Spy (2015)

First, there was the solid Bridesmaids in 2011. Then a couple years later The Heat in 2013. Following the every two-year formula, director Paul Feig and star Melissa McCarthy have teamed up again for another winner, hitting theaters this past weekend to very solid reviews and a very solid box office showing. Here's 2015's Spy.

For most of 10 years, Susan Cooper (McCarthy) has been an excellent analyst for the CIA, helping agents with her focus on details and all the little things. For years, she's worked with a suave, smooth and efficient agent, Bradley Fine (Jude Law), and has even developed some unanswered feelings for him. Now though, the CIA is in trouble. The daughter of a crime boss with ties to terrorists, Rayna Boyanov (Rose Byrne), has come into possession of a small-yield nuclear device and placed it out there for the highest bidder. An additional problem for the CIA? Boyanov knows the identity of all its field agents so anyone who would be sent to track her would be in even more danger. There's only one option, and that would be Susan. With no field experience and working all those years stashed away in a basement starting at a computer screen, Susan is tasked with tracking and identifying Rayna before she can sell the nuclear device. Heading into the real world of espionage with so much on the line, can Susan pull it off?

Give credit where it's due. When Feig and McCarthy team up, they've had nothing but solid results. More impressive than that though is how they do it. Comedies can be pretty run of the mill, a reason I don't always check new comedies out in theaters. This duo and their talented crews and casts look for familiar angles/stories and try to put a fresh, unique spin on those tried and true techniques. Bridesmaids had the girlish rom-com, Heat the buddy cop relationship and here with Spy, a deftly-handled almost-spoof of espionage flicks like the James Bond and Jason Bourne series. They find what makes those angles work and tweak them here and there for something familiar with something that usually catches you by surprise. Of the three, I'd put Spy right behind The Heat, but this new comedy was excellent. Go out and see it. You shan't be disappointed.

Not everybody seems to like her -- blame Identity Thief and Tammy -- but I'm a big Melissa McCarthy fan. I really, really disliked Identity Thief a few years back, but you had to admire her energy. She commits and goes hard for the laughs. So what about when the movie is good and she's on-board with that energy? As an audience, we're in for some fun. Yes, she's funny, but it's because she's able to switch back and forth effortlessly between impeccable line deliveries and perfect physical humor. There aren't a ton of actresses out there right now who are genuinely funny, but McCarthy is at or near the top of that list. Feig's script gives her plenty of chances for laughs, and she doesn't miss too many. Her Susan Cooper is a quiet, polite, detail-oriented systems analyst...until she isn't. Thrust into a hazardous mission after years of being desk-bound, Susan finds a hard edge that she puts to good use to bring things together. An excellent performance from the very funny McCarthy.

The script certainly has its fun with McCarthy's Cooper, sometimes too much. At times, I thought it went too far beating her down, cutting her out at the knees. When it works though, those moments are very funny. Case in point? Susan doesn't get a glamorous cover...far from it. She gets the chance to pose as a cat lady, a middle-aged mom, and all sorts of other embarrassing covers. Through it all, McCarthy goes for it, smoothing over some of the rough spots.

The movie's strongest moments are in its spoof-like qualities. I should say this clearly isn't a spoof of the spy genre. It just knows the genre, plays it seriously while having some serious fun with all the familiar genre touches. The opening credits play like a James Bond credits song, the opening action sequence has been in countless 007 flicks, and you feel like you're actually watching a Bond flick. The laughs though, my goodness, they're G-O-O-D. Jason Statham absolutely steals every scene he's in as Rick Ford, a grizzled CIA agent and a spy who is ALL that is man. He's seen everything and will let you know he's seen and survived everything the world can throw at him. His character consists of countless line deliveries explaining the harrowing experiences he's made it through, one more ridiculous than the other. I had two favorites. One, explaining how one of his arms was ripped off, but the other arm was able to put reattach it. Two, Ford offering to go into the Face/Off machine...as in the one used in the 1997 action movie Face/Off. Priceless stuff.

Some very talented people clearly enjoy working with Feig as a director, especially McCarthy. The cast is so good here, much of it the script but also worth mentioning is that they look to be having a ridiculous amount of fun. Statham is a scream, and Law as his co-worker but still rival agent goes for the more suave James Bond angle. As Statham's Ford explains it, a rivalry of MEN. Byrne hams it up just the right amount as the dastardly evil villain (with a giant hair-do) and has some great scenes with McCarthy as they go toe-to-toe. Along with McCarthy and Statham, my favorite part was Peter Serafinowicz as Aldo, Susan's Italian guide, a ladies man, constantly horny, and rather handsy. Too many good laughs to mention. Also worth mentioning is Miranda Hart as Nancy, Susan's work friend who's similarly bookish, a little mousey and looking for some fun In other supporting parts, look for Allison Janney, Morena Baccarin, Bobby Cannavale, and even 50 Cent making an appearance as himself.

This is a really easy movie to like, even love for some viewers no doubt. There aren't many comedies that are both really smart and really dumb at the same time, but this one qualifies. An extremely talented cast, a good script and unique ideas with people willing to think outside the box a little. Hard to beat that. Definitely go see this one.

Spy (2015): ***/****

Furious 7

When I think back to the first time I watched 2001's The Fast and The Furious -- probably about 13 years ago -- I remember liking it but not loving it. I can safely say I never thought that six movies later the franchise would be stronger than ever, and that I also would be disgustingly excited for each new entry. I've been counting down the months, weeks and days until the latest franchise entry. Maybe you've heard of it, a little movie released in theaters this past weekend, Furious 7.

Having put their mission in England and Spain behind them in putting away Owen Shaw, Dominic Toretto (Vin Diesel) and his crew of street racers and drivers have moved on. Well, that's the plan at least. Having moved back to his old stomping grounds in Los Angeles, Dom, friend and partner and crime, Brian O'Connor (Paul Walker), and his sister, Mia (Jordana Brewster) barely survive an explosion from a bomb sent their way by Shaw's older, more dangerous brother, Deckard (Jason Statham). Worse than that? Their friend, Han (Sung Kang), has already been killed by Deckard who has vowed to dispatch anyone involved in the attack on his brother. As if the younger Shaw hadn't been good enough, now Dom, Brian and the crew are going up against the very best. Their best hope of getting Shaw before Shaw gets them? Teaming up with a government agent who knows the perfect way to bring that confrontation into reality.

Let's start with the uncomfortable. Star Paul Walker tragically passed away in November 2013 as filming was in high gear for this action-packed sequel. His death left the production in a troubled state. Should they continue on or abandon the project? How would the Brian character be treated in terms of a send-off? In stepped Walker's brothers Caleb and Cody who helped stand in for their brother in scenes that hadn't been filmed yet. Some brotherly look-a-likes, some quick CGI work, yeah, it stands out at times the scenes Walker wasn't there, but it's never distracting. Is it a difficult movie to watch at times knowing it will be Walker's last? Hell yes, but it is a fitting send-off for an incredibly likable actor and movie star.

The movie itself, well, it continues on without missing a beat. In steps director James Wan, replacing Justin Lin who had directed the last 'Fast' entries starting with 'Tokyo Drift.' I was a little wary, but Wan follows the formula that's made these movies so successful and amps it up quite a bit. The biggest compliment I can give here is that this is the type of fun, ridiculously over the top entertainment that movies SHOULD be. These movies are F-U-N from beginning to end. 'Furious' is the longest such entry at 137 minutes, but it never even remotely feels long. The pacing and story actually fly by. It's far from the most pointed story and drifts along with crazy action sequences filling in the blanks, but you go along for the ride. Pun intended by the way. This is a popcorn movie at its absolute freaking best.

Yes, the action is ridiculous and will be discussed later. I have thought and continue to think that the heart of these movies is the characters. Seven movies in, you're familiar with them. You like them and you're rooting for them. That starts with Vin Diesel as Dominic Toretto, the team's leader, a philosophizing, growling street racer who holds family and loyalty above all else. Mess with his family and brace to incur his wrath. The most important relationship is between Dom and Walker's Brian, a brotherly relationship that has gotten better and deeper with each passing movie. These aren't the youngsters of 2001's original film. They're a little older, a little wiser, but they're still two of the best, most skilled drivers around. Their dynamic throughout is the real heart of the movie, two friends off-screen who allow that friendship to carry over onto the screen.

But wait, there's more! Basically the whole team is back. Unfortunately Dwayne Johnson isn't around much for his part as muscle-bound, one-liner spewing Agent Hobbs. He's there at the beginning and end but not the middle. When he's there, it's prime stuff. He just brings an energy to the character no matter how long he's around. Along with Brewster's Mia, Michelle Rodriguez, Tyrese Gibson, and Ludacris are all back. Rodriguez's Letty is slowly getting her memory back and gets some surprisingly effective scenes with Dom about their past. Tyrese as fast-talking jokester Roman Pearce and Ludacris as tech and hacker extraordinaire Tej provide some comic relief, a one-two punch who consistently get laughs from their bickering back and forths. Kang and Gal Gadot make quick appearances in footage from the previous movies and in a cool touch uniting the seemingly disjointed timeline of the franchise, Lucas Black reprises his role from Tokyo Drift as young driver Sean Boswell. Just a fun cast who are familiar with their characters and continue to bring them to life.

