Original vs. Remake Comparison: The Evil Dead (1981) vs. Evil Dead (2013)

Fede Alvarez’s new Evil Dead film has been the talk of the horror community for some time now. When news emerged that a remake of the classic was in the works, horror fans were instantly apprehensive of the idea. After all, Sam Raimi’s original The Evil Dead (1981)is one of the most beloved horror films of the 80’s, hell, it’s one of the most revered horror films ever, period. Sam Raimi and crew unleashed their independent horror film onto the world way back in 1981, when they were all struggling filmmakers and actors. Back then Raimi wasn’t the Hollywood mogul he is now, back then he was just a guy who loved making movies with his friends, and that he did. With every film they made goofing around, they got better and better, until they finally decided to make their first real feature length film. The Evil Dead’s kinetic style and frenetic pace truly impressed horror fans, so much so that Stephen King himself called it “the most ferociously original horror film of the year” That famous quote was well earned, back then, nobody had seen anything like The Evil Dead.

I first came in contact with the Evil Dead films around 1993 because it kept getting mentioned in Fangoria Magazine. Back then, before the internet, all a horror fan could do to keep up to date with new stuff and learn about the classics was to devour every issue of Fangoria and its sister magazine Gorezone. I kept seeing articles that mentioned The Evil Dead and Evil Dead 2: Dead by Dawn (1987) over and over again as films that any true horror fan should experience. Back then, as a neophyte horror fan, I devoured every horror movie I could see. When I finally got around to seeing The Evil Dead, my teenage mind finally realized what all the hype was about. Evil Dead was “the ultimate experience in grueling terror”. It quite simply pushed the limits of what had been done with gore and horror up to that time. Because of its meager budget (350,000) the film was a success and while it was banned in many countries because of its graphic nature, it also served its purpose; it showed the world that Sam Raimi was good at making horror films and that he was a special filmmaker that was here to stay.

Raimi and Campbell on the set of The Evil Dead

Fast forward 30 odd years later into the future and The Evil Dead has spawned two sequels, helped boost the career of both Sam Raimi and Bruce Campbell and has now spawned the most recent addition in the Evil Dead family: a remake. When I first heard about the remake, I was also apprehensive of it. I guess, that’s a gut reaction from any true horror fan. I also feared that this was going to be a watered down version of the Sam Raimi classic. Various factors lead me to believe this. Why was I so hesitant to believe that a new Evil Dead film was destined to be a “sans cojones”  version of the old one? Well, my main reason for all the trepidation was the sad state of the American Horror Film. For the past couple of years, the American Horror film has suffered from the same ailment that the American action film has suffered from. They just don’t have the guts they use to have; they just don’t make them like they used to. You know this and I know this. When you watch an action film from the 70’s or 80’s you can feel the difference, you can sense the augmented sense of horror and violence; you can see the characters were crazier, edgier somehow. When you watch old horror films from the 70’s and 80’s, you are reminded of what you no longer see in modern horror films. Where are today’s Icons of horror? Where are the Freddy’s and Jason’s of this generation? That shock to the system that you would get from these old horror films is all but gone from cinemas. All you’re left with is what American Horror films are today, a pale imitation of what they used to be. Old horror movies like The Evil Dead serve to remind us just how soft American horror films have become.

Then there’s the fact that the director behind the old Evil Dead films -Sam Raimi- has kind of drifted away from his horror roots, which is a natural progression for any filmmaker who wants to grow. Filmmakers need to stretch their muscles and try other things outside of the horror genre, which Raimi has proven he is adept at. Unfortunately, when Raimi attempted a return to horror he made Drag Me To Hell (2010) a film that I didn’t love because it simply felt like a watered down version of a Sam Raimi film. It was Sam Raimi light. Drag Me to Hell was the studio horror film that couldn’t go very far in terms of horror because it had to play it safe. It was a studio putting kajillions to make a horror film, Raimi couldn’t risk it being a failure. Drag Me to Hell was disappointing because it wasn’t the Raimi that I loved, it wasn’t the guy who pushed the horror genre as far as it could be pushed. Drag Me to Hell felt like Raimi was pushing back, pulling away.  Another thing that worried me are the horror films that Raimi has been producing through his own production company, Ghost House Pictures, a production company that Raimi formed to make new horror films and allow younger directors to take a crack at making them.  I’m talking about films like The Possesion (2012), Boogeyman (2005), Rise (2007), The Grudge (2004), not exactly a mind blowing group of films, not to mention the mind numbing direct to video sequels that followed some of these productions. My big worry was, would this new Evil Dead film also be unspectacular and watered down?

Boy was I wrong! This new Evil Dead film blew me away! It took my expectations and surpassed them in every way imaginable. In my book, Evil Dead is the horror film responsible for giving American horror its balls back. This is what I’m talking about! Evil Dead is a film unafraid to cut away, unafraid to show you the goods, unafraid to be graphic and brutal and unrelenting. In other words, I was a happy horror fan, I cheered, I clapped in approval, I jumped, I cringed, I gasped. It’s a funny thing that the director responsible for giving American Horror films it’s gravitas back is actually Uruguayan! Ha, but seriously folks, I applaud Sam Raimi for giving young filmmakers like Fede Alvarez a chance to just go out and make their own thing, test their mettle, see what they are made of. And let me tell ya, for a first time filmmaker who’d only made short films before this one, Alvarez shows great aplomb with Evil Dead. Editing, cinematography and performance wise the film is solid. It wowed me, it took me by surprise. Let’s explore what worked and didn’t with this remake shall we?

