Bill and Ted's Bogus Journey (1991)

Title: Bill and Ted’s Bogus Journey (1991)

Director: Peter Hewitt

Cast: Keanu Reeves, Alex Winters, William Sadler, George Carlin, Pamela Grier, Joss Ackland

Review:

Bill and Ted’s Excellent Adventure was the sleeper hit of 1989, nobody expected it to become a hit, yet, there it was, making millions at the box office. For a movie that only cost 10 million, making more than 40 million at the box office is a big deal, so of course, a bigger and more expensive sequel went into production; this time with twice the budget and better special effects. The result was Bill and Ted go to Hell, or as it was later re-titled: Bill and Ted’s Bogus Journey. The reason for changing the title was that in the United States, you cannot advertise anything on television with the word ‘Hell’ on it before 9 P.M., so in order to promote the film more effectively, they just changed the title. A stupid rule if there ever was any, how’s using the word hell going to affect a kid? So, whatever, they changed the title to Bogus Journey, which is a cool substitute title anyways. This film underwent many changes on its way to the silver screen, many of them had to do with the film being “too scary” for kids. I guess they figured this film was aimed at 12 year olds even though the main characters are young adults? This was one of those movies where studios get all nervous about marketing. If it’s too scary for kids, or too silly for adults, then there’s a possibility that the film will tank at the box office.

R.I.P. Bill and Ted! 

Thankfully, this didn’t happen to Bill and Ted’s Bogus Journey. It went on to recuperate its budget at the box office simply because there was no denying this movie was fun times, it was cool, it had that rock and roll attitude, it had two likable lead characters, cool effects and heavy doses of comedy. It feels like the overall vibe while making this movie was “the crazier the better!” I remember seeing the movie in theaters when I was about 15 years old and leaving the theater excited and satisfied. And I remember it was after I heard KISS’s ‘God Gave Rock and Roll to You II’ on this movie that I started to listen to KISS and I started to like them. I mean, according to the film, this was the song that was going to bring unity to the entire universe! It was thanks to this movie that I am a hardcore KISS fan! So I thank this movie for introducing me to the hottest band in the world. The soundtrack was pretty rocking too, I mean, here’s a soundtrack that had all manner of cool bands at the moment. Even cooler, the rest of the films rock and roll score was done by guitar legend Steve Vai;  how cool is that? The soundtrack included tunes from KISS, Megadeth, Primus, Faith No More and Winger. It also had a really catchy tune that was used to promote the film called “Shout it Out” by a hair band called Slaughter. I remember really liking that one too. It was these type of hair bands that dominated the popular music scene back in the early 90’s, this was just prior to the arrival of Nirvana, Pearl Jam and the death of hair bands. We could say that Bogus Journey captures the last vestiges of that party rock that was so popular in the 80’s. Hair bands had an expiration date, they just didn’t know it yet.

On Bill and Ted’s Bogus Journey we find Bill and Ted a little older, but not a little wiser, in fact, they are just as dumb as ever. Here we find them contemplating marriage! They even get engaged to ‘the babes’ and as engagement rings they give them plastic rings that seem to have come out of a Cracker Jack box! They innocently wonder if the babes will stay over after they marry? Ha! They are also trying to get into the battle of the bands. You see, according to the first film, Bill and Ted are supposed to be the saviors of the universe, bringing peace and unity to the galaxy through their rock and roll, unfortunately, they are having trouble living up to the prophecy because according to Mrs. Wardrobe the organizer of the Battle of the Bands competition, they stink! Meanwhile, in the future, a dictator known as De Nomolos is sending two evil robot versions of Bill and Ted (known throughout the movie as Evil Bill and Ted) to the past to kill Bill and Ted so that he can rule the future with an iron fist. Worst part of the whole thing is that the robots are successful, Bill and Ted are killed and that’s where their Bogus Journey through the afterlife begins. They meet God, Satan and everything in between, they even give The Grim Reaper a visit, hell they even play Battle Ship with him! Will they ever get a chance to live again? And just when and how will they become the saviors of the universe?

