Von Ryan's Express (1965)

VON RYAN'S EXPRESS

Having a history degree it should come to no surprise that I have affinity for World War II films, especially a liking for films in the genre made in the 1960s. For years I had heard about the greatness of “Von Ryan’s Express” but kept putting it off for the simple fact it starred Frank Sinatra. Ol’ blue eyes has a great voice and isn’t even a bad actor but I was never a fan of him as a person as his arrogant Jersey smugness always rubbed me the wrong way. Well after finally getting past my Sinatra ‘hatred’ I finally broke down and got this WWII classic and I’m glad I finally did as it lived up to it’s reputation of being one of the all-time great films of the genre.

 

Sinatra plays a pilot who gets shot down in Nazi occupied Italy. Thrown into a prisoner of war camp he butts heads with a British commander (Trevor Howard). After negotiating with their Italian captor (Adolfo Celi of ‘Thunderball”) he gets the prisoners rations and clothing but gets thrown in the sweat box in exchange. While cooking alive in the tin can the prisoners take the camp and escape not long before being caught. While being transported on a train, ol’ blue eyes and crew take it over and it’s a freight train speeding to freedom… but only if they can outrun the Nazi’s that seem to be at their every turn.

 

Before the 60s most war films were about being ‘heroic’ but when the 60s came calling war films turned a little darker, showing the horrors of war and became character studies on how war negatively affected individuals. This is why I love this era of the genre. “Von Ryan’s Express” takes this darker angle yet at the same time is a rip-roaring adventure flick along the lines of Alistair Maclean novels. It starts off like prisoner of war film, mimicking “The Great Escape’ but then quickly morphs into a high adventure escape flick that is sure to keep audiences on the edge of their seats at every turn on the track.

The look of the film is grand as Fox has something to prove after their huge flop “Cleopatra”. Mamoth sets (including a prison camp), eye popping cinematography, amazing special effects and authentic props was all a show for Fox to prove to their competitors that they were still worthy competition in the business. It worked as the film was a hit and historians will marvel at the authentic set pieces, including trains and clothing. Jerry Goldsmiths marvelous score perfectly encompasses all these professional film products.

The cast is great (with James Brolin in a small role) and though I’m not a fan of Frank Sinatra as a person I do admit he a wonderful acting job. One can tell they changed much of the dialogue to the wise, shiftless attitude of Sinatra but it fits him well especially with his adversarial relationship with Trevor Howard, one of the most underappreciated actors of his time for playing second fiddle to main leading men. Sinatra’s character is flawed, making poor dicisions throughout the film that affects the lives of the other prisoners so he personally had the ending of the film changed, and in my opinion for the better as it is more fitting for the character. 

“Von Ryan’s Express” is an exciting, high class thrilling World War II film. The darker approach to the subject matter with the high adventure script makes it an absolute winner and it’s a damn shame I waited so long to see it. I would even go as far to say that “Von Ryan’s Express” ranks up there with the best of the genre, just under the likes of films classics such as “The Great Escape” and “Where Eagles Dare.” In other words it’s a must own.

Written By Eric Reifschneider

Last Grenade, The (1970)

THE LAST GRENADE

Warner Brothers’ international hit “Dark of the Sun” introduced audiences to a whole new type of action picture – the mercenary film. It was a nice transitionary after the World War II epics of the 60s and the mercenary film offered audiences a wide array of loveable antiheroes that continues on to this day with the release of Sylvester Stallone’s “The Expendables”. Due to the success of “Dark of the Sun” mercenary films begin to fill theaters and drive-ins alike. Some, like “The Wild Geese” were celebrated, others like “The Last Grenade”, were critically panned and faded into oblivion.

 

The film opens with the slaughter of an entire camp of mercenaries by the psychotic Alex Cord laughing historically as he mows down men from the mounted gun in his helicopter. This of course pisses off their commander who is eager to get revenge on Cord so he takes a job of entering into China to rid the government the annoyance of Cord and his new group of mercenaries from fucking their system up. Along the way he falls for his hired boss’ wife (Honor Blackman of “Goldfinger”) which causes him all sorts of trouble.

