Nine Queens

Nine Queens (Nueve Reinas) (2000)

Runtime: 114 minutes

Directed by: Fabian Bielinsky

Starring: Ricardo Darin, Gaston Pauls, Leticia Bredice, Tomas Fonzi

From: Many Argentinian companies; Sony Pictures Classic put it out in the United States

To close out my month where I watch plenty of foreign films, I decided the last film should be one I've seen before, but not in years. This is a movie from Argentina that got a decent amount of attention in the United States, to the point that in '04 the American remake Criminal was made, which I actually saw on the big screen, believe it or not. I remembered it as being fine but I do have both movies on disc now.

The plot description from the IMDb, then the Letterboxd review: “Two con artists try to swindle a stamp collector by selling him a sheet of counterfeit rare stamps (the "nine queens").” That is true; it turns out that there are many twists and turns in this story and yes a woman is involved in the tale.

To close out this list I watched my last foreign movie of the month, and it was one I had seen before, but not in years. I did see this before the American remake (Criminal), which believe it or not I saw on the big screen. I'll rewatch that soon also.

If you don't know this film is all about hustlers (i.e. con men or whatever you want to call them), such as the ones you saw in American Hustle (or heck, The Monkey Hustle), running scams to rip off innocent people of their money. An experienced con artist notices a novice and the veteran takes the rookie under his wing. After some tricks are done by both guys, a huge scam is introduced where both guys are set to earn a lot of cash via the act of selling extremely rare and valuable stamps ... but many twists & turns and complications happen in this serpentine story where both gentlemen try to act slick and all-knowing but they experience family issues and assorted drama.

Why I rate it so highly is that it's such an entertaining and fun tale, where you get a good amount of humor along the way. There are plenty of colorful and interesting characters you see throughout the story. I wouldn't dare spoil any of the surprises along the way except to say that it's a thing in this movie, and it's done so well you'd want to see the movie again to view certain events in the right light. 

To me that is effective with such a film where at all times you're not 100% sure if the two main characters are being entirely forthright with each other, let alone all the other players in this tale. If you enjoy crime dramas then this is a must-see. I'll return tomorrow night.

Stripped To Kill

Stripped to Kill (1987)

Runtime: 88 minutes

Directed by: Katt Shea

Starring: Kay Lenz, Greg Evigan, Norman Fell, Pia Kamakahi

From: Concorde-New Horizons

This was not what I was planning on watching last night but someone I know on Facebook (I know him via a movie messageboard) brought up this film I hadn't heard of before, one that would be disappearing off of Instant soon so I figured I should watch it, especially after his hilarious description of that piece of cheese. The IMDb plot description, then the Letterboxd review, then me saying that I'll be back tomorrow... wait, I might as well say that now, I'll be back tomorrow night.

“When Detective Cody Sheehan discovers the body of a stripper from the Rock Bottom dance club, she wants the case. Her partner, Detective Heineman, is equally anxious to make the jump to the prestigious homicide division, but the only way Cody can get the assignment is to go undercover - uncovered - at the club.”

Here's a movie I found out about last night from someone I know online who isn't on (Letterboxd) but is a huge film buff and sometimes watches the most interesting low-budget cheese, and his strong praise for this made me want to see it on Instant before it goes away late Thursday night, although I am sure it's not hard to find online and I did hear it's coming out soon on Blu via Scorpion Releasing.

This is a “sexy thriller” from Roger Corman about a killer who goes after and starts killing the strippers at a low-rent place known as Rock Bottom (appropriate name) so Kay Lenz-a police officer-goes undercover. Yes you do see Kay nude. Her partner is Greg Evigan, who I heard described as a mix between Dolph's version of The Punisher and George Michael circa Faith, and it's an apt comparison. A lot of time is spent with the “entertainers” talking about how crappy their job is and the hard-knock lives they lead. The strip club is owned by a familiar face, that being Norman Fell. If you don't recognize the name... he was Mr. Roper on Three's Company!

The rating is mainly due to entertainment value rather than film quality. Not a lot of time is spent with the main plot and instead you get plenty of stripping and dancing. Many of the routines are more elaborate and outlandish than you'd expect. A regular at the club is known as MR. POCKET, due to a vulgar reason. Evigan's character acts like an A-hole most of the time. Mr. Roper says some things you never thought you'd hear him say.

Yet, I was amused by this goofy thing, which seems best for those out there like Mr. Pocket. I laughed at the horrendous 80's music and hair, that's for sure. Also, what a gleefully preposterous climax it has. I can only imagine how many obscure titles such as this there are on Instant, unknown to even most film fans.

Actually...

I decided to relax last night/today so no movie reviews tonight. But, I will return tomorrow night, promise. Sure, I could BS now about such things as Ryan Reynolds trying to be Deadpool or Tarantino thinking of doing sci-fi; I'll spare you all that.

Big Bad Wolves/Myn Bala: Warriors Of The Steppe

Here's something different for tonight: me reviewing two different films that I've watched as of late, both foreign and both on Instant. After some words and the plot description, the rest is from Letterboxd.

Big Bad Wolves (2013)

Runtime: 110 minutes

Directed by: Aharon Keshales, Navot Papushado

Starring: Tzahi Grad, Lior Ashkenzai, Rotem Keinan, Doval'e Glickman

From: United Channel Movies

Here's a foreign film that has gotten a lot of buzz over the past year or so; none other than Tarantino said that it was his favorite movie of 2013. There is a certain element or two that made it clear to me QT would love this. And, this happens to be a film from Israel, a recent hotbed of activity in terms of world news but that's the last time I will talk about that controversial topic. The directors had previously done a film called Rabies and that also got some hype but not like this.

The plot from the IMDb: “A series of brutal murders puts the lives of three men on a collision course: The father of the latest victim now out for revenge, a vigilante police detective operating outside the boundaries of law, and the main suspect in the killings - a religious studies teacher arrested and released due to a police blunder.” To clarify, the crimes being committed were the murder of little girls and it's gruesome stuff.

Well, I know this isn't the most popular opinion but the movie turned me off. It's about how three people come together after a young girl is violated and killed in a rather gross way and it's the latest in a series of similar crimes. The latest girl's father, a loose cannon cop who sort of looks like Frank Stallone (the fact that he wears blue jeans and a black leather jacket helps me with thinking he's Frank Stallone) and the meek guy accused of the horrific crimes all come together.

Really, this is just a dour unpleasant joyless movie. There are attempts at jet-black humor and I have no issue with dark comedy as a general principle but in a story like this? I thought it ended up being kind of gross, you know.

While there were memorable moments and a few times I was amused, I thought it got pretty ridiculous and with the ending they went with... it was less than satisfying and made me wonder why I put myself through what I thought was basically a torture porn movie (I know some hate that term but it's the easiest one to use here), just done prettier and fancier than most, and you don't even really know the characters all that well by the end either.

If you happen to love this movie that is OK, but to me watching it ended up not being that fun or enjoyable of an experience.

