Muchos de nosotros tuvimos nuestro primer encuentro con Guy Ritchie en 2000 con Snatch; yo por ejemplo me acuerdo perfectamente que fue de mis últimas pelis en los cinemas del centro, en la 24 con Séptima y en aquella ocasión me quedé con la rara sensasión de haber visto algo realmente diferente y pudo haber sido Brad Pitt como nunca lo había visto o ese mundo británico suburbano completamente nuevo para mi. Pero, al final, creo que fue esa forma de contar la historia tan peculiar y condimentada como sólo Ritchie lo sabe hacer.

Durante mucho tiempo viví fascinado con Snatch hasta que me topé con Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels y algo se rompió allá dentro de mí. Sentí que Snatch no era tan original como aparentaba y, por el contrario, era la re-interpretación de una muy buena peli (incluso en el Reino Unido la conocían como Lock, Stock and Six Stolen Diamonds).

En efecto, Snatch es muy buena peli pero Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels lo es mejor por ser la primera y clara inspiración de la segunda.

Sin embargo, la sinergia de las dos pelis en mi opinión es lo que ha hecho a Ritchie un contador de historias únicas, entretenidas y fascinantes. Tal vez, lo único diferente que ha hecho es Swept Away en 2002 cuando recien casado con Madonna le declara su amor con una historia, a su estilo, pero romántica (la carta es devuelta cuando Madonna le pide, dirija su video What It Feels Like for a Girl y se logra entrever lo retorcido de la mente y el estilo de Ritchie).

En esta peli en particular, el acento londinense del bajo mundo es encantador, tiene un empalague que gusta la primera vez que se escucha, hemos estado demasiado acostumbrados a Hollywood y su inglés del Bronx, Queens o Harlem cuando se habla de situaciones marginales. Ahora bien, si se siente la necesidad de sobrevivir, la pobreza y la marginalidad pero de alguna forma también se siente que esta vida de frenesí, vértigo y acción tienen un tono de picardía y hasta felicidad en sus personajes: La vida es una mierda pero el que no se la goce está jodido (pareciera ser entrelíneas la gran moraleja). Puede ser por eso que uno se encariña tan fácilmente con los anti-héroes de sus pelis o se tensiona cuando las situaciones se tornan en contra de ellos. Y es que es tan claro como los apodos o alias; primero que todo, todo el mundo tiene un apodo, es decir, todo el mundo es un malandro o tiene cosas malhabidas – nadie es inocente; segundo que todo, son descripciones de crueldad y de perversidad (Barry “el bautista” y una escena del man ahogando a un fulano, Rory “el quebrador” Breaker, Harry “el hacha”, etc…) y uno como espectador los asume como chistes, como ocurrencias, en un sentido completamente anecdotario.

Con las pelis de Ritchie sucede que las texturas de las escenas y el tono con que son llevadas pareciera que van muy bien aglutinadas por un conector invisible como lo es su banda sonora. Uno está embebido en una persecución y se escucha Zorba el Griego y uno simplemente lo asiente, no encuentra más que una sonrisa al entender el chiste en su literalidad. Para mi, lo importante de Ritchie es que escribe y dirige sus pelis como si fuera un rocker y al final se repite y se repite pero es eso. Un compositor de rock and roll en medio de situaciones londinenses coloridas y particulares.

Muchos se encasillan en un modelo de éxito y es fácil no salirse de ahí por la comodidad que genera el mismo éxito, la misma frase de su peli parece ser su perdición: Lock, Stock and Barrel se usa para denotar estancamiento y ruina. Pareciera que Ritchie con RocknRolla llegó a su tope y necesita un puente para salirse de ahí. Ojalá las superproducciones le den un vuelco a su creatividad y empecemos a observar lo que puede ser el amanecer de un nuevo momento en su vida. Mientras tanto, uno puede quedarse en casa repitiéndose una y otra vez este par de joyas.

It’s been a while since I’ve done one of these – I have a few months to catch up on. Some highlights:

Add another name to the list of brilliant entertainers who started to suck once they got sober (I’m looking at you, Trent Reznor). George Carlin: Life is Worth Losing (2005) is two hours of a crotchety old man complaining about society’s ills. It’s not even funny. 1/10.

Finally! A Jason Statham movie that’s actually pretty good! London (2005) follows the familiar formula of “Two strangers meet, sit in a room, have an intense and revealing conversation, and emerge better people at the end of the night.” It’s funny, it’s entertaining, and it’s not an action movie. 7/10, with the caveat that Statham’s normally closely-clipped scalp is covered with a douchey I-banker haircut. Bleh.

What do you get when you combine a talented cast with a script that goes nowhere? Burn After Reading (2008). It has it’s funny moments, but I felt like I wanted my two hours back at the end. J. K. Simmons  was the only bright spot. 3/10.

I’ve been hearing about Trainspotting (1996) for years and finally checked it out. I wasn’t a huge fan right away, although I thought it was better than that other popular drug movie, Requiem for a Dream. Then I realized that it was made in 1996, well before this generation’s drug movie craze. 7/10. Also, Ewan McGreggor, ftw. /dreamy sigh.

