'Deadpool & Wolverine'... LFG!!!

WARNING: I try to avoid spoilers as much as I can when reviewing a new movie. However, I do have to mention at least a summary of what the movie is about and that might contain minor spoilers. If you don't want to know absolutely anything going into the movie, then get away from this review and go watch the movie first. If you don't care, then read on and I hope you enjoy the review!

I’m just going to put it out there. I feel like I just got hit by a freight train in the best possible way! The third film in the “Deadpool” series and the character’s first appearance in the Marvel Cinematic Universe is a bonafide success.

It’s filled not just with easter eggs and cameos from other aspects of the MCU. It’s also filled with so many tributes to the Marvel movies that have come out over the last 25 years that I’ll have to watch it again just to see what I may have missed!

Wade Wilson and Logan finally join forces in 'Deadpool & Wolverine'!

In the new movie, Wade Wilson has retired from his life as a mercenary and works at a boring 9-5 job. One day, while celebrating his birthday with his friends, the TVA arrives and abducts him. The organization explains that Wade’s timeline is dying due to the death of his universe’s “anchor being”.

That anchor happened to be Logan who sacrificed himself to save a group of kid mutants in the 2017 film, “Logan”. Now, Wade returns as Deadpool and he is on a quest to find another Logan variant that can be his universe’s new anchor. However, the Logan that Deadpool finds is a former shell of himself that let his own universe down and is considered the “worst” variant of the character.

From there, Deadpool and Wolverine must try to work together to save a dying timeline… if only they would stop trying to kill each other in the process.

Okay, so like I’ve said already, there are so many easter eggs and cameos that I don’t know which ones I may have missed with this initial viewing. It is fan service of the highest caliber and I must admit that you have to have a pretty hefty knowledge of Marvel superhero films in order to get all the references.

Deadpool needs Logan's help if he is to save his own universe.

Thankfully, though, the movie doesn’t feel too overstuffed. The movie knows to stay focused on its two leads and their story is what successfully guides us through the rest of the movie.

Fans have been waiting for years to see Ryan Reynolds and Hugh Jackman work together on a “Deadpool” and/or “X-Men” movie. When Reynolds announced that Jackman would be reprising his role in the movie over a year ago, it sent shockwaves through the nerd community. We were finally going to get the two together in a movie.

Thankfully, it paid off as both Reynolds and Jackman’s chemistry cannot be denied. Deadpool is the funny man to Wolverine’s very serious demeanor. However, that doesn’t mean that Deadpool doesn’t have any meaningful scenes and they thankfully don’t short change Wolverine’s own story as well as Jackman brings the full weight of his acting talents back to a character that he has been playing for almost 25 years.

The action is non-stop as the movie plunges its way towards a thrilling conclusion. Seriously, the moment the action starts, it doesn’t let up except for a few moments where it will calm down to reveal more about the story or make some fresh new reveals that are fun as hell!

I don’t want to say too much more here for the sake of spoilers. You’ll come for Reynolds, Jackman, cameos, easter eggs, and tributes, but you’ll stay for the violent, darkly funny, extremely meta, and ultimately heartfelt story that lies at the center. In the words of both our title characters, “Let’s fucking go!”

'Twisters' Provides Ample Summer Thrills

WARNING: While I try to stay away from spoilers, I do sometimes have to talk more about the movie I'm reviewing than I do with other films. Therefore, if you don't want spoilers of any kind, then stay away from the review until you see the movie. If you don't care, then continue on and enjoy the article!

Okay, so let me go ahead and get the main criticism of “Twisters” out of the way. It’s a standalone sequel to the 1996 film “Twister” with few connections to the first movie. That’s not really the problem though, but it is also true that this new movie is simply not as good as the original classic despite better effects this time around due to coming out 28 years after the original.

The new movie follows Kate Carter (Daisy Edgar-Jones), a former storm chaser who suffered a terrible tragedy that forced her to walk away from her storm chasing days. One day, a former colleague, Javi (Anthony Ramos), finds her and tells her that he has a revolutionary way to scan tornados, a way that is ten times better than the Dorothy machines used in the original movie.

Despite her PTSD, Kate joins Javi when she realizes that their work could help save lives. Along the way to track an unprecedented outbreak of tornadoes, they encounter another team of wild storm chasers made famous by the internet. The leader is Tyler Owens (Glen Powell), a self-proclaimed “Tornado Wrangler” that is seemingly an out-of-control storm chaser that looks like he just wants fame and glory.

