The Professionals (1966).

Review #2371: The Professionals.

Cast: 

Burt Lancaster (Bill Dolworth), Lee Marvin (Henry "Rico" Fardan), Claudia Cardinale (Maria Grant), Robert Ryan (Hans Ehrengard), Woody Strode (Jake Sharp), Jack Palance (Jesus Raza), Ralph Bellamy (Joe Grant), Joe De Santis (Ortega), Rafael Bertrand (Fierro), Maria Gomez (Chiquita), and Jorge Martínez de Hoyos (Padillia) Written for the Screen and Directed by Richard Brooks (#871 - Cat on a Hot Tin Roof, #1033 - Dollars, #1426 - In Cold Blood)

Review: 

Admittedly, it does help to highlight a director that likes to have it their way as writer and/or producer too, particularly one as fiery and as less covered as I would like to admit. Richard Brooks was actually a reporter before he became interested in the film industry, and it served him well to serve in the Marine Corps film unit in World War II because his debut novel (you might know it as Crossfire [1947]) got him attention in actually being sought for writing in film, most notably with uncredited work with The Killers (1946) and collaboration on Key Largo (1948). He became writer/director with Crisis (1950) at MGM and honed his talent there, culminating with Cat on a Hot Tin Roof (1958), one of his numerous adaptations of previous material. He struck forward with other studios and won with Elmer Gantry (1960), which won him an Academy Award for his script. Two films later (Sweet Bird of Youth (1962), Lord Jim [1965]), here we are with another adaptation of previous material, in this case being the 1964 novel A Mule for the Marquesa, by Frank O'Rourke (O'Rourke was a regular writer of Western books, with The Bravados (1958) being among the first of his adapted into movies). The movie was shot in both California and Nevada (most notably with Death Valley). The result was a hit that garnered Brooks two Academy Award nominations. If any director had multiple peaks and valleys, Brooks likely reached his last peak with his next movie that arose in 1967 with In Cold Blood, as he directed six further movies in the next two decades.

Oh hell, you need to balance out the Westerns when travelling along the trail for curious entertainment, one that has two distinct halves that will hold one's attention with how much energy can be put on screen in such lean execution. Cliche as it sounds, this is clearly the work of a professional when it comes to establishing an entertaining ensemble (one that sure won't remind folks of say, The Magnificent Seven) and a locale that isn't lost among the peaks and valleys of dirt. It is a gritty and fun movie for its 117-minute run-time, suffice to say. It is a pal's kind of movie, not one where one ego just overshadows the other, but if we are being fair, Marvin fits the movie like a glove. There is something about Marvin* that inspires a smile with how one just rolls with him to lead a movie with such an understated charm that might as well have come right down from his days playing hardboiled guys that doesn't have to say much to just make one roll with things. Of course, Lancaster isn't too far behind in wise-ass charm, he just happens to be shrouded in curiosity in following along with being part of the kicking-ass nature and causing mayhem. Ryan and Strode round out the core four with their own entertaining qualities (even with both past their fifties, one can see an ass-kicker there, basically) while Cardinale and Palance fill the sides with commitment that show the actual sides to a frontier closing in on people where people will die for their commitment to a cause because of the passion they yearn to show. Bellamy is the right kind of craven outsider needed to start and end the movie. Being trapped in peaks and valleys roll well with the mayhem created in just letting things fly with relatively colorful people to hold it. By the time one gets to the ending, you might see a movie that strains to really hold it all together, but it does work out to see the culmination of making a choice on conviction rather than by simple order. In that sense, this is a neat movie, maybe not a great Western but a worthwhile ensemble movie with worthwhile people all around to make it worth your while.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

*You might want to know that would be Academy Award winning Lee Marvin, as the previous year saw the release of Cat Ballou (1965), which saw him win for Best Actor. Incidentally, Marvin and Ryan teamed up the next year for The Dirty Dozen in another movie about colorful characters and guns, guns, guns.

Tango & Cash.

Review #1876: Tango & Cash.

