I never knew Miles O'Keeffe was from Tennessee?, 5 December 2008
2/10
Saturday, December 11, 2010
Cave Dwellers (1984)
- Ator l'invincibile 2
I never knew Miles O'Keeffe was from Tennessee?, 5 December 2008
Another in the long line of Conan wannabes that tired to cash in on that movie's success, this Italian monstrosity is about as bad as they came. You know it's a bad sign when your heroes fight invisible enemies because the movie was made so cheaply there wasn't money for either adequate special effects or to hire real people. I won't even bother going into the plot as I defy anyone to follow it and make sense of the storyline. Maybe it's the television cut I watched, but I can't imagine any version being that much better. It all seems so random to me. Evil sorcerers, cavemen, giant snakes, medieval castles, grenades, and hang gliding – none of it fits together. It's as if director Joe D'Amato had an epileptic fit while making Cave Dwellers (or any of the other half-dozen names the movie goes by) and threw everything he could think of onto the screen regardless of how unrelated it was or how it fit into the film's already puzzling plot. The acting is sufficiently bad. Miles O'Keeffe could never act his way out of a wet paper bag and he proves that once again in this movie. The rest of the cast is equally atrocious. Then there's the . . . well, you get the idea. It's late, I'm tired, and I've already wasted more than enough time writing about this piece of garbage. Take my word for it – avoid Cave Dwellers (or whatever you want to call it) at all costs.
2/10
I never knew Miles O'Keeffe was from Tennessee?, 5 December 2008
2/10
Jonny Quest "The Riddle of the Gold" #1.5 (1964) (TV)
The introduction of Dr. Zin, 4 December 2008
In "The Riddle of the Gold", the Quest gang heads to India to check out a mine that has suddenly started producing a large quantity of gold. The problem, as Dr. Quest has discovered, is that it's not real. Who's behind this attempt at passing-off a worthless mineral as gold? And what dangers lay ahead for Dr. Quest, Race, Jonny, Hadji, and Bandit in India?
The single best thing "The Riddle of the Gold" has going for it is the introduction of Quest nemesis Dr. Zin. When I was younger, Dr. Zin represented the ultimate in bad guys – seemingly unlimited resources, grand evil plans, and a desire to do harm to anyone standing in his path. Other than that, there's really not a lot to get overly excited about in this episode. The tiger hunt, one of the episode's main set pieces, never really worked for me.
One thing about this episode that I find odd is seeing Dr. Quest and family on a commercial airline. Why not take the private jet they always flew in? I suppose the writers did it to pad the script and create a few comedic moments with Bandit on the airplane. There's really no other good explanation.
6/10
The single best thing "The Riddle of the Gold" has going for it is the introduction of Quest nemesis Dr. Zin. When I was younger, Dr. Zin represented the ultimate in bad guys – seemingly unlimited resources, grand evil plans, and a desire to do harm to anyone standing in his path. Other than that, there's really not a lot to get overly excited about in this episode. The tiger hunt, one of the episode's main set pieces, never really worked for me.
One thing about this episode that I find odd is seeing Dr. Quest and family on a commercial airline. Why not take the private jet they always flew in? I suppose the writers did it to pad the script and create a few comedic moments with Bandit on the airplane. There's really no other good explanation.
6/10
Project Moon Base (1953)
"Anymore guff out of you and I'll turn you over my knee and spank you.", 4 December 2008
The plot of Project Moon Base is fairly simple – Colonel Briteis is selected to pilot a rocket on a lunar orbit in preparation of an upcoming lunar landing. It's simple enough until it is discovered that an enemy agent is on board with intentions of sabotaging the mission. So whether their superiors like it or not, Colonel Briteis and Major Moore aren't going to be able to complete their mission. They're going to have to try to land on the moon.
Many of the comments you'll see on Project Moon Base focus a lot of attention on the movie's treatment or portrayal of women. Is the movie sexist? Those who argue against it mention Colonel Briteis' (Briteis is a female) position on the space voyage or the fact that the President is a woman. Well so what? Project Moon Base is as sexist as they come. I pointed out some of the sexist comments in Rocketship X-M and that movie's got nothing on Project Moon Base. From the intentional mispronunciation of Colonel Briteis name (Bright Eyes – yeah, right) to General Greene's threat to give Briteis a spanking to Briteis' incapability of fixing the radio after several hours of trying when Major Moore is able to do it in mere seconds – it's about as sexist as I've seen. Sure, it was made in a different time, so don't take my comments as a slam. I'm just pointing out the facts as I see them.
Two things I'm glad to have discovered about Project Moon Base. First, the movie was originally meant to be a television serial. That goes a long way to explaining some of the disjointed scenes and fragmented story lines. Second, many of the props and costumes were also used in Cat Women of the Moon. I thought they seemed awfully familiar. Glad to know I'm not going crazy. Overall, Project Moon Base is a fairly dull programmer with little to hold the attention of the viewer. There aren't any real action scenes and any suspense or drama never materializes. Even by 1953 standards, the special effects had to feel weak and not awfully convincing. Finally, much of the plot is handled rather awkwardly. The notion of an enemy agent infiltration the space program might have been interesting, but here it comes off as just too stupid for words.
As is the case with many of the films I watch, there is another hand. So, on the other hand, Project Moon Base is too enjoyable despite the numerous flaws for me to rate it as a stinker. Donna Martell gives Colonel Briteis an infectious nature that's hard not to enjoy. She's a pleasure to watch. Some of the goofy sight gags are almost charming in their naïveté. Take the scenes on the space station where people walk on the ceiling or the chairs on the wall. Stupid, sure – but fun nonetheless. Finally, there's a real innocence to most everything in Project Moon Base that's often sorely missing from today's movies that I can appreciate. Take the ending of the film where Colonel Briteis is forced to marry Major Bill Moore so people won't talk. And, even though the attitudes of the filmmakers may have been chauvinistic, most of it is harmless enough. Maybe I'm living in the past, but I sort of enjoyed Project Moon Base.
5/10
Many of the comments you'll see on Project Moon Base focus a lot of attention on the movie's treatment or portrayal of women. Is the movie sexist? Those who argue against it mention Colonel Briteis' (Briteis is a female) position on the space voyage or the fact that the President is a woman. Well so what? Project Moon Base is as sexist as they come. I pointed out some of the sexist comments in Rocketship X-M and that movie's got nothing on Project Moon Base. From the intentional mispronunciation of Colonel Briteis name (Bright Eyes – yeah, right) to General Greene's threat to give Briteis a spanking to Briteis' incapability of fixing the radio after several hours of trying when Major Moore is able to do it in mere seconds – it's about as sexist as I've seen. Sure, it was made in a different time, so don't take my comments as a slam. I'm just pointing out the facts as I see them.
Two things I'm glad to have discovered about Project Moon Base. First, the movie was originally meant to be a television serial. That goes a long way to explaining some of the disjointed scenes and fragmented story lines. Second, many of the props and costumes were also used in Cat Women of the Moon. I thought they seemed awfully familiar. Glad to know I'm not going crazy. Overall, Project Moon Base is a fairly dull programmer with little to hold the attention of the viewer. There aren't any real action scenes and any suspense or drama never materializes. Even by 1953 standards, the special effects had to feel weak and not awfully convincing. Finally, much of the plot is handled rather awkwardly. The notion of an enemy agent infiltration the space program might have been interesting, but here it comes off as just too stupid for words.
As is the case with many of the films I watch, there is another hand. So, on the other hand, Project Moon Base is too enjoyable despite the numerous flaws for me to rate it as a stinker. Donna Martell gives Colonel Briteis an infectious nature that's hard not to enjoy. She's a pleasure to watch. Some of the goofy sight gags are almost charming in their naïveté. Take the scenes on the space station where people walk on the ceiling or the chairs on the wall. Stupid, sure – but fun nonetheless. Finally, there's a real innocence to most everything in Project Moon Base that's often sorely missing from today's movies that I can appreciate. Take the ending of the film where Colonel Briteis is forced to marry Major Bill Moore so people won't talk. And, even though the attitudes of the filmmakers may have been chauvinistic, most of it is harmless enough. Maybe I'm living in the past, but I sort of enjoyed Project Moon Base.
5/10
The Exorcism of Emily Rose (2005)
"Once you've looked into the darkness I think you carry it with you for the rest of your life.", 3 December 2008
Supposedly based on (or should that be "inspired by"?) real events, The Exorcism of Emily Rose tells the story of a priest put on trial for the murder of a girl who died while undergoing an exorcism. Despite what the ads that ran when it was in the theater would have had you believe, it is not the story of Emily as much as it is the story of Father Moore's trial. Included in the many twists in the plot is whether or not the court will accept scientific evidence to support the claim of possession by demons. It's really an interesting and, for the most part, well done film. I had no problems with the plot, the logic behind the central themes in the movie, the acting, or most anything else. I actually quite enjoyed the movie. And as a bonus, I found that much of the film succeeded in being scary. I know a lot of people find these movies about God and demons to be unbelievable, but I think if you grew up with the Church and believing in Jesus, these movies can still be effective. If it weren't for a couple of issues I had with the movie, I could have easily rated it an 8/10. Where the movie really falters is in some of the character motivation and the lighting. Movies with horror themes are usually darkly lit – I understand that. But there were some scenes where I had trouble seeing what was going on. I'm beginning to think I've got a problem with my eyes, but, for example, I could barely make out what was going on in the barn during the exorcism scenes. Or take the scenes of Father Moore in prison. What real prison is so dimly lit? Most prisons I've seen will burn your retinas with the overhead fluorescents you can't escape. And the characters didn't make things any easier on me with the ridiculousness of some of their actions. Suppose you were like Emily and thought you might be possessed by demons. Do you really think you would walk down a dark hall without once trying to turn on the lights? Or what if you were the attorney, Erin Bruner, and you had started experiencing freaky things at 3:00 am every morning. Would you really stumble through your house looking for things that go bump in the night without once turning on a light? The answer to both questions – no you wouldn't. Please, somebody turn on a light! It was so frustrating. I was ready to pull out what little hair I have left.
6/10
6/10
Jonny Quest "Pursuit of the Po-Ho" #1.4 (1964) (TV)
What's wrong with calling someone a "heathen monkey"?, 2 December 2008
In "Pursuit of the Po-Ho", Dr. Quest receives an urgent message that a friend of his has been kidnapped by a group of natives known as the Po-Ho. But almost as soon as Dr. Quest and the rest of the family arrive in the jungle, Dr. Quest is also kidnapped. It's up to Race and the boys to save Dr. Quest and his friend. But how? Maybe they can trick the natives into believing that Race is the water god, Aquesio.
Until I sat down to write this, I never realized "Pursuit of the Po-Ho" was such a controversial episode. I think it's a real shame that Warner Bros. appears to have fallen in line with the thought police and edited their DVD release to eliminate the names Race calls the natives. I think calling the Po-Ho "savages" and "heathen monkeys" is pretty mild considering they've kidnapped and plan to kill (and most likely eat) Dr. Quest. I would have thought he would have done far worse than that. Besides that, I grew up watching this episode unedited. I don't think I've suffered any long lasting negative effects of the experience. It seems to me that people are just too sensitive today.
As for the episode itself, it's a good one. Lots of tension – well, at least as much tension as you can drum-up in a 22 minute cartoon. The Po-Ho are very effective and there's a real sense of danger every time they make an on-screen appearance. When I was younger, they absolutely terrified me. Evan at that age, I understood what they were about to do to Dr. Quest. And the sight of Race covered in berry juice, yelling at the Po-Ho – that's awesome. Finally, one thing I noticed while re-watching this episode is that the show should have been called Race Bannon – not Jonny Quest. More often than not, Race is the real star.
8/10
Until I sat down to write this, I never realized "Pursuit of the Po-Ho" was such a controversial episode. I think it's a real shame that Warner Bros. appears to have fallen in line with the thought police and edited their DVD release to eliminate the names Race calls the natives. I think calling the Po-Ho "savages" and "heathen monkeys" is pretty mild considering they've kidnapped and plan to kill (and most likely eat) Dr. Quest. I would have thought he would have done far worse than that. Besides that, I grew up watching this episode unedited. I don't think I've suffered any long lasting negative effects of the experience. It seems to me that people are just too sensitive today.