One of the things that I enjoy about this one is how inventive it is with its special effects and its visual gags. From start to finish we get a nonstop assortment of special effects. First we get to see ‘Bill and Ted University’ where Rufus, Bill and Ted’s mentor, is a professor. Cool part about this university is that if the students need to know who Benjamin Franklin is, Rufus just gets on the time machine and brings him right into the classroom! So anyhow, then Bill and Ted die and we go to hell, where meet Satan, who looks exactly how you’d expect him to look, like a giant red demon overseeing hell. Bill and Ted manage to greet him, “How’s it going Beelzebub?” Then Bill and Ted head on over to limbo and play a couple of board games with The Grim Reaper, who then takes Bill and Ted up to heaven, to meet God himself. So it’s a film that is constantly taking us to visually interesting places, it’s never boring that’s for sure. We even get to meet two little Martians called ‘Station’ who join their bodies and become this giant Martian scientist! And then we have both good and evil robot versions of Bill and Ted; if this all sounds like a huge mess of a movie, then you know what? You’re kind of right, this movie is all over the place! But that’s exactly what I like about it, how offbeat it is.

The film was actually even crazier then what I’ve described. I sometimes wish they would've released a director’s cut of this film because it would be an even cooler film, the stuff they left out was the edgier stuff, the stuff deemed too scary for kids, or stuff that the producers thought would be too confusing for audiences. For example, there’s a scene in which Evil Bill and Ted open up their robotic chests and take out three canisters, each canister containing one of Bill and Ted’s fears. They actually filmed a scene in which Bill and Ted are headed towards the Battle of the Bands on their van and they suddenly confront nightmarish versions of Bill’s Granny, The Easter Bunny and Coronel Oats! It becomes a showdown between Bill and Ted and hellish versions of their worst fears! The evil bunny rabbit looked positively evil! A pity it was left out of the film! 

This nightmarish Bunny Rabbit was cut out of the film if you can believe it! 

Another deleted scene had Evil Bill and Ted revealing that Evil Bill was actually Evil Ted and vice versa, now this part I know would have been confusing for audiences, because what the hell right? Evil Bill was actually Evil Ted? And Vice Versa?  Totally nuts right? But what the hell, the whole movie was crazy from the beginning anyway! There was also a deleted scene in which Bill and Ted are in Hell, hammering rocks with sledge hammers with a demon overseeing their work, and they say something like “I kind of like this!” and then the demon that’s watching over them eats a rat and one of them says “I heard a guy found one of those in a bucket of chicken!” I guess that was deemed to gross? Whatever, these deleted scenes simply show that Bill and Ted’s Bogus Journey was a film filled with so many ideas that they had to leave some of them out in order to make the movie flow, or to shorten running time. Cool to know that director Peter Hewitt shot an epic Bill and Ted film! This movie was going to be even more epic than it already is!

This deleted scene actually made it on to the comic book adaptation of the film done by Marvel Comics! 

Which is cool when we take in consideration that this was Peter Hewitt’s first film ever. Back then, this  28 year old British lad was chosen out of 50 other possible directors. He was chosen because of the strength of a short he had made called ‘The Candy Show’. After directing Bogus Journey Hewitt stuck to directing family films like The Borrowers (1997) and Garfield (2004). The rest of the cast has also gone on to do great things, Keanu Reeves of course went on to become the mega star he is today, and Alex Winter went on to become a director of children’s films and television shows like Ben 10. He is currently trying to get a remake of The Gate (1987) in 3-D, but that’s been in development hell like forever. I hope he does manage to get it made though! He also went on to direct the make-up effects heavy film called Freaked (1993), gonna be reviewing it soon. But what of Bill and Ted’s further adventures through time? Well, there’s been talk of a Bill and Ted 3, actually, I hear there’s even a screenplay written for it, written by the very same guys who created and wrote the first two films, Ed Solomon and Chris Matheson. According to Alex Winters himself, nothing is holding Bill and Ted 3 from getting made; it’s just that these things take time. I wonder if Keanu would go back to playing Ted again? I know I wouldn’t mind seeing another one! Maybe a new danger is threatening the peace of the universe? Bring it on! I wouldn’t mind seeing another one! Party on dudes!

Rating: 4 out of 5  

For an interesting and informative take on Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure (1989), the film that started it all, check out J.D. Lafrance's review on Radiator Heaven! 

