Dazed and Confused.

Review #1138: Dazed and Confused.

Cast: 
Jason London (Randall "Pink" Floyd), Wiley Wiggins (Mitch Kramer), Sasha Jenson (Don Dawson), Michelle Burke (Jodi Kramer), Christine Harnos (Kaye Faulkner), Rory Cochrane (Ron Slater), Ben Affleck (Fred O'Bannion), Adam Goldberg (Mike Newhouse), Anthony Rapp (Tony Olson), Marissa Ribisi (Cynthia Dunn), Catherine Avril Morris (Julie Simms), Matthew McConaughey (David Wooderson), Shawn Andrews (Kevin Pickford), Cole Hauser (Benny O'Donnell), Milla Jovovich (Michelle Burroughs), Joey Lauren Adams (Simone Kerr), Christin Hinojosa (Sabrina Davis), and Parker Posey (Darla Marks) Directed by Richard Linklater (#645 - School of Rock)

Review: 
It seems only natural to cover this film, released in the years after other coming-of-age teen comedies such as Porky's (1981), Fast Times at Ridgemont High (1982), Sixteen Candles (1984), but with an intent to stand out from those by trying to depict high school without trying to verge into any unnecessary drama while having an assortment of 70s songs wrapped up in a small-town movie without too much plot. I suppose the best words to describe it would be to just describe it as something wrapped in a time capsule with a bunch of albums and a bunch of items of leisure stuffed inside that will certainly take some people back while being handy entertainment for others. With such a big group of actors and characters like this, it's interesting to see who doesn't get lost in the shuffle too much and stick out.  London is a pretty fair lead to follow along with, a casual kind of guy that proves useful for a few laughs. Wiggins is also pretty casual, fitting in with what the film wants to go without looking out-of-place. Others such as Jenson, Burke and Harnos are okay, and Cochrane is pretty amusing to be around with. Affleck, in one of his first film roles, stands out handily, making something out of his bully material that can certainly seem familiar - for better or worse. Goldberg, Rapp, and Ribisi, playing an intellectual trio occasionally mixed in with the fun times, prove to be alright with having a few awkward laughs. Easily, the one who stands out is McConaughey, starring in his second ever role (appearing in a bit role in My Boyfriend's Back the same year), doing well with what he is given that makes for such amazement. He just sticks out with the way he chooses to interact in this landscape, whether when talking about a car or when talking about "livin'", it's easy to see in retrospect how he became such a prominent star. It is clear that there was a dedicated effort to capture an exact feel for the setting of the summer of 1976, with one-sixth of the six million dollar budget going towards licensing for usage of the songs featured from "Rock and Roll, Hoochie Koo" by Rick Derringer to "Slow Ride" by Foghat.

The movie isn't really about anything too deep in particular through its 102 minute run-time, but what it shows through its numerous characters is people certainly having some sort of good time. There isn't any kind of overtly cliche characters, everyone seems to just blend in, for lack of a better term that will prove interesting to follow through with for the most part. There isn't too much of an aim beyond just where it wants to show, but it isn't just a nostalgia trip that worships the "glory days" of high school; obviously the lens one views that era of their lives is different for a teen from the 1970s than a kid from the 2010s, and it'll play into how they see scenes in the film such as the scenes with the teens at the main hangout place or the casual conversations that go on there or elsewhere, or the scenes involving hazing the incoming freshman or the scene with neighborhood cruising while wrecking mailboxes. Perhaps having good memories of the times of the youth make this a great sit-through. I can look back on my times of youth decently enough, but I can't for the life of me think that I need to recollect these memories too much, but perhaps that's not the whole point. I myself am not too hard on movies for relying a bit on nostalgia, just as long as it doesn't go overboard - which the movie does fine with. The film resonated with me more often than not, but I can't find myself thinking that this is anything too particularly great, just being a decent feature. It will serve as handy entertainment for those who are curious to seek it, whether if looking for a decent time, palatable music or a trip to a different age.

Next Time: Spooktober officially begins.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Mr. Brooks.

Review #1137: Mr. Brooks.

Cast: 
Kevin Costner (Earl Brooks), William Hurt (Marshall), Demi Moore (Detective Tracy Atwood), Dane Cook (Mr. Smith / Graves Baffert), Marg Helgenberger (Emma Brooks), Danielle Panabaker (Jane Brooks), Aisha Hinds (Nancy Hart), and Jason Lewis (Jesse Vialo) Directed by Bruce A. Evans.

Review: 
Mr. Brooks is certainly an interesting film to think about, if not for the fact it certainly stands out for its main character - a man addicted to murder, as if they were doing a modern variant on the Jekyll and Hyde tale, to the point where Costner's character goes to twelve-step meetings for addicts to try and curb his "killing addiction". Believe it or not, this was meant to be the first film in a trilogy, and while the film was a mild success at the box office, there were no further follow-ups made. While I can't say that this is a great film, I will say that it is an interesting thing to watch, if not for the twists that it tries to pull and some of its performances being pretty stand-out, even if the film has some deep flaws of its own that can't quite make a success.

Costner and Hurt are easily the highlights for the film, interacting with each other over the nature of what they are bound to do with the kind of energy and interest that you would probably expect from a buddy film. Costner manages to pull off a entertaining performance, balancing the family man aspect of his role handily while also balancing his struggle to deal with his urges as if he was in a werewolf film. It's hard to resist seeing Hurt and his fiendish grin in his role as the alter ego, being watchable each time he appears on screen with his conversations, having fun with the mayhem that he lives on to compel Mr. Brooks to do. One big flaw that comes out from the cast is that there isn't anyone else in the film that actually gets up to the level of Costner and Hurt in terms of performance or presence. Moore plays her detective role with the kind of wooden nature that could only come from humorless television movies, but the more amusing thing is the threads that the film tries to stake on her character. She doesn't just play a detective, she plays a rich detective who does what she does for her own reasons, which the film likes to explain in the end as some sort of sting. In any case, there isn't any scene where she gives enough energy to make this role seem remotely interesting, being one of the lulls that stops the film's momentum. Would you expect that Moore's character has three plot-lines? Yes, between her investigation into the serial murders in the main thread, there is also the thread of her divorce and the thread about another killer that has escaped from jail that she put away that is in the pursuit of her - named the Hangman. The other lull is in Cook, playing a character seemingly devoid of charm or interest, which I suppose makes sense when playing someone who is trying to parrot Costner's character. Perhaps this would've worked if Cook (a stand-up comedian playing a dramatic role for some reason) actually made this person someone I wanted to be around with Costner and Hurt. Perhaps someone with a bit more charm (or possibly less time on screen) would've made the film run without less stoppage to it. Yes, the character is a slimy one, but it at least could've been a useful slimy one to be around with. Strangely enough, there isn't as much time for Helgenberger and Panabaker, who have minimal time on screen to be around Costner for this on-screen family. Maybe there would've been more for them to do if there had been sequels (and I put that generously), but there had to be another way to have them more involved. I feel like the parts with Costner and Panabaker should've had more of a focus, since she basically only has three brief scenes, and she basically disappears after the first hour. Yes, her character does have a function to at least one plot thread, but it doesn't really resonate as much as it could have. Spoiler alert, her character also committed a murder, as if she inherited it from her dad. Sure, why not. There are just as many plot threads than actual deaths in this film. By the time it gets to its climax, the film essentially collapses from exhaustion. It can be a creepy film sometimes, when it involves the nature of what makes Mr. Brooks who he is, but it isn't as effective as it probably should've been.

With all of its attempts to pull so many twists and narratives, the film can't quite execute at a fair rate, where there become so many threads that it almost feels needless. After a while, it becomes exhausting to wonder why there are so many plot threads going about in a film that probably should've just stuck to a bit more simple for a psychological thriller that manages to last two hours. When it wants to be just Costner and Hurt, the film works just fine, but when it tries to verge on others in its small cast, it feels a bit distracted and not too particularly focused. This may have worked better a television series with all the threads it wants to throw around, but even with that it mind, it's just a frustrating movie to sit through. I like the idea of where it wants to go with Costner and Hurt, but the final product just isn't enough to fully give thrills and satisfaction without becoming ridiculous and overstuffed. It's the kind of movie that might serve as a guilty pleasure for ones in the right mindset, or ones with more patience in mind for where it ultimately lingers.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

Gas-s-s-s.

