And I think that's an awesome idea.

I mean, yeah I try to get the random weirdos to rent rare shit like THE KEEP, but otherwise what good am I here?

THE KEEP (1983) - ***

With DVD technology now over a decade old, one would think the studios would have completely released all of their catalogue cinema library onto DVD. As MGM, Anchor Bay, and Blue Underground have proven, there is seemingly an audience for every title.

Now take a Paramount picture that isn't on DVD, and has been out of print since the early 1980s. Now imagine this movie having a hell of a cast with Sir Ian McKellen, the awesomely underused Scott Glenn, Jurgen Prochnow, and Gabriel Bryne. Plus, it was an early effort from one of my favorite filmmakers, writer/director Michael Mann.

Oh, and the plot is Nazis getting eaten by a monster.

If bad 50's French pornography can get a decent DVD release, why not THE KEEP?

I doubt if any of you good folks have seen this film, but if you ever might, you'll might know immediately know why with the smoke, the Tangerine Dream score raging in the background, and tanks rumbling through the Dinu mountain pass.

This might be one of the more goddamn bizarre studio-released pictures you'll ever see.

Based off on a then-popular novel penned by F. Paul Wilson, its 1941 and the Nazi German war machine rolls over Romania. Prochnow leads his German Army attachment into a remote mountain village that is home to "The Keep."

Generations of a peasant family have overseen it as caretakers, despite not knowing why a lone silver cross is surrounded by copper-laden crosses, nor for the structure's intended purpose.

Prochnow doesn't understand why a fortress built more to keep something in than out exists, but he uses it anyway as a base for his troops. Some treasure-hunting Nazis break open the silver cross, and all hell breaks loose.

The blackshirt SS arrive to "rectify the situation," which they do by executing random villagers. If Prochnow is reprising his "Good German" character from DAS BOOT, then Bryne in his brief scenes is a terrific Nazi asshole.

You know, the sorts that proudly shoot women and children, claim that he was only following orders at trial, or flee off to Argentina and try to pass off as innocent bystanders. If Ralph Fiennes had many scenes to make himself absolutely vile in SCHINDLER'S LIST, then Bryne makes alot out of nothing. No wonder he helps make the ending for THE USUAL SUSPECTS work.

The Nazis snatch a crippled dying languistics expert in McKellen and his daughter from the Death Camps to solve it, all the while a mysterious blue-eyed stranger in Scott Glenn travels from Greece to this "Keep" with great urgency.

And that is the plot that makes sense. The rest of the film I've only comprehended in the vaguest of terms since this movie is so ambigious, or the sorts that occur from a filmmaker trying to be visually atmospheric and moody, combined with reportedly massive re-cutting by the studio.

So much of the story, its people, and events occur out of the blue (like Glenn falling in love with the daughter) that it just adds to the oddball and sorta charming mystique that radiates from THE KEEP for me.

I've always thought of THE KEEP of sorts like that great TWILIGHT ZONE episode, "The Howling Man," where a visitor inadvertedly frees the Devil from his prison. The difference with the way I see KEEP though, you have in the Nazis possibly the most evil scum that's ever walked the Earth, who end up getting slaughtered by something even more evil.

It's a great primordial evil that predates way before Lucifer's fall from the Heavens, the sort that's lived on in one form or another in legends around the world. It's evil itself.

McKellen makes a deal with this creature to regain his health, to save his ethnicity threatened with exinction by Hitler's human army of darkness. It's a Faustian accord made not out of greed, but out of the very thing that the road to Hell is paved with.

Then with Glenn, he is a spirit for an ancient "good" that wants to stay with this woman, but he can't for if Evil is to be stopped, Good has to sacrifice greatly to bring back the balance.

Trust me, THE KEEP is a mess, but its the rare sort that I enjoyed it more for the idea than the actual execution. Years back, since I wanted to know exactly what the hell was going on, I read Wilson's book.

It's a good read, but in explaining actually the hero and villain, it renders my interpretation of the movie, and its very much less interesting. Add to that a happy romantic ending that apparently was also in Mann's final cut before the studio altered it.

While its really clumsy in how they acheived it, along with a dreaded "paused" snapshot, how many movies chopped by the studio actually stay away from the safe ending and pick the appropriate ending?

