Get the Gringo
Originally entitled How I Spent My Summer Vacation this film is welcome return to form for the embattled Mel Gibson. Gibson has a undeniable screen presence that has been shadowed by his recent loud antics. He has mastered the sly thief, paranoid taxi driver, Scottish hero, Mad Australian stunt man and charming ladies man. Aside from his recent troubles with racism and domestic violence he has proven that he still is a fantastic actor. He is at his best when he plays the criminal with a wild side that can still find redemption. His comic timing is on point and when he is around anything can happen. You belive he could survive in a Mexican prison, shoot a guy in the eye while holding a gun sideways and catch a grenade mid-air and throw it back at the man who threw the grenade….then survive the explosion.
Get the Gringo is the story of a career thief who puts his intelligence to use in a Mexican prison in order to get back the stolen money that was stolen from him. The prison becomes a character in itself. It is a slum in which prisoners can live with their families and pay money not to work. It has a life of its own and If you can figure out the system you can thrive while serving time. While in the prison he meets a precocious kid and his hardened yet still beautiful mom. He bonds with the little kid while figuring a way to get out of the prison. What follows is a rare happy ending and a whole lot of blood.
The film uses dark comedy to full effect and shows trademarks of Gibson’s flare for violence (Braveheart, Patriot, Apocolypto, Passion). However, it brings us to a world you’ve never seen and reintroduced us to a familiar Gibson that has been absent throughout his last few zany years. I can never assume what is going on through his mind but I like him not playing a parody of himself. I am worried about him being in the Machete sequel. I don’t think he needs the work so I don’t want to see him exploiting himself due to his public persona.
Get the Gringo is a film about Mel Gibson outsmarting everyone. His sly, mischievous and dangerous persona is welcome after all of his current problems. A full comeback is unlikely but this film shows he still has that Gibson charm. Hopefully, Mel stays away from Hollywood and continues to self finance his own films. This is a welcome predicament because he always produces something different that strays outside the mainstream. Get the Gringo is not for everybody but it is not a totally unpleasant way to spend 90 minutes.
Share this post:
The Bourne Legacy
I was working in a movie theater when the Bourne Identity hit the theaters in 2002. The film never sold out but for months it had a steady flow of people watching it. Word of mouth was solid and it proved to be a surprise hit. Watching Matt Damon run silently through a field with an old gun while outsmarting a world-class sniper was beautiful in its simplicity. Then, there was the Parisian fight scene that wowed audiences with its quick action and use of pens as killing devices. A new action star was born. The movie featured a realistic approach and featured an everyday man who was as afraid of his violence as were his victims. The movie influenced Casino Royale and Batman Begins. Here was a man looking for answers and dispatching of victims in practical ways and not by rocket launchers and biceps. The Bourne Identity was famous for its quiet hero and intense moments and nice love story. After the success of Identity Paul Greengrass jumped into the directors chair for Supremacy and Ultimatum and took the series to new levels with his shaky cam and globe-trotting tendencies. What followed was a billion dollar franchise that still had some gold left to be mined.
The Bourne legacy is a wonderful parallel continuation of the Bourne series. Replacing Matt Damon is the superb character actor Jeremy Renner. Renner successfully takes the reins as Aaron Cross with his impressive physicality and different take on a dangerous man. He is a chemically enhanced agent who becomes entangled in the web that Jason Bourne spun. Renner’s back story unfolds as multiple levels of government pursue him throughout the world. The action chases and dialogue create an intelligent film involving capable/violent people. Chris Ryan of the Hollywood prospectus podcast made a wonderful point when he said he “loves watching competent people.” This film features highly competent people accomplishing extraordinary things with ease.
Most of the worries I had about fancy fleeces and Bourne fatigue were assuaged quickly. Director/writer Tony Gilroy is a master wordsmith and he made the jump from Bourne writer to director. He creates three-dimensional characters with small actions and little exposition. The characters are not defined by dialogue. They are established with scenes that show and don’t tell us. For instance, The head of the CIA and his boss are in over their heads. The only option they have left is to call Edward Norton to clean things up. When you first see him he is running in the pouring rain at 4:45 AM. Norton’s sin eater character in captured in ten seconds. He is a driven, unflappable and successful man.
Renner proves to be magnetic but this film belongs to Edward Norton. A man who runs everything but stays behind the scene. If the Ghostbusters had trouble they would call Ed Norton. He is a man who gets things down in quiet, violent and competent ways. His speech to Renner about sin eating is a highlight in a film full of highlights.
Rachel Weisz carries on the strong female character arcs in the Bourne world. Her work as an intelligent yet disheveled doctor is enduring and believable. Also, Oscar Isaac (Drive) continues his successful string of character roles in his quiet Alaskan scenes with Renner. You enjoy the two of them together and much like the Grantland staff I’d pay to watch the two of them eat stew together. Louis Ozawa Changchien is also believable as Cross 2.0. He carries on the tradition of badass assassins who pursue the good guys. His stoic and violent ways fit right in with Clive Owen, Karl Urban and Edgar Ramirez.
