Category: Review

Snow White and the Seven Samurai

  By

★★½
“That whirring sound? Akira Kurosawa, spinning in his grave.”

I added an extra half-star here out of how much I was entertained by this. Although this was more a result of us yelling things at the screen than any intrinsic merits. The idea is kinda cool, but if you can’t think of ways this should have been improved  you are simply not trying. Anya Voight (Dorn) is known as ‘Snow White’, because her father, Joseph (Eric Roberts),  is a coke dealer. He’s killed by a mysterious assassin, and when his will is read, her jealous stepmom, Quinn (Vitori), is highly annoyed to discover Anya will be the one inheriting the business, and has plans to go legitimate. 

She sends her mysterious assassin (Jackson) to kill her stepdaughter, but he is driven off by Luna (Tellone), the leader of a sect of onna-musha, female samurai. Once numerous, they got into an ill-advised was with organized crime, and are now only seven in number, each a specialist in a different weapon. They agree to teach Anya, so she can take revenge on Quinn for killing Joseph. Cue the training montage! There is also a subplot where Quinn is trying to eliminate the three other bosses with which her late husband had partnered. However, this is functionally useless, and one of the avenues for improvement would have been eliminating this thread entirely. Spend the time instead, giving more than two of the samurai adequate character depth, for example. 

For if this had gone the way of The Asylum’s Mercenaries, it would also have helped. Cast seven women who know one end of a katana from the other, instead of… maybe one and a half? Give us something like Lady Bloodfight. Instead, while there’s no shortage of action – the final assault on Anya’s former home takes up much of the final third – very little of it makes an impact, save an unexpected twist regarding Joseph’s death. Vitori is fun to watch, really getting her teeth into the “evil stepmother” role. Hardly anyone else makes a significant impression. This is why we were forced to make our own entertainment, e.g. yelling “How not to be seen”, every time someone with a mask showed up. Which was frequently – largely to allow for recycling actors, I suspect.

Jackson, best known as an MMA fighter, obviously makes for a formidable opponent, though his role is almost wordless and doesn’t merit the above the title billing he receives on the cover. I’m fine with that: the problem is more that the film needs someone as a protagonist who can hold our attention, as well as a sword. Sadly, Dorn isn’t good enough in either category. Tellone might have made a slightly better lead actress, though that wouldn’t help problems in the script, such as the way Anya goes from fencing amateur to professional samurai, in only a few days. The best thing about this is the title, and disappointment thereafter is almost inevitable.

Dir: Michael Su
Star: Fiona Dorn, Gina Vitori, Sunny Tellone, Quinton ‘Rampage’ Jackson

The Eye of Ebon, by P. Pherson Green

  By

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

Independent Goodreads author (and one of my Goodreads friends) P. Pherson Green has been writing since the late 90s, and has previously had short stories published in various venues. However, this novel, the opener for his projected White Sword Saga series, is his long-fiction debut. He graciously gifted me with a hardcover review copy; no guarantee of a favorable review was requested, or given. My wife and I read the book together, during the intermittent and usually short times we were both traveling together in the car; so the nearly two months it took to read is misleading. It would have been a much quicker read if I’d read it by myself, devoting all of my individual reading time to it.

This is a work of traditional epic fantasy, set (as most tales in this genre are) in a medieval-like setting resembling the Europe of that day, except in an invented fantasy world. (A helpful map is provided, though it doesn’t show every single locality a reader might like to locate.) It would be fair to say that most if not all English-language epic fantasy written from the last half of the 20th century on owes something to the inescapable influence of Tolkien’s monumental LOTR saga, and this novel is no exception. We have here, ultimately, a quest narrative involving an artifact of great significance (and great seductive power, of an unwholesome sort). The characters’ world is one with a very long history, involving elder races and cataclysmic wars which have consequences for the present. Two non-human races, the Allarie and the Groll, are respectively much like Tolkien’s elves and orcs.

More importantly, we’re very definitely dealing here with a conflict between good and evil, with domination of a world at stake; and the conflict is not simply one of “Us” (the “good” characters) vs. “Them” (the “bad” characters), but rather within “Us” as well, since all humans can be tempted by evil. And like Tolkien (who once famously characterized the LOTR corpus as a “Catholic work”) Green is a Christian author, who writes from a Christian conception of the universe. Neither writer makes any explicit reference to Christianity, and indeed both are dealing with a world in which Christ has not been born; Middle Earth is supposedly our world long before Christianity existed, and Green’s Silver World (he introduces that name only in a short note after the novel proper) is an entirely different world with a different salvation history. But like Tolkien’s Morgoth (“the Great Enemy, of whom Sauron of Mordor was but a servant”) the entity variously known here as the Shadow, the Wyrm, the Foul Pretender or the Dark Beguiler is recognizable as Satan; and the apparently pagan polytheism of the Silver World isn’t quite as polytheistic as it initially seems.

