Unnecessary Remake - Red Dawn

The original Red Dawn is a fun movie. It is a product of it's time with a sinister coalition of Russians, Mexicans, Nicaraguans, Cubans, etc conquering a third of the US while Europe sits by and watches (except for England; hat-tip to our English brothers and sisters). Set in Calumet, Colorado, the original film followed the exploits of a group of resistance fighters, mostly teenagers. It ends with most of the protagonists dead and an epilogue set an unspecified number of years later that makes it clear that America eventually won World War Three. It has decent acting, some great action sequences, a lot of more-or-less accurate Soviet gear and a bitter-sweet ending.

The remake involves North Korea invading America using some poorly explained EMP device to cripple the US military. Oh, and Russia just "occupies" the East Coast. How? Obviously, all Russian mail-order brides are really spetsnaz operators. Anyway, a motley group of 30-year-olds playing teenagers run to the mountains around Spokane and start making life difficult for the invaders.

The remake is not just bad; it is unnecessary. A good remake should bring something new and interesting to the original story. Remakes, reimanginings and reboots are not inherently bad; but they have to have their own voice, something unique about the way they tell the story. It helps if that voice is as good or better than the original film's. The Red Dawn remake fails in both counts. The story it tells is inferior to the original's and the the way it tells is it is generic. Characters are one-dimensional and the actors bland. The villains are aren't even; they have no character at all. It's interesting that at the height of the Cold War, the original manages to spend some time giving a few of the invaders personality; the remake says "Why bother? Here's an explosion." Even the action is dull, relying on excessive "shakey-cam" and bad CGI. The finale, which in the original captures the tragedy of war and the bittersweet nature of victory, is terrible, a last bit of action and no conclusion. Maybe they were hoping for Red Dawn 2: Electric Boogaloo.

I saw it on Netflix and, with the amount of time I spend streaming, any particular movie winds up costing me about 15 cents. I still feel ripped off. Avoid at all costs.

Exploitation December - Ilsa, Harem Keeper of the Oil Sheiks (1976)

Fans of exploitation movies are familiar with Ilsa, She Wolf of the SS. The movie that introduced the world - or, at least those parts of the world that don't mind saying "one ticket for Ilsa, She Wolf of the SS please" - to the amazing Dyanne Thorne (see image below as to what was amazing about her), Ilsa spawned imitators (a whole series of Nazisploitation films) and a few "sequels." None are exactly sequels; Ilsa comes to a nasty (and generally fatal) end in each movie. But great boobs and cartoonishly executed sadism never really dies, does it?

Dyanne Thorne had enormous talents. Yay, I've mastered the single entendre.

Harem Keeper is the first Ilsa sequel and the best movie of the series. It has a coherent, if bare-bones, story, a better overall visual style and doesn't have the disturbing Nazi stuff. Instead, we get disturbing ethno-cultural stereotypes. Right, because that's much better...

The delectable Sharon Kelly realizes exactly what kind of movie she's in...and reacts accordingly.

Ilsa runs Sheik Sharif's (Jerry Delony) harem. A new shipment of women has arrived, all kidnapped from the West. They include Nora (the gorgeous redhead Sharon Kelly; for more of Ms. Kelly's work, check out Alice Goodbody; in the Eighties she "graduated" from exploitation movies to hardcore porn.) as the sole heir of the "chain store king of the United States" and Inga, a "Scandinavian love goddess" played by Uschi Digard. Uschi showed up in some of Russ Meyer's films, as well as a other exploitation films in the Seventies and was a popular softcore model at the time. Both were in She Wolf in minor roles. At the same time, American diplomat Dr. Kaiser (Richard Kennedy channeling Henry Kissinger) arrives from the US with Adam Scott, a CIA officer masquerading as Kaiser's assistant (Max Thayer), to negotiate with Sharif for more oil. There's some political back and forth, a sub-plot about the CIA spying on Sharif, etc. None of this plot gets in the way of nudity and depravity; just didn't want you to think this was going to turn into an episode of Firing Line.

As the film progresses, we are introduced to Haji (a Russ Meyer regular) who plays a belly dancer/American spy who is found out and tortured. This leads to some yuckiness (her awesome boobs are squished - a true crime against humanity - and her foot is eaten by ants), but also leads to the introduction of the most insanely disturbing idea in the film; an explosive diaphragm to be used for political assassinations. After Haji breaks under torture, Ilsa test out the device on her. For some reason, this requires strapping Haji to an auto-intercourse machine. I guess, Ilsa wanted her to...wait for it...go out with a bang. Thank you, thank you, I'll be here all week...please remember to tip your waitress.

Uschi Digard makes that tee-shirt look very happy.

In short order, Scott seduces Ilsa, Sharif orders Ilsa to kill Scott, she fails to obey, Sharif has her raped by a leper to teach her a lesson, Ilsa frees Scott, the two lead a revolt, release Sharif's imprisoned nephew, Salim, who takes over and Ilsa subjects Sharif to death by vaginal bomb (also killing the attractive and frequently topless Su Ling). Scott is horrified that Ilsa would sacrifice an innocent girl for revenge (now he's horrified!?!?) and refuses to intervene when Salim has Ilsa imprisoned in the dank cell he was kept in. The final scene shows him throwing her crumbs of bread, while she wastes away. The End.

