Foster on Film » Page 63

Independence Day (1996)

Oct 101996

Aliens invade the Earth in enormous ships, destroying the world’s large cities. Their technology makes them invulnerable to human weapons. It is up to a young U.S. president (Bill Pullman), a nerdy computer genius pining for his ex-wife (Jeff Goldblum), a brave fighter pilot (Will Smith), and a drunken trailer park resident who thinks he was abducted by aliens in the past (Randy Quaid), to find a way to defeat the extraterrestrials.

It was (and still is) fashionable for critics to pan Independence Day. No one listened, and it became one of the biggest blockbusters in cinema history. This time, I’m on the side of everyone else. Taking its plot from a combination of War of the Worlds and Earth vs the Flying Saucers, and its character arcs from 1970s disaster films, Independence Day swipes everything that’s fun in those other films and wraps it together with spectacular effects.

The characters are a mix of races and religions, professions, and sexual orientations. Everyone is just a step from a cliché, and no one is complex or deep, but they all have enough detail to fulfill their part of the story. By the end, I don’t know these people well, but I know everything I want to know. And I like them enough to cheer them on. These are people representing the best in humanity, while swimming in quirky imperfections. They also have a tendency to utter either humorous or inspirational dialog. Will Smith has many of the funniest lines as the wise-cracking but tough pilot. He would reuse the basics of this character again and again in his later films, running it into the ground, but here it is new and entertaining.

This is a movie where everyone except the shady ex-CIA chief has liberal leanings, caring about people and the planet and not caring that the TV station boss is homosexual or that the pilot’s girl is a stripper. But at the same time, the military is an honorable organization filled with dedicated and fair-minded people. It is a very patriotic film, but not a mindless, “don’t burn the flag” patriotism that tramples on freedom. This is patriotism as a love of country that inspires men to fight and sacrifice to protect the lives and freedoms of the people of the United States and the world. Sign me up.

Then there are the explosions. Independence Day is the king of destruction movies. Earth vs the Flying Saucers is a pathetic piece of filmmaking, except for its famous, climatic battle where both the Washington Monument and the Capital Dome are damaged by saucers. Independence Day ratchets that through the ceiling, frying the White House, Capital, and Empire State Building, to name only a few. I read one review where the author was appalled that people cheered as those icons were blown away. Strange man. Of course people cheered. It is one of the joys of movies—the old have your cake and eat it routine. We want to see them ruined, but we don’t want them actually harmed. God, I love movies.

So, does the story make sense? No. Not a bit. Almost everything about it is silly. But it is not any more nonsensical than War of the Worlds or Star Wars. I suppose there are people out there who say that Star Wars sucks because the workings of the Death Star, with its vulnerable duct, are ridiculous. If you are one of those people, then you won’t like Independence Day. I agree it would be better if a few moments would pass without something mind-numbingly stupid happening, but you are never given time to dwell on the ludicrous nature of the story. And Independence Day admits to its foolishness by taking the implausible virus ending to War of the Worlds (the aliens never checked the air for microbes?) and re-treading it with a nod and a wink for the ’90s.

Likable Characters with emotional arcs, humorous dialog, a fast-paced story, spectacular effects including awe-inspiring spacecraft and monumental explosions, humanity displayed as flawed, but with the potential to be something great, and a theme of hope—what more do you want? Sense? Well, for a few hours, you can do without sense.

Aliens, Reviews Tagged with: Four Reels

From Dusk Till Dawn (1996)

Oct 091996

Two on-the-run, violent criminals, Seth & Richard Gecko (George Clooney, Quentin Tarantino), kidnap an ex-minister (Harvey Keitel), his son, and daughter (Juliette Lewis), and use them to escape to Mexico. While waiting for a contact at a rowdy roadside bar, they are attacked by legions of vampires and must fight till dawn to survive.

A combination of two films that don’t fit together, Robert Rodriguez and Quentin Tarantino blend their talents, making a movie that is fifty percent entertaining. The first half of the film is pure Tarantino, with two gun-toting robbers who swear constantly and repeatedly shoot people. The style is tense and bloody. If you’ve seen Pulp Fiction or Jackie Brown you know what to expect. The difference is there is no underlying theme, no depth of character, no originality of plot, and no wit in the dialog. When the minister is introduced, there is an implication that a theme of faith will come with him, but that is quickly discarded and we’re back to what feels like a newbie-hack’s attempt to copy Tarantino. I’m guessing that Rodriguez and Tarantino wanted you to like Clooney’s Seth Gecko, but I found no reason to. He is almost as bad as his brother, and lacks the excuse of insanity.