Then again, maybe Mann's original edit makes that happy conclusion work, and is a better film. Who knows, but as the Director's Cut is locked inside Paramount's own Keep, we may never know what lurks within it. Almost as mysterious as to why its not on DVD.

I just finished watching "Shoot Em Up" starring Clive Owen.Basically,the whole movie is just random gun fights with shitty catch phrases.Clive Owen really can't act,not that he has to in this film.The visuals are pretty good,but the movie is all over the place and the tiny storyline is stupid and pointless.But,if you feel like killing a hour and a half and don't want to think,then check it out i guess.

Quentin Tarantino could learn a thing or two about hardboiled action filmmaking from this.

DELTA FARCE (2007) - * - Bomb

Anyone ever see that episode of THE BOONDOCKS where its protagonist is shocked at the dumbass entity that is SOUL PLANE? Then he's further humiliated when his grandfather and (dumber) brother go to see that demeaning idiocracy in theatres.

Well, that episode attacked blacks for wanting to go see a movie that enforces idiotic racial stereotypes, without pause or concern. Such pigeonholing may be based on some facts and truths, but when said peoples accept it legitimately in the arts, it only makes such cartoonish depictions re-enforced as fact in the eyes of everyone else.

Some of you might say, "Dude, it's a silly comedy. Take it easy." Yeah, and Amos & Andy was simply "silly comedy" too.

Now take DELTA FARCE, a Wayans Brothers-esque insulting comedy, except its a joker on southerners, shot by rednecks, and intended for hicks. You know, the sort of garbage that Hollywood expects a Tennessee Cracker like me to enjoy.

Then again, I shouldn't be surprised. The lead stars are the useless half from the BLUE COLLAR COMEDY TOUR, the one-line wonder Larry the Cable Guy and one-sign special Bill Engvall, or Dane Cook if he was an ugly white trashbag.

What proceeds is STRIPES meets THREE AMIGOS, and its dishonorable to even use two genuinely funny movies to describe this farce.

Some dumbasses in the National Guard gets called up for duty in Iraq, and accidently get dropped down in Mexico. I was going to ask why for dudes stationed obviously out somewhere in the south, on an airflight to Ramstein Air Base in Germany....how they must have gone in circles to make this plot possible. Then again its the Pentagon, so they must have a perfectly good illogic behind it.

Now while I understand that part of the joke-punch is that these yokels don't know they're at the wrong destination, in spite of eating Tacos, hearing people speak Spanish, and the Catholic imagery everywhere....but its just so damn stupid. Not even the people that these morons are supposed to parody are that daffy, and I include those that are fans of Intelligent Design.

But you Yankees, Californians, and foreigners will love the chariactures these losers draw up. Engvall is the lazy welfare case who files false lawsuits, lives at a trailer park, and boozing as his kids terrorize the neighborhood. Larry likes flannel shirts, had a cheating white trash girlfriend who got knocked up by someone else, and refuses to pronounce the "g" syllable.

DJ Qualls is the gun-freak who loves Slim Jims, wants to kill all the brown people, and yet another Pro Wrestling fan who thinks its real.

One criticism of Brian DePalma's recent REDACTED was that the racist hick characters were damn cartoonish, an argument with some merit. It's the Yankee view of the south. But to see a scene where a redneck psychopath opens fire on civilians for fun that was played as horrible in REDACTED now played as comedy in DELTA FARCE......what the hell?

To dump salt into my sore wound is seeing Danny Trejo and Keith David be wasted with this crap. It's obvious that both try to have some fun with their well-established cinema personas, but what's worse than an unfunny comedy?

Seeing two awesome guys I dig act in a scene together, and not me giving a damn about it at all.

I mean, this is David the badass who stood up to Roddy Piper in that legendary street brawl in THEY LIVE, and Trejo...well, he's just goddamn Danny Trejo. He doesn't need me to fluffer his street cred.

Plus, whats with the women that Larry the Cable Guy is with? They're all beautiful, but why would they fall for a "fugly" like him?

Now I'm not saying that ugly folks can't honestly attract the pretty folks, but usually its because such dudes offer something else. Take Bill Murray in STRIPES, where he's damn funny and charming. Plus, he beat up the Russians with his badass RV.

What does Larry and Nicholas Cage have for the other sex?

Thing is, I know this is more of an angry rant than review, but I think I'm not the only one offended by this trash. The Department of Defense refused to help FARCE. The majority of the American Armed Forces volunteers are from the south, the Pentagon is staffed by a many officers based from the southern tradition of military service, and its a story about U.S. troops saving the day.

