Assassins (1995).

Review #2546: Assassins (1995).

Cast:

Sylvester Stallone (Robert Rath / Joseph Rath), Antonio Banderas (Miguel Bain), Julianne Moore (Electra / Anna), Anatoly Davydov (Nicolai Tashlinkov), Muse Watson (Ketcham), Steve Kahan (Alan Branch), Kai Wulff (Remy), Mark Coates (Jereme Kyle), Kelly Rowan (Jennifer), and Reed Diamond (Bob) Directed by Richard Donner (#075 - Scrooged, #355 - Lethal Weapon, #356 - Lethal Weapon 2, #547 - Superman, #619 - Maverick, #731 - Lethal Weapon 3, #734 - Lethal Weapon 4, #1452 - The Omen, and #1542 - 16 Blocks, #1700 - The Goonies)

Review: 

"Assassins, I thought Stallone did one of the best jobs he’s ever done. He totally underplayed, he was quiet, he found the character and he went with it. I thought Antonio Banderas was wonderful. The picture came out, and it did not do very well at all. Sure, it hurts and you know why you wish it would do better? The studio gave you a lot of money and you want them to make their money back so that other people can make movies...And I thought we did a good job and they thought we did a good job, but the audiences and critics didn’t like it. Did I feel bad? Sure. Did it get me down? Nope, nope, nope — too lucky to be in this business to be down in the dumps."

Admittedly, I picked this movie because I felt it was time to look at another Richard Donner movie. So why not go with this one, a movie released near the tail-end (16th of 20*) of a fairly interesting career? You might think the film credit for the writing is interesting because it lists the Wachowskis for the story and a co-credit with Brian Helgeland (who at the point had worked on the scripts for the fourth A Nightmare on Elm Street film, 976-EVIL, and Highway to Hell) for the screenplay. When Donner got the script from Joel Silver (who had bought the spec script along with The Matrix), he had re-writes done to it (which namely involved toning down the violence along with emphasizing the Rath-Electra storyline while not having a certain character included for the climax), which the Wachowskis did not like to the point where they tried to get their name removed from it, but the Writers Guild of America refused. Interestingly, both screenplays are available for viewing (the Wachowskis one is seen here, while the modified shooting script is seen here). Made on a reported budget for $50 million, the movie was not a huge success with audiences or critics at the time. Probably the only thing the movie ended up being noted for was a reaction shot by Banderas that became a "meme" on the Internet.

 

In some ways, it feels like a movie that is desperate to be liked. With such a limited cast of basically three (with one further person being shoehorned in for the start and end), you might be forgiven for wondering if there was a tiny bit of a Western yearning to come out (an old gunfighter wanting to retire, only to encounter one more gunfight could be seen in say, The Shootist [1976]). And there are moments that are fascinating in Stallone trying to play an understated hero to go along with a colorful Banderas. Of course, the sinking feeling of watching the film unravel around the backstretch of setting up the final  act combines with a middling Moore and an unwieldy runtime of 133 minutes for a sad disappointment that I cannot really defend beyond saying "I like the people* in it but not the vehicle they are driving." Banderas basically steals the show in the theatrics that come in "trying to be No. 1" for basic one-upmanship that desperately needs a funnier or tighter movie to really let him do his thing besides a listless one that seems to accidentally stumble into anything. He's fun, if only because it is Banderas, not so much the script or direction. Stallone could do things other than action movies, the righteous ones know that from Oscar (1991), but I do get why "subdued" isn't exactly an easy sell. Some of the time feels like doddering to try and make him sound more interesting than he needs to be, because really it could've just been a hard-lined silent type and that would work better than trying to play type with Moore, who just seems adrift in "hacker" cliches and little humor to really make for a connection beyond one you might see when stuck at the self-checkout lane at the supermarket. You would think a movie where a guy is chasing someone around in the craven pursuit of being "number one", complete with various "conversations" spent on the computer (as one does as a hired guy, talking with a supervisor) would be more interesting, but no, it's just generic stuff. For a movie with an alleged polish, it just seems all too sluggish to actually get anywhere in staging the action, particularly with a climax that relies on the adversary having to sweat out waiting to shoot a dude leaving a bank (see, because that guy did the same years ago, so it is...tasteful imitation) only to get frustrated to go the bank to confront said guy (which in turn leads to sneaking around the creaky hideout), because, yeah, okay. The twist for the end is just lazy and leads to an even lamer resolution because, screw it, we forgot to have a body count worth updating regardless of how silly it looks. As a whole, Assassins is just a bit too lazy to excel as anything other than a mediocre effort from people who can't override the feeling of watching an undercooked movie that never rises all the way above the bare minimum. It just doesn't have the milage to do better than picking any other action film of its ilk, which is a shame. It's an autopilot movie that you may or may not see some interest in if you really, really, really need to see a certain director or star all the way through. 

