Author: Stan

“Serpentine!” —Vince Ricardo

Today’s quick review: The In-Laws. With just days to go until his daughter’s wedding, mild-mannered dentist Sheldon Kornpett (Alan Arkin) finally meets the groom’s father: Vince Ricardo (Peter Falk), an affable man with a mysterious profession. Sheldon agrees to do Vince a favor and soon finds himself tangled in a web of international intrigue, Vince’s unwilling accomplice in an unsanctioned CIA operation to sell engravings stolen from the U.S. Mint.

The In-Laws is a spy comedy that pairs an ordinary family man with a shady consultant who may or may not be working for the CIA. Sheldon’s attempts to get to know Vince backfire spectacularly as he gets drawn into Vince’s dubious escapades. An inventive premise, sharp writing, and an excellent pair of leads make The In-Laws a light and thoroughly entertaining comedy. However, the film relies on a particular flavor of humor that not everyone will enjoy.

What makes The In-Laws shine is its leads. Peter Falk delivers a spectacular performance as Vince. His friendly personality, questionable competence, and casual approach to dangerous situations are exactly what the film needs to lure Sheldon in over his head. Alan Arkin delivers an equally outstanding performance as Sheldon, a sympathetic man whose increasingly frantic reactions to the chaos around him form the other half of the film’s comedy.

The In-Laws has the script to support its leads. The plot escalates from family dinner to international caper with surprising ease, carried along by a string of half-truths and not-so-reasonable requests from Vince. The jokes are clever, understated, and delivered with skill. The tone remains light in spite of the odd bit of theft or murder. The In-Laws hits the exact target it’s aiming for: wry comedy with deadpan delivery and a dash of adventure.

Try The In-Laws when you’re in the mood for something clever and light-hearted. Its likable leads and mirthful chaos make it a refreshing comedy for the right viewer. Skip it if you dislike Peter Falk or Alan Arkin, or if you prefer more modern varieties of comedy. For a modern take on the same premise, try the remake. For a crime comedy in a similar vein, try The Whole Nine Yards. For another spy comedy with Alan Arkin, try Get Smart.

7.3 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.0 to 7.5 for a charming premise and an excellent comedy duo.

“What an absolutely marvelous idea.” —Ivan Dragomiloff

Today’s quick review: The Assassination Bureau. Early in the 20th century, aspiring journalist Sonya Winter (Diana Rigg) hires the Assassination Bureau to kill a very special target: Ivan Dragomiloff (Oliver Reed), the Bureau’s own chairman. Seeing an opportunity to clean house, Ivan accepts Sonya’s proposal and goes on the run, traveling across Europe to kill the assassins sent by Lord Bostwick (Telly Savalas), the Bureau’s ambitious vice chairman.

The Assassination Bureau is a classic comedy about a clandestine organization that turns the messy job of assassination into a professional affair. Diana Rigg stars as Miss Winter, a journalist who undertakes to put an end to the Bureau by cutting off its head. Oliver Reed plays opposite her as Ivan Dragomiloff, the Bureau’s suave and beguiling chairman, who uses her challenge as an excuse to purge the Bureau of its more mercenary members.

Romance, adventure, and a dusting of comedy ensue as Sonya and Ivan tour Europe, staying one step ahead of Ivan’s would-be assassins. The film makes light of murder by treating it with the genteel manners of the European upper crust. Assassination turns into a battle of wits: Ivan’s weapons and disguises against the vast resources of his Bureau. This inventive premise provides the backbone for a light, unqiue comedy with a bit of everything.

The Assassination Bureau does have a few faults that diminish its effectiveness. Oliver Reed has the grace and the bearing for the role of Ivan, but he never wears it effortlessly. The debonair charm that’s meant to tie the movie together only appears in small doses. The story itself is fun but not especially memorable. The Assassination Bureau has enough style to sell its unique flavor of adventure, but not enough to make the film sparkle.

The Assassination Bureau is a solid pick for fans of classic comedy. Its amusing premise, antagonistc romance, and gentlemanly sense of adventure all make it a film with a distinct identity and plenty to offer. However, it lacks the quality it needs to truly excel, leaving it merely a decent watch that won’t win many converts. For a classic comedy with better writing and a similar style of romance, try Charade or How to Steal a Million.

