Chopping Mall

Always trying to recapture my youth, I constantly look to my library of films from the 1980s, especially within the horror genre.  Because, out of all the memories of my teenaged years–which were during the 80s–most of the good ones took place hanging out with my good friend, Ron, at a choice movie theater to catch the latest popular flick.  We'd usually partake in a little smoky-smoke before the movie or maybe sneak in as many beers as it was physically possible to hide in our waistband and jacket pockets-whatever we could do to make the movie-going experience even better.  Yeah, he and I viewed quite a few films back then, from the shittiest snoozers to some Oscar-worthy contenders.  But it didn't matter, because those were some awesome days.

Back then, it was all about hanging out at The Meridian Quad in Cupertino, which was a four-screen movie complex with an arcade house across the way.  It was the place to hang out for us in-betweeners who were just starting to drive but weren't old enough to get into clubs or buy alcohol.  Nevertheless, it was some fun times over there, whether we went inside the arcade to waste a bunch of quarters to play the latest popular video game, see a movie at The Quad, or breakdance outside (yes, that was big back then).

Alas, The Meridian Quad has since been torn down many years ago, both the movie house and arcade building are absent from that area with a Round Table and other shops in their place.  But the

memories remain, especially when I put in a DVD or Blu-Ray of a film that I remember seeing at The Quad all those years ago.

It's funny that I went on with that narrative, waxing nostalgic about the movies I had seen during the 80s and where I saw them, because Chopping Mall was a film I'd neither seen at The Quad, nor had I seen it back when it was released in 1986.  In fact, I'd only heard of it a few years ago, seeing it online or in a review somewhere.

Probably the only reason that I'd talked about seeing movies in the 80s and the type that I loved seeing was that this flick fit that description so well.  Chopping Mall was the embodiment of cinema in the 80s where horror movies had a revival, being churned out left and right.  Some were god-awful...others were cheesy and laughable, with a few being really well done.  Believe it or not, this film was all of the above.

Park Plaza Mall decides to improve their security by implementing a small group of robots to be dispatched after the mall closes to thwart any crime that may transpire.  After being put into operation at the mall, a lightning strike hits the mall's antenna, going into the central hub of the robots' computer operation and creates a breakdown into the robots' programming, making them see anyone as a threat and causing them to use lethal force on anybody who comes across them.  As luck would have it, a group of teenagers–some who work at the mall–decide to have an after-hours party in the furniture store during the night the robots malfunction.  Will they be able to elude the robots' malevolence and survive the night?

First off, you may recognize the mall where the film took place, as many movies in the 80s featured this mall quite a bit–the Sherman Oaks Galleria Mall.  Fast Times at Ridgemont High had a lot of scenes filmed there, Weird Science as well, and a couple of Schwarzenegger's films–Commando and Terminator 2–contained some pivotal scenes there as well.

Now, I'd mentioned that Chopping Mall was awful, cheesy, laughable and well-done–a mixed bag of sequences if you will.  The acting, for its time, was believable with the cast having good chemistry together.  For the ridiculous subject matter, they really put on a good performance and made you believe in the threat they were facing throughout the story.  But the threat, when seen on the screen,

was sort of silly and pathetic, the robots looking like the one from Short Circuit and you sort of get the feeling that these were Star Wars rejects being used here.  The machines' primary weapon to dispatch the kids is some laser blast that they shoot out, but it's a cheap special effect that probably garnered more laughs than terror whenever this was shown in theaters.  It's really hard to take the robots seriously, especially when hearing the sounds they make and the robotic voices they use to communicate.

As horror fans, you may recognize a few familiar faces in this movie–Kelli Maroney, Russell Todd, and Barbara Crampton.  Maroney, who plays Alison Parks, is most notable for her role in Night of the Comet.  If you're a Friday the 13th nut like I am, you'll notice Russell Todd, playing Rick Stanton, was one of the victims from Friday the 13th Part 2.  Finally, Barbara Crampton, who plays Suzie Lynn, is probably the most recognizable as she's been in quite a few cult horror movies such as Re-Animator, From Beyond, and most recently, You're Next.

 

One noteworthy thing I can say about this film is that I watched it with today's standards in mind.  I'd never seen this film until recently, so there was really no nostalgic value that kept me from giving this a fair shake.  As a result, I felt that it was an amusing film, capturing the free nature of the 1980s' vibe and way of life for teenagers back then.  It also reminded me of how many silly films I had seen and come to love in that era as well.  All in all, I felt that I had watched this film in my youth because it definitely would've been something that I'd have been attracted to go see.

You can almost check off a virtual 1980s horror movie checklist when seeing Chopping Mall: Girls with big, fluffy overly hair-sprayed coifs?  Check.  Guys clearly in the late twenties who are playing teenagers?  Check.  Having sexual relations in really awkward places (in a furniture store, mere feet away from each other)?  Check.  Taking the whole film into account, the characters do so many dumb things that make you yell out to the screen, telling them not to do it and bad decisions are made throughout...I mean, this flick just has everything to make a good horror movie!

One downfall this disc has is that it's a bit misleading when you look at the title and cover art.  The name alone makes you think there's a maniac on the loose in a mall, chopping people up with a machete or cleaver.  Also, the cover shows someone dismembered in a shopping bag, so you can't help thinking you're going to be watching Friday the 13th in a shopping mall.  Initially, the film was to be named, Killbots–but they decided to go with what it's been titled...I think they should've stuck with the original title.

So, my final "bit"?

Any way you slice it (pardon the pun), you'll enjoy this movie if you're a child of the 80s like I am.  If you love horror films of that era, you'll love Chopping Mall.

Well, that's about it for now...thanks for reading and I welcome any comments that you may have.

Facebook page (Cinema Bits), Twitter (@CinemaBits).

Jeepers Creepers 2

Every 23rd Spring, for 23 days, it gets to eat... Welcome to day 23.

A while back, I had posted my thoughts on Jeepers Creepers (click here for that review) and how I thought it was an original concept, giving me a new horror film to watch annually.  I find that the horror franchises I like best are the ones that feature some sort of boogeyman as the villain who stalks after teens throughout the films.  Jeepers Creepers fit that bill nicely, right on par with Jason Voorhees and Freddy Krueger.  As much praise as I had given that first film, I'd never followed up with what I thought about its sequel, Jeepers Creepers 2.  So here I go...better late than never, I guess.

