Movie Review

(On VHS, September 1999) The unlikely pairing of Dennis Rodman and Jean-Claude van Damme would at first appear to be an exercise in cinematic awfulness critical mass. But Double Team ends up, strangely, as a curiously enjoyable piece of “guilty pleasure” B-cinema. Helping out is the effective direction of Hong Kong-expatriate Tsui Hark, who knows how to film an action scene. Otherwise, the script offers enough logical howlers and missing scenes to elicit gales of hilarity. Watch out for the deux-ex-Coke-machina ending! Not enough is done with Rodman’s character, but hey—at least he doesn’t embarrass himself.

(On TV, September 1999) So what is this film? As serious SF, it fails completely, never being able to convincingly explain its very framework. As satirical SF, it would have worked… in the fifties, and then again would have been re-written another time. (Though it does go through the motions of creating a different future.) As action, it’s almost a bore, given that we’ve seen all of it in other films, and more often than not, in other Sylvester Stallone films. As a comedy, it does have its moments, though those are dispersed between a mass of limp material. To the film’s credit, Stallone is okay and Sandra Bullock (“Lenina Huxley” is one of the few clever elements of the film) is adorable… but otherwise we’ll have to fall back on set design to say nice things about this movie. An acceptable divertimenti if you haven’t yet seen it, but otherwise not an essential.

(On TV, September 1999) One learns a lot from a movie while doing the dishes while it plays on TV. First; made-for-TV films are never of superior quality. Two; beautiful actresses can make you look at the screen even if what they’re doing isn’t really interesting. Three; it’s a very bad sign if you can’t remember the end of the film only two days later. Four; There is still no reason to disprove the axiom that “any movie title containing cyber is sign of a rotten script”. Five; When making a film about a pop signer, don’t repeat the same song four times, especially if it bears an uncanny resemblance to a Republica song. Six; washing dishes while watching a completely empty film still gives you the feeling you’ve accomplished something.

(On TV, September 1999) It’s hard to see where a soft-porn film about car crashes can go wrong for any young male, but David Cronenberg’s film never amounts to anything beyond a collection of brief sex scenes. And even then, most of those are cut so quickly as to be insignificant. If it’s supposed to be an exploration of sex versus machine, it doesn’t do a whole lot of exploring. The lack of development is such that once the superfluous is cut out, there can’t be much more than fifteen minutes of plot left. (At least Deborah Kara Unger is very hot, so much that she makes plain-looking Holly Hunter look ridiculous in comparison.) Say what you want about porn films, but most of them contain both more plot and more excitement -and, possibly, more realism- than Crash.

(On TV, September 1999) This may not be the most convincing thriller out there, but it works despite the numerous logical flaws, editing glitches and coherence problems it contains. The script scream “contrivance!” each time a new oh-so-dangerous situation emerges, regardless of previous continuity. The tough-but-sensitive protagonist role seems custom-built for Sylvester Stallone, who turns in a convincing performance. Director Renny Harlin obviously knows how to build a thriller, and Cliffhanger includes several money shots that elevate this action film from fair to good.

(On TV, September 1999) In an industry often incompetent enough to be unable to turn out decent product, it’s a refreshing change to see a perfectly good thriller so well-done. No earth-shattering villains, no save-the-world histrionics; just an ordinary guy looking for his wife, and battling plain blue-collar baddies. The pacing is superb, the direction is surprisingly competent and Kurt Russell turns in a fine performance. Though not without significant plot flaws (relying too much on coincidences in the first half-hour), Breakdown remains a superior, unassuming little thriller done strictly according to the rules of the genre. And that’s more than good enough.

(In theaters, September 1999) This works pretty well, provided you do consider it as what it is; an updated Beverly Hills Cop taking place in the same sunny fantasy Los Angeles world where police headquarters are architectural models and everyone fires heavy artillery at the slightest provocation. Martin Lawrence is surprisingly sympathetic as the protagonist. The script has numerous plot holes, but the comedy is funny and the action scenes are engaging. A perfect example of “a good time at the movies”, Blue Streak is -in the end- just enough fun.

