'Lisa Frankenstein' Can't Figure Itself Out In Order to Stand Out

'Lisa Frankenstein' (2024)

“Lisa Frankenstein” is the latest effort from screenwriter Diablo Cody and the feature-length directorial debut for Zelda Williams. The movie is set in 1989 and Lisa Swallows (Kathryn Newton) is a goth girl who suffered a terrible trauma two years prior when her mother was brutally murdered.

Her favorite thing to do is hang out at the grave of an unknown young man from the Victorian era while she avoids her evil stepmother Janet (Carla Gugino) and those at school who look down on her.

To her surprise, the deceased man of her dreams comes back to life and she now finds herself hiding the Creature (Cole Sprouse) while trying to figure things out. As the title already suggests, the movie is an update on the “Frankenstein” storyline with a look at what it’s like to be the outcast.

However, I could never completely get behind the movie. It took me a moment to figure out why that was because the performances are good and the direction from Williams is solid. I would seriously consider watching anything else that she may want to helm in the future.

Kathryn Newton and Cole Sprouse star in 'Lisa Frankenstein'.

After thinking about it for a minute and talking to my friend with whom I watched the movie, I realized what the main problem was. The movie’s identity never settles on what it wants to be. Does it want to be a horror comedy? Does it want to be taken seriously? Does it want to go over-the-top and do zany things? I don’t know and it would appear that the movie doesn’t know either.

Another problem is that I thought the film’s story would escalate more than it actually does. It gets to a certain point and then it stalls for the most part. There is one moment where I thought things were about to get even more interesting, but then it just ends.

That was another problem I had: the ending. I won’t spoil it here, obviously, but by the time the movie reaches the credits, I don’t feel like the movie earned its ending. I was left wanting more and all I got was an ultimately mediocre movie.

Finally, I think another reason that I felt something was missing was due to the fact that the movie forgets some of its own set up. For example, remember when I said that Lisa’s mother had been murdered prior to the film’s events? The movie goes to some lengths to set up that her mother’s murderer got away, but the movie quickly forgets this and moves on without ever mentioning it again.

So, in conclusion, the movie looks good and the movie has good performances. Unfortunately, that’s all I felt this movie succeeded at due to the story’s uneven and confused tone. There was potential with this story, but the final movie fails to make good on that potential.

THE '90S IN ACTION! - 'Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace' (1999)

'Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace' (1999)

Words cannot begin to express how much Star Wars fans were expecting "Star Wars - Episode I: The Phantom Menace" when it was about to be released in 1999. A lot of us waited forever for the trailer to download in Quicktime on our old computers so we could watch it over and over again. People sat outside theaters for days just so they could be the first to get in and get good seats.

Some today may be asking why there was all the fuss over the movie? Well, we hadn't received a new Star Wars film since the release of "Return of the Jedi" in 1983. For years, fans assumed that they only new stories they would get from this universe would be through the books and video games that were released in the Expanded Universe outside what was then just the Star Wars trilogy.

The fact that writer and director George Lucas was returning to his creation was a huge deal and it was heavily covered not just in its own marketing but through the media as well. When the movie came out on May 19, 1999, the reception was... decidedly mixed.

This was when the Star Wars fandom turned on anything that existed outside of what was now known as the Original Trilogy. A nice chunk of the fandom hated the new movie because they hated Lucas' new direction and vision for what was the beginning of the Prequel Trilogy.

Obi-Wan and Qui-Gon prepare to fight in 'The Phantom Menace'.

But why did they hate it so much? Well, it didn't give them what they wanted. Anakin Skywalker, who is destined not just to become a Jedi but also the evil Sith Lord known as Darth Vader, is shown here to be an innocent kid. He wasn't the evil Jedi right out of the gate and that bothered plenty of people in the fandom.

The movie also contained some annoying elements such as Jar Jar Binks, a character that was universally hated when the flick was finally released. The lighter tone of the Republic was also criticized as was the story that seemingly only involves a trade dispute on a small planet.

For years, the fandom decried this movie and it became one of the first examples of a film where the hatred online only amplified the fandom's problems with the movie. Finally, it also didn't help that this movie was released 16 years after the last film and every fan had it in their head what they wanted to see in this movie.

Thankfully, over the years, the fans that grew up with this movie have come to its defense and "The Phantom Menace" has grown quite the cult following within the fandom. Of course, part of that is due to the fact that the fandom has also found plenty of other things to bitch about with the content that Disney has released since they acquired Lucasfilm in 2012.

Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan fight the sinister Darth Maul in 'The Phantom Menace'.

For me, I can readily admit that I've enjoyed this first episode in Lucas' saga since it was released in '99. I went to the theaters to see it nine times and I've watched it numerous times during my various rewatches of the series over the years.

I'll go over my own thoughts in a minute, but for those who may not have seen the movie, here's a brief rundown. The Trade Federation has imposed a blockade on the small planet of Naboo and Coruscant has sent two Jedi, Qui-Gon Jinn (Liam Neeson) and Obi-Wan Kenobi (Ewan McGregor) to negotiate. Things do not go as planned and both Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan escape Naboo with Queen Amidala (Natalie Portman) in an attempt to get her to Coruscant in order to plead with the Galactic Senate for help.

First, though, they reach Tatooine where they meet a young boy named Anakin Skywalker (Jake Lloyed). Now, not only do they have to deal with a far bigger and more sinister plot by the Federation, but Qui-Gon must figure out why Anakin is so talented in the Force and whether or not Anakin should be trained in order to become a Jedi.

The first thing I'll say about the movie is that if any of the haters come to me and tell me what they think is wrong with the movie, I'll probably agree with their criticisms. Particularly, there is an overuse of CGI in places, the dialogue and acting can be cringy at times, and I do think that Jar Jar Binks is the most annoying character in all of Star Wars.

Yet, I can't help but like the movie in spite of its numerous flaws. I've even tried to watch this movie several times with the intent of really paying attention to the flaws and seeing if the great amount of hate surrounding this film over the years is justified. I just don't think that it is.

The movie flows extremely well from one scene to the next, it actually looks great for a movie that is now 25 years old, Neeson is great as Qui-Gon, and there are some action sequences that are fantastic such as the now famous Pod Racing scene and the climactic lightsaber battle towards the end of the movie.

In short, this is a Star Wars film that I can and have sat down to watch several times and I've had fun with it every time. While I can understand someone not liking this movie due to its flaws, I can't help but overlook them and enjoy the fun film that Lucas crafted all those years ago.

"The '90s in Action" - 'Hackers' (1995)

'Hackers' (1995)

Okay, so with my latest film for ‘The ‘90s in Action!’ is stretching the boundaries of what an action film is. “Hackers” is actually classified as a crime thriller, but it does have some action beats and it definitely has an over-the-top villain.

The first thing that I’ll get out of the way is that this movie does not accurately portray how computers work in any way and I’m well aware of that. In the ‘90s, it was apparently a big challenge to make it exciting showing people working on computers.

What “Hackers” does well, though, is that it gives us a true cyberpunk atmosphere and a highly stylized world where our hackers operate. It simplifies things for the audience’s sake and I believe film critic Roger Ebert said it best when he reviewed the film, “The movie is smart and entertaining, then, as long as you don’t take the computer stuff very seriously. I didn’t. I took it approximately as seriously as the archeology in Indiana Jones.”

What the movie sets out to show us was a very real culture where talented hackers use their talents behind the keyboard for harmless exercises. As the tagline for the movie read, “Their crime is curiosity.”

Crash Override and Acid Burn are at the center of 'Hackers'!

The movie mainly follows Dade Murphy (Jonny Lee Miller), a hacker who performed a major hack when he was a kid but got caught. Now that he’s 18, he has regained access to a computer and is hacking once again under the code name Crash Override. After being forced to move to New York City, he eventually meets other hackers like him.

There’s the Phantom Phreak (Renoly Santiago), Cereal Killer (Matthew Lillard), Lord Nikon (Laurence Mason), and Joey Pardella (Jesse Bradford) who has yet to get a nickname. Then there is Acid Burn (Angelina Jolie), a hacker who is initially at odds with Crash Override and they soon find themselves in a bet to see who the better hacker really is.

In the meantime, Joey gets set up for causing a virus that threatens to sink oil tankers unless whoever is behind the virus is paid $5 million. In reality, this is a cover by Eugene Belford, aka The Plague (Fisher Stevens). His true plan is that he’s been slowly embezzling money from the company he works for and Joey discovered this when he hacked the company’s mainframe, so the Plague framed Joey and he gets the secret service to track not just Joey but his friends as well.

Crash Override is not alone in 'Hackers'!

