Shoot to Kill (1988).

Review #2532: Shoot to Kill.

Cast: 

Sidney Poitier (Warren Stantin), Tom Berenger (Jonathan Knox), Kirstie Alley (Sarah Renell), Clancy Brown (Steve), Frederick Coffin (Ralph), Richard Masur (Norman), Andrew Robinson (Harvey), Kevin Scannell (Ben), Michael MacRae (Fournier), Milton Selzer (Mr. Berger), Les Lannom (Sheriff Dave Arnett), and Robert Lesser (Agent Minelli) Directed by Roger Spottiswoode (#171 - Tomorrow Never Dies, #191 - The 6th Day, #1205 - Air America)

Review: 

"The movies I want to make are not people's priority. Nobody would touch them. They cost a lot of money, and studios no longer finance development, so if I didn't pay for them myself they wouldn't happen."

Admittedly, I picked this movie to clear a few obligations of mine, mainly in my director logs (as one does when "this movie or this movie?" is not enough). I came across Roger Spottiswoode and figured, why not talk about one of his movies? The Ottawa-born director was the son of a documentary filmmaker that had made films for the war effort for the National Film Board of Canada. He started his film career as an editor (once stating that his school was in the cutting room), rising from doing work on commercials to being the co-editor of Straw Dogs (1971). He was approached to direct for the first time with the horror film Terror Train (1980), which was a light success. He took over the production of the troubled The Pursuit of D. B. Cooper that came out the following year before doing Under Fire (1983) and The Best of Times (1986), which were not major successes at the time. All of this collides with the return of Sidney Poitier to the big screen, as he had not starred in a film in eleven years (having spent a good chunk of his time directing). The story was written by Harv Zimmel, who in turn co-wrote the screenplay with Michael Burton and Daniel Petrie Jr, with the latter serving as a co-producer. For whatever reason, outside of North America the movie was called "Deadly Pursuit" (one of the working titles was "Mountain King"). Over the next couple of decades, he would direct a variety of films along with ones for television to varying levels of quality such as Turner & Hooch (1989) or And the Band Played On (1993). 

 

Sure, it might be easy to call this one routine, what with it being a buddy thriller in the mountains between two people who get through a few personal disagreements to work together in pursuing one pretty obvious goal. It's a machine of familiar aspects, right down to changing the locale for the final pursuit...and I love stuff like this. It's a fun movie for the execution that it holds in its hand of entertainment, one where you can playfully ask questions about its premise and not feel the need to come up with an answer (or, "cope", if one is younger). Who cares about why just one FBI guy is present to chase a killer when it is so much fun to see the revolving door of moments that come from Poitier and Berenger. It helps that Poitier (who turned 60 in 1987) hasn't lost his touch when it comes to selling the movie with poise that is basically unshakable even when in a different element (as one does when stolen jewels turn into folks having their eyes shot out), and it pairs well with the hardened Berenger (always a charmer*, I would say) for a few chuckles in the crisscross of trying to move forward in a locale that curves on a whim, such as say, a bear encounter. It helps that the movie takes some time to actually reveal just who is the killer is (okay you already can tell by the billing) to pair along with Alley (decent, if not exactly comparable to someone like Brown) and others for a bit of smooth tension, because there is a bit of a mean streak with the body count. Seriously, you get a few people thrown off ledges to pair with an experience that eventually climaxes with shooting a gun in water, it is the kind of movie you slip on at night and just enjoy the ride. Both actors get to run the process of what they know best in their environments without underselling the other person. This was a movie made when films still liked to actually strive for a landscape to look upon with pride (it was mostly filmed in British Columbia, as one does when being set in the Northwest), suffice to say. As a whole, Shoot to Kill is a pleasant thriller for all involved, maneuvering through its 109-minute runtime with a good sense of adventure and fun that doesn't waver in its entertainment value regardless of how familiar it might seem because its charms are too good to resist.

 

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Song of the day!

*Berenger is a sentimental favorite of mine, I think, mainly because I re-watch Major League every year.

*By the way, this movie actually has a 100% rating on Rotten Tomatoes. Seriously.

The Bride (1985).