However, my character concerns and boredom at the slow movement of the story (what story there is) vanish when the characters arrive at the Titty Twister bar. Is this because the film’s problems are solved? Nope. It’s because the first half of the film is cast away. From Dusk Till Dawn becomes a completely different picture, with a different style and a different purpose. Suddenly, it’s a comic-book, light-as-air, violence and nudity fest. Blood is everywhere, but now it might as well be Kool-Aid for all the shock value it has. Salma Hayek’s sensual (but strangely non-topless) dance is enough reason to rent the film, and the music she dances to will stick with you for weeks. Add in hordes of vampires and combat silliness (such as the crotch gun worn by horror master Tom Savini’s character, Sex Machine) and this is exciting, violent, sexy, and funny. Plus, the final scene is a kick (it’s a map painting, but a nice one). Rent From Dusk Till Dawn, and let it play while you get your drinks and pop some corn. When Cheech Marin’s second character (he plays three different ones) starts explaining why everyone should go into the bar, sit down and enjoy.

Followed by the inferior From Dusk Till Dawn 2: Texas Blood Money.

Reviews, Vampires Tagged with: Three & 1/2 Reels

Scream (1996)

Oct 091996

A year after a high school girl’s mother is killed, a psycho killer in a Scream mask begins killing. The students attempt to remain safe by relying on horror film clichés.

Quick Review: It isn’t as if there have been many original slasher films since Psycho, but by the mid-90s, the well was completely dry. How many times can you have an insane killer stalk high school students? Scream gives up; since there’s nothing new, why not just acknowledge that? It’s better to have your characters point out the flaws in the sub-genre than to have the audience do it. So, in Scream, everyone has watched horror films and read the magazines. They all know that the virgins die and you never say “I’ll be right back.” The entire film is an in-joke for anyone who has watched several dozen Slasher films. And it almost works. As a comedy, with Freddy as the janitor and the video clerk reciting the rules, it’s pretty funny. The violence and gore are adequate. But, strangely, Director Wes Craven takes it all seriously in long, ungainly segments. Neve Campbell acts like she’s in a Shakespearian tragedy and we end up with whining and what is supposed to be real, emotional pain. It’s no surprise that fails, and it is distracting in such a fluff piece, particularly when everyone else is giving us wacky, comic characters. This was never going to be a great film, but it could have been good. It managed OK.

Reviews, Slashers Tagged with: Two Reels

The Island of Dr. Moreau (1996)

Oct 081996

Edward Douglas (David Thewlis) survives a plane crash at sea, only to be rescued by Montgomery (Val Kilmer) and taken to an island controlled by mad scientist Dr. Moreau (Marlon Brando). Moreau has crossed human DNA with that of other animals, creating beastmen that he controls by means of imbedded pain chips. Moreau’s “daughter” (Fairuza Balk), a fully human-looking cat-person, joins Douglas in an escape, but they fail, and Douglas ends up a prisoner as the beastmen revolt.

They put together beautiful sets, created remarkable makeup, and hired a first class crew. Then everyone took a massive number of Quaaludes and made a film. It’s hard to say where the drugs had the greatest effect, in the inappropriate casting, mystifying acting, meandering story, or in the decision to release the finished product as it is.

The weirdness starts with David Thewlis, who spends the entire film looking uncomfortable. I’m not saying he’s playing a character who feels uncomfortable in his surroundings. That would be acting. Nope, it’s Thewlis who is furtively looking for a way out of the project. He doesn’t appear to be paying any attention to the rest of the cast (probably a good idea), nor does he show any real interest in his own lines. He isn’t helped by a repugnant character. Douglas is the lead (well, he’s supposed to be) and our guide to the world of Dr. Moreau. But he’s an unpleasant man. He owes his life to Montgomery, who he repays by hitting on Moreau’s daughter, damaging a door, snooping about a laboratory, and generally disobeying the simple rules he has been given. Sure, the rules were given in an ominous manner, but that should encourage him to follow them. Douglas also likes to insult his hosts whenever possible. This calls into question not only his upbringing, but his intelligence. Here’s a hint: If you encounter psychotic people—who are dangerous and have delusions of godhood—humor them. Do not immediately yell that they are Satanic. He’s also shallow, finding value in the beautiful girl, but denigrating the less attractive. All that would be fine if we were supposed to find him loathsome, but we’re not. The film is structured around Douglas being the reasonable human that the viewer can identify with. Maybe this isn’t an example of bad filmmaking, but rather a demonstration of the filmmakers’ belief that the average viewer is a pretty lowly sort as well. Either way, it’s depressing.

