Two of a Kind (1983)

Oblivious Neutron Bomb Double Feature! 

Synopsis: The leads from Grease must convince the Almighty not to destroy the world.  

Blurb From the VHS Jacket: "It's a match that could only be made in heaven."

What Did I Learn?: God sounds a lot like Gene Hackman.

You Might Like This Movie If: You have a deep love for the music of Olivia Newton-John. 

Really?: 1) It’s funny how Zach (John Travolta) is an inventor, but this is never explored – he doesn’t “MacGyver” his way out of a problem, and we aren’t given any information about why he became interested in science or inventing. 2) So, wait… Charlie the angel (Charles Durning) clearly informs the Devil (Oliver Reed) that when God initiates a second flood, the inhabitants of Earth will all go to Heaven; the Devil doesn’t believe him, and attempts to thwart Zach and Debbie (Olivia Newton-John) from developing a relationship. Ok, so why does the Devil believe Charlie later in the movie when he tells him the same thing? That doesn’t compute. 3) Holy shit, why does Charlie need three – count’em three sidekicks? What was the point of introducing Debbie’s (Olivia Newton-John) horny roommates and her creepy landlord, when none of these characters are further developed or even used to advance the plot? Why so many superfluous supporting characters? 4) Hold on – Zach breaks into Debbie’s apartment, robs her of the remainder of her stolen cash, and she decides to follow him for a walk-and-talk on the street? 5) Hmm…. Debbie is fired for openly flirting with Zach during the actual bank robbery. Why doesn’t anyone think to search her handbag?

Rating: I can see why Two of a Kind pretty much killed off Newton-John’s acting career and put Travolta in the doghouse for most of the 1980s. While I have to give this movie a few stars for originality and ambition, it doesn’t work for a number of reasons: the plot is a contrived mess, there are far too many undeveloped sub-plots and useless characters, and Newton-John wildly overacts. I can’t recommend this movie. 4/10 stars.

Would It Work For a Bad Movie Night?: Why not? Take a drink any time ONJ’s “Twist of Fate” or a film score version of it is used.   

Two of a Kind (1983) - IMDb

Rooster Cogburn (1975)

Dang – I could have used this for my salute to John Wayne Westerns!

Synopsis: It’s an unnecessary sequel to True Grit, combined with a reboot of The African Queen, featuring over-the-hill leads and forgettable villains.

Blurb From the VHS Jacket: “Two of the most popular stars in screen history are brought together for the first time in the follow-up to True Grit.” 

What Did I Learn?: You can’t lock up a man’s whisky! 2) Out in the Territories, they prize a dead shot more than a lady’s charms. 3) Water is like a woman: sly and fickle – you gotta watch it every minute! 4) People are rotten. 5) Women can no more keep their mouths shut than a yellow-tailed catfish. [These are quotations from the film, by the way]

You Might Like This Movie If: you have a thing for larger-than-life smart alec roosters...

Really?: 1) Holy shit, the characters in this film are transporting a wagon of nitro-fucking-glycerin! I’m pretty sure you can’t go whitewater rafting or charging down a bumpy hill without blowing yourself to Kingdom Come if you’re carrying cases of nitro. 2) Ok, I realize Eula is a naïve Bible-thumper, but I had a bit of trouble believing she would insult a bunch of men she knows are outlaws, or that she wouldn’t even flinch when Hawk decides to shoot at the ground near her feet. 3) See: “Synopsis.” Seriously, Wayne and Hepburn are far too old to carry an action-adventure, and the film is eerily similar to The African Queen in a number of ways. Oh, and why does Rooster address Eula as “Sister” every couple of minutes? She’s not a nun. 4) Is there a reason Rooster doesn’t simply hide the recovered nitro glycerin and escape to acquire some additional reinforcements?

Rating: While I enjoyed the banter between Wayne and Hepburn, Rooster Cogburn is a weak sequel to True Grit for a number of reasons, most notably a script that doesn’t make a lot of sense and the age of the lead actors – Eula is a bit too old to be living with her elderly father in a Native community. Check it out if you’re a John Wayne completist. 6/10 stars.

Rooster Cogburn (1975) - IMDb

The French Lieutenant's Woman (1981)

Synopsis: It’s 30 minutes of narcissistic actors sneaking around on their partners, circa 1980 tacked on to 90 minutes of depressing Victorian melodrama.

