Under Siege 2: Dark Territory.

Review #2552: Under Siege 2: Dark Territory.

Cast: 

Steven Seagal (Lieutenant Casey Ryback), Eric Bogosian (Travis Dane), Everett McGill (Marcus Penn), Katherine Heigl (Sarah Ryback), Morris Chestnut (Bobby Zachs), Nick Mancuso (Tom Breaker), Brenda Bakke (Captain Linda Gilder), Peter Greene (Mercenary #1), Patrick Kilpatrick (Mercenary #2), Scott Sowers (Mercenary #3), Afifi Alaouie (Fatima), Andy Romano (Admiral Bates), Dale Dye (Captain Nick Garza), Kurtwood Smith (Major General Stanley Cooper), and David Gianopoulos (Captain David Trilling) Directed by Geoff Murphy.

Review: 

"Films have a mind of their own, they are living entities. You discover them. I made a [Steven] Seagal film [Under Siege 2: Dark Territory] in America. It was a very dreary process and very highly contentious at the time - lots of arguments and stuff. There was a point during the editing where I observed this incredibly high energy beast emerging, and I didn't know where it had come from, because there wasn't any of that energy on the set. It seemed to grow out of the editing process. Whereas others, if you finish a shoot and think 'we've just shot a real beauty', then you're probably in trouble. Because they can jump up and bite you."

Yes, there was a second Under Siege movie. This was the seventh film with Steven Seagal as a star but the first one to come out after the ridiculously overblown On Deadly Ground (1994). You remember Under Siege (1992), right? The original script had been done by Matt Reeves and his college friend Richard Hatem, as they wanted to break into the market of spec scripts with action, with the script (with a working title of "Dark Territory", since, well, it refers to running track not controlled by signals) being described as "meant to be very much like a Die Hard movie". The market crashed for scripts, but it eventually was optioned and converted to what you see, with various script doctors such as Brian Helgeland delivering un-credited work. According to Chestnut, a good deal of the film was improvised, specifically when Seagal was on screen, which basically went, “Okay, this is what’s going to happen. You’re going to say this, I’m going to say this, then I’m going to do that and then you’re going to do that.” This was the last major production for its director Geoff Murphy, who had moved to Hollywood filmmaking after making films in his native New Zealand such as Goodbye Pork Pie (1981), Utu (1983) and The Quiet Earth (1985) that resulted in films such as Young Guns II (1990), Freejack (1992), and, well, this. He kept a busy profile with work in TV, smaller-scale stuff such as Race Against Time (2000) along with second-unit work on The Lord of the Rings. He died in 2018 at the age of 80. Made on a budget of $60 million (double the original), the movie was a mild box office hit, albeit not on the level of the original. Seagal's* next two films the following year were Executive Decision (a supporting role where he took a backseat plane ride to Kurt Russell) and The Glimmer Man. 

Is it unnecessary? Maybe. Is it not as good as the previous Under Siege? Mostly, yea. Is it worth it? Well, you know, I think so. I suppose this is where the apex of Seagal as a "star" has hit, complete with using a Apple Newton MessagePad 100 to really make this a high-tech thriller. But hey, a movie based in tension about trying to take a top-secret weapon looming in space with a hacker and multiple keyboards? This happened to be released a few months before Goldeneye, by the way. Sure, this is a movie that doesn't have the magic of two villains like before with Tommy Lee Jones and Gary Busey, but Bogosian, combined with the company of a cast that clearly is acting around Seagal, does hold the movie up enough to at least make the movie worth a check. Seagal, well, he mainly is there to lumber around and kick, with ounces of fun only really coming from seeing this guy seemingly try to hide the urge to say/do insane stuff when not engaged in the concentration of being the one-man army (okay, not always one-man, because Chestnut is there at times). He outruns a train crash, for God's sake. Bogosian saw Alan Rickman play a villain in Die Hard (1988) and decided, no I'm not kidding, that he wanted to play "a big, old fat villain in a big action movie". Sure, the end result had a bit of silliness due to the encouragement of Murphy to do so, but he apparently is quite satisfied with how it turned out with a crazed hacker wanting plenty of $ that quotes Louis Pasteur. And I agree with him! He is delightfully fun in this movie, managing to evoke menace with a jagged edge of wit. Then you have folks like McGill (a few years removed from being warmly cool in Twin Peaks*) trying to act tough (as one does when not being foiled by pepper spray) that amuses me greatly in his stature and the eventual result (nobody gets a long fight in this dojo). Chestnut provides a few chuckles as basically the Argyle equivalent that gets to trek across a train and throw people off helicopters while Heigl, well, there's always room to be a character in a different movie. It's an efficient movie for 100 minutes that fiddles in the ride of knowing what you are getting into with goofy scenarios (dropping people off helicopters, big ticking clocks) that you either appreciate or dismiss when it concludes. I liked it fine, and I'll accept the confusion over saying a movie with a middling lead does in fact work enough with the support under him to make it one to recommend. 