I cried watching North Country (2005). My father and his side of the family is from Minnesota’s iron range, and I remember him telling me how accurately the film portrays a lot of the attitudes that were prevalent in that area at the time. Also, who doesn’t love the idea of  a gorgeous woman getting uglied up for a role? Charlize, you’re a hero. 8/10.

I threw Sideways (2004) in the queue because of Thomas Hayden Church (hilarious in his Ned and Stacy days, not so much in this movie). After watching it, all I can think is that I really doubt that Paul Giamatti in khakis could ever score a babe like Virginia Madsen. 5/10. At least now I’m validated for not liking merlot.

The Wrestler (2008) was surprisingly good, considering its niche subject material. One friend I watched it with hated the unresolved ending (was that a spoiler? does saying that it’s unresolved ruin it?), but I thought it was well done. Incidentally, I googled Mickey Rourke after watching, and holy crap! I didn’t know he used to be so deliciously hawt! 9/10.

I am in love with Jason Segel after watching I Love You, Man (2009). The movie follows the predictable formula that I’ve come to expect from Paul Rudd’s movies, but it was hilarious and endearing, and really highlights the behavioral differences guys exhibit when around their girlfriends vs hanging with their buds. 7/10

21 Grams (2003) is one of those films with a disjointed time line involving three disparate stories that eventually crossover at the film’s climax. Sean Penn, Naomi Watts, and Benicio Del Toro are all strong actors, but the script is capital-M Meh. 3/10.

I’m always up for a film adaptation of Hamlet – Kenneth Branaugh’s is one of my fave movies. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead (1990) might be one of the best, most creative re-imaginings ever (certainly better than that Ethan Hawke abomination). The film follows the forgettable title characters and the disorientingly existential conversations they have “in the wings” (outside of the scripted scenes of the play). Normally, I’m not that impressed “quirky” films, but Richard Dreyfus and Gary Oldman really bring a lot to the table. I’ve read complaints that the script should have never been adapted for film, but I still found it engaging and… fun! 9/10.

Guy Ritchie en noviembre del año pasado se divorció de Madonna. Esta peli fue lanzada en diciembre del año pasado pero su lanzamiento estaba preparado para octubre. No sólo el lanzamiento fue el más afectado en la peli creo Ritchie como director tiene un producto iconoclasta que raya muy fuerte en esta ocación con aburrimiento y poca sorpresa.

Una peli sin ritmo, sin un protagonista claro, sin una consistencia bien establecida, una historia medianamente hilada pero con todos sus personajes súper desarticulados. La mayoría de la peli viene sin audio protagonista y es precisamente cuando hay un “flashback” o momento recordado en el pasado de la historia cuando se muestra el robo a los rusos donde se prende la banda sonora y volvemos a recordar que es una peli del director, con humor negro, excelentes tomas, valga la repetición, una muy buena banda sonora.

El reparto tampoco es el mismo equipo de siempre de Ritchie, se siente la falta de su actor fetiche Jason Statham que aunque encasillado en el mismo papel siempre es mejor narrador que Mark Strong o Gerard Butler quien está completamente perdido en la historia. El reparto lo encierran el magnífico Tom Wilkinson que es el que medianamente salva la peli y la bellísima Thandie Newton que definitivamente paga la boleta o, en mi caso el alquiler.

No es más lo que se pueda decir de esta peli más allá que los créditos son hermosamente manufacturados y que esperemos que esté completamente recuperado de su divorcio para que Sherlock su siguiente peli sea más interesante.

Death Race è un fil del 2008 prodotto, scritto e diretto da Paul WS Anderson. Il film è un remake di Death Race 2000 del 1975, basato sul racconto di Ib Melchior “The Racer”.

Leggi altre notizie su: | Paul W. S. Anderson | Jason Statham | Joan Allen | Tyrese Gibson

Action filmmaker and producer Luc Besson has always had an eye for action and having the ability to showcase it in a strange and unusual way. He honed the skills of Jet Li and Jason Statham with glorious success. He even turned his ex-lover Milla Jovovich into a female wrecking machine.

Now Besson hopes to find the next great action star in French sensation David Belle who founded a new form of martial arts called parkour. This new form is basically where the artist attempts to pass obstacles in the fastest and most direct manner possible by running, jumping, climbing, sliding, ducking and so forth.

Co-writer Luc Besson and director Pierre Morel sculpt out a story where an undercover cop (Cyril Raffaelli) must infiltrate one of the nastiest neighborhoods in 2010 Paris. The neighborhood is District 13.

The cop is joined by a convict (David Belle) who will guide him in his pursuit to find a neutron bomb somewhere in the district. But the convict also has an agenda all his own. Don’t they always.

The film’s plot, setup, direction and cinematography leave a lot to be desired. But if they were all state of the art and amazing then I guess we wouldn’t really be able to see what Belle can do with his “parkour”.

The sequences where parkour is focused are amazing and the stunt work flawless. It kind of reminded me a lot of the better Jackie Chan movies. You know where you stop and say to yourself, how do they do that?

The acting in the film reminded me of old “Godzilla” movies or Power Rangers episodes because even though I saw the film with subtitles and in its original French it still looked like it was dubbed and the audio was horrendous.

A-class stunts + lame ass plot = rental. Or at least it does in my books.

1 out of 5

So Says the Soothsayer.

