Masters of the Universe (1987).

Review #2545: Masters of the Universe.

Cast: 

Dolph Lundgren (He-Man), Frank Langella (Skeletor), Meg Foster (Evil-Lyn), Billy Barty (Gwildor), Courteney Cox (Julie Winston), Robert Duncan McNeill (Kevin Corrigan), Jon Cypher (Man-At-Arms), Chelsea Field (Teela), James Tolkan (Hugh Lubic), Christina Pickles (Sorceress), Tony Carroll (the Beastman), Pons Maar (Saurod), Anthony De Longis (Blade), and Robert Towers (Karg) Directed by Gary Goddard.

Review: 

Hey, remember Masters of the Universe? The impetus for trying to make the toy line came from Mattel's drive to come up with something good enough to possibly forget their rejection to produce action figures for a little film called Star Wars [1977] (Kenner famously did it first instead). Various concepts came around from people such as Roger Sweet and Mark Taylor. Coincidentally, this happened around the same time that the rights holder for Conan the Barbarian tried to do a toy deal with Mattel that fell through (they later sued Mattel claiming infringement, but Mattel won out in their toy line being original). The figures first came out with mini comics in 1981 before further waves of toys and, well, your parents probably watched the Filmation animated shows, with He-Man and the Masters of the Universe running from 1983 to 1985 and a spinoff with She-Ra: Princess of Power running from 1985 to 1987 (with that show, The Secret of the Sword [1985] was the premiere, a compilation of the first five episodes that was in theaters). According to one source, the original script by David Odell (writer of films such as Supergirl) had significant time spent on Eternia and Snake Mountain but this later changed to what you see here with a fairly Earthbound adventure (apparently, the link between the two places was that He-Man's mother was born on Earth). Mattel decided to be as cloying as possible for production, reportedly not paying their half of the production budget on time and they didn't want to their title character doing anything morally wrong. The film was directed by Gary Goddard (with his one other film credit being the co-writer of Tarzan, the Ape-Man [1981]) in the only theatrical film he has done. He has done theater shows along with dark rides and 3D movies.* Released around the same time as Stakeout and The Living Daylights in August 1987, Masters of the Universe was a flop, with its failure (along others such as Superman IV) hindering Cannon Films. They had planned to do a sequel film with Albert Pyun as director and even made some costumes and sets only to renege on a deal with Mattel that led them to re-tool it for what became Cyborg [1989].

Honestly, I never really got into He-Man, because, I was born in 1996, Legos were just more interesting (and as for the animated show...no, sorry). You might say that could help when talking about a movie that probably has a special cheesy place for those who watched it back then. No, not really, this movie is a lazy, middling film, a Conan/Star Wars wannabee mired in a "fish out of water" plotline and a monosyllabic lead.  Goddard claimed that the film's storyline was inspired by various Jack Kirby comic books (namely The New Gods), and he wanted Kirby to be a conceptual artist for the movie. I feel like play-acting a comic book would be a more entertaining experience, especially since it would probably have violence against actual humanoid-looking people in it (after the first couple of totally not Stormtroopers get shot by lasers, how far can you go?). Lundgren (in his first starring role after Rocky IV [1985]) and his dialogue was re-recorded and dubbed over the original footage, which at least sounds better than Goddard wanting to re-dub the whole film with someone else's voice...in theory. For a character that goes around dallying without using a sword too much, Lundgren is left adrift to really say anything of meaningful substance (this is me trying to be nice in not just calling him wooden*). It probably is a bit of a casting coup to have a willing Langella (of films such as Dracula [1979], which I'm sure somebody liked*) go all-out, apparently because his son was big on the animated show. He hams it up a bit and basically steals the movie, which is a bit of an accomplishment when wrapped in so much makeup (as one does for a skeleton). It doesn't save the movie, but still. Cox and McNeill (future featured players in television*) just look lost in this corny movie with little to really make you care about them in a film that just meanders around with the bare minimum to offer (to say nothing of an ending that basically is wish fulfillment without really earning it). Barty, cast as a freshly created character because they could not make Orko, a floating magician for the screen...is okay, but it probably makes one appreciate stuff like Legend (1985) and Willow (1988) by comparison in the "comedy relief" aspect that only goes so far to distract from a movie that has folks going around confronting the new realities of a bucket of ribs. In a sea of attempts of support from Foster and Cypher (and those totally comfortable suits), at least you can say Tolkan was trying to be funny. For someone who really does have a varying bar of giving films a chance, this is a movie that is just too shallow to really garner that much care for what goes on in it (a sorceress being trapped has never felt so small). As a whole, the movie didn't reach its target audience in its day (people who either loved their toys and sure love PG-rated flicks), and there are oodles of people who will try to call it a cult movie, but I'm just not a fan to where I can't even call it a "just missed the mark" type of movie. So it goes.

Overall, I give it 5 out of 10 stars.

Song of the day!

*He may also be a pervert, as detailed by articles such as this: https://www.latimes.com/entertainment/la-et-entertainment-news-updates-anthony-edwards-pens-powerful-essay-1510344160-htmlstory.html

*Unpopular and unrelated take: I suppose there's something to say about He-Man being a "gay icon" or something. No, not really. People will claim anything as an "icon" if it sounds "cool" enough. You can say "Fortunate Son" is an anti-war song but people will still put that song on full blast because...it sounds cool. 

*I still can't get over mediocre that Dracula movie was. Goddamnit. 

*folks would see Lundgren on the big screen a few more times in the next ten years (Red Scorpion [1988], The Punisher [1989 - although America got it direct-to-video], I Come in Peace [1990], Showdown in Little Tokyo [1991], Universal Soldier [1992], Johnny Mnemonic [1995]) sprinkled in with direct-to-video fare.

*Friends stinks. I'll watch Star Trek: Voyager all the way through once before I see Friends.

Making Mr. Right.

Review #2517: Making Mr. Right.

Cast: 

John Malkovich (Dr. Jeff Peters/Ulysses), Ann Magnuson (Frankie Stone), Glenne Headly (Trish), Ben Masters (Steve Marcus), Laurie Metcalf (Sandra "Sandy" McCleary), Polly Bergen (Estelle Stone), Harsh Nayyar (Dr. Ramdas), Hart Bochner (Don), Susan Berman (Ivy Stone), Polly Draper (Suzy Duncan), Christian Clemenson (Bruce), Merwin Goldsmith (Moe Glickstein) Directed by Susan Seidelman (#1987 - Smithereens, #2186 - Desperately Seeking Susan)

Review: 

"I was so happy with the response to that screening, because, when a movie is a flop, people tend to not want to talk about it. I loved making “Making Mr. Right,” but people seem to not want to bring up the fact that it was a flop at the box-office or hurt my feelings. It was in theatres for such a short amount of time, and then it was never really pushed on DVD. So Metrograph was the first time I had seen it with an audience up on a big screen in thirty years. And I laughed! I always thought maybe people didn’t get the style. It’s an A.I. romantic comedy."

Admittedly, this is the kind of movie you might try out on the back end of a to-do list of movie packs and obligations. This was one of the six movies on a "6 Comedies [MGM]" collection (next to Honeymoon in Vegas, Overboard, Speechless, Baby Boom, and Real Men) that I bought many years ago, and, well, it finally dovetailed with Susan Seidelman. This was her third feature film as a director and she played some influence on the script that had been written by Floyd Byars and Laurie Frank in 1985, specifically in the shift in focus from a Frankenstein-type story to one resembling Pygmalion. For whatever reason, the main production company behind this was Barry & Enright Productions, a TV company originally formed by Jack Barry and Dan Enright in the 1940s that occasionally produced movies (most notably with Private Lessons [1981]). Distributed by Orion Pictures to minimal audience returns, Seidelman's next feature came with Cookie in 1989*; Seidelman has expressed no hard feelings about how the film went, even attending a Q&A screening for the film in recent years.