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

Song of the day!

*21 if you want to include Superman II: The Richard Donner Cut (2006)

*What can I say, Sylvester Stallone is a fascinating person to see in movies? Sure, I doubt I would agree  with him on say, a certain political topic, but really, how can I turn away from seeing whatever ridiculous stuff he starred/directed? And Moore, well, I love women.

The Goonies.

Review #1700: The Goonies.

Cast: 

Sean Astin (Michael "Mikey" Walsh), Josh Brolin (Brandon "Brand" Walsh), Jeff Cohen (Lawrence "Chunk" Cohen), Corey Feldman (Clark "Mouth" Devereaux), Jonathan Ke Huy Quan (Richard "Data" Wang), Kerri Green (Andrea Theresa "Andy" Carmichael), Martha Plimpton (Stephanie "Stef" Steinbrenner), John Matuszak (Lotney "Sloth" Fratelli), Anne Ramsey (Mama Fratelli), Robert Davi (Jake Fratelli), Joe Pantoliano (Francis Fratelli), Mary Ellen Trainor (Irene Walsh), Keith Walker (Irving Walsh), Steve Antin (Troy Perkins), and Lupe Ontiveros (Rosalita) Directed by Richard Donner (#075 - Scrooged, #355 - Lethal Weapon, #356 - Lethal Weapon 2, #547 - Superman, #619 - Maverick, #731 - Lethal Weapon 3, #734 - Lethal Weapon 4, #1452 - The Omen, #1542 - 16 Blocks)

Review: 

Richard Donner was a director that managed to channel a long career in film through his versatility and consistency. He honed his craft through television in the late 1950s and the 1960s while making his start in film with X-15 (1961) before having his breakthrough with The Omen (1976) that continued with the film that defined superhero adaptation for a generation with Superman (1978). He directed twenty films from 1961 to 2006 alongside taking time to produce films with his wife Lauren with the Donners' Company before his recent passing early this month. The Goonies was the eighth feature directed by Donner, and it certainly serves as one of the most interesting collaborations between filmmakers, if you think about it. Steven Spielberg contributed the story (which was his last story credit until A.I. Artificial Intelligence in 2001) while also serving as executive producer with Amblin Entertainment as the main production company, while Chris Columbus (best known for his work on Gremlins the year before) wrote the screenplay (the second of three collaborations as writer to an Amblin production, which closed with Young Sherlock Holmes the same year). I will admit that the curiosity for watching this film has varied wildly over the past few years, although some movies slip by the cracks when you grow up past being a kid (which happened about over a thousand reviews ago). But hey, I guess one needs imagination now and then, whether that involves riding bikes with friends, them telling you about big events in their life so you don't hear it second-hand, saving the community, or pirate treasure involving dead pirates. It depends on how much one can dwell on the adventure and the craftsmanship taken to get to that point in the guise of a movie for kids with plenty of syrupy tone to go around. If you thought E.T. the Extra Terrestrial (1982) was too odd to try and experience for oneself in terms of "connected" aliens for the kid at heart, why not go a different direction with a tilt awhirl of feel-good adolescence? At least one can't say that the vision of the director isn't consumed by the habits of their producer (this is more true for other features with Spielberg as a producer with Tobe Hooper's Poltergeist (1982) or Joe Dante's Gremlins (1984), for example). While there were rumblings of a potential follow-up for a number of years, no sequel has come from it (or even a remake), which seems to be appropriate no matter how much one likes the film (because, really, who needs to break the illusion?).