The special effects are fantastic once again in 'Twisters'!

The new movie also has a plotline where Kate has a theory about how to make a tornado dissipate. This was the only thing that I didn’t quite buy. Yes, I did read up on it and theoretically, if you can take the moisture away from a tornado, it could potentially weaken it.

I don’t know why, but I had a more believable time with the first movie releasing the tiny sensors from Dorothy than I did the idea of actually taking out a tornado altogether. That said, the only other problem with the movie is that it is not as well paced as the first movie.

“Twister” moves at what seems like a breakneck speed towards its conclusion. “Twisters”, on the other hand, takes a few too many beats to calm things down before the action eventually picks back up. There could have been a few beats saved as there were subplots that weren’t necessary, such as a small plot point where there’s a wealthy man that is trying to buy up the land from devastated land owners after a tornado hits.

Glen Powell, Daisy Edgar-Jones, and Anthony Ramos star in 'Twisters'!

Anyway, now that I’m done criticizing the movie, here’s why I ultimately liked the movie. First, when the action does hit, it provides more than enough blockbuster entertainment. The tornadoes look fantastic and you feel the weight of them as Kate, Tyler, and their teams chase them down.

The final set piece is particularly worth noting for its thrills and genuine chills. This scene is almost worth the price of admission by itself.

Secondly, the overall feel of the movie does capture the same tone of the original film even if it can’t quite capture the same pacing. Even though it is a legacy sequel with no characters returning from the original movie, it still feels like it belongs in the series.

Then, there are the characters and the performers behind them. Edgar-Jones is great as Kate and you really do feel for this character that went through something terrible and now she is trying to recover from it.

Of course, there is Powell, a star that is continuing to rise in Hollywood. I was already impressed with his appearances in “Top Gun: Maverick” and this year’s “Hit Man” on Netflix. When Tyler shows up about 15 minutes into the movie, that is when the film also seems to rise to another level. If he wasn’t already considered a movie star at this point, this movie should be proof that he has definitely earned that status now.

So, in conclusion, the movie’s story does have some pitfalls and has some pacing issues. It’s also not as good as the original, but let’s face it, the movie was already going to have a hard time living up to that film’s standards. Ultimately, though, the performances and blockbuster action make this a fun Summer popcorn movie that’s worth seeing in the theaters.

The '90s In Action! - 'Twister' (1996)

Producer and director Steven Spielberg was originally set to direct “Twister” under his Amblin Entertainment company. He was sold on the movie by a proof-of-concept clip from Industrial Light & Magic involving tornadoes. Spielberg eventually stepped down into a producing role and directors such as Robert Zemeckis and James Cameron were considered for the project.

Eventually, though, Spielberg saw the success of “Speed” and decided to hire Jan de Bont to helm the picture. After reading the script, de Bont decided that it was right up his alley. He also knew that the visual effects would have to be state-of-the-art.

A major part of this was due to the fact that new software had to be developed to make the tornadoes and the destruction that they caused. This was one of the first major films to use particle animation to bring forth destruction such as one early scene where a barn is ripped to shreds. Another obstacle was the constant film movement.

Helen Hunt and Bill Paxton chase tornadoes in 'Twister'!

In previous films, filmmakers had to try and limit how much the camera could move for some shots so that the visual effects could be applied more easily to the scene. Here, de Bont wanted more movement and action because this was a frantic chase movie that required a lot of speed. Therefore, it was harder on the animators at ILM but they made it work in a big way.

Another key part of this movie was the casting. De Bont wanted Helen Hunt for the main female lead, but the studios were reluctant to hire her. They noted that she had only been on “Mad About You” and during this time, actors rarely transferred from TV to film and vice versa. However, de Bont’s constant support ultimately secured her the role.

Tom Hanks was initially asked to play the film’s male lead, but he turned it down. He then suggested that Paxton go for the role. Being from Texas where tornadoes are more common, Paxton enjoyed the energy of the script and quickly signed on.

The extensive special effects were created by ILM.

The movie became a massive success when it was finally released in ‘96. It went on to gross over $495 million and its legacy still lasts today. In fact, a standalone sequel, “Twisters”, is set to come out soon so I’ve decided to take a look back at this original classic.