Review #2439: The Bride (1985)

Cast: 

Sting (Baron Charles Frankenstein), David Rappaport (Rinaldo), Jennifer Beals (Eva), Clancy Brown (Viktor, the Monster), Geraldine Page (Mrs. Baumann), Anthony Higgins (Clerval), Alexei Sayle (Magar), Veruschka von Lehndorff (Countess), Quentin Crisp (Dr. Zalhus), Cary Elwes (Captain Josef Schoden), Phil Daniels (Bela), and Timothy Spall (Paulus) Directed by Franc Roddam.

Review: 

Admittedly, this movie had been on the ledger for quite a few months, mostly because one can only look over a Frankenstein film once in a while. The 1980s though, were not exactly a great time for movies with Frankenstein being an inspiration, as evidenced by Frankenstein Island (1981), The Vindicator (1986), or, well, The Monster Squad (1987). And then you have The Bride. The movie was directed by Franc Roddam, who went from London Film School to film directing with Quadrophenia (1979). Sting, best known at the time for his work with, well, The Police, had made his debut as an actor with the Quadrophenia film. Beals was best known for Flashdance (1983), which she filmed as a student at Yale University (The Bride was done on summer break and she graduated in 1987).  The movie was written by Lloyd Fonvielle, who had co-written the adaptation of The Lords of Discipline (1983), which Roddam directed. Interestingly, Roddam later created the worldwide sensation MasterChef. No, really.

The movie practically nosedives once you realize that yes, it is going to keep jumping between the narratives of Beals/Sting and Rappaport/Brown. Yes, the movie called "The Bride" really could've just been called "Frankenstein and the Circus", particularly since it becomes apparent that Beals is playing the title character but barely moves forward in terms of "interesting developments". Sure, you can say there is supposed to be something interesting in viewing what happens when you try to tell the story of a woman who learns to think for herself beyond just being groomed by a man to be in his image (remember that he tells folks she got found after an accident). Instead, it just comes off as something to chuckle at when you see a scene of her trying to be in respectable company and she starts hissing at a cat. The "psychic connection" that is suggested to be with Beals/Brown doesn't exactly help matters, coming off as someone having a bit too many shots of whiskey. If the Beals scenes are a drywall version of Pygmalion, the Brown sequences might as well have come from the land of Dumbo. At any rate, there is just something about Sting's performance that seems to desire a more experienced actor despite his decent attempt at playing a grand old hypocrite (or basically, an Internet "male feminist"). Even when one knows he is playing "Henry" Frankenstein, it still feels like one is chasing down Peter Cushing in a futile effort (incidentally, Frankenstein Created Woman (1967), the only one of the Hammer films involving creatures and women, was better). It is a hell of a thing to look like you are about to do a music video when trying to aim for "strange genius". There is an odd feeling one gets when watching Beals because you almost feel there is something really worthwhile to say about a woman created from lightning that finds more to life than what a "creator" says. Instead, she just gets lost in the shuffle, she doesn't really get her own highlight to be anything other than the lady who hisses at cats and gets cut off for the circus (don't even get me started on the brief sequence of nudity, what the hell is that all about?). This was one of the early roles for Elwes, and he just wanders in and out of the film with little damage to credibility (seriously, he wanders out of the movie just...because). 

Rappaport* does have a smarmy charm to make what probably could've been its own interesting tragedy or something else when you consider the bond that comes with misfits of all shapes and sizes. Brown gets a bit lost in the makeup, but he makes a quality imposing presence that you almost wish he was the one getting key billing. You wish there was a movie of Beals and Brown there, because the damn movie just ends abruptly (complete with a voiceover about following one's heart, as if this was an advertisement for coffee). There are a few supporting names that might be familiar, such as a 76-year-old "raconteur" in Crisp or a youthful Spall, who naturally are killed off in the opening lab sequence, which at least seemed like a scene worth highlighting for having lights and lightning that seem cool to think about before the inevitable. There just isn't passion to be found, it all feels like dinner theater Gothic horror, particularly when you grimace at the fact that 119 minutes can in fact feel like nothing has actually happened in the film beyond reminding you that even a scene throwing a dude off a building can make you roll your eyes. I'm not mad at the movie, just disappointed even with such low expectations (imagine how it must have felt in 1985, and this was for a movie that made less than $4 million*). A 6/10 implies a nearly-there experience, a 5/10 is the proper rating for a middle-of-the-road movie that is too lame to be a near-miss. As a whole, the movie is a failure in the parts that matter most: sure, it looks nice at times and it has a few interesting chuckles with Rappaport and Brown, but the film never has conviction in making you care about Beals or where the movie will end up and it has the tone of a Hallmark greeting card rather than actual Gothic horror. 

