Wardogs (1987)

Ever since I basked in the glory that was “Deadly Prey”, I had been in search of a low budget action flick to stand toe to toe with the GGtMC classic. I’ve perused through thrift stores and dug around the wonderful world of the internet. It’s when I wasn’t looking that I stumbled upon the next golden action extravaganza. While on a trip to pick up “The Iron Giant” at my local video store, I stumbled upon a VHS copy of “Wardogs (The Assassination Team).

This bucket of cheese was released by Vista Home Video. It comes in one of those mini clam shells that stick out in your collection, demanding attention. The cover is adorned by two soldiers equipped with guns starting off into the distance. Behind them is a flaming truck that just exploded. It perfectly signifies what this film is about.

The CIA has a secret organization of “wardogs”. These are vets who have been drugged and brainwashed by Spacek (Bengt Fridh) to kill innocent civilians. When his brother, Rick, is pronounced dead, Charles Stewart (Timothy Earle) believes it to be a lie. No body came back; just an urn filled with supposed ashes. With the help of reporter Dean Daniels (Gunnar Ernblad), he tracks down the truth and bites off more than he can chew.



A new war is waged between Rick and the “wardogs”. These soldiers are nearly invincible, acting more like cyborgs than human beings. They can take many bullets without flinching and have the deadliest chops outside of a kung fu film. They’re also highly trained with guns and have recruited some excellent snipers. When they strike, a pile of bodies is left behind.

There are two distinct action sequences that stand out in this film. The first comes early and it takes place at a gas station. This gas station is apparently owned by Coca-Cola, since ads and bottles of the product are strewn about the place. It’s like walking into Buffalo Bill’s house if he were addiced to Coca-Cola. The only other product (besides gas) that the owner seemed to be selling were Marlboros. I guess they needed to gain the budget somehow.

At this gas station, the “wardogs” ambush innocent civilians and pump bullets into all of them. Children aren’t exempt, as one little boy is pumped full of lead. Just a few moments earlier, he watched as his father, who was giving him ice cream, was shot point blank in the head. Then he watched his grandmother have multiple bullets driven into her back. It’s a gruesome scene.



The other action sequence takes place at an amusement park. The “wardogs” find Charles and Dean there and go to town on them and anybody in their way. One poor schmuck got shot atop of the water slide. He got to take the ride, but wasn’t conscious for it. His bloody carcass slipped down the slide and dropped into a pool full of people. Simply glorious!

Despite a low budget, the action itself looks good and Bjorn Carlstrom and Daniel Hubenbecher seemed to be blessed with an infinite amount of guns, tanks, cars, grenades and explosions. Every ten minutes or so something’s being blown to smithereens. None of it looks hokey. A lot of it looks more convincing than recent action movies of the past few years.

The only true downfall of the film (as the directorial mistakes are minor) is the ending. It goes from being an action film to a horror film. The finale acts more like the conclusion of a slasher film than it does a high-octane action orgasm. It comes out of left field and feels strained. I understand what Carlstrom and Hubenbecher were going for. It simply needed to be inserted into another film.

In my quest to find a successor to “Deadly Prey”, I feel I’ve finally found the holy grail. Just like that film, this is a wild and crazy action film that could only be found on the home video market. The creators don’t give a damn about good filmmaking and just want to feed junkies’ minds for an hour and a half. “Wardogs” delivered on that.



MVT: I’m going to go with Bengt Fridh as Spacek. Though he doesn’t have a lot of screen time, he makes the most of his role. He plays the stereotypical action villain to a tee and sports a wicked wife beater.

Make or Break: I could go with either action sequences I mentioned earlier. I’ll stick with the amusement park, as that was in the middle of the film. That solidified what type of action movie this was going to be; a cheesefest. That’s exactly what I wanted.

Final Score 8/10

Fighting Mad (1976)

The older I get, the more things get under my skin. Blaring music that is not issuing from my car or stereo irritates me no end. People who drive like I do piss me off when they do the things I would do but when I'm not doing them. The whole "pants around the knees" thing I just don't get, and even when I did wear baggy pants, they rarely drooped lower than waist level (and no, they weren't "Hammer Pants"). I think going out in public wearing your pajamas (even if it's just the bottoms, and "pajama jeans" count) shows a lack of respect not only for yourself but for society in general. Needless to say (that is, if you agree in the slightest with any of this), we cannot control these things individually. But the one thing that has really started to cheese me off is something which somehow must be my own fault and, ergo, controllable (right?). For some inexplicable reason (probably mental, what a shock), I seem to be waking up only a few short minutes from when my alarm is set lately. Now, maybe I would be able to go back to sleep and take advantage of those last few minutes of "Me Time" except for the fact that this is also about the same moment my bladder decides it's ready to explode. By that point, you may as well get your day started. You may not consider this a big deal, but I think it's enough to piss off the Pope.

Tom Hunter (Peter Fonda) and son, Dylan (Gino Franco), return to Tom's rural home town to work the farm with his father, Jeff (John Doucette) and brother, Charlie (Scott Glenn, billed here as Scott Glen). Meanwhile, corporate bigwig, Pierce Crabtree (Philip Carey), means to have the land the Hunters' farm is on by hook or by crook so he can develop the land and build malls, golf courses, and so on. Tom reignites his romance with old flame, Lorene (Lynn Lowry), but even she may not be strong enough to rein in Tom's fury when Crabtree and associates cross the line.

