'Cliffhanger' is a mountain of excitement

Cliffhanger (1993)
Starring: Sylvester Stallone, Michael Rooker, John Lithgow, Janine Turner, and Rex Linn
Director: Renny Harlin
Rating: Eight of Ten Stars

When a mid-air heist goes wrong and three cases full of $1,000 bills are dropped onto remote peaks of the Rocky Mountains, members of a search-and-rescue team (Rooker, Stallone, and Turner) are forced to help the murderous criminals retrieve them.

"Cliffhanger" is at its best during its opening rescue scene. Perhaps more-so than any other film, director Renny Harlin manages to capture the soaring peaks and terrifyingly deep canyons of mountains, both with excellent cinematography and performances from his actors. It's also a scene that contains the only real surprise in the film... and the first time you see it, you will be shocked.

While the mountain-climbing sequences, shoot-outs, explosions, and helicopter crashes are all very exciting, Harlan never manages to quite reach the artistry and suspense present in that opening scene. It's all extremely well done, and it all adds up to a great movie--one of the best Harlin has helmed, and one of the best of Stallone and Rooker's respective careers--but it still doesn't manage to top the mountain climbing scenes from Clint Eastwood's 1975 "The Eiger Sanction," where the dizzying heights and frightful plunges remain a constant and real threat. Here, they are more like book-ends--present at the film's beginning and briefly returning at the end--even though there are climbing scenes throughout the film.

But, even if Harlin can't top his own opening, he does deliver a fast-paced and exciting movie... so fast-paced and exciting that you'll hardly have time to consider some of the illogic and foolish behavior on the part of a number of characters. (The one exception to this will be when the psychotic villain played by Lithgow orders Stallone to throw a backpack from a cliff into an airborn helicopter. Even if the script was written that way, I would have thought the crew [which includes co-screenwriter Sylvester Stallone] would have been observant enough to recognize that the wind created by the helicopter blades would make such a toss very difficult if not impossible.)


From a filmmaking standpoint, "Cliffhanger" also shows the importance of shooting on location, as well as the fact that nine times out of ten, if you want a stunt scene to look realistic, you need live stunt men and actors dealing with real props and/or locations. There are very few of the mountain scenes shot on sound stages in this movie, and there are even fewer, if any, that use green screens and other digital trickery. Although movies are all about making the fake look real, when reality is the starting point, more reality is present in the end-product. And the fact that actors, stunt-people, and film crew were all actually working in snowy wilderness gives the film a sense of reality that computer artists and set builders will probably never be able to match.

Performance-wise, everyone featured is at the top of their game. Stallone gets to show some range without going over the top--the action hero hamming in this film is done by Michael Rooker--and Janine Turner steps away from the bubble-headed roles of her early career toward the portrayal of a strong and resourceful woman that would make her a star on the 1990s television series "Northern Exposure." Meanwhile, John Lithgow over-acts like he's never over-acted before, but he's still pitch-perfect as the psychotic criminal mastermind who will kill anyone who not only stands between him and his misplaced millions, but also anyone who stands near them, just because. It's the kind of villain that made movies of this type so much fun, and Lithgow does a great job.

"Cliffhanger" is an under appreciated entry on the resumes of everyone involved, partly due to the fact that the director is responsible for a number of truly awful films. But if you enjoy the action movies of the 1990s, or Stallone's more recent effort "The Expendables", this is a must-see.

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."

'The Expendables' is a great action flick

The Expendables (2010)
Starring: Sylvester Stallone, Jason Statham, Jet Li, Dolph Lundgren, Eric Roberts, David Zayas, Giselle Itie, Terry Crews, Randy Coutre, Mickey Rourke, and Charisma Carpenter
Director: Sylvester Stallone
Rating: Eight of Ten Stars

An elite team of mercenaries (Li, Statham, Stallone) turn down a contract to overthrow the military dictator of a small South American nation (Zayas). They change their minds when when the drug-runners who are the power-behind-the-power (Austin and Roberts) abduct the dictator's kindhearted daughter (Itie), and they set out to overthrow a government and kill every bad guy they come across--free of charge.


Forget the race-baiting self-consciously referential "Machete" that's coming out later this year. This is the film that captures the real mood and spirit of everything that was great about the explosion-laden action movies of yesteryear, without any posturing, preaching, or pandering.

Like "Predators" from earlier this summer, "The Expendables" is a throw-back movie that succeeds at what it sets out to do--to evoke the feeling of a 1980s action flick and to the movie days when men were men and every day brought another suicide mission. It does this with all the fight scenes, gunplay, car chases, and macho banter than even the most discriminating fan would want. It also does so by reviving a common 1980s villain (the corrupt CIA operative whose gone into the drug trade), by providing us lead characters who can be chivalrous when damsels are in distress, completely coldhearted and unforgiving to those who put them there, and forgiving to their friends even when they betray them.

In "The Expendables," Sylvester Stallone gathered such an array of stars--several of whom have cameos, such as Bruce Willis and Arnold Schwarzenegger--that I was afraid the film would collapse under the weight of egoes vying for screentime and recognition. Thankfully, I was wrong.

Stallone, who is also the co-writer and director of the flick, retains complete control of the straight-forward action narrative in the film, with every character and actor portraying it, playing their part in the story with no allowance for star-status, past or present. It goes without saying that three of the biggest stars appearing in the film--Stallone, Statham, and Li--also get the most screen time, but the rest of the almost equally famous cast play their parts without any particular acknowledgement beyond what any other actor might get. The only exception to this is the scene featuring Willis and Schwarzenegger. While it is needed for the plot, its execution feels a little forced, with the dialogue between Stallone, Willis, and Schwarzenegger being just a little too cute and too aware that it's an exchange among movie super-stars and one-time box office rivals.


Aside from that one minor misstep, Stallone keeps the film centered around Barney Ross (played by Stallone himself) and his friend and main partner Lee Christmas (played by Statham), men of violence who nonetheless hold to a strong code of honor and chivalry that they expect everyone who works with them to obey as well. This is established in the film's first scene, and it is carried throughout, as Ross and Lee's honorable natures are ultimately the motivating factor behind every event of the film. They are a pair of cool unapologetic tough guys with the sort of strong moral center that one wishes all such tough guys had both in fiction and reality.

Technically, this is is also an excellent film. It's well-written (aside from the aforementioned scene between between Stallone, Willis, and Schwarzenegger), expertly paced and edited, with every action scene being lean, mean, and exactly what is called for in order to get maximum impact. The only drawback is that this film makes the mistake that so many other action films have done of late--they use computer graphics to add blood spatter and gore to scenes. Unfortunately, it's no less obvious and fake-looking here than it was in the low-budget films that originated the practice, nor any better looking than in the other big-budget film I've recently seen that made use of the unfortunate practice ("MacGruber"). It's a shame really, because those obviously fake bits of CGI were very distracting during the otherwise exciting and fun climactic orgy of explosions, death, and mayhem.

'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.