Tag: l

Lady With a Sword

  By

★★★
“Can’t argue with that title.”

This was originally titled after its heroine, but since that obviously wouldn’t work in the West, it was changed to become about as generic a title as you could get. Behind this is a decent little flick, which is also worthy of note, because it may be the first Shaw Brothers action film to be directed by a woman. Pao-Shu Kao had been an actress with the studio since 1958, but this ended up being her sole movie as director for Shaw, as she started her own company, Park Films, with her husband. But this, her debut, is the highest-rated on the IMDb of the eleven features she helmed, at a respectable 6.8.

The heroine is Feng Fei Fei (Ho), who gets distressing news when her nephew, Hu Tou (Meng) shows up. He narrowly escaped with his young life after he and his mother, Fei Fei’s sister, were set upon by brigands, with Mom being killed. Fei Fei isn’t having that, so immediately sets out to take revenge on those responsible. She tracks down the first one, but this is where things get awkward. Because it turns out he’s Chin Lien Pai (Nam), the scion of a family friend, and worse, is the person to whom Fei Fei has been betrothed since they were young. While it’s a bit vague on the details, I guess vengeance would bring dishonour to her relations. Or, at least, make subsequent family get-togethers more than a little uncomfortable.

The first half-hour of this is really good, likely peaking with a hellacious fight at a brothel, where Fei Fei takes on what appears to be the entire population of China. It’s also notable, because next door, Hu Tou is also fighting, and it’s quite impressive too. East Asian films, be they Chinese, Taiwanese or from Hong Kong tend to use kids as comic relief, and the results tend to be grating and irritating. Not so here, with Hu Tou taken seriously, and allowed to take part in battles that work because he uses quickness and agility, not strength. But it is mostly Ho’s film and she gets a slew of solid fights, including against her fiancé’s mother, defending her son.

Unfortunately, after the brothel brawl, the film does tend to become a bit chatty and, worse, spends too much time on Chin and the other bad guys. It may be an attempt by Kao to deepen the portrayal of the villains beyond the shallow. However, guess what? I don’t care. The original attack firmly cements them as murderous scum-bags who deserve to die, and nothing is going to change my mind on this, thank you very much. The only interesting section sees Chin’s parents sharply differ in reaction to their son’s crimes: Dad thinks it brings shame on the family, Mum (as noted above), not so much. Fortunately, the ending gets back to the fighting, though it’s disappointing how Fei Fei needs help. Entertaining enough, yet after how if began, it seems a lost opportunity. 

Dir: Pao-Shu Kao
Star: Lily Ho, Seok-hoon Nam, Hsieh Wang, Yuen-Man Meng
a.k.a. Feng Fei Fei

The Legend of Calamity Jane

  By

★★★½
“What the title says.”

Martha Jane Cannary Burke, a.k.a. “Calamity Jane” (1852-1903) was a lot of things. But most of all she was the inventor of her own legend. By the end of the 19th century, dime novels based off her alleged adventures already sold very well. Unfortunately, the foul-mouthed and constantly drunk former frontier woman could never benefit financially from her reputation, with which others earned good money. She died early, though already perceived as a legend of the “old West”. To divide which of the many stories told about her are true, and which are not, is a job for the historians, not mine. For a character who definitely provided a “fill in the gaps” hero’s template, it’s no surprise Calamity Jane soon became a mythic legend of the “Wild West”, combined with other illustrious characters of that time such as “Wild Bill” Hickok, Wyatt Earp, Doc Holliday, Billy the Kid and many others.

On the big screen, she has been portrayed by Jane Russell (The Paleface), Jean Arthur in The Plainsman, Doris Day in the beloved musical Calamity Jane, Angelica Huston (Buffalo Girls) and Ellen Barkin in Wild Bill (next to Jeff Bridges). On the small screen she could be seen, amongst others, in an episode of Bonanza, played by Stephanie Powers, and 3 seasons of Deadwood where Robin Weigert played a more modern and realistic version of her. As the Calamity Jane character is so prominent, and separate from the real person she once was, in a way similar to Robin Hood, the Musketeers, or Matthias Kohlhaas in Europe, it seemed only a matter of time until she would also find her way into an animated version of herself, which this series presents.

The Legend of Calamity Jane was a short-lived animated show that came out in 1997, a co-production of French TV channel Canal+ and The WB in America. The intent was to create something similar to the successful animated Batman show. Originally scheduled for 13 episodes, after just three weeks, the series vanished from the TV guides. While obviously not successful enough in the US, the full series ran as a dubbed version in several other countries. Over time, maybe partly due to not being available, the show developed a cult following.

Originally, Jennifer Jason Leigh was chosen to play Calamity, but for unknown reasons was replaced by Barbara Scarf, who does a good and satisfying job. Though remembering the roles Leigh played, and her subsequent role as an evil criminal in Tarantino’s western The Hateful Eight, one wonders how her Calamity Jane would have sounded. But then Calamity is a true blue hero here, so maybe Leigh wouldn’t really have fit this version of the character.

