Speed Racer.

Review #2574: Speed Racer.

Cast: 

Emile Hirsch (Speed Racer; Nicholas Elia as Young Speed Racer), Christina Ricci (Trixie; Ariel Winter as Young Trixie), John Goodman (Pops Racer), Susan Sarandon (Mom Racer), Matthew Fox (Racer X / Rex Racer; Scott Porter as Young Rex Racer), Roger Allam (E.P. Arnold Royalton), Paulie Litt (Spritle Racer), Benno Fürmann (Inspector Detector), Hiroyuki Sanada (Mr. Musha), Rain (Taejo Togokahn), Richard Roundtree (Ben Burns), Kick Gurry (Sparky), John Benfield (Cruncher Block), Christian Oliver (Snake Oiler), Ralph Herforth (Jack "Cannonball" Taylor), Yu Nan (Horuko Togokahn), Nayo K. Wallace (Minx), and Melvil Poupaud (Johnny "Goodboy" Jones) Directed by The Wachowskis (#1272 - The Matrix)

Review: 

"We had that exact conversation so many times.  The whole impetus for 'Speed Racer' came out of the fact that we are visually-thinking people.  We go to art galleries and art museums all the time.  We go into the Art Institute and every room there, there are paintings that look completely and utterly different from the other rooms.  But in cinema, everything looks the same.  And it's a really aggressive straight-jacket, aesthetically.  We started talking about cubism, for instance, and we started talking about could you make a cubist film?  And we realized that if you try to make a cubist film for adults, you will end up like Picasso, running from the angry mob when he first showed Guernica.  They wanted to kill him.  Literally.  It's because adults… they reject change, and an aesthetic change is too aggressive a death for them.  Every generation experiences aesthetic death, and when you really assault an aesthetic, people freak out.  But we said that kids are okay with aesthetic change." - The Wachowskis

Not all adaptations are created equal. It was originally known as Mach GoGoGo in its native Japan that was created by Tatsuo Yoshida, who previously did an automobile racing comic with Pilot Ace. It started out as a manga in 1966 and became its own anime in 1967 that took inspiration from Viva Las Vegas (specifically the image shown with Elvis) and Goldfinger. The American localization changed it to Speed Racer (which saw the character "Go Mifune" morph into "Speed Racer") with plenty of editing and dubbing from Peter Fernandez. Sure, there were various TV adaptations of the franchise in the years that followed with The New Adventures of Speed Racer (1993), Mach GoGoGo/Speed Racer X (1997), and Speed Racer: The Next Generation (2008; made to promote the film), but, well, I think you see which one stuck around in people's heads (for me, I've seen clips of the 60s show, namely ones that make light of the English dub that selectively use clips that make it sound like Speed is a sociopath). As early as 1992, Warner Bros. wanted to make a movie adaptation, and over the years the project saw various turnover (Johnny Depp was once cast as the title character, for example). Eventually, by 2006, the folks who recently finished the Matrix trilogy (at the time) in the Wachowskis were hired to write and direct in what became quite the spectacle. Speed Racer came out on May 9, 2008, premiering the same week as What Happens in Vegas...and one week after Iron Man, and I think you know which movie ended up being the big hit of its time (yep, Vegas-nah, just kidding, it actually was Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, which premiered two weeks after Racer with its own type of curiosity*). The next movie of the Wachowskis came with Cloud Atlas (2012), which coincidentally has its own small following.

