Tag: Mickey Rourke

On the second night of Fantastic Fest my screeners gave to me, a film with a non-descript title!

Girl premiered on Friday, September 25, the second night of Fantastic Fest, but the review is coming late (despite me watching it early) because I wanted to also be able to link a review with the director. That interview is here.

Girl is unique in that out of all the movies coming out this week for the festival, it already has a publisher (out in November) and actually has some actors your are likely to recognize! And that probably makes it the most hyped up film of the festival.

This is the most non-descript Thorne has ever looked. Girl (Bella Thorne) travels home. Girl has letter. Girl mad at someone? Girl mad at daddy. Girl want kill daddy!

Girl in small town. Girl don’t remember others. Girl go to house. Girl can’t find daddy. Girl eventually find daddy. Daddy dead! No! Girl want kill daddy! Daddy already dead. 🙁

Girl tell cop (Mickey Rourke). Girl tell others. Girl fend off Charmer (Chad Faust). Girl sleuth. Girl figure out mystery. Girl find daddy killer.

Also starring Lanette Ware, Glen Gould, and Elizabeth Saunders.

A lot of zoomed in faces, what is this, Les Miserables? Girl gives off a real small town vibe in a few ways. One, small amount of locations. Two, the locations used are run down. And three small amount of characters.

Speaking of characters, they all are not given names that are given to us, but referred to by other things like Girl, or Charmer. It gives a unique “everywhere” feel to the film, and lets you insert your own character names into the roles if you’d like. It also makes the IMDB page for these actors look like they did when they first were getting roles in tv and film.

The story for this movie is really simple, but one that has emotional weight. This is all mostly due to Thorne in the lead role. I know she has a lot of flack lately for various reasons, but she does nail this role.

Given the simplistic nature, I did want something a bit more overall still. I personally could never feel attached to the store and only maintained a small interest in its resolution. I needed some other hook to really go hard with the emotional journey they went on.

It definitely is a film with promise and does a lot with its presumed limited resources at the disposal. And worth it for those fans of Thorne.

2 out of 4.

I don’t know how people reviewed the movie Sin City when it came out, I just know that Sin City: A Dame To Kill For will be pretty hard to review.

Sin City itself was pretty polarizing. I think overall it was on the positive side of the spectrum for most people (including me). The art style was something very different and took awhile for some people to get used to. It was also pseudo copied with The Spirit, which a lot of people hated (and those people also suck).

But a sequel has long been in development and long been clamored for, as the original came out in 2005. Almost took 10 years to get another installment. It has to live up to a lot of pressure, so I hope it can deliver.

Now with more nakedness than ever before.

Sin City is a land where dreams come true. Assuming your dreams involve corruption, drugs, sex, betrayal, murder, lawlessness, crime, death, and other synonyms. Shit is weak. Shit is weak everywhere.

Marv (Mickey Rourke) is still running around, being a badass. If you like him, good news, he is basically in every plot line.

Like when Johnny (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) comes to town, looking for secretive revenge and wanting to use his elite poker skills to do it. Or when Nancy the never naked Stripper (Jessica Alba) wants to enact revenge on the death of Hartigan (Bruce Willis) from the first film. Or when Dwight (Josh Brolin) has to go an save Ava (Eva Green) from an abusive relationship, taking out an inhuman body guard Manute (Dennis Haysbert).

So, basically Marv is everywhere. Yay continuity?

Also featuring others, like Rosario Dawson and Powers Boothe bringing back their old characters. Or like Jamie Chung, taking over someone else character. And some people in much smaller roles, like Ray Liotta, Christopher Meloni, Jeremy Piven and Christopher Lloyd who is like 150 at this point.

If only there were angels out there for him to help out?

More action! More death! More sex! Is Sin City: A Dame To Kill For a step in the franchise? Or is it just too late?

Hard to say what the reason is, but this movie felt incredibly lack luster for me. Maybe it is because when Sin City first came up, it was before comic book movies really started to amp up their games. Before The Dark Knight before the Marvel films. Because for the most part, this story / set of stories feels very familiar, yet still distant.