When the Bush White House refuses to back such a project, you know FARCE is a spitcan full of chewed-up tobacco.

I saw Atonement over the wekend. Not as good as the book ... overall a good movie but not great. Not sure what all the oscar buzz is about,

Bourne Ultimatum **
I finally managed to see this. It is thoroughly entertaining, but both the sequels look like replicas of the first one. The cities are different and the baddies are different. Nevertheless, the fight scenes are great. Matt Damon convincingly portrays a desperate man. Eventhough it looks like they have conclusively ended the series, there is a small possibility to start from this point and develop alternate storylines.

RUSH HOUR 3 (2007) - **1/2

As some of you know, I really like LETHAL WEAPON, and its superior sequel. Full of action, Full of humor, and great chemistry between Mel Gibson and Danny Glover.

Then I saw LETHAL WEAPON 3 as a young lad, and still remembering feeling very underwhelmed...and at an age where boys are easily impressed, there is a a disconnection.

The problem was that everyone involved knew that it would do gangbusters in theatres, and went ahead without a good finished script, because they figured they'll make enough cash before audiences realize they've been had. If enough action and one-liners are delivered, who cares about the story?

I sense that same situation with RUSH HOUR 3. Chris Tucker, Jackie Chan, and director Brett Ratner made headlines in Hollwood with the massive paychecks that New Line Cinema penned out for them, with the argument that it was a guaranteed money-maker.

The difference though is that HOUR 3 isn't a major step-down for that franchise...because it wasn't that good to begin with. But as a series of WEAPON knock-offs, they were entertaining in a pleasing, passive sort of way.

Chan and Tucker did have good chemistry in scenes mixing the martial arts with the jokes, which is surprising considering that after HOUR 3 came out, Chan admitted that he couldn't stand him nor the pictures. Then again, getting outpaid by someone who only worked in the HOUR movies since 1998 would annoy me too.

Certainly RUSH HOUR 3 continues the template with the fights, the Asian/Black jokes, the ENTER THE DRAGON references, and a really good actor stuck working as a lame villain. He may be the poor man's Richard Donner, but Brett Ratner is good at it.

All those movies carried this joke-platter of one of the stars going to a city they're unfamiliar with, and hilarity ensues. The gag now is that both Tucker and Chan are alien to Paris, which is a fine idea I guess.

The problem is that Chan isn't a butt of many jokes as much as the guy that Sam Jackson murdered in JACKIE BROWN. Yeah I get the joke, the French hate Americans, but don't Americans believe they hate everyone else too? Make the full use of that joke, I say.

Then again, the fortune shelled out for RUSH HOUR 3 didn't have much carved out for the script.

But there is something annoying about how the secret council meeting of the global Triads (or whatever nonsense) has an ultra-secret way of passing along the names of the sponsored chieftans, and Chan learns this from a person that should have been immediately suspected by Chan of dirty involvement.

SuperCop he aint.

This movie is lacking something to carry itself over the hump, to pull it through for the solid victory....and I know what it is.

Steven Seagal, a buddy of Chan, was booked originally as the villain, and that would have been the extra-mustard. Perhaps he isn't as action-credible as he once was (a major understatement), but Seagal is a name, and it would be fun to see the hero of UNDER SIEGE be the baddie.

Plus, imagine the countless fat jokes that Tucker could have spun at the expense of Flabby Seagull.

I don't think RUSH HOUR 3 is a bad movie at all, but that's about it. Its the sort of picture to escape the rain or reality with, and I sorta enjoyed the surprising TEMPLE OF DOOM homage.

Besides, where else would you see the great Roman Polanski harass the heroes by molestation? At least Ratner casted an actor with prior experience.

Not gonna go into full review mode, but just rewatched Spider-Man 2 the other day, and then (finally) Spider-Man 3 tonight. I was kinda nervous going into Three, with "Bad Spidey" and all -- but I think it could be the best one yet! Great job they did (despite the obvious CGI and chromakey effects, and perhaps one-too-many subplots). "Two" made me weep, and "Three" made me cheer! Go, Spidey!!

Inland Empire (Zero Stars)
3 hours of random stuff. David Lynch rehashes his pet theme of blurring line between imagination and reality, but only to result in a completely empty movie.

