Reviews by PvtCaboose91

"When I was 16 years old, I fell in love..."

The directorial sibling duo of Bobby and Peter Farrelly earned themselves a revered place among the gurus of the comedy genre after unleashing There's Something About Mary upon the unsuspecting movie-going public of 1998. There's Something About Mary can best be described as an unalloyed exercise in gross-out humour and plain bad taste, punctuated by a surprisingly heartfelt screenplay and an intriguing plot designed to steer its characters from one gag to the next.

Without a doubt, There's Something About Mary is the best film the Farrelly Brothers have created thus far in their filmic careers. This is a gigantic step up from prior Farrelly Brothers titterfests wherein a string of extraneous gags were supplied to conceal the lack of depth (and variety, for that matter). Perhaps the brothers had just grown up by this stage, or perhaps this was the consequence of the brothers collaborating with Ed Decter and John J. Strauss to pen the screenplay. Whatever the case, There's Something About Mary is endowed with a delightful wide appeal. For sure, it's gross-out comedy to extremes, but there is a heart and a believable, grounded storyline. A plethora of explosively hilarious set-pieces such as the prom night saga have taken their place in contemporary comic history. Yet, this sequence isn't a mere succession of unrelated gags. The building ridiculousness serves as a suitable introduction to the film's central premise: a well-meaning person inadvertently inviting chaos at every turn.

"Franks and Beans! Franks and Beans!"

Ted Stroehmann (Stiller) is a metal-mouth geek in his high school days in Rhode Island. It's the lead up to his Senior Prom, and Ted is seeking a date. Enter the beautiful Mary Jensen (Diaz) who asks the bewildered Ted to be her date for the prom. Ted is amazed and overjoyed, to say the least. But the prom night ends in tears when an unfortunate zipper accident leaves Ted in hospital. Thirteen years following this episode, Ted still pines for his lost Mary, whom he considers the love of his life. Ever since the end of school, though, Ted hasn't seen Mary at all - she's disappeared off the grid. With some encouragement from a friend, Ted opts to hire sleazy private eye Pat Healy (Dillon) to track down his old flame. However, after Pat takes one look at the radiant Mary, he decides he wants her for himself. Much conniving, back-stabbing and lying ensues in order to steal Mary's affections.

The story is episodic, to be sure. It exists as a vehicle to convey masses of uproarious gags. Also, characterisation is at a minimum. However, some of the characters are satisfactorily developed through the gags. The aforementioned prom night saga establishes Ted's character, for instance. The jokes are frequently hilarious (rarely, if ever, hit and miss) and the characters are extremely endearing, and at the end of the day that's what counts in this genre. There's Something About Mary also offers something to offend almost everyone - it's politically incorrect (usage of the word "retard" is an example), outrageous, uncouth, bawdy and unapologetically lowbrow...truly nothing is out of bounds here. The true allure of the flick, however, is its sweet core - a quality the Farrelly Brothers have yet to replicate to the same effect. Some viewers may dismiss this flick as a simple gross-out comedy unworthy of a second glance, but the film's genuine charms extend beyond the repulsive jokes. Of course, it does rely on this humour heavily to entertain...nevertheless, There's Something About Mary remains an appealing romantic comedy that delivers a sweet payoff.

"Is that... is that hair gel?"

In all fairness, the Farrelly Brothers don't entirely depend on genitals, breasts, bodily fluids, or an assortment of other tasteless subjects to manufacture each joke. A group of travelling minstrels who follow Ted around, singing about his exploits in Greek chorus fashion, for instance, is a wonderful withdrawal from the lowbrow moments. This may not be subtle or intellectual humour (these two words simply don't apply to any Farrelly Brothers production), but it is less bawdy than their usual material. Similarly, the entire cast sing along to Build Me Up, Buttercup during the closing credits. There's Something About Mary additionally manages to be fairly light on emotion, yet distinctly memorable, which is a tribute to the strength of its brilliant comic structure. It wears its influences (from the Marx Brothers to Porky's) clearly on its sleeve, but is able to wrap them in a tight, original story where each joke serves a purpose.

One reason why There's Something About Mary succeeds is on account of all the actors being utterly perfect for their chosen roles. With different casting, half the jokes would most certainly have fallen flat. Ben Stiller appears to understand comedy. His lines are delivered with impeccable comic timing, and he allows a viewer to sympathise with Ted while concurrently laughing at him. Getting one's dangly bits excruciatingly snared in a zipper is a fear faced by every male on the planet, but due to Stiller's fine acting we don't feel bad as we laugh at his agonising situation.
The actors surrounding Stiller are top-notch. The vivacious and gorgeous Cameron Diaz is perfect as Mary. Not Oscar material, but she immerses herself into the character suitably and gives her character the required charm. This is proof that Cameron Diaz used to be hot. The Farrellys were so keen to cast Cameron that they delayed the filming start date in order to accommodate the film in her schedule. "Cameron is Mary," asserts Peter Farrelly. "Like Mary, Cameron seems like the ultimate woman. Every guy on the set was crazy about her."
Matt Dillon is equally excellent. He manages to build great charm, but at the same time be contemptible in his methods. Dillon is perfect in tacky clothes and a seedy moustache.
In the supporting cast there's Lin Shaye as the extremely tanned Magda, and Lee Evans as yet another man in love with Mary. Other performers, such as Chris Elliot and W. Earl Brown, are terrific. In a comedy flick such as this, actors of this calibre are required in order for the gags to work to their full potential. Thank God for this delightful bunch!

"Have you seen my weiner?"

There's no doubt about it, There's Something About Mary is one of the funniest comedies you'll ever encounter - a harmonious cocktail of over-the-top physical gags and raunchy humour. To be fair, though, the film is far from perfect. It runs a tad long at almost two hours, and (to be expected) a few of the characters aren't developed past the second dimension. This isn't Academy Award material, but it certainly achieves its evident goal: to entertain and deliver laughs aplenty. The fact that the geeky loser gets the girl - Mary predictably choosing Ted over the supposedly perfect Brett (real-life pro quarterback Brett Favre, a typical Farrelly casting) - makes this a curiously bloke-friendly rom-com. Adding to its unisex appeal (and therefore justifying its box-office success), There's Something About Mary is simultaneously one of the most romantic gross-out comedies, and one of the most gross romantic comedies. Laughter is such a blessed relief when one is in a bad mood, and this film is guaranteed to work as well as anti-depressants. After watching this hysterical gem, you'll never look at hair gel the same ever again.

"His friends would say stop whining
They've had an enough of that
His friends would say stop pining
There is other girls to look at
They've tried to set'em up with Tiffany and Indigo

But there's something about Mary that they don't know.

Mary, there's just something about Mary."

8.2/10

Soldier. Fighter. Seeker. Legend.

Diamond Dogs delivers exactly what it promises - Dolph Lundgren kicking some ass! This is your standard direct-to-DVD action claptrap that strides through familiar territory. It could more or less be branded as a poor man's version of a modern-day Indiana Jones. On that note, it's endowed with a plot regarding an ancient Buddhist artefact (and the quest to find it), which adds further credence to the statement that Diamond Dogs aspires to be the next National Treasure or Raiders of the Lost Ark. It never quite reaches the level of these films it desires to emulate (not even close), but who cares? Once you learn to accept the below-par acting and the laughable plot contrivances, you can enjoy watching the Dolphster casually slaughtering bad guys. If you watch the film on its own terms, there's fun to be had - a substantial amount of it.

For this particular outing, the Dolphster is Xander Ronson; a former soldier now living in Inner Mongolia who has fallen on hard times. Ronson offers a security service, but hasn't had a client in two years and has been reduced to making money from fighting illegally in an underground fighting circuit (collaborating with a friend who bets on him to win, which he always does). Unfortunately, Ronson is heavily in debt and will be sent to prison if his debts aren't paid within a few weeks. Fortuitously for our brooding hero, he's approached by the wealthy Chambers (Shriver) - a fortune-seeking scumbag in search of an ancient (and extremely valuable) Buddhist artefact known as the Tangka. Chambers offers Ronson the job as head of security and guide for the trip, for which he will be paid extraordinarily well. Unfortunately for the whole group, not only is this bejewelled artefact supposedly cursed but a group of dastardly Russian mercenaries are also on a quest seeking the Tangka.

