REMO WILLIAMS: THE ADVENTURE BEGINS (1985) - ***

There is action cinema that has to be seen because they're the cream of the crop. DIE HARD, WHERE EAGLES DARE, HARD BOILED, and so forth. Then there are other movies that folks must watch simply because they actually exist.

Take REMO WILLIAMS: THE ADVENTURE BEGINS, a picture jam-packed with action and insanity, it has to be seen to be believed. Trust me action fans, your life isn't complete without a screening. It's something you'll never forget this side of seeing old people naked.

Imagine a movie where from a sheer hardcore training regiment, the hero Fred Ward is able to dodge bullets, air-walk over wet cement, spider-crawl all over Ferris Wheels and the Statue of Liberty, and make women orgasm by a gentle tap to the wrist.

How about the ultimate oriental badass who's a fan of Soap Operas? Hell, they're all nothing compared to a scene when Ward uses a thug's diamond-stud tooth to carve an escape out of a glass death trap.

REMO WILLIAMS was practically SHOOT'EM UP for the Reagan Decade

Based on the enduring THE DESTROYER adventure books, REMO details a NYPD cop who gets double-crossed, and his death faked by an ultra-secret government agency, C.U.R.E., which reports only to the President.

It's mandate is to take out people who cheat the judicial system with their money and power. Their slogan is the unofficial 11th Commandment: "Thou shalt not get away with it." You reading this Roger Clemens?

Ward, now given the codename "Remo Williams" (after a bedpan), is forced to become an assassin. He's sent to be trained by Korean fight master Joel Grey. REMO was I believe the last Hollywood production to go "Yellow-Face," or hired a caucasian actor to play an Oriental character under massive amounts of make-up.

Yet in spite of the logical and ethical issues I have with such castings, Grey hits a home-run as the racist, sexist, and hilarious as hell Chiun. Proud of his clan's murdering heritage ("Professional assassination, it's the highest form of public service"), the scenes of making the proud macho-American Ward humble are good fun.

Along with his endless sets of memorable one-liners, Grey practically is what makes REMO WILLIAMS worth watching.

Certainly the movie lacks the smooth masculine trashy fun intensity of the DESTROYER novels, but it sure as hell tries to be as "hip" and pulpy as them.

The problem for many DESTROYER fans, and I don't fault them really, is that all this supernatural ass-kicking was accomplished in the pre-CGI era by sound clips, quick cutting, and simple effects, which gives REMO WILLIAMS a pretty cheesy cheap vibe. It's arguably a great "bad" movie.

Then again, that's the charm of REMO for me. It works for me as a pure B-picture, and at times it plays like DR. NO, which was shot before 007 was A-level and big-budget.

There is a plot shoehorned into the narrative about a villainous weapons-manufacturer and a love interest, but they're all junk-filler for an "origin" tale that was the starting-point for a planned franchise that crashed and burned on the launch pad.

If only we lived in an mirror universe where we had gotten more REMO pictures, and RESIDENT EVIL got strangled in its crib....

THE GAME PLAN
(First Viewing)

Ok, I know the Rock went with the safe, family, Disney movie here but now he needs to turn it up a notch. This film, for whatever reason minorily boosted his career again (don't even ask me how or why the film was the #1 film in this country for a period of time or how and why it grossed as much money as it did). You're "back" Rock, now do something about it. He was "suppose" to be the next great acting star yet he can't even tie Jason Statham's shoes. On a minor note, Madison Pettis was impressive as his daugther.

Run Lola Run **
My only problem with enjoying this movie was that I knew the concept of the movie before hand. It is an interesting theme, but not too original. It is infinitely more entertaining than the Kieslowski movie Przypadek which it ripped off in terms of concept. At 81 minutes, it is very watchable.

SAW IV 1/2
(Second Viewing)

I'm a SAW fanatic as this is the best horror franchise running IMO. I love seeing a new film pop up every year around Halloween time because I know it'll be there. This, however I think was the first film were I felt it was starting to run its course. I still think they could do another one (maybe two) but after that it's going to turn to sh*t. This is in a lot of ways a remake of the first film.

I watched Wild Hogs on cable this morning. It is undoubtedly an incredibly stupid movie and a waste of a good cast. However, it is also very funny. I found myself alternately wincing at the bad plot and even worse dialogue, and laughing my ass off.

RUMBLE IN THE BRONX (1996) - **1/2

It's since then been demolished, but there once was the Martin Theatre, the centre for the Kingsport Mall, the first indoor shopping complex for that city. The Martin was from a by-gone era where before the age of the googleplex, only two movies played at a time, and the joint was absolutely nasty.

I mean the popcorn was always stale, stains everywhere, the toilets were broken, there was a visible tear on the screen, and the seats not repaired since the Reagan Administration. It was a favorite place for drug junkies and prostitutes applying their trade.

And yet, I sure miss the Martin if only because it was the site for so many of my cherished childhood movie-going experiences.

Take for instance me and my friends went off to a matinee screening of RUMBLE IN THE BRONX. While he already was an action cinema icon to an underground fan community, but it was BRONX where most Americans like us discovered Jackie Chan.

For us boys, Chan was certainly quite different from the other action heroes we grew up with. Unlike Van Damm and Seagal, Chan's body movements wasn't stationary and static, but very fluid....and literally all over the place like a cartoon. He was as charismatic as Bruce Lee, but in a quiet, gentler, more audience-friendly with charming mannerisms.

But most of all, unlike all those action stars, Chan is just isn't so goddamn SERIOUS.

Van Damm is almost always beaten nearly to death this side of a weird-ass sadomasichistic Jesus Christ complex. Seagal is always stone cold with his dead-calm dialogue, and Lee is either being philosophical fluffy about a code of honor while brutally killing his enemies.

No, Chan is more of the comic clown who rather avoid fighting but always seems to get trapped in sticky situations and has to use his fists and body to escape.

It's just like Buster Keaton, but if he had learned kung fu or got bored by trying to stop a train.

In reflection, BRONX is actually a lousy movie. The dubbing is GODZILLA bad, the acting is Soap Opera terrible, there are lots better Chan movies (DRUNKEN MASTER II)and well, the plot is a shabby excuse for the real show.

In a way, watching a Chan flick is like watching a Jeff Hardy wrestling match. Sometimes you may get good kayfabe storyline heat to cook up the in-ring storytelling, but usually you don't.

But you're guaranteed some aerobatic flips, injury-begging jumps, and once a blue moon, a death-defying "spot" that take your breath away. Like BRONX, its a glorified Stunt Show, which it should be simply viewed as.

From squeezing through a shopping cart to spider-crawling parking garages to avoiding death-collisions with buses to leaping onto a runaway hovercraft, we boys were shocked by seeing Chan doing all of this crazyness himself, and doing it simply for a movie.

Then seeing the blooper reel afterwards where Chan breaks his ankle, only to go back to work with a painted-sock. Hell, one spot in general, if he doesn't slide down a car's roof-door quick enough, a motorbike would have forced the movie to be retitled RUMBLE IN MY GROIN.

With all that, and his immortal jump across a city street onto a fire escape WITHOUT any safety catch, to us boys he was "hardcore" before we found Mick Foley and ECW.

We would then watch all his other pictures, either already on video before several of those same titles were re-released in theatres. Much like what happened after ENTER THE DRAGON and Lee's demise, Chan's earlier work flooded the American scene. Hell, he's the only reason why I went to see RUSH HOUR in theatres.

That said, I do remember now a brutal scene that didn't involve falling or getting hurt on Chan's behalf. You have this punk gang, which somehow survived the early 80s New York and mullets, prepping up baseball bats and beer bottles and you think, "yes another brawl!"

Instead, they play baseball with the empty bottles into Chan, and the shattered flying glass cuts him up this side of DIE HARD, blood everywhere.

Now that's gotta hurt....

SHOWGIRLS
(First Viewing)

An enjoyable please-take-me-seriously movie that turned out to be a huge bomb. I don't think this was the way Elizabeth Burkley wanted her career to turn out after SAVED BY THE BELL ran its course. Gina Gershon was quite enjoyable as the b*tch who toys with Berkley's character throughout the film.

Hey Ronnie have you seen Eastern Promises yet? I wanna check it out.

Yes, and it was on my Top Ten list for 2007...#3, I believe.

EASTERN PROMISES (2007) - ****1/2

ESCAPE FROM NEW YORK 1/2
(Second Viewing)

I gave it another shot and while I enjoyed it more, it still didn't blow me away unfortunately like HALLOWEEN or THE FOG did. I think on paper this seemed like a great film but for whatever reason, it just didn't translate well onto the screen. I think the costumes and cars were pretty campy and I'm looking forward to the remake due out in 2009 with Gerard Butler.

You mean the remake that got CANCELLED?

Then again, you always thought Brett Ratner was the shit.

Besides, EFNY was a pretty low budget movie back in ole 1980 or 81 or whatever. Give it a fucking break.

ASSAULT ON PRECINCT 13 (1976)
(First Viewing)

Not as captivating as the 2005 remake. The remake had a better cast, more realistic and better explained story, and more excitement. However, I'll give John Carpenter some props as it was one of his first films and he made HALLOWEEN following this.

THE THING (1982)
(Second Viewing)

Definitely better a second time around, well worth the rewatch. This film sucks you in from the begining about this thing that is attacking these American scientists. The effects were very good for 1982.

That was when Carpenter was churning out great movies like Halloween, The Fog, Escape from New York and then The Thing.

One of my favorite sci-fi movies of all-time is "The Thing" (1951). Hell, its one of my favorite movies, period. The fact that this remake matches the original (IMO) is remarkable enough, but it stands on its own merits. The FX are great as is the story (much truer to the novel "Who Goes There?", on which its based).

