Author: Stan

Today’s quick review: Alien 3. When her ship crash-lands on a remote prison planet, Ellen Ripley (Sigourney Weaver) is taken in by the inhabitants of the prison, some two dozen men who have turned to religion to atone for their crimes. Suspecting that a Xenomorph hidden aboard her ship was the cause of the crash, Ripley searches for evidence to confirm her theory, convince the prisoners the threat is real, and kill the alien before it is too late.

Alien 3 is a science fiction action movie and the third movie in the Alien series. Alien 3 replicates the Alien formula in a new setting: an ore refinery and prison complex populated by an unstable group of reformed criminals. Mediocre direction, uninspired writing, and a host of minor changes to the tone of the universe make the movie a clear step down from Alien and Aliens. The result is passable sci-fi that doesn’t live up to its pedigree.

Alien 3 makes minor additions to the canon that are accompanied by subtle but significant missteps. Ripley retains her resourcefulness but little of her resolve, taking on a more passive role in the plot and showing weakness that wasn’t present before. Weyland-Yutani, the sprawling corporation tied to the events of the first two films, makes a return appearance, but its involvement lacks the subtlety or mystery it had before.

Alien 3’s shortcomings extend to its plot and action as well. The lack of weapons in the prison colony should make for a desperate struggle, a horror thriller in the vein of Alien. Instead the movie plays out closer to Aliens, a straightforward action movie with few real scares, low firepower, and no real flair. The problem is compounded by an alien that comes, goes, and kills arbitrarily, with no sense of continuity or menace.

Still, taken on its own, Alien 3 makes for a serviceable sci-fi action flick. Ripley’s attempts to cope with the events of the previous films, the backstories of the prisoners, and their attempts to fight back against the Xenomorph all make for decent sci-fi fodder. There is nothing outstanding about the film, but those that like the formula it’s working with and don’t mind its middling execution quality will get some enjoyment out of it.

Those hoping for a worthy successor to Alien and Aliens will want to steer clear. Alien 3 has almost none of what made the previous films successful; at best it comes across as a poor copy. Even so, the movie holds some value for sci-fi fans who aren’t too critical of their action and are willing to take the film on its own terms. Those looking for a popcorn watch may want to try it. Those looking for something special should give it a miss.

For a better take on the same premise, try Alien or Aliens. For sci-fi action in a similar vein, try Pitch Black, The Chronicles of Riddick, or Riddick.

6.4 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.5 for decent sci-fi action without the quality or originality of the prior films.

Today’s quick review: Aliens. Waking from cryogenic sleep after her encounter with the Xenomorph, Ripley (Sigourney Weaver) learns that nearly six decades have passed, leaving her with no career, no family, and no future. When a Xenomorph outbreak decimates a remote colony, Ripley joins a team of space marines sent to deal with the crisis and uses her experience fighting the creature to prepare them for the battle ahead.

Aliens is a science fiction action movie from director James Cameron. The sequel to Alien takes the series in a new direction, shifting from survival horror with an emphasis on atmosphere to gung ho action about an unprepared team of marines facing off against a deadly foe. The new direction suits the movie well, making Aliens a rare sequel that manages to expand upon the original without sacrificing quality to do so.

Aliens’ premise is simple and cleanly executed: a team of soldiers takes on a colony full of alien creatures whose exotic biology and sheer numbers make them deadly foes. Improved special effects, plenty of firepower, and several iconic lines allow Aliens to succeed as an action movie. At the same time, it invests enough into its characters and world that they feel rich and justified. Aliens is a rare action film with substance to back its flash.

Aliens also benefits from the strengths of the previous movie. Once again, Ripley makes for a compelling protagonist, a heroine whose steely resolve and pragmatism make her easy to root for. The new challenges she faces add emotional depth to the character without sacrificing the strength and nuance of the first film. Aliens also takes advantage of a ready-made world with its own fascinating aliens and unanswered questions to work with.

The cost of these changes is the horror aspects of the original. The Xenomorphs are still gruesome and can be menacing, but the heavier firepower the marines bring to bear means that a single alien is now the same threat it was in the first film. There’s still plenty of danger and a high body count, but Ripley and the others take on a much more active, aggressive role than the crew of the Nostromo. The change will not be to everyone’s tastes.

Fans of the sci-fi action genre will want to give Aliens a try. It does sacrifice some of the brooding, suspenseful nature of the first film for the sake of action, but its additions to the franchise are smartly judged and don’t overstep their bounds. Whether you like Alien or Aliens better will come down to taste, but both movies are well worth watching for their respective merits. For more alien-hunting sci-fi action, try Pitch Black.

