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

November 5, 2026

The Last Broadcast.

Review #2624: The Last Broadcast.

Cast: 
David Beard (David Leigh), James Seward (James "Jim" L. Suerd), Stefan Avalos (Steven "Johnny" Avkast), Lance Weiler (Locus Wheeler), Rein Clabbers (Rein Clackin), Michele Pulaski (Michelle "Shelly" Monarch), Tom Brunt (Thomas "Tom" Branski), Mark Rublee (Clair Deforest), A.D. Roso (Detective Anthony Rosi), Dale Worstall (Dr. Dale Orstall), Vann K. Weller (forensic pathologist), Sam Wells (Sam Woods), Jay MacDonald (web designer), Faith Weiler (Joyce Dryer), and Marianne Connor (Mary Brenner) Produced, Written, and Directed by Stefan Avalos and Lance Weiler.

Review: 

This is yet again another movie that I had vaguely heard of as a teenager because of a YouTube video*. And that included even before seeing The Blair Witch Project [1999] (in all of its disappointing glory). The Last Broadcast, just like The Blair Witch Project, had its own interesting road from low-budget filmmaking to online phenomenon.  Stefan Avalos decided he wanted to be a filmmaker by high school rather than stay on as a trained violinist. Avalos met Weiler when the former was a lab assistant and the latter was a student at Bucks County Community College. Each rose up in the world of getting to do film and most importantly, video. The thing that was cited in making it possible, apparently, to do stuff with video came with cheap video digitizers for computers and digital camcorders that people could buy (for a considerable price, anyway). For the film, various formats were used in filming ranging from 8/16mm film to VHS to even Tyco cameras. The budget was recorded as being $900 (not counting costs for shooting, post, or borrowed equipment); as it was done on video, it started with regional releases in March 1998 before it rose to a few more cities in October, as done through satellite streaming. Since the release of the film, Weiler has been involved in a variety of ventures, ranging from an indie thriller/alternate reality game in Head Trauma in the 2000s, digital fiction and so on. Avalos has also stayed involved in film, even directing a shot-on-video thriller The Ghosts of Edendale [2003] and the violin-focused documentary Strad Style [2017]. 

So, what's the movie about? Well, it delves into the "investigation" of the deaths of a couple of public-access television hosts (as played by Avalos and Weiler) and their sound man (Clackin) along with the accused man (Seward) that had been with them at the time of their travels into the Pine Barrens in New Jersey to look for, wait for it, the Jersey Devil. For 1998, there's also the moments spent with the "Internet Relay Chat", because the plan was to do a live show (TV, radio *and* the Internet). Beard plays the filmmaker exploring the matter, for which things get weird. I tried to give this one a shot, really. Honestly, there was a part of me that wanted to believe that this would rise above the level of The Blair Witch Project (even if out of spite). And then, well, nope. 86 minutes of meandering around, narrating over select footage that tries to play completely serious as if one stumbled onto an impression of Dateline before eventually reaching a twist ending that comes completely out of nowhere for the sake of having a twist. It just drones on and on and on and on, and you have to wonder if it actually would've been better if it had actually just focused on the two doomed hosts rather than just getting nips and tucks of "the surviving footage". There is no person to be invested in because goddamnit, Beard is just not the type of guy to want to see talk the same points. The monster is the thought in your head to actually sit down and watch it. I can't imagine that true-crime stuff is this repetitive.  You have a group of desperate people wanting to believe that a couple of things they heard/saw on the Internet is enough to maybe make a show that see it all go to hell...and all you get is the most mundane stuff to come through. You get the gamut of info about "the accused" though, from the landlady to the child psychologist because hey, did you know he claimed to have psychic powers? Or that maybe he's innocent (but he's dead anyway). Well, you sure will get to hear about it over and over, so have fun. Does the audience question what they see, ending included? No, not really, it just comes off as a lazy cheat fit for a student film, not one trying to actually play off of "reality". As a whole, The Last Broadcast is an accomplishment for cheap filmmaking and the bare minimum of telling something different in the video format and little else when it comes to horror.

Overall, I give it 5 out of 10 stars.

Next up: Critters.

*You guessed it, Cinemassacre's Monster Madness (1:05:24) - Monster Madness History of Horror (2007)

As for the idea of, well, who came first, Blair Witch Project (apparently conceived earlier than its 1999 release date) or The Last Broadcast. Both involved a documentary crew going out to a place with trees and mystery around it all that leads to danger. That's basically really the only similarity, because at least Blair Witch gives you "people" to follow with. It feels so good to close the circle of "found footage horror in a forest" that I inadvertently started for myself back on the original Halloween: The Week After with The Blair Witch Project on November 5, 2019, while 2021 saw me do Blair Witch and 2024 saw me do Blair Witch 2. Of course, I hear there may be a new Blair Witch movie in 2027, so maybe, just maybe, *one* of these found footage forest movies will be a good one.

November 4, 2026

Mary Reilly.

Review #2623: Mary Reilly.

Cast:
Julia Roberts (Mary Reilly; Sasha Hanau as young Mary Reilly), John Malkovich (Dr. Henry Jekyll / Edward Hyde), Michael Sheen (Bradshaw), George Cole (Mr. Poole), Kathy Staff (Mrs. Kent), Bronagh Gallagher (Annie), Glenn Close (Mrs. Faraday), Michael Gambon (Mr. Reilly), Linda Bassett (Mrs. Reilly), Henry Goodman (Haffinger), Ciarán Hinds (Sir Danvers Carew), Tim Barlow (the Vicar), and Stephen Boxer (the Inspector) Directed by Stephen Frears (#2333 - High Fidelity)

Review: 
I guess if anybody needed a re-invention of the old horror stuff, Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde probably did merit consideration for the 1990s. Actually, the movie is based on the 1990 novel Mary Reilly by Valerie Martin, which was inspired by Robert Louis Stevenson's 1886 novella that I'm sure you know, well, didn't have a woman as among the key focus. Christopher Hampton (British playwright/screenwriter previous responsible for such works as Les Liaisons Dangereuses) wrote the screenplay and there were initial plans for Tim Burton (announced as early as 1993) to direct after he did Ed Wood, reportedly with Winona Ryder in mind for the lead. However, the ramifications of Wood being rushed to make a decision and the overmentioned Wood movie being put in turnaround led him dropping out. As much as TriStar Pictures wanted Daniel Day-Lewis to pair off with Julia Roberts, they got Roberts paired with John Malkovich instead. Amidst production delays from Tristar changing the release date over and over (to where it finally landed in February 1996 after production had started in 1994) to 25 drafts being written to quibbles over the ending (to the point where the studio tried making their own cut only to see test audiences not care for it either), the film plopped as a flop with audiences*.

There were various people in Stevenson's life that probably influenced him in making the original novella, whether that was the double life of cabinet-maker William Brodie or murderer Eugène Chantrelle. It probably would go hand-in-hand with Bram Stoker's Dracula [1992] and Mary Shelley's Frankenstein [1994] in deciding, hey, big Gothic re-inventions of old horror stuff that sees a desire of seeing repressed evil urges basically go for a desire to escape from a form of depression that sees the same type of things go awry. The result is the strangest type of disappointment: it isn't as nearly as the odd reputation that it garnered at the time, but it also isn't as interesting to actually hold up and defend besides calling it a close misfire. It aims for the horror of a woman living in the margins who has curiosity over what she sees from Jekyll and Hyde in sympathy and also revulsion. A good chunk of what Roberts does (besides wearing some scar makeup because hey, rat bites) is basically observing what is going around her that is very, very, very drawn out. Yes, even during the one transformation sequence of Hyde/Jekyll, she sits close by and watches, because heaven forbid anything of substance is allowed to just happen. If she is meant to be the face that drives a movie without saying much, I'd probably just take the bus and look somewhere else for presence. Whether by choice or otherwise, Malkovich mainly just comes off as awkward in the attempted display of a man in turmoil, with one side actually coming off as interesting (the bawdy, opinionated measure of a man that likes to kick people) and the other side coming off as a strange type of seething monotony that makes you ask the question, "Yes, and?". Every step of the way basically comes with weird caveats that tease rather than actually cut loose for 108 minutes that lets Close and Gambon basically sit on the sidelines for a painfully mundane movie (at least Cole gets to be a tiny bit jealous as the eldest of butlers). You get the occasional flash of blood and the idea of a body-count, but most times one is spent experiencing the day-to-day life of a person get upheaved by, well, things happening (oh but she doesn't hate the evil men in her life, that's a real keeper). You'd have better luck asking one of your parents how their week went. 

Sure, it has a certain type of look that actually seems pretty appropriate for the setting, but there is something about how the movie maneuvers that makes you feel as if you were watching a poor man's The Two Faces of Dr. Jekyll (1960). It's the 1990s for God's sake, you can't even cut loose for a really sexually charged scene? I would even settle for a real head-popping scene, because if you're going to tell a "companion piece" to the most well-told, well-known thing in existence that ends (most of the time, anyway) with dire circumstances for Dr. Jekyll, you have to at least have something to stir that stands out! Working women get slaughtered, the tease of libido gets strung around, but hey, we get to see the poor little maid grapple with what the hell is going on with the sulk of someone who can't get out of a long-winding conversation at the store. As a whole, there are some interesting moments to be had in the horrors of being swayed one way or the other by a man in turmoil, but Mary Reilly trudges along with no sense of involvement of actually getting to where it wants to go without dragging its feet until only the devoted have given up. You can only go so far with a mediocre movie before it all turns to mush, and that I suppose is the real lesson to learn when digging for "horror" and turning up for this.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.


Next up: The Last Broadcast.

*There were, however, a few defenders of the film, mainly Roger Ebert - https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/mary-reilly-1996

I didn't have time to see it, but he did at least one interview on the circuit about the film around the time it was out - Stephen Frears "Mary Reilly" 1996 - Bobbie Wygant Archive - YouTube

November 2, 2026

Bordello of Blood.

Review #2621: Bordello of Blood.

Cast: 
Dennis Miller (Rafe Guttman), Erika Eleniak (Katherine Verdoux), Angie Everhart (Lilith), Chris Sarandon (Reverend J.C. Current), Corey Feldman (Caleb Verdoux), Aubrey Morris (McCutcheon), Phil Fondacaro (Vincent Prather), Juliet Reagh (Tallulah), Kiara Hunter (Tamara), Eli Gabay (Miguel), Matt Hill (Reggie), Eric Keenleyside (Sheriff Noonan), with John Kassir (the voice of the Crypt Keeper; Brock Winkless as puppeteer), and William Sadler (Mummy) Directed by Gilbert Adler.

Review: 
You might remember Demon Knight (1995) was actually pretty decent, all things considered for a siege horror movie that tried to make Tales from the Crypt a film franchise. Sure, the tease for a zombie tale around New Orleans ("Dead Easy") didn't come to fruition, because Universal Studios decided fairly late in pre-production to turn it all around. But surely there had to be something with a movie that had a story from Robert Zemeckis and Bob Gale (a script that was written as old as the 1980s). Or not, because the story ended up being done by A.L. Katz and Gilbert Adler (Gale stated that the changes made were so bad that he never saw the film after the early cut). Producer Joel Silver got his way with casting, so instead of Daniel Baldwin as the lead and Robin Givens for the adversary...you get Dennis Miller paired against Angie Everhart. Adler had been a director on two episodes of the show (as well as producer) before directing this film, the only theatrical effort he has ever done (he has since been a producer on a litany of movies such as Valkyrie [2008]). 

The shoot and script of the film ended up going through the wringer with its key presences: Miller improvised nearly every line of his dialogue and even with a shoot that was rescheduled to work around his HBO show (effectively shooting on weekends), he was "too tired" at certain points to actually show up, for which some scenes were shot with a stand-in. Eleniak apparently wanted to take the movie seriously as an actress (to the point where she did not come out of her trailer besides filming) and reportedly wanted changes to the script to make her character not be a stripper but instead a religious advocate; she contended that her big line of contention was not wanting a "sexy" scene between her and Everhart specifically because it wasn't on the script while noting her disappointment at script changes that meant her character's secret past of being an ex-porn 300 pound star was deleted. On a budget of roughly $2.5 million, the movie barely made over double of its budget back. There were no more "Tales from the Crypt presents" movies, although Ritual (2002) later had a home video release with a newly filmed intro of the Crypt Keeper.

I should mention this is an 87-minute movie, but only 80 when taking out the credits. The first seven minutes show you an introduction involving the key from the last movie being used to help subdue a great vampire before you get interrupted with a three-minute interlude to see a mummy and the Cryptkeeper engage in a silly conversation about films. You get quickly to the title of the film involving a bordello and, well, vampire prostitutes. Unfortunately, you also get to Dennis Miller around the 21-minute mark. My first worry upon seeing his first scene was "oh God, is he going for a discount version of Jim Rockford from The Rockford Files?" It may interest you to know this is the first (and so far only) movie with Miller as a lead presence, and I'm sure at least someone in their mid-thirties or forties know about Miller as a stand-up comedian/talk show host in his heyday. With basically an hour of what you might term a performance, let's start with a ripoff of one of his jokes: the only difference between a bad performance and a tired performance is that in a bad performance you hear every single problem, and in a tired performance you see it. He really thought he could just yuk it up and coast on his lines ("I Feel like I'm in a bad Tales from the Crypt episode" - you are in a bad one!), and to call it embarrassing would be an understatement, because there is no semblance of charm found here. 

If you don't care about the lead in a vampire comedy, what's there to care about for the rest on down? Eleniak might actually be outclassed by Everhart (who has the excuse of little acting experience as a model), who at least gives you some sort of campy enjoyment whereas the other looks as if they actually would be better off being in a Baywatch episode. Feldman*, Sarandon, and Fondacaro just seem to have little to actually do before getting to bite the dust. My god, they made a movie with vampires operating a whorehouse and did the bare minimum! The attempted angle of positioning a seedy reverend getting in league with vampires to deal with sinners could've been something, but it all just comes off as lazy, as if they didn't have anything else to really go with the creatures besides killer tongues and not being captured on video camera. When you do a sequence of vampires getting taken down to "Ballroom Blitz" via holy water-filled super-soakers and just roll your eyes, you know you are in trouble. It isn't even worth getting down to the climax, where I guess it doesn't really matter to cut a heart of a vampire and take 'em out completely if it wasn't for the silly little matter of "surprise" endings (even Tales from the Darkside had better ideas). As a whole, there are a few decent effects and gore to accompany the movie, but Bordello of Blood never rises above lazy B-movie standards with actual commitment or charm to make it worth it. 

