Masters of the Universe (1987)

I didn’t watch a lot of Saturday-morning cartoons as a kid, mostly because I liked to sleep late.  I do remember two:  Thundercats and He-Man.  I was able to rent one of the Thundercats DVDs from Netflix, but returned it after the first episode.  It didn’t really hold up that well.  Perhaps some memories are better left as memories.

A few months ago, I saw a cover for Men’s Fitness with Dolph Lundgren.  The only thing I knew him from was the live-action Masters of the Universe (He-Man) movie.  I knew that I probably wouldn’t want to bother with the series, but the movie might be worth it.  It would only be a matter of time before Netflix had it streaming.  Lo and behold, Netflix started streaming Masters of the Universe recently.  Despite a few complaints, I remembered liking the movie as a kid.  What could go wrong?

The story starts with He-Man, Duncan and Teela talking about how Castle Grayskull has been taken over by Skeletor.  His plan is to take its power and rule the universe as evil overlord.  How is this possible?  Simple:  He’s tricked Gwildor into making a Cosmic Key that can transport the user and/or friends to any point in space and time.  Skeletor can send his troops to any planet and take it over.  In the process of stopping Skeletor, He-Man, Gwildor, Duncan and Teela are transported to Earth, promptly losing the Cosmic Key.  They don’t have much time to stop Skeletor, who has sent several mercenaries to find and capture He-Man.  Yeah, that’s pretty much the plot in a nutshell.

You know how movies meant for kids now have something for adults?  (How nice that the writers thought of the people who are paying for the tickets.)  Masters of the Universe wasn’t made with that consideration in mind.  The movie was designed to sell the toy line.  This is really where my perspective has changed over the years.  The movie was great for a kid that enjoyed the cartoon and would probably sit through anything that stayed moderately true to the cartoon.

That’s really where my complaints were.  They didn’t have He-Man change from his alter ego, Adam.  They also totally left out Battle Cat and Orko.  In fact, I thought Gwindor was supposed to be a version Orko.  That much I understood.  I could see not wanting to have a floating, vaguely ghost-like character due to budget concerns.  It could also be difficult to have a talking cat in the movie or to have Adam transform into He-Man, as per the TV series.  The $17 million budget was huge for them.  The director had to fight to get a decent ending.

This is one of those movies that I would totally understand if modern audiences skipped.  My watching it was pure nostalgia.  I knew Courteney Cox and Robert Duncan McNeill were in it.  There was also Billy Barty (Noodles MacIntosh from UHF) playing Gwildor.  I also recognized James Tolkan and Frank Langella.  Still, the main draw was having watched both this and the cartoon as a child.  I honestly feel bad for any parent that was dragged to see this.

I think the big drawback was the plot.  It was very underdeveloped to the point where I think the studio was using the characters as a draw.  this came across more as a bad in joke.  There were a few lines that were delivered like you were supposed to know the back story or were a reference to the TV show.  (Think “I have the power!”)     Instead of a standalone movie, like many of today’s movies based on TV shows, it seemed like the finale to a TV show that was cancelled.  (Speaking of which, a planned sequel was scrapped due to the studio losing the movie rights.  Legend has it that the proposed script became Cyborg with Jean-Claude Van Damme.)

The story seems to rely too heavily on cliché.  How is it that as soon as Skeletor locks in on the Cosmic Key, it moves?  Why is it that when anyone finds something of great importance, they instantly assume it’s something else and immediately start playing with it?  It’s amazing that Kevin didn’t send the entire planet into an alternate dimension or something.  I’ve also noticed that the main evil guy always gets really crappy henchmen.  Here’s a guy that took over a planet no problem, but he can’t find someone to do a simple search and retrieval.

The acting was somewhat decent.  Langella was best as Skeletor.  For those that have seen the Back to the Future movies and Top Gun, Tolkan was pretty much what you’d expect as Detective Lubic.  (Is it too much to ask that he call someone a slacker?)  Most of the rest of the acting is about what you’d expect of an 80s movie based on a toy line.  I’m not saying it’s bad, but a lot of it wasn’t memorable.

One of the advantages of Netflix streaming is that I didn’t have to wait for a disc.  The downside is that I couldn’t get any features.  I might rent the disc just to be able to see some of the commentary.  (Much of the information I get is through IMDb.)  I guess nostalgia is a funny thing.

There’s supposed to be another live-action movie coming out.  I don’t know if it’s supposed to be a sequel, a remake or a reboot, but I’m not sure how I’d feel about it.  I imagine it would be similar to the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles reboot, which is also currently available streaming.  Perhaps some memories are better left as memories.

IMDb page

Predestination (2014)

It can be difficult to alter the sequence of events in a story.  In the case of Memento, it makes sense.  Telling the story backwards mimics the main character’s amnesia.  We get insight into the character by not knowing what came before.  I don’t always like stories told in flashback, but it works in Forest Gump.  Lost also used it to give background on the characters.  Sometimes, a linear format doesn’t really make sense.  You have to pick somewhere to start and tell the story from there.

Predestination starts with a temporal agent (played by Ethan Hawke) trying to stop a fugitive called The Fizzle Bomber.  The agent fails to apprehend the bomber, but at least mitigates the effects of one of his bombs.  He has surgery to repair his face and is reassigned.  He now works as a barkeeper.  This is how he meets The Unmarried Mother, who’s played by Sarah Snook.  Barkeep and The Unmarried Mother start talking.  She writes confession stories for a magazine.

She’s got a heck of a story of her own, which Barkeep is perfectly willing to listen to.  Not only was she put up for adoption at an early age, but she has a child of her own that was taken from her a few days after the child’s birth.  The latter ordeal really affects her, as she can’t mother a child any more and the father of the child hurt her.  It’s not all bad news, though.  Barkeep may be able to help her in more ways than one.

I don’t want to go into a lot of detail.  Explaining the plot is a slippery slope.  The more I explain, the more I have to tell to explain that.  It’s one of those mysteries that unravels itself as the story goes along. Everyone has a secret and everyone has their own perspective and context.  When you figure all of that out, the story becomes clear.  (In that regard, you have to pay attention.  It’s a lot to take in.)

