The Company of Wolves.

Review #2613: The Company of Wolves.

Cast:

Sarah Patterson (Rosaleen), Angela Lansbury (Granny), David Warner (Father), Tusse Silberg (Mother), Micha Bergese (Huntsman), Brian Glover (Amorous Boy's father), Graham Crowden (Old Priest), Kathryn Pogson (Young Bride), Stephen Rea (Young Groom), Georgia Slowe (Alice, Girl Killed by Wolves), Susan Porrett (Amorous Boy's mother), Shane Johnstone (Amorous Boy), Dawn Archibald (Witch Woman), Richard Morant (Wealthy Groom), with Danielle Dax (Wolfgirl), Jim Carter (Second Husband), and Terence Stamp (The Devil) Directed by Neil Jordan.

Review: 

"In a normal film you have a story with different movements that program, develop, go a little bit off the trunk, come back, and end. In this film, the different movements of the plot are actually separate stories. You start with an introduction and then move into different stories that relate to the main theme, all building to the fairy tale that everybody knows. The opening element of the dreamer gave us the freedom to move from story to story."

I figured that with all of the ideas around for anthology horror movies, what about ones that happened to stray a different path? In 1979, there was a collection of short stories published called The Bloody Chamber that had been written by Angela Carter. Among the ten stories included "The Company of Wolves"'. These were stories in which Carter aimed to "extract the latent content from the traditional stories", as opposed to what others might call adult renditions of fairy tales (such as "Bluebeard", Beauty and the Beast, and in the case of Wolves, "Little Red Riding Hood". This was only the second movie for Neil Jordan, who had studied literature and history before becoming involved in student theatre and later television in his native Ireland. He met Carter at a writer's conference, and she wanted to do a screen version of one of her stories rather than, say, a 30-minute thing for a TV company. Jordan later stated that to him, the film is a "fairy tale" while challenging the notion that it had to belong to any category of horror, fantasy, or as a children's film. With shooting in England that dealt with heightened sense of reality in mind (per Jordan's ideas) from production designer Anton Furst to go against a limited budget, most of what was desired came across on screen, save for the ending, where they wanted akin to diving onto a floor rather than, well, what you get with wolves and screams. Chris Tucker (of The Elephant Man fame) was behind the effects behind the wolf transformation scenes (most of the wolves used were actually dyed dogs). Carter was involved in one further adaptation with The Magic Toyshop in 1987 for cinemas/television prior to her death in 1992 at the age of 51; both of her screenplays were included in the collection The Curious Room.

Oh sure, "fantasy-horror" is one thing, but having a structure akin to a Chinese box (one box fitting within the next) is fascinating enough here for at least one check within its 95 minute runtimee. So, what are those embedded stories? Well, they come around as someone dreams from their country house about being in an old village with a forest that revolve around a few tales of a young groom with a unibrow (yes, yes, "eyebrows that meet", granny could only know so much) that has a call of nature to see him go away for a time, another involves a unibrow man that encounters a dark-suited man in a car (with one neat cameo) with a potion to offer, another story offers a woman appearing at a wedding party to put wrong to right (devastating fun), and the last tale involves a she-wolf who gets shot and bandaged before going back into the night. And in the midst of that, you get to see some time with Lansbury playing a superstitious grandmother for a good chunk of time. It's a macabre tale that some will probably read with "Freud" on the mind (who among us sees wolves in a sensual matter? well, I don't say that, but...) while others like me have a chuckle at the tales provided in offbeat charm. Patterson accompanied a friend to an audition and wound up being cast. Her vulnerability in the face of development of growing up and looking at the world as one to actually be involved in beyond seeing things as either made of snips (and sails & puppy dog tails) or sugar (and spice & everything nice).  It isn't a movie for going along with the narrative in a straight line, but the horrors of growing up and seeing the world around you for what it really, madly, truly, deeply, looks like. You look at the movie and feel entrapped in a dream that is worth seeing all the way through for what comes in and out in reading the film besides the head-rolling, wolf-splashing time seen here. Horror, fantasy, fairy tale(s), it's a good time for the season.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Song of the day!

*This is like when people discuss if Peeping Tom was actually a horror movie - stop lying to yourself! This is almost as annoying as those who don't like too much gore in their horror movies.

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.

Song of the day!

Next up: A mystery...

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

Supergirl.

Review #2397: Supergirl.

Cast: 

Helen Slater (Kara Zor-El / Linda Lee / Supergirl), Faye Dunaway (Selena), Peter O'Toole (Zaltar), Hart Bochner (Ethan), Mia Farrow (Alura In-Ze), Brenda Vaccaro (Bianca), Peter Cook (Nigel), Simon Ward (Zor-El), Marc McClure (Jimmy Olsen), Maureen Teefy (Lucy Lane), and David Healy (Mr. Danvers) Directed by Jeannot Szwarc (#555 - Jaws 2)

 

Review: 

“Physically it’s not at all the prototype of a superhero the way Superman is. Superman was the man of steel and he’s big, he’s got muscles et cetera…she has superpowers [that] are the same…but where Superman is power and strength, [Supergirl] is more like style and elegance.” 

You might wonder where Supergirl came from. Well, it only took a few years (read: 1959) for Otto Binder and Al Plastino (the two credited creators of the character as writer and illustrator, respectively) to introduce the original character to Action Comics that had a cousin to Superman arrive from a doomed place that ended up raised as "Linda Lee" (later adopted to add Danvers) in an orphanage. Basically, the character was created in the same headspace that created super-powered pets to accompany the hero. Anyway, you might remember that when the Salkinds (Alexander, Ilya) bought the film rights to Superman in 1975 by paying money to Warner Bros to license the intellectual property, it also included the character of Supergirl. The Salkinds actually wanted to use the character in Superman III to maybe make a spinoff movie....but Warner Bros. apparently vetoed it (pity, good luck settling with Richard Pryor). At any rate, the two announced their plans to do a Supergirl movie in 1982 and had ideas in mind to maybe have Christopher Reeve appear in a bit role to set up a quest...and then he didn't want to appear in the movie. At least he suggested Jeannot Szwarc (who he worked with on Somewhere in Time [1980]) should direct the movie, since the Salkinds couldn't even get Robert Wise to do the movie. The screenplay was written by David Odell (well, it was re-written heavily, but still), who had written for films such as The Dark Crystal (1982) and later Masters of the Universe (1987). There somehow exists three different versions of the film to consider. The original cut of the movie was 138 minutes long, but test audiences apparently thought it was a bit too long, necessitating cuts. So, you would think it would be settled at having 124 minutes for the runtime...but no! The 124-minute version was released internationally, but somehow, American audiences got a version that lasted just 105 minutes (namely by trimming more sequences from Argo City, Midvale, etc). By 2000, one could finally check out the director's cut and International Cut on home media. Made for roughly over $30 million (as distributed by Tri-Star Pictures, who bent to the Salkinds wishing to release the movie in the winter of 1984 rather than in the summer), the movie was a general flop with audiences. Interestingly, in the comic books, the character was killed off (for a number of years, anyway) in the famed series Crisis on Infinite Earths. Slater never played the character again on film, but she appeared in the Supergirl TV series a few decades later. This was the last hurrah for the Salkinds and Super-people on film, as they sold to the Cannon Group in 1985 for the disaster that became Superman IV in 1987*.

