Fast Company

Fast Company (1979)

Runtime: 91 minutes

Directed by: David Cronenberg!

Starring: William Smith, Nicholas Campbell, John Saxon, Don Francks, Claudia Jennings

From: A few different Canadian companies 

This laid-back drag racing movie from DAVID CRONENBERG was as much a hoot as expected. Auto racing in general is not something I really watch, not even drag racing and its impressive living a quarter-mile at a time credo, driving more than 200 miles (322 kilometers) per hour. Of course, the director is the main reason many have even seen this “good old boy” picture that capitalized on such films as Smokey and the Bandit. Cronenberg admittedly only worked on this film for a paycheck, even if he is interested in cars and racing.

This follows a team sponsored by a motor oil company, FastCo. William Smith is a legend who drives “fuelies” (those long cars w/ the small wheels on the front) but it blows up pretty early. The drama is that John Saxon is a bureaucrat who is the team boss but is also a jerk who cares more about presenting the sponsorship than the team actually winning. He demands that Smith drives “funny cars” (those vehicles that look more like traditional road-legal automobiles) despite that being a role already had by young upstart Nicholas Campbell.

The viewer sees the team interact w/ rivals & deal w/ romantic entanglements. The film is straightforward & not subversive nor is there any body horror present, unless you count “guy pouring motor oil on the naked chest of a young woman as a form of foreplay!” This has little of his trademark style and it’s bizarre to see him direct a movie w/ a country rock soundtrack, full of characters that look amazingly of their time, giving themselves such monikers as MEATBALL and STONER. 

A laid-back 70’s movie like this isn’t for all tastes anyhow, and those that wanted more of the director’s style will be left disappointed. Well, I typically like laid-back 70’s movies and I was fine with the focus not on the sport, but rather the characters and their drama. The presence of such actors as Smith, Saxon, Campbell, cult favorite Claudia Jennings, and such “that guy” actors as Don Francks was naturally an asset. The drag races were at least exciting for those that are fans. The Western Canadian scenery was pleasant.

If your expectations are in check, you might have a good time; your opinions on cynical 70’s cinema-yes, this is one of those as well-will play a key role in your opinion of Fast Company. As the final 10 or so minutes were wild, I enjoyed Fast Company even if the other Cronenberg I’ve seen was better.

Warriors of the Wasteland

Warriors of the Wasteland (i.e. The New Barbarians; I Nuvori Barbari) (1983)

Runtime: 91 minutes

Directed by: Enzo G. Castellari

Starring: Giancarlo Prete, Fred Williamson, George Eastman (RIP), Anna Kanakis, Ennio Girolami

From: Deaf International/Fulvia Film

RIP George Eastman. After Jack Taylor, another familiar face in European genre films passed away recently. I’ve only seen a few movies with the giant (6’9, i.e. 2.06 meters!) actor who also wrote some films but I know some mutuals would want to hear the news if they hadn’t already-he died on the 19th at the age of 83.

Don’t confuse this w/ 2019: After the Fall of New York, despite The New Barbarians/Warriors of the Wasteland also being set in 2019 “after the nuclear holocaust” and the film also featuring Eastman. This was rather blatantly “inspired” by Mad Max 2: The Road Warrior-OK, I can’t sugarcoat it, the film is a ripoff. Eastman leads a gang known as The Templars, who want to exterminate all of humanity as the world’s a wasteland anyhow. I suppose he supports the Voluntary Human Extinction Movement…

Our hero is Scorpion, portrayed by Italian actor Giancarlo Prete. He meets a woman named Alma, who sadly doesn’t do all that much besides look pretty. There’s also Bob from The House by the Cemetery, a Fulci I haven’t tackled yet but will later in the year and several mutuals were bemused by his presence. However, the highlight acting-wise was from Fred Williamson-as typical, he portrayed an Alpha Male who was a deus ex machina more than once & possessed much more swagger than Scorpion, to the degree that his character NADIR hooked up w/ a random supporting woman character. I’ve never viewed The House by the Cemetery-yet; that’ll change later in the year-but multiple mutuals found it funny that child actor Bob from the film has a memorable supporting role here.

