Reviews

Bandit was directed by Allan Ungar, written by Kraig Wenman who adapts from a novel by Robert Knuckle, and stars Josh Duhamel, Elisha Cuthbert, Nestor Carbonell, Swen Temmel, and Mel Gibson. It's about the true story of the Flying Bandit, who robbed 59 Canadian banks while being hunted by a police task force.

The Plot: Plenty of movies have been made about the exploits of criminals working their way through a series of banks and stores for curated jewels and currency, and there will be plenty more for things to come. Wenman's rendition though, has one of those "stranger than fiction" stories that's virtually unequivocal to its brothers in the cinemascape.

Reaganomics has taken its toll on America's lower and middle class, with people like Gilbert Galvan Jr. (Duhamel) opting to go the fraudulent route in life, resulting in their imprisonment - in his case - that gets him only 18 months, but that's too long, for him and the movie to linger on. Bandit has a bit of an issue with breezing past certain moments like this that would've been interesting to get at least a couple minutes to grasp, instead it moves onto Canada, with Gilbert donning the alias of Robert Whiteman.

Energy is had in spades, but the movie is able to slow down to track details with Andrea (Cuthbert), who Gilbert takes up with after his arrival. Some months later, Gilbert has to begin getting money the hard way, starting a spree of robberies that require some help as cops Snydes (Carbonell) and Hoffman (Temmel) start a task force to catch the flying bandit. Crime lord Tommy (Gibson) becomes Gilbert's partner as he goes cross-country on a bewildering and sometimes overstuffed streak.

In a vacuum, the plot is decently above average, but with the knowledge that large parts of what Bandit depicts actually happened, it raises itself another notch ahead of other crooks in the business, structural issues or nay.

The Characters: Motives and personality for the lead is fully realized in Wenman's screenplay, which tracks subplots and dynamics impeccably while rarely dipping into cliche, which mostly resides in the side characters.

Gilbert is immensely charming, but he kind of has to be since his skills are limited and his upbringing troubled. Though he tries to do the right thing for almost a full year with relatively limited success, he can't help but resort to the less than legal once he realizes that his relationship with Andrea is going to change. Creativity is by far his strongest asset though; able to think on the fly by creating a new identity, avoiding confrontation with smooth talking, and selling pitches with ease. He makes mistakes, keeping him human, but retains the larger-than-life personality of the man - largely due to Duhamel's fantastic acting.

Andrea falls fast for Gilbert's (Robert to her) charms. The romance that blossoms between them is a little forced, happening over the course of a handful of scenes together, but one the hurdle is cleared, there's a greater understanding to the character. She's not too different from her new flame since she's been burned the same way by the economic shift of the 80s. Her work at a church hostel comes into play for a little while too, as the movie makes mention of the relationship woes that come from Gilbert's "father" and so forth.

Snydes and Hoffman are a familiar duo. The former is fed up with the skyrocketing robberies in the country, angry at the same system that Gilbert is for drastically different reasons. He's willing to cut corners and take a hit to his income if it means catching culprits, whereas Hoffman is the opposite - a straight man with an odd vocabulary that bounces off of Snydes' sarcastic demeanor. All of these characters make for a colorful roster and are exceptionally performed by a who are clearly having a great time playing them.

The Crime: Surreal doesn't begin to describe the criminal antics of Bandit, which benefits from some of the most baffling and comedic heisting I think I've ever seen put to film. Eventually the point is made and these sequences begin to lose their luster, but watching the bizarre ways that both the robber and the cops work is utterly fascinating.

Charting the rise of the notorious thief is a process pulled off with ease by Ungar, who inches Gilbert towards a path of no return by slowly dropping off potential places of employment while a traditional family life begins to take shape. Audaciousness is present before either cop or robber enters a bank, as Gilbert spontaneously bargains with a homeless man for his ID, winning it for a meager sum and carving out a position for himself in the underworld.

Of course, the larceny is the main attraction, and the movie doesn't disappoint. Nervousness permeates the first crime, Gilbert doesn't really know what he's doing, renting a costume and fake nose while pretending he has a weapon to surprising success. His penchant for disguises is clever and endearing, even though most of them look awful (on purpose in the feature but unintentional in reality), even to those he sticks up for the cash. Bandit does eventually manage to escalate beyond these low-end jobs, taking on jewelers for greater reward, but Gilbert remains the same charisma radiator as before - even managing to win over a few frequent faces.

Project Café takes its time to get approved even as the titular character makes headlines, only making Snydes and Hoffman more eager to stop the crook. Their stakeouts give great insight into what it must've been like to be part of the case; watching as different looking guys who drive the same car arrive at Tommy's place and never being able to place any of the pieces in the right positions. Once the task force starts to grapple with the absurd, their investigation gains momentum, re-upping tension when it loses steam.

Criminal actions are in no short supply, and the novelty lasts for the majority of the film, making Bandit quirky in the right ways, even when some of the subject matter leans into familiar territory.

The Technics: Despite being an indie production, Bandit has plenty of stylistics and competent dressing to match its main character. Though it can waver at times due to some insistence to go overboard, it's a strong piece.

Recognizing the silliness of the premise is the best choice that the people behind the movie could've made in service of entertainment value. A lot of the laughs - and there are many - come naturally, but enjoyably campy makeup effects, nice editing from Ungar and Michael Lane, along with the snappy dialogue from Wenman pair superbly with the feature. In different hands, this could've been a silly subject taken too seriously. Sometimes the score can overplay itself in scenes that would've benefitted from the awkward silence of exchanges, the filmmakers had the right idea.

Pacing does become a problem by the last act, as the movie simply runs out of things to do. Cutting some of the extraneous robberies would not only make each one more memorable, tense and funny, but the runtime would've benefitted too, making the movie resemble Gilbert Galvan Jr. In the speed he gets in and out without a hitch.

Stories like this don't get a lot of attention simply because most people don't know how to handle the material. While Bandit isn't perfect in its execution, it's a fun ride bolstered by phenomenal acting and a willingness to embrace the absurdity of it all.

77/100.