Cast: 

Sylvester Stallone (Lieutenant Raymond "Ray" Tango), Kurt Russell (Lieutenant Gabriel "Gabe" Cash), Jack Palance (Yves Perret), Teri Hatcher (Katherine "Kiki" Tango), Michael J. Pollard (Owen), Brion James (Requin), James Hong (Quan), Robert Z'Dar (Face), Marc Alaimo (Lopez), Roy Brocksmith (FBI Agent Davis), Phil Rubenstein (Matt Sokowski), Lewis Arquette (FBI Agent Wyler), Clint Howard (Slinky), Michael Jeter (Skinner), and Geoffrey Lewis (Captain Schroeder) Directed by Andrei Konchalovsky and Albert Magnoli (#885 - Purple Rain)

Review: 

"Andrei was a real gentleman and I thought his take on "Tango and Cash" was very good and would've been infinitely more realistic had he been allowed to continue. His replacement was more attuned to comic pop culture, so the film had a dramatic shift into a more lighthearted direction."

The combination of director, producer, and star(s) for an action film has probably never seemed so surprising with a film like this. Yes, Konchalovsky was an established director, so consider his resume: an adaptation of Uncle Vanya (1970), a historical epic with Siberiade (1979), his venture into American cinema with the drama Maria's Lovers (1984)...and the action thriller Runaway Train (1985), which used a script from Akira Kurosawa. Born in Moscow, he studied for a decade at the Moscow Conservatory with the intent to be a pianist but encountering Andrei Tarkovsky led to him to working with him on the script that became Andrei Rublev (1966). Konchalovsky began his career as director with The First Teacher (1964) and did a handful of films before moving to the United States in 1980, where he resided before returning to Russia in the 1990s, with this film being his last full American production (his next film, The Inner Circle (1991), was a co-production between America, Italy, and the Soviet Union). Now, if you were wondering how this movie came about, it was based on a script by Randy Feldman, who in turn was doing it on an idea that Jon Peters and Peter Guber had thought of, with the intention of Sylvester Stallone and Patrick Swayze as the stars. But Swayze decided to do Road House (1989) instead, which served as one of many weird things to come. Konchalovsky would spend three months in the director's chair before arguments with Peters came to a boiling point because of disagreements with tone (believe it or not, Stallone was on the director's side) and budget problems. Peter MacDonald (who had directed Rambo III ironically after taking over for a director that Stallone had fired) and Stallone filled in temporarily before Albert Magnoli was hired to shoot the chase and fight scenes in the ending. Jeffrey Boam was brought in to try and do re-writes to the script but hated the final result so much that he didn't want credit. Remember that this was a film that started to shoot in June and end shooting in August of 1989...which ended up needing re-shoots for two weeks in October before intending to be released in December. It barely met its goal, thanks to editing from three people, including Stuart Baird, who had edited countless movies such as Lethal Weapon and its sequel (incidentally, he would be brought in to fix further troubled movies such as The Last Boy Scout), with the film being released on December 22, serving alongside Always) as the last movies released in the 1980s.

Wait, people didn't care for this film in 1989? What exactly did they expect? It wasn't exactly a great commercial hit, but there is a tinge of appreciation for it after over 30 years. Honestly, I enjoyed it just fine, as it is a movie that does exactly what it wants to do in macho action flair. A sillier person could possibly make the argument that this is a play on the action genre, one that is as goofy and beefed up as possible with the most obvious lead stars to accomplish this goal. My god, it's a movie that starts with someone shooting a vehicle to reveal cocaine, continues with a guy using rats to demonstrate his complicated scheme, and ends with monster trucks and tank-like SUVs - who would resist? I understand the potential for a serious buddy cop type of movie, but sometimes going for broke really is the better option. For someone who is fascinated at seeing both Sylvester Stallone and Kurt Russell on screen like I am, this is basically the ideal bait. That doesn't mean that it is infallible in being good (because, trust me, Stallone has had made a few duds worth talking about), but it does mean that the curiosity factor went up far more than if it was just a strait-laced attempt at buddy cop stuff. Call me a junk connoisseur, but I do enjoy movies with a bit of bombast and confidence to just go on the beat of its own drum in action, winking eyes or not (my problems are more if someone tries to bullshit their movie into "up their own ass" territory"). Calling it a bastardized Lethal Weapon only serves to make the interest go up, not down, considering the impending mediocrity of movies that tried to hone in buddy cop cliches in obligation or bewildering confusion with 1990's Another 48 Hrs. or The Rookie.