The movie is based on the story All You Zombies by Robert A. Heinlein.  The movie seems to stay pretty close to the source material.  If you’ve read the story, there shouldn‘t be any surprises.   This isn’t to say it’s not worth watching.  I’ve always liked stories with a twisted plot.  I enjoy waiting for the next piece to fall into place.

I’m not sure if it’s that I knew the story coming in, but the movie seemed well paced.  It wasn’t rushed and I wasn’t overly eager to find out what happened next.  There were a few aspects that seemed odd, but not to the point of being confusing or contradictory.  For instance, the Unmarried Mother had applied to be in a space program.  I don‘t recall such a program existing, but it wasn‘t distracting.  Overall, it was a great movie. 


IMDb page

Time Lapse (2014)

One of the Twilight Zone episodes I find more memorable was called A Most Unusual Camera.  In it, three people find a camera that can see several minutes into the future.  They use it to win lots of money at the race track, as they can simply take a picture of the scoreboard and bet on what it shows.  It’s a fairly simple, straightforward story.  I doubt any of us would pass on such an opportunity.  However, such an opportunity isn’t without consequences.

In Time Lapse, a similar scenario is presented.  Finn is the maintenance guy for a rental complex.  He lives with Jasper and Callie, who help out.  Callie will sometimes check on people.  Jasper’s main contribution seems to be betting on races.  This is not an unimportant contribution.

When Finn gets the call that Mr. Bezzerides hasn’t paid the rent in two months, Callie goes over to check on him.  She doesn’t find Mr. B right away, but she does find a large camera aimed at their place.  How they never noticed it before isn’t mentioned, but it there is a large collection of Polaroid pictures on two walls.  Many have some combination of Callie, Finn and Jasper.

They come to realize that each picture shows what happens 24 hours in advance.  Jasper immediately realizes the potential to make money on races.  The catch is that Mr. B’s body is in his storage room.  Jasper wants to call the police and let the law take its course.  They agree to a compromise:  They wait for the next photo and see what happens.  If it shows yellow police tape, they call it in.  If it shows race results, they call Jasper’s bookie.

As you might imagine, the next photo shows sports scores.  Finn, Callie and Jasper become rich.  There is a catch:  Mr. B kept a journal stating not to deviate from what’s in the picture lest something horrible happen.  (Again, details aren’t forthcoming.)  This isn’t an issue until one photo shows Callie and Jasper making out.   Callie and Finn are a couple, which puts them on edge, but they go through with it.  They don’t want to risk deviating from the picture.

Then, Ivan appears in one of the photos.  Ivan is Jasper’s very paranoid bookie.  Ivan’s curious how Jasper has gone from a loser to a winner so quickly.  Jasper tries to pass it off as a lucky streak.  Even a broken clock is right twice a day.  Right?  When Ivan finds out about the camera, he takes over their little operation.  Ivan’s muscle, Marcus, will take possession of the photo so that Ivan can place the bets directly, compensating the trio for their troubles.  I don’t know that I’d be ruining anything by giving away the ending, but I won’t risk it.  All I’ll say is that the last picture any of them sees is of police tape.

There seems to be two paths you can take when presented with knowledge of the future.  As I said, this isn’t the first movie to show the main characters giving in to greed.  The Brass Teapot managed to handle it well.  The other extreme would be something like Early Edition, which showed how a good person might handle such knowledge.  Given to someone that realizes the humanitarian potential, a lot of good could be done.

To be honest, I’d probably want to make money given a crystal ball like this.  I’d probably find a way to pass along sports scores or lottery numbers.  I’d like to think I’d play it conservatively.  There’s no talk in the movie of attracting the wrong attention.  If you make the money at a track, you’re going to be noticed by the IRS at the very least.  The track (or, in this case, the bookie) is bound to ask some questions.  Jasper didn’t take this into consideration.

The big question is whether or not we have any sort of free will.  Seeing the picture creates a bootstrap paradox.  Anyone in the picture that’s aware of the picture has to replicate what they did.  Are they doing I because they know they have to or would they have done it anyway?  (Finn also gets to see his paintings, meaning he may not actually be creating them.  Then again, who is he copying from?)  The roommates had gone for months without ever knowing about the pictures, but the pictures were there.  There future had been foretold.  Mr. B essentially plays the role of Wigner’s Friend.

Ultimately, those who live by the camera die by the camera.

IMDb page

Area 51 (2015)

Sometimes, it’s hard to tell if my mother’s being serious.  She’ll make something with broccoli and swear that I love it.  I suspect she may be trying to use some psychological trick to get me to eat it.  It may also be that because she’s seen me eat it before that she honestly thinks that I like it.  I keep telling her that not complaining isn’t the same thing as liking.  Netflix seems to have a similar problem.  They seem to think that sitting through a movie is the same thing as liking it.  Just because I didn’t set my computer on fire while watching one movie doesn’t mean that I’ll like other similar movies.

Take the movie called Area 51.  It’s a found-footage movie about a guy named Reid who wants to break in to, of all places, Groom Lake.  (Groom Lake is commonly referred to as Area 51.)  Reid brings along two friends, Darren and Ben.  Darren is eager to go while Ben doesn’t think that Reid will go through with it.  They’re a little hesitant to meet Jelena, but her father worked in Groom Lake until he started asking questions.  She has information that could be useful.

Well, she gets Darren, Reid and herself in while Ben waits for them in the car.  Amazingly, they just run past security and manage to get all sorts of shaky footage of top-secret stuff, including a UFO.  It all comes to an end when they trip an alarm and have to run out while being chased by armed guards and what I assume is a tall, thin alien.  As you might guess from the found-footage status, things don’t end well for the four main characters.

The Blair Witch Project seems to be the go-to movie for found footage and for good reason.  When it came out in 1999, it was all new and edgy and people were so scared and everything.  While movies before it had used the plot device, The Blair Witch Project was the first to get some attention.   Area 51 came out in 2015.  It doesn’t seem to have contributed much to the idea.  It’s the same concept of someone finding footage and presenting it to the public.

Lunopolis, which I liked, dressed it up as a documentary.  With Trollhunter, we at least had people making a documentary when they stumble upon the truth.  Europa Report was about a scientific mission.  Here, there’s no compelling story.  The characters aren’t really that likable.  There’s nothing special about the movie other than the topic.  You have three guys that manage to luck their way into a secure facility only to meet an ambiguous ending and I didn’t even care.