It's easy to see where the line between "oh hey, the movie is doing this!" and "oh, the movie is really doing this" gets blurred with this movie many, many, many times over. There were parts where one can either roll along with in its "sensibility" or just roll their eyes, such as say, its fluid transitions, its top-heavy fiddling of exposition, or the wavering interest in these characters (if Spritle and Chim Chim fell into a pit, would you miss them? Or Sparky the mechanic?). I pondered over what I experienced with seeing the movie and honestly, I'll give it credit for its passion even I really wanted a bit more. It wants to be bold, it wants to be colorful, it wants to stick out, it wants to just be its thing, and yet somehow, in all of its car-fu and "modern sensibility", it is more of a "good" movie on the track (reminding me of, say, Grand Prix [1966]) than off it. For whatever reason, for me, at least, it just is a much more interesting movie when it tries to be creative about a car race would look if designed by an insane person with green screen as opposed to when it tries to be cute in its dialogue (honestly, when playing with little toy cars as a kid, I was more of a line-'em-up guy more than "here's the story involving guys telling their evil plan" guy). Hirsch is given the job of trying to make a mountain out of a molehill with a role that doesn't really have for him to really do when not in the Mach 5, but at least his earnest innocence does come out for some enjoyment (incidentally, he remains proud of the film). Sure, one wishes they had a little more time to spend with Ricci or the delightful ham in Allam (who among us haven't seen a corporate overlord being a twerp right in front of people and trying to skate along anyway?); Goodman seems to be having a bit more fun than, say, Sarandon, for example.

It just goes and goes for 135 minutes, and you either admire its tenacity (i.e. the equivalent of running around and making stuff up) or you just wait for it to shut up and flush. As silly as it sounds, either give me a racing movie that really does me care about Speed and the dynamic of, take your pick (Speed and his offbeat parents, Speed and his totally-dead brother Racer X*,, or, and this is just taking this too seriously, a dynamic that doesn't stall as long as humanly possible on Speed and Trixie doing the art of kissing*). Sitting around gawking at what is shown from the cars beyond the usual four-wheel action probably would make an interesting experience. You either find its conclusion one of triumph and go (speed racer) for it or go (speed racer) for the remote, and I would say, hey, I could go (speed racer go) enough to say it was worth one viewing. It goes all out for those to see and hear to the point of near-insanity and you probably will at least get where some might call it a "cult classic". I'm not sure if I would see it again, but I at least can say it was worth one trip. It overwhelms and rewards the curious (perhaps now more than ever), for better or worse.

  

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Song of the day #1

Song of the day #2, for obvious reasons

Next up: Looking back at a movie I wasn't too big on the first time...

*Remember when trying to survive a nuclear explosion in a lead-lined fridge was a thing to whine about? Looking back, yea, Kingdom of the Crystal Skull was pretty neat, and I'll stand on that hill with pride.

*Wonder if the English adaptation was inspired by Son of Dracula with R...a...c...E...r...X.

*Hell, why stop there? Let's just go full crass and have Speed and Trixie do it right on the race track. Sure, you lose the kid market, but you would have a key experiment: can you make a racing movie where the O doesn't automatically stand for octane? On second thought, maybe I should just watch Crash (1996) at some point in time, I keep hearing that movie is sick as hell. I hope you understand that, yes, I love throwing stuff out for notes. 

City Heat.

Review #2567: City Heat.

Cast: 

Clint Eastwood (Lieutenant Speer), Burt Reynolds (Mike Murphy), Jane Alexander (Addy), Madeline Kahn (Caroline Howley), Rip Torn (Primo Pitt), Beau Starr (Pitt Lookout), Irene Cara (Ginny Lee), Richard Roundtree (Diehl Swift), Tony Lo Bianco (Leon Coll), William Sanderson (Lonnie Ash), Nicholas Worth (Troy Roker), Robert Davi (Nino), Art LaFleur ("Bruiser"), Arthur Malet (Doc Loomis), and Jack Nance (Aram Strossell) Directed by Richard Benjamin (#1024 - My Favorite Year)

Review: 

