Tag: USA

Miss Bala (2018)

  By

★★½
“Cultural appropriation”

As the lazy joke goes, I preferred this film the first time I saw it, when it was called… Well, actually, it was called Miss Bala then too, this being a remake in (mostly) English of the Mexican movie from 2011. Its remake status probably explains why both protagonist and cartel boss antagonist are American citizens: convenient to avoid those pesky subtitles, yet it also allows the director to avoid blaming poor, downtrodden Mexico – in an interview, she pinned the drug business on “American demand, and of course, American guns.” Calling that a gross simplification is an insult to gross simplifications.

It keeps a similar structure to the original, albeit with tweaks necessary to get a Yankee involved. Rather than a beauty pageant contestant herself, Gloria (Rodriguez) is a Los Angeles make-up artist visiting her friend in Tijuana. After witnessing a nightclub shoot-out after which her friend vanishes, and making an incredibly stupid decision to tell the first cop she sees about it (really, I’ve spent one weekend in Mexico and know better than that), she ends up under the thumb of Los Estrellas, a cartel run by Lino Esparza (Córdova) – hey, also brought up in America! After unwittingly dropping off a car-bomb that blows up a DEA safe-house, Gloria also ends up under the thumb of Brian Reich (Lauria), a federal agent who makes her operate as an undercover mole inside the gang.

When Chris discovered the director of this was responsible for Twilight, she paused and then asked with a concerned expression, “They’re not going to turn into sparkly vampires, are they?” Fortunately, they don’t. Yet the adjustment in story is almost as problematic, because it seriously weakens Gloria’s motivation to comply. Rather than having her direct family be threatened, it’s just some friend and her little brother; we’re given no reason to understand her desperate willingness to do anything to save them. There’s also the sudden transformation into a heavily-armed beauty queen at the end, where one quick session of “Fire at them from the pointy end” training apparently turns her into the evening-gown clad angel of death shown in the picture.

Hardwicke even complained the film’s poor reviews were due to male critics preferring the more passive heroine of the original. Uh, no. It’s more that the 2011 version didn’t go full Peppermint – and with less justification. It was because its original heroine was atypical which made it work better. The remake manages to reproduce the flaws, while weakening the best element: depicting the futility of struggling against immensely powerful forces on both sides of the law, which really don’t care, save for how they can use you for their own purposes. Depressing, maybe; yet it had a realism this version could use, wanting instead to be both empowering wish-fulfillment and gritty narcocinema. Hardwicke should have swallowed her faux-feminist outrage, and just given us 90 minutes of Rodriguez shooting shit up in a long dress.

Dir: Catherine Hardwicke
Star: Gina Rodriguez, Ismael Cruz Córdova, Matt Lauria, Ricardo Abarca

Killing Joan

  By

★★
“Eating crow.”

Joan Butler (Bernadette) is an enforcer for mob boss Frank (Foster), with a zero-tolerance policy for those who disrespect her – whether they are on her side or not. When this eventually causes some of her gang to turn on Joan, she’s brutally beaten to a pulp, and apparently killed. However, she rises from the dead, now a figure who lives in the darkness, and one who has acquired the power to manipulate shadows. She sets about her mission of revenge against Frank and those who killed her. This is much to the distress of her on/off boyfriend Anthony (Celigo), a social worker. But her feelings for him and desire to protect the unfortunates with whom he works, puts them all at risk, when Frank realizes they represent her weak spot.

There are worse films to rip-off than The Crow, and Bartoo is far from the first person to have gone down this route, even in the girls-with-guns genre: see also Mohawk and .357: Six Bullets for Revenge, for examples of the vengeful resurrectee. The problem is, taking as your inspiration a film which is widely regarded as a cult classic: what you produce is, almost inevitably, going to suffer in comparison. That’s certainly the case here, with most of the flaws coming from a script which can’t be bothered to offer any more than the halfest-assed of explanations for her resurrection. It also provides no internal consistency. At times, the reborn Joan is returned to ethereal form by light; at others, not so much. Even the shadow tendrils which are her power, are inexplicably absent in the film’s opening scene, a flash-forward of things to come.

It’s a bit of a shame, since the version of Joan with a pulse is actually a somewhat interesting character, who takes no guff from anyone – especially men. This comes off as a natural trait, probably essential for survival in her line of work. Yet the sense of sisterhood hinted at in the early scenes is rapidly abandoned, in preference for a series of eyebrow-raising twists, where we discover half the people in the film have mystical powers. It builds instead to a disappointing battle against Frank’s sidekick, Donna (Katarina Waters, who wrestled in WWE as Katie Lea Burchill), which is more a showcase for mediocre visual effects and poor fight choreography than anything. Then we get a crappy “love conquers all” finale, that the film singularly fails to pull off – The Heroic Trio, this definitely is not.