Myn Bala: Warriors of the Steppe (Zhauzhurek Myng Bala) (2012)

Runtime: 110 minutes

Directed by: Akan Satayev

Starring: Asylkhan Tolypov, Tlektes Meiramov, Toleubek Aralbai, Eduard Ondar

From: Kazakhfilm Studios

Here's a movie that I have had in my Instant queue for awhile. I stumbled upon it and I was interested because it was from the country of Kazakhstan and it's a historical tale about events in the country's past; let's be honest here, when most people think of the country they think of Borat, which to me is unfortunate as it's an atrocious character...

The plot description from the IMDb: "A universal story about the freedom of the human spirit and the struggle against slavery and despotism, about love, loss and betrayal. It is seen through the eyes of simple Kazakh kids and teenagers." I know, it's generic but let me explain.

Anyhow, this is a tale set in the 18th century where the native Kazakh people were invaded by the Dzungarian people and how the Kazakh people tried to fight back to get back their homeland and the focus is on several teenagers. Really, it's standard all around.

It's not a film I hated by any means. The costumes were cool, the sets were nice to look at and so was the natural scenery of the country. It's just that like I said, it's a standard tale and yes, it's filled with cliches and it's the cliches you won't be surprised at in the least bit. There are battles, in-fighting, drama, and all the rest. I am sure that for the people of the country it's all inspiring and moving; for me, it's average overall and a 2 ½ star rating is perfect for it.

At least I gave it a chance; from looking at this site and IMDb, not too many people who frequent those sites have checked it out despite it being on Instant for awhile.

I'll return tomorrow night.

Almost Human

Almost Human (2013)

Runtime: 79 minutes

Directed by: Joe Begos

Starring: Graham Skipper, Josh Ethier, Vanessa Leigh, Susan T. Travers

From: Channel 83

Here's a movie I watched on Netflix Instant, which I recently signed up for again for at least the next month. I heard a lot about this movie in the past year or so; a lot of it was the bad kind of publicity, in that the movie sucked, but some do think of it highly so I was interested in checking it out. Yeah, people did compare it to the show of the same title that was on Fox last season before it got canceled and likely helped the publicity of this film.

The plot description from the IMDb: “Mark Fisher disappeared from his home in a brilliant flash of blue light almost two years ago. His friend Seth Hampton was the last to see him alive. Now a string of grisly, violent murders leads Seth to believe that Mark is back, and something evil is inside of him.”

The rest of my review is from what I said about it on Letterboxd.

I've heard about this movie for months and since I recently signed up for Netflix Instant again, I figured it was time to check it out. I imagine many have heard its plot, so I'll just briefly explain that it's about a bearded dude (who happens to look like Joss Whedon) who gets abducted by aliens and returns 2 years later but well... think of what the title of the movie is, and it's that. It's set in the late 80's, although a few times you spot something modern and it did ruin the illusion.

I heard some real mixed reviews about the movie. I know some who really hated it. To me, it's a real 2 star movie. I understand it was a real low-budget affair but there were definitely things that hampered the film. The general idea of the plot was pretty creepy and there were several gory moments. They tried REALLY hard to ape the style of Carpenter, from the opening credits font to the music, the way it was shot to several style elements that were present. It was slavishly done, almost to a fault.

Unfortunately, the story and the characters... that's where it's let down. The idea is cool, but the story and characters, not so much. The acting isn't always so good either. The film is only 70 minutes long before some of the slowest moving end credits you'll ever see, literally done to make it long enough for film festivals. I wish they would have made the movie longer in a more traditional way, in order to add more to the plot and most importantly, provided details that made you care about the characters, as I didn't really care for the characters aside from Seth, who was the lead... and a real annoying A-hole. That was a big problem, as you were supposed to like the dude.

I just didn't care most of the time while watching the movie and that was an issue. Even when things got cool in the last 10 to 15 minutes, overall I can't rate it higher than 2 stars.

I'll return tomorrow night, likely with more than one review.

Can Dialetics Break Bricks?

Can Dialetics Break Bricks? (La Dialectique Peut-Elle Casser Des Briques?) (1973)

Runtime: 83 minutes

Directed by: Kuang-Chi Tu, Rene Vienet

Starring: Chan Hung Liu, Ingrid Wu, Jason Pai Piao, Li Chai Chung

From: Telemondial

I'll explain later how I came across this real bizarre film, but basically it was due to me looking at random websites and ending up on a list on Letterboxd list and noticing a particular posted so I clicked on it and I was both shocked and amazed by the plot description, so I looked to see if it was online and it was. I'll explain the plot in the Letterboxd portion of the review, which is the rest of this review, as a matter of fact.

I can thank looking at random websites and coming to a list on Letterboxd for discovering this quite strange film. I found the list “Obscure” by a person calling themselves Sally Jane Black. They've managed to see all sorts of weird stuff even I hadn't heard of before, including this film. I looked at the plot description and saw it was available for viewing online so I checked it out and what an odd idea this was.

I am sure everyone knows of the 60's Woody Allen film What's Up, Tiger Lily?, where he took a random Japanese film and dubbed it so it turned into something comedic. That method of modifying someone else's work has been called detournement. This is a similar idea, except that a group that existed in France at the time known as Situationists (basically, anti-authority Marxists inspired by such things as surrealism and Dadaism) brought their ideas using the classical method of dialetic arguing and dubbed a random Hong Kong martial arts movie called Crush and now the heroes are the proletariats and the enemies are bureaucrats and such topics as anarchism, Maoism and the French riots of 1968 are discussed. I swear this is all true.

The thing is, as the original film was set in Korea and was about the Japanese occupying the country in the early 20th century, that's how they were able to fit such a wacky idea over a random Hong Kong martial arts movie most likely no one remembers today, and somehow make it work with them preaching their ideals while throwing in fourth wall breaking, vulgarity and jokes along the way. You only really need to know some basics of capitalism, anarchism, and Marxism to follow what's going on; while some of it did fly over my head, I got the basic idea and that was the important thing.

I am not saying I support the ideas presented in this film; after all it's pretty radical and says such things as “kill all priests”, I don't agree with. I am just saying this was so oddly entertaining and subversive and I am happy this real obscure film is actually pretty easy to find online to watch.

I'll return tomorrow night.

A Reason To Live, A Reason To Die

A Reason to Live, a Reason to Die (Una Ragione Per Vivere E Una Per Morire) (1972)

Runtime: 113 minutes

Directed by: Tonino Valerii

Starring: James Coburn, Bud Spencer, Telly Savalas, Georges Geret

From: Several companies, including Atlantida Films

Here is a random film I discovered on a site I just stumbled upon last week which is tremendous for seeing all sorts of real obscure things. Of course I won't mention what it is as the more that know about it, the more it's likely that it'll get shut down by The Man. I picked that out by the title being cool then I noticed who was in the cast and saw the plot, and it sounded like something I should check out. It's from Spain/Italy/France/West Germany, but it's mainly Italian and it was filmed in Spain, like so many Spaghetti Westerns were. After the plot description, what I wrote about it on Letterboxd:

The aforementioned plot, from the IMDb: “Branded a coward for surrendering his New Mexico fort to the Confederates without firing a shot, a Union colonel attempts to redeem himself by leading a band of condemned prisoners on a suicide mission to recapture it.” Yeah, there is a reason why the Colonel (Coburn) did such a thing and yes, it does sound similar to The Dirty Dozen.

