Texas Rangers/Bob Funk

Texas Rangers (2001)

Runtime: 90 minutes

Directed by: Steve Miner

Starring: Dylan McDermott, James Van Der Beek, Ashton Kutcher, Alfred Molina, Rachael Leigh Cook

From: Miramax

Bob Funk (2009)

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1091172/

Runtime: 106 minutes

Directed by: Craig Carlisle

Starring: Michael Leydon Campbell, Rachael Leigh Cook, Grace Zabraskie, Amy Ryan

From: Unified Pictures

Here's a two-fer for tonight, the final two movies I saw this past Tuesday in that big four movie marathon I did. First, I'll get to Texas Rangers, a movie not entirely based on fact and delayed for two years and obviously edited by 20 minutes before it finally got released.

The plot is rather simple: a ragtag group of young people decide to join the Texas Rangers after the Civil War; they are led by Leander McNelly (McDermott) and they end up having to deal with the villainous John King Fisher (Molina). That's it in a nutshell, but there's various dramatic moments with characters growing and changing and all that. There are also some comedic moments.

The movie isn't the greatest but it's still watchable. At least the movie moves fast enough (but too fast, it turns out) and the action is entertaining-enough. Like I said, though, I wish that one of these days the longer version would get released, but that is highly unlikely I realize. While it sounds toxic to watch a movie starring Van Der Beek and the former Mr. Demi Moore, they are more than tolerable. There are other familiar faces, like Usher (!), Randy Travis, and a tremendous mustache-wearing Robert Patrick. Rachael has a small role as the little hottie who lives on a big ranch in Texas. Tom Skerritt is her dad! Of course both James and Ashton take a shine to her. Besides the scenery she provides, the general scenery of the movie (filmed in Canada and Mexico) at least looks... well, scenic.

Onto the second film, something completely different. This is totally an indie film, good and bad. Here's the plot: The title dude is a loudmouthed abrasive drunk who gets fired from his job (his boss is his mom; awk-ward); he ends up getting hired back and he works under a new employee (Cook).

This is a comedy/drama and it often moves between the two, and not always so well. Sure, there are enough humorous moments but overall the movie just isn't that great in terms of being entertaining. Sometimes old Bob is entertaining but other times he's just a real A-hole and not even the type that you can enjoy. Rachael's character is one who is a ditz and clumsy and that's about it for character development. There is some random nudity to spice things up, if nothing else. Still, while this wasn't awful it certainly wasn't the favorite film of me when it comes to Ms. Cook; at least she was a dirty blonde here, which was cool.

I'll be back Wednesday night.

Blow Dry

Blow Dry (2001)

Runtime: 90 minutes

Directed by: Paddy Breathnach

Starring: Alan Rickman, Natasha Richardson, Bill Nighy, Josh Hartnett, Rachael Leigh Cook

From: Intermedia Films

Here is the first film I saw in that long four film marathon on Tuesday. It's a mainly British production and it has a mainly British cast, and it gives the world the chance to see Hartnett do a British accent. It goes about as well as you'd think. I realized it this week but he really was the Channing Tatum of his time. Except, in recent times Tatum has actually gotten praise for his roles, which I don't know if that ever happened with old Josh. It seemed like he vanished but from looking at Wikipedia, he's done small indie movies and also such things as going into the theater world.

As for this movie, what an interesting topic it is about... British hairdressers and the British Hairdressing Championship! I'll just assume that's actually what happens in Britain even if it's not true. You see it centered around two families, the hero Allen family and the mainly bad Robertson family. The former is veteran hairdresser Alan Rickman, his former wife Natasha Richardson, their daughter and their son (Hartnett). They go against Bill Nighy who is not a very nice man; however, his half-American daughter (Cook) is there visiting and she's definitely nicer than her dad and all the wacky crew he hangs out with. There's various stories revolving around the multi day competition, including the expected romance between Josh and Rachael and what troubles that cause.