Bernadette is probably the best thing about this, and is certainly the only performance to make any impression. Though thanks to the writing, even she can only move the needle from irredeemably tedious to largely uninteresting. Amusingly, she seems to be making a career out of revenge-seeking vigilantes, since the actress can also be seen in the recent sequel, I Spit On Your Grave: Deja Vu, playing the daughter of original victim Jennifer Hills.

Dir: Todd Bartoo
Star: Jamie Bernadette, Teo Celigo, Erik Aude, David Carey Foster

Assassination Nation

  By

★★★½
“Girls just wanna have fun…”

I don’t often get political here. Really, I watch movies to escape from that kind of thing. But in this case, since the movie itself is basically a cinematic manifesto, I’m going to wade a little bit out into the cesspool of contemporary politics. You have been warned. :)

There’s something called “The paradox of tolerance” which I’ve been hearing about a lot over the past couple of years. This says that if a society is tolerant without limit, its ability to be tolerant will eventually be destroyed by the intolerant. This is frequently used by the left, for example, to justify punching Nazis (or those they say are Nazis): if you don’t stand up to the intolerant, it will destroy you. However, there’s a reason it’s called a paradox – because it makes no logical sense. To me, it is hypocrisy in action, demanding tolerance for the people you say deserve it, while refusing it to those you consider unworthy.

That’s what you have here. One cast member called it, “A war on toxic masculinity, at all costs.” The moral problem is, the cost shown here is little if any better: toxic feminism, if you like. The heroines are four teenage girls: Lily (Young), Sarah (Waterhouse), Bex (Nef) and Em (Abra), living in the town of Salem. Someone starts leaking the private data of citizens, beginning with the homophobic Mayor, who turns out to be thoroughly gay himself. He ends up committing suicide at a press conference, Budd Dwyer-style. That’s just the first case: half the townspeople are similarly exposed, and when the evidence points at Lily as the culprit, the witch-hunt goes into top gear, in a style more reminiscent of The Purge. If the girls are going to survive the night, they’ll need to fight fire with (gun)fire.

There are moments where the style overwhelms the substance. Sometimes, this isn’t a bad thing. A single take of a home invasion, shot from outside the house, and swooping around, up and down, is quite amazing and incredibly effective – it reminded me of Dario Argento at his best. On the other hand, a party where Levinson uses split-screen implodes into incoherent confusion. Truth be told, most of the scenes with the girls interacting with each other or their contemporaries, are a bit of a mess. This is far more on point when it offers a scathing critique of social media, and there are moments when it is refreshingly incorrect. For example, the introduction features a litany of “trigger warnings”, for everything from transphobia to the male gaze.

Of course, it isn’t as smart as it thinks it is, being a one-sided argument, apparently largely formed in a bubble of Occupy Democrat Facebook posts and /r/politics. I’ll admit, I rolled my eyes at things such as it taking place in Salem – ‘cos witch-hunts, y’get it? –  and that’s often the level of subtlety you get here. Still, this complete lack of nuance can only be admired, especially when it results in heroines who watch Delinquent Girl Boss: Worthless to Confess for fashion inspiration, as shown above. Politically, it may be highly problematic – though it had its moments, such as a trans character who is not used as a banner of the film-maker’s progressive attitudes. And it’s not so overbearing that I couldn’t appreciate its merits. Even from the point of view of my impeccably “male gaze”, it remained entertaining trash, though if you take any of it seriously, you’re probably making a huge mistake.

Dir: Sam Levinson
Star: Odessa Young, Suki Waterhouse, Hari Nef, Abra

Betrayed Women

  By

★★★
“You’re a nice guy, Mr. Darrell. But here’s the hitch. I ain’t a nice girl.”

First, let me just say: that poster is a true work of art. Seriously, how can anyone look at that and not want to see it? Even knowing there’s no possible way it could deliver on what is promised, it’s among my all-time favourite posters. With that out of the way, we’d better move on, since for a 70-minute film, there’s a great deal going on. Honey Blake (Michaels) becomes the latest inmate at the infamous State Prison, after her gangster boyfriend, “Baby Face”, is gunned down by the law. She’s there barely five minutes, before she’s getting put in solitary for back-talk, etc.

Also in the slammer is Nora Collins (Knudsen), who is due to be released in a couple of months, and is in a surreptitious relationship with prison inspector Jeff Darrell (Drake). He’s trying to improve the lot of the inmates, but is getting push-back from hard-bitten Head Matron Ballard. Finally among the prisoners, is Kate Morrison (Mathews), who holds the secret of where $50,000 in robbery loot is stashed. She’s none too pleased with Honey’s taunts about Kate’s boyfriend having just got married, but after bonding through the traditional cat-fight, the pair plan and execute a daring escape. Taken along as hostages are Nora and Jeff, along with Ballard – who proves to be singularly unsuited for a trek through the swamps, pursued by the authorities and their blood-hounds. Kate’s boyfriend is making a beeline for the same spot, so felons, escapees and the law are all on an inevitable collision course.

