Movies: Last Movie You Watched and Rate It | Mid-Spring Edition. Happy Beltane!

kihei

McEnroe: The older I get, the better I used to be.
Jun 14, 2006
43,875
11,144
Toronto
image-w1280.jpg


The Beautiful Prisoner
(1983) Directed by Alain Robbe-Grillet 7A

The Beautiful Prisoner is about a man having a very bad dream, or worse. Or something. His conundrum involves a boss/lover named Zeitgeist; a beautiful girl who has been dead for years but keeps popping up anyway, sometimes as a vampire; a reality that keeps shifting under our hero’s feet; a detective who looks like a skinned bat (stole that description from somewhere, I think); a hefty dose of old-school, quite sexy eroticism; more references, visual allusions, and influences than you could shake a stick at; and an emphasis on Magritte’s brand of surrealism and Cocteau’s brand of fantasy (oh, those motorcycles and henchmen from the underworld). It’s a movie that doesn’t look like a noir but feels like a noir, possesses sumptuous cinematography and, unfortunately, employs a lead actor who, well, could have been better chosen.

About half way through this movie, I was thinking the “P” word and musing about the 100 megaton nuclear explosion that would occur, wiping out all life on this board as we know it, if I referred specifically to a Robbe-Grillet film as “pretentious.” But then the thing gradually won me over and disaster was averted. “Pretentious” moved on to “silly” which eventually parked at “playful.” I suspect that Robbe-Grillet is having a really good time here, and he does manage to take his audience along for the ride. Plus, The Beautiful Prisoner is as close as I am going to get to a new Cocteau movie, and I really like Cocteau. All in all, a fun, spirited night at the movies.

subtitles

MUBI
 
Last edited:

Pranzo Oltranzista

Registered User
Oct 18, 2017
3,981
2,900
All in all, a fun, spirited night at the movies.

I have it on DVD here, but I've only watched it once. I thought at the time that it was one of his weaker films, but you convinced me to have a look at it.


(oh and I think you meant Magritte)
 

Pink Mist

RIP MM*
Jan 11, 2009
6,779
4,905
Toronto
About half way through this movie, I was thinking the “P” word and musing about the 100 megaton nuclear explosion that would occur, wiping out all life on this board as we know it, if I referred specifically to a Robbe-Grillet film as “pretentious.” But then the thing gradually won me over and disaster was averted. “Pretentious” moved on to “silly” which eventually parked at “playful.”

Phew, crisis averted
 

Pink Mist

RIP MM*
Jan 11, 2009
6,779
4,905
Toronto
A Land Imagined [幻土] (2018) directed by Yeo Siew Hua

After a Chinese migrant worker (Liu Xiaoyi) and a Bengali migrant worker (Ishtiaque Zico) go missing at a Singapore land reclamation construction site, a sleepless detective (Peter Yu) investigates their disappearance and their relation to a strange internet café where the Chinese worker spent his nights. A moody neo-noir film that is almost dream like in its atmosphere with a synth and jazz score, gritty yet beautiful shots of the migrant workers living quarters and the underbelly of Singapore, and an at times incoherent and surreal plot. Think 1970s neo-noir by way of David Lynch. A great commentary on the other side of Singapore hidden from the glamour known and portrayed in something like Crazy Rich Asians, as an island quite literally built on the backs of underpaid and extremely exploited migrant workers – and I mean quite literally, the land reclamation construction site the film is based on is a project by which the Singaporean state is importing rock and sand from other countries in order to build and expand its geographical borders of the island. The film could have been better edited as some of the shifting in perspective can be confusing and make the plot more incoherent as it jumps from the perspective of the detective to the migrant worker then back again, but it is a solid haunting and hypnotic feature from Yeo Siew Hua.

