sound like it's probably not worth the watch anymore. On the contrary, I think it makes for a decent viewing with the right frame of mind. Before you enter into this, you might want to take the Disney+ disclaimer into consideration. Basically something that says "certain things were said and/or done here that aren't allowed anymore, and have since been deemed offensive". Then you can go into it, seeing it as a little piece of history. You can educate yourself on what we used to be able to get away with, and how far we've come. You can see it as the buddy cop movie that started it all (again, debatable), and do it all with the understanding that this was once a big hit. If nothing else, it was definitely an interesting title to look back on. But unfortunately for yours truly, I don't think it holds up enough to want to revisit it any time soon... the sequel on the other hand, at least has me mildly curious... 3/5 ![]() Here we have a fine example of a great movie that's slowly dying. One can find it, but they really have to dig - at least up here in the Great White North, where of course, we must dig through snow. Anyway, one can only rent it here from Apple TV or the Cineplex Store, and it really, truly deserves much more exposure than that. I think the idea is something that, while simple, isn't really something that has been repeated. I could be wrong, but as far as what I've seen goes, this feels like a breath of fresh air. A bounty hunter by the name of Jack Walsh (Robert De Nero) is hired by bail bondsman Eddie Moscone (Joe Pantoliano) to bring in a $450,000 bail-jumping accountant named Jonathan Mardukas, aka "The Duke" (Charles Grodin). The Duke's crime was to embezzle $15 million from Jimmy Serrano (Dennis Farina), a powerful Chicago mob boss. As a result, The Duke ran from LA and his bail. Walsh takes the job, demanding $100,000 for his return. When Walsh finally finds him, he ends up with more than the trouble seems to be worth, as The Duke happens to be a real talker and nit-picker. Although the character is pretty irritating, it all works when that personality clashes with De Nero's tough guy personality. Some of their exchanges are actually pretty hilarious. In the meantime, more people are chasing down The Duke for different reasons. FBI Agent Alonzo Mosely (Yaphet Kotto) wants to bring Mardukas in to testify against Serrano. But an angry Serrano also sends his goons Tony and Joey (Richard Foronjy and Robert Miranda, respectively) to intercept Mardukas for reasons perhaps a touch more lethal. Let's not forget Walsh's bounty-hunting rival, Marvin (John Ashton) who's a bit desperate for a bounty himself. To make matters even more difficult for Walsh's mission, Mardukas seems to have a panic-inducing fear of flying, so a lot of the return journey is on-foot or other various forms of transportation that don't "go down". This is a cross-country chase movie, jam-packed with a great cast. Some of the delivery these guys have is comedic gold. I particularly enjoyed De Nero responding to Grodin a lot of the time, and the entire side of the mob. Farina, in a way, is the cherry that really tops this sundae. He was making me laugh almost every time he was on-screen, and his two bumbling henchmen weren't far behind. It was further interesting to actually see Yaphet Kotto in a role that wasn't horror. Despite his filmography being fairly extensive, I know him best from 'Alien' and 'Freddy's Dead'. I didn't feel like he really stood out here, but he did manage to have a moment or two that caught my funny-bone, even if it wasn't intentional. It had been a while since I'd seen this, but I think I had more fun this time around than my first viewing several years ago. If you can find it, I highly recommend checking it out if you've never seen it. It's well-worth the rental cost, and it's easily one of the best examples of a mob comedy (mobedy?) I can think of. I may have a few nit-picks if I dig dep enough (like Grodin annoying me sometimes), but the truth of the matter is I had a lot of fun with this; certainly enough fun that it overshadowed any complaints I might have had - which I'd honestly have to look for. This one is hereby bookmarked as something I'll definitely be watching a few times over. 5/5 ![]() This one comes to me as not so much a high recommendation as a title in which Simon Pegg and Nick Frost coexist. I am a fan, especially when they team up with Edgar Wright, but that is not the case here. Still, I did check out the trailer, and to me, it looked like a fun time, if nothing else. Much like I appreciate in so many other films, it seemed to be a bit of a horror flick with plenty of comedy, and looked as though it would be right up my alley. However, sadly, sometimes things don't turn out quite how we would like. Following the tragic death of his father, Donald Wallace (Finn Cole) enrolls in an exclusive school known as Slaughterhouse. There, he attempts to fit in among his peers, meeting (among others) the odd but friendly roommate, Willoughby Blake (Asa Butterfield), a hardened prefect named Clegg (Tom Rhys Harries), Head of their Sparta House, Meredith Houseman (Simon Pegg) and the school's Headmaster, they call "The Bat" (Michael Sheen). The school is home to a fair share of secrets, one of which involves the Headmaster's scheme of fracking ("the process of injecting liquid at high pressure into subterranean rocks, boreholes, etc. so as to force open existing fissures and extract oil or gas"), Despite warnings from the local harbinger, Woody Chapman (Nick Frost), the fracking continues to the point where it eventually creates a sinkhole, unleashing horrible subterranean half-worm, half-dog creatures with an appetite for human flesh. Unfortunately, to get to this point takes a good long while, and the film really doesn't do anything special until that point. A lot of it is getting to know the characters, but no one really sticks out to me here; not even Pegg or Frost. Meredith spends his time pining for his far away girlfriend, Audrey (Margot Robbie) and Woody is just plain off his rocker, and not in the typically charming Nick Frost way so much as being all drugged up and serious. While it was easy enough to tell not to take a film like this seriously, I can't say I had as much fun as I wish I did. On paper, this sounds great - it's almost like 'Harry Potter' meets 'Attack the Block', except there's no magic and the aliens come from the underground. I can't deny that the gross-out creature effects were good and effective, utilizing a lot of practical over CG, but again, it just takes too long for anything to really happen. For almost the first hour, it's exposition and a sinkhole and then we finally get into the action. 