August 31, 2026

Redux: Last Action Hero.

Redux #576: Last Action Hero.

Cast: 
Arnold Schwarzenegger (Detective Jack Slater / Arnold Schwarzenegger), Austin O'Brien (Danny Madigan), Charles Dance (Mr. Benedict), Robert Prosky (Nick), Tom Noonan (the Ripper / Tom Noonan), Frank McRae (Lieutenant Dekker), Anthony Quinn (Tony Vivaldi), Bridgette Wilson (Whitney Slater / Meredith Caprice), F. Murray Abraham (John Practice), Mercedes Ruehl (Irene Madigan), Art Carney (Frank Slater), Professor Toru Tanaka ("Tough Asian Man"), Ryan Todd (Andrew Slater), Jeffrey Braer (Skeezy), and Bobbie Brown (Video Babe) Directed by John McTiernan (#014 - Die Hard, #018 - Die Hard with a Vengeance, #080 - The Hunt for Red October, #325 - Predator)

Review: 
"Initially, it was a wonderful Cinderella story with a nine-year-old boy. We had a pretty good script by Bill Goldman, charming. And this ludicrous hype machine got hold of it, and it got buried under bullshit. It was so overwhelmed with baggage. And then it was whipped out unedited, practically assembled right out of the camera. It was in the theater five or six weeks after I finished shooting. It was kamikaze, stupid, no good reason for it. And then to open the week after Jurassic Park—God! To get to the depth of bad judgment involved in that, you'd need a snorkel."

It is sometimes fun to go back to the (perceived) hits and misfires of the old favorites, particularly when it comes to Arnold Schwarzenegger. Honestly, the fact that he was enough of an action star to warrant curiosity all these years later is a curious one, at least when you consider that he was originally a bodybuilder that listed Steve Reeves as among his idols. There was a long road between being dubbed in his debut with Hercules in New York (1970) to the bodybuilding documentary Pumping Iron (1977) to Conan the Barbarian (1982) to being in movies that were boldly proclaimed to be the "big ticket of '93". Of course, Last Action Hero started and ended in completely different fashion from what anyone expected, but hey. Zak Penn and Adam Leff had met when taking a film appreciation course at Wesleyan University; later on, with a shared love of action movies and their cliches, they did a draft with "Extremely Violent" that basically was a flip of The Purple Rose of Cairo [1985] (in which a movie-star idol walks of the screen and joins the real world from time to time). Through a bit of puffery, they attracted an agent with Chris Moore and it eventually bore fruit where Columbia Pictures bought it, albeit so they could then get their own folks (credited folks and uncredited script doctors such as William Goldman) to do re-writes. For example, the Hamlet moment came from Penn & Leff, while the glass-eyed Mr. Bendict character was a Goldman idea, and the caper of disposing of a dynamite-stuffed gangster corpse (inspired by a book) came from Black and Arnott (in general, the original draft didn't even have the golden ticket). The result was Penn and Leff were given credit for the story while Shane Black and David Arnott (who basically thought of it as having the chance to do the "Wizard of Oz of action movies") were given credit for the screenplay. Filming was hectic enough that the studio basically released the movie as it was (i.e. ignoring test screening reactions) in order to beat the timed-release date of June 18, 1993 (one week after Jurassic Park) with a budget of $85 million, the movie made less than double of its budget back.

To be honest, this is basically a "Hudson Hawk" moment for me where I realize, you know, this is funny action worth appreciating. Eighteen-year-old me thought it was better as an action movie that wasn't as funny as it could be. Looking back, I think I just appreciate the cozy world that comes with a litany of action cliches and just going with the frenzied attention. It really is a cynical riff on The Wizard of Oz that makes me appreciate when I see on the screen and chuckle along with it. Incidentally, Penn and Leff actually did write it with Schwarzenegger in mind because of his "self-mocking personality" and being the biggest & exciting of the overblown action guys (evidently, you can read a draft here). Sure, they envisioned it as a divide between a smart real kid and a one-dimensional celluloid character rather than the wisecracking present in the latter, and sure, a lesson in not projecting himself into action movies is kind of lost in the moviemaking by committee. But goddamn it, I did enjoy seeing the pairing of Schwarzenegger and O'Brien in the long run. I once thought O'Brien "easily disposable if he wasn't our main character", which certainly seems to sell him short. O'Brien actually had made his film debut with The Lawnmower Man (1993) after apparently being impressive in a TV commercial. There is something to how the two work with each other that does have enough charm to help get the movie over most of the bumps in the 131-minute journey. Schwarzenegger just happens to be the type of guy who can make an action sequence look all the more entertaining with that certain cadence and it does work in his favor to have a little bit of fun in the freewheeling film world. It's messy and decidedly a guilty pleasure type of movie that clearly gave McTiernan problems that he at least stages with a few entertaining action sequences. Dance makes for a fun enough adversary in slowly eating the scenery in menace that seems to be having fun, and that goes doubly for the blustery McRae (not exactly as much for Prosky or Carney, but at least the latter has the excuse of playing the "poor tragic second cousin"). The best gag might be our hero reading a few cards that count down to one because, wait for it, there's a bomb. The litany of cameos and in jokes are basically hit and miss (I suppose Planet Hollywood was a big deal at one point, but a cartoon cat? A reference to Amadeus [1984]?) and being compared to Who Framed Roger Rabbit (1988) probably did it no favors, but I enjoyed what I saw to make an argument that the movie is sorely underrated. Life isn't just what you see in a movie because at the end, it's what you make of it: it can be adventurous, it can be full of itself, it can be charming, whatever. You just have to actually show up for it. In that sense, Last Action Hero might just be up your alley.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.


One more in the chamber, a non-redux this time: The Shadow

Redux: Predator 2.

Redux #548: Predator 2.

Cast:  
Danny Glover (Lieutenant Mike Harrigan), Kevin Peter Hall (City Hunter / The Predator; Hal Rayle as voice of the Predator), Gary Busey (Special Agent Peter Keyes), Rubén Blades (Detective Danny Archuleta), María Conchita Alonso (Detective Leona Cantrell), Bill Paxton (Detective Jerry Lambert), Lilyan Chauvin (Dr. Irene Edwards), Robert Davi (Deputy Chief Phil Heinemann), Adam Baldwin (Agent Adam Garber), Kent McCord (Captain Brent Pilgrim), Steve Kahan (Sergeant Neil Reeger), Henry Kingi ("El Scorpio"), Morton Downey Jr. (Tony Pope), Calvin Lockhart (Willie "King Willie"), and Sylvia Kauders (Ruth Albright) Directed by Stephen Hopkins.

Review: 
"I always think that about everything I do. I’m my worst most vicious critic of all of these things but I think I just would have made [Predator 2] probably a little less over the top. So it’s a little uneven in tone and sometimes it feels really real. Then you have these crazy Jamaican guys in gold disco pants. I just always want a sense of authenticity about stuff and there’s some of it that just doesn’t feel authentic at all. Some of it really does get to you and I think there’s a strange veer in tones but there’s nothing I’m ashamed of or anything. I think it is just a child from the MTV running around blowing shit up at will and enjoying it with a huge amount of backup working with people who are much smarter than me and could really help me do something that I never had a chance to do before."

