Honor and Glory (1993)

“I have arrived at the top of the world.” 9 April 2020

A female FBI agent, Tracy Pride (Cynthia Rothrock), and her overachieving reporter sister, Joyce Pride (Donna Jason), have their sights set on taking down a corrupt banker who just happens to have a nuclear triggering device he’s going to sell to the highest bidder.  

If Honor and Glory wasn’t so ridiculously funny, it might be one of the worst movies I’d ever seen.  Fortunately, it’s a deliciously hysterical mess of a movie. Godfrey Ho has managed to craft the most amazingly spastic movie imaginable.  The writing, directing, and editing all seem like they were handled by a chipmunk on speed. How else do you explain a slap-fight for keys and a chopstick battle over green beans?   Characters do and say the most ludicrous things. The abrupt nature of the laugh-out-loud fight scene with Joyce and a senator’s daughter being a prime example. As for the plot - well forget about it.  Ho certainly did. But the best (or is that worst?) thing Honor and Glory has going for it is chief baddie, Jason Slade (John Miller). Over-the-top doesn’t begin to describe this butt-kicking banker. I suggest you sit back and enjoy - especially his jaw-dropping monologue, “I have arrived at the top of the world. No man has control of more money. No man can fight me and live. No woman can share my bed and not be mine for life. I am like a god! I piss on you, from a great height.”  Just amazing!

Given this is a Cynthia Rothrock movie, you’re probably expecting a heavy dose of fight sequences. If so, you’re in luck.  Not all are great, but the scenes featuring Chuck Jeffreys are a highlight. As for Rothrock, I’ve never been much of a fan of her on-screen fighting.  There’s no doubting she has the technical skills, but for whatever reason, it doesn’t always translate well to film.  

As I said, this isn’t at all a “good” movie.  Regardless, I find it entertaining enough to give a 6/10.

6/10

The Great Texas Dynamite Chase (1976)

Now that was fun!, 8 April 2020

The Great Texas Dynamite Chase features a pretty simple plot:  two young women set-off across Texas with a plan to rob banks using sticks of dynamite.  While it may be a simple plot, this is one of the better 70s-era exploitation films I’ve run across.  So what makes this one so special? I’ll be honest, I’m often turned off by these movies because they can be so mean-spirited, poorly acted, poorly paced, and often quite dull.  The Great Texas Dynamite Chase is none of those things. It’s really an enjoyable movie.  

The biggest plus the movie has going for it is Claudia Jennings as Candy Monroe (in some of the most eye-catching hot-pants i’ve ever seen) and Jocelyn Jones as Elle-Jo.  The pair have incredible chemistry - some of the best non-romantic chemistry I can remember ever seeing. They seem so comfortable together. Everything between the two is natural and easy-going.  And while I’m familiar with Jennings (and what fan of 70s exploitation isn’t), I admit that Jones is new to me. What a revelation! She has a screen presence you don’t often see in someone with so little experience.   

Beyond Jennings and Jones, I’ve got to give a lot of credit to director MIchael Pressman.  He filled The Great Texas Dynamite Chase with plenty of action, comedy that works, some well placed explosions, sex scenes that are actually sexy, and a couple of enjoyable chase sequences.  He also doesn’t have to stoop to some of the typical exploitation fodder like rape and gratuetous violence. Good stuff all around.  

8/10

Peeper (1975)

Peeper?  I’ve never heard a PI called a “Peeper”, 7 April 2020

Bumbling PI Leslie C Tucker (Michael Caine) is hired to track down a little girl who was adopted many years ago.  Her real father has an inheritance he wants to pass on to her. He tracks the girl to a wealthy family, but there are two daughters.  Which of the sisters was adopted? And of course, there are others who would do just about anything to get their hands on the loot.  

Peeper is supposedly a film noir spoof.  I say “supposedly” because you would expect a spoof to be funny.  Watching Peeper, not only did I not laugh, I don’t think I even smiled.  The script isn’t anywhere near as clever and witty as it thinks it is. The jokes fall flat.  In fact, flat is a pretty good adjective to use to describe the whole thing. The comedy is flat.  The action is flat. The mystery is flat. The acting is flat. Caine is fine, but he’s given an abysmal script to work with.  It doesn’t help much that he has about zero on-screen chemistry with co-star Natalie Wood. Even their scenes together are, well, they’re also flat.

Another big problem I had with Peeper is how cheap it all seems.  The film is set in the 1940s. Instead, Peeper looks like a poorly dressed film that can’t hide its 1970s origins.  Rarely did anything have an authentic 1940s feel. The supporting cash doesn’t help any either. It’s not necessarily their fault, but Michael Constantine, Thayer David, and Don Calfa have a 1970s TV vibe about them.  

I honestly think Peeper might have been better had they just made a straightforward 1940s-style PI flick - without the attempts at comedy.  I really think I would have enjoyed that much more. As for film noir spoofs, nothing beats Dead Men Don’t Wear Plaid. Now that’s a funny movie.

4/10

Santa’s Summer House (2012)

Who thought this was a good idea?, 15 November 2019

What a load of garbage!  I don’t understand how films like this get made.  Who thought a movie like Santa’s Summer House was a good idea?  Did anyone involved in the making of Santa’s Summer House think it was going to be a quality movie?  Is the straight-to-video market so lucrative that trash like this actually makes money? So many questions that I couldn’t care less to learn the answers to.  