Basically, if you didn't care much for Superman III (1983), you will find the exact level of disinterest for Supergirl (1984). Both are tired efforts that show clear strain in all of its flabby flatness, which starts with the movie looking like a failed TV movie production and ends with a climax that does not exactly warrant further adventures. They clearly wanted to have their big-name stars lift up a young would-be name just like six year prior, but the cracks are apparent everywhere. Imitating how they cast Christopher Reeve years earlier in looking for an unknown, Helen Slater had quite the qualification of having been in exactly one TV episode and zero movies prior to Supergirl (hey, they also tested out folks like Demi Moore and Brooke Shields). Honestly, she does fine with the material that shows a naive but charming would-be hero that you could definitely like for other adventures (okay maybe not with the school stuff, that whole "changes hair color and costume" BS only works when stoned). Bochner, on the other hand, has nothing to work with as the romantic interest, and it doesn't help that a chunk of the time sees him under a love potion. Teefy and McClure (the only link to the Superman films) aren't worth talking about. Evidently, Dunaway must've loved Mommie Dearest (1982) so much that she decided eating the scenery in hammy acting needed seconds. Sure, we know she is a worthwhile actress, but the material she is given here is so weak that she has no choice but to ham it up to try and distract the viewer that is barely above the middling villainous comic book movie presence you saw in the aforementioned third Superman movie. She's supposed to be self-centered and a terror with what power can do to someone, but she just seems more man-hungry than anything, considering that she is first wrapped up in getting a man to drink some love potion and when her powers of persuasion fail, she needs the guy she ditched to do the job for her (oh but then she sends a woman into a phantom zone). Incidentally, she gets stopped only when a man intervenes (first when one of them fiddles with the magic ball thing and the second when the warlock that she decided to betray after getting his help in the first place tells our hero, who had to be told that she could go on *twice* beforehand, how to get the villain trapped). Honestly, they might've done better if Cook or O'Toole were the villains. It isn't even worth giving Vaccaro criticism beyond saying that Ned Beatty could've done this goon shtick in his sleep**. It's funny that Cook is supposed to be playing both a warlock and a teacher but looks like he would rather being doing a bit instead. In theory, Farrow was meant to be a big name to draw attention to the film and deliver drama to the movie...and she gets less time on screen than O'Toole, a far more talented actor even when he is phoning it in. The effects are okay, but in general, the movie looks too tired to be anything other than campy cheese. It might work out for those who love to view the films of camp or the old days of failed franchises, but it probably was for the best that it went by the wayside.

Overall, I give it 5 out of 10 stars.

*Interestingly, the Salkinds still had the chance to do other things away from Superman, they developed a television series based on the character of Superboy later in the decade.

**Beatty and Vaccaro were both nominated for Academy Awards, you know. But Beatty had a hell of a speech in Network (1976), so we salute him. And I guess we will find a worthy Mia Farrow movie to watch that isn't made by the overrated Woody Allen someday.

Repo Man.

Review #2338: Repo Man.

Cast:

Harry Dean Stanton (Bud), Emilio Estevez (Otto Maddox), Tracey Walter (Miller), Olivia Barash (Leila), Sy Richardson (Lite), Vonetta McGee (Marlene), Richard Foronjy (Arnold Plettschner), Susan Barnes (Agent Rogersz), Fox Harris (J. Frank Parnell), Tom Finnegan (Oly), Del Zamora (Lagarto Rodriguez), Eddie Velez (Napoleon "Napo" Rodriguez), Zander Schloss (Kevin), and Jennifer Balgobin (Debbi) Written and Directed by Alex Cox.

Review:

"Nuclear War.  Of course. What else could it be about?  And the demented society that contemplated the possibility thereof.  Repoing people’s cars and hating alien ideologies were only the tip of the iceberg.  The iceberg itself was the maniac culture which had elected so-called “leaders” named Reagan and Thatcher, who were prepared to sacrifice everything — all life on earth — to a gamble based on the longevity of the Soviet military, and the whims of their corporate masters."

Admittedly, it isn't every day you get to cover a director who basically used up Hollywood for a few movies and then got shuttered into independent work in the span of a decade. Cox was educated at the University of Bristol in film studies and got a scholarship to UCLA with its School of Theater, Film, and Television. Repo Man came about when Cox approached two UCLA friends about producing a film (since they were doing commercials), having failed to get a script about a World War I deserter off the ground. Cox wrote a script about nuclear blast veterans and thieves that was thought of as too expensive, so he then went on a script that was based on "my own personal Los Angeles horrors" along with a neighbor that happened to be a repo man. A key influence was also a script called "Leather Rubberneck" that had been written by an acting student named Dick Rude that had insight about punk culture (incidentally, Rude plays a minor character in this film). Eventually, "Repo Man" attracted enough attention to get Universal Pictures to do distribution, although the studio dragged its feet in actually releasing the movie for a time (to the point where the soundtrack probably had more to do with the movie getting out than anything). The movie was a light success at the time it was released in 1984. His second venture with Sid & Nancy (1986), a loose biopic of Sid Vicious and his relationship with, well, Nancy Spungen, has become a cult curiosity in recent times. Straight to Hell (1987) wasn't exactly a commercial hit (he elected to make it rather than Three Amigos), but any movie that tries to play Spaghetti Western with cameos that revolve from Dennis Hopper to the Circle Jerks can't be all bad. And then there was Walker (1987), a movie released by Universal Pictures that was filmed in Nicaragua during the Contra War loosely based on the life story of William Walker (a "president of Nicaragua") that received polarized reviews and got Cox on a "blacklist" from the major studios when it came to distribution. Cox could not find a job in Hollywood because of the failure of the film and also because he was blacklisted from the Writers Guild because of his work on scripts during a strike in the late 1980s. Cox persisted on with productions that would be made in a variety of places such as Highway Patrolman (which premiered in its native Mexico in 1991), Liverpool productions in Revengers Tragedy (2002), "microfeatures" in Repo Chick (2009) or crowdfunded ventures with Bill, the Galactic Hero (2014). Overall, Cox has directed thirteen films (with plans for a movie of the novel Dead Souls possible, even in his seventies) while also serving as a professor in film production and screenwriting at the University of Colorado at Boulder for a number of years.