It's possible that action movies are just above horror movies when it comes to looking back and thinking, yes, this was pretty good the next time around. I saw the first Predator (1987) movie on DVD when I was in high school and thought it was good and then go figure, I see it a few years later and thought it was really pretty good. Predator 2, which I saw back in 2014 and I guess I just didn't like the idea of a standalone sequel at the time. What I forgot to know at the time was that Jim and John Thomas, who wrote the first movie (involving a professional hunter hunting big game, at least how they proposed it), did in fact return to write the sequel and pitched a handful of ideas to 20th Century Fox; these ideas apparently included: starting straight after the explosion from the first film, or dropping a Predator into time periods such as the Battle of the Bulge. Instead, they went for a hunter that decided upon the then future of 1997 and the "urban jungle" in Los Angeles. The studio could not get Arnold Schwarzenegger to return because of a salary dispute. At the helm to direct was Jamaican-born British director Stephen Hopkins, who had attracted a bit of attention with his first two movies Dangerous Game (1987) and A Nightmare on Elm Street 5: The Dream Child (1989), and he worked out revisions and storyboarded moments with them. Shot on a quick window that had principal photography start in February for a release nine months later, Hopkins (28 at the time) stated he enjoyed the experience. Released on a budget of over $20-30 million in November 1990 (yes, roughly around the same time as Dances with Wolves and Home Alone), the movie made over $50 million worldwide (in comparison, the original made nearly $100 million). Not counting the Alien vs. Predator crossovers, there were no further Predator movies until Predators in 2010.

If Hopkins went a "bit crazy" in making a movie that still ended up being still pretty grounded that he felt was more in the western/thriller genre than sci-fi horror, well, he sure made a good one. With crazy discs and spears to go along with basically a retread of what you saw before in hunting the hunter, I could understand my initial disappointment to this movie and then also realize, yes, but it still deserves plenty of credit for its entertainment value. Over the top, sure, but I suppose I appreciate intensity and craftsmanship more and more when it comes to action/horror movies as the years move on. A lack of Schwarzenegger is regrettable, although it would've been a team-up movie that had inklings of casting Patrick Swayze or possibly Steven Seagal (Hopkins theorizes that he was persuaded by James Cameron to not do it before doing Terminator 2); instead, the role eventually played by Gary Busey* was expanded upon and Glover got cast (basically making this a semi-Lethal Weapon reunion between them, Steve Kahan and Joel Silver, the latter of whom produced both movies). Glover (in pretty good shape because of the physical training) pretty much elevates the movie to what could've easily just been a middling rehash because of how entertaining he proves to be as our hero. Sure, the stubborn loose cannon ordinary Joe isn't the most original type of movies of its ilk, but he has a certain type of timing and enthusiasm that makes it all seem worth it in seeing inevitable ass-kicking in the heat; besides, whether it was1990, 1997 or 2026, it does seem pretty relevant to have a smart mouth to seeing combative folks in really warm weather. This was the penultimate film appearance for Hall, who died the following year after having contracted HIV from a blood transfusion during surgery from injuries in a car accident, and he really did make the best of this role from that suit in making for a pretty imposing figure (which through the presentation of the hunter makes for basically an oddball looking for the alpha, such as when he does a roar and attracts a lightning bolt). I love this group of oddballs that surround the action with Alonso, Blades, and Paxton (no guesses for which plays the charming relief taken before the 108-minute action is over) or the oddball support with Busey in what can only be called "mellow delusion" and musician-turned-abrasive talk show host* Downey hamming it up as much as possible (or, for whatever reason, former Adam-12 star McCord and Davi having bit roles in the usual "cop, you're being too rough" spiel). You get plenty of grimy and intense things within sequences in the city, a massacre in the subway, stuff in a slaughterhouse that probably cribs a bit from Aliens and finally some time spent with an alien ship for a showdown of who really deserves a trophy for their mettle. You know what you're getting early on and if you like where it looks to be headed, well, you'll like it just as much by the end. As a whole, it's a fun average movie that I appreciate more and more because of its sheer energy and willingness to just go where it wants in hunting on a concrete jungle more than thinking too much about its effectiveness when compared to its predecessor. Good ol' sweaty gooey fun, check 'em out.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Yes, I finally decided to give a redux to a movie I saw over 10 years ago. A few more things to cover come up to end August...

*Post motorcycle accident Busey. Remember folks - always wear a helmet when riding a motorcycle.
*It wouldn't be a proper Movie Night if I didn't share his attempts to do novelty songs around this time - Morton Downey Jr. - Sings [1989]

August 30, 2026

Speed Racer.

Review #2572: Speed Racer.

Cast: 
Emile Hirsch (Speed Racer; Nicholas Elia as Young Speed Racer), Christina Ricci (Trixie; Ariel Winter as Young Trixie), John Goodman (Pops Racer), Susan Sarandon (Mom Racer), Matthew Fox (Racer X / Rex Racer; Scott Porter as Young Rex Racer), Roger Allam (E.P. Arnold Royalton), Paulie Litt (Spritle Racer), Benno Fürmann (Inspector Detector), Hiroyuki Sanada (Mr. Musha), Rain (Taejo Togokahn), Richard Roundtree (Ben Burns), Kick Gurry (Sparky), John Benfield (Cruncher Block), Christian Oliver (Snake Oiler), Ralph Herforth (Jack "Cannonball" Taylor), Yu Nan (Horuko Togokahn), Nayo K. Wallace (Minx), and Melvil Poupaud (Johnny "Goodboy" Jones) Directed by The Wachowskis (#1272 - The Matrix)

Review: 
"We had that exact conversation so many times.  The whole impetus for 'Speed Racer' came out of the fact that we are visually-thinking people.  We go to art galleries and art museums all the time.  We go into the Art Institute and every room there, there are paintings that look completely and utterly different from the other rooms.  But in cinema, everything looks the same.  And it's a really aggressive straight-jacket, aesthetically.  We started talking about cubism, for instance, and we started talking about could you make a cubist film?  And we realized that if you try to make a cubist film for adults, you will end up like Picasso, running from the angry mob when he first showed Guernica.  They wanted to kill him.  Literally.  It's because adults… they reject change, and an aesthetic change is too aggressive a death for them.  Every generation experiences aesthetic death, and when you really assault an aesthetic, people freak out.  But we said that kids are okay with aesthetic change." - The Wachowskis

Not all adaptations are created equal. It was originally known as Mach GoGoGo in its native Japan that was created by Tatsuo Yoshida, who previously did an automobile racing comic with Pilot Ace. It started out as a manga in 1966 and became its own anime in 1967 that took inspiration from Viva Las Vegas (specifically the image shown with Elvis) and Goldfinger. The American localization changed it to Speed Racer (which saw the character "Go Mifune" morph into "Speed Racer") with plenty of editing and dubbing from Peter Fernandez. Sure, there were various TV adaptations of the franchise in the years that followed with The New Adventures of Speed Racer (1993), Mach GoGoGo/Speed Racer X (1997), and Speed Racer: The Next Generation (2008; made to promote the film), but, well, I think you see which one stuck around in people's heads (for me, I've seen clips of the 60s show, namely ones that make light of the English dub that selectively use clips that make it sound like Speed is a sociopath). As early as 1992, Warner Bros. wanted to make a movie adaptation, and over the years the project saw various turnover (Johnny Depp was once cast as the title character, for example). Eventually, by 2006, the folks who recently finished the Matrix trilogy (at the time) in the Wachowskis were hired to write and direct in what became quite the spectacleSpeed Racer came out on May 9, 2008, premiering the same week as What Happens in Vegas...and one week after Iron Man, and I think you know which movie ended up being the big hit of its time (yep, Vegas-nah, just kidding, it actually was Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, which premiered two weeks after Racer with its own type of curiosity*). The next movie of the Wachowskis came with Cloud Atlas (2012), which coincidentally has its own small following.