First off, they give the events that happen in the film more depth, more weight. For all its legendary status and legions of fans, the original Evil Dead film is a very simple, straight forward horror movie about a group of friends going to a cabin to have some fun. Their main preoccupation is partying. Demons resurrection passages, the book of the dead and everything else is just something they stumble upon while on their search for good times. There’s a hint of romance between Linda and Ash which gives Ash something to fight for, but for the most part, the main focus of the first Evil Dead film was to shock the hell out of you. Where the remake succeeds in my book is in giving the proceedings meaning, purpoise. The kids on the remake go to the cabin to help their friend break with her cocaine habit. This isn’t a film about people going to have fun as in most horror films, nope, these kids are here to help their friend break the habit, so immediately the film has a more somber/dark tone to it. This mission was a positive addition to the film. I also enjoyed how they used demons as a metaphor for the Mia's personal demons, nice touch.

Then there’s the gore which was plentiful. How plentiful you ask? Well, let me put it this way, in the pantheon of ultra gory horror films like Peter Jackson’s Dead Alive (1992) or Clive Barker’s Hellraiser (1987) which are two of the goriest films I’ve ever seen, Evil Dead can proudly stand next to them. You know how modern horror films don’t linger too long on anything graphic, as if afraid to offend sensors or the Motion Picture Association of America? Well, Evil Dead isn’t like that; if somebody chops off their arm, you see it, if blood splatters, it really splatters! If somebody needs to get chopped up in half with a chainsaw, then this is what you are going to see! I honestly don’t know how the MPAA let this one slip by. That is the question that kept popping into my mind, how the hell did this one slip by them intact? Sam Raimi must’ve pulled a few strings because this is one blood drenched film. Honestly I was getting tired of films being all shy about the gore, this one my friends brings those gory days of the 80’s right back! There’s only one scene that I regret they didn’t include from the original and it’s the scene where Ash chops off his zombie girlfriends head off with a shovel. They do something similar, but they didn’t really do it. It’s the only negative thing I can say about it. But they included so many other cool things that I let that one pass. And the demon possessed folk look really demonic, loved that about it.

When comparing the two Evil Deads, both come out on top. Both are good for different reasons. Evil Dead is the rare remake that is great, it pays its respects, but keeps things interesting as well. Trust me, if you love horror, gore and demons in your entertainment, then go see this one as soon as possible! We get the stuff we love about the original, like kids going to a lonely cabin in the woods, we get a book that brings demons from hell and all that, but the film also offers up new things that we never saw on any of the previous Evil Dead films, but with enough familiar elements to keep Evil Dead fans happy. Its little things here and there, little bits of dialog, or simply, visual gags that pay homage to the original. For example, for most of the film we don’t see a chainsaw anywhere, but there’s this one moment in which a character finally picks one up and turns it on and at that precise moment, the audience cheered as if saying “now it’s really an Evil Dead film!” You’ll see Raimi’s signature yellow 1973 Oldsmobile Delta 88; a car that has appeared on all of Raimi’s Evil Dead films, including this one. So from the standpoint of an Evil Dead fan, I can say you’ll be happy.  

Audiences have liked this new remake, actually, audiences have devoured it! It is still number one in theaters and has more than doubled its budget with its box office intake! I personally would like to thank Raimi and Campbell and Alvarez for making this one special, it wasn't a half assed cheap-o sequel cash in. Nope, this one was made with love, and I know that sounds weird because its a movie about people getting chopped up with chainsaw's, but dammit, there's a love for the genre present here. A sequel is no doubt in the horizon as we speak and first time director Fede Alvarez must be feeling all kinds of giddy with his first success. Alvarez has already spoken about a sequel, which as he states it would be an all new story that takes things in a whole new direction, gotta admit, I’m looking forward to that! Evil Dead fans should be rejoicing because if internet buzz is true, then Sam Raimi and his brother are currently writing a new installment in the Evil Dead franchise! With Bruce Campbell playing Ash! Now how groovy is that? Extremely freaking groovy that’s how groovy! And speaking of groovy, take it for me and stay after the credits, there’s a special something for all you hardcore Evil Dead fans! It’s well worth the wait.

Rating for The Evil Dead (1981): 5 out of 5

Rating for Evil Dead (2013): 5 out of 5

   

Dreamscape (1984)

Title: Dreamscape (1984)

Director: Joseph Ruben

Cast: Dennis Quaid, Kate Capshaw, Max Von Sydow, Christopher Plummer, David Patrick Kelly

Review:

Dream movies are a special bunch of films; they offer things that no other kind of movie can offer us:   dream sequences that explore the surreal landscapes of the mind. In Dreamscape we meet Alex Gardner, a young man who can transport himself onto other people’s dreams. He is psychic, something we find out early on, when he wins a bunch of money at the horse track. His psychic abilities are what augment his dream traveling abilities. Once the government gets a whiff of Alex’s abilities, they kidnap him and convince him to help them with their new project; a project which consists of using a machine to enter other people’s minds. At first we are introduced to the benevolent side of the project, which is to help people confront their fears, but then we go into the negative applications of the technique, mainly, if you kill a person in the dream world, you can kill them in real life!