For a feature debut, this is a pretty slick movie. It will vary a bit in how much time it takes to really get into its satirical bent, but it ends up delivering a few good laughs with a worthwhile atmosphere that seems strangely in-tune to the times of now when it comes to the wide variety of characters one sees in the film that range from working men with habits (read: speed) to punks to strange travelers that wander in and out of the plot while one can see packages of food or drink with generic labels (evidently there was a time when one really could just buy generic-brand stuff at a market). Basically, it is the kind of movie that would fit right in being paired with Suburbia (1983) or a Roger Corman type of feature, complete with abject paranoia built right in. The days of living by codes or standards are flying by the wayside so one might as well live with the chaos that reigns free in "society among us". Estevez achieves that tightrope that arises in detached timing that sells the disillusionment that comes in growing youth and seeing hucksters all along the path that makes for a few good amusing lines, mostly because he sells the trip in actual commitment to what a punk looks like without just being a mug. Stanton has the disposition of a guy ripped out of a Western that he sells for a grizzled sense of charm and, well, humor in causal intensity, one that actually has a quote about hating ordinary people, which, well, it does kind of ring true for a certain type of working man. The rest of the cast is comprised of a few good kooks that range from Harris and basically being a man of both the background and foreground (consider where the movie jumps after the start) or the wide expression in Walter. The 92-minute runtime coasts along with confidence for its quirky characters and blend of genres for a fun time to think about when it rides off to the climax. Cox had an idea for a sequel in the late 1990s but never got to do it the way he wanted. Named "Waldo's Hawaiian Holiday", it was adapted into a graphic novel in 2008. In general, what we have is a pretty decent comedy that runs the gamut in punk flavor for expressing a howl at the times one is living in when it comes to consumerism and the presence of nuclear war in the face of all absurdities for a strange little fable.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Might as well update you with the upcoming stuff ahead as we march onto the last few days of New Director Month:

Pedro Almodóvar - Women on the Verge of a Nervous Breakdown 

Todd Haynes - Safe (1995). 

However, I have a special surprise coming up on Sunday, after not being able to do so last January. Be ready.

Bolero (1984).

Review #2315: Bolero.

Cast: 

Bo Derek (Ayre “Mac” McGillvary), George Kennedy (Cotton), Andrea Occhipinti (Rejoneador Angel Sacristan), Ana Obregon (Catalina), Olivia d'Abo (Paloma), Greg Bensen (Sheik), Ian Cochrane (Robert Stewart), and Mirta Miller (Evita) Written and Directed by John Derek.

Review: 

The best way to talk about these weird Derek-Derek films is to just go with it. The Hollywood-born John Derek had the looks to score a few bit parts in the 1940s before getting a break with being cast in Nicholas Ray's Knock on Any Door (1949). Derek would do a handful of films in the studio system era along with a select group of European productions but was on record for saying he never liked acting, with one trouble listed by him being his "monotone voice". He pursued directing and photography while marrying and divorcing three wives. He did work on Nightmare in the Sun (1965) as a co-producer before making his feature debut with Once Before I Die (1966). In total, he made eight feature films as a director, half of which starred Bo Derek. Born Mary Collins, she had decided to go to Greece to do a movie with Derek rather than continue to attend high school (she was 16 in 1972). The two had an affair that just happened to lead to the two marrying and returning to the States in 1976 (as for the film, Fantasies was released in 1981). Anyway, it was her appearance in 10 (1979) that raised her presence to the public (cornrow hair and all). A Change of Seasons (1980) and Tarzan, the Ape Man (1981) would follow, with the latter being her first "starring" role that was directed by her husband. What better association for the Dereks to have with Bolero and Cannon Films? Menahem Golan served as an executive producer and apparently suggested to the Dereks to spice up the sex scenes. Amusingly enough, the movie was shown to the CEO of MGM in Frank Yablans in an attempt to get him to intervene against Golan...who in turn stated his disliking of the film to the point where MGM dropped releasing the film when it looked like it would get an X rating to the point where Cannon released it themselves without a rating. The Dereks did one more film together with the "release" of Ghosts Can't Do It (1989); John Derek died in 1998 at the age of 71 while Bo has appeared in a handful of films and TV since.

Honestly, some movies are so dull you can actually feel your body focusing on anything other than what is occurring in front of you. I have to confess that sometimes I write reviews for one film when watching a different film, mainly for attempts at "efficiency". You can imagine how this might get odd with a movie that strives for steamy passion but has the execution of a 78-year-old virgin. With a crap flick, sometimes one just feels the need to pause the movie to just breathe with the stupidity you are watching and sometimes you pause because you get distracted trying to wonder how you got on a tangent reading about the last non-practicing lawyer to win a Supreme Court case (Sam Sloan, for those asking). Other times you wonder how the hell George Kennedy could be involved in such a wide spectrum of movies in quality (you might remember the Academy Award winning actor tried his hand at singing with Lost Horizon along with all of those Airport movies). I wonder how my perception of the Dereks would be if I had checked out that Tarzan film (which somehow got Richard Harris to co-star), which also had nudity. Nothing will really prepare you for Bolero and its bizarre qualities in trying to make a love story that has no actual substance to it. The Dereks sure must have had fun making films as a couple, but I can't imagine many viewers had that same experience. You could probably write a better script of sexual awakenings with crayons, but I don't know if you would be able to get your spouse to shoot the film (seriously, how many movies are there where a husband is directing his wife going through love scenes and being the cinematographer?). I kid you not, the climatic lovemaking sequence takes place amid a great deal of fog meant to make one believe they are looking at clouds while an "ecstasy" sign is briefly seen in the background. All of this is far more interesting to talk about than the acting of the film, which is the type you might find in a bad *parody* of romance movies, particularly from Derek, who has no sense of believability in terms of "awakening" beyond seeming like she is doing a crappy home movie. Occhipinti actually is more known as a producer/distributor more than his acting, and it is easier to give credit for someone making a living rather than simply talking about how a crappy movie's chemistry between its lead actors stinks. Kennedy may be struggling to contain himself in rigid weirdness for a movie that gives him lines such as musing about the last time he saw a certain person naked (the context isn't any better) and so on that makes one hope he got to have some sort of vacation with the experience. In general, the movie strains at times with leaps in logic, even forgetting to show how one escapes a plane in the air (seriously she just is out the plane right there) amid the general lack of sexual tension that would be fodder for several puns (the movie sure is limp when coming to the point, you might say). One feels dirty watching this movie in a way that exploitation directors would shudder to think about in ways that you honest to God would not see nowadays (Olivia d'Abo was 14 when she did this film and no, do not Google what that means).  In conclusion, Bolero is the movie one thinks The Room (2003) is when it comes to terrible vanity projects, failing to achieve any sort of charm beyond making you realize that some married couples really can be the most insufferable people you know. In a sea of bad movies, there is very little to redeem in this flaming heap of crap.

Overall, I give it 0 out of 10 stars. 

Next up: Familiar actors and the 1970s clash in Laserblast.

Redux: A Nightmare on Elm Street (1984).

Redux #474: A Nightmare on Elm Street.

Cast: 

Heather Langenkamp (Nancy Thompson), Robert Englund (Fred "Freddy" Krueger), Johnny Depp (Glen Lantz), Ronee Blakley (Marge Thompson), John Saxon (Lt. Donald "Don" Thompson), Amanda Wyss (Christina "Tina" Gray), Nick Corri (Rod Lane), Leslie Hoffman (Hall Guard), Joseph Whipp (Sgt. Parker), Charles Fleischer (Dr. King), and Lin Shaye (Teacher) Written and Directed by Wes Craven.

Review: 

Editor's note: while the original review was roughly on point for 257 words (as opposed to the usual "not great" reviews that I have slowly re-done over the past few years), it is obvious this one needed a re-doing anyway after eleven years. Enjoy.