Hangman was directed by Johnny Martin, written by Michael Caissie and Charles Huttinger and stars Al Pacino, Karl Urban, Brittany Snow, Sarah Shahi, Chelle Ramos, Steve Coulter, and Joe Anderson. It follows a pair of detectives and an investigative journalist as they try to catch a killer using the game "Hangman" to style his crimes.

The Plot: Both writers definitely saw Seven and took some of the cinematic lessons to heart, such as providing downtime between crimes and showing bursts of violence to emphasize scenes or plot points; but they also neglected more important, general rules of movies like devotion to its own conceit. Detective Ruiney (Urban) has been forced by Captain Watson (Shahi) to take esteemed journalist Christi (Snow) on a ride along to help improve public relations between the police and civilians. This would've been an interesting side effect of what's to come but it's dropped fairly quickly. On their ride along they find a hanged woman with a letter carved into her chest at a slightly dopey staged crime scene, along with the badge number of retired detective Archer (Pacino). From there it's mostly standard stuff as the trio work their way through suspects like Joey (Ramos), the girlfriend of the first victim, and ex-con-turned-reverend Green (Coulter). Once another body is found with a carving the three leads know they have a killer (played by Anderson) and have to stop him before he completes his game. Derivative is a good word to describe the overall plot and where it's going, especially with a flash-forward opening that basically calls out the killer from the get-go, but the journey is passable enough despite some reaches in logic.

The Characters: Unlike the addition of the children's game in the plot and crime element, there aren't any new twists added to the characters in Hangman. Cliches construct the characters but the writers add just enough traits to alleviate the familiarity, like Ruiney (pronounced Rooney) who's suffering after the recent death of his wife (is there another backstory in these movies?) and has his head stuck in that case more than the one he's on. However, when he finds out that her death could be linked to the Hangman, he cracks instead of magically improving, for a time anyway. It's a nice - albeit brief - change, as is the fact that he stepped down from an agency position to go back to homicide. Archer is the more sardonic of the three, showing that he's heard and seen it all until this case. He's smart most of the time, excluding one big stupid decision around 70 minutes in, but can be outdone physically thanks to his age and having been on the force for over two decades. He's nothing special as a character but Pacino does well as one would expect. Christi's character could've been merged into either Ruiney or Archer as she doesn't do much besides answer questions that would logically have been answered by seasoned detectives. Other than her Pulitzer, she doesn't get backstory and is left to embody the dropped PR element. Ruiney and Archer are good enough to keep the movie going but never leave a significant impression.

The Crime: Having a game like hangman as the central premise of a movie is more than a little silly, and the movie doesn't really beg to differ, but it does attempt to ground the game with some kind of realistic tone. Subtlety is also a problem, with Archer explaining that he was once an altar boy, then later on there's a victim in a church being a solid showcase for the scenes favoring supertext. While the mirroring of character traits at crime scenes can be on-the-nose, there are some times where it works, particularly with the second victim who's a direct callback to a moment in Archer's life that makes total sense during the climactic reveal. Interestingly, the killer likes having the cops witness the life leaving the victims, often scheduling, for lack of a better word, their arrival in tandem with the victim's death. Just why that is isn't explained but it does make for an energizing beat that keeps the movie moving at a decent pace to cover up the killer's identity; which, while we're given part of the answer in the first three minutes, is well-kept and makes sense why the trio didn't put all the pieces together until the last act. Suspension of disbelief is definitely required and some of the beats are a little too Seven-y or otherwise overplayed, but the investigation is mostly competent and has a genuinely interesting outcome.

The Technics: Martin is a competent director if nothing else, creating a movie with a pace to cover its average plot elements and admittedly low-brow MO of its killer. Hangman hardly drags and it's never poorly shot by Larry Blanford, with a few shots looking straight-up beautiful. The score, on the other hand, is easily forgotten and could be switched between any number of movies, crime genre or not. Hangman's pacing is mixed. Some scenes transition well with each other, flowing from one crime scene to characters deliberating on possibilities, but others are more abrupt, cutting to all of the characters talking after a close encounter with the killer. It's the most inconsistent aspect of the writing, which already struggled with that aspect, as well as having some occasionally woeful dialogue. Otherwise, the movie that's been served is a well put-together one.

Hangman takes quite a bit from better crime movies and can't match their subtlety, killers, or crimes, but its killer does have a unique MO with a well-guarded identity. Even though most of the movie is familiar, the journey and elevated pace thanks to the antagonist's daily dose of crime is remedied.

63/100.

The Virtuoso was directed by Nick Stagliano, written by James C. Wolf and Stagliano and stars Anson Mount, Abbie Cornish, David Morse, Richard Brake, Diora Baird, Eddie Marsan, and Anthony Hopkins. It follows an assassin as he works to uncover the identity of and eliminate his target while avoiding detection from the people surrounding him.

The Plot: It seems as though Stagliano and Wolf have opted to cover some well-worn territory with The Virtuoso, focusing on the exploits of a hitman whose calculating nature is beginning to slip as he takes on another job. What makes this one different is the mystery element surrounding the target. That by itself is nothing new, however, the men have stretched that mystery out to feature length, aspiring to deconstruct the hitman subgenre with mixed results. After taking a job from the Mentor (Hopkins) that doesn't allow for enough time to be taken to do it right, the Virtuoso (Mount) faces collateral damage. He then takes another job from the Mentor, which is a highly questionable decision that could've used more fleshing out, where he gets minimal data. He goes to a quiet town's local diner with the words "White Rivers" his only clue and faces a host of potential targets, including waitress Dixy (Cornish), the Deputy (Morse), the Loner (Marsan), Johnnie (Brake), and Johnnie's Girl (Baird). Now with plenty of options and one of them being an officer, the Virtuoso has to find and kill the target, remain undetected, and make it clean. It's a simple plot, but as the Virtuoso makes clear (I'm paraphrasing here): keeping it simple makes a better job. While that's true for him, the movie deviates and thankfully presents some of the faces as obstacles, adding some opposition and a couple violent encounters to lift a fairly bare plot to decency, even if the conclusion is more than obvious.

The Characters: While the writers chose not to provide names to most of the characters, they do offer behavioral tics and analysis from the Virtuoso that help to identify them, though it's all minimal. The lead himself is an interesting deconstruction of the hitman archetype and subgenre, showing his proficiency with planning and marksman talent in mere minutes. It's effective characterization added to by the noted lack of detachment he has from his job, being visibly shaken when he's faced with a job gone wrong for the first time; but not for lack of trying to dissociate from it. Dixy is something of a siren in that she's got good people skills and remembers the habits of her customers and changes her demeanor according to who she's talking to, especially around the Virtuoso who she wants to get into bed with. The Mentor is known to the Virtuoso, given his name and the knowledge he has of the Virtuoso's father, who he served with in Vietnam; during which time he appears to have knocked a couple screws loose, leaving him a suspect at the end of it all. The others are just options, really. Three of the five get cleared of having knowledge pertaining to the clue and once the last one is left, the movie isn't left with anything but convention.

The Thrills: For around half of the movie, the "White Rivers" question takes center stage, almost converting the movie's primary genre focus into mystery instead of thriller but it never quite makes that transition, instead heightening the threat of the "players" as the Virtuoso becomes more concerned that any one of them might be out to kill him before he can make sense of the little information he was given. Ultimately the movie becomes more about raising the viewer's pulse than raising their eyebrows, which works well enough when delivering its close encounters, sexual when dealing with Dixy's loneliness and "hunger", and violent when dealing with the Loner, Johnnie, his girl, and the Deputy as all of them are shifty. It peaks when offering off-beat sexuality, largely due to the Virtuoso being unsure as to how to react to a woman pushing herself closer to him while he's on the clock, as it were. Large portions of the movie provide some moderate excitement, but the finale isn't anything as interesting since the Virtuoso isn't examining it, he's just recapping what was shown over the runtime.

The Technics: Cinematographer Frank Prinzi and director Stagliano make The Virtuoso something more interesting to look at, keeping the main character in center frame and living in his space, with shots hardly ever leaving his side. It's a solid stylistic choice that, when paired with his narration that breaks down his profession, lends greatness to the movie. However, this decision does poke holes in its own plot, with flashbacks showing the audience things that never happened and only occasionally gets into its lead's headspace. There're no qualms to be had regarding the movie's construction aside from that, it's all very well put together from a technical standpoint. Wasting the talents of David Morse, Richard Brake, and Eddie Marsan while also underutilizing Anthony Hopkins, however, is unforgivable. The script neglects the "players" for a lot of the runtime which dampens the thrills until the finale explains it all in the flattest way it could. Elaboration on those characters and showing rather than telling the audience what "really" happened would've elevated the movie to where it really should be.

Anson Mount, Abbie Cornish, and the stylistic choices made by the director, writer, and DoP are the biggest reasons why The Virtuoso works. While it may be obvious where it's going, the encounters the main character has with the others and additive narration are solidly done to keep the journey engaging until the destination disappoints.

65/100.

Speed Racer was directed and written by the Wachowskis, who adapt from the animated series by Tatsuo Yoshida, and stars Emile Hirsch, Matthew Fox, John Goodman, Susan Sarandon, Christina Ricci, Paulie Litt, Benno Furmann, Rain, John Benfield, and Roger Allam. It's about a rookie race driver who aspires to win a championship and save the competition by doing so.

The Plot: The Wachowskis try to pack as much into Speed Racer as they can, disregarding even the idea of trimming the fat in the film. From racing action to criminal conspiracy to familial sentiment to hokey dialogue, it's all here; which could be a good thing but there's too little balance of all these intentions. After the death of his brother and destruction of his family unit, Speed (Hirsch) has taken up his mantle and is sweeping the racing scene, so much so that he's getting sponsorship offers from people like Royalton (Allam), a powerful corporate figurehead. Because his family (Pops (Goodman), Mom (Sarandon), and Spirtle (Litt)) and love interest Trixie (Ricci) hate megacorporations like Royalton's, Speed declines, much to Royalton's chagrin. He for some reason reveals that he and others like him have been rigging races and attacks the Racer family. Speed gets more offers from more people related to the industry like Inspector Detector (Furmann) and Taejo (Rain) who offer to provide evidence of fraud, but surprisingly the movie goes the paranoid route and has Speed get burned all throughout by all types of people. While all of this is taking place, Speed is gearing up to race in the Casa Cristo against Racer X (Fox), Snake Oiler (Benfield), and others to take the title back for his family. It's a crammed plot to be sure, and several beats are contrived into being, but the different perspective is nice to see. With a tighter script and a different skin this all would've worked better as the bright colors and hyperactive visuals are more than a little contrast-y but the plot works decently on its own.

The Characters: The quantity of different characters and relationships they have to others is far better suited to an adult-oriented movie, and the conversations they have about obligations to win to continue living don't befit the characters themselves who are one-dimensional archetypes. Speed is a one-track mind (get it?). He's always been interested in racing and everything it should bring, aspiring to fix the system on his own terms for the sake of his family and his lifestyle; and he's great at what he does. He's rather simple in that way but easy to identify with. Most of the Racer family is rather flat, with Pops the only one who gets any substantial development. He's always hated the control the corporations have over everything, which makes sense but there's never an inciting action shown to understand the point at which he began thinking the way he does. Everyone else directly related to Speed is basically filler and only exist to fit the name. Royalton is the most anachronistic, acting like an actual corporate suit but speaking like a cartoon. He's the best summary of the movie's issues in that he's endowed with legitimate criticisms but presented under the veneer of children's entertainment which eventually washes over him and drowns the message in bright colors and flashing lights. Racer X is at least more than just the ultimate obstacle for Speed since the Wachowskis sensibly give him a rebellious but dialed-in personality. If the directors made everything with that image in mind the characters, again, would've worked better.

The Action: Like all things in Speed Racer, the action is a mixed bag. Parts of the major races are enjoyable action that resemble fights for survival than actual racing. When viewed from afar or from overhead angles the races are at their peak as there's a clear illustration of what's going on in the grand scheme of the race. However, when the movie is right there alongside the drivers, it again loses itself among the headache-inducing vibrancy of the color palette and some woeful greenscreen compositing where the only benefit the Speed Racer name has on the movie shows itself by giving the movie some leeway to look like an underfunded Nickelodeon sitcom. Still, the variety of locations and eventual weaponry are the best representations the Speed Racer IP could've hoped for. Since the Wachowskis directed this movie, there had to be some hand-to-hand combat, and in the couple scenes where the characters fight with their fists, the movie looked great. Turning down the saturation and throw in some coherent cinematography for decent mindless set pieces.

The Technics: Speed Racer makes few attempts to balance its intentions, with an editorial jumpiness plaguing the runtime and darker scenes of real-world corruption pocked with a screaming kid and a monkey being the obvious bones to pick. During the few times the movie manages to find a niche for itself, there's enjoyment to be found in appreciating the work that went into the sound design and score, which are impressively detailed. Michael Giacchino's score perfectly captures the spirit of the cartoon and stands on its own as a supportive sound for the movie's plot. It does feel like the directors bit off more than they could chew in their handling of the narrative though. The plotlines that run throughout the entire movie could easily have been split and made into two completely different films, and as such, the pacing suffers. At times there will be an extended racing sequence suddenly interrupted by a cutaway to Royalton making deals with other racers and at other points the movie will launch into a flashback where a simple line of dialogue would've sufficed. Apparently a lot of work went into making Speed Racer, but this is one of those cases where the people behind it got carried away.

A packed plot is fine on its own, as are vibrant visuals and quick editing; but Speed Racer has all of these things and more, making for a movie that wants to have it all and be for everyone. Instead it suffers from average characters, a solid story brought down by tone, and visuals that could cause burst blood vessels. It simply ends being an appreciable misfire.

55/100.

Interceptor was directed by Michael Cohn, written by John Brancato and Michael Ferris and stars Andrew Divoff, Elizabeth Morehead, and Jurgen Prochnow. It's about an Air Force officer who gets caught up in the hijacking of two Stealth Bombers and must stop the assailants before they can complete their theft.

The Plot: Die Hard has had a remarkable effect on action movies, with plenty of movies aside from the namesake franchise coming to mind, and Interceptor is one of the earliest names on that list. It's not one of the best of the subgenre but it is there, abiding by tropes that had recently debuted and set in stone, delivering some good action scenes and an interesting idea for the setting but not much else. Captain Winfield (Divoff) is flying back to the U. S. on a cargo plane after the failed test flight of a new stealth bomber which resulted in the destruction of the craft. On that cargo plane, commanded by Major Morgan (Morehead), are two more bombers, bombers that Phillips (Prochnow) wants. After a very good interrogation scene in which he gets codes that send the refueling plane back, allowing him and his men to take its place, he does so, taking out most of the flight crew except for Winfield and Morgan. Unlike Die Hard, Interceptor doesn't have any tricks up its sleeve in its villain's plan, its hero's solutions, or outside interaction with other characters until the last 25 minutes. It's straight forward from here, which is fine for a low budget movie with a slight runtime, but to say there could've been more is an understatement.

The Characters: Clone or no, there should always be characters to follow and maybe even a couple to root for. Interceptor can't manage the latter requirement and instead opts to have its players blatantly showing the audience why they should care, with Winfield showing a picture of his family out of nowhere for no reason, only for that family tie to be dropped immediately. Winfield is just a blank slate aside from his rank which does give an idea to the training and experience he's had, but he doesn't have anything else. No friends, no life, nothing. It's not that he's explicitly denied these things, it's that the movie doesn't bother sketching them in. Morgan is the same aside from some minor banter between her red shirted flight crew and the fact that she's a female pilot, the perfect love interest for Winfield based solely on the two "traits" she has. Phillips is a mostly generic terrorist bad guy who does get a handful of scenes where he gets to make an impression. One being that interrogation scene and the others involve him adapting to changes in his plan caused by Winfield. His patriotic motivation is simple and doesn't ever get any emphasis, leaving those entertaining moments feeling a little hollow. Divoff is oddly flat here, not quite taking to the role with verve, often looking bored when delivering dialogue. He's normally terrific but in his defense there wasn't enough development between the three leads to make for one decent character.

The Action: Interceptor takes its time getting to the action, with the first major scuffle occurring around 45 minutes in which is way too long for a movie only barely lasting double that time. When the movie does finally kick into gear the action is good. Phillips's takeover isn't riveting by any stretch of the imagination but watching Winfield fight to take control back from the terrorists is amusing thanks to the setting's fragility, which comes into play multiple times and causes some cool kills and creates new hazards. None of the action scenes are remotely close to any of the first four Die Hard movies in brutality, inventiveness, or technical mastery, but the underdog is still watchable as he shoots some bad guys, falls down lots of stairs and spaces, and uses a grenade on a plane. Surprisingly for a movie of this budget there's a dogfighting finale to be seen. Had the movie stagnated in the cargo hold and cockpit, the meager quantity of action scenes until that point would not have sufficed. The dogfight isn't backed by much in the way of stakes but is engaging on its own terms, much like most of the action scenes that don't focus on jets.

The Technics: With the financial limitations considered, Interceptor is a passably made movie. It doesn't have much in the way of scope or atmosphere, but it creates its setting convincingly enough. The production design is unusually sturdy, with the admittedly few locations shown on the plane coming off as realistic, with accurate proportions and internal detailing. Sound design is generally above average too, with the swooping of aircraft, sucking of air pressure, and blasts of gunfire somewhat making up for the lack of grandiosity throughout the movie. Pacing is a problem here though, with so little to the main characters it would've been a smart move to get to the action as soon as possible without feigning false interest in the protagonists for 45 minutes. Once that halfway mark is crossed the movie leaps into action well enough but only shakily continues that energy to the climax.

Interceptor is notable for being one of the first real Die Hard clones, but that's most of what it has going for it. There are no characters to latch on to, spectacular action to behold, a plot whose direction is fun to follow, or suspense to keep your attention. It's a fine time killer once it moves past its setup but not nearly engaging enough to fill its runtime.

47/100.

One in the Chamber was directed by William Kaufman, written by Benjamin Shahrabani and Derek Kolstad, and stars Cuba Gooding Jr., Dolph Lundgren, Louis Mandylor, Andrew Bicknell, Leo Gregory, Claudia Bassols, and Billy Murray. It's about a hitman attempting to evade another hitman after a job sets off a battle between crime families.