Director Peter Hewitt talks over a scene with Martian Scientist 'Station'

Class of 1999 (1990)

Title: Class of 1999 (1990)

Director: Mark L. Lester

Cast:  Malcolm McDowell, Pamela Grier, Traci Lind, Kirk Kilpatrick, John P. Ryan, Stacy Keach

Review:

Mark L . Lester’s Class of 1984 (1982) was a film that addressed issues concerning gang violence in schools, something that was getting out of control during the late 70’s and early 80’s. As far as I know, school gangs and gangs in general have died out, not many people go around wearing ‘gang colors’ and wanting to beat the living shit out of anyone who doesn’t belong to their gang. Personally, I always thought the whole gang thing was so stupid, but back in the 70’s it was a huge problem. Gang wars and this violent behavior amongst young people caught the eye of various filmmakers who went on to make films addressing this issue through films like The Warriors (1979). Lester’s Class of 1984 starred Roddy McDowall as a teacher who is pushed to the edge by his out of control students, so much so that in one pivotal scene of the film, the teacher holds his entire class room at gunpoint. Films like these demonstrated the frustration felt towards youth going out of control in schools and performing acts of brutal violence on each other and upon teachers. Suddenly, a teacher could not feel safe in his or her own classroom. Class of 1984 wasn’t just a film we were watching in a movie theater, this was happening in the real world. Actually, that scene in which the teacher pulls out a gun on his students was based on a real life event, so the film doesn’t stray that far off from real life events. Students can and do get rowdy and out of control and in a very dangerous way.  So, it’s 1990 and here comes the sequel to the cult classic. How was it?

Class of 1999 starts out a whole lot like John Carpenter’s Escape from New York (1981); first we hear a voice over narrator telling us how violence in schools has gotten out of control, and how some schools exist behind these walls that separate the schools from the real world, behind these walls there are “no police, no rules” and only the strongest survive. These areas are called ‘Free Fire Zones’, which means that anyone can carry a gun and shoot it. This is the kind of town where when the students have a party, they randomly shoot their machine guns in the air as the dance! The students are divided into gangs, and of course, all gangs hate each other, defending their respective territories and so forth. In order to attack this violent environment, the Department of Educational Defense are bringing in three prototype teacher/robots who have a new way to teach these violent students: by using good old fashion physical discipline! Will these students make their teachers go crazy like in the first film? Or will these new teachers show these youngsters a lesson in respect and humility?

So yeah, basically what Class of 1999 does is it turns its teachers into villains, which is kind of a complete reversal of what we saw in Class of 1984; a film in which the students drive their music teacher to his limit, pushing him to the border of temporary insanity, in that film, the teacher was the victim and so when he pulls out a gun on the students, you see where he is coming from, you feel a bit of compassion for the teacher going berserk. Class of 1999 is the other way around; it’s the teachers who push the students’ buttons. These students might be out of control and totally anarchic (even more so then on Class of 1984) but these teachers are freaking terminators with flame throwers for hands and drills with which to “mold young minds”! So on this one, it’s the teachers who have the edge. The three robo-teachers are played by Pamela Grier, Patrick Kilpatrick and John P. Ryan and they all do a great job of coming off as cold, robotic beings following their programming. My favorite being P. ‘Mr. Hardish’ who picks up one of the rebellious students and actually begins to slap his ass to submission! 

The students are played by a group of young actors whom you might remember from other sci-fi horror films of the eighties. For example, you’ll probably remember Bradley Gregg who plays ‘Cody’ as one of the sleep walking kids in A Nightmare on Elm Street 3: The Dream Warriors (1987), he’s the kid that Freddy manipulates like a puppet. Tracy Lin plays the principals daughter here, but you might remember her as Alex, Charlie’s girlfriend in Fright Night II (1988). Joshua John Miller plays ‘Angel’, Cody’s younger brother, but you might remember him as ‘Homer’, the child vampire in Near Dark (1987).  To top things off we also get the great Malcolm McDowell playing the school’s principal; this is an interesting casting choice as well because early in his carrier McDowell was known for playing rebellious youth in films like A Clockwork Orange (1971) and If…(1968). On this one he is playing the school principal who’s trying to keep the students under control by implementing the disciplinary robots. So we have a pretty decent cast rounding out this film.