Val Kilmer is excellent and fits his role of the sadistic neurosurgeon turned jailer—for about thirty minutes. Kilmer gives sinister life to Montgomery, making him complex with secrets I wanted explored. Then something happens. What? Perhaps Kilmer popped those Quaaludes. Perhaps the script blew away so Kilmer decided to adlib bits from his seldom seen standup act. Perhaps director John Frankenheimer was called away to look at exciting time-share opportunities, and the uncontrolled Kilmer went on a binge, not realizing a camera was still running. Whatever the case, the menacing Montgomery vanishes to be replaced by the strung-out actor wandering aimlessly about the set and occasionally imitating Marlon Brando.

And that brings us to Brando. There is no Dr. Moreau in the film; there is just Brando, playing out his eccentricities. He appears, mumbles out incoherent gibberish in a 1950s fey British accent, than trundles on his way. Morbidly obese, he’s carried onto the screen (he doesn’t look like he could walk), garbed in a white muumuu, and wearing a scarf and old lady hat. Add to that his white, clown makeup, and he’s the stuff of absurdist comedy. But the movie is played straight. He even has a Mini-Me rat-man that imitates him (this is where Mike Myers got the idea for the Austin Powers film). It’s hard to imagine that a costume department came up with his getup, or that Frankenheimer (or anyone else) directed him. Unlike Kilmer, there’s something wrong with Brando’s state of mind from the beginning.

The actors playing the human-animal hybrids are in a different movie from the stars. Their film is a skillfully made, moving drama. Fairuza Balk is sexy and melancholy as Aissa, the cat-woman. Daniel Rigney plays Hyena-Swine, the force behind the rebellion. I don’t know how he manages to express real emotions behind all that makeup, but it is impressive. And Ron Perlman, who is buried under prosthetics in movie after movie, is once again excellent, though underutilized, as Sayer of the Law. But any tension or mood they might create is destroyed by the uncontrolled farce that Brando and Kilmer think they are in.

It’s easy to see where this project fell apart. Kilmer was supposed to play Douglas, but switched to the lesser role late in the planning stage (rumor has it this was due to his wife serving him with divorce papers). Brando, who is always in his own universe, had to wear a radio to feed him his lines. Writer-director Richard Stanley was fired after five days of shooting (either due to disagreements with the studio or from prima donna antics from Kilmer). Whatever the cause, it meant that there was no longer any communication with the man who wrote the script. Stanley did stick around, having the makeup department secretly turn him into one of the beastmen extras so he could at least watch. When Stanley was booted, Rob Morrow, who had taken over the role of Douglas, quit, leading to the last minute casting of Thewlis. The sometimes brilliant (The Manchurian Candidate, The Train), sometime pathetic (Prophecy: The Monster Movie, Reindeer Games), John Frankenheimer was dropped into the director’s chair. He has an eye for a scene, but little skill with fantasy and horror. With no time to prepare, he had no control on Brando and Kilmer, who were in ego overdrive. Brando remarked that Kilmer’s problem is that he thinks his talent matches his paycheck. Thewlis found the experience so unpleasant that he refuses to ever watch the finished film. With all that going on, it’s remarkable that any kind of film was finished.

I can see the potential on the screen, but that’s all it is. Still, it is fascinating to watch. I suggest popping a few of whatever the cast and crew were taking before sitting down to experience Dr. Brando and His Island of Confused and Irritable Thespians.

Back to Mad Scientists

Mad Scientists, Mad Scientists, Reviews Tagged with: Two Reels

Werewolf (1996)

Oct 061996

When a fight breaks out at an archeological dig over the bones of a werewolf, a digger gets cut and becomes infected with lycanthropy. Later, a writer comes to town, and due to a lab fight over the bones of the werewolf, he too becomes infected.

