Machine gun weilding girl vs bullies and ninjas!

The Machine Girl (2007)
Starring: Minase Yashiro, Asami, Honoka, Kentaro Shimazu, and Nobuhiro Nishihara
Director: Noboru Iguchi
Rating: Seven of Ten Stars

When her brother and his best friend are murdered by the spoiled sons of corrupt cops and the local Ninja and Yakuza clans, a high school girl (Yashiro) goes on a gory, revenge-driven murder-spree. After the Yakuza hacks off her left arm, a creative mechanic/gunsmith replace it with a custom-made machinegun, and the mother the brother's friend (Asami) joins her for a final, bloody showdown against Ninja, blood-crazed agents of the Yakuza, and ultimately the queen of the ninja clan and her bully son (Honoka and Nishihara).

"The Machine Girl" has all the prevelant elements of Japanse action films and cartoons crammed into this movie: cute high school girls kicking butt in their school uniforms, Yakuza, Ninja, a quest for righteous revenge, lots of dramatic posing and speechifying before fights can begin... but then it adds almost unimaginable moral bankruptcy, depravity, dismemberment, murder and enough geysers of blood and gore that it will sate the need of even the most hungry gore hound. And it combines all these elements into the funniest send-up of Jap-sploitation films you'll ever see.

This is an insanely gory film. Think "Dead Alive" except with Ninjas and a Japanese high school girl with a machine gun instead of zombies and a nerd with a lawnmower. That's the level of gore this film displays, as well as the level of cartoony-ness. (In fact, this film goes even further than "Dead Alive", as I don't think anything there really compares to the drill-bra mastectomy near the end of this film.)

Yes, this is an incredibly violent movie, but only the most ill socialized adults will mistake anything that happens in this film for reality. There's one scene where our heroines hammer several nails into the head of a Yakuza agent in order to get him to talk, yet he is up and walking around in the next scene. Ami's arm is deep-fried in tempura batter, yet she suffers no burns. Ami gets her arm chopped off, yet she doesn't bleed to death, despite a complete lack of medical attention. (In this movie, loss of blood and limbs only leads to shock and/or death when it's dramatically appropriate.)

This is definitely not a movie to let the younger kids see. It is also not a movie that you should watch if you're at all squeamish when it comes to movie blood or violence on-screen. You might also stay away from nihilism upsets you. I almost stopped the film before it kicked into high gear--just after Ami is almost killed by a crooked cop and his wife for seeking help with bringing her brother's killer to justice--because I found myself thinking, "Wow. What a twisted world this movie exists in... I'm not in the mood for a film with an outlook THIS horrible."

But then Ami went on her first killing spree and once the severed head bobbed to the top in the stew-pot, I was onboard for the rest of the ride.

There's a line between depressing nihilism and stirring (if gory) black comedy. Once "The Machine Girl" crossed that line, it had me laughing and going "eeew!" at the same time. (The only other moment where director/screenwriter Noboru Iguchi almost lost me again was with the final fate of Ami's best friend from school. It's a shocking scene--so I won't go into details and ruin it in case you decide to see the movie--but he went just a little too far for my sensibilities. I think most viewers will feel that way, too.)

If you're looking for a revenge flick with a serious message about an expanding cycle of violence, social responsibility and man's alienation from what makes him human, you need to look elsewhere. While "The Machine Girl" has that, it sort of turns the message inside out and pokes hilarious fun at those sorts of movies. The "expanding cycle of violence" in this movie leads to the creation of the Yakuza-funded, Power Rangers-like Super Mourner Revenge Squad made up of the parents of the Ninja and bullies that Ami and Miki kill. and Ami's alienation from her kinder self gets her an ally in Miki AND a machine gun that shoots enough rounds in a second to cause a human body to evaporate into a fine red mist.

For what is perhaps the goriest movie of the decade just past, as well as a hilarious send-up of Japanese action flicks, check out "The Machine Girl"! Just don't expect to eat dinner while watching it.

The deadliest of blogathons....

Tough guy vs. bratty kids and deadly Ninja!

The Pacifier (2005)
Starring Vin Diesel and Lauren Graham
Director: Adam Shankman
Rating: Six of Ten Stars

Vin Diesel stars as Shane Wolfe, the toughest SEAL team commander on active duty. After a botched mission to rescue a scientist who has developed some important new military technoiogy, Lt. Wolfe is assigned to protect the now-dead scientist's five young children from enemy agents still seeking to acquire the missing prototype. What follows is an amusing fish-out-of-water story, as the career SpecOps officer learns about family life, and in turn helps the children through their grief and teaches them alot about discipline and personal responsibility.


This type of story has been told in movies and in Afterschool Specials a hundred times, and "The Pacifier" is an average example of it. It avoids a couple of the most typical cliches of this type of comedy, but it dishes up the rest while even working in typical action movie tropes. (Diesel's fight with the ninjas [yes... the film not only has Navy SEALs, it has ninjas!] and the mini-van car-chase sequences are particularly amusing.)

If you're the overly cynical type, or if you suffer from diabetes, you might want to avoid this film--it will send you into insulin shock. I enjoyed its sweetness, even if there are a couple of plot-holes that bothered me.

'After the Sunset' is too full of plot holes

After the Sunset (2004)
Starring: Pierce Brosnan, Woody Harrelson, and Salma Hayek
Director: Brett Ratner
Rating: Four of Ten Stars

Jewel thief Max Burdett (Brosnan) retires to the Bahamas with long-time partner Lola (Hayek) after one last big heist. When Stan (Harrelson), an FBI agent they repeatedly humiliated during their respective careers shows up on the island supposedly to stop Max from stealing a valuable gem temporarily on display there, Max's compulsive obsession with thievery boils to the surface and he soon comes out of retirement for one more "one last heist."


After the Sunset could be better than it is. It's got a good cast, it's got a good location, and caper films are always fun. Sadly, the script is one that is so full of holes and inherently contradictory complications that the attentive viewer is left wondering "why did they have to do that when they already had achieved the objective?" and the actors mostly seem to be going through the motion of their parts. Worse, the storyline is pretty much a paint-by-number caper story, with the twists being so commonplace that I almost wish they hadn't done them. (In other words, it might have been a more satisfying film without the genre-dictated twists and double-crosses.)

