Movie #130 - A Fistful of Dollars

"This short cigar belongs to a man with no name. This long gun belongs to a man with no name. This poncho belongs to a man with no name. He's going to trigger a whole new style in adventure."

One of the quintessential Western movies of all time, A Fistful of Dollars introduces us to not only one of the greatest characters portrayed by Clint Eastwood, but probably one of the better set of films from this genre. Included in this Man with No Name trilogy are For A Few Dollars More and The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly.

What makes this film great is the contrast between the Eastwood character and Gian Maria Volonte (Ramon Rojo). Volonte is a villain in two of the three trilogy films and his great performances is what drives us to root for the protagonist in the end.

In fact, the Eastwood character in all three films isn't entirely good, he just has an ideal moral standard that he lives by, but in the end, he's either a bounty hunter or a petty thug in most cases. However, in the West, having a moral standard is quite rare, hence the character is compelling.

You can obviously tell that I am quite biased to these films. In a prior post, I believe I claimed that For A Few Dollars More is the best of the three films. I think its the tandem of Lee Van Cleef with Eastwood opposite Volonte that makes that film work.

Sergio Leone does some masterful work in this trilogy. Leone was definitely the king of the "spaghetti westerns" and its unfortunate that he didn't do many other films for U.S. release. However, this lack of exposure probably led to the cult status that has followed the Man with No Name trilogy. Had Leone done more films in this genre, I think he'd do just fine with the quality of work and the cinematography used for his films.

In the end, A Fistful of Dollars is a delight to watch and you'll just be sucked into the machismo that it exudes. As a suggestion, seek out the Japanese film Yojimbo (1961), which is what the story of this film is based on. If you don't want to go back that far, seek out Last Man Standing (1996) starring Bruce Willis and Christopher Walken. Its the exact same film with an updated cast and plot, but same concept. However, you'll like Leone's rendition of this story - its the most entertaining.

Movie #129 - Brewster's Millions

"An American excess story."

After doing some research for this blog post review, I learned that this movie is a remake of a number of films of the same title from the early era of movies. This film has been made in different varieties in 1914, 1921, 1935, and 1945, with the 1985 version being the latest. There is also rumours that another remake is in the works for 2012 release, but I'll stick to what I know.

The concept of all of these films, including this version is that Richard Pryor's character of Monty Brewster inherits $30 million, but must spend it in 30 days in order to inherit $300 million that he is entitled to. Also, there are stipulations. He must not inform anyone that he has to spend in this fashion and he cannot buy anything that he can keep after the 30 days are over - removing the aspects of buying property, investments, etc.

Probably everyone's dream of the 1980's, to learn of a distant relative that has given you such a windfall. The act of spending the money itself is entertaining due to its extravagance. I enjoyed the plot of this quirky 80's film and its cast of comedic actors to provide support to Pryor's character.

In addition to Pryor, you have supporting roles offered by the likes of Stephen Collins, John Candy, Jerry Orbach, Lonette McKee, and Hume Cronyn as his ominous distant relative. Pryor is a treat to watch in this film, despite the fact that the humour and comedy throughout the film are actually quite limited.

The quest to spend this money is both frustrating and creative. $30 million is quite a sum, especially if you cannot keep anything and have to spend every penny. So if you've ever dreamt of doing this in your lifetime, this is a movie that you will enjoy.

Movie #128 - U-571

"You won't come up for air until it's over!"

Great premise to this movie. If you are an avid fan of the History Channel, you have probably seen a number of documentaries on the effort to retrieve the Enigma device, a machine that allowed the Nazis to be able to communicate without detection - one of the key strategic advantages of the WWII U-boat campaign.

Although the U-571 film itself was fiction, it is based on various true missions in which the effort to obtain the Enigma device and its relevant code books to decipher the code were made by the Allied forces.

Cast with a solid team of actors, Matthew McConaughey, Bill Paxton, Harvey Keitel, and Jon Bon Jovi are the headliners. There are some solid support roles offered by David Keith, Jake Weber, Jack Noseworthy, Will Estes, and Erik Palladino.