In his life and career, Wes Craven made twenty feature films as a filmmaker, with all but one that belonged to the horror or thriller genre. The Cleveland native had been raised in a strict Baptist family while studying philosophy and writing at Johns Hopkins University before becoming a filmmaker rather than stay on as a teacher; he stated that seeing To Kill a Mockingbird (1962) was the film that "changed his life". His first major effort came up with The Last House on the Left (1972) that was wildly controversial and successful. The Hills Have Eyes (1977) was mildly successful while his first two features of the 1980s in Deadly Blessing (1981) and Swamp Thing (1982) were deemed fine. But it was this film (his fifth as a filmmaker) that really put him at the forefront. Craven had several inspirations for this film, such as the real-life stories covering "Sudden arrhythmic death syndrome", in which newspapers were covering the sudden death of Hmong refugees who had fled Laos (and other Asian countries) to America in the midst of war that saw them suffer nightmares and die in their sleep. Several studios rejected the screenplay except New Line Cinema (as operated by Robert Shaye), which at the time was mostly known as a distributor. As one already knows, the film (made on a budget of $1.8 million) became a franchise, even though Craven had really intended for it to end on a strange evocative note (apparently, the one they came up, involving a door with effects-use came about after brainstorming ideas with Robert Shaye that was quoted by Craven as having "amused us all so much, we couldn't not use it."). Craven rejected doing the 1985 sequel (which didn't even have a returning cast member besides Englund) but he did return to collaborate on the third film and Wes Craven's New Nightmare (1994). Craven died at the age of 76 in 2015. The series even went through the usual cycle of getting "remade" for modern audiences, although that 2010 remake (as directed by Samuel Bayer with Jackie Earle Haley as Freddy) is currently the last movie with the name to be released, even with the rights reverting back to the Craven estate.

It really is a movie all about facing reality, which actually works wonders at the hands of Craven for likely his best directing effort in terms of horror craftsmanship. It is funny, for all the times I've re-watched Halloween (1978) over the years, I forgot how good A Nightmare on Elm Street was in terms of its place among slasher movies, since it features a killer threat that isn't merely a lumbering presence (complete with having a cool supporting presence in an established actor). Sure, the bodycount and characterization of its lead threat would get further complicated in later films, but nothing touches the original in entertaining terror. Imagine being trapped in a dream that just won't end, one that seems very real and very much in one's conscious in terms of boogeymen. For his performance, Englund (cast because David Warner had scheduling conflicts after being cast originally) was inspired by Lon Chaney's monster performances alongside Klaus Kinski in Nosferatu the Vampyre (1979), which extends to the way he approached using his claw (in one interview, he stated a goal to "be mildly erotic", since we are talking about a dream invader). The strange thing is that the remake strived to have the makeup resemble third-degree burns (as based on photographs seen at the UCLA Medical Center) more closely and yet the first film probably did it best when it comes to terror, which features a few moments in shadows (alongside the other stuff, of course). It is tremendous how a performance can really work so well in making a capable villain, where he moves with theatricality to make a terrifying predator in ways that were not surpassed in the sequels to come. Saxon already was a presence in horror movies such as Black Christmas (1974) after years spent in Italian films and Westerns. Saxon has that familiarity factor where we just go with whatever he is playing, whether that involves authority figures or not (interestingly, he and Englund each wrote their own scripts for a third Nightmare film, which didn't come to pass); Blakely has the other side of the coin in fairly established presences (Nashville, for example) that actually does pretty well in conniving complicity (I roll with that final shot because, well, the hook was going to be weird regardless of how it went). Langenkamp had minimal film/TV experience but fit the bill of what Craven envisioned for basically an every-girl. It just clicks with her in terms of reactive timing and curiosity that is easy to roll with in confronting fear that stands starkly among most of the final folks in a slasher (her subsequent key appearances in the 3rd and 7th film were well deserved, one would say). The rest of the cast may be disposable lambs, but they at least are neat to go along with for a bit (Depp being a future star in the decade must've sure been a hell of a surprise, suffice to say). It manages to do so well with its budget through the execution of its crew and director in crafting an enjoyably spooky time in the play between fantasy and reality that isn't diminished by its subsequent franchising (for example, the gore went beyond blood out of a bed but probably doesn't have a fraction of the enduring power). Craven crafted a damn good classic that seemingly gets better upon re-watching for its craft on display, which is the mark of being one of the best slashers of its time that is a worthwhile statement to muse about four decades later.

Overall, I give it 10 out of 10 stars.

Streets of Fire.

Review #2218: Streets of Fire.

Cast: 

Michael Paré (Tom Cody), Diane Lane (Ellen Aim), Rick Moranis (Billy Fish), Amy Madigan (McCoy), Willem Dafoe (Raven Shaddock), Deborah Van Valkenburgh (Reva Cody), Richard Lawson (Ed Price), Rick Rossovich (Officer Cooley), Bill Paxton (Clyde), Lee Ving (Greer), and Stoney Jackson (Bird) Directed by Walter Hill (#1072 - 48 Hrs, #1091 - Last Man Standing, #1139 - Supernova, #1625 - The Long Riders, #1728 - Another 48 Hrs, #2217 - The Warriors)

Review: 

Paramount Pictures really liked 48 Hrs (1982), as directed by Walter Hill. He had co-written it with Larry Gross as a production that had Lawrence Gordon as one of the key producers. So, two years later, here they all are for a film again. And so, Hill wanted to make a film that he thought would be a perfect one for his teenage self that would have things he still loved even now: "custom cars, kissing in the rain, neon, trains in the night, high-speed pursuit, rumbles, rock stars, motorcycles, jokes in tough situations, leather jackets and questions of honor". Of course, in the words of Gross, Hill wanted to do a movie that basically was his "own comic book movie", which might sound a tiny bit like the inspirations for The Warriors. Casting hiccups (i.e. wanting Tom Cruise but getting beaten to the punch) and a sudden inspiration during writing...led Gross and Hill to take the success of Flashdance (1983) as a way to make the film as basically a musical, since, well, if one "stylized movie" can get going, why not this? Did I forget that one other inspiration for the type of reality depicted for the film was John Hughes? Yes, Hill not only wanted to make a movie that was something that could be great for his teenage self as a high school flick, a comic book-type film and also a musical. The film, meant to be the first of a planned trilogy (all with Pare tapped to star, naturally)...did not work out well, filing to make back its $14.5 million budget. Gross has gone on record stating that the film did have influence when it came to ones that were (in his words) "completely saturated in...iconography", such as RoboCop and Se7en, with his theory being that those films did stylization with a balance of gore that hooked the audience in ways that were not done with Streets of Fire. In 2008, Paré and Van Valkenburgh participated in Road to Hell (as directed by Albert Pyun), a sort-of follow-up.