For those who may not have seen the movie, we follow storm chasers Jo Harding (Hunt) and Bill Harding (Paxton) as they are going through a divorce. When Bill arrives to get the signed divorce papers at the site where Jo and her team are getting ready to chase tornadoes, she reveals that she has finally built “Dorothy”, a storm tracking device that Bill helped develop.

The device could help develop earlier warning signals and allow them to learn more about how a tornado really works. Unfortunately, a rival storm chaser Jonas Miller (Cary Elwes) has developed a similar device based off of their design and he is also set to release it when the storm starts to generate tornadoes. Bill decides to give Jo one day to get Dorothy off the ground in order to beat Jonas to the punch.

The danger is real as our heroes find they are the ones being chased!

Admittedly, the plotline involving Jonas is a bit generic and Jonas is a bit of a cardboard cutout villain, but Elwes manages to make the slimy character work. Also, you can tell that the whole Dorothy storyline is just there to propel the action but it serves its purpose well enough.

The visual effects in the movie are almost 30 years old and they hold up surprisingly well today. I can’t say that you don’t see the seams sometimes and they have aged, but they’ve definitely aged better than other visual effects heavy films from the day. I think this movie is helped by the fact that de Bont tried to capture everything that he could in camera and only used the visual effects when absolutely necessary.

Another thing that works in this movie is the eccentric group of people that we follow. Actors such as Philip Seymour Hoffman, Alan Ruck, Jeremy Davies, Joey Slotnick, Todd Field, Scott Thomson, and Wendle Josepher play the support team to Jo and Bill and you really enjoy following them on this adventure.

Then, there are our two leads. This film ended up becoming a signature film for both Hunt and Paxton. They have great chemistry with one another and you genuinely want to root for them. They handle the action that the film throws at them flawlessly and it is sad that we won’t be able to get a sequel with them due to Paxton’s death in 2017.

At the end of the day, this film has earned its classic status. It inspired a new wave of disaster films and inspired some fans to get into meteorology. Its visual effects were groundbreaking, the action is fierce, and the performances are fun. It is a rollercoaster ride that is most definitely worth getting on if you never have before or revisiting if you haven’t been on this particular ride in a while.

The '90s In Action! - 'Con Air' (1997)

Nicolas Cage was one of the biggest actors in the 1990s. In fact, he also became one of the biggest action stars as well. There is actually an unofficial trilogy of Cage films called the “The Beige Volvo Trilogy”. It consists of “The Rock”, “Face/Off”, and “Con Air”. Each film makes reference or shows a beige Volvo and each film came out close to each other in 1996 and ‘97.

Admittedly, “Con Air” is the weakest of the three films. It has random scenes that probably should have been cut such as a weird subplot with Steve Buscemi’s Garland Greene character and a random little girl that has nothing to do with the rest of the movie. It also has more cheese than the other two and that’s saying something considering that one of the other films is about literally swapping each other’s faces.

Finally, it also has Cage’s horrendous Southern accent. The actor claimed that he went to Alabama to perfect the accent, but he must have only stayed there for about 10 minutes, heard someone say something, said to himself “Got it!”, and then left.

The movie that launched a million memes!

Despite the movie’s flaws, though, it is still a shining example of the high-concept action films that invaded the theaters in the ‘90s. The movie follows Cameron Poe, a former Army Ranger that was imprisoned for seven years due to accidentally killing a guy in a bar fight. He has a little girl that was born after he was imprisoned and he can’t wait to finally meet her now that he’s been paroled.

Unfortunately for Cameron, he is temporarily put onto a plane with the vilest of the vile. Led by the highly notorious and intelligent “Cyrus the Virus” (John Malkovich), the criminals bust loose and take over the plane. Cameron stays onboard so he can help his former cellmate Baby-O (Mykelti Williamson) who is a diabetic and needs an insulin shot.

Meanwhile, on the ground, U.S. Marshal Vince Larkin (John Cusack) must figure out how to get the plane down safely. He is also up against the vengeful DEA Agent Duncan Malloy (Colm Meaney), a man who simply wants to shoot the plane down despite there being innocents onboard such as Poe and the guards.

The movie is saved by two things: thrilling action set pieces and the performances. Yes, that even includes Cage with his terrible accent because somehow, he made that work to his advantage.

