Heist (2015)

I've realized something these last few years as I've headed head first into old age. Yep, I'm 30 now. It's all downhill, huh? I went through a long phase where I was always looking for critical darlings, movies -- check that, films -- that were blah blah blah. I want to be entertained. Plain and simple. Therefore....2015's Heist is pretty dumb and even pretty bad, but 30-year old me was entertained and enjoyed it from beginning to end, dumb twists and all.

A dealer at a riverboat casino in the South, Luke Vaughn (Jeffrey Dean Morgan) is in trouble. His young daughter is sick and wasting away in a hospital, desperately waiting a surgery he can't afford. He has nowhere to turn other than his brutally efficient boss, Frank Pope (Robert De Niro), the owner of the casino, he has a history with...but is turned down. With nowhere left to turn, Luke agrees to work with a pit boss, Jason Cox (Dave Bautista), to take down the casino and remove some of its dirty money. It's a desperate plan that comes together quickly, but Luke has no other options and Cox wants and needs that cash (because he's greedy...nothing more sinister). The job itself goes awry almost immediately after they get their hands on the money, forcing Luke, Cox and two men Cox is working with to improvise under heavy gunfire. What to do? Where to go?

I love going to the movies. I love watching movies. What I'm still getting used to with that love? There are a lot of movies out there that never got a theatrical release and went straight to DVD/Blu-Ray, like this action thriller from director Scott Mann. Were they meant to be released in theaters only to see a studio back out? I'm still working on it. Seriously, check out Redbox or Netflix and see all these like-minded flicks. Usually some cool casts, interesting premises and...a dud of a movie!

This movie has a lot of potential, much of it coming from a very cool cast. The premise is pretty cool even if it doesn't always take advantage of that premise. There are plotholes so freaking big you could probably drive a semi-truck through them without any collateral damage. It's fairly predictable though it tries to reveal its big twists as HUGE REVEALS. The status quo for these straight-to-DVD flicks seems to be stories that fall apart in the finale, but hopefully by then you're at least partially invested enough that you don't audibly groan. Okay, I did a little bit here but that's my twist with the big reveal. Yes, 'Heist' is cliched, predictable and quite familiar if you've seen any -- ANY -- previous heist thrillers, but I did enjoy it. All those above descriptions aren't necessarily a movie killer as long as things stay entertaining.

Most of my enjoyment came from the casting. I wish Jeffrey Dean Morgan did more action movies that let him play these kinda roguish anti-heroes. I loved him in The Losers, liked him a lot back in '15 in Texas Rising, and he's good here as an unlikely crook who turns to a casino robbery to save his daughter. A little hammy (okay, very hammy, aiming right at the heartstrings), but it works with all the other craziness. As for that De Niro fella, maybe you've heard of him. He's a decent actor. Even when the script is nothing crazy and does him no favors, De Niro looks to be having fun, especially with the villainous Pope, a casino owner who watches over his money like a murdering mama bear. Likable stars can make just about anything worthwhile, and that's the case here. Well, at least the start of something.

There's a fun cast overall here, most of them playing characters that are either cliched stereotypes or cardboard cutouts, but it's fun to see the parts just the same. A former wrestler who's burst onto the movie scene with roles in Guardians of the Galaxy and Spectre, Bautista is quite an intimidating presences as the brutal co-conspirator. Also look for former MMA fighter Gina Carano as a police officer thrust into the situation, Mark-Paul Gosselaar as a fast-talking, no-nonsense detective, Kate Bosworth appearing in one scene as Pope's estranged daughter, and then D.B. Sweeney and Lydia Hull as unwilling participants in the post-heist aftermath. And last but not least, having some fun as a sadistic enforcer of Pope's and his casino heir, Morris Chestnut plays Derrick 'The Dog' Prince.' A fun cast with some cool faces to see pop up.

Not an especially good movie, but definitely an entertaining one. Don't go in with too high of expectations, and I think you'll get a kick out of it too.

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

The War Wagon

I love westerns. I love heist movies. They're two of my favorite genres. So what happens when you combine the two? And throw in two of my all-time favorite actors? Oh, no.....it's a movie nerd alert!!! With just an air of fun hanging over the whole story and production, it's hard not to get on-board and truly enjoy the 1967 western The War Wagon.

Fresh out of jail after serving a three-year sentence for a crime he didn't commit, former rancher Taw Jackson (John Wayne) heads home with revenge on his mind. Framed by a local businessman and landowner, Pierce (Bruce Cabot), Jackson wants to exact revenge where it hurts most...Pierce's gold mine. The attempt would seem suicidal though, Pierce paying for an armor-plated wagon outfitted with a Gatling gun and guarded by 33 outriders that transports the gold from the mine to the train station that would prove to be a major deterrent to any would-be robbers. Jackson isn't about to give up though, but he does need some help, including an unlikely partnership with a hired gun named Lomax (Kirk Douglas) with whom he's had a deadly rivalry in the past and has the bullet wounds to prove it. With a small team of fellow crooks, Taw puts his plan into action to rob the armor-plated wagon, the War Wagon. But just how in hell is he going to pull this off successfully without getting shot full of holes?

This is a movie that's just hard not to like. It was a staple on AMC and TNT growing up so I saw it many times, and it's one I always look forward to revisiting every so often. This last time, well, it had been quite awhile. From tough guy director (and a Wayne favorite) Burt Kennedy, 'War' is one of those perfectly straightforward westerns with no pretensions about the changing times or a revisionist view. It's F-U-N, plain and simple, mixing so effortlessly that western setting with a heist story. Put a crew together, give them a crazy, no way in hell this works mission, and let things fall where they may. Not the best, but one of the most purely entertaining westerns to come out of the decade.

So John Wayne and...Kirk Douglas. Please and THANK YOU. The duo had worked previously together in 1965's In Harm's Way and 1966's Cast a Giant Shadow, but this is the best pairing because it just lets these two pros go to work. Yeah, the heist is fun throughout, but you watch this movie for any and all scenes between Wayne and Douglas. The dialogue crackles between them, a rivalry that treads that fine line between joking and deadly serious. There's some genuine menace in the chemistry, but you just sit back and watch things develop. The best part? They're clearly having a blast. An underrated comedic actor to begin with, Wayne gets to show off his funny chops with some great line deliveries, and Douglas is the perfect foil as Lomax, a hired gun who's a bit of a dandy but takes his job supremely seriously, especially with so much potential money on the line. You couldn't ask for a better star duo to lead the adventure film.

Any good heist needs a good heist team so who to look out for? Certainly a motley crew of crooks, including the very white Howard Keel as Levi Walking Bear, Keenan Wynn as Wes, an employee of Pierce's, and Robert Walker Jr. as Billy, an explosives expert with a drinking problem. A Wayne friend and favorite, Cabot looks to be having a ball as Pierce, the sneering, menacing crook with a whole bunch of power. Also cool to see background player Don Collier get a more visible part as Pierce's right-hand man. Also look for Joanna Barnes, Valora Noland, Bruce Dern, Chuck Roberson (Wayne's stunt double), Emilio Fernandez, and Gene Evans rounding out the cast.

'Wagon' has a lot of little things going for it that combined make for a significantly better flick. Durango, Mexico was one of Wayne's favorite filming locations including Sons of Katie Elder, The Train Robbers, Chisum and here with 'Wagon.' The Mexican mountains and wilderness provide an intimidating, authentic backdrop to the story. Dimitri Tiomkin's score is a gem, big and booming, perfect for an adventure story and one that instantly screams 'Oh, yeah, that's Tiomkin music.' Lastly, an oh so perfectly bad theme song that you can listen to HERE. It's awful, but my goodness, is it ever catchy. I defy you to watch the movie and not to be humming along to the theme days later.