The critical and commercial success of Caged in 1950 (including three Oscar nominations), led to a slew of imitators in the years that followed. Most – including this one – were considerably cheaper and more down-market, but this one benefits from the fast pace mentioned above, and also a great central performance from Michaels. It’s obviously a product of its era, and so is considerably tamer than most of its ilk: there’s nothing here which would raise eyebrows even on the Lifetime network. [A WiP film the whole family can enjoy!] However, many of the genre tropes are still there: not just the cat-fight, also the lecherous guard and even a fire-hose, turned on Kate after a failed escape attempt.

Michaels is a joy to watch, and I’ll have to track down some of her other work. How can you resist titles like Wicked Women or Blonde Bait? Her impact here creeps up on you. It was only in the final showdown, as she hunkers down inside a farm-shed with her hostages, surrounded by the police that I realized two things. Firstly, I genuinely didn’t know if she was going to live, or go down in a blaze of glory like her lost love, Baby Face. Secondly, I actually cared about the outcome. And no, I’m not going to spoil it. The star retired from public life the following year, declining all interviews about her career in crime flicks, and eventually died, here in Phoenix, in 2007. Even then, she shunned the limelight, requesting no obituary or funeral service.

Dir: Edward L. Cahn
Star: Beverly Michaels, Carole Mathews, Peggy Knudsen, Tom Drake

Lady Psycho Killer

  By

★★½
“Teenage angst with a body-count.”

Ella (Daly) is a shy college student, whose psychology lecturer gives the class an unusual project: break a sexual norm. Unfortunately, Ella is rather confused about the intersection between sex and violence, in part because of genetics, for her father was a serial killer, before abandoning her pregnant mother (Heinrich). As a result, Ella’s attempt to carry out the assignment by auditioning at a strip-club, ends with her slitting the throat of the owner (Ron Jeremy, being appropriately grubby). This awakens the serial killer dormant inside her, and she starts taking out the sleazy men around her. The problem is nice guy Daniel (Andres), whose unwillingness to match her stereotypical opinions of masculinity, triggers further conflicting feelings in Ella, as her acts of murder become increasingly more blatant.

A lack of subtlety is also a problem when it comes to the film’s social commentary, though some credit is due for being a couple of years ahead of the #MeToo movement. Still, the almost constant use of voice-over as a narrative tool is lazily problematic, even if you can get past the ludicrous nature of the plot, or that Michael Madsen plays the least convincing college professor in movie history [Malcolm McDowell fares better as Ella’s creepy next-door neighbour]. The most interesting thing is perhaps the heroine’s relationship with her mother, which plays a little like a suburban version of Carrie, without the religious angle to the over-protective mom. I’d like to have seen this explored further.

Daly’s performance isn’t bad, having to cover a lot of emotional range from naively innocent to stone-cold killer, while also portraying the confusion of transforming from a girl into a woman. It’s a role that would challenge any actress, and hardly a surprise that Daly can’t quite convince across all the necessary aspects. She does fare better than the men in the script, who are given almost nothing to work with beyond “be creepy.” Perhaps this is intended as a sly commentary on the shallow depiction of female victims in many horror films? Let’s charitably assume that is indeed the case, though this could equally well just be more lazy writing.

For it is the script which hampers the film most of all, with almost every development triggering a roll of my eyes. What college professor would really hand out such an assignment? What cop would just let a confessed killer go, without any interrogation or further investigation, simply because a similar murder took place? What mother would affect little more than mild concern – especially, knowing her familial history- when her daughter comes home from a date, covered in blood? By coincidence, the day after seeing this, we re-watched American Psycho, a film which is clearly a significant influence on Oliver, in more than just its title (especially the original one, which omitted the word “Lady”). Its superiority is equally undeniable: he’d have benefited by learning a bit more from the source, especially in the area of writing.

Dir: Nathan Oliver
Star: Kate Daly, Dennis Andres, Meredith Heinrich, Josh Dolphin

Rogue One: A Star Wars Story

  By

★★★
“Girl with a ray-gun”

When this came out, all the way back in 2016 [so much has happened in the Star Wars universe since then and the way we regard LucasFilms…], it was met with a split reaction. Admittedly, the film never resulted in the kind of angry war that resulted from The Last Jedi the following year. While some praised Rogue One to the skies for being so different, dark and down-to-earth (some even went so far as to rank the film as the best movie of the series since A New Hope and The Empire Strikes Back, others – including myself – were more like: “…meh!”

This rather mixed reaction came after the entertaining roller-coaster ride The Force Awakens had provided. The more serious, less “fun” approach of RO made the new movie a much less-liked, some may even say “ignored”, entry in the new cycle of Disney-produced Star Wars movies. As usual, the truth lies somewhere in the middle. Personally, I was left cold by the movie, after having really enjoyed TFA. But, while RO has some real flaws in my humble opinion, and a problem in its basic conception, it is not a bad or mediocre movie. Just a flawed,”okayish” movie, and I’ll explain why I think so in more detail.

