25. Warrior King

Ahhh Tony Jaa, who remembers him eh?...

...What do you mean who's Tony Jaa?

Well at one point Tony Jaa had the martial arts film world at his feet. Exploding onto the scene with "Ong Bak", his dynamic mainstream debut, Tony displayed his Muay Thai skills masterfully, leaving any viewer back in 2003 open-mouthed in disbelief. We'll actually be covering "Ong Bak" eventually within the blog but needless to say, the stunts and action on display had people raving.

Hailed as the new king of the martial arts genre, Jaa was a breath of fresh air in the stale scene. Jackie Chan and Jet Li were now getting older, at least well into their 40's at this point and couldn't explode onto the screen as they had. Both had been poached by Hollywood and although earlier forays displayed them still at their best, by 2003 Jackie was content making comedies and Jet Li's reliance on wire work was beginning to get old very fast.

Jaa was poised to take the crown and struck while the iron was hot, quickly making follow up "Warrior King". Or at least that's what it's known as in the UK. Its original title was "Tom-Yum-Goong" which translates into 'Hot and sour prawn soup'. As hilarious as it would be for a film to be called that, I don't think it would have got the attention of the action junkies. In the US it's better known as "The Protector".

But sadly it all went a bit too much too fast for Tony. Opting to direct the next two "Ong Bak" sequels (although in reality, they're prequels) himself, he instead presented two overblown attempts at historical epics. Some good action aside, the movies were complete slogs to power through and the sheen had gone, the UK distributor quickly going cold on Tony and he slid down the card. By the time he mounted a comeback, the chaps from "The Raid" were the new talking point in the martial arts world and Tony was yesterday's news.

But let's catch him at his peak today with:

WARRIOR KING (2005 dir. Prachya Pinkaew)

 Ahh, the lad's mags comments. I think 'Genius' might be a bit strong there Maxim, it's a film about a bloke beating up lots of other blokes, it's hardly Martin Scorsese...

Why I bought/Why I liked it:

I, much like anyone who had the benefit of watching "Ong Bak" quickly became a fan of Tony Jaa. With the action sequences still fresh in mind and repeated viewings under our belts, my father and I were eagerly awaiting the next film of Mr Jaa's.

Finally available in Blockbusters (lighters please!), we watched and were blown away once again, even citing the action sequences to be superior to that of "Ong Bak"'s. Now reviewing it again remains to be seen which was the better film but needless to say, it made a strong first impression.

If you've seen "Ong Bak", you've seen the plot of "Warrior King". Just replace 'man needs to get back idol of worship from bad guys' to 'man needs to get back elephants from bad guys'. The plot is weak but as any GOOD martial arts film is, it SHOULD be. We just need a guy kicking some ass for the majority of the film and Tony Jaa does, Game Of Death style.

Yup, just like a video game, Tony needs to make his way through various henchmen and boss battles before confronting the top boss and getting back his darned elephants. That's it and it's glorious to watch unfurl.

Of course, myself being one of these action junkies, it got picked up pretty quickly after that initial home release.

If I think it'll stay in the collection:

Are you kidding? Good old 'leave your brain at the door and watch the violence unfold' films are the whole reason I love films in the first place. It's perfect escapism and I think its place in the collection is comfortable.

The review:

As expected, the action is phenomenal. When rolling it REALLY gets underway which I think feasibly is about 18 minutes in. Before that you sort of get some exposition, a little taste of Thai culture and some shots of some lovely elephants including a delightful baby one which had me melting in my chair.

So to further the plot, the elephants get stolen which leads Tony's Kham to Sydney. Here we discover that they're potentially food for an exotic restaurant which also acts as a criminal front for drugs and illegal prostitution. All exotic tastes are catered here: scorpions, turtles, porcupines, bats...

Kham eventually fights his way through more bad guys you could count. There's an awesome sequence with EXTREME sports fighters, invoking memories of the old EXTREME sports phase of the early noughties. Tony Hawk! Mat Hoffman! Dave Mirra! Phil 'The Power' Taylor! Peter Ebdon!

He then faces Eddy Gordo en route to the big showdown with former WWE 'Wrestler' Nathan Jones. What needs to be mentioned here besides my gushing of the action sequences is that Pinkaew really knows how to frame said action sequences too. The foley artists are on point with every strike and snap booming out of the speakers and the camera guys are great at following the action so that we can see what's going on. No mean feat as one sequence has Tony Jaa going so fast, numerous cameraman had to jump in to keep up.

Tony squares up to Nathan Jones. Nothing to do with The Supremes hit, Nathan was so bad as a wrestler he got pulled from his scheduled Wrestlemania match on THE DAY leaving Undertaker to wrestle a handicap match...

So that's the good out of the way, how about the bad? Well, "Warrior King" honestly boasts some of the worst caucasian actors I may have ever seen this side of Ashton Kutcher and Taylor Kitsch. Seriously, this is their native language and yet the delivery is so wooden it may as well be pornography for beavers. It makes the cast of 'Baywatch' seem like a touring Shakespearean group.

Presumably, they just pulled people off the street as there's no way Australian extras or actors could be this bad. Not from a country that gave us Geoffrey Rush, Guy Pearce, Margot Robbie and Stefan Dennis.

Some of the shots are annoying as all hell too, there's this annoying effect where the outer edges of the shot are blurred which occurs way too much. The action does indeed slow when Tony isn't kicking people either including a dodgy CGI scene that really takes the viewer out of the film. There's also a bit where Tony needs to act but then apparently forgets he's having the crap getting kicked out of him so he no-sells everything like he's Road Warrior Hawk or something.

And then there's the main bad person. Oooh, I'd forgotten about this. So the subplot is an evil trans-woman who wants to take over the criminal empire from her father so has him killed and any other potential candidates to take over, killed also. It's obvious she's the most suitable person for the job but because she's trans this eliminates her from the position and therefore lots of transphobic slurs come out of the woodwork. Ah, good old 2005.

These negatives aside, "Warrior King" should be watched for one reason and that's the action sequences, they're so good it makes up for all the above mentioned bad.

Should it stay or should it go?

It's easy to digest martial arts fare. You get that, a high-speed longboat chase and a Double Dragon type sequence in a restaurant. It stays in. Perhaps those rose-tinted glasses became clearer when re-watching and those highlighted all the negative points I mentioned but it's still a fun enough film to garner a re-watch a few more years down the line. That being said, the bad points did knock the rating down a bit so I'm giving it a 7.5 out of 10 instead of my estimated 8.

It does give me an opportunity to post this for the last time though:

Until next time, I remain,

Matt Major.

24. The Warriors

Can you dig it? No, I'm not trying to strike up a conversation with a graveyard worker or even trying my hand at a Booker T impression. No, it's the four words that usually get spoken when bringing up today's film, "The Warriors". This usually comes with a side helping of an impression of Cyrus from the film delivered in his deep tone which no one usually is able to pull off.