Most of it is the lack of a real story.  The first third of the movie is pure filler.  The next third is suspense.  The last third is a bunch of shaky camerawork and some somewhat interesting special effects.  I feel like we could have cut out the first half of the movie and used some minor exposition to explain how we got to Las Vegas.  (“What’s whith him?”  “Oh, he was abducted by aliens and now he’s obsessed.”)

Also, Reid manages to break into an employee’s house and steal a badge and a bottle with a fingerprint.  Ok.  I get that you need a fair amount of suspension of disbelief to get them in, but it seems odd to me that it’s possible to steal and use a badge and a fingerprint that easily.  This isn’t even accounting for the fact that they guy who was robbed probably would have reported the missing badge immediately.  (I guess he was too embarrassed that it was stolen so easily.)

And could someone please tell me how three people can walk around a secure facility without being noticed?  It would make more sense to have them caught and use the found footage during interrogation.  The only problem would be explaining how the footage got out at all, but I don’t think it would be that hard to come up with something.

I had wanted to watch the movie all the way through to see if anything interesting happened.  I was sorely disappointed.  I’d recommend skipping this one.  The shame of it is that Netflix has been recommending other similar found-footage movies.  Those, I’ve stopped watching about halfway through.  I can only hope that Netflix doesn’t count that as a like.

IMDb page

The Equalizer (2014)

I have this vague memory of the 1980s.  There were a lot of television shows I had only heard of, mostly because I had to be in bed before they came on.  In 1985, when I was just 9 years old, a show called the Equalizer came on.  It starred Edward Woodward and Robert McCall.  If you were in a bad situation and needed help, McCall would be that help.

In 2014, Denzel Washington took on the role of Robert McCall.  The new McCall was black ops, but is now working at Home Mart.  It doesn’t appear that anyone knows of his past and he’s happy to keep it that way.  He made a promise to his dead wife not to get back into any of that.  Things change when a young female acquaintance of his, Alina, is beaten by her pimp.  He tries to buy out her contract to no avail, leading McCall to take down her pimp and several of his associates.

This might not have otherwise been a problem except that her pimp was affiliated with the Russian mob.  Apparently, they don’t take kindly to their guys being killed.  So, they send in an enforcer to take care of McCall.  This is what takes up the bulk of the movie.  It’s mostly McCall helping Alina get a better life.  There are some side stories to show what kind of man McCall is.  (He helps a coworker pass his security-guard certification, for instance.)

McCall is very calm.  Probably due to his training, he’s capable of taking out the bad guys and he knows it.  He can use what’s available to build disarm or disable his opponents.  There’s a little bit of MacGuyver in him.  He’s basically a man that wants to be left alone.  He really doesn’t want to be drawn back into that world, but realizes that he has to what no one else will.

This is where it would be nice if Netflix had the TV series streaming.  I’d like to see the TV series to compare to the movie.  (I know…they have to pay for the streaming rights.  It’s my problem that I don’t want to wait for the DVDs.)  I’m not really sure how much is the same and how much is different.  I’ve sen Edward Woodward in posters for the TV show holding a gun, but I don’t know how much of the show relied on violence.  The TV series came out 30 years ago, which means that times have changed.  Many of the issues might be similar, but the faces and methods change.

It looks like there may be a sequel, but IMDb doesn’t have any details listed other than it would be Denzel Washington’s first sequel.   I’d definitely like to see it if it does get made.  I might even get around to watching the series.

IMDb page

Click (2006)

Note:  This review was originally posted to my Epinions account.


When I first saw the coming attractions for this movie, I had no intention of seeing it. I’m not a fan of Adam Sandler and felt that Click would be too goofy of a movie for me to really enjoy it. Then, a coworker saw it. He said that it was a lot more serious than most of Sandler’s movies, but still had its moments. It was then that I began to wonder how bad it could really be.

The movie is about Michael Newman (played by Sandler) who can’t keep track of all the remotes that he has. One night, he sets out to find a universal remote. He ends up in Bed, Bath & Beyond, where he meets Morty (Christopher Walken) in the ‘Beyond’ section. Morty has a truly universal remote, which allows Michael to control the universe. He can mute his dog, fast forward over arguments with his wife and even make his boss (and everyone else) speak Spanish, French or any other language.

When he gets this remote, Michael thinks that there’s no possible down side. He can skip ahead to the end of an unpleasant dinner or go ahead a few months to that next promotion. The trouble is that he’s missing out on a lot of things. (The wait for his next promotion turns out to be a year instead of two or three months.) It turns out that the remote creates a whole set of new problems, and Morty isn’t willing to take it back.

Now, I have to say that regardless of how serious the movie is, it’s still an Adam Sandler movie. As my coworker pointed out, Sandler just had to make a joke during the most serious point of the movie. This could have been a totally serious movie and Sandler could have handled it quite well without making too many jokes.

I’m not saying that I didn’t like the humor. It’s just that I don’t think that Sandler will ever break away from what I initially expected of the movie. There were a lot of funny parts, many of which made it into the trailers. Come to think of it, this is one of the few movies that I’ve seen where the plot does seem to stick to what was presented in the coming attractions. There was a comedic slant to most of the movie. There were a few things that I won’t spoil for you, but I do think that if you liked the trailer, you’ll like the movie.

I don’t think that the movie is appropriate for younger children. Although there was no nudity, there were a few adult moments. For instance, the Newman family has a dog that’s particularly fond of a plush toy. You might want to watch the movie before deciding whether or not your children should watch it.

As for older audiences, I’ll give this movie four stars. It’s not perfect, but it was definitely better than I expected. 

IMDb page

Parallels (2015)

I remember being excited when Sliders first aired.  It was a show about four people who are thrust into different universes, each with a slightly different set of circumstances.  One week might show a world where the United States was still a British dependency.  Another might show a world where advanced technology had been banned.  The concept wasn’t new.  Lots of movies and TV shows have used the concept before and since.

