Showing posts with label Udo Kier. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Udo Kier. Show all posts

February 17, 2018

Blade.


Review #1049: Blade.

Cast: 
Wesley Snipes (Eric Brooks / Blade), N'Bushe Wright (Dr. Karen Jenson), Stephen Dorff (Deacon Frost), Kris Kristofferson (Abraham Whistler), Donal Logue (Quinn), Udo Kier (Gitano Dragonetti), Sanaa Lathan (Vanessa Brooks), and Arly Jover (Mercury) Directed by Stephen Norrington.

Review: 
Blade was the sixth film that was based off a product from Marvel Comics (although it was only the second to be released widely in America, besides Howard the Duck in 1986), adapted off the comic book series created by Marv Wolfman and Gene Colan. The film began its development earlier in the decade, with LL Cool J expressing interest in playing the lead role before Snipes signed onto the role in 1996 (it is interesting to note that Snipes had plans to make a film about Black Panther, although that movie languished in development for over two decades until this year). In any case, this is an interesting take on the vampire film that generally hits more than it misses while notably being Marvel's first box office success.

There is just a certain level of excitement and style that makes the film ride consistently enough that comes in large part due to Snipes and his performance. He just manages to make the material feel believable and useful that might've sound silly with a lesser actor. Wright does a fine job, although I find that she doesn't particularly stand out too much. Dorff proves to be a quirky but fairly entertaining villain, having an unhinged manner to him that gels well on screen at times. Kristofferson manages to stand out pretty well with his rugged charm that clicks despite not having too much time on screen. The rest of the cast do their parts fairly well, not going too overboard nor too serious either. The action sequences are gripping and intense, managing to make for a quick tone that is fairly effective while not being disorientating. The plot isn't anything to be desired, but the film keeps itself entertaining enough to erase some of the nagging problems that would've become more noticeable for a film without as much enthusiasm or fun. The effects (with numerous sequences involving blood) look a bit wonky, but they don't distract too awfully as they probably could've been. The original cut (which lasted 140 minutes) had Dorff turn into a big mass of blood instead of the sword fight that does happen in the final cut, and upon seeing both versions of the fight, I can definitely say that they made the right decision in not using the big mass. At 120 minutes, the movie has a serviceable length that works without too much drag to it. On the whole, Blade is a strange mix of energy and slick filmmaking that works in the right places to make a solid piece of entertainment.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

December 27, 2016

Surviving Christmas.


Review #890: Surviving Christmas.

Cast:
Ben Affleck (Drew Latham), James Gandolfini (Tom Valco), Christina Applegate (Alicia Valco), Catherine O'Hara (Christine Valco), Josh Zuckerman (Brian Valco), Bill Macy (Doo-Dah/Saul), Jennifer Morrison (Missy Vangilder), and Udo Kier (Heinrich) Directed by Mike Mitchell (#209 - Shrek Forever After)

Review:
Here's a quick description of how the movie is: It's terrible. It is easy to say this movie is terrible, because it is terrible on a massive scale. The majority of the jokes do not land. The characters aren't ones to root for in any capacity, nor ones we should be following. The story trudges at such a bland pace that borders on being tedious that it makes for not only an unfunny movie but also a boring movie. It isn't so much Affleck's fault as it is the script's fault for being bad. Never once does his character come off as anything other than pathetic or flat out creepy. His pursuit of trying to spend time with people so he isn't alone on Christmas (which means bribing a family, naturally) never really rises to a level where I should actually care. It just comes off as sad, not something to inspire laughs, which is a problem in a movie trying desperately (or for a lack of a better word, lamely) to make you laugh. Gandolfini is somewhat better, in the sense that his character seems easier to go along with. It doesn't mean he's likable, but it does mean that it seems more easier to accept. Applegate doesn't have a bad edge to her either, but she also doesn't really have much characterization either. Her chemistry with Affleck seems more basic than anything else, with no real sort of impact. It's nice to see O'Hara, but her character also isn't really anything of note. When one of the quips of the movie is a Sonny Bono reference (to his skiing accident, no less), it really does say something about just how this movie wants to take itself.