As for the episode itself, it's a good one. Lots of tension – well, at least as much tension as you can drum-up in a 22 minute cartoon. The Po-Ho are very effective and there's a real sense of danger every time they make an on-screen appearance. When I was younger, they absolutely terrified me. Evan at that age, I understood what they were about to do to Dr. Quest. And the sight of Race covered in berry juice, yelling at the Po-Ho – that's awesome. Finally, one thing I noticed while re-watching this episode is that the show should have been called Race Bannon – not Jonny Quest. More often than not, Race is the real star.
8/10
Jonny Quest "The Curse of Anubis" #1.3 (1964) (TV)
Anubis goes for a walk, 1 December 2008
In this episode of Jonny Quest, Dr. Quest is summoned to Egypt by a supposed old friend, Dr. Ali Kareem, to take a look at his latest archaeological find. But Dr. Kareem has other plans in mind for Dr. Quest and family - and they don't include sightseeing. Dr. Kareem is behind the recent theft of the mask of Anubis. He hopes to pin the theft on Dr. Quest so that his plans might be fulfilled. Unknown to Dr. Kareem (or Dr. Quest for that matter), however, the mummy Anubis has come to life and is searching the countryside for his lost possession.
I can just imagine that someone smarter than me might take a look at "The Curse of Anubis" and write an essay about the unflattering portrayal of Middle Easterners by Westerners. Or they might write about the significance Dr. Ali Kareem's ramblings calling for a unified Arab state. But you won't get that from me. I've never watched an episode of Jonny Quest and come away with the un-PC notions some other viewers seem to. For me, it's all about the mummy Anubis as he makes his slow march across the desert. "The Curse of Anubis" features one of my absolute favorite moments from Jonny Quest. It might not sound like much, but the sight of Anubis standing on the dune with the moon in the background as his tattered bandages flap in the breeze – Wow! I loved it as a kid and still think it's a great sight. The biggest weakness I see in this episode is with the ambiguity of Dr. Kareem's plans. Don't ask me what those plans are because Dr. Kareem's thinking makes very little sense to me.
9/10
I can just imagine that someone smarter than me might take a look at "The Curse of Anubis" and write an essay about the unflattering portrayal of Middle Easterners by Westerners. Or they might write about the significance Dr. Ali Kareem's ramblings calling for a unified Arab state. But you won't get that from me. I've never watched an episode of Jonny Quest and come away with the un-PC notions some other viewers seem to. For me, it's all about the mummy Anubis as he makes his slow march across the desert. "The Curse of Anubis" features one of my absolute favorite moments from Jonny Quest. It might not sound like much, but the sight of Anubis standing on the dune with the moon in the background as his tattered bandages flap in the breeze – Wow! I loved it as a kid and still think it's a great sight. The biggest weakness I see in this episode is with the ambiguity of Dr. Kareem's plans. Don't ask me what those plans are because Dr. Kareem's thinking makes very little sense to me.
9/10
Laserblast (1978)
How desperate was Roddy McDowall?, 30 November 2008
I honestly hate to rate anything a 1/10, but with Laserblast, I don't see any other choice. The movie is bad in every conceivable way. The special effects – bad. The acting – with a couple of exceptions, bad. The pace and direction – bad. The script – bad. Name anything that goes into the production of a movie and I'm sure I would tell you it's bad in Laserblast. And to top it all off, Laserblast is often quite dull. What a winning combination - bad production values in a boring movie!
The plot involves a deadly laser weapon left behind on Earth by a couple of extraterrestrials. A troubled young man named Billy (Kim Milford) finds the weapon and uses it to get even with those he feels have done him wrong. But the weapon has unexpected side effects as Billy is turned into a green-hued snarling monster.
I said there were a couple of exceptions when it came to the bad acting in Laserblast. I'm not sure how the producers were able to do it, but they actually were able to get a couple of recognizable names and faces to appear in their movie. Keenan Wynn and Roddy McDowall must have been desperate to appear in this stinker. McDowall, in particular, phones in his 5 minutes of screen time. Other cast members I recognized included Cheryl "Rainbeaux" Smith, Dennis Burkley, and Ron Masak. Laserblast also features the first screen appearance of that barometer of bad movies, Eddie Deezen. With a cast like that, I would have expected much better than this.
1/10
The plot involves a deadly laser weapon left behind on Earth by a couple of extraterrestrials. A troubled young man named Billy (Kim Milford) finds the weapon and uses it to get even with those he feels have done him wrong. But the weapon has unexpected side effects as Billy is turned into a green-hued snarling monster.
I said there were a couple of exceptions when it came to the bad acting in Laserblast. I'm not sure how the producers were able to do it, but they actually were able to get a couple of recognizable names and faces to appear in their movie. Keenan Wynn and Roddy McDowall must have been desperate to appear in this stinker. McDowall, in particular, phones in his 5 minutes of screen time. Other cast members I recognized included Cheryl "Rainbeaux" Smith, Dennis Burkley, and Ron Masak. Laserblast also features the first screen appearance of that barometer of bad movies, Eddie Deezen. With a cast like that, I would have expected much better than this.
1/10
Law of the Jungle (1942)
Mantan Moreland is the only reason to watch this movie., 29 November 2008
I won't even bother with a plot description. The plot isn't the reason anyone today is going to watch Law of the Jungle anyway. The only reason to watch this movie and the only thing its got going for it is Mantan Moreland. As un-PC as it is in today's world, Moreland's brand of comedy is often laugh-out-loud funny. While he's not given material in Law of the Jungle that's as good as he had in some of his other movies (For example, I think he's given better, funnier lines in King of the Zombies.), I still found a laugh or two and always a smile on my face. As for the rest of the movie, it's largely forgettable. From the ridiculous night club in the middle of the jungle to the completely unrealistic man-in-a-gorilla suit to star John "Dusty" King's wooden performance, there's little besides Moreland to recommend. The rating I've given Law of the Jungle (5/10) is based almost entirely on Mantan Moreland.
One final thing, maybe I've missed something, but it seems a bit odd to me that Mantan Moreland's character's name is Jefferson "Jeff" Jones. If you go through his filmography, you'll notice that Moreland often played a character named Jefferson Jones or Jeff Jones or simply Jeff. Is this supposed to be the same person? It has no real bearing on Law of the Jungle, just something I noticed and thought was strange.
5/10
One final thing, maybe I've missed something, but it seems a bit odd to me that Mantan Moreland's character's name is Jefferson "Jeff" Jones. If you go through his filmography, you'll notice that Moreland often played a character named Jefferson Jones or Jeff Jones or simply Jeff. Is this supposed to be the same person? It has no real bearing on Law of the Jungle, just something I noticed and thought was strange.
5/10
Charlie Chan in Shanghai (1935)
"Spider does not spin web for single fly.", 29 November 2008
Charlie Chan arrives in Shanghai to help an old friend with opium smugglers. But when his friend (One thing you learn if you've seen enough of the Chan films – it sucks to be one of Chan's old friends. You've got the lifespan of a fruit fly!) is murdered, Charlie realizes just how dangerous his quarry is. With the help of #1 son Lee, can Charlie catch a killer and put a stop to a ring of drug smugglers in the process?
As far as Charlie Chan movies go, Charlie Chan in Shanghai is what I would call slightly below average and one of the weakest of the Warner Oland Chan films. It's watchable enough if you like these movies, but it's nowhere near as good as the best of the series. While it's got most the usual trappings you would expect from a Charlie Chan movie, it lacks an effective central murder case with all the red herrings, suspects, and intrigue that entails. The ring of drug smugglers doesn't provide an adequate substitute. One interesting aspect of Charlie Chan in Shanghai is the development of a more human, caring version of Charlie Chan. First, we get to see Charlie sing a neat little song to the children on board the ship he's traveling. Second, Charlie seems to show a great deal of affection for his son Lee. While both are oddities, neither event is unwelcome.
6/10
As far as Charlie Chan movies go, Charlie Chan in Shanghai is what I would call slightly below average and one of the weakest of the Warner Oland Chan films. It's watchable enough if you like these movies, but it's nowhere near as good as the best of the series. While it's got most the usual trappings you would expect from a Charlie Chan movie, it lacks an effective central murder case with all the red herrings, suspects, and intrigue that entails. The ring of drug smugglers doesn't provide an adequate substitute. One interesting aspect of Charlie Chan in Shanghai is the development of a more human, caring version of Charlie Chan. First, we get to see Charlie sing a neat little song to the children on board the ship he's traveling. Second, Charlie seems to show a great deal of affection for his son Lee. While both are oddities, neither event is unwelcome.
6/10
Devil Fish (1984)
- Shark: Rosso nell'oceano
"You filthy rotten bloody shark", 29 November 2008
I wish I had something more positive to say about Devil Fish, but I honestly can't seem to come up with much. I can't even come up with many of those "so bad, it's good" kind of moments. Devil Fish is just plain old bad. The plot is completely derivative (Jaws, anyone?), the acting is wooden, the characters are uninteresting, the special effects are beyond bad, and the score is annoying. Add to that the seemingly inept direction of Lamberto Bava and you've got one stinker of a movie. I think, however, that the film's biggest sin is its lack of a budget. It doesn't appear that Bava had much to work with. By 1984, the Italian film industry was in full decline – especially as far as genre films go. The funding available to Bava was most probably very meager. Film's like Devil Fish that rely on special effects just never had a chance to be good. It's not the only Italian film to suffer this fate. There are a number of Italian movies made in the mid-80s whose ideas and concepts far exceeded what anyone could realistically have expected given their budgetary limitations.
However, having said all that and noting the film's many weaknesses, I can't bring myself to rate Devil Fish lower than a 3/10. I've even considered rating it higher but can't because I realize how bad a movie it is. Why don't I rate it lower? Well that's hard to explain. Despite the many problems found in the movie, there's something about Devil Fish that I inexplicably enjoy. It could be as simple as my love for low-budget, cheesy, Italian movies. Maybe my taste in movies is horribly skewed, but I enjoy what I enjoy.
The Mystery Science Theater 3000 treatment of Devil Fish is actually very enjoyable. I rate Devil Fish a 4/5 on my MST3K rating scale. The guys do a fine job of poking fun at the movie's many flaws. One very astute observation comes very early in the commentary when Tom Servo notes, "Just because you can edit, doesn't mean you should" – highlighting yet another of the many weaknesses to be found in Devil Fish.
3/10
"You filthy rotten bloody shark", 29 November 2008
I wish I had something more positive to say about Devil Fish, but I honestly can't seem to come up with much. I can't even come up with many of those "so bad, it's good" kind of moments. Devil Fish is just plain old bad. The plot is completely derivative (Jaws, anyone?), the acting is wooden, the characters are uninteresting, the special effects are beyond bad, and the score is annoying. Add to that the seemingly inept direction of Lamberto Bava and you've got one stinker of a movie. I think, however, that the film's biggest sin is its lack of a budget. It doesn't appear that Bava had much to work with. By 1984, the Italian film industry was in full decline – especially as far as genre films go. The funding available to Bava was most probably very meager. Film's like Devil Fish that rely on special effects just never had a chance to be good. It's not the only Italian film to suffer this fate. There are a number of Italian movies made in the mid-80s whose ideas and concepts far exceeded what anyone could realistically have expected given their budgetary limitations.However, having said all that and noting the film's many weaknesses, I can't bring myself to rate Devil Fish lower than a 3/10. I've even considered rating it higher but can't because I realize how bad a movie it is. Why don't I rate it lower? Well that's hard to explain. Despite the many problems found in the movie, there's something about Devil Fish that I inexplicably enjoy. It could be as simple as my love for low-budget, cheesy, Italian movies. Maybe my taste in movies is horribly skewed, but I enjoy what I enjoy.
The Mystery Science Theater 3000 treatment of Devil Fish is actually very enjoyable. I rate Devil Fish a 4/5 on my MST3K rating scale. The guys do a fine job of poking fun at the movie's many flaws. One very astute observation comes very early in the commentary when Tom Servo notes, "Just because you can edit, doesn't mean you should" – highlighting yet another of the many weaknesses to be found in Devil Fish.
3/10
Bones "The Santa in the Slush" #3.9 (2007) (TV)
Nothing says "Merry Christmas" like the rat-chewed body of Santa Claus!, 26 November 2008
What an excellent way to kick-off the Holiday Season! The wife and I have been making our way through the first three seasons of Bones and so far, "The Santa in the Slush" just might be one of my favorite episodes. In this one, Booth and Brennan are called in to investigate the death of a man they later identify as Kris Kringle. In full Santa regalia, Kringle is found dead, his body decomposing, lying in a sewer. Nothing says "Merry Christmas" like the rat-chewed body of Santa Claus!