8.4 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.5 to 8.0 for rock-solid action wrapped up in an interesting story.

Today’s quick review: Alien. Answering a distress call on a deserted planet, the crew of the mining ship Nostromo finds an alien vessel that’s carrying unusual cargo: dozens of eggs of an unknown species. Soon enough, one of the eggs hatches and unleashes an alien organism on the Nostromo. Dallas (Tom Skerritt), Ripley (Sigourney Weaver), and the rest of the crew must track down the alien, determine its weakness, and kill it before it can kill them.

Alien is a science fiction horror movie from director Ridley Scott. Alien follows the crew of the Nostromo as they attempt to combat the alien in their midst. The movie earns its status as a classic through its original premise, innovative special effects, and strong sense of atmosphere. Solid direction, iconic scenes, and a highly capable lead in Ripley make Alien well worth a watch for any fan of the science fiction genre.

Alien’s greatest asset is arguably its atmosphere. The setup is minimalistic: a crew of seven on a lonely mission with a bare minimum of context, a couple of gaping mysteries, and no concrete answers. The setting weds the clean, futuristic aesthetic of earlier sci-fi movies with the grittier, more pratical look of movies yet to come. Alien also manages its horror well, with a good balance of grossness, tangible danger, and anticipation.

The cast of the movie contributes just as much. The standout is Sigourney Weaver as Ripley, a resilient and pragmatic officer who steps up to lead the hunt for the alien. Her character is human and heroic in equal measure, with nuances that let the film work as both brooding thriller and action movie. The rest of the cast is similarly reliable: characters with distinct personalities and differing priorities who make the story feel real.

Alien is a well-rounded science fiction movie that occupies an important place in the genre while having the raw quality to stand on its own. There are a few minor places where the film could have gone farther in terms of horror, special effects, or exposition. But the movie has only slight room for improvement, and what it gets right is enough to make it a strong choice for anyone interested in the darker side of the genre.

For a sci-fi horror movie with a similar tone and a greater emphasis on special effects, try The Thing. For the more action-packed sequel, try Aliens. For a prequel that hints at some of the answers, try Prometheus. For a purer science fiction film with an overlapping aesthetic and an even greater focus on cinematography, try 2001: A Space Odyssey.

8.5 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.5 to 8.0 for iconic scenes, impressive atmosphere, and a memorable lead; your score may be higher if you’re the right kind of sci-fi fan.

Today’s quick review: So I Married an Axe Murderer. Charlie Mackenzie (Michael Myers) hits the jackpot when he meets Harriet (Nancy Travis), a smart, funny, and gorgeous woman who has instant chemistry with him. The only catch is a big one: she might be a famous killer who murders her husbands on their honeymoons. As the evidence mounts up, Charlie must decide whether he wants to spend the rest of his life with Harriet—however long that may be.

So I Married an Axe Murderer is a comedy romance starring Michael Myers. True to its title, So I Married an Axe Murderer revolves around the question of whether Charlie’s new girlfriend is a marriage prospect or a woman with a murderous secret. Myers’ talents, a capable co-star in Nancy Travis, and a fun script to work with make the movie a straightforward but serviceable comedy. However, its overt humor and shallow plot won’t appeal to everyone.

The centerpiece of the film is Michael Myers, who plays a witty beat poet with a fear of commitment and a history of seeing the worst in his long-term girlfriends. His playful mannerisms and sarcasm as Charlie Mackenzie are not that far off of Myers’ usual routine, but they are constrained slightly by the role. The result is something less outrageous than Myers’ most famous work but still funny enough to entertain fans of his style.

The rest of the film is workmanlike and often clever. Nancy Travis is an excellent pick as Harriet, albeit a subtle one. Her expressions and delivery perfectly walk the line between dream girl and potential killer, and the ambiguity is what keeps the premise alive. The plot isn’t too sophisticated, but the movie does find some charming ways to play with the premise. Likewise, the gags aren’t brilliant, but they’re usually amusing and often clever.

How much you get out of So I Married an Axe Murderer will depend on your tastes. Fans of Michael Myers will find that the film’s humor hits home and that its creative premise pays off. Those who dislike Myers or prefer movies where he’s given free reign may want to skip it. In either case, So I Married an Axe Murderer aims to be nothing more than a modest comedy with a dash of romance. If that’s what you’re looking for, give it a shot.

For a more understated comedy with some of the same contrasts, try Grosse Pointe Blank or How to Murder Your Wife. For another comedy in the same vein, try The Man Who Knew Too Little. For a more memorable use of Michael Myers’ talents, try the Austin Powers movies. For a romantic comedy with similar chemistry, try Groundhog Day. For a romantic comedy about the perils of marriage, try Four Weddings and a Funeral.