Crank: High Voltage (2009)
★★ / ★★★★

At this point, I can enjoy just about any movie that Jason Statham stars in because even though most of them are mindless, they’re fun to watch. Statham is as charismatic as ever for his return as Chev Chelios, a hitman who gets caught up with gangsters who (literally) stole his heart. In order to survive, he must constantly charge his artificial heart which only lasts for about an hour. Half of the fun about this picture was the lead character trying to look for ways to charge his life force. The film is lewd, crude and downright crazy because even rubbing up against people could create enough electricity for him to survive. However, even I have to admit that I enjoyed this sequel less than the original for a few reasons. Mark Neveldine and Brian Taylor, the writers and directors, brought back certain characters from the original only to kill them off almost instantly. When a character did come back and survived, the character was not utilized in such a way that they could push the film forward. Therefore, there were many points in the film when it felt stuck even though the characters were kinetic in purpose and movement. I liked the campiness of the film but there were also times when it was too campy. In fact, there was a scene when it tried to summon Godzilla parodies. As adventurous as it was, it was dead on arrival for me because the violence that was being portrayed on screen was not funny, which was unlike the rest of the movie when everything else was cartoonish. In fact, that fighting sequence should have been quite epic, in my opinion, despite Johnny Vang (Art Hsu) being a simple-minded henchmen, because Statham’s character spent more than half of the film trying to chase him. Other actors that returned were Amy Smart as the girlfriend, Dwight Yoakam as Doc Miles, Efren Ramirez as Venus (who played Kaylo in the first), and Keone Young as Don Kim. I enjoyed this film’s enthusiasm to entertain but I ultimately have to give it a mediocre rating because it needed to have more focus instead of just aiming to be all over the place. Even though the first one was crazy, it tried to tell a story. On the other hand, “Crank: High Voltage” just felt like a series of random scenes pasted together which did not make sense as a whole.

Dr Uwe Boll (pronounced Oovay Bowel) is back with another game/ movie tie in!  Stand aside you Brett Ratners and Paul W Andersons of the world as the king of hacks is back!

This time he’s not throwing C list name actors at us as I suspect he’s realised that between the Far Cry game title and his own name there will be enough noteriety to get this into the hands of horrified gamers and bemused movie lovers throughout the world.  And you know what?  Good luck to him - there have been an extremely small number of games that came over well to the world of cinema so I really don’t see this as a wasted oportunity at all.  See you on Zone Horror in a few months Uwe!

Possibly needs more Jason Statham and Diora Baird though.

See what you think anyway (Far Cry is on DVD right now in the UK, November 29th in US!):

(DvS Edit: There’s another version of the trailer over at the following link, should you really feel you’re not getting as much of a fix as you’d really have liked. IGN Video: Far Cry DVD Trailer – Trailer.)

Law Abiding Citizen, the new film by F. Gary Gray, is a far-fetched fantasy disguised as a gritty serial killer thriller. There are also hints of social commentary that get interesting for half a second before diving into the realm of the ludicrous. Gray mixes and matches genres and ideas so liberally that the whole thing turns out to be a somewhat garbled mess. The idea of a man who got screwed over by the justice system deciding to try to take it down, and the man who cut a deal with a known rapist/murderer and then having to pay for his actions, are the material of a ripe Greek tragedy. Instead, Hollywood gets in the way, and the tones clash due to several key missteps.

Clyde Shelton (Gerard Butler) is an engineer whose house is invaded, and his wife and daughter are raped and murdered right before his eyes. Gray knows that the audience has zero chance of thinking of Clyde as anything but a brutal serial killer after the first half hour of the film, but wants us to sympathize with his plight until then, so he makes the unfortunate decision of showing us the viciousness of the home invasion. We see the knife enter the wife, we see her pants pulled down, we see the daughter walk in on the killer having mounted her mom, and we see the killer walk towards the girl, saying, “Little girls like me,” fully eliminating any trace of character dimension and replacing him with a murderous cartoon. Not surprisingly, later in the film, Clyde systematically tortures and kills the killers. It’s bloody and awful, but we still have traces of sympathy.

Then, the film starts to go from unpleasant to just plain bad. Nick Rice (Jamie Foxx) is the assistant district attorney who is more concerned with keeping a high conviction rate than serving justice, so he cuts a deal with the rapist, getting death penalty for the other home invader while the rapist goes free in eight to ten years. When Clyde starts exacting his revenge, however, it’s not just on the killers– it’s on anyone in the justice system involved with the events. He feels the system is broken, and he’s going to bring it all down. What follows are five ways in which the film messes up.

1. It doesn’t matter how badly the main character suffered– in a thoughtful film, brutal torture and slaughter of essentially innocent men and women will not be condonable. Ever. In The Transporter or some other Jason Statham film, this would be acceptable and in good fun, and starring Jason Statham, Law Abiding Citizen might have been a more successful (albeit different) movie. However, Gray tried to get us to sympathize with Clyde, and the way Gerard Butler is playing the part, it’s more like Hannibal Lecter than mournful parent/husband. It’s revealed that he used to be the brains for a spy organization, but that’s still not justification for what he does. The slimy people involved, who are self-centered and obnoxious? Of course, they need to die. But sweet, sympathetic supporting characters? And sending a video of vicious dismemberment to Rice’s 9-year-old daughter?

