Category: Review

Bang Bang Betty: Valerie’s Revenge

  By

★★½
“To lose one partner may be regarded as a misfortune; to lose two looks like carelessness.”

This one ends by informing us definitively that “Bang Bang Betty will return.” The statement may cause some confusion to viewers in this installment, because Bang Bang Betty is not present to begin with. No, this sequel to Bang Bang Betty is entirely Betty-free, without any real explanation as to why. I can only presume the actress involved was otherwise engaged. Instead, it focuses on Valerie Mendez (Hernandez), who was a prosecuting attorney in the first one, but now seems to be an undercover detective. She is investigating the drug trafficking activities of Sanchez (Soria), when her partner and fiancee, Beatriz, is killed in a gun-battle with Sanchez and his men.

This forms the dramatic impetus for the rest of the film, in which Valerie goes after Sanchez. Though since in this installment, we go from cold open to lesbian canoodling in under two minutes, then Beatriz getting fridged before the ten-minute mark, the emotional impact on the audience is limited. It does solve the purpose of justifying the title. Valerie then seeks vengeance in ways which don’t exactly stand up to scrutiny in terms of police procedure, to the point where “international incident” might be closer to the truth. Her motto appears to be ,”You can’t spell jurisdiction without I and N-O”, charging across the border into Mexico with help from her replacement partner, and DEA agent Richard Cross (Caliber), whose partner also fell victim to Sanchez. What are the odds?

I’ve a feeling this might have been filmed back-to-back or close to with its predecessor, and has many of the same strengths and weaknesses. The performances are decent, with a special shout-out to Padilla as Sanchez’s brutal henchwoman, Lola. The action is a bit up-and-down, and we never get to see the brawl between Valerie and Lola that I was expecting – and, to be honest, anticipating. It’s Cross who ends up getting that, and the film does nothing to defray the usual problems when there’s such a size discrepancy between opponents. The CGI blood remains as poorly-executed as before, which does the entire movie a disservice, leaving it looking cheap and rushed.

It’s a shame, because there are occasional moments which are genuinely impressive. For instance, a well-staged shot of Valerie cradling the dying Beatriz in her arms, while the gunfight goes on in slow-motion behind them. Or the unexpected Debussy which pops up on the soundtrack, as she raids one of Sanchez’s drug houses. These are moments which are likely better than anything in its predecessor. However, they are countered by the weakness of a plot which feels very much a downgrade: it’s implausible at best, and too often topples over into ridiculous. Overall, it comes in at the same grade, and I find myself, once again, cautiously looking forward to a third installment. Hopefully, this time the plot will receive as much effort as the characters.

Dir: Alexander T. Hwang
Star: Emily Rose Hernandez, Hector Soria, Kevin Caliber, Mariah Padilla

El Jardinero

  By

★★½
“Better late than never”

Well, that only took… twenty-one years. Back in 2003, I watched and reviewed El Jardinero 2, with the help of Chris, because it came on a Mexican DVD with no English subtitles. Imagine my surprise, therefore, when I booted up Tubi the other day, and found its predecessor streaming. No English subs – but there were Spanish ones. Nowadays, Google Translate offers a half-decent ability to convert into English, even if I ended up having to apply a lot of polish to the idiom. At least I didn’t have to bother Chris. Still, here we are, and… Well, it probably wasn’t worth all the effort, to be honest. It is another cheap slice of Mexploitation, with too much talk and not enough action, though like its successor is reasonably entertaining.

It turns out I misspoke in the sequel, when I described Pablo Moreno (L. Reynoso) as the husband of Lilia Gallardo (Herrera). It’s a bit more complex. Lilia returns from abroad to her home town in rural Mexico to discover her father has been murdered by drug dealers. Worse, her mother has taken up with the head of the clan, Adan Moreno. Lilia is unimpressed, and in the resulting fracas, shoots Moreno dead before fleeing. The family kinda blames their rivals, and Mom goes to her grave rather than implicate her daughter, despite brutal treatment at the hands of the gang’s enforcer, Mario Argumedo (Pineda). Dismissing the concern of her godfather, Lilia decides to infiltrate the family, do as much damage as possible and take her revenge.