Dreamscape is a film that explores the fascinating world of dreams. I’ve always found dreams to be incredibly interesting and the idea that we can consciously control what happens in dreams? Mind blowing! These types of dreams are called ‘Lucid Dreams’ and in them you become aware that you are dreaming and attempt to control what happens in the dream. This is not fantasy, and it’s something you can look into and learn how to achieve. I read up on it and tried some of the techniques, and I gotta tell you guys, Lucid Dreaming actually works! I was personally successful in my attempt; I actually became aware that I was dreaming, while dreaming! The bitch of the thing is trying to stay asleep once you become conscious in the dream, because the minds natural reaction is to wake you up when you become conscious. But the few seconds that I managed to be conscious within my dream was actually kind of frightening and intense, but also strangely exhilarating. Dreams are something we can all identify with because it’s something we all experience; we all dream. We all confront our fears in those wee hours of the night, which is probably the reason why dream movies are big hits with audiences. I mean, look at the success of the  Nightmare on Elm Street franchise, or Tarsem’s The Cell (2000), two films that have a whole lot in common with Dreamscape, the film that explored these themes first.

I see Tarsem’s The Cell as an update on the ideas presented in Dreamscape, but done in a far more stylish manner because of Tarsem Singh’s involvement in directing the picture. The Cell is a superior film in many ways, but that’s due to the fact that it had a bigger budgetthan Dreamscape, which was made with a measly 6 million dollars, mere pocket change in Hollywood terms. The Cell on the other hand had 33 million dollars to play with. Still, even with its meager budget, Dreamscape is a film big on ideas. I love it when these films get made in spite of their small budgets. The filmmakers say:  “screw it, we’ll make do with what we got!” The amazing thing is that most of the time, something cool comes forth none the less, which was the case with Dreamscape. The ideas presented are pretty outlandish! The president of the United States is having nightmares because of the Cold War. He has nightmares of people dying in a nuclear blast! He can’t take the pressure of being the president and having to be responsible for pressing the proverbial button that can kill millions. Once again, same as many films from the 80’s fear of nuclear holocaust is present because this is what people were living through at the time. So the film not only explores the dream world and all the possibilities therein, it also deals with political and moral issues.

An interesting aspect of Dreamscape, and I mentioned a bit of this earlier, is how many similarities it shares with the Nightmare on Elm Street franchise. We got characters going in and out of dreams; we have an evil dream demon type of guy who even has claws, just like Freddy Krueger does! Plus, there’s the idea that if you die in your dreams, you can die in real life! Even more interesting is that both A Nightmare on Elm Street (1984) and Dreamscape were being made at the same time, and released mere months apart. There’s a possibility that one studio was trying to copy the other studios dream film and so, we get two extremely similar films being released. But Dreamscape was released first in August 1984, while A Nightmare on Elm Streetwas released in November of the same year, so Dreamscape did it all first. Another connection that Dreamscape has with A Nightmare on Elm Street is that Dreamscape was partially written by Chuck Russell, the very same writer/director who ended up writing and directing A Nightmare on Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors(1987), a film that shares many similarities with Dreamscape. On that particular Elm Street film we meet Kirsten and Nancy, two characters with the ability to enter other people’s dreams, they can even bring people into their own dreams. So I’m guessing that Chuck Russell’s experience with writing about dreams in Dreamscape landed him the gig to write and direct the third entry in the original Nightmare on Elm Street franchise.

The only problem for me with Dreamscape is that sometimes the special effects look pretty outdated. There’s this one scene where we meet a half man, half snake creature, and the stop motion animation leaves a lot to be desired, I mean, not only is it stop motion animation, it’s bad stop motion animation. But aside from that, we get some trippy visuals every time we go into dream world, I sometimes got the feeling that the film was made for 3-D but never got around to getting converted. On the plus side of things, the film has an excellent cast, we get Dennis Quaid in the prime of his youth, actually, it might take you some time to get over how young he looks.  Christopher Plummer plays a political douche bag and Max Von Sydow his counterpart, the good natured scientist. Kate Capshaw (aka Spielberg’s wife) plays one of the heads of the dream project. And finally we get David “Warriors, come out and play” Patrick Kelly, playing the Freddy Krueger like villain of the piece. Final words on Dreamscape is that it’s a film with an interesting premise that did a lot with very little. Its budgetary limitations didn’t stop it from exploring its themes thoroughly; recommended to those who love movies that explore the fascinating world of dreams.

Rating: 3 ½ out of 5  

FOR A LOOK AT MEMORABLE DREAM SEQUENCES ON FILMS GO HERE!   

King Kong Lives (1986)

Title: King Kong Lives (1986)

Director:  John Guillermin

Cast: Linda Hamilton, Brian Kerwin

Review:

After seeing King Kong Lives and giving it a good reassessment, I can safely say that in the pantheon of really stupid movies, King Kong Lives is a contender for the top spot. I did a couple of articles a while back on Worst Movies Ever Made and I completely forgot about this one on there, in fact, I think I’ll edit the articles to include it. Yeah, its stupidity cannot be ignored. Wowzers this movie was bad! Let’s see, where do I begin? Well, let’s start at the beginning; King Kong Lives is the direct sequel to John Guillermin’s King Kong (1976), the one that starred Jessica Lange, Jeff Bridges and Charles Grodin. That film in turn was a remake of King Kong (1933), the film that started it all. Guillermin’s 1976 remake wasn’t bad at all, it retold the story with modern effects, it was campy, fun, it even had some romance in the mix. The only problem with watching it today is that the effects look really out dated; the filmmakers did what they could with the effects that were available at the time. When it was released, it was a marvel to behold; legendary make up effects artists Rick Baker and Carlo Rambaldi joined forces to create the beast for that movie, the results while not at all convincing (Rick Baker wasn’t entirely pleased with the final results) won the filmmakers an Academy Award for Best Special Effects. Guillermin’s remake was one of the most successful films of 1977 (ranking fifth) and when aired on television, it was also a ratings success; so of course, a sequel was a no brainer. Unfortunately it took the producers ten years to get going with it. So, literally ten years after the success of the first film, King Kong Lives roared its ways into theaters.