But, do we really watch a movie like this for geopolitics, palace intrigue and an insightful look into the sad life of a harem girl? Heck no! We want scantily clad (or unclad) chicks and ultraviolence, both of which are in abundance. The "training" of the new arrivals involves some welcome girl-on-girl action with Dyanne Thorne screaming "Lick, bitch!" in a bad German accent. We get to see force feeding (some guys like more meat on the bones and what better way then using a funnel to mash gruel down a woman's throat?), a slave auction, and some medical mayhem (including a gross as heck silicon ass injection ...I do not like needles). There are some scenes that are just disturbing because of what they don't show. One slave girl has her teeth chiseled out because her new buyer doesn't like the "scrape" of them. We just hear clicking and see bloody teeth falling to the ground. This works better - as far as being disturbing - than the more explicit gore sequences, which are laughably fake. To balance out the violence, there is a lot of nudity and all of the women (with the exception of the fat chicks...unless that's your thing...no judgement here) are pretty hot. One point to make: the amount of sex and violence on display is on par with an episode of Spartacus. 40 years ago, if you wanted to see this kind of imagery, you had to trek to a sleazy theater in a run-down urban wasteland. Now, you can just check out basic cable. Of course, the acting and technician proficiency is inferior to what you'll find in the better sex-and-violence shows out today; but, it is amazing how much the grotesqueries of the past are standard fare today.

A magazine cover from 1959. Note the cultural sensitivity...

Much of the imagery comes straight from pulp and men's magazine covers from the Fifties and Sixties, capturing that sense of lurid and ludicrous adventure. While Scott is a one-dimensional hero (he doesn't have much to do, except turn Ilsa do his side with the power of his American penis..."USA! USA! USA!") he does have the jut-jawed look of a pulp adventurer. The harem setting is common to exploitative stories of the last few hundred years, with the lusty, barbaric "Turk" ravishing the fair-skinned women of Europe. The film also incorporates Western stereotypes of the Middle Eastern petro-states as being run by sadistic monsters, who are using their oil wealth to "rape" the West, an idea that had great resonance during the Oil-Shock Seventies. There is also a very low-brow, grindhouse reflection of Edward Said's Orientalism at work here, with the audience being set up both for titillation and revulsion, playing off of culturally ingrained views of the Arab-Islamic world. A final bit of cultural stereotyping; in the end, the local rebels and slave girls need two white, American/Europeans (Scott and Ilsa) to lead them to freedom; or, really a potentially less oppression autocracy.

So, is Ilsa, Harem Keeper of the Oil Sheiks worth seeing? Yes...but...you really have to enjoy movies that are pure exploitation. This film is nothing more than excuse to alternate between scenes of female flesh and gory special effects. This is not a movie with themes. That it reflects complex cultural ideas only serves to show how deeply ingrained those ideas are.

The 19th Century image of the harem.

Exploitation December - The Wild Angels (1966)

Peter Fonda! Bruce Dern ! Nancy Sinatra! That weird, old baby looking guy from the Star Trek episode Miri!

A film with a story both paper-thin and meandering, The Wild Angels exploited America's fearful fascination with the Hell's Angels in the mid-60s. It also kicked off the biker movie craze that reached a critical peak with Easy Rider and burned out in the early-70s. Prior to The Wild Angels you had Brando dressed like a leather-boy taxi driver in The Wild One, but that was about it. After this movie, the roar of Harleys, the crunch of chains against bone and the Mongol war cries of bikers hungry for young flesh and hot blood could be heard in cinemas (and over drive-in speakers) on a regular basis.

Nancy Sinatra trying her best to emote.

The Wild Angels follows the exploits of Blues (Fonda), Loser (Dern) and Monkey (Sinatra) and their not-so-loveable crew of violent misfits. Over the course of a few days, they beat up some Hispanic mechanics, get drunk and joust with palm fronds, party in the great outdoors, have random sex and generally behave like decadent barbarians. Loser has a run in with the cops that leaves him shot and in a hospital. The rest of the gang decides to break him out (why would anyone think that would end well?) and he dies while taking one last toke of reefer. Bruce Dern is awesome in his "alive" scenes, playing Loser as a hyperactive, man-child. He's also pretty good as a corpse.

The Wild Angels, out for a pleasant Sunday drive.

The gang heads to Loser's hometown in Northern California to bury him. They have a wake that ends with booze and drug fueled violence, rape and "anarchism by way of Animal House" speech-making by Blues. When asked what the gang and, by extension, disaffected youth want by the preacher (Frank Maxwell), Blues responds with

We wanna be free! We wanna be free to do what we wanna do. We wanna be free to ride. We wanna be free to ride our machines without being hassled by The Man! ... And we wanna get loaded. And we wanna have a good time. And that's what we are gonna do. We are gonna have a good time... We are gonna have a party.

which to me sums up the whole Sixties "Youth Culture" philosophy. It started out high minded ("Stick it to the Man!") but wound up with everyone wasted and sleeping in their own vomit...aka the 1970s.