Blurb From the VHS Jacket: “Embraced by audiences and critics alike - and garnering five 1981 Academy Award nominations, including Best Actress for Streep - The French Lieutenant’s Woman will forever remain one of the most literate, imaginative and visually stunning love stories ever to grace the screen.” 

What Did I Learn?: In 1857, it’s estimated there were 80,000 prostitutes in the country of London, and out of every 60 houses, one was a brothel.

You Might Like This Movie If: Much like Charles, you believe there's something alluring about a woman who doesn't have all of her marbles. 

Really?: 1) Ok, I realize Charles (Jeremy Irons) falls hopelessly in love with Sarah (Meryl Streep), and lovestruck people don’t always make good decisions, but it’s painfully obvious that she’s completely insane [Spoiler Alert: Sarah never had sex with the French lieutenant, yet she claims otherwise because she wants to be scorned and ridiculed by the residents of Lyme] and she doesn’t seem all that interested in being saved. 2) So, three years pass, Sarah gets a cushy job and her mental illness seems to disappear? Ok, whatevs….

Rating: I have to give The French Lieutenant’s Woman something of a mixed review; while I appreciated its unique attempt at storytelling (the relationship between thespians Anna and Mike takes a strange turn when they portray star-crossed Victorian lovers during a movie shoot), its impressive cinematography, and the acting efforts of Streep and Irons, the story itself (which chucks aside the complex, multi-layered approach of John Fowles’ novel and inserts the Mike-and-Anna subplot), seemed simplistic and difficult to believe (see: “Synopsis” and “Really?”) and the characters left me cold; I didn’t care about any of them. 7/10 stars.

The French Lieutenant's Woman (1981) - IMDb

Cookie (1989)

Synopsis: Dapper don Dino discovers delinquent daughter, designs diabolic double-cross.

Blurb From the VHS Jacket: "A delicious new comedy." 

What Did I Learn?: You don’t get back at someone by telling them to fuck off.

You Might Like This Movie If: You're strangely intrigued by the title. 

Really?: 1) Funny how Pia (Ricki Lake) is Cookie’s (Emily Lloyd) best friend, yet she just disappears mid-way through. 2) I could be wrong, but I’m pretty sure the US government only admits gangsters into the WITNESS protection program in exchange for testifying in open court. I had a bit of trouble believing Dominick “Dino” Capisco (Peter Falk) could get away with whacking Carmine and stealing his dough, and then receive federal protection. I had even more trouble believing Cookie could mastermind such an intricate plot, or that she would be ok with the Carmine’s unpleasant end. 3) So, does Dino have some dough stashed away or not? This isn’t entirely clear.

Rating: I might have watched Cookie about 30 years ago on the First Choice movie channel, or not – it’s a very forgettable low-budget comedy that isn’t terribly funny or clever, and it never delivers the emotional payoff – a meeting of the minds between Dino and Cookie – that we expect to see. I’ll give Cookie a barely-passing grade only because I like Peter Falk, and I think it’s fine for a night’s entertainment. 5.5/10 stars.

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0097109/?ref_=fn_al_tt_2

Pollock (2000)

Synopsis: Mean-spirited, paint-dripping alcoholic weirdo gets the motion picture recognition he probably doesn’t deserve.

Blurb From the VHS Jacket: “But with fame and fortune comes a volatile temper and severe self-doubt; before long, Pollock’s life threatens to explode.”

What Did I Learn?: 1) The age of radio, supersonic air travel and the atom bomb could only be expressed artistically by spilling household paint on a horizontal canvas. 2) You can’t abstract from nothing. You can only abstract from life, from nature. 3) Peggy Guggenheim didn’t enjoy walking up stairs. 4) Gene Krupa was the greatest drummer in the world.

You Might Like This Movie If: you really want to get modern art. 

Really?: I realize Pollock is based upon a biography, but I’m shocked that Jackson Pollock could get away with pissing in Peggy Guggenheim’s fireplace, openly cheating on his wife in front of their friends, getting shitfaced drunk and erupting into volcanic rages at his friends and family, and he never faces any consequences for his atrocious behavior. (Well, not until the very end) 2) Funny how Pollock does so much to explain its subject’s thinking about art and his work but doesn’t think to tell us why he got into painting in the first place. 3) Why is Val Kilmer in this movie?