For all that, Green is his own person with his own literary vision and style; The Eye of Ebon is not a direct LOTR knock-off, in the way that Terry Brooks’ The Sword of Shanarra is. A major difference, of course, is the distaff perspective. While Tolkien’s Eowyn is an action-capable female, she’s not the heroine of the saga; his major characters, and most of the characters who display any real agency, or play a direct role in defeating evil, are male. Here, the two viewpoint characters, protagonist Samiare (whom you see depicted on the book’s cover) and essentially co-protagonist Rugette are both female, and formidable fighting females who carry the brunt of the book’s down-and-dirty struggle against evil, and who make the key, crucial gut wrenching and difficult moral decisions at the climactic points. (I was already inclined to rate the book at five stars, but those were the moments that clinched it, and for me moved this tale into the ranks of great, rather than merely good, literature!)

To be sure, unlike Rugette, whose combat skills, especially archery, result from rigorous training since she was in her early teens (I’d guess her to be about 30 here) and have been honed in years spent as a high-ranking warrior and scout fighting the Groll, Samiare, an untrained girl of 15, owes her prowess to a mysterious sword. At the very beginning of the main narrative, she lies dying in the snows of her homeland from cold and blood loss after being gang-raped by a band of Groll and renegade humans, who carved an obscenity on her belly, beat her and tortured her with branding irons, after killing her father and making off with her sister. When she cried out for deliverance “to the one god she knew –the one who watched over,” that sword was gifted to her by a glowing man-like being; and it proves to be no ordinary sword. But she still has to hold it and wield it –and make decisions about how she uses it.

The above paragraph suggests another difference from the Tolkien corpus; this narrative is much grittier, and gorier. While the gang-rape itself isn’t really directly described, we can tell it occurred; and while Green doesn’t make the brutalizing and torture here any more drawn-out than it has to be to make us feel it, he does make us do that. This sets a tone for a very violent book; there’s a lot of mortal combat action with edged weapons, and the Groll are an extremely sadistic and treacherous bunch, even to each other. (Tolkien, in a letter, once characterized the orcs as “almost irremediable,” but allowed that no being created by God is wholly irremediable. We get the impression here that the Groll may be; but even here, Green depicts them as having a claim to merciful treatment when they’re disabled in combat, which I regard as a plus.) So there’s a high body count, with quite a lot of humans and humanoids dying, often in nastily unpleasant ways. There’s no “pornography of violence,” but we do see the spilled entrails, severed limbs, split skulls, etc. However, there’s no quoted bad language, and no explicit sexual content. (In fact, the only reference to sex at all, besides the implied rape above, occupies a tastefully phrased single part of one sentence, in 230 pages of text proper. This would definitely not be characterized as a “romantasy.”)

Green has a serviceable, dignified and assured, naturally flowing prose style that holds interest well. Settings, scenes and people are described vividly enough to be pictured in the reader’s mind (and some of the scenes conjured rival those depicted by Robert E. Howard or A. Merritt for atmosphere and spectacle!), but not over-described. World-building is delivered along the way of the storyline, without info-dumps (there are a couple of roughly page-long appendices, “About the Silver World” and “The Four Lands,” which should be read). There aren’t many serious typos, the worst one being that “reigns” tends to be substituted when “reins” is meant (but that’s a quibble). We come to realize before long that the Prologue describes events taking place millennia before the main story, and occasional interspersed flashbacks set in the same time-frame aren’t distinguished by typeface or a heading; but the reader quickly comes to identify and understand these, and they do convey important information.

There’s no cliff-hanger here; the challenge of the main plot is brought to its conclusion. But it’s clear that the overall epochal struggle of the Four Lands is only beginning, and I’m invested in continuing the series!

Author: P. Pherson Green.
Publisher: Gold Dragon Publishing, available through Amazon, both for Kindle and as a printed book.
A version of this review previously appeared on Goodreads.

Hunting Day

  By

★★
“I am very confused.”

I like to think I am not an idiot. I can assemble words into a coherent order, perform fairly complex mental arithmetic with reasonable accuracy, and recently connected a printer to my wife’s computer on the first attempt. So, when I tell you I did not understand this film… I really did not understand this film. I’ve seen movies before, where I may be unclear on some points. But I could still provide a reasonably detailed synopsis. Here? I am utterly at sea, beyond the most basic level, to the point I’m wondering how the heck I will be able to reach my standard five hundred words. How many can I spend describing my bemusement?