It is true that if you can get past the absurd computer jargon, you find yourself in a fantastical world with characters that you enjoy hanging out with for the most part. While the computer effects are nothing like the real world, the movie is trying to get you into the mind of the hackers. They’re trying to get you to see what they see and, for the most part, you’re with them.

The performances are fun as well. Miller is a good lead, Lillard is as crazy as ever, Santiago is a good guide into this world of hackers, Jolie shows off her early talents as an actress that led her to superstardom, and Mason is great as Nikon, the man with a photographic memory that can remember everything.

Then there is Stevens as the Plague. I believe I read some time ago that Stevens dismisses this role and the movie altogether. I hate that because I actually think he gives an appropriately devious performance that is just right for this kind of movie. It’s a fun role for the audience to take in and Stevens should be proud of it.

Yes, the movie is absurd in places and out of date just due to age, but every time I play this movie, I love it. I just get lost in this world of hackers and their quest for justice for their friend and the fun they have in their world. In conclusion, if you can look past the absurd computer techno babble, this is a fun movie and one worth seeing!

MIDDLE -AGED MATINEE! #13 - 'A Nightmare on Elm Street'

'A Nightmare on Elm Street' (1984)

Welcome back to “Middle-Aged Matinee!”, the article where I take a look back at films that came out in the year of my birth, 1984! Today, I’m taking a look at a film that is often considered writer and director Wes Craven’s masterpiece, “A Nightmare on Elm Street”.

Believe it or not, by the time the mid-80s was arriving, the slasher genre was already starting to show diminishing returns at the box office. This is why, also in 1984, Paramount Pictures decided to try and end the “Friday the 13th” series with the fourth entry, “Friday the 13th: The Final Chapter”. But then, a movie came along that completely re-energized the slasher for the latter half of the ’80s.

“A Nightmare on Elm Street” was inspired by a series of unrelated articles that Craven read in the “L.A. Times''. The articles were about young teens, often refugees who had gone through bad experiences. The kids were trying to avoid sleep by taking caffeine pills or sneaking a coffee pot into their rooms because they thought their nightmares were trying to kill them.

The kids would eventually have to fall asleep and much to the horror of their parents, the kids would scream due to a terrible nightmare before dying in their sleep. This is when Craven had the idea of a monster that stalked kids in their nightmares and if the teens are killed in the dream, then they are killed in the real world.

Freddy invades the nightmares of his victims in 'A Nightmare on Elm Street'!

For years, Craven was trying to get his film off the ground, but no one wanted to touch it. Even Craven’s friend, Sean S. Cunningham (who directed “Friday the 13th”), told him that it wasn’t that scary since the kids were dying in their dreams. In other words, no one understood the concept and passed on it… Except for one man.

Robert Shaye was the founder and CEO of New Line Cinema, a small video distribution studio that had only dabbled in theatrical releases. Shaye wanted to make a real effort to put a movie into theaters and he actually understood and liked Craven’s idea.

While it was a harrowing experience to get the money and the funding even ran out at one point during the film’s production, Shaye was able to secure what ended up being the $1.1 million budget in order to finish the movie. “A Nightmare on Elm Street” came out on November 9, 1984, and ended up grossing $57 million, a solid hit when considering the genre and the budget.

The home video sales were also through the roof and New Line Cinema instantly became a major player in Hollywood. That is why New Line was often referred to as the “house that Freddy built.”

'A Nightmare on Elm Street' marked the feature film debut for Johnny Depp.

Speaking of which, for anyone who has never seen the movie, it is about a group of teens who are all having nightmares about the same monster. He is a horribly burned man who terrorizes them and tries to brutally murder them in their sleep. He has a unique glove with knives on the fingers and he wears a dusty fedora and a red and green striped sweater.

His name is Freddy Krueger. Now, it looks like Nancy Thompson (Heather Langenkamp) and her friends must figure out a way to stop him before it’s too late and they all end up on the wrong side of Freddy’s glove.

This movie is one of the most original slashers ever released with a genuinely original movie monster. Freddy is played by Robert Englund and it would become Englund’s signature role throughout the years. The character is based on an encounter that Craven had when he was a kid.

One night, in his bedroom, Craven looked down from his window and noticed an old man in a fedora walking down the street. The man somehow picked up on the fact that he was being watched and he turned and stared back up and smiled at Craven. The man then acted like he was going to come into the apartment building, but that was the last that Craven ever saw of this man that he assumed simply wanted to scare the shit out of a kid for kicks.

