Showing posts with label 1990s. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 1990s. Show all posts

June 29, 2026

Under Siege 2: Dark Territory.

Review #2552: Under Siege 2: Dark Territory.

Cast: 
Steven Seagal (Lieutenant Casey Ryback), Eric Bogosian (Travis Dane), Everett McGill (Marcus Penn), Katherine Heigl (Sarah Ryback), Morris Chestnut (Bobby Zachs), Nick Mancuso (Tom Breaker), Brenda Bakke (Captain Linda Gilder), Peter Greene (Mercenary #1), Patrick Kilpatrick (Mercenary #2), Scott Sowers (Mercenary #3), Afifi Alaouie (Fatima), Andy Romano (Admiral Bates), Dale Dye (Captain Nick Garza), Kurtwood Smith (Major General Stanley Cooper), and David Gianopoulos (Captain David Trilling) Directed by Geoff Murphy.

Review: 

Yes, there was a second Under Siege movie. This was the seventh film with Steven Seagal as a star but the first one to come out after the ridiculously overblown On Deadly Ground (1994). You remember Under Siege (1992), right? The original script had been done by Matt Reeves and his college friend Richard Hatem, as they wanted to break into the market of spec scripts with action, with the script (with a working title of "Dark Territory", since, well, it refers to running track not controlled by signals) being described as "meant to be very much like a Die Hard movie". The market crashed for scripts, but it eventually was optioned and converted to what you see, with various script doctors such as Brian Helgeland delivering un-credited work. According to Chestnut, a good deal of the film was improvised, specifically when Seagal was on screen, which basically went, “Okay, this is what’s going to happen. You’re going to say this, I’m going to say this, then I’m going to do that and then you’re going to do that.” This was the last major production for its director Geoff Murphy, who had moved to Hollywood filmmaking after making films in his native New Zealand such as Goodbye Pork Pie (1981), Utu (1983) and The Quiet Earth (1985) that resulted in films such as Young Guns II (1990), Freejack (1992), and, well, this. He kept a busy profile with work in TV, smaller-scale stuff such as Race Against Time (2000) along with second-unit work on The Lord of the Rings. He died in 2018 at the age of 80. Made on a budget of $60 million (double the original), the movie was a mild box office hit, albeit not on the level of the original. Seagal's* next two films the following year were Executive Decision (a supporting role where he took a backseat plane ride to Kurt Russell) and The Glimmer Man

Is it unnecessary? Maybe. Is it not as good as the previous Under Siege? Mostly, yea. Is it worth it? Well, you know, I think so. I suppose this is where the apex of Seagal as a "star" has hit, complete with using a Apple Newton MessagePad 100 to really make this a high-tech thriller. But hey, a movie based in tension about trying to take a top-secret weapon looming in space with a hacker and multiple keyboards? This happened to be released a few months before Goldeneye, by the way. Sure, this is a movie that doesn't have the magic of two villains like before with Tommy Lee Jones and Gary Busey, but Bogosian, combined with the company of a cast that clearly is acting around Seagal, does hold the movie up enough to at least make the movie worth a check. Seagal, well, he mainly is there to lumber around and kick, with ounces of fun only really coming from seeing this guy seemingly try to hide the urge to say/do insane stuff when not engaged in the concentration of being the one-man army (okay, not always one-man, because Chestnut is there at times). He outruns a train crash, for God's sake. Bogosian saw Alan Rickman play a villain in Die Hard (1988) and decided, no I'm not kidding, that he wanted to play "a big, old fat villain in a big action movie". Sure, the end result had a bit of silliness due to the encouragement of Murphy to do so, but he apparently is quite satisfied with how it turned out with a crazed hacker wanting plenty of $ that quotes Louis Pasteur. And I agree with him! He is delightfully fun in this movie, managing to evoke menace with a jagged edge of wit. Then you have folks like McGill (a few years removed from being warmly cool in Twin Peaks*) trying to act tough (as one does when not being foiled by pepper spray) that amuses me greatly in his stature and the eventual result (nobody gets a long fight in this dojo). Chestnut provides a few chuckles as basically the Argyle equivalent that gets to trek across a train and throw people off helicopters while Heigl, well, there's always room to be a character in a different movie. It's an efficient movie for 100 minutes that fiddles in the ride of knowing what you are getting into with goofy scenarios (dropping people off helicopters, big ticking clocks) that you either appreciate or dismiss when it concludes. I liked it fine, and I'll accept the confusion over saying a movie with a middling lead does in fact work enough with the support under him to make it one to recommend. 
 
Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.


*If one goes by what Heigl said or Jenny McCarthy said about auditioning (link here), it was definitely a strange experience being around Seagal.
*I'm still in the second season. We shall see about the movie. Also, he ruled in Licence to Kill.

June 18, 2026

Assassins (1995).

Review #2546: Assassins (1995).

Cast:
Sylvester Stallone (Robert Rath / Joseph Rath), Antonio Banderas (Miguel Bain), Julianne Moore (Electra / Anna), Anatoly Davydov (Nicolai Tashlinkov), Muse Watson (Ketcham), Steve Kahan (Alan Branch), Kai Wulff (Remy), Mark Coates (Jereme Kyle), Kelly Rowan (Jennifer), and Reed Diamond (Bob) Directed by Richard Donner (#075 - Scrooged, #355 - Lethal Weapon, #356 - Lethal Weapon 2, #547 - Superman, #619 - Maverick, #731 - Lethal Weapon 3, #734 - Lethal Weapon 4, #1452 - The Omen, and #1542 - 16 Blocks, #1700 - The Goonies)

Review: 

Admittedly, I picked this movie because I felt it was time to look at another Richard Donner movie. So why not go with this one, a movie released near the tail-end (16th of 20*) of a fairly interesting career? You might think the film credit for the writing is interesting because it lists the Wachowskis for the story and a co-credit with Brian Helgeland (who at the point had worked on the scripts for the fourth A Nightmare on Elm Street film, 976-EVIL, and Highway to Hell) for the screenplay. When Donner got the script from Joel Silver (who had bought the spec script along with The Matrix), he had re-writes done to it (which namely involved toning down the violence along with emphasizing the Rath-Electra storyline while not having a certain character included for the climax), which the Wachowskis did not like to the point where they tried to get their name removed from it, but the Writers Guild of America refused. Interestingly, both screenplays are available for viewing (the Wachowskis one is seen here, while the modified shooting script is seen here). Made on a reported budget for $50 million, the movie was not a huge success with audiences or critics at the time. Probably the only thing the movie ended up being noted for was a reaction shot by Banderas that became a "meme" on the Internet.
 