Review #1136: Gas-s-s-s.

Cast: 
Robert Corff (Coel), Elaine Giftos (Cilla), Bud Cort (Hooper), Talia Shire (Coralee), Ben Vereen (Carlos), Cindy Williams (Marissa), Alex Wilson (Jason), George Armitage (Billy the Kid), and Country Joe McDonald (AM Radio) (#368 - The Little Shop of Horrors, #684 - It Conquered the World, #852 - The Terror, #931 - Not of This Earth, #1007 - Attack of the Crab Monsters, #1039 - Five Guns West, and #1042 - War of the Satellites)

Review: 
Gas-s-s-s (also known as Gas! or It Became Necessary to Destroy the World in Order to Save It) is a black comedy in search of laughs at the end of the world. Needless to say, this is a clunky picture to sit through, moving at a pace more sluggish than anything seen in other films involving the youth culture of the late 1960s, where even films such as Alice's Restaurant (1969) and Zabriskie Point (released months before this film) manage to generate better entertainment value than this in part because they seemed to know where they wanted to go as a film - for the most part. With this movie, I can't be so certain Corman knew where he wanted to go. Did he want to make a satire about the end of days with hippie children (all under the age of 25) being the only survivors? Or did he want to make a movie that essentially devolves into a bunch of sketches involving hippies that happen to be apocalyptic? The fact that the film is 79 minutes long is somewhat of a blessing, since the idea of watching hippies in the desert for longer than 90 minutes would likely result in an actual apocalypse in the movie theater. With an ensemble cast like this, one might wonder if there's any sort of chemistry to give some laughs. Unfortunately, this is not the case. Corff (who now serves as a voice coach for various films) doesn't really present much charisma at any point of the film, not giving many laughs. Giftos isn't too much better, and it's amusing to see how uncooked their scenes seem to be from beginning to end. The other members of the cast include people who would become prominent for other products in the decade such as Cort (wearing sunglasses for all of his screen-time), Shire (credited as Tally Coppola), and Williams (would later star in Laverne & Shirley), but I'll be darned if I could note any sort of performance that generates consistent laughter, as if aimlessness was supposed to be the punchline. The groups and people that the film showcases throughout its run-time is as such: a police force that controls Dallas, a cowboy who steals their car, a meat-ravenous football team, a biker group that likes to ride around in golf carts, and Edgar Allen Poe in a motorcycle, spouting references from his work with a bird and lady at his side. After a while, it can get easy for the eyes to start wandering away from the film, as if the attempts to be "hip" are coming off as toothless and absurd, and I can only imagine how it would've felt upon original release. This was the last film that Corman directed for American International Pictures, and he had conflicts with the main studio executives (and founders), James H. Nicholson and Samuel Z. Arkoff, particularly with the ending shot, which went from one involving the top of a mesa to a simple kiss between the main couple - needless to say, the film wasn't a particularly great success. Corman had his reasons for the film's problems, stating that it was "...far too intellectual. Other people have told me that they think it's a meaningless film." In short, my thoughts on the film fall under the latter part of his statement, and this is disappointing when compared to other Corman directed films. On the whole, this is a movie without much charm or success in reaching the audience it wanted to reach in 1970, and it isn't much of a film to sit through over four decades later.

Overall, I give it 3 out of 10 stars.

Magnum Force.

Review #1135: Magnum Force.

Cast: 
Clint Eastwood (Inspector Harry Callahan), Hal Holbrook (Lt. Neil Briggs), David Soul (Officer John Davis), Tim Matheson (Officer Phil Sweet), Kip Niven (Officer Alan "Red" Astrachan), Robert Urich (Officer Mike Grimes), Felton Perry (Inspector Earlington "Early" Smith), Mitchell Ryan (Officer Charlie McCoy), Bob McClurg (the Cab Driver), and John Mitchum (Inspector Frank DiGiorgio) Directed by Ted Post (#518 - Hang 'Em High and #662 - Beneath the Planet of the Apes)

Review: 
The original Dirty Harry was a great success as an action crime thriller upon release in 1971, having a great combination of talent and style to it, from Don Siegel as director to a screenplay written by Harry Julian Fink, R.M. Fink & Dean Riesner, with un-credited work from John Milius. This time around, the director is Ted Post, who had directed numerous television programs such as Rawhide (also starring Clint Eastwood) and The Twilight Zone along with a few feature films, with Milius doing the story and co-writing the screenplay with Michael Cimino (co-writer of the screenplay for Silent Running a year prior). It should be noted that there had been a draft for the original film written by Terrence Malick that had a vigilante who hunted wealthy criminals who had gotten free of justice, which certainly has a bit of similarity with the story that Milius came up with for the sequel - albeit with motorcycle cops. The original film certainly attracted attention (and controversy) with the way it portrayed its loose cannon main character and how he did business, but the movie was certainly a popular one due to how it reflected the time it was made. In any case, the sequel tries to follow that up with something fresh, with the villain being people more rogue than him. For the most part, Magnum Force does a fine job in generating entertainment and thrills enough to make for a decent sequel, although it certainly has its limitations. Eastwood is as tough and grizzled as ever, which certainly leads to a bunch of effective sequences, such as the one involving a pistol championship between the cops or a scene with the adversaries and Eastwood stating their differences. Holbrook does a fine job with the role, managing to not fall under the radar while providing a fair contrast between his character and the main with how they treat the system - made true with the last half. Soul and the other three cops are okay, but they pale when compared to the villain from the original, particularly since they feel a bit more disposable and not as creepy this time around - for better or worse. Perry makes an fair impression when with Eastwood as partners, for the most part. Ryan does okay with the raw bit of time he has on screen. The film certainly feels a bit long at 124 minutes (as compared to the original being 102 minutes), and it is likely due to occasional lulls in the middle. The climax does fine with helping the film end without stumbling too much, but it doesn't seem to have the kind of punch that stands out amongst other action thrillers. Milius wasn't a particular fan of the film, describing it as one he did not like much, saying "They changed a lot of things in a cheap and distasteful manner. The whole ending is wrong, it wasn't mine at all. All movies had a motorcycle or car chase at the time — except Westerns." the film certainly had its troubles, with Post and Eastwood having disagreements over how the film should be done, which led to a falling out. In any case, There certainly is a good amount of action that will satisfy people enough without being too brutal or too out of place. I can't say that this is a great film by any means, but it is at least fair entertainment and a fair sequel.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

A Simple Favor.

Review #1134: A Simple Favor.

Cast: 
Anna Kendrick (Stephanie Smothers), Blake Lively (Emily Nelson), Henry Golding (Sean Townsend-Nelson), Andrew Rannells (Darren), Ian Ho (Nicky Townsend-Nelson), Joshua Satine (Miles Smothers), Linda Cardellini (Diana Hyland), Rupert Friend (Dennis Nylon), and Jean Smart (Margaret McLanden) Directed by Paul Feig.

Review: 
What makes for a good mystery thriller film? Is it a commendable cast? The fun in where it can go with its story threads? Or competent craftsmanship? Perhaps it is a combination of these categories that apply to making a mystery thriller worth watching, and this is apparent with this film as well. Based on the novel of the same name by Darcey Bell, A Simple Favor aspires to throw in as many thrills and twists wrapped with bits of humor that makes this a satisfying piece of entertainment. It certainly comes off a surprise, since I hadn't heard about this movie until roughly a week ago, but the real surprise is how weird the film gets itself with the cliches of a thriller that manage to come off positively, where it never devolves into trying to get cheap laughs or not lose charm by twisting itself too thin. At the heart of the film's success is its cast of characters and its main duo of Kendrick and Lively. Kendrick is fun to watch, having an energetic and capable nature to her, having a spunky charm while also being interesting to follow in her pursuits throughout the film, inspiring attention and occasional laughs. Lively does well at playing a character best described as an enigma in a suit, having a biting wit that certainly fits with what the film wants to be, wrapped in mystery and bonkers nature that goes just fine with a film like this. Kendrick and Lively have a fun charm together in their scenes together, whether while drinking or dealing with the twists that go on. Golding does pretty well in his time on screen, having a fair charm to him that goes along with the main duo at times. The rest of the cast don't have too much time on screen, but they do fine with keeping the flow of the film going at a fair pace, with Cardellini standing out with a rough amusing charm for her one scene on screen. At 117 minutes, I didn't mind its length too much, particularly since the film takes a bit of a turn half-way through, throwing a few twists that makes this come off as a bit campy, but I enjoyed where it wanted to go, even if it may (amusingly) remind me of a Lifetime movie - for better or worse. The screenplay from Jessica Sharzer (writer for a few episodes of American Horror Story and Nerve from 2016) is executed well by Feig to make a film that doesn't relent on its mystery and thrills while not devolving too much into farce or being too complex. It's a weird and wild mystery thriller that will surely prove itself well for its audience looking for a fun time.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

The Messenger (2009).

