Fools' Parade

So you know what sounded pretty awful? The Great Depression. Man, I'm good at writing introductions to these reviews, aren't I? For every well-known Depression-era movie out there, it seems like there's that many more generally forgotten in a wave of flicks. Here's one I stumbled across on a cable movie channel recently and simply couldn't pass up because of an impressive cast, 1971's Fools' Parade.

It's 1935 and three convicts are being released from a West Virginia penitentiary, including Mattie Appleyard (James Stewart), Lee (Strother Martin) and Johnny (Kurt Russell), all of them having served their sentence for varying crimes. They're driven to the train station by a vicious prison guard, Doc Council (George Kennedy), who ominously states that he'll see them soon. The trio boards the train with plans of opening a general store down the train line, using Mattie's hard-earned savings as a bankroll to get things started. There's a problem though as they get further away from the town and penitentiary. Mattie's check -- earned and saved from 40 years in prison -- can only be cashed back in Glory...where they've been less than pleasantly told to never come back. If they do, Council will be waiting for them. That's not their only problem. Council may not even be waiting that long to hunt them down...

From the older classic like The Grapes of Wrath to the newer entries like O, Brother, Where Art Thou, Depression-era flicks are a cool little genre of flicks that doesn't always get a ton of attention. Maybe it's the whole soul-killing tone of these flicks. Maybe. I don't know. The 1970's especially had some cool entries, including this flick, Emperor of the North Pole, Hard Times, Paper Moon and Dillinger among others. 'Parade' belongs in that group. It's dark(ish), gritty and has the look and feel of one of America's roughest historical stretches.

So why then does this 1971 drama with some light comedy touches have virtually no reputation? Virtually no following? Well, for starters, it most definitely and assuredly is very, very odd. I can't specifically put a finger on said oddness, but it is. It's there. It...is...odd. Maybe as close as I can get is the tone, or lack of. From director Andrew McLaglen and a screenplay by James Lee Barrett, 'Parade' is just a bit of an oddball flick. It's able to build up an impressive sense of doom early on but it never quite takes off. Things slowly derail as the 98-minute running time nears its finish. Still, this is a movie that's never dull or boring. Very watchable, just odd.

Sometimes, an all over the place tone comes in second to something, anything else that's far more appealing. Here, that's easy. It's the cast. That cast. We mostly follow our three recently-freed crooks in Stewart, Martin and Russell. Stewart's Mattie served a 40-year sentence for killing two men, Martin's Lee six years for bank robbery, and Russell's Johnny a shorter sentence for an incident with a girl that's generally left unexplained. The story doesn't linger long on our trio's past criminal transgressions (wisely), instead focusing on them trying to start over again, albeit at different points in their lives. I especially liked Stewart as Mattie, sporting a bizarre-looking glass eye, the oldest of the three who most strongly wants that fresh start. He stashed away all his money during his 40-year sentence (earning a ridiculous-sounding $25,000) and now meets all sorts of roadblocks in getting that cash. Martin's Lee is seemingly a little simple-minded in his obsession with putting together a general store inventory while Russell's Johnny is stubbornly loyal to Mattie. Still, there's something charming about the trio, and there is a solid chemistry among the group.

An interesting cast all-around. When he wanted to, George Kennedy could play one interesting bad guy, and that's on display here. It's just creepy watching him. You're rooting for him to get his due and get it badly. Who else to watch for? An unrecognizable Anne Baxter as a madam who's fallen on hard times, William Windom as an unlucky traveling salesman, Mike Kellin and Morgan Paull as Doc's oddball killers, Robert Donner as a train conductor, Katherine Cannon as Baxter's lone "girl," and David Huddleston as the greedy bank owner. Quite the eclectic bunch!

I can't quite put my finger on it as to 'why' exactly, but I very much enjoyed this movie. Though the subject matter is dark, it is an easy-going, mostly pleasant movie. Yeah, it is a touch slow at times for a movie that runs just 98-minutes, but it is never dull. The West Virginia filming locations are an ideal backdrop for the story as well, giving it an authentic sense of watching where this story would have actually happened. Worth a watch. Apparently, it's somewhat difficult to find so here's my help to the situation. I watched it on Retro, a movie channel coupled with the Encore package on cable. It's a movie I recommend tracking down. Hope you enjoy it!

Fools' Parade (1971): ***/****

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): ****/****

Backdraft

I grew up in Chicago, several classmates in grammar school with parents working as police officers and firefighters. I imagine there's a respect and admiration for police forces and fire stations in all cities, but even as a kid it was easy to see the regard in which many were held for putting their lives on their line for their jobs. Released in 1991, Backdraft delves into the lives of Chicago firefighters with some familiar family drama to keep things going.

Just seven years old, Brian McCaffrey is a frequent guest at his father's fire station along with his older brother, Stephen. On one fire call though, their dad is killed in a blast. Some 20 years later, Stephen (Kurt Russell, who also plays the Dad...albeit briefly) has followed in his dad's footsteps, becoming a respected lieutenant at one of Chicago's most respected stations. Station 17 has a couple new fireman to fit into the mix, Stephen's brother, Brian (William Baldwin), who did his best to avoid a firefighting career for years only to return to what his family knows best. The brothers have drifted apart over the years, both of them holding grudges that go back for years to when their dad died. With a career that hinges on life and death moments every single day, they have to learn to work together and put their differences aside. Meanwhile, an arsonist is starting fires all over Chicago with two dead already. Who is the arsonist? Does he have a different intention?

I was just six when this movie came out back in 1991. I remember my parents watching it at some point, and enjoying it. For me, there's a period in the late 1980s and early 1990s where because of my age, I just didn't see a lot of movies and never really caught up with them. From director Ron Howard, 'Backdraft' is a big one on that list. A box office success that picked up positive reviews while becoming a fan favorite, it's a solid, entertaining movie. It was filmed on location in Chicago -- never a bad thing -- and gives the developing story an authentic aura hanging in the air. It's not always familiar locations, "known" spots, but that works too in creating a grittier, more authentic feel. In the end, it is a good movie, even really good, that isn't quite great. Nothing wrong with that, but I didn't come away completely blown away like some reviews made it out to be.

The strongest aspect of the movie is one that treads a fine line. This is a film interested in showing the heroic actions of not only Chicago firefighters, but firefighters in general. It also delves into their personal lives, how the threat of horrific burns and wounds -- not to mention death -- hangs in the air with each passing fire. At times, the story gets a little too soap opera-esque, a little too familiar in terms of family issues and brotherly conflict. Still, the firefighting sequences are pretty insane. Firefighters watching the movie criticized Howard's film because these scenes were too clear, things too easily seen, but for the sake of making a movie, you can't criticize Howard there. You feel the fire, the heat, the warmth, the scorching flames nipping at your heels, blazing away at your face, with each passing sequence. Kudos in the reality department, transporting us into the fire with our firefighters. As a viewer, we get a sense of the hell that is these individuals' day jobs, avoiding too much hero worship.

A film archetype across all genres, the warring brothers formula is brought to life by Kurt Russell and Billy Baldwin. Both characters are a little too familiar, one rising above, the other not so much. Russell as Stephen gets the showier part, the gung-ho firefighter following in his father's footsteps. He's the best at what he does and isn't interested in too much career advancement. He puts out fires, wants to put out fires, and looks out for his crew. Look for Rebecca De Mornay as his wife, struggling to cope with the increasing dangers of his job, for her and for her son. Baldwin is okay as Brian, but the character just isn't interesting enough to merit much sympathy. His romantic subplot with Jennifer Jason Leigh's government assistant (a past fling/relationship) goes nowhere as well to the point their scenes become painful, especially the makeout session on a fire truck.....when the alarm goes off. Who saw that coming?!? 

Two supporting parts are truly worthy of mentioning. Along with Russell's Stephen, I thought Robert De Niro has the strongest part here, playing Shadow Rimgale, a fire inspector who helps determine if fires were accidental or the works of arsonists. It's that perfectly underplayed, more low-key part that De Niro could probably do in his sleep. Donald Sutherland is perfectly creepy too as Ronald Bartel as Bartel, an imprisoned arsonist who knows Rimgale all too well and may know what's going on around the city.  Also look for Scott Glenn and Jason Gedrick as fellow firefighters, J.T. Walsh playing a Chicago alderman who always has reelection on his mind.

A good, not great movie. I think it is a tad long in the tooth at 132 minutes, drifting along a little too much in the midsection before getting back to business for the finale. It is a tad cliched, too many slow motion 'Noooooooooooooo!' moments dotting the firefighting sequences. Composer Hans Zimmer's score is as solid as ever...in most scenes, sometimes reverting back to the hero worship that brings the movie down a notch. Big picture though, Backdraft has a lot going for it. An interesting story that did keep me guessing, a very solid cast, and a reveal that certainly caught me by surprise. An excellent look into the lives of Chicago firemen.

Backdraft (1991): ***/****

Miracle

When things are handled correctly, it's hard to beat a good, old-fashioned sports flick. Oh, and the story is based on a true story? Yeah, things just get a little bit easier. Sometimes it ends up being the craziest, no way in hell this could possibly happen angles of the story that end up being the most effective. Case in point, the story of the 1980 U.S. Olympic hockey team that captivated viewers, eventually earning a film adaptation with 2004's Miracle.

It's early in 1979 and the upcoming 1980 Winter Olympics in Lake Placid, New York are fast approaching. For years, the Russian hockey team has rolled through opponents like a buzz saw, destroying opponents left and right. The United States Olympic Committee is trying to do something about that epic winning streak, hiring a former player turned college coach at Minnesota, Herb Brooks (Kurt Russell), to put together a winning team that can make some noise at the upcoming Olympic games. Brooks takes the job but intends to go about putting the team together in his way, regardless of what the U.S.O.C. really thinks or wants. With little expected of the American team, Brooks decides on his team at tryouts and goes to work. His methods are tough, his players bristling at times at his authority, but Brooks isn't interested in making friends. He's interested in making this American hockey team something special, a team that could be on a collision course with the Russian powerhouse. 

Whether you're a hockey fan, a sports fan, or maybe even hate sports, this is a story that resonates. Audiences typically eat up underdog stories, and this is one of the all-time greats in U.S. sports history. Read about the true story HERE with more details. I've never been a huge hockey fan, and that's a big reason it took me most of 10 years to actually watch this. It was worth the wait, director Gavin O'Connor's film more than delivering the goods. 'Miracle' covers a lot of ground from Brooks' hiring to his choosing the team, their training to the actual Olympic games. Unless you've been under a rock for years, you no doubt know how the movie will end, but O'Connor's film does a good job keeping us interested (knowledge of the finale or not), building that momentum right up until the famous semifinal matchup with the powerhouse that was the Russian National team. It's nothing flashy, nothing we haven't seen in sports flicks before, but it is very good from beginning to end.

Kurt Russell is the Man. That is all. He hasn't worked a ton in film over the last 10-plus years, but this is one solid performance. He sinks his teeth into the part of Herb Brooks, the U.S. hockey team's head coach who goes about motivating his team under some unique circumstances. He isn't interested in being a friend to his players, even a casual acquaintance. Brooks is interested in one thing and one thing only; Winning. Russell's Brooks wants a team of hockey players, not a team of hockey stars and on-ice divas who make the game all about themselves. He pushes and pushes his players, knowing what it will take to pull off the impossible. The trick becomes, has he pushed them too far? I loved the performance from Russell (especially his late 70s/early 80s apparel. Those COATS!), the biggest and most important part that brings the real-life Brooks to life. Also look for Patricia Clarkson as Brooks' wife, struggling with the time commitment, and Noah Emmerich and Kenneth Welsh as his assistant coach and team doctor.

If I had an issue with the story, it is that with the focus on Brooks and the team, we don't get to know enough of the players, their history and their backgrounds. Yes, there's 20 players and there's no human way to introduce all of them, delve into all those back stories. Still, an effort for a little more depth would have been excellent. The biggest focus is on Eddie Cahill as Jim Craig, the U.S. team's goalie struggling with some personal and family issues.  Also look for Patrick O'Brien Dempsey, Michael Mantenuto, Nathan West, Kenneth Mitchell, and Eric Peter-Kaiser as the more visible of the U.S. team members.  

My counter to that previous statement is to shoot holes in said statement. Brook's intention as a coach was to bring a team together. Truly bring a team together, the players putting their egos aside for the sake of the team and for their country, the United States. In that sense, the focus of the film is on the team effort, not the individual effort. We don't necessarily need to know a whole lot about the players. As sappy or cheesy as it sounds, this is a movie patriotism and national pride, a story that if you didn't know it was true....you'd think this was some schmaltzy Hollywood script. So in the end, it is both good and bad. The effort is solid, a team's effort to win the Olympics, not the individual players, but I definitely would have liked a little more character development among the U.S. team members. Now that said.....U-S-A, U-S-A!!!

With sports movies sometimes, the biggest weakness is usually....well, the sports. The portrayal of said sport can be a tad rough and/or forced at times. I thought the hockey sequences were great here, whether it is the brutal training the U.S. team goes through (the painful 'Again...' scene following an Olympic warm-up, watch HERE) to the actual games, especially an early game against Sweden that comes down to the wire. The best sequence is of course, the epic showdown with Russia that gave the film its title, broadcaster Al Michaels infamously yelling 'Do you believe in miracles?!?' as the clock winds down. The game is one big drain on your adrenaline, so many up and down moments as the momentum switches back and forth. The actual gold medal game is an afterthought, the focus instead on the semifinals with the Russians. A very enjoyable sports movie, full of a handful of great, memorable moments and featuring an underrated performance from star Kurt Russell.

Miracle (2004): ***/****

The Art of the Steal

Here's a trend that's been developing over the last 10-15 years in Hollywood, one I see popping up more and more in recent years. Well, basically since The Sixth Sense first appeared in 1999. Movies aren't just interested in pulling a fast one on you with a great twist. They're obsessed with doing it. That's all fine and good until it becomes so ridiculously forced that said twist almost ruins the process of getting there. Case in point, 2013's The Art of the Steal, one I'm still mulling over.

Working with a small crew that includes his brother, Nicky (Matt Dillon), longtime thief and getaway driver Crunch Calhoun (Kurt Russell) has pulled off another job at a Polish art museum, getting away with an authentic Gauguin. Well....almost. Nicky gets picked up by the police and facing a stiff sentence if he's found guilty, turns Crunch in. Crunch serves five-plus years in prison, getting out and becoming a stunt motorcycle driver, that is until he's forced to team up with Nicky and the old crew again for one very lucrative job. One of the first books by Johannes Gutenberg has been stolen in Europe and is now just sitting at a border station in Canada, just waiting to be transported into the United States. Can Crunch, Nicky and the crew pull off the job? They've only got a couple days, an art expert coming to verify the book in just a few days. The job is one thing, but can Crunch trust Nicky?

Have you heard of this movie? Yeah, me neither. I don't believe it got any theatrical release in the U.S., but I found it on Netflix and here we sit. I love a good heist movie, and the cast seemed pretty promising for a movie that got little to no release, director Jonathan Sobol also writing the screenplay. It's nothing hugely special or out of this world, but I was entertained throughout. The style borrows here and there from other better, far better known heist flicks, especially the Ocean's movies. We get on-screen graphics telling us where we are -- Quebec City, Detroit (Yeah, not as glamorous) -- and narration laying the groundwork for everything, including giving the crew cute nicknames like the Idea Man, the Forger and others. You get the idea. If you like heist movies, you'll get some enjoyment out of it. How much? That's up to you.

The basic premise is pretty straightforward, playing on the all-too-familiar "one last big job." Russell's Crunch quickly knocks that myth out, stating there's no such thing....well, sorta. Give some background, introduce the personalities and some conflict, lay out the impossible objective to rob and let the hijinks begin. Nothing too crazy there. 'Art' does a good job in that department, following the formula and usually letting the tone stay pretty light. There's some genuinely good laughs sprinkled throughout the fast-moving 90-minute feature. That comes from, not surprisingly, the cast.

You know what? Kurt Russell is really cool. It's one of those things I knew, I was aware of, but it's nice to get a reminder sometimes. His last major studio release was 2007's Death Proof (he's currently filming Fast and Furious 7) so even in a smaller-scale story like this, it's cool to see him do his cool, smooth anti-hero type. Dillon is Dillon, the treacherous me-first brother who just know is up to no good. He pickpockets a young Asian girl for goodness sake!!! As for the rest of the crew, also look for Jay Baruchel as Francie, Crunch's young protege who hasn't been involved in a heist before, Kenneth Welsh as Paddy McCarthy, the smooth Irishman who knows everybody and everything, Chris Diamantopoulos as Guy, the smooth French forger, and Katheryn Winnick as Lola, Crunch's younger girlfriend. Some fun characters, some recognizable names, all of them looking like they're having fun with the stylish caper.

Also worth mentioning is Terence Stamp as Samuel Winter, an infamous thief in his own right, now working with Interpol to earn an early release on his very, very long prison sentence. Stamp shows off his subtle comedic chops as he works with Jason Jones' Interpol Agent Bick. He has little use for the driven Bick, his underplayed digs and insults providing some of the biggest laughs in 'Art' as well as his scene with Russell's Crunch.

And yes, then there's that twist. No, that's not spot-on. TwistSSSSSSSS. Movies aren't content anymore with just one twist or even two. They've got to blow you out of the water with one out of left field twist after another until it becomes indecipherable. Who's that? What's happening? What's going on? It's a heist movie. You know, just know, there is a twist coming, but here the entire last 30 minutes is one new revelation on top of another to the point it just becomes overkill. It doesn't ruin the movie, but the non-stop revelations and twists to get to be a little much. A better movie than I was expecting overall but enough is enough at a certain point. Worth recommending though for sure. A solid, enjoyable heist/caper flick.

The Art of the Steal (2013): ** 1/2 /****

The Thing (1982)

In the case of good original and good remake, 1951's The Thing from Another World and 1982's The Thing have the same basic storyline but differ from there on in. And that's not a bad thing. They're similar enough to be compared, but the remake is a stand-alone film in a lot of senses. It is the rare remake that improves on the original's premise, even spawning a recent prequel.

At a remote weather station in Antarctica, gunfire erupts as a Norwegian helicopter swoops in, a man firing away at a fleeing dog. The crew is killed, leaving the American outfit at the station to figure out what happened at the Norwegian camp, an hour's trip away. They find that the Norwegians stumbled across something in the ice, something other-worldly that's been hidden away in the ice. Among the Americans is MacReady (Kurt Russell), the helicopter pilot, Garry (Donald Moffat), the station commander, and Blair (Wilford Brimley), the station doctor. MacReady and Blair begin to piece it together. The dog that was running from the helicopter is the Thing, an alien species able to imitate life, killing its source in the process. Could any of the crew have been taken over? Is it too late to stop this being before it is too late and escapes?

The 1951 original is a smart, well-written horror/sci-fi story that capitalized on the fear in the U.S. of the Russians, Communism and the Cold War. It begged viewers to watch the skies because one never knew when an attack could come! Cue dramatic music! With the 1982 version, horror master John Carpenter directs a story that is darker, scarier and more ominous. This isolated station is hundreds of miles from civilization and any sort of help, the British Columbia location providing a great backdrop for that isolated feeling. Composer Ennio Morricone's score is what a good horror/thriller score should be. Unsettling without being obvious, it foreshadows the coming doom but never blares in your face. Listen to his main theme HERE.

What works so smoothly in Carpenter's version is how intelligent and well-written it is. Yes, it's creepy as hell watching the Thing attack anything and everything in sight, ripping them apart rather graphically and then "becoming" the victim. But that's just a visual scare. What about the paranoia and fear of not knowing who you can trust? Could the person you're talking to be the Thing? Maybe he's already been attacked. The Thing is able to perfectly replicate its source victim, forcing MacReady, Blair and the others to come up with a test to reveal someone/something's true identity. That's what makes 'Thing' special. Everyone begins to turn on each other, sure they're truly themselves, but who's sure? Even better, Carpenter keeps us in the dark as to several characters. As a viewer, we're not always sure who's real and who's the Thing, much less the characters. Gory, bloody scares are one thing, but smart, paranoia thrills are even better.

As a director, Carpenter has been a great interview on several other DVDs' special features, talking about his love of 1950s war/westerns that featured a group of specialists working together (another reason Carpenter is awesome). 'Thing' allows him to assemble an all-male ensemble cast, Russell being the biggest name here in the director/star's third movie together. Russell as MacReady is the unquestioned star, the cynical, boozing helicopter pilot. It's his appearance that made him iconic though; the beard, the long hair, heavy jacket and boots, the sombrero he wears while flying. Great presence for a great character. Brimley is a scene-stealer as Blair, the doc who figures the Thing out, and along with Moffat as Garry there's also T.K. Carter as Nauls (the cook), David Clennon as Palmer, Keith David as Childs, Richard Dysart as Copper (the 2nd doctor), Charles Hallahan as Norris, Peter Maloney as Bennings, Richard Masur as Clark (the dog handler), Joel Polis as Fuchs, and Thomas G. Waites as Windows (radioman). Basically, these guys are fodder for the Thing, but they're a uniformly solid bunch.

In terms of originality, it's hard to beat the opening for 1982's The Thing. With no explanation, we're dropped into a chase; a helicopter racing over the Antarctic terrain and pursuing something. A man-on board is hanging off the chopper on a runner, blasting away at a dog running away below. We don't know what or why (for awhile at least) he's doing so, making it all that much more mysterious and sinister. The explanation comes along and it all fits together, but in terms of scene and tone-setting, that opening is one of the all-time greats, especially with Morricone's score driving the action. Watch it HERE. As quite the bookend, the finale is great too, open-ended enough for the audience to make up their mind about what they've seen. One of the great final lines in a movie too.

Also worth mentioning? The 2011 prequel was good in its own right and more than did justice to the 1982 version. Some homework was clearly done setting up the mysterious Norwegian camp, making it a spot-on version of what we saw in the 1982 version, and that movie's ending is just as good, ending where this one begins in a great little connection. All told, all three 'Thing' movies are above average, but this sci-fi/horror/thriller from John Carpenter is hands down the best. You can watch the whole movie at Youtube -- watch HERE -- in 10 parts.

The Thing <---trailer (1982): *** 1/2 /****

Escape from L.A.

If you're going to do a sequel, you might as well commit and do it right, right? You'd think so, or at least that's usually my hope when I stumble across a sequel -- especially an unnecessary one. That is partially why I avoided John Carpenter's 1996 sequel Escape from L.A.. The 1981 original doesn't need a sequel so somewhat skeptical, I dove in.

It's 2013 and the United States is very much a dystopian country still, even 16 years since Special Forces soldier turned criminal Snake Plissken (Kurt Russell) rescued the President in New York. Now though, an immensely powerful earthquake has ripped Los Angeles apart, the city now an island destination for any "undesirables." Now a new religious fanatic (Cliff Robertson) has become the President, and his extremist daughter (A.J. Langer) has hijacked an item that could destroy the world, retreating to L.A. to work with fellow extremist Cuervo Jones (Georges Corraface). Snake's services are called on once more. Blackmailed and working against a deadline of death, Snake must sneak into L.A., retrieve the item, kill the daughter, and only then will he be safe. Can he pull off the impossible again?

I didn't love the original Escape from New York, but I certainly liked it. Made on a small budget, there was a certain B-movie charm to Carpenter's film. It was cheesy and ridiculous and over the top and most importantly of all, fun to watch. The dystopian setting of an America that is nothing like the country we know now is ideal, opening the door for all kinds of outlets to take a story. Carpenter and Russell worked together a handful of times over their careers, clearly enjoying making movies together. Russell liked it so much -- and playing Snake too -- that he worked with Carpenter on writing a sequel. It was held up for years, finally coming to fruition in the mid 1990s. With that long of a wait and this much talent involved, why then is the sequel so bad?

The obvious answer is that it is basically the same movie. Sequels are fine when they add another step, a new layer to a pre-existing world and characters. But making the same movie -- quite literally -- with all the same features, characters and settings? Replacing New York with Los Angeles isn't unique or new. It's a road trip. I guess I just expected more. If you've got 15-plus years to write a sequel, couldn't you manage something better than this?  It bombed in theaters, not making a profit, so I'm not the only one with complaints. The repeat of New York's success is one thing, but this 'Escape' has too much really awful CGI, too many similar characters, and did I mention the almost identical story?

What carries both movies on different levels is Kurt Russell. 'New York' is just a genuinely good B-movie that's aided and boosted by Russell. 'L.A.' is basically watchable only because of Russell. Snake Plissken is Russell's most iconic character from a successful career, and there's nothing about him that isn't cool. Okay, check that, the odd, fetishisized leather outfit is a little much. But other than that, Snake is the perfect anti-hero. A high profile crook with a reputation, he has no regard for any authority and only goes along with the plan because his life depends on it. Yes, he growls everything he says. Yes, he makes some awfully stupid decisions. But is he cool doing it? Yes, Kurt Russell is awesome, and he's cooler than you.

While the rest of the cast and characters are pretty ridiculous, Carpenter nonetheless assembles quite a cast. Start with Robertson, having some fun taking some jabs at the religious nuts. His U.S. President is one big stereotype, hamming it up like nobody's business. Stacy Keach plays Malloy, Snake's "handler" of sorts, with Michelle Forbes as his assistant. Steve Buscemi, Bruce Campbell, Valeria Golino and Peter Fonda play just some of the eccentric nuts trying to survive in Los Angeles who Snake runs across, Buscemi and Fonda making the best impressions. Look also for Pam Grier as Hershe Las Palmas, a drag queen who Snake used to work with on other jobs. I've gotta admit though, it's a little unsettling hearing a man's voice coming from Grier's mouth.

So watching a rehash of the more enjoyable Escape from New York, there are some saving graces in this most unnecessary of sequels. The ending features a couple very cool twists, some you can see coming if you're paying attention, but enjoyable nonetheless. Was there ever any doubt Snake was going to get duped repeatedly by these morons? I think not. Cool character, cool ending, but that doesn't save the movie.

Escape from L.A. <---trailer (1996): * 1/2 /****

Dark Blue

On April 29, 1992, three members of the Los Angeles police force were acquitted for their involvement in the Rodney King case, setting off six-days of rioting across the city that accounted for 53 deaths, thousands of injuries and over a billion dollars in damages. Using the week leading up to that acquittal as the setting for his script, James Ellroy -- who also wrote L.A. Confidential -- turns in another winner with 2001's Dark Blue, a story that deals with all the corruption and wrongdoings going on in the LAPD.

Working off Ellroy's novel for 'Confidential,' that 1997 movie earned a nomination for writing so Ellroy goes back to the well for Dark Blue, which explores some of the same topics. But setting the story around the Rodney King trial gives the movie an extremely tense feeling because as a viewer we know what's coming when the jury finally makes their decision. And with Chinatown (1930s), Confidential (1950s), and here with Dark Blue (1990s), it's like a timeline of corruption for Los Angeles.

Assigned a case usually given to homicide, detectives Eldon Perry (Kurt Russell), a veteran officer and a 3rd-generation cop, and Bobby Keogh (Scott Speedman), a new officer on the force, are investigating four murders at a Korean grocery market. But as they look into the brutal killings, the evidence doesn't add up, and they find out some of their superiors may have been involved with the case. As Perry and Keogh investigate, another higher-up officer, Arthur Holland (Ving Rhames), is trying to take the detective duo down because of what he believes is years of corruption, fabricating evidence and arresting people just to shut down cases, guilty or not. Perry's SIS supervisor, Jack Van Meter (Brendan Gleeson), is doing his best to keep his detectives out in the field. With the jury decision looming, Perry and Keogh do whatever they can to close their own case.

Procedural cop stories are a dime a dozen in both movies and TV and because they're so popular there is probably no end in sight. The better ones tend to dig into the real nitty-gritty day to day lives of the officers and beat cops on the streets. Russell's Perry grew up wanting to be a cop and isn't above bribing, blackmailing or fabricating evidence to get a warrant. He's as politically incorrect as possible, but did he become this way because of what he sees doing his job or because that's how he always was? These questions bounced around in my head a lot while watching, mostly because Russell is such a likable character that he makes Perry sympathetic at times and easily hatable in others.

Playing a darker character than he typically plays, Russell carries the movie with his performance. He's racist, alcoholic, sometimes trigger-happy and will close his cases and catch the bad guy rules/morals/policies be damned. All of this comes to a head as the race riots start in L.A. in an ending that could have been overly theatrical but ends up working because it shows a man that's been pushed too far. As his friend and boss, Gleeson steals just about every scene he's in as Van Meter, the incredibly corrupt long-time officer who lets other do his busy work for him while he reaps the benefits. Speedman is a bit of a weak link in the story mostly because he's not up to his co-stars in ability. Rhames has a small but integral part and handles it well, but don't expect two hours of Russell and Rhames going toe to toe.

Director Ron Shelton chose to film the movie in Los Angeles, often going into the roughest neighborhoods in the cities to get shots he needed. The decision pays off, giving the story that gritty, realistic feel it needed to be successful. The riot scenes especially stand out as Perry tries to drive through the mayhem tearing the city apart, all the while trying to catch two suspects looking to make a quick getaway. Not having been old enough to realize what was going on in 1992, seeing Shelton's depiction is downright frightening with the final shot an especially haunting one as L.A. burns.

Nothing too original here, nothing you won't have seen before if you're a fan of procedural police movies, but that doesn't mean it's not worth seeing. Formulaic doesn't mean bad in my book. Kurt Russell in the lead gives a fine performance and Brendan Gleeson matches him in every scene. It's not flashy in its execution, but Shelton's movie is always solid and worth a rent.

Dark Blue <---trailer (2002): ***/****

Escape from New York

Not having been around in the 60s and 70s when Kurt Russell was making a name for himself on TV and in Disney movies like 'The Computer Wore Tennis Shoes,' I don't know how popular the young actor was at the time. He was obviously popular enough though as he springboarded his early Disney career into feature films as an adult that typically had him playing some variation of a tough guy.

Part of that transition is thanks in great part to action/horror director John Carpenter who cast Russell in two early 80s movies, Escape from New York and The Thing (a remake of a 1950s sci-fi movie). The Thing is one of my favorite horror/sci-fi combos with Russell headlining as MacReady, a booze-swilling, tough talking helicopter pilot of a remote science station in the Arctic. Seeing the cast and reading the plot of 'Escape,' I thought I'd enjoy that one as much but came away disappointed.

In 1988, crime in the U.S. escalates over 400% and the island of Manhattan is turned into a maximum security prison. A huge wall is built all around the island, and all the bridges and exits off the island are mined so prisoners can't escape. It's a self-governed prison where there are no guards, and the prisoners rule themselves with no interference from above. The idea is simple, as a prisoner you go onto the island and never leave. But after years of success, a revolutionary group hijacks Air Force One with the President (Donald Pleasence) on board and crashes the plane onto the island.

The prison commissioner, Hauk (Lee Van Cleef) is forced to come up with a plan to get the President out of the island prison safely and is facing a deadline in doing it. The President needs to speak at a world summit -- the U.S., Russia, and China seem to be at war but it's never clearly spelled out -- and is carrying vital information. Hauk turns to his only option, a prisoner about to be sent to Manhattan, Snake Plisken (Russell), promising him a full pardon if he can get the President out in only 22 hours. Snake agrees, and gets onto the island via a glider that lands on top of the World Trade Center (a very eerie scene) only to find that the President is a prisoner of the Duke (Isaac Hayes), the self-appointed ruler of Manhattan Prison.

Carpenter's films have a reputation as cult classics, movies that aren't necessarily high quality but are nonetheless extremely entertaining. 'Escape' certainly has that popularity with its fans, but I struggled getting into the movie. It was filmed on a small budget, but that tends to work here more often than not. Carpenter uses parts of downtown St. Louis as a stand-in for a ruined, beaten down Manhattan, and the setting works beautifully. Almost all the movie takes place at night in the shadowy, vacant streets where prisoners with nothing to lose hide just out of sight ready to attack if the opportunity presents itself. Atmosphere and cinematography are the least of the movie's worries.

Clocking in at a brisk 99 minutes, the movie feels stagnant at times but could also use some fleshing out of the characters, especially Plissken. Russell growls and grimaces his way through lines, making Plissken a modern-day gunfighter you could see Clint Eastwood playing in a spaghetti western. His background is hinted at -- war hero turned criminal -- but it's never dealt with in full force. Maybe it was intended that way to keep the already very stylish, very cool character a mystery, which I understand, but even a little more background would have been good. Also, Carpenter had to cut the original beginning of the movie explaining how Plissken got caught, acts the way he does and ends up being sent to Manhattan. Check it out HERE if curious. Extremely stylish sequence which could have really helped the movie out.

But in addition to little development for Plissken, the supporting cast is given even less, a real shame when considering the talent involved. Hayes is more of a presence than an actor and pulls off the part of the Duke adequately, but how did he come to power in Manhattan? Van Cleef as always is a badass, and Pleasence is really just an idea of a president. There's also Ernest Borgnine as Cabbie, a longtime prisoner who still operates his cab, and Harry Dean Stanton as Brain, a prisoner living in the library who supplies the Duke with gasoline for his entourage, seen here. Cabbie gets some backstory but not much, and Brain has a history with Snake but that's never really revealed. Adrienne Barbeau's chest also makes an appearance as Maggie, Brain's girl. She says virtually nothing and wears a low-cut dress. That's the character, no frills attached.

The generally cheap feeling of the movie works in most cases, but basically nothing happens. Snake walks around a lot -- at a slow pace too considering time is of the essence -- meets people, runs around, snatches the President rather easily and tries to get out of the island prison fortress. Even Russell's cool presence couldn't save this one as an interesting story never rises to its potential and wastes a strong supporting cast.

Escape from New York <----trailer (1981): **/****