The story begins a couple of decades before the events of A New Hope. Scientist Galen Erso (Mads Mikkelsen) is recruited by the Empire through Director Orson Krennic (Ben Mendelsohn) to work on a new super weapon in development – which we all know today as the “Death Star”. Galen can’t refuse: he is abducted, his wife is killed during the kidnapping, and only his young daughter, Jyn, escapes.

Fast-forward to meet the now twenty-something Jyn Erso (Jones) again, as she is freed from prison by the Resistance. Together with spy Cassian Andor (Luna) and a couple of other misfits they meet along the way, they’re tasked to find out about that new deadly weapon in whose construction Jyn’s father was instrumental. That involves either freeing him from the Empire or, it’s implied, killing him so he cannot serve his masters any more. This could potentially pit Jyn against Cassian, though nothing is ever made of that interesting premise. As usual in Star Wars, it all ends in a big battle, this time, on and over the tropical island planet of Scarif. And [spoiler warning] this sees the surprising death of all the main characters, save those who will become main characters in its sequel, ANH, such as Leia, Darth Vader and Grand Moff Tarkin.

It doesn’t sound uninteresting but despite all the good points, there are also some serious flaws. For much of the time, the film is dragged down by expository scenes, flying from place A to B to accomplish this or that, getting another new character onto the ship and so on. It also suffers from the common bane of all prequels: telling a story nobody ever asked for, where we all already know the ending! What saves the film mainly, is the finale. Unlike the duo of Phil Lord and Christopher Miller on Solo, director Gareth Edwards wasn’t fired; his name is still attached to the movie. Yet there were reports about massive reshoots of the ending, by Tony Gilroy who also was responsible (together with Chris Weitz) for the screenplay. Certainly, the surprise introduction of Darth Vader into the plot and many snippets of scenes which were only in the trailers, seem to indicate the movie may have originally had a different direction.

This leads me to the subject of expectations. I recently saw a clip where some celebrity remembered an experience he had years before: “I saw Pulp Fiction in the cinema and in front of me were two teenagers who where definitely displeased by the movie, which I thought was great and original. On the way out, I overheard one of them say: “That must have been the worst Bruce Willis movie, I’ve ever seen!” That shows me, cinema has a lot to do with your expectations and your anticipation!”

That hits the nail right on the head, and I feel the same here. For some people RO was satisfying enough (or even great) because they got their “dark, gritty Star Wars-film”. Every fandom seems to have people who can accept something only if it is “dark and gritty”, which has led to some very unpleasant DC and James Bond movies in the past decade. However, I was disappointed, because I expected not only something very different, but also imagined a movie much better than the one I was served.

It all started with the trailer, that introduced us to Felicity Jones’ Jyn Erso like a hardened criminal in handcuffs with SW-regular Mon Mothma (Genevieve O’Reilly) listing off what seems to be Jyn’s juvenile record. Honestly, I wouldn’t have minded that at all, and would love to see a character like that in a SW movie. But they should have gone full throttle, and made her like Revy from Black Lagoon. Heck, make her the Snake Plissken of SW! But unfortunately, they didn’t do that.

Even her lines in the trailer: “This is a rebellion, isn’t it? So I rebel!” are just pretense: a hardness that is never proven, only claimed. But this line is also never said in the final movie. “Trailer-Jyn” seems to be a tough one, rejecting authority, while “Movie-Jyn” seems toned-down, and therefore quite a bit more bland. This had the potential to be highly interesting, and unfortunate that they never followed it up in the movie. For example, at the beginning we meet Cassian Andor: he shoots another spy who delivers vital information to him, fearing the comrade could endanger him by getting captured by Stormtroopers. You can think of many scenarios how Jyn and Cassian could work together, what kind of uneasy relationship they would establish. Cassian might be ready to kill her father – and potentially also Jyn when she causes trouble.

I do remember how my head-cinema went into overdrive when I heard Forest Whitaker’s voice in the trailer proclaiming: “What will you do when they break you? What… will you become…?” That really got my mind going, in combination with Jyn appearing in the trailer in a civil Imperial uniform. What could that mean? Would she go undercover, maybe for years to spy within the Empire? Leave her comrades and everyone she did know for good? Maybe figure as an elder version of herself in a future “Rey”-movie, or even turning out to be Rey’s mother? Remember, at this point I didn’t know anything at all about the upcoming movie. Would she have “Force powers” like Rey? Fall to the “dark side”? Perhaps, having been kicked around her whole life, she would decide that the “rebel scum” had no chance of winning at all, and join the Empire? After all, Telly Savalas was instrumental to the downfall of The Dirty Dozen, and this plot claimed to be cut from the same cloth.