I did enjoy the interplay between the Brosnan and Harrelson characters (even if I had to suspend my disbelief to a tremendous amount to buy into the way both seemed to accept each other's frendship, or assume that the other had bought into it, so quickly.

I also liked the subplot of the way Lola was revealed as the true professional while Max was a thief due to obsessive-compulsive behavior and supreme narcissism and arrogance; Lola was content to retire with her spoils and work on building the deck for their new house and take tennis lessons, while Max had to keep stealing. It was one part of the film that evoked an emotional response from me (aside from smiling at the funny parts), despite the fact that it was another of the films well-trod cliche elements.

"After the Sunset" could have been a Five or even Six Star movie if just a little more brainpower had been spent working out the problems in the script (and even the many shots of Hayek's ample assets barely contained in skimpy outfits can't make up for those).




Speaking of Salma Hayek, she was one of the "immodest women" featured in the very important, mind-opening "Tectonic Tuesdays" series at Cinema Steve.

The truth apparently lies in a boring place

Where the Truth Lies (2005)
Starring: Kevin Bacon, Colin Firth, Alison Lohman, and David Hayman
Director: Atom Egoyan
Rating: Five of Ten Stars

A young journalist specializing in celebrity interviews (Lohman) sets out to uncover the mystery behind the events that broke up the successful 1950s comedy team of Collins & Morris. She discovers an underbelly of the entertainment industry that is even more filthy than she had imagined.

"Where the Truth Lies" has the makings of an excellent mystery in the film noir vein. It's got the story elements--a reporter on a quest, reclusive men of riches and power with dark secrets to hide, betrayal, sex, lust, greed... everything--and it has the shells of some very interesting characters.

But the potential here remains unrealized.

The director seems to be have been more interested in showing off the film's excellent set and costume design (the film is VERY effective at evoking the two different time periods it takes place in--the 1950s and the 1970s) and trying to get as much milage out of titilation and sleaze as possible instead of giving us reasons to care about the film's characters.

The end result is a very hollow feeling movie, and a movie that starts to feel boring and overlong when it should drawing the viewer in with suspenseful anticipation. Because we don't really care about the characters, we are barely interested in the mystery at the film's core at the end than we were at the beginning. By the time it enters into its second half, the dominating feeling is "get on with it!" instead of an anticipation of what happens next.

"Where the Truth Lies" is a very pretty film, but that's not enough to make it worth sitting through. I saw this film while sitting in a hotel room with nothing better to do but watch it, and I kept grabbing books to flip through. Even the hawt lesbian nookie (although gorgeously filmed) was not enough to stave off my growing boredom and irritation with the fact the film wasn't getting to its conclusion.

'Layer Cake' is a trip through criminal chaos

Layer Cake (aka L4yer Cake) (2004)
Starring: Daniel Craig, George Harris, and Colm Meany
Director: Matthew Vaughn
Rating: Seven of Ten Stars

A successful cocaine dealer (Craig) is about to retire when he is drawn into a power struggle between two crime lords and a race to dispose of one million high-potency Ecstasy tables stolen from eastern European mobsters.

"Layer Cake" is a humor-tinged crime drama of the variety where everything can go wrong will go wrong for our "hero." It's well acted and well-written, and whether or not Craig's nameless, affable drug dealer will successfully extricate himself from the ever-deeping troubles that are arising on his final days in the business actually remains in doubt almost to the very end of the film. The balance between suspense and humor is maintained throughout in a fabulous fashion.

The film is from some of the same behind-the-camera talent that brought us "Snatch" and "Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels." The humor has been dailed back a bit, and it takes place at a level further up the criminal food chain than the other two films--so there aren't quite as many idiots running around--but if you enjoyed those other films, I think you'll like this one, too.

Your marital problems ain't nuttin'

Mr. and Mrs. Smith (2006)
Starring: Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt
Director: Doug Liman
Rating: Six of Ten Stars

John and Jane (Pitt and Jolie) meet by chance while both are on business in Bogota, fall in love, and get married a few months later. However, their separate professional lives and the secrets they are keeping from each other soon take a toll on their marriage, as they are both professional assassins working for competing firms. The truth comes out when they are both assigned to take out the same target.


"Mr. and Mrs. Smith" is a fun action movie that manages to dish out quite a bit of commentary on marriage, love, and friendship in between shoot-outs and chases. The film's a bit slow in its wide-up, but once it gets going it keeps you engaged. The action's okay and the jokes are funny. (The freeway mini-van chase is particularly exciting AND amusing.)

Pitt once again shows that he's one of the funnest actors working today, and Jolie pulls off a great assassin-turned-suburban housewife routine. Both stars also manage to present characters that are both tough and vulnerable (at least as far as one another are concerned).

There's no deep messages here, and the action scenes aren't groundbreaking, but aside from a slightly sluggish start, there's nothing particularly bad about the film. It's one of those where you can just turn off your brain and laugh at the mayhem.

'Zodiac' is too long, but still worth the time

Zodiac (2007)
Starring: Jake Gyllenhaal, Mark Ruffalo, Robert Downey Jr, Anthony Edwards, Chloë Sevigny, Elias Koteas, and John Carroll Lynch
Director: David Fincher
Rating: Six of Ten Stars

A mysterious killer taunts the police and the press with letters while remaining unknown and uncatchable. "Zodiac" tells the story of three men (Downey, Gyllenhaal, and Ruffalo) whose lives were altered and consumed by their attempts to unmask the killer. The tagline here-- "There's more than one way to lose your life to a killer"--is one of the more apt ones to ever be applied to a film.


Based on real-life events, "Zodiac" is a dialogue-driven thriller that keeps a downbeat, tense mood--accented by brief horror sequences as Zodiac commits his murders or moments such as when cartoonist-turned-amateur-slueth Robert Graysmith (played by Jake Gyllenhaal) comes face to face with a man he comes to believe is the Zodiac himself--as it grinds through its nearly three hour running time. While the fillm is entirely too long, it is nonetheless well put together with excellent performances by every member of the cast. (I am mildly troubled by the fact there's a two disk director's cut of this film available. It already began to feel tortourously long as the Zodiac investigation ran around in a swamp of dead ends and I was about ready to give up on it just when Graysmith finally started putting some pieces together and the movie picked up its pace as he zeroed in on the identity of the Zodiac Killer. I shudder to imagine how dull an even longer version of this movie must be.)