Vengeance is a long time coming, shall we say. She has to befriend Pablo, posing as an out-of-towner (I guess she must have been abroad for a long time, since he doesn’t recognize her), and using her womanly charms to get an invite to stay on the ranch. She then uses this access to figure out where their poppy fields are located, and recruits her godfather to set them on fire one night. There’s also dissent in the ranks between Pablo and his brother Gabino (H. Reynoso – no clue if the actor is related to his on-screen brother), with the latter unhappy about the influence Lilia is having on his sibling. It doesn’t stop Pablo from inviting her to help out in the family business.

And this is how we eventually get back to where we came in for the sequel, with a gun-battle between the two sides, roughly eighty minutes after the first time we see Lilia shoot Adan. It feels more like a feature-length telenovela, with all that implies. I’d be hard-pushed to call this good, yet it did manage to keep my interest, with things like how the small country towns is basically run by the Moreno cartel, with the police chief utterly in their pocket. None of the locals seem bothered. It’s certainly a bit different, though much as with the sequel, I wish Lilia had been as much of a bad-ass as the cover again implies.

Dir: Enrique Murillo
Star: Lorena Herrera, Salvador Pineda, Luis Reynoso, Héctor Reynoso

In the Eyes of the Prey

  By

★★½
“The eyes have it.”

New rule. If ever I become an evil, kidnapping overlord, I shall be sure not to leave potentially lethal power-tools left lying easily accessible, around the place where the abductee is being kept. This is just one of the many mistakes made by the criminals here, in what could be an instructional guide on how NOT to execute a kidnapping. Admittedly, they weren’t aware that their victim suffers from multiple personality disorder. The alternate version is more than happy to wield the aforementioned power-tool – specifically, a nail gun – with extreme prejudice. It helps that these grown men and hardened criminals make it remarkably easy, for a 110-lb woman to overpower them in various ways.

Let’s rewind though, because it takes a while to get to the nail gun carnage, the reason why we’re here. Laura (Calamassi) is the victim, having been kidnapped by a gang led by Santiago (Massaria). These are the usual mix of tropes from this kind of movie. There’s the nice one, Benedetto (Badea); the pervy one, Lupo (Potenza); the fiery hot-head, and so on. Meanwhile, we get far too much back story about Laura’s mental health history. This includes an assault on an art teacher, sessions of therapy, and childhood trauma where she saw her mother gunned down in front of her. Exactly how this triggers the splitting off of PsychoLaura is unclear. I suspect the film is equally reliable in the fields of aberrant psychology, and as a “how to kidnap” manual.

If the script is flimsy and not very interesting, the film does rebound somewhat in the performances. Calamassi delivers good work when going Full Gollum, tussling with her internal demons, and if the supporting cast aren’t given much to work with, they do what they can. Things liven up when PsychoLaura takes full control, but here the limited budget (only fifteen thousand Euros) comes into play. That’s why we only get told one of her victims suffered 90-100 stab wounds and has a saw sticking out of his forehead. Or when someone else is decapitated with wire… it’s nowhere near as cool on screen as it sounds. Pro tip: if you can’t afford to show it, don’t include it in your script. 

Conversely, the sole female member of the gang is included to no real purpose. She’s initially set up as another victim, yet once the truth is revealed, nothing much happens. The scenery is very nice. Wherever it was filmed, seems like a lovely place to visit – whether or not you happen to be hiding out with a mentally deranged teenage girl you have kidnapped. So when the story doesn’t manage to retain your interest, you can admire the setting. Well, during the second half, when both the film and Laura escape the confines of the house. Everything ends in an uncertain manner. I’d probably have been disappointed in it, if I had felt any more than marginally invested in the final outcome. 

Dir: Leonardo Barone
Star: Laura Calamassi, Gabriel Dorigo Badea, Paolo Massaria, Jerry Potenza
This review originally appeared on Film Blitz.

Hope

  By

★★
“Hope isn’t necessarily good.”

Hope (Larkin-Coyle) is an aspiring vlogger, though has not yet figured out how to make it pay sufficiently to quit her grindingly dull day job, for a boss who perpetually questions Hope’s commitment. She’s not wrong, because Hope’s heart definitely lives in the outdoors, not at a desk or in a Zoom meeting. Her particular niche of content creation is in wilderness adventures, whether that’s going up mountains, diving underwater or – as in this case – scaling a cliff-face. She then posts the videos online, so that others can live vicariously through her experience. She’s excited for her next trip, which will take her back to a part of Ireland by the ocean, which was a favourite haunt of her late mother.