Diamond Dogs is primarily marred by its script, which is bereft of originality and overflowing with predictability. However, to be fair, these are no real biggies - after all, if you're in the mood for a Dolph Lundgren actioner you're obviously not seeking anything that will engage on a cerebral level. Therefore, the script is deeply flawed but considering its nature this is no surprise. However, Diamond Dogs does fail in the pacing department. The script contains usually tedious dialogue, and the gaps between action scenes are occasionally unforgivable. The lack of action is evidently due to the film's ambitions: to be considered in the same league as the Indiana Jones films, wherein exposition plays a crucial role. The story here, however, isn't interesting enough; in truth it's devoid of any possibilities for intellectual discussions or grandiose scenarios. The story also seems incomplete, as if missing a monologue concerning the background of the Tangka. This is why Indiana Jones always does it right - the protagonist knows what he's doing, and can reveal interesting trivia pertaining to the artefact in question in small bits scattered generously throughout each adventure. Diamond Dogs adheres strictly to B-movie conventions that dictate films of this disposition. In the film's defence, though, it does manage to circumvent various proverbial clichés of the genre. A young girl enters the picture, for instance, but she's no love interest.

Production for Diamond Dogs took place in Inner Mongolia, lending a strange otherworldliness to the movie. Beautiful vistas are on display as the treasure hunt transpires, and the action occurs on ideal terrain. It has also been bestowed with a certain grittiness not usually present in run of the mill DTD flicks. Unfortunately, when Ronson & company enter the ancient crypt said to contain the Tangka it lacks marvel and awe. It looks cheap, as if an old cellar populated by lawn ornaments. Elaborate booby-traps are non-existent...the only traps present are nothing special and barely threatening. The Tangka is merely glanced at, and what we see resembles cheap plastic beads glued to construction paper. Where's the shiny gold that catches our attention whenever it enters the frame? This was definitely made on the cheap!

Action sequences are somewhat competent, and are infused with Dolph's glorious directorial talents. They're very noisy and very violent. Bare-knuckle fights at the beginning are gritty, bloody and quite enthralling. The occasional shootouts are also something special. The low budget is only semi-obvious. There's enough blood being spilt and folks being violently dispatched to distract us from the evident budget problems. The body count is tremendously high, each death is exceedingly bloody, and only Xander steps out of the flames in one piece in a final scene that appears to pay homage to The Searchers. Perhaps most commendable is the lack of diabolical slow motion. I enjoyed indulging in this little guilty pleasure as the bloodshed satisfies and the action is exhilarating.

Dolph Lundgren is no stranger to this type of film as he also serves as executive producer and, to a minor extent, director (uncredited). It's difficult not to like the Dolphster as he wades through various battlefields and protects himself with an endless amount of bullets. Predictably, though, he's quite invincible and bullets magically skirt around him (even when his cover is poor).
The cast is filled with mainly disposable actors, with few exceptions (Dolph being one of them). Perhaps the biggest shock to me was how much I came to like the slightly effeminate William Shriver as Chambers. He's wholly believable in his role; coming across as a character from an 80's action flick (you know you love them). Every other member of the cast is quite talent deficient, however, especially Nan Yu as Chambers' step-daughter.

All in all, Diamond Dogs is among the better additions to Dolph Lundgren's résumé. Not as good as The Mechanik, but not as poor as Missionary Man. This is a fairly enjoyable, albeit clichéd action-adventure film. There are too many sluggish points with an inadequate amount of quality action to compensate, but this is still sufficient for wasting time while enjoying pizza and beer. Diamond Dogs was reportedly intended to be the first movie in a trilogy of films chronicling the escapades of Dolph Lundgren's Xander Ronson. The second film even entered the planning stages with Dolph attached to direct and star...however, the production of Diamond Dogs was beset with a huge manner of dilemmas, resulting in the script being retooled and Dolph Lundgren stepping in to direct (relieving credited director Shimon Dotan) after only a few days of filming! This ultimately prevented the trilogy from materialising.
While Diamond Dogs has its lethal flaws (including the fact the word "assistant" is consistently misspelled as "asstistant" throughout the end credits), it's still an entertaining diversion.

5.7/10

Soldier...teacher...hero!

Detention is simply a straightforward throwback to the ridiculously enjoyable '80s action pictures of old - a generic compound of action flick clichés that gleans various ingredients from Die Hard and The Breakfast Club (an odd amalgam, I know), minus the extravagant special effects of the former and the deep characterisations of the latter. This is the epitome of absurdity; a brisk 95-minute excursion into over-the-top theatrics, conventional scenarios, gaping plot holes and teenage pregnancy. Dolph Lundgren is growing old, but in an action arena he's commendably self-assured. Detention isn't a masterpiece by any means, nor does it redefine the majestic art of bullet ballet. It's brainless to extremes, but (like all action films should) it entertains to no end. This is exactly the type of action flick that would emerge during the '80s; therefore witnessing this style of old-school action is frankly revitalising a bit over a decade since the 1980s concluded.

Sam Decker (Lundgren) is a former Special Forces operative who's haunted following a tour of duty in Bosnia. Ten years following this fateful tour of duty, Sam has become a school teacher at a tough high school. He had aimed to make a difference, but he becomes frustrated and angered by a system that doesn't appear to work. Sam submits his letter of resignation, as he's been offered a better position elsewhere. Unfortunately, on his final day (Friday) he gets coerced into staying after school to manage a detention class. Unfortunately, too, a well-organised group of gunmen invade the supposedly deserted school to use it as a base of operations for an armed car robbery. These gunmen, however, didn't expect Sam and his detention class to still be on school grounds... Cue violence and carnage.

Detention adheres to the Die Hard formula, but it isn't loaded with any intelligence. Plot holes flourish, and the silliness of the entire affair is guaranteed to trigger bucket-loads of derisive sniggers. Guns fire an unlimited supply of ammunition (pistols sometimes fire off roughly 30 rounds at a time without reloading), bad guys can never shoot straight, the hero endures a few gunshots (to the arm, of course, as bullets can never hit anywhere else) but shrugs them off, and (naturally) the cops are a bit on the corrupt side. Also, how can a criminal mastermind not anticipate any after school activities? Why would the high school have a total lockdown mode, which locks even the emergency exits (which is illegal)? What if the security guard controlling the lockdown fell asleep or was killed and was unable to switch off the lockdown? If the school is locked down, how can the characters reach the roof during the climax? But hey - who needs logic and brains when you have shell casings continually being expended and large-scale shootouts?

On a positive note, Detention is extremely enjoyable on account of the competent filmmaking on display. Director Sidney J. Furie has been in the industry for many decades, and his direction is first-rate here. The action is filmed in an old-school fashion, using wide shots and pans as opposed to shaky cam and shots lasting a nanosecond. Detention is infused with everything 80s - an 80's-style formula, 80's-style characters, and 80's-style filmmaking techniques. This is great entertainment...you just need to leave your brain at the door and suspend your disbelief, and you'll be fine. In other words, it's a guilty pleasure. And a damn enjoyable one!

Dolph Lundgren plays the typical trigger happy one-man army type very well, although he does appear to be operating on autopilot most of the time. There are a few notable moments for Dolph, especially his semi-amusing one-liners (after killing a corrupt cop, he exclaims "Now you're a deadbeat cop!")
Beside Dolph there's Alex Krazis as Chester Lamb; the mastermind behind the whole operation. The actor places forth an acceptable performance, harkening back to the golden age of the 80s. His character is poorly written, granted, but he's sinister when the occasion calls for it.
The cast is rounded out by various actors portraying the students who fight back against the troupe of gunmen. The bad guys, of course, are easy to despise.

All in all, Detention is simply a good old-fashioned, clichéd, 80's-style action flick, coated in a thick layer of cheese and silliness. From a critical standpoint this is an awful movie; however, every so often even a critic should just sit back and enjoy the ride. There's a lot of fun to be had in amongst the plethora of proficient action sequences and amusing one-liners. I enjoyed it from start to finish. If you're into bad action films, Detention is one to rent and/or perhaps add to your collection.