The film certainly is on a unique subject but for the most part it's rather straight-forward. There's some comedic moments and a nice amount of funny lines but there is also drama. For example, Richarson's character is quite ill with cancer. In 2012, that comes across as especially sad, for obvious reasons. There aren't too many surprises but it's still pleasant and entertaining. There's also such things as a small role from Heidi Klum, and not surprisingly for that time in her life there was a scene of her in her bra and panties... which I did not complain about.

Oh, and the soundtrack was a pleasant surprise to me. There are some covers of old songs that you should recognize and there are various old tunes used, such as Bachman Turner Overdrive's You Ain't Seen Nothing Yet, Bill Withers' Lovely Day, Climax Blues Band and their one big hit Couldn't Get It Right, and even a remix of Santa Esmeralda's Don't Let Me Be Misunderstood; Kill Bill wasn't the first to use that song.

I'll be back Sunday night with a two-fer.

The Big Empty

The Big Empty (2003)

Runtime: 94 minutes

Directed by: Steve Anderson

Starring: Jon Favreau (yes, the director of Iron Man and its sequel), Joey Lauren Adams, Rachael Leigh Cook, Kelsey Grammer

From: Aura Entertainment

Tuesday... oh Tuesday. On Monday night I was looking online for a schedule of what would be on pay TV the next day that I could see. I came across quite the revelation: it was scheduled almost perfectly that from 3:40 until almost 10 PM I could watch four Rachael Leigh Cook films in a row! It was spread out across 4 different channels across Showtime, Encore and The Movie Channel channels. Talk about a RACHAELAPALOOZA, unlike anything I've experienced before and won't ever again.

Except for one case (and I got the film on DVD so I could watch that to see the first few minutes I missed) I was able to watch one film, wait a few minutes, then start up a new one. Even for me, it was almost too much of a good thing, doing that sort of marathon, especially after doing one this past Thursday. Still, seeing three of the four movies in HD... worked for me. This movie wasn't the first in the marathon but I picked it as it is the most interesting to talk about.

This is yet another odd indie movie she appeared in. It reminds me in some ways of 29 Palms, but thankfully the characters here in general are definitely more pleasant. The story is that a struggling actor (Favreau) gets paid a lot of money to deliver a mysterious suitcase to the tiny town of Baker, California. There, he meets a rather odd assortment of characters.

I will admit right away that I was going along with the story, as weird as it is. Then, the last act happens and it gets REALLY strange, and it isn't really explained what happened, then it ends. What a typical indie movie thing to do, I say. Yet, I did not hate it. It's enjoyable to watch, especially if you enjoy something a little off-kilter, which becomes quite a bit off-kilter. There are plenty of humorous (and dark) situations that tickled my fancy. There are famous faces in the cast I haven't mentioned yet, like Sean Bean, Jon Gries, Bud Cort, and Daryl Hannah. I heard it compared to the 80's cult film Repo Man; why not? I am not 100 percent sure what I watched here, but I did not hate it.

I swear, I am not praising the movie because of the presence of Cook and what her character does. She plays Ruthie, a young lady who is quite wild. She pounds down Miller High Life (the champagne of beers!), drinks Jack out of the bottle, and she actually combines Jack with whipped cream by downing a shot then squirting the whipped cream right in her mouth. While it's not exactly what I would have done with that person and the combination of items... it was still pretty hot! I can't even deny it. She aso doesn't wear a bra at all during the movie and at one point you see her lean forward in a low-cut top and shortly after some sexual intercourse, she puts on her top and you briefly see a bit of sideboob action. But I swear that was not the big reason why I am giving a pass on the movie! I already mentioned what I liked concerning the humourous moments, the cast, and the performances. She did look smokin' hot in this movie, though.

Oh, and this is yet another film which relates to masturbation! I won't delve into the details but it's just discussed, talking about semen and Vaseline and I'll spare you the details about that.