I have to admit, the key impetus to actually watching this movie was the fact that it was on a DVD pack, specifically a Clint Eastwood set (paired with Pink Cadillac, of all things). Sure, Eastwood is a curious presence, why not try a comedy? I didn't have enough time to see it back in 2024, but it sure seems time to actually watch what all the fuss is about. Blake Edwards penned the original story (once called "Kansas City Jazz") in the 1970s and it eventually found its way to Warner Bros. wanting to have Edwards direct Reynolds and Eastwood together (previously, Edwards directed Reynolds with The Man Who Loved Women [1983]) Somehow, Eastwood had disagreements over the script and his character and Edwards was soon replaced with Richard Benjamin; this was the second of two movies directed by Benjamin to come out in 1984 after Racing with the Moon. According to Reynolds, Eastwood was fine with Benjamin replacing Edwards while saying the dismissal "hurt [Eastwood] badly". Reynolds claimed that he knew the film was going down the tubes ten days into shooting because he saw his role as such: "playing Jack Lemmon in this strange film where people were getting blown away...The public wanted Boom Town or to see us in a contemporary film. They didn't want Dirty Harry vs. the Wimp." As a result of an accident (reported as either a metal chair to the face or falling from a chair and hitting his jaw), this was not a happy experience for Reynolds. As a result, Joseph C. Stinson was credited as a co-writer of the screenplay with "Samuel O. Brown" (get it? S...O...B.?). Expected to be a big hit with a budget of $25 million and released on the same week as Beverly Hills Cop and 2010 in December 1984, the movie made roughly $38 million as a considerable disappointment. Benjamin kept on as a director with films of extremely varied quality such as The Money Pit (1986), Mermaids (1990), and Marci X (2003).

This might be the most obvious case of seeing a movie and watching it die in real time. Sometimes it looks nice and sometimes it comes off as a comedy and sometimes it has some violence worth being in a buddy action movie...but it never comes off as a complete package. For such a "buddy movie", it just seems more like two short films that got cobbled together, with Reynolds seemingly having the more thankless job of trying to carry a film in doing silly lines and getting beat up a bit while Eastwood basically goes "nope" and "yep". Even being a sendup of the gangster movie isn't that fun because the movie just dawdles for 97 minutes with a blithering plot and little else to go which goes as such: two gangs want this briefcase of records but the guy who stole it ends up dead and a game of "where's the briefcase?" tangles up a cop and cop-turned-private eye into an alliance to not only avenge the dead man & his injured girl but also to rescue both of their would-be lovers (as you do) that ends up in both gangs getting plenty of bullets and fire in them. For such a star-studded cast, it's amazing to make a movie that just feels so small. Sometimes I chuckled, sometimes I rolled my eyes: it's the ultimate 6/10 movie, arguably.

The fact that the movie almost gets to a quality finish line is more of a testament to Reynolds than Eastwood, arguably. I've had a soft spot for Reynolds for a number of years because of the varying heights that came with such a fascinating movie star that I knew was going to make for a curious experience when watching a stinker such as, say, this movie or Stroker Ace (released in 1983 that has been cited as the starting point of his downturn as a star). He may have been approaching middle age with shaky ground in terms of public appearance of his charm (his next movie ended up being the misfire Stick [1985]), but I liked what I saw of him here in the same way that one admires the hokum of someone trying to retain the appearance of legitimacy and virility. This is basically important to at least giving the movie a shot (grinning in the face of mediocrity, an American tradition?), because Eastwood and his routine that comes off as dry with the bare minimum in trying to make a pair that might accidentally make you appreciate The Rookie (1990) in the future of mismatched duos. Eastwood looks like he wants to be anywhere else than here and being a "can take this corny crap in stride" is not a compliment. It also extends to Alexander and Kahn, who are each given thankless tasks to pair off the two male leads that goes nowhere in actual charm (Kahn basically vanishes for a good chunk of the film too, making it even harder, but at least she is paired with Reynolds in...trying to do something). Roundtree and Cara are needlessly given little to actually do (besides being hit by a car), and Alexander being on the bottom edge of the totem pole of "what do they actually do?" is less helpful when you wonder why Torn or Davi are just...there. Whether because of Benjamin or studio arrogance of going "Eastwood and Reynolds, what could go wrong for printing money?" or something else, they never come off as much of a team together. As a whole, City Heat came and went with audiences and hasn't exactly rocketed in reputation four decades later. Flawed as it may be, you could find something curious here. 

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

Song of the day!

Next up: A mystery...

*Truthfully, Reynolds was already on my mind for this month with, say, Rent-a-Cop or Striptease. 

Inchon.

Review #1763: Inchon.