Another ideaarose on hearing that Mads Mikkelsen would be cast as her father. Jyn having to decide between accomplishing her mission, which would mean killing him if he tried to stop her, or joining him because she wanted to be reunited with her father. [In today’s SJW-storytelling environment that kind of plot wouldn’t be very far-fetched anymore…] And when I heard Darth Vader was in the movie it became even more fascinating. Would she maybe fight him, with Force powers? Would Vader threaten to behead her father in front of her, if she didn’t give up? “What… will you become?” indeed!

Or, hearing about martial arts actor Donnie Yen playing Chirrut (whom I thought of as a blind Jedi master at that point), my head-cinema saw the first Kung Fu-based “Force fight” between Darth Vader and Yen (with Yen obviously losing, since we all know Vader is alive in ANH). See how many colourful and fascinating ideas a few trailers, pictures and cast announcements can generate in someone’s mind? And you can also understand how terribly disappointing the movie we were served, proved to be for someone like me.

Understand, that I’m always looking at things from a dramatic standpoint. I want great drama that has an impact on me as an ordinary cinemagoer. I find it deplorable when I see good story material, not living up to its potential. I somehow can’t help feel that in all the original shot material that was indicated in the trailers, a much better, more interesting and dramatic film is hiding. It’s one we are never going to see because it either was never assembled or that edit vanished in Disney’s cupboard. But maybe I’m just as delusional as those DC fans who still call for the “Snyder-cut” of Justice League…

My personal feeling is that, maybe the first version of the movie was too hard and uncompromising for Disney and Kathleen Kennedy. Or higher-ups above her decided they didn’t want to reject the dollars of the 12-year olds, resulting in a much more toned-down version that, frankly, appears tame and comparatively harmless. Remember, this was supposed to be the “war” movie of the SW-franchise. But if you want a “hard, dark and gritty war movie” than for heaven’s sake do it, don’t make something that’s only half-baked!

Even if I don’t look at Rogue One from the perspective of what it could or should have been, just from what could have been objectively expected, the film sits well below the bar. For example: you hire the original “Ghost Dog” as stepdad for Jyn, then don’t have him fight with a laser-sword in the big battle? You only give him a small supporting role, playing “exposition dwarf” for Jyn? Really? Same with Donnie Yen, whom I imagined doing so much more. Why even bother hiring a famous and well-beloved martial artist, then not using his abilities. That hardly makes sense.

But you have to wonder why somebody thought it would be a great idea to make a Star Wars film without the Force in the first place. Isn’t it the kind of wish-fulfillment that makes these movies partly so great? Instead, the approach of this movie makes as much sense for me as a James Bond movie without any gadgets (sorry, Mr. Craig!) or the second Wolverine movie, with the hero robbed of his quick-healing abilities.

I do understand that certain people love to make stories which are more “realistic”. Yet why are these people (screenwriters, directors, whatever) hired at all to make movies that are MEANT to be escapist fantasies? That just doesn’t gel with me. While acknowledging how successful the Nolan Batman movies were, I really think it’s time to return to the FANTASY in big fantastic movies. Embrace those aspects wholeheartedly, instead of always putting a tight leash on the stories, and showing the audience what a “grown-up” storyteller you are.

Then there is Darth Vader. He might be the most “beloved” villain in the SW-universe. But instead of showing what he may have been doing between Episodes 3 and 4, he is terribly underused in all the Kennedy productions. I do understand the character was brought into this at the last minute, and as fan-service goes, he does miracles – as shown by the reactions of SW fans when his involvement was announced. His role here is still too small, merely an after-thought to save a probably not too satisfying movie. If I had been a decision-maker on this movie, believe me, he would have been much more central to the storyline and made a much bigger impact on the heroine. There would definitely have been a face-to-…helmet battle against Whitaker / Yen / Jones in my version.

Then there are conceptual flaws. Another appearance by Peter Cushing might have looked like a great idea on paper. The actual CGI-translation looks quite awkward to me; not directly cringe-worthy, yet definitely “off”. Even more than 20 years after the death of this iconic character actor, his subtle facial expressions are still so deeply ingrained in our memories, that CGI-Tarkin appears almost a cartoon character. The impression is that the artists were so enthusiastic about what they could do, within a short period of time all possible expressions run over the character’s face. Less would have definitely been more here.

Another justified complaint is that the whole movie undermines the importance of Princess Leia (here, also played by CGI) in ANH. While we never did know exactly how Leia got the plans of the Death Star, the feeling was always that she put herself on the line and retrieved the important data despite much personal danger. RO kind of retcons this: Leia’s contribution to the whole operation is being handed over the disc, safely on her ship after it felt like hundreds of people had died to get it. That’s suboptimal, as a friend of mine would say.