In some ways, it feels like a movie that is desperate to be liked. With such a limited cast of basically three (with one further person being shoehorned in for the start and end), you might be forgiven for wondering if there was a tiny bit of a Western yearning to come out (an old gunfighter wanting to retire, only to encounter one more gunfight could be seen in say, The Shootist [1976]). And there are moments that are fascinating in Stallone trying to play an understated hero to go along with a colorful Banderas. Of course, the sinking feeling of watching the film unravel around the backstretch of setting up the final  act combines with a middling Moore and an unwieldy runtime of 133 minutes for a sad disappointment that I cannot really defend beyond saying "I like the people* in it but not the vehicle they are driving." Banderas basically steals the show in the theatrics that come in "trying to be No. 1" for basic one-upmanship that desperately needs a funnier or tighter movie to really let him do his thing besides a listless one that seems to accidentally stumble into anything. He's fun, if only because it is Banderas, not so much the script or direction. Stallone could do things other than action movies, the righteous ones know that from Oscar (1991), but I do get why "subdued" isn't exactly an easy sell. Some of the time feels like doddering to try and make him sound more interesting than he needs to be, because really it could've just been a hard-lined silent type and that would work better than trying to play type with Moore, who just seems adrift in "hacker" cliches and little humor to really make for a connection beyond one you might see when stuck at the self-checkout lane at the supermarket. You would think a movie where a guy is chasing someone around in the craven pursuit of being "number one", complete with various "conversations" spent on the computer (as one does as a hired guy, talking with a supervisor) would be more interesting, but no, it's just generic stuff. For a movie with an alleged polish, it just seems all too sluggish to actually get anywhere in staging the action, particularly with a climax that relies on the adversary having to sweat out waiting to shoot a dude leaving a bank (see, because that guy did the same years ago, so it is...tasteful imitation) only to get frustrated to go the bank to confront said guy (which in turn leads to sneaking around the creaky hideout), because, yeah, okay. The twist for the end is just lazy and leads to an even lamer resolution because, screw it, we forgot to have a body count worth updating regardless of how silly it looks. As a whole, Assassins is just a bit too lazy to excel as anything other than a mediocre effort from people who can't override the feeling of watching an undercooked movie that never rises all the way above the bare minimum. It just doesn't have the milage to do better than picking any other action film of its ilk, which is a shame. It's an autopilot movie that you may or may not see some interest in if you really, really, really need to see a certain director or star all the way through. 

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.


*21 if you want to include Superman II: The Richard Donner Cut (2006)
*What can I say, Sylvester Stallone is a fascinating person to see in movies? Sure, I doubt I would agree  with him on say, a certain political topic, but really, how can I turn away from seeing whatever ridiculous stuff he starred/directed? And Moore, well, I love women.

May 30, 2026

The Quest (1999).

Review #2543: The Quest.

Cast: 
Jean-Claude Van Damme (Chris Dubois), Roger Moore (Lord Edgar Dobbs), James Remar (Maxie Devine), Janet Gunn (Carrie Newton), Jack McGee (Harry Smythe), Aki Aleong (Khao Prahan), Louis Mandylor (Riggi), Chang Ching Peng Chaplin (Master Tchi), Ryan Cutrona (Officer O'Keefe), Abdel Qissi (Khan, Mongolian Fighter), Jen Sung (Phang Prahan, Siamese Fighter), Stefanos Miltsakakis (Greek Fighter), Ong Soo Han (Korean Fighter), Peter Wong (Chinese Fighter), Kōji Kitao (Kyoshiro Yama, Japanese Fighter) Directed by Jean-Claude Van Damme.

Review: 
It feels a little nice to finally complete a movie pack, honestly. This was the fourth and final movie on a pack I somehow got about a couple of years ago that had four Jean-Claude Van Damme movies: Hard Target (which was awesome), Lionheart (fair), Sudden Death (hilariously enjoyable), and this one. As early as 1991, Van Damme was interested in doing a film that basically would be his farewell to the martial genre, as he once labeled it as "the Ben-Hur of martial arts films", albeit with inspirations taken from the Belgian comic The Adventures of Tintin. Amidst delays and other strange things (Van Damme apparently was going to fly above the city of Cannes for the 1993 Cannes Film Market in a Quest-branded hot air balloon, but bad weather scuttled these plans), thing eventually started moving with Moshe Diamant as producer for a production that had Universal Pictures distribute the film in North America. The script for the film basically became a rotted potato of half-baked ideas and disputes over who did what, with four names listed: Van Damme and Frank Dux (remember Bloodsport ?) were credited with the story (in a WGA decision rather than going with "Story by Jean-Claude Van Damme and Jean Claude Van Damme & Frank Dux" - more on that in a bit). Steven Klein and Paul Mones were credited with the screenplay, with the former being a pseudonym for Gene Quintano. Ed Khmara apparently was originally paired with Dux to help further out his ideas (after Sheldon Lettich gave some idea pitches but rejected the offer to co-write the movie). The result was a movie that ended up as a bigger hit with international audiences than in America. It is Van Damme's only released film as a director (with Frenchy, a 2008/2010 film, still unreleased). In 1998, Dux (who once claimed Bloodsport was based on his life, among other tall tales) sued Van Damme for improper compensation, arguing that his "Enter the New Dragon" and "The Quest" were the same film and that they had an agreement for money and percentage of the film's profits (somehow, one claim for the promise by Van Damme was an audio tape...that was unable to be retrieved because of damages to his apartment from the 1994 Northridge earthquake)

According to Roger Moore's autobiography, the production of the film was not a happy one, with Diamant trying to get people to work extra hours to compensate for delays that were mostly because of Van Damme showing up late on set, with second unit director Peter MacDonald being a positive for the film. Apparently, a large horseback battle was cut at the request of Diamant and Van Damme claimed that the budget was more around $12 million rather than the usual reports of $30-35 million. I think you can see at times where the movie is a bit unfocused in that regard, as it is a strangely unbalanced movie full of undercooked characters and story beats that basically come off as re-heated leftovers from Bloodsport. I will say, however, this is an amusing movie to see through to the end even in its mediocrity. You get a story in a bar with Van Damme in elderly makeup kicking ass (why not?) and it all closes with a closing of a book because, well, why not? I imagine that aside from the kicking, the real appeal of Van Damme movies is seeing what kind of hokum-sorry, charm is meant to be present with his character and the company of people around him (which namely involves flimsy romances and at least one funny moment by a supporting character). Here, he seems a bit vacant, as if he is lost in the shuffle of his own movie besides the kicks. At least his ego is funny to chuckle along with, as opposed to say, Steven Seagal? The tournament as a whole just seems repetitive (one round beatdowns that probably aren't as fun to watch as say, playing Mortal Kombat without the fatalities*) and not all that interesting beyond the attempt to raise the stakes at the end. 