Overall, I give it 5 out of 10 stars.

*It was made for roughly $14 million. God, could you imagine if The Bride! (made for reportedly $80 million scheduled for release 2026) is bad? If it is good, sure, cool. The trailer did not do many favors but I would desire a tiny trainwreck if possible.

*This actually was Rappaport's penultimate film appearance, having appeared in ten total movies from 1973 to 1989, most notably with Time Bandits (1981). He committed suicide in 1990, dying at the age of 38.

Blue Steel (1990).

Review #2361: Blue Steel.

Cast: 

Jamie Lee Curtis (Officer Megan Turner), Ron Silver (Eugene Hunt), Clancy Brown (Detective Nick Mann), Elizabeth Peña (Tracy Perez), Louise Fletcher (Shirley Turner), Philip Bosco (Frank Turner), Richard Jenkins (Dawson), Kevin Dunn (Assistant Chief Stanley Hoyt), and Tom Sizemore (Robber) Directed by Kathryn Bigelow (#1258 - K-19: The Widowmaker, #1548 - The Hurt Locker, #1820 - The Loveless, #2188 - Near Dark)

Review: 

"What was interesting to me was kind of a heretical, irreverent look at a particular moment in time. You have this woman who's a police officer. And believe it or not, that was very difficult to get made because the police officer was a woman. I was asked to make her a man, and then we could get financing. I said no, the whole point of making this was that she was a woman. It seems so strange today to think of that as being an obstacle, but it was a big obstacle."

The road for what became Bigelow's third feature film is a tricky one. According to Bigelow, Universal Pictures had tried to develop a movie that would be about gangs in East Harlem that had her interested in writing and directing that had come after Walter Hill had been in the process of setting up a producing deal there around the time of Streets of Fire. Years later, Oliver Stone apparently was interested in doing a project but about South LA gangs...and then he got involved in Salvador and Platoon while she did Near Dark. Long story short, Stone liked that film and was interested in doing whatever she wanted to do next, complete with being producer, and Bigelow sent him, well, the script for Blue Steel, which eventually came around with Stone and Edward Pressman producing. I wonder who exactly came up with what in the script for the film, since Bigelow shares the writing credit with Eric Red; they had previously written Near Dark (1987) together, although Red has apparently labeled the script as basically a "female version of The Hitcher". Apparently, the climax of the film (you know, the gun fight) would've had Curtis nude, but she said no to that, being quoted as saying "Everyone would be watching my breasts flopping around instead of watching the scene." Bigelow in the past was quoted as having an interest in "treading on familiar territory", describing Blue Steel as a "mutation that maybe implies a different genre". The movie was released by MGM in the wake of Vestron Pictures' impending doom as a company, and the movie made a small amount of money while Bigelow next directed with Point Break (1991).