I won't go into the details on how I discovered the film (before finding it I hadn't heard of the movie before) but as it fits into the theme of me watching foreign films for the month-sadly real life has gotten in the way of seeing more to put on the list, but the last few days of the month I'll see a few appropriate movies to make the list look better.

I checked it out as I enjoyed its English title, the main three people being James Coburn, Telly Savalas and Bud Spencer, and the plot being clearly inspired by The Dirty Dozen (one leader rounds up criminals to do an almost impossible task; here, Colonel Coburn gets some crooks together to do a raid on a fort that he used to be the head of before he lost it in what was seen a cowardly surrendering fashion, but of course there's a reason behind it). It sounded pretty promising.

While I am disappointed it wasn't awesome as I had hoped-until the action-packed cool finale-which at least did deliver-it at least wasn't bad. It's just that it was in a low gear much of the time and the raid does help elevate it to a 3 star rating. A lot of it is what you'd expect (the crooks not getting along with Coburn, and that sort of thing).

Really, there isn't too much else to say about it besides that it was filmed in Spain by (mainly the) Italians so you'll likely recognize some of the locations if you're familiar with that particular genre. Oh, and if you ever wanted to see Bud Spencer give someone the raspberries and later threaten to moon someone... actually, considering his film career that may have happened more than once, but it does happen here too.

I'll return tomorrow night.

I Discuss The Expendables 3

I know, not a movie review but there is a reason why I am talking about this film tonight; I'll get to that in a bit.

While not even all action fans agree on it, I think the first two Expendables films are great. All the complaints I've heard about 2... I disagree with most of them and I think it's unfortunate those people had the wrong expectation for the film. Now, you'd think that I'd be looking forward to 3 then. Well...

I started to get reservations about it earlier in the year. The cast looked too huge and there seemed to be way too many famous “good guys” compared to “bad guys”. I thought that was dopey. Then the rating hit; there's been rumors of how some people wanted the first two to be PG-13 but it ended up going R. Well, now it's PG-13 and that's really stupid, as what teenager under 17 would really care about this movie and its stars, even if it has the presence of such people as Ronda Rousey and Victor Ortiz? Just stupid all around, then there's the font for the advertising of the film looking almost exactly like The Fast & The Furious font, and that is why I have pretty low expectations for this, which is quite unfortunate.

Via a messageboard post I read a few hours ago, earlier today someone leaked a full copy of this movie onto all the torrent sites. Really. Why does that happen to Lionsgate more than other companies... hmmm. Anyhow, I looked at The Pirate Bay (yes, they're still around) and there are indeed several copies of the movie up there. Now, of course I didn't download any of them but I did see that the copies floating about... those that listed the length said it's 126 minutes and change; another source of contention is how long the film would be. I've seen several different runtimes and everyone agrees with such a large cast, a movie only like 100 minutes long would be unfortunate as talk about shortchanging everyone. I do feel better knowing it's 126 minutes. I could have done without seeing a comment in one of the torrents that-if true-is a spoiler and something I wish wouldn't have been spoiled. We'll have to wait a few weeks to see if that statement (which of course I won't spoil here) is factual or poppycock.

I'll return tomorrow night.

300: Rise Of An Empire

300: Rise of an Empire (2014)

41% on Rotten Tomatoes (out of 165 reviews)

Runtime: 102 minutes

Directed by: Noam Murro

Starring: Sullivan Stapleton, Eva Green, Lena Headley, Hans Matheson, Callan Mulvey

From: Warner Brothers/Legendary Pictures

Yep, as typical most of this review is from my Letterboxd review. It explains how I saw this movie on the big screen last night and how even to my surprise I gave it 4 out of 5 stars, a full star more than the first 300.

The plot courtesy of the IMDb: “Greek general Themistokles leads the charge against invading Persian forces led by mortal-turned-god Xerxes and Artemisia, vengeful commander of the Persian navy.” It takes place at the same time as the first movie.

So, I saw this movie last night on the big screen. If you're wondering how, AMC Theatres has a promotion all summer where Monday through Wednesday nights they show one slightly old film for only 3 bucks and all the proceeds go to charity; it's a cool concept and most of the films are genre efforts like this. As I heard some surprisingly strong praise for this movie from reliable people, I decided to take advantage of the opportunity to see it on the big screen.

I am sure people are wondering why I would rate this a full star higher than the first 300, or why I'd rate it so high in general. I realize it's not a popular opinion and I am OK with that. While this movie has some of the same issues as 300 (historical inaccuracy, general stupidity, goofy dialogue) I thought this definitely had less of the “douche-y bro-ness” of the original film, the story was generally more interesting to me (getting to know the antagonists better does help) and it has some memorable visuals, a cool musical score from Junkie XL and a lot of bloody violence.

To me I got a sleazy exploitation vibe from it. There are some gross elements and it only takes approximately one minute to see a topless lady. Speaking of women showing their breasts... Sullivan Stapleton (from the TV show Strike Back) does a fine job as the hero but honestly, who steals the show is Eva Green as the villain. What a gonzo role it is; she has to do some pretty crazy things and yet she went all in and she was great as an obsessed woman looking for revenge and everything revolving around her is oh so memorable, including an unforgettable scene with Stapleton.

Before the movie came out (and I did think it was very stupid how it suffered from the awful trend of studios pushing back a film's release date many months and at the last moment) I never would have thought I'd enjoy it as much as I did, but I am thankful I gave it a chance as I really did enjoy it.

I'll return tomorrow night.

300

300 (2006)

60% on Rotten Tomatoes (out of 226 reviews)

Runtime: 116 minutes

Directed by: Zach Snyder

Starring: Gerard Butler, Lena Headley, David Wenham, Dominic West, Michael Fassbender

From: Warner Brothers/Legendary Pictures

Yeah, there is a reason why I watched this last night. It'll be revealed when I return tomorrow afternoon. Now, I'll talk about this film, and how I only saw it one time before, shortly after it came out on disc. I know I watched it but I really don't remember it and it didn't leave much of an impression overall, so I was interested in seeing how I felt about it in 2014.

Here's the plot description, from the IMDb: “King Leonidas and a force of 300 men fight the Persians at Thermopylae in 480 B.C.” But I am sure we all knew this already, along with how the movie is quite loosely based on fact, as I imagine the Persians didn't have special warriors who wore weird metal-looking masks, or had giant mutant things running around, or had elephants show up out of nowhere.

I really didn't remember the film, it turns out. The rest is from my Letterboxd review.

I had only seen this movie once before, back soon after it came out on disc. As I have it on Blu-ray in a 3 pack I got for real cheap, I figured it was about time I saw this again. Plus, soon I'll see the sequel, which got stronger reviews than I expected.

The movie is definitely historically inaccurate, never really makes a lot of sense, has goofy dialogue all around, the super-stylized thing isn't really my thing, and the bro douche-y meathead vibe is oh so strong with this.  There sometimes being narration that usually isn't needed is also a thing. What helps is that the world does look visually interesting, the slow-mo is actually done and used real well, and the action stuff can be fun to watch. The fact that the pace is pretty quick and it' never boring is an asset too... I also dug the closing credits and their style.

