Change Your Image
Jefbecco-1
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Vindicta (2023)
Hallmark Channel gets bloody
I've watched many a low budget movie over the years. Some are groaners, and some are very effective. This one most definitely falls under the former. It dawned upon me, about two-thirds of the way through, that the production values reminded me of one of the many Hallmark Channel Christmas movies. The story felt like somebody was channeling R. L. Stine only without his sense of humor. The acting is wildly uneven as well. I suppose Jeremy Piven and Sean Astin needed to buy something. Why else would they to appear in this sad piece of dreck? Must be it. You have 90 minutes to waste? Here you go.
The Aftermath (1982)
Not great but sincere
A sincere effort. Amateurish, exploitive, low-budget and clunky, but everyone involved in the movie gives it their all. Borrows (or rips off depending on one's viewpoint) from every famous post-apocalyptic horror movie made up to that time. Reminds me of the "men's adventure" serial novels (The Survivalist, The Last Ranger) that I read as a teenager in the Eighties. It's interesting to note that at the same this movie was in production George Romero was working on his equally low-budgeted, but far superior "Dawn of the Dead". Watch the two movies back-to-back if you want to see how truly skilled film makers can work with a low budget and semi-professional actors.
Nevertheless, I've always had a fondness for low budget flicks that are made by enthusiastic semipros. Eye rolling and silly, but watchable.
The English (2022)
Excellent modern "spaghetti" western
Much has been written about "The English" being a revisionist western. It is at that, but at its heart it is a homage to all those sixties era Italian westerns. A very well-done homage, I should add. It also takes inspiration from the late Larry McMurtry's westerns, quirky characters, unpredictable violence, the vicious brutality and breathtaking grandeur of the American frontier.
Emily Blunt has executive producer credit. I can't help but speculate that she might have a fondness for variations on the Western ("The English", "Sicario"). Heck even "The Quiet Place" is a western in many ways.
Well anyway "The English" is a very watchable series. Definitely binge-worthy. Not a pleasant viewing experience but engrossing and thought provoking. It's suspenseful, disturbing and even poignant. It takes pleasure in upsetting the tropes (vengeance trail, body horror, star crossed lovers etc) while studiously following them. For example, there are certain characters that we come to care about only to have them die off-camera. The long-awaited reunion denied. Very unfair, but such things happn in the world. The big bad villain dies, but now how you expect. Yes, we are given that catharsis, but with a twist.
It's at its strongest in setting the atmosphere. In particular the danger that lies just underneath the frontier existence; where the rules are made up by those who live there. It also takes delight in showing how myths and reality are so often intertwined that we become uncertain as to what is actually the "truth". Native Americans worked for the U. S. Army, many who came to America from Europe were fleeing intolerable situations, but then inflicted many of the same injustices. Violence begats violence, but some just need to be killed.
Finally, it has an excellent score by Cristian Solimeno. I mentioned at the beginning of this review that the series is an homage to the Italian western of the Sixties. Mr. Solimeno's score is truly a nod to the great Ennio Morricone. The music plays almost "wall to wall" and is an integral part of the story. At times it feels a bit overwhelming, but it is very effective.
I strongly recommend "The English". It might make you uncomfortable and some American viewers might find it irritating that it's a British production, though many Europeans have contributed to the Western genre in both film and literature over the past 150 years. It's an intelligent, strongly written and well-acted dramatic western. Worth the time.
Station Eleven (2021)
Not bleak, woke or the Walking Dead
I read the novel in the spring of 2020. It had been sitting on my shelf for a couple years and seeing that the long-expected apocalypse appeared to have finally arrived I cracked it open. I wasn't sure what to expect but I found that I liked the novel. As a result, I was interested when I learned that the HBO was producing a limited series based on the novel. I'll get it out of the way at the start. I like the series and find all the anger and caustic commentary somewhat puzzling.
I'm fifty-three years old as I'm writing this review. I'm a lifelong fan of the post-apocalyptic and dystopian genres. One of my earliest memories is watching "The Omega Man" at a drive-in with my parents. I believe it would have been around 1973 or 1974. I would have been five or six years old, and the movie was the second feature. I can't recall what the main feature was, but I remember staying awake and watching the whole movie. Since that time, I've always been a fan. I don't really know why such a depressing genre would fascinate me so.
The younger me in 1985 (the year that I first read "The Stand") would have found "Station Eleven" to be boring. Far to "literary" without enough action (where are the mutants, killer robots' gun-battles and imagery of rotting corpses?). I definitely would have had no patience for Arthur and Miranda's story. Additionally, I would have wondered why there were no dramatic moments focused on the President (surviving in his underground bunker) and the brave soldiers fighting mutants while rebuilding the United States of America. The elegiacal style would have been the last thing I would have wanted at the age of seventeen. At that time in my life the post-apocalyptic world was the chance for an ordinary schlep (like me) to unleash one's inner hero and make things right unencumbered by society's burdensome rules. Well, what can I say? I was seventeen after all.
Fortunately, I've done some growing up in the past thirty-seven years. Among the many things I have to come to appreciate: one person's hero might be another's monster, the stifling and boring structure of civilization came about for a reason (which don't seem so stifling when the edges are getting flakey), modern dentistry is a good thing and death comes to us all.
The last one is very important. At 53 there have been several people that I care about die and it's only going to grow in numbers. At seventeen death is merely academic, but in one's middle years that is no longer the case. As I age, I find myself increasingly surrounded by memories and, try as I might not to, I think often of my past. "Station Eleven" is both a story about a dead world, but also about the new one that is slowly and painfully replacing it. This isn't a thrilling action-packed epic with a powerful orchestral soundtrack (though Dam Romer's score is both unusual and effective), but a thoughtful and observant story. For even after modern civilization collapses Humans remain and they start over again. Not on a big scale, but smaller just like our ancestors all those centuries ago. No big science fiction world building here.
The survivors of the collapse remember what came before and it's inevitable that it dominates both their awake time and their sleep. We don't remember our past in a linear fashion, and I appreciate what the series was doing with the non-linear approach. Our memories move about. I didn't find any difficulty in following the storyline and I actually appreciate the unconventional approach.
The characters are living in a mass graveyard, but this isn't a morbid story. The world is returning, and the survivors are doing more than scavenging and killing one another. Just like we have to get on with our lives after a personal tragedy so do the characters in "Station Eleven" get on with their lives. I liked the fact that this is a post-apocalyptic story that isn't depressing and with no hope. If that is the mark of being woke then I guess I'm wide awake.
It's a strongly written show with some very good performances, even if it doesn't have underground dwelling mutants and muscular heroes with flame-throwers.
Twilight's Last Gleaming (1977)
Robert Aldrich Melodrama
Robert Aldrich made some very entertaining movies in his time, but they were over the top ("The Dirty Dozen", "Whatever Happened to Baby Jane?", "Kiss Me Deadly"), often gloriously overacted and not even close to being realistic. "Twilight's Last Gleaming" is no exception. As pointed out by other reviewers; it's full of technical inaccuracies and the already implausible plot will fall apart of one has even rudimentary knowledge of how the Air Force operates a missile silo. I don't watch movies for documentary details but some films require attention to detail to ensure that the story works. Politics aside the movie is sloppy in this regard and makes for a less then successful piece of escapism.
I was in the U. S. Army for fourteen years and was amused by the inaccurate depiction of uniforms. In particular the uniform worn by Air Force Brigadier General (one star) O'Rourke (Gerald S. O'Loughlin). I observed that he is wearing a Combat Infantryman's Badge (CIB) with two stars. That means the good Air Force general served as an infantry (ground combat) soldier in three wars. Given that the story is set in the then futuristic year of 1981 would mean he saw combat (on the ground and in the Army) in WWII (1941-1945), Korea (1950-1953) and South Vietnam (1965-1973; years of American infantry in action). It is possible that he could have been a young enlisted infantry soldier during WWII who then went to college between WWII and Korea. Perhaps earning his commission (officer rank) via the Army R. O. T. C. and served in Korea as an Infantry officer (thus earning two CIBs) before moving over to the Air Force and reaching the lofty level of General. However the third CIB would have meant being an infantry officer in Vietnam and that is one CIB too many for an Air Force general. It takes time to reach General rank. It's a small thing and for many means nothing, but for those who have experienced (and survived) combat as an infantry solider it means a great deal indeed. There are other examples scattered through the movie, but this is a big one for me.
On top of the technical mistakes my ears were buffeted by many of the actors yelling their lines at top volume. Charles Durning was a great character actor and when reined in could be marvelous (see his Oscar nominated performance in "Best Little Whorehouse in Texas"), but here he was let off the leash and my ears paid the price. I understand that it's a stressful scenario and dramatic standards change, but nevertheless I felt like I had wandered into a convention of Al Pacino imitators.
"Twilight's Last Gleaming" could have been an entertaining genre piece with some political commentary thrown in to give it just a little gravitas. Along the lines of "Fail-Safe" perhaps, but it didn't succeed. The story over-reaches and with Robert Aldrich at the helm crashes noisily.
Regardless it's still a harmless enough way to waste a couple hours when one can't sleep and it is two o'clock in the morning. Though riddled with technical errors (the U. S. Air Force using German armored vehicles from WWII is another one) the movie was still a competently made production with scene chewing acting veterans giving it their all. I stayed with the movie until the end and for that reason I give it five stars.
Daylight's End (2016)
Not bad
I've been a fan of this genre since I saw "The Omega Man" ,back in the seventies, at a third-run movie theater (I was much younger). This is a B movie, but it's competently produced and it shows some effort went into it. This isn't one of those terrible schlocky "original productions" pieces that show up on Chiller or SyFy. The gunplay is professionally staged ( William Kaufman ,the director, is a U.S. Army veteran) and even the more wooden actors aren't too bad. Lance Henriksen is is usual dependable self of course. One can always count on Lance to get the job done.
This is not a deep movie. It reminds me of the "men's action novels" that were so popular in the seventies and eighties. The protagonists name is Thomas Rourke which I believe is a nod to the books series "The Survivalist" (authored by Jerry Ahern). The hero's full name in the novels was John Thomas Rourke. Somehow I don't believe that's a coincidence. If you ever read any of those books you know consisted of 20% character and plot and 80% gunfights and detailed descriptions of weapons and tactics. Basically that's what "Daylight's End" is.
Think of this movie as a gun heavy version of "I Am Legend" or "Road Warrior 2". Anyone who found those moves to be too cuddly and slow will enjoy "Daylight's End". It's not perfect (what is?), but it's a keeper. A post-apocalyptic western. Appropriately enough it was filmed in Texas.
Hard Sun (2018)
Shaggy Dog Story
Definition of a shaggy dog story:In its original sense, a shaggy dog story or yarn is an extremely long-winded anecdote characterized by extensive narration of typically irrelevant incidents and terminated by an anticlimax or a pointless punchline. (Wikipedia)
Yes I have to say that "Hard Sun" is a shaggy dog story. Episode 1 is intriguing. Something is happening with the sun and we don't have much time left. Five years. MI-5 agents are running wild knocking off people left and right and our two detectives are out there by themselves. Good start.
Unfortunately it sputters out at that point because there are multiple episodes and the show's creator ,Neil Cross, has gone on record that he has sketched out a five year story arc. So the six episodes mean that we aren't even going to get to the end of the world. Instead the five following episodes consist of disturbing and dark murders while our protagonists run around and lie to each other about everything.
It looks good, but it never delivers. At the end of episode 6 our two detectives have Lady MI-5 at gunpoint and then the sun rises. Something is wrong with the sun! Run credits. Okay so all those episodes and not much of anything happened. Essentially it's a pre-apocalyptic soap opera meets the "X-Files" and a bit of "Luther" thrown in for good measure.
Personally I think that the problems with "Hard Sun" is the same problems that so many television shows now share. Many of the shows take what is a good idea for a movie and stretch it out into a multiple episode television series. The result is you get episodes in which not much of anything happens. A whole lot of sound and fury signifying nothing (thank you Mr. Shakespeare). In the case of "Hard Sun" one can literally go from episode 1 to episode 6 and not miss much of anything. The recap at the start of episode 6 will cover everything that you need to know.
In other words it plays out like a soap opera. The better ones will pull you in promising a pay-off, but will never really deliver. How can they? They need you to keep watching since they hope to be renewed.
"Hard Sun" would have worked better as a movie or a six part limited run series that actually ends with episode six. I give the show four stars because it has good production values and the acting isn't too bad - if a bit overblown at times.
Ulzana's Raid (1972)
Well done. Very even handed.
I finally got to watch this movie last night thanks to Netflix. It wasn't what I was expecting. Made in 1972 I expected some type of simplistic left-wing hand-wringing allegory about the Vietnam War and the inherent evil of European culture vs. the Noble Red Man. Something along the same lines as the awful "Soldier Blue" (1970) or the better, but still hopelessly biased "Little Big Man" (1970). However I didn't get that at all.
"Ulzana's Raid" doesn't candy-coat either side. There is no simplistic paint strokes applied. The Apache Wars in the southwest in the late 1800's were brutal. No quarter was given and none was expected. Both sides were certain that they were right and their opponent was wrong and both sides were motivated by the belief that they were superior in terms of their civilizations and racial beliefs. Both sides committed atrocities, both sides could be both vicious and brave, both sides had blood on their hands.
The one thing that I came away with was that the fighting in Arizona was a guerrilla war. An undeclared war that was vicious and cruel and which the movie conveys very well. If there is any allegory to Vietnam I would say that is it. War is horrific and fighting one isn't a pleasant task. Decisions have to be made that often result in death, but those decisions have to be made and people have to follow the orders of those who make those decisions. Both sides.
Well done film. At times unpleasant and disturbing, but also thoughtful, intelligently written and balanced.
'Breaker' Morant (1980)
A dangerous profession. In many ways.
First of all let me get all the mandatory praising out of the way. This film has several brilliant performances,it's writing is witty and intelligent. I own it and I can't count how many times I've watched it, but I never tire of it. Now for weightier matters.