'Attack the Block' is very similar in some ways, but it hits the ground running and you don't stop running until it's over. This was more like waiting for the timer to go off, and nothing particularly special happens in that time. I think this could have been a lot of fun, if it was only cut down a bit. I'm not sure I'd say the film was bad, exactly, but I would suggest that it's pretty forgettable, and that there are other films like it that are much better. As a British creature feature, I would still highly recommend 'Attack the Block' over this any day. This isn't something I feel like I need to go back and watch again, or show off to my friends, and there are several other better Pegg/Frost movies out there much more worth your time. However, if you don't mind waiting for the horror aspect of this to pop up, it does get fun within the last half of it regardless of how you might feel about the first half. It could be a fun thing to throw on absent-mindedly, but nothing very special. It's readily available on Netflix (Canada) if you want to check it out for yourself. 2/5 ![]() This, to me, has always been one of the strangest recommendations given to me. This "reader suggestion" doesn't actually come from one reader in particular, but several - and its recommendation also dates all the way back to its initial release in 2001, first coming from several peers at school. I, however, would consistently avoid watching for the plain and simple reason that I felt I couldn't truly appreciate something that juggled medieval times with a modern soundtrack. The key song, of course, being Queen's 'We Will Rock You', which is a solid enough tune to be able to appeal to a mass audience. More on that later. Taking place in 14th century Europe, a great jouster named Sir Ector (Nick Brimble) has died, leaving behind his squires, William (Heath Ledger), Roland (Mark Addy) and Wat (Alan Tudyk). Being in the midst of a tournament, Ector was close to winning. Now destitute, however, William gets the bright idea to dress up as Ector, impersonate him, and win the tournament and all that comes with it. He naturally wins, and with the win comes the want to make a life of it, collecting riches along the way. Only nobles are allowed to compete, however that's resolved with real-life 14th century writer/poet Geoffrey Chaucer (Paul Bettany) comes into the picture, as he writes them a patent of nobility and gives William the name of Sir Ulrich von Liechtenstein" from Gelderland; also real with details of his early life spotty at best. This eventually becomes a love story when William meets the likes of Jocelyn (Shannyn Sossamon); a noblewoman who he falls head-over-heels for. He continues to fight and joust in an attempt to win her heart, but is rivaled both in battle and love by Count Adhemar of Anjou (Rufus Sewell). So basically what we have here is a work of historical fan fiction, as it uses real people and real concepts, but the artist gives it their own spin. A good comparison of this would be something like Tarantino's 'Inglourious Basterds'. And truth be told, the actual story is pretty good, and it does it with a certain sense of humor that does suggest not to take things too seriously. The thing is, however, I've always had a bit of a personal issue when it comes to matching era with music. I'll probably always feel that the music should fit the time period in some way, and to modernize it takes care. I would argue two examples of movies that did it right were 'The Great Gatsby', with it's modern hip hop take on swing music; and 'Guardians of the Galaxy' using retro pop music in an otherwise very futuristic setting with a story behind the music. But while this actually does have a solid soundtrack, nothing about it makes sense to me, and it just feels completely out of place. If you were to play this soundtrack for anyone who had absolutely no knowledge of this movie, I frankly doubt they'd be able to land on anything with a medieval theme. So it's an odd combo of decent movie, decent soundtrack, disappointing results. Once again though, I do feel like this is a movie not to be taken seriously, and the whole soundtrack thing really is just a personal nitpick. All in all, I was still pretty entertained by it, and it was actually somewhat a breath of fresh air to see something taking place in that time period that didn't feel like it needed to be "epic". When you get right down to it, there's a hell of a lot of time period movies that are serious, dark, and want to keep an audience on the edge of their seats - which is awesome, and I love it. But this viewing did provide me with further proof that thngs don't necessarily have to follow a formula to be entertaining. Though I still think this was passable at best, and couldn't hold a candle to some of the bigger productions out there, similar, I can't deny that I had fun. 3/5 ![]() This month is another focus on reader suggestions. I have been keeping a list as I go, and in some cases I ask about films with certain details. In this case, I requested an international action flick - and oh boy did I get one. To me, this was a mixture of 'John Wick' and 'Taken', and adding just a dash of 'Oldboy' to it, at least as far as the film's overall disturbing nature goes. It's a very dark, badass revenge film, but there's enough here to make one cringe in just how far it's willing to take things. One might even say there's a horror element to it all. The central character of this story is ex-special agent Cha Tae-sik (Won Bin), a man who runs a pawn shop and keeps to himself. He befriends a curious little neighbor girl named Jeong So-mi (Sae-ron-Kim) who is seemingly fascinated by him, and sees good in him where others can't seem to. So-mi's mother, Hyo-jeong (Hyo-seo Kim) is a heroin addict who one day entrusts Tae-sik with a camera bag which, unbeknownst to Tae-sik, contains some stolen heroin. This captures the attention of a crime lord named Oh Myung-gyu (Young-chang Song) who sends his brothers Man-seok (Hee-won Kim) and Jong-seok (Seong-oh Kim) to retrieve the stolen drugs. This eventually results in the kidnapping of both Hyo-jeong and So-mi, who the gang promises to release upon delivery of the stolen goods which Tae-sik has in his possession. Of course, when an ex-special agent finds himself in such a situation, especially with the kidnapping of