The biggest problem with this movie is all the stupidity you have to accept in order to follow the story. I know, watching a film about a giant gorilla stomping New York City already requires huge amounts of suspension of disbelief, but damn, this movie asked for more suspension of disbelief than humanly possible. The first idea we’re supposed to swallow is that Kong didn’t die at the ending of the previous film. Now this is virtually impossible since the giant ape was shot down by machine guns! He fell from the top of the World Trade Center! We heard his heart stop beating! I mean, everything pointed to Kong dying, same way he died in the original film. But no, the filmmakers behind this film (who by the way are the same ones who made the 1976 remake, right down to its director) ask us to believe that some way, somehow, Kong has been in some sort of a coma for more than 10 years!? Okay, fine, I’ll take that jagged little pill, but then we’re supposed to believe that Kong is getting a heart transplant! Okay, maybe I can believe that, but then after the operation the guy doesn’t even have the freaking scar he is supposed to have on his chest! The inconsistencies escalade that way all throughout the movie.

So anyhow, then there’s a Lady Kong that suddenly appears in the Congo and some Indiana Jones wannabe who goes by the name of Hank Mitchell finds this Lady Kong and sells her to the same university that is trying to give Kong a heart transplant. Now, here’s my big question: why would they want to bring Kong back to life? After all the death and destruction he brought to the city? Don’t they figure he can do much, much worse if he wakes up again? I mean, it’s like trying to wake up freaking Godzilla! Nobody wants that! Not only this, but then they actually consider bringing in a female, so they can give Kong the chance to multiply and bring forth little baby Kong’s that can probably wreck havoc on the city just as well! These must be the stupidest scientists this side of Howard the Duck! Not only that, but they don’t have the proper facilities to contain a beast like Kong. The funniest part of the whole thing is this; they struggle to give Kong a new heart so the beast can come back to life and we get the impression that somebody actually cares for Kong. But then after he wakes up, they drug him and put him right back to sleep! So what’s the deal? Did they want to bring him back to life or not? The characters in this film are playing games with poor Kong, leave the damn beast alone! Make up your minds about what you want to do with him, but this thing about resuscitating, drugging, resuscitating and drugging is just abusive! Especially with a creature who has a heart condition like Kong. 

But yeah, this movie is all about Kong’s heart beating faster every time he gets a whiff of Lady Kong,  who’s being held captive in a hangar, right next to Kong’s. It’s kind of funny seeing Kong fall in love and yes my friends, this is what you are going to see, Kong falling in love! Kong hitting on a girl, slowly working his way up to the big event, the only difference this time around is that he’s sticking to his species. In the first film he falls for a human, but on this one he’s found one of his own to do the dirty deed with. Here’s this rampaging beast that suddenly gets all sweet on us! You have to see Kong’s face when he sees his female counterpart for the first time! It’s quite funny! So get ready to see Kong actually grab Lady Kong’s ass!, I’m not kidding, this happens on this movie! Lady Kong’s reaction is priceless! See Kong share a meal with his lady! See Kong getting some! Yes my friends, not only does Kong get it on in this movie, he also takes that big step and becomes a dad. There’s this thing they tried to do which was show parallels between humans and animals, so while Kong is getting it on with Lady Kong, the Indiana Jones type gets it on with the scientist who takes care of Kong’s heart, who by the way is played by Linda Hamilton. Her reply to getting it on in the woods with the adventurer is “we are primates too”.

Linda Hamilton, behind the scenes on King Kong Lives

One of the biggest downsides to this movie are the special effects. This movie was made in 1986, but they decided to make this movie like it was still 1976. The 1976 version of King Kong updated things from an effects stand point. They decided not to use stop motion effects and instead decided having men in suits act like giant gorillas. They even went and built a gigantic robotic version of Kong that cost more then a million bucks! Here's a funny little bit of info from that 1976 version of King Kong, they spent a bunch of money creating that giant version of Kong, and it only appears on the film for like five seconds! Talk about a waste of money, but anyways, King Kong Lives though made ten years after the 1976 version made absolutely zero advancements in effects techniques. For all intents and purposes, this movie might as well have been in the 70's. Men in suits and miniatures galore.  

"What do you mean you don't you have protection?"

But then, after Kong plants his seed, the army takes Lady Kong away and it turns into a film about Kong trying to find his Lady friend. On his way he stumbles upon a couple of rednecks who want to make fun of him and they get what’s coming to them. There’s a chunk of the film which simply has Kong going around destroying little towns and smashing Lamborghinis, then the army decides they can take Kong on, apparently they never learn. Same thing happens in Japan, the army there doesn’t quite get it yet that their little tanks and guns are no good against Godzilla! Here it’s the same; they seem to think that bullets and tanks make them invincible against a giant gorilla! Now here’s where this movie gets even freaking stupider…the whole process of impregnation and birth for Lady Kong seems to happen in a matter of days! Ha! Before you know it, Lady Kong is pregnant and giving birth to Baby Kong! This movie is nuts, it’s the kind of movie that makes you wonder what the producers and director where thinking of when they made it. Still, I’ll let you be the judge of it because after all, a bad movie like this is good for a laugh, which is the only thing I can recommend this movie for. A laugh! And making me laugh ain’t a bad thing, a lot of people have a soft spot for this movie, warts and all. I gotta say, Kong kind of grows on you after a while. This film was the last nail on director John Guillermin’s coffin, after two blockbuster failures Sheena (1984) and King Kong Lives; he never made another film again. I wonder why? I guess it just proves one thing: one two many failures in a row will get you a free pass out of Hollywood. 

Rating:  2 out of 5 

G.I. Joe: Retaliation (2013)

Title: G.I. Joe: Retaliation (2013)

Director: Jon M. Chu

Cast: Jonathan Pryce, Dwayne Johnson, Bruce Willis, Channing Tatum, Ray Park, Byung Hung Lee, RZA

Review: 

G.I. Joe Retaliation is a film I watched with some trepidation because of how the studio got cold feet last summer and took the film off their summer roster. That’s right, Paramount Pictures and MGM spent a couple of millions promoting this sequel as a summer 2012 release then felt unsure about the film, yanked it out of its release date and shifted it to May 2013, almost a whole year after it was made; their reasons? Supposedly they wanted to amp up the effects and convert the thing to 3D. Me? I think they were fixing a couple of things here and there that they didn’t like about the film. Maybe they felt they had a lackluster film and decided to add a scene or two, just to make things flow a little better? Studios do these re-shoots all the time; they are fine by me as long as the end result is worth it. So, was the whole damn thing worth it? Did the studios course of action with this film work?

G.I. Joe Retaliation is about Cobra Commander breaking out of a super high tech underground prison and attempting, yet again, to “rule the world”. How does he plan to achieve this? By kidnapping the president and placing one of his loyal servants known as ‘Zartan’ (master of disguise) in his place. You see, Zartan can morph and look exactly like the president, so without America knowing it, they have a member of Cobra ruling the nation. And soon, at the right time, Cobra will take over! But how will he hold the world at ransom? And how can a disbanded G.I. Joe team stop him from achieving his world dominating goals?

So yeah, I wasn’t all that excited for this movie, in fact, I wasn’t planning on seeing it in theaters, because in my book, when a studio gets cold feet with a movie the way they did with this one, it raises a red flag for me immediately. It means the studio didn’t have faith in their product and thought it would fail if released. But then something happened. The film was released and it shot straight to the first spot at the box office! Reviews were saying “it wasn’t all that bad” and that it surpassed the first one, which wasn’t all that difficult considering how lackluster the first one was; making a better film wasn't a tough task. The real task was giving this one that G.I. Joe feel, something that I felt the original lacked, yet this one has in spades. The term used to describe a film like this one amongst film reviewers is “fluff”, which basically means it’s not an important film, it’s the kind of film you watch, are entertained by and then quickly forget because it doesn’t make a lasting impression on you. I personally think this is exactly the kind of film Retaliation is; pure and simple fluff, but that isn’t a bad thing if that’s what you know you’re going to see.  I knew this was what I was in for, so I just went with the flow. Did I end up having a good time?  Hells yeah. I mean, as everyone is saying, it is way better then the first. It isn’t as jokey, it’s tone is slightly more realistic, but I stress the “slightly”; the film is still very much a comic book film.

First the good points: this film feels like G.I. Joe movie, the vehicles they use in the film were apparently really based on the toys because I recognized a lot of them from my pre-teen years, back when I collected G.I. Joe toys with a vengeance. I was one of these kids who had a bunch of jets and tanks and Joes, and placed them in a bunch of positions, by the end of the day I’d have this big ass war going on, ha, the memories. But yeah, this movie will have you getting a couple of flashbacks if you were a hardcore Joe fan. Coolest part about the whole movie is that Cobra finally looks like freaking Cobra! I loved that about it. Cobra Commander looked so freaking cool with his mirror surface helmet. The voice, the wardrobe all screamed classic Cobra Commander. There are moments where Cobra is looking over his empire  that are too cool for school. On the downside, we didn’t get enough of Cobra; I wanted more of the guy! Instead we get Jonathan Pryce playing Zartan; he’s the villain for most of the picture, I wanted more Cobra!  

How cool does Cobra look?

Also on the downside of things, they treated so many characters like crap. I mean, all the Joes from the first film simply disappear or die, and we’re left with a rag tag bunch of Joes. I loved the addition of Dwayne Johnson into the whole G.I. Joe universe, but I hated the fact that for example they disposed so easily of ‘Destro’ one of the coolest villains that the Cobra’s count with. And where the hell was The Baroness? She was never even spoken of! But whatever, this is a comic book movie and things like this are bound to happen. I’m sure what happened was that the actors simply didn’t want to return to a movie they thought would end up being crap, I bet they all wish they had returned now! I’m sure they will return for a third entry, especially when we take in consideration how successful this film has turned out to be; nobody likes to say no to a blockbuster. Dwayne Johnson fits perfectly in this film, but they also decided to add Bruce Willis as ‘the original Joe’ but he ends up doing the same thing he’s being doing in most movies he is in now, smirking, shooting machine guns and saying one liners.

I enjoyed the fact that thematically speaking the film isn’t entirely hollow, actually, the story touches upon old fears that have, in an interesting turn of events, suddenly re-emerged in the world. I’m talking about nuclear paranoia; memories of the Cold War flashing on everbodies minds, countries threatening to blow each other away. Suddenly we got North Korea threatening to blow the world to smithereens with its nuclear weapons, and the whole world seems to be entering into some sort of cold war yet again. I guess governments want to amp up that all important fear factor in the world, some world leaders like to get cocky and show they are the biggest and baddest. So anyhow, there’s a cool moment in the film where many of the world’s rulers meet in one room to discuss the fate of the world and for a moment it seems like the world will be blown to shreds. I liked that contemporary theme, it rang true. Actually, those scenes had some people giggling in the theater, myself included, the whole idea of these crazy dudes shooting nuclear weapons at each other is so contemporary, so right of the moment. It brought to mind Kubrick’s Dr. Strangelove or How I learned to stop worrying and love the bomb (1964). The film points out, in the midst of all its comic book hijinks that the fate of the world lies in the hands of a couple of power hungry nutcases, it’s kind of scary when you think about it.

This new film is stylish, and has a couple of really cool action moments, like for example there’s this whole sequence where Snake Eyes has to escape a temple that’s up in some icy mountains, and he has to rappel the hell out of there, and so suddenly we get this really cool sequence with Ninjas fighting while rappelling down a mountain, which was too cool for school. I mean, the filmmakers themselves even ended the scene by cutting to another scene with people clapping as if giving themselves a pat on the back for the whole thing. Retaliation switches from huge action sequences to political intrigue scenes and it's all very entertaining in my book, it worked. Seeing power hungry politicians pressing red buttons is always entertaining! Even the idea gets me on the edge of my seat, G.I. Joe: Retaliation plays with all these fears that humanity must be feeling as I type this.  Retaliation was directed by a guy called Jon M. Chu, the guy responsible for bringing us such masterpieces as Step Up 2: The Streets (2008) and Step Up 3D (2010); I guess those films made enough money at the box office that he was given the chance to make this one, and that’s cool by me, he showed he could pull off an effects heavy film. Lucky for him that Retaliation has made so much money because a third film in the franchise has been greenlit, something tells me it will be bigger and better. Hopefully the series will continue its steady rise in quality. It might be fluff, but it’s fun fluff.

Rating: 4 out of 5  

R.I.P. Roger Ebert (1942-2013)

"No good movie is too long and no bad movie is short enough" - Roger Ebert

My Science Project (1985)

Title: My Science Project (1985)

Director: Jonathan R. Betuel

Cast: John Stockwell, Danielle Von Zerneck, Fisher Stevens, Dennis Hopper

Review:

My Science Project came about around the time when teenage sci-fi comedies like Back to the Future (1985), The Last Star Fighter (1984), Weird Science (1985) and Real Genius (1985) where huge box office hits. Some of these teen sci-fi comedies made a lot of money, others didn’t fare so well. My Science Project was one of the ones that didn’t fare so well at the box office. There are various reasons that we can attribute to its failure, one of them being that it didn’t have any “it” teenagers or big time producer/directors involved in its production. For example, Back to the Future starred Michael J. Fox and had Steven Spielberg producing, Weird Science had super hot model Kelly LeBrock, Real Genius had  Val Kilmer, but My Science Project counted with no name actors or producers. I mean, Fisher Stevens isn’t exactly a huge box office draw and neither was anyone else on the film, basically, this was one of those movies in which everyone was just getting started in the industry. Dennis Hoppers role is basically a glorified cameo, so it doesn’t really count.  Sometimes in a film, it’s the special effects that are the star of the show, this was the case with The Last Star Fighter which employed computer effects heavily, which was a novelty at the time. My Science Project also had a huge emphasis on visual effects, question is:  were they worth a damn?

The story for My Science Project goes something like this: Michael is the local grease monkey/high school student who is flunking science class. In order to pass the class, his science project has to be “Dy-no-mite”, unfortunately, nothing has popped into his head. It seems Michael is only good at one thing: fixing cars. Not to worry though, Michael has decided to visit a military junk yard in hopes to find something that might wow his science teacher. Low and behold, he finds this weird looking machine that glows with purple light. He doesn’t know exactly what it is, but It looks like he’s found exactly what he needs to pass his class! Too bad for him this isn’t just any old gizmo! This is an alien machine that creates “time warp wormholes” that bring things from other times into our own. Will they find a way to shut the damn thing off?

The thing about the film is that it starts out fun enough, with these teenagers, each doing their thing, one is a geek, the other a grease monkey, the other a television/comics freak and I was personally digging the movies first half in which we get to meet the protagonists. The girl of the group is ‘Ellie’ and she’s writing an article for the school newspaper while at the same time trying to go out with the grease monkey ‘Michael’. She’s all head strong about it asking him out. Problem is that Michael is confronted by his hippy science teacher played by Dennis Hopper. By then the film was reminding me of Bill and Ted’s Excellent Adventure (1989), which has a similar premise, two best friends have to travel through time to recover real life historical figures in order to pass their history exams. Unfortunately once Michael turns the machine on the film turns into a dull visual effects show that never seems to end. The effects are cool to look and I have to admit, I loved the sound effects they used for it, but after a while it turns redundant. You simply get more of the same thing over and over again. You see, the time warp thing brings all sorts of creatures and characters from other times into the local high school, so it isn’t long before we’re seeing mutants, cavemen and dinosaurs roaming the halls of the school. I will say that there’s this cool moment where a T-Rex pops into the school’s gym that I loved. But then we go back to the overdose of blue lights.

The concept is a good one; the whole thing with having creatures come in and out of time also reminded me a whole lot of Weird Science, a film where they also fooled around with the same idea. The only difference is that Weird Science was actually funny; this one loses the funny by focusing on the visual effects. At the time, these types of effects were very popular, I remember that Lifeforce (1985) was another film that had a lot of these flashy blue lights on the screen, the problem for me with My Science Project is that too much time is spent on the visual effects and the characters and their motivations get lost in the shuffle. The romance between Michael and Ellie kind of loses steam; in my opinion they needed to focus a bit more on it so things would matter more. There’s this whole subplot about Michaels father getting married with a bimbo that has absolutely nothing to do with the plot, it seems to have been included in there for no reason but to stretch the films running time. There’s a moment where the film drags, but then we go back to the whole thing with the monsters in the school and things get a bit more exciting. Then it's all about turning off the machine and fighting whatever monsters come out of the worm hole. 