Rating: Pollock is a moderately interesting biopic of an incredibly unlikeable title character; Ed Harris delivers an inspired performance as the troubled artist (Marcia Gay Harden is also quite good as Pollock’s long-suffering wife, Lee Krasner), but his direction of the film falls a bit flat. It’s difficult to spend two hours watching a self-destructive jerk verbally abuse his enablers, even if it does provide some insight into the late-1940s / early-1950s modern art scene. 7/10 stars.

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0183659/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_0

Best and Worst (2019)

The Best Movies I reviewed in 2019 (10/10 stars, or 9/10 stars):

Swingers 

Cop

You Can Count on Me 

Dazed and Confused 

Off the Black 

California Split 

Owning Mahoney

Housesitter

The Worst Movies I reviewed in 2019 (fewer than 5 stars): 

Soldier Boyz

Worth Winning

Volcano

Turk 182

Last Rites 

Everybody Wins

Stealing Home

Snake Eater III

Snake Eater (I gave Snake Eater II a barely-passing grade of 5/10 stars)

Bridge to Nowhere

Street Hawk 

Stone Cold 

Give My Regards to Broad Street

Houseguest 

Protecting the King 

Please click the links to read my Best and Worst lists for 2018, 2017, 2016, 2015, 2014, 2013, 2012 and 2011 

Swingers (1996)

Synopsis: It’s basically 96 minutes of sleazy-but-loveable Vince Vaughn attempting to cheer up his whiny pal.

Blurb From the VHS Jacket: "Cocktails first. Questions later." 

What Did I Learn?: 1) The beautiful babies don’t work the midnight to six shift at a casino on a Wednesday. 2) Two days is the minimum period of time (i.e. the “industry standard”) that must elapse before you can call a woman after she gives you her telephone number. 3) The LA Kings are either a “finesse team” or a “fucking bitch team.” 4) There’s nothing wrong with letting the girls know that you’re money and that you want to party. 5) It’s not a good idea to discuss ice cream and puppy dogs with women you’ve just met. 6) Everybody steals from everybody. That’s Hollywood.

You Might Like This Movie If: You enjoy watching otherwise-sane individuals get really excited about a really bad idea. 

Really?: 1) With the single exception of this film, I’ve never once heard anyone, either in real life or in a work of fiction describe another person as “money.” 2) So, Mike (John Favreau) is a comedian? Ok, I have it on good authority that most stand-up comics are bitter, self-loathing assholes, but aren't they also supposed to be funny? 

Rating:I was recently a bit surprised to learn that after eight years of writing Schuster at the Movies, I had yet to pen a review of Swingers. I’ve always carried a strong appreciation for this film, in spite of its obvious flaws (I’m thinking primarily of several scenes that carry on far too long, and writer Favreau’s odd decision not to develop the Trent character, or give the audience any indication of what makes him tick). Swingers is funny, clever, and it provides a number of interesting insights into breakups and life in the the bottom rungs of show business. That said, to this day I still can’t sit through the excruciating scene of Mike (Favreau) ruining his chances with Nikki when he foolishly decides to call her about 20 times in the middle of the night. Highly recommended. 9/10 stars. 

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0117802/?ref_=rvi_tt

Rain Man (1988)

Synopsis: Unlikeable narcissist exploits extremely annoying older brother during road trip across the American heartland.

Blurb From the VHS Jacket: “4 Academy Awards including Best Picture 1988”

What Did I Learn?: 1) K-Mart sucks. 2) Raymond is an excellent driver. 3) Maple syrup is supposed to be on the table before pancakes.

You Might Like This Movie If: you know this movie was ahead of its time regarding public perceptions of K-Mart. 

Really?: Holy shit, take a drink any time Hoffman uses the word “definitely.” 2) So, wait – Charlie’s big plan is to kidnap Raymond in exchange for half of the inheritance? Why doesn’t Dr. Bruner call the cops and have Charlie arrested for kidnapping? Even if the charges are eventually dismissed, it’s a good way to get Raymond back to the hospital in one piece, and discourage further attempts. And why doesn’t Charlie simply hire a lawyer and save himself the trouble of caring for a special needs adult? 3) I’m still not entirely clear on the nature of Charlie’s business – he purchases a few Lamborghinis at a time and re-sells them to wealthy buyers? Wouldn’t most people simply visit a dealership? 4) Isn’t Charlie basically broke, even after his visit to Las Vegas? I had a hard time believing he wouldn’t accept that $250,000 cheque. 