 

OzzyFan

Registered User
Sep 17, 2012
3,653
960
Halloween (Carpenter, 1978) – I am fully aware this is supposed to be the superior film and bestest slasher ever. It's just not (IMO). I mean, it's still a pretty decent movie, and I still think it is an important slasher and has to be seen by any fan of the genre, but there's so many things that just don't work for me that it's hard not to think it's overrated (I don't think, for example, that it should be considered more important than Black Christmas, nor a better film). Most of all – and I guess it's kind of a “hot take” – Donald Pleasance's Dr Loomis kind of ruins the film. That character is so bad that I can't rewatch Halloween without considering him an accomplice to Myers, and probably the crazier of the pair. I've watched the extended TV version and it only adds to that feeling (his reaction towards a 6 y/o boy (foreshadowing his inexcusable behavior around the little girl in parts 4&5?) certainly aren't that of a psychiatrist). Don't worry, I know the film is not supposed to be read that way, but the guy leaves the hospital car for Myers to escape with, knows instantly where Myers is going, makes one stop during his 150 miles trip to Haddonfield, exactly where Myers stopped to kill someone and steal his overalls, there he manages to find the nurse's matchbox in the grass but not the body that lies three feet away from him, he sends the cops in every and all directions except the right one, he pretends he doesn't see the hospital car at the hardware store, pretends he doesn't see it right next to him the whole time he waits at the Myers house, and he tells the sheriff not to inform the population. The guy is shady, obsessed with a patient that hasn't said a word in 15 years. It's hard to think it's not blanks that he shoots at Myers.
I won't even comment on the fact that the 6 y/o boy who spends 15 years staring at the window without speaking to anyone knows how to drive when he escapes, because it's probably Loomis who taught him. The extended version has the “Sister” marking in Myers' hospital room that introduced the sequel's family twist. I think it kind of saves the day for the killer, who's too easily read as a frustrated incel who follows women around. At some point, he follows Laurie and her friend, in his stolen hospital car, from daylight to darkness, without them noticing him even though they know a weirdo with a stationwagon has been following them. He's bumper to bumper the whole time! This goes with my second big problem with the film: Carpenter's spatial construction. The body in the grass, the car that Loomis doesn't see even though it's right beside him, the doors that don't open the right way, the interiors that don't match the exteriors of the houses, and Laurie's fall in the staircase – nothing works. You have to give it to Carpenter for a few amazing moments (Myers coming out of the shadows, wow, but right after that he tries to stab Laurie and misses her even though she's 3 inches from him and doesn't see him coming, which for some reason pushes her over the handrail and into the stairs), but I just don't think he's that good a director at that time. The robbery at the hardware store is really hard to place in the timeline too. The film has some cool atmosphere at times, but it has so many weaknesses that I have a hard time going over 5/10.


Halloween II (Rosenthal, 1981) – It had been a while since I'd seen this one. I usually refer to it as my favorite slasher, and it might just be. The last 30 minutes probably are. The ride to get there is a little bumpy, but this last stretch has Michael Myers at his most threatening (and better looking), and manages to create a dark and claustrophobic atmosphere in the hospital. Dr Loomis even almost looks sane and credible (not really but a lot more than usual) for a few minutes there. The first hour is certainly a lot weaker, with more than a few weak characters and with cheap and ineffective “scares” (the cat in the dumpster, the killer behind the closing door – stuff that makes you wonder how few ideas Carpenter was left with), even one that is so weirdly constructed that I had to rewind it a few times (the girl goes towards the door at the right of the frame, something very common to get the spectator's attention to that side of the frame, the jump scare comes from another side, sure, but you have Myers jumping on her from mid-frame as if he was... on the floor?) - but I think it was the only time in this one I had to try to figure out spatial construction, a huge improvement on the original. Some of the kills in the first hour are way too sophisticated for a man who's been locked up since he was 6 years old, but since he somehow learned to drive, I guess he might have pick up some other skills. It's still a little inconsistent with his other range of actions (can't push a door open, walks through it). Points to the sheriff for acknowledging Loomis is in cahoots with Myers. 6/10


SPOILERS, Because I don't want to do spoiler tags.

That Loomis angle is interesting, but I feel there are too many holes in it to work out. For instance:
-Why even visit the cemetery of his murdered sister's grave?
-Why get the full police force;'s attention/involved and on notice if he's the accomplice?
-Why shoot blanks at Myers until he falls of a 1 story balcony and could have seriously injured himself?
-Why not kill Laurie himself while Michael and her are alone with him and say Myers took his gun and shot her or something around the sort of the gun accidentally going off and killing her? Loomis could have maimed her with the gun and let Myers finish the job even.
-Altogether, why not help Myers in his quest and murders through distractions and direct or indirect aid in murders then also?
-And his actions in Halloween 2 I think nullify this, especially when Loomis lights Myers up like a Christmas tree with bullets in the hospital in front of others.