The show itself takes place around 1876 and is great fun. Calamity Jane is an adult, red-haired and green-eyed woman, with a whip that regularly comes in handy for dangerous situations. She is serious-minded and on the side of the law, meaning whenever help is needed, she will be there. She has a horse called Dakota and drinks milk (hey, what do you expect – it’s made for kids!). Always on her side is old Joe Presto (Welker) who can best be described as her comic sidekick, though sometimes comes across a bit simple-minded. Also, I sometimes had problems understanding his mumbling, though you get used to it. Of course, when you tell the story of Calamity Jane, Wild Bill Hickok is never far away. In real life she claimed that they were a couple in Deadwood. though according to historians, this could easily be another made-up story, as she was famous for doing. In this show, he helps her from time to time and is voiced by Clancy Brown (the Kurgan from Highlander).

The stories are one-offs, concluding at the end of each week, and Calamity usually has to deal with villains or other problems. For example, in the first episode, she prevents a war between the Comanches and the army; in another one she brokers peace between a racist settler and the Blackfoot tribe. Some villains can be quite nasty, although I don’t recall her killing any of them. But others are less confrontational. In one story, she meets her long-lost father, and in another, she has to deal with a young girl who has run away from home, and wants to become like her.

Overall, the stories are entertaining and different enough, so they never fall into a pattern or get boring. Of course, what I liked especially was action scenes which were above what you might expect from a show at the end of the 90s. There really was no reason why the show failed to find an audience in the US. It definitely could have stood alongside Batman, and I personally think there would have been a place for both, as each were their own thing. Fortunately, the series has now been made available on DVD and Blu-Ray. Here’s hoping Calamity will find many new fans.

Dir: Pascal Morelli
Star (voice): Barbara Scaff, Frank Welker, Clancy Brown, Michael Horse

Lady Outlaw

  By

★★★
“I’ve seen crazy before… And trouble always follows crazy.”

This low-budget Western does a lot of things right, but is not able to tie up all the loose ends in the final act. Most of which are ends that never needed to be loose in the first place. It takes place in 1890’s Oklahoma, when the gang of George ‘Bittercreek’ Newcomb (Henry) is trying to head back home. The gang includes a female outlaw, Rose Dunn (Butala), who is perhaps a little more moral than some members of the gang e.g. Tom, played by veteran villain Michael Ochotorena, this time covering up his impressive face tattoos. The situation comes to a head after Rose rescues a saloon girl, Ellie (Mattox), who just shot a man dead.

This won’t be the last woman Rose ends up saving, much to the chagrin of George. For they have enough trouble as is, being hunted by the dogged Marshal Hixon (Gillum). In an effort to shake the pursuers off, George and Rose head into Apache country, meaning they now also must deal with both no water and bad water. This seems a sequel of sorts to Mauser’s earlier Lady Lawman, which I haven’t seen – its protagonist seems to show up in an end-credit sequence. On the evidence here, I might have to check it out, because this is a decent character-driven piece. Although certainly chatty rather than shooty, it is largely interesting, especially courtesy of Ellie. She brings every scene she’s in to life, dragging the rest of the cast with her, if necessary. 

In particular, it’s as a result of her efforts that Dunn herself comes to life, after initially seeming like a bit of a stilted character. This may be intentional, a necessary survival technique in the otherwise all-male gang. Ellie brings Rose out of her shell, and by the ninety minute mark, we’d had a good arc for her, creating a fully rounded heroine, and a decent story. The problem is, the film runs 110 minutes. After forgetting about him in the middle, the film suddenly remembers Hixon, having to wrap up his story-line in a sequence which feels like an afterthought. There’s then an extended ending, and it seems equally tacked-on and unnecessary. This is definitely a case where less would have been more. 

There are a few gunfights, which provide the bulk of the action. These are marginally competent, and rather static, consisting mostly of people standing around while popping off shots at each other. The best sequence, for me, was the battle between Tom and Rose, a nasty bit of ground and pound, where both participants know only one is going to survive. The limitations on this front didn’t impact my interest, and until the final section, the performances and well-written dialogue held my attention effectively. There’s a lesson to be learned here for other low-budget filmmakers. If your foundation is solid, audiences will be willing to forgive the limited resources. 

Dir: Brett William Mauser
Star: Stars: Lisa Butala, Christopher Henry, Nicole Mattox, Wes Gillum

Lioness, season two

  By

★★★½
“Hold the lion…”

Interesting the title dropped the “Special Ops” prefix from the title for this series, necessitating a bit of a retro-fix on our season one review for consistency. The sophomore run is another solid television show. Between this and Yellowstone, it feels like Sheridan is the macho version of Shonda Rimes, creating television series that have a recognizable auteur feel to them. In Sheridan’s case, that means two-fisted tales,cbest enjoyed with a cigar and a glass of whiskey. That, in this case, it’s largely focused on female characters, does not make proceedings any less macho or two-fisted. This season certainly left me with a new, deeply held respect for attack helicopters. M134 Minigun go brrrrrr…

It’s the pilot of one such, Josie Carrillo (Rodriguez) who is recruited as this season’s Lioness. The reason is her family are deeply embedded in one of the Mexican cartels; in particular, her father is the chief accountant to the Los Tigres cartel, and her uncle is its leader. A dishonourable discharge is fabricated, and she’s sent back to her family. However, in a sharp change from season one, this is only a minor thread. Indeed, it’s only a few hours after her return that her father figures out what’s going on, and the surveillance team have to go in, guns blazing, to rescue Carrillo. It’s all painfully messy, and if there’s an overall theme in season 2, it’s that anything which can go wrong, will.