the young So-mi, you know shit's about to go off. As one can predict, you get what you come to see. For me, it's not quit as up there in action as 'John Wick', and it's actually a bit closer to 'Taken' as far as its execution. There's a bit more of a thriller here than straight up action. But I will say that when the action does unfold, it's some pretty badass stuff. The film is certainly propelled by the same ideas as John Wick though in the sense that something of pure innocence is taken away and we want nothing to stop our hero in his mission on getting revenge. We live vicariously through this hero as he stabs, shoots and punches his way through all the bad guys - and the worse someone gets it, the better we feel, especially when we know they're horrible people. Just to appeal to the masses, this is the same feeling just about anyone gets nowadays when we watch a World War II allied soldier take out a Nazi who's in the middle of torturing an innocent civilian. I suppose there's a sort of sadistic glee we get from such things - myself included. We just want to see horrible people get their comeuppance. If you're looking for a solid revenge film and don't mind a few subtitles, I might recommend this one to you, especially if you're missing that feeling 'John Wick' or 'Taken' gave you. However, I might bring to mind the horror element to this I brought up before. There's a certain realism to this film that is downright disturbing, and there are some pretty gruesome scenes throughout, be it in the physical or psychological sense. I'm not afraid to admit there were a few scenes here that got in my head, not because they were necessarily scary, but the imagery just stuck, and some of it was a bit too real - especially some scenes involving children. The odd thing is, it's probably not disturbing in the same ways one might imagine This is certainly one of those movies that falls under the category of movies where you feel like you need a post-viewing shower because it's just that filthy. But I will say that if you manage to make it through, the ending is something pretty powerful, and I have to say it caught me right in the feels. While it maintains a dark, creepy and even dirty atmosphere, there is still something about it that captures your heart in the sense that you feel for the misunderstood Tae-sik and you sincerely want him to find So-mi because their friendship is something truly special. I would recommend this to anyone looking for something more intense. It's not exactly what I'd call fun in the same way 'John Wick' is, but it does strike that chord of vengeful badassery quite nicely all the same. 4/5 ![]() This month's Kevin Smith catch-up wraps up with one of the most bizarre things I have ever seen. I tend to cut Kevin a lot of slack, as he's an incredibly likable, inspiring, and does better on catering to his fans than critics. The dude's not out there to win an Oscar, he's out there to make his fans happy, and push potential filmmakers to just go for it. All that said, however, I really can't give this one to him, and to perhaps no one's real surprise, I'm on the negative side of it. Indeed, this was one of those movies I very nearly walked away from in the middle of it. We follow the two clerks from 'Tusk', Colleen Collette (Lily-Rose Depp) and Colleen McKenzie (Harley Quinn Smith); two teenage girls who study yoga with their teacher, Yogi Bayer (Justin Long), work for the Eh-2-Zed convenience store, and spend a lot of their spare time rocking out in their band, Glamthrax. They are invited to a senior party by Colleen M's crush, Hunter (Austin Butler) and his friend, Gordon (Tyler Posey). Eventually this leads to a would-be ritual Satan-worshipping sacrifice, but all is disrupted by a bunch of (and I'm not making this up) stereotypically German Nazi bratwursts dressed in Canadian Mounty garb. These things kill the guys in a most grotesquely odd manner, and the Colleens escape, but are immediately arrested for their murders. At school, the Colleens learned that the Nazi Party once influenced Winnipeg, and a branch of Canadian Nazis emerged from it, led by self-proclaimed Canadian Führer, Adrien Arcand (Haley Joel Osment) and his partner in crime, Andronicus Arcane (Ralph Garman). Arcand was eventually arrested, but Arcane disappeared. Of course this all leads to a weird explanation as to why the Bratzis are even a thing, and the girls are helped by Guy LaPointe (Johnny Depp) who believes they are innocent, and upon acquiring Bratzi evidence, himself, helps them get to the bottom of things. And even that was almost too much explanation for a plot so strangely put together. It's abundantly clear that this movie is a bit of a middle finger towards critics - especially when you learn what the big villainous plan is near the end. It's something Smith seems to have made special for his daughter, and his die hard fans who all have the same reason for liking it; it's stupid, goofy fun. While that may be true, speaking as a Canadian, I can honestly say they went a little too overboard with the stereotypes here. Bearing in mind that's coming from someone who can freely admit that he eats Canadian stereotypes up, that's saying something. The whole "Aboot" thing is used to an absolute fault, and knowledge of Canadian music seems a bit lost here as "Oh Canada" seems to be the front-running song throughout the film. I further just have personal beef here, as it seemed to really be trying to be 'Scott Pilgrim vs The World' with the way it introduces characters, and a lot of visuals accompanied by quick humor. The difference is 'Scott Pilgrim' is actually much closer to what some Canadians are like. Taking place in Toronto, it seemed they clearly did their homework. This is really much more of a stereotype thing, which again is great a lot of the time, but here it felt so forced. Then I realize this is Part 2 of a trilogy ('Moose Jaws' is next) and I've gotta say, Kevin's directorial skills are fast-waning; although as a Jay & Silent Bob fan, I did still like 'Reboot', which was a great way to cater to his fans after this one. I think it's pretty safe to say that 'Yoga Hosers' is where Smith hits his rock bottom. I didn't like 'Tusk' a whole lot either, but at least I laughed in certain spots. This just didn't really give me anything, and I'd consider Guy LaPointe the only real saving grace. But I'm not about to rip apart Harley or Lily, as they are still a couple of fresh face to the industry and we all need to start somewhere. Harley has already been put in a Tarantino film ('Once Upon a Time in Hollywood') and Lily-Rose seems to be doing okay in the Indie film circuit. I hope to see them both make it, but as far as this particular film goes, it's a bit of a blotch on their resumes. I still love Kevin Smith, consider this a simple weak point in his career. Every director has something like that, eventually. His biggest fans know and love him best for his Jersey movies, so as long as we still have those, we're in good shape. 