Directed By: Richard Styles Written By: George Edward Fernandez Cinematography: Orson Ochoa Editor: Carolyn J. Horton
Cast: Tony March, Lisa Stahl, Tom Law, Carol Cadby, Donna Balton, Just Kelly, Vince Turner, Greg Todd David, Merry Rozelle
When four young college girls stumble upon a murder, they find themselves targeted by a killer who will stop at nothing to silence them.
This is not the exceptional thriller that was one of Director Danny Boyle’s first films. This is seemingly rushed to video spring break thriller.
The film almost could have been a decent television thriller. Except that the first half has a few lingering nude scenes and a scantily clad character. Who strangely never gets a chance to do any unveiling and truly seems to be the most stereotypical single-minded character.
The film is silly in parts but it keeps the audience’s attention. The first half of the film feels more exploitative than anything. As after all, it’s supposed to be a spring break T & A film.
The second half plays more like a thriller and a race against time. As each moment of mercy or hope is dashed at the last second.
Though there is an instance of nudity in the second half of the film that isn’t really needed and feels cruel.
The film opens with a bad yet believable PSYCHO homage only with more nudity.
Along the way, the characters meet with a pair of college boys who seem like Dimwitted heroes but prove to be more red herrings. For the majority of the movie, we watch how the murderer is going to try to cover his tracks and get to any witnesses.
The film opens promising before going very dark and never quite looks back. Definitely can give it points for trying.
This Film is practically THE LAST AMERICAN VIRGIN of thrillers only not as good as that film. The ending is that much of a gut punch, but also feels mercilessly cruel throughout to our Protagonists.
It’s sweaty, sleazy, and exploitive. So long as you know what you are getting into, you can find it repulsive or entertaining.
Written & Directed By: Elaine May Cinematography: Vittorio Storaro Editor: Richard P. Girincione, Stephen A. Rotter & William Reynolds
Cast: Warren Beatty, Dustin Hoffman, Isabelle Adjani, Charles Grodin, Jack Weston, Tess Harper, Carol Kane, David Marguiles, Aharon Ipale, Herb Gardner, Fred Melamed, Matt Frewer, Alex Hyde White
Two terrible lounge singers get booked to play a gig in a Moroccan hotel but somehow become pawns in an international power play between the C.I.A., the Emir of Ishtar, and the rebels trying to overthrow his regime.
The history of this film is infamous. From all of Its problems behind the scenes and on the screen. That it was considered a failure. So much so that I am so shocked that no one has written a book about it.
This comes off as a major failure but an interesting one. Not a car crash Per se
As the film seeks to mash a bunch of genres and types together. It tries to be a comedy where you can hear the jokes in the writing but the delivery is stiff and kind of shows the efforts of the actors who are more famous for drama overall really trying. Yet failing
It also is a kind of International road comedy. That is a kind of Bing Crosby and Bob Hope throwback. That then seems to become a loose espionage film.
The first 26 minutes could have been cut shorter as they introduce the characters and feels like an indulgence for the film to set up the characters and their dilemmas. That feels more like a character comedy which writer-director Elaine May is more famous for.
After those initial scenes once we make it to Morocco where the film’s actual plot starts. That is when the film feels like at least it has started to move. Even as the film feels longer than it actually is
As we can see the ideas on Display but they Don’t seem to connect. so that instead of seeing a production this almost comes off as cold reading or rehearsal
This film could have been a forgettable 80’s comedy. The only problem is that with the big name talent on display it magnifies everything and makes the film more interesting in studying than actually looking for entertainment.
At times It’s painful and at other times it is amusing. As this film seems like it wants to rest on the laurels of Its star’s star power to carry it. As that sometimes works in bad comedies that stay passable on the likeability of the star
It might have even been salvageable or understandable if it starred two actors more known for comedy. Though with two stars who are known for perfectionism and trying an out-and-out comedy rather than any drama. Was a recipe for disaster.
