Going On The Road

Your humble author is going on the road until April 12.  Since access to the Interwebzone is uncertain, updates are unlikely.  They'll be some new stuff when I get back from my tour of Europe, Asia and the Sub-continent, including my first foray into video reviews.  Be safe, be kind and don't name it after me.

Review - 300: Rise Of An Empire - This. Is. SPOILEROPOLIS!!!!

Athenians out for a walk. Hey, Greece was a tough neighborhood.

I went into 300: Rise of an Empire assuming it couldn't equal the first film. In this, I was correct. 300 helped create an entirely new visual sense, in which action scenes are envisioned as paintings slow motion paintings. The slightly sepia-toned look of the film has become de rigueur for sword and sandal films and television shows. Alternating between slow motion and high-speed in action sequences has been copied in a number of films and TV programs (e.g., Watchmen, Immortals, the Spartacus TV series).

300: Rise of an Empire these elements, except for the color palette is much darker. Where the original bathed most of its scenes in a warm tan glow, this film is made up of layers of blacks and grays. Even the blood is dark, like thick red paint. But, the reliance (at times, over reliance) on slow-motion, the narration via speech making, the extremely graphic violence, these things are all still in evidence.

Eva Green, showing how to put the "sexy" in "homicidal."

I could go over the plot in detail, but it really isn't important. Athenian general Themistocles (Sullivan Stapleton) is trying to hold off the Persian navy, led by sexy and deadly Artemisia (Eva Green). We get background on some of the characters, all in service of the main theme of the film, that people's actions often come back to haunt them, even if they seemed like the right idea at the time. Themistocles is a hero to the Greek for killing Persian king Darius (Igor Naor) ten years before the events of the film, but this act set his son Xerxes (Rodrigo Santoro reprising his role from the first film) on the path leading to a war of vengeance against Greece. Xerxes relied on Artemisia to secure the throne, but this means she has no respect for him, seeing herself as the real power in Persia. Artemisia, a Greek, let's her past - her family was slaughtered by Greek soldiers and she was cast into slavery - lead her to an obsession with destroying Greece. And Greece pays for the treatment of Artemisia with war, blood and death.

Sullivan Stapleton tries to channel Gerard Butler.

Of course, the main reason people see this films not for themes or character development. They're going to see a ton of violence. And the movie delivers. The action scenes are well done. They are very graphic, with heads and limbs being lopped off (although they miss out on the opportunity to have someone strangled with their own intestines; that's always good for a laugh) and blood splattering the camera lens. This last effect gets annoying quickly. The first time is neat; the 23rd time, I just wanted to say "clean off the lens, damn it."

The film benefits from some good performances. Eva Green is a compelling villain with mostly understandable motives. Stepleton delivers his lines with enough gusto to be believably rousing and swings a sword ably enough. The rest of the cast consists of glorified cameos. Lena Headey, the Spartan Queen Gorgo, is a welcome sight, although there are long stretches of the film where she is absent. She also has an out-of-place fight scene at the end of the film, leading the Spartan fleet, something that was established in the first film. Worse than that, it doesn't pay off the way it should, with a fight between Gorgo and Artemisia. In Jello...

Xerxes asks crowd the cape is too much.

This is an easy film to pick apart. Many of the characters communicate by speeches; this becomes melodramatic to the point of self-parody as the film progresses. The use of slow motion is excessive, at times applied to scenes (like people riding horses) where it does nothing to enhance the action or drama. The opening narration goes on for what seems like 20 minutes. Unlike the original film, where the narrative conceit - that the entire film is an inspirational story told on the eve of battle sets up the more fantastical elements as embellishments by the narrator, that is not the case in this film. Queen Gorgo provides the opening narration, much of which repeats what we are seeing on the screen, but the bulk of the film itself is not told from her point-of-view as storyteller. This means there is no built-in "suspension of disbelief" for the elements of the movie that are fantastic or don't make sense. Finally, the action ALMOST gets to the point where it is boring. The creative team does a couple of things to try and shake things up. For example, they try to "spice up" one naval battle by having the Persians use a bronze age oil tanker to burn out the Greek fleet. While this - and other scenes - look neat, the central problem is that the action becomes repetitive, with generic CGI ships ramming into each other and characters, who look pretty much the same, hacking off virtual limbs. While it is pretty - in a dark, violent way - when the film ends you realize you’ve just watched the cinematic equivalent of a marshmallow. It looks plumb and appealing and it’s kind of tasty but it’s mostly just air.