Review #1133: The Messenger.

Cast: 
Ben Foster (Sgt. Will Montgomery), Woody Harrelson (Capt. Tony Stone), Samantha Morton (Olivia Pitterson), Jena Malone (Kelly), Steve Buscemi (Dale Martin), Yaya DaCosta (Monica Washington), and Eamonn Walker (LtCol. Stuart Dorsett) Directed by Oren Moverman.

Review: 
It feels hard to face the truth at times. The realities of life and how people deal with their actions and consequences can make for an interesting subject for a film to confront. With this film, the main focus in on casualty notification officers, with the main two being a trainee and his mentor, as they try to do their job - no matter how hard it may be, whether for the notifier or the person being notified. There is a dark but driving feel to the reality that it shows for these two and the people that they encounter in their mission that justifies its existence through a 113 minute run-time. It may fall a bit with pacing at times, but there is a sense of duty to tell a story worth wanting to see, being factual and punctual with showing emotion that never feels cynically manufactured in its episodic nature. Foster and Harrelson make for an interesting pair to follow with, where they are faced with trying to do the job they are assigned to do within the standards of the role while dealing with their own story-lines. Foster does a fine job with what he is given, balancing the trauma the character has to deal with while dealing the newfangled reality of his assignment - particularly the people he encounters. Harrelson stands out the most among the cast, having a hardened edge of sincerity and intensity that invites us to look at him with a inquisitive lens that keeps the movie moving along. Morton does fine with what's she is given for a role that occasionally invites focus of interest, and her chemistry with Foster is somewhat present, making for a few fair moments. Buscemi, with a presence of probably less than ten minutes on screen, does fine with showing a good range of emotion as one of the receivers of news from the main group. The movie is at its finest when trying to show honestly with the rough nature of the main duo's job, which makes the first half work a bit better than the second half, which isn't as too held together. The film has a few cliches to it, but it isn't anything that makes the material come off as anything other than fairly watchable. It isn't the kind of movie that had much success upon original release, having a limited run in few theaters before making just over a million dollars on a $6.5 million budget, although it did receive nominations for numerous awards, such as Best Original Screenplay at the Academy Awards for writers Alessandro Camon and Oren Moverman and Best Supporting Actor for Harrelson; in any case, this is a fairly decent film that manages to pull enough emotional honesty and focus from its main two actors to pull a victory out, and I'm sure it will work just fine for people in the mindset for something a bit different for a war drama.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1978).

Review #1132: Invasion of the Body Snatchers.

Cast: 
Donald Sutherland (Dr. Matthew Bennell), Brooke Adams (Elizabeth Driscoll), Leonard Nimoy (Dr. David Kibner), Jeff Goldblum (Jack Bellicec), Veronica Cartwright (Nancy Bellicec), and Art Hindle (Dr. Geoffrey Howell) Directed by Philip Kaufman (#892 - The Right Stuff)

Review: 
It would only make sense for a science fiction novel such as Jack Finney's The Body Snatchers to have multiple adaptations into film. With Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1956), there was an intent to make a competent and intelligent horror sci-fi thriller, with a consistent message on the nature of conformity and autonomy for the time it was made, being made on a budget of less than half of a million dollars (with the budget for this film being roughly three million). Studio heads butted heads with director Don Siegel over the nature of the ending and other aspects that you might say conformed to the standards of the time - for better or worse. I enjoyed the film for its elements mentioned above, but I can't say I'm too surprised that a remake was released 22 years later. If you have an interesting idea to update the story and make something watchable out of it, naturally you should try to make that into a film. It is easy to say that this film represents the decade it was made in, updating itself in its structure and tone that makes for a gloomy but reasonably intelligent experience. It certainly amps up the effects and implications involved with conspiracy and paranoia, especially considering the setting being San Francisco instead of the small-town setting from the earlier film and the novel. It comes off as a brilliant decision that highlights how easy conformity can spread and not have many people notice, where a person can lose themselves in a big town and all the complexities that can go with it - such as self-help psychiatrists for example. If you thought a small town could lead to a threat like pod people encircling everyone quickly, a city will certainly make it seem quicker to conform.  

In that regard, Sutherland does pretty well in the main role, handling the situations thrown at him capably enough that makes him someone worth watching. It's hard to who exactly is the better lead, but I do find myself leaning a bit towards Kevin McCarthy, particularly when he makes an appearance in one scene. Perhaps it is the style that the film used to dictate its story and the way that McCarthy rolls with it that proves the difference. In any case, the scene with him is certainly a shocking surprise, resembling the scene from the original. Whether it is just a homage or a continuation of the events of the original (doubtful) is up to you, although it should be noted that the director of the original film (Siegel) also appears in the film as a cab driver. Adams is fine, having a range of concern and will that makes her watchable alongside Sutherland, and they have a decent amount of chemistry together. Nimoy is interesting to watch, skeptical and calculating that works to the film's advantage, particularly near the last third. Goldblum is quirky as one can be, showing the neurosis of his character without becoming annoying or too offbeat when shown with the other characters. Cartwright is okay, but she doesn't particularly stand out as well as the others in any substantial way, especially when compared to the other four. There is a helpless feeling of terror and conspiracy all-throughout the film, alongside moment of horror, such as the scene with the pods trying to form duplicates of the group, showing the details of the process pretty satisfyingly (through the effects-work by Russel Hessey and Dell Rheaume). The opening sequence involving the pods coming through space and coming to Earth on a dreary day is also a pretty interesting one. A good share of the credit for the film's good moments goes to Kaufman and screenwriter W. D. Richter (who later directed The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai Across the 8th Dimension) in making something that stands out in its own way.

The sound and music certainly help the film stick out in its own way, helping deliver striking moments of chills. Ben Burtt contributed Special Sound Effects for the film, while the film score was composed by jazz composer Denny Zeitlin, his only film score. Michael Chapman, cinematographer for films such as Taxi Driver (1976), does well at giving the film a panicked look, with occasional different angled shots that have their varying level of suspense. The length of the film certainly stands out, for better or worse. The original lasted 80 minutes, while this one lasts 115 minutes. The film doesn't border on boring, but it certainly has times where the length nearly becomes an anchor that could've been trimmed just a bit. It seems to linger a bit too much at times, but the climax is a pretty memorable one, having a fitting cold fear to it that works for the intent made by Kaufman. On the whole, I enjoyed the film for the most part due to it managing to justify its existence in terms of its narrative and most of its choices of style and casting. There are some who list it as one of the best film remakes ever. It isn't my favorite remake (The Thing (1982), which also has its share of paranoia, comes to mind), but I can say that this is a pretty good case for when a remake can go right. Instead of trying to just be different for the sake of difference or being an outright copy, a remake can stand-out for what it can cover in story and characters and make fine entertainment like this movie.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Hi. I decided to revise the image for the review. Here's the original image of review:

Motel Hell.

Review #1131: Motel Hell.

Cast: 
Rory Calhoun (Vincent Smith), Paul Linke (Sheriff Bruce Smith), Nancy Parsons (Ida Smith), Nina Axelrod (Terry), Wolfman Jack (Reverend Billy), Elaine Joyce (Edith Olson), Dick Curtis (Guy Robaire / 1st TV Preacher), Monique St. Pierre (Debbie), and Rosanne Katon (Suzi) Directed by Kevin Connor.