“Varevolf ” and “whairwof” are some of the exciting new words you can hear in Werewolf: The Search for the Accent. In this absorbing film, you never know what accent you’ll hear next. No, no, it’s not that different people have different accents. Rather, any character might break out with a new accent at any time. Apparently, they picked up a bunch of Romanian actors, gave them extensive language training in Brazil, and then told them all to attempt an American dialect. That doesn’t explain Joe Estevez’s (yup, Martin Sheen’s brother) double accent, but then he disappears from the film without explanation after 20 minutes, so let’s not dwell on him. Besides the fascinating pronunciations, this Tower of Babel mindset gives rise to captivating sentences like “You and Noel is in it for fame and fortune.” Yes, I’m afraid they is.

But don’t let the unusual sentences distract you from Yuri’s hair styles. His hair grows, shrinks, changes from black to brown to a reddish hue, and rises into a pompadour, and all within ten minutes. Now that’s exciting hair. If only the werewolves had been as interesting and frightening as that hair, but they tend to look like Fozzie Bear from a distance, and either Cornelius from Planet of the Apes or a guy in a store-bought dog mask when close. Which appearance they have is totally random. What is frightening is giving werewolves driving licenses as I learned from the unintentionally hilarious werewolf driving scene.

There are other things to learn from Werewolf, such as how unpleasant archeological digs are. I knew they could be uncomfortable, but I didn’t know how dangerous they can be. Yuri (of the transmigratory hair) has the job of sadistically beating diggers. He also injects watchmen with werewolf blood (well, I hope it was blood), and attacks people at birthday parties. He has some impulse control issues. It’s hard to figure what other motivation he might have, but then it’s perplexing that no one has him arrested.

No discussion of Werewolf would be complete without mentioning Sam, “The Keeper.” Sam, who dresses as Castro’s lieutenant and answers the door with a rifle, hangs around a suburban home to dust it. Who is paying him? Why is someone paying him? Why is he in the film? He does tells us, “I just found out that Dracula is a fag.” Ah.

While Werewolf is on no one’s top ten list, it’s a different matter of the MST3K version. It made for their very best show.

Reviews, Werewolves Tagged with: One Reel

Bad Moon (1996)

Oct 061996

Ted (Michael Paré) is attacked by a werewolf, and while he manages to kill the monster, he becomes one himself. He moves his trailer behind his sister Janet’s (Mariel Hemingway) house, but Thor, the dog, knows what he is.

Werewolf films are difficult to do right. They’re even difficult to do wrong. Of all the classic monsters, the werewolf is the cinematic failure. It’s been done right, most notably in 1941 with The Wolf Man, but I can count on one hand the good ones since, and Bad Moon isn’t one of them.

It starts promisingly enough with Ted and his girlfriend (Johanna Lebovitz) off in the jungle. They end up naked then she ends up sliced to pieces, and we’ve got a good, low-budge blood fest. Nothing brilliant, but fun.

Nope. That’s the last we see of topless women, and the blood flow drops to a trickle. All right, so it’s not going to be an exploitation film. Fine. Then it’s got to win me over with its complex plot, insightful theme, good acting, and clever dialog. Unfortunately, it has none of those. The plot barely exists and consists of Ted hanging in the backyard and Thor watching him. There is no theme (unless it’s “Don’t become a werewolf”). As for acting, it turns out that first death wasn’t a good thing as Lebovitz was the only one who displayed any acting talent. I’ll let you judge the dialog. Early on, Janet confronts a conman and utters the immortal words, “Do not mess with a lawyer on her own turf.”

I’m not sure I’d want to be Janet’s neighbor. The sheriff is a bit too laid back for me. He thinks Thor killed and horribly mutilated a guy, mentions it to Janet, and then leaves. He doesn’t take the dog or even look at him to see if he’s the culprit. Apparently, unlike in the Lost Skelleton of Cadavra, they don’t take their horrible mutilations seriously.

There are other “story” elements that don’t work, such as why Ted doesn’t stay away from those he loves, why he doesn’t work out something better than going out seconds before moonrise and handcuffing himself to a tree, and where does he buy the new set of jogging clothes he must need everyday, but those could only subtract from the film if it had some value.

The werewolf effects are pretty good for a small film, but can’t stand up to the light and attention they are given. A few more shadows and shorter cuts would have done wonders. The transformation scene is failed CGI. I know all films feel they must show the change on camera since An American Werewolf in London, but perhaps that should be reserved for films with substantial budgets.

All those other problems don’t matter because the film fails in a way that dooms a horror film. It’s boring. Even at a mere eighty minutes, it feels long. With little plot to take up time, the film is padded with minutes of Michael Pare and the dog staring at each other. And that’s not entertainment.