 

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

song of the day!

*If one goes by what Heigl said or Jenny McCarthy said about auditioning (link here), it was definitely a strange experience being around Seagal.

*I'm still in the second season. We shall see about the movie. Also, he ruled in Licence to Kill.

Oscar (1991).

Review #2239: Oscar (1991).

Cast: 

Sylvester Stallone (Angelo "Snaps" Provolone), Ornella Muti (Sofia Provolone), Peter Riegert (Aldo), Tim Curry (Dr. Thornton Poole), Vincent Spano (Anthony Rossano), Marisa Tomei (Lisa Provolone), Elizabeth Barondes (Theresa), Eddie Bracken (Five-Spot Charlie), Linda Gray (Roxanne), Chazz Palminteri (Connie), Don Ameche (Father Clemente), Kurtwood Smith (Lt. Toomey), William Atherton (Overton), Art LaFleur (Officer Quinn), Robert Lesser (Officer Keough), Yvonne De Carlo (Aunt Rosa), Martin Ferrero (Luigi Finucci), Harry Shearer (Guido Finucci), with Richard Romanus (Vendetti), and Kirk Douglas (Eduardo) Directed by John Landis (#328 - Trading Places, #410 - Coming to America, #513 - Spies Like Us, #1114 - Animal House, #1462 - The Blues Brothers, #1465 - An American Werewolf in London, #1699 - Blues Brothers 2000, #1718 - The Stupids, #2026 - Twilight Zone: The Movie)

Review: 

"Oscar is a farce set in 1931, sort of Damon Runyon meets Feydeau. I shot the picture in a deliberately stylized manner, attempting a thirties Hollywood comedy look and feel (Peter Riegart, at one point, actually says, Why I oughta...)"

 

Sure, I had this on my mind for a few years. How could one not be interested in a film with a director and actor passing through different tides of their career? It was the film Stallone appeared in right after the first perceived end of the Rocky series with Rocky V [1990] while for Landis it was the first of a string of, well, six films with little-to-no appreciation in the 1990s (which includes The Stupids [1996], a movie I heartedly defend). The film is a remake of the 1967 film of the same name, as originally directed by Édouard Molinaro (which in turn was based on a play by Claude Magnier). The key difference between the two Oscars is that the Landis one is set in the 1930s rather than being a contemporary comedy of errors; Landis wasn't exactly a stranger to screwy comedies, as evidenced by Trading Places (1983), for example. The film was written by Michael Barrie and Jim Mulholland, who actually had written for the comedy skit anthology film Amazon Women on the Moon (1987) to go with years and years of TV comedy writing. The movie was neither a hit with audiences or critics, with the common remark being that audiences apparently were not willing to go with Stallone in a non-action role (apparently, a test audience member actually wondered when Stallone was going to take off his shirt and start blasting people). Of course, Landis and Stallone do not shy away from talking about the film and its distinct place when it comes to actors trying to play against type (particularly when compared to Stallone in say, Rhinestone [1984] or the film that immediately followed Oscar with Stop! Or My Mom Will Shoot [1992])