Rating: I’ve always felt that Rain Man is a good, but somewhat overrated movie; Dangerous Liaisons or The Accidental Tourist should have won Best Picture at the 61st Academy Awards.  Sure, Cruise and Hoffmann (especially) deliver magnificent performances and share a number of great scenes together, but the plot is a bit too treacly, unbelievable and repetitive for my taste: as soon as the two leads meet, every scene involves the same basic set-up: Charlie wants Raymond to do something, Raymond responds either with memorized gibberish or by freaking out, and Charlie gets further irritated. A good movie needs more than great acting. 7/10 stars.

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0095953/?ref_=rvi_tt

Crime Spree (2003)

Synopsis: Bumbling French criminals somehow devise master plan to turn the tables on not one, but two powerful gangsters who want them dead.

Blurb From the DVD Jacket: "Wise guys. Not smart guys."

What Did I Learn?: 1) Supernumerary means “better than expected.” 2) Honour without respect is like a horseless carriage. [In the words of Harvey Keitel’s character: what the fuck does that mean?]

You Might Like This Movie If: You always wanted to see a live-action version of Victor and Hugo: Partners in Crime. 

Really?: See: “Synopsis.” Seriously, these dudes get their act together très rapide.

Rating: Crime Spree is an enjoyable, albeit lightweight and forgettable Guy Ritchie knock-off featuring French, rather than Cockney criminals. My biggest complaints would be that that the film drags for a while after Daniel’s crew lands in Chicago, and the crew itself features too many crooks; it’s hard to distinguish between a few of them, and the surplus of unnecessary accomplices leaves Gerard Depardieu a bit lost in the shuffle. 7/10 stars.

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0310924/?ref_=nm_flmg_act_57

Proof of Life (2000)

Synopsis: It’s over two hours of David Morse getting physically abused on a South American mountaintop, Meg Ryan losing her shit every couple of minutes, and Russell Crowe arguing with a short-wave radio.

Blurb From the VHS Jacket: "Proof of Life is gripping proof that the romantic thriller is forcefully alive." 

What Did I Learn?: 1) An English general’s daughter gets back at daddy by marrying an Australian. 2) Things don’t happen for reason; they just happen. 3) You never, ever pay for a proof-of-life. 4) South America is a dangerous place, and best avoided altogether.

You Might Like This Movie If: you're always searching for a proof of life. 

Really?: 1) Wait – Terry (Crowe) isn’t entirely convinced Peter (Morse) is dead, so he wants to double-check, and Alice (Ryan) slaps him in the face? 2) I had a bit of trouble with the ending: it’s clear that Peter and Alice’s marriage is on the rocks before the kidnapping, and she later falls in love with Terry, yet she goes to Dallas with Peter anyway? 3) So, Terry gives up a major payday in Thailand to assist penniless Alice for four months because… um…he’s a nice guy? 4) I have to wonder how many kidnapping victims would disobey, and loudly challenge their armed captors to a fight even when it’s obvious one or two of the thugs aren’t playing with a full deck.

Rating: Proof of Life is a slow-moving, but watchable drama that suffers from too much intercutting between Peter’s captivity and the Terry/Alice storylines, and a weak performance from Ryan. (Strangely, Ryan and Crowe were involved in an off-screen romance at the time, yet there’s barely any chemistry between them). The film works best when it focuses on Terry’s world and the business side of rescuing high-profile kidnapping victims – that part is interesting - but it takes a looong time to arrive at an exciting climax, and we’re treated to far too many scenes of Peter getting beaten by his kidnappers for my taste. 6.5/10 stars.

Proof of Life (2000) - IMDb

Top Gun (1986)

Not Quite a War Movie #2

Synopsis: Tom Cruise flies a fighter plane, romances a social-climbing instructor, plays shirtless volleyball with Val Kilmer and takes long showers with other guys…wait, WTF?!?

Blurb From the VHS Jacket: “A hip, heart-pounding combination of action, music and incredible aerial photography helped make Top Gun the blockbuster hit of 1986.” [How about acting, dialogue or character development?]

What Did I Learn?: 1) A MiG 28 can do a 4g negative dive. 2) You never, never leave your wing man. 3) When you’re a hotshot naval aviator, you can get away with disobeying direct orders from your superior officer and buzzing the control tower if you meekly submit to a five-minute tongue-lashing.