Fighting Mad was Jonathan Demme's third film with Roger Corman (I have not had the opportunity to watch their second pairing, Crazy Mama, but it's on my bucket list), and like their first collaboration, Caged Heat, the film is more than a collection of exploitable elements edited together. There is a definite craft and sense of style to Demme's (early) filmmaking, even under the restraints of a low budget. During an early scene, he uses crosscutting (and more interestingly, cutting away to a scene of camaraderie and peace), Dutch angles, and shortened shot durations to accentuate an attack by Crabtree's men. Later, Demme creates an uncharacteristically melancholic feel in a night action scene through music, extensive use of aerial shots, and the movement of truck lights on a sea of virtual darkness. The sound of explosions from land development in the distance substitutes for the sounds of thunder (the oncoming storm) and mirror the pent up ferocity bubbling in Tom's head. Clearly, the director was honing his nascent skills with every choice that he made, and the stamp of a young filmmaker is definitely on the film (not everything comes off as smoothly or perfectly as a more refined filmmaker might be able to achieve). But the talent on display behind the camera is evident.

The basic conflict of the film's narrative deals with the idea of the intrusion of technology and corporate sterility against a common desire for simplicity. This dilemma is nothing new. In fact, this type of film is virtually a subgenre unto itself. The man of the land just wants to work, feed his family, and go about his business. The corporate villain cannot stand the thought of untrammeled nature and has to have everything cleaned up, made symmetrical and regimented. The beauty of nature's natural architecture is anathema to the big businessman. Plus, nature represents potential money not being made (and most importantly, not being made by him). It's the simple man's stubbornness in not giving the businessman what he desires that drives the businessman to behave violently. Naturally, this violence will be met with violence in turn.

Normally in a film of this type, you expect the hero to be a quiet man. Maybe he has something boiling under the surface, but he keeps it under wraps. That is, up until he is "pushed too far" and has to finally retaliate against his oppressors. Tom Hunter (related to Dinah Hunter of Jackson County Jail, perhaps?) is not like that. He is a quiet man at first blush, but within the opening scenes of the film, it's made abundantly clear he is not a man who will "grin and bear it." After some of Crabtree's men act like absolute vermin, Tom removes his glasses (kind of like Clark Kent becoming Superman but also a symbol for him dropping the thin veneer of a civilized man) and opens up a can of whoop-ass. This, then, is how Tom is defined in the film. He is a man looking for a fight, yet when he gets one, he doesn't change, he charges in. To Tom, violence can solve all problems, and he is inevitably proved right by film's end. This extends to his somewhat antagonistic and dismissive treatment of not only Lorene but also Dylan. He regularly tells his son to shut up and won't allow Dylan to sleep in Tom's bedroom. Tom also lets his short fuse cripple his emotional involvement with Lorene. He is atypical of what we know to be the norm from the setup and a nice subversion of audience expectations.

This same subversion underscores the theme of justice versus pacifism that the film puts forth. The people who won't (or can't) put up their fists are the ones taken advantage of the most. Authority, in the form of Sheriff Skerritt (Harry Northup), is petty and allows justice to be perverted rather than upholding the laws, at first. Still, Skerritt is a decent man at his core, and he will only allow Crabtree to go so far before turning back to a more righteous path. The crux of the argument, then, is you can be a pacifist and nonviolent and give up what's yours, or you can be violent and fight for the justice you've been denied so long. In other words, die on your feet or live on your knees. And while the film appears to come down on the side of the former half of that statement, it also (on a far more subtle level) says that, to quote (and I'm sure bastardize) Shakespeare's The Merchant Of Venice, "Though justice be thy plea, consider this, that in the course of justice none of us should see salvation."

MVT: Mr. Demme exhibits a sure hand behind the scenes. He also gives us little hints of his future heights through his solid storytelling skills. And all on a budget of less than a million dollars. As a matter of fact (and completely tangential to the point), I don't think you could get craft services today on this film's entire budget.

Make Or Break: The scene with Tom quietly drinking and fuming as we hear the dynamite exploding in the distance illustrates his character beautifully as well as epitomizing Demme's nuanced artistry.

Score: 7/10

 **Like this review?  Share it with a friend.  Hate it?  Share it with an enemy.**

Episode #175: Bloody Godzilla

Welcome to another episode of the GGtMC!!!

This week the Gents cover Godzilla (1954) directed by Ishiro Honda (you may have heard of it) and Bloody Birthday (1981) directed by Ed Hunt.

We had a blast talking about these two films and we want to thank our sponsor diabolikdvd.com for working with us to bring you this coverage this week....head over and shop till you drop at the website Gentle-Minions!!!

Direct download: BloodyGodzillaRM2.mp3

Emails to midnitecinema@gmail.com

Voicemails to 206-666-5207

Adios!!!

DVD/Blu-Ray Picks Of The Week - 3/13/12

Sammy's Pick: THE LAST TEMPTATION OF CHRIST (Region 1 Blu-Ray; Criterion)
There was a TON of controversy when this film was getting made, and once it was released it was attacked for being anti-religion. I find this film to be one of the most religious films I have ever seen, from a director who was bold enough to ask questions about his own faith. The controversy really stems from a "what if" moment in many ways, and if Jesus was human did he possibly not have the same desires and faults of man? Many believe not and this film doesn't support one belief over another but yet shows a subtle touch that possibly Jesus was as much man as any of us. I won't make this personal but I think this film is a catalyst on the true power of cinema as discussion and thought-provoking material. I will be upgrading my DVD copy....fact.

Links:
Amazon
BoulevardMovies.com
Blu-Ray.com Review
High-Def Digest Review

Dolly Dearest (1992)

Since the Gentlemen reviewed “Magic” this week, I decided to get in on the doll craze. I chose a film farther from “Magic” and closer to “Child’s Play”. You could say this is almost a knock-off. It’s a film that a few other blogs have reviewed already (such as “Deadly Dollhouse” and “Chuck Norris Ate My Baby”). That being “Dolly Dearest”. What new can I add to the mix? I’ve got a vagina joke!