It's easy to see where the line between "oh hey, the movie is doing this!" and "oh, the movie is really doing this" gets blurred with this movie many, many, many times over. There were parts where one can either roll along with in its "sensibility" or just roll their eyes, such as say, its fluid transitions, its top-heavy fiddling of exposition, or the wavering interest in these characters (if Spritle and Chim Chim fell into a pit, would you miss them? Or Sparky the mechanic?). I pondered over what I experienced with seeing the movie and honestly, I'll give it credit for its passion even I really wanted a bit more. It wants to be bold, it wants to be colorful, it wants to stick out, it wants to just be its thing, and yet somehow, in all of its car-fu and "modern sensibility", it is more of a "good" movie on the track (reminding me of, say, Grand Prix [1966]) than off it. For whatever reason, for me, at least, it just is a much more interesting movie when it tries to be creative about a car race would look if designed by an insane person with green screen as opposed to when it tries to be cute in its dialogue (honestly, when playing with little toy cars as a kid, I was more of a line-'em-up guy more than "here's the story involving guys telling their evil plan" guy). Hirsch is given the job of trying to make a mountain out of a molehill with a role that doesn't really have for him to really do when not in the Mach 5, but at least his earnest innocence does come out for some enjoyment (incidentally, he remains proud of the film). Sure, one wishes they had a little more time to spend with Ricci or the delightful ham in Allam (who among us haven't seen a corporate overlord being a twerp right in front of people and trying to skate along anyway?); Goodman seems to be having a bit more fun than, say, Sarandon, for example.

It just goes and goes for 135 minutes, and you either admire its tenacity (i.e. the equivalent of running around and making stuff up) or you just wait for it to shut up and flush. As silly as it sounds, either give me a racing movie that really does me care about Speed and the dynamic of, take your pick (Speed and his offbeat parents, Speed and his totally-dead brother Racer X*,, or, and this is just taking this too seriously, a dynamic that doesn't stall as long as humanly possible on Speed and Trixie doing the art of kissing*). Sitting around gawking at what is shown from the cars beyond the usual four-wheel action probably would make an interesting experience. You either find its conclusion one of triumph and go (speed racer) for it or go (speed racer) for the remote, and I would say, hey, I could go (speed racer go) enough to say it was worth one viewing. It goes all out for those to see and hear to the point of near-insanity and you probably will at least get where some might call it a "cult classic". I'm not sure if I would see it again, but I at least can say it was worth one trip. It overwhelms and rewards the curious (perhaps now more than ever), for better or worse.
  
Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.


Next up: Looking back at a movie I wasn't too big on the first time...

*Remember when trying to survive a nuclear explosion in a lead-lined fridge was a thing to whine about? Looking back, yea, Kingdom of the Crystal Skull was pretty neat, and I'll stand on that hill with pride.

*Wonder if the English adaptation was inspired by Son of Dracula with R...a...c...E...r...X.

*Hell, why stop there? Let's just go full crass and have Speed and Trixie do it right on the race track. Sure, you lose the kid market, but you would have a key experiment: can you make a racing movie where the O doesn't automatically stand for octane? On second thought, maybe I should just watch Crash (1996) at some point in time, I keep hearing that movie is sick as hell. I hope you understand that, yes, I love throwing stuff out for notes. 

August 25, 2026

Freaked.

Review #2573: Freaked.

Cast: 
Alex Winter (Ricky Coogin), Michael Stoyanov (Ernie), Megan Ward (Julie), Randy Quaid (Elijah C. Skuggs), William Sadler (Dick Brian), Alex Zuckerman (Stuey Gluck), Keanu Reeves (Ortiz "The Dog Boy"), Mr. T (The Bearded Lady), Brooke Shields (Skye Daley), Bobcat Goldthwait ("Sockhead"/Sock (Tourist), Derek McGrath ("Worm"/Oxford Professor), Jeff Kahn ("Nosey"), John Hawkes ("Cowboy"), Lee Arenberg ("The Human Flame"), Patti Tippo (Rosie "The Pinhead"), Tim Burns ("Frogman"), Ray Baker (Bill Blazer), Jaime Cardriche ("Toad"), Tom Stern (Milkman), with Jon M. Chu (Giant Stuey Monster), and Michael Gilden & Joseph S. Griffo ("Eye N. Eye") Directed by Alex Winter and Tom Stern.

Review: 


Is it picking low hanging fruit to go along with a movie that basically was just screwed over by its studio? Alex Winter and Tom Stern met at Tisch School of the Arts at New York University in the 1980s that shared interests in "underground comix, punk rock, Monty Python, etc." They soon collaborated on a few short films together such as Squeal of Death, Bar-B-Que Movie (which featured the rock band Butthole Surfers*) and a few music videos. Alongside Tim Burns (who had met Stern when working on The Jim Henson Hour), they created the sketch comedy show The Idiot Box (aired in 1991), which ran for six episodes on MTV (back when it actually ran music videos). They ended the show to take a deal with 20th Century Fox for what became this film. At the time, Winter believed that cynical comedy was on the rise in part because of the outlook of the United States* and thought, well, what's more cynical than laughing at the misfortune of the main character? Of course, he also claimed that the original intent was to make the "ultimate cult film" to overly exaggerate before Fox came in and wanted rewrites (Joe Roth in particular was name-dropped for being with them on making a movie together), so there's that. Burns gave the film a re-write (evidently, one of the moments excised involved a guitar player playing with a living person's spinal cord). Studio turnover led to Roth departing Fox and replaced by someone who did not care for the film (shot for over $12 million that actually had merchandise released for it such as a figure line). Bad test screenings (one screening apparently had a bunch of numbskulls believing it was going to be like Bill & Ted) led to a theater release on October 3...to two screens (there exists a few different editions, with the longest being 86 minutes and the US version went 80). Winter has made a handful of features and documentaries (ranging from Fever [1999] to Zappa [2020] to Adulthood [2025]) while Stern has gone off on his own filmmaking with stuff such as co-writing An American Werewolf in Paris (1997), a handful of TV episodes and documentaries. After receiving runs on home media (2005, 2013), it got a full restoration (and release) from Winter in 2025.