You Might Like This Movie If: You really want to see Tom Cruise find the right woman and settle down. 

Really?: 1) So, who exactly is this “enemy” that’s able to send advanced MiG fighters into the Indian Ocean, and how can they fire upon and destroy US naval aircraft without starting a war? 2) I’m a little unclear on the purpose of the Top Gun academy… ok, maybe it makes sense to teach dogfighting skills to prevent pilots from becoming too reliant on using missiles, but why does it only accept the very best naval pilots? Wouldn’t average pilots gain more from this training? 3) See: “What Did I Learn?” #3.

Rating: I’ve always felt that Top Gun is a highly overrated hunk of mid-1980s cheese. Top Gun is too well-produced to be an outright bad movie; its air combat scenes are impressive, and I liked both the soundtrack and Harold Faltermeyer’s musical score, but the film really falls apart when Maverick (Cruise) interacts with the other characters; he and McGillis share no romantic chemistry, and the dialogue everyone recites is far too expository and cliched to sound credible. Top Gun did NOT take my breath away. 6/10 stars.

Top Gun (1986) - IMDb

Soldier Boyz (1995)

Not Quite a War Movie #3 

Synopsis: It’s basically a low-budget and extremely dumbed-down remake of The Dirty Dozen. 

Blurb From the VHS Jacket: “The worst criminals make the best soldiers.” [Um… I’m not sure that’s true]

What Did I Learn?: Michael Dudikoff’s career really went straight down the crapper after he made those American Ninja movies.

You Might Like This Movie If: You'll watch any piece of crap with the word "boyz" in the title.

Really?: 1) Is Vasquez (Jacqueline Obradors) actually being held in a men’s prison? If not, why does Toliver interview her? 2) I had a LOT of trouble believing the premise of this film… how would any of these lazy, disobedient, and completely untrustworthy thugs be useful on a complex combat mission? Why would Toliver bring a convicted rapist to rescue an attractive young woman from captivity? Why doesn’t anyone think of simply hiring some professional mercenaries? 3) So, Toliver provides these punks with one day of training? What could they possibly learn about military tactics in such a short period of time? 4) Hold on… Vinh Moc has carved out his own little pocket of Vietnam, and even brutally attacks a town, and the authorities don’t seem to care? Come to think of it, the authorities also apparently don’t have a problem with Toliver and his merry band of armed hooligans traipsing about their country, either.  

Rating: Badly written, cheaply produced, and featuring some truly awful performances, Soldier Boyz is one of the most ineptly-made films I’ve ever had the misfortune to watch. I cannot recommend this movie. 1/10 stars.

Would it Work For a Bad Movie Night?: Absolutely – take a drink any time Dudikoff assembles his troops and announces: “now listen up,” or any time the Boyz strangely act as a cohesive fighting unit immediately after they try to kill each other. 

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0114489/?ref_=rvi_tt

Sergeant Ryker (1963)

Not Quite a War Movie #1

Synopsis: Idealistic young military lawyer flushes career down the toilet to passionately defend the man he convicted of treason because….um….you know, that’s a very tough premise to swallow. 

Blurb From the VHS Jacket: “The battlefield is his home….he will protect it at all costs!” [This blurb has nothing to do with the actual film, by the way]

What Did I Learn?: Apparently, American soldiers in the midst of a mass-evacuation from incoming hostile forces will gladly drop everything when a pushy officer shows up and asks them to assist him perform a series of questionable-at-best tasks.

You Might Like This Movie If: You'd believe anything Lee Marvin tells you - even that Pall Mall cigarettes are compatible with physical fitness. 

Really?: See: “Synopsis” and “What Did I Learn?”

Rating: Originally aired on television as a two-parter, Sergeant Ryker takes a loooong time to get started, but ultimately matures into an engaging courtroom drama. The film features a noteworthy cast (including Peter Graves and Norman Fell before they became TV stars), but I could have done without the dozens of shouting matches between Ryker (Lee Marvin) and his lawyer (Bradford Dillman in an impressive performance), and action scene of a North Korean jet attacking Dillman’s jeep is completely unnecessary. 6.5/10 stars.

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0622162/?ref_=rvi_tt

Von Ryan's Express (1965)

War Movie

Synopsis: Old Blue Eyes sleepwalks his way through mid-1960s war picture that can’t decide if it wants to be The Great Escape, The Bridge on the River Kwai, Stalag 17, or Silver Streak.

