Enthiran (2010)
Runtime: 174 minutes (no, not a misprint)
Directed by: S. Shankar
Starring: Rajinikanth, Aishwarya Rai, Danny Denzongpa, Santhanam
From: Sun Pictures
Alright, here’s a review of something that’s rather strange but yet it’s timely, and not just because I’ve talked of some foreign flicks as of late. Last week I first heard about this movie on a website where a pair of videos were posted. I didn’t watch them… which was a mistake. Suddenly, on Thursday the 27th the second video that was posted went viral and was talked about on various sites, due to the fact that you saw action scenes that were SO wacky and over the top and yet because of that, it was great beyond words. I looked around and found out what the movie was called. It apparently was released in a few places in the US a few months ago, but I had not heard anything about it. I looked around some more, and magically, someone uploaded the entire film to YouTube, and with English subtitles! How nice of that person. Of course, that got taken down but as I’m typing this late Sunday night, someone uploaded the movie in 12 parts on YouTube, in better quality and subtitles for the songs too. You just have to know what they’re singing. Here’s Part 1, to put it out there blatantly.
So, I watched it that way, and what an experience. Now, even though it’s from India, it’s not a “Bollywood” movie. Rather, it’s called “Kollywood”, or Tamil to be more specific. I don’t really know how it’s different, as you still get random extravagant musical numbers like you do in Bollywood flicks. Also, at random points the cast will speak a few words in English before returning to their native language. This happens often, and I have ZERO idea as to why.
Besides those things, though, the movie is rather straightforward. A scientist (Rajinikanth) creates a robot in his image. He has a hot girlfriend (Rai). The robot does many amazing things… in fact, to a preposterous degree, but it works in this universe. So, the scientist wants the robot to become a weapon of the state, but there’s reservations. It becomes injected with emotions, and that causes problems, as you might expect. The robot starts to fall for Rai too; at least that is understandable. As you can see, I find her to rank high on the attractiveness scale. Now there’s another person who has tried a few times to break into the Western world, but when those films are The Last Legion (trust me, I’ve seen it and it’s not all that great) and The Pink Panther sequel… I’m sure she doesn’t mind still being a huge star in her homeland.
Anyhow, there’s also problems with rivals who wish to have the technology themselves. To give it away (hey, the videos went viral, after all, so you’ve probably already seen it), the robot gets trashed and thrown away, only to end up in the wrong hands, and that’s how you end up with many copies of it.
Much of the movie isn’t action-related at all. Besides the musical stuff there’s also drama, romance and comedy. But, what action you do see is in those two videos I linked to, and what insane action it is. You see many preposterous things… and yet most of it was just so damn COOL! Most of it I had never seen before (or even thought of) and while it’s videogame-like, it doesn’t look bad at all. It’s not like they have ILM magic working for them so you can’t expect stuff comparable to the most recent and biggest Hollywood blockbusters. It works for the movie.
The other stuff is also fine. The story really wasn’t all that original if you look at it closely; who cares, though, if you’re entertained by it? There was enough for me not to be bored, even with it being almost 3 hours long. The songs… they’re wacky, so for that reason alone you shouldn’t be bored by that particular aspect either.
So, whether you want to watch it that way or wait for DVD or what have you, if it sounds interesting for your tastes, go for it.
I'll be back Thursday night with a new review.
Monday, January 31, 2011
Saturday, January 29, 2011
Badge 373
Badge 373 (1973)
Runtime: 116 minutes
Directed by: Howard W. Koch
Starring: Robert Duvall, Verna Bloom, Henry Darrow, Felipe Luciano
From: Paramount
Here’s a curio. It is a movie never released on DVD yet one time it was on TCM (it was during a month where they paid tribute to Hispanics and even though the movie’s portray of Puerto Ricans is not flattering, to say the least, it still had many of its top actors during the time period) and a few days ago on a TMC channel they showed the flick, so I caught it that way. It is one of those movies based on the exploits of Eddie Egan, who is now most famous for being the inspiration for “Popeye” Doyle of The French Connection fame. Now, I got to be honest here. The one time I saw that movie, I wasn’t blown away by it and in fact I wondered why it was so beloved. Sure, the famed car chase was cool and all. The rest of it, though, did nothing for me, and I remember not really liking the two lead cops, which is definitely a problem.
Then again, it can be tough to like the lead here, known as Eddie Ryan. Played by Duvall, he’s a gruff cop who clearly has his prejudices. He uses a certain Hispanic slur (it’s a four letter word starting with S) about 10 times and it can be difficult to like that sort of protagonist. At least here he can be outrageously funny. For example, a suspect calls him a maricon and Ryan responds, “I bet you’ve taken it up the chocolate-covered speedway a few times, haven’t you?” and says to a prostitute, “Listen, you coked-up whore bitch!” That sort of dialogue makes me laugh, as politically incorrect as it is.
However, the movie overall is average at best. It’s overlong and despite a fun first ten minutes where Ryan goes in disguise as a club patron (with giant fake mustache) in order to be part of a bust, the rest of the movie can be downright dull at times and the story (involving guns and Puerto Rican independence) isn’t anything special. There’s some unintentional laughs but that’s about it. However, the music is early 70’s grooviness, and I at least enjoyed that. It was done by J.J. Jackson, the guy famous for the oldies staple But It’s Alright (covered in the 80’s by Huey Lewis);
It’s a shame, as Duvall delivers the expected good performance. I just wish that aside from some nice dramatic moments scattered throughout, that there’d be more of this movie than there was. It doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be on DVD, though.
I’ll be back Monday night with a foreign flick, and while I’ve only seen clips of it as of this time, I already know it’ll be quite the review.
