Invasion U.S.A. (1985) - 2.5/5

Invasion U.S.A., Death Wish 3, and Revenge of the Ninja are hands down my top three favorite guilty pleasure films from my favorite production company Cannon Films. Invasion U.S.A. reunites Missing in Action director Joe Zito and star Chucky Norris and they both up the ante in their second outing. Overall Invasion U.S.A. is a worse film than Missing in Action but it does out due that film in one aspect... and that is pure trashy entertainment value!

Don't be completely fooled by the poster art and title of the film. The poster art and title gives one the impression that this is going to the one man army version of Red Dawn. Chuck Norris single handedly taking on the entire Russian military! Sadly the film isn't quite that big in scope as Norris only takes on a small Russian/Cuban army (more like terrorists) who make a make a very small beach invasion in Florida in order to wreck chaos and destruction in the good 'ol US of A. The leader of these terrorists (Richard Lynch) is haunted by his old confrontations with ex-special services soldier Matt Hunter (Norris, of course) so he decides to send a small group up to kill him in his humble bayou home. Norris of course senses their presence (insert Norris joke here!) and survives the onslaught on his house so Norris makes it a personal mission to take Lynch out and foiling all of this terrorist schemes.

This is cheesy action at its most extreme and serious! Like Missing in Action, director Joseph Zito and Norris take the film seriously and Zito loads the film up with uber violence and action sequences. The film's best action sequence is by far a mall shoot-out where Norris literally drives his pickup in through some mall doors in order to take out some terrorists shooting up the place. This sequence is followed by a real kickass chase sequence with our terrorists holding a hostage on the outside of their car!

Norris is basically playing Braddock again and thankfully Zito gives him psychotic edge back. Lynch makes a great villain here (what film doesn't he in?) and his extremely violent edge makes him a great counterbalance to Braddock...err... I mean Hunter! The one character I have to complain about is the reporter "love interest" who is just completely annoying and irrelevant to the plot. Norris reportedly wanted Whoopi Goldberg to be casted in the role and thank God Zito put a co bash on that!

People who remember the Chuck Norris jokes that became popular a few years ago will find many of those jokes apply to this film. Chuck Norris doesn't sleep, he waits... yep that joke applies here. In one sequence an old boss rows a boat in the middle of the night to Norris's house only to have Norris sneak up behind him by surprise. Norris was wide awake.... like he was waiting! The film is also loaded with great cheesy lines like "If you come back in here, I'm going to hit you with so many rights you're going to beg for a left!"

Invasion U.S.A. is a high budget "bad" action film and many people wonder why Norris went back to Cannon to make these films after making that rather critically acclaimed action film Code of Silence. Though I like Code of Silence I am still extremely ecstatic that he went back to making B-action films! Invasion U.S.A. is definitely one of the kings of the B-action genre and anyone with a soft spot for these type of films should love it. A sequel also followed called Avenging Force with Michael "Dude"ikoff taking over the role of Hunter.

Written By Eric Reifschneider

Cotton Comes To Harlem - 3.5/5

When I first heard of Cotton Comes to Harlem, I originally got the inclination that the film was bout a guy named Cotton that comes to Harlem. Far be it from me to actually expect an actual bail of cotton is what the title is referring to! This is just of a taste of a interestingly little, albeit forgotten Blaxploitation film.

Our film opens with two cops keeping an eye on a shady religious figure, who seems to be working up a large following. Of course he is getting people to donate their hard earned money for him to make a trek back to Africa. He of course intends on stealing the money, so he hides the dough in a bail of cotton and stages a robbery. The cops know what he's up to but other people get wind and the bail of cotton it keeps getting stolen and disappearing until the cops don't know where to look or who to trust anymore.