Okay, it’s not that good of a vagina joke. It’s just that, when one of the workers died, he ripped open his shirt before collapsing for no apparent reason. The only chest hair he had was above his pecs and was in the shape of a vagina. Not much of a joke, more of a keen (and perverted) observation.

Now that my pathetic excuse for humor is out of the way, let’s get to the film. Elliot Wade (Sam Bottoms a.k.a. Steve Guttenberg‘s lost brother) moves his family to Mexico to work at a doll factory. This factory looks more like a crack house, which is probably where the writers came up with this story. The line of dolls he operates are “Dolly Dearest”, which I’m guessing are supposed to resemble Hilary Swank.



His daughter, Jessica (Candy Huston), becomes attached to one that just so happens to be possessed by a demon. How did the demon possess the doll, you ask? Archeologist Karl Resnick (Rip Torn) accidentally unleashed the leader of a satanic cult. Oh, and her minions were released too, as all of the dolls are possessed.

Jessica’s behavior becomes erratic and worries her mother, Marilyn (Denise Crosby). Elliot just thinks she’s paranoid because he’s an idiot who can’t notice the signs that are right in front of him. In one scene, Jessica tells her mother, in a demonic voice, that she’ll kill her if she takes away Dolly. Elliot is right outside of the door when this happens, but brushes it off. Before anybody says he couldn’t have heard her, his son, Jimmy (Chris Demetral), heard it and he was right in front of his father.



Speaking of the demonic voices, they can be hilariously off-putting. When speaking, Dolly sounds like a record player that’s on slow. The voice doesn’t match the face, causing fits of hysteria. When all of them are running around and giggling, they cackle like Gremlins. It’s also hard to tell whether all of the demons are female or if any of them are, for that matter. It does add to the mystique though.

As for the doll animatronics, they’re really good for such a low budget film. They move around nicely and all of the facial movements are done well. They can be a bit shaky at times, but they get the job done. I did get a laugh when Dolly rolled her eyes at the bumbling factory worker. Oh, and I’d be remiss if I didn’t mention the strange and random tongue wiggling one of the doll heads did.



“Dolly Dearest” is plagued with a lot of problems. It drags in spots, borrows too heavily from films such as “Child’s Play” and can be unintentionally hilarious at times. It does have it’s upsides, though. The performances are fine (except for Rip Torn, who must’ve been paying off a debt), the animatronics are good and the look of the doll is simple and effective. The film can get pretty boring at times, but it’s good for background fodder that you can occasionally peek up at and enjoy.

MVT: Definitely the doll. The simple look works and can instill fear, especially if you don’t like dolls. The animatronics help in making it chilling.

Make or Break: The first time we see the doll move. I was expecting cheap animatronics, which would have ruined the film. It may have been funny to watch, but painful to sit through after awhile.

Final Score: 5.5/10

DVD/Blu-Ray Picks Of The Week - 3/6/12

Sammy's Pick: THE SKIN I LIVE IN (Region 1 DVD/Blu-Ray Combo; Sony)
My second favorite film of 2011 comes to DVD and Blu and this one is a doozy, folks!!! See one of the best performances in a film all year from Banderas and one of the most mind-bending films of recent memory. Perverse and yet romantic....BUY!!!

Links:
Amazon
BoulevardMovies.com
Blu-Ray.com Review

Danger: Diabolik (1967)

Fetish fashion has been around for centuries (probably about as long as there's been clothing). However, it didn't become more accepted by mainstream culture before the 1960s (at least, not to my knowledge). Up until then, it was considered almost exclusively the province of homosexuals, "perverts," and "weirdos." Personally, I think its acceptance came about through music. Rock n' Roll was big and getting bigger, and the youth culture of the time (as it always does) wanted to distance itself more and more from their parents and authority figures. Leather pants became fashion shorthand for identifying rockers. So, of course, the leather catsuit wasn't far behind. Most notably worn by Diana Rigg on "The Avengers," the catsuit was the uniform for a cadre of superspies, supercriminals, and superheroes. And, then, funny enough, fetish gear fell back out of fashion and back into the realm of the socially unacceptable. But not before Diabolik rocked the shit out of it.

Danger: Diabolik opens (as it must) with a heist. The police, led by Inspector Ginko (Michel Piccoli), attempt to stay one step ahead of the titular thief. Trying to keep millions of dollars of Treasury money safe, they send an armored car loaded with fake bills out along with a car holding the real cash and several policemen in disguise. Needless to say, Diabolik (John Phillip Law) outwits Johnny Law (note: not an actual character) and makes away with the loot to his high tech hideout and sexbomb moll, Eva Kant (Marisa Mell). After the police interfere with the narcotics operations of mafia kingpin, Valmont (Adolfo Celi), the gangster decides to collude with the authorities (sort of) and get rid of the leatherclad thorn in both their sides.

By all accounts, Diabolik is not a hero in any sense of the word. He is vain, avaricious, and petty. He is not above killing (and killing police, to boot) in the course of his work. Yet we, as the audience, root for him. He is an antihero, but not in the tradition of, say, Conan or Snake Plissken, who, while certainly criminals, will still (sort of) do the right thing in the end (though often under duress). No, Diabolik is a criminal antihero in the sense of Hannibal Lecter or Tony Montana. We don't approve socially of what he does, but we want to see him accomplish his goals. It is complete wish fulfillment on the audience's part to be an outlaw in this way, to have the power, the smarts, and the drive to not only be outside society but to thumb your nose at it. It is, in fact, one of the reasons fiction exists at all. 