6.8 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.0 for a creative premise with decent execution.

Today’s quick review: Those Magnificent Men in Their Flying Machines. To cement Britain’s place at the forefront of aviation, pilot Richard Mays (James Fox) convinces Lord Rawnsley (Robert Morley) to sponsor an air race from London to Paris. Aviators from all across the globe come to compete. But Richard meets an unexpected challenge in Orvil Newton (Stuart Whitman), a Yankee pilot who catches the eye of Richard’s girlfriend Patricia (Sarah Miles).

Those Magnificent Men in Their Flying Machines is a classic ensemble comedy about an air race at the dawn of aviation. The movie pokes gentle fun at the development of heavier-than-air flight and the political and cultural landscape of the early 20th century. Improbable aircraft, national rivalries, and light slapstick are the movie’s bread and butter. However, the film’s somewhat thin characters and writing mean that it won’t appeal to everyone.

Those Magnificent Men in Their Flying Machines draws much of its humor from its colorful cast of characters. The pilots include Colonel Holstein (Gert Frobe), a puffed-up German officer; Pierre Dubois (Jean-Pierre Cassel), an easygoing Frenchman; Emilio Ponticelli (Alberto Sordi), an Italian hero; and Sir Percy (Terry-Thomas), a cheating British aristocrat. No single character is brilliant, but their comical antics make them easy to like.

The story itself is thin but serviceable. The movie never concerns itself with heavy drama or high tension, instead taking a lax, farcical approach to its story. The air race doesn’t start until fairly late in the movie. The time until then is spent on the pilots’ preparations, comedic digressions that let the movie indulge in aerial slapstick. The humor isn’t spectacular, but the light tone and lively cast help it earn some honest laughs.

Give Those Magnificent Men in Their Flying Machines a try when you’re in the mood for something fun and carefree. The movie’s unusual premise and competent execution make it a worthy pick for fans of classic comedies. Those looking for sharper writing or deeper characters should look elsewhere. For a comedy with a similar tone and premise, try The Great Race. For an even more chaotic ensemble comedy, try It’s a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World.

7.0 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it the same for pleasant humor and a fruitful premise.

Today’s quick review: The Great Race. At the dawn of the twentieth century, popular daredevil The Great Leslie (Tony Curtis) proposes a race around the world as a publicity stunt. His rival Professor Fate (Jack Lemmon) sees the race as a personal challenge and enters along with his accomplice Max (Peter Falk). Their automotive duel is disrupted by a late entrant: Maggie Dubois (Natalie Wood), a reporter who’s determined to cover the race from the inside.

The Great Race is a classic comedy with a star-studded cast and a sweeping plot. The Great Race taps into the heroism, villainy, and sense of adventure found in early 20th-century serials. Tony Curtis stars as the valiant and talented Leslie. Jack Lemmon co-stars as Professor Fate, a scoundrel who uses elaborate gadgets and underhanded tactics to win. Natalie Wood rounds out the trio as Maggie Dubois, a strong-willed suffragette who enters the race too.

The Great Race uses its globe-spanning race as an excuse to dole out slapstick in great heaps. The movie relies heavily on a comedy staple: Professor Fate and Max try to cheat to get ahead, only for it to blow up in their faces. The Great Race never goes far beyond this formula, but the race’s variety of locales and situations help keep things fresh. The movie does not offer much in the way of depth, but fans of cartoonish humor will enjoy themselves.

However, The Great Race suffers from a few issues that will narrow its appeal. The story drags on longer than it needs to, filling its time with long digressions that have little to do with the race proper, such as a brawl in a Western town, an Arctic escapade, or a case of mistaken identity in Europe. These episodes hold some amusement on their own, but they hurt the movie’s momentum and turn its premise into merely a thin unifying thread.

How much you get out of The Great Race will depend on how much you like the slapstick comedies of old. At its best, The Great Race is a spirited, comedic tribute to an era of noble heroes and dastardly villains. At its worst, it is a drawn-out slog with thin characters and repetitive situations. Those who are willing to trade nuance and concision for simple fun will enjoy the film. But its particular flavor of comedy won’t appeal to everyone.