There's a bit more to it than that, because Moore plays a guy who tricks Van Damme's character into being sold into slavery while Remar plays the heavyweight boxing champion who never ends up fighting in the tournament...no, really.  Having Moore in the film probably was a big thing in terms of "stature", even if by this point, he was nearly 70 (perhaps most famously, he once joked that he had three expressions as James Bond: "right eyebrow raised, left eyebrow raised, and eyebrows crossed when grabbed by Jaws"). While I get having him there, it doesn't make that much sense when you also have Remar there in the "guys who come along for the tournament" department, with even McGee seeming more in place than having both Moore and Remar. Gunn is basically given the equivalent of when you give someone an unplugged controller, and Qissi is basically just doing re-heated leftovers from when he was in Lionheart (you'd think killing an opponent would help in the "villain" department, but no, not really). You might be wondering: what the hell is the "quest" part? Well, the lead character is a guy who ran away from gangsters after he helped some orphans get money, promising to return to America, so I guess he's on the quest for his soul (and money). Somehow in the aftermath of denying himself the "Golden Dragon" (to save the dudes who formerly tricked him into slavery), one is told in voiceover that he returned to New York and helped the kids get off the streets (while the others get happy endings). As a 95-minute movie that is basically split between the adventure aspects (a ship boarding, the training stuff) and a repetitive tournament that happens to end with the characters going outside the ring, it's all pretty amusing hokum. Sure, it's a retread of stuff you've probably seen before, but there are some movies where inflated self-importance is part of the fun for an action movie that is exactly what you think it is. As a whole, The Quest is sometimes amusing, sometimes odd and generally watchable even as a lesser effort for Van Damme as both star and director.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.


*I was never that good at getting the fatalities in Mortal Kombat, sue me.

April 30, 2026

Frankenstein Unbound

Review #2534: Frankenstein Unbound.

Cast: 
John Hurt (Joe Buchanan / The Narrator), Raul Julia (Dr. Victor Frankenstein), Bridget Fonda (Mary Shelley), Nick Brimble (Frankenstein's monster), Catherine Rabett (Elizabeth Lavenza), Jason Patric (Lord Byron), Michael Hutchence (Percy Shelley), Catherine Corman (Justine Moritz), Mickey Knox (General Reade), and Terri Treas (The Voice of Computer) 

Directed by Roger Corman (#368 The Little Shop of Horrors, #684 - It Conquered the World, #852 - The Terror, #931 - Not of This Earth, #1007 - Attack of the Crab Monsters, #1039 - Five Guns West#1042 - War of the Satellites, #1136 - Gas-s-s-s, #1147 - X: The Man with the X-ray Eyes#1186 A Bucket of Blood, #1423 The Wild Angels, #1425 The St. Valentine's Day Massacre, #1674 - Machine-Gun Kelly, #1684 - Creature from the Haunted Sea, #1918 - House of Usher#2030 The Trip, #2113 - The Undead#2211 - The Intruder, #2275 - The Wasp Woman, #2295 - The Pit and the Pendulum, #2434 - The Premature Burial)

Review: 

Well, better late than never. Honestly, I wanted to do this film last November, but I just didn't have enough time to truly give the film the attention it deserved, even with the occasion of the film turning 35 years ago. Coincidentally, this month was the 100th anniversary of Roger Corman's birth (having been born on the 5th in 1926 in Detroit). Now, you might wonder, what the hell is Frankenstein Unbound? Well, it was the little-seen swansong of Roger Corman as a director. Sure, he had kept busy as a producer, but he had not directed a movie since the chaotic production of Von Richthofen and Brown (1971). Producer Thom Mount approached him with the idea to get back into directing and after a few years of ballooning budgeting (reported to be $11.5 million for a film distributed by 20th Century Fox in the US/Canada and Warner Bros. for the international market), Corman was there, complete with a $1 million fee. The film is loosely based on the 1973 novel of the same name by Brian Aldiss (whose other noted story that was turned into a film being "Supertoys Last All Summer Long", which served as the basis for A.I. Artificial Intelligence [2001]), for which F. X. Feeney, better known as a freelance journalist was tasked to write the adaptation, although Corman wound up being credited as a co-writer with his input on the script; Edward Neumeier (of RoboCop [1987] fame) apparently contributed to the script but was not credited. The movie was not a success with audiences (according to Aldiss, a screening he went to in London had just six people seeing it), managing to go to the video markets by February after being released in November. While Aldiss apparently was interested enough to want to do a "Dracula Unbound" to where he wrote a script, it never came to pass, and Corman stuck to producing all the way up until 2018. 

It almost pulls it off. As pulpy and as ridiculous as it might look, it really does almost work as a movie worth thinking about on the offbeat path when talking about Frankenstein-adjacent films. I imagine those who saw the Corman movies from three decades prior that freely had fun with the works of Edgar Allen Poe will have a bit of curiosity in seeing what Corman has to offer here...and just wish it all clicked more. So, what's the setting: in the future (insert yell here) of 2031, a scientist has made an energy beam weapon that could destroy an object on a molecular level that he thinks could lead to world peace only to have it cause bad weather and rifts in time. He just happens to be in his state-of-the-art talking sports car when he goes to 1817 and finds a scientist that not only exists along with Mary Shelley but also is totally not similar to him in developing a major scientific breakthrough with dangerous consequences. Of the main focuses, Julia seems to be the only one who is really pulling in an invested performance, having a solemn dignity in his delusions about being one above the rest as a creator that can't reckon with the idea of being wrong. this isn't to complain about Hurt, who is tasked to play an American for whatever reason, although Fonda isn't exactly swimming in praise when you consider that Rabett is meant to be the key force to setup the actual climax (to say nothing of the lack of things to really do for Patric or Michel Hutchence, best known as the singer of the underrated band INXS).

I can't say it is a compromised movie in producer interference, but it just seems to be out of step with really delivering on what it believes it wants to show in the perils of trying to play God in the guise of science. It just feels like a movie out of date despite its strange moments of charm that prove too fleeting for something that meanders far too many times to not earn its runtime (85 minutes). It has a few charming moments, at least; simply put, even goofy schlock is better than self-important slop. Nothing feels all that surprising or particularly involving besides the occasional splotches of gore (to say nothing of the curiously stretched makeup of the monster, which goes better than the lack of material for Brimble to chew on). After a climax of transporting people back to time and killing people off as swiftly as possible, it ends with a bunch of lasers going around to somehow deal with the monster, who then voices the last lines of the film about being "unbound" for whatever reason. And that's the last you see of Corman as a director, a...voice of the unbound as a guy goes to a crappy future looking for a city (speaking of premises that might have been better).  As a whole, Frankenstein Unbound begs to really cut loose in being a film besides the usual trappings of a Frankenstein movie that isn't bound enough in motivations or in energy to really rise to the occasion for entertainment. If you like to see curious last efforts or films that might be a hidden gem in the rough, this might just be up your alley.
 
Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.


*I really did want to watch and review it for November 7 to close out 7 Days of The Week After Halloween (2025), but I instead went with the doubleheader Mayhem and Suitable Flesh. So it goes.

Soapdish.

Review #2533: Soapdish.

Cast: 
Sally Field (Celeste Talbert / "Maggie"), Kevin Kline (Jeffrey Anderson / "Dr. Rod Randall"), Robert Downey Jr (David Seton Barnes), Cathy Moriarty (Montana Moorehead / "Nurse Nan"), Elisabeth Shue (Lori Craven / "Angelique"), Whoopi Goldberg (Rose Schwartz), Teri Hatcher (Ariel Maloney / "Dr. Monica Demonico"), Garry Marshall (Edmund Edwards), Kathy Najimy (Tawny Miller), Arne Nannestad (Burton White), and Paul Johansson (Blair Brennan / "Bolt") Directed by Michael Hoffman.

Review: 
Who doesn't love a good soap opera? I vaguely remember seeing a bit of soap operas when I was younger (I'm told Passions had a town witch?) but parodies of soap operas have been around since what, Soap (the nighttime parody that ran in the late 1970s)? Apparently, the original impetus for what became Soapdish was formed during production of Steel Magnolias (1989), as writer Robert Harling had a handful of conversations with Sally Field and Alan Greisman, a producer and Field's husband at the time (apparently, Sigourney Weaver was at one point considered for the lead role before rejecting it, a move she regretted). Originally tabbed with Herbert Ross to direct at TriStar, it eventually shifted to Paramount, with a few other changes as well Andrew Bergman (who stated that he did not visit the set much) gave re-writes to the script. Of note is that Aaron Spelling served as a co-producer (yes, in between an executive producer on shows such as The Love Boat and Dynasty*, Spelling dabbed in producing, with this being his last one as a producer before being an executive producer for The Mod Squad [1999] and Charlie's Angels [2000]). This was the fifth feature film directed by Michael Hoffman who actually had studied at Boise State University before earning a Rhodes Scholarship that led to him studying Renaissance literature and eventually became involved in drama. Hoffman served as a co-founder of both the Idaho Shakespeare Festival and the Oxford University Film Foundation; his first feature was made at Oxford with Privileged (1982). Made on a budget of $25 million, the movie was a light success with audiences. Honestly, I had this film on the shelf as part of a three-pack (where it was somehow lapped in with Book Club [2018] and The First Wives Club [1996]) for a few years, so there's that.
 
Sure, it's a light farce that has a few garish colors with its outfitting at times (as designed by Nolan Miller of Dynasty fame that you can see in select shots here), and sure, it moves along with a quick pace at 97 minutes...and that's all good with me. It is a dazzling affair wrapped in the odd quirks that come with big stars and bigger egos that lends itself to plenty of humor from people who seem pretty game. At the helm is Field (already a bit familiar in comedy for those who watch, say, Smokey and the Bandit every year like I do*) in a role that lets her have a chance to play a goofy pampered oddball that is affectionately entertaining. She clearly had enjoyment at doing a slapsticky type of farce that could've just as easily been played as a pathetic clown but instead has a plucky type of charm to laugh along with in the wide variety of moments that come with being a name that ages by the Hollywood minute while real-life drama and soap drama really can just crash together. The best little scene might be with Goldberg and Field exchanging in a little game of egoboosting when the former pretends to recognize the latter at the mall to the surprised glee of a handful of fans (everyone loves a scene-chewer). Kline actually had a bit of experience with soaps via a brief run on Search for Tomorrow, so it probably makes sense that he said this role was akin to playing a "psychotic", which seems apt for someone basically given some room to play a neat little ham. Of course the real chewer of scenery in delightfulness is Moriarty, who clicks into place in ravenous conniving energy from the jump, one who takes (nearly*) everything in stride. There are highlights from rest of the cast in neat little quirks that come through, such as the brief dazzling nature of Hatcher*, the charmingly smarmy Downey Jr, the relatively normal charm of Shue, the all-too brief fun of seeing Marshall/Fisher riff on the usual privileged executive or the beleaguered Goldberg. It's a likable movie with plenty of goofy little moments of seeing people have fun with the inner workings of "the right shot", "the right script", "the right thing" all going to hell at the whims of basically who talked last or pulled rank the best. By the time the movie rumbles to its conclusion involving offbeat revelations and a plausible enough sell of life basically moving along to the next season of gossip and looking for the next thing to chase. As a whole, Soapdish is a charmer that dishes out enough little moments of amusement to keep the viewer soaped up for a fun time.
 
Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.


*I was going to mention 7th Heaven in the "hey, remember this show?" but I feel that mentioning the show starring an actual pervert seems a bit much.

*I know Field is a two-time Academy Award winner and all that, but, yeah, Smokey is the one I think about when I think of Field first, which I probably should rectify. At least I don't think of her as a flying nun.

*I don't understand the criticism of the transgender character being revealed to be the villain. What, are transgender people supposed to be saints in every film ever? 

*And as we all know from Seinfeld, "they're real...and they're spectacular." I will say that if I had to consider watching slowly watching a TV show from start to end from the 2000s, Desperate Housewives would be on the shortlist. No, really.

March 30, 2026

Point Break.

Review #2520: Point Break.

Cast: 
Keanu Reeves (FBI Agent Johnny Utah), Patrick Swayze (Bodhi), Gary Busey (FBI Agent Angelo Pappas), Lori Petty (Tyler Ann Endicott), John C. McGinley (FBI Director Ben Harp), James LeGros (Roach), John Philbin (Nathaniel), Bojesse Christopher (Grommet), Lee Tergesen (Rosie), Vincent Klyn (Lupton 'Warchild' Pittman), Chris Pedersen ('Bunker' Weiss), Dave Olson (Archbold), Anthony Kiedis (Tone), and Galyn Gorg (Margarita) Directed by Kathryn Bigelow (#1258 - K-19: The Widowmaker, #1548 - The Hurt Locker, #1820 - The Loveless#2188 - Near Dark#2361 - Blue Steel, #2494 - Strange Days)

Review: 

Sure, it feels right. The original idea of the film came from Rick King, who wondered about surfers who robbed banks. King had directed Prayer of the Rollerboys (1990), which was written by W. Peter Iliff, who once was waiting tables in his late twenties before becoming a screenwriter. Iliff's original screenplay (under the working title Johnny Utah) actually had bounced around for much of the late 1980s (Ridley Scott was at one point tapped before pre-production didn't go anywhere) before eventually falling into the hands of Lawrence Gordon and his company that went with Kathryn Bigelow to direct. Bigelow, alongside her then-husband James Cameron did re-writes for a production draft (one particular moment that Cameron came up with was the main character jumping out of a plane without a parachute); in short, it wasn't a movie crafted by one person but through a variety of influences (Cameron, for whatever reason, recently expressed a bit of bitterness over not getting a writer's credit). Made on a budget of $24 million, the movie was a decent enough with audiences at the time of release and it attracted enough of a following that someone made a "reality-play" parody (which premiered in Seattle in 2003) of the film that has a new unrehearsed actor play the lead role and read lines from cue-cards (various people have attended performances such as Busey, Petty, and even Bigelow). A remake was released in 2015, which was shot/directed by Ericson Core with Édgar Ramírez and Luke Bracey playing the lead roles, and a TV adaptation has been floating around for a few months.

