Diablo

I love westerns, but by 2016, it can be genuinely hard to bring something new to the genre. To any genre really. It's tough. So what do you say about 2015's Diablo? It's a western with some potential to be pretty decent...but it just ISN'T. It's not very good, but there is a twist. A good twist. What's your take though? Is that twist enough to save an otherwise mediocre-to-bad movie?

It's 1872 in the Colorado Territory and a young rancher, Jackson (Scott Eastwood), is woken in the dead of night. His home, his barn, his corrals are on fire, and he sees three men riding away to the south with his wife. He rides out in the morning having to make up time and miles on the trail, all with the hope of getting his wife back and exacting revenge on the men who kidnapped her. Nothing will come easy though in the pursuit as Jackson meets all sorts of obstacles though. His biggest obstacle? That could be himself as his violent past threatens to tear him apart before he can catch up and save his wife. Can he somehow do it?

As I write today's western review, I check the count and see that I've written 245 western reviews since starting my movie review blog. I've been in a good place lately, watching and re-watching westerns as quick as I could. So while this western from director/writer Lawrence Roeck didn't get a theatrical release (that I'm aware of), I had to give it a shot. The verdict is pretty straightforward. Though there's potential, it simply isn't very good. I'll give westerns the benefit of the doubt for the most part but this one has too many holes.

What's most disappointing is that Roeck and his crew are clearly fans of the genre. Filmed in Alberta, Canada, 'Diablo' is a beautiful-looking film. This isn't the sun-drenched desert vistas you might expect in a western. This is the snow-capped mountains, the frigid air, the bundled-up cowboys so that's pretty cool, an interesting change of pace. The shots of Eastwood's Jackson riding through the mountains, across a snowy ridge, cutting across the horizon, they're gorgeous...at first. The movie's only 82 minutes long, and I'm betting 30 minutes are simply establishing shots of a rider riding. Helicopter shots, overhead shots, from the side, from the other side, from behind, straight-on....oh my goodness. It's repetitive and repetitive and repetitive. The same for the musical score. It's appropriate but it tries to be too big and epic-based when the story just doesn't call for it. 'Diablo' knows and respects the western genre but can't quite get there.

Then there's the twist. Looking back on it and the build-up, there are hints as to what's coming. I didn't pick up on them at the time. Either they're too subtle or I just take the western at face value too much (See it and you'll understand my issue; read 'dumbness.') Reading some message boards, some other critics' reviews, the twist is pretty divisive; love it or hate it. For me, it took me by surprise completely. I didn't see it coming. I thought it worked...but it is underutilized. No spoilers, but the reveal comes at the hour-mark after a painfully slow first hour. Then when we should be reveling in the reveal, the movie ends 15 minutes later. The credits roll at the 77-minute mark. We waste so much time getting to that point that it feels completely -- no check that, COMPLETELY -- wasted. I'll give credit where it's due, and the final scene ends on a creepy shocker, but again, it is almost all potential.

The son of the legendary Clint Eastwood (still the coolest), Scott Eastwood has been working in film and television since 2006 and he seems to be taking off a bit in the star department. He's still developing though as an actor and struggles at times when he doesn't get any help from the script. Eastwood does show his skill though, but in a short movie with so many moving pieces, he kinda gets lost in the shuffle. Who else to look for? Some cool names, some recognizable faces including Walton Goggins, Danny Glover, Tzi Ma, Camilla Belle, Jose Zuniga, Adam Beach and Joaquim de Almeida as some folks who pop up along the trail. Most aren't around for more than a scene or two, but it is cool to see them in a western story. Just wish the source material was a little stronger.

Too bad in the end. With some tweaks here and a fleshed-out story there, we're talking a pretty decent little flick. There's just too many holes here. A short movie is almost unbearably slow, the dialogue is some of the most stilted I've ever heard, and a potentially really cool twist never gets a chance to take off. I'll ever so slightly recommend it for the gimmick, for that twist, but other than that, probably for diehard western fans only.

Diablo (2015): * 1/2 /****

Lonesome Dove

Sometimes you just need to sit back and take it all in. Just appreciate a movie for being pretty much perfect on all levels. Case in point? The 1989 CBS miniseries Lonesome Dove, based off the Pulitzer Prize-winning novel -- also an all-timer and one of my favorites -- from author Larry McMurtry. Aired over four nights, the miniseries pulled in crazy ratings, better reviews, and rave reviews for its cast. It deserves every positive thing it got. It is a true classic, and regardless of its TV roots, one of the best westerns of all-time.

Along the Rio Grande River in the town of Lonesome Dove in south Texas, former Texas Rangers Capt. Augustus McCrae (Robert Duvall) and Capt. Woodrow F. Call (Tommy Lee Jones) own the Hat Creek Company, working as cattle buyers and sellers, selling an occasional horse but nothing too lucrative. After creating quite a name for themselves as Rangers when all of Texas was still a wilderness, the duo has drifted into obscurity some. They're pleasantly surprised when a good friend from their past and a former ranger himself, Jake Spoon (Robert Urich), rides into Lonesome Dove telling them how beautiful and untouched the Montana territory far to the north is. Call gets the idea in his head to put together a herd of cattle and drive them all the way to the territory, starting up the first cattle ranch in Montana. Gus and several of their men are wary but go along with it. The veteran Rangers have their reasons for going -- both very different -- but no one involved has any real idea what awaits them on the trail.

It's impossible to condense a 900-plus page novel and a four-part miniseries running 384 minutes into one concise paragraph explaining the plot. Expanding a little, the two Rangers drive a cattle herd from south Texas to Montana, experiencing all the good, bad, dangerous and terrifying that the trail has to offer. Without getting too cheesy/flowery, it's about friendship, love, betrayal, pride, loyalty and on the biggest level, the changing times in the west, seen through the eyes of old and young men alike. There is a subplot I've lost interest in over the years and repeated viewings/readings, but Lonesome Dove is as perfect a movie as I've ever seen. I highly recommend the novel too if you're a reader looking for a good book.