So, what's the movie about? Well, in the (presumably) near future, a scientist makes an android (which happens to look just like him) and is priming it for deep space exploration that dovetails right with a PR consultant (recently dumped) that is hired to help humanize the android for the project sponsors. It starts its attempts at capturing the vibe of someone who might fall for, say, a robot by having an opening that shows an old-fashioned dumping and shaving while going to work. For a 99-minute movie, it might wind up as light fare, but there is an earnest spirit about the movie (namely because it has a fairly neat style in terms of its setting and look that will surely inspire interest from those who know what retro-futurism is) that I like enough to at least say is at least a possible small gem as a comedy of errors. It just happens to have a bit of deference to those who might have an interest in something different from the perceived normal, particularly since most of the men in the film are, well, kooks (at least Robert Trebor* is delightfully smarmy for a small role), particularly in their feelings. So it isn't just "but is the robot fully functional?*", it's a comedy about people who really need to know what they want out of life, people, and, well, themselves. It might interest you to know that this was the one big role for Magnuson, who had dabbled in music and a few minor film roles (such as Desperately Seeking Susan). She apparently actually wanted the supporting role that ended up being cast for Headly but it seems Seidelman saw something worthwhile in her that comes out here. There is a certain type of moxie that comes through with her that I can't help but enjoy in a whimsical sense (besides, she has one line that is basically the lifeblood of the chaotic worker: "I'm always late; but, I'm worth it."). The make-or-break comes with Malkovich and his dual role as one who can't stand people and one who wants to understand things beyond what he was made for. So one side gets to play the hapless oddball and the other lumbers around with a ditzy sense of timing, and it generally works out for a few quirky moments. Whether it really is all that convincing is up to you (stranger people have fallen for stranger things), I suppose. The others in the cast have a few little moments of charm that spring for amusement in the crisscross of oddballs and Miami chic, whether that involves a brief interlude with the loopy Metcalf or the charming Headly. As a whole, Making Mr. Right just couldn't find the right audience when it really mattered for those who like some offbeat romantic comedies, suffice to say. But if you like the idea of a movie that pokes at the odd quirks that come with people that don't have everything figured out in their personal lives that happens to involve romance with a robot, you might have a hidden winner here.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Song of the day!

 

*Cookie had Peter Falk and Dianne Wiest, but She-Devil (1991) which paired Meryl Streep (who I'm sure other people know pretty well, but...) with, and I'm not kidding: Roseanne. 

*Hey, I imagine people are still waiting (but obviously not saying out loud, on the internet, or in conversation) for sex robots, it isn't that hard of a question to ask if you can put your ding-dongs in 'em.

*I remember Trebor well from Hercules: The Legendary Journeys, where he regularly appeared as Salmoneus - he was pretty funny in that show. He passed away just last year - RIP.

Dragnet (1987).

Review #2427: Dragnet (1987).

Cast: 

Dan Aykroyd (Detective Sergeant Joe Friday), Tom Hanks (Detective Pep Streebek), Christopher Plummer (the Reverend Jonathan Whirley), Harry Morgan (Captain Bill Gannon), Alexandra Paul ("the Virgin" Connie Swail), Jack O'Halloran (Emil Muzz), Elizabeth Ashley (Commissioner Jane Kirkpatrick), and Dabney Coleman (Jerry Caesar) Directed by Tom Mankiewicz.

Review: 

Maybe you know what Dragnet is, but your dad or grandfather probably know it quite well in some way or form. Apparently, Webb was inspired by what he saw when filming his role in He Walked by Night (1948), specifically what he heard from technical consultant Marty Wynn involving the actual procedures and activities of police officers that he got Wynn to cooperate on what became one of the big procedurals of its time. In 1949, Dragnet was born on radio with the NBC radio network, as featuring Jack Webb and a handful of partners. Two years later went by before it went to television (now with Webb and Ben Alexander), running for eight years and also having a film version in 1954. And then of course there was the new thing for its time: a revival years later, with Webb now starring with Harry Morgan that ran from 1967 to 1970. There were plenty of routines to be had in those shows, whether that involved LSD or other types of rackets. Webb would continue to busy with making television shows involving authority such as Adam-12 (1968-75), O'Hara, U.S. Treasury (1971-72), and Emergency! (1972-77) before he died in 1982 at the age of 62.*  Apparently, Tom Mankiewicz was brought in to work on a re-write of a film script that had been done by Dan Aykroyd and Alan Zweibel (who had worked together on Saturday Night Live) involving Dragnet and was then asked to direct it himself, which was his directing debut, having famously done work as just a writer with Superman and an assortment of James Bond movies; he directed just one other movie with Delirious (1991)

I do remember, very vaguely, seeing my dad watch this movie on a VHS tape once, specifically the part where the name P.A.G.A.N is revealed (People Against Goodness and Normalcy, ha, get it). That was what, nearly 15 years ago, so I suppose it is better late than never to actually watch this movie. You get a buddy cop movie (complete with a tank and jet) that happens to have a very by-the-book person at the helm that is sometimes funny and altogether a bit stuffed at 106 minutes long. As a semi-spoof, it at least looks like it cared about the original material, although it definitely shows a bit too much willingness for the "let's put a pop song in it" idea. You can probably tell that Aykroyd had a fascination with Jack Webb in actually getting the jargon down with the calm and collected feel of someone who rolls with the punches. Of course, Aykroyd actually did work as a reserve officer with multiple police departments (no I'm not joking), so this isn't merely just a case of a long-winded bit, he just thought it would be an honor to do a Jack Webb homage, to a certain type of mixed result. According to Aykroyd, Hanks (who was cast in the film because Albert Brooks said no and Jim Belushi wasn't available) was not big on the final result of the film. Hanks (in the period between Splash [1984] and, well, Big [1989]) does fine here, maneuvering through the proceedings with a good dose of charm and you do eventually get a sense of connection between him and Aykroyd as hard (okay, maybe sometimes hardly) working cops on the beat as a team. Morgan might have been winding down in his seventies (this was his penultimate film appearance), but at least he looks happy to be around for a few scenes in experiencing some jargon said at him again. Plummer is calm enough to work as the wolf in sheep's clothing, for the most part. The rest is here and there, mainly because the movie comes up with a few softball ideas to corral the procedural (so a Playboy knockoff and a totally not evil Reverend to go with uniting them for a common goal) that probably came out of at least one too many re-writes. Sure, you can't make it all a sketch, but the movie does have most of its steam in the first half when trying to play setup rather than the inevitable sequences of action, for better or worse. I enjoyed it just enough to roll with its general pacing. As a whole, Dragnet (1987) is a fine little movie that at least doesn't come off as merely an overextended sketch idea and has a few moments worth watching. It definitely is hit-or-miss, but if you are looking for a bit of fun, you might find it here.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

*To tie this to movies a tiny bit, Webb was actually approached about playing Dean Wormer in Animal House (1979). Go figure, he turned it down.

Tomorrow: the horror season begins.

Hollywood Shuffle.

Review #2348: Hollywood Shuffle.