Especially when you have the stars kind of switch roles from the type of roles they usually play with Dustin Hoffman mroe being the ladies man and Warren Beatty the romantic dumb one who is mroe nerdy
One can only imagine writer/director Elaine May, more known for long takes, shooting a lot of footage, and putting films together in editing. Directing two actors known for being particular and revising scripts to their expectations and have been known to take over productions to fit their standards overall. Was quite the match
The film seems like there might have been some Improv at times though also scripted more when it comes to the plot threads. This would also explain why some scenes feel monotonous In Length and dialogue. Like skits, they aren’t working
It might have been funnier if the characters’ manipulation and distrust of one another we played up more. As we know the characters are dumb and in over their heads already. Though it becomes a buddy comedy that started off in that way
Even though they distrust one another to a degree eventually it is so fast. That separation is never felt. As usually in buddy comedies, friction between the leads is part of the entertainment and watching them come back together only resonates with the depth of their friendship and loyalty.
This for s across as an example of the excess in the 1980s and how it affected Even those you counted on for quality eventual icons well into their careers to know better and why they might have become even more particular
It seems like a typical studio comedy where the package was more important than the actual ingredients, story, or material. Not a particularly high concept In plot but talent definitely
Unfortunately, it is also so far the last film Elaine May directed, and it’s a shame as most of her movies, even this are great in their own way, classics. This one more so for being an example or made an example of whereas the others were excellent quality. So that she showed a master of writing-directing in the comedy A NEW LEAF and drama MICKEY AND NICKY
As Isabelle Adjabi and Charles Grodin come off more professional And one note. Though Adjani seems like she’d rather be anywhere else. Their roles and playing up what they know or are expected of them. As they come off more as Hollywood in this film and like they belong in the part of the film they are in. Whereas Hoffman and Beatty belong in the movie that is the first act but then become entangled in the rest where they stick out which seems like they were part of the plan. Though the mixture doesn’t work as you might want to see, the first act continued in one movie, and the later film is more plausible with different actors and characters coming Into it
This just feels like a movie more for film fans or Hollywood and Tinseltown historians rather than the. Maybe a general audience unless fan completists if the main actors. It’s not as horrible. As it has been labeled. Trust me It’s not good, but it is fun in so bad it’s Good. It’s just not that engaging as it constantly feels like a production
Even if the actors played the right roles it would not save the film but while it looks initially done to be funnier and a stretch for both of them. It ends up coming Off weak and would have fixed one of Its Many problems
Mismatched as they play songwriters but they can’t sing well their characters nor the actors appear and while some of the songs are catchy in the writing scenes the performance is horrible. That originally there was going to be a soundtrack but that was scraped after the film bombed
If the Morocco scenes weren’t so heavy and most of the film. The film could have just been a misfire. As if the characters stayed in New York as we marvel at their failures. Through the depth of their friendship. You can Understand what attracts the stars. As this was a bit of a comeback for each of them
Or was supposed to be. As both had been away from the big screen for five years and their previous films before this were considered classics these days
Like dumb and dumber in the dessert international. Silly and fun and plays stupid but smarter than it comes across. As it is an epic failure that has so many mishandling yet good intentions and ideas. That is more purely comedic but some spoofs and like the decade excessive in many ways
Then it all ends abruptly though it feels like it goes a long way just to get to the joke that is the ending while clearly showing Its inspiration so just like the Bing Crosby Bob hope films you have two iconic popular stars all heir for drama starring in a road to type comedy an expensive one that is all over the place
Which makes the film a Hollywood artifact that matches the likes of Brian de Palma’s bonfire of the vanities with the film’s problems in the making, post-production, and marketing. With songs co-written by Paul Williams which might be why I when a weakness for them
Written By: Donald Cammell & China Cammell Based on the novel “MRS. WHITE” By: Andrew Klavan & Laurence Klavan
Cinematography: Larry McConkey
Editor: Terry Rawlings
Cast: David Keith, Cathy Moriarty, Alan Rosenberg, Art Evans, Alberta Watson, William G. Schilling, Mimi Lieber, Michael Greene, Danielle Smith
In a wealthy and isolated desert community, a sound expert is targeted as the prime suspect of a series of brutal murders of local suburban housewives who were attacked and mutilated in their homes. As he desperately tries to prove his innocence, his young wife starts to uncover mysteries of her own…
This film is like a jazz album. One can’t quite get into or find the correct beat to connect with to groove with it.