Both Malkovich and Cusack have tried to distance themselves from this movie from time to time, but they really shouldn’t. Yes, they’re in a cheesy action blockbuster, but it is their performances that help make even the most unbelievable stuff in the movie work. Cyrus is an absolute blast as a villain and Cusack brings his talents to the table as the smart and tactful Larkin who wants to use Poe to help save the plane.

Again, if you give me a choice between this, “Face/Off”, and “The Rock”, I’m going to choose one of the other two to watch first. But once I’m done with both of those movies, I wouldn’t hesitate for a heart beat to put on this solid piece of action entertainment!

'Longlegs' Can't Survive a Messy Third Act

As of this writing, critics are praising “Longlegs” for the most part. For the first two acts of the movie, I’m right there with them. However, a sloppy third act left me with more questions and disappointment than anything else.

The movie is the latest effort from director Osgood Perkins and it follows FBI Agent Lee Harker (Maika Monroe) as she tracks down a serial killer in the 1990s. The killer somehow forces a family member to kill their family and themselves and he is known as “Longlegs” (Nicolas Cage). Lee seems to have limited psychic abilities and is brought in on the case to help track down this elusive killer.

As I mentioned before, I was with the movie for the first two acts. It has a psychological horror tone reminiscent of “The Silence of the Lambs” and “Se7en”. The movie is set in the ‘90s yet feels timeless. Perkins’ direction is solid and there is a satisfactorily eerie tone at first that invades the film.

Maika Monroe sets out to find a killer in 'Longlegs'.

The performances are also great. I think Monroe turns in a solid performance as the odd Lee Harker, a woman who has the ability to track down a killer but is socially cut off from almost everyone else. And Nicolas Cage… well, he’s Nicolas Cage and you’ll either like his performance or not based on how you feel about the actor’s previous works. For me, I thought it was a solidly wild performance that I could get behind.

Things were moving swimmingly with the story until I reached the third act. For me, this is where the movie took a sharp right turn and got a little too messy for its own good. What was once a police procedural psychological thriller suddenly enters into a more supernatural space but fails to provide satisfying answers to the question, “What the heck did I just watch?”

That was my problem with the movie. By the time the credits hit, I simply thought, “Oh, that’s it? Okay, I guess.” I realized not long after that I was left with more questions than answers and the answers I got weren’t wholly satisfying.

As I mentioned before, I was with the movie up until the final act. Therefore, I can understand why someone would enjoy the movie. I went with two friends to see the movie. One friend seemed to like it more than I did while the other friend hated it way more than I did.

For me, I’m in the middle and while I definitely liked certain aspects of the movie, I can’t quite recommend it.

CATCH-UP REVIEW 2024 - 'IF' Is a Decent If Somewhat Uneven Family Film

Writer and director John Krasinski developed this wholesome family film alongside producer and star Ryan Reynolds. Cailey Fleming stars as Bea, a young girl who had previously lost her mother and now her dad (Krasinski) is about to go in for heart surgery.

Bea begins to see strange creatures and encounters Cal (Ryan Reynolds), a man who can also see what are referred to as IFs, short for Imaginary Friends. The film’s main IF Blue (Steve Carell) explains that Calvin tries to take care of IFs whose children have grown up and forgotten about them. Now, Bea seeks to help the IFs by making their former kids remember them.

Ryan Reynolds and Cailey Fleming star in 'IF'!

The movie is a decent enough family movie. There are some genuinely sweet scenes and some tear-jerking moments that try to tug at your heartstrings. Fleming and Reynolds give genuinely good performances, especially Fleming who proves that she can handle the emotional weight that Bea has to carry with her sometimes.

The only real problem I had with the movie was that it was a bit uneven at times. I also had a hard time in the middle of the film seeing where they were trying to go with the concept. In fact, it was during this time that I was more focused on trying to guess who voiced the various IFs as the voice cast is stacked with top-tier talent.

Again, while the movie is not the best family film out there, it definitely isn’t the worst. I can see adults enjoying the more emotional beats and Reynolds and I can see kids getting a kick out of the various IFs. I wasn’t mad that I had watched the movie, but I don’t see myself watching it again in the near future.

At the time of this article posting, the movie is now available to stream on Paramount+. If you have that service and your kids maybe need something to distract them, then you could do a lot worse than “IF”.