1/5 ![]() There was once a time when Kevin Smith left his Askewniverse (AKA, anything that features Jay and Silent Bob) to dabble in other things. This all basically started with 'Jersey Girl' in 2004 and carried on with 'Zack & Miri' in 2008 and 'Cop Out' in 2010. But this was all still comedy, and about the furthest we ever saw him veer off a comedic course was how dramatic 'Jersey Girl' and even 'Chasing Amy' were. So, after 'Cop Out' (which perhaps I'll review another time) bit the guy in the ass with bad reception, he decided to try his hand at real-life horror with this film. For me, this one had a very 'Hostel' feel to it for various reasons; namely the idea of horny teenagers falling into a brutal trap. In this case, three hormone-driven dudes; Travis (Michael Angarano), Jarod (Kyle Gallner) and Billy Ray (Nicholas Braun) are convinced that an older woman named Sara (Melissa Leo) wants to have group sex with them. Upon meeting her, Sara drugs the boys, and we are offered Jarod's perspective as he wakes up in a covered cage in the hyper-conservative Five Points Trinity Church, led by Abin Cooper (Michael Parks); a hate-filled, prejudice man - especially towards the gay community. The reality of this movie pops a bit when you realize he's based on Fred Phelps; a very real and frankly scary right-wing extremist. On their way to meet Sara, the boys manage to sideswipe the vehicle of Sheriff Wynan (Stephen Root) who gets his deputy Pete (Matt Jones) to go out to look for the vehicle that hit his. This eventually leads Pete to the church where he realizes very quickly that he's gonna need some backup, namely from Agent Joseph Keenan (John Goodman) of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. Things eventually come to a stand-off between the authorities and the church while the boys do what they can to escape their captors. It's not exactly a plot you'd consider fresh or original, but I will admit that it's interesting to see Smith tackle not only the horror genre, but keep it in the real world (although apparently an alternate ending to this involves the Rapture). Make no mistake on this one though - it's not a fun horror movie, despite the fact that it's directed by Kevin Smith. This is very reminiscent of torture porn, although it's not nearly as extreme as something like 'Hostel'. But the general idea that someone seeking fun finds themselves drugged and held captive in any way just points in that direction. This one also has that does of reality that, most unfortunately, there are some right wing extremists out there who are that horrifying. I can't imagine actually being gay (or for that matter, any member of the LGBTQ community) and knowing that I have these real-life Boogeymen to look out for. I have no basis for comparison on a lot of things, being a straight, white, male - but I can certainly empathize when I see a film like this, and if that was Kevin's point, it worked. I can't really say I got a lot of entertainment value out of this one, but it was a fascinating one-off for a few different reasons. Namely, this includes Kevin breaking off from his regular comedy routine to try something new, bringing a reality to his horror, and basically just having the balls to tackle something so controversial. For me, this is one of those movies you watch once to try it out, but you don't feel much of a need to return to it any time soon. It's not something you can just watch over and over again like so many of his other films, but I'd say if you're curious about seeing Kevin flex that horror muscle, it could be worth checking out. Just bear in mind the controversial issues involved, as this one is bound to cause discomfort for a few. 3/5 ![]() This film has provided me with a pretty good opportunity to express my feelings on Melissa McCarthy. I have always said that she definitely has the talent, but she's so terribly typecast that she's not given the room to be at her best. Of course, since 2015, when this film was initially released, we've all seen her come pretty far. This includes a Best Actress nomination for a very serious role in 'Can You Ever Forgive Me', and I really do hope to see more opportunity present itself to her in the future, as she's such an underutilized actress. I personally found that after watching this movie, 'Spy' may be that perfect balance of her talents. She does the funny thing, she does the serious thing, she does the badass thing, and it all comes together with a fantastic supporting cast, great dialogue, and a fair share of decent action. I can say with all honesty that this was a very pleasant surprise, as I went into it expecting something pretty bottom-shelf. I do love when a film proves me wrong though, and this is no exception. In fact, even thought it's a bold statement, I might currently consider this the most surprised I've been by a movie (although 'Jumanji' 2017 is a big contender). We're introduced to a desk-bound CIA agent named Susan Cooper (McCarthy); a techie for field agent Bradley Fine (Jude Law). Things go pretty well between them as a team, and we get that Susan has a bit of a thing for Fine's suave good looks and demeanor. However, long story short, when things go south, Fine is assassinated by a Bulgarian arms dealer named Rayna Boyanov (Rose Byrn). Having such strong feelings for her friend, partner and potential love interest, Susan eventually manages to get her first undercover assignment from her boss, Elaine Crocker (Allison Janney), to help with the capture of Boyanov. The running gag is that every time her identity changes, it's never anything flattering, and the disguises kinda just keep getting lamer but funnier. In the meantime, Susan has to go undercover due to the agency's top agent's names being revealed, and becoming easily identifiable. The two top agents in question are the seemingly fake-friendly Karen Walker (Morena Baccarin), whose confidence lets her get away with far too much, and Rick Ford (Jason Statham) who puts that cherry on top of this wonderful spy sundae. His running gag is bragging about