It's one thing to put Reeves in a dog suit, it's another thing to have Mr. T. play a bearded lady. Among the folks responsible for the effects included Tony Gardner, Steve Johnson, and Screaming Mad George. If they couldn't get their dream of Beach Blanket Bingo meeting The Evil Dead", at least there's a gooey and goofy time to have here with this movie, which has plenty of glee over its Freekz (hey, the working title was "Hideous Mutant Freekz"), which are wonderful to gawk at alongside to have amusement over how they look when faced with crowds of humans who aren't really that much different in temperament, honestly. If Freaks (1932) wanted to show the actual side of sideshow performers* and the horrors that come in trying to ignore them as people, Freaked yearns to just go off the wall with its own type of performers that we celebrate for all that they do in mayhem: cow-men, toads with big tongues, and to top it all, a giant mutated nerd. It's the kind of movie fit for those who had fun with, say, Nothing But Trouble (1991). As star and co-director, Winter was wrapped with plenty of makeup for twelve hours (complete with remote control work), and, well, handling duties that resulted in him barely being able to sleep for a few months. As such, he makes for a good presence in carrying things in scuzzball grossness (as per the goal), one who hams it up with no hesitation. Winter, Stoyanov, and Ward make for a suitable group of goofs to get turned into freaks (one with half of a good face and the other two being pooled together) as equal opportunity jerks. The supporting cast has a handful of gags and charms, ranging from the most obvious person to play a sock puppet, a stuffy worm, and a delightfully dry Mr. T exploring the helpful side of femininity. The movie drifts in and out with just having fun in effects and slinging any gag possible that makes for a pretty good time to let play out. In a sea of over-the-top people that aspire to be a spokesman for toxic waste (hey, is it any less degenerate than people who go for gambling sites in 2026*?) or live with a group of folks ranging from worms to mutated hammers, aiming for any type of joke (high and low) is the kind of movie fit for the oddball in all of us.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.


Next: To hell with it, Speed Racer.

*Butthole Surfers? Good lord, what a crappy name for a band. What's next, Viet Cong? 
*At least 1993 had Bill Clinton. 
*DraftKings and any other site that goes all in for gambling should die a horrible death. Gambling should've been relegated to the seedy basement and never given any type of prominence. At least alcohol has an argument for being a "social" drink (hey, I think it's a piece of crap, but still), what the hell does gambling do for anything?
*I wondered, hey, would some bastard try to argue that Freaks (1932) isn't really a horror movie? Low and behold, some people do in fact try to argue that - sad! 

August 23, 2026

Harley Davidson and the Marlboro Man.











Review #2572: Harley Davidson and the Marlboro Man.

Cast:
Mickey Rourke (Harley Davidson), Don Johnson (Robert Lee "Marlboro Man" Edison), Chelsea Field (Officer Virginia Slim), Tom Sizemore (Chance Wilder), Daniel Baldwin (Alexander), Vanessa Williams (Lulu Daniels), Giancarlo Esposito (Jimmy Jiles), Robert Ginty (Thom), Tia Carrere (Kimiko), Big John Studd (Jack Daniels), Julius Harris ('The Old Man' Jiles), Eloy Casados (Jose Cuervo), and Kelly Hu (Suzie) Directed by Simon Wincer.

Review: 
You're never going to believe this: a buddy biker action movie (that could also be called a "neo-Western") that wasn't a hit on release. The film was directed by one Simon Wincer, an Australian director that had done plenty of television before becoming a film guy with such movies as Snapshot (1979), D.A.R.Y.L. (1985) and Quigley Down Under (1990). The original script was written by aspiring actor Don Michael Paul that apparently took inspiration from Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid [1969] (which is strange because the movie has exactly one robbery while Cassidy features multiple robberies and a failed attempt at going straight, although a "super-posse" does sound pretty prevalent in both). It soon found a deal with MGM (at the time in hell with Giancarlo Parretti in management) and a quick turnaround with Wincer and company (you might be wondering - Paul? Yes, that's correct, Paul ended up being the writer/director for Half Past Dead [2002]*). Sure, Johnson and Rourke were mostly in it to try and get out of career ruts, but they apparently had a decent time making the movie. Released on August 23, 1991 (the same week as movies such as Dead Again) with little expectations from even MGM's own president at the time with a budget of roughly $18 million, the movie made less than half of that. Wincer went on to make a string of movies that surely sound normal: Free Willy (1993), that movie with a big whale in it, Lightning Jack (1994), an ill-fated attempt at a Paul Hogan vehicle (?), Operation Dumbo Drop (1995), a movie involving an elephant in the Vietnam War (no, really), and The Phantom (1996), a comic strip movie with a big purple costumed hero.

The heroes being named after brands was, well, not trying to sell cigarettes (which suck anyway*) or motorcycles. The real movie basically starts about nearly an hour after the heist is done and it's just two folks riding around trying to make the best of the fact that one can barely shoot a gun and the other wears duct-tape boots. Rourke was there solely for the money because of a string of flops and decided that as a 39-year-old in 1991 to do, and I'm not kidding, focus his time on boxing (he wound up doing a few fights around the world before going back to acting). Meanwhile, the elder Johnson (i.e. early forties) was still hoping to branch out from being more than Crockett from Miami Vice (hey, in fairness, he was fine in A Boy and His Dog [1975]). Even with that type of freewheeling attitude, there is still a veneer of interest in watching these people meander across the screen engaging in the most predictable type of adventure imaginable because they do conjure up a smile for those who are familiar with wiseasses that should know better. It's the kind of movie for those who thought Tango & Cash (1989) or Stone Cold (1991) were sick as hell, honestly. What other movie goes around having characters spend 99 percent of the time in duct-taped boots to go along with stunts of jumping onto pools or say, a person falling off a motorcycle just so it rolls at a group of people (who naturally all jump over it at the same time)? Or arm wrestling / bar fights? 

Much like the film, there are no excuses for what I do (see, I do crib quotes) in saying that this was a pretty decent movie in basically exploring two people that don't really know what they want besides having as much as possible before, well, the ride of the grim reaper hits. It just happens to be a movie where folks decide to rob a bank threatening to foreclose their favorite bar. Sure, it doesn't have much for Field to really do opposite Johnson (Williams also gets exactly one scene that doesn't involve singing), and sure, Baldwin and Sizemore don't get that much to particularly do as the primary adversaries (one basically travels in a straight line with other black-coated dudes but you still go, "cool"), and sure, it's a movie that hinges on selling drugs *back* to the people they robbed (equal opportunity robbers that don't love addictive drugs, what a pairing) but I got a kick out of its entertainment value. When your favorite place gets trashed (or in the modern sense, bought out or turned lame) by a bunch of stooges from a bank (capital?) just because they can, yeah, I would think wish fulfillment in getting revenge sounds like a fun time for 98 minutes, quite honestly. 35 years haven't exactly elevated it all the way to a cult movie, but it is the kind of curious movie to watch get on the road to ass-kicking and a few chuckles along the way.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Next up: At last, a movie title worthy for this month: Freaked.