Runtime: 116 minutes
Directed by: Howard W. Koch
Starring: Robert Duvall, Verna Bloom, Henry Darrow, Felipe Luciano
From: Paramount
Here’s a curio. It is a movie never released on DVD yet one time it was on TCM (it was during a month where they paid tribute to Hispanics and even though the movie’s portray of Puerto Ricans is not flattering, to say the least, it still had many of its top actors during the time period) and a few days ago on a TMC channel they showed the flick, so I caught it that way. It is one of those movies based on the exploits of Eddie Egan, who is now most famous for being the inspiration for “Popeye” Doyle of The French Connection fame. Now, I got to be honest here. The one time I saw that movie, I wasn’t blown away by it and in fact I wondered why it was so beloved. Sure, the famed car chase was cool and all. The rest of it, though, did nothing for me, and I remember not really liking the two lead cops, which is definitely a problem.
Then again, it can be tough to like the lead here, known as Eddie Ryan. Played by Duvall, he’s a gruff cop who clearly has his prejudices. He uses a certain Hispanic slur (it’s a four letter word starting with S) about 10 times and it can be difficult to like that sort of protagonist. At least here he can be outrageously funny. For example, a suspect calls him a maricon and Ryan responds, “I bet you’ve taken it up the chocolate-covered speedway a few times, haven’t you?” and says to a prostitute, “Listen, you coked-up whore bitch!” That sort of dialogue makes me laugh, as politically incorrect as it is.
However, the movie overall is average at best. It’s overlong and despite a fun first ten minutes where Ryan goes in disguise as a club patron (with giant fake mustache) in order to be part of a bust, the rest of the movie can be downright dull at times and the story (involving guns and Puerto Rican independence) isn’t anything special. There’s some unintentional laughs but that’s about it. However, the music is early 70’s grooviness, and I at least enjoyed that. It was done by J.J. Jackson, the guy famous for the oldies staple But It’s Alright (covered in the 80’s by Huey Lewis);
It’s a shame, as Duvall delivers the expected good performance. I just wish that aside from some nice dramatic moments scattered throughout, that there’d be more of this movie than there was. It doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be on DVD, though.
I’ll be back Monday night with a foreign flick, and while I’ve only seen clips of it as of this time, I already know it’ll be quite the review.
Wednesday, January 26, 2011
Shout At The Devil
Shout At The Devil (1976)
Runtime: 128 minutes (US Version), or 150 minutes (British Version)
Directed by: Peter Hunt (please don’t snicker)
Starring: Lee Marvin, Roger Moore, Barbara Parkins, Ian Holm
From: Tonav/AIP
Here is something that I saw early this month but I wanted to save the review for a later date, as I don’t have that much to say about it and plus, I was going to talk about something else but things happened and now I’ll be discussing this.
This is a British movie from 1976 that got released in the States by low-budget masters American International Pictures, although it was edited down by 20 some odd minutes and plus I saw this on THIS-TV, a commercial channel. Not the most ideal thing, but given how rare the movie is, I still watched it that way.
The movie is set in Zanzibar in 1913. Marvin plays a guy named Flynn O’Flynn! He’s a wild guy who likes to drink (not that far from real life, to be honest here) and his daughter (Parkins) is hooked up with proper aristocratic Sebastian (Moore) and they get wrapped up in a scheme involving revenge, ivory poaching, and so on and so forth with the Germans, who controlled the area at the time.
The movie sounds cool on people. It stars some quality actors and is directed by Hunt, who is best known for doing a great job of editing the first few Bond movies (and directing one of them, too); the plot also sounded interesting. Not to mention, it reminds me of the Motley Crue song of the same name.
It may just be me, but while a lot of stuff did go on, much of it wasn’t that interesting to me. Sorry to say; that’s just how I felt. Maybe if I saw it in its proper format (and saw its original British cut, although given that I thought the cut version dragged on and was overlong…) I’d think differently. Based off of what I saw, though, it’s a misfire, although a noble one and it isn’t what I’d call “awful”. I was just hoping it’d be better, an underappreciated gem.
One good thing I can say about the movie is that it has a great fistfight, and it’s on YouTube. It starts at 2:45 in the video. It’s of Marvin and Moore engaging in a long fistfight. I mean, think of the big fight in They Live in terms of length. It’s a raucous affair and I’m glad you can at least see that if you don’t want to try and watch the entire movie.
Also tremendous is the rumor that during filming of the movie Moore and Marvin got into a *legit* fight-who knows over what but given Lee’s known troublemaking ways during the filming of movies and his love of drink…-and apparently Roger whooped his ass and knocked him unconscious! Both guys are definitely tough (they were both members of the military, after all) so I wish I could have been a fly on the wall for that.
Anyway, you may enjoy it more than I did. If you do want to see it, it is likely on once in a blue moon on channels like THIS and MGMHD.
I’ll be back Friday night, and it won’t be a foreign film, but it will be something obscure and rather interesting.
Runtime: 128 minutes (US Version), or 150 minutes (British Version)
Directed by: Peter Hunt (please don’t snicker)
Starring: Lee Marvin, Roger Moore, Barbara Parkins, Ian Holm
From: Tonav/AIP
Here is something that I saw early this month but I wanted to save the review for a later date, as I don’t have that much to say about it and plus, I was going to talk about something else but things happened and now I’ll be discussing this.
This is a British movie from 1976 that got released in the States by low-budget masters American International Pictures, although it was edited down by 20 some odd minutes and plus I saw this on THIS-TV, a commercial channel. Not the most ideal thing, but given how rare the movie is, I still watched it that way.