As a result, Joe McNamara (Saldaña), the CIA officer in charge of the Lioness program, and her boss Kaitlyn Meade (Kidman), spend much of the series trying to fight the resulting fires. The instigating event is the kidnapping of an American congresswoman by Los Tigres, whom Joe and her team have to rescue from over the border in Mexico. Though Meade and her ultimate boss, Secretary of State Edwin Mullins (Freeman), detect the hand of foreign powers behind the cartel’s actions. Which is why, eight episodes later, Joe and her team are sent to Iran, to stop two Chinese nuclear scientists from joining their weapons program. The message is clear. You think you can cross our border with impunity? That belief operates in both directions.

In between though, a lot of stuff goes bad, as Los Tigres are targeted. Not all the opposition is external either, with inter-agency cooperation notable by its absence, and a shady DEA agent whose loyalties are seriously in question. There’s bad intel thrown in too: what is supposed to be a cartel drug stash house ends up containing children, and a well-meaning attempt to rescue them fails spectacularly. The action scenes may be among the best on TV, especially the sequences book-ending this season. However, I felt there was rather too much political intrigue. I wouldn’t mind it in another show: you get a real sense of how different government departments fight each other, rather than working together. But it’s all time when we should be watching M134 Miniguns go brrrrrr.

Creator: Taylor Sheridan
Star: Zoe Saldaña, Nicole Kidman, Genesis Rodriguez, Morgan Freeman

Lady Scorpions

  By

★★★
“Growing old gracefully”

Cynthia Rothrock is 67 years old. That is considerably older than I am, and I consider it a victory if I manage to get out of bed in under ten minutes. I am certainly not kicking and punching my way through a slew of bad guys, in moderately convincing fashion. While this certainly has its flaws, it’s hard not to be impressed, especially for anyone familiar with Rothrock’s long career in action movies. Personally, I’m just glad she has moved on from the “erotic thriller” period of her career. Sixty-seven is too old for some things. But there’s also a passing of the torch here, introducing us to a potentially promising action actress in Caitlin Dechelle.

She was Gal Gadot’s main stunt double in Wonder Woman, and also doubled for Betty Gilpin in The Hunt. While still a little rough around the acting edges, you could certainly say the same about Rothrock’s early work, such as Yes, Madam. Here, she plays martial arts teacher Lacy Moore, who is estranged from her workaholic mother Alena (Rothrock). For several decades, Alena has been chasing after drug kingpin Lucien (Fahey), to no avail. He’s now ready to pass on the crown to his loose cannon offspring, Sonny (Manuel), After Alena interferes with Sonny’s activities, he decides to sideline her by kidnapping Lacy’s daughter, Ariel. Very poor judgment on his part I’d say. I suspect I need hardly bother outlining the rest of the film.

Though just in case there is someone who has never seen a film in this genre: Lacy reunites with Alena, and they team up to go after Sonny and rescue their mutual descendant. This involves them working their way through minor henchmen, until they extract Ariel’s location. There’s a rescue attempt, the duo get captured, we learn why Alena is so obsessed, they escape thanks to the help of a bad guy with a conscience, and the expected large fight ensues. There’s not much new here, and what there is, tends to be irritating. Del Castillo worked as a grip on a number of Tarantino films and it seems to have rubbed off, in the shape of inappropriate needle drops and villains who love the sound of their own voice.

In between the rolling of eyes these provoked, however, this has its moments. While it’s clear Rothrock won’t be scorpion kicking anyone, she has a grace and fluidity that’s inspiring. Or, would be, if only I could get up off this damn couch. Wisely, it’s left to Dechelle to do the heavy lifting in the action scenes, and she delivers, especially in a fight against fellow stuntwoman Mamyi Ithou, which I wanted to see go longer. I’ll admit to being a bit disappointed in the ending, since this goes from sixty to zero – more specifically, sixty to a “Six months later” caption – far too quickly. But it remains the best Rothrock vehicle I’ve seen in a while. If this is the way she chooses to go out, I’m fine with it.

Dir: Bruce Del Castillo
Star: Cynthia Rothrock, Caitlin Dechelle, Jeff Fahey, Jose Manuel

Louisiana Longshot, by Jana Deleon

  By

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

A Goodreads friend gave this novel (the first book in the author’s Miss Fortune Mysteries) five stars, which put it on my radar; and I downloaded the e-book edition when I discovered that it’s offered for free, as a teaser for the series. While my rating isn’t as high as my friend’s, and I didn’t expect that it would be, I did turn out to like the book somewhat more than I expected to.

Our protagonist and first-person narrator here is “Fortune” Redding. We’re not told her real first name (“Fortune” is the handle she’s used to answering to, but it’s indicated, well into the book, that it’s a nickname, short for “soldier of fortune”) or her exact age; but she’s worked for the CIA for eight or five years, depending on which figure we go with, since we’re given both in different places. (I took the first one to start with, so picture her as about 30, joining the Company just after college.) The affiliation was a natural one for her; her father, with whom she had a prickly relationship, was a top CIA agent, and after his death when she was 15, her remaining teen years were overseen by a couple of CIA officials, one of whom is now her boss. (Her mother had died years earlier.) She’s a seasoned assassin (of verified baddies), with a VERY long list of kills to her credit, and zero compunctions about her line of work. But she’s neither a psychopath nor a moral nihilist; on the contrary, she’s basically a kindhearted person (albeit an emotionally-constipated loner with no confidential friends), who sympathizes readily with those in danger and distress.