Well, you either live for the ride, or the waves will just splash you away. The whole "initiation into a group by a cop" thing wasn't completely mined out by this point (as evidenced by say, The Fast and the Furious [2001] a decade later), but the best thing about the movie is that it just coasts on the amount of casual energy it has with its cast and action. The folks here play the whole thing as straight as you can play it even with folks being named "Johnny Utah" going from former football players to FBI agents (in fairness, Charles Tillman actually did go from former NFL player to federal agent, so there's that) to go along with people who are all in their own varying levels of inner balance*. Reeves was the one that Bigelow defended despite studio doubts, and, yeah, he makes for a good pairing with Swayze in that type of bond that basically goes past the usual cat-and-mouse game that comes with these types of movies. You've got vulnerability and the yearning to actually do something on one side with Reeves and the eclectic confidence that comes from someone who aims to be the master of their own domain (spiritually, literally, whatever). All will drift onto the other side, so why not try to aim for the ultimate thrill when doing so? The rest of the cast* are fairly charming in their aims for a film that takes things casually, whether that means a few chuckles at the strait-laced McGinley or the odd duck straight man nature of Busey (see, he doesn't always play louts or the heavy). Call it whatever you want (one label that has been floated around is "wet Western"), call it a movie about finding a soul within riding the waves of the frontier that is the sea, the important part is that it is a pretty neat thriller at the end of the day. It packs enough heat within its 122-minute runtime that coasts in the air with skydiving, on the ground with one particular chase scene and in the water for, well, various moments to try and capture the feeling of surfing (I myself can't say stuff about water besides trips to the waterpark). It even has an ending like a Western with the culmination of one perhaps finding a soul within the waves. For a movie as stimulating in its curiosity for high-octane interest as this one is, you will probably have a good time with a film that has managed to get to 35 years with relative ease.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.


*There are apparently people who find a homoerotic subtext to the film in the same sense that people try to do that for Top Gun. Truth be told, I wish people had half as much time to use on Strange Days, which is the far more interesting Bigelow movie of the 1990s. Seriously, go see it.
*My balance is trying to hide my desire to be wrapped up on an island with a lady just like Lori Petty's character. What a character, especially with that hair.

March 28, 2026

I Shot Andy Warhol.

Review #2519: I Shot Andy Warhol.

Cast: 
Lili Taylor (Valerie Solanas), Jared Harris (Andy Warhol), Stephen Dorff (Candy Darling), Martha Plimpton (Stevie), Lothaire Bluteau (Maurice Girodias), Anna Levine (Iris), Peter Friedman (Alan Burke), Tahnee Welch (Viva), Jamie Harrold (Jackie Curtis), Donovan Leitch (Gerard Malanga), Jim Lyons (Billy Name), Michael Imperioli (Ondine), and Reg Rogers (Paul Morrissey) Directed by Mary Harron (#1984 - American Psycho)

Review: 

I suppose this is the best way to dip the toes into the world of Andy Warhol. Once upon a time, Mary Harron was in the punk scene and into The Velvet Underground, the rock band with a distinct influence within the underground scene that mixed right in with Warhol being their manager from 1966 to 1967. In college, Harron had written a piece about Warhol and his work for a university magazine and even spent time looking upon his movies. When she became a music writer, she was fortunate enough to have a brief interview with Warhol around his studio of The Factory (he subsequently died in 1987). A couple of years later, when working in television, she did research for a Warhol documentary and happened to come across the SCUM Manifesto (self-published in 1967 before becoming commercially published in 1968 through Maurice Girodias and his Olympia Press) in a store that interested her because for all the footage and interviews one knew of Warhol and the Factory, one name never really came up with Valerie Solanas. Her interest in doing a documentary happened to crisscross with Tom Kalin and Christine Vachon in doing something...as a film. Harron co-wrote the film with Daniel Minahan (with research by Diane Tucker along with having certain dialogue come from Jeremiah Newton's edited compilation The Letters and Diaries of Candy Darling) and the movie had funding from a variety of companies such as Killer Films and Goldwyn Films International. John Cale of the Underground wrote the music score for the film despite disagreements with Lou Reed. The movie made a bit of money and was enough of a hit with its screening at Sundance that the offer to do the script for American Psycho came right afterwards. The years that followed the release of the movie is fairly interesting. The movie was released by a company that soon went bankrupt and the rights were in murky limbo for a time to where it was barely available on DVD and it apparently was once only available online through a rip on YouTube. Solanas had crafted a play called Up Your Ass that she had given a copy to Warhol that was accidentally misplaced - in 1999, it was rediscovered and produced in 2000 in San Francisco by George Coates Performance Works*. Further information about Solanas came around with the 2014 biography Valerie Solanas: The Defiant Life of the Woman Who Wrote SCUM (and Shot Andy Warhol)*.

You might wonder what Solanas (a graduate of University of Maryland, College Park) has to offer in terms of a manifesto. Well, its opening declaration [with one word difference depending on the edition] states that women should "overthrow the government, eliminate the money system, institute complete automation and eliminate [destroy] the men" (incidentally, there are a few moments in black-and-white that depict stuff from the manifesto being read). She sold copies in bookstores and on the streets of Greenwich Village for $1 (unless you were a guy, then it was $2) and even appeared in one Warhol film with I, a Man (1967). One person associated with Warhol once stated that life around the sphere of Warhol ended up making them "all captives of Andy's magnetism and his outlaw culture". Amidst all of that, Solanas might as well be an imp to these self-obsessed people that can't quite get the recognition they believe they deserve,and Taylor carries the film to fascinating levels of curiosity. It isn't a lament of a "tortured genius" or just a "craven nut" but instead something that teeters in the irony that comes in so many contradictions that can be tragic along with being fascinating. There is a burning, acerbic spirit to her that you can't exactly shoo away as an irrational being because damn it, there are plenty of irrational people to go around anyway, even if most don't go around shooting people and getting their own spin of a bio-drama.  Harris pulls in well with shades of vulnerability and elusiveness (without being a caricature to poke with) that you can't easily grab upon beyond the obvious that might as well reflect how one views Warhol and his art, for better or worse.  The real Solanas spent time in a prison ward and periods of evaluation over her mental state (mainly the paranoid schizophrenia) before she essentially faded into obscurity by the late 1970s and died in San Francisco in 1988 at just the age of 52. Regardless of how one might view Solanas and her view of men (as represented by, say, this exchange here or this one), there is something quite fascinating about what Herron has captured here about someone who lived by their contradictions. As such, this is a worthwhile debut in its capture of a misfit that doesn't judge or defend but instead lets the images and words speak for themselves in entertaining fashion that is a strange little gem.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.


*Apparently, Warhol was quoted in a book in the 1980s that he apparently glanced at the play and was more concerned with wondering if she was actually an undercover cop. By the way, that gunshot was brutal: he got shot in a way that had damage to his lungs, esophagus, liver, spleen, and stomach.
*For one thing, Solanas actually had children at a young age but had to give them away. 
*honestly, the fact that there was an anarchic group named "Up Against the Wall Motherfucker" in the 1960s shouldn't surprise me.

March 22, 2026

Tank Girl.

Review #2516: Tank Girl.