But, ah yes, the heist. There's hints along the way of what Taw, Lomax and Co. are up to, but nothing too specific. So like the best heist movies, as the caper develops, we're in the dark to the exact details, all of that adding a sense of mystery to the proceedings. Nothing too crazy here other than a matter of split-second timing, some dumb luck, and one rather prominent plot hole if you ask me. But there's no point in ripping it to pieces too hard. This is a movie that's meant to be a hell of a lot of fun, and it succeeds throughout on that premise. Wayne and Douglas are pitch perfect together and look to be having a ball.

Sit back, enjoy and let that fun take over from there.

The War Wagon (1967): ***/****
Rewrite of February 2009 review

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 /****

Kelly's Heroes

Growing up, I always associated Memorial Day Weekend with the war movie marathons on TV that dotted TNT, AMC and Turner Classic Movies. I ate them up -- still do -- as I watched as many as I could. They're still some of my favorite movies, everything from The Dirty Dozen to The Devil's Brigade and one of my favorites, 1970's Kelly's Heroes.

It's fall 1944 and Allied forces are fighting their way across France, the German army slowly being beaten back. At the forefront of the Allied advance, a recon platoon, including Sgt. Big Joe (Telly Savalas), are worn down after months of fighting. One member of the platoon, Pvt. Kelly (Clint Eastwood), stumbles across an interesting tidbit of information while interrogating a German colonel. There is 14,000 bars of gold -- worth $16 million -- in a bank just waiting to be plucked. The catch? The bank is 30 miles behind German lines. Joe manages to convince both Big Joe and the platoon to navigate through the lines and get their hands on the gold. With a scrounger/supply sergeant, Crapgame (Don Rickles) and three Sherman tanks commanded by a hippie, Oddball (Donald Sutherland), along for the ride, Kelly and his motley crew of soldiers head out with a chance to net quite the payday.

What an appropriately timed World War II movie. By the late 1960s, the tone of war movies had changed from the big epics to the more cynical/comedic variety, movies like MASH and Catch 22 among others. Enter Kelly's Heroes, directed by Brian G. Hutton (who also directed Where Eagles Dare), one of the most entertaining war movies I've ever seen. Cynical with a dark sense of humor but also some lighter moments -- courtesy of Sutherland's hippie tank commander -- with some great action, memorable score, and one of those perfect tough guy casts. There's a reason it remains a fan favorite 40-plus years later, and much of it because it blends all those things together so effortlessly. Even an odd-sounding theme, Burning Bridges, fits perfectly in an odd way. It is one of my favorite movies and always will be, a classic war flick that I can sit down and watch whenever it pops up on TV.

Can you ask for a better lead quartet than Clint Eastwood, Telly Savalas, Don Rickles and Donald Sutherland? Yeah, there has been casts with bigger star power, bigger name recognition, but it's more than that here. This is four tough guys having fun, on-screen chemistry that's just hard to describe. They all get their chance in the spotlight. Eastwood is Eastwood, the impeccably cool and man of few words hero. Savalas is a subtle scene-stealer as Big Joe, the unofficial commander of the recon platoon (Hal Buckley playing the clueless real commander Capt. Maitland), just trying to get his men through the fighting unscathed and a somewhat unwilling participant in the gold heist. Rickles is an out of left field choice to join the cast, but it works, his Crapgame a smart-ass New Yorker always with an eye for a profit. And then there's Sutherland as Oddball, the tank commander always talking about positive waves (No Negative Waves, man!), his Zen-like qualities, heading into battle with music blaring and shells filled with paint waiting to be unleashed on the Germans.

As a fan of guy's guys movies, it's simply hard to beat those four stars. They make it look downright easy. Much of that chemistry and success comes from the script written by Troy Kennedy-Martin, a script with too many great one-liners to even mention. We see familiar character archetypes, familiar war movie situations -- stumbling into a minefield, prepping for battle -- but there's a different energy to the whole thing. It's that tone that blends the drama, comedy and action so easily that makes it work. Carroll O'Connor too is excellent in a part that lets him ham it up as General Colt, the fiery division commander who's frustrated with the stagnant front lines, getting a jolt of energy when Kelly's screwball force unintentionally opens things up all along the front. There's something to be said for a movie that is non-stop fun. It never gets heavy-handed or obvious like some more message-oriented war movies.

When the platoon looks back on a field where some of their fallen comrades lay dead in the dirt, there's no words that need to be said. The looks on the surviving men's faces says it all. Showing he's putting on appearances for his men, Big Joe turns and raises his binoculars to check one last time. The dynamic is there from the lead quartet right down to the platoon, a group of recognizable character actors clearly having some fun. The platoon includes Little Joe (Stuart Margolin), Big Joe's radioman, Cowboy (Jeff Morris) and Willard (Harry Dean Stanton), two drawling best buds, Gutowski (Dick Davalos), the sniper, Petuko (Perry Lopez), the smooth, goofy ladies man, Cpl. Job (Tom Troupe), Joe's second-in-command close friend, Fisher (Dick Balduzzi), the platoon genius, and Babra not Barbara (Gene Collins). Also, you can't forget Gavin MacLeod as Moriarty, Oddball's mechanical genius and constant provide of negative waves.

Also look for Seinfeld's Uncle Leo, Len Lesser, as Bellamy, an engineer Oddball ropes into helping the cause and Karl-Otto Alberty as a German tank commander who goes up against Kelly's forces and Oddball's tank trio.

With a 146-minute running time, we've got plenty of chances for guys being guys and plenty of action scenes. We get lots of action -- escaping a minefield, a tank attack on a railway station, the platoon racing through a German crossroad under mortar attack -- but the best is saved for last as the platoon descends on Clermont, the town where the bank and the gold are waiting. It's an extended sequence that runs about 35 minutes that doesn't rush into it. We get almost 10 minutes of the men and the tanks sneaking into town while the German garrison slowly wakes up, composer Lalo Schifrin's score driving the action. The entire movie was filmed in Czechoslovakia, the action finale filmed in the village of Vizinada. It's an extended sequence that is hard to beat.

Just a great movie overall. Great cast, incredibly quotable, lots of action, memorable soundtrack (Quentin Tarantino is a big fan of the score, especially Tiger Tank), and even a nod to Eastwood's spaghetti western background with a three-way showdown with said tank. One of my all-time favorites and hopefully you'll enjoy it just as much as I do.

Kelly's Heroes (1970): ****/****
Rewrite of August 2009 review

Sam Whiskey

Before Burt Reynolds became a bankable star in the 1970s, he had to cut his teeth somewhere, both as a supporting player on a show like Gunsmoke (1962-1965) and in a handful of B-movies from the late 1960s like Navajo Joe, 100 Rifles, Impasse, and in 1969, Sam Whiskey, a generally forgotten B(ish)-western with a solid cast.

An orphan who grew up on his own during the 1840s/50s/60s, creating his own instantly recognizable reputation, Sam Whiskey (Reynolds) has done it all from being a cowboy to a shotgun driver on a stagecoach, an Army scout to a cattle rancher. Well, he's now gotten himself into something deep that could prove rather difficult. A widow, Laura Breckenridge (Angie Dickinson), approaches Sam with a favor, her dead husband having robbed the U.S. Mint of $200,000 worth of gold bars, but the ship it was being transported on sunk in the middle of a deep river. Laura doesn't want it back but to put it back so her husband's memory can be saved. With help from two partners, O.W. Bandy (Clint Walker), a quirky inventor, and Jed Hooker (Ossie Davis), a blacksmith, Sam goes about putting his plan into action, but there's some other parties who want the gold just as bad.