Cast: 

Laurence Olivier (General Douglas MacArthur), Jacqueline Bisset (Barbara Hallsworth), Ben Gazzara (Major Frank Hallsworth), Toshiro Mifune (Saito), Richard Roundtree (Sergeant Augustus Henderson), David Janssen (David Feld), Namkoong Won (Park), Karen Kahn (Lim), and Rex Reed (Longfellow) Directed by Terence Young (#150 - Dr. No, #278 - From Russia with Love, and #335 - Thunderball)

Review: 

In a way, sometimes a movie gets a reputation because of production troubles or bad word-of-mouth (traditional movies, anyway, although ones outside the mainstream can get through that regardless). Inchon was a perfect storm that has never managed to live down its infamy in the four decades that have passed since it was released. The movie is based on the events that occurred during the Battle of Inchon in South Korea, which occurred from September 10-19, 1950 (the city is referred to today as Incheon, as the country changed their Romanization system for names in 2000), with the amphibious assault being led by Douglas MacArthur, Commander in Chief of United Nations Forces; the battle is considered a key point of the Korean War. MacArthur had been the subject of one previous feature with a biopic that was released four years prior that was directed by Joseph Sargent that had Gregory Peck as the general; the next film to detail the battle wouldn't occur for three decades in Operation Chromite (2016). Of course, the sticking point for a film like this is one that doesn't tie to its international cast or its noted director. Instead, it ties down to five words: Special advisor Sun Myung Moon. Well, since this is a movie review, we can't exactly talk about Moon beyond a few short sentences: For one, he was an anti-communist Korean that formed the Unification Church in 1954, and he later proclaimed himself as a Messiah that stoked plenty of followers and just as many critics (he also was a businessman that dealt in news media, such as with The Washington Times), particularly with his conviction for filling false federal income tax returns and conspiracy in 1984. Perhaps it was an act of God that brought all of these circumstances together to make a uniquely amusing time, since the press kit for the film actually claimed that McArthur approved of his portrayal...from the spirit world, as he had died a decade prior. Of course, the other choices that Moon thought about making a movie about involved Jesus and Elvis Presley (all of this is actually correct, I am not joking). Of course, one can't forget about Terence Young in all of this. Sure, this was the second-to-last film in his forty year career, but Young was at the very least a director who in theory could have executed a well done war film, at least since he could handle three James Bond features to worthy reputation, particularly since he was familiar with international co-productions such as Red Sun (1971). Of course, he also stated that Moon putting his name on the credits of the film would be a mistake (along with the Church's idea to actually distribute the film itself, and they settled with fronting the promotional material), and the film ended up having to be shot in both Korea and Rome. The movie was written by Robin Moore and Laird Koenig, while the story was done by Moore and Paul Savage. Moore was known for his writings such as The Green Berets and The French Connection, but he chafed at the demands for a war story that also had to have numerous narratives within a story that probably was too much to handle in a two hour feature.

Technically speaking, this might be a prescient feature in terms of church-funded mega-failures in the vein of Battlefield Earth (2000), but there is a quick distinction between those films: One can actually see that movie on home video. Inchon has never been released on DVD, and the only reason that anyone can even find footage of the film to view (in dubious quality) is because the movie was shown on the Church's former television network (GoodLife Television Network), for which people transferred it onto VHS for bootleg recordings. The original cut of the film was 140 minutes, and this is the version that was shown on television, albeit with certain swear words edited out, but it should be mentioned that the film shown in theaters was only 106 minutes long, which cut out scenes with David Janssen (best known for The Fugitive, who took the movie to work with Olivier), who had died before release.  I'm sure you don't need to know that this is a dramatization of the battle and not actually based entirely in reality, since lighthouses generally do not serve as the be-all end-all to war victories. Besides, the movie can't even have one consistent narrative, since it also has to balance out its parts with MacArthur for scenes spent with Gazzara & Bisset, which manages to mangle any attempt at perspective beyond boredom (at least when it isn't spending time with a barely hearable Janssen and a "no, I'm not joking" Reed for exposition). Somehow, having Roundtree and Mifune as supporting members doesn't help. Gazzara and Bisset seem more bored than anything when it comes to some spiel about romance or rescuing others from danger. At least one can say Olivier tried. At this point in his life, he was taking film roles for money, and this was certainly one of those roles, since he described himself as like a vintage wine that needs to be drank quickly before becoming sour (he wanted to leave enough money for his family); while he was ill for the last decade of his life, he still marched on as an actor without complaint. He did his research when it came to visiting the MacArthur Museum and even visiting a prominent member that had served under the general during the war while also trying to imitate his voice (which apparently sounded like W. C. Fields) and go through plenty of makeup, although he stated that he didn't think he looked like MacArthur or even himself. The clip at the end of the real MacArthur speaking does not exactly help matters; in the end, he moves like a pale ghost and yet manages to be the only presence worth trying to watch, and it isn't even a good performance. The movie has the attitude of trying to be a spectacle epic with dramatic weight, but it has the striking power of a B-movie, pure and simple. It plods along for way too long with narratives far too boring for anybody to care about while having the spiritual depth of a two-inch fountain. If one is going to watch a war movie that borders on propaganda, by God could they do better than this feature when it comes to actual relevance for showing a useful story. You might as well spend an hor looking for articles on the Internet about Incheon than spend two hours with this dramatization. It is an obvious turkey that is best suited for testing if hearing explosions will interrupt two hours of snoozing; it might not be the worst war film or worst of anything (since the Church aspect probably makes this an easy target), but it sure is one for the ages in terms of turkey-dom.

