Written By: Cherry Chevapravatdumrong and Teresa Hsaio
Story By: Adele Kim, Cherry Chevapravatdumrong and Teresa Hsaio
Cinematography: Paul Yee
Editor: Nena Erb
Cast: Ashley Park, Sherry Cola, Sabrina Wu, Stephanie Hsu, Timothy Simons, Ronny Chaing, Lori Tan Chinn, Annie Mumolo, David Denman, Desmond Chiam, Meredith Hagner, Daniel Dae Kim
Follows four Chinese-American friends as they bond and discover the truth of what it means to know and love who you are, while they travel through China in search of one of their birth mothers.
The film does feel like the same kind of humor as the television show BROAD CITY only abroad in the east. Instead of two roads, it’s four though there is a main contingent of two in the middle.
It seems like it strives to be like the movie GIRL’S TRIP to a degree. It has that same type of energy but has way more set-ups for there to be madness.
Just Like that film though everyone seems to get their moments and is on Equal footing as there is no real star and while in that film Tiffany Haddish became the standout. Here there isn’t one really as again they all have their moments and especially more on the shocking Side. As the film is raunchy.
It’s Nice to see it break the wall if it is a female-driven comedy and an Asian American leading ladies. Who break the mood of the stereotypical roles they usually are portrayed or cast. Going at it with full gusto.
While it makes its points about culture and points out some issues. It also is more about entertainment.
It’s A Nice follow-up for actress Stephanie Tsu coming off her recent Academy Award best-supporting actress Nomination with another memorable noteworthy role. Though Not for its dramatics
It feels a bit like the first AMERICAN PIE for that summer shocking comedy for a specific audience that grows bigger than Its demographic. That seems to come from nowhere. Yet charms and excites the audience. Even when at times you can see where it is going.
Directed By: James Melkonian Written By: James Melkonian and Rich Wilkes Cinematography: Paul Holahan Editor: Peter Schink
Cast: Michael Kopelow, Bradford Tatum, China Kantner, Renee Ammann, Clifton Collins Jr., Kevin Kilner, Taylor Negron, Art Chudabala, David Groh, Jake Busey
Determined to avoid another night of driving aimlessly around Torrance in the Blue Torpedo, Joe and Hubbs set out on a quest for fine chicks. Their paths soon cross with Tack, from whom they learn about a pair of radical chicks hanging out near the Frankie Avalon place. Over Joe’s objections, Hubbs worms Tack out of the deal, and the pair take a slow ride toward their destiny.
The trailer for this movie drag me in as it was so hilarious at the time that this was a must-see and I have to say definitely not disappointed.
I am probably remembering it as better than it probably is but I generally like this movie as I saw it when I was a teenager and to me, it was a straight-to-home video classic
This is truly the 1980s suburban teenager dream party film as it is actually nasty funny witty at some points and actually just generally kind of fun. It never overstayed his welcome and it keeps moving forward in the kind of buddy comedy and of itself, only the buddies are already friends at the beginning of the film. This is just like watching their misadventures throughout the situation of the night.
As it had the rebelliousness of a teen movie, even though you could tell, nobody was really a teen in the movie, and it seem more of a throwback to maybe a more certain California suburban lifestyle. They don’t make movies like this at all anymore, which is why it stays memorable whereas at the time it might’ve been just another and this film is rude and crude and not afraid to offend anyone, nor does he go out of his way to do that either.
It’s also generally unrepentant when it comes to the material of the film, which really feels like a throwback to the 1980s teen sex comedy. Only there is a lot of talking about sex in the idealization of women as sex objects, but there isn’t that much actual sex there is nudity.
Renee Ammann seems to be the sex object of the film that all men or most of the men desire throughout, she is the bombshell that brings all the boys to the yard literally but what I really liked was the ridiculous side characters and the comedy between them and how ridiculous they were. As she is treated like this precious object or treasure, that is meant to be held possessed, and had. Then discover while she is good, looking, she’s human, and not necessarily all that special.