Nancy and Freddy face off in 'A Nightmare on Elm Street'!

While the role was originally supposed to be played by an older man, Englund’s persona and his ability to tap into Freddy’s dark humorous side won Craven over. And we’re all glad that it did because without Englund, this film wouldn’t have worked nearly as well as it does.

The movie is also beautifully shot by Craven and his cinematographer Jacques Haitkin and, along with Charles Bernstein’s haunting score, it really does give the movie a dream-like feel. The dream sequences themselves are also great, including the death of a character that is dragged up the walls in the real world by an unseen Freddy.

The performances beyond Englund are great as well. Langenkamp is perfect as the girl next door and ultimate final girl, Nancy Thompson. She has to make a transformation from an innocent young woman to a badass who ultimately decides that she has to face off with Freddy herself. Nancy is up there with the other legendary final girls such as Sally Hardesty, Laurie Strode, and Alice Hardy.

The movie would go on to spawn a legendary series of films where Englund would return time and time again as Freddy Krueger. The franchise would also spawn an anthology TV show called “Freddy’s Nightmares” with Freddy as the host and the original movie would be remade in 2010, but the less said about that the better.

No matter what anyone thinks of the later movies or where the franchise went, though, there is no denying that the original “A Nightmare on Elm Street” is still a bonafide horror classic. It is definitely a masterpiece from the legendary Wes Craven and if by some chance you’ve never seen it, then you need to do yourself a favor. If you have seen it, you already know how special this movie really is.

The '90s in Action: 'Blade' (1998)

'Blade' (1998)

There is no denying that 20th Century Fox’s “X-Men” proved in 2000 that the box office was there for superhero films. In 2002, it can’t be denied that “Spider-Man” proved to be the film where the superhero powderkeg blew up and Hollywood wanted to then make every superhero film known to man.

However, it was a lower-budgeted film in 1998 that proved that adult audiences were ready for more mature superhero fare. That movie was “Blade” and 26 years later, it still shows that it is one of the best superhero films ever made. It is the movie that lit the fuse on the aforementioned superhero powderkeg.

For anyone who may not have watched this movie, it is about a character called Blade and he is played to perfection by Wesley Snipes. Right off the bat, this character is quickly established, showing that he was born to a mother who had just been bitten by a vampire.

Blade grows up with a thirst for killing any vampires that cross his path. The movie opens with an unwitting man being dragged to an underground nightclub. He soon learns that he’s in a room full of vampires, but just before he can be devoured by the members of this sadistic club, Blade enters like an old Western gunslinger, ready to massacre them all.

This intro into the movie establishes that you’re not getting your usual superhero fare and that you’re also getting one of the best superhero films ever made. Blade is indeed a gunslinger and swordsman who also happens to have the help of Abraham Whistler, a fellow vampire hunter and father figure.

Blade and Deacon Frost face off in 'Blade'!

Blade is trying to get to Deacon Frost, a vampire who wants to fulfill an ancient prophecy involving a vampire god that will help him take over the human race. Frost is played to perfection by Stephn Dorff and a perfect villain for the more serious Blade.

The movie is 26 years old and the only thing I can say about the movie is that the special-effects, particularly those towards the end of the film, don’t work quite as great as they did back when the movie was initially released. Yet again, I can forgive this simply because the movie is damn near three decades old now.

The movie itself is a particularly dark yet also darkly comedic film from director Stephen Norrington. Also, the movie looks incredible and both Norrington and his cinematographer Theo van de Sande deserves a special shoutout for giving this movie a unique look and tone.

The movie’s action sequences are also top notch. It is known that Snipes is an expert martial artist and he brings the full weight of that training to the movie. From the opening nightclub sequence to the climactic battle to stop a vampire god, the fight sequences are quite amazing!

The performances are also a highlight of the movie. Snipes is perfect as Blade as is Kris Kristofferson as Whistler, Blade’s right hand man and father figure. You care for these characters’ causes and you want them to succeed. N’Bushe Wright is also great as Dr. Karen Jenson, a woman who is bitten by a vampire and tries to help not only devise a cure for herself but also a better serum for Blade who also has a thirst for human blood if he doesn’t take a special mixture every once in a while.

Of course, no great hero is great without a great villain. Dorff is great as Frost, a vampire who may be feeling a bit of an inferiority complex due to being a vampire that was turned instead of being a purebred. While Frost is most definitely a villain, he has his proper motivations for wanting to become a vampire god and wanting to turn the entire world into vampires.