The film had a fantastic opening weekend pulling in $40 million and is currently at $98 million if you add foreign and domestic. The film is proving to be a successful gamble that will easily make the $125 million production budget back. The only discouraging thing is that it has a confusing 55% on Rotten Tomatoes and only a 59% user rating. This sub par percentages are understandable but discouraging because I feel like people are not appreciating the fantastic writing. Hopefully, it will leave the door open for a Renner/Damon team up in which they battle Norton and other fascinating assassins. The Bourne series has been defined by its ability to excel and influence. I really hope that they continue making movies about this world.
The Bourne Legacy is a lean, intelligent and a fantastic addition to a successful and influential trio of films.
Share this post:
Bad Movie Tuesday: ATM
Three people, one ATM and a killer who can be defined as a “booksmart jerk.” ATM is a tiny Canadian thriller that has a decent premise but fails to cash in on the situation. It tries to make lone ATMs as threatening as the water in Jaws. However, the bad guy in this film is a total poindexter. He lacks the teeth, tenacity and unpredictable nature that made the large shark so scary. The shark was a perfect predator while this guy is great with a slide ruler and relies on mass quantities of luck.
Sidenote: I wrote this while watching Shark Week and geeking out over my Jaws Blu-ray.
The film was written by the man who wrote Buried. That film starred Ryan Reynolds as a dude trapped in a coffin. Buried created decent suspense with its Hitchcock style and creative with nothing sensibilities. ATM can’t buy the suspense because it includes a ridiculous bad guy and characters who make terrible decisions. Instead of watching this film look at these three pictures and you will get the idea.
The best part of the film Buried was that the man could not leave the coffin. He was stuck and had to use any available resource to survive. The three people in ATM have every chance to escape on multiple occasions. They entrap themselves instead of being trapped. I understand that the killer could be anywhere but it is ridiculous to assume that the hooded killer could be everywhere. The man plans on every angle and has endless charts and graphs proving he did his homework. However, knowing this makes it lame. Nothing makes a movie less scary than watching a killer find out the trajectory of a video camera. Imagine watching Jason Voorhees at Home Depot testing out what Machete has the best air trajectory. Wait, watching people gawk at a masked behemoth swinging a machete is aisle 14 sounds fantastic.
To be fair you don’t find out that the killer is a researcher until the final credits. So, you are annoyed at the final twist (ATM camera only picked up what went on inside the ATM thus making the nice kid look guilty) then you become more peeved knowing that this wasn’t some random hunting.
How could he plan for all the intangibles including cops, patrons, cell phones and guns. It makes all of the prep work useless. What kind of game is this guy playing? There is zero back story. I know in the past I’ve complained about too much back story. However, you need to know a little about the person who is killing all of the good-looking people. Otherwise, it is just a bunch of attractive people getting killed. The three actors are wasted as well. Alice Eve is a wonderfully nice actress, Josh Peck was solid in The Wackness and the other guy was in The Hurt Locker. 40 minutes into the film my girlfriend looked at me and said “why is Alice Eve in this film?” I wondered the same thing. The charming young cast is reduced to stereotypes and the film quickly becomes tired. This would have been a perfect short film about three people hunted by a silent killer. Make it part of a trilogy of short films of people who get killed in an ATM, porta potty and an enclosed gondola.
ATM tried something new on a budget. However, nobody can buy the plot because of the uninteresting killer and improbable decisions made by the three good-looking people. Don’t watch this film. Watch the wonderfully underrated film Devil. You will love it.
Share this post:
The Expendables 2
MFF cowriter John wrote a thoroughly entertaining review if you want to get a more in-depth look at this movie. I want to write about the unadulterated joy that this film exudes. The characters say “I’ll be back.” Chuck Norris destroys everything and Dolph gets to play around with his Masters Degree in chemical engineering. This film was meant for the fans to enjoy. To walk into a theater and analyze this film would be a major mistake. You will cheating yourself from having a joyous time.
Is this film good? The answer is no. Is this film awesome? Yes! The dialogue can be painful and Liam Hemsworth has to spout some truly clichéd dialogue about war that makes you wonder if the same person who wrote this wrote the recent Rocky and Rambo films. When my girlfriend and I were walking out of the theater we overheard a man share his thoughts about the film. He said “it wasn’t life changing.” I found this to be incredibly odd and disheartening. It meant that this man went into this film looking for something that would change his life. Was he looking for a new battle cry or did he think JCVD would spout a one liner of destiny? This film will not change your life. However, it will make you clap, laugh and appreciate every second spent with old heroes and JCVD
When I was 12 years old my buddy and I walked up to the ticket counter at the local theater and bravely asked “two tickets for Timecop please.” The younger guy at the ticket counter smiled and gave us the two mythical tickets. We watched in awe as JCVD traveled around time spin kicking people. This film led me to watch Bloodsport, Universal Solider, Kickboxer, Lionheart and Hard Target. Jean was a big hit amongst all of my teenager friends. He eventually fell into direct to DVD hell and has reemerged with wonderful performances in JCVD and Universal Soldier: Regeneration. The Expendables 2 does for JCVD what the first film did for Dolph Lundgren’s career. It reminded us why we loved these guys in the first place.
