PartTimeCritic Reviews

Clear and Present Danger (1994)

An All-Time Great Political Thriller Undercut by a Poor Third Act Choice

[6/10 · 15 July 2023]

CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER (B) is really a really informative and engaging primer on the complexities of intelligence work and politics for the first two thirds of the film before it gives itself over to a traditional Hollywood action climax that feels underwhelming and out of place. Jack Ryan, played again here by a righteous and morally upstanding Harrison Ford, is back in the CIA and instead of Russians or Irish extremists, the new threat on the block are drug cartels. Most of the film does a remarkably great job slowly unfolding the complexities of drug enforcement, national intelligence work vs undercover secret operations, congressional oversight, and all of the politics that get caught up between everyone involved. That's no easy task, yet director Philip Noyce and the screenwriters have taken Clancy's dense novel and made it a very difficult and complex subject accessible and engaging. I was locked in as the story kept revealing more and more layers that while exaggerated for the screen, I knew had plenty of roots in real world operations. Heck, there's even a healthy subtext of how these kinds of decisions and steps were part of the run-up to Vietnam. Unfortunately, once Ford's Ryan makes his way down to Columbia to take matters into his own hands and become a much more traditional hero in a traditional movie shootout - the whole thing really falters. Let Arnold and Sylvester do their thing and give us more sequences of Ryan outsmarting, outwitting, or even out-computering his opponents. Aside from a poor decision, much like in Patriot Games, to go traditional with its action climax, I do appreciate the political ending we get with Ryan learning Washington politics but not being changed by them. Overall, this is easily the most sophisticated and layered of the Jack Ryan films and had they found a better way to bring the action to a close, it could have been a real contender for one of the best political thrillers ever made.

Plane (2023)

Butler Gets His Own Low Budget but Engaging Captain Phillips on a Plane

[6/10 · 14 July 2023]

I remember the advertising for Plane made it feel like a campy action film, but that's not what I experienced at all. Yes, it's obviously lower budget, but the tone of the film is much closer to Captain Phillips crossed with United 93 and the 2008 Rambo. After lightning strikes a passenger plane, Captain Brodie Torrance (played by Gerard Butler), has to ditch the plane at best he can in a surprisingly well-made sequence given the budget constraints. Unfortunately, the plane lands on an island of the Philippines held by rebels who enjoy taking hostages for political gains. The rest of the film turns into a rescue mission with some decent grounded action along the way. Gerard Butler anchors the film well giving another solid performance as a man who gets the mission accomplished no matter the sacrifice. Butler just nails these roles, bringing a commitment and seriousness that really elevates the material. I especially enjoyed that Butler wasn't an "ex-marine" pilot, but just a caring and serious minded dude who did what he had to do - kind of like a Captain Sully who was forced to pick up a gun if he had to. This isn't top level filmmaking, but it's a surprisingly good one that deserves a viewing if you're looking for something engaging and less than two hours to turn on.

Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves (2023)

Is to LORD OF THE RINGS what SHREK is to Disney Princess Films

[7/10 · 12 July 2023]

I heard some rumblings that this one might be better than it's early year release date and it has easily become my first real surprise viewing of the year and I think it deserves to be ranked amongst some of the best fantasy films in the genre. Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves is a fantasy film with a journey/heist at its center that takes a likable group of thieves (really just misunderstood heroes) through imaginative locations, encountering creative characters/creatures, and giving us some memorable action set pieces with castle chases and even pudgy dragon fights. Calling it a Guardians of the Galaxy for the fantasy genre is a bit simplistic, but it's also not that far off. Another way to put it would be that this is to Lord of the Rings what Shrek was to Disney Princess films. The director/writers here were the writers from 2018's Game Night so that might help give you a clue as to the layered humor to expect and also hope for a juicy Jesse Plemons role in a future sequel.

Three things make this fantasy-action-comedy stand out to me. First, it's just a fun story to watch filled with actors who genuinely feel like they are enjoying their roles. Chris Pine gives a charismatic lead performance here that brings a lot of comedy and still finds some strong dramatic notes. Pine plays the character a bit like if Jason Bateman had been cast as Star Lord in Guardians of the Galaxy instead of Chris Pratt. There's a moment Chris Pine breaks into a song and it's not just played for laughs - it's meant to be for levity and it really works. Hugh Grant, like in Paddington, gets to sink himself into another smarmy villainous role and there's even a delightful little surprise cameo that had me rolling. Second, the film is bursting with creative imagination and features plenty of practical effects to pull it off. There's lots of real-life locations, practical builds, and costumes mixed in with stages/CGI to ground the film. Also, you never feel like they over rely on magic just for the sake of getting some CGI moment into the trailer. Finally, the relatively simple stakes of the film, recapturing a lost family, are refreshing for such a big blockbuster. Sure, they backdoor a bit higher stakes during the overstuffed finale (some trimming and focus would have really helped to nail the landing here) but it's light and takes a backseat to the family stuff. On one hand, it's heartening to have only one entry here and just let this story and world be a one off. On the other hand, they've developed such likable characters and such an interesting and fun world that it would be a shame not to revisit it. If that's a problem, that's a pretty good one to have.

