The Marksman (2021)
Former United States Marine Corps Scout Sniper and Vietnam War veteran Jim Hanson (Liam Neeson) lives on a ranch on the Arizona-Mexico border. The mortgage on the property is in arrears after the death of his wife has left him medically bankrupt. One day while patrolling his property he encounters Mother Rosa (Teresa Ruiz) with her son Miguel (Jacob Perez) illegally crossing the border fence. He calls his step daughter Sarah (Katheryn Winnick) in the border patrol and reports them as they’re miles from any habitation. However, Rosa and Miguel are fleeing a drug cartel and Mauricio (Juan Pablo Raba), one of their enforcers. When Mauricio and his men try to forcibly take Rosa, Jim intervenes and a car chase and firefight ensue. Mauricio’s brother is killed and Rosa is fatally wounded. She gives Jim a note with her family's address in Chicago and he reluctantly agrees to take Miguel there.
Former United States Marine Corps Scout Sniper and Vietnam War veteran Jim Hanson (Liam Neeson) lives on a ranch on the Arizona-Mexico border. The mortgage on the property is in arrears after the death of his wife has left him medically bankrupt. One day while patrolling his property he encounters Mother Rosa (Teresa Ruiz) with her son Miguel (Jacob Perez) illegally crossing the border fence. He calls his step daughter Sarah (Katheryn Winnick) in the border patrol and reports them as they’re miles from any habitation. However, Rosa and Miguel are fleeing a drug cartel and Mauricio (Juan Pablo Raba), one of their enforcers. When Mauricio and his men try to forcibly take Rosa, Jim intervenes and a car chase and firefight ensue. Mauricio’s brother is killed and Rosa is fatally wounded. She gives Jim a note with her family's address in Chicago and he reluctantly agrees to take Miguel there.
The various trailers and advertisements for The Marksman give the impression that this is an action film but that is not the case. This thoughtful, low key drama is far more of a character study of the relationship between Jim and Miguel. The film explores bereavement and loss, the plight of migrants across the US border and what happens when the “American Dream” turns bad. It bears a lot of similarities to Clint Eastwood’s A Perfect World (1993). Critics claims that the story is formulaic are indeed true and there are not many plot surprises along the way. However, the film’s strength lies in the two central performances which are both very good. There is genuine pathos as opposed to contrived sentimentality and again we are reminded that Neeson is a serious actor who reinvented himself as an action star. Plus it helps that Neeson can do “gruff” and “sad” with his eyes shut. He does much with the simple dialogue to establish his Rooster Cogburn credentials. “Nobody needs to call me, and I like it that way” he exclaims when asked why he doesn’t own a cell phone.
The Marksman is obviously made on a modest budget yet its cinematography by Mark Patten is handsome and makes the most of the vistas and scenery of Arizona and Wyoming. The film does a good job of conveying the immense size and often remote nature of the US border states. The action scenes are functional and do not strain the viewer's sense of credulity. Neeson is supposed to be an ageing Marine and not a special forces operative. He handles himself well in a fight but he also takes a beating. Everything of this nature remains within the confines of the film’s PG-13 rating which is fine as this is a story about characters bonding rather than breaking bones. Director Robert Lorenz has one final trick up his sleeve after teasing us with an action movie and giving us a character drama for 100 minutes. The ending, as Liam Neeson takes a bus to return home, is very reminiscent of Midnight Cowboy. It’s a little unexpected but in step with the film’s overall tone. The Marksman is by no means a masterpiece but is certainly better than its marketing campaign implied.
A lot of people may know Luke Evans from the live action version of Beauty and the Beast or Peter Jackson’s The Hobbit trilogy. With his matinee idol good looks, charming Welsh demeanour and his “smoky” tenor singing voice, he projects a sense of old school stardom. Which brings us to No One Lives; a film which is a radical departure from his previous work. His performance is disconcerting to say the least and the film is somewhat unhinged. Directed by Ryuhei Kitamura, who made an interesting adaptation of Clive Barker’s The Midnight Meat Train, this cinematic outing is similarly replete with robust shocks and gore. There are some interesting ideas about the nature of violence, Stockholm Syndrome and whether one should deny or embrace one’s nature. However, these are ultimately minor asides. Philosophical musings in between bouts of surprisingly striking unpleasantness.
When I first saw the promotional trailer for Gangster Squad back in 2012, prior to its release, I wasn't especially impressed. I simply thought the film was another attempt to re-invent the gangster genre for a generation who were not especially familiar with it. I wasn't exactly overwhelmed with director Ruben Fleischer's resume either. I didn't particularly like Zombieland and haven't seen 30 Minutes Or Less. Then came the tragic mass shootings in Aurora, Colorado which led to the movie being delayed so that the original ending, which featured a shoot-out in a movie theatre, could be replaced. Hence when I finally watched this film recently, I wasn't expecting a movie up to the standards of say Once Upon A Time In America or Miller’s Crossing and it would seem that I was right do so. Gangster Squad is not especially noteworthy in any respect.
The Cold War was a mainstay of many a thriller and action movie throughout the sixties, seventies and eighties. However, all too often it was depicted in terms of the US versus the Soviet Union. China didn’t seem to feature so much, although it was just as equally an “enemy” of the West. Hence when I recently read about The Chairman (which has just had a Blu-ray release), it was of interest to me. An espionage story, starring Gregory Peck with a hidden bug implanted in his skull, infiltrating China to steal a secret enzyme formula is quite an intriguing premise. Furthermore, director J. Lee Thompson had previously worked with Peck on The Guns of Navarone, which is a solid action movie. Therefore I was initially optimistic that this film which I was previously unaware of, would be an interesting diversion. Unfortunately, having now seen The Chairman, all I can really describe it as is a cinematic curiosity. One of numerous films produced by a big studio in the late sixties that failed to satisfy anyone's expectations.
Former United States Marine Corps Scout Sniper and Vietnam War veteran Jim Hanson (Liam Neeson) lives on a ranch on the Arizona-Mexico border. The mortgage on the property is in arrears after the death of his wife has left him medically bankrupt. One day while patrolling his property he encounters Mother Rosa (Teresa Ruiz) with her son Miguel (Jacob Perez) illegally crossing the border fence. He calls his step daughter Sarah (Katheryn Winnick) in the border patrol and reports them as they’re miles from any habitation. However, Rosa and Miguel are fleeing a drug cartel and Mauricio (Juan Pablo Raba), one of their enforcers. When Mauricio and his men try to forcibly take Rosa, Jim intervenes and a car chase and firefight ensue. Mauricio’s brother is killed and Rosa is fatally wounded. She gives Jim a note with her family's address in Chicago and he reluctantly agrees to take Miguel there.
Sometimes a perfectly competent film simply misses the boat. The Fourth Protocol is a prime example of this. Based upon the novel by Frederick Forsythe this well made, somewhat clinical thriller arrived in cinemas at a time when the cold war was coming to an end due to “glasnost” and the “red menace” was becoming a somewhat tired plot device. It didn’t help that a similar story about a rogue Russian mission to detonate a nuclear device on a US base had already featured four years earlier in the Bond film, Octopussy. Michael Caine spent several years trying to get the project off the ground, after initially reading the author’s draft manuscript of the novel. Veteran screenwriter George Axelrod was hired and John Frankenheimer was sought to direct the film. However, difficulties in financing the project led to changes in the production and Forsythe ended writing the screenplay himself, while John Mackenzie (The Long Good Friday) took on the direction.
Film Noir often reflects the numerous things that influenced it. German expressionism, French poetic realism and American hardboiled fiction. Hence many films from this genre have a tendency to be stylised both visually and narratively speaking, with a fatalistic tone. Kiss Me Deadly, directed by Robert Aldrich in 1955, takes all these attributes as well as others and amplifies them in one of the bleakest and most uncompromising movies of the fifties. It features a brutal protagonist who isn’t even a decent detective and a plot that seems at first glance to come straight out of Greek mythology. Yet Kiss Me Deadly is compelling and lean without any superfluous scenes or narrative baggage. There’s also what appears to be the mother of all cinematic "MacGuffins" but once the film is over and the viewer reflects upon what they have seen, it can be argued that maybe the characters and the inevitability of their actions are actually the driving plot device instead.
Forensic accountant Owen Casserly (Jake Weber) flees his home with his teenage son Connor (Finn Little) when he discovers he has been targeted by a pair of assassins (Nicholas Hoult and Aidan Gillen) who have been hired to stop him giving evidence in a major corruption case. Connor witnesses the murder of his father after their car is run off the road. Entrusted with important written evidence, he escapes into the dense forests of the Montana wilderness pursued by the killers. Seeking help he runs into smokejumper Hannah Faber (Angelina Jolie) who is stationed at a remote fire lookout tower. Hannah suffers from PTSD from a previous forest fire in which she was unable to save three young boys. Hannah attempts to lead Connor through the forest to safety. Meanwhile the assassins set fire to the forest to divert the attention of the authorities and cover their tracks.
When one considers all the various elements involved in the production of Telefon, it makes it all the more disappointing that the movie fails to reach its potential. The basic idea about sleeper agents in the US is sound but the story doesn’t really go anywhere and not a great deal happens. The strong cast featuring Charles Bronson, Lee Remick and Donald Pleasance have to do their best with an undeveloped screenplay. Considering that it was written by Peter Hyams and Stirling Silliphant (from a novel by Walter Wager) it is quite surprising how lacklustre it all is. But perhaps the most saddening aspect of the film is the somewhat indifferent direction from Don Siegel, who by his own admission was not especially engaged with the story. Considering that he had scored a major hit the previous year with John Wayne’s swansong The Shootist, makes it more curious that he wasn’t more enthused. Even Lalo Schifrin’s score fails to bolster Telefon.
There have been several movie adaptations of the books of Jonathan Stark (AKA Donald E. Westlake) featuring his career criminal lead character, Parker. Sadly not all of them have fared well, either critically or at the box office. Many have deviated from the source material, often just using mere aspects of the original plot as the basis of their screenplay. Perhaps the most successful of these has been Point Blank (1967), directed by John Boorman and starring Lee Marvin. Slayground sadly follows the pattern set by previous adaptations. It changes several character names and takes two main elements from the source text and uses them as a premise. Specifically, a robbery that goes wrong which results in an accidental death and a climactic shootout in an out of season fairground. Due to the financing of the film, half of the story takes place in the US and the other in the UK. Much of the cast are British, resulting in a curious and at first glance somewhat incongruous film.
The Long Good Friday not only launched then career of Bob Hoskins but remains a uniquely British take on the gangster genre. Featuring authentic performances and a credible plot, the screenplay touches upon many of the social and political issues of the time; police corruption, the IRA, urban renewal and the decline of industry, along with EEC membership and the free-market economy. It’s a gritty and unrelenting drama that is still relevant today. Furthermore, the film is filled with quotable dialogue and has several stand out scenes that showcase Bob Hoskins’ smouldering performance. It’s also offers of “who’s who” of British character actors and there is one sequence still has the power to shock even today.
John le Carré's Cold War thriller Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, is not only a good example of the spy novel genre, but a fine piece of seventies British literature per se. Therefore I was most surprised when I learned back in 2011 that it was to be made as a film. Could the complexities and subtleties of this cerebral and deliberately slowly paced book be adequately brought to the big screen, by today’s studio system? Could it compete with the previous BBC television adaptation starring Alec Guiness that was made in 1979? Thankfully, director Thomas Alfredson and Working Title films have successfully managed to distil the complex plot into the film’s 127-minute running time. Furthermore, the ensemble cast have a quality script to work with and the entire production benefits from the flair of a quality European director who brings an interesting outsiders dynamic to this very British tale.
Inside a dark, remote warehouse, seven members of an unnamed midwestern militia meet. They’ve all heard via radio or police scanners that an unnamed, armed shooter armed with a modified AR-15 has opened fire on a police funeral. The assailant also plant IEDs and the casualty rate is therefore very high. This means the authorities will be scouring the countryside, raiding all known militia groups and their affiliates in the region. The men’s concern quickly turns to panic when they discover that one of their AR-15 is missing from their weapons cache, along with body armour and explosives. Is one of their own the shooter? Ford (Chris Mulkey), the group’s no-nonsense leader, asks fellow member Gannon (James Badge Dale), a former police interrogator, to question all the men and determine who is responsible. However, matters prove more complicated as Gannon knows that one other member, Noah (Brian Geraghty), is an undercover cop. Can a solution be found before the police inevitably come calling?
Clint Eastwood is 88 years old and has a successful career spanning over six decades. During that time he has proved to be one of America’s most bankable box office stars and established himself as an actor and director of note among his peers. If The Mule turns out to be his swansong, then it is certainly a fitting end to a prestigious career. Because in many respects The Mule is a distillation of many of the themes and concepts, we’ve seen in previous Eastwood movies such as Gran Torino and The Unforgiven. Perhaps the core story of an ageing man trying to reconcile himself to a modern world and make peace with it, is in some way Eastwood commenting on the movie industry himself. It is very much his film and his performance underpins the proceedings.
What is it with director Ridley Scott and his predilection for multiple edits of his films? Is he indecisive and a consummate tinkerer (like George Lucas) or a victim of studio politics? I suspect none of these are true. So how come there are always multiple cuts of his movies? Do his terms of employment always deny him final edit on a movie? I would think not. A film maker of his stature must surely get far more favourable terms when contract to make a film? Whatever the reason it leaves audience with a problem. How is one exactly to determine which is the best version of any of his films to see? For example, Kingdom of Heaven was greatly improved in its extended format. Yet his revised version of Alien is actually inferior to the original theatrical cut. And don’t even get me started on the plethora of versions of Blade Runner. His penchant for multiple edits therefore makes it difficult to debate his work.
In a recent blog post I wrote about the difficulty that you can encounter sometimes when trying to watch movies that have been deemed “classic” by popular consensus. I listed 10 films of note that I intend to watch this year and to see if my views aligned with the various institutions and critics that praise them. The first on that list was the iconic sixties thriller Bullitt starring Steve McQueen. Having now watched the movie, I thought it would be prudent to collate my thoughts on it. Considering the immense amount of material that has already been written about it, I see no reason to present a review per se. Rather, here are my initial impressions for consideration. I’ve tried to highlight some specific aspects of the film that I think are of note or merit debate.
Legend is an extremely lavish biopic. Despite being about a pair of notorious British villains it has both the look and feel of an American gangster epic. There is no real attempt to depict either the period or the locations accurately nor is the story of the Kray twins themselves factually correct. As ever with American productions of this nature both the era and the subject matter are viewed through a miasma of sentimentality and faux nostalgia. The Krays are portrayed as folk heroes rather than the petty thugs that they were. However if you are prepared to overlook these deliberate biases then Legend is can still be an entertaining movie.
Minions (2015)
It would appear that there is a Minions 2, although it’s release around the world has been staggered due to the pandemic. So I thought I’d revisit the original movie for a second viewing. Spin-off movies can be a risky venture. Side characters may work well in a supporting role within a successful movie but may not necessarily find an audience in their own vehicle. However this is most definitely not the case with Minions. The movie is ninety one minutes of exquisitely crafted cinema. From the opening Universal fanfare (which the Minions sing-a-long to) to the post credit rendition of Revolution, the film is consistently funny and perfectly paced. The production design and overall aesthetic is beautifully realised and the central characters of Kevin, Stuart and Bob are thoroughly engaging. Actually, forget "engaging ''. They are genuinely loveable. Directors Pierre Coffin and Kyle Balda barely put a foot wrong.
It would appear that there is a Minions 2, although it’s release around the world has been staggered due to the pandemic. So I thought I’d revisit the original movie for a second viewing. Spin-off movies can be a risky venture. Side characters may work well in a supporting role within a successful movie but may not necessarily find an audience in their own vehicle. However this is most definitely not the case with Minions. The movie is ninety one minutes of exquisitely crafted cinema. From the opening Universal fanfare (which the Minions sing-a-long to) to the post credit rendition of Revolution, the film is consistently funny and perfectly paced. The production design and overall aesthetic is beautifully realised and the central characters of Kevin, Stuart and Bob are thoroughly engaging. Actually, forget "engaging ''. They are genuinely loveable. Directors Pierre Coffin and Kyle Balda barely put a foot wrong.
Set in 1968, the Minions are in an emotional decline as they cannot find a master to serve. So Kevin, Stuart and Bob set off from home to find the biggest and baddest villain around with a view of becoming their henchmen. They chance upon international criminal Scarlet Overkill (Sandra Bullock) and due to good luck, inadvertently win her favour. If they can secure the Queen of England's crown for her, then Scarlet will find a home for them and restore them to their rightful role as henchmen. This broad plot lends itself to a wealth of sixties pop culture references and clever in-joke, along with continual slapstick humour. This is a movie that entertains on multiple levels which explains why the adults outnumbered the children in the screening I saw back in 2015.
During the course of their misadventures Kevin, Stuart and Bob drive through a movie set where Stanley Kubrick is faking the Moon Landing, get walked over by The Beatles at the Abbey Road zebra crossing and pull the sword Excalibur from the stone, thus claiming the throne of England. Minions is the sort of movie that requires multiple viewings to fully appreciate all it's throwaway gags and one liners. I spotted a great deal more second time round. The period setting also lends itself to a cornucopia of classic tunes by the likes of The Who, The Kinks and The Rolling Stones. Are they clichéd? Yes. Do they still work? Most certainly due to the way they superbly underscore the onscreen action.
I laughed continuously while watching Minions and was more than happy to surrender myself to its inherent stupidity and tangential narrative. The minions themselves are extremely likeable. There is no need for them to possess complex character traits or to have convoluted motivations beyond their Joie de vivre and penchant for bananas. This most certainly has been the funniest movie I've seen for a while and I felt immensely restored by seeing it. Laughter really does have curative properties and there is simply so much material to see here. Oh and if you do decide to watch Minions, stay right until the end and ensure you watch all the credits and beyond. You'll be well rewarded. Let us hope that the sequel delivers more of the same.
I recently found a DVD boxset of Return to the Planet of the Apes in a charity shop which I bought for £4, which is a ridiculously cheap price. I considered it an interesting find because it was a Region 1, US copy. However, that is not so unusual these days as most DVD players are now region free and Amazon (UK) sells media from all over the world. As for the show in question, I vaguely remember Return to the Planet of the Apes being shown on UK network TV when I was a child, probably circa 1976. Back then it would usually take a year or so before US shows made it onto UK television. From a commercial perspective, the entire Planet of the Apes franchise was beginning to run out of steam. I was 8 years old at the time so had missed most of the film releases. However, I enjoyed the live action TV show hence an animated follow up had obvious appeal to a child of my age.
It is not unusual for Disney to change film titles when marketing them outside of the US. In 2016 they renamed the animated feature film Zootopia to Zootropolis in the UK and Europe to avoid trademark conflicts with other existing businesses. For example there is a Danish zoo which already holds the “Zootopia” name. Similarly, in Germany there is a children’s book which caused copyright conflict, which led to the film being released under the title Zoomania. Such changes, although practical for legal reasons, can sometimes cause a degree of confusion. Especially as there are numerous, low budget productions companies that go out of their way to produce similarly titled “mockbusters” whenever there are big, tentpole, releases. So for clarity, Zootopia 2 has been released in the UK as Zootropolis 2.
With the proliferation of lore driven, franchise movies in recent years, a culture of analysis has developed online. Hence you will find a lot of YouTube videos that claim to “explain” the ending of specific films or provide clarification of their respective themes and subtexts. While critical debate and discussion about cinema is welcome, I think it is a mistake to always look for a specific meaning in cinema. Even clearly narrative films can be ambiguous. Art is ultimately a very subjective field of expression open to personal interpretation. Which brings me neatly to Flow, an animated feature film which tells a compelling story but raises more questions than it answers. It leaves the viewer to fill in a lot of the blanks themselves and the film is all the better for this approach. Flow is an extraordinary example of animation and a fascinating example of innovative, thought provoking filmmaking. Quite the rarity these days.
For those unfamiliar with Dav Pilkey’s graphic novel character Dog Man, he’s a half-dog, half-human police officer. This comic chimaera is the result of a surgical procedure carried out after Officer Knight and his trusty dog Greg are blown up while defusing a bomb. Greg’s head is grafted to Officer Knight's body. Post surgery, Dog Man (Peter Hastings) remains an officer of the law and continues to track his nemesis, Petey (Pete Davidson), an orange cat and criminal genius. However, despite positive media coverage and a high arrest rate, Dog Man incurs the ire of his Chief (Lil Rel Howery) who is jealous of his success. Furthermore, Dog Man becomes depressed due to the loss of his owner, girlfriend and former home. Meanwhile, Petey decides to clone himself in an attempt to find a worthy assistant and also plots to resurrect a deceased super villain, Flippy, who is an evil telekinetic fish.
I have always found it curious that there haven't been more feature films set in Middle-earth, after the success of Peter Jackson’s The Lord of the Rings trilogy. However, a little research shows a very complex set of rights regarding Tolkien’s work, with different material being controlled and administered by different bodies. Hence, the market has not been saturated with officially licensed material. Thus, when The Lord of the Rings: The War of the Rohirrim was announced to be in production, it aroused a great deal of curiosity both among fans and those with an interest in the wider film industry. To base an entire feature film on something that is effectively just a few paragraphs in the appendices of The Lord of the Rings is quite intriguing. The producers claimed it afforded them greater artistic freedom not to be constrained by an excess of lore. Industry pundits theorised that the film was being produced solely to ensure that wider rights were retained.
Whenever I feel that mainstream filmmaking is becoming increasingly bland and I grow despondent with it, along comes an animated film to prove that there is still greatness and art to be found through the medium of cinema. Robot Dreams begins as a tale of loneliness and then quickly becomes a eulogy to friendship and participating in life. The story then turns things on its head as it explores loss and finally concludes with a profoundly beautiful resolution, as it muses upon accepting change and new friends. Robot Dreams succeeds where so many other films fail by being honest, candid and sincere. Hence the emotions expressed by what is essentially a simple story are genuine and palpable. The film’s lack of dialogue is a blessing, with music doing a great deal of the narrative heavy lifting. This allows audiences to focus on the main characters without unnecessary distraction. The animation is uncomplicated but very specific in its style and setting. It utterly suits the tale being told.
Guillermo del Toro's Pinocchio is a bold and inventive take on Carlo Collodi's classic story of the puppet that aspires to be a “real boy”. As you would expect from the director, it is a far cry from Disney’s 1940 version, taking a more bleak and sinister tone. Despite songs and exuberant set pieces, Guillermo del Toro's Pinocchio is an exploration of grief, death and even fascism. The screenplay by Guillermo del Toro and Patrick McHale also tackles the complexities of the relationship between parent and child. It is a remarkable example of stop motion animation and is visually very striking. However, it is a somewhat niche market adaptation and is not exactly easily accessible to children or the furiously hard of thinking. It comes as no surprise that this cinematic venture was green lit by Netflix, which appears to be the new home of the experimental, rather than a mainstream studio.
George A. Romero’s Night of the Living Dead is a true genre milestone that is praised not only by horror film fans but mainstream critics alike. If you are interested in watching an intelligent, well researched and entertaining documentary about the film’s provenance and cultural impact then I thoroughly recommend Birth of the Living Dead (2013) by Rob Kuhn. It tells you pretty much all you need to know about why this classic film is so important. As for Night of the Living Dead itself, it still holds up well after 53 years. It is the immediacy and relatability of the premise and overall story that still makes the film relevant. The zombies are purely a “MacGuffin” and the real focus of the plot is how people behave under pressure in life threatening situations. It’s a film about how we can react to the same situation differently and how cultural baggage and the need for people to be “right”, hinders co-operation and thwarts progress.
It would appear that there is a Minions 2, although it’s release around the world has been staggered due to the pandemic. So I thought I’d revisit the original movie for a second viewing. Spin-off movies can be a risky venture. Side characters may work well in a supporting role within a successful movie but may not necessarily find an audience in their own vehicle. However this is most definitely not the case with Minions. The movie is ninety one minutes of exquisitely crafted cinema. From the opening Universal fanfare (which the Minions sing-a-long to) to the post credit rendition of Revolution, the film is consistently funny and perfectly paced. The production design and overall aesthetic is beautifully realised and the central characters of Kevin, Stuart and Bob are thoroughly engaging. Actually, forget "engaging ''. They are genuinely loveable. Directors Pierre Coffin and Kyle Balda barely put a foot wrong.
Although I have a passing interest in the franchise per se, I'm not a consummate fan of all things Batman. Hence a lot of content passes me by or I catch up with it years later. So it came as a great surprise when I discovered Batman: Return of the Caped Crusaders; a 2016 release in the ever growing catalogue of DC themed direct to DVD animated films. The movie is a de facto continuation of the sixties TV series, with the original actors reprising their roles (where possible). The cast includes Adam West as Batman, Burt Ward as Robin and Julie Newmar as Catwoman. Due to the death of actors Cesar Romero, Burgess Meredith and Frank Gorshin the voices for The Joker, The Penguin and The Riddler have been provided by Jeff Bergman, William Salyers and Wally Wingert. All of whom do their best to recreate the tone and idiom of the original artists.
There are three key elements to Disney’s 2009 3D computer-animated adaptation of A Christmas Carol. Firstly, director Robert Zemeckis clearly seeks authenticity and hence includes a lot of original dialogue from the novel, as well as a bleaker depiction of the period. Secondly, he uses the digital production tools at his disposal to create sweeping vistas of 19th century London as well as highly stylised caricatures of the central characters. Thirdly, as this is a Disney production, there is an occasional lapse visual humour and levity that is required by their business model. Sadly all of these aspects of the production make for strange bedfellows that are at odds with each other. The result is a visually sumptuous film that loses its way as it lurches between bleak drama, odd humour and CGI driven spectacle.
Upon its theatrical release, Mickey’s Christmas Carol was the first animated film to star Mickey Mouse for thirty years. It was therefore accompanied with a large amount of hype and a wave of nostalgia. The US marketing stated “He’s Back. Mickey Mouse in his first new motion picture” which was somewhat misleading, as the actual animated film was just 26 minutes long. It was shown theatrically along with a re-release of The Rescuers in the US and The Jungle Book in the UK and other territories, in late December 1983. And despite his name being in the title, Mickey doesn’t have a lot of screen time as he plays Bob Cratchit. This is very much a vehicle for Scrooge McDuck as Ebenezer Scrooge. Overall, it’s a succinct distillation of the plot of Dickens’ A Christmas Carol, filled with cameo appearances by classic Disney characters. Naturally it is replete with the humour and sentiment that is inherent in the process known colloquially as Disneyfication. However, does this mitigate the book’s message?
At first glance, there is not much to distinguish this low budget production by Burbank Films Australia, from any of the other adaptations that were ubiquitous during the seventies and eighties. However, attentive viewers will discover a few details that lift this particular version above the mundane. Firstly, this is the second animated adaptation to feature the voice acting of Ron Haddrick as Ebenezer Scrooge. He had previously voiced the character in Air Programs International's shorter version of A Christmas Carol in 1969, thirteen years earlier. Secondly, despite the modest production values, there are a few additional scenes taken from the source text by Dickens, that don’t usually make it most film and TV adaptations. It is these minor embellishments that compensate for the simplicity of the animation (during the opening scene, some background characters do not move).
Scoob! is one of several movies that was slated for a theatrical release this summer but ended up being premiering on VOD instead due to the global pandemic. As a result, it is difficult to ascertain exactly how successful this animated film has been. A lot of trade newspapers have indicated that rentals have been high and that the film has proven more popular than Tom Hardy’s new movie Capone. Some industry sources have estimated a gross of $100,000,000 in a two week period. I suspect that the current lockdown has provided a market of children craving new entertainment and parents happy to pay for 90 minutes of peace and quiet. Hence Scoob! appears to have been in the right place at the right time. Whether that popular success would have happened if the movie had been released theatrically is another matter.
The first I found out about Top Cat: The Movie was when I received an email from an events company that was handling promotional screenings, prior to the film’s UK release in the summer of 2012. For some reason I missed the usual pre-production publicity that comes with the rebooting of a popular franchise. One of the benefits of this was that I didn't have time to fret or fuss about this reimagining of an integral part of my childhood. I must admit I was flummoxed that this 50-year-old franchise was subject to a makeover and was even more discombobulated to find out that the original show was a massive hit in Mexico and had garnered a huge cult following. This was why Warner Bros. subcontracted this production to Mexico's Anima and Argentina's Illusion studios. Subsequently Don Gato y Su Pandilla (Top Cat and His Gang) opened on 16th September 2011 in Mexico to weekend box office returns of 41m pesos ($2.9m). It subsequently became the highest-grossing independent animated films released in the United States that year.
It’s interesting that so many adaptations of Charles Dickens’ iconic seasonal story are brought to us via the medium of animation. Naturally, this is a far more economical means of depicting the story with its period detail and supernatural elements, compared to a live action production. However, for an animated version of A Christmas Carol to work successfully, it needs three things. An innovative and striking production design, robust voice acting and a screenplay that keeps the core themes while offering significance difference compared to prior adaptations. You’ll find all of these elements in Richard Williams’ 1971 animated short. Sadly they’re conspicuously absent from the 1997 version. Despite the presence such talents as Tim Curry, Ed Asner and Whoopi Goldberg, this is a distinctly arbitrary animated film. Considering that the screenplay was written by Jymn Magon who has years of experience working for Disney, I had hoped this would be better endeavour.
There’s a degree of hubris implicit in such a definitive title. At the very least the inference is that this is a notable adaptation of Charles Dickens’ classic book. And at first glance, it is perfectly reasonable to assume just that. Jimmy Murakami was an animator of note with such unique movies as The Snowman and When the Wind Blows to his credit. Hence it is reasonable to expect a similar quirky and experimental treatment of this well know yuletide story. However, what audiences actually get is a rather bold adaptation that substantially embellishes upon the established narrative. Veering between sinister and borderline psychedelic imagery, this is a very inconsistent version that tries to be too many things at once. Just as you think you’ve got a handle on the film approach it takes an abrupt turn in the opposite direction. Comedy, drama and even power ballads are thrown into the mix. Sadly, all these elements do not hang well together.
The Hobbit (1977) is a curious beast. It’s a made for television animated film, which despite its budgetary constraints, strives to comprehensively adapted one of the most beloved children’s books of the last century. I remember reading an article about this television adaptation of The Hobbit, in Starburst Magazine during the late seventies. There were rumours that this Rankin/Bass production, which had already premièred on US network television, would gain a European cinema release. This was presumably to cash in on the success of Ralph Bakshi's animated feature film adaptation of The Lord of The Rings. However, this never happened to my knowledge. In fact, The Hobbit was not commercially available in the UK until 2001, when Warner Bros. released it on DVD to capitalise on the success of Peter Jackson’s The Fellowship of the Ring.
Over the last few years I’ve reviewed several adaptations of Charles Dickens seasonal story A Christmas Carol. As I stated previously one of the stories greatest strength is that it lends itself perfectly to multiple interpretations. I recently had the good fortune to rediscover the animated version from 1969 by Air Programs International. I remember seeing this animated short as a child but could not recollect sufficient details to allow me to track it down via the IMDB. Then by complete chance, I stumbled across it again on You Tube while doing some research.
I have a great deal of affection for Charles Dickens' A Christmas Carol, not only because it’s a fine piece of literature but because it lends itself so well to dramatisation. I therefore have a keen interests in all the respective adaptation, of which there are many. Over the years there has been a trend to focus excessively on the sentimental aspect of the plot, resulting in a rather nauseating Disneyfication of the story. Although the redemption of the main protagonist is central to the narrative, the poverty and deprivations of the time are still very pertinent themes, especially in today's economic climate. I was therefore very gratified to rediscover the 1971 version of Charles Dickens' classic story which was originally shown on ABC. This short 25 minute animated feature realises the story superbly, capturing the tone of the book and accurately reflecting the darker aspects. Remember that A Christmas Carol is fundamentally a ghost story.
The Fourth Protocol (1987)
Sometimes a perfectly competent film simply misses the boat. The Fourth Protocol is a prime example of this. Based upon the novel by Frederick Forsythe this well made, somewhat clinical thriller arrived in cinemas at a time when the cold war was coming to an end due to “glasnost” and the “red menace” was becoming a somewhat tired plot device. It didn’t help that a similar story about a rogue Russian mission to detonate a nuclear device on a US base had already featured four years earlier in the Bond film, Octopussy. Michael Caine spent several years trying to get the project off the ground, after initially reading the author’s draft manuscript of the novel. Veteran screenwriter George Axelrod was hired and John Frankenheimer was sought to direct the film. However, difficulties in financing the project led to changes in the production and Forsythe ended writing the screenplay himself, while John Mackenzie (The Long Good Friday) took on the direction.
Sometimes a perfectly competent film simply misses the boat. The Fourth Protocol is a prime example of this. Based upon the novel by Frederick Forsythe this well made, somewhat clinical thriller arrived in cinemas at a time when the cold war was coming to an end due to “glasnost” and the “red menace” was becoming a somewhat tired plot device. It didn’t help that a similar story about a rogue Russian mission to detonate a nuclear device on a US base had already featured four years earlier in the Bond film, Octopussy. Michael Caine spent several years trying to get the project off the ground, after initially reading the author’s draft manuscript of the novel. Veteran screenwriter George Axelrod was hired and John Frankenheimer was sought to direct the film. However, difficulties in financing the project led to changes in the production and Forsythe ended writing the screenplay himself, while John Mackenzie (The Long Good Friday) took on the direction.
MI5 officer John Preston (Michael Caine) discovers that British government official George Berenson (Anton Rodgers) is leaking government documents. Although his investigation is well received by British Secret Service official Sir Nigel Irvine (Ian Richardson), Preston's methods embarrass the acting Director of MI5, Brian Harcourt-Smith (Julian Glover) and he is reassigned to "Airports and Ports". Meanwhile in Russia, KGB General Yevgeny Karpov (Ray MacAnally) suspects that his immediate superior, General Gavorshin (Alan North) is mounting an unauthorised operation. He discovers that Major Valeri Petrofsky (Pierce Brosnan) has recently assumed a long established fake identity and been dispatched to the UK. In the meantime, Preston investigates the death of a Russain merchant seaman who was run over while trying to leave port without authorisation. While searching through his personal affects he discovers a metal disk. This is subsequently identified as polonium, which could be used as part of a detonator for an atomic bomb.
The Fourth Protocol has a very similar feel to The Day of the Jackal, insofar that it is procedurally driven and plays at times more like a faux docudrama rather than thriller. The fact they’re both written by the same author is obviously relevant. In the case of The Fourth Protocol, this very procedural approach to Preston’s investigation, juxtaposed with Petrofsky’s methodical collection of the various bomb parts, does come somewhat at the expense of character development. This is a film mainly about archetypes and political themes common to the spy genre. However the film does offer some great detail such as when Berenson (Anton Rodgers) is followed by an MI5 surveillance team across London. Petrofsky’s elimination of casual witnesses is also quite grim. The practicalities of creating a nuclear bomb are also starkly presented, although certain aspects of the process are ignored for practical and narrative reasons.
Caine and Brosnan do much of the heavy lifting and keep the drama afloat. The latter does very well considering he does have a minimal amount of dialogue. Caine has some smart one liners that he delivers with relish and the scene where he forensically deals with two skinheads on the London Underground who are racially harassing a passenger is spot on. The film has some very good yet somewhat low key stunts. The scene where Caine and his MI5 sidekick drive directly onto a platform at King’s Cross station and Caine leaps onto the moving train is well handled. The fact that it's executed within a single tracking shot makes it all the more impressive. The film also benefits from a solid score by Lalo Schifrin which underpins the action and enhances the drama. All in all, this is a solid thriller which keeps the viewer engaged for nearly two hours. Unfortunately, timing is important and public tastes change. Hence The Fourth Protocol was just a few years too late and didn’t quite make its mark.
Exit 8 is a sophisticated and claustrophobic psychological thriller directed by Genki Kawamura, which skilfully transforms a minimalist indie walking-simulator game into a cinematic existential enigma. This overtly metaphorical film renders the repetitive nature and drudgery of modern working life into a physical environment in which the lead character is trapped and must find a way out. A random, brutal maze filled with an atmosphere of indifference to the lab rats that find themselves trapped within. Or is it their personal guilt that has put them there? Genki Kawamura’s psychological mystery draws inspiration from the Japanese video game of the same name, as well as from the cyclical nature of Groundhog Day and endless corridors of the Overlook Hotel in Kubrick’s The Shining. Although there are jump scares and some ghoulish imagery, this is not a horror vehicle. Instead this is a disquieting psychological drama with a strong sense of morality.
A lot of people may know Luke Evans from the live action version of Beauty and the Beast or Peter Jackson’s The Hobbit trilogy. With his matinee idol good looks, charming Welsh demeanour and his “smoky” tenor singing voice, he projects a sense of old school stardom. Which brings us to No One Lives; a film which is a radical departure from his previous work. His performance is disconcerting to say the least and the film is somewhat unhinged. Directed by Ryuhei Kitamura, who made an interesting adaptation of Clive Barker’s The Midnight Meat Train, this cinematic outing is similarly replete with robust shocks and gore. There are some interesting ideas about the nature of violence, Stockholm Syndrome and whether one should deny or embrace one’s nature. However, these are ultimately minor asides. Philosophical musings in between bouts of surprisingly striking unpleasantness.
When I first saw the promotional trailer for Gangster Squad back in 2012, prior to its release, I wasn't especially impressed. I simply thought the film was another attempt to re-invent the gangster genre for a generation who were not especially familiar with it. I wasn't exactly overwhelmed with director Ruben Fleischer's resume either. I didn't particularly like Zombieland and haven't seen 30 Minutes Or Less. Then came the tragic mass shootings in Aurora, Colorado which led to the movie being delayed so that the original ending, which featured a shoot-out in a movie theatre, could be replaced. Hence when I finally watched this film recently, I wasn't expecting a movie up to the standards of say Once Upon A Time In America or Miller’s Crossing and it would seem that I was right do so. Gangster Squad is not especially noteworthy in any respect.
The Cold War was a mainstay of many a thriller and action movie throughout the sixties, seventies and eighties. However, all too often it was depicted in terms of the US versus the Soviet Union. China didn’t seem to feature so much, although it was just as equally an “enemy” of the West. Hence when I recently read about The Chairman (which has just had a Blu-ray release), it was of interest to me. An espionage story, starring Gregory Peck with a hidden bug implanted in his skull, infiltrating China to steal a secret enzyme formula is quite an intriguing premise. Furthermore, director J. Lee Thompson had previously worked with Peck on The Guns of Navarone, which is a solid action movie. Therefore I was initially optimistic that this film which I was previously unaware of, would be an interesting diversion. Unfortunately, having now seen The Chairman, all I can really describe it as is a cinematic curiosity. One of numerous films produced by a big studio in the late sixties that failed to satisfy anyone's expectations.
Former United States Marine Corps Scout Sniper and Vietnam War veteran Jim Hanson (Liam Neeson) lives on a ranch on the Arizona-Mexico border. The mortgage on the property is in arrears after the death of his wife has left him medically bankrupt. One day while patrolling his property he encounters Mother Rosa (Teresa Ruiz) with her son Miguel (Jacob Perez) illegally crossing the border fence. He calls his step daughter Sarah (Katheryn Winnick) in the border patrol and reports them as they’re miles from any habitation. However, Rosa and Miguel are fleeing a drug cartel and Mauricio (Juan Pablo Raba), one of their enforcers. When Mauricio and his men try to forcibly take Rosa, Jim intervenes and a car chase and firefight ensue. Mauricio’s brother is killed and Rosa is fatally wounded. She gives Jim a note with her family's address in Chicago and he reluctantly agrees to take Miguel there.
Sometimes a perfectly competent film simply misses the boat. The Fourth Protocol is a prime example of this. Based upon the novel by Frederick Forsythe this well made, somewhat clinical thriller arrived in cinemas at a time when the cold war was coming to an end due to “glasnost” and the “red menace” was becoming a somewhat tired plot device. It didn’t help that a similar story about a rogue Russian mission to detonate a nuclear device on a US base had already featured four years earlier in the Bond film, Octopussy. Michael Caine spent several years trying to get the project off the ground, after initially reading the author’s draft manuscript of the novel. Veteran screenwriter George Axelrod was hired and John Frankenheimer was sought to direct the film. However, difficulties in financing the project led to changes in the production and Forsythe ended writing the screenplay himself, while John Mackenzie (The Long Good Friday) took on the direction.
Film Noir often reflects the numerous things that influenced it. German expressionism, French poetic realism and American hardboiled fiction. Hence many films from this genre have a tendency to be stylised both visually and narratively speaking, with a fatalistic tone. Kiss Me Deadly, directed by Robert Aldrich in 1955, takes all these attributes as well as others and amplifies them in one of the bleakest and most uncompromising movies of the fifties. It features a brutal protagonist who isn’t even a decent detective and a plot that seems at first glance to come straight out of Greek mythology. Yet Kiss Me Deadly is compelling and lean without any superfluous scenes or narrative baggage. There’s also what appears to be the mother of all cinematic "MacGuffins" but once the film is over and the viewer reflects upon what they have seen, it can be argued that maybe the characters and the inevitability of their actions are actually the driving plot device instead.
Forensic accountant Owen Casserly (Jake Weber) flees his home with his teenage son Connor (Finn Little) when he discovers he has been targeted by a pair of assassins (Nicholas Hoult and Aidan Gillen) who have been hired to stop him giving evidence in a major corruption case. Connor witnesses the murder of his father after their car is run off the road. Entrusted with important written evidence, he escapes into the dense forests of the Montana wilderness pursued by the killers. Seeking help he runs into smokejumper Hannah Faber (Angelina Jolie) who is stationed at a remote fire lookout tower. Hannah suffers from PTSD from a previous forest fire in which she was unable to save three young boys. Hannah attempts to lead Connor through the forest to safety. Meanwhile the assassins set fire to the forest to divert the attention of the authorities and cover their tracks.
When one considers all the various elements involved in the production of Telefon, it makes it all the more disappointing that the movie fails to reach its potential. The basic idea about sleeper agents in the US is sound but the story doesn’t really go anywhere and not a great deal happens. The strong cast featuring Charles Bronson, Lee Remick and Donald Pleasance have to do their best with an undeveloped screenplay. Considering that it was written by Peter Hyams and Stirling Silliphant (from a novel by Walter Wager) it is quite surprising how lacklustre it all is. But perhaps the most saddening aspect of the film is the somewhat indifferent direction from Don Siegel, who by his own admission was not especially engaged with the story. Considering that he had scored a major hit the previous year with John Wayne’s swansong The Shootist, makes it more curious that he wasn’t more enthused. Even Lalo Schifrin’s score fails to bolster Telefon.
There have been several movie adaptations of the books of Jonathan Stark (AKA Donald E. Westlake) featuring his career criminal lead character, Parker. Sadly not all of them have fared well, either critically or at the box office. Many have deviated from the source material, often just using mere aspects of the original plot as the basis of their screenplay. Perhaps the most successful of these has been Point Blank (1967), directed by John Boorman and starring Lee Marvin. Slayground sadly follows the pattern set by previous adaptations. It changes several character names and takes two main elements from the source text and uses them as a premise. Specifically, a robbery that goes wrong which results in an accidental death and a climactic shootout in an out of season fairground. Due to the financing of the film, half of the story takes place in the US and the other in the UK. Much of the cast are British, resulting in a curious and at first glance somewhat incongruous film.
The Long Good Friday not only launched then career of Bob Hoskins but remains a uniquely British take on the gangster genre. Featuring authentic performances and a credible plot, the screenplay touches upon many of the social and political issues of the time; police corruption, the IRA, urban renewal and the decline of industry, along with EEC membership and the free-market economy. It’s a gritty and unrelenting drama that is still relevant today. Furthermore, the film is filled with quotable dialogue and has several stand out scenes that showcase Bob Hoskins’ smouldering performance. It’s also offers of “who’s who” of British character actors and there is one sequence still has the power to shock even today.
John le Carré's Cold War thriller Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, is not only a good example of the spy novel genre, but a fine piece of seventies British literature per se. Therefore I was most surprised when I learned back in 2011 that it was to be made as a film. Could the complexities and subtleties of this cerebral and deliberately slowly paced book be adequately brought to the big screen, by today’s studio system? Could it compete with the previous BBC television adaptation starring Alec Guiness that was made in 1979? Thankfully, director Thomas Alfredson and Working Title films have successfully managed to distil the complex plot into the film’s 127-minute running time. Furthermore, the ensemble cast have a quality script to work with and the entire production benefits from the flair of a quality European director who brings an interesting outsiders dynamic to this very British tale.
Inside a dark, remote warehouse, seven members of an unnamed midwestern militia meet. They’ve all heard via radio or police scanners that an unnamed, armed shooter armed with a modified AR-15 has opened fire on a police funeral. The assailant also plant IEDs and the casualty rate is therefore very high. This means the authorities will be scouring the countryside, raiding all known militia groups and their affiliates in the region. The men’s concern quickly turns to panic when they discover that one of their AR-15 is missing from their weapons cache, along with body armour and explosives. Is one of their own the shooter? Ford (Chris Mulkey), the group’s no-nonsense leader, asks fellow member Gannon (James Badge Dale), a former police interrogator, to question all the men and determine who is responsible. However, matters prove more complicated as Gannon knows that one other member, Noah (Brian Geraghty), is an undercover cop. Can a solution be found before the police inevitably come calling?
Clint Eastwood is 88 years old and has a successful career spanning over six decades. During that time he has proved to be one of America’s most bankable box office stars and established himself as an actor and director of note among his peers. If The Mule turns out to be his swansong, then it is certainly a fitting end to a prestigious career. Because in many respects The Mule is a distillation of many of the themes and concepts, we’ve seen in previous Eastwood movies such as Gran Torino and The Unforgiven. Perhaps the core story of an ageing man trying to reconcile himself to a modern world and make peace with it, is in some way Eastwood commenting on the movie industry himself. It is very much his film and his performance underpins the proceedings.
What is it with director Ridley Scott and his predilection for multiple edits of his films? Is he indecisive and a consummate tinkerer (like George Lucas) or a victim of studio politics? I suspect none of these are true. So how come there are always multiple cuts of his movies? Do his terms of employment always deny him final edit on a movie? I would think not. A film maker of his stature must surely get far more favourable terms when contract to make a film? Whatever the reason it leaves audience with a problem. How is one exactly to determine which is the best version of any of his films to see? For example, Kingdom of Heaven was greatly improved in its extended format. Yet his revised version of Alien is actually inferior to the original theatrical cut. And don’t even get me started on the plethora of versions of Blade Runner. His penchant for multiple edits therefore makes it difficult to debate his work.
In a recent blog post I wrote about the difficulty that you can encounter sometimes when trying to watch movies that have been deemed “classic” by popular consensus. I listed 10 films of note that I intend to watch this year and to see if my views aligned with the various institutions and critics that praise them. The first on that list was the iconic sixties thriller Bullitt starring Steve McQueen. Having now watched the movie, I thought it would be prudent to collate my thoughts on it. Considering the immense amount of material that has already been written about it, I see no reason to present a review per se. Rather, here are my initial impressions for consideration. I’ve tried to highlight some specific aspects of the film that I think are of note or merit debate.
Legend is an extremely lavish biopic. Despite being about a pair of notorious British villains it has both the look and feel of an American gangster epic. There is no real attempt to depict either the period or the locations accurately nor is the story of the Kray twins themselves factually correct. As ever with American productions of this nature both the era and the subject matter are viewed through a miasma of sentimentality and faux nostalgia. The Krays are portrayed as folk heroes rather than the petty thugs that they were. However if you are prepared to overlook these deliberate biases then Legend is can still be an entertaining movie.