We end with Loser being buried, the cops approaching and everyone but Blues fleeing. He knows that game is over and that the festive nihilism he'd been living is as much of a con as mainstream society.

The movie has great acting from the leads (except Nancy Sinatra; she really does not play biker-chick very well). Fonda and Dern are good actors. Dern's American Kamikaze performance is engaging. Fonda conveys some intelligence behind the stoic thug facade. And, he does have an actual character arc, a good sign that something is going on in the writer's (Charles Griffith who had a long career penning B-movies) head. The director, Roger Corman, provides his usual efficient camera work; nothing too flashy, but always clear and geared towards telling the story. There are a few moments that are a bit rough - in particular, there are a couple of "dance" moments (in which the the gang's women gyrate like they have some sort of horrible nervous disorder) that some across as long and laughable. The story/plot is really a series of set-pieces, not tell a particularly compelling tale. That is probably the weakest part of the film; all of the male characters are dirt-bags, engaging in casual violence and rape, thumbing their nose at authority out of a primal infantilism. The women are enablers, who generally revel in their role as property, personal or community. This does contribute to the over-arching theme; that this "lifestyle" is pointless and self-destructive. The movie, for all of it's excessive, is very conservative; the Angel life-style seems superficially fun, but ultimately is a dead end.

Anyway, check it out. This is a superior B-movie and created an entire sub-genre of films.

Exploitation December - Humanoids from the Deep (1980)

When the Gillman spotted Julie Adams in her succulent white, one-piece bathing suit frolicking in his Black Lagoon home, we know what he was thinking of; fertilizing her eggs. How he would do that was left to the imagination; but we all knew what he wanted. And who could blame him? The chicks in monster movies have historically been stone-cold foxes. If I was some radioactive, mutant Hell-beast, I wouldn't mind getting a little B-movie starlet action.

In the Fifties, audiences were not ready for this to be graphically represented; they weren't ready for married couples to be sleeping the same bed. By the Seventies, sensibilities had changed. It should be no surprise that B-movie maestro Roger Corman took this idea - the monster wanting to get it on with the girl - to it's logical conclusion. In Humanoids from the Deep the fishman have their way with our women!

Julie Adams, the gold standard for monster lust objects.

The plot isn't much impediment to the blood and boobs. Growth homrmones have created mutant fishmen from the salmon population off the coast of Noyo, Washington. Local racist Vic Morrow thinks Indians - in the person of Johnny Eagle (Anthony Pena) - are responsible for the trouble in the area, since he is opposed to a new cannery being built. Seventies B-movie staple Doug McClure plays Jim hill, our hero, who thinks that something more sinister is afoot...or afin.

One of the fishmen, just out looking for love.

The gory - and rapey - monster attacks escalate. Lady scientist Susan Drake (Ann Turkel) shows up to offer some exposition - she helped create the mutant salmon for the cennery company - and be menaced by fishmen. It all ends with a massive attack on a seaside festival...or does it? Not really, since our last scene is of one of the monster's victims giving birth to a little fish monster. Aw, look, he has his father's gills! How cute.

This movie is great. There is a ton of gratuitous nudity (shot by Corman after director Barbara Peeters left the film). Every attack on a woman starts with the monster helpfully tearing off the victim's top. "Thanks for being so thoughtful," I think every time a pair of boobs pops into view. There's gore aplenty, starting with a couple of shredded dogs that will upset every animal lover. Don't worry, though; the fishmen soon move on to clawing humans to bloody ribbons. The movie has an appropriately cold and dreary look about it; the town of Noyo seems like the kind of place that no one would miss if it were overrun by salmon-monsters. There's some heavy handed social commentary with the native American angle (Johnny Eagle doesn't want the cannery built for some reason while Vic Morrow is cartoonishly racist) but that doesn't distract from the exploitation aspects of the film.

Doug, you need to open your eyes...it helps with the aiming and stuff.

The monster costumes are pretty cool, given the budget constraints; these days, they'd be CGI and jump around like monkeys on speed. Here, they lumber about when they aren't menacing bikini tops. The acting is pretty bad; Morrow seems bored and drunk. McClure, normally a reliable B-movie hero, phones it in. Everyone else is either bad, bland or there to show her tits. I don't judge; I only report.

I can't recommend this film highly enough. If you like movies that are entertaining in a sleazy, over-the-top way, you'll love this film. Check it out.

Exploitation December - The Hard Road (1970)

Nothing says "Merry Christmas" like films overflowing with blood and boobs. So, each day for the rest of the month, a film from the Golden Age of Exploitation - the 1970s with spill-over on either side - will be reviewed. This was the heyday of grindhouse cinema, the last gasp of the drive-in, the age when porn went slightly legit, before migrating to VHS and, eventually, the Internet. It was a time when you could see a movie about mud-wresting ninjas (The Life of Ninja), Tube-dwelling cannibals (Raw Meat) and lycanthropic bikers (Werewolves on Wheels). Softcore boobs and hardcore gore, mutant octopus men, planet busting smart bombs, chop-socky imports, showering cheerleaders...everything was being spewed across the screens of America's cinemas.