For another classic comedy with a similar premise, try Those Magnificent Men in Their Flying Machines. For an adventure with the same sort of spirit, try Around the World in 80 Days. For a classic madcap comedy with a more elaborate plot and a sharper script, try It’s a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World. For a long-distance race without the comedic aspects, try Hidalgo. For a period comedy with a similar flavor of romance, try The Assassination Bureau.

7.3 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.5 to 7.0 for a talented cast and some decent laughs, hurt somewhat by its slow pacing and cartoonish nature.

“I did nothing. The pavement was his enemy.” —Julius Benedict

Today’s quick review: Twins. Julius Benedict (Arnold Schwarzenegger) is the product of a genetic engineering program that made him a genius and a peak physical specimen. Raised in isolation, Julius ventures into Los Angeles when he learns that he has a twin brother: Vincent (Danny DeVito), a dishonest scoundrel with none of his brother’s gifts. As the two men get to know each other, they wind up taking a cross-country trip to search for their mother.

Twins is a buddy comedy starring Arnold Schwarzenegger and Danny DeVito as an unlikely pair of brothers. Twins contrasts Julius’ optimism, intellect, and innocence about the world with Vincent’s cynicism, dirty dealing, and knack for getting into trouble. The film gets a fair amount of mileage out of this premise, using both DeVito and Schwarzenegger to good comedic effect. But its odd premise and eclectic plot make Twins something of a stretch.

Twins is at its best when it’s playing Danny DeVito and Arnold Schwarzenegger off one another. DeVito’s Vincent is a liar and a thief with just enough charm to be likable. His attempts to take advantage of his newfound twin brother give the film both a reliable source of comedy and an emotional core for it to work with. The humor is unsophisticated but entertaining, primarily consisting of jokes about Julius’ size, his naivety, or Vincent’s hustles.

The downside of Twins’ premise is that it takes a lot of effort to set up. Twins goes to great lengths to establish Julius’ gifts, Vincent’s schemes, the program that made them, and the road trip that forms the second half of the movie. Murderous thugs, industrial espionage, long-kept secrets, and even a dash of romance all factor into Twins’ story. These never get in the way of the film’s comedy, but they do keep it from being elegant or cohesive.

Give Twins a shot when you’re in the mood for straightforward buddy humor with no strings attached. Twins has to work hard to make its jumble of ideas fit together, but the end result is a fun, serviceable comedy that’s far from spectacular but reaches its modest goals. Skip it if you’re looking for something highbrow or subtle. For a more raucous buddy comedy, try Kingpin. For one with more focus on action, try Rush Hour.

6.0 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.5 for decent comedy offset by an overly tangled story.

Today’s quick review: Rollerball. Out of options in the United States, extreme athlete John Cross (Chris Klein) seeks his fortune as a Rollerball player in Central Asia. John’s skills help him rocket to the top of the violent sport, alongside his friend Marcus Ridley (LL Cool J) and girlfriend Aurora (Rebecca Romijn). But when John uncovers a conspiracy to injure players for higher ratings, he earns the wrath of Petrovich (Jean Reno), the team’s owner.

Rollerball is a sports action movie about a fictitious blood sport and the steep price of commercial success. A remake of the sci-fi movie of the same name, Rollerball scraps the original’s corporate future for a seedy present where media tycoons stand to make a fortune from the barely licit sport. The movie musters a fair amount of action, but its execution leaves plenty to be desired, thanks to flaky direction and mediocre acting and writing.

Rollerball makes a lot of little mistakes that add up quickly. The jumpy presentation style makes it hard to track the action. Small editing errors and shots that leave out important information contribute to a subtly bumpy ride. The film also relies too much on noise and spectacle to sell its sport and not enough on concrete action. The frenzied, commercial nature of Rollerball matches the themes of the movie but undermines the impact of its stunts.

These minor flaws weaken an already shaky foundation. The titular sport is a perfect excuse for violence, but its execution is lackluster. Chris Klein, LL Cool J, and Rebecca Romijn are decent leads who never really shine, while Jean Reno’s cartoonish performance is a distraction at best. The plot is predictable and doesn’t give the characters much to do. Topping it all off are the film’s efforts to come across as cool, which simply fall flat.

