Partners

Partners (1982)

Runtime: 93 minutes

Directed by: James Burrows

Starring: Ryan O’Neal, John Hurt, Robyn Douglass, Kenneth McMillan

From: Paramount

Here is a movie I’ve heard about for a long time now and Monday night I was channel-surfing when I came upon the FLIX channel (yeah, I still get the Showtime channels for free, as I have for the past year, even though they’ve never been paid for and the house has been getting it for free for that long… hey, it’s the cable company’s fault!) and noticed that this movie was on, so I checked it out.

The main thing about the movie is that it’s a comedy/murder mystery with an emphasis on the former; oh yeah, and the gimmick is that the two cops (O’Neal and Hurt) have to go undercover to try and solve the case… and as the case involves the murder of homosexuals, they have to disguise themselves as a gay couple; that isn’t a problem for Hurt’s character, who IS a homosexual. Let me tell you, Hollywood’s views on homosexuals in ’82… yikes in hindsight.

Before I get to that, though, I have to mention the film Cruising. It’s a 1980 film starring Al Pacino as a cop who gets asked to go undercover to investigate a series of homosexual murders and he has to dive deep into the S&M homosexual world. Sound familiar? I’ve seen the movie before and it’s just way too ambiguous rather than straightforward for my tastes. It’s not awful, but… at least it’s rather unique. I understand that the movie got a LOT of bad press. It didn’t make a lot of people happy on either side.

With Partners, it’s like a comedy parody of Cruising, as peculiar as it sounds to do a comedy version of a dark and moody film. Overall, the movie is just strange more than anything else. Like I said, the views on homosexuality back then aren’t like it is today, where you have states that have legalized gay marriage. The stereotypes you get to see here... yikes. The F-word gets used often, and I do not mean the four letter word. I mean the slur against homosexuals.

Most of the homosexuals you get to see are lisping prancing sissies (hey, that’s the portrayal they were given) who were pink or purple and are happy to do such things as feel up guys they just meet, wear short-shorts, run naked on the beach (!) or other similar actions. Sure, the movie makes Hurt the guy who gets the most done on solving the case, but... hell, it's implied (or rather, it's more explicit than implicit) that Hurt's character falls in love with Ryan O'Neal! Then again, who can resist him wearing a leather jacket and headband, which I guess is his idea of dressing up like a gay guy.

The film wasn't all that funny, unfortunately. Sure, I chuckled a few times but most of the humor is rather dated. It's more interesting than anything else. Like I said, it's strange more than anything else. As for the murder mystery part, it's not too much. I won't reveal what it is, but it's just as wacky and odd as the entire movie, and that's about all that needs to be said about this motion picture.

I'll be back a week from today with a new review.

Yojimbo

Yojimbo (1961)

Runtime: 110 minutes

Directed by: Akira Kurosawa

Starring: Toshiro Mifune, Tatsuya Nakadai, Yoko Tsukasa, Isuzu Yamada

From: Toho

Here’s a classic film from the Criterion collection, but this time it was something I bought on Blu-Ray when it was on sale at Barnes & Noble awhile back. I finally watched the movie this week and…

In short, the movie is about the title samurai (Mifune) who ends up in an almost constantly windy and dusty town in the Land of the Rising Sun in the early 1860’s-at least according to the small part of the commentary I listened to-and discovers that the small burgh is ridden with a pair of gangs who are aligned with either a sake or a silk merchant and a pair of wacky characters (who are his only allies in the town) tells him that the city has been ruined by these feuding gangs. So, he concocts a plot where he plays the two sides against each other to his advantage in hopes of getting rid of those guys, whether by them killing each other or just leaving the area.

If you’ve ever seen the movie A Fistful of Dollars, you’ll recognize the plot of this, as it’s an unofficial remake by Sergio Leone of this film, and that launched Clint Eastwood’s career. Now that I’ve seen both… it’s difficult to say which one is “better”. Both are classics and should be seen. But one of these days I’ll talk about The Man With No Name Trilogy. Here, this movie was pretty great. It’s an endlessly entertaining darkly comic tale where I was always interested in Yojimbo’s plan and how it would turn out, and while it definitely wasn’t subtle in portraying the bad guys as just that, who cares when it’s so much fun to watch. Mifune in the title role was classic.

