Grieving the loss of a best friend she couldn’t protect, an ex-bodyguard sets out to fulfill her dear friend’s last wish: sweet revenge.
This is not the JOHN WICK Spin-off that people are anxiously awaiting with Ana de Armas starring but a South Korean action revenge tale.
Went in expecting more of an action film which it is but this one is backed more by a dramatic story
It’s meant to make the action more personal and feel more as if the storyline includes a conspiracy or her taking down more of a small bit of a larger enterprise.
Should have expected that when the film stars, Jeon Jong-Seo. who is more known for her dramatic work. Here she is playing an action-oriented role. She is believable and it helps her. As most of the other characters expect her to be weak.
Most of the male characters are in on this conspiracy and repulsive throughout. Showcasing the film to be more female-oriented and justified.
The action sequences are well done. It includes the use of a flame thrower which is always a plus.
The movie is unfortunately mostly typical to average with a colorful shaded filtered motif throughout.
Though the film truly becomes more impressive and noteworthy in the final 15 minutes which it builds up to and seems to truly come alive in its somber tone. After all that build-up.
When a shady corporation’s illegal mining operation disturbs the ocean’s mysterious seabed, veteran deep-sea rescue diver Jonas Taylor and a research team unearth terror beyond imagination. Five years after the horrific first encounter with the unstoppable Megalodon in The Meg, Jonas must now face a ferocious old enemy for the second time. But the sea’s perplexing depths harbor prehistoric, blood-chilling secrets aching to resurface. Can Jonas confront what emerges from the trench?
The title sounds like a crossover with AQUA-MAN that some might have hoped for or the French spin-off movie only connected to the Meg universe. No such luck
This movie is truly a sequel with not only a bigger shark but three of them. While there is some humor in the film it’s not as strong or as fun as the first film.
It might be that in the first film, there were more recognizable actors in the first film. Where as here half the actors are new. The survivors from the first film are back for this film.
One of the problems might be that a sequel wasn’t really needed. Even with this film half of the script seems made up and offers nothing new except for the same old basic plot points of betrayal and underground criminals.
Another problem is that other than a hand-to-hand action sequence on a ship for Jason Statham to show off his fighting skills. There is no other action for the first hour practically. the second half makes up for it but mostly being action, but by then you have already lost certain members if the audience. Seemingly so you can set up plot points and try to make up science for what is happening.
Then even though faxing the sharks is bad enough yet too much like the first film. You set up a mercenary force for them to fight and outwit. Which again allows Jason Statham some more hand-to-hand action.
Then you have the sharks and big lizards start attacking innocent citizens at a resort. So that it becomes a rescue disaster movie. As well as a JURASSIC PARK knockoff and allows the film to up the limited body count it has provided so far.
Another problem is that the special effects are so obvious. That it is hard to get scared of something you know is pretty much animated.‘you take the fear out despite the bloody violence. It still feels more like a family film, more than anything.
The saving grace of the Movie actually is actor Page Kennedy. He seems to understand the ridiculous mood of the film and manages to make his l character stand out among the
Many a few of them also understand the nature of the film but do not manage to come away as memorable only serviceable.
The first hour might be the way it Is because of director Ben Wheatley who usually directs his own independent projects making his first studio film. As a challenge or for whatever reason. He wants to get the dramatics and set up first and let it build to the action massacre. It could also be a more for-hire job and not an original project that he started. The passion might be missing
It might be that the film is based on a novel. So the need to explain the science and technical aspects must come first. Before we can truly enjoy the senseless action that feels repetitive and never as exciting as the filmmakers are trying for. Which also amounts to a lot of exposition.
The film was also made to appeal to a more global market. As it has quite an international cast. Which unfortunately makes it seem more like a byproduct than even an actual product.
Cast: Bert Kreischer, Mark Hamill, Jimmy Tatro, Iva Babic, Robert Maaser, Stephanie Kurtzuba, Martyn Ford, Jessica Gabor, Rita Bernard Shaw, Oleg Taktarov
Bert’s drunken past catches up with him 20 years down the road when he and his father are kidnapped by those Bert wronged 20 years ago while drunk on a college semester abroad in Russia.