Is it worth seeing? Yes; if you liked 300, you’ll like this film. However, unlike the first movie, which had innovative imagery to prop up its bare-bones story, 300: Rise of an Empire offers nothing new.

New Trailer For Edge Of Tomorrow

This is looking even more awesome. The battle sequences continue to impress. And the..."You're leg's broken"..."No, I'm good"...BANG..sequence got a laugh out of me. Anyway, check it out.

New X-Men Trailer Out

A new trailer for X-Men: Days of Future Past has been dropped. It looks better than the last one, giving a sense of the scope of the film (big) and showcasing the actors we want to see. No offense to Ian McKellen and Patrick Stewart, but McAvoy and Fassbender were so good in the last film, that they are the ones I want to see up on the big screen.

We get to see a bunch of mutants (Colossus, Bishop, Storm, Kitty Pryde, Sunspot, Iceman, Blink, Mystique, Beast) and a pretty good look at both the Sentinel Mark 1 and the future Sentinels. The Mark 1 looks good; the future Sentinels...look a little like the Destroyer from Thor after 6 months on Slimfast. Hopefully, most of the movie will take place in the 70s, as the future looks appropriately gloomy, but not very visually interesting. Just another dark landscape of blasted buildings.

This trailer makes me a bit more hopeful for the film. Check out the trailer below.

Trailer Mania!

I went to see 300: Rise of an Empire yesterday. My review of that film will be up in a little bit. However, I was hit with a slew of trailers before the film and, since the coming attractions is one of my favorite parts of going to the cinema, I decided to give a run-down of what was shown.

1. Sin City: A Dame to Kill For: I liked the original.  Visually, it was impressive, the black and white with splotches of color highlighting the unreality of the whole thing (and helping make some iffy CGI look "artsy").  And, for the most part, the stories and acting were good, although I didn't The Big Fat Kill section.  That was the one with all the super-model hookers and Miho, the pixie ninja.  The story didn't interest me.  Anyway, A Dame to Kill For looks like more of the same: pulp/noir style stories, the same black and white visuals, the same stylized filming. In other words, a film I'll be checking out in the cinema. 
2. A Million Ways to Die in the West: Seth MacFarlane's western-comedy.  Either this will be completely awesome...or all the best stuff is in the trailer.   Definitely a Netflix viewing.
3. Deliver Us From Evil:  This might be good, but I got an Exorcist III vibe from the trailer.  Which isn't necessarily a bad thing, since I think Exorcist III, for all its flaws, is an interesting film.  But, it is interesting more as parts than as a sum.  Anyway, this is probably a Netflix viewing for me. 
4. X-Men: Days of Future Past: Same blah trailer. I don not have the warm fuzzies about this movie.  I'll probably still see it in a theater; but, so far, it is not a "must-see." 
5. Edge of Tomorrow:  Same trailer that has been out for a while, but I am still psyched to see this movie.  It seems pretty high concept - if Halo meets Groundhogs Day is high concept these days.  Anyway, I like Tom Cruise (just saw Valkyrie and was pleasantly surprised with how much I enjoyed it) and the invasion scenes look they'll make an awesome FPS.   Oh, and the title of the novel it is based on...All You Need Is Kill....much better.  Definite theater visit for this one. 
6. Transcendence:  Johnny Depp becomes Skynet.  Hey, wasn't Transcendence the name of the VR game in eXistenZ.  Well, the game the eXistenZ game was part of.  If it really was a game.  Damn you and your opaque-ish plot!  Netflix for me. 
7. Sabotage: Generic action plus boobs plus lesbo make-out scene plus FPS action plus Arnold! Hell yeah!  Well, Hell yeah Netflix!  Also, "Clean up on aisle three"...isn't that from Threat Level Midnight?  

Short Attention Span Review - American Hustle (2013)

I finally had a chance to see American Hustle.  I had, of course, been exposed to all the lavish praise heaped on the movie by critics over the last few months.  While I enjoyed it, I wonder if I watched the same movie those people saw.

There isn't much to say about the plot.  It is 1978.  Irving Rosenfeld (Christian Bale) and Sydney Prosser (the beautiful and talented Amy Adams) are con artists who are arrested by FBI Agent Richard DiMaso (Bradley Cooper).  DiMaso decides to use their talents and connections to bring down corrupt politicians and a Mafia family (a heavily fictionalized version of Abscam).  Rosenfeld, in addition to sleeping with Prosser, is married to the unstable Rosalyn (Jennifer Lawrence).  Stuff happens, classic songs are played, Christian Bale shows off his pot belly and insane comb-over and the movie ends with everyone kind of getting what they deserve.

