Mr. Brooks.

Review #1137: Mr. Brooks.

Cast: 
Kevin Costner (Earl Brooks), William Hurt (Marshall), Demi Moore (Detective Tracy Atwood), Dane Cook (Mr. Smith / Graves Baffert), Marg Helgenberger (Emma Brooks), Danielle Panabaker (Jane Brooks), Aisha Hinds (Nancy Hart), and Jason Lewis (Jesse Vialo) Directed by Bruce A. Evans.

Review: 
Mr. Brooks is certainly an interesting film to think about, if not for the fact it certainly stands out for its main character - a man addicted to murder, as if they were doing a modern variant on the Jekyll and Hyde tale, to the point where Costner's character goes to twelve-step meetings for addicts to try and curb his "killing addiction". Believe it or not, this was meant to be the first film in a trilogy, and while the film was a mild success at the box office, there were no further follow-ups made. While I can't say that this is a great film, I will say that it is an interesting thing to watch, if not for the twists that it tries to pull and some of its performances being pretty stand-out, even if the film has some deep flaws of its own that can't quite make a success.

Costner and Hurt are easily the highlights for the film, interacting with each other over the nature of what they are bound to do with the kind of energy and interest that you would probably expect from a buddy film. Costner manages to pull off a entertaining performance, balancing the family man aspect of his role handily while also balancing his struggle to deal with his urges as if he was in a werewolf film. It's hard to resist seeing Hurt and his fiendish grin in his role as the alter ego, being watchable each time he appears on screen with his conversations, having fun with the mayhem that he lives on to compel Mr. Brooks to do. One big flaw that comes out from the cast is that there isn't anyone else in the film that actually gets up to the level of Costner and Hurt in terms of performance or presence. Moore plays her detective role with the kind of wooden nature that could only come from humorless television movies, but the more amusing thing is the threads that the film tries to stake on her character. She doesn't just play a detective, she plays a rich detective who does what she does for her own reasons, which the film likes to explain in the end as some sort of sting. In any case, there isn't any scene where she gives enough energy to make this role seem remotely interesting, being one of the lulls that stops the film's momentum. Would you expect that Moore's character has three plot-lines? Yes, between her investigation into the serial murders in the main thread, there is also the thread of her divorce and the thread about another killer that has escaped from jail that she put away that is in the pursuit of her - named the Hangman. The other lull is in Cook, playing a character seemingly devoid of charm or interest, which I suppose makes sense when playing someone who is trying to parrot Costner's character. Perhaps this would've worked if Cook (a stand-up comedian playing a dramatic role for some reason) actually made this person someone I wanted to be around with Costner and Hurt. Perhaps someone with a bit more charm (or possibly less time on screen) would've made the film run without less stoppage to it. Yes, the character is a slimy one, but it at least could've been a useful slimy one to be around with. Strangely enough, there isn't as much time for Helgenberger and Panabaker, who have minimal time on screen to be around Costner for this on-screen family. Maybe there would've been more for them to do if there had been sequels (and I put that generously), but there had to be another way to have them more involved. I feel like the parts with Costner and Panabaker should've had more of a focus, since she basically only has three brief scenes, and she basically disappears after the first hour. Yes, her character does have a function to at least one plot thread, but it doesn't really resonate as much as it could have. Spoiler alert, her character also committed a murder, as if she inherited it from her dad. Sure, why not. There are just as many plot threads than actual deaths in this film. By the time it gets to its climax, the film essentially collapses from exhaustion. It can be a creepy film sometimes, when it involves the nature of what makes Mr. Brooks who he is, but it isn't as effective as it probably should've been.

With all of its attempts to pull so many twists and narratives, the film can't quite execute at a fair rate, where there become so many threads that it almost feels needless. After a while, it becomes exhausting to wonder why there are so many plot threads going about in a film that probably should've just stuck to a bit more simple for a psychological thriller that manages to last two hours. When it wants to be just Costner and Hurt, the film works just fine, but when it tries to verge on others in its small cast, it feels a bit distracted and not too particularly focused. This may have worked better a television series with all the threads it wants to throw around, but even with that it mind, it's just a frustrating movie to sit through. I like the idea of where it wants to go with Costner and Hurt, but the final product just isn't enough to fully give thrills and satisfaction without becoming ridiculous and overstuffed. It's the kind of movie that might serve as a guilty pleasure for ones in the right mindset, or ones with more patience in mind for where it ultimately lingers.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

Gas-s-s-s.