4.8/10

Jarfe: "That's impossible, it can't be you..."
Ryde: "It's me."

As washed-up '80s action stars churn out an endless selection of below-par, low-budget, direct-to-DVD action flicks, you can at least admire them for their persistence. In recent years, Dolph Lundgren has demonstrated his competence as not only an actor but also a director. Following the astonishingly positive reception of his second directorial outing, The Mechanik (also known as The Russian Specialist), in 2005, Dolph went on to helm Missionary Man - this stylish, albeit unoriginal and mundane contemporary Western that pays tribute to such classics as High Plains Drifter and Pale Rider. It's your conventional "tough guy rides in to clean up a corrupt town" story, primarily following the DTD formula to the letter. On the cover/poster for Missionary Man Dolph Lundgren is heavily armed, there's an explosion in the background, and the tagline reads "No sin shall go unpunished" - judge the book by its cover, as what you see is pretty much what you get.

The story is set on a Native American Indian reservation where a gang of sadistic palefaces rule through violence and corruption. An enigmatic stranger known only as Ryder (Lundgren), rolls into town with a Bible and a score to settle. Ryder's character is unmistakably established as being some sort of enigmatic badass after he drinks straight tequila (no salt, no lime) and reads various verses of the Bible. His business in town is to attend the funeral of an old acquaintance known as J.J., who had recently drowned. However, J.J.'s family refuse to believe his death was an accident, and blame malicious local oppressor John Reno (Tompkins) for the murder. Ryder - the tall, blonde-haired stranger - begins befriending members of the local Indian community, and causes problems for Reno when he defeats hired hands and interferes with his underhanded practises. Tensions rise between Reno and Ryder, and the possibilities for a violent showdown continue to elevate.

Missionary Man is just a forgettable shoot-'em-up action romp, featuring an aging Dolph Lundgren taking on countless enemies (sometimes simultaneously) with unwavering efficiency. Dolph (who also co-wrote the script) unfortunately takes things far too seriously. The film aspires to be an incisive character study, but Dolph lacks the requisite skill as a writer, director and star to pull this off successfully. Dialogue is fairly humdrum, and clichés proliferate, not to mention the air of unreserved seriousness is never (purposely) breached. Silly events and corny dialogue unfortunately prompt derisory chortles. Some scenes do work, especially when the hulking Ryder (remaining nameless, in an ostensible homage to Clint Eastwood) demonstrates his ability as a fighter. The photography is also endlessly stylish (due to an error during the DVD mastering, the colours are washed-out, giving the film an almost mythical look). Nevertheless, the overall lack of unique action scenes (not to mention action scenes in general are in short supply, instead opting to develop a dreary congregation of characters) as well as noteworthy storytelling prevent Missionary Man from rising above the usual low standard for DTD action flicks.

The cinematography is of a satisfactory standard. Adhering to the widespread plague of contemporary action flicks, the camera suffers an epileptic attack whenever an action scene takes place. Shaky cam syndrome does no wonders on the cinematography front, ultimately coming across as cheap and disorientating. However, cinematographer Bing Rao's work isn't a total dud. The first ten minutes in particular is intriguingly shot, using clever camera angles and (thanks to nice lighting) usually clouding Ryder in darkness. Elia Cmiral's music to complement the photography is, of course, atmospheric and effective.

Even at 50 years old, Dolph Lundgren never fails as a badass. He certainly looks the part, donning an outfit extremely appropriate for his character. Ryder is a one-dimensional hero - i.e. he lacks a weighty back-story. What's missing is acceptable motivation and reasoning for his return to the town. Conveniently, Ryder had an altercation in the past with a few members of this quiet town and returns purely for vengeance-related reasons. But no explanation is offered regarding events that had previously transpired. An air of mystery surrounding the protagonist is usually a great decision, but at least a little motivation would've proved advantageous.
The supporting cast is generally populated by little-known actors. There's a bunch of performances of questionable quality, but they're uniformly watchable at least. Matthew Tompkins appears to give it his all as the despicable John Reno. He's the proverbial genre villain - outwardly appealing, but shady and corrupt, and has plenty of hired guns on standby to unleash upon the hero.

Missionary Man is a clear homage to the Westerns of old, communicating a contemporary version of a story wherein a stranger rides into town to save the day. Instead of horses, they ride motorcycles (at one stage Reno even tells Ryder to leave town on his "iron horse"). This isn't a necessarily bad movie...it's just a familiar DTD movie. Innovative this is not. However Dolph's religious one man army shtick is eye-catching, pairing a mainly silent performance with a charismatic swagger (the kind you generally don't witness in a mindless production like this). The only true flaws are a handful of shaky performances, the indiscriminate use of slow motion, and the fact it's bereft of anything truly worthwhile or memorable. For your basic DTD film, this isn't a total waste. The display of blood and guts is occasionally quite graphic (therefore enjoyable), and it offers Dolph Lundgren drinking tequila, riding a motorcycle and kicking ass. Let's face it: it's why you paid the money to see it in the first place.

5.2/10

"Hitler is dead. Operation Valkyrie is in effect."

Valkyrie is a solid World War II espionage thriller, conveying one of the most staggering true stories in modern history. This is a motion picture infused with a rare story regarding the German Resistance that primarily concentrates on the overlooked heroism of officers and soldiers who actively fought against Adolf Hitler and his regime from within ranks of power. Directed by Bryan Singer (a man blessed with a virtually unbroken run of impressive work; his previous films including The Usual Suspects, X-Men and Superman Returns), Valkyrie manages to thrill and entertain the mass market, but it seems hardly worth the wait and effort. Singer's film is coated in an inevitable layer of thick Hollywood gloss, and is also lacking in vital depth. Screenwriters Christopher McQuarrie and Nathan Alexander employ the historical facts of this remarkable true story (told rather faithfully) to construct the flick, but it comes across as well-oiled Hollywood entertainment rather than a sensationalist chapter of WWII. While not a bad film by any means, Valkyrie would've carried far more clout if it had emerged from the confident German film industry (with home-grown actors and a director to match) as opposed to the tired mills of Hollywood.

Sour industry buzz intensely enveloped Valkyrie as it was slammed unjustly since production commenced in 2007, facing augmented hostility that greeted the shifting release dates as well as the trailers that underlined the bewildering cocktail of British and American accents meant to represent the resistance movement inside the Third Reich. It turns out this bad press was merely conjecture; battling the odds and winning, Singer has handsomely directed this engaging, intense World War II thriller. It's not as bad as the negative pre-hype suggested, but Valkyrie still had the potential to be a superior flick.

The film covers a span of roughly 18 months, from early 1943 until the fateful final day. Valkyrie provides an examination of the workings of the German Resistance movement, wherein high-ranking officials with various levels of access to Hitler collaborate to bring to fruition a plot to assassinate their Fuhrer.
With Germany's loss in the war a predetermined conclusion to nearly everyone except for Hitler himself, these high-ranking German officers valiantly conspire to murder their leader, replace the government as peacefully as possible and implement a new regime during which they'd negotiate a peace. Consequently, a peace would spare the loss of more German soldiers and repair what's left of their country's legacy. The cunning idea is to use the German government's own emergency plan (dubbed Operation Valkyrie) against it. With each officer in the group assigned a different role, they propose to plant a bomb inside the Wolf's Lair (an enclosed bunker where high security meetings were held), killing Hitler and his staff before overthrowing the Nazi government from the inside. However, paranoia grips the schemers as success grows nearer. As anyone with a basic knowledge of World War II knows, Hitler would later die by his own hand.

"The point of replacing Hitler is to negotiate the truce with the Allies. The Allies, I suspect would be more amenable to a truce if we offer it to them before they get to fucking Berlin!"

