|
Post by Captain Spencer on Nov 28, 2022 17:38:20 GMT
Certain Fury (1985)The recent death of Irene Cara made me recall this cheesy exploitation action flick she was in. I haven't seen it since the good ole' days of VHS, so I looked it up and sure enough it's streaming on Tubi. I watched it for the first time in decades. Irene plays a suburanite on the lam with an illiterate, street-wise prostitute (Tatum O'Neal) who is facing murder charges. When a movie has an unbelievable, bloody shootout in a courtroom within the first ten minutes you would think you would know the direction it was heading. A somewhat enjoyable piece of 80s exploitation trash, perhaps? The kind that Linda Blair did often during that era? Well, it seemed like that for a while but then it doesn't really reach its potential as being good, grindhouse fun. Also it becomes apparent there isn't much of a story here. Certain Fury ends up losing its edge and even becomes schmaltzy by the end. Too bad, it could have been something better. Irene is OK as the naive gal, but Tatum isn't really convincing as a rough-around-the-edges street punk. I would have expected better from an Oscar winner who previously gave fine performances in other films, but she probably didn't care for the material to begin with. Directed by Stephen Gyllenhaal who is the father of Jake and Maggie Gyllenhaal. This one was a missed opportunity. I actually liked the first half-hour, and I might have liked the performances of Tatum and Irene a little more than you did. But I agree, it should have stuck with its all out action exploitation opening than falling into its dramatic story elements. Below are my thoughts from a previous post on this action thread. Certain Fury (1985)Tatum O’Neal and Irene Cara team up together in this very trashy, b-grade urban action-thriller exploitation; a modernized mould of “THE DEFIANT ONES”. On the run they go, trying to survive, being fingered for a crime they did not commit. One costly mishap after another puts both in many dangerous predicaments on the dirty side of town. After a great full-throttle opening half-hour filled with a brutal courthouse slaughter and a trek in the city's sewers. Come to the halfway mark, it had already peaked. There it becomes uneven, the tension had little impact as scenes go on longer than they should and eventually it meandered to the (lousy) finish line. Sometimes dipping both into half-baked exploitation and serious drama. The latter does get manipulatively cheesy by trying to strike up an emotional chord; like the (unnecessary) scenes with one of the girl’s father (Cara). Although I did like the combination between O’Neal and Cara, even though the characters are predictably wear-worn, yet their relationship engages, from the callous remarks/or actions to their growing bond. Both stars weren't afraid to get down and dirty, but while not particularly likeable O’Neal did standout in her hardened, street smart hooker turn. Someone who didn’t is a paycheck collecting Peter Fonda who appears in one of the most ridiculously unconvincing staged moments in the film involving a nail-filer. Good review. Agree about the first half hour being good, and then it does fall apart after that. Peter Fonda must have owed somebody a favor by appearing in this claptrap for about five minutes!
|
|
mgmarshall
Junior Member
@mgmarshall
Posts: 2,052
Likes: 3,304
|
Post by mgmarshall on Nov 29, 2022 23:49:46 GMT
Man, I really fell off of writing reviews for a while there. I'm not so self important as to think anybody was waiting patiently for the next one, but I missed doing it. Anywho, back to business with a Jackie Chan movie! The ForeignerIt's so fascinating any time Jackie Chan does some darker material. Granted his more lighthearted action flicks and family friendly material have a great deal of charm (I even enjoyed The Spy Next Door against my better judgment); but it's pretty cool to see him do something grittier like The Protector or Crime Story or even the first two Police Story movies every now and again. The guy has range as an actor people don't give him credit for, and he can be quite imposing when it's called for. In this movie there are stretches where he's downright scary. Sure, the story of grieving father Jackie seeking revenge for the IRA bombing that killed his daughter and coming up against crooked government official Pierce Brosnan feels a lot like an attempt at a Taken knockoff. But, Jackie is likeable (and as mentioned, frightening), Pierce Brosnan makes for an appropriately coldhearted villain, and the revenge which finally comes is harsh, brutally violent, and over quick. The movie even gets to go all First Blood for a little while when a silenlty murderous Jackie begins stalking the woods around Brosnan's country estate and picking off henchmen with improvised traps. It's pretty fun.