I understand your reasonings for your thoughts on 1 vs 2. I'll politely disagree though with reasoning in my 2 previous reviews.

The driving difficulty thing has caught my interest. I mean, Loomis did make a comment about Michael somehow oddly knowing to drive or "he was doing all right last night. Maybe somebody around here gave him lessons". That said, once you figure out the gear shift and throwing it into drive, I don't feel it's overly complicated to figure out how to maneuver with the steering wheel in your face and 2 pedals by your feet. Now following traffic laws, unless he took note of that as a young child before getting 'imprisoned', is a whole other story.
 

Pranzo Oltranzista

Registered User
Oct 18, 2017
3,981
2,900
SPOILERS, Because I don't want to do spoiler tags.

That Loomis angle is interesting, but I feel there are too many holes in it to work out. For instance:
-Why even visit the cemetery of his murdered sister's grave?
-Why get the full police force;'s attention/involved and on notice if he's the accomplice?
-Why shoot blanks at Myers until he falls of a 1 story balcony and could have seriously injured himself?
-Why not kill Laurie himself while Michael and her are alone with him and say Myers took his gun and shot her or something around the sort of the gun accidentally going off and killing her? Loomis could have maimed her with the gun and let Myers finish the job even.
-Altogether, why not help Myers in his quest and murders through distractions and direct or indirect aid in murders then also?
-And his actions in Halloween 2 I think nullify this, especially when Loomis lights Myers up like a Christmas tree with bullets in the hospital in front of others.

I understand your reasonings for your thoughts on 1 vs 2. I'll politely disagree though with reasoning in my 2 previous reviews.

The driving difficulty thing has caught my interest. I mean, Loomis did make a comment about Michael somehow oddly knowing to drive or "he was doing all right last night. Maybe somebody around here gave him lessons". That said, once you figure out the gear shift and throwing it into drive, I don't feel it's overly complicated to figure out how to maneuver with the steering wheel in your face and 2 pedals by your feet. Now following traffic laws, unless he took note of that as a young child before getting 'imprisoned', is a whole other story.

Of course, my Loomis take isn't really serious and he's not actually working with Myers, but he's so dumb that he mostly always end up helping him. The fact that he mysteriously survives the fire in part 2, and that he disappear with Michael at the end of part 6 (due to Pleasance's death, there's at least one scene missing), also make him way too shady to be innocent. It's either that or he is the most incompetent psychiatrist ever and a very dumb person in general, which makes the film almost unwatchable. I prefer to consider him prime suspect. ;-)
 
  • Like
Reactions: OzzyFan

Osprey

Registered User
Feb 18, 2005
27,922
10,805
Welcome back, kihei. A few days ago, it struck me that we hadn't seen you in weeks and I knew that it could mean only one thing. Sure enough, Wimbledon was going on. With that ending the other day, here you are, right on schedule, like an animal emerging from hibernation.

Incidentally, I probably won't be reviewing any movies for two weeks during the Olympics, myself, so you'll all get a much-needed break from me soon.
 
Last edited:

kihei

McEnroe: The older I get, the better I used to be.
Jun 14, 2006
43,875
11,144
Toronto
Welcome back, kihei. A few days ago, it struck me that we hadn't seen you in weeks and I knew that it could mean only one thing. Sure enough, Wimbledon was going on. With that ending the other day, here you are, right on schedule, like an animal emerging from hibernation.

Incidentally, I probably won't be reviewing any movies for two weeks during the Olympics, myself, so you'll all get a much-needed break from me soon.
Thank you. Yeah, Grand Slams are pretty movie free for me. But, actually, I am trying to cut down. I've been restricting myself to a Tuesday review for the last five weeks, as nothing much is going on until we get to the fall when things may pick up again.
 