The protagonist of the story, Colonel Claus von Stauffenberg (Cruise), initially suffers serious wounds in Africa. Despite (or perhaps owing to) his injuries, Stauffenberg is recruited into the resistance, being introduced to the secret circle of conscientious objectors. The plan itself is complicated and never clearly explained by the characters (dialogue is fairly stilted), but the basic details are straightforward enough. This is a fascinating story to preserve on film as it's all-too-often neglected. It's curious to note, however, that the film eschews the details of the most famous casualty of the July 20 assassination attempt - Field Marshal Rommel, who was mistakenly implicated and committed suicide as a result. This oversight is likely owing to time constraints, but it's an unfortunate exclusion as it would have shown how far and wide the net was spread to obliterate resistance within the military.

"We have to show the world that not all of us are like him. Otherwise, this will always be Hitler's Germany."

The extremely obvious (and well-known) outcome of the story barely affects our immersion. Director Singer competently brews a substantial amount of suspense. A chain of near misses and tense decisions pinch a viewer with anxiety. Following a fairly sluggish opening act, Valkyrie transforms into a taut assassination game, and the suspense levels continue to elevate throughout the second half when the implementation of Operation Valkyrie develops into a battle of bluff between Stauffenberg's rebels and Hitler's media machine. The performances are especially strong here; each man conflicted as they witness the monster they believe they've killed sprout another head and pursue them. The outcomes of such biographical or historical films as JFK, World Trade Center and Malcolm X are also well known but it doesn't detract from the brilliance of those films. Therefore, why should Valkyrie be held to a different and stricter standard?

One of the most widespread criticisms is perhaps the most valid; the cast never speak in German accents, nor do they speak German. Nazi officials articulate faultless English while writing in German. The problem is addressed during the opening few minutes, during which German titles transform into English titles, and Tom Cruise begins talking in German before beginning to speak English. The implication is that the characters do speak German, but for the sake of being a slice of Westernised entertainment a viewer hears them speaking English (a tactic first employed in The Hunt for Red October). Nevertheless, this is a fault too blatant and baffling, and it's consequently difficult to overlook. Once again, German filmmakers should've committed this ignored piece of history to celluloid.

"I'm a soldier, but in serving my country, I have betrayed my conscience."

In different hands, Valkyrie would've been a deep examination of the people involved, their motives and fears, and maybe even their personal lives. If Valkyrie provided further insight into the lives of these fascinating historical figures, it'd be a more thoughtful and therefore better film. Stauffenberg may have been maimed in the war, but his disenchantment with Hitler predated his injuries, and the film hardly explores this. Instead the film spends lots of time trying to prove that he's a great man. However, whether he was nice or mean is beside the point in the long view. Screenwriters McQuarrie and Alexander needed to dig into Stauffenberg's character and explore the reason why he decided to take such risks. They instead give Cruise the WWII equivalent of his character from Mission: Impossible.
Also, were the co-conspirators simply patriotic Germans, or did they have a deeper motivation for committing treason? With a few exceptions, we never really know. Valkyrie simply feels too underdone, as if heavily cut in the editing room. It seems to have been re-cut to be less of an Oscar-bait drama and more of a popcorn thriller; while serviceable as the latter, it might have been a better film as the former.

Singer dives into the material with plenty of zeal, moulding the assassination plot into an eye-catching, jaw-clenching movement of urgency, utilising the characters as chess pawns on the board game of Germany's future. Singer's work has generated a well-directed chronicle of misbegotten patriotism, with emphasis on sharply angled Nazi ornamentation, beautifully photographed by Newton Thomas Sigel. Several scenes were filmed on location in Berlin (using many locations where actual events occurred, including the Benderblock). In some instances where a certain location no longer existed, it was meticulously recreated. However, what's missing here (but effortlessly captured in films like Black Book) is any sense of the horrors of war, the maniacal evil of the Nazi regime, and the corrosive effect on civilians. The Berlin depicted here is too pristine and glossy...it's unmistakably a Hollywood production. The grittiness and brilliance of 2004's Der Undertang (Downfall) should have pervaded a film covering this source material.

David Bamber's physical resemblance to Adolf Hitler is effective enough for the few scenes in which he features, but it almost goes without saying that he doesn't come close to Bruno Ganz's astonishing portrayal of the dictator in Downfall (which was a far more gripping and riveting flick, in no small part because of Ganz).
Tom Cruise is adequate as Colonel Claus von Stauffenberg. Much controversy was sparked about Cruise taking on such a role, to the point that the German government forbade filming in their country due to his scientology cult (eventually permission was granted). Cruise is surprisingly strong, infusing his performance with a crucial level of emotionality. The actor never entirely immerses himself into the character, but his appearance is ideal. If only Cruise delivered dialogue in a more German fashion...
Once you accept English Nazis, you can easily accept the great cast - including Bill Nighy, Terence Stamp and Kenneth Branagh who play old-school soldiers with stiff upper lips. Tom Wilkinson is a slimy delight as a Nazi official who turns a blind eye to the operation as opposed to actually helping. Eddie Izzard, Kevin McNally and Christian Berkel also appear (among others), and all hit their marks delightfully.
Carice van Houten, who was so remarkable in the WWII drama Black Book, is given minor screen-time as Stauffenberg's wife. (It's worth noting that another Black Book cast member, Waldemar Kobus, also appears in Valkyrie. In the former film he played a piggish Nazi officer, and here he's a police chief who collaborates with the resistance.)

"Long live sacred Germany!"

Taken merely as a genre piece, Valkyrie is an engaging but incomplete thriller. Its illustrious cast do their jobs adequately, but the story could have benefitted from further insight into the men who tried to kill Hitler. At the end of the day it's a tense, competently-crafted thriller that accurately communicates a story of bravery and betrayal. But when Hollywood has the last word, something dies. It ultimately feels like the story has been taken advantage of, and skilfully repackaged as entertainment for money purposes.

6.7/10

"Hopeless emptiness. Now you've said it. Plenty of people are onto the emptiness, but it takes real guts to see the hopelessness."

Revolutionary Road, a cinematic adaptation of the novel by Richard Yates, is a compelling character study as well as a brutal, emotionally-straining examination of a marriage in turmoil that denounces the American Dream as a cruel charade. Director Sam Mendes, who had previously helmed the 1999 film American Beauty, returns to his roots in crafting this powerful suburban drama. Revolutionary Road is a truly extraordinary motion picture that harnesses spellbinding emotional discharge and enthralling repugnance, employing two talented and captivating lead actors (Kate Winslet and Leonardo DiCaprio, reuniting in a movie for the first time since 1997's Titanic) to bring to the screen a masterwork of domestic isolation. Bearing in mind Mendes' penchant for polished hysteria (and considering the source material), it makes perfect sense for Revolutionary Road to linger on the bubbling pot of emotive poison splashing on the marriage of the protagonists. This is a beautifully mounted voyage of discomfort, scrutinising the forever expanding line that divides two individuals who've lost interest in open communication, and who are forced to preserve their decaying lifestyle and status in the name of matrimony. Those keen to reaffirm the transforming power of love may feel like slashing their wrists after watching this bleak drama during which love turns into loathing, defiance and tragedy.

Trying their best to conform to mid-1950's standards of social grace and marital comfort, Frank (DiCaprio) and April (Winslet) Wheeler have settled resentfully into stultifying suburbia but fantasise of reclaiming their lives as free spirits. They're living the American Dream; however their lives are trapped and unfulfilled. April's acting aspirations are sunk beyond salvaging, and Frank works everyday at a job he can barely tolerate. They begin coming apart at the seams, and endeavour to rejuvenate and rescue their marriage.
Concise, carefully placed flashbacks depict Frank and April in happier times, but now they have become stagnant and indignant...at least under the surface. Outwardly the couple are still trying to be happy, impulsively deciding to take the kids and move to Paris. However, a combination of mutual loathing and growing unrest (not to mention infidelity) threatens their lives, and they begin to turn on each other with cataclysmic consequences.

The callousness which pulls Frank and April apart is where Revolutionary Road hits the hardest. Playing with steadfast gender roles and suburban complacency, the film opts to portray the slow burn path, charitably exhibiting the erosion of spirit within the two bickering protagonists. Frank and April were united by cocktail-hour flirtation and promises that were eventually broken...and now the couple are left to cope with their messy lives. They've basically declared war on each other; April's pregnancy and Frank's possible new position (at a company he detests) is exercised as ammunition to unleash staggering diatribes against each other. Revolutionary Road is bursting with searing belligerent situations, but director Mendes never permits the discontent to blur into white noise. The film instead grips tighter with every passing scene, deepening the characterisation as Frank and April challenge their borders for the first time. They slowly come to the realisation that kids, a house in a typical neighbourhood, and prearranged domestic roles have transformed them into mere rats trapped inside a cage.