"Zodiac" is worth seeing, particularly if you enjoy true-to-life police procedurals and low-key thrillers, but be aware that you'll probably have to set aside an entire evening to do so. I'd be prone to stay away from the extended director's cut, but I admit to not having seen it.)

'Nurse Betty' features great performances

This review is part of Blogcabin's 30 dAyS oF cRaZy blog-a-thon.

Nurse Betty (2000)
Starring: Renee Zellweger, Morgan Freeman, Chris Rock, Greg Kinnear, Tia Texada, and Crispin Glover
Director: Neil LaBute
Rating: Seven of Ten Stars

The shock of witnessing her husband's murder drives Betty (Zellweger) into a fantasy world where she believes she is the first love of her favorite soap opera character. She sets off for California to reunite with him. Meanwhile, two hired killers (Freeman and Rock) are tracking her, intending to eliminate the only witness to their crime and to recover drugs they believe she has stolen.


"Nurse Betty" is a sharply written comedy that delivers a multi layered message about how expectations and dreams drive us forward and shape our actions. Three of the film's major characters are in love with an ideal that has a physical counterpart but really doesn't exist outside their imagination. (Betty is in love with a kindhearted, romantic heart surgeon whose personality is very different from the actor who portrays him; Betty comes to represent the perfect woman to the hit man played by Morgan Freeman who falls in love with her picture as he tracks her westward; and Greg Kinnear comes to view Betty as his ticket to the next stage of his career, as he believes her to be a fantastically talented improv performer instead of a poor woman suffering from a dissociative disorder).

As is often the case when supported by a good script, every actor in this film is at their best. Even Chris Rock, who usually annoys the heck out of me, is funny at the right times and dramatic at the right times.

Of particular note in this stand-out cast is Morgan Freeman. While Freeman is playing the character he seems to play most often--a professional killer who is smarter and a little less psychotic than is typical for members of that profession--he is perhaps better here than any other of the times he's played it. While he usually manages to present a charming and somewhat sympathetic character no matter how amoral he ultimately turns out to be, his character here is one that you will find yourself having real sympathy for when all his hopes and dreams are shattered toward the end of the movie, and he ends up paying a heavy price for his life of violence.

This is one of those movies I sat down to watch with no idea what to suspect--the leads have all appeared in a wide variety of genres--but it was a pleasant surprise. The script is well written with not a single moment wasted, and every performer featured gives a top-notch performance. It's definitely worth checking out by anyone who enjoys a well-crafted romantic comedies. While "Nurse Betty" might not have a storybook ending, every character who deserves a happy ending gets one, and you're guaranteed to be left feeling warm and fuzzy as the end credits roll.

Steven Seagal embarrasses himself again

Belly of the Beast (2003)
Starring: Steven Seagal, Byron Mann, Monica Lo, Tom Wu, and Sara Malakul Lane
Director: Tony Ching
Rating: Four of Ten Stars

One-time CIA operative Jake Hopper (Seagal) travels to Thailand to rescue his daughter (Lane) who is being held for ransom by militants. He runs head-long into intrigues involving rogue military officers, corrupt CIA agents, and an evil sorcerer.

"Belly of the Beast" is a paint-by-numbers action flick that borrows and steals from any number of superior films. I'm not sure there's a single frame in it that isn't cribbed from somewhere, except perhaps the bit where a monastery full of Buddhist monks get together to unite their spiritual force and attempt to slay the evil Thai voodoo priest who is targeting their good buddy Jake Hooper with his voodoo dolls and chants. (It also happens to be one of the dumber moments in the movie. I know Buddhism is a big tent, but does it really have room for an entire monastery of monks who violate one of the most basic preciepts of Buddhism, that being "you will not take a human life"?)

Being unoriginal isn't necessarily bad. The recent hit movie "Machete"--which features Steven Seagal in a supporting role as the main villain--owes everything to 1970s blacksploitation films, and it's a great deal of fun. Sometimes, turning off the brain and just watching things explode isn't all that bad.

"Belly of the Beast" had the potential to be a movie like that, but that potential is sapped away by the presence of a weak, overweight, and generally unhealthly looking Steven Seagal. The fact that he is past his physical prime and out of shape--perhaps even ill--is made all the more obvious by the scenes he shares with sidekick Byron Mann. Mann is the young, physically fit actor that Seagal USED to be twenty years ago, and Mann doesn't need stand-ins and creative camera angles to make it look like he is doing his fight scenes, because he actually is doing his fight scenes.


Actually, this film would have been a far-sight more watchable if Mann had been the hero on a quest to free his kidnapped daughter and Seagal being the sidekick recruited out of retirement in a Buddhist monastery. Mann in the lead and Seagal as the sidekick would have fixed this film's worst problems. It might even have made the plot line with the barmaid falling head-over-heels in love with the dashing hero who rescues her believable. (Of course, the different casting would not have allowed broken down old fat guys like me to imagine us in Steven Seagal's shoes... "wow, if he can get a hot chick, then so can I!" Nor would we have been treated to teenaged girls in short-shorts and bikini tops, as any daugther Mann's character might have would be entirely too young for such displays. But I think it would have been a fair trade-off to avoid yet another sad spectacle of Steven Seagal humiliating himself.)

With a new decade upon us, I think maybe that Steven Seagal has FINALLY taken the hard look at himself and his career that he should have taken back in 2000. The role his plays in "Machete" is far more suitable for his physical condition and appearance these days--even if he had to play at being the bad-ass there, too. Maybe now, he will start settling into supporting roles and stop making those of us who liked his films in the early 1990s look upon him with pity.

'The Contract' is not worth working for

The Contract (2006)
Starring: Morgan Freeman, John Cusack, and Jamie Anderson
Director: Bruce Beresford
Rating: Five of Ten Stars

A top assassin (Freeman), stranded in the Washington backwoods, ends up in the custody of Ray (Cusack), a retired police officer who wants to reconnect with and impress his young son (Anderson). Will Ray manage to bring the killer to the authorities, or will the rest of the hit team catch with up him first?


