Last Blog On The Left

I´m gonna level with you here: I walked out of the theatre kind of disappointed after watching this one. I was definitely expecting more but that´s one of the dangers when Hollywood finally gets around to actually making one of those legendary scripts that´s been floating around for ten or fifteen years. I remember hearing about Robert Rodriguez´s “Predator”-script back in the 90´s and he dropped hints about in interviews and I sat there, foaming at the mouth, thinking “Jumpin´ Jesus Christ, that sounds like the greatest movie ever!” He mentioned that it took place on the Predator´s home planet and that either Schwarzenegger´s character or his brother was the lead character, something like that. He also said that you got to see how things worked on this planet.

Well, turns out that Robert Rodriguez is a big fat liar. Because you don´t get to see very much of this planet at all. And that´s what I was expecting! Ever since that sequence in “Alien VS. Predator”, where the Aliens attack that pyramid I´ve been thinking “That´s what I wanna see!” But now when we finally get a movie that´s set on this god damn planet the only thing we do get to see is the jungle and it looks exactly like ours, like in the first “Predator”.

But hey, I guess that´s also one of the good things: Predator is back in the jungle, for chrissakes! He´s not running around, fighting pizza delivery boys and Aliens in Small Town American sewer systems, he´s back in the jungle fighting soldiers! So I guess that this is one of those double edged swords that you hear about every now and then.

Here´s the story in broad strokes: Chosen for their different abilities, a group of individuals where some are trained to kill and some are not, must endeavor the alien race of predators that have set out to target them as prey. Dropped into the vast jungle of a distant world, these human predators must learn just who, or what, they are up against…

My one main objection with this set up would be that it takes too long to get going. If this were the first Predator movie released, the suspense would´ve been absolutely awesome and I would have absolutely flipped over it but honestly, this is a franchise we´re five movies into now so it´s pretty hard to recreate the same kind of tension that John McTiernan had going on in the original one. Maybe it can be done and god knows that Nimrod Antal tries here, but it just doesn´t work like that.

It´s not like it´s boring but to have a movie called “Predators”, which kind of suggests that you´re gonna go the Cameron route like he did with “Aliens” and create one of the all time greatest shoot ´em up-flicks, and then not have any Predators show up for at least 40 minutes? That´s just wrong, Nimrod! By the way, I wonder what it´s like going through life with a name like that? “Nimrod”? Fortunately, it worked out for this guy because like I said, they could´ve done a hell of a lot worse finding a guy to direct this one. Antal has proved himself to be a reliable director ever since his debut “Kontroll” (which I wrote about here) and the fantastic “Vacancy” (which is his best work to date, in my opinion). He kind of dropped the ball on his last flick, the heist-gone-wrong-story “Armored” but he still proved to have an appealing old school approach to the genre, which I hope he manages to maintain. Which is particularly pleasing in this one because when it becomes time for some of the action sequences, that means that because Antal approaches this like an 80´s movie it basically means that you can actually see what´s going on. It´s not filled with cuts that are so quick that they feel like they´re subliminal. Christ, it´s as if Michael Bay and his awful legacy on the film industry never occurred.

But anyway, instead of showing anything of how their planet and world order works, they reveal nothing at all so that they can keep on thinking about which direction they wanna go in future movies. The mythology is intact, so to speak. But I can´t help it, I wanna see more!

This is apparently a wild game preserve that our characters are dropped into and they have been handpicked by our old friends with the vagina-like faces because they have different talents that makes it a sport for the Predators to hunt and kill them, ok? But like I said, we´re five movies into the “Predators”-franchise now (or three unless you don´t count the ones where they squared off against the Aliens) and I think it´s time they blow the lid off of these creatures and their world. Here´s a list of things I´d like to see in the next movie:

• If one were to judge from the Predator´s weapon technology, they are pretty advanced, technologically speaking, which makes one wonder what their cities look like. I mean, we´ve seen what their holidays resorts look like (earth and the preserve in this one) so for the next one, I´d like to get a glimpse of their infrastructure, ok?

• Do these Predators work for a living? Since this is a wild life game preserve, I´m figuring this is something they do in their days off, right? What the hell are they up to when they´re not hunting elite soldiers in the shape of Adrian Brody and Laurence Fishburne?

• What else do they do for fun? Do these fuckers drink? Do they go online and download Predator-porn? I´d love to see a scene with a drunken barroom brawl between two Predators, fighting over some girl or something like that.

I really hope that this one make enough money so that the producers and the studio find it worth making at least a couple of more installments because as you can see, it´s pretty obvious that there´s more stuff to be mined from this mythology.

When it comes to the acting in this one, let´s just say that if we compare this to the last installment, we´re talking Oscar material here. I mean literally, because as you might remember Adrian Brody, who I guess plays the lead, did win an Oscar for “The Pianist”. Now, he isn´t the kind of guy you expect to show up in a movie like this but after the awful disaster that was “Giallo”, I say that anything goes. The great thing about Brody in this movie is that he´s not treating it like “Ha, ha, look at me! I´m an Academy Award Winner and I´m in a Predator movie!” Instead he´s taking it pretty seriously and he´s bulked up pretty good for this part so I´d say that he´s pretty believable as the silent, tough guy-type. But still… he´s Adrian Brody so when he´s next to Danny Trejo in a scene, there´s no doubting which one of them would win if push came to shove, ok? But all around, they managed to get some pretty good actors in there. Alice Braga from “Redbelt” is there as well, so I´m not complaining.

All in all, this is an above average action movie, it´s just that I had certain expectations that it didn´t live up to. But I really hope that Rodriguez gets to produce the next one, as well. The lean-mean approach they took with this one really works, with no subplots and shit like that. I´m glad that someone learned something from the abomination that was “Alien VS. Predators: Requiem”.

Until next time: take scare!

Thomas

Imagine that you´re going to an old friend, it´s Saturday night, you´ve bought more than enough booze and beer, and the people that´s coming to your friend´s party are all people you know and like. These are people you haven´t seen in a while because most of them have gotten kids or moved but you used to hang out quite a lot back in the day. These are people who you share the same taste in music with, the same political sensibilities and like the same movies. In other words: old pals! Now, imagine that this evening comes off exactly like you imagined: everyone had a blast, everyone got shitfaced and everyone sang along to the songs that played on the stereo. If “The Expendables” were a party, that´s exactly the kind of party it would be!

This is the action movie event of the year, hell, probably the decade for all I know and I´m sure that no one has missed the fact that this movie opened this weekend. I´ll admit that I had my fair share of trepidation when I walked into the theatre because how the hell could this movie live up to the hype? Really, was it even possible? Well, as it turns out, it is! I´ll admit that I didn´t have that “Holy shit, what the hell is going on”-experience I had when I saw “Rambo” on opening day but let´s be fair here, there´s no way in hell that when it comes to action sequences that that movie will ever be topped. This is a different kind of beast, yet it is very obvious that both these movies have sprung from the mind of Sylvester Stallone.

I´m not gonna bore you with the story because I´m sure you all know what it´s about (a group of mercenaries take on an evil dictator), but it´s the sequences that surround the action set pieces that makes this kind of unique in today´s action movie landscape. It is unique in that it is essentially a throwback to the kind of action movies we grew up with. You see, this is a movie about men. It´s about men, made by men and aimed squarely at men, boys, guys, dudes, whatever! If it were scientifically possible to transfer pure testosterone onto celluloid, this is what it would look like.