When I saw Parallels, I expected something similar.  Instead of a wormhole, we have a building.  We have three friends, two of whom are brother and sister, going from world to world with a stranger.  The first is a post-apocalyptic world.  It turns out that their father nuked the surrounding area.  They manage to escape to a futuristic world.  The date is the same, but technology has advanced quite a bit beyond what we have.  It’s apparent from graffiti inside the building that there are all sorts of other worlds.  (In one, the attack on the Twin Towers happened on a different date. In another, all live births are twins.)

I had wondered why I hadn’t heard of this airing on TV, as it gives the impression of being a TV pilot.  It turns out that Netflix produced it and has it available streaming.  It could very well be made into a TV series.  On that note, I see a lot of similarities with Sliders.  You have two children finding out that they weren’t born on the Earth that they were raised on.  They’re trying to seek out their mother to find their home world.  (In sliders, they were trying to find both parents.)  They also gain control over which world they go to next.

With Netflix producing original content, I could see this being made into a TV series.  (Since the movie was released earlier this year, I don’t know how long it will be before we hear of any news.)  Constance Wu, who plays the stranger, is apparently staring on Fresh Off the Boat.  I don’t know how that would affect anything.  She wouldn’t be the first character to be recast and/or replaced when a movie was made into a TV series.

The main problem would be the similarity to Sliders.  I’d imagine that there would be a similar slew of alternate worlds being used as social commentary.  The main difference would be that other story lines are introduced from the onset.  Sliders kind of jumped the shark when they started having Cromags and the search for the brothers’ real parents/home world.

Another problem I’ve had with alternate universes is how many of the main characters are in the other worlds.  Yes, I realize that it’s easier to use the same actors.  However, do you realize the odds of the same sperm meeting up with the same egg?  The slightest variation could produce a totally different person or not result in a pregnancy at all.  I always found it odd that each world the Sliders visited had most, if not all, of the main characters.  I’d hope that if this movie is made into a show, it might rely on this less.  Given that there’s the potential for a whole new, potentially expansive, mythology, I might very well get my wish.  That is, assuming it gets made into a series at all.

IMDb page

Brave (2012)

Note:  This review was originally posted to my Epinions account.

 

As I was thinking about another movie, ParaNorman, it occurred to me that there aren’t many mainstream animated movies that come to mind.  There are a few, like Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within, that come to mind, but at best are intended for a specific crowd.  You don’t have any animated films that are intended for a general 30-and-older crowd.  My parents will automatically write off a movie simply because it’s animated and with what I will grudgingly admit is good reason:  most animated films are ultimately geared towards a younger audience.  Despite this, I had wanted to see Brave for a while.  I knew it was going to be a more kids-oriented movie, but I like animated films more than my parents.

The movie is about Merida.  The movie starts with her as a young girl, but she grows up and the time comes for her to marry someone from a neighboring clan.  Each potential suitor is vastly different from the others and not particularly to Merida’s liking.  Part of the problem is that she just doesn’t want to marry yet, but her mother is insistent that she follow tradition.  It’s what unifies the four clans.  Merida’s father, on the other hand, tends to encourage (perhaps even enable) Merida’s behavior.

It’s hard to go into the rest of the movie without ruining it, but the bulk of it stems from a misspoken wish that Merida makes and her need to rectify it.  I will say that it’s predictable at times and not so much at others.  (Sometimes, getting exactly what you asked for is the worst thing that can happen.)  It’s basically a goofy movie that children can watch with their parents.  There are a few potentially scary moments, like a bear attacking, but it’s nothing a child wouldn’t understand.  It’s ultimately about a mother and daughter having to understand one another.

The people look exaggerated, which you might expect if you’ve seen other animated films like Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs.  However, there were times when I got lost in the film.  I stopped noticing that it was animated and started noticing the detail in the scenery.

I also empathized with the characters.  It’s pretty easy to relate to a child that doesn’t want to bend to their parents’ wishes, especially when it comes to major life decisions.  This is marriage, after all.  Then again, the king and queen are expected to follow tradition, regardless of their daughter’s wishes.  It may not be right and it may not be fair, but it is the way things have been done for generations.

Maybe I’m just an overgrown kid.  My rooms a mess and I still don’t like broccoli.  With this comes a certain suspicion of people with clean rooms that claim to like broccoli.  I also tend to wonder about people that begrudgingly go to animated films.  I wonder if a few of them are just taking the kids as an excuse to go themselves.

Here’s the thing, though.  This past Academy Awards was one of the few in recent memory where I had seen many of the nominees, one of them being this film, which won.  (The other two are ParaNorman and Frankenweenie, which I’ll get around to reviewing.)  I think I recall an animated film being nominated for Best Film once.

I kind of wonder what it would take for an animated film to be nominated, or at least be considered by the general population.  I’d settle for my mother renting one on her own.  Then again, I’m sure she’d settle for me taking some extra broccoli once in a while. 

Official Site

IMDb page

Wreck-It Ralph (2012)

Sometimes, it’s hard to break out of a mold.  If you’re destined for greatness, you don’t question this.  However, if you’re destined to be the bad guy, you may just want a chance to prove you can do better.  Such is the life of Wreck-it Ralph.  He’s a good guy, but he’s been cast as the villain in a game called Fix-it Felix, Jr.  Everyone loves Felix because he comes to the rescue.  No one wants anything to do with Ralph because he’s a big oaf and all he does is destroy stuff.

This is how the game was designed.  Characters have to stay in character while the game is on, but this seems to extend into their off time, as well.  Ralph has his purpose, but he also has his place, and that place happens to be a pile of bricks at the end of the day.

One day, he decides to take matters into his own hands.  One of the residents of the building he always destroys tells Ralph that if he can win a medal, he can have the key to the penthouse.  He then goes into a first-person shooter game called Hero’s Duty and manages to get the medal, but inadvertently puts another game at risk.  Also, since Ralph wasn’t in his own game, Fix-it Felix, Jr. is assumed to be broken and may be unplugged.  He’s given the key he was promised, but is further ostracized.  To make matters worse, he has endangered a third game called Sugar Rush Speedway.  While in the game, he meets a character going through a similar plight.  (Vanellope von Schweetz isn’t even allowed to participate in her game.)