Last edited:

Pranzo Oltranzista

Registered User
Oct 18, 2017
3,981
2,900
CR7qJ9nWoAAobkH.jpg


Halloween III: Season of the Witch
(Wallace, 1982) - Very dark paranoid thriller mixed with decent gore. Gotta love the balls on this one, aiming for the children and not hesitating melting one with critters coming out of his face. The premise is great, the tone is great, but other than that, it's saddly pretty silly. The inexplicable stonehenge mystical bullshit is just too much, and the romance between the fugly womanizer doctor and the young lady who just lost her father the day before is hilarious (the line where she asks him where he'd like to sleep got me laughing out loud). Includes a little sexual harrassment seminar in the workplace with our good doctor slapping the ass of his lady colleague for fun. The film is on Roger Ebert's most hated list, but it's miles better than parts 4, 5, 6, H20, & Resurrection. In fact, I kind of like it. 4.5/10

Edit: I really don't know how I feel towards Wallace because of his unclear participation in Amityville II's screenplay. I suspect he ruined Damiani's version and is responsible for lifting the whole ending part from The Exorcist, but there's no record of exactly who did what that I could find. Wallace ended up directing the It original miniseries, which was pretty bad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Osprey

Savi

Registered User
Dec 3, 2006
9,370
1,968
Bruges, Belgium
I watched The Double Life of Veronique last night, I had the blu-ray sitting on a shelf for years and never bothered to watch it. :laugh: I look like an idiot now of course because that is one beautiful film. Absolutely loved it.

Another name I've been really impressed with recently is Derek Tsang. He's an actor and director from Hong Kong, I mainly knew him from his acting (for example, he's in my favourite Hong Kong movie of all time, Ho-Cheung Pang's Isabella from 2006) but I've taken a closer look at some of his directing work. I watched two films so far, 2016's Soul Mate (about the friendship between two young girls growing up, and how it changes over times when they mature) and 2019's Better Days (about a young girl being bullied who suddenly gets protection from a mysterious, unknown boy) and both have really impressed me, from the acting to the way they were shot, very stylish.

A Land Imagined [幻土] (2018) directed by Yeo Siew Hua

After a Chinese migrant worker (Liu Xiaoyi) and a Bengali migrant worker (Ishtiaque Zico) go missing at a Singapore land reclamation construction site, a sleepless detective (Peter Yu) investigates their disappearance and their relation to a strange internet café where the Chinese worker spent his nights. A moody neo-noir film that is almost dream like in its atmosphere with a synth and jazz score, gritty yet beautiful shots of the migrant workers living quarters and the underbelly of Singapore, and an at times incoherent and surreal plot. Think 1970s neo-noir by way of David Lynch. A great commentary on the other side of Singapore hidden from the glamour known and portrayed in something like Crazy Rich Asians, as an island quite literally built on the backs of underpaid and extremely exploited migrant workers – and I mean quite literally, the land reclamation construction site the film is based on is a project by which the Singaporean state is importing rock and sand from other countries in order to build and expand its geographical borders of the island. The film could have been better edited as some of the shifting in perspective can be confusing and make the plot more incoherent as it jumps from the perspective of the detective to the migrant worker then back again, but it is a solid haunting and hypnotic feature from Yeo Siew Hua.



Pretty spot-on review. I went to it's premiere at the Rotterdam film festival a couple of years ago and I always found it be underrated, even though it was, as you said, a bit confusing at times.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kihei and Pink Mist

Osprey

Registered User
Feb 18, 2005
27,922
10,805
CR7qJ9nWoAAobkH.jpg


Halloween III: Season of the Witch
(Wallace, 1982) - Very dark paranoid thriller mixed with decent gore. Gotta love the balls on this one, aiming for the children and not hesitating melting one with critters coming out of his face. The premise is great, the tone is great, but other than that, it's saddly pretty silly. The inexplicable stonehenge mystical bullshit is just too much, and the romance between the fugly womanizer doctor and the young lady who just lost her father the day before is hilarious (the line where she asks him where he'd like to sleep got me laughing out loud). Includes a little sexual harrassment seminar in the workplace with our good doctor slapping the ass of his lady colleague for fun. The film is on Roger Ebert's most hated list, but it's miles better than parts 4, 5, 6, H20, & Resurrection. In fact, I kind of like it. 4.5/10

I saw it for the first time several years ago and sort of liked it, as well... or, at least, it wasn't as bad as I was expecting. It's easy to understand why it was and is generally hated, since it's nothing like the first two movies, but I knew that, so I just treated it as a standalone horror film. It's still not a good one, but it has some things going for it, like an obnoxiously catchy jingle, being as dark as it is and being about Halloween but not a slasher. It's funny that it critiques consumerism, yet is called "Halloween III" in order to make more money off of consumers. I want to watch it again some day to see if I just convinced myself that it wasn't so bad because my expectations were so low.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Pranzo Oltranzista

OzzyFan

Registered User
Sep 17, 2012
3,653
960
A Nightmare on Elm Street (1984)
3.00 out of 4stars