The Plot: Kolstad has come a long way in a short time. From cowriting generic fare like this to John Wick and Nobody. One in the Chamber's plot isn't terrible, it just isn't special in its frequent usage of action movie tropes without adding any personal spin to them. Ray (Gooding Jr.) has reluctantly taken on a hit in Prague, of course, for heads of the Suverov crime family Mikhail (Bicknell) and Bobby (Gregory) to wipe out the Tavanian family, headed by Vlad and Demyan (Mandylor). Of course the dispute is over a drug proposition, with the Tavanian family overstepping their bounds, why wouldn't it be? Ray kills Vlad in the hit, but not Demyan, who escapes and hires Ray through his handler Leo (Murray) to retaliate while the Suverovs sends the Wolf (Lundgren) who uses anything he can, including Janice (Bassols), a love interest, after Ray. That's about it for the plot, which is smartly (and thankfully) not stretched to be some kind of epic, but still could've used more meat on the bones. Some betrayals, some grander scheme, some different scenes that aren't used in nearly every modern DTV action movie. There's a flashback to an unethical kill, a handful of threatening phone calls, the whole drug-based motivations for the families, and not much else. Everything is merely functional, as though designed by an algorithm to satiate action appetites.

The Characters: One in the Chamber is one of those movies where the bad guy is more entertaining than the good guy, it's the Wolf (Aleksey, in actuality) who holds the movie together by his sheer disregard for all social standards and professional behavior, as well as the most casual attire ever seen on a gun-for-hire. Ray is another one of those reluctant hero types, his defining characteristic is that he's a reader and quoter of Biblical scripture, but that's a trait that's only used as dressing and never comes up in any significant manner. He does, however, have an appreciable insecurity in his approach to women in that he never talks with Janice for too long, even after coming to her aid. It's not much and the relationship is generic as most other things here and quickly becomes a savior and damsel situation but that little quirk helps liven a couple scenes. The crime families are as cliché as they come. War veterans who came back and went bad for the money, doing whatever pays them the most while maintaining a fair business relationship in the city. Demyan is more spiteful than the average bad guy but that's not enough to make him memorable. Gooding Jr. Is fine here and Mandylor is good, as are the supporting cast, but this movie belongs to Lundgren who oozes smugness and enthusiasm as Aleksey. He's having fun but dials his performance in when necessary. He's become a very good actor as time has passed.

The Action: It's most likely down to the low budget, as Kolstad isn't one to skimp on spectacular action scenes by choice; or maybe that comes from Shahrabani's input. Either way, One in the Chamber doesn't have that much action and most of what is provided is sourced from Ray sitting in a chair firing a sniper rifle or assault rifle with a scope on it into a crowd of bad guys from a safe distance. There's some good sound design and foley work done for his weapons of choice but the outcome is all too familiar. Lots of shot-reverse shot sequences of Ray shooting and Czech enforcers falling over with the occasional spurt of blood. Aleksey's action scenes aren't much better as far as the action itself goes, but his character elevates them with his nonchalance about his work. He counts his targets and estimates the number of rounds he'll have left in his guns and stands in disbelief when Mikhail tortures one of the characters. It makes his scenes a lot of fun. When he and Ray are fighting each other the movie does pick up by quite a bit but those encounters are few and far between. Still, Lundgren's scenes are worth seeking out.

The Technics: Eastern European countries offer tax benefits for film productions, hence the numerous movies that have been at least partially shot in the region over the past two decades. Those production values are present in this movie and help give it a grander look and feel, but that feeling is nothing that hasn't been felt before in a laundry list of other action movies. Camerawork in One in the Chamber is better than a chunk of its peers thanks to having talent behind the camera and a lot in front of it. Almost any movie with Lundgren has a few decent fights. The 91-minute runtime can drag at a couple points but that comes from the lackluster writing and characters. A decent score or a slightly tighter edit could've aided the movie but it's the lack of impressive action or any personal touches (that aren't from Lundgren) that damns the movie to the back of the viewer's mind.

Lundgren owns One in the Chamber. After having played at least four other Russian characters he's nailed the role. It's not a memorable movie by any stretch, proved by the workmanlike story, characters, and action; but it can pass the time.

54/100.

House of Sand and Fog was directed by Vadim Perelman, written by Perelman and Shawn Lawrence Otto, who adapt from a novel by Andre Dubus III, and stars Jennifer Connelly, Ben Kingsley, Ron Eldard, Shohreh Aghdashloo, Jonathan Ahdout, and Frances Fisher. It's about the conflict that erupts between the ex-owner and current owner of a house.

The Plot: A certain triviality holds itself high over the basic plot. Normally a movie would strive to provide a less depressive and less recognizable central conflict for its viewers entertainment. Perelman doesn't take to that approach, creating an articulate and singular feature that presents a seemingly narrow issue broadly enough to compel. Kathy (Connelly) has just been evicted from her family's old house for a piddly late payment of $500 while Behrani (Kingsley) has moved in with his wife Nadi (Aghdashloo) and son Esmail (Ahdout), much to Kathy's justifiable chagrin. Kathy begins fighting for the house back from her car, using Connie (Fisher), a lawyer to bargain with the county while confiding in Lester (Eldard), a cop and one of the men who served her notice. Kathy and Behrani justify their legal ownership of the house to the point of hostility and eventual tragedy. All the plot points link together without a hitch, making this realty saga a believable drama that has few parallels. While it's all investing to the end, some scenes are extraneous. Not padding, per se, but overreaching from a good place. House of Sand and Fog's story nails what it intends but does turn out just the slightest bit thinner than expected thanks to a plot point that comes from a place of desire from the writers to dip into thriller territory instead of sticking with its drama; it's quite assured and uses its time wisely.