Some reviews of the time compared the movie to Halloween (1978) because of the whole boogeyman thing and having Curtis, I guess, but I don't seem to remember the part in the earlier film where the lead became a cop. But what we do have is a weird movie, one that is entertaining but stupefying in its execution to varying levels of effectiveness that tries to play two different angles: the plight of a (woman) cop that has to come to terms with who they really are when faced with rough surroundings...and also a nut that has an obsession with her and, well, things that lead him to want to shoot again and again. Technically speaking, the movie is kinetically interesting in general action while dragging along at 102 minutes to a conclusion that will befuddle the viewer in its certain positioning (ambiguity or overwrought, you might wonder) while seeming digging new ways to throw itself in melodrama. But how many films do we let certain things fall by the wayside because of our relative enjoyment, anyway? Is it nitpicking to wonder where the line should be drawn with a movie where a robbery takes place but somehow the guy in the front of it thought he saw a knife rather than, well a gun*. But Curtis does hold the film together with a generally tense performance that shows the struggle that arises with her position that only is solid when she essentially plays nice in the box she is constrained to, and that's without even mentioning her interactions with the other side of the coin of someone trapped in the strange world of struggling with their position and place. We the audience know what we know, so if someone can badger her about her method the way they do in one particular scene, imagine how is in an actual active scenario. If you're not with her and her charm that comes through even in the plight around her, then, well, the rest of the film goes down with her, for better or worse. Silver is mostly effective in evoking tension, albeit with a few obvious beats (bad enough he carves names into bullets, does he need to have voices in his head and also spout lines about death?) to go with the newfound power of a gun, which I'm sure could be interpreted in different ways**. The scenes the two share with each other are curious enough to make a worthy enough cat-and-mouse game to a certain point, being more interesting in the start and close rather than the holding down that comes with stretching things out. Brown moseys about with a casual charm, albeit with late usefulness in the long run, since it is more a movie of doubts and moods that might as well be a dreary dream. You don't exactly get much time to spend with Bosco and Fletcher[*] besides the bare minimum that comes with semi-resolved (?) family tension either. By the time the movie moves to its endgame around Wall Street, you have a movie that is frantic enough to possibly override the inevitable quibbles because it has a committed director and star that want to make an entertaining thriller. In a sea of varying effectiveness when it comes to women-leading action movies, Blue Steel is at least a solid enough recommendation to seek out for the ride it goes on in the curiosity about the nature of power and, well, the thrills.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

*I don't want to pick all the way to hell, but probably the most ridiculous idea is that our lead comes to her parents, sees a fresh bruise on her mom, arrests her dad but decides in the middle of a conversation with him in the back of the car to just...let him off with a warning to not be who he is anymore. Or something. 

**Something something Freud something something penis. Actually, I wish my memory was a bit better, because I swear it isn't too particularly hard to find a movie about someone finding a gun and deciding to mosey around the city with it. Instead, I keep wondering why I haven't watched Gun Crazy.

[*] Bosco was a Tony Award winning actor for 1989, while Fletcher, well, you know her Academy Award-winning role in One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, but for me, her performances as Kai Winn on the massively underrated Star Trek: Deep Space Nine was probably just as cool.

John Wick: Chapter 4.

Review #1998: John Wick: Chapter 4.

Cast: 

Keanu Reeves (John Wick), Donnie Yen (Caine), Bill Skarsgård (the Marquis Vincent de Gramont), Laurence Fishburne (the Bowery King), Hiroyuki Sanada (Shimazu Koji), Shamier Anderson (Mr. Nobody / The Tracker), Lance Reddick (Charon), Rina Sawayama (Shimazu Akira), Scott Adkins (Killa Harkan), Clancy Brown (the Harbinger), Ian McShane (Winston Scott), and Natalia Tena (Katia) Directed by Chad Stahelski (#905 - John Wick, #906 - John Wick: Chapter 2, #1222 - John Wick Chapter 3 – Parabellum)

Review: 

"John Wick is a weird spillover of anime, manga, graphic novel sensibility as well as Wuxia films, Chanbara films, Samurai films, and Westerns. It’s got this weird transference."

It was ten years ago this year that Keanu Reeves signed on for a project that in the end run became a franchise. It is funny to consider that John Wick became a franchise that has seemingly risen in ambition with each passing sequel that has adequate staging in plot to accompany exquisite staging when it comes to action. You don't need me to tell you that this film is already a hit or that it is the longest film of the series at 169 minutes. I would be silly to not mention that a spinoff of the series is intended for release the following year with Ballerina with some of the main cast; a limited series "from the world of John Wick" will also be present in the coming months, if you are into that sort of thing. The film was written by Shay Hatten (who co-wrote the third film with series creator Derek Kolstad) and Michael Finch.