 

The cast is wonderful (except for Alex Cord) with respectable actors Stanley Baker (“Zulu”), Richard Attenborough (“The Great Escape) and Honor Blackman giving the film their all. Other than the lamentable Alex Cord (who gives an embarrassing performance and should no means ever be casted as a protagonist), the great cast can’t save the messy script that likes to jump all over the place. To top it off our ‘hero’ is an incompetent buffoon constantly getting spanked and humiliated by his arch nemesis Alex Cord. What can you expect from a jackass that wears a fucking red beret into battle which is equivalent of painting a god damn bull’s-eye in the middle of your forehead.

 

Though the film contains plenty of action, fans of the genre might be a little disappointed that the film concentrates just as much on its love story angle as the action scenes. I didn’t mind this much as it offered something a little different than the average mercenary picture and god only knows a film like “The Last Grenade” needs more beauty in the form of Honor Blakeman to help drown out the plot holes. The problem is the love angle isn’t balanced with the action scenes and tends to bog the film down, interrupting the pacing.

 

With a tighter script and better characters “The Last Grenade” could have been a classic example of the genre as the cast was there, just not the execution. The film has action but it gets bogged down by its love story subplot and it never truly lives up to its explosive introduction. A nice plot twist gets glazed over by poor pace and plot holes big enough to throw a grenade through. It may not be a classic but’s worth a view for fans of obscure cinema with great casts that has fallen off the radar in recent years.

Written By Eric Reifschneider

Who? (1974)

WHO?

Aka "Robo Man"

As a youth there was a period of time where I was a science fiction fiend and read all I could by classic sci fi authors Robert Heinlein, Arthur C. Clarke and Isaac Asimov. During this period in my life I read a book simply called “Who?” by Algis Budrys, a philosophical science fiction novel about political espionage. Over the years the story faded from memory and I only recently discovered they made a 1973 film based on the classic story. Knowing the origins I knew the story would be difficult to pull off in film form and my instincts were correct as the film version is a real mixed bag.

 

The title refers to a brilliant American scientist that’s in charge of a top secret research project getting into a deadly car wreck over the border into Russian territory. In order to save his life the Russian government replaces most of his body with cybernetic components, including completely replacing his face. Soon after the Russian government gives him back to American authorities but FBI agent Elliot Gould doesn’t believe the metal man is who he says he is. Is the metal man really the brilliant scientist or an imposter secret agent?

 

The cast, acting and directing of the film are all solid. Heavy hitters Elliot Gould (recently divorced from Barbara Streisand at the time) and Trevor Howard light up the cast (while at the same time eating up the budget) and so does Joseph Bova as our ‘cyborg’. The problem the filmmakers faced though was the appearance of our brilliant scientist Lucas. In the novel he was explained to be recognizably human yet at the same time unrecognizable as Lucas. How does one exactly go about this? Well the result of our metal man on camera is rather laughable by today’s standards but it’s not for a lack of trying. The low budget and lack of prep time no doubt aided in the robo man’s humorous look but I’m not sure it would have been any better with more time and money as it is such a difficult concept to visualize onto film.

 

The final result of the film is for most ‘a good try’ and it’s not for a lack of hard work. Director Jack Gold keeps this cold war science fiction drama moving at a solid pace and keeps the audience guessing until the very end if Lucas is who he says he is but the philosophical subject matter on what makes a human truly human and the look of Lucas is difficult to convey on camera. The result had the film quietly disappear from theaters only to reappear on VHS re-titled “Robo Man” to cash-in on the “RoboCop” craze occurring in the late 80s. As is “Who?” is a compelling oddity from the 70s worth a look for science fiction fans that like depth to their stories, even if it’s a hard literary subject to transfer to film.

Written By Eric Reifschneider

Silent Hill: Revelation (2012)

Director: Michael J. Bassett
Notable Cast: Adelaide Clemens, Sean Bean, Kit Harington, Carrie-Anne Moss, Malcolm McDowell

I had been warned by many of my colleagues. I had been warned by many of my friends. "Silent Hill: Revelation" was terrible. The critics hated it. The fans seemed to generally hate it. The chances of me liking it? Slim to none. It's not my fault though. I'm a franchise whore and I owe it to you, blood brethren, to finally get around to watching and reviewing this long standing second "Silent Hill" film. Oh yeah, it's bad. It's very, very bad.