However, I think I'd prefer a serious historical documentary of what actually happened at the Battle of Thermopylae to the nonsense with this movie, where you have giant hulking mutated creatures, Persians that are effeminate, all the homoeroticism, and all the overall nonsense you see and hear.

Like I said I'll return tomorrow afternoon.

Blah

I hate having to do another postponement, but I am sure everyone would understand why I wasn't in the mood yesterday to watch any film when you know that someone I knew from my old hometown in Illinois, someone from my graduating class and someone who I talked to before and had classes with, unexpectedly passed away. Hearing that made me very sad so I decided to take a break from watching any motion pictures, but I'll try to tonight so hopefully tomorrow afternoon when I'll return it'll be a movie review you will be reading.

So Yeah...

What I decided to do today is to rewatch a film for Letterboxd and rewrite a review for the site as the old one I had up was very short. Of course, I am going out and about a little later so I have no time to waste trying to deal with that site not working properly (like what happened for much of yesterday) so of course that is exactly what's happening now... hopefully late tonight I am able to post my review of The Warriors, but who knows... at least I'll return Monday afternoon.

Fantasy Mission Force

Fantasy Mission Force (Mi Ni Te Gong Dui) (1983)

Runtime: 89 minutes

Directed by: Yen-Ping Chu

Starring: Brigitte Lin, David Tao, Yueh Sun, Jimmy Wang Yu, Jackie Chan

From: Cheung Ming Film

It's become the norm by now: most of this review is from Letterboxd. That portion will start after I give the IMDb plot description to what is a well-known film... known because it's so weird.

The plot from the IMDb: “Similar to "The Dirty Dozen" or one of that nature. Japan is trying to take over the world and the generals of the allied forces trying to stop the Japanese have been taken prisoner. A force of loners and fighters is put together to try and rescue the generals and save the war effort with the promise of gold and/or pardons of past crimes.” That makes things sound somewhat normal; trust me it isn't.

Here's another case of me watching something extremely bizarre because I heard about it on a forum, and it's also a rewatch of something I first checked out like 8 years ago or so. Even back then the film had a reputation. People talked about this movie and it sounded so strange it needed to be seen. I found a VHS copy at a mom & pop store that was going out of business (true story) and indeed is really strange.

The film is always billed as starring Chan (for obvious reasons) but he's just a supporting character; after the fact I heard that allegedly Chan only appeared in the movie as a favor to Wang Yu for old Jimmy helping him out against the Triads early in his career. Also, this movie is both from Taiwan and Hong Kong, making it appropriate for my foreign film watching month.

Let me tell you about the first few minutes of the film. It's pretty much set in an alternate universe. I mean, the evil Japanese capture the generals at a meeting. The American one looks like Stonewall Jackson and yet he refers to himself as “Abraham Lincoln”. There's a meeting with the good guys where they discuss who should lead the mission to rescue them. Drawings are shown of Roger Moore's version of James Bond, “Snake King” (Snake Plissken), some Hong Kong characters I did not recognize, and even Rocky Balboa. They then decide on a general, played by Wang Yu. After that... a musical number! Yes, the movie has a few of those. This one has an odd-looking dude in a suit and top hat. And that's just in the first 10 minutes.

The other highlights in this mesmerizing genre-bending film include:

* Hopping vampires, which are a part of Chinese lore; yes they squeezed horror into this
* The Japanese villains... also Nazi's... who ride around in 70's era muscle cars!
* Cannibal Amazonian people are also involved
* Music is ripped off from American movies; two noted examples are the original Planet of the Apes and the original Halloween; also, scenes from popular films such as Raiders of the Lost Ark are blatantly lifted
* A self-proclaimed escape artist is part of the motley crew and he calls himself Grease Lightning

There's more but I don't want to spoil everything. Really, this is a difficult movie to rate. It's so random, so free-wheeling, so willing to change tone and styles at the snap of your fingers... and yet despite it making no sense and having crap happen at random, if you shut your brain off you may enjoy the insanity like I did enough to where a 3 star rating seems reasonable. And hey, if nothing else it's one of only a few movies to feature both Chan and Yu.

I'll return on Saturday; if it's not in the afternoon it'll be in the evening.

Dry Summer

Dry Summer (Susuz Yaz) (1963... or 1964; I've seen both)

Runtime: 90 minutes

Directed by: Metin Erksan

Starring: Erol Tas, Hulya Kocyigit, Ulvi Dogan, Alaettin Altiok

From: Hitit

Here's me continuing my foreign movie watching. This time it's from Turkey and it's not one of those really bizarre films from the 70's or early 80's where they rip off American properties to the point that they illegally stole footage and music from those movies. I am not fully sure why that scene became so bad you had such a thing going on for years, but note that not all cinema from there was like that. Sometimes it was serious too, such as this film, which was on the Criterion box set Martin Scorsese's World Cinema Project.

The plot description from Letterboxd: “A scheming tobacco farmer sets out to ruin his competition by diverting the local water to his own property.” Well, actually... a pair of tobacco farmers (they are also brothers) own a piece of land that has a spring; the water from that is used by the fellow neighbors of that part of rural Turkey. Suddenly, a drought happens and the older brother (Osman) becomes a humongous dick and despite the protests of his younger brother he decides to dam up the spring water so his neighbors are restricted from getting that water.

At first I thought this movie was repetitious with the conflict you see. Then, the lurid melodrama aspects kick in and I really began to enjoy it. The younger brother has an attractive young wife and Osman becomes a really disgusting person, constantly leering at her, doing some incredible things which I won't spoil her, and is a Peeping Tom to boot. Osman is quite the character due to how repentantly evil he is, doing awful things from beginning to end and having no redeeming qualities. 

The movie is filmed well and the story of water being so important is an evergreen topic (look at what unfortunately is going on in California) but it's Erol Tas doing such a great job as Osman that makes the film. It's unfortunate that things happened in the Turkish film industry and you got the wackiness in the 70's, and even the director of this had to do what's known in most places as “Turkish Exorcist”.

Now, if only this movie didn't have those horrific moments of animal cruelty... you have been warned there. I'll return tomorrow night.

On Second Thought...

I got wrapped up in doing other things and they had to get done tonight, so my plans changed and I'll instead watch something soon and I'll review it for tomorrow afternoon. That is a guarantee.

Legendary: Tomb Of The Dragon

Legendary: Tomb of the Dragon (2013)

Runtime: 92 minutes

Directed by: Eric Styles

Starring: Scott Adkins, Dolph Lundgren, Yi Huang, Nathan Lee, Lydia Leonard

From: Several companies, including China Film Group and Midsummer Films

Yep, another review where most of it is copied over from Letterboxd. In short, someone on a messageboard recommended to me early in the year I should watch this. The film was on YouTube at the time. Eventually it was taken down, but I found it on (redacted) so I watched it there tonight, and hopefully that person appreciates it that I finally took him up on his offer.

