Thor: Ragnarok (2017)

Thor: Ragnarok (2017)

Director: Taika Waititi

Cast: Chris Hemsworth, Tom Hiddleston, Cate Blanchett, Jeff Goldblum, Tessa Thompson, Karl Urban, Mark Ruffallo, Anthony Hopkins, Bennedict Cumberbatch

Within the Marvel movies, there are the huge hits that everyone loves like Guardians of the Galaxy (2014) and The Avengers (2012) and then there are those films that people liked but don’t go bananas over, like the Thor movies. The first film was directed by Kenneth Branagh and I was really pumped for it because he’s known for doing Shakespeare adaptations and so I was like, cool, he’s going to bring that Shakespearian quality to the Thor universe, which he did. That first film was all serious and tragic in true Shakespearian fashion. It was followed by a less then spectacular sequel which really didn’t do much for me. Which is probably why the Thor franchise has never been the one to light the Box Office on fire, well, at least not as spectacularly as the rest of the Marvel Universe. Thor movies made money, but didn’t make as much as the rest. Which meant something had to be reworked, something had to be fixed, because people weren’t reacting as favorably to the Thor franchise as Disney hoped they would. So what’s a studio to do? Well, Disney did what they had to do, they tried something new for this third film to ensure its success. They made it funny. Did it work?

This time around Thor faces the takeover of Asgard by his evil sister Hella. Unfortunately, he accidentally ends up stranded on a distant planet where people are obsessed with Gladiator fights featuring The Incredible Hulk as the star of the show. Oh, and Thor’s also without his magical Hammer Mjolnir. Can he get back home to fix things in Asgard before his sister begins her reign of terror? Will he ever get Mjolnir back? And can he win in a fight against the Hulk?

With the success of films like Guardians of the Galaxy (2014) and Deadpool (2016), suddenly offbeat movies that didn’t take themselves so seriously were the big money makers. And so, this new Thor movie is a thrill a minute, fast paced, joke fest. It’s lighthearted and crazy and I love it and so has the rest of the world; Thor Ragnarok has turned into one of the biggest money makers in the entire Marvel Cinematic Universe. A huge part of the successful formula for this enjoyable film is the guy behind the camera, Taika Waititi. Who the hell is Taika Waititi you might ask. Well, he might not be a household name yet, but Waititi has been making movies for a while now. In all honesty, he’s a rather gifted storyteller. If you want to see what he is capable of, I recommend you check out a movie he made called Boy (2010), a touching and beautiful film about a boy who misses his father. Waititi acts, writes and directs his own films, yes my friends, Waititi is a creative force to be reckoned with and I have a feeling we’ve yet to discover what he can really do. I mean, if this is him working with a studios ideas, imagine when he does a project thats purely his. I predict good things from Waititi. You might remember him best for his performance in a faux Documentary What We Do in The Shadows (2014), a super funny film that follows a group of vampires who are all house mates in a flat in London. Just hilarious, highly recommend checking that film out. After seeing Waititi’s repertoire, you’ll understand perfectly well why Thor: Ragnarok is so hilarious. So remember, if you enjoy the funny in Ragnarok, Waititi is the guy you have to thank.  

What Waititi does with some of his films is he turns things around, he puts a tired idea in a new unexpected situation. I mean, there’s no more tired genre than the vampire genre and Waititi made it work. He made us see vampires in a way we hadn’t seen them before. I mean, did you ever think you’d see vampires squabbling over who should do the dishes? “Fuck that! Vampires don’t do dishes!” Did you ever think you’d see Thor being traumatized after seeing Hulk naked? Well, in this movie he does, and that’s what I’m talking about, he puts the characters we know and love in funny, unthought of situations. Situations you’d never imagine seeing them in. Situations that most movies would avoid. Not only is the film funny, but it shatters the foundations of the Thor universe to their very core. Thor goes through a life changing journey, more so than any previous films. Ragnarok shakes things up good. Nothing is sacred. All while spewing one liners. You wont feel danger or peril, but you’ll have one hell of a good time. You’ll bust a gut with the banter between Thor and The Hulk.