Maybe I am annoyed at just how connected they wanted everything to feel? I liked the disjointedness of the first film, just a few short stories and then another.

Maybe it is just the quality of the stories? For what it is worth, there are basically three plot lines. The middle being the longest and most complete, or at least featuring the most characters, but even it dragged by the end. The “first” plot with JG-L didn’t feel interesting, and Alba’s felt not as epic as it was going for.

Maybe it is that the style feels stale after all this time, with the 3D elements never really enhancing it like I had hoped?

Maybe I don’t know. The only thing I know is this movie felt like a great disappointment. But also, maybe I am just getting older.

1 out of 4.

So, Generation Iron came to town, so I had to watch it in theaters. My first question was, what in the fuck is Generation Iron? Basically, it is a sequel to Pumping Iron, a documentary that came out in the late 70s to introduce the world more to the idea of bodybuilding and Mr. Olympia.

The purpose of this one? I guess to remind us that Mr. Olympia and bodybuilding are still a thing, and they want attention, damn it.

Unless they are dressing up like ninjas, then they do not want to be seen.

The year, 2011, and Phil Heath has just won the Mr. Olympia contest, his first ever. In fact, he won with a perfect score. Could he be the next big deal?

Well, he thinks so, he is a cocky son of a bitch, who talks about perfection, and just trying to beat himself at this point.

This film details the lives of several current big name body builders who hope to take the title, and who are going through many different paths to achieve that goal. A lot of names, could list them all, but I just want to note Kai Greene, who looks way too friendly to be a body builder, and Dennis Wolf, who is the real life incarnation of Rainier Wolfcastle.

The film talks about it all. Science, training regiments, heart, why they get so bronzed up before a competition, and steroids. Yes, even steroids. They don’t avoid the subject, they talk about it straight on…just…uneasily.

Also a lot of guest stars. Arnold Schwarzenegger, Lou Ferrigno, Busta Rhymes, Michael Jai White, and awkwardly narrated by Mickey Rourke. Why awkward? Well, because he didn’t really add much to to it. Just said some stuff, usually poetic, every once in awhile. Kind of creeped me out.

Then it of course goes into the 2012 Mr. Olympia contest, showing us how its all done, and yeah. Movie! Woo weights!

If they knew how to fight, they could kick all of our asses.

Again, documentaries are kind of strange to review, but here is my attempt. This movie gave a really good view of bodybuilding from what felt a neutral stand point. Despite Phil being the winner, they didn’t attempt to show him in a positive light, they let him be himself (and he is apparently an egotistical asshole. Alright, maybe they hate him and it was cut that way?). We got to see the good and bad of lots of contenders, who come from many different backgrounds and abilities. I loved its neutrality on all the issues, and the fact that they even brought up steroids. Made me happy.

I am not a fan of these competitions, because they are just so damn biased, they don’t make much sense to me. Why do all the champions win so many times in a row? Probably because the judges are just making shit up and basing it off of who has won before and who should win now. That is my guess. Kind of hard to ignore. No real way to do a blind taste test.

In general, the Mr. Olympia show looks like shit. Especially in 2012, when there is no suspense as to who will win. Why? Because they will call certain competitors back out to get second look, but only if they are the top overall people. If they suck, they don’t want to see you again. They just give extra time to the people who they like, so again, no real suspense, seems pointless to me. They should give everyone equal time, more fair.

But eh. It is an okay movie. I think it was too long, had some boring stretches, and I forgot the difference between a few people. Phil wins 2012, which is not a spoiler, because the 2013 competition has already happened when this came out in theaters. That is three in a row for Phil. They should really get this out quicker, its already old and awkward. Can’t be too hard to polish up a documentary.

2 out of 4.

“Hey, website guy, why do you keep watching bad movies, then getting upset that the movies are bad?”

Well, reader. Just because a movie is direct to video, not advertised, or unheard of doesn’t mean it is automatically bad. I have found many great films that were blind watches, so that is part of the thrill. Sure, more may have been shit, but when the good ones show up, it is a great feeling. It is a feeling that lets me tell the world that they need to see a movie, so that they too can have some joy in their lives.

But this time, The Courier happens to fall in line with the majority, and isn’t a good outlier.

Generic photo, void of any action.

So in this movie we have a courier (Jeffrey Dean Morgan). We know he is a courier, because his name is The Courier. It is important to establish himself as a courier, and not a transporter, because making a movie about a transporter would be silly. Either way, some guy (Til Schweiger) makes it so he has to deliver a package to another man. He just wont let him know where to find the man, because that would be too easy. So instead, he is getting a lot of money to use his skills to find the man and deliver the package. If he doesn’t, he will die.

Oh, well, I guess he better get to it then.

Some people die, some torture, some plot twist, then some action stuff. Mickey Rourke. Lili Taylor. Miguel Ferrer. Mark Margolis. Yawn.

Generic stand off, still void of any action.

So here is a problem I am facing. Jeffrey Dean Morgan. He is a charismatic guy, I guess. He could be a nice action star. I liked him in a few movies. But now he has been the lead in two movies I have rated 0 out of 4 (The other being The Possession). I don’t do that too often, just as rare as a 4 out of 4. I am proud of my bell curve of ratings! So two films I have just hated that I watched it and would never recommend to anyone in my life ever.

What the hell, Jeff?

This movie was so bad, they didn’t even advertise it correctly, and not for the reason you think. You probably have never heard of the movie, that is fine. It is a direct to video, no theater, action movie. Whatever. But it did have some movie posters regardless. Like this one here. Go on, look. Kind of cool, sure. BUT THEY SPELLED MICKEY ROURKE’S NAME WRONG. On their own dang official poster.

Hah. Just hah.

Get the fuck out of here, The Courier.

0 out of 4.

It has taken me a long time to watch The Expendables, mostly because it and Eat, Pray, Love came out on the same day as Scott Pilgrim vs The World in theaters. Both of which did better in the box office, despite my fanboyism declaring that SP was clearly the best movie. So, in order to make up for it, I had to do the SP review before at least one of those movies. Hooray!

Well, I know ONE cast member who is excited.

The Expendables are a mercenary group for higher, and has quite a few of the names mentioned in them. Lead by Sylvester Stallone, and Jason Statham, it also features Jet Li, Terry Crews, Dolph Lundgren, and Randy Couture. Each having their own specializations of course, because that’s how elite teams works.

They are sent to (somewhere in South America), to take down a dictator played by David Zayas. Eventually Mickey Rourke joins their team as well. Steve Austin is a hired muscle bad guy too! But where do Bruce Willis and Arnold Schwarzenegger come in?

Arnold is the leader of a rival group, who already has a mission lined up, so he lets the Expendables take this one. Willis is the man hiring them. So there is one scene with those two and Stallone, and that is all you will get of those two. So, if that is your draw? Well, ignore the movie.

So yeah. Plot is basically that. Lot of action, lot of killing, and the heroes win out at the end of the day. I think what makes a better story is who didn’t make the film!

John-Claude Van Damme was supposed to play a major role, but didn’t want to. But he regrets it now and will be in the sequel. Terry Crews role went through 3 people before him (Wesley Snipes, Forest Whitaker, and 50 Cent). And the role that Willis landed was first given to Arnold, and then offered to Kurt Russell, but I guess he was too cool to do one scene in a movie.

Really, all that does is make me wish original people got their roles. There’d be more bigger famous names, less new guys (who the hell is Randy Couture??).

Some guy who loves puppies?

In terms of plot, its is pretty weak. In terms of tons of action, and throw backs to the “classics” in the 80s and 90s, it does well. This is one of those films where you will know if you will enjoy it before going to see it. Really not much else to say about that.

2 out of 4.

Wooo. Another movie in theaters! I don’t like movies in theaters normally. People are there. Yuck. Similarly I tend to like movies way more than normal on a big screen, so I can’t necessarily think straight.

I am pretty sure though that after seeing Immortals the big screen factor didn’t come into play at all.

It hit me like a spear in the head.