various stunts he's done, and more often than not, I'm pretty sure they turn out to be something you may have seen him do in another movie at some point. The gag is that to hear these situations out loud is laughable, even if it all looks incredibly badass on screen. So it takes its jabs at typical Hollywood action with a modern "It" guy for the genre. Beyond having a great cast, this film is just really well written for a spy spoof. It seems abundantly clear by the way things unfold that writer/director Paul Feig has an appreciation for spy movies. For as much of a comedy/action that this is, it's a bit surprising, and a breath of fresh air, not to see it go too off the rails at any point. It's oddly believable as an actual spy movie with comedic situations as opposed to just a spy spoof like 'Spy Hard' or 'Austin Powers'. Yet as you get the gags going through the film, it's easy to tell that it's something that doesn't take itself too seriously either. It's kinda "just right" as far as a spy comedy/spoof goes. So, if you're anything like me and find Melissa McCarthy a little too typecast as a goofy character, you might find the trailer for this giving you pause. It just looks like Melissa McCarthy is gonna play Melissa McCarthy again, on the surface. But trust me when I say there is much more to this movie than meets the eye. But don't take my word for it either. Rotten Tomatoes balances the critic/audience rating on an average of 86.5%, with the critics liking it more! If you haven't seen it yet, and you appreciate a good spy movie, and are any kind of fan of Jason Stathom, this was made for you. Check it out. It's awesome! 5/5 ![]() This one floats a bit under the radar, but can be found on Amazon Prime (Canada) for those who are looking to quench that thirst for a good martial arts movie. It has come highly recommended by a few close friends as one of those movies that's just plain and simply off-the-wall awesome. I can say with all honesty that it doesn't disappoint in the least. I absolutely loved it. Renound Chinese professor, Jack (Jackie Chan) teams up with a young Indian professor named Ashmita (Disha Patani) to search for the lost Magadha treasure in Tibet. Together, they assemble a team or archaeologists and other specialists, Jones Lee (Aarif Rahman), Xiaoguang (Lay Zhang), Kyra (Amyra Dastur) and Noumin (Miya Muqi). Eventually, using modern technology, they locate the treasure under a frozen lake. Here, they are ambushed by a group of mercenaries led by Randall (Sonu Sood), but our hero team escapes with a diamond that could lead to the Magadha Treasure. Soon, it becomes a race to get to the lost treasure first, very much in the style of 'Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade'. In fact, this movie with all of its ideas borrows a great deal from 'Indiana Jones', but think of it this way; what if Indiana Jones knew martial arts? While the film isn't entirely original in plot, it's made up for with the idea of bringing the art of Kung Fu together with the art of Yoga, and the film shows they hold as many differences as they do similarities. They are both used quite a bit throughout the film, and you get you Jackie Chan fighting blended with other great martial artists and their individual styles. It's neat that it doesn't just stop at being a Kung Fu movie. This is another one of those movies that certainly isn't without its flaws, but the flaws are so overshadowed by the awesomely random stuff that keeps happening. I mean, there's a scene where Jackie's in a speedy car chase with a lion as his passenger. Read that out loud and tell me that doesn't sound like something that would be cool to see. There's actually a lot of animal use in this, but I'm pretty confident it's about 99% CG. You get wolves, elephants, hyenas, snakes, horses, camels, there's a zoo in this movie. The wolf part in particular was my favorite, involving Jackie and Jones doing some Kung Fu training in order to intimidate the wolves. It looks like a one-on-one fighting game with a cool wolf/tundra background. That actually brings me to my next point, the CG. You really have to watch this movie in a certain way, because the CG isn't what you'd call strong. You'll know everything you need to know in the opening sequence about it. My general impression was that though it looks kinda rough, it really pops with bright color and swift action, and I thought to myself that if it was a video game cut scene, it would look pretty awesome. With that, I just carried on watching the rest as if it was a high def game come to life, and it worked out pretty well. So, if you're on the lookout for a good action movie with a good blend of martial arts, I can honestly recommend this pretty highly. You'll need to go in with an open mind, and convince yourself to let a few things slide, but all in all this is a fun movie. I will forewarn that I thought it ended very abruptly though. If I have any real complaints about it, that's probably what it would be. There's a little lesson of positivity, and then it just kinda ends. But it ends with a dance number so catchy that you almost shrug off how abrupt the ending is because at that moment it's very clear that this was something made for fun more than anything. Sit back, relax, and get a taste of that classic Jackie Chan fighting. 4/5 ![]() This movie is one of my favorite things; a movie with a Critic Rating scale on the low side (40%), but an audience rating on the high side (74%). Movies like this are the reason I do what I do here. I review these titles, not as a film school graduate, but as an audience member. I wanted to review movies from a general audience perspective, and it probably shows with how generous I tend to be with some of my ratings. I therefore go against the grain on this one, and hop in there with the audience, because 'Bloodsport' has so much still going for it. The film centers on American Army Captain, Frank Dux (Jean-Claude Van Damme), who's sensei, Senzo Tanaka (Roy Chiao) trained in the art of Ninjutsu. Tanaka took Dux under his wing, as a child, who broke into Tanaka's house to steal a katana. Tanaka tells Dux that a katana is not to be stolen, but earned through strict training, and such is done, alongside Shingo (Sean Ward), Tanaka's son. Eventually Shingo fights in an illegal underground tournament held in Hong Kong called the Kumite, which kills him, and soon Dux is trained to become a member of the Tanaka clan through a pretty brutal but bad ass training montage. Dux is then invited to fight in the