I have yet to see it (7.4/10 IMDb, 5.8/10 Netflix), but at this point, I've yet to even understand WTF any Lynch movie is really about.

"I'd rather people feel a film before understanding it."
- Robert Bresson

Anyway, I think Inland Empire is one of the richest films of last year. The sheer gesture of having a fictional actress playing a fictional character whose psyches splinter and impact their respective realities is fascinating enough, but the sound design and imagery scare me shitless.

JG, if you're interested in discovering Lynch but don't want to dive in head-first, try The Elephant Man (1980) and The Straight Story (1999). They're incredible, but very accessible too.

I did see The Elephant Man many, many years ago - didn't even realize he did it. It was cool, I'll have to rewatch it. I'll check'm both out.

My first head-first dive was Lost Highway, which I got a pre-release copy of when I worked for Polygram. Watched it stoned w/ a few friends and obviously had no idea WTF was going on. But then I watched it 2 or 3 times since and still have no idea...

PS - Blue Velvet's cool, Dune's okay, and Eraserhead is interesting to say the least (saw it in college, didn't get it, but it was hip at least )

I thought, up until I read that post, that I had never seen a David Lynch film. But I have seen The Straight Story. From everything I have read about his movies, The Straight Story doesn't seem to be something he would do. Isn't it much more lighthearted with a simple storyline compared with his other work? It is a great movie though, I'll have to check out Elephant Man.

HANNIBAL (2001) - **1/2

You can only do so much with a lousy book.

Hollywood went nuts when it was announced that Thomas Harris was going to finally pen a sequel to SILENCE OF THE LAMBS, which its cinematic adaptation was a major smash hit, and won the Best Picture Oscar.

Italian producer Dino DeLaurentiis infamously passed on LAMBS because his MANHUNTER (based on Harris' RED DRAGON) died in theatres, paid an astronomical $10 million for HANNIBAL's film rights, saying: "I won't make the same mistake twice!"

To give him credit, HANNIBAL did make alot of money all over the world, as did his later Hannibal Lecter pictures in HANNIBAL RISING and yet another version of RED DRAGON. I must say, it was a smart financial investment....but that's about it.

Besides the fact that the novel sucked, Harris had a very nice contract clause where he had script approval. Now I'm not blaming him at all for this goop, but consider all the talent involved with HANNIBAL.

Besides Anthony Hopkins back, you have the very capable Julianne Moore booked after Jodie Foster bailed. You have the great Sir Ridley Scott hired after Jonathan Demme passed on it, and this as the follow-up to Scott's triumphant GLADIATOR.

Then you have both great scripters David Mamet and Steven Zaillian take a crack at the adaptation. When the penners of GLENGARRY GLEN ROSS and SCHINDLER'S LIST can't make something out of this book, there is a serious problem here.

More than likely though, its probably another Hollywood production where too many cooks are in the kitchen, and no one really has a clue as for what the approach for the material should be....except that HANNIBAL is a cash register.

I think my central problem with HANNIBAL is the whole emphasis on Lecter. He's simply a monster that by sheer dramatic manipulation, was able to come off as an anti-hero in LAMBS because compared to Ted Levine, he seemed charmingly gracious. Plus, audiences respect a villain after such a brilliant jail break.

With HANNIBAL, we're supposed to cheer for him again because an old maimed victim in Gary Oldman wants revenge...and why shouldn't he get it?

Yeah Oldman is as prickish as any villain supposed to be, but wouldn't you be too if someone ate your face off? Forget W.W.J.D., Christ would go medieval on Hannibal's ass too.

Then there is Julianne Moore. She's a good actress, but damn her character is pretty boring. If Foster was supposed to be a wild-eyed rookie that was way over her head, Clarice Starling is now a clone from a bad action movie.

You know what I'm talking about, a cop in heat with her superiors like Ray Liotta over nothing, and getting wrongly blamed for a botched FBI operation because of something, because otherwise the story wouldn't move forward. It's amazing how already we don't care about her story, and it doesn't ever improve.

Cue the "boring" chants from wrestling fans.

And yet whenever Hopkins appears, despite my problem with his angle, he is thrilling. He's clearly having fun and really energized in his return to his iconic role. Most of all, he's involved in a really well-shot sequences contained in what is overwise a meh glamour production.