Honestly, it is hard to say which of the three John Wick sequels has turned out the best (if you want to be technical, the first is probably still the best for the surprise that comes with such a raw film). It definitely is the one where Reeves seems to say the least number of words, adhering most to the tradition set out by Sergio Leone's spaghetti westerns with its one quiet hero. Each of the films feature plenty of what you might as well call gun-fu to go with fairly distinct actors getting to play support to Reeves and his exquisite timing as an action icon. The movies are bombastic in trying to top the other while finding new places to play like a kid wanting to take the toybox to new places, whether that means a sequence shot in Jordan or an action sequence at the Arc de Triomphe. The movie takes action sequences like it is water to absorb, which means one sees the vast effort required to make these scenes important to view in their ass-kicking glory without a feeling of repetition. There's plenty of targets to go around from the disposable to Scott Adkins in a fat suit hamming it up for all that seems clearly required. Reeves clearly knows what he likes as the ultimate action-boogeyman, one who moves through any sort of scene with precision and engagement for the action ballet that takes place with him usually at the forefront that shows the dedication required in performing a mix of judo and mixed marital arts that looks just like it feels to watch in absorption. The fact that a good chunk of his dialogue is just "yeah" is probably more of the fact that one has gotten to the point where he is simply just where he needs to be without such need for lengthy moments in his path of last vengeance (or in a different way, the path of seeing where his smoldering decisions have left others). Yen accompanies him in his style of worthwhile action charisma, a worthy match against Reeves in saying what needs to be said, which goes double for someone playing a blind assassin. Skarsgård makes a quality adversary, preening in haughtiness in a series all about the sheer arrogance that comes with not planning more than two steps ahead of a "Baba Yaga". Among the other additions is Anderson, who makes an adequate background mercenary, while Sawayama (a singer in their acting debut) does well in the parts they are in the film, which mostly involves interaction with Sanada, which is neat. It's always fun to see Brown or McShane around, but it is especially true with Reddick, who passed away last month at the age of 60 (small sentences or not, he always made this role distinct). The fact that a duel for the climax be handled so fervently in elegance is a testament to how the series has managed to hold in consistency. It is fun without becoming a needless excuse of dim lighting or being wishy-washy with its tone. As a whole, the film is paced well enough to roll with every punch and shot without dawdling on something for too long. Who knows where the series might go from here, but I can safely say that it was a pleasure to see Reeves on screen again in a role that he obviously seemed born to play to go along with a director that knows what he likes in raising the expectations set as a director that makes one curious to see what could be next.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Next Time: A special celebration on April 20th in the way best suited for Movie Night: a double-header with one film of world cinema and one from America.

Starship Troopers.

Review #1922: Starship Troopers.

Cast: 

Casper Van Dien (Johnny Rico), Dina Meyer (Dizzy Flores), Denise Richards (Carmen Ibanez), Jake Busey (Ace Levy), Neil Patrick Harris (Carl Jenkins), Clancy Brown (Sgt. Zim), Seth Gilliam (Sugar Watkins), Patrick Muldoon (Zander Barcalow), and Michael Ironside (Jean Rasczak) Directed by Paul Verhoeven (#002 - RoboCop and #632 - Total Recall)

Review: 

You know, this is a strange movie to think about with its reputation in the 25 years that have passed since its release. Edward Neumeier started writing an original script called "Bug Hunt at Outpost Nine" in the time that followed RoboCop, which he co-wrote (with Michael Miner). The script was a bug movie that also happened to be a teen romance movie. However, when Jon Davison noticed the similarities to Robert A. Heinlein's Starship Troopers, the script was kindly modified to fit as an "adaptation" of the book in order to sell better to any interested studios. It was a film made for over $100 million that made its budget back by a slight amount. The reputation of the film has handily improved in later years to where it is considered a "cult classic". Incidentally, there have been four sequels, all released direct-to-video (the lead star in Van Dien reprised his role in two of the films while Ed Neumeier wrote three of them while directing one). If I am being honest, I wonder how a straight adaptation of the novel would have been rather than this ended up. A cursory glance at the plot of the original work notes that they share a similar structure: a young lad (in the book a Filipino) enters the military because of a woman, makes an error but decides not to leave, sees family members in Buenos Aires get nuked, participates in a futile battle on the alien Arachind before seeing a successful raid on the brain caste and queens while seeing a platoon named after him. But the work is more involved in discussing the nature of what a world would look like if only veterans of the military were allowed to vote (also Rico ends up serving alongside his father in the book). Of course, fascism in the eyes of people wanting to label something fascist may just be their personal boogeyman rather than based on facts (but hey, the book is totally about fascism, trust a person on the Internet telling you this). With all of that in mind, the movie is massively average. Satire or not, I found it just a mild movie. It doesn't shock me or enrage me one bit, but maybe that falls to how many movies one has seen over the years. You might think that the fact that folks being unable to "recognize true propaganda" is a bad thing, but you know, Dirty Harry (1971) was labeled a fascist movie, and I don't see people getting weird about it being average in the "entertainment" department. "Joke" or not, an average movie is still average.