And this is why Diabolik, as a character, is never developed. He does not exist outside his costume. Sure, he takes it off, but that's how he is defined. We never get a real name for him nor any background. He is a cipher intended for the viewer to project himself onto. This is also why Mario Bava and company (wisely, I think) don't spend much time with him as a person. Instead, the main narrative drive of the film is on the machinations of Valmont and Ginko to capture and/or kill our protagonist. Our involvement with Diabolik and Eva is primarily either when they're at leisure (notably making love on a rotating bed/bedroom covered in stolen money, equating money and sex) or pulling a job. Yes, at one point the argument can be made that Diabolik takes on a socialist/anarchist role, essentially accomplishing what Tyler Durden would attempt decades later. But he doesn't do it for the sake of the downtrodden or the lowly taxpayer. He does it because the authorities offer a huge reward for his arrest, and he needs for that to not happen (if he values his freedom). 

Like all good heist films (Rififi, Topkapi, several of Jean-Pierre Melville's films, and so on), the heists are what interest the viewer most, and they are the most detailed and exhilarating portions of the movie. From a movie of this sort (and especially after seeing his futuristic lair setup), one would expect Diabolik to whip out all sorts of cutting edge, high tech gadgets to pull off his crimes. Even so, his jobs are performed in a decidedly low tech fashion. He uses stealth (including what I call the "Storm Shadow" suit), agility, suction cups, cranes, boats, nothing really out of the ordinary or that we would associate with that era's view of next-step technology. In fact, aside from a large, highly-reflective metal sheet and the means he uses to steal and move a massive hunk of gold, all of the tools in Diabolik's toolbox are rather ordinary. Interestingly, it is Valmont and Ginko who have the high tech gear in the field, and yet with all their resources, they cannot catch this one man.

It's also of note to look at how Bava shot Danger: Diabolik. The first establishing shot of the film gives us an idea of the scope of the film, and he employs this symmetrical style of composition often throughout when showing the world outside Diabolik's hideout. Inside the hideout, the frame is allowed to be a bit off-center, the lair's style accentuated by shooting through natural apertures created by the architecture. Bava uses a wide angle lens at many points throughout, and the deep focus that it furnishes gives the film a three-dimensional feel. The most noticeable example of Bava's more traditional filmmaking style is in the club scene. Aside from a few quick zoom-ins and zoom-outs, the camera is kept level. When the clubbers pass a doobie (I'm not sure if the kids still call them that) down the line, Bava uses a blurred out fisheye lens and his signature brilliant color lighting. However, the motion of the joint from toker to toker is captured via a very smooth, controlled tracking shot. Can we assume from this that while the filmmakers wanted to be "down with the youth," they couldn't give in to other filmmakers' tendency at the time to go sloppy and incoherent in attempts at atmospherics and psychedelics? Whichever, the film looks great, and Bava does a fantastic job keeping things visually striking but also solidly grounded. 

Constant emphasis is placed on Law's captivating eyes, in costume or out (and interestingly, he covers them most times he's out in public). This accentuation is a callback to the comic book the film is based on (created by Angela and Luciana Giussani), where oftentimes Diabolik's eyes and the area around them are the only spots of white on a panel or page. Also, as has been commented on by many others, Bava composed frames within the film frame to simulate comic book panels, but there are more self-reflexive elements included as well. As Ginko is trying to determine how to catch Diabolik, Ginko looks at a map of the city before him. The streets become highlighted in red and animation creates an emphasized section of the city to focus on. Later, a prostitute is asked to describe Eva to a mob henchman using a high tech "identikit" sort of machine. Again, there is an animated sequence (reminiscent in many ways to Saul Bass's popular and influential design work of the time) that filters through facial features until a drawing of Ms. Kant emerges. Plus, direct address is employed not only by Terry-Thomas (in a small but memorable role as Minister of Finance) but by Diabolik in a wink directly to the audience. It's this sense of fun, adventure, and ultimately escapism, then, which makes the film not only one of my favorite Bava films but also one of my favorite comic book films. 

MVT: The design style of the film, while definitely of its time, is charming and oh-so-satisfying to immerse yourself in. This is in spite of the ironic, kitschy way most folks look at this type of thing. I love it.

Make Or Break: Without giving anything away, Diabolik comes up with an absolutely brilliant way of getting away with the emeralds he's just stolen. This is the most memorable bit in the movie and exquisitely summarizes why this is such a great film (but you probably already knew that).

Score: 8.25/10

**Like this review?  Share it with a friend.  Hate it?  Share it with an enemy.**

Episode #174: Magic

Welcome to our show sponsored by boulevardmovies.com and feedback combo!!!

This week we are covering Magic (1978) directed by Sir Richard Attenborough and starring Anthony Hopkins and Ann Margret and we cover a ton of listener feedback from our lovely listeners!!!

Direct download: MagicRM.mp3

Emails to midnitecinema@gmail.com

Voicemails to 206-666-5207

Adios!!!

The Initiation (1984)

For me, one of the most intriguing aspects of a slasher is it’s setting. Where the murders take place is a key element in grabbing my attention. This may be why I was always a fan of sequels that went to exotic locations. Changing up the scenery added new flavor to the genre.

One of my favorite locations for a slasher would be a department store/grocery store. This is why the 1989 film, “Intruder”, is such a favorite of mine. I’m a sucker for the grocery store setting. That’s why this film jumped out at me. Being set in a department store after hours while a killer is on the loose was tantalizing.

Larry Stewart does take his sweet time getting there, though. The first half of the film is a slow build to the megaplex. We’re introduced to a group of sorority pledges who are enduring Hell Week. Our main female is Kelly Fairchild (Daphne Zuniga), whose father owns the department store. It’s her responsibility to get the gals into the building after hours for a mini party.



In the midst of Hell Week, she strikes about a working relationship with Peter (James Read). He’s a psychology TA specializing in dreams. She’s been having the same reoccurring nightmare since she was a child. In it, she catches her parents having sex. She grabs a knife and stabs her father in the leg. Immediately after that, another man enters the room and engages in a fight with her father. After a short scuffle, the intruder is set ablaze.

This loosely ties in with Jason Randall (Robert Dowdell), an escaped mental patient who has been horribly burned. Half of his face is scarred, heavily resembling the man in Kelly’s nightmares. As you could guess, he begins picking off the pledges one by one, as well as leaving a blood trail around them. In true slasher fashion, he has a signature weapon. His being a gardening tool that is used to dig up weeds.



“The Initiation” follows the slasher’s guide to filmmaking to a tee. It has naked women, a good body count, disfigured killer, signature weapon, exotic location and even a twist. It’s twist definitely sours the ending, as opposed to enhancing it. I won’t spoil it, but will state it does more harm than good. It feels tacked on and forced.

The subplot on nightmares is a bit of a bore, to be honest. As captivating as the subject matter is, Stewart handles it in a way that would cause sleep to occur. Peter spouts out the usual mumbo jumbo while Kelly frantically tosses and turns into her sleep. It’s fitting that this was released the same year as “A Nightmare on Elm Street”. Wes Craven came to the rescue and salvaged the damaged goods of this project.



Wade through this and the slow build (which produces some decent tension) and you’re treated to a satisfying back half set in the department store. Stewart uses the huge surrounding effectively. One nifty sequence has the lamps in an appliance store turning on and off as Kelly runs by them. Randall also swaps out his gardening tool with whatever he can get his hands on. This includes a spear gun!

If you’ve watched all the big guns of the slasher genre and are salivating for more, “The Initiation” is a good little treat. You may have to sift through some garbage, but the good stuff at the bottom is worth it. It may not be anywhere near the levels of “Friday the 13th” or “My Bloody Valentine”, for example, but it gets the job done.



MVT: Easily the department store setting. It’s what jumped out at me and grabbed my attention. It’s utilized so well and plays as a nice host for the murders.

Make or Break: I’d go with when Randall brandishes the spear gun. That was a sign of things to come and that I had a lot to look forward to.

Final Score: 6/10

Episode #173: The Gents List 2011

IT'S TIME!!!

The GGtMC brings you the favorite films of Large William and The Samurai from this past year....2011 turned out to be a great year for cinema and us film lovers had so much to choose from that it was tough for Willy and I to narrow it down to 30 films a piece.

As always we thank the listeners for another great year and please check out our Kickstarter campaign when you get a chance, we have big plans for the years ahead.

Direct download: TopShow2011RM.mp3

Emails to midnitecinema@gmail.com

Voicemails to 206-666-5207

Adios!!!

Resonnances (2006)

"Echo" and "resonance" are two different words with two different definitions. Yet, they are similar enough to be linked together in both usage and accepted, general meaning by most folks. "Echo" refers almost exclusively to sounds and their repetition and reflection. Yet the word is often used to describe any type of callback, aural, visual, thematic, and so on. By that same token, "resonance," which is usually understood to have primarily (but not exclusively) to do with amplification of sound, enriching it, elongating it, is often described like an echo. We speak of images, songs, speeches as resonating with people. They stay with us, their impact on us grows. Both, then, can be seen as artifacts of the past, but they still have an effect in the present, even though they're not truly related in a literal sense. Just saying, is all.

Philippe Robert's Resonnances opens in medieval France. A woman (Livane Revel) wanders in the woods when a meteor crashes into the ground, sending her flying. As the smoke clears, the woman is chased by the creature in the meteor (which moves underground) and eventually killed. Cut to present-day France. Yann (Yann Sundberg) is taking Karine (Marjorie Dubesset) to a small barbecue along with his pals, Vincent (Vincent Lecompte) and Thomas (Thomas Vallegeas), and then the group (including the two other women they barbecued with) plan on going out afterward. However, the men and women take off in separate cars, and the guys soon find themselves out of gas. Stopping at a darkened gas station, the trio pick up a mysterious stranger (played by Patrick Mons, who I'm sure couldn't be the serial killer who recently escaped from prison, could he?). Tooling down a dark road, the guys are distracted by what appears to be a ghost, get smacked by what appears to be a tentacle, and soon find themselves careening over a cliff. And if they survive all that, there's a very old monster with an appetite waiting.

As a feature shot on almost no budget, on standard definition video, Resonnances is both ambitious and something for the filmmakers to crow about. Granted, the majority of the special and visual effects are computer-generated, but there also appears to be some miniature work which is by-and-large effective. I've probably said this before, but I feel it bears repeating; just getting a feature completed is a noteworthy accomplishment. When the work in question is as ambitious in scope as this one is, it's even more so. Nevertheless, triumphing over filmmaking adversity is no panacea against the ills that affect novice filmmakers.

As homage to a simpler style of horror film, the film wears its influences on its sleeve. Tremors, The Thing, Blood Beach, Evil Dead, Jaws, The Hitcher, and even Day Of The Triffids and some of the teen sex road comedies show their "faces" at various points in this one. There is a very obvious love that the filmmakers have for these films. A good deal of time is taken setting up the characters, and yet none of them is much more than a type. Yann is the young man in love, Thomas is the status-seeker who loves his Volkswagen, and Vincent is the gamer who's more concerned with leveling up than what's going on around him. Antoine is the lip-smacking villain of the piece, complete with buggy eyes (hello, BEM Awards). Karine, then, is the understanding, cool chick who "gets it." None of the characters is all that believable or well-rounded, but none of them is too unlikeable, either, and for a story like this, that goes a long way.