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Dec 6, 2022 20:09:11 GMT
|
|
mgmarshall
Junior Member
@mgmarshall
Posts: 2,052
Likes: 3,304
|
Post by mgmarshall on Dec 6, 2022 21:25:21 GMT
Dog Eat DogUnmercifully ugly, cruel crime thriller is a long way from Paul Schrader's best work. I'm not really sure what it is, but this one just rubbed me the wrong way. It's not the degree of its violence- after all, Schrader's work is no stranger to graphic violence and I can generally handle that in a movie. But something about it here just feels so utterly pointless and needlessly mean-spirited. Take, for instance, the opening and closing scenes. The beginning of the movie serves as an introduction to Willem Dafoe's "Mad Dog" and the violent, murderous, drug-induced haze in which he spends basically his every waking moment. We see him completely zonked out on cocaine, heroin, and god knows what else. Later, a minor argument with his girlfriend escalates to Dafoe stabbing the woman to death before shooting her daughter twice in the head. Sure, it's a gruesome and unsettling sequence; but it then has absolutely no effect on the rest of the story until two thirds of the movie have gone by and Mad Dog decides to confess the deed to somebody. It just feels like it's only there for shock value.
Similarly, I just don't know that I get the ending either. Once the kidnapping job Nicolas Cage and his cohorts were hired to do gets completely botched and both his buddies are dead, the plot basically runs completely out of steam through a sequence where Cage takes an elderly couple hostage at gunpoint, monologues at them a bit while doing a Humphrey Bogart impression, and then deliberately gets them killed in a hail of bullets as part of his suicide-by-cop. The camera then lingers over their corpses while Cage's narration drones out the final thoughts of the movie. Again, it just feels weirdly abrupt and needlessly mean-spirited and ultimately sorta hollow. It is at least a nicely shot, well-acted movie. The garish color choices really pop and give the movie a distinct, memorably seedy look. Nicolas Cage is actually quite reserved in this one, and he pulls it off pretty well playing himself up as the brains of the movie's central trio. Willem Dafoe is violent, drug addled, cartoonishly ugly, and ultimately pathetically needy. Christopher Matthew Cook might actually succeed in stealing the show from both of them, perfectly embodying his character's dual nature as a musclebound, gun-toting thug and a more thoughtful, introspective guy who just may be the only one of the group with something resembling a moral compass. Schrader saves the movie's only other really prominent part as Cage's boss (manager? The guy who sets up the heists...) for himself, and frankly he ain't much of an actor. It's a frustrating movie because I can feel it trying to get at something about the alienation its three leads face as ex-cons. In a world that's basically passed them by while they've been rotting in prison, a sort of sociopathic fatalism emerges. What does it matter if the job succeeds or fails, what does it matter how many innocent bystanders die, what does it matter if they die themselves? They were basically screwed from the beginning. But if none of those things matter, what am I even watching the movie for...?
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Dec 7, 2022 15:17:44 GMT
|
|
|
Post by FridayOnElmStreet on Dec 7, 2022 22:00:04 GMT
- 4/10 - 3/10 - 7/10 - 1/10 - 2/10 - 5/10
|
|
|
Post by lostinlimbo on Dec 8, 2022 0:33:05 GMT
Dog Eat DogUnmercifully ugly, cruel crime thriller is a long way from Paul Schrader's best work. I'm not really sure what it is, but this one just rubbed me the wrong way. It's not the degree of its violence- after all, Schrader's work is no stranger to graphic violence and I can generally handle that in a movie. But something about it here just feels so utterly pointless and needlessly mean-spirited. Take, for instance, the opening and closing scenes. The beginning of the movie serves as an introduction to Willem Dafoe's "Mad Dog" and the violent, murderous, drug-induced haze in which he spends basically his every waking moment. We see him completely zonked out on cocaine, heroin, and god knows what else. Later, a minor argument with his girlfriend escalates to Dafoe stabbing the woman to death before shooting her daughter twice in the head. Sure, it's a gruesome and unsettling sequence; but it then has absolutely no effect on the rest of the story until two thirds of the movie have gone by and Mad Dog decides to confess the deed to somebody. It just feels like it's only there for shock value.