There is great tension and a pure atmosphere of terror this side of the Grand Guignol when at the museum in Florence, Giarncarlo Giannini finally realized too late that he's no match for the Good Doctor. If only it was in a good movie....

As much as I've trashed the novel, I'll give it credit in that its ending is very conclusive, and perhaps logical in a screwy romantic sort of way this side of BUG or NATURAL BORN KILLERS.

Of course it was inevitably too insane and grotesque to stay in the final film (and if the reports are to be believed, its a major factor why Demme/Foster bailed out.) Yet the ending for HANNIBAL the movie is a fustratingly alienating cop out, surely they couldn't have done worse with the original finale.

If only if they picked apart Liotta's brain more for some better ideas....

Definitely. It's why I recommend both as his most accessible films ("accessible" is such a relative term, but here I mean "most mainstream"). Did you like The Straight Story, Blib? I think it's excellent. The last time I saw it (on the big screen), I cried my eyes out. The Elephant Man might be even more heartbreaking.

I was talking to a friend at uni before the Christmas vacation and he said he loved both of these films, and because of them he was frustrated that Lynch - a director who, for him, can easily evoke such emotions with ease - tends to make more obscure, surreal stuff. I love both styles, though; he evokes fright just as easily. I think he's a master.

Yes I thought The Straight Story was great! I can't say I cried, but I did get watery eyed several times (is that considered crying?).

*minor spoilers*
I really enjoyed the scene when he is talking to the other war veteran as well as the upset lady who hit the deer.

I saw The Orphanage Saturday. It scared the living hell out of me. One of the most terrifying horror movies of al time.

THE KILLERS (1964)

This remake of the 1946 Film Noir classic has Angie Dickenson and John Cassavetes in the Ava Gardner and Burt Lancaster roles. Both did better before and since. In the earlier version, the killers ( Robert Conrad and Charles McGraw) are nasty but appear only briefly. Here the killers--Clu Gulager and Lee Marvin--are the dominant actors, and they provide much of the juice. Gulager is an obvious borderline psycho, but director Don Siegel has the good sense to keep him from going over the top. Lee Marvin, always good, is better than good here as the brooding, cold-blooded boss of the two. Ronald Reagan, in his last film role, is excellent as the tough, menacing mastermind of the heist that set the whole she-bang in motion--and the lover of divided-loyalty Dickenson.

This is undeniably a B-movie. But Siegel, like Roger Corman, does B-movies with style and conviction. Not bad a-tall.

I have just finished watching The Movie,Let's go to prison i had never heard of it before but decided to watch it and im glad i did i found it very original and funny and will definetly watch it again.

28 days later (zero stars)
There were several alternate endings in the DVD and what I saw is probably the US version (not sure). Terribly inappropriate music spoiled any bit of horror that the movie could have produced. Without that it would have been yet another zombie movie with occasional scares. This movie can be described as a comedy at best. I cannot understand its popularity.

CHARLIE AND THE CHOCOLATE FACTORY (2005) - ***1/2

As a kid, I may have been real keen to literature compared to the rest of my peers, or simply became snobbier much earlier than I remember. I hated so-called "children's books" or "juvenile fiction" or whatever demographic-label the publishing industry uses now.

Maybe its because I thought such authors talked down to me because of my age or were trying to tell some lame morality tales disguised as "adventure" books. Why bother with those damn kids of C.S. Lewis in the middle of their epic Christian allegory when I could be reading BATMAN?

But there was one author I did really like back then. Roald Dahl's books really are the Grimm fairy tales of this modern era, except in place of the Germanic sterness is English wit and dry humor.

Those writings have such little details of insanity that are just taken for granted by its characters, and the readers. There could be a Bill Gates-esque "chocolateer" who can make or break the global candy economy. There are people only as tall as your knees. You can get a job screwing caps on toothpaste tubes. Your grandparents do literally stay in bed for years.

Believe it or not, and I know a whole generation or two of people will be surprised by this, but I'm not much of a fan of the WILLY WONKA movie with Gene Wilder.

Yes, even as a kid.

Oh sure, Wilder was really charming and fun, but the rest of the movie to me was meh. That whole film was practically about how great the factory was, but it lacked those bizarre but whimsical organic moments that populated Dahl's universe. It's about as magical as a Hollywood studio tour.

Maybe this is why I was so pleasantly surprised with Tim Burton's adaptation of Dahl's iconic book. All those scenes I vividly remember all those years ago is here, pretty much as I remembered them.