*Supposedly, Johnson had his friend Sean "Arizona Slim" Walsh (a Miami Vice script doctor) and Jay Helfert write the pool hall scene that introduces his character. Wikipedia is fairly trustworthy on select movies, but I prefer a clickable link, so who knows?

*Movie Night explicitly says that cigarettes are a shitty product in every shape or form. Hell, that goes for vaping too. 

*I really should watch Rourke in The Wrestler, I keep forgetting to do that one. A whole lot easier to justify than watching Sean Penn in Milk, that's for sure. 

August 18, 2026

Snakes on a Plane.



Review #2571: Snakes on a Plane.

Cast: 
Samuel L. Jackson (Agent Neville Flynn), Julianna Margulies (Claire Miller), Nathan Phillips (Sean Jones), Rachel Blanchard (Mercedes Harbont), Flex Alexander (Clarence "Three G's" Dewey), Kenan Thompson (Troy), Keith Dallas (Big Leroy), Sunny Mabrey (Tiffany Engelhard), Bruce James (Ken), Lin Shaye (Grace), Terry Chen (Chen Leong), Elsa Pataky (Maria), Mark Houghton (Agent John Sanders), David Koechner (Rick Archibald), Bobby Cannavale (Special Agent Hank Harris), and Todd Louiso (Dr. Steven Price) Directed by David R. Ellis (#437 - Homeward Bound II: Lost in San Francisco, #2137 - Final Festination 2)

Review: 
Hey, this is a month dedicated to the flops from audiences in its time, and this technically counts. 20 years ago, New Line Cinema believed they were on the cusp of a pretty good hit on their hands with an "internet phenomenon"...and then it wasn't. I'm not kidding, there were magazines that put it on the cover and asked if the "Hokey Horror Flick" could "Change The Movie Business". The project was first discussed in 1999 after a Dreamworks executive in Craig Berenson read a script called "Venom" by David Dalessandro, an administrator at the University of Pittsburgh and first-time scriptwriter that had been inspired by reading an article about Indonesian brown tree snakes climbing on cargo planes in World War II and eventually was inspired to have a script, with, well, lots of snakes. Berenson found that script and on a "happy hour" type of party, he pitched it as "Snakes on a Plane" and thought, hey, maybe there is something to it, which is where he got the services of John Heffernan to work on the story. Years of pitching and re-writes (which added one more credited writer with Sebastian Gutierrez) eventually got it to New Line Cinema and Ronny Yu to direct and Jackson to star in it, mainly because of the title. Sure, they quickly lost Yu due to disagreements (which led to the hiring of stuntman-turned filmmaker Ellis, behind films such as Final Destination 2), and sure, New Line tried to rename the project "Pacific Flight 121" (others report it as "Pacific Air 121"), and sure, they initially aimed for a PG-13 rating even during shooting, but eventually there was a movie ready to go for people to speculate on (such as screenwriters) online. New Line aimed to engage with fan-generated speculation and take the movie seriously. Debuting for audiences (with no screenings for critics) on August 18, 2006 (other choices that month included films such as Barnyard, The Descent, Talladega Nights: The Ballad of Ricky Bobby, World Trade Center, Step Up, The Illusionist) and released on a budget of $33 million, the movie made almost double its budget that was labeled as just an "Internet-only phenomenon" and a "dud". Ellis directed three further films (one direct-to-video), with the last being Shark Night in 2011 prior to his sudden death in 2013 at the age of 60.

For a movie that shows at least a dozen people joining the body count movie, it sure doesn't feel like a horror movie (that "hokey" label seems more like a joke). The opening seems more of a reworking of the crap you saw in those Airport movies (27 minutes, mainly) but it eventually becomes obvious where they tried to shoehorn it being an R-rated movie (with the occasional shot of blood). It may interest you to know that most of the snakes in the film are either CG or animatronic, especially the ones that don't attack people or encounter Jackson. I suppose it could make a doubleheader with Cocaine Bear (2023) in the "hey, it's a movie with a title like that, why not?" department*, although most people probably are more spooked by bears than wondering about what type of snake is venomous. To be honest, as a person who actually has had a snake around their shoulders (as I vaguely remember from a trip to a nature center), I'll take the snake over flying right about now, trusting a tin can flying in the air where you could theoretically get blown up or deal with aircraft decompression or deal with, well, a crappy-made plane. I guess I'm stalling at trying to understand what all the fuss about this movie was, which, really, is it known for anything other than that one line said about 80 minutes into its 106-minute runtime about having had enough of these [you know the swear] planes on this ... plane? Anybody? It's an overgrown B-movie made for way too much money to be considered one that has exactly one joke (tongue in cheek because ha ha, get it, it's a movie that can be used in a punchline of a sitcom) and the bare minimum to actually have fun with. You've got three folks better known for TV (Margulies, Alexander, and Thompson*) paired with basically nothing from Phillips for a movie that thinks throwing snakes around the compartments and having the bare minimum of carnage is enough. Nope. I like Jackson, and he seems to be having some fun here, but this is a movie that begs to just be an Air Force One (thought be some as a Die Hard pastiche) ripoff rather than pairing him with basically nothing to really engage with (imagine if it was say...Gans Hruber threatening to release snakes from a time-controlled crate unless he gets money while also motioning to kill the witness anyway - it would be the most delusional movie ever). Creature features can't really reach the levels of Jaws (1975), so folks basically try to get on the level of trying to rise above say, Anaconda [1997] (honestly, that movie might be a bit more interesting, at least it has an actual adversary in the mayhem).

Oh, but you don't need to know much about their personal lives besides the intro, well, I want to at least feel like people are going to go through peril, and it's not saying much when Shaye's character going down under is the highlight of seeing sacrifices and "into the jaws of death" moments (you could count a yapping dog being thrown into the path of a snake, but, well, really?). You'd think going around using a taser on snakes and having a kickboxer character would be enough, but it just feels like a movie going through the motions with an assured feeling of doing enough without actually proving anything. The snakes just aren't that spooky enough to make me unsettled beyond the "will they take down any of the comedy relief?" (get it, the musician with guards is actually a germophobe? get it? get it, one of them gets bit in the ass? get it? get it, the movie rests on the power of PlayStation* flight simulating? get it). There are certain movies that feel like "fast food movies" that basically go through you with one viewing and satisfy the bare minimum, and some of them accomplish the job of satisfying the general expectation laid out by its viewer (action movie with explosions, horror movie with scares*, whatever). Snakes on a Plane just feels like microwaved leftovers: you've done this before and you just don't feel like it matters to actually do it again (to say nothing of those mockblusters that come out from folks such as The Asylum - a waste of time if there ever was one!*). Some movies can get on by with an decent lead among its cast and middling tension, but this is one that has no actual fangs in it that results in an overhyped, overblown mediocrity.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.


Next up: who knows? 

*Also the department of "includes kids in the peril but in the mildest possible way that totally isn't cowardly". 