I like how our two cop characters are more realistic compared to other films in the blaxploitation genre. Their less focused on being "cool" and come across tough by just being more normal, hard working detectives. This is no doubt one of the reasons the film isn't as popular as audiences enjoy the over-the-top coolness of such kats as Shaft and Superfly. Though director Ossie Davis keeps our cops normal (other than their character names), he does add some nice comedy touches to the film. An example is during a car chase, we have a pick pocket steal a woman's purse, run out into the street only to be hit by the car the cops are chasing. Sequences like this brought a smile to my face.

If I had to complain about one aspect of the film it has to be the third act and the film slows down to an almost grinding halt. The film's climax takes place in a theater the film starts focusing on the woman dancing for what seems to be 10 minutes. An attractive women she was but holy hell it was it completely pointless! The rest of the film just meanders away and never truly recovers.

Overall though this was an entertaining Blaxploitation film but fans will no doubt would rather see super cool kats like Shaft as opposed to our cops Gravedigger Jones and Coffin Ed Johnson (cool nicknames I do have to admit). I say give it shot. The humor is good but not obtrusive and the characters are interesting (interesting enough to inspire two rarely seen sequels). I recommend the film if one can get through the humdrum final act.

Written By Eric Reifschneider

Kill Theory - 2.5/5

The impact of "Saw" on modern Horror cinema is something to be admired. It changed the game. That's why we have movies like "Kill Theory" now by the dozens. Although this film, released as a part of the fourth After Dark Horrorfest, does seem to run through the motions as a morality slasher film, it does give it a mighty good try and accomplishes a bit just through pure effort. It's still your rather run of the mill 'people in a trap that have to make the ultimate choice/sacrifice' that we see over and over again now, but it does have heart.

A faceless psychotic man is out to prove his 'kill theory' as truth. His theory is that no matter how close you are to your friends and loved ones, that if you are forced with a choice then you will kill them to save yourself. To test this theory, he enlists (alright, 'traps' if you will) a group of graduating college friends out for a trip a secluded cabin. They have until 6:00 am to kill one another until only one is left. If only one is left at that time, then that person lives. There is no escape either because he has rigged the place with traps and sabotaged their vehicles. Now its kill or be killed in a test of how far you would go for your closest friends and loved ones.

"Kill Theory" does have a lot of heart for what it is. The problem that plagues this from from beginning to end is that is suffers from being a bit too amateurish. At times it doesn't trust its audience to get things (like having the entire back story of the killer done as the prologue instead of letting it play out during the events), the dialogue seems to be simplified down quite a bit, and it comes off as rather predictable and when it does have twists they seem rather forced. These are all amateurish flaws that bog down the experience of the film.

On the other hand, I was impressed by the genuine effort the film puts out. Despite its flaws, it keeps pushing itself at 110% and the charm of this does show through. This film honestly tries and I have to give it some credit for that. The actors do their best and give it their all (although some are definitely better than others) and the writing might seem a little too surface, but it puts it all out there.

"Kill Theory" may not be the best horror film out there, but modern fans might get a kick out of it. It gets an A for effort, but the film never really blossoms into the heavy weighted morality suspense tale it could have.

BONUS RANT: At times it felt like the film wanted to make the villain climber man into a slasher killer with his weird ax and his smoker's voice. It never really does and because the story never really was built to make him that way, its sort of just a futile effort. 

Written By Matt Reifschneider

I Sell The Dead - 3/5

With the praise this little independent dark comedy was receiving, it didn't seem too far fetched that "I Sell The Dead" would end up in my viewing queue eventually. Although not quite the uproarious dark comedy I was expecting, "I Sell The Dead" does have a knack for charm and unique vision that makes it worth at least a few watches. Perhaps not quite what I was expecting, the film does have its moments and succeeds in some of the most unusual ways.

Arthur Blake (Monaghan) definitely got himself into some trouble. He's in prison falsely accused of murder and his best friend/mentor Willie Grimes (Fessenden) has already been beheaded. In this odd old time (an odd made up time in Ireland around the 19th Century), a priest comes to hear Blake's sins for all the graves that they robbed. Blake reminisces about the events that lead up to the so called murder on the island and tells the priest about all the horrific things he has seen including vampires, aliens, and even zombies. Blake has to talk his way out of this jam quickly though as the guillotine's blade only seems to be getting closer.