Cast: 

Robert Townsend (Bobby Taylor), Anne-Marie Johnson (Lydia), Craigus R. Johnson (Stevie Taylor), Helen Martin (Bobby's Grandmother), Starletta DuPois (Bobby's Mother), David McKnight (Uncle Ray), Keenen Ivory Wayans (Donald), Lou B. Washington (Tiny), Brad Sanders (B. B. Sanders/Batty Boy), John Witherspoon (Mr. Jones), Eugene Robert Glazer (Director), Lisa Mende (Casting Director), and Dom Irrera (Writer) Directed by Robert Townsend (#1315 - Eddie Murphy Raw)

Review: 

There is always enough time to do a movie where with an actor-star double threat, and this time is no different here. Born in Chicago, Robert Townsend found an interest in acting as a teenager, even in the face of studying at Illinois State University, as he found that his passion for acting, whether in workshops, standup, or appearances in movies such as Cooley High [1975] and A Soldier's Story [1984]. Incidentally, Townsend auditioned for Saturday Night Live in 1980 only to be passed over for Eddie Murphy. When it came to this movie, Townsend shifted interest into directing by the early 1980s and he would bring the help of Keenan Ivory Wayans (who he had known for a handful of years) into writing the film together, which was funded by a row of pre-approved credit card applications. The movie was shot over the course of nearly two years (while actually only having filming done in fourteen days) because Townsend had to make sure the budget would not go under by going on tour with his standup routines. As it turned out, the scene in the film involving looking for “Eddie Murphy-type,” was so amusing to Murphy that when he saw the movie, he asked for Townsend to direct the concert film Eddie Murphy Raw, which was released a few months after Shuffle. In his career, Townsend has directed seven theatrical films to go along with occasional acting roles and work in television, as highlighted by works such as The Five Heartbeats and The Parent 'Hood.

Technically the movie could be thought of as a sketch movie, because there are a handful of vignettes dedicated to making light of certain experiences and viewpoints, whether that involves a "Black Acting School" or, well, making light of Siskel & Ebert with "Sneaking into the Movies". One finds a clear passion by Townsend in poking at people who seem to believe that people have look and act a certain type of way just to even be considered for movies, right down to having a character even remark that it isn't about the art for them but the "sequel". It stings to see the depths people will go in treating people as cogs to throw in and out on a whim and asks the question of what it takes to "play the game" when it really is a matter of one's soul on the selling line. Sure, it comes and goes in getting its target down with bite to match, but it manages to hold together for 78 minutes with pretty game people for those bits spent in mockery, such as the vignette about a private eye is particularly funny to play with the cliches in sharp energy. Others come and go in varying levels of interest, whether that involves the interludes spent in dead-end nature with Witherspoon/Wayans/Washington or the sharp seasonable presence in Martin or most significantly, the one-scene wonder with the helpful McKnight. I like the last sequences in showing a key message not merely by preaching to the pulpit but by just showing how it looks to people around them (and one callback about making a honest living). Life will crush you down regardless of one's race, but that doesn't mean you have to let your dream pass you by. In that sense, Hollywood Shuffle has relevant chuckles at the expense of an industry that likes to pigeon-hole people in a certain way that can only be remedied by looking at the options laid in front of them and moving forward on one's own path. In short: it is a biting movie with a good deal of laughs.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Creepshow 2.

Review #2268: Creepshow 2.

Cast: 

Wraparound story: Domenick John (Billy), Tom Savini (The Creep), Joe Silver (The Creep voice), with the voices of Brian Noodt, Marc Stephan Delgatto, Jason Late, P.J. Morrison, and Clark Utterback.

"Old Chief Wood'nhead" segment: George Kennedy (Ray Spruce), Dorothy Lamour (Martha Spruce), Philip Dore (Curly), Frank Salsedo (Ben Whitemoon), Holt McCallany (Sam Whitemoon), David Holbrook (Vince “Fat Stuff” Gribbens), Don Harvey (Andy Cavanaugh), and Dan Kamin (Old Chief Wood'nhead)

"The Raft" segment: Paul Satterfield (Deke), Jeremy Green (Laverne), Daniel Beer (Randy), and Page Hannah (Rachel)

"The Hitchhiker" segment: Lois Chiles (Annie Lansing), David Beecroft (Annie's Lover), Tom Wright (The Hitchhiker), Richard Parks (George Lansing), Stephen King (Truck Driver), and Cheré Bryson (Woman at Accident)

Directed by Michael Gornick.

Review: 

Oh hey, remember Creepshow (1982)? That was the fun-as-hell anthology film (distributed by Warner Bros.) that had the 1-2 punch of George A. Romero directing five stories that had each been written by Stephen King. There were plenty of interesting shots in the film that aimed to capture the feel of comics such as Tales from the Crypt that had interested the minds of children (and made whiny complainers mad) in the 1950s. Five years after the general success of the film came a sequel that had Michael Gornick serve as director. In addition to being the cinematographer of five Romero features (such as Creepshow), he had directed a handful of episodes of the Romero-created Tales from the Darkside (1984-86) show; this is the only film directed by Gornick. Stephen King wrote an outline for the film that George A. Romero utilized to write the screenplay. Of course, because of a lessened budget for the sequel (reported to be half of the original, as distributed by New World Pictures), the plan for five stories instead became just three. "Pinfall" involved a rivalry between two bowling teams that turns deadly in more ways than one. Apparently, the story was adapted into a comic book of limited quantity in 2016. The other story, "The Cat from Hell" (a story written by King in 1977), would eventually find its way into filming as one of the segments for Tales from the Darkside: The Movie (1990), which if you remember was co-written by Romero. The movie was a mild hit with audiences. There was a Creepshow 3 (2006), but it is more "in name-only" than anything; a TV series based on the 1982 film (with two King stories adapted into episode form) came out in 2019.

This time around, there are a few wraparound segments (done in animation), such as the five-minute opening involving a delivery boy and "The Creep" (seen in live action for the intro and the final shot before the credits). I wanted to like this movie, but there is an underwhelming fashion to it all that reminds me more of lesser episodes of Tales from the Darkside than the fun times one had with Creepshow (there isn't anything as entertaining as say, Leslie Nielsen casually burying a man on the beach). It just doesn't have as much interesting things to really play in grand execution, seeming more a problem of middling acting and budget more than anything. In terms of "not quite great anthology", it probably matches more with The Vault of Horror (1973) than Tales from the Crypt (1972), which is to say is not a compliment. "Old Chief Wood'nhead" is somehow the longest story at 28 minutes, probably because it loves to stall for what it thinks is atmosphere for the beginning when it comes to setting up an old dying town and two leads in Kennedy and Lamour that is then interrupted by-oh you get the idea, something has to happen for a wooden Indian statue to matter. It is about as predictable as the gore that will arise from it, for better or worse. "The Raft", lasting roughly 20 minutes, was based on the King story of the same name (as published in 1982), albeit with a few small changes. It probably matches the best in terms of compact pacing with a useful enough terror to go with some silly teenagers getting nabbed. "The Hitchhiker", lasting roughly 24 minutes, is mostly a duet where one hangs inside a car and one hangs from it. Chiles and her casual nature of trying to cope with what is and what isn't real in that debate of culpability while one gets to hear "Thanks for the ride, lady!" again and again. The movie didn't really have that much steam to lose, anyway. The wraparound segments aren't even that satisfying after a while because really, what's the point of having Tom Savini under makeup anyway? The animation is mild and overall conclusion involving plants isn't even worth writing home about. In conclusion, there are plenty of things one can say about the movie that are "okay" or "mild", but the movie in total never particularly gels greatly enough in enough of its stories to really pull a punch. Being the sequel to a really fun anthology is no fun, managing to make the subsequent Tales from the Darkside film come off as being better handled is another matter. I can't call it a good movie because I know it will just fade from my head as quickly as it came in, which is a shame.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

Ishtar.

Review #2248: Ishtar.

Cast: 

Dustin Hoffman (Chuck Clarke), Warren Beatty (Lyle Rogers), Isabelle Adjani (Shirra Assel), Charles Grodin (Jim Harrison), Jack Weston (Marty Freed), Carol Kane (Carol), Tess Harper (Willa Rogers), Aharon Ipalé (Emir Yousef), Fred Melamed (the Caid of Assari), Fuad Hageb (Abdul), David Margulies (Mr. Clarke) and Rose Arrick (Mrs. Clarke) Written and Directed by Elaine May.

Review: 

"Well, oddly enough when I made this movie, Ronald Reagan was president and there was Iran-Contra, we were supporting Iran and Iraq. We put in Saddam. We had taken out the Shah. Khomeini was there. I remember looking at Ronald Reagan and thinking—I’m qualifying this, this was just an idea, I didn’t really believe it—I thought, he’s from Hollywood, he’s a really nice man. It’s possible the only movie he’s ever seen about the Middle East are the road movies with Hope and Crosby, and I thought I would make that movie....If all of the people who hate Ishtar had seen it, I would be a rich woman today."