That all sounds probably very negative. And yes, it is. But the above focuses only on what I thought were the shortcomings and flaws of the movie. It also has moments one can appreciate. I like Mads Mikkelsen who gave a surprisingly emotional performance. I find it always surprising how good some actors can be when cast against their usual image e.g. Christoph Waltz in Alita. Mikkelsen comes across as both a loving, caring father and a scientist with principles. It would have been so easy to make him the stereotypical villain of the piece, and the decision not to do that pays off greatly, especially compared to his terribly uninspired and bland performance in Doctor Strange.

Also, Ben Mendelsohn as Director Orson Krennic is a great casting choice. Looking like a younger Ian McKellen, Mendelsohn plays Krennic as an over-ambitious employee who is instrumental to the Empire’s power. But he never gets what he wants: neither Darth Vader nor Grand Moff Tarkin (changed here characterwise to accommodate the story), both higher in command, ever respect him or feel the need to grant his wishes. That makes the character actually more human. Sometimes even Empire officials have bad days.

I didn’t think much of Felicity Jones or her “brothers-in-arms”. While Jones is probably not a bad actress, there’s little to chew on acting-wise: a couple of moments here and there, such as when she meets her father again, and I like the way she moves. But Jyn Erso is under-served by the script; we needed to see more of her past in order to connect with her on an emotional level. As this didn’t happen, neither her death – as surprising it was to see in a Disney movie – nor those of the other combatants, had the emotional impact they should have.

Thinking back to other movies that dealt with a group of diverse misfits in an extreme situation, despite being over 130 minutes long, the big problem here is time. If you watch The Dirty Dozen, you see plenty of the protagonists preparing and bonding for their great mission, establishing a sense of who they are. A classic like The Magnificent Seven constantly gives you little snippets of how these characters react, telling enough to the audience about the characters that you care for them. Heck, even epic war movies of the past like The Longest Day or The Great Escape did better, despite it seeming half of all the actors in the world appeared in them. You could still make them out as characters, and care about their success or death.

In Rogue One… not much, unfortunately. The characters stay ciphers, almost interchangeable. What do we know much about Chirrut or Baze or Bodhi Rook? Nothing really. I’ve heard there’s a “Cassian Andor” TV series in the making; so that may change for him in the future. That’s too late, and should have happened in the movie. But while the movie underwhelms in so many respects, I say again: It’s not a bad movie, just one that for numerous reasons didn’t live up to its potential. Here are some of the moments I liked:

  • Forest Whitaker in his small role
  • comic relief robot K-2SO who is so much different from someone like C-3P0
  • the scene with Jyn and her father
  • Krennic facing Vader
  • the scene where Jyn and Cassian have to retrieve the disc “manually”
  • the fight above Scarif with the protection shield that makes it other spaceships impossible to gain entry
  • the last confrontation with Krennic
  • Darth Vader slicing and dicing his way through a tube full of unfortunate rebel soldiers
  • and of course the consequential ending, saving the film from a far worse fate.

I like it shows that sometimes, protagonists just die and don’t “get better” like Superman in his tomb. or their death is not real like “Agent Coulson” of the Marvel movies. Sometimes the price for success is to give your all; that can mean death and sacrifice. May I refer you to the much darker TV-pilot of the Battlestar Galactica reboot from 2004? And it is almost Solomonic that they all die, the Rogue One crew as well as Krennic, leaving the future fights to all the other characters. somewhere in the stars. That’s a fine storytelling attitude, though my Shakespeare-approved sensibilities are used to more impactful, dramatic storytelling than this could provide. Which may say more about me than the movie!

What is my final verdict? Despite definite flaws the movie has its qualities. It may be a “low-key” entry in the series but that’s fine. It doesn’t have to be “the big story” every time. Yes, thinking what it could potentially have been, makes me a bit sad. But all said and done, it’s watchable. Maybe you should see it separately, rather than together with all the other movies of the series. Ranking-wise it is less enjoyable than The Force Awakens but much much better than that terrible mess of The Last Jedi. You can easily watch Rogue One when you feel like watching a big SF movie. And it doesn’t even have to be on a rainy Saturday afternoon!

Dir: Gareth Edwards
Star:  Felicity Jones, Diego Luna, Ben Mendelsohn, Donnie Yen

Bad Grandmas

  By

★★
“Near-dead.”

There is entertainment value to be found even in bad movies. Bad action, horror and SF are sometimes just as amusing as the good stuff. But bad comedy is almost irredeemable: that’s why Mystery Science Theater 3000 rarely go there. Bad comedy just… sits there, dull and unamusing, almost worthless. And that’s what we have here. It’s a somewhat interesting idea, with some potential. Unfortunately, the execution – mostly in the script and direction – are so woefully inept that even the brave efforts of Florence Henderson, in her final film, aren’t enough to salvage it. And wasting the talents of Pam Grier needs to be some kind of cinematic capital offense.