Overall, I give it 2 out of 10 stars.

Next Time: Sometimes, the best way to look at an action star is to look at what happens when they are put into the director's chair. So it's time for On Deadly Ground.

Se7en.

Review #1510: Seven.

Cast:
Brad Pitt (Detective David Mills), Morgan Freeman (Detective Lieutenant William Somerset), Gwyneth Paltrow (Tracy Mills), Kevin Spacey (John Doe), R. Lee Ermey (Police Captain), Richard Roundtree (District Attorney Martin Talbot), and Richard Schiff (Mark Swarr) Directed by David Fincher (#586 - Alien 3, #705 - The Social Network, and #1284 - Fight Club)

Review: 
"As a director, film is about how you dole out the information so that the audience stays with you when they're supposed to stay with you, behind you when they're supposed to stay behind you, and ahead of you when they're supposed to stay ahead of you."

From a young age, David Fincher knew he wanted to make films. He expressed an interest in photography and drawing as a child, and it was his viewing of a behind-the-scenes show about Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid (1969) that proved the biggest inspiration to directing, noting that it was when he realized films didn't happen in real time, seeing it as a "cool job". He started making 16mm films in the third grade, with film classes during those times proved helpful to his pursuits (such as for example doing an assignment about making a film to a particular song). Fincher would do a variety of jobs and projects growing up in Oregon, such as directing and designing sets for his high school plays along with work with a news station and as a busboy. After turning 20, he moved into doing work in the film industry with people such as John Korty and Industrial Light and Magic (ILM) which started with work such as Twice Upon a Time (1983) with special photographic effects. He moved from doing assistant work to directing for television commercials and soon music videos (both involving prominent companies and groups like Levi's and Rick Springfield, respectively). He was given his first chance to direct a feature with Alien 3 (1990). To put it mildly, he hated the experience, one undone by script troubles and re-editing.

Fincher went back to making music videos, but he managed to come across an intriguing script done by Andrew Kevin Walker (who had based his experiences living in New York City for five years as his inspiration), which was looked into by New Line Cinema after a few revisions. Fincher asked to read the script, but it was accidentally the one with the original ending that was sent to him by the studio to garner his interest; Fincher liked what he saw, and consulting with studio head Mike De Luca led to the understanding that while studio pressure wanted to go forward with the more conventional manner of ending, provided that Fincher was ready to go in six weeks. This did not stop pressure from other hands at the studio from trying to guide the ending to something different, but several people, including Fincher, Pitt, Freeman, and Spacey, protested against changing the film, which succeeded as Fincher's first key hit in a career that has persisted for over three decades. The movies that linger in our memories are the ones where you can really distill it down to one key moment or quote in crystal clearness, one that you can say "The film with that ending." Sure, you could use The Usual Suspects for 1995's example of an iconic trickster for its ending, but Seven is the superior effort. It manages to achieve such a well-done construction of a compelling crime narrative that has a solid and recognizable cast to go alongside an unnerving tone and pace that makes its ending all the more wrenching in effectiveness, earning its twists and turns with no sort of cheating or contrivances, made particularly clear with the third act in its method of madness with Pitt, Freeman, and Spacey. Drenched in darkness, who can resist its realism? Precise and uncompromising scares of what makes a hunt for a murderer all the more successful. It is no wonder that Fincher was attracted to this, seeing it as a "meditation on evil and how evil gets on you and you can't get it off", rather than just a police procedural. With the way it goes with its gruesome moments (whether shown on camera or not), you almost could put it under horror as well.