I do have to admire the fact the film unfolds entirely without dialogue.  Not a single word. It’s the kind of brave artistic choice which deserves respect. However, I have to say, it likely hurts the film more than it helps, and ends up feeling like an artistic conceit. Going by the IMDb, co-writer/director Patrice has no other credits beyond being executive producer, on a film currently in post-production. Yet this kind of gimmick movie screams out for someone with experience and a firm grasp of cinematic language. Somebody with a proven capacity for telling a story with dialogue. You need to work up to this kind of thing, otherwise you will potentially be leaving both yourself and, more importantly, the viewer, adrift and confused.

The IMDb synopsis is: “Deep in a threatening forest, Sarah faces off with the brutal hunter who killed her sister. Its a cat and mouse fight for survival.” No argument there. It’s just the large amount of stuff going around the edges, from which my confusion stems. For example, not long after Sarah (Huet) arrives in the forest, she starts seeing a young girl in a sheep’s head mask. Is that supposed to be her sister? If so, does this indicate Sarah is barking mad? In turn, would that mean nothing else we see or hear is trustworthy? Not least at the end, things spiral off into a resolution which is not, followed by a post-credit moment that then throws everything into doubt.

It all simply left me with too many questions, though other elements were fine. This is nicely photographed, and Huet does as much as she can, without words to express herself. The same goes for Duez as her (dead?) sister, and Bardoul, in the role of the hunter. But another seeming misstep is Patrice’s decision to tell the story out of chronological order. I’m unclear what he was trying to achieve with this, but the net result was another element coming between the audience, and any emotional reaction to events as they unfold. I tried. I really did, to the point I watched this twice (at a 72-minute running time, it could have been worse). In the end though, I’m convinced of one thing: I’m not the problem here. 

Dir: Julien Patrice
Star: Clothilde Huet, Cloe Duez, Steve Bardoul

Baltimore

  By

★★★
“The art of terrorism.”

Going off the Wikipedia article about Rose Dugdale, I can’t help feeling this could have been more epic than it was. I mean, a former debutante who, “As an IRA member, took part in the theft of paintings worth IR£8 million, a bomb attack on a Royal Ulster Constabulary station using a hijacked helicopter, and developed a rocket launcher” which used – I kid you not – packets of biscuits to absorb the recoil. There’s so much there, it feels a shame the movie focuses almost entirely on the art theft. This was carried out in 1974, raiding a stately home in rural Ireland (fun fact: the house was used as a location in Haywire), with the aim of swapping the paintings for the release of prisoners. 

That said, the film does a good job of weaving several strands together. Firstly, Rose’s upbringing, and her conversion from a wealthy upbringing to political firebrand, and subsequently terrorist for the Irish Republican cause. Then there’s the actual robbery itself, and finally, the aftermath as Rose (Poots) and her two accomplices (Vaughan-Lawlor and Brophy) hide out and try to make their demands. It is definitely a sympathetic portrayal, which quietly ignores her role in civilian deaths. For instance, Dugdale made the device for the 1992 Baltic Exchange bombing in London, which killed three. And incidentally, blew up the office where I worked, around the corner in Bevis Marks. This may explain why I feel less charitably inclined towards her than the story wants.

Poots’s performance is solid enough to overcome my kneejerk aversion, and Rose as a character is depicted as someone who’s worthy of respect. You definitely get the sense she was genuine about her commitment to ‘The Cause’, born of an honest rejection of her privileged life. In this rebellion against her upbringing, she feels somewhat like a more ideologically committed, English version of Patty Hearst. [Hearst was kidnapped the same year as Rose’s robbery, and ended up robbing banks with the Symbionese Liberation Army] The film does skip over exactly how she went from activist, to hijacking a helicopter in order to drop milk churns on police stations – an incident only referenced in passing on a radio broadcast. 

What this does, it does well though. There’s an escalating sense of tension and paranoia, with Rose eventually ending up on her own (her accomplices were never caught, according to a final caption), as the net closes in. She agonizes over whether to kill a local who might suspect her, and if she should tell her boyfriend (Meade) about her pregnancy. However, while it’s far superior to Poots’s terrible Black Christmas remake, after reading the Wikipedia page, I was left hungry for further details. This feels closer to an episode of a TV series about Dugdale, rather than a fully rounded depiction of her life. I think I might end up going deeper into an apparently fascinating woman who, at her trial, pronounced herself “proudly and incorruptibly guilty”.

Dir: Joe Lawlor and Christine Molloy
Star: Imogen Poots, Tom Vaughan-Lawlor, Lewis Brophy, Jack Meade
a.k.a. Rose’s War

Riley Parra: Better Angels

  By

★★
“Wings of desire.”