Sharon (Clemens), who now goes by the name Heather because her and her father (Bean) are on the run, has been having nightmares about a horrific carnival filled with infernal faceless creatures. As it would happen, the people of the cursed Silent Hill have been searching for her. Waiting to bring her back. They kidnap her father to bring her to the ash covered place, but what could they want with her?

To give my review some context, I have to say that even the first "Silent Hill" isn't a great film. It was a bit long and the story could be a bit confusing. It did, however, have stunning atmosphere and the visual charm of director Christophe Gans. When he dropped off of this sequel and Michael J. Bassett stepped on, I already knew that "Revelation" was in trouble. Trouble isn't a harsh enough term for it. "Revelation" is single handedly worse in every aspect to the original - and that's from a guy who didn't think the original one was a great film to begin with.

"We're caught in the web...of the shitty sequel!"

To kick things off, the story for "Revelation" is completely and utterly confusing. When they adapted the awesome video game, they must have known that trying to portray the 'alternate existence' of Silent Hill was going to be tough. Gans did a decent job at getting the jist out, but "Revelation" can't even pull off anything cohesive. The characters are ignored for the sake of plot, including our lead who at least has some sort of arc instead of nothing at all like the rest of them. The film then has to utterly rush through its plot to fit it all in leaving it a jumbled mess of missed "twists" and feeble motivations. Ironically enough, the film only gets worse when Sharon finds her way to the mystical terror of Silent Hill half way through the film.

We get Cenobyte rejects...and Sadako rejects!

At this point, it becomes so obvious that writer/director Bassett has no idea how to build tension or atmosphere. The one great thing about the original one, lost in a director who instead opts for a more Americanized monster film approach with fulfilling scares and underutilized set ups. Mannequin spider demon? Great idea! Well, maybe on paper since it shows up for like 2 seconds and sort of just runs into things. Sound triggered knife wielding nurse demons? Even better. Wait, I was too distracted figuring out why the guys even walked into the room knowing they were there to be slaughtered by them to feel the tiniest bit of fear. Even the all mighty and frightening Pyramid Head returns from the first...to ultimately do battle with a Cenobyte reject in a cheap set that fails to keep my attention. Ugh.

"Pyramid Head don't give a shit..."

It's no shock that the film was a critical flop. When it's not being cliche, it's being terrible. Granted the film ended up making money on the world wide market (it ended up around $50 million world wide for its $20 million budget), so don't be surprised if "Silent Hill" continues on the straight to home video market sometime in the future. As for "Revelation" though, I suggest a healthy skip and just try to remember the first one for what it was able to accomplish.

Written By Matt Reifschneider

Stigma (1972)

STIGMA

Much like his later “Miami Vice” co-star Don Johnson had a cult favorite from the early 70s with “A Boy and His Dog”, so did Philip Michael Thomas with “Stigma”, just to a lesser extent. This little exploitation follow-up to director David E. Durston’s far more popular “I Drink Your Blood” is a film with a message – safe sex. An exploitation film preaching about the horrors of promiscuous sex… what the hell is this? Oh don’t worry as it gets its message across while at the same time delivering some goods that exploitation film fans come to expect.

 

Dr. Crosse (Philip Michael Thomas) is recently released from prison for doing an illegal abortion and is hitch-hiking to a small island community to help an old professor with a disease outbreak. Upon arrival he finds his old colleague dead and an unwelcome response from the residents. It seems a deadly STD has broken out on the island and is running rampant due to promiscuous youths and the towns sheriff will seemingly do anything to keep a lid on it to keep the reputation of the church going community.

 

Mimicking “I Drink Your Blood”, “Stigma” is about disease spreading in a local community but it’s much more subtle and ‘less-in-your-face’ with its approach and gore. Due to this some fans may be disappointed from the lack of gore and horror elements but it doesn’t mean it’s any less interesting or thought provoking. The idea of mixing a message about ‘safe sex’ and ‘exploitation’ film may bring ideas of mixing oil and water but director David E. Durston gets his message across and while dishing out large amounts of exploitation goodness in the process.

 

The cast is likeable but the acting is somewhat restrained with Philip Michael Thomas being the best of the cast but even he comes out looking a little embarrassed at times. This could be because Thomas doesn’t know how director David E. Durston wants to take the film. At first he approaches the film as a comedy yet this is quickly dropped and then becomes an anti-racist asseveration. After that it delves into the suspense/thriller sector that preaches some public service facts on safe sex.