It's hard not to be charmed by the odd combination of dry humor, legit scares, and clever story telling that makes "I Sell The Dead" the film that has earned so much praise. With a unique combination of animated comic style moments, insanely dark and dry humorous dialogue, and Horror throwbacks to the grave robbing days of old, this film does some unusual things with its time on screen. At many times I was reminded of Monty Python and their random yet intelligent sketch work with this film, but it does carry a streak of Horror film fetish that will make genre fans clap a little. This combination is definitely unique.

The problem with "I Sell The Dead" is that, despite its charm, it rarely finds the right balance of humor and horror that it needed. Much of the humor is so dry that if you aren't in the right mood, it just seems silly rather than actually funny. Much of this has to do with the chemistry between our two leads. Although they have their moments (the vampire sequence for one), I rarely caught the spark that would make them an ingenious comedic pair. I wanted them to almost be a Laurel And Hardy combination of smarts, dumbs, and misguided attempts at working together, but it rarely comes out that way. It just comes off as two bumbling idiots than the comedic duet we needed.

This film does have some great moments though, with a stellar score, some great comic book-y villains, and its rather clever telling of the stories and how it all comes together. The foundations for an amazing film are all there, but many of the details and major strokes just fall out of place and in the end, "I Sell The Dead" comes out rather flat lining on many of the humorous parts.

BONUS PRAISE: Angus Scrimm, the Tall Man from the "Phantasm" films, makes a guest appearance in this film. Enough said. 

Written By Matt Reifschneider

Braddock: Missing In Action III - 3/5

After the disappointing prequel which was Missing in Action 2, Chuck Norris took the reins of this second sequel by co-writing it and even getting his brother Aarron Norris to direct. The result was surprisingly good and far better than any sequel should be with Norris writing and a stuntman directing.

The film opens in Saigon and the continuity errors are blatant right away (more on that later). We have Braddock in Saigon moments before it falls to North Vietnam and American forces are pulling out. In the midst of the chaos, Norris's Vietnamese wife loses her papers on her way to the American embassy and is not allowed to leave. Norris, thinking she's dead, evacuates with rest of the troops. Years later Norris is approached by a priest saying that his wife and child are alive. Norris, disbelieving at first, eventually comes to believe and in good MIA fashion heads back to Vietnam to rescue his wife and son with the aid of an old war buddy. Of course it isn't going to be easy as they are held captive by a sadistic general who takes great glee in torturing Vietnamese-American half-breed children.

The opening of the film is the highlight as even with a lower budget (compared to the first two films), the production values are just fantastic and it really looks like the fall of Saigon (look for the great Keith David as a gate guard). The character of Braddock does lack some of the psychotic edge of his character in the previous films but Norris is still likeable as ever in his typical nice tough guy mode. Aki Aleong is also terrific as our sadistic general but they do have his character yell "Braddock" just a little too often. I will hand it to these Missing in Action sequels as they do get great actors to make truly unlikeable antagonists. Ron Barker makes a rather blah carbon copy of Braddock's war buddy M. Emmet Walsh from the first film and there are a few wince away bad lines like "I don't step on toes, I step on necks", but these are just minor hindrances.

The main aspect that rattles my cage a bit with this sequel is for its complete lack of continuity to the first two films. It is very obviously said in those films that Braddock was in a POW camp and didn't even know the war had ended. Here for some damn reason he is in Saigon during the end of the war and it doesn't even seem like he ever spent time in a POW camp. There must be two Braddocks! The second film also mentions that Braddock has a wife back in the states but in this film he is married to a Vietnamese woman. What?! Did they think fans wouldn't notice these blatant disregards to continuity and plot points?

Continuity problems aside, I actually was flabbergasted by this sequel and it came out MUCH better than I was ever expecting. I would even rank this entry a hair better than the first film but I do seem to be in the minority as this sequel is rarely talked about. For a lower budgeted sequel I was really impressed with the production design and I also dug how the film was more emotionally driven. I can't believe this sequel isn't held in higher regard when it comes to the fans.