The idea here is considerably stronger than the execution. Police detective Riley Parra (Hassler) works the scummiest part of town, which is ruled by mysterious and possibly legendary figure Marchosias (Landler). However, while working a murder case, Riley discovers the area is, in fact, Ground Zero for an ongoing war between demons and angels. More startlingly yet, she’s directly involved, because she is the “champion” on the side of the angels. This revelation has the potential to destroy the shaky truce which has been in place between the two sides. Riley also has to deal with pesky journalist, Gail Finney (Sirtis, sporting an Australian accent for some reason), and attraction to new medical examiner Dr. Gillian Hunt (Vassey).

This is based on a series of books by Geonn Cannon, and is a mixed bag. I like the idea that the police department is entirely staffed by women, and nobody particularly cares. That they all appear to be lesbians? Hmm. Geonn is a male author, I should mention, which makes this… interesting. It’s all very much PG-rated, but really, I feel all the relationship stuff seriously gets in the way of the plot. Not least, because this ends with none of the major threads anywhere close to tied-up. Instead, it finishes with Riley just having solved a murder which doesn’t even take place until 65 minutes into the movie. Originally a webseries, it seems more a pilot than an actual film. Five years later, there’s no continuation, so do not expect resolution.

There are also silly little gaffes, such as Dr. Hunt picking up evidence at a murder scene with her bare hands. Or Riley getting a call and being texted the location of the same murder, then saying, “I’ll be there in 15 minutes” – without looking at her phone. Be where exactly? It’s all minor, but indicative of a rather sloppy approach to film-making. Shame, since the characters here are quite interesting, and the performances are decent. Everyone here seems like they could be a real person, even Marchosias and his outrageously French accent (that actor actually is French, so I’ll let it pass).

It feels fairly pro-religion, both in its central concept and sympathetic presentation of the priest, to whom Riley turns for advice. I’d have liked to have seen more action: I think the only person Riley shoots is her partner – not much of a spoiler, since it happens early on. Oddly, that barely leads to any disciplinary action or investigation, more evidence of the slapdash approach to detail. I do suspect some characters are not what they seem. I think either Riley’s boss, or Gail Finney, are actually agents for Marchosias. The latter would be interesting, being the kind of crusading, anti-police journalist you might expect to be the heroine in another story. Guess we’ll never know. Well, unless I read the novels and… Yeah, I probably wasn’t sufficiently into this to justify the effort there.

Dir: Christin Baker
Star: Marem Hassler, Liz Vassey, Karl E. Landler, Marina Sirtis

Kidnapping in the Grand Canyon

  By

★★★
“Not grand, but adequate.”

Despite my relentlessly commitment to sit through any film with an action heroine that strays across my radar, I’ll admit to suppressing an inward wince, when the film started and the ‘Lifetime Movies’ logo popped up. This origin was news to me. However, I was literally a captive viewer, since I was sitting on a plane to Mexico, so couldn’t exactly pop up and put on something else. At least it did mean I wasn’t going to end up uncomfortably trying to hide my screen from fellow passengers. This has occasionally happened previously, after an ill-considered choice of in-flight entertainment. Inevitably when I’m occupying the middle seat. Say what you like, Lifetime TVMs are safe. 

And to my surprise, in this case, reasonably entertaining. Admittedly, expectations were low. However, this kept my attention. Not that I could exactly walk out. But it keeps things simple, and is the better for it. To mark the twentieth anniversary of their friendship, pediatrician Brooke (Vitori) and photographer Chandra (Rosita) decide to do something special and hike the Grand Canyon. They bump into guide Nate (Boyd), who convinces them to go off trail and see hidden delights. As the title suggests, big mistake. For he is actually in need of a doctor who can tend to a nasty, infected leg wound suffered by extremely reluctant fiancée Tara (Bailey), and won’t take no for an answer, from any of the three women. 

Nothing new in the plotting here (there’s another Lifetime film with a suspiciously similar premise, Vanished in Yosemite),  but it does a decent job of avoiding character idiocy often needed in many of this sort of thing. Chandra is established early on as the risk-taker, so it makes sense when she immediately accepts Nate’s offer, over the objections of the much more cautious Brooke. This, too, is understandable as she lost her husband in a climbing accident two years previously. Yet despite the disparate personalities, the friendship between them is sold by the actresses’ performances. It gives a solid foundation, so that the occasionally rocky plotting doesn’t end up causing the whole endeavour to collapse. By the end, both have clearly changed and moved towards the middle, a nice acknowledgement of moderation being the best policy. Boyd does his part too, initially making Nate seem charming, until the inevitable – for anyone who has seen a man in a Lifetime movie, anyway – heel turn. 