"The Contract" isn't a bad movie, but it isn't exactly a good one, either. The plot is one that's been done a dozen times over, the "twists" are all predictable because they too have been done a dozen times over characters are cliches that only come to life due to the excellent work of the actors portraying them... but even the best actor can make up for the fact that every action the characters take seem dictated by plot needs rather than common sense. It's the sort of film that's worth watching if you come across it late at night on television and can't sleep. It's not worth going out of your way for, though.

The best thing about the film is actually Morgan Freeman. He plays the cold-blooded, practical, and well-spoken sociopath very well... although he's had plenty of practice, given that this is the third or fourth time he's played that character. Freeman is interesting enough of an actor that he manages to make hit man Frank Carden interesting and likable, even if the character is as written is as dull as they come, and he is the villain of the piece; not the main villain, but certainly not a character the viewer is supposed to be as sympathetic toward as we are.

Our sympathies should lie with Ray, the father struggling to keep his son from "going bad" and the struggling to keep everyone alive. Unfortunately, Ray is such a dunderhead--being the main factor that keeps some fairly simple resolutions to the storyline from being enacted, no matter how sensible they might be--and John Cusack plays the part like he's asleep half the time, so Ray ends up feeling like a non-entity, exactly like the troubled single father stereotype he's written as.

Where Freeman seems to give his character life beyond the page, Cusack never seems to rise above the workman-like script. So, with a perceptive man of steel on one hand, and a dimwitted dish rag on the other, it's no wonder that we like Freeman's character over Cusack's. (And, of course, in the end, Freeman's character turns out to be not such a bad guy after all... because hit men are murderers with honor and hearts of gold in the world of movie stereotypes.)

'New York Blood' is a decent no-budget film

New York Blood (2009)
Starring: Vinnie Stigma and Marvin W. Schwartz
Director: Nick Oddo
Rating: Five of Ten Stars

New York gangster Vinny (Stigma) tries to help his psychotic father (Schwartz) when he is released from prison for murder. Instead, the old man's blood-thirsty, violent ways ends up destroying Vinny's little kingdom of prostitution and drug dealing.


"New York Blood" is an ultra-low budget movie with the running-time and pacing of an hour-long television drama. Writer/director Nick Oddo created a movie that has some of the typical flaws seen in films at this production level, but for the most part it's superior to most other films you'll come across that were made for $4,000. It's also a decent gangster movie that's populated with characters that come across as real.

The biggest budget-related production flaws that "New York Blood" displays--here it's mostly bad sound, as it seems either the microphone on the camera itself was used, or a single mic on one actor in each scene was used to pick up the dialogue from all actors and no (if any) post-production looping took place. Otherwise, the film is well-lit, well-staged, and well-paced, with not a single scrap of padding anywhere to be found. The only other annoying flaw--and this may be nitpicking--was the strangely loose bandage on the face of a girl who had supposedly been cut up by a psychopath. Could whoever was doubling as propmaster and/or costumer not have applied a little extra glue to the surgical tape so it would stick to the girl's make-up? Even a dab of Elmer's Glue would have been better than the distracting, flapping tape in the scene.

The acting here is also better than what is usually found in films at this level, or, rather, Oddo managed to hide the short-comings of his cast of mostly first-time and one-time movie actors. First, none of the weaker actors are called upon to carry any significant scenes--Oddo was very wise in casting and editing choices. Second, the film has the feel of a documentary and/or a "reality show" to the point where Vinny addresses the camera with comments about what he is doing--so it works that a few characters feel a little stiff. Unfortunately, Oddo doesn't keep this documentary tone consistently through the picture, choosing to break from it by showing Lorenzo committing his gory murders. While I understand why Oddo wanted to get some violence into his flick, the way he did it undermines the best aspect of the film.

Still, there are filmmakers who spend ten times what Oddo spent on his movie that don't make them this good. If you like gangster movies, I think you would do well to check it out.

Bad management can lead to the most unexpected of problems

Scorched (2002)
Starring: John Cleese, Paulo Costanzo, Rachael Leigh Cook, Woody Harrelson, Joshua Leonard, Alicia Silverstone, and Marcus Thomas.
Rating: Seven of Ten Stars

Three tellers at a small branch office bank (Costanzo, Harrelson,and Silverstone), each with their own reasons for feeling disgruntled and put-upon decide independently to rob their employeer. Each has their own plan, each intends to target a different part of the bank, and each chooses to commit their larceny on the same weekend. And that's when things start getting really crazy.


This ensamble comedy features a strong cast (more comment on this below) and likable characters that move back and forth through four overlapping storylines--the three heists and a fourth involving a pair of geeky roommates who are trying to land one of them a job he can keep for more than a couple of hours. It also features a surprsingly tense roulette scene during one of the larcenous tellers' trip to Vegas. Some of the lines are a bit clunky and there are one or two scenes that could do with some punching up, but overall this film is pretty darn good and extremely entertaining.

I also think it's a film old-school roleplaying gamers might enjoy. Several of the film's characters are in a D&D gaming group, and I think we all might recognize some of the character types at the table. Cook's character is a particularly cute parody of the 'gamer chick.'

Speaking of Rachel Leigh Cook, it's probably a good thing that she and Alicia Silverstone don't actually share any scenes. I've never been a big fan of Silverstone, but seeing her in a film with an actress that is so full of charm and energy makes me feel even more underwhelmed by her talent and screen presence. While both actresses did a fine job, I think it is probably a casting mistake to put them in the movie; it makes Silverstone look bad.

'Crank' is chaotic but not all that exciting

Crank (2006)
Starring: Jason Statham, Amy Smart, Jose Pablo Cantillo, Dwight Yoakam, Efren Ramirez, and Carlos Sanz
Directors: Mark Neveldine and Brian Taylor
Rating: Five of Ten Stars

Professional hit man Chev Chelios (Statham) wakes up to discover that he has himself has been the target of an assassination: He has been poisoned with a slow-acting drug that will kill him if his hear-rate drops. In order to survive long enough to reach the doctor who might save him (Yoakam), he goes on a chaotic rampage across Los Angeles to keep his blood pumping and adrenaline flowing.