Review: 
Motel Hell is a weird, off-beat dark comedy that has a late-night appeal and charm through the power of a game cast and a fairly consistent tone. It's a horror film with unsettling material, but it also is a black comedy that has a share of laughs that never seem overbearing in any respect. It isn't a masterpiece by any standard, but it's the kind of movie that generates some enjoyment through strange material - after all, one of the taglines for the film is this: "It takes all kinds of critters ... to make Farmer Vincent's fritters." The key to the film's success is the performances of Calhoun and Parsons, partners in a unique kind of harvest for sausages, and I suppose it makes sense that the film has had comparisons to The Texas Chain Saw Massacre (1974), directed by Tobe Hooper. In fact, the original intent was to have him direct the film (which had plenty of dark elements and violence) for Universal Studios, but when they decided to not go through with production, Hooper bowed out (with United Artists later serving as distributor). It was the bringing in of Connor (known for work such as The Land That Time Forgot) as director that led to changes to a black comedy, with a tongue-in-cheek feel. Robert Jaffe and Steven-Charles Jaffe served as writers and producers for the film, with the former having served as co-writer of Demon Seed (1977), a film just as weird as this one with its premise. It is the performances of Calhoun and Parsons that make the film click handily enough. Calhoun has a country-style manner that mixes in with a warped sense of view that seems readily easy to go along with. Parsons is a bit more bonkers with her role, but she never comes off as a full-off cartoon of delusion or too underplayed for farmers turning people into food. Linke plays the oblivious sheriff type as okay as one can play when trying to keep up with not only weird farmers but also a love triangle. Axelrod, the fourth and final one of the main group is okay, but she doesn't really have much to give to a fleeting amount of time of sitting there with Calhoun in an offbeat sort of chemistry that isn't as particularly interesting as the horror parts. In the supporting cast is Jack in short bursts and Joyce & Curtis playing swingers that get the special treatment from the farmers that proves amusing. The middle proves to be a bit of a lull, but the first third and last third makes the patience worth it. The highlight of the film proves to be the climax, involving a chainsaw fight, complete with maniacal laughing and one certain mask that makes the experience a satisfaction in sleaze, complete with a lasting line that makes more sense to watch than just have revealed in text. It won't prove too daunting at 102 minutes, and while it may not be the best type of horror-comedy for everyone's taste, I found myself enjoying it enough for its weird but interesting choices for entertainment, preferably late at night.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

The Best Little Whorehouse in Texas.

Review #1130: The Best Little Whorehouse in Texas.

Cast: 
Burt Reynolds (Sheriff Ed Earl Dodd), Dolly Parton (Mona Stangley), Dom DeLuise (Melvin P. Thorpe), Charles Durning (The Governor), Theresa Merritt (Jewel), Jim Nabors (Deputy Fred), Lois Nettleton (Dulcie Mae), Noah Beery Jr. (Edsel), Robert Mandan (Senator Charles Wingwood), and Barry Corbin (C.J.) Directed by Colin Higgins.

Review: 
Admittedly, some films can have some interesting back-story to them. This film, for example, was adapted from the 1978 musical of the same name by Larry L. King and Peter Masterson, who had developed the musical loosely based on events that occurred in La Grange, Texas in 1973. The two contributed to writing the film alongside director Higgins (who had written films such as Harold and Maude), with this being his third and final directed effort before his death in 1988. Carol Hall, writer of the music and lyrics for the musical, contributed to the music for the film alongside Parton, in her second film role after 9 to 5 (1980). One of the production companies involved with the film is Miller-Milkis-Boyett Productions (named for its three people involved, Thomas L. Miller, Edward K. Milkis, and Robert L. Boyett), with them being responsible for producing shows such as Happy Days and Laverne & Shirley alongside films of their own such as Silver Streak (1976) and Foul Play (1978).

With all of that in mind, the film proves to be a fair if not flawed charmer. It doesn't come off as a surprise that the film fell to cuts (reportedly the original version lasted roughly two-and-a-half-hours), particularly when the film starts and ends with Nabors giving off narration to help with telling parts of the story, and that certainly feels a bit weird for something that lasts 114 minutes. At the heart of trying to provide charm is the duo of Reynolds and Parton, who certainly seem to want to generate excitement, particularly when singing together. For the most part, they do a fine job in providing a chuckle and a smile, but it isn't anything too greatly special that you would see from other musicals. Reynolds pulls off his typical swagger and mischievous charm with the kind of effort you expect from him. Parton comes off as appealing and interesting to watch that I don't find too surprising - making the character come alive with a good sense of humor. Their duet song "Sneakin Around" is a decent one to listen to with a foot-tap or two. DeLuise essentially plays a caricature of any sort of "decency police" huckster with the kind of zip and edge (alongside a wardrobe suited for spectacle) that certainly plays fine against the coziness of Reynolds and Parton. Durning stands out in part due to his song "The Sidestep" that certainly clicks as an ear-worm while also being pretty amusing, particularly for the character played. Nabors (who sings the first song of the movie with "20 Fans") is quirky but a welcome presence for a film trying to balance humor with music. The other members of the cast are okay, but the real focus is the main trio, with occasional parts of raunchiness. The movie moves itself at a gradual pace with trying to go through its material with flashes of singing and humor that comes off okay. Its story does sometimes stumble when it comes to its romance, and the cuts made to the film perhaps play a big part in making it have a bit less meat to it than the aspects with songs. One of the more amusing sequences involves Reynolds confronting DeLuise in the town public square, complete with gruff language and a fountain. While I can say that I knew pretty quickly that it was not going to be a great kind of movie, I found myself enjoying it enough to make the experience worth it.

On a sadder note, I would like to say my respects to Burt Reynolds, who died on September 6. In the eight films I have viewed that have featured Reynolds, there is not one performance that isn't in some way memorable or entertaining. His performance in Deliverance is especially one that stands out amongst other fun times delivered in movies such as The Longest Yard and Smokey and the Bandit. I'll end this with a quote from the man himself - "All you really have in the end are your stories.”

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Scream and Scream Again.

Review #1129: Scream and Scream Again.

Cast: 
Vincent Price (Dr. Browning), Christopher Lee (Fremont), Peter Cushing (Major Heinrich Benedek), Judy Huxtable (Sylvia), Alfred Marks (Detective Superintendent Bellaver), Michael Gothard (Keith), Marshall Jones (Konratz), Uta Levka (Jane), Christopher Matthews (Dr. David Sorel), Anthony Newlands (Ludwig), Peter Sallis (Schweitz), Judy Bloom (Helen Bradford), and Clifford Earl (Detective Sergeant Jimmy Joyce) Directed by Gordon Hessler.

Review: 
Editor's note: Movie Night will likely have delays with release of certain reviews in part due to my obligations with my new job - in other words, when I have time to write and post, I'll try to get it done, preferably with at least one or two reviews a week. I honestly did not intend to write over a thousand words for this review, yet here we are. I hope you enjoy this review in any case.

The movie is adapted from a novel called The Disorientated Man by Peter Saxon. Peter Saxon was a house pseudonym used by various authors of pulp fiction during the 1960s and 1970s, such as W. Howard Baker, Stephen Frances and others. In the book, aliens tried to colonize the Earth through making synthetic creatures made from people abducted and murdered by the group. The events depicted are done as a series of events that seem unrelated at first - such as people's limbs being taken away from them, investigation of a "vampire murderer", and a brutal foreign country dealing with diplomacy, for example. It generally is considered to be a science fiction conspiracy thriller, with bits of horror. With billing that promotes Price, Lee and Cushing all-together in one film, the expectation (at least for someone like me, anyways) is that there is a product that gives them something interesting to do. Perhaps it is that billing (or a title that invites horror connotations like this does) that makes the eventual result a disappointment. The real focus of actors involves not so much Price or Lee, but people such as Huxtable, Marks, Gothard, and Matthews, with Price only getting real substantial screen-time near the climax. The screenplay was done by Christopher Wicking, who had contributed additional dialogue for The Oblong Box (1969), which shared the same director while starring Lee and Price and having cinematography by John Coquillon (known for cinematography of films such as Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid).