When it comes to finely-tuned pairings of procedure, Pitt and Freeman make a good team. They bounce off each other in contrast with their sensibility towards virtue and reality that work out quite well. Pitt has an interesting natural ability to sink into this role with both feet facing forward and a capability of determination in a fledged interest with flaws for us to see through what seems to just be energy. Freeman accomplishes a weary and effective turn of the other side of the procedural screw, one with a steady pace towards his past and future when it comes to the grind of age and the regrets that can come from it. Paltrow lends some brightness to the atmosphere with grace as the only one that isn't directly related to the case yet see in her struggle to maintain oneself in the grind of a brooding life within a city looking dark enough to engulf all. Spacey is concise and effective with the moments he is given (which is best not to highlight in keeping the curiosity to oneself or in just waiting to see when he comes in), making a useful adversary that never adheres to all of the clichés you could see in a lesser killer film. Ermey and Roundtree have small moments, but they are each worthwhile actors with what is required when interacting with our leads regardless. With a slick way of maneuvering through its methods in 127 minutes with most of its moments hitting in keeping the pulse firmly in keeping the audience on their toes without needing to bash them over the head for the sins of lesser procedurals before it. This is a fairly effective film for its era that dares to take its audience through murky touchings with a capable cast and execution that will stay in the boxes of your mind for quite some time after it is finished.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Shaft in Africa.

Review #1231: Shaft in Africa.

Cast: 
Richard Roundtree (John Shaft), Frank Finlay (Amafi), Vonetta McGee (Aleme), Neda Arneric (Jazar), Debebe Eshetu (Wassa), Marne Maitland (Col. Gonder), Spiros Focás (Sassari), Jacques Herlin (Perreau), Frank McRae (Osiat), Nadim Sawalha (Zubair), Thomas Baptiste (Kopo), and Glynn Edwards (Vanden) Directed by John Guillermin (#726 - King Kong (1976))

Review: 
Admittedly, the first two Shaft films (released in 1971 and 1972, respectively) were fun pieces of entertainment for the right time, being on the forefront of the blaxploitation era - riveting movies that had plenty of action and interesting qualities to go around , with a good deal of credit going to its lead in Roundtree alongside direction from Gordon Parks and writing from Ernest Tidyman (writer of the novels that had featured the character beginning in 1970). For this one, both did not return, with the writing being delegated to Stirling Silliphant (mostly known for his work on projects such as Route 66 along with the screenplay for In the Heat of the Night) while Guillermin was brought in as director. This was the third installement of the series - which proved to be the last of the series for over two decades. It ranks as the weaker of the three Roundtree films in terms of general excitement and foundation, but Roundtree keeps it together long enough to make it most worth a watch. It is evident the makers of this film really wanted to keep things fresh, and perhaps they really thought changing the setting to Africa would rake in a few more box office dollars. After all, both of the previous films had each been made for under $2 million while raking in over $10 million each at the box office, so raising the budget a bit should prove good luck - it did not, since the film failed to make its budget back. The film seems a bit too closed in with trying to make a casual adventure action film, complete with James Bond type gadgets in a stick and a story that tries to cover itself with some subtext involving a bunch of 70s sounding topics while only really doing best with its action sequences, which do their part in giving the film a leg to stand on. It feels a bit too long at 112 minutes, dragging in the middle while not recieving much help from its opening or end in makign a proper powderkeg of entertainment go off. Roundtree is the highlight of the film, containing charm and care without having to say too much, stepping into some comfortable if not entirely challenging shoes. Finlay can't really make this role seem any more than just an "Evil Brit" type, but at least he's passable. McGee is fairly charming, although the others aren't too particularly memorable to go along with. It is a film that meanders in a somewhat interesting setting but with conventional execution and not much else to go along with. On the whole, this is a film that just can't quite get itself into gear enough to make a consistent winner, but it may prove just well enough for people wanting some fair action type without too many struggles. It works best when one doesn't give too much thought to how things go down and just let it happen, whether it involves stickfights, a mild climax, and a little passion to go around.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

Q (1982).