The movie starts off with some fake Greek mythology, alright. Fine. Theseus, played by Henry Cavill, is pretty bad ass. That is him with the spear. Mickey Rourke, a King, wants to fuck everything up, find some bow, and release the Titans. With the help of a thief (Stephen Dorff) an Oracle (Freida Pinto) and occasional god tamperings (like Zeus / Luke Evans), they must try to stop the King before he releases the TItans. Or else everyone will die?

First off, for an action movie, there was a whole lot of not action. The main character himself didn’t seem to be that good. He could get the jump on a big group, kill some, and then bam. Get captured. He kept failing against big groups, it wasn’t funny. At least twice. The only amazing things he really did were two one on one fights. He even found the magical bow, and lost it almost instantly. The plot had a lot of holes in it, but if I told about them, it would provide more than one spoiler. But the bow? I guess just by saying it is magical or powerful, it can do anything? Sure it made its own energy bolts. But when he somehow sent arrows so quick four of them hit four targets at the same time. But later? These arrows make powerful explosions that go through stone walls. Way different properties out of nowhere.

So instead of action, they had the bad plot with bad acting. Because of the holes, I kept getting confused at what was going on. Confused may be a strong word, because it was simple. But still. You know.

I also didn’t find the visuals to be good at all. Everything just felt brown. I think a less realistic CGI or something might have helped the movie a bit. Which yeah doesn’t make any sense. The ending? Besides the confusion gained from the plot holes, it just didn’t make overall sense. I cannot tell if they are just trying to set up a sequel, or what.

It does feature some nice God on God action though. Even though this scene also was pretty stupid.

1 out of 4.

13 in a few ways reminded me of the movie Mean Guns. Okay. Barely. But lets just say people die, and there is money available in both movies.

Ice-T isn’t in 13. But 50 Cent is.

The beginning of this movie is pretty slow (and arguably the ending). Sam Riley, some no name, is an electrician at some dude’s house. Dude dies though. For some reason or another, he opens his mail and sees a message with a key, telling him to go to a lockbox. He does, finds another message and a train ticket. At this point, he is like, fuck it, lets do this shit. Despite not knowing anything, he keeps going along with the checkpoints, getting frisked, searched for wires, etc. And you know what? He is fucked.

He is now taking part in a weird “tournament” where very little skill is required, just luck. A group of about 20 or so individuals, complete with numbers on their shirts (guess which number is our main guy?) pretty much play russian roulette. They are made to stand in a circle, each with one bullet, spinning chambers and all, and pointing their gun at the person in front of them. When a light goes on, they shoot. If they survive, congrats! If not, well dead.

Why is this? Because of gambling! Lot of people are watching these games, making very high stake bets. I couldn’t really understand most of the betting terminology though passed around. Each shooter has a handler to help them through the rounds, and someone who represents them for bets and what not. 50 Cent had brought in Mickey Rourke to participate. They have an interesting side story themselves.

Jason Statham brought in his brother (for the fourth time) and Alexander Skarsgård ends up helping main guy. At the same time, David Zayas is playing a detective looking for this underground gambling ring (he is good at being a detective I guess). So overall, there are three rounds, each with increasing bullets. At the end, 2 people are randomly selected to stand face to face in a duel, with 3 bullets.

Yes, this is all for gambling. Yes people die. But hey, if you survive until the end you get lots of money too. That makes it okay?

I will admit, I think this poster is pretty cool.

So the acting isn’t the best. But you probably expected that. This is a pretty low budget movie. It is probably too long at 90 minutes. The scenes to get to the gambling arena place took awhile. But the tournament, I just described it, doesn’t take that long either. So the ending after the tournament, if not completely expected, is kinda of slow too. Nothing unpredictable happens after it either. So that kind of sucks. This is one of the times I would have preferred a 75~ minute movie or so. Or, if they wanted, they could have had a lot crazier good acting, in regards to how the different “contestants” were handling the pressure of the game.

But this movie if anything was interesting for the majority chunk of it, and I like that it tried something new, if not horrible to think about.

2 out of 4.