That trait got her in trouble on her latest mission. It wasn’t supposed to be a hit; she was simply posing as the glamorous mistress of a drug dealer, delivering money for him to a Middle Eastern crime boss. But (as we learn along with her, at the debriefing in the first chapter) her meeting was compromised by an unknown leak in the CIA, who’d tipped the bad guys off as to who she was. They’d decided to test the tip by setting up a situation where she’d have to act to try to rescue a 12-year-old sex trafficking victim, figuring that she could then easily be dealt with, since she’d come unarmed. Unhappily for them, Fortune’s quite adept at improvising a weapon when she has to; though she doesn’t care much for high heels, she dispatched the head honcho with a stiletto heel on the shoes she was wearing, and got away clean, presumably with the 12-year-old. (We learn about this only in a terse second-hand report; I’d have loved to read it in real time!) Now, the deceased’s brother Ahmad, also a big-time crime lord, has put her picture all over the Dark Web, with a million-dollar price on her head (ten million, if she can be delivered to him alive to be tortured).

If Ahmad can be taken out, the contract on her will be moot, but in the meantime, she needs to be stashed in a safe place –and one that can’t be compromised by the unidentified leaker. Luckily, her boss’ niece, librarian and former beauty queen Sandy-Sue Morrow, just inherited a house in Sinful (population 253) in the bayou country of southern Louisiana from a newly-dead aunt on her mother’s side. The two weren’t close; Sandy-Sue has never been to Sinful, and she has no social media presence due to a stalking incident years ago. With summer just starting, she’s scheduled to go down there to inventory the house’s contents and prepare it for sale. Before the very unwilling Fortune can say “culture shock,” her boss has packed the real Sandy-Sue off for a summer in Europe, and our heroine is in route to Louisiana to hide under this new identity. It’s only supposed to be through the summer months; and in a small, quiet southern community, nothing’s apt to go wrong, right? But the flooding caused by a recent hurricane unearthed and moved a lot of debris in the backwoods, and on Fortune’s first evening in town, the late aunt’s dog fishes a human bone out of the bayou behind the house. It proves to have belonged to a very wealthy, and universally hated, town resident who disappeared some five years ago….

As mysteries go, this one is not deep or in some respects very plausible, but it is entertaining. Despite the author’s use of a humorous tone in most of it –though it has its serious moments, some of them deadly so (literally!)– it’s not really an example of the “cozy” subgenre, nor even of the broader stream of more “genteel” who-dunnits in general. That tradition features more actual detection in terms of sifting physical clues and witness statements, and eschews directly-described physical violence. There’s little of the former here, and definitely some of the latter in the denouement. (Action-heroine fans may be pleasantly surprised to find that Fortune’s combat skills won’t necessarily have to go to waste in this new environment!) But the mystery of who killed Harvey Chicoran doesn’t necessarily have an immediately obvious solution (many characters, and no doubt readers, may assume that the widow did it –but did she?). There will be twists and turns in solving it, and Fortune’s involvement in that effort will provide her –and readers– with challenges, adventures, excitement and danger.

A weakness of the book is that a lot of the humor exaggerates the quirkiness and peculiarities of the Louisiana bayou country’s rural inhabitants to the point of caricature. It plays to stereotypes that too many urbanites have about the South, and rural people in general, which reflects culpable ignorance of cultures outside their own. Fortune herself is a prime example; she seriously wonders, for instance, if the community she’s going to has electricity. (Rolls eyes profusely.) She also has a tendency to reduce women with Sandy-Sue’s background to despised, stereotyped “Others.” Some characters, like the members of the Sinful Ladies Society (membership is only open to “old maids” or widows of 10 years standing, to avoid contamination by “silly man thinking”), are steeped in misandry, and Deleon views that as funny. This is mitigated to a degree by the fact that she’s native to the region (which I’ve visited) herself, does reveal some basic affection for it, and depicts it with some realistic local color; and by the fact that she does portray a couple of male characters positively. There are also a few inconsistencies that should have been caught and edited out.

On the positive side, this is a tautly paced book that keeps you turning pages, or in my case clicking frames (I read the first two-thirds of it in one sitting, and could and would have read it all if time had allowed!), with a tightly-compressed plot that unfolds in less than a week. Even if you disagree with some of Fortune’s attitudes, she is honestly likable, with a wryly humorous narrative voice that’s appealing (at least to this reader). She exhibits a willingness to look at herself and grow through exposure to new experience, which I like; and I appreciated the strong depiction of female friendship and loyalty. There’s a certain amount of bad language here, mostly of the h and d-word sort or vulgarisms, but not much profanity and no obscenity; and there’s no sexual content nor any romance at all (though I understand that a romance develops in subsequent books in the series). While Fortune describes herself, though not out loud, as a “heathen” (when she’s informed that everybody in Sinful who’s not one of the latter attends one of its two churches), and some humor based on the foibles of the church-goers, there’s no actual pushing of an anti-Christian agenda.