I'll be back tomorrow night with another review from one of the four movies I watched on Tuesday.

The Dark Knight

The Dark Knight (2008)

94% on Rotten Tomatoes (out of 283 reviews)

Runtime: 152 minutes

Directed by: Christopher Nolan

Starring: Christian Bale, Heath Ledger, Aaron Eckhart, Maggie Gyllenhaal

From: Warner Brothers

Here we go, talking about a much-beloved film that I certainly enjoyed at the time but hadn't really watched in full since then. Some people at the time bashed the movie for various foibles; when it came to plot contrivances and how things seemed to have been convenient in how elaborate plans happened to prograss and how many things needed to happen in a row and they did... that is understandable. Some things after the big hospital explosion are kind of dumb.

But you know what, after seeing it on the big screen again, I still dug it a lot. The story is rather mature and complex in dealing with such things as crime, morality, unpredictibility, luck, corruption, and what have you. I am (mostly) able to excuse the dumb stuff as I so enjoy the ride. From the awesome bank robbery at the beginning to the big showdown at the end, much of it is quite entertaining. There's high drama, some comedy, and some thrilling action scenes. The general story is pretty great in all the things it discusses, including Batman hiding behind an identity and how the psychopathic Joker has such an issue with that.

All in all the performances are at least good. The regulars in the series are cool, and so is Maggie replacing Katie Holmes. Eckhart is underrated as Harvey Dent, a guy who should have been the true hero of Gotham but he was brought down by The Joker. And while I expected this going in, Ledger's performance as The Joker was still awesome as when I saw it four summers ago. Who knows what could have happened had Heath not OD'ed a few years ago and he could have returned to the role in The Dark Knight Rises. If only...

What else can I say about a film that everyone has seen and is beloved by many? I am happy that I was able to see it again in a theatre and I did not end up turning against the movie. At least in my opinion it holds up and it's clearly the best of the Nolan trilogy. Who knows where the Batman series will go now. Of course there will be a new one without Nolan involved. Will it be wackier? If so I hope it's not too cartoony; we don't need another Batman & Robin.

I'll be back Wednesday night with something completely different.

Batman Begins

Batman Begins (2005)

Runtime: 140 minutes

Directed by: Christopher Nolan

Starring: Christian Bale, Liam Neeson, Katie Holmes, Cillian Murphy

From: Warner Brothers

My apologies for this going up a day late. My schedule was more jam-packed than expected and the entire evening was taken up by a UFC show that turned out to not be so good, especially the pay per view version.

I already talked about this movie on Friday and how I don't understand why so many people love it. I'll try now to explain my opinion without saying too much about the plot, even though most people have already seen the film by now. It was interesting to see it on an IMAX screen, I will admit that.

I'm sure the plot is well-known by now: the title explains pretty well that you see how Bruce Wayne became Batman, from him as a kid and his parents getting killed by Joe Chill, to him going around the world as an adult and meeting up with Ra's Al Ghul and the League of Shadows to returning to Gotham and becoming the crime-fighting superhero doing battle against the mob and other elements. Suddenly, a threat comes and Batman has to do a lot to combat it.

After seeing it on the big screen it's ultimately a movie I strongly dislike. It's unfortunate as the Gotham presented here looks nice (I don't know why the Gothams you see in all three movies look noticeably different, as that's just dumb), the performers all try their best with what they're given (even Holmes is better than expected), and the general idea of the plot is certainly fine.

However, what turns me off is that too many characters just act like douches/real stupid, the fight scenes are horribly done to the point you can barely make any of them out, and just too much makes zero sense, especially the laughable third act. The Scarecrow as a villain... come on now. I don't care about what he is in the comics, some random idiot wearing a cloth sack on his head isn't a scary bad guy to me; it just makes me laugh. And does more than half of the dialogue need to come across as EPIC PROCLAMATIONS instead of something that comes across as realistic and natural?

Yet, many people love this, and Nolan as a director. I guess I'll never get it. At least this film had a role for Rutger Hauer, but that's definitely not enough.