There are some movies out that that just don't want to be watched. I recorded this western from director Arnold Laven off of MGM-HD on TV over the last couple weeks only to receive a surprise. MGM doesn't use commercials, instead using a mid-movie intermission. Well, when the intermission came back, the credits for a new movie we're rolling. What the heck?!? Thankfully, it popped up on the schedule again, and I was able to watch the last 40 minutes. There's nothing classic about this comedic western, but if nothing else, it's cool to see this generally light-hearted, funny western in a time -- the late 1960s -- when the western was anything but. At times, it has the feel of an extended TV episode (mostly because of the town sets) with a limited budget. Expect an easygoing story with some fun characters, and you won't be disappointed.

Not yet the instantly recognizable leading man with the sex appeal and the bankable background, Reynolds looks to be finding his groove early of things to come in the future. His Sam Whiskey is an amiable if somewhat devious drifter who's done a little bit of everything to make some money. In the coming years, Reynold would eat a part like this for breakfast. It looks easy for him. He's charming and smooth, a quick thinker who always see the potential for a big payoff. He's also constantly singing, a little dirty ditty dubbed Mary McCarty, which adds to the general goofiness of the story.  As for the humor, it leans toward the scandalous in certain departments. How exactly does Dickinson's Breckenridge convince Sam to help her? Sure, the money works, but so does jumping into bed with him. Dickinson disappears for vast stretches of a 97-minute movie -- watch out, Lady, men at work -- but her part is good, especially when she's forced to babysit a kidnapping victim (Woodrow Parfrey). Still, Reynolds and Dickinson have a pleasant chemistry throughout.

Much of the story revolves around Sam, Walker's Bandy and Davis' Hooker, a kind of oddball teaming but one that works surprisingly well nonetheless. Reynolds is Reynolds, the smooth, confident leader while the other two play well off Reynolds' antics. Walker especially plays against type, forsaking his usual strongman character for a smart, quirky inventor who's putting his alcohol-fueled life behind him...or at least trying, sometimes successfully. Davis as the blacksmith gets to play the straight man to the antics around him for the most part. His Jed Hooker isn't about to get conned by Sam, seeing through his shenanigans as they pop up. With much of the story following this trio on the trail, recovering the gold and eventually replacing the gold, it's never a bad thing when you've got three likable stars working together to carry the story.

The strongest part of 'Whiskey' comes in the second half -- after that doomed "intermission" -- when Sam, Bandy and Hooker try to put the gold back into the U.S. Mint in Denver. That's right, putting the gold back. 'Whiskey' is a comedic western, but this extended sequence is very well-done in the old drama department. Almost working like an anti-heist, the trio must work inside a well-guarded mint in the dead of night, guards patrolling all around, the mint superintendent (William Schallert) slowly figuring out their plan. An especially enjoyable sequence, improving on the first half of the movie that, while good, is a tad slow-moving at times. A good, not great comedy western overall.

Sam Whiskey (1969): ** 1/2 /****

Gambit

I feel like I've probably seen too many heist movies. Why you ask? Because I'm pretty sure I could rob a bank or an armored car or an impenetrable art gallery and get away with it. That premise of course, is ridiculous. I would most likely get shot down immediately. But what have heist movies taught me? That no matter how much you plan, right down to the smallest detail, something, SOMETHING, will go wrong. From 1966, Gambit has a lot of fun with that simple genre premise.

An experienced thief who has managed to stay under the radar (those pesky police), Harry Dean (Michael Caine) has come up with a brilliantly unique plan that will net him quite the profit. He's going to rob the apartment of the supposed richest man in the world, Shahbandar (Herbert Lom), in Dammuz, a Middle Eastern city. His plan? He recruits Nicole Chang (Shirley MacLaine), a dance hall girl trapped in Hong Kong without money or passport. Nicole bears a striking resemblance to Shahbandar's wife who died some 20 years ago. Harry assumes that if the richest man in the world even sees Nicole, he'll be dumbstruck. So, soooo, while Shahbandar is distracted with Nicole -- posing as Harry's wife -- Harry intends to get into his heavily guarded, fortified with security apartment. He's got it all planned down to the miniscule details....and nothing seems like it can go as planned.

Not gonna lie, about 25 minutes into this comedy heist film from director Ronald Neame, I was ridiculously close to bailing. Why you ask? SPOILERS STOP READING FOR FIRST 30 MINUTE SPOILERS Well, the entire first half four of the story is a what-if. We don't know it at the time, but just the same, that's what it is. What we see is how Harry envisions his plan coming together. Every little thing comes together perfectly, no flubs or screw-ups, just a plan developing like a well-oiled machine. I did get a kick out of it that MacLaine's Nicole says absolutely NOTHING over the opener, Harry's plan ideally having her silent. I don't know why, but that premise cracked me up. Still, while it's clever, I also felt it was quite a gimmick, like a wasted half hour I wouldn't be getting back anytime soon. Thankfully in this case, I was wrong. Yes, it's a gimmick, but because of what came after it, that darn gimmick worked well.

Considering the stars involved, I was surprised I'd never heard of this heist comedy. It is funny, never going into Spoof or Stupid Territory, keeping the laughs low-key and pretty natural without too much forced. 'Gambit' is hard to peg, but it's enjoyable throughout its 109-minute running time. The biggest reason is the gimmick's payoff. The what-if first 25 minutes is dull because, well, everything goes well. What's the fun in seeing everything work out? It's all part of the set-up. We're then transported back to where Harry began, laying out his plan for the robbery. The last 90 minutes is excellent because we've already seen what Harry thinks (even expects) to happen. Seeing it go in almost the exact opposite way provides some great moments, the seemingly smooth Cockney thief unraveling with one miscue after another. MacLaine's Nicole -- now allowed to speak -- is sweet, charming and intelligent, correcting Harry ad nauseum. In those quiet, underplayed moments with genuine laughs, that's where 'Gambit' is at its absolute best.

All style choices aside, this flick's success rode on the shoulders of stars Shirley MacLaine and Michael Caine. An established star, MacLaine shows off her impeccable comedic timing with each passing scene. It's hard not to like her and more importantly, her character, Nicole, an Asian-American looking for an out of Hong Kong. It's odd to think of this, but this film was Caine's first American film after the British success of Zulu, The Ipcress File, Alfie and The Wrong Box. The part was an excellent introduction of sorts for American audiences, a smooth Brit who isn't so smooth under pressure. On their own, these are two really fun, entertaining characters, but together? There's a reason MacLaine and Caine are two of the best to ever grace the silver screen. Their chemistry is pitch-perfect, MacLaine's calm meets chipper demeanor vs. Caine's ultra-smooth, ultra-confident thief playing well off each other. Just sit back and watch two pros do their thing.

Beyond the star duo, the cast is pretty limited here. Lom rounds out the lead trio as Shahbandar, the target of Harry's brilliantly put together robbery. Not quite a villain, not quite a good guy, he's in between as he tries to figure out exactly what Harry and Nicole are up to. Who else to look for? Roger C. Carmel as Ram, the hotel attendant Harry is counting on, John Abbott as Emile, Harry's partner in crime, Arnold Moss as Abdul, Shahbandar's loyal assistant, and Richard Angarola as Salim, the police chief.

Lesson No. 2 from the Heist genre: There's always a twist. Does it always work? No. The ending here falls in between. It works, but it's not as smart as it probably thinks it is. The twist certainly does come out of left field and for the most part it all clicks together. Still, the fun is getting to the finale. If the bookends aren't the strongest aspects overall, so be it, because the middle portion is quite easy to recommend. Definitely worth checking out. Composer Maurice Jarre has some fun with his musical score, touching on a variety of different genres with his cues.