I only read this book as a diversion, because it was free; I don’t plan to follow the series. But I don’t regret making Fortune’s acquaintance, nor visiting her in her new-found community. :-)

Author: Jana Deleon
Publisher: Self-publihed; available through Amazon, both for Kindle and as a print book.
A version of this review previously appeared on Goodreads.

Love Lies Bleeding

  By

★★★
“‘Roids and rage.”

In a trans-continental coincidence, both Dieter and I ended up watching and writing our own, independent reviews of this. At least we agreed on the three-star rating!

Well, you might or might not like the way this ends… However, you certainly will remember it. Credit director/co-writer Glass for apparently deciding to live (or die) by the mantra, “Go big or go home.” Literally. It’s in line with a general feeling she doesn’t want to take the easy options at any point here. It doesn’t always work. Boy, does it not. However, I respect the approach. It takes place in a small New Mexico town towards the end of the eighties, where Lou (Stewart) is a gym manager, a lesbian and the estranged daughter of Lou Sr. (Harris). He is a gun-range owner with a very shady sideline in arms dealing, and a desert ravine into which his enemies vanish.

Things are upset by the arrival in town of Jackie Cleaver (O’Brien), a bodybuilder on her way to Vegas for a contest. The two begin a passionate affair, in which Lou also introduces Jackie to the dubious joys of steroid use (though I’m fairly certain these do not work in quite the way depicted here). Lou has another situation, in that her sister Beth is trapped in an abusive relationship with her husband. Jackie decides to take care of this problem for Lou. However, doing so causes more issues than it resolves, not least in that it brings down law enforcement heat on Lou Sr. as the most obvious suspect. Dad demands his daughter fix things, causing Lou to threaten to expose her father to authorities.

It’s all a very grubby take on the lesbian-noir genre, whose best-known example is probably Bound. Stewart seems consciously to be trying to break out of her Twilight reputation, though results so far have been mixed. At least this isn’t the Charlie’s Angels reboot, so for that, we thank her. It is not exactly subtle in its gender depictions: every single male depicted here is violent, though it’s interesting how Glass embraces the view that violence is the only solution, too. Though it’s complex: Jackie declines a gun, saying “Anyone can feel strong hiding behind a piece of metal. I prefer to know my own strength.” Let’s say, that’s not a position she maintains throughout.

O’Brian, who was a bodybuilder before turning to acting, and has a black belt in hapkido, certainly has the physical presence needed for the role. I was less convinced by Stewart, feeling as if her character was stuck in a permanent sulk. The failure to establish her as likeable leaves the relationship with Jackie feeling implausible: if Lou has hidden depths of appeal, they’re apparently buried at the bottom of the Marianas Trench. The decision to wander off, on a number of occasions, into territory closer to David Lynch than the Coen Brothers is one I would not have made, personally, and is likely to alienate a significant number of viewers. A straight (pun not intended) telling of the story would have been preferred. But you do you, Rose. You do you.

[Jim McLennan]

Today on the menu: Lesbian thrillers! Somehow this seems to become the new “trend-du-jour” as a new sub-genre. This year already saw the Ethan Coen-directed lesbian crime comedy Drive Away Dolls and the novel adaptation Eileen with Anne Hathaway. Lesbian-themed movies seem to have come a long way since movies such as Desert Hearts (1985), Thelma & Louise (1991; hey, stop, were these two actually lesbians?) or Fried Green Tomatoes (1991). The difference today is that films can be more direct in their depiction of whatever they want to show. Whether this is really an advantage, is up to the individual viewer. Rose Glass (Saint Maud) shows in her second theatrical movie that she can keep up with male directors of bloody thrillers. The film was a co-operation of British TV Channel 4 and American studio A24, which seems to be building a reputation for slow-burn horror movies.

Principally, the movie is a modern film noir (think Coen brother movies minus the humor). But it also could be called a film soleil, like the French 1980s subgenre of film noir, with most of the story playing in broad daylight. O’Brian and Stewart give good performances, which is satisfying because my usual problem with Stewart is that in most of her films, she almost seems like she is sleepwalking. But not here. I don’t have much to say about Ed Harris who is great and convincing in anything he plays. For me the secret star of the movie is Anna Baryshnikov (yes, the daughter of ballet dancer Mikhail) as the ill-fated ex lover of Stewart’s character.

The film has a strong sense of style, though for me it felt more like the mid-80s than the end-80s. A feeling of unhealthiness permeates the whole film, be it Stewart’s constant smoking (while listening to tapes telling her how unhealthy cigarettes are), the use of drugs to build up muscle tissue, or Ed Harris growing caterpillars and beetles. The relationships of the characters here, be they familiar or otherwise, also feel rotten. It’s definitely not the ideal family promoted by the Reagan administration in the 1980s (But then, in 1989 Bush Sr. was president).

It seeks to comment on the abnormal body cult of the eighties, the decade where hypertrophic heroes like Arnie, Sly and Dolph became big stars – though female bodybuilding is still a thing today (Julian Sands’ last movie before his untimely death dealt with the subject). Also, the characters here seem weird and far from sympathetic: everyone is sweating all the time, Harris with his long hair, Stewart looking as if she is permanently on drugs. They all look like people one wouldn’t necessarily want to meet. Then there is Jackie: while never directly said, it’s implied her erratic behavior is the result of the drugs that Lou gave her.