What would a successful franchise be without some fresh blood? Expanding on his surprise appearance at the end of 'F+F 6,' Statham has some fun as Deckard Shaw, a brooding, menacing villain who isn't given much to do other than pop up and wreak havoc at the least opportune time. I wish he was given more to do, but it's Statham in villain mode. That's rarely a bad thing. Other new faces include Nathalie Emmanuel as Ramsey, a world-class hacker, Djimon Hounsou as an international terrorist and Tony Jaa as his brutal enforcer, and UFC fighter Ronda Rousey as a bodyguard who tangles with Rodriguez's Letty. My favorite new part? Kurt Russell having a blast as Mr. Nobody, an incredibly capable, dangerous government agent who teams up with Dom and Co. to bring Shaw to justice. Russell is smiling almost every scene he's in, and it looks like he's genuinely having some chaotic fun.

Most movies would be hard-pressed to improve on the action of its two predecessors, Fast Five and Fast and Furious 6. '7' manages to do just that. The action is flat out, over the top, ludicrously nuts, never possibly exist in this reality type of action. Car chases in abundance, Statham taking on Hobbs early and then Diesel in the finale, Rodriguez and Rousey tearing each other up (in some classy gowns at that), it is all NUTS. It works though because the story and characters commit. It never plays out like a spoof. So yes, there's cars dropping out of a plane and parachuting to take down an armored convoy. Yes, the attack is nuts. Yes, Dom and Brian crash from one skyscraper to another....and another in Abu Dabi. The finale itself is probably about 30 minutes long and just a smorgasbord of excessive action on the streets of Los Angeles. Car chases, fist fights (with wrenches), helicopters and missile-loaded drones....and very few cops in sight. Go along with it and have some fun.

I read heading into this sequel that Wan and Co. filmed a poignant tribute to Paul Walker for the finale. Yeah, about that...it's a perfect, moving ending. And no, those aren't tears in my eyes. I'm allergic to something, anything, whatever. Don't Judge Me!!! The final scene and a quick montage of Walker's involvement in the series is beyond a perfect send-off to the very popular movie star and actor. If this is the end of the series, so be it. This was a more than worthy finale. If it isn't -- supposedly there's at least 2 more sequels coming -- I'll welcome them with open arms. This is that rare series that has gotten better in the second half of its run. Judging by the box office money on opening weekend, I'm not the only one to feel that way. It made $400 million this weekend internationally. 400 MILLION!!!! That perfect popcorn movie and a fitting finale for Paul Walker's Brian O'Connor character.

Furious 7 (2014): ****/****

The Expendables 3

I've enjoyed both the previous Expendable movies, The Expendables and The Expendables 2, knowing full well they're not particularly good movies. It's the rare franchise where things get better with each progressing flick. Then came the third entry...pretty much panned by critics and not embraced by audiences as much. Well, most of the audience. I happened to love it for all its insane goofiness and over the top everything. Here's 2014's The Expendables 3.

Having rescued a former member of the team from a heavily guarded train, Barney Ross (Sylvester Stallone), Lee Christmas (Jason Statham) and the Expendables move onto their next mission, but there is far more awaiting them than they expected. Sent to knock off an international arms dealer, Barney is stunned to find out who the dealer actually is. His name is Conrad Stonebanks (Mel Gibson), a former member of the Expendables and a co-founder of the group with Barney who's long been believed dead after going rogue from the group. The team is all shot up and not in a good place to go after Stonebanks, but Barney wants nothing more than revenge on his former partner turned lunatic enemy. He sees the writing on the wall though and doesn't want to see his fellow mercenaries get killed in the process. Instead of going forward, Barney disbands the group and assembles a younger group of fiery mercenaries looking to prove themselves. Can they get the job done and not get killed in the process?

The first two Expendables movies are far from perfect, but the second one was definitely better than the first. Things were allowed to breathe a little bit and some fun characters were added to the mix. This third entry struggled at the box office, some attributing that to a PG-13 rating instead of an R-rating while others pointed to a bootleg getting a release weeks before the wide release. You know what? WHO CARES?!? These are movies meant for action-hungry fans who love over the top shootouts, a ridiculously cool cast, one-liner one after another, and villains you just love to hate. Nothing groundbreaking for director Patrick Hughes' film, but it is most assuredly not trying to break any new ground. Having written the screenplay for the first two, Stallone again handles that department and doesn't disappoint.

Stallone will never be accused of writing anything Shakespearean or all-time classic, but who the f*** cares? The man knows how to write a good, old-fashioned shoot 'em up, dammit! He tried to accomplish a lot with the first two flicks, but here? Here?!? It's like he challenged himself to amp things up to even more ridiculous levels. Much of the cast returns with quite a few BIG names joining the mix. It's a longer movie than its predecessors (126 minutes) and features a ton of action from the word 'Go.' It isn't a great movie, but 'Expendables' is damn entertaining. I watched it with a smile on my face and thoroughly enjoyed it from beginning to end. All Stallone wants to do is to put something out there that audiences WANT to see, and I love him for it. About as good as a movie like this can get.

The ensemble and action out of this world star power is at an all-time action high, but the guts of the movie remains that men on a mission, mercenary tough guy mindset. It starts of course with Stallone's Barney and Statham's Lee, bitching and moaning at each other like an old married couple. Those scenes provide some good laughs while also offering some background about the history of the Expendables. Dolph Lundgren, Terry Crews and Randy Couture are back too with Jet Li only appearing in the final 20 minutes in nothing more than an extended cameo. I still feel like people were surprised by how well the Expendables movies did in theaters. For years before the movies there were rumors of all the 1980s/1990s action stars who were interested in starring only to drop out. Since then, a long list of stars have made appearances leaving Lundgren, Crews, Couture and Li with little to nothing to do. Oh, that Arnold Schwarzenegger fella is around too, chomping on cigars and even yelling "Get to the chopper!" How can you lose with that happening?

So Chuck Norris and Jean-Claude Van Damme weren't enough, huh? The casting gets taken to crazy levels here. Gibson is a great addition to the series, his Stonebanks a perfectly evil, sinister, growling villain, injecting a ton of energy. I need more! Replacing Bruce Willis, Harrison Ford is an easy cool as Drummer, the team's CIA holder of sorts. Wesley Snipes and Antonio Banderas join the Expendables too because...well, why the hell not?  Both look to be having a lot of fun in parts that let them ham it up some (or for Banderas, A LOT). As for the new, fresh Expendables, there's Kellan Lutz (former Marine, favors a motorcycle), Ronda Rousey (hand-to-hand specialist), Glen Powell (tech) and Victor Ortiz (weapons). The younger group isn't as interesting, but their inclusion to the story is more of a means to an end. Kelsey Grammer plays Bonaparte, Barney's mercenary recruiter, the recruiting scene something right out of The Magnificent Seven or countless other men on a mission movies.   

Look, there's no point in analyzing the action. It's good, but obviously not as bloody or as graphic as an R-rated version would have been. Blood or not, the body count that piles up is downright gratuitous. The finale alone is ridiculous with every action cliche ever invented seemingly on display. Stallone vs. Gibson, thousands of bullets flying, Lutz doing his best Steve McQueen/Great Escape impression, Ford flying overhead in a helicopter with Schwarzenegger as his machine gunner, and that's just the start. As an action fan, it's almost too much....eh, not really. It's awesome and just a blast to watch. From the action to the cast, the mercenaries busting each other and seeing who's the best, the old vs. new school, the great villain, it is a hell of a lot of fun. An easy-going mess of a movie that I loved throughout. Here's a closing thought to process.

Late in the movie, a helicopter is loaded with some of the most iconic action heroes ever. We're talking Rambo/Rocky, Han Solo/Indiana Jones, the Terminator, Blade, the Transporter, Ivan Drago, and Desperado all flying along. Oh, and Braveheart is below chasing after them. It's just too much to take in! Aaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhh!

The Expendables 3 (2014): *** 1/2 /****

Chaos

I've got 30-plus movies on my Netflix queue, and I'm....in....a....rut. Last weekend, not one of them burst off the page. I didn't really want to see any of them so I did a sorta-random search and picked a movie. The end result....2005's Chaos, a movie that got an extremely limited theatrical release. Good cast, cool premise? Maybe we've got a rut-buster.