The collage of plot threads would be interesting if things didn't go in such a boring manner as if to produce frustration. For the most part, the film's focus is on its crime thriller angle, with occasional bits of horror before playing sci-fi late in the game. It's like they couldn't figure out whether to be a paranoia-conspiracy thriller or a mad scientist film, so they just threw things in a blender and hoped that people wouldn't care about it making not much sense because it was so "entertaining" - or something like that. Price is the highlight, taking things in stride with a calm and collected manner that nearly makes having to sit through an hour to get more Price involvement. Lee is in the film for probably less than ten minutes (for a movie that runs at 95 minutes), having minimal presence until its climax. He says his lines without too much semblance of emotion, but no one in this film seems to show any particularly interesting emotional responses. Cushing was added in at the last minute to help with box office appeal, having just one scene. With three minutes of screen presence, it is sometimes easy to forget why he can be enjoyable to watch. Then I realize it is the fact that he brings a certain legitimacy and entertainment value to whatever role he brings, and I was thinking of that quite clearly when watching his scene because it reminds me that there isn't quite enough entertainment value from many of the cast-mates, including Jones, the one who nerve pinches Cushing to death. Huxtable doesn't make too much of an impression in a film that likes to talk and show imagery but not go anywhere with it. Gothard, the first adversary for the film (amusingly dubbed a "vampire killer" at one point), can't really make much of an impression aside from a bit of a frenzied face and a ruffled shirt, and the chase sequence is a doozy of amusement. It goes from a car chase to a chase in a quarry to one that ends back at a house where the killer just jumps in a pool of acid. In a better film, maybe it would've felt more interesting and exciting, but it's more of an amusing thing to look at, particularly their attempts to try and chase him down on foot.

Marks plays his police role with a dryness that invites a cursory watch but doesn't give off anything too charismatic. He does get some occasional offbeat lines, such as when being asked about murder: "Is it murder? Don't be so bloody stupid!" Matthews isn't too much better as the second figure to follow, but he plays things off okay at least. Jones plays a somewhat towering adversary that can't inspire much menace besides a mild unintentional chuckle. The other actors aren't too particularly memorable. By the time the film gets somewhere with its climax involving Price, it gets particularly amusing. A movie that likes to confound and confuse decides to shift into a quasi-Frankenstein film. Then again, the Hammer Frankenstein films were actually more interesting to look at and even more amusing to think about. The ideas presented involving creating some sort of composite people is far more interesting than anything the film tried to do for its first half. But truly, nothing can top a fight sequence involving an acid bath between Price and Lee, where they share the screen for a minute before Lee forces Price into the bath not by pushing him, but by...staring and towering over him, I guess. The sight of Price's face as he accepts his fate is particularly amusing, as if someone was dangling rotted cheese behind him. Reportedly, Price and Lee couldn't take the scene seriously, with Lee struggling to keep a straight face at the idea of Price (who didn't use a stunt double for the scene) sinking into some yellowy acid, which apparently affected Price due to the stuff affecting his nose that gave him nasal sinus for years afterwards. By the time the film ends, the idea of pondering what its final moments entail seem like a fruitless challenge, since expressing frustration at the junk produced on screen seems more appropriate. On the whole, this is an amusing misfire that knows to confuse its audiences with a barrage of images and junk without having an entertaining or even intriguing plot to go with it, with Price being the only real saving grace. The only real shock the film has is how much of a mess it is.

Overall, I give it 5 out of 10 stars.

Hackers.

Review #1128: Hackers.

Cast: 
Jonny Lee Miller (Dade Murphy / "Zero Cool" / "Crash Override"), Angelina Jolie (Kate Libby / "Acid Burn"), Fisher Stevens ("The Plague" / Eugene Belford), Renoly Santiago (Ramόn Sánchez / "The Phantom Phreak"), Matthew Lillard (Emmanuel Goldstein / "Cereal Killer"), Laurence Mason (Paul Cook / "Lord Nikon"), Jesse Bradford (Joey Pardella), Lorraine Bracco (Margo Wallace), Alberta Watson (Lauren Murphy), Penn Jillette (Hal), and Wendell Pierce (Special Agent Richard Gill) Directed by Iain Softley.

Review: 
I suppose it makes sense that this I encounter Hackers, since it seems to linger on how hip and weird it wants to be, even if it shows its age more so than actual people from the 90s. After all, what other movie can you think of that showcases Jolt Cola? (of which I can safely say I have had a cup of). Or offbeat hairstyles and fashion choices that make bow-ties seem sane by comparison? No doubt, the highlight of this is seeing the virtual environment and computer screens that we can see on people's faces without much problem. This is a film that certainly had some sort of curiosity about hacking and cyberpunk subcultures, where Rafael Moreu (screenwriter for the movie) talked with actual hackers to help develop inspiration for the movie, which the cast also ended up doing, to the point where Miller attended an actual hacker's convention. By the time this film was released, hackers even had their own manifesto out in the open. Sometimes, the best thing to say about a movie is to say that it's "just a movie", for better or worse. How can I take this movie seriously when the stakes and situations presented are so ridiculous in execution? This is a film that has a scene of our main lead hacking a local TV station's computer network to get it to show The Outer Limits (not that there's anything wrong with that choice) and leads into a hacking showoff with another hacker that has the imagery of cassette machines fighting over what tape to show. On one side of the film is a bunch of hacker heroes who like to roller-blade and listen to electronic music, while on the other side is a villain who un-ironically goes by "The Plague" who likes to skateboard around when working who plays the cliche of the corporate adversary, complete with a theft scheme right out of Superman III (1983). Actually, the fact that Penn Jillette (of the comedy magic duo Penn & Teller) is featured in a supporting role probably doesn't break the top five of weirdest things to note in this movie. One could probably write an entire essay over the strange nature of a film made in a time where people weren't as familiar with the Internet as they are today - you're reading this on a virtual screen, after all. Although the movie (made on a budget of $20 million) was not much of a success with audiences at the time, it does endure with its own cult following.

Miller does an okay job at handling a main role, but there are times when he feels a bit dry and not always too interesting, particularly when others are on screen who stand out in their own ways. After all, you might say he's a hacker, not a fighter. Jolie (in her third ever appearance on film) for example, has a certain kind of energy and nature to her that invites interest even with her closed off character and a hacker rivalry with Miller that goes (mostly) the way one would probably expect. They do share some chemistry with each other, at least, although the fact it is in a movie as weirdly built as this one is amusing. It proves amusing to see itself try to subvert the cliche romance, mostly because you'll find yourself involved with the hacking more. Santiago is fine, and Lillard certainly inspires hit-or-miss moments with his scene-stealing moments of hacking and weird hair. Mason and Bradford round out the hacker group, and they are both fine in their brief time. Clearly, the one who munches attention is Stevens, the keyboard cowboy (as he puts it) who makes the experience worth it in playing the role of the adversary without taking it too seriously or too amusingly. In lesser hands, it would've come off as silly nonsense, but Stevens is adept at being compelling to watch be the smug and clever foil, even if the stakes aren't particularly too high. Oh sure, a bunch of oil tanker fleets will capsize to cover a hacking scheme, but there is something truly amusing about the levels of tension (and occasional humor) the film wants to draw for its climax, complete with rollerblading, hacker-themed pirate TV show hosts, and splotches of color and imagery for a hacking showdown. Interestingly, the cyberspace effects are not computer generated imagery, but instead naturally created, using methods such as animations, motion control, or other methods. The cutting edge-ness that I'm sure the film had in 1995 is more of a soft edge now, but there is something to watch in its entertainment value regardless, whether for laughs or not. It's dumb and cheesy, but there's a certain feeling to its cheese that makes it one you can't reject too easily out of hand. I'd hesitate to easily call it a cult classic, but it's certainly the kind of film you could watch late at night and point at with chuckles, for better or worse, even if I can't quite give it a positive endorsement. It isn't much as a crime film, but it is certainly something on an entertainment level. It's entertaining junk of the weirdest order even with over two decades of age behind it.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

eXistenZ.

Review #1127: eXistenZ.

Cast: 
Jennifer Jason Leigh (Allegra Geller), Jude Law (Ted Pikul), Ian Holm (Kiri Vinokur), Don McKellar (Yevgeny Nourish), Callum Keith Rennie (Hugo Carlaw), Sarah Polley (Merle), Christopher Eccleston (the Seminar Leader), Willem Dafoe (Gas), Robert A. Silverman (D'Arcy Nader), Oscar Hsu (Chinese Waiter), and Kris Lemche (Noel Dichter) Directed by David Cronenberg (#816 - Crimes of the Future)

Review: 
Believe it or not, this review has been delayed quite significantly by roughly a week. It was supposed to be completed before the review of Legacy of Blood. However, I found that it was easier to come up with thoughts for the plethora of reviews that have come out in the past week. I hope that this review is satisfactory to the standards that I try to have for this show. 