This is one of those movies that could be thought of as "classic-proof" to those who like it. For me, I just call it "okay-proof" and shrug my shoulders. The level of enjoyment depends on the level of patience one has for the contrivances displayed on screen (maps in the attic that happen to lead to treasure, the amount of booby traps in the road to the ship, finding jewels right before a big signing moment, et cetera). It likely hasn't aged as well as other highlight films that grabbed the attention of its audiences in the 1980s, but it does manage to have an appeal within a game cast and some interest in maintaining adventure after a sluggish start that will surely leave one satisfied enough with the concoction brewed by Donner. The kids are kids, really. I think at least one of the kids will remind you of yourself, so I suppose that is more of a compliment than if I was instead bored by syrupy sentiment or self indulgency, and this is for a film where four of its main seven kid actors are making their film debut (Astin, Brolin, Green, Cohen) and the most experienced actor is Feldman. In that sense, Brolin stands out the best among the fresh folks, mostly because his beleaguered elder presence is the most refreshing to see through the film, which is then followed by Plimpton, who provides fair timing to accommodate a mild Green (with milder chemistry shared against Brolin). Astin is fine, in the sense that he holds well to the quivering balance of adventure and goofball folks without seeming like a slam brand of bland man (of course, the scene at the well is hit-and-miss for me, but hey, if it is indeed your time, go ahead). Cohen did exactly one feature film before eventually deciding to study law, so I think it all makes out well for some decent comic relief that is more than just "haha Truffle shuffle". Feldman maneuvers fine in mouthy charm, while Quan gets to have a few chuckles with the gadget sight gag cycle. Sure, the kids are fine and all, but I find the adult trio of Ramsey-Davi-Pantoliano to be far more curious to view from time to time, particularly if one views them as a prototype for the foils in Home Alone (1990; Columbus did co-write the script for the film, after all). Ramsey generates a few chuckles for what is needed in that friendly balance of cartoon and cruelty that results in plenty of curiosity and moments to view with brazen warmth. The same goes for Davi and Pantoliano, each of which clearly had bigger and better roles to come when it comes to cultivate distinct presences beyond just "the heavy" (which works when using a trained singer doing opera for a joke). Football player-turned-actor Matuszak plays the heavy with the right balance of strength and timing to not become just an effects-show. Honestly, the best parts of the movie come out best when the film doesn't turn on the hokum full blast; it is nice film to look at when it comes to its trek across the water for a ship, and seeing a bunch of skeletons around does at least make the danger seem apparent to make sure one isn't too lost in syrupy antics for gold. It can be fun for those who want to have fun with it, and that will surely work enough for those who buy into the execution of a few gags of humor to go with its eventual end shot, which I admit is a nice touch. I can't quite go so far as to label it as a refined classic, but the lasting appeal has been there in the 36 years that have followed its release for those in need of movies with "heart", if you will.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

16 Blocks.

Review #1542: 16 Blocks.

Cast: 
Bruce Willis (Det. Jack Mosley), Mos Def (Edward "Eddie" Bunker), David Morse (Det. Frank Nugent), Jenna Stern (Diane Mosley), Casey Sander (Capt. Dan Gruber), Cylk Cozart (Det. Jimmy Mulvey), David Zayas (Det. Robert "Bobby" Torres), Robert Racki (Det. Jerry Shue), Patrick Garrow (Det. Touhey), and Sasha Roiz (Det. Kaller) Directed by Richard Donner (#075 - Scrooged, #355 - Lethal Weapon, #356 - Lethal Weapon 2, #547 - Superman, #619 - Maverick, #731 - Lethal Weapon 3, #734 - Lethal Weapon 4, and #1452 - The Omen)

Review: 
"I think as filmmakers, we all kind of reflect who we are, what we stand for, how we treat the whole relationship of motion pictures. My wife is a really great producer, and she always says to me, when you’re making a movie, and you’re hiring the director, invariably, the director’s personality comes across on the screen."

Perhaps the saying that goes right with this film is that some old habits die hard, particularly when it comes to prominent actors or directors. This is the 20th feature film directed by Donner (and first since Timeline three years prior) and as of now is his last effort as director. This is the third writing effort of Richard Wenk (Vamp (1986) and Just the Ticket (1998), which he also directed) with the original intent of also taking on directing before Donner became interested in doing the film himself. What better pairing for an action thriller than usual favorite Willis, child-actor-turned-rapper Mos Def and Morse (best known for St. Elsewhere and various character roles)? Sure, why not a film about keeping time and focus on just a few characters. Of course the film has also been compared to Clint Eastwood's The Gauntlet (1977), which from a description I read about the film involved a weary cop trying to escort a witness (a prostitute, who he falls for) to survival while dealing with trouble from cops (hence a "gauntlet" of them). I don't know if that film has its own shuffling of clichés like this film does, but then again one wonders when they will get tired of cop movies like if the talent doesn't live up to standard. But there's a simple fact that remains when it comes to films in the 20th or 21st century: it may be familiar in the faces or some of its story beats, but I generally found this to be a decent experience, one that hits the right boxes with a charming enough main trio and enough competent moves to justify its 102 minutes despite being one of Donner's most average works.

One starts easily with Willis, who certainly has had quite a progression of curiosity and charisma since his days of Moonlighting and Die Hard in the 1980s. He eventually progressed to a version of the weary cop routine in Die Hard with a Vengeance (1995, a film that either ranks as the best sequel to the original or as the silliest) and other various roles that make for an interesting way to age as an actor, which when given focus can result in something interesting. In this sense, he seems to be having a good time in making a weary role like this work with conviction. He moves on the edge with burnout that nevertheless is easy to go along with without falling into disrepair. Def (who had a few supporting roles in films like Bamboozled (2000) and Monster's Ball (2001) alongside TV work) follows along with another cliché as the motormouth accomplice, but this works itself out in that Def actually proves himself quite well in making a rapport with Willis stick with care and honesty that make a few worthy barbs and other moments that help to sell a film about trying to make change in their life stick. Morse proves a worthy enough adversary (or at least one that follows the idea of a person that we can at least believe thinks they are right without dismissing it immediately) in carefully-planned menace that generally keeps things rolling in pursuit that sells himself well without having to ham things up or become an action cliché to be ignored. On the whole, the film moves along with a reasonable pace and handling of its characters with enjoyment and patience that tries to find itself out of the muck of the genres it is in alongside burst of sentiment and just ekes out safely with at least some basic satisfaction. For me, I thought it was a fine movie, wrapped in a degree of familiarity that will either make for an alright time or will just hamper it in mediocrity. Whatever works best is the way to go, I would say.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

The Omen (1976).

Review #1452: The Omen.

Cast: 
Gregory Peck (Robert Thorn), Lee Remick (Katherine Thorn), David Warner (Keith Jennings), Billie Whitelaw (Mrs. Willa Baylock), Harvey Spencer Stephens (Damien Thorn), Patrick Troughton (Father Brennan), Martin Benson (Father Spiletto), Leo McKern (Carl Bugenhagen), Robert Rietti (Monk), John Stride (The Psychiatrist), and Anthony Nicholls (Dr. Fred Becker) Directed by Richard Donner (#075 - Scrooged, #355 - Lethal Weapon, #356 - Lethal Weapon 2, #547 - Superman, #619 - Maverick, #731 - Lethal Weapon 3, and #734 - Lethal Weapon 4)

Review: 
"With The Omen, I really felt I wasn't in control. It was panic...It was constantly on my head. I was scared, and I didn't want to disappoint Alan Ladd, who had trusted me."

When you think of good horror films, what comes to your mind first? Maybe it involves something involving the possible Antichrist, or some straight-laced acting, or maybe something with occasional gore that will sneak up on you with creeping terror without being too wretchedly scary. It should only figure that its director would receive a breakthrough with making it in Richard Donner (his next feature in Superman. He had an initial interest in acting, doing a few Off-Broadway productions and bit parts before being encouraged by Martin Ritt to try his hand at directing. In the 1960s, he would cultivate a modest career of directing television with shows such as The Rifleman (1962, seven episodes), Mr. Novak (1963-64, also seven), and The Twilight Zone (1963-64, six episodes). He made his feature debut with X-15 (1961) and followed it with a few other films in Salt and Pepper (1968) and Twinky (1969). There were quite a few actors who rejected starring as the lead for this film, ranging from Charlton Heston to Dick Van Dyke (no, not joking), and William Holden (who would star in the sequel four years later), although Warner Brothers initially considered doing this film with Oliver Reed in mind before 20th Century Fox later developed interest after Donner had seen the script and convinced Fox head Alan Ladd Jr to look over the script and take it on (albeit with reduction of elements that was felt to be too obvious, like cloven hoofs). David Seltzer was behind the screenplay, which took a year to write after inspiration came to producer Harvey Bernhard from his friend Bob Munger. Donner described in an interview how he approached Peck to do the film in treating it as a "mystery suspense thriller" rather than straight horror, which convinced Peck to sign on.

