Showing posts with label Meagan Good. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Meagan Good. Show all posts

October 5, 2026

Saw V.

Review #2589: Saw V.

Cast: 
Tobin Bell (Jigsaw / John Kramer), Costas Mandylor (Mark Hoffman), Scott Patterson (Agent Strahm), Betsy Russell (Jill), Julie Benz (Brit), Meagan Good (Luba), Mark Rolston (Dan Erickson), Carlo Rota (Charles), Greg Bryk (Mallick), and Laura Gordon (Ashley) Directed by David Hackl.

Review: 

Sure, every year required a Saw movie, so why should it be any different the longer that John Kramer is dead? (outlines were being prepped the month that IV came out to theaters). Making his feature film debut was David Hack; the Toronto native actually was a second unit director/production designer on the previous three films. Patrick Melton and Marcus Dunstan, the co-writers of Saw IV (2007) are here for the rest of the original run of these films, which you may remember was the one that took place basically in parallel with the third film (i.e. the one that foolishly decided to kill Amanda off). If you go by what Hackl said at the time of IV's release, there was a whole week to writing an outline, a script by the end of a month before having their little adjustments and things changed right as filming is to end (of course they had full storyboards on set, so I guess they had this stuff ready). Made on a budget of over $10 million, well, you know the movie was a big hit with October audiences.

I just look back at the first two movies and sigh at the following follow-ups that came in the wake of believing that Kramer was a vigilante (yeah, I totally never killed anyone guys, I just merely put them in traps that require somebody to cut people internally or cut themselves to get free) and also had plenty of flashbacks to tell certain people about that makes him still important to look on. At least this time around, they try to give some sort of motive and time to Hoffman (while in turn diminishing Amanda, since only one dead person can stick around in flashbacks) going around as the guy with his own game looming over his head. It just so happens to come around in a movie that has a litany of folks being wrapped up in a game that are given the bare minimum to really do (while killing off the possible most interesting person early) before setting up the inevitable sixth movie with the twist that is at least not nearly as much of a cheat this time around. I should note that having Bell around in "flashback mania" isn't exactly a criticism, since he is his usual convincing self that really does go around with the belief that his crusade is a meaningful one with unnerving conviction. Sure, it might have been more fun when it felt like a path of "hey man, I'm doing this because you don't like life" rather than "so in my flashback of how I became Jigsaw, the vigilante who totally never killed people in a long-winded plan that brings multiple accomplices in the fold...", but at least he isn't phoning it in. 

Mandylor just feels like a cipher with the bare minimum that basically handcuffs him to not being nearly as compelling of a threat as you would hope; you'd think a cop that goes around making their own Jigsaw-type devices (i.e. the one in the intro, which begs the question where he got the voice from, as it is revealed to have been done when Kramer was alive but, well, not doing stuff like that) would be more unnerving, but, well, maybe VI will actually let him breathe. It comes and goes with Patterson in the lone wolf type that makes me miss the days of Danny Glover in the first film. Of the group of new folks in the game that takes up what you might call the B-part of the film (or whatever you call this 92-minute movie), it only sounded interesting that a reporter (Rota) was among the mix of the usual people with "well, I did this one thing that led to a few people's lives being ruined" qualities. Naturally, this can't do, because he goes down the tubes quickly for the would-be final folks with Benz and Byrk and the supposed lesson learned from playing the game (I suppose it's meant to be funny that a series of tests meant to have people work together ended up going in a way where a survivor ends up murdering people anyway). The gore is on the usual level of "oh that does look painful", even if it still has the quirks of editing/color that make you occasionally roll your eyes. As a whole, Saw V doesn't elevate the series, but being a mediocre sequel is better than being an insulting one, so I suppose there are worse things in life than continuing further with whatever happens next.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

Since I'm too lazy, here's a link to each of the films reviewed in the series

Saw - the one where Cary Elwes and Danny Glover are in it for a bit before the killer arises from the ground
Saw II - the one with Donnie Wahlberg, more of Tobin Bell and that particular twist for the end
Saw III - the test of Amanda and other things
Saw IV - the mystery of the final game of the killer, at least in theory

Saw X - the one set between 1 and 2 with Jigsaw and Amanda

March 12, 2025

D.E.B.S.

Review #2357: D.E.B.S.

Cast: 
Sara Foster (Amy Bradshaw), Jordana Brewster (Lucy Diamond), Meagan Good (Max Brewer), Devon Aoki (Dominique), Jill Ritchie (Janet), Geoff Stults (Bobby Matthews), Jimmi Simpson (Scud), Holland Taylor (Ms. Petrie), Michael Clarke Duncan (Mr. Phipps), and Jessica Cauffiel (Ninotchka Kaprova) Written and Directed by Angela Robinson (#411 - Herbie: Fully Loaded)

Review: 
"I kind of “riff” on a lot of genre influences in my work, [and] in “D.E.B.S.” I’m constantly quoting other movies. It’s kind of a “mish-mash” of influences."

