Category Archives: 80’s Movies

Silent Night, Deadly Night (1984)

Posted on December 26, 2024 | Leave a comment

silent

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 6 out of 10

4-Word Review: A killer Santa Claus.

When he’s only 5-years-old Billy Chapman (Jonathan Best) has a very traumatic experience. It starts when he and his family are visiting their grandfather (Will Hare) inside a senior living facility. While his parents and younger brother are temporarily out of the room his grandfather, who usually never says a word, suddenly speaks by warning him about Santa Claus and how he punishes those who’ve been naughty. On the car ride home, his family is attacked by a gunmen dressed as Santa (Charles Dierkop) who has just robbed a liquor store. Both his parents are killed by the man, but Billy manages to escape by running out of the vehicle and hiding behind some bushes. Things now flash forward to the year 1984 where Billy (now played by Robert Brian Wilson) is 18 and still suffering from the dark memories of the event as well as the abusive upbringing inside the orphanage he was sent to that was ruled by a tyrannical Mother Superior (Lilyan Chauvin). Working as a stock boy at a nearby toy store, he gets asked to fill-in as Santa when the man who usually plays him calls-in sick. Playing the part though brings back up all the repressed emotions of what happened years earlier causing him to have a mental breakdown and turning him into a killer. 

This film ended up becoming quite controversial and it all started when producer Scott J. Schiend accepted story submissions from the public to help him decide what movie project he’d like to finance next. One of those submissions was short story written by a recent college grad named Paul Caimi entitled ‘He Sees You When You’re Sleeping’, which involved a killer Santa. Schnied became intrigued by the concept and hired Michael Hickey to write a full-length screenplay around the premise. Once completed the script was shopped around until Tri-Star Pictures decided to pick-it-up and finance it as well as act as its distributor. 

Since there were already two other films that had been released that dealt with a killer Claus including the 1972 horror anthology Tales from the Crypt, and the 1980 slasher You Better Watch Out! no one behind-the-scenes was expecting this one to create much controversy since neither of those had. However, mainly because of an aggressive marketing campaign, it soon caused the ire of many parents who felt based off of the TV-ads that this film would tarnish the image of Santa Claus and make children fear him and thus a movement to have the movie removed from theaters was created. Even Siskel and Ebert got in on it by focusing an entire episode of their show to it and reading out the names of the cast and crew in order to ‘shame’ them for having worked on the production. The movie was soon pulled after having been in theaters for only a week, but the controversy ended up having a Streisand effect as it garnered it more attention than it would’ve otherwise, and it made a hefty profit at the box office and ultimately became a cult hit that spawned 4 sequels as well as a reboot.  

It seems to me that most people that protested the movie didn’t actually watch it because if they had they’d realize that it’s made very clear that the guy doing the killings isn’t really Santa nor does he even look much like him. The kid who plays him doesn’t even bother putting the beard on and his own face is constantly exposed while he does the butchering, so at no point does the viewer ever see him as being anyone other than a troubled teen with severe mental issues. I actually wished the part had been played by Dierkop who portrays the initial Santa during the hold-up and puts far better energy into the role and genuinely looks more like the classic Claus both in his age and physical build. 

The movie puts a lot of effort into showing how Billy became the way he does, but for me that was a problem as it gets too plodding and seems to take forever for the carnage to get going, which for a slasher fan is what you really want to see. Would’ve been better had it started out right away with this guy Santa killing people, maybe even one of the kids who sits on his lap at the store, and with no reason why he was doing it, and then through intermittent flashbacks allow his back story to be revealed versus having the background painfully elaborated from the start, which takes away any mystery, or surprise. There’s also the issue of young Billy having prominent brown eyes, but when he reaches adolescence his eye color suddenly turns to blue. 

Spoiler Alert!

My biggest complaint though is with the Mother Superior. Chauvin plays the part quite well making the nun scarier than the killer and somebody you really love to hate, but she’s never killed off, which is a huge disappointment. Many people who grew up going to a strict Catholic School might’ve enjoyed seeing a disciplinarian nun get hacked and it might’ve been cathartic and thus having it not occur doesn’t give the film a sufficient payoff. 

My Rating: 6 out of 10

Released: November 9, 1984

Runtime: 1 Hour 25 Minutes

Rated R

Director: Charles E. Sellier Jr.

Studio: Tri-Star Pictures

Available: DVD, Blu-ray, Amazon Video

Leave a comment

Posted in 80's Movies, Christmas Movies, Cold Climate/Wintertime Movies, Cult, Horror, Movies with Nudity, Slasher/Gore

Tagged , , , , ,

Max Dugan Returns (1983)

Posted on December 17, 2024 | Leave a comment

max1

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 4 out of 10

4-Word Review: Estranged father comes back.

Nora (Marsha Mason) is a single mother living with her 15-year-old son Michael (Matthew Broderick) who’s struggling to make ends meet as a High School English Teacher. Things become particularly desperate when her beat-up 1964 Volvo car gets stolen and she no longer has any transportation to get to work nor the money to afford buying a new car, or even a used one. Fortunately, the officer working on the case, Brian (Donald Sutherland) takes a liking to her and offers her to use his motorbike even though she needs training on how to drive it. Once she goes through the crash course and begins using it she still has other financial concerns to worry about until one night she receives a mysterious visitor, which turns-out to be her estranged father Max Dugan (Jason Robards) who ran-out on his family 29 years earlier. Now he has returned with a briefcase full of $687,000, which he skimmed from a crooked casino that he used to work at. He tells her he has only 6-months to live and advises her to take the money, so that she and her son can live stress-free, but Nora isn’t so sure she wants to accept it, so Max goes about buying her stuff anyways including a fancy new car.