The Expendables 2 is owned by JCVD. His brash and flashy villain named Jean Vilain is an obscure 80s evil guy who enslaves European men and makes them mine for plutonium. He will sell the plutonium to the highest bidder than go do something else evil. There is no reason for his madness other than he has the symbol of the devil’s goat tattooed onto his neck. He does the Devil’s dirty work and is teamed with direct to DVD action star Scott Adkins. Watching these two together made me really happy. I realize most people will not have the memories I have of JCVD or know about Adkins double spin kicks. However, I love that there is a series that hasn’t forgotten about the action stars of yesteryear and today.
This film spares us the 17 minute Mickey Rourke heavy breathing monologue and instead crashes planes through plutonium mines, bad guys literally explode when hit by bullets and features Dolph trying to put his chemical engineering skills to use to make a bomb. The Expendables 2 in the words of my girlfriend Megan is “not a good movie. It is an awesome movie.” These men throw tactics out of the window and instead make the loudest entrance possible. I love that Nobody investigates why somebody wants tons of plutonium, Dolph Lundgren says “good-bye” then front kicks a guy off of a balcony and Bruce Willis wears super stylish scarves whilst driving a smart car and exploding mercenaries.
The highly trained bad guy mercenaries can’t hit anything with bullets, Statham says “I know pronounce you man and knife” and there are so many references to the main stars other movies it becomes wonderfully ridiculous. I was wrong when I assumed hiring Simon West of Con Air fame was a bad idea. He injects testosterone to 11 and has created a film that audiences will love. The visual palate is grey and the film jumps around like seventeen people on a trampoline. You never know who will go flying and when.
The highlights are a fantastic yet short fight scene between Jason Statham and Scott Adkins and an opening 15 minutes where millions of bullets are sprayed whilst the Expendables rescue a chinese billionaire. Stallone continues to build a fun relationship between himself and Statham. Also, Terry Crewes, Randy Couture and Dolph Lundgren become a trio of destruction and goofiness.
The opening weekend has not been too kind to The Expendables. It pulled in a decent 28 million. However, it is certified fresh on Rotten Tomatoes, the cinemascore is an “A-” and it was up against some tough competition. I predict this film will pull in a big worldwide gross and stay strong at the box office. It may not be quite the hit the original was but I think it will have a long shelf life amongst action aficionados.
Watch this film. Enjoy this film. Enjoy the Dolph, JCVD and Adkins.
Share this post:
MY CALL: Abject acting, a story that I can’t really explain, and cheap exploitation tactics make this laughably awful flick watchable to only the most serious of bad-horror lovers. Other reviewers mention gore, zombies and the ending’s twist. I would warn that none of these elements are strong-suited in this—not even a bit. IF YOU LIKE THIS WATCH: With LeeAnne Baker: Mutant Hunt (1986), Breeders (1986). Without LeeAnne Baker: Alien Contamination, Deep Space, Galaxy of Terror, Inseminoid, Dreamaniac, Nightwish, Humanoids From the Deep, Slugs, Hardware, Of Unknown Origin. SIDEBAR: This flick is called Necropolis, which means “city of the dead” or such. I don’t think that a few dead New York Italians and a few breast-feeding zombies constitute a city of the dead.
New Amsterdam, 1686—A hideously bewigged LeeAnne Baker (Mutant Hunt, Breeders)with way too much slutty eye make-up does a bare-nippled 80s dance routine in honor of her “marriage” to “the king of Hell” in front of what I can only describe as a stage prop from a KISS concert in front of a smoke machine. Then some guy finds his way to her lair with a small mob and rather thoughtfully and slowly “stabs” her in the stomach with a totally blunt crucifix. Her reaction: “You will never kill me…blah blah blah…and seek my revenge.” At this point I have no idea what I’m in for.
She was Slayer’s number one fan in the 90s.
Fast forward to present day New York City and she has a motorcycle, much shorter hair, the same slutty 80s dance moves, and just as much slutty eye make-up. She stops by her local dark arts store and uses telepathy to strong arm the owner into giving her “the Devil’s ring.” When he doesn’t offer it up she “telepathies” him to death. It’s terrible. Then she uses some suggestive ESP/mind control to make some descendent of the crucifix-stabbing reverend look bad. In fact, she encounters reincarnations of everyone in the 1686 mob—all evidently reincarnated at the same time (i.e., 300 years after their “first” birth).
As she continues killing reincarnated mob members, she eventually finds some virgin reporter—a reincarnated virgin she tried to kill in the opening scene—whom she must kill to gain something. Not sure what though. Evidently, she either reincarnates with all of her memories from time to time, or she’s been alive for the last 300 years, in either case with some major powers of enchantment. So what does she want with this virgin anyway?
If I was a witch, I doubt that I’d be so obvious as to enter some Cult-mania Shop during business hours wearing pentagram earrings and talking about “the Devil’s ring” for God’s sake.