Director Simon Wincer does an admirable job bringing McMurtry's novel to life. Decisions that are made to streamline the story excise non-essential characters, scenes and explanation to make a four-part miniseries into a miniseries running longer than six hours that flies by. The filming locations are perfect, helping set up the passage of time with cinematographer Dean Semler turning in a beautiful-looking story. A TV miniseries might seem limiting, but the visual scope and beauty here is a huge selling point. Throw in a sweeping, emotionally perfect score (listen HERE) from composer Basil Poledouris, and you've got all the makings of a halfway decent story!

What sets 'Lonesome' apart I've always felt is its ability to mix the romance of the wild west with the realism of the wild west. There's something straightforward and iconic about the visual of a cowboy on horseback trailing along with a cattle herd against the horizon. There's something simple about it that is able to permeate itself through a ton of westerns, good and bad. A man on his horse, doing a job that isn't easy and ready to fight off whatever comes at the herd because it's his job. The counter? There was nothing romantic about it no matter what you may want to think. It was back-breaking work, and death comes cheap (as it's said several times) to those who aren't careful and even to those who are. It doesn't take much for the winds to shift from good to bad. Straddling that line, 'Lonesome' is a somber, moving story that has the ability to tear your guts up through good and bad. It's the rare western with that ability.

Robert Duvall and Tommy Lee Jones. That's it. That's all. I could leave it at that and be good, but that'd make for a short review, wouldn't it? Both men have had remarkable careers, but I don't believe either has ever (EVER!!!) been better than they were here. Duvall's Gus is fast-talking, loves some whiskey and good biscuits, a ladies man, and an all-timer at avoiding work. Jones' Call is a man of few words, ridiculously stubborn, hard-working to a fault, and lives by a code. A true Odd Couple-esque dynamic, these are phenomenal performances. They play off each other with ease. Their dialogue crackles with energy whether it be two friends busting each other, two partners figuring out how to solve a problem, or two longtime friends having a rare heart-to-heart in a trying moment. Both are amazingly excellent, but Duvall is on another level here as Gus. His energy, his non-stop talking, his physical mannerisms from a quick smirk to sucking his lips to his unique walk...my goodness, Gus McCrae is one of the all-time best western characters. Robert Duvall is the freaking man.


Though there are many characters in the miniseries, the heart of the story is Gus and Call's Hat Creek outfit and their motley crew of cowboys. Danny Glover is a quiet scene-stealer as Josh Deets, the outfit's tracker and scout, a fiercely capable worker and fighter who never complains, just putting his head down and getting the job done. Rick Schroder is excellent as Newt, a young, inexperienced 17-year old cowboy orphaned years before and picked up and cared for by the Hat Creek outfit. Tim Scott plays Pea Eye, a well-meaning but not so intelligent former Ranger. And last, there's unofficial member Dish Boggett, played by D.B. Sweeney, a more than capable cowboy who finds a niche with the group. There's a bond, a camaraderie amongst the crew that feels natural and real, not actors, but real people and their relationships. It is the rare western where you can say that.

You could write a thesis paper about individual characters here, making my job reviewing the miniseries a tough one! Diane Lane doesn't deserved to get buried so far down in a review, but here we sit. Her Lorena Wood, a beautiful young prostitute who finds herself on the trail with the herd, is a fascinating character to watch grow and develop. Her chemistry with Duvall is impeccable too. Anjelica Houston plays Clara, a past love (and maybe currently) of Gus', married and with children on a horse ranch in Nebraska. Frederic Forrest is frightening as Blue Duck, a half-breed bandit who's rampaged all over Texas for years, all the while out of the reach of our Rangers. I also especially liked Jorge Martinez de Hoyos as Po Campo, the cook traveling with the herd.

If there is a weak point in 'Lonesome,' it is a subplot involving an Arkansas sheriff, July Johnson (Chris Cooper), trailing Jake Spoon only to find out his wife (Glenne Headly) has left him. This subplot also features Barry Corbin, Steve Buscemi, and Frederick Coffin. I just don't find myself drawn to the characters here and as a result, their portions of the story tend to drag.

This is a movie that deserves a big old, long review full of in-depth analysis, more than I've got the space for here. I easily could write a college paper about this McMurtry novel! I also don't want to give away too much here with my review, recommending you go into the miniseries with a clean slate. I'll say this instead. There are moments that are absolutely heartbreaking, truly gut-wrenching, whether it be a surprising/shocking death to a face-to-face where you're begging something to happen. Both watching the miniseries and reading McMurtry's novel, I've cried and we're talking real, big crocodile tears. It's a classic movie -- screw the miniseries moniker -- and required viewing for anyone who loves good characters, story and scope regardless of your feelings on the western genre.

Interesting tidbit? McMurtry originally wrote the basic idea as a movie with John Wayne (Call), Jimmy Stewart (Gus) and Henry Fonda (Jake) leading the cast only to see it fall apart because of scheduling conflicts. Can you imagine that? If you're looking to kill a couple hours, see if you can fill out the rest of the cast with actors working in the late 1960's and early 1970's. I have, and let me tell you, it's tough. In the meantime, check Lonesome Dove out.

Lonesome Dove (1989): ****/****

Predator 2

Released in 1987, the original Predator is one of the best action movies of all-time. The Magnificent Seven meets Alien, it's a gem, an almost perfect movie for what it set out to do. But wait...there's more! Sequels! I'd never sat down and watched the first sequel in one sitting, but I can check it off my list now. The first of several sequels, here's 1990's Predator 2.

It's 1997 and it's a scorching hot summer in Los Angeles. The never-ending heat wave is made that much worse by a drug war between warring factions that threatens to tear the city apart, both sides fighting for turf and not too interested in who gets caught in the crossfire. Right in the middle is an overworked, shot-up police force trying its best to keep the peace. Among those officers is Lt. Mike Harrigan (Danny Glover) who with a small team of officers tries to take the fighting to the drug factions. Some weird crime scenes have been popping up though -- no spent bullets, horrific wounds on the dead, bodies skinned and hung up like trophies -- that no one can rightfully explain. What the hell's going on? Is a new hired killer tearing both sides apart that Harrigan and the police have no idea of? No, well...sorta. The enemy they're fighting is nothing of this world...

The killer of course is the Predator, a big-game killer from a far-off galaxy, a space traveler who goes from planet to planet and solar system to solar system killing for sport, for trophies, for the love of the hunt and kill. Last we saw he was somewhere in central America dispatching Arnold Schwarzenegger's team of specialists, but now he's made it to Los Angeles! Semi-spoilers I guess. There's a brief mention of the first movie but nothing heavy, and this 1990 sequel works fairly well as a stand-alone action flick. Does it help to see the first one? It certainly doesn't hurt but it is far from a deal-breaker.

I liked this sequel from director Stephen Hopkins but didn't love it. It's dumb, mindless, shoot 'em up fun and completely unnecessary other than the fact that the idea and concept behind the Predator is so freaking cool. Released in 1990, the sequel is set in the not so distant future of glorious 1997 where the only major difference seems to be some higher tech pistols and automatic weapons. The heat wave covering the city is a nice touch, giving the story a boiled over, sweaty look as everyone tries to survive the heat. That's kinda the entire movie. Gritty, in your face, violent, not too polished, fun and pretty dumb. Alan Silvestri returns to do the soundtrack, the Predator theme thankfully making a repeat performance. Not nearly as good as the first one but not bad for an unnecessary sequel. More of a guilty pleasure than a genuinely good movie.

Danny Glover is a Just Hit Play favorite, and the late 80's and early 90's are a big reason why. We're talking Lonesome Dove (my all-time favorite Glover part), the Lethal Weapon series, and a couple Disney classics called Angels in the Outfield and Operation Dumbo Drop (CLASSICS. GO SEE THEM). Here, he's in tweaked Lethal Weapon mode but hold the Mel Gibson. Glover's Harrigan is a veteran cop who plays by his own rules (yeah!) to get the job done. He's perennially pissed off and curses a blue streak the entire movie. No-nonsense, all business and sick of his streets getting shot up and littered with bodies on a daily basis. His crew includes Ruben Blades, Maria Conchita Alonso and Bill Paxton in full-on hamming it up mode. I would have liked some more scenes among the team, but some good supporting parts.

Only sorta crazy Gary Busey shows up as Keyes, a government agent who arrives on the scene and pisses everyone off immediately. Sorta, he's not telling the whole truth of why he's there, but it's Gary Busey in perpetual angry, in your face acting mode and that is ALWAYS entertaining. Also look for Robert Davi, Calvin Lockhart, Adam Baldwin, Kent McCord and Morton Downey Jr. in other supporting parts.

Probably the most appealing aspect of this 1990 sequel is the development of the Predator. SPOILER We see the Predator killed at the end of the 1987 original, but obviously he was not the only one of his kind. It's a whole breed of killers, going wherever their prey takes them. In this case, it's drug war-torn L.A. in the midst of a heat wave. The budget is somewhat limited so the special effects are okay at best, but the knowledge of a futuristic, other-worldly killer who moves among us so effortlessly to kill is a GREAT villain. Where there was Arnie in the original, there's pissed off Danny Glover in the sequel, an incredibly capable cop who always gets the job done. In other words, a more than worthy adversary for the universe's most brutally effective big game hunters. Kevin Peter Hall returns to play the Predator, a physically imposing, terrifying villain.

The action and shootouts are pretty consistent throughout, finally building up to the Predator vs. Glover's Harrigan in a drawn-out chase/fight scene that dragged on a little too much for my liking. It's still cool, leading to a finale with some cool twists about the Predator culture and most importantly, its past. So in the end, good sequel that's pretty entertaining. There have been five Predator movies, and I especially liked the attempt at a reboot in 2010 Predators. Where will it go? Who knows for sure so soak up the ones you can.

Predator 2 (1990): ** 1/2 /****

Silverado

By the 1980s, the western genre had unfortunately gone by the wayside. The often white-washed entries of the 1950s, the spaghetti westerns of the 1960s and the revisionist westerns of the 1970s had done a number on fans, and the genre was never quite the same. I'm still not sure why dammit! Maybe I was meant to grow up during the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s! After the 70s, the western became few and far between, like 1985's Silverado, a throwback western I've seen bits and pieces of but only saw all the way through...well, this time.

Having served a five-year jail sentence for a murder that was actually self-defense, a drifter named Emmett (Scott Glenn) is riding west with California as his ultimate destination. Riding deep into the desert, Emmett finds something his eyes just don't believe. Lying in long underwear in the sand is a man named Paden (Kevin Kline) who tells the story of how he was double-crossed and left to die with no water or supplies. The two pair up and keep on heading west, both with their own objectives. What awaits them? First, they'll find out Emmett's younger brother, Jake (Kevin Costner), is about to be hung for a murder that sounds fishy while also running into a man, Mal (Danny Glover), heading west to help his family run their small homestead and ranch. The trail ahead won't be easy though as a corrupt rancher and his equally corrupt sheriff are wreaking havoc on the town of Silverado, the town they're all heading to.

I caught the first 45 minutes of this 1985 western a few years back. I liked it, didn't love it, but never got back to it. Well, Encore Westerns tempted me once too often with it on its schedule. My biggest takeaway? Director Lawrence Kasdan (who also wrote the screenplay with his brother, Mark) loves westerns. LOVES them. He must have grown up watching countless westerns because in the same way Indiana Jones and Star Wars did, 'Silverado' plays like a tribute film to its genre predecessors while also creating its own identity. I guess it makes sense because Kasdan wrote Raiders, Empire and Jedi. Go figure! It feels familiar -- in a good way -- and the lines are blurred some, but from the start things are pretty clear. The good guys are good and the bad guys are corrupt, greedy and evil. Entertaining in the best kind of way.

What I remember struggling with was the almost complete lack of a story. There are characters. There are some vignettes here and there. But a linear story? No, not really. We meet a ton of characters, things are kinda laid out, and then eventually, the good guys face off against those dastardly bad guys. It can be frustrating, but the payoff is worth it. Just know that getting there can be a tad slow in a 133-minute flick.

If you've seen Kasdan's writing credits -- read it HERE -- it's clear he's at his strongest with ensembles, typically tough guy ensembles. That is the biggest strength here in 'Silverado,' specifically with his four main heroes, Kline, Glenn, Glover and Costner. These are archetypal western characters, and they don't disappoint. Kline's Paden is the former gunslinger with a checkered past, Glenn's Emmett the amiable but tough as nails drifter, Costner's Jake the fun-loving, hard-living, cocky youngster, and Glover's Mal the ice water in his veins rifleman and family man. Kline doesn't scream 'wild west gunfighter,' but he's the coolest character. Glenn and Glover are similarly strong with Costner the only relative weak link in the bunch. It's not his fault, but the character is just a bit too goofy. Still, the strength is in the group. By the time you see the gun-slinging quartet ride to the final showdown, you're fully on their side.

Who else to look for? Let's talk baddies. Brian Dennehy is Sheriff Cobb, an imposing, brutish man who used to ride with Paden and is now working with a local rancher to buy up all the land around the town. Jeff Fahey is solid as his enforcer of sorts, Tyree. Jeff Goldblum has some fun as Slick, a gambler who arrives in Silverado looking for some easy cash. I thought the best supporting part was Linda Hunt (later of NCIS: LA) as Stella, the diminutive but feisty owner of the Silverado saloon. And in the out of left field department, John Cleese plays a sheriff in another town who comes across our heroes' trail. Also look for Rosanna Arquette, James Gammon and Lynn Whitfield in other supporting roles. If there's a weakness in the cast, it's that beyond Dennehy the villains aren't developed much or even on-screen. The evil rancher is almost an afterthought. The depth of the cast is still very impressive.

So westerns, they like their guns. 'Silverado' is a movie for those with a gun fetish. Scene after scene bring these guns to life from the hard, metallic click of the Henry rifle being loaded to a six-shooter being cocked and fired. The guns end up becoming additional characters. The action is pretty violent but never overly graphic. In the throwback fashion, it's good, old-fashioned, rip-roaring action. A rare "cold" western with snow and the mountains instead of the dusty prairies, this is a western that truly appreciates the genre it's come from. An Oscar-nominated musical score (little too adoring at times), a fun cast, fun vignettes and entertaining throughout. One of those perfect 3-star movies, best watched with a big tub of popcorn.

Silverado (1985): ***/****

Buffalo Soldiers

One of the most interesting stories to come out of the settling of the American west is that of the Buffalo Soldiers, two cavalry and two infantry regiments that served as an integral part of the Indian Wars. The regiments of African-American soldiers don't always get their due in American history. Where 1989's Glory told the story of the 54th Massachusetts in the Civil War, here we are with a story about the 10th Cavalry, 1997's TV movie Buffalo Soldiers.

It's 1880 in the Arizona territory with the 10th Cavalry, a regiment of black soldiers, stationed at Fort Clark. Among the cavalry regiment is H Troop with First Sergeant Washington Wyatt (Danny Glover) in command after the company commander is killed. Longtime veterans who have served in the American southwest for years, H Troop is full of capable soldiers who have battled Sioux to Comanches to now, the Apaches. Signs point to two warring Apache tribes joining up to wreak havoc across the territory, killing, pillaging and burning everything in their path. Tasked with preventing the link-up, Wyatt, H Troop and the 10th as a whole find themselves in a stickier situation when a new officer, General Pike (Tom Bower), arrives at Fort Clark, readily admitting he questions the abilities of these Buffalo soldiers. 

Way back in the 1990s, the cable channel TNT wasn't just about regurgitating major network TV shows and Hollywood blockbusters 24-7. One of the best parts of the network was their creation of a variety of made-for-TV movies, many of them focusing on the American west and biblical quasi-epics. I grew up watching them so it's cool now most of 15-20 years later to catch up with them. Check out many of them HERE. The scale is limited, but the quality from the acting and cast to the action is story is almost there...just don't expect $100 million gargantuan epics. This historically based western from director Charles Haid certainly qualifies, telling a relatively little-known story about the American west.

If you've seen 1989's Glory, a classic about the formation of the first all-black regiment in the Civil War, you have an idea of what you're getting into here. Even though the U.S. government backed the formation of black regiments -- both cavalry and infantry -- they weren't always supported whether it be from the government that formed them, the high-ranking army officers who commanded them, or the settlers and townspeople that depended on their protection. We see that in the new commanding officer, the doubting General Pike, his right-hand, prejudiced/racist Major Carr (Timothy Busfield), but also the other side, the supportive side in the 10th's commander, Colonel Grierson (Bob Gunton), and one of his company commanders, Captain Calhoun (Matt Ross). The conversations can be tough at times -- a multitude of uses of the 'N-word' -- but the reality of the history is there all over.

Our focus mostly is on Glover's Sergeant Washington Wyatt, a former slave from Mississippi who joined the army, has been there for years and climbed through the ranks. Now as a first sergeant in the 10th, he's respected by his men and for the most part, his superiors. Glover does a fine job with his performance, an incredibly capable soldier who is nonetheless limited by perceptions, regulations and in some cases, ignorance from those in command. We see those struggles, Wyatt instead trying to focus on doing his job and getting his men through as many scrapes as they can untouched. There's a cool dynamic with Pike's scout, John Horse (Carl Lumbly), a half-Seminole, half-black man who's also an expert scout. John questions what drives Wyatt, what pushes him to do what he does, and maybe most importantly, to tolerate what he does from those around him, including his superiors. The heart of the movie, and an excellent performance from Glover.

The rest of the Buffalo soldiers include a focus on Corporal Christy (Mykelti Williamson), Wyatt's close friend who always seems to be getting himself into trouble, and Sergeant Joyu Ruth (Glynn Turman), a grizzled veteran and another friend of Wyatt's. Also look for Lamont Bentley, Michael Warren, David Jean Thomas, Gabriel Casseus, and Clifton Powell as H Troop soldiers. I would have liked some more background on all these men, from Wyatt through the company, but some of the movie's strongest moments are those when we see the bond of friendship among the troop. Riding in formation on the trail, sitting around a campfire with a cup of coffee, doing upkeep on the fort, those are the moments that ring most true.  

The visual is there -- a cavalry company outlined against the setting sun on the horizon -- and the action is excellent, if not there in abundance. It can vicious and startling, but that's how it was in the fighting between the cavalry and the Apaches. It is only in the final act that things fall apart a touch. In hopes of doing what is right and just, Wyatt and H Troop do something that while noble could potentially cost the lives of countless others down the trail someplace. The story becomes a little too much in looking at the history with idolizing eyes, especially the final scene. It's a good movie, a pretty good TV movie, but brace yourself a little for the finale.

Buffalo Soldiers (1997): ** 1/2 /****

Lethal Weapon 2

So a movie that easily stands on its own is a huge success in theaters, audiences coming out in droves to theaters to see what's going on.  It has a good cast, has some fun with a known genre while adding something new to it, but in reality just doesn't need to keep on going.  That first movie is good enough on its own.  So how should we proceed?  Why, that's easy. Let's make sequels!

I use that as an introduction only because I get sick of seeing more and more unnecessary sequels being released in theaters.  As I reviewed in February, I very much enjoyed 1987's Lethal Weapon, a fresh take on the buddy cop movie.  Not surprisingly, it was a movie that would have sufficed on its own.  In theaters in the late 80s, the original made over $120 million so it was only a matter of time before a sequel(s) was released. There would be three more sequels, but I shouldn't get ahead of myself.  Let's start with the first sequel, the one considered the best of the three, 1989's Lethal Weapon 2.

During a high speed car chase through Los Angeles, LAPD officers Martin Riggs (Mel Gibson) and Roger Murtaugh (Danny Glover) stumble across a car trunk full of Krugerrands, South African gold pieces. Because of the damage caused in the chase, Riggs and Murtaugh are pulled from the case and reassigned to a witness protection job, looking after Leo Genz (Joe Pesci), a money launderer who cleaned millions of dollars for drug dealers, skimming some off the top for himself. With some help from Leo, the officers stumble into a drug case involving South African officials citing diplomatic immunity. It's obvious the diplomats are using their immunity for all sorts of illegal activities, but what can Riggs and Murtaugh do?  They put pressure on the diplomats, but with millions of dollars involved, it's only a matter of time before the South African "diplomats" push back with force.

My concern with any series that keeps going back to the well is that things will get boring, tedious, monotonous, and repetitive.  Just two years removed from the first Lethal Weapon, '2' isn't to that point yet, not by a long shot.  Director Richard Donner keeps things interesting throughout this 114-minute long buddy cop movie, leaning more on action sequences than story and character development.  Not a criticism, just an observation.  On the whole, it doesn't even touch the first one which still has something appealing about it that is hard to explain. It's a familiar angle -- two very different cops forced to partner up -- with a fresh edge. I get the feeling with '2' there was an assumption that if you're watching the sequel, you must have liked the first one so let's not waste time developing things. Instead, let's just have some fun.

The lone exception to this is Mel Gibson as Martin Riggs, the at-times off his hinges officer prone to bits of lunacy.  We do get to know Riggs a little better this time around as his backstory involving his deceased wife is explained.  Gibson's off-screen issues over the last few years have overshadowed the fact that he is a supremely talented actor, especially here with one of his most iconic, recognizable characters.  As the straight man to most of the shenanigans, Glover as Murtaugh matches Gibson scene for scene.  Some acting duos just have chemistry, and these two pros certainly have it. There is an ease to their scenes together that can't be explained. They're close friends, willing to always help the other one in need, but they'll also bullshit each other, rip each other whenever the opportunity arises, and generally make their partner's life a living hell.  A great pairing no matter the quality of the movie.

Not that the first movie was any slouch in the action department, but Donner's movie certainly takes it up a notch...or two or 10.  The opening car chase sequence is a mess, an orgy of explosions and crashes that gets the action going from 0 to 60 miles per hour in about four seconds.  There's plenty more though, including another chase on a mountain road that plays out like a Rube Goldberg device with a rather unique capper courtesy of an airborne surf board.  Also, a memorably tense scene in the bathroom ratchets up the nerves with a bomb strapped to Murtaugh's toilet. The best is saved for last though, Riggs and Murtaugh leaving their badges behind and going vigilante.  They go gunning for the conniving South African officials at a heavily guarded shipyard in a bloody, chaotic finale.  Speaking of, how many movies over the last 20 years have used a shipyard as an action set piece? I thought of maybe eight different movies just sitting through Lethal Weapon 2's credits. Still, done to death or not, the ending is a winner.

Hamming it up as the unbelievably evil baddies are Joss Ackland as Arjen Rudd and Derrick O'Connor as his enforcer, Pieter. They are the type of villains who probably laugh at the notion of a redeeming quality in a bad guy. You know from the second they're introduced that they will be dispatched in some gruesome fashion...and they are.  The best addition to the cast though is Pesci as fast-talking Leo, a welcome presence who works well with and fits in seamlessly with Gibson and Glover.  Just one more thing Donner did to keep his Lethal Weapon series fresh. Not on the same level as the original, but still an entertaining movie.

Lethal Weapon 2 <---trailer (1989): ***/****

The Rainmaker (1997)

The name John Grisham is synonymous with courtroom dramas and legal thrillers. There is A Time to Kill, The Firm, Runaway Jury, Pelican Brief, The Rainmaker and The Client to name a few. I've only read one Grisham novel -- A Painted House, his departure from the courtroom ironically enough -- but his stories translate well to film. There is a natural drama to courtroom proceedings that just works well, especially with 1997's The Rainmaker, a drama that isn't flashy or showy, just a well-made, polished story.

The different elements that are all over the place here somehow find a way to click and gel together. Some of that can no doubt be chalked up to Grisham's familiarity and ease with his story and characters which smooth out any number of rough patches. The director here is Francis Ford Coppola, he of The Godfather series, who I wouldn't picture in a courtroom story. Rising star Matt Damon is aided by a pitch-perfect supporting cast with Elmer Bernstein providing a somewhat odd, blues/jazz mix for his soundtrack. It isn't a great movie, and maybe it isn't even a very good movie, but it is GOOD from the get-go.

Fresh out of law school in Memphis, Rudy Baylor (Damon) takes a job with ambulance chasing lawyer Bruiser Stone (Mickey Rourke) while he waits to pass the Bar exam. Working with insurance agent and attempted lawyer, Deck Shifflet (Danny DeVito), Rudy sees the writing on the wall and knows Bruiser is about to get taken down by the FBI. With Deck, he starts his own small firm. Their only case comes from a lower classic family, the Blacks, including mother Dot (Mary Kay Place) and son, Donny Ray (Johnny Whitworth), who is dying of leukemia. The Blacks' insurance company is denying their claim, but Rudy takes on the case -- his first -- in hopes of bringing the suffering family some peace. He's forced to learn on the fly, especially with his opponent, Leo Drummond (Jon Voight), an experienced, smart, tricky and veteran lawyer looking to take him to pieces.

So we can all agree lawyers suck, right? Okay, that's harsh. Maybe only like 96% of them. Movies have a chance and a way of humanizing them, especially here in the eyes of young, inexperienced lawyer Rudy. You need an underdog in a story like this, and Damon's Rudy supplies it in spades. While intelligent and book smart, he doesn't necessarily know the ins and outs of being a lawyer, the courtroom basics an experienced lawyer would take for granted. Damon's narration is at its best in its simplicity, a young man questioning the system he so wants to be a part of. For all the good it is intended to do, the judicial system is flawed in countless ways, something Rudy finds out quickly. It isn't just right and wrong anymore. It's about winning and losing plain and simple with plenty of money on the line. Innocent and even a little naive, Damon does a great job with this character, a sign of the acting ability we've come to appreciate in the years since.

How good is the cast here? Danny Glover plays the judge trying the case, a civil rights supporter and opponent of big business, and the man isn't even credited. DANNY GLOVER! DeVito gets a showier part -- if a background one -- as Deck, the almost-lawyer who still has a slimy veneer to him even when you can't help but like him and his nose for getting in and out of trouble. Voight is perfect as Leo Drummond, the snake oil lawyer who knows every trick in the business. Place, Whitworth and Red West give the movies its heart as the Black family, their scenes touching and heartbreaking as the story develops. Not enough for you? There's also Rourke, Virginia Madsen as a key witness, Dean Stockwell as an old school judge, Teresa Wright as Rudy's client and landlady, Roy Scheider as a CEO who could make or break the case, and even country singer Randy Travis in a great bit part as a potential juror. Good enough for you?

I liked this movie, but as I write this review I'm struggling to come up with reasons why. Thanks to shows like Law and Order and its countless spin-offs, the courtroom drama is far from original anymore. It seems stupid to be critical of a movie released almost 15 years ago for things that have happened since, but there it is. This Coppola-directed courtroom drama is the equivalent of comfort food. You have a good sense of what's going on, the semi-twists that will eventually be revealed, and in the end...well, let's not go there.  The movie and story are in their comfort zone in the court scenes with an easygoing sense of where they want to go and what they want to accomplish. Damon and Voight play off each other nicely with Glover and DeVito making their impact known as needed. The out-of-court scenes tend to meander a bit, but the movie always rights itself when needed.

The only real complaint I have for the movie, and the one part I genuinely didn't like was a subplot with Damon's Rudy and a client of his, Kelly (Claire Danes), a young wife married to an abusive husband (Andrew Shue). Rudy instantly develops feelings for her, wanting to save her from almost certain doom at the hands of her husband. In an effort to develop Rudy more as a character (unnecessary if you ask me), I felt like the story went down an easy path that Grisham is just better than. The story doesn't dwell too long on these scenes, but the damage is done early. Not a deal breaker, but it does bring the movie down a notch or two.

I'm struggling here. I don't know what else to say. I liked this movie if I didn't love it. Not bad at all, but it never reaches that level of courtroom drama classic. Solid if not so flashy directing from Coppola, and an all-star cast that does not disappoint, but it's just missing something overall. Still worth checking out though.

The Rainmaker <---trailer (1997): ***/****

Gone Fishin'

Why do we remember some movies so much more clearly than others? I’ve watched classic movies, movies I should fall in love with, and within a day or so of watching said movie I can’t remember much about it.  And that’s not even considering if I did actually like the movie. On the other hand, I can remember awful, godforsaken movies and every little detail about them. So goes 1997’s Gone Fishin’.

Of all the things I remember from growing up, I typically remember strange little details about meeting people, about major events, and in this case…why I love Gone Fishin’. On a day off from school when I was in 7^th or 8^th grade, my Mom rented two or three movies for my sister and I to watch so hopefully we would stay out of trouble at home with no adult supervision. Dun-dun-duh! Gone Fishin’ was one of those classics, and even now I remember my sister bailing on it about 20 or 30 minutes in. Me? I stuck through it until the end. It became a running joke with my cousin since about how great a movie it is. Is it? Nope, not at all. It’s actually a really bad movie with two otherwise great actors slumming it. And through it all, I love every minute.

Next door neighbors who have been friends since childhood, Gus (Danny Glover) and Joe (Joe Pesci) have won a contest with the grand prize being a tricked out fishing trip in the Florida Everglades. Amateur fishermen that they are, the duo heads to Florida excited for what awaits. Instead almost upon arrival, Joe’s classic Blue Barracuda is stolen, and they’re left stranded with nothing but their small fishing boat. They quickly find out that the man who stole the car is actually a con man and a killer (Nick Brimble), rumored to have millions of dollars in cash and jewels hidden away somewhere in the Everglades. All they wanted to do was go fishing and relax, but now Gus and Joe – bumbling fishermen that they are – get wrapped up in this crazy predicament where anything could happen.

Doesn’t really sound like a comedy, does it? The story is beyond ridiculous right from the get-go and ends up playing like an extended episode of I Love Lucy with Gus and Joe replacing Lucy and Ethel.  What crazy situations won’t these two childhood friends get into? Pilot a runaway boat on a highway? Check. Have one be a sleep-walker and accidentally light their hotel room on fire? You bet. Get in a brawl with a vengeful alligator? Comic gold, and it’s all here.  It builds to an appropriately insane ending with Gus, Joe and the killer (NAME) chasing each other across the swamps on airboats. Subtle humor this is not. We’re talking lowest common denominator in terms of humor here, but it still manages to work. Gone Fishin’ is not trying to be a classic comedy. It’s just funny.

Having worked together a couple times already in the Lethal Weapon series, Glover and Pesci team up again here as Gus and Joe.  My first reaction upon revisiting this movie was that someone had some dirt on these two and blackmailed them into taking the movie. What could have prompted them to take this movie? Without stars like them, this would have been a straight to DVD/VHS movie that would be even more forgotten than it already is with them involved. But you know what? The duo – ever the professionals – commit to the story and characters. They have a great chemistry together that carries the movie through all its ridiculousness. They are funny together, setting each other up nicely in each scene. And if Pesci repeatedly lisping ‘Hey…Gussh’ doesn’t put a smile on your face, this ain’t your movie. 

As if seeing these two typically solid actors slumming it here wasn't enough, Gone Fishin' includes a couple other actors making appearances that similarly question what made them take this movie.  Rosanna Arquette and  Lynn Whitfield play Rita and Angie, two women who pick up Gus and Joe on the road and coincidentally enough also have an interest in getting their hands on the killer.  The point of these characters is never really explained although it does give Glover and Pesci a chance to use their "killer" look on the two women in hopes of impressing them.  Also in the pointless cameo department, country singer Willie Nelson makes an appearance as legendary fisherman Billy "Catch" Pooler, saving the boys from certain doom and receding into the background as quickly as he appeared.

You watch a movie like this and can't believe you're watching such a horrible movie.  Is it intentionally stupid, or did all the talent involved think this was a legitimately good flick?  None of that is even relevant though. Yes, it's awful and downright stupid right from the start. Somehow it gets worse as the story moves along. At one point, Glover and Pesci even fight with an alligator.  But through it all, it's a funny (if stupid) movie.  I laughed a ton, and even acting well below their ability, Glover and Pesci have a great chemistry together. Just know you won't be watching a modern classic, and wallow in the badness that is Gone Fishin'.

Gone Fishin' (1997): ***/****

Lethal Weapon

When thinking of celebrities who have fallen from grace, a good place to start is with Mel Gibson.  It's hard to think of another celebrity who was as universally popular as Gibson was only to fall hard and fast under a long list of embarrassing public incidents. The criticism started with his Passion of the Christ as questions arose about his message in the movie, and it went downhill from there.  The anti-Semitic issue came full front in some of Gibson's drunken rages in the years since, and for the most part he's disappeared from the limelight.

It's just hard to believe that someone as popular as Gibson could do something so stupid.  It goes to show you that as moviegoers and fans of celebrities, we can pretend all we want that we "know" these people, but if anything we know their on-screen personality and most often, not their real personality.  With Gibson, it is easier to think of Mad Max, William Wallace, and overall one of the biggest and most bankable stars of the 1980s and 1990s.  Of all his roles though, one recurring character stands out from the rest, his crazy cop Martin Riggs in the four Lethal Weapon movies, starting first with 1987's Lethal Weapon.

Sergeant Roger Murtaugh (Danny Glover) is a veteran cop in Los Angeles with a wife and four kids waiting for him at home.  Just having turned 50, Murtaugh is a good cop if a cautious one.  Sergeant Martin Riggs (Gibson) is a younger narcotics officer on the force struggling to cope with the recent death of his wife. Rumors throughout the LAPD linger that Riggs is suicidal so no one wants to work with him.  Unfortunately for Murtaugh, that's just what he gets as the two cops with very different styles are partnered together on a prostitute's murder.  Murtaugh and Riggs feel each other out, figuring out how the other one operates, all the while the evidence building up and the clues pointing to an immense drug and prostitution ring that dates back to some shady dealings during the Vietnam War. Can Murtaugh and Riggs work together to take the ring down?

If you have never heard of a buddy cop movie, this is the movie to start with.  And two, if you haven't heard of a buddy cop movie, what's wrong with you? Where have you been?  The formula is simple and was used before Lethal Weapon and has been used since LW, but it's rarely been handled as perfectly as it was in this 1987 action classic.  Pair two opposites together in some dangerous situation, let them fight things out as they discover all their differences, work together to solve a crime or case, let them bond through said differences, and let the entertainment values shoot up.  When handled correctly, the buddy cop movie is that perfect mix of action, drama and humor.  The 1980s were rampant with movies like this, but few are as good as the original Lethal Weapon.

For starters, instead of focusing on an overload of pointless shootouts, director Richard Donner focuses a majority of the movie on his two main characters. Without the development that comes out in these characters over the course of the movie, we're left with two cardboard cutouts of police officers.  One, the family man cop, and two, the livewire cop with a death wish.  Instead, Donner fleshes Murtaugh and Riggs out.  Yes, Murtaugh is a family man concerned about who his daughter's dating, the boat sitting in his driveway, and he complains about his wife's cooking.  Yes, Riggs is suicidal after his wife's death in a car accident.  But there's more than just that for both men.  By the end of the movie -- and into the three sequels -- we actually get a feel for who these two police officers are.

That's what separates Lethal Weapon from just about any other buddy cop movie you're going to see.  Amidst the humor and action, it's just a good, solid, well-written and well-made movie.  Gibson -- awesome 80s mullet and all -- was rarely better than he was here.  He's crazy, but he's a damn good cop too.  Glover isn't quite the straight man because he gets his fair share of laughs (his 'I'm getting too old for this shit' line is priceless) playing off of Gibson.  As separates, they're both great characters, but working together it takes the movie to another level.  For every scene where they bitch back and forth at each other, there's another endearing scene where they talk things out, realize they're after the same thing, and end up becoming not just partners, but friends.  It's not as sappy as I've made it out to be, but you get the idea.  Gibson and Glover carry the movie.

All the touches of a buddy cop movie are there though, not just the two leads.  You obviously need some particularly nasty villains, and Mitchell Ryan and Gary Busey certainly fill those shoes nicely as a former Special Forces general turned drug dealer and his head man, now working as a mercenary. The action is top-notch throughout, especially a Mexican standoff in the desert with Riggs and Murtaugh going toe to toe with Ryan's crew.  The finale between Gibson and Busey is epic, one expert fighter against another expert fighter in hand-to-hand combat.  I loved it all, the very 80s soundtrack, the action, the characters.  It's that perfect dose of action, drama and humor, and I look forward to seeing the sequels.

Lethal Weapon <---trailer (1987): ****/****

2012

Watching his movies, I can't help but wonder if Roland Emmerich would have been better suited if he was born about 20 years earlier.  That way, his success in disaster movies would have coincided nicely with the 1970s epidemic of disaster movies.  To his name, he already has Godzilla, Independence Day, The Day After Tomorrow, and now 2012, all dealing with some sort of disaster of epic proportions.  Of course, all of these movies use CGI heavily so where would the German actor be?

I feel the need to point this out so I don't come across too critical, but Emmerich's movies are awful.  (How could that be construed as critical?).  Even his good ones like The Patriot, Stargate, and the ones mentioned before are awful movies.  Just about all of them qualify in the always entertaining 'so bad they're good' category and count me among the moviegoers who enjoyed these schlock fests.  But with his most recent outing, last fall's 2012, I think Emmerich finally hit rock bottom.  It's beyond 'bad but good' and produces so many unintentional -- I hope -- laughs that I'd recommend it for the comedy, not the drama.

Now as the year 2012 draws closer, more and more is being made of the ancient Mayan calendar predicting the end of the world, the apocalypse.  Emmerich takes the idea and runs with it, going from zero to 60 like nobody's business.  An American geologist (Chiwetel Ejiofor, one of the few bright spots in the movie) working with a friend in India finds out the Earth's core is beginning to heat up.  He informs his government superior (Oliver Platt in prime a-hole mode) who then passes it along to the president (Danny Glover).  Fast forward three years to 2012, and the predicted cataclysmic events come earlier than expected.

A divorced dad (John Cusack) works to save his family as the Earth starts to tear itself apart with volcanoes, tsunamis, and earthquakes all starting at once.  It's while vacationing in Yellowstone with his two kids that Cusack's all-American dad starts to catch wind of the coming disaster, but he shrugs off the warnings of a conspiracy theorist (Woody Harrelson) spouting off about the coming disasters.  The crazy guy is of course, correct, forcing divorcee dad to keep his family alive...somehow....some way.  From the theorist, he heard of a government plan to continue mankind, spaceships outfitted to handle 400,000 people each.  The only problem?  These ships are in China.  Oh, but good news, the new dad in the family has taken flying lessons!  Now let's all find a plane!

Yeah, yeah, I know no one goes to these big budget disaster movies for the story, but come on, Roland Emmerich.  That's all you've got?  More so than most disaster movies, this one depends on coincidence and huge strokes of luck more than it should.  It's also pretty lazy with four different instances of characters having to outrun deadly death clouds/earthquakes/tsunamis/asteroids, like THIS ONE.  Some of those moments do provide the story's funniest scenes with Cusack scrambling around and looking worried, screaming at anyone who will listen.  I typically like Cusack as an actor, but he was not the right guy for this part.

The cast is full of big names -- as is required in a disaster movie -- who are forced to play cardboard cutouts of characters.  Anyone with half a brain cell can figure out within 30 seconds of a character's introduction if they will or will not survive the disaster.  Divorced dad making up for lost time?  He'll make it, especially cause he's got a cute daughter.  New dad who is an all-around douchebag?  Don't hold your breath.  That's the problem with the whole movie, you can tell where it's going before the movie probably even knew.  Also worth mentioning are Amanda Peet as Cusack's ex, and Thandie Newton as the President's daughter destined to end up with Ejiofor's scientist.  One other observation, do disaster movies require a black president?  Just wondering.

Now on to the good stuff, the CGI.  A sign of good CGI -- for me at least -- is that it doesn't produce groans from audiences when it appears, so basically anything even remotely fake-looking.  Emmerich spares no expense (okay, maybe the story) to produce some top notch CGI action.  The apocalypse never looked so good as when Emmerich is directing the story.  Not surprisingly, watch this one for the special effects.  Your viewing experience will almost certainly be more enjoyable with friends and beer too.  Brace yourself though, it's a long movie at 159 minutes.  And don't trick yourself into thinking it'll fly by, there are times (basically any dialogue scene) that are painfully slow.

Saving the best for last though, the ending.  Cusack saves the day and helps one of the spaceships -- they're actually arks -- survive.  A title cards reads 'Day 27....Year 01'  (pretentious much?) as the three remaining arcs sail around the world, or at least what's left of it.  We learn that Africa, the whole damn continent, wasn't affected at all by the natural disasters.  Not even a little bit, none, zilch, nada.  So actually, the end of the world was only sorta the end of the world.  It's one of the stupidest endings ever...only topped by the alternate ending on the DVD.  No spoilers here, I'll force you to rent/buy it.

A truly awful movie that seems to object to its status as a truly awful movie.  Lots of overacting from some typically talented people, cliched and boring story, and some cool, well-done CGI to balance things out.

2012 <----trailer (2009): */****