The Indian Prince who loses his Willy Wonka-designed chocolate palace melts to the hot sun because of his ego. Wonka venturing into the deep jungles for new flavors where he rescues his tiny workers from being lunch. The fact that Wonka would use his genuis to break the laws of science just to make melt-proof ice cream.

Hell, even the backstory invented for the film in John August's-penned screenplay is Dahl-esque. You have kid Wonka threatening to run away to Switzerland from his dentist-father Christopher Lee, who warns that he "won't be here when you come back."

The kid returns, and not only is pops gone, but so is their entire apartment, leaving behind an empty awkward void on the city block. That's Dahl right there. God forbid, if I hadn't known any better since I haven't read the book in years, I would have mistakenly thought that sequence was always there.

Really, I was actually surprised that Burton would embrace the book in both script and in art direction, but I guess I shouldn't be. I was so burned badly by the quite lousy PLANET OF THE APES, and really....another CHOCOLATE FACTORY adaptation seemed like another commercial job for Burton to work so he could fund his precious little personal projects.

Instead, he bothers with good effort by bringing his fantastic visuals that dominated EDWARD SCISSORHANDS, A NIGHTMARE BEFORE CHRISTMAS, and SWEENEY TODD, but painted to a hyperbole with a very lightened-up color scheme instead of Burton's usual-Gothic look.

After all, CHARLIE is a sugar-coated fairy tale, pun intended.

Plus, we have Burton working with the one and only Johnny Depp. People made Michael Jackson allusions back in 2005, and its warranted, but I'm sure it wasn't intentional. This Willy Wonka isn't a surrogate-father figure for the kid hero like the Wilder movie. The kid has a decent dad back home.

This Willy Wonka is like Doc Brown in the BACK TO THE FUTURE movies. He's nuts with his eccentricities, but very intelligent. As the local mad genuis, that the kid seems inspired by him, or at least curious without prejudgement. He's wildly impressed with this oddball and his factory.

But I would have to say the biggest improvement over the Wilder version is the music. WONKA was old-school musical in it style, but an Aryan kid singing was a waste of my time. Especially when my alternative is Danny Elfman.

Guess who wins.

I've watched a fair amount of movies since my last post. Too lazy to rate or review but the list for those who are curious (and it is incomplete, I'm sure I'm missing some):

-FAIR GAME
-KINDERGARTEN COP
-RUNNING SCARED
-SCROOGED
-WAIST DEEP
-SERPICO
-THE KINGDOM
-WHO'S THE MAN?
-SHOOT 'EM UP
-3:10 TO YUMA
-DEATH SENTENCE
-DIRTY MARY CRAZY LARRY
-THE FOG (original)
-DIRTY HARRY
-HE WAS A QUIET MAN
-GOOD LUCK CHUCK
-MR. WOODCOCK
-ALIEN
-ALIENS
-EASTERN PROMISES
-THE HEARTBREAK KID
-WAR
-THE LADY VANISHES
-PROM NIGHT
-HALLOWEEN (original)
-TERROR TRAIN
-SCREAM

STRIPES
(First Viewing)

Just another bland '80s comedy that I found to not be very entertaining yet some say is a minor classic. Reitman, Murray and Ramis got it done better the second and third time around with GHOSTBUSTERS and GHOSTBUSTERS II at least.

THE NOTORIOUS BETTIE PAGE 1/2
(Third Viewing)

Gretchen Mol did a great job with this character. She was the perfect mixture of innocence and sexuality, although I don't know how faithful she was to the real Bettie Page.

RED PLANET
(First Viewing)

From a script standpoint this probably looked like a great idea but it just didn't translate well onto screen. These characters are going through these enormous personality changes given their situation and I don't believe a single one of them.

ROMEO MUST DIE 1/2
(First Viewing)

Some pretty decent fighting going on here but Jet Li still hasn't had that American hit on the same scale as HERO or FEARLESS. However, the fight scene with Jet Li, Aaliyah, and the other Chinese woman was pretty bad. Anthony Anderson did a great job at bringing some much needed humor to this otherwise dull film.

Yeah, Val Kilmer is a good guy?

Pfft....

And you better review every damn one of them, or I'll be giving you a whipping with mah belt. I'll be keeping count.

Yeah, STRIPES just aint as good as EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH.

Right?