Kiss Me Deadly (1955)
Film Noir often reflects the numerous things that influenced it. German expressionism, French poetic realism and American hardboiled fiction. Hence many films from this genre have a tendency to be stylised both visually and narratively speaking, with a fatalistic tone. Kiss Me Deadly, directed by Robert Aldrich in 1955, takes all these attributes as well as others and amplifies them in one of the bleakest and most uncompromising movies of the fifties. It features a brutal protagonist who isn’t even a decent detective and a plot that seems at first glance to come straight out of Greek mythology. Yet Kiss Me Deadly is compelling and lean without any superfluous scenes or narrative baggage. There’s also what appears to be the mother of all cinematic "MacGuffins" but once the film is over and the viewer reflects upon what they have seen, it can be argued that maybe the characters and the inevitability of their actions are actually the driving plot device instead.
Film Noir often reflects the numerous things that influenced it. German expressionism, French poetic realism and American hardboiled fiction. Hence many films from this genre have a tendency to be stylised both visually and narratively speaking, with a fatalistic tone. Kiss Me Deadly, directed by Robert Aldrich in 1955, takes all these attributes as well as others and amplifies them in one of the bleakest and most uncompromising movies of the fifties. It features a brutal protagonist who isn’t even a decent detective and a plot that seems at first glance to come straight out of Greek mythology. Yet Kiss Me Deadly is compelling and lean without any superfluous scenes or narrative baggage. There’s also what appears to be the mother of all cinematic "MacGuffins" but once the film is over and the viewer reflects upon what they have seen, it can be argued that maybe the characters and the inevitability of their actions are actually the driving plot device instead.
P. I. Mike Hammer (Ralph Meeker) is driving his sports car one evening when he is forced to stop due to a woman running barefoot along the road, wearing nothing but a trench coat. He offers her a lift and she identifies herself as Christina (Cloris Leachman). She then asks him to "remember me", regardless of what happens next, alluding to a poem by Christina Rossetti. The pair are subsequently run off the road by unseen assailants. Hammer is knocked out in the crash and briefly comes round to find himself in a house where Christina is tortured to death. Hammer is then put back in his car along with Christina's body and the vehicle is pushed off a cliff. He awakes in hospital, to find his secretary Velda (Maxine Cooper) waiting for him. He decides to investigate Christina's murder believing that it "must be connected with something big." He subsequently tracks down Lily Carver (Gaby Rodgers), Christina's roommate. Lily tells Hammer she is hiding from sinister forces who are trying to find a mysterious box that, she believes, has contents worth a fortune.
Author Mickey Spillane created the character of Mike Hammer in 1946 and he was never intended to be as cerebral or as reflective as other hard boiled literary P.I.s such as Philip Marlowe. Director Robert Aldrich refines the character even further. In an early scene Christina makes an intuitive assessment of Hammer stating that he is the sort of man that “never gives in a relationship, who only takes”. And take he does. Hammer is a cheap private detective who usually does nothing more than squalid divorce cases. He often involves Velda in his work who does his dirty work out of love and devotion.Things he uses to his benefit. He also takes a beating. Regularly. Due to a plot conceit involving a suspended gun permit, Hammer never pulls a weapon. He only makes progress with his case because the villains of the story briefly consider using him to their advantage. Hammer is lacking in sophistication or breadth of vision. He is indeed like his name, a very specific tool and sees everything “as nails”. In many ways like the US foreign policy during the era.
Robert Aldrich was a radical film maker who smuggled his anti-establishment ideas in what many would assume were mainstream films. Kiss Me Deadly is not really a hard-boiled crime drama but a parable about the risks of nuclear proliferation with the clear metaphor of opening Pandora’s box. He shows how violence, allegedly an anathema to the righteous and virtuous, often becomes a convenient tool as they pursue their cause. Hammer casually destroys an Opera lover's record collection in front of him, relishing his discomfort. He also slams a drawer on an old man’s hand for “reasons”. Aldrich is also far more enamoured with his female characters. Their clearly marginalised status in 1950s America affords them a far more introspective and philosophical nature. Velda quickly grasps the magnitude of the mysterious box that is being sought by multiple parties, referring to it at the great “whatsit”. Christina knows that her fate is sealed the moment she strays into the affairs of men.
The script for Kiss Me Deadly by AI Bezzerides, a left leaning blacklisted screenwriter at the time, is very precise and minimalist. Something that a lot of modern writers need to learn. The sumptuous black and white cinematography by Ernest Laszlo is inherently classic yet reflects the modernity that post World War II America exulted. Perhaps the most memorable aspect of Kiss Me Deadly is its ending. Aldrich saves his best metaphor for last. Is Lily, like the United States, so obsessed with the power inherent with destruction, compelled to open the lid to satisfy her insatiable curiosity? The denouement still leaves an impression today and it has clearly influenced many other filmmakers. Steven Spielberg references it during the ending of Raiders of the Lost Ark. And the concept of an all powerful force in the trunk of a car was similarly adopted by Alex Cox in his 1984 science fiction movie Repo Man.
Oh look, that’s similar…
Exit 8 is a sophisticated and claustrophobic psychological thriller directed by Genki Kawamura, which skilfully transforms a minimalist indie walking-simulator game into a cinematic existential enigma. This overtly metaphorical film renders the repetitive nature and drudgery of modern working life into a physical environment in which the lead character is trapped and must find a way out. A random, brutal maze filled with an atmosphere of indifference to the lab rats that find themselves trapped within. Or is it their personal guilt that has put them there? Genki Kawamura’s psychological mystery draws inspiration from the Japanese video game of the same name, as well as from the cyclical nature of Groundhog Day and endless corridors of the Overlook Hotel in Kubrick’s The Shining. Although there are jump scares and some ghoulish imagery, this is not a horror vehicle. Instead this is a disquieting psychological drama with a strong sense of morality.
A lot of people may know Luke Evans from the live action version of Beauty and the Beast or Peter Jackson’s The Hobbit trilogy. With his matinee idol good looks, charming Welsh demeanour and his “smoky” tenor singing voice, he projects a sense of old school stardom. Which brings us to No One Lives; a film which is a radical departure from his previous work. His performance is disconcerting to say the least and the film is somewhat unhinged. Directed by Ryuhei Kitamura, who made an interesting adaptation of Clive Barker’s The Midnight Meat Train, this cinematic outing is similarly replete with robust shocks and gore. There are some interesting ideas about the nature of violence, Stockholm Syndrome and whether one should deny or embrace one’s nature. However, these are ultimately minor asides. Philosophical musings in between bouts of surprisingly striking unpleasantness.
When I first saw the promotional trailer for Gangster Squad back in 2012, prior to its release, I wasn't especially impressed. I simply thought the film was another attempt to re-invent the gangster genre for a generation who were not especially familiar with it. I wasn't exactly overwhelmed with director Ruben Fleischer's resume either. I didn't particularly like Zombieland and haven't seen 30 Minutes Or Less. Then came the tragic mass shootings in Aurora, Colorado which led to the movie being delayed so that the original ending, which featured a shoot-out in a movie theatre, could be replaced. Hence when I finally watched this film recently, I wasn't expecting a movie up to the standards of say Once Upon A Time In America or Miller’s Crossing and it would seem that I was right do so. Gangster Squad is not especially noteworthy in any respect.
The Cold War was a mainstay of many a thriller and action movie throughout the sixties, seventies and eighties. However, all too often it was depicted in terms of the US versus the Soviet Union. China didn’t seem to feature so much, although it was just as equally an “enemy” of the West. Hence when I recently read about The Chairman (which has just had a Blu-ray release), it was of interest to me. An espionage story, starring Gregory Peck with a hidden bug implanted in his skull, infiltrating China to steal a secret enzyme formula is quite an intriguing premise. Furthermore, director J. Lee Thompson had previously worked with Peck on The Guns of Navarone, which is a solid action movie. Therefore I was initially optimistic that this film which I was previously unaware of, would be an interesting diversion. Unfortunately, having now seen The Chairman, all I can really describe it as is a cinematic curiosity. One of numerous films produced by a big studio in the late sixties that failed to satisfy anyone's expectations.
Former United States Marine Corps Scout Sniper and Vietnam War veteran Jim Hanson (Liam Neeson) lives on a ranch on the Arizona-Mexico border. The mortgage on the property is in arrears after the death of his wife has left him medically bankrupt. One day while patrolling his property he encounters Mother Rosa (Teresa Ruiz) with her son Miguel (Jacob Perez) illegally crossing the border fence. He calls his step daughter Sarah (Katheryn Winnick) in the border patrol and reports them as they’re miles from any habitation. However, Rosa and Miguel are fleeing a drug cartel and Mauricio (Juan Pablo Raba), one of their enforcers. When Mauricio and his men try to forcibly take Rosa, Jim intervenes and a car chase and firefight ensue. Mauricio’s brother is killed and Rosa is fatally wounded. She gives Jim a note with her family's address in Chicago and he reluctantly agrees to take Miguel there.
Sometimes a perfectly competent film simply misses the boat. The Fourth Protocol is a prime example of this. Based upon the novel by Frederick Forsythe this well made, somewhat clinical thriller arrived in cinemas at a time when the cold war was coming to an end due to “glasnost” and the “red menace” was becoming a somewhat tired plot device. It didn’t help that a similar story about a rogue Russian mission to detonate a nuclear device on a US base had already featured four years earlier in the Bond film, Octopussy. Michael Caine spent several years trying to get the project off the ground, after initially reading the author’s draft manuscript of the novel. Veteran screenwriter George Axelrod was hired and John Frankenheimer was sought to direct the film. However, difficulties in financing the project led to changes in the production and Forsythe ended writing the screenplay himself, while John Mackenzie (The Long Good Friday) took on the direction.
Film Noir often reflects the numerous things that influenced it. German expressionism, French poetic realism and American hardboiled fiction. Hence many films from this genre have a tendency to be stylised both visually and narratively speaking, with a fatalistic tone. Kiss Me Deadly, directed by Robert Aldrich in 1955, takes all these attributes as well as others and amplifies them in one of the bleakest and most uncompromising movies of the fifties. It features a brutal protagonist who isn’t even a decent detective and a plot that seems at first glance to come straight out of Greek mythology. Yet Kiss Me Deadly is compelling and lean without any superfluous scenes or narrative baggage. There’s also what appears to be the mother of all cinematic "MacGuffins" but once the film is over and the viewer reflects upon what they have seen, it can be argued that maybe the characters and the inevitability of their actions are actually the driving plot device instead.
Forensic accountant Owen Casserly (Jake Weber) flees his home with his teenage son Connor (Finn Little) when he discovers he has been targeted by a pair of assassins (Nicholas Hoult and Aidan Gillen) who have been hired to stop him giving evidence in a major corruption case. Connor witnesses the murder of his father after their car is run off the road. Entrusted with important written evidence, he escapes into the dense forests of the Montana wilderness pursued by the killers. Seeking help he runs into smokejumper Hannah Faber (Angelina Jolie) who is stationed at a remote fire lookout tower. Hannah suffers from PTSD from a previous forest fire in which she was unable to save three young boys. Hannah attempts to lead Connor through the forest to safety. Meanwhile the assassins set fire to the forest to divert the attention of the authorities and cover their tracks.
When one considers all the various elements involved in the production of Telefon, it makes it all the more disappointing that the movie fails to reach its potential. The basic idea about sleeper agents in the US is sound but the story doesn’t really go anywhere and not a great deal happens. The strong cast featuring Charles Bronson, Lee Remick and Donald Pleasance have to do their best with an undeveloped screenplay. Considering that it was written by Peter Hyams and Stirling Silliphant (from a novel by Walter Wager) it is quite surprising how lacklustre it all is. But perhaps the most saddening aspect of the film is the somewhat indifferent direction from Don Siegel, who by his own admission was not especially engaged with the story. Considering that he had scored a major hit the previous year with John Wayne’s swansong The Shootist, makes it more curious that he wasn’t more enthused. Even Lalo Schifrin’s score fails to bolster Telefon.
There have been several movie adaptations of the books of Jonathan Stark (AKA Donald E. Westlake) featuring his career criminal lead character, Parker. Sadly not all of them have fared well, either critically or at the box office. Many have deviated from the source material, often just using mere aspects of the original plot as the basis of their screenplay. Perhaps the most successful of these has been Point Blank (1967), directed by John Boorman and starring Lee Marvin. Slayground sadly follows the pattern set by previous adaptations. It changes several character names and takes two main elements from the source text and uses them as a premise. Specifically, a robbery that goes wrong which results in an accidental death and a climactic shootout in an out of season fairground. Due to the financing of the film, half of the story takes place in the US and the other in the UK. Much of the cast are British, resulting in a curious and at first glance somewhat incongruous film.
The Long Good Friday not only launched then career of Bob Hoskins but remains a uniquely British take on the gangster genre. Featuring authentic performances and a credible plot, the screenplay touches upon many of the social and political issues of the time; police corruption, the IRA, urban renewal and the decline of industry, along with EEC membership and the free-market economy. It’s a gritty and unrelenting drama that is still relevant today. Furthermore, the film is filled with quotable dialogue and has several stand out scenes that showcase Bob Hoskins’ smouldering performance. It’s also offers of “who’s who” of British character actors and there is one sequence still has the power to shock even today.
John le Carré's Cold War thriller Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, is not only a good example of the spy novel genre, but a fine piece of seventies British literature per se. Therefore I was most surprised when I learned back in 2011 that it was to be made as a film. Could the complexities and subtleties of this cerebral and deliberately slowly paced book be adequately brought to the big screen, by today’s studio system? Could it compete with the previous BBC television adaptation starring Alec Guiness that was made in 1979? Thankfully, director Thomas Alfredson and Working Title films have successfully managed to distil the complex plot into the film’s 127-minute running time. Furthermore, the ensemble cast have a quality script to work with and the entire production benefits from the flair of a quality European director who brings an interesting outsiders dynamic to this very British tale.
Inside a dark, remote warehouse, seven members of an unnamed midwestern militia meet. They’ve all heard via radio or police scanners that an unnamed, armed shooter armed with a modified AR-15 has opened fire on a police funeral. The assailant also plant IEDs and the casualty rate is therefore very high. This means the authorities will be scouring the countryside, raiding all known militia groups and their affiliates in the region. The men’s concern quickly turns to panic when they discover that one of their AR-15 is missing from their weapons cache, along with body armour and explosives. Is one of their own the shooter? Ford (Chris Mulkey), the group’s no-nonsense leader, asks fellow member Gannon (James Badge Dale), a former police interrogator, to question all the men and determine who is responsible. However, matters prove more complicated as Gannon knows that one other member, Noah (Brian Geraghty), is an undercover cop. Can a solution be found before the police inevitably come calling?
Clint Eastwood is 88 years old and has a successful career spanning over six decades. During that time he has proved to be one of America’s most bankable box office stars and established himself as an actor and director of note among his peers. If The Mule turns out to be his swansong, then it is certainly a fitting end to a prestigious career. Because in many respects The Mule is a distillation of many of the themes and concepts, we’ve seen in previous Eastwood movies such as Gran Torino and The Unforgiven. Perhaps the core story of an ageing man trying to reconcile himself to a modern world and make peace with it, is in some way Eastwood commenting on the movie industry himself. It is very much his film and his performance underpins the proceedings.
What is it with director Ridley Scott and his predilection for multiple edits of his films? Is he indecisive and a consummate tinkerer (like George Lucas) or a victim of studio politics? I suspect none of these are true. So how come there are always multiple cuts of his movies? Do his terms of employment always deny him final edit on a movie? I would think not. A film maker of his stature must surely get far more favourable terms when contract to make a film? Whatever the reason it leaves audience with a problem. How is one exactly to determine which is the best version of any of his films to see? For example, Kingdom of Heaven was greatly improved in its extended format. Yet his revised version of Alien is actually inferior to the original theatrical cut. And don’t even get me started on the plethora of versions of Blade Runner. His penchant for multiple edits therefore makes it difficult to debate his work.
In a recent blog post I wrote about the difficulty that you can encounter sometimes when trying to watch movies that have been deemed “classic” by popular consensus. I listed 10 films of note that I intend to watch this year and to see if my views aligned with the various institutions and critics that praise them. The first on that list was the iconic sixties thriller Bullitt starring Steve McQueen. Having now watched the movie, I thought it would be prudent to collate my thoughts on it. Considering the immense amount of material that has already been written about it, I see no reason to present a review per se. Rather, here are my initial impressions for consideration. I’ve tried to highlight some specific aspects of the film that I think are of note or merit debate.
Legend is an extremely lavish biopic. Despite being about a pair of notorious British villains it has both the look and feel of an American gangster epic. There is no real attempt to depict either the period or the locations accurately nor is the story of the Kray twins themselves factually correct. As ever with American productions of this nature both the era and the subject matter are viewed through a miasma of sentimentality and faux nostalgia. The Krays are portrayed as folk heroes rather than the petty thugs that they were. However if you are prepared to overlook these deliberate biases then Legend is can still be an entertaining movie.
Keeping a Popular Franchise Relevant
I’ve written in the past about “how long should a TV show run for” and it remains a very interesting talking point. An ageing cast and a played out formula are not uncommon problems that can lead to a popular show being cancelled. But some long standing TV dramas have different issues that can blight them. Such as overly complicated lore, a vocal fanbase and a need to stay relevant in a way that some other shows don’t have to worry about. Martin Belam has recently written a very good article about this subject. He cites Doctor Who as a show that is extremely fatigued at present and suggests that maybe taking it off air and having some time out may well be the solution to its “problems”. I agree with him. Not only with regard to Doctor Who but basically any TV or movie franchise that has become ubiquitous and therefore tired as a result.
I’ve written in the past about “how long should a TV show run for” and it remains a very interesting talking point. An ageing cast and a played out formula are not uncommon problems that can lead to a popular show being cancelled. But some long standing TV dramas have different issues that can blight them. Such as overly complicated lore, a vocal fanbase and a need to stay relevant in a way that some other shows don’t have to worry about. Martin Belam has recently written a very good article about this subject. He cites Doctor Who as a show that is extremely fatigued at present and suggests that maybe taking it off air and having some time out may well be the solution to its “problems”. I agree with him. Not only with regard to Doctor Who but basically any TV or movie franchise that has become ubiquitous and therefore tired as a result.
Here are a few select quotes that I think are pertinent. Again these are specifically about Doctor Who but are equally applicable to comparable shows.
“Sometimes it feels like the show is being buried under the weight of its own continuity”.
“The decision to cast a woman as the Doctor has also meant the franchise became a pawn in the culture wars, further souring relationships in the fandom, and making the social media posts of the show’s creators and stars toxic to wade through”.
“It feels as if it is telling an increasingly self-absorbed meta-story about its own run, accompanied by a very vocal online fandom that isn’t quite sure what it wants, but knows it doesn’t want this”.
Doctor Who has been absent from our televisions in the past. It lost its way back in the middle to late eighties and was taken off air when audiences started declining. The sixteen year hiatus certainly made a difference and when it returned in 2005 it had totally reinvented itself and found exactly the right tone for a modern audience. James Bond is another prime example. The franchise has taken time out twice to rethink its direction. GoldenEye (1995) put the franchise back on track after the excesses of the Roger Moore era (The two Dalton movies were a change of tone too quickly). And Casino Royale (2006), possibly the best realisation of the character from the original text, made Bond relevant again after the franchise started losing ground to its competitors. However, taking a break doesn’t always guarantee an improved return. Dare I mention a certain franchise set in a galaxy, far, far away.
It is easy to see why owning a popular franchise is appealing to a TV network or film studio. Once established they become known quantities that need to be managed and curated. Spinoffs offer potential new content and do not pose the same risk as completely new products. You only have to look at Disney + to see a textbook example of such portfolio management. The BBC is not in such a position with Doctor Who. It doesn’t have the finances unless it goes into business partnership with a third party. Such a collaboration could potentially reinvigorate the franchise. But there is also equal scope for it to go the other way. A major US backer would naturally want a product tailored to its domestic market. All things considered, if Doctor Who doesn’t rethink its current direction it is destined to repeat the same mistakes of the late eighties, become a caricature of itself and get cancelled. Perhaps it is better to jump, than be pushed. A short hiatus may well be the solution.
It has become a popular TV formula to find two celebrities or television personalities and put them into an informal documentary style show. While the pair nominally undertake the task at hand, the emergent banter between the two is the alleged television gold. Hence we had Mortimer and Whitehouse: Gone Fishing which became a big hit. Then there’s shows such as Extraordinary Escapes with Sandi Toksvig and Perfect Pub Walks with Bill Bailey where the presenter is joined by a different celebrity guest each episode. Again it is the off topic chats that make these shows interesting variations on pure documentaries. All of which brings me nicely to Sam & Ade Go Birding. I missed this show when it was first broadcast in the UK in April this year. I caught five minutes of a repeat recently while channel hopping and was so intrigued by the premise, I immediately went to the appropriate on demand player and watched the first episode. Over the next two evenings I watched the remaining two instalments. All of which was a wonderful change of pace from the frenetic and boisterous enthusiasm of mainstream entertainment. Two guys go bird watching. One is an expert, the other isn’t. Banter ensues along with some superb wildlife photography. This is calming, tranquil and relaxing viewing.
Star Trek is slightly older than me by 14 months. I was born on December 18th 1967. Star Trek was first broadcast in the US on 8th September 1966. Hence this show has always been part of the prevailing pop culture that surrounded me, as I grew up. I first began watching Star Trek as a young child in the early seventies. It would be repeated on the BBC in the early evening on Fridays and it became a family ritual to sit down together and watch it. As a seven or eight year old, it left a great impression upon me and was in many ways, the television highlight of the week. Star Trek along with Doctor Who certainly started my interest in science fiction. Star Trek was also one of the first shows that introduced me to tie-in marketing. I remember seeing in a toy shop, near to my school at the time, a Dinky Klingon Battle Cruiser and was flabbergasted that such a thing existed. I immediately coveted it but sadly never obtained one.
Thoughts on TV shows and my current viewing habits.
This so-called recurring post is certainly becoming quite irregular, as It’s been over a year since I wrote the last instalment of The Idiot Box. I noted back then how I was watching less television and to be frank that hasn’t really changed. Although there are plenty of well written and entertaining shows out there, too often choosing to watch one effectively places you in an opened ended social contract. For example, I watched the first season of The Agency, which is a superior espionage drama. It ended with the main story completed and a few plot lines open for another season. A second season has just been released and I have learned from a blog post by Wilhelm Arcturus, that this season ends on a cliffhanger. Oh dear. Do I really want to get on another TV show treadmill? Nope. I like TV shows that have self-contained seasons. So I guess I’ll be skipping The Agency. Shame. I liked the Jack Black cover of a U2 song that they use on the title credits.
I recently found a DVD boxset of Return to the Planet of the Apes in a charity shop which I bought for £4, which is a ridiculously cheap price. I considered it an interesting find because it was a Region 1, US copy. However, that is not so unusual these days as most DVD players are now region free and Amazon (UK) sells media from all over the world. As for the show in question, I vaguely remember Return to the Planet of the Apes being shown on UK network TV when I was a child, probably circa 1976. Back then it would usually take a year or so before US shows made it onto UK television. From a commercial perspective, the entire Planet of the Apes franchise was beginning to run out of steam. I was 8 years old at the time so had missed most of the film releases. However, I enjoyed the live action TV show hence an animated follow up had obvious appeal to a child of my age.
I have not watched as much TV as I usually do, this year. Mainly because I have become a little weary of the ways contemporary TV is produced, especially with regards to streaming shows. Due to the costs, shows such as Star Trek: Strange New Worlds only have 10 episodes per season. Simply put, the season begins to hit its stride and then is abruptly over. This problem (if you see it as such) is then further compounded by there being a significant wait between seasons. In the case of STSNW it was two years between season two and season three. Not all shows fall foul of this. Apple TV produces two seasons of the excellent espionage drama Slow Horses at a time, ensuring a prompt release schedule. However, even this has issues. Due to the complexity of the plots of many contemporary TV shows, something that is a marketing point, some viewers cannot remember the plot after a twelve month hiatus. Network TV shows seldom have these issues with each season being 20 plus episodes long and story arcs that are seldom as complex.
Strictly Come Dancing remains the BBC’s flagship light entertainment show for Autumn. Despite controversy and scandal, the show bounced back last year and firmly re-established itself as the “feel good, family show” it has always claimed to be. Blind comedian Chris McCausland becoming the 2024 champion certainly validated the show’s commitment to diversity and inclusion and helped place Strictly (as it is known to its fans) back on its cultural pedestal. I’m sure those involved in the production of the show breathed a sigh of relief when the season ended on such a positive note, eclipsing the negative press that had been ever present last summer. Second chances and opportunities for a “course correction” are few and far between these days. Especially when you have elements of the UK press waiting with bated breath and hoping that you’ll fail.
Treasure Island In Outer Space is a curious Italian television production from 1987 starring Anthony Quinn and Ernest Borgnine. It also features numerous international actors better known for their work in cult and exploitation films, such as Bobby Rhodes, David Warbeck and John Morghan. Directed by Antonio Margheriti (AKA Anthony Dawson), famous for such films as Killer Fish (a cash in on Piranha) and The Last Hunter (a Vietnam exploitation epic), Treasure Island In Outer Space is a faithful adaptation of Robert Louis Stevenson’s classic novel. The screenplay by Renato Castellani and Lucio De Caro draws heavily from the source text, maintaining character names and original dialogue. However in updating the material to a futuristic setting, the script is littered with the worst kind of eighties sci-fi clichés. We are subjected to sonic trains, anti-gravity rays and the usual buzzword driven faux science.
Thoughts on TV shows and my current viewing habits.
I last wrote a blog post in this series back in February 2022. Then for various reasons, I stopped. Possibly because my relationship with TV has changed in recent years. It’s fair to say at present that viewers are spoilt for choice. There are lots of very good shows around. Conversely, there is also a lot of bland, generic, filler as well. I appreciate that not every television series has to be an industry milestone and there are times when I’m content to watch undemanding content. However, I am very protective of how I spend my leisure time at present. I am not prepared to sink 6 or 8 hours into a show that is just “okay”. Hence I’m becoming very particular about what I watch. If something isn’t working for me in any fashion then I just abandon it and am happy to do so.
The seventies was an interesting time for UK genre television. Despite small budgets and often low key visual effects, there was no shortage of good ideas and creativity. Sapphire & Steel is a prime example of a show couched in a high concept, produced on a shoestring. It also credits its audiences with some degree of intelligence. Rather than spoon feeding the narrative in a didactic manner, it hints and implies, then leaves the rest to its viewers imagination. Created by Peter J. Hammond, a veteran TV writer, Sapphire & Steel centres on a pair of interdimensional operatives named Sapphire and Steel. They are two of a number of elements that assume human form. Over the course of three seasons little is revealed about the pair but they appear whenever there is any anomalous temporal activity. Time itself is portrayed as a sentient and malignant force that seeks to make incursions into the present reality, through weaknesses in the fabric of space.
Season 2 of Andor has received praise from both critics and fans alike. It finally seems to have put to bed the common argument that Star Wars as a franchise has traditionally been light on narrative depth, character development and the exploration of the themes that its main story is predicated upon. Andor shows the realities of opposing authoritarian regimes and exists within shades of grey, rather than purille, binary positions. Many have drawn parallels with the current state of geopolitics, especially that of the United States. I certainly found the second season of Andor to be engaging and thought provoking. I also enjoyed the performances of many of the British actors who by default are cast in all the major Empire roles. I thought Anton Lesser was especially noteworthy as a senior officer in the Imperial Security Bureau.
If you don’t want to pay for streaming services, or premium digital satellite and cable content, then your choice in the UK is somewhat limited. You can receive all “free to air channels”, IE the ones that have advertising, via the digital terrestrial platform Freeview. Most UK televisions have Freeview access built in. Alternatively, the same selection of channels are available via the digital satellite platform Freesat. You can also buy either Freeview or Freesat digital video recorders and require only a rooftop aerial or satellite dish respectively to access these platforms. Most DVRs come with additional IPTV functionality built in along with the most popular streaming apps, so additional subscription services can be added if the viewer so desires. Freeview and Freesat carry a mixture of high definition and standard definition channels. Internet based services offer 4K content.
When I started writing this post it was intended to be about changing from one UK TV provider to another. However, I became concerned that there was a need to provide some sort of historical context, because I wasn’t sure whether all readers would be familiar with how television is provided here. The next thing I know, I’ve written a potted history of public and commercial broadcasting in the UK and the resulting post has become somewhat lengthy. So I have decided to split the text into two halves. The first being a summary of how the provision of television has changed in the UK over the course of the last fifty plus years. The second focuses more upon changes to the TV industry’s business model, consumer habits and the present status quo.
It is fair to say that we live in an age where we do not lack quality TV. There are numerous shows that have garnered critical acclaim or a strong word of mouth following that are deemed “must see” viewing. No doubt you, like myself, have a long “to do” list of programs that you need to “get round to watching” on top of those shows which are staples of your viewing regime. If you didn’t have enough programmes already to catch up with, we all have friends and family telling us about a “great show” that’s on a platform we don’t subscribe to, that we really need to see. It is quite extraordinary and a far cry from my youth when the UK simply had three terrestrial channels until satellite TV became popular in the late eighties. To paraphrase the former Prime Minister Harold Macmillan “we’ve never had it so good”.
Music by John Williams is a documentary celebration of the famous composer and his illustrious body of work. It provides some interesting biographical background information as to how the man was born into a family of talented musicians. It then traces his rise from pianist for hire to the most well known film composer today. Along the way, anyone who is anyone in film and music appears to heap justifiable praise upon him and his body of work. It also features a continuous medley of John Williams’ greatest hits, as it catalogues his work in broadly chronological order. Music by John Williams is an upbeat and positive love letter to the composer and exactly what you would expect, when you consider that the documentary was produced by his friends and peers.
Tonight’s results for week 5 of Strictly Come Dancing (season 22) have once again demonstrated that this show is more than just a dancing competition to UK viewers. If it were just a case of determining who are the best dancers, then JB Gill would not have been in the dance off. The judges may well see things exclusively in such terms but the public clearly do not. I last wrote about this phenomenon in 2019 and I think it appropriate to raise the subject again as this season of Strictly seems to be bucking past trends and I suspect we may be in for further upsets in the run up to the season finale. Broadly speaking, the public usually tends to vote in a manner similar to the official leaderboard. Hence, those who score the lowest usually end up in the dance off. Occasionally an underdog will be championed and kept on the show but that trend seems to have lost its novelty in recent years. This season appears to be quite different.
I make no bones about the fact that I watch Strictly Come Dancing every year. For those who live outside of the UK, this is the original version of the dancing reality show that you probably know as Dancing With the Stars in your country. It is still a big deal in the UK as far as TV ratings go, getting audiences on average of 6.6 million viewers. There are many aspects of the show that are textbook examples of prime time, popular entertainment but I like it because the “celebrities” that take part are ultimately learning a skill that is genuinely difficult. The latest season of Strictly, as it is known to its fans, is especially interesting as the BBC had a major PR problem earlier in the year, where several previous participants made allegations of bullying and abuse about their pro-dancer partners. An investigation is still ongoing and in the meantime, the two professional dancers that were named have withdrawn from the show. Hence everyone involved with the latest season are all on message, stating that it’s “all about having fun”.
Watching TV was a far more communal activity in my youth. Families sat and watched specific shows or sports together. “Appointment TV” had its benefits not only for TV ratings but for advertising revenue. Although audiences may have grown over the years, they have also become more fragmented and compartmentalised. Smaller market shares have therefore made advertising far more pervasive. Even big streaming platforms are feeling the squeeze with declining subscribers and therefore introducing advertising on lower tier tariffs. Many catch up services also rely on advertising. However, viewers can always pay a fee if they wish to dispense with it. Another foible of modern digital television is poor picture quality Many smaller digital channels broadcast in standard definition. The source material has often been converted between different picture formats and has been cropped to suit a 16:9 screen. This results in low definition picture quality, with weak colours and a lot of digital artefacts.
I recently visited my local branch of the British Heart Foundation. This is a chain of UK charity shops that sell previously owned furniture and electrical goods, all of which are certified to be in good working order. It’s one of the few places where you’ll still find old school CRT televisions. These mainly come from house clearances. On this occasion, a particularly bulky model from the early 2000s was on display and despite its age, it still had a good, clear picture. I spoke to a member of staff and apparently these TVs are still popular with gamers who buy them for use with retro video games consoles. I felt especially nostalgic for this particular ageing Sony TV, because Mrs P and I had once owned a similar model. We bought it from a local department store (which no longer exists) and I remember it took two robust gentlemen to deliver it and install it.
We all knew it had to happen sooner or later. According to reports, Lucasfilm is planning to reduce its Star Wars related output on Disney+. Specifically, from 2025 there will be only one live-action television series per year. For comparison, Disney+ commissioned three shows in 2022 and two shows in both 2023 and 2024. It should be noted that this reduced output doesn’t include animated shows. It would appear that senior management at Disney have finally figured out something most of us have known for a while. That saturating the market with content based upon a specific intellectual property, is ultimately detrimental to its popularity and financial viability. To use an old adage “familiarity breeds contempt”. At present, hardcore fans are “unhappy” with the way the IP is being developed, while casual fans are somewhat burned out by the excess of content and its varying quality.
Two years ago, The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power premiered on Amazon Prime to mixed reviews and a tedious and predictable internet brouhaha. I have no interest in that debacle as I consider it spurious, to say the least. Representation is a commercial imperative for any big budget television production. As for any deviation from the established canon, that’s due to the show being an “adaptation” of Tolkien’s work. At no point were viewers promised a literal interpretation of the source text. Therefore I am only interested in legitimate critiques of the show based upon its production, writing and acting. As far as I’m concerned, the first season was broadly entertaining and had outstanding production values. Overall I enjoyed The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power as an exciting and inventive take on Tolkien’s legendarium. Hence, I have been looking forward to the second season, which began today.
Ghostwatch is a controversial British horror “mockumentary” produced by the BBC that was first broadcast on October 31st 1992. Written by Stephen Volk and produced by Ruth Baumgarten it is now considered a milestone in UK broadcasting. This was mainly due to the strong reaction it provoked from the public, many of whom failed to grasp that it was a drama. At the time it raised serious questions about responsible programming and caused a furore in the British press. It has curiously never been shown since by the BBC. Ghostwatch remains a talking point to this day and is a text book example of the power of television as well as the publics enduring belief in the supernatural.
Ronald Erle Grainer (11 August 1922 – 21 February 1981) was a prolific Australian composer who is best remembered for his work in the United Kingdom during the sixties and seventies. He wrote numerous notable scores and theme music for several iconic television shows such as Doctor Who, Steptoe and Son and Tales of the Unexpected. He also composed the soundtrack for several major motion pictures such as Some People (1962), The Assassination Bureau (1969) and The Omega Man (1971). Grainer relocated to London from Australia in 1952 but it was not until 1960 that he gained critical success after writing the music for the popular TV show Maigret. He subsequently received an Ivor Novello award for “Outstanding Composition for Film, TV or Radio”.
Anyone who writes regularly, sooner or later will have the following epiphany. The realisation that the post you consider your best work seldom finds an audience. Furthermore, the most inconsequential, disposable things that you have written on a whim, will often end up being the one article that gets a big response. It can be very frustrating but it is a reality of writing. It is with that idea in mind, I wish to move on to the matter of “Walter Watches”. In late March 2019, I took a picture of Walter sitting in his chair, watching a classic episode of The Twilight Zone. I subsequently Tweeted this image along with a descriptive caption. This gained a number of “likes” and retweets, so a day later I posted another. This time Walter was watching the film Krull (1983) and I added a humorous caption. Let’s just say I got more of a response for that one Tweet than I had for anything else I had posted over the previous nine years when promoting a blog post.
I was seven when The Six Million Dollar Man was first broadcast in the UK in late 1974. As a young and impressionable child, who was already fascinated by Doctor Who, Star Trek (TOS) and the films of Ray Harryhausen, this show was essential weekly viewing. I believe for the first couple of seasons, we sat and watched it as an entire family. Television was less sophisticated back then and dominated by sitcoms, police procedurals and traditional dramas. So a weekly show blending the espionage genre with science fiction themes was revolutionary. It also inspired a generation of school kids to run around the playground in “slow motion” and give themselves hernias as they attempted to lift heavy objects. And don’t get me started on the range of Steve Austin toys. One had a “bionic eye” which meant it had a lens in the front of the action figure’s face and you could look through the back of his head like a telescope. What a time to be alive!
Despite being an analysis of the past there is a portentous air about Ken Burns and Lynn Novick’s Prohibition. A fascinating five-and-a-half-hour documentary produced for PBS in 2011. The history of this disastrous experiment, the banning of alcoholic beverages, is a textbook example of how the transactional nature of US politics can be effectively used upon “wedge” issues. Prohibition follows the format and style of Burns previous documentaries such as the Civil War (1990) and The War (2007) with the wider subject broken down and analysed according to protagonists, events and the political background. Specific historical figures and key players are followed throughout the documentary’s narrative, giving viewers a sense of focus. Hence we meet the hatchet-wielding Carrie Nation, Wayne Wheeler from the Anti-Saloon League and media savvy gangsters like Al Capone. It is interesting to note that some themes continue from Burns’ previous work, such as the political and cultural conflict between native-born Americans and European immigrants. The rural heartlands versus the big cities.
Andor is not like other entries in the Star Wars canon. It explores the human, social and political consequences of rebelling against an oppressive, totalitarian regime. The writing is intelligent and well observed, choosing to focus on the average citizens of the Empire and the nature of their daily lives. Andor also explores the ineffectual politicians and the way the senate are self serving and ultimately impotent. The Emperor is remote and instead we see how Imperial colonialism works at a grassroots level. It is an all too familiar depiction, born out of historical fact, such as Vichy France during World War II. Petty thugs and aspiring psychopaths happily align themselves with their Imperial overlords and actively oppress their own people. As for the Empire, and in particular the ISB (Imperial Security Bureau) it is rife with infighting, personal fiefdoms and all the flaws of similar institutions from the real world.
Having watched the first two episodes of The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power, I wish to express my thoughts on what I’ve seen and my overall impressions so far. I do not think it would be fair to frame this post as a review as the two episodes only constitute 25% of the show’s total content. A formal review of the first season seems more appropriate when I have seen it in its entirety. Before I begin commenting on specific points about the two premier episodes, I wish to point out that I have no problem with “representation” and have expressed my thoughts on this matter in a previous post. It also covers the matter of “adaptation” and how complex texts can at times require augmenting to be made accessible to wider audiences. Hence those viewers who want 100% canonical purity are unrealistic in their expectations. Objections based in racism and sexism can simply be ignored. NB I shall endeavour to keep my thoughts spoiler free.
The last time I wrote about our home entertainment system was six years ago. Back then I was hoping to upgrade our TV from HD to UHD. However, unless you are fortunate to have a surfeit of cash, most of us tend to soldier on with the hardware we already have until it breaks. Then at least we can justify replacing it. And that is exactly what happened to us last week. It would appear that both the TV and the powerline internet adapters which are in our lounge, suffered electrical induction damage during a recent thunderstorm. One of the powerline adapters was completely dead and the HDMI sockets on the television ceased to function. This meant we had no access to streaming services, the Blu-ray player or our BT TV DVR. We could access a selection of free, terrestrial digital channels via the aerial, but could not pause or record anything. Furthermore all of these were in standard definition.
The Sea Wolves (1980)
I have always had a soft spot for the action movies that Euan Lloyd produced in the late seventies and early eighties. The Wild Geese (1978), The Sea Wolves (1980), Who Dares Wins (1982) and Wild Geese II (1985). They were quite gritty and all had a strong cast of British character actors. Sadly some of them strayed into political issues with their stories and often got out of their depths. The Wild Geese ham-fistedly explores the political landscape of post colonial Africa and Who Dares Wins clumsily deals with terrorism and the concept of unilateral nuclear disarmament. Yet despite the somewhat school boy approach to geopolitics, the action scenes are well crafted (often by legendary Bond stunt arranger Bob Simmons) and the cast more than make up for any narrative failings. All four films also have charismatic soundtracks by Roy Budd. However The Sea Wolves differs from the other three movies in so far that it is set during World War II and is loosely based on real events.
I have always had a soft spot for the action movies that Euan Lloyd produced in the late seventies and early eighties. The Wild Geese (1978), The Sea Wolves (1980), Who Dares Wins (1982) and Wild Geese II (1985). They were quite gritty and all had a strong cast of British character actors. Sadly some of them strayed into political issues with their stories and often got out of their depths. The Wild Geese ham-fistedly explores the political landscape of post colonial Africa and Who Dares Wins clumsily deals with terrorism and the concept of unilateral nuclear disarmament. Yet despite the somewhat school boy approach to geopolitics, the action scenes are well crafted (often by legendary Bond stunt arranger Bob Simmons) and the cast more than make up for any narrative failings. All four films also have charismatic soundtracks by Roy Budd. However The Sea Wolves differs from the other three movies in so far that it is set during World War II and is loosely based on real events.
During World War II, many British merchant ships are being sunk by German U-boats. British intelligence, based in India, believe that the information is being passed to the U-boats by a radio transmitter hidden on board one of three German merchant ships interned in the neutral Portuguese colony of Goa. Lieutenant-Colonel Pugh (Gregory Peck) of the Special Operations Executive (SOE) is tasked with finding the German spy passing the shipping information and destroying the radio transmitter onboard the interned ships. Accompanied by fellow operative Captain Gavin Stewart (Roger Moore), the pair travel to Goa to attempt to capture a high level German spy known as Trompeta (Wolf Kahler). After he dies during a struggle, Pugh decides to make a daring raid on the interned ships in Goa harbour. Due to Portugal's neutrality SOE cannot use British troops. So Pugh asks Colonel W.H. Grice (David Niven), the commanding officer of a Territorial unit of British expatriates called the Calcutta Light Horse, if they would carry out the mission covertly. They all volunteer as they are all ex-service men and keen to 'do their bit'.
The Sea Wolves is a very traditional high adventure movie directed by veteran filmmaker Andrew V. McLaglen. The film’s strength lies with its strong cast featuring the likes of Trevor Howard, Patrick Macnee and Patrick Allen. The script is functional and has occasional moments of droll dialogue, usually based around the age of the various old soldiers complaining about their aches and pains. The locations are interesting and the production design does a good job of recreating the period. Furthermore, the miniature effects by Kit West and Nick Allder are top drawer and the action scenes are credible, well edited and entertaining. The Sea Wolves eschews the cliched cinematic conceit of the German cast speaking English, instead opting for authentic dialogue and subtitles. Yet despite many positive elements, the film drags during the turgid romance between Captain Stewart and divorcee (and German spy) Agnes Cromwell (Barbara Kellerman).
Roger Moore was 52 when he was cast in The Sea Wolves and he was clearly losing his boyish good looks. Yet the film industry still insisted upon casting him as a romantic lead. He continued with Bond well after his best before date and frankly it showed. In this instance his torrid affair is very much written in the idiom of the times and it is as dull as ditch water. The plot grinds to a halt during these scenes. Furthermore critics at the time made a big deal out of Gregory Peck’s English accent but I’ve heard far worse over the years and don’t consider it to be a deal breaker. It should be remembered that to finance such a British production Euan Lloyd needed a known star that would clearly appeal to the US market. Peck was such an actor and works well in the role. He certainly shines in his scene with David Niven who he worked with previously on The Guns of Navarone.
Film’s about World War II proved a mainstay of the UK and US box office for over 30 years. However interest waned eventually as a new generation of cinema viewers, who were born in the post war years, became the principal audience. Films that have revisited this historical period since then have tended to take a more revisionist approach to the subject matter. The Sea Wolves is one of the last old school, “for King and country” style of action movie. Perhaps that is why it didn’t fare as well at the box office as other Euan Lloyd productions. He personally blamed this on the demise of co-financier Lorimar Pictures and their poor marketing. I think that audiences simply wanted something more contemporary, as proved by Who Dares Wins. Viewed with a modern perspective The Sea Wolves does seem somewhat dated in its tone. However, it can still prove entertaining and certainly offers an unusual story, set away from the European theatre of war.
The Imperial War Museum serves as a national museum for Britain. Its main location is in London, complemented by five additional branches across England. Established in 1917 as the Imperial War Museum, its original purpose was to document the civil and military efforts and sacrifices made by the United Kingdom and its Empire during the First World War. Over time, the museum’s scope has broadened to encompass all conflicts involving British or Commonwealth forces since 1914. As of 2012, the museum’s mission is to provide and encourage the study and understanding of the history of modern warfare as well as the “wartime experience”. The IWM as it is now known has its headquarters and primary site is located at Southwark in Central London. The museum is funded by government grants, charitable donations and revenue generated through commercial activity such as retailing, licensing and publishing. General admission is free to IWM London.
Over the years I have seen many documentaries about World War II. Although I do not claim in any way to be an expert, I believe I have a good grasp on the causes and the course of that six year conflict. However, it recently struck me that I could not say the same about World War I. In my youth I watched a repeat showing of the BBC documentary series The Great War (1964) but I remember very little of its prodigious 26 episodes. The one thing that stood out were the interviews with veterans. So I was very pleased when perusing BritBox over the weekend to find the 2003 documentary The First World War, based upon the book of the same name by Professor Hew Strachan. This ten part analysis takes a global view of the conflict, rather than excessively focusing upon the Western Front and also debunks a lot of the apocryphal ideas and notions that have persisted over the years. I found it so compelling that I binged watched the entire thing over two evenings.
In 1944, the USAAF faces increased losses of Allied bombers conducting operations over Europe. The 332d Fighter Group (The Tuskegee Airmen), consisting of young African-American fighter pilots, are confined to ground attack missions in Italy and hampered with ageing, poorly maintained Curtiss P-40 Warhawk aircraft. After the Tuskegee Airmen distinguish themselves in support of the Allied landings at Anzio, Col. A.J. Bullard (Terence Howard) is surprised when the USAAF Bomber Command asks him if his men will escort the Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress bombers on their day time raids. Casualties have become unacceptably high. Bullard accepts on the condition his unit be supplied with the new North American P-51 Mustang. The tails of the new aircraft are painted bright red and become the unofficial name of the outfit. Bullard orders his pilots to remain with the bombers that they’re escorting and their first escort mission proves a success without the loss of a single bomber. Slowly, entrenched racist attitudes within the USAAF begin to change.
I have always had a soft spot for the action movies that Euan Lloyd produced in the late seventies and early eighties. The Wild Geese (1978), The Sea Wolves (1980), Who Dares Wins (1982) and Wild Geese II (1985). They were quite gritty and all had a strong cast of British character actors. Sadly some of them strayed into political issues with their stories and often got out of their depths. The Wild Geese ham-fistedly explores the political landscape of post colonial Africa and Who Dares Wins clumsily deals with terrorism and the concept of unilateral nuclear disarmament. Yet despite the somewhat school boy approach to geopolitics, the action scenes are well crafted (often by legendary Bond stunt arranger Bob Simmons) and the cast more than make up for any narrative failings. All four films also have charismatic soundtracks by Roy Budd. However The Sea Wolves differs from the other three movies in so far that it is set during World War II and is loosely based on real events.
One of the things that immediately strikes you when watching Fury is its credibility and realism. The film reeks of authenticity. Every aspect of the production has been meticulously researched, from uniform and equipment, to ordnance and tactics. The M4A3E8 Sherman tank was not only the workhorse of the US Army but also a home for its five man crew. Director David Ayer makes this idea the foundation of his movie and then proceeds to explore those two perennial themes, the horrors of war and the loss of innocence. The film focuses on the experiences of the crew consisting of Don "Wardaddy" Collier (Brad Pitt), gunner Boyd "Bible" Swan (Shia LeBeouf), loader Grady "Coon-Ass" Travis (Jon Bernthal), and driver Trini "Gordo" Garcia (Michael Peña). They’re a tight knit family, relying on each other to stay alive and keep their mental stability.