The plot description from IMDb: "Travis and his team travel to China in search of what isn't supposed to exist ... their mission to capture a Cryptid which is wreaking havoc in a remote village and they need to do this before it is killed by Harker, the legendary bounty hunter."

The best way to describe this movie: the movie where Scott Adkins is a cryptozoologist. If you don't know, cryptozoology is the study of animals said to exist but there's no definitive proof of their existence. You know, like Bigfoot, the Loch Ness Monster, and various local lore you likely haven't heard of before. That pseudoscience field is more interesting than this film, which is just known as Legendary on IMDb... understandable as there are no dragons or even any tombs.

The big bad creature is some giant lizard thing that might as well be a huge gecko or salamander and it's not even like the Chinese version of a dragon you saw in, say, Mulan. But I suppose that “Legendary: A Giant Killer Salamander” doesn't have quite the same ring now, does it?

This UK/China collaboration filmed in China had martial arts film star Adkins show off his acting chops for once (he was healing from an injury so I am sure he was fine to relax and probably enjoyed the free trip halfway across the world too) as a scientist who along with his team is looking for a mysterious aquatic creature but a constant thorn in his side is hunter Harker, played by Dolph Lundgren; he does liven up the proceedings as he plays a tremendous A-hole. He provided a lot of entertainment.

Then again, Adkins can come off as a dick too and I don't know if that was the intention. Right after the critter kills one person and tries to kill a few others, he proclaims that the animal should be saved and protected! Viewing it as him being deluded and crazy and harmful for the locals and his own team by his obsession for keeping a killer animal alive... that puts an interesting spin on things.

What you get is a dull at times and usually goofy story and a take on a light Indiana Jones-style adventure, including an enemy trying to muck up things. It's a long story why I watched this movie; I won't get into it. One thing to note: unlike some of the people who commented on the film already, I thought the computer effects were pretty bad and so fake-looking they took me out of the film. At times I did laugh AT the film, which is part of the reason for the rating. I am glad I didn't hate it or think it was boring, as I had feared beforehand. There's also colorful opening/closing credits (w/ a funny/wacky song during the latter) and a silly ending.

This isn't awful; I was able to finish it and it did not fill me with rage. It is better than the huge glut of terrible creature feature movies you get on the Syfy Channel with even worse computer graphics, although this film is destined to be on rotation on the channel in the future. It's just that the movie's average at best and it is helped by both the lovely rural Chinese scenery and Dolph's ruthless villainy. If it wasn't for that I wouldn't be as generous with the rating.

Still, there definitely are better and/or more creative DTV films out there featuring Dolph and Adkins, whether it be both them starring in Universal Soldier: Day of Reckoning or with Adkins, the Ninja movies and Undisputed II or with Dolph, The Russian Specialist and Universal Soldier: Regeneration. I haven't reviewed them all as some I watched before I joined Letterboxd or even started doing these movie reviews, but I can vouch for them.

I'll return tomorrow night.

My Best Movies Of The Year (So Far)

With the way my schedule turned out I wanted to say that there was no time to watch a film today BUT I'll have a review up tomorrow night, I promise. In the meantime I wanted to post something short and sweet, which is that here are the best movies I've seen so far this year, in a somewhat solid order:

Godzilla
Dawn of the Planet of the Apes
Cold in July
Cocaine Cowboys: Reloaded

Really, those are the only ones worthy of being on the list. I hope that the rest of the year has more candidates that I rate highly once I see them, and yeah there are some films from earlier in the year I still need to check out, and I'll do that in the next few months.

Dawn Of The Planet Of The Apes

Dawn of the Planet of the Apes (2014)

90% on Rotten Tomatoes (out of 168 reviews)

Runtime: 131 minutes

Directed by: Matt Reeves

Starring: Andy Serkis, Toby Kebbel, Jason Clarke, Gary Oldman, Keri Russell (no relation)

From: 20th Century Fox

Now, I am finally caught up with my movie-watching and reviewing. I saw this Thursday night right after seeing this film's preceding movie, Rise of the Planet of the Apes. It proved to be a quality night in terms of watching films. After I post the plot description from the IMDb, the rest of the review is from Letterboxd. I'll return tomorrow night.

The plot description from the IMDb: “A growing nation of genetically evolved apes led by Caesar is threatened by a band of human survivors of the devastating virus unleashed a decade earlier. They reach a fragile peace, but it proves short-lived, as both sides are brought to the brink of a war that will determine who will emerge as Earth's dominant species.” I have no idea what most people know of the movie being going in. I really knew nothing. I never saw a trailer and only saw bits of some TV ads. Hopefully the plot description doesn't spoil anything for the common person.

Seeing Rise of... on the big screen right before this was helpful, as what happens during the end credits of Rise dovetails right into the beginning of this film.

I'll be honest and say that I managed to avoid very well just about all information concerning the movie. I don't know how but I did. I never saw a trailer and heck, I didn't even look up beforehand who was in the film so I was surprised when those name actors appeared. I did see the poster and parts of some commercials so I knew that there'd be monkeys riding black horses and that indeed did happen and in the movie it was as awesome as it sounded. There are definitely even more awesome moments you see the monkeys do that I won't spoil.

While the humans are fine characters and I have no complaints with their story, a lot more interesting and rich is the story involving Caesar and all of his followers and a concept horrifying to Creationists, that the apes end up not being all that different from mankind.

What an intoxicating mix that was created here between the engrossing stories and how they intersect, all the drama and surprises that happen, the look of the world that the apes created for themselves, and the outstanding performances from the CGI creatures, especially Caesar. Serkis topped even what he did in Rise. You really do care about all of those primates due to the effects and the characters themselves.

Now this is a summer blockbuster worth seeing and a rare sequel that clearly is better than what last preceded it, which is more a strong statement of how I think Dawn is one of the best films of the year and the hype surrounding it is not hot air.

Rise Of The Planet Of The Apes

Rise of the Planet of the Apes (2011)

82% on Rotten Tomatoes (out of 247 reviews)

Runtime: 105 minutes

Directed by: Rupert Wyatt

Starring: James Franco, Freida Pinto, Andy Serkis, Brian Cox, John Lithgow

From: 20th Century Fox

To clarify, earlier in the day I posted another review, so you can scroll down to see that. Tomorrow afternoon I'll post a review to this movie's sequel; I saw them back to back on the big screen. I can tell you that Dawn is well worth seeing and it's among my favorites of the year. First, the plot description then my review, both taken from Letterboxd.

"Scientist Will Rodman is determined to find a cure for Alzheimer's, the disease which has slowly consumed his father Charles. Will feels certain he is close to a breakthrough and tests his latest serum on apes, noticing dramatic increases in intelligence and brain activity in the primate subjects... Especially Caesar, his pet chimpanzee." True. But of course things go horrifically wrong, especially with what happens during the end credits.

Would you believe that last night was the first time I had ever seen this movie? It's true. Despite hearing praise for it online and from people I deemed to be reliable, I put off seeing it all those years. At least I got to see this on the big screen with Dawn in a double bill that various theatres throughout the country did. As I probably should have seen it on the big screen back in '11, at least I was able to rectify the mistake.