Frank and April aren't the only despondent ones (as we realise through subdued moments with supporting characters), yet their unhappiness is so immense they've no choice but to lay into each other. They pictured themselves as citified intellectuals, and treated their move to the suburbs (witnessed in a sole flashback) as a grand adventure. Seven years later, however, they've inhabited lives neither of them desired, but neither knows how to escape - Frank is stuck in a low-level position at a machine tooling company (the same company his father was an employee of for twenty years), and April is a lonesome and desolate housewife. They try and fail to keep disappointment at bay by pretending that - despite their suburban address, two small children and a picture window overlooking the perfectly manicured front lawn - they aren't like everyone else... But they are like everyone else. Moreover, they're crippled by the sense that they are superior to the excruciating banality they've fallen into. In order to escape this, their European dream is conceived. They ostensibly believe their troubles will recede in Paris, and that this move would prove they're not "just another American couple". April perfectly explains this at one stage: "Our whole existence here is based on this great premise that we're...special. And superior to the whole thing. But we're not. We're just like everyone else. Look at us, we've bought into the same ridiculous delusion...this idea that you have to resign from life and settle down the moment you have children. And we've been punishing each other for it."

"I wanted IN. I just wanted us to live again. For years I thought we've shared this secret that we would be wonderful in the world. I don't know exactly how, but just the possibility kept me hoping. How pathetic is that? So stupid. To put all your hopes in a promise that was never made. Frank knows what he wants, he found his place, he's just fine. Married, two kids, it should be enough. It is for him. And he's right; we were never special or destined for anything at all."

Revolutionary Road is the type of novel Hollywood tends to botch, mainly on account of the story constantly taking place inside the heads of its characters, because the Wheelers aren't particularly affable, and because pessimism without obvious salvation is a tough sell. Considering that the story spends large sections inside the characters' heads, it's remarkable how well Mr. Mendes' motion picture adaptation is able to encapsulate the same truths about the characters. Small gestures are hugely significant, and complete sequences of emotions wash across a face within seconds. All the actors work magnificently to externalise a story all about what's never said. Frank and April lay it all out in their screaming brawls, but the true story lies within the moment Frank's face breaks during their fight, or the sceptically even tone in April's voice when she organises breakfast for him the morning after a major blow-out. In a supporting role, Michael Shannon plays John; the formerly institutionalised son of the Wheeler's realtor. Shannon (nominated for an Oscar) adds a unique energy to the movie, portraying the sole clear thinker of the story. He's a man entwined in mental illness, yet he perceives Frank and April for who they truly are. With a mere two sequences in which he features in, Shannon enriches the film with his cracked mischief, prodding the Wheeler discomfort to detonation.

With master cinematographer Roger Deakins, Mendes has fastidiously recreated suburban Connecticut of the 1950s. Production values are truly astonishing - from the immaculate costumes (drab grey suits & hats for the men, plain housewife clothing for the women) to the spot-on room decoration that creates a uniquely '50s atmosphere. The mood is even evoked through both subtle and obvious characteristics (think cigarettes). It's the equivalent of witnessing the decade through snapshots or newsreel footage. Multiple images are extremely remarkable, and shall forever remain embedded in my memory.

The screenplay (adapted by Justin Haythe) is teeming with dialogue cleverly pervaded by authentic '50s language, including adjectives (like "swell" and "quaint") and telephone numbers beginning with "Klondike 5". The dialogue is extremely well-written, delivered by a wonderful selection of actors. However, the screenplay is undermined by its abridged nature. Following a masterful prologue introducing Frank and April, the script fasts forward several years and the couple are suddenly married. Furthermore, the Wheeler offspring simply appear without an appropriate introduction, and play an unrealistically minor role in the family. The script leaves too many questions about what's behind these unhappy people, but in any case with these top-notch actors it's fairly possible to overlook this fault.

Thomas Newman's score is perhaps most spellbinding. It further establishes the impeccable '50s-style atmosphere and suitably mesmerises during the dramatic arguments. The poignant main theme (recurringly played at various points throughout the movie) is able to move a viewer to tears, especially towards the end when the combination of music and first-rate acting is extraordinary. Without Newman's eloquent music, Revolutionary Road wouldn't be half as powerful. In truth, moments devoid of music occasionally fail to engage.

"You want to play house you got to have a job. You want to play nice house, very sweet house, you got to have a job you don't like."

With its morbid and incisive portrait of a suburban marriage, Revolutionary Road perhaps isn't the onscreen reunion of Kate and Leo that most moviegoers had fantasised about. For the actors, however, it's a challenge - both stars take an audacious leap into characterisations that are emotionally raw and often alienating. They are people we may loathe as chilly and condescending, but we can nevertheless relate to them as representations of unfulfilled yearnings. DiCaprio and Winslet construct a touching portrait of a couple splitting at the seams. Both performers impart a dire quality with minimal moves; internalising the repentance and fury using excellent facial contortions. We are offered little about the marriage of Frank and April preceding their relocation to the cruelly named Revolutionary Road, yet it may not have truly existed either.
Winslet's performance is consistently on target. DiCaprio is far more memorable, though, mostly on account of his commanding screen presence and the believable rage exhibited throughout the main argument scene. It's reasonably effortless to play one emotion...in this film, however, DiCaprio is able to play several at once - hurt, furious, betrayed, humiliated - with raw vulnerability. The actors throttle the pain gently, saving themselves for eruptions of both love and hate, interpreting a marriage assembled on a fleeting memory of passion that flew the coop long ago.

"You're just some guy who made me laugh at a party once."

Completing the Titanic reunion is Kathy Bates, whose work as the Wheeler's realtor is utterly stunning. She perfectly embodies the characteristics we associate with this type of character, such as the love for chatting about dilemmas with a fellow woman and the intricate clothing with not a hair out of place.
Michael Shannon (previously mentioned) earned a Best Supporting Actor Oscar nomination for his brilliant and intriguing portrayal as the only one unafraid to speak the truth. He's a commanding scene stealer, and as he provokes Frank and April to confront the truth he never treads a foot wrong.
Other supporting actors make reasonably brief appearances, for instance Dylan Baker as an employee of the machine tooling company.

In the commercial movie marketplace, thematic dramas such as Revolutionary Road are a tough sell. Granted, this won't generate impressive box office receipts and it doesn't offer frivolous entertainment. Revolutionary Road instead offers two fantastic stars surpassing themselves (especially during those fierce confrontational scenes when their grievances turn corrosive) and first-rate filmmaking. The result, while unfortunately missing out on various deserving Oscar nominations, is another Sam Mendes masterpiece - definitely among the best films of 2008. This is a rare classy literary adaptation infused with a beating heart, and it reaches a summit of dramatic gratification and pure emotional mutilation that's utterly mesmerising. According to the women who lived during the mid-1950s, cultural markers (movies, TV, radio, advertisements) assured them happiness in domestic servitude...but they weren't happy at all. One could consider Revolutionary Road a tribute to those women.

8.8/10

"That's a great plan, Walter. That's fuckin' ingenious, if I understand it correctly. It's a Swiss fuckin' watch."

Honestly, what is there to say about The Big Lebowski that hasn't already been declared thousands of times before? It seems practically redundant to pen a critique of this particular motion picture. Thus, I've undertaken this review to present a different opinion - an opinion which will be grilled, criticised, and won't be widely shared...