Similarly, I just don't know that I get the ending either. Once the kidnapping job Nicolas Cage and his cohorts were hired to do gets completely botched and both his buddies are dead, the plot basically runs completely out of steam through a sequence where Cage takes an elderly couple hostage at gunpoint, monologues at them a bit while doing a Humphrey Bogart impression, and then deliberately gets them killed in a hail of bullets as part of his suicide-by-cop. The camera then lingers over their corpses while Cage's narration drones out the final thoughts of the movie. Again, it just feels weirdly abrupt and needlessly mean-spirited and ultimately sorta hollow. It is at least a nicely shot, well-acted movie. The garish color choices really pop and give the movie a distinct, memorably seedy look. Nicolas Cage is actually quite reserved in this one, and he pulls it off pretty well playing himself up as the brains of the movie's central trio. Willem Dafoe is violent, drug addled, cartoonishly ugly, and ultimately pathetically needy. Christopher Matthew Cook might actually succeed in stealing the show from both of them, perfectly embodying his character's dual nature as a musclebound, gun-toting thug and a more thoughtful, introspective guy who just may be the only one of the group with something resembling a moral compass. Schrader saves the movie's only other really prominent part as Cage's boss (manager? The guy who sets up the heists...) for himself, and frankly he ain't much of an actor. It's a frustrating movie because I can feel it trying to get at something about the alienation its three leads face as ex-cons. In a world that's basically passed them by while they've been rotting in prison, a sort of sociopathic fatalism emerges. What does it matter if the job succeeds or fails, what does it matter how many innocent bystanders die, what does it matter if they die themselves? They were basically screwed from the beginning. But if none of those things matter, what am I even watching the movie for...? I thought the film was decent. In that it was stylised and had its moments, though the plot felt aimless come the third act. But that ending… Left me befuddled. Was it a joke, which I just didn’t get? It was cringe though. Sure the film was ridiculous from the get-go, but that ending felt like a tact-on blooper outtake. True, it was quite a mean-spirited & grimy film. You also could say gratuitous. But cannot argue that it wasn’t true to its film title. Sorta enjoyed Dafoe’s performance though. Playing opposite to Cage’s straight man. Slow-mo dancing, underwear and sauce?! Now that’s one crazy scene with Cage and Dafoe.
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Dec 11, 2022 4:54:16 GMT
Holy shit...and I mean that in the best "so bad it's good" kind of way.
|
|
|
Post by lostinlimbo on Dec 16, 2022 10:53:15 GMT
Holy shit...and I mean that in the best "so bad it's good" kind of way.
Nothing quite like it. 😁
|
|
|
Post by theravenking on Dec 16, 2022 13:08:48 GMT
Licence To Kill (1989; John Glen)My third watch of this highly divisive Bond movie, which I must say I prefer to Casino Royale, since I find, that unlike Daniel Craig, Timothy Dalton did not overdo the tough guy act. It's not among my favorite Bond movies, but I still find it pretty enjoyable for what it is. A few random thoughts on the film: - I didn't notice before, that Pedro Armendáriz Jr. who plays the corrupt president of the fictional Republic of Isthmus, is the son of Pedro Armendáriz who played Kerim Bey in From Russia With Love. - I like how Robert Davi plays Sanchez as a soft-spoken gentleman and not as some obnoxious moron with anger issues. - I still find the explosions in the finale to be some of the most spectacular ever put on screen. They don't make them like this anymore. - I had completely forgotten, that there are some hilarious moments in the film, such as the scene where Bond wakes up in bed after being taken by Sanchez`s men and and finds himself staring into the eyes of a grotesque fish sculpture (a somewhat similar fish can be seen at the end blinking as Bond and Pam are kissing - not sure what this was about, some inside joke from the director?) - Love that the iguana Sanchez is carrying on his shoulder at the casino is wearing a diamond necklace (according to the audio commentary Robert Davi christened the animal Iguanita). - According to the end credits the jewellery was provided by a lady named Sheila Goldfinger (!).
|
|
|
Post by sadsaak on Dec 16, 2022 14:01:13 GMT
Cinderalla Man
It has Russell Crowe and Renee Zellwenger and how bad is that?