2. Be thoughtful or don’t– but if you don’t pick a side, it doesn’t work. There are moments of discussion about the flaws in the justice system, and how it can be easily manipulated so that murderers go free. The most interesting moment in the film is when Clyde acts as his own attorney and reveals that despite the very evident fact that he committed the murders, there’s no evidence that will stand up in a court of law. The judge agrees, and agrees to give him bail. Moments like this reveal the direction in which the film could have gone. Instead, it prefers to have outrageous twists and death scenes. One of the deaths is ludicrous, inventive, and shocking, and would fit perfectly into some B-film (my audience laughed out loud in delight). However, following the discussions of the justice system, it shifts the film from being thoughtful to thoughtless. It’s like a tug-of-war between those desirous of an intelligent film, and those desirous of turning their brain off before stepping into the theater. You can balance both, but this film doesn’t attempt to balance– it merely mashes one into the other.

3. If you set up a seemingly impossible scenario, and you don’t have an intelligent ending, your audience will rebel. I can forgive the tonal shifts. There is some good cinematography and a few cool deaths (though you can tell intelligence goes out the window in dealing with this film when the best compliment I can give it is some “cool deaths”). However, the ending has me scratching my head still, twelve hours later. Not only is the twist regarding how Clyde manages to kill all these people from the confines of his jail cell an enormously stupid cop out, the character who receives his just desserts (I won’t say if it’s Nick or Clyde) receives them in a way that is implausible at best and laughable at worst. I would be happy to hear an explanation in the comments section below, with spoilers and all. I simply don’t know how the ending was pulled off.

4. If your supporting actors are more interesting than your main ones, you have a serious problem. Bruce McGill and Leslie Bibb both do nice work battling with their moral dilemma, whether they did the right thing and if they earned the death that’s coming for them. Jamie Foxx is the stubborn one, who only contemplates his responsibility for what happened maybe once, before continuing to do the necessary police work to save the day (even though he’s a lawyer, not a cop… the line is blurry in Gray’s world between lawyers and cops). Finally, Gray should have seen the work Viola Davis was doing as the mayor of Philadelphia, noted how she was exerting more force and power on the screen than any other character by a long shot, and written more scenes for her. She outclasses Butler and Foxx by a country mile in this film.

5. Don’t let Hollywood dictate the path of your film. Somewhere, I have the feeling there was an interesting movie– in fact, I read that Jamie Foxx was originally set to play Clyde with Gerard Butler as Nick. This intrigues me… Foxx would have likely been a more pensive, less psychotic killer, and Butler would have been more emotional as the assistant D.A. (at least, I’m basing this on their strengths as performers). This might have lent itself to a more intriguing thriller, laced with moral dilemmas and not merely packed with killing for the sake of blood. But that’s not what’s “in” in Hollywood right now, is it? Why have thoughtful thrillers when people’s phones can blow their brains out and twist endings can ruin any semblance of logic? In the end, while Gray and company might have abided by the laws of the brainless Hollywood thriller, he is guilty of a first-degree waste of talent.

I usually review new films on this blog, but I passed on a chance to see “Pirate Radio” this weekend, and with good reason: “Almost Famous” was barely tolerable, so the idea of “Almost Famous on a Boat” seemed a bit too precious. Whether or not it was that is irrelevant; even moviegoers in its native England stayed away in droves. If a film on such a small budget with such a big cast and such good music can’t make a profit, beware. Besides, I find rock movies in general a bit too hard to swallow as legitimate entertainment.

Anyway, I decided to lay out my first impression of the 2007 American cut of Guy Ritchie’s post-Snatch film “Revolver.” To be delicate, I’ll borrow a phrase from Richard Hammond: “Ambitious but Rubbish.” To be not-so-delicate: It made our heads hurt, and after what seemed like four hours we had to turn it off before they repeated the “formula” for the umpteenth time.

To paraphrase Ian Malcolm, Guy Ritchie seems bent on wielding the concepts and ideas of Kabbalah like a kid who’s found his dad’s gun. It’s fine to borrow religious concepts; Pi did a fine job of it; in only 84 minutes it was able to at least appear profound and mystique-y and dredge up questions. Revolver has no such success, because it doesn’t care if the audience is confused, and seems to relish their confusion Also, the film itself seems to be as confused as we are, so shows us Turkish going through a windshield backwards really slowly. I also don’t see why Guy Ritchie had to make a third film about professional criminals, especially one that was far worse than the other two.

And why did Jason Statham have to narrate this film as well? The whole time it sounded like Snatch with all the good bits removed and replaced with seemingly infinite number of scenes featuring Ray Liotta in various states of undress trying too hard to express his anger and frustration to his unflappable lieutenant, followed by a seemingly infinite number of scenes of Andre 3000 (dressed as…Andre 3000) apparently reading cue cards in monotone, punctuated by variations of “Shut the Fuck up” from Vincent Pastore. Again and again, Turkish tries to get an explanation out of these guys, and hits a wall. So do we. Interest is rapidly lost.

Yeah, there’s a white masculine pillar, feminine black pillar, and the Turkish green pillar in the middle, and chess has 32 pieces, ooooooooooo, so mystical. Too bad it all feels cheap and irrelevant and futile amongst all the horrible acting, longwinded musical interludes, and lack of direction. It feels, empty; hollow; a bunch of overly-styled nothing.

