Showing posts with label Chris Mulkey. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Chris Mulkey. Show all posts

December 18, 2018

Runaway (1984).


Review #1171: Runaway.

Cast: 
Tom Selleck (Sgt. Jack R. Ramsay), Cynthia Rhodes (Karen Thompson), Gene Simmons (Dr. Charles Luther), Kirstie Alley (Jackie Rogers), Stan Shaw (Sgt. Marvin James), G.W. Bailey (Chief of Police), Joey Cramer (Bobby Ramsay), and Chris Mulkey (David Johnson) Directed by Michael Crichton (#988 - Westworld)

Review: 
Runaway was the fifth film that Michael Crichton directed and wrote for, and I suppose there must've been a yearning for him to make a sci-fi action thriller film with a look at machines. It certainly invites some comparisons to the technology present over thirty years since its release, that is for sure. There certainly are some things present here that are interesting to look at, such as smart bullets or robot spiders with acid. For a movie with no real terrible performances, how does the end product manage to be just mediocre? I suppose this comes due to the fact that there also isn't too much from what the movie offers that differs from other cop movies besides occasional moments with tech, particularly with its climax in a unfinished building. It manages to have a bunch of the cliches that you might expect from something like this, such as a new partner, greedy bad guy, someone involved in double-crossing the villain, hostage exchanges, etc, having a fair bit of predictability by the time the film moves towards its climax  For a movie that is about cops taking care of wayward machines, I feel that the premise isn't really executed too well, feeling a bit too casual with its approach. Honestly, you probably could've made a comedy with this material, as if the Geek Squad suddenly became cops in the future. Selleck (playing a cop who happens to be a expert on robots) is fine and pleasant, but the material doesn't really give him much to do besides a few stiff moments trying to establish chemistry with Rhodes and occasional moments trying to play off Simmons that begs for something a bit over-the-top. The oddest scene is where he takes down a robot that shocks you without protective gear to help a woman to safety because...he just wants to impress her I suppose, although I don't know how much she'll like him beating the thing with a bat. Rhodes is fine, having a bit of charm on occasion. Simmons (in his first feature role) is somewhat interesting in this slimy role, at least. Perhaps the material needed to give him a bit more to do to make it really have more impact. His fight with Selleck at the end feels a bit lacking, but at least there's a few killer spiders to go around and plenty of heights. Alley is fine, but she isn't really in the film too much to make much of an impact. The film doesn't really have any character that sticks out too greatly, being an okay but not special action flick with occasional moments of robot stuff. In a year with hit films such as Beverly Hills Cop and The Terminator, this movie did not prove to be a hit with audiences, making just over six million at the box office on an eight million budget upon release in late December. On the whole, the movie isn't anything to point and pick at, but it also isn't anything too great to write home about either. It exists on the scale of average, teetering between interesting and forgettable. Would I recommend it? I can't say it won't waste your time too much, but I also can't say that it really will prove to be too beneficial for certain tastes and patience, seemingly fitting only when there aren't too many choices to pick from.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

January 18, 2018

Cloverfield.


Review #1038: Cloverfield.

Cast: 
Michael Stahl-David (Robert "Rob" Hawkins), T.J. Miller (Hudson "Hud" Platt), Jessica Lucas (Lily Ford), Odette Yustman (Elizabeth "Beth" McIntyre), Lizzy Caplan (Marlena Diamond), Mike Vogel (Jason Hawkins), Ben Feldman (Travis), Billy Brown (Staff Sergeant Pryce), and Chris Mulkey (Lieutenant General Graff) Directed by Matt Reeves.

Review: 
I suppose it makes sense to review this film today on January 18, since it is the 10th anniversary of the film's release in theaters, so it is a perfect time to get to it along with giving you fellow readers a new review after a week since the last one. 

When asked about the film prior to its release, J. J. Abrams (who served as producer for the film) stated that he was inspired to make an American monster after seeing Godzilla toys in stores in Japan with his son, one that would be "insane and intense", which is certainly interesting. I was eleven years old when the film came out, but I don't particularly remember the marketing for the film, although I imagine that it must've been interesting for people on the Internet to focus a bit of time on (take that statement as you may). In any case, how is the movie itself? I find the movie to be fairly decent, although I can't say I really thought it was that scary or all too special. It is an interesting idea to make a monster movie that doesn't intend to go for only big entertainment spectacle destruction and instead goes for something that plays on fears and anxiety that people would have if a situation like this actually did arise; one scene in particular stands out, involving people taking out their phones after seeing the head of the Statue of Liberty fall right near them. I wish I could say the plot or the characters are as intriguing as the concept for the film, but that it is not the case here. The performances aren't terrible, but they aren't too particularly interesting. I will state that Miller does a pretty decent job, however. I found him to be more interesting to follow than the plot around the other characters, even if most of the time he is just the guy filming the things happening. Caplan also comes off a bit interesting when she is on screen.

The film has a look intended to resemble hand-held camera filming, including jump cuts that make it feel a bit like a home movie, although I will admit that the effect can feel a bit disorientating at times. Apparently, some viewers of the film during its release experienced motion sickness due to the film's cinematography, to the point that some theaters posted warnings about the film that stated it may "experience side effects associated with motion sickness similar to riding a rollercoaster". Sometimes the shots (and the shakes) worked in my view, but other times it felt a bit tedious. I imagine seeing this in a theater would be a significantly different experience than seeing it on a normal TV set. The visual effects were incorporated after filming, so the cast had to react to an unseen creature during their scenes, which I suppose is an achievement on their part in imagination. The monster (of what we see, anyway) is not too terrible, and it generally is one that feels pretty creepy and menacing. It doesn't have much of an origin, but that doesn't really feel too surprising. The film runs at 84 minutes, which feels alright considering the plot matter and the shaky-cam stuff. Ultimately, Cloverfield has an interesting premise that it plays around with a bit to fine effect, but on the whole it is a fairly decent monster/horror flick that stands alone as a curiosity if one has the patience for it.

Oh yeah, I probably should refer 10 Cloverfield Lane (#784), released eight years after this film. That film, while not a direct sequel, was a fairly interesting thriller that certainly played itself as a thriller neatly enough. Cloverfield doesn't exactly pale too badly in comparison with 10 Cloverfield Lane, but I felt that this needed to be mentioned in any case.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

December 28, 2010

Movie Night: First Blood.

Review #025: First Blood.

Cast
Sylvester Stallone (John Rambo), Richard Crenna (Colonel Sam Trautman), Brian Dennehy (Sheriff Will Teasle), Bill McKinney (Dave Kern), Jack Starrett (Art Galt), Michael Talbott (Balford), Chris Mulkey (Ward), John McLiam (Orval), Alf Humphreys (Lester), and David Caruso (Mitch) Directed by Ted Kotcheff.

Review
This is based off of David Morrell's 1972 novel of the same name. PTSD is Post Tramatic Stress Disorder, and Stallone plays a man with the disorder. He plays him quite well. This film makes you believe that Rambo is the sympathetic character instead of the policemen (and for good reason). The actors all play their roles very well as the film isn't just a beat them up, it's a psychological film with heart that would inspire three sequels different from the first...

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.