Review #1136: Gas-s-s-s.

Cast: 
Robert Corff (Coel), Elaine Giftos (Cilla), Bud Cort (Hooper), Talia Shire (Coralee), Ben Vereen (Carlos), Cindy Williams (Marissa), Alex Wilson (Jason), George Armitage (Billy the Kid), and Country Joe McDonald (AM Radio) (#368 - The Little Shop of Horrors, #684 - It Conquered the World, #852 - The Terror, #931 - Not of This Earth, #1007 - Attack of the Crab Monsters, #1039 - Five Guns West, and #1042 - War of the Satellites)

Review: 
Gas-s-s-s (also known as Gas! or It Became Necessary to Destroy the World in Order to Save It) is a black comedy in search of laughs at the end of the world. Needless to say, this is a clunky picture to sit through, moving at a pace more sluggish than anything seen in other films involving the youth culture of the late 1960s, where even films such as Alice's Restaurant (1969) and Zabriskie Point (released months before this film) manage to generate better entertainment value than this in part because they seemed to know where they wanted to go as a film - for the most part. With this movie, I can't be so certain Corman knew where he wanted to go. Did he want to make a satire about the end of days with hippie children (all under the age of 25) being the only survivors? Or did he want to make a movie that essentially devolves into a bunch of sketches involving hippies that happen to be apocalyptic? The fact that the film is 79 minutes long is somewhat of a blessing, since the idea of watching hippies in the desert for longer than 90 minutes would likely result in an actual apocalypse in the movie theater. With an ensemble cast like this, one might wonder if there's any sort of chemistry to give some laughs. Unfortunately, this is not the case. Corff (who now serves as a voice coach for various films) doesn't really present much charisma at any point of the film, not giving many laughs. Giftos isn't too much better, and it's amusing to see how uncooked their scenes seem to be from beginning to end. The other members of the cast include people who would become prominent for other products in the decade such as Cort (wearing sunglasses for all of his screen-time), Shire (credited as Tally Coppola), and Williams (would later star in Laverne & Shirley), but I'll be darned if I could note any sort of performance that generates consistent laughter, as if aimlessness was supposed to be the punchline. The groups and people that the film showcases throughout its run-time is as such: a police force that controls Dallas, a cowboy who steals their car, a meat-ravenous football team, a biker group that likes to ride around in golf carts, and Edgar Allen Poe in a motorcycle, spouting references from his work with a bird and lady at his side. After a while, it can get easy for the eyes to start wandering away from the film, as if the attempts to be "hip" are coming off as toothless and absurd, and I can only imagine how it would've felt upon original release. This was the last film that Corman directed for American International Pictures, and he had conflicts with the main studio executives (and founders), James H. Nicholson and Samuel Z. Arkoff, particularly with the ending shot, which went from one involving the top of a mesa to a simple kiss between the main couple - needless to say, the film wasn't a particularly great success. Corman had his reasons for the film's problems, stating that it was "...far too intellectual. Other people have told me that they think it's a meaningless film." In short, my thoughts on the film fall under the latter part of his statement, and this is disappointing when compared to other Corman directed films. On the whole, this is a movie without much charm or success in reaching the audience it wanted to reach in 1970, and it isn't much of a film to sit through over four decades later.

Overall, I give it 3 out of 10 stars.

Magnum Force.

Review #1135: Magnum Force.