But you know, like I mentioned it´s the more quiet scenes that gives the movie its depth. Now, when I say “depth”, I´m not talking Bergman-like despair here, ok? But just like in “Rocky Balboa”, Stallone is preoccupied with what life does to men, particularly men of action and violence. How does it affect you to be the source of and witness to such cruelty as Stallone´s character, Barney, is? Well, one of my favorite scenes of the film is when he has a conversation with his old friend Tool and they discuss this matter in their own macho kind of way. This could have been a pretty bad scene that would have served as nothing but a segue into the next action scene but as faith would have it, this guy Tool is played by none other than Mickey Rourke, so you see… It´s pretty fantastic, if you know what I mean.

Man, I just love how Mickey Rourke looks these days. I mean, no matter what he´ll do, no matter how much he´ll try there´s no hiding this guy´s emotional scars from the many beatings he´s taken in life and it´s exactly in these kind of roles that they´re put to perfect use. But unless you slept your way through “The Wrestler” you already know this.

I have to say that I was pretty impressed with the way that Stallone managed to make every single member of The Expendables hard as hell, although it does feel like some of Randy Couture´s scenes may have ended up on the cutting room floor, but that´s probably a good thing. Randy “The Natural” Couture may be the toughest of the bunch in real life but it´s pretty obvious that the guy is not a professional actor.

However, when I say that every one of The Expendables is “hard as hell”, that´s a truth with some modification to it because if we´re gonna be honest: Jet Li? No matter how hard he´ll try, he´s never gonna be “hard” in that macho kind of way that a guy like Stone Cold Steve Austin or Dolph Lundgren is, even when they´re sleeping. But at least, Stallone is aware of this and instead uses Li for what he´s good at, which is jumping all around the place and kicking the shit out of people.

I would have loved to see more of Gary Daniel´s henchman character, though. He does a pretty good job of snarling his way through the movie and the fight scene he has is one of the best I´ve seen in many years.

I´m not even gonna try to say that this was a movie that I watched objectively. If this would have turned out to suck, I think that I just would have lied and told everyone I liked it anyway. You know, kind of like if that party I compared it to at the beginning had sucked, when people would have asked how it was you don´t wanna admit that you´ve grown apart as friends and that you don´t have that much in common any longer and that it was an awful evening, right? You would´ve just said “Fine!” That´s what I was fearing with this movie: what if Stallone doesn´t have “it” any longer? What if this is just his way of cashing in on his newly regained box office respectability, after “Rocky Balboa” and “Rambo”? Well, fortunately the old man knows exactly how to construct a ripping action yarn.

If there´s one thing I didn´t enjoy with the movie, it´s the fact that Stallone does have a tendency to let the cuts come a bit too quickly in the fighting scenes. I would have liked it if the camera would have been allowed to rest longer on the actors but hey, at least it´s not Michael Bay we´re talking here! It´s not that bad.

As great as it is to see all of these guys together on screen, I have to say that it´s a little greater to see some more than others. Naturally, I´m talking about Dolph Lundgren! It´s about frickin´ time that this guy appears on the big screen again. Now, I am a Swede just as Dolph but honestly, if there´s one actor out there who deserves to be rescued from the straight-to-DVD-trenches, it´s Dolph goddamn Lundgren! I mean, look at this guy´s face! It´s like his genes were constructed to do one thing and one thing only and that is to star in action movies and the older he gets the more brutal he looks. I thought that he delivered a fantastic performance in the latest “Universal Soldier” movie, where he came across as almost sort of a Frankenstein´s monster of a man and I would love to see him do more roles where he plays on this newfound ruggedness.

Now, I haven´t even mentioned that scene. You know which one I´m talking about, the one featuring a certain bald headed actor and a certain governor of California. Well, it´s pretty funny to see the three of them together on screen and the great thing is that Stallone has actually managed to not make it feel contrived or forced and even manages to get a laugh in there, as well. Which is another thing I appreciated about the film: it´s got a lot of humor in it but wisely, it is grounded in how the characters behave and not in the kind of wisecracks or one liners that we´re mostly used to.

This is basically the kind of movie that you get drunk while watching, or at least you wanna get drunk after having watched it, as I did. I can promise that I won´t have more fun at the cinema this year than I did while watching this one. You gotta be reminded every now and again that it´s pretty good to be a man so thanks for that, Stallone!

Until next time: take scare!

Thomas

Ok, so Mel Gibson´s apparently lost his marbles. I think we can all agree on that. I don´t who I would recommend he´d see first, a therapist or an exorcist (judging from that heavy breathing on one of those recordings that´s doing the rounds on the internet) but it´s pretty obvious that the guy needs some help. But I´ve been thinking a lot about how will this affect his career? Is it over? Will he be able to direct in the future or has he flushed that part of his career down the drain, as well? And more importantly, how will this affect the way we watch the movies he´s already made from here on out? Will we be able to enjoy the “Lethal Weapon” movies in the future where Gibson plays an unhinged character as Martin Riggs, when he´s clearly pretty unhinged in real life, as well? How about “Mad Max”? Is it possible to enjoy a guy´s movies after you´ve heard him threaten his wife that he´ll “put her in a rose garden, because I´m capable”?

Well, I think you can but it clearly changes things. Which is a goddamn shame because “Edge of Darkness” is a pretty solid thriller and Mel Gibson is back on form as the kind of stoic, resolute character we´re used of seeing him as. Gibson plays Thomas Craven, a single father and a Boston homicide detective. His 24-year-old daughter Emma, his only child, is killed on the front steps of his home. At first it appears that Craven was the intended target but pretty soon he discovers that his daughter was the one they were aiming for…

This basically means that we get to see Mel Gibson do what he does best in movies: threaten guys and beat them up, while gathering information. Hey, remember “Payback”? I´m not sure if you aware of this but it has been scientifically proven that “Payback” is in fact one of the best action movies of the last 20 years. I don´t care which version you watch, the theatrical one (which apparently Gibson took control over, which would explain a prolonged torture scene where the bad guys crushes his feet) or the director´s cut “Straight up”-one, they´re both fantastic!

And even though “Edge of Darkness” is in no way close to rivaling that movie´s in the departments of bad ass-ery and hardboiled-edness, this is still the closest thing Gibson has come to it since then. And that my friends, is a good thing. A very good thing…

You see, this is the kind of action movies they don´t make that many of nowadays. It´s a pretty somber story and surprisingly “slow”-paced. I put “slow” within quotation marks because I myself didn´t find it to be slow but I´m pretty sure that some of you out there will find it that. If you do, I don´t know what to tell you other than that you are clearly wrong.

The director Martin Campbell is one of those guys that I haven´t paid too much attention to, due to the fact that besides directing one of the best Bond movies ever, “Casino Royale”, he´s also the man responsible for such movies as “Vertical Limit” and the unbelievably awful “Zorro”-sequel. But after watching this one, I actually suspect that this guy is one of the best action directors out there today. That scene at the opening of “Casino Royale”, where Bond beat the hell out of a guy in a bathroom was spectacular and there´s a great, little scene like that in this one where Gibson goes to question his daughter´s boyfriend, where he makes use of what´s available to him in the room in order to beat the crap out of the guy.

But still, while watching this one it´s impossible to not think of the fact that this guy, Mel Gibson who once was Martin Riggs to the whole world and whose movies you enjoyed is now the same guy who´s shouting “I need a womaaaaaaan! A real womaaaaaan!” on those tapes. And that makes it pretty hard to enjoy a movie starring him, which sucks pretty hard because I think that this is the best Gibson has been in ages. I don´t know what he´s been up to these last couple of years but it sure as hell has taken its toll on him. Gibson is one of the few actors out there who actually looks his age and all that drunk driving and other mischief clearly shows in the lines of his face. And it´s fantastic! He´s got that gravelly voice now, as well, which every action movie star should have. Gibson looks and sounds fantastic, I think.

But it´s still with a weird sensation of guilt that I watched and enjoyed this movie. Are you supposed to enjoy a movie starring someone who is clearly unwell in the mental department and is heard threatening the life of his girlfriend on tape? Is it possible to separate the art from the artist? I personally don´t think that you can. You can still enjoy the works of someone demented on some sort of level but the fact that this has been created by someone who is clearly in poor mental health, will always be looming over you. And let´s face it, Mel Gibson has used up whatever amount of goodwill he may have possessed in the past. Which is why, if you attempt to recommend this movie to someone you may be exposed to some weird looks and remarks like “Do you mean the one starring Mel Gibson? That insane fucker? Did you actually like that one?” Just be prepared that this may happen. Which is a shame, because like I mentioned earlier this is one of the best action movies I´ve seen in a long time! It reminded me of a 70´s movie in the way that it actually takes its time to tell an exciting and interesting story, instead of just catapulting itself into the next set piece after the other.

Seeing as Gibson has ruined his career, this may very well be the last movie we see him starring in and if that´s the case I think he should be pleased with himself. In a way it kind of reminded me of Clint Eastwood´s swan song “Gran Torino” in that it has that somber vibe to it and it´s got kind of a fitting ending, if it does turn out to be Gibson´s last foray into the action genre.

You should definitely check this one out. It´s a keeper and if you don´t like, you need to stop watching those Michael Bay-movies because this is how it´s done…

Until next time: take scare!

Thomas

It´s time to make a stand for everything that is good here in our rotten world again, friends. In this case all that happens to be good about our world is spelled John Landis and “Innocent Blood”. When this one was released back in 1992, it was pretty much universally lambasted for being a failure. Critics were disappointed, to say the least. I guess that I could understand them being that this was made by the director who made the werewolf classic “An American Werewolf in London” so when this guy was gonna tackle the vampire genre, everyone was getting a hard on just by the thought of it. Then everyone was all sad and blue when it was released because it didn´t live up to their expectations. Well, boo-fucking-hoo, I say! You see, I was around thirteen when this one was released and thought that it was fantastic. But the thing is that I hadn´t seen this movie since then, until I finally got around to ordering the German DVD (it´s the only one released in widescreen) and sat down to watch it the other night.

It´s always something of a gamble when you´re gonna re-visit one of these childhood favorites. Chances are that you´re gonna agree with everyone that kept calling you stupid as a kid because most of the times those movies you liked turn out to be pretty crappy, so you end up sitting there thinking “Christ, they were right! I must´ve been pretty stupid to like this movie, because this really blows!”

Well, in this case I had the exact opposite experience. This movie was actually better than I remember it being. And do you know why that is? Because John Landis is a genius and his take on vampirism is pretty goddamn funny, that´s why! And gory!

Marie (Anne Parillaud) is a vampire, making her rounds in a wintry Chicago. But she´s not your ordinary kind of vampire. She´s the kind that has a conscience, which means that she tries to limit her throat-sucking to the criminal denizens of her city. Everything´s hunky dory until two problems come up, she is interrupted while feeding on Sal “the shark” Macelli (Robert Loggia) and she begins to develop a relationship with Joe Gennaro (Anthony LaPaglia), the policeman who has been trying to put Sal away. Sal wakes up in the morgue very confused and very thirsty. He goes back to his old haunts and begins to create an organized crime family of vampires while Marie and her policeman lover decide to hunt him down.

Did I mention that Marie also has quite an appetite for sex? That´s right, just like all good vampires she doesn´t only crave blood. Do you hear that, “Twilight”? That´s why it´s such fun to re-visit this movie because it´s a hell of a lot more gorier than I remember it being and in the first five minutes we´ve also been treated to the wonderful sight of Anne Parillaud walking around her bedroom, in her birthday suit! We´re talking full frontal here and tell me, how can you not like a movie that opens this way?

This is one underrated film we´ve got here, friends. We all know the state of vampires these days with young girls fawning over R-Pattz or whatever the hell they call him today, which is why this movie makes me nostalgic for the vampires of yesteryear. Remember when vampires actually did some killing whenever they showed up in a movie? Hey, it sounds crazy, kids, but that´s what they did! In this one they don´t sparkle in the sunlight, oh no, sir! You see, this Marie gal can be pretty vicious when she sets her mind to it and that´s why her attacks are among the highlights of the film. They´re pretty brutal, especially by today´s standards.

And you know what else I love about John Landis´ movies? It´s because they seem designed to be one and one thing only: fun! And this one is no exception. To see Italian gangsters run around, taking big chomps out of each other´s necks is pretty hilarious. Kind of makes me wonder why the hell no one ever came up with the idea of vampire gangsters before this movie. Especially since Robert Loggia seems to be born to play this part. He really lets it rip as the mob boss. The scene where he wakes up at the morgue is particularly funny. He kind of does the same schtick here that he would later hone to perfection on David Lynch´s “Lost Highway”, when he played that gangster boss with a severe case of road rage.

And you know, since this is a John Landis movie we also get the obligatory slew of cameos from different directors and other faces familiar to horror fans. In this one we get Sam Raimi as guy who works at a meat packing plant, Dario Argento as a paramedic, Michael Ritchie as a night watchman, Linnea Quigley as a nurse, Frank Oz as a pathologist and Forrest J. Ackerman as a guy who gets his car stolen. That´s always fun with Landis´ movies: to spot the different cameos. I know, it´s nerdy, but I admit it: I wear my badge of nerdiness with pride.

But except for the cameos, it´s a pretty impressive cast: Chazz Palminteri plays Loggia´s right hand man, Don Rickles plays the mobster´s lawyer, David Proval is in there, as well as Tony Sirico who played Tony Walnuts on “The Sopranos”. It´s kind of fun to see these guys who usually show up in mob movies directed by Scorsese, send up their image in this way.

And you know, since this is a movie from 1992 we´re talking about here, do you know what the best thing about it is? No goddamn CGI! That´s right, folks! None whatsoever. I know that that sounds pretty unbelievable but that´s how they made films back then: just practical effects. This means that when the blood starts to flow, it really flows here. Landis isn´t holding back here. Imagine that they got away with this back then: a vampire comedy with an R rating? Fantastic.

It´s obvious that Landis himself is a fan boy, as well. He shows his dedication to the genre by almost always having some old horror movie showing in the background and constantly paying tribute to other films. That doesn´t mean that he´s afraid to mix it up a bit when it comes to the vampire conventions, though. The vampires in this one doesn´t need a wooden stake through the heart in order to die. Landis shows a couple of times that regular bullets will suffice more than well. They also have a reflection whenever they look in the mirror. Garlic, however, is still a problem for them. We´re also shown in one of the best scenes of the movie that sunlight still pack a punch.

I kinda appreciate this approach to making a vampire movie. I think it makes it more fun if you deviate somewhat from the standard rules and conventions. But like I said, that does not mean that you should turn the vampires in the sobbing emo kids who sparkle when they´re exposed to sunlight, ok?

So let´s just ignore the fact that Anne Parillaud may not be the best actress in the world, ok? At least not when she´s forced to speak her lines in English, which isn´t her native tongue, then she sounds a bit stilted. She was fantastic in “Nikita” but she isn´t the most charismatic vampire in this one but I´ll take her over Bella any day. But let´s ignore that and concentrate on the fact that this may be one of the last truly entertaining vampire films ever produced. So thanks for that, John Landis!

Until next time: take scare!

Thomas

I always enjoy a good summer-movie-action-extravaganza. Don´t we all? That´s why I dragged my scarred, old body to the theatre the other today so I could catch this summer´s first action blockbuster, “The A-Team”. I didn´t have my hopes set too high but I was expecting a little more than the usual Michael Bay-crap, since it´s Joe Carnahan that was sitting in the director chair on this one. Carnahan was responsible for the fairly enjoyable “Smokin´ Aces” and the fantastic “Narc”, so chances was that this one was actually gonna be pretty good. Other than that, you also got Liam Neeson in the role of Hannibal Smith, Sharlto Copley (the guy from “District 9”) as Murdoch and Bradley Cooper as Face. These three guys´ performances are pretty decent. But the first mistake of “The A-Team” is that they instead of just hiring Mr. T again, is that they brought in this guy, Quinton “Rampage” Jackson, to play B.A. Baracus. I wasn´t familiar with this guy but apparently he´s some sort of mixed martial artist or whatever. I have no idea what “mixed” means. Maybe he´s feeling a bit confused about his choice to compete in martial arts? Is his emotional life in upheaval? Honestly, I have no idea.

But anyway, this guy is no actor, I think we can all agree on that and even though a guy like Liam Neeson isn´t exactly stretching his acting muscles in a movie like this, it´s pretty apparent that he belongs in a different league. But maybe it´s wrong of me to complain about a thing like this ´cuz after all, this is “The A-Team”, not Shakespeare, right? But you know, it wasn´t that long ago that I saw one of those infomercials that Mr. T has done where he´s selling his own grill or whatever the hell it is and the weird thing is that the guy looks exactly like he did 20 years ago! Apparently Mr. T forgot to age during the years he´s been away from the limelight. “I pity the fool who grows old!” They could´ve easily gotten away with giving him the role.

But even if you disregard the fact that Mr. T wasn´t cast in the movie, is it any good? Not really. It is kind of fun but this is a good example of the usual overkill that goes on in today´s action movies. Hell, at one point Neeson´s character even says “Overkill is underrated” but you know what, usually I´m not of the habit of disagreeing with Liam Neeson (not after watching “Taken” and realizing that the guy kicks ass like it´s nobody´s business) but I think I have to, in this case.  “The A-Team” is a bit too much of everything.

The story goes like this: The A-Team, an elite combat unit, is framed for a crime they didn´t commit. This means that they have to clear their names and in order to do this, they have to blow a lot of shit up. That´s all you need to know, really.

Let´s start off with the good things: Sharlto Copley! This guy has got the chops. I think we can agree that he delivered on of last year´s best performances in “District 9” and even though he´s not gonna get any Oscar nominations for his turn as Murdoch, he still manages to nail that insane quality that Dwight Schultz had in the original TV-series.

I guess that Liam Neeson is one of the other things that´s pretty good about this flick. I like the direction this guy´s career has taken in the last couple of years. It started when he made that western with Pierce Brosnan, “Seraphim Falls” and then in his quest to become one of baddest of asses in Hollywood he made the fantastic “Taken” and now this. I could watch a new action movie with him every week. Keep ´em coming, Liam!

But this is by now way a great movie. Unfortunately, halfway through the film director Joe Carnahan seemed to have come up with the not-so-fantastic idea that what he really wanted to make was a Jason Bourne movie, so suddenly we find ourselves in Germany at a train station with lots of surveillance cameras and shit. Very much Jason Bourne, if you get my drift.

I have to say that I had some problem keeping my interest alive throughout its running time. This is partly due to the fact that Carnahan tries to create the most spectacular action sequences, and in order to do that he resorts to the old CGI-way of movie trickery. Not my favorite way of creating an action sequence, but I don´t wanna sound like an old cranky man, so let´s skip that for now. Unfortunately, Carnahan hasn´t calmed down with his insane shaky-camera movements. If you saw his previous flick, “Smokin´ Aces” you know what I´m talking about here. He used the same technique to fantastic effect in the opening scene of “Narc” when Jason Patric is chasing a drug dealer down an alley but in that film it served a purpose. In that one, Carnahan placed us smack in the middle of a foot chase and we were supposed to wonder what the hell was going on. That´s a whole different thing. It´s never a good thing when you start to wonder what´s going on or who´s firing at who. Unfortunately, that´s exactly what happens here.

I know I said I wasn´t gonna go off on another one of these rants but I can´t control myself: honestly, what is it with today´s action directors and CGI? I´m not saying that you should actually put Liam Neeson in a tank and then throw it out of an airplane but honestly, CGI really has killed the action star! Why don´t everyone take a cue from Christopher Nolan and what he achieved with “The Dark Knight”? He managed to create some truly unforgettable action sequences there. Remember that tank flipping over in the middle of the street? You can bet your computer generated ass that that wasn´t CGI.

I also found myself wondering why the hell this movie was called “The A-Team” in the first place because frankly, it doesn´t have much to do with the original TV-series. They could´ve easily just changed the names of the characters and I don´t think that anyone would´ve suspected much of anything. Which begs the question: why the hell do you wanna remake something if you´re gonna change it so much that doesn´t resemble the original in the first place? I can appreciate the fact that Carnahan wanted to make a grittier movie but he still has to work within the realms that the PG-13 rating creates. This basically means that no matter how cool and brutal Carnahan wanted Hannibal and his team to be, they´re never gonna come close to the mayhem he unleashed in “Smokin´ Aces”. So once again: why even bother calling it “The A-Team” at all? Beats me.

But what the hell, all in all this is a pretty enjoyable, stupid action flick and I guess you could do a lot worse this summer. At least Carnahan knows what he´s doing but unfortunately, since we´re all waiting for the wonder that will be “The Expendables” I´m afraid it´s hard to get too excited about this one.

Until next time: take scare!

Thomas

When you´re gonna make a sequel to a hit movie you´re obviously faced with some problems: you wanna keep it relatively similar to the first one, yet (hopefully) give the audience something fresh and new. A while back when I talked to you about “The Descent Part 2”, my main objection about that film was that the director seemed to have forgotten the fact that there´s a pretty good chance that the audience have already seen part I and that the cat is out of that so-often-mentioned bag. It doesn´t work when you try to build up the same momentum as they did in the first one, back when the audience didn´t know what to expect. So how the hell do you do it then? Well, you could do like Jaume Balagueró and Paco Plaza has done and take a cue from James Cameron´s “Aliens”. I don´t think I´m telling any tales out of school when I say that “Aliens” is widely regarded to be one of the best sequels ever, right? Because what was it that Cameron did so great with that one? He took the characters and the monster from the first one but placed them smack in the middle of a story that transformed the movie into, not a sci-fi-horror movie like the first one, but a goddamn war movie-extravaganza! Basically, more guns and more monsters! That´s the approach that Balagueró and Plaza has taken with their sequel to “[Rec]”!