As for further thoughts… I was surprised at how violent and bloody it was. When you did see violence, there was usually blood spurting about and you even get to see arms get hacked off and a torrent of claret gush out. I wasn’t expecting that. There was even a great gag involving a hand that I won’t dare reveal. I also was surprised to see a huge dude in one of the gangs who reminded me of Japanese pro wrestler Giant Baba. His name was Namigoro Rashomon and not too surprisingly, this 6 foot 10 man was also a pro wrestler, or so I hear. I also hear that I’m not the only one who has compared the two. In this movie, he was quite the menacing figure and he actually whupped Yojimbo’s ass in hand to hand combat. This was his only movie, though.

Anyhow, if you’ve never seen this, you should check it out, especially if you’re a fan of The Man With No Name Trilogy. I’ll be back Wednesday night with a new review.

Surviving Edged Weapons

Surviving Edged Weapons (198?)

Runtime: 85 minutes

Directed by: Dennis Anderson

From: Calibre Press

I can’t give any further info on this, as it’s a video made for law enforcement (made in Illinois/Wisconsin but they must have used only Canadian “actors”, given that many have Canadian accents that are REALLY strong) that got uploaded to a forum I won’t name as it’s a place to download obscure movies (including some that I’ve reviewed already), so “shhh” there. This won’t count as a regular movie review as it’s not even listed in IMDb. It’s just something different for me to write about.

Like I said, it was made for law enforcement to learn how to avoid attacks by edged weapons such as broken beer bottles, knives, swords, shurikens (!), and other wacky weapons. You get interviews with cops about getting hurt on the job, along with reenactments (if they didn’t make up this shit, which wouldn’t surprise me) that are the highlight of it for me. It’s unintentionally funny to watch them. A lot of it looks fine considering what had to be a low-budget shoot, but it still has an air of campiness to it, especially when watching it now compared to the 80’s when it was filmed, and yeah, some of the acting IS howlingly bad.

Not too surprisingly, clips from the video (but not the full video itself) can be found online. For example, there is this 90 second deal which includes my favorite part-a guy who looks like vintage-era Van Damme but with a unibrow getting stabbed in the face; no way would that happen to the real life JCVD-and then there is this video, which is more of a parody but still amusing and you see plenty of the reenactments to whet your appetite.

Sure, you could get it on Amazon, but you’d have to pay 140 bucks (!) for the VHS tape. Eh, no thanks there. I’m glad I illegally got it, and I have no shame in saying that. From unibrow Van Damme to the opening involving cavemen attacking each other (?) to all the blood and viscera that is shown, to the droll narration to even a pair of cops busting a woman worshipping Satan in a barren room but with a giant poster of Iron Maiden advertising The Trooper (!!!)… it’s all great.

I know I shouldn’t laugh at something meant to be serious to an important part of our society such as law enforcement, but me and other people just can’t help themselves. I’ll be back on Friday night, and this time it’ll be my usual review concerning an actual motion picture.

Harlan County USA

Harlan County USA (1976)

Runtime: 104 minutes

Directed by: Barbara Koppel

Starring: This is a documentary

From: Cabin Creek

Here’s another documentary (I’m a non-fiction fan, remember) and this one I got to see on Hulu via Criterion having it up on there. Yeah, I paid for a month more of it, just so I can check out a few more movies on Hulu Plus.

This one is an Academy Award winning documentary about a bitter coal miner’s strike down in Harlan, Kentucky. That is one rural area, if you just look at it on a map. The workers of the Brookside Mine in that town decided to join the union. The people who own the mine, the Duke Power Company, refused to agree to that deal. So, the workers went on strike. They got some help from the union, but not a lot.

So, those workers had to find other jobs along with pickets and other things to get attention to their plight as “scabs” took their jobs, and the war between the two sides got very serious. You get to see a surprising amount of time spent with the wives of the miners… not a bad thing, as they are “real” characters, as earthy as you can imagine.

The filmmakers were there originally to film something else related to the coal miner’s union; however, once the strike started, they shifted focus. So, not only do you see the strike and its effects on that poor town in Kentucky, but you also see the drama involved with the union itself; it’s quite shocking, actually, what went on with the union. I’m sure you won’t be shocked, though, to learn that coal mining is a real bitch, between black lung’s disease, how dangerous and back-breaking the work is, and all that.

I won’t real too much more as it’d spoil things, but it’s real life drama with a lot of difficult issues presented, and you get to see many rural bucolic people get interviewed and have their side of the story presented, and for that and other reasons, this documentary is sad and yet endlessly captivating at the same time. You should check it out if you love documentaries.

I’ll be back tomorrow night.