Maybe i just need to give it another watch, as is typical of Ritchie films, but to be frank, I and everyone watching wished we had stopped it a bit sooner, since there was still a half-hour of the stuff left to watch and we were already turned off of it. A rewatch sound like and even bigger waste of time.

I have no doubt Sherlock Holmes will be better (if for no other reason than Downey Jr.,) But after two very good and very watchable crime capers and one absolute stinker, my confidence in Guy Ritchie was definitely shaken. And he was with Madonna, who just looks wierd nowadays. Not so easy on the eyes anymore.

So yeah, I played Russian Roulette with “Revolver” and lost, badly. We had to watch “La Jetee” afterwards just to get the bad taste out of our mouths. Now that’s a movie…and only 28 minutes long.

Behind The Scenes

ya man Stallone still goin in at 62!?!?! WWWWWOOOOOOWWWWW…… matter fact, not even wow…. LEGEND!!!!! lol

Looks official…..the cast line up is crazy

So I figured since we are already in the mood for Stallone with last blogs update on possible Rambo 5 plotlines-wait, Rambo movies have plots?!! Anyway I just saw the official trailer finally for The Expendables! The all star cast action movie that’s written and directed by Sly himself! This movie is a throwback to 80’s action flicks and is sure to deliver the goods! Lots of explosions, machine guns and one liners! I found out that the trailer has been up now for a week or so but I don’t care-I just saw it for the first time ( plus a couple weeks ago when I checked it was taken down for some reason) and it looks like alot of fun! I still can’t believe Van Damme turned this down-what a shmuck! check it out…

Es geht um “London”. Aber nicht um die Stadt, sondern um eine Frau. Syd (Chris Evans) ist mitlerweile ein komplettes Wrack, seitdem seine leidenschaftliche und stürmische Beziehung zu London (Jessica Biel) scheiterte. Während er seinen Schmerz mit Drogen und Alkohol verdrängt, findet er heraus, dass ihre Freundinnen eine Abschiedsparty für London planen, da diese bald umziehen möchte, Syd wagt einen letzten Versuch…

CLICK FOR TRAILER

What?

Hitman Chev Chelios faces a Chinese mobster who has stolen his nearly indestructible heart and replaced it with a battery-powered ticker that requires regular jolts of electricity to keep working.

Where?

At home.

With?

Myself.

Why?

I am 99% certain that when I saw this originally in the cinema, it was the best time I’ve had watching a new film. There were 2 groups of us and we lapped up every second of this absolutely insane movie,

Will it have the same impact second time around?

Worth It?

I enjoyed it still, it’s off the wall mental from start to finish, but it definitely lost something on second viewing.

I think the first viewing came with so many surprises and shocks with just how far the makers pushed the film into the realms of hyper-reality, one Godzilla inspired set piece in particular. On second viewing, I was expecting everything that was thrown at me and whilst still laughing my arse off, the jaw dropping aspect of the madness had died but then, that’s hardly the films fault.

In summary, still marvellous fun and a massive two fingers up to the movie studios who insist on neuturing our action heroes (’sup Die Hard 4.0) and stripping away every bit of testosterone to avoid any bit of offense. Crank: High Voltage goes out of its way to shock, offend, disgust and destroy, and it nails every one of them, and the world is a better place because of it.

7.5/10

Cartel de Death Race

Paul W.S. Anderson anunció que la precuela de Death Race, que ya había sido anunciada anteriormente, tiene ya luz verde, y comenzará a filmarse este mes de enero. Sin embargo, dio a conocer que la misma no será hecha para salas, sino que se lanzará directamente a video. Considerando que la primera parte consiguió una recaudación a nivel mundial de $75 millones de dólares, parecería ilógico no llevarla a las pantallas, aunque la ausencia de Jason Statham podría ser suficiente como para que no tenga el mismo impacto.

Does it look like I got cunt written on my head? Who do you think you are fucking with?

– Chev Chelios

The high intensity action movie Crank was never my kind of movie. I am the big action anti-hero movie kind of guy. Directors Neveldine/Taylor has a reputation of having a buffed anti-hero kicking ass and taking names with jump cuts, thumping music and saturated lens. It feels like combination between Danny Boyle, Tony Scott and Renny Harlin. That may not end up as a good thing.

Chev Chelios (Jason Statham) is a contract killer for a Los Angles crime syndicate. He wakes up to find himself a groggy mess. There is a video playing of Ricky Verona (Jose Pablo Cantillo) drugging him with the “Beijing Cocktail” on Chev’s TV. Ricky’s motive for the injection is retribution for not killing Don Kim (Keone Young).

Little does Chev know is that the serum slows down his heart. He has one hour to live before the serum kills him. He calls Doc Miles (Dwight Yoakum). Doc informs Chev that he has to keep his heart pumping with adrenaline to stay alive by any means necessary from coke, tossing back Red Bulls, car chases, and nasal spray or fucking his brains out with his pothead girlfriend, Eve (Amy Smart).

He wants to seek revenge on Ricky. He enlists the help of his gay friend, Kaylo (Efren Ramirez) to get Chev closer to getting Ricky. Chev realizes that his boss Carlito (Carlos Sanz) is conspiring with Ricky for Chev not finishing the job.