It cannot, however, compare to the superb timing and dialogue of the original (which is somewhat dated by today's standards). I highly recommend viewing the 1951 version, but I'd equally recommend this wonderful remake.

I want to watch the original but can't find it on DVD. If you ever see it coming on cable anytime, please let me know.

Will do.

Thanks

You can get a new DVD for $6+ on Amazon.com.

Here's a link:

"THE THING" (1951) - CLICK HERE

Hmm, I didn't know it was under that title. Thanks for the heads up SC, I added it to my Blockbuster queue

Cool!!!

Don't judge it by the effects (silly by today's standards) or the filming itself (some scenes are clearly "fake") but rather by the dialogue and its quick, machine-gun delivery (as good as any I've ever seen).

Keep in mind this was made in 1951 when we were really just at the birth of the nuclear age and a lot of people were anti-military. There's an interesting insight into some pro-military thinking here (unlike in "The Day the Earth Stood Still", another excellent sci-fi flick from the same year).

I think you're asking too much of him.

To see films in context is probably the biggest difficulty or failure of which I see with my generation.

Take ESCAPE FROM NEW YORK. It was a B-movie through and through, and its budget was peanuts, like $5 million, to try to create as something like a futuristic action movie about escaping a maximum security New York City prison.

In a way, its Carpenter trying his own hand at a Leone movie...not as graceful, but its still a lean, mean, satisfying B-action movie.

Plus, you gotta dig Snake Plissken. He's a criminal through and through, never apologizing or doing anything that redeems or whatever.

But I guess some folks rather have CGI up the ass, stupidity, apolitical*, and a hero with redeeming qualities or whatever nonsense.

*=Carpenter is either an anarchist or a libertarian, I can't tell. His America of the future is always a paramilitary fascist state. This works because Snake is, for better or for worse, individualistic, or freedom.....think about it.

I'll admit that the first time I saw "Escape From New York" I didn't like it but watched it again (simply because it was about my home city). Upon subsequent viewings I enjoyed it more and more and saw it for what is was - a pretty good movie!

Maybe I am being unfair to ask someone to watch a movie that I've enjoyed immensely and giving them guidelines to do so. Its just that I've been watching this (original) movie of "The Thing" for about 47-48 years and even I find it almost laughable in parts because its so dated. I just want to stress the timeless qualities of it - its dialogue and how its deliverered - almost a machinegun like rat-a-tat style, fast and effective.

The "context" part was added just because its a subject dear to me... I once started writing an essay comparing the two movies from the same year ("The Thing" and "The Day the Earth Stood Still") and how they were diametrically opposite each other. One of these days I'll finish that essay.

I agree. Like I said yesterday with a second viewing, I enjoyed it more and thought it was a good movie a second time around. But I wouldn't call it great. Now THE THING was great a second time around.

What's next, you'll realize that BLADE RUNNER is great too the next time around?

Better late than never, I say.

Well, its like my review of Howard Hawks' SCARFACE.

Unlike some people on these boards, I don't do the silly thing and compare that 1932 classic to say modern cinema.

I tried to watch it for the context of the times it was shot in, and for that era of the Gangster-genre....it fucking stands out as a movie where the criminal-hero never reprents for being a criminal, but simply that he got busted...and how Hawks was willing to let such an animal be a compelling underdog tale.

And its great in spite of the bullshit changes put in place after the fact....

Now that's saying something.

And context works for ESCAPE FROM NEW YORK as well. It was scripted in the not-too-optimistic late 1970s in America, and while John Carpenter won't ever admit it, but I am certain the 1979 Iranian hostage crisis played a creative impetus for EFNY's premise in some way.

While you have these pretty boy "Punk" bands running around these lands and boring us through the airwaves, that late 70s/early 80s was "Punk" in these anti-authoritarian rants...and thats what EFNY basically is, especially with the ending where Snake fucks the President over.

Plus, since STAR WARS and RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK, where each was about action action every few minutes, EFNY was of the old school variety where an action picture tied itself around 2-3 action sequences, ala THE GREAT ESCAPE, BULLIT, etc.

Thats a good point, and one I've never made a conscious connection with.

Some Like It Hot (1959) A comedy about two struggling Chicago musicians who after witnessing the St. Valentine's Day massacre are wanted by a mob boss named Spats (George Raft). In order to get away from the mob the two men dress up as women and hop on a train with an all girl band that is going to Miami.

No matter how many times I watch this movie it's just as funny and entertaining as the last viewing. A movie that I never tire of. Jack Lemmon and Tony Curtis are just hilarious. And the Joe E. Brown / Jack Lemmon dressed as 'Daphne' scenes are just classic.

Night of the Hunter *
It resembles a typical Hitchcock film in terms of plot and story, which I am not a big fan of anyway. The camera work is pretty good. But it is painfully dated and didn't interest me for most part.

1408 ***
This movie is based on a Stephen King novel. It is genuinely spooky in some places. Though I am not very much into horror movies, I found this very interesting. Good acting by John Cusack.