To put it mildly, Ishtar landed like a smelly fish being thrown onto a wedding party with audiences at large. There's plenty to say about Elaine May beyond just saying this is (currently) her last film as a feature director. The Philadelphia native was the child of actors that had their own Yiddish theater company. Not surprisingly, she got into acting, which eventually led her to meeting Mike Nichols. The two collaborated with each other in improvisational comedy that led to them doing their own standup team that ran for a few years (resulting in Grammy Awards) before they went their own ways. After a handful of years in acting and theatre work, May became a director with A New Leaf in 1971. The Heartbreak Kid (1972) is arguably her most noted film, but Micky and Nicky (1976) endured enough trouble that she did not have her cut of the film shown to the public until after the film already died in theaters. So, a decade later, May was essentially given a chance to direct again because of her help in writing on Heaven Can Wait (1978) and Reds (1981), which each had Warren Beatty as star and director. So yes, Beatty would produce the film (believing that May never had a good producer behind her) to go along with starring alongside Hoffman, who happened to have the help of May in (uncredited) work on Tootsie (1982) and eventually went along with being in the film despite his misgivings about the script (specifically when the film shifts from New York to Morocco for "these guys who think they're Simon and Garfunkel"). While the movie was a flop, May has continued to write (such as the 1996 Nichols comedy The Birdcage) and occasionally act into her nineties.

Maybe it works better for those more familiar with road movies. The film is basically a riff on the seven Road to... films that featured Bing Crosby, Bob Hope & Dorothy Lamour from 1940 to 1962. Those were comedies that were more about gags (and the occasional song) than plot (which could have differing professions from film to film such as sailor playboys on an island or inept vaudevillians dealing with evil hypnotists). Of course, maybe I'm not as familiar with Hoffman or Beatty in films. Maybe it just was a bit too subtle for its time. Maybe, maybe, maybe, nah, this movie just wasn't for me. Honestly, I tried to give the movie a fair shake, but really it just wasn't that funny. It lumbers in the time between the start and actually getting to Ishtar with songs that totally supposed to be funny by being terrible (as written by Paul Williams, who you would remember from stuff such as A Star Is Born [1976]). But all I see is a movie that drones and drones until the only thing that matters by the end of its time in the sand and bland is being thankful you aren't stuck watching it further. You can try to mine humor all one wants in uncomfortable neurotic weirdos, you just have to *be funny* about it. Strangely, it reminded me of Spies Like Us (released two years earlier as its own homage to the Road films, complete with having Hope in a cameo), which also wasn't exactly great in, well, the comedy (of course, it didn't stop others from making their own Road homages, as evidenced by The Road to El Dorado [2000]). Hoffman and Beatty have mostly stuck with the film in terms of defending it (for the most part) with the former calling it "a B-minus, C-plus comedy". And there are people that have raised the film up as not being just a noted flop that probably did find something worthwhile in its comedy involving second-rate musicians that fulfill themselves in their craft. The attempts at showing the "creative process" must be how people who don't care for watching movies about making movies feel.

The chemistry of the trio just isn't there to inspire anything on the level beyond looking at the sand and the ideas of trying to say something about the politics around the people thinking about the Middle East that just seems middling. Adjani bumbles around in a silly getup (get it? short hair?) that benefits no one in actual presence, and the only funny one really is Grodin, because he always seems on point for understated amusement (or Weston, who is seldom seen). Even at 107 minutes, it just feels hollow and middle-ground, never actually getting a rise by the time it goes to what surely seemed funny for its climax of essentially saying, yes, you too can sing all you want and be a name if you happen to have leverage. As a whole, the negative buzz around the film didn't lend it many favors back then, and maybe there really will be a push a few more years down the line to really rehabilitate the movie as a hidden gem, but I am not one of those people. Encounter at your own curiosity of a film that is not nearly what you might think it is, for better or worse.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

Next up: let's do a second chance for something that actually is good...Hudson Hawk.

O.C. and Stiggs.

Review #2243: O.C. and Stiggs.

Cast: 

Daniel H. Jenkins (O.C.), Neill Barry (Mark Stiggs), Paul Dooley (Randall Schwab), Jane Curtin (Elinore Schwab), Jon Cryer (Randall Schwab, Jr), Laura Urstein (Lenore Schwab), Victor Ho (Frankie Tang), Ray Walston (Gramps), Donald May (Jack Stiggs), Carla Borelli (Stella Stiggs), Stephanie Elfrink (Missie Stiggs), Amanda Hull (Debbie Stiggs), James Gilsenan (Barney Beaugereaux), Tina Louise (Florence Beaugereaux), Cynthia Nixon (Michelle), Greg Wangler (Jefferson Washington), with Dennis Hopper (Sponson), Martin Mull (Pat Coletti), Melvin van Peebles (Wino Bob), Tiffany Helm (Charlotte), Dana Andersen (Robin), and Bob Uecker (himself) Directed by Robert Altman (#900 - Nashville, #1433 - M*A*S*H, #1890 - The Delinquents, #2061 - Health)

Review: 

"[O.C. and Stiggs] was about how two teenage boys spend their summer, and it was also about cultural anarchy. Teenage exploitation films were all the rage at the time… I agreed to do it because I hated teenage movies so much. I thought I could do it as a satire of a teenage movie. But of course, it was sold as a teenage movie. It was a suspect project from the beginning."

It is strange, I'm not actually that much of an expert on the filmmaking of Robert Altman and yet here we are with something a bit on the odd side for a filmmaker with such a long and winding road over the span of multiple decades. This strange time would come around particularly after the double-edged sword of 1980's Health and Popeye, neither, where the former barely had a release and the latter wasn't as successful with audiences or critics as one hoped. Afterwards, he did a handful of plays and TV productions to go with smaller-scale films, such as Come Back to the 5 & Dime, Jimmy Dean, Jimmy Dean (1982) and Streamers (1983). But O.C. and Stiggs would be an attempt to get back in Hollywood. ...which went a certain type of way. For context, O.C. and Stiggs were originally characters in stories written for National Lampoon magazine by Ted Mann and Tod Carroll, most notably with the 1982 story ""The Utterly Monstrous Mind-Roasting Summer of O.C. and Stiggs". One of the producers of this film was Peter Newman (who had been the production executive of the Jimmy Dean play that Altman had made into a film), who was interested in what he saw of the Stiggs stories. Newman had made an agreement to help produce the film, which would have had Mike Nichols eventually make the film after he finished his other commitments...and then one day Newman, in a conversation with Altman, found someone willing to do the film right then and there, complete with fast tracking for MGM because of their desperation for a teen-movie hit. It was shot in Arizona for MGM away from executives and screenwriters in 1983 that saw a party atmosphere (gambling, smoking pot, here is an informative article about that). While Mann and Carroll were given credit for the story, Carroll elected to take his name off the screenplay (which was credited to Mann and Donald Cantrell) for a film that Mann wasn't particularly big on anyway, calling it "of little interest and believe that the chatter of an ordinary street corner schizo is of equal weight and consequence." MGM hated the film in screenings done for the film in 1984 before limited screenings were eventually one in 1987. Of course, by 1987, Altman was already on the next thing, receiving some notice with Secret Honor (1984) to go along with subsequent notice with his TV production Tanner '88 alongside Vincent & Theo (1990) before his "comeback" with The Player (1992).