"Crank" may be a case of "too much of a good thing." I found the first 45 minutes or so of Chev's quest to stay alive at least long enough to kill those who killed him very amusing and very entertaining. It was a little like the classic "D.O.A." but on speedballs and a gallon of coffee. Statham has many amusing one-liners, and the situation his character is in is both funny and nightmarish in the way it's presented.

But then I started looking at the clock and wondering if the film wouldn't get to some sort of point.

Basically, this is a one-gag story, and the gag starts to wear pretty thin after the third time Chev almost dies and needs to find some other way to keep his excitement up. Yes, there are laughs and plenty of action... but there is no substance. Like the video games the film references on several occassions--characters are playing them, doors are decorated with icons from them--the film keeps looping through the same type of encounters and situations but on different "levels". This is great if you're actually the one playing a video game, but not terribly interesting if you're just watching, as I was with this movie.

I do applaud the filmmakers for creating a film that unfolds like a video game, even if I wish there had been more substance to it, and even if I don't particularly care for the nonsensical, dreamlike ending. It's out of step with the rest of the movie, and fails to take advantage of the ending that was pefectly set up. I suppose they were trying to avoid the pat and obvious "happy ending," but I would have appreciated it.

On the other hand, there is a sequel to this film, featuring Statham, as improbably as that seems given the film's final moments. Maybe the ending I thought was being set up was the actual ending and the dreamlike stuff was just a dream.

So... as much as I don't like the ending, and as much as I wanted "Crank" to bring more than it does--or wanted it to be about 15 minutes shorter--I will probably been seekig out the sequel. I enjoyed it enough that I am curious to see what happens next.

The Complete 'Transporter' Series

As part of "The Expendables Week," I'm re-presenting my reviews of the movies that elevated Jason Statham to the position of action super star--the Luc Besson-produced "Transporter" series. Like many of the reviews found on the various Cinema Steve blogs, these originally appeared on my blog at rottentomatoes.com between the years of 2005 and 2008.


The Transporter (2002)
Starring: Jason Statham, Qi Shu, and François Berléand
Director: Louis Leterrier and Corey Yuen
Rating: Six of Ten Stars

Frank Martin (Statham) is the underworld's chief courier, and he can deliver anything and anyone to any place, no questions asked. But when one particular package turns out to be a bound and gagged Chinese girl (Shu), Frank is forced to take on the mantle of hero.


I think I saw something in this movie that most reviewers did not, and I think that caused me to have an even more favorable impression of this film than they did.

Frank Martin and everything about him reminded me of Bean Bandit from the classic "Gunsmith Cats" graphic novels, and the film felt like an unauthorized live-action version of a Bean Bandit adventure. That character, too, is a hard-bitten rogue with his own never-compromised code of honor, drives a ultra-costumized car, will deliver anything anywhere against any odds, and can kick the ass of those he can't outdrive. In every detail that matters, Frank Martin is Bean Bandit. And like "Gunsmith Cats," this movie is more concerned about guns, fast cars, and action than about tight story logic.

The echoes of "Gunsmith Cats" and Bean Bandit aside, this is also just a fun ride of a movie. Frank Martin is a cool action hero in the mold of an Old West cowboy or an 1980s/1990s Sylvester Stallone or Arnold Schwarzenegger character. Unlike the characters portrayed by them, however, Frank is a man of style and refinement--his car is always spotless and his black suits and ties are always crisply pressed. Even after an extended fight, Frank looks sharp.

The biggest flaw with this picture is that I had the sense that filmmakers didn't have the guts to take the film where it needed to go. The film occupies a middle-ground between an early 1980s action film with a bit of a Dirty Harry vibe coming from its detatched-yet-heroically minded central character, and the over-the-top crazy comic-book-action rampage... and more than once is swings to one extreme or the other. The end result is a film that's mildly frustrating to watch, because it ends up being neither fish nor fowl. It's got action and plenty of it, but it's so inconsistent in its tone that it's hard to sit back and enjoy it.

And this is a shame, because Jason Statham plays a very good Bean Bandit... sorry, Frank Martin. If the vehicle had been just a little more soundly constructed, he could have taken us for a spectacular ride instead of a merely okay one.


Transporter 2 (2005)
Starring: Jason Statham, Katie Nauta, and Allesandro Gassman
Director: Louis Leterrier
Rating: Eight of Ten Stars

Frank Martin, a worldclass driver and killer (Statham), is hired to chauffeur and protect the son of a high-placed US government official. The boy is kidnapped, but that's only a prelude to a far more devious and far-reaching plot that only Frank (and a whole lot bullets and fancy driving) can stop.


When I saw the original "Transporter," I viewed it as an unauthorized movie based on the Bean Bandit character from the "Gunsmith Cats" graphic novel series. Its only real flaw was that its creators couldn't make up their minds whether they were making a serious, down-to-earth crime drama with fast cars, or an over-the-top comic-booky action film.

With "Transporter 2," the filmmakers came to a decision, and we are treated to one outrageous, thrilling, and waaaay over-the-top action sequence after another. What's more, the plot is clever and complicated enough that it keeps delivering unexpected twists almost up to the very end. (This is another step up from the first film, I suppose... the plot there was pretty straight-forward.)

Jason Statham is great as the always calm and coldblooded Frank, but, as someone once said, a hero is only as good as the villains he fights... and in "Transporter 2" Frank is up against some very nasty bad guys. The lead heavies are played by Allesandro Gassman (a druglord who puts every letter in EVIL) and Katie Nauta (a psychopathic sex-kitten who fires more bullets in 30 seconds than are fired in the entirety of most major wars), and they are both a joy to watch. The actors, the plot, and the action sequences all blend together seamlessly to make this a great movie experience.


So, why am I only giving it 8 Stars? Well, that is because there are two major flaws that made me sigh with irritation.

First, there is a pretty nifty scene where Frank uses a firehose to beat the living tar out of a bunch of gun-toting bad guys. It's a Jackie Chan sort of scene, although I suspect much of it is done with computer animation and clever editing rather than actual props. Unfortunately, the climax of the scene completely breaks continuity with the entire fight that proceeded.