I do suspect not all of it was actually filmed in the Grand Canyon. The stuff at the rim, certainly. But they’re shown entering the National Park, before arriving at the Sugar Loaf Lodge, which is actually in Sedona, a good hundred miles south. Some of the scenery looks more like Utah as well. However, you can’t go wrong with the Grand Canyon. It looks as majestic and imposing as ever, adding value to the production. Weirdly, it ends up being the second film I’ve seen this week, after Deep Fear, where a flare gun is wielded for offensive purposes. What are the odds?

Dir: Derek Pike
Star: Gina Vitori, Philip Boyd, Katrina Rosita, Ryann Bailey
A version of this review originally appeared on Film Blitz.

The ‘Angels of Vengeance’ trilogy

  By

The history of action heroines can’t be told without a chapter on China and Hong Kong. When we watched Michelle Yeoh kick butt in Yes, Madam, did we ever think she’d be an Oscar winner? She’s just the best-known product of a system which also gave us the likes of Moon Lee, Cynthia Khan and Maggie Q. The golden era for Hong Kong Girls With Guns films, was arguably the late eighties, but it’s never died away entirely. In the past few years, I’ve been finding a rich vein of recent Chinese GWG movies on YouTube. Streaming films took off there during COVID, with makers churning out a high-volume of films, in the action, horror and SF genre. Naturally, some fall under our remit.

Though researching them has been a bit problematic. Certain… “unofficial” channels, shall we say, will post the films with titles which are largely useless in terms of finding cast, crew, or even the film’s name. For instance, I discovered this franchise via a post titled, and I quote, “【FULL MOVIE】The beautiful police officers compete with criminal gangs in a battle of wits and courag”. In the comments, someone revealed it was called Angels of Vengeance 2. I thought I’d found part one on YT… But despite having the title Angels of Vengeance, none of the synopsis or cast info matched up. It turned out to be a mis-titled copy of Angel Warriors.

This issue actually feels like a throwback to the eighties, when the In the Line of Duty series, for example, had almost different titles in every country. Similarly, you’re sometimes dealing with subtitles that are less than optimal, and as we’ll see, audio is a sadly common problem too. However, after some further research, I eventually hit the mother lode, finding all three movies with English subs on Youku’s YouTube channel. The Chinese title of the franchise is 辣警狂花, which according to Google translates as “Hot policeman crazy flower.” I guess Angels of Vengeance will do under the circumstances.

Information on the franchise, director or actresses involved is hard to come by. In fact, at the time of writing in late 2024, this would appear to be the first English-language coverage the trilogy will have ever received. I love that: discovering obscurities is, to me, one of the joys of the site, especially when they end up being generally more entertaining than many a better-known production. But to quote the lyrics to the song which close out the third installment.

The resounding song is the sword of justice
Police badges shine with firm faith
Fear no flying bullets, guns in my hands, shield on my shoulder
I’m fearless to any dangers.
We undertake missions, we maintain the faith
Proceeding with firm steps, we keep going
We’re thunderbolts, charging forward
We safeguard the peace by fighting crime.

Can’t say more than that, really. Here are reviews of each film in the series, and a YouTube playlist of the trilogy.

Angels of Vengeance: Blood Trails

★★★½

This introduces us to the main protagonist, Tang Shi-Yu (Yan), a member of a Chinese SWAT team. She is recruited to infiltrate the drug-running gang belonging to Zhao Wen-jiu (Bai), doing so by rescuing Jiu’s younger sister, Ya-Ya (Mu), who is oblivious to her sibling’s criminal activities, from an attack in a nightclub. Tang’s undercover identity is someone in debt to loan sharks, and Jiu offers to take care of this, if she comes to work for him. After proving her loyalty, and also rescuing Jiu from an assassination attempt, she’s successfully embedded in the organization. But things are complicated, due to the reason behind the hit. Jiu killed someone close to his rival, Chen Jia-hua (Zheng), and Chen is out for revenge.

The obvious target for that is Ya-Ya, who is kidnapped, luring Jiu into a confrontation. Eventually, an uneasy peace between producer and distributoris brokered, setting the scene for a major drug deal going down at the docks. Tang informs her colleagues, and plans are put in place for a raid which will sweep up both sets of traffickers. This does a fair amount right, in particular the lead performances of Yan and Bai, which are thoughtful and well-considered. Both come over as smart individuals, and there is a complexity to the gangster which is a little surprising. Indeed, you could argue that, with his relationship to Ya-Ya, and their history, Wen-Jiu is given depth which is largely missing from Shi-yu. She is almost entirely defined by her career.