Review #1140: Q.

Cast: 
Michael Moriarty (Jimmy Quinn), Candy Clark (Joan), David Carradine (Detective Shepard), Richard Roundtree (Sgt Powell), James Dixon (Lt. Murray), Malachy McCourt (Commissioner Nick McConnell), Fred J. Scollay (Captain Fletcher), Peter Hock (Detective Harold Kipps), and Ron Cey (Detective Hoberman) Directed by Larry Cohen.

Review: 
Q (also known as The Winged Serpent and Q – The Winged Serpent) is certainly a film that relies on techniques and gimmicks of the past to generate entertainment. Its director Larry Cohen is best known for b-movie films that fall in some way to either exploitation, horror or sci-fi, with examples of this being movies such as Bone (1972), It's Alive (1974) or later work such as The Stuff (1985). He also served as screenwriter for the film, of which he did for other material such as his creation of the television series The Invaders (1967-68) to even writing Phone Booth (2002). So, what is Q all about? Well, it's an Aztec god (half bird, half reptile) named Quetzalcoatl that nests itself on the Chrysler Building when not taking people out of the sky and devouring them. Naturally, there was a good reason that Cohen wanted to use that building, stating "The Empire State building had their monster, but I thought the Chrysler Building was a better-looking building, so I thought, “Well, they should have their own monster!” It's not hard to find the hallmarks and cliches that you might expect from a horror monster flick like this, but the entertainment is fairly high in part due to a game cast, particularly with Moriarty. There is something so offbeat and weird about his character that he manages to generate such watch-ability from, complete with his own improvised piano piece. He's an interesting anti-hero, never becoming too grating on the audience while also keeping the film afloat for the parts not involving the monster. Who else can make the idea of someone extorting New York for the location of a flying serpent for money seem so amusing and yet compelling at the same time? Clark plays her role with a fair deal of sense and balance that certainly sticks out from the odd stuff otherwise present, and it doesn't come off as distracting in any sense. Carradine pulls off an entertaining performance in a role that probably would've worked fine for a police film, but with him at the helm of facing the usual cop elements (rituals involving Aztec cultists sacrificing people in order to bring Q to life, no less) alongside giving a bit of exposition about the monster, and he handles it effectively enough. Roundtree plays his cop role with the kind of gruffness that corresponds just fine with Carradine for the time he gets to be on screen. The others in the cast are just fine, doing their bits without much struggle. The stop-motion effects, done by David Allen and Randy Cook hold up for the time just decently enough for entertainment value that likely works better than if this film had been made a decade or two later. For the most part, this manages to be a fine piece of entertainment in its 93 minute run-time. It can sometimes be silly but it also has its moments of charm and creepiness that has a winning cast headlined by Moriarty to make this a welcome cult classic right for the occasion for October.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Shaft's Big Score!

Review #1045: Shaft's Big Score!

Cast: 
Richard Roundtree (John Shaft), Moses Gunn (Bumpy Jonas), Drew Bundini Brown (Willy), Joseph Mascolo (Gus Mascola), Kathy Imrie (Rita), Wally Taylor (Johnny Kelly), Julius Harris (Capt. Bollin), Rosalind Miles (Arna Asby), and Joe Santos (Pascal) Directed by Gordon Parks (#610 - Shaft (1971))

Review: 
The original Shaft movie was described by me as one with an "epitome of cool", in part due to its title character, action sequences, and its music. It had a style to it that is hard to beat and even harder to replicate, although that doesn't mean the sequel isn't any good. Shaft's Big Score! is fairly entertaining fare, with a cast that does its job with flying colors and some interesting action sequences to push this over the top for the most. Admittedly, the story is a bit sketchy at times with its execution and the pacing isn't as rip-roaring, mostly because the film seems a bit muddy with its motivations (even the title seems to be a bit strange considering what occurs in the film), but it's not a terribly boring movie. Roundtree is the key standout, retaining the confident charisma from the original while also being fairly hip and fairly consistent, resembling James Bond but without the gadgets.

