Reviews by PvtCaboose91

District 9, the searing debut feature of South African director Neill Blomkamp, is a summer flick of a rare breed: it's a science fiction movie with depth and provocative ideas that also leaves space for violence and action. With heavyweight New Zealand moviemaker Peter Jackson serving as producer, this excellent low-budget sci-fi actioner (which stars no well-known actors) has drawn a lot of attention in the lead-up to its release. And, for those concerned, it surpasses its hype with aplomb. Lensed with a staggering degree of immediacy, District 9 grasps an unoriginal premise and adds innovation, producing the most compelling and cerebral science fiction movie to hit cinemas for years. It's definitive proof that a successful summer extravaganza doesn't need to be brain-dead or big-budget. (This is particularly potent in the late months of 2009; a year which bore the release of the catastrophic $200 million blockbuster Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen.)

Blomkamp begins his film in the style of a documentary; presenting a montage comprised of news reports, interviews and raw footage. An audience can accept the premise more easily because these creatures are introduced in the type of scenes we see on the daily news. It's soon revealed that during the 1980s an enormous disabled spaceship cast its shadow over Johannesburg, South Africa (as opposed to a more glamorous port of call). Yet this ship that hovers above Earth turns out to be a rotting cocoon inhabited by creatures on the verge of death. The authorities remove these aliens from their ship, dump them in a fenced shantytown, and force them to live in slum-like conditions. Here they're derogatorily referred to as "prawns" (on account of their crustacean-like appearance).

The main story thread transpires during 2010 when the human populace of Johannesburg demand that the prawns be moved somewhere else. Enter Multi-National United (MNU); the company in charge of the relocation program. The protagonist of the film is an MNU bureaucrat named Wikus Van De Merwe (Copley) who's exposed to alien biotechnology.

The genesis of District 9 (penned by Blomkamp with writing partner Terri Tatchell) dates back to a low-budget short movie entitled Alive in Joburg. This six-minute short, directed by Blomkamp, caught the eye of Peter Jackson who in turn hired the young South African to helm the screen adaptation of Halo. When the Halo project crumbled, Jackson gave his protégé the proper funding to create the feature-length expansion of Alive in Joburg as an alternative - and District 9 was the product.

Gritty faux-documentary footage is intermingled with first-rate CGI to mesmerising and convincing effect, giving a viewer the distinct impression they're on the lam beside Wikus. It's certainly far more compelling viewing than your typical high-gloss Hollywood production. Once District 9 shifts into its second half, there's action aplenty. And it's during these action sequences that Blomkamp shows real potential - they're expertly choreographed, gritty, easy to follow, and are able to generate tension and excitement (unlike Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen). Blomkamp's handheld style is effective, never too jerky, and never nauseating. With a vivid imagination and a taste for gore, the director additionally conceives an arsenal of alien weaponry capable of blasting and frying humans in a variety of gory ways. The film's R-rating from the MPAA is more than warranted.

The computer-generated special effects (created on a diminutive budget that would barely pay for Optimus Prime's left arm) are astonishing - the prawns are utterly convincing in their movements, body language and environmental interaction. The film even affords the occasional close-up, portraying thoughtful eyes and enough humanity to make these computer-generated aliens sympathetic to a viewer. District 9 is a big upwards step in the realm of CGI wizardry; the creatures are so realistic you'll quickly forget that they're digital creations, and focus on the story instead. It's a bit of a shame, then, that the film doesn't reveal more about these otherworldly beings. Our queries about the aliens aren't all explored since the key focus is on Wikus' (admittedly more interesting) story.

The human effect of District 9 is another strong asset - Wikus' transformation from government stooge to freedom fighter is gripping. It helps that South African actor Sharlto Copley turns in a stunning debut performance. Copley immerses himself into the character of Wikus Van De Merwe; he feels natural, not contrived. Meanwhile all the supporting actors - from the interviewees to Wikus' colleagues - are outstanding. However the characters themselves don't fare so well. The gung-go military forces, lead by stereotypically brutish jarheads, are quite predictable. There are some other minor issues here and there (basically just small issues with storytelling), but these are fairly forgivable considering Blomkamp's relative inexperience.