So it's the film that spawned so many imitators despite its simple plot, cemented Walter Hill's status as an exciting director and for better or worse gave us James Remar. It also gives people an easy costume idea for when Halloween is around the corner. So let's re-watch:

THE WARRIORS (1979. dir Walter Hill)

Geez, more like The Borrowers based on this sucky DVD cover. Sadly the infamous poster with all the gang members wasn't used until later releases...

Why I bought it/Why I liked it:

"The Warriors" was actually recommended to me by my Dad when it was getting a TV showing maybe about 15 years ago. To be honest, despite garnering a cult following that would eventually spawn a video game spinoff from Rockstar, it was a film that tended not to get a lot of air time on the networks. Possibly because they didn't want impressionable youngsters to form their own gangs and run rampant in say Norwich for example.

So I watched it and thoroughly enjoyed it. I liked the dark feel of the film. I enjoyed the survival element and the simple plot of the Warriors simply trying to make it from one area to another and staying alive. I liked that the little bitch Thomas Waites got shoved onto a railway track and smooshed by a subway train. The colourful cast of characters and gangs also helped it stand out too. So when the opportunity to purchase it in, you guessed it, CEX, came about, it was purchased and sat in the collection ready for a moment such as today to be re-watched and re-evaluated.

Oh, the soundtrack's really good too. Damn, I don't remember too much about this film, do I?

If I think it'll stay in the collection:

Unless time has been rather unkind or my memory's as bad as recapping the previous section, I think all will be well for "The Warriors". There's a possibility I may upgrade it to one of the many director's cut editions that are floating about in the ether but I think it's still a classic of its time and way ahead of the pack for films made in 1979.

The review:

So a few things:

At the beginning of the film, we see that Cyrus has called a big meet of the gangs, only 9 members from each gang permitted, no weapons. As exposition unwinds and we also get our introduction to 'The Warriors', we also get glimpses of other gangs. There are some pretty snazzily dressed chaps in purple, then there's a gang of mimes...

MIMES!

Who the fuck thinks:

 'Hey, we need a motif for our gang.'
'I know what'll stop people from messing with us, we should dress up as mimes...'

I wanted to kick these guys asses and I'm not even a violent person. Hell, I could probably beat them too, what're they gonna do, hit me with invisible weapons?

Also when Cyrus inevitably gets shot to get the plot moving (Ohh Spoilers: The movie came out in 1979 for crying out loud) and good old rat-faced Luther yells out:

'It wuz The Warriors! They did it!'
at no point does anyone go:
'Can anyone confirm that? Your gang member in The Rogues backs this up but I don't feel he's a reliable witness somehow...'

Fun quibbling aside, for the most part, it is a breakneck 89 minutes in which the titular Warriors have to stay alive through any means necessary. This isn't easy because the majority of them are REALLY STUPID but it's also manageable because, despite a number of threatening-looking gangs, they can't actually fight for shit.

Here's a Baseball Fury, possibly doing an early audition for Domino in "Deadpool". Memorable for their look and not much else, apparently no one taught them how to use those bats as they get their asses handed to them by The Warriors...

As stated before I do enjoy the feel of the film, almost set entirely at nighttime. You can tell it's a hot muggy night in New York as the streets steam under the glow of electric lights. Walter Hill's casting is impressive too. Michael Beck takes lead as Swan, James Remar grunts and uses 'faggot' an awful lot as lunkheaded Ajax but the rest of the Warriors play their roles well. Special mention goes to Luther played by David Patrick Kelly who usually gets the best lines and is wonderfully annoying making you hope he gets his comeuppance.

There are a few minutes that linger just a touch, the growing relationship between Swan and Mercy, a girl who follows them from Orphan territory drags a bit but for the most part, there's always another fight around the corner.

Should it stay or should it go?

It's a perfectly inoffensive way to burn through 90 minutes and can easily be slapped on in the background while doing other things or if you just need a go-to movie. I'm giving this one a 7.5 out of 10, there's lots of cool stuff and ideas that happen throughout but it doesn't hit that upper echelon of an action movie.

Next stop, back to Martial Arts town.

Until next time, I remain,

Matt Major.








 

23. The Way Of The Dragon

Oh, fuck yeah! It's time for some good old fashioned martial arts action with the man who changed the landscape for them, I told you we were hitting quite the action patch.

My love of martial arts actually started back in the waning days of our very local video rental shop, 'Swaythling Video Library'. I'd started really enjoying the clips that they'd show on tv so my dad took the leap and despite me not being quite of age to see them, my dad plonked "Wheels On Meals" in front of me and thus changed my life.

Yup, my first taste of the world of Martial Arts films was through a traditional Jackie Chan action-comedy. Of course, I knew who Bruce Lee was at that point but his movies were still in BBFC hell due to his liberal use of nunchaku throughout. Over here in the UK, any reference for them was banned so we wouldn't get full cuts of a lot of Bruce's films.

It's the early 90s to boot and a high profile biopic was being made of the man at the same time. That being said it wasn't until well into the late 90s that I believe Channel 4 finally did a retrospective of his films.

It's sadly a lost thing now. Back then the 'arty' channels like BBC2 and Channel 4 would present a season of films highlighting a particular actor or director. It was through this I got to see a bunch of Marx Brothers movies, Leone's Dollars trilogy and ultimately Bruce Lee's back catalogue. Which brings us up to:

THE WAY OF THE DRAGON (1972 dir. Bruce Lee)

It's between this or the final scene of "Enter The Dragon" with a bloodied Bruce in the hall of mirrors that would grace many a poster back in the day...

Why I bought it/Why I liked it:

Of the five 'main' Bruce Lee films, I own four of them. That's mainly because I argue that "Game Of Death" is at best a quarter of a Bruce Lee film. His action scenes are excellent but where it's infamously the film he never completed, the exploitative story and overall lack of Bruce make it an unenjoyable watch. No point in owning a film for 15-20 minutes of action sequences...

For years I was adamant that THIS was the best Bruce Lee film. In my later years, I'd say it was tied with "Enter The Dragon", solely on the basis that "Enter" flies by at a crazy pace and the spy element and the banter between Jim Kelly and John Saxon coupled with crazy handless villain makes it an insane watch.

The running theme in those other films though was Bruce often played a stoic man. He was mostly all action rarely letting his personality shine through. "The Way Of The Dragon" changed all that, unsurprisingly as it's the only film Bruce managed to write, direct and star in before his untimely demise.

Those who knew Bruce behind the scenes knew that he had a fun sense of humour and that's evident throughout this film. He's more relaxed, he gets to have fun and it makes for a far more enjoyable film than say "The Big Boss" does.

Of course, there are lashings of action sequences including the infamous fight scene where Bruce and Chuck freaking Norris fight in the Rome Colleseum but just as fondly remembered is his impish sense of humour which shines throughout.