Blurb From the VHS Jacket: "Frank Sinatra busts loose and outsmarts the Nazis!"

What Did I Learn?: Italian POW camps served some really awful pumpkin soup during the Second World War.

You Might Like This Movie If: You know that Frank Sinatra was a natural alpha male leader. 

Really?: 1) I’m curious: would an Army Air Corps colonel fly on a bombing mission? And if the Italian soldiers really don’t like the Germans to the point so not handing an injured Ryan over to them, why did they take him to the Italian POW camp? 2) Strange how the script establishes a test of wills between Ryan and Major Fincham; they clash, we expect an air-clearing verbal brawl to break out so they can reach some sort of understanding and it NEVER HAPPENS. 3) So, what are Ryan’s motivations? Why did he join the army? What was he doing before the war? It’s bad enough that none of the other characters are ever further developed as the film progresses, but Ryan’s the protagonist! 4) Hold on – Fincham’s men are literally dying of malaria, and he refuses to share his hidden cache of medicine because they may need it for a future escape attempt? Sorry, but in my mind this sets him up as a villain, albeit a misguided one.

Rating: Von Ryan’s Express is an action-packed and enjoyable, albeit somewhat confused and lacklustre Sinatra vehicle. I don’t blame Richard Burton for turning down the role of Major Fincham, considering the character spends most of the film taking verbal potshots at Ryan and richly deserves at least one head punch. 6.5/10 stars.

Von Ryan's Express (1965) - IMDb

Cop (1988)

Synopsis: Hmm…the title of this film is “Cop,” so I’m guessing maybe it has something to do with law enforcement?

Blurb From the DVD Jacket: “A killer on the loose. A cop on the edge.” 

What Did I Learn?: 1) When you blow away a lady’s date, the least you can do is drive her home. 2a) Innocence kills. 2b) The big reason women wind up murdered, strung out on drugs or on the streets is that they grew up with high expectations.

You Might Like This Movie If: You're happy to watch James Woods in anything. 

Really?: 1) Holy shit, doesn’t Lloyd (James Woods) ever sleep? I’m pretty sure he pulls at least two all-nighters in a row yet he’s more-or-less fresh the next day thanks to that magical combination of coffee and cigarettes. 2) So, by his own admission Lloyd is guilty of breaking and entering, stealing evidence, and assault and battery – and he might have murdered a fellow police officer, but he’s simply suspended from the department rather than arrested? 3a) It’s strange how super-cop Lloyd never follows up on his request for a list of Joannie’s clients. 3b) Wait, why does the killer photograph Lloyd and Joannie having sex in her kitchen? Did he have any reason to suspect Joannie was going to drop a dime on him at this point in the film? 4) Hold on… Lloyd visits a feminist bookstore looking for some background information and somehow stumbles upon a central figure in a series of murders?

Rating: Cop is a gritty police thriller that’s best described as clichéd, somewhat contrived (see: “Really?”), yet surprisingly compelling. Ordinarily, I might give a movie like this 6.5 or 7 stars out of 10, but Woods delivers an outstanding performance as Lloyd Hopkins: a world-weary and highly amoral law enforcement professional who probably shouldn’t be employed by the LAPD except that he’s extremely good at his job. Woods adds some much-needed humour to this film and does a great deal to make it interesting; there’s a reason I once referred to him as this blog’s favourite unlikeable guy. 9/10 stars.

Cop (1988) - IMDb

Big Trouble in Little China (1986)

Synopsis: Surprisingly incompetent hero discovers San Francisco’s Chinatown is riddled with underground temples and dungeons and infested with strange, mythical creatures.

Blurb From the VHS Jacket: “High adventure in an underground kingdom!”

What Did I Learn?: A brave man likes the feel of nature on his face….and a wise man has enough sense to get out of the rain. 2) Sorcery is real and it always begins very small. 3) When some wild-eyed, eight-foot-tall maniac grabs your neck, taps the back of your favorite head up against the barroom wall, and he looks you crooked in the eye and he asks you if ya paid your dues, you just stare that big sucker right back in the eye and reply: “Yessir, the check is in the mail.”

