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.

Song of the day, because I owe you one

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

I Know What You Did Last Summer (1997).

Review #2463: I Know What You Did Last Summer.

Cast: 

Jennifer Love Hewitt (Julie James), Sarah Michelle Gellar (Helen Shivers), Ryan Phillippe (Barry Cox), Freddie Prinze Jr (Ray Bronson), Johnny Galecki (Max Neurick), Bridgette Wilson (Elsa Shivers), Anne Heche (Melissa "Missy" Egan), Muse Watson (Benjamin "Ben" Willis / the Fisherman), and Stuart Greer (Officer) Directed by Jim Gillespie.

Review: 

"The joy of this film for me as a filmmaker was in taking [the] elements that we've seen before, and saying to the audience: 'Here's something you've seen before'—knowing that they're saying 'We've seen this before'—and still getting them to jump."

You may or may not know that this came from the writer of Scream (1996). Yes, Kevin Williamson had written a script loosely based on the 1973 novel of the same name, which had been written by Lois Duncan...but that script was done before Scream was even a thought in his mind, with the success of the 1996 movie getting people onto the idea of maybe doing studio slashers, which is where the old script came into play. This was the feature film debut of Jim Gillespie, who previously had done work on television and music videos. Duncan went on record as stating she was appalled by the movie being based on her book (stating specifically that she had a problem with sensationalized violence made to "seem thrilling rather than terrible", particularly since she was the mother of a murdered child); incidentally, Gillespie aimed to film with as little on-screen blood as possible to try and not be gratuitous with the violence. The book was a suspense novel featured a group of teens getting into a car accident (in the book's case, a young boy on a bike) that leads to death for the kid and oddly enough, nobody else. The movie was relatively successful with audiences, at least enough to inspire a sequel called I Still Know What You Did Last Summer in 1998 to go along with a direct-to-video feature (nobody cares), a modern take of the first film for an Amazon show in 2021 (what?), and a legacy sequel in 2025 that was called...I Know What You Did Last Summer (ironically following Scream doing the same thing years earlier*). 

Sure, you remember the movie about a hook-wielding killer terrorizing four teenagers. And you probably had one question on your mind: What the hell? What the hell to any of this? This was Williamson's "straightforward" horror script? To be clear, I will say that I may or may not be a bit generous with horror movies when it comes to assessing them because, well, there are some that are just entertaining even in mediocrity. But not this one. It isn't even the barebones body count (four), and it isn't even just the fact that the characters might as well have been constructed out of a wood board. No, what annoys me the most is that this supposed modern take on the slasher movie is just the same type of hack stuff you could find in Friday the 13th. And that movie was meant to be taken seriously, but with this movie, I thought it was supposed to be a joke, right down to the scene where Hewitt twirls around before screaming into the air what is the killer waiting for. Some might be subservient to any kind of slasher movie when it comes to spectacle, but not me, not for this one. The funny thing is that the killer is pretty terrible at how he targets people, since half the people he kills had nothing to do with the thing that happened a year prior and some of the time he just sneaks up on the people just to...terrorize them (seriously, he breaks into one girl's house to cut her hair down). But it comes in such a tedious little movie, one that aims to say something, anything about what it means to make the wrong choice and have to live with it...and then the ending coughs that up anyway! 

Some folks might consider Gellar to be the highlight of the film when it comes to...acting, but in general, everyone seems to be on the autopilot you could find in any generic slasher, even with the proverbial dark cloud over their heads. They just seem more like they are waiting for the boat show rather than being spooked by what is occurring around them, suffice to say. At least Phillippe is amusing in that veneer of arrogance and privilege for a time, probably far more than you think he will go given the amount of people to be terrorized or otherwise (such as Galecki, who might as well have been a paperweight). By the time the movie has ended its reign of error, complete with the characters seemingly learning about telling the cops about what the hell is going on, you will have gotten the feeling the movie was the equivalent of a toothache. This isn't one of those times where I get mad a slasher for being a slasher, this is just one of those frustratingly mediocre movies to get mad at because there were ideas worth looking into. Why not make a mystery worth watching about people who can't cope with who they are in making the wrong choice? But nah, there was a hook story mentioned in the early parts of the movie so we can have the killer go with hooks because, uh, reasons. As a whole, I Know What You Did Last Summer has a few tiny moments of relief - the chase of Gellar near the end is probably the highlight, at least when not considering the humor at the movie's expense for sheer ludicrous things. But the real moment where you believe things will be good comes here: when you look at the fact the 101 minutes are over, and you can watch a different, more interesting slasher movie. Or just a non-slasher movie. Or, well, whatever. Anything other than middle of the road junk.

Overall, I give it 5 out of 10 stars.

Next up: Pumpkinhead.

*Totally not the point, but I don't give a shit about the reasoning for Scream 5 (2022) being called Scream. It was stupid when Halloween (2018) did it, so if I ever get to the Scream movies beyond the first, you best believe I'm calling the 2022 one Scream 5. Then again, the weird people talking about Scream in recent days about 7 on both sides make me roll my eyes. 

Mortal Kombat.

Review #1670: Mortal Kombat.

Cast: 

Christopher Lambert (Lord Raiden), Robin Shou (Liu Kang), Linden Ashby (Johnny Cage), Cary-Hiroyuki Tagawa (Shang Tsung), Bridgette Wilson (Sonya Blade), Talisa Soto (Kitana), Trevor Goddard (Kano), Chris Casamassa (Scorpion, with Ed Boon as voice), François Petit (Sub-Zero), Keith Cooke (Reptile), Tom Woodruff, Jr (Goro, with Kevin Michael Richardson as voice), Gregory McKinney (Jax), Kenneth Edwards (Art Lean), Stephen Ho (Chan), and Frank Welker (Shao Kahn; vocal efforts of Goro and Reptile) Directed by Paul W. S. Anderson.

Review: 

There is a certain inevitability to how certain movies come out, if you think about it, particularly if it fits the time and place. Mortal Kombat, released in 1995, certainly fits the bill in all the weird places when it comes to gloriously ridiculous entertainment. But before we get into all of that, why don't we have a little bit of details to the methods of madness. The video game was created by Ed Boon and John Tobias in 1992, which started as an idea with ninjas that at one point wanted to included Jean-Claude Van Damme (there were numerous influences, such as wuxia cinema and the video game Karate Champ); its use of digitized actors made it stand out among fighting games, which at the time was rocked by the success of Street Fighter II (Boon apparently described his intent to make a "MTV version" of that game, i.e. one that would be distinctly different from that game). Near release, Lawrence Kasanoff was on the trail as someone who had done merchandise promotion for Terminator 2: Judgement Day (1991) that included its arcade game, and when shown of the impending Mortal Kombat arcade, he was amazed by what he saw. Kasanoff saw the potential for a phenomenon, reportedly eyeing television shows and stage shows to go with movies, and he described it as "Star Wars meets Enter the Dragon" in the pitch to Midway, who were skeptical at first before agreeing after three months of negotiation for the rights. The doubts of its appeal were not completely unfounded: Super Mario Bros (1993), Double Dragon (1994) and Street Fighter (1994) made folks wary of that sort of intention in terms of audience appeal for video game movies. New Line Cinema, despite not liking the script (done by Kevin Droney), decided to let it go forward as a film. Paul Anderson (who added the W. S. later) had exactly one film credit to his name (along with writing for El C.I.D., a television comedy-drama), but Shopping (1994) certainly found someone to impress, since a screening at the agency office gave a chance for Anderson to enter the running. A native of Wallsend, Northumberland in England, this would be the first of a string of effects-driven films by the director (which includes the Resident Evil series), who had to learn about visual effects (which he did by reading any book he could on the subject) and fight scenes (which were choreographed by Pat E. Johnson). With a budget of $18 million, the amount of effects and choice of actors would be selective at times to adhere to what they could do, with Christopher Lambert being the most well-known of the cast (and he would've had less time on screen with their original plan of doing close-up shots in one place and then do wide shots of a double in Thailand, but Lambert decided to go with them to the chagrin of his agents). Believe it or not, the filmmakers actually had to add action scenes after they had finished enough to show for focus screenings, because they wanted more fight scenes (such as the Scorpion and Reptile fights). 

I do remember the games, mostly because my first experience with the series was Mortal Kombat: Armageddon, which I found pretty enjoyable in my college years (ah the joys of shopping for old games on GameStop) with its level of violence to go with fighting. Look, if you can't buy into a movie that yells its title out in the first ten seconds, I don't know how I can really convince you that this is one of the most curious average movies to ever come out of its era. Don't get me wrong, the movie has its flaws, most notably in its varying levels of cheese in the acting, but it surely will please those who thought Bloodsport (1988) was an inspiration, falling just a notch above that film with an inviting atmosphere that doesn't fall prey to all of the schlock qualities or overt self-seriousness that could have come from a less enthusiastic director and crew; remember, this is involving a tournament of fighters that have to beat a guy who needs to win just one more title (to make ten, which is done every generation that implies one has to win for at least three centuries) to take over the Earth in a movie that was aimed for a PG-13 crowd. It is an ensemble piece that is driven by the trio of Shou, Ashby, and Wilson while Lambert and Tagawa grease up the wheels as mentor and villain, respectively. Shou had a few films in Hong Kong action films in experience (alongside time spent as a stuntman), and it is the action sequences that he does quite well with helping to shape a journey without hiccups. Ashby takes some time, but his wisecracks do help make the film a bit funny (at least intentionally). Lambert is generally best known for his star role in Highlander (1986), and it is perhaps ironic that he was the second actor offered the role after Sean Connery didn't want a physical role to mess with his golf game. He invites a bit of mystery with that gravel voice and careful stare that certainly could have lended to further action moments (ah the pitfalls of a cliffhanger closing scene). Wilson does okay with giving the lines some emphasis, but real credit goes more to doing all of their stunts (complete with dislocating her shoulder at one point); she actually was the second choice, since Cameron Diaz broke her wrist in training. Who would have thought that the highlight would be Tagawa? The Tokyo native (raised in Calfornia) got his start with The Last Emperor (1987), and he was the first and only choice in mind for the role. Keep in mind, the dialogue may cliché (a combination of the script and improvisation by actors like Ashby that was encouraged by Anderson), but there is a way that he conveys this cheese that makes him enjoyable in inflection that never seems outmatched. The others are okay, in that no one makes a ham-fisted effort to get in the way (Richardson is probably the more notable voice to hear for a time). So yes, there is a certain quality to this film that works out, although its effects are certainly more for the time as opposed to now; the character of Goro was a massive animatronic that needed over a dozen people to operate, and it is a fairly decent achievement for something that couldn't be done on location. The CG is a bit less there, having a glob effect that counteracts the attempts at balancing violence that isn't too sanitized (for some reason, one could show creatures being killed on screen but not humans in order to keep it under a R rating by the ratings board - go figure), and the spear effect on the character of Scorpion doesn't help either. The wire fu has been argued by Anderson to be cutting edge, and we are talking about a film released four years before The Matrix (1999), and there is a kinetic feel to it that keeps you on the edge without too much trouble that fits the film without seeming like an over-indulgence, one that would fit right at home for those who dig the wuxia genre.

The film received attention from audiences that would help to spur a made-for-video release with Mortal Kombat: The Journey Begins (which digitized the sets for its animation) and a sequel in Mortal Kombat: Annihilation (1997), which would only have Shou and Soto return in probably the most confusing degradation of cast/director turnover for any movie sequel (Anderson expressed slight regret at not returning, citing his desire for something different for his next venture...which was Event Horizon). 25 years later, Mortal Kombat has a following that manages to endure even with the impending release of a new feature film for all the right reasons. Over the top, intense and entertaining, it might not be the most sound film to ever grace the screen in action and effect-laden features, but it sure has its fun for those who find it to their liking in enjoyment for what it accomplishes. 

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Billy Madison.

Review #887: Billy Madison.

Cast:
Adam Sandler (Billy Madison), Darren McGavin (Brian Madison), Bridgette Wilson (Veronica Vaughn), Bradley Whitford (Eric Gordon), Josh Mostel (Principal Max Anderson), Norm Macdonald (Frank), Mark Beltzman (Jack), Larry Hankin (Carl Alphonse), and Theresa Merritt (Juanita) Directed by Tamra Davis.

Review:
Let me get this out of the way early: I don't like this movie. And yet somehow, this manages to be the kind of movie that is digestible, even if it is made of some sort of junk. Much like the other Sandler films done on this show (#045 - Just Go With It and #345 - Happy Gilmore), the gags miss more than they hit (at least for me anyway), though at least this one (like the latter listed) is watchable at 89 minutes. Sandler plays a character with some sort of idiocy that can be endearing, I suppose. I'm just not a fan of his kind of shtick, which just feels tired after a few minutes. McGavin is pretty endearing, probably more than Sandler, despite not having too much screen time. Whitford is somewhat enjoyable as the villain (in a snarky way), because it's like seeing a race for weirdest character, though he loses that to Mostel, playing a school principal...and a wrestler. They are occasionally funny, somehow. Sandler and Wilson have a chemistry (in that it is a word) that sort of helps the movie have some sort of human element. It isn't charming, but it is something. There is a plot, and at least it's one that doesn't hurt the senses. Obviously this isn't a movie for me (or anybody looking for some comedy without easy gags with varying levels of body humor), but I can't really get too worked up about it. Who am I to judge a movie about people who act like fools? The movie flows the way you'd expect, with lame gags and being about as harmless as someone with too much caffeine. Would I recommend it? Of course not. But I can't stop you.

Overall, I give it 5 out of 10 stars.