Wolfen.

Review #1902: Wolfen.

Cast: 

Albert Finney (Detective Dewey Wilson), Diane Venora (Detective Rebecca Neff), Edward James Olmos (Eddie Holt), Gregory Hines (Coroner Whittington), Tom Noonan (Ferguson), Dick O'Neill (Captain Warren), Dehl Berti (Old Indian), Peter Michael Goetz (Ross), Reginald VelJohnson (Morgue Attendant), James Tolkan ("Baldy", The Medical Examiner), and Donald Symington (Lawyer) Directed by Michael Wadleigh.

Review: 

Sure, it is possible that there is no real big link between a film like this and ones such as The Howling (1981) and An American Werewolf in London (1981). But it is fun to talk about the one thing they do have in common: each are horror movies with killer wolves, with The Howling being released in March before Wolfen was released in July and American Werewolf in London was released in August. Wolfen was the least successful with audiences among the three, not making its $17 million budget back. The movie is an adaptation of The Wolfen, a 1978 novel by Whitley Strieber (a writer of thriller novels and a "non-fiction" book about being abducted...by non-human entities). David M. Eyre, Jr. and Michael Wadleigh were credited for both the screenplay and story while Eric Roth provided un-credited work. Apparently, the book and film share distinct differences, as the book had cops become the opening victims rather than a land developer (with wife and bodyguard in tow) and the climax is also different in how the lead characters handle the Wolfen. The film began shooting in 1979 for a targeted release in the fall of 1980, but delays would arise between Orion Pictures (the production company behind the film, which was distributed by Warner Bros.) and Wadleigh. It got to the point where the Directors Guild of America had a three-week hearing involving the rights of the director, who apparently had a first cut of four hours while complaining of having no budget reported to him (at least he was granted his choice of star with Finney, since Dustin Hoffman pestered him to try and get the role to no avail). The next cut was two hours and 29 minutes, but then the producers made an agreement to let Wadleigh shoot the remainder of things needed to be filmed before Richard Chew was sent to cut the film after Wadleigh was done and let go (John D. Hancock was sent to supervise the ADR sessions). This is how you get a final version of one hour and 54 minutes. This was the feature film debut of Wadleigh, who is best known for his work in documenting the 1969 Woodstock Music Festival, for which he and his crew shot for a documentary that was released in 1970 to great success. At any rate, this is the only non-documentary that Wadleigh has ever shot.

You can tell that this is a movie written to feel four hours long that got hacked into something that is a procedural movie with flashes of horror that ends up with varying results. Man, do I wish that I enjoyed this film more than I did, because honestly, it pales when compared to the aforementioned other wolf films. For one, this film isn't a "werewolf film", because the wolves here are a spirit that may or may not be gods, ones that have walked the Earth for many, many, many years, as explained by a group of Native Americans that exists to defend their territory. So, yes, there isn't a werewolf transformation here, since the concern is really more about looking at urban decay and procedure, since one is trying to guess how folks are being terrorized by something that severs certain body parts without just thinking it is terrorism, complete with nice shots of New York (such as the South Bronx). A good chunk of this is actually fairly interesting (having a thermographic visual for the Wolfen perspective is one), but at a certain point you really are just waiting for them to stop window-dressing and get to the point. Yes, it does keep itself in the realm of seriousness without ridicule, but it only marginally has the element of shock to keep things going. Sometimes you have to cut the cord, and I think this means that we have a film that is watchable but quite average. I think the cast is assembled nicely, because Finney does make a quality leader. He keeps a shaky but composted attitude about what goes on without making it look like it is beneath him. Venora was actually making her film debut with this film after graduating from Juilliard School and stage plays. She does okay here, quiet but serviceable in the procedural element...the chemistry between not so much, but it isn't too corny. Olmos practically chews on the camera in brooding charm, which proves quite compelling. Tap dancer-turned-actor Hines provides a bit of levity to the surroundings as well, making a useful rapport with Finney in minimal moments. Noonan is offbeat and quite watchable in little moments as well, while O'Neill plays the cop beat about how you would expect. I really did want to like the film more, because there is something to brood over with the idea of nature vs. greed, but I think the pacing is a bit uneven to hold things together enough to really make capable thrills. This isn't to say that I wanted an effects show, because the movie does do fine with the perspective shots alongside ones with wolves, but I think a little more "oomph" is required here to make it less like a procedural that just happened to break out into horror, particularly with a low-key ending (again, one that plays to the allure of what is allowed to lurk in the shadows rather than the book's idea about things) - decent for the film's mood but also just okay. I wonder how this would have worked as a four-hour cut or as a miniseries, where you can play out all of the things you want in trying to do a Bronx tale of people getting cut down by wolves that have humans as their prey. In fact, if you want to play semantics about better procedurals, Q, released the following year involving a winged serpent, handled its balance of procedural and creature elements with more reverence than this film (schlock or not, some things work better to others). At any rate, Wolfen is a decent film sandwiched in between other, better, movies involving creatures of the night, which may work out quite well for those who are interested in curiosity pieces among the years of horror.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Manhunter.