"The monstrous spirit of a slain child murderer seeks revenge by invading the dreams of teenagers whose parents were responsible for his untimely death."
One of the most well-known clever horror murder/slasher concepts, killing victims in their dreams/sleep. And lucky for us, it was well executed. From this movie's murderer's design as a creepy disfigured burn victim with a hand full of long razor finger blades and gleefully psychotic demeanor. To his unforgivable backstory and understandable revenge plot, albeit it would have been darker and more understandable yet less studio friendly if Freddy started this when the kids were elementary school aged. To even most of the dream sequences being creative enough with solid character/reality confusion going on. And the murders correlating into the real world were fun and visually enthralling, most of the time. To even the main target playing the "must never fall asleep card" very well with her acting and actions. To even the catchy Freddy Krueger 'theme song' (One Two Freddy's....). Altogether making it a must see classic in the horror slasher genre.


The Exorcist 3 and The Exorcist 3:Legion/The Director's Cut
2.65 out of 4stars

"15 years after the exorcist's events in this direct sequel to the original, a police Lieutenant uncovers more than he bargained for as his investigation of a series of murders, which have all the hallmarks of the deceased Gemini serial killer, leads him to question the patients of a psychiatric ward."
This is a tale of 2 movies with some small but definitive changes between the 2 cuts, making 1 a flashier supernatural tale and the other a more subdued supernatural crime murder mystery. Which one prefers I believe is entirely in the eye of the beholder depending on one's preference because each has their weaknesses. I'd also like to clarify, when I give descriptions of each cut as they are, both still have elements of the other. The theatrical cut still brings dialogue and food for thought, just not as much. And the director's cut still brings some visual flair and happenings, just not as much. Either way, George C Scott is a revelation as the main investigative Lieutenant Kinderman on the case, with his passion, expressions, and realism. Again, as in my review of the first Exorcist movie, being grounded in realism aside the supernatural is what makes these 2 movies work. Both movies have excellently written dialogue, giving you ample discussion material on God's existence, his allowance or the purpose of earthly evils and sufferings and death if he is truly omnipotent, demons, the unexplainable, and more. There is also some good snappy wit thrown in. I have no idea if Blatty's writings/films are heavily research based, but they are effective and smartly coherent in a sensical supernatural way. I won't ruin anything, but both films feel a bit short of what they should be. The theatrical cut is more visually rewarding and popcorny and a painfully a bit over the top at the end, yet doesn't feel as deep. And the director's cut is deeper and more realistic, but also choppy, a little too wordsy at times, and feels incomplete by the film's end. I honestly feel a better mix of both of them would have been incredibly rewarding to both the eyes/emotions and the brain, but instead we get 2 films that are good but missing things that can make them great.
 

Pink Mist

RIP MM*
Jan 11, 2009
6,779
4,905
Toronto
Within Our Gates (1920) directed by Oscar Micheaux

When a black woman (Evelyn Preer) travels to the north to secure funding for a school in the deep south her relationship with a doctor reveals her hidden mixed race past. Known for being the oldest surviving film directed by a black filmmaker (this was Micheaux’s second film, but his first and others that were made by black directors before then have been lost to time), Within Our Gates is not just an important and interesting historical artifact, it is an excellent film in its own right. Shot in a non-linear style which feels ahead of its time compared to contemporary films at its time in the early ‘20s, and is an ideologically and thematically complex examination of race relations in the Jim Crow era. Micheaux is not just targeting easy marks of white supremacists in the South, but he sets his aims at white progressives in the North, black religious leaders, and black intelligentsia who are complicit in the subjugation of others through self-interest, and provides a frank depiction of the state of life for black people in the United States post WWI. In many ways Within Our Gates is an indirect response to D.W. Griffiths’ Birth of a Nation and a rejection of white fears of black violence, and instead flips the tables to articulate who the real menace in race relations are. The film was presumed lost until 1993 when a remaining print of the film from a Spanish version of the film found in the late 1970s was restored, and like watching anything that was at one time presumed to be lost forever, the novelty of being able to see it never ceases to amaze me – especially something like this which is in additional to being a great film is an important document of race relations at the time of its release in a medium almost entirely dominated by white and often racist perspectives.