Honestly, I understand where Stallone was coming from with the character, he tries to play here in this offbeat take on the action cop type with glasses (actual ones used by Stallone) and a banker attire...but Stallone is Stallone. Making a chuckle with "Rambo is a pussy" is cute, but one knows that the best way to contain the ever-growing ego of Stallone (when you created Rocky, you get slack) is to just let him be himself. He has the schlock factor of someone who would've been "man in a suit" for a certain type of older movies, but he does it with a certain charm that you go along with what he tries to pull here. Besides, Russell has always been a favorite with me, in that he can basically walk through a role with no trouble, which I would expect from someone who went from Disney child star to a guy who can pass for both comedy and drama. He passes through here with casual charm, one who knows what kind of movie he is in without thinking they are above it all, smirking his way through with the kind of stubborn tenacity I would expect to see play out when playing out this intense dunderhead chemistry shared with Stallone that plays in the vein of The Odd Couple at times. Of course, in the middle of this is James, whose went from having two scenes turned into more when they liked his "Cockney" accent (he was an American with plenty of experience playing bad guys). He overshadows Palance (who even manages to turn a role of watching things happen into a ham) to the benefit of the movie when it comes to casual derangement. Hatcher would obviously find better material to hone in her charms (besides TV anyway) while Pollard breezes through with light amusement. The climax is preposterous and exactly what one could expect without dull surprises. As a whole, it manages to rein enough out of 104 minutes for stupefying fun that I believe make it a worthy curiosity, one with the general action sought by audiences with corny liners and general engagement from two likable stars to carry it despite plenty of clear faults and excesses. If you've seen one, you've seen plenty, but the folks that enjoy what they like to enjoy will be right at home here.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Redux: Batman (1989).

Redux #040: Batman (1989)

Cast: 

Jack Nicholson (Jack Napier / The Joker), Michael Keaton (Bruce Wayne / Batman), Kim Basinger (Vicki Vale), Robert Wuhl (Alexander Knox), Pat Hingle (Commissioner Gordon), Billy Dee Williams (Harvey Dent), Michael Gough (Alfred Pennyworth), Jack Palance (Carl Grissom), Jerry Hall (Alicia Hunt), Tracey Walter (Bob the Goon), Lee Wallace (Mayor Borg), and William Hootkins (Lt. Max Eckhardt) Directed by Tim Burton.

Review: 

"I liked parts of it, but the whole movie is mainly boring to me. It's OK, but it was more of a cultural phenomenon than a great movie." - Tim Burton

If you remember correctly, 1989's Batman took the world by storm when it was released in June of 1989 in ways that have not been forgotten when it comes to blockbusters and comic book movies. Michael E. Uslan, inspired by reading Batman comics as a kid, had a desire to make the definitive version of Batman that had been envisioned by artist Bob Kane and writer Bill Finger when they created the character in 1939. Uslan was a fan of the main character alongside the family of villains, and he even taught a class about comic books at Indiana University. Of course, when Uslan first approached DC Comics about making a movie, they thought it was a crazy idea, because the character's popularity had diminished in the years that followed the cancellation of the 1966 television series, which certainly was still in the public consciousness for the character (which makes sense, as the Adam West interpretation certainly matched the era to a T). Uslan cultivated his movie credentials by working at United Artists (after graduating law school), and he credit DC head Sol Harrison as a mentor in getting the process to a good start - the rights to Batman were bought by Uslan and Benjamin Melniker in 1979, aligning with producers Jon Peters and Peter Guber (it should be noted that Guber and Peters, hairdresser-turned producer and possible scumbag,  manipulated their way to be main producers in getting a deal with Warner Brothers that sent Uslan and Melniker to executive producers with only "net profits"). Uslan even wrote a script with a friend to try and give people an idea of what he wanted to make to counteract the preconceived idea from doubtful skeptics along with a "creative blueprint" memo, complete with having Jack Nicholson in mind for the Joker. Warner Bros. decided to serve as the studio to produce Batman in 1980, but their attempts to have a script by Tom Mankiewicz (contributor on the Superman movie in 1978) did not go well. At any rate, pre-production stalled until 1986. Warner executive Bonni Lee got Burton to join in on the project, helped by the success seen in his work on Pee-wee's Big Adventure (1985) for the studio, although the success with Beetlejuice (1988) gave the formal greenlight in 1988. Burton, at the suggestion of Peters, picked Keaton to play Batman because of their work together on the latter film, one that he felt would have the audience suspend its belief and take the actor seriously. He also stated that the locale of Gotham City had to be just as important a character for the movie to work. Steve Englehart and Julie Hickson each wrote film treatments before a screenwriter was hired. Sam Hamm wrote the story (alongside side work done by Burton, without credit), but the screenplay was done by Hamm and Warren Skaaren. Rewrites were done by Skaaren with others, excluding Hamm due to a strike by the Writers Guild of America. Influences included stories such as Alan Moore & Brian Bolland's The Killing Joke (a story that Burton personally loved in understanding the mythology) and Frank Miller's The Dark Knight Returns. Bob Kane worked as a consultant on the film (coincidentally, he credited Finger, who died in 1974, as a "contributing force", although Finger was not given proper credit until 2015). Peters tried to mold Burton in his image when it came to making a Batman that he didn't want to be thought of (in his words) "Wussman", complete with making suggestions for the climax, which originally involved a different character meeting their end, and he actually commissioned a 38-foot model of a cathedral for the characters to be for said climax. At any rate, Peters and Guber did not return to produce the sequel, but they reaped the benefits of being behind one of the biggest blockbusters of its time; as his third feature film, Burton described the filming process as "torture", but he returned for the sequel in 1992.