She summons the “children of the dead” in the sewers to help her do…whatever it is she’s trying to do. These minions look like zombie cultists or something. She goes around stealing souls which, apparently, are composed of thick clear mucus. For some reason, though, these zombies never really do anything. I mean, they kidnap the virgin, but the witch could have done that herself with her nifty mental magic.
The holy shit moment of the movie: So, after collecting some souls she returns to the sewer to feed her zombies. To do this, she performs a short ritual during which the zombies literally stare at her while she’s topless. Then she grows four more breasts—yes, I did just say those words—she grows four more breasts which secrete the liquefied gooey goodness that is human soul so that she can sloppily breast feed more than two zombies at once—I guess they’re not very patient. Because everybody knows that zombies breast feed on gooey souls, right? Oh, and of course we see this oozing breasty six-pack more than once in the movie. You know, just to drive the point home of how important this minion nourishment task truly is. This is every bit as awful as the giant semen hot tub in Breeders…just shameless. However, on a completely different note, I would like to point out that this was released years before the three-breasted woman graced the silver screen in Total Recall(1990, 2012). This isn’t the only prophetic moment of the film either.
Ummm…that’s REALLY gross. There is no unperverted reason for “human soul” to look like that!
Later, a pimp giving a pep talk to his hookers on a slow night says “if you think of tricks they will come.” I guess that’s where they got the idea for the tagline for Field of Dreams (1989). Then our witch telekinetically bitch slaps the hooker like Darth Maul using the force. It seems that a lot of writers and directors sampled ideas from this lesser known, crusty little horror gem. Click here for a link to her six-breastedness because I’m not showing it here.
I understand using what’s on hand to battle Satan. Sure. But where the Hell did he find all those sticks in downtown NYC? Isn’t it illegal to damage the city-planted trees?
The end is, true to form, awful. The priest, armed with sharpened twigs bound together into a cross, along with our sleazy cop interrupt the witch’s ritual sacrifice. This “action sequence” is painful and to call it a finale would just be more upsetting. Then there was the attempt at a twist at the end. Not very twisty; quite predictable; oh, and awful, though it did draw a smile.
AAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!
Worst twist ever!
Some interesting inconsistencies include 1) the virgin British reporter (in NYC, already not credible) inviting a sleaze-bag Italian New York cop (who was her 1686 groom-to-be) to her surprisingly sex-friendly apartment where she lives alone, 2) I never knew zombies ate that way—why wasn’t that in any other movies?, and 3) why was the witch trying to kill that virgin again?
Share this post:
MY CALL: The key word here is fun. Watching this movie was a BLAST! The plot (between the action scenes) can be slow to the point of weary, but it’s all worth the wait! [A- for an action flick] IF YOU LIKE THIS WATCH: The Expendables(2010). REALITY CHECK: Van Damme is 52 years old. Dolph Lundgren is 55. And Stallone is 66—FYI, that’s Medicare-old. Holy shit are they still in scary-epic shape! Then, of course, there’s the aging Crews (44), Statham (45), Li (49), Couture (49), Willis (57), Norris (62) and Schwarzenegger (65)—who is reigniting his action-movie career!!!
The first thing on everyone’s mind is “Was it as good as the original?” For me: no. I liked this one more. But I can understand how many would favor the original. Let’s split the difference and simply agree that if you loved part one, then stop reading this review and just go see part two. Like—NOW!
Much like the original (The Expendables), this is truly paramount among “movies for guys who like movies.” It’s an overdose of action filled with satirical classic one-liners, big biceps, large caliber weapons, huge explosions and tremendous sprays of gore as people are nearly liquefied when shot—much like the recent Rambo (2008). The humor is also abundant, including an epic Chuck Norris joke delivered by the legend himself. I honestly have never liked Chuck Norris—but I loved him in this!
Then there was the real-life paralleling bit about Dolph Lundgren being an MIT-trained chemical engineer as a Fulbright Scholar (actually true). Needless to say, I loved this movie despite its numerous 80s-esque classic action movie flaws.
Such a great villain. I hope this turns into a trend. But not like it did for Eric Roberts. That was a very bad trend.
Jean-Claude Van Damme, as Jean Vilain (cliché much?), plays our resident bad guy. He’s forcing Albanians into slave-labor for his plutonium mining project. Vilain intends to sell the plutonium to, presumably, some other bad guys. But the plot is kept very simple and we don’t get into that…like, at all—not even a bit—that somehow doesn’t matter. Anyway, Van Damme does a REALLY good job—although he makes a lot of “stupid villain mistakes” keeping in line with the swiss cheese plot-holey 80s action movies that birthed our present stars. The plot, which really isn’t important other than knowing who the bad guy is, shifts on us a couple times from rescuing some Chinese billionaire to a “settling old debts job” (and, by the way, wondering where the Hell Van Damme is in this flick) and finally to a “take down Van Damme” sort of deal and somehow without actually caring AT ALL that he’s a weapons of mass destruction dealer. Despite all these damning flaws, I never once cared. LOL!