The first film up is The Hard Road. This is a hard hitting look at the wasted youth culture of the late-60s...naw, it's an excuse for sex, drugs and VD films. Graphic VD films...yikes!

Connie Nelson before she's traveled the Hard Road.

Pam is 17 (yummy Connie Nelson who was also in the awesome Angels Die Hard) and pregnant. She delivers her baby (we get to see some graphic birth footage...yay!) in a home for wayward young women and gives it up for adoption. Her father arranges for her to work as a secretary for Leo (Gary Kent) a sleazy, small-time talent agent. Leo also has a one-way mirror to spy on his secretary. Doesn't everyone? So, Pam meets one of Leo's rock-star clients who introduces her to drugs and sex (well, random sex; she was pregnant after all). She soon hooks up with Jeannie (Catherine Howard) and Jimmy Devlin (John Alderman) her junkie pimp boyfriend, and descends into drug fueled debauchery, tries out prostitution to get Jimmy money for heroin, contracts gonorrhea and finally comes to a bad end while tripping on acid. Don't let this happen to you!

Liz Renay, because this post needed some cheesecake.

This movie is astounding. It isn't good; but it has so much sleazy awesomeness that it should be required viewing. We get dirty junkie hippies going through vomitous withdrawal in jail. We get a graphic - very graphic - VD film along with a showstopping lecture about the dangers of sex. Literally show stopping; the movie suddenly becomes a sexual hygiene lecture. We get drunken, pill-popping mom and dad (Liz Renay and Ray Meritt) wondering where they went wrong with their little girl. There are a couple of extended freakout sessions, in which our heroes run around, scream at nothing, stare at lava lamps, etc. There's nudity, violence, adult language, images of bodies ravaged by syphilis, terrible dialogue, microphone shadows...everything you can ask for in a no-budget exploitation film masquerading as a cautionary tale. This is a must see for everyone.

Noir November - The Brothers Rico (1957)

The Brothers Rico has a strong opening and some winning performances. Unfortunately, the acting is uneven, the cinematography uninspired and the ending, rushed with a happy wrap-up that feels tonally out of step with the rest of the film.

The film opens with Eddie Rico (Richard Conte) and his wife, Alice (Dianne Foster) in separate beds, asleep. The phone rings; it is Phil (Paul Dubov). He is sending someone to Eddie to work in his successful laundry business. Although it is not stated immediately, it is clear that Eddie used to be involved in organized crime (it is later revealed that he was an accountant for the "syndicate").

Eddie's brothers Gino (Paul Picerni) and Johnny (James Darren) have gone missing after carrying out a mob hit. Eddie's old boss - Sid Kubik (Larry Gates) - has Eddie go in search of Johnny, after telling him that the other mob bosses are afraid Johnny might listen to his new wife (Eddie was unaware his brother was married) and talk about his role in the killing to the authorities. Although Kubik claims to be on Johnny's side and just wants him out of the country, after Eddie agrees to go in search of him, it is revealed that Gino is in Kubik's custody and has been tortured.

After some sleuthing, Eddie finds Johnny in southern California. After trying to convince him to go to Mexico, Eddie is met in his hotel room by the local mob boss, Mike Lamotta (Harry Bellaver). Mike tells Eddie that Johnny is going to die and that Kubik never planned to let him go. Eddie is powerless to stop the death of his brother - he also is told that Gino is dead - but escapes form Mike's lackey Charlie Gonzales (Rudy Bond) and goes looking for vengeance. There is a final, fatal, confrontation between Kubik and Eddie, which leaves Kubik dead...and Eddie and Alica living happily ever after. The End.

This is a tough movie to recommend. It is competently filmed by Phil Karlson (director, best known for the Joe Don Baker movie Walking Tall) and Burnett Guffey (cinematographer), but has no particular visual flair. The story suffers from a rushed ending and an out-of-place happy ending, as well as dropping a some story threads. For example, the mob member sent to Eddie at the beginning - who was involved in the same killing as the Rico boys - is sent off by Eddie to work, mentioned briefly when Eddie meets Kubik, but then just dropped form the story. And the last 90 seconds or so has the feeling of a studio mandated happy ending, not the finale that makes sense in the context of the rest of the story. Finally, the theme of family solidarity, which would logically be an important part of a story like this, is underdeveloped and perfunctorily addressed.

It is the uneven acting that really hurts the film. Conte and Foster make a believable couple and have on-screen chemistry. While they have separate beds, within the first few minutes, it is pretty clear they have sex right after the late-night phone call from Phil and then again the next morning in the shower. Their concerns - Eddie for both his family and for remaining apart for the mob, Alice for adopting a child to start her own family - are realistic and handled well. Larry Gates is a good villain, playing Kubik in low-key, ingratiating way, but with the right amount of condescension and menace to be accepted as a mob boss. Bellaver's Mike Lamotta is great, even though he only has about 10 minutes of screen time, playing a philosophical - and pragmatic - thug. But that's about it, as far as actors who deliver good performances.

Darren, Kathryn Crosby as Johnny's wife Norah and, most harmfully, Argentina Brunetti as "Mama" Rico all overact shamelessly. Brunetti seems to be playing a parody of Italian mothers, with lots of "Ima gonna make-a you some pasta" level dialogue. While the actual words can be blamed in the screenplay writers, it is up to the actor and director to make even bad dialogue acceptable, if not compelling. In The Brothers Rico that is not the case. Darren and Crosby are not as bad; however, Crosby's default method of emoting appears to be saying every line as shrilly as possible. Darren comes across as dense (again, this is partially the problem of the screenplay) and whiny. There is no reason for him not to immediately take his Eddie's advice and flee; but he refuses to, leading to his death.

I give this a weak recommendation for the good performances and the parts of the story that work. So, check it out; but don't expect too much.

Movie Logic - Knight and Day (2010)

Cameron Diaz in a red dress from The Mask. Just posting this because a) hot and b) I can.

I was watching Knight and Day, the action movie/comedy vehicle for Tom Cruise and Cameron Diaz. Early in the film, Diaz, a "normal person" who turns into a secret agent type, a la Jamie Lee Curtis in True Lies, has been taken into custody by men claiming to be FBI agents. Tom Cruise, as a CIA operative who has gone "rogue" to protect a high-tech energy source from bad guys both inside and outside the Agency, rescues her in an extended car chase/fight scene. The entire sequence is pretty good. There are some funny moments and some nice stunts and effects.

The problem: we find out that the CIA agent heading up the team is a bad guy; he wants to sell the technology - or the young savant who designed it - to a European arms dealer. However, as the movie proceeds, you realize that he was probably the only guy who was part fo that team who was a villain. All of the other guys are, apparently, actual CIA (or, maybe, FBI) agents. So, Tom Cruise winds up injuring (and probably killing) numerous Federal employees, men who are just doing their job.

Not very heroic of him.

Check out the chase below...and say a prayer for all of those poor GS-12s...

Noir November - The Asphalt Jungle (1950)

The Asphalt Jungle is one of the best movies in the crime genre ever made. The film boasts a solid cast of B-level actors (Sterling Hayden, James Whitmore, Sam Jaffe), great direction by John Huston, cinematography that captures the grit of the city and a tightly plotted story. It is required viewing for anyone who loves crime dramas, film noir or movies in general.

"Doc" Reidenschneider (Sam Jaffe), a master criminal known throughout the underworld, has just been released form prison. He travels to a nameless city somewhere in the Mid-West with a "caper" in mind. He gets in touch with Cobby a local fixer and bookie (played with ferret-like intensity by Marc Lawrence) and secures funding from a local lawyer, the shady Alonzo Emmerich (played with an oily, superficial charm by Louis Calhern). The plan is to rob a local jewel merchant of over half-a-million dollars in stones. "Doc" organizes a crew made up of Dix Handly (Sterling Hayden) as the "hooligan" (muscle), Louis Ciavelli (Anthony Caruso) as the "box man" (safe cracker) and Gus (James Whitmore), the driver. Even though the robbery is successful, the aftermath is more problematic. With the police on their trail and with treachery afoot, "Doc" and Dix have to figure out a way to escape The Asphalt Jungle.

Filmed in Cincinnati and Los Angeles (mostly in the latter, at MGM Studios), Huston gives the film an almost post-apocalyptic look. The city seems to be almost deserted. The opening sequences (where the Cincinnati shooting is featured) depict a rundown, urban wasteland. The only exteriors showing life outside of the "rough areas" of town are at the jewelry store at night, maintaining the stark and empty visual motif. Interiors are cramped and rundown from Gus's tiny greasy spoon diner to Cobby's minimalist gambling den to the claustrophobic apartments that the criminals live in. Even Emmerich's home and cottage/love nest for his mistress, Angela (Marilyn Monroe in a small but colorful part) are mostly small sets - an office, a bedroom, a foyer, probably the largest room, one that serves no function. One can understand the desperate nature of the characters, given the dark, constricted world they live in.

Sterling Hayden looking appropriately badass.

The cast is almost perfect. The characters are all film noir archetypes, from Hayden's thug with the dreams of a child (his only goal, his obsession, is to raise enough money to buy back the horse farm he lived on as a boy), to Jaffe's criminal mastermind with a fatal flaw. In this case, his flaw is his sensuality; he wants to live the good life, giving in to impulses that lead to his eventual - and inevitable - downfall. Emmerich is broke, living a life-style that has drained him of money and made him desperate. He has a bedridden wife and a young mistress, a good representation of his dual nature, the life he used to have (with a loving wife and, one gets the impression, a more respectable legal practice) and his life now (mistress "young enough to be his grand-daughter," defending criminals and getting directly involved in crime). These are rich, complex characters.

The film is also noteworthy for the amount of care and attention paid to the details of the heist. The audience is shown how much planning goes into a professional crime. From securing state-up funds, finding a "crew" and, once the robbery is underway, the details of defeating security systems, cracking a safe and dealing with the stolen goods afterwards. During the heist - an 11 minute scene - everyone behaves calmly and professionally, Huston's direction and the cast's acting selling the illusion that these men are professional thieves. While scenes like this are common now, for 1950 this was pretty revolutionary.

While the point of view of the police is presented, they are not shown in the best light. The lead detective is a crook, taking money from Cubby in exchange for not shutting down his gambling den. The police commissioner (John McIntire) while an upstanding man, is also shown to indulge in crude stereotypes about the men he is chasing. In particular, he says that Handly is a "man without human feeling, without human mercy" something he most definitely is not. Even the arrest of Reidenschneider presents a scene of moral ambiguity. Set in a roadside diner, Doc is paying a young woman to dance for him. While it is mostly innocent - she and her friends were dancing to music on juke box anyway - he clearly is getting pleasure watching her. As he leaves, two state troopers pick him up. He asks them how long they were waiting and they say long enough to watch the girl dancing as well. It is clear that audience is supposed to question how different the police and the criminals really are. In the end, there is a preachy scene where the commissioner addresses some reporters. Without the police, he says, there would be chaos. While this might be true, the movie portrays all levels of society as corrupt and driven by base desires. The most loyal relationships are between the criminals Gus and Dix, and Dix and Doll (Jean Hagen) his boozey, ditzy, but devoted friend (they have some sort of relationship, but are not a committed couple).

The Asphalt Jungle is a complex, multi-layered story, one that rewards repeat viewings with its rich characterizations and engaging acting. Huston creates a set of images that tells a story from the edge of civilization, in a morally bankrupt, physically decaying urban wasteland. Anyone who loves films or just great stories should see this.

Marilyn Monroe...is she good? Is she bad? Or is she just really, really hot...yep, that's it.

Movie Review - Thor: The Dark World (2013)

Thor: The Dark World, is a movie. Stuff happens. Things (including people) explode. Natalie Portman uses Stella Skarsgard’s magic rods to save the day. The End.

What, I have to write more? Son. Of. A. Bi...

Be careful...here come the spoilers...

Thor 2 (easier to write) takes place a year after The Avengers. Thor (Chris Hemsworth) and his merry band of LARPers are going through “the Nine Realms” bringing order out of chaos by beating on people. With love...and swords and hammers. Thor breaks giant made out of rock from Galaxy Quest and the last of the marauders give up. They look so dejected; they'd found their niche in life and now they've had that taken from them. Sad, really.

Oh, wait, before all this, we have the opening scene from The Lord of the Rings series. 5000 years ago, Malekith (Christopher Eccleston), an angry elf, tries to unmake the universe with something called the Aether. It looks like glowing Hawaiian Punch; which is appropriate, since Hawaiian Punch is evil. It a scientific fact. And the ambulatory punchbowl man is an avatar of Satan. But, enough of my religious beliefs.

Odin’s (Anthony Hopkins) father Bor (Tony Curran) and his army of Asgardians snatch the Aether before Malekith can return the universe to a state of darkness...or something. It is never really clear what Malekith expects to happen. It looks like all the lights will go off, which will result in significant rise in toe stubbings. Oww!

Malekith sacrifices his entire fleet and army to mask his escape. Why is is that evil guys like killing their own henchmen? How is it that they keep getting henchmen? Wouldn’t a potential henchmen look at the fate of the last batch and say “umm...I’m gonna go do seasonal work at Target. Later Tatter.”

Bor survives and hides the Aether because it cannot be destroyed. Of course, he picks the worst place in the universe to hide it, since a random human physicist can just wander in (well, wander in through a dimensional portal; still, the security for the universe ending faux-fruit punch is really lacking). But, I’m getting a little ahead of the story.

So, backstory, backstory backstory...Thor reduces stone giant to gravel...okay, now we’re on Asgard. Loki (Tom Hiddleston) is imprisoned for his “pro-human enslavement” plans as seen in The Avengers and is tossed into the dungeon. All of the prisoners from Thor’s pacification campaigns also wind up in the dungeons. Don’t the other worlds have court systems? If you rape and pillage on Vanaheim (or wherever) shouldn’t the Asgardians turn over the prisoners to the Vanaheim cops?

Thor and Loki look as lost by the plot as I was.

Anyway, we see the fate of Loki and then head to Earth, where Natalie Portman (as mopey scinetist, Jane Foster) is in London doing science stuff and pining over Thor, two years after he ditched her. This makes Portman's character seem like a complete loser. Yes, Thor is a god...but he hasn't called in two years. Get over it! She does have an amusing "date" with Chris O'Dowd (from The IT Crowd). But, that comes to an abrupt end as we start to get more Kat Dennings (as Darcy the Intern) moments than anyone could possibly have wanted. There’s a lot of gobbledigook about gravity (not Gravity; that's another movie) and other dimensions and weird physics. It all leads to two things: a pretty amusing joke about wormholes and shoes (which has a cute payoff later in the movie) and Natalie Portman somehow traveling through a dimensional rift to whatever world the Aether was buried on. Within 90 seconds of arriving, she is “infected” by it and then deposited back on Earth. Is it really that easy to get your hands on a universe ending super-weapon? I mean, I could use one begin my reign of terror...I mean, no one should be able to get their hands on one to begin a reign of terror.