Hey, do you want a movie that tells you that violence is the way to solve problems (satire)? Okay then, enjoy a cadre of teen romance cliches sprinkled in for probably longer than you actually think it will be present. Take my perspective on it: Things in this movie only seem interesting when it involves the Arachnids. The movie may think it is pretty funny for itself when talking about "fascism", but my god, sometimes you should just embrace the cliches that people really care about when it comes to "sci-fi action film". Oh, but RoboCop (1987) is a sci-fi satire that was handled great by Verhoeven, you might say. Well, one realizes pretty quickly that RoboCop would be as convincing as a ball of mud trying to be tinfoil if "teenagers" were the lead focus. That isn't to say I despised the characters (because hey, they mostly act like folks who don't think they are bad guys), but there was never a time where I felt this material was anything better than the general schlock you might see from a 1950s sci-fi film about dealing with marauders from abroad or being anything better than the unintentional amusement found in Top Gun (1986). The attempt to turn the idea of a military elite-ruled world (reminder: Verhoeven didn't even finish the novel because it apparently depressed him) into a mockery of politics and culture of modern America is just basically "Beverly Hills 90210 meets Vietnam War". I don't think Heinlein really wanted a government where the military was the head honcho, I just think he wanted to show how one might operate in some twisted way. Hell, consider this quote from Heinlein: "War is not violence and killing, pure and simple; war is controlled violence, for a purpose.” In response to that, Verhoeven and Neumeier have turned his curiosity into mockery, and I guess this is meant to be clever only because it happens to be an adaptation of a particular novel. Keep in mind, I did like the movie fine, but it isn't worth the discussion as some sort of hidden masterpiece. It is a bug movie on par with schlock movies of the past that happens to be made on a large budget with characters that were pulled from a soap opera mixed in with stock characters (who are ungodly more interesting) that results in a silly effects show. The parts involving a possible "Brain Bug" is quite interesting, if only to suggest the idea of fighting an enemy that isn't just an ugly dumb bug, even if more time is spent wondering just how dumb our lead is before he gets the idea of who wants to bone him. It is the B-movie spectacle that I care most about in the long run of 129 minutes, and Verhoeven does stage his adventure with the basic stops one does see coming without trying to pull an anti-climax. Van Dien maneuvers the dialogue of wood with general interest (whether in on the joke or not), but honestly Ironside and Brown are the highlights for me, if only because they are the seasoned pros of hardlined patience that the movie does best. Patrick Harris and Richards end up overshadowed by Meyer, who naturally doesn't get to enjoy all of the climax. Actually, Busey makes a pretty good heel for a time, so there's another little compliment amongst what seems to be me gritting my teeth. At any rate, I wish I liked the movie more than I did. It does just fine in the presentation of spectacle in all of its weird and cheap forms while barely making headway in any other department, working best for those who dig over-the-top movies that may or may not read as "effective" satire. 

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

The Shawshank Redemption.

Review #1506: The Shawshank Redemption.

Cast: 
Tim Robbins (Andy Dufresne), Morgan Freeman (Ellis Boyd "Red" Redding), Bob Gunton (Samuel Norton), William Sadler (Heywood), Clancy Brown (Byron Hadley), Gil Bellows (Tommy Williams), James Whitmore (Brooks Hatlen), and Mark Rolston (Bogs Diamond) Written and Directed by Frank Darabont.

Review: 
"I really don't think you can get tired of the kind of loving reaction that people have for this movie. It seems to have become its own ambassador to the world. It does mean something to people, and that's so fantastic to me. How many people have even one thing like that in their lives?"