When I saw this film originally in 2011, I was a fourteen-year-old trying to write quickly and write what I liked on the spot with a movie. Long story short, those reviews aren't great, so a redux movement is slowly building up steam by me to get as many redux-es possible for reviews I feel deserve better. This one, even with 200 words for what was somehow called a 10/10 movie, seemed very ripe for a second look. Actually, it is a third look, because I did watch this movie a couple of years later to try and refresh my memory, which didn't exactly help this movie too much. The third time around has basically confirmed that the best memories about a movie are sometimes left to younger eyes. Burton thought that the best way to approach the movie is to see Batman and Joker as essentially two of a kind in odd freaks that are intertwined in origin. Anton Furst and Peter Young designed the sets for the film, which shows an Art Deco style that makes Gotham seem reminiscent of something like The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari (1920) or noir. You have to understand that people actually thought that casting Keaton was going to make it seem like a comedy because of his work on stuff like Mr. Mom (1983). It is interesting to consider that because of the fact that Keaton approaches the material with righteous timing and balance required, even if one seems to think that he is overshadowed by you-know-who - him going "you wanna get nuts?!" is an interesting highlight when thinking of the fair blend of seeing the deeper-voiced Batman and the unassuming Bruce Wayne. Of course, the high-priced and high-billed Nicholson steals the show, because playing an agent of chaos that grins his way through the proceedings is a role to dream for that he stretches right to form. This isn't to say that it is a hammy performance as it is just one that controls the mood of the movie that might as well make it his movie more than Keaton's movie. Basinger does fine with the balance between the battle of freaks, bewildered but not washed out; the scene where she waltzes into the Batcave doesn't exactly help. Apparently, Wuhl's character was meant to die in the climax, but the filmmakers liked him so much they let him live. That is probably the best compliment I can find when talking about him in this film, because the less said about him, the better. Hingle and Gough don't have too much to particularly do, but at least one takes them seriously for what is needed. Williams in theory should be really interesting, but since there would be no more Williams as the character of Dent, it comes off as ridiculous to have him cast but not actually do anything (besides, Walter is the amusing quiet man in the group). 

Maybe there is an argument that the movie might be a bit too dark for younger folks. This is ridiculous, since I doubt that one will really have this much trouble with a PG-13 rated movie like this in just letting the visuals play out on screen; one could also just stick with the West version of Batman, since it also holds up well, incidentally. Danny Elfman, best known for his work with the band Oingo Boingo alongside Burton's previous two features, did the music, albeit with Prince composing and writing songs as well. The music score ends up sticking better than the songs, because one clearly won't forget the main theme. As a whole, the 126 minutes does go by with loose construction, one that tries hard to ride on style rather than substance, which only can go so far before falling all the way off the offbeat wayside. Seeing the origin for the Joker is far more interesting than the eventual reveal of the Wayne murder, because it makes things too convenient to have two characters create the origin for each other (i.e., having a random guy being the killer is far more tragic than just finding out it is the guy you happen to be going off to face and probably take down). I think the fact that the success of the movie inspired the development of an animated series for television probably is more of a point in the favor of the legacy of the film in what it impacted rather than the overall content of the film itself (the series, premiering in 1992, is arguably the best portrayal of Batman outside of the comics). It is a roaring adventure that builds a mystery with fair success for haunted spectacle with Burton's sensibilities clashing with other visions to make a strange concoction that lives and dies in the time it was made. It is the movie that tried to top the heights raised by Superman (1978), pure and simple. Of course, whether the movie works or not in its execution is up to you. 