However, a moment’s inattention leads to disaster, with Hope sent plummeting to the rocks below. When she regains consciousness, she finds her shin bone shattered and sticking out of her leg. With (inevitably!) no cell signal, she is thrown back on her own resources, and will have to make her way out of an increasingly precarious situation, entirely by herself. As you can imagine from this synopsis, it puts a lot of weight on the shoulders of the lead actress, and it’s all a little contrived. Initially, I expected there to be much more of her speaking to the camera, documenting events for her online followers. But the film doesn’t really go that way, favoring a more general voicing of Hope’s inner monologue.

In the main, to be blunt, you are basically watching a woman crawl across rocks for an hour, and I’m probably stating the obvious when I say that this is of limited appeal. There are some inconsistencies which seemed annoying at the time, almost as if whole scenes had been removed. One second, Hope is on a beach. The next, she’s swimming in the water – broken leg and all. Then she’s suddenly marooned in a cave. There’s also character stupidity, such as Hope’s ignorance or wilful disregard for basic survival protocols. However, there’s a third-act twist which, to be fair, goes a long way to explaining what had gone before. On the other hand, you’re left wondering if perhaps the film-makers have sabotaged the entire point with it.

A more definite problem is the sense that there simply is not enough happening here. The fall, presumably for budgetary reasons, is a simple fade to black accompanied by a scream. I will say, the sounds Coyle makes when exploring her wound are legitimately harrowing, and help sell her injury as much as the small but effective effects work on her leg. That takes care of about five minutes, leaving… 93 others, which fall well short of possessing the same degree of intensity. It feels as if the makers were looking to paint a psychological portrait, using the frame of a wilderness survival story. As someone who was expecting a genuine wilderness survival story, I’m left feeling distinctly short-changed, and a little bit cheated.

Dir: Bobby Marno
Star: Sadhbh Larkin Coyle

Keisha Takes the Block

  By

★½
“Talk is cheap, and so is this.”

Reviewing director Profitt’s filmography on the IMDb is an interesting experience. He seems to have started off in the paranormal, drifted through pseudo-reality TV with titles like Untold Undercover Police Stories, and has now found a niche in the low-budget urban gangster field, for which Tubi seems to have an inexhaustible appetite. But the promise very much exceeds the product. Case in point: while the woman on the cover here is the main character, she does not even touch a gun until, literally, the final shot of the movie. Profitt has instead realized that the best way to stretch his budget is to have long scenes of two characters talking to each other.

So that’s what you get here. A lot. It begins with Keisha (Seaton) talking to a fellow “prisoner” in “jail”. Quotes used advisedly, because after an establishing shot of the outside of a prison, the whole scene takes place in an entirely generic corner of a room. No guards. No bars. Could be a community college classroom. This sets the tone for the next thirty minutes, almost without exception: two people have a conversation. Two different people have a conversation. Two people have a conversation outside. Two people have a conversation on a couch. If you can think of a (slight) variation on two people having a conversation, you are likely to see it used here. It almost becomes hypnotic.

The story unfolds entirely through the resulting dialogue. Keisha is seeking to expand her criminal operations, but is facing push-back from the current boss, Quan (Settles). So she recruits his abused girlfriend, Rayna (Yvonne) to provide inside information on his activities. Meanwhile, her pet dirty cop, Ronny (Profitt), also tells Keisha heat will be coming from law enforcement, especially as the cold war between her and Quan heats up. Keisha’s long-time best friend begs her to leave the criminal life before it all catches up to her, and she begins to realize she needs an exit strategy. All of which sounds considerably more exciting than it is, because it’s far, far too dialogue heavy, and even these scenes are flat and largely lacking in dramatic energy.

The performances aren’t bad, and mercifully, Profitt doesn’t lean on the “my friends’ rap music” soundtrack typically used in this genre. Indeed, the lack of music, while probably another money-saving device, is sometimes effective. But there just is not enough going on here to hold the audience’s interest. The supposed battle for territory between Quan and Keisha doesn’t appear to use more than one clip of ammunition. Then again, both sides could probably hold their gang meetings in a phone-booth, such is the lack of resources here.  It is something of a shame, as there are elements here capable of generating dramatic conflict, in the right hands, and as noted, the actresses generally deliver their lines well. But Profitt the director seriously needs to fire Profitt the writer.