Perhaps it is easy to make a cynical kind of Christmas movie, which this film falls under. These are movies that try to be festive by completely taking the spirit out of what makes movies, and in effect the holiday being covered. There are movies like Elves (#680), which are dumb, but harmless in its attempt at cheer, even with killer elves. Then there are movies like Christmas with the Kranks (#082) and Just Friends (#838), ones with the bare minimum of cheer along with a lack of laughs. But then there are movies like Santa Claus (1959, #309) Jingle All the Way (#491), The Santa Clause 3: The Escape Clause (#496), Santa Claus Conquers the Martians (#507), Four Christmases (#772) and A Madea Christmas (#872), where it seems that cheer has been replaced with some form of misery, intentional or not. There aren't really any sort of laughs because of the movie, though it can inspire laughs at its expense. And then of course there is Deck the Halls (#497), the ultimate in terrible Christmas movies (for this show), a movie that sucks out the holiday spirit completely with a baseless plot and even more baseless characters. But with all of this, where does Saving Christmas stand? I'd say it falls around the bottom, managing to be a movie bereft of fun while also tremendously tedious as well.

Most of the examples listed actually sound like they could've been made into dramas, in part because they aren't really funny enough to be anything other than sad ideas. In fact, this film actually does have some attempt at drama, particularly at the end, but of course the movies doesn't actually have any sort of buildup nor does it earn any sort of pity. Most of these movies (except Santa Claus Conquers the Martians) deserve pity for being terrible. Here's the bottom line: Skip this movie.

Countdown to 900 Reviews: 10...

Overall, I give it 3 out of 10 stars.

October 6, 2015

Halloween (2007).


Review #743: Halloween.

Cast
Malcolm McDowell (Dr. Samuel Loomis), Tyler Mane (Michael Myers), Scout Taylor-Compton (Laurie Strode), Brad Dourif (Sheriff Lee Brackett), Daeg Faerch (Michael Myers, age 10), Sheri Moon Zombie (Deborah Myers), Danielle Harris (Annie Brackett), William Forsythe (Ronnie White), Richard Lynch (Principal Chambers), Udo Kier (Morgan Walker), Clint Howard (Doctor Koplenson), and Danny Trejo (Ismael Cruz) Directed by Rob Zombie.

Review
I knew I would have to deal with this eventually. I've already stated before my thoughts on John Carpenter's Halloween, which I still say is the best of the franchise and is still one of my favorite horror films. But of course, it had to have a remake, and who better than musician/director Rob Zombie to make his own version? (And release it in August, no less. That's a good way to annoy a film fan right off the bat, release a horror movie not in late September or October, but in August, a month known for nothing, especially in this day and age...okay, rant over) The first half of the movie gives Michael a back story, and it is about as uninteresting as you'd expect. Honestly I stopped really caring about his troubled home life after a while, probably because all of this is unnecessary when you get down to it. Do we really need to know about his treatment of animals? The monotony of the unlikable characters combined with the deaths make for a first half that doesn't really get you in the mood for a movie that then proceeds to take scenes from the original. The acting certainly fits with the twisted style of the movie, with McDowell being the one I like the most, probably because he's the most likable. Don't get me wrong, not all movies need to have likable characters...but then again not all remakes need to explain why the villain became the villain they are. The original movie's characters certainly rooted themselves better, especially Loomis and Strode. With this one, I felt empty with regards to caring about any of these characters.  The death scenes are bloody, mainly because of Michael's (arguably) sloppy method with respect to his victims, who don't die with one blow. The gritty tone can work depending on the audience watching, but I mainly didn't care for it too much. The fact that this was a remake (or "re-imagining") only means this will have to be compared to the original, and this falls way, way too short. If you like this...congrats to you. Me? I'll probably forget all about this film later anyway. Blergh.

Countdown to 750 Reviews: 10, 9, 8, 7...

Overall, I give it 4 out of 10 stars.