Reviews, Werewolves Tagged with: One Reel

Hellraiser IV/Hellraiser: Bloodline (1996)

Oct 051996

This is the story of the Lament Configuration, the puzzle box that opens the gate to hell, and the family that made it, tracing events from the 18th century when the first box was made and the demon Angelique appeared, through modern times, to the final confrontation in 2127.

Quick Review: A return to the mythology, if not the themes, of the first Hellraiser films, Bloodline brings back the eerie atmosphere that was once so effective. There are some interesting historical events, a new sensual cenobite, an engrossing plot, and great dialog, but it isn’t enough. The film doesn’t give us time to know and care about any of the humans. Also, the cenobites are not what they once were. In Hellraiser, they were: “Explorers in the further regions of experience. Demons to some. Angels to others.” In Bloodline, they are just agents of the army of evil, only demons, never angels. The complexity is gone. The human is the good guy; the monsters are bad. That’s it. I can’t help feeling that this movie could have been so much more. But for what little it is, it’s not bad. Even the Pin Head in space section comes off much less silly than I would have assumed.

The other films in the series are: Hellraiser, Hellbound: Hellraiser II, Hellraiser III: Hell on Earth, Hellraiser: Inferno, Hellraiser: Hellseeker, Hellraiser: Deader, Hellraiser: Hellworld.

Back to Demons

Demons, Reviews

The Craft (1996)

Oct 051996

Melancholy teen, Sarah (Robin Tunney) moves to L.A. and becomes the latest outsider at a Catholic school. Nancy (Fairuza Balk), Bonnie (Neve Campbell), and Rochelle (Rachel True), three outcast and psychologically damaged teens, recognize her as the needed fourth for their “coven.” With Sarah participating in rituals, their spells work, too well. Worse, the normal failings of the girls are amplified by their newfound power.

A combo teen-girl-empowerment and revenge flick, The Craft puts the final stake into the old, ugly, Satanic witch and replaces her with the young, hot, Wiccan. No more pointed hats; it’s goth dance tunes, black eyeliner, and long, long legs.

The four over-aged teen stars are attractive, sexy, and stylish, particularly when fulfilling fantasies in re-cut catholic school girl uniforms. They are also right on the money in their portrayal of self-involved, high school girls. Tunney mixes “nice” and lost, creating a believable character that I could care about. Balk takes over every scene with her troubled and troubling goth, and she is likely to be the one you remember after the credits roll.

How much you like The Craft will largely be determined on how much you believe its portrayal of high school, or perhaps I should say, how much its portrayal matches your experience. If you were (are) the popular football hero or homecoming queen, you won’t see much familiar, but for a majority of viewers, these are the people you remember. None of them are pure and good, and a majority are atrocious, though generally for a reason.

The Craft has taken a lot of criticism for not teaching morals or answering all the questions of high school. I would have been disappointed if it gave simple answers. There aren’t any. Sarah doesn’t become a kindly soul and Nancy, Bonnie, and Rochelle are not sorry for their misdeeds, which is fine by me as I didn’t need a fable. While the overly informative occult-bookseller does state a golden-rule for magic (you get paid back three times for what you do), that ends up irrelevant. Sarah’s success comes from learning to be comfortable with herself and realizing she isn’t responsible for her mother’s death. I suppose that’s a moral.

With all the buildup, the climatic magic duel is a disappointment. It is far too surrealistic and lacks drama. Since the outcome is predictable, it needs to have excitement and action in the execution. Instead, it is mainly Sarah walking around and looking over her shoulder.

The Craft suffers from being too true to teen life and too slight on magic and fantasy. I remember being a teen; I don’t need to watch it.

Reviews, Witches Tagged with: Three Reels

Eko Eko Azarak II: Birth of a Wizard (1996)

Oct 051996

Misa Kuroi (Kimika Yoshino) is an average high school girl, with absent parents, until her friends are slaughtered and the killer comes after her. Years ago, a clan of magic-users was destroyed by a resurrected spirit. After a 100 years sleep, the spirit is back, hopping bodies until it finds the one it wants to possess permanently: Misa’s. Misa is the chosen one, born with unlimited witchcraft powers. Unfortunately, she doesn’t know how to use them. The only thing on her side is a warlock, the last survivor of the clan, who has pledged to protect her and eliminate the spirit.