Speaking of the films look, well, it’s very bright and colorful. It’s very much in tune with the look and feel of two very important comic book artists who helped shape the character of Thor in the 60’s. I speak of  Jacky Kirby and Walter Simonson. Kirby and Simonson did some of the more seminal runs on Thor, they helped shape and define what Thor eventually became, the way he would look. Waititi and crew paid homage to these classic artists by giving the film a very classic look with regards to set designs and the wardrobe of some of the characters. Thor himself has a more contemporary feel, getting away from the long hair, the capes and the hammer, making him less of a Viking. So the film is a bit of the old and the new.  Speaking of the old and the retro, If you love the 80’s then you’ll love the soundtrack which is pure 80’s synth stuff. It has a John Carpenter/Stranger Things vibe going for it. Thor: Ragnarok is a film that is showing us just how important it is to put the right person behind the camera, because without Waititi, this would be a very different film. This film shows movie studios can realize when something didnt work and that they shouldn’t be afraid to go in an entirely different direction to try something new and freshen things up. Who knows, it just might work. This is a lesson the DC Universe could learn from.

Rating: 4 out of 5

Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1978)

Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1978)

Director: Phillip Kaufman

Cast: Donald Sutherland, Jeff Goldblum, Brooke Adams, Veronica Carthwright, Leonard Nimoy

There have been three remakes of the original Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1956). The first one was this Phillip Kaufman version I’ll be reviewing today, then there’s Abel Ferrara’s Body Snatchers (1993) which I will be reviewing soon, then there’s The Invasion (2007) which strangely enough was as devoid of emotion as the aliens it was depicting, don’t even bother with that one. But I decided to revisit this 1978 version because I had not seen it since I was a child and wanted to see what I could get out of it now as an adult because my original reaction to it as a kid was one of pure fright. The idea that these aliens were trying to turn us into something we are not frightened me immensely, my reaction was a visceral one; I hated these aliens with no personality and emotions. But back then I was simply a scared little kid, frightened by these notions, my reaction was based on fear, I didn’t really see the themes behind the film, or what the filmmakers where really trying to say, to me it was just a freaky movie. Upon my re-watch I discovered that this film is still freaky, still highly effective as a horror/sci-fi hybrid, and filled with socially relevant issues. How did the film fare this time around, from an adult perspective?

Invasion of the Body Snatchers is all about these alien spores that make it to our planet by traveling through space. I loved how the director decided to film the opening sequences by using footage of micro organisms (I have no idea what they really were) and made it look like they were the alien organisms infiltrating our planet. So anyways, these alien organisms arrive to our planet and attach themselves to plants which grow into these giant pods from which half formed humanoid beings pop out of. They wait until you are asleep and then try to duplicate you. After they do, your body decomposes and turns to dust, and then the duplicate takes over. The duplicate looks like you in every way save for one significant difference; you are now a being devoid of emotion! The main characters in the film realize this is happening and attempt to runaway in order to retain their humanity. But how far can they run before the pod people catch them?  

Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1956), the first film to bring Jack Finney’s book to life was made during the 50’s, when Russians enemies to the Americans, so if we look at it within that context, the aliens probably represented communism, which believe it or not was actually spreading itself rather quickly throughout the united states. During those years, there was such a thing as a ‘communist party’ in America. Communists numbered in the many thousands and where growing strong! The workers unions all got together to fight for their rights, and many of these workers were foreigners with communism as their way of life. So of course Americans were trembling in their pants, capitalism as a way of life was in peril! So it’s safe to say that we can see the original Invasion of the Body Snatchers as an allegory for that, a metaphor for the ever spreading ‘menace’  of communism, which threatened the American way of life. Was this 1978 version addressing these same fears? Or was it about something else?