Tang does an excellent job of maintaining her undercover status, even when drenched in gasoline and threatened with immolation, and takes care of business on the action front when necessary too. I’d like to have seen more from the female members of her support team; outside of a little at the beginning, and a raid on Jiu’s offices, they don’t particularly get to show off their skills much. The ending feels a little underwhelming too, though that may partly be a result of the severely muffled audio during almost the entire sequence [It’s something you sadly need to live with on a lot of Chinese YouTube channels, even the legitimate ones like Youku]

I appreciate the practical effects: especially during the rescue attempt on Ya-Ya, there are real explosions rather than CGI.  It feel like there was good effort put into the script as well, which always keeps moving forward, and Chen’s presence adds an extra twist or two. There’s a great scene when the two gangsters have a meeting in a restaurant; the intensity and tension here is off the charts, and you can sense Tang’s nervousness as she can do nothing except standby and watch. This feels like the kind of film which could easily be remade for a Western audience, and I’d be happy to watch it again. A pretty solid and promising start, delivering a better story and performances than I expected.

Dir: Yuan Shuo
Star: Jessie Yan Jia-ying, Bai Yun-Feng, Mu Lan, Zheng He-Cheng

Angels of Vengeance 2: Top Fugitive 

★★★

This is based around “P2P lending” which was a major thing in China during the mid-2010’s, before the government cracked down on the various dubious pyramid schemes operating under it. A significant number of people lost a lot of money, but going by this relatively contemporary film, it’s still happening, and still problematic. In this case, young women are lured into running up large debts, and when they’re unable to pay, are abducted and sold into sex slavery, to cover the amount owed. I have some questions about exactly how this would operate, but I’m just going to presume the basic scenario makes sense in context for the local audience.

It’s a bit more of an ensemble piece here, with Tang’s SWAT group in Hanjiang City becoming involved after being called in to resolve a hostage situation at a petrol station. Turns out, the two women were victims in the scheme, but as the investigation proceeds, the criminals involved are covering their traces in no uncertain i.e. murderous fashion. Things become rather personal, since SWAT member Hao Miaomiao (Zhao) has lent money to her cousin, Zhang Le-Le (@@@), supposed for education purposes. Turns out Lele’s boyfriend is part of the gang, but when it comes time to kidnap the victim, an administrative mix-up leads to Miaomaio being snatched off the street, rather than Le-Le.

This pushes Shi-Yu’s investigation into overdrive, because they need to find their colleague before she gets shipped permanently out of the country. After Miaomiao is able to get her hands on a phone, she contacts Shi-Yu and is able to send her location. This allows the SWAT team to tool up, and head to the rescue of their colleague. To be honest, the resulting battle represents a clear majority of the action in this installment. Up until that point, there’s a good urban chase sequence, as the team tries to stop a witness from being offed, but this is probably more of a thriller than an action movie. Although it’s still interesting, because of the cultural differences, there are points where it teeters on the edge of TVM territory.

As noted, there  is a better sense of team here, and you get a feeling for the camaraderie between the various members. Witness the affectionate hazing at the end, when Miaomiao tries to skimp on the “thank you” meal for her rescuers. It’s novel to see SWAT people like Ting actively involved in a criminal investigation. This is presumably how things work in China, rather than the sharp demarcation of responsibility with detectives they have in the West. It could have use additional intensity, for example, a greater sense of threat to the victims, as it’s rather too vague on the specifics to present any real peril. The lack of a well-defined antagonist also keeps this one below the bar set by the first installment. It remains a pleasant enough way to pass 85 minutes.

Dir: Yuan Shuo
Star: Jessie Yan Jia-ying, Zhao Jing, Zhang Zi-Yue, Li Ran

Angels of Vengeance 3: Shadow Repose

★★★½

This gets off to an excellent start, depicting the kidnapping and subsequent ransom attempt of Ni-ni, the daughter of industrialist Yang Shi-ke (Bin). He’s getting instructions from the kidnapper, Li Zi-Xiong (Zhou), by phone in order to shake the tail on him, before the drop. As well as following Yang, Tang and her colleagues try to locate the victim, but neither side of this goes perfectly: while they don’t lose the ransom, there’s a trap which leaves Miaomiao badly injured in hospital, and the team with egg on their face. However, SWAT member An Qi (Zhang) suspects there’s more going on than meets the eye, with elements of Yang’s behaviour seeming suspicious.

As seems common throughout the series, we get more time than I expected spent on the villains. In this case, one of them is killed in the first pick-up attempt, which causes his friend to want to kill Ni-Ni. When Li refuses to allow that, the friend swears vengeance against the cops he considers responsible. No prizes for guessing who that is. This adds an additional wrinkle to what might otherwise be a fairly straightforward (though effective enough) kidnapping plot. Between that and Yang’s murky actions, the story is pretty interesting. We’re kept uncertain whether what Yang is doing, is simply to get Ni-ni back safely. Especially after we learn that Li has a long track record of kidnaps – and that the victims there have not come back alive. 