Barbarians/Warriors was filmed on the cheap and is silly crap. At the same this, this was a cheesy fun time which gave what B-movie afficionados would want: explosions, decapitations, car chases-albeit rather slower than the ones you saw in George Miller’s films-fire, exploding arrows, bravado, pew pew laser guns, & more. It definitely gave me what I wanted: to me, THE highlight was the wild, on-fire synth score from the great Claudio Simonetti.

As Eastman played his villain role rather well, this was not only a satisfactory way to tip my cap, but also a nice experience. Once in awhile, I’m alright w/ experiencing such foolishness-it’ll never become more commonplace in my cinematic diet.

I'l Catch Up in the Next 24 Hours

Promise.

Luxo Jr

Yes, this is the 1986 Pixar short which is more than just a historically significant artifact.

Hopefully no one minds me only having the motivation to review something 90 seconds long minus credits. Seeing a Letterboxd mutual noting they revisited the film earlier in the afternoon, my not having viewed anything Pixar in months, and the historical significance are good reasons for a review.

This is quite the achievement, factoring in the computing technology of the time. The animation is primitive (the items are on a wooden desk, the background is black) yet a story is still told via seeing Luxo, Sr. watching his son play w/ a multicolored ball, it accidentally deflating, then the concluding punchline… the short is successful in presenting a big desk lamp and a small desk lamp as sentient beings.

Luxo, Jr. sent shockwaves through the industry as its premiered at SIGGRAPH, a famous annual computer graphics conference; lore tells the crowd applauded SECONDS into the short. Besides being the first CG film nominated for an Academy Award, it was proven that a story can be told w/ objects that are inanimate in “the real world” when beforehand, they were glorified tech demos. I don’t need to elaborate on the rise of Pixar after they worked w/ Disney on various projects until Toy Story’s release then their great run until their purchase by Disney (where many said that led to the company’s downfall) or the rise of computer-animated feature films once computing processing improved to create such imagery.

I’m happy to have computer animation co-exist rather than replace traditional animation. All varieties of animation are worthy; last week I saw a trailer for the upcoming Laika film Wildwood, something I probably will view theatrically unless the buzz surrounding it is poor. In the future, more Pixar films will be viewed-I still haven’t seen some from their Golden Era, as appalling as that will be to many. I was happy to see the beginning of the company, the breathtaking leaps in computing power, and finally tackle the backstory behind the Luxo lamp part of the company’s logo.

I Had a Statham Saturday

This means, watching two Jason Statham movies I saw & reviewed here originally, many years ago. First is 2009's Crank: High Voltage.

Why not have a STATHAM SATURDAY during this Memorial Day weekend?

Today, I revisited Crank: Danger Danger, High Voltage so it’d replace the old, brief review I had from my first few days on the site, THIRTEEN years ago. Sometime in the next 5 to 6 hours, I’ll revisit, write a review, then post said review for another Statham movie to write a better review for that as well. Crank 2 was viewed theatrically in ’09 then later on Blu-Ray, but that was before 2013. Several people here and elsewhere wanted this revisit. Well, be careful what you wish for… I originally thought the movie was OK; now, I hate Danger Danger, High Voltage!

The OG Crank is a loud, absurd movie, yet managed to work if you enjoy insanity as Chev Chelios required constant energy due to a poison he was injected with. This sequel… I know that many people are fans due to the film trying SO, SO hard to be “edgy” and “cool,” thinking that increasing everything 10-fold and CONSTANTLY being “offensive” makes a movie “great.” Sorry to disappoint everyone, but “NO” is my response to that belief.

I rarely enjoy movies-especially now-that try this hard and are so aggro & stupid; that’s my opinion of High Voltage. Yes, there are still frenetic action beats and wacky moments that did make me chuckle. I can’t explain why Chev mentioned Tiger Woods after a CAR CRASH (he didn’t start this trend until months after release) but that was prophetic. However, you can imagine how I feel about the “F this” and “F that” dialogue that is constant, or the constant vulgarities, or how the sequel made the misogynistic original look like a feminist masterpiece in comparison. The Bai Ling character alone—gross.