You Might Like This Movie If: The title brings back some unpleasant memories 

Really?: See: “Synopsis.” and "Blurb from the VHS Jacket." Seriously, Big Trouble is a larger-than-life action-fantasy-comedy that gleefully demolishes the boundaries of narrative credibility, but I’d like to point out that: a) Miao Yin (Suzee Pai) doesn’t look particularly Chinese, b) I have no idea why Wang (Dennis Dun) somehow feels he needs Jack’s (Kurt Russell) help to rescue Miao, considering the former is quite an accomplished martial arts expert, and Jack is more of a blustering goofball, and c) it’s awfully convenient how Jack and Wang somehow bump into Gracie (Kim Cattrall) at the airport, and she later (and independently) joins their team.

Rating: Big Trouble in Little China is a roller coaster ride of a movie that’s built around an extremely wacky plot and a very funny performance from Russell that owes a lot more to John Wayne than the Clint Eastwood impression he adopted in Escape from New York. Big Trouble is a fun little romp, but the story doesn’t make a lot of sense and it tends to drag near the end. 7/10 stars.

Big Trouble in Little China (1986) - IMDb

Hghlander (1986)

Synopsis: Sean Connery plays an older tough guy who assists a wet-behind-the-ears hero take on a dangerous criminal….no, that’s the Synopsis for The Untouchables. Um…Scottish lad engages in risky behavior, yet somehow manages to cheat death and outwit a psycho….no, that’s Trainspotting. Badass with a cool weapon travels to mysterious, far-away city to battle a great evil….no, that’s Krull.

Blurb From the VHS Jacket: “Connor MacLeod is a Scot who should have died in 1536. But he belongs to a rare race of immortals that can only be killed when beheaded by a sword.”

What Did I Learn?: 1) Love is for poets. 2) Cops can’t read. 3) There can be only one!

You Might Like This Movie If: you're able to thank your lucky stars you aren't watching the sequel, Highlander II: The Quickening.

Really?: 1) So, let me see if I get this straight…Ramirez (Sean Connery, who gets second-billing but doesn’t actually appear until about 45 minutes into the movie) has no idea how the immortals were created, or where they came from, but he knows everything about the gathering and the so-called prize. 2) Speaking of the prize, that’s it? Connor loses his immortality, and feels a oneness with all living creatures? How would the Kurgan have used that to enslave humanity? 3) I’m a little unclear about this whole immortality thing… I can understand Connor and others like him being impervious to drowning, stab wounds, falls, and such but what would happen if he were to be thrown into a wood-chipper, or if he found himself at Ground Zero during an atomic bomb explosion? How could he survive either of those gruesome deaths?

Rating: I hadn’t watched Highlander since the late 1980s, so I wasn’t entirely sure what to expect. The film features some stylish sword-fighting action sequences and a highly imaginative story, and I quite liked the interplay between Connery and Lambert when they’re together in Scotland. On the other hand, the plot is predictable and chock full of holes, and Lambert isn’t the world’s greatest actor – at least not in English. 6/10 stars.

Highlander (1986) - IMDb

Panic (2000)

Synopsis: William H. Macy plays a sad-sack ordinary guy who runs afoul of organized crime….no, that’s the Synopsis for The Cooler. Um… likeable killer sees a shrink….no, that’s Analyze This. Badass son confronts not-so-nice father about his reluctance to work in the family business. Nope, that’s Return of the Jedi.

Blurb From the DVD Jacket: “A story of family, lust, murder….and other midlife crises.” 

What Did I Learn?: Every man has a destiny. Life is not…random. 2) If you’re going to kill somebody, keep it fast-and-simple, don’t meet the victim’s eyes, just walk up, do the job and walk away. 3) The Billy Crystal/Gregory Hines action-comedy Running Scared didn’t leave much of an impression on moviegoers.

You Might Like This Movie If: You know that some people really need to blaze their own career path.

Really?: 1) So, Alex (Macy) is a professional assassin who lives a boring middle-class life lifestyle with a wife and a son (don’t these guys charge hundreds of thousands of dollars for a hit?), and he suddenly develops a conscience in his mid-40s? 2) I’m curious: why does Alex’s dad, Michael (Donald Sutherland) browbeat Alex into murdering his psychologist, even to the point of spilling the beans to Martha? Why doesn’t he do it himself? He clearly stalked Dr. Parks (John Ritter) to snap a photograph. 3) I had a bit of trouble believing that Sarah (Neve Campbell) would somehow fall for a somewhat-older man with a less-than-dynamic personality when she apparently spends most of her free time banging hot chicks. 4) How did Michael develop his unusual business? Who are his clients - and his victims? Has he or Alex ever run afoul of the law?  How do they take assignments? I think some of these details should have been fleshed out. 5) Wow…that is one precocious kid…

Rating: Panic is an interesting character-driven thriller (I’m not sure how else to describe this film) that features a fine performance from Macy, and a highly impressive cast, but somehow misses its mark. Panic has a few credibility issues (see: “Really?”) but it’s biggest problem is that it fails to adequately resolve a number of key relationships, and I’m not convinced that the one between Alex and Sarah is even necessary. 6.5/10 stars.