Dir: Jeff Profitt
Star: Brandi Seaton, Vicky Yvonne, Bernard Q. Settles, Jeff Profitt

When Women Were Warriors: The Warrior’s Path, by Catherine M. Wilson

  By

Literary rating: ★★½
Kick-butt quotient: ☆

To be frank, I was expecting rather more action given the title here. Almost all of it, however, takes place “off-screen”, as it were, being described second-hand, rather than experienced. It makes sense in the context of the book, and it’s not badly written. But when you use the word “warrior” or derivations thereof, not once but twice in your title, it would seem fair to expect a higher quotient of… warrioring. I tagged this as fantasy, mostly because it clearly takes place elsewhere and/or elsewhen. It is fairly grounded e.g. no dragons or vampires, but certainly contains elements I would call mystical.

The book tells the story of Tamras, who is sent to join the house of Lady Merin, hoping to progress through the ranks of apprentices and become a warrior woman herself, like her mother before her. Tamras feels too small and weak to succeed, but bonds with another outsider there, Maara, a mysterious woman with no past, who came from the north and whose loyalties are consequently suspected by the others. Maara initially rejects Tamras, but after the warrior is hurt while fending off cattle raiders, it’s Tamras who is largely responsible for nursing her back to health, and the pair begin to forge a relationship. After providing valuable information, Maara wins Merin’s trust, although others in the house still perceive her as a threat.

There is a great deal of sitting around here, though I suspect that might be partly the point. To quote Maara, “Most of a warrior’s days are uneventful” this coming after a month when she and Tamras have been part of a group which spent a month guarding against further livestock theft, without very much happening at all. The nearest to proper action are the reports of the battle where the warriors successfully repel an attack, thanks to Maara’s intel. I liked the setting, this being a world where gender – at least, in this part of the world – is not seen as an issue, with men and women fighting side by side. It’s also definitely lesbian friendly – more so than action heroine friendly, I would suggest.

For there was a point, probably about two-thirds of the way through, that I realized the author really wasn’t interested in providing an adrenaline-packed thrill-ride. This is much more about the relationships between the women – we poor men rarely merit a mention – and in Tamras’s growth as a person. Taken as that character study, it’s by no means bad: Wilson has a good turn of phrase, with some of the more spiritual experiences having particular weight. But at other points, it does feel more like sword ‘n’ soap-opera, and the overall sense of much more interesting stuff happening elsewhere became overpowering before the end. The rating above reflects that; while on purely literary terms, it’s likely better, I was left wanting less talk and more fighting.

Author: Catherine M. Wilson
Publisher: Shield Maiden Press, available through Amazon, both as a paperback and an e-book
Book 1 of 3 in the When Women Were Warriors series.

Ninja: Prophecy of Death

  By

½
“I know ninjas are supposed to be silent, but…”

To a certain degree, this should be graded as “incomplete”. Easiest to quote the IMDb on the reason why. “This film was to be shelved by director Kabasinski, when post-production had a lengthy delay and he went on to produce the film Skull Forest. Very happy with the improvements in overall production value of Skull Forest, Kabasinski was going to just take this film as a ‘loss’ having already moved forward. It was not until an editor from Buffalo, NY stepped in and expressed desire in taking on the project. Feeling indebted to the cast and crew for the film and post-production going better then expected, Kabasinski decided on releasing the film.”

He shouldn’t have bothered. Because it does the Kabasinski brand-name irreparable damage, due to its terrible quality, in one aspect especially. If this had been fixed, it still wouldn’t have been great – it would remain cheap and amateur. But it would not be in the conversation for worst action heroine movie of all-time, as is the case based on what was eventually released. The story is about an assassin, known only as “The Lost One” (Porada), who is part of a sect of ninjas. On a mission, she balks when she is ordered to kidnap a child. This mutiny is not taken well, and she is left for dead by her colleagues. Naturally, she isn’t, and teams up with some Mafia hitmen (Anthony and Poffo) to get her revenge. 

It’s a basic plot, yet not unworkable, especially when delivered with the director’s enthusiastic fondness for gratuitous nudity and gloopy violence. The low budget doesn’t really matter when you are talking nekkid ninja training. But what irredeemably sinks the movie, and why it should have remained lost (or, at best, a bonus feature on another movie) is the audio. Regular readers will know this is a common complaint I have with smaller productions,  and it’s a personal peeve. I don’t use words like “worst ever” lightly either. So you will understand how much of an issue it is that – bold font, please – this is the worst ever audio I have heard on a released film, bar none.