*The three in particular for 2006 was ER*, One on One and Saturday Night Live. Anyway, The only modern TV show I really got into when it was *new* was Lucifer (before Fox was too stupid to cancel it) and The Blacklist. as for Margulies, what the hell is a The Good Wife?

*Lmao, Nintendo forever.

*I don't care what they say, you do have to be a bit scary in your horror movie. 

*Sharknado was made for television but at least that went into a few theaters for midnight showings. But most of their crap goes direct-to-video, which is something I explicitly do not aim for. 

August 17, 2026

Cisco Pike.











Review #2570: Cisco Pike.

Cast: 
Kris Kristofferson (Cisco Pike), Gene Hackman (Detective Leo Holland), Karen Black (Sue), Harry Dean Stanton (Jesse Dupre), Viva (Merna), Doug Sahm (Rex), Roscoe Lee Browne (Pawnshop Owner), Joy Bang (Lynn), Severn Darden (Lawyer), Antonio Fargas (Brother Buffalo), with Don Sturdy (Recording Engineer), and Allan Arbus (Sim Valensi) Directed by Bill L. Norton.

Review:  
My favoritism does ring strong for select folks, admittedly. How many people can beat Barbra Striesand at their own game in trying to be the big fish in terms of actual presence in a movie (I fondly still remember watching A Star is Born (1976) and being amazed its sheer mediocrity). The Brownsville-born nomad was prolific enough at Pomona College that there were ideas of him being a writer, complete with study at the University of Oxford. Instead, he ended up as a jack of all trades in odd jobs (okay there was stuff in the middle of that such as being in the Army), one of them being a janitor at Columbia Records as a wannabee songwriter. He did appear in his first film with the adventure from hell in The Last Movie (1971). Apparently, in the aftermath of drunkenly stumbling through being rejected for a part in Two-Lane Blacktop, he got offered the script for this film and decided against the advice of taking acting lessons for a character that he thought he related to. Inadvertently, this also is a chance to spotlight a forgotten filmmaker that had a brief flash in the sun. Bill L. Norton was the son of William W. Norton, who actually was a writer in Hollywood that ranged from television with The Big Valley to movies with White Lightning [1973]*. As for the younger Norton, he graduated from UCLA and went from writing stuff such as How to Succeed with Girls (1964) and (uncredited) camera operating on movies like The Fortune Cookie (1966). But when film producers looked for any type of "freethinkers" or "hippie" perspective in the wake of Easy Rider's success in 1969, Norton got his chance to be a director with a script (with one working title being "Dealer") that attracted producer Gerald Ayres and Columbia Pictures. Robert Towne was asked to look over the script, with his most noted contribution being the addition of Hackman's character, although he was left uncredited. Lumped in some circles to other counterculture movies such as Getting Straight [1970] and Making It [1971], the movie had its opening premiere in late 1971 before going into limited release in 1972 that resulted middling reviews and a lack of an audience. The next Norton movie was More American Graffiti (1979). While there were a few showings to theaters that still had a print, the movie wasn't available on home media such as VHS or DVD until a release in the latter format in 2006. 

I suppose it makes sense that Norton called it his rendition of La Dolce Vita but set in L.A." In the domain of the Venice neighborhood with things of yesteryear such as the Pacific Ocean Park (closed since 1967). You could consider how Kristofferson considered acting to be as one that could be "just understanding a character, and then being just as honest as you can possibly be" (as said in 1974), or, for what he thought about the movie over 50 years later, one where he mused about what exactly "gave me the audacity to think I could act." The movie coasts along with a lead character that basically is an anachronism going through a travelogue in a type of California (West L.A.) that either runs on the fumes of banality or, well, is curious enough to actually see all the way through its 95-minute runtime. Kristofferson is the drifter, the has-been, the elusive one, the guy in all of us that can't just be one thing without some smart aleck or oddball trying to get one over us (such as trying to not be a dealer). Hackman made the movie right before doing The French Connection (Cisco premiered shortly after Connection). His panicky oddness popping in every now and then (for what could generously be estimated as being less than 20 minutes) is a curious one to see when compared to the familiar comforts of the kooky Black (by this point a recent Academy Award nominee with Five Easy Pieces [1970]) or the splattering of support that comes with Viva or the withered Stanton. Any observation about the movie, positive or negative, basically can be responded to with "it depends, man". The songs from Kristofferson are delightful for those who roll with doing something for the sake of it that basically is the movie in a nutshell: you drift in and drift out and maybe figure something out by the time it all has come to pass (or not). I can't call it a great movie, but a drifting movie with likeable enough folks and music is more than enough to at least call it a possible gem for the curious.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Next up: Fuck it, it's 20 years old: 8.18.06: SNAKES ON A PLANE

*Honestly, I have no bias against Streisand, I just...never got into watching her movies. Or her songs. I accidentally took nearly 15 years of Movie Night to actually get to a Jane Fonda movie, it isn't exactly a surprise that I've seen two Streisand movies in the span of 16 years.

*Mr. William W. Norton was a strange guy. He crapped on his contributions to movies (once stating that one would only know his films if their "I.Q" [was] low enough"), later moved to Ireland and got mad about Roman Catholic residents getting attacked to the point where he went back to the States to run guns to the Irish National Liberation Army. He got caught and served 19 months in prison. He moved to Central America only to get robbed and killed one of the robbers. He moved around before finally being smuggled back to America. He died in 2010 at the age of 85 while his son Bill still lives.

*Forgot to send a link: LIFE - Google Books

August 10, 2026

Soldier (1998).

Review #2569: Soldier (1998).

Cast: 
Kurt Russell (Sergeant Todd "3465"; Jesse Littlejohn as 8-year-old Todd; Wyatt Russell as 11-year-old Todd), Jason Scott Lee (Caine 607), Jason Isaacs (Colonel Mekum), Connie Nielsen (Sandra), Sean Pertwee (Mace), Jared & Taylor Thorne (Nathan), Mark Bringelson (Lieutenant Rubrick), Gary Busey (Captain Church), K. K. Dodds (Lieutenant Sloan), James R. Black (Riley), Kyle Sullivan (Tommy), Corbin Bleu (Johnny), with Sara Paxton (Angie), and Michael Chiklis (Jimmy Pig) Directed by Paul W. S. Anderson (#1670 - Mortal Kombat#1688 - Alien vs. Predator, #2158 - Resident Evil)

Review:
Sure, let's have another movie to test my bias for select presences in movies and also movies that came out either before I was born/when I wasn't old enough to stumble onto it on a DVD shelf. It may interest you to know that the movie was written by David Peoples. He was the co-writer of Blade Runner (1982) and other films such as Unforgiven (1992) and 12 Monkeys (1995). Soldier, much like Unforgiven, had languished in development hell for years.  Evidently, at one time, Clint Eastwood was tapped to be involved with filming (you might remember that Eastwood had directed/starred in People's script Unforgiven [1992]) before it eventually fell down to Paul W. S. Anderson and Kurt Russell. While claims have been made that it was envisioned as being a side-sequel to that film, Peoples has denied this, stating that he wrote it in 1984 after having seen The Terminator and wanting to make a movie with a tough guy who actually is the hero, and yes, yes, Terminator 2: Judgement Day, 1991, but hey, Soldier came out in 1998 (at any rate, a movie that shows the combat history of someone at the "Shoulder of Orion" along with getting a "Plissken Patch" is probably just having fun with stuff). The regimen of workouts for Russell led to delays in starting production (which apparently led to Anderson using the time to do Event Horizon [1997]) that also led to planned locations being unused due to bad weather in favor of sets; reportedly, Anderson did a re-write of the film, with Peoples claiming to have not seen the film. Released in October 1998 (a month where the most noted movie released that month was Antz) on a budget of $60 million, the movie was a flop that made less than a fourth of its budget back (dollars aren't everything, of course, but consider the timescape). Anderson's next theatrical project came with Resident Evil (2002) while this happens to be the last script done by Peoples to have been made into a movie.