What does it mean to live in reality? Particularly in our day and age, where virtual reality seems more than just a pipe dream? For something like this, a science fiction body horror film, eXistenZ likes to throw questions and gooey things at its audience, and it is the ways that it plays games with its viewer that help in seeing if the film actually succeeds in telling its intriguing ideas. It's a mind-game of a movie, filled with gooey imagery and a fairly game cast willing to showcase this weird world and its situations, and it isn't hard to see why this could be considered a cult classic. For me, it borders on the line of average, but there are aspects of the film that are fairly interesting, along with parts that aren't as bright. Undeniably, the best one to shine in this film is Leigh. She has a certain energy to her that has its shares of cynicism and intrigue (such as when talking about the plot) that makes her a person worth following, which makes sense even now with how people treat creators of things that certainly spring creativity of any kind - whether in technology or some other field.

The same can't be said as much for Law. Perhaps it is the nature of the character that makes him a dry one to follow (being a PR guy) that makes him not as interesting to go along with, although Law can prove decent at times at reacting to the weirdness that this film can verge itself into. Holm and McKeller prove okay, providing the kind of support you'd expect in a situation presented like this (if that makes sense, anyway). Dafoe proves a fine highlight for the time he is on screen, being the most interesting person playing off Leigh and Law for most of the film. This is a movie where people put squid-looking things in their lower back. In an age where people like wear big headsets to experience "VR", who can judge? People certainly love the creations that invite creativity and imagination, whether it blurs the line between fantasy and reality or not, much like how a filmmaker creates the world that encompasses a movie. The film moves at a casual pace in its 97 minute run-time, having a look and feel that plays against expectation that feels welcome in a sense. Where one might expect darkness and jargon, one finds a different sort, a weird energy of events and things that has a fine cinematography from Peter Suschitzky (who had done work on films such as The Empire Strikes Back and other previous Cronenberg films such since Dead Ringers in 1988) to go with it. The ending likes to twist itself with a sort of relish for trickery and mystery, and while I'm not the biggest fan of it, I will say it ends the film without turning it into a joke.

The best way to describe the film is to imagine a philosophy lecture with a professor that happens to have goo in its presentation. For a general crowd, it could prove frustrating, particularly if one doesn't have much patience for something that is suited for examination and discussion a bit more different than a usual talk about a general movie. It certainly isn't something like Tron or The Matrix, that's for sure. But if one takes the film and looks under the surface, I think they will find something that is worth the game it wants to play with the mind.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Warning from Space.

Review #1126: Warning from Space.

Cast: 
Keizô Kawasaki (Dr. Toru Itsobe), Toyomi Karita (Hikari Aozora / Ginko), Bin Yagisawa (No. 2 Pairan), Shôzô Nanbu (The Elder Dr. Itsobe), Bontarô Miake (Dr. Kamura), Mieko Nagai (Taeko Kamura), Kiyoko Hirai (Mrs. Matsuda), and Isao Yamagata (Dr. Matsuda) Directed by Koji Shima.

Review: 
Warning from Space (also known as Uchūjin Tokyo ni arawaru) is a film that is a science fiction tokusatsu (a term to describe a film that uses many special effects) that came after the popularity of Gojira (1954). It is loosely adapted from a novel by Gentaro Nakajima, with the creatures being designed by avant-garde arist Tarō Okamoto, which had a starfish resemblance with one eye. It was produced and distributed by Daiei Film, which produced films such as Rashomon and the Gamera film series prior to its merger with Kadokawa Pictures in 2002. In a decade that brought the first color feature for Japan with Carmen Comes Home (1951), this happens to be the first Japanese color science fiction film. I can't say that this film comes out a winner, but I will give it credit for occasional sparks of imagination. The sequences with the creatures (which contrary to the posters are human scale and not large) certainly lend themselves attention, since they stick out in their own way from usual films with creatures, having a weird but amusing look to them. Any time the aliens are on screen makes the film have some sort of energy and life. Actually, one other sequence is amusing, involving an alien trying to disguise herself as a human, complete with leaping ten feet in the air when playing tennis and materializing wherever she wants.

However, the film likes to focus more on its plot (much like another film that took influence from it - Gorath, released six years later), there is a certain feeling of boredom that levels in due to the resulting scenes not being particularly compelling. The cast don't do a terrible job with what they're given, with Yamagata being a fair standout, although this is more of a movie that strolls to its destinations. Nobody is too particularly over-the-top, not too underplayed, but it's the kind of performances that play to the sci-fi cliches without really giving too much life to the film. Oddly enough, this film has slipped into the public domain, which makes it readily available on the Internet. The version I watched was dubbed in English, which was produced at Titra Sound Studios by Jay H. Cipes and Edward Palmer. If one is curious to view the film, I would advise to try and fine a good quality print, as opposed to prints that have a washed out look (as is the case with some films in the public domain) that hurt the viewing experience since it is in color. The film as a whole has a decent look, but it isn't anything that shines over other sci-fi films of its ilk. However, it, along with other sci-fi films of its time had an influence on Stanley Kubrick, who made 2001: A Space Odyssey twelve years later. On the whole, this isn't a terrible experience, in part because of the effects that shine on occasion. At 87 minutes, it may move a sluggish kind of pace, but it may prove worth it for people looking for something to pass some time with sparks of curiosity.

Overall, I give it 5 out of 10 stars.

Mr. Peabody & Sherman.

Review #1125: Mr. Peabody & Sherman.

Cast: 
Ty Burrell (Mr. Peabody), Max Charles (Sherman), Ariel Winter (Penny Peterson), Stephen Colbert (Paul Peterson), Leslie Mann (Patty Peterson), Allison Janney (Edwina Grunion), Stephen Tobolowsky (Principal Purdy), Stanley Tucci (Leonardo da Vinci), Patrick Warburton (King Agamemnon), Zach Callison (King Tut), Dennis Haysbert (Judge), and Leila Birch (WABAC) Directed by Rob Minkoff (#073 - The Lion King and #746 - The Haunted Mansion)

Review: 
In a world where any kind of show or segment can be adapted into a show, I suppose it only makes sense that this exists. This is an adaptation of "Peabody's Improbable History", created by Ted Key that appeared as a segment on The Adventures of Rocky and Bullwinkle and Friends from 1959 to 1960. It is also the 28th film from Dreamworks Animation, which seems to want to churn out as many products of entertainment as it pleases, which can certainly lead to some interesting things - for better or for worse. The best thing I can say about this film is that it will get the job done in terms of entertainment for its target audience, for better or worse. There is a certain charm that the movie has with its jokes, having an eccentric nature that combines with some engaging animation to carry the movie more often than not. Burrell does a fine job, being fairly clever and interesting to watch while generating a fair share of amusement. Charles does fine, having a spunky boyish nature that plays well with Burrell in the history segments, with the family segments playing off okay. Winter does okay with what she's given, but her character generally comes off as annoying and self-serving, and her chemistry with the other two is more irritating than dynamic; with her first scene (involving her calling Sherman a dog), you'd think she was actually playing an adversary. She lightens up slightly, but not entirely to make a winning trio. The only other person with significant screen-time is Janney, playing a bureaucrat that is an unwanted presence each time she pops up, not generating any sort of laughs, representing the time when the movie slows itself down to try and create conflict. There are three main timelines covered in the film, with a varying consistency that don't plod too much, with the Troy marginally being the best one with its energy, with Warburton helping out in that regard. Nothing says "history lesson" like puns and goofy portrayals of history, reminding me a bit of History of the World, Part I (1981), albeit with attempts to connect the plot together. The story, written by Craig Wright (writer for shows such Six Feet Under) is usually up to task. The time travel story does weave itself a bit complex, but it proves workable without being too cliched. However, the film's problem is its elements besides time travel. Perhaps there wasn't a way to make a film without introducing a third to go with the main duo, but then I remember that Back to the Future (1985) and the Bill and Ted films worked out just fine with weaving its time travel and humor with its duo. The whimsicalness can only go so far when the emotional arc tries to wedge itself in, for better or worse. The climax is okay, but its shoehorned parts about the nature of the duo's relationship (in an attempt to establish "heart", I suppose) border on cringing the audience. When the movie wants to have zany fun and not try to go through the motions of predictability, it is engaging and worth a fine time, making for a solidly average but serviceable movie. At 92 minutes, it won't torture its audience, working as decent fare for families and anybody looking for a decent time to travel with.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

The Beast of Hollow Mountain.