In effect, we have tension between Yang, who is prepared to do anything to recover his daughter, and the authorities, whose main interest seems to be in arresting the criminals, with the hostage’s health falling under the “optional” category. To what extent this reflects the reality of Chinese policy, I can’t say. It makes for an interesting point of consideration. The action has its moments too: there’s a particularly good brawl in a hotel kitchen. The finale is, at least initially, more stealth-oriented than the second part. The team capture one of the kidnappers during another attempt to collect the ransom, and successfully turn him, reminding him of the death penalty he could face – China does not mess about with punishing criminals!

He then returns to the lair, carrying the ransom, and with Tang, An and third member of the team,Yang Fan (Hong Shuang), hidden in the bag. They’re just able to free Ni-Ni before the deception is discovered, leading to an enjoysble and hard-hitting battle against Li and his henchmen (albeit with an ending which merits an “I’m so sure…” comment from this viewer!). Annoyingly, this film suffers from even worse audio problems than the first two entries, in the version provided by Youku. The sound completely vanishes at points, and when it goes, it takes the subtitles with it. The film is strong enough to survive the issue with most of the entertainment value intact. I can’t help thinking, if there had been a better presentation, this one might well have merited our Seal of Approval. Hopefully, there will be more entries to come.

Dir: Yuan Shuo, Wang Ke
Star: Jessie Yan Jia-ying, Zhou Yan, Zhang Lin, Xue Bin

Women Rescuers of WWII, by Elise Baker

  By

Literary rating: ★★
Kick-butt quotient: ☆

With the somewhat accurate and rather clunky sub-title of “True stories of the unsung women heroes who rescued refugees and Allied servicemen in WWII”, this is a book whose idea I liked rather more than the execution. The core is six chapters, each devoted to a woman or pair of women, who operated before and around World War II, mostly helping refugees to escape the Nazi regime as it swept across Europe. Every chapter has the same structure. Each begins with ‘The Threshold’, describing how they came to take on that role; then ‘The Move’, covering their heroic activities; and finally, ‘The Close’, detailing what happened to them afterward.

These stories are all worth telling, though perhaps not to the same degree. A couple appear more like glorified bureaucrats, and while their roles in facilitating emigration of refugees were important, you don’t get much sense they were in genuine danger. Others, however, such as Irena Sendler, was clearly risking her own life in smuggling Jewish children out of the Warsaw ghetto, being captured and brutally interrogated by the Gestapo. The same goes for Andrée de Jongh, who ran the Comet Line which allowed Allied soldiers trapped behind enemy lines in occupied Europe, to make their way back to friendly territory. She ended up in Ravensbruck concentration camp: that’s “real” heroism, putting yourself at personal risk, and definitely deserves to be better known.

However, the desire to cram in too much here works against the book. Each chapter typically covers only 20-25 pages, and as a result, you get not much more depth about each woman, than you would find in a well-written Wikipedia article. These are more like an appetizer, and you’ll probably be left hungry to know more about the likes of de Jongh. Baker has an odd tendency to shift from factual descriptions to what reads like dramatic restagings of scenes, an awkward shift that she does not manage to pull off. Rather than letting the stories speak for themselves, she tends to belabour her point about sexism being responsible for suppressing these stories.

It’s somewhat questionable, since many male heroes of WW2 are arguably more unsung: de Jongh, for example, was awarded decorations by multiple countries, including the George Medal, Britain’s highest civilian honour. That’s not “unsung.” I’d rather Baker had used the pages she spends on making such points, to tell the reader more about the women’s stories.  I will admit, I did learn things here, and if you’re looking for a primer – a Cliff Notes on wartime heroism – this and the other books in the series are probably worth a look. But it feels like Baker is only skimming the surface, and the subjects would have been better served by a more in-depth recounting, rather than trying to cover so many different candidates. Sometimes, less is definitely more, and this would be a good example. 

Author: Elise Baker
Publisher: Intrepidas Publishing, available through Amazon, both as a paperback and an e-book
Book Part of the Brave Women Who Changed the Course of WWII series.

We Kill Them All

  By

★½
“Kill me too. Please”

It generally makes sense for a film to escalate over its duration. The problem here is, what escalated was my annoyance. It began as irritation, but by the end I was deeply peeved, because the stupidity is strong in this one. It begins with two different strands. In one, former desperado Lee Hughes is visited in his mountain resort by ex-colleague Jimmy Montague (Fafard) and his minions. They want to know the location of two million in proceeds from a previous crime Lee and Jimmy pulled. In the other, lesbian couple Lane (Newton) and Megan (McClay) are busy being lesbionic with each other, because they’re lesbians. Did I mention they are a same-sex couple?