Cast: 
Lori Petty (Tank Girl), Ice-T (T-Saint), Naomi Watts (Jet Girl), Malcolm McDowell (Kesslee), Don Harvey (Sgt. Small), Jeff Kober (Booga), Reg E. Cathey (Deetee), Scott Coffey (Donner), Stacy Linn Ramsower (Sam), Ann Cusack (Sub Girl), Brian Wimmer (Richard), Iggy Pop (Rat Face), Ann Magnuson (The Madam), Dawn Robinson (Model), Billy L. Sullivan (Max), James Hong (Che'tsai), Charles Lucia (Capt. Derouche), with Harlan Clark (Additional Ripper), Doug Jones (Ripper), Ata Scanlan (Additional Ripper), Alvarez Wortham (Additional Ripper), and Roz Witt (Dr. Nikita) Directed by Rachel Talalay (#1144 - Freddy's Dead: The Final Nightmare)

Review: 
I will admit that I had vaguely heard of this movie for years but was just lazy to see it (I first heard of this movie from the Nostalgia Critic* many years ago). Apparently, Rachel Talalay was given a Tank Girl comic to read by her stepdaughter when shooting her first film with Freddy's Dead: The Final Nightmare (1991). Tank Girl first appeared in print in 1988 in Deadline (a British comic magazine) that was developed by Alan Martin and artist Jamie Hewlett; you might be interested to know that Hewlett, whose drawings were extracted for use in the title sequence of the film, later moved into a place with Blur's Damon Albarn that led to them being involved with the virtual band Gorillaz in 1998*. Talalay (the unpaid production assistant-turned-accountant-turned-producer-turned-director) got interested in doing a movie and found the Deadline publisher was already trying to find a studio. Eventually, MGM/United Artists became involved with doing the film (Talalay apparently rejected an offer from Disney, believing that they would not allow the amount of violence/sexual references required). Talalay then picked Catherine Hardwicke to be the production designer, while Tedi Sarafian wrote the screenplay. Made on a budget of $25 million in New Mexico and Arizona (mostly in an abandoned open-pit mine), there were considerable edits made by the studio that ranged from a "naked Ripper suit", edits to the torture scene, edits to one role in particular, and, naturally, the original ending where Tank Girl burps as it starts to rain. The animated sequences (as done by Mike Smith) were put in because they didn't have the money to do the action sequences (apparently the tank wasn't particularly fast). Martin and Hewlett did not like the finished product, believing in a subsequent interview that nobody could really make a successful movie of the character (as for Tank Girl, it went through a hiatus before returning for an on-and-off basis since 2007). Talalay and Petty were proud enough of the film that they did a live viewing party of the film in 2020.

Imagine: it's the year 2033 and all the water is gone. It's a freewheeling, bratty, odd little movie...and I can't help but like it. It's strange too, because a good chunk of the critiques of the film could just as easily be spun around for people (like me, only I probably won't go into detail about feminism, because, well, good luck with that*) that praise the film as a zany and free-spirited mess. There is a certain type of charm that appeals to me for most of its 104-minute runtime in its energy that is infectious. Apparently, the production team did not expect to get the services of Stan Winston but go figure, they were so enthusiastic that they cut their usual rates in half to meet the budget for the Rippers you see on screen: articulated ears and tails activated remotely and, well, no puppetry. Suffice to say that beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but hey, half man/kangaroo, I can roll with it for a movie that likes to lurk in a offbeat wasteland (your milage may vary over how it would've gone if the film had not been edited down to, uh, take out the prosthetic penis). Petty (cast after consideration to go with Emily Lloyd) is delightfully loony enough to make for an entertaining antihero, one who has their own kinks and interests that could turn anything to make a crack at. Far be it from a movie that asks about power or the circumstances of what a wasteland looks like, you just get an unruly movie that has time to have a music interlude of "Let's Do It". Evidently, McDowell had a few decent memories making the movie, and, yes, this seems right up his alley to play a villain that loves water so much that he stabs people with a device that sucks the water right out of their body. How could one not enjoy him here? The rest of the cast roll along with causal engagement with a movie that moves to its own beat, for better or worse. As a whole, Tank Girl is the kind of movie that clicked enough for me to have fun with, although I can understand where it didn't exactly rock the world back in 1995. Offbeat and anarchic in ways that can be off-putting to those with less patience
 
Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.


*For a time, the Critic was my jam alongside Cinemassacre. And The Cinema Snob, eventually. 
*I used to know someone in college who dug them. The friendship didn't last at all, but at least Gorillaz is pretty decent.
*There was a discussion in a book, once, about talking about what cult films were "feminist" that called this film a "real feminist cult film" while labeling films by Kathryn Bigelow and Catherine Hardwicke as "too masculine", which honestly sounds like sour grapes more than anything.

Evidently, there was a mockumentary for the film, if you love it that much: Tank Girl Documentary 1995

February 28, 2026

The Five Heartbeats.

Review #2514: The Five Heartbeats.

Cast: 
Robert Townsend (Donald "Duck" Matthews), Michael Wright (Eddie King, Jr), Leon (J.T. Matthews), Harry J. Lennix (Terrence "Dresser" Williams), Tico Wells (Anthony "Choirboy" Stone), Tressa Thomas (Clara), Diahann Carroll (Eleanor Potter), John Canada Terrell (Michael "Flash" Turner), Chuck Patterson (Jimmy Potter), Harold Nicholas (Ernest "Sarge" Johnson), Hawthorne James (Big Red Davis), Roy Fegan (Victor "Bird" Thomas), with John Witherspoon (Wild Rudy), and Troy Beyer (Baby Doll) Directed by Robert Townsend (#1315 - Eddie Murphy Raw, #2348 - Hollywood Shuffle)

Review: 

You might be familiar with the soulful power of groups such as The Dells, The Temptations*, Four Tops or the singers in Wilson Pickett, James Brown, Frankie Lymon, and Sam Cooke. At any rate, the sound that came from them clearly had an effect on Robert Townsend and also Keenen Ivory Wayans, as the two wrote the film that was originally in development with the idea of having the Wayans family appear in the lead roles, but when Warner Bros. passed, the Wayans moved on to other ventures (In Living Color, namely). But Townsend persisted and found a deal with 20th Century Fox in 1990. Apparently, Townsend wanted David Ruffin and Eddie Kendrick of the Temptations to be technical advisors but 20th Century Fox vetoed it because they thought Motown founder Berry Gordy Jr could sue the studio. Instead, the Dells (as comprised of Marvin Junior, Verne Allison, Mickey McGill, Chuck Barksdale and Johnny Carter). were brought in. A variety of musicians were utilized for near dozen songs featured in the film, most notably with The Dells with songs such as "A Heart Is a House for Love" while Dee Harvey also provided a handful of songs for the actors to lip-synch to. Made on a budget of roughly $8 million, the film was not a big success with audiences (although it has a small cult following), while Townsend's next feature film came with The Meteor Man in 1993.

1965...at least when told in flashback, since it starts out with one of those "Where Are They Now?" type of magazines showing that, yes, everyone becomes a "whatever happened...?" type. Oh sure, The Five Heartbeats is a bit of a sentimental movie, and I doubt anyone is exactly going to be surprised by what goes on in a music biopic (real or imagined), but I do admire this stuff a bit in the general experience that comes with having some music just flow into you. It just so happens to be a movie that yearns to show the rise, fall, and redemption of people where flaws and mistakes can be one to survive with the right type of love and forgiveness behind it. Preachy or not, it also happens that some of the music is fairly entertaining to mostly smooth over a 122-minute runtime that would make a cynic blush. The music montages in particular make for a curious way to convey a film in some parts, but, hey, more for the rest of us. Strangely, it might be Lennix that steals the show best in the type of steely intensity that makes for a useful performer to see out there among the others, who are mostly fair in their characterizations (Townsend, suffice to say, is okay). Patterson and James make for a fascinating double-edge sword of figures to lurk behind the group in their own varying levels of motivation to be around music (the latter, spoiler alert, is basically a wolf in sheep's clothing, made clear with an excellent little scene of him threatening someone). It is the type of movie that unabashedly preaches to the choir of seeing the good and bad that arises in sudden rises (and falls) to fame that keeps a good beat and keeps a good level of intimacy around to make you believe in these folks without turning it into a riff of comedy beats or just straight drama. I enjoyed its little trek that shows a period piece for earnest enjoyment that searches for a common truth in what really matters besides the hunt for a good beat or material efforts: coming back together at the end and caring about one other. It's a nice little movie that might flow up your alley.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.
Once more, a song of the night

*Incidentally, when NBC did a miniseries about the Temptations in 1998, Leon was cast as David Ruffin, who by that point had passed away in 1991.

A Rage in Harlem.

Review #2513: A Rage in Harlem.

Cast: 
Forest Whitaker (Jackson), Gregory Hines (Goldy/Sherman), Robin Givens (Imabelle), Zakes Mokae (Big Kathy), Danny Glover (Easy Money), Badja Djola (Slim), John Toles-Bey (Jodie), Tyler Collins (Teena), Ron Taylor (Hank), Samm-Art Williams (Gus Parsons), Stack Pierce (Detective Ed "Coffin Ed" Johnson), Willard E. Pugh (Claude X), Helen Martin (Mrs. Canfield), Wendell Pierce (Louis), T. K. Carter (Smitty), Jalacy Hawkins (Jay "Screamin' Jay" Hawkins), Beatrice Winde (Clerk), and George Wallace (Detective "Gravedigger" Jones) Directed by Bill Duke.

Review: 

Honestly, this movie was lightly on my mind for a few years. You might remember that Cotton Comes to Harlem (1970) and Come Back, Charleston Blue (1972) were loosely based on the works of Chester Himes involving Harlem detectives that had Godfrey Cambridge and Raymond St. Jacques as the stars.  But first, let's talk a bit about this being the feature film debut of Bill Duke. Born in Poughkeepsie, New York, Duke was curious about writing from a young age, mainly because he wrote a journal from a young age because in his words, he wasn't a good verbal communicator but his poems were liked by a teacher of his. He attended Dutchess Community College and was encouraged to enroll in drama that saw him want to do acting. He studied at Boston University and subsequently New York University's Tisch School of the Arts before getting a role on Broadway in 1971 with "Ain't Supposed to Die a Natural Death.”  Duke broke into film with Car Wash (1976) before eventually coming onto the need to study film, which he did with the AFI Conservatory. Duke became a director for a variety of television shows in the 1980s that ranged from Falcon Crest to Knots Landing. Duke made his directorial debut with the made-for-PBS The Killing Floor (1984) before moving into film with this movie. William Horberg got the rights to the Himes novel and eventually got the efforts of Stephen Woolley to get the idea of doing a film sold to Miramax Films. John Toles-Bey and Bobby Crawford were credited as having written the film. Apparently, halfway through the production, Woolley claimed that the film was meant to be a comedy and that Duke disagreed with that sentiment. At any rate, the movie made roughly $10 million. Duke's next film was with Deep Cover (1992).

You've got a movie wrapped in the vibrant atmosphere of Harlem (okay it was filmed in Cincinnati but still) that has a carefully wound-up game of wits and oddball characters for a few interesting moments (and, arguably, a few chuckles, so maybe Woolley wasn't too far off). Its tale of lust and larceny isn't too far off from a B-movie or, say, those 70s movies I had mentioned earlier that makes for a decent first effort. It doesn't exactly have every plot beat down to a T, mainly because the chemistry between the characters work far better than any motivations involving gold and sheer hokum. Of course, it also is an off-kilter romance (when not dealing in clash of street/book smart) that basically lends itself to a handful of curious moments of who really is in control of their own desires and sense of self. In that sense, Whitaker and Hines make for a couple of entertaining leads to counteract each other as if one was in a hardboiled buddy film (with perhaps a bit of a coming-of-age sprinkled in, neo-noir style). This was the first prominent film role for Givens, who previously had been featured in Head of the Class for television. She makes for a quality femme fatale, one with sultry grace that manages to have the right time of timing to make the tenuous dynamic between her and Whitaker a compelling one. There are a wide variety of characters to come and go with charm to spare, whether that involves a cross-dresser played by Mokae or with heavies in Glover and Djola (or Williams, but he is only in it for a while). In general, the film is quick on its feet to make its 115-minute runtime feel like a breeze worth passing through to see it play all the way to the finish that manages to hit most of the right notes for a fairly satisfying first effort.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars. 

Another Movie Night Song of the day

February 26, 2026

Sudden Death.

Review #2510: Sudden Death.

Cast:
Jean-Claude Van Damme (Darren McCord), Powers Boothe (Joshua Foss), Raymond J. Barry (U.S. Vice President Daniel Bender), Dorian Harewood (Matthew Hallmark), Whittni Wright (Emily McCord), Ross Malinger (Tyler McCord), Michael Gaston (Hickey), Faith Minton (Carla), Paul Mochnick (Andrew Ferrara), Audra Lindley (Angeline Ferrara), and Jack Erdie (Scratch) Directed by Peter Hyams (#233 - 2010: The Year We Make Contact, #326 - Timecop, #2477 - A Sound of Thunder)

Review: 

What better day to do a movie about hockey than a few days after the United States of America managed to beat the odds and win the gold medal in hockey (and in true gender equality: the men and women each won*)? What better time to see a movie that could basically be thought of as an ad for a hockey team? The original story came from Karen Baldwin, an aspiring actress who became part of a producing firm with her husband Howard, which basically came on the side of sports ownership, as the Baldwins were among the owners of the Pittsburgh Penguins (as was the case from 1992-1998*). At the time, the team played in the Civic Arena, and the unique roof of the venue that could open up apparently led to Karen thinking about the possibility of doing "something like Die Hard in a hockey arena", which also matched with a story the Baldwins had tried to do about a Soviet goaltender trying to defect because they were wearing a mask; Gene Quintano then wrote the screenplay. When Peter Hyams (not exactly a hockey fan at the time) was approached, he was astounded to see the Baldwins willing to do a movie with so much action in their own venue (he proceeded to suggest a fight scene with a killer dressed up as the team mascot). Of course, the 1994-95 league lockout hindered them in getting the proper filming for crowds, and a good variety of the hockey action ended up being the work of local hockey players (while Mike Lange and Paul Steigerwald provided commentary). As the second collaboration between Hyams and Jean-Claude Van Damme (after Timecop), the movie was a mild success at the time while becoming a rental favorite. 