The '90s In Action! - 'Street Fighter' (1994)

If 1995’s “Mortal Kombat” could be seen as one of the first good adaptations of a video game that was successful at the box office, then 1994’s “Street Fighter” is the exact opposite of that. The movie was critically panned by both critics and fans of the long-running “Street Fighter” video game series.

“Street Fighter II” was released in arcades in 1991 and it quickly became a sensation. It is the game most directly responsible for putting the fighting game on the map and several iterations of the game were released. So, it should come as no surprise that someone wanted to make a movie out of it.

The movie was actually produced by Capcom, the video game studio responsible for the game series. It was eventually picked up and distributed by Universal Pictures. The movie was written and directed by Steven E. de Souza, the same man who wrote or co-wrote several big action films such as “48 Hrs.”, “Commando”, “The Running Man”, and “Die Hard”.

That meant that nothing could go wrong, right? Well, this is also the same screenwriter who wrote films such as “Hudson Hawk” and “Judge Dredd”. Guess which version of the screenwriter decided to show up for this one?

Okay, there are some good points. Namely, I know people who love campy movies. Well, if that’s your cup of tea, then there is a small chance that you may get something out of this movie. I will say that for my money, it falls just short of the “it’s so bad, it’s good” category.

Yeah... this actually happens in 'Street Fighter'.

Secondly, Raul Julia! Here’s a man who understood the assignment when he signed on to play the film’s primary antagonist, General M. Bison. There is a reason why I actually respect both Julia as M. Bison and, let’s say, Arnold Schwarzenegger for his role as Mr. Freeze in “Batman and Robin”. These are two actors that looked at the script and went, “Oh, I know what this shit is and I’m committing 110%!”

Somehow, Julia makes his scenes as Bison work while others cannot… Okay, that’s it. That’s all I can say that is good with the movie.

The first major problem is with the fighting scenes… or lack thereof. Most of the time, when a fight is about to break out, it’s interrupted by either a gunfight or some other distraction. You know, that’s what I love most about “Street Fighter”. All of the gunplay!

The second problem is the lack of faithfulness to the source material, which is sad considering that the same studio that made the games produced the movie. It’s like they took a look at their own property and went, “You know what? Our storyline sucks. Let’s go in the complete opposite direction. Ooh, I know! Let’s make Ryu and Ken secondary characters and terrible con artists and while we’re at it, cast a man from Brussels as the ultimate American hero from our games!”

Admittedly, the actors do try their best with this movie. Ming-Na Wen tries her best as Chun-Li as do Damian Chapa as Ken and Byron Mann as Ryu. They just aren’t given enough to work with and no matter what they do, they can’t save this abortion of a movie.

Throughout the whole movie, you’re either waiting for something memorable to happen or you’re hoping it’ll at least be something worth making fun of later on. Sadly, neither thing happens and this movie still proves to be one of the worst video game adaptations of all time.

The '90s In Action! - 'Mortal Kombat' (1995)

When the fighting game “Mortal Kombat” hit arcades in 1992, it became a smash hit and a controversial one at that. The game contained blood and violence such as brutal Fatalities in order to finish off the other fighter. It was so controversial that it was front and center when the ESRB ratings were created for video games.

The game was also a gorier and simpler competitor to the then popular “Street Fighter II” that had also dominated the arcades since its release in 1991.

The series became an even bigger sensation when “Mortal Kombat II” came out in 1993 and when the games hit home consoles. Therefore, it was no big surprise that a studio would want to make a movie out of the property and that studio was New Line Cinema.

Shot on a $20 million budget, “Mortal Kombat” really became the first successful video game adaptation that fans seemed to embrace for the most part. I remember going to see it in theaters and enjoying that it did stick to the source material for the most part.

I also enjoyed the performances. I thought Robin Shou, Bridgette Wilson, and Linden Ashby worked well together as Liu Kang, Sonya Blade, and Johnny Cage. Cary-Hiroyuki Tagawa also did a great job as the film’s main antagonist, Shang Tsung. I even enjoyed Christopher Lambert’s quirky performance as Lord Raiden.

Most importantly, I enjoyed the fighting that was found in the movie and it was pretty well choreographed. That was then, though, and now I must give my thoughts on the movie today. So, does it hold up?

Sub-Zero and Liu Kang prepare to fight in 'Mortal Kombat'!