Glass doesn’t shy away from the ugly or disgusting. One of the first scenes show us Stewart cleaning a clogged toilet (remember the scandal when Hitchcock showed us a clean toilet in Psycho!). Later, we see a body whose jaw is broken into pieces, O’Brian vomiting up Stewart in a hallucination scene and Harris eating a horned beetle. If you are a fan of beautiful pictures this movie might not be for you! Some scenes reference typical Hitchcock or classical thriller suspense scenes, like Harris looking for his son-in-law in his flat while Stewart hides in the closet, or FBI agents interrogating Stewart, when there’s a corpse behind her couch

But not everything works: for example, Lou and Jackie hooking up so quickly was not very believable. But what do I know? I’m neither American nor was I out of puberty in 1989. At the same time I never thought that Jackie might be using Lou for her own advantage, as the movie wants me to believe. So, yes: the characters in the script needed more effort to work. Glass uses some interesting techniques to enhance the creepy atmosphere. Some scenes have a distortion effect with slow motion, very bright lights, coloring e.g. Harris filmed with a red light, and disturbing sound effects. Unfortunately, she spoils otherwise competent work with a final scene which feels as if it would fit better in a fifties sci-fi film than a thriller? Whose perspective is it supposed to be? It might have been meant as a feminist or lesbian empowerment message, but logically makes zero sense.

For me the big deal breaker is the end scene: After telling her father she is nothing like him, Lou completes a murder Jackie didn’t finish. In a way, she is indeed like her father: The same way he tried to protect her out of love, she protects her new found love. Not long ago The Marsh King’s Daughter showed a similar “like father like daughter” scenario. Not that I liked Lou much before: she appeared constantly angry, snappy, possessive, vindictive and irrational. But when she kills a virtually innocent person to secure her relationship, she becomes totally unsympathetic. Probably a great role for an actress but you cannot expect an audience to sympathize or even identify with such a character.

In classic Hollywood noirs, dark-hearted anti-heroes would pay for their crimes. Among many examples, Fred MacMurray getting shot for his sins by femme fatale Barbara Stanwyck in Billy Wilder’s classic Double Indemnity (1944). Heck, even Thelma and Louise paid with their lives for a more or less accidental killing. In modern films it seems if evil is done by women, film makers are reluctant to give them the punishment they deserve, and let them off the hook. I find such story-telling hypocritical and highly questionable: what message is being sent to an audience?

It is okay to commit crimes if you don’t get caught? Killing an innocent is justified in the name of love? Female characters should get off for crimes every man in every movie would be killed for? It seems to be a double standard – I just call it inequality. If you want equal treatment, take it all, including the negatives. No, cherry-picking allowed. Please don’t call me morally sour: I had for example no problem with that famed lesbian noir, Bound (1996), a film where “Love Lies Bleeding” stole some of its ideas from, directed by the Wachowskis. There, the two heroines got away with a murder and theft but they had to defend themselves from a mad angry mafioso. This is different and feels different.

Ah, you want to know about the sex scene? Unfortunately, there is hardly anything mentionable to see here. The short scene is quickly cut and over before you can blink. Audiences are better served erotically either with the aforementioned and superior, though less stylized Bound, or Italian giallo films of the 1970s which seemed more open to  showing sexuality or nudity than modern American movies. But what can you expect, with the new guidelines in movies which require “intimacy coordinators”, primarily so the production won’t be sued. I now feel a great need to watch Basic Instinct again!

So, what’s my conclusion? Well, the film is definitely watchable, a very stylish modern bloody film noir. And if you want to see a movie with lesbians or involving bodybuilding, you might not want to skip it. But its unsympathetic characters prohibit a second viewing or a whole-hearted recommendation from me.

[Dieter]

Dir: Rose Glass
Star: Kristen Stewart, Katy O’Brian, Ed Harris, Anna Baryshnikov

Legacy of the Lost, by Lindsey Sparks

  By

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

Cora Blackthorn’s teenage life has been severely hampered by an untreatable condition, which triggers a severe, painful reaction any time she has physical contact with another human being. She spends her live sequestered on Orcas Island, off the coast in the Pacific Northwest, but has found solace in the world of online gaming. Her mother, however, is a globe-trotting archaeologist, explorer and… well, let’s be honest, tomb raider. [Small letters, please, to avoid copyright suits] Then, Mom vanishes, the only clue being a cryptic package she sent back to her daughter. Cora now needs to come out of her seclusion, with the help of childhood friend, ex-soldier Raiden, and travel to Rome and the catacombs under the Vatican, in search of the truth about both what happened to her mother, as well as Cora’s own origins.

For, it turns out, there”s quite a lot going on. Top of the list is that Cora is not of this Earth, being an alien embryo, part of the race who were known in ancient history as Atlanteans. who was implanted in her mother after she stole it from an ancient Catholic order, the Custodes Veritatis, and is now coming into her ancestral talents, based on the genetic material from her ancestor, an Atlantean called Persephone, which include all of Persephone’s memories, and holy run-on sentence, Batman. Yeah, it’s a lot to swallow, both on the literary and story level, and Sparks leans heavily on not one, but two, writing clichés. Firstly, the mental link to Persephone, whose memories and abilities conveniently pop up when necessary to the plot; secondly, a journal left behind by Cora’s mom for her daughter, which explains exactly the amount of information required at that point. Cora trapped in a situation with no hope of escape? Oh, look: here comes Persephone, and/or an alien artifact to get her out of trouble.