As Chev stretches his limited time, Doc Miles tells him that he needs to find epinephrine. He tears Los Angeles apart to get the drug. He overdoses on the epinephrine and he has to burn it off.

From the get go, the movie is beyond reality with the ridiculous premise. I understand the movie is supposed to be frenetic and fast paced. Sometimes it could be too much. I believe that Neveldine/Taylor knows that the movie is ridiculous and treat it as much. There was the WTF sequel Crank: High Voltage that came out earlier this year, it makes the ending falls flat. Sorta speak.

Judgment: This is a fun movie that should not be taken seriously.

Rating: ***1/2

Paul W S Anderson – a man, a filmmaker and much maligned. I’ve talked about his work before and he often has good ideas and a nice look to some of his films, but they often miss the mark.

Death Race starring Jason Statham wasn’t great, but it wasn’t as bad as I thought it was going to be. It probably helped that the car scenes used as much physical FX as they could. I thought that was it though for the Death Race.

Now according to STYD Universal has officially given Death Race 2 the green light based on a script by Tony Giglio.

The follow-up, a prequel looking into the past of the race car driver known as Frankenstein, will probably go straight to DVD.

It is based on an idea by Anderson, but no word on who will be directing or whether The Stath will be in it although I doubt it as it’s a prequel.

Spoiler TV has the character details. Here are a few:

[CARL "LUKE" LUCAS]
In his 20s-30, American, European, British, Australian, Latino, etc., handsome and confident, with a hint of danger, Lucas has been in trouble since the age of 12. Right-hand man to a notorious mobster for twelve years, he is sent away for life
after killing a cop in the course of robbing a bank. Offered a deal by the DA if he turns state’s evidence, Lucas opts to take his chances behind bars, where he soon captures the attention of a violence-peddling television producer. Possessed of some serious driving skills, assertive, strong, and charismatic, Lucas is a natural fit for the ultimate test, aka, the “Death Race.”

[SEPTEMBER JONES]
In her 20s – early 30s, a model turned journalist, September is is “insatiably ambitious and eye-poppingly gorgeous,” a woman who knows how to use what she’s got to get what she wants. She’s callous and self-serving, dressed provocatively, with the soul of an ice-pick, but the brains to know how to market violence to the masses. When ratings for her gladiator-style television show begin plummeting, September is quick to come up with the “Death Race” concept, thrilled by its stunning success

[ELIZABETH JAYNE CASE]
In her 20s – early 30s, and sexy, she is a card girl for the fight matches, later a navigator when the prisoners are forced to test their driving skills. Intelligent (valedictorian of her high school class), decent, with a good heart, Case landed in prison after killing her abusive cop husband. Quick to come to the aide of girl in peril or help Lucas outwit an adversary, she’s a courageous, admirable young woman. Teamed with Lucas for a death race, the chemistry soon heats up between the two

[BIG BILL]
In his 30s, African American, a steroid-enhanced mountain man, head of the United Blood Nation, the African American gang in Terminal Island…1 speech & 5 lines, 9 scenes

[LISTS]
In his 20s, nicknamed “Lists” because he’s a font of information about almost any subject, quickly spewing lists of details. Convicted of matricide, he’s a newbie at the prison and obviously scared. He later teams up with Gunner, becoming part of Lucas’ pit crew

[14K]
Named for his fourteen “kills,” Asian, in his 30s – 40s, a “combination of Bruce Lee and Genghis Khan,” he is the leader of The Triads, the most powerful Chinese gang on the planet (or at least in the prison).sptv050769..1 speech & 1 line, 6 scenes

What would you like to see in the Death Race sequel?

Un film del 2011, regia di F. Gary Gray, con Mark Wahlberg / Charlize Theron / Jason Statham / Seth Green. Prodotto da ()

Avventura / Azione / Poliziesco

Charlie Croker e la sua banda di esperti rapinatori si ritrovano a Rio de Janeiro pronti per un nuovo colpo.

Un film del 2011, regia di F. Gary Gray, con Mark Wahlberg / Charlize Theron / Jason Statham / Seth Green. Prodotto da ()

Avventura / Azione / Poliziesco

Charlie Croker e la sua banda di esperti rapinatori si ritrovano a Rio de Janeiro pronti per un nuovo colpo.

As far as I know, this film may never see the light of day in North America. That could be a blessing.

Guy Ritchie burst on the scene as the director of “Snatch” which was such a great little film that practically redefined the whole “Euro-gangster” film genre. Since then Ritchie married Madonna, wrote and directed his wife in the 2002 utter disaster “Swept Away”.

“Revolver” was supposed to be his return to greatness. It has a dynamic cast led by Jason Statham and Ray Liotta. So what happened?

The story opens as gambler Jake Green (Jason Statham) is released from prison. Green has a troubled past that is linked to a dark underworld headed by casino mogul Dorothy Macha (Ray Liotta). Green’s claim to fame is that he is very lucky that is until he is diagnosed with only 3 days to live.

As a sort of redemption for his troubled life, Green teams up with some two lone sharks to start giving away the fortune he has accumulated during his career. Green doesn’t exactly understand how that will help him but his luck seems to point him that way.