Well yes, this time around, instead of aiming its guns at communism, this version of Invasion of the Body Snatchers is all about “losing our humanity”, a theme that is emphasized all throughout the film. The main characters are fighting for their right to retain their memories, the right to feel, the right to retain what makes them human. This theme brought to mind George Orwell’s 1984, which is a novel about a totalitarian government that prohibits all forms of emotions. Everyone dresses the same; no one is more special than the other. In this novel everyone is loyal to the all powerful, ever watching government. If you go against them, someone will rat on you. And when this happens, you will end up paying for your betrayal to the all knowing ‘Big Brother’. Individuality is not encouraged in Orwell’s novel. But the main characters always fight for it, even if it means death. Well, this version of Invasion of the Body Snatchers is not all that different from Orwell’s novel. The aliens want you to be like them, or else. They are a race of beings who don’t show any emotion at all, if you show emotion the point at you and give this other worldly scream in order to alert all other aliens that you are not one of them. So this of course creates an intense feeling of paranoia amongst the humans who live in constant fear of getting caught. The paranoia is extremely palpable in this movie; it’s one of those movies where the whole town is in on something, something that you don’t want to be a part of. I drew similarities with Invaders from Mars, a film that plays with similar themes. 

Because this film was made in the 70’s, everything feels more real somehow. There’s no color filters, no computer effects, this is a film that comes from an era when they actually shot movies with film and a camera and real actors instead of CGI doubles and color correction. I love how the effects are entirely practical, so visceral, palpable. There's even some gore in there! This film feels gritty and realistic; something I wish modern films would go back to. Even the actors are adult, which is something you don’t see a lot of these days either, nowadays most films only use young people. Yet during the tail end of the 70’s films were way more adult oriented. The actors seen in most films were adults, not teens, not twenty- somethings. Speaking of actors, this film has an awesome cast! Donald Sutherland,  Jeff Goldblum,  Brooke Adams and Veronica Cartwright all do a splendid job of displaying fear. Even Leonard Nimoy is hear playing a psychologist! By the way, be on the lookout for cameos by Robert Duvall as a creepy looking priest, director Phillip Kaufman and even Kevin McCarthy, the main actor from the original Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1956)!

So yeah, closing statements on this film is that it’s solid, still creepy and filled with copious amounts of paranoia! It is also considered one of the best remakes ever, some even think that it’s better than the original because it takes the concepts presented on the original and improves them and even takes them to places that the first film never went, which is always a sign of a good remake. The worst thing you can get is a remake that plays out exactly the same way the original did. So I guess this one can be placed in the same pantheon of awesome remakes as The Fly (1986), The Thing (1982) and Night of the Living Dead (1990). Be on the lookout for subtle hints of paranoia throughout the film. I mean, right from the very beginning, little things happen that let you know something is not quite right with people. The creepiest thing about this film for me is how fast the aliens spread, how effectively they organize themselves and spread their pods, you get this feeling that the aliens are overpowering, that they are in fact an unstoppable force which we cannot deal with and simply have to give into. A frightening idea indeed!

Rating: 5 out of 5

A dog with a human head, I never did understand why it appears on the film. Be my guest and try and explain it! Still an effectively freaky visual dont you think?

The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai Across the 8th Dimension (1984)

Title: The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai Across the 8^th Dimension (1984)

Director: W.D. Richter

Cast: Peter Weller, John Lithgow, Jeff Goldblum, Ellen Barkin, Christopher Lloyd, Lewis Smith, Robert Ito, Clancy Brown, Vincent Schiavelli

Review:

Sometimes, a films premise can be so outlandish and weird, so unpredictable, that movie studios just don’t know how to sell it to the masses. As a result, these “weird films” usually die a quick death at the box office. An example is John Carpenter’s Big Trouble In Little China (1986) which 20^th Century Fox simply didn’t know what to do with. How the hell do you sell a movie about a truck driver who ends up fighting Chinese ghosts in an underground Chinese temple? Exactly! So Big Trouble in Little China went the way of the dinosaur and disappeared from theaters. These films aren’t necessarily bad films, sometimes they are just not what audiences are accustomed to, they can’t be explained in a simple way to the masses. And trust me, this is what studios prefer: films that can be explained in a sentence, a caption, a tagline. For Hollywood, when it comes to selling a film, simplicity is of the essence. If your movie is too complicated a sell, it will either get a limited release, or go straight to dvd, either way, your film isn’t going to get much exposure. Often time, the films tagline will let you know that you’re in for a weird movie, for example the tagline for Big Trouble in Little China was “A Mystical, Action, Adventure, Comedy, Kung Fu, Monster, Ghost Story!” The tagline for The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai Across the 8^th Dimension was “Expect the Unexpected. He does.” which I have to admit is pretty accurate description of the film, and it’s exactly what makes it so damn watchable. It is extremely unpredictable.