The writer-director duo of Joel & Ethan Coen are dotingly recognised for their unparalleled ability to conceive vividly-drawn characters, beguiling stories and brilliantly peculiar cinematic experiences in general. They manage to construct inventive stories that conform to familiar generic conventions but are wrapped in outlandish and original settings, and the result entertains endlessly. The Big Lebowski is extensively regarded as a cult comedy classic - it performed poorly at the box office (scoring less than $18 million from a reported budget of $15 million), yet various viewers and critics worldwide adore it, quote it limitlessly, and worship it religiously. But alas, through the eyes of this reviewer, The Big Lebowski is undeserving of its accolades and cult status. This is a dreary, unfunny, virtually unwatchable filmic concoction. Its diminutive plot exists as a paltry excuse to showcase off-the-wall character vignettes as the actors stroll through strange scenarios. Normally, slender plots can be overlooked if there's sufficient fun to be had. In the case of The Big Lebowski, though, the film grows tedious very quickly.

Here's the essential vibe of the plot (if it can even be labelled as such):
Jeffrey "The Dude" Lebowski (Bridges) is a lowlife, unemployed slacker who loves bowling, White Russians and Creedence Clearwater Revival. A group of inept crooks mistake the Dude for a millionaire businessman, and urinate on his rug in an attempt to coerce him into paying a debt he has absolutely no knowledge of. Seeking retribution for his soiled rug, the Dude visits the wealthy Jeff Lebowski (Huddleston) and soon becomes a patsy when he's embroiled in a case of kidnapping and extortion.

"Donny you're out of your element! Dude, the Chinaman is not the issue here!"

The plot sounds slightly similar to The Big Sleep or some Raymond Chandler story, doesn't it? This is pretty much the sole running gag - it's a convoluted detective story through extraordinary eyes that concerns a congregation of lowlife characters. It's a pastiche of Raymond Chandler's proverbial labyrinthine noir, anchored not in the hard-bitten Humphrey Bogart but the quixotic pothead Bridges. A majority of the gags featured in this lacklustre creation are hit-and-miss. The eccentric supporting characters are acted with delightful abandon; yet the script never utilises them effectively. The film is also sometimes too downbeat and too serious...it's jarring. I never laughed out loud...the film merely provoked a few subdued chortles. Lines such as "Obviously, you're not a golfer" among others have become venerated by ardent fans, but they come across as random, and are desperately missing a context. Aside from a handful of amusing lines courtesy of the impeccable John Goodman, there is nothing "hilarious" about this drab, excruciating, unfunny black comedy.

"That rug really tied the room together."

The script additionally contains an excessive amount of profanity. Normally there's no problem with profanity aplenty, but it's used far too unnecessarily frequently. At one stage the narrator even asks the Dude "Do you have to use so many cuss words?". If only the Coen Brothers had taken notice of the words they had written in their screenplay...
The lack of plot or - genuine momentum, for that matter - is ostensibly concealed by drawn-out, Busby Berkeley-style dream sequences. With this in mind, The Big Lebowski is a classic exercise in self-indulgence - plenty of impressive style to behold, with zero substance to complement it. Why viewers lap up this twaddle and worship it like the second coming is possibly the biggest mystery I've encountered in all my years of movie-watching.

Certainly, The Big Lebowski isn't a total disaster. Several Coenisms (as previously mentioned) are in evidence, and the actors perfectly immerse themselves into their respective characters. John Goodman is the standout as Walter; a gun-toting, Jewish-convert Vietnam veteran with anger issues. The sole funny lines are delivered by Goodman, and frankly the film suffers whenever he isn't on the screen. Jeff Bridges looks and acts the part of the Dude, even though his occasionally monotonous line deliveries cause the film to bog. The third and final member of the main cast is Steve Buscemi (a Coen Brothers veteran) as Donny; the soft-spoken, reserved member of the group.
The secondary cast are also worth mentioning. Julianne Moore is fantastic and engaging as the pseudo-European feminist art freak. David Huddleston nails the brusque tone as the millionaire Lebowski, with the always dynamic Philip Seymour Hoffman appearing as his snivelling assistant. Sam Elliott is a treat as the narrator, Peter Stormare (another Coen Brothers veteran) is amusing as the German rocker-come-porn star nihilist, and there's also John Turturro as the convicted child-molester-turned-bowler named Jesus.

Another upside is the delightful soundtrack. In addition to Carter Burwell's excellent original score, there's a terrific brew of extra songs tossed into the mix. The film features music from Nina Simone, Bob Dylan, Captain Beefheart and Creedence Clearwater Revival, as well as including a Spanish cover (by the Gypsy Kings) of Hotel California.

All in all, the Coen Brothers missed the mark by a country mile with The Big Lebowski. Maybe I just don't "get" this type of humour, or maybe it simply isn't to my taste. Nevertheless, after three agonising viewings (and despite my love for other films created by the Coen Brothers, such as Fargo and Raising Arizona) I still can't find much value in this particular film.

"I guess that's the way the whole durned human comedy keeps perpetuatin' itself."

3.8/10

Jack Conrad: "You know, I don't know who you are, and I don't care. But I don't play games."
Ian Breckel: "You don't have to win... but everbody plays."

There's something moralistically baffling about a balls-to-the-wall action flick that simultaneously celebrates violence and scolds an audience for celebrating violence...

This above sentence refers to The Condemned; a WWE-produced action film helmed by Scott Wiper (A Better Way to Die is another entry to this director's CV). Borrowing heavily from Battle Royale, The Most Dangerous Game and The Running Man, it's apparent that this derivative production won't merit any points for originality. That said, The Condemned is an exploitative and entertaining action film that delivers precisely what any viewer expects: graphic violence, pulse-pounding action, and muscular performers generally beating the absolute crap out of each other. It will never receive any Oscars (or any prestigious awards, for that matter), nor will it be deemed a masterpiece. In addition, this certainly isn't the greatest action flick the industry has to offer (it's a breeding ground for clichés, for instance, and there are too many missteps that prevent it from being anything overly special). However, if you're seeking a straightforward actioner crammed with mindless violence that doesn't pull any punches, then get together a few mates, order pizza, pop open a cold one and enjoy The Condemned.

WWE wrestler "Stone Cold" (a.k.a. Steven Austin) plays Jack Conrad; an American with a mysterious past who's incarcerated in an El Salvadorian prison. He's granted a reprieve, however, when ambitious reality television producer Ian Breckel (Mammone) selects him as part of his latest project. Ian acquires ten death row inmates from various global prisons and places them on a remote island. These condemned individuals are allotted thirty hours to fight each other to the death. The sole survivor of the bloodbath will be given freedom and sufficient cash to commence a new life. In essence, Breckel's show is reminiscent of the golden days of the Colosseum when gladiators fought to the death as a form of entertainment.
Meanwhile, as the violence unfolds, the camera-infested island broadcasts the legally questionable carnage across the internet. Anyone in the world willing to pay fifty bucks can witness this live snuff film.

The Condemned can be easily recommended to action movie connoisseurs. The mayhem is brutal, hard-hitting, entrenched in realism, and (despite a sagging middle act) in abundance. A few interesting action set-pieces make for enjoyable viewing, and the island (photographed in Queensland, Australia) is a great location for the chaos to unfold. Especially during the middle section there's far too much yakking in between the action, and the filmmakers seem to believe the best way to shoot fight scenes is to make them somewhat incomprehensible. The choreography is top-notch (crafted by Australian martial arts legend Richard Norton), but nearly every violent conflict is lensed with shaky, handheld camera...it all appears to be a nauseating blur. We see people pummelling each other, and we occasionally get a sense of who's who, but we usually have to wait for the fight to conclude before we can properly comprehend what actually transpired. The frenetic editing exacerbates this problem by cutting every nanosecond or so. Rectification of this problem was staring the filmmakers in the face: why not utilise the footage Ian Breckel and his team are capturing? Why not show the majority of a battle from the perspective of a paying viewer, watching the carnage from their computer? This'd make the action far more interesting and, honestly, more edifying. Unfortunately, outside of a bar full of Jack Conrad's friends, the film never shows anyone else who paid to watch this internet blood sport.