Overall, I give it 5 out of 10 stars.

Next up: Messiah of Evil.


*The actual joke told by Miller as found on Wikipedia: "The only difference between group sex and group therapy is that in group therapy you hear about everyone's problems, and in group sex you see them."

*Feldman is a weird guy in many matters: this matter or the one non-laughing matter.

November 1, 2026

Hardware.

Review #2620: Hardware (1990).

Cast: 
Dylan McDermott (Moses "Hard Mo" Baxter), Stacey Travis (Jill), John Lynch (Shades), Iggy Pop (Angry Bob), Carl McCoy (Nomad / Zone Tripper), William Hootkins (Lincoln Wineberg Jr), with Mark Northover (Alvy), Paul McKenzie (Vernon), and Lemmy (Water Taxi Driver) Directed by Richard Stanley.

Review: 
I suppose it was eventually time to encounter a Richard Stanley movie, so why not go with his first one? Born in South Africa in the era of what he called a "police state", he was interested in filmmaking from a young age and studied at Cape Town Film School. When he was a teenager in school, he made a short film called "Incidents in an Expanding Universe" that was set in a dystopia that provided some steps into what became Hardware. He moved to London in his twenties and did work directing music videos before traveling to Afghanistan to document the Soviet-Afghan War (specifically by joining a guerrilla Muslim faction) that saw him see plenty of danger for him and his camera man. With Hardware, it came out of the process of wanting to actually get one of his scripts made that happened to take comments into account for what people "wanted", which namely ranged from a chainsaw to a fire stunt that saw him apparently write it in a week (he later stated that he was in a "pretty hellacious frame of mind at the time"). The film was shot in an abandoned place called the Roundhouse in east London (with the opening in Morocco) and ultimately found a place of distribution with Miramax. Even with cuts made to dance around an X rating, the movie was a mild hit (on its reported budget of over $1 million) and Stanley directed three further features over the next few decades, most notably with Color Out of Space (2019). Stanley kept busy, of course, writing various unproduced screenplays (one of which apparently being "Hardware II") along with directing a documentary on the life and times of Otto Rahn. 

Red skies, bills involving clean breaks with procreation, and a world seen and heard through a screen, it's a future not all that distant from what we wish to tell ourselves, as if "stupid, sadistic, and suicidal" actually could be a mantra. Is it a familiar type of "cyberpunk"? Maybe. Is it a familiar type of slasher? Probably. Is it still my kind of movie to at least give credit to? Oh you bet. Around the time of release, Fleetway Comics sued the filmmakers for plagiarism because of perceived similarities between the film and "SHOK!", a 1981 short story (as written by Steve MacManus and Kevin O'Neill) that had appeared in a spin-off publication of 2000 AD; as with Hardware, both happen to involve the remains of a droid from a devastated zone getting into the hands into a sculptress that re-assembles and traps her in her place (one goes for body heat, one is weak to moisture). Whether having inspiration from Soylent Green, the novel Damnation Alley, or with Saturn 3, I had plenty of interest in actually seeing the movie because of the dreary charm that comes through in a world where there just isn't anything to really latch onto for hope besides just aiming to drive out the noise. It's the illusion that there even is a fight worth having when a killer robot is just going to grind you away (in packaged fascism) that is probably more fit now in our rusty times. McDermott and Travis have their own differing way of interacting with the world of sludge that sees them engage in, well, passion (as seen by a delightfully disgusting Hootkins) before it gives way to a monster flick. I think I enjoy it more within its latter half of the 94 minute runtime when it gets to the cruel showcase of mayhem, ranging from a pervert viewing a real bug-eyed presence to a solution drenched in moisture and actual futility. As a whole, Hardware is bleak, unsettling, familiar, and the kind of movie fit for all times in the decayed corners of a world going down the tubes.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.


Welcome to Halloween: The Week After - Crazy Eights. All the way to November 7, we will be clearing the road with horror movies that I couldn't quite get to in October and hopefully have some fun with it. But first, let's take a tiny detour in curiosity with the next movie:

Bordello of Blood

October 31, 2026

Ravenous (1999).

Review #2619: Ravenous.

Cast: 
Guy Pearce (Captain John Boyd), Robert Carlyle (F.W. Colqhoun / Colonel Ives), David Arquette (Private Cleaves), Jeremy Davies (Private Toffler), Jeffrey Jones (Colonel Hart), John Spencer (General Slauson), Stephen Spinella (Major Knox), Neal McDonough (Private Reich), Joseph Runningfox (George), Sheila Tousey (Martha), and Bill Brochtrup (Lindus) Directed by Antonia Bird.

Review: 

A long time ago, in a frontier not too far far away, there were people in this world that came out of a travelling party with survival coming by the one thing you could not expect, at least if you believe what survives in historical fact. Alfred Packer claimed that he survived a number of days on roots within a brutal wilderness of what was not quite the state of Colorado in the winter of 1874. Aside from being a petty thief, Packer was not exactly a consistent man with his stories of survival, so it perhaps came as the tiniest bit of surprise that it wasn't so much a man making a tall tale of survival to cover a robbery but instead a claim that he survived on the bones of his party members (to say nothing of the Donner Party from three decades prior, where a group of pioneers saw 30+ people perish and a few bones missing along the way). Anyway, Ted Griffin was a first-time screenwriter that had graduated Colgate University. All of a sudden, Ravenous was one of three screenplays that got sold to a studio in a week, with Fox 2000 slating a director with Milcho Manchevski (director of Before the Rain [1994]) by 1997. Shooting was done in Mexico alongside Slovakia that saw production squabbles between its producer and Machevski to the point where an attempted replacing with Raja Gosnell went nowhere. Antonia Bird was brought in to direct because of the recommendation of her business partner, Robert Carlyle. Bird was involved in theatre from the age of 17 with Coventry Rep and directed a total of four films (Priest [1994], Mad Love [1995], Face [1997]) alongside the various TV and theatre involved as both producer and director. She did not get everything she wanted for the finished film, as post-production saw a voiceover included alongside the quotes you see in the introduction (i.e: "He who fights the monster must make sure not to become a monster."- Friedrich Nietzsche is then followed with "Eat me!"- Anonymous) that she felt was "superfluous". Even with a budget of $12 million and an initial release in over a thousand theaters, Ravenous was not a hit at the time of release. 