Buckaroo Banzai is a fascinating character in my book. He is that kind of character that is a genius and therefore knows how to do practically everything, which became a funny gag to me. Let’s see Buckaroo Banzai is an excellent brain surgeon, lead singer and lead guitar player of a rock and roll band called ‘Buckaroo Banzai and the Hong Kong Cavaliers', in which he also plays the trumpet! Buckaroo is also a scientist who experiments with interdimensional travel, and ends up being the first human being to travel  through solid matter! If you can believe it, he is also a Samurai. He part times as a super hero, and is also one of the founding fathers of the ‘Banzai Institute for Biomedical Engineering and Strategic Information’ amongst other things that I’m sure are not mentioned in the film. With the help of one Dr. Hikita, Buckaroo invents the ‘Oscillation Overthruster’ a device that allows humans to travel through solid matter and into other dimensions! Unfortunately, it also opens a door for aliens from Planet 10 (called ‘Red Lectroids’) to escape from the 8^th Dimension! Now, these Red Lectroids want to go back to their home planet so they can rule it with an iron fist and they want to use Buckaroo’s Oscillation Overthruster to do it! Will Buckaroo and his Hong Kong Cavaliers find a way to stop them before it’s too late?

So yeah, this movie is fascinating to me in many ways. I like it because you feel like your falling right smack in the middle of a movie already in progress; this my friends, is not a film that will stop and explain every single little thing for you. This movie might have an outlandish plotline and a comic book premise, but it’s a film that expects you to be quick, to pay attention, this is not the kind of film where your brain can just wonder off, you have to pay attention to every single bit of dialog, or you’ll be lost on your way. Which is what I like about it, it’s a strange thing: a silly movie written by intelligent people. Yeah, it’s complicated in some ways, but not impossible to decipher as some might have you believe. Actually, if you stick with it, the inside jokes can be very rewarding!

Part of what makes this one so enjoyable is the amazing ensemble cast! We get Peter Weller playing Buckaroo, the main character in the film. He comes off as totally likable, like he’s this guy who knows everything about everything, the kind of guy you wish you could be, if you had the brain of a genius. I wish we could have seen more of his Samurai side. Then we have his gang of sidekicks, The Hong Kong Cavaliers, all geniuses themselves. One of them is played by Jeff Goldblum, who for some reason dresses up as a cowboy for the whole freaking film! Then we get the beautiful Ellen Arkin playing the role of Penny Priddy, boy does she look hot on this one! She pops up in the film as this depressed girl who wants to commit suicide, but is saved by Buckaroo, who detects her sadness in the middle of one of his rock and roll shows. Then we get a trio of Red Lectroids played by Christopher Lloyd, Dan Hedaya and Vincent Schiavelli. I mean, what’s not to like about this awesome cast? Everybody seems to be having a blast here; everybody got the spirit and tone of the film just right.

There are political symbolisms to be found in The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai and I think that in order to completely understand it, we have to be conscious of the political climate of the 80’s, the fear of nuclear meltdown and the cold war.  This is yet another film that reflects society’s fears and concerns of the time. Like many of the films of the 80’s (War Games (1983) and The Manhattan Project (1985) for example) the fear of nuclear meltdown at the hands of the Russians is felt. The “Red Lectroids from Planet 10” are a clear allusion to the Russians, who were enemies to the Americans at the time. Russians have always been described as “Reds” by the Americans, same as the villains in the film are the “Red Lectroids”. The fear of nuclear meltdown is felt in one scene in which an alien race threatens to destroy Russia, and Perfect Tommy, one of Buckaroo’s right hand men says “The Russians might misinterpret the attack as an American strike; they’re already a little trigger happy!” and yet another allusion to how conscious people where of this nuclear tension can be seen in a moment in which an alien being tells Buckaroo and his team:  “If you fail, we will be forced to help you destroy yourselves” In this way, the filmmakers point at humanities tendency to threaten our own existence with nuclear weapons.