Sure, one could see the truth that Carroll and Mann had tried to seek out in their characters in "middle-class America" in a coming of age. Of course, I had a feeling that somehow, this film would remind me of Health (1980) in that "oh it seems kinda funny, but you just know only five people would like it in theaters". To see O.C. and Stiggs is to see a movie wrapped with plenty of seething amusement for the time and place it exists in. Imagine a film set in suburban Arizona of all godforsaken places and think that this would be a normal teen movie, although you do get a song courtesy of King Sunny Adé and His African Beats. Screw it, I kind of enjoyed this movie, which just manages to hit the sweet-spot when it comes to chaotic hellraisers. The few people that actually saw the movie upon release basically took the movie seriously without thinking of all the caricatures that are present in a world of self-absorbed weirdos (just get a look at the bomb shelter near the end). These folks really believe they are living the American Dream (consider one quote involving "Arkansas is one of the United States. All America is the same" coming from one of the parental figures to go alongside the other one that, well, is a bigot) that happens to have smug self-satisfied avengers for leads. It is a contorted and twisted film that happens to have a bevy of riches for its supporting cast (speaking of people in little-seen Altman films, Paul Dooley...) to support our two leads. It may seem mean, but the madcap bitterness is the point, and I think you could really interpret Mann's statement about the film as being bitter at being outclassed by a director who made a prank film at the expense of both writers and studio executives. Jenkins and Barry (each first-timer film stars) may not have ended up being a duo that had multiple films to engage in madcap stuff together, but I think they do pretty well together here. They smirk and engage with the world as if they were a trickster God, which actually seems pretty in line with what teenagers really seem to be to the ones around them: silly jerks with every-changing fashion sense (others probably had at least one person they treated like crap as a friend growing up anyway). The object of their bullying is Dooley, who is delightfully smarmy and amusing in the ways one would expect from a portrayal of a 1980s conservative in his suburban element, one that sees past the strangeness of his family in the known alcoholic to all but herself with Curtain and the stunted weirdo in Cryer to go along with a son-in-law who has the most decisive moment to finally speak after so many casual snipes at his Asian heritage. It is probably apt of something that Hopper appeared in this film the same year that he did a daredevil stunt in front of college students involving a chair and sticks of dynamite. Altman having Hopper doing a riff on the role he did in Apocalypse Now (1979) is crispy in its amusement, actually, one who gets to casually say lines such as calling guns a "disease" with worthwhile conviction, particularly when he gets to go loose for the climax. One sees plenty of presences of once and future presences in film/TV (such as a young bemused Nixon to go with a typically "on" Mull to go with a goofy codger in Walston), which probably takes the cake when one sees Bob Uecker ramble to essentially nobody for his cameo sequence. The 109-minute experience gives plenty of anarchy to see among the odd suburbanites (take one look at the places) that lands more often than not in Altman's practical joke among those looking for a typical teenage comedy in the 1980s without some sort of abject shot at society as one knows it.  I found this movie by the stupidest of ways, googling random films to maybe transfer over to USB (after finding a copy on the Internet) for later use (this goes along with "amusing" perspectives on obscure stuff). I can't say the film is for everyone, but if one manages to find this film (Internet or otherwise), I recommend seeing the film in all of its zany idiocy as an Altman movie wrapped in the underbelly of artificiality for delightful hit-or-miss entertainment.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Next up: Time enough at last with Nothing But Trouble.

Near Dark.

Review #2188: Near Dark.

Cast: 

Adrian Pasdar (Caleb Colton), Jenny Wright (Mae), Lance Henriksen (Jesse Hooker), Bill Paxton (Severen), Jenette Goldstein (Diamondback), Joshua John Miller (Homer), Marcie Leeds (Sarah Colton), and Tim Thomerson (Loy Colton) Directed by Kathryn Bigelow (#1258 - K-19: The Widowmaker, #1548 - The Hurt Locker, #1820 - The Loveless)

Review: 

I'm sure you can see the familiar tropes here: one wants to make a certain kind of genre movie but when they can't get the funding or interest for it, they find themselves framing it a different way. Eric Red (writer of one previous film with 1986's The Hitcher) and Kathryn Bigelow wanted to do a Western, but they found a lack of interest in making that sort of genre film, which eventually led them to the idea of think outside the box to make a horror-Western graft that attracted attention. The script was done on spec, which helped in having Bigelow to be the one to direct it rather than anyone else. It was made on a budget of $5 million but had considerably less attention paid to it when compared to that other movie about vampires in a small town for 1987 in The Lost Boys (incidentally, that film also featured a son of Jason Miller in Jason Patric). It was distributed by the DeLaurentiis Entertainment Group (as headlined by Dino De Laurentiis that had a place in North Carolina), which went under two years after the release of this film. While Bigelow went six years between The Loveless and this film, her next film would come out in less time with Blue Steel (1990), which she wrote with Red.

This is the kind of film that strips the vampire to the most basic of elements, ones that you don't see fangs or them being affected by religious objects (guns seem more like pellets to them) because the sun and the consequences of love and attraction is more than enough. One won't find anything Gothic here, unless one finds music by Tangerine Dream in that array (no). The vampires are basically gunslingers that happen to love the night while harassing would-be prey. It is a lean 95-minute runtime, packed with entertainment value when it comes to the clashes of a would-be father figure and reality. Honestly, it seems like a toss-up to say whether this one is the better vampire film of its year, but one can at least enjoy either film with their sense of handling the clash of communities, with our lead not exactly being the clear hero type (really one wouldn't be too off to be reminded of The Searchers, albeit in a smaller timeframe). One is watching a wolf pack of grimy people that would be grimy regardless of the vampirism. And it all starts because of one act of being bit by a woman. Pasdar thus has the interesting double-act of being a focus that wants as little to do with vampirism as one could possibly do because, well, it isn't his way as a country boy in a den of experienced bloodsuckers. Pasdar and Wright make for a shaky pairing because of course they would be shaky when it comes to coercions and trying to live down certain choices that grow bigger throughout the film. That scene of Pasdar trying to run down to the van with a cover, flames and all, is quite breathtaking to see when it comes to making choices and sticking with them. Apparently, Henriksen, in costume, would go around picking up hitchhikers to prepare for the role, which is meant to be a vampire old enough to fight for the Confederacy. He chews up this role for all of the charismatic menace possible, a "father of the night" that would fit the most within horror or the Western genres. Of course, the other big presence is Paxton, who is having a ball as a vampire could possibly have when it comes to practically playing with his food, such as the scene where he gets into a momentary fight with a tough guy that has him "choking" before he takes the time to steal some sunglasses and muse about hating eating folks who are unshaved. He just knows the buttons to push when it comes to conniving century-old presences that don't need much backstory to convey chaos. Rounding out the cast is Goldstein and Miller, with the latter indeed being a child actor playing a vampire that is quite creepy. I appreciate the film for maintaining steady pacing in the tension in trying to affirm just where they belong and making the choice of where to stand when the sun is about to rise. Bigelow's second effort as a filmmaker is a solid one, packed with a few thrills for the horror and western parameters that deserved better for its time - no better time to see some frontier terror in the dark.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Adventures in Babysitting.

Review #2047: Adventures in Babysitting.

Cast: 

Elisabeth Shue (Christina "Chris" Parker), Keith Coogan (Brad Anderson), Anthony Rapp (Daryl Coopersmith), Maia Brewton (Sarah Anderson), Penelope Ann Miller (Brenda), Bradley Whitford (Mike Todwell), Calvin Levels (Joe Gipp), George Newbern (Dan Lynch), John Chandler (Bleak), Ron Canada (Graydon), John Ford Noonan ("Handsome" John Pruitt), Albert Collins (Himself), and Vincent D'Onofrio (Dawson) Directed by Chris Columbus (#038 - Percy Jackson & the Olympians: The Lightning Thief, #117 - Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone, #118 - Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets, #304 - Home Alone, #310 - Home Alone 2: Lost in New York, and #831 - Mrs. Doubtfire)

Review: 

I do try to keep up with as many filmmakers as possible, particularly in tracking debut features. So here we are with Chris Columbus. Born to a coal miner and a factory worker in Spangler, Pennsylvania (but raised mostly in Ohio), he grew up with an interest in books, comics, and movies, which honed to his modest living. He studied at New York University but learned his key lesson due to a mistake that had him work in a factory for a summer that drove him to write above all else. He started to write screenplays in the 1980s, and Reckless was the first one bought for a director to make, albeit one that was a flop. However, his next script in Gremlins (1984) was a major hit that saw him receive further work for screenplays that led to The Goonies and Young Sherlock Holmes (both 1985). Adventures in Babysitting (1987) was written by David Simkins, and Columbus picked the script from the countless ones he read because he was fine with the small sense of scale it had. After the release of the film, he would follow it up with Heartbreak Hotel (1988), which was not quite as successful as this film with audiences, but then came an offer from John Hughes to direct a Christmas comedy with Home Alone (1990), and I think you know the rest (which included him later co-founding his own production company). 