The road the boys slalom off of is called "The Road of the White Lady," and we soon find out the reason why when the "ghost" of the woman in the prologue appears floating off the side of the road. The most intriguing idea the filmmakers had was to connect this spectre with the alien monster. And yet, the concept is frustratingly never fleshed out. The apparition appears twice in the piece, does nothing, and interacts with no one, consequently leaving one wondering why it was included at all. If she (it, whatever) is meant to be an echo/resonance of the creature's first victim, an actual disembodied spirit, or just a lure like on an angler fish, it's not clarified. So why bother with it? This is one of those things where you want to give the filmmakers credit for being clever and for granting the audience a quantum of intelligence, but it feels more accidental than inventive.

As a presence, the monster is mostly shown burrowing after its victims a la the Blair-Alien of John Carpenter's The Thing or the graboids of Tremors. When it is actually shown, it's interesting (resembling a tentacular trilobite) but not overly-impressive. Wisely, Robert keeps it obscured in the dark for the most part. But movies of this nature are never really about the monster. That's just the MacGuffin. The main tension of the story is generated by the tensions between the characters (hence having a serial killer as one of the group). The filmmakers subvert the normal hero dynamic in this type of film, and this helps greatly in distinguishing itself from others of its type. I won't tell you exactly who does what, but I will tell you what the set up is. We expect Yann to be the dashing hero. We expect Karine to be the "Final Girl." We expect Vincent and Thomas to be monster fodder. We expect Antoine to get killed by the alien. We expect there to be some type of disquieting twist in the final shot. Some of these happen, some don't. This undermining of genre expectations is one of the video's stronger attributes.

One the whole, however, Resonnances doesn't feel like a complete piece. Large chunks of exposition are elided completely (perhaps this is better than dropping it into lengthy sections of clunky dialogue, but it does not help the viewer orientate himself). Characters disappear never to be heard from again. Other characters are ignored entirely or dealt with entirely out of hand. Further, the filmmakers want us to believe that this thing has been in this forest for centuries, yet we're never told how it has managed to do so. A reason is neither postulated nor suggested. 

The plain fact of the matter is that, despite the more innovative aspects of the story, the dots are not all connected, and the audience is not given enough evidence to connect them by themselves. And while one can hypothesize and conjecture (given the paucity of information from the movie) for hours on what things mean or how they were accomplished, it is not enough to provide a satisfying cinematic experience (and seeing as this was shot on video, I guess that statement is somewhat ironic). I'll revisit this one as a light diversion and a low budget achievement, and it is enjoyable on some level. But in the end, it just doesn't resonate (sorry) enough.

MVT: Philippe Robert is the one who got this thing made, and for that, he should be applauded for it. Unfortunately, he must also accept the blame for its deficiencies.

Make Or Break: The prologue scene has everything in it you can expect from this movie, good and bad. As such, it does what good prologues do, prepare you for what's ahead, and tease you enough to keep you watching.

Score: 6.75/10

 (Like this review?  Share it with a friend.  Hate it?  Share it with an enemy.)

Top Line (1988)

Tell me this doesn’t sound awesome. Franco Nero stars as Ted Angelo, a former novelist is visiting a remote Columbian jungle. While there, he discovers a UFO. Hoping to cash in on this extraordinary find and revitalize his career, he attempts to sell the story. This triggers an onslaught of government agents, organized crime members, neo-Nazis, extraterrestrials and even a cyborg. Sounds amazing, doesn’t it?

Unfortunately, it’s not. This sci-fi action flick has all of the ingredients for a fun romp, but never utilizes them correctly. Enemies pop out of nowhere, as if ripped from an arcade game. Most of them being agents and crooks. The aliens and cyborg only pop up sporadically. They don’t stick around for too long.

Franco Nero does his best with the material. He brings that cheeky charm of his and mugs at the camera for all it’s worth. One scene in particular perfectly encapsulates this. After discovering the UFO, he rushes home to phone a publisher. His description of his find is reminiscent of a young teen finding his father’s nude magazines.



Even Nero gets bored with the movie after awhile. There are quite a few times he’s seemingly sleepwalking through his performances. As if the film’s slow pace and lack of excitement has dragged his spirit down. I started feeling bad for the fellow.

As I mentioned, this film suffers from terrible pacing. Nello Rossati’s pacing makes a snail resemble Michael Johnson. It becomes nearly unbearable trying to trek through this story. It’s so simple, yet takes forever to be told. The first half hour alone barely moves, as if it’s stuck in a standstill.

There are two car chases in this film that also suffer from Rossati’s decelerated pace. One made sense, but simply went on too long. That would be when Ted, while on foot, is being chased by a criminal through a cactus patch. The crook isn’t trying to catch up with him; he’s torturing him.

The other car chase is inexcusable. The same crook lost track of Ted. Angelo has hopped onto the back of a watermelon truck and is hiding under a sombrero. When he is found out, a car chase ensues… at low speed. It does end with Ted niftily using eggs to take out the baddie, who goes tumbling down the mountain.

The other enemies don’t make much of a dent. A cyborg randomly pops up near the end, but barely does anything. Same goes for the aliens, though I’ll give credit where credit is due; their makeup was fantastic. As for the neo-Nazis, I honestly can’t even remember them. Was that a typo on Mill Creek’s part?



“Top Line” is like a lot of other 80’s direct-to-video action titles. It promises a lot, but delivers very little. The director seems more concerned with quickly churning this out than taking his time in perfecting it (or at least making it enjoyable). Nero, bless his heart, does his best. There’s just not much for him to work with.

“Top Line” also goes by the alternate title of “Alien Terminator”. It’s probably a good thing my copy didn’t go by that (even though it would have suited the Sci-Fi Invasion pack better). My hopes would have been much higher, even if I knew a film with a title like that wouldn’t live up to my expectations.



MVT: Franco Nero. He carries this film, though he completely drops it constantly. That’s not necessarily his fault, but you catch my drift.

Make or Break: The slow pacing and dull action sequences. There’s not one in particular I can pinpoint as being the concrete break. They all run together, which is why I’m including them as one whole break.

Final Score: 4/10

Alien 2: On Earth (1980)

It has been postulated and fantasized about for centuries that the interior of the planet Earth holds just as many thrilling and fearsome inhabitants as its surface holds. In Ireland, the area of Cruachan contains what is sometimes referred to as "Ireland's gate of hell." The area has been mythologized, and tales have been told of monsters, dead gods, and spirits emerging from the Earth here and causing havoc. The idea of a Hollow Earth inside the ground we walk on has also given way to the premise of an Expanding Earth. Essentially, this theory states that the crust of the Earth is flexible and ever-expanding (thus accounting for things like continental drift, plate tectonics, and so on). The reason it expands is because it is filled with material less dense than the crust (say, air?). Now, we know that animal life can exist at extremes of depth and pressure in the Marianas Trench (granted they're mostly single-celled organisms). So, if we know this to be true, it is at least within the realm of possibility (extreme though it may be) that life can also exist within this Hollow Earth (if we, in fact, take that to be true). And while we don't have to believe in this theory to explain anything about our world, it does make for some exciting flights of fancy, doesn't it?

Hardly-eminent speleologist, Thelma (Belinda Mayne), has an "episode" while taping a television show. You see, she's a telepath and can sense when things are happening or going to happen (which I suppose would also make her clairvoyant). Anyway, the world is meanwhile holding its collective breath waiting for a manned space capsule to splash down, and when it does, the astronauts are missing (though somehow I missed this bit of information while watching the film). There are also strange blue rocks showing up on the ground thither and yon, but none of this stops Thelma, her beau Roy (Mark Bodin), and their pals from going spelunking. Can the astronauts, the mystery rocks, and Thelma's telepathic spidey-sense all be connected?

If my synopsis of director Ciro Ippolito's (here hiding out under the nom de plume Sam Cromwell) Alien 2: On Earth (aka Alien Terror, aka Alien 2: Sulla Terra) seems disjointed and sloppy, that's only because that's what this movie is. It all starts with stock footage (and lots of it) from NASA showing various aspects of space flight, splashdown, and recovery. Meanwhile, we're being told that this is stock footage explicitly by characters onscreen, and we keep cutting back to this footage in an effort to build up a sense of suspense and atmosphere but ultimately failing miserably. 

Thelma's telepathy kicks in when it's convenient for the plot or for a cheap thrill. There is some slight attempt at grounding how this ability affects Thelma's life when she is told (by her doctor? Professor? Who the hell can tell?) that the monsters she sees all around her (but the audience never sees...or do they?) are all in her mind. To me, this is a fascinating idea, that one's worst enemy is oneself. The entire movie should have been structured around this idea, as there's tons of worthwhile material to be mined from it. There's the added aspect of Thelma's telepathic connection with the aliens and how her abilities develop during the course of the film, but none of this is anything other than plot devices. What's most disheartening about missed opportunities like these is that they are essentially cheap to put on screen, they don't require much in the way of production costs. But films like this are, let's be honest, only produced for the fast cash-grab on the coat tails of other, better, original work (I'll give you three guesses what movie this one is a cash-in on).

The amount of padding in this film is mind-boggling. Aside from the copious stock footage littered throughout the first act, we are treated to a leisurely drive to the television station with our two protagonists during the opening credits. This is really more a warning to the viewer than anything else. Regardless, once we hit the caves, there are interminable scenes of the characters rappelling, shining their headlamps at the camera to distract us from the fact that we can't see the background at all. We get all the minutiae of everyone helping out a fallen friend, yet bafflingly, we get none of the excitement that a scene of this nature inherently generates. It's like watching someone walk up the side of a building with no external help; We know it shouldn't be possible, and yet we are witness to it. Later, we get a very slow toe-to-head dolly shot of a stricken character. The bright side of this one, at least, is that there's a nice, gory finale to the shot.

This, then, is the film's big upside. There is a ton of gore in this film, and it is delivered wet, chunky, and graphically. Characters aren't just attacked. They are attacked, and then we get to see their head and part of their internal organs slough off the rest of their body. Now, there has always been an unwritten rule about children in peril in films. Either the danger is a red herring, or the child is hurt/killed offscreen. When a child's death is portrayed onscreen, it signals one thing to the audience: Anything goes. It was interesting, then, to see a child killed offscreen early in the film, but we get to see the aftermath vividly and moistly. Naturally, I don't wish to see harm come to any child, but seeing this scene gave me a twinge of hope for this movie. It was soon to be dashed.

The core conceit of the film (the inside of the Earth is just as alien as the furthest reaches of outer space) is engaging. The first shot we get of the cave interior shows the characters crawling in, the foreground limned by stalactites and stalagmites, essentially creating a nasty-looking set of jaws just waiting to chomp down on our merry band. This is reinforced throughout our time in the caves, the odd rock formations created over millennia forming an alien landscape akin to the Space Jockey's derelict ship from Alien. The actual aliens, then, are so disappointing in comparison. They are formless, wet, sort of tentacles with a hole at the end (sometimes), and sometimes, they just appear to be animal innards hurled at the actors like the pudding scene in Hot Shots!
 

The film's end almost makes up for the sloppy, lazy, tedium-bordering remainder of the runtime, but "almost" only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades. Still and all, this is one of those movies I'll come back to thinking that it couldn't possibly have been that dull and apathetic, that there must be something to get behind on it. And even knowing this and knowing that I know this, I know I'll probably voluntarily watch Alien 2: On Earth again in the future and search desperately for what I must have missed the first time around.