It is kinda interesting to see Cora develop over the course of the novel, but it just does not feel like a natural arc: at times, she feels like a meat puppet, not operating of her own free will. The inevitable romantic angle with Raiden feels dutiful rather than organic, and he’s entirely abandoned for the final quarter of the book, having outlived his usefulness to the plot. There is a decent sense of place, with Sparks clearly having done her research regarding Rome, and when things are in motion, you do sense Cora being involved in a grand conspiracy beyond anything she could have imagined. Yet the clunky elements repeatedly derail this progress. I think the point at which I abandoned hope, was when Cora needed a detailed map of the Rome catacombs, and her online BFF, just so happened to have spent the past few years researching exactly this. I kept expecting BFF to be part of the Custodes Veritatis, or something to justify this outrageous leap. No such luck. At least not in this volume, and I won’t be engaging with future ones.

Author: Lindsey Sparks
Publisher: Rubus Pressg, available through Amazon, both as a paperback and an e-book
Book 1 of 4 in the Atlantis Legacy series.

Lady Whirlwind Against the Rangers

  By

★★½
“Gal force winds.”

Not to be confused, in the slightest bit, with Lady Whirlwind (though both Tubi and the IMDb do, affixing posters from it to their entries for this movie), it is a straightforward slice of chop-socky – with all that entails, both good and bad. The plot is simple in comparison to some. Lin Jo-Nan (Shang-Kuan) is the daughter of a law official, who tries to stop the salt hijacking operations of notorious bandit, Chang Piao (Kurata). After he refuses to let the criminals go, he’s framed and arrested. Jo-Nan and her little brother, Shao Lung (Yeh), try to take revenge on the bandit, but end up getting their butts kicked, so another, more subtle plan is clearly required.

This involves both siblings dressing as the opposite sex, with Jo-Nan getting a job as assistant foreman of a salt company. She gets her boss. Ma Wen (Ma) to agree to take the fight to Chang Piao, and hijack a few of his salt shipments. That gets her promoted to chief foreman, and the disgruntled man she replaces is ripe for recruitment on to Chang’s side. The section thereafter is likely the weakest, as the movie drifts into broad comedy, after someone discovers Jo-Nan’s true gender, and falls for her. Of course, as is usual in these things, the heroine is hardly convincing as a man, and the plot basically relies on everyone accepting her preferred pronouns without question. Though she at least has a short haircut to help the illusion.

Eventually, the core plot shows up again, with Chang Piao putting into action a plan to kill Ma Wen with a booby-trapped sculpture. Can anything then stop him from taking over? Well, you will likely not be surprised by the answer to that particular question. Though, again, it takes a while for Jo-Nan to get back into the action, after a brisk start where it seems like every scene is another battle for her. The annoying kid also falls into the category of “Things I could probably have used less of”, right down to the inevitable urine-based humour. His kidnapping does kick off the final battle, with Jo-Nan riding to the rescue, and storming Chang’s villa, where she has the inevitable final fight against him.

The kung-fu on view here is generally fine. Polly has a no-nonsense style, which fits in nicely with the larger opponents she has to battle, and it’s also apparent she’s doing all (or close to all) of her own work. Disappointingly, she ends up needing help to dispose of the main bad guy, from an undercover policeman, and the ending falls rather flat, without her getting to batter Chang Piao into oblivion. As kung-fu revenge flicks go, the way this finishes falls into the kinder, gentler, “let the law punish him appropriately” category, and that’s disappointing. However, the biggest problem is the lack of Polly-action in the middle, and your attention should be forgiven if it drifts elsewhere.

Dir: Cheng Hou
Star: Polly Shang-Kuan, Yasuaki Kurata, Chi Ma, Hsiao-Yi Yeh

A League of Their Own

  By

It has been a very quiet year for action heroine films. Here we sit, entering the sixth month of the year, and the only one of the top 100 movies in 2023 at the North American box-office I’ve reviewed here is Everything Everywhere All at Once – and that actually came out in April last year. [I’ll probably add Polite Society to the list shortly] There have been a couple of high-profile streaming titles, such as The Mother, and last week, I discovered the third series of La Reina Del Sur had hit Netflix. It made the top ten shows in the US, which is quite impressive. But it’ll take a few months for me to get through its 60 episodes.

Since there’s nothing new to “feature”, I decided to dip back into the archives and revisit some old reviews, which are in need of updating for one reason or another. I’m starting with League of Their Own. This is partly because it deserves more than the three hundred words it got when originally reviewed 20+ years ago, and partly because of the Amazon reboot into a TV series which came out (as we’ll see, a very apt phrase!) last year. I think my original review (below) was a little harsh, though it may be that I’ve changed since. Baseball is now an intrinsic part of my everyday life, especially during the summer, and I can perhaps appreciate the film that much more.