With my schedule, I am sure I'll be back tomorrow night with The Dark Knight, a movie that I still enjoy despite itself.

The Dark Knight Rises

The Dark Knight Rises (2012)

86% on Rotten Tomatoes (out of 212 reviews)

Runtime: 164 minutes

Directed by: Christopher Nolan

Starring: Christian Bale, Tom Hardy, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Marion Cotillard

From: Warner Brothers

Before I get to talking about the film, I have to mention a few things. What happened in Colorado last night was quite sad to hear about; I get sad whenever that sort of thing happens, no matter where or how it takes place. I just hope that there aren't various scapegoats made (such as gun control or blaming the movies themselves) and instead the blame is put on the A-hole who was clearly mentally ill and anything could have set him off and he chose a popular thing to make that attack to get attention.

I ended up seeing all three Nolan films on an IMAX screen. My opinion on Batman Begins is that I still ultimately hate it for various reasons. The Dark Knight is still quite enjoyable aside from some stupidity, especially after the hospital blows up. Still, I dig the story and the idea behind it and Ledger was still awesome as The Joker. The auditorium was almost sold out so there had to be at least 250 people in there. It manly went fine, except that one fat ginger guy got escorted out by a cop during The Dark Knight. I have no idea why but there were applause for this so he must have been quite the disrupter.

As for this film, I will not reveal too much aside from the general idea presented in the trailers. The hugely muscular Bane (Hardy) appears in Gotham. Batman is away and he has to return to try and save the day. There are several important new characters, such as the young cop (Gordon-Levitt) and a comely young lass (Cotillard) who happens to have a lot of dough herself.

I'll give my take on the movie without spoiling anything; in various ways it will remind you of Batman Begins. You know, the theme and all that. For me, that is not really a good thing. I would have preferred a more original story that tried to present some of the ideas you saw here. This is definitely more comic book-y than the other two movies. Think of that how you will. There are some good ideas... along with some bad ones. The general idea was nice; just how it was executed that I did not enjoy. There are various surprises, some better than others, and some things revolving around comic canon and some not so much, from what I know of limited comic knowledge and Wikipedia searching. And sad to say, Bruce Wayne comes off as being a whiny emo dick. That was a real turn-off.

Still, I have a feeling most will enjoy this more than I did. The action for the most part was pretty satisfying. Batman vs. Bane is pretty cool. And while he's not quite like The Joker and Ledger, Bane and Hardy ended up being pretty cool. And thankfully you could understand most of his dialogue. The cast in general is fine acting-wise.

It is just a shame it could not measure up to The Dark Knight; talk about a difficult task but while not having the highest of expectations for it, I still felt let down as if the story overall would have been different and better then I might have enjoyed this more. It's not awful and enrages me like Batman Begins does. Like I said though it's no Dark Knight.

I'll be back tomorrow afternoon and I'll talk about Batman Begins.

Exorcist II: The Heretic

Exorcist II: The Heretic (1977)

 

Runtime: 118 minutes

Directed by: John Boorman

Starring: Linda Blair, Richard Burton, Louise Fletcher, Kitty Winn

From: Warner Brothers

Yep, I watched this movie for a second time and for the first time in what had to be 10-15 years. A messageboard reference brought this on. I was going to watch it on an Encore channel but when the time came, the cable box was on the fritz so no viewing of that channel could take place. I found another way to watch it and that's what I did tonight. Of course, I'll mention right away that the first is pretty awesome and still frightening even today, although I hadn't seen that in too long either. The third is flawed and there were obvious problems production-wise but it's still a rather creepy film and there are some awesome jump-scares. I've seen neither of the prequel movies, the two being the same story with the same actors but done differently by two drastically different directors.