The Characters: The writers don't do a lot of character development through dialogue, opting instead to use behavior and visual details to clue the audience in to what the characters have been through and why they act the way they do. Kathy is struggling to get over her addiction and to find purpose after being ditched by her husband, relapsing into her old habit as she witnesses change play out. There's an earnestness to her character, shown as she tries to get herself back together more for the sake of her family (who are coming to visit in two weeks) but can't quite get herself to change, as seen in many occasions but most effectively shown via the state of her car, which is decent looking on the outside but a mess on the inside. Her sole purpose at this point is to get what is rightfully hers. Behrani is an emigrant ex-colonel from Iran. Despite his working conditions (working two laborious jobs) he takes his image seriously, from always wearing a suit to demanding he be called by his rank in conversation, and it's easy to see why given his character's context. He wants to reach a quality of life similar to what he had before: traditional, prestigious, and quiet; but without the troubled setting of Iran. He's the powerhouse (get it?) of the family, keeping Nadi in check and being an idol for his son. It's definitely eastern, but entirely understandable. Lester acts as a restarting point for Kathy. A man with a life, has kids, a stable income, and desire. He's a bit opaque in the beginning in that it's hard to tell if he's romantically interested in Kathy, but it adds to the character later. These are rich characters and the movie is all the better for them.

The Drama: With characters as real and as murkily human as this movie has, the only way to go with the dramatic factor is to follow suit and play it grey. House of Sand and Fog doesn't go for good versus evil and it hardly ever takes sides, only offering perspective on each decision, not endorsing or condemning it. Beginning with the first scene after the title card the audience is let in on a world of complications. Behrani only wants what he lost and so to does Kathy, and Perelman is able to condense that desire which both of the main characters have into a single place for the betterment of the movie. While the inciting incident should've been elaborated on (why would somebody just actively avoid opening their mail?), everything after that is an organic piece of work. From a legal standpoint, there's blame to place on the county for evicting Kathy in the first place; but as the movie goes on and Behrani makes a legitimate purchase in order to sell the house, he's in the right. But so is Kathy as the county overturns the eviction. Watching the back and forth between Kathy and Lester with Behrani is devastating because each decision just digs the hole deeper and everything these characters do is born out of real human logic and emotion. It's hard to watch in the best way possible.

The Technics: Perelman's debut doesn't at all play like a debut, if I hadn't known better I'd have thought this was his twelfth outing because of his expert direction. For an hour and fifty minutes of the two-hour runtime there isn't a single false note, with scenes being perfectly paced and the dialogue apt but realistic. James Horner's score is terrific and balanced nicely with what's happening on screen, working with the movie instead of over it where plenty of other dramas let the music do the heavy lifting instead of the script. Teamed with Roger Deakins's stellar cinematography that captures the melancholy of the movie, House of Sand and Fog hardly feels like a movie and more like an event.

Its ending may stray into Hollywood territory, but House of Sand and Fog is a masterclass in every aspect of film making to that point. From flawless performances from Connelly, Kingsley, Eldard, and Aghdashloo to legitimizing its seemingly minute premise; Perelman's debut immediately ranks up with the best dramas ever put to the big screen.

91/100.

Alex Cross was directed by Rob Cohen, written by Marc Moss and Kerry Williamson, who adapt from a novel by James Patterson, and stars Tyler Perry, Matthew Fox, Edward Burns, Rachel Nichols, John C. McGinley, and Jean Reno. It's about a detective who's pushed to his limits as he tracks a deranged serial killer.

The Plot: Nothing especially interesting posits itself in the general plot of Alex Cross. An ace cop/detective? Check. Serial Killer? Check. Our protagonist becoming a target? Check and a half. Just about everything related to the story's details and progression is insanely bland with some occasional blips of energy when its baddie is center screen. Detective Cross (Perry) is living happily in Detroit with his wife and kids when he gets put on a crime scene by Captain Brookwell (McGinley) surrounding a businesswoman, dead at the hands of "Picasso" (Fox). Finding clues at the scene, Cross and his partners Kane (Burns) and Ashe (Nichols) work to track the killer and prevent him from killing any more high-profile businessmen and women like Mercier (Reno). It gets personal and now Cross's family and friends are in the crosshairs of quite the criminal. It's the two tones of the plot that make it feel disjointed, with a mediocre crime plot mixed with a bizarrely cartoony villain. Truth be told, there's not much here. Moss and Williamson check the boxes and add some brutality (this movie stretches the PG-13 rating) but never raise their script above par.

The Characters: Most times a derivative main story begets a gamut of derivative characters, and it's definitely the case (get it?) in Alex Cross. For being the lead, Cross himself is the least interesting, which is made all the more surprising considering he's the character leading Patterson's series of novels. He's a family man, supporting a wife and two (soon to be three) kids and housing his mother with them. Most of his development is given in a couple exposition dumps in the beginning that stick out like crazy. The movie tries to have him walk a grey line of morality but there's hardly a doubt that he's doing the right thing. Picasso is a solid villain but feels out of place in a mostly serious crime movie because of his perpetually strained muscles, frequent quips about loving pain, and some gadgets that look like something out of a Mission: Impossible movie. He's intimidating and has personality and an unpredictability about him but brings about a tonal shift whenever he's onscreen. Kane and Ashe are decent enough as support and share a relationship and fairly believable back and forth but don't do much in the grand scheme. Perry is fine in the role of Cross but his character would've been better played by any other actor that could embody the character. The supporting cast do well with what they have too, but the standout is Fox, who out-acts Perry without even saying a word. It's a transformative performance that deserved a better movie.

The Crime: An adaptation of a successful novel focusing on a grounded character renowned for his crime-solving abilities should get an engaging, twisty, and realistic scenario to solve on the big screen, but that's not what happens in Alex Cross. Those with even a twentieth of the knack for deduction that the main character has will immediately be able to see what Picasso's motivations are and who they come from as soon as one of Cross's partners discloses how the targets are related. The journey doesn't exactly make up for the destination either, since a majority of the movie's runtime is devoted to bog standard scenes like the phone call between the protagonist and antagonist, the character-centric scene right before a major casualty, and the "go get that son-of-a-so-and-so" scene that follows almost immediately after. Picasso makes some stupid decisions too. Ones that aren't born out of realistic character motivations, but in the service of brutality and style. The most egregious example is in the beginning when Picasso uses TTX to paralyze the businesswoman and then asks her for her computer passwords. A couple legitimately cool and unexpected scenes show how professional Picasso is but one or two notable moments can't hold the weight of an otherwise average crime element.