Review #1713: Manhunter.

Cast: 

William Petersen (Will Graham), Kim Greist (Molly Graham), Joan Allen (Reba McClane), Brian Cox (Dr. Hannibal Lecktor), Dennis Farina (Jack Crawford), Tom Noonan (Francis Dollarhyde), Stephen Lang (Freddy Lounds), David Seaman (Kevin Graham), Benjamin Hendrickson (Dr. Frederick Chilton), Michael Talbott (Geehan), and Dan Butler (Jimmy Price) Written and Directed by Michael Mann (#1531 - Ali and #1631 - The Last of the Mohicans)

Review: 

It is odd to think that this film has only just reached its 35th anniversary today. The movie is an adaptation of Red Dragon, which was written by Thomas Harris in 1981 as his second novel (Black Sunday (1975) was his first, and that book was turned into a film two years later). He took a good deal of research into the novel that meant classes with the FBI Behavioral Science Unit in Quantico, Virginia. Stephen King, when asked about the book, gave notice to Harris for his "clean eye for prose and his impeccable choice of detail" alongside the great deal of suspense packed into the narrative. Of course, when one thinks of a producer to bring something big into theaters, you probably think of Dino De Laurentiis (and his wife Martha, who both would own the rights to the character of Lecter on film). Since he had experienced failure with Year of the Dragon (1985), this somehow meant that the title of this movie had to be Manhunter (no points as to who came up with adding a K to Lector's name). Of course, we all know what came to follow after the release of the book and the film adaptation. Harris wrote a second book involving Hannibal Lecter with The Silence of the Lambs in 1988 that was turned into a film three years later to near unanimous praise (featuring Anthony Hopkins as Lector over Cox); amusingly enough, the De Laurentiis couple allowed Orion Pictures to produce the film without their involvement, and obviously they were eager to find a way to see a new novel by Harris to adapt. One sequel book/film adaptation later, a second adaptation of Red Dragon followed in 2002 (with the De Laurentiis couple back as producers again, in probably one of the most befuddling distinctions ever in being behind two adaptations of the same book), which was directed by Brett Ratner with Edward Norton as Graham and Hopkins as Lector one more time.

Oddly enough, I am reminded of Mann's other most noted work in the decade with the television show Miami Vice, which he served as executive producer (mostly with the color palate, which had distinct touches in the early years) Granted, Manhunter is generally more consistent, but that detail of style seems apparent when talking about the film when it is paired with the intensity of the grim pursuit for a solid thriller. Undeniably, there is a good amount of folks that will encounter this after seeing the more famous Lector movie, and the differences between the two might surprise folks. It eschews attempts at going for levels of squeamishness that keep the manhunt at the forefront that makes one at least have some sort of shiver at what it takes to try and come back into getting into the the mindset of thinking like a killer with a distinct sense of voyeurism that keeps one on their toes. It makes sense to have Petersen there as your lead if only because one knows he already excelled with stuff like To Live and Die in L.A. (1985), which Mann saw footage of and liked enough to cast Petersen (he also had a small role in Mann's debut film Thief in 1981); as a whole, he proves quite curious, whether that means he is shown talking to home movies in pursuit of the mind or when trying to justify why he does the things he does.  It should be noted that Farina was a police officer for the Chicago Police Department for eighteen years before a chance role as a police consultant for Thief (1981) helped get him into moonlighting for Chicago-based movies and shows; incidentally, he would star in Crime Story (1986-88, which Mann served as executive producer and occasional writer/director) a month after this film premiered in theaters. Farina seems exactly at home here with solid procedural material, wrapped with tough energy that makes one at least wonder why they didn't keep him over Scott Glenn when it came time for the aforementioned next film. Greist has a few moments here and there with Petersen that go over okay, while Allen eventually gets to be paired with Noonan that ends up quite cursory. This was actually one of Lang's earliest roles, and while he may not have much to do besides play a pest, he does alright with generating a smarmy chuckle to what needs to happen. Cox is quite restrained here, but it makes sense for what happens here for a movie adaptation focused on the hunt of a different killer anyway. Hopkins would have more "meat" to chew on a few years later, but Cox sets his own stage nicely enough with a calm ooze. One doesn't need to really see him out of those bars to know that there is something dark lurking within a supposedly pathetic state. Besides, one knows the power that comes in making a fearful beast. He proves the highlight of the film, and he doesn't ever show up until nearly an hour in for a two-hour movie. Honestly, while it may be a bit too glossy for its own good at certain times, one can't say that it is a forgettable experience. It manages to keep you roped in to what is going to happen next with its pursuit with a fairly game cast and workable tension that still proves useful even after 35 years as a solid work from Mann.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Redux: RoboCop 2.