If I think it'll stay in the collection:

To date, I think it's still the only Bruce Lee film I shelled out full price for when I was building the collection. As such it's one of the oldest films in my collection and I see no reason as to why it should leave any time soon.

The review:

The great thing about this film is that Bruce subverts your typical image of him. The first part of the film he brilliantly plays the 'fish out of water' while in Rome speaking none of the language and unaccustomed to their culture. Simple things such as finding the toilet or ordering some food result in comedic circumstances.

They even tease action early on but hilariously deprive you of it when customers in the restaurant arrive. It's essentially Bruce sending up the image of himself and having fun with it, challenging the viewers who think they know what he's all about.

The plot is one of those gloriously simple ones, often associated with the martial arts genre. A Chinese restaurant in Rome is under threat from gangsters, Bruce Lee's Ah Lung or Tang Lung (depending on what day the subtitlers were working) has been sent from Hong Kong to help out. He's the Cantonese Equalizer!

Hilariously because of the time period, the gangsters resemble the rock group Boston upon entering the restaurant and thus by today's standards would probably pose little threat but it's still fun to watch Bruce kick all of their butts.

I've watched this in the original Cantonese with English Subtitles as I often do with Bruce films. Odd really as I often watch Jackie films with Dubbing. I have done this so I can experience the pure annoyance of effeminate henchman Ho's mocking in the Colleseum as I like to punish myself. I can assure you it is quite annoying but purposefully so.

Bruce was so hard that he kick the beard off Chuck Norris' face thus rendering the memes obsolete...

Finally, the big bad boss realizes that the combined efforts of Boston and The Doobie Brothers weren't going to cut it and brings in the big guns in the form of then beardless sasquatch Chuck Norris. Yes, for better or worse this was the film that jump-started Chuck Norris' film career. I say for worse as despite cheesy performances in 'Walker, Texas Ranger', his back catalogue is pretty fucking awful and not in the so bad its good way. TRY watching "Missing In Action", I dare you.

Despite these minor niggles, "The Way Of The Dragon" is still a fantastic piece of kung-fu cinema, even if Bruce is still hammering home the Chinese Kung-Fu is better than Japanese Karate them he'd used in "Fist Of Fury". It's a really fun film and it's a shame Bruce never had the opportunity to make more under his own direction.

Should it stay or should it go?

Just as easy to watch as the first time I managed to back on a Saturday night on Channel 4. The backdrop and extras are hilariously dated but the film still remains a tasty slice of entertainment and a must-see for any fans of the martial arts genre.  A chunky 9 out of 10 rating here.

Action time rolls on with the next film. So until next time, I remain,

Matt Major








 

22. The Way Of The Gun

Action movie time! We're actually hitting a patch of them for this period, some I haven't revisited for a while, some I can actually barely remember. Today's entry falls in the latter.

Christopher McQuarrie's a big name in the action movie genre. First cutting his teeth in the highly acclaimed twisty-turney crime caper "The Usual Suspects", McQuarrie first brushed shoulders with eventual collaborator Tom Cruise by writing "Valkyrie" before solidifying himself with his live-action adaptation of personal favourite author Lee Child's creation Jack Reacher in ummm "Jack Reacher".

Regrettably not returning to direct the sequel, McQuarrie instead went over to Tom's OTHER big movie franchise "Mission Impossible" where he completely reinvigorated the series producing two of the best instalments in the franchise in "Rogue Nation" and "Fallout". But what of his earlier forgotten work?

Nestled between his work on "The Usual Suspects" and "Valkyrie", lies McQuarrie's first directorial feature. Much has been written by McQuarrie himself stating it as a missed opportunity to other critics declaring it to be a lost gem of the action movie genre. Having rapidly become a fan of Christophers' after his kick-ass adaptation of "Jack Reacher", I opted to hunt it down, knowing it often popped its head up in CEX at the time.

THE WAY OF THE GUN (2000 dir. Christopher McQuarrie)

A still for the box art of the UK release was nigh on impossible, the only image I could find was a blurry one on Amazon. Just imagine the same cover but completely in red and you have the UK box art.

Why I bought it/Why I liked it:

Always looking to broaden my horizons, I needed to unearth some action movie gems that were at least available in the country (regrettably so many delightful action films in the states have never made their way on home entertainment release on ol' Blighty). Looking through lists, one film appeared to keep popping up on critics lists. Further research revealed that a solid cast plus the rapidly impressive McQuarrie involvement made this one a bit of a no-brainer to pick up.  Through CEX mail order I believe...

Benicio Del Toro is usually a firm favourite but I always felt bad for Ryan Phillippe. He never seemed to shake the stigma of the pretty-boy teen actor from "Cruel Intentions" despite putting in many noticeable good turns later on in his career. Here he was still the draw so despite Benicio being the veteran, Ryan gets top billing.

In truth, I can remember little about the film outside of the opening scene which is excellent and a pretty innovative final shootout scene at the end. Having watched the film with my old man, we both agreed that it was good but missing something throughout.

In fact, it looked like it was going on the chopping block then and there but the final act's shootout had impressed me that much that it was spared and replaced back in the collection. Foreshadowing?

If I think it'll stay in the collection:

Tastes mature and patience can be prolonged. When I was a college student, if you'd sat me down and made me watch "Amadeus", I would probably pay little attention to it, instead thinking about which wrestlers I could create in 'Smackdown: Shut Your Mouth' for the PS2. Fast forward a few years later, I watch "Amadeus" and am blown away. I have the patience to watch it now, my fidgeting at a minimum.

"The Way Of The Gun" may very well fall into this category, knowing I'm not gearing up for explosions until the final act, I can perhaps be more tolerant of the plot and how we get there. Or on the other hand, my suspicions were true and although enjoyable, it just doesn't cut the mustard. Only one way to find out...

The review:

Ok, quick tangent here. The back of the DVD has a 'Watch Out For:' feature on the back trying to promote other movies also distributed by Momentum Pictures. One of these films is "Requiem For A Dream", another independent 18 certificate film directed by Darren Aronofsky. I'm not a fan but it's certainly fitting in the independent adult film frame.

The other film is "The Adventures of Rocky & Bullwinkle".

Who thought that promoting these two films together was a good idea? Why would you even promote a film where Robert De Niro attempts comedy is a good idea especially as it was universally panned? The mind boggles.

Right, tangent over. "The Way Of The Gun" was a much more enjoyable film for me the second time around. It is a film of its time though. There's no way a film like this could be made today.

It harks back warm memories of the wild west of independent film making. These days the major studios gobble up any hint of independent film making, attempting to just promote it as their own. Back in 2000, there was still leeway given, films made on a budget. Veteran movie stars looking to bolster their careers by appearing in an indy classic much like Mr James Caan is doing in this film. Much like Harvey Keitel took a chance on a young Quentin Tarantino.

Things aren't slick and polished, "The Way Of The Gun"'s backdrops are seedy and dusty but therein lies its charm. Our protagonists are not nice people in the slightest. Phillippe and Del Toro are petty thieves, kidnapping Juliette Lewis is hoping of making a big score and just getting out of this life. They'll happily maim, torture and kill just to get ahead in life yet somehow these end up being our 'good' guys. Yup, it's one of those 'No one's a good guy' films, a sub-genre of action films I always get a kick out of.

A wandering Norm Peterson quickly discovered that not all watering holes were as friendly as 'Cheers'...

What unfolds is another layered twisty plot with reveals gradually being distributed throughout. It's good fun. Sometimes admittedly it can be a little too clever for its own good but I remained involved throughout showing that mature taste I mentioned earlier. The first time around, I sort of got lost a little in the plot, this time it made much more sense.

When before I saw a stripped-back budget film, now when I'm older I can appreciate its sparseness, actually pining for a time when films like these were made and simply had to rely on the resources available. As a result, the performances are of high quality for the most part and the action really delivers a punch. Even in his freshman effort, McQuarrie knew how to frame and present a tense action sequence.

Special mention should go to the excellent opening scene with a ranting Sarah Silverman on peak form. I always wonder what happened to her as one moment she was female comedienne du jour and suddenly she's gone. Shame as I'd rather have her around than Amy Schumer these days.

As mentioned there are some aspects of the film that may turn the modern viewer off, the payoff of the opening scene would never be filmed today and likewise, there's a somewhat uncomfortable piece of dialogue in a sperm bank where the homosexual slur word beginning with 'f' is used freely. I wouldn't blink an eyelid back then but modern-day conditioning does make you wince a little somewhat at the overuse of the word today.

Another point of notice is how desensitized to automatic weapons we were before 9/11. Phillippe's character has to remind them that guns are now present in a hostage situation in order to clear out any bystanders, again another example of a movie of its time.

Should it stay or should it go?

Once again I feel it just avoids the trading pile. There's enough here to warrant a repeated viewing, years down the line. I can see where some people might find this slow as I sort of initially did but if you've got the time and you have a love for the bygone age of the 90s to noughties independent scene, I think this movie will reward you. I'm giving it a 7 out of 10 but who knows if a third viewing might bolster its score.

Martial arts time next with one of the all-time great stars of the genre showcasing his many talents.

Until next time, I remain,

Matt Major.

21. Wayne's World

So with only 28 reviews under the belt, my method of working backwards through my collection has landed us at this. My favourite movie of all time.

I've touched upon it briefly when typing up the "Wayne's World 2" review. I acknowledge that there are thousands of movies I could have easily picked as my favourite movie of all time. But much like "Who Framed Roger Rabbit?" this was a huge chunk of my childhood. Could it have something to do with the repeated viewings on BBC1 when the BBC made more of an effort to stick films on its main two channels outside of a holiday? Maybe. Could it have had a part in my emerging love of rock music, being the main reason I got into Queen at an early age and having their entire back catalogue by the age of 12? Absolutely.

There are so many great connotations and warm memories and for me, it's my ultimate comfort film. Without further hesitation, let's get into:

WAYNE'S WORLD (1992 dir Penelope Spheeris)

Warm memories if you have this on DVD or Blu-Ray, fling it to the pits of Hades if you have a video game version of this, however...


Why I bought it/Why I liked it:

To this date, "Wayne's World" alongside most episodes of 'The Simpsons' and "Clerks" remains one of the few films I can recite by heart. Does it have something to do with those repeated viewings? Sure, but I wouldn't have watched it so many times if I didn't love the hell out of this film.

I owned the soundtrack, first on cassette and then on CD, I would constantly bang my head during 'that' Brian May guitar solo on 'Bohemian Rhapsody' and try to get my friends to join in. I would wear black t-shirts and ill-advised baseball caps. This movie had struck a chord and still does. To this day when watching it, I'm whisked away to being a kid in the early '90s, sunny summer afternoons, rock music blasting, Amiga 500 on the go, visiting my friends to play their SNES's. Those were some of the happiest times of my life and this always acts as a trigger to those memories.

Who ultimately doesn't love a good comedy too? This along with a couple of others helped set the groundwork for my humour which is either a good thing or a bad thing depending on some friends you ask. "Wayne's World" still remains funny to this day.

Mike Myers and Dana Carvey nail their characters and it's breaking of the forth wall is always fun and charming. As a film still finding its feet it relies far less on superstar cameos and more on established comedic character actors. Brian Doyle-Murray, Lara Flynn Boyle as Wayne's psycho ex-girlfriend Stacy and my previous gushing of Rob Lowe's Benjamin and Ed O'Neill's fantastic Glenn all deliver amazing performances here.

Penelope Spheeris' direction is awesome, having made two highly acclaimed documentaries on the rock culture surrounding the film, she was a perfect fit for this film, coupled with Myers' and Bonnie and Terry Turners script. The Turners would go on to create hits such as 'Third Rock From The Sun' and 'That 70s Show'. It's a shame Spheeris and Myers were like oil and water during production as the union here creates something truly special.

There's the soundtrack too, besides Queen who could forger Gary Wright's 'Dream Weaver' cues, Jimi Hendrix's 'Foxy Lady', the live performance of 'Feed My Frankenstein' by Alice Cooper and Tia Carrere's rocking version of 'Ballroom Blitz'. This is all solid gold stuff.

If I think it'll stay in the collection:

After a gushing intro like that, how could it not? I doubt I'll go for a pro wrestling 'swerve' and declare my hatred of it within 90 minutes, this inevitably will be nestled back into its rightful place alongside its sequel, ready for a rainy day or my birthday once again. Party On!

The review:

Watching this back, I think what sets this apart from its still entertaining sequel is the simplicity of the film. It's essentially a Cameron Crowe movie but being more self-aware.

Wayne's goals are simple, he wants a guitar, he wants more money in his pocket and ultimately he wants the girl. The thing is all three are obtainable goals too, much more so than say running a rocket concert as was the plot of the second film.

Both Wayne and Garth get equal screen time too, both get to talk to the camera, a fact that didn't really occur during the sequel as much. In fact, as stated Garth's subplot felt tacked on where here he shares almost equal billing. Was this due to the original plot of the sequel having to be scrapped and hurried rewrites or was Mike Myers buying into his own stardom at this point? Either way, the surprising turnaround (merely a year) between the release of this film and its sequel must've hurt it too. Maybe an extra year would've smoothed things out.

This is why "Wayne's World" feels like a more complete film. It actually has time to concentrate on the secondary characters at least giving them something to do. Poor Terry feels like he's there for just continuity in the sequel. There's more of a community aspect too, that the people around Wayne like him so much that they're willing to pitch in and help. It's a feel-good moment, of which there are many.

The reason why my neck probably pops so much these days...I should get that checked out...

As mentioned Rob Lowe's Benjamin is terrifically slimy but his plot to steal the girl makes way more sense than Christopher Walken's Bobby suddenly being engaged and getting married to her in Act 3 of "Wayne's World 2". Hell, even Kurt Fuller's Russell has time to have a redemption character arc within the movie's short run time.

Most importantly though, it can still make me laugh after all this time. I have just as much fun knowing which gags are coming and how they're delivered in 2020 as I did back in 1992. If the then dying Freddie Mercury found the 'Bohemian Rhapsody' car scene to be hilarious then mileage can still be gotten out of this ol' gal for many years to come.

Should it stay or should it go?

As if you had any doubt. "Wayne's World" gets the perfect 10 out of 10 score here and thus endeth the overtly biased portion of our blog review...for now. I'll leave Wayne here to tell you what I still think of the film:

Zang indeed.

Next up, a string of action movies as we break away from comedy land for now.

So until next time, I remain,

Matt Major.

20. Wayne's World 2

Nostalgia's a powerful tool. Upon re-reading my last review, it never occurred to me that "Wedding Crashers" might have nostalgic memories for people of a certain age or generation. It's certainly understandable as it's why this review and ultimately the next review have such strong memories for me.

Everything just clicks, the time period in which you first watched the movie, sweeping you back to memorable happier times in your life. All the jokes just seem to hit and while deep down you know the movie you're watching is maybe average at best, you rate it higher because there are just certain connotations the film has with you that make it a sentimental favourite.

Any reader here should know that any review here is my own and just my personal opinion. I never actively try to discourage anyone from watching a film and the ratings I give them are based on my personal experience.

I'm merely stating this as we're about to experience two reviews of complete and utter bias...

Presenting to you, the sequel to my favourite movie of all time, still:

WAYNE'S WORLD 2 (1993 dir. Stephen Surjik)

Dated reference number one: Bunny ears behind someone. 90's kids, we're still ageing ourselves if we're doing these...

Why I bought it/Why I liked it:

As explained, it's the sequel to my favourite film of all time so of course, it was going to get bought.

To further elaborate, "Wayne's World 2" and ultimately "Wayne's World" were HUGE parts of my childhood growing up. I'll probably go into further detail in the next review but I would idolize these films, genuinely thinking they were the height of cool and possibly annoying my childhood chums with constant references to these films whenever I could shoehorn them in.

In reality, it falls under a perfectly entertaining sequel. There are times when the film borrows some of the best elements from the first film, therefore, lacking the originality of its predecessor but at this point, it was a case of 'if it ain't broke, don't fix it'. In the case of the "Wayne's World" franchise, Mike Myers and co knew when to stop too before it outwore its welcome. Had there been a "Wayne's World 3", I may have had more to gripe about.

But there are enough gags and laughs to be had through the duration of the film. Wayne and Garth are still incredibly charming, Cassandra is still drop-dead gorgeous. The supporting actors and cameos are just as memorable too ranging from Ralph Brown's show-stealing Del Preston to personal fav Chris Farley's Milton. It conjures up warm images and the soundtrack is rocking too, Aerosmith not quite in on the gag as Alice Cooper was previously but still game.

Oh, and Christopher Walken plays the bad guy, although nowhere near as effective as Rob Lowe's terrifically slimy performance as Benjamin, he delivers a reliable turn.

It's the 90's in a comedic 95-minute package! Of course, I love this film.

If I think it'll stay in the collection:

It's not even going to get a whiff of the trade pile honestly. Yes, it's dated comedy in places but fuck it, it's MY dated comedy and I love it to bits. The only way I can see it going is if I find a terrific deal on Blu-Ray, but the extras need to be sweet too.

The review:

"Wayne's World 2" is a case of a sequel striking while the iron is hot. As I watched it, you could see a lot of the old gags from the first movie creep back in but there are still some stand out sequences that warrant many a good laugh. I still had a blast watching it but like I said I'm biased.

The movie is gloriously self-referential but perhaps relies on too many film parodies of the time, the final act looking to really hammer home that "Graduate" gag. But the main stars are on fine form, Mike Myers beaming away, sly winks to the camera, Dana Carvey's awkward Garth amiably bumbling along with each scene. Any scene with the aforementioned Ralph Brown is a delight as he pretty much steals the show when he turns up.

Admit it, you're looking at this image and you're doing the voice and routine. I won't judge you.

The movie lacks the tightness of the first, possibly due to the loss of Penelope Spheeris who quite famously had a big falling out with Mike Myers during the production of the first film. It loses its edge somewhat but is still no less an entertaining movie. Some of the strengths of the film, in fact, are the little throwaway gags tossed here and there that reward you for paying attention.

It's from the strength of the first film that the stars started swarming in for the second. Christopher Walken despite being a big coup (and the fact you get to see him bust out the moves) sort of sleepwalks his way through the film, not chewing up the scenery as gloriously as he was in "Welcome To The Jungle". As mentioned Rob Lowe was MUCH better as the antagonist in the first film.

The cameos, oh the cameos. Kevin Pollack, Drew Barrymore, James Hong, Charlton Heston, Harry Shearer and Ted McGinley. Even Heather Locklear although wisely she doesn't speak.
Kim Basinger's here too, her subplot with Garth is there just because they needed to use Kim Basinger and while she's easy on the eyes, the subplot goes nowhere. It is fun, however.

And most criminally Ed O'Neill's Glenn is reduced to one appearance. A forgotten gem of the first film, he's one and done here but still delivers a great performance. Ed O'Neill is always fantastic in anything he's in. He should always be in more things.

The soundtrack is excellent, many classic rock staples peppered throughout. If anything it's the constant references to Oliver Stones' "The Doors" that make the movie seem a trifle dated, one of those weird films that you forgot existed but made a little splash at the time.

Finally, sure, some gags you can see for a mile off but that doesn't make them any less satisfying when they land.

Should it stay or should it go?

Ultimately, "Wayne's World 2" is a dumb but fun film. I'd say even the cold-hearted of people wouldn't be able to crack a smile at least once while watching this film. I still enjoyed revisiting this one and I'm giving it a strong 8 out of 10 here. It doesn't outstay its welcome and is still a fitting end to the franchise.

So no prizes for guessing what the next review is then. If you thought I was overly complimentary of this film, you ain't seen nothing yet.

Until next time, I remain,

Matt Major






 

19. Wedding Crashers

Oyyyy. I am NOT looking forward to this one.

So we reach one of the films that prompted me to start this whole blog in the first place, 2005's "Wedding Crashers". I remember it being an absolute blast in the cinema and the subsequent re-watch on home rental (lighters out for Blockbusters again please) made it just as enjoyable as the first.

But 15 years have passed since then. I've got grey hairs (god, I have a lot of grey hairs, I don't think I have any brown ones left), I eat vegetables like a normal human being should, I haven't flat shared in over 4 years, things change. Comedy tastes change. That's not to say I'm a snob if comedy's timeless it still holds the test of time and stays in my collection. My aforementioned love of Looney Tunes is still an example. I still love 'Friends', 'Seinfeld', 'Frasier', 'Cheers','Bottom', 'Animal House', The Marx Brothers. If it's funny, it stays funny.

But is "Wedding Crashers" still funny? We all sort of fell in love with the 'Frat Pack' at this point in time. We couldn't get enough of the antics of Ben Stiller, Owen Wilson, Vince Vaughn, Jack Black, Will Ferrell et al. But now while some of their pieces still hold up or at least hold up better, there are some pieces we look back at and go 'Oh yeah...THAT...'

Time to stop procrastinating with the intro, let's get to:

WEDDING CRASHERS (2005, dir. David Dobkin)

 No charity shop in the UK is without a copy of these alongside copies of Lostprophets CDs and crockery emblazoned with Charles & Diana's wedding...

Why I bought it/Why I liked it:

We already touched upon this in the intro. Again it fell under cinema films I ended up watching with my dad. We didn't usually take in that many comedies in the cinema honestly but there was an interesting thing circling with this one.

You HAD to see it.

Like without a word of a lie 2005 was THE year for "Wedding Crashers". The buzz around it was something else. Everybody was recommending it to one another, you weren't anyone unless you went and saw this movie.

We saw it, we laughed, we liked it. It kicked off the boom of the more adult-rated comedies, a trend that's died down a lot know since peak Judd Apatow period with only Seth Rogen really waving the torch for it.

There were plenty of memorable performances in it. Off the top of my head besides the two main stars, I can remember it making a bigger name out of Rachel McAdams. It made a Hollywood name out of Isla Fisher and made us question if Jane Seymour could actually age. Oh and good ol' Christopher Walken is in it.

But here's the thing, I can't name you a single gag in "Wedding Crashers" right now. I know I ended up buying this shortly after it's home rental release but at a time when it dropped enough for me to warrant it being in my collection. To this date, I haven't actually revisited it...

If I think it'll stay in the collection:

*Winces through clenched teeth* Probably not. Times change, fads change. Hell, we thought Limp Bizkit used to be cool at one point and we were all playing Guitar Hero. Now we just swim in plastic guitars in CEX's. It'll be interesting to see how much this has aged but honestly, there are better 'Frat Pack' films (Dodgeball and Anchorman chief among them) and I don't think "Wedding Crashers" is long for the collection.

The review:

Jesus.

For a start, I never understood the allure of the two hours plus comedy. Comedies are one-two punches, they're in, they're out. It's a habit that a lot of these filmmakers, including Judd Apatow, started to pick up and honestly, it's unwelcome as you've blown your best gags within the first two acts.

"Wedding Crashers" in 2020 is very much one of those films. It has a fun premise which might be fine for like 80-90 minutes but it's not. In fact, I watched the 'Uncorked' Directors Cut which clocked in at a little over two hours. This is not advised.

It has aged better than "Zoolander", my first review way back in the summer of last year. The MVP of the piece is, without doubt, Vince Vaughn. On fine rapid delivery form, he steals the show in almost every scene he's in. The problem is this isn't really a Vince Vaughn film, he plays comedy sidekick to Owen Wilson.

Now, I'm not going to turn this into a forum to bash Owen Wilson. Even though in 2020 he's essentially a meme, he's done a lot of good work, played sidekick and stolen the show a few times and collaborated with Wes Anderson in numerous good to great films. It's just his character, John Beckwith, in an attempt to seduce Rachel McAdam's Claire Cleary (who came up with her name, Stan Lee?!?), doesn't come across as likeable. Perhaps as he himself played a similar character in "Meet The Parents", I have no sympathy if he gets the girl or not.

Chris has remembered where he'd left his watch...

As a result, the film rapidly runs out of steam and the third act is DEATH as Wilson's Beckwith goes on a redemption arc and tries to win back Clearly in a wedding scene that even by romantic standards would be too cliché.

There are germs of good ideas here and solid performances from most of the cast. Isla Fisher stands out as the kooky younger sister Gloria and it's understandable how this film made her a star. Christopher Walken is Christopher Walken, somewhat subdued but still good and Jane Seymour is terrific as Senator Cleary's wife, who's oversexed wife act sadly has no time to develop into further gags and thus is shoved into the background by the third act.  A special mention can also go to pre stubble days Bradley Cooper, here ably playing preppy douchebag Sack Lodge, Claire's fiancee. He plays the unlikeable asshole rather well.

Then there's even by 2005's standards horrible caricatures of people such as Ellen Albertini Dow's senile grandmother and Kier O' Donnell's goth closest homosexual Todd. These are bad cookie-cutter characters with no point other than to raise the odd cheap laugh.

That's not to say laughs don't come, I noticed I laughed watching this far more than "Zoolander" but that was primarily from Vaughn's excellent performance.

Should it stay or should it go?

15 years have not been kind to "Wedding Crashers". What remained hot property then has now seen the landscape change and the humour it once trumpeted now relegated to behind the spotlight. Chuckles can be had but it's not worth braving this for 2 hours just to get them.  I'll be kind and give it a quarter-point over "Zoolander", so it gets the rather odd rating of 5.75 out of 10 but that's as kind as I'm going to go.

Next up, MORE Christopher Walken!

Until next time, I remain,

Matt Major.

18. Welcome To Collinwood

A short breezy review for a short breezy film today I feel. It's a film I've quite looked forward to revisiting as it's been YEARS since I've watched it, possibly not since the time of its home rental release.

And hey, what do you know? Before they even made 'Community' or even tackled bigger fish with the Captain America franchise and ultimately making the highest-grossing movie of all time, finally knocking James Cameron off the top spot, with "Avengers - Endgame", The Russo brothers made this humble little film that somehow sunk its hooks into me.

And nope, I didn't even know it was a Russo brothers film (although technically a western remake of an old Italian 1958 film) until I looked up the appropriate details to type into this blog entry. Good old hindsight.

WELCOME TO COLLINWOOD (2002 dir. Anthony Russo & James Russo)

Ocean Colour Scene looked pretty rough for their upcoming reunion tour...

Why I bought it/Why I liked it:

My memory remains slightly foggy for this one. I honestly can't remember if the first time this was viewed fell under 'newest release of the week' in the cinema or the 'one of the newest release of the week' in Blockbuster. Please light your lighters for the traditional mention of Blockbusters and how they are still sorely missed in today's world.

Either way, this fell shortly after one of the all-time classic heist movies I had watched, Stephen Soderbergh's incredible remake of "Ocean's Eleven". To this date, one of my favourite ever films just because of how damn slick and cool the movie feels, my bubbling respect for George Clooney was beginning to boil over.