While this is another comedian Bert Kreischer taking from his stand-up and making a movie out of it, or at least part of his stand this one actually kind of works a little deeper as a presents itself as a sophomore, action comedy. At times the humor is juvenile, but in the end, it’s all about taking responsibility and trying to do the best for your kids. Not to mention the complicated relationships families can have. Especially when trying to either honor or prove yourself.
it also focuses on a father and son relationship and bonding that I’ve done well, I am a sucker for. Which, at least, gives this film some kind of depth.
So, while the action scenes are serviceable and not entirely impressive, they do help break up the film and add a little bit more excitement to it.
As Director, Peter Atecino is more of a noted comedy Director. He does OK with the action sequences.
It’s nice to see Mark Hamill on the big screen and not only doing a voice acting role or just some extension of either playing himself or a Star Wars movie
I will admit to being a partial Bert Kreischer fan as I have seen many of his online antics. I have listened to his podcast. I’ve read his book and he just seems like the type of guy you might wanna hang out with or if you do, something memorable who just seems to collect those moments
It’s cloudy how his drinking superpowers sort of make him invincible in flashbacks. It just shows I’m taking off her shirt and getting drunk and not performing any particularly that define hacks, though it does seem like if anything it just gives him more drunk courage which, in the end, helps him out as an adult, living up to the legend And being not work.
He and Mark Hamill have great chemistry as Burt plays a version of himself that makes the film a little meta–
Not to mention have to give credit to a found that feels like a 1980s over-the-top action comedy with a scene right out of a Schwarzenegger movie where he literally uses a machine gun just to light his cigar in the middle of a battle. I can imagine Arnold Schwarzenegger watching that and thinking why didn’t I do that makes me a little jealous.
It’s a Film worth taking a chance on, it’s entertaining, and it’s not gonna change your world. If you’re a fan of Hays, you should enjoy it but it’s not something that is going to lay in your memory for a long time, it’s a Film for his audience or a nice introduction to who he is.
In the end, the film is more silly than anything else
Directed By: Jerrold Freedman Written By: Jerrold Freedman and Steve Kline Cinematography: Tak Fujimoto Editor: John F. Link II
Cast: Charles Bronson, Bruno Kirby, Ed Harris, Bert Ramsen, Wilford Brimley, Michael Lerner, James Victor, Kenneth McMillan, John Ashton, Karim Murcelo, Enrique Castillo
Jeb Maynard is a patrolman guarding the U.S.-Mexican border, whose partner and buddy Scooter has just been murdered. Maynard knows that a smuggler of illegal aliens is responsible for Scooter’s death, but the feds insist that drug dealers committed the crime. If this villainous smuggler is going to be caught, Maynard is going to have to do the dirty work himself.
While this film doesn’t present anything new. At the time it was a social issue that was gaining more and more interest in popularity.
What is a Charles Bronson movie if you are looking or expecting an action epic you will be disappointed as well. The film does have scenes of action. There aren’t many more plays out as a crime drama.
The film is full of naughty character actors who have supporting and small roles. At the heart of the story is just trying to investigate the death of a border agent and an innocent, immigrant teenager and finding justice for them.
Throughout the tale, Charles Bronson is gentlemanly, and just generally a good guy. The film put a face to the villains in the organization they weren’t for, and the systematic way in which this business is lucrative for them.
We also see all the dangers and perils of the immigrants, trying to get into the country, what they lose, what they risk, and the general manner in which they are treated. During a section of the film, Charles Bronson’s character even goes undercover as an immigrant to try and catch and experience what most of them have to go through, and hopefully confront or come face-to-face with the perpetrators
The film offers something different than expected and entertains throughout her house and gives us the overview to see the perpetrators and we just wait to see how Charles Bronson & company will eventually hopefully bring them down.