The villain of the film is played by the great John Lithgow, who is running on all cylinders on this one, playing the over the top villain ‘Lord John Whorfin’ a.k.a. Dr. Lizardo. He is the leader of the Red Lectroids that are scattered on earth. Lord John Whorfin is portrayed as a crazy fascist dictator “not unlike your Hitler”. He runs a company called ‘Yoyodine Propulsion Systems’; which is really a front for the Red Lectroids headquarters. The Red Lectroid’s headquarters has speakers blaring systematic brain washing messages like “The only joy is the joy of duty! Work, work, work!”  So this is a film that though funny and totally zany, is also heavy on political themes.  The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai might seem like a crazy movie to some, but at heart, it plays with a lot of important issues; the filmmakers where just having fun (and lots of it) as they said their piece with this film.

But I don’t want to make it sound like this is a film with a boring political agenda or what have you, nope; this movie is tons of zany fun. It is a completely offbeat film, right down to it's closing credits. It has so many ideas going for it that you feel like it is a set up for future films, as if a whole universe had been created and we were just seeing the tip of the iceberg. In actuality, more Buckaroo Banzai films were planned, proof of this is the promised sequel mentioned during the closing credits: Buckaroo Banzai vs. The World Crime League. They even hint at this planned  sequel when they talk about a villain called ‘Hanoi Xan’, the leader of the World Crime League. Sadly, this sequel never came to be because the first and only film failed horribly at the box office. Its failure can be attributed to its convoluted nature, but it also faced tough completion at the box office! Buckaroo Banzai went up against such smash hits as Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (1984), Star Trek III: The Search for Spock (1984) and Ghostbusters (1984), so it didn’t exactly get it easy at the box office; plus it was released in only a limited amount of theaters. But as it often happens with good films, Buckaroo Banzai has found its audience in home video, and its cult following grows. There’s been various Buckaroo Banzai novels and comic books released throughout the years, so you might want to look into those of if you can’t get enough of Buckaroo Banzai. Here’s hoping some day it gets the reboot treatment, because if you ask me, this things got potential!

Rating:  4 out of 5

The Sentinel (1977)

Title: The Sentinel (1977)

Director: Michael Winner

Cast: Chris Sarandon, Cristina Raines, Burgess Meredith, Eli Wallach, Ava Gardner, Jose Ferrer, Beverly D’Angelo, Christopher Walken, Jeff Goldblum

Review:

In Lucio Fulci’s City of the Living Dead (1981) the suicide of a priest causes the doors of hell to burst open. After that, ghosts/zombies are set loose upon the world and the undead begin to walk the streets, people barf up their innards and maggots fall from the sky. But that’s the Lucio Fulci version of the gates of hell opening. Now that I’ve seen Michael Winner’s The Sentinel, I can see where Fulci might have gotten the idea for his City of the Living Dead, in fact, I’m sure Fulci was inspired by The Sentinel. Both films have lots of similarities in terms of plot, images and situations. This wouldn’t surprise me, since Italians were particularly well known for ripping off American horror films and making lower budgeted versions of them.

 In The Sentinel, we meet Allison Parker a young model living and working in New York City. She’s thinking about marrying her fiancé, Michael Lerman (Chris Sarandon) but she still hasn’t given him the proverbial “yes”. Instead, she wants to find her own apartment and be an independent person; just to prove to herself that she can survive on her own in this big bad world. And find her own apartment she does; It’s in a beautiful building right smack in the middle of Brooklyn, New York. According to the landlady, Allison along with an old blind priest that lives in the fifth floor will be the only ones living in the apartment building. But is that the truth? Allison hears strange noises in the middle of the night and meets a bunch of weird neighbors. Could there be something more to this apartment building then meets the eye? And why is that blind priest always sitting by his apartment window staring at nothing?  