As for this film, I'll just quote Father Lamont (a usually sweaty and usually in a trance Burton) by saying, “Utterly horrible... and fascinating”. There is no other way to describe this film. The plot sounds rather simple: Regan (Blair, who now is in her teenage years and in real life she was like 17 when the film was made, so the decision to have her never wear a bra throughout... kind of creepy) is still possessed by the demon Pazuzu. This is discovered as the sweaty priest as he's investigating what happened with Father Merrin (Max Von Sydow, who you see in the film in flashback scenes). From that you get a whole lot of what looks like drug-fueled insanity; maybe that's the proper way to digest this film. There is locusts, a church built in the side of a mountain in Ethiopia, a made-up device where two people can experience one person's hypnosis, there's odd music, strangely faux-futuristic sets, James Earl Jones wearing some goofy clothing, Ned Beatty in a few minute cameo as a pilot who collects religious artifacts... see what I mean about the drugs?

The movie is pretty terrible, especially compared to the classic first. But, it sure as hell isn't boring. It's a great film to laugh at and wonder how things ended up at this point and how this movie got released. What a fascinating failure. I mean, the last act has Lamont wearing a loud red patterned shirt which made his outfit pretty much a leisure suit. Only in the 70's...

I'll be back either really late tomorrow night (I mean, more than 24 hours from now) or I'll wait until Friday afternoon to talk about The Dark Knight Rises.

Barely Legal (No This Is Not A Porno)

Barely Legal (2011)

Runtime: 89 minutes

Directed by: Jose Montesinos

Starring: Jeneta St. Clair, Lisa Younger, Melissa Johnston, Morgan Benoit

From: The Asylum

Like I said, I swear this isn't any sort of porno, whether it be softcore or hardcore. Rather, it was a movie that was on a Showtime channel awhile back and I saw part of it but with the sound off. No, not for any illicit reasons; I was listening to a podcast before I went to bed, where again I did not do anything illicit. The movie looked crappy so I did not feel like watching it in full; besides, it's from The Asylum, a studio I've never had a lot of faith in for various good reasons. But, last week I saw it was on again late-nite so I decided to watch it in full, for shits and giggles.

And I am talking about this tonight as I was going to watch something but plans changed so I decided to talk about this instead.

This is a sex comedy so there isn't much of a plot: three girls who are friends and who just happened to be all born on the same day decided to celebrate their 18^th birthday by losing their virginity on the big day.

To be honest, this isn't too much above a softcore porn. Pretty much all of the action takes place in a big mansion. You see no parents or butlers/maids or anything. You really have to shut your brain off. At least they found someone with a great fancy place as it was roomy enough to hold a beerfest party with a lot of young people roaming about.

But hey, this is a raunchy teen sex comedy where you see the women sex-crazed and horny. If you enjoy vulgar humor then this will be your bag. It's pretty stupid and not that great on a technical scale; still, I laughed more often than I care to admit at all the crude and crass gags. This must be the unrated version given all the vulgarity and you see such things as full frontal nudity. There really aren't any surprises; there's one horny girl, one who is normal and one who is chaste but of course ends up being a horndog.

Still, if you shut off your brain and enjoy crass comedies then you may want to give this a shot. Also, if you enjoy full frontal nudity then you'll probably like this for non movie-watching reasons if you get my drift.

I will be back on Wednesday with a more legit film then the rest of the week will be rather busy as I will be watching all three Nolan Batman movies back to back to back on an IMAX screen and I will give my take on The Dark Knight Rises first then I'll talk about Batman Begins then The Dark Knight. So it will be quite the week here.

The Eighteenth Angel

The Eighteenth Angel (1998)

Runtime: 88 minutes

Directed by: William Bindley

Starring: Christopher McDonald, Rachael Leigh Cook, Stanley Tucci, Maximillian Schell

From: Rysher Entertainment

Yep, I am continuing the RACHAELAPALOOZA for today by talking about one of the rare ventures into the horror genre that she did, and this is a perfect day to talk about that genre. Note that judging by the dates you see in the movie, she had to be like 16 or 17 at the most when this was filmed, so you shouldn't watch this to oogle her... unless you're a perv, that is.