MVT: The gore is the only saving grace I could find in this film. If gobs of lumpy red stuff are all you need in a movie, you'll be satisfied here.

Make Or Break: Between the confusingly strung together stock footage and the exhaustingly drawn out credit sequence road tour that kick starts the film, you'll be checking your watch well before the first ten minutes of runtime has passed.

Score: 4.5/10

(Like this review?  Share it with a friend?  Hate it?  Share it with an enemy.)

Episode #172: A Minor Discourse

Welcome to a new thing for the GGtMC!!!

This week Will brings in guests to shoot the SHEEEE-IITTTTT for about an hour and 40 minutes because we ran into some issues with scheduling this week. Stay tuned next week for our year end top 30 films and I want to thank the participants for stepping in for me this week....

Direct download: MinorDiscourseRM.mp3

Emails to midnitecinema@gmail.com

Voicemails to 206-666-5207

Adios!!!

Karl Brezdin's Top Films of 2011: Yes, I Watched Something Other Than Don "The Dragon" Wilson Movies

This was the first in many years where I made a conscious effort to see new releases in the theater. In some cases, it worked like gangbusters (Take Shelter, Drive) while other films have continued to elude me (Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, Shame, Melancholia). I decided to take a break from grad school and not updating the Fist of B-List blog to share some thoughts with the GGtMC community on my favorite ten films of 2011, in reverse order.

Attack the Block
Everything a popcorn flick should be: fast, funny, and slick as all hell. John Boyega looks like a star in the making and the movie contains the latest and greatest in visually iconic screen creatures. Somewhere in there, the filmmakers also managed to include some actual character development. What a concept!

Midnight in Paris
In his return to magic realist territory, Woody Allen achieves a funny and charming cinematic meditation on nostalgia, art, and relationships. Owen Wilson is cast perfectly as Allen's artistic "man out of time," an aspiring novelist in a modern era which values the book far less than it values his current trade (hackneyed Hollywood film scripts). It features terrific performances from Michael Sheen, Rachel McAdams, Corey Stoll as Ernest Hemingway, and the always enchanting Marion Cotillard. The present is boring because we're stuck here, the future is hopeful because we're going there, and the past is alluring because we can't ever go back.

Senna
Great documentary films take any subject, no matter how unfamiliar to the audience, and find ways to make it engaging and fulfilling. In weaving archival footage of the life and times of Formula One racer, Ayrton Senna, director Asif Kapadia has made the finest documentary film of the year, and one of the best sports films in recent memory. The doc touches on all the elements which make sports narratives so compelling: rivalries, comebacks, organizational bureaucracy, transcendent greatness, and sadly, unfulfilled potential.

Warrior
Underdog sports stories are nothing new. Alcoholic mentors have been done to death. In 2011, however, well-acted films about estranged brothers beating the piss out of each other joined wrestler retirement speeches and dog/soldier reunions as manly things that make me weepy. Nick Nolte's performance is incredible. The end.

Beginners
Little known fact about the guy who covers Billy Blanks and Art Camacho movies: I'm a total sucker for romances and tearjerkers alike. Beginners hits all the right beats for me with respect to technically sound filmmaking and authenticity of emotion, and it shifts between sadness, sweetness, and hilarity without feeling forced or twee. Performance-wise, Christopher Plummer is getting all the press, and Ewan McGregor is typically solid, but Mélanie Laurent is armed to the gills with 1,001 ways to steal your heart. If you like your stories about beautiful people falling in love backed by some frequently bittersweet notes, Beginners is eminently qualified.

Martha Marcy May Marlene
The talent and beauty of star Elizabeth Olsen can't be overstated, but the deliberate pace and jarring narrative jumps in Martha Marcy May Marlene made this a more complete film than most performance-oriented criticisms might have led you to believe. I felt the film's stinging notes of unsettling paranoia in the central character nicely echoed 1971's Let's Scare Jessica to Death, which also featured a damaged woman cracking up before our eyes as she attempts to rejoin the normative societal fray. Throw in a gaunt John Hawkes playing folksy backwoods menace to a T, and you've got a fantastic debut feature film from director Sean Durkin.

The Skin I Live In
Two decades following Tie Me Up! Tie Me Down!, Antonio Banderas and Pedro Almodóvar reunited for this total gem of a psychological thriller. Fantastic performances, a deliciously sick premise, and a solid score combine for one of the best cinematic punches to the dick in years.

A Night in Nude: Salvation
Gonin director Takashi Ishii's fantastic return to the noir-tinged universe of 1993's A Night in Nude was underseen on account of its one-night U.S. showing at the 2011 New York Asian Film Festival back in July. Have no fear though, you needn't see the original to appreciate this follow-up because it works just fine as a stand-alone film. Naoto Takenaka and former model Hiroko Sato deliver the dramatic goods and Ishii's attention to shot composition in this world of beating rain and Tokyo neon is admirable. Add in Joe Shishido achieving a level of sleaze somewhere between Noah Cross and Frank Booth, and you've got a finely twisted piece of Japanese cinema that will stick in your craw for days on end.

Drive
Other writers have already sung the praises of Nicolas Winding Refn's entry for Coolest Cinematic Shit of the Year better than I could hope to do. This film was a well-polished marriage of sound, image, pace, and mood, while providing the moments of violence and action plenty of room to breathe. We'll look back on Gosling's character as one of the most iconic of its time. I still want that jacket.

Take Shelter
Stellar direction, a potent allegory, and fantastic performances from Michael Shannon and Jessica Chastain combined for my favorite film of the year. Shannon joins a short list of contemporary actors who can act circles around most of his peers with his face alone. Jeff Nichols has the potential to be one of the finest directors of his generation. I'll stop there and take this tumble down the hyperbolic wormhole offline.