Bonus Rant: The title is no doubt a take on the title Rambo: First Blood Part II in order to make the character Braddock a household name when it comes to action heroes. What's next? "Braddock IV" and then simply "Braddock"?

Written By Eric Reifschneider

Missing In Action 2: The Beginning - 2/5

As you can deduce from the subtitle, Missing in Action 2 is a prequel to the original film. A prequel is fine and dandy as there was enough plot for the filmmakers to tell the back-story of Braddock before escaping Vietnam and going back to rescue POWs. The problem is the filmmakers decide to shift the tone from the seriously taken original to a total cornball approach.

Our film opens with Braddock and his Platoon all getting captured by Vietcong and the rest of the film has the group isolated in a prison for years and the film showcases all the torture and hard times they go through under the iron fist of prison warden Soon Tek-Ho (I always thought his name was cool). If action films weren't predictable enough, prequels are even more predictable because thanks to the first film we all know that Braddock will soon rise up and save the day, killing our sadistic warden and rescuing our POWs and of course losing an emotional few along the way.

Like I mentioned before director Lance Hool opts to go for a total cornball approach to this film making it FAR more cheesy than the original. The film even opens with the movie still framing on each character, typing their name on the bottom of the screen and then having an MIA stamp (complete with cheesball sound effect) punch on top of their face. Cornball exactly!

Norris thankfully keeps his psychotic edge to his character from the original film and Soon Tek-Ho is wonderful as the villain but the rest of the cast's acting talent is far below par. Thankfully there's enough action to keep one from wincing in pain from the painful acting. It is also a criminal act that Jay Chattaway's original score is not brought back and instead we get a Swiss cheesy score provided by Brian May (No, not the guitarist of Queen but the music composer for the Mad Max films).

I have read, but have found no proof, that Missing in Action 2 was actually filmed before the first Missing in Action but Cannon opted to release "part 2" first as it was a far stronger film. Being a Cannon fanatic I have exhausted my research and still have found no proof of that fact. If it was made first then that would help explain some of the awful continuity. First of all the prison camp resembles nothing of the original and none of Braddock's nemesis' that tortured him in the camp return. Very lazy on the continuity factor but continuity would only get worse with the next entry.

I enjoyed Missing in Action 2 enough for what it was but it is hands down the weakest film in Missing in Action trilogy. Perhaps if Lance Hool gave it a similar tone to the original I might have liked it more but as is it is just another cornball B-action sequel...errr....prequel.

Written By Eric Reifschneider

Missing In Action - 3/5

When news came out in the early 80's that there were still American POWs and MIAs in Vietnam, it quickly became fodder for Hollywood to make gung ho action films about. The most popular film with a story surrounding a one man army going in and rescuing American MIAs in Vietnam is of course Rambo: First Blood Part II. That film however wasn't the first and the Cannon group beat Stallone to the punch by a year with the release of the Chuck Norris vehicle Missing in Action (not counting Uncommon Valor, which was about a group of men).

Norris portrays Col. Braddock, a POW that has recently escaped after years of imprisonment and has made his way back to the United States. While back in the normal world he becomes angered at the public and government as they turn a blind eye to the fact that there are still American POWs in Vietnam. The Vietnam government refuses to admit it so Norris's only option is to become a one man army and with the help of an old war buddy (M. Emmett Walsh) decides to go back to 'Nam to rescue American MIAs.

Missing in Action holds a special place in this reviewers heart as it not only marks Norris's first collaboration with Cannon films but it was also the first Cannon film I remember seeing. The mix of over the-top heroics, heightened violence, and B-movie qualities made this reviewer a fan of the production company for life. Cannon spared no penny here as they gave the cheesy action film a solid budget and director Joseph Zito proudly shows it on screen lots of explosions and great stunts.