The film starts off fairly slowly as we learn of the plot and the mission to be undertaken by the cast. With unforeseen changes to the original plans, the remaining cast members are forced to use the U-boat that they have raided to escape the Germans.

Once that part of the story begins, the movie itself becomes scripted and predictable. With a submarine movie, apart from torpedo scenes and compelling moments with depth charges, the movie isn't really exciting anymore. Maybe I am just a little jaded with this film, considering I watch the second half of it almost every time its on television. I've probably seen the chase scenes more than 10 times at the very least.

In the end, what's amazing is that the sailors of WWII actually had missions like this and that our grandparents' generation had to endure such events in their lives. For that alone, this movie is a must see, maybe not for its acting or overall quality as a film, but for its historical references to what did in fact occur during those U-boat / Enigma campaigns.

Movie #127 - Mortal Kombat

"Choose your destiny..."

One of the more popular movies of my youth, at 15 years old, this movie was a must-see. Especially since everyone was either playing this game at the elite level at the arcades or at least had a copy of the game either on Super Nintendo or Sega Genesis.

Unfortunately, similar to all of the video game movie adaptations that you see nowadays, Mortal Kombat was a poor rendition of the very popular game. Although the film itself had some strong special effects for 1995 and was well-cast in terms of martial artists who could act, the storyline and plot behind the game was somewhat silly.

Characters portrayed by Christopher Lambert (Rayden), Robin Shou (Liu Kang), Linden Ashby (Johnny Cage), and Bridgette Wilson (Sonya Blade) were the good guys of the story while Cary-Hiroyuki Tagawa (Shang Tsung) was the leader of the bad guys. The plot behind this film - a battle between good and evil, the final battle to decide who will rule the world.

Beyond the video game plot, I enjoyed the action sequences in this film. The martial arts is top notch, however, this film would've been more enjoyable had the scenes been shot in full speed and not riddled with slow-motion sequences. Shou and Ashby are solid martial artists and this is also enhanced by the stunt work and choreography utilized in the film. Mixed in with a soundtrack that everyone remembers from 1995, and you definitely have a high octane film on your hands.

Lambert is still a creepy dude in this film and every warm-blooded male probably had a thing for Sonya Blade, either on screen or in the video game. Wilson was a perfect casting for Blade as she had the build and look, and was quite a popular female actress during the middle part of the 90's as she is known for her role in Billy Madison and for marrying tennis superstar Pete Sampras.

If watched today, this film is quite silly, even in comparison to some of the recent video game adaptations. Back when I was 15, I probably thought this was one of the best movies of the year, watching it with a bunch of friends in high school and probably sneaking in candy and snacks into the theatre. Back when kids used to go to movie theatres instead of downloading them or buying bootlegs at flea markets, of course.

Movie #126 - Under Siege

"It's not a job...It's an Adventure!"

Somewhat of an odd tagline considering this movie has a number of other themes to play on. Steven Seagal was at the top of his game in this movie and unfortunately for his career, was the beginning of the end. Also cast in this film was Tommy Lee Jones and Gary Busey, who in the early 90's were the best villains money could buy.

For Jones, Under Siege was a string of films in which Jones was grossly over exposed. From 1989-1994, Jones completed 13 films. All of which are overshadowed by his solid performance in The Fugitive. However, his maniacal role in this film suited Jones' ability to act serious. Providing support on the evil side is Gary Busey, who was coming off of his success on Lethal Weapon and Predator 2. Unfortunately, Busey's career as a villain didn't really take off as most would've expected - probably a product of poor career management and role selection.

The concept of this movie is good. Capturing the retired battleship with nuclear warheads within the arsenal. Pitting a number of rogue special operations soldiers against a cook in Seagal's character. Although we later find out that Seagal is actually a former Navy Seal, its funny to see the reactions everyone has to his "cook" moniker.

I remember watching this film when it first came out on VHS at a birthday party. My friends and I were 12 years old and Baywatch was definitely a popular television show of that era. Erika Eleniak was a nice bonus to this film, full of action, violence, and suspense.