Gambit (1966): ***/****

The Sicilian Clan

Well, here we are again, and it's been too long. Mostly because they're not readily available in the U.S., I have to search out Euro-crime thrillers from the 1960s and 1970s on Netflix, on Youtube, and occasionally random channels on TV. So when I do find one, I better savor it, right? Not an issue with 1969's The Sicilian Clan, a very stylish, very easy movie to like.

About to be sent to trial over the murder of two police officers, accused killer and thief Roger Sartet (Alain Delon) instead manages a daring escape aided by a former partner in crime, Aldo (Yves Lefebvre). In exchange for helping him pull off the escape, Sartet agrees to work with Aldo's family, the Manalese clan, a small-scale but successful Sicilian crime family, headed by patriarch Vittorio (Jean Gabin). Their plan? Take down a heavily guarded diamond exhibit displayed in Rome, state of the art technology intended to trip them up at any given moment. It seems an impossible, even suicidal objective with virtually no shot of succeeding. With some help from an American mafioso counterpart, Sartet and the Manalese clan put a plan into action though. It's as daring as they come, but some rivalries and personal motivations threaten to tear it apart before the heist is ever put into action. Their time is limited too, the police commissioner, Le Goff (Lino Ventura), obsessively searching for Sartet.

These movies never get old. Okay, well that's not completely true. There are some duds, but even the duds usually have something worth recommending. This one from director Henri Verneuil is a gem so no worries in that department. When it works, it just does, plain and simple. There is a style that helps carry the sub-genre from one movie to another. The on-location shooting never hurts, especially here in Paris, but the music goes a long way too. Here it's one of the best composers ever, Ennio Morricone providing a score that's equal parts playful and catchy with darker samples as needed. Listen to a sample HERE. For me though, the most appealing part of the Euro-crime genre is simple. These movies are cynical, brutal and dark. A majority of the stories play like tweaked American film noirs. Crime doesn't pay, the crooks are pretty nasty, the cops sometimes more so, and we're rarely talking about a happy Hollywood ending.

Released in 1969, this French crime thriller's appeal is more than obvious. One movie that stars Alain Delon, Lino Ventura and Jean Gabin?!? These were three iconic actors in France, internationally, in the genre, in all sorts of ways, so to see them working together in a single movie is just a lot of fun. There are lots of characters, but the ensemble cast leaves the focus on this trio. Delon is one of my favorites, his cool, calm, even icy demeanor just reflecting well as the anti-hero you can't help but like. Gabin is the smooth one here though, his Vittorio almost monotone in his delivery. His facial expressions almost never change, nothing rattling him. Even when things go awry, he calmly deals with, internalizing the rage. As for Ventura, it's cool to see him in a non-villain role, his Le Goff an experienced police officer who becomes almost obsessed with catching the murdering Sartet. All characters/actors that are capable of carrying a movie on their own, working together in a very worthwhile ensemble.

Who else to look out for? Those are the most recognizable names, but there's some cool supporting parts. Vittorio's sons include Lefebvre and Marc Porel, his son-in-law played by Philippe Baronnet, all three taking active parts in their crime family. Aldo's wife, Jeanne, is played by Irina Dernick, a Frenchwoman who takes a liking to Delon's Sartet as a fellow Frenchman as she's not used to living with all these Sicilians. Amedeo Nazzari is excellent as Tony, an American mobster who's worked with Vittorio in the past, working together again to pull off this diamond heist. Tony sends one of his men, Sydney Chaplin playing the alcoholic crook, Jack. Danielle Volle has a small but necessary (and good) part as Sartet's sister, worried about her brother's well-being.

And now for that heist. This is a genre that's done just about everything it can do to throw something new and original and fresh at the audience. Well, kudos to you The Sicilian Clan. This is definitely something new. When the diamond exhibit is introduced, I thought I was watching Rififi or Le Cercle Rouge (actually released a year later in 1970), but I was in for a surprise. 'Sicilian' doesn't go for the status quo....at all. This French crime thriller definitely comes up with something new and different, Sartet, Vittorio and the Manalese clan working with Tony and his New York mobsters to pull off the job. No spoilers here, the heist coming together nicely. If you think about it, there is a flaw in their plan that involves kidnapping -- it's rather unnecessary if you ask me -- but you get so caught up in what they're doing it isn't a huge issue. It becomes far more about 'Can they pull it off?'

But as Euro-crime thrillers have taught me, that ending.....well, the heist is usually the easy part. It's the fallout that provides the most drama. Again, I'm not going to spoil how it develops because even though it is hinted at in the build-up, it gets lost in the shuffle. When it does reveal itself, yeah, it works after some initial issues I had with it. The twist comes from a special place in the Mafia family lexicon. Don't....go....against....the....Family. That's it. Don't mess it up, and you'll probably be okay. It is quite an ending, very appropriate to the general darkness of the genre. An excellent movie, one very much worth catching up to.

The Sicilian Clan (1969): *** 1/2 /****

Trance

Not many directors have the guts to do what Danny Boyle does. Check out the British director's list of films. There's a ridiculous variety of films there, and the scary part? With one exception I'm seeing, there isn't a weak flick in the bunch. Even his less highly regarded movies are still pretty decent. How about hypnosis and amnesia though? Can Boyle even pull that one off? Let's see with 2013's Trance.

An art auctioneer working for a high-end auction house, Simon Newton (James McAvoy) has become involved with a gang of crooks led by Franck (Vincent Cassel). Their target? A rare Francisco Goya painting, Witches in the Air, that will soon go up for auction. The job goes relatively smooth until Simon inexplicably trying to stop Franck who punches him in the face, knocking him out. Franck discovers later that Simon switched out the paintings, just leaving the frame in the case. In the meantime, Simon has become a hero for trying to stop the robbery, but there's a problem. Simon can't remember what happened after Franck's punch, can't remember what happened to the painting. Even after some torture, Simon still can't remember so Franck knows he genuinely can't remember. He comes up with an out of left field solution, sending Simon to a hypnotist, Dr. Elizabeth Lamb (Rosario Dawson), who will help him remember and net him a lucrative payday in the end.

Another movie to add to the list of "I was bored so I explored Netflix" finds, 'Trance' was given a limited theatrical release in the U.S., seeing the light of day in a sprinkling of theaters. Let's say this...it's a doozy of a flick, one Boyle had wanted to bring to the big screen for years having read Joe Ahearne's script in the mid-1990s. Is it a good or bad doozy though? I'm still deciding there. The problem is simple, Ahearne's script is interesting but its goal is to deceive. It is a movie meant to confuse and baffle as it develops, and then when the finale comes along, it comes as a complete surprise. That's fine, right? Yeah, surprises are good, but this one feels very forced, very contrived and completely lucky. So many things (sssssssso many) need to happen for it to work that it passes any sort of reality -- even movie reality -- and leaves it in the rear view mirror.

The catch to it all is that because Boyle is a very talented director, he still makes it work even in spite of its flaws. As a visual director, Boyle has few rivals currently working. His movies are polished, stylish and quite the visual treat. The cinematography from Anthony Dod Mantle is a gem, scenes full of color from the white, clean look of Elizabeth's office, to Franck's dark, poorly lit and sparsely decorated house to Simon's cluttered house. Even when the story may be a tad confusing -- and it is -- watching the movie is still a treat. There's little to no action, instead scenes of dialogue and hypnosis replacing them, so Boyle and Mantle work to make those scenes visually interesting. We're watching the hypnosis as it happens through the individual's head, seeing what they see, those listening "appearing" in the hypnosis as if they were really there. The score from composer Rick Smith is solid as well (listen HERE), driving the story forward with a mix of electronic/trance-like music that fits well.