Back when 2001's Jeepers Creepers came out on home media, I'd queued it up on my Netflix list and had it sent to me shortly after.  It was a simple story, really, about a demonic being-The Creeper-that ate parts of people it needed for itself.  If it lost an arm or leg, it would eat the arm or leg of a person to replace its own arm or leg.  To do this, it drove some antiquated truck with a souped up engine that had one whopper of a horn and travelled the local highway for its victims.

Such a simple concept, yet it propelled this demonic being to the ranks of all the well-known horror icons in an instant.  But that film was only the tip of the iceberg, as we had more to learn about this mysterious creature, and that's where 2003's Jeepers Creepers 2 comes in.

When I had heard about that the sequel was going forth and being filmed, again written and directed by Victor Salva, I was pretty happy about it.  I had heard that the first film was cut here and there, as requested by the studio, to be able to skim it down to a shorter running time, so I was hoping we'd get a bit more story to what The Creeper is really all about.  As filming was taking place, more info came about as to what the story was going to be, and that's when the whole of the plot came out that it was going to take place on, and around, a bus filled with high schoolers.  I was a little disappointed initially because I loved the travelling aspect of the first film and how it took place in multiple locations.  Alas, I waited patiently and when the day came that Jeepers Creepers 2 was released in theaters, I took a drive to our town's local movie house and paid my money to see the film.

The film opens on a rural farm with Jack Taggart (Ray Wise) working on his post-installing machine while his eldest son, Jack, Jr. (Luke Edwards), is working on their pick-up and the youngest, Billy (Shaun Fleming), is out in the field, hanging scarecrows.  As Billy finishes propping up a scarecrow, he notices one off to the side that seems strange.  Seeing that the feet of the scarecrow are actually claws and that it starts to move, Billy runs, screaming, towards the farm.  Jack and his oldest run out to the field, but they're too late as The Creeper grabs Billy and flies off into the sky.  The film then moves to a school bus filled with a high school sports team and cheerleaders, driving down a rural highway.  The bus gets a flat tire and after pulling over, the driver and the coaches find a primitive object embedded in the tire.  With the inner tire still good, the bus keeps going, until the inner tire is flattened with another similar instrument.  Now stuck on the highway, with nightfall coming, the driver and coaches begin to be carried off by The Creeper, one by one, until only the teenagers are left on the bus.  Back at the Taggart Farm, after Jack's young son was taken by The Creeper, he decided he was going to find the creature and kill it, using his post installing machine that he converted into a harpoon cannon.  He and his eldest hear a plea from the kids on the bus on the CB and know it's The Creature that took his son.  Can he get there on time to save the kids and get his revenge?

For the most part, the film is a worthy sequel to the 2001 hit and does give a little bit more to The Creeper's background...but not much.  Again, like the first film, we have to rely on a character that happens to have some sort of psychic ability, this time with one of the cheerleaders who dreams of Darry (Justin Long) as he gives her the information about The Creeper.  We get too big of a group of characters, much of them without any character development, and it's hard to care much about them.  But we can put ourselves in their position as it would be a bit of a claustrophobic feeling to be trapped in a bus with the unknown danger lurking outside of it.

Ray Wise's character of Jack Taggart was the heart of this movie and should've been more prevalent in the story.  He sort of bookends the film with what happened to his son in the beginning and how he comes in to face the creature at the end.  But overall, he is the Captain Ahab of this tale with The Creeper being his Moby Dick.  The film is saved with that sense of revenge that the character tries to get because without it, the film wouldn't be much fun.

As I'd said, we do get a bit more of The Creeper in this one, but at the same time we're still treated to more mystery about it.  One thing for sure, we get to see that there really may be no way to kill it-after seeing the javelin scene, you'll know what I'm talking about.  But there's more flying scenes (as it seems to be his

preferred method of travel in this one), its use of weapons and tools, how its body works (sense of smell and if it really needs certain body parts to survive), and how relentless it can be.

Now, the special effects portions of the film are where the film suffers a little bit-just a little, not much.  Some of the flying scenes with The Creeper hovering in the air looks a little like stop motion and takes you out of the film a little.  Even the moment after the Javelin scene looks campy as they use a bit of morphing CGI, but it comes off looking a little hokey.  If this was ten years prior, when bad CGI was predominant in most films, I'd forgive it.  But this was 2003, folks...films those days had some really impressive computer effects.  Nevertheless, the movie features some good sight gags as well, like the javelin scene I'd mentioned earlier or the wing scene (you'll know it when you see it).  The scene where The Creeper is going after the pickup is pretty damned good as well and sort of reminds you of the T-Rex going after the Jeep in Jurassic Park.  The good effects cancels out the bad ones, so it's not a total loss and you can thoroughly enjoy the film.

So, what's my final "bit" on Jeepers Creepers 2?

Jeepers Creepers 2 definitely delivers the scares and the suspense, this time giving us a hero that wants to settle a score by avenging his son's death.  Though it suffers a bit by including such a large cast of characters, the story is well told and enjoyable.  The Creeper is certainly close to becoming a household name, so where's the sequel to this one?  It's been over ten years since Salva has mentioned that he has a script for a sequel, so what's the holdup?  IMDb has the sequel (Jeepers Creepers 3) under Salva's name, but with question marks where the year should be noted.  Are they going to wait the actual 23 years for another story?  Is it Salva's past that's in question?  What is it?  Hopefully we get it soon and keep The Creeper on the minds of horror hounds for years to come.  For now, I recommend both films...see them if you haven't already.

Thanks for reading...and I welcome any comments!

You can also tweet to me on Twitter (@CinemaBits) or check out my Facebook page here.

Jaws

 Well, summer's just around the corner, just a mere month or so away, and during this warmer time of year, I like to throw on a movie that showcases this particular season.  Being that there's not too many films out there-especially horror films-that highlight this hot time of year, I try to wait until we're in June or July before I insert my summer discs into my PS3 (no, I'm not upgrading to PS4 no matter what types of bells and whistles it has).  I'm already chomping at the bit to throw on my summer titles, but the one I usually go to first is Steven Spielberg's 1975 classic, Jaws.

Proclaimed to be the very first summer blockbuster, Jaws definitely delivers, to this day, the story and excitement a movie of that caliber should display.  Not only that, but the film is a nostalgic trip back to the days when people flocked to the beach for a day in the sun without worrying about high UV levels or having the constant need to be on a cell phone or on social media sites-those reservations wouldn't come up until the 90s.

Also, back then, real men were cast as the stars of films, not like today where all the stars of movies look to be in their prepubescent years.  You had men with scruff, full beards, deep voices, and hair on their chest...real men.  Okay, before you get the wrong idea of where I'm going with that, I'll switch gears and synopsize the film.

The film centers on the new Chief of Police of Amity Island, Martin Brody (the late great Roy Scheider) and how he moved his family to the small town life, away from the crime of the big city.  After a missing local girl, Chrissie Watkins (Susan Backlinie), turns up dead, washed ashore as an apparent Great White shark attack victim, Brody wants to close the beaches until further notice.  When Mayor Vaughn (Murray Hamilton) receives word of this, he quickly talks to Brody about it, telling him he's being hasty, trying to convince him that it may have been anything that killed the girl as he cites that she might've swam out too far and was hit by a boat's propeller.  He also mentions that the town relies on the tourists that come to visit the island and how closing the beaches would be detrimental to the town's businesses' expected summer income.  Brody warily agrees to keep the beaches open, but more shark attacks occur, resulting in Brody to do something about it.  With the help of a marine biologist, Matt Hooper (Richard Dreyfuss), and led by a local shark hunter, Quint (Robert Shaw), Brody sets out to the ocean to capture and kill the shark.

Where should I start?  I guess the very first shark attack is what really hooks you in, setting the movie up for a very scary ride and automatically makes you never want to swim in the ocean ever again.  After seeing what the girl goes through in the beginning of Jaws, swimming in the dark, with no one around...it sets up the mood perfectly.  And there's never any feeling of being ripped off, not seeing the shark throughout most of this movie, because that's exactly what we'd go through if we were put in that place-we'd never see the shark as well.  In my opinion, that's what's terrifying about this opening.

From beginning to end it's definitely a slow-burn, hinting at the threat through music cues and point-of-view underwater filming, the movie giving us a great dramatic piece during the first two acts while laying it on us throughout the third.  Spielberg may have wanted to give us more, but due to the special effects constraints and the notorious problems he had with the mechanical shark, it definitely was a blessing in disguise that it turned out the way it had.  The film as a whole certainly goes with the less-is-more approach, but it makes me wonder if the film would be as good as it is if they were able to get the shark to work perfectly.  Would we have had a Deep Blue Sea where it was too-much-shark and not-enough-story?  Probably not, but it's fun to speculate.

Now the performances throughout are stellar, each individual character gives their all and they never hold back.

Scheider, as the police chief was perfect and I can't see anybody ever playing this role but him.  The dramatic moments feel genuine when his character deals with the shark attacks and helps with the excitement of this movie.  Add to that, the touching moments between him and his family-especially the little mimicking scene with his little boy, Sean (Jay Mello)-develop his character perfectly.

I love Dreyfuss in this movie.  His Hooper character is beneficial to the film, providing a sense of credibility with having a marine biologist involved, giving the audience information about what's happening without really throwing it in our faces.  Yet, Dreyfuss offers the character human emotion, showing us he's not perfect with

a side of apprehensiveness that comes out when he's around the character of Quint.  And hearing that the two actors didn't get along with each other during the shoot makes the film that much more interesting.  Which brings me to Robert Shaw...

Shaw was brilliant as Quint and even though he plays him as an asshole in this story, he's so likeable and charismatic that you can't help but love the guy.  Of course, we all know the story of the account that Quint tells Brody and Hooper regarding his time on the USS Indianapolis.  It's a brilliantly acted out scene that gives the character such depth and a window to his past, letting us see that there's a sort of vendetta Quint wants to carry out.  Out of all the times I've seen this film throughout the years, I've never gotten tired of seeing and listening to that scene.

Jaws was the second collaboration between Steven Spielberg and John Williams (the first being Spielberg's first feature directorial debut, Sugarland Express), but this was the first memorable theme that really made the movie what it was and still is.  The simple two-note beginning is what most people from my generation think of when swimming in or around the ocean.  It's so well known for its basic motif that most people can-and love-to mimic it when swimming out in the water.  But besides the shark's iniquitous music cues, the rest of the score fits perfectly in whatever scene we see.  When we're watching the scenes where the residents and tourists are enjoying the first days of summer out on the beach, we hear happy melodies, giving us the Superman?  Or who can say with conviction that they didn't come close to tears when Elliot says goodbye to E.T. in E.T.: The Extraterrestrial?  Much like Halloween wouldn't be scary without John Carpenter's well known theme, Jaws wouldn't be what it is without John Williams score.

effect that it's a bright sunny day where all is pleasurable.  Williams is so good at giving us that feeling and we continue to hear that in all of his Spielberg collaborations.  Though it doesn't happen in this film, many of his scores evoke wide ranges of emotions out of me that I sometimes get a lump in my throat or have my eyes start to water when I hear them.  I mean, who doesn't feel a charge when Christopher Reeve dons the red & blues for the first time and we hear that famous theme song in

My final "bit" on Jaws?

Spielberg's 1975 film is and will always be a classic.  Though most kids today might find the shark a little fake-looking, being used to having everything CGI'd, you still can't escape the tension and terror one feels when watching this movie.  The actors have such great chemistry and work well together, whether they all had gotten along or not, and you'll really go through a rollercoaster ride with Jaws.  It's a must to watch, especially during the summer.  It's just a shame what the franchise turned into after part two.  Believe me...you don't want to watch anything after part two.

Well, guess I better get another Friday the 13th post ready...I want to make sure I get them all done by June 13th...which is on a Friday.  See where I'm going with this?

Thanks for reading and I welcome any comments that you may have.

Be sure the check out my Facebook page, Cinema Bits, and you can tweet at me on Twitter (@CinemaBits).

Jason Lives: Friday the 13th Part VI

Dammit!  I told myself I wouldn't do another franchise retrospective again!  But here I am, going over Jason Lives: Friday the 13th Part VI, and having a lot on my mind to put down in words.  You'd think after my look into films based on Stephen King's works, I'd be burned out by doing posts like this.  But seeing that this franchise is probably my favorite horror movie franchise-actually, it is-I guess it's worth it to put myself through such hell again.  At least this time I'm not committing myself to release each post, one by one.

So, right off the bat and after looking at all the titles in the whole franchise, you might see there's no consistency to the naming conventions.  The first sequel has "2" in the title, the third film goes with roman numeral "III," the fourth film has no number at all, the fifth one sometimes has a roman numeral "V" and sometimes it doesn't, and this one goes with having the subtitle first...didn't each filmmaker check what was there before?

All that aside, yes, the title says it all: Jason Lives!  It was exactly what everybody wanted, much like how everybody wanted Michael Myers back after he was absent from Halloween III, Jason comes back for this film and if it started anything, it was the debate whether Jason was a zombie or not.  Well, that's a discussion that I won't get into and my opinion on the matter will be kept to myself.  Some call this the conclusion of a Tommy Jarvis trilogy and I can agree with that: In part four Tommy is psychologically affected by Jason when he has to kill him, in part five he overcomes his trauma, and in this one he finishes what he'd started and puts Jason down for good.  Or does he...?

Well, the film starts with Tommy (Thom Mathews), seeming to be a little better-he's talking a lot more, that's for sure.  Along with his institute friend, Allen (the late, great Ron Palillo of "Welcome Back Kotter" fame), they head to the gravesite of Jason Voorhees with shovels and containers of gasoline.  Although Allen tries to talk Tommy out of doing what he's about to do, as he's clearly freaked out about being in a graveyard late at night, he helps him dig up the grave and open up the coffin.  In a moment of grief-stricken anger, as he

remembers what happened long ago, Tommy pulls out a part of the wrought iron fence and begins to stab the corpse of Jason, leaving the piece of metal pierced into the dead body as a storm approaches.  Tommy throws the hockey mask he brought with him into the coffin and says, "yeah, fuck you, Jason," and begins to get the gasoline ready, apparently to burn up Jason's body for good.  Suddenly, lightning strikes and hits the metal piece twice, bringing Jason to life.  He gets out of his coffin, kills Allen and goes for Tommy.  After splashing the fuel on Jason, Tommy can't light a match to burn Jason-especially with the rain starting to come down-and decides to flee.  Jason dons the hockey mask once more to continue his carnage in the community of Forest Green, formally known as...Crystal Lake.

Right away, you know this film is going to be a bit goofy, particularly when you see the beginning credits.  You see, when Jason puts on the mask, the camera zooms in on one of the darkened eyeholes until we get a little "James Bond" type of scene with Jason walking and turning to slash toward the camera.  It's kind of cool, but silly.

Although I thought Thom Mathews put on a good performance, the casting of him to play Tommy Jarvis didn't appear seamless in comparison to the actor who played him in part five (John Shepherd)-he goes from being nearly mute in part five to never shutting up in part six.  Also, the chemistry between his character and Megan (Jennifer Cooke) seemed out of place.  Not forced or bad, just not supposed to be in this movie and between those characters.

So, okay, let's talk about the good...

• I like how they went with this resurrection scene to get Jason back up and moving around again.  The franchise needed to get him going again and this not only helped him back in the picture, but also explained why he wasn't in the previous film-he was dead.  It was actually a pretty cool part, how Tommy was suddenly filled with anger and decided to vent it out by stabbing him over and over with the piece of fence, which gave the lightning a perfect conduit to strike and jumpstart Jason again, à la Frankenstein's Monster.

• The aftermath of the RV kill scene, when the Winnebago flips to its side and sits there burning.  The image of Jason bursting through the door and climbing on top of the smoldering RV, standing, was monumental.

• Although silly up to the point, when the drunk graveyard caretaker throws his empty bottle and expecting it to break in the distance and he turns around to see Jason has caught it in mid-air, was a phenomenal kill scene (even though it cuts away and we don't actually see the death of the caretaker).

Okay, let's talk about the bad...

• Right away, I had a bad feeling about the cemetery caretaker.  The actor really overdid it with the constant drinking, breaking the fourth wall, and just using the cheesiest lines.  The "farthead" line still makes me cringe when I see and hear it today.

• The deputy's "ya bang" line was ridiculous.

• The paint gun scene was silly and tried to bring comedy where it shouldn't be.

• The stupid "Camp Blood" card game that Sissy (Renée Jones) explains was ludicrous and seemed like a boring game anyway.

• The two boys from camp who the filmmakers tried to feature as a little comedy team fell flat each time they were on the screen.

• Above all else, the most annoying character in the film was Cort (Tom Fridley).  His clothes, attempt at being charming, the camp tale he tried telling the kids, the RV scene...every time I saw him on the screen, it made me feel like turning off the movie.

Yes, the movie was definitely not one of my favorites from the franchise; however, I sit through it because I'm a completist.  Not only that, but there are some validating qualities here and there.  It's just that the interjecting of comedy-not to mention illogical actions by some of the characters-was too much for a film like this and I really think it ruined it, giving it too much of a surreal feel to it.

I really didn't think I was going to get that deep into this film, but I guess I let my feelings show a little too much.  It's just that this franchise is my favorite of the horror genre and, over the years, Paramount let it go to the wayside until they just sold the rights away.  Remembering these films as a staple of the 80s and my teenage years, it saddens me that the franchise was treated disrespectfully.

Anyway, my final "bit" on Jason Lives: Friday the 13th Part VI?

Fun fact: This is the first of the franchise not to have a nude scene featured in the film, even though two characters have sex before the RV kill (it was fully clothed).  Regardless of that fun fact, it's not too fun of a movie.  Besides the beginning, there's really not much more to it.  Really, all you'll have to do is see the beginning and then fast forward to the climax on the lake.  I was never really a big fan of the gloved Jason

with the utility belt and I don't know why they went with this design of his look-at least they didn't get rid of the hockey mask.  But he's still the unstoppable force that can't be put down so easily and there are still some scares and good times scattered throughout this outing.  See this only if you're a die hard aficionado of the franchise.  If you are, you know I didn't need to tell you this.

Thanks for reading and I welcome any comments!

You can also tweet to me on Twitter: @CinemaBits or check out my Facebook page here.

The Amazing Spider-Man 2

Currently, as I write this, I'm sitting at home, deciding whether I should take a trip to the local multiplex to see the new Spidey flick.  After 2012's reboot, the world of Spider-Man was ruined for me (for that review, click here).  Being a diehard Spidey fan all of my life, that's a tough thing for me to admit.  I've actually considered putting a halt to collecting all things Spidey, due to that one movie.  Where Sam Raimi solidified my love for the comic book character, Marc Webb is making me reconsider.

It's funny, looking back at the first (rebooted) film, how a lot of changes were made just to distance that new movie from Raimi's trio of films.  The crudest of changes was the costume...ugh!  The photos released were rebuked and ridiculed by all the fans as it gave us an early look to how the film was going to be.  To hear that Raimi wanted to feature The Lizard in his (never accomplished) part four film and Sony talked him out of it, only to have that same villain in the reboot is ludicrous.  The constant boasting that they were going to cut down the CGI and simply use practical wire work to display Spider-Man's web swinging, then the movie CGI'd the shit out of The Lizard, was a little confusing.  The worst, by far, is that the whole world of Peter Parker was a big Twilight vibe that just reeked of shitty writing.

I'll say this for the sequel to 2012's reboot-at least the production listened and decided to go back to Spidey's traditional look that Raimi's films captured, even going a bit further to make him look exactly like the comic book depiction.  But what I've seen so far in the trailers-the mechanical Rhino and the hair gelled Green Goblin-makes me want to skip this.  I can already see that everything is tying into Oscorp, with all the villains gaining their abilities or toys from the company.  Plus it looks like they're going to continue the boring saga of Peter's parents and why they left him as a child.  It was uninteresting in the comics and it appears unexciting in this new rebooted franchise.

Now, a lot of people are pissed that Sony has the rights to Spider-Man and that they wish Marvel would gain the rights back for their film production company, getting the character involved in their cinematic universe, and I agree.  But that's the way things happened, Marvel Comics sold the live-action movie rights to the Spider-Man character a loooooong time ago, way before they had their own movie production.  I'd hate to admit it, but if it weren't for them selling the rights to Spidey and some of the other Marvel characters, we probably wouldn't have the movies they'd given us so far, leading to the upcoming Avengers 2 and beyond.  But we can all do something about it...we can join the "Boycott Remakes" movement and help the cause to have Marvel gain all their characters back (for more on that, click here).

Well, I'm going to try and have an open mind...I'm going to head over to watch The Amazing Spider-Man 2.

Okay, after a scant 3 hours (movie plus previews and the interesting after-credits stinger), I'm back.  So, without beating around the bush, I'll admit, it was a good movie.

Before getting into some of the aspects and scene expositions of the movie, let me break down the story for you.

The film opens with Peter Parker's parents, in a flashback scene, showing them heading somewhere on a private jet after fleeing their home and leaving their son with his aunt and uncle.  As Peter's dad, Richard (Campbell Scott), is trying to transfer a file to somewhere called "Roosevelt," one of the pilots comes out of the cockpit to try and kill them.  The plane becomes crippled and is about to crash, but not before we see that Richard was able to complete the file transfer.  The film then cuts to present day, where we see Peter/Spider-Man (Andrew Garfield) at work, helping police stop an armored car jacking.  During the chase scene, Spidey saves the life of Max Dillon (Jamie Foxx), a lowly electric engineer of Oscorp who later becomes an electrically supercharged villain named Electro after an accident at work.  Struggling with the promise he made Captain Stacy (an uncredited Denis Leary) about staying away from his daughter, Gwen (Emma Stone), Peter goes up against the powerful Electro and defeats him.  But after escaping his incarceration, Electro returns, more powerful than ever, going up against Spider-Man, to try and destroy him for good.

Well, to go over the film, piece by piece, let me start from the beginning, because there's a lot more to that short summation I'd just given.

So the opening with the plight of Peter's parents was interesting, especially after seeing where it went as it was revealed near the end of the film.  I still think it's a little unnecessary to bring the story of Richard and Mary Parker into this franchise, but it was a nice little thrilling scene to start the film.  As I'd read the comics and the saga of Peter's parents reemerged back into his life, I thought it was interesting.  I'm sure every fan of the comic book series wanted to know whatever happened to his parents and how he ended up with his aunt and uncle, so the series answered those questions...until they were revealed to be a couple of androids put into Peter's life by some villain. But hopefully, and by the looks of it in The Amazing Spider-Man 2, the story has been put to bed in the new rebooted franchise and we've heard and seen the last of his parents...but I won't hold my breath.

It's good to see Peter has honed his skills perfectly since the first film.  While he was a little bungling and clumsy when he came into his powers in part one, he now can swing and maneuver beautifully throughout the buildings and sky as if it were second nature to him.  Even though I refused to see this in 3D (still not convinced by the gimmick that costs an extra five or six dollars to experience...not only that, but in accomplishing my Boycott Remakes Movement, I had to see the standard version of the film), the scenes of Spidey web-slinging and travelling through New York's cityscapes was amazing.  Not only that, but the way he uses his webbing to achieve some of the movements he needs to perform to avoid danger was pretty incredible-kudos to the special effects crew for that CGI (so much for wire work, eh, Marc Webb?).

We definitely get a better Spidey in this sequel-wisecracking, joking, and humorous camaraderie with police and firemen-it's almost right out of the comic book pages.  Garfield certainly improves in this one, as does the costume, so it's obvious that the filmmakers listened to the gripes of the real Spider-Man fans.  Though I still love the look of the character in the Raimi films, this new look comes pretty close.  I guess it has a lot to do with Garfield's physique, because he's a tall gangly kid and already looks a little strange sans costume.  I only wish they'd fit the costume a little better, but I believe it was done purposely to give the outfit a more realistic look to it.

I had my reservations with Jamie Foxx as Electro-I'd quit collecting comic books in the late 90s and I'm not familiar with the "Ultimate" titles or volume 2 of the "Amazing" title of books-but my concerns went away when I witnessed him in this film, especially when he becomes Electro.  As he was being portrayed as the nobody before gaining his powers, I felt it was a little cartoony and out of place, losing the realism of the film.  Memories of Jim Carrey as Edward Nygma in Batman Forever came to mind when I was watching Foxx play the pre-Electro character.  However, it was soon forgiven after his transformation into the villain.

The continued story of Gwen and Peter is pretty well done as we see great chemistry between Emma Stone and Andrew Garfield.  I guess it helps that they're a couple in real life, but I'd think they'd pull off their performances regardless.  Gone is the Twilight-esque vibe we'd gotten from the 2012 film with more of an upbeat love story between the two in this one.  However, besides being the love interest of Peter Parker, the character of Gwen Stacy really didn't add much to the story.  What the character did provide-a few plot devices that helped Spider-Man in his second encounter with Electro-could've been thought up by the hero himself, which is pretty much what he'd do in the comic books.  I do have a few more words of critique I'd like to impart, but I don't want to give any more of the story away so I'll leave it at that.

The one character that was wasted and had nothing to add to this story was Aunt May (Sally Field).  Besides being in the movie to show her being upset with Peter for being late to graduation or turning the laundry red and blue, there really was no need to include her in the film.  But, of course, that would upset fans like me who'd decree it a sin to have a Spidey flick without Aunt May.  I just wish they'd give her more to do or have the character be more influential to Peter/Spider-Man.

Two characters I didn't mention in the synopsis were Alexsei Sytsevich (Paul Giamatti) and Harry Osborn (Dane Dehaan).

Giamatti's scenes were very tiny, with the few minutes in the opening to reestablish the audience to Spider-Man's heroics and another at the end to introduce us to Sytsevich's alter-ego, The Rhino.  Although very short, Giamatti played the part a little too animated and way overboard on top of that.  We really get no character development about his part, but maybe we'll get it in the sequel or in the "Sinister Six" standalone

movie that has been promised.  Above all else, I really don't get why Oscorp developed an armor that resembles a rhinoceros.

Dane Dehaan's Harry Osborn has a bit more to do in this film and is responsible for some of the chaos that goes on near the middle act of the story.  But the whole introduction of his character was a little forced and rushed.  One thing that had me amused was that Harry's brought in to take over his father's estate and company.  As Norman Osborn (Chris Cooper, also uncredited) is on his death bed, he lets his son know that his disease has been passed down to him as it's hereditary.  Just then, Harry's hand starts trembling and soon after, he starts feeling the effects of the disease.  It just seemed a little strange that Harry shows up looking to be in perfect health and after his dad says he has the same ailment, he starts looking sickly.

Overall, the continued everything-ties-in-to-Oscorp storyline is already getting tired in my opinion.  But I guess it gives the villains credence to how they gain their super-powered abilities and/or subsequent mechanical devices.

One last thing before I get into my final words of this film is the music score, credited not only to Hans Zimmer but also Johnny Marr and Pharrell Williams.  If there's anything I dislike about this movie is the music featured throughout.  Oddly enough, Zimmer's themes were a little off and didn't mesh well with the themes.  The music seemed to want to go somewhere that the scene was not portraying and I noticed it right away.  But the worst was the decision to include pop songs peppered during the film; it ruined whatever was happening and stuck out like a sore thumb as not belonging whatsoever.

Well, without further ado, here's my final "bit" on The Amazing Spider-Man 2...

The film is a much more confident and established movie than the 2012 film.  Where the first (rebooted) film left plotlines dangling or just had open voids that went nowhere, part two answers some questions and leaves no doors unopened.  Director Marc Webb seemed to have a better plan here and stuck to it, proving to be more poised with his storytelling of the webbed one.  The movie has very superb action scenes and entertaining dialogue, so it won't disappoint the average movie-going fan.  The only downfall to the villains was their short range of going from liking Peter Parker/Spider-Man to outright hating him.  Other than that, the film was pretty solid in its entertainment value.  But as a Spider-Man fan, I'd still say this franchise pales in comparison to what Sam Raimi accomplished back in '02 and '04.  If I were to grade all the Spidey films, Raimi's and Webb's combined, starting from worst to best, these would be the rankings:

5) The Amazing Spider-Man (2012)
4) Spider-Man 3 (2007)
3) The Amazing Spider-Man 2 (2014)
2) Spider-Man (2002)
1) Spider-Man 2 (2004)

So, right down the middle is where this film falls in contrast.  But don't get me wrong...it's a very good film, great for the whole family and it won't disappoint.  Even if you're a comic book fan, you'll enjoy it and like the improvement from the first rebooted film.  The Amazing Spider-Man 2 is worth a watch while it's still in theaters, but don't fall for the hype of 3D and just enjoy it in the standard format (not to mention avoiding the migraine-like headache you get when wearing those glasses).

So, that's my look at the latest Spidey film...not as bad as I thought it was going to be, but I'll stick with my movement to stop remakes (click here for more info).

Until next time, you can reach me on Twitter or Facebook.

Thanks for reading!

Van Helsing

Now, in films over the last twenty years or so, there have been good and bad CGI performances.  The good stuff is what you see in today's films and I'm not sure how much more they can improve on what we've seen thus far.  The bad stuff is what we saw when the CGI craze came out after Terminator 2, with Anaconda being the worst I've seen.  During the first decade of the 21st century, however, the motion capture aspect helped things out quite a bit, but there was always the problem with the eyes when creating a fully animated person or creature.  The eyes never looked quite right and it was definitely a difficult thing to perfect, until just recently where the performers are known to have their eyes filmed and it's somehow all brought together when rendering the CGI image.  Van Helsing has good and bad CGI, with the werewolf effects not so good, but the Wives of Dracula looking pretty damned good when shown in flying form.

Van Helsing is definitely not some artsy-fartsy film looking to earn an Oscar-or any other type of award for that matter-it's simply a film for the audience to have fun with, nothing more.  Stephen Sommers directed the film as a nostalgic nod to the classic Universal Monsters like Dracula, Frankenstein and The Wolf Man and is basically an extension of the two Mummy films he'd directed a few years prior.

The film begins, in black & white, with Dr. Frankenstein (Samuel West) bringing to life his creation: Frankenstein's Monster (Shuler Hensley).  Dracula (Richard Roxburgh) is there and wants the doctor to use his skills and knowledge for some plans he has in store.  When the doctor refuses, Dracula kills him.  The Monster, coming to life and seeing what the vampire had done to his creator, tries to destroy Dracula-but doesn't, obviously-and flees to a nearby windmill, only to have the townspeople take chase and burn the

windmill down.  Gabriel Van Helsing (Hugh Jackman) is introduced as the film metamorphoses into color and he's established as a monster hunter, going after Mr. Hyde (computer generated-with dead eyes-and voiced by Robbie Coltrane) in France, resorting to involuntarily killing him-as well as killing Dr. Jekyll (Stephen Fisher).  As he returns to the Knights of the Holy Order, he's chastised about killing the schizophrenic doctor, but is assigned a new task: to help the descendants of the Valerious lineage kill Count Vladislaus Dracula.  It seems generations ago, the family swore to kill Dracula and will not enter into heaven until he is destroyed.  Van Helsing, along with his trusted friar, Carl (David Wenham), travel to Transylvania to meet with the last known descendant of the Valerious family, Anna (Kate Beckinsale)- it's believed her brother, Velkan (Will Kemp), was killed by a werewolf, but was, unbeknownst to Anna, cursed with being a werewolf himself- to help find and kill the dreaded Count Dracula.

The story may sound complicated, and it is, but there's nothing that goes over your head as you watch this.  Since the whole story makes use of the well-known monsters of Universal Studios prominence, there's really no need to develop those icons any further or change what we know about them.  Everyone knows Frankenstein's Monster, we all know that Dracula's the original vampire that started it all, and-guess what?-when there's a full moon, anyone with the curse of the beast turns into a werewolf.  All these icons are household names and most everyone recognizes them when they see them.  That's the genius of Van Helsing, in my view.

The way the character of Gabriel Van Helsing is shown as some sort of 19th century "James Bond," complete with his sidekick, Friar Carl, acting as his Q, who stockpiles Van Helsing with all sorts of weaponry he'll need, is pretty cool.  I like the scenes before they set off for Transylvania, how they go into the lab where all these weapons and devices are kept, as Carl goes over certain arms and explosions.  The weapons look primitive, albeit a bit advanced, and I doubt if they'd work in real life, but it's still pretty cool to see what they do...especially those portable circular saws that Van Helsing uses on Mr. Hyde.

All the monster principles are presented and aren't really changed.  But the writers did add a scheme that we've never seen in any movie before (to my knowledge), regarding Dracula's plan and his use of Dr. Frankenstein's technology.  Although, this may be where the movie falls flat, but I like that they added it.  The subplot gives reason to have Frankenstein's Monster in the film, giving him a few memorable moments as well as a heroic scene near the end of the movie.  It's an interesting scheme that Dracula comes up with, which had originated from Dr. Frankenstein's work in creating his creature and gives them a nice tie to each other.  Since Dracula and his three wives (Elena Anaya, Silvia Colloca, and Josie Maran) are technically dead, the children that are born of them are dead...not even living-dead like Dracula and his mates.  So, he wants Frankenstein's technology to make his children live.  Trouble is there are thousands of them and only a few hundred people living in the small village nearby.  But the scene culminates pretty abruptly, raising everything to the next level.

The movie, as a whole, is very lighthearted and doesn't seem as threatening as it would have if it were an R-rated film.  But, as movie studio execs keep doing in error, they constantly churn out PG-13 films so they can widen the audience and make more money; however, it's more like they're giving the finger to real horror adherents like myself.  Even still, the film is very enjoyable, something you can watch with the whole family, especially if you want to introduce these classic monsters to someone who's never heard of them.

Although we all know Jackman as Wolverine, he's pretty proficient at changing his personality so that you don't constantly see the X-Men character every time he's on screen.  I guess it helps that he doesn't have the fuzzy porkchop sideburns down his face and that claws don't "snikt" out of his fists every so often.  Jackman even gives his character an odd accent throughout this film; it's not an English accent or his native Australian one...it's almost in between English and American, but he keeps it the whole time.  Above all else, he definitely knows how to play the hero.

Kate Beckinsale does well as Anna Valerious, complete with the Transylvanian accent and that outfit...wow!  She holds her own and doesn't just sit back and play the damsel in distress-she kicks some ass!  Did I mention the outfit?

All the performances are great and I really thought this would hit it off as a multi-picture franchise.  I certainly could've seen Jackman recur this role, coming back to hunt more of the classic monsters we all know and love.  But, for some reason, this film didn't fare well with critics.  However, we'll probably see the character again-just not Hugh Jackman in the role-as word is going around that Universal wants to green light a reboot (surprise, surprise) with Tom Cruise in the lead.  I'm a big fan of Cruise, but...I don't know about that.

My final "bit" on Van Helsing is that it's a fun film with a fun story, as they're faithful to the iconic status of the Universal Monsters.  Don't miss it!

Thanks for reading and I welcome any comments!

You can also tweet to me on Twitter: @CinemaBits or visit my Facebook page here.

The Road Warrior

You know, most of my posts begin with a nostalgic story on how I came about the film that I discuss.  It’s only because I remember little things that happen before, during, and after viewing the film.  When I first saw Superman: The Movie back in 1978, I’ll never forget that it was the mother of my brother’s friend, Brian, who’d driven us to the movie theater and dropped us off to watch it.  I even remember when we stepped out of the theater and Brian kidded with me that I’d developed a spit curl like Christopher Reeve had had in the movie, having a good laugh about it afterwards.  The same year, my brother and I were treated to the re-release of Star Wars by our grandmother’s husband, John.  I’ll never forget how Corvette Summer was playing in the same multiplex and he thought we might’ve wanted to see that instead, giving us the option to go see that while he went to see Star Wars.  I guess he thought kids wanted to see the other movies because it was the cool one to see, but we assured him it was Star Wars that struck our fancy.  In 1984, my mom had dropped off my brother and me to see The Terminator at the popular Meridian Quad multiplex and after picking us up, witnessing an 81-year-old man getting run down—later passing away—by some idiot who ran the red light. 

Yes, every movie has a memory behind it, either some minor detail like me inadvertently having a spit curl or a vast event where an elderly man lost his life.

Well, watching The Road Warrior back in 1982 was no different.

Another popular multiplex my brother and I frequented was the Hacienda Six in Sunnyvale, California.  At that point in time, I’d never been able to see an R-rated movie, both forbidden by my parents and not being able to get in one of them because of my 13-year-old age.   However, my brother and I found ourselves at that theater one day with another friend of his named Wesley.  Probably there to see some other movie besides The Road Warrior, we were hanging out by the arcade games while waiting for the movie to start.  For some reason, Wesley (who was one of my brother’s trouble-making friends) was talking it up with one of the theater workers there and saying something to him, while they were taking turns on a video game.  After a few minutes, when he came over to us, he informed us that the worker was his friend and that he was going to let us watch The Road Warrior because he lost a bet on the game they were playing.  Of course, we were all excited, and at the same time a little scared, to see our first R-rated movie in a theater.  So, when the time came, we found ourselves in the seats of the theater and widened our eyes as the movie began.

We’d sat and saw a good portion of the film, taking in all the curse words and terrified, yet excited, when we saw the girl getting her clothes torn off and seeing her bare naked breasts, and just enthralled at how much of a bad-ass we saw in Mel Gibson.  Even though Wesley assured us he’d gotten the okay for us to be in this theater to watch this age-restricted movie, I still had a bit of apprehension about it, thinking that someone was going to come in and kick us out.  After a while, I had stopped worrying and figured it was smooth

sailing until the end of the film.  But just as we had started getting comfortable, thinking we were going to see this film through—and around the part where the villains of the film try to take the compound and the little feral boy throws his boomerang, slicing off the fingers of one of the bad guys as he tried to catch it—the same worker, who Brian claimed gave us the okay to see the movie, walks up to us and tells us to get out.  I was embarrassed, upset, and a little scared, all at the same time.

I can’t remember what happened afterwards, if we went back to the movie that we’d paid for or if we were kicked out completely, but I’ll never forget that first taste of seeing an R-rated movie in a theater setting.  It’d be another year or so before I was able to see the film in its entirety—most likely on Showtime—but I’d finally seen it and I’d become a fan of Mel Gibson all over again.

One thing about this film at the time that I hadn’t discovered was that it’s actually a sequel to an Australian film called Mad Max.  As a matter of fact, when looking up this title, IMDb.com has it listed as Mad Max 2: The Road Warrior, and I believe I actually saw the Blu-Ray in the store the other day with that actual title printed on the cover.  I guess back then, the first film wasn’t that well known in America, so Warner Bros. packaged this film to look like a stand-alone film.  And it works, because I hadn’t known it was a sequel until the first film gained some popularity in the States.  But anyone can watch this film without the knowledge of the first one, due to the recap or explanation as to why the world (in Australia anyway) went to hell in a hand basket.

So that’s how The Road Warrior begins, with a narrative voice-over (by Harold Baigent), explaining how war ravaged the world as the oil and fuel economy collapsed, leaving gangs of scavengers killing and pillaging for fuel.  In the midst of all this, it left Max (Mel Gibson) a shell of a man after gangs of scavengers took the lives of his wife and infant child.  But Max drives to survive, as he and his faithful (and clever) dog scavenge as well to get fuel and whatever other necessities they can find.  After Max is attacked by, then gets the upper hand on, a man who calls himself the Gyro Captain (due to him using a gyrocopter as his means of travel), they come upon a compound containing a refinery.  The place is under siege by a large gang on motorcycles and hot rods, all led by a big muscular masked man who calls himself Lord Humungus, and Max decides to help the compound and the people living there to protect their fuel as long as he can get some in return for his services.

The director, George Miller, certainly had what it took—and of course he still does—to make a blow-em-up, ass-kicking action flick of Hollywood proportions.  Being that this was a foreign film—an Ausploitation flick to boot—you’d think it’d be a little subpar.  But, on the contrary, this movie went above and beyond Hollywood movies of its time pale in comparison.  Miller just knew how to film this, obviously mounting cameras on the sides of the vehicles or even building platforms on the sides of the cars and trucks to place him in the action as he filmed.  But all that he did unquestionably made the film what it was, dangerous or not.  He knew what the audience wanted to see and feel, giving them front row in all these crazy scenes, and it worked terrifically.

with the chase scenes, explosions and stunts…so much so, that

Speaking of all the action and stunt work in the film, there was an over indulgence of it, making any fan of the genre happy beyond belief.  I don’t think the film would’ve been as successful if all these stunts weren’t in the film and we might’ve never heard of Mel Gibson today (I’m not sure whether that’s good or bad).  I’ll say this about the stunt work in this film: the one memorable stunt we see in this film is the guy flying off the car and flipping head-over-foot in the air and, to this day, I’ve never seen a more fantastic stunt in a movie.  Side note, however, I heard that was a mistake in coordination and the guy accidentally hit the car and the flipping was unintentional, causing the stuntman to be seriously hurt (I believe you can tell that he broke his leg in that scene if you put the DVD in slow motion).

With all the intense action and dystopian themes involved in this film, my favorite part is actually a funny lighthearted scene involving Max’s dog.  After getting the edge over the Gyro Captain, Max ties him up and puts him in the backseat of his car.  A shotgun is positioned with a string tied to the trigger, with the other end

tied to a dog toy that Max’s dog has in his mouth.  As they’re all driving along the Outback, a rabbit hopping in the distance catches the dog’s eye, worrying the Captain.  I’ve got to say, that dog was well-trained.

Anyway, I’ve gushed about The Road Warrior long enough, so let’s get my final “bit” on it.

The film is a classic, definitely putting Australian films on the movie-making map.  George Miller made something here that outshined most other futuristic films, making us believe the world might come to this one day.  Although there are some silly get-ups and situations involving the villains, overall it’s a scary look at a very dystopian world the planet might come to if we ever run out of necessary resources.  This is, by all means, my favorite Mel Gibson film…you shouldn’t miss it.

Well…that’s it for now.  So thanks for reading and I welcome any comments!

Please check out my Cinema Bits Facebook page here...and you can also tweet to me on Twitter: @CinemaBits.