If you want, you could do an entire game of how many things seemed ripe for sitcoms. You've got 24-year-olds meant to be playing high school seniors (one of whom gets mistaken for a Playboy model for a few jokes, because, well...?), folks getting into wacky hijinks in tall buildings, a chase to fool the parents, and so on and on. The fact that the movie is set in Chicago as a presentation of folks from the suburbs getting into the big city all by themselves is probably the least surprising thing ever to happen in one of these teen comedies. Shue is at least delightful in the lead role, warm and engaging that suits the need of the film in the most basic element in engagement. Granted, her (and Whitford, most significantly) is probably a bit too close to the edge of being "young" enough to play high schoolers, but at least she makes the most of being the heart of the film in the ways that matter. The trio of Coogan-Rapp-Brewton is at least decent enough as kids to go along with Shue, in terms of trying to sell such cheap gags. The less said about the totally-hilariously panicky Miller, the better (oh look, a young Vincent D'Onofrio!). The film badly needs a more prominent threat than Chandler, who might as well be ripped from some other film about the city, which goes for Levels as well. I think your enjoyment of the film will depend on just how many twee things you can take for something that would make Weird Science (1985) blush in how average it all ends up being, right down to its climax involving a drawn-out sequence involving heights. I wish I could embrace the film, but there is something so corny about its entanglement that makes me reluctant to give credit beyond a few decent performances that come with hit-and-miss gags. It reminds me of the kid in the back of the classroom: it doesn't matter if he can sit still or not, the attempts at making a joke are going to feel the same no matter what the time of day it is. The most interesting sequence might be a blues one involving Albert Collins that sees an impromptu song that makes the most of being just as silly in setup as everything else by that point. Writing about the film and its runtime of 99 minutes seems fruitless in trying to beat down the point that it doesn't have enough foundation to back up its ambitions. It reminds me of Footloose (1984) in that regard. Columbus shows some promise with his first time here, but there are better ways to spend looking at someone's first film.  As a whole, it lacks that certain type of magic beyond the paint-by-numbers stuff to make it worthy to recommend beyond for folks who are pretty familiar already with the time it was made for.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

Redux: Predator.

Redux: #325: Predator.

Cast: 

Arnold Schwarzenegger (Dutch Schaefer), Carl Weathers (George Dillon), Elpidia Carrillo (Anna), Bill Duke (Mac Eliot), Jesse Ventura (Blain Cooper), Sonny Landham (Billy Sole), Richard Chaves (Poncho Ramirez), Shane Black (Rick Hawkins), R. G. Armstrong (Homer Phillips), and Kevin Peter Hall (The Predator) Directed by John McTiernan (#014 - Die Hard, #018 - Die Hard with a Vengeance, #080 - The Hunt for Red October)

Review: 

"Terrifying in a lot of ways, and a learning experience in a lot of other ways." - John McTiernan

The key to understanding Predator, released on June 12, 1987, is that it is a triumph of arrangement and dedication from top to bottom that delivers a multi-genre success for its makers and star. Jim Thomas and John Thomas (raised in Bakersfield, California and each serving a variety of odd-jobs before trying to be writers) were inspired by old mythological tales told to them by their parents such as The Brothers Grimm when it came to the script, which would see what would happen when one hunts the hunter; the script was finished in 1983 and sold in early 1984; it should be noted however that one other inspiration, quoted in a magazine detailing the production in 1987, was a joke that had circulated around Hollywood involving Rocky IV (1985) where the title character would probably have to fight an alien for the next bout. At any rate, producer 20th Century Fox handed Joel Silver (fresh off hits like 48 Hrs (1982) and Commando (1985)) the script in 1985, which he liked, and he served as a co-producer with John Davis and Lawrence Gordon (un-credited script work was apparently done later by David Peoples and also Shane Black). You have to consider that this was the big hit for its main director in John McTiernan. From a career that went from 1986 to its untimely "end" in 2003, he directed eleven feature films. Born in Albany, New York, he studied at both Juilliard School and the American Film Institute, graduating from the latter in 1975. He did a variety of commercials to start his career before his first film with Nomads (1986). That movie was not a success with critics or audiences, but it did attract one fan: Arnold Schwarzenegger, who liked the tense atmosphere created on a low budget. Commitments from its star meant that shooting was not started until 1986, and it proved to be a grueling shoot that saw dedicated work had to be done with effects, which needed work from R/Greenberg Associates to pull off the effect of a creature in thermal vision and a chameleon-like invisibility, which meant someone had to run around in a red suit and a second take with a 30% wider lens to make one optical shot). Plans to use a creature designed by Richard Edlund of Boss Film Studios resulted in an ungainly result that needed a new designer: Stan Winston, who took a suggestion made while sketching (James Cameron) that resulted in a creature with mandibles. While it was not exactly a critical darling on release, its reputation has improved in later years, and it was an audience hit in 1987. The success of the film would lead to a sequel in 1990, which had the Thomas brothers return to write the film. Each sequel has seen a different cast and locale: the second film was set in Los Angeles during a heat wave and drug cartel war, Predators (2010) was set on an alien planet with trained killers being hunted, and The Predator (2018) matched soldiers against Predators on Earth while Prey, set to be released in 2022, will apparently match the creatures against Commanche warriors in 1719. 

We have a movie that starts out as an action feature with plenty of macho trimmings that warm one up to the surroundings before it eventually segues into a sci-fi horror feature that keeps the interest high. Apparently, the original script involved just one man up against a predator before changes were made, and it is a wise one, since the picking off the crew makes for a capable thriller that McTiernan can arrange with suitable staging that makes the 107 minutes pass by with quick engagement. Yes, it has some of the little quips that come from select Schwarzenegger features, but it also sees him look at the very least vulnerable enough to where one might really think the character could not make it. In other words: he had improved himself quite a bit from his bodybuilder image and stuff like Conan the Barbarian (1982). For a movie inspired by Joseph Conrad's Heart of Darkness, the result works well in turning what was a would-be rescue operation into a fight of survival. You have a cadre of actors here (a mix of veterans and younger actors) that make an impression on you with little charming moments, such as Ventura (a Navy man and WWF star at the time) practically chewing lines of bravado or with a joking but efficient Black. Chaves lingers his ground with the rest of the bunch. Landham makes a calm and collected presence of fire to accompany the bunch, while Duke and Weathers seal the tandem up with their own brand of distinct charm and habits. Carrillo is the distinct middle ground between all the hunters, which is spent mostly in calm terror that works to the moments required for a movie where the jungle comes alive. The creature would be played by Kevin Peter Hall (a height of 7 feet and 2 two inches), replacing Jean-Claude Van Damme (5'9) to wanting a more imposing actor for the cumbersome suit, which does look quite menacing enough to work on the level that it needs to be seen. Given that Hall couldn't really see out of the suit, he makes the best of it by making the climax work as well as it does because one finds this to be a suitable presence to counteract Schwarzenegger with all the buildup the movie has done: two warriors, having found out aspects about the other in how to hide and how to entrap, now find themselves combatting in the dark, as opposed to just having a firefight with shots being fired to no particular location. With a distinct musical score by Alan Silvestri (fresh off scores for films such as Back to the Future) and interesting special effects that show well in the jungle landscape shot in Mexico, it all adds up to a quality adventure that uses its strong cast and surroundings for an efficient movie of its time. As a whole, Predator works because of its arrangements from start to finish: director, actors, design, nnd more to make for a quality action adventure.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Beverly Hills Cop II.

Review #1842: Beverly Hills Cop II.

Cast: 

Eddie Murphy (Detective Axel Foley), Judge Reinhold (Detective Billy Rosewood), Jürgen Prochnow (Maxwell Dent), John Ashton (Detective John Taggart), Ronny Cox (Captain Andrew Bogomil), Brigitte Nielsen (Karla Fry), Allen Garfield (Chief Harold Lutz), Brian O'Connor (Detective Biddle), Dean Stockwell (Charles Cain), Gil Hill (Inspector Douglas Todd), Gilbert Gottfried (Sidney Bernstein), Paul Reiser (Detective Jeffrey Friedman), Paul Guilfoyle (Nikos Thomopolis), Robert Ridgely (Mayor Ted Egan), and Alice Adair (Jan Bogomil) Directed by Tony Scott (#029 - Top Gun, #253 - Unstoppable, #357 - The Last Boy Scout, #1632 - True Romance)

Review: 

Admittedly, it isn't much of a surprise that this film came on the heels of a successful feature, one that  celebrates its 35th anniversary of release. Beverly Hills Cop (1984), based on a script by Danilo Bach and Daniel Petrie Jr with direction by Martin Brest, was the right movie at the right time to bring its main star (Eddie Murphy rather than Sylvester Stallone, who is referenced from time to time in this movie) to widespread popularity, one that was the biggest blockbuster (and biggest overall hit) of its year. As such, the sequel features the same producers in Don Simpson and Jerry Bruckheimer along with most of the regulars back to star; the movie was done rather than the idea of doing a television series, which is what Paramount Pictures wanted to do (Murphy said no to the idea). Of course, the writers are different, as Larry Ferguson and Warren Skaaren wrote the screenplay while Robert D. Wachs and Eddie Murphy did the story. For what it's worth, Murphy said a few years later that it was a "half-assed movie." Tony Scott, who had made a serviceable hit for Bruckheimer with Top Gun (1986), was brought in to direct the movie, which was his third ever feature as director (with his older brother Ridley, they had founded a company together in 1968 that honed directors like him and Alan Parker in making commercials).

At least "Shakedown" is a good song to start with (Bob Seger is underrated)? Honestly, it is just okay. It doesn't do well in terms of generating amusement, but Scott does well enough with staging the action and general charm of Murphy and friends to make a relatively decent experience. One gets to see Murphy paired with Reinhold and Ashton while others nearly fall by the wayside, whether that means Prochnow or with Cox. It glides around for103-minute with some of the same beats from the original while trying to not muddle the machinations of the plot, which goes from "fish out of water breaking into a crime ring by a businessman" to "not fish out of water breaking into a crime ring by a businessman" (both involving someone close to him being shot in Beverly Hills), with "alphabet crimes" being the name of the game here. Scott stated this film as a cross between Beverly Hills Cop and 48 Hrs (1982), but it inadvertently serves as a precursor to Murphy doing second-tier work in later years such as Another 48 Hrs (1990), although at least this film doesn't strain itself too hard to explain its plot beyond what it needs to. Murphy at least makes the effort in driving the movie along with his general charm that maneuvers his way through the action/comedy beats with staid patience rather than complete "paycheck mode". Additionally, Reinhold and Ashton make for a good trio to follow along with in budding engagement, where one likes to see them around making good beats for timing with contrast between calm and hard-lined personality. Prochnow and Nielsen are moderately around the adversarial level that the first film had in general "okay" quality that can't exactly stand out too well from Murphy besides cardboard threats of inevitability (Stockwell being used as a front man rather than for actual moments of ooze is particularly vexing, I don't care how many movies Prochnow has done, you cannot tell me Stockwell isn't up to his par). Besides, Garfield is the hard-lined foil to remember for short bits anyway. There are a select number of small appearances with recognizable faces (established or not), with some of those working out fine like with Gottfried and his momentary bumbling (also, Chris Rock makes his first film appearance) while others...do not (no one, and I mean no one, needs a sequence at the Playboy Mansion). As a whole, the movie is glossier and perhaps less heightened than the original, one with all the right (cliche) moves that will please just the folks who are fine with what they have seen before, serving as a pinnacle of average. There is nothing great or terrible with it, which seems more of a description of fast-food products more than anything. With that in mind, this is one of those "take it or leave it" movies, where Murphy and company carry it far enough over the finish line to make the experience mostly worth it. In a sea of Murphy movies, being in the middle of the pack is not a bad thing to consider.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Silent Night, Deadly Night Part 2.

Review #1776: Silent Night, Deadly Night Part 2.

Cast: 

Eric Freeman (Ricky Caldwell), Darrel Guilbeau (Ricky, age 15), Brian Michael Henley (Ricky, age 10), James L. Newman (Dr. Henry Bloom), Elizabeth Kaitan (Jennifer Statson), Jean Miller (Mother Superior), Corrine Gelfan (Martha Rosenberg), Michael Combatti (Morty Rosenberg), Jill K. Allen (Mrs. Rosenberg's Friend), Ken Weichert (Chip), Ron Moriarty (Detective), and Frank Novak (Rocco, The Loan Shark) Directed by Lee Harry.

Featuring archival footage of Robert Brian Wilson (Billy Chapman, age 18), Danny Wagner (Billy, age 8), Jonathan Best (Billy, age 5), Alex Burton (Ricky Caldwell, age 14), Max Broadhead (Ricky, age 4), Gilmer McCormick (Sister Margaret), and Lilyan Chauvin (Mother Superior)

Review: 

If you remember, people got really weird about the idea of someone dressed up as Santa Claus going around slashing people in Silent Night, Deadly Night (1984). In that film, if you recall, this happened to an eighteen year old after having a psychological breakdown from a bad childhood where he saw his parents get killed by a man in said suit (after conveniently having his grandfather tell him that Santa punishes the "naughty" kids) and raised in a sad orphanage. Critics took umbrage with the film as some sort of feeling that it was either something that would traumatize kids and their trust in Santa (uh...) or as "bloody money" (as stated by Gene Siskel, which is purely ridiculous). Parents groups also took (hysterical) umbrage with the film and even had protesters picket the theater and sing Christmas carols (of course, I'm not sure how that is supposed to sway someone interested in watching a slasher film). Even Mickey Rooney spoke out against the film, saying "How dare they! I'm all for the first amendment but... don't give me Santa Claus with a gun going to kill someone. The scum who made that movie should be run out of town." (he proceeded to star in Silent Night, Deadly Night 5: The Toy Maker). Of course, it wasn't even the first Christmas slasher film, since Christmas Evil (1980) had been released independently, but I think you can understand how times have changed since 1984, for better or worse. Imagine my surprise to hear that a second film came and went without even half of the controversy, three years later. Granted, it barely had a release in theaters at all, but it still made it in time with alleged scares to follow. The film was written by Harry and Joseph H. Earle for its screenplay while its story was done by Lee, Earle, Dennis Patterson, and Lawrence Appelbaum (the latter also produced the film).