6.4 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.5 to 7.0 for fun, serviceable comedy.

Today’s quick review: Look Out, Officer!. After dying on the job, Officer Cheung Biu (Bill Tung) comes back as a ghost to avenge his murder. Officer Sing (Stephen Chow), Cheung’s replacement on the force, agrees to help track down the killer in exchange for Cheung’s help advancing his professional and romantic life. But the situation grows complicated with Officer Li Kam (Stanley Sui-Fan Fung), Cheung’s old partner, gets involved.

Look Out, Officer! is a Chinese crime comedy about a rookie cop and his ghostly benefactor. The movie is a light-hearted romp that thrusts Sing into a series of wild situations that only Cheung’s powers can save him from. Look Out, Officer! has luck with its talented leads, inventive situations, and irreverent tone. However, its crude humor, over-reliance on Cheung’s powers, and lack of a substantive plot make it a mixed bag overall.

Look Out, Officer!’s biggest draw is Stephen Chow. Officer Sing is one of Chow’s typical roles: a hapless but well-meaning young man who relies on external aid, raw luck, and a dash of cunning to make it through. Chow’s elastic mannerisms and keen comedic timing make him an entertaining lead for anyone interested in his expressive, slapstick-heavy style of humor. He’s also complemented fairly well by Bill Tung and Stanley Sui-Fan Fung.

The main problem with Look Out, Officer! is that a lot of its humor sails wide of the mark. Cheung Biu’s ghostly antics are the focal point of the film’s comedy, but they’re mainly an excuse for cheap slapstick rather than anything clever. Many of the gags are crude, and while they don’t cross any major lines, they do make the film a decidedly lowbrow watch. Look Out, Officer! also sticks with a simple plot with little logic and low stakes.

Give Look Out, Officer! a watch if you’re a fan of goofy comedies and looking for something light and modestly entertaining. Look Out, Officer! doesn’t make the best use of its premise, but it packs in enough comedy to entertain the right viewer. For sharper comedy in the same vein, try The Naked Gun, Hot Shots!, or Police Academy. For more Stephen Chow, try Kung Fu Hustle, Shaolin Soccer, Love on Delivery, or Justice, My Foot!.

6.1 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.5 for lowbrow but moderately effective humor.

Today’s quick review: The Great Magician. Cheung Yin (Tony Leung), a skilled magician, returns from years abroad to win back his one-time fiance, Liu Yin (Zhou Xun), from her hated husband, General Bully Lei (Lau Ching-wan). Cheung delights Lei with his magic and becomes his close confidant in order to approach Liu. But a complex political situation between the general, his fellow warlords, and the deposed emperor threatens to undo Cheung’s scheme.

The Great Magician is a Chinese comedy with elements of drama, action, and romance. The story concerns a love triangle involving a clever magician, a dimwitted general, and a strong-willed woman, set during a period of political turmoil in China. The Great Magician offers a little bit of everything, but nothing in excess. Interwoven plot threads, subtle characterization, and magic tricks both practical and inexplicable make it an interesting watch.

The Great Magician takes a basic premise and spins it into something unique with the help of its well-drawn characters. Cheung Yin is a charismatic magician with a surefire plan, only to run up against unforeseen complications, including Liu’s resentment over being abandoned. Bully Lei is a foolish but powerful warlord with a hidden soft spot. Their evolving relationship, plus Liu’s disapproval of both men, takes the story in unexpected directions.

The plot is similarly hard to predict. The main plot thread concerns Cheung’s romantic endeavors, but he’s also deeply involved in the political situation, plotting with and against Bully Lei as part of his schemes. Imperial loyalists, rival warlords, and a magic trick to end them all, known only to Liu’s missing father, give the story all the variety it needs. For all that the story lacks focus, nearly everything ties together by the end.

Watch The Great Magician if you’re interested in a eclectic comedy that skews light in spite of a few dramatic scenes. No single aspect of the movie stands out; indeed, there are wittier comedies, sharper political dramas, and cleverer magic movies out there. But its likable characters, elaborate plot, and magic tricks are just enough to make it an entertaining watch for the right viewer. Steer clear if you’re looking for something superlative.

For a romantic drama with a remarkably similar initial premise, try The Illusionist. For a convoluted mystery about a magical rivalry, try The Prestige. For a light, modern heist movie that makes similar use of magic, try Now You See Me.

5.9 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.5 to 7.0 for a pleasant patchwork of elements.