It does kind of boggle the mind to have your hockey team be part of a movie that has the following: the team mascot getting into a fight with the lead hero (before getting brutally killed), team security basically being humiliated at all costs (mayhem after every period ends no less), and, to top it all, the lead villain wearing Penguins gear right before he dies in "death by helicopter stalling". Of course, the funniest thing is the movie just...ends, because I could only wonder how a hockey game continues after all that. For a movie that freely cribs from Die Hard, except with trying to disarm bombs, it is quite fascinating to see it all play out (right down to a henchman playing Doom), unless one doesn't like violence in their action movie - the body count on this film of people who die is actually considerable, jeez.. This was a movie that had both of its hero and villain cast because other people rejected it (Sylvester Stallone and James Woods, for example) and yet each manage to have a ball with the roles presented here, mostly in the case of Boothe, who has tremendous alacrity to engage with the mayhem without just having it mosey on by. Van Damme may never have really been a great action star in terms of variety, but he at least was still committed enough in physicality to at least make it worthwhile to see him kick the hell out of someone dressed up as a mascot. As much as it would be nice to have some presence from the hostages besides cursory interest from Barry, the movie doesn't hesitate in just going with the mayhem. The maneuvering of the plot does not exactly gel completely with reality (bomb detonations are to be delayed by the onset of overtime because, well, I guess even terrorists wanted to make sure they didn't miss the finale before blowing it up?), but the movie manages to move its machinery for 110 minutes without treating the audience as if they were entitled to be liked for the sake of being liked. You either buy what it is selling (complete with rooftop action for the climax) or you just wash it away quickly. As a whole, Hyams shot and directed a decent little film that basically maneuvers itself the way you would hope for a wind-up action movie in an era where cribbing from others was fine as long as you had some craftsmanship behind it. It's not a great movie, but being good enough is fine anyway.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night presents: Song of the day

*It should be noted that Howard Baldwin was behind the change of the iconic Penguins logo for, well, a loser logo that never won anything when it was around because...merchandising. Also he called the old logo a "pigeon". Just goes to show that rich people really do sometimes have no taste at all.
*I mean this with only a lit bit of venom towards the sore losers towards how the men's/women's hockey games went: Suck it Canada! 

February 15, 2026

The X-Files

Review #2506: The X-Files.

Cast:
David Duchovny (Special Agent Fox Mulder), Gillian Anderson (Special Agent Dana Scully), Martin Landau (Alvin Kurtzweil), Blythe Danner (Jana Cassidy), Armin Mueller-Stahl (Conrad Strughold), Mitch Pileggi (Assistant Director Walter Skinner), William B. Davis (Cigarette-Smoking Man), John Neville (Well-Manicured Man), Dean Haglund (Richard "Ringo" Langly), Bruce Harwood (John Fitzgerald Byers), Tom Braidwood (Melvin Frohike), Jeffrey DeMunn (Ben Bronschweig), Jason Beghe (FBI Man at Bomb Site), Michael Shamus Wiles (Black-Haired Man), with Terry O'Quinn (Special Agent in Charge Darius Michaud), and Lucas Black (Stevie) Directed by Rob Bowman.

Review: 

Hey, remember The X-Files? At one point in time, it was the big thing for the then-fledgling Fox network that began in 1993 with various inspirations that popped into the head of Chris Carter, whether that was Kolchak: The Night Stalker to The Twilight Zone to, well, various other things. Various writers and directors were just as important to the success of the show from David Sackheim to Darin Morgan to Glen Morgan & James Wong, to, well the natural chemistry of the stars in Gillian Anderson and David Duchovny. Apparently, the original intent of the film was to start its own movie franchise* while the show would end (so basically what happened with Star Trek: The Next Generation) after its fifth season, but the show was so lucrative for Fox that two more seasons were ordered. At least it was helpful for fans, as the season 5 finale "The End" aired on May 17, one month before the premiere of this film on June 19 (meanwhile the season 6 premiere aired on November 8). Carter wrote the screenplay and co-wrote the story with Frank Spotnitz. The movie was directed by Rob Bowman, who directed countless episodes of the show (by the time of 2000, he had directed 33 of them). The next film in the franchise was with The X-Files: I Want to Believe in 2008.*

Honestly, it is an okay movie, but it is a bit amusing to think this was once conceived as the thing that would follow the fun that came from the TV show, mainly because for the most part, the so-called "Monster of the Week" episodes were mostly superior to the ones involving the "Syndicate" or whatever². It basically is an okay rendition of a usual two-parter (albeit much longer at 122 minutes to say, two TV episodes), one that basically coasts on how much you really care about the lead duo wrapped in the shadowy doubt of whatever lurks beneath the cornfields (this was 1998, before select people believed chemtrails were a thing). It's funny that a movie with a variety of returning characters from the show tries mildly to just have a fraction do something (seriously, Pileggi spends most of his time glaring or, um, sitting down*). The unraveling of actual answers only leads to just asking more questions, which is as frustrating as is easy to see coming for a film that mostly sticks the landings of making you curious for more with these folks. Regardless of how much one has seen the show, it is clear that Duchovny and Anderson were pros at making it clear how much they understand and respect each other in the mish-mash of grounded purpose (ironically, despite the obvious relationship these characters had, there were people actually whining on the Internet about it at the time). So you get the bemused expressions of Duchovny in seeing someone just as odd with Landau while Anderson basically glides through the mumbo-jumbo presented (namely, bees) with graceful charm to basically glue the film from what could've just been mumbo jumbo (right down to the opening scene involving black oil and cavemen, but nothing tops the ending scene involving the X-Files being re-opened...again, because, yes, they did that before). Landau and Danner lurk every now and then to deliver the spiel that comes with having name actors doing things that basically already happened in the show (i.e. "crackpot" and "authority figure in a hearing"), but at least Davis has not lost any sense of malevolence on the transition to the big screen and it is nice to see the cold steely dignity of Neville one more time (hey, it can't all be shadowy rooms with figures standing around). In general, the movie is moderately entertaining when focused on Mulder and Scully rather than the idea of unravelling the proverbial mystery bar (spoiler: the core of that bar is basically a roll of paper saying "try again later") to go along with a few decent visuals for a mostly standard affair. Regardless if you saw the show or not, the movie is mostly one to be enjoyed in the margins of middle ground entertainment, which is fine by me, I suppose.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

*Evidently, there were rumblings where the Season 7 finale "Requiem" (aired in 2000) could have just easily have been the finale of the show or just the setup to doing another movie.
*Regardless of watching the show on Season 10 or Season 1, what the fuck was "My Struggle IV" even meant to be? Nearly six years later and that's what the show ended on?
² See that's how you know the character of Marita Covarrubias stinks (blame Chris Carter?), she wasn't even in the movie despite being, you know, the informant character (of course I might be biased, I adored Deep Throat and X in the "oh hey, they are in this episode"). Even The Lone Gunmen got to be in this movie, and those guys are lovable scamps. Of course, this note section can't be just geeking out about random X-Files musings, then it would be too obvious (such as saying I would fold to Scully immediately).