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Shane.

Review #1382: Shane.

Cast: 
Alan Ladd (Shane), Jean Arthur (Marian Starrett), Van Heflin (Joe Starrett), Brandon deWilde (Joey Starrett), Jack Palance (Jack Wilson), Ben Johnson (Chris Calloway), Edgar Buchanan (Fred Lewis), Emile Meyer (Rufus Ryker), Elisha Cook Jr (Frank "Stonewall" Torrey), Douglas Spencer (Axel 'Swede' Shipstead), John Dierkes (Morgan Ryker), Ellen Corby (Mrs. Liz Torrey), and Paul McVey (Sam Grafton) Produced and Directed by George Stevens (#911 - Woman of the Year)

Review: 
“I’ve always been of the opinion that a director should never touch a film without his having a basic knowledge of its contents.”

There have been a countless amount of Westerns to choose from when it comes to picking a film to watch and plenty that came from the 1950s. It should only prove natural that a classic as timeless as this one is came from George Stevens. Born in a family of actors and film crewmen, Stevens honed his craft first as a cameraman with the Laurel and Hardy film series before soon cutting his teeth as a director for shorts and eventually his first feature with the comedy The Cohens and Kellys in Trouble (1933). In the prevailing next few years, he would go on to do comedies and romantic dramas before he left to serve in World War II, which had a diverse selection of stars ranging from Katherine Hepburn and Spencer Tracy (where he directed the first film to feature the two together in Woman of the Year) to Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers with Swing Time (1936) to Cary Grant with Gunga Din (1939). He served with the U.S. Army Signal Corps as a head of the film unit, which filmed numerous events of the war such as the D-Day landings and shots of concentrations camps such as Dachau. When he returned to direct feature films in 1948, his films darkened in optimism, but he reached success with his ambitious efforts. He won two Academy Awards for Best Director for A Place in the Sun (1951) and Giant (1956), a feat matched by just twenty other directors before he closed his career with The Only Game in Town (1970). Stevens commanded respect from his fellow directors and stars, a man capable of keeping control of the film to himself and not at the whims of producers or big names, believing that films should be respected as more than just a tool to be used to sell products when they were aired on television.

It should only prove fitting that the film has a tremendous tense presence to headline a classic like this. Ladd (a man who tried his hand at extras and bit parts before getting his big break at the age of 29) is precisely the man for the moments required of him in this film, a weary presence that we see ourselves drawn to even before conflict has built itself to a boil. He doesn't have the biggest of backstories or the tallest of heights, but there is plenty to see within his eyes when interacting with the others, such as with deWilde or with Arthur, a graceful presence in her last performance before film retirement. Heflin keeps up with resilience fitting of a community man, while deWilde (who had his Broadway debut at the age of 7) makes a compelling coming of age presence that is crystalized with the final iconic scene with Ladd. The rest of the cast contribute in their own ways, such as a conniving Meyer. Palance utilizes his moments on screen with menacing precision through the way he says his lines, with the highlight being the sequence outside the saloon that builds tension right up until the gunshots are fired (done by shooting into a garbage can), complete with wires to jerk back the actor after being shot, a startlingly effective choice. The film was adapted from the Jack Schaefer's 1949 novel of the same name by Pultizer Prize novelist A.B. Guthrie Jr and columnist Jack Sher. It's interesting that the film turned out so well with the strange difficulties it faced at times with its stars. For example, Ladd, who disliked guns, took 116 takes when it came time to film the shooting demonstration sequence. Palance did not have much experience with guns or horses, and he had trouble in mounting (and demounting) his horse; the one take of him successfully mounting his horse would be used numerous times (along with being reversed for dismounts) during the film. This is a film that went from original plans of 58 shooting days to 75 (done in 1951) with extensive editing done by Stevens that led to delays. And yet here we are, talking about a classic for its decade because of how well-crafted it is, meticulous in its look in sets alongside award-winning cinematography from Loyal Griggs that go with a game cast and startling direction that certainly proved inspiring for future films (such as Pale Rider) while ultimately being a thought-provoking Western of a time that never ages and never dies.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Panic in the Streets.