The plot: A sect of the Etruscan's turn out to be evil bastards. They are led by Schell (it's no surprise to me he was evil, nor that he hammed it up). They set up a cloning program and such things as evil cats, a mutated rat and other strange crap happen, all in the pretty Italian countryside. They need eighteen young people (explaining the title) to set in motion alongside an ancient clock plans to bring Satan back to Earth. Cook's character was found and judged to be a perfect angel (certainly understandable, I say) so under the guise of modeling she and her music professor dad (McDonald) go to Italy and you see various things happen.

This movie isn't awful but it isn't that good either. There are some creepy moments, the villain was hammy and Rachael tried her best with the material given, but the script just isn't too good. There are plenty of plot holes that made things more bumpy than the rural Italian roads you see in the motion picture. And as others have noted, it seemed derivative of other movies, most of them better than this one. I mean, I am talking about such films as Eyes Without a Face and The Exorcist

Not to mention, it's not really scary or terrifying at all. There were some creepy moments but that's about it. It's hardly bloody at all so you shouldn't watch it if you're a gorehound.I thought it was more dull than anything else, so there's no reason to see it, unless you're a Cook completist. Not even the unintentional humor-of which there was some-made this worthwhile.

Hopefully everyone has a decent Friday the 13^th today; I'll be back Monday night.

A Short Bit of Randomness

I ended up going out in the afternoon and my entire evening was taken up by watching tonight's UFC show and then I listened to a podcast immediately afterwards, so no time for a movie, Dr. Jones. I will mention a few things, though.

Last night I saw a documentary I've wanted to see for awhile; via the Sundance Channel I saw Lost in La Mancha, the 2002 film about all the troubles that led to the cancellation of Terry Gilliam's movie about Don Quixote. That property must be cursed as back in the day Orson Welles also tried to bring it to screen, with no luck. What resulted in the cancellation of Gilliam's film was massive problems with location shooting and then the old actor who they had cast as the Don (famous French star Jean Rochefort) got hurt bad enough to have to pull out, and the whole thing collapsed. Needless to say, Gilliam has had massive problems in bringing most-if not all-of his flicks to the big screen; while a lot of it is his doing, I still feel bad for the guy. He is still trying to bring his vision of Don Quixote to film; who knows if it'll happen.

One more thing before I go: the main thing I did today is go to the local Barnes & Noble as now is the thing they do twice a year where some if not all (it depends on where you go) of their Criterion Collection DVD's and Blu-Rays are 50 percent off. That is quite the deal. I did get some items on this day.

I'll be back sometime on Friday the 13th and yes I will be reviewing a horror film. It won't be one featuring Jason Voorhees but it will still fit the day.

Josie and the Pussycats

Josie and the Pussycats (2001)

Runtime: 99 minutes

Directed by: Harry Elfont, Deborah Kaplan

Starring: Rachael Leigh Cook, Rosario Dawson, Tara Reid, Alan Cumming, Parker Posey

From: Universal/MGM

Yep, I watched this movie; I might look like I watched it because of the leads and how they are hot rocker girls. OK, that was part of it but I also wanted to see it as I've heard quite a bit about it in the past.

Before I get to that, though, I have to mention one thing: a reason why this is going up at this hour is that I had to at 10 PM watch Ms. Cook and her debuting new drama, Perception; it's on TNT and she's an FBI agent who recruits her old pal, a college professor (Will from Will & Grace) who happens to be schizophrenic so he has visions and they happen to help him out on the various cases. Wacky, I know, but I managed to like it. And no, not because of who was the lead lady nor how at the end there was a brief bit where a random college-aged girl took off her top and you got to see the amply-endowed lady wearing just a bra. Rather, it's when Rachael (i.e. Kate Moretti) apprehends a fleeing subject who happens to be a fat dude by doing something that made me laugh uproariously; she jumped from a second story fire escape and flew as if she was Superfly Jimmy Snuka and squashed the guy... and his blubber must have been a great cushion as she was 100 percent fine after that big leap. Awesome. A nice way to end an evening of RACHAELAPALOOZA; don't ask me why it took me a few weeks to come up with that.

Now, onto this film... I'll give the brief plot description straight from the IMDb: A girl group finds themselves in a middle of a conspiracy to deliver subliminal messages through popular music in this send-up of the music industry and pop culture.

The movie itself, what a unique and odd beast it is. It's rather loud and gaudy and in your face and certainly not subtle, especially with some of the acting; you see many bright colors and it moves so fast, I swore that by the end it felt like everything in the film just about gave me a coke-high! At least I presume that's what a coke-high feels like. To give a less blunt comparsion, maybe it's like after you pound down some energy drinks and eat Cheetos and listen to a bunch of dubstep. It fired me up. And yet it's not only a teen comedy sort of thing but it actually satirizes pop culture and the music industry by saying that there's a bunch of subliminal messages and advertising going on which tells the young people what to like, what to listen to, and what to buy. Like I said, pretty odd overall but...

I ended up enjoying it quite a bit. No, it's not for such things as noticing that in one scene one girl was obviously not wearing a bra, or anything like that. Rather, I couldn't help but enjoy this wacky yet fun film. It's usually pretty funny, I certainly liked what they were satirizing, and the music is fine too. It's not a surprise something like this didn't do so hot at the box office; I didn't go and see it on the big screen; in hindsight, what a fail for me not to have seen any of Rachael's movies on the big screen in the past, but that is another topic for another day. Still, I am glad it was made and I am glad I finally saw it. If you do check it out, you'll probably enjoy Cumming's performance, as he was usually quite amusing.

I'll be back Wednesday night and it will be a more low-key film; not that this is a hard thing to do...

El Condor

El Condor (1970)

Runtime: 102 minutes

Directed by: John Guillerman

Starring: Jim Brown, Lee Van Cleef, Patrick O'Neal, Marianna Hill

From: National General Pictures

Here's a random movie I hadn't even heard of until a few days ago. I checked the schedule for what was on late at night on the Showtime/The Movie Channel channels and this movie popped up. The two leads were certainly appealing and so was the premise of the duo leading a bunch of Apache warriors (led by Iron Eyes Cody) to raid a Mexican fort that is said to contain a large stash of gold. I was hoping this Western set in the 1860's would turn out to be good.

I basically mentioned the plot already: Luke (Brown) is an escaped convict who hears about the gold stash at El Condor; he runs into Jaroo (Van Cleef), a lout of a guy who loves to drink and drink. Jaroo happens to associate with the Apache and even speaks their language. They all agree to go after the gold. They meet up with the evil general who runs the fort (O'Neal) and his lady, the shapely Hill.

As I heard elsewhere, the movie isn't spectacular but it is still rather entertaining; I agree with those sentiments. The leads work well together, the action usually is pretty entertaining and there are some nice sequences, the big Condor set is rather nice-looking, and to my surprise there was no shortage of nudity. I mean, at one point there's full-frontal... not that I was complaining! Speaking of sets, Ms. Hill... well, let's just say you get to see her bare Hills, and she must work out as she's fit... to paraphrase an IMDb commenter.

Sure, at times it seems the film may be confused about the messages it's trying to tell; otherwise, though, it's just enjoyable to watch and I am not quite sure why it's so obscure now.

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

Real Men

Real Men (1987)

Runtime: 85 minutes

Directed by: Dennis Feldman

Starring: Jim Belushi, John Ritter, Barbara Barrie, Bill Morey

From: United Artists

Now, here's something that is odd to review for the 4^th of July but yet in a strange way it fits, just like how somehow this strange and odd movie still manages to be quite funny, have some nice action, and it deals with Americans having to deal with those evil Soviet bastards in order to try and save the world.