The best thing that can be said about the film is that it does manage to build a sense of foreboding to make a useful experience with consistent acting, top-rate music from Jerry Goldsmith and worthwhile moments of horror terror that make a decent if not exceptional horror film for its time. I suppose it really depends on how much one knows about its threat of evil (or at least the possibility of it, since this is a child we are talking about) when it comes to stoking true tension without waiting for the inevitable. I do wonder how this might compare to Rosemary's Baby (1968), which dealt with the possibility of a newborn being the spawn of a jackal to be used by cultists (or at least that's what I read from browsing). The film builds itself on carrying itself calmly to where you will presumably will let your guard down when something scary could befall someone in connecting the dots to the idea that yes indeed there is something wrong with this dark-haired little gremlin child, as if one might actually believe that we are going to be faked out at the last minute. It just depends on what seems the most interesting in whether the parts with the family seem more involving than the hunt for clues for evil, where one can either spend time with Peck and Remick, or see Peck and Warner. Peck is interesting, in the sense that he is taking things with a good grain of salt that doesn't crush the film's credibility nor make things a bore. Remick does fine, albeit with slightly less to do when comparing the first and second halves (though the zoo sequence is pretty amusing). Whitelaw makes a fair adversarial presence to nurture Stephens (who when prompted to go at Donner during the auditions like the others apparently screamed and clawed at him) to the other side without too much silliness. Warner follows along with quiet foreboding. Really though the most interesting small presence is Troughton (best known for his television work in programs such as Doctor Who), who is quite interesting in generating furor in small doses (before having to run away from foreboding weather, of course). This is a film caught between two worlds: On the one hand, it is a dignified kind of film that has plenty of production value to elevate what could've been very hokey in schlockier hands. On the other hand, it is the kind of film that runs for 111 minutes with a concept of horror rather than a true finish, where it only just works as a thriller if you aren't already incredibly familiar with what it is trying to sell you about a main threat of a five year old who could be the Antichrist (insert jokes about him coming to power in politics here). The ending is downbeat enough to make the idea potentially spring further into something more concrete (for which two sequels and an apparent line-by-line remake followed), and on the whole this makes for satisfactory entertainment worth a curious look.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Lethal Weapon 4.

Review #734: Lethal Weapon 4.

Cast
Mel Gibson (Martin Riggs), Danny Glover (Roger Murtaugh), Jet Li (Wah Sing Ku), Rene Russo (Lorna Cole), Joe Pesci (Leo Getz), Chris Rock (Detective Lee Butters), Kim Chan (Uncle Benny Chan), Steve Kahan (Captain Ed Murphy), Calvin Jung (Detective Ng), Jack Kehler (U.S. State Department Official), and Eddy Ko (Hong) Directed by Richard Donner (#075 - Scrooged, #355 - Lethal Weapon, #356 - Lethal Weapon 2, #547 - Superman, #619 - Maverick, and #731 - Lethal Weapon 3)

Review
It's hard to say how I feel about finally finishing this series of films. On the one hand, the first two movies are really, really excellent buddy cop movies. On the other hand, the last two don't exactly cut it. It really is hard to stay fresh when you've already done three films. Remember how I said the last movie had a lack of punch? This film essentially is a sucker punch when it comes to action, though the effectiveness of it all depends on the audience. It does have a good deal of night-time action, and even Riggs and Murtaugh get bloodied up, which I guess is some sort of variety (seriously, they have more than just bruises - one's on crutches!), and shows that...yeah, they really too old for this-you get the idea. But was this film really necessary? I suppose if you like fours, sure. The cast is fine, and Gibson-Glover is about enjoyable as they have been earlier. Russo is given barely any time, but she does fine. Li doesn't speak too much, though at least he knows how to beat the snot out of people. Is he a good villain? Not really, but at least he puts up a fight. Pesci and Rock are (mostly) endearing, being relevant to the plot just enough. The underlying problem with the movie is that it isn't as funny (or fun) to watch. Remember the toiler bomb scene in the 2nd movie? It was funny, in a movie that really set the bar for action-comedy. In this? Murtaugh's house gets burned down, and unless being saved by a kid is funny, that whole sequence to me just sums the relative lack of fun emitted in this one. Sure, there is a scene with laughing gas that is fun (unless you've already seen people laughing and laughing over and over *cough* Fresh Prince of Bel-Air), but the action and tone pretty much suffocate the movie. The opening sequence is entertaining, and even the ending is poignant enough, but the movie isn't so lucky. Don't get me wrong: This is not a bad movie. It is entertaining, though not so much as before. At least it is a good way to end the series, no matter any attempts Hollywood will try in remaking the magic.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

Lethal Weapon 3.