Of course, by the end the main character realizes that it’s not all about sex it’s also about who you get along with, and who has a better personality, and you just generally vibe with, as far as chemistry. as he is more the romantic of the two, and though his best friend is a jerk. They still remain friends until the end.
Think of this as a harder edge and less out their version of DUDE, WHERE’S MY CAR, and movies like that?
It’s also how I discovered the song Don’t Fear the Reaper by Blue Öyster Cult before it was heavily used again in the movie THE FRIGHTENERS. It also helped me to discover and appreciate the band also. Before they became legends with the infamous Christopher Walken, Will Ferrell Saturday night live cowbell sketch.
The film can be seen as two friends on a quest that never really goes out of anywhere that they are unfamiliar, but seeing it in a new light, and facing up to the challenges that they come upon on this quest. As after all, it’s about the journey, not the prize. They even learn something about themselves.
This is a general R-rated teen sex comedy. That’s a throwback and I appreciate it for what it is. It doesn’t try to be anything more. I mean the title loans to tell you what you’re in for so while it’s not great cinema, it is at least entertaining for the audience that would want to see a movie called The Stoned Age. And do not believe it to be a sequel to Encino Man. Which one of the actresses actually had a small role.
It’s just fun lowbrow humor. A fun, cold comedy that came from a short film and was intended to be the first of a trilogy starring the two main characters.
You can look at it as a nostalgic throwback to dumb or stoner comedies along the lines of Pauly Shore, movies, or the dude where’s my car type.
Directed By: Zane Buzby Written By: Steve Zacharias and Jeff Buhai Cinematography: Steven Katz and Alex Nepomniaschy Editor: Gregory Scherick
Cast: Charles Grodin, Robin Pearson Rose, John Ashton, Megan Mullally, Jon Lovitz, Phil Hartman, Mario Van Peebles, Gerrit Graham, Brenda Bakke, David Mirkin, Scott Nemes, Jacob Vargas
George Lollar takes his family on vacation with “Club Sand”, a shoddy and untrustworthy company. On their tropical island, they find soldiers everywhere, an unhelpful staff, inhospitable accommodation, and undesirable holidaymakers, but everyone except George manages to have fun in the sun.
This is a Film that I have always seen the poster in box art for. I might have even remembered a commercial, or at least a preview of it.
So, after all these years, I finally decided to sit down and watch it, and I can see I was wise to avoid it for all those previous years. the only noteworthy thing about this movie is its casting.
He calls itself a comedy, but while he tries to be funny, they are seldom laughs to be had. It is basically a visual guide of what can go wrong and will go wrong, especially when you are a nuclear family.
And there are a lot of comedic recognizable actors in this film either before or while they were on SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE, as well as less recognizable actors. It’s a rare early role for Megan Mullally of will and grace for instance
Though the film seems to beat a dead horse as it just shows a Family on a nightmare vacation in a Third World country in the 1980s where the staff is more interested in partying rather than helping
While Charles Grodin’s character, the father of the family stays unhappy and complains and has to deal with all the shenanigans around him, his family slowly one by one is charmed by the resort and it’s residence so that soon he is the only stick in the mud
So if you are a fan of watching Charles Grodin, be the street man and get exasperated as the conditions get more and more ridiculous. This is a Film for you. If you thought he yelled a lot in his other films, you ain’t seen anything yet.
They must’ve paid Charles Grodin very well and allowed him to pretty much be his screen. Self knows that seems to be what he does throughout the film and is probably the rare occurrence of him having a lead role. Though supposedly he believed this to be his funniest film. As he also helped rewrite it.
For a film that seems to hint at being a sex comedy and offers plenty of T&A. The film shows a little but prefers to suggest rather than show. If it did show this might have made it into National Lampoon territory. As it seems a bit inspired by the Chevy Chase Starring. National Lampoon’s Vacation movies
if you want to watch some comedic actors before they were stars, embarrass themselves by doing bad accents this is the film for you
It’s just shocking how few laughs there are in a film stacked with a great cast. This is truly an example of looks being deceiving.