I wish I could love it. I really do. The film is wonderfully shot by cinematographer Andy Laszlo when it comes to that weird world of another time and place that makes for a fruitfully interesting vibe and such for 93 minutes. To me, it just comes off as a more average rendition of The Warriors (1979), complete with an even less interesting idea behind its main duo because dear god, it focuses on the wrong two! I swear, one has more fun with the cheesy retort between Pare and Madigan than the attempts of trying to make me care about him and Lane (oh look, an ex-boyfriend encountering his ex-girlfriend in a rescue operation, makes one want to slip on Casablanca). Hell, according to Madigan, when she read for the film (for the part played by Van Valkenburgh), she apparently found the nomad soldier-for-hire the more interesting one. With the charm of someone seemingly ripped out of a Howard Hawks film, she steals the show away from Pare, who plays it all too cool that really only works if one is Clint Eastwood. Lane (present in a handful of films such as Coppola's two 1983 films in The Outsiders and Rumble Fish) may have a suitable presence when it comes to singing, but I think I actually found her more interested in chemistry with her lead...in A Little Romance, five years earlier. One just has to view the film around them as if it was one of those cheesy teen films where the action matters more than if the sucker gets the girl. Of course, Dafoe wearing a leather...apron (?) is far more belonging to the vibe of goofball adventure, complete with a casually weird vibe that would make a fascinating comparison with The Loveless. There is something oddly amusing about Moranis not getting to do schtick with this role, which is staid but kinda funny. It is a lean movie of pretty simple Western values that has an axe-fight in the middle of a crowd before closing its mish-mash of vibes and a song naturally named "Tonight Is What It Means To Be Young". As a whole, it is a film that looks nice and has a few moments of good-natured fun within its fable elements of rock and roll to clash with mediocre leads and stuff that only scratches the surface of being more than just "okay" entertainment. It might be among Hill's ambitious ideas for filmmaking, which therefore makes it more than just calling it one of his average productions of his heyday. 

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Missing in Action.

Review #2202: Missing in Action.

Cast: 

Chuck Norris (Colonel James Braddock), M. Emmet Walsh (Jack "Tuck" Tucker), David Tress (Senator Maxwell Porter), Lenore Kasdorf (Ann Fitzgerald), Ernie Ortega (General Vinh), James Hong (General Tran), E. Erich Anderson (Masucci), and Pierrino Mascarino (Jacques) Directed by Joseph Zito.

Review: 

Much in the same way that a fruit can be cut several different ways, one can really do movies with similar subject matter with pretty different execution. If you remember, James Cameron was behind the original treatment for what became Rambo: First Blood Part II in May of 1985 (he had written it when waiting to start filming The Terminator), which, well, was an action film where Rambo went from being a "documenter of possible prisoners held by jailers" to "fuck 'em". Incidentally, earlier in the decade, Robert R. Garwood (a Private), among one of the last American POW from the Vietnam War (as captured in 1965 but one who did not return to America until 1979) faced a court martial after being accused of being a collaborator with the enemy that saw him stripped of his rank (he had claimed that American POWs were left behind in Vietnam). Even decades after the war, the Department of Defense lists "current numbers of Americans who are unaccounted for in Southeast Asia" at over a thousand. Anyway, Cameron's script led to inspiration (as one says) for the Cannon Group to see if they could do their own film involving war veterans and beat the Rambo film to the punch, which they did. In fact, they filmed two Missing in Action films, with the original plan to have the one directed by Lance Hool (which involved the POW days of the lead character) be released first before the rescue one...but the commercial prospects were found to be better with this film and so the other film was titled Missing in Action 2: The Beginning and released in March of 1985 (not long after the first one!) and somehow two months before the Rambo sequel. All of this is how the first film gets a screenplay and writing credit that has Arthur Silver, Larry Levinson and Steve Bing listed for characters, James Bruner for screenplay, and John Crowther and Lance Hool for story. 1988 saw the release of Braddock: Missing in Action III, which was considerably less successful.

Norris has stated that the film was one he made as a memorial for his younger brother Wieland, who died in combat in Vietnam. It was also the first film he did with the Cannon Group. This was the fifth film of Joseph Zito, who had directed the fourth (and intended final) film of the Friday the 13th series earlier in 1984, although his previous effort The Prowler (1981) has received far more interesting notice in later years. He did one further film with Norris in Invasion U.S.A. (1985). Imagine making a 100-minute movie with as little tension as possible and you have something that probably would fit right at home with keeping one eye open when trying to, say, paint. Norris seems to have settled into a Clint Eastwood impersonation that happens to do action with feet and blasting away, but it isn't particularly infused with even the slightest bit of charisma besides the minimum. The film somehow feels small in scale because by blasting away with faceless enemies (Hong doesn't even make it to the 45th minute but he does what the film needs before being disposed of) and having just Walsh with the semblance of energy, one just finds an average hollow film. Walsh is sly enough that being a sidekick character in his mid-forties is a hoot fitting enough to engage with. Well, I can say this much...it makes one realize that um, maybe I misjudged Good Guys Wear Black (1978) when it came to calling Norris one who sounded like an "instructional guidebook for using a power tool". This film at least drops the pretense of playing it for the thriller angle and goes straight for an action cheese fest. Sure, it lacks a true villain besides the nameless folks getting shot at, but one can at least get some sort of curiosity of seeing Norris playing opposite a character actor pro in Walsh (rest in peace) as opposed to trying to wedge in a romantic angle between Norris and Kasdorf (at least this one doesn't go like that aforementioned Good Guys film and explode a plane). I especially like how the ending is a dramatic build to...storming a building to show the truth. As a whole, it may have beaten First Blood Part II when it comes to POW rescue films, but it doesn't hold too much of a candle in overall execution, instead being an average film that lacks the final push to be anything other than the action film picked after the pile has nearly been finished.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

Redux: The Terminator.

Redux #063: The Terminator.

Cast: 

Arnold Schwarzenegger (the Terminator), Michael Biehn (Kyle Reese), Linda Hamilton (Sarah Connor), Paul Winfield (Ed Traxler), Lance Henriksen (Vukovich), Bess Motta (Ginger), Rick Rossovich (Matt), Earl Boen (Dr. Silberman), Shawn Schepps (Nancy), and Dick Miller (Clerk) Directed by James Cameron.

Review: 

From my review on July 30, 2011:

This film is in a word a classic. It has good acting for the most part, a good film noir, (which will be referred to as TechNoir) and a great plot. Good effects especially at the end. Good action and also good direction with a young Cameron at the wheel.

"The Terminator themes had been important to me since high school. Those apocalyptic visions, ideas about our love/hate relationship with technology, our tendency as a species to move in a direction that might ultimately destroy us, and a central faith in the resourcefulness of humanity." - James Cameron

In 1981, James Cameron was trying to become a feature film director when he was hired to do Piranha II: The Spawning, rising from special effects director to the main job due to creative differences with the producer (Cameron had become interested in films due to reading about special effects while in school, if you remember). The movie was not a pleasant experience for him (namely because he got fired days into the film), but it was during a moment spent in Rome after being fired that proved important for Cameron. One night, wracked with a fever, he had a fever dream of a metallic man with knives that dragged itself from an explosion. Taking inspiration from John Carpenter (once described by Cameron as his idol) and how he made Halloween for less than $100,000 as a stylish horror film, it helped serve as a launching pad for what became the initial script of The Terminator. Cameron did have help in the script, for the most part. William Wisher, Jr helped turn Cameron's draft into a script, such as writing scenes involving the police or early scenes with Sarah Connor (he got an "additional dialogue" credit); Gale Anne Hurd, who suggested edits to the scripts, was given screenwriting credit to go along with serving as producer, as both Hurd and Cameron had worked under Roger Corman at New World Pictures (Orion Pictures, who distributed the film, had two ex-Corman associates on staff). Cameron even did concept art for trying to sell the idea to prospective filmmakers (such as Hemdale Film Corporation), to the point where Lance Henriksen was the likeness for the drawing along with being brought in to spook the staff in boots and leather, which worked out well in a deal with Hemdale and Cameron. Admittedly, any mention of The Terminator (1984) might bring a reminder that Harlan Ellison is listed with an acknowledgement in the credits. He loved the movie, but he thought it seemed familiar to his script for "Soldier", written for the TV program The Outer Limits in the 1960s. The filmmakers decided to settle and give him a credit in later prints of the film, much to the chagrin of Cameron.