Director Scott Wiper, it seems, isn't quite satisfied with helming a mere exploitation film. The Condemned comes armed with a message: consumers love violence. People like the odious Breckel become rich as long as viewers flock to this stuff in droves. Years ago, this may have been considered provocative; today, however, it's trite, and it disastrously decelerates the pace.
Superfluous subplots also emerge in spades, proving very harmful to the pacing. Breckel's underlings constantly bicker as they are confronted with silly attacks of conscience. There's also a love story between Conrad and a girl back home. This exists purely as a foundation on which to build a corny happy ending. Naturally, the FBI also becomes involved. This addition, however, is shallow. The FBI ultimately does nothing useful. It isn't even properly exploited (imagine the possibilities of an FBI raid of Breckel's island...), therefore coming off as unnecessary.

Despite the aforementioned criticisms, the film isn't without its upsides. The Condemned remains a fairly enjoyable romp featuring one-liners and action, even if the adrenaline stops pumping for corny chit-chat every so often. Director Wiper has made a commendable creative decision to eschew digital effects and green screen, predominantly employing the WYSIWYG (what you see is what you get) approach. As a result, the film feels far grittier.

A majority of the characters are stock personalities hardly developed past the first dimension. Character development doesn't exist beyond demonstrations of a character's fighting ability. It's extremely gruelling to keep up with who's been dispatched and who's still alive due to the congregation of mainly forgettable characters. The only truly memorable characters are Austin's Jack Conrad and Vinnie Jones' Ewan McStarley. Ultimately, after the other cookie-cutters have been eliminated in predictable ways, it's a duel between these two. Their climactic one-on-one conflict, though, is frequently baffling on account of the camera (which experiences an epileptic seizure any time there's an action sequence).

Steven Austin has a terrific screen presence owing to his hulking appearance. There's little doubt he has potential as a hero, but this is an unsuitable vehicle for the actor. Based on the evidence available here it's difficult to ascertain whether or not he's capable of delivering dialogue - aside from a few conversations (during which he's fairly soft-spoken) he doesn't have much to say.
Vinnie Jones, as always, is excellent. He's a menacing villain and certainly one of the highlights of this movie. Robert Mammone stars as the selfish reality television producer. He hits all the correct notes and comes across as pretty despicable. Other additions to the cast include Rick Hoffman (remember him from Hostel?), Tory Mussett (appearing under the name of Victoria Mussett), Manu Bennett, Madeleine West, Christopher Baker, Sam Healy, Luke Pegler, Emelia Burns and Dasi Ruz - all providing acceptable support. Most notable, though, is Masa Yamaguchi who seems extremely keen during his fight sequences.

Perhaps a re-edited version of The Condemned (removing the tedious and superfluous subplots) would accelerate the pacing and allow for more testosterone-fuelled entertainment. At two hours long, this movie is too lengthy and at times too gruelling. It needed a more concise running time, more action and less exposition. But there's still the problem of the camerawork...
For a film produced by WWE, The Condemned is better than expected...but this remains a faint praise. It's not as cheesy as John Cena's The Marine or as preposterous as Kane's See No Evil, but this had the potential to be a better movie. With a more competent director (as well as a superior cinematographer, for that matter) and a considerable trim, The Condemned could have fulfilled its potential. In the end, however, this picture gets enough right, and it's enjoyable without being too taxing.

5.9/10

"Okay, here we go. Focus. Speed. I am speed. One winner, forty-two losers. I eat losers for breakfast. Breakfast? Maybe I should have had breakfast? Brekkie could be good for me. No, no, no, focus. Speed. Faster than fast, quicker than quick. I am Lightning."

Considering the astronomical box office intake for every CGI-animated picture Pixar has distributed as of 2006, the revolutionary animation studio has developed into the most commercially successful studio in history. Their first six feature films (beginning with 1995's Toy Story) were extensively considered to be instant classics from the moment their first digitally-rendered frames streaked across worldwide theatre screens. Yet more than mere dollars are in consideration here - Pixar pictures are resonant works of art which shall remain watchable and enjoyable for many subsequent generations. Each Pixar masterpiece is infused with genuine heart, timeless laughs and meaningful messages. Thus far, Pixar features have given voices to bugs, toys, monsters and fish...so why not cars?

Cars arguably marks the first true Pixar misfire. In addition, this 2006 picture is debatably the weakest animated feature to emerge from the virtual drawing board at this successful company. Not to say that Cars is a total disaster - by all accounts it's bright and creative, and is pervaded with a very intriguing concept indeed. This is also one of Pixar's greatest visual achievements to date, featuring state-of-the-art CGI animation bordering on photo-realism guaranteed to astound on a very high level. However, feeble screenwriting proves injurious - fewer laughs, lots of excess, and a cumbersome, predictable story that preaches the same ol' clichéd messages. It's too long and listless, and while adults may tolerate the excessive character development, the children - with their notoriously diminutive attention spans - may grow restless. Cars is a character-driven feature, therefore including fewer action scenes than most animated films. The kinetic energy of the initial racing sequences is unfortunately not sustained.

Cars transpires in a universe dominated entirely by automobiles (without any humans or animals...even flies are tiny cars with wings).
The story centres on cocky hotshot rookie race car Lightning McQueen (Wilson). In his first year of racing, Lightning has taken the prestigious Piston Cup by storm. Locked in a battle for the championship against two seasoned pros, the final race is set to be held in California. En route across the country to compete in this final race, Lightning becomes waylaid in the small forgotten town of Radiator Springs after inadvertently mangling the main street during a police pursuit. In a subtle homage to Cool Hand Luke (starring Paul Newman, who lends his voice to the cantankerous old Doc Hudson), Lightning is sentenced to repair the main street through days of gruelling labour. As Lightning begins befriending the townsfolk (towncars?) of Radiator Springs, the conceited race car begins to realise that perhaps there's more to life than winning. The question soon arises: when he attends the big race will be maintain his newfound values or revert to his old ways?

"When was the last time you cared about something except yourself, hot rod? You name me one time, and I will take it all back. Uh-huh. I thought so.

In conveying its plot, Cars brings two well-worn clichés to the animation realm. The first is the apprehensive friendship between an elderly gent and a young hotshot. The second is the story of how a pastoral setting percolates the blood of a city boy. However, Cars isn't merely the story about one little NASCAR-type racer who becomes lost and stranded in the desert, nor is it just about a big-city hotshot who learns valuable messages. It's primarily a story concerning all the vanishing little towns in America that modern Interstate thoroughfares have bypassed and left for dead. The simple message is quite clear: life was better in the old days.

"I don't need a map! I have the GPS. Never need a map again, thank you."

For Pixar chief John Lasseter, Cars was a personal project. Lasseter had worked flat out for 10 years, and the outcome of these exertions was the first two Toy Story features. Following this extensive labour, his wife explained that his commitment to other children's happiness may cause him to miss the experience of witnessing his own children grow up. Lasseter responded to this by taking a few months off to drive his family through the backwaters of America, circumventing the interstate highways. The excursion was a revelation for the animation director - he was moved by the stories he was told about the consequences of interstates on the old Route 66 towns. Lasseter was inspired to begin penning (with the sadly deceased Joe Ranft) a story about slowing down and smelling the roses.

As usual for a Pixar movie, Cars sports a strong ensemble cast, featuring the voices of Bonnie Hunt, Owen Wilson, Cheech Marin, Tony Shaloub, Paul Newman, George Carlin, and Michael Keaton (to name a few), along with a plethora of racing personalities and a few other interesting celebrities.
Owen Wilson possesses the requisite mix of brashness and congeniality, and his vocal inflections are well-suited for the egotistical little speedster. The filmmakers reportedly named Lightning McQueen after the late Pixar animator Glenn McQueen, but most viewers will most likely associate the character name with the late actor Steve McQueen (who was fond of driving).

"These are good folk around here who care about one another. I don't want them depending on someone they can't count on."

This was one of Paul Newman's final films. Newman's wise and amiable voice is perfect for Doc Hudson. Bonnie Hunt, abandoning her regular sardonic style, wonderfully mixes sassiness and heart as the sexy Porsche Sally. Larry the Cable Guy is terrific as Mater, who invests his character with charm that makes him a memorable sidekick. Additionally, authentic broadcasters and race drivers such as Bob Costas, Jay Leno, Darrel Waltrip, Richard Petty, Dale Earnhardt Jr., Michael Schumacher, and Mario Andretti lend their voices to the film in cameo appearances.