In the past, I apparently tolerated-if not liked-crap where characters are named POON DONG and that allegedly is knee-slapping hilarious for some. It’s like when I revisited Machete Unleashed at home years after the fact & what I thought was incredibly uneven was now as pleasant as fingernails on a chalkboard due to the forced edginess, absurdism in place of actual humor, & vulgarity… which are among the reasons why I still think Everything, Everywhere, All at Once is one of the worst movies I ever saw theatrically. High Voltage is even worse-it’s like two meth-heads screaming in your ears for 90 minutes!

I’m glad many of you can somehow find enjoyment in this edgelord nonsense. Me, I am thankful that the choice can be made to avoid movies seemingly designed to repulse me, no matter what everyone else feels about them.

Second, 2012's Safe.

My second & last film in my STATHAM SATURDAY is one I hadn’t seen since the theatrical experience, late April of 2012. Unlike w/ Crank: Danger Danger, High Voltage, my opinion hasn’t changed in the 14 years between screenings.

The plot is still complete poppycock; it involves an 11-year-old Chinese girl who has a photographic memory & is a genius at math, because stereotypes… speaking of that, there’s the Russian mob, the Triad, and corrupt NYC cops—insert your own comments if you wish. Meanwhile, Statham is a ex-cop and MMA fighter who fell on hard times after a fixed fight gone wrong.

I still don’t love the opening act; thankfully, when Statham and little Mei meet each other and he saves her (although he said she saved him… awwww), business picked up, both with the story and the action. There’s brawls, shootouts, and martial arts galore; Dudes definitely Get Wrecked ™ & that was satisfying. As I learned via the end credits, Chad Stahelski did the action-no wonder. An even biggest surprise than learning Mark Mothersbaugh did the score was that an executive producer was… KEVIN SPACEY.

It was nice seeing the likes of Chris Sarandon, Robert John Burke, Anson Mount, and (especially) James Hong, but Statham-along w/ his relationship with little girl Catherine Chan-that was quite charming. As silly as the film is, for those that like their 3-star Jason Statham motion pictures, this certainly is one of those, although aided by the rather tasty action beats.

Star Wars: The Mandalorian & Grogu

Star Wars: The Mandalorian & Grogu (2026)

64% on Rotten Tomatoes (out of 214 reviews) 

Runtime: 132 minutes

Directed by: Jon Favreau

Starring: Pedro Pascal & quite a few other random voices & actors, including Martin Scorsese!

From: Lucasfilm

I now know that Star Wars has:

Hell as a concept
Lawyers
MINIONS. At least that’s what those tiny hairy bipedal creatures sounded like

My review of The Mandalorian & Grogu will be even lengthier than usual; however, my history with Star Wars is probably necessary here. I am a middle-aged dude who has some gray hair that loved the original trilogy since a little kid, the prequel trilogy was a great idea executed poorly, and I’d rather forget about all the movies in the sequel trilogy, especially the abominations that were The Last Jedi and The Rise of Skywalker. One day, new reviews of those two need to be done-I’m sure they’d be rated much lower by me… but the gag is that I’d quite hesitant to check out those awful movies again!

As for the streaming shows, I only saw the first season of The Mandalorian and wasn’t impressed; the other streaming shows I never bothered with. The only two that doesn’t seem like gruel is Andor & Visions. As to why I’d even bother with The Mandalorian & Grogu, it’s not to be a troll or hater. Rather, “morbid curiosity” and “all the other live-action theatrical movies were viewed on the big screen” were the reasons why.

The Mandalorian & Grogu thankfully isn’t a disaster like The Last Jedi or The Rise of Skywalker. That doesn’t mean I thought it was good, let alone great. As others have noted, the movie felt quite episodic and did not have a traditional plot structure; that’s not necessarily a bad thing, although the movie felt like several episodes of the streaming show. Regrettably, much of this was just forgettable.