Thematically speaking Class of 1999 is shallower than its predecessor. While the first one contains some social commentary on violence amongst students, this sequel is simply a movie where the  teachers are the monsters, so it’s a monster movie in the sameway that The Terminator is a monster movie.  Actually, Class of 1999 feels like a mix between Robocop (1987), The Terminator (1984) and a little bit of Escape from New York (1981) for good measure. There’s a side plot about kids being on this new drug called ‘edge’, but that goes nowhere. There’s a Romeo and Juliet thing going on between Cody and the principals’ daughter, but it goes nowhere as well. My point is they had a couple of sub plots that could have served to flesh out some of the characters, but the filmmakers did not pursue them, instead they went for the wow factor, the whammy, the cool stuff, killer robots on the loose and I’d say that this is the way the film is meant to be enjoyed, as a sci-fi/horror film with scary robo-teachers and nothing more. While I did enjoy those moments when the teachers confront the rebellious students with extreme disciplinary actions, the best thing about this movie is the last half hour, when the teachers show their true colors. Then the film becomes a showcase of decent effects work. This is in my opinion an underrated sci-fi flick from the 90’s that is often times overshadowed by the more recognized original. Give it a shot for a decent slice of 90’s sci-fi; just don’t expect anything to deep.

Rating 3 ½ out of 5

The Man with the Iron Fists (2012)

Title: The Man with The Iron Fists (2012)

Director: The RZA

Cast: Russell Crowe, Lucy Liu, RZA, Byron Mann, Rick Yune, David Bautista, Pam Grier, Gordon Liu

The RZA’s love for Kung Fu movies can be traced all the way back to his beginnings as a musician in the Wu-Tang clan, where the famous rap group would conceptualize whole albums based on Kung Fu movies like The 36^th Chamber of Shaolin (1978). RZA also scored the music to Tarantino’s Kill Bill movies,   Afro Samurai (2007) and its sequel Afro Samurai Resurrection (2009). So it’s safe to say that RZA’s love for Kung Fu films has always been there. In a featurette RZA did for the Afro Samurai dvd, his genuine love and appreciation for these films was evident; so the fact that he directed, wrote, starred and scored The Man With the Iron Fists doesn’t surprise me the least, in fact, it makes all the sense in the world. Here’s a guy who’s seen thousands of Kung Fu movies. He understands and obviously loves the genre; this isn’t some ignorant poser trying to make a Kung Fu film, this is a connoisseur. With The Man with the Iron Fists he meant to unleash all that Kung Fu knowledge onto the silver screen as a love letter to genre. Problem is, this is his first film ever, so a lot was depending on him pulling it off, and pulling it off well. So, the question remained: would the RZA be able to do it? Could he pull off this ambitious project on his first time out?

Story is all about this peace loving blacksmith (RZA) who hates making weapons and would much rather spend his time making toys for kids. But, as fate would have it, he ends up having to make weapons anyway so he can save enough money to escape with the woman he loves. He makes weapons for two gangs that are fighting each other over a shipment of gold, and the control of the town. You see one greedy bastard known as ‘Silver Lion’ killed his own master ‘Golden Lion’ just so he could take over the clan; problem is that while Golden Lion wanted peace, Silver Lion wants war and The Blacksmith is caught in the middle of it all. Will The Blacksmith ever find the peace and love he yearns, or will death, carnage and revenge force him to turn into a stone cold killer?

The Man with the Iron Fists was obviously a labor of love for the RZA who basically took all the things he loves about Kung Fu movies, put them all in a blender and called it The Man with the Iron Fists. It’s got elements from recent Kung Fu films like True Legend (2010), a little bit of Afro Samurai (2007) and a whole lot of Shaw Brothers. The thing with The Man with the Iron Fists is that if you’re a lover of Kung Fu movies (like I am) you will immediately identify the films where RZA got his inspiration from. It kind of reminds of what happens when you watch a Tarantino film. The film has that repetitive storyline that a lot of Kung Fu movies have where the hero gets all banged up by the bad guys, goes through a recuperation/training process and by the ending of the film, he ends up kicking everyone’s collective asses to kingdom come. The difference between a Tarantino film and The Man with the Iron Fists is that while Tarantino takes the genre he is paying homage to and re-invents it, brings something new to the table, makes it better somehow, The Man with the Iron Fists hardly re-invents the Kung Fu genre, or brings anything new to the table. It’s quite simply a homage that walks on tired ground. Still, that being said, the film is an extremely entertaining affair; I was not bored for a moment.