Conspiracy is a 2001 co-production between the BBC and HBO, that dramatises the events of the Wannsee Conference of 1942. Based upon secret minutes of the meeting, the drama explores the businesslike manner in which the German State decided and implemented the "Final Solution of the Jewish Question" during World War II. Set in a confiscated lakeside villa in the Berlin borough of Wannsee, the plot unfolds around a conference table. The screenplay by Loring Mandel is free from theatrics and hyperbole. Instead it focuses upon a chilling meeting in which genocide is calmly debated in the same way as armament quotas or economic growth. Frank Pierson’s direction is straightforward and uncomplicated allowing the viewer to dwell on the manner and tone of the proceedings. Conspiracy features an ensemble cast, including Kenneth Branagh as Reinhard Heydrich, Stanley Tucci as Adolf Eichmann, Colin Firth as Dr Wilhelm Stuckart and an early appearance by Tom Hiddleston.
Greyhound is a curious film in that it flies in the face of one’s expectations. When I (and possibly others) see an advertisement or trailer for a World War II movie starring Tom Hanks, I naturally assume that the lead actor has been hired for his prodigious acting talent and that he’ll be providing an in depth character study. I was expecting Greyhound to be the story of an untested US Naval Commander enduring an ordeal by fire on his first escort mission. And that is to a degree what director Aaron Schneider provides but instead of the narrative arc focusing on Ernest Krause’s emotional struggles with his duties, we instead get a docudrama focusing on the technicalities of naval warfare. The latter approach is certainly engaging and at times tense and exciting but this decision narrows the appeal of the film. I personally would have preferred the former.
Big budget, historically driven movies that set out to recount key events of World War II are a rarity these days. If you ignore the bombastic inanities of Michael Bay’s Pearl Harbor (2001), then you have to go back to the late seventies to films such as A Bridge Too Far to find a suitable example. This is why Roland Emmerich’s Midway came as a genuine surprise. When I saw a trailer for the film last October, I was flummoxed that such a production had been made. My initial concerns were that it would focus on spectacle rather than historical fact and trivialise events of great military and historical importance. After having watched Midway, I am pleased to report that this is a surprising throwback in many ways. The film covers the events of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, the subsequent Doolittle Raids on Tokyo by the US and the Battle of Midway, both succinctly and accurately. Furthermore, much of the cast play real veterans who participated in these events. Overall this is an entertaining and informative movie that feels like a relic from fifty years ago. However, its docudrama aspirations also make for somewhat generic character development.
For the first ten minutes or so, World War II action horror movie Overlord ticks a lot of boxes. The film has a surprisingly high budget ($38,000,000) for a niche genre product and as a result has a handsome production design. The cinematography by Laurie Rose and Fabian Wagner is striking, capturing the beauty of the French countryside as well as framing the various unpleasantness in a suitably Teutonic fashion. The visual effects both digital and practical are also of a high calibre, further adding to the authentic atmosphere. Yet despite all these positive points, Overlord is a somewhat slow and underwhelming affair, running fifteen to twenty minutes too long. Like so many modern movies, the focus of the production is on spectacle, rather than on character and script. Hence Overlords fails to meet its potential and makes for a somewhat frustrating viewing experience due to it squandering such a good opportunity.
I have enjoyed Sniper Elite 4 and all of the sundry DLC immensely since its release in Spring. The game presents an interesting alternative to the traditional shooter with its stealth based level design. The latest instalment, Obliteration (the third part of an ongoing story), is set in an empty Bavarian town and has an intricate map with an authentic period feel. It offers opportunities for both long range sniping and close quarters stealth kills. Overall, I have found that the franchise provides engaging and complex gameplay, as well as satisfying the players baser need for blood and violence. However, playing this and other similar titles got me thinking. It would appear that World War II, one of the defining periods of the last century that still has ramifications today, is in certain quarters now simply a setting, a plot device or a Hitchcockian MacGuffin. Is the broader subtext of this major event now irrelevant to a generation of players because they have no immediate connection to this period in history? If that is the case, exactly when does it become acceptable for something of this magnitude, to be trivialised in this manner (if that is indeed the case).
Five Came Back is a fascinating documentary about five remarkable Hollywood film directors who put themselves in harm’s way to film World War II for the US War Department. William Wyler, Frank Capra, George Stevens, John Ford and John Huston were in many ways a diverse bunch, yet the all represented a different facet of “America”. Certainly, all were idealists who felt it was their duty to use their talents to create accessible propaganda for the US public and more importantly, the 12 million men who were drafted. Despite the factual accuracy of this three-part documentary, there is an inherent romance to the tale and the way these Hollywood mavericks took on first American Isolationism, then the Third Reich and US military politics.
Gritty, grim and fatalistic are just a few of the ways I would describe Play Dirty. Made at a time when cinema was becoming more realistic and cynical, it eschews the traditional depiction of World War II heroism and paints a singularly unglamorous picture. Due to some minor plot similarities, it is frequently compared to The Dirty Dozen but they are far from identical movies. Robert Aldrich’s film despite having an offbeat plot and a cast of quality characters actors still followed a traditional action based formula and had a relatively upbeat ending. Play Dirty is content to pursue its dour storyline to its inevitable conclusion.
The seventies were a Golden Age for cerebral documentaries with such outstanding examples as The Ascent of Man, Cosmos and Life on Earth. Such shows were content driven, relying heavily upon the quality of the script along with the charisma and gravitas of the presenter. Jacob Bronowski, Carl Sagan and David Attenborough were exemplars of this. Jeremy Isaac’s The World at War is another archetype of quality documentary film making from this decade.
Assassin’s Creed (2016)
On paper, a video games franchise such as Assassin’s Creed lends itself perfectly to a cinematic adaptation. The parkour action scenes, the historical settings and the contemporary conspiracy theory themes are all elements that should play well with a modern youth audience. Hence with the backing of a major studio such as Twentieth Century Fox and a budget of $125 million, the 2016 movie should have been a guaranteed box office hit. The casting of Michael Fassbender, an actor who is comfortable with serious roles and big Hollywood franchises, should have carried this film comfortably over the finishing line. Director Justin Kurzel, who had found critical success with his adaptation of MacBeth a year previously, must have looked like a safe pair of hands to handle such a project. Sadly, that was not the case. Assassin’s Creed is not the sum of its parts, in fact many elements appear to be pulling in opposite directions. The resulting feature film is staggeringly dull, soulless and a chore to watch. A testament to how modern big budget franchise movies have become a production line, with all the art stripped from them.
On paper, a video games franchise such as Assassin’s Creed lends itself perfectly to a cinematic adaptation. The parkour action scenes, the historical settings and the contemporary conspiracy theory themes are all elements that should play well with a modern youth audience. Hence with the backing of a major studio such as Twentieth Century Fox and a budget of $125 million, the 2016 movie should have been a guaranteed box office hit. The casting of Michael Fassbender, an actor who is comfortable with serious roles and big Hollywood franchises, should have carried this film comfortably over the finishing line. Director Justin Kurzel, who had found critical success with his adaptation of MacBeth a year previously, must have looked like a safe pair of hands to handle such a project. Sadly, that was not the case. Assassin’s Creed is not the sum of its parts, in fact many elements appear to be pulling in opposite directions. The resulting feature film is staggeringly dull, soulless and a chore to watch. A testament to how modern big budget franchise movies have become a production line, with all the art stripped from them.
Convicted murder, Callum Lynch (Michael Fassbender), is sentenced to death by lethal injection in a prison in Texas. He awakes from his execution to find himself very much alive and in a high tech research laboratory in Madrid, run by the Abstergo Foundation and its sinister CEO Alan Rikkin (Jeremy Irons). Dr. Sofia Rikkin (Marion Cotillard) explains to Cal that she wishes to access inherited memories hidden in his DNA, of his ancestor Aguilar de Nerha, who was a member of the Assassins Brotherhood in 15th Century Spain. Abstergo Industries is actually funded and controlled by the Templars, an ancient order that has been at war with the Assassins Brotherhood for centuries. They seek the Apple of Eden, an artefact that holds the code to humanity’s ability for free will, which they seek to control. Cal is placed in the Animus, a machine which allows him to relive (and the scientists to observe) Aguilar's genetic memories, so that Abstergo can learn what he did with the Apple. Aguilar was previously charged with protecting the artefact from Templar Grand Master Tomas de Torquemada.
Within minutes of the film’s opening sequence which is set in 1492 Andalusia, the muddy colour palette and swooping camera it becomes clear that Assassin’s Creed has been shot using all the visual styles and editing techniques that are currently in vogue. It is the sort of movie where all concerned are far more enamoured by the aesthetic they have created rather than presenting the audience with a coherent and engaging narrative. Naturally, the production design and visual effects are top draw as you would expect from a mainstream film with this sort of budget. Yet the entire movie is presented in a singularly unappealing fashion and unfolds in a ponderous manner. The colours are muted, the camera refuses to stay still, inducing a sense of motion sickness. The editing is so rapid it often renders the onscreen action incomprehensible and the imagery strikes hard upon the senses. It is also clear that the film has chosen this technique to mask and reduce the levels of violence, so it can maintain the desired PG-13 rating.
There are three writers credited with the screenplay for Assassin’s Creed. Michael Lesslie, Adam Cooper and Bill Collage. Yet despite their efforts the story is perfunctory and the central characters are utterly forgettable. Action movies never used to be like this. In 1981 Raiders of the Lost Ark featured a wealth of interesting, enjoyable characters and the screenplay was savvy, filled with knowing genre references and droll, hard boiled dialogue. There is none of that here and a cast of solid actors are saddled with the most arbitrary of expository dialogue. Brendon Gleason has a cameo as Michael Fassbender’s Father. The relatively short role is supposed to provide an emotional epiphany within the story and create a sense of pathos but it is devoid of any dramatic resonance. It simply serves as an expostionary scene to move the story on. As for the more philosophical aspects of the plot regarding free will and determinism, these are abandoned immediately after they are mentioned.
Assassin’s Creed offers several clear nods to its source material. The costume design, hidden blades, parkour and historical setting certainly tap into the vibe of the first two games. The realisation of the Animus is also creative. Yet irrespective of the money and talent that is involved in the production, the film is staggeringly unexciting. In many ways it is a textbook example of all the artistic failings of corporate film making these days. Too much of our popular entertainment, be it music, TV or film are generic and made to an established formula. 40 years ago summer blockbusters were not only commercially successful but artistically created with flair and panache. The homogenous nature of their modern counterparts robs them of any unique personality of their own. For example, Assassin’s Creed runs for nearly 2 hours and features a musical score by Jed Kurzel that is essentially forgettable. I still recall the impact that James Horner’s soundtrack for Krull (1983) had upon me when I first saw it and it remains a personal favourite all these years later
Assassin’s Creed made a total profit of $240,697,856 internationally. It nearly doubled its investment yet was deemed a box office failure by those that financed it. A similar mindset is prevalent in the video game industry. Expectations regarding profit are often ambitious to say the least. Considering how poor the final movie is, I suspect that the entire project was a litany of continuous interventions by focus groups and sub-committees. So in many ways the studios are the architects of their own problem. To those who have a serious interest in cinema and are curious to see an example of when a film inherently fails on all levels, I would recommend Assassin’s Creed as a point of study. Beyond this niche market analysis, I cannot think of any positive points for the benefit of the casual viewer. Avid fans of the games will more than likely be disappointed as there is no exploration of their themes beyond the very superficial. Perhaps the failure of Assassin’s Creed will at least encourage the industry to rethink its approach to such movies and the wider action genre.
Mainstream films are easy to recommend to people. They’re usually formulaic, work within clear parameters and they’re not controversial. Most people, when viewing such film on someone else’s suggestion, are left with a fairly simply choice. Did they like it or not? Whatever the outcome, no feathers are ruffled. No one looks at you askance afterwards and says “why the hell did you think I’d like that piece of shit”? If something like this happens, then you have clearly not recommended a mainstream film. Perhaps you’ve suggested something that’s a little more of an acquired taste. Something niche, from a very specific sub-genre. Which brings me neatly to Blazing Magnum AKA Strange Shadows in an Empty Room (1976). The US title gives the impression that this film is a hard boiled cop thriller, like so many others that followed in the wake of Dirty Harry. But there’s a clue in the European title. Yes, this movie has more than just a whiff of a giallo about it.
Jason Statham is an exemplar of the US mantra of “staying in your lane”. He makes action movies and occasionally strays into action comedies. His formula broadly works and is sufficiently lucrative to keep Mr. Statham employed. Therefore, if you watch a film in which he stars, you have a fairly good idea of what you’ll be getting. Of late, the criteria for his action vehicles have become more succinct. Jason Statham will play an innocuous character, such as a construction foreman or a bee keeper. Something terrible will subsequently befall another character who Mr. Statham has an emotional connection with in some capacity. He will subsequently hunt down those responsible and meet out death and violence. At some point the villain of the story will enquire as to how this innocuous person is so lethal. Research will then show that our Jason is in fact an ex-police officer/special forces operative/international assassin. There’s then a showdown and the villain dies. Job done.
The Light at the Edge of the World presented itself as an action movie upon its release in 1971. Based upon a story by Jules Verne, the Spanish American co-production was driven by its star Kirk Douglas, who curiously hired British director Kevin Billington to helm the project. This tale of a lighthouse keeper fighting a war of attrition against a group of pirates that have captured his island, was market as an adventure film ostensibly in the idiom of the authors previous works and as a pirate movie. MGM bought the rights to distribute the film in the UK on the misunderstanding that it was a family friendly production. It was not and remains so. They subsequently had to cut 15 minutes of violence and torture as well as an undercurrent of sexual assault to secure a suitable rating. Conversely, the US distributors received an arbitrary PG rating, despite the fact this is one of a handful of films that honestly depicts pirates as murderers, rapists and worse.
It’s an established action film trope. The fire team comprised of ex-military personnel, move in on their target. Only to have the tables turned by someone they don’t deem a threat. What makes it different in The Last Stand of Ellen Cole is a throwaway line of dialogue. The bested operative lies bleeding on the floor and the protagonists stands over them ready to finish them off. “Don’t, I have a cat” they feebly plead. For me that was the icing on the cake. The movie had already established it was taking the “same old, same old” and doing something different. Something fun, if taken in the right spirit. This scene tipped the balance and I embraced this film because it was being honest about what it is. This is a modern B movie that decides to give a very specific sub-genre a makeover. Furthermore, its clearly done with an affectionate wink, which is very different to sly wink. This isn’t deliberate self-knowing irony. Its just a film doing something different and possibly silly but it genuinely wants to have fun with it.
Stephen King’s dystopian story, The Running Man, was previously adapted very loosely in 1987, as a vehicle for Arnold Schwarzenegger. That version focused mainly on the “Battle Royale” element of the story and leaned heavily into Arnie’s personality, rather than the politics of the book. It also wasn’t well received by the author. Edgar Wright’s remake follows the source text a lot more closely and is far more interested in its political themes and wider social commentary. Furthermore, this version re-establishes the everyman quality of the hero of Ben Richards, rather than him being the muscle bound, ex-military hero as per Mr. Schwarzenegger’s prior interpretation. This time round, The Running Man uses a lot of the visual and narrative tropes of contemporary reality TV, making this forty three year old story very relevant to today’s viewers and couching the film in a style that is recognisable and accessible.
After the success of Raiders of the Lost Ark in 1981, filmmakers scrambled to find existing intellectual properties that they could use for similar films. Hence archaic heroes such as Alan Quatermain were hastily given a modern makeover and thrust into generic movies, in a vague attempt to replicate Steven Spielberg’s successful formula. Which brings us neatly on to James Charles Bigglesworth AKA “Biggles”, a fictional pilot and adventurer from a series of books written by W. E. Johns between 1932 and 1968. Several attempts had been made in the past to bring this character to the silver screen, including one by Disney but they all failed. However, the commercial and critical success of Indiana Jones provided sufficient impetus to greenlight a new film. However, due to some curious production choices, when Biggles was finally released it was far from just a period set, action movie.
Setting aside the hubris of remaking a film such as Red Dawn, the 2012 reboot had a troubled production. Shot over the course of late 2009, on location in Michigan, MGM intended to release the film in September 2010. However, the studio’s financial problems became unsustainable over the course of that year and the film was shelved, while a financial solution was sought. Furthermore, while Red Dawn was in post production, there was a major economic shift within Hollywood due to the increasing importance of the Chinese market. This was a significant problem for MGM because the new version of Red Dawn had the Chinese invading the USA instead of Russia. Hence there were reshoots and the need for additional visual effects, so that the Chinese could be replaced with North Koreans. MGM eventually went bankrupt and the distribution rights to Red Dawn were sold off. The film was eventually released in 2012.
When I first saw the promotional trailer for Gangster Squad back in 2012, prior to its release, I wasn't especially impressed. I simply thought the film was another attempt to re-invent the gangster genre for a generation who were not especially familiar with it. I wasn't exactly overwhelmed with director Ruben Fleischer's resume either. I didn't particularly like Zombieland and haven't seen 30 Minutes Or Less. Then came the tragic mass shootings in Aurora, Colorado which led to the movie being delayed so that the original ending, which featured a shoot-out in a movie theatre, could be replaced. Hence when I finally watched this film recently, I wasn't expecting a movie up to the standards of say Once Upon A Time In America or Miller’s Crossing and it would seem that I was right do so. Gangster Squad is not especially noteworthy in any respect.
Levon Cade (Jason Staham) is a former Royal Marine Commando who has retired from military service and now works as the leader of a construction team in Chicago. He has a close relationship with Joe and Carla Garcia (Michael Peña and Noemi Gonzalez ) who run the company and considers them as family. Outside of work, Levon is involved in a bitter custody battle for his daughter, against her maternal grandfather, who blames Levon for his daughter’s suicide. When Garcia's teenage daughter Jenny (Arianna Rivas) goes missing, Levon reluctantly agrees to help her parents and get her back. Beginning his search at the nightclub where Jenny was last seen, he soon discovers that she was abducted by Russian traffickers. Furthermore, the culprit is Dimi Kolisnyk (Maximilian Osinski), the wayward son of a senior ranking gangster.
PC Nicholas Angel (Simon Pegg) is an exemplary Police Officer, with a strict adherence to the letter of the law. As a result of making the rest of the London Metropolitan Police look bad, he is transferred to the rural town of Sandford, Gloucestershire. On arrival, Angel finds that the local Inspector, Frank Butterman (Jim Broadbent), takes a far more laissez-faire approach to policing. His colleagues are incompetent and he is further hampered by the Neighbourhood Watch Alliance (NWA), who prioritise low crime statistics over law enforcement due to their desire to win the title of “Village of the Year”. Furthermore, Angel is partnered with the Inspector’s son, Constable Danny Butterman (Nick Frost), who is infatuated with “buddy cop” movies and is in awe of Angel’s London experience. “Have you ever fired two guns while jumping through the air?” However, a sudden spate of grisly accidents lead Angel to believe that there's more to the seemingly tranquil and picture-perfect community than meets the eye.
As a collection of history's worst tyrants and criminal masterminds gather to plot a war to wipe out millions, one man must race against time to stop them. Discover the origins of the very first independent intelligence agency in The King's Man. Based on the Comic Book “The Secret Service” by Mark Millar and Dave Gibbons. 20th Century Studios
Matthew Vaughn’s The King’s Man is an inconsistent film, both narratively and tonally. It veers between serious themes and stylised, hyperbolic action. At times it does quite a good job of exploring such complex subjects as global politics, mechanised warfare and colonialism. Sadly it then wrenches the viewer out of these cerebral reveries as it lapses into the sort of over the top action sequences that were notable in the two earlier films. It’s a shame because The King’s Man gets so many other aspects of the production right. The casting is very interesting, especially Ralph Fiennes as the “pacifist” Duke of Oxford. He is actually a very good fit for the action genre. Djimon Hounsou and Gemma Arterton are given little backstory beyond being respectively the faithful manservant and the family nanny but both are notable due to their own inherent acting chops and personal charisma. Rhys Ifans obviously has a great time as Grigori Rasputin, ensuring all the man’s vices are robustly depicted.
On paper, a video games franchise such as Assassin’s Creed lends itself perfectly to a cinematic adaptation. The parkour action scenes, the historical settings and the contemporary conspiracy theory themes are all elements that should play well with a modern youth audience. Hence with the backing of a major studio such as Twentieth Century Fox and a budget of $125 million, the 2016 movie should have been a guaranteed box office hit. The casting of Michael Fassbender, an actor who is comfortable with serious roles and big Hollywood franchises, should have carried this film comfortably over the finishing line. Director Justin Kurzel, who had found critical success with his adaptation of MacBeth a year previously, must have looked like a safe pair of hands to handle such a project. Sadly, that was not the case. Assassin’s Creed is not the sum of its parts, in fact many elements appear to be pulling in opposite directions. The resulting feature film is staggeringly dull, soulless and a chore to watch. A testament to how modern big budget franchise movies have become a production line, with all the art stripped from them.
300: Rise of an Empire is a curious beast, being neither a sequel nor a prequel. It is infact a tale that takes place simultaneously with those of the original movie. While Gerard Butler is busy making a last stand at the Battle of Thermopylae, fellow warrior and politician Themistokles, played by the singularly uncharismatic Sullivan Stapleton, leads a similar army of buffed Greeks against the Persian fleet. Once again we have a movie that is the epitome of style over substance, complete with a sound design that challenges what can physically be endured by human hearing. They say the first casualty of war is innocence but in this type of movie it's closely followed by historical accuracy and authentic depictions of ethnicity. 300: Rise of an Empire is a cinematic assault upon the senses but not in a good way like Mad Max: Fury Road.
Back in September 2017, Liam Neeson stated in an interview with Sky News that he was retiring from the action genre, due to his age. He felt that audiences would question his credibility in such roles. After the release of The Commuter (2018) and Cold Pursuit (2019) Mr Neeson appeared to return to human dramas and films that focus on performance rather than punching man and beast. Ordinary Love and Made in Italy, both released in 2019, demonstrate the actor’s versatility and skill. People seem to forget that he is a thespian who was initially known for his character driven roles in films such as The Mission (1986), Rob Roy (1995 and Michael Collins (1996). It was only in 2008 that he reinvented himself as an action hero. It’s all a far cry from Schindler’s List and his performance that earned him an academy award nomination. The reason I mention all of this is because The Ice Road is the third action movie I’ve seen in 2021 that stars Liam Neeson.
One of the stand out tropes of the modern action film is that the stakes are always cranked right up to 11. Terrorists, biological weapons and nuclear bombs are common threats in such movies with a hero or heroes trying to save the world from death and destruction or worse. However, back in the sixties and seventies, things were a little more straight forward and in some respects more credible. Take When Eight Bells Toll, released in 1971, for example. British Treasury secret agent Phillip Calvert investigates the theft of £8,000,000 in gold bullion by a gang of international smugglers. In the context of the times this was no small beer however it’s somewhat mundane compared to fighting super villains and their space lasers. Frankly I prefer these low key plot devices as they can make a film a little more plausible within the confines of the genre. A concept that is often forgotten today.
Forensic accountant Owen Casserly (Jake Weber) flees his home with his teenage son Connor (Finn Little) when he discovers he has been targeted by a pair of assassins (Nicholas Hoult and Aidan Gillen) who have been hired to stop him giving evidence in a major corruption case. Connor witnesses the murder of his father after their car is run off the road. Entrusted with important written evidence, he escapes into the dense forests of the Montana wilderness pursued by the killers. Seeking help he runs into smokejumper Hannah Faber (Angelina Jolie) who is stationed at a remote fire lookout tower. Hannah suffers from PTSD from a previous forest fire in which she was unable to save three young boys. Hannah attempts to lead Connor through the forest to safety. Meanwhile the assassins set fire to the forest to divert the attention of the authorities and cover their tracks.
I must admit that I did not have particularly high hopes for Paul W S Anderson's remake of the 1975 Roger Corman produced cult classic. Anderson’s work varies greatly. Event Horizon and Soldier are solid genre films but I still have not fully come to terms with Alien vs. Predator. Jason Statham is also a name that divides the public, with solid material such as The Transporter and unfathomable tosh like Revolver. But despite these considerations, Death Race is in fact quite a surprise and does not follow the path that so many remakes do. It takes the basic themes and concept associated with the original and tries to do something different with them. It doesn’t reinvent the wheel nor is it a genre milestone. But it does offer a different spin on things, have some engaging action scenes and provide some dumb but enjoyable entertainment. When combined with snacks and some beer this is a passable way to kill 111 minutes.
I did not watch Zero Dark Thirty upon its initial release, due to the politics surrounding it. I wanted to be able to view it free from bipartisan debate. Eight years on I believe this now achievable and although debate still exists it is now more measured and less strident. Zero Dark Thirty is certainly a compelling movie. It plays as a docudrama, providing an in-depth study of the US intelligence services hunt for Osama Bin Laden. It cannot be faulted on a technical level and the performances are very strong. It does not adopt a celebratory or triumphalist tone in its approach to the story. Director Kathryn Bigelow endeavours to keep the proceedings focused upon the intricacies of an intelligence driven manhunt. There is little or no tubthumping, jingoism. The decision to find Bin Laden is shown as a political and military exercise of foreign policy. The film solely focuses on the story from a US perspective but that is perfectly acceptable as it is not intended to be an exploration of geo-politics.
Firestorm was originally written as a vehicle for Sylvester Stallone, however when the production company Savoy Pictures went bankrupt the screenplay was bought by Twentieth Fox and the scope of the movie reduced to suit a lower budget. It’s broadly similar to Cliffhanger in so far as the lead character is a specialist in a certain field who runs afoul of criminals in a perilous environment. Whereas Cliffhanger is set in the Rocky Mountains, Firestorm takes place in the forests of Northern Wyoming. After the script was revised four times, the finished screenplay was given a final “polish” by Graham Yost who has considerable experience with the action movie genre. As stallone was no longer associated with the project and the production had been repurposed to be less extravagant, the movie was assigned to former NFL star Howie Long. Long had already appeared in the John Woo movie Broken Arrow (1996) and the Firestorm was seen as a means to give him a star vehicle.
The original French movies District 13 and its sequel District 13: Ultimatum, conceived and produced by Luc Besson, were enjoyable variations of the Escape from New York theme. Their charm lay in their European pedigree and the skilful use of parkour. The two leads, David Belle and Cyril Raffaelli, were eminently suited to the minimalist roles and the screenplays were fun. Half of these movies appeal was the fact that they were not mainstream US products. Brick Mansions is the Hollywood remake of District 13, as well as being Paul Walkers’ final movie. Sadly, this film is far from a fitting epitaph, being devoid of any charisma or innovations. It is blandly shot , poorly edited and has been stripped of everything that made the original entertaining.
Arnold Schwarzenegger's return to the big screen after his political career has been uneven to say the least. His cameos in The Expendables and The Expendables 2 were well received, with their self referential charm and age related irony. Yet his first major movie The Last Stand, although competent, failed to find an audience. Escape Plan fared better at the box office but did not put Arnie back on the A list. Effectively there's a large percentage of the contemporary cinematic audience who were born after his heyday and are simply not overt fans of his work. His core audience is more than likely of the age group that consume most of their film entertainment at home. Which may explain why Sabotage tanked in the US upon release on March 28th 2014. It was the worst opening box office of Arnie's career. He used to break first day opening records.
Sequels and reboots are hardly a new concept and have been a part of Hollywood culture since the 1930s. The success of the Universal Horror movies from that era being a prime example of direct follow ups and retconned movies. However, there is one fundamental rule that distinguishes a good sequel from a bad one. You should never mitigate, undermine or make irrelevant the events of the previous movie, just to provide your new film with a raison d'être. For example, the events of Aliens do not contradict or trivialise those that happened in Alien. In fact with that franchise there is a very clear logical progression between the two movies. The same is true for Mad Max and Mad Max 2 or Star Wars and The Empire Strikes Back. The key is to progress a story, enhance it or explore things from an alternative angle and bring something new to the cinematic table. Sadly this philosophy is all too often lost on corporate film making. Which means that many sequels are just tedious replays of prior films. Terminator: Dark Fate falls squarely into this category.
The enduring appeal of the character John Rambo in First Blood comes from the fact that he is a traumatised ex- service man who keeps himself to himself as he drifts from job to job, trying to come to terms with his wartime experiences. His poor treatment at the hands of a small-town Sheriff is a succinct metaphor for the social and political indifference that Vietnam veterans were shown upon their return to the US. He’s a man with a code in a world that no longer has any use for him. His simple and honest patriotism is not returned and he is in fact viewed with shame by many from the nation he loves. Furthermore, the first movie does not paint him as a cold-blooded killer. Despite provocation he is not the first person to shoot to kill. Rambo is in many ways a victim. A broken man, who society has asked to do unspeakable things. Now society wants nothing to do with him and fears the “monster” they created. Although clearly an action movie, First Blood had narrative depth and a flawed but sympathetic protagonist. 37 years and four movies later, such dramatic themes have long left the franchise. The central character is indeed a caricature of its former self.
It was hardly surprising that the movie adaptation of Chris Kyle's autobiography American Sniper, would cause controversy. The Iraq war, US Foreign Policy and national pride are seldom subjects that are discussed in a calm and measured fashion. And then there are the personal politics of director Clint Eastwood to consider. Hence there were claims from some quarters upon the movie’s release, that it was Islamophobic and counter claims that criticisms of the late Chris Kyle were unpatriotic. There still remain issues regarding the authenticity of events depicted in the source text and subsequently the movies screenplay by Jason Hall. Yet none of these factors have in anyway impacted upon the film's box office returns which currently stands at $247,900,417 worldwide.
Do I really need to present you with some sort of plot synopsis for Transporter 3? No, I didn’t think so. More of the same as Frank Martin (Jason Statham) and his police chum, Inspector Tarconi (Francois Berleand) become embroiled in yet another high-octane escapade. There's fights, car stunts, exotic international locations and a strong sense of humour. This time, the disposable love interest is a Ukrainian girl named Valentina (Natalya Rudakova) who fulfils her role succinctly. The film benefits by being set back in Europe, after the mistake of basing Transporter 2 in the US. This time, the story takes us to such locations as Budapest and Odessa. The international film crew once again bring a veneer of panache to the production that is conspicuously absent in US action movies. For a modest budget fil, Transporter 3 it looks very good. Again the proceedings are given a boost by a pertinent soundtrack by Alexandre Azaria and a selection of European “tunes”.
Jason Bourne originally graced our screens for the first time seventeen years ago. The Bourne Identity was a gritty, minimalist take on the espionage genre and a welcome change from the excesses of the Pierce Brosnan Bond era. The story arc was sustained over three movies and ended efficiently and succinctly. After which Matt Damon moved on, as did the director of two of the movies, Paul Greengrass. Which leaves us with The Bourne Legacy; the tangential sequel that arrived in 2012. A film that exists because the money men and bean counters hate to pass up on a franchise until it has been squeezed utterly dry. Hence, they commissioned the writer of the series, Tony Gilroy, to come up with a screenplay and direct a spinoff movie. Jeremy Renner was cast in the lead role. Yet despite narrative and production continuity, The Bourne Legacy was not a Jason Bourne movie with the star appeal of Matt Damon. Although the film turned a profit, it had the lowest box office returns out of the entire franchise.
During the eighties there was a clear league table of action movie stars. By the mid-nineties this system fell into decline and the Hollywood lacked any clearly defined exponents of the genre. A decade later, due to the success of Luc Besson’s Transporter films, Jason Statham became a bankable box office star in this field. When you look at Statham's early work in Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels it is hard to envisage the "mockney geezer" as an international action star. Yet he has successfully stepped into the role and enjoys a large following. I enjoy his work as he has a likeable on-screen persona. My 88-year-old Mum likes him to because "he wears nice suits". The action genre seldom reaches such a diverse demographic.
Before we start, I recollect that one well known UK critic described Safe House as sub-Tony Scott, upon its release. Now I’ve always been conflicted over Scott’s back catalogue, as I’ve always found his movies to be hampered by their own unique style. The subtleties of his characters and depth of his themes are all too often drowned out by his frenetic style and fast paced editing. Therefore a comment such as this really sets off alarm bells for me. Having recently watched The Equalizer 2, I wanted a further fix of Denzel Washington in a similar action vehicle. As Safe House was available on Netflix UK, I decided to kill a couple of hours and see what actually constitutes as “sub-Tony Scott”.
The Sparks Brothers (2021)
The music business is a strange, interesting and broad church. A spectrum of musical styles and personalities all fulfilling the needs of different markets. There are pop stars who are buoyant but ephemeral. Then there are singer/songwriters who take their work seriously as they express their critique of the human condition via their music. There are also style icons, novelty acts, indie bands, lounge crooners and a myriad of other niche acts, all doing their own thing. And occasionally there are enigmas. Artists and bands that fly in the face of prevailing trends and commercial interest, who do consider their work to be an artistic endeavour and an expression of themselves and as such, do not see the virtue of personal compromise or corporate interests. Esoteric musicians who reinvent themselves continuously as they grow and age. Constantly defying the expectations of both their own fans and naysayers. Sparks are such a musical entity and the subject of a fascinating documentary by director Edgar Wright.
The music business is a strange, interesting and broad church. A spectrum of musical styles and personalities all fulfilling the needs of different markets. There are pop stars who are buoyant but ephemeral. Then there are singer/songwriters who take their work seriously as they express their critique of the human condition via their music. There are also style icons, novelty acts, indie bands, lounge crooners and a myriad of other niche acts, all doing their own thing. And occasionally there are enigmas. Artists and bands that fly in the face of prevailing trends and commercial interest, who do consider their work to be an artistic endeavour and an expression of themselves and as such, do not see the virtue of personal compromise or corporate interests. Esoteric musicians who reinvent themselves continuously as they grow and age. Constantly defying the expectations of both their own fans and naysayers. Sparks are such a musical entity and the subject of a fascinating documentary by director Edgar Wright.
Sparks, created by brothers Ron and Russell Mael, are musical chameleons. During the course of their five decade long career they have flirted with rock, synth pop and the art song but always in their own unique and idiosyncratic way. They’re the very definition of a cult band who have often charted a course parallel to that of mainstream music. Yet their influence is far reaching as they very much appear to be “your favourite band’s favourite band”. The Sparks Brothers attempts to explore all these things in an energetic and surprisingly droll fashion. Director Edgar Wright, explains their appeal in part by emphasizing its essential nebulous and arcane nature. The documentary follows a simple chronological path from the brothers early life and first forays into music then continues to delineate their seminal albums and changes of musical direction over the ensuing years. Ron and Russell are clearly intelligent, talented and conscious of their own enigma. They are also very witty and personable. There are no divas here, just hardworking disciplined artists, intent on doing their thing.
Sparks’s public image is clearly defined and is possibly one of few constants about the duo. It is also one of contrasts. Vocalist Russell’s athletic physique, flowing locks and matinee-idol looks are contrasted by brother Ron and his gangrel deportment, deadpan countenance and Brilliantined hair. He has always sported a moustache that is somewhere between that of Charlie Chaplin and Adolf Hitler. Russell’s falsetto voice and energetic on stage antics are further offset by Ron’s static performance as he sits at his keyboard exuding a miasma of curious strangeness. During the course of their career the brothers have made genuinely creative videos and their stage shows have bordered on performance art. Hence they have an appeal that reaches across musical genres and sexual demographics. All while singing about Sherlock Holmes, breasts and other eclectic subjects. Over the years their music has featured rock guitar riffs, synth arpeggios and infuriatingly catchy baroque song structures that draw upon classical composers such as Bach and Beethoven.
One of the most interesting aspects of The Sparks Brothers is the way the guest talking heads try to assess them and express their befuddlement at trying to pin them down. Nick Heyward candidly states “I thought they didn’t really exist” after he saw them in the flesh, out and about. Jonathan Ross describes their uniqueness and how they eschewed the traditional band image. “They look like people who’ve been sort of let out for a day”. Franz Ferdinand lead singer, Alex Kapranos, touches upon a commonly held misconception about the band “I always thought Sparks were a British Band” mainly because it seemed unlikely that the US could spawn an act so eccentric. The Sparks Brothers successfully sheds some light on the duo, who despite their European sound and anglophile nature were raised in California. Russell was surprisingly a high-school quarterback. Their father, an artist, seems to have had a major influence upon the brothers instilling a love of music, cinema and art. He tragically died when Ron was 11 and Russell 8.
Edgar Wright, the director of quirky and intelligent films such as Shaun of the Dead and Baby Driver is eminently suited to document and dissect a band such as Sparks. In many ways they are kindred spirits and therefore both have a strong understanding of each other. Wright also has a proven track record of understanding music as he has used it so intelligently in his body of work. He manages to look beyond the band’s eccentric schtick and gets some very honest opinions out of them. They’re surprisingly unpretentious despite their somewhat esoteric body of work. They just think that music is more than just a disposable commodity and it is frankly very refreshing the way they constantly strive to do something different. They certainly do not seem to be disposed toward resting upon their laurels or retiring anytime soon.
The Sparks Brothers may be a little long for the casual viewer. Some may tire of the celebrity endorsements and find it a little borderline “lovies, darlings” but I would counter that with the relevance of being recognised and admired by your peers, rather than mainstream media. I deem one to be more significant and genuine than the other. The documentary references many of their best songs and I was surprised at how many I was directly or subconsciously familiar with. I even bought a 3 CD “best of” boxset as a result. Even if you’re not completely sold on the Mael brother’s brand of music, I can wholeheartedly recommend the documentary just as a study on genuine creativity and artistic integrity. Both are rare commodities these days. And for your edification, here is the song Something for the Girl With Everything which is pretty much Sparks in a nutshell. The tune is catchy but unusual and the lyrics are a psychologist's dream.
Something for the girl with everything
See, the writing's on the wall
You bought the girl a wall
Complete with matching ball-point pen
You can breathe another day
Secure in knowing she won't break you (yet)
Something for the girl with everything
Have another sweet my dear
Don't try to talk my dear
Your tiny little mouth is full
Here's a flavour you ain't tried
You shouldn't try to talk, your mouth is full
Something for the girl with everything
Three wise men are here
Three wise men are here
Bearing gifts to aid amnesia
She knows everything
She knows everything
She knew you way back when you weren't yourself
Here's a really pretty car
I hope it takes you far
I hope it takes you fast and far
Wow, the engine's really loud
Nobody's gonna hear a thing you say
Something for the girl with everything
Three wise men are here
Three wise men are here
Where should they leave these imported gimmicks
Leave them anywhere, leave them anywhere
Make sure that there's a clear path to the door
Something for the girl with everything
Something for the girl with everything
Something for the girl with everything
Something for the girl with everything
Three wise men are here
Three wise men are here
Three wise men are here
Three wise men are here
Here's a partridge in a tree
A gardener for the tree
Complete with ornithologist
Careful, careful with that crate
You wouldn't want to dent Sinatra, no
Something for the girl who has got everything,
Yes everything
Hey, come out and say hello
Before our friends all go
But say no more than just hello
Ah, the little girl is shy
You see of late she's been quite speechless, very speechless
She's got everything
Music by John Williams is a documentary celebration of the famous composer and his illustrious body of work. It provides some interesting biographical background information as to how the man was born into a family of talented musicians. It then traces his rise from pianist for hire to the most well known film composer today. Along the way, anyone who is anyone in film and music appears to heap justifiable praise upon him and his body of work. It also features a continuous medley of John Williams’ greatest hits, as it catalogues his work in broadly chronological order. Music by John Williams is an upbeat and positive love letter to the composer and exactly what you would expect, when you consider that the documentary was produced by his friends and peers.
Despite being an analysis of the past there is a portentous air about Ken Burns and Lynn Novick’s Prohibition. A fascinating five-and-a-half-hour documentary produced for PBS in 2011. The history of this disastrous experiment, the banning of alcoholic beverages, is a textbook example of how the transactional nature of US politics can be effectively used upon “wedge” issues. Prohibition follows the format and style of Burns previous documentaries such as the Civil War (1990) and The War (2007) with the wider subject broken down and analysed according to protagonists, events and the political background. Specific historical figures and key players are followed throughout the documentary’s narrative, giving viewers a sense of focus. Hence we meet the hatchet-wielding Carrie Nation, Wayne Wheeler from the Anti-Saloon League and media savvy gangsters like Al Capone. It is interesting to note that some themes continue from Burns’ previous work, such as the political and cultural conflict between native-born Americans and European immigrants. The rural heartlands versus the big cities.
Joel Allen Schroeder's documentary Dear Mr. Watterson is a curious beast insofar that it takes some time before it decides exactly what it wants to focus upon. It begins by examining the cultural impact of the hugely popular comic strip “Calvin & Hobbes” and what it means to people around the world. However, little information is given about the creator, Bill Watterson beyond a very simple biography. Joel Allen Schroeder’s also makes no attempt to contact and interview the reclusive Mr. Watterson to find out more about the man and his iconic work. Instead, the documentary eventually settles into an assessment of Watterson’s work by other industry luminaries and a broader accounting of the overall decline of the newspaper cartoon as a social institution. The presentation is bright, stylish and there’s a lot of love for the subject but it takes some time before it commits to a specific approach.
“Kurt Vonnegut: Unstuck in Time” is a sprawling, non-linear eulogy to the to the life of writer Kurt Vonnegut, by Emmy-winning director Robert B. Weide (“Curb Your Enthusiasm”), who was a friend of Vonnegut's throughout the last 25 years of his life. Weide himself features heavily throughout the two hour running time, which is something Weide says he usually hates in documentaries. However, what unfolds is a story of a documentary maker who wanted to film his idol and was granted an opportunity to do so in the early eighties. The project was never completed and both Weide and Vonnegut continuously returned to it over the years as their friendship grew, leading to Weide eventually becoming Vonnegut’s personal archivist. However, despite this curious relationship, this is still very much a film about Kurt Vonnegut, the author, the social commentator and the man. It becomes quite clear why he is considered one of the most important writers of the 20th century.
Benjamin Franklin is in many ways the most interesting of the American Founding Fathers. A self taught man who went on to become a polymath. An inventor, accomplished writer and publisher. A diplomat who successfully held multiple public offices. A loyalist who went on to become a “reluctant revolutionary”. A slave owner who eventually became an abolitionist. A questionable parent who favoured specific children over others, as well as a negligent husband. Franklin was all these things, as Ken Burns’ documentary takes great pains to highlight. A broad cross section of historians tackle these foibles and contradictions from multiple perspectives. As Joseph J. Ellis states, Benjamin Franklin was “a Nobel-calibre scientist, the greatest prose stylist of his generation, and probably the greatest diplomat in American history”. His legacy is chronologically analysed over four hours in two distinct episodes.
Giuseppe Tornatore’s sprawling documentary Ennio, is a finely detailed and absorbing exploration of prolific and iconic Italian composer Ennio Morricone. Despite its very traditional approach to its subject matter, looking at Morricone’s career chronologically, intercut with celebrity talking heads, it still manages to convey the unorthodox, innovative and experimental nature of the composer. The 156 minute running time is not necessarily the impediment that one expects. Rather it is the sheer weight of the emotional impact that comes from Morricone’s music that is at times overwhelming. Archival footage and a new and comprehensive interview recorded just prior to the composer’s death in 2020 is intercut with a wealth of audio cues and concert footage from a broad cross section of his work. The result is most illuminating with regard to the man and his approach to composing. The conclusion backed by many of those interviewed is that Ennio Morricone has shaped the nature of film music and elevated it to an artform.
Gerry Anderson: A Life Uncharted is a documentary that focuses specifically on the man, rather than the shows that he created. If you are more interested in the latter then you would be better off watching Filmed in Supermarionation (2014), which provides a comprehensive overview of all productions, wrapped in a cosy blanket of nostalgia and fandom. Gerry Anderson: A Life Uncharted offers a more challenging viewing experience due to its honesty and candour. Gerry Anderson had a difficult childhood and suffered a bereavement early in life. During the course of this 88 minute exploration of his life it becomes clear that these traumas both drove his creativity as well as marred his own personal life. Furthermore, this documentary is also about a son looking for answers, as Jamie Anderson attempts to learn more about his father’s past.
Star Trek documentaries are very much like Bruce Lee documentaries, in so far as they’re both a saturated market and more often than not, new content frequently ends up covering the same ground. However, fans tend to watch anything new in the hope that they will find a few new nuggets of information. Brian Volk-Weiss’ new 11 part series, The Center Seat: 55 years of Star Trek, not only covers established facts about the iconic show but also expands upon them as well as providing a wealth of new information. Volk-Weiss has previously explored popular culture with documentaries such as The Toys That Made Us and The Movies That Made Us. The Center Seat: 55 years of Star Trek is an in-depth chronological study of the Star Trek franchise, from its creation at Desilu Productions in 1965 all the way through to the latest iterations, Star Trek: Picard and Star Trek: Discovery.
Shatner in Space is a 45 minute documentary about the 90 year old actor, William Shatner and his recent foray into space via Jeff Bezos’ Blue Origin sub-orbital spaceflight service. Considering the provenance of this entire undertaking, attitudes in general towards billionaires and the obvious publicity seeking hubris of sending a cultural icon into space, it’s easy to dismiss Shatner in Space as nothing more than a very, very expensive infomercial. However, the quiet dignity of Mr Shatner whose age and experience means that he draws a very different conclusion from his space flight than his fellow passengers, is utterly compelling and possibly a little profound. If you can endure the soulless polish of the scenes with an immaculately staged managed Jeff Bezos, then you’ll be rewarded with the philosophical musings of a man approaching the end of his life who is naturally curious about his own mortality.
I am not a fan of conspiracy theories, nor those who are heavily invested in them. There are many reasons to repudiate such ideas but for me the main one is just a simple observation on human nature. Any major conspiracy, plot or cover up requires large swaths of people to participate and remain quiet about the facts. Yet one of the most common attributes of the human condition is peoples total inability to shut up. Simply put, most conspiracy theories don’t hold water because someone would have blabbed. Hence, documentaries about how the moon landings were faked or how 9/11 was an “inside job” tend not to “butter any parsnips” with me. However, JFK Revisited: Through the Looking Glass is a surprisingly different beast. I was surprised by its measured approach and its inferred conclusion. Has old age mellowed the filmmaker Oliver Stone?
Television programmes that deal with the so-called supernatural, mysterious and the unexplained are commonplace these days. They fill the schedules of channels that used to broadcast quality wildlife, historical and scientific documentaries. All too often these shows focus on the sensational nature of their subject matter and lack any real objectivity, analysis and scientific rigour. The idea is not to impartially explore a subject to determine its veracity but to simply provide a degree of spectacle for as broad a viewing demographic as possible. However, that was not always the case. Back in 1980, Yorkshire Television produced Arthur C. Clarke's Mysterious World. A high profile exploration thirteen-part British television series looking at unexplained phenomena from around the world. The presence of Clarke, who introduced and book-ended the various subjects the show explored, brought a degree of impartiality and credibility to the proceedings.
Over the years I have seen many documentaries about World War II. Although I do not claim in any way to be an expert, I believe I have a good grasp on the causes and the course of that six year conflict. However, it recently struck me that I could not say the same about World War I. In my youth I watched a repeat showing of the BBC documentary series The Great War (1964) but I remember very little of its prodigious 26 episodes. The one thing that stood out were the interviews with veterans. So I was very pleased when perusing BritBox over the weekend to find the 2003 documentary The First World War, based upon the book of the same name by Professor Hew Strachan. This ten part analysis takes a global view of the conflict, rather than excessively focusing upon the Western Front and also debunks a lot of the apocryphal ideas and notions that have persisted over the years. I found it so compelling that I binged watched the entire thing over two evenings.
The music business is a strange, interesting and broad church. A spectrum of musical styles and personalities all fulfilling the needs of different markets. There are pop stars who are buoyant but ephemeral. Then there are singer/songwriters who take their work seriously as they express their critique of the human condition via their music. There are also style icons, novelty acts, indie bands, lounge crooners and a myriad of other niche acts, all doing their own thing. And occasionally there are enigmas. Artists and bands that fly in the face of prevailing trends and commercial interest, who do consider their work to be an artistic endeavour and an expression of themselves and as such, do not see the virtue of personal compromise or corporate interests. Esoteric musicians who reinvent themselves continuously as they grow and age. Constantly defying the expectations of both their own fans and naysayers. Sparks are such a musical entity and the subject of a fascinating documentary by director Edgar Wright.