Review #1375: Panic in the Streets.

Cast: 
Richard Widmark (Lieutenant Commander "Clint" Reed, M.D.), Paul Douglas (Captain Tom Warren), Barbara Bel Geddes (Nancy Reed), Jack Palance (Blackie), Zero Mostel (Raymond Fitch), Alexis Minotis (John Mefaris), Dan Riss (Neff), Guy Thonajan (Poldi), and Tommy Cook (Vince Poldi) Directed by Elia Kazan (#104 - East of Eden, #109 - A Streetcar Named Desire, and #110 - On the Waterfront)

Review: 
"I don't move unless I have some empathy with the basic theme."

Elia Kazan is thought to be one of the greatest influential directors of our time. He started his post college life as a stage actor, but his most important influence was the Group Theatre, a collective dedicated to a naturalistic and forceful style of acting, influenced by the teachings of Konstantin Stanislavski, with this particular style being associated later in the 20th century as the Method style of acting. Kazan did do some acting in his time with the Theatre, but it was his directing that soon came to be noticed on the New York stage, where he won three Tony Award for direction (most notably with Death of a Salesman). He came to Hollywood to direct his debut picture in A Tree Grows in Brooklyn (1945). 1947 was a critical year in his life, as he directed three films and had one of them (Gentlemen's Agreement) win an Academy Award for Best Picture and Best Director. He also helped to form the Actors Studio (along with Cheryl Crawford and Robert Lewis), which later had Group Theatre founder Lee Strasberg as director, who would later be described as the father of method acting in America. Ultimately, Kazan would direct nineteen films in 29 years of directing, with a majority of his films receiving award nominations and nine actors receiving Academy Awards for work in his films. Kazan liked to pick people for his films that weren't necessarily big stars, acting as a mentor to them to try and figure them out so they aren't a complete unknown when it comes to filming. One particular unknown who got a break from Kazan in this film was Walter (Jack) Palance. He had made his debut in theater in 1947 at the age of 28 after spending his life doing a variety of professions, ranging from a coal miner to a boxer to working various cooking jobs at Stanford University (where he nearly gradated from). He was later described by main star Widmark as "the toughest guy I ever met. He was the only actor I've ever been physically afraid of."

In any case, this is certainly an interesting film to pick out from Kazan, one to start out a prime decade for capable films from him alongside ones involving noir thrillers. For one thing, it's a film about a hunt for a killer that doesn't know he has the plague, filmed on location in New Orleans (with the underbelly parts being emphasized for effect) with a mix of professional actors and hired locale. Perhaps predictably, the Hays Code had their slight issues with the film (which had working titles Port of Entry and Outbreak) before it could get itself going, mostly with the ideas of not having a suggestion of a cop being killed, or a falling mattress scene being not too realistic in gruesomeness. The film had two separate writing credits, with Richard Murphy and Daniel Fuchs doing the screenplay while Edna and Edward Anhalt wrote the story. The Anhalts would win an Academy Award for Best Writing, Motion Picture Story for this film. In any case, this is a film that basks itself in its setting with openness and a sense of realism that makes for compelling staying power for this exact time seven decades after its release. It finds a path to not being just a plain procedural with relative tension and a collection of capable presences to follow along with. Widmark (known early for villainous roles) gives off a durable performance, one that is urgent and easy to follow along with no trouble in terms of belief. Douglas (having started his film career just one year earlier) accompanies him with rough assurance. Bel Geddes makes her time count with decent chemistry when needed with Widmark. Undeniably, Palance makes for a enterprising debut, a clear chilling presence whenever he is on screen, while Mostel (who was blacklisted in the late 1940s) accompanies him with panicky brilliance. On the whole, the film balances itself through 96 minutes with a grimy mix of terror and drama that doesn't sell itself short in overwrought decision-making, having a proactive vision of realism that applies especially now more than ever.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Gor.

Review #1189: Gor.

Cast: 
Urbano Barberini (Tarl Cabot), Rebecca Ferratti (Talena), Jack Palance (Xenos), Paul L. Smith (Surbus), Oliver Reed (Sarm), Larry Taylor (King Marlenus), Graham Clarke (Drusus), and Janine Denison (Brandy) Directed by Fritz Kiersch.