Second, there is the final dispatching of Nauta's character. It's too easy and too coincidental for a character that has been built up the way she is during the film. I'm not spoiling anything by stating that she dies--if you've seen more than two of these kinds of movies, you know she's too evil to make it through the story alive--and it needs to be mentioned because that character's death is badly done both from a storytelling and a action movie staple perspective. There isn't even a touch of irony in the way she dies... it's just an "oops... she's dead" ending.

Nonetheless, I think this is a move worth seeing if you love over-the-top action films (doubly-so if you're a fan of "Gunsmith Cats".)


Transporter 3 (2008)
Starring: Jason Statham, Natalya Rudakova, Robert Knepper and François Berléand
Director: Olivier Megaton
Rating: Five of Ten Stars

Professional driver Frank Martin (Statham) is a man with a reputation that he'll deliver anything to any place a road will take him and his souped-up Audi, so long as his clients accept a few simple conditions that Frank insists upon. However, when a would-be client won't abide by Frank's rules nor take no for an answer, Frank finds himself forced to drive a mysterious package and an equally mysterious and totally obnoxious young woman (Rudakova) across Europe toward an ever-shifting destination... and if he tries to abandon the job, he'll be blown to bits by an explosive bracelet he's been fitted with.


"Transporter 3" is a step below the wild comic book action of the film immediatetly preceeding it in the series... and even a step below the film that started it all.

I suspect the filmmakers thought they were being topical with a half-assed environmental theme and oh-so-global-community-relevant-and-respectful with the films villains. They are eeeeeeevil American industrialists who are using any means necessary to force a righteous and pure-hearted Ukrainian politician to let them turn his nation into a chemical dumping ground. The truth, however, is that I don't think I've seen an environmentally-themed action flick this stupid since Steven Seagal's "On Deadly Ground". At least this film never gets preachy.

It's also not particularly logical or even intelligent in the way it's executed. The bad guys have grabbed the daughter of the pure-hearted politician in order to force him to do their bidding and they somehow feel the need to move her across Europe using a guy who doesn't work for them. A stupid plan that is doomed to fail. Why even move her anywhere in the first place? And why do the eeeeeeevil industrialists insist on having their cargoships full of toxic waste unloaded in the Ukraine? Why not just let Somali pirates hijack them? Or just dump the waste in Somalia where no one will be able to oppose them? (Or some other equally corrupt and disorganized hell hole... the world is full of them.)

But being stupid isn't the worst aspect of this film; I can forgive a certain level of stupid in a movie series that's evolving into a small-scale James Bond-type deal. The worst aspect of this film is that it never gets really exciting. It features some nice car chases, some okay fight scenes where Frank opens many cans of whoop-ass on hapless mooks, and a couple of cool action set-pieces, but the material that exists between them is poorly written. Not even Frank is very interesting in this film.


This is one of those pictures where the cast is let down by a weak script and a less-than-talented director.

Statham plays his usual laconic I'd-as-soon-kick-your-ass-as-talk-to-you character, but the lines he does have lack punch and the fight scenes he is placed in are ineptly choreographed.

Natalya Rudakova has a different look to her than most actresses that appear in films like this, and I think she might be an okay performer... but it's hard to tell because her character was so annoying throughout the movie. I can't for the life of me understand how the romance that developed between her character, Valentina, and Frank was supposed to have come from. (I was further annoyed by her character's tendency to wear too much eyeshadow. One of the evil characters did it in "Transporter 2" and now we have the heroine doing it in "Transporter 3". Will this become a signature of the series?)

All the flaws present in "Transporter 3" make this a movie that all but the most hungry-for-an-action-film viewers can skip.

What is a 'Lucky Number Slevin' anyhow?

Lucky Number Slevin (aka "The Wrong Man") (2006)
Starring: Josh Hartnett, Bruce Willis, Morgan Freeman, Stanley Tucci, Lucy Liu, and Ben Kingsley
Director: Paul McGuigan
Rating: Eight of Ten Stars

A case of mistaken identity places Slevin Kelevra (Hartnett) squarely in the middle of a decades-old feude between two rival crimelords (Freeman and Kingsley) that's about to get very, very hot. With a quirky coroner (Liu) as his only ally, and a cop with a dark secret out to arrest him (Tucci), Slevin has three days to figure out a way to balance the mutually exclusive expectations of the criminals threatening him and stay alive in the process. The difficult situation may well be impossible, as the feared assassin Mr. Goodkat (Willis) is also in the mix, with an agenda dating back over 20 years.


When "Lucky Number Slevin" appeared in theaters in 2006, I wrote in my review of it that "it seems that Hollywood is finally making some good thrillers again" and "I can declare that the dry-spell of decent thrillers in the vein of Hitchcock is over."

I have since stepped a bit back from that optimistic position--2006 was just a very good year for the thriller genre... the Hollywood offerings quickly returned to the levels of crapitude I have come to accept as reality--but "Lucky Number Slevin" was and is a great mix of film-noir genre standards and comedy that is enhanced by sharply crafted dialogue and presented in a fabulously convoluted mystery plot. The acting is top-rate by all involved, the set design appropriately strange (reflecting Slevin's bizarre predicament), with clever use of editing, overlays, and the musical score serving only to elevate what is already good even further. While there isn't a whole lot of originality in "Lucky Number Slevin" as far as the story goes, it uses the building blocks of a film-noir story so effectively that pretty much everything works here. (In fact, "Lucky Number Slevin" reminded me more of Hitchcock at his best than countless movies that critics have labeled "Hitchcockian" over the years.)

The only complaint I have with the film is Liu's character, Lindsey. Her dinginess became a little hard to swallow after it was revealed that she was a coronor, and I didn't buy the insta-relationship between her and Slevin. I have the same problem with a number of classic suspense movies--with Hitchcock's "Notorious" and "The Trouble With Harry" being among the biggest offenders--but given that it's an element that's present in many of "Lucky Number Slevin's" filmic ancestors, it doesn't bother me any more here that it does in the others.

I think fans of Hitchcock movies and well-done crime/caper movies will find "Lucky Number Slevin" well worth their time and money.

You'll wonder what 'War' is good for

War (aka "Rogue Assassin") (2007)
Starring: Jason Statham, Jet Li, John Lone, Mark Cheng, Devon Aoki, Ryo Ishibashi, Sung Kang, and Terry Chen
Director: Philip G. Atwell
Rating: Four of Ten Stars

FBI Special Agent Crawford (Statham) tries to corner the assassin known as Rogue (Li), finally hoping to get revenge for the murders of his partner and his partner's family. Meanwhile, the killer is attempting to start a war between the Yakuza and Triad gangs in San Francisco for reasons known only to him.