same tournament, and the movie really makes you wonder how they got a movie like 'Street Fighter' so screwed up. His superiors refuse to let him go, so Dux just says "the hell with it" and goes to Hong Kong to fight, anyway. This leads to Criminal Investigation Command officers, Helmer (Norman Burton) and Rawlins (Forest Whitaker) to track him down. Meanwhile, once he gets to Honk Kong, Dux is befriended by a fellow tournament fighter, Ray Jackson (Donald Gibb) and a streetwise guide named Victor Lin (Ken Siu). The pair are lead to the tournament, Dux performs some bad assery to prove he's worthy to fight, and the tournament begins. Soon the attention of Kumite champion, Chong Li (Bolo Yeung) is caught when Dux breaks his record for fastest knock-out - guess who the villain is. As for romantic interest, that's here too, with American journalist, Janice Kent (Leah Ayres), who's investigating the Kumite, which could mean trouble. Anyway, the bottom line is that if you wanna see Jean-Claude Van Damme in a better 'Street Fighter' movie that's more about the tournament than anything else, this is a very good place to turn. Let's face facts, the fighting and bad-assery is why anyone is gonna watch this movie and enjoy it. Things like acting and bad dubbing are to be overlooked, and it's a simple story of vengeance, complete with some gnarly broken bone scenes. With that, there's not a whole lot more to say about 'Bloodsport'. It's an hour and a half of Jean-Claude Van Damme training and fighting, but make no mistake, it's not as dull as that either. There's a generous sense of humor behind it, and there's a charm when we see the friendship between Dux and Ray. It's that same buddy-buddy thing you got with Maverick and Goose from 'Top Gun'. 'Bloodsport' has developed a really generous cult following over the years since its release, and some might even claim this as Van Damme's real breakout performance. Up until this point, he was credited as a movie goer, a spectator, a soldier, a "gay karate man", and finally, Ivan Kraschinsky the Russian in 'No Retreat, No Surrender', which he's known for, but I daresay it doesn't have quite the same strength as 'Bloodsport' as a popular movie. I actually remember peers talking about this movie when I was a kid, and how cool JCVD was. Some would even challenge Schwarzenegger's awesomeness with his. Bear in mind that a LOT of my peers were watching things like gory horror at a super early age. Without this being the suggestion of a dear old friend, I'm not sure I ever would have gotten around to watching it. It was always one of those martial arts movies that for whatever reason I never got super into (which is super weird, considering some of my particular tastes). When you picture your ideal-minded kid when it came to watching violence, I was damn near perfect. I didn't even start getting into horror until I was about 17, so movies like this were just off my radar, growing up. Nowadays, it's really just more interesting to watch as a piece of cinematic history. It was movies like this that prompted American action filmmakers to say "let's get the guy who can do the splits, he's awesome." It's well worth the hour and a half, and my criticisms are so minimal they don't matter. Just sit back and watch the fight. 4/5 ![]() Today, we begin another month of reader suggestions. This is where friends, family, coworkers, and even maybe a few fans throw a title out there that they would suggest I watch. The main reason is to catch up on great movies that I've missed over the years, and I had a good time with it a few months ago, so I figure this is going to be a relatively regular thing. No names will be mentioned throughout the process, but you'll know your suggestion when it pops up. This one is for a lifelong friend of mine, and huge supporter of the site. For a "movie guy", it's actually pretty amazing how much I've missed out on over the years. Some titles falling under that category are titles I surprise myself with, and 'The Warriors' has been under that category for quite some time. Truth be told, the only, and I mean only thing I ever knew about this movie was that it was a street gang related story where some guy clinks beer bottles and utters the famous sing-song line of "Waarrioors, come out to plaayaay". It's a creepy-ass scene, but it was never enough to draw me in completely, without knowing the rest. But now that I have finally seen it, I just regret holding off for so damn long. Our story centers on gangs of New York City in 1979, that really seem to reflect the gritty side of New York street life in the 80s (it was like they knew what they had). Leader of the Gramercy Riffs, Cyrus (Roger Hill) calls a midnight summit, requesting nine unarmed representatives from each gang. He proposes a city-wide truce among the gangs, as together, they outnumber the cops by a significant amount. Together, they could take back the streets, and most of the gangs cheer. But when Luthor, leader of the Rogues, shoots Cyrus, he pegs the murder on Cleon, leader of the Warriors. Chaos ensues, and most of the Warriors escape, but a hit on the Warriors is put out over the radio, and soon it turns into survival for them. Although the film came out to critical ridicule upon its release, it has since become a cult classic reflection of the times. Some of the cult draw may have to do with the idea of it being a rare film with a violent history upon its release. Our version of that might be 'The Dark Knight Rises', which involved a massive theatrical shooting in Aurora, Colorado. 'The Warriors' was linked to acts of vandalism and three murders between showings the week following its release. Paramount pulled all advertising, theater owners were allowed out of their contractual obligation to show it, and security personnel were added to at least 200 theaters across America. That doesn't sound like a lot now, but in 1979, that was pretty significant. Getting back to the movie itself, however, we really just wanna know if I thought it was any good. Well, this movie does what a lot of movies struggle to do, and I admire it every time I see it - well-rounded characters. We have a full gang of main characters here, and the film does a good job at letting us know that while we're routing for them, they're still a tough street gang of New York, and at points you kinda second guess your liking of them. In actuality, they're just the unlikely gang that got framed. There was nothing particularly special about any of them, but in a weird roundabout way, that's