Roger Corman has one hell of a filmmaking tree when it comes to people he employed who ended up becoming directors, and James Cameron essentially had his first major film success come with a production that he treated like a Corman film, complete with filming at night with guerilla-style shots done on a small(ish) budget; the fact that the film runs at 107 minutes is a testament to making a lean but effective piece of entertainment without any sort of element that seems unnecessary. I know I have said the movie is a classic, but the movie has only gotten better with age and further viewings, in my view. Every so often you have to remember that this is basically a slasher movie when you consider the body count. Aside from failing to take his main target, the Terminator takes down over two dozen folks, probably doing so with more efficiency than slasher villains of the time ever did. Hell, Biehn and Schwarzenegger have only one moment together where they are even in the same frame, consider that. Stan Winston and his studio had the task of doing a "flesh-covered endoskeleton", i.e., not just a man in a robot suit. They clearly made a great result, one that menaces the screen and achieves the art of seeming quite real to the audience without distraction. A creature that can't be reasoned with that manages to come after you even when it is shed of its humanoid skin, that is one hell of a concoction for a film that veers into horror, science-fiction, and yes, even noir territory.

Schwarzenegger had one key film credit to his name with Conan the Barbarian (1982), and it should be noted that he actually speaks less lines in this film than the prior movie. The funny thing is that he was actually thought by Orion for the film not as the title character but for the Reese character. This was contrary to Cameron's expectations of using low-key actors to do a cheap film, since he figured that he would have Henriksen play the Terminator, since it was meant to be a character that could blend in a crowd (go figure, Orion had O. J. Simpson in mind for the title role). A meeting between the two made it apparent to Cameron and Schwarzenegger that he would probably be better suited for the Terminator role, which clearly was the right decision. He sells the role in ways that one could only dream they could do in a role with little to say beyond having to act like a machine. Aside from a few television appearances, Hamilton had one prominent film credit before this film: Children of the Corn (1984), which was released a few months before this film. Hamilton is given the task of playing both relative innocence and hidden strength in a variation of the "Final Girl" trope in horror, which she handles expertly. Her terror at the situation she is thrust into becomes one we feel is thrust onto us. Biehn was actually cast because of his role in The Fan (1981), a movie that Cameron saw where Biehn plays a nice-looking guy who ends up being a killer stalker. For a good part of the film (at least for those who haven't seen it once), Biehn is effective in that mindset before he enters the picture as the would-be protector, which he handles quite well without having to strain to make the dialogue (consisting mostly of reacting to the Terminator or to Hamilton) work as well as it does. Henriksen may not have a big role, but the fact that he was effective in helping the film gain some interest with the whole "dressing up like the Terminator" stunt makes him an unforgettable part of how The Terminator became what it was. Winfield is the other part of the supporting cast that is basically cosigned to police beat elements, which works out pretty well for what is needed. It really is a lean movie, one that wraps itself quite tightly in efficient storytelling that shows just enough of the future landscape in perspective to make the drama occurring back in the present seem even more thrilling, particularly when it comes to the last sequence within a factory setting, where a machine stripped to its core is still on the chase and even still a menace with diminished legs. The synthesizer soundtrack by Brad Fiedel only adds to the level of terror in ways I hadn't really appreciated until listening to it once again, one that doesn't come off as dated (not to say that synthesizer music is dated, just that the use of it can have consequences in lesser hands). 

As a whole, the real crime is that the film was not even more successful. Sure, it did strike well with audiences, but Orion did not have as much faith for such a great movie as one would expect, doing little promotion (owing to wanting to elevate some of its other features of the time, such as Amadeus, the eventual Academy Award winner for Best Picture that year). At any rate, Schwarzenegger was clearly interested in making a sequel more so than Cameron, but a sequel wasn't commissioned until the film right were purchased back from Hemdale and Hurd. At any rate, with a story idea cribbed from the first film and a bigger budget, Terminator 2: Judgement Day was released in 1991. Four sequels would follow in the next three decades, with varying reception made worse by the fact that T2 is generally thought to be one of the greatest sequels ever made. At any rate, The Terminator is the film that made James Cameron a name to be reckoned with as a filmmaker and Arnold Schwarzenegger a true star, and it is a grand achievement for all involved as a science fiction action masterpiece.

Overall, I give it 10 out of 10 stars.

Redux: Ghostbusters (1984).

Redux Review #026: Ghostbusters.

Cast:
Bill Murray (Peter Venkman), Dan Aykroyd (Raymond "Ray" Stantz), Sigourney Weaver (Dana Barrett), Harold Ramis (Egon Spengler), Rick Moranis (Louis Tully), Ernie Hudson (Winston Zeddemore), Annie Potts (Janine Melnitz), William Atherton (Walter Peck), David Margulies (Mayor Lenny Clotch), and Slavitza Jovan (Gozer) [Paddi Edwards as the voice of Gozer] Produced and Directed by Ivan Reitman.

Background:
Review #26, December 28, 2010. Originally, I described it as "this film is a load of fun, pure and simple", while giving it a 10 out of 10 stars. The original review was less than 100 words, so I figure I owe you readers at least some statements about the movie more substantial than the old review.

Review:

"By watching Ghostbusters, there's a sense that you can control this, that you can mitigate it somehow and it doesn't have to be that frightening. It became this movie that parents liked to bring their kids to—they could appreciate it on different levels but still watch it together."

The summer of 1984 was a beautiful time, and Ghostbusters ended up being one of the biggest hits of its time when it was released on June 8, 1984, serving as the second-highest grossing movie of the year behind Beverly Hills Cop. The development of the film from its initial idea to the final result is fascinating to consider. Dan Aykroyd had a long fascination with the supernatural due to his family upbringing that spanned three generations, complete with his father writing a book detailing the history of ghosts. At any rate, Aykroyd had become notable for his writing/feature role on the first four seasons of Saturday Night Live alongside The Blues Brothers (1980), and it was around the 1980s that he had developed a script that he wanted to make into a movie with his good friend John Belushi that had them travelling through time and space fighting ghosts, but Belushi died in 1982. At any rate, Aykroyd wanted to make a movie reminiscent of the ghost movies of the 1930s and 1940s (such as The Ghost Breakers), and he approached Bill Murray (also a SNL alum) to join in with his (half-finished) script and then approached Ivan Reitman, known for Meatballs (1979) and Stripes (1981) to direct. Reitman saw the potential in a sprawling script on levels that would have required a substantially higher budget by 1984 standards (incidentally, the Marshmallow Man was included in the script), and he talked with Aykroyd about grounding the plot down in a way that made the business akin to like pest control rather than an intergalactic ghost police, with Harold Ramis (writer of Animal House, Meatballs, Caddyshack, Stripes) being asked to co-write the script; by the time the movie was finished, it had been done on a budget of $25-30 million shot in the span of a year, complete with the help of Richard Edlund and his effects team with Boss Film Studios had to do a wide array of effects from practical to puppets in a span of ten months (it also did work on 2010: The Year We Make Contact at the same time), and some effects shots were done in one take. 