Thankfully, after I rewatched it, I am glad to report that the movie still works… for the most part. Yes, the movie was shot on a relatively low budget so the special-effects (particularly the CGI) have not aged well. If that’s a problem for you, then it may affect your enjoyment of the movie if you’re a first time viewer.

Also, some fans of the game didn’t like that the movie wasn’t an R rated affair and that they cut down the violence of the source material. That one didn’t bother me as much and I don’t mind that the movie is PG-13 but since it does bother some fans, I thought I’d go ahead and mention it here.

Beyond that, I still think the movie works as fun popcorn entertainment and a decent adaptation of its source material. I still liked the performances and the fights and I like the movie’s brisk pace without idling too long on any particular subplot or moment.

Then, of course, there is the soundtrack. Everyone remembers the iconic theme Techno-Syndrome by The Immortals. The techno-inspired soundtrack and score is admittedly dated and more nostalgic for me than anything else, but I still love it, especially the theme.

Unfortunately, this movie was followed by an atrocious sequel “Mortal Kombat: Annihilation” and as a result, the film series was halted. There was finally a decent reboot released in 2021 and while I enjoyed the new movie and can’t wait for its upcoming sequel, I’ll always hold a special place in my heart for this original adaptation of the long-running video game franchise.

It’s sure as shit better than 1994’s “Street Fighter” adaptation… but more on that later.

'MaXXXine' Is Another Solid Entry in Ti West's 'X' Universe!

I enjoyed writer and director Ti West’s “X” when it came out in 2022. Later that same year, I ended up enjoying the prequel, “Pearl”, even more. While I would still say that “Pearl” is my favorite in what is currently a pretty solid horror trilogy, I would say that “MaXXXine” is a close second.

The movie reunites us with Maxine Minx, the sole survivor of “X” and currently a porn star in 1985’s Hollywood. However, she’s just landed her first legit movie role in a horror picture. Unfortunately, there is also a killer in the streets of Tinseltown and he seems to have his sights set on Maxine and is using a ruthless private investigator, John Labat (Kevin Bacon), to let her know that the killer knows the truth about her past.

The first thing I can say is that West knows how to capture both the era the film is set in and the tone of the horror subgenre he is trying to pay homage to. In “X”, West captured the gritty tone of films such as “The Texas Chain Saw Massacre” from the 19790s. In “Pearl”, he captured the silent age of Hollywood in 1918.

Mia Goth returns as Maxine Minx in 'MaXXXine'!

In this movie, it sometimes feels like West shot this film in the ‘80s. There are videotaped moments and he successfully recreates the seedy underbelly of Hollywood. He also uses real world elements from the time in order to frame the slasher narrative such as the Night Stalker murders and the Satanic panic that gripped the world at the time. What is great is that the Satanic panic is sort of a villain of the piece beyond the actual villains Maxine must go up against.

The performances are not something to sneeze at as well. Goth is once again great as Maxine as she plays one of the more complex horror heroines that we’ve seen in quite some time. This is not the clean cut drug and sex free final girl that we usually get. In fact, she’s more of an antihero than a straight protagonist.

Bacon is another highlight as private eye Labat, a truly heinous character that also provides some of the film’s darkly humorous moments. He’s a genuine threat, but he also hasn’t been up against someone like Maxine before, either.

Another standout performance turns out to be Giancarlo Esposito as Teddy Knight, an agent for the adult film industry and actors lower on the totem pole. I will say that he’s not in the film too much, but when he is there, he becomes the MVP of the movie.

West initially announced that this movie would be the end of a trilogy. Since then, he’s reconsidered and said that he has ideas for a fourth film in this horror universe that he’s created. If that idea is as strong as the first three entries, then I’ll be the first to stand in line for a ticket!

The '90s In Action! - 'Kindergarten Cop' (1990)

This movie is considered a classic in Arnold Schwarzenegger’s filmography, but it may also be one of his oddest additions as well. The movie aims to blend Schwarzenegger’s status as a leading action star of the ‘80s and ‘90s with his more comedic efforts such as “Twins”, another movie directed by Ivan Reitman of “Ghostbusters” fame.

The confusing tone of the movie can be summed up with its opening sequence. The movie has the film’s lead, Detective John Kimble, tracking down the movie’s primary antagonist, Cullen Crisp (Richard Tyson). While the tone suggests that this is a serious movie, some of the credits are drawn in with crayon and that cuts into the supposed tension we’re supposed to be feeling.