Carl Sagan's seminal science documentary Cosmos: A Personal Voyage was initially broadcast in the US between 28th September and 21st December 1980. Six months later it was shown in the UK on BBC One throughout the summer of 1981. I was thirteen years old at the time and this science documentary series had a tremendous impact upon not only me but an entire generation. The complexity of some of the subjects explored and discussed by Carl Sagan often left me perplexed. However, I knew that there was something special about this show and the way it presented science in such a personal manner. Therefore, I found myself going to both my local and school library to further read about the topics raised in each episode. But perhaps the most standout aspect of the show was Sagan himself. His commentary delivered directly to the camera was both enthralling and lyrical. His love and enthusiasm was palpable and clearly bled through into every aspect of the show. His ability to communicate clearly, complex and at times esoteric ideas, was a revelation and in many ways a gift. Similar to that of Jacob Bronowski and David Attenborough.
There was a time when film making was seen as an artistic endeavour and the idea of the auteur director pursuing a vision was considered a romantic and even noble undertaking. Big multi-million-dollar productions were welcomed when they filmed on location, providing work and glamour to the local population. The might of the dollar would often grease the wheels of industry, making the impossible possible. Egos were massaged, and actors were indulged and treated like minor deities. Huge sets would appear in the middle of nowhere, like Victorian follies and luxury items would be flown around the world to placate the capricious nature of the various Hollywood stars. Money would flow like water, much to the dismay of the producers, sitting back in the offices in the US or Europe. But this era has now past. Big budget movies are still made but it is now driven by corporate accounting and artistic vision is no longer a primary consideration. It is now a rather soulless business process. Hence a movie such as Apocalypse Now would never be made today in the same manner that it was back in 1976 when the production started.
MR James: Ghost Writer is a sixty-minute documentary written and presented by Mark Gatiss, exploring the life of Britain's foremost ghost story writer. Gatiss, a long-time admirer of James, delves in to the life of the author from his devout Anglican upbringing and close-knit family life, through to his ascent to the summit of academia at King's college, Cambridge. The program seeks to discover what motivated this scholarly bachelor to create some of the most iconic and chilling ghost stories in English literature. By following in James’s footsteps, the documentary attempts to gain a greater insight in to the enigmatic author.
Wisconsin Death Trip is a strange, enigmatic, non-linear docudrama and that makes for compelling viewing for the open minded. It is based upon the 1973 non-fiction book Wisconsin Death Trip by Michael Lesy, which explores a collection of late 19th century photographs by Jackson County, photographer Charles Van Schaick. These are mainly taken in the city of Black River Falls. The authentic black and white pictures are further embellished by local news reports from the same period, predominantly taken from the Black River Falls newspaper. These articles emphasise the harsh aspects of Midwestern rural life under the pressures of crime, disease, mental illness, and urbanization. The book has been a source of influence over the years, with authors such as Stephen King and Rod Jones citing the impact its had upon their respective work. Film maker James Marsh has subsequently taken this curious microcosm of rural life and death and extrapolated it a compelling reflection upon mortality and the fragility of human existence.
Dean Haglund is best known for playing Richard Langly, one of the Lone Gunmen on The X-Files. In recent years has capitalised upon that role and has become closely identified with the realm of the paranormal and the world of conspiracy theories. The documentary The Truth Is Out There follows Dean as he travels the US and attempts to discover just what it means to search for the truth in a world where conspiracies theories, untruths and fake news abound. The documentary directed by Phil Leirness, humorously takes the viewer on a journey of discovery, talking to those who believe that the world is not what it seems.
Once again Jamie Benning has created a filmumentary that is pretty much a definitive exploration of its subject matter. Inside Jaws contains a staggering amount of facts, details, insight and commentary about one of the greatest films ever made. Yet despite a wealth of information, it is presented in a way that is easily digestible and enhances the movie, rather than overwhelms it. As with Star Wars Begins, the original movie is annotated with on-screen text, commentary tracks and behind the scenes footage, which provide incisive overview into the movies production.
Star Wars Begins is a detailed documentary by film maker Jamie Benning that explores the creation of what is now considered to be the most iconic movie of the seventies; namely Star Wars. It features a wealth of deleted scenes, alternate takes, behind-the-scenes footage, bloopers, original on set audio recordings and a great deal of commentary by the original cast and crew. As far as I’m concerned, it is the most thorough and in-depth analysis of Star Wars I have yet to see. Frankly it beats hands down, any of the officially sanctioned documentaries that have appeared over the year on the various DVD and Blu-ray releases of the trilogy.
Indie Game: The Movie is a genuinely fascinating documentary not only about the machinations video games industry but also the blood, sweat and tears that go into any creative process. It is a film that really does give you pause for thought and encourages you to reflect upon what you may want in life. It clearly shows the true cost and the star reality of any labour of love. It should be required viewing in schools and colleges for any wannabe who dreams of being on a reality shows and achieving a fast path to their perceived heart’s desire. Such is the impact of the documentary’s message.
Despite having played a broad spectrum of games in my time, I've never really had much dealings with the Blizzard. Beyond owning Overwatch, a game I’ve long stopped playing and trying a free trial of both World of Warcraft and Hearthstone, I have little personal experience of their games. However, I am fully aware of their product range and their reputation within the gaming industry. Overwatch has taught me how well-conceived and polished their games can be. Blizzard may not be incredibly innovative, but they learn from others and produce titles with all the elements that work well. Sadly, I have no real affinity to their flagship MMORPG, as my point of entry with that genre was LOTRO. My interest in World of Warcraft mainly stems from a business perspective and the place it holds in gaming history. Overall my curiosity about the game, its community and culture is mainly academic. So, I finally got around to watching the documentary World of Warcraft: Looking for Group that showcased at Blizzcon in 2014 and was subsequently released on You Tube thereafter.
Certain groups just lend themselves to ridicule from the media and in popular culture in general, irrespective of whether they deserve it or not. Star Wars fans are a prime example of this. Their love of the lore, predilection for cosplay and hunger for collectables at first glance makes them an easy target. Film maker Mark Edlitz, takes a decidedly different approach in his documentary Jedi Junkies. Instead of finger-pointing and making cheap jokes, Jedi Junkies puts a very human face on a group of enthusiasts, showing their passion to be in essence, no different to that of sports fans or other more mainstream hobbies and pastimes.
After watching several hours of the documentary, The Vietnam War, one has to wonder at the utter inability of the US government of the time, to think outside the box during the period of that conflict. Seldom does a military, political, and social analysis of an historical event go this deep. During its eighteen hour running time directors Ken Burns and Lynn Novick cover a wealth of issues associated with this conflict, exploring it from multiple perspectives. Not only do they shine a light upon the hubris and folly of both respective governments, they manage to keep a very intimate and human perspective. Personal stories from both sides are told and if there is a common theme, it is sadly one of tragedy and regret.
Considering the mainstream popularity of gaming, there is a distinct lack of related content on television. Journalist, writer and social commentator Charlie Brooker attempted to address this in 2009 with Gameswipe but the show remained a one-off production. Then again in late 2013, he had another crack at the subject with the documentary How Videogames Changed the World, providing a broad overview on the genre, exploring key events and titles from the past forty years. As ever with Mr. Brooker, the commentary was intelligent and acerbic. There was also an interesting and diverse selection of talking heads who spoke from personal experience, rather than the usual scripted garrulous inanities.
Constance Marks’ documentary explores the story of Kevin Clash, the man who effectively "was" Seasame Street's Elmo until 2014. The film charts Kevin Clash's rise from his modest beginnings in Baltimore to his success as a globally famous character and a major player in the Henson family of puppeteers. The documentary manages to maintain a good balance between examining the mechanics of puppetry and focusing on the human impact of Kevin's work. Like so many documentaries of these type, it clearly shows that achieving your dreams always comes with a cost and is often immensely arduous. It also reveals the complexity of something we take for granted and possibly trivialise, namely puppetry. Filmed in 2011 the documentary does not cover Kevin Clash’s resignation from “Seasame Workshop” three years later.
Documentaries about the fans and fandom often lack any impartiality and frequently have their own agenda, be it positive or negative. Looking at the names associated with Comic-Con Episode IV: A Fan's Hope, it’s fairly clear from the outset that this is not going to be an overtly critical undertaking. Director Morgan Spurlock follows five attendees during San Diego Comic-Con 2010 as they endeavour to fulfil their ambitions. The fans are immediately presented in a fairly positive way and as the documentary proceeds the viewer gets the opportunity to form their own opinion about the lifestyles, choices and philosophies. The documentary is also interspersed with talking heads from known genre luminaries such a Joss Wheedon, Kevin Smith and Stan Lee, who provide some interesting and quite frank views on Comic-Con as well as the wider fan scene.
The documentary Mifune: The Last Samurai is both an exploration and celebration of the Japanese actor Toshiro Mifune (1920-1997), narrated by Keanu Reeves. Over the course of seventy minutes his life and body of work is critiqued by his industry peers as well as several cinematic luminaries such as Martin Scorsese and Steven Speilberg. The focus is very much upon the man himself, as his personality was integral to his acting technique. For those unfamiliar with classic Japanese cinema during its golden age, the documentary provides a broad and practical overview. It also includes a brief history of the chanbara (sword fighting) genre, as well as a concise and honest analysis of Mifune’s career.
300: Rise of an Empire (2014)
300: Rise of an Empire is a curious beast, being neither a sequel nor a prequel. It is infact a tale that takes place simultaneously with those of the original movie. While Gerard Butler is busy making a last stand at the Battle of Thermopylae, fellow warrior and politician Themistokles, played by the singularly uncharismatic Sullivan Stapleton, leads a similar army of buffed Greeks against the Persian fleet. Once again we have a movie that is the epitome of style over substance, complete with a sound design that challenges what can physically be endured by human hearing. They say the first casualty of war is innocence but in this type of movie it's closely followed by historical accuracy and authentic depictions of ethnicity. 300: Rise of an Empire is a cinematic assault upon the senses but not in a good way like Mad Max: Fury Road.
300: Rise of an Empire is a curious beast, being neither a sequel nor a prequel. It is infact a tale that takes place simultaneously with those of the original movie. While Gerard Butler is busy making a last stand at the Battle of Thermopylae, fellow warrior and politician Themistokles, played by the singularly uncharismatic Sullivan Stapleton, leads a similar army of buffed Greeks against the Persian fleet. Once again we have a movie that is the epitome of style over substance, complete with a sound design that challenges what can physically be endured by human hearing. They say the first casualty of war is innocence but in this type of movie it's closely followed by historical accuracy and authentic depictions of ethnicity. 300: Rise of an Empire is a cinematic assault upon the senses but not in a good way like Mad Max: Fury Road.
Since the release of the original 300 back in 2007, the aesthetic created by Zack Snyder has been heavily replicated elsewhere. Although it was quite innovative at the time, reflecting the original style of Frank Miller's graphic novel, it is now a somewhat tired visual effect. The market is somewhat saturated by big budget spectacles these days and Hollywood's overall aesthetic style is becoming increasingly homogeneous and self plagiarising. The only major difference with this film is that director Noam Murro has added 3D to the mix, although it offers few benefits. The stylised violence continues to be a major element of the film and still happily ignores the realities of basic human anatomy. Hence the action scenes speed up and then slow down, while the camera swoops and soars around the CGI mayhem. Blood sprays like geysers. Teenage viewers may well get excited. Seasoned cinematic enthusiasts roll their eyes and check their watch.
Like Gerard Butler's performance in the 300, Eva Green shoulders the dramatic burden this time round and saves the entire movie from being a total dog’s dinner. She attacks the role of Artemisia with a maniacal fervour and is very watchable. Everything else is somewhat arbitrary. The plot is dutifully trotted out by means of a lengthy prologue. Queen Gorgo (Lena Headey) mourns her husband and sundry returning cast members from the previous film wring their hands at the wrongdoings of Persian King Xerxes (Rodrigo Santiago). There are also some oblique references to historical events and the prevailing philosophies of the age but they are never embellished upon or explored with any conviction. This is a movie about the carnage of battle and rippling muscles. To be fair, it wasn’t intended or marketed as a serious insight into the historical events of the time,
Beyond Eva Green's presence there is nothing much new to sell 300: Rise of an Empire. Same meat, different gravy, as the expression goes. It is squarely aimed at the same audience as the previous movie. One that likes this sort of visually self-indulgent, homo-erotic, historically superficial actionfest. It can even entertain an ageing and cynical cinemagoer like myself, if expectations are set suitably low and copious amounts of alcohol are consumed prior to watching. If you’re looking for a similar period film that’s a little bit more historically accurate and cerebral you can always try one of the four versions of Alexander, directed by Oliver Stone. As for the cries from certain quarters that 300: Rise of an Empire is yet another nail in the coffin of narrative cinema, ignore them because it's not. It's just a loud and excessive commercial movie. Hollywood has always made these.
Mainstream films are easy to recommend to people. They’re usually formulaic, work within clear parameters and they’re not controversial. Most people, when viewing such film on someone else’s suggestion, are left with a fairly simply choice. Did they like it or not? Whatever the outcome, no feathers are ruffled. No one looks at you askance afterwards and says “why the hell did you think I’d like that piece of shit”? If something like this happens, then you have clearly not recommended a mainstream film. Perhaps you’ve suggested something that’s a little more of an acquired taste. Something niche, from a very specific sub-genre. Which brings me neatly to Blazing Magnum AKA Strange Shadows in an Empty Room (1976). The US title gives the impression that this film is a hard boiled cop thriller, like so many others that followed in the wake of Dirty Harry. But there’s a clue in the European title. Yes, this movie has more than just a whiff of a giallo about it.
Jason Statham is an exemplar of the US mantra of “staying in your lane”. He makes action movies and occasionally strays into action comedies. His formula broadly works and is sufficiently lucrative to keep Mr. Statham employed. Therefore, if you watch a film in which he stars, you have a fairly good idea of what you’ll be getting. Of late, the criteria for his action vehicles have become more succinct. Jason Statham will play an innocuous character, such as a construction foreman or a bee keeper. Something terrible will subsequently befall another character who Mr. Statham has an emotional connection with in some capacity. He will subsequently hunt down those responsible and meet out death and violence. At some point the villain of the story will enquire as to how this innocuous person is so lethal. Research will then show that our Jason is in fact an ex-police officer/special forces operative/international assassin. There’s then a showdown and the villain dies. Job done.
The Light at the Edge of the World presented itself as an action movie upon its release in 1971. Based upon a story by Jules Verne, the Spanish American co-production was driven by its star Kirk Douglas, who curiously hired British director Kevin Billington to helm the project. This tale of a lighthouse keeper fighting a war of attrition against a group of pirates that have captured his island, was market as an adventure film ostensibly in the idiom of the authors previous works and as a pirate movie. MGM bought the rights to distribute the film in the UK on the misunderstanding that it was a family friendly production. It was not and remains so. They subsequently had to cut 15 minutes of violence and torture as well as an undercurrent of sexual assault to secure a suitable rating. Conversely, the US distributors received an arbitrary PG rating, despite the fact this is one of a handful of films that honestly depicts pirates as murderers, rapists and worse.
It’s an established action film trope. The fire team comprised of ex-military personnel, move in on their target. Only to have the tables turned by someone they don’t deem a threat. What makes it different in The Last Stand of Ellen Cole is a throwaway line of dialogue. The bested operative lies bleeding on the floor and the protagonists stands over them ready to finish them off. “Don’t, I have a cat” they feebly plead. For me that was the icing on the cake. The movie had already established it was taking the “same old, same old” and doing something different. Something fun, if taken in the right spirit. This scene tipped the balance and I embraced this film because it was being honest about what it is. This is a modern B movie that decides to give a very specific sub-genre a makeover. Furthermore, its clearly done with an affectionate wink, which is very different to sly wink. This isn’t deliberate self-knowing irony. Its just a film doing something different and possibly silly but it genuinely wants to have fun with it.
Stephen King’s dystopian story, The Running Man, was previously adapted very loosely in 1987, as a vehicle for Arnold Schwarzenegger. That version focused mainly on the “Battle Royale” element of the story and leaned heavily into Arnie’s personality, rather than the politics of the book. It also wasn’t well received by the author. Edgar Wright’s remake follows the source text a lot more closely and is far more interested in its political themes and wider social commentary. Furthermore, this version re-establishes the everyman quality of the hero of Ben Richards, rather than him being the muscle bound, ex-military hero as per Mr. Schwarzenegger’s prior interpretation. This time round, The Running Man uses a lot of the visual and narrative tropes of contemporary reality TV, making this forty three year old story very relevant to today’s viewers and couching the film in a style that is recognisable and accessible.
After the success of Raiders of the Lost Ark in 1981, filmmakers scrambled to find existing intellectual properties that they could use for similar films. Hence archaic heroes such as Alan Quatermain were hastily given a modern makeover and thrust into generic movies, in a vague attempt to replicate Steven Spielberg’s successful formula. Which brings us neatly on to James Charles Bigglesworth AKA “Biggles”, a fictional pilot and adventurer from a series of books written by W. E. Johns between 1932 and 1968. Several attempts had been made in the past to bring this character to the silver screen, including one by Disney but they all failed. However, the commercial and critical success of Indiana Jones provided sufficient impetus to greenlight a new film. However, due to some curious production choices, when Biggles was finally released it was far from just a period set, action movie.
Setting aside the hubris of remaking a film such as Red Dawn, the 2012 reboot had a troubled production. Shot over the course of late 2009, on location in Michigan, MGM intended to release the film in September 2010. However, the studio’s financial problems became unsustainable over the course of that year and the film was shelved, while a financial solution was sought. Furthermore, while Red Dawn was in post production, there was a major economic shift within Hollywood due to the increasing importance of the Chinese market. This was a significant problem for MGM because the new version of Red Dawn had the Chinese invading the USA instead of Russia. Hence there were reshoots and the need for additional visual effects, so that the Chinese could be replaced with North Koreans. MGM eventually went bankrupt and the distribution rights to Red Dawn were sold off. The film was eventually released in 2012.
When I first saw the promotional trailer for Gangster Squad back in 2012, prior to its release, I wasn't especially impressed. I simply thought the film was another attempt to re-invent the gangster genre for a generation who were not especially familiar with it. I wasn't exactly overwhelmed with director Ruben Fleischer's resume either. I didn't particularly like Zombieland and haven't seen 30 Minutes Or Less. Then came the tragic mass shootings in Aurora, Colorado which led to the movie being delayed so that the original ending, which featured a shoot-out in a movie theatre, could be replaced. Hence when I finally watched this film recently, I wasn't expecting a movie up to the standards of say Once Upon A Time In America or Miller’s Crossing and it would seem that I was right do so. Gangster Squad is not especially noteworthy in any respect.
Levon Cade (Jason Staham) is a former Royal Marine Commando who has retired from military service and now works as the leader of a construction team in Chicago. He has a close relationship with Joe and Carla Garcia (Michael Peña and Noemi Gonzalez ) who run the company and considers them as family. Outside of work, Levon is involved in a bitter custody battle for his daughter, against her maternal grandfather, who blames Levon for his daughter’s suicide. When Garcia's teenage daughter Jenny (Arianna Rivas) goes missing, Levon reluctantly agrees to help her parents and get her back. Beginning his search at the nightclub where Jenny was last seen, he soon discovers that she was abducted by Russian traffickers. Furthermore, the culprit is Dimi Kolisnyk (Maximilian Osinski), the wayward son of a senior ranking gangster.
PC Nicholas Angel (Simon Pegg) is an exemplary Police Officer, with a strict adherence to the letter of the law. As a result of making the rest of the London Metropolitan Police look bad, he is transferred to the rural town of Sandford, Gloucestershire. On arrival, Angel finds that the local Inspector, Frank Butterman (Jim Broadbent), takes a far more laissez-faire approach to policing. His colleagues are incompetent and he is further hampered by the Neighbourhood Watch Alliance (NWA), who prioritise low crime statistics over law enforcement due to their desire to win the title of “Village of the Year”. Furthermore, Angel is partnered with the Inspector’s son, Constable Danny Butterman (Nick Frost), who is infatuated with “buddy cop” movies and is in awe of Angel’s London experience. “Have you ever fired two guns while jumping through the air?” However, a sudden spate of grisly accidents lead Angel to believe that there's more to the seemingly tranquil and picture-perfect community than meets the eye.
As a collection of history's worst tyrants and criminal masterminds gather to plot a war to wipe out millions, one man must race against time to stop them. Discover the origins of the very first independent intelligence agency in The King's Man. Based on the Comic Book “The Secret Service” by Mark Millar and Dave Gibbons. 20th Century Studios
Matthew Vaughn’s The King’s Man is an inconsistent film, both narratively and tonally. It veers between serious themes and stylised, hyperbolic action. At times it does quite a good job of exploring such complex subjects as global politics, mechanised warfare and colonialism. Sadly it then wrenches the viewer out of these cerebral reveries as it lapses into the sort of over the top action sequences that were notable in the two earlier films. It’s a shame because The King’s Man gets so many other aspects of the production right. The casting is very interesting, especially Ralph Fiennes as the “pacifist” Duke of Oxford. He is actually a very good fit for the action genre. Djimon Hounsou and Gemma Arterton are given little backstory beyond being respectively the faithful manservant and the family nanny but both are notable due to their own inherent acting chops and personal charisma. Rhys Ifans obviously has a great time as Grigori Rasputin, ensuring all the man’s vices are robustly depicted.
On paper, a video games franchise such as Assassin’s Creed lends itself perfectly to a cinematic adaptation. The parkour action scenes, the historical settings and the contemporary conspiracy theory themes are all elements that should play well with a modern youth audience. Hence with the backing of a major studio such as Twentieth Century Fox and a budget of $125 million, the 2016 movie should have been a guaranteed box office hit. The casting of Michael Fassbender, an actor who is comfortable with serious roles and big Hollywood franchises, should have carried this film comfortably over the finishing line. Director Justin Kurzel, who had found critical success with his adaptation of MacBeth a year previously, must have looked like a safe pair of hands to handle such a project. Sadly, that was not the case. Assassin’s Creed is not the sum of its parts, in fact many elements appear to be pulling in opposite directions. The resulting feature film is staggeringly dull, soulless and a chore to watch. A testament to how modern big budget franchise movies have become a production line, with all the art stripped from them.
300: Rise of an Empire is a curious beast, being neither a sequel nor a prequel. It is infact a tale that takes place simultaneously with those of the original movie. While Gerard Butler is busy making a last stand at the Battle of Thermopylae, fellow warrior and politician Themistokles, played by the singularly uncharismatic Sullivan Stapleton, leads a similar army of buffed Greeks against the Persian fleet. Once again we have a movie that is the epitome of style over substance, complete with a sound design that challenges what can physically be endured by human hearing. They say the first casualty of war is innocence but in this type of movie it's closely followed by historical accuracy and authentic depictions of ethnicity. 300: Rise of an Empire is a cinematic assault upon the senses but not in a good way like Mad Max: Fury Road.
Back in September 2017, Liam Neeson stated in an interview with Sky News that he was retiring from the action genre, due to his age. He felt that audiences would question his credibility in such roles. After the release of The Commuter (2018) and Cold Pursuit (2019) Mr Neeson appeared to return to human dramas and films that focus on performance rather than punching man and beast. Ordinary Love and Made in Italy, both released in 2019, demonstrate the actor’s versatility and skill. People seem to forget that he is a thespian who was initially known for his character driven roles in films such as The Mission (1986), Rob Roy (1995 and Michael Collins (1996). It was only in 2008 that he reinvented himself as an action hero. It’s all a far cry from Schindler’s List and his performance that earned him an academy award nomination. The reason I mention all of this is because The Ice Road is the third action movie I’ve seen in 2021 that stars Liam Neeson.
One of the stand out tropes of the modern action film is that the stakes are always cranked right up to 11. Terrorists, biological weapons and nuclear bombs are common threats in such movies with a hero or heroes trying to save the world from death and destruction or worse. However, back in the sixties and seventies, things were a little more straight forward and in some respects more credible. Take When Eight Bells Toll, released in 1971, for example. British Treasury secret agent Phillip Calvert investigates the theft of £8,000,000 in gold bullion by a gang of international smugglers. In the context of the times this was no small beer however it’s somewhat mundane compared to fighting super villains and their space lasers. Frankly I prefer these low key plot devices as they can make a film a little more plausible within the confines of the genre. A concept that is often forgotten today.
Forensic accountant Owen Casserly (Jake Weber) flees his home with his teenage son Connor (Finn Little) when he discovers he has been targeted by a pair of assassins (Nicholas Hoult and Aidan Gillen) who have been hired to stop him giving evidence in a major corruption case. Connor witnesses the murder of his father after their car is run off the road. Entrusted with important written evidence, he escapes into the dense forests of the Montana wilderness pursued by the killers. Seeking help he runs into smokejumper Hannah Faber (Angelina Jolie) who is stationed at a remote fire lookout tower. Hannah suffers from PTSD from a previous forest fire in which she was unable to save three young boys. Hannah attempts to lead Connor through the forest to safety. Meanwhile the assassins set fire to the forest to divert the attention of the authorities and cover their tracks.
I must admit that I did not have particularly high hopes for Paul W S Anderson's remake of the 1975 Roger Corman produced cult classic. Anderson’s work varies greatly. Event Horizon and Soldier are solid genre films but I still have not fully come to terms with Alien vs. Predator. Jason Statham is also a name that divides the public, with solid material such as The Transporter and unfathomable tosh like Revolver. But despite these considerations, Death Race is in fact quite a surprise and does not follow the path that so many remakes do. It takes the basic themes and concept associated with the original and tries to do something different with them. It doesn’t reinvent the wheel nor is it a genre milestone. But it does offer a different spin on things, have some engaging action scenes and provide some dumb but enjoyable entertainment. When combined with snacks and some beer this is a passable way to kill 111 minutes.
I did not watch Zero Dark Thirty upon its initial release, due to the politics surrounding it. I wanted to be able to view it free from bipartisan debate. Eight years on I believe this now achievable and although debate still exists it is now more measured and less strident. Zero Dark Thirty is certainly a compelling movie. It plays as a docudrama, providing an in-depth study of the US intelligence services hunt for Osama Bin Laden. It cannot be faulted on a technical level and the performances are very strong. It does not adopt a celebratory or triumphalist tone in its approach to the story. Director Kathryn Bigelow endeavours to keep the proceedings focused upon the intricacies of an intelligence driven manhunt. There is little or no tubthumping, jingoism. The decision to find Bin Laden is shown as a political and military exercise of foreign policy. The film solely focuses on the story from a US perspective but that is perfectly acceptable as it is not intended to be an exploration of geo-politics.
Firestorm was originally written as a vehicle for Sylvester Stallone, however when the production company Savoy Pictures went bankrupt the screenplay was bought by Twentieth Fox and the scope of the movie reduced to suit a lower budget. It’s broadly similar to Cliffhanger in so far as the lead character is a specialist in a certain field who runs afoul of criminals in a perilous environment. Whereas Cliffhanger is set in the Rocky Mountains, Firestorm takes place in the forests of Northern Wyoming. After the script was revised four times, the finished screenplay was given a final “polish” by Graham Yost who has considerable experience with the action movie genre. As stallone was no longer associated with the project and the production had been repurposed to be less extravagant, the movie was assigned to former NFL star Howie Long. Long had already appeared in the John Woo movie Broken Arrow (1996) and the Firestorm was seen as a means to give him a star vehicle.
The original French movies District 13 and its sequel District 13: Ultimatum, conceived and produced by Luc Besson, were enjoyable variations of the Escape from New York theme. Their charm lay in their European pedigree and the skilful use of parkour. The two leads, David Belle and Cyril Raffaelli, were eminently suited to the minimalist roles and the screenplays were fun. Half of these movies appeal was the fact that they were not mainstream US products. Brick Mansions is the Hollywood remake of District 13, as well as being Paul Walkers’ final movie. Sadly, this film is far from a fitting epitaph, being devoid of any charisma or innovations. It is blandly shot , poorly edited and has been stripped of everything that made the original entertaining.
Arnold Schwarzenegger's return to the big screen after his political career has been uneven to say the least. His cameos in The Expendables and The Expendables 2 were well received, with their self referential charm and age related irony. Yet his first major movie The Last Stand, although competent, failed to find an audience. Escape Plan fared better at the box office but did not put Arnie back on the A list. Effectively there's a large percentage of the contemporary cinematic audience who were born after his heyday and are simply not overt fans of his work. His core audience is more than likely of the age group that consume most of their film entertainment at home. Which may explain why Sabotage tanked in the US upon release on March 28th 2014. It was the worst opening box office of Arnie's career. He used to break first day opening records.
Sequels and reboots are hardly a new concept and have been a part of Hollywood culture since the 1930s. The success of the Universal Horror movies from that era being a prime example of direct follow ups and retconned movies. However, there is one fundamental rule that distinguishes a good sequel from a bad one. You should never mitigate, undermine or make irrelevant the events of the previous movie, just to provide your new film with a raison d'être. For example, the events of Aliens do not contradict or trivialise those that happened in Alien. In fact with that franchise there is a very clear logical progression between the two movies. The same is true for Mad Max and Mad Max 2 or Star Wars and The Empire Strikes Back. The key is to progress a story, enhance it or explore things from an alternative angle and bring something new to the cinematic table. Sadly this philosophy is all too often lost on corporate film making. Which means that many sequels are just tedious replays of prior films. Terminator: Dark Fate falls squarely into this category.
The enduring appeal of the character John Rambo in First Blood comes from the fact that he is a traumatised ex- service man who keeps himself to himself as he drifts from job to job, trying to come to terms with his wartime experiences. His poor treatment at the hands of a small-town Sheriff is a succinct metaphor for the social and political indifference that Vietnam veterans were shown upon their return to the US. He’s a man with a code in a world that no longer has any use for him. His simple and honest patriotism is not returned and he is in fact viewed with shame by many from the nation he loves. Furthermore, the first movie does not paint him as a cold-blooded killer. Despite provocation he is not the first person to shoot to kill. Rambo is in many ways a victim. A broken man, who society has asked to do unspeakable things. Now society wants nothing to do with him and fears the “monster” they created. Although clearly an action movie, First Blood had narrative depth and a flawed but sympathetic protagonist. 37 years and four movies later, such dramatic themes have long left the franchise. The central character is indeed a caricature of its former self.
It was hardly surprising that the movie adaptation of Chris Kyle's autobiography American Sniper, would cause controversy. The Iraq war, US Foreign Policy and national pride are seldom subjects that are discussed in a calm and measured fashion. And then there are the personal politics of director Clint Eastwood to consider. Hence there were claims from some quarters upon the movie’s release, that it was Islamophobic and counter claims that criticisms of the late Chris Kyle were unpatriotic. There still remain issues regarding the authenticity of events depicted in the source text and subsequently the movies screenplay by Jason Hall. Yet none of these factors have in anyway impacted upon the film's box office returns which currently stands at $247,900,417 worldwide.
Do I really need to present you with some sort of plot synopsis for Transporter 3? No, I didn’t think so. More of the same as Frank Martin (Jason Statham) and his police chum, Inspector Tarconi (Francois Berleand) become embroiled in yet another high-octane escapade. There's fights, car stunts, exotic international locations and a strong sense of humour. This time, the disposable love interest is a Ukrainian girl named Valentina (Natalya Rudakova) who fulfils her role succinctly. The film benefits by being set back in Europe, after the mistake of basing Transporter 2 in the US. This time, the story takes us to such locations as Budapest and Odessa. The international film crew once again bring a veneer of panache to the production that is conspicuously absent in US action movies. For a modest budget fil, Transporter 3 it looks very good. Again the proceedings are given a boost by a pertinent soundtrack by Alexandre Azaria and a selection of European “tunes”.
Jason Bourne originally graced our screens for the first time seventeen years ago. The Bourne Identity was a gritty, minimalist take on the espionage genre and a welcome change from the excesses of the Pierce Brosnan Bond era. The story arc was sustained over three movies and ended efficiently and succinctly. After which Matt Damon moved on, as did the director of two of the movies, Paul Greengrass. Which leaves us with The Bourne Legacy; the tangential sequel that arrived in 2012. A film that exists because the money men and bean counters hate to pass up on a franchise until it has been squeezed utterly dry. Hence, they commissioned the writer of the series, Tony Gilroy, to come up with a screenplay and direct a spinoff movie. Jeremy Renner was cast in the lead role. Yet despite narrative and production continuity, The Bourne Legacy was not a Jason Bourne movie with the star appeal of Matt Damon. Although the film turned a profit, it had the lowest box office returns out of the entire franchise.
During the eighties there was a clear league table of action movie stars. By the mid-nineties this system fell into decline and the Hollywood lacked any clearly defined exponents of the genre. A decade later, due to the success of Luc Besson’s Transporter films, Jason Statham became a bankable box office star in this field. When you look at Statham's early work in Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels it is hard to envisage the "mockney geezer" as an international action star. Yet he has successfully stepped into the role and enjoys a large following. I enjoy his work as he has a likeable on-screen persona. My 88-year-old Mum likes him to because "he wears nice suits". The action genre seldom reaches such a diverse demographic.
Before we start, I recollect that one well known UK critic described Safe House as sub-Tony Scott, upon its release. Now I’ve always been conflicted over Scott’s back catalogue, as I’ve always found his movies to be hampered by their own unique style. The subtleties of his characters and depth of his themes are all too often drowned out by his frenetic style and fast paced editing. Therefore a comment such as this really sets off alarm bells for me. Having recently watched The Equalizer 2, I wanted a further fix of Denzel Washington in a similar action vehicle. As Safe House was available on Netflix UK, I decided to kill a couple of hours and see what actually constitutes as “sub-Tony Scott”.
The Ice Road (2021)
Back in September 2017, Liam Neeson stated in an interview with Sky News that he was retiring from the action genre, due to his age. He felt that audiences would question his credibility in such roles. After the release of The Commuter (2018) and Cold Pursuit (2019) Mr Neeson appeared to return to human dramas and films that focus on performance rather than punching man and beast. Ordinary Love and Made in Italy, both released in 2019, demonstrate the actor’s versatility and skill. People seem to forget that he is a thespian who was initially known for his character driven roles in films such as The Mission (1986), Rob Roy (1995 and Michael Collins (1996). It was only in 2008 that he reinvented himself as an action hero. It’s all a far cry from Schindler’s List and his performance that earned him an academy award nomination. The reason I mention all of this is because The Ice Road is the third action movie I’ve seen in 2021 that stars Liam Neeson.
Back in September 2017, Liam Neeson stated in an interview with Sky News that he was retiring from the action genre, due to his age. He felt that audiences would question his credibility in such roles. After the release of The Commuter (2018) and Cold Pursuit (2019) Mr Neeson appeared to return to human dramas and films that focus on performance rather than punching man and beast. Ordinary Love and Made in Italy, both released in 2019, demonstrate the actor’s versatility and skill. People seem to forget that he is a thespian who was initially known for his character driven roles in films such as The Mission (1986), Rob Roy (1995 and Michael Collins (1996). It was only in 2008 that he reinvented himself as an action hero. It’s all a far cry from Schindler’s List and his performance that earned him an academy award nomination. The reason I mention all of this is because The Ice Road is the third action movie I’ve seen in 2021 that stars Liam Neeson.
After a methane explosion, a remote mine caves in northern Canada trapping 26 men. The mine owners desperately mount a rescue mission that requires a wellhead and piping to be urgently delivered to the site of the disaster. As there is no airstrip in the area that can accommodate military transport planes, the equipment has to be driven by truck across the ice roads which are beginning to thaw in the spring weather. A team is hastily put together consisting of three trucks. These are driven by Jim Goldenrod (Lawrence Fishburne) an ice road veteran, the hot headed Tantoo (Amber Midthunder) whose brother is trapped in the mine and brothers Mike (Liam Neeson) and Gurty McCann (Marcus Thomas). Gurty is a Iraq War veteran suffering from PTSD and aphasia as well as an exceptional mechanic. They are joined by Tom Varnay (Benjamin Walker), an actuary from the mine’s insurance company. Racing against the clock, the team soon discover that there’s more than just the weather working against them.
The Ice Road is written and directed by Jonathan Hensleigh and is his first movie for a decade. Hensleigh wrote several high profile films in the nineties (including Die hard with a Vengeance and Armageddon)and has often employed an uncredited “script doctor”. His directorial debut, The Punisher in 2004, was well received due to its intelligent exploration of vigilante genre and use of physical stunt work rather than CGI. His subsequent films have not fared so well. Both Welcome to the Jungle (2007) and Kill the Irishman (2011) were criticised for being derivative. Sadly that still seems to be the case. The Ice Road feels like a simplified version of Henri-Georges Clouzot's iconic thriller The Wages of Fear (1953) and (or) William Friedkin’s Sorcerer (1977). One scene even feels like it’s been cribbed from the classic Thunderbirds episode Day of Disaster.
However, that being said, the budget for this film is modest and so the set pieces are not excessive in that “Fast and the Furious” idiom. The scope of the action is quite contained, although somewhat implausible. The laws of physics are bent but not broken and the ice and weather do feel like a legitimate threat. The characters are leaning towards the generic, however the interaction between Neeson and his troubled brother played by Marcus Thomas, does make the story a little more interesting. The Ice Road fits comfortably within its PG-13 rating and doesn’t overstay its welcome like so many modern action movies do. Overall, this movie provides some mid tier thrills and can be entertaining if you accept the premise. It is better than equally stupid The Hurricane Heist (2018). Neeson does much of the heavy lifting, as per usual. Sadly Lawrence Fishburne, another watchable actor, doesn’t have as much screen time as he deserves.
David Koepp is no stranger to genre cinema, having written the screenplay for such films as Jurassic Park, Spider-man and War of the Worlds. Where these titles are big budget, major studio productions, Cold Storage is a far more modest production with a smaller scope. Adapted from his own novel, the screenplay is by David Koepp and the film is directed by British film-maker Jonny Campbell. At first glance, Cold Storage seems a somewhat derivative science fiction horror film with a relatively modest budget, financed through a convoluted US and French co-production. Lurid green and red colours feature heavily in the marketing artwork and it is easy, after a cursory look, to write the film off as cheap, generic, direct-to-streaming filler. However, Cold Storage is prime example of why you should not judge a book by it’s cover, or in this case, a film by its posters and online advertising. It is in fact an amusing and fun endeavour that can fill an evening.
Former United States Marine Corps Scout Sniper and Vietnam War veteran Jim Hanson (Liam Neeson) lives on a ranch on the Arizona-Mexico border. The mortgage on the property is in arrears after the death of his wife has left him medically bankrupt. One day while patrolling his property he encounters Mother Rosa (Teresa Ruiz) with her son Miguel (Jacob Perez) illegally crossing the border fence. He calls his step daughter Sarah (Katheryn Winnick) in the border patrol and reports them as they’re miles from any habitation. However, Rosa and Miguel are fleeing a drug cartel and Mauricio (Juan Pablo Raba), one of their enforcers. When Mauricio and his men try to forcibly take Rosa, Jim intervenes and a car chase and firefight ensue. Mauricio’s brother is killed and Rosa is fatally wounded. She gives Jim a note with her family's address in Chicago and he reluctantly agrees to take Miguel there.
Back in September 2017, Liam Neeson stated in an interview with Sky News that he was retiring from the action genre, due to his age. He felt that audiences would question his credibility in such roles. After the release of The Commuter (2018) and Cold Pursuit (2019) Mr Neeson appeared to return to human dramas and films that focus on performance rather than punching man and beast. Ordinary Love and Made in Italy, both released in 2019, demonstrate the actor’s versatility and skill. People seem to forget that he is a thespian who was initially known for his character driven roles in films such as The Mission (1986), Rob Roy (1995 and Michael Collins (1996). It was only in 2008 that he reinvented himself as an action hero. It’s all a far cry from Schindler’s List and his performance that earned him an academy award nomination. The reason I mention all of this is because The Ice Road is the third action movie I’ve seen in 2021 that stars Liam Neeson.
I try and keep abreast of what's happening and going on, especially in those areas of interest to me such as movies, TV and gaming etc. Occasionally stuff passes me by that I subsequently discover at a later date, often to the refrain of WTF? A few years ago I was idly channel surfing only to discover that a seminal UK children's TV show from my youth, the Mr. Men, had been remade in a more contemporary idiom. Luckily, the source characters were still relatively unscathed, and the revamped show did a competent job in bringing Roger Hargreaves work to a new generation. Still, no one had told me and discovering this, in such a fashion was a bit of a surprise.
Life in the Mills family is never easy. After surviving two previous kidnappings, Brian (Liam Neeson) now finds that his ex-wife Lenore (Famke Janssen) has been brutally murdered. Framed for the crime, goes on the run from the Police, in an attempt to discover the true perpetrator and clear his name. Is Lenore's current partner, Stuart St. John (Dougray Scott) involved in some way? Can Brian protect his pregnant daughter Kim (Maggie Grace)? Has he ever stopped to consider why so many bad things happen to him? Why wasn’t this movie set in Europe like the others? What happens to the huge cuddly Panda seen at the start of the movie? Who in the name of all that is holy edited this movie?
If it worked once already, why not just do it all again irrespective of logic and statistical likelihood? Thus, in Taken 2 Ex-CIA operative (and mail order catalogue) Bryan Mills (Liam Neeson) is struggling to come to terms with his daughter Kim (Maggie Grace) growing up and his relationship with his ex-wife Lenore (Famke Janssen). If life wasn't complicated enough with being a Dad, Bryan finds himself up against a vengeful Albanian gang. It would appear that they're somewhat annoyed that he slaughtered their brethren in the previous instalment. Hence Bryan and Lenore are kidnapped whilst on vacation in Istanbul and face a grim death at the hands of the gang's patriarch, Murad Hoxha (Rade Šerbedžija). Once again, the criminal fraternity underestimates the resourcefulness of Mr. Mills and it is not long before the tables are turned.
Sometimes when a movie chimes with the public is goes from being a box office success to becoming part of popular culture. The Taken franchise has done exactly that and a piece of iconic dialogue has now become a perennial internet meme. But if you look beyond this “baggage” and subsequently judge the film by the standards of the genre, you’ll find there’s more than meets the eye. On paper Taken is a fairly formulaic thriller. But it boasts a more interesting pedigree than other movies of this kind. Written by Luc Besson and directed by Pierre Morel (of District 13 fame), the action driven story set in Paris, has all the benefits that come from a European production. But the most intriguing aspect of Taken is the casting of the lead character Bryan Mills. Instead of relying on a known action star, the part ended up with Oscar nominated actor Liam Nesson. As you can imagine, the results are not as you would expect and as a result a serious actor re-invented himself as an action star.
There are action movies. There are subsets of action movies such as the martial arts, heroic bloodshed and the “Die Hard on a [insert mode of transport here]”sub-genre. And then there are Liam Neeson action movies which are a unique a form of films in their own right. Because few actors have achieved what Liam Neeson has done. Some actors start their careers stuck in low budget, exploitation films, only to claw their way up the greasy pole until the wow us with a serious performance and effectively re-invent themselves as a quality character actor. Liam Neeson has done the reverse. After making his mark as a serious actor, with an Oscar nomination under his belt, he then took a serious change in direction to become an action movie star in his mid-fifties. In doing so he found himself a completely new audience and proved a star at the box office. It’s a curious yet strangely laudable achievement. This leads us neatly onto The Commuter. It’s Neeson’s swansong to the action genre, as he has subsequently announced that he’s retiring from this type of movie.
Run All Night is a neo-noir with an above average cast (Neeson, Ed Harris, Vincent D'Onofrio and even Nick Nolte). The screenplay by Brad Ingelsby (who co-wrote the similarly hyperbolic Out of the Furnace) is based around the perennial theme of family feuds in the New York's gangster community. It's a plot device that’s been the mainstay of many a movie over the years but few of any outstanding quality. However, Run All Night has the benefits of two strong leads and an exceptional visual aesthetic, that elevate it above the mundane. Narrative weakness is countered with strong performances and the inherent charisma of Neeson and Harris.
I don't know what it is about the planes but they do seem to lend a certain "je ne sais quoi" to movies. Whether it's the claustrophobic environment with its shared intimacy or our general familiarity with air travel, staging a film on a commercial flight can often improve its chances to entertain. Zombies, snakes and terrorists have all benefited from this plot device, with varying degrees of success. So bearing this in mind, if you put Liam Neeson on a plane, you know that there's going to be more than just some in-flight turbulence. That is exactly what director Jaume Collet-Serra and writers Chris Roach and John Richardson have done with Non-Stop; a surprisingly entertaining action movie.
Contrary to its rather obvious marketing, The Grey is not just a black and white, testosterone fuelled, action movie. It has far greater philosophical aspirations. Beneath the survivalist storyline is a narrative that explores the nature of hope, human determination and the inevitability of death as well as its place in the natural order of things. This is surprisingly cerebral for a film of this genre. It is sombre and dour but totally justified in adopting such tones. Director Joe Carnahan initially sets out a traditional scenario of a rag tag group of oil workers, desperately trying to survive the Alaskan wilderness, after a plane crash. They look to Liam Neeson to assume the alpha-male role for their group. However, we soon discover that he is wrestling with his own personal demons.
Army of the Dead (2021)
One of the biggest issues associated with modern film production is creative interference by the studios financing them. Despite employing known writers and directors who have an established track record and creative style, all too often control is taken from these individuals and changes are imposed upon the production, usually to the detriment of the overall film. Hence, you can understand why more and more filmmakers are taking their work to Netflix and similar platforms. Streaming services are apparently far more accommodating and understanding. Martin Scorsese himself made his last film The Irishman, for Netflix. However, such creative freedom can be a double edged sword. Some directors need to be tempered, the same way that some writers need a good editor. There is often a fine line between creative freedom and self indulgence.
One of the biggest issues associated with modern film production is creative interference by the studios financing them. Despite employing known writers and directors who have an established track record and creative style, all too often control is taken from these individuals and changes are imposed upon the production, usually to the detriment of the overall film. Hence, you can understand why more and more filmmakers are taking their work to Netflix and similar platforms. Streaming services are apparently far more accommodating and understanding. Martin Scorsese himself made his last film The Irishman, for Netflix. However, such creative freedom can be a double edged sword. Some directors need to be tempered, the same way that some writers need a good editor. There is often a fine line between creative freedom and self indulgence.
Following an zombie outbreak due to a military “accident”, Las Vegas has been wall off to contain the walking dead. Former decorated soldier Scott Ward (Dave Bautista), who led the initial evacuation, is employed by casino owner Bly Tanaka (Hiroyuki Sanada) to break into the quarantine zone and recover $200 million from his casino vault, before the US military obliterates the city with a tactical nuclear warhead. Ward has mixed feelings about returning to Vegas as he had to kill his wife during the evacuation when she was bitten by a zombie. He recruits his former teammates Maria Cruz and Vanderohe, along with helicopter pilot Marianne Peters, German safecracker Ludwig Dieter, and Chicano sharpshooter Mikey Guzman, who brings along his associate Chambers. Tanaka sends his right hand man Martin to provide access to the casino vault. Enroute Ward encounters his estranged daughter Kate (Ella Purnell); a volunteer in the Vegas refugee camp.
Zack Snyder’s latest film, Army of the Dead, is a textbook example of “indulging” a filmmaker and not legitimately questioning any of their creative decisions. As a result the handful of innovative ideas get lost among the bloated set pieces and mitigated by the crass screenplay with its puerile dialogue. I was raised on classic zombie movies and therefore am more disposed by default to favour the “Romero rules” governing zombie behaviour. However, I am open to alternative ideas and was not averse to the rather threatening fast moving zombies in Snyder’s previous remake of Dawn of the Dead. Sadly, the inclusion of the so-called “Alpha” zombies in Army of the Dead does more harm than good. By making zombies less mysterious and giving them more specific human cognitive abilities, it essentially robs them of their mystique. They become a far more rationalised threat and hence less of the enigmatic metaphor for wider social issues as in other films.