Chief among the most intriguing aspects of District 9 is the way director Blomkamp re-aligns our sympathies. Initially, aided by the documentary-style montage that recaps the prawns' arrival on Earth, an audience are neutral observers who naturally side with humanity. But as the story unfolds, and as we are privy to the atrocities committed within D9 on top of the inhumane manner in which the prawns are treated, our allegiances shift.

District 9 is one of the most eloquent and original science fiction movies of the decade. It showcases the efforts of an exciting new director skilled in mise-en-scène, pacing and suspense-building. It's amazing that the film was produced on such a paltry budget of $30 million. From a technical standpoint it's a triumph, and this indicates an economy of both filmmaking and storytelling that makes Neill Blomkamp a director worth watching out for. District 9 has the maverick, genre-bending energy of Peter Jackson's early works and it is directed by Blomkamp with an equally sure hand. It also proves there's intelligent alien life in the movie universe during the 2009 summer season.

9.5/10

Chuck Norris, it would seem, is America's leading brand of all-purpose pest control. Whether it be Russians, mobsters, thieves, ninjas or Satan himself, the bearded superhero possesses the ability to save America from every threat that rears its unpleasant head. 1985's Invasion U.S.A. is a prime example of what the Chuckster can achieve when left to his own devices. Utilising an impressive array of weaponry to dispense his own patented style of vigilante justice, the lethal hero works to protect America from hundreds of heavily-armed Russian soldiers who have unexpectedly stormed the country's sandy shores.

Following the plot (if you will) of Invasion U.S.A. shouldn't be difficult whatsoever. It's as basic, generic and pedestrian as they come, allowing even the terminally stupid to enjoy the proceedings without ever being required to overexert their limited intelligence. Basically, an army of Russian terrorists led by Soviet agent Mikhail Rostov (Lynch) invade America. Meanwhile, Mr. Norris stars as ex-federal agent/karate expert/alligator wrangler Matt Hunter who's asked to take down Rostov and company by the agency he formerly worked for (leading to a "We really need you this time" scene). Initially he declines, but (as you'd expect from a mid-80s action flick) the bad guy makes the common mistake of taking a bazooka to Hunter's home and killing his friend. Thus, the stage is set for one man against hundreds...and this is fine, because it's 1985 - it's the time of Stallone, Schwarzenegger, and the one-man army genre.

What ensues is a full-scale (in Miami at least) attack on American civilians as Rostov's troops take to the streets with weapons aplenty (their preferred choice of human destruction being the trusty rocket launcher). The National Guard eventually shows up to control to the civil unrest and defend the streets (though not effectively). The backdrop of Invasion U.S.A. is the grand standoff between the USA and the USSR, but the story more or less only amounts to a local mano-a-mano grudge-match between Hunter and Rostov. The thought-process behind Rostov's decision to seek vengeance upon Hunter is murky, but it has something to do with Rostov being unable to get a good night's sleep.

Did I mention Hunter is psychic? I should have, 'cause he is. Whenever the terrorists are about to strike, Hunter shows up to spoil their efforts and kick ass. The script (co-written by Chuck himself) provides an ample amount of these situations, with the simplicity of the plot, characters, and production values reflected in Hunter's terse catchphrase "It's time to die." For sure, Invasion U.S.A. is astonishingly bare-bones, but it's entertaining to watch while the film alternates between scenes of terrorist nastiness and of Hunter doing cool, manly things. Norris occasionally speaks ("If you come back in here, I'm gonna hit you with so many rights, you're gonna beg for a left"), but the film's key focus is on the action set-pieces. Shit continually explodes and the body count continues to rise, reaffirming that Chuck Norris - and, by extension, America - is not to be fucked with.

The consistent tactic of Invasion U.S.A. is to build sympathy for helpless stock characters (like two lovers on the beach or a family erecting their Christmas tree on an idyllic suburban block) before they're mercilessly slaughtered by the terrorists. Therefore when the Chuckster kills the terrorists responsible for this massacre, we cheer and applaud.