I'm sure you've heard of a movie with a battle of "obsolete" versus "new" before, and I'm sure you've heard of a Western or two involving a weapon finding a family beyond the bullets. Sure, the adversaries are the bare minimum, and sure the environments are pretty set-bound. You've got a training sequence (told with as little dialogue as possible) to show the trained soldiers from birth in 1996 to the future...of 2036. I guess it depends on how much you take the movie seriously in what it gives you: Is it familiar to those who've seen one too many Westerns like Shane [1953] (only instead of having that little kid whining about coming back, the soldier simply kicks ass and stays around)? Sure. Is it filled with a few too many cliches? Maybe. Do you know where it is going to go where one man seeks to take fellow soldiers to hell? Yea. Did I enjoy this? Yes, I did. So, there's Kurt Russell in a role with as little words to say as possible learning about actual society and defending it by killing as many faceless dudes as it takes to keep himself and others alive. Sore foot or no sore foot, he wasn't going to let it get in the way of a big paycheck and goddamnit, I like his moxie in a movie that is saved from outright mediocrity because he really is that damn good here. He may have been in his late forties here, but he still has the physicality and the presence to make this an interesting character to see grow from a broken weapon to a guy with the semblance of a soul that people want to be around. The adversaries are not exactly given much to do to combat that as tools of a new order of brutality, mainly because Lee doesn't get much to say (as one does from a super soldier that gets their eye gouged out early before getting back to action) and Isaacs is more of a pencil-necked blowhard, but I like their stuff anyway in confrontation with the inevitable. Nielsen and Pertwee lead the ordinary folks down on the desolate lands (which look pretty neat at times) with mixed results - "soldiers deserve soldiers" basically sums up that yea, there's some folks worth saving, but yeah, our eyes are focused on that one guy no matter what. It's a 99-minute adventure that can be fun depending on how many cliches is enough in an obvious action movie. As a whole, the action sequences (such as for the climax) mostly hold things together for a movie that either falls by the wayside for those who don't fall for its cliche charms or has just enough enjoyment to actually make you believe that the film is worth a check. As a clear fan of Russell and a person who likes their action movies of varying levels of ambition, this one is decent enough to say it might be worth your time.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.


Next up - Kristofferson.

*I always try to find time to find a link to an interview or something for research or for fun, so enjoy a Peoples interview - Janet and David Webb Peoples at Cinequest I will say this one quote is kinda funny from Peoples: "Hollywood encourages violence". Well, yes! Isn't that the fun of moviemaking? What's next, wanting movies to have less sex?

August 8, 2026

Mystery Men.

Review #2568: Mystery Men.

Cast: 
Ben Stiller (Roy / Mr. Furious), Hank Azaria (Jeffery / Blue Raja), William H. Macy (Eddie / Shoveler), Greg Kinnear (Lance Hunt / Captain Amazing), Kel Mitchell (Invisible Boy), Paul Reubens (Spleen), Janeane Garofalo (Carol / Bowler), Wes Studi (The Sphinx), Claire Forlani (Monica), Geoffrey Rush (Casanova Frankenstein), Lena Olin (Dr. Anabel Leek), Eddie Izzard (Tony P.), Tom Waits (Doc Heller), Artie Lange (Big Red), Louise Lasser (Violet), and Ricky Jay (Vic Weems) Directed by Kinka Usher.

Review: 

I'm not really sure when I first heard of this movie, to be honest with you. Maybe it was the silly title or seeing a trailer of it on one of those "hey, this is on DVD too" things. But time comes for all things, so screw it, why not this one? Obviously, this had to be based off a comic book, although it is a bit more interesting than the usual source material. It all started with Bob Burden, who wrote and drew a comic called Flaming Carrot Comics that had a guest star with the Mysterymen, a group of "other guys" that consisted of many oddballs such as, well, The Shoveler, Spleen, Mr. Furious, you get the idea (as for the Carrot, well, he had a utility belt, a really strong pogo stick and weapon, and whatever "Zen Stupidity" is). Burden wrote over 30 issues from 1984 to 2006 that had various publishers from Aardvark-Vanaheim to Dark Horse Comics to Image. His work attracted the attention of Lawrence Gordon and Universal Pictures and eventually came into fruition with a first-time director as rejections from filmmakers such as Danny DeVito and Ben Stiller. Kinka Usher had been born in France (to a dance teacher mom and graphic designer dad) before breaking into the film industry in his twenties, which included, and I'm sure this is a surprise, work as a cameraman on a Roger Corman production. He became a director in commercials for various companies and kept on directing them* after this film came and went. Neil Cuthbert (a co-writer on The Return of Swamp Thing [1989] and Hocus Pocus [1993] and future writer of The Adventures of Pluto Nash [2002]) is the credited writer of the film, which had various re-writes that mainly dealt with people wanting to personalize their parts; Burden was even present on set for a few of those days. August 6, 1999 had plenty of cool options for theater releases: this movie, The Thomas Crown Affair, The Iron Giant, The Sixth Sense (and, to be generous, Dick came out two days earlier and the wider release for Blair Witch Project came right before August), with some of those movies becoming successes and some, well, being flops. The movie made less than half of its $68 million budget back and was not exactly a critical darling. 

This is a movie that yearns to be loved by an appreciative crowd, one that knows of the campy weirdness of comic book movies of yesteryear such as say, Batman and Robin (1997) or the current crop of offbeat failures such as Madame Web (2024). Some movies have a chump in the midst of their movie, Mystery Men is basically an entire team of chumps, the kind of folks who basically all represent the many facets of misfits you would see in school for two hours. It's a jumbled mess that will feel like a long bout of twaddle to those who don't like what its selling or will feel like a dream for those who love ridiculous little movies with noted names and the time capsule of good ol' 1999 that has serious-minded people in a silly world that gives them one shot to be on top when the corporate suck-sorry, corporate superhero can't save the city for once. Stiller tries to play it both ways: the bravado of actually trying to ragebait himself into being an actual person that is sometimes interesting. I could take it or leave it with the interactions spent between him and Forlani (who among us has an interest in striking up conversations with the waitress again and again), though. Macy and his can-do attitude of plugging away as a would-be hero is probably the most interesting of the leads because of his charm in the face of what could've easily just been a sad schlub but instead is likable enough to see him try to rise above the crop of mediocrity. I get the joke with Azaria and the attempt at doing a British accent of the highest camp order and also think taking a fork to the throat would be preferable to hearing his bit again, which actually makes hearing the long-winded fart joke of Reubens (who among us wouldn't want to be in a movie basically playing a slob?) tolerable. Kinnear is vastly needed more in his ridiculous mannerisms as a hero who can't exactly handle being "too good" at their job, particularly since Rush is supposed to match him as the main threat of mischief and can only help but pop up every now and then. Garofalo, Mitchell, and a randomly appearing Studi round it out with varying levels of interest (namely with Garofalo). You've got folks who have plugged away (shovels, jobs, you pick one) for years at something only to get silent stares, people who have been overlooked long enough to think they are invisible, folks who put on an accent/act to try and sound normal, folks who have to be rattled to even feel something (strength is one thing, some people actually willingly look at stuff that will get them mad Online) ...and then you've got folks talking in riddles, throwing balls and, well, farting. If taken seriously, it flails around with flab that will foil less patient folks while those who know what they're getting in a "hit or miss" goofy type of comedy will surely find something worth liking with these misfits and their freewheeling of the usual ensemble of would-be heroes and the offbeat ambition and neurosis in all of us.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.


Next up: A familiar face with little to say but plenty to do.

*Evidently, there exists an urban legend that Tim Burton actually directed the movie. I cannot imagine a urban legend more absurd. What's next, thinking that Steven Spielberg directed Poltergeist? 

*I swear, this was completely coincidental to review the movie around its 27th anniversary. Also, for fun, enjoy a making of video: Mystery Men Featurette - Spotlight on Location - Interviews With The Cast | 1999

August 5, 2026

City Heat.

Review #2567: City Heat.

Cast: 
Clint Eastwood (Lieutenant Speer), Burt Reynolds (Mike Murphy), Jane Alexander (Addy), Madeline Kahn (Caroline Howley), Rip Torn (Primo Pitt), Beau Starr (Pitt Lookout), Irene Cara (Ginny Lee), Richard Roundtree (Diehl Swift), Tony Lo Bianco (Leon Coll), William Sanderson (Lonnie Ash), Nicholas Worth (Troy Roker), Robert Davi (Nino), Art LaFleur ("Bruiser"), Arthur Malet (Doc Loomis), and Jack Nance (Aram Strossell) Directed by Richard Benjamin (#1024 - My Favorite Year)

Review: 
I have to admit, the key impetus to actually watching this movie was the fact that it was on a DVD pack, specifically a Clint Eastwood set (paired with Pink Cadillac, of all things). Sure, Eastwood is a curious presence, why not try a comedy? I didn't have enough time to see it back in 2024, but it sure seems time to actually watch what all the fuss is about. Blake Edwards penned the original story (once called "Kansas City Jazz") in the 1970s and it eventually found its way to Warner Bros. wanting to have Edwards direct Reynolds and Eastwood together (previously, Edwards directed Reynolds with The Man Who Loved Women [1983]) Somehow, Eastwood had disagreements over the script and his character and Edwards was soon replaced with Richard Benjamin; this was the second of two movies directed by Benjamin to come out in 1984 after Racing with the Moon. According to Reynolds, Eastwood was fine with Benjamin replacing Edwards while saying the dismissal "hurt [Eastwood] badly". Reynolds claimed that he knew the film was going down the tubes ten days into shooting because he saw his role as such: "playing Jack Lemmon in this strange film where people were getting blown away...The public wanted Boom Town or to see us in a contemporary film. They didn't want Dirty Harry vs. the Wimp." As a result of an accident (reported as either a metal chair to the face or falling from a chair and hitting his jaw), this was not a happy experience for Reynolds. As a result, Joseph C. Stinson was credited as a co-writer of the screenplay with "Samuel O. Brown" (get it? S...O...B.?). Expected to be a big hit with a budget of $25 million and released on the same week as Beverly Hills Cop and 2010 in December 1984, the movie made roughly $38 million as a considerable disappointment. Benjamin kept on as a director with films of extremely varied quality such as The Money Pit (1986), Mermaids (1990), and Marci X (2003).

This might be the most obvious case of seeing a movie and watching it die in real time. Sometimes it looks nice and sometimes it comes off as a comedy and sometimes it has some violence worth being in a buddy action movie...but it never comes off as a complete package. For such a "buddy movie", it just seems more like two short films that got cobbled together, with Reynolds seemingly having the more thankless job of trying to carry a film in doing silly lines and getting beat up a bit while Eastwood basically goes "nope" and "yep". Even being a sendup of the gangster movie isn't that fun because the movie just dawdles for 97 minutes with a blithering plot and little else to go which goes as such: two gangs want this briefcase of records but the guy who stole it ends up dead and a game of "where's the briefcase?" tangles up a cop and cop-turned-private eye into an alliance to not only avenge the dead man & his injured girl but also to rescue both of their would-be lovers (as you do) that ends up in both gangs getting plenty of bullets and fire in them. For such a star-studded cast, it's amazing to make a movie that just feels so small. Sometimes I chuckled, sometimes I rolled my eyes: it's the ultimate 6/10 movie, arguably.

The fact that the movie almost gets to a quality finish line is more of a testament to Reynolds than Eastwood, arguably. I've had a soft spot for Reynolds for a number of years because of the varying heights that came with such a fascinating movie star that I knew was going to make for a curious experience when watching a stinker such as, say, this movie or Stroker Ace (released in 1983 that has been cited as the starting point of his downturn as a star). He may have been approaching middle age with shaky ground in terms of public appearance of his charm (his next movie ended up being the misfire Stick [1985]), but I liked what I saw of him here in the same way that one admires the hokum of someone trying to retain the appearance of legitimacy and virility. This is basically important to at least giving the movie a shot (grinning in the face of mediocrity, an American tradition?), because Eastwood and his routine that comes off as dry with the bare minimum in trying to make a pair that might accidentally make you appreciate The Rookie (1990) in the future of mismatched duos. Eastwood looks like he wants to be anywhere else than here and being a "can take this corny crap in stride" is not a compliment. It also extends to Alexander and Kahn, who are each given thankless tasks to pair off the two male leads that goes nowhere in actual charm (Kahn basically vanishes for a good chunk of the film too, making it even harder, but at least she is paired with Reynolds in...trying to do something). Roundtree and Cara are needlessly given little to actually do (besides being hit by a car), and Alexander being on the bottom edge of the totem pole of "what do they actually do?" is less helpful when you wonder why Torn or Davi are just...there. Whether because of Benjamin or studio arrogance of going "Eastwood and Reynolds, what could go wrong for printing money?" or something else, they never come off as much of a team together. As a whole, City Heat came and went with audiences and hasn't exactly rocketed in reputation four decades later. Flawed as it may be, you could find something curious here. 

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.


Next up: A mystery...

*Truthfully, Reynolds was already on my mind for this month with, say, Rent-a-Cop or Striptease.