Army of the Dead is overlong, too dependent on CGI rather than physical effects and is filled with characters who are woefully undeveloped or even interesting. It lacks the narrative subtly of Romero’s work and the cast carry out their duties in a perfunctory manner. Zack Snyder has an eye for visuals and certainly can produce better work (as his extended version of Justice League proves). However, I feel that he needs a creative partner who can curb his excesses and nurture his valid ideas. As it stands Army of the Dead is a ponderous viewing experience, with no hardboiled action movie cliché left unturned. It wastes the presence of Dave Bautista, who has proven he can be a personable lead and saddles us with a dull, obvious narrative. Rather than advance or reinvigorate the zombie horror movie subgenre, it succinctly demonstrates why it has fallen by the wayside by doing absolutely nothing new of note during it’s 148 minute running time.
George A. Romero's Day Of The Dead (1985) is a bleak and remorseless masterpiece. The final entry in his “Dead Trilogy”, its central theme is that in a world on the brink of destruction, man is still the biggest threat to his own existence. It is well scripted, clinically accurate in its observations on human nature and thought provoking, despite having its budget cut just weeks before production commenced. 40 years later it is revered as a genre milestone and is considered one of Romero’s finest works. Sadly, the 2008 “remake” directed by Steve Miner, who has a background in slasher and exploitation movies, takes a contrasting approach, to say the least. It certainly has very little to do with Romero’s film and one can’t help but assume that it is nothing more than a cynical cash in. Setting aside comparisons with the original, this is not in any way a standout zombie film in its own right.
George A. Romero’s Night of the Living Dead is a true genre milestone that is praised not only by horror film fans but mainstream critics alike. If you are interested in watching an intelligent, well researched and entertaining documentary about the film’s provenance and cultural impact then I thoroughly recommend Birth of the Living Dead (2013) by Rob Kuhn. It tells you pretty much all you need to know about why this classic film is so important. As for Night of the Living Dead itself, it still holds up well after 53 years. It is the immediacy and relatability of the premise and overall story that still makes the film relevant. The zombies are purely a “MacGuffin” and the real focus of the plot is how people behave under pressure in life threatening situations. It’s a film about how we can react to the same situation differently and how cultural baggage and the need for people to be “right”, hinders co-operation and thwarts progress.
One of the biggest issues associated with modern film production is creative interference by the studios financing them. Despite employing known writers and directors who have an established track record and creative style, all too often control is taken from these individuals and changes are imposed upon the production, usually to the detriment of the overall film. Hence, you can understand why more and more filmmakers are taking their work to Netflix and similar platforms. Streaming services are apparently far more accommodating and understanding. Martin Scorsese himself made his last film The Irishman, for Netflix. However, such creative freedom can be a double edged sword. Some directors need to be tempered, the same way that some writers need a good editor. There is often a fine line between creative freedom and self indulgence.
Sometimes just the name of a film is sufficient to sell it to you. I originally discovered this zombie crossover movie thanks to film critic Mark Kermode's video blog from the 2008 Cannes Film Festival. He reported on how the film festival was also a major marketplace for independent movie makers trying to find international distribution for their products. Flight of the Living Dead was one of the lurid flyers he was given. Writer and director Scott Thomas claimed at the time that despite the obvious plot similarities with Snakes on a Plane, his film was not intended to be a quick cash-in on Samuel L. Jackson’s sleeper hit from 2006. The basic concept and the pre-production phase of Flight of the Living Dead supposedly pre-dates the aforementioned exploitation movie. Considering how long it can take for a small independently funded movie to find a distributor this may well be true.
Five years ago, I wrote about a fan edit of George Romero’s horror classic Dawn of the Dead that attempted to recreate the original rough cut of the movie. The so-called “Extended Mall Hours” cut was composed of the 139 minute Cannes edit of the film and the 117 minute Dario Argento version. It was a very interesting project but as it consisted of DVD quality material (including deleted scenes) it was not an optimal presentation. Being a fan edit, there were obvious issues regarding legality, so I never really expected to see anything comparable to this version being officially sanctioned or released. So I was therefore most surprised to learn that a recent Blu-ray boxset release by Austrian distributors XT Video included a “Complete Cut” which similarly combines all available material. This is presented in 1080p, at a ratio of 1:85:1 and runs 155 minutes. It is superior in quality to the “Extended Mall Hours” cut and is most likely the nearest any fan is ever going to get to seeing Romero’s initial edit of the film.
Contrary to a lot of the pre-release doom and gloom regarding re-edits and extensive new footage being shot, World War Z turned out to be far from the disaster that some critics implied. Ultimately there were some good ideas and snatches of interesting dialogue. Some of the characters were unusual and there seems to have been an attempt do something different with the genre. All of these things are laudable. Unfortunately, despite these positive attributes the movie clearly shows the signs of post-production interference and material from the extensive re-shoot is all too apparent. That’s not to say that is bad because that is not the case. It’s because it is noticeably different in style and tone from the rest of the film.
Back in the summer of 2012, the red band trailer for Cockneys vs Zombies set a very high benchmark and certainly raised expectations for the final movie. The title itself was also somewhat of a gamble, either raising a wry smile among horror fans or eliciting a roll of the eyes and a deep sigh for a genre in decline. I was unable to attend the premier at Frighfest 2012, but the general feedback at the time was that that that the movie was extremely well received by horror fans. Finally, six years later, I finally caught up with the film on Amazon Prime and I’m happy to report that Cockneys vs Zombies does live up expectations and is a thoroughly entertaining, quirky and very British horror movie. It manages to balance both visceral horror with a healthy dose of black humour, which is no mean feat.
The horror genre has more than its fair share of bad movies. It’s the nature of the beast (no pun intended). Films of this type can be made quickly and cheaply but have the potential to make a tidy profit. Therefore, they attract not only burgeoning talent but those bereft of any as well. Furthermore, traditional formulas work, so any new innovative production is often followed by a wealth of copycats and knockoff films. To say that the genre is self-plagiarising is an understatement. Yet, from time to time, horror movies can surpass mainstream cinema with regard to social commentary, satire and intelligent adult narratives. Look no further than Dawn of the Dead, The Thing and The Descent if you want three solid examples. Horror is a versatile and malleable genre that can facilitate great stories and reflections upon the human condition.
World War Z Unrated Cut runs seven minutes longer than the theatrical version of the movie and contains "intense footage not shown in theaters". The material consists of more violent alternative takes of existing action scenes and features mainly CGI effects work. There is no additional plot, although there may be some nominal changes to dialogue. Overall the unrated cut is an improvement over the theatrical print in so far it offers a more traditional zombie movie experience. However, compared to other examples of the genre, the unrated version of World War Z still remains relatively sedate in terms of violence. The movie focuses on the scale of the zombie outbreak, rather than the visceral mayhem of a George Romero film.
These day’s zombies are a somewhat ubiquitous plot device and enjoy an entire literary, artistic and cinematic sub-genre. The Walking Dead is one of the most popular TV shows internationally and hundreds of thousands of gamers fight the undead, online every day. Yet there was a time when zombies were just a minor subset of the horror genre and far from a popular one. That all changed in 1968, when a low-budget, independent film called Night of the Living Dead was released upon an unsuspecting public. The movie’s impact upon the film industry and popular culture was extraordinary. Rob Kuhns’ appropriately titled documentary Birth of the Living Dead analyses the creation of George A. Romero’s seminal classic and strives to determine how a single movie could have such impact.
In the last few years I’ve become acquainted with the concept of fan edits. Fan edit are versions of a film that has been modified by a viewer. This involves the removal, reordering, or the addition of new material to create a new interpretation of the film. Fan edits include the removal of scenes or dialogue, replacement of audio and visual elements, as well as adding material from sources such as deleted scenes or even other films. Due to the easy access to pro-quality software and high definition source material, such editions are often very professionally realised. Naturally fan edits often fall foul of copyright law.
If you are a fan of horror movies then sooner or later Lucio Fulci’s Zombi 2 (also known as Zombie, Island of the Living Dead, Zombie Island, Zombie Flesh-Eaters and Woodoo) will appear on your radar. For good or ill, this movie looms large within the genre and has a mixed reputation. Even by current cinematic standards, this movie is a gore-fest and it still has the ability to make viewers squirm. It is a curious phenomenon that a relatively low budget and obscure Italian cash-in on George Romero’s Dawn of the Dead, has managed to achieve such an infamous, iconic and cult status.
When Eight Bells Toll (1971)
One of the stand out tropes of the modern action film is that the stakes are always cranked right up to 11. Terrorists, biological weapons and nuclear bombs are common threats in such movies with a hero or heroes trying to save the world from death and destruction or worse. However, back in the sixties and seventies, things were a little more straight forward and in some respects more credible. Take When Eight Bells Toll, released in 1971, for example. British Treasury secret agent Phillip Calvert investigates the theft of £8,000,000 in gold bullion by a gang of international smugglers. In the context of the times this was no small beer however it’s somewhat mundane compared to fighting super villains and their space lasers. Frankly I prefer these low key plot devices as they can make a film a little more plausible within the confines of the genre. A concept that is often forgotten today.
One of the stand out tropes of the modern action film is that the stakes are always cranked right up to 11. Terrorists, biological weapons and nuclear bombs are common threats in such movies with a hero or heroes trying to save the world from death and destruction or worse. However, back in the sixties and seventies, things were a little more straight forward and in some respects more credible. Take When Eight Bells Toll, released in 1971, for example. British Treasury secret agent Phillip Calvert investigates the theft of £8,000,000 in gold bullion by a gang of international smugglers. In the context of the times this was no small beer however it’s somewhat mundane compared to fighting super villains and their space lasers. Frankly I prefer these low key plot devices as they can make a film a little more plausible within the confines of the genre. A concept that is often forgotten today.
Phillip Calvert (Anthony Hopkins) an undercover British treasury agent along with his intelligence officer partner Hunslett (Corin Redgrave) are assigned to find five cargo ships that have gone missing in the Irish Sea. They track a ship,The Nantesville, which is carrying £8 million in gold bullion, to the Scottish Highlands before it mysteriously goes missing. Posing as marine biologists, Calvert and Hunslett find the local inhabitants both suspicious and hostile. A Cypriot shipping tycoon Sir Anthony Skouras (Jack Hawkins), whose luxury yacht Shangri-La is anchored off the coast, may be involved in the theft of the gold bullion. While searching the surrounding area by helicopter, Calvert makes contact with a group of remote shark fishermen who appear more friendly than Torbay's locals. Calvert also meets Lord Kirkside (Tom Chatto) and his teenage daughter in their remote hilltop castle. Both act strangely and are uncooperative. Calvert’s helicopter is then shot down and he only just manages to escape back to his boat. However, he then finds that Hunslett is missing.
Based upon a novel by Alistair MacLean, When Eight Bells Toll is a lean and focused thriller that eschews the excess of the James Bond franchise. There are no gadgets or globe trotting to exotic locations. The story confines itself to the sea and some remote Scottish islands.The plot moves fast and is punctuated by some low key but hard hitting action scenes. Veteran stunt arranger Bob Simmons stages the fights sequences and shootouts in an efficient manner. Anthony Hopkins trained and lost weight for the role and handles these scenes well. There is a casual efficiency to the violence. After one fight, Calvert wraps a length of chain around a incapcitated enemy and throws overboard. Later while breaking into Lord Kirkside’s castle he knocks out another heavy and promptly throws him out of a nearby window into the sea below. Although unpleasant it does bring an air of authenticity to the proceedings.
When Eight Bells Toll benefits from the casting of Anthony Hopkins. He brings his acting talent to bear on the role and is suitably sarcastic and menacing as a good spy should be. Screenplay is at its best when he is being upbraided by his superior officer, “Uncle Arthur”, played with aplomb by the great Robert Morley. Morley is sceptical of Calvert, suspecting he went to an “indifferent school”. The class divide and snobbery inherent in the UK government services is wittily explored but ultimately doesn’t get in the way of Uncle Arthur and Calverts business relationship. Jack Hawkins again has his voice dubbed by Charles Gray as his treatment for throat cancer had robbed him of his distinct voice. Perhaps the weakest role is that of Charlotte (Sir Anthony’s second wife) played by Nathelie Delon. The character is supposed to be scheming and duplicitous but is sadly underwritten, thus making Calvert’s involvement with her somewhat curious. Lavorski, the leader of the smuggling ring played by Ferdy Mayne, is also a two dimensional villain who we learn little about.
Overall When Eight Bells Toll is a concise and focused action movie which benefits from good performances from Hopkins and Morely as well as some solid set pieces. Sadly director Étienne Périer does not bring much flair to the production. Despite having some wonderful Scottish scenery the cinematography by Arthur Ibbetson is somewhat stark. Perhaps that was the look they were looking for, It contrasts with the interior shots which do feel very studio bound. The editing is also somewhat pedestrian. However, the film’s score by Angela Morley (credited as Walter Stott) is sublimely brassy and bombastic, reflecting the accepted musical idiom of the spy movie genre from that time. Sadly, despite the producer’s hope to start a franchise, there were no further Phillip Calvert films, which is a shame. The minimalism and lack of glamor is reminiscent of The Ipcress Files and Calvert is an interesting anti-hero.
Mainstream films are easy to recommend to people. They’re usually formulaic, work within clear parameters and they’re not controversial. Most people, when viewing such film on someone else’s suggestion, are left with a fairly simply choice. Did they like it or not? Whatever the outcome, no feathers are ruffled. No one looks at you askance afterwards and says “why the hell did you think I’d like that piece of shit”? If something like this happens, then you have clearly not recommended a mainstream film. Perhaps you’ve suggested something that’s a little more of an acquired taste. Something niche, from a very specific sub-genre. Which brings me neatly to Blazing Magnum AKA Strange Shadows in an Empty Room (1976). The US title gives the impression that this film is a hard boiled cop thriller, like so many others that followed in the wake of Dirty Harry. But there’s a clue in the European title. Yes, this movie has more than just a whiff of a giallo about it.
Jason Statham is an exemplar of the US mantra of “staying in your lane”. He makes action movies and occasionally strays into action comedies. His formula broadly works and is sufficiently lucrative to keep Mr. Statham employed. Therefore, if you watch a film in which he stars, you have a fairly good idea of what you’ll be getting. Of late, the criteria for his action vehicles have become more succinct. Jason Statham will play an innocuous character, such as a construction foreman or a bee keeper. Something terrible will subsequently befall another character who Mr. Statham has an emotional connection with in some capacity. He will subsequently hunt down those responsible and meet out death and violence. At some point the villain of the story will enquire as to how this innocuous person is so lethal. Research will then show that our Jason is in fact an ex-police officer/special forces operative/international assassin. There’s then a showdown and the villain dies. Job done.
The Light at the Edge of the World presented itself as an action movie upon its release in 1971. Based upon a story by Jules Verne, the Spanish American co-production was driven by its star Kirk Douglas, who curiously hired British director Kevin Billington to helm the project. This tale of a lighthouse keeper fighting a war of attrition against a group of pirates that have captured his island, was market as an adventure film ostensibly in the idiom of the authors previous works and as a pirate movie. MGM bought the rights to distribute the film in the UK on the misunderstanding that it was a family friendly production. It was not and remains so. They subsequently had to cut 15 minutes of violence and torture as well as an undercurrent of sexual assault to secure a suitable rating. Conversely, the US distributors received an arbitrary PG rating, despite the fact this is one of a handful of films that honestly depicts pirates as murderers, rapists and worse.
It’s an established action film trope. The fire team comprised of ex-military personnel, move in on their target. Only to have the tables turned by someone they don’t deem a threat. What makes it different in The Last Stand of Ellen Cole is a throwaway line of dialogue. The bested operative lies bleeding on the floor and the protagonists stands over them ready to finish them off. “Don’t, I have a cat” they feebly plead. For me that was the icing on the cake. The movie had already established it was taking the “same old, same old” and doing something different. Something fun, if taken in the right spirit. This scene tipped the balance and I embraced this film because it was being honest about what it is. This is a modern B movie that decides to give a very specific sub-genre a makeover. Furthermore, its clearly done with an affectionate wink, which is very different to sly wink. This isn’t deliberate self-knowing irony. Its just a film doing something different and possibly silly but it genuinely wants to have fun with it.
Stephen King’s dystopian story, The Running Man, was previously adapted very loosely in 1987, as a vehicle for Arnold Schwarzenegger. That version focused mainly on the “Battle Royale” element of the story and leaned heavily into Arnie’s personality, rather than the politics of the book. It also wasn’t well received by the author. Edgar Wright’s remake follows the source text a lot more closely and is far more interested in its political themes and wider social commentary. Furthermore, this version re-establishes the everyman quality of the hero of Ben Richards, rather than him being the muscle bound, ex-military hero as per Mr. Schwarzenegger’s prior interpretation. This time round, The Running Man uses a lot of the visual and narrative tropes of contemporary reality TV, making this forty three year old story very relevant to today’s viewers and couching the film in a style that is recognisable and accessible.
After the success of Raiders of the Lost Ark in 1981, filmmakers scrambled to find existing intellectual properties that they could use for similar films. Hence archaic heroes such as Alan Quatermain were hastily given a modern makeover and thrust into generic movies, in a vague attempt to replicate Steven Spielberg’s successful formula. Which brings us neatly on to James Charles Bigglesworth AKA “Biggles”, a fictional pilot and adventurer from a series of books written by W. E. Johns between 1932 and 1968. Several attempts had been made in the past to bring this character to the silver screen, including one by Disney but they all failed. However, the commercial and critical success of Indiana Jones provided sufficient impetus to greenlight a new film. However, due to some curious production choices, when Biggles was finally released it was far from just a period set, action movie.
Setting aside the hubris of remaking a film such as Red Dawn, the 2012 reboot had a troubled production. Shot over the course of late 2009, on location in Michigan, MGM intended to release the film in September 2010. However, the studio’s financial problems became unsustainable over the course of that year and the film was shelved, while a financial solution was sought. Furthermore, while Red Dawn was in post production, there was a major economic shift within Hollywood due to the increasing importance of the Chinese market. This was a significant problem for MGM because the new version of Red Dawn had the Chinese invading the USA instead of Russia. Hence there were reshoots and the need for additional visual effects, so that the Chinese could be replaced with North Koreans. MGM eventually went bankrupt and the distribution rights to Red Dawn were sold off. The film was eventually released in 2012.
When I first saw the promotional trailer for Gangster Squad back in 2012, prior to its release, I wasn't especially impressed. I simply thought the film was another attempt to re-invent the gangster genre for a generation who were not especially familiar with it. I wasn't exactly overwhelmed with director Ruben Fleischer's resume either. I didn't particularly like Zombieland and haven't seen 30 Minutes Or Less. Then came the tragic mass shootings in Aurora, Colorado which led to the movie being delayed so that the original ending, which featured a shoot-out in a movie theatre, could be replaced. Hence when I finally watched this film recently, I wasn't expecting a movie up to the standards of say Once Upon A Time In America or Miller’s Crossing and it would seem that I was right do so. Gangster Squad is not especially noteworthy in any respect.
Levon Cade (Jason Staham) is a former Royal Marine Commando who has retired from military service and now works as the leader of a construction team in Chicago. He has a close relationship with Joe and Carla Garcia (Michael Peña and Noemi Gonzalez ) who run the company and considers them as family. Outside of work, Levon is involved in a bitter custody battle for his daughter, against her maternal grandfather, who blames Levon for his daughter’s suicide. When Garcia's teenage daughter Jenny (Arianna Rivas) goes missing, Levon reluctantly agrees to help her parents and get her back. Beginning his search at the nightclub where Jenny was last seen, he soon discovers that she was abducted by Russian traffickers. Furthermore, the culprit is Dimi Kolisnyk (Maximilian Osinski), the wayward son of a senior ranking gangster.
PC Nicholas Angel (Simon Pegg) is an exemplary Police Officer, with a strict adherence to the letter of the law. As a result of making the rest of the London Metropolitan Police look bad, he is transferred to the rural town of Sandford, Gloucestershire. On arrival, Angel finds that the local Inspector, Frank Butterman (Jim Broadbent), takes a far more laissez-faire approach to policing. His colleagues are incompetent and he is further hampered by the Neighbourhood Watch Alliance (NWA), who prioritise low crime statistics over law enforcement due to their desire to win the title of “Village of the Year”. Furthermore, Angel is partnered with the Inspector’s son, Constable Danny Butterman (Nick Frost), who is infatuated with “buddy cop” movies and is in awe of Angel’s London experience. “Have you ever fired two guns while jumping through the air?” However, a sudden spate of grisly accidents lead Angel to believe that there's more to the seemingly tranquil and picture-perfect community than meets the eye.
As a collection of history's worst tyrants and criminal masterminds gather to plot a war to wipe out millions, one man must race against time to stop them. Discover the origins of the very first independent intelligence agency in The King's Man. Based on the Comic Book “The Secret Service” by Mark Millar and Dave Gibbons. 20th Century Studios
Matthew Vaughn’s The King’s Man is an inconsistent film, both narratively and tonally. It veers between serious themes and stylised, hyperbolic action. At times it does quite a good job of exploring such complex subjects as global politics, mechanised warfare and colonialism. Sadly it then wrenches the viewer out of these cerebral reveries as it lapses into the sort of over the top action sequences that were notable in the two earlier films. It’s a shame because The King’s Man gets so many other aspects of the production right. The casting is very interesting, especially Ralph Fiennes as the “pacifist” Duke of Oxford. He is actually a very good fit for the action genre. Djimon Hounsou and Gemma Arterton are given little backstory beyond being respectively the faithful manservant and the family nanny but both are notable due to their own inherent acting chops and personal charisma. Rhys Ifans obviously has a great time as Grigori Rasputin, ensuring all the man’s vices are robustly depicted.
On paper, a video games franchise such as Assassin’s Creed lends itself perfectly to a cinematic adaptation. The parkour action scenes, the historical settings and the contemporary conspiracy theory themes are all elements that should play well with a modern youth audience. Hence with the backing of a major studio such as Twentieth Century Fox and a budget of $125 million, the 2016 movie should have been a guaranteed box office hit. The casting of Michael Fassbender, an actor who is comfortable with serious roles and big Hollywood franchises, should have carried this film comfortably over the finishing line. Director Justin Kurzel, who had found critical success with his adaptation of MacBeth a year previously, must have looked like a safe pair of hands to handle such a project. Sadly, that was not the case. Assassin’s Creed is not the sum of its parts, in fact many elements appear to be pulling in opposite directions. The resulting feature film is staggeringly dull, soulless and a chore to watch. A testament to how modern big budget franchise movies have become a production line, with all the art stripped from them.
300: Rise of an Empire is a curious beast, being neither a sequel nor a prequel. It is infact a tale that takes place simultaneously with those of the original movie. While Gerard Butler is busy making a last stand at the Battle of Thermopylae, fellow warrior and politician Themistokles, played by the singularly uncharismatic Sullivan Stapleton, leads a similar army of buffed Greeks against the Persian fleet. Once again we have a movie that is the epitome of style over substance, complete with a sound design that challenges what can physically be endured by human hearing. They say the first casualty of war is innocence but in this type of movie it's closely followed by historical accuracy and authentic depictions of ethnicity. 300: Rise of an Empire is a cinematic assault upon the senses but not in a good way like Mad Max: Fury Road.
Back in September 2017, Liam Neeson stated in an interview with Sky News that he was retiring from the action genre, due to his age. He felt that audiences would question his credibility in such roles. After the release of The Commuter (2018) and Cold Pursuit (2019) Mr Neeson appeared to return to human dramas and films that focus on performance rather than punching man and beast. Ordinary Love and Made in Italy, both released in 2019, demonstrate the actor’s versatility and skill. People seem to forget that he is a thespian who was initially known for his character driven roles in films such as The Mission (1986), Rob Roy (1995 and Michael Collins (1996). It was only in 2008 that he reinvented himself as an action hero. It’s all a far cry from Schindler’s List and his performance that earned him an academy award nomination. The reason I mention all of this is because The Ice Road is the third action movie I’ve seen in 2021 that stars Liam Neeson.
One of the stand out tropes of the modern action film is that the stakes are always cranked right up to 11. Terrorists, biological weapons and nuclear bombs are common threats in such movies with a hero or heroes trying to save the world from death and destruction or worse. However, back in the sixties and seventies, things were a little more straight forward and in some respects more credible. Take When Eight Bells Toll, released in 1971, for example. British Treasury secret agent Phillip Calvert investigates the theft of £8,000,000 in gold bullion by a gang of international smugglers. In the context of the times this was no small beer however it’s somewhat mundane compared to fighting super villains and their space lasers. Frankly I prefer these low key plot devices as they can make a film a little more plausible within the confines of the genre. A concept that is often forgotten today.
Forensic accountant Owen Casserly (Jake Weber) flees his home with his teenage son Connor (Finn Little) when he discovers he has been targeted by a pair of assassins (Nicholas Hoult and Aidan Gillen) who have been hired to stop him giving evidence in a major corruption case. Connor witnesses the murder of his father after their car is run off the road. Entrusted with important written evidence, he escapes into the dense forests of the Montana wilderness pursued by the killers. Seeking help he runs into smokejumper Hannah Faber (Angelina Jolie) who is stationed at a remote fire lookout tower. Hannah suffers from PTSD from a previous forest fire in which she was unable to save three young boys. Hannah attempts to lead Connor through the forest to safety. Meanwhile the assassins set fire to the forest to divert the attention of the authorities and cover their tracks.
I must admit that I did not have particularly high hopes for Paul W S Anderson's remake of the 1975 Roger Corman produced cult classic. Anderson’s work varies greatly. Event Horizon and Soldier are solid genre films but I still have not fully come to terms with Alien vs. Predator. Jason Statham is also a name that divides the public, with solid material such as The Transporter and unfathomable tosh like Revolver. But despite these considerations, Death Race is in fact quite a surprise and does not follow the path that so many remakes do. It takes the basic themes and concept associated with the original and tries to do something different with them. It doesn’t reinvent the wheel nor is it a genre milestone. But it does offer a different spin on things, have some engaging action scenes and provide some dumb but enjoyable entertainment. When combined with snacks and some beer this is a passable way to kill 111 minutes.
I did not watch Zero Dark Thirty upon its initial release, due to the politics surrounding it. I wanted to be able to view it free from bipartisan debate. Eight years on I believe this now achievable and although debate still exists it is now more measured and less strident. Zero Dark Thirty is certainly a compelling movie. It plays as a docudrama, providing an in-depth study of the US intelligence services hunt for Osama Bin Laden. It cannot be faulted on a technical level and the performances are very strong. It does not adopt a celebratory or triumphalist tone in its approach to the story. Director Kathryn Bigelow endeavours to keep the proceedings focused upon the intricacies of an intelligence driven manhunt. There is little or no tubthumping, jingoism. The decision to find Bin Laden is shown as a political and military exercise of foreign policy. The film solely focuses on the story from a US perspective but that is perfectly acceptable as it is not intended to be an exploration of geo-politics.
Firestorm was originally written as a vehicle for Sylvester Stallone, however when the production company Savoy Pictures went bankrupt the screenplay was bought by Twentieth Fox and the scope of the movie reduced to suit a lower budget. It’s broadly similar to Cliffhanger in so far as the lead character is a specialist in a certain field who runs afoul of criminals in a perilous environment. Whereas Cliffhanger is set in the Rocky Mountains, Firestorm takes place in the forests of Northern Wyoming. After the script was revised four times, the finished screenplay was given a final “polish” by Graham Yost who has considerable experience with the action movie genre. As stallone was no longer associated with the project and the production had been repurposed to be less extravagant, the movie was assigned to former NFL star Howie Long. Long had already appeared in the John Woo movie Broken Arrow (1996) and the Firestorm was seen as a means to give him a star vehicle.
The original French movies District 13 and its sequel District 13: Ultimatum, conceived and produced by Luc Besson, were enjoyable variations of the Escape from New York theme. Their charm lay in their European pedigree and the skilful use of parkour. The two leads, David Belle and Cyril Raffaelli, were eminently suited to the minimalist roles and the screenplays were fun. Half of these movies appeal was the fact that they were not mainstream US products. Brick Mansions is the Hollywood remake of District 13, as well as being Paul Walkers’ final movie. Sadly, this film is far from a fitting epitaph, being devoid of any charisma or innovations. It is blandly shot , poorly edited and has been stripped of everything that made the original entertaining.
Arnold Schwarzenegger's return to the big screen after his political career has been uneven to say the least. His cameos in The Expendables and The Expendables 2 were well received, with their self referential charm and age related irony. Yet his first major movie The Last Stand, although competent, failed to find an audience. Escape Plan fared better at the box office but did not put Arnie back on the A list. Effectively there's a large percentage of the contemporary cinematic audience who were born after his heyday and are simply not overt fans of his work. His core audience is more than likely of the age group that consume most of their film entertainment at home. Which may explain why Sabotage tanked in the US upon release on March 28th 2014. It was the worst opening box office of Arnie's career. He used to break first day opening records.
Sequels and reboots are hardly a new concept and have been a part of Hollywood culture since the 1930s. The success of the Universal Horror movies from that era being a prime example of direct follow ups and retconned movies. However, there is one fundamental rule that distinguishes a good sequel from a bad one. You should never mitigate, undermine or make irrelevant the events of the previous movie, just to provide your new film with a raison d'être. For example, the events of Aliens do not contradict or trivialise those that happened in Alien. In fact with that franchise there is a very clear logical progression between the two movies. The same is true for Mad Max and Mad Max 2 or Star Wars and The Empire Strikes Back. The key is to progress a story, enhance it or explore things from an alternative angle and bring something new to the cinematic table. Sadly this philosophy is all too often lost on corporate film making. Which means that many sequels are just tedious replays of prior films. Terminator: Dark Fate falls squarely into this category.
The enduring appeal of the character John Rambo in First Blood comes from the fact that he is a traumatised ex- service man who keeps himself to himself as he drifts from job to job, trying to come to terms with his wartime experiences. His poor treatment at the hands of a small-town Sheriff is a succinct metaphor for the social and political indifference that Vietnam veterans were shown upon their return to the US. He’s a man with a code in a world that no longer has any use for him. His simple and honest patriotism is not returned and he is in fact viewed with shame by many from the nation he loves. Furthermore, the first movie does not paint him as a cold-blooded killer. Despite provocation he is not the first person to shoot to kill. Rambo is in many ways a victim. A broken man, who society has asked to do unspeakable things. Now society wants nothing to do with him and fears the “monster” they created. Although clearly an action movie, First Blood had narrative depth and a flawed but sympathetic protagonist. 37 years and four movies later, such dramatic themes have long left the franchise. The central character is indeed a caricature of its former self.
It was hardly surprising that the movie adaptation of Chris Kyle's autobiography American Sniper, would cause controversy. The Iraq war, US Foreign Policy and national pride are seldom subjects that are discussed in a calm and measured fashion. And then there are the personal politics of director Clint Eastwood to consider. Hence there were claims from some quarters upon the movie’s release, that it was Islamophobic and counter claims that criticisms of the late Chris Kyle were unpatriotic. There still remain issues regarding the authenticity of events depicted in the source text and subsequently the movies screenplay by Jason Hall. Yet none of these factors have in anyway impacted upon the film's box office returns which currently stands at $247,900,417 worldwide.
Do I really need to present you with some sort of plot synopsis for Transporter 3? No, I didn’t think so. More of the same as Frank Martin (Jason Statham) and his police chum, Inspector Tarconi (Francois Berleand) become embroiled in yet another high-octane escapade. There's fights, car stunts, exotic international locations and a strong sense of humour. This time, the disposable love interest is a Ukrainian girl named Valentina (Natalya Rudakova) who fulfils her role succinctly. The film benefits by being set back in Europe, after the mistake of basing Transporter 2 in the US. This time, the story takes us to such locations as Budapest and Odessa. The international film crew once again bring a veneer of panache to the production that is conspicuously absent in US action movies. For a modest budget fil, Transporter 3 it looks very good. Again the proceedings are given a boost by a pertinent soundtrack by Alexandre Azaria and a selection of European “tunes”.
Jason Bourne originally graced our screens for the first time seventeen years ago. The Bourne Identity was a gritty, minimalist take on the espionage genre and a welcome change from the excesses of the Pierce Brosnan Bond era. The story arc was sustained over three movies and ended efficiently and succinctly. After which Matt Damon moved on, as did the director of two of the movies, Paul Greengrass. Which leaves us with The Bourne Legacy; the tangential sequel that arrived in 2012. A film that exists because the money men and bean counters hate to pass up on a franchise until it has been squeezed utterly dry. Hence, they commissioned the writer of the series, Tony Gilroy, to come up with a screenplay and direct a spinoff movie. Jeremy Renner was cast in the lead role. Yet despite narrative and production continuity, The Bourne Legacy was not a Jason Bourne movie with the star appeal of Matt Damon. Although the film turned a profit, it had the lowest box office returns out of the entire franchise.
During the eighties there was a clear league table of action movie stars. By the mid-nineties this system fell into decline and the Hollywood lacked any clearly defined exponents of the genre. A decade later, due to the success of Luc Besson’s Transporter films, Jason Statham became a bankable box office star in this field. When you look at Statham's early work in Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels it is hard to envisage the "mockney geezer" as an international action star. Yet he has successfully stepped into the role and enjoys a large following. I enjoy his work as he has a likeable on-screen persona. My 88-year-old Mum likes him to because "he wears nice suits". The action genre seldom reaches such a diverse demographic.
Before we start, I recollect that one well known UK critic described Safe House as sub-Tony Scott, upon its release. Now I’ve always been conflicted over Scott’s back catalogue, as I’ve always found his movies to be hampered by their own unique style. The subtleties of his characters and depth of his themes are all too often drowned out by his frenetic style and fast paced editing. Therefore a comment such as this really sets off alarm bells for me. Having recently watched The Equalizer 2, I wanted a further fix of Denzel Washington in a similar action vehicle. As Safe House was available on Netflix UK, I decided to kill a couple of hours and see what actually constitutes as “sub-Tony Scott”.
Grizzly (1976)
After the critical and commercial success of Jaws in 1975, a veritable tsunami of “creature feature” movies followed in its wake. A few titles, such as Alligator (1980) and Piranha (1978) managed to do something different with the rogue animal trope, both providing a quirky and satirical look at the genre along with plenty of exploitation mayhem. However, most of the rest were low budget productions of negligible quality. However, such qualities are not always an impediment at the box office. Grizzly (1976) was hastily made on a budget of $750,000 yet earned an impressive $39,000,000 at the box office. The critics hated it but the public loved it and it went on to be the second most financially successful independent feature film in the US that year (the first being Monty Python and the Holy Grail). Grizzly is in many ways a microcosm of the exploitation genre from the seventies and needs to be viewed through that prism if it is to be enjoyed.
After the critical and commercial success of Jaws in 1975, a veritable tsunami of “creature feature” movies followed in its wake. A few titles, such as Alligator (1980) and Piranha (1978) managed to do something different with the rogue animal trope, both providing a quirky and satirical look at the genre along with plenty of exploitation mayhem. However, most of the rest were low budget productions of negligible quality. However, such qualities are not always an impediment at the box office. Grizzly (1976) was hastily made on a budget of $750,000 yet earned an impressive $39,000,000 at the box office. The critics hated it but the public loved it and it went on to be the second most financially successful independent feature film in the US that year (the first being Monty Python and the Holy Grail). Grizzly is in many ways a microcosm of the exploitation genre from the seventies and needs to be viewed through that prism if it is to be enjoyed.
In an unspecified National Park in South Eastern America, Chief Ranger Michael Kelly (Christopher George) and his team search for two female hikers who are overdue after breaking camp. Kelly is joined by photographer Allison Corwin (Joan McCall) who subsequently stumbles upon human remains that have been partially buried. Tracks in the area and a subsequent autopsy confirm that there is a large predator loose in the park. Charley Kittridge (Joe Dorsey) the park supervisor, blames Kelly and naturalist Arthur Scott (Richard Jaeckel) as all bears were supposed to be tagged and removed from the tourist areas before the vacation season began. After further attacks Kittridge invites local hunters to kill the bear. Kelly and Scott decide to track the Grizzly down themselves. With the help of local helicopter pilot and Vietnam veteran Don Stober (Andrew Prine), they journey into the wilderness and attempt to set a trap. But the 15 ft, 2000 lbs bear proves more cunning than they anticipate.
One of the most often cited criticisms of Grizzly is it’s slavish adherence to the plot of Jaws. Director William Girdler attempts to duplicate many of the plot details from Spielberg’s iconic film. Hence we have a senior public official who refuses to take action when necessary, the near death of a child being a major catalyst of events and a trio of heroes who take on the task of hunting down the predator themselves. Sadly, Grizzly lacks the production polish and the quality dialogue that Jaws has in spades. The screenplay by Harvey Flaxman and David Sheldon is perfunctory to say the best and weak even by the standards of the exploitation genre. All major characters are woefully undeveloped and Christopher George, Andrew Prine and Richard Jaekel struggle to do much with their roles, often having to rely on their own personalities to get by. The location photography is good but the dense forest and striking mountains are not used to their full advantage.
Due to several plotlines and characters vanishing from the proceedings, shortly after being introduced, it seems likely that Grizzly was edited down from a longer film into the tight 89 minutes that makes up the theatrical release. Native American culture is alluded to but then plays no further part of the plot. Kelly’s romance with Allison Corwin simply ceases to be relevant halfway in and is dispensed with after a time. The levels of violence are also inconsistent. The first two onscreen deaths feature a severed arm flying across the screen. After this the kills are somewhat tamer. However, Grizzly ups the ante when a child is attacked in his garden. His Mother beats the bear with a broom, who drops the young child revealing his left leg bitten off below the knee. She herself is then mauled to death. This disparity in content again suggests last minute editing to secure a lower rating. Allegedly the first cut was R rated and featured more nudity and gore. It was then reduced for a PG rating.
Perhaps the weakest aspect of Grizzly is the bear itself. In a few of the attack sequences, the bear is a stunt performer in a suit but for the vast majority of the film, a real Kodiak bear (called Teddy) was used. Sadly, this particular bear never appears particularly menacing or threatening. Apparently the bear wrangler used marshmallows on a stick to make the animal stand and reach. Its subsequent slavering looks more comical than enraged. The bear certainly is imposing, due to its height but it never truly instills fear. Yet perhaps I am looking at this film with the perspective of a genre aficionado in his middle fifties, who has seen a lot of movies over the years. In the late seventies, this sort of fodder would have appealed greatly to the youth market (as the box office returns show). Director William Girdler went on to direct The Manitou, which I am very fond of. As for Grizzly, it remains an interesting example of how being in the right place at the right time is often essential to successful exploitation cinema.
In 1968 the dilapidated freighter Corita hastily leaves Freetown to avoid a customs inspection. Captain Lansen (Eric Porter) has a cargo of dangerous explosives which he is smuggling so he can finally retire. His ship’s passengers also have reasons for leaving in a hurry. Dr. Webster (Nigel Stock), together with his daughter Unity (Suzanna leigh), is relocating due to his indiscretions with patients and illegal operations. Alcoholic pianist Harry Tyler (Tony Beckley) is aimlessly drifting from port to port. Eva Peters (Hildegard Knef) is fleeing from her husband with stolen bearer bonds which she intend to use to buy back her son from his evil clutches Caracas. Ricaldi (Ben Carruthers), a questionable lawyer, is pursuing Eva to retrieve the stolen bonds. First officer Hemmings (Neil McCallum) suggests that the ship should return to Freetown after an imminent Hurricane warning. The Captain asks the passengers and they are unanimous that they do not wish to return. However a mutinous crew, the bad weather and the instability of the explosives force everyone to abandon ship. The survivors find themselves adrift in a lifeboat surrounded by a strange carnivorous seaweed.
Despite being considered by many as an original story, The Abominable Snowman (1957) is in fact a remake of a made for television play, The Creature, that was originally broadcast in the UK in 1955. Hammer Films would often purchase the rights of popular TV programs and subsequently re-work them for mainstream, international cinema. Larger production budgets and fewer censorship restrictions allowed them to make their cinematic interpretations more lurid, thus commercially viable. Hence The Quatermass Xperiment, Quatermass II and Quatermass and the Pit were all given a big screen makeover and were commercially successful. The Abominable Snowman was written by acclaimed writer Nigel Kneale, who also wrote the original television drama and the aforementioned Quatermass trilogy. Although ostensibly marketed as a horror film this production is actually an interesting blend of psychological thriller and science fiction.
In the near future, Kepler 822, a research and drilling facility located at the bottom of the Mariana Trench, suffers a sudden and catastrophic structural failure. There are only six survivors. Mechanical engineer Norah Price (Kristen Stewart), Captain Lucien (Vincent Cassel), biologist Emily Haversham (Jessica Henwick), engineer Liam Smith (John Gallagher Jr.) and crew members Rodrigo (Mamoudou Athie) and Paul (T.J. Miller). As all the functional escape pods have been used and they are unable to contact the surface, the Captain suggests using pressurized suits to walk one mile across the ocean floor to the Roebuck 641 drill installation. There they will find more escape pods. However, it soon becomes apparent that the disaster was not caused by an undersea earthquake and that they are not alone as they make their journey.
One of the most common objections raised regarding the Jurassic Park/Jurassic World franchise is that the films are specifically made to obtain a PG-13 rating from the Motion Picture Association, for purely commercial reasons. Hence, in all films, there is little on screen violence and the dinosaurs are mainly portrayed as a threat and a means of providing jump scares. When a character is killed by a dinosaur it usually happens off screen, is obscured by something else in frame, or is shown in long shot with very little detail. The realities of being eaten alive by a predator are conspicuously absent. Hence, audiences looking for films featuring more graphic dinosaur attacks, have not been well catered for apart from some minor direct-to-video titles. Primitive War finally fills this gap in the market with a frenetic genre mashup that strives to punch above is budgetary weight.
Fluke is a curious film about a man who is reincarnated as a dog and his subsequent realisation that he may have been murdered. It takes an adult novel by British author James Herbert, which is filled with philosophical musing and strives to adapt it in a far more family friendly fashion. The result is a somewhat bipolar production which thematically alternates between existential introspection and Buddhism. It then strives to deliver its message in a Disneyesque idiom. Children will potentially be confused and upset by what they see and adults will be wrongfooted by the continual shift in tone. Fluke was not a critical or commercial success upon release and the flaws that were identified by critics at the time still ring true today. That being said, Fluke is still an interesting and entertaining film, despite its faults.
When reviewing Sting, one critic stated that the small scale setting and thus, low stakes (IE only a few peoples lives are at risk), made the film not especially memorable. I consider this to be a somewhat spurious criticism. It is the very fact that Sting takes place in such a commonplace environment, with the main characters being everyday people that makes it different. There is a clear focus on well defined characters and their backstory. Unlike so many contemporary films, I actually gave a damn about the protagonists in Sting. An integral aspect of the horror genre is the ability to take a well known and familiar trope and provide a different and absorbing spin on it .It would appear that some audiences have been belaboured over the head by so many overblown and bombastic blockbusters, that the very notion of depicting small, localised and intimate events in a film, seems to bamboozle them.
When I first saw Mimic in 1997, I was impressed by the fact that it offered a different perspective on the monster movie genre and that it seemed to have moments of greater depth than you'd expect from such material. Later on when I became more aware of the works of writer, director Guillermo del Toro, I learned that this movie had had a troubled production and that Miramx had imposed specific requirements upon the final cut of the film. This explained some of the movies inconsistencies and hinted at a far more ambitious artistic endeavour by del Toro. Initially Mimic was conceived as a thirty minute short and part of a three part anthology movie. However it along with the sci-fi film Imposter were both deemed to be of sufficient merit to be developed into feature length productions.
During the seventies, Hollywood started looking to ongoing societal and political concerns as a source of material for movies. Hence, the energy crisis, terrorism and global pollution quickly found themselves being subsumed into hastily written screenplays, in attempt to be topical, commercially successful and relevant. Prophecy based upon a novel by David Seltzer tackled not only the issue of pollution but also the ongoing disenfranchisement of Native Americans. Paramount studios went so far as hiring an established director of note, John Frankenheimer. In many respects this movie should have been a bigger success with a reasonable budget, robust cast and studio support. Sadly it did not fare well, either critically or at the box office due to obvious flaws in the production. Despite his outstanding body work, (Birdman of Alcatraz, The Manchurian Candidate) Frankenheimer was not the best choice of director for a genre movie such as this and he was also going through a period of alcoholism.
In Agua Dulce, California, the Haywood family trains horses for film and TV productions. One day at the Haywood ranch, small metal objects unaccountably fall from the sky. One of which, a nickel, kills Otis Haywood Sr (Keith David). His children, Emerald “Em” Haywood (Keke Palmer) and Otis “OJ” Haywood Jr. (Daniel Kaluuya), continue to run the business. However, due to the loss of a contract, they have to sell some of the horses to Ricky “Jupe” Park (Steven Yeun), who operates a Western theme park called Jupiter's Claim. One night, the Haywood’s notice the electricity supply fluctuating and their horses violently reacting to an unknown presence. They discover that something has been taking their horses and regurgitating inorganic matter, which OJ believes caused their father's death. The Haywood’s decide to obtain proof and subsequently ask electronics store employee and UFO enthusiast, Angel Torres (Brandon Perea) to set up surveillance cameras.
Back in 2018 I wrote the following about The Meg in my review. “My interest doesn’t go so far as a sequel. This sort of movie is the equivalent of a greasy burger you buy at the funfair. It’s fine once in a while as an indulgence, despite the fact that you know it’s bad, but you would soon tire of them being a regular part of my diet”. Five years later, I foolishly thought it may be “fun” to give the sequel, Meg 2: The Trench (2023), a go. Especially in light of the fact that it’s directed by Ben Wheatley. Surely such a filmmaker would bring some creativity and a fresh perspective to this franchise? Nope. Turns out he didn’t. Meg 2: The Trench lacks everything that made its predecessor tolerable. This superfluous sequel is an uninspired, poorly written mess which confuses turning everything up to eleven with entertainment. It gets nowhere near “it’s so bad, it’s good” territory. Instead it makes the biggest mistake a film of this nature can do. It’s dull.
Not to be confused with the Shaw Brothers martial arts film of the same name from 1978, The Deadly Mantis (1957) is a creature feature in the idiom of Them! (1954). Unlike that film’s mutant ants, the monster on this occasion is not the product of the atomic age but a giant prehistoric praying mantis that has been released from the polar ice caps. Exactly how a creature associated with more tropical regions came to be at the North Pole is never explained. In fact precious little is in The Deadly Mantis. The film’s overall scope is somewhat limited with a basic story, limited action scenes and a rather dull cast of generic characters. There is an over reliance upon stock footage from period military documentaries and previous Universal Studio feature films. The film’s biggest failing is the giant praying mantis which does most of its rampaging conveniently off camera. It’s all rather disappointing.
It is no secret that the film industry relies on a handful of common tropes as the mainstay of their cinematic output. It uses timeless themes, storylines and archetypes that have featured in folk tales, plays and literature throughout history. Hence their familiarity with audiences around the world. Where the skill in filmmaking lies is to take a common, well known idea and interpret it in a new and innovative fashion. Akira Kurosawa took Shakespeare’s MacBeth and retold the tale through the prism of Japanese feudalistic culture. The result, Throne of Blood, is considered a masterpiece. Similarly, The Lion King retells the same story through the medium of animation and anthropomorphic wildlife. All of which proves that the key to successfully retelling a familiar tale is to be creative with regard to setting, presentation and perspective.
Jurassic World Dominion is a textbook example of a franchise that has run out of steam. Despite the enormous budget, the top notch production values and the presence of three members of the original cast, this is a long, tedious and curiously uneventful film. It has nothing new to say about environmental matters or unfettered science; themes that were front and centre in previous instalments. Nor does it do anything interesting with the main plot device of dinosaurs trying to integrate into our current ecosystems. But perhaps its biggest failing is the conspicuous lack of tension. The denizens of Jurassic World are simply not a threat and fail to have any emotional impact. The film doesn’t even placate viewers with superfluous cast members being eaten. The onscreen deaths by dinosaurs are rather tame.
Set in Brazil in 1901, plantation owner Christopher Leiningen (Charlton Heston) makes arrangements to get married. He has spent his entire life building his estate and reclaiming land from the jungle. He is fiercely independent but he is also alone and isolated. Joanna Selby (Eleanor Parker) from New Orleans agrees to marry him but their first meeting does not go well. Leiningen is unhappy to discover that Joanna is a widow and hence has a past, so he tells her to return to America on the next available boat. However, local commissioner (William Conrad) informs Leiningen that swarming soldier ants, or Marabunta, are moving towards his plantation destroying everything in their path. Leiningen refuses to abandon his life’s work and is surprised when Joanna decides to stay with him. Can they convince their native workers to stay too and can they defend the estate from the Marabunta, described as “forty square miles of agonising death”.
After the critical and commercial success of Jaws in 1975, a veritable tsunami of “creature feature” movies followed in its wake. A few titles, such as Alligator (1980) and Piranha (1978) managed to do something different with the rogue animal trope, both providing a quirky and satirical look at the genre along with plenty of exploitation mayhem. However, most of the rest were low budget productions of negligible quality. However, such qualities are not always an impediment at the box office. Grizzly (1976) was hastily made on a budget of $750,000 yet earned an impressive $39,000,000 at the box office. The critics hated it but the public loved it and it went on to be the second most financially successful independent feature film in the US that year (the first being Monty Python and the Holy Grail). Grizzly is in many ways a microcosm of the exploitation genre from the seventies and needs to be viewed through that prism if it is to be enjoyed.
The seventies saw a minor boom in creature feature films after the box office success of Jaws. Hence, we had movies such as Orca (1977), Tentacles (1977), The Pack (1977) and Piranha (1978). If an animal could eat you or potentially pose any threat to people, someone somewhere would make a movie about it. Usually a bad one. A few of these even dared to stray into other hot topics of the time such as pollution and protecting the environment. Some would even invoke mysticism and folk lore to facilitate their protagonists. Nightwing is one such curious genre hybrid which combines vampire bats, shale oil mining and Native American culture in its clumsy and unsubtle plot. It’s a somewhat odd undertaking, directed by Arthur Hiller. His previous work included Love Story (1970) and Silver Streak (1976), so he was not the first person you’d expect to see associated with such material. The film doesn’t work well as either a horror movie or an exploration of social issues, but like so many movies from this era, it is of interest mainly due to its sheer incongruity.
If you have seen any of the marketing material or trailers for The Meg, then you know exactly what you’re getting right from the get-go. All movies inherently require the viewer to suspend their sense of disbelief to various degrees. Naturally, the “creature feature” genre asks audience to go the extra mile with this concept. The Meg takes a major gamble by insisting that everyone goes further still, not by believing in a giant prehistoric shark (Megalodon) but that Jason Statham is a ex-navy, deep sea rescue diver. However, it pays off and the resulting movie is staggeringly stupid, but mercifully entertaining in an undemanding way. Recent movies such as Into the Storm and Geostorm are crass and made worse by their implicit assumption that their viewers are stupid. The Meg is far from cerebral but has an upbeat tone and a sense of playfulness that knowingly invites the audience to come aboard with the silliness. It’s a big distinction and the reason why I smiled a lot and frequently rolled my eyes while watching The Meg, but never with derision.
Critical opinion was very much split this summer when Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom was released. However, the viewers were somewhat indifferent to the opinions of the professional critics and the movie made a healthy $1,303,476,615 globally, proving once again that the public’s’ continuing love affair with “all things dinosaur” shows no sign of abating. When you factor in the home media market into overall profits, the entire Jurassic Park franchise will have made $5 billion worldwide. So, bearing in mind the old adage that “money talks and bullshit walks”, I think it’s safe to say there’ll be more instalments in the years to come. When faced with such overwhelming box office popularity it seems somewhat pointless to dissect the latest movie, because the film seems to be bullet proof regardless of narrative flaws or ill-conceived plot devices. However, film criticism isn’t about box office popularity but about analysing the relative quality of a movie’s construction and its subsequent standing.
I first saw The Land That Time Forgot way back in 1975 at the Odeon Isle of Wight, when it was first released. We were on holiday at the time, which was cause for celebration in itself, as these were few and far between during my youth, due to the state of the UK economy at the time. But to then go to the cinema and see a fantasy film, filled with action, adventure and monsters, was the icing on the cake for an over excited eight-year-old. Adapted by Michael Moorcock and James Cawthorn from the 1924 the novel by Edgar Rice Burroughs, The Land That Time Forgot is a classic example of high adventure on a low budget. Its technical shortcomings were even apparent to me as a child, yet there was a charm and honesty to this curious British production, that had the audacity to try and compete with the likes of more expensive US productions such as The Golden Voyage of Sinbad and Island at the Top of the World.
Black Sheep is a high concept horror comedy from New Zealand. Featuring creative physical effects by Weta Workshop, this tale of genetically modified killer sheep, animal husbandry and environmentalism requires a very broad sense of humour and an abiding love for the “creature feature” sub-genre. It should be noted that the copy I watched was the unrated R1 DVD. This version is stronger in content than the R rated US theatrical release and yet was released at the UK cinemas with only a 15 rating from the BBFC. I suspect that the similarities in humour between the UK and New Zealand contributed to this somewhat low rating. That and the fact that horror comedy often gets a free pass because the humour always tends to mitigate the violence.
Frank Darabont achieved both critical acclaim and mass appeal with his adaptations of The Shawshank Redemption and The Green Mile. In 2007 he returned once again to the work of Stephen King with his film version of The Mist. It’s a sideways step away from human drama into a more genre piece, yet it still retains a very traditional story at its heart. Once you look beyond the superficial elements of "creature feature" plot, you get yet another well written character study by an ensemble cast, again focusing on how the human condition deals with extreme situations. The particular route it takes and some of the themes it explores may not be to everyone's taste. However, it still focuses on characters and performances. It is also a movie that ends with a somewhat unexpected plot development, that some viewers may find a little extreme. It is one of those film related twists that if known in advance, greatly diminishes once enjoyment of the film.
When you see the names of such cinematic luminaries as Steven Spielberg and J.J. Abrams together on the same movie poster, naturally your expectations are going to be high. Yet when watching the various trailers for Super 8, just prior to its release in 2011, I was somewhat cautious. I have discussed in the past at some length the ambiguous nature of trailers and that they can misrepresent a film. Yet even bearing this in mind at the time, I couldn’t help but feel that Super 8 seemed like a somewhat self-indulgent homage to Spielberg's earlier work. I subsequently saw the movie at the cinema in August that year and my suspicions were validated. However, over time I have spoken to several friends who are advocates of the movie, so I thought I’d watch it a second time. Sadly, I still find myself unable to label Super 8 as anything else other than adequate. Now I would hasten to add, that I use adequate within the context of both director’s body of work. An adequate film from either Mr Spielberg or Abrams is still superior to many of their competitors. But that's not the point. I simply expected better from such a project.
Having recently sat through Orcs! I decided to take a further chance and watch Orc Wars. It too is a very low budget film, although this time the finances were raised through crowdfunding. Sadly, it is not the fun, tongue in cheek, independent adventure movie the trailer and associated marketing implies. There is very little merit in this production. It's cheap, cheerful and although harmless, it clearly demonstrates that not all fan funded projects are good cinema. Some are just indulgences. The problem is in the title itself, which tries to sell an idea that the movie production is incapable of delivering. Instead of the spectacle of an army of a thousand Orcs pitted against the technological might of the US war machine, we get a few extras in ill-fitting costumes, running skirmishes against no-name actors on quad bikes and a few old Army Surplus vehicles. It's all rather lacklustre and underwhelming.
As a fan of the horror genre I’ve sat through numerous low budget films in my time. This has usually been at festivals or conventions. Sometimes watching something as part of a group, with likeminded individuals, makes a difference. You find yourself groaning in unison and the shared experience helps compensate for potential deficiencies. Watching questionable material in the comfort of your own home, purely on your own can be a lot tougher. However, due to my abiding love of the genre, I am prepared to cut a lot of cheap ass indie flicks considerably more slack than I would others. So, I'll endeavour to review Orcs! with as much impartiality as possible. Oh, and before we start, let us clarify the term Orcs. Although Middle-earth is not referenced in any way, this film is definitely about Tolkien's creations. Or at least their depiction in another well-known series of films.
10 Cloverfield Lane blends several cinematic genres producing an interesting premise. Once it has established its narrative arc, it then dives head long into an exciting and tense one hundred and four minutes. The movie is not a direct sequel to Cloverfield (2008) but does touch upon some of the same themes and ideas. Made on a modest budget of $15 million, the claustrophobic setting of a nuclear bunker accommodates strong performances from the lead actors. It is not until the third act when the story movies back to the outside world, do we see any major visual effects. Overall, this is a very compelling film due to the strong screenplay and well defined central characters.
I did my best to avoid the hype surrounding the initial release of Cloverfield. Such media saturation and public interest can often cloud the issue of whether the actual film is any good. Five years later and having watched the movie twice, once in the theatre and once at home, I am still somewhat conflicted about this movie. The use of hand held video cameras is both a boon and a bane. The constant movement of the image has proven to cause motion sickness for some viewers, although this is not so overwhelming when viewed on a smaller screen at home. Yet the medium of news footage mixed with handheld cameras does create a palpable sense of immediacy. This helps immensely when trying to sell a fantastic concept, such as the one that Cloverfield features.
The enigma of the Xenomorph in the Alien franchise is diminished once you start to rationalise its heritage. Sadly, that’s exactly what Alien: Covenant has chosen to do. It jettisons the mystery of the original 1979 movie and pulls back the curtain, so wisely put in place thirty-eight years ago, to reveal a rather lacklustre explanation to the Xenomorph’s origin. Having spent nearly $100 million and employed a production team of some of the finest talent that money can buy, the resulting movie is not bad per se, just crushingly superfluous. After watching Alien: Covenant this week, my overall reaction can be distilled down to a deep sigh of indifference and a shrug of the shoulders.
I have written many times in recent years about how big titles get announced by the gaming industry, of the ensuing hype up that leads up to launch day and then the subsequent disappointment on purchase. It is a malady that has afflicted the movie industry for decades and has become increasingly more common in the last decade. Hype has a curious link with reputation. There are a handful of directors in contemporary Hollywood who when they add their name to a production, people take notice. Ridley Scott is one of these. His body of work pretty much guarantees he can make whatever he wants, be it a commercial undertaking or a ludicrous vanity project. However, the downside to being a film maker of this stature is that you are not so easily exposed to proper scrutiny by your peers. No one stops you from making a mistake because you are supposed to know what you are doing. They let you do what you want. Which is bad.
Shalako (1968)
From the 1950s to the mid 1970s, most major film stars would appear in a western at some point in their career. The western genre was simply too popular and lucrative to avoid or dismiss. So it probably won’t come as a surprise to learn that after he walked away from James Bond in 1967, Sean Connery appeared in the western Shalako, a year later. Based on a novel by Louis L’Amour, this European financed production with an international cast is a curious beast that straddles two competing approaches to the genre. The traditional, romanticised western with its stylised tropes was giving way to a grittier, revisionist approach. Shalako still feels like an example of the former but director Edward Dmytryk does not shy away from the more contemporary use of violence. The film drags, especially during the awkward romantic interludes between Connery and Brigitte Bardot. But the action scenes are quite gritty and some of the story’s themes are quite dour.
From the 1950s to the mid 1970s, most major film stars would appear in a western at some point in their career. The western genre was simply too popular and lucrative to avoid or dismiss. So it probably won’t come as a surprise to learn that after he walked away from James Bond in 1967, Sean Connery appeared in the western Shalako, a year later. Based on a novel by Louis L’Amour, this European financed production with an international cast is a curious beast that straddles two competing approaches to the genre. The traditional, romanticised western with its stylised tropes was giving way to a grittier, revisionist approach. Shalako still feels like an example of the former but director Edward Dmytryk does not shy away from the more contemporary use of violence. The film drags, especially during the awkward romantic interludes between Connery and Brigitte Bardot. But the action scenes are quite gritty and some of the story’s themes are quite dour.
Shalako starts with an opening crawl by author Louis L’Amour, stating how many European nobles and dignitaries came to American to hunt and to experience the frontier. The story then focuses on a party of visiting aristocrats and a U.S. senator who are on a hunting expedition, while bringing all the trappings of their lifestyle with them. Servants, vintage wine and silverware as well their socioeconomic based hubris. Their questionable guide Bosky Fulton (Stephen Boyd) foolishly camps on Apache land incurring the wrath of the local chief and his warriors. When Countess Irina (Bardot) is waylaid by the Indians she is rescued by ex-army scout Shalako (Sean Connery), who had previously brokered a peace between the Indians and the US government. The pair return to the camp and inform Baron Frederick Von Hallstatt (Peter van Eyck) of the impending attack. However, neither the European dignitaries or Fulton and his men take the threat seriously. The subsequent raid the following dawn is barely repelled and leaves many dead. Fulton abandons his employer and his men take all the remaining food, water and ammunition. It is up to Shalako to lead the survivors out of Indian territory.
Filmed in Almeria, Spain, where so many international westerns were, Shalako boasts a strong cast, a desolate location and some well choreographed action scenes staged by former Bond stunt arranger Bob Simmons. On paper it all has the making for a solid western. Unfortunately the reality is somewhat different. The pacing is somewhat pedestrian and the screenplay struggles with the themes it attempts to explore. There’s a lot of unrequited love, marital resentment and lust simmering away among the characters. Senator Henry Clarke (Alexander Knox) blames his wife’s ethnicity for his political career stalling. Lady Daggett (Honor Blackman) despises her older husband (Jack Hawkins) and flirts with their guide Fulton. And Countess Irina is expected to marry the Baron but is conflicted by her desire for Shalako. These plot threads initially seem like they are going to be handled in a modern way, reflecting the changing morality of the sixties. Sadly all are resolved in a distinctly twee, old school fashion.
The story lurches between such dated scenes and several action sequences which although not especially graphic are tonally quite strong. One of Fulton’s team is captured by Indians and tied over a broken lance, while precariously balanced in a stress position. When he inevitably can no longer support his own body weight, he collapses and is impaled. One of the Baron’s staff is shot with a flaming arrow. He dies during a desperate attempt to remove it. Lady Daggett is captures by an Indian war party and there is a rather disturbing threat of rape as she is tormented by her captors. The casting of African American actor Woody Strode as an Apache is dated and somewhat risible. There is also an excess of the cast riding through the utterly barren terrain. Overall it feels as if the film could have lost fifteen minutes to tighten the flow of the story. The title song is another unnecessary hangover from earlier western films.
Shalako did not fare well in the US but did surprisingly well at the box office in Europe. However, due to the complexities of the film’s financing, the production just about broke even. Producer Euan Lloyd had a penchant for looking back at the golden age of Hollywood and attempting to recreate it at a time when the industry was moving on. Many of his later films would fall between similar stools. Paper Tiger, The Wild Geese and Who Dares Wins all boast strong casts and robust production values but are also saddled with politically naive storylines that are out of step with the contemporary views of the times. Shalako, as mentioned earlier, seems to want to be gritty and yet clings to a very formal western idiom at times. An odd outcome considering director Edward Dmytryk’s pedigree, with films such as The Caine Mutiny (1954) and Alvarez Kelly (1966). At most Shalako remains a cinematic curiosity. The only western that Sean Connery made and a rare British produced genre entry.
From the 1950s to the mid 1970s, most major film stars would appear in a western at some point in their career. The western genre was simply too popular and lucrative to avoid or dismiss. So it probably won’t come as a surprise to learn that after he walked away from James Bond in 1967, Sean Connery appeared in the western Shalako, a year later. Based on a novel by Louis L’Amour, this European financed production with an international cast is a curious beast that straddles two competing approaches to the genre. The traditional, romanticised western with its stylised tropes was giving way to a grittier, revisionist approach. Shalako still feels like an example of the former but director Edward Dmytryk does not shy away from the more contemporary use of violence. The film drags, especially during the awkward romantic interludes between Connery and Brigitte Bardot. But the action scenes are quite gritty and some of the story’s themes are quite dour.
Soldier Blue is an American Revisionist Western from 1970, directed by Ralph Nelson, telling a fictionalised account of the events surrounding the 1864 Sand Creek massacre in the Colorado Territory. It was written by John Gay based on the novel "Arrow in the Sun" by Theodore V. Olsen and starred Candice Bergen, Peter Strauss, and Donald Pleasence. The title song was performed by Buffy Sainte-Marie. Released during the height of the Vietnam War against the backdrop of the Mỹ Lai massacre, it provided a depiction of a notorious incident in the history of the American frontier, in which troops massacred an undefended village of Cheyenne and Arapaho Indians. The film creates a back story involving the escape of white survivors from an earlier massacre of U.S. Cavalry troops by Indians. The film was controversial at the time not only as a revisionist western but for its graphic levels of violence. Director Nelson, pushed the depiction of the violence to new levels, showing graphic rape scenes, as well as "realistic" atrocities.
I have been revisiting the western genre and reacquainting myself with some of its more cerebral examples. Ulzanna’s Raid (1972) and Tom Horn (1980) certainly helped remind me of the diversity of themes and the scope of subjects that this genre has explored over the years. Obviously due to the westerns decline in popularity, there are fewer examples to cite from recent years, although I would single out Open Range (2003) and 3:10 to Yuma (2007). However, Appaloosa (2008) is a movie that embodies all the narrative qualities that a good western can achieve and furthermore it does so without the need to re-invent the wheel. In structural terms, this is old school cinema and all the better for it.
Stephen King’s body of work has proven to be an invaluable source of material for film and television over the last forty years. The results have often been as varied as the books themselves. Because of the inherent differences between the respective mediums, sometimes the complexity and sheer scope of King’s work can be lost in translation from one to the other. It’s happened before with several high-profile adaptations and it will no doubt happen again. The Dark Tower is a classic example failing to capture the essence of King’s work. Trying to distil and convey a mythos that is spread over eight volumes, into a single movie is a tall order for any director and screen writer. It can be cogently argued that material of this sort is better suited to television where lengthy, complex story arcs can be indulged and characters can be explored at leisure. In fact, during it’s time in development hell, The Dark Tower was at one point destined to be adapted for the small screen. However, the desire to create a lucrative film franchise ultimately prevailed.
The Hunting Party is a curious Western, made at a time when the genre was struggling to maintain its popularity with the viewing public. Melissa Ruger (Candice Bergen) is a school teacher married to wealthy Cattle Baron, Brandt Ruger (Gene Hackman). When she is abducted by outlaw Frank Calder (Oliver Reed) and his gang, he husband is naturally incensed. He quickly arranges a posse of business associates and uses his personal fortune to equips them all with the latest long-range hunting rifles with telescopic sights. He then sets off in pursuit of Calder's trail before they can cross the border. However, it soon becomes apparent to Ruger’s associates that he may have other motives than just rescuing his wife.
The Outlaw Josey Wales is often hailed as the last great western from the golden era of the genre. As a child when I first saw the movie, I failed to appreciate its subtleties, having been raised on a more traditional diet of movies from this genre such as El Dorado. It has only been in more recent years that I have revised my opinion of this finely crafted piece of cinema. It is radically different from the much of Clint Eastwood's earlier work and most certainly displays a quality in his film making that was not apparent previously.
El Dorado opens with a montage of paintings by celebrated Western artists Olaf Weighorst. These beautiful pictures in many ways reflect the nature of the movie, depicting a stylised representation of the Old West that despite its beauty, never really existed. Director Howard Hawks includes every possible genre trope and meme into El Dorado but far from being a handicap, it makes the movie a perfect distillation of Hollywood Western. The pairing of John Wayne and Robert Mitchum is sublime as the two effortlessly riff off each other. If you need an example of how the Western is the most flexible and accessible movie genre, then El Dorado is a text book example.
As the Western waned in popularity in the seventies, the Italian market was still further revising this already stylised genre with a distinctly comedic element. The uniquely European approach to slapstick was introduced as a mean to try and explore the genre in new ways. Unlike US comedy Westerns such as The Hallelujah Trail and There Was a Crooked Man, their Italians counterparts seemed to have an allegorical theme and as ever a heavy political sub-text. They were also steeped in the unique audio and visual style of their makers.
Fury (2014)
One of the things that immediately strikes you when watching Fury is its credibility and realism. The film reeks of authenticity. Every aspect of the production has been meticulously researched, from uniform and equipment, to ordnance and tactics. The M4A3E8 Sherman tank was not only the workhorse of the US Army but also a home for its five man crew. Director David Ayer makes this idea the foundation of his movie and then proceeds to explore those two perennial themes, the horrors of war and the loss of innocence. The film focuses on the experiences of the crew consisting of Don "Wardaddy" Collier (Brad Pitt), gunner Boyd "Bible" Swan (Shia LeBeouf), loader Grady "Coon-Ass" Travis (Jon Bernthal), and driver Trini "Gordo" Garcia (Michael Peña). They’re a tight knit family, relying on each other to stay alive and keep their mental stability.
One of the things that immediately strikes you when watching Fury is its credibility and realism. The film reeks of authenticity. Every aspect of the production has been meticulously researched, from uniform and equipment, to ordnance and tactics. The M4A3E8 Sherman tank was not only the workhorse of the US Army but also a home for its five man crew. Director David Ayer makes this idea the foundation of his movie and then proceeds to explore those two perennial themes, the horrors of war and the loss of innocence. The film focuses on the experiences of the crew consisting of Don "Wardaddy" Collier (Brad Pitt), gunner Boyd "Bible" Swan (Shia LeBeouf), loader Grady "Coon-Ass" Travis (Jon Bernthal), and driver Trini "Gordo" Garcia (Michael Peña). They’re a tight knit family, relying on each other to stay alive and keep their mental stability.
In many respects Fury tells a very traditional story, as a new crew member Norman Ellison (Logan Lerman) joins the team and the movie is told from his perspective. What makes the proceedings different is the setting (with its tangible sense of claustrophobia) and the reluctance by the director to place the protagonists on a pedestal. These soldiers have a job to do and they deal with it by stripping away the moral ambiguity and psychological ramifications associated with warfare. They undertake their duties in a clinical and functional manner out of necessity and it's not pretty. In some respects Fury has many similarities with Sam Peckinpah’s Cross of Iron (1977) and Samuel Fuller’s The Big Red One (1980). It certainly doesn't have the rose tinted, moral perspective of Spielberg's Saving Private Ryan (1998) which was undermined by its bookend scenes.
With a movie such as this where the plot hinges on the tight knit social dynamics of the tank crew, you need a strong cast and Fury has this in spades. All actors put in strong performances, especially Shia LeBeouf who plays a lay preacher struggling to reconcile his faith with the carnage around him. Director Ayer also cranks up the tension outside of the battle scenes. After capturing a German town the tank crew enters a house to find two terrified women who naturally expect the worst. In a desperate attempt for normality and for a brief respite from the war, Sergeant Collier tries to impose some order on their lives by having a meal around a dinner table. Sadly, it does not go well and highlights the mental strain that all are under.
There are two stand out battle scenes in Fury that really leave their mark on the viewer. One involves a formation of four Sherman tanks taking on a German Tiger I, which was a technically superior vehicle. The tactics are credible and realistic, as is the depiction of the damage armour piercing ordnance can do. Then there is the climactic battle in which the crew of Fury expend all the ammunition they have in an attempt to fend off a column of three hundred Waffen-SS infantry. Both these scenes are compelling and tense. We see the realities of being on the receiving end of a .50 calibre Browning or a shell loaded with white phosphorus. However, director David Ayer finds the right balance with these scenes of violence and injury and does not teeter into excess.
The ending of Fury may not come as any surprise and it makes perfect sense within the context of the story. Anything else would harm the credibility of the movie and possibly be disrespectful to those who did serve under such conditions. There is a nod to traditional war movie symbolism as the film starts and ends with a white horse. As World War II recedes further into the past and the public’s connection to it becomes less and less each year, it is important that the subject is still explored by cinema. Fury offers a fresh perspective on the conventional trope that "war is hell". It is a theme that remains relevant and still provides quality film makers with a rich vein of material to mine. It is technically accurate and certainly flies in the face of standard Hollywood depictions of military engagements.
On the Eastern Front in 1943, a German Tiger tank crew led by Lieutenant Philip Gerkens (David Schütter) is sent on a mission to rescue the missing officer Paul von Hardenburg (Tilman Strauss) from a top-secret bunker that is at risk of falling into enemy hands. As they make their way through an eerie no-man’s land, they have to avoid Russian armoured vehicles that seem to be aware of their mission. They also encounter a German unit taking punitive action against a peasant village, in reprisal for partisan activity in the area. The youngest crew member, Michel (Yoran Leicher), talks of the land being home to ghosts and spirits. As the tank penetrates further into contested territory the crew become increasingly disturbed by the uncanny nature of their mission and begin to fall prey to their own inner fears.
Setting aside the hubris of remaking a film such as Red Dawn, the 2012 reboot had a troubled production. Shot over the course of late 2009, on location in Michigan, MGM intended to release the film in September 2010. However, the studio’s financial problems became unsustainable over the course of that year and the film was shelved, while a financial solution was sought. Furthermore, while Red Dawn was in post production, there was a major economic shift within Hollywood due to the increasing importance of the Chinese market. This was a significant problem for MGM because the new version of Red Dawn had the Chinese invading the USA instead of Russia. Hence there were reshoots and the need for additional visual effects, so that the Chinese could be replaced with North Koreans. MGM eventually went bankrupt and the distribution rights to Red Dawn were sold off. The film was eventually released in 2012.
Zulu (1964) recounts the Battle of Rorke’s Drift between the British Army and the Zulus in January 1879. Directed, produced and co-written by Cy Endfield the film presents an action filled account of how 150 British soldiers, 30 of whom were sick and wounded, successfully held off a force of 4,000 Zulu warriors. Although well made and rousing, it is very much a film from the British perspective. Despite depicting the Zulu nation fairly, the film makes no attempt to put the clash between two empires in any sort of wider context. Zulu Dawn is a direct prequel which shows the events that directly lead up to the Battle of Rorke’s Drift. Much more time is dedicated to exploring the Zulu’s position as their leader King Cetshwayo attempts to avoid the political fait accompli he has been presented with. Furthermore, Zulu Dawn does not in any way try to avoid the failure of the British chain of command that resulted in the defeat of 1,300 British soldiers at the Battle of Isandlwana.
During the last days of World War II, the British Merchant Navy ship Mount Kyle is torpedoed by a German U-Boat off the coast of Venezuela. The crew are subsequently massacred as they abandon ship, leaving one survivor, an Irish engineer named Murphy (Peter O’Toole). After being rescued by Louis Brezon (Philippe Noiret), a caretaker for an oil company which has a pipeline in the area, he is taken to a local missionary medical facility run by Dr. Hayden (Siân Phillips). Upon recovering, Murphy becomes determined to find the U-Boat that sank his ship and seeks revenge. However, as the war is clearly drawing to a close Dr. Hayden is reluctant to help him and tries to dissuade him from his plan as it may endanger the local community. In the meantime, Murphy finds a damaged Grumman J2F Duck floatplane from his ship and salvages it. With the assistance of Louis, he makes some improvised munitions and draws his plans against the Germans.
One of the things that immediately strikes you when watching Fury is its credibility and realism. The film reeks of authenticity. Every aspect of the production has been meticulously researched, from uniform and equipment, to ordnance and tactics. The M4A3E8 Sherman tank was not only the workhorse of the US Army but also a home for its five man crew. Director David Ayer makes this idea the foundation of his movie and then proceeds to explore those two perennial themes, the horrors of war and the loss of innocence. The film focuses on the experiences of the crew consisting of Don "Wardaddy" Collier (Brad Pitt), gunner Boyd "Bible" Swan (Shia LeBeouf), loader Grady "Coon-Ass" Travis (Jon Bernthal), and driver Trini "Gordo" Garcia (Michael Peña). They’re a tight knit family, relying on each other to stay alive and keep their mental stability.
Greyhound is a curious film in that it flies in the face of one’s expectations. When I (and possibly others) see an advertisement or trailer for a World War II movie starring Tom Hanks, I naturally assume that the lead actor has been hired for his prodigious acting talent and that he’ll be providing an in depth character study. I was expecting Greyhound to be the story of an untested US Naval Commander enduring an ordeal by fire on his first escort mission. And that is to a degree what director Aaron Schneider provides but instead of the narrative arc focusing on Ernest Krause’s emotional struggles with his duties, we instead get a docudrama focusing on the technicalities of naval warfare. The latter approach is certainly engaging and at times tense and exciting but this decision narrows the appeal of the film. I personally would have preferred the former.
Big budget, historically driven movies that set out to recount key events of World War II are a rarity these days. If you ignore the bombastic inanities of Michael Bay’s Pearl Harbor (2001), then you have to go back to the late seventies to films such as A Bridge Too Far to find a suitable example. This is why Roland Emmerich’s Midway came as a genuine surprise. When I saw a trailer for the film last October, I was flummoxed that such a production had been made. My initial concerns were that it would focus on spectacle rather than historical fact and trivialise events of great military and historical importance. After having watched Midway, I am pleased to report that this is a surprising throwback in many ways. The film covers the events of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, the subsequent Doolittle Raids on Tokyo by the US and the Battle of Midway, both succinctly and accurately. Furthermore, much of the cast play real veterans who participated in these events. Overall this is an entertaining and informative movie that feels like a relic from fifty years ago. However, its docudrama aspirations also make for somewhat generic character development.
It was hardly surprising that the movie adaptation of Chris Kyle's autobiography American Sniper, would cause controversy. The Iraq war, US Foreign Policy and national pride are seldom subjects that are discussed in a calm and measured fashion. And then there are the personal politics of director Clint Eastwood to consider. Hence there were claims from some quarters upon the movie’s release, that it was Islamophobic and counter claims that criticisms of the late Chris Kyle were unpatriotic. There still remain issues regarding the authenticity of events depicted in the source text and subsequently the movies screenplay by Jason Hall. Yet none of these factors have in anyway impacted upon the film's box office returns which currently stands at $247,900,417 worldwide.
There are many films about war. There are many films about the Vietnam war. A few have transcended mere historical depiction and managed to capture the utter horror and political insanity of the situation, along with the tragic human cost. And then there are those which simply seek to use the setting as a vehicle for an exploitation movie, in the hope of making a fast buck. The Last Hunter (L'ultimo cacciatore) falls firmly into the second camp. This Italian "macaroni combat" movie (yes, I didn’t know that’s a thing either) offers a straight forward tale of an incursion behind enemy lines by an officer charged with destroying a radio transmitter, broadcasting anti-US propaganda. It is violent, action packed and surprisingly honest about what sort of film it is. You’ll find no pretentious philosophical musings here. Just explosions, rotting corpses and Viet Cong booby traps.
There are times when watching the third instalment of the contemporary Planet of the Apes franchise that you feel like your experiencing something akin to Terrence Malick's The Thin Red Line. There is a narrative depth and an intelligence to the screenplay that you seldom see these days coming from a major studio production. As with the original movies, the story makes multiple subtle points about the nature of humanity and our self-destructive tendencies. Yet it’s all done in a thought full and measured fashion. If you wish to treat War for the Planet of the Apes as simply a science fiction action movie then you will certainly be provided with such a film. However, if you choose to engage your intellect and ponder some of the deeper aspects of the story you’ll be rewarded with much more.
Darkest Hour, unlike many other biopics, focuses specifically on the initial weeks of Winston Churchill’s first term of office as Prime Minister, in May 1940. It paints a picture of an unwanted leader who inherits the role due to political expediency, rather than through universal support. Considered by the King as a dangerous adventurer and overshadowed by previous policy failures such as the Gallipoli landings and the Indian famine, Churchill is without allies and under pressure to appease the Germans. Director Joe Wright, sets the pieces on the chess board succinctly and within a few minutes audiences are brought up to speed with the prevailing historical situation. It is against this setting that that Darkest Hour then explores Churchills uphill struggle to rally a nation that appears to have no appetite for war and fend off political assassination. With the imminent defeat of the British Army in France and the prospect of a humiliating surrender at Dunkirk, should he seek a negotiated settlement with Germany, via Italian diplomatic sources?
Dunkirk is an extraordinary war movie, that eschews the traditional sprawling format of its predecessors, filled with celebrity cameos and contrived expositionary dialogue. Instead Christopher Nolan manages to embrace the concept of “show, don’t tell”, yet uses what little dialogue he has to succinctly punctuate the unfolding story with emotion and gravitas. There is a sense of spectacle, yet it is far from the stark and dispassionate CGI we usually see. Through creative and focused editing Nolan generates a palpable sense of tension, be it in the air with extraordinary aerial dogfights or on the ground as men flee sinking ships and dodge artillery fire. Dunkirk facilitates an intense and emotional journey during its lean 106 minute running time. It is altogether a remarkable piece of cinema.
In terms of its production values, Valkyrie is a throwback to the big budget war films of the sixties and seventies. However, that is where the similarities end. This is not a stylised action movie with the Nazis simply as a dramatic foil. Valkyrie focuses on facts, narrative and performances. Director Bryan Singer ensures that the true story that the film depicts is driven by the central characters. Overall Valkyrie is a very laudable production and although not an outstanding feature film, it is competently made, broadly historically accurate whilst and entertaining.
There was a wealth of revisionist Vietnam War films released in the wake of Oliver Stones’ Oscar winning Platoon. Not all were of equal merit or technical competence but occasionally a low budget B movie can surpass the big studio competition. The Siege of Firebase Gloria is one such example, being a minimalist, straightforward film about US Marines defending an isolated outpost in Vietnam, during the Tet offensive. Directed by British expatriate Brain Trenchard-Smith and starring R. Lee Ermey, Wings Hauser and Albert Popwell ("Hey, I've gots to know!"), it’s often been overlooked. However it’s low key plot which seeks no more than to show a small facet of the war, sheds more light upon the overall war and a soldier’s life than one would expect from such a modest production.
The Eagle Has Landed was veteran director John Sturges' final movie, whose body of work includes such classics as Bad Day at Black Rock, The Magnificent Seven and The Great Escape. Based on the bestselling book by Jack Higgins and adapted by Tom Mankiewicz, the film is a curious beast. It’s an in-depth character driven drama you would expect from such a veteran director, with the succinct and violent action scenes that were prevalent during the seventies. Although the phrase “they don’t make them like that anymore” is somewhat of a cliché, it is quite apt in the case of The Eagle Has Landed. Many of the crew as well as the producers hailed from the golden age of Hollywood.
Gritty, grim and fatalistic are just a few of the ways I would describe Play Dirty. Made at a time when cinema was becoming more realistic and cynical, it eschews the traditional depiction of World War II heroism and paints a singularly unglamorous picture. Due to some minor plot similarities, it is frequently compared to The Dirty Dozen but they are far from identical movies. Robert Aldrich’s film despite having an offbeat plot and a cast of quality characters actors still followed a traditional action based formula and had a relatively upbeat ending. Play Dirty is content to pursue its dour storyline to its inevitable conclusion.
It is rewarding to find a movie that wrong-foots you and challenges your perceptions on certain subjects. White Tiger is exactly such a film. Starting of as a traditional war movie, the story quickly evolves into a supernatural revenge story with shades of Moby Dick. The final act and subsequent sting in the tail ending provides immense food for thought. It proposes an idea that many will find particularly challenging. However the film succeeds in making such a bold pitch because of its inherent Russian earnestness and the fact that that nation’s war experience is so subtly different from others.
Those Who Wish Me Dead (2021)
Forensic accountant Owen Casserly (Jake Weber) flees his home with his teenage son Connor (Finn Little) when he discovers he has been targeted by a pair of assassins (Nicholas Hoult and Aidan Gillen) who have been hired to stop him giving evidence in a major corruption case. Connor witnesses the murder of his father after their car is run off the road. Entrusted with important written evidence, he escapes into the dense forests of the Montana wilderness pursued by the killers. Seeking help he runs into smokejumper Hannah Faber (Angelina Jolie) who is stationed at a remote fire lookout tower. Hannah suffers from PTSD from a previous forest fire in which she was unable to save three young boys. Hannah attempts to lead Connor through the forest to safety. Meanwhile the assassins set fire to the forest to divert the attention of the authorities and cover their tracks.
Forensic accountant Owen Casserly (Jake Weber) flees his home with his teenage son Connor (Finn Little) when he discovers he has been targeted by a pair of assassins (Nicholas Hoult and Aidan Gillen) who have been hired to stop him giving evidence in a major corruption case. Connor witnesses the murder of his father after their car is run off the road. Entrusted with important written evidence, he escapes into the dense forests of the Montana wilderness pursued by the killers. Seeking help he runs into smokejumper Hannah Faber (Angelina Jolie) who is stationed at a remote fire lookout tower. Hannah suffers from PTSD from a previous forest fire in which she was unable to save three young boys. Hannah attempts to lead Connor through the forest to safety. Meanwhile the assassins set fire to the forest to divert the attention of the authorities and cover their tracks.
Upon reading the plot synopsis for Those Who Wish Me Dead, I immediately thought of the 1998 action movie Firestorm starring Howie Long. However upon further consideration the similarities lie purely in the setting. Those Who Wish Me Dead aspires to be a little more than just an action vehicle although it includes many familiar tropes. Angelina Jolie treads Liam Neeson territory with her “wounded Lion” role. The central character is a “wild card” with a past who is seeking redemption. However, despite a plethora of familiar plot themes, director Taylor Sheridan (Yellowstone) chooses to focus on character and story. There are some solid and somewhat brutal action scenes but they are not the heart of the proceedings. The film’s pacing is somewhat languid as a consequence. The writer of the source novel, Michael Koryta, is credited as having co-written the screenplay and it may be the case that he wanted to focus more on the characters nature, rather than their deeds.
Angelina Jolie acquits herself well and is very watchable, handling the physical demands of her role well. Finn Little similarly is a plausible young teenager, suitably traumatised and yet resourceful. Teenagers are so often depicted in a tiresomely formulaic manner in these sorts of films, so it is quite refreshing to have a more palatable character. Furthermore, Those Who Wish Me Dead flips several common place genre tropes. The two assassins are in fact brothers and this gives an interesting dynamic to their interactions. They’re both clearly psychotic and simply view their work as a process, which they undertake in a very matter of fact manner. We don’t necessarily learn a lot about them but they are more than just the standard “off the peg” bad guys required in action movies And then there’s the pregnant wife of the local sheriff, Alison played by (Medina Senghore) who quickly contradicts the woman in danger trope.
Overall Those Who Wish Me Dead is a more polished and finely honed action movie than your average studio genre material. It is raised to a higher standard because of the central performances and due to the competence of the cast. The digital FX work is also very good finding the right balance between creating spectacle and not overplaying its hand. As a result the burning forest seems a genuine threat. These high production values along with a story that is prepared to fly in the face of some of the genre’s more common attributes makes Those Who Wish Me Dead better than average. The presence of Angelina Jolie may well broaden the film’s appeal beyond action fans. She has the acting chops to play a firefighter, although she still doesn’t quite look the part. And if given a choice I would recommend Those Who Wish Me Dead over Firestorm.
Mainstream films are easy to recommend to people. They’re usually formulaic, work within clear parameters and they’re not controversial. Most people, when viewing such film on someone else’s suggestion, are left with a fairly simply choice. Did they like it or not? Whatever the outcome, no feathers are ruffled. No one looks at you askance afterwards and says “why the hell did you think I’d like that piece of shit”? If something like this happens, then you have clearly not recommended a mainstream film. Perhaps you’ve suggested something that’s a little more of an acquired taste. Something niche, from a very specific sub-genre. Which brings me neatly to Blazing Magnum AKA Strange Shadows in an Empty Room (1976). The US title gives the impression that this film is a hard boiled cop thriller, like so many others that followed in the wake of Dirty Harry. But there’s a clue in the European title. Yes, this movie has more than just a whiff of a giallo about it.
Jason Statham is an exemplar of the US mantra of “staying in your lane”. He makes action movies and occasionally strays into action comedies. His formula broadly works and is sufficiently lucrative to keep Mr. Statham employed. Therefore, if you watch a film in which he stars, you have a fairly good idea of what you’ll be getting. Of late, the criteria for his action vehicles have become more succinct. Jason Statham will play an innocuous character, such as a construction foreman or a bee keeper. Something terrible will subsequently befall another character who Mr. Statham has an emotional connection with in some capacity. He will subsequently hunt down those responsible and meet out death and violence. At some point the villain of the story will enquire as to how this innocuous person is so lethal. Research will then show that our Jason is in fact an ex-police officer/special forces operative/international assassin. There’s then a showdown and the villain dies. Job done.
The Light at the Edge of the World presented itself as an action movie upon its release in 1971. Based upon a story by Jules Verne, the Spanish American co-production was driven by its star Kirk Douglas, who curiously hired British director Kevin Billington to helm the project. This tale of a lighthouse keeper fighting a war of attrition against a group of pirates that have captured his island, was market as an adventure film ostensibly in the idiom of the authors previous works and as a pirate movie. MGM bought the rights to distribute the film in the UK on the misunderstanding that it was a family friendly production. It was not and remains so. They subsequently had to cut 15 minutes of violence and torture as well as an undercurrent of sexual assault to secure a suitable rating. Conversely, the US distributors received an arbitrary PG rating, despite the fact this is one of a handful of films that honestly depicts pirates as murderers, rapists and worse.
It’s an established action film trope. The fire team comprised of ex-military personnel, move in on their target. Only to have the tables turned by someone they don’t deem a threat. What makes it different in The Last Stand of Ellen Cole is a throwaway line of dialogue. The bested operative lies bleeding on the floor and the protagonists stands over them ready to finish them off. “Don’t, I have a cat” they feebly plead. For me that was the icing on the cake. The movie had already established it was taking the “same old, same old” and doing something different. Something fun, if taken in the right spirit. This scene tipped the balance and I embraced this film because it was being honest about what it is. This is a modern B movie that decides to give a very specific sub-genre a makeover. Furthermore, its clearly done with an affectionate wink, which is very different to sly wink. This isn’t deliberate self-knowing irony. Its just a film doing something different and possibly silly but it genuinely wants to have fun with it.
Stephen King’s dystopian story, The Running Man, was previously adapted very loosely in 1987, as a vehicle for Arnold Schwarzenegger. That version focused mainly on the “Battle Royale” element of the story and leaned heavily into Arnie’s personality, rather than the politics of the book. It also wasn’t well received by the author. Edgar Wright’s remake follows the source text a lot more closely and is far more interested in its political themes and wider social commentary. Furthermore, this version re-establishes the everyman quality of the hero of Ben Richards, rather than him being the muscle bound, ex-military hero as per Mr. Schwarzenegger’s prior interpretation. This time round, The Running Man uses a lot of the visual and narrative tropes of contemporary reality TV, making this forty three year old story very relevant to today’s viewers and couching the film in a style that is recognisable and accessible.
After the success of Raiders of the Lost Ark in 1981, filmmakers scrambled to find existing intellectual properties that they could use for similar films. Hence archaic heroes such as Alan Quatermain were hastily given a modern makeover and thrust into generic movies, in a vague attempt to replicate Steven Spielberg’s successful formula. Which brings us neatly on to James Charles Bigglesworth AKA “Biggles”, a fictional pilot and adventurer from a series of books written by W. E. Johns between 1932 and 1968. Several attempts had been made in the past to bring this character to the silver screen, including one by Disney but they all failed. However, the commercial and critical success of Indiana Jones provided sufficient impetus to greenlight a new film. However, due to some curious production choices, when Biggles was finally released it was far from just a period set, action movie.
Setting aside the hubris of remaking a film such as Red Dawn, the 2012 reboot had a troubled production. Shot over the course of late 2009, on location in Michigan, MGM intended to release the film in September 2010. However, the studio’s financial problems became unsustainable over the course of that year and the film was shelved, while a financial solution was sought. Furthermore, while Red Dawn was in post production, there was a major economic shift within Hollywood due to the increasing importance of the Chinese market. This was a significant problem for MGM because the new version of Red Dawn had the Chinese invading the USA instead of Russia. Hence there were reshoots and the need for additional visual effects, so that the Chinese could be replaced with North Koreans. MGM eventually went bankrupt and the distribution rights to Red Dawn were sold off. The film was eventually released in 2012.
When I first saw the promotional trailer for Gangster Squad back in 2012, prior to its release, I wasn't especially impressed. I simply thought the film was another attempt to re-invent the gangster genre for a generation who were not especially familiar with it. I wasn't exactly overwhelmed with director Ruben Fleischer's resume either. I didn't particularly like Zombieland and haven't seen 30 Minutes Or Less. Then came the tragic mass shootings in Aurora, Colorado which led to the movie being delayed so that the original ending, which featured a shoot-out in a movie theatre, could be replaced. Hence when I finally watched this film recently, I wasn't expecting a movie up to the standards of say Once Upon A Time In America or Miller’s Crossing and it would seem that I was right do so. Gangster Squad is not especially noteworthy in any respect.
Levon Cade (Jason Staham) is a former Royal Marine Commando who has retired from military service and now works as the leader of a construction team in Chicago. He has a close relationship with Joe and Carla Garcia (Michael Peña and Noemi Gonzalez ) who run the company and considers them as family. Outside of work, Levon is involved in a bitter custody battle for his daughter, against her maternal grandfather, who blames Levon for his daughter’s suicide. When Garcia's teenage daughter Jenny (Arianna Rivas) goes missing, Levon reluctantly agrees to help her parents and get her back. Beginning his search at the nightclub where Jenny was last seen, he soon discovers that she was abducted by Russian traffickers. Furthermore, the culprit is Dimi Kolisnyk (Maximilian Osinski), the wayward son of a senior ranking gangster.
PC Nicholas Angel (Simon Pegg) is an exemplary Police Officer, with a strict adherence to the letter of the law. As a result of making the rest of the London Metropolitan Police look bad, he is transferred to the rural town of Sandford, Gloucestershire. On arrival, Angel finds that the local Inspector, Frank Butterman (Jim Broadbent), takes a far more laissez-faire approach to policing. His colleagues are incompetent and he is further hampered by the Neighbourhood Watch Alliance (NWA), who prioritise low crime statistics over law enforcement due to their desire to win the title of “Village of the Year”. Furthermore, Angel is partnered with the Inspector’s son, Constable Danny Butterman (Nick Frost), who is infatuated with “buddy cop” movies and is in awe of Angel’s London experience. “Have you ever fired two guns while jumping through the air?” However, a sudden spate of grisly accidents lead Angel to believe that there's more to the seemingly tranquil and picture-perfect community than meets the eye.
As a collection of history's worst tyrants and criminal masterminds gather to plot a war to wipe out millions, one man must race against time to stop them. Discover the origins of the very first independent intelligence agency in The King's Man. Based on the Comic Book “The Secret Service” by Mark Millar and Dave Gibbons. 20th Century Studios
Matthew Vaughn’s The King’s Man is an inconsistent film, both narratively and tonally. It veers between serious themes and stylised, hyperbolic action. At times it does quite a good job of exploring such complex subjects as global politics, mechanised warfare and colonialism. Sadly it then wrenches the viewer out of these cerebral reveries as it lapses into the sort of over the top action sequences that were notable in the two earlier films. It’s a shame because The King’s Man gets so many other aspects of the production right. The casting is very interesting, especially Ralph Fiennes as the “pacifist” Duke of Oxford. He is actually a very good fit for the action genre. Djimon Hounsou and Gemma Arterton are given little backstory beyond being respectively the faithful manservant and the family nanny but both are notable due to their own inherent acting chops and personal charisma. Rhys Ifans obviously has a great time as Grigori Rasputin, ensuring all the man’s vices are robustly depicted.
On paper, a video games franchise such as Assassin’s Creed lends itself perfectly to a cinematic adaptation. The parkour action scenes, the historical settings and the contemporary conspiracy theory themes are all elements that should play well with a modern youth audience. Hence with the backing of a major studio such as Twentieth Century Fox and a budget of $125 million, the 2016 movie should have been a guaranteed box office hit. The casting of Michael Fassbender, an actor who is comfortable with serious roles and big Hollywood franchises, should have carried this film comfortably over the finishing line. Director Justin Kurzel, who had found critical success with his adaptation of MacBeth a year previously, must have looked like a safe pair of hands to handle such a project. Sadly, that was not the case. Assassin’s Creed is not the sum of its parts, in fact many elements appear to be pulling in opposite directions. The resulting feature film is staggeringly dull, soulless and a chore to watch. A testament to how modern big budget franchise movies have become a production line, with all the art stripped from them.
300: Rise of an Empire is a curious beast, being neither a sequel nor a prequel. It is infact a tale that takes place simultaneously with those of the original movie. While Gerard Butler is busy making a last stand at the Battle of Thermopylae, fellow warrior and politician Themistokles, played by the singularly uncharismatic Sullivan Stapleton, leads a similar army of buffed Greeks against the Persian fleet. Once again we have a movie that is the epitome of style over substance, complete with a sound design that challenges what can physically be endured by human hearing. They say the first casualty of war is innocence but in this type of movie it's closely followed by historical accuracy and authentic depictions of ethnicity. 300: Rise of an Empire is a cinematic assault upon the senses but not in a good way like Mad Max: Fury Road.
Back in September 2017, Liam Neeson stated in an interview with Sky News that he was retiring from the action genre, due to his age. He felt that audiences would question his credibility in such roles. After the release of The Commuter (2018) and Cold Pursuit (2019) Mr Neeson appeared to return to human dramas and films that focus on performance rather than punching man and beast. Ordinary Love and Made in Italy, both released in 2019, demonstrate the actor’s versatility and skill. People seem to forget that he is a thespian who was initially known for his character driven roles in films such as The Mission (1986), Rob Roy (1995 and Michael Collins (1996). It was only in 2008 that he reinvented himself as an action hero. It’s all a far cry from Schindler’s List and his performance that earned him an academy award nomination. The reason I mention all of this is because The Ice Road is the third action movie I’ve seen in 2021 that stars Liam Neeson.
One of the stand out tropes of the modern action film is that the stakes are always cranked right up to 11. Terrorists, biological weapons and nuclear bombs are common threats in such movies with a hero or heroes trying to save the world from death and destruction or worse. However, back in the sixties and seventies, things were a little more straight forward and in some respects more credible. Take When Eight Bells Toll, released in 1971, for example. British Treasury secret agent Phillip Calvert investigates the theft of £8,000,000 in gold bullion by a gang of international smugglers. In the context of the times this was no small beer however it’s somewhat mundane compared to fighting super villains and their space lasers. Frankly I prefer these low key plot devices as they can make a film a little more plausible within the confines of the genre. A concept that is often forgotten today.
Forensic accountant Owen Casserly (Jake Weber) flees his home with his teenage son Connor (Finn Little) when he discovers he has been targeted by a pair of assassins (Nicholas Hoult and Aidan Gillen) who have been hired to stop him giving evidence in a major corruption case. Connor witnesses the murder of his father after their car is run off the road. Entrusted with important written evidence, he escapes into the dense forests of the Montana wilderness pursued by the killers. Seeking help he runs into smokejumper Hannah Faber (Angelina Jolie) who is stationed at a remote fire lookout tower. Hannah suffers from PTSD from a previous forest fire in which she was unable to save three young boys. Hannah attempts to lead Connor through the forest to safety. Meanwhile the assassins set fire to the forest to divert the attention of the authorities and cover their tracks.
I must admit that I did not have particularly high hopes for Paul W S Anderson's remake of the 1975 Roger Corman produced cult classic. Anderson’s work varies greatly. Event Horizon and Soldier are solid genre films but I still have not fully come to terms with Alien vs. Predator. Jason Statham is also a name that divides the public, with solid material such as The Transporter and unfathomable tosh like Revolver. But despite these considerations, Death Race is in fact quite a surprise and does not follow the path that so many remakes do. It takes the basic themes and concept associated with the original and tries to do something different with them. It doesn’t reinvent the wheel nor is it a genre milestone. But it does offer a different spin on things, have some engaging action scenes and provide some dumb but enjoyable entertainment. When combined with snacks and some beer this is a passable way to kill 111 minutes.
I did not watch Zero Dark Thirty upon its initial release, due to the politics surrounding it. I wanted to be able to view it free from bipartisan debate. Eight years on I believe this now achievable and although debate still exists it is now more measured and less strident. Zero Dark Thirty is certainly a compelling movie. It plays as a docudrama, providing an in-depth study of the US intelligence services hunt for Osama Bin Laden. It cannot be faulted on a technical level and the performances are very strong. It does not adopt a celebratory or triumphalist tone in its approach to the story. Director Kathryn Bigelow endeavours to keep the proceedings focused upon the intricacies of an intelligence driven manhunt. There is little or no tubthumping, jingoism. The decision to find Bin Laden is shown as a political and military exercise of foreign policy. The film solely focuses on the story from a US perspective but that is perfectly acceptable as it is not intended to be an exploration of geo-politics.
Firestorm was originally written as a vehicle for Sylvester Stallone, however when the production company Savoy Pictures went bankrupt the screenplay was bought by Twentieth Fox and the scope of the movie reduced to suit a lower budget. It’s broadly similar to Cliffhanger in so far as the lead character is a specialist in a certain field who runs afoul of criminals in a perilous environment. Whereas Cliffhanger is set in the Rocky Mountains, Firestorm takes place in the forests of Northern Wyoming. After the script was revised four times, the finished screenplay was given a final “polish” by Graham Yost who has considerable experience with the action movie genre. As stallone was no longer associated with the project and the production had been repurposed to be less extravagant, the movie was assigned to former NFL star Howie Long. Long had already appeared in the John Woo movie Broken Arrow (1996) and the Firestorm was seen as a means to give him a star vehicle.
The original French movies District 13 and its sequel District 13: Ultimatum, conceived and produced by Luc Besson, were enjoyable variations of the Escape from New York theme. Their charm lay in their European pedigree and the skilful use of parkour. The two leads, David Belle and Cyril Raffaelli, were eminently suited to the minimalist roles and the screenplays were fun. Half of these movies appeal was the fact that they were not mainstream US products. Brick Mansions is the Hollywood remake of District 13, as well as being Paul Walkers’ final movie. Sadly, this film is far from a fitting epitaph, being devoid of any charisma or innovations. It is blandly shot , poorly edited and has been stripped of everything that made the original entertaining.
Arnold Schwarzenegger's return to the big screen after his political career has been uneven to say the least. His cameos in The Expendables and The Expendables 2 were well received, with their self referential charm and age related irony. Yet his first major movie The Last Stand, although competent, failed to find an audience. Escape Plan fared better at the box office but did not put Arnie back on the A list. Effectively there's a large percentage of the contemporary cinematic audience who were born after his heyday and are simply not overt fans of his work. His core audience is more than likely of the age group that consume most of their film entertainment at home. Which may explain why Sabotage tanked in the US upon release on March 28th 2014. It was the worst opening box office of Arnie's career. He used to break first day opening records.
Sequels and reboots are hardly a new concept and have been a part of Hollywood culture since the 1930s. The success of the Universal Horror movies from that era being a prime example of direct follow ups and retconned movies. However, there is one fundamental rule that distinguishes a good sequel from a bad one. You should never mitigate, undermine or make irrelevant the events of the previous movie, just to provide your new film with a raison d'être. For example, the events of Aliens do not contradict or trivialise those that happened in Alien. In fact with that franchise there is a very clear logical progression between the two movies. The same is true for Mad Max and Mad Max 2 or Star Wars and The Empire Strikes Back. The key is to progress a story, enhance it or explore things from an alternative angle and bring something new to the cinematic table. Sadly this philosophy is all too often lost on corporate film making. Which means that many sequels are just tedious replays of prior films. Terminator: Dark Fate falls squarely into this category.
The enduring appeal of the character John Rambo in First Blood comes from the fact that he is a traumatised ex- service man who keeps himself to himself as he drifts from job to job, trying to come to terms with his wartime experiences. His poor treatment at the hands of a small-town Sheriff is a succinct metaphor for the social and political indifference that Vietnam veterans were shown upon their return to the US. He’s a man with a code in a world that no longer has any use for him. His simple and honest patriotism is not returned and he is in fact viewed with shame by many from the nation he loves. Furthermore, the first movie does not paint him as a cold-blooded killer. Despite provocation he is not the first person to shoot to kill. Rambo is in many ways a victim. A broken man, who society has asked to do unspeakable things. Now society wants nothing to do with him and fears the “monster” they created. Although clearly an action movie, First Blood had narrative depth and a flawed but sympathetic protagonist. 37 years and four movies later, such dramatic themes have long left the franchise. The central character is indeed a caricature of its former self.
It was hardly surprising that the movie adaptation of Chris Kyle's autobiography American Sniper, would cause controversy. The Iraq war, US Foreign Policy and national pride are seldom subjects that are discussed in a calm and measured fashion. And then there are the personal politics of director Clint Eastwood to consider. Hence there were claims from some quarters upon the movie’s release, that it was Islamophobic and counter claims that criticisms of the late Chris Kyle were unpatriotic. There still remain issues regarding the authenticity of events depicted in the source text and subsequently the movies screenplay by Jason Hall. Yet none of these factors have in anyway impacted upon the film's box office returns which currently stands at $247,900,417 worldwide.
Do I really need to present you with some sort of plot synopsis for Transporter 3? No, I didn’t think so. More of the same as Frank Martin (Jason Statham) and his police chum, Inspector Tarconi (Francois Berleand) become embroiled in yet another high-octane escapade. There's fights, car stunts, exotic international locations and a strong sense of humour. This time, the disposable love interest is a Ukrainian girl named Valentina (Natalya Rudakova) who fulfils her role succinctly. The film benefits by being set back in Europe, after the mistake of basing Transporter 2 in the US. This time, the story takes us to such locations as Budapest and Odessa. The international film crew once again bring a veneer of panache to the production that is conspicuously absent in US action movies. For a modest budget fil, Transporter 3 it looks very good. Again the proceedings are given a boost by a pertinent soundtrack by Alexandre Azaria and a selection of European “tunes”.
Jason Bourne originally graced our screens for the first time seventeen years ago. The Bourne Identity was a gritty, minimalist take on the espionage genre and a welcome change from the excesses of the Pierce Brosnan Bond era. The story arc was sustained over three movies and ended efficiently and succinctly. After which Matt Damon moved on, as did the director of two of the movies, Paul Greengrass. Which leaves us with The Bourne Legacy; the tangential sequel that arrived in 2012. A film that exists because the money men and bean counters hate to pass up on a franchise until it has been squeezed utterly dry. Hence, they commissioned the writer of the series, Tony Gilroy, to come up with a screenplay and direct a spinoff movie. Jeremy Renner was cast in the lead role. Yet despite narrative and production continuity, The Bourne Legacy was not a Jason Bourne movie with the star appeal of Matt Damon. Although the film turned a profit, it had the lowest box office returns out of the entire franchise.
During the eighties there was a clear league table of action movie stars. By the mid-nineties this system fell into decline and the Hollywood lacked any clearly defined exponents of the genre. A decade later, due to the success of Luc Besson’s Transporter films, Jason Statham became a bankable box office star in this field. When you look at Statham's early work in Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels it is hard to envisage the "mockney geezer" as an international action star. Yet he has successfully stepped into the role and enjoys a large following. I enjoy his work as he has a likeable on-screen persona. My 88-year-old Mum likes him to because "he wears nice suits". The action genre seldom reaches such a diverse demographic.
Before we start, I recollect that one well known UK critic described Safe House as sub-Tony Scott, upon its release. Now I’ve always been conflicted over Scott’s back catalogue, as I’ve always found his movies to be hampered by their own unique style. The subtleties of his characters and depth of his themes are all too often drowned out by his frenetic style and fast paced editing. Therefore a comment such as this really sets off alarm bells for me. Having recently watched The Equalizer 2, I wanted a further fix of Denzel Washington in a similar action vehicle. As Safe House was available on Netflix UK, I decided to kill a couple of hours and see what actually constitutes as “sub-Tony Scott”.
Source Code (2011)
I wanted to watch Source Code for a second time before I wrote about it. This is because numerous internet debates have arisen regarding the plausibility of the film’s ending. I find this a somewhat curious stance considering that the story, written by Ben Ripley, deals with temporal travel and multiple timelines. All of which are purely theoretical and not currently subject to singular, definitive interpretations. I would further add that the science of the film is simply a plot device and is not its raison d'être. But that’s movies for you. People love to discuss them and more recently we have seen the rise of “explanation” videos on YouTube. However, the latter is a separate debate and something I may write about in the future. As for Source Code, I enjoyed it even more the second time round, as I had the time to focus on the minor details rather than trying to stay abreast with the main plot, as I did on my first viewing.
I wanted to watch Source Code for a second time before I wrote about it. This is because numerous internet debates have arisen regarding the plausibility of the film’s ending. I find this a somewhat curious stance considering that the story, written by Ben Ripley, deals with temporal travel and multiple timelines. All of which are purely theoretical and not currently subject to singular, definitive interpretations. I would further add that the science of the film is simply a plot device and is not its raison d'être. But that’s movies for you. People love to discuss them and more recently we have seen the rise of “explanation” videos on YouTube. However, the latter is a separate debate and something I may write about in the future. As for Source Code, I enjoyed it even more the second time round, as I had the time to focus on the minor details rather than trying to stay abreast with the main plot, as I did on my first viewing.
Army Captain Colter Stevens (Jake Gyllenhaal) wakes to find himself on a train, occupying the body of a teacher called Sean Fentress who is commuting to work in Chicago. Stevens is confused and disorientated as the last thing he remembers is being on a mission in Afghanistan. 8 minutes later the train explodes due to a terrorist bomb. He then awakes again to find himself in a dimly lit cockpit. Communicating via a video link, Air Force Captain Colleen Goodwin (Vera Farmiga) explains that he is on a covert mission to identify the terrorists that caused the attack before returning him back to the train to relive the 8 minutes again. Stevens is sceptical at first as he has no memory of events prior to the mission. However he surmises that he is being tested and continues to return to the train multiple times in an attempt to gain vital intelligence. As he observes the other passengers he forms a bond with his traveling companion Christina (Michelle Monaghan). Can he change the events that have happened or is he simply creating an alternative reality?
Source Code is an intelligent, well packaged film that manages to provide mainstream entertainment without the need to condescend to its audience. Director Duncan Jones, is cinematically literate and the film has clear nods to Groundhog Day, Rashomon and even Tony Scott's Deja View. He explores themes such as personal identity and the nature of existence, yet does not allow such philosophical musing to slow the action or bore the viewer. As science shatters traditional myths such as linear time, the film challenges our perceptions with some creative ideas. The central performances by Jake Gyllenhaal and Michelle Monaghan, are very strong. The concept of two strangers forming a strong bond under extreme circumstances reminded me of David Niven and Kim Hunter in A Matter Of Life And Death. There is an amusing homage to the cinematic cliché of the "evil scientist", with actor Jeffrey Wright sporting a walking stick. It should also be noted that the Source Code storyline unfolds in a tidy ninety plus minutes and does not suffer from the current Hollywood trend of out staying its welcome.
Christopher Nolan set the bar very high with Inception, proving that films with strong narratives and requiring the audience to think, can be financially successful. Source Code was similarly met with equally strong critical and public approval upon its release. Its narrative is not quite as complex as Nolan’s opus but it does require a degree of reflection by the viewer. Where Source Code compensates for its convoluted science fiction plotline is with its characters and the human drama they share. Captain Stevens isn’t just on a mission to identify a terrorist. He quickly becomes invested in trying to save the passengers on the train. His companion Christina is a very engaging foil and the romantic element of the plot is very much a hark back to the golden age of Hollywood. The film ends in quite a bold fashion with both good and bad events occurring in separate realities. Science fiction films seldom have this emotional depth, making Source Code far more accessible to wider audiences.
Star Trek is slightly older than me by 14 months. I was born on December 18th 1967. Star Trek was first broadcast in the US on 8th September 1966. Hence this show has always been part of the prevailing pop culture that surrounded me, as I grew up. I first began watching Star Trek as a young child in the early seventies. It would be repeated on the BBC in the early evening on Fridays and it became a family ritual to sit down together and watch it. As a seven or eight year old, it left a great impression upon me and was in many ways, the television highlight of the week. Star Trek along with Doctor Who certainly started my interest in science fiction. Star Trek was also one of the first shows that introduced me to tie-in marketing. I remember seeing in a toy shop, near to my school at the time, a Dinky Klingon Battle Cruiser and was flabbergasted that such a thing existed. I immediately coveted it but sadly never obtained one.
David Koepp is no stranger to genre cinema, having written the screenplay for such films as Jurassic Park, Spider-man and War of the Worlds. Where these titles are big budget, major studio productions, Cold Storage is a far more modest production with a smaller scope. Adapted from his own novel, the screenplay is by David Koepp and the film is directed by British film-maker Jonny Campbell. At first glance, Cold Storage seems a somewhat derivative science fiction horror film with a relatively modest budget, financed through a convoluted US and French co-production. Lurid green and red colours feature heavily in the marketing artwork and it is easy, after a cursory look, to write the film off as cheap, generic, direct-to-streaming filler. However, Cold Storage is prime example of why you should not judge a book by it’s cover, or in this case, a film by its posters and online advertising. It is in fact an amusing and fun endeavour that can fill an evening.
Treasure Island In Outer Space is a curious Italian television production from 1987 starring Anthony Quinn and Ernest Borgnine. It also features numerous international actors better known for their work in cult and exploitation films, such as Bobby Rhodes, David Warbeck and John Morghan. Directed by Antonio Margheriti (AKA Anthony Dawson), famous for such films as Killer Fish (a cash in on Piranha) and The Last Hunter (a Vietnam exploitation epic), Treasure Island In Outer Space is a faithful adaptation of Robert Louis Stevenson’s classic novel. The screenplay by Renato Castellani and Lucio De Caro draws heavily from the source text, maintaining character names and original dialogue. However in updating the material to a futuristic setting, the script is littered with the worst kind of eighties sci-fi clichés. We are subjected to sonic trains, anti-gravity rays and the usual buzzword driven faux science.
After the success of Raiders of the Lost Ark in 1981, filmmakers scrambled to find existing intellectual properties that they could use for similar films. Hence archaic heroes such as Alan Quatermain were hastily given a modern makeover and thrust into generic movies, in a vague attempt to replicate Steven Spielberg’s successful formula. Which brings us neatly on to James Charles Bigglesworth AKA “Biggles”, a fictional pilot and adventurer from a series of books written by W. E. Johns between 1932 and 1968. Several attempts had been made in the past to bring this character to the silver screen, including one by Disney but they all failed. However, the commercial and critical success of Indiana Jones provided sufficient impetus to greenlight a new film. However, due to some curious production choices, when Biggles was finally released it was far from just a period set, action movie.
The seventies was an interesting time for UK genre television. Despite small budgets and often low key visual effects, there was no shortage of good ideas and creativity. Sapphire & Steel is a prime example of a show couched in a high concept, produced on a shoestring. It also credits its audiences with some degree of intelligence. Rather than spoon feeding the narrative in a didactic manner, it hints and implies, then leaves the rest to its viewers imagination. Created by Peter J. Hammond, a veteran TV writer, Sapphire & Steel centres on a pair of interdimensional operatives named Sapphire and Steel. They are two of a number of elements that assume human form. Over the course of three seasons little is revealed about the pair but they appear whenever there is any anomalous temporal activity. Time itself is portrayed as a sentient and malignant force that seeks to make incursions into the present reality, through weaknesses in the fabric of space.
The Humanoid is one of many international Star Wars knock-offs that flooded cinemas in the late seventies and early eighties. Like so many others, it is derivative (even to the extent of replicating specific scenes from George Lucas’ movie), replete with awful dialogue and has somewhat basic production values. However, it does have an interesting cast including Richard Kiel, Barbara Bach, Arthur Kennedy and Corinne Cléry. Kiel gained a lot of media attention after his appearance as the steel-toothed villain Jaws in the 1977 Bond film, The Spy Who Loved Me. His stature made him the perfect fit for the titular character in this Italian science fiction production. Sadly, beyond a curious lineup of actors, The Humanoid has little to distinguish it from so many similar movies. For example, if you’ve seen Starcrash then you’ll be adequately prepared for this film.
Some films are made with the intention of starting a franchise, others evolve into one after a surprise box office success and lucrative sequels. Alien (1979) falls into the latter category. A mid-budget science fiction horror film that was well crafted and then benefited immensely by being released at just the right time. Sadly, many franchises become derailed and enter into a death spiral due to competing artistic visions, cynical studio politics and cinematic ignorance. This has certainly afflicted all subsequent Alien films after James Cameron’s magnificent Aliens (1986). Sometimes, a franchise can correct its course and do something fresh with the source material. Prey (2022) is a fine example of this with director Dan Trachtenberg bringing fresh vigour and intelligence back to the Predator movies. I believe that was the intention with Alien Romulus (2024). Sadly, the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
Event Horizon is a curious movie hybrid, mixing plot elements from classic sci-fi and horror genres. It has been labelled “Hellraiser in Space” by some lazy critics, although I think there's far more to it than that. Perhaps a more apt description would be a Gothic horror story set in space. The movie has garnered a cult reputation since its release in 1997, mainly due to its graphic imagery and troubled production history. It does indeed have some quite shocking sequences but the lightning editing does not show as much as some would think. Paramount forced director Paul W S Anderson to reduce the original one hundred and thirty minute running time down to a more manageable ninety, after unfavourable test screenings. Much of the violence was allegedly removed as a result of that process. Sadly nothing survives of the removed material other than a VHS workprint. Hence a restored director’s cut is therefore unlikely.
I recently watched the first trailer for the new Obi-Wan Kenobi television show that is premiering on Disney + in May. I am interested in this latest instalment in the Star Wars franchise and curious as to whether Liam Neeson will make an appearance. I also watched a 20 minute fan video in which they “analysed” the entire trailer. They discussed the content of this 2 minute preview and then did a great deal of speculating about potential themes and characters that may feature in the show. They were clearly enthusiastic about what they had seen and were very knowledgeable about the subject. This resonated with me, as I like to be well versed about the things I enjoy. However, it is worth remembering that fandom can tip into obsession and gatekeeping. Hence I feel there is a subject to explore here.
On paper Finch has little originality. The moment I read the plot synopsis and saw the first trailer I instantly thought of other such films as Silent Running, Short Circuit and Chappie. However, irrespective of its derivative concept and the fact it channels many of the major tropes of the genre, it does have three cards to play. Namely strong performances by Tom Hanks, Caleb Landry Jones and canine actor Seamus. Although not a genre milestone, Finch is a curiously pleasant post apocalyptic road movie. Despite travelling through the sun bleached vistas of a ravaged America, the story focuses on the three protagonists and their relationship. It is no small feat to find genuine sentiment in such a harsh environment and indeed in such a genre but Finch proves to be an engaging emotional journey. Once again the most effective explorations of the human condition are often through characters who are conspicuously not.
I wanted to watch Source Code for a second time before I wrote about it. This is because numerous internet debates have arisen regarding the plausibility of the film’s ending. I find this a somewhat curious stance considering that the story, written by Ben Ripley, deals with temporal travel and multiple timelines. All of which are purely theoretical and not currently subject to singular, definitive interpretations. I would further add that the science of the film is simply a plot device and is not its raison d'être. But that’s movies for you. People love to discuss them and more recently we have seen the rise of “explanation” videos on YouTube. However, the latter is a separate debate and something I may write about in the future. As for Source Code, I enjoyed it even more the second time round, as I had the time to focus on the minor details rather than trying to stay abreast with the main plot, as I did on my first viewing.
I revisited M Night Shyamalan's The Happening recently to try and determine whether he is indeed suffering from Orson Welles syndrome. IE that he has made all his best work at the beginning of his career. Because he’s never quite recaptured the critical or artistic success of The Sixth Sense, Unbreakable and Signs. I was one of the few that actually liked The Lady in The water but I could see why viewers would assume that he had become a victim of his own style and technique with that particular movie. Casting yourself as an author whose work will reshape society and change the course of history is at the very least, a little egotistical and at worst an act of immense hubris. Then in recent years we have had The Last Airbender and After Earth, both of which have performed poorly. However I thought I'd give The Happening another chance as it remains the directors only R rated movie to date.
I wrote an article back in 2009 as to why I felt a remake of The Thing was a bad idea. At that time, the project was in development hell and didn’t look like getting off the ground. Subsequently, the production evolved into a prequel and managed to find financial support, culminating in a theatrical release in late 2011. Like many interested parties, I watched the initial teaser trailer with a mixture of curiosity and trepidation. Then when the red band trailer arrived I felt that the shark was well and truly jumped. Too much was shown (a common problem with modern trailers) and there the internet was awash with discontented mutterings from John Carpenter purists. Hence I refrained from watching this movie for several years. When I finally got round to doing so, I was not well disposed towards it. However, over the Christmas holidays, I decide to give this prequel a second viewing and see if I could approach it with a less partisan mindset.
Cloverfield (2008) was a surprise hit, earning $172 million worldwide at the box office against a $25 million budget. Paramount Pictures naturally wanted a sequel but director Matt Reeves and writer Drew Goddard struggled to find a suitable narrative means to progress the original story. Both eventually left the project and the production descended into development hell. The subsequent success of Godzilla and Pacific Rim saw the Kaiju genre becoming oversaturated and so the decision to make a direct sequel was re-evaluated. Eventually a “speculative screenplay” called The Cellar was purchased and repurposed to include some additional science fiction elements and became 10 Cloverfield Lane. Despite being a curious genre hybrid which only tenuously links to the original movie, this too fared well at the box office. Therefore it was inevitable that a third movie in the so-called “Cloververse” would follow.
In many ways the story behind The McPherson Tape is a lot more interesting than the film itself. This early found footage movie from 1989, was shot on home video on a virtually non-existent budget. The director Dean Alioto eventually found a distributor but on the eve of the movie’s home video release, the warehouse burned down and allegedly destroyed the master tape and all the promotional artwork. Yet this was not the end of the story. It was common practice in the eighties for small distributors to send advance copies to local independent video stores. Hence The McPherson Tape found its way into the pirate video ecosystem. It then migrated to the UFO community where it was circulated as being a video of a legitimate alien abduction. Dean found himself in the unusual position of having to debunk his own work. Three decades later due to the intriguing tale associated with The McPherson Tape, it has been remastered from the newly rediscovered 3/4" tape and re-released.
Last month, I tried a 30 day free trial of the streaming service BritBox. One of the main selling points was that the platform has an extensive back catalogue of Classic Doctor Who. Although I initially tried to keep up with the reboot of the franchise in 2005 my interest waned after several seasons. I am not opposed to any of the changes made and I am very pleased that the show has found a new audience. However, it doesn’t resonate with me so much anymore and I find that there is too much human drama for my liking. So I decided to revisit my youth and watch some classic Doctor Who; episodes that I haven’t seen in over forty years (yes, I’m that old). Now I’m fully aware of the potential issues that can come from returning to things that you enjoyed in one’s youth, so I believe I did my best in managing my expectations. However, the results of my nostalgia trip were interesting. The things I thought would be a problem nowadays weren’t so and the things I expected to hold up well despite the passage of time, didn’t always succeed. It’s been a curious experience.
I was 12 years old when I first saw Battle Beyond the Stars during its UK theatrical release. I remember that I enjoyed it and thought it was an action packed movie. Being young, lacking the critical faculties that come with age and exposure to a wider variety of cinematic material, a lot of the films plus points were lost on me. I recollect that I did pick up on the fact that this film was more ghoulish than the other “Space Operas” that flooded theatres at the time. But beyond that, all I saw was a fun and enjoyable science fiction movie. I cheered when the Malmori were defeated and was saddened when Space Cowboy died. It is only after subsequent viewing over the years, that I’ve realised that this film is a microcosm of all the things that made Roger Corman productions so successful and unique. Despite its low budget, the visual effects were good and innovative for the times. There was more sex and violence present, than in comparable productions. And the crew is a veritable who’s who of talent that went on to wider success.
Contrary to the endorsement on the above poster, Riddick was not "the most entertaining action movie of the year" in 2013. It was just an adequate third instalment in a rather ambitious franchise, that has failed to grab the wider public's attention. That’s not to say that they didn’t make money. This is after all the third movie. Writer and Director David Twohy has done his best to try and make the character of Riddick (Vin Diesel) more than the sum of his parts and I admire both of them for their persistence. Unfortunately, Riddick just isn't engaging or complicated enough a protagonist to sustain a franchise of this nature. The anti-hero was sufficient to drive the original Pitch Black back in 2000 which had some good ideas but just couldn't sustain the overarching and overblown Chronicles of Riddick in 2004. This instalment is competently made but ultimately superfluous.
Sequels and reboots are hardly a new concept and have been a part of Hollywood culture since the 1930s. The success of the Universal Horror movies from that era being a prime example of direct follow ups and retconned movies. However, there is one fundamental rule that distinguishes a good sequel from a bad one. You should never mitigate, undermine or make irrelevant the events of the previous movie, just to provide your new film with a raison d'être. For example, the events of Aliens do not contradict or trivialise those that happened in Alien. In fact with that franchise there is a very clear logical progression between the two movies. The same is true for Mad Max and Mad Max 2 or Star Wars and The Empire Strikes Back. The key is to progress a story, enhance it or explore things from an alternative angle and bring something new to the cinematic table. Sadly this philosophy is all too often lost on corporate film making. Which means that many sequels are just tedious replays of prior films. Terminator: Dark Fate falls squarely into this category.
In the near future, a series of mysterious power surges strike the Solar System, endangering all human life. Astronaut Major Roy McBride, is selected by U.S. Space Command (SpaceCom) to investigate their source near Neptune. The surges are linked to the "Lima Project", a failed experiment from 26 years earlier, that was intended to search for intelligent life outside of our solar system. The ship’s antimatter drive is potentially malfunctioning and responsible for the energy surges. Roy’s investigation is further complicated by the fact his Father H. Clifford McBride (Tommy Lee Jones), led the "Lima Project" and has not been heard from for 16 years after reaching Neptune. Having been told that Clifford may still be alive, Roy is joined by his father's old associate Colonel Pruitt (Donald Sutherland) whose loyalties remain ambiguous. Roy, who is noted for remaining calm under pressure, shows little emotional reaction to the news about his Father. As he and Pruitt travel covertly from Earth, to the moon and then onto Mars, it becomes clear that there is more to the mission than meets the eye. Will Roy remain emotionally detached or will old wounds impair his judgement?
I was very surprised when I saw a trailer for a fourth instalment on the MiB franchise, based on Lowell Cunningham’s 1990 comic book series about secret government agents battling alien infiltration of earth. The third movie from 2012 managed to keep its head above water despite a very troubled production. At the time of its release, I like everyone else, pretty much thought that the series had run its course. Yet we live in the age of belated sequels as well as hard and soft reboots. And although Will Smith’s star may well be waning, Chris Hemsworth is still box office gold. Hence, we saw the release of Men in Black: International this summer. The basic concept of the franchise remains the same but this time the action begins in the London Office and then takes a more international journey with such locations as Marrakesh and Naples. Emma Thompson returns as Agent O and Liam Neeson joins the cast as agent High T.
The original Men in Black movie hit our screens back in 1997. It was a box office success and was therefore followed by a mediocre sequel in 2002. It took a decade before we got a third instalment in the franchise. However, the popularity of the two lead actors contributed greatly to the success of this series and so despite well documented production problems Men in Black III was released in 2012. However, the delay between movies did have consequences. Will Smith, despite being an Oscar winner and box office star, had lost his way during this time and was not as popular with audiences. Men in Black III was a timely opportunity to reconnect with his core fans. So to ensure that the film hit all the required beats and stand a better chance of being a success, the Columbia Pictures brought back previous director Barry Sonnenfeld, in hopes of warding off the Hollywood curse of third movie instalments.
Fellow blogger and all round good guy Murf, posted an ode to Bill & Ted’s Excellent Adventure today. It is clearly a movie that he enjoys (Go read his review). He references how due to this movie (along with others), as well as being a decent person in real life, that actor Keanu Reeves enjoys a great deal of goodwill from fans and pop culture cognoscenti. Which is a good thing for Mr Reeves, because goodwill often means that folk are prepared to overlook past transgressions and misdemeanours. And in cinematic terms, Keanu has had a few. The Day the Earth Stood Still is definitely one of them. Now I’ve questioned before the wisdom and merits of writing a predominantly negative film review and believe me my thoughts on The Day the Earth Stood Still are most definitely so. However, I think that something positive can still be gained from scrutinising this film. It can be held up as a textbook example of how not to remake a classic.
Every now and then, a mainstream film studio employs an artisan director to helm some sort of experimental or vanity project. The studio executives often have very little understanding of the film maker or their body of work, beyond that their artistically respected by their peers. Hence there is the corporate hope that the resulting production will be both critically acclaimed and financially successful. However, what all too often happens is that the said director goes off and indulges themselves, or simply does what they’re hired to do and delivers a finished picture that is beyond the intellectual horizons of the studio. Sphincter’s subsequently tighten among executives; the director is denied final cut and the film is taken a way and re-edited in the hope of rendering it more commercially viable. In the worse cases, a second director is brought onboard and new material shot in the hope of “saving” the picture. The net result is usually acrimony among all involved parties and a film that fails to make its money back at the box office.
For anyone with a passing interest in literary science fiction, Arthur C. Clarke’s Childhood’s End is a seminal novel and considered an essential read. The story of humanity being shepherded into a utopian golden age by allegedly benevolent alien Overlords and the consequences it has upon society, was a radical departure from prevailing science fiction norms of the time. Over the years several film makers have expressed interest in adapting the story, but it has proven difficult to come to grips with. Stanley Kubrick initially wished to develop the novel but his subsequent collaboration with the author eventually lead to the making of 2001: A Space Odyssey. Since then there have been radio adaptations and audiobook versions, all of which seem to be a better medium for this episodic and contemplative tale. In late 2015 US cable and satellite channel Syfy broadcast a three-part miniseries based upon the 1953 story; something that past me by at the time. I recently caught up with this adaptation which seems to have provoked very mixed reactions among viewers. As ever, the controversy seems to stem from purists who favour a more slavish interpretation of the book.
I always cringe when I hear the phrase re-imagining. It's yet another contrived expression created by marketing bodies to justify the somewhat arbitrary process of remaking an established title. Often the re-imagined product has little to do with the source material and was chosen simply because of brand awareness. If you want a textbook example of a recent example of this somewhat cynical process then look no further than last year’s Death Wish reboot. It had nothing new to say on the subject and simply trotted out a generic and bland revenge thriller. So, when I discovered that Robert Wise's classic science fiction film, The Andromeda Strain had been remade as a TV miniseries (that had completely passed me by), I had great reservations as to whether this would be worth watching. However, the involvement of Tony and Ridley Scott piqued my interest, so I decided to take a calculated risk and give this 2008 A&E Network production a go.
Time is quite literally money in the movie In Time, starring Amanda Seyfried and Justin Timberlake. Written and directed by Andrew Niccol, who previously wrote Gattaca and S1m0ne which both had similar dystopian themes, we are presented with a chilling scenario. What if you had to spend minutes or hours or perhaps days of your life in the same way you spend money? The movie offers a future where the population is genetically programmed to stop aging at twenty-five. If you're rich enough, you can purchase and trade this commodity, adding time to your life, making you effectively immortal. For the poor, the future is a far bleaker with most dying within a year of this hardcoded end date. Every transaction comes with a price in minutes and seconds.
Many years ago, I use to rush home from school to watch Project UFO. Based loosely on the real-life Project Blue Book, this show from 1978 featured two U.S. Air Force investigators, Maj. Jake Gatlin (William Jordan) and Staff Sgt. Harry Fitz (Caskey Swaim) and their subsequent investigation into alleged UFO sightings. Sometimes there would be rational explanations and on other occasions, there was clearly extraterrestrial involvement. By the second season out protagonists experienced a close encounter of their own. It wasn’t the most densely plotted of dramas and was produced and presented in the idiom of mainstream television of the time. However, for a ten-year-old boy it had some excellent miniature work (Brick Price Movie Miniatures) and anything about UFOs was always a source of interest. There was also a great and very seventies theme tune by Nelson Riddle. So when I discovered that History (formerly The History Channel) had produced a science fiction drama series called Project Blue Book, I became somewhat nostalgic and equally intrigued.
Flight of the Living Dead (2007)
Sometimes just the name of a film is sufficient to sell it to you. I originally discovered this zombie crossover movie thanks to film critic Mark Kermode's video blog from the 2008 Cannes Film Festival. He reported on how the film festival was also a major marketplace for independent movie makers trying to find international distribution for their products. Flight of the Living Dead was one of the lurid flyers he was given. Writer and director Scott Thomas claimed at the time that despite the obvious plot similarities with Snakes on a Plane, his film was not intended to be a quick cash-in on Samuel L. Jackson’s sleeper hit from 2006. The basic concept and the pre-production phase of Flight of the Living Dead supposedly pre-dates the aforementioned exploitation movie. Considering how long it can take for a small independently funded movie to find a distributor this may well be true.
Sometimes just the name of a film is sufficient to sell it to you. I originally discovered this zombie crossover movie thanks to film critic Mark Kermode's video blog from the 2008 Cannes Film Festival. He reported on how the film festival was also a major marketplace for independent movie makers trying to find international distribution for their products. Flight of the Living Dead was one of the lurid flyers he was given. Writer and director Scott Thomas claimed at the time that despite the obvious plot similarities with Snakes on a Plane, his film was not intended to be a quick cash-in on Samuel L. Jackson’s sleeper hit from 2006. The basic concept and the pre-production phase of Flight of the Living Dead supposedly pre-dates the aforementioned exploitation movie. Considering how long it can take for a small independently funded movie to find a distributor this may well be true.
Dr. Bennett (Erick Avari) and his team of scientists are en route to Paris, transporting a cryogenically frozen coffin in the hold of the plane. The flight crew are unsettled not only by the presence of a cadaver but by the fact there's an armed guard securing it. The plane finds itself in the middle of a violent storm, which inevitably leads to the coffin accidentally being opened. It contains a mysterious woman, who doesn't appear to be quite dead. After attacking the guard she soon starts to spread her contagion among the rest of the crew and passengers. The survivors, including a policeman and prisoner as well as a golf pro and his wife, make a desperate last stand against the zombies and try to land a damaged plane. However, the authorities have other ideas and a military option soon becomes apparent.
Director Scott Thomas does not leave a single horror cliché left unturned in what is a surprisingly enjoyable tongue in cheek "B" horror movie. There is a capable cast of TV and genre actors such as David Chisum, Kristen Kerr, Kevin J. O'Connor, Richard Tyson and Raymond J. Barry. Furthermore Thomas has crafted a professional looking production despite the limited budget at his disposal. The make-up FX's are perfectly acceptable and the CGI work is better than what you usually see in such low budget movies. The script is the weakest aspect of the film and could have been tighter and a little more satirical. It struggles at times to decide what direction it wants to take. Overall the cast has a great time despite these shortcomings and I couldn't help but enjoy the film, as it has no pretensions to be anything other than what it is.
Flight of the Living Dead is the very essence of direct-to-video filmmaking and "high concept" movie and that's meant as a compliment. Long time horror fans have a highly attuned grading system when it comes to these sorts of movies. This movie is a cut above your standard cash-in bullshit. It puts a grin on your face with the sheer gall of its title and manages to maintain that goodwill for the remaining ninety minutes. Sometimes these DTV titles have a candour about them that is absent in the bigger budget and often more pretentious cousins. It is not as gory as it could be and the scope of the story pretty much remains within the confines of the title but if you want 90 minutes of zombie mayhem set on a plane then Flight of the Living Dead meets that requirement.
George A. Romero's Day Of The Dead (1985) is a bleak and remorseless masterpiece. The final entry in his “Dead Trilogy”, its central theme is that in a world on the brink of destruction, man is still the biggest threat to his own existence. It is well scripted, clinically accurate in its observations on human nature and thought provoking, despite having its budget cut just weeks before production commenced. 40 years later it is revered as a genre milestone and is considered one of Romero’s finest works. Sadly, the 2008 “remake” directed by Steve Miner, who has a background in slasher and exploitation movies, takes a contrasting approach, to say the least. It certainly has very little to do with Romero’s film and one can’t help but assume that it is nothing more than a cynical cash in. Setting aside comparisons with the original, this is not in any way a standout zombie film in its own right.
George A. Romero’s Night of the Living Dead is a true genre milestone that is praised not only by horror film fans but mainstream critics alike. If you are interested in watching an intelligent, well researched and entertaining documentary about the film’s provenance and cultural impact then I thoroughly recommend Birth of the Living Dead (2013) by Rob Kuhn. It tells you pretty much all you need to know about why this classic film is so important. As for Night of the Living Dead itself, it still holds up well after 53 years. It is the immediacy and relatability of the premise and overall story that still makes the film relevant. The zombies are purely a “MacGuffin” and the real focus of the plot is how people behave under pressure in life threatening situations. It’s a film about how we can react to the same situation differently and how cultural baggage and the need for people to be “right”, hinders co-operation and thwarts progress.
One of the biggest issues associated with modern film production is creative interference by the studios financing them. Despite employing known writers and directors who have an established track record and creative style, all too often control is taken from these individuals and changes are imposed upon the production, usually to the detriment of the overall film. Hence, you can understand why more and more filmmakers are taking their work to Netflix and similar platforms. Streaming services are apparently far more accommodating and understanding. Martin Scorsese himself made his last film The Irishman, for Netflix. However, such creative freedom can be a double edged sword. Some directors need to be tempered, the same way that some writers need a good editor. There is often a fine line between creative freedom and self indulgence.
Sometimes just the name of a film is sufficient to sell it to you. I originally discovered this zombie crossover movie thanks to film critic Mark Kermode's video blog from the 2008 Cannes Film Festival. He reported on how the film festival was also a major marketplace for independent movie makers trying to find international distribution for their products. Flight of the Living Dead was one of the lurid flyers he was given. Writer and director Scott Thomas claimed at the time that despite the obvious plot similarities with Snakes on a Plane, his film was not intended to be a quick cash-in on Samuel L. Jackson’s sleeper hit from 2006. The basic concept and the pre-production phase of Flight of the Living Dead supposedly pre-dates the aforementioned exploitation movie. Considering how long it can take for a small independently funded movie to find a distributor this may well be true.
Five years ago, I wrote about a fan edit of George Romero’s horror classic Dawn of the Dead that attempted to recreate the original rough cut of the movie. The so-called “Extended Mall Hours” cut was composed of the 139 minute Cannes edit of the film and the 117 minute Dario Argento version. It was a very interesting project but as it consisted of DVD quality material (including deleted scenes) it was not an optimal presentation. Being a fan edit, there were obvious issues regarding legality, so I never really expected to see anything comparable to this version being officially sanctioned or released. So I was therefore most surprised to learn that a recent Blu-ray boxset release by Austrian distributors XT Video included a “Complete Cut” which similarly combines all available material. This is presented in 1080p, at a ratio of 1:85:1 and runs 155 minutes. It is superior in quality to the “Extended Mall Hours” cut and is most likely the nearest any fan is ever going to get to seeing Romero’s initial edit of the film.
Contrary to a lot of the pre-release doom and gloom regarding re-edits and extensive new footage being shot, World War Z turned out to be far from the disaster that some critics implied. Ultimately there were some good ideas and snatches of interesting dialogue. Some of the characters were unusual and there seems to have been an attempt do something different with the genre. All of these things are laudable. Unfortunately, despite these positive attributes the movie clearly shows the signs of post-production interference and material from the extensive re-shoot is all too apparent. That’s not to say that is bad because that is not the case. It’s because it is noticeably different in style and tone from the rest of the film.
Back in the summer of 2012, the red band trailer for Cockneys vs Zombies set a very high benchmark and certainly raised expectations for the final movie. The title itself was also somewhat of a gamble, either raising a wry smile among horror fans or eliciting a roll of the eyes and a deep sigh for a genre in decline. I was unable to attend the premier at Frighfest 2012, but the general feedback at the time was that that that the movie was extremely well received by horror fans. Finally, six years later, I finally caught up with the film on Amazon Prime and I’m happy to report that Cockneys vs Zombies does live up expectations and is a thoroughly entertaining, quirky and very British horror movie. It manages to balance both visceral horror with a healthy dose of black humour, which is no mean feat.
The horror genre has more than its fair share of bad movies. It’s the nature of the beast (no pun intended). Films of this type can be made quickly and cheaply but have the potential to make a tidy profit. Therefore, they attract not only burgeoning talent but those bereft of any as well. Furthermore, traditional formulas work, so any new innovative production is often followed by a wealth of copycats and knockoff films. To say that the genre is self-plagiarising is an understatement. Yet, from time to time, horror movies can surpass mainstream cinema with regard to social commentary, satire and intelligent adult narratives. Look no further than Dawn of the Dead, The Thing and The Descent if you want three solid examples. Horror is a versatile and malleable genre that can facilitate great stories and reflections upon the human condition.
World War Z Unrated Cut runs seven minutes longer than the theatrical version of the movie and contains "intense footage not shown in theaters". The material consists of more violent alternative takes of existing action scenes and features mainly CGI effects work. There is no additional plot, although there may be some nominal changes to dialogue. Overall the unrated cut is an improvement over the theatrical print in so far it offers a more traditional zombie movie experience. However, compared to other examples of the genre, the unrated version of World War Z still remains relatively sedate in terms of violence. The movie focuses on the scale of the zombie outbreak, rather than the visceral mayhem of a George Romero film.
These day’s zombies are a somewhat ubiquitous plot device and enjoy an entire literary, artistic and cinematic sub-genre. The Walking Dead is one of the most popular TV shows internationally and hundreds of thousands of gamers fight the undead, online every day. Yet there was a time when zombies were just a minor subset of the horror genre and far from a popular one. That all changed in 1968, when a low-budget, independent film called Night of the Living Dead was released upon an unsuspecting public. The movie’s impact upon the film industry and popular culture was extraordinary. Rob Kuhns’ appropriately titled documentary Birth of the Living Dead analyses the creation of George A. Romero’s seminal classic and strives to determine how a single movie could have such impact.
In the last few years I’ve become acquainted with the concept of fan edits. Fan edit are versions of a film that has been modified by a viewer. This involves the removal, reordering, or the addition of new material to create a new interpretation of the film. Fan edits include the removal of scenes or dialogue, replacement of audio and visual elements, as well as adding material from sources such as deleted scenes or even other films. Due to the easy access to pro-quality software and high definition source material, such editions are often very professionally realised. Naturally fan edits often fall foul of copyright law.
If you are a fan of horror movies then sooner or later Lucio Fulci’s Zombi 2 (also known as Zombie, Island of the Living Dead, Zombie Island, Zombie Flesh-Eaters and Woodoo) will appear on your radar. For good or ill, this movie looms large within the genre and has a mixed reputation. Even by current cinematic standards, this movie is a gore-fest and it still has the ability to make viewers squirm. It is a curious phenomenon that a relatively low budget and obscure Italian cash-in on George Romero’s Dawn of the Dead, has managed to achieve such an infamous, iconic and cult status.