The Technics: Plenty of faults reside on the narrative side of the movie, but few stick to the surface level. As far as the visuals go, Alex Cross is pretty above average, nice to look at, and uses its production almost to the fullest like most of Cohen's directorial efforts. A handful of closer quarters action scenes are choppily edited, and an odd visual effect is laid over Picasso when he gets super aggro. While not offensive, those little bits could've easily been fixed in post or given a second take during filming. Dialogue is spottier than anything else aside from the script and plot themselves. Picasso's lines can come across as comic book-y on occasion and some lines are just baffling; like "yo yo, Geico cavemen, what do you say we break that down in English?" and "this is a guy who can tell you had scrambled eggs for breakfast from 100 yards." It's an easy movie to watch, just hard to listen to at times.

It's a disappointment that the Alex Cross character hadn't had a great solo film up to this movie's release. He still doesn't, and while Alex Cross isn't terrible and has some good moments paired with a great performance from Matthew Fox, this outing is certainly better than many made it seem; but nowhere near greatness.

58/100.

Parker was directed by Taylor Hackford, written by John J. McLaughlin who adapts from a book by Donald Westlake, and stars Jason Statham, Jennifer Lopez, Michael Chiklis, Micah Hauptman, Wendell Pierce, Clifton Collins Jr., Emma Booth, and Nick Nolte. It's about a thief betrayed by his crew working with a woman on the inside to take his ex-crew's next score.

The Plot: Heist/revenge stories are hardly original yarns and this one is no different. It's been spun time and again, but Hackford's pulpy lead character manages to keep eyes on the screen for most of the runtime, occasionally losing control of the details in the latter half. Parker's (Statham) leading a heist of the Ohio state fair with Melander (Chiklis), Hardwicke (Hauptman), Carlson (Pierce), and Ross (Collins Jr.) that mostly goes to plan, but when the rest of the crew demands his money in preparation for another job; Parker wants no part of it. Shot for his denial, he's picked up and recovers, now leaning on mastermind Hurley (Nolte) who somehow doesn't know what went down; Parker's out for blood, money, and to save his girlfriend Claire (Booth) by putting her in needless danger. There's plenty of holes to poke in the plan, especially once Parker partners up with Leslie (Lopez), but the movie moves fast enough to avert attention from them. It's good escapist fun.

The Characters: Again, all of these things, these characters, they've been done innumerable times before; but the script by McLaughlin does a solid job at giving the movie a handful of memorable ones alongside an upper-tier Statham protagonist. Parker himself is the most vivid of the bunch even though the movie doesn't dive into him. He's by no means a flawless man, but he does have some sense of right and wrong, he distastes killing even if he has no reservations about thievery or maiming (as is well-depicted in the opening heist). And there are people he likes, even if he puts them in danger. Leslie is refreshing in that she may be in the presence of a good-looking and well-trained guy, but eschews a would-be romance subplot by just being in it for the money. She's occasionally annoying but much less than expected. The baddies are solid fodder too, with greed at their centers, but it's different since they want to do something aside from robbing and running. They all do just enough to set themselves apart.

The Action: Hackford stages a few fun action sequences throughout the course of the movie. From the opening credits there's a unique sense of place, using a state fair, in the midwest no less, is a rarity in movies; and an added touch of neo-noir (in the first act anyway) only raises the bar for later. Fisticuffs and gunfights are much punchier here than in other post-Taken, pre-Wick action romps too (excluding series like the Expendables). Statham gets plenty of time to show why he's in demand, and the baddies (even the nameless one played by Daniel Bernhardt) put up some good resistance. Some of that brutality gets lost in choppy edits, probably hiding people that aren't Statham; or just in an attempt to manufacture more of a rush. Still, while a lot of what's being shown is reminiscent of other movies, the stuff that's original is enjoyable.

The Technics: More than just kinetic fluidity was lost in editing, with the location whipping around like a lion tamer and the script insisting on playing the "last name game" throughout the runtime. Melander adopts a fake identity that's only explained when Parker infiltrates the place the crew are hiding out in, the location changes from Ohio to Kentucky to Texas to Florida in 20 minutes, give or take; and despite a few run-ins with Claire, she never feels like anything more than a tacked-on trait of Parker's. With all the bouncing around, there's plenty of scope to show for it. And while most scenes are high in adrenaline, it's still easy to appreciate the sights on display, from the set design to the locations, to Lopez's cleavage. While the editing does a number on the cohesion of the story and the action, the cinematography itself never suffers.

Statham and the whole cast (possibly barring Lopez) slip into their roles with ease while the momentum hardly lets up, making Parker a fun sit even if the details get hazy and the logic goes limp thanks to a woeful edit. Parker may not be the freshest of action films, but it hits the right spot.

70/100.

I Am Vengeance was directed and written by Ross Boyask and stars Stu Bennett, Anna Shaffer, Gary Daniels, Bryan Larkin, Alan Calton, Sebastian Knapp, and Kevin Leslie. It follows an ex-special operator as he returns home to find out who killed his best friend and why, making sure to kill all of those responsible along the way.

The Plot: It's hard to be original at this point in cinema, and the reductive attitudes more and more people have don't make it any easier; so I Am Vengeance takes the basic revenge-based action template and tries little to make itself especially different. After the murder of his best friend Dan (Leslie) and his family at the hands of Hatcher (Daniels), ex-soldier turned merc Gold (Bennett) returns to his hometown where it seems that no one is willing to speak up about who killed Dan. After a run-in with Hatcher and goons Marshall (Larkin) and Lambert (Calton), Gold meets Sandra (Shaffer) who knows Keith (Knapp) who knew Dan and got the short end from Hatcher. Following his introduction, Gold is ready to take the baddies down and save the town. There's a conspiracy bent to the story that, while by no means unheard of, does add the slightest bit of depth to a quite surface level story. It's just nice to have some meat on the bones of an action B-Movie while still being an efficient time killer.