I hadn't even heard of this movie until some people on a forum watched it a matter of some months ago and gave it some strong praise. I recently took an interest in watching it, then discovered that yesterday it was showing in the middle of the afternoon on Encore; that was perfect for me.

The plot... there's a CIA agent (Belushi) who is great at his job despite being unconventional; he has to team up with a guy who looks just like a recently killed fellow agent (Ritter) as that guy is needed to complete a trade that involves ALIENS in order to save the world.

The movie certainly is odd and has quite a few strange things to it... not to mention, the two leads as action hero types. But, it's a good type of odd and strange. I mean, it's never off-putting. An example of the weirdness is that the phrase “HO-LEE SHIT, clown attack!” is used and it's actualy appropriate for what's going on.

It's not a movie you want to examine the plot of too closely but what makes this fun to watch is that it moves at a fast pace, the action stuff is entertaining, and it's often quite funny. The one-liners work and fit with the scene. And even though this is PG-13 this was back in the day where you could get away with quite a bit more than you can now with that rating. Here, many people get killed and you get to see a topless woman.

In fact this movie may have been ahead of its time. I say that as some gags that were used here were copied in movies that came out much later. For example, there's a brief scene of Jim having sex with a lady; mid-coitus, he takes out a gun and shoots a bad guy. That sort of thing was expanded on and used in movies like Shoot Em Up and Drive Angry. There's also the point where someone takes their finger and shoots someone with it and the person actually dies; that was used in movies like Crank 2.

So, if you enjoy quirky comedies that are actually funny, then this movie-which bombed on release and I don't think has found too large of an audience since then-is certainly worth seeing. I'll be back Friday night.

Tightrope

Tightrope (1984)

Runtime: 114 minutes

Directed by: Richard Tuggle

Starring: Clint Eastwood, Genevieve Bujold, Dan Hedaya, Alison Eastwood

From: Warner Brothers

Here is something different from what I've been watching as of late; this is a pretty sleazy 80's movie (that seems to be a great decade for sleazy films) that I've heard about from some people on a forum as they enjoy it quite a bit. Turns out, they were right.

I'll cut to the chase and get to the plot: Clint plays troubled New Orleans cop Wes Block, who is a single dad that is divorced from his wife and raises two young girls on his own (including his own real-life daughter Alison). He has to deal with a serial killer who goes after streetwalkers, which results in Wes having to dive into the sleaziest part of what can be a pretty sleazy city; suddenly, the killer starts targeting Block...

I've heard this described as an American giallo film with some grindhouse elements and I say that is pretty accurate. You see some wild things in the various nightclubs in New Orleans. While not as wild as the club scenes in One Man Force, you still see the likes of girls hot oil-wrestling with each other with a dwarf as the referee, or a guy in a black Speedo thrusting his crotch about. But it's mostly serious, with Wes being shown as an alcoholic flawed figure; he ends up being friendly with the hookers even before the serial killer murders start. He gets a hummer from one girl during the movie! Not to mention, there's plenty of nudity. You also have quite the conversation about hard-ons, and involving people who you wouldn't expect to hear hard-on talk from.

The New Orleans setting is used well. Besides Clint wearing a tremendous New Orleans Saints t-shirt and hat, there's a scene on the riverboat, there's a scene at a Hollywood carnival, and of course there's some Bourbon Street action. There is also some horror things you see as Wes tries to track down the killer in some spooky locales, and there's a kill that seems straight out of an early 80's horror movie that got remade in the past 10 years. I know, I'm being vague as what I said could apply to a number of movies.

If you want to see Clint Eastwood play a troubled character who ends up being deeply affected by the dark case he's working, then this is worth seeing. Besides, from all I've heard this is the closest he's come to doing an outright horror movie, and it's pretty cool and well-done, with a funky soundtrack that fits the city and time.

I'll be back Wednesday afternoon with a movie that oddly fits the 4^th of July.