Classic Movie Themes: An American Werewolf in London
An American Werewolf in London is a genre milestone and one of the few horror films that successfully manages to balance humour and suspense without mitigating the overall tone of the story. 40 years on from its theatrical release it still holds up well with its bitter sweet love story, tragic themes and ground breaking transformation effects by Rick Baker. Director John Landis never really bettered this concise and effective genre outing. It hits the mark in virtually every part of the production. However, there is one aspect of the film that does suffer as a result of the director’s personal choices. Whether it is to the detriment of the overall film is debatable. The point in question is the film’s soundtrack and the director’s focus upon the song Blue Moon by Richard Rodgers and Lorenz Hart.
An American Werewolf in London is a genre milestone and one of the few horror films that successfully manages to balance humour and suspense without mitigating the overall tone of the story. 40 years on from its theatrical release it still holds up well with its bitter sweet love story, tragic themes and ground breaking transformation effects by Rick Baker. Director John Landis never really bettered this concise and effective genre outing. It hits the mark in virtually every part of the production. However, there is one aspect of the film that does suffer as a result of the director’s personal choices. Whether it is to the detriment of the overall film is debatable. The point in question is the film’s soundtrack and the director’s focus upon the song Blue Moon by Richard Rodgers and Lorenz Hart.
Hollywood veteran, Elmer Bernstein, was commissioned by Landis to write the score for An American Werewolf in London. But Landis had already decided to use a selection of songs to play during key scenes. All of which referenced the moon in some fashion, thus ironically highlighting the significance of the lunar cycle in lycanthropy. Hence the film starts with Blue Moon by Bobby Vinton playing over the opening credits. Moondance by Van Morrison is used during a love. Bad Moon Rising by Creedence Clearwater Revival accompanies a scene where the lead actor David Naughton anxiously paces round Nurse Price’s flat. Then perhaps the most notable use of a song is during the iconic werewolf transformation scene, which features Blue Moon by Sam Cooke. Finally, the end credits roll to a doo-wop version of Blue Moon by The Marcels.
The use of these songs is appropriate and more to the point works within the context of the film. I certainly understand why John Landis chose to juxtapose the shocking imagery of the werewolf transformation sequence with the sweat and wholesome tones of Sam Cooke. However, it does raise the question why employ such a canny and talented composer as Elmer Bernstein if you’re not really going to use their work. Because Bernstein did indeed compose a cue specifically for the werewolf scene, despite being told by Landis that it wouldn’t be required. He apparently produced a lot more material for the film that wasn’t used but did so as a safety net in case Landis could not secure the licenses for the songs he intended to use. You can find a detailed account of the story behind this decision over at Hollywood and All That, which makes for interesting reading if you’re a movie trivia aficionado.
There has never been a comprehensive or in fact any kind of release of Elmer Bernstein’s score for An American Werewolf in London. Soundtrack albums associated with the film tend to focus on the songs. There is a disco album by Meco called Impressions of An American Werewolf in London, which is best not talked about. However, one of the unused cues for the film surfaced in 2005. Composer and arranger Nic Raine specialises in re-recording classic film soundtracks in conjunction with the Prague Philharmonic. The Essential Elmer Bernstein Film Music Collection features a track called “Metamorphosis”. It is a five minute piece with two distinct phases. It has subsequently been determined that part of this is indeed the cue that Bernstein wrote for the werewolf transformation. Furthermore, attentive listeners have determined that elements of this track were used in Michael Jackson’s Thriller, which was also directed by John Landis and credits Elmer Bernstein for scary music.
At present, there are only bootleg scores for An American Werewolf in London or YouTube videos featuring music extracted directly from DVD or Blu-ray releases of the film. One such track circulating under the title “An American Werewolf in London suite”, features just under 4 minutes of material from Bernstein’s soundtrack. I have included it here because, despite its brevity, it includes the beautiful central motif played on piano.
As a bonus, we also have Nic Raine’s re-recording of the lost “Metamorphosis” cue. Perhaps one day a comprehensive reconstruction of the entire score will be undertaken. Until then enjoy these two tracks.
The Planet of the Apes movie franchise took a radical change of course with its third entry in the series. The first two films were set in the future and benefited from high production values to help realise a post apocalyptic earth. However, due to a substantial reduction of budget, Escape from the Planet of the Apes uses a time travel plot device to bring the ape protagonists to present day Los Angeles (1971 in this case). The result is a film with a much smaller narrative scope. However, although it lacks the science fiction spectacle of its predecessors, it features an interesting satirical exploration of celebrity culture and ponders what it is like to be deemed an enemy of the state. As ever, Roddy McDowell and Kim Hunter provide exceptional lead performances as the Chimpanzees Cornelius and Zira. Escape from the Planet of the Apes also captures the pop culture vibe of seventies America.
Ronald Erle Grainer (11 August 1922 – 21 February 1981) was a prolific Australian composer who is best remembered for his work in the United Kingdom during the sixties and seventies. He wrote numerous notable scores and theme music for several iconic television shows such as Doctor Who, Steptoe and Son and Tales of the Unexpected. He also composed the soundtrack for several major motion pictures such as Some People (1962), The Assassination Bureau (1969) and The Omega Man (1971). Grainer relocated to London from Australia in 1952 but it was not until 1960 that he gained critical success after writing the music for the popular TV show Maigret. He subsequently received an Ivor Novello award for “Outstanding Composition for Film, TV or Radio”.
The following is about a cultural change. That is not to say that it’s a value judgement or one of those posts you so frequently read by bloggers of a certain age, that essentially boil down to “things were better in my day”. It is merely an observation and like all observations it is not 100% universal. There will always be exceptions to the rule. I am simply painting with broad strokes a general truism for your consideration. My point being that people listen, experience and enjoy music differently these days compared to how they did three to four decades ago. I’m not talking about the science of hearing or anything complex like that. I am merely highlighting the change in the way we choose to experience music and how that has an impact upon its creation and presentation. So like Anne Elk, presenting her theory on the Brontosaurus, here is the axiom at the heart of this post.
Allonsanfàn (1974) is an Italian historical drama film written and directed by Paolo and Vittorio Taviani. The title of the film derives from the first words of the French Revolutionary anthem La Marseillaise (Allons enfants, IE “Arise, children”). It is also the name of a character in the story. Set against the backdrop of the Italian Unification in early 19th-century Italy, Marcello Mastroianni stars as an ageing revolutionary, Fulvio Imbriani, who becomes disillusioned after the Restoration and endeavours to betray his companions, who are organising an insurrection in Southern Italy. Allonsanfàn is a complex film that is not immediately accessible to those unfamiliar with the intricacies of Italian political history nor the arthouse style of the Taviani brothers. However, it is visually arresting and features a rousing score by Ennio Morricone.
Jerry Goldsmith’s contribution to Star Trek is immense. Yet simply listing the films and TV episodes he wrote music for does not adequately encapsulate the significance of his contribution to the franchise. His majestic, thoughtful and uplifting musical scores provide an emotional foundation that reflects the core ethos of Star Trek. They also create an invaluable sense of continuity that spans multiple shows and movies. Perhaps the most obvious example of this is his iconic title music for Star Trek: The Motion Picture (1979) that was subsequently adopted as the theme tune for Star Trek: The Next Generation. His work was held in such high regard, when Star Trek V: The Final Frontier (1989) ran into production issues, it was thought that a Jerry Goldsmith soundtrack may well elevate the film. Sadly it didn’t but his work on that instalment was outstanding and among his best.
Halloween (1978) is both a genre and cinematic milestone. It made stars of Jamie Lee Curtis and director John Carpenter as well as kickstarting the slasher genre that dominated the box office for the next 15 years. Unlike many of the inferior imitations that followed in its wake, Halloween is not a gorefest but a far more suspenseful and unsettling film. It’s shocks and sinister atmosphere are the result of sumptuous panavision cinematography by Dean Cundey and inventive editing by Tommy Wallace and Charles Bornstein. Another invaluable asset to the film’s effectiveness is John Carpenter minimalistic synth and piano score which perfectly embellishes the film with an air of menace. After 33 years and various re-arrangements in subsequent sequels, the original Halloween Theme is still as effective today as it was when the film was first released.
Tenebrae (1982) is probably Dario Argento’s most accessible “giallo” for mainstream audiences. Although violent, it is not as narratively complex as Deep Red (1975) or as bat shit crazy as Phenomena (1985). The story centres on popular American novelist Peter Neal (Anthony Fanciosa) who is in Rome to promote his latest book. Events take a turn for the worst when a series of murders appear to have been inspired by his work. The plot twists and turns, the director explores themes such as dualism along with sexual aberration and blood is copiously spattered across the white walled interiors of modernist buildings. It is slick, disturbing and has a pounding synth and rock score by former Goblin members, Claudio Simonetti, Fabio Pignatelli, and Massimo Morante.
An American Werewolf in London is a genre milestone and one of the few horror films that successfully manages to balance humour and suspense without mitigating the overall tone of the story. 40 years on from its theatrical release it still holds up well with its bitter sweet love story, tragic themes and ground breaking transformation effects by Rick Baker. Director John Landis never really bettered this concise and effective genre outing. It hits the mark in virtually every part of the production. However, there is one aspect of the film that does suffer as a result of the director’s personal choices. Whether it is to the detriment of the overall film is debatable. The point in question is the film’s soundtrack and the director’s focus upon the song Blue Moon by Richard Rodgers and Lorenz Hart.
Before we start, no I am not writing about Alexander Courage’s classic main theme for the original Star Trek show. I can add nothing further to that particular discussion and it remains iconic and inspiring, even when distilled down to just the initial fanfare. In this post I want to draw your attention to another piece of music from Star Trek that has permeated its way into popular culture. A cue that when heard, if the listener is familiar with its provenance, will instantly conjure up images of flying drop kicks, ear claps and judo chops. A piece of music that can be added to pretty much any video footage and instantly make it more heroic. Yes, I am talking about what has become generically known as Star Trek “fight music”. Or more specifically, the "The Ancient Battle/2nd Kroykah" cue from Amok Time (S02E01) composed by Gerald Fried. The scene during the koon-ut-kal-if-fee ritual in which Spock fights Kirk on the planet Vulcan for complicated “reasons”.
Classical music has often been used to great effect in cinema since the advent of sound. It has certain advantages over bespoke compositions, in that it can imbue a scene with a sense of gravitas and emotionally connect with viewers who may already be familiar with the piece being played. Legendary director Stanley Kubrick famously rejected Alex North’s score for 2001: A space Odyssey after finding the classical tracks he used for the temporary soundtrack complement the visuals perfectly. Over the years, some particular pieces of classical music have proven to be very popular and flexible, thus appearing in a wide variety of films across multiple genres. Hence, I have chosen two well known tracks that demonstrate this. I would also like to highlight contemporary classical music and have also selected one example that I feel demonstrates how the genre sublimely compliments cinema.
If you mention The Pink Panther (1963) I’d hazard a guess that most people will instantly think of Inspector Clouseau (and possibly throw in a quote in faux French about “Minkeys”) or hum or whistle the iconic theme tune. It’s blend of cool sixties Jazz and Lounge is both classy and evocative. Henry Mancini’s contribution to the Pink Panther franchise is commensurate to that of Peter Sellers and Blake Edwards. If you removed his musical scores from any of the films they would be greatly diminished. In fact one can argue that the movies made in the eighties after Sellers’ death are greatly bolstered by Mancini’s intelligent and accomplished musical accompaniment. The franchise may have run out of steam but Mancini never did so.
Back in August 2018, I posted seven of my favourite tracks from various video games that I’ve played over the years. I thought recently that it was high time that I did the same again. So here are a further five musical cues that I especially enjoy. All of which contribute greatly to the respective games that they feature in. Unlike film composers, musicians that write for video games do not always enjoy comparable exposure or attention. Yet often they have a more complex remit, having to write material for dozens of hours of content, rather than just two or three. Furthermore, the complete soundtrack to many video games often remain conspicuously absent, with fans having to data mine the game client to find the tracks that they love. Which is why it is important for those that enjoy video game music to show their support. Perhaps then more publishers will release full and comprehensive game soundtracks for digital download.
It was Friday the 13th yesterday, so I thought it was about time that I added Harry Manfredini’s iconic score to the annals of Classic Movie Themes. The 1980 slasher movie Friday the 13th has become as legendary in the pantheon of cinematic horror history as John Carpenter’s Halloween. Although there are marked differences between these two films, both use minimalist musical scores extremely effectively to punctuate the proceedings and embellish the overall atmosphere. However, Manfedini did not want to provide viewers with obvious audio cues during scenes of building tension. He preferred to focus his score upon the activities of the franchise's iconic killer, Jason Voorhees, and hence have strong musical cues when he was on screen. This approach meant that he had to use a unique musical motif to denote potential tension, without diminishing its effect on the audience by excessive use of obvious and melodramatic cues.
Game of Death was Bruce Lee’s fourth Hong Kong martial arts movie. Due to the success of his previous films he found himself in a position where he could finally write and direct a project himself. Filmed in late 1972 and early 1973, the film was put on hold midway through production when Hollywood offered him a starring role in Enter the Dragon. He died shortly after completing the US backed movie that made him an international star, so Game of Death remained unfinished. Several years later the rights to the raw footage were sold and recycled for a new movie, that kept the name but bore little resemblance to Lee’s original vision. For most of Game of Death, Kim Tai-jong and Yuen Biao double for Bruce Lee and it is only in the final act that audiences actually get to see about 12 minutes of material that he shot himself. The 1978 release of Game of Death, directed by Robert Clouse, is a mess but remains a cinematic curiosity. The scenes which genuinely feature Bruce Lee are outstanding, even in an abridged form.
The Long Good Friday not only launched then career of Bob Hoskins but remains a uniquely British take on the gangster genre. Featuring authentic performances and a credible plot, the screenplay touches upon many of the social and political issues of the time; police corruption, the IRA, urban renewal and the decline of industry, along with EEC membership and the free-market economy. It’s a gritty and unrelenting drama that is still relevant today. Furthermore, the film is filled with quotable dialogue and has several stand out scenes that showcase Bob Hoskins’ smouldering performance. It’s also offers of “who’s who” of British character actors and there is one sequence still has the power to shock even today.
A few years ago, I wrote a post about cult movie soundtracks and how many of these movies are often blessed with a high quality score from an established composer. The subject came up again recently when I was visiting the British Film Institute with friends, and several other examples were discussed. Hence, I thought it would be prudent to write a follow up post with another selection of material, as it continues to amaze me how often the most appalling films can still have outstanding soundtracks. With this idea in mind I've collated five films that are for various reasons are labelled “cult” and have suffered the “slings and arrows of outrageous fortune” over the years. All have scores of interests and note, though for different reasons. I have chosen a track from each soundtrack which I think highlights the musical excellence and integrity of the composers involved. The genres are varied as are the musical styles and nuances of each piece. All clearly demonstrate how a well-conceived score can embellish and enhance a movie, effectively becoming a character in its own right.
Lords of the Fallen is an action role-playing game from 2014, played from a third-person perspective. It is broadly in the same idiom to Darksiders and Dark Souls with the emphasis on complex and challenging combat. And it is for that reason that I didn’t get on with this title when I bought it in a Steam sale a few years ago. I felt that the long, protracted fights were an impediment to the narrative, which I quite enjoyed. However, the game was designed this way to appeal to the combat focused gamer and “git gud” culture. But I think that it’s important to try different genres of games from time to time and to step occasionally out of your comfort zone. I would cite the Hand of Fate series as a positive example of this. Both of those titles are from a genre I wouldn’t usually consider and playing them turned out to be a very positive experience
Alien is a unique genre milestone. It challenged the established aesthetic created by 2001: A Space Odyssey of space travel being pristine, clinical and high tech and replaced it with a grimy, industrial quality. The space tug Nostromo is also a conspicuously “blue collar”, civilian venture, underwritten by a large corporation. As for H. R Giger’s xenomorph, it redefined the depiction of extraterrestrial life in movies. Director Ridley Scott brought visual style and atmosphere to particularly unglamorous and dismal setting. He also scared the hell out of audiences at the time with his slow burn story structure and editing style that hints, rather than shows. Overall, Alien is a text book example of how to make a horror movie and put a new spin on a classic and well-trodden concept.
James Horner was a prolific, yet consistently good composer with a broad range of styles. Consider his score for 48 Hrs with its Jazz under currents and then compare it to his grand swashbuckling approach to Krull. They are radically different soundtracks, but both are extremely effective in embellishing their respective motion pictures. That was James Horner great talent. He knew when to be theatrical and bombastic but could also dial it back and be subtle, gentle and delicate. It made his body of work very diverse and memorable.
James Horner, although possessing a very broad and eclectic musical range, was in many respects a very traditional composer. He was certainly au fait with works of such giants as Miklós Rózsa, Korngold and Bernard Herrmann and it often manifested itself in his music through his use of the leitmotif. Perhaps the reason James Horner was so consistently good and crafted so many outstanding pieces of music, is because he never saw his profession as just a means to an end. As he said in an interview once, “I don’t look at this as just a job. I see music as art”.
Star Trek: Enterprise was the first show in the Star Trek pantheon to have a song performed by an established artist play over the opening credits, rather than a traditional theme tune. Up until 2001, the franchise had maintained a more formal approach, established with the iconic introduction to the original series composed by Alexander Courage. Needless to say, such a radical departure from established practise brought about consternation and debate among fans. In some respects, you can argue that point about the entire show itself, but that as they say, is an entirely different blog post. Needless to say, the dislike and hatred that the song Where My Heart Will Take Me engendered in certain quarters, lead to a petition to have it removed. Needless to say, this movement failed, and the show continued using it for four seasons. Seventeen years on this particular debacle has now died down and the song is often just referenced ironically by fans as an amusing anecdote and piece of Trek trivia.
According to Wikipedia “Hawk the Slayer is a 1980 British sword and sorcery adventure film directed by Terry Marcel and starring John Terry and Jack Palance. The film has developed a cult following”. That doesn’t do the movie justice by any reckoning. Hawk the Slayer is a quirky, low budget, high camp fantasy movie that compensates for its budgetary shortcoming by being so preposterously silly. It is loaded with hard boiled, fantasy steeped dialogue that parodies well known genre tropes. It treads a fine line between utter bilge and stupid fun. It is very much a product of its time and is also filled with British character actors. Some viewers will see nothing more than a cheap and cheerful cash-in on the eighties Sword and Sorcery boom. Others will delight at this inventive, stylised and silly fantasy orientated outing. Such is the nature of cult movies.
Film producer Julian Blaustein had a long-standing desire to make a film that addressed the fears and concerns of the post war Atomic Age. With the backing from Fox Studio Executive Darryl F. Zanuck, he hired screenwriter Edmund North to adapt the short story Farewell to the Master by Harry Bates. The screenplay provided a moral commentary about the ongoing arms race and featured an alien visitor with Christ like qualities who delivers an apocalyptic message. Veteran director Robert Wise was brought in head the project and a fine cast of established characters actors such as Michael Rennie, Patricia Neal Hugh Marlowe and Sam Jaffe was assembled. The finished movie has proven to be one of the greatest science fiction movies ever; it is The Day the Earth Stood Still made in 1951.
King Solomon’s Mines is a 1985 Cannon Films production based on the pulp works of H. Rider Haggard. It was quickly made to cash in on the ongoing success of Indiana Jones franchise, although the finished movie bears little resemblance to the classic original novel. Like most Cannon movies from that boom era, it was a cheap and fast enterprise that superficially sported a good cast, but ultimately didn’t do much with them. Veteran director J. Lee Thompson favoured a light and comic approach to the material, as the film’s budget could hardly sustain any major notable set pieces. Yet, it proved popular enough at the box office to warrant a sequel the following year. Allan Quatermain and the Lost City of Gold proved to be as equally silly but by then the public’s interest had waned.
A ten months ago, I wrote about the LOTRO soundtrack and listed some of my favourite tracks. This time round rather than just limit myself to music from one game, I thought it may be more interesting to broaden the remit. So, I have decided to upload seven of my favourite tracks and music cues from various games I have played over the last two decades. As with cinema, the soundtrack of a game plays a very important role. It can make a substantial impact on the players perceptions and enjoyment. The following tracks are examples that I feel have greatly enhanced a game. They’re also ones that I find particularly enjoyable. They are not in any order of preference.
Paul Verhoeven has seldom made a movie without some semblance of controversy associated with it, and his 1992 neo-noir Basic Instinct was no different. Even before its US release, Basic Instinct courted controversy due over its overt sexuality and graphic depiction of violence. It was strongly opposed by gay rights activists, who criticised the film's depiction of homosexual relationships and the portrayal of a bisexual woman as a homocidal narcissistic psychopath. The opening murder with an icepick is still shocking twenty six years later and is an excellent showcase for makeup FX artists Rob Bottin.
You can write pages on Gerry Anderson's 1968 Supermarionation series Joe 90. There's the morally ambiguous premise of giving an emotionally immature nine-year-old the experiences of an adult. Then the psychological effects of allowing him to kill at will. Then there's the perennial issue of scientists prostituting their skills to the intelligence community. One can also reflect upon the absence of any major female characters in the series and how that may impact upon Joe himself. Finally, when one finally arrives she's a gold-digging bitch who tries to exploit Joe’s Dad, Professor McClaine. Joe 90 is certainly a psychiatrist’s dream subject.
Despite the popularity of the TV show in 1965, the two spinoff Thunderbirds feature films were both box offices failures. This has often been attributed to the indifferently written screenplays that seem to have completely missed the sense of suspense that the fifty-minute episodes achieved. Both feature films feel rather slow and like extended episodes rather than big budget extravaganzas. They fail to do anything different with established characters and apart from showcasing more extensive miniature effects in a widescreen format, don’t really have much more to offer. It’s curious that the winning, character driven formula that worked on television was overlooked for these big screen outings.
I grew up during the seventies when network TV shows still put a lot of thought and effort into such things as their theme tune. It was a decade littered with memorable tracks that captured the essence of the shows they came from. Many have now become integral aspects of popular culture, leading to countless internet memes as well as becoming the ringtones of choice for many a fortysomething. However, things are very different now. You can have a staggeringly good theme for your show, but it can't possibly be longer than thirty seconds. And don’t think for a moment that viewers can listen to it again at the end, as it has now become standard practice to compress the credits into a third of the TV screen and preview what's coming next, while some link announcer spouts inanities. Mercifully, cable and streaming companies tend to treat their TV shows with greater respect. The lack of commercial advertising ensures a longer program duration and hence more focus on a theme tune. However, network TV still commands big audiences, yet hasn’t in recent years produced any TV show themes of note.
Death Race (2008)
I must admit that I did not have particularly high hopes for Paul W S Anderson's remake of the 1975 Roger Corman produced cult classic. Anderson’s work varies greatly. Event Horizon and Soldier are solid genre films but I still have not fully come to terms with Alien vs. Predator. Jason Statham is also a name that divides the public, with solid material such as The Transporter and unfathomable tosh like Revolver. But despite these considerations, Death Race is in fact quite a surprise and does not follow the path that so many remakes do. It takes the basic themes and concept associated with the original and tries to do something different with them. It doesn’t reinvent the wheel nor is it a genre milestone. But it does offer a different spin on things, have some engaging action scenes and provide some dumb but enjoyable entertainment. When combined with snacks and some beer this is a passable way to kill 111 minutes.
I must admit that I did not have particularly high hopes for Paul W S Anderson's remake of the 1975 Roger Corman produced cult classic. Anderson’s work varies greatly. Event Horizon and Soldier are solid genre films but I still have not fully come to terms with Alien vs. Predator. Jason Statham is also a name that divides the public, with solid material such as The Transporter and unfathomable tosh like Revolver. But despite these considerations, Death Race is in fact quite a surprise and does not follow the path that so many remakes do. It takes the basic themes and concept associated with the original and tries to do something different with them. It doesn’t reinvent the wheel nor is it a genre milestone. But it does offer a different spin on things, have some engaging action scenes and provide some dumb but enjoyable entertainment. When combined with snacks and some beer this is a passable way to kill 111 minutes.
Death Race is not an exact retread of the original movie. It bears more similarities to Arnold Schwarzenegger's The Running Man but avoids any attempt at social commentary. The plot is very matter of fact and established very quickly. In the near future, the US has suffered a complete economic collapse. Unemployment and poverty stalk the land, like two giant stalking things (to quote Blackadder). Ex-professional driver Jensen Ames (Jason Statham) is framed for his wife’s murder and ends up in the proverbial big house. Evil Warden Hennessey (Joan Allen) who makes a profit from the prison system by staging a brutal set of fatal demolition derby’s, blackmails Jensen into driving under the guise of punters favourite, “Frankenstein”. The deal is that he’ll earn his freedom if he co-operates. He is aided in his endeavours by institutionalized mechanic “Coach” (Ian McShane) and his navigator Case (Natalie Martinez).
Death Race is actually an honest action movie, avoiding the usual pitfalls of being too OTT or having delusions of grandeur. The script is tight and serviceable, not straying from the accepted formula. There are no major surprises but it is not predictable to the point of tedium. The visual feel and production design are solid and the stunt driving and FXs work are good. There are several affectionate homage to well known road and action movies. The violence is strong but not gloating or gratuitous. For a genre piece, the actors and performances are above average. It’s nice to see Joan Allen indulge in action movie smacktalk. “Okay cocksucker. Fuck with me and we’ll see who shit’s on the sidewalk!” The soundtrack is also very appropriate for the subject matter, with a good selection of songs and metal riffs.
Director Anderson meets audience expectations with Death Race. Don’t get me wrong, this film is still a somewhat niche market product. Fans of costume dramas and character studies will still struggle to define the film's philosophical subtext. But for those wanting a fix of old school action with a squared jawed hero, you can’t go far wrong with Death Race. The film was sufficiently successful to spawn three direct-to-video sequels. Death Race 2 (2010), Death Race 3: Inferno (2013) and Death Race: Beyond Anarchy (2018). However, Jason Statham didn’t see fit to return so is conspicuously absent from them. He is replaced by Luke Goss in the first two follow ups and then Zach McGowan in the last. The budgets and quality decline exponentially as the franchise progresses, as is often the case with these sorts sequels. So I can’t recommend them to anyone but the most ardent genre aficionado.
Mainstream films are easy to recommend to people. They’re usually formulaic, work within clear parameters and they’re not controversial. Most people, when viewing such film on someone else’s suggestion, are left with a fairly simply choice. Did they like it or not? Whatever the outcome, no feathers are ruffled. No one looks at you askance afterwards and says “why the hell did you think I’d like that piece of shit”? If something like this happens, then you have clearly not recommended a mainstream film. Perhaps you’ve suggested something that’s a little more of an acquired taste. Something niche, from a very specific sub-genre. Which brings me neatly to Blazing Magnum AKA Strange Shadows in an Empty Room (1976). The US title gives the impression that this film is a hard boiled cop thriller, like so many others that followed in the wake of Dirty Harry. But there’s a clue in the European title. Yes, this movie has more than just a whiff of a giallo about it.
Jason Statham is an exemplar of the US mantra of “staying in your lane”. He makes action movies and occasionally strays into action comedies. His formula broadly works and is sufficiently lucrative to keep Mr. Statham employed. Therefore, if you watch a film in which he stars, you have a fairly good idea of what you’ll be getting. Of late, the criteria for his action vehicles have become more succinct. Jason Statham will play an innocuous character, such as a construction foreman or a bee keeper. Something terrible will subsequently befall another character who Mr. Statham has an emotional connection with in some capacity. He will subsequently hunt down those responsible and meet out death and violence. At some point the villain of the story will enquire as to how this innocuous person is so lethal. Research will then show that our Jason is in fact an ex-police officer/special forces operative/international assassin. There’s then a showdown and the villain dies. Job done.
The Light at the Edge of the World presented itself as an action movie upon its release in 1971. Based upon a story by Jules Verne, the Spanish American co-production was driven by its star Kirk Douglas, who curiously hired British director Kevin Billington to helm the project. This tale of a lighthouse keeper fighting a war of attrition against a group of pirates that have captured his island, was market as an adventure film ostensibly in the idiom of the authors previous works and as a pirate movie. MGM bought the rights to distribute the film in the UK on the misunderstanding that it was a family friendly production. It was not and remains so. They subsequently had to cut 15 minutes of violence and torture as well as an undercurrent of sexual assault to secure a suitable rating. Conversely, the US distributors received an arbitrary PG rating, despite the fact this is one of a handful of films that honestly depicts pirates as murderers, rapists and worse.
It’s an established action film trope. The fire team comprised of ex-military personnel, move in on their target. Only to have the tables turned by someone they don’t deem a threat. What makes it different in The Last Stand of Ellen Cole is a throwaway line of dialogue. The bested operative lies bleeding on the floor and the protagonists stands over them ready to finish them off. “Don’t, I have a cat” they feebly plead. For me that was the icing on the cake. The movie had already established it was taking the “same old, same old” and doing something different. Something fun, if taken in the right spirit. This scene tipped the balance and I embraced this film because it was being honest about what it is. This is a modern B movie that decides to give a very specific sub-genre a makeover. Furthermore, its clearly done with an affectionate wink, which is very different to sly wink. This isn’t deliberate self-knowing irony. Its just a film doing something different and possibly silly but it genuinely wants to have fun with it.
Stephen King’s dystopian story, The Running Man, was previously adapted very loosely in 1987, as a vehicle for Arnold Schwarzenegger. That version focused mainly on the “Battle Royale” element of the story and leaned heavily into Arnie’s personality, rather than the politics of the book. It also wasn’t well received by the author. Edgar Wright’s remake follows the source text a lot more closely and is far more interested in its political themes and wider social commentary. Furthermore, this version re-establishes the everyman quality of the hero of Ben Richards, rather than him being the muscle bound, ex-military hero as per Mr. Schwarzenegger’s prior interpretation. This time round, The Running Man uses a lot of the visual and narrative tropes of contemporary reality TV, making this forty three year old story very relevant to today’s viewers and couching the film in a style that is recognisable and accessible.
After the success of Raiders of the Lost Ark in 1981, filmmakers scrambled to find existing intellectual properties that they could use for similar films. Hence archaic heroes such as Alan Quatermain were hastily given a modern makeover and thrust into generic movies, in a vague attempt to replicate Steven Spielberg’s successful formula. Which brings us neatly on to James Charles Bigglesworth AKA “Biggles”, a fictional pilot and adventurer from a series of books written by W. E. Johns between 1932 and 1968. Several attempts had been made in the past to bring this character to the silver screen, including one by Disney but they all failed. However, the commercial and critical success of Indiana Jones provided sufficient impetus to greenlight a new film. However, due to some curious production choices, when Biggles was finally released it was far from just a period set, action movie.
Setting aside the hubris of remaking a film such as Red Dawn, the 2012 reboot had a troubled production. Shot over the course of late 2009, on location in Michigan, MGM intended to release the film in September 2010. However, the studio’s financial problems became unsustainable over the course of that year and the film was shelved, while a financial solution was sought. Furthermore, while Red Dawn was in post production, there was a major economic shift within Hollywood due to the increasing importance of the Chinese market. This was a significant problem for MGM because the new version of Red Dawn had the Chinese invading the USA instead of Russia. Hence there were reshoots and the need for additional visual effects, so that the Chinese could be replaced with North Koreans. MGM eventually went bankrupt and the distribution rights to Red Dawn were sold off. The film was eventually released in 2012.
When I first saw the promotional trailer for Gangster Squad back in 2012, prior to its release, I wasn't especially impressed. I simply thought the film was another attempt to re-invent the gangster genre for a generation who were not especially familiar with it. I wasn't exactly overwhelmed with director Ruben Fleischer's resume either. I didn't particularly like Zombieland and haven't seen 30 Minutes Or Less. Then came the tragic mass shootings in Aurora, Colorado which led to the movie being delayed so that the original ending, which featured a shoot-out in a movie theatre, could be replaced. Hence when I finally watched this film recently, I wasn't expecting a movie up to the standards of say Once Upon A Time In America or Miller’s Crossing and it would seem that I was right do so. Gangster Squad is not especially noteworthy in any respect.
Levon Cade (Jason Staham) is a former Royal Marine Commando who has retired from military service and now works as the leader of a construction team in Chicago. He has a close relationship with Joe and Carla Garcia (Michael Peña and Noemi Gonzalez ) who run the company and considers them as family. Outside of work, Levon is involved in a bitter custody battle for his daughter, against her maternal grandfather, who blames Levon for his daughter’s suicide. When Garcia's teenage daughter Jenny (Arianna Rivas) goes missing, Levon reluctantly agrees to help her parents and get her back. Beginning his search at the nightclub where Jenny was last seen, he soon discovers that she was abducted by Russian traffickers. Furthermore, the culprit is Dimi Kolisnyk (Maximilian Osinski), the wayward son of a senior ranking gangster.
PC Nicholas Angel (Simon Pegg) is an exemplary Police Officer, with a strict adherence to the letter of the law. As a result of making the rest of the London Metropolitan Police look bad, he is transferred to the rural town of Sandford, Gloucestershire. On arrival, Angel finds that the local Inspector, Frank Butterman (Jim Broadbent), takes a far more laissez-faire approach to policing. His colleagues are incompetent and he is further hampered by the Neighbourhood Watch Alliance (NWA), who prioritise low crime statistics over law enforcement due to their desire to win the title of “Village of the Year”. Furthermore, Angel is partnered with the Inspector’s son, Constable Danny Butterman (Nick Frost), who is infatuated with “buddy cop” movies and is in awe of Angel’s London experience. “Have you ever fired two guns while jumping through the air?” However, a sudden spate of grisly accidents lead Angel to believe that there's more to the seemingly tranquil and picture-perfect community than meets the eye.
As a collection of history's worst tyrants and criminal masterminds gather to plot a war to wipe out millions, one man must race against time to stop them. Discover the origins of the very first independent intelligence agency in The King's Man. Based on the Comic Book “The Secret Service” by Mark Millar and Dave Gibbons. 20th Century Studios
Matthew Vaughn’s The King’s Man is an inconsistent film, both narratively and tonally. It veers between serious themes and stylised, hyperbolic action. At times it does quite a good job of exploring such complex subjects as global politics, mechanised warfare and colonialism. Sadly it then wrenches the viewer out of these cerebral reveries as it lapses into the sort of over the top action sequences that were notable in the two earlier films. It’s a shame because The King’s Man gets so many other aspects of the production right. The casting is very interesting, especially Ralph Fiennes as the “pacifist” Duke of Oxford. He is actually a very good fit for the action genre. Djimon Hounsou and Gemma Arterton are given little backstory beyond being respectively the faithful manservant and the family nanny but both are notable due to their own inherent acting chops and personal charisma. Rhys Ifans obviously has a great time as Grigori Rasputin, ensuring all the man’s vices are robustly depicted.
On paper, a video games franchise such as Assassin’s Creed lends itself perfectly to a cinematic adaptation. The parkour action scenes, the historical settings and the contemporary conspiracy theory themes are all elements that should play well with a modern youth audience. Hence with the backing of a major studio such as Twentieth Century Fox and a budget of $125 million, the 2016 movie should have been a guaranteed box office hit. The casting of Michael Fassbender, an actor who is comfortable with serious roles and big Hollywood franchises, should have carried this film comfortably over the finishing line. Director Justin Kurzel, who had found critical success with his adaptation of MacBeth a year previously, must have looked like a safe pair of hands to handle such a project. Sadly, that was not the case. Assassin’s Creed is not the sum of its parts, in fact many elements appear to be pulling in opposite directions. The resulting feature film is staggeringly dull, soulless and a chore to watch. A testament to how modern big budget franchise movies have become a production line, with all the art stripped from them.
300: Rise of an Empire is a curious beast, being neither a sequel nor a prequel. It is infact a tale that takes place simultaneously with those of the original movie. While Gerard Butler is busy making a last stand at the Battle of Thermopylae, fellow warrior and politician Themistokles, played by the singularly uncharismatic Sullivan Stapleton, leads a similar army of buffed Greeks against the Persian fleet. Once again we have a movie that is the epitome of style over substance, complete with a sound design that challenges what can physically be endured by human hearing. They say the first casualty of war is innocence but in this type of movie it's closely followed by historical accuracy and authentic depictions of ethnicity. 300: Rise of an Empire is a cinematic assault upon the senses but not in a good way like Mad Max: Fury Road.
Back in September 2017, Liam Neeson stated in an interview with Sky News that he was retiring from the action genre, due to his age. He felt that audiences would question his credibility in such roles. After the release of The Commuter (2018) and Cold Pursuit (2019) Mr Neeson appeared to return to human dramas and films that focus on performance rather than punching man and beast. Ordinary Love and Made in Italy, both released in 2019, demonstrate the actor’s versatility and skill. People seem to forget that he is a thespian who was initially known for his character driven roles in films such as The Mission (1986), Rob Roy (1995 and Michael Collins (1996). It was only in 2008 that he reinvented himself as an action hero. It’s all a far cry from Schindler’s List and his performance that earned him an academy award nomination. The reason I mention all of this is because The Ice Road is the third action movie I’ve seen in 2021 that stars Liam Neeson.
One of the stand out tropes of the modern action film is that the stakes are always cranked right up to 11. Terrorists, biological weapons and nuclear bombs are common threats in such movies with a hero or heroes trying to save the world from death and destruction or worse. However, back in the sixties and seventies, things were a little more straight forward and in some respects more credible. Take When Eight Bells Toll, released in 1971, for example. British Treasury secret agent Phillip Calvert investigates the theft of £8,000,000 in gold bullion by a gang of international smugglers. In the context of the times this was no small beer however it’s somewhat mundane compared to fighting super villains and their space lasers. Frankly I prefer these low key plot devices as they can make a film a little more plausible within the confines of the genre. A concept that is often forgotten today.
Forensic accountant Owen Casserly (Jake Weber) flees his home with his teenage son Connor (Finn Little) when he discovers he has been targeted by a pair of assassins (Nicholas Hoult and Aidan Gillen) who have been hired to stop him giving evidence in a major corruption case. Connor witnesses the murder of his father after their car is run off the road. Entrusted with important written evidence, he escapes into the dense forests of the Montana wilderness pursued by the killers. Seeking help he runs into smokejumper Hannah Faber (Angelina Jolie) who is stationed at a remote fire lookout tower. Hannah suffers from PTSD from a previous forest fire in which she was unable to save three young boys. Hannah attempts to lead Connor through the forest to safety. Meanwhile the assassins set fire to the forest to divert the attention of the authorities and cover their tracks.
I must admit that I did not have particularly high hopes for Paul W S Anderson's remake of the 1975 Roger Corman produced cult classic. Anderson’s work varies greatly. Event Horizon and Soldier are solid genre films but I still have not fully come to terms with Alien vs. Predator. Jason Statham is also a name that divides the public, with solid material such as The Transporter and unfathomable tosh like Revolver. But despite these considerations, Death Race is in fact quite a surprise and does not follow the path that so many remakes do. It takes the basic themes and concept associated with the original and tries to do something different with them. It doesn’t reinvent the wheel nor is it a genre milestone. But it does offer a different spin on things, have some engaging action scenes and provide some dumb but enjoyable entertainment. When combined with snacks and some beer this is a passable way to kill 111 minutes.
I did not watch Zero Dark Thirty upon its initial release, due to the politics surrounding it. I wanted to be able to view it free from bipartisan debate. Eight years on I believe this now achievable and although debate still exists it is now more measured and less strident. Zero Dark Thirty is certainly a compelling movie. It plays as a docudrama, providing an in-depth study of the US intelligence services hunt for Osama Bin Laden. It cannot be faulted on a technical level and the performances are very strong. It does not adopt a celebratory or triumphalist tone in its approach to the story. Director Kathryn Bigelow endeavours to keep the proceedings focused upon the intricacies of an intelligence driven manhunt. There is little or no tubthumping, jingoism. The decision to find Bin Laden is shown as a political and military exercise of foreign policy. The film solely focuses on the story from a US perspective but that is perfectly acceptable as it is not intended to be an exploration of geo-politics.
Firestorm was originally written as a vehicle for Sylvester Stallone, however when the production company Savoy Pictures went bankrupt the screenplay was bought by Twentieth Fox and the scope of the movie reduced to suit a lower budget. It’s broadly similar to Cliffhanger in so far as the lead character is a specialist in a certain field who runs afoul of criminals in a perilous environment. Whereas Cliffhanger is set in the Rocky Mountains, Firestorm takes place in the forests of Northern Wyoming. After the script was revised four times, the finished screenplay was given a final “polish” by Graham Yost who has considerable experience with the action movie genre. As stallone was no longer associated with the project and the production had been repurposed to be less extravagant, the movie was assigned to former NFL star Howie Long. Long had already appeared in the John Woo movie Broken Arrow (1996) and the Firestorm was seen as a means to give him a star vehicle.
The original French movies District 13 and its sequel District 13: Ultimatum, conceived and produced by Luc Besson, were enjoyable variations of the Escape from New York theme. Their charm lay in their European pedigree and the skilful use of parkour. The two leads, David Belle and Cyril Raffaelli, were eminently suited to the minimalist roles and the screenplays were fun. Half of these movies appeal was the fact that they were not mainstream US products. Brick Mansions is the Hollywood remake of District 13, as well as being Paul Walkers’ final movie. Sadly, this film is far from a fitting epitaph, being devoid of any charisma or innovations. It is blandly shot , poorly edited and has been stripped of everything that made the original entertaining.
Arnold Schwarzenegger's return to the big screen after his political career has been uneven to say the least. His cameos in The Expendables and The Expendables 2 were well received, with their self referential charm and age related irony. Yet his first major movie The Last Stand, although competent, failed to find an audience. Escape Plan fared better at the box office but did not put Arnie back on the A list. Effectively there's a large percentage of the contemporary cinematic audience who were born after his heyday and are simply not overt fans of his work. His core audience is more than likely of the age group that consume most of their film entertainment at home. Which may explain why Sabotage tanked in the US upon release on March 28th 2014. It was the worst opening box office of Arnie's career. He used to break first day opening records.
Sequels and reboots are hardly a new concept and have been a part of Hollywood culture since the 1930s. The success of the Universal Horror movies from that era being a prime example of direct follow ups and retconned movies. However, there is one fundamental rule that distinguishes a good sequel from a bad one. You should never mitigate, undermine or make irrelevant the events of the previous movie, just to provide your new film with a raison d'être. For example, the events of Aliens do not contradict or trivialise those that happened in Alien. In fact with that franchise there is a very clear logical progression between the two movies. The same is true for Mad Max and Mad Max 2 or Star Wars and The Empire Strikes Back. The key is to progress a story, enhance it or explore things from an alternative angle and bring something new to the cinematic table. Sadly this philosophy is all too often lost on corporate film making. Which means that many sequels are just tedious replays of prior films. Terminator: Dark Fate falls squarely into this category.
The enduring appeal of the character John Rambo in First Blood comes from the fact that he is a traumatised ex- service man who keeps himself to himself as he drifts from job to job, trying to come to terms with his wartime experiences. His poor treatment at the hands of a small-town Sheriff is a succinct metaphor for the social and political indifference that Vietnam veterans were shown upon their return to the US. He’s a man with a code in a world that no longer has any use for him. His simple and honest patriotism is not returned and he is in fact viewed with shame by many from the nation he loves. Furthermore, the first movie does not paint him as a cold-blooded killer. Despite provocation he is not the first person to shoot to kill. Rambo is in many ways a victim. A broken man, who society has asked to do unspeakable things. Now society wants nothing to do with him and fears the “monster” they created. Although clearly an action movie, First Blood had narrative depth and a flawed but sympathetic protagonist. 37 years and four movies later, such dramatic themes have long left the franchise. The central character is indeed a caricature of its former self.
It was hardly surprising that the movie adaptation of Chris Kyle's autobiography American Sniper, would cause controversy. The Iraq war, US Foreign Policy and national pride are seldom subjects that are discussed in a calm and measured fashion. And then there are the personal politics of director Clint Eastwood to consider. Hence there were claims from some quarters upon the movie’s release, that it was Islamophobic and counter claims that criticisms of the late Chris Kyle were unpatriotic. There still remain issues regarding the authenticity of events depicted in the source text and subsequently the movies screenplay by Jason Hall. Yet none of these factors have in anyway impacted upon the film's box office returns which currently stands at $247,900,417 worldwide.
Do I really need to present you with some sort of plot synopsis for Transporter 3? No, I didn’t think so. More of the same as Frank Martin (Jason Statham) and his police chum, Inspector Tarconi (Francois Berleand) become embroiled in yet another high-octane escapade. There's fights, car stunts, exotic international locations and a strong sense of humour. This time, the disposable love interest is a Ukrainian girl named Valentina (Natalya Rudakova) who fulfils her role succinctly. The film benefits by being set back in Europe, after the mistake of basing Transporter 2 in the US. This time, the story takes us to such locations as Budapest and Odessa. The international film crew once again bring a veneer of panache to the production that is conspicuously absent in US action movies. For a modest budget fil, Transporter 3 it looks very good. Again the proceedings are given a boost by a pertinent soundtrack by Alexandre Azaria and a selection of European “tunes”.
Jason Bourne originally graced our screens for the first time seventeen years ago. The Bourne Identity was a gritty, minimalist take on the espionage genre and a welcome change from the excesses of the Pierce Brosnan Bond era. The story arc was sustained over three movies and ended efficiently and succinctly. After which Matt Damon moved on, as did the director of two of the movies, Paul Greengrass. Which leaves us with The Bourne Legacy; the tangential sequel that arrived in 2012. A film that exists because the money men and bean counters hate to pass up on a franchise until it has been squeezed utterly dry. Hence, they commissioned the writer of the series, Tony Gilroy, to come up with a screenplay and direct a spinoff movie. Jeremy Renner was cast in the lead role. Yet despite narrative and production continuity, The Bourne Legacy was not a Jason Bourne movie with the star appeal of Matt Damon. Although the film turned a profit, it had the lowest box office returns out of the entire franchise.
During the eighties there was a clear league table of action movie stars. By the mid-nineties this system fell into decline and the Hollywood lacked any clearly defined exponents of the genre. A decade later, due to the success of Luc Besson’s Transporter films, Jason Statham became a bankable box office star in this field. When you look at Statham's early work in Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels it is hard to envisage the "mockney geezer" as an international action star. Yet he has successfully stepped into the role and enjoys a large following. I enjoy his work as he has a likeable on-screen persona. My 88-year-old Mum likes him to because "he wears nice suits". The action genre seldom reaches such a diverse demographic.
Before we start, I recollect that one well known UK critic described Safe House as sub-Tony Scott, upon its release. Now I’ve always been conflicted over Scott’s back catalogue, as I’ve always found his movies to be hampered by their own unique style. The subtleties of his characters and depth of his themes are all too often drowned out by his frenetic style and fast paced editing. Therefore a comment such as this really sets off alarm bells for me. Having recently watched The Equalizer 2, I wanted a further fix of Denzel Washington in a similar action vehicle. As Safe House was available on Netflix UK, I decided to kill a couple of hours and see what actually constitutes as “sub-Tony Scott”.
Exit 8 is a sophisticated and claustrophobic psychological thriller directed by Genki Kawamura, which skilfully transforms a minimalist indie walking-simulator game into a cinematic existential enigma. This overtly metaphorical film renders the repetitive nature and drudgery of modern working life into a physical environment in which the lead character is trapped and must find a way out. A random, brutal maze filled with an atmosphere of indifference to the lab rats that find themselves trapped within. Or is it their personal guilt that has put them there? Genki Kawamura’s psychological mystery draws inspiration from the Japanese video game of the same name, as well as from the cyclical nature of Groundhog Day and endless corridors of the Overlook Hotel in Kubrick’s The Shining. Although there are jump scares and some ghoulish imagery, this is not a horror vehicle. Instead this is a disquieting psychological drama with a strong sense of morality.