This is one of those movies where you can probably figure out what’s going to happen.  If Ralph doesn’t get what he wants, he’ll at least put things back close to the way they were and maybe earn some respect.  The fun of the movie, at least for adults, will be nostalgia.  We get to see a lot of video-game characters for 30 years ago, like Pac-Man and Q*bert.  Some of the games were designed for the movie, either to make it easier to write the story or to at least avoid copyright issues.  The characters live in their own universe with games connected by the power cords.  (Those whose games were shut off live in power strips.)

You’d think that animated means simple, but this was one of the more interesting animated movies I’ve seen in a while.  The main character is a villain trying to be a hero.  He meets another character that also just wants to be accepted.  Yes, a few of the characters are a little exaggerated, but this is a movie about video games and their characters.  This is to be expected.  You can empathize with Ralph; the people in his game aren’t necessarily nasty to him, but they could do a lot better.  He’s not asking for much.

There were a lot of references to video games, a few of which I missed.  Those that grew up in the 80s will probably recognize many of the characters and games.  There are a lot of throwaway jokes based on games, both classic and current.  Most are simple, like graffiti in bathrooms and stuff.  It’s definitely a fun movie.  I’d recommend renting it.

Official Site

IMDb page

Dark Girls (2011)

I remember a line from CSI that went something like “It’s not what they call you.  It‘s what you answer to.”  (I’ve found similar quotes attributed to Tylor Perry and W. C. Fields.)  What people call themselves, or at least what they answer to, varies quite a bit in Miami.  Just because you have dark skin doesn’t mean you’re African-American.  Your lineage may have come through any one of a number of nearby countries like Jamaica, Haiti or The Bahamas  Even those that trace their ancestry directly to Africa may have no immediate ties to the continent.  They were born here, as were their parents and grandparents.  It’s not that easy to apply one label to such a diverse group.

This is brought up in Dark Girls.  As you might imagine, the movie is about women of color, which is a very general designation.  This includes many different women from many different places.  In the beginning, we get to see a girl reject the label of African-American, as her family doesn’t come directly from Africa.  The movie goes on to show how darker skin is often seen as worse.  A girl is given five drawings of a child.  The outline is the same for each; the only difference is the color.  When asked to pick the smartest or prettiest, she picks the lightest one.  When asked to pick the worst, she picks the darkest.

From there, the movie tends to ramble.  We have lots of people talk about what it means to be darker or lighter in a society that values being lighter.  We see how women are lightened, both digitally and cosmetically, so as to look prettier.  Several women were told by older relatives to marry lighter so as to have lighter children.  This isn’t even something that’s confined to the United States.

I’ve heard of lighter being better in India and Brazil.  (The movie points out that the reverse is true in only one country.)  I recall one story I heard years ago of a women applying for a role in a commercial featuring a husband, wife and a maid.  She wanted the role of the wife, but was thrown a maid’s uniform because she was darker.  It tends to be harder to love yourself when the media portrays your group as being lesser or worse.  It may not always be overt, but it is there.  (The fact that there’s an industry devoted to lightening skin is testament to this.)

The documentary isn’t great, but it could be used as a starting point.  It’s the kind of thing that I could see schools or other organizations using to get a conversation started.  Race is a very complicated thing.  I’m not sure one documentary could do it justice.

Consider that we share 98% of our DNA with chimpanzees.  Imagine the difference between any two humans.  Such a small difference is what makes us judge one another, whether accurately or not.  I’ve often thought this may explain the Fermi paradox.  Aliens bay be looking at us and seeing how we treat our own species.  How can we be expected to treat an alien race fairly?

Official Site

IMDb page

Best in Show (2000)

Note:  This review was originally posted to my Epinions account.

I remember seeing this movie when it first came out. I was aware of what a mockumentary is at the time, but I still wasn’t that interested. For those that don’t know, a mockumentary is a mock documentary. In this case, it’s a fictional account of several people entering a dog show, each hoping for the ultimate title of best in show.

The first half of the movie sets up the various characters. There’s one couple that has a Weimaraner. The two of them met in Starbucks. Actually, they met in two different Starbucks that were across the street from each other. They also like to shop out of J. Crew catalogs so as not to come in contact with anyone.

In another case, there’s a well-endowed woman who married presumably for a quick inheritance and has a standard poodle, who will be handled by another woman. (I have to ask: If they have standard poodles, wouldn’t that imply substandard poodles, as well?)

The second half deals with the actual show, which is the 125th Annual Mayflower Kennel Club Dog Show. The couple with the Weimaraner is particularly stressed out. They really seemed over the top. (The movie begins with the couple and the dog in therapy. If I was that dog, I’d be depressed, too.) Others also have varying degrees of stress, but nothing like them. They actually obsess over a little bumblebee toy for the dog. For many of the others, it’s simply a matter of trying to get the dogs just right.

The dog show had two commentators; one seemed to know what he was talking about and the other seemed to know very little, making for an odd-couple pairing. Some of the discussion between the two seemed sensible, such as what a miniature breed is. Other parts of the commentary were a little bit more ridiculous, such as having a bloodhound wear an outfit reminiscent of Sherlock Holmes.

I don’t really watch dog shows, so I can’t really tell how accurately they were portrayed. It looks like the movie was intended for people like me, which would be people that have a passing knowledge of dog shows. I know enough to know the basic concept of what goes on, but not much else.

While I thought the movie was amusing, I didn’t think that it was particularly funny. I guess you’d have to know a little bit more about dogs, as the movie seems to be more of a commentary of that lifestyle. All of the people were a little too attached to their dogs.

Some of the humor was also a little crude. For instance, Eugene Levy plays a man with two left feet – literally. His wife seems to have dated every man they come in contact with on the way to the show.

I’d have to give this movie two stars. I really can’t recommend it. I almost stopped watching it at some points. I really think you’d be better off watching something else.

IMDb page

Le tableau/The Painting (2011)

Some movies I watch because I want to watch them.  Either they have an actor I like or the trailers look interesting.  Some movies I watch to see how bad they are.  Usually, these are the ones that have a reputation for being bad.  They may be on one of those combo packs, in which case I’m just looking for a review.  There are others that I come across that I want to watch just to see how they handled special effects or subject matter.

When I came across The Painting on Netflix, I added it to my list.  It’s about characters in an unfinished painting that go in search of the painter.  I had wanted to see how they put painted characters in the real world, but kept putting off watching it.  I knew that it was supposed to be an allegory for class.  There was also the issue of the characters finding their creator.  Either aspect could come across as contrived if not handled well.  Eventually, curiosity got the better of me.

