lordguano Reviews

The Mummy Returns (2001)

Mindlessly entertaining...

[6/10 · 21 May 2001]

Here we have one of those rare sequels that is every bit as good

as the original. Of course, I'm not saying the original was any good

to begin with. Actually, I'm not even sure they didn't just basically

recut the same old movie and tag one or two new characters and

then release it under this new title!

In any event, I took my 7 year old boy to see the movie and he had

a ball. Come to think of it, I was pretty well entertained also. Plot

details are too silly (and inconsequential) to get into. Suffice to say,

the title character (the sullen Imhotep) is somehow resurrected

and, by some contrivance, once again must face the meddling of

Brendan Fraser, Rachel Weisz (now married with a tow headed

Junior Egyptologist as their son) and the bumbling brother-in-law

John Hannah. Mysterious native good-guy Ardeth Bey is also back

as are the usual Indiana Jones inspired assortment of swarthy

power (or money) hungry villains.

The new twist involves the legendary character of the Scorpion

King (WWF's The Rock in his well suited -- and undemanding --

debut performance) whose legend is laid out in a tidy opening

sequence set some 5000 years in the past. Suffice to say, the

forces of both good and evil are concerned with the Scorpion

King's resurrection and the ancient prophesy that would release

the evil Egyptian God Anubis' army of the undead upon the

unsuspecting world. Do I have to keep it a secret as to who

prevails?

The movie is charged with energy and the action doesn't let up

long enough for anyone to groan over the scripts numerous

attempts at machismo-levity in the face of great peril (a hallmark of

Fraser's). In the end, the movie, like its predecessor, strives to be

an Indiana Jones episode. And, as with its predecessor, it comes

off as a 2nd rate imitation. It just tries too hard and the strain bogs

the film down. What's most surprising about this movie is how

disappointing the special effects turn out to be. The seams really

show during several crucial sequences. Most egregious of all is

the CGI figure of the resurrected Scorpion King as a half man/half

scorpion creature. What is supposed to look like The Rock's head

and upper torso, looks like one of the human characters from Toy

Story. Those Ray Harryhausen stop motion creatures from the

Sinbad movies would have been more effective.

I would recommend The Mummy Returns for everyone who enjoyed the first movie. It's not a bad family fright movie either.

While the action may be intense for the smallest movie-age

kiddies, the violence is quite bloodless. Most harrowing for

youngsters might be the scene where the decomposed Imhotep

"sucks" the skin off of three victims (who kind of deserved it

anyway, in the morality of the narrative) in order to reconstitute his

own flesh. It sounds worse than it actually appears on film, believe

it or not. Actually, so does this movie.

Everyone Says I Love You (1996)

Woody sings (even if he doesn't soar)...

[6/10 · 26 April 2001]

I am a huge Woody Allen fan, but I must say I was somewhat

disappointed in this loving, but sometimes awkward and very mild

tribute to Hollywood musicals of the 1930's. Actually, perhaps that

is something of a misconception, as the movie never really

attempts to pay tribute to the usual "boy meets chorus girl on her

way up" depression era musical story lines, nor does it attempt

any recreation of the Busby Berkely type production numbers that

prevailed during that period. Rather, it tells a modern (and typically

neurotic Allenesque) love story where the characters break out in

song to convey their inner (or outward) thoughts and emotions --

and the tunes all happen to be from the '30's.

There are actually several "love" stories here, each seeming to

depict various modes of romantic infatuation. Edward Norton and

Drew Barrymore mostly play out the conventional Hollywood love

story about two well to do youngsters engaged to wed. Woody

himself is a long divorced ex-patriat New Yorker now living in Paris

and rebounding from yet another in a series of failed relationships,

who finds himself infatuated with a woman (Julia Roberts) he

sees while vacationing in Venice. He pretends to be Roberts' soul

mate by masquerading himself with character traits that his

daughter (Natasha Lyons) supplies to him based on intimate

information she gathered while eavesdropping on Roberts

psychiatric sessions back in New York. Lyons herself seems to

fall in love with just about every new young stud she meets. And

even the betrothed Barrymore fancies a fling with a seductively

dangerous prison parolee portrayed by Tim Roth. Meanwhile, Allen

also harbors lingering love for his ex-wife (Goldie Hawn) who is

now happily married to Alan Alda (and their teenage daughters

both fall in puppy love with the same local boy they've been

admiring from afar).