 So yeah, the similarities between this film and Fulci’s City of the Living Dead are pretty obvious. Girl moves into a new apartment, turns out it’s the gateway into hell. She starts seeing all manner of strange supernatural events. Suicide figures into the plot, as do blind girls. The only thing is that Fulci being Fulci, well he’s take on the “Gates of Hell” theme is way more graphic, and gory and over all, pretty freaking nasty. After all it’s not in every film you get to see a beautiful young girl barfing up her intestines. But such is the nature of a Fulci flick, always aiming to shock you. The Sentinel is a much more cerebral and moody film. It doesn’t aim for cheap shocks, or to gross you out with its graphic nature. Instead, it wants to creep you out with its atmosphere. The Sentinel is disturbing on a whole other level that City of the Living Dead (a.k.a. The Gates of Hell) isn’t. This difference between films with similar premise shows us just how much of a difference on a film a director can make. With these two films we have a similar premise, but two completely different films in terms of mood. Give a movie like this to Mr. Fulci and you get a maggot storm. Give it to Winner and you get human oddities as demons.

 If I had to compare The Sentinel to another horror film in terms of mood and atmosphere, it would be with Rosemary’s Baby (1968), the biggest influence on The Sentinel if you ask me. The Sentinel was made in the late 70’s the day and age of the supernatural horror film. Because of the resounding success of The Exorcist (1973), horror films dealing with the supernatural where the order of the day for Hollywood. So films like The Omen (1976), The Amityville Horror (1979) and The Changeling (1980) were getting made left and right. But in my opinion it was Polanski’s Rosemary’s Baby that influenced The Sentinel the most. We have a female protagonist, who is not really right in her head. The film is all about a girl moving into a new apartment, in New York City. She is hounded by a bunch of weirdo neighbors, who may or may not have an evil purpose for her. No one is to be trusted, and just like in many Roman Polanski films, paranoia reigns supreme. The similarities with Rosemary’s Baby are all over the place with this film.

With it's evil old people, The Sentinel was obviously influenced by Rosemary's Baby!

Same as in many supernatural themed horror films, the Catholic Church is the one with all the answers and the powers to stop the evil. And yet again I notice how much these films are used to propagate the idea of Christian faith onto the masses. And once again this is a film in which an unbeliever is taught a lesson and made to pay for her sins. In one moment of The Sentinel the main character actually goes into a church to ask for forgiveness for having renounced Jesus Christ, you see, she’s been experiencing a lot of spooky shit and so she wants to be on Gods side, just in case. This is yet another film which brings Catholic fantasies to life. And a big fat fantasy it is, I mean the gates of hell are on the top floor of an apartment building in Brooklyn! The blind priest who lives in the top floor is supposed to be the guardian of these gates, unfortunately he doesn’t do a very good job at it because demons keep getting out and harassing poor Allison. Characters in this film talk about paying for their sins for all eternity and what not, so yeah, this one is all about Catholic guilt, and Catholic beliefs.

 But I will give this to The Sentinel, it does have some truly disturbing imagery in it. On this film, demons harass Allison, the dead visit her in the middle of the night and she has these weird dreams. And it’s the way that these undead entities are portrayed in the film that brings forth the disturbing and unsettling nature of The Sentinel. Director Michael Winner thought it would be a good idea to use real deformed people to portray the demons. So suddenly, whenever demons appear in the film we are treated to an avalanche of fat, old, deformed, handicapped, human beings.  This isn’t the first time that a film director uses human oddities for a horror film. Other examples of this can be found in Tod Browning’s Freaks (1932) and Alejandro Jodorowsky’s Santa Sangre (1989); actually, any Jodorowsky film can be mentioned here because that’s something Jodorowsky always relied on for his films: the use of human oddities to bring forth a feeling of unease. The use of human oddities on The Sentinel cause some controversy when the film was first released. Is this exploitative? Should it be allowed in films? Is it wrong to use these kind of people in films? Is it ethical?