Rollerball has the makings of a decent action movie, but it lacks the craftsmanship, taste, and originality to follow through on them. It serves as a weak popcorn watch for dedicated action fans, but it’s badly outclassed by other movies in the genre. Most viewers would be better off skipping it. For a weightier take on a similar premise, try the original Rollerball. For a more robust take on extreme sports, try xXx, Death Race, or Gamer.

3.0 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 5.0 for poor execution.

Today’s quick review: Rollerball. In a future dominated by corporations, the sport of choice is Rollerball, a full-contact blood sport where death and injury are common. Jonathan E. (James Caan), Houston’s captain, is at the peak of his career and set to lead his team to another world championship. But when the executives who own the team try to force him to retire, Jonathan must decide whether to fight for the sport he loves or simply play along.

Rollerball is a sci-fi sports action movie about a star athlete whose career is threatened by outside forces. Rollerball combines the solid action afforded by the titular sport with a slow, philosophical plot, making it a decent but oddly balanced entry into the sci-fi genre. The movie touches on some interesting themes, and its roller derby-esque melee action gives it a unique angle, but it lacks the quality of writing needed to excel.

Rollerball handles both its action and its speculation well, but it runs into problems when it tries to unite the two. The movie takes the time to elaborate on its setting, a future where corporations run society and executives rule by fiat. The sport itself is a satisfying mix of racing and combat, with enough detail to its rule set for the audience to follow along, and the lengthy action sequences give the film some good excitement.

However, the plot itself is mediocre, a mystery with no real clues or answers. Jonathan’s investigation into who wants him out of the game never really gets off the ground. His deliberations over whether to stick with the sport carry some weight, but the story is missing one of the key pieces it needs to drive it forward. The story’s pacing doesn’t help matters; the plot takes some time to get moving, and even then it’s slow to escalate.

Watch Rollerball if you’re a science fiction fan who wants a peek into another alternate future. Rollerball doesn’t have the depth needed to make the most of its premise, but what’s there is enough to provide a bit of action and a bit of speculation. Steer clear if you’re looking for faster-paced action or a more cerebral thriller. For similar sci-fi speculation, try Logan’s Run. For another blood sport with more action, try Death Race or Gamer.

6.6 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.5 to 7.0 for an inventive premise and decent action without the tight story needed to tie it all together.

Today’s quick review: Battle Royale. In the near future, a 9th-grade class is selected by Kitano (Beat Takeshi), their bitter former teacher, for Japan’s Battle Royale, an annual three-day contest where the students are forced to kill each other to survive. Close friends Shuya Nanahara (Tatsuya Fujiwara) and Noriko Nakagawa (Aki Maeda) team up with Kawada (Tara Yamamoto), a veteran of the game, to try to make it through violent struggle alive.

Battle Royale is a Japanese action horror movie that pits 42 teenagers against one another in a fight to the death. Battle Royale is the quintessential death game movie, sporting brutal violence, a simple but effective premise, and plenty of character-driven drama. The movie’s dark tone, copious amounts of gore, and immense cast can make it a tough watch for the wrong viewer. However, its craftsmanship makes it a worthwhile investment for the right one.

Battle Royale takes greater pains with its material than most other films in the genre. Each of the students gets at least a brief treatment, with a specific personality, backstory, and tragic end. The movie lays on its drama thick but artfully. The travails of adolescence play a large role in how the students react to the violence around them. Rivalries, unrequited crushes, and old trauma all boil to the surface over the course of the game.

Watch Battle Royale when you’re in the mood for something dark, brutal, and occasionally uplifting. Not everyone will enjoy what the movie has to offer, but those who can stomach its violence and track its many characters will be treated to a tense, sprawling battle of wits, nerves, and cunning. Sensitive viewers should steer well clear. For a flimsier, action-oriented take on the death game genre, try Death Race, Gamer, or The Tournament.

7.7 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.5 for careful drama and well-crafted violence.