I first watched this movie back in ‘98 when it initially came out and I loved it then. Now, it’s time to acknowledge another fact about the movie. It truly is the first great Marvel movie ever to be made and it still holds up after 26 years as a bonafide classic.

Director and Star Dev Patel Gives a Bloody Right Hook to Elitism and Corruption in 'Monkey Man'

'Monkey Man' (2024)

I’m once again playing catch-up with another small review for a film that I didn’t get to catch earlier in the year. This time, I’m taking a look at “Monkey Man”, a film that is also the directorial debut for its star, Dev Patel.

In “Monkey Man”, Kid (Patel) is working as a heel for an underground night club, taking dives against more popular fighters under the moniker “Monkey Man”. Meanwhile, Kid is also trying to exact revenge against those who murdered his mother. However, he soon finds that he is not only fighting for his own vengeance, but for others who have been terrorized by the same people.

Dev Patel is Kid in 'Monkey Man'.

Patel makes his directorial debut with this movie and it is quite a movie to behold. It is actually a bit slower than I expected it to be, but that’s not necessarily a bad thing. The movie begins as a revenge film and while the revenge element never goes away completely, Kid at least learns that he is also fighting for a greater purpose.

The movie is beautifully shot, so kudos to both Patel and his cinematographer Sharone Meir. The action sequences also hit hard when they do happen and this is one of the better action films to emerge in a post-”John Wick” world that has films featuring high energy, well choreographed set pieces.

The movie takes a look at real world problems such as discrimination on a marginalized group, poverty, and the class systems that separate the corrupt rich from the poor people they claim to represent in seats of power. That means that this movie has more to say rather than just being about a guy against the world and that also helps this movie stand apart from other action films in recent memory.

So, to quickly recap, while the movie can be slow at times, it knows when to kick up the action and it just so happens to have a sociopolitical message to go along with it. This is a great action film that everyone should check out and a wonderful directorial debut for its star.

'Argylle' Is Too Much of a Formerly Good Thing

'Argylle' (2024)

Director Matthew Vaughn continues his journey in the “Kingsman” franchise with a standalone spin-off called “Argylle”. In the movie, Bryce Dallas Howard plays Elly Conway, a novelist who writes a series of spy novels featuring her main spy, Argylle (Henry Cavill). One day, while on a train, she encounters Aiden (Sam Rockwell), a man who happens to be a real spy.

After saving Elly, Aiden reveals that her books have predicted real world events and that there are very powerful people coming after her. Namely, soldiers from the Division led by Director Ritter (Bryan Cranston) are the ones who want to know her secrets and how she knows the events that she has written about in her books.

From there on, the movie has every twist and turn you can think of for a spy thriller. Some of these are, admittedly, fun and clever while others feel like overkill. The same can be said for the action sequences.

Aiden (Rockwell) and Elly (Howard) try to discover a mystery in 'Argylle'.

If you’ve watched any of the “Kingsman” films, you know that Vaughn has a fascination with over-the-top action sequences. They also involve a lot of CGI and highly stylized sequences. This movie contains those sequences, but it feels like Vaughn goes too far with the silliness of these moments and they come off more as parody than anything that is meant to be taken seriously.

The performances are pretty solid, to be sure. Howard is great as the lead character and Rockwell as Aiden is another standout performance from an actor who always tends to stand out. Unfortunately, he’s a stand out in a movie that just doesn’t work.

At first, I was onboard. The moment Aiden helps Elly on the train, I was hooked but a few too many twists and over-the-top action sequences later, I was pulled right back out of the movie. The movie is big and dumb… and mostly just dumb.

It’s now known that this movie is a standalone spin-off of the “Kingsman” franchise. This is not hard to decipher when you look at subtle clues such as Elly drinking a beer from the Statesman and other revelations from later in the movie. Vaughn would like to make a series of “Argylle” films that will eventually crossover with the “Kingsman” series. 

Believe it or not, I’ve enjoyed “Kingsman”, “Kingsman: The Golden Circle”, and even the prequel “The King’s Man”. However, after watching “Argylle”, I’m truly questioning whether or not I need anymore films in either series of the franchise. Maybe it’s time for Vaughn to move on from this franchise.

I Watched 'Night Swim' So You Don't Have To!