(On DVD, September 1999) This manages to build three-quarters of quite a good B-grade action film before completely losing it in the finale. Patrick Swayze does a good job as the trucker action hero—looking disturbingly like Kurt Russell. (Meatloaf’s character, however, ends on a cringe-inducing over-the-top mode.) The truck stunts are really enjoyable: make no mistake, this is a truck movie, probably the best since Convoy and/or Smokey And The Bandit. (Feeling nostalgic, yet?) The plot is serviceable, but takes a turn toward both the gee-that’s-boring and the where-did-THAT-come-from in the schizophrenic finale. Worth a look for action/truck junkies, but you might be better off rewinding the cassette at the one-hour mark and making up the ending in your own head.

(On TV, September 1999) Here’s a splendid example of a comedy that loses “it” completely and repeatedly. “It” being wit, development, arc, punch lines and cohesiveness. Not the ingredients needed to build a successful comedy, you’ll say… and yet compare the silly throw-stuff-at-the-audience-until- something-sticks “philosophy” of Billy Madison with the meticulously constructed and developed comedy of, say, Shakespeare In Love and see if one isn’t funnier -and more satisfying- than the other. Even Adam Sandler’s latter Happy Gilmore is more focused and thus more enjoyable. Still, there’s no denying that there are a few good laughs out of Billy Madison, though they won’t make much of an impression… and won’t quite stop to make you wonder how on earth would someone like Madison would end up with someone like Brigitte Wilson.

(On VHS, September 1999) Often-impressive war drama that unfortunately bogs down in useless vignettes and an empty last thirty minutes. Some of the combat scenes are truly stunning, and deservedly attain classical status. On the other hand, the film as a whole is a disappointment; a series of hits and misses, ending on a big miss.

(In theaters, September 1999) Even though Oscar buzz for this film is pretty high, I can’t say I’m cheering for it. Yes, Kevin Spacey is magnificent as the curiously sympathetic protagonist. But, -and this is almost certainly an age thing- I wasn’t deeply affected either by the middle-age crisis theme nor the adolescent-angst subplot, leaving me hanging straight in-between these two age groups. Granted, the movie is at times spectacularly funny, but then it predictably veers into the melodramatic and the deliberately-artsy, making me wish it would go back in comedy territory. The final line is pretty good, though.

(On VHS, August 1999) The biggest problem with this film is that it’s far more interested in being a parody of thrillers than being a comedy. This gives rise to two problems: One, the films feels like a disconnected string of not-so-funny gags rather than a coherent laugh riot and two, the film doesn’t make much sense if you’re not familiar with the source material. Add to that the problem that Leslie Nielsen’s standard bumbling fool comedy personae is wearing thin (even the film’s opening credits acknowledge “Leslie Nielsen As Leslie Nielsen”) and… hmmm… the result is uninspired despite being all-inspired. Some grins, rare chuckles but no belly laughs.

(On TV, August 1999) I had heard many good thing about this much-lauded film and frankly, I was caught unprepared at how… conventional it all was. Yes, David Mamet’s macho-guy dialogue is fun, and there are some pretty good set-pieces, but did it have to be so obvious? The infamous Eisenstein-ripped staircase sequence is set up for what seems like five interminable minutes, and it all ends up being barely okay. (The parody in Naked Gun II was far superior) Otherwise, you can pretty much guess what’s going to happen five minutes in advance, and the late-minute gunfight heroics aren’t really as satisfying as they’re made out to be. Good entertainment, but not a classic!

(On VHS, August 1999) One of my favorite film gems is a little-seen pseudo-documentary comedy about the rise, fall and reunion of a rap group, Fear Of A Black Hat. Many other reviewers dissented, calling it a pale imitation of This Is Spinal Tap, an early-eighties pseudo-documentary comedy about the rise, fall and reunion of a rock group. After seeing the earlier film, I must say that it must be a generational thing: No only is the style of music of Fear Of A Black Hat closer to my rap/dance favorites, but the latter film simply seemed funnier than This Is Spinal Tap, which hasn’t aged very well. In fact, a lot of the film just seems too close to reality to actually being funny. This isn’t to say that there aren’t any chuckles here and there, but the music industry has changed considerably in fifteen years, and This Is Spinal Tap suffers from it. Of course, who’s to say how Fear Of A Black Hat will sound in ten more years? Probably that by then, there will be another pseudo-documentary about the rise, fall and reunion of…