While there were some moments that made me go “Hey, wait a minute...” overall it's a pretty effective and entertaining film with some nice action scenes and most importantly, not only an engrossing story involving someone trying to use medical science to try and-among other things-cure his father's Alzheimer's (a struggle I am sure many of us has experienced; my late grandfather developed it in the last few years of his life and boy is it a heartbreaking experience, something the movie did express) but also a story involving various primates and you actually have sympathy for the simian creatures, especially Caesar; Andy Serkis did a great job with that character. The special effects also look nice and that certainly helps make you believe this tale.

It's just a fun movie to watch that doesn't overstay its welcome with the story it was telling; as I discovered when I then saw Dawn (which I'll post a review and rating to a little later), it set up the sequels very well. What a sh*theel A-hole character Draco Malfoy plays, by the way. You know he'll get his well-deserved comeuppance and when it finally happens and in a glorious way... it's tremendous.

Death Of A Snowman

Death of a Snowman (1976)

Runtime: 88 minutes

Directed by: Christopher Rowley

Starring: Nigel Davenport, Ken Gampu, Madala Mphahlele, Peter Dyneley

From: Martin Wragge Productions

Here's another entry where most of the text is from Letterboxd. Here's a movie (from South Africa, of all places) known by several titles but it's now best known by that title, which is the name of a character in the film so the title is a spoiler. Now, the rest of the text is from Letterboxd. I'll be back later tonight.

Here's another film I can thank Letterboxd for introducing to me.

Via someone I follow liking the list ZAxploitation (a list of movies from South Africa; ZA is their country code), I discovered several hundred films I had never heard of before.

I presume that even the vast majority of the hardcore film fans here have little knowledge of that country's movie scene aside from stuff like The Gods Must Be Crazy and it being a place where for decades movies have been made on a budget, and in recent years several highly regarded direct to video and theatrical movies have been made in the country and people have raved about how the movie goes far and above its budget. Clearly, South Africa is the best country to film in if you want your dollars to be put to their best use and have a quality action movie that doesn't cost tens of millions of dollars.

Anyhow, while looking through that list I stumbled upon this movie, and its cover stuck out, in a good way. Reading that it had blaxploitation/exploitation elements definitely caught my eye and it sounded like a sleazy in a 70's way good time, and as Synapse Films put it out on disc a few years ago it's not hard to find; it's even on Amazon Instant Video where at most you only pay 2 bucks to stream it, which is what I did.

This film did surprise me. It does have blaxploitation elements but I say it's more a standard exploitation film than anything else. While the plot is that some people who appear to be vigilantes are killing the scumbag criminals (usually black) of Johannesburg in order to ensure the minorities in the community can be safe and receive monetary assistance-but of course not everything is as it seems-you have black and white people intermingling with each other often and the heroes are a white cop (famous UK actor Nigel Davenport) and a black newspaper reporter (legendary South African actor of stage and screen Ken Gampu) who are longtime friends; I'll admit I was surprised to see that considering it was the mid 70's and it was still years before South Africa got rid of Apartheid.

The movie had a pretty entertaining story and I enjoyed the action scenes you got; sure, the ending was in a dark building and it wasn't always easy to see what was going on, but even with that it was fun action and it should satisfy those who enjoy 70's exploitation, with the novelty of the South African setting adding a different flavor to things.

There are also some colorful characters; the hairy bearded guy on the cover is a minor character but he was amusing; he looked like a stub-nosed Jesus Christ, wore some funny clothes and happened to be the film's screenwriter, the tremendously named in real life BIMA STAGG.

One important thing I learned (besides that in the mid 70's South Africa had Kentucky Fried Chicken) is that the guy who contributed most of the often funky score for the movie is a familiar name: Trevor Rabin! This was before Yes and primarily writing Owner of a Lonely Heart and long before he became a composer and did some of Michael Bay's films. He's actually from South Africa so that explains it.

On Second Thought...

My schedule changed so I'll be doing something rare: Friday afternoon I'll post a review for what I watched late last night, then Friday night I'll post another review, so make sure to note that.

Here Comes The Devil

Here Comes the Devil (Ahi Va El Diablo) (2012)

Runtime: 97 minutes

Directed by: Adrian Garcia Bogliano

Starring: Francisco Barreiro, Laura Caro, Alan Martinez, Michele Garcia

From: Morbido Films

I figured it was about time I continued the list I started for the month on Letterboxd of me watching foreign films for the month of July. This entry is from Mexico and it's only the third one on the list. The other 2/3 of the month I'll watch them more frequently. I had heard buzz about this movie from more than one person on various messageboards so I figured this was the perfect time to check out that horror film. Plus, it has a pretty rad poster.

The plot description from the IMDb: "A married couple lose their children while on a family trip near some caves in Tijuana. The kids eventually reappear without explanation, but it becomes clear that they are not who they used to be, that something terrifying has changed them." Note that the children appear to be 13 and 11 years old.

The rest of this is from my Letterboxd review.

Man, was this difficult to rate, although I have more of an idea now than I did right after I finished watching this late last night.

The plot of his recent Mexican horror film is that a husband, wife and two pre-teens are on vacation and the kids disappear after going into a cave high in the mountains, and of course the area is said to be haunted and full of weird shit. The children return the next day but they don't act the same...

This movie was pretty weird, I'll admit it. It's not a surreal mindf*ck of an experience, but it was still weird. It was not what I was expecting and I was surprised-not in a bad way-by some of the things that happened. I certainly was not expecting the emphasis on sex and nudity; it can be titillating... but sometimes it's used in a quite disturbing way. And the conversation that the parents have during foreplay is so bizarre and not what you'd think would be material to get someone turned on... it was incredible and I laughed.

I suppose 3 stars is the most accurate way to rate this. I could complain about certain things and how not everything always makes sense. But, the parents (the characters that are the main focus of the picture) are nicely acted and always interesting, and throughout the movie does retain a creepy vibe.

Also, I appreciate that at least it isn't the same old same old that have been just about all of the wide release American horror films of the past few years; judging by the box office United States audiences are also tired of the same old crap. So, while I think this is more weird than good, I didn't hate it and thus the rating seems appropriate.

I'll return tomorrow afternoon.

No Reviews Tonight

It's a long story but I am completely discombobulated today and among other things I woke up later than expected & something unexpected happened with my cable service so I had to spend time with that and it doesn't work at 100% but considering they're likely extremely busy with many other people experiencing that issue or other issues today, I won't even worry about it until tomorrow or later.

Anyhow, like I said I am really out of it today and hopefully when I return tomorrow night I'll have some sort of review up.

Murder Party/Blue Ruin

Murder Party (2007)

Runtime: 79 minutes

Directed by: Jeremy Saulnier

Starring: Chris Sharp, Macon Blair, Stacy Rock, Paul Goldblatt, William Lacey

From: The Lab of Madness

Blue Ruin (2013)

Runtime: 90 minutes

Directed by: Jeremy Saulnier

Starring: Macon Blair, Devin Ratray (yes, Buz from the Home Alone films), Amy Hargreaves, Kevin Kolack

From: The Lab of Madness

Yes, this is a double shot where I review two movies at once. They are from the same director and these are the only feature length films he's done so it makes sense. The bulk of this is from my Letterboxd reviews, by the way. Note that I only gave Murder Party 1 star out of 5. The plot description from IMDb: "A random invitation to a Halloween party leads a man into the hands of a rogue collective intent on murdering him for the sake of their art, sparking a bloodbath of mishap, mayhem and hilarity." The last part of it I cast into doubt...