What the first “[Rec]” did so spectacularly well (besides giving you an uncomfortable feeling of nausea due to the hand held cameras that refused to stay still for more than a tenth of a second) was that it built towards a climax that were genuinely chilling, and we all know that those doesn´t exactly grow on trees nowadays. It also revealed some of the back story to us, but we weren´t given the whole picture, which was a pretty clever decision on the filmmaker´s behalf. This means that they have some room to expand on the whole mythology of what the hell was going on up in that penthouse, where they kept that little girl.

And Balagueró & Plaza ain´t here to screw around… Part 2 opens 5 minutes after the end of the first one, when an official from the Department of Health along with a SWAT Team is sent into the building. It doesn´t take long until they encounter one of the infected and the government official, Dr. Owen, starts fighting off the infected by using rosaries and spouting religious mantras. Guess what? Turns out the guy is a priest sent out to get a sample from the Medeiros girl, who started the infection in the first movie.

Now, what´s so great about this movie is the fact that we all know that this building are filled with the infected, we know what they look like and all that, so Balagueró & Plaza doesn´t waste any time at all on that crap. They did that the first time around, so let´s skip that shit, ok? So, as soon as the team enters the building they are attacked from every corner and every door. But since we´ve got a SWAT Team with some pretty big guns with us this time around, it gets pretty messy. This is how they start out the movie, like an action-movie done in a shoot ´em up-like fashion. But then things start to gradually change, the longer the movie goes on. At first, this SWAT Team seems to be in control of the situation but the closer the team gets to the penthouse, we learn that there are indeed sinister forces at work here and maybe it doesn´t matter what size your gun is (according to the women of the world, that isn´t supposed to matter anyway). The movie constantly throws curveballs at you and what you were expecting isn´t what you end up getting.

For instance, about half way through the film we´re introduced to a group of teenagers who´s trying to launch an inflatable sex doll by tying it to some rockets up on a roof top. I immediately started whining: “Great, that´s exactly what this movie needs now: a bunch of stupid, annoying teenagers who tries to have sex with each other and ignores the most obvious threats…” Well, I didn´t exactly say it out loud because that would be pretty creepy if I were to sit around by myself and have conversations like that all by my lonesome, wouldn´t it? But I was thinking it, because that´s what teenagers do in horror movies, right? They always have to go into the woods when they hear a strange noise.

And guess what, this is exactly what these teenagers do, as well. Turns out that Spanish teens aren´t that different from American ones camping out at Crystal Lake. Weird, huh? Because what do these Spanish kids do when they realize that the nearby building is under quarantine? Naturally they go down into the sewers and try to get in. Frickin´ kids!

But the weird thing is that when you see this is in a Spanish movie it doesn´t feel as forced and inherently stupid as it does when you see it in an American horror movie. You kinda buy it in this one because at some level, isn´t this exactly what many teenagers would do in this situation: you see a SWAT Team going into a building, wouldn´t you want to have a peek at what´s going on in there? For some reason I found the way that these teenagers reacted to be pretty believable. And it´s these scenes with the kids that ends up containing some of the film´s strongest moments. For instance, the scene where one of them has to fire a gun towards an infected guy´s skull is probably the most harrowing in the entire movie.

But now I´m sounding like this movie is the second coming and it isn´t. It has its flaws and the greatest one is the fact that it is still handheld cameras swinging around and around and around until you feel like even Michael Bay would feel nauseous after watching this. I realize that this is the format of these movies but that doesn´t mean that I have to like it, does it? It´s just a bit too much at times.

Another thing that is lacking in this installment is the mystery and the suspense of the first one but I´ve already whined about that. Fortunately, it makes up for that with a whole bunch of action, gore, exploding heads and whatnot. I guess if you can´t find a way to recreate the suspense of the original, just go the Cameron-way and by that I don´t mean that you should populate your movie with a bunch of giant blue-looking fuckers that keeps nagging about mother nature and how we´re all connected, ok? Go with the guns instead.

The fact of the matter is that this is one frenetic movie. In fact, if you were to screen the both “[Rec]” movies back to back, I think that the second one would feel like an 80 minutes long final act. It´s like one long final action sequence and how can you not like that shit?

Apparently “[Rec] 3” is going to be released in 2011 and I could definitely go for a third serving of these infected fuckers. Maybe one of these days I´ll come around to checking out that American remake of the first one, “Quarantine”, but to be honest, I don´t think so. I think I´d rather stick with the original recipe.

Until next time: take scare!

Thomas

These last couple of years Nicolas Cage´s career has been in kind of a slump and I was actually afraid that he had started consuming either hard drugs on set or suffered some sort of brain aneurism (That´s right, “Bangkok Dangerous”, I´m looking at you!) due to the fact that he seemed to be sleepwalking his way through entire films. We all know that Nicolas Cage does his best work when he is un-Caged and allowed to shout, scream and howl his way through a film in that fantastic way of his. Unfortunately, he´s been shackled by uninteresting scripts and bizarre haircuts these last couple of years.

For those of you out there with a masochistic streak and who regularly read my rants here, you are familiar with the fact that I have an ongoing love affair with the remake of “The Wicker Man”, a movie that seem to symbolize all that is bad with remakes for most people and widely recognized at “the most despised film of all time”. It was released in 2006 and it marked the start of an era for Cage, where he spent the next few years looking like he was gonna fall asleep anytime in every movie he did. Christ, he was like a narcoleptic in the making. We got “Next”, “Ghost Rider”, “National Treasure: Book of Secrets”, the before mentioned “Bangkok Dangerous” and “Knowing” (which I really enjoyed, though). In all these films we got the patented style of Cage´s somber acting, combined with one weird haircut after another. Things were not looking good for the Cage-ster.

But then something happened…

Nicolas met Werner… And it was as if Cage realized that this shit has got to stop! Enough of this somber, sleepwalking-type of acting! That´s why in 2009 we were treated to the glorious dementia of Werner Herzhog´s “Bad Lieutenant: Port of Call New Orleans”, which is nothing short of a masterpiece and gives us Cage in full twitchy, howling regalia.

But as if that wasn´t enough, then we got to see Cage in Matthew Vaughn´s comic book adaptation “Kick-Ass” and I think that he is absolutely one of the best things about that movie. Unless you haven´t heard about Hit Girl and the controversy she has sparked in the United States, you´ve either been comatose or stoned out of your mind these last couple of months and if so, here´s a quick summary of what the frickin´ movie´s about:

Dave Lizewski (Aaron Johnson) is an unnoticed high school student and comic book fan with few friends and he lives alone with his father. His life is not very difficult and his personal trials not that overwhelming. However, one day he makes the simple decision to become a super-hero even though he has no powers or training. Said and done, Dave re-invents himself as Kick-Ass, a superhero with no powers. Later, he is joined by Red Mist (Christopher Mintz-Plasse), Hit Girl (Chloe Moretz) and her father Big Daddy (Nicolas Cage) and they form a vigilante team, fighting drug dealers and vandals. However, Big Daddy and Hit Girl has an agenda of their own…

Let me just start off by saying that I really enjoyed this flick! Hell, if you´ve ever had any kind of interest or passion for comic books while growing up, this is gonna float your boat. I don´t think that it will go down as one of the great classics in the pantheon of comic book movies, however because while I did appreciate the movie and its many scenes of shootouts and spectacularly choreographed fights, there is something that rubs me the wrong way about it. There´s a certain smugness about this movie that I unfortunately have a small problem with.