'Night Swim' (2024)

The following is a brief “catch up” review for a film that I didn’t get to catch earlier in the year.

“Night Swim” seemed to have everything going for it. It was distributed by Universal Pictures and it was produced by both Blumhouse Productions and James Wan’s Atomic Monster. It even has two good leading actors with Wyatt Russell and Kerry Condon.

So, why does it suck so much?! Well, first, I will say that the setup is decent enough and there are a couple of good jumpscares in the first few minutes of the movie. Then, the Waller family moves into a house and… there seems to be something up with their pool.

Wyatt Russell and Kerry Condon in 'Night Swim'.

Ray Waller is a former MLB player who had to retire early due to being diagnosed with MS. His wife Eve gets a job at a school nearby to get insurance for Ray and in order to support their children Izzy (Amélie Hoeferle) and Elliot (Gavin Warren). As usual in these types of horror films, things are good at first, then things get a little weird, then things go bonkers.

The movie is a demonic possession horror flick. It’s basically “The Amityville Horror” except it’s the pool instead of the house that is haunted. It’s a paint by numbers horror film that doesn’t add anything to the subgenre it embraces.

The performances are also quite bland. However, I don’t blame any of the actors for this because they honestly don’t have much to work with here. The script has terrible dialogue and the premise of a haunted pool just isn’t enough for even a 90 minute feature-film.

The only other thing that I can say about this movie is that being bad isn’t the worst thing going for it. I’ve said this about horror films plenty of times before, there is only one sin a horror movie can’t commit and that sin is when the movie is mind-numbingly boring.

“Night Swim” is not just boring, it may very well be the worst film I’ve seen so far this year.

MOVIE REVIEW! - 'Brats'

'Brats' (2024)

In the 1980s, a group of young actors were branded “The Brat Pack” in a “New York” article titled ‘Hollywood’s Brat Pack’ by David Blum. The article was about a group of young actors who often starred in similar teenage films (oftentimes together) and they were beloved by young audience members all over the world. There was only one group that hated the branding: the Brat Pack themselves.

In particular, Andrew McCarthy seems to have had the hardest time coming to terms with this time in his life. Now, McCarthy is on a quest to talk to some of the other Brats in order to figure out what they thought of that time and how they learned to cope with it. This includes McCarthy revisiting people he hadn’t seen in 30 years such as Emilio Estevez, Demi Moore, Rob Lowe, and Ally Sheedy.

But before watching the documentary, I decided to read the infamous article that coined the Brat Pack term… and I have some thoughts.

THE ARTICLE

Published in 1985 before the premiere of “St. Elmo’s Fire”, Blum’s article was originally supposed to focus on Estevez only. However, after experiencing a night where Estevez and his friends were partying, he pivoted his article to talk about this young group of teenage actors instead.

The article is, in my opinion, a trashy and jealous article. It feels as though Blum was upset that he wasn’t a part of the gang and that he envied their youth and success. For some unknown reason, he mentions that none of them went to acting school (which is false because McCarthy did study acting) and that none of them went to college. There’s no reason for Blum to mention any of this, but he does so anyway as though it was a bad thing that they went straight to Hollywood from high school.

The worst thing he tries to say about the Brat Pack is that they are overprivileged (omg, Estevez got a free ticket to a movie! The audacity!) and that they party and drink at night. Again, a group of young adults in their early 20s are drinking Coronas and attending night clubs? So, you’re trying to say what? That they’re like most every other person in their 20s?

This article should have been flat out denied by “New York”, but they ran with it and it did end up hurting or at least briefly stalling a lot of young careers. Speaking of which…

It was during the release of 'St. Elmo's Fire' that the infamous 'New York' article was released.

THE DOCUMENTARY

In the movie, McCarthy explains that after the article’s release, the term Brat Pack was being embraced by the outside world as a positive thing. However, in the industry, the actors associated with the term were now looked upon as unprofessional and not worthy of more serious roles.

While interviewing Estevez, McCarthy learned that the “Young Guns” actor actively avoided certain movie roles if any other “members” of the Brat Pack had been cast in other parts. In fact, almost every member of the unofficial group avoided each other. The irony is that the article actually broke up the group entirely.

There are, admittedly, times where I don’t think the documentary knows where it wants to go. This could be because McCarthy doesn’t quite know where he wants it to go as well other than to just clear the air about what happened all those years ago.

The good news is that the interviews with the other members are intriguing because we’re finally getting to see how each member dealt with this thing in their lives. They all start out by saying that they hated it at first, but most of them then reveal how they’ve learned not only to cope with the Brat Pack days but also how to embrace them.

The only two people that he doesn’t really talk to are Molly Ringwald and Judd Nelson. They were both approached but McCarthy has revealed that they simply didn’t want to talk about the past and just want to move forward. In a way, this documentary reveals that this is what McCarthy is trying to do.

Throughout the years, I knew that the people associated with the Brat Pack hated that it ever happened, but I always felt that it was McCarthy that had taken it the hardest. He had wanted a more serious acting career and it was completely stalled by this thing that he couldn’t quite control.

The good news is that this doc does seem to be a bit of a catharsis for McCarthy. He even gets to confront Blum about the article and even gets a better understanding as to why Blum wrote the article. In short, though, I can say that this is a compelling if somewhat confused documentary that I definitely recommend and, at the end of the day, I hope this allows McCarthy to close the book on this particular chapter in his life.

MOVIE REVIEW! - 'The Beekeeper'

'The Beekeeper' (2024)

I’m taking time to visit some films that came out earlier in the year that I didn’t get to go out and review. These will probably be smaller "catch-up" reviews. The first of these catch-up reviews is “The Beekeeper” from director David Ayer.

There is a part of me that would have liked to have recommended this movie. There is good action and Jason Statham proves once again that he is a bonafide action star. The problem is the script just goes in a direction that I could not join and the second half of the movie killed the whole thing for me.

In this movie, Statham plays Adam Clay, a beekeeper that is staying in a barn owned by Eloise Parker (Phylicia Rashad), a kind old lady who manages a charity with a lot of money in it and she has money in other investments as well. One day, Eloise gets a warning on her computer telling her to call a number.

Jason Statham plays Adam Clay in 'The Beekeeper'.

When she does, it turns out to be a huge phising scam and she gets every penny taken away from her. In her despair, she kills herself and after Adam discovers what happened, he goes and destroys the building holding the hackers that took advantage of Eloise. As it turns out, though, this was only one arm of a much larger criminal enterprise.

Of course, Statham wasn’t always a beekeeper. As it turns out, there is a secret government operation where Statham was literally known as a Beekeeper, an assassin that protects “the hive”, with the hive supposedly being America. It’s the old “he was once the most deadly man around” routine. However, this part of the tried-and-true action formula isn’t what breaks the movie.

What breaks the movie is that it takes one step too far in trying to up the ante and make things more thrilling, but the movie’s big twist had me going, “Wait, what?” instead of gasping with surprise. I won’t spoil that twist, but it was when the movie lost me.

Don’t get me wrong, I love big high-concept action movies. I always have, but the films that I love can take the absurdity to the line, but not ever cross that line. For me, this movie crossed said line. Now, I will say I can see how Statham fans or fans of Ayer’s movies may enjoy this story.

Again, I didn’t completely hate the movie, but at the end of the day, I just couldn’t bring myself to recommend it and I have to say skip it.

MOVIE REVIEW! - 'Bad Boys: Ride or Die'

'Bad Boys: Ride or Die' (2024)

WARNING: I try not to spoil too many things in a new movie, but I have to cover what the movie is about to a certain extent. So, just in case, consider this a spoiler warning. If you don’t want to know absolutely anything, then turn back now. If you don’t care, then read on and I hope you enjoy the review!

The bad boys known as Mike Lowrey (Will Smith) and Marcus Burnett (Martin Lawrence) are back for a fourth high-octane action comedy in “Bad Boys: Ride or Die”. This time, deceased police captain Conrad Howard (Joe Pantoliano) is being framed for police corruption by an undercover drug smuggling operation.

They not only frame Howard, but they are trying to track down all the files Howard had on them when he was trying to reveal the organization in order to take them down. When the bad guys try to break into Howard’s computer, an automatic message is sent out to Mike and Marcus with the captain requesting that they finish what he couldn’t when he was alive.

One person who could help discover the identity of the big man behind the criminal organization is Armando Aretas (Jacob Scipio), Mike’s son and the man who killed Captain Howard in the previous movie. While transferring Armando to a safe location, they are ambushed and branded as fugitives from the law.

So, not only do Mike and Marcus have to clear Howard’s name, they also have to outrun various law enforcement agencies. This includes avoiding the U.S. Marshal Judy Howard (Rhea Seehorn), Captain Howard’s daughter who also wants revenge against Aretas.