The movie is set in Zanzibar in 1913. Marvin plays a guy named Flynn O’Flynn! He’s a wild guy who likes to drink (not that far from real life, to be honest here) and his daughter (Parkins) is hooked up with proper aristocratic Sebastian (Moore) and they get wrapped up in a scheme involving revenge, ivory poaching, and so on and so forth with the Germans, who controlled the area at the time.
The movie sounds cool on people. It stars some quality actors and is directed by Hunt, who is best known for doing a great job of editing the first few Bond movies (and directing one of them, too); the plot also sounded interesting. Not to mention, it reminds me of the Motley Crue song of the same name.
It may just be me, but while a lot of stuff did go on, much of it wasn’t that interesting to me. Sorry to say; that’s just how I felt. Maybe if I saw it in its proper format (and saw its original British cut, although given that I thought the cut version dragged on and was overlong…) I’d think differently. Based off of what I saw, though, it’s a misfire, although a noble one and it isn’t what I’d call “awful”. I was just hoping it’d be better, an underappreciated gem.
One good thing I can say about the movie is that it has a great fistfight, and it’s on YouTube. It starts at 2:45 in the video. It’s of Marvin and Moore engaging in a long fistfight. I mean, think of the big fight in They Live in terms of length. It’s a raucous affair and I’m glad you can at least see that if you don’t want to try and watch the entire movie.
Also tremendous is the rumor that during filming of the movie Moore and Marvin got into a *legit* fight-who knows over what but given Lee’s known troublemaking ways during the filming of movies and his love of drink…-and apparently Roger whooped his ass and knocked him unconscious! Both guys are definitely tough (they were both members of the military, after all) so I wish I could have been a fly on the wall for that.
Anyway, you may enjoy it more than I did. If you do want to see it, it is likely on once in a blue moon on channels like THIS and MGMHD.
I’ll be back Friday night, and it won’t be a foreign film, but it will be something obscure and rather interesting.
Monday, January 24, 2011
I'll Be Back Wednesday Night
I apologize for another delay, but I had a rough weekend-and busier than expected Monday-so I don't feel like doing one of these today. I'll be back Wednesday night. That is all.
Friday, January 21, 2011
The Mesrine Movies
Mesrine: Killer Instinct (L’instinct de mort) (2008)
84% on Rotten Tomatoes (out of 62 reviews)
Runtime: 113 minutes
Directed by: Jean-Francois Richet
Starring: Vincent Cassel, Cecile De France, Gerard Depardieu, Gilles Lellouche
From: La Petite Reine
Mesrine: Public Enemy #1 (L’ennemi public n1) (2008)
84% on Rotten Tomatoes (out of 79 reviews)
Runtime: 133 minutes
Directed by: Jean-Francois Richet
Starring: Vincent Cassel, Ludivine Sagnier, Mathieu Amalric, Samuel Le Bihan
From: La Petite Reine
Here’s a double-shot where I talk about a pair of French movies released over there a few years ago which-believe it or not-started playing a few miles from where I leave. Epic Theatres of Clermont didn’t always do this, but as of a few months ago, usually they’d have an auditorium devoted to something more independent/obscure, like some documentaries, smaller films, and foreign movies (like I believe all of the flicks in the The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo series, which I have zero interest in seeing… and I’d rather not see the American remake either.) Finally I bit the bullet and decided to give some money to this endeavor, so that they continue to do such a thing in the future and thus possibly give me the chance to see something cool on the big screen that I otherwise wouldn’t have the opportunity to.
The two movies were based on famed French criminal Jacques Mesrine, who became notorious for his great ability to elude the police and if he did get caught, he was able to escape in some great ways. In the two movies you get to see some of that, and it seems almost too crazy to believe, and yet as far as I have heard, all of that stuff is accurate. Just look at his Wikipedia page. Note that not everything featured among his exploits on Wiki gets featured in the films. I mean, the movies are not just him doing a lot of crazy stuff. Rather, it tries to example Jacques Mesrine and tries to figure out why he did the crazy things he did, along with the interactions he had with other people and the effect his life had on his close confidants. His manipulation of the media, which allowed him to actually become a popular figure in France, also is addressed.
In short, the first movie is about the title character and how he started off in the criminal life as a young man throughout the end of the 1960’s, when he ended up in North America. The second movie was set in the 70’s and you get to see his downfall. It’s no spoiler to mention it, but he gets gunned down in controversial fashion, more of an execution than any sort of attempted arrest… at least according to how this movie told the story.
It’s more of a drama with some action mixed in, a la The Godfather or Goodfellas. I’m not saying this is as great as those two undeniable classics. I’m more talking about theme and structure, that’s all. Although, the two movies are both pretty great on their own and are well worth tracking down if you enjoy that sort of thing. I have no idea when it’ll be coming out on DVD, though.
One thing I’ll note from the first movie is Depardieu. He’s been a huge star in Europe for many years and he tried to replicate the same success in America in the early 90’s, to little success. No matter the reasons, it didn’t work out. I guess that still being a star in Europe isn’t too shabby. I haven’t really seen much of his work, but I do know that he’s similar to Orson Welles or Marlon Brando… in a not so great way, i.e. their girth as they got older. But hey, that doesn’t mean too much to me and he managed to look the part for the film (a tough gangster boss) and it was a quality performance. Although, Cassel was great and the star of both films. He knocked it out of the ballpark with his performance.
There are some things about the movie that I’ll say are “totally European”, even though I may be generalizing based off assumptions, given that I haven’t seen too many movies from that continent. For example, there’s a lot of smoking going on. There are countless scenes with characters puffing away. I know, the movie’s set in the past, but I haven’t seen movies with that much lighting up… well, maybe ever. Also, a few times you have split-screens, where you see a few different views of the same scene. It isn’t done so often it becomes a distraction, thankfully. Also, while you get your fair share of violent moments (stabbings, shootings, pistol-whippings, car chases, and so forth) it’s Europe so sex is more out in the open, and you also get to see some thrusting action, to put it bluntly. Also, there’s some nudity… which I didn’t complain about!
Like I said, when you're able to see it, I recommend seeing this. I'll be back Monday night with a totally different kind of foreign motion picture.
84% on Rotten Tomatoes (out of 62 reviews)
Runtime: 113 minutes
Directed by: Jean-Francois Richet
Starring: Vincent Cassel, Cecile De France, Gerard Depardieu, Gilles Lellouche
From: La Petite Reine
Mesrine: Public Enemy #1 (L’ennemi public n1) (2008)
84% on Rotten Tomatoes (out of 79 reviews)
Runtime: 133 minutes
Directed by: Jean-Francois Richet
Starring: Vincent Cassel, Ludivine Sagnier, Mathieu Amalric, Samuel Le Bihan
From: La Petite Reine
Here’s a double-shot where I talk about a pair of French movies released over there a few years ago which-believe it or not-started playing a few miles from where I leave. Epic Theatres of Clermont didn’t always do this, but as of a few months ago, usually they’d have an auditorium devoted to something more independent/obscure, like some documentaries, smaller films, and foreign movies (like I believe all of the flicks in the The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo series, which I have zero interest in seeing… and I’d rather not see the American remake either.) Finally I bit the bullet and decided to give some money to this endeavor, so that they continue to do such a thing in the future and thus possibly give me the chance to see something cool on the big screen that I otherwise wouldn’t have the opportunity to.
The two movies were based on famed French criminal Jacques Mesrine, who became notorious for his great ability to elude the police and if he did get caught, he was able to escape in some great ways. In the two movies you get to see some of that, and it seems almost too crazy to believe, and yet as far as I have heard, all of that stuff is accurate. Just look at his Wikipedia page. Note that not everything featured among his exploits on Wiki gets featured in the films. I mean, the movies are not just him doing a lot of crazy stuff. Rather, it tries to example Jacques Mesrine and tries to figure out why he did the crazy things he did, along with the interactions he had with other people and the effect his life had on his close confidants. His manipulation of the media, which allowed him to actually become a popular figure in France, also is addressed.
In short, the first movie is about the title character and how he started off in the criminal life as a young man throughout the end of the 1960’s, when he ended up in North America. The second movie was set in the 70’s and you get to see his downfall. It’s no spoiler to mention it, but he gets gunned down in controversial fashion, more of an execution than any sort of attempted arrest… at least according to how this movie told the story.
It’s more of a drama with some action mixed in, a la The Godfather or Goodfellas. I’m not saying this is as great as those two undeniable classics. I’m more talking about theme and structure, that’s all. Although, the two movies are both pretty great on their own and are well worth tracking down if you enjoy that sort of thing. I have no idea when it’ll be coming out on DVD, though.
One thing I’ll note from the first movie is Depardieu. He’s been a huge star in Europe for many years and he tried to replicate the same success in America in the early 90’s, to little success. No matter the reasons, it didn’t work out. I guess that still being a star in Europe isn’t too shabby. I haven’t really seen much of his work, but I do know that he’s similar to Orson Welles or Marlon Brando… in a not so great way, i.e. their girth as they got older. But hey, that doesn’t mean too much to me and he managed to look the part for the film (a tough gangster boss) and it was a quality performance. Although, Cassel was great and the star of both films. He knocked it out of the ballpark with his performance.
There are some things about the movie that I’ll say are “totally European”, even though I may be generalizing based off assumptions, given that I haven’t seen too many movies from that continent. For example, there’s a lot of smoking going on. There are countless scenes with characters puffing away. I know, the movie’s set in the past, but I haven’t seen movies with that much lighting up… well, maybe ever. Also, a few times you have split-screens, where you see a few different views of the same scene. It isn’t done so often it becomes a distraction, thankfully. Also, while you get your fair share of violent moments (stabbings, shootings, pistol-whippings, car chases, and so forth) it’s Europe so sex is more out in the open, and you also get to see some thrusting action, to put it bluntly. Also, there’s some nudity… which I didn’t complain about!
Like I said, when you're able to see it, I recommend seeing this. I'll be back Monday night with a totally different kind of foreign motion picture.
Monday, January 17, 2011
Season of the Witch
Season of the Witch (2011)
4% on Rotten Tomatoes (out of 91 reviews)
Runtime: 95 minutes
Directed by: Dominic Sena
Starring: Nicolas Cage, Ron Perlman, Claire Foy, Christopher Lee
From: Rogue/Relativity/Atlas
Here’s my first-ever review of a movie released in 2011, and to be honest, I doubt I’ll be saying too much about it. Sure, I could spend a lot of time ranting about the Troglodytes I had to watch the movie with when I went out to the Cineplex to check it out, but I’ll spare you that; it’s just the usual idiocy that took place with people and movie theatres. Sigh.
I’ve heard about the movie for awhile and it sat on the shelf for at least a year, which is usually a bad sign for a completed movie to sit unreleased for so many months. I wasn’t sure what to make of it from the previews. Most of the movies I’ve seen that take place so long ago aren’t so great, like The Last Legion or Pathfinder (maybe one of these days I’ll review those, mainly because I doubt too many people have checked them out… even though trust me, they really aren’t worth seeing!) so that gave me pause. But, I wanted to get out one night and that was the only thing out that interested me, so I decided to give it a chance.