Written & Directed: Alex Heller Cinematography: Jason Chiu Editor: Harrison Atkins
Cast: Alex Heller, J. Smith-Cameron, Steve Buscemi, Emily Robinson, Wyatt Oleff, Kyanna Simone, Rajeey Jacob, Anne Hollister
Clemence Miller is coming home to live in her family’s basement after dropping out of college with a newly diagnosed mental illness. Having to face her battered relationships and responsibilities of adulthood, she is driving everyone around her… crazy.
The one thing about this film is its Cookie cutter surroundings and times that it plays like a racy sitcom. It always feels devastatingly honest.
The film is like a suburban heartfelt confession. That offers no real answers. As it doesn’t have any to give. It is just what works for the main character, as this film is autobiographical. This might be what works.
The film shows that no matter what. No one is perfect and they are trying to do the best that they can. That most are opportunistic and there is always a chance for opportunity open.
You know how it most likely will turn out from the title alone. Which doesn’t offer up a finality but seems more like a midpoint. Which could be the ingredient or the meat of a Sandwich. The most flavorful and tasty.
It also offers a look at what isn’t necessarily Tackled in films about main characters with illnesses mental and physical. Which is the toll it takes on those around you. As the world still goes around. Even when you are dealing with things that are holding you back.
The film points out that not everyone has the same Opportunities or chances and choices, but the film still doesn’t explore their options or chances. Then again the film Isn’t their story. Which makes the character identifiable a bit maybe not the situations.
Alex Heller writes, directs, and stars. At times her mental illness comes across more as a Comic persona but seems to be her truth. As she doesn’t come across as likable but she is understandable. As she shows warts and all her downfall and many rock Bottoms, not also Her trying to get better and the ups and downs of that.
Directed By: Michael Winner Written by: Dan Jakoby Based on characters created by: Brian Garfield Cinematography: John Stainer Editor: Arnold Crust
Cast: Charles Bronson, Ed Lauter, Martin Balsam, Deborah Raffin, Gavin O’Herlihy, Kirk Taylor, Alex Winter, Tony Spiridakis, Marina Sirtis
Architect/vigilante Paul Kersey arrives back in New York City and is forcibly recruited by a crooked police chief to fight street crime caused by a large gang terrorizing the neighborhoods.
This film is a cult classic to many and it’s very easy to see why. As it is supposed to be New York, but you can tell not only it’s a set but actually filmed in England!!!!
This film doesn’t bother to put up any pretense; it cuts to the chase immediately. No real drama, just Charles Bronson’s friend getting immediately killed when he is on his way to visit him in NYC. So he seeks revenge after being arrested as a suspect in his friend’s murder. He is in the same holding cell as the film’s main villain. Definitely a full pedal to the metal.
When I say things are kept simple I mean it when it comes to this film. As the villain is middle-aged and a gang leader. A gang that never leaves the neighborhood and he himself looks middle-aged with a bad haircut in his balding frame. There is no rhyme or reason for his or his gang’s killing. Even when they say he has a clean arrest record. It seems like maybe because he is a trust fund kid or makes enough money to afford a good lawyer. Nope, he just has others do his crimes for him.
As soon as Charles Bronson comes into the neighborhood he defends it openly. While a detective supports it. You wonder if the cops are dirty after one of the older couples has their gun taken away by cops after a complaint from the criminals.
At least by the end, he gets to the neighborhood helping fight off the gang. This might be because the neighborhood has become a literal war zone. With explosions, guns, blades, and machine guns.
As usual, this film gives Bronson a love interest. So far in these movies, he must personally lose two people. The film opens with the death of his friend and then the death of a lawyer he was dating who was much younger than him. Her death is senseless, but it does provide the motivation to finally make him mad.
The film is ridiculous in itself, but it is more fine and entertaining than the last film. As this
The film really gives fans of this franchise what they want and gets to the action immediately. It also helped that the film capitalized on the vigilante shooting in New York by Bernard Goetz at the time. As the film shows that only violence will help cure bad violence.
The film still has its fate share of gruesome exploitive violence against women. Including a sexual assault and an attempted one in which the woman is stripped bare. These attacks happen even in the middle of a battle or war towards the end. Makes it even more over the top and distasteful. Many might blame director Michael Winner, this was the last time he directed frequent collaborator Charles Bronson or any of the DEATH WISH movies. Director Winner also seems to take particular glee in the violence and nude scenes.
The last two are forgettable and more basic. He brought the sleaze to these films that whole bad certainly helped them to stand out. So that this filled like his over-the-top opus.
The artillery certainly is used more and it’s more of a battle. Eye for an eye as most victims in the neighborhood are elderly. Which is disheartening to watch. The guns get bigger with Bronson seeming to have a signature gun like Clint Eastwood as Dirty Harry.
This film has a more recognizable cast. Though in the end, you are a fan of ridiculous action, give this film a try. As it is certainly entertaining with a disturbing dark side.
Directed By: Michael Winner Written By: David Engelbach Based On Characters Created By: Brian Garfield Cinematography: Tom Del Ruth and Richard H. Kline Editor: Arnold Crust and Julian Semian
Cast: Charles Bronson, Jill Ireland, Vincent Gardenia, Anthony Franciosa, Laurence Fishburne, Ben Frank, J.D. Cannon, Robin Sherwood, Robert F. Lyons, Silvena Gallardo
Architect Paul Kersey once again becomes a vigilante when he tries to find the five street punks who murdered his daughter and housekeeper, this time on the dark streets of Los Angeles.
While I will admit I am not a man of the first film for many reasons. I have to say the first one is definitely better than this sequel. At least it had dramatic tension and tried to be somewhat of a character piece.
This film is exploitative even when watching the theatrical version and not the unrated edition. It’s sleazy and a retread of the original. Only without any of the drama or moral questions that might have been raised before.
No, here as soon as a tragedy happens he goes right into action without a second thought and not trying to stop crime necessarily. Here Charles Bronson’s character is on a revenge mission. So while other crimes happen around him. He lets them go.
This seems to be more of the same, only in a new location.
This feels more like an even more Hollywood version of the bloodletting wish-fulfillment fantasy. That the audience for this franchise wants. Whereas the first film tried to be more a character-driven thriller. This is our and our action.
One of the film’s main problems is that it feels so sleazy and exploitative. Not necessarily the violence but the sexual assaults and nudity throughout. That feels gratuitous even when edited down. Even In some scenes, there is just nudity when not really needed.
The rape and murder of the maid seem to be shown and filmed graphically mainly to show the ugliness of not only the crime but also to make the audience mad at the brutality and show how savage these characters truly are.
The film is under 90 minutes and is never subtle and Vincent Gardenia’s character seems wasted and only as another way to link back to the first film and explain why he is in Los Angeles instead of Chicago. Though here he seems almost like comedic relief rather than as a strong character from the first film.
Directed By: Sam Peckinpah Written By: Marc Norman and Stirling Silliphant Based On The Novel “Monkey In The Middle”: Robert Rostand Cinematography: Philip Lathrop Editor: Monte Hellman and Tony De Zarraga
Cast: James Caan, Robert Duvall, Bo Hopkins, Mako, Burt Young, Gig Young, Arthur Hill, Tom Clancy, Tiana, Kate Heflin, Sondra Blake
Mike Locken is one of the principal members of a group of freelance spies. A significant portion of their work is for the C.I.A. While he’s on a case for them, one of his friends turns on him and shoots him in the elbow and knee. His assignment, to protect someone, goes down in flames. He is nearly crippled, but with braces is able to become mobile again. For revenge as much as anything else, Mike goes after his ex-friend.
The film plays like experimental jazz. So many elements coming together seemingly Off beat, yet you stay to see where it is going. Considering the talents involved
James Caan is the lead, laid back and riffing through it all, but showing his skills and talent. Even though his character is supposedly handicapped.
Where it always seems Like he is more a lady’s man constantly flirting or always having a one-liner rather than being a fighter. Though I won’t Front would totally rock the outfit of his turtleneck.
Robert Duvall seems more like he dropped into the production as a favor or a debt owned (think Edward Norton in THE ITALIAN JOB)
The film shows Life at the C.I.A., might not be as exciting day to day, but lacks plenty of action in the field.
The main characters aren’t suit and tie or all business, nor typical heroes. In fact, it looks like they are all wearing their own clothes from home. As half the film takes place over 2 days.
They are ordinary guys the type you see around your neighborhood Back in the day 9 – 5 guys. Who meet up for drinks at a local bar after work to talk and drink their troubles away.
Not too much exciting action. A lot of slow motion doesn’t help. The film Has a messy 3 act structure that seems to have Its own mini-arcs in act one through so many soliloquies. Which leads to pacing problems.
You are left wanting even when it seems to take side steps to be more quirky. As you are looking for something with more attitude. Though it plays more like a kind of Western with those types of characters.
At times the film is impressive, even more knowing what went on behind the scenes and the messiness of the production. Which includes diced to cast the screenwriter’s girlfriend, and drugs being used on the set.
As it goes off on its own solos of little twists and turns that add to the overall element of a project.
In the end, this is a film that seems like it will only be liked by fans of those involved as a completist type of movie.
Directed By: Stephen Chow and Lik-Chi Lee Written By: Stephen Chow, Man Sang Lo and Kan-Cheung Tsang Cinematography: Jingle Ma Editor: Ka-Fai Cheung
Cast: Stephen Chow, Karen Mok, Vincent Kok, Man-Tat Ng, Tats Lau, Chi-Shing Chan, Jung Chen
The God of Cookery, a brilliant chef who sits in judgment of those who would challenge his title, loses his title when a jealous chef reveals him to be a con-man and humiliates him publicly. As this new chef takes on the God of Cookery’s role, the former God tries to pull himself back on top again, to challenge his rival and find once and for all who is the true God of Cookery.
This is a riches-to-rags story of trying to make a comeback. Where the main character actually Manages to learn something on his way trying to make a comeback.
Where he falls in with an ensemble of oddballs and low lives. Where an asshole stays an asshole but learns some depth and integrity.
Having only seen a few of Writer/Director/Star Stephen Chow’s later more popular movies such as KUNG FU HUSTLE and SHAOLIN SOCCER. Watching this movie isn’t too far off from his later material. Though here a little less polished, the same kind of humor is more broad and slapstick without the heavy reliance on CGI & special effects as much.
His films still come across as more cartoonish. Due to them seeing more like live-action cartoon animated films. Though in all of the films I have watched, the earlier films are more cynical. While his later films are more positive and open. Though this film doesn’t feel as much of a fantasy.
This film Is more of a physical comedy and seems to love to showcase the grotesque.
Though for all the comic violence, blood seems to underline that there are at least some consequences of it.
Though the film is more made for adults. The film like most of his again has a childlike look at the world making even the most dangerous things seem fun. The humor remains juvenile yet usually funny. He still manages to bring some martial arts into it
The film flows well tighter than her harmoniously. As it comes across at times as a like note to food. Not necessarily a love note though. That showcases the evil of corruption At every turn of business.
The film has a bizarre third act which is strange even for this film.
Again Stephen Chow is starring, writing, and directing putting himself center stage but happily not failing and managing to impress. He even uses his actual name for the character.
Directed By: Stephen Chow & Lik-Chi Lee Written By: Stephen Chow, Erica Lee, Kan-Cheung Tsang, Man-Fai Cheng and Min-Hang Fung Cinematography: Wing-Hang Wong Editor: Kit-Wai Kai and Chi-Wai Yau
Cast: Stephen Chow, Karen Mok, Cecilia Cheung, Man-Tat Ng, Kai-Man Tin, Chi-Sing Lam, Po Chun Chan, Joe Cheng
A bar girl hires a struggling actor to give her acting lessons so that she can feign a greater interest in her customers. The longer they work together, the more they find they have in common.
This film from writer/director/star Stephen Chow is Still a Little Silly but more sophisticated than his usual films. Unfortunately, this is one of his more disappointing works. as it’s not as madcap it off the wall as the others and is more at the beginning of his writing and directing career
The film has its moments but altogether doesn’t feel as strong or as funny as his usual Work. Maybe as this is a little more conventional and while he usually plays the jerk here his character seems more simple and innocent. Rather than Intentionally Difficult.
Most of the more comedic scenes he leaves to his co-stars with him just more supporting in the scenes. Though he does let the jokes build more than Usual.
The comedic scenes that do involve him Are fun but less taxing on him.
The film seems to start off well with a cameo from a worldwide action superstar. Which seemed smart then starts to go downhill slowly from there.
The scenes of an action film seem to be spoofing the work of director John Woo works, but when it comes to physical gags after it seems more fake and cause for obvious Special Effects.
In the middle of all this there is a romance and then a strange unconsummated love triangle that once it seems relieved ends up with him losing it all after finally seeming to be on the road to being successful. In a plot like that it is hard to swallow.
Then the third act totally comes out of nowhere like it was made in a last-minute decision to stretch the film and make it all worth it. As well as add some overall thrills.
The film Seems a little lost In Translation. In the end, the film seems To go all over the place and not in a necessarily cohesive way always. as even the ending seems strange and a little out of place.
Directed By: Michael Showalter Written By: Dan Savage and David Marshall Grant Based On The Book: SPOILER ALERT: THE HERO DIES. By Michael Ausiello Cinematography: Brian Burgoyne Editor: Peter Teschner
Cast: Jim Parsons, Ben Aldridge, Sally Field, Bill Irwin, Nikki M. James, Jeffrey Self, Sadie Scott, Josh Pais, David Marshall Grant, Jason Gotay, Antoni Porowski
The story of Michael Ausiello and Kit Cowan’s relationship takes a tragic turn when Cowan is diagnosed with terminal cancer.
Based on a true story, Though it’s still has a kind of tragedy that the title alerts you to, and even the title of the memoir it’s based upon. Which usually is a cliché in LGBTQ stories. Here it is used as an emotional resonance as for the film, it provides an ending, but also a catharsis as this is truly a love story with a beginning, a middle, and an end so that each stage is clearly representing an emotional and it’s on Waze
As it is a love story, it shows the beautiful beginnings. Where are you think it’s going to be the happily ever after, it also does present and show the problems. The small details are usually a part of a real-life love story, but in the movie usually cruise over or never show.
The happily ever after is only at the end of act one there’s so much more road to travel, and at times it feels unflinching. Nothing is completely solved, but we see how to deal.
It also presents the love story as something universal that everyone can understand and gives humanity to the main characters who are gay and is more of a mainstream love story
I will admit what attracted me to the story and personalize it is that it’s about an entertainment journalist who I have read over the years and can easily identify with his passion for pop culture, which I think will strike many in the audience
It’s just a beautiful love story after all, and the fact that it’s based on a true story, only helps it as many times it will leave the audience emotional with happiness, joy, and sadness like
No, it does have its points that are more inventive and imaginative. It always stays reliably true even when it reaches its quirky moments.
The film it’s a lot deeper than expected and you can appreciate its nuances. Though the title says it alone, it still offers. Plenty of warm, surprises and emotions. Where are you? Truly fall in love with the characters as they fall in. Love with each other.
In the end, it’s just been an affecting beautiful story slice of life, if anything love story that most of us dream ever hope for. It’s so heartwarming it feels like a Christmas movie which is what one of the characters is obsessed with.
Director Michael Showalter makes another heartfelt emotional character, driven comedy, wherein its heart is a nerd in love.
Cut To The Chase 