There are other episodes of Bones that are more realistic, that take their subject matter more seriously, and that toy more with the emotions of the viewer – but there are few that are this much fun. A lot of the usual drama is pushed to the side in favor of a more comedic tone – and with excellent results. Don't misunderstand, I realize there is a touch of comedy in almost every episode, but here it takes center stage. And just the notion of a temp agency specializing in Santas and Elves is hysterical. The interplay between Bones and Booth was never better. The subplots dealing with Bones' attempt to give her father his dream Christmas in jail and Booth's desire to spend the Holiday with his son add just the right touch of humanity without ever becoming schmaltzy. Altogether, this is one fine episode of a wonderful show. A 9/10 seems right to me.
9/10
There are other episodes of Bones that are more realistic, that take their subject matter more seriously, and that toy more with the emotions of the viewer – but there are few that are this much fun. A lot of the usual drama is pushed to the side in favor of a more comedic tone – and with excellent results. Don't misunderstand, I realize there is a touch of comedy in almost every episode, but here it takes center stage. And just the notion of a temp agency specializing in Santas and Elves is hysterical. The interplay between Bones and Booth was never better. The subplots dealing with Bones' attempt to give her father his dream Christmas in jail and Booth's desire to spend the Holiday with his son add just the right touch of humanity without ever becoming schmaltzy. Altogether, this is one fine episode of a wonderful show. A 9/10 seems right to me.
9/10
Friday, December 10, 2010
Jonny Quest "Arctic Splashdown" #1.2 (1964) (TV)
Jonny goes to the North Pole, 26 November 2008
A rocket headed for space goes off-course and crashes in the Arctic. The rocket was armed with an auto-destruct mechanism, but it mysteriously failed to activate. Dr. Quest and family are sent in to investigate and retrieve the valuable scientific instruments on board the craft. But Quest and Company aren't alone. There's a foreign power prowling beneath the Arctic ice flow who will stop at nothing to get their hands on the rocket's many secrets.
"Arctic Splashdown" proves that not all episodes of Jonny Quest were created equally. To the best of my memory, this has to be one of the weakest of the bunch. The problem is nothing much happens and there's no air of menace so often present in the show. The episode features one of the lamest baddies the Quest gang would run across. After firing a torpedo at Quest's ship and hitting an ice berg instead (Am I supposed to believe he didn't see that giant floating block of ice?), #1 baddie decides not to fire again, but wait for later. Huh? How stupid is that? "Arctic Splashdown" isn't a total waste as it does feature some pretty cool gadgets like the ice skiffs (I think that's what they're called), that groovy Jonny Quest music, and that overall sense of nostalgia that I always get when watching Jonny Quest. A 5/10 seems about right for this episode.
5/10
"Arctic Splashdown" proves that not all episodes of Jonny Quest were created equally. To the best of my memory, this has to be one of the weakest of the bunch. The problem is nothing much happens and there's no air of menace so often present in the show. The episode features one of the lamest baddies the Quest gang would run across. After firing a torpedo at Quest's ship and hitting an ice berg instead (Am I supposed to believe he didn't see that giant floating block of ice?), #1 baddie decides not to fire again, but wait for later. Huh? How stupid is that? "Arctic Splashdown" isn't a total waste as it does feature some pretty cool gadgets like the ice skiffs (I think that's what they're called), that groovy Jonny Quest music, and that overall sense of nostalgia that I always get when watching Jonny Quest. A 5/10 seems about right for this episode.
5/10
Jonny Quest "The Mystery of the Lizard Men" #1.1 (1964) (TV)
A solid way to start off the series, 25 November 2008
Over the years, I've seen most every one of the Jonny Quest episodes at least a half-a-dozen times. When I was much younger, there wasn't much of anything on television as cool as Jonny Quest. It combined mysteries, monsters, and the unknown with some really groovy 60s music, and James Bond type gadgets. What boy wouldn't love this stuff!
Well, I'm not a kid anymore and it's not the 60s anymore, but I still enjoy watching Jonny Quest. Over the next few weeks, I'm going to give every episode of Jonny Quest another go round. I started this morning with the first episode, "The Mystery of the Lizard Men". While I don't think the sight of the lizard men's hands reaching over the side of the boat affected me the way it did several decades ago, it's still a nice moment. Overall, it's a solid way to start off the series. Spooky ghost ships, the mysterious Sargasso Sea, and deadly lasers – "The Mystery of the Lizard Men" packs a lot into its brief runtime. I don't rate this episode as highly as others because the main baddie doesn't really stand out and he's too easily defeated. Otherwise, it's an enjoyable episode. A 7/10 seems about right.
7/10
Well, I'm not a kid anymore and it's not the 60s anymore, but I still enjoy watching Jonny Quest. Over the next few weeks, I'm going to give every episode of Jonny Quest another go round. I started this morning with the first episode, "The Mystery of the Lizard Men". While I don't think the sight of the lizard men's hands reaching over the side of the boat affected me the way it did several decades ago, it's still a nice moment. Overall, it's a solid way to start off the series. Spooky ghost ships, the mysterious Sargasso Sea, and deadly lasers – "The Mystery of the Lizard Men" packs a lot into its brief runtime. I don't rate this episode as highly as others because the main baddie doesn't really stand out and he's too easily defeated. Otherwise, it's an enjoyable episode. A 7/10 seems about right.
7/10
The Hound of the Baskervilles (1939)
"Mr. Holmes, you're the one man in all England who can help me.", 25 November 2008
Of the half dozen or so different takes on The Hound of the Baskervilles that I've seen, this one is my favorite - just barely edging out the Hammer film from 1959. Why? There are a number of reasons I could cite.
1. Acting – The 1939 version of the Hound of the Baskervilles has to have one of the strongest casts ever assembled for a Sherlock Holmes film. It's a veritable Who's Who of 1930s/40s horror/thriller stars. Basil Rathbone, Lionel Atwill, John Carradine, Wendy Barrie, and Eily Malyon all give outstanding performances. Even E.E. Clive appears in a small but enjoyable role. And Nigel Bruce, whose bumbling Watson could really get on my nerves, gives one of his best performances as Holmes' sidekick.
2. Atmosphere – If there's something that filmmakers from the 1930s knew how to do and were especially adept at, its creating atmosphere. From the fog shrouded moors to the dangerous London streets, there's enough atmosphere in The Hound of the Baskervilles for two or three movies. The cinematography and lighting go along way to helping create this feeling. It's something that seems lost on many of today's filmmakers.
3. Direction – While nothing outstanding, Sidney Lanfield is nonetheless solid in the director's chair. One key is the pacing he gives to the film. The movie moves along quite nicely with very few moments that slow things down. Sure, this version of The Hound of the Baskervilles may veer away from the original source material, but it's for good reason. The film would have been too slow and, ultimately, quite dull had it stuck too closely to Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's work. I've read the book, but as much as I enjoy it, I realize changes have to be made for the screen.
While there are a number of other things I could mention in The Hound of the Baskervilles that appeal to me, I'll stop here before this thing gets out of hand. In the end, I've always found this a solid production and a very enjoyable film. I've got no problems rating it a 9/10.
Finally, one thing that has always seemed odd to me is the appeal of The Hound of the Baskervilles. Don't misunderstand, it's a good story. But I'm not sure I understand why it has been filmed more often than any other Sherlock Holmes story. Why would a plot that has its main character (Holmes in this case) disappear for about half the movie be the most famous and most often filmed story from the character's casebook? Like I said, it's just always seemed a bit odd to me.
9/10
1. Acting – The 1939 version of the Hound of the Baskervilles has to have one of the strongest casts ever assembled for a Sherlock Holmes film. It's a veritable Who's Who of 1930s/40s horror/thriller stars. Basil Rathbone, Lionel Atwill, John Carradine, Wendy Barrie, and Eily Malyon all give outstanding performances. Even E.E. Clive appears in a small but enjoyable role. And Nigel Bruce, whose bumbling Watson could really get on my nerves, gives one of his best performances as Holmes' sidekick.
2. Atmosphere – If there's something that filmmakers from the 1930s knew how to do and were especially adept at, its creating atmosphere. From the fog shrouded moors to the dangerous London streets, there's enough atmosphere in The Hound of the Baskervilles for two or three movies. The cinematography and lighting go along way to helping create this feeling. It's something that seems lost on many of today's filmmakers.
3. Direction – While nothing outstanding, Sidney Lanfield is nonetheless solid in the director's chair. One key is the pacing he gives to the film. The movie moves along quite nicely with very few moments that slow things down. Sure, this version of The Hound of the Baskervilles may veer away from the original source material, but it's for good reason. The film would have been too slow and, ultimately, quite dull had it stuck too closely to Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's work. I've read the book, but as much as I enjoy it, I realize changes have to be made for the screen.
While there are a number of other things I could mention in The Hound of the Baskervilles that appeal to me, I'll stop here before this thing gets out of hand. In the end, I've always found this a solid production and a very enjoyable film. I've got no problems rating it a 9/10.
Finally, one thing that has always seemed odd to me is the appeal of The Hound of the Baskervilles. Don't misunderstand, it's a good story. But I'm not sure I understand why it has been filmed more often than any other Sherlock Holmes story. Why would a plot that has its main character (Holmes in this case) disappear for about half the movie be the most famous and most often filmed story from the character's casebook? Like I said, it's just always seemed a bit odd to me.
9/10
The Hound of the Baskervilles (1959)
"Do as the legend tells and avoid the moor when the forces of darkness are exalted.", 23 November 2008
From what I understand, The Hound of the Baskervilles was to be the first in a series of Sherlock Holmes films from Hammer Film Productions. For whatever reason, the film didn't do what Hammer was expecting and they decided to scrap any further Holmes movies. Too bad, because I really enjoy this version of the famous story and would have enjoyed seeing Hammer take their turn with some of the others. And I would have enjoyed the opportunity to see Peter Cushing again play the famous detective while still in his prime. I can only imagine what might have been.
As for the movie itself, Hammer's The Hound of the Baskervilles plays as loose and free with the original story elements as any other I've seen. It doesn't necessarily hurt my enjoyment, but those seeking something that follows the book to the letter would be better off looking elsewhere. Because this is Hammer, the horror aspects of the story are quite naturally highlighted – and to good effect. Cushing makes a wonderful Holmes. Not only does Cushing act the part, in my mind anyway, he looks the part as well. I often go back and forth about which Holmes' portrayal I enjoy more – Cushing or Rathbone. Andre Morrell makes for as good a Dr. Watson as you're likely to find. The rest of the cast, including Christopher Lee and Francis De Wolff, is as solid as any that Hammer ever assembled. I get a real kick out of Miles Malleson's delightfully forgetful Bishop. Finally, and unlike a lot of the more stage-bound Hammer productions, The Hound of the Baskervilles benefits from some excellent location shots. All together, this is one very enjoyable film. If it weren't for Rathbone's The Hound of the Baskervilles, this would be my favorite version of the story – even with (or should that be because of) the numerous deviations from the source material. The Hound of the Baskervilles is also in my top 5 favorite Hammer films as well. A 9/10 seems about right to me.
9/10
As for the movie itself, Hammer's The Hound of the Baskervilles plays as loose and free with the original story elements as any other I've seen. It doesn't necessarily hurt my enjoyment, but those seeking something that follows the book to the letter would be better off looking elsewhere. Because this is Hammer, the horror aspects of the story are quite naturally highlighted – and to good effect. Cushing makes a wonderful Holmes. Not only does Cushing act the part, in my mind anyway, he looks the part as well. I often go back and forth about which Holmes' portrayal I enjoy more – Cushing or Rathbone. Andre Morrell makes for as good a Dr. Watson as you're likely to find. The rest of the cast, including Christopher Lee and Francis De Wolff, is as solid as any that Hammer ever assembled. I get a real kick out of Miles Malleson's delightfully forgetful Bishop. Finally, and unlike a lot of the more stage-bound Hammer productions, The Hound of the Baskervilles benefits from some excellent location shots. All together, this is one very enjoyable film. If it weren't for Rathbone's The Hound of the Baskervilles, this would be my favorite version of the story – even with (or should that be because of) the numerous deviations from the source material. The Hound of the Baskervilles is also in my top 5 favorite Hammer films as well. A 9/10 seems about right to me.