"Who you gonna call?"

In terms of performances, this movie's saving grace is of course, Dennis Hopper who plays the stoned out of his mind science teacher. He isn’t in the film all that much, but when he is he lights up the screen and steals the show. Basically, Hopper plays the whole thing as if he was still ‘Billy’ from Easy Rider (1969), he says “yeah man” and “far out” a lot and wears a peace symbol on his neck. He has one of the craziest moments in the film. Then we have Fisher Stevens, whom some of you might remember as the guy who invented ‘Johnny Five’ in Short Circuit (1986). He’s easily the funniest thing in the movie, always referencing some 80’s movie or television show. There’s this moment where he talks about John Carpenter’s Christine (1983). That’s one of the things I like about this movie, the kids are all talking about very 80’s things. For example, there’s this one moment when somebody asks “How many times have you seen Jedi?” At another moment in the film some hoodlums are wearing storm trooper helmets! All these 80’s references made the whole thing very nostalgic for me, I used to watch this one a lot back in the day. How 80's is this movie? Well, wait till the end credits and hear the theme song for the film, thats how 80's!. 

I watched this one with a friend of mine and she kept pointing out how hot John Stockwell looked, unfortunately, his good looks didn’t take him too far, he never turned into an 80’s “it boy”, what he did do was become a filmmaker. He’s gone on to make films like Crazy/Beautiful (2001), Blue Crush (2002), Into the Blue (2005) and Turistas (2006), his career as a filmmaker is actually alive and kicking. Fisher Stevens also turned into a director making films like Stand Up Guys (2012) and Just a Kiss (2002). Danielle Von Zerneck ‘s career isn’t filled with that many great films, but to me she will always be Ritchie Valens’s  girlfriend “Donna” in La Bamba (1987). So maybe starring in My Science Project didn’t send them to stardom, but hey, these protagonists have found a way to thrive in the film industry in other ways. The only one whose career in the film industry fizzled was the films director, Jonathan Betuel. He wrote and directed the film, which was kind of cool because he also happens to be the guy who wrote The Last Star Fighter (1984), one of my favorite films from the 80’s. The success of The Last Star Figther is probably what got him this gig. After being involved in the making of these two films, he never directed any feature films of note, unless you count the Whoopi Goldberg vehicle Theodore Rex (1995) which cost 33 million dollars yet went straight to video, which probably explains why Betuel never worked again in the film industry, that’s what I call one expensive flop! I haven’t seen Theodore Rex, but it is heralded as one of the worst films ever made. They say it’s kind of like a remake of Blade Runner, but with Harrison Ford as a Dinosaur? Damn, now that I think about it, I’m going to have to see that! I'll have me one of those 'bad movie nights'.  Bottom line with My Science Project is, it’s not a ‘top tier’ 80’s film, but it’s not completely forgettable rubbish either. If you’re feeling nostalgic about the 80’s, it’s at least worth a watch.

Rating: 3 out of 5

Big Trouble in Little China (1986)

Title: Big Trouble in Little China (1986)

Director: John Carpenter

Cast: Kurt Russell, Kim Cattrall, Dennis Dun, James Wong, Victor Wong

Review:

You guys ever seen The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai (1984)? That’s the one in which Peter Weller discovers a way to go to other dimensions by traveling through solid matter? Well, anyways, at the ending of that film, a sequel entitled: Buckaroo Banzai vs. The World Crime League was promised. Unfortunately, The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai didn’t make much money at the box office, so that sequel never came to be. But there’s this myth amongst hard core Buckaroo fans that says that Big Trouble in Little China is actually the unofficial sequel to The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai. How did this rumor come about? Well, I didn’t know this until the other day when I reviewed The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai and one of my readers pointed this fact out to me, but W.D. Richter, the guy who wrote The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai also wrote Big Trouble in Little China. That’s right my friends, these two nutty, misunderstood films come from the same brilliant mind. Kind of makes sense don’t it?

 For those not in the know, Big Trouble in Little China is a ghost story about Lo Pan, an ancient Chinese emperor who died centuries ago but is now looking for a way to become flesh again. Problem is he has to marry a girl with green eyes in order to do so. Enter Wang Chi and Jack Burton, two buddies who are on their way to the airport to pick up Wang’s girlfriend ‘Miao Yin’, a Chinese girl who’s coming from China to reunite with Wang, her fiancé. Unfortunately, before Wang and Miao Yin can reunite she is kidnapped by a group of thugs who work for Lo Pan, the ghost who wants to be a man. Apparently Miao Yin is the girl who can fit his bill. She does have green eyes after all! Will Wang and Jack have what it takes to infiltrate Lo Pan’s temple and rescue Miao Yin before she marries Lo Pan? Will Jack ever get his truck back?  