Seriously, the audio is entirely missing for about half the scenes. No music, no background sounds, nothing. This includes the entire opening credits, which feature Mrs. Kabasinski doing more nude sword work. It almost becomes some bizarre form of art statement, like a throwback to the silent era. Even when it’s present, it is poorly mixed and the dialogue sometimes inaudible. It would probably have worked significantly better had Kabasinski nuked all the audio, turned it b&w, added some intertitles to tell us the plot, and thrown ninety minutes of public domain orchestral music onto it. Instead, what you have is a feature-length demonstration about the importance of the auditory portion to cinema. As well as how worthless a movie can be, when the makers simply cannot be bothered to deliver the materials. 

Dir: Len Kabasinski
Star: Renee Porada, Brian Anthony, Lanny Poffo, Darian Caine

Vengeance Turns

  By

★★
“Turnabout’s fair play.”

The film opens with a caption, “The first feature film from Robert Christopher Smith,” and it’s largely superfluous. Because, to be brutally honest, you can tell. It’s filled with choices which virtually scream, movie-making debut. That it’s a passion project for Smith is clear, and the persistence with which he pursued his vision is clear, and highly laudable. Perseverance can only take you so far, however, and is no substitute for skill and experience. It does feels this was a learning experience on the fly, with a palpable improvement over its course, and Smith left the production a significantly better film-maker than he came in, I suspect. At least it does tell a fairly complete story (glares over at Gold Raiders).

We first meet heroine Rebecca Falcon (Luelmo), arguing with other locals outside the town store in the 1876 Western town where she lives with her husband and two children. The topic is the local Kumeyaay tribe, whom most regard as savages, and blame for a series of recent violent incidents. Rebecca disagrees: for her it’s personal, since she’s one-quarter Kumeyaay herself, though few know it. Her home is the next invaded – not by the natives – with Rebecca left for dead, and her family brutally slaughtered. She is rescued by Simon (Vecchio), who is actually the son of the group’s leader Jefferson Coletrain (Gardner). Nursed back to health by the real Kumeyaay, Rebecca vows to take vengeance on Jefferson and his gang.

This was split into two parts for release, but is very much one film. and at two hours forty minutes in total… Yeah, it’s definitely overlong, especially in the first half. While relatively quick to get to the reason for revenge, proceedings then grind to a complete halt while she’s recuperating with the Kumeyaay. You’re left hanging out with characters sporting names like “Delicate Poison” (Jaffer) and – I wrote this down – “Ghost with Silent Knives Protects”. The former is played by a Pakistani-Norwegian actress with a clipped British accent. The weird thing is, Jaffer seems a good performer, just wholly inappropriate for this role, to the point I genuinely felt embarrassed for her.

If you have the mental stamina to reach Volume Two, things do improve. Rebecca’s vengeance proves somewhat unfocused initially, though like other threads e.g. her being part-Kumeyaay, nothing much comes of this. It’s clear she is basically deranged, though this is depicted mostly in Luelmo speaking… slowly… and… slurrrrrring her words. Still, things actually happen, and the arrival of batshit crazy Chinese cannibal lady Gloria (Catherine Bo-Eun Song) adds entertainment value. There are technical issues, not least with the audio: one scene on horseback is almost inaudible, between the hooves and the wind. However, there are also scenes that work, such as the brutal interrogation of a prisoner by Gloria and Delicate Poison, or our heroine’s confrontation with an old “friend”. Copious room for improvement, to be sure, yet not without merit. Everyone has to start somewhere.

Dir: Robert Christopher Smith
Star: Paola Luelmo, Azeem Vecchio, Jamald Gardner, Kelsey Jaffer

Supergirl, on its 40th anniversary

  By

★★★
“Revisiting the original Maid of Might”

Before Supergirl: Woman of Tomorrow arrives on our screens in 2026, starring Milly Alcock from House of the Dragon in the title role, I thought, it would be a good time to revisit the original Supergirl movie, which was released in the United States forty years ago this month. So what is Supergirl? A campy trash/cult classic? A fine, forgotten superhero movie? A guilty pleasure? A lame forgettable flop of the 80s? Hopefully, after reading this review you’ll be able to make your own, well-informed judgment!