The cast is limited basically to the three stars, McAvoy, Cassel and Dawson. Obviously, the focus is on this trio of characters in just about every scene. What works well is that the three of them all have a development over the course of the movie, and all in surprising fashion. McAvoy does a very solid job as Simon, the art auctioneer who becomes a participant in a heist after taking a serious punch to the head. He does a good job as the tortured individual trying to figure it all out (and with a twist). Dawson is excellent too, her soothing voice providing the good backdrop for the hypnotist who also has ulterior motives. Cassel does what he does best, a scheming, sneering intimidating villain who just looks like a bad guy. I don't want to give too much away about where/what these characters become, but all three performances are certainly interesting. As Franck's gang, look for Danny Sapani, Matt Cross and Wahab Sheikh in supporting parts.

Most of the last 30 minutes are spent on the twist, the reveal, and then the explanation. Again, no real spoilers here to speak of. Even clues could take away your enjoyment, or at least the surprise, when things are revealed. Because Boyle knows what he's doing, the big reveal is something else to watch. It's meant to catch you by surprise, even shock you in some instances (and it does), but the more I thought about it, the less I liked it. So so many things have to happen for this all to happen that it becomes ridiculous to fathom. The same for one particular twist that seems to defy explanation involving something stashed away in a car trunk. As for the final scene, there's a nod/rip-off (depending on your interpretation) to Christopher Nolan's Inception.

Quite the mixed bag in the end. A lot of talent working with a very skilled director, but it never quite gels. Tries too hard at some times, very stylish and entertaining in others.

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

Bank Shot

I discovered author Donald Westlake the way I do a lot of authors, via movie credits, finding out the movie I was watching was based on a novel/book/story from an author. I first heard his name watching 1972's The Hot Rock, based on his novel of the same name. I gave his books a try and liked them, including his 1972 novel Bank Shot. I wish I could say the same for the 1974 film adaptation, Bank Shot.

Wasting away a prison/rehab center run by Bulldog Streiger (Clifton James), accomplished crook and master planner Walter Ballentine (George C. Scott) is slowly losing his mind. He's allowed a visitor one day, his "lawyer" who's really his former partner in crime, Al G. Karp (Sorrell Brooke), and he's got a new plan for a very lucrative caper. Streiger is on the lookout, but even he can't keep Ballentine from escaping, his prisoner getting away in ridiculous fashion. What job awaits him with Karp? Not one he would have thought of. A new bank in Los Angeles is being built, a temporary bank in a trailer being used until the new one opens. Ballentine laughs at the plan given him and comes up with his own instead. Instead of robbing the bank in convoluted fashion, why not just steal the entire bank? With Karp's oddball crew of crooks, Ballentine goes about putting his own plan into operation.

Wow, this movie was just not good. Like at all. We're talking really bad. Eastlake's novel is pretty goofy, a little silly, but there's an underplayed sense of humor that works well. I could be wrong too, maybe that's just my interpretation. This comedy from director Gower Champion has no subtlety, no sense of underplaying anything, no real laughs at all. It is the broadest definition of broad humor. Oh, no! Ballentine is driving a huge Caterpillar into a barn! Oh, no! A trailer is driving out of control down a vacant road! Physical comedy is one thing, but this is so bad it never amounts to anything. John Morris' musical score is painfully obvious, almost begging, willing the audience to laugh. The opening prison break, Ballentine getting away on an excavator, Streiger on a souped-up golf cart, sets the tone for the painfully unfunny attempts at laughs to come.

What the hell is George C. Scott doing here? Scott had some odd acting choices in the 1970s, but this one is pretty bad. I say that having watched a movie with Scott where had to stop an assassination attempt on the President by....dolphins. Yeah, The Day of the Dolphin, check it out. It really exists. From the get-go here, Scott seems bored and uninterested in actually being a part of the ever-stupid story. As for the character that Eastlake wrote -- John Dortmunder in the books -- Scott isn't the best casting choice either, whether it be his physical appearance (rocking some amazingly LARGE eyebrows, we're talking REAL big) or his demeanor at basically all times. Was he blackmailed? Was he doing a favor for a friend? I don't know what was going on, what prompted him into doing this flick? I'm listening if there's a good theory out there.

So heist flick with a lousy premise that falls short on basically every level, surely the oddball crew of crooks can save this poop-fest, right?!? Yeah, that's what I was counting on, only to be disappointed there too. Beyond Brooke as Al G. Karp as Ballentine's goofy partner, there's also Eleonora (Joanna Cassidy), the sexy backer of the plan with all her cash (and an unexplained attraction to Ballentine, helping him "ease back" into society after so long away from women), Victor Karp (Bob Balaban), Al's nephew, the other planner and a former FBI agent, Muns Gornik (Bibi Osterwald) and her son, Stosh (Don Calfa), and Hermann X (Frank McRae), a pistol-wielding, demolition expert hoping to become a politician. There isn't an interesting character in the bunch, making it a tad difficult to actually support the crew. We learn little to nothing about them, just an introduction and right into the heist. The rest of the story in an 83-minute story is spent on hamming it up James and his L.A. cop partner (G. Wood) trying to track Ballentine down.

The premise of the heist is actually pretty original, and some of their plans are actually unique. But at any point is it interesting to watch? No. Everything just seems obvious from beginning to end. The heist and its fallout could have been decent if it wasn't handled in such spoof-like fashion, but the efforts to make it all hysterically, gut-busting funny fall short. Steer clear of this one, go read the Westlake novel instead.

Bank Shot (1974): */****   

Now You See Me

Here we sit again. I love a good twist in a movie. It's fun for any number of reasons. Will the twist work? Will it fall short? Maybe the best thing going though is can you get ahead of the twist? Can you figure it out before the reveal? It goes both ways. Now movies are trying to dupe us. The end result? Movies like 2013's Now You See Me, obsessed with making the audience look stupid.

Las Vegas audiences have seen just about everything, but they've seen nothing like the show put on by four street performers, magicians and con men dubbed The Four Horsemen, headlined by J. Daniel Atlas (Jesse Eisenberg). During a show in front of a packed house, the Horsemen seek the help of an audience member and actually manage to somehow rob a bank in France of $3 million francs. Is it deception? A sleight of hand? Or is something magically mysterious going on? An FBI agent, Dylan Rhodes (Mark Ruffalo), is called in to head the case and figure out exactly what's going on. He's given the help of an inexperienced Interpol agent (Melanie Laurent) but is dealt a tough hand almost immediately. The Horsemen welcome the challenge. If the FBI and police are going to prosecute them, they're all but admitting that magic is in fact, real. The Horsemen say they've got two more shows and it will all come together. What are they up to?

Released in theaters late this spring, 'Now' was a surprise success with audiences, earning over $320 million worldwide. It was so successful a sequel has already been confirmed. I can't wait! Yeah! Reviews were generally pretty mixed, and I was skeptical going into my first viewing. The previews looked a little too goofy for my liking. At the same time, the cast listing looked absolutely ridiculous. We're talking lots of very talented individuals here working together. As is so often the case though with big, impressive casts, there's too much going on. Still, the cast is nuts. Unfortunately a very talented cast is wasted in this heist thriller from director Louis Leterrier. I really do my best not to give spoilers away so I'll try here, but it's going to be difficult.

Magic is inherently....well....mysterious, right? How do magicians pull off those crazy tricks? Is there an element of the supernatural in their acts? That's the challenge here. In the movie's first scene, Eisenberg's Atlas addresses the point of the movie. While you're trying to figure out his trick, he's pulling a fast one on you in the opposite direction. And there's the movie. While we're trying to figure out how the Four Horsemen pull off their jobs, the actual job/heist is being pulled somewhere else. 'Now' is admitting it is trying to trick us, and that's where things blow up. It is so interested in tricking us that any degree of reality, believability, or coherent semblance of anything is completely thrown out the window. Oh, they didn't really rob the Parisian bank? Oh, but they kinda did? Oh, all of their plans involved meticulous detail that no real life plan could possibly hinge on?

The catch is that the twist isn't really as clever as it thinks it is. Oddly enough, it's both really obvious and really out of left field. If you pay attention early when a character discusses some personal history, you can start to put the pieces together. That's as far as it goes. When the reveal comes, it defies description. It is so mind-blowingly stupid that it pained me to go back and thought how it all fit together. In order for it to work, whole scenes, whole sequences that we've already seen are now basically null and void. Again, no spoilers because I want you to experience the badness of this movie. Let it be known though. It is real bad.

Okay, now for the cast. Along with Eisenberg (who isn't as obnoxious as usual), the Four Horsemen include Woody Harrelson, Isla Fisher and Dave Franco. As their notoriety rises, we actually see little of them for long stretches. Ruffalo and Laurent are decent together, but we get the pleasure of seeing the what if angle of their relationship. Along with that duo in the law enforcement wing, we get Michael Kelly and Common, neither given much to do except look foolish as the Horsemen one-up and dupe them again. But wait, there's more! Michael Caine and Morgan Freeman both have key supporting roles. The parts are so thinly written that we never really learn much about anyone in terms of background, motivation or actual personality traits. Cool characters/actors in name only.

I also didn't care for the score from composer Brian Tyler, a kinda 1970s crime thriller throwback that's too obvious as it blares away with each passing scene. I had moderate at best expectations for this movie, but it was frustratingly bad. At the expense of any good story, 'Now' goes for the huge twist that depends on shock value more than making sense in terms of the movie. I can't wait to not see the follow-up. Oh, I also like the assumption that if you're a con man street performer, you're also an expert in hand-to-hand combat. I especially liked Franco's street performer doing battle with Ruffalo by whipping playing cards at him, Ruffalo comically yelling back. Unintentionally funny, a light moment in a sea of badness.

Now You See Me (2013): */****

The Split

A stylish, dark heist flick from the 1960s with one of the all-time great tough guy casts. It's a winning formula for sure, especially for a sucker like me for heist movies. It took me years to track down 1968's The Split -- which I first reviewed in August 2009 -- and I was less than impressed with the film on my first viewing. When it popped up on Turner Classic Movie's schedule recently, I was going to give it another try. I mean....come on.....look at this cast!

A master thief who's gone off the grid seemingly for several years, a man named McClain (Jim Brown) is reunited with a former partner and an expert planner, Gladys (Julie Harris), when it comes to pulling off impossible jobs. They team up again, Gladys putting forth the plan; rob the L.A. Coliseum during an NFL playoff game that will net $500,000. McClain assembles a team of crooks who haven't worked together in the past, but he convinces them to put their differences aside with the thought of a very lucrative payday. The five-man team goes about planning the job with very little time to do so. The dangerous job is one thing though, but the fallout from the job may be even more dangerous, especially when an investigating detective, Lt. Brill (Gene Hackman), catches wind of them and is right behind them.

For years, this 1968 heist film from director Gordon Flemyng wasn't available in any form; DVD, VHS, nothing. Now, it's available on a burn-for-order DVD so if you've never seen it and are dying to catch up, there it is for you. First or second viewing though, I had the same issues. 'Split' has a lot of potential, much of it tied to the casting, but it never quite goes anywhere. It's got the style from its frame-in-frame credits sequence to its Quincy Jones soundtrack, the on-location shooting at the L.A. Coliseum to the dark nature of the team of crooks working together. All these disparate elements never manage to jell, ending up with a heist film that takes a really bizarre turn in the last third of the movie. A very disappointing end result because it did have so much potential.

How about that casting though? In assembling his team for the robbery, Brown's McClain brings together Bert Clinger (Ernest Borgnine), a gym owner and strong man, Harry Kifka (Jack Klugman), a down on his luck limo driver who will serve as the team's getaway driver, Marty Gough (Warren Oates), a temperamental safe cracker, and Dave Negli (Donald Sutherland), a smooth as ice hit man and hired killer. And NFL great turned action star Jim Brown for good measure?!? How can you lose??? Well, as dark and dirty as things get, something is missing from the group. The movie runs only 91 minutes and after McClain's recruiting, things move right along to the actual heist. The group is full of so many bad guys I never found myself rooting for them to pull the job off successfully. Still, it is an impressive grouping of star power, misutilized though they may be.

I think that's the problem for 'Split' in general. With so much going on, the right tone is never picked out. It bounces back and forth and among all these different things. Brown's McClain meets up with his jilted ex-wife, Ellie (Diahann Carroll), still holding a grudge, but darn it, she still likes him a lot as we see in a montage set to a Jones song as they walk along a beach. The actual recruiting of the team just feels a tad bit off, like certain things aren't fitting together well, but it's entertaining enough. The robbery at the Coliseum lacks a certain energy with no real catch of anything unique helping them pull the job off. But the biggest problem? That would be the final half hour.

One of the keys to a good heist film is oddly enough, not the heist. It's the fallout after the job when the cops close in, the team has to wait for things to cool down to get their money, and seemingly inevitably....turn on each other. That's fine and dandy, just about any good heist movie follows that formula. Ready for the derail? It comes in a really odd one-scene cameo from James Whitmore as Ellie's creepy landlord. Then, Gene Hackman doesn't even make his first appearance until 70 minutes into a 90-minute movie. From there on in, the story and twists and turns feel rushed. It's a pretty dark ending, but even that feels mishandled. The movie just sort of ends, leaving all sorts of questions unanswered. A truly disappointing movie, one that handled differently could have been a near-classic among the heist genre. Oh, and the above poster is bad, giving the impression the team is just a bunch of friends out to pull a job. Um.....no.

The Split (1968): **/****
Rewrite of August 2009 review

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 Burglars

Well, give me credit. I'm timely every so often....now whether I intended to be timely, that's a different story. A few days ago I reviewed an underrated film noir from 1957, The Burglar, only to find out I had also recorded another version of the same novel by author David Goodis. Well, it's alike in basic -- very basic -- storyline alone, going down a different route in 1971's The Burglars. It's plural this time!

Working with a small crew of thieves, a master crook named Azad (Jean-Paul Belmondo) pulls off an impossible job, robbing a wealthy Greek businessman (Jose Luis de Vilallonga) of a million dollar's worth of rare emeralds. The plan goes off without a hitch, or so Azad and the crew think. A suspicious police officer, Abel Zacharia (Omar Sharif), is onto them and knows what they're trying. His only issue becomes proving their guilt, finding them while they're carrying the emeralds. Azad is ready to make his getaway out of a Greek port, but the ship is undergoing maintenance and can't leave for five more days. Now, he must improvise, getting the persistent -- and dirty -- cop off his trail. Can the crew stay quiet and hidden away until they're ready to escape?

Okay, get the basic plot from Goodis' novel and then go with it. That's all this 1971 version really has to do with its source novel or its 1957 predecessor. Now that said, it isn't a bad thing. Director Henri Verneuil has a good film somewhere in his 120-minute movie, but it's finding that movie that proves difficult. Reading a plot description, I thought I was getting a hard boiled heist flick, and in doses, that's what it is. Without much of a transition, one scene will be brutally dark, the next oddly off the wall. Then, we get some weird aside at an "erotic club" followed by one of the craziest, best car chases I've ever seen in a film. While I liked 'Burglars,' I also thought it was far too schizophrenic to be a movie that received a straight-up positive review. When it works though, it really works. It's getting to that point.

The positives are pretty obvious, starting with Belmondo and Sharif as the two leads, the cat-and-mouse rivals. I've yet to be impressed with Belmondo -- I still don't get the appeal of Breathless -- in the films I've seen, but this performance is a gem. He sounds dubbed but apparently that's him (go figure). Most surprisingly though, he proves himself as an action star, handling his own stunts for the most part including a couple ridiculous stunts. He literally rides the side of a handful of buses on busy streets and later takes a rolling fall down the side of a hill with an almost sheer face. His character itself is pretty cool, a confident, slightly showy thief who thinks he has no rivals, always believing he can outsmart Sharif's cop if it comes down to it. That smartass smile/smirk plays well though, and I really liked what he did with the character.

 Doing a 180 from most of his hero performances, Sharif looks to be having a ball as the sinister, truly brutal cop, Abel Zacharia, looking to line his own pockets in "catching" Azad. At first glance, he appears to be a pretty normal cop but with each passing scene we learn the true depths of how far he'll go for a payday. Dyan Cannon plays Lena, a nude model and quasi-Playmate of sorts who catches Azad's eye and may be letting on more than she knows. Robert Hossein, Nicole Calfan and Renato Salvatori round out Azad's crew, none really given much to do with the spotlight on Belmondo and Sharif. 

Coupled with the tough guy leads, 'Burglars' manages to stand free of the crowd because of the action. A 13-minute car chase about 30 minutes into the movie is ridiculous to the point of being overindulgent. We're talking two cars that should have blown up miles and crashes ago still running and doing so smoothly. It gives us some solid new additions to the car chase sequence too, never a bad thing. Watch it HERE. When there is action, it's handled expertly, including another slightly lower key chase with Belmondo jumping from moving bus to moving bus (again, doing all his own stunts seemingly). Watch a really solid stunt montage HERE. There is a simple professionalism to these scenes that just works well. Not flashy, just efficiently effective. Oh, and composer Ennio Morricone turns in a quiet, understated gem of a soundtrack. Didn't see that coming, did you?

So anyhoo.....the movie does have some flaws. The opening heist sequence is so interested in the gory, boring and downright dull details of how they're pulling the job that any tension gets thrown out the window. What should be a great opening, building momentum is actually a hindrance to a story that ends up being pretty good. A later departure to Cannon's "erotic club" goes on far too long, and in general, too much time is spent with Cannon for a disappointing payoff late in the movie. It is a movie that could have been tightened up at several different points along the way. It's also trying to be funny, action-packed, slightly romantic, full of drama, and it just doesn't always work. In the end, it could have been a near classic, but as is, it's a very watchable heist movie with some pretty severe flaws. Give the movie a watch HERE at Youtube.

The Burglars (1971): ** 1/2 /****

Guns, Girls and Gangsters

The 1950s were the age of the sex kitten blondes, especially Marilyn Monroe and later Jayne Mansfield. Where one succeeds, others follow and beyond Monroe and Mansfield was another bleach blonde movie star, Mamie Van Doren. She never reached the stardom of either Monroe or Mansfield, but became a bit of a cult favorite in the late 1950s and 1960s in some really odd, entertaining and bizarre flicks. Case in point, 1959's Guns, Girls and Gangsters.

Released from prison, Chuck Wheeler (Gerald Mohr) has a plan in mind that will net him some $2 million, a plan he developed with another prisoner in jail. He enlists the unwilling help of the prisoner's wife, Vi Victor (Van Doren), to do a key part of the job while also assembling a small team of crooks to help him pull it off. The objective? Knock off an armored car traveling from Las Vegas to Los Angeles packed to the guts with casino winnings from the New Year's holiday. His plan depends on precision detail, and he's confident he can pull it off, even planning ahead for a smooth getaway. There's a problem though. He wants Vi too and not just the money, quite the issue when his prisoner friend and Vi's husband, Mike Bennett (Lee Van Cleef), escapes from prison following Vi's letter asking for a divorce. Can the plan hold together before Mike comes after them?

My first introduction to Mamie Van Doren is a good one. While she's not a great actor, she fits in well with this hard-edged B-movie. Too often in 1950s B-movies, pretty actresses (often models turned actresses) were able to single-handedly ruin films with their bad acting. So, Van Doren doesn't have a ton of range, and the script doesn't call for any huge action scenes, but she more than holds her own with an almost entirely male cast. She has a good chemistry with Mohr especially, and if there was a question....yes, the sex kitten angle is on display. Van Doren is always in a variety of ridiculously tight dresses, night gowns and/or lingerie, and swimsuits. Yes, her looks don't hurt the appeal here. There, it had to be said. Oh, and she gets two chances to sing and perform so there's that too. Watch them HERE.

As a B-movie film noir though, 'Guns' typically succeeds. As a B-movie, it can get away with following the bad guys and leaving the good guys by the wayside for the most part. Everyone is a bad guy, it just depends on what shade of bad you are. Van Doren's Vi? Bad but almost by default. Mohr's Weaver? Pretty bad dude, but maybe...just maybe...he'll have a redemptive moment. Van Cleef's Mike? Oh, he's doomed. Bet on it. I liked the generally dark take on everything, an uncredited narrator keeping things moving with a brisk pace for a 70-minute flick. It has the feel of an episode of Dragnet, any number of 1950/1960s police procedurals. Mostly filmed on studio sets, 'Guns' does have a couple ventures outside, providing some solid location shooting.

Even starting with Van Doren as the top-billed star, there isn't exactly any star power here. Van Doren is solid, a quasi-femme fatale caught in a sticky heist situation. A tough guy star of countless B-movies and a guest star on TV shows, Mohr is a very good anti-hero in the lead, although I suppose I'm using the 'hero' part lightly. Van Cleef is a scene-stealer, still a relative unknown relegated to supporting parts in westerns and crime stories, his Mike like an exposed wire just waiting to spark. Grant Richards plays Darren, the mobster with money problems (with Carlo Fiore as his main henchman) while the always reliable Paul Fix is Largo, an ex-con working with Weaver to pull off the job. Elaine Edwards and John Baer play Ann and Steve Thomas, owners of a highway motel and fix-it shop who unknowingly become part of Weaver's plan.

The early going can be a little slow as Weaver and Vi meet, fight, talk, fight and then decide to work together. Once the heist is actually brought along, the pace quickens for the better. The heist angle is ahead of its time and most definitely has a hard-edge to it, our main characters ready to dispatch anyone standing in their way. Like any heist movie, part of the fun is seeing an impossible plan come together (and ultimately how it will fail), and 'Guns' does it right. So while not a classic, it is an enjoyable enough B-movie film noir. Worth giving a watch if nothing else.

Guns, Girls and Gangsters (1959): ** 1/2 /**** 

The Thieves

So I kinda like heist films if you haven't figured out. I'll give them all a shot no matter the positive/negative reviews. It's getting more difficult to find new ones though, even lesser known heist flicks from the past. In other words, it takes some digging to find any entries I haven't seen. Here's the latest find, a 2012 South Korean heist flick, The Thieves.

Working with a small crew of thieves and con men in South Korea, Popeye (Jung-Jae Lee) has earned himself quite a reputation as a capable organizer and thief. His crew has pulled off a successful job of an ancient artifact and is all set to do another job, if a somewhat curious one. A former associate (Uh-oh! Drama and history!) of Popeye's, legendary thief Macao Park (Yun-seok Kim) has a plan to steal a famous diamond, the Tear of the Sun, worth some $20 million. They won't be able to do it alone though, teaming with another infamous thief, Chen (Simon Yam), and his own team from Hong Kong to pull off the job. The diamond is under heavy security at a Macau casino. Macao Park's plan though is ridiculously detailed, counting on countless separate pieces working together at the exact right second. Let the fun begin.

The comparison for this heist flick is obvious, it's a South Korean Ocean's Eleven. Well, mostly, it's got a mean, downright dark streak up its back. It uses the basic premise -- team of thieves and specialists working together to pull off a job -- but manages to create its own identity. From director Dong-Hoon Choi, 'Thieves' now stands at the second highest grossing film in Korean history. I don't know how much to read into that, but I can safely say it was successful. It should be that way for a reason, right? No need to worry here. It's a winner. I liked it from the start, both for its familiarity with a great genre but also for an ability to add some solid tweaks, twists and turns in the process.

Maybe the coolest thing I was able to take away from this South Korean heist flick was its style. It was filmed in South Korea, Hong Kong and Macau, and there isn't a scene that isn't full of vibrant colors and movement. It sounds simple, but it goes a long way. The story itself is really interesting, but actually watching a good-looking visual film can be a treat, like here. Using that stylistic filmmaking as a jumping off point, the story does a good job keeping the viewer guessing too, but more on that later. More than though, it jumps from tone to tone smoothly. It is equal parts funny, dramatic, sexy and action-packed. One ridiculously cool action sequence has Macao Park running from heavily-armed gunmen, leaping off the side of a building and descending down the side. He swings back and forth with an attached bungee cord, his pursuers doing the same. With action scenes, it's harder and harder to come up with something audiences haven't seen, but this one is an action masterpiece.

Mostly though, 'Thieves' is a good flick because of the deep cast. I don't know much about Korean films/actors, but from doing a little research (Oh, clever Internet), it's apparent the cast here is as All Star as they get with a lot of name recognition and star power. Introduced to this cast, I came away very impressed. Lee as Popeye is the smooth up-and-comer, leading his crew that includes right hand man Zampano (Soo Hyun Kim), smooth-talking beautiful thief Yenicall (Gianna Jun), and Chewingum (Hae-suk Kim), an experienced if poor female thief. As the veteran thief with a checkered past, Yam is a quiet, subtle scene-stealer with his crew including goofy Korean-Chinese thief, Andrew (Dal-su Oh), young Johnny (Kwok Cheung Tsang) and safecracker Julie (Angelica Lee). Rounding out the team is Pepsee (Hye-su Kim), another safecracker who's worked with Popeye and Macao Park before. 

I was a little skeptical going in that with so many characters too many would get the short end of the stick. Choi does a great job keeping things balanced among all these characters with all their separate backstories and history. They each have their own personal style and look on top of their individual personality quirks. What brings it up a notch as a script, story and film is how it develops. It surprisingly keeps us guessing. We think we feel one way about a certain character, and then get hit with a twist, then another, and then another. With each passing twist, what we thought we know gets thrown out the window. And don't be fooled, there's twists galore right through the final scene.

'Thieves' is a rather leisurely 136 minutes and takes its time developing. It lays everything out nicely, setting up the characters and the coming heist. The highlight is not surprisingly the actual heist and the fallout. That's no spoilers if you're curious. It's the rare heist flick that goes smoothly. It is there where the twists get thrown at us. Just a good movie, and more proof scrounging for movies on Netflix and IMDB is worth the time spent.

The Thieves (2012): *** 1/2 /****

Deadfall

I've written about it before, and it will most likely come up again at some point. You're watching a movie, everything's going smoothly. You're liking it a lot, maybe even loving it, and then something happens. It's as quick as flipping a switch, and all that positive momentum goes right out the window. Some movies can save themselves in the end. What about 1968's Deadfall? Read on and see.

Resting and recuperating a rest clinic for alcoholism (or is he?), Henry Clarke (Michael Caine) is approached one day by a young visitor, the beautiful Fe Moreau (Giovanna Ralli), with a proposal. Her husband, Richard (Eric Portman), a significantly older man than his young wife, knows Henry's secret, that he's a master thief and he's got a job in mind for the unlikely trio. Clarke does his detective work and agrees to go along with the plan. First, though Richard wants to test Clarke's ability, but that is the least of the master thief's worries. As he gets to know the couple, Henry falls hard for the beautiful Fe, and the feeling is mutual. As the job nears, he also finds out that Richard hasn't been telling him everything he needs to know.

This film from director and screenplay writer Bryan Forbes is an interesting one. It has received pretty lukewarm reviews, and some are significantly more harsh. An actor for years, Forbes made the jump to the director's chair without a glitch. In Deadfall, he creates quite the interesting movie to watch for good and bad. Visually, it is a stunner, shot on location in Spain. Forbes rarely uses a straight-on camera angle, instead opting for off-kilter, slightly ajar shots. Many reviews point to the director trying to adapt a European New Wave look with his unconventional shooting style, and I tend to agree. You can watch it and appreciate for any number of things from the unique angles and style to the stunning Spanish locations serving as a backdrop to the story.

Ah, the story, and here we are with the problems that ultimately bring the movie down a notch (or more depending on your opinion). For a 1968 audience, it does deal with some fairly controversial topics. We learn about Richard's past in World War II and also how he came to marry the beautiful Fe. It takes Caine's Clarke only a meeting or two to figure out that the older husband is in fact, gay. So what's he up to? What is his background in World War II? That's the problem with the story. It has a lot of ideas but no real focus. It kinda sorta knows where it wants to get, but not really how to get there. Instead, Forbes' screenplay (based off a novel by Desmond Cory) bounces back and forth among a whole lot of different things from adultery, incest, Nazism, betrayals and much more. A story that doesn't spell every single little thing out isn't a deal breaker -- in some cases it can be a huge positive -- but 'Deadfall' is too vague for its own good.

The most unfortunate thing is that for the first half of this 120-minute movie, I did love this movie. That Euro New Wave style works perfectly in a tension-packed heist movie that is mysterious, intense and keeps you guessing. Richard insists Henry prove himself in one heist, robbing a high-walled villa in Tangiers under heavy guard. It is a remarkable sequence, artsy and stylish like the best heist sequences can be when handled right. The extended sequence -- running about 15 minutes -- is done with virtually no dialogue, just composer John Barry's score playing over the developing heist. The best addition? The owner of the villa is at a concert -- listen HERE -- so the music we're hearing at the concert (Barry making a cameo, Renata Tarrago playing a Spanish guitar) is edited into the heist. It develops like a stage play, a tour de force sequence that I loved.

What's the problem? The heist is completed by the hour-mark. The second hour? Not so enjoyable. It devolves into a love triangle as Clarke fights for Fe, Fe wrestles with what to do, and Richard decides how to handle his new rival. Throw in Richard's young lover, Tony (Carlos Pierre), and we've got ourselves quite the mess. A tension-packed heist flick turned into a love triangle where our three participants philosophically analyze what love is? Gag me. It gets to be too pretentious for its own good at times. The ending especially comes out of nowhere and seems forced.

It's unfortunate -- yes, I'm using that again -- because Caine, Portman and Ralli all do pretty good jobs bringing the characters to life. Maybe I'm just that much in love with the first hour that I'm equally frustrated with the second half. It's a mixed bag, but what I loved, I really loved -- especially the heist sequence -- and what I didn't like came up short in a lot of ways. Also look for Nanette Newman as the Girl, a pretty young woman who keeps popping up, Leonard Rossiter as Fillmore, a source of info for Clarke, and David Buck as Salinas, a possible target for Clarke.

Deadfall (1968): ***/****