 

Some might view an exploitation film showing the horrors of promiscuous sex as hypocritical but Durston somehow makes it work and oddly enough the United States Navy at one time used the film to show their horny sailors as a scare tactic when they entered port. His direction is abashed in his approach as he doesn’t know how to present the subject matter but overall it’s an oddly compelling idiosyncrasy from the early 70s exploitation film craze with enough bizarreness, odd camera angles, kooky characters and nudity to appease fans of the weird and obscure.

Written By Eric Reifschneider

Flying Guillotine, The (1975)

Wow. Another terrible cover.

Director: Meng Hua Ho
Notable Cast: Kuan Tai Chen, Keng Fu, Wu Chi Liu, Hung Wei

It took a while for Dragon Dynasty to finally release this 70s kung fu cult classic and when they did, Blood Brothers was all over getting our hands on a copy. The word of mouth was that "The Flying Guillotine" was an instantly memorable and sharp Shaw Brothers film (no pun intended) that rose above the gimmick of its titular weapon. All of this is true, "The Flying Guillotine" is a strong balance of story, character, and action and one that easily overcomes the pitfalls of its concept.

Ma Teng (Kuan Tai Chen) was one of twelve men secretly chosen for their strong abilities and loyalty to the Emperor to be part of a new secret assassination program. The men will be taught to use a brand new weapon called the Flying Guillotine, a bladed throwing weapon with the ability to behead the target from a long distance. When Ma Teng realizes that there is a bit of corruption in the ranks and that their targets are leaders of their own country, he decides to flee from the group incurring their wrath.

Come at me, bro.

Believe it or not, the flying guillotine is not the highlight of this film. I know, for a kung fu film centered around assassins trained with this semi-mythical weapon (there is little historical fact that validates how this weapon worked or what it was even used for) you would think that the sequences featuring the bladed Frisbee of decapitation would be the highlights. While these moments are fun and definitely very unique, including how director Meng Hua Ho uses super clever editing and zooms to make the physics of the weapon seem feasible, it's the story and characters that truly highlight the film.

"I don't know how if fucking works either!"

What makes "The Flying Guillotine" work is the character arc for Ma Teng. Kuan Tai Chen is impressively strong in the lead here, validating his very long career in Hong Kong cinema, and despite the obvious lack of thoughtful villain (yes, his motivation is jealousy that bleeds into power!) Kuan Tai Chen carries this film almost single-handedly. While the random time jumps that Shaw studios love to brush over still irritates, his growth from a fully loyal servant to a rebel to a family man in the third act is fascinating to watch. By the time that his fellow Guillotiners (I'm making up words now, people) show up to threaten his family, you want him to burn the whole damn program to the ground. I was ready to do it for him too. That's how strongly the story and characters had me invested.

As for action, it's hard to discredit any Shaw Brothers film here. Interestingly enough, the action and martial arts tend to be less of a focus in the film. While you do get a few hand to hand combat sequences which are fun, the film focuses on a more thriller style of action - a game of cat and mouse if you will. The use of the titular weapon tends to be surrounded by tension and atmosphere rather than excitement and adrenaline (until the finale on the rocky cliffs of a waterfall) and it comes off as more effective for the story that way. I was also impressed with the heightened sense of violence around the weapon and it makes it even scarier in feeling so that when it's used it has a stronger effect on the audience. Decapitated bodies spasm in blood puddles on the ground, a villain gets the bladed side of the guillotine to the face, and at one point they even decapitate a dog...an rather unintentionally hilarious moment. It works here though.

Whoops.

For both kung fu fanatics and for fans of cult cinema, "The Flying Guillotine" is a must see. It's got a great story, focused characters, and a wicked aura for the title weapon when it shows up on screen. This has easily leaped up the list of my favorite Shaw Brothers films and I highly suggest it to anyone curious about the pop culture weapon and the film that started it all.