In short, the movie isn’t as awful as the critics are saying. Problem is, it’s mediocre at best in every which way, from story to the special effects to the action. But, I guess I shouldn’t say “every” which way, as at least Cage and Perlman were amusing at times and their chemistry was fine. If only they had a better movie to work with…
In short, Cage and Perlman play knights during the Crusades (and personally, I wish for more *good* movies about that time in history) who quit the gig when Cage accidentally does something bad. They travel along but then stumble upon a village which is suffering the effects of the Black Plague. They blame it on a witch, who happens to be an attractive young lady (Foy). They and some other people have to transport her to another city in order to stop her powers, or some such nonsense. To give more away would ruin the threadbare story.
So, I say that if you really want to see the movie, wait until it comes out on DVD/Blu-Ray. It’s not worth theatre prices. Like I said, it’s not awful, but it’s not that memorable either and nothing really stands out. Is it better to be bad or to be dull and soul-crushingly average? I'm not quite sure.
Anyhow, I'll be back Friday and for at least a week or two I'll be reviewing some foreign films in order to do something different.
4% on Rotten Tomatoes (out of 91 reviews)
Runtime: 95 minutes
Directed by: Dominic Sena
Starring: Nicolas Cage, Ron Perlman, Claire Foy, Christopher Lee
From: Rogue/Relativity/Atlas
Here’s my first-ever review of a movie released in 2011, and to be honest, I doubt I’ll be saying too much about it. Sure, I could spend a lot of time ranting about the Troglodytes I had to watch the movie with when I went out to the Cineplex to check it out, but I’ll spare you that; it’s just the usual idiocy that took place with people and movie theatres. Sigh.
I’ve heard about the movie for awhile and it sat on the shelf for at least a year, which is usually a bad sign for a completed movie to sit unreleased for so many months. I wasn’t sure what to make of it from the previews. Most of the movies I’ve seen that take place so long ago aren’t so great, like The Last Legion or Pathfinder (maybe one of these days I’ll review those, mainly because I doubt too many people have checked them out… even though trust me, they really aren’t worth seeing!) so that gave me pause. But, I wanted to get out one night and that was the only thing out that interested me, so I decided to give it a chance.
In short, the movie isn’t as awful as the critics are saying. Problem is, it’s mediocre at best in every which way, from story to the special effects to the action. But, I guess I shouldn’t say “every” which way, as at least Cage and Perlman were amusing at times and their chemistry was fine. If only they had a better movie to work with…
In short, Cage and Perlman play knights during the Crusades (and personally, I wish for more *good* movies about that time in history) who quit the gig when Cage accidentally does something bad. They travel along but then stumble upon a village which is suffering the effects of the Black Plague. They blame it on a witch, who happens to be an attractive young lady (Foy). They and some other people have to transport her to another city in order to stop her powers, or some such nonsense. To give more away would ruin the threadbare story.
So, I say that if you really want to see the movie, wait until it comes out on DVD/Blu-Ray. It’s not worth theatre prices. Like I said, it’s not awful, but it’s not that memorable either and nothing really stands out. Is it better to be bad or to be dull and soul-crushingly average? I'm not quite sure.
Anyhow, I'll be back Friday and for at least a week or two I'll be reviewing some foreign films in order to do something different.
Thursday, January 13, 2011
Murphy's Law
Murphy’s Law (1986)
Runtime: 100 minutes
Directed by: J. Lee Thompson
Starring: Charles Bronson, Kathleen Wilhoite, Carrie Snodgress, Lawrence Tierney
From: MGM/Cannon
Here’s another movie I saw due to the fact that I still get Showtime channels for free, for goodness knows what reason. Hey, it’s my cable provider’s mistake… what they don’t know won’t hurt them, right? Here’s one of the movies that Bronson did for Cannon and Golan-Globus back in the 80’s. A few of them were directed by Thompson and from what I understand, their quality varies, but here, one thing certainly stands out.
Bronson plays a troubled cop, Jack Murphy-who you quickly learn follows only one law, which is “Don’t F*** With Jack Murphy!-who is troubled because he just got divorced from his wife, who not only already has a new man but also dances at the type of sleazy yet upscale 80’s strip clubs you only saw in 80’s films. When I say troubled, I mean that he loves the bottle, has trouble getting out of bed in the morning, AND pretty much stalks his now ex! Meanwhile, a woman named Joan (Snodgress) is on the hunt for Jack and she tries his best to screw up his life. I don’t think that’s really spoiling anything, as real early in the morning you see her gun down Tierney, who I am sure most people remember now from his role in Reservoir Dogs as Joe Cabot.
Through reasons that I won’t get into, Bronson ends up teaming up with a young punk teenager who he earlier busted for attempting to steal his automobile (a fine mid 80’s Oldsmobile, which you may think is an oxymoron)… he thwarted her by throwing a bag of groceries at the windshield. No, really. Anyway, he teams up with the girl, Arabella McGee (Wilhoite) and it’s a rather contentious relationship, to say the very least. They go through a variety of adventures and misadventures as not only do they deal with Joan and her devious scheme, but the Mob also gets involved.
What is the most distinctive thing about the movie is that for some bizarre reason, Arabella’s near-constant insults directed towards everyone else are just astounding, and I don’t really mean that in a good way. I mean, she actually spouts phrases such as “butt crust”, “suck a doorknob, you homo”, “monkey vomit”, “dinosaur dorks”, and “spermbank”. I mean, some of her comments are vulgar but most of them are just extremely goofy. But, the character isn’t quite as loathsome as you might expect. She even says at one point that she “digs older men”, but don’t worry, the then sexagenarian Bronson doesn’t get it on with a girl who age-wise could be his granddaughter. At least, it doesn’t happen on-screen. Who knows, though, maybe off-screen they did bump and grind!