Cast: 
Clint Eastwood (Inspector Harry Callahan), Hal Holbrook (Lt. Neil Briggs), David Soul (Officer John Davis), Tim Matheson (Officer Phil Sweet), Kip Niven (Officer Alan "Red" Astrachan), Robert Urich (Officer Mike Grimes), Felton Perry (Inspector Earlington "Early" Smith), Mitchell Ryan (Officer Charlie McCoy), Bob McClurg (the Cab Driver), and John Mitchum (Inspector Frank DiGiorgio) Directed by Ted Post (#518 - Hang 'Em High and #662 - Beneath the Planet of the Apes)

Review: 
The original Dirty Harry was a great success as an action crime thriller upon release in 1971, having a great combination of talent and style to it, from Don Siegel as director to a screenplay written by Harry Julian Fink, R.M. Fink & Dean Riesner, with un-credited work from John Milius. This time around, the director is Ted Post, who had directed numerous television programs such as Rawhide (also starring Clint Eastwood) and The Twilight Zone along with a few feature films, with Milius doing the story and co-writing the screenplay with Michael Cimino (co-writer of the screenplay for Silent Running a year prior). It should be noted that there had been a draft for the original film written by Terrence Malick that had a vigilante who hunted wealthy criminals who had gotten free of justice, which certainly has a bit of similarity with the story that Milius came up with for the sequel - albeit with motorcycle cops. The original film certainly attracted attention (and controversy) with the way it portrayed its loose cannon main character and how he did business, but the movie was certainly a popular one due to how it reflected the time it was made. In any case, the sequel tries to follow that up with something fresh, with the villain being people more rogue than him. For the most part, Magnum Force does a fine job in generating entertainment and thrills enough to make for a decent sequel, although it certainly has its limitations. Eastwood is as tough and grizzled as ever, which certainly leads to a bunch of effective sequences, such as the one involving a pistol championship between the cops or a scene with the adversaries and Eastwood stating their differences. Holbrook does a fine job with the role, managing to not fall under the radar while providing a fair contrast between his character and the main with how they treat the system - made true with the last half. Soul and the other three cops are okay, but they pale when compared to the villain from the original, particularly since they feel a bit more disposable and not as creepy this time around - for better or worse. Perry makes an fair impression when with Eastwood as partners, for the most part. Ryan does okay with the raw bit of time he has on screen. The film certainly feels a bit long at 124 minutes (as compared to the original being 102 minutes), and it is likely due to occasional lulls in the middle. The climax does fine with helping the film end without stumbling too much, but it doesn't seem to have the kind of punch that stands out amongst other action thrillers. Milius wasn't a particular fan of the film, describing it as one he did not like much, saying "They changed a lot of things in a cheap and distasteful manner. The whole ending is wrong, it wasn't mine at all. All movies had a motorcycle or car chase at the time — except Westerns." the film certainly had its troubles, with Post and Eastwood having disagreements over how the film should be done, which led to a falling out. In any case, There certainly is a good amount of action that will satisfy people enough without being too brutal or too out of place. I can't say that this is a great film by any means, but it is at least fair entertainment and a fair sequel.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

A Simple Favor.

Review #1134: A Simple Favor.

Cast: 
Anna Kendrick (Stephanie Smothers), Blake Lively (Emily Nelson), Henry Golding (Sean Townsend-Nelson), Andrew Rannells (Darren), Ian Ho (Nicky Townsend-Nelson), Joshua Satine (Miles Smothers), Linda Cardellini (Diana Hyland), Rupert Friend (Dennis Nylon), and Jean Smart (Margaret McLanden) Directed by Paul Feig.