The Characters: Everyone in the movie is a walking, talking cliche and there's (again) near zero efforts to challenge the action hero status quo; which is fine but leaves the actors without much to dig in to and the movie feeling closer to a template than something finished. Gold is a pretty archetypical tough guy who can throw down with the best of them thanks to his military background and gun-for-hire lifestyle. Boyask is wise to include an element of mystery about the man. He's been considered a primary target by a shadowy suit who's always watching him and reporting in on what he's doing. It's more window-dressing than character but it's something. Sandra fills the sidekick role out well enough, although Shaffer plays her way too bubbly, which gets old fast. Hatcher and his goons are all played well by the actors, but there's so little to them aside from basic greed that any impression they do happen to make is because of the actors and not the script; which is true for most of the characters here.

The Action: For an action movie, there isn't very much action. There are some decent sequences that make good use of Bennett's aptitude for physicality, but there's only a couple of fights worth remembering. Highlights include a fight inside a drug den between Gold and Lambert and the final showdown between Gold and Hatcher where the both of them get to show off their skills. It's not built up all that well and Bennett isn't on the level of Daniels quite yet in his career, but it does act as a moment where Gold gets to blow off all the steam he had clearly been holding on to for a long time and lets the movie end on a high note. Editing trickery is equal parts obvious and confusing when it does happen. One major fight scene is cut as though Bennett was incapable of action but that couldn't be further from the truth, as is shown whenever he has to take down some fools.

The Technics: This lower budgeted B-Movie manages to have two solidly known faces in the action world while still looking competent, except during some of the fight scenes, which is an accomplishment on its own terms. Conversely, the sounds are subpar at best, with an out of place electronic theme that comes up fairly often and never quite gels with what's happening on screen. Stock sound effects are also used, which by itself isn't any problem, but using the same sound three times in the same scene in a context that doesn't make sense certainly is a problem. Luckily it's only that egregious once, a phrase that suits the movie more than it should. It's well-produced but leaves you wanting more.

As a first outing for a new action hero, I Am Vengeance shows some promise, largely due to Bennett and some good action beats. Unfortunately more often than not, the movie plays it safe, using the same formula with no deviation. With a more playful script there could be something worth franchising, but not quite yet.

56/100.

Army of the Dead was directed by Zack Snyder, written by Snyder, Joby Harold, and Shay Hatten, and stars Dave Bautista, Ella Purnell, Omari Hardwick, Ana de la Reguera, Garret Dillahunt, Matthias Schweighofer, Tig Notaro, Raul Castillo, and Nora Arnezeder. It's about a ragtag group of people who take a deal from a millionaire to return to a zombified Las Vegas to score $200 million.

The Plot: It seems as though Snyder and his co-writers watched whichever Fast and Furious movie had the crew driving with a safe attached to the back of a truck through a city and said "Yes. Now let's add zombies." and throttled everything else. Scott (Bautista) is propositioned by millionaire Tanaka to return to a cordoned-off Vegas to break into a vault for a fortune before the whole city is nuked. He gathers a team which includes Maria (Reguera), Vanderohe (Hardwick), Dieter (Schweighofer), Peters (Notaro), Mikey (Castillo), and Lilly (Arnezeder); Scott's daughter Kate (Purnell) demands to join. She, along with Tanaka's man Martin (Dillahunt) round out the crew. Snyder gets down to business quickly, establishing the plan and the crew hastily to get to the heist. From that point on the movie becomes a generic action movie with zombie fodder and some worldbuilding on the side. Plenty of questions go unasked or unanswered regarding the mission, both before and during. While Snyder does add some life via a lead zombie and a hierarchy, the story lifts so much from Aliens and the "Fast" franchise that it's groan worthy.

The Characters: Attempts are made to create an emotional center with Scott and Kate's relationship. Scott is the reluctant hero who had to make a tough call in killing his infected wife to save his daughter; becoming something of a hero in the process of their own escape from the initial outbreak. It costs him his future and his daughter's love. If that sounds good it's because I told it that way, in the movie Kate only makes stupid decisions that cost more lives while still resenting her father until the very end. The few scenes between the pair make Kate despicable and Scott a sad sight. The rest are broad sketches that can be simplified in one word: Vanderohe = hardened, Maria = bubbly. Dieter = eccentric. Martin = Burke from Aliens. It's rough and uninvolving but the characters need to exist to form a cohesive team. Additionally, the opening credits lazily establish Scott's background literally by showing a picture. Cardboard cutouts would've made better protagonists. Conversely, the lead zombies are given a family element and repeatedly receive moments where they act like a real couple. There's more to the zombies than the humans. Why.

The Action: With the movie working to add some variance to the zombies with the inclusion of a "king" and "queen" for lack of a better word, and different types of zombies like the shamblers (Romero-esq zombies), runners (Boyle-esq infected), and some kind of zombie baby thing (zombaby?); it would be reasonable to assume that the action scenes involving them would be something different. It was not reasonable. When Tanaka discusses the plan with the crew before they execute it, there's a visual showcase of what it may look like, and that is the peak of the action even though it doesn't technically happen. Action beats in reality consist of the characters stabbing a few heads and sneaking by the rest. Two sequences are worth noting and both involve Scott brawling with zombies. Army of the Dead needed more of that and less of the zombies being non threats, actively avoiding biting the humans to attempt to heighten the drama.

The Technics: It's a real mixed bag when it comes to the more mechanical aspects of the movie. Being a zombie movie, there's gore, plenty of it. It's really gruesome and gross and fun to look at but the rest of the effects look awful. Valentine (the zombified white tiger) looks like an asset ripped from a PS2 game, the explosions look mediocre at best, and Peters' character was blatantly comped in after filming. Pacing is equally disastrous, with the first act being an agreeable good time with some lighthearted jaunt, but the middle hour is just the characters sitting in the casino waiting for the vault to be opened. Army of the Dead never picks up from the slump it puts itself in. Interestingly, Snyder did his own cinematography and it shows since there's a distortion to the depth of field throughout most of the runtime that appears like everything I see when I take off my glasses. It's irritating. The gore is the saving grace, just barely.

Zack Snyder's return to undead action comes off as a rushed and poorly thought-out concept stretched to fill nearly 250 minutes at the cost of logic, likeable characters, and fun. There's good gore and some good performances from Bautista and Dillahunt but Army of the Dead is only something to watch if a gamble goes bad.

30/100.