And here’s the part where I start talking about all the cool stuff this movie has going for it. First off, the production values are top notch. The art direction, the wardrobes, the weapons and the look of the film were all great. I’m thinking that the production benefited a whole lot from shooting on location in china, which is a great surprise; I love it when a film shoots on location. The Kung Fu action is excellent and very well shot. I’ve read some reviewers complaint about them not being able to comprehend what’s going on in the fights, I don’t get where they are coming from, I could see perfectly well what was happening during the fight choreography, which was quite good in my book. Characters have all sorts of cool weapons that I had not seen on any movie before; like for example there’s these two sword fighters,  each has a sword that when united with the other, creates a ying and yang symbol that allows them to kick some serious ass together.  The gore was plentiful as well, which caught me completely off guard! Since Hollywood’s so shy with blood and guts these days, I was expecting a tame film in this regard, but I was wrong. There’s all sorts of over the top death sequences; which were gruesomely entertaining; a kung fu fan should be pleased with all the blood spraying on this movie.

I won’t lie, the film does have a few flaws here and there, most of them related to this being the RZA’s first film. For instance, I don’t think it was a smart choice on the RZA’s part to juggle so many production responsibilities. He directs, writes, scores and on top of all that, acts in the film! The RZA plays the titular ‘Man with the Iron Fists’ and his performance is quite subdued. The Blacksmith is a very quiet, laid back kind of character, it felt to me like this pivotal character should have been played a bit more intensely by an actor with experience.  I don’t think it’s the worst performance ever, but the part called for someone who could display more emotion,  plus to be honest, I don’t think RZA’s much of an actor. As a director? Sure, he did a decent job, but acting is definitely not his forte.  Also, somewhere near the end, the film feels a bit rushed. This could also have something to do with the fact that the original cut of the film was four hours long and the RZA had to compromise and cut it down to the usual hour and a half; this is his first film after all. I’m looking forward to a director’s cut of the film where hopefully we’ll get more character development and story. I hear RZA is pushing for a director’s cut for the dvd release, which would be awesome in my book. Since this film only cost 20 million dollars to make (a modest budget by Hollywood standards) I think it will be successful enough to make its money back, and hopefully bring on a sequel. I wouldn’t mind getting a second dose of Kung Fu awesomeness from RZA, because this movie satisfies in that department.

My final word on this one is that it’s not a perfect movie, but it is fun enough for you to forget all about the flaws and just enjoy the damn thing. The violence is so cartoonish and over the top that people laugh after some of the deaths, which I think is a perfectly normal reaction to all the mayhem that happens on screen. The idea of this character having Iron Fists is freaking awesome and him battling this other dude with metal skin? Sweeeet. The RZA as the Black Smith was the weak link of the show, but then we have Russell Crow chewing up scenes and having a blast with Lucy Liu who plays the lady who runs the local whore house. Fun times are to be had, if you love your Kung Fu mixed with some hip hop tunes; this is the place to go. I wonder if what RZA was really trying to prove with this film is that he could be the one to direct the Afro Samurai movie? Now there’s an idea!

Rating: 4 out of 5

Escape from L.A. (1996)

Title: Escape from L.A. (1996)

Director: John Carpenter

Cast: Kurt Russell, Steve Buscemi, Peter Fonda, Valeria Golino, Pamela Grier, Bruce Campbell, A.J. Langer

Review:

Escape from L.A. is a strange kind of film. When I first heard the news that a sequel to John Carpenter's  Escape from New York (1981) was being made I was excited to see the resulting film because not only was John Carpenter back behind the directors chair, but Kurt Russell was still going to play Snake Plissken! That’s really all I needed to know. Sadly, when I went to the theater to see it, I came out being disappointed. Where was all the darkness? Where was that terrifying post- apocalyptic world that I loved from the first film? Why were characters trying to be funny? Why was everything so silly? Why? Why? Why? Well, many years have passed since my initial disappointment with Escape from L.A. I’ve grown some, matured some. I had a chance to recently re-watch Escape from L.A. How do I see this film now?