Director Vaughn is just too aware of how hip and funny the shit he throws at us is, and it feels at times that he, for the first time in his career as a director, resorts to the Guy Ritchie-way of directing movies. As you might be familiar with, Vaughn started out as a producer on Ritchie´s cockney-gangster-flicks “Lock, Stock & Two Smoking Barrels” and “Snatch” and when Vaughn made his directing debut with “Layer Cake”, many of us feared that that was gonna be one long exercise in frenetic editing crazy hi-jinks a´ la Guy Ritchie but that one actually turned out to be a much more mature gangster flick than I thought any of us were expecting. Same thing with “Stardust”. Much better than I thought it would be.

And now we have “Kick-Ass”. And like I said, even though I enjoyed the hell out of this movie, sometimes it feels a bit too calculated. But then again, how can you not love a film where one of the characters is an 11 year old girl who shoots, slashes and karates her way through an army of bad guys?

My main objection with “Kick-Ass” is that it lacks the emotional depth that every comic book movie needs to elevate itself from just an “entertaining” one to a “great” one. The whole story with Dave and his romantic interest in Katie plays out like and episode of “Glee” or some other High School show and it doesn´t feel too believable. But that´s why we should be thanking our lucky stars that we get to witness the awesomeness of Nicolas Cage, because he provides the movie with its much needed emotional focus.

Like I mentioned earlier, Big Daddy and Hit Girl has an own agenda, one which involves Big Daddy extracting revenge on those who´ve done him wrong in the past. His back story is shown in one of those animated comic strip-montages that seem to pop up everywhere ever since Tarantino used one like it in “Kill Bill”, and in this one we´re shown how Big Daddy´s a former cop, how his wife died and how his partner took care of his daughter while he was incarcerated for a crime he didn´t commit. It probably takes up about one or two minute of screen time but this brief scene is by far the most interesting thing in the whole movie. Why didn´t they build the whole movie around this story line instead? I would´ve loved to see that.

What makes Cage´s character so great is that even though some of you may object to the way he raises his girl, you always believe that he absolutely adores her. Cage is great in these scenes. For instance, it´s pretty hilarious when they´re trying out a bullet proof vest and he´s gonna fire one more round into her chest and calms her with “Just one more, baby doll. One more and then we´ll go get hot chocolate”.

I think that one mistake that they made with this movie is that they´re trying to make one of those “this is what it would be like if an ordinary kid dressed up as a superhero and started fighting criminals in real life”-movies and for the first hour that´s actually what it is. Dave is cut up pretty bad and is hospitalized the first time he tries to intervene but then the movie gets a little too smart for its own good.

There many scenes set in a café called “Atomic Comics”, which I reckon is just an excuse for letting all the fanboys in the audience know that the filmmakers are just as versed in comics as they are. Kirby, Romita and other names are dropped to the left and right and so on. I think the movie would´ve been better if the filmmakers would´ve played it straight, instead. This kind of flirting with the audience takes me out of the film and I would´ve loved to see “Kick-Ass” play out in a more realistic fashion. As it is now, it´s kind of a movie of two halves and even though it is a lot of fun, I would´ve preferred the grittier, more realistic one.

I mean, let´s be honest here: this kind of nudging and winking at the audience isn´t that cool anymore. It was one thing when Kevin Smith did it with his “Star Wars”-references back in the early 90´s, you know before internet and all that but these days it just feels tired and worn out. I much more appreciate a movie these days that has the guts to not wink at its audience and play it totally straight. These last couple of years this audience-winking and filmmaker´s burning ambition to show the audience that they indeed are one of them, that they like and appreciate the same things that they do, have become very annoying. It´s just a way of showing that you´re not confident enough in your own work and this habit of namedropping and shit like that is just a cheap way to get the audience on your side.

Now, “Kick-Ass” isn´t the worst example of that but I still feel that this would have been a much superior film if Vaughn had steered clear of that kind of indulgence, which is kind of the comic book movies´ equivalent of the annoying black sidekick that every action movie back in the late 80´s and early 90´s had, like a cheap way to get some laughs. You know what I´m talking about: the kind of character that always had to point out how insane everything was and make wise cracks about everything and everyone just to let the audience know that “Hey, isn´t this weird and over-the-top? I´ve noticed that too, yet I am in the movie! Isn´t that cool, kids?”

One thing that Matthew Vaughn does deserve credit for is the fact that he managed to cast Deborah Twiss in the role of Mrs. Zane, Dave´s teacher which he fantasizes about. I don´t know if you´re familiar with her but back in ´96 she starred in the vigilante-flick “A Gun For Jennifer” (which I wrote about here) and it was pretty cool to see her again. They should expand her role for the sequel, which apparently is greenlit now. Hell, she could play the same role as in “A Gun For Jennifer” and she could join forces with Kick-Ass and start killing off the rapists of New York City again.

But still, all nudging and winking aside, this is still one entertaining fucker of a film. If you for some insane reason decides that you don´t wanna go out drinking one Saturday night, you could do a lot worse than this one.

Until next time: take scare!

Thomas

Here´s another movie that I´m late as hell with but do you know why that is? It´s because I am somewhat of a rebel and tend to do things when I feel like it, no matter what everyone else says! Either that or it could be the fact that I´m just a lazy son of a bitch. To be honest, I don´t know why it took me until now to check this one out. When I first heard that it was McG that was gonna be directing this one, I (like most of the internet community) was pretty worried. But (unlike most of said internet community) I didn´t spend all my waking hours to whine about it. But I actually was kinda worried. Although I can appreciate the “Charlie´s Angels” movies as much as the next guy, I wasn´t particularly eager to see McG bring that kind of aesthetic to the “Terminator”-franchise. But then again, I wasn´t that eager to see anyone else beside James Cameron direct a “Terminator” movie but then they got that Jonathan Mostow guy to do the third one and I really enjoyed that one, so you never know, right? That´s why I was trying to keep an open mind about this one.

But then something weird happened with this movie: everyone seemed to suddenly have decided that they weren´t gonna like this movie at all, before it was even released! Do you remember this? Do you remember how shocked everyone was when that recording of Christian Bale throwing a tantrum leaked onto the information superhighway? “Who does the guy thinks he is” and “What the hell does he have up his ass” and whatever the hell everyone was saying and then suddenly, everyone had always hated Christian Bale even though no one really said that when they were creaming their pants during “The Dark Knight”.

But anyway, without a doubt this movie got a bad rep because of that whole recording being leaked. I think that maybe it was because of this that it took me so long to finally get around and actually watch the damn thing. I was afraid that I wasn´t going to be able to concentrate on the film and just sit there and as soon as Bale showed up, I was gonna go “I wonder if this is the scene where he lost his marbles? Or maybe it´s this one? Or this one?”

Well, I finally felt that I had matured enough as a human being to overcome this obstacle in the way of me enjoying this fourth installment in the “Terminator” saga. Which begs the question, did I enjoy it? Well, kind of. It´s definitely not a failure on any level but it´s definitely the least entertaining “Terminator” movie yet. I´m not counting that “Sarah Connor Chronicles” TV-series because I couldn´t muster up the energy to watch that one.

Somehow this one doesn´t quite feel as a “Terminator” movie, really. And I guess it isn´t because the big man himself, Anhuldt, isn´t in it. But besides that, one of the reasons why this one doesn´t feel like a “Terminator” movie is because this is the first one in the series that takes place exclusively in the future world that we´ve only gotten glimpses of in the previous films. And what is so weird is that ever since we first saw that goddamn robot foot stomp down on that skull back in the early 90´s, I´ve been going on and on about how frickin´ cool it would be to see an entire movie set in this world and now that it´s here, I´m sitting here and complaining about it! What the hell is wrong with me?