The good news is that this is my biggest criticism of the movie! The flick is actually a pretty decent action comedy that gets more right than it gets wrong with the aforementioned uneven tone. I had only seen this film maybe once when it initially came out, so this was a pretty fresh viewing for me.

Schwarzenegger has his hands full with both villains and kids in 'Kindergarten Cop'!

For those who haven’t seen the movie yet, the film sees Kimble trying to track down the wife and child of Cullen so that he can pull them back in to testify against the diabolical father and put him away for good. The only problem is that they are told that the wife also stole over $3 million from Crisp and if she turns herself in, they’ll give her immunity for her testimony.

Initially, Kimble’s partner Phoebe O’Hara (Pamela Reed) is going to go undercover as a kindergarten teacher in order to find out which kid it is Cullen’s. Unfortunately, O’Hara falls ill with a bad stomach flu and it is Kimble that has to go undercover as the teacher. He quickly finds out that the kids that he must look after may be more dangerous than the criminals he usually pursues.

The movie is a PG-13 affair that has some pretty decent action sequences and one hell of a creepy villain. Tyson definitely chews the scenery a bit with his creepy fascination with his kid and his even creepier relationship with his mother, Eleanor Crisp (Carroll Baker).

The movie also proved once again that Schwarzenegger is actually a pretty good comedic actor. This is because he’s not afraid to make himself look like a fool for the sake of a good laugh. He could have chosen to make himself look “cool” in every scene, but some of the best comedy in the movie comes from when the rough and tough Kimble is taken down by a bunch of kids.

At the end of the day, the movie is not the best Schwarzenegger movie out there, but it is also far from his worst. It proved to be another great collaboration between Schwarzenegger and Reitman and by the film’s climactic third act, it also proved to be a pretty good action film as well.

The '90s In Action! - 'Lethal Weapon 3' (1992)

In 1987 and 1989, Warner Bros. released “Lethal Weapon” and “Lethal Weapon 2”, directed by Richard Donner and starring Mel Gibson and Danny Glover. Gibson plays Riggs, a man who was a suicidal mess after the death of his wife while Glover plays Roger Murtaugh, a veteran detective who is just trying to make it to retirement and is constantly “too old for this shit.”

“Lethal Weapon 2” had Riggs going crazy again when he learned that the bad guys in that film were actually involved in his wife’s death. It also introduced Joe Pesci as the fast-talking police informant named Leo Getz. Murtaugh was still “too old for this shit.”

By 1992, it was decided that if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it and “Lethal Weapon 3” was released. All of these films play like a band getting back together. Richard Donner directs and Gibson and Glover return for more hijinks and action. Even Pesci returned as Leo Getz, now a legitimate real estate agent that is trying to sell Murtaugh’s house since he is only days away from retirement… and still “too old for this shit.”

The third movie has Riggs and Murtaugh investigating a case involving illegal guns being put out into the streets. The only problem is that these guns seem to be coming from the LAPD’s own evidence lockers. That means that someone on the inside may be the person they’re looking for… or is it someone who used to work for them?

Murtaugh and Riggs returned for more action in 'Lethal Weapon 3'!

That’s also why Rene Russo’s Lorna Cole enters the picture. She’s an Internal Affairs officer who is initially antagonistic against Riggs and Murtaugh because of their penchant for destruction and chaos, but she may also be the perfect fit for Riggs with shared interests and battle scars.

What is surprising about the third movie is how well it holds up with the first two movies. It’s great to see Riggs and Murtaugh in action again and since the same team that made the first and second film return for this outing, it’s also consistent with what came before it.

Donner’s skills as an action director don’t fail him here with this movie. There are several great action set pieces such as a thrilling chase that sees Riggs trying to keep up with the bad guys while driving a police motorcycle.

Russo’s involvement in the movie also proves to be a great asset. She has great chemistry with Gibson and her character fits right in with the rest of the gang.

The film’s villain is actually an ex-cop named Jack Travis (Stuart Wilson) and while he can be an over-the-top villain, he’s actually a good antagonist for the movie. The fact that he also knows how to secure guns, drugs, etc. from the LAPD’s own evidence lockers also makes him an extra threat for our characters.