Carpenter and Russell on the set of Escape from L.A.

Well, I honestly can’t bring myself to hate it. I see why I didn’t like it when it was first released, but I’ve grown to accept this film for what it is. It’s pure unadulterated campy fun. Funny thing is that a script was written for this film way back in 1985, by a guy called Coleman Luck, but Carpenter thought the script was too light and campy. What? X-squeeze me? Baking Powder? That’s exactly what Escape from L.A. turned out to be anyways! Ultra campy and ultra light; at least when compared to the first film which was so dark and brooding. Escape from New York was a film that took itself very seriously. Yeah it’s a science fiction film, but it was a decidedly serious one. Not many laughs or  jokes in sight. In contrast Escape from L.A. is colorful, filled with one joke after the another, and very, very campy. This movie is obviously making fun of itself. And to tell you the truth, I like that about it because it’s obviously what Carpenter and Russell were going for. So you’ll be better of just erasing your expectations for this film. If you haven’t seen this one yet, you have to go in expecting a different film than Escape from New York.

What makes Escape from L.A. so different? It’s all about the tone of the film, the look of it. While Escape from New York felt like a horror movie at times with it’s darkness and freaky looking characters, Escape from L.A. is actually well lit and colorful,  filled with comic book heroes, villains and one liners galore. Take for example the character called ‘The Surgeon General of Beverly Hills’ the one played by Bruce Campbell. This character feels like a comic book villain, like something out of an episode of the old Batman television show. He’s a surgeon general who has performed so much surgery on himself and on his patients, that they have disfigured their faces! He likes chopping up good looking people to use for his surgeries. This is a prime example of the kind of totally over the top characters you will find on this film. They aren’t particularly scary or intimidating like the villains on the first film, but they are entertaining none the less. And the comic book characters don't stop there my friends! Pamela Grier plays a transvestite who used to be Snake Plissken’s partner in crime! Steve Buscemi plays a double crossing tourist guide! Peter Fonda plays a surfer who likes to ride Tsunami tidal waves! And so on. But even though this film is filled with funny, entertaining characters such as the ones I’ve mentioned, this doesn’t make Escape from L.A. a bad film in book, just a different kind of film than its predecessor. 

Bruce Campbell's 'Surgeon General of Beverly Hills'

Both Escape from New York and Escape from L.A. are decidedly anti-establishment films. They both have this cynical view of the government; in these films, the government is not to be trusted. There are terrorist attacks aimed at the government on both films. On the first one they hijack and crash Air Force One; forcing The President of the United States to fall into the hands of the freaks inside Manhattan. On this second one, the president’s own daughter is the one that rebels against the government and decides to live with the leader of the criminals; a guy called ‘Cuervo Jones’. And here’s what I liked about this movie. While it does criticize fascist forms of government, it also criticizes rebellious leaders who instigate their followers towards committing violent acts. So it doesn’t side with anyone. On this film, both sides are wrong. The film pleads for a new beginning, it’s asking governments to forget their old grudges and start from scratch. Snake himself says it in one scene: “I shut down the third world, you win, they loose. I shut down America, they win, you loose. The more things change, the more they stay the same” This is one of the ideas presented in the film that I truly liked. The idea that both sides should just call it quits and bring on the peace, bring on the freedom. Again, this last bit demonstrates how much of Kurt Russell’s Libertarian views are on this film. After all, he wrote a lot of it himself along with John Carpenter and Debra Hill. These are three life long buddies writing a movie they would find amusing, which makes this film a labor of love. This is probably why the film has a more laid back, ‘were having fun here’ vibe to it.

That being said, the film does have some faults going for it. The visual effects for example are freaking horrendous, I mean this was a 50 million dollar movie, one would think that better effects could have been afforded. There’s this painfully bad effects sequence in which Snake drives this mini-submarine through the underwater ruins of L.A….wow, there’s some bad CGI for you. I mean, granted this was early CGI, but even for 1996, these effects where half assed in my book. The scene where Snake Plissken rides a tsunami wave on a surfboard with Peter Fonda, while campy and kind of cool in a way (it’s all about that Hippy attitude!) the scene just comes off as one bad special effect. The scenes with Snake and crew flying these gliders, wow, you could just tell those things weren’t really flying; the list just goes on and on. So expect lots of cheesy effects on this show.