Indeed, of all the films about baseball – and there have been some classic – I’d rate League behind only The Natural overall. The latter captures the mythic, almost epic quality of the sport, but League simply sparkles in terms of story, characters and dialogue. Virtually everyone involved gives at or near career-best performances, and considering that includes Tom Hanks and Geena Davis, this is a high bar indeed. Hell, even Madonna is good, though it feels more as if the character was written for her, rather than she’s playing a role.

At its heart is the relationship between sisters Dottie (Davis) and Kit (Lori Petty). Kit has been overshadowed by her sister for her whole life, but can at least hold her own in the baseball arena. When the chance comes to play professionally, it’s Dottie the scout wants, but Kit who needs the opportunity, and convinces the scout to take them both. Thereafter, it’s partly about Kit trying to come out from under the shadow of her sister, but also coach Jimmy Dugan (Hanks) rediscovering his love for the game, and all the women proving the game they provide can be every bit as entertaining for spectators as the male version, even if the quality of play is lower]

[Diversion. The distinction between quality and entertainment was made clear to me over the past few months as I’ve followed the battle for Wrexham to get promotion from the fifth to the fourth tier of English football. The talent on view is not of Premier League quality, clearly. But the decisive contest against rivals Notts County – won 3-2 by Wrexham after their keeper saved a penalty in injury time – was the most dramatic and enthralling game of football I’ve ever watched. So, the appeal of the All-American Girls Professional Baseball League doesn’t need explaining, even if they’re not the major-leagues]

Writers Lowell Ganz and Babaloo Mandel do a remarkably good job of keeping all the threads of the story moving forward over the course of the season. Events culminate in the final game, where the two sisters face off, on different teams, for the championship. Dottie knows its her last game, since she’s going to quit and start a family. Kit, however, needs the win, for her self-esteem. It is, of course, Sports Cliche 1.0.1, with the title decided on the final play, Kit barreling into Dottie at home-plate. Yet it still works. Even the wraparound segments, which I disliked at the time, now seem to provide a suitable send-off for the characters we have grown to love over the preceding two hours. Hence, its rating is upgraded to a very solid ★★★★.

Then there’s Amazon’s League of Their Own. It’s basically unwatchable. I tried, trust me. But it takes a story that operated at the intersection of sports and humanity, and turns it into one firmly located on the cross-streets of sexuality and race. And that’s fine. It’s certainly a version which could be told about the AAGPBL. But it isn’t what I wanted to see, and it certainly shouldn’t have been called A League of Their Own, because that creates a set of expectations which the film is unable to fulfill, despite forcing in famous lines like “There’s no crying in baseball!” Call it Lesbians in the War Who Occasionally Play Baseball: that’d be a more accurate reflection of the show’s interests.

Even as that, it’s not very good. The CGI used during the baseball games is flat-out terrible: nobody involved here looks even slightly competent (an area where it differs radically from, say, GLOW). It’s also a thoroughly unconvincing rendition of the period. The dialogue, attitudes and even the incidental music, all appear to come from significantly later times, to the point why you wonder why they bothered setting it in in the forties at all. Turning a frothy and subtly empowering comedy-drama into a social commentary sledgehammer, where baseball is an escape from straight society, was never a good decision. At least the largely (and justifiably) forgotten 1993 series, for all its flaws, operated in the same thematic ballpark. Pun not intended.

None of which takes away in the slightest from the joys to be had in the original movie. We watched it last night, and never mind baseball, it has to be one of the best sports movies, regardless of gender, of all time. That’s probably because it’s a rare entity which works both in terms of its sport and without it. You could remove every scene of them playing baseball and you’d still have a thoroughly entertaining, if somewhat confusing, film. About an all-women bus tour of the Midwest, I guess. But the AAGPBL was an entity that certainly needed to be better known too, and A League of Their Own is the telling of their story which it deserves.

★★★½
“A chick flick with balls…and strikes.”

Deserving credit for being about the only female sports film of note, this is actually pretty good, despite a pointless and schmaltzy wraparound, which gives us nothing but some wrinkly baseball, one of Madonna’s least memorable songs and Geena Davis as a thoroughly unconvincing pensioner. Which is a shame; if the bread in the sandwich is stale, the meat is tasty and filling.

From 1943 to 1954, women played professional baseball, a fact largely forgotten until this film. Davis plays the star catcher, taken from the countryside to play ball – giving a new meaning to “farm team”, hohoho – along with her sister (Petty). The movie covers the first season, under a recovering alcoholic coach (Hanks), leading to a face-off between siblings in Game 7 of the championship.

Davis is excellent and entirely convincing (she’d go on to make final trials for the US 2000 Olympic archery team): the interplay between her and Hanks is great, and most of her team-mates are also true personalities. However, Madonna is superfluous, given the similar presence of Rosie O’Donnell [I’m struggling to avoid obvious jokes here]. Jon Lovitz steals the first quarter as an acidic scout, and it’s a shame when he leaves.

If the characters are great, there’s a lack of narrative drive; how can you get excited over playoffs, when it looks like every team qualifies? The friction between Davis and Petty vanishes for much of the movie, in favour of a series of entertaining but – being honest – unimportant diversions. When we reach the finale though, it’s great; ever bit as exciting as any World Series Game 7. And coming from an Arizona Diamondbacks fan, that’s praise indeed.

Dir: Penny Marshall
Star: Geena Davis, Lori Petty, Tom Hanks, Rosie O’Donnell