Mimi (Henderson) is trying to help out her friend Bobbi (Wall), who is being thrown out of her house by an evil son-in-law. She goes to confront the perp, only for him to end up dead. She and her senior citizenette pals dispose of the body, hiding it in a freezer. But this just brings them to the attention of Harry (Reinhold), the local loan-shark to who the son-in-law owed two hundred grand. He kidnaps Bobbi, demanding the house or the money; Mimi is having none of that, and when Harry sends over an associate to collect, the henchmen ends up similarly dismembered and in the deep-freeze. Meanwhile, the local sheriff (Batinkoff) is also sniffing around, initially having been investigating Harry’s financial dealings.

Henderson does her best with material which seems designed to destroy any audience sympathy. For example, her first victim isn’t killed initially, and Mimi immediately stabs him in the heart to finish the job. I remind you: this film is supposedly a comedy. If it wanted to go this “dark passenger” route [and it includes an explicit reference to Dexter], that might have worked better, and I’d have been fine with it. Make Mimi a retired serial killer, former CIA operative or something to explain her apparent psychopathic tendencies. For the ease with which she slides from genteel retirement into cold-blooded dispatch is jarring and at odds with the light-hearted tone for which the film is aiming (and, largely, falling short).

A far more egregious complaint would be putting one of the godmothers of action heroineism, Grier, in a timid, mouse-like role, beneath a poorly-considered blonde wig, and giving her next to nothing to do. I know she’s in her late sixties, but that never stopped the similarly-aged Helen Mirren from letting rip in Red. I just breathed a sigh of relief on checking Pam’s filmography to discover she had appeared in other films since. Bad enough this was Henderson’s swan-song, we didn’t need it also to be that of an unquestioned icon like Grier. I sense where this is trying to go – something similar to the Bad Ass franchise, with its similarly mature cast of Dannys Glover and Trejo. However, that knew what to do with its characters, and made much better use of them than this, a well-intentioned failure.

Dir: Srikant Chellappa
Star: Florence Henderson, Randall Batinkoff, Judge Reinhold, Susie Wall

Atone

  By

★★
“atone: make amends or reparation.”

I mention the above for two reasons. Firstly, because Chris wondered why the film was called “At One”. Secondly, because when it finished, I turned to her and said those four little words which mean so much: “I can only apologize…” Yes, to use it in a sentence, I’ll be atoning for picking to watch this low-rent “Die Hard in a church” offering, for some time to come. [Though the following night, I had to sit through her choice of Justice League: paid back in full, I’d say…] There were a couple of aspects here that weren’t terrible; unfortunately, the overall execution was painfully close to… well, god awful seems the appropriate term here.

Laura Bishop (Fleming) is a former soldier, struggling to adapt back to civilian life. Through her father, she gets a job as a security guard in a local megachurch which is about to open. And what are the odds, she hasn’t even been able to complete new employee orientation before a group of terrorists, led by White (Short) storm into the building and take the employees, in particular Reverend Mark Shaw (Rusler), hostage. Worse still, Laura’s little daughter is also in the building, so she has to find and take care of the moppet, as well as fending off the terrorists.

This seems to be teetering on the edge of being a faith-based action-heroine pic, which is a rate, although not quite unique entity – The Trail comes to mind. These aspects are not too badly-handled: despite the setting, they’re mostly played fairly light, and I actually found the motivation of the chief villain quite refreshing. I say this to make it clear that I’m not slagging this off for its beliefs. Especially not when there are plenty of other, perfectly credible reasons to slag it off. The entire subplot involving her daughter, for example, makes no sense, and she just kinda wanders out of an emergency exit, largely forgotten thereafter. There’s also the bizarre “street fight club” of which Laura is a member, which forms the opening scene, and is never mentioned again.

It feels as if, for every step forward this takes, there are two back. Farrelly, better known as WWE’s Sheamus, shows up as one of the bad guys, and crosses himself every time he kills someone, which is the kind of endearing quirk that works. He and the heroine have a decent bathroom brawl. But then there are amateur digital effects, poor continuity and no sense at all of escalation, as well as villains who fall astonishingly short of even basic competence. The explanation about why Lauren has her PTSD, is held back until the very end, far too late for the viewer to care one whit. It’s all a jumbled, and worse, largely boring mess. They say the devil has all the best tunes. On the basis of this, he can likely also lay claim to the best girls-with-guns films as well.

Dir: Wes Miller
Star: Jaqueline Fleming, Robert Rusler, Columbus Short, Stephen Farrelly

Sheba, Baby

  By

★★★
“Neither claim on the top left of the poster are accurate.”

After the success of Coffy and Foxy Brown, Pam Grier continued her career with this not dissimilar blaxploitation flick, albeit one of a more restrained approach. Indeed, this received a ‘PG’ rating at the time of its release in April 1975, something modern ears would likely find shocking, considering the copious use of certain racial epithets deployed here. She plays private detective Sheba Shayne, who returns to her home town of Louisville from Chicago, after getting a telegram from her father’s business partner, Brick Williams (Stoker). He warns that her father (Challenger) is taking on some rough customers who are trying to force him into selling his company. Sheba, naturally, is having none of it, and when the police refuse to do much, starts working her way up the food-chain of scumbags, to the apex predator of The Man, who in this incarnation is Shark (Merrifield).