"I don't know what's harder to find: Lightning McQueen or a crew chief who'll work with him."

At a little under two hours, Cars is (just barely) Pixar's longest animated feature to date. With its first act lacking a solid hook, Cars almost certainly would've been a considerably smoother ride if the road to Radiator Springs was more streamlined. Furthermore, the majority of the laughs aren't as sophisticated as we've come to expect from Pixar. The double-underlined moral lessons and oversentimentality can also be quite ham-fisted. This is not Pixar firing on all cylinders. Judged merely as a visual exercise, Cars is a triumph. However, Pixar are usually renowned for their clever stories and great screenplays which are as deft as the animation. On account of the screenplay here being so dodgy, Cars is a misfire - visually wonderful, but still a misfire. As a piece of storytelling, Cars sometimes has a sluggishness that is all the more surprising considering it's directed by animation god John Lasseter, back behind the wheel for the first time since Toy Story 2.

5.8/10

"The blood from your whole body goes to your head... it stops there... never comes down. But soon, it will come out of your nose, your ears, and even your eyes... and then... you will die... painfully..."

As we learn during the final showdown, the title Kiss of the Dragon is derived from a method of killing - it essentially involves the insertion of an acupuncture needle into a "very forbidden" point on the body, trapping the body's blood supply in the head which consequently triggers bleeding from the head's orifices and a very painful death via a brain aneurysm. Guess who's going to implement the Kiss of the Dragon?

Kiss of the Dragon was reportedly rushed into production due to Jet Li's fans requesting more realistic fight sequences. In the post-Matrix days of filmmaking, traditional martial arts movies are usually permeated with Matrix-style trickery to spice up action scenes. Thankfully, Kiss of the Dragon avoids falling victim to this unfortunate plague. This is old-fashioned butt-kicking martial arts material, using digital effects rarely and featuring wire-work only once. Unlike Jackie Chan who combines martial arts skills with comedic flair, Jet Li provides straight-up action minus any comedy - he's far more interested in generating an adrenaline rush. There is no deeper meaning to this particular movie; it's just professional, well-staged action filmed with a certain stylistic elegance.

Predictably, Kiss of the Dragon lacks a truly intricate story. This is a straightforward action affair, produced purely with the intention of showcasing Jet Li's talents as a martial artist. It admittedly lacks motivation and logic, but never mind. In a motion picture featuring physical action bordering on impossible, why should the plot be reasonable and credible?
Top Beijing government agent Liu Jian (Li) is sent on an assignment in Paris to assist in a drug-smuggling bust (or something of that nature...the whole plot is frustratingly vague). Not long after his arrival in France, Jian becomes the patsy when he's framed for a double murder by the ruthless French investigator Jean-Pierre Richard (Karyo), who has a limitless supply of henchmen at his disposal. Unsurprisingly, Jian escapes the clutches of Richard and goes on the run in a desperate attempt to prove his innocence. For the rest of the picture, Jian attempts to extricate himself from the (dodgy) frame-up, eventually developing a reluctant partnership with hooker Jessica (Fonda).

Kiss of the Dragon tantalisingly opens without a single drop of exposition in an energetic, sustained set-piece following Jian's initial arrival in Paris. As the plot arrives, the film grows moronic when the script refuses to explain itself. What is Richard's connection to the Chinese? Why has he bothered to abduct the child of an immigrant hooker as collateral when he kills everyone else? Furthermore, why doesn't anyone bother to dispose of incriminating evidence instead of locking it in a drawer?
Tchéky Karyo as Richard (a fundamental doppelganger of Sean Bean in GoldenEye) barely reaches the first dimension. During all his villainous acts of killing and barking strict orders, he forgets to have a motivation. What is the point of framing Jian? Why did he murder those involved in this drug ring of sorts?

As the thrilling action-packed ride unspools, the film appears to focus exclusively on the action scenes. The hero is a one-dimensional single-man army, taking on multiple brainless enemies simultaneously and always coming out on top. Horribly lazy plotting emerges when Jian and Jessica meet. We're not only expected to believe a top government agent has been framed, but also that this prostitute just happens to work the streets where Jian is temporarily residing. This is a coincidence of monumental proportions, and it's simply too ridiculous to be believed. Character development doesn't exist beyond a few cheesy emotional exchanges between the protagonists, and therefore it's impossible to get involved with the characters. Also, as Jet Li works his way through a buffed brigade of baddies with more and more elaborate martial jousting, it begs the question: why doesn't someone just shoot the trouble-maker?

Kiss of the Dragon was co-written and co-produced by Luc Besson, known for a number of past hits including Leon (The Professional), The Fifth Element, and La Femme Nikita (just to name a few). But despite the efforts of the usually reliable Besson, Kiss of the Dragon is a cookie-cutter of a script for a well-trodden genre. Clichés abound, and the whole thing is predictable from the word go. All action movies are predictable, granted, thus it's all about the execution. In this case the characters are flat, the dialogue is banal, and the gaps between action sequences continually bog.

First-time director Chris Nahon has managed to imbue the visuals with a satisfyingly dark and gritty tone; successfully utilising the Parisian locations to great effect. Veteran action coordinator Cory Yuen is responsible for the creation of a handful of beautifully choreographed and superbly performed action sequences. These fight scenes are genuine masterpieces, helped in no small part by the athletic Jet Li. The final result when stringed together, however, is watchable and exhilarating but ultimately somewhat forgettable.

Luc Besson is one of a group of French directors who believe that in order for a French movie to succeed on the international stage, it must be successful in the United States. Consequently, even though this flick was filmed in and takes place in Paris, virtually everyone speaks English. Mainstream movie-goers will therefore be none the wiser, thinking it's just another Hollywood production...which is precisely Besson's intention. It is absurd watching Frenchman and Chinese speaking English to each other, though.

Jet Li's performance is top-notch. Kiss of the Dragon seems keen to establish Li as the next big martial arts star. He oozes charisma and coolness, and he actually has acting ability (instead of someone like Steven Seagal, who's generally sluggish and might easily be mistaken for a wooden post). Not only is Li unbelievably athletic and able to perform kicks and thrusts with blazing speed, but his screen presence is likable.
Bridget Fonda makes an endearing companion who brings out Jian's humanity and becomes unintentionally involved in the proceedings. To the credit of the screenwriting community, there is no love interest developed between Fonda and Li. Also, predictably, Ms. Fonda isn't granted much in the heroics department... In fact, she's just there - a fundamental add-on with little genuine involvement with the story-line. Her screen presence is sufficiently amiable, but she more or less comes off as just a plot device to provide Li with an excuse to exercise his fighting skills for a reason other than exonerating his own name.
Meanwhile, Tchéky Karyo plays the role of the bad guy with aplomb; creating a type of bastard we'll have no difficulty despising. Burt Kwouk (of the Pink Panther fame) makes a brief appearance, and makes the most of his screen-time. Cyril Raffaelli is also given the opportunity to demonstrate his skills as a martial artist. In fact, on only one occasion were wires used for fight scenes - when Raffaelli and Li verse one another. Wires were utilised to slow down their movements as the two performers were too fast for the camera to track them!

Instead of being endowed with any real plausibility or any serious motivation for the events, Kiss of the Dragon merely offers a state of affairs whereby Li can showcase his skills as a martial artist...and he does a splendid job at it! The film's first ten minutes ran my hopes high. Had it developed a solid story, exhibited an ounce of credibility, or even delivered a quick dash of tongue-in-cheek humour, Kiss of the Dragon could have completely fulfilled its potential. Its auspicious premise instead quickly transforms into yet another action spectacle featuring comic-book heroes and sinister villains. If that's all you expected, you'll probably get a kick out of it. If you expected something more (Luc Besson did co-write the story!), you'll find Kiss of the Dragon a simple, mindless, enjoyable guilty pleasure (like I did). It gets the adrenaline rushing during the action sequences, but it's short on plot, credibility and characterisation. This is exclusively for dedicated Li fans and/or martial arts film fans.

"You know, since I've been here I've had four others like you. Strong, fast, young, they've all died, the last right in my arms. Before I go home I'd like to send one back alive."

5.6/10