what's so good about it. They stay true to who they are supposed to be representing. At no point do you get characters like the goody-goody who says "gee whiz, you guys, I think this is wrong." In short, the movie has balls. This is one of those "made for men" kinda movies; 1979's version of something like '300' or 'The Expendables', but less about action and more about survival, and holding your turf. There are some relatively uncomfortable moments, but nothing too extreme. It gets as intense as it needs to when it comes to them facing off against other gangs, and you can't really help but get into how original some of the gang ideas are. This is actually quite a creative movie, despite its overall simple plot. And speaking of creative, I did NOT know that Joe Walsh's 'In the City' was written for this movie! Most would know it as being performed by The Eagles, but it's totally Walsh's song. Anyway, it gets bonus points for that, as I am an Eagles fan, and that's a great tune. 4/5 ![]() This one peaked my curiosity at the time, but I missed out on the chance to catch it in theaters, and haven't really looked back until now. It struck me as what could probably be a really good revenge movie, and with Jackie Chan in the lead, how could you go wrong with its badassery? Minh Quan (Chan) lives a peaceful life, with his daughter, Fan (Katie Leung). For work, he runs a Chinese restaurant with his business partner, Lam (Tao Liu). Things are going pretty well for the lot of them, but things hit the ground running at mach speed when Fan is killed in a bombing incident, while shopping. This, of course, puts our revenge story on track, as Quan does everything in his power to try to get the names of the bombers. Starting, and failing, with Scotland Yard, his next big focus is the Deputy First Minister of Northern Ireland, Liam Hennessy (Pierce Brosnan), who Quan catches speaking publicly about being a former IRA leader, but condemning the bombing. The "Authentic IRA" claim the bombing, and the combination of events leads Quan to Belfast to find Hennessy, and take things into his own hands, stopping at nothing to try to get Hennessy to admit that he knows the names of the bombers - and when I say stopping at nothing, I mean it. This guy does not take "no" for an answer if he suspects anything you might be hiding from him. While it is a Jackie Chan movie, and he does still show us that he's definitely still got it, I can honestly say that it doesn't feel like it used to be. And listen, that's perfectly fine. Chan has worked incredibly hard for decades, and into his 60's by this point. The guy deserves our praise for providing us with so much awesomeness for as long as he's lasted in the acting game. But if you're looking for a lot of his epic moves, you might be a little disappointed. With that said, that's also just not the kind of movie this is. It's more of a suspense thriller, and Chan does things more stealthily and methodically here that usual. The film is much darker than his regular stuff, and we get to see a different, more dramatic side to him here. It's still very entertaining, it's just very different than his usual gig. I'm glad I finally watched it, but I dunno if I really got a hell of a lot out of it. It's good for what it is, and if you're looking for a movie where Jackie Chan changes it up a bit, it's a good one to check out. But overall, I found it to be a little hard to follow (at least for me), often getting into Irish politics and such, and yeah, political thrillers are not my idea of a good time (although I understand I'm an odd one out here). As an action/suspense/thriller/revenge film, it's not bad, but movies like 'John Wick' otherwise exist, and I personally just have more fun with those. Still, it's perfectly passable, and others might get more out of it than me. 3/5 ![]() I decided to end Bad Superhero Month with another made-for-TV flick - this one based on Nick Fury before Sam Jackson started owning the role. Instead, Nick is portrayed by the one and only Hoff (that's David Hasselhoff for any newcomers), and he's a much more gruff and almost Wolverine-like character... who lost his eye by NOT a cat! The plot is one gigantic cliche. Fury is retired after working with SHIELD, living that country life of solitude. He is approached by Alexander Goodwyn Pierce (Neil Roberts) and his old friend, Val Fontaine (Lisa Rinna) to come back to work to stop Hydra, now being led by Baron Von Strucker's daughter, Andrea (Sandra Hess) Andrea poses a threat to release something called the Death's Head Virus over Manhattan unless Hydra is paid a hefty ransom of one billion dollars, and it's up to Fury and the other agents of SHIELD to take them down before the launch can happen because it's better than paying up. Being that this was a made-for-TV movie, these cliches are almost to be expected. Truth be told, it's still kinda fun to watch AS the big cliche that it is. It's the same reason I enjoyed the 'Friday the 13th' remake - it's everything typical of that type of movie. And then we have the Hoff as Nick Fury, which is just as entertaining as it sounds. There's really not much going on with this movie. It's kinda just a neat thing to watch as something that predates the MCU by about ten years. The funny thing is, I urge everyone to Google what Nick Fury looked like before Sam Jackson came along. Hasselhoff admittedly looks the part, and being that it was 1998, 'Baywatch' was still a thing, so he may have even been able to be taken more seriously back then. But today, the Hoff is one of those celebs who can get a good laugh at himself, and we love him for being so cheesy. This has just turned into a fun thing to see to kill an hour and a half. I dunno that I'd say this is so bad it's good. It's not quite what 'The Punisher' was on that over the top fun level. This was made for TV, so a lot of the fun comes from the cheesy dialogue and action sequences that don't quite work. One of the funniest things is just watching Fury kick people. For what it is though, it's not that terrible. If nothing else, one could call this a guilty pleasure - but make no mistake, it's still pretty bad. If you can manage to get your hands on it, I'd say it's worth checking out just to see an original Nick Fury at work in all the corniest ways. 2/5 ![]() Man, talk about a movie that's absolutely entertaining in all the worst ways. This certainly falls under the "so bad it's good" category with a rather hilarious combination of bad dialogue, impossible action sequences, and some