The movie overall isn’t some sort of underappreciated gem by any means, but it’s a competent 80’s drama/action flick, with at least something unique in that the villain was a revenge-driven woman. It’s usually not boring at all, and if nothing else you can laugh or be befuddled at most of the insults that come out of Arabella’s mouth, or why the movie’s writers thought that those sorts of one-liners were the way that punk 80’s kids actually talked.
I'll be back Monday night with a new review.
Runtime: 100 minutes
Directed by: J. Lee Thompson
Starring: Charles Bronson, Kathleen Wilhoite, Carrie Snodgress, Lawrence Tierney
From: MGM/Cannon
Here’s another movie I saw due to the fact that I still get Showtime channels for free, for goodness knows what reason. Hey, it’s my cable provider’s mistake… what they don’t know won’t hurt them, right? Here’s one of the movies that Bronson did for Cannon and Golan-Globus back in the 80’s. A few of them were directed by Thompson and from what I understand, their quality varies, but here, one thing certainly stands out.
Bronson plays a troubled cop, Jack Murphy-who you quickly learn follows only one law, which is “Don’t F*** With Jack Murphy!-who is troubled because he just got divorced from his wife, who not only already has a new man but also dances at the type of sleazy yet upscale 80’s strip clubs you only saw in 80’s films. When I say troubled, I mean that he loves the bottle, has trouble getting out of bed in the morning, AND pretty much stalks his now ex! Meanwhile, a woman named Joan (Snodgress) is on the hunt for Jack and she tries his best to screw up his life. I don’t think that’s really spoiling anything, as real early in the morning you see her gun down Tierney, who I am sure most people remember now from his role in Reservoir Dogs as Joe Cabot.
Through reasons that I won’t get into, Bronson ends up teaming up with a young punk teenager who he earlier busted for attempting to steal his automobile (a fine mid 80’s Oldsmobile, which you may think is an oxymoron)… he thwarted her by throwing a bag of groceries at the windshield. No, really. Anyway, he teams up with the girl, Arabella McGee (Wilhoite) and it’s a rather contentious relationship, to say the very least. They go through a variety of adventures and misadventures as not only do they deal with Joan and her devious scheme, but the Mob also gets involved.
What is the most distinctive thing about the movie is that for some bizarre reason, Arabella’s near-constant insults directed towards everyone else are just astounding, and I don’t really mean that in a good way. I mean, she actually spouts phrases such as “butt crust”, “suck a doorknob, you homo”, “monkey vomit”, “dinosaur dorks”, and “spermbank”. I mean, some of her comments are vulgar but most of them are just extremely goofy. But, the character isn’t quite as loathsome as you might expect. She even says at one point that she “digs older men”, but don’t worry, the then sexagenarian Bronson doesn’t get it on with a girl who age-wise could be his granddaughter. At least, it doesn’t happen on-screen. Who knows, though, maybe off-screen they did bump and grind!
The movie overall isn’t some sort of underappreciated gem by any means, but it’s a competent 80’s drama/action flick, with at least something unique in that the villain was a revenge-driven woman. It’s usually not boring at all, and if nothing else you can laugh or be befuddled at most of the insults that come out of Arabella’s mouth, or why the movie’s writers thought that those sorts of one-liners were the way that punk 80’s kids actually talked.
I'll be back Monday night with a new review.
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
I'll Be Back Tomorrow Night
Unfortunately, due to unexpected things good and bad today (seeing a relative for the first time in a few years, the good, and spending almost 2 hours trying and then finally uninstalling a program that kept on crashing my computer, the bad), I'll have to wait to do what I was planning on doing today until tomorrow, so Thursday night I'll have up my newest review.
Saturday, January 8, 2011
Catfish
Catfish (2010)
81% on Rotten Tomatoes (out of 126 reviews)
Runtime: 87 minutes
Directed by: Henry Joost/Ariel Schulman
Starring: Ariel Schulman, Yaniv Schulman, Angela Weselman-Pierce
From: Universal/Rogue/Relativity
Here’s a documentary movie that I’ve heard about for awhile now, and if I would have seen it last year, I would have included it in the list I just posted.
By the way, my apologies for posting this so late, but things got in the way.
Anyhow, I just saw it on DVD this week and while it’s controversial, I’d still include it on the list of the best movies I saw that were released in 2010. Problem is, I can’t say too much about the movie itself without giving out major spoilers, and in the case of this film, major spoilers would REALLY ruin everything.
To try and explain it the best I can in vague terms, the movie is about a photographer who lives in New York City (Yaniv Schulman) who one day receives word that a photo he took was painted by an 8 year old girl who lives in the upper peninsula of Michigan. At this same time, his brother Ariel and Henry Joost are filming him for some sort of documentary. They end up following him as he gets to know the family of the 8 year old girl, and he actually becomes online friends with the 19 year old girl in the family, Megan… only it was more than just friends when they talked to each other.
Things happen and… I’ll stop there. The big appeal is that you aren’t supposed to know too much about the movie or how it turns out. Let’s just say that you may have an idea, but it isn’t truly what you expected.
What I can say is that the controversy is over how much of the movie is legit. Some thing that it’s all staged; others think that it’s all real, and others think that part of it was recreated later on in order to fit into an exciting narrative but the last half of the movie or so is totally legit. I fall into that latter category. I usually am a hater when it comes to “reality” TV as almost all of it is totally staged/manipulated and it’s a total waste of time dealing with garbage where producers fan the flames to cause drama. Don’t even get me started on Jersey Shore and how just hearing that it’s return Thursday night had over EIGHT MILLION viewers… it makes me want to inject cyanide!
