Reviews

8 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
6/10
Great Premise Hurt by Slow- Moving and Predictable Script
7 March 2008
Warning: Spoilers
"The Stalking Moon" is a pretty good, if not terribly significant, little western with great performances all around and some very suspenseful scenarios. The plot focuses on army scout Gregory Peck whose party takes a group of Native Americans into custody and retrieve white woman Eve-Marie Saint, who was kidnapped years earlier, and her young son, who was fathered by one of the Indians. When Saint insists that she and her son must get out of the area immediately, Peck gives in and takes them to his father's ranch. However, they are followed by the boy's father, a silent hunter intent on taking back his son.

The premise is rather original, and it allows for some spine tingling scenarios near the end of the movie. Unfortunately, the film is, up until the last half hour or so, extremely slow- moving and sometimes dull. Much of the time spent leading up to the villain's arrival (which encompasses about two thirds of the film) seems padded out, with nothing truly significant Taking place for stretches at a time. The fact that the set up takes so much longer to play out than it needs to reveal that in the end, as interesting as it may be, the plot is a bit thin.

Although the first section of the film does start to get boring after a while, sitting through it does pay off. After the arrival of the hunter, the movie remains consistently suspenseful, with one particularly memorable sequence in which Peck waits in silence for his approaching foe that manages to build up tension quite well. The final shootout at the end of the film is also quite exciting.

The story behind the film's villain is also instrumental in building up suspense. It becomes clear as the film moves along and Peck's character learns of the crimes of his enemy that he is human killing machine, capable of stalking his prey in total silence. The movie's villain never speaks a line and is seldom seen throughout the course of the film, but is nevertheless extremely menacing because of what he is capable of doing.

Despite its slow pace, "The Stalking Moon" should still be worthy of one's interest both because of its tense scenarios and because of its solid cast. Gregory Peck makes an excellent hero, as always, eve- Marie Saint gives a melancholy performance as the worried mother who, after years of Indian captivity, barely remembers English, and Robert Forster is good as a member of Peck's party who comes to his aid in fending off his enemy. Overall, this is a worthwhile experience for fans of both suspense films and westerns.
5 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Mission Kill (1985)
4/10
No Originality, Lots of Action and Violence
26 January 2008
This is a fairly standard 80's style action movie, with nothing to distinguish it from others of its kind. Although reasonably entertaining while it lasts thanks to a fair amount of action and a fast pace, it is, overall, a ridiculous and below average action pick.

Robert Ginty, best known for the 1980 cult classic "The Exterminator," her plays a vengeful Vietnam Veteran (way to broaden your horizon, Bob), who assists rebel forces in a fictional Central American country after his buddy is killed running guns into the nation so as to provide aid for the rebels. The story is as ridiculous as one would expect; Robert Ginty plays a sort of superman who single handedly leads the struggling rebellion towards success. Of course, nobody wants to see an action movie called "Mission Kill" and have it be entirely believable, but the movie is so self serious and overly dramatic that it just can't get away with such a ludicrous premise.

In addition to the typically ridiculous and entirely forgettable premise, Ginty's performance is also bland and unmemorable, as is most of the cast. Only Sandy Baron stands out as the zealous reporter responsible for getting Ginty's efforts as a rebel leader recognized by the public.

The actions sequences aren't really anything special either; however, they are enough to keep the movie from getting boring throughout its runtime. If anything, this movie is reasonably entertaining, thanks to a fast moving plot and lots violent action.

Although it isn't boring, "Mission... Kill" certainly isn't memorable, with a plot that manages to be both preposterous and overly dramatic, stereotypical characters and generally lousy performances. Action fans ought to be able to get some enjoyment out of the movie, but honestly, considering the number of excellent action movies available, there really isn't much reason to be watching a mediocre one like this.
4 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Dark Harvest (2004 Video)
1/10
Simply Awful, Even By Made For Video Horror Movie Standards
30 December 2007
This is an irredeemably stupid, boring, unimaginative, lazily put together piece of garbage. When watching a direct to video slasher pick, it is only fair to expect the film to be trashy on some level, but this goes beyond trashy. It is just horrible on every level, with a cliché ridden script that manages to be both incredibly stupid and incredibly boring at the same time, a cast of no name over actors, and some of the worst special effects I have ever seen. Even fans of slasher movies won't be able to find anything here that would make this film a worthwhile use of an hour and a half.