That said, as others have noted, thank cripes this isn’t more nonsense featuring characters from the original movies or rehashing ideas ad nauseum. I never saw Clone Wars-the show or movie-yet have heard that Jabba’s son Rotta is a character. I wasn’t sure what was more jarring: a Hutt who is YOKED or the Hutts mainly speaking English instead of Huttese. Jeremy Allen White voicing Rotta was a genuine shock; the credits did remind me that SCORSESE provided a voice for who knows what reason. It’s a small role, so dignified that he brought to life… what is best described as “a four-armed Italian monkey!” Our lead duo deals with several members of the Hutt clan as they attempt to track down a warlord who’s a thread to the New Republic.

It's a shame that this exhibited several of the issues that I feel have been industry-wide problems for years: dimly-lit, unneeded, unnecessary “humor” (although it wasn’t as bad or frequent as in Jedi or Rise), overly explanatory dialogue that wasn’t needed. I’m crestfallen, as the Ludwig Goransson score was quality, many different creatures were seen, and Grogu was usually brought to life by animatronics or puppetry rather than CG.

Disney Star Wars can’t be categorized as anything but a disaster overall. Back then, I never could have imagine them creating films that still have divided the fanbase, focused on streaming gruel, make horrible decision after horrible decision, announce a plethora of projects only to later cancel them, created an industry where “certain YouTubers” have made serious bank criticizing the and THIS is how they returned to cinemas after 6 ½ years. The buzz for the movie seems incredibly low for what was THE name worldwide franchise; many were likely as apathetic as I was, and there has to be plenty that only will see the film for the same reasons I did.

When a highlight (that doesn’t seem like Star Wars but that’s been an issue for years now) is Grogu in a GEARING-UP MONTAGE like he’s John Rambo or John Matrix… well, at least it made me laugh. As someone who avoids modern blockbusters in general-don’t expect me to discuss many more of those in 2026-I suppose it’s a relief that I felt the movie was “incredibly average” instead of “incredibly enraging” or “incredibly stupid.”

The Man from U.N.C.L.E., Revisited

I was wrong about this movie.

The first review-which is now deleted; I’m embarrassed by it-was done the summer of ’15, via a theatrical viewing. My opinion was “meh” and what threw me off was the tongue-in-cheek style, mainly from Henry Cavill but also from the other characters. In hindsight, after viewing other modern films aping the 1960’s and seeing similar performances from others-which didn’t really bother me… Uncle deserved another shot. I thought of doing so for YEARS; of course, it was recent messageboard discussion of Michael Fassbender and Alicia Vikander-more on that at the end-which finally gave me the push.

In 2026, the movie played much better for me. I always enjoyed the style, the fashion, the music; now, the plot and the performances sat better with me, including from Mr. Cavill. Shame that Armie Hammer has been exposed as an alleged sex pest & weirdo in the preceding 11 years, but… this tale is of a CIA agent teaming with a KGB agent along w/ Vikander (daughter of a nuclear scientist) to Rome to stop Nazi sympathizers from building their own nuclear bomb.

Now, I appreciate how fun, entertaining, cool, funny, and yes, sexy, the lead trio that couldn’t trust each other were together. The supporting turns from the likes of Hugh Grant and Elizabeth Debicki were also memorable. Even more so than 2015, the awesome fashion-especially worn by Ms. Vikander-the sweet jazzy soundtrack from Daniel Pemberton, and needle-drops that are still original today, not to mention greatly appealing to my tastes due to the usage of groovy old tunes comprising several different genres.

It is a shame that a stylish, wacky, light yet still thrilling spy film set in the swingin’ 60’s missed the mark for me back in 2015 for whatever reasons. I realize now how wrong I was then. The action was cool but the focus was on how fashionable everything was. At least now, many more eyes than back then will have read my new take on U.N.C.L.E.—now I wish there would have been a sequel teased during the conclusion.

I wish Guy Ritchie would continue to make motion pictures like this-apparently he hasn’t. As for why there was discussion on a messageboard a few days ago concerning Alicia Vikander & her husband Michael Fassbender: would you believe they are in a Korean film?! Yes, they’re in Hope, from the dude that directed the quality films The Wailing & The Chaser. I am fascinated and now excited to check out Hope in the future.