of the funniest kills you might ever see. It's a lot more fun if you watch this as a straight up action cliche movie. Just think of Frank Castle (Dolph Lundgren) as McBain from 'The Simpsons'. Of course, Punisher is one of those Marvel heroes along with Spidey, Fantastic Four or Hulk, where we really don't need one of those origin story movies. To be perfectly fair, this actually does manage to pull that off. We get that his family has been killed, that turned him into The Punisher, and he runs around New York, "punishing" the guilty. Here, he's mostly seen as a vigilante with a high body count, and the whole moral aspect of his life's mission ends up being brought into question. In an amazing twist, even though the film's execution is extremely weak and clumsy, they kinda had the right idea about things here. For the most part, here, Frank's just out for revenge, and his main target is the mob family who murdered his family. Again, we all know how it goes. The big difference is, in the '04 version, Frank worked cleverly and behind the scenes, manipulating his enemies into harming each other, keeping his hands clean. In this, it's just balls to the wall guns blazing, and he might as well be a Terminator with how senseless he is with it. Of course, that's about where it gets hilarious. The overkill in this is actually kinda lovable in a weird way. Back to the main plot, head mob boss, Gianni Franco (Jeroen Krabbé) plans to unite several mob families, which attracts the attention of Asian crime syndicate, the Yakuza, lead by Lady Tanaka (Kim Miyori), who kidnaps the mobsters' children in an effort to make them see reason to the Yakuza taking over the crime scene. The whole mess makes Frank's friend, Shake (Barry Otto) plead Frank to rescue these kids, trying to show Frank that family exists on either side of good and bad. Shake is perhaps the most interesting character in here, speaking in rhyme all the time for no good reason that comes to mind. I guess he's here to play the moral compass, making sure Frank doesn't get too out of hand (which is hard to say with a straight face). I mentioned that a lot of the dialogue was funny, but none of it seems to be intentional (save a few scenes that are just straight up cheesy). Although Dolph delivers a lot of these lines, no one made me laugh more than the boss man, himself, Gianni Franco. This is a Dutch dude with a Dutch accent, playing an Italian mob boss, just for the record. It's mostly in his delivery of his lines. It's just impossible to take seriously. Anyway, if you're on the lookout for one of the best bad superhero movies, I'd say look no further than here. So far, on this list, this is the one that has entertained me the most, and I'd happily watch again and again as I introduce people to its terrible-ness. Just a bit of senseless fun that I might recommend to anyone having a particularly bad day. 2/5 ![]() Many people out there, including myself, have been unaware of this film's existence until finding some random review of it on the internet. It has gone under the radar since its initial release due to being one of the all time worst superhero adaptations in cinematic history. Once again, this one is definitely "so-bad-it's-good", maybe even more so that 'F4', and that's saying a lot! The difference being that at the very least, 'F4' had some accuracies. 'Captain America' is downright painful in its execution, right down to getting ethnicities completely wrong. As one would probably guess, this film has a lot to do with Cap's (Matt Salinger) origin, and his big battle with Red Skull (Scott Paulin) the German baddie who for some reason is now Italian here, and, for most of the movie, is covered with plastic surgery. He ends up being one of the all-time worst villain adaptations in comic book movie history. But at the very least, his character is actually kinda funny to watch. Actually, the same goes with Salinger, because the dude is a terrible actor here. Plus, I mean, look at his costume. And speaking of the costume, that gets me started on 'First Avenger' comparisons, and why that's actually such a good movie. 'First Avenger' gives a clear explanation for his corny costume, in this, he just kinda gets it, and it's even addressed that it lacks camouflage as a military soldier's outfit. 'First Avenger' allows us to get to know and like Steve Rogers as a person, giving leeway as to why he's the perfect candidate for the Super Soldier serum. Here, he's just some guy with Polio who volunteers so he can be somewhat normal again, and it's all done in a matter of minutes. By the time Steve turns into Cap, we don't care what happens to him from here on in because we have n idea who this guy is as a character, save very small details. And guess what? We never really DO get to know him. He's just a meathead throughout this whole thing to the point that it's comical. At best this is an incredibly basic and poorly adapted superhero story of good guy vs bad guy before bad guy hurts too many people. Red Skull's motivation here is disagreement on environmental policies that the President (Ronny Cox) has put in place. Cap then has to rescue a kidnapped president. Again, very basic plot, but it's the overall execution that will have people laughing at this movie - and not in a way it's meant to be laughed at. Indeed, this is most definitely on the lowest side of superhero movies that I've seen. It still has that "so-bad-it's-good" quality to it, and that at least gives it that rewatchability that you get from such terrible titles. But make no mistake, this is a movie to be passed around in the same way 'Troll 2' or 'The Room' is. You wanna introduce people to it because it's so bad. I'm one of those seemingly few fans of Captain America's films and overall character arch in the MCU (seriously, I know a LOT of people who show Cap a lot of hate). To me, he's the moral compass, voice of reason, and the character who wears the title of "hero" on his sleeve more than any other hero in the MCU. I also enjoy his "underdog" story, as I, myself, wear THAT title on my own sleeve. He got to be the character we know now through several stories of solid development, most of which was told in his intro film - 'First Avenger'. This film will most definitely make one appreciate Cap's MCU films on the same level I do, because this offers nothing! It's just a goofy attempt from a director who seemingly only knew the source material incredibly loosely. As in the names of the characters, the look of the suit and... not much more. 1/5 |