These two threads link up because Megan is Lee’s daughter. When she and Lane head up to visit him, they discover only Jimmy and his henchmen, Tweedledum and Tweedledumber. They think Megan knows where the loot is. And this is where the idiocy becomes industrial strength. I’m not sure who is worse. The bad guys, for repeatedly allowing their captives to escape. Or Megan and Lane, for repeatedly allowing themselves to get recaptured. It doesn’t help the script ties itself in knots, trying to keep any firearms out of the wonens’ hands before the very end. Yes, the liberal agenda™ here seems to extend to gun control. Until it finally gives up and admits that they are, in fact, the best equalizer in a home invasion scenario. 

Lane, in particular, is entirely useless for the great bulk of proceedings. Until she is not, suddenly able to escape from being tied up with barbed wire – albeit the kind of barbed wire which leaves no marks in her flesh – and left entirely alone while Jimmy and Megan wander off. Again. Megan does, at least, have some guts. But, really: you are in a kitchen, and the best impromptu weapon you can find is… A chopping board? Meanwhile, the purpose of the whole lesbian thing is revealed. It’s cheap heat, so the bad guys can get all homophobic. Being bad is not, apparently enough. [The film really needs to take lessons from What Keeps You Alive in the department of lesbian relationships]

I honestly feel the whole endeavour would be improved by dubbing Three Stooges sound effects over the top of it. The first half is meandering and not very interesting. The second half does at least have things happening. It’s just that they range from the weakly plotted down to the flat out ludicrous. With little or no reason to care about the characters, who seem entirely defined by their bedroom habits, I was left with no interest in their fate. This, incidentally, ends up being exactly what I expected at the mid-way point. I want to stress, this isn’t a bad film because the heroines are lesbians. There are a lot of perfectly good, unbigoted reasons to find this well below average. 

Dir: Jeremy Drummond
Star: Chloe McClay, Emma Newton, Leo Fafard, Michasha Armstrong

Back in Action

  By

★★★
“Back to basics.”

The title could very well apply to star Diaz as well, since this is her first movie in over a decade. She retired in 2014 after Annie (which also starred Foxx), to focus on her family. But the actress, who will always be beloved here for her role in the best incarnation of Charlie’s Angels, was lured out for this genre mashup, which combines comedy, action, romance, family drama and thriller elements. She plays Emily, a former spy who retired fifteen years ago, and dropped out of sight. She’s now happily married to partner Matt (Foxx), with two teenage kids – the daughter being particularly obnoxious – and a house roughly the size of Vermont. Espionage must be a very lucrative business. 

This domestic bliss is, naturally, upended after the arrival of former handler Chuck (Chandler) with a warning, rapidly followed by assassins. Turns out, on their last mission, Matt lifted and subsequently hid, a device capable of controlling any electronic system. Everyone now wants to get their hands on this MacGuffin, which he stashed away on the estate of Emily’s estranged mother, Ginny (Close), back in England. Kids in tow, Matt and Emily have to drop off the grid, go there and secure the device before it falls into the hands of the bad guys, who intend to auction it off to the highest bidder. Needless to say, their children are surprised by this development. Not least the daughter, who was just grounded for using a fake ID.

Make no mistake, this is glossy, simple and unchallenging entertainment. But that’s perfectly fine. Not everything has to be significant or deep, and if this is unambitious, it doesn’t make it any less decent as something to throw on TV of a Sunday night. Diaz and Foxx both have charisma to spare, and together, their characters have a relationship which seems genuine. They love each other, while their children are stuck permanently in adolescent eye-roll mode, despising their parents taste in music, etc. It’s a salutory lesson, that in reality, Emily and Matt are far cooler, more interesting and highly skilled than their offspring would ever give them credit. The parent in me nods wisely at this family dynamic.

The action is decent, with some impressive bits of vehicular mayhem, and Diaz showing she can still move. But I particularly liked Ginny – I can only presume Helen Mirren was unavailable, as it’s a clone of her character from RED – and her charmingly ineffectual toy boy, Nigel (Jamie Demetriou). They deserve a franchise of their own. No less than nineteen writers were involved in the script. This has to be close to a record, and to be honest, you can tell, especially in the final act. There, things tend to become awfully convenient, as everybody whizzes around London in pursuit of the MacGuffin. With a bloated budget estimated at over $200 million, I’m just glad it wasn’t my money. I’ll happily take advantage of the results, however. 

Dir: Seth Gordon
Star:Cameron Diaz, Jamie Foxx, Kyle Chandler, Glenn Close