I wasn't sure how the musical numbers would work, and there

was much promise displayed with the opening number sung by

Edward Norton, which the movie launches into directly out of the

brief opening credits. The mood seems just right as Norton

serenades Barrymore on the streets of Manhattan, and passersby

(including a disheveled panhandler) soon begin to join in with

song. Unfortunately, this kind of earnestness is reproduced only

sporadically throughout the rest of the movie. A definite highlight

would be the singing and dancing spirits that emerge from coffins

in a funeral home to implore the bereaved to get out and enjoy life

while they still have the time. The comedy is rather mild, but there

is one priceless gag where ultra-liberal Alda gets a medical

explanation for his son's inexplicable reactionary Rush Limbaugh

brand of conservatism.

Allen does save the best for last, however, in a sequence that

begins with a musical tribute to Groucho Marx at a Parisian gala,

and continues with two priceless scenes (one at the gala, the

other along the Seine River) between Allen and Hawn. These two

have such wonderful chemistry and the film comes so sparklingly

to life in their interplay, that it is a wonder Allen hasn't since written

a vehicle in which the pair could properly shine.

Everyone Says I Love You is never more than mildly amusing, and

never less than pleasantly diverting. Yet, one must applaud the

bold and noble experiment. Allen is an artist who has proven in the

last 10 years that he is still capable of producing strong and even

poignant material (Husbands and Wives, Sweet and Lowdown,

Deconstructing Harry) that it is somewhat surprising when his

films do NOT rise to his usual level of excellence. Fortunately for

us, such misteps (Shadows and Fog) are few and far between.

Dracula Has Risen from the Grave (1968)

...but has sunk to mere revenge as motivation.

[23 March 2001]

This is Chris Lee's 3rd appearance as Dracula, and Hammer

continues to believe that less Lee is more. As with this film's

immediate predecessor, Dracula Prince of Darkness, Lee is given

precious little screen time, but when he is on screen, he is

absolutely riveting. Many people think this is a highlight of the

series, and when I was younger, I used to be one of those people.

Now, while I still find this a vast improvement over Prince of

Darkness, and much better than the horrible pair of "modern day"

films (Dracula, AD 1972 and The Satanic Rites Of Dracula) that

would eventually mark the end of Lee's involvement in the cycle,

this film still pales to Hammer's 1958 original as well as the next

two films. Once again, the film makers have decided that we are to care a

great deal for the vapid dullards who are to be the nominal hero

and heroine in the story and therefore spend a great deal of time

away from the Count focusing on their relationships. Ho hum. On

the other hand, the film does score points for playing up the sexual

angle (ie, the breathless anticipation of Dracula's bite and the

orgasmic response thereto) to a degree that none of the earlier

films would venture, as well as trying to infuse the vampiric lore

with religious overtones. I'm not sure I'm entirely satisfied with the

latter angle, although it does lead to two of the films most powerful

sequences: one wherein the Count angrily wrenches a steak from

his chest after the hero's lack of religious conviction renders its

effect mute; and the final impalement of Dracula upon a huge

metallic crucifix. Also an upgrade from the last movie is the fact that Lee gets to

actually speak a few lines throughout the movie. But this is a

double edged sword as the lines are the most poorly written drivel,

such as "Now my revenge is complete!" Which leads me to the

poor plot, which has the Count seeking revenge on the family of

the monsignor responsible for nailing a cross to the door of his

castle while the vampire lay inert, frozen under the creek beyond

his castle walls as we left him at the end of Prince of Darkness. If

nothing else, I do admire how each film (at least through Taste

The Blood of Dracula) took great pains to pick up exactly where the

previous episode ended. While Taste The Blood of Dracula (the immediate sequel to this

film) also deals in a sense with revenge, Dracula's perverse and

subtle intrusion into the Victorian ideal of the proper English family

(a concept lifted from the original novel) provides that film with a

rich subtext that (for me) makes it the unsung entry in this series. It

is certainly the least known and least seen in the US. And it is well

worth hunting down. In fact, I think these two films would make a

fine cozy night's double feature.