Review: 
You may be wondering what exactly is Gor? Well, it refers a planet on the other side of Earth's orbit from the Earth that serves as the setting for sword and planet adventure novels written by John Norman, the pen name of John Frederick Lange, Jr (who serves as a professor of philosophy. Since writing the first installment of the series with Tarnsman of Gor in 1966, there have been 34 books that Norman has written and had published. In a decade with fantasy films like Conan the Barbarian, Willow, and several others, this manages to be just as laughable as one would expect from something that manages to make Red Sonja (1985) seem tolerable by comparison. Simply put, this is a miserable little movie to sit through, flailing around with ridiculous production value and actors that aren't too particularly interesting to follow along with, particularly with its lead. This is especially apparent in the first scene with a cheap-looking ring that serves important to the plot (for the beginning and ending, anyway) while having a socially awkward professor make his way to Gor by a car crash and lightning strike. Barberini would at first seem like the kind of guy suited more for action sequences than anything dealing with plot. This is erased by the fact that no one really is too particularly good with making convincing (or at least interesting) fight scenes. The character type of him having to learn to become a hero is done pretty silly, since he gets his training in one quick sequence. I barely noticed that he was supposed to have chemistry with Ferratti, honestly. The only one worth looking at is Reed, who mostly understates his lines (for better or worse) while having to wear a ridiculously framed costume that doesn't help him at all; his flailing for his death scene with an arrow to the neck is amusing, and he's the only sort of highlight in this clunker. Palance is given a high billing despite being in the film for less than five minutes in an attempt at sequel-bait (there was a sequel the following year named Outlaw of Gor released on video). The screenplay from Rick Marx and Harry Alan Towers (under the pseudonym Peter Welbeck) never feels epic in any sort of way, particularly when faced with a low budget and locations in South Africa that has a bunch of sand to it and not much else. It has the cliches from other, better movies, but it is a tiresome kind of movie that makes one aspire for any other kind of film, whether released by Cannon Films or someone else.

You would actually be better off watching plastic sword fighting in the neighborhood jungle gym (complete with sand doubling as fire) with a bunch of random music blaring in the background than this. There are movies that can use a low budget or modest cast to make an interesting adventure, but this is not one of them. It fails people looking for fantasy and it fails people looking for something daring with adventure.

Overall, I give it 3 out of 10 stars.

City Slickers.

Review #808: City Slickers.

Cast
Billy Crystal (Mitch Robbins), Daniel Stern (Phil Berquist), Bruno Kirby (Ed Furillo), Patricia Wettig (Barbara Robbins), Helen Slater (Bonnie Rayburn), Jack Palance (Curly Washburn), Noble Willingham (Clay Stone), Tracey Walter (Cookie), Jeffrey Tambor (Lou), Josh Mostel (Barry Shalowitz), David Paymer (Ira Shalowitz), Bill Henderson (Dr. Ben Jessup), Phill Lewis (Dr. Steve Jessup), Kyle Secor (Jeff), Dean Hallo (T.R.) Directed by Ron Underwood.

Review
On the 25th Anniversary of this movie's release, I decided that it would be a good idea to make a review for it and ultimately it turned out to be a great idea. City Slickers is not just a well-made comedy, it is also a movie with layers of drama that manages to give it enough weight to make for a truly entertaining film. The main trio (Crystal, Stern, Kirby) have good chemistry with each other, managing to share some good moments of screen together; one of my favorites is when they are talking about their best (and worst) days, mainly because we get a glimpse at what made them feel their happiest (along with their lowest), as they are trying to capture that spirit again. The movie never feels contrived in either its comedy or its drama, always managing to keep a balance. Naturally, the supporting cast is also a key highlight, with Palance standing out easily, with his first scene having him rope a character to a fence, complete with that chiseled look of his He plays the role with simply and effectively, without any ounce of fakery, and he certainly works well with Crystal, particularly when trying to deliver a calf. He doesn't have all too much screen time, but he is certainly memorable enough and excellent to the core, and his performance managed to snag an Oscar. There is a certain appeal to what these characters are going through, with them trying to use a dude ranch (disguised as a mythic kind of fantasy) to solve their problems, as weird as it may seem. You get to feel for these characters, while also having a laugh at the lines and gags that make up an enjoyable movie. I'd recommend seeing it, one for the jokes, and one for the other elements that give it much needed weight.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.