|
|
|
Post by brandomarlon2003 on Dec 16, 2022 15:10:19 GMT
|
|
|
Post by lostinlimbo on Dec 17, 2022 23:44:26 GMT
Prolific Phillipines film-maker Cirio H. Santiago gets in on the ‘Mad Max 2’ craze with his little rip-off film ‘Wheels of Fire’ (1985). Looking on Tubi, it looks like he has done quite few of ‘em (post-apocalyptic films), which I’ll probably check out since I rather enjoyed this outing. Sure it’s by-the-numbers and obviously influenced by story threads in Mad Max 2, but it remains rapid paced, particularly trashy, and delivers the vehicle carnage one would hope from such a production. Sure it’s no Mad Max when it comes to the stunt work, but it doesn’t disappoint either. There’s one funny moment (which I assume was unintentional) as the lead hero gets out of the car, and it looks like he forgot to put on the handbrake as it starts to roll backwards. Cut to next scene and it’s stationary. Oh, and this Mad Max caricature has got his own flame thrower. Uses it quite a bit too.
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Dec 17, 2022 23:47:11 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Nalkarj on Dec 19, 2022 15:14:29 GMT
Black Adam, 2022, dir. Jaume Collet-Serra. I’m not sure what, or how much, to say about this. Criticizing it seems pointless because it’s not a good movie (what a surprise), and I’m sure the critics have gone to town on it (it’s also, Wikipedia says, a box-office bomb, which does surprise me). But, even though it’s not a good movie, it’s not a terrible movie either. I put it on because I’m sick and wanted to watch some mindless fluff. This is mindless fluff in the best way: It’s (if you can get past the first five minutes’ horrid exposition) entertaining rather than tedious. The director, who used to helm those Liam Neeson b-thrillers (make more of those!), always keeps things moving. The big explosive fight scenes, which I usually find so boring in these movies, are kinda fun here because something new is always happening, something changes up the fight or some character does something unexpected. I don’t want to praise Black Adam too much: Keeping action scenes fresh and surprising should be standard for action movies. Unfortunately, in a lot of modern action movies—and especially action superhero movies—it’s not. The cast is also good: Aldis Hodge and Pierce Brosnan have gravitas and somehow make their ridiculous dialogue believable. They truly come off as a team, and I can imagine people looking for Hawkman and Dr. Fate movies after this. (All the heroes in this are DC’s second-stringers—third-stringers, even?) Even the young heroes are fine, acting-wise (though, seriously, what was the point of the Henry Winkler cameo as the one guy’s uncle? Did the Fonz always want to be in a… Black Adam movie?!?). And The Rock, who has such charm and such a terrible filmography, is good. I’d go so far as to say he’s giving a good performance. This was a passion project for him, so I shouldn’t be that surprised that he’s giving his all, but still this is probably the best Dwayne Johnson performance I’ve seen. What else…? The villain is so unmemorable, he might as well not be in the movie, but that’s how it is in a lot of modern superhero flicks, for some reason. I liked this a lot more than the better-reviewed Shazam! (2019), of which this is some sort of spinoff. I found that movie unbearable, with cheap jokes and an obnoxious, whiny performance from the actor playing the hero. Black Adam—though, again, not a good movie—is, by mindless fluff standards, actually kind of OK.
|
|
mgmarshall
Junior Member
@mgmarshall
Posts: 2,052
Likes: 3,304
|
Post by mgmarshall on Dec 21, 2022 8:57:30 GMT
Prolific Phillipines film-maker Cirio H. Santiago gets in on the ‘Mad Max 2’ craze with his little rip-off film ‘Wheels of Fire’ (1985). Looking on Tubi, it looks like he has done quite few of ‘em (post-apocalyptic films), which I’ll probably check out since I rather enjoyed this outing. Sure it’s by-the-numbers and obviously influenced by story threads in Mad Max 2, but it remains rapid paced, particularly trashy, and delivers the vehicle carnage one would hope from such a production. Sure it’s no Mad Max when it comes to the stunt work, but it doesn’t disappoint either. There’s one funny moment (which I assume was unintentional) as the lead hero gets out of the car, and it looks like he forgot to put on the handbrake as it starts to roll backwards. Cut to next scene and it’s stationary. Oh, and this Mad Max caricature has got his own flame thrower. Uses it quite a bit too. Now that looks fun!