Review #731: Lethal Weapon 3.

Cast
Mel Gibson (Martin Riggs), Danny Glover (Roger Murtaugh), Rene Russo (Lorna Cole), Stuart Wilson (Jack Travis), Joe Pesci (Leo Getz), Steve Kahan (Captain Murphy), Darlene Love (Trish Murtaugh), Ebonie Smith (Carrie Murtaugh), and Nick Chinlund (Hatchett) Directed by Richard Donner (#075 - Scrooged, #355 - Lethal Weapon, #356 - Lethal Weapon 2, #547 - Superman, and #619 - Maverick)

Review
Compared to the two previous Lethal Weapon movies, Lethal Weapon 3 isn't as good. But that's not saying it's not a good movie. It doesn't have the same punch as the first two movies, but the banter between Gibson and Glover combined with good entertaining action push the movie to respectability. If you liked the first two films, you'll like this one too, though admittedly not as much. It's not as if there's any terrible characters, in fact I love Russo's character, mainly because it's nice to see another person kick some people to the ground. Or maybe because I prefer her over Pesci's character. This time around, he's not as helpful but at least he's in the movie in limited quantities. In fact, Pesci's character wasn't in the original script, but added in later, which explains the "pop ins" he does. At least he doesn't grate on your nerves too much. The villain this time around isn't half-bad, though I won't probably remember too much of him. I do like his introduction in which he deals with an employee...with cement. It's always nice to see Gibson and Glover together because they make a good pair and have some fun that rolls with the audience. Take this for what it's worth, which is pretty good.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Maverick.

Review #619: Maverick.

Cast
Mel Gibson (Bret Maverick), Jodie Foster (Annabelle Bransford), James Garner (Marshal Zane Cooper), Graham Greene (Joseph), Alfred Molina (Angel), James Coburn (Commodore Duvall), Geoffrey Lewis (Matthew Wicker), Paul L. Smith (The Archduke), and Max Perlich (Johnny Hardin) Directed by Richard Donner (#355 - Lethal Weapon, #356 - Lethal Weapon 2, and #547 - Superman)

Review
The movie is based off the classic television show of the same name, which also had the late great James Garner in it. The movie uses a trio of actors that manage to do a great job together, especially Gibson and Garner, they share a really good act with each other and Foster is also excellent, very clever and very intriguing to watch. But what makes the movie just so awesome is how it manages to be not only a fine action movie, but also a good comedy as well, making for a really entertaining film. The supporting cast is delightful to watch, especially Molina and Coburn. They're practically irresistible to watch, even Coburn's beard. The card games are interesting to watch, even the riverboat is great to look at, it just looks so beautiful. This is a Western that just has fun, and it's a pleasure to see Garner and all of his charm in a film like this. It's a fantastic film that manages to not just a other adaptation of a TV show, it's a movie of its own that is just so fun.

On a sadder note, I would like to say rest in peace to James Garner, who died just two days ago. We will all miss James Garner, but we will always have movies (#559 - Grand Prix, The Thrill of It All, The Great Escape, Space Cowboys, etc) and TV shows (The Rockford Files, 8 Simple Rules) to remember him for, with his charm being especially one that will last forever.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Superman (1978).

Review #547: Superman.

Cast
Marlon Brando (Jor-El), Gene Hackman (Lex Luthor), Christopher Reeve (Clark Kent/Superman), Margot Kidder (Lois Lane), Ned Beatty (Otis), Jackie Cooper (Perry White), Glenn Ford (Jonathan Kent), Valerie Perrine (Eve Teschmacher), Phyllis Thaxter (Martha Kent), Trevor Howard (First Elder), Maria Schell (Vond-Ah), and Terence Stamp (General Zod) Directed by Richard Donner (#075 - Scrooged, #355 - Lethal Weapon, and #356 - Lethal Weapon 2)