The film gets more convoluted and complicated from there as Macha and Green continue to butt heads. The film seems to explore redemption, darkness in our spirit, mortality and luck. What it doesn’t do is hold our interest.

The film is so confusing and dialogue heavy that I had a hard time deciphering the significance of each character and the message the film was trying to convey.

There were some scenes and isolated characters that I liked but for the most part I wanted to cry in my hands. Ritchie has always been good at developing smaller characters with extremely interesting names. In every one of his films there were always smaller supporting characters I adored even if the film wasn’t that great. “Revolver” definitely follows in that tradition.

“Revolver” never had a chance to be grand or great because it lacked a distinct vision. There are so many elements of millions of ideas but no direct way to convey the any of the ideas even if they were brilliant or ill-conceived. In other words, it’s an utter mess.

1.5 out of 5

So Says the Soothsayer.

CLICK FOR TRAILER

What?

Mercenary Frank Martin, who specializes moving goods of all kinds, surfaces again this time in Miami, Florida when he’s implicated in the kidnapping of the young son of a powerful USA official.

Where?

At home.

With?

With the dog.

Why?

Sometimes, I just need 100% un-adulterated entertainment. I recently picked this up on Blu-Ray having enjoyed it so much when I saw it with a good friend at the cinema. After a hit and miss day, I need this…I need this in my life right now.

Worth It?

That little corner in my heart that can only be filled by explosions and fast cars feels a lot fuller now. Whilst not as insane as the Crank series, Transporter 2 more than matches it for action set pieces.

Statham again proves himself to be THE action hero of this generation and without a pretender to the crown, I can’t see too much changing. Once you flip a car over in mid-air to remove a bomb attached to the axle, your status is cemented in my mind.

Big booms, Pretty ladies, extravagant beatings. Great fun, great flick.

8/10

5. Remove the Car Bomb-Transporter 2

I actually forgot why I even decided to see Transporter 2.  Never did see the first one, the second didn’t look great and I never saw the third either.  However, I did wind up seeing the film and it’s one that has disbelief written all over it.  One scene in particular, however, left me completely speechless at how bluntly unrealistic it was.  If you’ve seen the film, then you know that Statham’s car winds up having a bomb under it so what does he do?  He jumps off a ramp causing his car to spin around, the bottom of the car barely scrapes a crane hook that perfectly removes the bomb without issue and he still lands with little to no problem.  Normally I’d go into more detail, but I think watching the scene yourself should put it into perspective.

4. Refrigerator vs. Nuke-Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull

The Indiana Jones films have always been a favorite of mine.  Though Temple of Doom was always my childhood favorite, the other two (of the original trilogy) have since grown on me and I actually enjoy Last Crusade the most.  So it goes without saying I was quite curious as to how good Kingdom of the Crystal Skull would be.  Unfortunately, it does not hold a flag to its predecessors and there’s one scene in particular that I whispered to myself “I do believe that this is the most unrealistic scene ever.”  Towards the beginning, Jones finds out that he’s in an area about to be nuked so what does he do?  He hides in a refrigerator.  And since this is shortly into the film with our hero’s life at stake he of course manages to survive with the fridge conveniently being the only object that gets blasted away and lands in tact.

3. Needle vs. Bullet to the Skin-Far Cry

Alright, just so everyone knows, I actually how not seen this film and I never intend to.  I shelled money out for an Uwe Boll film once before and I will never do so again.  But I saw a review for this film which went through the entire film and one part that stood out in an idiotic way was towards the beginning when the super soldiers are tested.  During this scene, we find that the mutated skin can essentially bounce bullets back like rubber but after things go out of control they manage to suppress it with a needle to the skin.  That’s right, the skin is impervious to bullets yet needles go in without an issue.  Figure that out on your own.

2. Spin Back Time-Superman

I’m going to shamelessly admit that I haven’t seen any of the original Superman films.  In fact, other than the most recent film, Superman Returns, all I’ve seen of Superman at all are gameplay videos of Superman on the N64 and him in the TV show Justice League.  So it should go without saying I know about this scene from someone who did a video on the film and the turned out to be one by Doug Walker aka the Nostalgia Critic.  The video was a Top 11 countdown of the dumbest Superman moments and at number one was when Superman turns the world back to reverse time.  Apparently causing the Earth’s rotation to reverse would be the key to spinning back time.  I guess I’d better build a really fast airplane to do this and bring me back to my high school days.

1. Every Scene-Batman & Robin

Even though this list is supposed to be for single scenes from a single film, Joel Schumacher’s hilariously bad sequel to Batman Forever (which he also directed) has so many impossible scenes packed in together that I really can’t think of any other film that hits quite as low.  I won’t state every one of the scenes but here’s just a few of them:  Schwarzenegger surviving water that’s 50 degrees below zero, his freeze gun landing on top of a curved statue perfectly like a magnet, Batgirl jumping off her motorcycle onto Robin’s…swamp-like machine for a few seconds to jump back on her bike which has managed to keep up with the Batmobile and Robin without falling over, the bathooks always managing to hit/grab surfaces strong enough to pull our heroes forward, Batman and Robin air surfing using doors as boards while casually heading back down to the ground, etc.  If a single movie can actually top the level of implausibility here, then I think we’re in trouble.