For most of its running time, "War" is a slightly below average action film. The fight and gun-play scenes are okay, the chase scenes outstay their welcome a little, but nothing is too terrible. It remains in this mode, until, literally its final minutes... at which time not one but two surprise twists are introduced, one of which in particular goes a long way to undermine everything we've just sat through.

I don't like spoiling movies in my reviews, so I won't go into details about the twists. If someone out there wants more information, or wants to discuss them, please open a conversation in the Comments section. However, as far as the twists go in the most general of terms...

The first twist relates to the nature and identity of Rogue and what his motivations are. Early in the film, it's established the Rogue is erratic, has changed allegiances at least once in his career, and so unpredictable that some even question whether he exists or not. As we see Rogue in action throughout the movie, we come to see his erratic nature first hand, as whenever we think we know what he's up to, it turns out that it's really something entirely different. It works for the movie, as the "A Fistful of Dollars"-type plot-line with Rogue setting the Yakuza and Triad gangs on a path of mutually assured destruction while both sides think he is working for them while betraying the other is one of its more entertaining aspects. However, it seems extremely contrived--beyond even the point that is acceptable for a film like this, where everything feels contrived to one degree or another when the all of Rogue's secrets are laid bare at the last minute.


Then there's the film's second twist, the one that costs it an entire ratings point all by itself. I don't mind movies of this type having thin plots, nor do I necessarily mind lots and lots of contrived and convenient circumstances to keep them going, nor to I necessarily mind some degree of incoherence and/or illogic in the story-telling; if I did, I doubt I would like any of them. What I don't like is when the filmmakers think they are being clever/dramatic/Shakespearean-level-tragic when they throw in some "surprise revelation" that is badly set up (if set up at all) and which either fits poorly with everything that's gone before, or so transforms our impression of the characters the revelation is related to that it sours us on the entire movie.

In "War," the "clever surprise revelation" is so badly executed that it doesn't quite sour the viewer on the characters, but it will annoy the heck out of anyone who is paying attention. But it is illogical in the extreme and it ruins what might otherwise have been a strong ending--and even a set-up for a potential sequel. Perhaps even worse, it feels like half a twist, as its main set-up comes during the final confrontation between Rogue and the Yakuza. It grows out of what seems to be an obvious lie, and it still feels like a lie even its being confirmed during last two minutes. It's a twist that leads to a turns into a spoiled ending, due to incompetent writing and directing.

As for the acting, nothing here is too terrible, but nothing is all that remarkable either. Jason Statham and Jet Li were both better in their previous teaming--"The One," I film I wished I'd watched again instead of taking the time to see this one--but they do the best with what they have here. Their characters don't demand a whole lot of acting from them, and the fight scenes are pretty standard for the film's we've seen them in.

When "War" was released in 2007, I ignored it, because I felt the previews made it look uninteresting. I should have stayed with my first instincts and ignored it on DVD as well. It's a mediocre action film that's ruined by plot twists conceived by writers who weren't talented enough to properly pull them off.

'Eye See You' isn't worth viewing

Eye See You (aka "D-Tox") (2002)
Starring: Sylvester Stallone, Charles Dutton, Kris Kristofferson, Tom Berenger, Polly Walker, Robert Patrick, and Christopher Fulford
Director: Jim Gillespie
Rating: Four of Ten Stars

When his girlfriend is murdered by a serial killer who has targeted him and other cops, FBI Agent Jake Malloy (Stallone) falls apart. After a suicide attempt, he checks himself into an isolated rehab center that specializes in helping police officers. The killer vowed to stay after Malloy, however, and as a blizzard cuts the facility off from the rest of the world, it appears that he may have be making good on his promise.


"Eye See You" is a charmless spin on the "Ten Little Indians"-type mystery--a group of strangers in an isolated setting, one among them is a killer who is bumping off the rest--with a heapin' helpin' of slasher-film style violence added.; Unfortunately, most of the characters never evolve beyond annoying stereotypes and there are a couple of really glaring plotholes that should have been fixed before this movie went anywhere near the public. To make matters worse, the acting is nothing special, except in a negative sense where Stallone is conccerned. He is so awful in this film that if I hadn't just seen "The Expendables", I would be wondering.. the guy could act at one time, right? I'm not misrembering, am I?).

Oh... and the ending is one of those infuriating ones where the hero ends up devolving almost to the level of the bad guy and lowers himself to a status of little more than a murderer himself.

There's nothing new or even particuarly good here. Don't bother seeing "Eye See You."

'Get Smart' is a great update of classic show

Get Smart (2008)
Starring: Steve Carrel, Anne Hathaway, Alan Arkin, Dwayne Johnson, Terence Stamp, Ken Davitian, and Dalip Singh
Director: Steven Segal
Rating: Eight of Ten Stars

When the international crime syndicate and freelance spy-ring KAOS gains a complete roster of field agents working for the most secret branch of the United States intelligence services, CONTROL, the Chief (Arkin) promotes eager-beaver analyst Maxwell Smart (Carrel) to field agent. Together with the only other agent not compromised by KAOS, Agent 99 (Hathaway), he sets out to discover what notoriouls KOAS agent Seigfried (Stamp) intends to do with stolen radioactive materials.


When "Get Smart" was released in 2008, it got bad reviews. As with several other comedies from around that time--"Balls of Fury" and "Nacho Libre" spring to mind immediately--the bad reviews were more a reflection of critical cluelessness than any probems with the movie itself. Too many movie critics had their heads too far up their asses to see that this film provided a fun update of the 1960s spy spoof that modernizes the characters and conflicts without feeling the need to denigrate and mock the original show (as was done in movies like "Starsky and Hutch"), or all but ignore the original show, except for a little lip service (as was done with the "Mission: Impossible" movies). This film takes all that was good about the TV series, even to the point where some of the spirit can stil be felt, and delivers it in a package that both those who love the old show and those who have never even heard of it can enjoy.