There’s really no point in listing all the bad aspects of Santa’s Summer House.  Everything about it is bottom-of-the barrel. The plot is beyond ridiculous, most of the acting is horrendous (Christopher Mitchum proves yet again that acting ability isn’t inherited), the lighting is gawdy, and the sound is so poor you can hear echoes anytime a character walks across the tile floor.  The plot has a message that’s pretty decent, but it’s handled so annoyingly hamfisted that it loses much of its effectiveness. The entire time I was watching, I was just hoping and praying that 90s martial art icon (am I overstating it?) Cynthia Rothrock would do some sort of spinning-scorpion-five-finger-Shaolin-death-kick on the rest of the cast.  

If it’s so bad, then why haven’t I rated it lower?  Well, as bad as it is, it’s not unwatchable. There are a boatload of movies out there much worse than this.  And, like I said, it does have a decent message. Finally, I’ll give it a point for hilariously casting Rothrock in the role of Nanna, Santa’s wife.  

3/10

Halloween 4: The Return of Michael Myers (1988)

“Ten years ago, he tried to kill Laurie Strode. Now he wants her daughter.”  15 November 2019

The quote I used as a title for this pretty well summarizes the plot.  Michael Myers escapes, heads back to Haddonfield, and goes on a killing spree while searching for his niece.

Until the other night, I hadn’t seen Halloween 4: The Return of Michael Myers in years, but it’s much better than I remember.  Of all of the sequels in the original Halloween line, this one might just be the best. I know a lot of people prefer Halloween II or H2O, but for me, this one comes closest to capturing the spirit of the original.  Halloween 4 has a similar feel to it with plenty of atmosphere and chills. The scenes of Michael stalking Jamie and Rachel are especially creepy. As with the first film, for whatever reason, I find the daytime stalking scenes incredibly effective.  And the rooftop escape sequence near the end is just plain old thrilling. Halloween 4 features a nice cast - better than you’ll find in the average Halloween sequel. Donald Pleasence gives his usual over-the-top, but totally enjoyable performance. Young Danielle Harris, in her first real role, is a stand-out.  She may be the best thing Halloween 4 has going for it. She’s that good. The rest of the cast, including Ellie Cornell and Beau Starr, is very strong. While I do have some issues with the plot - the notion of transporting Michael at night in a driving thunderstorm, a niece Michael knows nothing about until he accidentally over-hears someone talking about her, Michael’ ability to walk / drive around town without drawing attention to himself, etc - it’s nowhere near as whacky and off-the-rails as the sequels to follow.  Plus, there’s none of the Thorn nonsense that’s introduced in Part 5. It may seem petty, I guess one of my biggest complaints with Halloween 4 is that awful looking mask. The white is so bright, it pretty much glows. And what’s with the hair? Looks like someone used a tub of pomade to smooth it down.  

Overall, Halloween 4: The Return of Michael Myers is worthy successor to the original.  While it never reaches that level of brilliance, it’s far superior to a lot of the dreck that followed.

7/10

Bees Make Honey (2017)

Not what I was looking for, 7 November 2019

The basic plot in Bees Make Honey is fairly routine - Honey (Alice Eve) is convinced that her husband was murdered at last year’s Halloween party.  To find the killer, she invites the exact same guests to this year’s party. But she also invites a police detective to help her unmask a murderer.  

It’s not that I disliked Bees Make Honey, but it could have been so much better.  My biggest issue was the lack of focus. I’m a sucker for a good mystery. But too often, director Jack Eve seemed to turn his attention to anything but the mystery.  Give me clues, suspects, motives, etc. - that’s what I want. I suppose that what it boils down to is that I wanted a different movie, one with a good old fashioned, drawing room style mystery.  Instead, what a I got was a mystery buried under kitchy characters, crazy musical interludes, and bizarre scenes that seem to exist only to be bizarre (a Nazi doing line after line of coke, for example).  

I will give Eve credit for ambition.  Just a few minutes in and it’s easy to see Eve and Bees Make Honey have style to burn.  And the movie looks fantastic. Costuming, sets, and lighting are all amazing. Being set during a Halloween party helps create the fantastic imagery.  And I was impressed with Eve’s sister, Alice Eve, in the lead. She brought real life and energy to Honey. It’s too bad her main co-star, Wilf Scolding, couldn’t keep up.

5/10

Lovejoy “The March of Time” #1.8 (1986) (TV)

“We should be back home trying to make a dishonest living.”, 5 Novembe 2019

While working to repair a relatively worthless clock, Lovejoy discovers a set of love letters from the time of the Napoleonic Wars.  Lovejoy realizes he may have something of value. When someone steals the clock, Lovejoy’s convinced he’s onto something and decides to investigate.  

The March of Time may not be the best episode, but it’s still an enjoyable, worthwhile experience.  The plot is nothing to write home about - there’s not much danger, there’s no murder to solve, and the story of the letters isn’t as exciting as something like treasure buried under an abbey.  But watching Lovejoy and the sheer pleasure we see on his face as he reads the letters gives as much insight to Lovejoy, the character, as anything we’ve seen so far. When Lovejoy initially finds the letters, you can see the dollar signs in his eyes.  When he meets their rightful owner, the devastatingly (as Lovejoy describes her) beautiful Sophy, we can see something else in his eyes. But in the end, Lovejoy’s love for antiques and doing what’s right wins out and Lovejoy sacrifices money and his shot with Sophy to see the letters made whole.    

6/10