A prequel to Eko Eko Azarak: Wizard of Darkness, Eko Eko Azarak II is a more accomplished film. The story is deeper, the characters far more developed, and the production values are greatly improved. There’s more than one set this time around and the camera seems to be operated by professionals (the first had a bland TV look). More importantly, the first film’s greatest flaw, the overly theatrical acting style, is gone. Well, there are a couple of Snidely Whiplash evil laughing moments, so make that the style is nearly gone. It’s also a slower film, with several scenes going on too long, and it has a new set of clichés which are more annoying than the old ones.

This time around there’s a lot more character development. Much of the runtime is spent finding out who Misa is. That she turns out to be whiny and rather dim are unfortunate. Like in most Asian horror, we still end up knowing very few facts about the girl, but we do get her personality. Why her folks are never around is still a mystery, as well as what she likes to do, what her life has been like, etc. I guess there’s a different standard for “knowing someone” in Japan.

The film was almost over before I realized I was watching a remake of Terminator 2. Here we have a young, inexperienced person who is the future savior of the world, but for now, is nothing special. Her pursuer is unstoppable, and can take the form of friends or just people on the street. She’s rescued by someone in the know who has the power to fight the killer, but will never be able to win. Together, they run. A lot.

The downfall of Eko Eko Azarak II are the she’s-dumber-than-dirt moments, moments that have appeared in dozens of possession/replacement movies. Misa knows that her enemy can take over other people. She’s also seen it with the body of her best friend’s father. Yet she’s completely oblivious. Anyone she knows comes along and instantly she wants a hug. She stops the warlock from defending her because, “this is my friend.” And she does it repeatedly. There’s a point at which I throw up my hands and figure that anyone this stupid deserves to die.

The first film distracted the viewer from its failings with blood and skin. Not this time. Until near the end, when the flying, dismembered body parts become comic, there’s little gore. As for sex, everyone keeps their clothes tightly buttoned, and there’s not a wisp of teen lesbianism. A bit of spice might have made the slow sections seem faster, or made Misa’s stupidity easier to handle. Without it, the plot and characters have to carry the show, and they’re a re-write or two away from having the ability.

The other films in the series are Eko Eko Azarak: Wizard of Darkness (1996), Eko Eko Azarak III: Misa The Dark Angel (1998), Eko Eko Azarak IV (2001), Eko Eko Azarak: R-page (2006), and Eko Eko Azarak: B-page (2006).

Asian, Foreign Language, Reviews, Witches Tagged with: Two & 1/2 Reels

Escape from L.A. (1996)

Oct 051996

Loner Snake Plissken (Kurt Russell) has been captured by the U.S. national police force and brought to officers Malloy and Brazen (Stacy Keach, Michelle Forbes). They force him to undertake a mission for the Christian fanatic president (Cliff Robertson). He must enter L.A., no longer part of the country after the earthquake of 2000, and retrieve a black box stolen by the president’s daughter, Utopia (A.J. Langer), and given to the revolutionary leader, Cuervo Jones (George Corraface). Entering the island city by sub, Snake meets an array of colorful characters who both help and hinder him, including treacherous Map to the Stars Eddie (Steve Buscemi), ex-thief Hershe Las Palmas (Pam Grier), and surfer-dude Pipeline (Peter Fonda).

Like its predecessor, Escape From New York, Escape From L.A. earns its post-apocalyptic label with a mini-apocalypse. The world hasn’t been destroyed, just L.A. And like in most post-apocalyptic tales, the story follows one, tough, unpleasant, larger-than-life anti-hero as he fights everybody. This is also a dystopian film as the U.S. has become a Christian theocratic dictatorship. Director John Carpenter, never one to shy away from his political leanings, uses both aspects to extol the virtues of libertarianism (making the film feel like Demolition Man, or his own They Live). While most of the politics is hammered too hard, the arrests for “moral crimes” does touch a nerve in modern U.S. lawmaking.

But this is no contemplative film; it’s an all out action picture, with guns a’blazing. Carpenter tosses in everything. If there’s movement, it’s in the film. Besides the shooting (with machine guns, rocket launchers, pistols, rifles, mouth darts, and net guns), there is a fight with a scalpel, hang gliding, high speed submarine travel, surfing on a tidal wave, and a basketball game. A basketball game? Yeah, well, I didn’t say it all works.

While Escape From New York was an action picture with some comedy, Escape From L.A. is a comedy pic with lots of action. Everything is light, fluffy, and silly. The characters are often caricatures of current L.A. stereotypes. So, there’s a guy still selling maps to the star’s homes, even though everything is in ruins. There’s an evil group of plastic surgery addicts, and a surfer waiting to ride a tidal wave. You could label it social criticism, but it is less a call for change than a child pointing and laughing.