Is it a good movie?  Yes, it is.  The film is engaging. The cinematography is serviceable; nothing spectacular, but everything looks good...or, at least as good as late-70s fashion and design will allow things to look.  The soundtrack works well to enhance the visuals. 

Amy Adams, the best thing about the film.

The cast is uneven with Bale and Adams giving the best performances.  Lawrence isn't bad, although it is hard to judge her ability to convey a fully-rounded character, since Rosalyn is just a collection of quirks.  Cooper doesn't seem to be in the movie as everyone else.  His interpretation of the FBI Agent is to make him a shrill, violent, mercurial a-hole.  This could work, but Cooper chews the scenery with such gusto it becomes farcical. Of the supporting cast, only Jeremy Renner, as the good-hearted but corruptible mayor of Camden, makes much of an impact.  The other cast members are basically one-note. 

The main weakness of the movie is that, as a narrative, it is a series of tenuously connected scenes, not a coherent whole.  While most of the individual scenes are good, there are so many tonal shifts that impression is of watching four different movies.  Movie 1 is a compelling character/relationship study with Bale and Adams.  Movie 2 is a dark take on sitcom families with Bale and Lawrence.   Movie 3 is every cliche of mob movies you can think of, including a distracting cameo by Robert Di Nero. Movie 4 is Bradley Cooper and whatever the hell he is doing.

To be clear, this is still a good, entertaining film.  It just has a number of weaknesses that seem to indicate an overall lack of director control over the actors and the story.  David O. Russel has delivered some great movies, including one of my favorite films, The Fighter.   With tighter control over the performances and a stronger story, American Hustle could have been a great film.  Instead, it is an entertaining showcase for a couple of really good actors.  Check it out; but don't buy into the hype.

Classic TV - The Twilight Zone - The Little People

I've been taking advantage of Netflix and re-watching some of my favorite episodes of the original Twilight Zone series.  Last night, while cruising through the list of episodes, I noticed one I had never seen - The Little People.

This is how Netflix captioned the episode "On a desolate planet, two astronauts discover a society populated by beings only 1/100th their size. One astronaut decides to rule the society as God."  Okay...and it stars Claude Akins!  Hell yeah!

Our heroes are trying to fix their ship.  Peter Craig (Joe Maross) the navigator, is a grouser.  William Fletcher (Claude Akins) is the can-do captain.  When Fletcher notices that Craig hasn’t touched his water supply, he confronts him.  Craig shows him what he has found - a civilization people (“no bigger than ants”) living in a sheltered area in a nearby valley.  They have a high tech society, complete with bulldozers and Victorian-style homes.  They also have the misfortune of making first contact with Craig.  He has decide to set himself up as their god.  A very angry god, at that, who occasionally stamps on their towns in order to make himself feel powerful.  The little people build him a life-sized statue overnight, which pretty much pushes his sanity over the edge.  When Fletcher fixes the ship, Craig refuses to leave, threatening to shoot Fletcher.  Fletcher leaves, warning Craig that he will go made from loneliness.  By all appearances, Craig is already mayor (or maybe god) of Crazy Town.  While Craig is ranting about how he is going to lord over the little people, another spaceship lands.  The crew of this ship are enormous humans, towering over the mountains.  One picks Craig up, accidentally killing him.  As the giants leave, the little people pull down the statue of Craig.

Science and logic mean nothing in this episode, of course.  Creatures the size of the giant aliens would collapse under their own weight.  And, the scale of the little people and their civilization changes from shot to shot.  At one point, Craig holds a dump truck in his hand, a tiny speck in his palm that requires a microscope to be seen.  In another, his foot is just a little larger than the house it crushes.  It is not explained how this society developed technology that looks just like that on Earth.   It is not explained how they managed to construct a statue that, to them, would be miles high in the space of one night.  And so on.

But, as an allegorical fantasy, it works pretty well.  What would a vastly superior race/culture do when they find a weaker one?  Some, like Fletcher, ask for forgiveness for the damage that has been done.  Others, people like Craig, see it as an opportunity to play god.  We see this happening every day.  And, like Craig, those who try to twist others to their way of living often come to a bad end.

The episode also looks at what happens when people are able to actualize their dreams born of personal inadequacies.  Craig feels like everyone is out to get him, that is a "little man" of no importance.  Of course, he thinks this is a great injustice.  But, when he finally gets is chance to be a "big man" he can only torment the little people.  He is only satisfied when they do something that strokes his stunted ego. 