After a hostage standoff goes horribly wrong, Seattle detective Quentin Conners (Jason Statham) is suspended indefinitely from the force while his partner is fired. Just a few months later, Conners is brought back to the force when his supervisor has no other option. A bank is being robbed by five heavily armed gunmen with over 40 hostages taken. The leader of the bank robbers, Lorenz (Wesley Snipes), has demanded to negotiate only with Conners and no one else. Given a young, new partner -- really more of a watchdog -- Shane Dekker (Ryan Phillippe), Conners heads to the bank looking to get the robbers and save the hostages. Nothing goes right though, several hostages injured in an explosion that allows the bank robbers to escape as well. Inside the bank, no money seems to have been taken. What exactly was the purpose of the "robbery"? What did they hope to achieve? Can Conners and Dekker figure it all out?

Yeah, about this one......wow, what a stinker. This is not the rut-buster I was counting on for my Netflix queue. From director Tony Giglio (who also wrote the screenplay), 'Chaos' borrows liberally from a fair amount of like-minded movies about bank robberies and hostages, anything from Swordfish to Inside Man (heavily borrowed), Dog Day Afternoon to Heat and plenty other movies that are far better than this one. It was clearly made on a smaller budget, Canadian locations filling in for Seattle, and generally has the feel of a straight-to-DVD dud. It tries to be something better, something else, but it never creates enough of its own identity and is dead on arrival. 'Chaos' is only 106 minutes long but it drags badly almost immediately and never picks up any momentum.

The formula for cheap action flicks like this is usually cast two or three pretty recognizable actors/stars, get another actor who never quite became a star but is a recognizable face, and then fill in the rest of the cast with no-name actors and actresses. Here we get Statham (rising action star at the time), Snipes (past his prime star with some legal issues) and Phillippe (young star who never quite rose to stardom). The three lead performances range from decent to pointless to wasted and then just some plain old bad. Statham's cool on-screen persona is there, but his American accent drifts in and out at will. Mostly, he looks frustrated or has a smart-ass grin on his face. Snipes' part amounts to little more than a cameo, but he goes for it in the over-the-top villain department. Phillippe just struggles. He gets the big, explanatory dialogue scenes and it's just bad. Uncomfortably bad.

The only other recognizable face is Henry Czerny as Capt. Martin Jenkins, the higher-ranking police officer who speaks in cliches, questioning everything and demanding things be done his way. Or the highway!!! It's the same part he played in Mission: Impossible and Clear and Present Danger.

Bad is bad, but then there's just awful bad. 'Chaos' has more of those awful moments than any guilty pleasure should have. My favorite right out of the Jerry Bruckheimer/Michael Bay school of Action Movies goes like this. Phillippe is chasing a suspect down an alley in a foot chase and smashes right into a row of parked motorcycles. Shane yells "I'm a police officer! I need your motorcycle!" at which point he puts on a ridiculous helmet and chases after him, a ridiculously long action sequence starting up. The other goes down the Overtly Uncomfortable Sexual Tension Department. Investigating a crime scene, Conners and Dekker talk to a CSI investigator (Keegan Connor Tracy) who tells Dekker she'd like to ride him and she has a list of approved things he can put in her mouth. Oh, all the while she's sucking on a sucker. Subtle, this ain't. You'll think you've stumbled across a Skinamax movie late at night.

Then there's the twist and then another and then another. The movie's title is based on chaos theory which suggests that seemingly random occurrences are actually related in some fashion or another. Random eventually leads to patterns so in fact, nothing is in fact, chaotic. There are so many good movies out there like The Usual Suspects and Fight Club and The Sixth Sense with excellent twists, really well thought out revelations that seem ridiculous, but nope, when you really start to think about them it all comes together. This is not one of those movies. The twists are both obvious and stupid, and the ending goes for a "clever" finale that plays against genre conventions, but even that falls short. Just nothing to recommend here unfortunately. Avoid at all costs.

Chaos (2005): */****

Homefront

I've said it before, and I'll probably say it again. Jason Statham is one of the best action stars around, but I can't help but think that he was born about 15, maybe 20 years too late. This is a guy meant for the 1980s and all its action excesses. He's one of the few legit action stars working today which can be a good and bad thing, depending on the movie. Typecast in a fair share of his movies, Statham gets a change of pace -- while still kicking some ass -- in this new release, 2013's Homefront.

A D.E.A. agent with a huge bust under his belt, Phil Broker (Statham) has retired of sorts, moving to a small town in Louisiana with his daughter, Maddy (Izabela Vidovic). His wife died in the past year, father and daughter trying to move on and handle the death together, supporting each other as much as they can. Their quiet, country/small town life is a refreshing change of pace for both, but Broker's past is going to come back to haunt him. A low-level meth dealer, Gator (James Franco), discovers Broker's true identity and background, realizing he stands to better himself in a big way if he can turn the DEA agent over to some willing enemies. Trying to adjust in the small, country town, Broker senses things going the wrong way, knowing his life, and more importantly, his daughter's life, is at risk. Can he get out in front of the new threat before it claims him?

You know what? Screw it. I'll say it. I liked this one. I liked it a lot. This Statham-fueled action story from director Gary Fleder was a lot of fun if not a particularly taxing or original flick. Above all else though, it was a lot of fun. 'Homefront' reminded me a lot of some pretty good 1970s crime thrillers meet kinda low-brow action flicks. I mean that in the nicest sense, I love those type of straightforward, entertaining B-movies. Statham is very good in the lead role, but you could easily see Charles Bronson, Burt Reynolds or Clint Eastwood playing the part. It's got touches of Southern Comfort, Deliverance, White Lightning, even some Smokey and the Bandit, and it's the better for it. Composer Mark Isham's score is solid too, a nice blend of some familiar action with a mood-setting, here comes trouble Cajun-themed softer portions. It won't rewrite the genre, and no doubt it's gonna take some hits from the critics, but I enjoyed it.

Watching this flick at an advanced screening with a pretty full house last week, there was an audible groan when the credits rolled by and it said 'Screenplay by Sylvester Stallone.' (based off a novel by author Chuck Logan). Was it a surprised 'Oh, I didn't know Stallone wrote this...." or was it 'Oh, Stallone wrote it....' sentiment? I think a little of both, but I like Stallone as a writer. It's nothing award-winning, but the man writes a good script from Rocky and its sequels to the more action-oriented Rambo and Expendables series. If it is written in broad strokes, so be it. Good guys = perfect good guys. Bad guys = stereotypically over the top, truly evil bad guys. Good is good and the bad are real bad. Basically, don't mess with a former D.E.A. agent's daughter or his daughter's cute cat. You...Will....Pay. Yes, the story depended a little too much on coincidence for my liking, a couple things happening because the story needs it to, not because those things actually make sense.

Blah blah blah at this point, I haven't talked yet about Jason Statham punching, kicking and generally beating the crap out of people. That's never really in question, even his bad movies entertaining to a point because Statham is just legit a really good action star. He more than handles his own here, dispatching nameless, brooding thugs as needed. For the most part, his Broker is trying to go straight, start a new life with his daughter in an isolated country town in backwoods Louisiana. Naturally because the movie has to have something going on, that new life ain't so smooth. The always capable Statham ends up fighting local thugs, Franco's Gator, and eventually, a drug-dealing, badass biker gang. The finale has Broker defending his house -- in the dead of night of course -- as the biker gang, headed by the always reliably creepy Frank Grillo (playing a biker hitman) tries to take him out before he can cause anymore trouble. Hand-to-hand, gunfights, improvised weaponry, it features a little bit of all of the above.

Beyond the typical shoot 'em up, punch 'em up, Stallone's script gives some familiar if pretty decent character development, Idovic doing a fine job as Broker's 10-year old daughter, Maddy. Their scenes together are pretty good, a single father and his daughter both coping with the recent death of his wife and her mother. Franco looks to be enjoying himself as the villainous Gator (no explanation provided), but thankfully doesn't ham it up too much -- cough Spring Breakers cough -- as the poop hits the fan. Winona Ryder grunges it up as a former biker groupie working with Gator, Kate Bosworth plays Gator's drug-addicted, trouble-seeking sister, and Rachelle Lefevre plays one of the teachers at Maddy's school who may/may not like Phil (SPOILERS ALERT she totally does). Also look for Clancy Brown as a possibly corrupt town mayor, Omar Benson Miller as Tito, Broker's construction friend in town, and Marcus Hester as Bosworth's much-abused husband.

No point in analyzing this one too much. At 100 minutes long, it isn't around long enough to overstay its welcome. Statham is as reliable as ever, Franco plays against type as an out-and-out villain, the supporting ast is good, and there's never too long in between some action, whether it be hand to hand or gunfights. Solid, entertaining flick.

Homefront (2013): ***/****

Parker

I like Jason Statham. I typically like him even if some of his movies are pretty bad. Even in the schlockiest of flicks, he's typically pretty cool, a badass action star who dispatches bad guys left and right. Can it be too much at times? It seems like we're seeing the same movie over and over again. I liked 2013's Parker, but it most definitely feels like 'been there, seen that.'

A professional thief with a unique code of thieving ethics, Parker (Statham) is a solid man to have on your team when trying to pull off a job. Through his well-connected father-in-law, Hurley (Nick Nolte), Parker accepts a job with four other thieves, men he hasn't worked with in the past. The job is successful as the crew takes down a packed cash room at the Ohio State Fair, but following the heist, the rest of the crew, including volatile Melander (Michael Chiklis), approaches Parker with an offer for a far more lucrative job. He doesn't like the sound of it and refuses, the team turning on him in the process, shooting him and leaving him for dead by the side of the road. Parker is seriously wounded, but he doesn't die, vowing to exact revenge on his betrayers. How to do it? Foul up the very job they had offered him.

From director Taylor Hackford and based off a Donald E. Weslake novel, 'Parker' is an enjoyable if unspectacular crime film. It isn't nearly as bad as some reviews make it out to be, nor is it as convoluted as some would lead you to believe. The story bounces around, never standing in one place too long and features solid amounts of action and shootouts, all capably done. I liked the cast, liked parts of the story, and what do I come away with? Meh, it was all right. For lack of a more descriptive wrap-up, 'Parker' is just sort of there. It doesn't jump off the screen and pull you in, doesn't have you at the edge of your seat as we wonder what's coming up next. 'Parker' is a well-made, capably done crime flick that still manages to be dull and more than a little lifeless.

It feels familiar which isn't always a bad thing, but this is a film that needed something more. Jason Statham fights and argues, mumbles and stares menacingly, beating the hell out of people as the story requires. As is so often the case, Statham is a more than suitable lead. As an action star, he has few rivals. His man of few words anti-hero is a seminal character in the action genre. Playing Parker, he does a solid job, his professional thief who has some Robin Hood-esque tactics. He lives by a code, taking what he's owed and nothing more, expecting his cohorts to work by the same code -- with varying results (crooks tend to be selfish and greedy, go figure). The only problem? We've seen this character in the Transporter series, the Crank series, Killer Elite, The Mechanic, The Expendables I and II, War, Safe and Blitz. Statham's good but a change of pace film couldn't hurt.

The rest of the cast is hit and miss. Jennifer Lopez is surprisingly pretty good as Leslie, a down on her luck Palm Beach real estate agent unknowingly brought into Parker's elaborate plan of revenge. She has a good chemistry with Statham and blends well with the story although the script does find a way to get her down to her bra and panties. Nolte is wasted, given little to do but growl his lines unfortunately. Chiklis is always an imposing presence but similarly given nothing to do with Wendell Pierce, Clifton Collins Jr. and Micah A. Hauptman as his fellow conniving crooks. Patti LuPone plays Ascencion, Leslie's nagging mother while Bobby Cannavale is a cop with eyes on Leslie, but nice eyes, not menacing "I'm a cop so you have to do what I say" eyes if that makes any sense. 

Beyond just saying the movie isn't good because it's too familiar, 'Parker' does have its flaws. The pacing can be frenetic at times, moving at breakneck speeds because it can, especially in the first hour. Plot advances without any real explanation or reality, just bouncing to bounce. As good as Lopez is, too much time is spent on her background and her money woes. In general, there's just too much going on with too many characters, twists and turns in a meandering story. The action is good, bloody and vicious, especially the finale as Parker's plan comes together and Statham's earlier scene with a hitman (Daniel Bernhardt) in a Palm Beach hotel room. Something is missing from the word 'go' though. Something doesn't translate. It is a decent enough time waster, but nothing more unfortunately.

Parker (2013): ** 1/2 /****

The Expendables 2

I watched 2010's The Expendables all the while knowing I wasn't watching a good movie. Did I enjoy it? Yes, but it had massive flaws and issues that I was barely....barely....able to look past. Well, either I'm a glutton for punishment or just forgetful because I had to give the sequel, 2012's The Expendables 2, a shot. Rather than repeat and rewrite the original review (and trust me, I could), I'll give this one a shot. It's basically the same movie, but I liked it more.

Having completed a mission to rescue a hostage in Nepal, mercenaries Barney Ross (Sylvester Stallone), his right-hand man Lee Christmas (Jason Statham), and their crew of specialists return to New Orleans to celebrate a successful mission and prep for their next one. Ross though is approached -- and basically blackmailed -- by Church (Bruce Willis), a mysterious CIA agent who Ross knows well from his past. The mission? Ross and his team must head to Albania and recover something from a downed plane. Now what that object is, Ross isn't told, only that he'll have someone along for the ride, Maggie (Nan Yu), to help accomplish the mission. It seems and sounds like a simple grab and bag job, but deep in enemy territory, anything could happen.

Here we are again. The make or break part of the review. The complaints/compliments I'm going to throw out there now come down to one simple thing; do you like-to-love action movies? If you even remotely like action movies, you should find something enjoyable about this....at least a little. From director Simon West, '2' improves on the formula laid out in the first one (for the most part). Assemble a ridiculous amount of action stars, give them lots of cool one-liners and lots of people to kill/maim/shoot/stab on a ridiculous mission. To its credit, '2' is more self-assured it knows what it's doing. The crazy amounts of action are still there on top of some more humor -- more on that humor later. It's the same more, but I enjoyed this one more than the first shoot 'em up flick.

What was never in question is the casting here. Still chugging along as a believable action star at 66 years old, Stallone is and always will be a badass. His Barney Ross is that requisite tough group leader, burned and warped for years by the death around him and the suicidal life he leads. Statham is once again, a great sidekick. The two bitch and moan at each other, reflecting a partnership that goes back for years. It seems in all his movies Stallone knows what his fans want to see, and he doesn't disappoint. Filling out Ross' team is returnees Jet Li (making basically a cameo), Randy Couture, and Terry Crews. Also returning from the first one and given more of a role is Dolph Lundgren with newcomer Liam Hemsworth joining the team as Billy the Kid, a disillusioned Army sniper. As more and more bigger names join the cast, Couture and Crews are given little to do and left in the background, but Lundgren and Hemsworth both represent themselves well.

Putting these movies together though, Stallone's goal has been to assemble any and all action stars. Willis and Arnold Schwarzenegger return as Church and Trench, fellow personalities in the mercenary/espionage underworld, with both stars getting more screen-time and more to do. One of the huge names in action movies in the 1980s and 1990s, Jean-Claude Van Damme plays a villain named....Vilain (pretty original, huh?), an Eastern European hired killer with a gang of killers, the Sangs. Not enough? Chuck Norris....yes, CHUCK NORRIS....plays Booker, a loner mercenary content to work by himself but helping out the Expendables as needed. Scott Adkins plays Hector, Vilain's brutal right hand man while Yu holds her own in the testosterone-fueled action pic.

So what stops this ridiculously action-packed movie from being the classic that it wants? As was the case with the first movie, there's just something missing. I can't put my finger on it. In an attempt to craft a story full of action, badass characters and funny one-liners, everything else gets left by the wayside. E-V-E-R-Y-T-H-I-N-G. Scenes lack any sort of transitions, bouncing from one location to the next without even an establishing shot or two. Oh, the story stalls? Enter Norris, Willis or Schwarzenegger out of nowhere, no explanation provided. The music score is anything but subtle and far from memorable. It's fun from the start, but several reviews point this out. An action movie doesn't have to be HUGE, but some scale certainly helps. Both Expendables movies are missing that scale. At times, it even feels like a straight-to-DVD action flick, and that's never a good comparison for any theatrical release.

More than that though, '2' feels rushed, much like the first film did. It clocks in at 103 minutes, but if you take away a 10-minute credits sequence, it's just 93 minutes long. Deep on story it is not, but in just over an hour and a half, this film covers a lot of ground. Yes, I know an action movie like this isn't going to be Shakespeare, but slow down even just a little. And then there's that script. It just has too many references to previous movies the cast has been in. We get it, Arnold was the Terminator, Bruce was in Die Hard, and Norris was in Lone Wolf McQuade. For goodness sake, there's even a Chuck Norris Fact dropped during his introduction. Humor is one thing, some clever references another, but one after another becomes downright tedious and even annoying.

Now if you're still reading, you must sorta like action movies....kinda, maybe, I could be wrong. The action here is pretty cool, and thankfully, director West doesn't utilize the ultra-schizo technique used in the Bourne movies. For the most part, we see the action. All the cliches/stereotypes are there. We've got small armies of bad guys who can't hit the broad side of a barn, the heroes who can hit every single thing they aim at, and so on and so forth. It's a pretty good movie, just know that it's mindless entertainment at its best, nothing else.    

The Expendables 2 (2012): ***/****

The Mechanic (2011)

Jason Statham is an action star, not an actor. That's not a dig no matter how it sounds. He plays an almost identical role from movie to movie; quiet, intense, loner anti-hero who says little but can take you out with any variety of weapons, improvised or not. As I watched one of his latest offerings, the unnecessary but mindlessly entertaining 2011's The Mechanic, that's all I could think of. He's Charles Bronson meets Chuck Norris meets any number of other action stars. No what you're watching with him, and you will normally enjoy it....to a point.

Working for a mysterious agency with seemingly infinite funds available to them, Arthur Bishop (Statham) is the best at what he does. His job? He's a mechanic; a man who takes assignments, researches them, fixes them and gets the job done. Translation = He's a hit man, and there are none better. Finally though, he's given a task that hits him the wrong way; Bishop must kill Harry McKenna (Donald Sutherland), his longtime employer who's been accused of turning on the agency. Testing his loyalty, Bishop goes through with it only to run into Steve McKenna (Ben Foster) soon after. Through some combination of guilt, regret and confusion, Bishop takes Steve under his wing, teaching him all he knows about pulling off a successful hit.

First off, this movie -- as mentioned earlier -- is completely unnecessary. It is a remake of a cult classic from 1972 (same title) starring Charles Bronson and Jan Michael Vincent that is oddly perfect in that 1970s B-movie quality. Why touch it? Why remake it? I suppose someone said 'Why not?' So with that said, let's move on. To his credit, director Simon West commits to this movie. It is a no frills action story, brutal in its depiction of violence, not subtle in its random sex scenes, and generally has the feel of a 1970s crime thriller. New Orleans and the surrounding swamps serve as the background, a gritty down South feel permeating the story. It doesn't try to be anything profound, groundbreaking or new. That's all great, but it begs the question I so often ask when watching a remake of a movie that didn't need to be remade.....why?

If you're a fan of the original with Bronson, you will no doubt enjoy this one to a point. If you haven't seen it, who knows, maybe you will like it more. The only change in the tone of the story is the agency Bishop works for. 'Mechanic' thankfully does not try to make Bishop a hero, but at the same time, he's not just a hitman. His targets end up being the scum of the Earth, people who deserve to get killed including a pedophile rival hitman and a corrupt TV evangelical preacher. Just have him kill lots and lots of really bad dudes. Don't try and shove a message down my throat. He's a badass. Leave it at that.

Remaking the Bronson original, it is only fitting then that Statham is cast in the titular role. I'm not saying Jason Statham is Charles Bronson, but there are certain similarities in the roles they played. Neither is ever talkative on-screen, and there is a coldness and natural brutality and callousness in their performances. That translates well playing a hit man who knows the ins and outs of everything about his business. A clean kill, make it look like an accident, send a message, Statham's Bishop can do it all. Channeling some other movie hit men that have come before him, Statham makes his character stoic, almost monk-like who meticulously prepares for his next assignment. Prone to overacting at times, Foster is a good counter to Statham's quietness. He tones it down some while still managing to get a few good laughs from some dark, dark humor. Sutherland's part amounts to a cameo so it's cool to see him but little else with Tony Goldwyn playing Dean, Arthur's employer and contact for assignments.

The one thing I was genuinely looking forward to here was how the 2011 version handled the ending. The 1972 version is a classic in its shock value. Well, I have to say I think I'm losing my mind when it comes to botched endings. 'Mechanic' goes for that similar ending -- still effective even knowing what's coming -- and then taps the brakes similar to what Oliver Stone did in this summer's Savages. Why do directors feel the need to tweak nearly perfect endings? Does everything have to be wrapped up nicely in a bow? Here, it is a quick scene that throws a stupid twist our way, reversing what could have been a great ending. But no, we're forced to have it all end pleasantly. Overall, I came away entertained somewhat but mostly unimpressed. Technically, it's a good enough movie, but it never really gives us a reason to enjoy it.

The Mechanic <---trailer (2011): **/****

The Italian Job (2003)

In an age of sequels, prequels and remakes, all I'm usually looking for is a new tweak. It doesn't have to be a major thing, just a difference. So how about a remake of the 1969 cult favorite The Italian Job? First, Americanize it of sorts, put together a cool cast, stylish heist, and ta-da! We've got 2003's The Italian Job!

Having pulled off an intricate robbery in Venice, Charlie Croker (Mark Wahlberg), John Bridger (Donald Sutherland) and their heist team manage to escape with $35 million of gold bars. But as they escape in the Alps, one of the team, Steve (Edward Norton), turns on the group and steals the gold for himself. Bridger is shot and killed and the rest are left for dead as Steve escapes with all the gold. A year later, Charlie has managed to track down Steve who's gone into hiding. He's got the heist team back together, and they're looking for some revenge. What better way than to steal their gold back? They'll need help though so Charlie recruits Stella Bridger (Charlize Theron), John's daughter and an expert safecracker.

Basically this is a remake in name only. Oh, and a team of crooks does in fact steal things while using Mini-Coopers as part of the getaway. Other than that though, it's a whole other heist movie that stands on its own. Director F. Gary Gray has modernized the story, jumping the story from a European setting to Philadelphia and Los Angeles instead. There is something simple, straightforward and appealing about this remake. Low-key isn't the right description, but 'Italian' doesn't try to rewrite or reinvent the genre. It knows where it wants to get, and it knows how it's going to get there. Is it so wrong that it is just a solid, entertaining and fun heist movie? I say that like 'Just' is a bad thing.

That comfort level in knowing where the movie hopes to end up is most evident in the actual heists. The opening robbery of a heavily guarded home in Venice is an ideal scene-setter, capping off with a high-speed boat chase through the Venetian canals. It gets the movie going at a breakneck speed immediately, and Sutherland's appearance is a very cool addition. The finale heist is again, pretty straightforward, but just as exciting. Norton's Steve is onto Charlie's plan and tries to sneak the gold out, but with three Mini-Coopers, explosives, Russian gangsters, armored truck guards, heavily armed motorcycle guards and a patrolling helicopter 'Italian' has some tricks up its sleeve right until the end.

More than the heist aspect of 'Italian,' the thing that most appeals to me about this movie is the casting. Both the good guys, the bad guys and the yet to be determined to the end, it is a likable, appealing cast. Wahlberg especially is one of my favorites, an actor who's carved a niche out for himself, playing a variation on the tough guy everyman. If it sounds like a dig or something negative, I don't mean it, but he's incredibly likable on-screen, especially as the confident high-class thief leading his team. It's also good to see Theron do just a fun movie, not a big, message movie. She fits in well with the crew, and it's the type of part that's right in her wheelhouse. And can you go wrong with a quick appearance by Donald Sutherland? Too bad it's not a larger part. Charlie's team also includes Handsome Rob (Jason Statham), the driver and all-around ladies man, Lyle (Seth Green), the tech guy and hacker who claims Napster was his own creation, Left Ear (rapper Mos Def), specialist in explosives, and Wrench (Franky G), the mechanic who rigs the cars for added weight.

Oh, yeah, Edward Norton is awesome whether he plays a good guy or bad guy. Playing the paranoid thief with $ for eyes, he doesn't disappoint. Also look for Olek Krupa as Mashkov, a Ukrainian gangster who has an interest in how the robbery develops, but no spoilers here. Not a ton to analyze about this ready-made, entertaining heist rehash, but I think that's the point. It's got action, laughs and a good dynamic among the team, especially Green impersonating Statham. Watch it HERE, it's dead-on. Just sit back and enjoy Mark Wahlberg, Charlize Theron and Jason Statham try to pull off a crazy heist. Fun from the start.

The Italian Job <---trailer (2003): ***/****

Killer Elite (2011)

Not to be confused with Sam Peckinpah's 1975 flick The Killer Elite -- a mess of a movie but entertaining -- came 2011's Killer Elite. See, they dropped the 'The' to help us out. Throwing me for a loop even more was that the stories sounded somewhat similar. The more recent Killer Elite looked pretty generic to me, but I've been in a bit of a slump at Netflix lately so I thought I'd give it a try. Not a classic, but it was much better than I anticipated.

It's 1980 and after a mission doesn't go off quite as planned, mercenary Danny Bryce (Jason Statham) decides to leave the business and heads home to Australia. A year later, he finds out that his old partner, Hunter (Robert De Niro), is being held prisoner for not completing a high-paying but risky job. Danny takes the job on to save his friend. Working for a Middle Eastern sheikh, Danny must avenge the deaths of the deposed sheikh's three sons, the deaths coming at the hands of SAS (British Special Forces) agents. He must not only kill them, but get taped confessions in the process. With some help from his former team, Danny goes about finding them, but he isn't privy to the whole scenario. Waiting for him is a former SAS agent with a shadowy past, Spike (Clive Owen), who will do his best to protect his former partners too.

Based on the novel The Feather Men by Ranulph Fiennes, 'Elite' is supposedly based on real-life events. The Feather Men were a group of mercenary vigilantes who did all sorts of shady things, most of them helping protect others from killers and murderers. Now whether it's true or not is one thing. Take it's honesty however you want it -- it is certainly possible -- but what surprised me is how much I liked the movie. Set in 1980, it has the distinct feel of a 1980s action movie. No frills, no wasted efforts, and little to no sense of humor. All the characters aren't black and white, but shades of gray, and the world is one nasty place where everyone is in it for themselves. There are some twists toward the end that work pretty well, but as far as action movies go, it rises above the majority of those released recently.

This may sound odd concerning an action movie, but I liked the look and feel of 'Elite.' Director Gary McKendry -- in his first feature film -- does a great job of setting things up. He shot the movie on-location in Wales, England and Australia, and it doesn't have that generic look of 'been there, seen that.' With a story set in 1980, it actually feels like 1980 whether it be the clothes, the bad hair cuts, or even the throwback cars that make the chases that much more interesting. Throw in a solid score from Reinhold Heil and Johnny Klimek -- seemingly channeling Hans Zimmer's Inception score at times -- and you've got all the makings of a real winner.

With all those shadowy good/bad guys, McKendry certainly must have had some fun casting. All the sudden, it feels like Jason Statham is in every movie hitting theaters, but I'm a fan, and I'm okay with that. His steely-eyed, cold mercenary is what Statham does best. He glares and sneers, growls his lines, and when needed kicks/punches/shoots anyone in his way. Like some of his other movies though, it isn't mindless fight scenes repeated one after another. The fights have something to do with a...wait for it...story! As his SAS opponent, Clive Owen again shows he can be an action star. He's a great actor, but with roles like this that allow him to have some fun, he doesn't disappoint. Rocking an epic mustache, Owen's Spike is an enforcer of sorts for what the book dubbed 'the Feather Men.' We learn very little about him or his background other than that he's extremely capable and a highly dangerous man.

And then's there Robert De Niro.....freaking De Niro! It's great to see him play more mainstream, commercial roles too. Now are these especially good parts? No, not in the least. Playing Hunter, Danny's mentor and former partner, De Niro isn't exactly phoning it in, but it's close. He has some great one-liners and does have a good give-and-take with Statham. It's really more of a cameo than anything as he disappears for long stretches. Other worthwhile parts go to Dominic Purcell as Davies, the hot-headed Welshman (with handlebar mustache, epic sideburns, nasty, greasy hair), and Aden Young as Meier, the quiet killer, two former members of Danny's team now working with him once again. Star of TV's Chuck, Yvonne Strahovski plays Anne, the love interest that Danny must protect when threatened. Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje has a good part too as Agent, Danny's link for jobs and missions around the world.

Struggling in theaters -- making around $25 million -- and receiving mixed to negative reviews, Killer Elite is probably doomed to the $5 bin of movies at Wal-Mart. It's too bad because while not a classic, it is very watchable and I enjoyed it. Maybe it's that throwback feel to 1980s action movies or a solid cast working so well together, but I'd recommend this one. It isn't the tongue in cheek, over the top action movie that trailers and commercials presented it as. Cool globe-trotting cast, great action, and a solid and possibly true story.

Killer Elite <---trailer (2011): ***/****

Revolver (2005)

With The Transporter, Crank and The Expendables series among a few other stand alone movies, Jason Statham is first and foremost an action star.  If anything of late, he's being typecast in the same part over and over again, not even an all-around action star. When given the chance to actually act, he's more than capable. He's just not getting that chance too often.  Working with frequent collaborator director Guy Ritchie, he got his chance in 2005's Revolver.  

After serving seven years in solitary confinement, Jake Green (Statham) is released from prison, and using a simple, effective and brilliant "formula" builds himself a fortune in just two years. He's got revenge on his mind, going up against Macha (Ray Liotta), the casino kingpin who helped put him away for all those years. Green does it in a flash, taking him for a cool fortune, but now Macha is gunning for him. Two loan sharks, Avi (Outkast's Andre Benjamin) and Zach (Vincent Pastore), mysteriously step to the plate offering to help Green survive...for a price. With no other options, Green agrees. Can his formula that helped him rise to fame help him now when he needs it the most?

Well, let's talk about Statham because other than his part -- and one supporting player -- I basically hated this movie. An action star of few words, this is a huge departure for the British actor. Statham shows he is more than capable of acting, not just beating the crap out of people in highly choreographed action sequences. His Jake Green, an ex-con looking for revenge, is battling with some inner demons of epic proportions.  He believes he's got it all figured out, but everything around him is trying to tell him otherwise. One monologue about halfway through is a great dramatic moment as is a late scene where Jake -- alone in a claustrophobic elevator -- forces himself to battle through his demons and issues. In a movie that defies a simple description, Statham's performance is lost in a maze of symbolism, metaphors and a pretentious existentialism that drove me nuts.

I like Guy Ritchie. I do. Snatch, Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels, RocknRolla, Sherlock Holmes, all entertaining, enjoyable movies. This isn't his best work. It's funny that the story focuses so much on ego and handling your own ego because the movie feels like a huge ego trip for the director. Look at me, I'm talented! With a Ritchie film, a certain amount of over-the-top style is to be expected, and that's fine. His personal directing style is aggressive, even in your face at times. How many directors have classical music playing over frenetic and/or slow motion action? There's convoluted, and there's this story. Characters drift around, pitting themselves against each other, guys shoot at each other, and somehow it's supposed to make sense. As near as I can figure, Avi and Zach are trying to "save" Jake from himself, but it is the most ridiculously complicated plan ever.

Okay, stories meant to confuse you, forcing you to piece things together. Thoughts? I'm all for it. I appreciate a movie that forces viewer interaction.  Ritchie makes his story not only confusing, but as mentioned before, pretentious. According to Wikipedia (the end all, be all for info), Ritchie was highly interested in Kabbalah while filming, taking some of those teachings and putting them into his story. Jake Green's reasoning for revenge -- which is never explained -- will open doors to something bigger. I thought I was getting one movie and got another. 'Revolver' is all about expanding your mind and refusing to be kept down by your own ego, your own greed and needs. Once you truly allow your mind to see, the potential and possibilities are unlimited. Really? That's where this movie is going? It took two hours of violent, pointless detours to get to that point? Yeah, I'll pass.

Not knowing what I was getting into when I picked this movie, my reasoning was Ritchie directing and the cast he assembled. Behind Statham's strong lead, Liotta is a good choice to play Dorothy Macha, gambling kingpin, if somewhat underused. In most of his roles, Liotta can be intensity on a crazy level, but here it works. It's needed. Over the top, yes, but we need this crazy, live-wire to counter Statham's Green. Benjamin and Pastore are supposed to be these mysterious, all-knowing loan sharks, but their "background" is left unexplained until the end so I never connected with either character. Terence Maynard is a scene-stealer as French Paul, Macha's right hand man, while Ritchie favorite (and JHP favorite too) Mark Strong is Sorter, Macha's personal hired killer, the best money can buy. Andrew Howard too is very good in a small part as Billy, Jake's brother caught up in the craziness.

I wanted to like this movie. I like Ritchie and much of his cast. There apparently was a reason Netflix didn't think I would like it though, and they were right.  A story with a more profound message that's trying to say something is rarely a bad thing. With Revolver though, it's wrapped up in a convoluted story with needless departures from the story that looking bad now, were unnecessary and served no purpose other than to confuse us intentionally. Some reviewers are quick to jump to "If you don't get it, you're stupid" (which is always a classy response; some people just don't like movies...doesn't mean they're dumb). Maybe it would be better with a second viewing where everything can be pieced together, knowing what's coming. On first viewing though, it wasn't good.

Revolver <---trailer (2005): * 1/2 /****

The Transporter

So what does an action star need more than anything? Above all else, he needs a character, a series, a franchise, someone and/or something that audiences will keep coming back to see.  Arnold Schwarzenegger had the Terminator, Sylvester Stallone had Rambo, and Bruce Willis had John McClane in the Die Hard movies. One of the biggest action stars around right now, Jason Statham has been lucky enough to be in two franchises, Crank (awful, truly awful movies) and the Transporter series, the first of which, 2002's The Transporter, I watched for the first time recently.

An ex-Special Forces soldier, Frank Martin (Statham) is a transporter. For a price, he will deliver questionable and dangerous packages from one place to another, no questions asked. He has a special skill-set, and he's made quite a career out of his driving ability. One mission goes wrong in a big way though when his employer, Wall Street (Matt Schulze), tries to take him out when Frank finds out he's transporting a person, a young woman named Lai (Qi Shu). He has no idea what he's stumbled into and doesn't even want to know. All Frank's looking for? Survive, and get out alive. As the transporter runs for his life, a French police inspector, Tarconi (Francois Berleand), follows the evidence and gets closer and closer to getting his hands on Frank.

You know what surprised me about this movie? And before you guess, remember I'm a fan of Jason Statham and love a good action movie. Can't figure it out? I absolutely hated this movie. Not a mild dislike or bored watching it...I hated it. Little interest in anything going on, atrociously bad choices in soundtrack, a general feel of Euro-trash entertainment mixed with Hong Kong action, and action that is so over-choreographed I couldn't stand it. Oh, okay, it wasn't all bad.  I enjoyed the first 20 minutes, and Statham is cool so there's that.

There's no way this next statement is going to come out the right way, but here goes anyways. Where a movie is made has an impact on the feel, the style, the look of a movie. Not all European movies -- mostly the bad, real bad ones -- have this overdone, cheesy, ridiculously exaggerated feel and look to them. The Transporter (from French writer Luc Besson and Hong Kong director Corey Yuen) unfortunately does. The bad guys are so out of this world stupid and evil, they cease to be bad guys. They're comedically bad. Maybe the biggest strike against 'Transporter' is the soundtrack though, an off the wall mix of Euro-pop and rap/hip-hop songs thrown in with some themes that sound like they would be more at home in a softcore porno. It wouldn't be bad in small doses, but the score from Stanley Clarke never stops to take a breath. A score that ruins a movie, and that's saying something.

Looking for a saving grace, you can find it in Jason Statham. Check that, saving grace isn't the right choice. Statham doesn't save the movie, but he keeps it passably watchable. Now there is a ringing endorsement for you. His Frank Martin character somewhat...just a bit...a tiny bit....resembles Alain Delon's hitman in Le Samourai. It is a minimalist part; a superbly trained and skilled operator who lives a simple life. He's impeccably good at what he does with no rivals. Frank lives by a few easy rules. 1. Can't change the deal. 2. No names. 3. Never look at the package. We find out little about Frank, and we don't need to know much. I like Statham as an action star and as an actor, and in a lost movie, he manages to make something worthwhile.

As for the acting department, Statham is all The Transporter has going for it.  I don't know if I've ever seen worse "performances." Playing the troubled Lai, Qi Shu delivers one of the worst, most incredibly annoying performances I've ever seen. There's a damsel in distress, and there's Lai, putting the damsel idea a long ways back in the rearview. From the Fast and the Furious movies, I didn't think Schulze was much of an actor anyways, and he confirms that here. He sneers and leers, glares and "intimidates" as Wall Street. Why Wall Street? Who the hell knows. Ric Young -- sporting the most insanely obvious wig/toupee I've ever seen -- is hilariously bad as Mr. Kwai, Lai's father with his hand in human and slave trafficking.  

What people keep coming back to with the Transporter movies -- two sequels have been released since 2002 -- is the action. I thought that might save things a bit, especially after the opening car chase/getaway in Nice after a bank robbery. It serves as a perfect example of how to do a car chase, keeping it entertaining and allowing the viewer to keep up. It goes downhill after the opening sequence. There are fake action scenes, and then there's fake. Is it possible for a fight scene to be over choreographed? I don't need a scene to be realistic (far from it), but watching Frank battle countless waves of henchmen quickly becomes tedious. They're too polished, too choreographed. It's a shame right on through to the end, a high-speed chase on a mountain road that should have been much, much cooler.

It is hard to film a movie in Europe -- Nice, Marseilles, Paris -- and mess that up. The movie looks great because of that. Statham's character has potential like so much else in the movie. I'm just curious enough to see if Transporter 2 or 3 is even a little bit better because this one was that bad. Statham's scenes with Bertreand's Inspector are one of the few bright spots, actual conversation between two characters, two men who aren't admitting everything they know. Not enough by a long shot to save this dud. Bad, bad and bad.

The Transporter <---trailer (2002): */****

Snatch.

I find it hard to criticize a director for sticking with what he does best. Michael Bay does huge action movies, John Ford did westerns, Billy Wilder did smart comedies. There always seem to be departures from the norm, but when you're good at doing something, why go too far? I'm finding that's more the case with British director Guy Ritchie who is quickly climbing my list of currently working film directors.

Throw out Sherlock Holmes as a fun historical/period piece, and we're not even going to mention his ill-fated flick with then-wife Madonna, Swept Away. He has only had six feature length movies with his seventh coming this winter, a Sherlock sequel. I recently reviewed his first movie -- cult hit Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels which I loved -- and last fall was introduced to Ritchie's British crime thrillers with RocknRolla. With a limited filmography, it is easy to catch up with the whole Ritchie catalog, and I'm getting there after watching 2000's Snatch., his most highly rated movie to date.

Working with his longtime partner, Tommy (Stephen Graham), underground illegal boxing promoter Turkish (Jason Statham) is in it deep with old-time gangster, Brick Top (Alan Ford). Turkish needs a fighter to take a dive in the fourth round of a fight, picking gypsy, bare-knuckle fighter, Mickey O'Neil (Brad Pitt), but even he isn't sure if the unpredictable gypsy will take a dive. At the same time, a gambler/crook named Frankie Four Fingers (Benicio del Toro) pulls off a heist with an 86-karat diamond. He's trying to unload the diamond for some quick cash, setting up a deal with New York City broker, Cousin Avi (Dennis Farina), but before he can reach London, everything is thrown up for grabs. Pawn shop owners turned crooks, greedy bookies, low-level gangsters, enforcers and thugs, everyone wants their hands on this diamond, and by the end everyone and anyone will cross paths.

The story itself is cookie-cutter in terms of Ritchie's talents and ability. RockNRolla had a painting, Lock/Stock had two shotguns, and Snatch has a big, freaking diamond. Throw this one item into a pack of wild dogs -- crooks, criminals, thugs, gangsters -- and let them go to work on each other. What sets it apart though from other similar movies (Ritchie's style has inspired countless knockoffs) is this unique style and blend of black, dark humor, surprising graphic violence, and dialogue that crackles in every scene. His camerawork is fun to watch, and the pace nears frenetic but never becomes indecipherable. Ritchie makes his movie on a small budget, but it never reflects it in the finished product.

With countless characters to work with and a positive reputation following 'Lock, Stock,' Ritchie remains true to his roots here while still adding some big names to the cast. Brad Pitt is obviously the biggest name as the heavily bearded, heavily tattooed, gypsy, bare-knuckle fighter Mickey O'Neil.  The part is a credit to Pitt for taking a smaller role that ends up being one of the movie's best. He speaks in this lightning quick, mumbling, heavy Irish accent that makes it nearly impossible to follow without subtitles, but there's a charm to this character that Pitt brings to the table. Dennis Farina gets to play straight man to all the comedic chaos around him as Cousin Avi, a NYC diamond broker totally out of his element in the London underworld. Benicio Del Toro is in the movie for about six seconds so don't go in expecting him to be around long.

That is only three characters though in a sea of memorable characters. Statham and Graham are great together as Turkish and Tommy, two low level boxing promoters maneuvering for their lives when a deal goes wrong. Ritchie favorite Vinnie Jones plays Bullet Tooth Tony, an enforcer similar to the character he played two years earlier in 'Lock, Stock.' Rade Serbedzija is foreboding, intimidating and even funny as Boris the Bullet Dodger, a guns dealer who used to be a KGB agent. Ford as Brick Top provides some of the movie's funniest lines, ones you wouldn't think would be funny but his delivery sells it. Lennie James and Robbie Gee play Sol and Vinny, two pawn shop owners turned robbers with their not-so svelte getaway driver, Tyrone (Ade). What makes all this craziness work is that with limited screentime, each and every one of these characters gets a chance to shine. Some are more memorable than others, but not a one disappoints.

Beyond all the stylish camera work, the crazy, convoluted story, and graphic violence, I think the biggest selling point for Ritchie's movies is the incredibly dark -- and therefore a whole lot funnier -- humor. Ade's Tyrone is an obese getaway driver who can barely get in and out of his car. He refuses to park in a suitable parking spot because he claims there isn't room (there's plenty) and then shows what a crappy driver he is. Ford's Brick Top explains in graphic detail how to dispose of a body at a pig farm, a story that in no way should be funny but somehow is. Avi wants Tony to kill a dog because he believes the diamond is inside him, producing a series of great one-liners and reactions that had me roaring. Tony later tries to dispatch a rival, emptying a clip into him only to hear him deliver one line after another as he refuses to die. Out of context, maybe it's not that funny. But this movie is funnier than most straight comedies out there.

With Guy Ritchie movies, I think you're either going to love them or hate them. You will either embrace the crazy antics and the lunacy of what's going on, or it's just not going to appeal to you. As good as Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels was, I think this is Ritchie's best movie up to now. Twisting and turning story, great script (written by Ritchie), and more memorable characters than I care to mention.

Snatch. <---trailer (2000): *** 1/2 /****

Death Race

One of the great cult films of all time, 1975's Death Race 2000 is a great example of a low-budget pile of schlock actually amounting to something.  By all accounts, it is a horrific movie that should by no means actually work.  It does though, mostly because of the badness.  It's so funny, so stupid, so cheap, and ultimately so mind-blowingly ridiculous that you end up liking the movie.  I'm not a huge, die-hard fan of the Roger Corman produced flick, but I liked it enough. Still, I was rather skeptical when 2008's Death Race was released.

My usual reaction to any remake is what's the point? Is a new version of an old movie going to add anything or improve on something? In the case of the original Death Race, a lot was left to be desired, but because of the low-budget factor you went along for the ride. The 2008 remake thankfully does switch things up, adding some cool touches to the same basic premise.  The cast is solid -- especially two key supporting roles -- and the action is fun, the premise more than interesting, and in the end, it's an entertaining action flick. With a movie like this, I'm not looking for Academy-Award winning stuff, just to have fun.

It's 2012 and the American economy has collapsed, and a new entertainment venue has emerged to keep the masses happy. Private corporations run the prison system, and one warden, Hennessy (Joan Allen), has put together 'Death Race,' a three-stage race where hardened killers, rapists and crooks compete against each other in heavily armored cars featuring tons of vicious weapons. Jensen Ames (Jason Statham) is a former race car driver framed for the murder of his wife who's sent to Hennessy's Terminal Island prison. She needs Jensen to pose as the most infamous of the drivers, Frankenstein, a man so scarred by previous races he wears a mask at all times. All he needs to do is race, win once, and he'll get his walking papers. Jensen agrees, knowing the warden won't keep her promise, but this man with revenge on his mind has other plans.

From a low-budget drive-in movie from 1975 to a high-octane, big-budget action movie, everything has been ratcheted up a notch or two or ten.  The film's look is grayish and washed out, almost like some sort of post-apocalyptic hell.  The story is straightforward and fairly obvious, but with a movie called 'Death Race' you're not exactly looking for Shakespeare, are you?  The action is pretty much non-stop once the background is established. Following the good old Roger Corman (who produced the original and remake) formula for success, director Paul W.S. Anderson has assembled a movie with tons of violence, tough guy actors, and ridiculously gorgeous female cast members who are required to look ridiculously gorgeous. When handled right, that always sounds like a good movie to me.

Say what you want about Jason Statham's acting range, but the guy is one of the coolest action stars out there.  He's usually right in that silent to ultra-silent category, using words like they pain him to say anything. I think he's made some poor decisions with the movies he's taken (the Crank movies, In the Name of the King), but I've always liked him. As Jensen Ames, he doesn't need to show much range. He is pissed at the world, and he's going to get his revenge one way or another. Tyrese Gibson takes over for Sylvester Stallone as Machine Gun Joe, a rival driver in the race and Jensen/Frank's biggest competition. The same goes for Gibson as it does Statham. He isn't the best actor around, but he's always a presence and looks like he's having a hell of a good time.  Natalie Martinez is the completely unnecessary eye candy as Case, Jensen's navigator. Her character is the equivalent of a GPS with a Barbie doll body. Her line deliveries are so bad it's laughable. Watch the slow motion scene where she steps out of a classic car though, and you'll see why she was hired. Not a complaint by any means either.

With this type of schlock, I had to wonder. Were Joan Allen and Ian McShane blackmailed into doing this movie?  These are two supremely talented actors so what are they doing here? As actors, they legitimize the movie just by being there. They don't have to do anything or say a word, and the movie is better for it.  Of course, they don't just stand there. Director Anderson takes advantage, giving them two great supporting parts. Allen has one of the most amazing line deliveries I've ever heard (see if you can figure it out at IMDB's Memorable Quotes HERE). She is icy, steely-eyed, and ruthlessly brutal. McShane gets all the great lines and hams it up with the best of them as Coach, Jensen's pit-boss who has lost track of how many years he's been in prison. His last line is the best though, listen toward the end of the race. Coach's pit crew includes Jacob Vargas as Gunner, the mechanic, and Frederick Koehler, as Lists, the mousey genius. Jason Clarke plays Ulrich, Hennessy's top guard and henchman.

In a movie dominated by the bloody three-stage race, my issue comes from the editing as it so often does with action movies of the last 10 years or so. The driving sequences are so hyper, so frantically cut that the scenes are almost indecipherable.  You can barely see what's going on with all the shaky cam, smoke and explosions.  Because of that, the driving scenes even get a little tedious.  How many times can you see one car blast away with machine guns and rockets at another? There are some cool surprises for the racers, but even that gets old fairly quickly.

Predictable, yes, but the last 15 minutes do provide a couple of solid twists.  You know those twists are coming because of some rather obvious hints, but they work regardless.  And if nothing else, the remake does try something different with its ending as opposed to going for the same one as the original.  It's a good enough movie to be judged on its own from the original, and that's always a good sign for a remake.

Death Race <---trailer (2008): ** 1/2 /****   

Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels

For a guy with only six feature films to his name (one among them considered an epic bomb), British director Guy Ritchie has certainly made a name for himself over the last 13 years, and a positive name for himself at that. His most recent movie, Sherlock Holmes, was a bit of a departure for Ritchie though, a period piece with his own unique vision and style.  Of the movies I've seen of his though, it's been my least favorite...by far.  He is most at home with crime thrillers, and his best may have been his first, 1998's Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels.  

Making this movie as a relative unknown in the late 1990s on a ridiculously small budget, Ritchie nonetheless shows a knack for moviemaking that just comes easy to some people.  All his trademarks that he's perfected over the last 12 years are there, to the point you have to wonder how long he'd been planning his moves out.  The almost schizophrenic story jumps from scene to scene in milliseconds, introducing and dispatching characters as quickly as they appear, a camera shooting style that is in your face and aggressive, and a labyrinth plot that crosses and intertwines left and right with everyone and everything crossing paths at some point. A movie that would certainly require repeated viewings to make sure everything actually works out, I still feel like I have a good grasp on the movie. I loved it.

Pooling their money together to join a high-stakes card game, longtime friends Eddie (Nick Moran), Bacon (Jason Statham), Tom (Jason Flemyng), and Soap (Dexter Fletcher), plan on big winnings if Eddie -- the most skilled card player among them -- can pull off a win.  Instead, they get hustled and end up owing 500,000 pounds to Hatchet Harry (P.H. Moriarty), the local crime boss with ties in everything. The crew is given a week to get back the money for Harry or else they'll lose a finger each for each day they're late. But where would four working class bums get their hands on so much money in such a short time?  Eddie's got a plan to knock off their drug-dealing next door neighbors which sounds too good, too easy to be true.  Long story short? It is as Eddie and his friends end up in a convoluted deal with mobsters, low level thugs, black market dealers, a calm and cool collector, and a pair of 1800s shotguns that just keep popping up.

To try and actually explain Lock, Stock and all the workings of its plot would take several more, much longer reviews. That is about as mainlined a description as I'm going to be able to come up with.  As the story crisses and crosses though, it keeps you on your toes.  There are about 10 unifying links among all the convoluted mayhem, the key one being a pair of shotguns that Hatchet Harry wants to get his hands on.  You don't always see these links until the absolute last second, but that's part of the fun.  Looking back on the movie (having just finished it about 15 minutes ago), I'm positive I couldn't even begin to explain all the craziness.  In the moment though, it's convoluted without being confusing -- if that makes any sense at all.  You don't need to keep up. Just sit back and enjoy.

Last year I watched Rock N Rolla, my first real introduction to Ritchie and his ways in a British crime flick.  I loved it just like I loved this one.  The strongest aspect of the movies for me -- besides the stories -- are the characters, and there are a lot of them...too many to even keep straight without charts and graphs identifying and categorizing how everyone is connected.  The heart of these characters is the four friends, Bacon, Tom, Soap and Eddie, in their misadventures to get a crapload of money to save their lives.  Using them as an example, you get a sense of Ritchie's writing flair.  The dialogue among these old friends is quick and snappy, zingers thrown left and right, a natural give and take as they talk.  Statham has gone on to be the biggest star here, but the cast as whole (and not just these four) all fit together perfectly, just like the story does.

Trying to give you an idea of what I mean concerning the story, here's an attempt to identify all the key players.  Brace yourself, it's a doozy.  First, there's Winston (Steven Mackintosh) and his three-man crew, a bunch that grows and sells marijuana by the kilo and does it successfully. Winston works for Rory Breaker (Vas Blackwood), a black guy with an afro typically identified as a lunatic. Plank (Steve Sweeney) buys from Winston and is a low-level thug for Dog (Frank Harper), who has an idea to rob Winston's lab for all his weed and cash on-hand. Meanwhile, Harry's muscle, Barry the Baptist (Lenny McClean), is working with two of the lowest level of thieves, Gary and Dean (Victor McGuire and Jake Abraham), to get a pair of shotguns for Harry. All this time, Big Chris (Vinnie Jones) works as a collector, intimidating and bullying for Harry. Middleman Nick the Greek (Stephen Marcus) is trying to keep countless plates spinning, working deals with just about everyone else already mentioned. Oh, and Sting plays Eddie's dad, JD.

Enough for you?  Yeah, me too.  There's something I'm missing here as I try and explain why this movie works. I just can't put my finger on it.  It's funny, genuinely laugh out loud funny. It's got plenty of action, gunfights, shootouts and brawls throughout.  It's got style to spare, and more than enough story for two or three of the most convoluted Seinfield episodes ever. The soundtrack is full of Indie, punk and Brit rock (check it out HERE) It has a low-budget look to it that appeals to me because it isn't so spic and span, so perfectly polished. Directing and writing the movie, Ritchie clearly had a ton of fun putting it all together. It is painfully obvious to see why. The movie deserves the cult following it has received over the last 10-years plus.

Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels <---trailer (1998): *** 1/2 /****