Already having earned my respect with Robert Rodriguez's "From Dusk 'Till Dawn", George's coolness factor was turning a few heads at this point. Off the success of "Oceans Eleven", the marketing guys used George as the focal point for the promotion of this film, even though he isn't the star of said film. See look at the DVD cover, who's front and centre at this point?

I'd also paid attention to it coming up when Empire wrote a brief preview of the film. Sitting down and watching it with my dad, it was a fun breezy heist caper featuring a wealth of familiar faces and character actors of the time. Sam Rockwell was building momentum before showing the world what he could really do after playing bit parts in many a film. The ever-dependable William H. Macy popped up and the man who seemed to follow me everywhere at one point, Luis Guzman. I'm not kidding in a run of films I would watch especially during this period, Luis Guzman would more than often pop up. I swear him and Xander Berkley just follow me around.

In fact, new segment in the blog:

Seems appropriate.

Anyhoo, all these guys made for a great viewing experience and like I mentioned, just something about it struck a really nice chord in me.

Inevitably during another bulking the collection out session in CEX, it got picked up on the cheap.

If I think it'll stay in the collection:

I think it's too harmless to not stay in the collection. I remember the film being a really fun made little caper and I think it'll fly along quite merrily. Again the dreaded early noughties rose-tinted glasses effect might come into play here but I was surprised that "Welcome To The Jungle" held up, so it might not be all "Zoolander" doom and gloom.

The review:

It's a delightful film. The plot is simple, a lifer in prison tells an inmate of the perfect heist and all that needs to be done is for them to carry it out. Rewatching it again, I laughed in various places, was swept away by a variety of enjoyable performances and chewed up the music and scenery. It's the equivalent of going to a music bar to meet some friends. You take a gamble, you've never heard these guys before but they start playing. They're tight, you start bopping your head to the music, tapping your foot against the barstool. By the time they've finished their set, you've become a fan and you'll definitely come back to see them again.

That's this film really. A special mention needs to be made to the aesthetic of the film. It's a wonderful combination of modern but with a 40's feel. Sort of how Gotham is portrayed in 'Batman: The Animated Series'. Old storefronts, swinging jazz, there's a warm feel about it, like wrapping yourself up in a blanket and drinking a hot drink. The score provided by Mark Mothersbaugh proves why he's one of the unsung heroes of the film soundtrack and why he's so often used by Wes Anderson. It fits in perfectly with the feel of the movie.

Handy Andy knew his days on 'Changing Rooms' were closing in on him...

The meat and potatoes of the film are the performances though. From Luis Guzman's angry and frustrated Cosimo and his long-suffering girlfriend Rosalind, played by the always reliable Patricia Clarkson. The dapper and always well dressed Isiah Washington as Leon wearing a dinner jacket and pipe to a boxing match, to hopeless but loveable loser Sam Rockwell as Pero. Wonderful turns also put in by Michael Jeter as Toto which sadly was one of his last films and the eternally beautiful Jennifer Esposito as the flirtatious Carmella. These are characters, they stand out and like everyone in a band they hit their notes on point.

I won't spoil what happens during the actual heist itself but needless to say, it's a chuckle a minute making this a very easy watch,


Negatives are few, there are a few tacked-on romantic scenes that linger perhaps a tad too long, including a side plot with character Basil which ultimately goes nowhere but does add charm at the very least.

Should it stay or should it go?

It's charming and inoffensive, a perfectly good way to kill an hour and a half. Your mileage may vary as it would with any film I review but I think this is a little gem and should be given if a chance should you stumble upon it on tv or in a charity shop. I'll give this 7 out of 10 too. It won't change your life but you won't be angry you watched it either.

So next up, one of the films that were actually the basis for me starting this whole blog in the first place. Oh and Christopher Walken says hi again...

Until next time, I remain,

Matt Major.

17. Welcome To The Jungle

We've got fun and games...like Ludo.  Yes, today sees me dip into early noughties action fare with one of the biggest brightest stars of that time period, sinking his teeth into the action genre which would eventually make him a star. It took some time to get there though.

Any readers from overseas may be familiar with the film under another title: "The Rundown". In hindsight this was a much better title considering the title would also be used for a survivalist jungle horror movie, a weird ensemble cast comedy starring Jean Claude Van Damme and even ended up being the tagline for a later Dwayne Johnson franchise: Jumanji.

Yup, Dwayne 'The Rock' Johnson. Surprisingly despite my love of wrestling, even I can acknowledge Mr Johnson's back catalogue to be patchy at best. Today he's Hollywood's biggest superstar, back in 2003, we were all waiting to see if he wasn't going to Hulk Hogan himself. I dare say Dave Bautista has proven himself to be the best wrestler turned actor but back then it looked like Dwayne was going to take the action king crown.

Opening with "The Scorpion King", a decent 'Conan-Lite' adventure, this film and "Walking Tall" it seemed that Mr Johnson was filling in a void so often missed and needed. That of the fresh action movie star. Sadly the wheels started coming off pretty quickly with questionable role after questionable role and despite trying to nab the role of Jack Reacher (a role that he would have been excellent in for the record), he failed and ended up in the Fast & The Furious franchise.  What's often forgotten is that this was an ailing franchise in itself and they both needed one another. Thankfully it benefitted both and skyrocketed Dwayne to his second resurgence.

But we're still back in 2003 at this point, so let's dip into:

WELCOME TO THE JUNGLE (2003 dir. Peter Berg)

Ah yes, the three perfect rips in the shoulder area of the t-shirt. A badge of honour among the action heroes.

Why I bought it/Why I liked it:

As mentioned I was a big fan of The Rock and at this point, he was still officially a wrestler moonlighting as an actor and not vice versa. I'd enjoyed "The Scorpion King" enough and the trailers showed this to be a lot of fun.

To be honest it boasted a heck of a supporting cast for the time period also. Reliable and always entertaining comic relief Seann William Scott (who in my opinion makes most things better even though he couldn't save "Dude, Where's My Car?" from its hideousness), the then up and coming Rosario Dawson and Christopher freaking Walken as the bad guy.

This was one of the movies during the 'watch the newest release of that week' cinema period I used to attend with my dad. The truth was, we didn't have much to do and this was a good way to spend time together following my parent's divorce so regular trips to the Odeon were usually on the menu.

It was a blast. It ticked all of the boxes I looked for in a dumb fun action film, and much like the Arnie cameo earlier in the film, it looked like Dwayne had picked up the torch from the once-mighty king.

Memories of positivity continued into my CEX 'add movies to my collection for cheap' phase so when it popped up for cheap, it was an easy purchase.

If I think it'll stay in the collection:

Tough call actually. As we know I like a dumb fun action film but there seems to be something about early noughties output that just awkwardly ages. As such, there are very few good action films from this period that have held up over time.  I'm hoping that the performances and action are enough to carry it through but I can just as easily see this going on the trade pile. It's another coin flip, to be honest.

The review:

"Welcome To The Jungle" is complete claptrap. It is, however, still rather enjoyable claptrap. The Rock shows that he could carry his charisma from the squared circle onto celluloid and looks every bit the action star that plays to his strengths.

Seann William Scott, on the other hand, is on fine form as the motormouth quarry/sidekick/treasure hunter, constantly delivery quips and showing just why he was the talented one from the "American Pie" posse. Rosario's character admittedly isn't fleshed out at all but she makes for enjoyable eye candy and Christopher Walken is on fine snarling form as the stock bad guy of the day.

 No, YOU do "Southland Tales".

It's a slickly made film, complete with those 'wonderful' whip pans and zooms that were so frequent during this period but it trundles along at a fun pace. Peter Berg showing he's capable of making a fun action film, this nestles in quite nicely along with recent Netflix exclusive "Spenser Confidential" in the easy film to veg out and watch stakes.

The music choices are a bit suspect, there's a cringeworthy mash-up of Missy Elliot's 'Get Your Freak On' coupled with AC/DC's 'Back In Black' that comes across as being off its time. It's not a particularly smooth mash-up either.

Oh and renowned Scottish actor Ewen Bremner inexplicably puts on a Northern Irish accent, delivers soliloquies and plays the bagpipes in the last act of the film which immediately costs this film a point. There's never a good time for bagpipes...

But there is a scene where Dwayne has his face humped by a monkey. I did laugh pretty hard at that one.

Should it stay or should it go?

"Welcome To The Jungle" is a harmless little action flick that you can just leave your brain at the door. The plot is weak, there are eye-rolling nods to "Raiders Of The Lost Ark" for a spell but it's fun.
This probably remains one of The Rock's best outside of the Fast & The Furious franchise.  It gets a respectable 7 out of 10 from me today.

Christopher Walken is not that far away but next time we review a film I thought I'd be reviewing today...until I realized that I'd alphabetized wrongly.

Until next time, I remain,

Matt Major.

 

Brucie Bonus - 16.5.- What Ever Happened To Baby Jane?

So April turned out to be my most productive month on the blog yet considering my hiatus. It's amazing what being cooped up in your flat due to a pandemic can do for you. Yes, we still live in crazy Covid-19 times but there's still plenty of movies to be watched.

Celebrating this mini victory, we're hurtling into May with a recent addition to the collection but one that was easily tacked onto the end. A movie that's still in the cellophane wrapper no less. So what better way to ring in a drab Sunday morning than to watch a film where the two stars hated each other.

Today we tackle,

WHAT EVER HAPPENED TO BABY JANE? (1962. dir Robert Aldrich)

Man, 'The Great Pottery Throw-Down' was getting intense...

Why I watched it:

For me, this has always been one of those elusive films. It would pop up,  mentioned in many a film magazine or reference book, often referenced in comedy programmes and parodied but never really popped up on TV.

What's sad is that a lot of these classic films barely get a look in now, especially on the warmly remembered matinee slots BBC2 or Channel 4 used to reserve for classic Warner Bros movies. I think TCM has the monopoly on them being owned by the once Turner group. I have no idea if TCM is meant to be Freeview or back to being a Sky exclusive but either way, such gems are unavailable.

I procured this film during one of the Oscar seasons. Sainsbury's have a little spinning rack of budget movies they like to sell and during Oscar season, they would put previous winners or nominees on the rack so for the price of under a tenner, now seemed as good as any to give it a watch.

Considering I'm not overly familiar with either woman's body of work (I know, for shame) and the only film of either I saw was Bette Davis' "The Private Lives Of Elizabeth And Essex". In all, I thought the film was clearly well-acted but being a romantic period drama, this ticked none of my boxes. Coincidentally that was part of an Errol Flynn boxset where I can comfortably say if it isn't a swashbuckler with Basil Rathbone in it, save your time.

The review:

Oyyyy. Well, this gives me time to talk about a certain breed of movie.

Forgive the tangent but I don't like the "Lord Of The Rings" trilogy directed by Peter Jackson. Do I think they're well made? Undeniably. Do I think it's well-acted? For the most part yes, there are some excellent performances. Do I enjoy them? No. I think that personally, they're too long and I don't connect with most of the characters, in particular, the Hobbits.

So why do I bring this up? Because "What Ever Happened To Baby Jane?" falls right into this category of film. Both Bette Davis and Joan Crawford are excellent in their respective roles. Davis, in particular, is fantastic as a sneering one moment, completely glassy-eyed and unhinged character the next. Victor Buono adds comedic touches to what is essentially a really dark film about sibling rivalry and the perils of stardom.

The movie is shot beautifully playing with light and shadows brilliantly portrayed throughout. And yet about an hour in, I realized that I wasn't really enjoying this movie. I could appreciate the movie but I wasn't sucked into it.

If we keep liking these awful Harley Quinn movies, this is what Margot Robbie's going to look like when she's reprising her role 30 years from now...

Now I know I've unabashedly declared my love for junky action films and in terms of content and what they deliver, they're the equivalent of a take-out pizza. But the important thing is, I'm sucked into it, yes the acting might be shit, appalling in places and the plots as thin as a Victoria Beckham catalogue but I'm being entertained. For the duration of the film and this should be the intention of all films as a form of escapism, you've got my undivided attention and I'm in for the ride.

So when my mind starts drifting about stuff like:

'Where do I know Victor Buono from? Oh right, he was King Tut in the Adam West Batman show',

'What the hell was the appeal in the early 20th century about watching little girls sing and tapdance? Thank god, we're not like that anymore, oh no, wait, I forgot about that Honey Boo Boo craze.'

OR MOST IMPORTANTLY:

'This film would've been over if Blanche Hudson just fucking yelled 'HELP!' AT THREE DIFFERENT OCCASIONS!'

See I shouldn't be picking plot holes in movies like this. It's meant to be a suspension of disbelief situation, I know it's stupid when John Mclane saves everyone from Nakatomi Plaza, I know it's dumb that Casey Ryback can dispatch a ship full of terrorists but things are going at 300 m.p.h. that I don't care. If the movie's lingering so much that I can't comprehend why Joan Crawford can't use her voice, you've not succeeded in holding my attention.

And yeah, there's a twist at the end but evidently, I already knew it when I described the film to my buddy Ross.

Adding to the collection?

Nope. This falls firmly into the: 'I'm glad I watched this, now I need never see it again' territory. It's a tick on the 'Have you seen these classic movies?' checklist. Thank you ladies, you tried your hardest and well done on the nominations but "What Ever Happened To Baby Jane?" gets a 5 out of 10.

Oh yeah, despite my bitching it's still better than "Cable Hogue" or "Young Guns".

Until next time, I remain,

Matt Major.