9/10
The Hound of the Baskervilles (1988) (TV)
"It's an ugly, dangerous business, Watson.", 22 November 2008
This version of The Hound of the Baskervilles is the third I've seen in the past week or so. It's also a first time viewing for me. My initial reaction – I'm somewhat disappointed based on many of the reviews I've read on IMDb. While I enjoyed it much more than the 1978 abomination, I much preferred the 1983 version – also a TV movie. There's little doubt that Jeremy Brett makes a fine Sherlock Holmes (though having grown up with Rathbone, he gets my vote for the best) and Edward Hardwicke wisely plays Watson less the bumbling fool. The rest of the actors are at least adequate, though I thought Fiona Gillies was horribly miscast as Beryl. The authentic looking locations, both moors and other sets, add a lot to the production. But the weakness in the film is in its direction and pacing. Had director Brian Mills kept things moving at a better pace, it might have been more enjoyable effort. As it is, there are some stretches that are difficult to get through. After a nice start and a decent enough third act (although it did feel a bit rushed), the middle portion of the movie grinds to a halt. Finally, who thought it would be a good idea to color the hound a glowing green color in post production? It reminded me of something you might see from a poverty row studio of the 1940s.
6/10
6/10
Final Justice (1985)
"Think you can take me? Well, go ahead on. It's your move.", 21 November 2008
After apprehending the man responsible for the murder of his boss, Deputy Sheriff Thomas Jefferson Geronimo, III, is assigned the task of taking the killer back to Italy. On the way, however, the plane is diverted to Malta. Not long after landing, the killer escapes. Now, and with little help from the Maltese police, Deputy Sheriff Geronimo is out to recapture a murderer. But will his "shoot first, take names later" brand of Texas justice work in a foreign country?
Let me get this out right up front, I've seen Final Justice both with and without the Mystery Science Theater 3000 commentary. I've seen the scenes that were cut that help make the movie a more coherent whole. And I've seen the cut-up TV version that was used for MST3K. Having said that, I've got to admit that I much prefer the MST3K version. Why? Because Final Justice is one lousy movie. The MST3K commentary helps make it much more palatable. On its own, it's a real snoozer of an action movie with corny dialogue (often delivered with such thick Italian accents that it's impossible to understand), bad acting, weak direction, gigantic plot holes, and most everything else you'll find in a bad movie. And if most of Final Justice wasn't "so bad, it's good", it would be one terribly dull movie on top of everything else. So, yes, I enjoy the often very funny MST3K commentary over the bad movie on its own.
My main sticking points with the MST3K commentary and with most of the reviews I've read on Final Justice, however, involve the criticisms of Joe Don Baker. The main weaknesses in Baker's performance actually have nothing to do with his size or the wardrobe choices of his character or any of the other jokes flung in his direction. Instead, I think much of it is has to do with the poor decision to cast him in the lead in the first place. Joe Don Baker has always struck me as a decent enough actor, but he's not the kind of guy I would call an "action hero" by any stretch of the imagination. He's more of a sidekick as he demonstrated with solid performances in a couple of James Bond movies. Or if you really want to blame someone for the problems with Final Justice, point your finger at director Greydon Clark. Clark's resume can't begin to compare with Baker's. So I say, "Lay off Joe Don Baker!"
3/10
Let me get this out right up front, I've seen Final Justice both with and without the Mystery Science Theater 3000 commentary. I've seen the scenes that were cut that help make the movie a more coherent whole. And I've seen the cut-up TV version that was used for MST3K. Having said that, I've got to admit that I much prefer the MST3K version. Why? Because Final Justice is one lousy movie. The MST3K commentary helps make it much more palatable. On its own, it's a real snoozer of an action movie with corny dialogue (often delivered with such thick Italian accents that it's impossible to understand), bad acting, weak direction, gigantic plot holes, and most everything else you'll find in a bad movie. And if most of Final Justice wasn't "so bad, it's good", it would be one terribly dull movie on top of everything else. So, yes, I enjoy the often very funny MST3K commentary over the bad movie on its own.
My main sticking points with the MST3K commentary and with most of the reviews I've read on Final Justice, however, involve the criticisms of Joe Don Baker. The main weaknesses in Baker's performance actually have nothing to do with his size or the wardrobe choices of his character or any of the other jokes flung in his direction. Instead, I think much of it is has to do with the poor decision to cast him in the lead in the first place. Joe Don Baker has always struck me as a decent enough actor, but he's not the kind of guy I would call an "action hero" by any stretch of the imagination. He's more of a sidekick as he demonstrated with solid performances in a couple of James Bond movies. Or if you really want to blame someone for the problems with Final Justice, point your finger at director Greydon Clark. Clark's resume can't begin to compare with Baker's. So I say, "Lay off Joe Don Baker!"
3/10
Thursday, December 9, 2010
Quest of the Delta Knights (1993)
One big old dog of a movie, 20 November 2008
Plot (and I'll keep this brief – no point in dragging it out): Quest of the Delta Knights is the story of a boy, sold into slavery, who becomes the leader of a revolutionary group out to stop the evil Lord Vultare from discovering Archimedes lost storehouse and the knowledge it contains. This knowledge includes a weapon of unlimited power.
My plot description almost makes Quest of the Delta Knights sound good. Unfortunately, Quest of the Delta Knights is one big old dog of a movie. Nothing in the movie makes sense. It's a mish-mash of ideas and characters that don't go together. Imageine every sort of pre-16th Century character you can think of and you're bound to find them fighting and living beside each other in this movie. Viking, knights, Italian scholars – it doesn't matter. Also, I've seen this movie several times and I'm not quite sure where it's supposed to be set. Someone mentions England, but there are Viking roaming around. With Leonardo Di Vinci as a character, you might think Italy. Again, how do you explain the Vikings? How about Atlantis? It's anyone's guess. And because the whole thing looks like its straight out a Renaissance festival, maybe the setting is supposed to be California? Makes as much sense as anything else you'll find in the movie. This is just one small example of the numerous inconsistencies and annoyances you'll find in Quest of the Delta Knights. Believe me, there are plenty more.
Watching Quest of the Delta Knights, I decided that some people will do just about anything if the price is right. Apparently the producers of this turkey offered David Warner enough money that he was willing to embarrass himself by taking on not one, but two roles. How much money does it take for an actor to agree to star in something like this? Many watchers would also recognize Richard Kind in the role of wise man/Magi Wamthool. But the casting of Kind has to be one of the most puzzling in movie history. I realize they were going for comic relief but they failed miserably. Kind may even have embarrassed himself more than Warner in his mercifully brief performance.
I could go on and on, but really there's no point. My opinion of Quest of the Delta Knights should already be painfully obvious. If not, I'll spell it out for you – it's an incredibly bad movie with one ridiculous set-piece after the next. There are few, if any, redeeming moments to be found. I must admit, however, that my experiences with Quest of the Delta Knights have been softened by watching the Mystery Science Theater 3000 version of the movie. The MST3K guys make it a barrel of laughs. So, while I rate the movie a miserable 2/10, I'll give it a 4/5 on my MST3K rating scale.
2/10
Plot (and I'll keep this brief – no point in dragging it out): Quest of the Delta Knights is the story of a boy, sold into slavery, who becomes the leader of a revolutionary group out to stop the evil Lord Vultare from discovering Archimedes lost storehouse and the knowledge it contains. This knowledge includes a weapon of unlimited power.My plot description almost makes Quest of the Delta Knights sound good. Unfortunately, Quest of the Delta Knights is one big old dog of a movie. Nothing in the movie makes sense. It's a mish-mash of ideas and characters that don't go together. Imageine every sort of pre-16th Century character you can think of and you're bound to find them fighting and living beside each other in this movie. Viking, knights, Italian scholars – it doesn't matter. Also, I've seen this movie several times and I'm not quite sure where it's supposed to be set. Someone mentions England, but there are Viking roaming around. With Leonardo Di Vinci as a character, you might think Italy. Again, how do you explain the Vikings? How about Atlantis? It's anyone's guess. And because the whole thing looks like its straight out a Renaissance festival, maybe the setting is supposed to be California? Makes as much sense as anything else you'll find in the movie. This is just one small example of the numerous inconsistencies and annoyances you'll find in Quest of the Delta Knights. Believe me, there are plenty more.
Watching Quest of the Delta Knights, I decided that some people will do just about anything if the price is right. Apparently the producers of this turkey offered David Warner enough money that he was willing to embarrass himself by taking on not one, but two roles. How much money does it take for an actor to agree to star in something like this? Many watchers would also recognize Richard Kind in the role of wise man/Magi Wamthool. But the casting of Kind has to be one of the most puzzling in movie history. I realize they were going for comic relief but they failed miserably. Kind may even have embarrassed himself more than Warner in his mercifully brief performance.
I could go on and on, but really there's no point. My opinion of Quest of the Delta Knights should already be painfully obvious. If not, I'll spell it out for you – it's an incredibly bad movie with one ridiculous set-piece after the next. There are few, if any, redeeming moments to be found. I must admit, however, that my experiences with Quest of the Delta Knights have been softened by watching the Mystery Science Theater 3000 version of the movie. The MST3K guys make it a barrel of laughs. So, while I rate the movie a miserable 2/10, I'll give it a 4/5 on my MST3K rating scale.
2/10
Murder Over New York (1940)
"I'll never go on a case like this again without a gat.", 19 November 2008
On his way to a police convention in New York, Charlie Chan runs into an old friend from Scotland Yard, Hugh Drake. Drake, now employed by military intelligence, is hot on the heels of a saboteur named Paul Narvo. Drake asks Chan to pay him a visit while he's in New York to talk over his case. Chan makes the visit only to find that his colleague has been murdered.
If you look through my reviews, it should become apparent that I'm a fan of Charlie Chan. That's why it pains me to admit that I don't really care for Murder Over New York as much as most other fans seem to. Part of the problem is the whole WWII spy angle. I've never much cared for this type of plot when watching a Chan film. I should also point out that I have the same problem with the Basil Rathbone Sherlock Holmes films that deal with WWII espionage. I'd much rather see my favorite film detectives solving murders than chasing spies.
Beyond my issues with the plot, I've always had a real problem the solution to the case. There is no way that the audience could hope to play along with Chan and come up with a solution. The movie cheats far too much. There is information known only to Chan that comes up after the killer is identified. All I ask is that movies of this type play fair.
From my rating, it's probably obvious that even with the problems I have with the film, I still enjoy it. I mean it's still Charlie Chan after all. Sidney Toler is as enjoyable as ever. Victor Sen Yung is as good, if not better (meaning less annoying), than in some of the previous installments. The rest of the cast is more than serviceable with a fun cameo from Shemp Howard. Like all the other Chan films, this one looks much better than it should. The cinematography is solid. Finally, considering all the problems I pointed out that I have with Murder Over New York, it's a bit odd that I've probably seen it more than any other Charlie Chan film. That's got to count for something.
6/10
On his way to a police convention in New York, Charlie Chan runs into an old friend from Scotland Yard, Hugh Drake. Drake, now employed by military intelligence, is hot on the heels of a saboteur named Paul Narvo. Drake asks Chan to pay him a visit while he's in New York to talk over his case. Chan makes the visit only to find that his colleague has been murdered.If you look through my reviews, it should become apparent that I'm a fan of Charlie Chan. That's why it pains me to admit that I don't really care for Murder Over New York as much as most other fans seem to. Part of the problem is the whole WWII spy angle. I've never much cared for this type of plot when watching a Chan film. I should also point out that I have the same problem with the Basil Rathbone Sherlock Holmes films that deal with WWII espionage. I'd much rather see my favorite film detectives solving murders than chasing spies.
Beyond my issues with the plot, I've always had a real problem the solution to the case. There is no way that the audience could hope to play along with Chan and come up with a solution. The movie cheats far too much. There is information known only to Chan that comes up after the killer is identified. All I ask is that movies of this type play fair.
From my rating, it's probably obvious that even with the problems I have with the film, I still enjoy it. I mean it's still Charlie Chan after all. Sidney Toler is as enjoyable as ever. Victor Sen Yung is as good, if not better (meaning less annoying), than in some of the previous installments. The rest of the cast is more than serviceable with a fun cameo from Shemp Howard. Like all the other Chan films, this one looks much better than it should. The cinematography is solid. Finally, considering all the problems I pointed out that I have with Murder Over New York, it's a bit odd that I've probably seen it more than any other Charlie Chan film. That's got to count for something.