Unfortunately, for Seagal's career, Under Siege represented the high point of his accomplishments. His Casey Ryback character was one of his best and his role on this film was well cast and suited for his persona. He quickly made other films to follow that were poorly done, including a sequel that was ill-advised.

Seagal is hoping to rejuvenate his career on television for A&E (Steven Seagal: Lawman). He is portraying himself as a fully-commissioned deputy in Louisiana. Early reviews are mixed, but seeing Seagal in a similar light to Dog the Bounty Hunter might just work in the end.

Movie #125 - To Sir with Love

"A story as fresh as the girls in their minis. . .and as tough as the kids from London's East End!"

I must admit, I haven't seen this movie since I was probably around 15 years old, back when my older sister was obsessed with movies from the 60's and 70's. I am happy to convey that there isn't much to this film. Teacher tries to reach out to a bunch of troubled kids and succeeds in the end.

Although this plot line is similar to many films that have been produced in recent years, its obviously one of the first movies to try to do it. You can loosely tie this plot line to films such as Dangerous Minds, although I'm sure the original producers would not want to be affiliated with such a bad film from the 90's.

As you can see from the trailer below, Sidney Poitier is the main driving force behind this film's promotion. In the 60's, Poitier was one of the most highly coveted actors of his generation, starring in a number of pivotal movies of the era such as Guess Who's Coming to Dinner? and In the Heat of the Night - all made in 1967 like this film. Poitier is an acclaimed actor and won an Academy Award in 1963 for Lilies on the Field and was nominated for 1958's The Defiant Ones.

However, as you can see with the promotion of this movie, the producers intended to position it more as a teen angst film, casting a British pop singer, Lulu as one of the characters who also sang the famous score of the movie. In the end, this movie accomplishes that feat, however, the adaptation intended probably wasn't captured. There are too many fluff 60's scenes: inopportune dance sequences, singing montages, etc. The film doesn't have an identity and because of that, it falls flat for intention. Poitier looks grossly out of place in this film and I believe its one he'd be willing to hide from his dramatic acting resume.

Movie #124 - Bee Movie

"On November 2 Hold on to your honey."

Back when I still had The Movie Network, I was watching movies every couple of days. I decided to give Bee Movie a chance, even though I think I've grown out of the CGI type of cartoons. Despite this lack of enthusiasm to watch the movie, I found it quite entertaining. I've noticed a trend ever since Toy Story - all of these CGI films are actually geared more to adults than children. Adults are the ones with the money, the ones who have to sit through countless repeat viewings of these films on DVD, and they are the ones who buy the kids the merchandise, clothing, and toys.

All that being said, the film would be quite entertaining for the kids and for the adults who think or still act like children. The film is cast quite well, with an abundance of recognizable names including Jerry Seinfeld, Renee Zellweger, Matthew Broderick, John Goodman, Chris Rock, and Kathy Bates. You'll also get quite a few celebrity cameos with Ray Liotta, Larry King, Sting, Oprah Winfrey, Megan Mullaly, and even Michael Richards.

Originally, I wasn't sold on the fact that Seinfeld could produce some good voice over work. He's no Robin Williams, but he does a good job emoting and providing intonation in his voice. Children love it when the character voices are quite animated (no pun intended) and he does a good job with it. Ideally, from the adult perspective, having a plot, well-written comedic script, and a happy ending for the children in the audience helps bring this movie along. However, when you've seen one summer blockbuster cartoon, you've seen them all.

Despite having a clever cast and a strong plot, this movie is similar to every other cartoon that is generated every quarter year or so. Children are a large marketing target, and unfortunately, also have short memories. Because of this, movie corporations are churning out children's cartoons at an alarming rate due to the technology available. Gone are the days of the hand drawn cartoon movie epics - hello to the movies you can make in 3-6 months using a bunch of Mac computers.

Don't get me wrong, I like the fact that the new technology makes larger panoramic cartoon shots and allows the producers to spend on voice over talent budgets, but scripts still need to be fresh and dynamic. Despite being somewhat predictable, Bee Movie is a fun film for the family and one of the better CGI cartoons I've seen recently. That being said, I've only seen three in the past five years, so that may not say much either!