True Lies (1994)

Enjoyable Cameron Action with Some Issues

[6/10 · 5 May 2023]

TRUE LIES (B): After his enormously successful and box-office changing R-rated 1991 blockbuster Terminator 2: Judgment Day, director/writer James Cameron decided to follow it up with his own take on a big James Bond action mashup. In James Cameron's vision, Bond is played by the confident and capable Arnold Schwarzenegger as the American super spy Harry Tasker with a comedic sidekick played by Tom Arnold (in a role that surprisingly works very well). The additional gimmick and the source of the title for the film is that Arnold's super spy has a family that he keeps in the dark about his actual line of work - they think he's a computer salesman. Arnold's wife Helen is played by Jamie Lee Curtis and Arnold's constant nights and weekends out is making her lonely. The title also refers to the lies Curtis tells Arnold, as she is caught up in a potential affair with a secretive man named Simon (who is lying as well) she finds engaging. The secretive man is played by Bill Paxton (in a beautifully slimy role) and he's really a used car salesman who is playing as a secret spy in order to get Curtis into bed. The irony of course is that Curtis is already married to a real super spy. Arnold of course finds out and in a fairly comical series of sequences he exposes Simon for who he is. It's a little less comical when Arnold plays games with his wife to see if she still loves him. Of course, it's in "good fun" but the problem with Arnold playing with his wife is that during the whole thing he never recognizes his own faults in the marriage; he's just so unaware and the entire thing stretches out for quite a bit of the runtime (I would have preferred one more action sequence). This is all really a side story that eventually gets caught up into the major plot of the film - a potential terrorist nuclear attack. An Arab terrorist group named Crimson Jihad has secured a few nuclear warheads and want to hold American foreign policy hostage by threatening them with it. Arnold and Curtis get caught up in the plot and taken down to the keys. It's from there that Arnold must stop the weapons from being brought into America. This is where most of the films major action sequences come from and I really love James Cameron the action filmmaker who just seems to intuitively understand what makes cinematic action so interesting and so much fun. In the first act of the film we get a masterpiece of a shootout chase sequence that goes from a bathroom brawl to the streets to the top of a Washington DC high rise hotel. The standout feature here is the chase between the villain and Arnold that so happens to take place while Arnold is on horseback and the villain is on a motorcycle. It's an extended chase sequence with several great shots and stunts. The ending thirty minutes or so is the action the film is most known for, but it never comes close to the quality of the horse chase in my opinion. The seven mile bridge and Miami skyrise sequences are fun and visually spectacular, but they never quite have the kinetic back and forth or the grounding of the chase. True Lies is a good action film, but I don't think it really lives up to its reputation. It's a bit too long, with an over-indulgent middle that features zero action. The final sequences, while visually wonderful, are a bit too goofy and over the top for me to rate this any higher than a good mixture of highs and lows.

Sidekicks (1992)

A Decent Enough Riff on KARATE KID

[5/10 · 30 April 2023]

SIDEKICKS (C+) is a perfectly acceptable family directed martial arts film. It stars Jonathan Brandis who plays high-schooler Barry who can't stop dreaming about being Chuck Norris' sidekick on his many action adventures. Large segments of the movie are given over to Brandis day-dreaming of himself fighting or shooting alongside Norris in mockups of several of his movies. Brandis, however, has a tough time facing reality and his daydreaming is getting him in trouble at school and with a high school bully. Luckily, his teacher and father come up with a plan for Brandis to train with a Master Miyagi like mentor who whips him into shape and gets him into a karate style tournament finale where, Chuck Norris actually joins his team. They do battle against the high school bully and a local jerk karate master played by Joe Piscopo and it's all decent stuff. It's essentially a riff on the much better Karate Kid, but Brandis and Piscopo are game to ham it up at times and the little action vignettes are all good natured. Nothing great, but a fun little fighting family film.

Gettysburg (1993)

Sweeping and Informative Telling of a Pivotal Battle

[8/10 · 29 April 2023]

GETTYSBURG (A-) is a sweeping, detailed, and moving re-telling of the crucial Civil War battle of Gettysburg, The three-day battle in the small Pennsylvania town is largely told by following several different strands of characters ranging from the generals in charge down to the individual commanders and soldiers of various regiments and companies. The Confederate general Robert E. Lee, played with Southern grace, patience, and intelligence by Martin Sheen, and his right-hand man General Longstreet, played by Tom Berenger as more cynical and practical but no less intelligent, stand out most on the rebel side. Though we meet various generals and leaders on the side of the Union, none stand out like Jeff Daniel's portrayal of the Maine college professor turned Union leader Joshua Chamberlain (sporting an iconic mustache). We first meet Colonel Joshua Chamberlain not long after he's become a regiment commander and he has a small crisis to deal with, a beautiful little detail that gives us a glimpse into the character and context of the times. A small company has been taken prisoner for refusing to fight and given to Chamberlain's command. Chamberlain must deal with them, force them to fight, or shoot them. He refuses to use force and instead speaks to them kindly and with a moving speech filled with details and themes about war aims. Chamberlain's sincerity and vulnerability is instantly endearing here. He's one of many strands the movie is able to juggle that give us both sympathetic and informative portraits of the individuals who made up the near 200,000 men involved in the battle. While it is still a Hollywood production complete with a stirring musical score, there is a unique commitment by the creative team to tell the story as historically and objectively as possible. The film is a long-simmering passion project of writer/director Ronald Maxwell as well as Ted Turner who helped to finance the film. It was filmed largely on the actual historical battle sites and used large numbers of Civil War battle re-enactors to fill out the large army sequences. Alongside the individual stories there is great care and attention paid to showing the maneuvering and strategy that led to the greatest battle on American soil. I do wish more maps or helicopter shots were used here, for unless you intuitively understand the geography of this battle, it can be hard to keep all of the various maneuvering and commanders clearly in your mind. We are shown portions of three major battles on each day: Buford's stand and holding of the high ground on the first day, Chamberlain's heroic defense of Little Round Top on the second day, and Pickett's tragic charge on the final day. While these battles are dramatic and shot well, I do wish they were filmed with a little more gravity in their violence. Unfortunately, what we see is mostly old school film battles where people fall down when they are shot or jump as cannons explode near them - all bloodless. Violence in battle at the time of the film was largely kept to the Vietnam war and spared in World War 2 or Civil War depictions (with some exceptions of course) - seeing it as more noble or something. Thankfully that would largely all change after Saving Private Ryan in 1998. Given the commitment to historicity, I think a commitment to showing the atrocity and horror of war here would have been proper. These are minor problems for an otherwise masterful war film that should be sought out by cinephiles and history lovers alike.

Cliffhanger (1993)

Doesn't Quite Hold Up

[5/10 · 23 April 2023]

CLIFFHANGER (C+) is an overall decent action film that doesn't quite hold up to its reputation as one of Stallone's better films. The "Die Hard on a Mountain" story is a bit too simplistic and winds up feeling like not much more than a bunch of isolated little bits of action and stunts, "...and then this happens...and then this happens" strung together to make a plot. Additionally, Stallone's character gets little definition other than the traumatic event that opens the film. The film is best known for its mountain photography and rock-climbing stunts and those are certainly the film's best features. However, while the stunts have held up, some of the rock-climbing visual effects have not. In all, this is really just an alright entry in the "Die Hard on a..." genre that gets by on Stallone's charisma and some pretty nifty mountain stunts.

Dave (1993)

Serviceable Fantasy Comedy

[6/10 · 23 April 2023]

DAVE (B-) is a comedy film with a very simple premise: What if the President of the United States went into a coma and his closest political advisors used his body double to stand-in for him? President Bill Mitchell, a cold politician played by Kevin Kline, has a stroke while in the midst of a secret affair. To keep the affair a secret, the President's Chief of Staff, played by a stern and conniving Frank Langella, makes the decision to use the President's new happy-go lucky stand-in named Dave (also played by Kevin Kline) as a kind of stealth President. Another advisor, played by the great character actor Kevin Dunn, agrees and together they give Dave the knowledge needed to become the President until the real one can make a return. In the meantime, Langella uses the opportunity to try and rule the country through the unwitting Dave. It's fun to watch Dave, just a normal nice guy who isn't exactly political, take to the different public functions of the Presidency, including the inevitable conflicts with his Chief of Staff. I enjoyed the "enjoying the Presidency" stuff much better than the more serious third act of the film. The concluding events are a bit of a stretch for me and although they tried hard to keep the film apolitical, the naivete it called for was a bit silly by the end. Still, as a fantasy comedy, it's not half bad and Kevin Cline does a fine job giving us a sense of what a President who was just a good guy would look like.

Sakra (2023)

Skip the Film - Youtube the Fight Scenes

[3/10 · 22 April 2023]

SAKRA (C-) is Donnie Yen's attempt at crafting a new epic Wuxia classic, bit instead crafts three decent action sequences surrounded by a hot flaming mess of storytelling. I'm not even going to try and give a plot description other than to say it takes place in Ancient China and features a horrifically confusing and unnecessarily convoluted plot with Donnie Yen's good guy kung fu artist constantly being in the wrong place at the wrong time. It's apparently based on a wuxia novel series that's rooted in Buddhist ideas, but it's just not very accessible, even for a charitable and engaged outsider like me. I knew I was in for a confusing mess when even the opening title cards were a confusing mess of an English translation. The good news is that the large budget is all on the screen with incredible looking sets and great costumes. Donnie Yen has been quoted as saying this was his attempt to make a Marvel like film using the wuxia genre and he absolutely failed to do so. He doesn't seem to recognize that the power of the first few phases of Marvel films was in how simple and straightforward they were: Simple plots with instantly likeable characters and great action sequences. Sakra does emulate some of the superhero like abilities into its action sequences, but Yen's character largely mopes about the film while most scenes feature endless talking and complications. The three major action sequences we get are pretty good, featuring impressive wire work and stunts, but they also feature oppressive sound design and CGI that feels like it could have used a bit more love. Skip the film and youtube the fight sequences in a few months from now.

Knock at the Cabin (2023)

Interesting, Thought-Provoking, but Ultimately Lacking

[5/10 · 18 April 2023]

KNOCK AT THE CABIN (C+) represents another entry into M. Night Shyamalan's output of self-contained little mystery/horror films of varying quality that try to engage with big themes in an engaging way. Since so much of the power of this one rests in the slow unfolding of its secrets, I'll refrain from a plot summary except to give you some comparisons to help you judge if it sounds appealing: It's like a cross between Funny Games, Cabin in the Woods, and Genesis 22 (yeah the Bible chapter) put into a story like Shyamalan's Old or The Visit. I found the story thought-provoking, but ultimately lacking. The film revolves in some ways around the idea of love and sacrifice, but Shyamalan's view of love is only superficially sketched out. Like many of his films post-Unbreakable, there's some potent themes raised and interesting characters created, but there's just too flaws of some sort that by the end it's never quite as powerful as you think it will be.

Cocaine Bear (2023)

Can't Even Get It's Core Gimmick Right

[2/10 · 18 April 2023]

COCAINE BEAR (C-): If the idea of a bear that develops a penchant for cocaine and mauling anyone who gets between him and his powder naturally interests you then you'll likely enjoy...at least a quarter of this movie. If you like cheesy 80's music references and lots of cursing then you'll enjoy another 25% of the film! The basic premise that drug runners drop a large amount of packed cocaine out a plane into the Chattahoochee forest to be recovered later, but a meddlesome bear with a penchant for cocaine screws it up is all you really need for this 'B' concept. Throw in the cops and robbers melee recovering it, let the baddies take the gruesome revenge deaths, and call it a cheesy day but successful day right? Nope. The creative staff behind the film just don't seem to trust its core gimmick well enough that they have to weigh it down with a knock off Guy Ritchie / Tarantino intersection of quirky for quirk sake characters (the kids curse and try eating the cocaine! The park officials are looney!) The whole whirlwind of characters just feel like they do their own thing until the filmmakers finally want the bear to wander into the story and do the thing the trailers told us it would do, only to wander out again and let the story continue on. Unfortunately, the one thing the film does promise, the bear attacks, they largely screwup. In some sequences the bear is a raging monster (even without the cocaine, like in the first attack it seems), in others he's a stealth monster quietly sneaking up and popping out of nowhere, and in others after he does the coke he acts all loopy. You never feel like the bear becomes a consistent character where you can anticipate his thoughts and action - which is shame for a 'B' movie like this. The actual attacks are gory and while that's not necessarily a bad thing, the film's pretty amoral about who gets killed, and that's disappointing. The whole point of us getting to enjoy a bear's murder spree (to the extent we can enjoy it) is that film's like this have an unwritten rule that whoever gets eviscerated kinda had it coming. Not here - just being quirky, foreign, or even just a pair of kind paramedics showing up to a call is grounds for death. What's the world come to when you can't trust filmmakers to get a murderous cocaine-fueled bear monster right?

Big Brother (2018)

Cheesy and Formulaic After School Special with Some Donnie Yen Kicks

[1/10 · 15 April 2023]

BIG BROTHER (D+) is Donnie Yen's attempt to make an inspiring teacher film where he of course believes in his kids and is able to bring his own brand of hope and hard love to bear on them. The school is only interested in high test scores and wants to kick low scoring students out and there's a band of businessmen who want the school to die off as well so they can build luxury buildings on the property. All of the school stuff is extremely weak, cheesy, and written as if it was for six year olds. Yen's character and the flunky kids he inspires are both so shallow and superficial that there's really only enough for a 3-minute music video. Unsurprisingly, there's several musical montages in the film with Yen going around and trying to help solve his students life situations set to pop songs. It plays a bit like those Thai Life commercials, but worse, and one right after another. Near the end the earlier mentioned thugs rear their heads long enough to give us a couple decent action sequences. These are pretty good, but feel pretty strange in the context of the film - like they had to happen because it's a Donnie Yen film rather than because the film actually needed it. This is a pretty big misfire - an after school special turned into a vanity star role for Donnie Yen.

The Sandlot (1993)

STAND BY ME Toned Down, Made Optimistic, & Family Friendly

[7/10 · 13 April 2023]

THE SANDLOT (B+) is a fantastic family film set around the summer of 1962 (complete with 60's soundtrack!) when fifth grader Scott Smalls moves to the San Fernando Valley and falls in with a bunch of kids who play baseball. As the new kid in town, he wants to make friends and thankfully the leader of the gang of kids who play ball, Benny Rodriguez, is a nice kid and includes Smalls in their clan (he makes their 9th player, a full team). The story of the summer takes on many forms and tones. It's part Stand By Me dramatic kid bonding by taking on a quest together (complete with insightful voice over!), part teen coming of age comedy (complete with chewing tobacco, ogling over girls at the pool, and facing down bullies), and part kid sports drama (it's shot through with a genuine love of baseball). The key plot point here is that the boys play baseball most days of the summer in an abandoned sandlot. Whenever someone hits a homerun into a particular fenced yard, the baseball is unrecoverable due to a large, loud, and vicious dog who rules the yard. The boys have even concocted horror origin stories for the dog (and the film wisely uses an obviously oversized suit/mannequin any time parts of the dog are visible - the thing is treated a bit like Spielberg treated the shark in Jaws. When another ball gets lost in the yard, Scott Smalls remembers his dad had a prized baseball in his room and decides to use it to keep the fun summer games going. Unfortunately, that ball gets knocked into the yard as well and Smalls reveals the ball was signed by some lady Baby Ruth. The rest of the squad goes nuts and reveals to Smalls who Babe Ruth is. There's a lot of comedy mined from the kids attempting to get the ball back only to be beaten back time and time against by the backyard beast. The final attempt sees the fastest kid in the group Benny (after a dream with Babe Ruth encourages him) hop the fence and put his speed to the test against the beast. I love that when Benny decides to face the fear and jump the face he doesn't see the comical beast we've seen so far, but a real dog. The bold feat leads to a foot race all through town as the dog chases Benny down and winds up back where they started, but an accident knocks the fence down and traps the dog. When the boys help the dog get out they make a new friend and the beast shows the boys his pile of balls. When the boys get the courage to talk with the owner of the dog (James Earl Jones) they realize he's not the monster they had made him out to be. It turns out the owner is blind and used to be a player in the Negro leagues but knew and played with the Babe. He takes mercy on the boys and trades them their chewed-up ball for a ball signed by all the 1927 Yankees. When I said the film was part Stand By Me, it's essentially a facsimile of Stand By Me but toned down, sanitized, and covered over with a veneer of wonder and optimism for a family audience. The narrator, the nerd kid, the knowledgeable older kid, the puking, the life obstacles tackled together, the joys and struggles of childhood...it's all here. While I appreciate the more grounded nature of Stand By Me and how it confronts the viewer with a more truthful version of growing up, I'm glad a version like THE SANDLOT can exist alongside it as well. Both films capture truths of that age in different ways. I think we need both visions, both sides, or we lose an important balance. I think viewed back to back they can make for a fascinating study in contrasts.

Shadowlands (1993)

An Insightful and Moving Story Told in a Classic Style

[8/10 · 12 April 2023]

SHADOWLANDS (A-): In Shadowlands, Anthony Hopkins tackles the famous Christian academic and writer of the children's books like The Chronicles of Narnia C. S. Lewis. Hopkins depicts Lewis as a comfortable king of his land; an Oxford academic who writes, lectures, teaches, fellowships with his friends, and always wins debates. In his lectures he feels free to opine about how pain is God's megaphone to rouse a deaf world, in his teaching he feels free to challenge his students, and in his fellowship he feels confident he's always right. Into this wonderful Oxford existence, the middle-aged American divorcee Joy Gresham descends initially as a fan and letter writer to Lewis. After their first meeting, Joy's bluntness and matter of fact nature challenges Lewis, befuddles him, and from Hopkins acting cues, you can tell he's charmed by her. Their relationship blooms as she makes visits to Lewis' house and stays for Christmas. Joy has the intellectual depth to stand toe to toe with Lewis and her lack of "society airs" allows her to crash through normal social barriers and put Lewis' academic world on their heels. The leisurely film, directed by Richard Attenborough in his old-school classic style, recounts their eventual marriage (in secret and in public) that challenges Lewis' views of friendship/love and then Joy's tragic early death which challenges Lewis' view of suffering and grief. The movie wisely shows Lewis giving his lecture on God's use of suffering several times, until Joy's suffering and death of course. Lewis struggles with his grief over Joy. It's always easier to opine on death and suffering when its from the safety of a pen! The film's screenplay by William Nicholson (he wrote a television version in the 80's then adapted it to a play and then now to this film) captures the spirit of Lewis and Oxford well, distilling his reflections on love and grief earned during this consequential stretch of his life and making great use of his own words from his beloved writings. I love how the film sublimely ends bringing together so many of the films thematic and visual cues with a grieving Lewis and young Douglas (the son of Joy) sitting before the wardrobe that was an inspiration for his kids series as they weep (in "happiness") over the Joy's death. Powerful stuff for those willing to get past the slow and somewhat stilted nature of the film.

Loaded Weapon 1 (1993)

A Quality Entry into the Parody Genre that Loses Steam Towards the End

[6/10 · 12 April 2023]

LOADED WEAPON 1 (B-): A parody spoof on the popular Lethal Weapon franchise (and macho action films in general) done in the vein of Naked Gun and Hot Shots! From the opening shootout in a convenience store, the inciting murder, and the initial investigation, you can see there was a lot of energy and creativity behind this spoof. Even the musical score is a hilarious ode to jazzy cop film soundtracks. There's a gag every second (often multiple in the backgrounds of each scene) and many of them are pretty spot on and some are really inspired. In place of Mel Gibson we have Emilio Estevez and in place of Danny Glover we have Samuel L. Jackson. Emilio Estevez may not be Charlie Sheen levels of dry, but he's close enough. His deadpan works great as a comedic stand-in for Mel Gibson's unhinged Lethal Weapon cop. The two set out to investigate the murder of Samuel L. Jackson's old partner (Whoopi Goldberg) and find themselves caught up in busting a drug smuggling ring through a girl scout like corporation. William Shatner gets to ham it up as the film's main villain behind the drug ring and Tim Curry plays his right-hand man. Like all good parodies, this film finely balances telling a coherent and engaging story while still providing consistent comedic set pieces and gas. In the worst parodies the plot is just an afterthought or bare skeleton for a couple of jokes featured in the trailer. Unfortunately, the movie does lose its steam a bit toward the end with sequences still being funny, but lacking the hit rate or density of the first half. This isn't in the Airplane! Tier of classic spoofs, but this is a quality genre entry. If you like parodies, give it a watch.

Lucy (I) (2014)

Interesting Ideas & Scientific Quackery Just Simmer with Mediocre Execution

[5/10 · 9 April 2023]

LUCY (C+) is based with the premise that humans only use 10% of their brains and would become superhuman like if they were able to access even more. Scarlett Johansson plays a young female named Lucy whose one-week-old boyfriend accidentally gets her involved in a drug smuggling ring that knocks her unconscious and surgically implants a bag of drugs in her. The drugs turn out to be a synthetic version of a pregnancy hormone and after one of her captors kick her in the stomach, the implanted bag of drugs bursts and leaks into her system. The drug increases her brain capacity slowly and what is unlocked as her brain capacity begins to increase is the bulk of the film. With her new found abilities, Lucy begins hunting down those responsible for the drug smuggling ring as well as trying to overcome any obstacles in her way. I say "obstacles" but the truth is that Lucy becomes so powerful so quickly that the actions scenes don't really involve all that much tension at all. Instead of fighting she can just freeze people, make them fall asleep, or manipulate their weapons. This isn't a knock on Scarlett who really tries hard here, but spends much of the film acting like a semi-Terminator - robotic and ticky as if she is computing everything all at once. A good example of this is the finale which is trying to be part action film and part 2001: A SPACE ODDYSEY but it doesn't really do either fairly well and it essentially renders Scarlett as someone who just sits in a chair transcending everyone else. It's just not all that well integrated or interesting, despite the imagination clearly on display here. An interesting idea, lots of stupid Hollywood quackery science, but all would be forgiven if it was better than mediocre execution.

The Legend of Fong Sai-Yuk 2 (1993)

A Consistently Good but Still Inferior Sequel

[5/10 · 8 April 2023]

THE LEGEND OF FONG SAI-YUK II (B-) continues the story of Fong Sai-Yuk and his mother helping the Red Flower Society work against their Manchu leaders. The leader of the Red Flower Society is secretly of the Emperor's line (therefore a threat to the Manchu Crown) and there's a sacred box being guarded by Japanese Samurai that houses this secret. The Red Flower Society tries to retrieve this box leading to a series of action sequences and in-fighting within the society. There are a few comedic sequences thrown in as well, mostly having to do with Fong Sai-Yuk's mother or love interests, and they don't quite work - even if they are better integrated into the story than most humor in films like this. The fight scenes here are consistently good and inventive. While none of them reach the heights of the first film, they are enjoyable and worth a view. The sequel is a step down from the first film, but it is still another enjoyable and quality film in a spectacular run from Cory Yuen and Jet Li.

A Perfect World (1993)

A Challenging But Accessible Tale of Broken Fathers

[7/10 · 7 April 2023]

A PERFECT WORLD (B+) is the second 1993 film starring Clint Eastwood and featuring a criminal manhunt. Like in Wolfgang Peterson's thrilling In the Line of Fire, Eastwood heads up another manhunt except this time he's head of the Texas State Police in the 1960's and he's searching for Kevin Costner's escaped convict. Costner plays Butch Haynes, a smart and cunning convict who broke out of prison with another petty criminal whose ineptitude leads them to take a young boy hostage. A situation with two fugitives on the run with a kidnapped boy (named Phillip) becomes hot news, especially during a Governor's campaign, and Eastwood's "Red" and Laura Dern's prison specialist are called in on the job. There's some nice humor in the film and it's easy to watch. The cop/robber chase is part The Getaway style procedural Texas manhunt, but the core of the film is the relationship that buds between Costner's Haynes and the young boy Phillip who has grown up so far without a father. There are several nice moments where the film uses this relationship to offer insightful commentary on masculinity and fatherhood. Eastwood is often attracted to how the cycle of violence continues itself (see Unforgiven & Mystic River) and that's present here, but it's largely examined through father-son relationships and how their imperfections can spiral through generations. In a bit of a throwaway line a character speaking to Laura Dern's specialist says, "Well, in a perfect world, Miss Gerber, we'd all lock arms and thrash the bushes until he turned up." Her response is, "Well, in a perfect world, things like this wouldn't happen in the first place, right?" The film makes a compelling but heartbreaking case that fatherhood is one of the central planks in breaking that perfect world.

In the Name of the Father (1993)

A Parable on How to Respond to Violence - Based on a True Story

[8/10 · 27 March 2023]

IN THE NAME OF THE FATHER (A-) is the second collaboration between director Jim Sheridan and actor Daniel Day-Lewis and scored seven Academy Award nominations (winning none of them). The film is based on the true story of how Gerry Conlon, his father, and other members of his extended family were wrongly accused, framed, and imprisoned for an IRA bombing in London during the 1970's. Rather than a examine the particulars of the IRA situation, the film uses the story of Gerry Conlon and the injustice done to him by the English government as a parable of vengeance and justice. Yes, the particulars of the story are important to inform and you do walk away with a general sense of what happened in this story, but the film is more pre-occupied with embodying the different responses we can make to injustice: should we just accept it (Gerry Conlon), violently react (Joe McAndrew), or peacefully protest it (Giuseppe Conlon)? Gerry Conlon is one of Daniel Day-Lewis best performances and I'm aware at the stiff competition that is. Daniel Day-Lewis becomes Gerry - an immature, ignorant, and unprincipled young man with no real direction or passions in life. After he's dumb enough to steal roofing metal in Dublin causing an IRA riot his father Giuseppe sends him off to live in London. It's there where he happens to be in the wrong place and time to be framed for an IRA pub bombing. I greatly enjoyed watching Conlon struggle to care in the face of injustice and though his father Giuseppe (who is imprisoned alongside him) starts a peaceful letter campaign, Gerry despairs. There's a wonderful mid-section of the film in prison where the real bomber, Joe McAndrew, winds up and showcases what it looks like to stand up and violently respond to injustice. The lessons Gerry learns here become the heart of the movie and move him to accept his father's (who is now dying) ways. It's not a perfect movie, but it is a moving story of injustice and how our responses can to it can either continue to perpetuate injustice/violence, or can seek to disarm it. Well written, directed, and performed, this is one of the best court/prison films out there.

Philadelphia (1993)

Good Movie With a Complicated Legacy

[6/10 · 14 March 2023]

PHILADELPHIA (B) is notorious for being the first major film from Hollywood to at least feature a story about HIV. It's also notorious for being a polarizing film, a perfect introductory vehicle aimed at bringing middle America to empathy and understanding for its supporters and a watered down, sanitized, and fraudulent Hollywood-ized version of homosexuality to its critics. I think both sides have a point and the truth about the film lay somewhere in the middle. It is true that this film has been written and filmed with the intention of bringing the AIDS issue to the general populace. To this end, Tom Hanks (riding a huge wave in popularity) took the lead role of Andrew Beckett who is wrongfully fired from his law firm after the homophobic senior partners learn that he is suffering from HIV and is a homosexual. Without anywhere to turn and after initially rejecting him, Denzel Washington's lawyer Joe Miller takes on Andy's case. It's a smart way to get a potential audience to listen, rather than make a film directly about HIV - which was highly controversial - the film is about Becket being unlawfully fired and discriminated against, an injustice we can all rally around. While we can be unified around that issue, the film can introduce Beckett as a human being suffering with a horrible disease who is surrounded by loved ones. On the courtroom sequences and seeing the evolution of Washington's Joe Miller come to see Becket more as a human being I think the movie is a real success. It's very well acted and Jonathan Demme is an impeccable director. It's in the "domestic" side of the story that I think the film's critics have a point - Andrew Beckett isn't a person, he's a screenwriting saint surrounded by the perfect understanding family whose slow death feels more timed to the plot's mechanics than a genuine human story. There's very little background to his life, we barely know him, and what we do feels fine-tuned to be as blandly appealing as possible. This isn't a fatal issue to me and it would be hard to not be human and be moved by the final moments of this film. In as much as this film inspires tolerance and a basic understanding I think it has done at least a good job of it. Unfortunately, do to key choices the film makes to remain accessible and mainstream, the extent of that understanding is limited.

The Legend (1993)

A Strong Jet Li Film with 3 Classic Fights

[6/10 · 12 March 2023]

THE LEGEND (B) comes on the heels of Jet's successful Once Upon a Time in China franchise where he played the folk Chinese kung fu hero Wong Fei-Hung. The Legend represents a fresh franchise starter for Jet Li with action director Cory Yuen. The story stars Li as another Chinese folk kung fu hero known as Fong Sai Yuk. It's a bit of a fool's errand to try and sum up the convolutions of Hong Kong martial arts films as many of them follow what I call the complicated simple plot: a basic story that turns in on itself so many times it becomes confusing. In this case, we have an evil and unpopular government trying to track down and destroy a popular underground movement against them known as the Red Lotus Society. Within that story the characters circle each other and cross back and forth, mostly for laughs, but also for fights, until the final showdown everything has been leading to. Vincent Zhao plays the central villain trying to track down a list of members of the Red Lotus Society and this is how Fong Sai Yuk ultimately becomes involved. The fight choreography here is top notch and it's not surprising to hear that this film won swept the Golden Horse and Hong Kong fight choreography awards. There are at least three major fight sequences that I score as an 'A-' or better here which is a rare feat. It's not the best film Jet's made, but it's the best of his 1993 output and a collection of fights you won't want to miss - especially his creative wire heavy "can't touch the ground" fight and two showdowns with Vincent Zhao.

Women Talking (2022)

Insightful, Thoughtful, Drama - One of the Best of 2022

[8/10 · 12 March 2023]

WOMEN TALKING (A-): Sarah Polley's adaptation of Miriam Toews' 2018 novel is an insightful and moving glimpse into painful true stories of the women survivors of abuse in a small ultraconservative religious community. Toews' novel is a fictional representation of a true story that occurred from 2005 to 2009 where women (and some boys) of a Canadian ultraconservative religious community were drugged and raped at night. When they awoke bruised, bleeding, or pregnant they were told it was for their sins or visits from demons. It is a horrific story and Women Talking presents an imaginary situation where the survivors of the abuse convene together to discuss if they will stay in the community and fight the men for change or if they will leave. What follows is a kind of 12 Angry Men style dialogue between the women that artfully and thoughtfully reveals the different personalities, philosophies, and mindsets. We learn more of their stories and find ourselves pondering alongside of them what real forgiveness looks like. I found deeply moving how genuinely the faith of the women are portrayed, not just as a crutch, but as a unifier and guide. There might be things I could nitpick or things that I wish I could have added or questions I would have asked if I was part of the conversation, but that's not really important. Listening alone, despite some small protestations I might want to make, is powerful and challenging enough here. The stories of private suffering, betrayal, and loss of hope are devastating. This is another thoughtful and measured story from director/adaptor Sarah Polley and one of the best films of 2022. It should not be missed.

The Three Musketeers (1993)

Acceptable Adventure Aimed at Young Teen Boys

[5/10 · 12 March 2023]

THE THREE MUSKETEERS (C+): The high production values are a bit deceiving early on, but it doesn't take long to realize that this 1993 Disney adaptation of Alexandre Dumas' novel is primarily aimed at the intersection of the audiences who like the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles franchise and 1991's Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves. When you understand that's what they were going for, you might be able to forgive a lot of the plot conveniences, constant juvenile quipping, bad acting, and outright copying of similar elements. The basic story here revolves around evil Cardinal Richelieu's (Tim Curry) plans to take the throne by signing a secret alliance with England and assassinating the French King. The first part in his plan is to disband the Musketeers and he sends his right hand man Rochefort (Michael Wincott who played a similar role in Prince of Thieves) to accomplish it. Unfortunately, the young D'Artagnan (Chirs O'Donnell), portly Porthos (Oliver Platt), religious Aramis (Charlie Sheen), and angsty Athos (Keifer Sutherland), are the last musketeers to combine to stop the Cardinal's plans. Again, the action, the dialogue, and the relationships all play themselves out in a way that a young teenage boy would find exciting so if that's your thing you'd likely find this up your alley. However, if you find it a bit odd that Aramis is considered religious solely because he spouts some verses, that maybe Porthos shouldn't be teaching D'Artagnan the "art of wenching" in a light-hearted manner, or that "stubborn and one note" isn't enough for us to actually enjoy D'Artagnan as a character then you might not enjoy this as much. Since the film draws comparisons to Prince of Thieves, it must be said that Tim Curry (despite him trying) just can't quite find the right campiness that made Alan Rickman's baddie so memorable. Additionally, the action, while well shot and coordinated, just doesn't have the same impact as the final sequence in Prince of Thieves - I think the musical score and characterizations have a lot to do with that.

So I Married an Axe Murderer (1993)

Uneven Comedy that Struggles to a Mike Myers Vehicle

[4/10 · 12 March 2023]

SO I MARRIED AN AXE MURDERER (C) is a kind of twist on romantic comedies and star vehicle for popular SNL comedian Mike Myers coming off the success of 1992's Wayne's World. Myers plays Charles Mackenzie, a San Francisco poet who abandons relationships early due to his fear of commitment. Charlie eventually meets Harriet at a butcher's shop and they hit it off quickly. The twist of the film and this is where the parody part comes in, is that Charlie is fed a story from her mom about a woman who has murdered her previous three boyfriends. To Charlie's surprise, lots of little details from that story and Charlie's new girlfriend Harriet begin to add up and Charlie shows some surprise. Is Harriet the mysterious axe murderer or is this just Charlie's fear of commitment? If you are used to a Mike Myers comedy you might be surprised at the restraint here - by comparison to the other films in his canon, this is one restrained comedy. There are small trademarks here, especially Myer's role has Charlie's father who he plays as a kind of proto-Shrek (apparently, both are based on his real-life father). Other than that, the comedy here has to come from the central gimmick (will my girlfriend kill me?) and Myer's natural charisma. That give us some memorable moments (Allen Alda's too nice police chief, Michael Richard's insensitive journalist, & Myer's slam poetry), but that's just not enough in my opinion. For long stretches this film feels less like a comedy twist on romantic comedies and more just a sub-par romantic comedy. For my money, I think this is a miss and I much prefer Myers in all out comedy character mode.

Last Hero in China (1993)

Overly Complicated, Failed, Jokes, but a Quirky/Strong Final Act

[5/10 · 12 March 2023]

LAST HERO IN CHINA (C+) comes during an incredibly prolific stretch of films for Jet Li as depending on how you count it, this one of six or seven films he made for 1993 alone! Jet Li continues to play the role of local kung fu master Wong Fei-Hung, but this time outside of the Once Upon a Time in China series. This entry is written by Jing Wong and co-directed by Jing Wong and Yuen Woo-Ping. The basic concept is simple - the local temple is abducting and smuggling women and the corrupt government officials are in on it. Wong Fei-Hung and his students must stop it. The spin this time, and I expect this is from Jing Wong, is that Wong Fei-Hung has accidentally transplanted his growing school next to a brothel. Early in the film they try and mine some comedic set pieces from it but it all falls flat. After an initial run-in with the temple and the government officials, Fei-Hung is rendered deaf and he exiles himself to get better so he can return and defeat the evil powers. Believe it or not, it gets more complicated than that with lion dances and centipede enemies. The fight sequences are hit or miss with a lot of short undercranked sequences early on. The two stand out sequences here are a mid film fight between Jet Li and Gordon Liu that succeeds despite a lot of gimmicks and a strong two-part finale that see's Jet Li take on a centipede as a chicken (yes you read that right) and then get a very good one vs one fight with the film's main villain. A quirky but strong final act Redeems a mediocre film.