This is the kind of film that is not really talked about when it comes to Charles Bronson but definitely should be. This film works on his decency and charisma throughout even when it lacks action and shows what he can be capable of when he doesn’t have a gun in his hand.
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.
Written & Directed By: Sung-Hyun Byun Cinematography: Hyung Rae Cho Editor: Kim Sang- Beom
Cast: Jeon Do-Yeon, Esom, Koo Kyo-Hwan, Hwang Jung-Min, Lee Yeon, Si-ah Kim, Sol Kyung-Gu, Fahim Fazli, George Tsai, Elyse Dinh
Single mother Kill Bok Soon is one of the world’s deadliest assassins thanks to her 100% success rate on contract killings. Bok Soon works for M.K Ent, which is run by the man that taught her, Cha Min Kyo. The pair hold mutual respect for each other, but Kill Bok Soon understands that a moment’s notice could take everything away from her. Just before Kill Bok Soon is due to renew her contract, loyalties are put to the test when Bok Soon is involved in a kill-or-be-killed incident.
This has a bit of JOHN WICK in it. Only when it comes to the action. Which is more hand-to-hand than guns, though guns are used frequently. It more leans into the facts of that film’s world-building or an organization of assassins of which there seem to be many. Which has its own set of rules.
The action sequences here are noteworthy for not only the choreography and staging but for some of their humor. One, In Particular, takes place in a bar/restaurant where various killers are after only one person and end up sometimes sabotaging themselves. While other males testimonies as they perish.
The film definitely has a sheen and polish. That puts it a little above the rest. As it isn’t gritty but just as dirty as some others of Its genre
The film does end up feeling too long at over two hours. You, unfortunately, feel it, so it’s not a smooth journey. As the film plays like a contained epic with many levels. It starts to feel endless. Especially when it plays up more the melodrama of the relationships.
Which is expected though strangely a bit strong for an action film about assassins. It is also that element at the heart of the film and pushes the running time. It might be a case of trying to be more than what is expected.
As the film makes the case of showing why maybe as a paid killer it doesn’t always help to have Friends to get to close to your colleagues
Though not a Netflix original. It feels like their brand of recent action films. Similar to GUNPOWDER MILKSHAKE only without the all-star cast.
Directed By: Veronica Ngo Written By: Veronica Ngo, Nha Uyen Ly Nguyen, Nguyen Truong Nhan, Ngu Yen Ngoc Thach and Aaron Toronto Cinematography: Phunam Editor: Nguyen Cong Dang
Cast: Dong Anh Quynh, Toc Tien, Thuan Nguyen, Rima Thanh, Song Luan, Gi A Nguyen, Thanh Nhien Phan
A mysterious woman trains a trio of girls to take revenge on a criminal gang that abuses females. The three lady warriors risk everything to challenge this corrupt empire.
This film could have almost been nicknamed GET ‘EM GIRLS.
Now this film doesn’t reinvent the wheel. As it pretty much is predictable and you have seen it before. It does offer excitement as you watch it and tries to provide some twists and turns of its own.
This is the first female action-oriented film that I have truly been impressed by since CHOCOLATE. This film offers female action heroes and feels like a mixture of a revenge tale with parts of CHARLIE’S ANGELS & GUNPOWDER MILKSHAKE. Though luckily without as much humor as those films and less gunplay. As there are guns involved but this is more hand-to-hand combat with machetes and steel pipes. Think DAREDEVIL, the series’ action scenes.
So the film is a bit more vicious than expected.
The third act of the film feels like a video game with a henchman who looks like he came out of one. This goes along with the cartoonish main villain whose real danger is the threat from those who follow him in force.
Other than actually being a dangerous fighter on his own. Where the audience questions why they follow him in the first place then.
It even offers some drama just to up the stakes and meaning In These fight scenes.
The film is well-directed and has a danger to it. Like the other films I compared it to, it has a little gloss and lots of filtered and neon lighting. That leaves the film with plenty of styles.
Written & Directed By: Wong Kar Wai Based On The Book “The Eagle Shooting Heores” By: Louis Cha Cinematography By: Christopher Doyle & Pung-Leung Kwan Editor: Patrick Tam & Kit-Wai Kai Cast: Brigitte Lin, Leslie Cheung, Maggie Cheung, Tony Leung,
Ou-yang Feng lives in the middle of a desert, where he acts as a middleman to various swordsmen in ancient China. One of those swordsmen is Huang Yao-shi, who has found some magic wine that causes one to forget the past. At another time, Huang met Mu-rong Yin and under the influence of drink, promised to marry Mu-rong’s sister Mu-rong Yang. Huang jilts her, and Mu-rong Yin hires Ou-yang to kill Huang. But then Mu-rong Yang hires Ou-yang to protect Huang. This is awkward, because Mu-rong Yang and Mu-rong Yin are in reality the same person. Other unrelated plot lines careen about. Among them is Ou-yang’s continuing efforts to destroy a band of horse thieves. Oy-yang recruits another swordsman, a man who is going blind and wants to get home to see his wife before his sight goes completely. The swordsman is killed. Ou-yang then meets another swordsman who doesn’t like wearing shoes. Oy-yang sends this man after the horse thieves, with better results. We then find out what a man must give…
The original cut was released in 1994 I am reviewing the re-edited version of 2008
I will admit that I haven’t watched the original cut yet. This is the same film only re-edited to put emphasis on different things and look at the film in a different way. Sort of like what was attempted when the Mel Gibson film PAYBACK was put out on DVD and re-edited more to the director’s original vision before the production was taken outbid his hands and re-shot and re-edited it’s also similar to the APOCALYPSE NOW REDUX putting back in cut scenes to supposedly make the film richer in content and context.
This is a great movie… To have on in the background of a party continuously playing, but sitting through it is a challenge. I love Wong Kar Wai’s work but I couldn’t wait for it to end. It was like sitting through a music video with its camera work and rapid editing. Though a music video with a thin plot seems a simple reason to link scenes of action together.
This film feels moody as you have to be in a certain type of mood to watch, more open and accepting of the story it presents. I believe the reason I didn’t enjoy it as much as Wai’s other films are that one saw the masterpieces first and came back to watch this film which doesn’t match the greatness of his other films though you can see the seeds. It almost feels unfocused half of the time as to where it is going or what it wishes to convey.
While the film is visually arresting. The story begins to get confusing and boring. When the film is on the verge of getting too boring it redeems itself with an action scene.
Director, Wong Kar wai shows that he is capable of stunning action sequences, which are rather rare in his films, but then he messes them up in this film by making the. In slow motion. Almost like a delayed slow-motion capture. This messes up the fluidity of the choreographed action, but when the scenes run at regular speed they are a sight to behold. This film had an exhausting effect on Wong Kar Wai. While on hiatus during the editing process, he wrote CHUNGKING EXPRESS to “clear his head”.
This is a visually beautiful movie, low budget with a few too many close-ups for no reason it seems. I will prefer and enjoy the first cut just like APOCALYPSE NOW REDUX.
What is interesting about Wong kar wai when it comes to most of his films is that he is a visual stylist as a director, but not, in the same way, directors like Tim Burton works most of the time in his movies. The camera stays still and he lets the sort be about the characters as they reveal relationships and the big story. Now when this is happening the lighting and colors are usually immaculate and use the landscapes to their fullest. And when the camera moves the angles he uses in the scenes are strange, but breathtaking that you feel the movie so much more because at the heart of most of his films are relationships.
It’s like Woody Allen films with less dialogue, no comedy, and no archetypes yet more open and visual. More seems to be at stake and the characters are usually young with more modest incomes plus more sensual than sexual.
It hurts to give this film such a low grade. He has made strides since this film it is an early work that hints at his future vision and genius. Still one of the better and More Interesting filmmakers still working today
Cut To The Chase 