All he wants is his truck back

I started my review for Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai by comparing both of these films, and I didn’t even know they were related in this way! My brain somehow connected both of these films in the same review, which I think is really weird. So anyhow, in my review for Buckaroo I compared the two because both of these films are so offbeat and bizarre that the studios that produced them just didn’t know how to market them to the masses. These movies are what are known in the film industry as a “tough sell” something that Hollywood doesn’t like at all, they like their films to be easily marketable, with an easily identifiable target audience. Who do you sell a movie like Big Trouble in Little China to? If you ask me I would’ve just sold it as a modern day Kung Fu flick, which it essentially is, but apparently the marketing department at 20^th Century Fox didn’t know what the hell to do with this movie, so they invested very little into promoting it. Another film lost millions because studios couldn’t make heads or tails of the film. Strange how easily a studio can get cold feet with a production because they think it’s too weird and it won’t make any money. But time always proves all these silly producers wrong, and so Big Trouble in Little China has become a solid cult favorite. The people who love this movie, really love this movie. This proves once again that studio heads know jack, they’ll market the hell out of Transformers 2, a terrible film in my opinion, but won’t market Big Trouble in Little China, which was very obviously a good movie.

Truth is, Big Trouble in Little China is an easy movie to love. I’m a huge fan so excuse me if I gush about it for the next few paragraphs.  It has so many fun characters, they can’t seem to ever stop yapping, and the stuff they talk about is just hilarious. I mean, seriously, how many of you folks out there agree that Big Trouble in Little China is one of the most quotable films ever? I know right? In the dvd commentary for this film Carpenter and Russell call Jack Burton’s dialog ‘Burtonisms’ which are basically little golden nuggets of wisdom that the character of Jack Burton spews throughout the whole movie. I’m talking about thought provoking stuff like:  “It’s all in the reflexes” and “You’d have to be some kind of a fool to think we’re all alone in this universe!” Trust me, there’s more where those came from, and if I’m not back in ten minutes “call the president!”  So yeah folks, what we have here is one of those extremely quotable films. I haven’t been quoting this movie all my life for nothing!

Going back to the whole thing about Big Trouble in Little China being an unofficial sequel to Buckaroo Banzai, the real dirt on the story is this:  the film had originally been written as a western by two guys: Gary Goldman (this is one of the guys who wrote the script for Total Recall (1989)) and David Z. Weinstein.  Apparently this version of the film was going to prove to be too expensive! In that script they didn’t steal Jacks truck, they stole his horse! So anyhow, thing is the studio thought it was going to be a tough movie to produce so they brought in W. D. Richter to rewrite the thing, they wanted him to set the story in a contemporary setting, so that audiences could identify better with it; funny how they still managed to produce a film that didn’t connect with audiences! But anyways, W. D. Richter took the opportunity to inject elements into the Big Trouble in Little China script that were meant for the unproduced Buckaroo Banzai sequel! Knowing  this takes my enjoyment of the film to a whole different level! Now I’m always going to see Burton as the truck driving version of Buckaroo Banzai! 

Aside from all these Buckaroo Banzai connections, Big Trouble in Little China is an extremely entertaining movie on its own. What I personally enjoy about it is how crazy it gets. We’re talking about a Chinese ghost that wants to be flesh again so he can rule the universe from beyond the grave, or check into a psycho ward, whichever comes first! We’re talking about a movie where characters can have sword battles in mid air and ancient sorcerers have huge magic battles! This is a film in which we can see flying eye monsters that have telepathic abilities! A film with characters that can manipulate lightning and air! I mean, here’s a film with a ten foot tall ghost who shoots light out his eyes for crying out loud! This my friends, was John Carpenter’s version of a Shaw Bros. Fantasy/ Kung Fu movie and I loved every second of it. There’s no denying it’s an offbeat film, but that’s what I love about it. Even Russell himself was afraid of making it because he was afraid it’d be too weird. You see, Kurt Russell had done a series of box office bombs before Big Trouble in Little China (for example Carpenter’s own The Thing (1982)) and he didn’t want to make another one. Yet, he committed to the film anyways because Carpenter and Russell are not just co-workers, these guys are friends, they’ve been making films since Escape from New York (1981)! Russell and Carpenter understand each other, it’s something that’s quite obvious when you hear the dvd commentary for Big Trouble In Little China. According to both Russell and Carpenter’s commentary, the film was getting great results with tests audiences, so much so that they both thought it was going to be a hit! Unfortunately, thanks to 20^th Century Fox’s botched marketing techniques, no one knew about the film when it was released and so kaput, it died.

But a movie flopping in theaters does not equal a bad film, in rare occasions it’s quite the opposite, the film simply slipped by the public’s consciousness. It’s not our fault that the studio didn’t sell it to us properly, something that’s supposed to be their forte. So anyways, even though Big Trouble in Little China was a huge money looser for the studio, I The Film Connoisseur, guarantee you’ll have a good time with it. Think about this: in what other film are you going to see a underground Chinese temple with glowing neon nights? Or people who become Kung Fu Masters by drinking out of a seven demon bag? Nowhere but in Big Trouble in Little China that’s where! This is a film that openly embraces its fantasy roots and asks no questions about it. We have monsters, magic, and Kung Fu in this movie, what’s not to like? James Wong is great as Lo Pan; a brilliant performance in what in my opinion is the best role of his life. Russell, Cattrall, both of the Wongs and Dunn, they all make for a Motley Crue of crazy, funny, people who all act like they are high on coke, they reminded me of Buckaroo’s group of sidekicks, “ The Hong Kong Cavaliers”, aha! If you ask me, this is one of Carpenter’s best films; production values, visual effects and script wise, this movie is top notch every step of the way. At the very least it’s on my list of top five John Carpenter films.  It shouldn’t have bombed the way it did. But it’s all cool; we now have it on dvd and Blue Ray and it’s legions of fans grow every day. Oh and there’s a possible remake on the horizon! If it doesn’t work, just remember what Jack Burton always says at a time like this. Old Jack always says: “What the hell!”  

Rating:  5 out of 5