Someone I know on a messageboard has heavily pimped the film Blue Ruin and I was one of the few to show interest in it so for his sake I figured I should finally watch that film... but not before checking out the first film from the director, where Blue Ruin's star is a co-star here. I actually had heard of it before way back when on a horror podcast. It was mentioned briefly and it was said that someone dressed like a Baseball Fury from The Warriors, which is in fact true.

Well, this unfortunately didn't inspire hope in me that I'll enjoy the highly regarded Blue Ruin, as I thought this was another film I saw this weekend that was intolerable and just pretty bad. The central conceit of a random person being killed in the name of art is rather dumb logically but I hoped I would still enjoy it as I understood it spoofed and made fun of hipster pretentious art student douches, people who I have little experience with but I imagine are the sort of people I couldn't stand. I now wonder if the filmmakers were actually douchey pretentious art students themselves.

Sad to say, this seemed like a short stretched out WAY too long just to make it 80 minutes. All the talking bits among characters that were just stupid and dragged on and on and on... and I barely laughed at all at what was allegedly a “comedy”... sorry but this is another film where I do not understand the hype and praise at all.

Good job, this guy made it with his buddies-some of who are atrocious actors-and it poorly spoofed what should have been an easy target and almost put me to sleep like it was a Ti West film... I don't get it.

Now, onto Blue Ruin, a movie I only gave 2 1/2 stars. I hope I don't sound like a "hater" now with my last few reviews. I am just being honest here. The plot description for that, again from the IMDb: "A mysterious outsider's quiet life is turned upside down when he returns to his childhood home to carry out an act of vengeance. Proving himself an amateur assassin, he winds up in a brutal fight to protect his estranged family." That outsider is a homeless guy who lives in a crappy car, which was interesting. I was amused that a bit role was played by Eve Plumb. Yes, Jan Brady.

By now some people that follow me probably think I'm starting to turn into Armond White. I swear that's not the case. It's just that as of late I've been baffled by the films that have gotten a huge amount of praise. For a few months now, here and elsewhere I've heard about how great this movie is, and finally tonight I saw the director's first film (Murder Party) then this one. Murder Party was pretty bad in my opinion and I did not understand the praise it's gotten since it came out. Still, I had hopes that the director made a massive improvement and I'd love this tale and I'd feel the same way about it that everyone else does.

Sad to say, this movie full of preposterous moments, shit that don't make sense, dumb convenient plot twists, padding to make it feature length (just like in Murder Party; this had some Ti West glacial pacing too), characters I didn't like due to them acting nonsensically-I am looking at you, Dwight's sister-and a cypher of a main character I was never given any reason to care about... it really left me cold. I can't say I hate it as Blair's performance as the homeless guy lead was fine, there were some memorable moments, the Virginia scenery sure looked nice and the general idea of a man looking for revenge on the man who killed his parents only for it to go horrifically wrong is a good one. I just feel very disappointed by this and not because it didn't turn out like how I expected. 

I wish it didn't have those problems and have the stench of “pretentious indy movie bullcrap” but I guess most people love it so I'm in the wrong... I really wish I knew why most film fans love it; I just can't comprehend it. Maybe the film was too built up for me but I felt that in the end it was really pointless and a waste of time-as I was never given a reason to care-and like I said, disappointing in my eyes.

I'll return tomorrow night, hopefully with something more positive.

Snowpiercer

Snowpiercer (2013)

93% on Rotten Tomatoes (out of 102 reviews)

Runtime: 126 minutes

Directed by: Joon-ho Bong

Starring: Chris Evans, Jamie Bell, Tilda Swinton, Kang-ho Song, John Hurt

From: It was distributed in the United States by The Weinstein Company, a source of controversy

I tell you, I haven't had a good week. It's been big things and little things. The latter is Letterboxd not operating properly for me for the past 24 hours. I just may not look at the site for a few days until I am sure they can actually get their shit together. I say that as I am glad I was actually able to copy and paste over my review of (or rather, rant against) this movie.

The plot description, from me for once: In 2014, a chemical is used to combat global warming. It goes haywire and causes a new Ice Age. The few people that do survive are on a massive train that goes around the globe once a year. Really. It's a class system and the lower classes are finally willing to rebel. The rest of this is from Letterboxd:

2014 is really “the year of disappointing movies”, at least in my opinion. From Sabotage being a thoroughly unpleasant film to The Raid 2 being quite a bit worse than the the first film, I am thankful I thought this year's Godzilla was awesome. I know those last two opinions are drastically different from what most people online (especially this site) think, but that's honestly what I think.

I sure as hell know that most people will be disgusted with my rating of this film or just be flabbergasted. Honestly, I am flabbergasted too I feel this way. The few Korean films I have seen have been high quality, stuff I really dig (such as The Good, The Bad, The Weird or War of the Arrows) and while I haven't seen The Host since I watched it on the big screen back when it played the arthouse joints, I thought it was good... not great, but good.

While I did see some opinions that say the movie was about average, most rate it as great, so of course I presumed that I'd enjoy it and I was happy to see it considering The Weinstein Company's mishandling of it and how they came real close to being D-bags and cutting the movie themselves, something that I am glad did not happen for artist integrity reasons. There are three spots around Orlando to see the film so I was surprised the auditorium of about 100 was almost completely full, and it included some people who I was surprised to see had even heard of the movie, to be honest. I couldn't really tell what they thought of it.

Unfortunately, while I am in a very small minority here I thought that much of the movie is just horrible and also insufferable and “illogical” doesn't even begin to describe it. I am sure everyone knows its plot by now so I won't waste time giving it, except that I did know beforehand what it basically was and yes, I did think the general idea didn't make a whole lot of sense. I thought that wouldn't be a big deal as if you have a fun story populated with interesting and fun characters. I don't know why it didn't work for me like it has with just about everyone else, but I HATED most of the characters; they were just illogical A-holes and acted dumb, no matter if they were “the good guys”, “the bad guys” or innocent parties. I don't know what the hell it was that Tilda Swinton played, except it was an atrocious caricature of something or another and not something you'd actually find on planet Earth, no matter if it's a new Ice Age or not.

Besides the characters I couldn't give a damn about, there's the story. In simplest terms it makes sense. How it plays out, though... nope. It's a confused mess & the further along it goes the more I got angry with all the surreal and ridiculous and intelligence-insulting shit I saw on screen. I could go on and on about it and give spoilers but I won't. The movie seemed to think it would be “funny” to throw out all sorts of bizarre shit on the screen as it'd be entertaining. I say “nope” to that in this film's case.