 Sexuality is also used as a means to convey ‘evil’. For example, amongst some of Allison’s freaky neighbors there is a pair of lesbians. When Allison asks them what it is that they do for a living one of them replies “we fondle each other”. Then Beverly D’Angelo’s character begins to masturbate in front of Allison, in what is without a doubt one of the most awkward moments in the film. A lot of the ghosts appear naked through out the film; in fact, at the crux of the film is a scene in which Allison catches her father in an orgy! So sticking pretty close to Catholic beliefs, sexuality is demonized on this film.

 Finally, something has to be said about the films cast. It’s interesting that the film is filled with so many good actors in extremely small roles. Some of the cast members were not particularly well known at the time, but they were going to be. Bit parts in this film were performed by the likes of Christopher Walken, Jeff Goldblum and Beverly D’Angelo; all unknowns at the time. The film also has bit parts for famous old actors like Ava Gardner, Jose Ferrer and Burgess Meredith, by the way Burgess Meredith always plays these nice old dudes in his films. I mean, I always remember him as Rocky Balboa's father like figure 'Micky' from the Rocky movies, but on The Sentinel he is this weird old man, he was obviously going for something against the type of characters he was used to playing all the time. We also get Chris Sarandon playing Allison’s boyfriend, I mean, we have a star studded cast for this old school spooky film. And old school it is; The Sentinel has a classic vibe going for it, it is not a film that relies on visual effects or cheap looking ghosts, the emphasis on this one is mood and atmosphere. And I must say that it achieves a spooky, unsettling atmosphere quite effectively. With The Sentinel, you get the feeling that something is not quite right, that there is evil in the air. The Sentinel is one of these ultra-serious horror films from the 70’s; the kind of horror film they don’t make anymore.

Rating: 4 out of 5 

Death Wish and Death Wish 2

Title: Death Wish (1974) and Death Wish 2 (1982)

Director: Michael Winner

Cast: Charles Bronson, Hope Lange, Vincent Gardenia, Jeff Goldblum, Laurence Fishburne

Review:

One thing popped into my mind while watching Charles Bronson mercilessly kicking crimes ass in Death Wish: “they just don’t make them like this anymore”. And that is true, stone cold classics like this aren’t made in these extremely PC, PG-13 days. Bad ass mother truckers like Charles Bronson aren’t born anymore either. I mean, Jason Statham might try to be as ice cold deadly as Bronson by remaking Bronson’s The Mechanic (1972) (which I will be reviewing soon) but he is a few bald spots short of portraying that hard ass/mean bastard persona that Bronson displayed so naturally. One icy cold stare from Bronson and you knew you were going to meet your maker. One look at a film like Death Wish and its obvious that action films have been as watered down same way that  horror films have. Sad but true, action/horror films just don’t have the gravitas they used to. At least we still have these grimy revenge flicks on dvd to remind us of a bygone era in Hollywood filmmaking, a time when filmmakers didn’t even take in consideration having their character do the right thing. Or the best thing, he simply did what had to be done.

Paul Kersey the architect, but his real passion is vigilantism. 

 Story for Death Wish concerns an architect called Paul Kersey (Bronson). Paul lives a great life with his wife and daughter. Film starts out with Paul and his wife on vacation in Hawaii, taking in the sunsets, enjoying a dinner by candlelight, basically, having a grand old time with his beautiful wife. But crime never sleeps, and so, one night, while Paul is still working in the office, a band of hoodlums that seem to have come straight out of Stanley Kubrick’s A Clockwork Orange (1971) burst into his home and savagely attack his wife and daughter, effectively killing Paul’s wife. By the way, keep an eye open for a very young Jeff Goldblum who plays one of the rapists! This was Goldblum’s debut film. So anyways, the authorities promise to perform an investigation, but that’s as far as it goes. Paul knows the cops aren’t going to get anything really done in a city as big as New York, so he does what any revenge hungry ex-husband would do under the same circumstances; he goes out and starts looking for those responsible. And those of their ilk. Which means, if you’re a criminal, you were going to get your lesson coming from Bronson’s gun. Paul turns vigilante and starts whacking out any bastard who even looks at him funny. Bronson is tired of getting kicked around by thugs and living in fear, he takes matters into his own hands and turns into a stone cold vigilante! Are the streets ready for Paul Kemp’s vengeful anger?