Ultimately, if you loved the first two films in the series and the movie that succeeded this one, then you’ll love “Lethal Weapon 3”. If you didn’t like the first two movies, then this one won’t do much to change your mind. For me, I’m a fan of this series and feel that this third film is a worthy entry into the franchise. 

'Beverly Hills Cop: Axel F' Is a Fun Return to Form!

In 1994, Paramount released “Beverly Hills Cop III” and it was universally panned by both the critics and the fans. The movie was less violent, John Ashton was missing as Sgt. Taggart, it had way too many celebrity cameos for no reason, and the story was thinner than thin.

The worst thing about the movie, though, is that it also featured a star comedian who was depressed at the time and didn’t want Axel to be the wisecracking cop that he was in previous movies. Director John Landis said that he thought the script was rather weak, but he figured he would make it funny with Murphy at his side.

Instead, any suggestions that Landis gave were ignored by Murphy. After the movie’s release, Murphy himself admitted that the movie was the weakest entry into the series. Plans for a fourth film began in the late ‘90s mostly because Murphy did not want the series to end on a low note.

Unfortunately, “Beverly Hills Cop IV” entered development hell. There were various scripts and directors attached along the way. After a fourth film didn’t seem to be coming anytime soon, Murphy developed a TV show that would follow Axel’s son while he would make appearances here and there in a supporting role.

Eddie Murphy is heading back to 90210 in 'Beverly Hills Cop: Axel F'!

After the pilot was filmed, CBS decided not to move forward with a series. This was when Paramount shifted gears back into making a fourth movie with Axel Foley as the star.

Eventually, Paramount signed a one film licensing agreement with the option to produce another sequel with Netflix. The fourth film finally got underway and despite a delay due to the COVID-19 Pandemic, “Beverly Hills Cop: Axel F” was finally produced.

So, does the movie deliver 30 years after the last movie came out and 40 years after the original classic? Well, it definitely makes up for “Beverly Hills Cop III”. I can’t say that it is as good as the original or even the second film, but it is definitely a welcomed return to form.

Axel Foley is still on the streets of Detroit causing chaos in his search for justice. His deputy chief is actually his old partner Jeffrey Friedman (Paul Reiser) and tries everything he can to keep his friend out of trouble.

Things quickly escalate for Axel in 'Beverly Hills Cop: Axel F'.

Meanwhile, back in Beverly Hills, Axel’s estranged daughter Jane Saunders (Taylour Paige) is a lawyer that is trying to uncover a conspiracy with Billy Rosewood (Judge Reinhold), who is now a private investigator. After Jane’s life is threatened and Rosewood is kidnapped, Axel returns to Beverly Hills to try and help his daughter stop the bad guys along with a new partner from the Beverly Hills Police Department named Bobby Abbott (Joseph Gordon-Levitt).

The movie follows the formula well with Axel being in Detroit and there being a reason for him to head back out to Beverly Hills. The estranged daughter storyline allows for Murphy to successfully play both the wisecracking Foley we remember and the (slightly) more mature Foley that Murphy wanted to play in the third film.

Gordon-Levitt’s Bobby Abbott is also another welcomed addition and it is good to see both Ashton and Reinhold back even if their parts are minimal compared to Foley and the new characters. Kevin Bacon also joins in on the fun as Captain Cade Grant, a police captain who is wearing way too many expensive clothes to be a good cop.

Mark Molloy, an Australian commercial director, makes his feature film directorial debut with this movie. It is a beautifully directed movie with plenty of great action set pieces. If this movie is any indicator, I have a feeling we’ll be seeing more of Molloy’s directing work in the future.

Lorne Balfe takes over duties for the film’s score and he does a great job honoring Harold Faltermeyer’s original score while giving this movie its own epic tone. Balfe is another rising star having done scores for the last two “Bad Boys” films as well as two of the “Mission: Impossible” films and “Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves”.

Balfe is a student of Hans Zimmer from Zimmer’s production company Remote Control Productions and it shows. He knew just how much to pepper in the iconic theme song and when to really go for it and the overall score adds to the impact of the action.

So, all that said, the fourth film in the long-running “Beverly Hills Cop” series isn’t as good as the original, but none of the sequels are as good as that classic action film. The movie is the one thing it has to be: a fun ride. It sure as hell beats “Beverly Hills Cop III” and should this be the last movie in the series, at least the series is finally going out on a high note.