What I like about this film is that it's a cheesy action film taken seriously and Zito even punctuates the action with some intense violence. Norris is also deadly serious in his career defining roll of Braddock giving the hero an almost psychotic edge, an edge that many of Norris's characters to follow would lack (even Braddock in later sequels). M. Emmet Walsh is likable as Braddock's lazy army bud but the film truly lacks a villain. Sure there is James Hong and his second in command, but they only make a appearances so often and the villain in the film really is the army force of Vietcong. I felt the film would have been stronger if they gave the enemy a face and a truly sadistic leader (this is something the sequels would get right.)

Missing in Action proved to be a tremendous success at the box office allowing there two sequels to be made as well as giving Norris a solid contract with Cannon and a majority of his action films to follow would be under that glorious Cannon logo. Norris and Zito would team up again in a similarly toned violent action film with Invasion U.S.A., a film that even has more of a cult following.

Written By Eric Reifschneider

Clash Of The Titans (2010) - 2/5

I'm not always against remakes. If you can make something better or throw a new twist into it without losing the heart and soul of the original then I say go for it. When you lose sight of what made the original one good or even fodder for a revamp, then screw off. Unfortunately, "Clash Of The Titans" tends to fall into the latter category more often then not and despite its low brow action packed entertaining value, this film sinks like a stone Kraken.

Perseus (Worthington), a demigod son of Zeus, finds himself in a bad situation. The world is rising up against the gods and a plan hatched by Hades (Fiennes) convinces Zeus (Neeson) that he should release the Kraken to inspire more prayers and a new fear of the god's wrath. So Perseus and a few warriors of Argos go on a quest to seek answers about how to take down the legendary beast and put Hades back in his place. Its a long journey that is going to cost a lot of men their lives and Persus is on a time restraint to do it. He's got a long way to go and a short time to do it in.

When going into "Clash Of The Titans" make sure that you check most of your IQ at the door. This film wasn't made to be thought provoking or even all that charming. Its action and special effects. With that in mind you may enjoy it. Its hard not to get enthused by its relentless pacing and stark (almost tries too hard) epic nature.

Believe it or not, its breakneck pacing is one of its main flaws. It keeps you entertained, sure, but it also allows for almost nil for dialogue (which is okay considering how simple and silly the dialogue was) and it never lets the audience feel anything for any of the characters. Or hardly get a grasp on how epic this film should be before it moves onto the next creature and next local. By the time we got to Medusa I had forgotten what they had to do to get there because it was moving so fast. It was like when you drive for a while and realize that you don't remember driving parts because you were so intent on what was happening in the moment. That's how "Clash Of The Titans" works too much.

Even better yet, is the horrible use of the cast. Sam Worthington is still an anomaly to me. He's fucking bank at the box office ("Avatar", "Terminator: Salvation", this) but I'll be damned if he's not just going through the motions in all of them. Sam Worthington is Worthless-ington when it comes to actual acting. Then we have a cult fans dream list of supporting cast. Neeson, Fiennes, Flemying, and Mikkelsen. Damn! Too bad most of them seem to sleep walk through their parts. Poor characters and paper thin back stories just make them shadows of what these actors can do. Its sad really.

"Clash Of The Titans" may not be award winning material in most any way, but go into with low expectations, leave your IQ at the door, and just enjoy it for the spectacle that it was made to be instead of the charming story that the original one was. It still isn't good and half the time feels forced. Just got with it. Or better yet, buy the original and enjoy that one for its campy charm and mechanical owl magic. 

Written By Matt Reifschneider

Showdown In Little Tokyo - 2/5

Mark L. Lester is one of the kings of higher budget cheesy action films despite only directing a handful of films in the genre. This guy directed perhaps the epitome of cheesy action films with Commando in 1985. Can a film starring Dolf Lundgren and Brandon Lee hold a candle to the cheese god of Lester's Commando? Sadly not but then again I went into this film not expecting the same cheesy goodness.