Redux Review #004: RoboCop 2.

Cast
Peter Weller (Alex Murphy/RoboCop), Nancy Allen (Anne Lewis), Belinda Bauer (Dr. Juliette Faxx), Dan O'Herlihy ("The Old Man" / OCP President), Felton Perry (OCP Vice President Donald Johnson), Tom Noonan (Cain), Willard E. Pugh (Mayor Marvin Kuzak), Gabriel Damon (Hob), Galyn Görg (Angie), Stephen Lee (Officer Duffy), and Robert DoQui (Sgt. Reed) Directed by Irvin Kershner (#114 - The Empire Strikes Back)

Review
Welcome to a Redux Review of the original RoboCop 2 film, which is a revised review meant to say more about the movie as a whole. The rating will stay the same, but I feel that this Redux is necessary (which I could say for a good deal the original batch of reviews). Not to worry, there will be new reviews on the way, but I feel that the upcoming Redux Reviews are necessary to help better the evolution of Movie Night, and to help alleviate the unintentional month long hiatus. Enjoy. 

RoboCop 2. For me, it might actually be more disappointing than the third one because of the fact that even though it is better than RoboCop 3, the level of expectations/care is way, way less in that film than in this, a movie that resets Murphy into fighting (internally) the man-or-the-machine conundrum...that had been dealt with in the first film. The mood in this film is significantly more darker, and the violence is certainly more prevalent this time around. I do like the effects, especially with the climax, which is very impressive to watch. The movie does at least retain the Media Break/commercial interludes (my favorite being the one about Sun Block 5000, a blue sunscreen that causes skin cancer with frequent use), but it feels somewhat lacking in the most critical component: RoboCop.

The movie seems to focus more on the impending bankruptcy of Detroit (the movie did at least get one prediction true)...or the police strike...or the building of RoboCop 2...or the rise of Nuke, or pretty much anything that involves RoboCop being not as prominent this time around. Sure, he does get butchered into pieces and promptly gets restored...inputted with so many directives. I understand the idea behind it (example: RoboCop shooting at spots near a dude until he drops his cigarette...actually, that's just weird), but it barely goes anywhere due to RoboCop promptly frying himself and all of his directives. I guess its interesting that he does this willingly, but by that point, I was just waiting for RoboCop to be involved with taking down Nuke...which he does, technically. The movie isn't very enjoyable to watch, because there isn't much to root for, aside from RoboCop. I can't care too much for OCP and their troubles, and I can't care for the city's problems when the mayor resorts to taking drug lord money to pay off a debt...I could care about the police strike, if it wasn't for that it kinda just ends after RoboCop fries himself. The music by Leonard Roseman isn't terrible, but after a riveting score in the first film, having a theme in which a chorus sings out RoboCop's name is a bit much, don't you think? This isn't the 60's Batman theme (which is meant to be campy), you know. At least the movie continues the tradition of being filmed in Texas (this time being filmed in Houston - I guess Texan cities double well for Detroit?).