Sure, why not. This was the feature film debut of one Angela Robinson, a Chicago native who had made a handful of short films for nearly a decade before getting her chance with a studio movie. D.E.B.S. was actually originally a short film done in 2003 that had been sponsored by a grant from POWER UP that came from her inspiration of drawing comics when in college (she studied and graduated from Brown and NYU). The short basically was one where she "was playing with the idea of a really outrageous WB show" (so basically a riff on Charlie's Angels). The result was an a 11-minute short (released in 2003, most notably at Sundance) that Screen Gems liked enough to want to make a feature film of, complete with Robinson at the helm (Jill Ritchie was the sole returning actress from the short). The movie was released to literally less theaters than you could imagine: 45, but somehow it generated a reaction from one producer to eventually spring a deal for Robinson to direct her next film: Herbie: Fully Loaded (2005). Robinson has mostly directed in television (ironically enough, it included an episode of the failed Charlie's Angels reboot). The movie eventually sprung some sort of cult following in the "I checked it out in the video store" sense.

Okay, so we've got a movie about a secret test in the SAT that tests one on recruitment to D.E.B.S: Discipline, Energy, Beauty, Strength. I think you can see where it might lend itself to aiming for goofy parody (complete with plaid skirts), but really you could call it an offbeat romcom (a spy and a kooky criminal) with two women that just happens to be a PG-13 rated movie. It has the hit-or-miss quality in being a parody on the level of say, I'm Gonna Git You Sucka (1988), which basically means you'll either get into the movie and chuckle or will just find it a bit of a lightweight. Eh, I liked the movie fine, mainly because it had the commitment to actually go where it wanted to go without feeling like a slapdashed product, which is more than one can say for certain movies of its ilk. "Camp" or not, one will at least get the impression that Foster and Brewster are having at least some fun trying to establish a repertoire with each other; it's a "meet cute" movie that happens to have a bit of greenscreen, what's not to get? Foster is quite proud of her appearance in the film, stating once that people apparently go up to her and say that the movie made them feel "comfortable being who I am". Her shaky road to realizing what she actually wants (coming of age meets coming out?) is interesting enough to work, mostly because the movie rolls on self-realization that is at least "real". It just happens that Brewster (she's named for a song, heh) has that "it factor" when it comes to charm even in the muddle of hang-up neurosis. You get two people yearning to figure out who they are with someone around them, Brewster just is a bit funnier when accomplishing the sell (you get a scene about accidentally snapping a bra, just to point the goofy stuff). The others are fine here and there in those little side gags (not every parody has that many well-defined people besides "smokes cigarettes" anyway). You get a bit of appearance time from Duncan and Taylor that mostly fill a bit of story time (well okay, Taylor is bitingly interesting, but a regular TV viewer already knows that), which is particularly interesting to reveal that really the "secret test" is all about measuring one's ability to lie (interpret that however you like). Its cheeky enough to get away with cheap gags because it has silly fun and doesn't bite more than it can chew. The 92-minute runtime is about what you might expect in drawing every last little gag you might hear from a spoof, which is fine by me when driving off into the sunset. Ultimately, it is the kind of movie where one can be called a "gay slut" and chuckle with the shallow but committed nature that may just be up your alley, midnight movie or not.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

January 25, 2015

Movie Night: Anchorman 2: The Legend Continues.


Review #693: Anchorman 2: The Legend Continues.

Cast
Will Ferrell (Ron Burgundy), Steve Carell (Brick Tamland), Paul Rudd (Brian Fantana), David Koechner (Champ Kind), Christina Applegate (Veronica Corningstone), Dylan Baker (Freddie Shapp), Meagan Good (Linda Jackson), James Marsden (Jack Lime), Kristen Wiig (Chani Lastnamé), and Judah Nelson (Walter Burgundy) Directed by Adam McKay (#526 - Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy)

Review
Admittedly, nine years is a weird gap between films, especially for a comedy. But hey, nobody's perfect. But was is it worth it? I guess so. It's not a disappointment but in terms of fun, the first wins out. It is a likable movie, and it does flow well with itself, which are all nice little strengths, though again it nearly suffers from comparisons to the first. The movie doesn't really have much of a flaw to it, though the cameos at the end of the movie, while somewhat entertaining, almost seem too indulgent. The movie seems to be a little more injected with drama and while it is admirable to have, it's not really helping the movie all that much. It is fun to see the cast once again, and I guess it wouldn't be awful if a third movie was made. So all in all, take the movie for what it is and consider the fact this isn't a bad way to spend your time, so that's that.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.