Once again, Marcus and Mike prepare to take on the bad guys in 'Bad Boys: Ride or Die'!

Now, that may seem like I’m giving a lot away, but trust me when I say that there is plenty more where that came from. If you enjoyed the previous three films in this long-running series, then you’ll find a lot to enjoy here. I think it was as entertaining as “Bad Boys for Life” and both of them are close to the original classic that started this franchise 29 years ago.

The first and most important thing to return is the undeniable chemistry between Smith and Lawrence as Mike and Marcus. As usual, Smith plays the straight man to Lawrence but not without having some great comedy moments as well. Maybe not every joke lands and Marcus does admittedly have an absurd subplot, but somehow Lawrence makes it work for the most part.

The next thing that came back in full force is the well choreographed action sequences. Directors Adil & Bilall (returning from “Bad Boys for Life”) also come up with action shots that I’ve never seen in an action film and that helps bring a fresh take to the movie’s huge set pieces.

There is a great action scene that I can’t go into detail here but it is a standout that I think almost steals the show. Then there are the third act action sequences which live up to why this series is still loved by so many action fans. Adil & Bilall pull out all the tricks throughout this movie including innovative transition shots, drone shots, and yes, even the famous slow motion turn around Mike and Marcus as they realize that things just got real.

It’s a rare thing when a fourth film in a series actually works. Most of the time, the fourth movie just proves that the series has run its course and out of ideas. Thankfully, this is not the case for “Bad Boys: Ride or Die”.

The boys still have it and I would not mind if Smith and Lawrence are willing to return for a fifth outing. Considering the opening weekend box office for this movie, that may very well be a possibility. In the meantime, I’m just happy that I got to enjoy a great summer blockbuster at the theaters.

MIDDLE-AGED MATINEE! #12 - 'Friday the 13th: The Final Chapter'

'Friday the 13th: The Final Chapter' (1984)

Welcome back to my "Middle-Aged Matinee!" article. In this article, I look back at certain films that came out during the year of my birth, 1984! This week, I take a look at "Friday the 13th: The Final Chapter". As always, I hope you enjoy the following review.

Believe it or not, the slasher genre during the mid-1980s was already starting to show diminishing returns at the box office. That’s why Paramount Pictures attempted to do what so many protagonists have failed to do over the years in a “Friday the 13th” film: kill off Jason Voorhees.

The diminishing returns of the series, along with the fact that the studio always looked at the films in this series as their bastard cousins, are why “Friday the 13th: The Final Chapter” exists. In the movie, Jason is still alive and begins to terrorize a family in one house near Camp Crystal Lake while also going after a group of college kids that have rented another house nearby.

As for the family, they are the real main characters of the movie. This is particularly true of Kimberly Beck as Trish and Corey Feldman as her younger brother Tommy Jarvis. The other group of sexually active, drug using teens… Well, they’re just fodder for the most part.

Jason Voorhees is back for more blood in 'Friday the 13th: The Final Chapter'!

This is the fourth movie in the “Friday the 13th” franchise. If you don’t know what you’re getting by the time of this movie, then I don’t know what to tell you. This is another movie about a deformed killer taking out a bunch of kids essentially because they’re on his turf at Camp Crystal Lake.

Although, I will say that this is one of my favorite movies in the “Friday the 13th” series. I actually do like the characters and that even includes Crispen Glover’s insanely awkward Jimmy who has… Well, let’s just say some pretty unique moves on the dance floor.

Trish and Tommy are also characters that you actually root for and you hope they survive Jason’s wrath. Beck is a solid final girl and Feldman’s Tommy is one of the more unique heroes in an ‘80s slasher flick.

Of course, another highlight of the movie are the kills. This is really why audiences wanted to go see these films back in the day. This movie benefits from the master of special make-up effects, Tom Savini who returned one last time after skipping the second and third outings. Like with most of the other movies he’s worked on, Savini works his magic and comes up with some pretty remarkable ways to off the characters.

Now, we do know that “The Final Chapter” wasn’t actually the final chapter in the series, but there was definitely a solid attempt to send Jason out with a bang. At the end of the day, there were great kills, characters I actually gave a damn about, and a genuine attempt to end this series with a little more style than we’re accustomed to from ‘80s slashers.

In short, “Friday the 13th: The Final Chapter” is one of the better sequels to emerge from the long-running franchise.