Review #1124: The Beast of Hollow Mountain.

Cast: 
Guy Madison (Jimmy Ryan), Patricia Medina (Sarita), Carlos Rivas (Felipe Sanchez), Eduardo Noriega (Enrique Rios), Julio Villarreal (Don Pedro), Mario Navarro (Panchito), Pascual García Peña (Pancho), and Lupe Carriles (Margarita) Directed by Edward Nassour and Ismael Rodríguez.

Review: 
What can one really say about a movie that combines a Western with dinosaurs? For the first hour, the only thing you can think is surprise that it takes so long to show the beast, and then the last twenty minutes the only thing you can think about is the sheer strange nature of a dinosaur being in a Western and share some sort of joy. Nothing says a good introduction like a faceless narrator telling us about this supposed hollow mountain in a back country that is supposedly evil - spooky, I suppose.  Filmed with an animation process called "Nassour Regiscope", the best parts of the film are obviously near the end with the monster, which certainly appeals to monster lover along with anyone looking for more than the conventional cattle rancher rival story presented for most of its 81 minute run-time. The idea for the film came from Willis O'Brien, who you may remember for his effects work on King Kong (1933) and Mighty Joe Young (1949), among others, although he was not involved with the film besides just giving the idea. This was an co-production between the USA and Mexico, filmed in CinemaScope (combined with stop-motion animation) while having English and Spanish versions filmed simultaneously.

Nobody from the cast generates too much excitement or interest. Madison and Medina fit the mold of conventional people in a movie that would've been just fine for prior decades. This can also apply to the generic adversary played by Noriega or the mildness of the kid played by Navarro. Everybody has a standard feel to them that is incredibly stale when faced with the fact that they dominate our attention for over an hour with barely a hint of a "beast", with the highlight moment to make fun of being a brawl between two characters that comes out of nowhere. Actually, I take that back, the sequence where footage of cattle stampeding is sped up to look more menacing is pretty amusing. The effects for the beast is interesting to look at, in a Saturday morning cartoon kind of way, complete with a large tongue. Four people provided effects work, with Louis DeWitt and Jack Rabin doing photographic effects, while Henry Lyon did model work and Nassour did the stop-motion animation work. The monster doesn't look too imposing in certain shots, and the minimal body count associated with it doesn't make for a particularly riveting experience, but on a basic level there is some enjoyment to be had with a dinosaur stalking a bunch of people. The climax is a bit abrupt, in that it just ends quickly without much closure given to these characters - for better or worse. One has a few options to watching this film - they could watch the film all the way as intended, or they could watch the 2017 riffing by Mystery Science Theater 3000, or they could simply watch the last 20 minutes with the dinosaurs. This isn't a good movie in any sense, but it will provide a basic mode of entertainment if one is in the mood for some junk.

Overall, I give it 5 out of 10 stars.

Legacy of Blood (1971).

Review #1123: Legacy of Blood.

Cast: 
Rodolfo Acosta (Sheriff Dan Garcia), Merry Anders (Laura Dean), Norman Bartold (Tom Drake), Ivy Bethune (Elga), John Carradine (Christopher Dean), Richard Davalos (Johnny Dean), Faith Domergue (Veronica Dean), Buck Kartalian (Igor Garin), Brooke Mills (Leslie Dean), Jeff Morrow (Gregory Dean), John Russell (Frank Mantee), and John Smith (Dr. Carl Isenburg) Directed by Carl Monson.

Review: 
The most interesting thing about this movie is the fact that there isn't one consistent title - there are three. The titles are Legacy of Blood, Blood Legacy, and Will to Die, but I think I will go with the first one, since that one was used for the opening title sequence. It also happened to be featured on Elvira's Movie Macabre with that same title, who I imagine had more fun delivering commentary for a cruddy film like this than I could generate. In any case, this is a movie that is described as a "mystery slasher" - and I put that term in quotation marks because the film is barely a mystery and barely a slasher in any respectable sense. Basked in cliches, the only surprise is how frustrating it operates itself, having minimal gore but maximum tedium. None of the situations or characters presented aren't too particularly interesting. The best thing one can say about the cast is that Carradine is the only one adept at making something watchable - even material boring as this. He's kooky, but he commands attention that the others can't do as well. There isn't anyone to follow with, whether to cheer or hiss at, just a bunch of oddball people who look like they are either doing it for a paycheck or doing it for "the art", whatever that means. Everybody else comes off as stale or not particularly exciting to follow with, unless you count sideburns as something to look at. The body count goes up at a snail's pace while the soap opera type plot serves to irritate its audience, with its best scene being one single shot - a lamp, which relates back to an earlier line about one character's past. How does a movie manage to make a bee sequence come off as boring? Have the setup to said sequence not make much sense. The climax (and its "twist" ending) is like a big joke to its audience, since it comes out of nowhere while bringing itself to a crashing halt - with a last line that breaks the fourth wall that is a sure groaner. Ultimately, this is a dull experience that is more horrible than horror.

Overall, I give it 3 out of 10 stars.

Beerfest.

Review #1122: Beerfest.

Cast: 
Jay Chandrasekhar (Barry Badrinath), Kevin Heffernan (Phil "Landfill" Krundle / Gil "Landfill" Krundle), Steve Lemme (Steve "Fink" Finkelstein), Paul Soter (Jan Wolfhouse), Erik Stolhanske (Todd Wolfhouse / Young Baron Ludwig), Nat Faxon (Rolf), Will Forte (Otto), Ralf Möller (Hammacher), Mo'Nique (Cherry), Eric Christian Olsen (Gunther), Jürgen Prochnow (Baron Wolfgang von Wolfhausen), Cloris Leachman (Great Gam Gam Wolfhouse), Donald Sutherland (Johann von Wolfhaus), Blanchard Ryan (Krista Krundle), and Gunter Schlierkamp (Schlemmer) Directed by Jay Chandrasekhar (#1121 - Super Troopers)

Review: 
Beerfest is the fourth film from Broken Lizard, released two years after Club Dread (2004), with the inspiration for this movie being a chugging contest at a beer garden in Australia that the group had. Admittedly, this is a film that does have the standards of a mediocre sports movie, just piled with a bunch of gags throughout an 110 minute run-time. The main five do manage to create a fair bit of laughs, for the most part. Soter and Stolhanske serve as the leads for the bare story that accompanies the film, each doing okay with what's given. Chandrasekhar carries this character of talented pathetic nature with competence. Heffernan is fairly entertaining at times. Lemme does okay, although some of the gags with him prove a bit too obvious. Leachman provides some warmth for brief but welcome times. The other members of the cast have their moments of amusement, although nothing too particularly greatly funny. The adversaries (highlighted by Forte) do prove serviceable, silly in their toughness that can be appreciated. For me, I felt that while the first third worked fine with its setups, the other parts come off a bit sluggish, with the pacing not working particularly well with what probably could've been a shorter experience. By the time it gets to the climax with its competition, it's more of a stagger than a sprint. The competition is fine, having a fair amount of amusement (and things you'd expect) that make it fairly worth it, I suppose, and it ends neatly enough without being too forced. Thinking back to Super Troopers (which was seven minutes shorter) reminded me that while it wasn't always a consistent film to go with, it seemed to gel better with its gags and pace that seemed a bit less tiring overall. For people looking for something wild and silly, this may prove up your alley well enough, particularly if you are in the right flavor/mood for something like this. For me, I thought it was an okay venture, but it isn't consistent enough to really think of it as a clearheaded winner.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

Super Troopers.

Review #1121: Super Troopers.

Cast: 
Jay Chandrasekhar (Trooper Arcot "Thorny" Ramathorn), Kevin Heffernan (Trooper Rodney "Rod" Farva), Steve Lemme (Trooper MacIntyre "Mac" Womack), Paul Soter (Trooper Jeff Foster), Erik Stolhanske (Trooper Robert "Rabbit" Roto), Brian Cox (Captain John O'Hagen), Marisa Coughlan (Officer Ursula Hanson), Daniel von Bargen (Police Chief Bruce Grady), James Grace (Officer Jim Rando), Michael Weaver (Officer Samuel Smy), and Dan Fey (Officer Jack Burton) Directed by Jay Chandrasekhar.