The plot... what plot. We have Dolf Lundgren as a cop in Little Tokyo in L.A.. He basically runs around beating the shit out of people. He then gets a new partner in the form of the late Brandon Lee, a young preppy guy that usually just makes smart ass one liners. So they both go around just kicking the shit out of everyone in different settings including restaurants, public baths, etc. All their ass kicking is going well until Dolf discovers the man who killed his parents, so they both decide to kick ass to get revenge.

Typical with Mark L. Lester action films everything is anteed up. In Commando Lester went to great lengths to show that Arnold Schwarzenegger had larger than life strength and he goes to the same extreme here with Lundgren. Lundgren even flips over a car with his bare hands, then while driving away shoots the gas tank to kill some bad guys. He also swings into a an illegal fight with a rope and also takes down five baddies while holding onto a cup of coffee, not spilling a drop. Lee on the other hand is just in the film to provide "comic relief" which mostly falls flat. Cary-Hiroyuki Tagawa is our villain. He almost always plays a villain but like always he's good as the antagonist. He's pretty fucking hardcore also as he even beheads a girl while attempting to take her from behind.

As expected the worst aspect of the film is by far the acting and dialogue. Lundgren and Lee were never known to be great actors and they still prove they can't here. The dialogue just makes their performances worse as they have to spew out filth like "sometimes you do the right thing because you have to do the right thing." A little redundant don't you think? The absolute worst line comes during a firefight at Lundgren's home and Lee turns to him and says "Just in case we get killed I just want to say you have the biggest dick I have ever seen on a man." What man says this to another man unless he's a homosexual? Talk about homosexual undertones! Undertones, more like overtones! Also did he really have to end the remark with "on a man"?

Though a larger budget cheesy action film, Showdown in Little Tokyo fails to live up to Lester's other grand cheesfest Commando or even Class of 1999. The violence again is plentiful but so is the bad acting and dialogue. I still had a fun time for the most part but the big "endowment" line still throws me for a loop to this day. Why oh why did Brandon Lee agree to say it? I bet he just rolls in his grave every time some action fan watches this.

Written By Eric Reifschneider

Eye Of The Eagle III - 1.5/5

Pulse may be the trilogy that no one asked for but Eye of the Eagle is the trilogy no one knows about. It just floors me that they actually made three of these damn things especially since no one seems to know they exist! With Eye of the Eagle III we have director Cirio H. Santiago stepping back into the director's chair as he only served as producer on the second film. This could be either a good or bad thing as the first film in the series that he directed was pretty dreadful. Well all I can say is it at least came out better than that outing...

Our film opens with a platoon in Vietnam sabotaging a Vietnam train. The platoon is then sent to a deserted camp at Lang Mei where they are given orders to hold the hill. In the mean time their commanding officer is taken into custody for murder so the military send out a new captain that is completely green and knows nothing about being in actual combat. Can our original commander break out of prison in time to help his troops defeat the oncoming North Vietnam force? By the time it happens will anyone be awake?

Thanks to the films plot, the action and events are confined to basically one set. Since the film has poorly developed characters that don't hold our interest, the setting becomes boring really fast. Who knew a film with so many bullets fired could be so damn boring?

The acting is definitely better compared to the first film and thank God Santiago did away with that jagged jump cutting before stunts! Still the film is just yawn educing and completely forgettable. The film also has NO plot or character connection to either of the previous two Eye of the Eagle films. Like the second film it seems to be only retitled to be part of the "franchise" as it is another cheaply made Philippine Vietnam War film.

If you have to see one of these damn films then make it Eye of the Eagle II as that film was surprisingly decent. I recommend leaving Eye of the Eagle III alone on the video store shelf and picking up Braddock: Missing in Action III to rent instead.

Bonus Rant: Our Native American soldier in the film has a weird hallucination where he sees himself all painted blue and completely made up in a Native American headdress. This is a "what the fuck" moment and completely ruins a serious scene. I'm not sure what the point of the scene was but it definitely took me out of the "plot", or woke me up, take your pick.

Written By Eric Reifschneider