This ended up being Bird's last feature film as a director, as she spent the rest of her time as a TV director until her death in 2013 at the age of 62. Such a pity for a movie with interest in the intensities of competitiveness. What Bird saw the movie as was the perils of consumption and all that comes with a focus on two people that happen be the embodiment of drug pusher and junkie (in a sea of folktale movies, going with a version of the Wendigo myth from native Algonquian folklore is pretty interesting). It isn't exactly a fight for survival in the woods type of movie, it isn't exactly a fight for revenge, it isn't exactly the kind of movie for everyone...and it is still pretty damn fun. It's the type of movie to absorb in all the absurdities and pleasures that come with its atmosphere and tremendously game cast that remind you as many times as possible that one really should eat to live as opposed to living to eat when it comes to horror and pitch-black humor (did I mention the off-kilter playing of music in banjos, violins and more from Damon Albarn and Michael Nyman?). This is the kind of movie that does wonder about people who maybe see others as mere meat slabs. Pearce is given a pretty thankless task if you want to play devil's advocate: a weary junkie with nowhere to actually run. It isn't a road to seeing him becone a hero, it is a road of actually knowing what one is beyond a string of meat and desires, where one must see if they can actually atone with all that they did. Undeniably, Carlyle runs away with the show with his devilish qualities worth seeing as basically a vampire, one that believes it is more courageous to walk with him than to walk against him. He plays around with who he is to others around him with a type of confidence that could only come from someone who really has lived the tricks of the trade and decided he liked the taste too much to let it go. The body count actually is a bit considerable despite the careful pace (in fact, you might be more squeamish about seeing meat than blood, save for one scene), and Jones* manages to play off the general absurdity of his situation in wayward elegance for a few chuckles (McDonough is not in it much, hut his intensity is worth a look). It is a movie filled ominous delight over what happens when power truly does seep into the flesh and the inevitable crash of junkie and dealer in lyrical darkness that is actually pretty fun. It takes plenty of time to get there among flesh, blood, and the stark terror of the frontier, but the ride is worth it at least once, I believe. 

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.


Happy Halloween. Hell of a time for a triple header, we will see you later for Halloween -The Week After: Crazy Eights.

*I would be remiss not to mention that Jones would later be charged in 2002 for crimes involving a minor involving posing for photographs that saw him sentenced to probation and become registered as a sex offender for life.

October 8, 2026

Scream 2.

Review #2593: Scream 2.

Cast: 
Neve Campbell (Sidney Prescott), Courteney Cox (Gale Weathers), David Arquette (Dewey Riley), Sarah Michelle Gellar (Cici Cooper), Jamie Kennedy (Randy Meeks), Laurie Metcalf (Debbie Salt), Elise Neal (Hallie McDaniel), Jerry O'Connell (Derek Feldman), Timothy Olyphant (Mickey Altieri), Liev Schreiber (Cotton Weary), Lewis Arquette (Louis Hartley), Philip Pavel (Officer Andrews), Christopher Doyle (Officer Richards), Duane Martin (Joel), Rebecca Gayheart (Lois), Portia de Rossi (Murphy), with Roger L. Jackson (voice of Ghostface), David Warner (Gus Gold), Omar Epps (Phil Stevens), and Jada Pinkett (Maureen Evans)

Directed by Wes Craven (#474 - A Nightmare on Elm Street, #558 - Scream, #633 - Red Eye, #939 - Swamp Thing, #1156 - Wes Craven's New Nightmare, #2135 - The Last House on the Left, #2306 - The Hills Have Eyes, #2455 - Vampire in Brooklyn)

Review: 
To be perfectly honest, I never really got into Scream the way I expected to. Sure, I liked the first film (as released in December 1996) just fine, but I honestly forgot that I saw it way back in 2014 and honestly forgot that, yeah, there were pretty clever moments to serve as the attraction for folks that maybe squirm a bit when confronted with horror stuff in a horror movie*. Sure, it was the brainchild of Kevin Williamson being inspired by both his experiences watching horror films like Halloween (1978) and also the idea that maybe movies just make psychos more creative than actually create them. The opening sequence, well, that's the showstopper, and that's the one that got Miramax to buy into it and eventually corral Wes Craven into doing it. You basically got a who-dun-it with enough pieces for folks to enjoy putting together before the inevitable TV-to-the-head. It took a few weeks, but it became a hit that led to clamors for a sequel. Naturally, Williamson actually had a few ideas in mind for potential sequels pretty early (why entice buyers with one movie when you can sell the potential for a franchise?) and production for a second movie was greenlit three months after its release. After a brief fling with having Robert Rodriguez direct, Craven elected to return instead for a film that started filming in the summer for a winter release. By this point in time, Williamson attracted enough attention to become involved in TV with his development of Dawson's Creek, which meant that he shuttled between sets that saw most of the script pages for Scream 2 written when on set. A leak of a script (with one ending stated by Williamson as a "dummy draft" meant to keep details under wraps) on the Internet did not help matters, but the film was released on time to, well, enough success to inspire further sequels, with Scream 3 (which did not have Williamson back) coming out three years later in 2000.

I don't know, man. I did like this movie just fine, mainly when it actually does engage with the actual premise of gore and also with some of its ideas of just who would go around wearing a Ghostface mask after all that happened the first time around, but it really is a case where it almost outsmarts itself with actually getting to the point by the time its two-hour trek is over. The new characters prove to be more of a cipher than really developed, which is a curious move in what is meant to be a "guess who?" movie, and in general it just feels like a movie that needed more time in the oven. The opening sequence (involving a busy movie theater with death in the seats) probably sets too high of an expectation/delight from what actually happens afterwards, and that is saying something for something that pales a bit from what one saw in to open the first film. Campbell does carry the movie pretty well in the vulnerability of someone who I suppose would do better than most in living the hell of life after seeing people you know be murdered get turned into both a book and a film (or worse yet, get played by Tori Spelling) and then see it happen all over again (minus one quibble*). It goes a bit better when seeing the interactions between Cox and Arquette, who probably share the best scenes, mainly in seeing that tension slowly melt away for fondness that is a bit fun to see (it does get a bit distracting hearing that Broken Arrow cue again and again though) in the show of just how much fun-loving bravery can be enough in one guy when pooled against opportunism (or in a different scene with Cox, getting slapped for their trouble). It lifts the film plenty when compared to the new blood with O'Connell-Olyphant-Gellar-Neal, who, well, are just not the kind of folks to really roll with besides a mild flick of my eyes, particularly when I was more interested in the wormy nature of Schreiber (given a bit more to do from the last film, if you recall). 

You might remember Kennedy's character as the one who explained the rules of surviving a horror film in the previous movie, but I'll be honest with you: I don't care (geek or no geek, I think I'll take the bus). If you're going to dispatch anyone who happened to be around from a previous horror movie, if you're going to do kill someone off to raise the stakes, if you're going to do so in broad daylight, he fits the bill, so it is quite a way to go out. It probably isn't too much of a spoiler to say that one of the new blood ends up being a killer, and I have to say that the motive is actually pretty interesting, as if someone wanted to crib lovingly from Natural Born Killers (1994), but then it gets a bit too cute with its other dangling twist, because heaven forbid one killer isn't enough, no, it runs off the oldest tricks of the book in the guise of "cleverness", as if hanging around so long in plain sight (oh hi familiar face from TV) along with, well I'm sure you can get the rest. In general, there are a few fun moments in actual mayhem (and that one fateful moment of triumph) to make for a fairly decent sequel that gives you a few scares within its scrapes of gore and playful attempts at digging into familiar slasher territory that works more often than not.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.


*Tiniest sidenote: When doing these cast listings, sometimes I have to adjust them because for whatever reason, billing is sometimes done *alphabetically* (as noted on the poster and on Wikipedia), which is the stupidest way to do credits. You know and I know who is the star, so why bother?