While this is one of Carpenter’s most expensive movies, it looks like his cheapest. The real problem is in ineffective and extremely obvious CGI. From the submarine to the giant wave to a wide shot of the city, nothing looks real.

As a sequel, Escape From L.A. took the path of least resistance, repeating almost every plot point of the original. Snake is the same guy as before. He’s arrested again, given a mission that involves retrieving something for the president of the United States, and is given an implant that will kill him if he doesn’t complete the job in a set time. He’s again sent into a prison island, where he meets wacky characters, including a girl that wants to help him and a driver to take him around. The similarities continue, but you should be getting the idea. If you liked Escape From New York, well here it is again, with everyone older and the jokes broader. Why not just watch the first one?

John Carpenter’s other films include Halloween, The Fog, Prince of Darkness, and Village of the Damned.

Post-Apocalyptic, Reviews Tagged with: Two Reels

Tornado! (1996)

Oct 041996

An entertainment spy sneaks into Michael Crichton’s room and steals his script for Twister. His bosses make a few cosmetic changes, paste a new name on it, and rush it into production so it can beat Twister‘s release date. Wait, that’s not the plot of Tornado!. That’s a reasonable supposition on how it was made. OK, the plot. Hot grant auditor Samantha Callen (Shannon Sturges) arrives in Texas to pull the funding of Dr. Joe Branson’s (Ernie Hudson) tornado measuring device. Tornado chaser Jake Thorne (Bruce Campbell) needs to show her how valuable the project is while tossing in a little romance. Of course there’s a bad guy weather man because…well, because there was one in Twister.

There was a time when Bruce Campbell could do no wrong: Evil Dead II—1987, Moontrap—1989, Army of Darkness—1992, The Hudsucker Proxy—1994. Even when the material left something to be desired (Waxwork II: Lost in Time—1992), Campbell was quirky and entertaining. By ’96, that time was coming to an end. Now, with Man with the Screaming Brain and Alien Apocalypse under his belt, the Campbell name doesn’t mean much, and it doesn’t in Tornado!.

Campbell plays his normal he-man, but without the eccentricities. That makes him a pleasant, but unremarkable leading man, and puts the weight of the film on the plot and on the special effects. Neither can support it. The story meanders about with lots of talk on the dangers of tornadoes (I’m from the Midwest; I’m well acquainted with what they can do) and just a little talk about the fancy new invention which is supposed to be so important. That’s just as well as it’s hard to get excited about planting detection equipment in the wind.

Since this is a disaster movie, the payoff has to be some kick-ass destruction, but that requires money, and there isn’t enough. We get a lot of rain, and some nice gales, but no money shots. No buildings tumbling over or cows flying in the air. The scenes are exciting enough for a drama or character study, but not for a movie named Tornado!

The ending is painful: false sincerity with characters behaving ludicrously. If you must watch this (perhaps you have an office contest to see who can watch the most disaster films), turn it off ten minutes before the credits roll. You’ll be happier.

Disaster, Miscellaneous, Reviews Tagged with: One Reel

Twelfth Night: Or What You Will (1996)

Sep 281996

A shipwrecked young woman (Imogen Stubbs) takes the identity a man, giving her the appearance of her drowned brother (Steven Mackintosh), and becomes the confidant to the local duke (Toby Stephens). This leads to romantic confusion as she loves the duke, the duke loves Lady Olivia (Helena Bonham Carter), Olivia loves the cross-dressing girl, and the brother isn’t really dead.

Quick Review: My favorite Shakespearian comedy, Twelfth Night, is a hilarious farce, filled with pratfalls, sexual innuendo, sight-gags, over-the-top characters, and general silliness.

But not in this production. Director Trevor Nunn has made a skillfully shot, adeptly acted drama, which is unfortunate when filming a comedy. Ben Kingsley’s Feste is a good example of where this production fails. No one can fault his performance; it is first rate, but it is of the wrong character. Feste is a wacky fool, but Kingsley plays him as a melancholy philosopher. Nunn has a great deal of respect for Shakespeare, but Twelfth Night doesn’t need respect. It needs to be funny, and here, it isn’t.

Reviews, Shakespeare Tagged with: Toxic

1 2 … 61 62 63 64 65 … 131 132