Originally, the character of Superman’s cousin was supposed to appear in Superman III, but after a new script was written, the character was moved to her own movie. Alexander and Ilya Salkind, the producers who had given Superman life on the big screen in form of Christopher Reeve, probably thought they might score as big with Supergirl as they had with the first two Superman movies. Unfortunately, when Superman III came out in 1983 it was heavily criticized, and fell well below financial expectations, which caused Warner Brothers to give distribution rights to the Salkinds, who would sell it to Tri-Star.

It may not have been the best move, for it seems the film got little marketing (though did get a royal premiere in Britain), and was also sharply edited down. It’s a bit difficult to be certain how many versions of the film exist, but three are well-known: 1) The theatrical cut that runs a bit over 90 minutes. 2) The international version, also called “European theatrical”, though that did not come out in German cinemas. 3) The so-called director’s cut of 138 minutes, which is overly long, especially by 80’s standards. Nowadays, you’re happy when a big movie doesn’t exceed the 2-½ hour mark. How times have changed!

The box-office also ended far, far below expectations and resulted in the Salkinds selling their rights to make any further Superman-related movies. Which is… kind of regrettable, I think, because this movie is not half as bad as it is usually made out to be. I’ll go into its obvious flaws later. But what is the story about? Introducing Supergirl to the film world was not so easy. After all, we had all seen Superman’s home world Krypton blow up in the original movie. But the film actually followed, without really explaining how scientists did it, the original comics which introduced Supergirl in 1959. Argo City, home of Kara Zor-El’s (Slater), was saved from the catastrophe that befell Krypton and in the film survived in “inner space”, whatever that might be – today we would probably call this another dimension.

Here, Kara lives with her parents, other families and scientist mentor Zaltar (Peter O’Toole). The parents are played by Mia Farrow and Simon Ward in cameos; obviously the producers wanted to give Supergirl the same support, with famous or well-known actors, as they did for the Man of Steel. After losing the Omegahedron, the power source of the city, Kara follows it via unexplained Kryptonian technology to our Earth to bring it back. Unfortunately, evil wanna-be witch, quack doctor and esoteric Selena (Dunaway) has taken it with plans to conquer the world. Their mutual interest in young gardener Ethan (Bochner) and Kara’s need to conceal her real identity, going by the alias of school girl Linda Lee, complicate matters further.

From that summary, you should be clued in to what the movie is. It’s a loose repackaging of the Superman story; though some aspects are different here, at the core it’s the same. Maybe this was one of the reasons why the movie failed to attract audiences. But the story and some characters chosen for it come with problems too. While Superman could still be seen as science fiction, Supergirl seems more like a fantasy movie. While Clark Kent’s continuous attempts to dupe Lois that he is Superman were used in the original two movies to wonderfully hilarious effect, this aspect doesn’t appear here at all.

Then again, how could it? Supergirl has just arrived on Earth, differently to Superman. Christopher Reeve’s Superman was originally heavily involved in the script but Reeve politely declined; maybe he didn’t want to play second fiddle to someone else? So the script was rewritten, with Superman on a “special mission” in another galaxy. Neither her room mate – who happens to be the younger sister of Lois Lane – nor Jimmy Olsen, the only character from the Superman movies to appear, know her, so there can be no “A-ha!” moment. Nor can love-struck gardener Ethan see that the brunette school girl he was just talking to, is also the blonde girl in the super-dress. Whoever wrote this should get a “D-” in basic logic. At least Superman changed totally in behavior and wore glasses when he played Clark Kent. Here, there is no believable excuse for it.

The film has other problems. One is a lot of unnecessary characters that are neither needed, nor add anything essential to the plot. It’s especially apparent with actors probably cast for their comedic talents. Peter Cook, often well-matched with Dudley Moore on stage and film, might be a good comedian but is totally unfunny here. The same goes for Brenda Vaccaro as Dunaway’s sidekick: compare her to Ned Beatty’s Otis, alongside Gene Hackman, and you’ll see how ineffective Vaccaro’s role is here. I’ve already mentioned Lucy Lane and Jimmy Olsen. Why are they here? What do they add to the story? Do they do anything that has an impact?

Trimming should have happened in the writing phase. If they would have eliminated, reduced or at least given these characters something of meaning to do in the plot, the movie might have been much better. Additionally, there is a side-plot of female bullies picking on Kara, seeming only to serve the purpose of showing that Kara has the same heat-vision as her cousin. Other strange decisions were made by the screenwriter, and slid past the producer and director. When Kara lands on Earth the first people she meets are two drunk, wannabe rapists who try to molest her. Hurray for feminism, I guess, as Kara shows them that a Kryptonian teen can defend herself. It’s an ill-fitting scene in a movie apparently intended to be family- and kid-friendly. Wonder Woman 1984 also had such a stupid, distracting scene. So either there is something I  don’t understand, or film directors and screenwriters have not learned much over the four decades between the movies!