Gunn also returns, although he isn't given too much to do. Taylor also does a pretty fine job in an adversarial role that doesn't go too over the top. Mascolo is the main villain (with Taylor also serving as an adversary), but it takes probably a bit too much time to introduce him and thus his performance is merely just okay. The rest of the cast do their jobs fairly well. The film retains the same director from the original, Gordon Parks (who also provides the music due to Issac Hayes being unavailable) along with Ernest Tidman, writer (along with producer) who had written the book that Shaft was based off of and cinematographer Urs Furrer. The climax scene, which goes from land to sea to air, manages to stand out fairly well due to having a gritty but riveting feel that is executed pretty well. This is the kind of film that has a certain energy and click that is absorbing for a blockbuster like this. On the whole, the movie is a bit uneven at times, but it also is an entertaining kind of action flick that makes for a useful good time.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Shaft (1971).

Review #610: Shaft.

Cast
Richard Roundtree (John Shaft), Moses Gunn (Bumpy Jonas), Charles Cioffi (Lt. Vic Androzzi), Christopher St. John (Ben Buford), Gwenn Mitchell (Ellie Moore), Lawrence Pressman (Tom Hannon), Victor Arnold (Charlie), and Sherri Brewer (Marcy Jonas) Directed by Gordon Parks.

Review
The epitome of cool, Shaft manages to have a charming lead character and have some thrilling action, combined with a cool theme song. Roundtree is fun to watch, with his charisma and charm the best aspect of the movie. The theme song by Issac Hayes is the right amount of funk and the right amount of cool to work perfectly. The movie feels like a throwback to detective movies from the 30's/40's, but Shaft has enough edge to work as its own, and the characters are certainly noteworthy. Gunn does a fine performance; his twisted character and his emotions (two) are contrasted well. It's a cheaply made movie, but it's a well-made movie nonetheless, it has enough charm and style with Roundtree alone to be a good flick, but the rest just adds on to the pile in a movie that will probably be immortalized and remembered for more years to come, as we're still talking about it 43 years (and a day) later.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Shaft (2000).

Review #545: Shaft (2000).

Cast
Samuel L. Jackson (John Shaft), Vanessa Williams (Carmen Vasquez), Jeffrey Wright (Peoples Hernandez), Christian Bale (Walter Wade, Jr), Richard Roundtree (Uncle John), Busta Rhymes (Rasaan), Toni Collette (Diane Palmieri), Pat Hingle (Dennis Bradford), Dan Hedaya (Jack Roselli), Ruben Santiago-Hudson (Jimmy Groves), Josef Sommer (Curt Flemming), and Lynne Thigpen (Carla Howard) Directed by John Singleton.

Review
Shaft is strangely not a remake of the notable 1971 film, instead a sequel (The 1990's/2000's/2010's were a hotbed for remakes of films, in fact, there's a RoboCop remake in theaters right now, remakes of films 20-80 years old are common), and hey, the original star from the '71 film (Roundtree) even makes an appearance. For those who don't know, Shaft was a franchise in the 1970's (originally based off the novel of the same name by Ernest Tidyman), consisting of three films: Shaft (1971), Shaft's Big Score, and Shaft in Africa, along with a television series. So after all that history (or whatever), how is the film itself? It has its moments of good action, and Jackson does a wonderful job. But what makes the movie stand out is its (unintentional) hilarity that I sometimes received from the movie. Some of the scenes were effective, but they were also hilarious because of how over the top it could get, the way that the characters react to the action made me laugh. It's funny how Christian Bale went from this film to Batman in only 5 years, just shows that anyone can be Batman (Isn't that right, Daredevil-I mean Ben Affleck?), given the circumstances. The movie has a good deal of style and the right amount of charm (I do like the scenes with Jackson and Roundtree, from...nephew to uncle. I guess Shaft had a brother who named his son in honor of John) to make for a fun film.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.