But don’t get me wrong, I don’t hate this movie. I quite enjoyed it actually. I mean yeah, I loved the first one a whole lot more. It’s just darker and scarier; it’s got more of an edge to it. This second one is tongue in cheek every step of the way. Watching Escape from L.A. feels like watching a cheap Italian Rip Off like 2019: After the Fall of New York (1983), but with a bigger budget. Actually, Escape from L.A. has a lot of similarities with 2019: After the Fall of New York, so in a way, this is Carpenter's pay back for all those cheap Escape from New York rip offs that the Italians made. Ultimately, I love both Escape from New York and Escape from L.A. for different reasons. And for all the tonal differences between both films, they still have many similarities. No matter where, Snake Plissken will always be Snake Plissken, you can tell Russell has lots of love for this character. Plissken is what kept me watching. The opening and closing segments of the films are extremely similar as well. And here’s where we get to the best part of the film, the ending. Not gonna spoil it don’t worry, but I will tell you that it is the best thing about the movie. Russell himself came up with it and I applaud him for it, it encapsulates everything Snake Plissken is in terms of attitude. That idea that maybe the world would be better off if we simply started again,  from scratch, screw the way things are, let’s try something new! Welcome to the human race my friends, welcome to the human race.

Rating 3 ½ out of 5  

Jackie Brown (1997)

Title: Jackie Brown (1997)

Director/Writer: Quentin Tarantino (Based on the novel ‘Rum Punch’ by Elmore Leonard)

Cast: Pamela Grier, Samuel L. Jackson, Robert Deniro, Robert Foster, Bridget Fonda, Michael Keaton, Chris Tucker

Jackie Brown is one big, gigantic, bombastic love letter to blaxpoitation films of the seventies. But of course, a film like Jackie Brown, coming from Quentin Tarantino, makes all the sense in the world. If I didn’t know any better, I would say that Tarantino was black. But he isn’t, Tarantino is a whitey. Still, he may be white on the outside, but his soul is blacker then James Brown on the inside! Tarantino has had a love affair with blacksploitation films for the longest time, it’s evident in many of his films, most notably Pulp Fiction (1994). There’s always a nod to some obscure blacksploitation film in his own films. But Jackie Brown takes the taco as the biggest, baddest and blackest of them all.

On this film we follow the life of Jackie Brown, a stewardess of the skies who likes to make a little extra on the side by smuggling money from Mexico to the United States for a gun dealer. Problem is she’s been caught with some cash and some cocaine on her, so she gets sent to jail. When we first meet her, she is just getting out of jail and trying to pick up the pieces of her life. Trying to start anew; this means of course pulling off one last score that will set her up for the rest of her life. Will she be able to pull it off and live a worry free life? Or will she continue to live the life of a hustler, always looking for the next ‘get rich quick’ scheme?

How black is this movie? This is how black: there is no musical score for this film; instead, Tarantino chose a bunch of songs he liked from a bunch of blacksploitation films from the seventies. The soundtrack plays like a blacksploitation compilation of songs from films like Coffy (1973), Foxy Brown (1974), Across 110th Street (1972) and black artists like Bobby Womack, The Supremes and The Delfonics. The most notable song in the film is “Across 110th Street” which appears in the opening and closing credits of the film as a way to introduce and say good bye to the character of Jackie Brown. And as it usually happens in Tarantino films, the song fits perfectly with the character and situation. If we analyze the lyrics to this song, we can get to know who Jackie is, what she’s living through and her state of mind. Let’s analyze the song for a moment shall we?

Song starts out by saying “Doing whatever I had to do to survive, I’m not saying what I did was alright, trying to break out of the ghetto was a day to day fight” which perfectly describes who Jackie Brown is. She’s planning her way out of poverty and she’s willing to take some risks if she has to. She’s even willing to do illegal things like smuggling money from one country to another. She may not be doing something honest, but hey, this is a dog eat dog world, and she’s doing what she’s gotta do to survive. She’s looking out for number one; herself. Gotta give it to her, she’s putting all that’s street smart to good use!