I don't really understand how people didn't like this film. Was it really that hard to see Sylvester Stallone (who was cast in the film after Al Pacino came and went because Dick Tracy offered more money) do comedy? Really? Sure, the "Around the rugged rocks the ragged rascals ran" bit may have been familiar to some folks, but was it really hard to see how it could be played for worthwhile amusement with Stallone there to say it? Of course, Tango & Cash (1989) was sort of a funny movie that I appreciated with Stallone, so maybe broad It is a gangster film without any violence that confines itself to one location for most of its runtime (109 minutes) with a cast packed to the gills in names to see for later (and those that weren't as much) in support around Stallone that do the type of hit-or-miss comedy that is just about screwy enough to work. It is delightfully manufactured weirdness that contorts itself for a few delightful moments. Stallone isn't asked to do too much broad comedy here, but he clearly is game to play along with the idea of "civility" packed in a suit that handles the ever-growing confusion of daughters and cases with charm (I'm not sure if I agree with his musing that he should've played it "incredibly cynical"). Riegert and Palminteri accompany Stallone at times with their own goofy type of charm (one snide and one in constant confusion), which is delightful in the best ways possible. Go figure that Curry nails his enunciation act right then and there with dignified timing and (wait for it) charm to spare. Tomei is quite amusing in flapper attitude that is fiery in that momentary sparkplug of goofiness. It should be noted that Tomei was cast in My Cousin Vinny (1992) because the filmmakers for that film were invited to the set by Landis and liked what they saw of her acting in a scene, so that's one person who really benefitted from this film. For all the credit one can give to Stallone or others, Spano unfortunately draws the shortest stick, because he isn't particularly interesting enough to keep being in the film to draw attempts at what I think should be humor but is the equivalent of a vacant stare (Muti and Barondes narrowly miss the shortest stick). Others get less to nibble on but are neat for those who like certain faces or sounds in say, eagle-bleary-eyed Smith or the small double act of Ferrero and Shearer. The film drifts in and out with wry enjoyment at being a quirky flashback that I enjoyed more often than not with its dedicated cast engaged to make silly entertainment that is sincere enough to merit a look for the curious at heart.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars. 

Next up: Debt 1, Pirates 0 in Cutthroat Island. 

Rambo III.

Review #961: Rambo III.

Cast: 
Sylvester Stallone (John J. Rambo), Richard Crenna (Colonel Sam Trautman), Kurtwood Smith (Robert Griggs), Marc de Jonge (Colonel Alexei Zaysen), Sasson Gabai (Mousa Ghani), Doudi Shoua (Hamid), Spiros Focas (Masoud), Randy Raney (Sergeant Kourov), and Marcus Gilbert (Tomask) Directed by Peter MacDonald.

Review: 
When I watched the second film, I described it as "moderately entertaining, but not as good as the first film", crediting its satisfying action in a movie that was okay with being average but fair entertainment. But this one felt like middling returns, where the action scenes outweigh the heart of the film and make for something that isn't as satisfying in entertainment. There isn't anything that is inherently awful, but there is nothing that suggests greatness or new in interest. Nothing is really improved on from the last two films, essentially. Stallone is what you've seen before previously (which is fine), though one the best highlights involving him is one where he removes a spike from his side and seals the wound with flaming gunpowder. Crenna does a fine job once again, while having a bit more screen-time this time around, and he gets to be part of the action, which is nice. It's always nice to see Smith, but he doesn't really have much to do in his small time on screen (never trust the billing, I suppose). de Jonge seems more in line with a cartoon-ish villain than anything really menacing, not even a silly over-the-top moment or a memorable henchman. The rest of the cast is decent, but they can't help elevate the movie toward anything worth competency. There definitely is a good deal of action (listed by the Guinness World Records book to have 221 acts of violence, at least 70 explosions and over 108 on-screen deaths), but it seems a bit hollow and not as electrifying as the previous films for me. The movie (filmed in Israel, Thailand, and Arizona) does have a neat look to it, at least. It's easy to say this isn't a good movie, but it's hard to recommend against watching it, particularly if you are an action buff. It has quite a good amount of imperfections, but perhaps there is some sort of gem within all of this film's mess.

Happy Independence Day, folks. I hope you've enjoyed this review.  Enjoy the sixth straight year with a review on July 4th.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

Background: 
It has been one full year since I watched Rambo: First Blood Part II as part of my Independence Day Feature, and since the time has come once again to do something for my home country, it only makes sense to cover this film. This is the 11th film done since I began the Independence Day Feature in 2012, with the other films being: #193 - Independence Day, #413 - The Patriot, #414 - Air Force One, #415 - America, #416 - Yankee Doodle Dandy, #611 - Spider-Man, #612 - The Devil's Disciple, #724 - Sagebrush Trail, #817 - Suddenly, and #818 - Rambo: First Blood Part II. 

original image: 

Redux: RoboCop (1987).

Redux #002: RoboCop.

Cast
Peter Weller (Alex Murphy / RoboCop), Nancy Allen (Anne Lewis), Ronny Cox (Dick Jones), Kurtwood Smith (Clarence Boddicker), Miguel Ferrer (Bob Morton), Dan O'Herlihy ("The Old Man"), Paul McCrane (Emil Antonowsky), Ray Wise (Leon Nash), Jesse D. Goins (Joe Cox), Calvin Jung (Steve Minh), Michael Gregory (Lt. Hedgecock), Robert DoQui (Sergeant Reed), and Felton Perry (OCP Executive Johnson) Directed by Paul Verhoeven.

Review
Welcome to a Redux Review of the original RoboCop film, which is a revised review meant to say more about the movie as a whole. The upcoming Redux Reviews are necessary to help better the evolution of Movie Night in all that has changed from its inception in 2010 to the present age - enjoy.

The initial thing that can be said about RoboCop, released on July 17, 1987, is that it showcased more than the sum of its parts from what you would have expected in its era, with layers of satire and emotional depth to make for a compelling movie. The action and violence is certainly entertaining in that goes over-the-top with great results. I remember seeing the scene where Murphy gets gunned down when I was barely a teenager, and even all these years later it still manages to leave an imprint on my mind because of how striking it is. One effect that certainly still ranks high on the memorability scale is the toxic waste infested Emil, right down to the collision with a car. The effects also are pretty well done, and the fight between ED-209 and RoboCop is impressive, right down to the end result (sure, the stairs part is cute, but the moment where one sees the eye of RoboCop exposed is just as striking). The music by Basil Poledouris is brilliant, being both triumphant and emotionally reaching at the right times, using synthesizer and orchestral music very well, with the music at the climax of the move working just right. Of course, there is plenty to say about the movie besides what one can say was enjoyable in imagery, because it is a movie that strikes at the heart of the age it was made in that still strikes a chord today because of how Paul Verhoeven and company succeeded in what they aspired to do despite the hard conditions of filming. The film was written by Edward Neumeier and Michael Miner, with the former being a junior story executive at Universal Pictures before aspiring to write screenplays, as inspired by him seeing the production of Blade Runner (1982); Miner came on Neumeier's radar because of a student video he did, which led to his idea of a robot-themed rock music video converging rightly with Neumeier's idea. Verhoeven, a Dutch director who had just moved to the States best known for films such as Soldier of Orange (1977) and Flesh+Blood (1985), was approached about directing the film after a handful of names dropped out of doing it, and he actually rejected it before his wife encouraged him to give the script a chance - the scene at the abandoned house hooked him onto doing it. The film was made for under $14 million and made roughly $53 million on original release, with its legacy growing in stature in the wake of analysis over its themes involving humanity and corporate policies.

You have to understand that the era of the 1980s had corporate people who were not above reading Japanese texts about killing more effectively. So, a movie involving a corporation taking the task of running a police department and trying to deploy products to rid crime like it was a cancer isn't exactly too off the deep end (one of the writers termed the movie as "fascism for liberals", so take that for what it is worth). The occasional newsbreak/commercials also help to serve the satire in its excesses and absurdity as well, considering that coverage of an ambush of cops with one gravely injured in the attack closes with a broadcaster going "Good luck" to them. The segments lighten up the movie when compared to the violence, which actually was toned down because of the MPAA deeming it an X rather than the R rating targeted...eight times; one can see the un-rated cut on home video now, fortunately.  Eventually, the movie also looks upon the humanity that starts to shine through the title character despite the attempts to strip it away and present it as product, one that results in a soulful and sobering film that could also be construed in religious tones, and Verhoeven has referred to the execution of Weller's character as like a crucifixion.

Weller had spent time studying mime after he managed to be cast in the film, one that had struggled to find a right lead actor because they wanted someone who was both a suitable size that wouldn't look awkward when the suit would be designed around them and also have a good jawline (of course, acting without having the face shown for most of it didn't exactly attract much help either). The studying did not help him much when the actual suit (made of flexible foam latex, polyurethane, and fiberglass) came around, because its bulky nature and long makeup time led to discomfort, complete with dehydration. Eventually, he worked out a more deliberate moving style to help deal with the costume, and it is evident to see how he managed to turn all of this into an excellent performance. He handles the one extended human sequence with warm gusto that you would expect from a cop drama before segueing into the main course handily; the humanity that was thought lost starts to come in bits and pieces that he handles with calm effectiveness, whether that involves him traversing through an abandoned house or the scene where he sees his own face in a reflection before wishing to be left alone. Allen (cast after Stephanie Zimbalist dropped out in preproduction) proves a fitting partner for certain moments to show his lingering humanity in earthy grace. 