This movie definitely addresses the issue of ethics and morality in wartime. it's shows that soldiering is a dangerous profession in so many ways. One will often have more than one foe. There is the armed foe that one has been sent to fight and then there is one's superiors and peers. Warfare is the business of nations, which means there are often many things on the table besides defeating ones enemy. Politicians have a way of changing their objectives and not informing the soldiers of the changes. Previously condoned behavior can suddenly become "inconvenient" and the soldier find him or herself the scapegoat.
What I get from this superb movie is that sacrificing one's own beliefs and ,doing what you know to be wrong, because one's superiors say it's all right, is a dangerous thing indeed. It isn't worth it. Warfare is a grim activity. Killing and survival often are and holding on to one's ethics are often the only thing one may have. As I said earlier, danger for a soldier doesn't always come from the enemy, sometimes it comes from ones own. Never sacrifice your morals for politicians,they aren't worth it.
The Yakuza (1974)
Takes it's time, but it's worth it.
Note: This is partially an older review that I wrote ten years ago on Amazon.com.
This movie is one of the best action films to be made in the seventies and late sixties. It stays away from the anti-establishment preachiness so popular during that time and goes for classic hard-boiled action. As noted by others it also explores the concepts of honor and friendship.
During this time period several of Hollywood's older leading men who had been real studs in the forties and fifties (Robert Mitchum, Bill Holden, Brian Keith ) were turning out some superior movies with intelligent scripts. The Yakuza is no exception. In this story there are two wildly different cultures clashing, but also finding much in common. Two strong-willed and principled men working together, even though at first they dislike one another, both always having to work at staying true to their principles while dealing with the world they live in and others who are not so principled.
Some might find the message that violence and vengeance have a place in the scheme of things ,and can be cleansing, to be disturbing. It needs to be understood that this story is about two warriors(essentially). The pure warrior strives for perfection in many pursuits, but pacifism isn't one of those. When one is betrayed then retribution must be dealt to the betrayer and sometimes honor can only be restored by cutting off one's finger.
To a Western viewer much of this is inconceivable - we're all too enlightened anymore. Several years ago my wife watched this movie with me and her response was "gross". She loves the Lethal Weapon movies - which have as much substance to them as cotton candy. The Yakuza is a much more solid piece of film-making in which the violence has a place. I found it to be restrained and not gratuitous. It does not indulge in death and mayhem for their own sake. Barely noticed when it was first released in 1975 the movie has gone on to spawn numerous imitations. For example Black Rain which is a handsomely produced and enjoyable action flick, but once you watch The Yakuza you'll see it for what it is - an imitation. One that was attempting to capture the superficial elements without covering the greater in-depth points. Watch this movie if you get the chance. You might be surprised.
Hickey & Boggs (1972)
Very interesting. Not flashy or pretty.
I've been hearing about this movie for years. A couple days ago I spent the three dollars on Amazon and watched it. I wanted to see what all the fuss was about.
The first thing I noticed was that this was not a movie about pretty people living the glamorous life in Los Angeles. Our two protagonists do not live well. Hickey (Bill Cosby) evidently owns two suits. Boggs (Robert Culp) is only seen in the same blue suit. Their vehicles are wrecks - on their last legs. Both men are weary and just grimy. There is even one shot in which we can see the sweat stains on Bogg's shirt.It's apparent that if the movie came with smell Hickey and Boggs would need showers.
One also gets the definite impression that the movie was filmed when it was hot in L.A. and there was no air conditioning available. Windows are open to catch what breeze there is and the air looks like you could cut it with a knife. There is absolutely no effort to make Southern California or our heroes look clean and neat. Wilted is the word that comes to mind.
And they aren't they only ones .The police officers and much of the general public look the same way.
Considering that in the early seventies Southern California was still considered to be the land of milk and honey to many Americans the decision to show the wormy underbelly of the state was daring.
Our heroes are not slick, perfect men. Neither are in very good shape. At one point Boggs breaks into a run, but soon gives it up. They aren't very good shots with their revolvers (a refreshing change of pace actually) and they more or less stumble onto many of the leads in the course of their investigation.
When the story ends they haven't accomplished anything except to kill the three mob soldiers who dog them throughout the movie. They save nobody, the mob remains untouched, and they might very well be looking at time in prison. At best they'll probably lose their private investigator licenses.
It's been said before, but this movie would never get made today. At least not as a mainstream movie. There is no satisfying conclusion. The villains continue to prosper with only a few low level "torpedos" and a middle level manager dead. The female ,who at first one thinks might need to be helped by our intrepid P.I.'s, soon turns out to be as bad as everyone else.
Jaded and cynical, but I liked this movie. It was smartly written and had a bite to it that one doesn't find anymore. In 2011 movie characters are perfect. Even the villains are perfect. In 1972 there was still room for the ordinary, sloppy, imperfect people.