While I will grant the criticsm that the movie never gets quite as crazy as the TV show could be at its finest, and that only a few of the dialogue exchanges approach Mel Brooks and Buck Henry level writing (like the "if you were CONTROL you'd be dead" scene between Maxwell Smart and Seigfried, as featured in one of the previews), but the movie would have been a miserable failure if it had aped the old show. There is only one Mel Brooks and whenever writers try to copy him, they always fail spectacularly.

The actors portraying the various familiar characters are not attempting mimic those who have come before. Like Roger Moore didn't do a Sean Connery impersonation when he took over as James Bond, nor does Steve Carell do Don Adams when he plays Maxwell Smart. The character is obviously the same character, but the Carell gives his own spin on him. The same is true of Anne Hathaway as Agent 99 and Alan Arkin as The Chief. The characters are recreated, but still recognizable.

Another very smart move done by the film's creators (particularly score composer Trevor Rabin) was to retain the old "Get Smart" theme and weave it throughout the soundtrack music. They were smart to enough to recognize that the "Get Smart" theme by Irving Szathmary is one of the best pieces of television music ever written and that a "Get Smart" update wouldn't be complete without it. Just like the actors took the characters and reinvented them, so did Trevor Rabin take the spy music second only in fame to the "James Bond Theme" and make it his with a number of playful and thrilling variations as the movie unfolds. (The soundtrack music is available from Amazon.com, and the disc contains several more of Rabin's variations on the theme that don't appear in the film but which are very creative and worthwhile. Even if you don't see the movie, the soundtrack is worth owning, because this fun music stands just fine on its own.

From the first teaser ad for the "Get Smart" film, I was looking forward to seeing it. As longer previews appeared, I started getting concerned that it was going to be another adaptation/update that was going to be intended more as an excersize in mocking the original show, or too mean-spirited to really capture the "Get Smart" feel. Thankfully, my fears were unfounded, and the film turned out to be a fun, breezy upate of the classic TV show... a laugh- and action-filled spy spoof that's well worth seeing. (It may not be perfect--there are a couple of instances I found myself thinking, "Waitaminnit... why isn't Smart reacting to that comment?" and "Why did the leap to THAT conclusion?"-- but the flaws are few and minor.)

A sidekick gets promoted to lead hero....

Inspector Lewis (2006)
Starring: Kevin Whately, Laurence Fox, Clare Holman, Charlie Cox, Jemma Redgrave, Lizzy McInnerny, Jack Ellis and Rebecca Front
Director: Bill Anderson
Rating: Seven of Ten Stars

Robbie Lewis (Whately), one-time sidekick to the famed Inspector Morse, has been promoted to Inspector himself and returns to Oxford after a long absense. Still in emotional pain from the sudden death of his beloved wife, Lewis finds himself involved in a murder case that brings back even more painful memories as it is related to a case that Morse once worked on.


"Inspector Lewis" was the pilot episode for a sequel series to the popular British television series "Inspector Morse". It is a sold start for a respectable follow-on to a classic, even if Kevin Whatley really is better suited to play a second-banana character than being the one who carries the show.

Fans of "Inspector Morse"--and good detective stories in general--will enjoy this movie and the television episdoes that follow it. Despite that, some might, like me, be a little peturbed with the killing-off of Lewis' wife. I think it would have been a nice change of pace to have a lead detective on one of these shows who actually has a solid homelife and who is completely devoted to and deeply in love with his or her spouse.

Dirty cops must silence witness in '16 Blocks'

16 Blocks (2006)
Starring: Bruce Willis, Mos Def, and David Morse
Director: Richard Donner
Rating: Six of Ten Stars

Broken-down, burned-out NYPD detective Jack Mosely (Willis) is given a simple assignment: Escort a prisoner, Eddie Bunker (Def), sixteen blocks from the police station holding-tank to the courthouse so he testify before a Grand Jury. The prisoner has to be there by 10am, because if he isn't, the Grand Jury is dismissed and the prosecutor's case will fall apart. But even in New York traffic, two hours to cover sixteen blocks should be easy, right? Well, not if the witness's testimony is going to expose police corruption reaching from the streets to highest pinnacle of power within the NYPD.


"16 Blocks" is, basically, a lesser version of the story told in the classic movie "The Gauntlet". Here, like in that film, a cop who is just marking time until retirement manages to summon up whatever spark first inspired him to join the police and do the right thing against ever-increasing odds; a major difference between the Eastwood character in "The Gauntlet" and Mosely is that he is aware that other cops are trying to kill his charge from the outset, and that this is what sparks his desire to overcome in the first place. Another difference is that while the witness in "The Gauntlet" was annoying, Sandra Locke's character at least had some likable qualities to her. There is nothing particularly likable about the character played by Mos Def in "16 Blocks"--not even his oft-stated dream to leave crime behind and become a baker, because it never once rings true--and his nonstop babbling and truly obnoxious voice becomes nerve-grating more than once. Finally, there is a difference in intensity... in "The Gauntlet", here's a sense of ever-increasing danger and pressure. That never occurs here... the film reaches a level a few minutes in and stays there, despite the many shoot-outs and close calls between Mosely and his pursuers.

Bruce Willis gives a great performance as a man who is way past his prime and in over his head; there are several times where his facial expressions say more than any lines of dialogue could. Unfortunately, his co-star, Def, is so annoying that I found myself wishing someone would shoot his character now. Willis also has the problem that he's in a movie that doesn't seem to go anywhere. There's a great build-up to the moment when assassins take a shot at Bunker, and it feels like the film will get even tenser when Mosely realizes that his old partner (Morse) and other detectives that seem to come to his aid are actually part of the plot to silence the witness... but instead the momentum seems to stall. The film coasts through the roughly one-and-three-quarter hours of real-time as Mosely struggles to deliver Bunker to the courthouse alive, eventually coming to a sputtering halt at its ending, whether the original one, or the "shocking" alternate ending included on the DVD release.

"16 Blocks" had a lot of potential, but it never really lives up to its promise; like its hero, it seems to be coasting, but unlike the hero, it never finds its "spark" or redemption. It is a film that any big time Bruce Willis fan should check out--he is quite good in it. The rest of us are probably better off picking up a copy of "The Gauntlet" if we haven't seen it yet.