Today’s quick review: Inside Out. Eleven-year-old Riley Anderson (Kaitlyn Dias) sees the world through her emotions: Joy (Amy Poehler), Sadness (Phyllis Smith), Fear (Bill Hader), Disgust (Mindy Kaling), and Anger (Lewis Black). But when a stressful period of Riley’s life sends her into depression, Joy and Sadness must journey through Riley’s mind to restore her personality to its proper balance and help Riley adjust to her new situation.

Inside Out is an animated family comedy adventure from Pixar. Inside Out takes a look at growing up and dealing with life’s hardships through the eyes of an adolescent girl and her anthropomorphized emotions. From their control room in Riley’s mind, Joy and the other emotions help Riley process and react to the world around her, at least until an accident in the control room leaves her detached and unable to cope with a difficult time in her life.

Inside Out takes this premise and spins it into a story that’s entertaining and insightful. The keystone of the film is Joy, Riley’s dominant emotion and the one who feels responsible for making sure Riley stays happy. Her impromptu journey through the inner workings of Riley’s mind serves as the main storyline for the movie. It also leads to some subtle character growth as Joy comes to appreciate the role of Sadness and the other emotions.

Inside Out balances out its weightier moments with plenty of comedy. The five emotions play off each other remarkably well. Their personalities are not as one-dimensional as their names would suggest, and a combination of vivid voice acting and apt comedic timing makes their scenes together a delight to watch. The inside of Riley’s mind is a creative, cartoonish landscape for an adventure, letting the film indulge in a wider variety of jokes.

Watch Inside Out when you’re in the mood for a family adventure with more depth than usual. Its sharp comedy and unfettered creativity make it a fun, family-friendly watch, while its subtle character work and meaningful story give it unexpected weight. Inside Out hits a sweet spot between levity and substance that gives it broad appeal. Not everyone will enjoy its offbeat world, but its sheer quality makes it worth a shot even for skeptical viewers.

For an animated coming-of-age adventure with similarly nuanced characters, try Spirited Away. For a Pixar film with a similar sense of heart, try Up or WALL-E. For a much less successful attempt at a similar adventure, try The Emoji Movie.

8.2 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.5 to 8.0 for enjoyable comedy and a surprisingly tender story.

Today’s quick review: Rain Man. Charlie Babbitt (Tom Cruise) is a sharp, young businessman who only thinks of himself. His selfish attitude comes back to bite him when his wealthy father leaves him out of his will in favor of Raymond (Dustin Hoffman), the mentally challenged brother he never knew he had. Trying to get a piece of the inheritance, Charlie embarks on a cross-country roadtrip with Raymond that brings him closer to his newfound brother.

Rain Man is a drama about a self-centered hotshot and his autistic savant brother. Rain Man follows the Babbitts on a car trip across the country that introduces Raymond to the world outside his hospital room and Charlie to something more valuable than money. An innovative premise, two talented leads, and a suitable balance of dramatic moments and lighter ones make Rain Man a worthwhile watch. However, what it offers will not appeal to everyone.

The star of the show is Dustin Hoffman, whose skillful portrayal of Raymond is the film’s distinguishing feature. Raymond’s unusual brain makes him prone to repetition, easily overwhelmed, and unable to express himself, as well as giving him a remarkable ability to calculate and remember numbers. Watching Raymond interact with the broader world is a rewarding experience as much for his failures as for his successes.

Hoffman is balanced perfectly by Tom Cruise, who plays the sharp, ambitious, and cold character of Charlie Babbitt. Charlie’s self-serving personality leads him to see Raymond as an inconvenience at best, an obstacle to be overcome to claim his inheritance. But over the course of their journey, he comes to understand his brother more deeply. Their relationship is the heart of the film, and its nuanced nature gives Rain Man the depth it needs.

Watch Rain Man if you’re interested in a character-focused tale of brotherhood. Rain Man has the raw craftsmanship to achieve what it sets out to do, and the lives of Charlie and Raymond Babbitt are well worth following. How much their story will resonate will come down to taste, though. Viewers who prefer plot-driven stories, high-stakes drama, or fictional character quirks as opposed to real mental disorders will want to steer clear.

For another moving drama about a man with an unusual mind, try Good Will Hunting or A Beautiful Mind. For a wry, sentimental comedy with a similar lead, try Being There. For a drama that doubles down on Charlie Babbitt’s hard-nosed style of doing business, try Glengarry Glen Ross. For another thoughtful film starring Dustin Hoffman, try The Graduate. For a lowbrow comedy about mismatched brothers, try Twins.

8.0 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.0 to 7.5 for strong acting and an effective story; your score will vary.