This film was recommended by quite a few people. Especially as it is one of the few films directed by Donald Cammell a popular writer and director of cult films such as PERFORMANCE.
As his films are usually out there it’s expected that his films will be a bit crazy. This one Certainly is it commits the sin of being boring for most of the film Until a totally bonkers ending. Which still doesn’t save the film as a whole.
The film shows its Giallo influences only when it uses them in the daylight. These scenes are the only time the film comes alive and its artistic touches work to its advantage. Other times it seems like a film that is pretty Mainstream and more a studio product but presented in a style that feels peculiar and not for the better. That comes off pretty bland the first 2 thirds of the Film.
The camera work is unpredictable which is a thrill. It keeps you alert. Even the casting is inspired but in the end, the ingredients are there, but the dish served comes up short.
What saves the film somewhat or at least keeps you watching is David Keith’s performance that goes from mundane to romantic to off the wall.
Alan Rosenberg doesn’t fare as well as he comes off like a New York stereotype at first who is dim-witted and then later comes across as a new age burnout.
Cathy morality gets a chance to not play her usually big-haired villain or tough New York City girl. Here she gets a chance to just play normally as the lead who might be a little too trusting, but other than Be the audience’s introduction to the events and revelations she is given little to work with or do with her character to make an impression.
It also doesn’t help that this film is supposed to be sexy and have a lot of sex and half the time it is usually the opposite and the seduction doesn’t seem to raise the temperature. Even the sex scenes take a while for the audience to realize what they are doing.
The film’s theme seems to be nature vs commercialism. Which represents more of an Avant-garde film abs approach that eases into trappings of the more ridiculous commercialism.
By the end the film made me come up with some thoughts when it comes to films such as these. Where it seems we will make excuses for ourselves to explain why we just sat through all of this, but rationalize what we have seen by giving it artistic credentials because it tries to be artistic and different. When it did take a gamble that was misguided. Ultimately it might actually be bad but if the filmmaker had success before there must be some kind of deeper point
Usually viewed by an audience who expected it. Usually mostly caucasian looking at it analytically abs since it speaks to them or is identifiable it must be good abs preached upon.
A group of people stop by a mansion during a storm and discover two magical toy makers and their haunted collection of dolls.
Directed By: Stuart Gordon Written By: Ed Naha Cinematography By: Mac Ahlberg Editor: Lee Percy
Cast: Ian Patrick Williams, Stephen Lee, Guy Rolfe
This is a sick film. That keeps a creepy tone by showing disgusting graphic violence but keeping a child-like mood and innocence while it is happening. From the score to the colors of the background it is an achievement and scary at the same time. Which is why I openly admire this film.
I remember first hearing about this movie on ENTERTAINMENT TONIGHT at 10 years old. They showed an infamous scene, Where a character who is dead with no eyeballs holds up doll’s eyes as they’re own. A true show stopper in the film. It was shown on E.T. as a story about over the top violence in films. Which made me want to see it in the first place. I got my wish 5 years later when I first saw this film at first on television in a censored version and became so fascinated by it I hunted it down to see the full Uncut theatrical version. Watching it I was horrified but happy
It’s a very macabre film but for horror aficionados definitely a must-see.
The film Stars the very likable Stephen Lee. The film is about a little girl and her abominable Father and stepmother who get stranded on a trip and end up staying overnight at a bed & Breakfast until they can get they’re car fixed in the morning, As the night goes on another driver and two punk-rock British hitchhikers end up stranded there too. The elderly couple who run the place have a collection of antique dolls that the little girl adores, But the doll creeps everyone else out as do the elderly couple and as the night goes on, They’re fears come true as not everyone survives the night.
The film was actually filmed after RE-ANIMATOR but before FROM BEYOND and used the same sets but it came out one year after FROM BEYOND because the Doll Special Effects took so long to master that once it was done it was decided to keep it on the shelf for another year. The producers wanted more gore in the film and were actually filmed but the footage was thrown out once all agreed that it really didn’t fit the tone of the film. At one point Stuart Gordon considered making a sequel but unfortunately abandoned that idea as he thought this film spoke well enough for itself. Though he did really like the characters and felt a need to see what they were up to after all these years.
I find it funny that the films Screenwriter wrote not only other horror films such as C.H.U.D. II and TROLL but then went on to write Disney Films Such as HONEY, I SHRUNK THE KID and now writes biblical films. He did at least stay within that fantasy and Fairly tale world.
One of the reasons this film is enjoyable is it feels like a dark fairy tale. It takes a premise you have seen before and injects it with some originality. This is for the most part an unpredictable film. It’s not like similar films that followed in it’s wake such as CHILD’S PLAY and PUPPET MASTER. Both of these are fine films but in a totally different way as those films are more literally one line movie plots Killer toys. Whereas this film takes you into an otherworldly universe.
This is a film that deserves to be part of your film library.
Cast: Crystal Bernard, Jennifer Rhodes, Atanas Ilitch, Kimberly McArthur, Patrick Lowe, Heidi Kozak, Juliette Cummins
Courtney Bates, the younger sister of Valerie, and her friends go to their condo for a weekend getaway, but Courtney can’t get rid of the haunting feeling that a supernatural rockabilly driller killer is coming to murder them all.
This is a film I definitely have mixed feelings about. As this is obviously a film that isn’t meant to be taken seriously at all. As most from the title, it reeks of exploitation.
Now while one can see what they are going for and should be a fun ridiculous frolic. It just doesn’t do it for me as it is never strong enough in either of the directions it wants to go to. The one thing it has going for it is that it is unpredictable to a degree.
This movie is crazy and all over the place but it fits into it’s Time period of the 1980s. The filM Plays like a teen romp for most of the time. Except for its random violent scenes that come Across as dreams or daydreams. Then once it gets to the third act it starts with the Actual violence and killings.
The film is a low budget this is a movie that is more fun. As long as you don’t think about it. I fact the more impaired you are or the more people you have around watched it. The more you enjoy it, for its ridiculous nature. A b-movie that desires it’s own cult audience. Sort of like the movie THE ROOM. As this is a film that is best to know what you are getting into before watching.
Though if looking for a harder-edged comedy this is not it. As this almost plays like a spoof or parody of the genre, emphasizing it’s
More ridiculous elements. As it might remind one of a TROMA studios film only with better production values.
The movie seems like an intentional comedy in the horror genre though still tries to be a creditable horror film. As each aspect of the movie seems to explore the theme of being afraid of intimacy, Losing one’s Virginity and sex In General. As most of the film doesn’t have the character to be sexual even as every other character does or talks about it.
The film more forces the point as every time she comes close to being intimate even in dreams they result in death. Finally, when in life she does seem ready for sex it’s Like she wills the Killer inadvertently out of her dreams and into physical form. A rock n roll singer With a guitar that has a huge drill at the end (which he uses to penetrate his victims both female and male) and the killer who looks like a younger rockabilly character with a resemblance to Andrew Dice Clay. Who also performs a song during the film.
Though he is in second place as the girls have a rock group themselves and perform two songs. (These music montages help kill the running time) Which only makes more of a case that the killer might be a second personality or a manifestation of her fear and defense against sex. Or did she will him into being. As the final girl might not only be the reason but inadvertent killer herself.
Her violent fantasies help the film have a horror or at least violence to keep the audience interested and hyped in the first two acts.
The film talks about sex and shows some Scenes of nudity and we hear sex but never see it. That is about how far it goes into exploitation other than the over the top fantasies and behavior the violence is more gratuitous.
Each member of the all-girl band has a personality type, but they feel interchangeable. Though the film has a strong female perspective as the leads and most of the characters throughout.
The film seems to combine a bunch of popular horror cliches of the time. The dreams with a Killer element is from A NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET. The killer’s art in the third act from many a slasher film.
nothing is ever really explained even the ending is never quite clear as to what is actually real and happening. For instance, we are told she is the little sister of the survivor of the first film. How come no one acknowledges her survival from the first film. No one thinks that maybe her little sister is traumatized after his sister survived such a huge tragedy. Did her sister really die as she seems to do In her daydreams, but by the killer? Is her willing of the killer really her in a different personality and showing that mental illness runs in the family? What was with that melted face with a huge zig that explodes. As that has nothing to do with the killer. That seemed more a lost scene from SOCIETY. What does the ending mean which is the true ending? Does he exist? Is this a manifestation. The film doesn’t want to answer that question leaving room for sequels. Though also uses cinematic dream logic for a film whose audience doesn’t seem to want that. Though which only makes the film more of a cult oddity.
Directed By: Brian DePalma Written By: David Mamet Suggested By A Book By: Elliot Ness & Oscar Fraley Cinematography: Stephen H Burum Editor: Jerry Greenberg & Bill Pankow
Cast: Kevin Costner, Robert DeNiro, Sean Connery, Andy Garcia, Charles Martin Smith, Richard Bradford, Billy Drago, Patricia Clarkson, Don Harvey, Jack Kehoe, Del Close
During the era of Prohibition in the United States, Federal Agent Eliot Ness sets out to stop ruthless Chicago gangster Al Capone and, because of rampant corruption, assembles a small, hand-picked team to help him.Continue reading “THE UNTOUCHABLES (1987)”→
CAST: Carmine Capobianco, Debi Thibeault, Frank Stewart
A strip-joint owner and a manicurist find that they have many things in common, the foremost being that they are psychotic serial killers. They fall in love and are happy being the family that slays together, until one day they come up against a plumber who also happens to be a cannibal.
Directed By: Garry Marshall
Written By: Leslie Dixon
Cinematography: John A. Alonzo
Editor: Sonny Baskin & Dov Hoeing
Cast: Goldie Hawn, Kurt Russell, Roddy McDowell, Edward Herrman, Katherine Helmond, Jared Rushton, Ray Combs, Hector Elizondo, Sven-ole Thorsen, Michael G. Hagerty
Dr Joanna hires country carpenter Dean to build a closet on her yacht. When the two don’t see eye-to-eye, Dean is left unpaid while Joannard sets sail. The following day, Joanna is fished out of the sea, after falling overboard, suffering from amnesia. Dean sees a neat way to regain the money she owes him… he tells her she’s his wife; that way Dean gets a free housekeeper and mother for his four kids.
Written & Directed By: Paul Schrader Cinematography: John Bailey Editor: Jaqueline Cambas & Jill Savitt Music By: Thomas Newman
Cast: Michael J. Fox, Joan Jett, Gena Rowlands, Michael McKean, Cherry Jones, Jason Miller, Tom Irwin, Michael Rooker, Del Close, Alan Poul, Trent Reznor
A pair of siblings must choose whether to pursue their dream of touring with their rock band or support their family and stay in Cleveland, Ohio. This is a movie i sought for years l. As I remember the trailers and advertisements and posters yet never saw it. Which is surprising as I was a huge Michael J. fox fan but also a Joan Jett fan. Then once finally watching it realizing Gena Rowlands and Michael Mckean we’re in it I am kicking myself
Cut To The Chase 