In the movie, there are three classes: Allduns, Halfies and Sketchies.  Allduns are those that are fully painted.  Halfies are partially painted.  Sketchies, as you might expect, are just rough sketches.  Allduns live in luxury, leaving the others to fend for themselves in a garden.  Even those that are nearly finished aren’t good enough for the Allduns to associate with.  Several of the characters go out to find The Painter, hoping that he will complete the painting.  (At the very least, he might at least explain why he abandoned the painting.)

The CGI was almost obvious, especially when the painted characters cross over into the real world.  This isn’t necessarily a bad thing and may have been intended, as they’re basically from a two-dimensional world.  They leave their painting and search several other paintings, which serve as portals to a shared universe.  They explore this universe before going to find The Painter.

There were a few scenes where it seemed like it was geared towards younger audiences.  There is some artistic nudity and one scene where Death chases the characters, but I don’t recall anything that would scar anyone for life.   It seems like the kind of movie that would be appropriate for teenagers and above.  The movie doesn’t hit us over the head with class issues.  We see what the lower-class characters have to go through, but rather than make us feel sorry for them, we get to see them attempt to do something about it.

It was also fairly obvious that The Painter was supposed to represent The Creator.  (Why would The Painter/The Creator abandon them?  Why would he allow them to suffer?)  It didn’t seem preachy.  Instead, it was incorporated into the story line fairly well.  (The characters even wonder who created their creator.)

This ended up being one of the better Netflix finds.  The only problem I had was that I was forced to go with the subtitles.  I’m not sure if there’s an English dub, but I usually like having the option.  I’d definitely recommend watching the movie if you get a chance.


IMDb page

The Painting - Now on DVD [Official US Trailer]

Bloody Tease 2D & 3D

Note:  This review was originally posted to my Epinions account.

I really have to stop getting these movies that have plots in them. It’s not that I don’t like a good story. It’s simply that I have other priorities when I get an adult movie. (At least, movies that I think are adult movies.) Usually, the plot isn’t that developed, the acting is bad and what little the movie has to offer simply distracts from those other priorities. I got Bloody Tease for that and one other reason: There was a 3-D version, which I’ll get to later.

First, I want to talk about that plot which barely exists. It seems that three vampires have set up a strip club to lure college-aged men. Once they have some ‘clients’ inside the club, the three vampires feed on them. (For some reason, they really like college students.) They move on when they’ve had their fill of the local selection, or at least when they’ve been found out. (It seems as though somewhere along the way, they’ve made enemies.)

One day, three friends decide to bring the vampires home for a little ‘private entertainment’, only to discover that they have to fight for their lives or something like that. The truth is that I didn’t really get that far. This was a horrible movie in pretty much every respect. The acting was the typical bad-acting acting. The script and plot were really, really bad. The strip club looked like an abandoned warehouse. Everything was horrible.

I also made the mistake of thinking that this was an adult movie. It has sexual themes and vampires are erotic, but what sexuality there was tended to be spread out and the vampire makeup wasn’t that great. Add to that the fact that the women weren’t supermodels. Yes, they were attractive, but they’re not that attractive. Also, I can’t seem to find them in any other movie anywhere. (If a movie’s main cast hasn’t been in any other movies, that alone should tell you something.)

As for this 3-D business, I saw that the movie came in the standard 2-D version plus a 3-D version. The DVD didn’t come with any 3-D glasses. I thought that I had some 3-D glasses around my house somewhere, but I was too lazy to go digging through everything to find them, especially considering what I thought of the 2-D version. The 3-D version was a nice bonus, but I never got around to using it.

There were no extras. I really shouldn’t complain about that, though. I can’t see there really being any need. It might have been fun to see the thought process behind the plot. (“Well, we were at this strip club and one of the strippers looked like a vampire…”) If there had been any extras, I don’t think that they would have been that substantial. Overall, this is a bad investment. I’m sorry that I paid anything for it. 

IMDb page

Akira (1988)

Note:  This review was originally posted to my Epinions account.

 

It’s been said that you can do a lot more with animation than you can do in real life because animation has a leveling effect on the special effects.. This is evident in films such as Akira. Let’s face it; the movie starts out with a nuclear explosion in Tokyo. The result is Neo Tokyo. 30 years have passed since the explosion. (The bulk of the movie takes place in 2019.)

Biker gangs are everywhere. The police go after them, but there are always more. In the beginning of the movie, one gang is chasing after another. As soon as the police show up, they scatter. Still, one gang member wants to chase down another. One thing leads to another, which in turn leads to an accident. Tetsuo (the one doing the chasing) is taken away in a helicopter. None of his fellow gang members can figure out where he’s been taken or what happened to him.

Tetsuo is taken to a secret research facility where experiments are done on him. (These experiments are related to what happened in Tokyo in 1989, but you don’t find out how until much later in the movie.) The experiments have very serious consequences, including hallucinations and the development of incredible powers. Tetsuo doesn’t understand what’s happening to him or what kind of power he has.

It’s really hard to go into the plot from there for two reasons. First, it’s way too complicated to explain. Second, I’d also have to give out a lot of the plot twists. It’s better to just watch the movie. I have to warn you that it’s a very violent movie with disturbing visuals. I should point out that this is not a movie for children unless they like having nightmares. In one scene, you get to see a giant teddy bear with liquid pouring out of it and Tetsuo is terrified of it for good reason. I’d say the movie is more appropriate for those of high-school age or older.

The movie is a good movie for several different reasons. First, the animation is great despite the fact that the movie was made in 1988. (I was going into middle school the summer this movie was released in Japan.) Also, it’s a great story. Yes, you’re thinking that animation is kids’ stuff. Might I remind you of the last paragraph? This is not a kids’ movie. It’s a story about someone who starts out as someone the gang leader protects to someone the gang leader (and everyone else) fears.

From what I understand, there are several translations. Even on the same DVD, sub and dub are different. I’ve usually gone for dub, even though most people go for subtitles. I find that having to read subtitles is too distracting. I’d rather be able to see the animation than have to look down every few seconds. (One of these days, though, I’m going to learn Japanese.)