Lunchtime date yesterday with City Chap from the all-Christian website. We had some common interests, the conversation was fine, he was amiable without ever really making me laugh: I’d give it a three out of five, the dating equivalent of a Jason Statham action movie. In other words, a sequel’s almost inevitable, but no one’s looking forward to it that much.

More importantly though, I’ve uncovered my ideal first-date venue. So far I’ve been happy to wing it, and agree to meet anywhere with the proviso that it’s vaguely central, and dark enough to hide the bags under my eyes. But I’ve always rather envied my colleagues who have tried-and-tested places. I’ve noticed that seems to be an exclusively male thing, but I’m not too proud to learn from the guys.

One of them has a riverside walk that he takes each new date on, which ends at his favourite bar. It might sound unimaginative, but it’s actually very well thought through. For a start, the walk means that you’re not thrown into an immediate face-to-face situation as you are over, say, a dinner table. Walking shoulder to shoulder along a riverbank is a less intense way to begin with someone you’ve never met before, and it takes the sting out of awkward silences – there’s plenty to observe and remark on if you do run out of things to say. The bar, meanwhile, is one he feels really at home in, and he can be fairly sure that if the girl doesn’t enjoy the place then she’s not the one for him.

I like this idea. Yesterday I met City Chap at a pub I used to live near and adore; the perfect place to test out* a new date. It’s low key; it makes me feel warm, nostalgic and happy; it shows sport (in an unobtrusive way) so if things flag a little we can talk about the match; and my route home is in the opposite direction to the tube, which makes for a quick escape if things do go wrong.

I have thought of only one possible flaw. Having shared this hidden gem of a pub with my various dates, they may start using it freely as their own, which would obviously ruin it for me forever.

*no, not in an evil, trying-to-trip-them-up kind of way. I’m a nice Christian girl, remember

Crank

Registi: Mark Neveldine, Brian Taylor
Anno: 2006
Attori Principali: Jason Statham

Trama del Film:

Chev Chelios (Jason Statham) è un killer che ha smesso di uccidere per amore della bella Eve. Ma il boss dei duri e cattivi malavitosi della West Coast non ci sta e lo condanna a una morte singolare. Durante il sonno, lo schizzato Ricky Verona inietta a Chev un veleno che arresta il cuore. Per sopravvivere il suo corpo dovrà costantemente rilasciare adrenalina. Far reagire il cuore, creando situazioni di stress, sarà la missione del killer pentito. Lecito e vitale qualsiasi espediente: provocare afroamericani incazzati e armati, guidare in un centro commerciale, scolare Red Bull, cavalcare una moto o possedere la compagna sui marciapiedi di Los Angeles.

“Se ti fermi, sei morto…”

Trailer del film:

Links:

Recensione su MyMovies.it

Death Race

Regista: Paul W. S. Anderson
Anno: 2008
Attori Principali: Jason Statham

Trama del film:

United States, 2012. Jensen Ames (Jason Statham) è un ex carcerato che vorrebbe rimanere fuori dal giro con un lavoro onesto, una moglie comprensiva e una bambina nata dalla loro unione. I tempi sono difficili, la crisi finanziaria in cui versa il paese crea tensioni e affama i cittadini che trovano negli sport estremi una via di fuga agli affanni quotidiani. Dopo essere stato licenziato e aver ritirato l’ultimo stipendio, Jensen torna a casa dove viene aggredito e abbattuto con un narcotico. Al risveglio stringe un coltello al fianco della moglie ferita a morte. Arrestato e innocente, viene condotto a Terminal Island, un penitenziario di massima sicurezza in mezzo all’oceano. Ingaggiato dall’algida direttrice Warden Hennessey, disputerà una gara di automobili tecnicamente modificate e armate di mitraglie e lanciafiamme. Costretto a gareggiare con l’identità e la maschera di Frank(enstein), un ex detenuto pilota morto in un incidente, Jensen dovrà vincere la corsa in cambio della libertà. Ma le automobili della “death race” non saranno l’unica cosa truccata dentro un gioco spedito e sporco.

Accade a Hollywood che un film mainstream non limiti l’azione al roboante fragore di esplosioni, a prestazioni acrobatiche e ad effetti sonori aberranti ma al contrario, alla faccia dell’immortale pregiudizio nei confronti del cinema popolare e di consumo, torni a (saper) fare dell’inseguimento un’arte.
Con Death Race Paul W.S. Anderson, benedetto e “assistito” da Roger Corman, dimostra che ad Hollywood c’è ancora qualcuno in grado di raccontare un inseguimento, di inquadrare due soggetti differenti coinvolti nella stessa azione, di mettere a punto le regole di apparizione nell’inquadratura (le entrate e le uscite), di posizionare la macchina da presa e comprendere l’importanza dello spettacolo tecnologico e del richiamo catastrofico, che sono tra le pulsioni più insondabili e irrinunciabili del cinema.

Le macchine ritoccate di Anderson rivaleggiano e si sorpassano senza mai superare il ruolo riservato ai corpi, che concepiscono l’esecuzione del piano di fuga e accelerano lungo i vertiginosi punti di fuga. Date gas e godetevi il piacere del cinema e la gioia fisica del countdown.

Trailer del film:

Un’immagine del film:

Links:

Recensione del film su MyMovies.it