6/10
The Hound of the Baskervilles (1983) (TV)
A rock solid effort, 18 November 2008
This 1983 version of The Hound of the Baskervilles, Sherlock Holmes' most famous mystery, is a rock solid effort. I enjoyed it immensely. And when you consider the fact that it's a made-for-TV film, it's even more amazing to me just how good it really is. I say amazing because I simply cannot imagine an American made-for-TV production equaling this British effort. Highlights for me include the acting (including nice performances by Ian Richardson, Brian Blessed, and Denholm Elliot), the location shoots (the authenticity of the movie is greatly enhanced by shooting on real mires and bogs), and a steady hand in the director's chair (the pacing of the film is just one of the movie's outstanding features). In fact, I've got very little to complain about. Sure, Donald Churchill all but takes his Watson into Nigel Bruce territory, but it's a minor distraction. Some of my favorite set-pieces included the hound attack in the fog, Holmes' gypsy impersonation, and the flashback sequence. Overall, this version of The Hound of the Baskervilles may not be my favorite and it may not be completely faithful to the source material, but it's a good show and well worth the effort to seek out for any fan of Sherlock Holmes.
One final word on The Hound of the Baskervilles (1983) – I've got one small complaint about the DVD I viewed (R1 DVD from Image). Maybe it was just the copy I had or maybe it was the monitor I was watching it on, but several scenes were a bit too dark. A few times I had difficulty seeing what was going on. Like I said, maybe it was just me, but I thought I would put the warning out there just he same.
8/10
One final word on The Hound of the Baskervilles (1983) – I've got one small complaint about the DVD I viewed (R1 DVD from Image). Maybe it was just the copy I had or maybe it was the monitor I was watching it on, but several scenes were a bit too dark. A few times I had difficulty seeing what was going on. Like I said, maybe it was just me, but I thought I would put the warning out there just he same.
8/10
The Hound of the Baskervilles (1978)
"In the name of all the flocking blind cripples, I beseech you", 17 November 2008
I've seen a number of different film adaptations of The Hound of the Baskervilles, so I thought I might enjoy a spoof of this familiar story. Also, I've seen some of the other work Peter Cook and Dudley Moore did together and thought they might have a chance at success with such a project. My reaction, well if you've been on IMDb for any length of time, you've probably seen the well thought out response "It Sux" when someone is asked about their opinion on a given film. Well, "It Sux" pretty well sums up my feelings to the abomination that is The Hound of the Baskervilles. It is a complete waste of time and effort. I can't imagine how two talented individuals like Cook and Moore could have concocted such a disaster of a film. It's nothing short of a chore to sit through the thing. It's the complete opposite of funny. In addition to Cook and Moore, there's a good cast assembled including Joan Greenwood, Denholm Elliot, Hugh Griffith, and the usually entertaining Terry-Thomas. I actually started to feel embarrassed for these talented actors. What were they thinking? And where in the world did the scenes taken from The Exorcist come from? I don't remember any pea soup spitting in Doyle's original work.
I actually bought The Hound of the Baskervilles on DVD. I'm glad it only set me back $3, because the 2/10 I've rated the movie may actually be overstating things a bit.
2/10
I actually bought The Hound of the Baskervilles on DVD. I'm glad it only set me back $3, because the 2/10 I've rated the movie may actually be overstating things a bit.
2/10
Psycho a Go-Go (1965)
Don't miss Tacey and her bouffant, 15 November 2008
A jewel heist is going just about as planned until the loot ends up in the back of a pick-up truck. Unaware of what he's carrying, the unsuspecting driver of the truck takes the fortune in jewels home with him. His young daughter finds the treasure and stuffs it into her doll. Unfortunately for this suburban family, one of the robbers is also a killer and he'll do anything to get his hands on the jewels.
I'd be stretching the truth if I said Psycho a Go-Go was a good movie. It's got far too many problems to be "good". Spotty acting, giant plot holes, bad editing, and poor sound are among the many problems you'll find in the movie. But the film's biggest weakness can be traced directly to its director – Al Adamson. Adamson is responsible for some of the worst, albeit entertaining, movies made in the 60s and 70s. In Psycho a Go-Go, Adamson's biggest sin is losing focus of what's going on. Too often, he lets the movie grind to a halt before going on to the next set-piece. Stronger direction and better pacing would have made a world of difference in the movie.
But the movie isn't without its strong points. Chief among them (and I'm not really sure how to put this), the film is just whacked-out enough to be fun despite itself. From the go-go dancers at the beginning, cool music choices, a coherent and interesting plot (yes, an Al Adamson movie with a plot I found interesting), and a prolonged chase through the snow, Psycho a Go-Go is at least worth a watch. There are also a couple of songs performed by Tacey Robbins with The Vendells that are almost worth the price of admission alone. The opening number, My L.A., is especially catchy. Finally, even though I called the acting spotty, the movie is not without at least one standout performance. Roy Morton plays the menacing killer to perfection.
5/10
I'd be stretching the truth if I said Psycho a Go-Go was a good movie. It's got far too many problems to be "good". Spotty acting, giant plot holes, bad editing, and poor sound are among the many problems you'll find in the movie. But the film's biggest weakness can be traced directly to its director – Al Adamson. Adamson is responsible for some of the worst, albeit entertaining, movies made in the 60s and 70s. In Psycho a Go-Go, Adamson's biggest sin is losing focus of what's going on. Too often, he lets the movie grind to a halt before going on to the next set-piece. Stronger direction and better pacing would have made a world of difference in the movie.
But the movie isn't without its strong points. Chief among them (and I'm not really sure how to put this), the film is just whacked-out enough to be fun despite itself. From the go-go dancers at the beginning, cool music choices, a coherent and interesting plot (yes, an Al Adamson movie with a plot I found interesting), and a prolonged chase through the snow, Psycho a Go-Go is at least worth a watch. There are also a couple of songs performed by Tacey Robbins with The Vendells that are almost worth the price of admission alone. The opening number, My L.A., is especially catchy. Finally, even though I called the acting spotty, the movie is not without at least one standout performance. Roy Morton plays the menacing killer to perfection.
5/10
Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer (1986)
"Yeah. I killed my mama.", 15 November 2008
Movies like Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer really test my assertion that I base my ratings and opinions more on entertainment value than anything else. Was I entertained by Henry? Well, not if you're using the traditional definition of the word. I can't imagine that anyone would find the all too realistic handling of the subject matter "entertaining". There's a sense of real menace and violence just under the surface of every scene. Henry doesn't come across like a normal Hollywood horror movie where everything feels like fantasy and you know as soon as the lights come on it's over. The horror in Henry goes on long after the movie ends. I generally watch movies for escapist entertainment – and you won't find that here. Watching Henry and Otis go about there daily life, including the butchering of innocent, unknown victims, is like peeking into the mind of an actual serial killer. I'm not sure that's a place any of us want to be. So I can't really use the word "entertained" to describe the experience of watching Henry. But I was certainly mesmerized. It's almost cliché to say, but watching Henry is akin to watching a car wreck – it's impossible to look away.
Director John McNaughton crafted an incredible film given its almost repugnant content and miniscule budget. The low budget look, the pacing, and the almost documentary style of the film really go a long way to making Henry effective. Another plus for the film is the acting of the three main characters. Michael Rooker gets most of the acclaim, but I think Tracy Arnold and especially Tom Towles give equally strong performances. It's a nice job by three unknowns (at least unknown to many people).
So in the end, I've got to give Henry a rating of 8/10. It's a powerful, shocking, raw, brutal movie that, while often difficult to watch, is impossible to ignore or forget.
8/10
Director John McNaughton crafted an incredible film given its almost repugnant content and miniscule budget. The low budget look, the pacing, and the almost documentary style of the film really go a long way to making Henry effective. Another plus for the film is the acting of the three main characters. Michael Rooker gets most of the acclaim, but I think Tracy Arnold and especially Tom Towles give equally strong performances. It's a nice job by three unknowns (at least unknown to many people).
So in the end, I've got to give Henry a rating of 8/10. It's a powerful, shocking, raw, brutal movie that, while often difficult to watch, is impossible to ignore or forget.
8/10
The Exorcist (1973)
"Keep away. The sow is mine.", 15 November 2008
I'll keep this brief - most every horror fan has seen The Exorcist and all of them have an opinion of it. While many people would most certainly list The Exorcist as THE scariest movie ever made, there seems to be a growing number of fans who find humor where it was not intended. I don't get it. Maybe it's a generational thing, but The Exorcist remains as effective today as it was in 1973. If the story of a young, helpless girl being turned into a snarling creature isn't horror enough, add to that the desecration of sacred religious symbols and you've got something quite shocking. Beyond the story, the strong performances by a good cast really help put The Exorcist over the top. Max von Sydow was never better. And the performance of an incredibly young and inexperienced Linda Blair is nothing short of remarkable. Add to that the excellent lighting, sound, cinematography, and special effects, and you've got not just a scary movie, but a very well made movie as well.
8/10
8/10
Dr. Renault's Secret (1942)
"You can't fall out of a closed window!", 15 November 2008
While I enjoyed watching Dr. Renault's Secret, the movie has one serious flaw that keeps it from being a real winner. The problem with Dr. Renault's Secret is that there really isn't much of a secret. Anyone with half a brain would be hard pressed not to guess what's going on within the first ten minutes of the movie. I have a hard time believing that even the less jaded horror fans of 1942 would have been shocked by the revelations made toward the end of the film about Dr. Renault and his assistant, Noel. The movie all but beats you over the head with its supposed "secret".
But even with this flaw, there's still a lot to enjoy here for fans of classic horror. To start with, J. Carrol Naish gives one of those wonderful performances that I'll remember long after having watched the movie. He's awesome as the strange Noel. The way he changes his body language as the movie goes on and his more animalistic tendencies start to come out is perfect. George Zucco gives his usual nice performance even though his role is limited. The film also very nicely shot. Dr. Renault's Secret features some top-notch cinematography, set design, lighting, and everything else that goes into make a movie look "good". It might have been a "B" film, but it doesn't look like it. Fox didn't make many horror films, but when they did, they did it right.
One final note – it's odd to me that the movie is supposed to be set in France. While I don't necessarily have a problem with some of the British and American actors in the movie, there's just no way Arthur Shields could have ever been a French police inspector. He's way too Irish to ever be anything but Irish.
6/10
But even with this flaw, there's still a lot to enjoy here for fans of classic horror. To start with, J. Carrol Naish gives one of those wonderful performances that I'll remember long after having watched the movie. He's awesome as the strange Noel. The way he changes his body language as the movie goes on and his more animalistic tendencies start to come out is perfect. George Zucco gives his usual nice performance even though his role is limited. The film also very nicely shot. Dr. Renault's Secret features some top-notch cinematography, set design, lighting, and everything else that goes into make a movie look "good". It might have been a "B" film, but it doesn't look like it. Fox didn't make many horror films, but when they did, they did it right.
One final note – it's odd to me that the movie is supposed to be set in France. While I don't necessarily have a problem with some of the British and American actors in the movie, there's just no way Arthur Shields could have ever been a French police inspector. He's way too Irish to ever be anything but Irish.
6/10
Charlie Chan at the Wax Museum (1940)
"Only very foolish mouse makes nest in cat's ear.", 14 November 2008
As the movie opens, Charlie Chan finds himself at the sentencing phase of trial he has given evidence in against a criminal named Steve McBirney. After McBirney is sentenced to be executed, he shoots his way out of the courthouse and makes his escape. He heads straight to a wax museum dedicated to figures depicting famous crimes and criminals. The museum is run by Dr. Cream. But Dr. Cream has another profession – he's a plastic surgeon who specializes in making the faces of criminals unrecognizable. Dr. Cream also hosts a regular weekly radio show in his museum dedicated to crime. He invites Charlie Chan to be a guest on the next program. Reluctantly, Chan agrees to appear. But unfortunately for Chan, this week's radio program is a set-up for McBirney to get his revenge against the detective he blames for getting him convicted.
If someone would have asked me twenty-five years ago what my favorite Charlie Chan film was, I would have most likely answered Charlie Chan at the Wax Museum. It's got a whole lot to like and a whole lot that appealed to me during my youth. Secret passages, a dark and stormy night, and creepy wax figures all add up to one of the more atmospheric movies in the Chan series. Charlie Chan at the Wax Museum probably comes as close as any of the other Chan films to having actual elements of horror – something I always go for. As an added bonus, #2 son Jimmy is less of an annoyance in this film and actually gives an interesting performance as he helps his Pop with the case. It's really not difficult to see why this movie appealed to me. It's just a fun movie!
Well, and unfortunately, my tastes seem to have changed over the past couple of decades. Thanks to the recent R1 DVD release, I was finally able to revisit Charlie Chan at the Wax Museum. And while my 8/10 rating indicates I enjoyed the experience, it wasn't what I remembered. I could cite a number of problems I had with the film, but I'll just go into the most obvious. When it is discovered that someone was trying to use the wired-up chair to electrocute Chan, why doesn't Chan seem more interested in looking into this particular clue? Other than being mentioned in passing a few times, the chair is almost forgotten. Shouldn't Chan have tried to discover more about the chair like who hooked it up to the wires or what Dr. Cream knew about it? Instead, Chan spends his time running around in the dark (both literally and figuratively) trying to find a murderer. Sorry, but it doesn't add up.
8/10
If someone would have asked me twenty-five years ago what my favorite Charlie Chan film was, I would have most likely answered Charlie Chan at the Wax Museum. It's got a whole lot to like and a whole lot that appealed to me during my youth. Secret passages, a dark and stormy night, and creepy wax figures all add up to one of the more atmospheric movies in the Chan series. Charlie Chan at the Wax Museum probably comes as close as any of the other Chan films to having actual elements of horror – something I always go for. As an added bonus, #2 son Jimmy is less of an annoyance in this film and actually gives an interesting performance as he helps his Pop with the case. It's really not difficult to see why this movie appealed to me. It's just a fun movie!
Well, and unfortunately, my tastes seem to have changed over the past couple of decades. Thanks to the recent R1 DVD release, I was finally able to revisit Charlie Chan at the Wax Museum. And while my 8/10 rating indicates I enjoyed the experience, it wasn't what I remembered. I could cite a number of problems I had with the film, but I'll just go into the most obvious. When it is discovered that someone was trying to use the wired-up chair to electrocute Chan, why doesn't Chan seem more interested in looking into this particular clue? Other than being mentioned in passing a few times, the chair is almost forgotten. Shouldn't Chan have tried to discover more about the chair like who hooked it up to the wires or what Dr. Cream knew about it? Instead, Chan spends his time running around in the dark (both literally and figuratively) trying to find a murderer. Sorry, but it doesn't add up.
8/10
Charlie Chan's Murder Cruise (1940)
"Truth, like oil, will in time rise to surface.", 9 November 2008
Charlie Chan and #2 son Jimmy join a cruise headed to San Francisco hot on the heels of a murderer. The mad strangler has already killed Chan's friend and colleague from Scotland Yard, so Charlie has to be on his toes. And with the confined space of a cruise ship, suspects at every turn, and even more dead bodies, Charlie Chan certainly has his hands full.
When you go about 35 years in between viewings, you not only forget everything about the plot (including the killer's identity), but you also forget how good a movie can be. That's the case with me and Charlie Chan's Murder Cruise. I had the opportunity to check out it out last night for the first time in over three decades. My reaction - what a wonderful movie! An excellent and convoluted plot, a ruthless killer, red herrings everywhere you look, comic relief that doesn't get in the way of the mystery, and some of the most solid acting you'll find in one of the Toler Chan films help make Charlie Chan's Murder Cruise a real winner. The cast that includes Sidney Toler, Victor Sen Yung, the always enjoyable Lionel Atwill, Leo (no G.) Carroll, and Charles Middleton is as good as you'll find in a "B" mystery from the 40s. Another big plus is the film's location. I've always been a fan of a mystery where the killer and suspects are trapped in a place with no hope of escape. And a cruise ship is one of those kind of locations. Add to this list of superlatives I've mentioned some nice pacing from director Eugene Forde and solid cinematography and lighting and you've got the makings of a wonderful entry in the log running Charlie Chan series.
8/10
When you go about 35 years in between viewings, you not only forget everything about the plot (including the killer's identity), but you also forget how good a movie can be. That's the case with me and Charlie Chan's Murder Cruise. I had the opportunity to check out it out last night for the first time in over three decades. My reaction - what a wonderful movie! An excellent and convoluted plot, a ruthless killer, red herrings everywhere you look, comic relief that doesn't get in the way of the mystery, and some of the most solid acting you'll find in one of the Toler Chan films help make Charlie Chan's Murder Cruise a real winner. The cast that includes Sidney Toler, Victor Sen Yung, the always enjoyable Lionel Atwill, Leo (no G.) Carroll, and Charles Middleton is as good as you'll find in a "B" mystery from the 40s. Another big plus is the film's location. I've always been a fan of a mystery where the killer and suspects are trapped in a place with no hope of escape. And a cruise ship is one of those kind of locations. Add to this list of superlatives I've mentioned some nice pacing from director Eugene Forde and solid cinematography and lighting and you've got the makings of a wonderful entry in the log running Charlie Chan series.
8/10
Time Chasers (1994)
- Tangents
"Whoa, minutemen!", 8 November 2008
Nick Miller has developed a means of time travel using a computer and his small airplane. Needing the funds to continue his experiments, he agrees to sell his invention to a large corporation named GenCorp. But Nick hadn't planned on how GenCorp would use his time machine. On his next trip to the future, he discovers a world in chaos where social order has broken down. Nick decides he must go into the past if he is to restore the future.
Like most people on this sight, I came by Time Chasers courtesy of Mystery Science Theater 3000. And while the movie is bad, it's not as bad as a lot of the stuff they showed. Oh, it's got the usual bad acting, a dorky lead, poor special effects, some ridiculous locations (Others have mentioned it, but I've got to agree with the slamming of J.K. Robertson's office. The mezzanine of the local public library isn't a very effective or realistic looking location.), giant plot holes, and everything else you find in your typical, run-of-the-mill bad movie, but it's got something I wasn't expecting to find. It's actually got some good ideas buried under the rubbish. The whole notion of time travel, changing the future, and going into the past to make things right is a good, interesting concept. Unfortunately for the makers of this movie, I think their ideas far exceeded both their abilities and certainly their budget. It's too bad, because as I indicated, there are some good ideas to be found in Time Chasers.
The MST3K treatment of Time Chasers is good – actually, it's very good. The first time I saw it, I found myself laughing out loud. So, while I give the movie a 3/10, I'll give it a 4/5 on my MST3K rating scale.
3/10
"Whoa, minutemen!", 8 November 2008
Like most people on this sight, I came by Time Chasers courtesy of Mystery Science Theater 3000. And while the movie is bad, it's not as bad as a lot of the stuff they showed. Oh, it's got the usual bad acting, a dorky lead, poor special effects, some ridiculous locations (Others have mentioned it, but I've got to agree with the slamming of J.K. Robertson's office. The mezzanine of the local public library isn't a very effective or realistic looking location.), giant plot holes, and everything else you find in your typical, run-of-the-mill bad movie, but it's got something I wasn't expecting to find. It's actually got some good ideas buried under the rubbish. The whole notion of time travel, changing the future, and going into the past to make things right is a good, interesting concept. Unfortunately for the makers of this movie, I think their ideas far exceeded both their abilities and certainly their budget. It's too bad, because as I indicated, there are some good ideas to be found in Time Chasers.
The MST3K treatment of Time Chasers is good – actually, it's very good. The first time I saw it, I found myself laughing out loud. So, while I give the movie a 3/10, I'll give it a 4/5 on my MST3K rating scale.
3/10
Devil Doll (1964)
Why the need for a fake beard?, 31 October 2008
Devil Doll is one of those movies that, while it will never be confused with a masterpiece of horror, is effective in its on little way. Though the story is often predictable, it's creepy enough to provide a few chills along the way – not scary, just creepy. Ventriloquist dummies like Hugo have always given me the heebie-jeebies and when you give them a soul, a mind of their own, and the ability to move (not to mention a knife), it's the stuff of nightmares as far as I'm concerned. Finally, in the case of Devil Doll, the ending really works as the villainous Great Vorelli gets what he deserves. Though nowhere near as effective as the ending of Freaks, it's very reminiscent of that film's finale. On the downside, Devil Doll would have probably worked better at 60 minutes instead of 81. Not that there's an abundance of obvious padding, but there's hardly enough material to fill the extra 20 minutes. The acting is nothing to write home about. While Bryant Haliday is effectively villainous, William Sylvester is a complete bore as the film's hero. One thing that I really don't understand is the need for Vorelli to wear the fake beard. I mean no one was chasing him so why the need for a disguise? It's not really a criticism, just an odd observation. Lastly, it would have helped Devil Doll had the script given Yvonne Romain a little more to do. Her talents are wasted walking around in a trance for most of the movie.
Devil Doll is another of those films that I've seen both with and without the Mystery Science Theater 3000 commentary. And while I enjoy the movie on its own, it makes for a really good MST3K episode. Some very funny riffs and some solid host segments. I'll rate the movie a 5/10 but give it a 4/5 on my MST3k rating scale.
5/10
Devil Doll is another of those films that I've seen both with and without the Mystery Science Theater 3000 commentary. And while I enjoy the movie on its own, it makes for a really good MST3K episode. Some very funny riffs and some solid host segments. I'll rate the movie a 5/10 but give it a 4/5 on my MST3k rating scale.
5/10
The Gang's All Here (1941)
The gang may be here, but it's nothing to get excited about, 27 October 2008
A series of truck hijackings threatens to put the Overland Transport Company out of business. In fact, the company is so desperate, they agree to hire the inexperienced team of Frankie O'Malley (Frankie Darro) and Jeff Smith (Mantan Moreland) to be their saving grace. But who's really behind the hijackings? When Frankie and Jeff find themselves on the wrong end of a gun barrel, it soon becomes apparent just who the bad guys really are.
It's a good thing that The Gang's All Here only runs 61 minutes. Anymore and it would have overstayed its welcome. Oh, it's okay I suppose in an inoffensive sort of way, but it's an awfully lifeless way to spend an hour. While some of the movie is mildly entertaining, most scenes are just plain old dull. The only real entertainment comes from Mantan Moreland. He's one of those few people with enough talent and screen presence to make anything worth watching at least once. This is the first movie I've seen where Moreland is paired with Frankie Darro. I've noticed that the two made a few more movies together, but I'm not sure how much of a hurry I'm in to seek them out. Darro did absolutely nothing for me. In fact, I more often than not found his on-screen persona annoying. The rest of the cast is unremarkable and completely unmemorable. The plot – boring is the first word that comes to mind. And the supposed action sequences are anything but. Maybe there are better Darro/Moreland movies out there, but it will be a while until I'm up for discovering them.
4/10
It's a good thing that The Gang's All Here only runs 61 minutes. Anymore and it would have overstayed its welcome. Oh, it's okay I suppose in an inoffensive sort of way, but it's an awfully lifeless way to spend an hour. While some of the movie is mildly entertaining, most scenes are just plain old dull. The only real entertainment comes from Mantan Moreland. He's one of those few people with enough talent and screen presence to make anything worth watching at least once. This is the first movie I've seen where Moreland is paired with Frankie Darro. I've noticed that the two made a few more movies together, but I'm not sure how much of a hurry I'm in to seek them out. Darro did absolutely nothing for me. In fact, I more often than not found his on-screen persona annoying. The rest of the cast is unremarkable and completely unmemorable. The plot – boring is the first word that comes to mind. And the supposed action sequences are anything but. Maybe there are better Darro/Moreland movies out there, but it will be a while until I'm up for discovering them.
4/10
Tuesday, December 7, 2010
The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor (2008)
"You guys are like mummy magnets!", 3 August 2008
I caught The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor with the family this past Friday night and couldn't be more underwhelmed by the experience. I'm not much of a fan of the first two Brendan Fraser mummy movies, but with Jet Li in the cast I was actually looking forward to this one. I honestly didn't expect much more than a mindless action movie. But what I wasn't expecting was something quite this vapid. Bigger and louder with more explosions isn't always a good thing. The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor went beyond being mindless to the point it began to insult my intelligence. The tissue paper thin plot (which I'm not going to bother to even go into) seems as if it were made up on the spot and merely serves to string together a series of action set pieces. And there is little to no attempt made at character development. If you aren't familiar with the other movies in the series, I bet you'd be hard pressed to know anything about Brendan Fraser's character. And whose bright idea was it to have Luke Ford play Fraser's son? Was he born when Fraser's character was about 12 or something? Just one of the many examples I could cite of things that really bothered me about The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor.
Despite what I've written so far, the movie isn't a total waste. Some of the action set pieces really do work despite the idiocy surrounding them. For example, my single favorite scene in the film is when Jet Li faces off with Michelle Yeoh. It's magical! Unfortunately, that scene only lasts for a minute or so and we're back to the action by-the-numbers nonsense.