And as noted the CGI was pretty bad, which surprised me as I've seen older Korean films where it was clearly better than what's present here. And as I haven't seen too many complaints about it yet, I thought too much of the action stuff was a shaky-cam nightmare to where I had difficulty making it out; I pretty much can't stand such a thing so that didn't help my opinion of the film.

Then the final act-like some I thought the first act was tone-deaf and overlong and that helped start things off on a bad foot, or maybe it should be bad arm-most of it was particularly bad as it gave more exposition which make it even more illogical, characters became even more intolerable, and how they chose to end the movie... I wasn't expecting it but it doesn't mean it was good or the right way to end that story; it just made me feel like the train ride I took was a real waste of time and it seemed kind of pointless. It does not get an even lower rating as there was a rare moment or two I thought was cool.


What a MASSIVE disappointment in a year that has already had more than I expected. I hope to see more more movies I actually like or my Top 10 for the year will be pretty weak compared to the past few years.

I'll return tomorrow night.

My Apologies...

I was going to post something this afternoon explaining why I didn't see anything last night but I ran out of time and it's a moot point aside from me saying that I did other things last night so there was no time for movie watching.

I'll return tomorrow afternoon with a review for a film most seem to love but me it left me totally cold (pun intended) when it didn't anger me with how bad it was.

Colt .38 Special Squad

Colt .38 Special Squad (Quelli Della Caibro 38) (1976)

Runtime: 102 minutes

Directed by: Massimo Dallamano

Starring: Marcel Bozzuffi, Carole Andre, Ivan Rassimov, Riccardo Salvino

From: European Inc.

Last June for the Letterboxd website I followed the lead of many on the site and I did a month where I watched foreign films and put them on a list, as lists are popular on the site. I decided to do it again, as I got those foreign films from Criterion and I'll see at least one theatrically. I figured I should start off the list with a bang by doing an Italian poliziotteschi movie, as I had a feeling I'd enjoy this.

To steal the plot description from Letterboxd, modified so it's actually correct: “When his wife is killed by a local crime lord in a fit of revenge (Ivan Rassimov), a determined police captain (Marcel Bozzuffi) forms his own squad of rogue cops, each of whom wields a .38 Colt revolver, to combat all the crime in the city "

The rest of the review is taken from Letterboxd, with some added info: Turns out, I enjoyed it as much as I typically enjoy the works in this genre. Many of the hallmarks are there: dirtbikes, loose cannon cops, car and/or bike chases, a look at how the bad guys operate, sleaze, and general craziness and some shocking things you probably weren't expecting to see.

This tale about an older cop-who sometimes dresses like he's a grandfather but he's not actually that old-who forms a squad that carries a trademark gun-you can probably guess what it is-that goes after the worst criminals in a random Italian city (they were responsible for killing his wife) was a lot of fun. A large quantity of dynamite is acquired by the bad guys and it's used in a series of bombings. There are indeed some pretty gruesome moments among all the violence you get to see.

Also, some time is spent with a few of the underlings of the villain's gang, which was an interesting touch, especially considering one of them was a woman. Speaking of woman, a singer/actress who became famous in later years contributed two songs to the-groovy-soundtrack and even appears as a singer in a nightclub... Grace Jones!

It had been too long since I had seen a poliziottesci film and this satisfied that itch. I'll relax and not do a review tomorrow night. I'll save typing and posting the review for Saturday afternoon.

Criterion Sales At Barnes & Noble Are Pretty Great

I don't have time to say too much about that right now, but this month I do know I'll see some Planet of the Apes films, at least one highly regarded movie from this year, and for Letterboxd, some foreign movies. That's what I got from the Criterion sale they have at Barnes & Noble each July and November.

I think it'll be a busy month. I'll return tomorrow night and I am planning on reviewing... something.

Foodfight!

Foodfight! (2012)

Runtime: 91 minutes

Directed by: Lawrence Kasanoff

Starring: The voices of Charlie Sheen, the Duff sisters, Eva Longoria, Christopher Lloyd

From: Threshold Entertainment

Yes, I finally saw this infamous computer animated film, the source of many interesting articles about its making (it took about a decade for it to come out!), from how hard drives containing the completed film were allegedly stolen thus necessitating them starting all over to other nonsense... also, there's 80 different brand logos that appear as characters-albeit minor background ones, from Mr. Clean and the California Raisins to Mrs. Buttersworth and Charlie Tuna. I heard from many reliable sources how atrocious this film was, but it's available for free on YouTube (you didn't hear that from me) so I couldn't resist. Oh, what a mistake I made!

The plot, modified by me from the IMDb: “Dex, a superdog sleuth (Dex Dogtective actually dresses like Indiana Jones), is the law of the land when the world's most recognized brands take on the forces of evil and the devilish Brand X.” Note that this takes place in a supermarket that has a life of its own when it's empty (hmmm, doesn't sound like Toy Story to me at all...) and this is actually basically a remake of Casablanca. Really. That includes the Nazi symbolism stuff, as horrifying as it is in a movie designed for children.

This is as bad as you may have heard. Let me list just a few reasons why:

* The animation. It's horrible. It's flat and looks like something made for a few bucks by a cheap outfit for-say, a car dealership or some other local organization that advertises after the mainstream commercial products and before the show starts back up. I heard it compared to the title character in The General ads and that is a fair comparison. It looks like they did the bare minimum and it looks like stuff wasn't even finished. It's appalling that this is animation you see in a feature length film with its cast released in early 2013. That doesn't even take into account how the characters move about or how the camera almost constantly moves for no real good reason... or how many look absolutely terrifying.

* This film is not for children! It's a PG rated thing for family but it's not something you should ever show your children; I have twin nephews who are around 18 months old now, and I would be horrified if they ever saw it, especially at that young age. There's double entendres all around, weird sexual stuff, an actual reference to Requiem for a Dream, Wayne Brady playing an odious comic relief chocolate squirrel who's basically a bad caricature that could be called offensive (he once uses the phrase “chocolate frosting” when talking to a female; that's not OK! There's far more examples of him saying such questionable things), and so much more. That's not even considering...

* The Nazi stuff. You see the SS Eagle symbol used as the Brand X (the villains of this picture), for crying out loud! There's even a cleaning agent involved and as disgusting as it is, you are supposed to think about “cleansing”.

* The story itself is just atrocious. Things make no sense and there's plenty of awful puns, many of which are more painful than funny. Although, I don't know what to think of the male vampire furry thing having what looks like a hunger for the chocolate squirrel; if he is gay, then that's alright with me.

* The music also is bad. There are some “songs”, and they stink. 

Besides the people listed, the voice talent includes the likes of Chris Kattan, Harvey Fierstein, Ed Asner, Jerry Stiller, and Edie McClurg; they're listed on Wikipedia but not IMDb; I'm sure they're fine with that.

There are plenty of articles, YouTube reviews (the most popular one being from The Nostalgia Critic), and podcast episodes devoted to this atrocity. All of them are better than actually watching this, and they're all shorter too. It's a painful agonizing hour and a half. Never watch it and please please please never show it to children! It's one of the worst movies I've ever seen and that's no exaggeration.

I'll return tomorrow night, and if I see another film it'll be a guarantee it's better than this.