Review: 
What makes for a good mystery thriller film? Is it a commendable cast? The fun in where it can go with its story threads? Or competent craftsmanship? Perhaps it is a combination of these categories that apply to making a mystery thriller worth watching, and this is apparent with this film as well. Based on the novel of the same name by Darcey Bell, A Simple Favor aspires to throw in as many thrills and twists wrapped with bits of humor that makes this a satisfying piece of entertainment. It certainly comes off a surprise, since I hadn't heard about this movie until roughly a week ago, but the real surprise is how weird the film gets itself with the cliches of a thriller that manage to come off positively, where it never devolves into trying to get cheap laughs or not lose charm by twisting itself too thin. At the heart of the film's success is its cast of characters and its main duo of Kendrick and Lively. Kendrick is fun to watch, having an energetic and capable nature to her, having a spunky charm while also being interesting to follow in her pursuits throughout the film, inspiring attention and occasional laughs. Lively does well at playing a character best described as an enigma in a suit, having a biting wit that certainly fits with what the film wants to be, wrapped in mystery and bonkers nature that goes just fine with a film like this. Kendrick and Lively have a fun charm together in their scenes together, whether while drinking or dealing with the twists that go on. Golding does pretty well in his time on screen, having a fair charm to him that goes along with the main duo at times. The rest of the cast don't have too much time on screen, but they do fine with keeping the flow of the film going at a fair pace, with Cardellini standing out with a rough amusing charm for her one scene on screen. At 117 minutes, I didn't mind its length too much, particularly since the film takes a bit of a turn half-way through, throwing a few twists that makes this come off as a bit campy, but I enjoyed where it wanted to go, even if it may (amusingly) remind me of a Lifetime movie - for better or worse. The screenplay from Jessica Sharzer (writer for a few episodes of American Horror Story and Nerve from 2016) is executed well by Feig to make a film that doesn't relent on its mystery and thrills while not devolving too much into farce or being too complex. It's a weird and wild mystery thriller that will surely prove itself well for its audience looking for a fun time.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

The Messenger (2009).

Review #1133: The Messenger.

Cast: 
Ben Foster (Sgt. Will Montgomery), Woody Harrelson (Capt. Tony Stone), Samantha Morton (Olivia Pitterson), Jena Malone (Kelly), Steve Buscemi (Dale Martin), Yaya DaCosta (Monica Washington), and Eamonn Walker (LtCol. Stuart Dorsett) Directed by Oren Moverman.

Review: 
It feels hard to face the truth at times. The realities of life and how people deal with their actions and consequences can make for an interesting subject for a film to confront. With this film, the main focus in on casualty notification officers, with the main two being a trainee and his mentor, as they try to do their job - no matter how hard it may be, whether for the notifier or the person being notified. There is a dark but driving feel to the reality that it shows for these two and the people that they encounter in their mission that justifies its existence through a 113 minute run-time. It may fall a bit with pacing at times, but there is a sense of duty to tell a story worth wanting to see, being factual and punctual with showing emotion that never feels cynically manufactured in its episodic nature. Foster and Harrelson make for an interesting pair to follow with, where they are faced with trying to do the job they are assigned to do within the standards of the role while dealing with their own story-lines. Foster does a fine job with what he is given, balancing the trauma the character has to deal with while dealing the newfangled reality of his assignment - particularly the people he encounters. Harrelson stands out the most among the cast, having a hardened edge of sincerity and intensity that invites us to look at him with a inquisitive lens that keeps the movie moving along. Morton does fine with what's she is given for a role that occasionally invites focus of interest, and her chemistry with Foster is somewhat present, making for a few fair moments. Buscemi, with a presence of probably less than ten minutes on screen, does fine with showing a good range of emotion as one of the receivers of news from the main group. The movie is at its finest when trying to show honestly with the rough nature of the main duo's job, which makes the first half work a bit better than the second half, which isn't as too held together. The film has a few cliches to it, but it isn't anything that makes the material come off as anything other than fairly watchable. It isn't the kind of movie that had much success upon original release, having a limited run in few theaters before making just over a million dollars on a $6.5 million budget, although it did receive nominations for numerous awards, such as Best Original Screenplay at the Academy Awards for writers Alessandro Camon and Oren Moverman and Best Supporting Actor for Harrelson; in any case, this is a fairly decent film that manages to pull enough emotional honesty and focus from its main two actors to pull a victory out, and I'm sure it will work just fine for people in the mindset for something a bit different for a war drama.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1978).

Review #1132: Invasion of the Body Snatchers.