The song continues “Been down so long, getting up didn’t cross my mind, I knew there was a better way of life that I was just trying to find” This line lets us see that she’s tired of the hard life. She’s sick of working on a low paying job in the bad side of town, she wants a better life for herself and she’s going to do whatever she has to do to get it. Basically, she’s planning this huge heist so that she can finally stop struggling to survive. She continuously complaints that because she went to prison, she hasn’t been able to get any good paying jobs. Best she could do was flight attendant. And since she just got out of jail again, she thinks it will only get worse. So she plans her big get away.

Then the song says “you don’t know what you’ll do under pressure, 110th is a hell of a tester” which is exactly the situation she is in. She is under pressure for two reasons, the cops are on to her, and they want to use her to catch the big fish. So she’s under pressure from both camps; the good guys and the bad guys. Another line of the song says “Pimps trying to catch a woman that’s weak”. Notice how that line says “trying to catch a woman that’s weak”, but Jackie Brown aint weak! She’s one tough cookie mama! They can’t catch her no matter how much they try, she’s too smart for them, too slick. You get the feeling while watching this movie that Jackie is always one step ahead of everyone on the film. The song continues saying “Woman trying to catch a trick on the street” which explains what she is doing by pulling off this one final trick. In other words, Jackie Brown is willing to do whatever it takes to get out. “You got to be strong if you want to survive” says to the song to Jackie as she sings it driving in her car. I love how Tarantino had Jackie actually sing the lyrics to the song, showing us how much she identifies with it, how much it means to her. The song perfectly embodies her whole struggle, which is genius on Tarantino’s part. Plus, its such a damn good song, I havent been able to stop humming it for the past few days!

Tarantino enjoys working next to one of his favorite movie Icons of the seventies, Pamela Grier!

Best thing about this movie is watching Pamela Grier enjoying her big come back and making the most of it. She really pulls off this street smart, lonely chick trying to outsmart the world type of character. She’s a loner, looking out for no one else but herself. And well, maybe her bail bondsman Max Cherry, an old dude that’s kind of got the hots for her and decides to help her out. I love the fact that there is some sexual tension between them, but nothing ever comes of it. Max is just a good guy who is smitten by this street smart girl and wants to help her out. I guess he kind of gets how much of a struggle her life is, and also, I think he admires how much of a fighter she is. He quickly sees that she aint any ordinary lady, she’s a fighter who’s lead a tough life. Foster plays it cool, as if he knows he is probably too old for Jackie, but he still finds her incredibly attractive. Cant blame the man, Grier looks great for her age on this film. Her character perfectly walks the line between good girl and bad girl, you never truly know what to expect from her.

Tarantino made sure that the rest of the cast was equally amazing. Samuel L. Jackson plays a villain who goes by the name of Ordell, but he isn’t a likable villain. No, this guy has some evil in his eyes. Deniro plays Louis Gara, an ex-con who just got out of jail. He plays it cool for most of the film, smoking weed with Bridget Fonda’s Melanie, Ordelle’s brain dead girlfriend. The cast is rounded out by Michael Keaton who plays the cop who’s trying to use Jackie Brown to get to Ordell. So all in all, we have another star studded cast from Tarantino, gotta hand it to him, he really does find the right actors for the right roles.

Finally, this is the only film that isn’t 100% pure Tarantino because the script he wrote was based on Elmore Leonard’s novel ‘Rum Punch’. Maybe thats why some people get turned off by this film, but in all honesty, this is very much a Tarantino flick. What Tarantino did was he basically took Leonard's novel and made it his own. He made the main character black, added some soul to the whole thing and gave it the Tarantino stamp. That means an awesome soundtrack, girls walking around barefoot, long shots that don’t cut for a long time, scenes shot from the trunk of a car, and finally, that awesome blacksploitation vibe, no doubt derived from years and years of watching groundhouse films. Thank the movie gods that these films keep inspiring Tarantino through out his career! There are lots of in-jokes on this movie, if you are a Tarantino fan, and a fan of grindhouse films, you’ll probably catch them. (Hint: Sid Haig plays a judge!) So anyways, all in all, I enjoyed this flick a whole lot more watching it after all these years, turns out this is yet another great Tarantino film. Don’t know why it gets labeled as the one that people like the least; Pamela Grier is so damn likable on this flick.

Rating: 5 out of 5

This is a Tarantino film alright!