However, in this case, due to reasons I can’t really get into, I can’t complain about part of it being recreated. It had to be done in that way in order to make the movie so engrossing and mysterious at times.
The theme of the movie was technology (the Internet plays a big role, with Google Maps, YouTube, iTunes, and other stalwarts) and how it’s pervasive today and yet for some people, it’s really needed in their lives, but used in the wrong way/you go overboard with it and yikes, people can get really wrapped up in that whole scene.
Two last things… ignore the theatrical trailer that was created for the film. It’s totally misleading. Sure, it’s hard to market this sort of documentary, but still… misleading. Also, the title of the movie actually is explained by the end. It’s rather wacky but it actually makes sense given what the movie ends up being about; but again I can’t reveal more than that as it would give away something major. As you can see, this is a unique movie but if you’re willing to give a chance and fully believe that everyone is on the up and up, you’ll never forget it, even if replay value may not be the highest.
I’ll be back Wednesday night with a new review.
81% on Rotten Tomatoes (out of 126 reviews)
Runtime: 87 minutes
Directed by: Henry Joost/Ariel Schulman
Starring: Ariel Schulman, Yaniv Schulman, Angela Weselman-Pierce
From: Universal/Rogue/Relativity
Here’s a documentary movie that I’ve heard about for awhile now, and if I would have seen it last year, I would have included it in the list I just posted.
By the way, my apologies for posting this so late, but things got in the way.
Anyhow, I just saw it on DVD this week and while it’s controversial, I’d still include it on the list of the best movies I saw that were released in 2010. Problem is, I can’t say too much about the movie itself without giving out major spoilers, and in the case of this film, major spoilers would REALLY ruin everything.
To try and explain it the best I can in vague terms, the movie is about a photographer who lives in New York City (Yaniv Schulman) who one day receives word that a photo he took was painted by an 8 year old girl who lives in the upper peninsula of Michigan. At this same time, his brother Ariel and Henry Joost are filming him for some sort of documentary. They end up following him as he gets to know the family of the 8 year old girl, and he actually becomes online friends with the 19 year old girl in the family, Megan… only it was more than just friends when they talked to each other.
Things happen and… I’ll stop there. The big appeal is that you aren’t supposed to know too much about the movie or how it turns out. Let’s just say that you may have an idea, but it isn’t truly what you expected.
What I can say is that the controversy is over how much of the movie is legit. Some thing that it’s all staged; others think that it’s all real, and others think that part of it was recreated later on in order to fit into an exciting narrative but the last half of the movie or so is totally legit. I fall into that latter category. I usually am a hater when it comes to “reality” TV as almost all of it is totally staged/manipulated and it’s a total waste of time dealing with garbage where producers fan the flames to cause drama. Don’t even get me started on Jersey Shore and how just hearing that it’s return Thursday night had over EIGHT MILLION viewers… it makes me want to inject cyanide!
However, in this case, due to reasons I can’t really get into, I can’t complain about part of it being recreated. It had to be done in that way in order to make the movie so engrossing and mysterious at times.
The theme of the movie was technology (the Internet plays a big role, with Google Maps, YouTube, iTunes, and other stalwarts) and how it’s pervasive today and yet for some people, it’s really needed in their lives, but used in the wrong way/you go overboard with it and yikes, people can get really wrapped up in that whole scene.
Two last things… ignore the theatrical trailer that was created for the film. It’s totally misleading. Sure, it’s hard to market this sort of documentary, but still… misleading. Also, the title of the movie actually is explained by the end. It’s rather wacky but it actually makes sense given what the movie ends up being about; but again I can’t reveal more than that as it would give away something major. As you can see, this is a unique movie but if you’re willing to give a chance and fully believe that everyone is on the up and up, you’ll never forget it, even if replay value may not be the highest.
I’ll be back Wednesday night with a new review.
Wednesday, January 5, 2011
The Best Movies I Saw Last Year
Via a conversation elsewhere, I’ve come to realize that I can’t even come up with a list of the Top 10 movies I saw that were released in 2010. I am sure that by the time 2011 ends I’ll see some more movies from last year that I would put in the list, but for now… I might as well present the movies in a rough order, with clickable links to my reviews of them.
8. Burning Bright. It’s just your usual direct to DVD movie that revolves around a hot young woman, her autistic brother, a boarded-up house in a hurricane, an evil stepfather, and a killer tiger on the loose in the house… it sounds too ridiculous to enjoy, and yet the movie manages to work. Star Briana Evigan does a great job with the role, and her wearing not a lot of clothing for a good amount of the running time wasn’t something I complained about either. It may be hard to find unless you rent it at a place like Blockbuster or Netflix.
7. Ninja. It’s another direct to DVD movie. It is a simple yet effective tale involving a dojo, the title characters, and a literal warchest that’s the prize everyone is after. It may not sound like it from the review, but it was a movie that-budget limitations aside-is still a satisfying action film that may be more thrilling than many of the big-budget action films you see on the big screen in recent years.
6. The A-Team. Well, this is a big-budget action movie that wasn’t bad, by my estimation, even though it isn’t perfect and it’s a little long in the tooth. I haven’t even watched the longer version on DVD, and it may be best if I don’t. However, what makes it fun (besides the nice action sequences) is the light nature and the great cast that works well with those particular roles.
5. Paranormal Activity 2. It’s a quickly-made sequel to a surprise horror hit and somehow, it managed to be comparable to the first one, and in fact could be argued that it was even better. If you liked the first, see this one. If not… then don’t. I dug the first one, so I was glad this sequel wasn’t a cheap horror sequel that was a mockery of the first movie.
4. Piranha 3D. Here’s a remake of a cult 70’s movie that doesn’t have much to do with the original, but it’s over the top ridiculous and delivers what you would expect of a bikini-filled gorefest, and does so in spades. It’s hardcore gore (I couldn’t believe all of the nasty stuff that appeared in this R-rated film; I later saw the movie Hatchet II on the big screen and if you compare the two… it’s suspicious as the latter was shown unrated.) and there is a plethora of nudity. It’s a LOT of fun if you’re into that sort of thing.
3. Machete. I know this movie wasn’t for everyone and not even all action fans agreed on this, but I dug the vibe that this gave out… and if it isn’t perfect, I’ll just say that it was because it was THAT close of a homage to those trashy 70’s films. Or, at least that’s the excuse that I’ll use. It has an entertaining plot and I wildly enjoyed it.
2. Toy Story 3. It’s Pixar and while I haven’t seen enough of their films, I know that they pretty much always deliver and they did so yet again with this movie. It’s comparable to the first two films in the series, if definitely the darkest Toy Story film. There are many great moments and it’s a must-see. It’s a lot more than “just” a cartoon, if you happen to think that way.
1. The Expendables. Here is a movie that I had been waiting to see for months. It’s an all-star action film that was designed to be old-school, filled with old favorites and some newer dudes. While to my shock some so-called action fans did not like it at all, most thought that it was perfect for them, and I agree. It was everything I expected, with the cheesy dialogue and one-liners, the macho bravado, the simple yet effective plot… oh yeah, and the action. It was glorious. There’s a huge gun known as the Street Sweeper (at least according to the gun nut I saw it with when I recently checked it out on Blu-Ray) that gets used in memorable ways, and things get blown up real good. I was so happy that this delivered and I wasn’t disappointed by it, as I was with some films I saw last year that shall go unnamed.
I realize the list is rather unorthodox, especially compared to the ones you'd find from a typical movie critic. There are more than a few movies I wish I would have seen on the big screen in 2010 but it wasn't meant to be. Plus, I'm a rather unorthodox individual!
I'll be back Friday night with an actual review.
8. Burning Bright. It’s just your usual direct to DVD movie that revolves around a hot young woman, her autistic brother, a boarded-up house in a hurricane, an evil stepfather, and a killer tiger on the loose in the house… it sounds too ridiculous to enjoy, and yet the movie manages to work. Star Briana Evigan does a great job with the role, and her wearing not a lot of clothing for a good amount of the running time wasn’t something I complained about either. It may be hard to find unless you rent it at a place like Blockbuster or Netflix.
7. Ninja. It’s another direct to DVD movie. It is a simple yet effective tale involving a dojo, the title characters, and a literal warchest that’s the prize everyone is after. It may not sound like it from the review, but it was a movie that-budget limitations aside-is still a satisfying action film that may be more thrilling than many of the big-budget action films you see on the big screen in recent years.
6. The A-Team. Well, this is a big-budget action movie that wasn’t bad, by my estimation, even though it isn’t perfect and it’s a little long in the tooth. I haven’t even watched the longer version on DVD, and it may be best if I don’t. However, what makes it fun (besides the nice action sequences) is the light nature and the great cast that works well with those particular roles.
5. Paranormal Activity 2. It’s a quickly-made sequel to a surprise horror hit and somehow, it managed to be comparable to the first one, and in fact could be argued that it was even better. If you liked the first, see this one. If not… then don’t. I dug the first one, so I was glad this sequel wasn’t a cheap horror sequel that was a mockery of the first movie.
4. Piranha 3D. Here’s a remake of a cult 70’s movie that doesn’t have much to do with the original, but it’s over the top ridiculous and delivers what you would expect of a bikini-filled gorefest, and does so in spades. It’s hardcore gore (I couldn’t believe all of the nasty stuff that appeared in this R-rated film; I later saw the movie Hatchet II on the big screen and if you compare the two… it’s suspicious as the latter was shown unrated.) and there is a plethora of nudity. It’s a LOT of fun if you’re into that sort of thing.
3. Machete. I know this movie wasn’t for everyone and not even all action fans agreed on this, but I dug the vibe that this gave out… and if it isn’t perfect, I’ll just say that it was because it was THAT close of a homage to those trashy 70’s films. Or, at least that’s the excuse that I’ll use. It has an entertaining plot and I wildly enjoyed it.
2. Toy Story 3. It’s Pixar and while I haven’t seen enough of their films, I know that they pretty much always deliver and they did so yet again with this movie. It’s comparable to the first two films in the series, if definitely the darkest Toy Story film. There are many great moments and it’s a must-see. It’s a lot more than “just” a cartoon, if you happen to think that way.
1. The Expendables. Here is a movie that I had been waiting to see for months. It’s an all-star action film that was designed to be old-school, filled with old favorites and some newer dudes. While to my shock some so-called action fans did not like it at all, most thought that it was perfect for them, and I agree. It was everything I expected, with the cheesy dialogue and one-liners, the macho bravado, the simple yet effective plot… oh yeah, and the action. It was glorious. There’s a huge gun known as the Street Sweeper (at least according to the gun nut I saw it with when I recently checked it out on Blu-Ray) that gets used in memorable ways, and things get blown up real good. I was so happy that this delivered and I wasn’t disappointed by it, as I was with some films I saw last year that shall go unnamed.
I realize the list is rather unorthodox, especially compared to the ones you'd find from a typical movie critic. There are more than a few movies I wish I would have seen on the big screen in 2010 but it wasn't meant to be. Plus, I'm a rather unorthodox individual!
I'll be back Friday night with an actual review.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)