Written By Matt Reifschneider

Police Connection, The (1973)

THE POLICE CONNECTION

Aka "The Mad Bomber"

With a title like “The Police Connection” one would think this is a low grade clone of William Friedkin’s 1971 crime thriller “The French Connection”. This however was a lame cash-in retitling by distributors and for me the film will always be known by its original title “The Mad Bomber”, a fitting description of what the film is actually about – which is a fucking insane bomber going around and blowing shit up! Sounds far more interesting than the passable “Police Connection” and trust me it is as “The Mad Bomber” is an explosive good time.

 

Chuck Conners plays an insane man distraught with grief by the death of his daughter so he desides to go around the city blowing shit up. While blowing up a mental health clinic a rapist witnesses his face so a psychotic cop is hell-bent to catch the rapist in order to identify the bomber. Can he do it in time before the city is nothing but ash?

"What do you mean some jackass theatrical distrubutors retitled my film to cash-in on 'The French Connection?!'"

What I love about the film is the triumvirate storylines and how three insane individuals’ lives intertwine in order to stop death and destruction. Bert I. Gordon’s nifty script (taking a break from all his giant monster flicks) is full of surprises and sleaze as the audience cringes as our cop has the trust the word of a seedy rapist in order to catch the bomber.

 

The casting is impeccable with Chuck Conners shining being cast against type of his usually tough hero role. Who knew he could play an insane nut-job so well and it just brings a smile to my face as he goes around town going all Michael “Falling Down” Douglas on peoples asses, including chewing out a cop for staring at him! Neville Brand, best known for playing the Leatherface stand-in in Tobe Hooper’s “Eaten Alive”, is sublime as the slimy rapist, easily solidifying is face in film history as one of the creepiest actors that ever lived. Vince Edwards also gives a strong performance as the cop on the brink of being as insane as the culprits he is trying to track down.

 

“The Mad Bomber”, whoops I mean “The Police Connection”, was way more enjoyable than I thought it would be especially coming from B-movie legend Bert I. Gordon. His script was delightfully intertwined and full of sleaze and the cast is pitch perfect raising the film above it’s B-movie limitations. The explosive ending just tops off the film perfectly making “The Police Connection one of the most under-appreciated action/thriller films of the 1970s. Given a rather shoddy DVD release under the better title “The Mad Bomber”, Code Red gave the film much needed respect and unleashed this classic completely uncut with all the violence intact in beautiful widescreen version under the title “The Police Connection”. Make sure to get the Code Red release.

Written By Eric Reifschneider 

Gangster Squad (2012)

Director: Ruben Fleischer
Notable Cast: Josh Brolin, Ryan Gosling, Sean Penn, Emma Stone, Nick Nolte, Anthony Mackie, Giovanni Ribisi, Michael Pena, Robert Patrick

Do you know that moment when you first purchase one of those big ass puzzles, you dump out all the pieces on a table, and its just a massive mess? You look at the beautiful picture on the box and you know all the pieces are there to make that picture, but the massive pile of ink and cardboard overwhelms you as a disaster? That pile is "Gangster Squad." This is a film with all the right components, but they are in all the wrong places. It leaves a film that, like the picture on that puzzle box, should be beautiful, but ends up jumbled, incohesive, and downright confusing like that pile.

Mickey Cohen (Penn) has established himself as both a criminal tyrant and a mob renegade to his ex-bosses in Chicago. His Los Angeles home has become a hive of scum and villainy in the late 40s and the chief of police (Nolte) is fed up with it. He asks a fierce detective (Brolin) to put together a squad of trust worthy police officers to form a 'gangster squad' to bring Cohen to justice. With the help of a reluctant and young up-and-comer (Gosling), the small group have quite a bit on their hands...and it just might kill them in the end.

"You're not the real Sean Penn! He can act!"

I want you to briefly look back at the top of this review. I want you to read through that cast listing. Brolin and Gosling as our leads duking it out with Sean Penn as our crime lord in 40s Los Angeles? Tell me that this idea, on paper, shouldn't be Oscar worthy. This is the kind of film that should define an actor/director/writer's career has a highlight. It should any way. So what do we get with "Gangster Squad?" A half assed, style-over-substance film that fails to even find it's footing with a poor script before caking on some haphazard humor and some of the worst dialogue that I've seen from a film of this caliber. It's definitely one of the biggest disappointments of the year.

To be honest, the idea isn't half bad either. Rogue cops gunning down booze smuggling gangsters with Tommy guns. The classic noir elements with dames in poor situations, thugs in suits, and a leader cop who's ex-military and not afraid the throw down. Dammit! This film SHOULD BE SO FUCKING AWESOME. So where is the blame to fall? Well, in a lot of places overall, but definitely in the writing. "Gangster Squad", instead of embracing its darkness script wise, instead opts for an almost 'wink-wink' nod towards the audience. The dialogue is meant to be fun and witty, but comes off as forced and silly including a point where I couldn't stop laughing from Sean Penn declaring 'here comes Santa Claus' before unleashing machine gun fire through a Christmas tree. The characters, besides an intriguing lead in Brolin, are all underdeveloped too leaving a terrible romantic subplot for Gosling and Stone and a team of throwaway cops and villains whose live or die situations fail to feel as such.

"I loved you in "Crazy Stupid Love"."

One element that the film did get right was the extreme violence. Many critics panned the film for such, but when I go into a film about gangster wars these moments are the ones that actually seemed to feel like they understood the dark places that this film should go. Unfortunately, these moments are undermined by the film's odd play of humor (particularly from Gosling and his arrogant 'don't give a shit attitude' which completely leads a shoe shining boy's serious death sequence as out of place) and the director's penchant for "Sin City" style slick visual schemes. I'm all for tone and style, but in the case of this film it never felt right for what they were aiming for.

Ra-ta-ta-ta-tat!

Well, I'm glad that I didn't cough up my hard earned cash for a theatrical viewing like I planned to. I probably would have stormed out of the theater raging from all of the missed opportunities that "Gangster Squad" pandered away. Had I known going into it that it was meant to be more of a fun and silly film, I might have been a bit more lenient. As is though, "Gangster Squad" is one of the biggest disappointments I've see. A film that had so much potential and never lived up to any of it.

Written By Matt Reifschneider

Born Losers, The (1967)

THE BORN LOSERS

Aka "Born Losers"

Billy Jack mania swept the nation in the early 70s with the 1973 release of “Billy Jack”. Few then and even today other than the most die hard fans realized that it was a sequel to a modest 1967 dive-in hit “The Born Losers”, a vigilante film jumping in on the biker movie craze at the time that more importantly introduced audiences to an ex-Green Beret ass-kickin Native American “half-breed” played by Tom Laughlin. Yes the legend of Billy Jack begins here.

 

A biker gang makes their way into a Southern California coastal town to tear the place up. Billy Jack, in attempting to save a young man’s life, gets arrested and punished more harshly than the gang members that attempted the murder. In the meantime the gang kidnaps and rapes four young girls in the community and threaten their lives if they testify in court. Billy Jack, upset with the legal system, begins to fall in the love with one of the victims and decides to take the law into his own hands.

 

“The Born Losers” is a labor of love for Tom Laughlin as he wrote, directed and starred in the film for the sole reason to raise money for his dream project which would later evolve into the film “Billy Jack”. “Billy Jack” contained too many controversial themes to be made at the time so Laughlin toned down the message a bit but that doesn’t mean “The Born Losers" lacks any hidden meanings. On the surface it may look like “good guy defeats biker gang to save rape victims” but hidden below its ‘biker film’ exterior is how the Vietnam War affected everyday normal Americans. He is also careful to make all the characters not completely ‘good’ or ‘evil’ and that both sides exist in all of us.

 

The production values are extremely low, definitely drive-in-fare and the film runs far too long (typical with Tom Laughlin “Billy Jack” films) clocking in a hair under two hours long when a film of this nature should have kept between the 80 to 90 minute mark. The bikers spend most of the time talking but the few confrontational action scenes are good and Tom Laughlin (sporting a cowboy hat instead of his iconic ‘Uncle Joe’ hat) owns the role of Billy Jack.

 

It may be the humble beginnings for an iconic 70s character and the main message of the film may be tamer than its sequels to come, but that’s what I like about “The Born Losers”. It aims more to entertain as a film instead of being overly preachy with its core beliefs. A tighter pace would have helped the film ememesly but the likeable character of Billy Jack makes this small trifle easier to stomach (not so much in the later films) and it’s easy to see why the chacter became such an icon. Oh and there’s a sexy chick that rides a motorcycle in a white bikini… that’s always a plus.

Written By Eric Reifschneider