Cast: 
Donald Sutherland (Dr. Matthew Bennell), Brooke Adams (Elizabeth Driscoll), Leonard Nimoy (Dr. David Kibner), Jeff Goldblum (Jack Bellicec), Veronica Cartwright (Nancy Bellicec), and Art Hindle (Dr. Geoffrey Howell) Directed by Philip Kaufman (#892 - The Right Stuff)

Review: 
It would only make sense for a science fiction novel such as Jack Finney's The Body Snatchers to have multiple adaptations into film. With Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1956), there was an intent to make a competent and intelligent horror sci-fi thriller, with a consistent message on the nature of conformity and autonomy for the time it was made, being made on a budget of less than half of a million dollars (with the budget for this film being roughly three million). Studio heads butted heads with director Don Siegel over the nature of the ending and other aspects that you might say conformed to the standards of the time - for better or worse. I enjoyed the film for its elements mentioned above, but I can't say I'm too surprised that a remake was released 22 years later. If you have an interesting idea to update the story and make something watchable out of it, naturally you should try to make that into a film.

It is easy to say that this film represents the decade it was made in, updating itself in its structure and tone that makes for a gloomy but reasonably intelligent experience. It certainly amps up the effects and implications involved with conspiracy and paranoia, especially considering the setting being San Francisco instead of the small-town setting from the earlier film and the novel. It comes off as a brilliant decision that highlights how easy conformity can spread and not have many people notice, where a person can lose themselves in a big town and all the complexities that can go with it - such as self-help psychiatrists for example. If you thought a small town could lead to a threat like pod people encircling everyone quickly, a city will certainly make it seem quicker to conform.  Sutherland does pretty well in the main role, handling the situations thrown at him capably enough that makes him someone worth watching. It's hard to who exactly is the better lead, but I do find myself leaning a bit towards Kevin McCarthy, particularly when he makes an appearance in one scene. Perhaps it is the style that the film used to dictate its story and the way that McCarthy rolls with it that proves the difference. In any case, the scene with him is certainly a shocking surprise, resembling the scene from the original. Whether it is just a homage or a continuation of the events of the original (doubtful) is up to you, although it should be noted that the director of the original film (Siegel) also appears in the film as a cab driver. Adams is fine, having a range of concern and will that makes her watchable alongside Sutherland, and they have a decent amount of chemistry together. Nimoy is interesting to watch, skeptical and calculating that works to the film's advantage, particularly near the last third. Goldblum is quirky as one can be, showing the neurosis of his character without becoming annoying or too offbeat when shown with the other characters. Cartwright is okay, but she doesn't particularly stand out as well as the others in any substantial way, especially when compared to the other four. There is a helpless feeling of terror and conspiracy all-throughout the film, alongside moment of horror, such as the scene with the pods trying to form duplicates of the group, showing the details of the process pretty satisfyingly (through the effects-work by Russel Hessey and Dell Rheaume). The opening sequence involving the pods coming through space and coming to Earth on a dreary day is also a pretty interesting one. A good share of the credit for the film's good moments goes to Kaufman and screenwriter W. D. Richter (who later directed The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai Across the 8th Dimension) in making something that stands out in its own way.

The sound and music certainly help the film stick out in its own way, helping deliver striking moments of chills. Ben Burtt contributed Special Sound Effects for the film, while the film score was composed by jazz composer Denny Zeitlin, his only film score. Michael Chapman, cinematographer for films such as Taxi Driver (1976), does well at giving the film a panicked look, with occasional different angled shots that have their varying level of suspense. The length of the film certainly stands out, for better or worse. The original lasted 80 minutes, while this one lasts 115 minutes. The film doesn't border on boring, but it certainly has times where the length nearly becomes an anchor that could've been trimmed just a bit. It seems to linger a bit too much at times, but the climax is a pretty memorable one, having a fitting cold fear to it that works for the intent made by Kaufman. On the whole, I enjoyed the film for the most part due to it managing to justify its existence in terms of its narrative and most of its choices of style and casting. There are some who list it as one of the best film remakes ever. It isn't my favorite remake (The Thing (1982), which also has its share of paranoia, comes to mind), but I can say that this is a pretty good case for when a remake can go right. Instead of trying to just be different for the sake of difference or being an outright copy, a remake can stand-out for what it can cover in story and characters and make fine entertainment like this movie.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Motel Hell.

Review #1131: Motel Hell.

Cast: 
Rory Calhoun (Vincent Smith), Paul Linke (Sheriff Bruce Smith), Nancy Parsons (Ida Smith), Nina Axelrod (Terry), Wolfman Jack (Reverend Billy), Elaine Joyce (Edith Olson), Dick Curtis (Guy Robaire / 1st TV Preacher), Monique St. Pierre (Debbie), and Rosanne Katon (Suzi) Directed by Kevin Connor.

Review: 
Motel Hell is a weird, off-beat dark comedy that has a late-night appeal and charm through the power of a game cast and a fairly consistent tone. It's a horror film with unsettling material, but it also is a black comedy that has a share of laughs that never seem overbearing in any respect. It isn't a masterpiece by any standard, but it's the kind of movie that generates some enjoyment through strange material - after all, one of the taglines for the film is this: "It takes all kinds of critters ... to make Farmer Vincent's fritters." The key to the film's success is the performances of Calhoun and Parsons, partners in a unique kind of harvest for sausages, and I suppose it makes sense that the film has had comparisons to The Texas Chain Saw Massacre (1974), directed by Tobe Hooper. In fact, the original intent was to have him direct the film (which had plenty of dark elements and violence) for Universal Studios, but when they decided to not go through with production, Hooper bowed out (with United Artists later serving as distributor). It was the bringing in of Connor (known for work such as The Land That Time Forgot) as director that led to changes to a black comedy, with a tongue-in-cheek feel. Robert Jaffe and Steven-Charles Jaffe served as writers and producers for the film, with the former having served as co-writer of Demon Seed (1977), a film just as weird as this one with its premise. It is the performances of Calhoun and Parsons that make the film click handily enough. Calhoun has a country-style manner that mixes in with a warped sense of view that seems readily easy to go along with. Parsons is a bit more bonkers with her role, but she never comes off as a full-off cartoon of delusion or too underplayed for farmers turning people into food. Linke plays the oblivious sheriff type as okay as one can play when trying to keep up with not only weird farmers but also a love triangle. Axelrod, the fourth and final one of the main group is okay, but she doesn't really have much to give to a fleeting amount of time of sitting there with Calhoun in an offbeat sort of chemistry that isn't as particularly interesting as the horror parts. In the supporting cast is Jack in short bursts and Joyce & Curtis playing swingers that get the special treatment from the farmers that proves amusing. The middle proves to be a bit of a lull, but the first third and last third makes the patience worth it. The highlight of the film proves to be the climax, involving a chainsaw fight, complete with maniacal laughing and one certain mask that makes the experience a satisfaction in sleaze, complete with a lasting line that makes more sense to watch than just have revealed in text. It won't prove too daunting at 102 minutes, and while it may not be the best type of horror-comedy for everyone's taste, I found myself enjoying it enough for its weird but interesting choices for entertainment, preferably late at night.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

The Best Little Whorehouse in Texas.

Review #1130: The Best Little Whorehouse in Texas.

Cast: 
Burt Reynolds (Sheriff Ed Earl Dodd), Dolly Parton (Mona Stangley), Dom DeLuise (Melvin P. Thorpe), Charles Durning (The Governor), Theresa Merritt (Jewel), Jim Nabors (Deputy Fred), Lois Nettleton (Dulcie Mae), Noah Beery Jr. (Edsel), Robert Mandan (Senator Charles Wingwood), and Barry Corbin (C.J.) Directed by Colin Higgins.

Review: 
Admittedly, some films can have some interesting back-story to them. This film, for example, was adapted from the 1978 musical of the same name by Larry L. King and Peter Masterson, who had developed the musical loosely based on events that occurred in La Grange, Texas in 1973. The two contributed to writing the film alongside director Higgins (who had written films such as Harold and Maude), with this being his third and final directed effort before his death in 1988. Carol Hall, writer of the music and lyrics for the musical, contributed to the music for the film alongside Parton, in her second film role after 9 to 5 (1980). One of the production companies involved with the film is Miller-Milkis-Boyett Productions (named for its three people involved, Thomas L. Miller, Edward K. Milkis, and Robert L. Boyett), with them being responsible for producing shows such as Happy Days and Laverne & Shirley alongside films of their own such as Silver Streak (1976) and Foul Play (1978).

