Cast:
Chuck Norris (Colonel James Thomas Braddock), Soon-Tek Oh (Colonel Yin), Steven Williams (Captain David Nester), Bennett Ohta (Captain Ho), Cosie Costa (Lieutenant Anthony Mazilli), Joe Michael Terry (Corporal Lawrence Opelka), Christopher Cary (Emerson), John Wesley (Master Sergeant Ernest Franklin), David Chung (Dou Chou), and Professor Toru Tanaka (Lao) Directed by Lance Hool.
Review:
You might remember that with Missing in Action (1984), there were two movies done back-to-back about a man trapped in a North Vietnamese POW camp that eventually broke out from there and years later traveled with an investigation team wondering if there was any US soldier still out there. Well, the movie about the man going back to the jungle somehow seemed more commercially appealing than the movie about being in a POW camp, so with the planned first movie, they simply just named it "The Beginning". The script for this film (made for roughly over $2 million) was written by Arthur Silver, Larry Levinson, and Steve Bing. This actually was the directorial debut of Lance Hool, who had served as producer on films such as Wolf Lake (1979) and The Evil That Men Do (1984) while spending many years in the Mexican film industry. Hool has sticked mostly to producing movies, but he has directed three other movies as well, with the latest one being 2 Hearts [2020]. Chuck Norris once stated that his films "do deal with certain positive things", believing that people went to see them because of the feel-good endings and stating that one great thrill of his life was hearing people applaud at the end of Missing in Action (1984); he participated in those movies as a tribute to his brother Wieland and also remarked that Vietnam "was a tragic mistake. If you don't want to win the battle, don't get involved.'' Four years later, with a script written by James Bruner and Chuck Norris with direction by his brother Aaron, Braddock: Missing in Action III came out from Cannon Films, complete with yet another different supporting cast around its star.
You would think a movie where Norris has to at least sell the perils of being trapped in a POW camp (with a 95-minute runtime) would be an interesting prospect to set up a tense experience before the inevitable climax. But all you get here is just a movie too wrapped in flat routines. It's not enough for a POW camp to have a guy leading the way in sadistic torture, complete with an actual (dead) rat used in one scene with a bag, no he also grows opium for a side hustle in drugs too. You might say that a good deal of action movies has routines they have to live by, but some of them at least have the energy to back up any audacious moments. Here, you have a movie that is probably only truly interesting with a scene involving, well, a rat. John Wayne impersonation or not, Norris is just too stoic here, somehow having as little personality as possible. Oh may have some of the smug and sadistic qualities needed for an adversary this film desperately requires, but there is still something so hollow in the writing beyond what you might see from the old-fashioned exploitation films of yesteryear. Hell, probably the one thing that sticks out from him is that he and the villain have a fistfight at the end because they share the same rationale of "nah, I can't just shoot him, I must beat him head-on" before the ending decides that, wait, you gotta blow him up too just for good measure. Williams probably is the highlight among most (if not all) of the cast*, mainly because his struggle with his own surroundings as one with the illusion of freedom, but it can only go so far with such few scenes (one being a fistfight, naturally) that it almost seems pointless. The time spent in captivity might be interesting to those who probably thought The Deer Hunter (1978) was too subtle. The movie may believe it has the energy and commitment to have its first half of misery follow with the action-packed climax mesh well together, but it really just comes off as a puddle. I called the other Missing in Action "an action cheese fest", but at least it had gall to set forth on that goal. In general, the movie is probably best serviceable for those who cared about the first film, whether that is the dull sense of the word or not, but this is a movie made on the cheap that really needed fleshing out, because the end result is just too cardboard in its one-sided goals to rise above D-grade entertainment.
Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.
*Tanaka (Charles J. Kalani Jr) was actually a boxer-turned-wrestler-turned-actor and he barely has anything to do besides be the heavy. Incidentally, four of the main ten cast members of the film don't even have Wikipedia pages.
No comments:
Post a Comment