Part one was a lot like a “getting to know the expendables crew” movie. We saw them fight bad guys and we saw them fighting each other. In part two, they play well together as a team and only fight bad guys. Jet Li gets some great one-against-many fighting, but then disappears from the movie for some reason—whatever, I loved what I got and there are lots more people I love to watch in this flick. The rest of the cast also had some impressive hand-to-hand action against a slew of soldiers. But my favorite fights were the obvious ones. Van Damme versus Stallone was a heavy-hitting fun-fest complete with villainous taunting, jump spin kicks, and a “finish him” moment worthy of Mortal Kombat. I also enjoyed Scott Adkins versus Jason Statham. However, I think they really under-utilized both of them. They are capable of amazing acrobatics and technical choreography. I understand that Statham’s Transporter work and Scott Adkin’s over-flaired aerial assaults from X-Men Origins: Wolverine as Deadpool are not realistic. But still, they could have given us more. And I really wanted to see Adkins fight more than once.
Scott Adkins posting a Facebook image after he was turned down for Magic Mike. Luckily, someone working on The Expendables 2 thought his biceps would fit right in with Van Damme and Stallone.
Minus Mickey Rourke, this was like a workoutaholics meeting featuring everyone from the first movie along with Liam Hemsworth (The Hunger Games), Jean-Claude Van Damme (Assassination Games), Scott Adkins (Assassination Games; Undisputed 2 & 3; Ninja), Chuck Norris and Nan Yu. Bruce Willis and Arnold Schwarzenegger also received much larger roles in this one—but still noticeably secondary to the primary team. But everyone really gets their chance to shine at least once, which strikes me as a difficult task handled very well by the filmmakers.
All in all, I spent most of this movie laughing, wowing, oh-my-God-ing and wishing that it would never end. So get off your ass and see this now! Oh, and then call me up when you find out who the bad guy will be in The Expendables 3. I’m hoping for a larger team of bad guys made of more big name action stars. How about adding Jason Mamoa (Conan the Barbarian), Nathan Jones (Troy), Tony Jaa (Ong-Bak) and Dwayne Johnson (Fast Five)?
When asked if he’d like to be in part 3, Crews [below] ate the young reporter and then did some powerlifts.
Share this post:
Tokyo Shock: Vampire Girl vs Frankenstein Girl (2009)
MY CALL: More cutesy-story-driven and less goretastic than Tokyo Gore Police (2008), but still a fine addition to the Tokyo Shock genre. This is like a high schooler’s Tokyo Shock flick; a good taste of the style. Lovers of the genre won’t be disappointed. [B-] IF YOU LIKE THIS WATCH: Tokyo Gore Police (2008), Helldriver (2010), RoboGeisha (2009). LANGUAGE: Japanese; I got the 2-disc DVD, which offers English dubbing.
Intentionally over-acted like an early Troma film, this movie is about Keiko (Frankenstein Girl; Eri Otoguo) and Monami (Vampire Girl; Yukie Kawamura), clearly the protagonist. It’s Valentine’s Day in their high school and both of them like the same guy, Jyugon. The first half of the movie is really just about Monami pursuing this guy and Keiko figuring out what’s going on between the two of them. Then, when she confronts the lovers, she accidently dies. Luckily, this happens just as her father discovers how to make Franken-monsters. And so, two-thirds into the movie, we finally get Frankenstein Girl and a 25-minute fight scene involving the majority of the movie’s characters. The finale closes with a happy ending, a goofy surprise ending, and a cutesy little twist.
When I see trailers for Tokyo Shockers from Sushi Typhoon or Magnet entertainment, I wonder “just what nonsense is in this flick that I won’t want to miss?” Well…flesh is stripped away in lengthy strands, stretchy faces are peeled off, swords are gorily worked into bodily crevices that I dare not mention, amputations leave behind uber-fake stumpy prostheses which Gallagher-cannon fake blood, sometimes it simply “rains” blood a la Broadway as Monami dances and soaks in it to some happy-go-lucky music, an animated intelligent blood droplet, a blood cocoon, a two-footed one-handed one-eyed Franken-thing reminiscent of Jeffrey Comb’s creation from Bride of the Re-Animator (1990), living “screw” worms, a “smashed” face, an arm used as a helicopter propeller screwed into someone’s head, bone-shard katanas, projectile fingered eye-nipples, and a hail of blood bullets.
ABOVE: Three examples of why I love this movie.
My next thought might be “well what sort of weird hybridized bad guys are there and what weapons do they use?” A sword-armed sumo wrestler with a holy helmet gun, buzz-saw ankle-wheels made out of crystallized blood, and after we think she’s been defeated Frankenstein Girl returns as an odd, spider-like mechanized menace.
These movies tend to add some other flavor particles as well (e.g., strange commercials in Tokyo Gore Police). The pale and awkward Wrist-cutters Club girls practice with box-cutters like cheerleaders preparing for the 13th Nationwide High School Student Wrist Cut Rally (which is really nasty). There is an extremely racist depiction of a clique of black girls—one is actually a spear-toting tribesman, another a fro’d 80s hip-hop black panther mix—it’s really inappropriate…and that makes it funny. Lastly, like any Asian movie, even this slapstick sensation features some informative background, in which Scream Queen Eihi Shiina cameos as Monami’s mother during a backstory flashback.
Any movie that manages to mix over-the-top racism with a fast and loose Singing in the Rain reference gets my vote.
There is some goofy, almost farcically cartoony, CGI. They even feel like they’d be in a macabre version of Pee-Wee’s Playhouse, especially when we see Keiko’s Dr. Frankensteiny father (dressed up like Sgt. Kabuki Man) and his assistant (the sexy school nurse) hacking up some poor guy.
I have no explanation for this. Nunchucks are simply awesome.
It’s so wonderful when two great minds can work together to produce something so beautiful. Director Yoshihiro Nishimura also directed Tokyo Gore Police (2008), Mutant Girl Squad (2010), Helldriver(2010), and the upcoming The ABC’s of Death (2012) and The Profane Exhibit (2012), in addition to doing the make up for dozens of Tokyo Shock flicks. Co-director Naoyuki Tomomatsu directed Zombie Self Defense Force (2006), Maidroid (2008), Maidroid 2 (2010) and Rape Zombie: Lust of the Dead (2012), along with a lot of writing experience in the subgenre. Scream Queen Eri Otoguo (Frankenstein Girl) and Scream Queen Yukie Kawamura (Vampire Girl) each have some exploitative slaughter movie experience as well.
DVD Special Features: I have warned before about the lack of content and/or re-release of these films in my Beginners Guide to Tokyo Shock Cinema. The features are nothing special. Just some footage of “the making of” the film. It’s entertaining seeing how cute Yukie Kawamura is in between scenes. But we don’t get any interesting insights about making the film. These features could have easily fit on to one disc with the movie. I wonder if they made it a 2-disc unit to fool people into thinking it would be something special. But, like Tokyo Gore Police, expect a re-release with an additional disc with some real special features. Then, maybe even another re-release with more stuff.
Share this post:
John’s Horror Corner: Mother’s Day (2012)
MY CALL: I’m gonna’ go out on a limb here and say maaaybe you shouldn’t sit down with mom to watch this on Mother’s Day. But you should watch it! This home invasion flick yields more action than one could have ever imagined given the premise; more than Hostage (2005), The Strangers (2008) or The Perfect Host (2010). Not only that, but the action often involves chicks doing hardcore tough physical things under believable circumstances including a surprisingly long fight scene with 51-year old Rebecca De Mornay! Predictable but good. [B] IF YOU LIKE THIS WATCH: Tough to say. I’d go with The Perfect Host (2010), which also features a criminal-crashed house party gone horribly wrong with some gritty and unexpected scenes.
The Koffin family is a mean one. When a bank job goes wrong, the three Koffin boys flee to what was their mother’s home. Only, the house was foreclosed and the new owners are having a friendly gathering when the Koffin boys bust in, panicked, and one (Johnny Koffin) is seriously injured. Daniel and Beth are the hosting couple and they have six guests.
The brothers call mother and when she arrives we learn that she is a loving, civil, polite sociopath who provided her boys with their criminal skill set. We not only learn that, but that stolen money that the boys were sending mother from previous jobs clearly never made it to her…but the new owners don’t seem to know anything about it.
As this story of domestic attrition progresses, tension increases on many levels. As Johnny Koffin’s injury advances Mother Koffin becomes less intolerant and her boys more temperamental. While on a “field trip” with one of the Koffin’s Beth has difficulty finding enough money to meet their demands. The party guests are pit against one another under plausible circumstances—and the guests find reasons to turn against each other on their own and it’s not handled politely. George (Shawn Ashmore) gets caught revealing Mother Koffin’s manipulations to Lydia, who gradually finds George’s claims more credible. And Mother Koffin finds it ever less plausible that the party hosts don’t know anything about the money as she discovers Daniel’s capacity for lying.
The brutality in this film is immediate! Johnny Koffin’s horrible wound is tended, bones are gruelingly crushed, and chunks of flesh palatably slap about.
The players include the hosting couple is Daniel (Frank Grillo; Warrior (2011), The Grey (2012)) and Beth (Scream Queen Jaime King; Silent Night (2012), My Bloody Valentine (2009)). Beth is credibly horrified, serially fragile, and occasionally strong. Their house guests include Shawn Ashmore (the X-Men trilogy (2000-2006)), Scream Queen Briana Evigan (The Devil’s Carnival (2012), Sorority Row (2009), S. Darko (2009)) as a refined punkster, Scream Queen Kandyse McClure (Children of the Corn (2009), Carrie (2002)), and Scream Queen Jessie Rusu (The Tortured (2010), Saw VI (2009)).
Mother Koffin (Scream Queen Rebecca De Mornay; Apartment 1303 3D (2012), Identity (2003)) is cold, calculating, and evidently went to charm school. She won’t steal an engagement ring that was a family heirloom, but she won’t flinch as horrible physical deeds are conducted before their eyes. But she is not without her own frailty when it comes to seeing her family safely moved from harm’s way.
Her boys are brutal but fearful. The submissive Lydia Koffin (Scream Queen Deborah Ann Woll; True Blood (2008-2012)) takes orders without questions. She seems sweet and out of place, but her obedience is apparent.
In the end, the friends attempt to look past their newfound hostilities to work together and escape. But have they been through too much sick shit for that little dream to come true? Could the Koffins simply that little encountered evil that always seems to win?
You’ll have to watch to find out and I do consider it worth the watch.
A remake of Charlie Kaufman’s Troma film classic Mother’s Day (1980), this film was undertaken by gore-seasoned director Darren Lynn Bousman (Saw II-IV, Repo! The Genetic Opera). I am rather shocked that a Troma film has been the subject of a remake—I am unaware of this ever happening before. Anyway, this flick features several Scream Queens among a nice cast and some uncommon scenarios.
Share this post:
Bad Movie Tuesday: Total Recall
These were my thoughts about Total Recall immediately after I walked out of the theater:
“Pouting, foot chase, squinting, car chase, gratuitous Kate Beckinsale beauty shot, squinting, Lens flairs, Bryan Cranstons hair, shoulder wounds, Jessica Biel yells “come on, let’s go!”, henley’s and popped collars, squinting and whole lot of confusion.”
The new Total Recall is a good-looking yet joyless barrage of unnecessary action and a waste of Colin Farrell. He has been on a fantastic career resurgence as of late (In Bruges, London Boulevard, Fright Night, Horrible Bosses) In this film all he does is look confused, squint and run. The original catered to Arnold’s acting style of physicality and surprising humour and it worked because you liked his character. In this film, Colin never gets to use his sly humor or tough guy Woody Allen routine. He is just a dude who yells “Let’s go” a lot.
Len Wiseman didn’t want to have any fun. Gone is the tongue in cheek hyperviolence of the orignal Total Recall. This film feels like a vehicle for Wiseman’s wife Kate Beckinsale. Beckinsale is a slightly inept and destructive agent who kills many innocent bystanders whilst chasing Farrell. The film is a huge Kate Beckinsale beauty shot . It feels incredibly gratuitous and becomes comical. I’m all for tough women (Ripley, Connor, Seline, Milla in every movie) but I am %100 certain that the role was built around her posing in various angles.
After the film I looked over to my girlfriend and I asked “what was that about?” She replied “I have no clue.” The movie is about a guy who gets caught, gets his memory wiped then is used as a pawn to wipe out the resistance. Everything else in between is a bungled mess of bungled stuff. There is a foot chase through a lego city, a car chase through a magnet city and many unnecessary explosions. The brave new world also features a populace heavily clothed in layers of henleys, V-necks and overcoats with popped collars. I totally believe the only reason they included one scene was so Collin could wear two stylish gas masks. By the end of the film you looking at millions of dollars of CGI and there is no response. You sit there quietly while things blow and up people get shot in the shoulder then you walk out and go on with your life.
The 1990 Total Recall is still relevant because it wanted to have fun. It shocked and awed audiences for generations because of the crazy visuals, decapitations and a certain woman with three very particular parts.
Total Recall is style over substance. That is its downfall. It doesn’t have the quirks that the original had. The violence is not balls to the wall. The characters are stock and it makes for a boring experience. That is the worst thing that can be said about a futuristic science fiction tale that involves good-looking people, explosions and gun fights.
Skip this film. Watch the original. Appreciate the classics.
Share this post:
John’s Horror Corner: Episode 50 (2011)
MY CALL: Not worth my time. Sadly, this film used a great model— one that I’ve seen before and hope to see redone again—but it failed in all forms of delivery other than a few of the earliest introductory points. WHAT TO WATCH INSTEAD: White Noise (2005), Poltergeist (1982), Paranormal Activity (2007-2011), Grave Encounters (2011), and maybe The Last Exorcism (2010) or Insidious (2010). Also Session 9 (2001), although there are no “investigators” in it.
Episode 50 opens with what I consider an effective strategy. With hardly any background noise you are presented a taxonomy of paranormal activity increasingly ordered from least to most dangerous—naturally, you’re saying to yourself, oh it’s gonna’ be the that last one. Already I’m reminded of movies like White Noise (2005), Poltergeist (1982), Paranormal Activity (2007-2011) and Insidious (2010).
Paranormal investigators recognize four classes of hauntings:
1. Residual—unaware of the living; no interaction or physical contact; not dangerous.
2. Intelligent—possible physical contact and interactions with objects and people; generally not dangerous.
3. Poltergeist—trickster spirits with objectives; deceiver; possible physical contact and interactions with objects and people; moderately dangerous.
4. Inhuman—a spirit that was never human; makes physical contact with objects and people for the purposes of possession, mental manipulation or bodily harm; extremely dangerous.
In the style of Grave Encounters (2011), The Devil Inside (2012) and The Last Exorcism (2010), our story within the movie is being filmed for TV show or documentarian purposes. It’s presented much like an actual episode of the show. We are introduced to our team of skeptical paranormal investigators who are young, sharp, and are trying to comfort a couple that was hustled by a previous team of people.
Hilarious sidebar: In some surveillance footage the husband, when spooked, hits his wife in the face with a hammer. The injury make-up is somehow hilarious and really quite good at the same time (until seen up close).
Anyway, their routine and delivery is one part hokey, one part cute, one part well-done. What do I mean by that? Well, if you hate Ghost Hunters you’ll probably be reminded of that and dislike this for the same reason—that’s the “hokey” that I don’t like. Thankfully this is a movie, so even you aren’t a believer you shouldn’t be too bothered.
“Hmmmm. Well, unless our middle school science class has taught us nothing, this can’t be a ghost.”
Our skeptics meet some terminally ill, rich ex-con. He’s played by a terrible character and, along with his two attorneys, will likely diminish this movie’s credibility with their deadpan acting. Their playing lawyers, but I doubt they could argue their way out of a parking ticket—really, like special-ed jocks taking pre-algebra in 12th grade stupid. Anyway, our team is offered two days of unfettered access to a previously inaccessible location: “The Gates to Hell,” the West Virginia State Lunatic Asylum considered the most haunted locale. Why does a rich, dying ex-con care about this? Because if they can debunk “Hell,” then maybe he won’t spend eternity burning there.
“Hmmmm. Could there be ghosts?”
At first, I thought that most of the bad reviews of this film were due to random actors with little screen time (e.g., the rich guy’s lawyers). But I found additional legitimate complaints.
“I’m stickin’ to the no ghosts policy.”
We see expert testimonials from doctors and computer analysts delivering realistic fact-based explanations for paranormal phenomena and pointing out the things we can’t solve. This montage felt very effective if, and only if, I ignored the clips with these twin psychology students who—despite delivering good information—had completely hamstrung the credibility of the whole scene. Really, they were awful and clearly the result of a small casting pool or hiring a friend as a favor. Bad call!
Our team meets a rival team. Our apparent protagonist team of skeptics (the “Paranormal Inspectors”) expects to debunk the landmark haunting of this most haunted site whereas the other team (amateurs of the Academia Spirit Searchers Club, the ASSC or “Ask”) hopes to confirm the presence of a demonic spirit—that was stage 4 on the paranormal danger scale that opens the movie. The leader of ASSC is an over-enthusiastic zealot and is a character of questionable credibility.
Now the screen cuts to black and the following caption is presented:
“During the shoot, something went wrong. In an unexpected move, the parent network of the show cancelled the series before airing episode 50. Nobody knew what actually happened during the filming. Until now.”
They arrive on the scene. I was hoping for a little more Session 9 (2001) in terms of site eeriness. The “show” footage scenes earlier in the film were quite good, but the “behind the scenes” acting involving real interactions (i.e., not using Paranormal Investigator TV show personas) degenerates rapidly. Then there’s a slapstick Scottish dude who, like so many other additions to this flick, further cripples whatever credibility the film had left—if any.
Top shelf production quality. This film had a great model, but simply too many flaws in its execution to be passable, or even forgivable.
I really don’t mean to belittle the intelligence of youth, but this movie would be better suited for middle and high schoolers. Having generally less life experience and, more importantly, having seen considerably fewer movies, it will be harder for them to catch the outlandish tactics used in this movie. Like how quickly the two teams go from hating each other to getting along, the ridiculousness of the rich guy who got them access, the first “odd encounter” at the site involving the mysterious movement of some duct tape. There’s no slow build-up or increasing tension, but rather the team members immediately encounter numerous unsubtle sounds, voices, slamming doors and objects moving about. There’s really no sense of tone as was done so well in Session 9, Grave Encounters, White Noise and the Paranormal Activity movies. The storytelling feels like an adult version of a campfire ghost story told immaturely.
I won’t give away “what” they encounter, but I will say that some Japanese-style horror tactics are used, and not done as well as the Japanese. The sightings are always caught on camera, often seen by the team members, and far too frequent to be at all effective.
SO WHO WAS THIS MOVIE MADE FOR? Sometime after graduating to pull-up diapers and training wheels horror hound pups should have “baby’s first haunting flick.” I think this is it. It’s way in-your-face, plot and points are blatantly drilled to a nub, the characters are immature and never really develop, and you don’t have to look too hard to “catch” anything. Most horror relies on observant viewers to “catch” the quick, unsettling glance of something. Here anything that happens, even if briefly, is accompanied by sound and then washed, rinsed and repeated seconds later. Like any such movie, the characters get killed. But the deaths aren’t very intense—nothing is hard to watch. Also, the images may be scary to some, but I would consider them hardly disturbing compared to so much other material out there even from PG-13 flicks. Lastly, all mysteries and questions are answered within minutes of their inception.
Movies, Films & Flix 