It is the adversarial side that makes it all come together of course. Cox may have been known for nice-guy roles, but he sure chomps on this material for all of what it is worth, striking the heart of a great villain in believing in their righteousness to the bitter end no matter who gets struck in their wake. Gang leaders may be tough, but one hasn't seen nothing until he spooks a cocky executive with a few calm words and a hair-pull. O'Herlihy doesn't have a lot of screen time, but he certainly makes his presence felt as the head of corporate sharks. One of my favorite quirks is that Jones regards to the death of an employee via the ED 209 as a "glitch", and the Old Man is more angry at the "temporary setback". Ferrer elevates a corporate wolf-in-sheep's clothing into something charming in its smarminess, one that might have been an adversarial stooge in a different movie but instead ends up something different for satisfaction. Last but not least, Kurtwood Smith does a wonderfully evil job of making Boddicker more than just a cop-killer, with a look that was actually inspired by Nazi leaders. Sure, the execution sequence is a clear highlight, but my particular favorite occurs within a standoff during a negotiation, which involves a line like this: "Oooh. Guns, guns, guns! C'mon, Sal! The Tigers are playing... *slaps table* …tonight. I never miss a game." He has a manner to him that makes him more than just a common street thug, one who controls any scene he is in with confidence (later on, the character spits blood on his booking in jail, as suggested by Smith). The showdown at the end of the movie is riveting, showing the lasting conclusion of Verhoeven's "American Jesus" to its logical endpoint that Smith and company handle well.

The 102 minutes pass by with great execution by Verhoeven and company, as Rob Bottin and his special effects team (which included folks such as Phil Tippet) lend a great hand in making over-the-top spectacle in effects go hand-in-hand with the locations (shot in Dallas, TX alongside Pennsylvania and Long Beach) in seamless style. Sure, some might have had a problem with the violence, but I think it is necessary to understand our own human nature, as if satire is just something you can present in a vacuum or that the darkness of the human spirit isn't lurking within us. I didn't wince at the violence when I saw it years ago, I sure as hell don't see how one can wince at it now. Over three decades later, the legacy of the film is that none of the follow-ups that have passed in its wake have managed to top it in all of the aspects that made the original so striking. The 1990 sequel, with no Verhoeven or the original writers present, proved quite absurd in its continuation of corporate avarice while failing to reach the soulful highlights presented by the original in favor of ultra-violence that lacked a real third act. The 1993 sequel, now without its main star, was an ill-advised attempt at sanitizing the material for younger audiences that made for one hell of a movie to pick apart as a franchise killer. At any rate, the original 1987 movie aimed not for the strings of franchise-making or ultra violent fun but instead for a parable about how far one's humanity reaches even with the confines of a metallic body flung into pursuit for justice. It is a great action film, but it is also a well-done satire that still reaches the mark in corporate insanity and violent absurdity that makes it a movie for all time.

Overall, I give it 10 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Broken Arrow (1996).

Review #336: Broken Arrow.

Cast
John Travolta (Vic Deakins), Christian Slater (Riley Hale), Samantha Mathis (Terry Carmichael), Delroy Lindo (Max Wilkins), Bob Gunton (Pritchett), Casey Biggs (Novacek), Frank Whaley (Giles Prentice), Shaun Toub (Max), Howie Long (Kelly), Vondie Curtis-Hall (Sam Rhodes), and Kurtwood Smith (Secretary of Defense) Directed by John Woo (#030 - Face/Off)

Review
It's almost amazing how an action film can feel so familiar, feeling like other films without even trying. There's something about this film that dooms it (for me) from the start. Our two leads. Maybe its just me, but Travolta is actually more interesting to go for. With Slater I just have this mild feel for, even with the leading actress. The acting is mediocre, not too bad, but not exactly anything either. I do like Delroy Lindo though, though it may be due to missing him and his performance in Get Shorty. Oh, and Kurtwood Smith. The film's action is okay, with the usual explosions of stuff one might expect. But honestly, I have absolutely no investment in the two main plot devices (Nuclear weapons) of the film. The timecodes get switched consistantly, giving not much time to care. While Woo does a fine job directing, it's obvious that his next film after this would be better (That would be Face/Off), and while it can have some fun by Travolta, it's not one of his best. If you have zero expectations of great quality that actions films wish they could do, you might get some enjoyment.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.