Akins is good as the no-nonsense commander.  He sells Fletcher's professionalism, as well as his genuine concern for Craig.  Maross' performance, unfortunately, is a significant weakness of the episode.  He plays his character so broadly, so manically, one wonders how he every got into the space program.  He’s basically a dick from scene one.  His only development is to become an unbalanced and homicidal dick at the end.  Even with the short runtime (24 minutes) the character of Craig needed some subtlety.  In particular, the final ranting scene - where he tells the little people that he has plans for them - really didn't need his forced cackling and rolling around on the ground. 

The special effects are pretty bad.  The Twilight Zone was never known for its effects; here, we get some bad blue screens and one sub-Godzilla moment of a boot crushing a miniature home.  While some Twilight Zone episodes have impressive images (e.g., bookworm Burgess Meredith sitting the bombed out ruins of a library, his shattered glasses in his hand), modern fans of The Twilight Zone don't watch it for the effects; we watch it for the stories.

Is this one of the best episodes?  No.  The problems with the Craig character and Maross' portrayal are enough to relegate this to the ranks of the weaker episodes.  However, Rod Serling and his writers (this episode was written by Serling) knew how to tell thematically rich stories in a limited amount of time.  If you can get past the bad effects, character and acting problems with Maross and the more obvious plot holes, you might just find yourself enjoying this tale of the temptations and dangers of playing god.  I know I did.


I found the episode on Youtube and embedded it below.  Check it out

New Godzilla Poster Shows Some Tail

The new Godzilla poster is out an it looks pretty neat. Although, as you can see, it doesn't show much, it does give an idea of the scale of the action (epic destruction) and that the new Godzilla is going look very similar to the classic Toho monster. Unlike the makers of the 1998 Godzilla, these guys understand that the look of the creature matters.

In addition, it is important to get the tone right. The 1998 Emmerich-Devlin effort treated the subject like a campy joke. While there were many elements of the Toho films that could be viewed as silly, they did not treat Godzilla as a joke. Well, a couple of the films from the 1970s may have; but let's not talk about those. If the posters and trailers are any indication, this Godzilla will be similar to the 1954 film and some of the Heisei and Millennium series. Combine this with a huge budget and a great cast and you probably have a winner.

Marvel Movie Concept Art

Hulkbuster! There, got that out of my system. Wait...motherf**kin' Hulkbuster!!!!! Okay, now I'm better.

Marvel dropped some concept art for Age of Ultron and Guardians of the Galaxy yesterday, as well as photos from Ant-Man. And it all looks awesome. I was actually at the Comic-con where Edgar Wright showed his ant Man footage, but missed it. I think I was stalking some hot cosplay chicks or something. Did I say stalking? I meant, getting to know from afar.

Anyway, here are the images, with my all-important comments, of course.

First, up, we have the Hulk fighting Stark...or, at least someone wearing the Hulkbuster armor. When the Hulkbuster was featured in IM3, geeks like me in the audience got a little wood (or the female equivalent) knowing that we would get an epic Hulk vs Stark fight at some point in the future. Well, it looks like we'll get it in Avengers 2...although whether this will be Stark or, perhaps, Ultron, controlling the suit we'll have to see.

Next up, two pieces from the Guardians movie. This film looks like it will be a ton of fun. I've enjoyed the recent run of Guardians comics and the movie looks like it has the same sense of quirky fun and over-the-top action. I assume this scene is on Knowhere. In the comics, Knowhere is a space station made out of the head of a giant alien. We'll see if they keep that bit of awesome weirdness in the film.

Here we have Rocket Raccoon and Groot getting ready to kick some butt.

This image and the two following are from Ant-Man. The suit looks as good as it could and Edgar Wright is one of my favorite directors. The cast announced so far - Paul Rudd as Scott Lang and Michael Douglas as Hank Pym - is pretty exciting. I had hoped they would go for an Eric O'Grady story...but I guess we don't need a superhero who uses his shrinking powers to spy on showering women.

Quicksilver ashowing off some super speed. Hey, nobody gets between Pietro Maximoff and his morning latte. I really liked Aaron-Taylor Johnson in Kick-Ass and Savages (yes, I'm one of the three people who liked Savages...wait, it's 51% on Rotten Tomatoes...I'm with the majority! Yay!) and am looking forward to his take on one of the biggest a-holes in Marvel Comics.