Also, the “love story” between Ethan and Kara is essentially a “non-love story”. His love for her is induced by Selena’s magical potion, who wants the man for herself. If the first person Ethan saw after waking up had been a cow, would he have fallen in love with a cow? The length of the movie was already criticized when it originally came out, even though it was shorter at the time. And the version that I knew from seeing the movie in the late eighties on German TV was even shorter. You can hardly expect a movie, of whatever quality, that has been edited down so much to still make much sense at all.

It’s no surprise O’Toole and Dunaway were nominated for Razzie Awards, though it’s not all their fault. Obviously, director Jeannot Szwarc had no problem with Dunaway going as campy as she wanted. It’s a pity because her role could have been convincing or even menacing, played straight. There is no doubt Dunaway, with a fine reputation of playing difficult characters, could have given a good, villainous performance. Heck, she already played a first class femme fatale in the Musketeer movies for the Salkinds in the 70’s. Of course when you go camp, you can hardly blame Dunaway for trying to repeat what Gene Hackman successfully did as Lex Luthor, But you have to be really funny, something that worked for the Hackman-Beatty pairing but not here.

O’Toole has only two significant scenes in the movie, at the beginning and the end. His performance in the first seems a bit uninspired and odd. I wouldn’t be surprised if he was drunk while doing it; the actor was famous for this, like Richard Burton or Oliver Reed. The second, where Zaltar seems to have given up all hope and sacrifices himself for Kara, is quite well done and touching. Although a strange decision was made in the German dubbing, where someone came up with the idea of casting the German voice of Clint Eastwood for him!

For all the negatives I have listed, there are quite a few positives, shining bright in this movie pursued by bad luck. Helen Slater probably gave the performance of her career. She is really, really good playing the female version of the true-blue hero, as well as the innocent-looking big-eyed teenager in Argo City, and her cute school girl role of Linda Lee. Slater was even nominated for a Saturn Award for her performance. If the film had been better – or at least financially successful – maybe she could have had a similar career to the one Christopher Reeve enjoyed due to his Superman role? Alas, it wasn’t to be…

The special effects of the film may look dated today – and they are. But considering all of it was before the advent of CGI, digital and computer effects, it’s impressive what could be achieved by in-camera-tricks, visual illusions, miniature and composite effects. Sure, a lot of effects could be simply generated on the computer today. But even a cardboard photo cut-out of Supergirl, drawn quickly out of the water, is astonishingly effective and can only be recognized for what it is today, due to DVDs and Blu-Rays. How do you show Supergirl almost torn to pieces by a monster in 1984? At that time all the filmmakers had were some distortion effects by a changed perspective – nevertheless, it works, and there are some very nice effects.

As kitschy as it seems, I personally loved the aerial ballet of Supergirl when she arrives. For the first time too, we get to see the Phantom Zone: it’s constantly mentioned in the Superman movies, but here it is actually a set in Britain’s Pinewood studios (used for many Bond movies), and must have been one helluva work to create. Selena’s traps and the shaking, fiery ground are impressive, as are her manipulations in the abandoned event park. My favourite effect might be Kara fighting an invisible monster which you only can recognize by its impact on the environment, e.g. giant footprints on the ground, breaking fences, etc. This seems directly inspired by the classic “ID” monster from Forbidden Planet.

All in all, the effects were as good as possible at the time, so shouldn’t be judged by today’s standards. The film in addition boasts great production design, luscious exterior shots, a well-timed tractor-on-the-loose action sequence, appropriate and good-looking costumes (especially for Dunaway), all of which are undeniable pluses. Then there is the – as always – great Jerry Goldsmith score which makes up more than half of the movie’s atmosphere. It’s especially impressive, considering I could hardly imagine anyone else being able to step in the shoes of John Williams, who scored the original Superman score.