Panic (2000) - IMDb

Worth Winning (1989)

Synopsis: Mark Harmon stars in a pointless, badly-written B-movie….sorry, that’s the Synopsis for Stealing Home. Um… narcissistic Pennsylvania weatherman must grow up if he wants to win the love of a cultured, sophisticated woman….no, that’s Groundhog Day. Charming operator solicits marriage proposals for personal gain….no, that’s Heartbreakers. Creepy weirdo who doesn't have to worry about money throws caution to the wind to pursue the woman of his dreams….no, that’s 10.

Blurb From the VHS Jacket: “An engaging comedy about a bachelor and three near Mrs.” 

What Did I Learn?: Poetic justice doesn’t feel so good. 2) A hero should accomplish something. 3) A beautiful woman is one of the loneliest creatures on the face of the Earth. 4) Without suffering, you don’t grow. 5) There wouldn’t be great sex if we didn’t have awful sex.

You Might Like This Movie If: You know that some prizes are worth winning...and some aren't. 

Really?: 1) So, Taylor (Harmon) is so good-looking and charming that he can somehow date an attractive woman’s roommate and then manipulate her into apologizing to him for complaining about it? Or somehow get back into Veronica’s (Madeleine Stowe) good graces after a night of bad sex? I don’t think so. 2) At some point mid-way through the movie, Taylor casually asks Ned if he’s given any thought to his plan’s possible impact on other people, and neither of them seem terribly interested in providing an answer. Holy shit, Ned seriously bets his wife’s Picasso that Taylor can’t seduce three difficult women into accepting marriage proposals – and he does this to “help” his old buddy. How are we supposed to sympathize with either of these wackos? This is sick, sociopathic behavior. 3) Just curious: does Taylor still have a job after Veronica dumps him at the altar and he goes into a deep, blue funk for a month? 4) I’m pretty sure Taylor’s proposal to Elinore was just pillow talk, and how can Taylor allow Ned to interfere without scotching the wager? 5) Wow…Andrea Martin doesn’t have much of a part, does she?

Rating: Worth Winning is a lame, unfunny and deservedly-forgotten late-1980s rom com. Even the usually-likeable Harmon can’t bring any life to Worth Winning’s bad script, as his character is incredibly smug and shallow until sometime in the third act. I cannot recommend this movie. 4/10 stars.

Would it Work for a Bad Movie Night?: No, but take a drink any time you think Ned should lose his psychiatric licence. (The worst thing that happens to him is he upsets his wife and must apologize to her).

Worth Winning (1989) - IMDb

You Can Count on Me (2000)

Synopsis: Loveable fuckup bonds with estranged, sexually-frustrated small-town sister and over-protected kid as lots of depressing cello music plays in the background.  

Blurb From the VHS Jacket: "But when Terry's behaviour becomes disruptive, Sammy must finally confront the choices of the past... and make new ones as her family faces the future."

What Did I Learn?: “No comment” isn’t a very satisfying response if your son asks if you were a wild kid in your youth. 

You Might Like This Movie If: You're fascinated by Upstate New York. 

Really?: Overall, this movie is grounded in realism and highly believable, but I didn’t exactly buy the scene where Sammy offers to buy out Terry’s share of the home and he refuses. He hasn’t lived there in ages, he’s always short of money, and it seems like a highly illogical decision.

Rating: You Can Count on Me is an impressive character-driven drama that’s moving and strangely compelling, even though it doesn’t have much of a plot. Instead, this film features strong performances from Laura Linney and Mark Ruffalo (Matthew Broderick, meanwhile, provides some nice comic relief as Sammy’s inept micromanaging boss), some great dialogue, and yes – a bit too much cello music for my taste. Highly recommended. 10/10 stars. 

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0203230/?ref_=nv_sr_1?ref_=nv_sr_1