Finally, I feel the need to mention the opening 10 or so minutes that provide a back-story for the Dragon Emperor and many of the events to come. That looks like it might have been an interesting and intelligent movie. I'd pay to see that story fleshed out. What I won't pay for, however, is anymore of these Gawd awful mummy movies.
3/10
Despite what I've written so far, the movie isn't a total waste. Some of the action set pieces really do work despite the idiocy surrounding them. For example, my single favorite scene in the film is when Jet Li faces off with Michelle Yeoh. It's magical! Unfortunately, that scene only lasts for a minute or so and we're back to the action by-the-numbers nonsense.
Finally, I feel the need to mention the opening 10 or so minutes that provide a back-story for the Dragon Emperor and many of the events to come. That looks like it might have been an interesting and intelligent movie. I'd pay to see that story fleshed out. What I won't pay for, however, is anymore of these Gawd awful mummy movies.
3/10
Barbarian Queen II: The Empress Strikes Back (1992)
"What an awesomely disgusting sight!", 2 August 2008
Move along people! Nothing to see here!
And I mean that…quite literally. Unless you're some sort of dyed in the wool Lana Clarkson fan, I sincerely doubt you'll find a whole lot about Barbarian Queen II to enjoy. Other than a couple scenes where Lana gets topless (one, where she mud wrestles for the leadership of the rebel force and, two, where she's tied to the rack) you can safely fast forward through the magical hokum, the poorly done fight scenes, and the failed attempts at acting on the part of the entire cast without missing anything. Add to that a plot that's not worth mentioning (so I won't), awkwardly choreographed action sequences, and a complete lack of anything remotely entertaining. In fact, I can't think of a single redeeming feature of Barbarian Queen II.
Overall, 30 or so seconds of a topless Lana Clarkson vs. wasting 80 minutes of your life – not a very good ratio if you ask me.
1/10
And I mean that…quite literally. Unless you're some sort of dyed in the wool Lana Clarkson fan, I sincerely doubt you'll find a whole lot about Barbarian Queen II to enjoy. Other than a couple scenes where Lana gets topless (one, where she mud wrestles for the leadership of the rebel force and, two, where she's tied to the rack) you can safely fast forward through the magical hokum, the poorly done fight scenes, and the failed attempts at acting on the part of the entire cast without missing anything. Add to that a plot that's not worth mentioning (so I won't), awkwardly choreographed action sequences, and a complete lack of anything remotely entertaining. In fact, I can't think of a single redeeming feature of Barbarian Queen II.
Overall, 30 or so seconds of a topless Lana Clarkson vs. wasting 80 minutes of your life – not a very good ratio if you ask me.
1/10
Monday, December 6, 2010
Battle Beneath the Earth (1967)
These guys are supposed to be Chinese?, 2 August 2008
It'll never be on my "favorites" list, but Battle Beneath the Earth is not a half bad way to waste away an hour and a half or so. The movie is beyond silly, but that's what makes it fun and entertaining. The plot involves a Chinese General named Chan Lu (Martin Benson) who has a plan to destroy the United States from below. Using his boring machine, he and his renegade army have dug several large tunnels below the North American continent that they plan to use to launch a nuclear attack. Armed with his own borer, Cmdr. Jonathan Shaw (Kerwin Mathews) leads an American expeditionary force to investigate and stop General Lu in his tracks.
Everything about this movie is utterly ridiculous. The plot, acting, and special effects are all ridiculous. The movie seems to have been made on a budget less than what a grande Starbucks might cost. I swear I saw our heroes go past the same stack of crates about a half a dozen times in their escape from the tunnels. And whose idea was it to use so many non-Asians in all the primary Chinese roles? These people look about as Asian as I do (which is not at all). Finally, the whole thing is shot in a style reminiscent of the 60s Batman television show with overly bright primary colors, poor and fake looking props, and weak staging in the action sequences. Still, it's all these factors that make the movie a blast. It might not work for everyone, but I enjoyed Battle Beneath the Earth. A 6/10 seems about right.
6/10
Everything about this movie is utterly ridiculous. The plot, acting, and special effects are all ridiculous. The movie seems to have been made on a budget less than what a grande Starbucks might cost. I swear I saw our heroes go past the same stack of crates about a half a dozen times in their escape from the tunnels. And whose idea was it to use so many non-Asians in all the primary Chinese roles? These people look about as Asian as I do (which is not at all). Finally, the whole thing is shot in a style reminiscent of the 60s Batman television show with overly bright primary colors, poor and fake looking props, and weak staging in the action sequences. Still, it's all these factors that make the movie a blast. It might not work for everyone, but I enjoyed Battle Beneath the Earth. A 6/10 seems about right.
6/10
When Dinosaurs Ruled the Earth (1970)
"Akita!", 1 August 2008
I may be the only person alive who has seen both One Million Years B.C. and When Dinosaurs Ruled the Earth that actually prefers the sequel to the original. Not that either is something I would recommend very highly, but at least there's a sense of goofiness about When Dinosaurs Ruled the Earth that's not present in the overly serious Raquel Welch film. When Dinosaurs Ruled the Earth also features a bevy of scantily clad cave women (could Victori Vetri fill out a bikini or what?), stop-motion dinosaurs that almost outdo the ones from Harryhausen, and a few nice action sequences. Based on my rating there's obviously a flip-side. The negatives for me include too much dialogue (in a made-up language no less that's completely impossible to follow), an overly involved plot (at least overly involved given the lack of language), and too much caveman butt. The language business actually had me laughing a couple of times. Apparently neither the cavemen nor the screenwriters could agree on what certain words meant. "Akita" appears to have meant anything from let's go over there to I really like you to your ham sandwich is ready! Unintentionally, it's hysterical (and distracting).
In the end, I can't in good conscious rate When Dinosaurs Ruled the Earth any better than a 6/10 – not the best movie in the world but worth seeking out if you're a fan of either this kind of dinosaur movie or a Hammer completist.
6/10
In the end, I can't in good conscious rate When Dinosaurs Ruled the Earth any better than a 6/10 – not the best movie in the world but worth seeking out if you're a fan of either this kind of dinosaur movie or a Hammer completist.
6/10
Castle in the Desert (1942)
No phone! No lights! No motor cars!, 1 August 2008
While I admit that the Chan films of Warner Oland are, as a group, superior to those of Sidney Toler, that doesn't mean that some of the Toler films aren't rock solid and as good individually as anything Oland made. Three that immediately come to mind are Charlie Chan at Treasure Island, Charlie Chan at the Wax Museum, and this film, Castle in the Desert. (By the way, why isn't the title Charlie Chan and the Castle in the Desert? It would have made sense to me.) In Castle in the Desert, Charlie is summoned to a strange, isolated castle in the middle of the Mojave Desert. But no one in the house will admit to having sent of Chan. His presence is, however, quickly needed when in no time at all Charlie finds himself up to his elbows in murder, poison, deadly arrows, red herrings, and suspects galore. What could be more fun!
I've seen someone use this phrase before to describe a Charlie Chan film and I think it fits Castle in the Desert – "It's a crackling good mystery". As I've indicated, all of the necessary ingredients for a fun outing with Chan are here. In fact, Castle in the Desert is really more like two mysteries in one. While the solution to the first is fairly obvious, it's still a lot of fun and just an appetizer for the more difficult and dangerous mystery to come. This was Toler's last Chan film for Fox and, by the time this one was made, Toler could have played the role in his sleep. He seems so at ease with the character. The rest of the cast is enjoyable with Henry Daniell and, one of my favorites, Douglass Dumbrille standing out in support. Another bonus for Castle in the Desert is that Victor Sen Yung as #2 son Jimmy Chan isn't anywhere near as annoying as he is in some of the other Chan films.
Overall, Castle in the Desert is a nice finale to the Chan films at Fox. Nothing that would come later at Monogram is anywhere close to matching it. I've got no problem rating this one a strong 7/10 verging on an 8/10.
7/10
I've seen someone use this phrase before to describe a Charlie Chan film and I think it fits Castle in the Desert – "It's a crackling good mystery". As I've indicated, all of the necessary ingredients for a fun outing with Chan are here. In fact, Castle in the Desert is really more like two mysteries in one. While the solution to the first is fairly obvious, it's still a lot of fun and just an appetizer for the more difficult and dangerous mystery to come. This was Toler's last Chan film for Fox and, by the time this one was made, Toler could have played the role in his sleep. He seems so at ease with the character. The rest of the cast is enjoyable with Henry Daniell and, one of my favorites, Douglass Dumbrille standing out in support. Another bonus for Castle in the Desert is that Victor Sen Yung as #2 son Jimmy Chan isn't anywhere near as annoying as he is in some of the other Chan films.
Overall, Castle in the Desert is a nice finale to the Chan films at Fox. Nothing that would come later at Monogram is anywhere close to matching it. I've got no problem rating this one a strong 7/10 verging on an 8/10.
7/10
At the Earth's Core (1976)
"You cannot mesmerize me! I'm British!", 27 July 2008
How many of these lost-world/center-of-the-earth style movies did they make in the late 60s and early 70s? I swear I think I've seen a dozen or more. In At the Earth's Core, Dr. Abner Perry (the great Peter Cushing) and David Innes (Doug McClure) set off for an experimental ride in their earth digging machine, the Iron Mole. Something goes horribly wrong (and doesn't it always!) and the pair find themselves miles beneath the Earth's surface in a strange and unusual world. This underground world is ruled by some ridiculous looking pterodactyl-like creatures that make slaves of the local human inhabitants. It's the usual story from here on out – defeat the creatures, get the girl, escape, and generally save the day.
As much as I hate rating a movie a wishy-washy 5/10, that pretty much sums up my feelings of At the Earth's Core. I mean parts of the movie are bad and parts of the movie are good. On the bad side you've got the really awful special effects and a whole "been there, done that" feeling to much of the movie. As bad as the rubber-suited pterodactyl men look, they pale in comparison to what I'll call the saber-toothed hippo and the giant fire-breathing frog. You've also got Doug McClure trying in vain to play the hero. It doesn't work. On the positive side you've got Peter Cushing hamming it up like I've never seen before and a sense of fun about the whole thing. It never takes itself too seriously. Just let yourself go with the silliness. Another positive I feel compelled to mention are the outfits worn by Caroline Munro. Too bad she disappears for about 2/3 of the movie. So in the end, the good and bad sort of cancel each other out and I'm left with a completely average movie. And that, at least in my way of rating movies, is just what a 5/10 is – an average movie.
5/10
As much as I hate rating a movie a wishy-washy 5/10, that pretty much sums up my feelings of At the Earth's Core. I mean parts of the movie are bad and parts of the movie are good. On the bad side you've got the really awful special effects and a whole "been there, done that" feeling to much of the movie. As bad as the rubber-suited pterodactyl men look, they pale in comparison to what I'll call the saber-toothed hippo and the giant fire-breathing frog. You've also got Doug McClure trying in vain to play the hero. It doesn't work. On the positive side you've got Peter Cushing hamming it up like I've never seen before and a sense of fun about the whole thing. It never takes itself too seriously. Just let yourself go with the silliness. Another positive I feel compelled to mention are the outfits worn by Caroline Munro. Too bad she disappears for about 2/3 of the movie. So in the end, the good and bad sort of cancel each other out and I'm left with a completely average movie. And that, at least in my way of rating movies, is just what a 5/10 is – an average movie.
5/10
Sunday, December 5, 2010
When Women Had Tails (1970)
- Quando le donne avevano la coda
Positives: Senta Berger - Negatives: Everything Else, 26 July 2008
I readily admit that I watch a lot of really bad movies. But there are very few that I can think of that are quite as bad as When Women Had Tails. It's a stinker of epic proportions. What should have been a sexy comedy about a group of cavemen discovering a woman for the first time is instead a dull, lifeless affair without a single laugh to be had. The comedy is extremely weak. I suppose if you think bashing someone in the head is funny, you might find a laugh or two. The guys in this movie make the Three Stooges look like high art. And there's just not enough of a plot to hold the thing together. It seems to drag on and on and on.
Well, you may be asking yourself, "If it's as bad as you say, why haven't you rated it lower than a 3/10?" Good question! And I've got two answers. First, the movie is not without its curiosity value. I do find a bit of interest in an Italian spoof of movies like One Million Years B.C. with Raquel Welch. I'll give When Women Had Tails a point for its historic "value". The other two points are for the mere presence of Senta Berger. I know it's not much of an explanation or reasoning for a rating, but what are you going to do? It's the best I can come up with.