Supergirl is still not a great comic book superhero movie. Nor a bad one: more somewhat mediocre, but kind of sympathetic. As mentioned, the movie had bad luck, being both too late and too early. Too late, as it seems audiences had started to grow tired of the whole Superman circus: within six years people had been exposed to four Superman-related movies. The “All-American” hero had become kind of passé with Schwarzenegger, Stallone and co. introducing the new, harder and gritty anti-hero who would dominate the screens for the next decade. Alternatively, you had more goofy heroes like Eddie Murphy in Beverly Hills Cop or the Ghostbusters. A simple, straightforward hero didn’t fit into this time anymore.

But the movie might have been too early as well. At that time, audiences were simply not interested in female comic book heroes as flops like Red Sonja, Sheena and Brenda Starr proved again and again. Even a further attempt in the early 2000s with Elektra, Catwoman and the like failed. It’s only recently that movies like Black Widow, Captain Marvel or Wonder Woman are really scoring big at the box-office. This was also before the “girl power” era. In the late 90s and early 2000s, with TV shows like Charmed, Buffy, Xena, Kim Possible and movies like The Craft, Mean Girls or Legally Blonde, a movie about a school girl fighting an evil, powerful witch could have scored big – but well… not in the 80s!

So… maybe “Supergirl” was just a bit ahead of its time. Judge for yourself.  What about my interest in the movie? Well, I saw photos of it in film magazines, years after it was in cinemas. At that time the movie had not been shown on TV and my family had no VCR yet. All I had was some photos and my imagination to tell me what the movie might be about. For me the film belongs in the category of enjoyable fantasy movies of the 1980s together with fare like The Neverending Story or Highlander. That photo of young Helen Slater with her clenched fist, flying with the glowing sun in the background, still hangs on my wall! So I may be a bit biased concerning the film. But aren’t we all regarding our favourites?

Dir: Jeannot Szwarc
Star: Helen Slater, Faye Dunaway, Hart Bochner, Peter Cook

Don’t Move

  By

★★★
“Suicide hotline stalking”

A somewhat gimmicky but adequately competent Netflix Original, I guess the moral here is that being abducted and stalked by a serial killer is the best kind of therapy. We meet Iris (Asbille) in the remote woods where her young son previously died. She never recovered, and is now standing on edge of a cliff, contemplating suicide. She’s interrupted by the arrival of a stranger, Richard (Wittrock), who talks her down. However, it turns out he has an ulterior motive: he wants to be the one to kill Iris. He tazes her, and while subsequently managing to escape, she has also been injected with a muscle relaxant that in twenty minutes will render her unable to move. 

Obviously, this makes for a perilous situation, as the drug slowly works its way through her system, eventually shutting down almost all conscious muscle movements. As such, it is going to be an “action” heroine film more in spirit than literally. For the vast majority of the film, Iris is unable to do very much more except blink enthusiastically. Naturally, both coming and going, the chemicals operate in exactly the way necessary to facilitate the script, and ratchet up the tension. Need to alert a suspicious police officer (Francis) to her presence? She will be able to move her hand just enough for that purpose, albeit very slowly. However, the script is assembled well enough, these moments feel organic enough to pass muster.

I think the best sequence has her washing up on the land of the reclusive Bill (Treadwell), an old geezer who is initially able to help. However, he is interrupted by the arrival of Richard, supposedly looking for his mentally disturbed wife. Bill can sense this isn’t exactly the truth, but Richard spins a plausible web of lies, all while Iris is inches away, unable to do anything. This generates quite the nervous energy, before it’s suddenly released. Indeed, Bill is an interesting person, albeit by the low standards of “minor characters in serial killer films”. Richard, too, has some surprises in his back-story. An unexpected phone call upends his carefully prepared plans, requiring a quick disposal of Iris, which leads to the movie’s climax. 

This is where it does topple over in terms of credibility, with more than one, “Wait, what?” moment. Apparently, a dunk in cold water is all it takes to reverse any pharmaceutical effects. Didn’t do much earlier, but I’ll say no more. While it’s always an issue if a film can’t stick the landing, Asbille delivers a good enough portrayal to keep me interested. That’s especially so, given the physical limitations imposed on her by the script; there are points where her eyes are the entire performance. Like most Netflix Originals, this isn’t likely to leave a lasting impression. However, unlike some, it did not leave me feeling my time had been wasted. Producer Sam Raimi, his name larger on the poster than the stars or directors, shouldn’t be embarrassed by this.

Dir: Brian Netto, Adam Schindler
Star: Kelsey Asbille, Finn Wittrock, Moray Treadwell, Daniel Francis