 Death Wish took me back to those days when there were no video cameras in every square of inch of the city. This was a time when if you were waiting for the train at 2 a.m. and a group of thugs came into the subway, kicked you in the nuts, stole your wallet and took off running, no one would know it happened but you. The thug who did it would end up happily counting your hard earned cash in some dark corner of the city. I lived in New York City during the early 80’s, and I can attest to that feeling of insecurity you got while walking the streets at night. Deathwish captures that feeling perfectly. I know what it was like to take the train and suddenly become frozen with fear when a good for nothing troublemaker walked into the train cabin, with mischief on his mind; with evil in his eyes. Films like Deathwish were a response to that out of control wave of violence that took over the streets of New York City circa 1970’s. You’d walk with fear of getting mugged, or raped or possibly even killed, all for the contents of your wallet.

Gun behind the newspaper, oldest trick in the book!

 But this is a film that looks at those criminals straight in the eyes and says “Screw you bastards! You’re all going down!” It has that “I’m not taking this shit anymore” vibe going for it. It’s a film with the mentality of someone who has decided to take matters into his own hands. Since there are no video cameras taping your every move, Paul Kersey can whip out his gun, blow away any criminal that attempts a vile act and simply walk away from the scene as if nothing had ever happened. Paul Kersey vengeful acts are fueled by what was done to his wife and daughter, but its crime in general who pays. He doesn’t just focus his vigilantism towards the ones who hurt his family; Paul Kersey goes out into the streets to declare war on all manner of thugs. Kersey goes from one scumbag to the next, blowing them away as best as his gun can, cleaning up the city for good. Doing what the police haven’t got the man power to do. In a way, Kersey ends up being a hero.

 I saw Death Wish and Death Wish 2 (1982) over the weekend; while watching the second one, I couldn’t help feeling like I was watching the first one all over again. Yes my friends, Death Wish 2 is basically the exact same movie, with the exact same plot. It picks up where the first one left off; with Kersey trying to help his daughter lead a normal life again after the events of the first film. He’s got himself a new girlfriend and a new job in Los Angeles. Slowly but surely, happiness seems to be creeping back into his life. But, crime doesn’t rest, and so hoodlums break into his household once again. They rape his housemaid, and kidnap and rape his daughter. And so the cycle of revenge fueled vigilantism continues. The sequel focuses more on Kersey seeking revenge from the actual perpetrators of the crimes, as opposed to crime in general as seen on the first film.  But he still manages to save a citizen or two from a criminal attack; it is in these scenes that he is portrayed as a hero, or a “very good citizen” for doing what he does. While Kersey is out there stopping crime, the film asks the police force: “Where the hell where you guys?”

 In spite of Death Wish 2’s repetitiveness in storyline, it still manages to have its moments and some very memorable lines. One scene has Kersey following a group of criminals into an abandoned hotel. Upon coming face to face with one of the men who raped his daughter, Kersey notices that the perpetrator is wearing a crucifix on his neck. He asks the low life: “Do you believe in Jesus?” and the guy says “Yes” then Kersey tells him: “Well, you’re going to meet him!” and then BLAMO! Blows the guy away! No mercy for the wicked. Death Wish 1 and 2 were films of their time, they represented a frustration with the violence on the streets, and a desire for citizens to take matters into their own hands and protect themselves from the evil out there on the streets. Some studios backed away from producing these films because they considered them too controversial. They didn’t want to spread the idea of vigilantism amongst the populace and because they thought that a film with the word “Death” on its title wouldn’t sell tickets. Boy where they wrong! This franchise lasted all the way up to Death Wish 5: The Face of Death (1994), where Kersey still kicked ass even though Bronson was something like 72 years old when he made that film; evidence that Charles Bronson’s hard ass genes  allow him to kick ass longer than any normal man would.

Rating Death Wish (1974): 4  

Rating Death Wish 2 (1985): 3 1/2