3/10
Positives: Senta Berger - Negatives: Everything Else, 26 July 2008
Well, you may be asking yourself, "If it's as bad as you say, why haven't you rated it lower than a 3/10?" Good question! And I've got two answers. First, the movie is not without its curiosity value. I do find a bit of interest in an Italian spoof of movies like One Million Years B.C. with Raquel Welch. I'll give When Women Had Tails a point for its historic "value". The other two points are for the mere presence of Senta Berger. I know it's not much of an explanation or reasoning for a rating, but what are you going to do? It's the best I can come up with.
3/10
House of Flying Daggers (2004)
- Shi mian mai fu
"Just call me Wind.", 13 July 2008
Sometimes after watching a movie, I'm at a complete loss for words. Sometimes there's just so much I want to write that I'm afraid to even attempt it for fear of leaving things out or not expressing my thoughts as clearly as I would like. That's the case with House of Flying Daggers. The movie is so . . . well, the movie is so perfect that I doubt I could ever do it justice. To say I was overwhelmed by the movie's plot, acting, and direction would be a gross understatement. The plot drew me in from the word "go". All of the many twists and turns worked flawlessly on me. I couldn't wait to see what would happen next. As for the acting, all three of the main actors were perfect in their roles. It's hard to pick a favorite between Takeshi Kaneshiro, Andy Lau, and Ziyi Zhang – though I suppose Ziyi Zhang as the blind warrior was the most impressive. This is the first movie by director Yimou Zhang that I've seen, but it won't be the last. Not only does he keep things flowing at a wonderful pace, but he's made a movie that has to be one of the most beautiful works of art I've ever seen. I would love to freeze and print almost every frame of House of Flying Daggers to hang on my walls. Stunning is the word that comes to mind.
I'll end here realizing that I'm leaving a lot out like a plot description (I wouldn't want to ruin a second for someone else). To sum it all up, House of Flying Daggers is easily one of the very best movies I've ever seen. A 10/10 isn't good enough for it.
10/10
"Just call me Wind.", 13 July 2008
I'll end here realizing that I'm leaving a lot out like a plot description (I wouldn't want to ruin a second for someone else). To sum it all up, House of Flying Daggers is easily one of the very best movies I've ever seen. A 10/10 isn't good enough for it.
10/10
Kiss of the Dragon (2001)
"I don't sell shrimp chips.", 13 July 2008
Liu Jian (Jet Li) is a Chinese policeman sent to France to help with the apprehension of big-time Chinese drug lord. But Jian is quickly double-crossed and finds himself on the run having been accused of murder. The one person who may be able to help him is a drug-addicted prostitute whose child is being held hostage by the same man who set-up Jian - and he's a high-ranking French policeman. Jian and the prostitute make for an unlikely pair, but they'll have to work together to make things right.
As an action movie, Kiss of the Dragon gets several things right. Both Jet Li and Bridget Fonda are more than capable of pulling off this kind of movie. Li, in particular, is exceptionally good showing the moves that have made him an internationally acclaimed martial arts star. He does a lot of different moves in the movie but my particular favorite is a quick one involving a pool ball that he sends flying with a well placed foot. Unfortunately, beyond the two stars and a wickedly evil performance by Tchéky Karyo, the rest of the movie is pretty average. It's one action/martial arts cliché after then next with the child being held hostage the icing on the cake. The only action standard the movie fails to include is letting the male and female leads fall in love with each other. And I'm glad because that would have really ruined the movie. As it is, Kiss of the Dragon is a harmless enough time waster that may lack creativity, but benefits from the presence of Jet Li.
6/10
As an action movie, Kiss of the Dragon gets several things right. Both Jet Li and Bridget Fonda are more than capable of pulling off this kind of movie. Li, in particular, is exceptionally good showing the moves that have made him an internationally acclaimed martial arts star. He does a lot of different moves in the movie but my particular favorite is a quick one involving a pool ball that he sends flying with a well placed foot. Unfortunately, beyond the two stars and a wickedly evil performance by Tchéky Karyo, the rest of the movie is pretty average. It's one action/martial arts cliché after then next with the child being held hostage the icing on the cake. The only action standard the movie fails to include is letting the male and female leads fall in love with each other. And I'm glad because that would have really ruined the movie. As it is, Kiss of the Dragon is a harmless enough time waster that may lack creativity, but benefits from the presence of Jet Li.
6/10
Return to the Planet of the Apes "Attack from the Clouds" #1.8 (1975) (TV)
One of the weakest I've seen so far, 2 July 2008
As Urko plans his latest campaign to wipe-out the humanoids, Ape City is terrorized by a flying, prehistoric beast. The apes are not alone as the creature sees fit to frighten the humanoids and actually steals one of their cow-like creatures. Once again, Jeff, Bill, and Judy must save the human race.
"Attack from the Clouds" has to be one of the very weakest installments I've seen so far in the Return to the Planet of the Apes series. The poor animation really hurts this one. The high flying scenes of creature and plane should be exciting. But not the way they're handled here. It's dull all the way through. And it doesn't help that much of the existing story line is pushed to the background. Oh well, there's always the next episode.
4/10
"Attack from the Clouds" has to be one of the very weakest installments I've seen so far in the Return to the Planet of the Apes series. The poor animation really hurts this one. The high flying scenes of creature and plane should be exciting. But not the way they're handled here. It's dull all the way through. And it doesn't help that much of the existing story line is pushed to the background. Oh well, there's always the next episode.
4/10
Gator (1976)
What happened to Gator McKlusky?, 19 June 2008
A two-time loser like Gator McKlusky (Burt Reynolds) will do anything to avoid a third strike and a long prison stint. So when a big city revenuer asks for Gator's help, what choice does he have? Gator's mission is to get the goods on Bama McCall (Jerry Reed), the nasty crime boss of a neighboring county. Gator gets something else he hadn't counted on, however, when he falls for television reporter Aggie Maybank (Lauren Hutton). Can he get the girl and the goon?
As is the case with most sequels, Gator is a vastly inferior movie to its predecessor, White Lightning. Everything that made that movie so good and so memorable is missing from Gator. While there are a few good moments like the opening boat chase, the movie doesn't have the same gritty feel to it that characterized White Lightning. Gator trades much of the action of White Lightning for a tired, dull romance between Reynolds and Hutton. Not only isn't it believable (especially if you know the Gator character from the first movie), but the outcome of the relationship is terribly predictable. "Sappy" and Gator McKlusky just shouldn't be used together.
But the most offensive part of Gator is Burt Reynolds. In White Lightning, he played it straight. From my review of White Lightning, "One of the coolest things about White Lightning is that it presents Burt Reynolds as an actor at the top of his game. This was a Burt Reynolds who seemed to actually care about the final product and not just yucking it up with his buddies on screen." In Gator, far too often Reynolds reverts to the clown he would become in movies like Smokey and the Bandit and Cannonball Run. That laugh of his just grates on my nerves. There are times in Gator when Reynolds and Reed are on screen together that I swear it's like a test run for Smokey and the Bandit. And it's not surprising to see Hal Needham's name in the credits as Second Unit Director.
Overall, Gator is a huge disappointment. I'm being generous with my 3/10 rating.
3/10
As is the case with most sequels, Gator is a vastly inferior movie to its predecessor, White Lightning. Everything that made that movie so good and so memorable is missing from Gator. While there are a few good moments like the opening boat chase, the movie doesn't have the same gritty feel to it that characterized White Lightning. Gator trades much of the action of White Lightning for a tired, dull romance between Reynolds and Hutton. Not only isn't it believable (especially if you know the Gator character from the first movie), but the outcome of the relationship is terribly predictable. "Sappy" and Gator McKlusky just shouldn't be used together.
But the most offensive part of Gator is Burt Reynolds. In White Lightning, he played it straight. From my review of White Lightning, "One of the coolest things about White Lightning is that it presents Burt Reynolds as an actor at the top of his game. This was a Burt Reynolds who seemed to actually care about the final product and not just yucking it up with his buddies on screen." In Gator, far too often Reynolds reverts to the clown he would become in movies like Smokey and the Bandit and Cannonball Run. That laugh of his just grates on my nerves. There are times in Gator when Reynolds and Reed are on screen together that I swear it's like a test run for Smokey and the Bandit. And it's not surprising to see Hal Needham's name in the credits as Second Unit Director.
Overall, Gator is a huge disappointment. I'm being generous with my 3/10 rating.
3/10
Return to the Planet of the Apes "Trail to the Unknown" #1.7 (1975) (TV)
A new friend, 18 June 2008
In "Trail to the Unknown", it's finally time for Bill, Jeff, and Judy to move the humanoids to a more secure location. First by raft and then across the burning desert, the plan is to get as far away from Urko as possible. But along the way, our heroes run into an unexpected surprise - they meet another astronaut named Brent. With Brent's help, they manage to get the humanoids to safety and defeat Urko's latest attack.
While "Trail to the Unknown" has some nice moments, overall it's too inconsistent to rate much higher than a 6/10. Brent's introduction is the highlight. My reaction was similar in astonishment to that of Jeff and Bill. Another astronaut! - How cool is that? But the rest of the episode is pretty much by the numbers. Urko's attack feels uninspired and is there just to kill some time. It's not the full scale invasion he's been promising. The attack is probably there because the writers didn't know what else to do. Still, I'm looking forward to the rest of Return to the Planet of the Apes.
6/10
While "Trail to the Unknown" has some nice moments, overall it's too inconsistent to rate much higher than a 6/10. Brent's introduction is the highlight. My reaction was similar in astonishment to that of Jeff and Bill. Another astronaut! - How cool is that? But the rest of the episode is pretty much by the numbers. Urko's attack feels uninspired and is there just to kill some time. It's not the full scale invasion he's been promising. The attack is probably there because the writers didn't know what else to do. Still, I'm looking forward to the rest of Return to the Planet of the Apes.
6/10
Poirot "Five Little Pigs" #9.1 (2003) (TV)
"Human nature has an infinite capacity to surprise.", 18 June 2008
Finally! I've now seen all of the feature length installments of the Poirot movies featuring David Suchet. And wouldn't you know it – the last one I watch just happens to be one of the best of the entire series.
Five Little Pigs, which happens to benefit from staying fairly true to Agatha Christie's original work (at least as best as I can remember), is a poignant, gut-wrenching, and beautifully filmed movie. As Christie did in her novel, the mystery is told though a series of five interviews that flashback to that fateful day when a murder was committed. Director Paul Unwin handles this portion quite nicely. I was worried about all the hand-held shaky-cam, but it works well for the iffy memories of events of fourteen years previous. Even though I knew the outcome, I thought the mystery elements were well done. I think someone without knowledge of the plot would really enjoy this part of Five Little Pigs. The acting, other than the abysmal performance of Aimee Mullins as the adult Lucy, is more than acceptable. By now (or by 2003 at least), Suchet has grown in the role of Poirot to the point that I cannot imagine anyone else even attempting to do the character. Two other real highlights for me were the music (it's quite beautiful) and the photography (there are some gorgeous landscape shots throughout the movie). All together, an 8/10 seems about right by me. Had the adult Lucy not been so distractingly poorly played, I could have easily rated Five Little Pigs higher.
8/10
Five Little Pigs, which happens to benefit from staying fairly true to Agatha Christie's original work (at least as best as I can remember), is a poignant, gut-wrenching, and beautifully filmed movie. As Christie did in her novel, the mystery is told though a series of five interviews that flashback to that fateful day when a murder was committed. Director Paul Unwin handles this portion quite nicely. I was worried about all the hand-held shaky-cam, but it works well for the iffy memories of events of fourteen years previous. Even though I knew the outcome, I thought the mystery elements were well done. I think someone without knowledge of the plot would really enjoy this part of Five Little Pigs. The acting, other than the abysmal performance of Aimee Mullins as the adult Lucy, is more than acceptable. By now (or by 2003 at least), Suchet has grown in the role of Poirot to the point that I cannot imagine anyone else even attempting to do the character. Two other real highlights for me were the music (it's quite beautiful) and the photography (there are some gorgeous landscape shots throughout the movie). All together, an 8/10 seems about right by me. Had the adult Lucy not been so distractingly poorly played, I could have easily rated Five Little Pigs higher.
8/10
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)