Today’s quick review: Tag. Mitsuko (Reina Triendl), a Japanese teenager, is on a school trip when the rest of her classmates are killed in a freak incident. Fleeing the scene, Mitsuko finds herself in an alternate world where her classmates Aki (Yuki Sakurai), Taeko (Aki Hiraoka), and Sur (Ami Tomite) are alive. But when violence erupts in this new reality, Mitsuko must flee to another one to have any hope of staying alive.

Tag is a Japanese horror movie about a young girl plagued by inexplicable and surreal violence. Mitsuko is thrust into a series of dreamlike scenarios that invariably turn into gory nightmares. The film has a thin plot that consists of Mitsuko bouncing from massacre to massacre with no explanation. The gore is schlocky and laid on thick. Tag has occasional good ideas, but the meaningless nature of the violence makes the movie hard to invest in.

Tag gives the impression that it’s building to some lofty idea that will make sense of the chaos, but no such idea ever appears. The premise would be compatible with a surreal nightmare, repressed memories, or some kind of curse, but the movie is less interested in building to one of these ideas than setting up its next act of violence. The answers that it does eventually dole out are cryptic, belated, and inadequate to explain what came before.

Even taken on its own terms, Tag is a mixed bag. Mitsuko and her friends are fairly likable in the scenes they’re given together. Recurring symbols, themes of choice and fate, and a sense of unspecified guilt all hint at some deeper meaning, even if it never becomes fully apparent. The gore is enough to shock but too gratuitous to take seriously. Tag isn’t so much frightening as it is perplexing, a horror movie that’s more about premise than payoff.

Watch Tag only if you’re a fan of gory horror and surreal, abstract stories. Tag’s weak payoff keeps it from working as a psychological thriller, while its meaningless events keep it from working as a straight violence fantasy. All that it can truly offer is cheap gore and hints at something more. For a violent Japanese action movie with a better plot and more flair, try Battle Royale. For similar themes in an action fantasy package, try Sucker Punch.

6.1 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 5.0 for a peculiar premise and mediocre execution.

Today’s quick review: Battlefield Baseball. Principal Kocho of Seido High has high hopes for his school’s baseball team. But his playoff ambitions are dashed when Seido is scheduled to play Gedo High, a team of sadistic murderers, in the first round. Seido’s only hope of making it through the game alive is for Four Eyes (Atsushi Ito), the team’s worst player, to recruit Jubeh (Tak Sakaguchi), a talented but troubled new student, to join them.

Battlefield Baseball is a Japanese sports horror comedy about a brutal baseball team that uses the game as an excuse to kill its foes. In spite of its name, Battlefield Baseball has very little to do with baseball at all. The sport is reimagined as a no-holds-barred death match where bats are weapons, violence is encouraged, and the winner is whichever team is left standing. Battlefield Baseball is a gory, cartoonish romp with considerable niche appeal.

Battlefield Baseball tackles its premise with joyful abandon. The plot, such as it is, centers around the reluctant hero Jubeh and his return to the sport he swore off long ago. The movie plays fast and loose with its story, its world, the lives of its characters, and basic common sense, yielding a surreal, enthusiastic comedy that’s peppered with schlocky violence. The movie isn’t clever or artful, but it earns its laughs by swinging for the fences.

Half of the film’s charm comes from its low production values. The film has almost no polish. Empty sets, overblown acting, and transparently fake special effects all contribute to the absurd atmosphere and blur the line between the deliberate comedy and the comedy that’s unintentional. If Battlefield Baseball succeeds at all, it’s because its heart is in the right place, not out of any sort of precision in its writing or execution.

Battlefield Baseball is not for everyone, or even most people. Its ridiculous plot and low budget will turn off most viewers, while its horror elements, however unbelievable, make it even more of a niche pick. But for the right viewer, one who appreciates schlock and absurdity, Battlefield Baseball is a diamond in the rough.

For a surreal Japanese horror movie from the same director, try Versus. For a sports comedy with a similar sense of humor and more polish, try Shaolin Soccer. For a martial arts comedy with the same sort of absurdity, try Kung Fu Hustle or Kung Pow: Enter the First. For a horror comedy with a similar attitude and less energetic delivery, try Bubba Ho-Tep.

5.8 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.5 to 7.0 as a balance between its outrageous comedy, an absurd plot, and bottom-of-the-barrel production quality; your score will vary wildly depending on how you weight these factors.