With all of that in mind, the film proves to be a fair if not flawed charmer. It doesn't come off as a surprise that the film fell to cuts (reportedly the original version lasted roughly two-and-a-half-hours), particularly when the film starts and ends with Nabors giving off narration to help with telling parts of the story, and that certainly feels a bit weird for something that lasts 114 minutes. At the heart of trying to provide charm is the duo of Reynolds and Parton, who certainly seem to want to generate excitement, particularly when singing together. For the most part, they do a fine job in providing a chuckle and a smile, but it isn't anything too greatly special that you would see from other musicals. Reynolds pulls off his typical swagger and mischievous charm with the kind of effort you expect from him. Parton comes off as appealing and interesting to watch that I don't find too surprising - making the character come alive with a good sense of humor. Their duet song "Sneakin Around" is a decent one to listen to with a foot-tap or two. DeLuise essentially plays a caricature of any sort of "decency police" huckster with the kind of zip and edge (alongside a wardrobe suited for spectacle) that certainly plays fine against the coziness of Reynolds and Parton. Durning stands out in part due to his song "The Sidestep" that certainly clicks as an ear-worm while also being pretty amusing, particularly for the character played. Nabors (who sings the first song of the movie with "20 Fans") is quirky but a welcome presence for a film trying to balance humor with music. The other members of the cast are okay, but the real focus is the main trio, with occasional parts of raunchiness. The movie moves itself at a gradual pace with trying to go through its material with flashes of singing and humor that comes off okay. Its story does sometimes stumble when it comes to its romance, and the cuts made to the film perhaps play a big part in making it have a bit less meat to it than the aspects with songs. One of the more amusing sequences involves Reynolds confronting DeLuise in the town public square, complete with gruff language and a fountain. While I can say that I knew pretty quickly that it was not going to be a great kind of movie, I found myself enjoying it enough to make the experience worth it.

On a sadder note, I would like to say my respects to Burt Reynolds, who died on September 6. In the eight films I have viewed that have featured Reynolds, there is not one performance that isn't in some way memorable or entertaining. His performance in Deliverance is especially one that stands out amongst other fun times delivered in movies such as The Longest Yard and Smokey and the Bandit. I'll end this with a quote from the man himself - "All you really have in the end are your stories.”

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Scream and Scream Again.

Review #1129: Scream and Scream Again.

Cast: 
Vincent Price (Dr. Browning), Christopher Lee (Fremont), Peter Cushing (Major Heinrich Benedek), Judy Huxtable (Sylvia), Alfred Marks (Detective Superintendent Bellaver), Michael Gothard (Keith), Marshall Jones (Konratz), Uta Levka (Jane), Christopher Matthews (Dr. David Sorel), Anthony Newlands (Ludwig), Peter Sallis (Schweitz), Judy Bloom (Helen Bradford), and Clifford Earl (Detective Sergeant Jimmy Joyce) Directed by Gordon Hessler.

Review: 
Editor's note: Movie Night will likely have delays with release of certain reviews in part due to my obligations with my new job - in other words, when I have time to write and post, I'll try to get it done, preferably with at least one or two reviews a week. I honestly did not intend to write over a thousand words for this review, yet here we are. I hope you enjoy this review in any case.