Sometimes a film can have all the right pieces fall into all of the right places. Cast, writing, direction, and several other aspects are important to making something that one would hope will find an audience in some way, and The Shawshank Redemption is no different. The man responsible for doing the film in the way it is in script adaptation and direction is Frank Darabont, making his theatrical feature debut. He was inspired to venture into film through his youth after seeing THX 1138 (1971). He went from jobs at the Grauman's Egyptian Theatre to production assistant on small production films. He made his first attempt at filmmaking with the short film The Woman in the Room in 1983 (based on the short story of the same name written by Stephen King, who granted permission for him to make the film), which was later described by King "clearly the best of the short films made from my stuff." He dabbled in writing scripts alongside production work before getting a break with being asked to become a writing partner with Chuck Russell to try and develop a script remake of The Blob. After doing a script worthy enough to try and pitch to shop around, they were approached to quickly re-write a script together with Russell serving as director. That film, A Nightmare on Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors, proved a hit with audiences and helped them get further opportunities in films (such as the subsequent 1988 remake of The Blob). It was King's appreciation of what Darabont had done with his short story that helped in King giving him rights to do a film of one of his novellas (Rita Hayworth and Shawshank Redemption, written originally in 1982 as part of Different Seasons), although it would take a few years before Darabont would get around to developing the project (the script however took just a few weeks), with Castle Rock Entertainment serving to help in making the film. The founder of that company, Rob Reiner was deeply interested in doing the project for himself (with Tom Cruise in mind for one of the lead roles), but Darabont held firm to directing the film for himself.

I think most of us have a grasp on how well-regarded this film has become over the past 25 years. It wasn't the hugest hit with audiences at the time of release (this was the year of Forrest Gump and Pulp Fiction), but video release and numerous television showings have helped spread the film into a phenomenon that certainly seems suited for any curious audience viewer. It has an appeal that can seemingly reach any person that sees it because of how much of it can resonate with a viewer. We all have our moments when we need to seek out some sort of hope or redemption, whether through some sort of tough situation or for ourselves. Fear can keep us in line in many ways, but it is what we do with that challenge that makes life worth living to pull through. It has a great sense of sensitivity and movement that we can cling to almost immediately with the way it moves along with pace and sensibility to go along with some entertaining performances through its cast. Robbins moves with a shuffled pace that certainly stands different from the others in our main setting in how we observe him in his routine of endurance and capability to stroll through routine without fail. Freeman is our observer and eyes for the film (along with narrator) that we appreciate almost immediately in his terrific honesty and weary reflection that never wavers in conviction or in method. Gunton proves exquisite in his time handled on screen in perfectly controlled form of hypocrisy and manner of authority that sells his moments with Robbins or with others with no trouble at all. Sadler and Whitmore lend a supporting hand to the scope of the surroundings with charm and sobering stature, respectively (the latter's scene out of his prison at long last is likely one of the best poignant moments of the film). Brown rounds out the group with tremendous intimidating stature that is effective in driving the oppressive elements of the main setting down with ease. Beyond its great cast and well-done direction is a great look captured by Roger Deakins in cinematography to go with the sound stage sets (to go alongside exteriors of the real Ohio State Reformatory in Mansfield) that makes its message all the more useful and strong. With a 142 minute run-time that goes along like prose in building its atmosphere to all the points it desires with relentless honesty that makes its climax all the more rewarding. For some, it may very well be one of the greatest films ever, but it most definitely can be agreed by most to be one for the ages in hope and usefulness to view for themselves.

Overall, I give it 10 out of 10 stars.

The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai Across the 8th Dimension.

Review #776: The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai Across the 8th Dimension.

Cast
Peter Weller (Buckaroo Banzai), John Lithgow (Lord John Whorfin / Dr. Emilio Lizardo), Ellen Barkin (Penny Priddy), Jeff Goldblum (New Jersey/Dr. Sidney Zweibel), Christopher Lloyd (John Bigboote), Lewis Smith (Perfect Tommy), Rosalind Cash (John Emdall), Clancy Brown (Rawhide), Robert Ito (Professor Hikita), Pepe Serna (Reno Nevada), Ronald Lacey (President Widmark), Matt Clark (Secretary of Defense), William Traylor (General Catburd), Carl Lumbly (John Parker), Dan Hedaya (John Gomez), and Vincent Schiavelli (John O'Connor) Directed by W. D. Richter.

Review

Here's what we can all agree is a "cult film". Buckaroo Banzai certainly have a mind of its own when it comes to being as offbeat and ambitious as possible. It has been described as a "science fiction romantic adventure comedy film", which is one heck of an classification, and it makes sense. Our main character is a scientist/neurosurgeon/rock musician/race car driver, complete with a bunch of assistants called the The Hong Kong Cavaliers. It's not an origin story as much as it feels like the middle of a much larger tale, especially with regards to our multi-talented lead. Weller excels as Banzai, mainly because of how he projects the hero, not being just an action hero, but also a smart quirky aspect to a quirky row of characters. Lithgow hams it up as well as anyone would when named "Lizardo", especially with that wig and teeth. The Cavaliers (Brown, Serna, Smith, Goldblum, Vera) and Lloyd (especially that makeup) are also pretty entertaining to watch as well. Weller and Barkin certainly have some entertaining chemistry together. The movie is certainly offbeat enough to work, although it is a shame that the movie did not succeed financially. It certainly has enough charm and fun in it. The effects still look pretty good for 1984, especially with the Lectroids, who look right for a movie as offbeat as this. The movie ends (naturally) with our heroes walking off together (with a killer end credits theme), announcing plans for a sequel that (so far) has never been made entitled Buckaroo Banzai Against the World Crime League. Ultimately, this is a movie that does what it feels makes sense, without regards to trying to being simple in any regard that you have to see for yourself.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: The SpongeBob SquarePants Movie.

Review #242: The SpongeBob SquarePants Movie.

Cast
Tom Kenny (SpongeBob SquarePants), Bill Fagerbakke (Patrick Star), Clancy Brown (Mr. Krabs), Rodger Bumpass (Squidward Tentacles), Mr. Lawrence (Sheldon J. Plankton), Alec Baldwin (Dennis), Scarlett Johansson (Princess Mindy), and Jeffrey Tambor (King Neptune) Directed by Stephen Hillenburg.

Review
Oh dear, here we are. Based off the popular series created in 1999 by Stephen Hillenberg, this film apparently was intended to be the series finale. Intended being the main word. This film might seem like one of those annoying things that could destroy minds and make you question why this was made, but is it really? Yes and no. The animation is alright, with some good acting here and there. And...the plot does feel like a finale, which feels like closure....until you realize the show would later be renewed and continue on for more....adventures if you want to call it that. And that brings up a little flaw for me, if Plankton steals the formula (which he does), and yet loses it anyway, why didn't he just memorize it down and make his own Krabby Patties again after eventually escaping from his incarceration? While the film is at least a little funny in its approach, it'll be one of those love or hate films. I find it...Less then evil. Countdown to 250: 10, 9, 8...

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010).

Review #048: A Nightmare on Elm Street.

Cast
Jackie Earle Haley (Freddy Krueger), Kyle Gallner (Quentin Smith), Rooney Mara (Nancy Holbrook), Katie Cassidy (Kris Fowles), Thomas Dekker (Jesse Braun), Kellan Lutz (Dean Russell), Clancy Brown (Alan Smith), Connie Britton (Dr. Gwen Holbrook), and Lia D. Mortensen (Nora Fowles) Directed by Samuel Bayer.

Review
This film is...I don't know, what's the word for bad? This film tries to be scary, but it actually makes you bored. The acting is predictably standard (Except for Haley, who does try to act his best), as this film doesnot much scare factor. The makeup looks awkward on Freddy, making him look like melted cheese. With the original Freddy (From what I've seen), he actually looks like a burn victim. Here, he looks like he got into a cheese fight. It's predictable with it's attempts at scares, it has a predictable end scene, and it just bores you. It's not fun to watch, even though Haley tries his best, but in the end, it's a predictable stale horror film that makes you want to watch the original.

Overall, I give it 4 out of 10 stars.