The Lord of the Rings: Fellowship of the Ring

The Lord of the Rings: Fellowship of the Ring (2001)

Runtime: 208 minuets (Extended Edition)

Directed by: Peter Jackson

Starring: Elijah Wood, Sean Astin, Viggo Mortensen, Ian McKellen

From: New Line Cinema

Would you believe that I had never seen this film before… or any of the Lord of the Rings movies? I haven’t read the book either. I just had never given a damn. And that’s with hearing about how good the book was from some older people I knew and hung out with at the time (back before the films came out) and I had seen clips from all three movies before. It still never interested me. Then, recently I found out that on the 14th, 21st, and 28th of this month, some AMC Theatres across the country are doing a special deal where on those days, they’d screen a LOTR movie, with this one being first, the second on the 21st, and the last on the 28th. I figured I would roll the dice and give the first one a shot, despite its length.

The only unique thing I saw about this screening (I bounced after the end credits began) was that it opened with a short introduction from the director, who thanked everyone for coming out, mentioned that he was shocked he was able to make the movies in the first place, and despite how long it took to make the three movies, he was proud of how they turned out. I don’t think I need to mention what the series of movies is about (I mean, even I generally knew what it was about), so I’ll get to my thoughts on this movie itself.

Me… it’s not for me. I know, some people will get mad at that statement, and people will think I’m being “different”, a “contrarian”, or what have you. That’s not the case; I just wasn’t convinced that I was wrong in ignoring this whole franchise. Sure, that film looked and sounded great, and what an expansive world it was (I enjoyed the New Zealand scenery). I just thought that everything was overblown, overwrought (especially the score at times), confused, and just too damn long. It’s the longest movie I’ve ever seen on the big screen, so there’s that, but I couldn’t understand what powers the “all-powerful” wizards had or didn’t have and when they do or don’t use those powers, and trying to understand what the characters do and don’t at certain times… I guess I just don’t care for the novel and its plot then.

I’m not saying this is a terrible movie by any means; it’s just not my thing. Besides the praise I’ve already given to how it looked and sounded, there were definitely some interesting creatures and the action is entertaining-enough. It’s just that if I do decide to ever see the other two films, it’ll be on disk instead of the big screen… or maybe I’ll just read the synopsis of those movies on Wikipedia. It’d save a lot of time.

I’ll be back Sunday night and what I do then will definitely be less controversial than this.

Charley Varrick

Charley Varrick (1973)

Runtime: 111 minutes

Directed by: Don Siegel

Starring: Walter Matthau, Felicia Farr, Andrew Robinson, Joe Don Baker

From: Universal

Here’s a movie from the 70’s that you may not have heard of before, but it’s quite entertaining. Despite Matthau in the lead it’s more like his work in The Taking of Pelham One Two Three as it’s a drama rather than a comedy, although there is some humor involved.

The plot is rather interesting; a heist is involved as the title character (Walter) leads a gang who robs a bank. It’s in a small town so they expect a small payoff but they’re shocked when they get a large chunk of change. The reason why… the bank is owned by the Mob! They realized their error and the story is that they have to get the money back to them, while dealing with such things as in-fighting, double-crosses, having to resort to crafty plans to get out of the jam they’re in, and a visit to the Mustang Ranch (the real original one in Nevada).

Some of the bad guys that they have to deal with include Maynard Boyle (John Vernon) and a hired killer known as Molly (Baker, who back in those days was more than the title character in Mitchell, as torn apart brutally by Mystery Science Theater 3000 that one time. He’s more than just a boozy cop character in a movie destined for obscurity. Here, it was a quality performance as he played one evil dude rather well.

The movie as a whole is just entertaining to watch. The characters are entertaining, the action you get to see is fun (which includes an escape via car from the bank), and the ending is an obvious allusion to a famous moment in a Hitchcock movie-I won’t mention which one, as it’d probably give it away-and it’s directly nicely by the dude who helmed the first Dirty Harry motion picture. The score by the legendary Lalo Schifrin comes together nicely with what you see on the screen.

I don’t want to give anything else away concerning the plot as I don’t want to give away any surprises. I will close this out by saying that Tarantino was obviously a fan of this too. He almost lifted completely a line of dialogue that Marsellus Wallace ended up saying in Pulp Fiction, and an idea or two was also used for Reservoir Dogs. If you think that his endorsement is worth anything, then you should try and track this down, even though the only DVD in the states of this movie is in full-screen. Likely, you’ll have to be “not so ethical” to find a widescreen version.

I’ll be back Wednesday night.