The movie is adapted from a novel called The Disorientated Man by Peter Saxon. Peter Saxon was a house pseudonym used by various authors of pulp fiction during the 1960s and 1970s, such as W. Howard Baker, Stephen Frances and others. In the book, aliens tried to colonize the Earth through making synthetic creatures made from people abducted and murdered by the group. The events depicted are done as a series of events that seem unrelated at first - such as people's limbs being taken away from them, investigation of a "vampire murderer", and a brutal foreign country dealing with diplomacy, for example. It generally is considered to be a science fiction conspiracy thriller, with bits of horror. With billing that promotes Price, Lee and Cushing all-together in one film, the expectation (at least for someone like me, anyways) is that there is a product that gives them something interesting to do. Perhaps it is that billing (or a title that invites horror connotations like this does) that makes the eventual result a disappointment. The real focus of actors involves not so much Price or Lee, but people such as Huxtable, Marks, Gothard, and Matthews, with Price only getting real substantial screen-time near the climax. The screenplay was done by Christopher Wicking, who had contributed additional dialogue for The Oblong Box (1969), which shared the same director while starring Lee and Price and having cinematography by John Coquillon (known for cinematography of films such as Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid).

The collage of plot threads would be interesting if things didn't go in such a boring manner as if to produce frustration. For the most part, the film's focus is on its crime thriller angle, with occasional bits of horror before playing sci-fi late in the game. It's like they couldn't figure out whether to be a paranoia-conspiracy thriller or a mad scientist film, so they just threw things in a blender and hoped that people wouldn't care about it making not much sense because it was so "entertaining" - or something like that. Price is the highlight, taking things in stride with a calm and collected manner that nearly makes having to sit through an hour to get more Price involvement. Lee is in the film for probably less than ten minutes (for a movie that runs at 95 minutes), having minimal presence until its climax. He says his lines without too much semblance of emotion, but no one in this film seems to show any particularly interesting emotional responses. Cushing was added in at the last minute to help with box office appeal, having just one scene. With three minutes of screen presence, it is sometimes easy to forget why he can be enjoyable to watch. Then I realize it is the fact that he brings a certain legitimacy and entertainment value to whatever role he brings, and I was thinking of that quite clearly when watching his scene because it reminds me that there isn't quite enough entertainment value from many of the cast-mates, including Jones, the one who nerve pinches Cushing to death. Huxtable doesn't make too much of an impression in a film that likes to talk and show imagery but not go anywhere with it. Gothard, the first adversary for the film (amusingly dubbed a "vampire killer" at one point), can't really make much of an impression aside from a bit of a frenzied face and a ruffled shirt, and the chase sequence is a doozy of amusement. It goes from a car chase to a chase in a quarry to one that ends back at a house where the killer just jumps in a pool of acid. In a better film, maybe it would've felt more interesting and exciting, but it's more of an amusing thing to look at, particularly their attempts to try and chase him down on foot.

Marks plays his police role with a dryness that invites a cursory watch but doesn't give off anything too charismatic. He does get some occasional offbeat lines, such as when being asked about murder: "Is it murder? Don't be so bloody stupid!" Matthews isn't too much better as the second figure to follow, but he plays things off okay at least. Jones plays a somewhat towering adversary that can't inspire much menace besides a mild unintentional chuckle. The other actors aren't too particularly memorable. By the time the film gets somewhere with its climax involving Price, it gets particularly amusing. A movie that likes to confound and confuse decides to shift into a quasi-Frankenstein film. Then again, the Hammer Frankenstein films were actually more interesting to look at and even more amusing to think about. The ideas presented involving creating some sort of composite people is far more interesting than anything the film tried to do for its first half. But truly, nothing can top a fight sequence involving an acid bath between Price and Lee, where they share the screen for a minute before Lee forces Price into the bath not by pushing him, but by...staring and towering over him, I guess. The sight of Price's face as he accepts his fate is particularly amusing, as if someone was dangling rotted cheese behind him. Reportedly, Price and Lee couldn't take the scene seriously, with Lee struggling to keep a straight face at the idea of Price (who didn't use a stunt double for the scene) sinking into some yellowy acid, which apparently affected Price due to the stuff affecting his nose that gave him nasal sinus for years afterwards. By the time the film ends, the idea of pondering what its final moments entail seem like a fruitless challenge, since expressing frustration at the junk produced on screen seems more appropriate. On the whole, this is an amusing misfire that knows to confuse its audiences with a barrage of images and junk without having an entertaining or even intriguing plot to go with it, with Price being the only real saving grace. The only real shock the film has is how much of a mess it is.

Overall, I give it 5 out of 10 stars.