Dracula: Prince of Darkness (1966)

Lee's second serving is less filling...

[6/10 · 23 March 2001]

Chris Lee makes his second appearance as Count Dracula in this

sequel to Hammer's original Dracula (USA title: Horror of Dracula)

after an 8 year absence from the role. This is actually the 3rd film

in the series since, while Dracula himself does not appear in

1960's Brides of Dracula, Peter Cushing reprises his role as the

vampire hunter Dr. Van Helsing in that film. Too bad Cushing is

not on hand for this outing. While not completely bad, this movie

suffers from Hammer's wrong headed decision that we should

care more about the characters who are to be victimized by the

Count than we do about the Count himself. Therefore, it is quite

some time into the movie before Dracula makes his first

appearance, while we are subjected to spending quality time with

4 completely dull English travelers who unwittingly make their way

to Castle Dracula. Once Lee does enter the picture, he basically

has to make do with a mute, almost cameo role. After all this time,

wouldn't the producers of this movie have thought that audiences

would be starving for healthier doses of Lee's inimitable portrait of

the King of Vampires? This annoyance is even more frustrating on

commercial TV, where commercials pad out the opening sequences, delaying Dracula's appearance even more painfully. Unfortunately, these same mistakes are made in this entry's

immediate sequel, Dracula Has Risen From The Grave (although

Lee does at least have a few meager -- and poorly written -- lines

in that film and gets a bit more screen time). It wouldn't be until the

5th film in the series, Taste The Blood Of Dracula, that Hammer

would produce a complex and literate film worthy of Lee and the

Count. This isn't to say that either Prince of Darkness nor Risen

From the Grave do not have their share of effective moments. In

this film, the most effective moments include the incredible

resurrection sequence wherein the Count's faithful man-servant

strings up a victim over the coffin containing Dracula's ashy

remains and proceeds to slice open his stomach so that the blood

mixes with the ashes and revives the Count. I love the detail here

of seeing Dracula's naked arm popping up over the rim of the

crypt... similar sequences in later films would assume that the

Count would be resurrected in full costume. Another particularly

intense sequence involves the staking of one of Dracula's vampire

brides by a local priest. Here Barbara Shelley's performance as

the tormented creature is incredibly effective. All in all, still a fairly enjoyable film for fans of this genre (and

this Hammer series in particular). My advice would still be to stick

with the original film and the superior sequels, Brides of Dracula

and Taste the Blood of Dracula. And just for controversy's sake, I

would also recommend the slapdash, but entertainingly manic

Scars of Dracula, which breaks from the continuity of the original

series, but returns Dracula to the role of mysteriously sinister host

bidding welcome to unwary guests at his castle.

Battlefield Earth (2000)

Yes, it's as bad as they say...

[1/10 · 16 February 2001]

Ed Wood lives! Absolutely wretched on almost every level. The

special effects crew should be proud -- there is one scene

involving the spectacular destruction of an entire planet that is

pretty breathtaking -- but every one else should remain in

seclusion. Or at least buy one of those fake nose and mustache

kits in case they need to get out to the store. Completely inept

direction, laughably cliched and ponderous dialog, plot holes you

could fly a starship through, embarrassingly poor acting... I felt

uncomfortably sorry for Forest Whittaker -- I hope it was a decent

paycheck at least. What else can I say? Compared to this, The

Postman is Citizen Kane. If you already thought that to be the case,

then go ahead and give this a try. Otherwise, steer clear. Oh, and

of course the ending leaves everything WIDE open for the

possibility of a sequel. Heaven help us all!