It is the PG-rated comedy that generations grew up with and cherish, what more can really be said? A bit, really. What is it about Ghostbusters that works so easily and so effectively? Is it the quick wit? Is it the way the effects and comedy mesh without overriding each other? Is it the performances? The simple answer is all of the above and more. It is obvious to note the chemistry between Murray, Aykroyd and Ramis, who exchange lines and wit together that permeate into numerous memorable scenes, with lines that are effective and still memorable even after over three decades since its release; neither actor intrudes on each other, with their characters being easily distinctive. Sure, there are other versions of these characters (the cynic, the heart, the brains, the surrogate) in other movies, but nothing makes it work so neatly and so fruitfully as this one. Stating one's favorite scenes or lines could be a marathon with films like this, but the important thing to remember is that the timing and execution is exquisite, one with offbeat charm that keeps interest high without selling anyone short or riding a joke too long in a 105-minute run-time. It goes without saying that this is Reitman's best effort as a director, showing his effectiveness in arranging actors and spectacle in a New York love-letter, and it might be a top-3 highlight for each of its main castmates, top to bottom. Murray is the deadpan highlight, one who glides through the movie with wise-ass charm that he had honed with films like Meatballs, but he does it here with no sense of repetition. Aykroyd had the knack for writing amusing situations in his days back at SNL, and he continues that stroke of energetic effectiveness that seeps into his character to useful results. Ramis and his stoic nature work exactly to perfection, just as seeped into the ghost mumbo-jumbo with conviction. Hudson (introduced 40 minutes in) is the appropriate everyman required with select amusing moments that make him just as important as the others. Weaver has the knack for comedy with charming grace and useful chemistry spent with Murray, while Atherton makes a quality foil, and Potts & Moranis make suitable pieces to end the puzzle. Elmer Bernstein's musical score proves distinctive in balancing interest in comedy alongside the mystical parts, while Ray Parker Jr's "Ghostbusters" song proves quite hard to get out of one's head, for good reason (so good that Huey Lewis sued him for plagiarism). The effects for the movie work just enough to lend credibility to what is going on around us without becoming a distraction or the entire package to focus on, since the script glides along with careful timing that develops its story gradually to go along with its gags. In short: it is one of the most entertaining movies of its era.

Of course, the film would inspire a handful of follow-up material, none quite as striking as the original but memorable. There were two animated shows with The Real Ghostbusters and Extreme Ghostbusters alongside a direct film sequel with Ghostbusters II (1989), a "reboot" film of the same name in 2016, and Ghostbusters: Afterlife (2021). Honestly, the best follow-up might have been Ghostbusters: The Video Game, a video game released in 2009 that saw the main quartet return to voice their characters in an action game that Aykroyd and Ramis also wrote, with the former calling it "essentially the third movie". At any rate, everyone and their mother have probably watched the film by now, but it is evident now more than ever that Ghostbusters is one of the best comedies of its time, a blockbuster for all time with success in its comedy and effects that ranks as a high mark for all involved in the best way possible.

Overall, I give it 10 out of 10 stars.

The Karate Kid (1984)

Review #1759: The Karate Kid.

Cast: 

Ralph Macchio (Daniel LaRusso), Pat Morita (Mr. Miyagi), Elisabeth Shue (Ali Mills), Martin Kove (John Kreese), Randee Heller (Lucille LaRusso), William Zabka (Johnny Lawrence), Chad McQueen (Dutch), Ron Thomas (Bobby Brown), Rob Garrison (Tommy), and Tony O'Dell (Jimmy) Directed by John G. Avildsen (#003 - Rocky, #895 - Rocky V, #1689 - W.W. and the Dixie Dancekings)

Review: 

Sure, you could make the connection that a director best known for a film about fighting in John G. Avildsen might have wanted to make a hit that was reminiscent of Rocky (1976) for the 1980s (the one song associated with this film coincidentally was meant for Rocky III). Of course, the actual inspiration for this film came with its writer in Robert Mark Kamen. The New York native was actually a student of karate, having studied it after he was beaten up at the 1964 New York World's Fair (note that one of the characters is actually named after a famed martial artist, for which Kamen trained under a sensei that had learned from said martial artist). Kamen eventually became a screenwriter (with his first collaboration being with Taps in 1981), but the story for this film actually came from Kamen being asked if he could make a story around an article that had been optioned by a producer that involved a kid taking up karate to deal with neighborhood bullies. The funny thing is that the main two roles had widely divergent options before settling with Macchio and Morita; Nicolas Cage was one consideration, while the other role was really meant for a perceived serious actor...Toshiro Mifune was actually considered for the role, but he wasn't chosen because he did not actually speak English (I would like to point the irony that Kamen learned karate from a master that didn't speak English). Instead, it went to the actor that Avildsen fought for: Noriyuki "Pat" Morita, who was more known as a comic than a serious actor (I suppose folks really weren't convinced that comedic actors can do useful serious performances); the best scene in the whole film with him was one that nearly got cut because of requests by Columbia, but Avildsen managed to keep it in the film (of course, martial artist Fumio Demura has also been cited as source of inspiration for Morita, complete with stunt doubling for him in parts).