|
|
|
Post by stryker on Dec 22, 2022 1:09:03 GMT
|
|
mgmarshall
Junior Member
@mgmarshall
Posts: 2,052
Likes: 3,304
|
Post by mgmarshall on Dec 31, 2022 17:06:26 GMT
Vengeance: A Love StoryUtterly dull, generic revenge flick sees jaded cop Nicolas Cage briefly connecting with a young widow (Anna Hutchison) and then avenging her after she's brutally gang raped by a bunch of rednecks (one of whom I swear looks like Ronnie Van Zant). Cage looks bored, and the movie has nothing particularly original or eye-catching going for it. Although, the courtroom scenes featuring Don Johnson as the world's slimiest defense attorney and a gallery full of yokels who erupt into wild applause when he calls a gang rape victim a whore are so hackneyed and cartoonish that they manage to be almost funny. Also, it's pretty impressive how completely obvious and clumsy this movie is willing to be about its politics. It has a hard-on for vigilante justice that would give the Death Wish sequels a run for their money. So if that does anything for you, have at it. If not, I say skip this one and go with Bad Lieutenant: Port of Call New Orleans instead.
|
|
|
Post by James on Dec 31, 2022 19:24:20 GMT
|
|
|
Post by stefancrosscoe on Jan 13, 2023 12:22:37 GMT
Been a while since last post, but seen quite a lot of action films the last couple of weeks, and sadly, very few unseen ones, that ever managed to live up to my expectations. I guess re-watching Die Hard (1988) the day before Christmas, kind of "ruined" those hopes of seeing something great or just as highly enjoyable, but then again, very few ever comes close to reaching that kind of quality films. Avalanche (1994) by Paul Shapiro It was meant to be nice and quiet little vacation along with his kids. But father and author (Michael Gross) turns into a desperate survivor, as the cabin they had rented, suddenly is struck with a giant avalance, causing the three to be trapped inside the remains. And just as things cannot get any worse, all of a sudden a mysterious man (David Hasselhoff), bumps into their lives, half dead, and pretty soon it turns out that he has his own secrets, like being a murderous lunatic, who ends up taking the family as hostages, forcing them into working to dig out a treasure hidden under all the snow.Another night, another not all bad made for tv David Hasselhoff movie, and one that also features Michael Gross. I thought it was quite a nice set up, along with some very lively performances, specially from David, who seems to go for a similar Jack Torrance over the top scenery during the end. 5/10Body Count (1995) by Talun Hsu "Classic" Youtube impulsive pick, when you just cannot bother to dig too dip into what kind of "quality" you might get out of it, and just ends up going for the more familiar names and faces, hoping for something not all too terrible in return. And sure, we have Robert Davi, Jan-Michael Vincent, Steven Bauer, Sonny Chiba and even the once lovely Brigitte Nielsen, and sadly it still manages to turn into a rather boring and uneventful ride. Probably did not help much out either, that this Youtube version, looked rather cut to pieces, everytime a foul language part or some limbs were about to be torn or cut off, and all of a sudden, some dead guy lay on the floor, or some other dude has one arm less, so it gets almost comical but also annoying, since they obivously had no problems with lots of sleazy tits and ass shots, spread all over, so why the problem with some cheesy and low budget violence? Davi is a likeable guy, and always nice to see him getting a few leading roles, even if they often arrived in pretty dull 90s straight to video releases, and Sonny Chiba puts in some cool fight scenes, but the main reason to why I ended up not falling into a coma, was Brigitte Nielsen, who looked damn fine in this one. 4/10
Fled (1996) by Kevin Hooks Two desperate prisoners on the loose, tied to each other, has to find a a way in order to cooperate, and also trying to get to the bottom of not only who might be their "helping" hand during the escape, as well as closing down who set them up to begin with.A pretty typical mid 90s buddy cop attempt, one which I remember got sent quite a lot on late night cable tv, but somehow had not seen it, for almost 20 years. But did remember it starred Laurence Fishbourne as the older and angrier of the two, while one of the younger Baldwin brothers (Stephen), as the computer hacker crime genius, and throw in a hot and feisty Salma Hayek, and you got yourself an enjoyable 90-100 minutes of action ride. The film fits into the more "forgettable" line up of similar themed buddy cop action films, like Fair Game (1995) and Money Train (1995), and also includes a laughable torture scene, where the sadistic villain, seems annoyed about wasting time, so to speed things up, why not just go for some asian old torture method, called death of a thousand small cuts, which is supposed to be very painful, but yeah, it might take quite a while to get there, and what is buddy cop action adventure, without at least one torture scene? All in all, not grat, but enjoyable for what it is, and gave it a kind: 6/10
|
|