I think that this is what´s going on here: “Terminator: Salvation” suffers from a clear case of the “Alien 3”-syndrome. Now, you should know that “Alien 3” is my favorite in that series. What I mean with “Terminator: Salvation” suffering from this is that this is a movie that is so clearly different from the previous installments and maybe I just wasn´t ready for that. God knows I wasn´t with “Alien 3” but since then it has grown on me and now it´s my favorite one. Maybe this one will too, in the years to come but I have a hard time seeing myself preferring this one over part I and II, to be honest.

But I guess that I have to admire McG for having the guts to make this movie as bleak as he did. One thing I didn´t like was when it for a brief scene turned into “Transformers” with a giant Terminator robot chasing Christian Bale & Co. I was really worried there for a minute or two but fortunately McG managed to keep his inner demons at Bay (Get that one? “Transformers” and Bay as in Michael Bay? Christ, I´m good) and keep the movie from turning into one long never ending scene of a million zillion cuts and things exploding, which to be honest, this could´ve easily been. This is why this is one of those weird movies where I don´t feel as much disappointment for it not being great as I feel appreciation for the director not fucking it up royally. At least we´ll always have that, huh?

But I welcome this development in McG´s style. The fact that he actually lets his action sequences play out without cutting them to shreds shows some hope for the future. No matter how entertaining I find “Charlie´s Angels: Full Throttle”, I don´t think that my psyche could take another movie done in that fashion.

The sad thing is that there´s a gnawing feeling throughout the film that somewhere inside, there actually is a great film just waiting to come bursting out, kinda like the alien did from that dog´s stomach in “Alien 3”. But unfortunately, it´s hankered down by a subplot that is mostly uninteresting and a couple of acting performances that isn´t particularly good, to be honest.

I mean, this Sam Worthington guy? Between this and “Avatar” he hasn´t exactly convinced me that he deserves to be Hollywood´s new go-to-guy for the lead in every huge action movie being made, like the case clearly is at the moment. And the subplot I mentioned that didn´t exactly float my boat is the one involving Worthington´s character Marcus Wright and Moon Bloodgood´s character Blair Williams. That one could´ve easily been excised from the film and I think it would´ve made it much better. But then on the other hand we wouldn´t have had the opportunity to watch the credits where a name like “Moon Bloodgood” actually appears! This has got to be the greatest name for any actress in the history of movies. Jesus Christ! Why isn´t there a crime fighting comic book hero named this? Get this girl her own comic book now, Hollywood!

But anyway, I guess you´ve all already seen this one but if you haven´t, it´s definitely worth two hours of your time, despite all its flaws. And like I said: I have the strange sensation that this one will grow on me.

Until next time: take scare!

Thomas

The other day I suffered some kind of mental breakdown because I actually sat down and tried to watch a movie called “Stan Helsing”, which is about some slacker running around in a hockey shirt and bandana and fighting such well known horror movie icons as Freddy Krueger, Jason Voorhees and shit. That movie turned out to be a big pile of stinkin´, fumin´ shit and to my big surprise Leslie Nielsen has a part in it. For some reason he wears a wig and fake breasts in it. I have no idea why. I feel sorry for Leslie Nielsen. I grew up with the guy as Frank Drebin in “The Naked Gun”-movies and the “Police Squad” TV-series but is this really what it has come to: Nielsen is 83 fucking years old and relegated to playing a transvestite or whatever the hell he´s supposed to be in a movie called “Stan Helsing”, starring the guy who was married to Reba McIntyre´s daughter on her crappy sitcom? Really? My heart bleeds for you, Leslie.

Anyway, this sad sight of Leslie Nielsen made me do two things. The first was to re-watch “Airplane!” just to remind myself how goddamn funny he was once upon a time (“I am serious and don´t call me Shirley”). The second thing was to re-watch “Van Helsing”, starring Hugh Jackman. Yes, I said “re-watch”! I have seen this movie more than once, believe it or not. Bare with me and I´ll try to explain what appeal this movie holds for me, ok?

Some movies are made for one and one reason only: to make you stuff your face with popcorn! “Van Helsing” is such a film. In fact, this movie is basically the celluloid version of popcorn: it doesn´t taste that much but it goes down without you having to chew it too much and every once in a while you get one of those annoying little corn bits stuck between your teeth. That´s “Van Helsing”! I´ll probably get crucified for saying this out loud but I actually enjoy this movie. It´s entertaining in that kind of Saturday morning-serial cartoons used to be when you were a kid. Every time I watch this movie I have to check to see if I´m not still in my pajamas I wore when I was about eight years old. Fortunately that isn´t the case because that would pretty disturbing, to put it mildly.

Now, let´s get one thing out of the way immediately: if you can´t stand CGI, you should avoid this movie. Also, if you´re looking for a “real” horror movie, this is not the movie for you. This is about as much horror as “Dracula-Dead and Loving It”, ok? Or as that fricking “Stan Helsing”-movie, for that matter.

Anyway, Hugh Jackman stars as Van Helsing, who in Stephen Sommers´world works as a monster hunter for the Vatican. Remember that albino fucker in “The Da Vinci Code”? If you cross him with James Bond then we´re sort of close to what Van Helsing is like in this movie.

Van Helsing has a trusty sidekick named Carl (played by David Wenham), travels to Transylvania to battle a whole bunch of monsters, like Dracula and his sultry brides, the Wolfman and Frankenstein.

Now, since this is a movie directed by Stephen Sommers, who´s responsible for “The Mummy”-series and the criminally underrated “Deep Rising”, Van Helsing gets able help from Anna Valerious, who has her own agenda of why she wants to kill these fuckers. The thing is that she´s played by Kate Beckinsale. She´s the girl in the latex suit from the “Underworld”-series and let´s just say that she gets quite a becoming outfit in this one, as well.

And because this is a Stephen Sommers-movies you shouldn´t expect a Hammer-style movie. Like I mentioned, in his world Van Helsing is James Bond, appears to have the same stylist as Keanu Reeves had in “The Matrix” and the Wolfman is an over-sized raging monster who´s about as far from Lon Chaney as I am to giving up drinking, ok?

I am well aware that this is the kind of movie that I should hate. I should despise it with a passion. Yet, for some strange reason, I don´t. I must´ve seen this movie about four or five times but I still can´t quite remember what happens in it. I remember parts from it and that it was entertaining enough. The thing is that I seem to conjure up memories of it actually being better and more fun than it is, so I have to re-watch it every year or so and every time I finish watching it I realize that it´s not a great movie by any means but you know, you could do a hell of a lot worse if you´re stuck with a hangover from the depths of hell on Sunday morning.

I know that that´s not a valid reason for liking a movie and usually I´m not one to say things like “What did you expect? Shakespeare?” after watching a movie like “Transformers”, ok? But I´m willing to go with that argument with this one. I admit that Stephen Sommers should´ve done more with such a great concept movie for a genuine horror movie but instead he turned it into a movie equivalent of an amusement park ride. But hey, at least he´s not Michael Bay, ok? I think it´s obvious that while watching “Van Helsing” or “The Mummy” for that matter, that Sommers do have a genuine love for these kinds of movies. He seem to have a goal with them and that is to create the most entertaining movie he can for that seven year old kid who still watches those cartoons in his pajamas on Saturday morning. I don´t think that that´s the worst goal to have when you´re making a huge blockbuster like this one.