Review: 
It is interesting to think about a movie such as this and see the nature of its success and upbringing-the byproduct of a comedy troupe known as Broken Lizard. The troupe, which stars as the main trooper group for the film, originated at Colgate University in 1989, although it only became the five-man troupe people know in later years (as was the name, since originally one of the names was "Charred Goosebeak"). It is pretty easy to see influence from films such as Animal House, Caddyshack and Police Academy when it comes to the comedy stylings that this film has in its approach - to have a bunch of ridiculous fun. This was the second directed feature from the group, after making Puddle Cruiser (1996). Super Troopers was their first major release, with a final budget of around $3 million that premiered on January 19, 2001, at the Sundance Film Festival. After its premiere, it was bought by Fox Searchlight Pictures, which distributed a general release the following year, with the film being a minor success, making $20 million at the box office while inspiring a cult following that led to a sequel in 2018. meow

It is easy to see why this has endured as a cult classic in the years that have followed its release - it's a silly movie, but it's one that knows what its going for with its audience and reaches for amusement with skit after skit. Whether involving wordplay, sight gags, or some sort of mix of both, this is something that managed to warm up to me because it was satisfactory with being wacky. There are more hits in it than misses, with some of the gags in particular sticking out pretty well - such as one involving syrup or a word challenge. The plot is thin, but the film will prove to win itself over by having enough payoff while keeping a good sense of humor that doesn't prove distracting. The main five are entertaining to watch together, such as Chandrasekhar and Stolhanske, who each make for good fun people to follow with. Heffernan proves amusing, playing it with obnoxiousness that lends laughs that contrasts pretty neatly with the others - such as his request for a "litre" of cola. Lemme and Soter prove amusing, making for some amusing shenanigans alongside the rest that generate good times. Cox and von Bargen play the authority roles the way you expect, but Cox is a warm one to go along with while von Bargen makes for an amusing adversary. Coughlan rounds out the cast with significant screen-time (aside from a brief cameo from Lynda Carter), and she does stand out in her own way from the antics played with the others, making for a welcome addition. The 103 minute run-time feels fine to sustain itself enough, with the first and last thirds of the movie holding up the best, never riding the waters of annoyance nor being too slow. The film pulls itself into something to like with the charm that it tries to pull with the numerous gags it likes to throw at the audience, and it has a range of success with the fun it tries to have that I can recommend, provided one is in the right mood for it. meow

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

History of the World, Part I.

Review #1120: History of the World, Part I.

Cast: 
Mel Brooks (Moses / Comicus / Torquemada / Jacques / King Louis XVI), Dom DeLuise (Emperor Nero), Madeline Kahn (Empress Nympho), Harvey Korman (Count de Monet), Cloris Leachman (Madame Defarge), Ron Carey (Swiftus), Gregory Hines (Josephus), Pamela Stephenson (Mademoiselle Rimbaud), Shecky Greene (Marcus Vindictus), Sid Caesar (Chief Caveman), Mary-Margaret Humes (Miriam), Rudy De Luca (Prehistoric Man / Captain Mucus - The Roman Empire), with Orson Welles (Narrator) Directed by Mel Brooks (#061 - Blazing Saddles, #198 - Spaceballs, #248 - Robin Hood: Men in Tights, #361 - The Producers, #364 - High Anxiety, #623 - Silent Movie, and #655 - Young Frankenstein)

Review: 
History of the World, Part I was the seventh film directed and written by Brooks, with this being an anthology film based around numerous moments in history such as the Stone Age or Rome, making fun of the epics and dramas involving sword and sandals and period costumes. It's easy to say that this is one of his weaker films, particularly when compared to his other parodies such as Blazing Saddles for Westerns or High Anxiety for suspense films. However, this film does have its moments that work despite a disjointed feel in part because of the jokes that get thrown out through its 92 minute run-time. In a sense, it is like a greasy burger (or if you're a vegetarian, a salad I suppose) at a fast-food joint: it's probably not great for you, but it will serve its purpose handy enough and it has some flavor. The film revels in its crude nature and its puns while messing around with the historical situations that it presents, with Welles providing a narration that proves effective each time he is heard on screen. Brooks does a fine job handling himself in playing multiple roles, making each one have their moments of amusement without becoming too much of a caricature. DeLuise has brief time on screen, but he certainly plays off things fine enough. Kahn proves amusing with her expressions and eccentric nature in her third and final collaboration with Brooks. Korman and Leachman also do fine in their brief time on screen. Hines, a dancer-singer in his film debut, does fairly well with his role, eliciting a fine bit of charm. The other actors do fine with what they need to do, with a few cameo appearances from actors such as Bea Arthur and Jackie Mason among others that work out fine. Of the numerous segments of the film, "The Spanish Inquisition" one, involving a song-and-dance number along with stylings of torture devices and aquatic ballet that certainly feels absurd enough for its intent, shines fairly enough. The meat of the movie comes through the segments involving Rome and France, although the former lasts a bit better with its jokes throughout its time. The other segments and bits covered do okay, although the consistency does vary. It is safe to say that this is a movie that can be hit and miss, but it will serve well for anyone in the mindset for something with shades of amusement that won't dull all the senses by the time it is finished.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Mission: Impossible – Fallout.

Review #1119: Mission: Impossible – Fallout.

Cast:
Tom Cruise (Ethan Hunt), Henry Cavill (August Walker), Ving Rhames (Luther Stickell), Simon Pegg (Benjamin "Benji" Dunn), Rebecca Ferguson (Ilsa Faust), Sean Harris (Solomon Lane), Angela Bassett (Erica Sloane), Michelle Monaghan (Julia Meade), Alec Baldwin (Alan Hunley), Vanessa Kirby (White Widow), Frederick Schmidt (Zola), and Wes Bentley (Patrick) Directed by Christopher McQuarrie (#1117 - Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation)

Review: 
For a film series that has lasted 22 years and six films, one would wonder if the Mission: Impossible series would ever seem to be slowing down in its execution and quality, and then I realize that Cruise, like the films themselves, seems to be more durable than ever. After all, how can one not be impressed by someone who insists on doing their stunts for a film that showcases a HALO jump and numerous chase sequences to the point where one said sequence led to him breaking his ankle? Stunts aside, this is a film that certainly sticks out from the other installments in the series in more ways than one. For instance, McQuarrie returns to direct and write once again for the series, and he certainly makes a great follow-up to Rogue Nation, amping the stakes and action while not sacrificing the spirit of what makes these engaging films to watch, particularly since each one has improved on the last one since the third one twelve years prior. This one manages to have a story that piles itself with motivations and turns that certainly try to keep up with the action sequences thrown in from time to time, which is helpful for a movie that lasts 147 minutes but never manages to come off as plodding or too long. Some of its beats and motivations with its adversaries may feel a bit obvious before the movie wants to show its hand, but there isn't anything too complicated or insulting to the film's detriment.

The cast all do a fine job with what they are meant to do. Cruise has a talent for enduring as long as he has as an action hero by being adept at his feet along being adept at being incredibly easy to follow, never letting the audience down once. Cavill does a fine job, playing his role with a raw sensibility that has a blunt consistency that plays well against Cruise. It is nice to see Rhames and Pegg again, proving fine character moments once again while serving well with whatever the plot wants to throw with them and not just being put aside. Ferguson proves capable to the task given for her, having a charm and energy to her that zips with everything neatly enough. Harris (the first recurring villain in the series) manages to still have a menace to his performance that works enough for the time given without feeling stale. Monaghan does fine with her time on screen, being interesting to see again. Bassett and Baldwin make for capable authority figures in their own ways. Kirby is fairly refreshing with her brief moments with Cruise, having a casual but crucial nature that is sold well. The film has a good deal of intensity with its suspense while trying to not cheat its audience with computer trickery while not going overboard too much. The action can be brutal at times, but there is never a point where the lines become blurred or too unsettling to enjoy, confident in what it shows without risk. The best action sequence is the climax, involving helicopters that certainly has a good deal of air to it, being the peak of excitement. Ultimately, I found this to be an enjoyable piece of entertainment with enough action and charm that one can expect from the series that sets the bar as high as it has ever been for the franchise but also likely for action films as a whole. It is a thrill ride from start to finish that accomplishes everything it sets out to do for its audience and more that I think makes it the best Mission: Impossible film yet.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.