By the time he starred in Invasion U.S.A., Chuck Norris had appeared in movies for over a decade. However, he still hadn't picked up on the whole acting thing yet. The key requirement for a one-man army is to not only remain calm & confident under pressure, but to be careful not to demonstrate a huge array of facial expressions - one expression does nicely, and two is a bit of a stretch. For most of this film, Norris sports a very bland facial expression. He only smiles twice - when he sees his pet armadillo acting stupid, and when he's watching an old black and white film on TV (a 1953 sci-fi picture called...Invasion USA!).

The plot's straightforward nature is also mirrored by Chuck Norris' wardrobe. He's simply a bearded action hero dressed in blue jeans, a low-buttoned denim shirt, duel leather shoulder holsters, black gloves and (most importantly) an Uzi for each hand.

Richard Lynch seems to be having a blast playing the mastermind behind the slaughter; delivering a thick layer of faux Russian cheese that will either leave you amused or offended.

Now...flaws? Sure, there are heaps. Invasion U.S.A. had the potential to be a truly epic action film, but budgetary constraints mar this potential. Trucks are shown heading to several American locations, yet the action is restricted to Miami. The abrupt ending will leave you wanting so much more. Naturally the dialogue is usually flat as well. In addition, the whole thing is cheesy, stupid, preposterous and often hilarious (intentional or otherwise).

As the decades roll by, there will always be a place for gormless action movies like these. They act as fun reminders of an era during which the intellectual appetites and expectations for Hollywood actioners were at an all-time low. Invasion U.S.A. is a perfectly entertaining guilty pleasure. They just don't make ambitiously cheesy movies like this anymore.

6.1/10

Loosely based on a true story of a manhunt that took place in Depression-era Canada, Death Hunt denotes the ambitious re-teaming of two of cinema's most manly actors - Charles Bronson and Lee Marvin (they previously appeared together in The Dirty Dozen). Fans of these respective actors as well as action enthusiasts in general will discover plenty to like about this nail-biting action-adventure, which is essentially a Western transplanted into an icy Canadian backdrop with the undertones of a morality play.

The story takes place in the remote snowy wilderness of Yukon Territory (Canada) in 1931. A grizzled loner named Albert Johnson (Bronson) is attacked by a group of hillbillies, and in self-defence Johnson manages to kill one of them. Infuriated, these hillbillies accuse Johnson of murder. Sergeant Edgar Millen (Marvin) of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police suspects that Johnson's actions were out of self-defence, but is compelled to pursue the accused murderer regardless. While Sergeant Millen has his experience and the resources of the RCMP on his side, Johnson has the skills, endurance and experience of mountain living to elude his pursuers. To make things more complicated, the local hillbillies place a sizeable bounty on Johnson's head.

Johnson and Millen are worthy adversaries who clearly possess no animosity towards one another - Millen is carrying out his duties in accordance with his job, and Johnson just wants to stay alive and be left alone. In real-life, it wasn't clear whether Johnson was actually guilty. In this motion picture adaptation, however, he was unmistakably the victim of false charges. Perhaps it'd make for more riveting viewing if the film's standpoint on Johnson was ambiguous instead.

Usually in '80s action films of this ilk, set-ups are shortened in order to dive into the nitty gritty as quickly as possible. Death Hunt is different - the premise is established at a relaxed pace, which allows for a decent amount of character development before things kick into high gear.

Rest assured that once the premise is instituted, the chase that ensues is thrilling and the body count is substantial. As the film progresses, Johnson constantly manages to outmanoeuvre Millen's men as they attempt to catch him, albeit just barely in some instances. He also makes mincemeat out of the hicks who are hunting him (who are interested in collecting the bounty on the man's head). Ironically, Johnson's pursuers perceive their hunt for him as the titular "death hunt", but at the end of the day it is their own deaths that make it a death hunt.