*You ever hear people whine about horror movies being too gruesome or possibly being a bad influence on the youth? I laugh too.

*The only quibble I have with Sidney comes in the sequence when she gets into a car-wreck. So she escapes a wrecked car, goes a couple of feet and decides, no, I need to go back to try and unmask Ghostface just because. Nay, I won't go to see if that cop on the hood has a gun so I can straight up shoot him, I'm just going to get close and- oh golly gee, the girl I'm with is dead! On an unrelated note, I do wonder if Sidney ever considers getting a gun in the sequels because, screw it, what could go wrong?

August 31, 2026

The Shadow (1994).

Review #2575: The Shadow (1994).

Cast: 
Alec Baldwin (Lamont Cranston / The Shadow), John Lone (Shiwan Kahn), Penelope Ann Miller (Margo Lane), Ian McKellen (Dr. Reinhardt Lane), Peter Boyle (Moses "Moe" Shrevnitz), Jonathan Winters (Commissioner Wainwright Barth), Tim Curry (Farley Claymore), Joseph Maher (Isaac Newboldt), John Kapelos (Duke Rollins), Max Wright (Berger), Sab Shimono (Dr. Roy Tam), with Brady Tsurutani (the Tulku), Andre Gregory (Burbank), James Hong (Li Peng), Arsenio "Sonny" Trinidad (Wu), and Ethan Phillips (Nelson) Directed by Russell Mulcahy.

Review: 
There were quite a few folks who really, really, really wanted to make their own type of franchise based on some old books lying around in the latter stages of the 20th century. For every Superman (1978) or Batman (1989) or even Dick Tracy (1990), you would get movies such as Flash Gordon (1980) or Remo Williams: The Adventure Begins (1985) or The Phantom (1996) that just didn't pan out... or this. The Shadow actually arose first as a marketing tool, specifically as a storyteller with a distinct voice to narrate the Detective Story Hour for radio. The voice seemed more interesting than the show, so Walter B. Gibson was commissioned to begin writing stories of the character (with a pen name of Maxwell Grant, as one does) that ran on and off for 20 years. You've got a man clad in black (hat, cloak) as a vigilante (while spending his days as a rich playboy, most of the time) that fought crime starting in 1931. The radio drama apparently was the one that made him invisible when in operation. There were two low-budget films done in the late 1930s (The Shadow Strikes [1937], International Crime [1938]) with Rod La Rocque as the title character while Victor Jory starred in a 15-chapter serial for Columbia Pictures in 1940 and Kane Richjmond starred in a trio of B-movie quickies in 1946. The character did in fact prove an inspiration for both Batman and V for Vendetta* (Batman co-creator Bill Finger stated that his first story for the character was a takeoff of a Shadow story). Martin Bregman bought the rights to the character in the 1980s and had Robert Zemeckis in mind to direct, but this did not come to pass (incidentally, Sam Raimi had pitched an idea but was ignored, but he ended up doing Darkman [1990] anyway). Eventually, it worked out for Universal Pictures to have Australian-born Russell Mulcahy (responsible for the first two Highlander films) as director and David Koepp (who had co-adapted Jurassic Park [1993] as writer. Filmed with a mix of traditional practical and optical effects alongside CGI for a budget of $40 million that was released on July 1, 1994 (right between the releases of The Lion King and Forrest Gump), the movie made just $48 million with audiences.

If you like movies set in the 1930s that just rolls along with any offbeat situation possible for what you might call an aloof type of superhero movie, you might have fun with this film. How many movies do you know where one of the key aspects to the plan of the movie is to hypnotize an entire city to not see a whole building? It's a movie all about atonement and adventure in the most offbeat of ways that I can't help but appreciate for its execution and its style that plays fast and loose for 108 minutes. Koepp had actually listened to the radio shows when he was a kid and he utilized the pulp novels as inspiration for his script and it shows in the charm that comes through and through in pulpy oddness, at least for those who get into it (thin? well, your milage may vary). Baldwin proves to be fairly game as the lead that dazzles in serving as a pulp avenger that occasionally terrorizes folks with a booming voice (as one does when having the mental fortitude to only be detected by one's shadow) or has a ball trying to adjust to the charms of Miller; it's all suave and all spry with these folks, it's hard to not have fun. Lone (playing a Genghis Khan descendant, as one does) makes for a delightfully hammy villain, coasting along with clinical precision for a role that could've easily been cardboard. Plans of world domination and folks fighting crime in the middle of the night work when there is some style to it, and I liked what I saw in splattering of Art Deco that keeps its outlandish stuff right for when it needs its most (a naturally elaborate network of tubes to communicate stuff, bombs that roll around like a ball, a climax involving mirrors, for example). There is a bit of relief with McKellen, Boyle, Winters, and Curry* to provide further bits of charm and curiosity to make this oddball world of shadowy networking and henchmen stuff work without too many hitches. With the way the climax goes, I do wonder how the hell they were going to do more of these, but I love ridiculous endings to see where they can write their way out of it (which, well, you know how that worked out). As a whole, The Shadow is an underrated little gem that has enough charm and look to generally rise with its pulp trappings and offbeat plot to make for a curious recommendation for those who can see past shadows and fog.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.


*As devised by noted artist and also noted grumpy person Alan Moore. 
*As with Dolly Parton, we'll remember Tim Curry in this life and the next.
*Incidentally, it was nice to have a small role of Ethan Phillips, who played Neelix on Star Trek: Voyager. Why? Because I hate Neelix and Phillips' character in this film gets what Neelix deserved: bipped by the bad guy.

Well, it was a good run for Acknowledged in August Again.

There were many candidates that couldn't quite make the cut due to time or other reasons. These included: 1941, The Plague Dogs, Innocent Blood, Quintet, Sucker Punch, True Colors, Human Highway, Dream Lover, Over the Top, Things to Do in Denver When You're Dead, Bad Timing, Timebomb, Leviathan, Brain Donors, Rent-a-Cop, The Missing, 3000 Miles to Graceland, Cutters' Way, Swing Swift, Captain Ron, Circle of Iron, Keys to Tulsa, The New Age, Speaking of Sex, Powwow Highway, Monkeybone, The Frisco Kid, Twister (1989), Shoot 'em Up, The Phantom, Very Bad Things, Terminator: Dark Fate, The Taking of Beverly Hills, Moment by Moment, Big Wednesday, Let's Get Harry, The 13th Warrior, [Redux of Escape from L.A./Small Soldiers], Striptease

Barring an unforeseen emergency, August 2027 will see Around the World Again in August

Redux: Last Action Hero.

Redux #576: Last Action Hero.

Cast: 
Arnold Schwarzenegger (Detective Jack Slater / Arnold Schwarzenegger), Austin O'Brien (Danny Madigan), Charles Dance (Mr. Benedict), Robert Prosky (Nick), Tom Noonan (the Ripper / Tom Noonan), Frank McRae (Lieutenant Dekker), Anthony Quinn (Tony Vivaldi), Bridgette Wilson (Whitney Slater / Meredith Caprice), F. Murray Abraham (John Practice), Mercedes Ruehl (Irene Madigan), Art Carney (Frank Slater), Professor Toru Tanaka ("Tough Asian Man"), Ryan Todd (Andrew Slater), Jeffrey Braer (Skeezy), and Bobbie Brown (Video Babe) Directed by John McTiernan (#014 - Die Hard, #018 - Die Hard with a Vengeance, #080 - The Hunt for Red October, #325 - Predator)

Review: 
"Initially, it was a wonderful Cinderella story with a nine-year-old boy. We had a pretty good script by Bill Goldman, charming. And this ludicrous hype machine got hold of it, and it got buried under bullshit. It was so overwhelmed with baggage. And then it was whipped out unedited, practically assembled right out of the camera. It was in the theater five or six weeks after I finished shooting. It was kamikaze, stupid, no good reason for it. And then to open the week after Jurassic Park—God! To get to the depth of bad judgment involved in that, you'd need a snorkel."

It is sometimes fun to go back to the (perceived) hits and misfires of the old favorites, particularly when it comes to Arnold Schwarzenegger. Honestly, the fact that he was enough of an action star to warrant curiosity all these years later is a curious one, at least when you consider that he was originally a bodybuilder that listed Steve Reeves as among his idols. There was a long road between being dubbed in his debut with Hercules in New York (1970) to the bodybuilding documentary Pumping Iron (1977) to Conan the Barbarian (1982) to being in movies that were boldly proclaimed to be the "big ticket of '93". Of course, Last Action Hero started and ended in completely different fashion from what anyone expected, but hey. Zak Penn and Adam Leff had met when taking a film appreciation course at Wesleyan University; later on, with a shared love of action movies and their cliches, they did a draft with "Extremely Violent" that basically was a flip of The Purple Rose of Cairo [1985] (in which a movie-star idol walks of the screen and joins the real world from time to time). Through a bit of puffery, they attracted an agent with Chris Moore and it eventually bore fruit where Columbia Pictures bought it, albeit so they could then get their own folks (credited folks and uncredited script doctors such as William Goldman) to do re-writes. For example, the Hamlet moment came from Penn & Leff, while the glass-eyed Mr. Bendict character was a Goldman idea, and the caper of disposing of a dynamite-stuffed gangster corpse (inspired by a book) came from Black and Arnott (in general, the original draft didn't even have the golden ticket). The result was Penn and Leff were given credit for the story while Shane Black and David Arnott (who basically thought of it as having the chance to do the "Wizard of Oz of action movies") were given credit for the screenplay. Filming was hectic enough that the studio basically released the movie as it was (i.e. ignoring test screening reactions) in order to beat the timed-release date of June 18, 1993 (one week after Jurassic Park) with a budget of $85 million, the movie made less than double of its budget back.

To be honest, this is basically a "Hudson Hawk" moment for me where I realize, you know, this is funny action worth appreciating. Eighteen-year-old me thought it was better as an action movie that wasn't as funny as it could be. Looking back, I think I just appreciate the cozy world that comes with a litany of action cliches and just going with the frenzied attention. It really is a cynical riff on The Wizard of Oz that makes me appreciate when I see on the screen and chuckle along with it. Incidentally, Penn and Leff actually did write it with Schwarzenegger in mind because of his "self-mocking personality" and being the biggest & exciting of the overblown action guys (evidently, you can read a draft here). Sure, they envisioned it as a divide between a smart real kid and a one-dimensional celluloid character rather than the wisecracking present in the latter, and sure, a lesson in not projecting himself into action movies is kind of lost in the moviemaking by committee. But goddamn it, I did enjoy seeing the pairing of Schwarzenegger and O'Brien in the long run. I once thought O'Brien "easily disposable if he wasn't our main character", which certainly seems to sell him short. O'Brien actually had made his film debut with The Lawnmower Man (1993) after apparently being impressive in a TV commercial. There is something to how the two work with each other that does have enough charm to help get the movie over most of the bumps in the 131-minute journey. Schwarzenegger just happens to be the type of guy who can make an action sequence look all the more entertaining with that certain cadence and it does work in his favor to have a little bit of fun in the freewheeling film world. It's messy and decidedly a guilty pleasure type of movie that clearly gave McTiernan problems that he at least stages with a few entertaining action sequences. Dance makes for a fun enough adversary in slowly eating the scenery in menace that seems to be having fun, and that goes doubly for the blustery McRae (not exactly as much for Prosky or Carney, but at least the latter has the excuse of playing the "poor tragic second cousin"). The best gag might be our hero reading a few cards that count down to one because, wait for it, there's a bomb. The litany of cameos and in jokes are basically hit and miss (I suppose Planet Hollywood was a big deal at one point, but a cartoon cat? A reference to Amadeus [1984]?) and being compared to Who Framed Roger Rabbit (1988) probably did it no favors, but I enjoyed what I saw to make an argument that the movie is sorely underrated. Life isn't just what you see in a movie because at the end, it's what you make of it: it can be adventurous, it can be full of itself, it can be charming, whatever. You just have to actually show up for it. In that sense, Last Action Hero might just be up your alley.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.


One more in the chamber, a non-redux this time: The Shadow

Redux: Predator 2.

Redux #548: Predator 2.

Cast:  
Danny Glover (Lieutenant Mike Harrigan), Kevin Peter Hall (City Hunter / The Predator; Hal Rayle as voice of the Predator), Gary Busey (Special Agent Peter Keyes), Rubén Blades (Detective Danny Archuleta), María Conchita Alonso (Detective Leona Cantrell), Bill Paxton (Detective Jerry Lambert), Lilyan Chauvin (Dr. Irene Edwards), Robert Davi (Deputy Chief Phil Heinemann), Adam Baldwin (Agent Adam Garber), Kent McCord (Captain Brent Pilgrim), Steve Kahan (Sergeant Neil Reeger), Henry Kingi ("El Scorpio"), Morton Downey Jr. (Tony Pope), Calvin Lockhart (Willie "King Willie"), and Sylvia Kauders (Ruth Albright) Directed by Stephen Hopkins.

Review: 
"I always think that about everything I do. I’m my worst most vicious critic of all of these things but I think I just would have made [Predator 2] probably a little less over the top. So it’s a little uneven in tone and sometimes it feels really real. Then you have these crazy Jamaican guys in gold disco pants. I just always want a sense of authenticity about stuff and there’s some of it that just doesn’t feel authentic at all. Some of it really does get to you and I think there’s a strange veer in tones but there’s nothing I’m ashamed of or anything. I think it is just a child from the MTV running around blowing shit up at will and enjoying it with a huge amount of backup working with people who are much smarter than me and could really help me do something that I never had a chance to do before."

It's possible that action movies are just above horror movies when it comes to looking back and thinking, yes, this was pretty good the next time around. I saw the first Predator (1987) movie on DVD when I was in high school and thought it was good and then go figure, I see it a few years later and thought it was really pretty good. Predator 2, which I saw back in 2014 and I guess I just didn't like the idea of a standalone sequel at the time. What I forgot to know at the time was that Jim and John Thomas, who wrote the first movie (involving a professional hunter hunting big game, at least how they proposed it), did in fact return to write the sequel and pitched a handful of ideas to 20th Century Fox; these ideas apparently included: starting straight after the explosion from the first film, or dropping a Predator into time periods such as the Battle of the Bulge. Instead, they went for a hunter that decided upon the then future of 1997 and the "urban jungle" in Los Angeles. The studio could not get Arnold Schwarzenegger to return because of a salary dispute. At the helm to direct was Jamaican-born British director Stephen Hopkins, who had attracted a bit of attention with his first two movies Dangerous Game (1987) and A Nightmare on Elm Street 5: The Dream Child (1989), and he worked out revisions and storyboarded moments with them. Shot on a quick window that had principal photography start in February for a release nine months later, Hopkins (28 at the time) stated he enjoyed the experience. Released on a budget of over $20-30 million in November 1990 (yes, roughly around the same time as Dances with Wolves and Home Alone), the movie made over $50 million worldwide (in comparison, the original made nearly $100 million). Not counting the Alien vs. Predator crossovers, there were no further Predator movies until Predators in 2010.

If Hopkins went a "bit crazy" in making a movie that still ended up being still pretty grounded that he felt was more in the western/thriller genre than sci-fi horror, well, he sure made a good one. With crazy discs and spears to go along with basically a retread of what you saw before in hunting the hunter, I could understand my initial disappointment to this movie and then also realize, yes, but it still deserves plenty of credit for its entertainment value. Over the top, sure, but I suppose I appreciate intensity and craftsmanship more and more when it comes to action/horror movies as the years move on. A lack of Schwarzenegger is regrettable, although it would've been a team-up movie that had inklings of casting Patrick Swayze or possibly Steven Seagal (Hopkins theorizes that he was persuaded by James Cameron to not do it before doing Terminator 2); instead, the role eventually played by Gary Busey* was expanded upon and Glover got cast (basically making this a semi-Lethal Weapon reunion between them, Steve Kahan and Joel Silver, the latter of whom produced both movies). Glover (in pretty good shape because of the physical training) pretty much elevates the movie to what could've easily just been a middling rehash because of how entertaining he proves to be as our hero. Sure, the stubborn loose cannon ordinary Joe isn't the most original type of movies of its ilk, but he has a certain type of timing and enthusiasm that makes it all seem worth it in seeing inevitable ass-kicking in the heat; besides, whether it was1990, 1997 or 2026, it does seem pretty relevant to have a smart mouth to seeing combative folks in really warm weather. This was the penultimate film appearance for Hall, who died the following year after having contracted HIV from a blood transfusion during surgery from injuries in a car accident, and he really did make the best of this role from that suit in making for a pretty imposing figure (which through the presentation of the hunter makes for basically an oddball looking for the alpha, such as when he does a roar and attracts a lightning bolt). I love this group of oddballs that surround the action with Alonso, Blades, and Paxton (no guesses for which plays the charming relief taken before the 108-minute action is over) or the oddball support with Busey in what can only be called "mellow delusion" and musician-turned-abrasive talk show host* Downey hamming it up as much as possible (or, for whatever reason, former Adam-12 star McCord and Davi having bit roles in the usual "cop, you're being too rough" spiel). You get plenty of grimy and intense things within sequences in the city, a massacre in the subway, stuff in a slaughterhouse that probably cribs a bit from Aliens and finally some time spent with an alien ship for a showdown of who really deserves a trophy for their mettle. You know what you're getting early on and if you like where it looks to be headed, well, you'll like it just as much by the end. As a whole, it's a fun average movie that I appreciate more and more because of its sheer energy and willingness to just go where it wants in hunting on a concrete jungle more than thinking too much about its effectiveness when compared to its predecessor. Good ol' sweaty gooey fun, check 'em out.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Yes, I finally decided to give a redux to a movie I saw over 10 years ago. A few more things to cover come up to end August...

*Post motorcycle accident Busey. Remember folks - always wear a helmet when riding a motorcycle.
*It wouldn't be a proper Movie Night if I didn't share his attempts to do novelty songs around this time - Morton Downey Jr. - Sings [1989]. 

August 25, 2026

Freaked.

Review #2573: Freaked.

Cast: 
Alex Winter (Ricky Coogin), Michael Stoyanov (Ernie), Megan Ward (Julie), Randy Quaid (Elijah C. Skuggs), William Sadler (Dick Brian), Alex Zuckerman (Stuey Gluck), Keanu Reeves (Ortiz "The Dog Boy"), Mr. T (The Bearded Lady), Brooke Shields (Skye Daley), Bobcat Goldthwait ("Sockhead"/Sock (Tourist), Derek McGrath ("Worm"/Oxford Professor), Jeff Kahn ("Nosey"), John Hawkes ("Cowboy"), Lee Arenberg ("The Human Flame"), Patti Tippo (Rosie "The Pinhead"), Tim Burns ("Frogman"), Ray Baker (Bill Blazer), Jaime Cardriche ("Toad"), Tom Stern (Milkman), with Jon M. Chu (Giant Stuey Monster), and Michael Gilden & Joseph S. Griffo ("Eye N. Eye") Directed by Alex Winter and Tom Stern.

Review: 


Is it picking low hanging fruit to go along with a movie that basically was just screwed over by its studio? Alex Winter and Tom Stern met at Tisch School of the Arts at New York University in the 1980s that shared interests in "underground comix, punk rock, Monty Python, etc." They soon collaborated on a few short films together such as Squeal of Death, Bar-B-Que Movie (which featured the rock band Butthole Surfers*) and a few music videos. Alongside Tim Burns (who had met Stern when working on The Jim Henson Hour), they created the sketch comedy show The Idiot Box (aired in 1991), which ran for six episodes on MTV (back when it actually ran music videos). They ended the show to take a deal with 20th Century Fox for what became this film. At the time, Winter believed that cynical comedy was on the rise in part because of the outlook of the United States* and thought, well, what's more cynical than laughing at the misfortune of the main character? Of course, he also claimed that the original intent was to make the "ultimate cult film" to overly exaggerate before Fox came in and wanted rewrites (Joe Roth in particular was name-dropped for being with them on making a movie together), so there's that. Burns gave the film a re-write (evidently, one of the moments excised involved a guitar player playing with a living person's spinal cord). Studio turnover led to Roth departing Fox and replaced by someone who did not care for the film (shot for over $12 million that actually had merchandise released for it such as a figure line). Bad test screenings (one screening apparently had a bunch of numbskulls believing it was going to be like Bill & Ted) led to a theater release on October 3...to two screens (there exists a few different editions, with the longest being 86 minutes and the US version went 80). Winter has made a handful of features and documentaries (ranging from Fever [1999] to Zappa [2020] to Adulthood [2025]) while Stern has gone off on his own filmmaking with stuff such as co-writing An American Werewolf in Paris (1997), a handful of TV episodes and documentaries. After receiving runs on home media (2005, 2013), it got a full restoration (and release) from Winter in 2025.

It's one thing to put Reeves in a dog suit, it's another thing to have Mr. T. play a bearded lady. Among the folks responsible for the effects included Tony Gardner, Steve Johnson, and Screaming Mad George. If they couldn't get their dream of Beach Blanket Bingo meeting The Evil Dead", at least there's a gooey and goofy time to have here with this movie, which has plenty of glee over its Freekz (hey, the working title was "Hideous Mutant Freekz"), which are wonderful to gawk at alongside to have amusement over how they look when faced with crowds of humans who aren't really that much different in temperament, honestly. If Freaks (1932) wanted to show the actual side of sideshow performers* and the horrors that come in trying to ignore them as people, Freaked yearns to just go off the wall with its own type of performers that we celebrate for all that they do in mayhem: cow-men, toads with big tongues, and to top it all, a giant mutated nerd. It's the kind of movie fit for those who had fun with, say, Nothing But Trouble (1991). As star and co-director, Winter was wrapped with plenty of makeup for twelve hours (complete with remote control work), and, well, handling duties that resulted in him barely being able to sleep for a few months. As such, he makes for a good presence in carrying things in scuzzball grossness (as per the goal), one who hams it up with no hesitation. Winter, Stoyanov, and Ward make for a suitable group of goofs to get turned into freaks (one with half of a good face and the other two being pooled together) as equal opportunity jerks. The supporting cast has a handful of gags and charms, ranging from the most obvious person to play a sock puppet, a stuffy worm, and a delightfully dry Mr. T exploring the helpful side of femininity. The movie drifts in and out with just having fun in effects and slinging any gag possible that makes for a pretty good time to let play out. In a sea of over-the-top people that aspire to be a spokesman for toxic waste (hey, is it any less degenerate than people who go for gambling sites in 2026*?) or live with a group of folks ranging from worms to mutated hammers, aiming for any type of joke (high and low) is the kind of movie fit for the oddball in all of us.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.


Next: To hell with it, Speed Racer.

*Butthole Surfers? Good lord, what a crappy name for a band. What's next, Viet Cong? 
*At least 1993 had Bill Clinton. 
*DraftKings and any other site that goes all in for gambling should die a horrible death. Gambling should've been relegated to the seedy basement and never given any type of prominence. At least alcohol has an argument for being a "social" drink (hey, I think it's a piece of crap, but still), what the hell does gambling do for anything?
*I wondered, hey, would some bastard try to argue that Freaks (1932) isn't really a horror movie? Low and behold, some people do in fact try to argue that - sad! 

August 23, 2026

Harley Davidson and the Marlboro Man.











Review #2572: Harley Davidson and the Marlboro Man.

Cast:
Mickey Rourke (Harley Davidson), Don Johnson (Robert Lee "Marlboro Man" Edison), Chelsea Field (Officer Virginia Slim), Tom Sizemore (Chance Wilder), Daniel Baldwin (Alexander), Vanessa Williams (Lulu Daniels), Giancarlo Esposito (Jimmy Jiles), Robert Ginty (Thom), Tia Carrere (Kimiko), Big John Studd (Jack Daniels), Julius Harris ('The Old Man' Jiles), Eloy Casados (Jose Cuervo), and Kelly Hu (Suzie) Directed by Simon Wincer.

Review: 
You're never going to believe this: a buddy biker action movie (that could also be called a "neo-Western") that wasn't a hit on release. The film was directed by one Simon Wincer, an Australian director that had done plenty of television before becoming a film guy with such movies as Snapshot (1979), D.A.R.Y.L. (1985) and Quigley Down Under (1990). The original script was written by aspiring actor Don Michael Paul that apparently took inspiration from Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid [1969] (which is strange because the movie has exactly one robbery while Cassidy features multiple robberies and a failed attempt at going straight, although a "super-posse" does sound pretty prevalent in both). It soon found a deal with MGM (at the time in hell with Giancarlo Parretti in management) and a quick turnaround with Wincer and company (you might be wondering - Paul? Yes, that's correct, Paul ended up being the writer/director for Half Past Dead [2002]*). Sure, Johnson and Rourke were mostly in it to try and get out of career ruts, but they apparently had a decent time making the movie. Released on August 23, 1991 (the same week as movies such as Dead Again) with little expectations from even MGM's own president at the time with a budget of roughly $18 million, the movie made less than half of that. Wincer went on to make a string of movies that surely sound normal: Free Willy (1993), that movie with a big whale in it, Lightning Jack (1994), an ill-fated attempt at a Paul Hogan vehicle (?), Operation Dumbo Drop (1995), a movie involving an elephant in the Vietnam War (no, really), and The Phantom (1996), a comic strip movie with a big purple costumed hero.

The heroes being named after brands was, well, not trying to sell cigarettes (which suck anyway*) or motorcycles. The real movie basically starts about nearly an hour after the heist is done and it's just two folks riding around trying to make the best of the fact that one can barely shoot a gun and the other wears duct-tape boots. Rourke was there solely for the money because of a string of flops and decided that as a 39-year-old in 1991 to do, and I'm not kidding, focus his time on boxing (he wound up doing a few fights around the world before going back to acting). Meanwhile, the elder Johnson (i.e. early forties) was still hoping to branch out from being more than Crockett from Miami Vice (hey, in fairness, he was fine in A Boy and His Dog [1975]). Even with that type of freewheeling attitude, there is still a veneer of interest in watching these people meander across the screen engaging in the most predictable type of adventure imaginable because they do conjure up a smile for those who are familiar with wiseasses that should know better. It's the kind of movie for those who thought Tango & Cash (1989) or Stone Cold (1991) were sick as hell, honestly. What other movie goes around having characters spend 99 percent of the time in duct-taped boots to go along with stunts of jumping onto pools or say, a person falling off a motorcycle just so it rolls at a group of people (who naturally all jump over it at the same time)? Or arm wrestling / bar fights? 

Much like the film, there are no excuses for what I do (see, I do crib quotes) in saying that this was a pretty decent movie in basically exploring two people that don't really know what they want besides having as much as possible before, well, the ride of the grim reaper hits. It just happens to be a movie where folks decide to rob a bank threatening to foreclose their favorite bar. Sure, it doesn't have much for Field to really do opposite Johnson (Williams also gets exactly one scene that doesn't involve singing), and sure, Baldwin and Sizemore don't get that much to particularly do as the primary adversaries (one basically travels in a straight line with other black-coated dudes but you still go, "cool"), and sure, it's a movie that hinges on selling drugs *back* to the people they robbed (equal opportunity robbers that don't love addictive drugs, what a pairing) but I got a kick out of its entertainment value. When your favorite place gets trashed (or in the modern sense, bought out or turned lame) by a bunch of stooges from a bank (capital?) just because they can, yeah, I would think wish fulfillment in getting revenge sounds like a fun time for 98 minutes, quite honestly. 35 years haven't exactly elevated it all the way to a cult movie, but it is the kind of curious movie to watch get on the road to ass-kicking and a few chuckles along the way.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Next up: At last, a movie title worthy for this month: Freaked.

*Supposedly, Johnson had his friend Sean "Arizona Slim" Walsh (a Miami Vice script doctor) and Jay Helfert write the pool hall scene that introduces his character. Wikipedia is fairly trustworthy on select movies, but I prefer a clickable link, so who knows?

*Movie Night explicitly says that cigarettes are a shitty product in every shape or form. Hell, that goes for vaping too. 

*I really should watch Rourke in The Wrestler, I keep forgetting to do that one. A whole lot easier to justify than watching Sean Penn in Milk, that's for sure.