Look, we're talking about a movie where someone learns to basically be a black belt in two months. If one can take that carefully enough, I'm pretty sure you can handle two hours of material that could have teetered over the saccharine line and yet manages to be a riveting experience with a game cast that proves up to the task of capable entertainment. The karate passes enough to keep one interested (unless one is really, really into accuracy) without diverting all the attention from the routines the story has to stretch to get where it needs to go without becoming the "why doesn't the main character call the cops on these weirdo karate punks?" kind of movie. Macchio proves adept with cultivating a likable lead focus with enthusiasm and sense of timing that makes the journey worth taking without seeming like a hokey TV special (i.e in the overall message involving not just learning something just to enact violence on them). The support around him always will circle to Morita first when it comes to this film - for good reason. Leave it to Avildsen to pick an unlikely name for an intriguing role that worked out exactly to what is needed to essentially serve as the counterpart for Macchio without turning the role into a diet of clichés and tired lines. In short, he makes a worthy presence of soothing interest that serves the film well in patience (although the sequences involving him training the lead seem reminiscent of the training done in Rocky (1976), it has a different touch). It was his most notable role, one that would earn him an Academy Award nomination for Best Supporting Actor: the scene that likely helped sell it involves him opening up about his past with who he loved and lost, for which the chemistry between Macchio and Morita helps a poignant bond seem only more fitting. Of course, the others in the cast keep up just fine: Shue makes a fair pairing with Macchio, while Kove absolutely makes for a worthy foil that is accompanied by Zabka and his wavering intimidation that makes a useful contrast to focus on from time to time. The film sells its moments with balance that never seeps into camp value, whether for overt seriousness or veering all the way into comedy, maneuvering its way through with pride to go along with a few quotable lines (for which I'm sure you've heard someone wax on or wax off before). Oh sure, there is quite an enduring legacy to the film, which believe it or not was actually a surprise hit to a good number of the cast and crew. Part II (1986) and Part III (1989) were both directed by Avildsen while featuring Macchio, Morita, and Kove (and Kamen as writer), while The Next Karate Kid (1994) featured only Morita. A remake of the original film was done in 2010. A web television series sequel followed with Cobra Kai (2018-present), featuring both Macchio and Zabka as star. If that is not enough, there are even plans for a musical on Broadway. At any rate, The Karate Kid (1984) has endured for so long because of how it managed to put all the right moves together at the right time with the right cast and right folks behind it to make a fun movie and a worthy piece of the capsule of good stuff from the 1980s without becoming gripped as a relic of the time. Sincere without sickening, it doesn't take long to become gripped by its charm, for which I would say is a useful accomplishment worth checking out.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Next Time: Turkey Week looms. With a week to Thanksgiving, it is almost time for Movie Night: Turkey Week Two, which will take place from November 21 to November 27 (i.e. the week of Thanksgiving, like last year) while focusing on films that are thought of as "turkeys", if you will; last year featured eight films from different decades that went from The Terror of Tiny Town to Freddy Got Fingered, and the approach will continue.

Footloose.

Review #1690: Footloose.

Cast: 

Kevin Bacon (Ren McCormack), Lori Singer (Ariel Moore), Dianne Wiest (Vi Moore), John Lithgow (Rev. Shaw Moore), Chris Penn (Willard Hewitt), Sarah Jessica Parker (Rusty), John Laughlin (Woody), Elizabeth Gorcey (Wendy Jo), Frances Lee McCain (Ethel McCormack), Jim Youngs (Chuck Cranston), and Timothy Scott (Andy Beamis) Directed by Herbert Ross (#244 - The Sunshine Boys and #1455 - The Goodbye Girl)

Review: 

It it hard to say a movie is inevitable. And yet, this is one of the most obvious movies that one will ever glare at in their lives, not so much because it is memorably great or terrible, but because one just has the feeling that they will watch it at some point in time. This is a long and dull way of saying I knew I would have to do this movie because I once had to practice dancing to the title song of this movie for a sweet sixteen birthday party...nine years ago. Trust me, time has not withered the memory of having to hear that Kenny Loggins song over and over again, and I say this as someone who digs the singer, even for a movie that is inferior to other movies with Loggins doing the lead song (well, there is Caddyshack II, but pretend that doesn't exist). You may be interested to know that the film was written by Dean Pitchford, who had won an Academy Award for his song-writing with the title song to Fame (1980). He had been inspired by a news story he had heard in 1979 that involved Elmore City, Oklahoma, a town that had just eliminated a ban on dancing that lasted 80 years. He would ultimately co-write ten of the thirteen songs present in the soundtrack, which included singers such as Loggins, Bonnie Tyler, and Sammy Hager. Strangely, the first director in mind to direct this movie was Michael Cimino (fresh off the production fiasco of Heaven's Gate (1980), if you remember). No, seriously, he was hired in 1983 before filming was to start. This occurred due to stalled negotiations with Herbert Ross (a director familiar with dance since he had done choreography on films and Broadway before taking on directing in 1969), but the demands that Cimino would put on pre-production ended up in his dismissal. Specifically, he wanted $250,000 for the script to be re-written in order to make it darker (as quoted by a producer, who stated that they wanted to make entertainment, and it probably doesn't help to go over a budget when you have just $7.5 million to spend). I will admit that while The Deer Hunter (1978) wasn't exactly a great favorite of mine, I would certainly have been interested to see just what Cimino would have done with his type of polish involved instead of what we received instead.

So yeah, I guess this is a movie for the teens. At least I think so, if one wants to have a movie filled with a grab-bag of 80s songs like a music video (the jury's out on pairing Bonnie Tyler's "Holding Out for a Hero" with a game of chicken with tractors), or maybe it's supposed to be a teen drama, filled with oddballs that have to deal with the terrible task of no dancing or rock music in a small town with a gymnast for a lead character. Or maybe it is the classic teenage hokum movie (small town folks, let me know if you've ever seen a truck with deer antlers on it). Teenagers doing bits of gymnastics in a warehouse? Sure, go ahead, and add a secret place full of graffiti of forbidden words put there by kids that even includes a daredevil who likes pulling dumb stunts like standing on the train tracks with a train ahead (that opening stunt is a crock, because I actually thought that would be the impetus for the whole "dancing/rock music leads to debauchery and maybe death", just look at that car...nah, it just gets told to us later). By the time folks start to think about burning books, my eyes were already on their fifth cycle of rolling (how the focus goes from rejecting an offer to do a prom to books in the library are harming the children is up to you). At least the parents don't start to use the mountains in the background (filmed in Utah, where else?) for watchtowers. Technically speaking, there is an interesting drama that is just begging to play itself out (albeit one with maybe four or five actors present, not the handful here), but even Saturday Night Fever (1977) manages to dance circles around this movie, and the weirdest thing is that both movies have pretty good performances from the lead actor. Clearly the movie has made an interesting fit for some folks when it comes to its era and mood, but it just didn't click with me. I never really found much to care about in its attempts at balancing music and its plot, because it all reaches with the depth of a marshmallow, equating to a book report about why folks should be allowed to express themselves (in other words, Saturday Night Fever wasn't merely a disco movie, and Footloose isn't merely anything). Bacon (whose first prominent film role was with Diner two years prior alongside a handful of stage work) is the best presence in the movie, mostly because he handles everything with composed charisma. In a movie where he has to play the fish-out-of-water from Chicago that deals with odd yokels and friends with dance, he makes sure to play it on key, because he sells what needs to happen on his end with no trouble because of his energy. Singer fares less than great, probably because the whole daredevil attitude is probably the most interesting thing about her character, and we are talking about someone who gets to share time with Bacon and Lithgow, which means one gets to be overshadowed twice. Wiest has a few moments to share with Lithgow that compliments the adult perspective of trying to deal with a growing adolescent. Lithgow is the other side of the interesting coin, devout in his composure that acts like a parent of a community, which naturally has to shift in layers for 110 minutes (albeit not a complete 180), which works okay. Penn plays a sturdy folksy relief character (one who can't dance, but come on, that hasn't stopped dummies like me from trying) - he soon would become better known with comic / tough roles, and this is a moderately curious early role for him. This was the second film role for Parker (familiar with theater and television from a young age); those brief moments on screen are enough for a positive sentence, for what it is worth. As a whole, Footloose is cheese that has the kind of polish that can satisfy those who find its sweet spot to their liking, whether because of the music, the charm of its lead (or Lithgow), one that has a little bit of what counts in expressing oneself that might just prove enough in entertainment. I can't endorse it, but I also can't stop one from having the curiosity to seek what all the fuss is about.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.