“We have got to hide all of the sharp objects!” —Tucker

Today’s quick review: Tucker and Dale vs. Evil. While on vacation in the mountains of West Virginia, Chad (Jesse Moss) and his college friends mistake Tucker (Alan Tudyk) and Dale (Tyler Labine), two well-intentioned but awkward locals, for a pair of serial killers. When the college students think they see the duo kidnap Allison (Katrina Bowden), a member of their group, it kicks off a series of misunderstandings that quickly escalate into violence.

Tucker and Dale vs. Evil is a horror comedy about a pair of rednecks who get mistaken for serial killers on the basis of their looks. Tucker and Dale vs. Evil is a loving spoof of the slasher genre that thrusts two unwitting men into the role of slasher villains, at least in the eyes of their supposed victims. Comedic misunderstandings, gory slapstick, a likable pair of leads, and a dash of charm allow the movie to deliver on its creative premise.

Tucker and Dale vs. Evil has a surprising amount of heart. Tucker and Dale are two of the nicest characters to ever stumble into a horror movie. Dale is a sweetheart, a selfless man with a clumsy exterior who strikes up an unlikely friendship with Allison. Tucker is his best friend, a simple man who wants nothing more than to clean up his new lakeside cabin. The characters are incredibly easy to like, and their fun banter holds the movie together.

Tucker and Dale vs. Evil puts these characters to use in an intricate web of misconception, paranoia, and unfortunate coincidence. Through no fault of their own, Tucker and Dale convince the jumpy college students that they are dangerous, and a series of slasher-esque moments occur as the students’ attempts to get the drop on the duo backfire. The movie is remarkably clever in the way it handles its characters’ beliefs and channels them into comedy.

Even so, Tucker and Dale vs. Evil offers something very specific, and those who aren’t interested in it will get very little from the movie. The movie depends heavily on the viewer investing in Tucker, Dale, and Allison. While it does a good job of making them likable, if they don’t click, nothing else will. The film also sticks to the single, somewhat limited story it sets out to tell; it is modest in scope, rather than a far-reaching parody.

Watch Tucker and Dale vs. Evil when you’re looking for a bit of gory, straightforward fun. The movie takes a creative premise, plays it out earnestly, and accomplishes just what it sets out to do. Steer clear if you’re looking for true horror or are sensitive to gore.

For a horror comedy with a more cerebral story, try Cabin in the Woods. For a more overt, raunchy comedy with similar spirit, try Super Troopers. For a superhero comedy with similarly likable characters, try Shazam!. For a darkly dramatic take on a similar situation, try Deliverance.

7.6 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.0 to 7.5 for fun comedy, great characters, and enough creativity to become a favorite for the right viewer.

Today’s quick review: Godzilla: The Planet Eater. In the wake of Captain Haruo Sakaki’s (Mamoru Miyano) decision to spare Godzilla rather than become a monster himself, humanity’s survivors are at a loss for what to do next. Metphies (Takahiro Sakurai), an alien priest, steps into the void. He converts many of the survivors to his religion and convinces them to pray to Ghidorah, a monster capable of destroying Godzilla, for salvation.

Godzilla: The Planet Eater is a Japanese animated sci-fi movie that concludes the trilogy begun with Godzilla: Planet of the Monsters. The movie deals with the failure of humanity’s best chance of using technology against Godzilla and their turn to an even more terrifying being as a last resort. The Planet Eater has roughly the same strengths and weaknesses as the previous two films, but with an emphasis on plot over action.

The Planet Eater is where the series’ story finally comes into its own. The conflicts seeded in the prior films begin to blossom, and the far-future setting begins to feel consequential, rather than just a bleak backdrop. The series’ philosophical themes take center stage as Haruo wrestles with the consequences of his actions and the choice offered by Metphies. The payoff is imperfect, but the story does have more substance than before.

The tradeoff for the move substantial story is a relative lack of action. Godzilla plays even more of a passive role in this film, barely moving at all, and the action is limited to a highly static fight between him and Ghidorah. The Planet Eater also suffers from the same problems as the previous films: stiff animation, characters that are hard to relate to, and a story that’s more outlandish sci-fi speculation than monster movie.

Godzilla: The Planet Eater is worth a watch for anyone who enjoyed the first two films in the trilogy. Newcomers will want to begin with Planet of the Monsters for the series to make any sort of sense, and those hoping for a straight adaptation of the classic Godzilla storyline will want to steer clear altogether. The Planet Eater’s interseting ideas will appeal to sci-fi fans, but its action and personal drama leave something to be desired.

4.9 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.5 for an interesting, if somewhat weird, story without the action or dynamism to back it up.