Hobo With A Shotgun

Hobo With A Shotgun (2011)

75% on Rotten Tomatoes (out of 69 reviews)

Runtime: 86 minutes

Directed by: Jason Eisenser

Starring: Rutger Hauer, Molly Dunsworth, Brian Downey, Nick Bateman

From: Alliance

Here’s a movie that I’ve known about for awhile and while you can likely find it via on demand services and watch it at home, I was glad I waited out and saw it on the big screen via the Enzian Theater. I am also glad that Magnet released it on the U.S. so that people like me can watch something this f***** up on the big screen.

So, a fan-made trailer entitled Hobo With A Shotgun added to some screenings up in Canada to the big screen showings of Grindhouse via a contest that was won by the filmmakers. You can watch said trailer here. A lot of the ideas there ended up in the motion picture that was released earlier this year.

As an aside, Thursday night I had a rather horrifying night which involved talking to some young lady I barely know via a forum and trying to tell her that she shouldn’t go with her threats to KILL HERSELF; I swear, this is true. She even posted a photo to everyone on the forum of her just-bandaged wrists, which were just slit. Wow. The last I knew, she’s still alive and I hope she’s getting help for her personal demons. You can read more about it here in my usual blogs I post on Facebook and now Blogger on a weekly basis.

I bring that up as after that sort of night, I needed to have some time set aside where I can watch what I know is a depraved and really wacked-out and yet entertaining at the same time if you enjoy that sort of thing motion picture. Thus, me going out Friday night to see this. The crowd I saw it with was smaller than I expected, and from what I could tell the movie got a mixed reaction, but me, I was flabbergasted by what I saw on screen… in a good way. From the 70’s opening credits to the apparent 80’s setting all the way to the LOL-worthy end credits song, which is preposterous-sounding 80’s song that sounded like something made up from the film but actually is a song from the 80’s that was for the opening of some 80’s Canadian kids show about raccoons (!?)*, it was quite the experience.

• I swear, it’s true. Just check out this link.

The plot of this movie… an unnamed hobo (Hauer) ends up in a city known as Hope Town (but commonly known as something far more vulgar) and discovers it’s a wasteland of crime and it’s controlled by a slimy guy known as Drake (Downey) who has his two sons run roughshod over everything. He meets up with a whore with a heart of gold (Dunsworth) and he saves up enough money to buy a lawnmower. Really! That would be his new job… but one day, something happens and he decides to live up to the title of the film and he gets his revenge.

I’ll tell you right away that this film is unrated for a good reason. If you’ve seen Peter Jackson’s early movies-like Dead Alive-then you have an idea as to the level of violence, gore, and downright depravity you get to see. Beheadings, disembowelings, a pedophile Santa, and many shotgun wounds are seen. There’s a lot of fake blood you get to see.

There’s a section on IMDB’s website-Parents Guide-which lists all the things in a movie that parents would be objectionable if their kids watched that film. For this movie… it’s rather long. Here’s a bit I got from there, and if it’s your thing, then you should check out the movie. If not, then you can skip it:

A man is placed in a manhole, has a barb wire noose placed around his neck which is attached to a car, and is decapitated. Blood fountains from his head and hookers grind while the blood coats them.

The movie isn’t good technically, but it’s SO outrageous and over the top it becomes captivating, and it helps that they have a legit actor in the lead. Hauer’s not a bad thespian at all but for whatever reasons he’s ended up in a lot of films that are not too good. Here, he delivers a performance that isn’t phoned in, and it stands out among the rest of the cast, which I’ll say is inexperienced.

I understand you can still find it on demand in some spots, but it’s coming out on DVD/Blu-Ray in a few weeks. At least see it that way if this is up your alley. I'll be back Monday night.

Come Back Saturday Afternoon

Well, the past few days have been more hectic than expected, to say the least, so what I wanted to see will be watched late tonight and the review will come Saturday afternoon.

The Hangover Part II

The Hangover Part II (2011)

35% on Rotten Tomatoes (out of 207 reviews)

Runtime: 102 minutes

Directed by: Todd Phillips

Starring: Bradley Cooper, Ed Helms, Zach Galifiankis, Ken Jeong

From: Warner Brothers

So, I finally went out and saw this movie despite knowing that it was as much of a carbon copy of the first as Home Alone 2 is to the first Home Alone. I enjoyed the first, so yesterday at the local Cineplex I watched this film. And…

But, first I should mention that with the first Hangover, it was a movie I ended up liking, despite it being hit or miss at times and some of the things that Alan (Zach G.) says and does is more strange than funny. It’s more of the same here. I mean, this won’t be a long review.

Just like in the first movie, you have the main characters together to celebrate a bachelor party-this time, in Bangkok-a blackout happens, they have to try and find someone, they meet wacky characters, and a misunderstanding happens. Honestly, that all happens for a second time, and none of that should be a spoiler if you’ve seen the trailers and commercials. It’s just that the setting is different and you get to see some stereotypes that you may think of when it comes to the topic of Thailand.

Sure, it’s ridiculous that all the same things happen for a second time (even to the point that Mr. Chow (Jeong) shows up again; he’s not the only bit player from the original to also appear here; I’m not counting either one actor playing a character in the first and playing a different character this time) and again, some the things that Alan says and does can be off-putting. Even then, I laughed at the situation happening again along with the new gags they came up with. The cute little monkey you get to see was also amusing. One thing I do have to mention is that the film is more mean-spirited and dark in comparison. And not just because the setting is more mysterious and odd to Westerners than Las Vegas is. As someone I know online said, it’s like Die Hard 2 compared to Die Hard.

Because I knew how carbon-copy it was, I wasn’t too upset with the concept when I watched it and the movie was actually funny. Although, you know they’ll do a third one and they better not go to the same well again, lest they find that it dried up…

They can keep on doing the gimmick of funny photos during the end credits, though.

I also have to mention that I was amused early on to get a peek into Alan's room and seeing that he's a wrestling fan (among other things), with action figures all over and posters of 80's WWF wrestlers, including Hillbilly Jim and... Macho Man Randy Savage. That's melancholy after what happened a few weeks ago.

I'll be back on Friday night with a new review.

Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides

Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides (2011)

33% on Rotten Tomatoes (out of 225 reviews)

Runtime: 136 minutes

Directed by: Rob Marshall

Starring: Johnny Depp, Geoffrey Rush, Penelope Cruz, Ian McShane

From: Walt Disney

Well, this would have been better if I would have manned up and watched the first three movies in this franchise again, as I was thinking about doing last month. It didn’t come together, although sometime later this summer I may do just that. I could do a lot of ranting about the second and especially the third. I can’t believe how badly the franchise got botched considering that the original film is a blast and a lot of fun to watch… if having a plot twist or two too many. The second movie started the whole deal of it being way too convoluted and bloated, and the third movie was nothing but it being convoluted and bloated, and also with them destroying the character of Captain Jack Sparrow, who saw multiple versions of himself and in a scene that almost made me walk out of the auditorium back in ’07, that scene in “white space” with him moving stones around. I haven’t even seen that movie since I watched it on a big screen-and got enraged-so now I wish I would have watched all three last month so that I’d have a more accurate (and maybe changed) opinion on the entire franchise.

Despite my feelings on the previous two films, I was a dope so I went to Downtown Disney to watch this movie in 3D on their giant screen and fancy sound system. The movie at least looked and sounded nice with it being filmed in Hawaii, but overall… it was sure as hell better than the third-At World’s End-as it wasn’t so damn long, long-winded, complex, poorly told, or aggravating, but it still doesn’t hold a candle to the first movie.

In short (even though I’m sure most know the plot by now) Captain Jack Sparrow ends up being involved with former (or current… actually, their relationship changes on a whim like 50 times during this flick) love Angelica (Cruz) as they search for the Fountain of Youth, which is also the target for the likes of Blackbeard (McShane), now Privateer Barbossa (Rush), and even some Spaniards. Along the way, the likes of mermaids and zombies (!) get involved, only it’s not as exciting as it may sound, and in fact is rather stupid at times.

My problems were that it was just too stupid and while the plot is a lot less confused than the previous two motion pictures, it doesn’t mean it is a GOOD plot. Let’s start from the beginning, where you find out that not only does a major London court not know what Captain Jack Sparrow looks like, but the real Sparrow can disguise himself as the judge, even though he was as convincing as a judge as Bugs Bunny is in camouflage. That turned me off right away, and you see stupid things like that throughout up to the very end. There’s enough action, but it can be hard to follow at times as it wasn’t filmed too spectacularly. You can’t tell where the various factions are in their trip to the Fountain in relation to each other and their positions throughout don’t make a lot of logical sense… there’s even a pair of new characters who are supposed to be romantic like Elizabeth Swan and Will Turner were before… it doesn’t quite work out that way. I really shouldn’t be surprised that I’ve seen some rave reviews for this, even on messageboards where I figured people would know better. I think the plot stupidity annoyed me just as much as it did in TRON: Legacy.

So yeah, while I didn’t hate this as much as I did At World’s End, it’s not a good movie and it’s starting to become amazing to me that the series ran around so badly after such a memorable original flick. I guess that they’ll never make another good Captain Jack Sparrow movie. Figures.

I'll be back Monday night with a new review.