As a retelling of the story of the real Albert Johnson, Death Hunt fails since the screenwriters took a number of liberties with the facts in order to create a more romanticised tale. But as a gritty '80s action-adventure, Death Hunt works - it's an excellent slice of manly entertainment. The photography of the forbidding icy landscape is breathtaking and atmospheric. And with Peter Hunt at the helm (a veteran of the early James Bond movies as both an editor and a director), there are a bunch of well-handled action sequences to behold, although the film does suffer from being choppy and disjointed from time to time.

On some levels Death Hunt does falter. It feels a tad underdone, and needed more depth since a lot of the characters are hollow stereotypes. A bunch of typical '80s conventions are occasionally used as well. For instance during a few of the shootouts Johnson stands still and is out in the open, but his opponents never manage to hit him (whereas Johnson manages to fire a number of well-aimed shots). Taking these credibility issues further, Millen's men use a cluster of dynamite to blow up Johnson's cabin. An enormous explosion is the result, but Johnson (who is inside his cabin at the time) emerges totally unscathed.

At its core, Death Hunt is an acting duel between Charles Bronson and Lee Marvin (although they only engage in one dialogue scene together). Both of these actors were clearly aging by the early '80s, but they bring incredible conviction to their respective roles. Bronson employs his distinctive quiet fortitude while Marvin offers a rugged disposition. This is a fine vehicle for these two badass leads. Angie Dickinson briefly appears as the love interest for Marvin's Sergeant Millen. The brief scenes between these two performers begin to effectively flesh out the character of Millen, showing a sad adherence to duty that he's unable to drop. Death Hunt marked the final cinematic pairing of Dickinson and Marvin (the two other films being The Killers and Point Blank).

With a manly cast (boasting such names as Bronson, Marvin, Carl Weathers and Ed Lauter), an engaging narrative and picturesque locations, Death Hunt is an essential '80s actioner. A few faults aside, this tense flick is solid entertainment from start to finish.

The Dirty Dozen is a quintessential man's movie - a blokey salute to courage, determination and true grit. Director Robert Aldrich seizes a traditional World War II adventure tale and cleverly blends it with anti-authoritarian attitudes that were flourishing in America by the late 1960s (as the unpopular Vietnam War continued to escalate). Amazingly for such a beefy two-and-a-half-hour movie, The Dirty Dozen is nimbly paced and not a moment feels inessential. It's unable to hold a candle to the visceral war films of later decades (like Saving Private Ryan), but The Dirty Dozen remains undeniably enjoyable and captivating.

Set just before D-Day, the film involves a cynical army major named John Reisman (Marvin). As a prelude to the Normandy invasion, Reisman's superiors order him to carry out a classified mission: recruit and train twelve army prisoners (who are condemned to either death or life imprisonment), and lead them behind enemy lines to destroy a Nazi chateau. This chateau houses a variety of high-ranking German officers, and killing them could disrupt the enemies' chain of command. Reisman's twelve soldiers (known as the Dirty Dozen because they were stripped of their bathing privileges as a form of punishment) will be granted a full pardon if they return from their suicide mission alive.

The story is straightforward, but our intimate involvement with the characters carries this simple story a lot further. The Dirty Dozen fleshes out its characters as much as the story demands without resorting to meandering bonding scenes or dated montages. Even despite the fact that some of these characters are alleged murderers, they're wonderfully humanised and likeable.

The team of misfits initially detest one another, but they're brought together through their hard, laborious training. By the third act the twelve soldiers share a unique brotherhood, but this is not long-lived. The climax may not be the most spectacular combat sequence in history, but the film's brutal honesty in displaying the systematic elimination of members of the Dirty Dozen is astonishing. Normally in mainstream cinema, the heroes survive and save the day. But in The Dirty Dozen, the heroes learn a cruel reality of war: people die.

The Dirty Dozen is based on the novel of the same name by E.M. Nathanson. Neither the book nor the film has any particular historical antecedent, though it was common practice in wars to send criminals into battle with the promise of a full pardon if they survive. Those who are sticklers for detail will find a lot to nitpick about The Dirty Dozen - its depiction of the military and of military procedures is slipshod, the wargames sequence is at times absurd, and its set-up of the climax (with guards in short supply) is contrived. The biggest flaw, however, is that the Nazis are written as too conveniently stupid. Had they been that dumb in real life, the war would have been won in a matter of days. These problems don't interfere too severely with one's overall enjoyment of the film though, which is a testament to Aldrich's directorial skill.

The Dirty Dozen was created during an era before computer-generated special effects became an integral part of the moviemaking process. Therefore a significant portion of the budget for this film went towards constructing an actual mansion for the final battle. The pyrotechnics and practical effects in general are refreshing in an age of CGI-overwhelmed blockbusters. The climax itself is an impressive action sequence brimming with nail-biting intensity. It definitely lacks a certain visceral punch in terms of gunshot wounds (those who are shot just fall to the ground without any palpable injury), but it nevertheless remains an incredibly entertaining sequence...the half an hour just flies by.

While it can be perceived as fairly tame, The Dirty Dozen was edgy for its era and hit a nerve with audiences upon release in 1967. The film isn't weighed down by messages or moral lessons, but it was one of the first motion pictures in history to display the darker side of war - that the best soldiers are often societal outcasts who murder and rape. War is hell, it ain't civilised, and it brings out the savage in everyone.

Aldrich's film provides a cynical view of the army, of authority and of the mission the dozen are asked to execute (after all, why couldn't they just bomb the chateau?). The fact that the mission seems suicidal and unnecessary is deliberate, as Aldrich's primary target was military idiocy. Throughout the course of the film he even takes swipes at the death penalty and race relations. The Dirty Dozen also became the first major mainstream movie to acknowledge that atrocities took place on both sides during World War II. The film's protagonists kill plenty of Germans (some of whom are innocent civilians) in cold blood. Arriving on screens in the middle of the increasingly ostracised Vietnam War, The Dirty Dozen broke a barrier, blurring the line between the "good guys" and the "bad guys".

One of the most distinguished aspects of this ensemble action flick is the cast. Lee Marvin and Charles Bronson are major badasses, and their characters are representative of their own personalities. John Wayne was apparently considered for the part of Major Reisman but he declined in order to make The Green Berets, and Lee Marvin stepped into the role instead. Marvin is excellent; portraying Reisman as an unflinchingly authoritarian. Other standouts in the cast include John Cassavetes, who earned an Oscar nomination for Best Supporting Actor for his work as the most outspoken and toughest of Reisman's convicts. As for the rest of the cast, there's Ernest Borgnine, Jim Brown, Richard Jaeckel, George Kennedy, Trini López, Ralph Meeker, Robert Ryan, Telly Savalas, Donald Sutherland, Clint Walker, Robert Webber, Tom Busby, Ben Carruthers, Colin Maitland, Stuart Cooper and Al Mancini among others - every one of whom hit their marks.

The Dirty Dozen even influenced numerous films, ranging from made-for-television sequels to movies which employ a similar premise and modify it (Quentin Tarantino's Inglourious Basterds, Sylvester Stallone's The Expendables, and so on).

Sure, The Dirty Dozen is flawed and it's more of a macho male's fantasy than a realistic war film, but it remains an eminently watchable 145-minute cinematic experience. This is just a good old-fashioned manly movie. Not to be missed.

8.4/10

1994's Death Wish V: The Face of Death further confirms that prolific architect-cum-vigilante Paul Kersey (Charles Bronson) is the single unluckiest man on the planet. This fifth and final instalment in the long-running Death Wish franchise hit cinemas on the twentieth anniversary of Kersey's first attempt to stifle crime on the streets of New York City, and it represents the legendary Charles Bronson's last theatrical appearance (he would only star in three more made-for-TV films). Death Wish V (randomly reverting back to Roman numerals) drifts even further away from the original Death Wish, playing out as a violent action fantasy rather than providing any thoughtful themes. Indeed, in spite of their entertainment value, the Death Wish sequels unmistakably advocate vigilante justice rather than condoning it, continually reiterating the message that the law system does not work. Nevertheless, as trashy low-grade '90s action movies go, Death Wish V is perfectly serviceable despite its silliness, and long-time Bronson fans should still have fun with it.

In this follow-up, Kersey has returned to New York City and again enters a relationship with a woman thirty years his junior. Kersey is dating renowned fashion industry figure Olivia Regent (Lesley-Anne Down), whom he intends to marry. However, Olivia's mafia ex-husband Tommy O'Shea (Michael Parks) wants to get his mitts on her fashion empire. Hoping to put O'Shea behind bars, Olivia agrees to testify against him, but she winds up predictably dead as a result. Kersey is less than pleased about his fiancée's murder, bringing about a pertinent question from the cops: "You're not thinking about going back to your old ways, are you?" But of course, this would not be another Death Wish sequel unless Kersey comes out of retirement one last time to punish the perpetrators.

The problems with Death Wish V primarily stem from the elementary script, credited to director Allan A. Goldstein. Dialogue is unremarkable and clichés are frequent, ranging from corrupt police to a villain with most of the city on his payroll. The set-up preceding Olivia's death is comparatively extended, implying that Goldstein was trying to establish a genuine emotional connection between Kersey and his fiancée to add impact to her inevitable demise, but the writer-director lacks the dexterity to pull it off, and the relationship instead feels perfunctory. Indeed, Death Wish V is pure formula, never attempting to stray from the franchise's well-worn idiosyncrasies or story points. In standard Death Wish tradition, there are thankfully plenty of cheesy one-liners which are easy to laugh at, and Kersey delivers ample tough guy dialogue.

Armed with a scant $5 million budget, the film's technical presentation is pleasingly competent and the action sequences are assembled with adequate flair despite Goldstein's inexperience with genre pictures. Produced before digital effects became so prominent, there are real stunts and explosions to be seen throughout Death Wish V, though the seams are visible at times (a person on fire is clearly wearing a protective face mask, for instance). The lack of budget is occasionally evident as well, particularly after Olivia is supposedly disfigured by a broken mirror - the actress only appears to have a few texta marks on her face. In addition, funerals are sparsely attended and Olivia's entire fashion empire is restricted to a single dingy warehouse, complete with an acidic pool. Filming for Death Wish V took place in Canada to save money, and Goldstein uses stock footage of New York City to create the illusion that the movie takes place in NYC. Frankly, the stock footage comprises at least half of the movie, and it is obvious that the principal actors are never in New York. In 1974's Death Wish, NYC was a character unto itself, but it's difficult to get a proper sense of time and place here. Furthermore, Goldstein stages several sequences of torture that go on for too long and lack tact, creating an air of sadism. Death Wish V also ends abruptly - the script reportedly contained additional ending scenes that were not filmed, and the result is jarring.

Bronson was seventy-two at the time of Death Wish V, necessitating a suspension of disbelief as Kersey continues to indulge his vigilante instincts. Unsurprisingly, Bronson does not display a great deal of athleticism, but he does appear in respectable shape despite his age. As ever, this is not an especially nuanced performance, but those who appreciate his screen persona should get a kick out of his efforts nevertheless. Kersey continues to expand his arsenal here, murdering victims using poison and remote-controlled soccer ball bombs, among other things. Indeed, much like Death Wish 4, this occasionally feels more like a sequel to The Mechanic, given the elaborate assassinations. In the role of O'Shea, late veteran character actor Michael Parks (From Dusk till Dawn, Kill Bill) is reliably effective and scenery-chewing, though the script only asks him to play a simplistic black-and-white bad guy. But despite the character's one-dimensionality, Parks is one of the better villains in the franchise, and is well-matched against Bronson. Saul Rubinek (True Romance, Unforgiven) also appears in a minor role, while other mildly recognisable performers fill out the supporting cast.

At its most basic level, Death Wish V: The Face of Death is a watchable 1990s action film, the likes of which Menahem Golan was renowned for producing during his heyday. Those seeking a straightforward revenge actioner with Bronson doing what he does best should be satisfied, but if you want a rumination on the morality of vigilante justice like the original Death Wish, you should not be watching these sequels. Cannon Films dissolved in the early 1990s due to bankruptcy, leading Golan to establish his own production company and spearhead Death Wish V in the hope that it would serve as a sure-fire hit. Alas, the follow-up was an abject failure at the domestic box office, grossing a pathetic $1.7 million against the reported $5 million budget, and receiving a direct-to-video release in other parts of the world. Nevertheless, another sequel was considered without Bronson's involvement, to be titled Death Wish 6: The New Vigilante. When Golan's 21st Century Film Corporation went bankrupt, however, the fifth sequel was cancelled. Since the quality could have only declined even further, particularly with Bronson stepping away, it is probably fortunate that the planned fifth sequel was never brought to fruition. Instead, Death Wish was remade in 2018 with Bruce Willis taking up the mantle as Paul Kersey.

5.3/10

5.8/10

By 1985, the movie-going public had been subjected to a new breed of action filmmaking: the "one man army" genre. Character development and logic are of no concern to such actioners since their prime focus is instead on a lone hero annihilating as many bad guys as possible (think Rambo: First Blood Part II and Commando). Death Wish 3 (the second sequel to 1974's Death Wish) employs this particular template. It discards the gritty drama and interesting themes of the original movie (which spoke about the urban condition of its time) in favour of simple, orgasmically satisfying violence. Death Wish 3 is a bona fide guilty pleasure - it isn't a particularly good movie and it recycles every '80s action movie cliché in existence, but it's a highly entertaining product of its time.

As expected, the plot of Death Wish 3 is as thin as they come. Paul Kersey (Bronson) departs from Los Angeles and travels back to New York City to visit a friend. His buddy (who resides in a bad neighbourhood) is killed by local gang members, and Paul is mistakenly arrested for the crime. The local police captain (Lauter) recognises Kersey from his earlier vigilante adventures, and sets him free under the condition that he tidies up the streets. Living in his late friend's apartment and amassing an arsenal of weapons, Paul rages war on the local gang, much to the happiness of the law-abiding citizens of the neighbourhood. The movie of course eventually builds to a crescendo in which the neighbourhood is reduced to a massive war zone.

Death Wish 3 is just a 90-minute turkey shoot - a madhouse of rape, torture, violence, brutality, explosions, and savagery. Attempts to justify the violence and mass-murder are perfunctory for this instalment. The dialogue is frequently awkward and the proceedings are generally silly. The street creeps are cardboard caricatures that in no way resemble genuine criminals of 1985, not to mention the main gang is portrayed as more of a cult - they dress in strange break dance fashion and wear identifying marks on their foreheads.

Throughout most of the movie Paul merely lures out his victims with the promise of an easy steal before hosing them down with hot lead. At no point does he ever seem in genuine peril. On top of everything, there's a romance subplot that's cumbersome and random. To set up an incredibly violent climax, Paul has to endure some form of emotional turmoil, and that's where this romantic subplot comes into play (though after his girl is killed, he doesn't give her a second glance before he returns to whatever he was doing). When all's said and done, Death Wish 3 exists to showcase gratuitous violence...and it delivers in spades. It's impossible to keep up with the amount of people who are shot, blown up, stabbed, beaten, pushed off rooftops, or just plain maimed during the climax. The whole thing is so violent that it was initially hit with an 'X' rating by the MPAA, though this was successfully appealed. Death Wish II was also a repellent, exploitative actioner, but this third movie surpasses its predecessor because it has more style and a greater entertainment value.

Charles Bronson remains shockingly one-note for all of his screen-time. Even when people close to him are killed, he doesn't seem too fazed. His dialogue is restricted, and his most complicated deliveries come in the form of providing rundowns of the weapons he receives in the mail. Just like the second Death Wish picture, credibility is a key issue - despite looking so old, Bronson's Paul Kersey is able to run down opponents on foot and is a perfect marksman while the young hooligans can't shoot for shit (even when Paul is in the open).

Kersey's .475 Wildey Magnum is probably as much the star of the movie as Bronson. Hilariously (and perhaps alarmingly), the creator of this handgun (Wildey Moore) admitted in an interview that there is a spike in sales of the .475 Magnum every time Death Wish 3 appears on television.

Bronson tore Death Wish 3 to pieces in later interviews and ended his professional partnership with Winner after the film was released. Bronson was reportedly dissatisfied with the script since production commenced, and at the time he was far more concerned about the health of his wife (Jill Ireland) who was diagnosed with cancer. In any case, Bronson still starred in the film. His performance may not contain much heart, but his rugged demeanour is nonetheless compelling. Death Wish 3 (Roman numerals weren't used in the title like the second film because most Americans are unable to decipher them) fails as a serious crime/drama, but it works marvellously as an entertaining, balls-to-the-wall '80s action film.

Followed by Death Wish 4: The Crackdown.

5.7/10

Death Wish II arrived eight years after 1974's Death Wish (a smash-hit which apparently reduced the crime rate in New York City during its theatrical run!), and this sequel was clearly green-lit for the sole purpose of cashing in on the success of its predecessor. This is fundamentally a shameless rehash of the original Death Wish that's packed with gratuitous violence and rape. Where the first film presented Charles Bronson's character of Paul Kersey as a victim of violence pushed to breaking point, this follow-up finds Paul in John Rambo territory - he has become an apathetic iconoclast bent on revenge. The underlying moral debate of the first film has vanished, and has been replaced with unhealthy blood-lust. The product is a serviceable actioner that most audiences will find unbearably repugnant.

This follow-up is a complete break from the Brian Garfield novel series on which the original film is based. Garfield's second novel (entitled Death Sentence) was unused in the creation of this sequel, but was eventually adapted for the screen in 2007 (directed by Saw creator James Wan).

In what is essentially Death Wish revisited, we find Paul Kersey (Bronson) who's turned loose on the creeps of Los Angeles. The health of his catatonic daughter Carol (Sherwood) is improving, but tranquillity in the family was not destined to be long-lived. Five street punks (one of which is a young Laurence Fishburne) break into Paul's home and assault everyone in sight, resulting in the death of both his daughter and housekeeper. Paul, shaken up and deeply pissed off about the event, plots revenge and begins to methodically hunt down each of the five thugs.

Where Death Wish persuaded a viewer to support the protagonist's crusade, this support is taken for granted here. Unlike its predecessor, Death Wish II spends no time watching Paul contemplate his actions before turning to vigilantism - he simply goes to work, rendering himself a stoic killing machine. The punks are unimaginative and soulless caricatures, conceived for the purpose of showing how awful the underbelly of society truly is. The portrayal of street crime is so one-dimensional it practically borders on parody. There are literally thugs on every street block, and they're all unmistakable due to how they dress. While admittedly entertaining, Death Wish II is desperately underwritten and underplotted, alternating between violent action, gratuitous rape scenes and banal dialogue passages.

At the tip of the iceberg, the story of Death Wish II has little credibility - the chances are slim to none that Paul Kersey would suffer two such horrendous experiences during the course of a few years. Credibility is further disregarded during the first ten minutes when a visibly aged Charles Bronson is portrayed as an adept hand-to-hand combat fighter even while battling more agile opponents. One sequence even shows Paul winning a fight with a thug who easily fought off a dozen cops just a few scenes earlier. It's just ridiculous. Death Wish II has no intention of pursuing the interesting themes of its forerunner. Michael Winner dedicates this film to an audience hungry for exploitation.

Director Winner does stage a number of exciting shootouts, however, though the film as a whole sorely lacks both artistry and style. The pace for this tight 90-minute flick is incredibly brisk, but that comes at the expense of interesting characterisations. On top of all this, former Led Zeppelin guitarist Jimmy Page (who was Winner's neighbour in the '80s) provides an adequate score.

All things considered, Death Wish II is enjoyable but thoroughly disappointing, and it was made purely for box office returns. It's routine, lazy and silly. A bunch of entertaining action sequences provides the only reason to watch this sequel. Those who seek more weight and/or gravitas with their action films, however, should avoid this empty-headed actioner at all costs.

Followed by Death Wish 3.

4.7/10