Review
Of all the comic book movies I've done on this...show, I suppose, the one glaring omission has been the Superman franchise. Superman was the first major superhero feature movie made (Side note here: There had been three serials made before this movie, such as Superman (1948), Atom Man vs. Superman (1950), and Superman and the Mole Men (1951), along with animated shorts made by Fleischer Studios, a radio and television series), and the movie's success would lead to more superhero films. But anyway, how is the film itself? Let's start with the actors. Brando does well for the small amount of time he has, and his speech to his newborn son is effective, but also powerful. Hackman is a decent villain, he does pair well with Beatty, who isn't half bad in a supporting role. Christopher Reeve is just perfect in both roles, managing to act well enough to make these two personalities stand out effectively. Kidder is good, she pairs off well with Reeve, and the scene where Superman takes Lane on a flight is a really good scene that only shows the emotion the movie has. The movie has excellent effects and manages to tell a good story with only a few bumps along the way. The ending either makes Superman's character fully defined...or a cop out that is actually more confusing in how it works then infuriating. I think it's more of both, it defines that Clark/Superman is here for a reason, a point mentioned by Kent's adoptive father, in contrast to Jor-El's warning about changing history. Superman finds his destiny, and it does make sense, though the time traveling part boggles my mind. Endings aside, the movie is a fine epic that succeeds in nearly everyway possible.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Lethal Weapon 2.

Review #356: Lethal Weapon 2.

Cast
Mel Gibson (Martin Riggs), Danny Glover (Roger Murtaugh), Joe Pesci (Leo Getz), Joss Ackland (Arjen Rudd), Derrick O'Connor (Pieter Vorstedt), Patsy Kensit (Rika Van Den Haas), Darlene Love (Trish Murtaugh), Traci Wolfe (Rianne Murtaugh), Steve Kahan (Captain Murphy), Mark Rolston (Hans), and Jenette Goldstein (Meagan Shapiro) Directed by Richard Donner.

Review
Lethal Weapon 2 is a film that in the end manages to hold up to the first one in many ways, with twists of its own. To begin with, Gibson and Glover do well, but the twist to this is the addition of Joe Pesci (part of the "Sequel-Character" Rule, where a film's sequel has added a new character to affect or help out in the story.), who..does a fine job. Maybe it's because I can handle his aspects of acting in the film better than Chris Tucker in Rush Hour. Come to think of it, this is more entertaining than the Rush Hour films, with a better to story to boot. This story is allright, weaving the good parts of the first with unusually more comedy aspects that make this an entertaining flick that keeps the magic of the first film alive.

Overall, I give it 10 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Lethal Weapon.

Review #355: Lethal Weapon.

Cast
Mel Gibson (Martin Riggs), Danny Glover (Roger Murtaugh), Gary Busey (Mr. Joshua), Mitchell Ryan (Peter McAllister), Tom Atkins (Michael Hunsaker), Darlene Love (Trish Murtaugh), Jackie Swanson (Amanda Hunsaker), Traci Wolfe (Rianne Murtaugh), Damon Hines (Nick Murtaugh), and Ebonie Smith (Carrie Murtaugh) Directed by Richard Donner (#075 - Scrooged)

Review
This has a lot going for it, especially with the two main characters and the villain. Gibson and Glover work especially well, as a duo for some laughs and as a double team, which is magnified by the action. Oddly enough, Gary Busey does a fine job as...a villain. Last I reviewed him he was Buddy Holly, so its a bit of a change. But it works. The rest of the cast is good as well, keeping the pace going. The film manages to have some gags that do manage to not get in the way of the action. It's a strange, but good feeling. The story is fine, and the directing is effective. After all these years and some sequels, this hangs well, managing to live on and on. I'm not getting too old for this stuff...

Overall, I give it 10 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Scrooged.

Review #075: Scrooged.

Cast
Bill Murray (Francis Xavier "Frank" Cross), Karen Allen (Claire Phillips), John Forsythe (Lew Hayward), John Glover (Brice Cummings), Alfre Woodard (Grace Cooley), Bobcat Goldthwait (Eliot Loudermilk), David Johansen (the Ghost of Christmas Past), Carol Kane (the Ghost of Christmas Present), Robert Mitchum (Preston Rhinelander), Nicholas Phillips (Calvin Cooley), and Michael J. Pollard (Herman) Directed by Richard Donner.

Review
This film is a humorous take on the classic Charles Dickens tale, A Christmas Carol. It is a decent flick that makes sure that it doesn't do bad in its job. Murray does a good preformance. This film isn't exactly a good film in the sense that it doesn't really do much other then what it's supposed to do (It decides to pick this theme rather then another), but it at least tried to be entertaining, and while it may not have been as funny as it could've been, it at least tried.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.