There’s not much here which could be described as particularly new or exciting. Indeed, I almost passed on the movie entirely, thinking I’d already seen it, but it appears I was confusing this with Friday Foster. That’s the thing about Grier’s career: she received only limited opportunities to break out from the ghetto of blaxploitation, and to some degree, her output is much of a muchness. Though at this point, there were precious few other areas of English-speaking media which allowed women to kick butt in the way she did. We were still in the era before Charlie’s Angels and Wonder Woman, albeit just – WW started the November after Sheba came out, and CA the following year.

For now, Grier was ploughing her own furrow in the vanguard of action heroines, and despite the generic nature of this offering (it was the final movie of Pam’s contract with American International Pictures), still represents okay value for money. It does gloss over the fact that Sheba’s Dad is little more than a kinder, gentler loan-shark, operating what appears to be a payday finance company, of the kind often described as “predatory” these days. It’s not even clear quite why Shark is so keen to take over the business. Fortunately, before becoming a Chicago PI, seems Sheba was a local cop. She still has some of the connections from that time – as a bonus, without having to worry about niceties like ‘due process’ or ‘police brutality’.

Even with the relatively low-key sex ‘n’ violence allowed by the PG rating [which would be “almost none” and “light”, compared to Grier’s previous offerings], it’s still fun to watch her in action. The highlight is likely her encounter with a “street entrepreneur” wearing a suit which looks more like an optical illusion. After he runs off, rather than answer her questions, she simply gets into the back of his pimpmobile and waits for him to return. It builds toward her sneaking onto Shark’s boat, jumping off it, sneaking back on, getting caught, escaping, and eventually chasing him through the Southern bayou on a jetski. It seems to have strayed in from Live and Let Die, and the cops seem remarkably unfazed by Sheba behaving in a manner more befitting Moby Dick, shall we say.

As noted at the top, this falls short of Grier’s best work, though is still better than Foster. It’s workmanlike, rather than impressive, and the restraint necessary for the certificate probably works against it. The words “family-friendly” and “blaxploitation” are clearly better off kept apart from each other, I suspect.

Dir: William Girdler
Star: Pam Grier, Austin Stoker, Rudy Challenger, Dick Merrifield

Johnnie Mae Gibson: FBI

  By

★★
“Not-so fair cop”

This 1986 TV movie was the first film made about an FBI agent while they were still active. Gibson was the fifth black female agent in the bureau’s history: she broke new ground by being the first such assigned to the Fugitive Matters department in the Miami branch, and was also the first to reach a supervisory level within the FBI. That would, however, be well after the story told in this film. It covers how she came to join the FBI, and her first major undercover operation, taking down a gun-running ring operated by ex-NFL star, Adam Prentice (Lawson). However, Gibson starts to find the lines between real-life and undercover work blurring, and begins feeling genuine affection for her target. This doesn’t sit well with her partner, TC (Rollins). If it sounds all very by the numbers… It is.

No less stereotypical are the other black men in Gibson’s life. Most notable are her sternly disciplinarian father, who thrashes Johnnie after she accepts a Thanksgiving gift on a surplus turkey from some white folks, and Marvin (Young), the husband she meets at college. The latter is thoroughly unimpressed when she announces – in a staggeringly clunky fashion, showing up in full uniform – that’s she going to join the police force. You can imagine his reaction to her becoming an FBI agent, and his perpetual whining is perhaps the film’s most annoying aspect. Though it has to be said, when it comes to caring for their daughter, Gibson is very much the absent mother.

All the background stuff is bounced over so quickly as to be little more than a parade of cliches. Yeah, we get it: she had to overcome some obstacles. Though based on the evidence here, racism wasn’t really one of them, and the way sexism is depicted has some flaws, for example when a fellow trainee at Quantico kicks her ass repeatedly in hand-to-hand training. For this begs an obvious question: would a criminal in the field go easy on an FBI agent trying to arrest them, because they were a woman? Of course not. From that viewpoint, this incident was actually less sexism than a reality check. It could have been welcomed as such, showing Johnnie she needs to use her brain rather than brawn, rather than a simplistic message of The Man Keeping A Woman Down (literally).

The undercover case is not much better in this department, trotting out the usual tropes before suddenly exploding into a gun-battle at the end, which even Gibson, in interviews at the time it was shown, noted was entirely fictional. The TV movie seems particularly guilty of trying to cram too much in, and would have been better served by focusing either on its subject’s journey to becoming an agent, or on her work thereafter. By attempting to cover both, it succeeds in covering neither adequately. While the subject is undeniably worthy, I can’t say that this treatment feels as if it does her justice.

Dir: Bill Duke
Star: Lynn Whitfield, William Allen Young, Howard Rollins, Richard Lawson