* the version from YouTube doesn't include a score for the film, however the version on the Criterion Channel does
 

Pranzo Oltranzista

Registered User
Oct 18, 2017
3,981
2,900
I saw it for the first time several years ago and sort of liked it, as well... or, at least, it wasn't as bad as I was expecting. It's easy to understand why it was and is generally hated, since it's nothing like the first two movies, but I knew that, so I just treated it as a standalone horror film. It's probably still not a good one, but it has some things going for it, like an obnoxiously catchy jingle, being as dark as it is and being about Halloween but not a slasher. It's funny that it critiques consumerism, yet is called "Halloween III" in order to make more money off of consumers. I'd consume it again.

The first Halloween film exists in the universe of part 3 so its relation to the series is pretty weird.
 

kihei

McEnroe: The older I get, the better I used to be.
Jun 14, 2006
43,875
11,144
Toronto
Can't think of a movie title, but maybe someone can help me out. All I remember about it is a gritty independent Chinese or Korean film (I think) about a troubled young man, circ '18 or '19 perhaps. The thing that distinquises the film is that it uses found footage to tell the story (not a horror movie, though--ultra realictic). I remember most a creepy sequence of someone absentmindedly walking off a pathway into a reservoir and then splashing around and potentially drowning. Anyone remember this one?
 

KallioWeHardlyKnewYe

Hey! We won!
May 30, 2003
15,772
3,808
Can't think of a movie title, but maybe someone can help me out. All I remember about it is a gritty independent Chinese or Korean film (I think) about a troubled young man, circ '18 or '19 perhaps. The thing that distinquises the film is that it uses found footage to tell the story (not a horror movie, though--ultra realictic). I remember most a creepy sequence of someone absentmindedly walking off a pathway into a reservoir and then splashing around and potentially drowning. Anyone remember this one?

This?

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt6576482/
 
  • Like
Reactions: kihei

KallioWeHardlyKnewYe

Hey! We won!
May 30, 2003
15,772
3,808
Bless you. That is it. I'm going to check and see if it is available and, if so, Dragonfly Eyes might be a future Movie of the Week. Thanks, again. Really appreciate it.

I don't want to spoil your idea but I think it HAS been a Movie of the Week pick.

I definitely saw it because of HF. Can't remember if it was there or a random suggestion here.
 

Chili

Time passes when you're not looking
Jun 10, 2004
8,787
4,922
taleoftwocitiesmain-1600x900-c-default.jpg


A Tale of Two Cities-1935

In honour of today, July 14th: 'It was the best of times, it was the worst of times...'. The Dickens' classic brought to life. So many memorable characters and faces. Great filming of the storming of the Bastille. Builds nicely to the final scene. A personal favorite.

Sidenote: John Dickens (Charles father) was imprisoned a couple of times in debtors prison when Charles was young which must have left some painful memories influencing his works.

tale-of-two-cities-conway.jpg
 
Last edited:

Osprey

Registered User
Feb 18, 2005
27,922
10,805


Gunpowder Milkshake (2021) - 3/10 (Really disliked it)

A hitwoman (Karen Gillan) joins other hitwomen (Lena Headey, Angela Bassett, Carla Gugino, Michelle Yeoh) to take down an organization of hitmen and save an 8 (and 3 quarters) year-old girl. It's like Kill Bill mixed with Kingsman and John Wick, but not as fun or fresh as any of them. There is a lot of highly stylized action, popular music during fight scenes and dramatic music during so many slow motion shots that you'll wonder if Zack Snyder directed it. It tries really hard to be cool and funny, such as by having the lead carry her guns around in a yellow tote with "I ❤ kittens" written on it and beat up guys with a panda-shaped suitcase. It doesn't try to hide its sexist theme, though, with every hero being female and every enemy being not just male, but comically incompetent, unprofessional and/or sleazy. It gets particularly silly in the second half. Gillan is short on charisma and struggles to carry the film, in my opinion, so it's good that she gets a strong supporting cast, but their talents are wasted and no one stands out, unless you count the strange sight of a 60-year-old Angela Bassett engaging in hand to hand combat with a hammer in each hand. There isn't much of a story and the dialogue is pretty bad, both of which can be excusable for this type of movie if it's fun, regardless, but it wasn't for me. I found it to be, despite its abundance of style, remarkably generic and stale, but others might enjoy its mindless action. It's new on Netflix if you care to take the chance.
 
Last edited:

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad