3:10 to Yuma (2007)

Oh, remakes...we meet again. And a western at that?!? Oh, the horrors! As for my rule though, if you're going to do a remake, you'd better be ready to do something different, something with a twist. Here's a perfect case in point with 2007's 3:10 to Yuma, a remake of a 1957 western of the same name. The original is a good if not great western that with some tweaks could be great. Does the remake capitalize on that potential?

A rancher in New Mexico with a wife and two kids, Dan Evans (Christian Bale) is struggling. A drought has left his land barely getting by, and he's running out of money to pay off some significant debts. What can he do to save his family and their land? A highly lucrative, highly dangerous option has presented itself. An infamous outlaw and killer, Ben Wade (Russell Crowe), has been captured in the town of Bisbee following a successful payroll robbery. The railroad wants Wade brought to justice, hoping to send him to Yuma Prison where he will be tried and prosecuted, hopefully ending up in a noose. For $200, Dan agrees to go along in transporting Wade to the town of Contention where the outlaw can be put on a train to Yuma. With a small, not too capable posse helping, Dan and Wade hit the trail. Not far behind? Wade's murdering, bloodthirsty gang, looking to free their boss and not caring if they've gotta kill a few people in the process.

The 1957 3:10 to Yuma from director Delmer Daves stars Glenn Ford (as Wade) and Van Heflin (as Dan) in a pretty good but not great western. It's solid. It's entertaining. A remake isn't necessarily needed, but if you're gonna do it right...do it like this.

From director James Mangold, 2007 'Yuma' injects some energy into the western genre. Some of the DVD special features address that aspect, the love of the western, the general death of the western in theatres, and without getting preachy...the need for westerns in theaters. The original is a talkative movie, but the 2007 version is talkative, action-packed, highly entertaining, and features some great performances. Filmed on-location in New Mexico with an Oscar-nominated score from Marco Beltrami, 'Yuma' feels and looks authentic. It's dirty, dusty and grimy with gunplay and death hanging in the air. There's nothing glamorous or romantic about the late 19th Century in the American southwest. Throw it all together though, and we've got a western with a ton of energy that is just fun. It's entertaining. 'Yuma' shows you can be a so-called "adult western" while still having fun.

Who better to inject that energy into a decidedly-American genre? Lead actors from New Zealand and England of course! Crowe and Bale are perfectly cast in their respective roles. Crowe's Ben Wade is a killer, a bandit, brutal, ruthless....but damn, he's charming when he wants to be. Lightning-fast with a gun, he's also freakishly quick with a disarming line. Wade can play mind games with few equals, providing some fun as he messes with his captors. Crowe is clearly reveling in the part, clearly having a ton of fun with the amiable but brutally efficient outlaw. As farmer/rancher Dan Evans, Bale gets the more straight role but similarly throws himself into the part. His Civil War past still weighs on him, and he desperately wants to provide for his family, including his wife (Gretchen Mol) and two sons. While few men would take the risks associated with transporting a notorious outlaw, Dan has no other options. Two fascinating characters.

Crowe and Bale are excellent together, featuring some great banter throughout. The most memorable part though, that goes to Ben Foster as Charlie Prince, Wade's right-hand man, a lightning-fast gunslinger who's also just a touch unhinged. Foster is terrifyingly good here from his wardrobe, to his evil smile to ability with a gun. A great supporting part. Also look for Logan Lerman as Dan's oldest son, Dallas Roberts as Butterfield, the railroad representative, Peter Fonda (who's always welcome) as McElroy, a grizzled Pinkerton agent, Alan Tudyk as Doc Potter, Kevin Durand as the maniacal Tucker, Vinessa Shaw as a madam who meets Wade's liking, and in the odd, out-of-left-field department, Luke Wilson in a random part as a gunslinging miner.

A couple things bugged me on the recent viewing. Trying to stay ahead of the vengeful Prince and Wade's gang, Dan, Butterfield and Co. seem to be in absolutely no rush to get to Contention. They set down and camp....a lot. We're talking long, restful sleeps each night it seems like! Before that, they stop and have a nice dinner at the Evans ranch. Eh, time isn't of the essence or anything, right?

Some plot holes and discrepancies aside, this was a great western. There isn't a ton of action, but what's there is excellent. The opening stagecoach robbery -- featuring a gatling gun! -- is a quality scene-setter and some gunplay is sprinkled throughout until the finale, an exciting, bullet-riddled chase through Contention to the train depot. Where the remake differentiates itself from the original is the mix of drama and action. Mangold knows what he's working with in Crowe and Bale and lets the camera and story stick with his star duo. Their chemistry is without doubt throughout, two pros in a heavyweight fight just waiting to deliver the knockout punch.

As for my general complaint about remakes, do something different if you're gonna remake a movie that didn't need it. The 2007 version does plenty different, including quite a different ending. Some critics took issue with the ending and Wade's reasoning for what he does, but if you're paying attention, clues are dropped throughout as to his intentions. An excellent all-around western that's highly recommended!

3:10 to Yuma (2007): *** 1/2 /****

Dirty Mary Crazy Larry

Cars are pretty cool, huh? Yes, another sterling lead courtesy of Just Hit Play, and you're welcome. It's a simple truth though, one that the movie industry has believed in for years. My car can go faster than yours. What are you going to do about it? There's something primal and stupid about watching a souped-up car gunning it down the road, typically with cops or gangsters or any number of random bad guys on their trail. From the decade of the car movie, here comes another gem, 1974's Dirty Mary Crazy Larry.

A stock car driver who's never quite made it to the big time, Larry (Peter Fonda) is convinced all he needs is a car and the equipment to make it big but no one will back him. With his longtime friend and down-on-his-luck mechanic, Deke (Adam Roarke), Larry has a plan. The duo concocts a plan though, robbing a grocery store that just received its payroll in a tiny, backroads town. The job goes off smoothly....until they try to get away. Waiting inside their getaway car is Mary (Susan George), a one-night stand (at the time) of Larry's who secretly tagged along. With no way to get rid of her -- without her turning them in -- she tags along on the getaway. Their plan comes together nicely, even when the local police, led by ridiculously persistent Captain Franklin (Vic Morrow), catch wind of them and aren't far behind.

Made on the cheap and the definition of a B-movie that thrives in its cheapness, 'Crazy' is a gem of a car movie. From director John Hough, it makes no bones about what it is. This is a movie about badass, souped-up cars with V-8 engines going wheel-to-wheel on the open road. Are you interested in a movie with well thought-out characters that develop over time? A story with twists and turns and an Oscar-caliber script? You should probably check out a different movie. It clocks in at 93 minutes and never truly slows down. In the vein of Thunder Road, Bullitt, Smokey and the Bandit, Vanishing Point, Two-Lane Blacktop and many more car flicks, 'Crazy' more than belongs in the conversation.

This is a movie to watch the cars drive and drive ridiculously fast. It was filmed in the California countryside away from the big cities, including some great locations in and around the walnut groves in Stockton and Linden, California. I'm a sucker for any car movies, and while I didn't love all of this flick -- more on that later -- the appeal is obvious. We're talking the souped-up cars (Larry and Deke drive a 1966 Chevy Impala and later a 1969 Dodge Charger) doing battle with similarly souped-up police cars, and in the coolest development? The Charger going up against an obsessed Franklin in a police helicopter on an isolated road. All the driving stunts are impressive in their own right, but this extended sequence is something else. The helicopter looks to be flying at top speeds just feet -- maybe inches -- away from the Charger. Great story this is not, just sit back and admire the truly impressive stunt work and driving.

This is a fun movie, but there are stretches that tested even my limits. That issue comes from the title characters. A rebel icon of the 1960s and 1970s, Peter Fonda is and always will be pretty cool. Playing crazy Larry though, he's just annoying. His character is hard to like even a little, and the cocky stock car driver gets old quick, especially his cackling laughter. Unfortunately, he's not the most annoying person here. That title belongs to Susan George as Dirty Mary. Around because the movie requires some eye candy and little else, Mary is beyond shrill. Larry affectionately calls her 'Dingleberry' after their magical one-night together so clearly it's a classic movie romance on par with Casablanca. George does look good, rocking low-rise jeans and a denim bikini top, but the shrillness is unreal, and the character's down right stupid.

That's all unfortunate because when Fonda's Larry and Roarke's Deke are together, we've got a good thing going. I especially liked Roarke as mechanic Deke, an expert in everything motor and gearhead. He just wants to get away with the money and is less than appreciative of Mary tagging along on the getaway. Even he grows a little tired of Larry's act though. A star of biker flicks, Roarke was my favorite actor here. As Capt. Franklin, Morrow continues to establish himself as the face of the evil Establishment, just like Bad News Bears. It's a funny part though, a cop who doesn't care about rules or appearances, just catching the bad guy. Also look for Kenneth Tobey as Donahue, Franklin's by-the-book superior, and Eugene Daniels as Hank, one of Franklin's cops who gets his hands on a police interceptor with a cranked-up V-8 engine.

The movie is a hot mess overall. Larry and Deke take the grocery store owner (an uncredited Roddy McDowall) captive, holding his family hostage at their home while they pull off the robbery. Unsympathetic characters to say the least, but thankfully that rights itself a little bit. Sure, there are flaws a-plenty here in this cult classic, but it's fun throughout. Enjoy it, and don't blink or you'll miss the shocker of an ending.

Dirty Mary Crazy Larry (1974): ***/****  

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 /****

The Limey

Maybe getting old isn't half as bad as it is made out to be.  Just look at movie stars who well into their 60s and past that are still as cool as ever...if not more so. Think Robert Redford, Michael Caine, Sean Connery, Christopher Plummer. With the exception of Redford, they are all British.  Hmmm, might be something to that, but that's for another review. One of those actors who everyone is aware of but can't always place him, British actor Terence Stamp is for the lack of a better description cool, especially in 1999's The Limey, one of his best roles in a career dating back to the early 1960s.

This taut little thriller -- clocking in at just 89 minutes -- is an oddity among the revenge/vigilante picture. Without explaining the whole review and movie in one sentence, all I can say is that it is different, but for all the right reasons.  Director Steven Soderbergh does not settle for the status quo with a story that has been seen before and will be seen again. It would have been easy for 'Limey' to stay in that safe middle ground, and the movie would have been acceptably entertaining. But Soderbergh puts his own unique style on the revenge flick, and the movie is the better for it.

Just released after serving a nine-year sentence for a failed robbery, aging British crook Wilson (Stamp) heads to Los Angeles in search of answers after finding out his daughter died in a car crash. He doesn't believe the story for a second, getting help from a friend of his daughter's, Eduardo (Luis Guzman), who helps him get around the city and meet the people he needs to see. It doesn't take long for Wilson to start piecing things together with all the evidence from his daughter's death pointing at Terry Valentine (Peter Fonda), a high-end music promoter who is mixed up in some shady business dealings. A fish out of water with nothing but revenge driving him, Wilson starts gunning for him, ready to do whatever it takes to get revenge for his daughter's supposed accidental death.

I am most familiar with Soderbergh's work in the form of the Ocean's movies, starting with 2001's Ocean's Eleven and continuing since with two more sequels.  As a director, Soderbergh has a knack for the highly stylized without sacrificing story. Some of his other films include Traffic, The Good German, Che, and Erin Brockovich so he obviously knows what he's doing in making a reputation for himself.  With 'Limey,' there is something difficult to explain why the movie works. It was filmed on a relatively low budget (under $10 million) and has a somewhat cheap, renegade film-making look to it. The story wastes little time with anything unnecessary, boasting a confidence in getting where it wants when it wants. That's the movie in a nutshell. Different? Yes, but it is comfortable in its own skin, content to be different for entertainment value, not for the sake of being different.

Soderbergh's directing style can get in the way at times with his fast-paced thriller/mystery.  The editing is never an 'in your face, aggressive, look at me!' style, but it treads that fine line.  Dialogue between characters is quick cut and edited with shots from before and after being seen while the words play over the images. We see images that seemingly have little or no effect on what we're actually seeing, but in the end they all come together. SPOILER ALERT We're actually seeing part of the ending throughout the movie except we're not aware of it at times. END OF SPOILER  It's not until the end that everything fits together with a non-linear storyline that doesn't have everything in order, forcing us to piece things together at a certain point. In Soderbergh's hands, the gimmick works, but in a lesser film or working with a less talented director, this could have been a mess.

Style aside and eccentricities in storytelling aside, the main reason to see this movie is Terence Stamp's performance as Wilson, the aging British crook looking for answers concerning his daughter's death.  From the description I read, the main character sounded like any number of other normal men turned vigilante heroes. Nothing about the character though is commonplace, Stamp putting his own spin on the stock character. He's extremely capable and doesn't care much what happens to him, but he has this darkly comic edge to him, providing laughs with his Cockney sayings that he has to explain to anyone he's talking with. His pants are a size too small, giving him an oddly human edge as he goes about his investigations. Most of all though, I genuinely liked Wilson, especially the revelation he has and the changes he makes as he sees his faults as a father. A great performance overall, one that carries the movie.

Joining Stamp in a part that pokes fun at himself is Fonda as Terry Valentine, high-powered music promoter who finds himself up to his knees in trouble.  His character shot to the top in the 1960s -- much like Fonda did -- and to a point he still is and belongs in the long-since gone decade.  One of my favorite character actors, Guzman is subtle in hitting all the right notes as Eduardo, Wilson's unofficial sidekick. Lesley Ann Warren plays Elaine, a friend of Wilson's daughter, while Barry Newman plays the straight villain, Valentine's security and all-around shady dude, Avery. Also look for Nicky Katt as Stacy, a thug and hired killer who provides some surprisingly funny moments in his outlook on the Hollywood lifestyle and Amelia Heinle as Adhara, Valentine's much-younger girlfriend. 

As I review this movie, the description that keeps coming to mind was how pleasantly surprised I was, how much I enjoyed the movie from start to finish. It just isn't what you would expect from reading the description, but in a good way, not bad. An underrated gem.

The Limey <---trailer (1999): ***/****

Race With the Devil

Ah, the open road where anything can happen.  Of course, if everyday life was anything like the open road in movies, no one would ever leave their home.  Has anything ever gone well on an epic road trip?  There's always murdering hitchhikers, roving motorcycle gangs, or suicidal semi-truck drivers just waiting to kill you.  In 1975's Race with the Devil, it's none of those.  Instead, it's a satanic cult terrorizing our all-American couples on the open road.

After saving for years for vacation, two couples, Roger and Kelly (Peter Fonda and Lara Parker) and Frank and Alice (Warren Oates and Loretta Swit) head west in their new RV for Aspen, Colorado for some skiing.  The first night out, they camp a mile or so off the road to enjoy the beauty of the country.  Staying up late drinking, Roger and Frank see something weird on a nearby hilltop; a group of people chanting and dancing around a roaring fire.  At first, they think nothing of it until one of the dancers is stripped and stabbed.  They're spotted, and by the skin of their teeth escape.  The sheriff (R.G. Armstrong) in the closest town investigates and sends them on their way when he decides there's nothing more they can do.  But these cultists aren't done with these two couples yet.

When it comes to horror and thriller movies, I typically stay pretty clear of them.  But with this one, the cast and the very B-movieish plot caught my eye.  'Devil' was released four years after Steven Spielberg's Duel premiered on TV, and it would be hard not to compare the two.  Where Duel had one man vs. one rogue semi driver, 'Devil' has four people running for their lives from a lot of people -- a number is never really established.  SPOILERS  It seems everyone they run into following the murder is in the cult.  You could call it a twist, but it was pretty obvious to me what was going on the second Armstrong enters as the all too helpful country sheriff. END OF SPOILERS

I enjoyed the movie as a whole, but two scenes will stick with me most of all.  One, the getaway after they've been spotted.  It's the dead of night, and these cultists are hauling ass after them.  I'll go into this more later, but a gigantic, new model RV also isn't the best getaway vehicle.  Of course, the RV gets stuck in a shallow riverbed as the cultists close in.  Check out the murder and getaway HERE at Youtube.  Another is midway through the movie as paranoia starts to set in that they're being tracked.  The cult has hidden rattlesnakes throughout the RV, and coming from someone who isn't a huge fan of snakes in general, this is an incredibly uncomfortable scene to watch.  Add to it that the scene goes on and on as Roger and Frank try to throw these snakes outside, and you've got quite a shocker sequence.

The last 45 minutes are more like Duel because the story is almost completely contained in this RV as the cultists try to knock them off the road.  These chase sequences are something else, especially considering the type of vehicles.  The RV seems to swallow up the road with its size, and chasing them are tow trucks, school buses, and midsize trucks.  The chases feature some impressive stunt driving and keep that lightning fast pace going right up until the end.  The two couples just want to get to Amarillo and a bigger police force to report what's happened, but nothing is going to come easy for them on the open road and all its dangers.

Fonda and Oates had worked together four years earlier in 1971's The Hired Hand, and the chemistry they had there rolls over to this B-movie.  These aren't roles that require a whole lot of acting -- look worried/pissed/terrified and repeat -- but both stars look to be having fun.  Oates always is worth watching even in the worst movies, and Fonda holds his own alongside the wily character actor.  This was also the first time I'd seen Swit -- MASH's Margaret 'Hot Lips' Houlihan -- in a movie and not TV.  The same as the gents, she's required to look worried and be scared.  Parker doesn't make much of an impression as the wife who's losing her mind a whole lot quicker than the rest of the RV passengers.  They do meet a handful of people on the road -- all of them connected with the cult -- but they're nothing more than creepy faces.

And then there was the ending.  I won't spoil it here for you, but it is the type of ending that could only be in a movie from the 1970s, and more than that, a 70s horror/thriller flick.  It's quick with little build-up and certainly caught me off guard.  Don't blink or you might miss it before the credits start to roll.  Apparently, it's a pretty unpopular ending, but I really liked it in terms of story and shock value.  The whole story's been building up to this so why throw in a happy ending?  Check this out at Youtube, starting with Part 1.  A cheesy movie for sure, but it packs some good scares and a good cast.  Worth a watch.

Race With the Devil <-----trailer (1975): ***/****

The Boondock Saints II: All Saints Day

In a perfect example of how strong DVD sales can give a movie a second chance, 1999's The Boondock Saints made less than $20,000 in a very short theater run only to become a cult hit on DVD.  But success came at a price with a 2003 documentary that showed director Troy Duffy's meteoric rise to success and fall from grace.  Duffy fell completely out of the limelight and didn't make another movie for 10 years until the studios finally asked him to make a sequel for the Saints, 2009's The Boondock Saints II: All Saints Day.

The original is actually a mess of a movie that works because of all its goofy action, cheesy one-liners, and characters that were surprisingly sympathetic.  It was a formula that worked so Duffy repeats it with his sequel.  Not 'repeats' like he continues where the 1st movie left off, but 'repeats' like scene-for-scene with the same humor and action.  With 10 years to work on a sequel and script, this is the best he could come up with?  As a huge fan of the original, this sequel comes across as boring, been there and done that, and generally pretty lazy.  The two vigilante brothers cleaning up society's trash worked smoothly the first time around, but not for a second go-around.

It's been eight years since brothers Connor (Sean Patrick Flanery) and Murphy (Norman Reedus) killed a Boston mafioso in a courtroom full of witnesses with their father, Il Duce (Billy Connolly).  Dubbed 'the Saints,' the trio escaped to Ireland where they tend a small sheep farm, but news reaches them that a priest in Boston was killed in a manner suspiciously similar to how they dispatched their victims.  So either some one is trying to frame them, or two, lure them back to Boston.  No matter the reason, the Saints return to the states with Romeo (Clifton Collins Jr.), basically a Mexican gangster, joining them.  They set their sites on Concezio Yakavetta (Judd Nelson), the son of the mafioso they killed years before.  But not so fast, the Feds get called in with Special Agent Eunice Bloom (Julie Benz) leading the investigation.

I don't even know where to start with this one.  With a few very small exceptions, nothing really works here.  Two of the original's best characters aren't back -- one died in the first movie, the other makes a very small, very pointless cameo -- but instead of bringing in some new, interesting characters, Duffy creates new versions that are almost identical.  Collins Jr. is funny enough although he's trying too hard as Rocco 2, I mean Romeo.  He acts crazy and bugs out his eyes after every line.  As for Benz, she's the student of Agent Paul Smecker (Wilem Dafoe, he makes the cameo) and basically channels his ability.  Easy on the eyes, but not on the ears, Benz has an accent like nails on the chalkboard and comes across as more annoying than cutesy.

That's not to say they're the ones to blame.  With the brothers, whole scenes are duplicated from the original to show off their dynamic.  The most obnoxious one has them getting into a fistfight right before a hit attempt that of course, goes perfectly even if it wasn't drawn up that way.  Their lines are nothing more than a series of one-liners that don't do much at all, my favorite being Reedus' "Let's do some gratuitous violence."  It doesn't make sense, and haha, we get it, you're addressing us as fans.  And completely unrelated to story or character, as Connor, Flanery doesn't look quite right -- something's going on with his eyes and face.  Connolly is a bright spot as he was in the original, and we do see some great background with him as to how he became the notorious killer Il Duce.

Connolly's subplot is the worthy part of the story, including his relationship with his former partner who eventually turned him in.  SPOILERS STOP READING IF YOU DON'T WANT TO KNOW THE TWIST SPOILERS  The partner, now all grown up, is setting up the brothers to get a crack at Connor and Murphy.  In what should have been a cool part, Peter Fonda plays the Roman, an aging gangster trying to right wrongs he's done.  Connolly and Fonda have a great scene together near the finale, but it's undone by a really stupid action scene to close out the movie.  And the capper, Il Duce gets knocked off.  Not cool at all, but it does go along with my "the coolest character always gets whacked" theory.  END OF SPOILERS

The action especially is pretty disappointing, looking more like PG-13 shootouts than the R-rating it was given.  Instead of improving on the top-notch, highly stylized action of the original, Duffy does the same exact thing in terms of storytelling.  Set-up is introduced, fade to black, aftermath, FBI agents analyze scene, and Benz's Bloom explains what happens inserted into the scene.  It was cool the first time, especially with Dafoe's famous "THERE WAS A FIREFIGHT!" line, but it's dull here.  As a comparison, watch Benz inexplicably dressed up as a cowgirl in a similar scene. (SPOILERS watch it HERE).  The finale too disappoints mostly because by then the story is a complete mess and makes no sense.  If that's important to you.

For every good moment here in the sequel, they're undone by many more moments that fall flat on their faces.  Awkward unnecessary nudity, some horrific choices in soundtrack playing over the countless montages, and not more than an ounce or two of originality.  The Boondock Saints was a surprise hit, and it seems Duffy tried to do exactly the same thing with his second feature film.

Of course, the final scene is actually pretty cool, and leaves the door open for a third movie.  As much as I loved the first one, I can't help but hope that they decide to let a sleeping dog lie.  Who knows what went wrong?  The tone's too jokey where the original was mostly serious, and the humor falls flat.  There's also countless flashbacks as if to point out, 'hey, remember how good the original was?'  It needlessly calls attention to what could have been. This sequel was awful.

The Boondock Saints II: All Saint's Day <----trailer (2009): */****

Netflix review #17: The Hired Hand

Peter Fonda will never be considered a mainstream, Hollywood kind of guy. His first big hit, 1969's Easy Rider, proved that pretty clearly about two bikers enjoying their travels across the country before they start to see what the country and people are really like. Fonda's first film as a director, 1971's The Hired Hand, has the same edge and darkness in tone to it as Easy Rider, except that instead of modern times, it takes place in the Old West.

Riding west toward the Pacific Ocean, cowboy drifters Harry Collings (Fonda) and Arch Harris (Warren Oates) hope to hit it big in California. Along for the adventure is a youngster, Danny Griffen (Robert Pratt) who's always looking for the next big thing on the horizon. But as they ride into a no-account, run down town of Del Norte, Harry decides he's had enough of the drifting life and wants to go back home. It's been years, but he had a wife and daughter at some point and wants to find them. Longtime friends, Arch tags along.

It's at home on a quaint, little farm they discover Harry's wife, Hannah (Verna Bloom), isn't going to welcome him back with open arms and understandably so. She'll tolerate him, but that's as far as things will go until Harry proves he's there to stay. Arch sees the writing on the wall and leaves his friend, knowing that Harry's found what he's looking for. Everything seems to have worked out perfectly until a rider comes along saying Arch is in trouble, and the only one that can help him is his old friend. Does Harry go and help him, or stay with the life he's rediscovered?

I'm not sure if it makes sense, but this is an artsy western that at times reminded me of Terrence Malick movies. Much of the movie was shot with an eye for the visual, riders moving across a sandy plain or through a densely wooded forest. There's a very lyrical, other worldly feel to the proceedings. One technique I thought worked really well was shots overlapping each other. One in particular has Harry and Arch talking to each other with their faces in close-up while in long shot their bodies are blurred by the setting sun. On top of each other, the two shots form a beautiful shot.

Casting is dead on, plain and simple. Fonda's Harry is similar to Captain America in many ways. He's laid back and easygoing, just looking for a good life and happiness wherever it may be. It's only when you push him too far his other side comes out. As his partner, Oates hits all the right notes as Arch. The veteran character actor was so good at turning it on and hamming it up, just one of the reasons he's the best, but here he underplays everything. Harry and Arch have ridden across the west for 7 years and there's a genuine friendship there. It's that relationship that carries the movie and sets it apart from most westerns with a similar storyline.

Verna Bloom could have easily gotten lost in the movie behind Fonda and Oates, but her performance is on equal ground with them. As Hannah, Harry's wife, she is a woman that's been burned in the past and she has trouble putting it behind her. Hannah is lonely and wants companionship, but she's worried she'll get hurt again, as much for her daughter Janey as herself. Two other supporting roles are worth mentioning, Pratt's youngster Danny and Severn Darden as McVey, the power-hungry little dictator of Del Norte who doesn't have much use for rules or laws and because of that forces a confrontation.

Besides all the casting and cinematography, The Hired Hand is what's right about westerns. Shown through the Harry and Arch relationship, the bigger idea here is loyalty and doing what's right even if the cost may be a hard one to pay. A man does something not because he's forced to do it, but because he knows it's the right thing to do. It's a great little western that I'm glad I watched.

Released through Sundance Film Festival, the DVD has the movie in a well-done widescreen presentation and trailers for a wide variety of Sundance releases. Fonda also provides a commentary track. And if you don't want to invest in the DVD, Youtube has the movie posted and broken up into segments. Here's a trailer if interested.

The Hired Hand (1971): *** 1/2/****