I'm still not sure how I feel about the inclusion of the casting of Elizabeth Olsen as the Scarlet Witch. She just isn't sexy; she's not unattractive, but Scarlet Witch is supposed to be stunning. When I look at Olsen, I am not stunned; mildly dazed maybe. But not stunned.

I like this. I have a feeling the dialogue that goes with this scene goes something like this. Black Widow: "Hulk, you broke the building." Hulk: "Hulk sorry." Black Widow: "Well, next time just ask me if a building needs breaking before you do it."

Finally, I leave you with this: Yaya Han showing us what the Scarlet Witch should look like. "Hey, you got your stripper in my superhero!" "No, you got your superhero in my stripper!."

Movie Poster of the Day - The Gauntlet (1977)

Although The Gauntlet is not one of the best Clint Eastwood movies, it is fun. Here's what IMDB says about the film: "A hard but mediocre cop [Ben Shockley, played by Eastwood] is assigned to escort a prostitute [Augustina "Gus" Mally played by Sondra Locke] into custody from Las Vegas to Phoenix, so that she can testify in a mob trial. But a lot of people are literally betting that they won't make it into town alive."

It features some pretty decent action scenes, including a house being demolished by small arms fire. The film ends with Eastwood driving an armored bus into Phoenix, where heavily armed cops (who think Eastwood is the bad guy) are waiting for them.

Unfortunately, nothing in the movie quite equals the poster by Frank Frazetta. Frazetta's work always has an epic feel to it. Even though his work usually had fantasy, science-fiction or horror themes, The Gauntlet poster has this same feel. The burning, wrecked bus and orange sky overwhelming the buildings create a post-apocalyptic background. Shockley's rippling muscles are reminiscent of Frazetta's Conan paintings. And "Gus" - looking nothing like Sondra Locke, other than being female and blonde - has the same full hips and tattered clothing of any number of Frazetta's fantasy women. We don't see what Shockley is looking at...but we know he's going to kick it's butt.

If you want to see more of Frazetta's work, you can find his art work here.

Movie Poster Of The Day - Crocodile (1980)

I love old movie posters. In particular, I love posters that featured original art. Sometimes this art was more exciting than the film itself, promising action and images that were not on-screen. Once you had paid your money, though, the poster had done it's job.

Today, I'm checking out Crocodile (1980). Here's the synopsis from IMDB: "A giant crocodile is killing and frightening people living nearby rivers. Two men, whose wives and daughter have been killed by the crocodile, decide to chase and eliminate it."

Made in Thailand and originally released as Chorakhe, the US release poster (pictured) is colorful and kinetic. Based on the trailer, the proportions look about right; the film really does feature a giant crocodile. Of course, the stiff model in the film doesn't match the thrashing beast promised in the poster. Still, the poster accurately reflects the tone of the movie; an over-sized croc, laying waste to unlucky bathers.

The poster has some nice touches. The centering of the yellow eye, drawing the viewers gaze. The man peaking out of the throat of the crocodile (behind the bikini-clad woman draped over the lower jaw). Even the way the boater in the top right-hand corner "breaks out" of the confines of the painting, almost like the artist is saying "this movie is so awesome, it's going spill off the screen!"

A great tagline ("FROM THE SLIMY DEPTHS OF THE OCEAN...NATURE EXPLODES WITH SAVAGE FURY!"), a vibrant image, an up-front representation of the kind of film you're getting ("monster eating people")...everything a good movie poster should have.

Short Attention Span Review - Ritual (2012) - Spoliers

John Evans (Rio Dewanto) wakes up in a shallow grave. He doesn't remember his name or how he got there. Over the course of a day, he finds that his wife is dead and his children are missing. Or...are they? Ritual strives for some originality in its stalk-and-kill formula. While it succeeds in having an original framework for the killer - John is the killer; he goes to elaborate lengths to pick a target family, kill the father, then, with the help of drug-induced amnesia, make himself believe that it is his wife who has died and that the children are really killers stalking him - the film fails to be interesting enough to recommend. There is some nausea inducing shaky cam. There are numerous scenes of John screaming, sweating or drooling. The killer's plot relies on many coincidences to function, the biggest one being "what if amnesiac John doesn't head in the right direction and wanders out of the woods?" And the ending is unnecessarily long. After seeing John go through the paces and kill the last members of his "victim" family, we see how he sets up the next one. This goes on for about 20 minutes and is unnecessary as any viewer who was paying attention can figure out the hows and whys.