Natalie has the evil punch in her veins, Loki is in prison and Thor heads to Earth to hook up with Natalie. He deduces that something is wrong with her after she emits a shower of fruit that knocks over a gaggle of cops (gaggle's the right word for a group of cops, right? or is that geese? Hmmm). Thor takes her to Asgard to find out what’s wrong with her. We also find out that Malekth and his surviving elves have spent the last 5000 years in hibernation on their space ship (which does look pretty awesome). Malekith knows that the Aether has been found and is in Asgard.

Acton scenes follow. They are fun action scenes, full of explosions and flying stuff and guys with swords and implosion grenades and all manner of things for the hyper-active five-year-old in each of us. One of Malekith’s henchmen - the only black guy in a race of albinos, apparently - infiltrates the Asgardian prison. Kurse (Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje) - Malekith's henchman - is brought in with a group of prisoners. However, little if any time seems to have passed between the moment he is sent out and when he is brought in. Also, the impression is that he is brought in with a group of marauders. But, we are told that the last of the marauders surrendered to Thor at the beginning of the movie. Did Kurse just show up at an Asgardian outpost and say "hey, I'm a marauder. Could you arrest me please? I could break something, if you'd like."

Jamie Alexander showing why she should be the female lead in the next Thor movie. I was going to make a comment about her riding my longboat (because, you know, Vikings) but I have some dignity.

Once in jail, Kurse activates a flaming acorn Malekith buried in his stomach that gives him superpowers and disables the Asgardian defensive shield long enough for an elf assault force (that sounds stupid even writing it) to penetrate (heh heh) the main castle and kill Thor’s mother, Frigga (Rene Russo). Thor toasts the side of Malekith's face with a bolt of lightning and Portman is kept out of his evil elvish hands.

Odin wants to protect Portman on Asgard, even if it means every Asgardian will die. Thor wants to use her as bait, have Malekith suck the evil juice out of her and then kill him and destroy the Aether. Odin has the better argument. Although they took some damage, we did just see the Asgardians destroy most of Malekith's ships and kill a bunch of his men. Although he did penetrate (there's that word again...heh heh) Asgard's defenses, that seemed to have more to do with the element of surprise. Yes, his ship does have a Romulan cloaking device. But it is only one ship. But this is Thor's movie, not Odin's. So, Thor teams up with Loki, who is very angry with Malekith because of Frigga's death. Loki has a "secret way" out of Asgard that doesn't require the use of the Bi-Frost Bridge/workhole generator. What it does require is flying into a cave. That's it? It is anti-climatic, since it seems like a "secret portal" that would be easy to find. On the positive side, we do get to see some of Thor's compatriots beat up on other Asgardians and a good aerial chase scene. Also, I do like the way this sequence is cut, with Thor and his fellow conspirators sitting around a table outlining the plan, intercut with the action sequences. It is a nice way to break up and highlight the action, as well as provide some character moments.

Kat Denning, at the world premier of Thor 2...hmmm... there are somethings about her I really like...not sure what they are...

Thor and Loki, with Portman in tow, track Malekith back to THE DARK WORLD (see, you knew the title is there for a reason), trick him into draining her of the FPMD (Fruit Punch of Mass Destruction...and no, I will not stop comparing the Aether to a cloyingly sweet beverage; my house, my rules) and beat on him and his elves for a while. Malekith escapes and Loki appears to die while killing Kurse and sacrificing himself to save Thor. I say “appears to die” because EXTRA SPECIAL SPOILER ALERT the most popular character in the Thor movies is not going to expire. Ever. At least, not until Tom Hiddleston demands a truckload of cash to sneer winningly on screen.

So, the evil elf has the death punch and heads to Earth, where a convergence of the Nine Realms will weakened the barriers between dimensions allowing him to unmake the current universe, returning it to the darkness that the elves like. Or, to be more correct, that Malekith likes. The other elves might just want to go catch a tan at Cabo. We'll never know...

So, why Earth? If the worlds are aligned, wouldn't any of them do? As we saw in the prologue, the last time Malekith tried to use the Aether, it was on Elfworld. I guess we need an excuse to get back to Earth and give our other actors (Denning, Stellan Skarsgard as the pantless and moderately bonkers Dr. Erik Selvig and John Howard, playing Ian, Denning's intern and straight-man) something to do, since we've wasted time cutting back to them throughout the movie. Yes, there is a b-story involving these three which is meaningless. They don't do anything to rescue Portman or otherwise advance the plot. I guess their scenes are supposed to be humorous; but they really take up screen time that could've been used to tighten up the plot and expand the characters who actually matter. I would rather have seen more time spent with Sif and the Warrior's Three, as well as more time developing Malekith.