The movie gets five stars. I would recommend this, but to older audiences. I couldn’t see a small child watching this and coming out ok. Even for an adult, you have to be used to disturbing stuff.

IMDb page

Official Site {Japan]

The Gate (1987)

There are some movies that can withstand the test of time.  They have a quality that allows them to be understood and enjoyed equally by any generation.  Such movies can be watched and rewatched and never lose their appeal.  The Gate is not such a movie.

The movie starts with a boy named Glen returning home to find it abandoned.  It looks like his family left mid meal.  He goes to his tree house, which is promptly hit by lightening.  He awakens to find it was just a nightmare.  When he looks out of his window, he sees said tree being cut down, leaving a geode exposed.  Glen and his friend, Terry, manage to dig it back up after the workers burry it.  Glen’s parents are going out of town for the weekend.  In their absence, Glen’s sister, Alexandra, will be in charge.  (This basically means that Alexandra will be inviting her obnoxious friends over.)

If you’ve seen a lot of mid-budget horror movies, you’re probably wondering by now what could possibly go wrong.  Well, the hole that’s been reopened by the boys happens to be a portal to a netherworld.  Inside the geode is a set of instructions meant to let a demon and its minions through to our plane.  It just so happens that Glen and Terry manage to set off a series of bizarre and horrifying events.

When I say horrifying, remember that this is a 1987 movie.  It’s not for small children, but it’s not particularly nightmare inducing, either.  (Teens on up should be fine.)  Those that grew up on more modern movies will probably find the effects and the scary parts laughable.  The scariest thing is a large demon coming out of the floor.

There are also some things that would be either cliché or lost on today’s audiences, such as playing a vinyl record backwards for a satanic/subliminal message.  You don’t really hear about that much any more.  (I guess it wouldn’t be hard to play an MP3 backwards, but still…)  I also find it odd that there’s always exactly one character that knows exactly what do to.  It just so happens that Terry knows all about the portal.  This is because he has a record made by a band that had previous dealings with the portal.  This one and only album has liner notes with very helpful instructions.

Also, despite the characters’ best efforts, various requisite acts, such as offering blood, occur either accidentally or without the main characters’ knowledge.  I don’t want to give away too much, in case you want to experience the movie for yourself, but when you have instructions on how to open a portal to hell, you have to know that every step will eventually be followed.  (How is it that Glen is even able to read the instructions, anyway?)

I vaguely remember seeing this movie when I was in middle school.  I also remember a friend referencing the movie’s sequel, which I may look in to.  I don’t remember if I overlooked the movie’s shortcomings at the time because it was on par with other stuff of the era or if it was because I was 11 when the movie came out.  I’m not saying that it’s a total waste of 85 minutes. I suppose if you have just over an hour to kill, there are worse things you could watch.  I’m just saying that there are probably better horror movies if that’s what you’re looking for.

IMDb page

Santa Claus Conquers the Martians (1964) full movie

I finally decided to upload a public-domain movie to my YouTube channel.  It's one that I've already reviewed before. I figured I'd give everyone an easy way to view it.  If I can get enough subscriberws and viewers, I may consider posting more.  I'll have to see how it goes.

Beyond Suspicion/Appointment for a Killing (1993)

Note:  This review was originally posted to my Epinions account.  A few modifications have been made.

When you say that a movie was made for TV, it‘s not usually meant to boost people’s expectations about it.  I’m not saying that it’s fair, but it’s often right.  Take Appointment for a Murder, a.k.a. Beyond Suspicion.  The movie is about a dentist, Stan, who has a thing for killing people for money.  Shortly after divorcing his wife, Joyce, he admits to killing someone, but in such a vague manner that she can’t really pin anything on him.  The next morning, Stan threatens that if she tells anyone, he’ll kill her or arrange to have her killed.

She does go to the police, but they don’t take her seriously.  Stan didn’t give out any details like names, locations or motives.  She does catch the attention of a Federal Agent Ron McNally, who thinks that he can link Stan to several murders.  What really makes Stan  a suspect and makes the whole operation possible is that Stan killed someone that he owed money to, which looked very suspicious.  (There was no proof, of course, but it was very convenient for Stan.)   Joyce agrees to have her house bugged so that the authorities can hopefully get some evidence.

Of course, it’s not that easy.  Stan is a cold, calculating person and would never admit to doing anything so quickly.  Yes, Stan does go over to Joyce’s new place a lot, but he’s not the kind of person that usually makes mistakes.  Plus, you’ve got Joyce’s meddling cat, who starts playing with one of the microphones, drawing Stan’s attention.  (I’ve always thought that this sort of thing is cliché and used only to add some drama, but I digress.)  Joyce does eventually get Stan to confess to murder on tape, thus sending Stan to jail for a long time.

Now, in this case, the movie does reek of being made for TV.  First, you’ve got those fadeouts every fifteen or twenty minutes.  Second, the video quality looks like it was made for the small screen.  Add to that the fact that there’s not much of a detailed story or character development.  (It’s based on a true story.)  There are three big names involved in the movie:  Corbin Bernsen as Stan, Markie Post as Joyce and Kelsey Grammer as Agent McNally.  (Don Swayze is the only other person I recognized.)

The movie takes place in St. Louis.  There are a few establishing shots of St. Louis, like the Gateway Arch, but the rest of the film could have been filmed anywhere.  The houses look like any other houses in any suburban area.  The streets look like they could be anywhere.  I guess one of the advantages of it being so far inland is that you don’t have to worry about coastlines.  (I guess it is kind of hard to put that sort of stuff in inconspicuously.)

I got this as part of a two-pack of movies a long, long time ago with the intention of writing reviews.  (The other movie was To Love, Honor And Deceive.)  Both movies were decent, but I really think I should have skipped these.  I don’t even remember how much I paid for them, but I think it was too much.  If you’re going to watch this movie, I’d recommend waiting for it to come on TV again.

IMDb page

Charlotte Sometimes (2002)

Note:  This review was originally posted to my Epinions account.

 

Michael lives alone in the upstairs part of a duplex. Downstairs is Lori, a friend of his. Justin is her boyfriend, who stays over every night. The routine goes that after having sex, Justin falls asleep and Lori goes upstairs to be with Michael. Because of thin walls, Michael hears a lot of it, so he often goes out.