It's not a bad movie. I respect what it is trying to accomplish; a new take on a well-worn story. But, it strikes me that this film would've been better as a thirty-minute short. As it is, the film feels unnecessarily drawn out. It's on Netflix streaming, so if you that, check it out. Otherwise, I have a hard time recommending this film.

Movie Babe - Monica Bellucci

I'm convinced that Monica Bellucci is not human. She is a fembot designed by a team of former Disney animatronic engineers and Hugh Hefner's Id - which has taken on a life of its own, not unlike Walter Pigeon's Id in Forbidden Planet - in a secret lab in Argentina. They set out to create the perfect woman; they succeeded. Since the first moment I set eyes on her (in Brotherhood of the Wolf) I knew that all other women would be measured against Monica.

The Hef-Monster in search of a new collection of girlfriends.

Beside her obvious charms (boobs...I'm talking about boobs) she is also a good actress. While some roles (e.g., Persephone in the Matrix movies) required her to be little more than latex covered window dressing (thanks Wachowski Brothers...um...siblings...for that!) she has also shown serious acting ability. In particular, her roles in Irreversible, Malena and Don't Look Back showed talent that compliments her beauty.

Speaking of her beauty...enjoy...

Monica as a sexy spy/assassin/brothel owner in Brotherhood of the Wolf.

Although she has never been in a Little Red Hood movie, she obviously should be.

In my head, this is how Monica walks around the house...which is a nice Victorian with solar panels, because Monica is green friendly. I have very involved Monica fantasies...

See, green friendly. Oh, that's not what that means? Hmmmm...

I would kill to be the costumer who had to lever her into this thing.

Monica taking a more serious role...as an aid worker in Africa who is also a super-model, apparently.

Monica even sprawls in a sexy way.

TV Logic - Walking Dead (episode 13 "Alone")

Do they really walk? More like, Shuffling Dead...

I've been enjoying this half-season. After some of the misfires of the first half of season four - in particular the pointless Governor two-parter - I've liked spending some time with the protagonists. Not every episode has been great (the Tyreese and the kids episode was weak) but they've all been entertaining and pretty logical as far as telling stories. That's why last week's episode had an event in it that bothered me a bit. While most of it was okay, the scene where Beth (no longer "what's her name...Hershel's blonde daughter" which was how I referred to her since she was introduced...now, she has a name) is kidnapped struck me as needlessly random. We are to believe that a car just happened to be driving by at the moment a zombie horde attacks the house? Even if the person or people in the car turn out to be the one's who had been staying in the funeral home, his is still a coincidence too far.

This is a common trope in fiction; the improbable or coincidental happening in just such a way as to advance the plot. While it can be accepted in some -even many - cases, here it seems like poor writing. Can this been redeemed? Sure. If the explanation of why they just happened to be driving by and why they stooped even though there were zombies wandering around AND if the story-line is engaging enough, then plot-device will be forgivable; however, it will still be a painfully obvious plot device and a prefect example of reliance on tropes over original writing.

Movie Logic - Parker (2013)

Parker is a bad movie. Boring action, paper thin characters, a needlessly convoluted plot...does this sound like something you want to watch? Well, I did, mainly because of Jason Statham, who is a fun action actor and Jennifer Lopez who has a great ass. Yes, I will watch a movie based on how the actresses butts look. I never claimed depth.

The movie follows Jason Statham as Parker, a thief who has been doubled-crossed, left for dead and is out for some payback. He travels to Miami in search of the men who tried to kill him and take revenge (as well as the $50 million in jewels they are playing to steal). He runs into Jennifer Lopez, playing Leslie Rodgers a down-on-her-luck real estate agent who lives with her bundle-of-stereotypes mother. Lopez somehow figures out who Parker is and that whatever he is doing in Miami is a) illegal and b) worth a lot of money. For a cut, she offers to help him.

Movie logic rears it's ugly, irrational head a number of times, but I'll focus on the one that bothered me the most. For the finale, Parker raids the house his former partners are using as a base with the intent of killing them and taking the jewels they have just stolen. What's does J-Lo decide to do? Why, go to the house on her own to "help." How? She is shown to have few skills, none of which would help in this situation anyway. She doesn't know what Parker's plan is and offers no plausible reason for going. Of course, she is there to be captured, threatened with rape and death and, at the last moment, to kill one of the thieves (the rapey one) and just complicate things in the most cliched way possible.

This is only one of many actions J-Lo's character takes that are so silly and unrealistic that they constantly take one of out of the story. When you are dealing with a movie that is already a dull collection of genre cliches, this is fatal, to the movie as a compelling narrative or even as pure entertainment.