Anyway...action scene, action scene, action scene. Malekith fails to destroy the universe...what a surprise!

We then get a big reveal at the end (that Loki has replaced Odin), a lesser reveal in the now obligatory mid-credits scene (that the Aether is an Infinity Stone, which Sif (Jamie Alexander) and Volstagg (Ray Stevenson)- the Warrior Three with weight issues…sorry, he’s big boned - give to Benicio Del Toro as The Collector) and the non-reveal, a horrible end of credits scene with Thor and Portman sucking face and some Asgardian monster playfully chasing birds in London. The end.

I had a big problem with The Collector, by the way. The scene looked cheap and Benicio is acting goofy with a weird vocal inflection and silly hand gestures. However, as an introduction to plot elements that will be featured in Guardians of the Galaxy and Phase 3 Marvel films (the Infinity Gauntlet looks set to be the centerpiece of The Avengers 3) it’s okay and it is only 90 seconds long.

No, Natalie Portman does not make out with Mila Kunis in Thor 2...however, she does in Black Swan, so, ummm, yeah. Hey, just focus on the kissing chicks.

As for the rest of the film, Portman is the single worst thing about it. Yes, even worse than the incoherent plot. She seems bored with the role (and the millions of dollars she made, I guess. Must be nice!) and whenever she is on the screen, the film drags. She has absolutely no chemistry with Helmsworth. There is a brief scene in which Sif and Thor share a moment that creates more of connection between the characters than 90 minutes of screen time that Portman has. The “jokey” elements - many focused on Stellan Skarsgard because he's not wearing pants. It’s funny! See, no pants! - are pretty bad. Denning's character is mildly amusing and she delivers her lines well enough; but she seems to be out of another film; she's the snarky girl who befriends the ugly duckling that the mean, popular girls torment.

Not all of the humor is out of place. Hiddleson does snide well and the moment when he briefly appears as Captain America (in order to taunt Thor) is pretty funny. The problem is that much of the humor seems out of place and makes the film schizophrenic. This is a movie in which the stakes are all of existence; do I really need to have extended scenes of Skarsgard without pants just for a cheap laugh?

These tonal shifts are one of the big problems with the movie. The other is the lack of a sufficiently developed villain. Malekith’s motivation is poorly defined and his character arc a single point (beginning of movie “I want to destroy everything”…end of movie “I want to really destroy everything”). There are many, many plot holes, from little things (how do the Skarsgard's science rods work?) to big ones (why does Portman go to the Aether crypt and how does it pop out and infect her?). Buuuuuut...the movie moves quickly, the action is well done (at no point do you not know what is going on in the action scenes, something that is not a given in modern action films...see every frickin’ Bourne movie for an example of that school of film-making), the chemistry between Helmsford and Hiddelston is engaging and the visuals are impressive, so a lot of the plot problems just get stomped on.

Is this the best Marvel film? No. That honor belongs equally to Iron Manand The Avengers. Is it the worst? No; that title belongs to the first Thor movie, which I find barely watchable (I’m only considering Marvel shared universe films). Is it a fun movie, with some nice dialogue, great action scenes and nice continuation of the themes and plots of the Marvel Universe? Yes, it is. So, go check it out.

The Remans from Star Trek Nemesis and the Dark Elves...hmmm...well, that would explain the cloaking device.

Movie Review - Gravity (2013)

Going into Gravity I knew I'd like the visuals. The effects looked stunning in the trailers and Alfanso Cuaron demonstrated he knew how to craft visuals Children of Men. The question was, could Sandra Bullock sustain the film, since she'd be in much of it by herself. The answer, thankfully, is yes. It's not a perfect role; there are moments when she talks to herself that are unnecessary. The most egregious is a scene that involves an errant ham radio broadcast that she picks up in a language she doesn't understand. It goes on for a while and ends with her howling along with the broadcasters dog, which is laughable. And, yes, there are technical flaws, although some of these can be overlooked since this is set in some kind of alternate universe, in which the US has a functioning Shuttle program and the Chinese have a large space station. If you want to see a good overview of the flaws in the film, check out Time Magazines write-up.

In space, stuff blows up real good.

The question isn't really "is it scientifically accurate" No, the question is "is it a good story with believable characters in engaging situations?" And, the answer is, "yes." Clooney and Bullock both deliver performances that are sympathetic. The script by Alfonso Cuaron and his son, Jonas, creates believable people who act mostly in reasonable ways. The single biggest problem is the way Clooney dies. Quite simply, it makes no sense, if you know anything about physics. I don't mind weird orbital mechanics or equipment oddities; but, when you violent basic physics in order to create drama, I have a problem with that. This was the one moment in the film when I literally said "Oh, come on, that's dumb."

Not feeling so sexy in those spacesuits, are you guys? Ah, damn, it's Clooney and Bullock...of course they are.

I'll leave out the ending, accept to say I didn't it, even though there is a lot of suspension of disbelief involved.

Even with the criticism, this is still a really good movie, one that deserves to be seen on the big screen in order to appreciate Cuaron's visuals and has a story and acting that makes this more than just pretty pictures. Check it out.