Frankenstein's Bloody Terror (1968)

A distant but fond memory

[6 January 2001]

This film is absolutely NEVER aired on TV anymore and is nearly impossible to find on video. I remember seeing it several times as a staple on one of the numerous horror movie shows that used to air in NYC years ago (Creature Features, Thriller Theater, etc.) I would love to revisit it.

As a cheapo horror movie buff (and veteran of the "old" Times Square horror/kung fu/blacksploitation double-feature movie houses), I've since learned that like many other European horror movies of the era, the version seen here in America (Frankenstein's Bloody Terror) is a truncated version of the original Spanish print. Stripped down from 93 minutes to just 78 minutes only added confusion to plot points that were vague or contrived to begin with. I'm keen on seeing the original version, but I'm sure the shorter randomly edited version is probably a lot more fun (as is often the case -- see The 7 Brothers Meet Dracula for another example).

The only Naschy werewolf film that I've seen in video release is Fury of the Wolfman, which doesn't hold a candle to this movie in terms of pure kitschy so-bad-it's-good delight.

Fillmore (1972)

This film needs to be preserved and released on video asap!

[5 January 2001]

This movie is a precious time-capsule that is, unfortunately, out of print on home video. The terrific performances from the likes of Boz Scaggs, Santana, Jefferson Airplane and particularly the Grateful Dead each at their respective peaks, would be reason enough to celebrate this film... But they almost pale in comparison to the portrait of the magnetic pioneering rock impresario Bill Graham and his immortal magical San Fransiscan rock palace, the Fillmore West.

In 1971, Graham decided the time had come to close the doors to the fabled concert hall (and it's NYC counterpart, The Fillmore East) due to what he candidly describes as the egos of the performers having run amuck. This now-rarely seen documentary gives us a glimpse into the hassles and headaches (and joy) Graham experiences while trying to put together the lineup of acts for this final week of shows at the Fillmore. Footage of Graham doing dances to accommodate the needs of this performer or meet the demands of that agent illustrate his sense of disillusionment with the "business" in fascinating detail.

While the split screen techniques applied here are derivative of the ground breaking work by Mike Wadleigh and company on the Woodstock film project, the subject matter in Fillmore is sufficient to set this movie apart from most other such films of the time. The only question remains is, who owns the rights to this film and why hasn't it been mastered in wide screen for DVD and home video yet?

Sid and Nancy (1986)

Intense and well acted but ultimately depressing and unrevealing look at the infamous punk rock couple.

[7/10 · 3 August 2000]

The brilliant performances of Gary Oldman and Chloe Webb in the title roles propel this bleak and depressing look into the calamitous relationship between Sex Pistols bass player Sid Vicious and American punk rock groupie Nancy Spungen. The characters are introduced to us in tragedy right from the opening scene, casting the rest of the film with a fatalistic sense of impending doom. These are two tortured souls in communion who seem at odds with just about every facet of society -- even the extreme punk rock counter-culture to which they both ostensibly belong.

A major problem with the film (and all the more reason to tip our hats to the two leads) is that Sid and Nancy are written as such abrasive and disagreeable characters, one is hard pressed to relate to them on any meaningful level.

And while the re-creation of their reckless and volatile rebelliousness is quite detailed and credible, we never get a sense of how they came to be so angry and tortured to begin with. Even the smallest glimpse at their inner turmoil would have gone a long way in creating sympathy and concern from the audience. Instead, director Cox relies on the pureness of their genuine love for each other to provide that hook. That strategy succeeds to the extent it does ONLY because of Oldman's and Webb's amazing transformation into these parts.

If you own a DVD player, try to get a hold of the Criterion Collection edition of this film. That disc contains some excellent, revealing footage of the REAL Sid and Nancy that was shot for a contemporary documentary on the Sex Pistols ill-fated 1978 tour of the USA. If nothing else, the footage will increase your appreciation for these two splendid performances.