Lori visits Michael one day at work. (He’s an auto mechanic. He also happens to read a lot, but I won’t get into that now.) Lori wants to set Michael up with someone, but Michael won’t even let her say it. Not to long after, Michael meets an attractive woman in a bar that he frequents. She introduces herself as Charlotte.

Now, Michael is in an interesting situation. He’s interested in Lori, but Charlotte is interested in him. Michael and Lori see each other. However, she travels a lot and will be in town for a few days. Whenever she’s back in town, they hook up again. (At least, that’s the impression that I got.) The trouble is that there’s more to Charlotte than Michael is led to believe. I’m not going to say more because it would ruin the movie. I don’t really think that it’s necessary to discuss the movie as a whole.

The only major complaint I had was that there was no sense of time in the movie. I believe that it took place over the course of at least a month, but there was nothing that would indicate the passage of time between scenes. Usually, this wasn’t a problem, but there were times when it got confusing.

There’s a camcorder feel to a lot of the scenes, especially with the lighting. I’m not complaining, though. It was done well. I just don’t know if this would be a turnoff for anyone. A lot of the people I know have strange hang-ups about movies. I think it only adds to the feel of the movie.

As for the extras, there were two tracks for audio commentary as well as a behind-the-scenes/commentary video and another video with Roger Ebert. I found the behind-the-scenes video to be interesting, but I don’t usually go for audio commentary and the video with Ebert didn’t seem that interesting, either. It looked like the video was actually taken from someone’s camcorder.

Overall, the DVD gets five stars.

Official Site

IMDb page

Airplane II: The Sequel (1982)

Note:  This review was originally posted to my Epinions account.

 

One of the advantages of renting movies is the ability to see a movie and its sequel within a few weeks of each other. With Airplane 2 – The Sequel!, I felt like I was watching the same movie again. Robert Hays returns as Ted Striker, who, in this movie, was a test pilot for the Mayflower I. The Mayflower I is about to go on its maiden voyage to the moon, but Striker doesn’t think that it will make it. The shuttle is riddled with problems, such as faulty circuitry, but the mission is going ahead anyway.

Those in charge of the program had Striker committed to a mental institution, but he escapes in time to make it to the spaceport and purchase a ticket for the flight. (It was sold out months ago, but he finds a scalper willing to sell him a ticket.) Elaine, played again by Julie Hagerty, is on the flight, but she’s engaged to Simon Kurtz, played by Chad Everett. Captain Clarence Oveur is back as the pilot, but he has a new flight crew. The navigator is named Unger and the first officer is Dunn, giving us a great scene where the three of them recall the chain of command during the war. (“Well, technically, Dunn was over Unger and I was over Dunn.”)

The plot is very similar to the first movie. As I mentioned, Striker finds his way onto the flight and has to win the heart of Elaine while saving the day. He has the help of the control tower, but he winds up the hero. The movie seems to have been made simply to string the jokes together. Some of them are obvious, such as Sonny Bono going to the spaceport gift shop and actually buying a bomb. Some of them are a little more obscure. During the scene with Sonny Bono, you’ll notice a poster for Rocky XXXVIII. There’s another scene on the plane where you will probably miss a sign that reads, “UNAUTHORIZED PERSONNEL ONLY”. William Shatner also appears in the movie as a sort of parody of his role as Captain Kirk. (There’s even a shot of the U.S.S. Enterprise flying by.)

There were no DVD extras in the version that I got from NetFlix. (It’s possible that there are other versions out there.) This means that you may be buying just the movie. If that’s the case, avoid it. It was almost like I was watching the first movie a second time. The only thing that was new was the set of jokes and gags. It’s good, but not that good. The movie gets three stars.

IMDb page

Frequencies/OXV: The Manual (2013)

Sometimes quirky works.  Not always, but it sometimes makes for a better movie.  Frequencies is about a reality very similar to ours, except that people have frequencies.  It seems to work like an IQ in that 100 is considered average or neutral.  Lower numbers indicate negative aspects like awkwardness and bad luck. Those with lower numbers also tend to be more emotional.  Those with higher numbers tend to lead a more privileged life, finding that good things just happen to them.  Those with higher numbers tend to be more logical.  Bring together two people on opposing sides of 100 and you get strange, dangerous results.  It’s also seemingly impossible to change your frequency.

The movie centers around Zak and Marie.  Zak has a lower frequency, but is placed in a school for those with higher frequencies.  There, he meets Marie.  Her frequency is so high that she can’t feel emotion at all.  Zak also has a friend, Theo, who is more moderate in frequency.  Zak has a thing for Marie, but their union can never be, as there’s a one-minute time limit per year imposed by the physics of this universe.  That’s when the bizarre and dangerous stuff starts to happen.

Zak is able to find a way to borrow energy from other people, which allows him to increase his time with Marie to the point that they can start dating.  Zak and Theo find that by using some two-syllable nonsense words, Zak can control people.  This catches the attention of an organization that kidnaps Marie and Zak, as well as a few others, and has them do further research and study.  It turns out that they’ve known about this for a while.  The details been lost and rediscovered over the years, with 1066 and 1760 being important years.

I’m not sure what to make of this film.  It’s one of those movies that is just obvious enough about its message (privilege and class structure) that we get it but not so forward with it that we feel like we’re being beaten over the head with it.  It’s a world where high- and low-frequency people literally can’t exist together.  There’s also the issue of fate.  Theo wants to build a machine that will let him know how the universe will unfold.  What would it mean to build such a machine?  Does it even matter?

A lot of these things aren’t really explored in the movie.  For instance, many of the characters are named for important people in our universe.  Zak’s full name is Isaac-Newton Midgeley; Marie is Marie-Curie Fortune.   No one speaks about their namesake, so we don‘t know any historical details about these people.  Certain things seemed contrived, like the use of an irony particle and music as an inoculation.

It’s one of those movies that I can’t really not recommend, but I’m not sure who I would recommend it to.  I was able to get it streaming from Netflix.  If you have Netflix and are able to stream, you could give it a try.  It’s not much of a loss at 105 minutes.  I don’t know that I would have gotten it if I had to wait for it to be mailed to me.  Would it be too cliché to say that watching it was my destiny?

IMDb page