Don´t even ask me what Michael Bay´s goal is because I have no idea. Probably to corrupt the minds of audiences and create kids with attention spans that won´t stretch longer than two seconds.

This is a loud, dumb-as-hell and cheesy movie but tell me this: how can you not like a movie where Van Helsing has a crossbow battle with flying vampire witches just moments after he´s arrived in Transylvania? You can´t. You just can´t…

I promise I will try to discuss something a little more high brow next time, ok? But for now, just check your brain at the door.

Until next time: take scare!

Thomas

Ok, I think we can all agree on the fact that when the first ”Iron Man” was released, we were all pretty surprised. I don´t think anyone expected it to be that much fun except for maybe the guys who actually made the movie. I mean, granted that whoever got the brilliant idea to cast Robert Downey, JR as Tony Stark deserves a raise but when I heard that it was gonna be directed by that guy from “Swingers” and who played Monica´s rich boyfriend on “Friends”, I wasn´t too thrilled. Well, as we all know Jon Favreau turned out to be the perfect choice because “Iron Man” was one of the more enjoyable and entertaining comic book movies of the last ten years! I mean, I appreciate a brooding hero like Batman in “The Dark Knight” as much as the next guy but we can all use a movie like this that is just plain, good old-fashioned fun! So while the first one took us by surprise, the second one has a lot to live up to. And I mean a lot…

So does it succeed? Kind of. This isn´t as much fun as the first one, which kind of surprised me that I felt that way. Usually I´m not that big of a fan when it comes to the first installment in superhero-franchises. I always think that the origin story is the least interesting one. Just look at “Batman Begins” compared to “The Dark Knight”. It´s the same with the first two “Spider Man” movies. Once they get that origin shit out of the way, things usually gets interesting.

Well, I didn´t feel that way with this franchise. However, I have to admit that they´ve done a great job with continuing the story arch from the first movie without it feeling forced or contrived. To be honest, this doesn´t so much feel like a sequel, instead it feels like the same movie as the first one. I love it when sequels start off right where the first one ended and this one does exactly this. And let´s face it: “Iron Man” part I had a great fucking ending! You know, when Tony Stark announced to the world that “I am Iron Man”?

And it´s much to this that “Iron Man” remains interesting. He is one of the few super heroes where the world is aware of his identity and this guy embraces it wholeheartedly. This is how we´re introduced to Stark in the second one, when he appears at the opening of the “Stark Expo”, where makes quite an entrance. Since the first movie, Stark has managed to negotiate a peace between the world´s major super powers and he´s not gonna let anyone forget this. He´s got quite the rock star thing going on and he´s living it up. But you know, like every major rock star Stark also has his own skeletons in the closet but it´s not like he´s got a heroin addiction nor has a penchant for underage girls or anything like that. Instead Stark is dying because of the palladium in the arc reactor he´s got mounted in his chest. Life ain´t easy for a crime fighting multi billionaire, you know? Plus the fact that he´s got a sleazy senator (played by Garry Shandling) after him and wants him to turn over the “Iron Man” suit to the government and an equally slimy weapons manufacturer (played by Sam Rockwell), trying to copy his work.

And as if this wasn´t enough, when Stark is in Monaco, trying to enjoy a quiet day of racing the formula one car that he owns, Ivan Vanko (Mickey Rourke, sporting more tattoos than Lemmy and with more gold in his mouth than Fort Knox), shows up with a weapon very similar to Stark´s and he makes it pretty clear that he doesn´t intend on using it for the good of mankind.

There´s a lot going on in “Iron Man 2”. Maybe a bit too much to fit it all into a 2 hour popcorn movie? There a couple of storylines that are brushed over too easily and that I would´ve liked to see some more of. For instance, Mickey Rourke is sorely underused in the film. It´s good to see him back on the big screen and hopefully this elevates him even further into the movie stardom stratosphere, to the point where he can make the kind of movies he wants to, but Vanko is by far the most interesting character in the film. He´s had a pretty brutal past where he was raised by an alcoholic father who was deported from the states, partly thanks to Howard Stark, Tony´s father, and this is only hinted at in a couple of scenes and I would´ve definitely liked to have seen this explored some more. I don´t know if Favreau initially shot a longer version of the film because it feels like some characters are introduced, then dropped without ever to appear again.

It´s the same thing with Scarlett Johansson´s Black Widow aka Natasha Romanoff. I don´t know about you, but I´m not that big of a fan when it comes to the “Iron Man” comic book. I always thought it had a boring lead character and it wasn´t particularly exciting. However, I was always a huge fan of the Black Widow character. She kicked ass long before they made that Nicolas Cage-movie with that same name. Unfortunately, she too is sorely underused in the movie. Hell, we only get to see her in full Black Widow-regalia in one scene towards the end, which is way too little. It is a pretty cool scene though, so I´m not gonna whine too much.

But there are a couple of things that bugged me. For instance, they make a big deal about Mickey Rourke´s pet bird, which is shown briefly in a credit sequence, and he keeps going on about how he wants his bird and all that. When they finally get the bird to him, it´s not the same bird but then it doesn´t seem to matter too much to him. He seems to like this other bird just as much, which I found weird. I´m not sure what the whole deal about this bird was? Was there some kind of plotline where they showed how this bird and Mickey Rourke love each other which were cut out of the film? Are they dating? Have the bird cheated on him, is that why he forgets about it so quickly? It´s just weird…

At another point in the movie, Kate Mara (of “Brokeback Mountain” and “Shooter”-fame) pops up as a solicitor, serving Tony Stark with an impeachment, only to disappear after that one sequence. I think she´s a little bit too well known for a small cameo like this which only makes her appearance distracting, when you realize that this character isn´t gonna show up again. I kept waiting for her to re-appear and use her super special legal-skills to help Tony Stark out of a bind, or something. Didn´t happen.

But this is probably one of the more entertaining action movies you´re gonna see this summer and even though it is fun as hell, it still manages to hint at some of the darkness that Tony Stark has to carry with him. Like his alcohol consumption, for instance. This is shown in a scene that manages to be pretty funny and awkwardly sad at the same time, much thanks to Downey, JR´s performance. I think it´s safe to say that the guy has that mixed up-alcoholic thing down to a tee. I was waiting for a scene where he´s flying around in his “Iron Man” suit, drunk as hell and accidently flies into his neighbor’s house only to pass out in the daughter´s bed and then be picked up by the cops but maybe that was one of the deleted scenes that I mentioned earlier.

I think it would be interesting to watch the two movies back-to-back when this one is released on DVD because I think that it´ll play even better then. I kinda got the feeling that the movie ended pretty abruptly in its current state but maybe it´ll play better when you watch the two movies in one sitting. But then again, what the hell do I know?

All in all, I gotta say that I really liked this one and I´d definitely pay to see a third one, which judging from the post credit-sequence you get in this one, promises to be pretty goddamn great! I do have one major objection and that is that Samuel L. Jackson as Nick Fury is just wrong. And believe me, this is not a racial thing. I thought Michael Clarke Duncan as Kingpin in “Daredevil” worked just fine but it just feels weird watching Jackson as Fury. Samuel L. Jackson always plays and always will play no other character than Samuel L. Jackson, so to cast him as Nick Fury, head director of S.H.I.E.L.D., is not the brightest move the movie industry has made.

If it were up to me they should´ve let David Hasselhoff, who played Fury in the 1998 TV-movie “Nick Fury: Agent of S.H.I.E.L.D.”, have another go at the character. But that´s just one guy´s opinion.

Until next time: take scare!

Thomas