The plot focuses on your usual group of young people who decide to spend the weekend at a remote farm in West Virginia that one member of the group has recently inherited. Unfortunately for the teenagers, the inherited land was once owned by a farmer who made sacrifices in order to help his crops grow, or something stupid along those lines, and now some evil scarecrows are out to kill everybody. I don't know anything about writer director Paul Moore, but I am assuming he is over ten years old, and therefore he ought to be able to come up with something more original than killer scarecrows. Honestly.

The special effects bringing the scarecrows to life are laughably poor. They often look like hardly more than Haloween costumes on sticks. Special effects such as these would have been considered rather rather poor twenty years ago, but by todays standards, they are nothing short of embarrassing.

This is a total waste of time for all viewers, whether or not they are into horror movies. If you must watch a slasher film, rent any one of the "Friday the 13th" or "Halloween" movies. Most of them aren't very good, but are certainly superior to crap like this.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Quick, Fun Action Flick With a Great Cast
30 December 2007
Armed Response is a movie that doesn't exceed one's expectations, never trying to be any more than a typical action film, but does what is expected of it in the best way possible. It's silly, not terribly original, but also entertaining through an trough, just as an action movie ought to be. The movie's terrific B-movie cast help to make this a thoroughly enjoyable experience for action fans.

The plot focuses on the Roth family, Burt (Lee Van Cleef) and his sons Jim, Clay, and Tommy (David Carradine, David Goss, and Brent Huff), who become targets of mob boss, Akira Tenaka (Mako) after coming into possession of a stolen jade statue. The plot isn't hard to follow,and it is able to hold one's interest despite not being terribly complex or original. The plot is also filled with action it the form of shoot-outs, fist fights, and one terrific car chase. The plot moves along quickly thanks to a fair amount of action and the presence of some great B-movie stars.

David Carradine makes a great leading man for this sort of movie; his performance is not technically "good" but he is nevertheless enormously appealing in his role. Mako is also good as the movie's villain, but the film's most stand-out cast member is without a doubt B-movie veteran Lee Van Cleef, who is a joy to watch as Carradine's tough, irritable dad who doesn't crap from anybody. His character is undeniably rather clichéd, but he plays the part better than anyone else could.

Armed Response delivers exactly what it offers, and provides a fun hour and a half for fans of its genre. It doesn't offer anything new or special for those who aren't already fans of the genre, but those who are should find it consistently entertaining.
3 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Freejack (1992)
5/10
Dumb, unoriginal, but fun sci-fi action pic
10 December 2007
This silliness is the sort of thing that you can sit down and enjoy without having to worry about paying close attention to what you're watching. There are some great action sequences, the stars are fun to watch, and the premise, which focuses on a New York race car driver(Emilio Estevez) who is kidnapped and brought to the year 2009 so that his body can store the mind of a terminally ill billionaire (Anthony Hopkins) is silly and done without much imagination. There really isn't any cleverness or novelty to be found here, but the movie really works as mindless entertainment and is never boring.

Every member of this movie's cast fits his or her role very well (even Emilio Estevez, whom I don't typically care for), but Mick Jagger really steals the show as the bounty hunter, or "bonejacker," hired to catch Estevez after he escapes from his captors. He's never been much of an actor, and this was his first movie in twenty-one years, but he conveys an enormous amount charisma as the movie's smug villain. Another stand out cast member is Anothony Hopkins, who as usual, plays a very sophisticated bad guy and does an excellent job of it (however, it is all to clear that he was in this movie for the money alone, giving a good but very brief performance.

Although the performers give it their all, they are unfortunately not provided with a script interesting enough to help make their appearances memorable. Most of the dialog is derivative and silly. One can't very well sit down to watch a movie like this and expect a good script, but it fair to hope for some memorable one liners, and this movie really didn't offer any. Another problem I had with this movie was the fact that it was set in 2009. If your going to set a movie in a desolate future, where the majority of New York City is crime infested hell-hole, make sure the future is far enough away to seem plausible. Having a world like this seventeen years after the movie was released just seems ridiculous.

If you are in the mood for an undemanding, entertaining guilty pleasure, give this movie a look. The good performances, action, and special effects should be enough to keep you interested throughout the movie's hour and fifty minute running time, but probably won't make the movie stick with you for very long after you have finished watching it.
3 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Embarrassing Piece of Junk
18 November 2007
This is one of those movies that is so obviously thrown together to make a quick buck that anyone stuck watching it is bound to feel embarrassed after sitting through, say, the first ten minutes, wondering why they have chosen to waste their time in such a way. Everything about this flick- the acting, the special effects, and especially the writing- are so bland and derivative that it is clear that no one involved in the making of this picture really cared about what they were putting together, didn't care if the film they were making was memorable or meaningful or even entertaining in any way. The fact that the people who made this movie put so little effort into it is genuinely insulting to anyone who has chosen to invest precious time in this excuse for a movie. The plot, by the way, in case you care, focuses on a heroic fighter pilot (Costas Mandalys, in an astonishingly dull performance) who attempts to retrieve a stolen jet from a villain who has happened to employ the pilots wayward ex comrade (Ice T). Its all stuff you've seen a thousand times before, and almost always done better than it is here. With so many great action movies out there, there is no reason to waste your time on this.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Slow Burn (1989 Video)
6/10
Moderately Entertaining, Especially for a B Grade Action Pic
12 November 2007
Warning: Spoilers
This review may contain some (very minor) spoilers.

I purchased this movie at my local video store for a buck, and after watching it, I have to say I got pretty much what I expected to get out of it. This movie really isn't any thing special, but it is a tough, often bloody, and only occasionally boring action movie that provides a decent time killer for fans of its genre.

It focuses on a veteran cop named Murphy (Ivan Rogers) who is determined to exact revenge on a mob hit-man named Renzetti (Anthony James) who killed his partner. However, Murphy isn't the only person with a grudge against Renzetti. Gino (Scott Anderson), a rookie cop who has gone under cover and gotten close to Renzetti's boss (a big time mobster played by William Smith), and he too, wants to off Renzetti for killing his parents years earlier. Also involved are the Chinese mafia, whom William Smith is at war with.

One thing that can be said against this film is that the plot is unnecessarily complicated. There are too many different sides involved in the proceedings, and the subplot about crime don William smith's war with the Chinese mafia really doesn't connect with the main goings on in the film and usually isn't very interesting.

However, on the whole, the films numerous shoots outs, car chases, and explosions keep one from getting bored before the short running time is finished. Another thing this movie has going for it is the presence of two great character actors, William Smith and Anthony James. Both play their roles excellently (william Smith has this great, ultra cheesy fake accent) and they both manage to keep the time spend on screen rather enjoyable. Overall, I think that genre fans should be able to get some enjoyment out of this.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Below Average, Even for the Genre
11 November 2007
Warning: Spoilers
This is the first David A. Prior movie I have ever seen, and although I really wasn't expecting much, I have to say that I was disappointed. Based on the title, and what I know about the director from reviews I've read on this sight, I was expecting an entertaining, violent, stupid low-budgeter. This is what I got, minus the entertainment.

This movie, which focuses on a training mission in Vietnam that unexpectedly succumbs to an enemy ambush, is really just a bunch of tediously repetitive bare-knuckle fights and shoot outs mixed with a little bit of clichéd, banal war movie dialogue. I was really disappointed to find that most of the movie's dialogue is too boring to be unintentionally funny, and the and the action is to repetitive to be entertaining at all.

The only part of the movie that that was the least bit interesting is one really weird scene in which we see the movie's two main heroes(Fritz Mathews and Ted Prior) heading off on their mission and hear William Smith's narration in the form of what sounds like some kind kind of bizarre poem. I couldn't help but smile while listening to Smith's odd, cornball commentary.

Overall, this is a stupid and often boring film recommended only for David A. Prior aficionados and die-hard fans of the B action movie genre.
4 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed