Juarez, Mexico is one of those films that can be easily trashed. It's like fighting a boxer with no arms. How hard can it be to tee off? There is no mistake that this film is bad on many levels. To make this more challenging I'll attempt to comment on it's good point. Juarez, Mexico is an extremely interesting premise for a film since it is based on a true story. Many young women disappear around Juarez. It's a story that has been covered by the news. Writer and Director and Star James Cahill was smart to try to tell the story.
Many reviewers are extremely critical of indy films made for little money for some reason. If the expectation is to get a film made for peanuts to be like a 100 million dollar blockbuster then you will be greatly disappointed. I know the steak at Sizzler won't taste like the one at Mortons. When I rented Juarez, Mexico I was taken in by the box cover and what was written on the back. Looked and sounded like a good watch.
What fell flat was the action. James Cahill casting himself as a martial arts action star hurt the film. The fight sequences were completely unbelievable all around. In films viewers will suspend reality because they know it's only entertainment. How believable are any of the Die Hard or Mission Impossible films? What makes Juarez, Mexico outlandishly unbelievable is the silly way the fights happen in very real settings. Most of us have seen bar fights between people or been in them. In this film bad looking guys with muscles basically stick there chins out for James Cahill to tee off on. Total nonsense.
I did not find the production quality bad for a no budget indy film. It was more than acceptable to me. What I did find bad was James Cahill as Johnny Cash crime fighter. This could have been better if he stayed behind the camera.
Many reviewers are extremely critical of indy films made for little money for some reason. If the expectation is to get a film made for peanuts to be like a 100 million dollar blockbuster then you will be greatly disappointed. I know the steak at Sizzler won't taste like the one at Mortons. When I rented Juarez, Mexico I was taken in by the box cover and what was written on the back. Looked and sounded like a good watch.
What fell flat was the action. James Cahill casting himself as a martial arts action star hurt the film. The fight sequences were completely unbelievable all around. In films viewers will suspend reality because they know it's only entertainment. How believable are any of the Die Hard or Mission Impossible films? What makes Juarez, Mexico outlandishly unbelievable is the silly way the fights happen in very real settings. Most of us have seen bar fights between people or been in them. In this film bad looking guys with muscles basically stick there chins out for James Cahill to tee off on. Total nonsense.
I did not find the production quality bad for a no budget indy film. It was more than acceptable to me. What I did find bad was James Cahill as Johnny Cash crime fighter. This could have been better if he stayed behind the camera.