Are you ready for this? Somehow, the producers got an idea to take the first film and basically re-edit it with a few small new sequences to try and sell a "new" film to audiences. But the director managed to convince them to allow for a few days of shooting to film a few new sequences that could at least make a plot besides just re-using the original. So... that means nearly forty minutes of footage from the first film is present here, basically telling us an abridged version of the events from that film again, with occasional narration (by Freeman) or segments involving Freeman and Newman (try not to dwell on the fact that a character is narrating events that they were not present for and for some reason with a different last name than before); the total run-time of this film is 88 minutes, by the way,  complete with crediting the original cast in the credits. Eventually comes the use of footage with Freeman in the "well, now here's what happened when I turned 18" before finally, finally getting to actual breathing attempts at slasher stuff near the end. The gore is okay, but it proves pretty silly compared to what we had to see for the first forty minutes. You have a scene where a guy pushes an umbrella through someone's entire body before it reaches its peak with the one sticking line of the film: The killer, loose on a rampage seeing someone put their garbage on the street and saying "Garbage Day!" in an over-the-top nature. It became a "meme" in the early days of the Internet for good reason. Freeman attracted a cult following, probably amplified by the fact that he basically disapeared from acting after 1992. In fact, he couldn't even be contacted when it came time to do a commentary with Harry; an actual community on the Internet was even made (Finding Freeman) about him. The writer of the film apparently encouraged Freeman to go for an over-the-top performance, while Harry did not give him too much encouragement. One will see plenty of eyebrow twitching and shifts in his voice that makes for a curious performance. It is more watchable to hear him toy with Newman than it is to hear him narrate over exposition. Him just saying "I was there." to when he is asked about how he remembers a murder as a baby makes it almost seem worth it. All Newman has to do is sit in a chair and look over Chapman as the plot is told and so on, which is at least better than it could have been. Kaitian and Weichert make the significant part of the "plot" (i.e. a romance and rival), and each actually make Freeman look better by comparison before they become bait (Gelfan and Combatti basically disappear from the film after only a few minutes, somehow). It is bewildering to show so much stock footage of Chauvin and her icy effective performance from the first film only to have a different actress play the character in Miller (complete with makeup). It just doesn't seem the same when it comes to character motivation (if you can call it that for this film) when talking about the climax. Somehow, the series would morph into further weirdness. While the second film was the last to be released theatrically, three further films followed, each with their own storyline (the third one re-casts the "Billy" character while following up this one). A remake called Silent Night (2012) was also made. As a whole, the film is an amusing embarrassment, one that can't live up to the already mediocre standards the first feature had done that shows its limitations in all of the campy ways possible. If one wants to see where "Garbage Day!" comes from...seeing the clip is better than seeing the film, probably.  

Overall, I give it 4 out of 10 stars.

Next time: something better, again.

The Lost Boys.

Review #1745: The Lost Boys.

Cast: 

Jason Patric (Michael Emerson), Corey Haim (Sam Emerson), Dianne Wiest (Lucy Emerson), Barnard Hughes (Grandpa), Edward Herrmann (Max), Kiefer Sutherland (David Powers), Jami Gertz (Star), Corey Feldman (Edgar Frog), Jamison Newlander (Alan Frog), Billy Wirth (Dwayne), Alex Winter (Marko), and Brooke McCarter (Paul) Directed by Joel Schumacher (#197 - Phone Booth, #217 - Batman Forever, and #218 - Batman & Robin)

Review: 

“Warner Bros. took a big chance with this movie, and with me, because they really didn’t know what the heck I was doing."

The 1980s must have been an interesting time for horror fans to see come out on the screen, particularly for folks who wanted to see a fresh rendition of the vampire. They certainly got their money's worth with this spectacle, one that definitely owes as much to MTV as it does to Peter Pan. There were a sea of movies with vampires in that era (and, of course, a great one with Nosferatu the Vampyre in 1979) such as The Hunger (1983), Fright Night (1985), Lifeforce (1985), and even The Monster Squad (1987). But when it comes down to lingering influence, one can't ignore the lasting endurance of The Lost Boys, which inspired filmmakers such as Joss Whedon. The original idea came from James Jermias, a grip at the time on studio lots that had read Anne Rice's 1976 novel Interview With the Vampire (which if you remember had its own adaptation in 1994), which led him to think about Peter Pan and the idea of vampires that could come out at night to fly without growing up (hence the title). He wrote the screenplay with Janice Fischer in 1984, but their idea involved pre-teens rather than adults (for example, the Frog brothers were written originally as eight year old Boy Scouts and the character of Star was a boy). The following year resulted in the script being sold for a fair sum with plans to have Richard Donner direct, albeit with a re-write. Jeffrey Boam was brought in to do a fresh draft, but Donner would not be around to direct, since Lethal Weapon soon was offered to him. Enter Schumacher. If you remember, he had gotten his start in Hollywood as a costume designer before dabbling into screenwriting with Car Wash (1976), with directing coming in The Incredible Shrinking Woman (1981) before having his first notable hit with St. Elmo's Fire (1985), which had been produced by Lauren Shuler, who recommended Schumacher for this film. If it wasn't for the fact that he developed ideas of his own upon seeing the script (which he described as "Goonies Go Vampire", complete with a cave), he would have turned it down...instead, he found inspiration involving teenaged vampires with motorcycles (for his part, he believed vampires to be a metaphor for oral sex), one that he tasked to make the "coolest vampire movie ever made" (in his words). At any rate, the film is generally considered one of Schumacher's most enduring works, which included a few more horror films in a three decade career before his death in 2020.

Honestly, it did take me a while to buy into this film, mostly because one has to remember that Schumacher really seems to have a fascination with getting pretty shots that might as well have been edited for a music video before getting on with creeping weirdness. But it always manages to keep you drawn in with the characters of the night with a curious charisma to go with wonderful design and effects that make for a fun time. Sure, it is a horror film, but that doesn't mean that there aren't a few tinges of humor to ride along with the experience in offbeat characters. Of course, one has to start with the lead in Patric, who actually had to be convinced repeatedly to do the film; he does a fine job here, one that has to balance calmness with eccentrics at every turn that either want to party or take him. Haim matches him just as well, probably best exemplified by the scene where one finds out the other is a vampire with a mirror and all one can say is that they are going to tell on 'em to mother. Wiest is the general straight-laced one of the main triangle that we are introduced to, and she makes it count with useful grace that is warm to follow on the side when not thinking too much about creeps at night. Undeniably, the highlight of the film is Sutherland, who has the most presence among the vampire cast-mates despite not having as many lines as the others; regardless of line count, he gives it his all in evocative charisma in a way that hadn't been seen in a vampiric lead in quite a bit of time, one that oozes along with carefree life befitting the requirements needed for a creeping film of wild living in the night. Feldman and Newlander make a worthy pair of offbeat hunters, selling it beat by beat in half-hearted chuckles. The same can be applied to Hughes, who actually might be my favorite presence in terms of his stubborn approach to everything that includes various traits such as "going out to the country" by turning on the ignition and doing nothing and acting stoic when it comes to the climax with vampires formerly around him. Others do well in smaller focus such as a hazy Gertz and a ruffled Herrmann, but one will find plenty to keep interest for 98 minutes. It moves with the mood of a glossy project with appropriate music trimmings (such as Tim Cappello performing "I Still Believe" in full detail and sax) and a worthy look that I think hits most of its marks with the right touch of effectiveness without becoming a cliché of the youth.

 

The film was a fair hit on release, making back its $8.5 million budget three times over while being a considerable video hit. There were ideas of doing another Lost Boys film with Schumacher involved (with his suggestions being one set during the 1906 San Francisco Earthquake and a "Lost Girls" film), but they never came to pass; instead, two direct-to-video sequels came with Lost Boys: The Tribe (2008) and Lost Boys: The Thirst (2010), which each featured just Feldman and Newlander returning to their roles. Sure, The Lost Boys might be an acquired taste for folks that have their own preferences for vampire horror (with or without tinges of humor), but when it comes to glossy roaring chaos, no one is better suited for such material than Schumacher, and he milks it all for what is needed in curious entertainment. In a decade with a handful of re-inventions, one can't go wrong with The Lost Boys for a fresh take on the desires that comes with eternal youth and bloodlust in all of its weird trappings.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Next Time: Candyman (1992).