The acting this time around is fine, and I do like Weller, who seems like he really is trying to make the movie work, although he evidently had gripes with the third act, particularly with the lack of morality, in his words. Bauer is okay, but as for her character...I'll get to that shortly. O'Herlihy gets a chance to ham it up this time around, even yelling "BEHAVE YOURSELVES" to the two RoboCops near the end. It is a bit jarring to see the Old Man turn out to be evil, but I guess the plan of engineering a police strike to make the city default is one you have to conceal very well. Noonan does an alright job, but he doesn't have as much memorability as the previous villain. Granted, he does become RoboCop 2, but by then it's almost too late. And of course there's Gabriel Damon playing a foul-mouthed teenage member of Cain's gang that's also (probably, never counted) a murderer.

The idea of having the character in the movie comes off as both silly and flat-out ridiculously over-the-top stupid, especially when he takes over Cain's "empire" near the end. Actually, the worst scene is his death sequence, a scene that is absurd in the idea that anyone could feel any sympathy for this character - especially after he uses a lunch-box gun against cops. Sure, he's a kid that was killed (by Cain no less), but...nope, the sympathy card doesn't go that far. I'm aware that Frank Miller was hired to write the film, but his script (deemed "unfilmable" by the producers) was changed, though some of his ideas (such as Hob) stayed. I wonder whose idea it was to have RoboCop confront Cain (the second time) and have him play chicken with him on a motorcycle, though. Miller's words on the movie: "Don’t be the writer. The director’s got the power. The screenplay is a fire hydrant, and there’s a row of dogs around the block waiting for it."

My other gripe with the movie is the idea of putting a drug lord's brain into a cyborg body, using the drug as a way of controlling him (?!), because you can totally control someone who's bigger and stronger than you and is completely insane (you'd go insane if you were took off your ventilator and promptly see your head with only your eyes and brain to watch. Because what could go wrong-Yea, everything goes wrong for OCP really fast (what did you expect?!). Sure, the rest of OCP (minus Faxx, who picked the brain) probably didn't expect the result they got, especially after they sent the thing to murder the mayor and a group of city councilmen when trying to make a deal to save the city (I do like  Of course the Old Man displays a canister of Nuke right in front of RoboCop 2 when making a presentation about how the cyborg will rid the drug from the streets...and the crazed robot goes right for it. Logic is dead. Technically you could say the Old Man and Faxx get their comeuppance...in that they might go to jail. Whoopee, because that makes all of this mean-spirited mess worth it. It would be like if Boddicker went to jail instead of getting the sendoff that he got in the previous film (you know, the one that knew how to treat its characters).

For all the times I compare it to the first film, the movie isn't inherently terrible. It's just a very scrambled mess that comes off as too cynical and probably a bit too long (nearly 2 hours), while managing to be only mildly successful. It does have its moments, but it begs to be made with more competent storytelling, and that is the greatest crime of all.

We all know about the third one. And if you don't...you'll see. 
For the record, I didn't intend on writing over 1000 words for an inferior sequel, it just happened.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Last Action Hero.

Review #576: Last Action Hero.

Cast
Arnold Schwarzenegger (Jack Slater/Himself), Austin O'Brien (Danny Madigan), Charles Dance (Benedict), Robert Prosky (Nick), Tom Noonan (The Ripper/Himself), Art Carney (Frank), Frank McRae (Lieutenant Dekker), Anthony Quinn (Tony Vivaldi), Bridgette Wilson (Whitney Slater and Meredith Caprice), F. Murray Abraham (John Practice), and Mercedes Ruehl (Irene Madigan) Directed by John McTiernan (#014 - Die Hard, #018 - Die Hard with a Vengeance, #080 - The Hunt for Red October, and #325 - Predator)

Review
Last Action Hero tries and nearly succeeds in its goals of action and comedy fun for all. It's a better action movie then a comedy, Arnold can be funny, but the movie just doesn't have enough comedy in it. feeling like more like a commentary on itself which while welcome, isn't exactly that funny (Though seeing Stallone as the Terminator in Slater's world amuses me), at least it tries. The cast is okay, but I find more enjoyment with Schwarzenegger then with O'Brien because at least he does something fun to watch, where O'Brien is just the second fiddle who could be easily disposable if he wasn't out main character. At least Art Carney is fun to watch in his final film role, he packs some energy and is certainly warming to watch. The movie doesn't really break any new ground and it isn't one of Arnold's best, but this is an okay movie that isn't hard to like if you want some good ol' Arnold and some good ol' fun. Take it for what it's worth.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.