This has to be one of Neil Simon’s least imaginative efforts and the concept seems so contrived it’s like he thought it up for the 10-minutes that he was sitting on the john. I’ll admit when I was a teen and watched it when it first came out, I enjoyed it. I especially remembered the scenes dealing with Charley Lau, who regrettably died less than a year after the film’s release, where he plays himself the hitting coach for the Chicago White Sox baseball team, who Max hires to help Michael become a better hitter and these teaching scenes I found to be engaging. Unfortunately, the foundational premise has a lot of holes.

The idea that a father would suddenly want to see his daughter after 29 years of being away didn’t seem authentic. If he longed to reconnect then why not reach out earlier? Granted he was in jail for 6 of those years, but what about the other 23? If family was so important to him then why run out on them in the first place? Why doesn’t he at least make some attempts in-between those years to communicate like sending letters of phone calls before just showing up and expecting to be welcomed with open arms? The idea of throwing her and his grandson a lot of money comes-off in bad taste like he’s simply trying to buy their love and if anything seems quite shallow. During those 29 years away you’d think he would’ve met other people he’d become friends with, or other women he dated that he might’ve wanted to give the money to instead, or are we to presume that for 3-decades he lived in a cave and made no contact with anyone else?

I didn’t get why Nora didn’t recognize her father when he called. Yes, it had been awhile since she had last heard or seen him, it’s stated that she was 9 when he left, but he has a distinctive voice, so I’d think it would set something off in the back of her brain that she knows who this is, but can’t quite place it, versus having her immediately call the police in panic after getting a call from some ‘strange man’. He also tells her at one point that he may not actually be Max Dugan, but again she wasn’t a month-old infant when she last saw him, but instead someone entering the fourth grade, which should’ve given her a solid enough memory of what he looked like and thus know if this was her real father, or not.

To help solve all of this Nora should’ve been made a divorcee instead of a widow. The husband/father could’ve been the one who went to jail and then returned a 6 years later with stolen money hoping to use it to win back his wife’s and son’s favor. It would’ve made more sense because less time would’ve passed, and he’d have a more vested emotional interest in bonding with his son since he was directly his versus an elusive grandfather who didn’t even know the kid existed until being ‘tipped off’ that Nora had one by some secondary source.

Matthew Broderick’s character is problematic too. He seems just too obedient and goody-goody to be a believable teen as he promptly makes his bed every morning, even his mother’s, asks to be excused from the dinner table, and even lets his mother kiss him while in full view of his friends. Yes, there’s one brief moment where he tries to sneak a smoke, but otherwise I didn’t detect the typical rebellion to authority that most teens that age have, and it would’ve been improved had the kid been 9 or 10 where still being compliant with their parents’ wishes is a little more understandable.

Sutherland’s character was off as well as he seems way too aggressive about asking out a woman that he had just met while on-duty and actively investigating her case making it ethically questionable whether he should even be doing it. If a guy does come-on to a woman so quickly, simply because she’s attractive and single, as he knew nothing else about her, you’d presume he’s done this to other available women as well and thus should have a throng of casual girlfriends and Nora would just be one of many. The film should’ve just had him already her boyfriend from the start and thus avoided this otherwise awkward and rushed relationship. I also thought it was dumb that Kiefer Sutherland, who appears early on in a brief non-speaking role as one of Broderick’s friends, wasn’t cast as Donald’s son in the climactic baseball sequence at the end and instead the part was given to another young actor.

Spoiler Alert!

The money issue becomes yet another problem as Max spends it on so many lavish gifts that I started to wonder if there would be any left to put into savings. The idea that he could’ve had workers refurbish the house in just one day while Nora and son where in school is ridiculous as something that massive would take weeks if not months. He even ends up driving away with the car he had bought her leaving her again without a vehicle. Yes, he does open-up a bank account in her name and puts in $400,000, but her cop boyfriend was already aware of this and made clear he put his duty to uphold the law over his personal relationships making it very probable that she’d be forced to give it all back. Worse she might be considered an accomplice forcing her to hire an attorney, which would’ve sent her into even more debt making it seem like she’d be better off had the whole thing not even happened to begin with.

My Rating: 4 out of 10

Released: March 25, 1983

Runtime: 1 Hour 38 Minutes

Rated PG

Director: Herbert Ross

Studio: 20th Century Fox

Available: DVD, Amazon Video, YouTube

Leave a comment

Posted in 80's Movies, Adolescence/High School, Comedy

Tagged , , , , , , , ,

Night Shift (1982)

Posted on December 12, 2024 | Leave a comment

nightshift1

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 6 out of 10

4-Word Review: Hookers in a morgue.

Chuck (Henry Winkler) has dropped-out of his former job as a stockbroker due to the stress and decided to work in a more tranquil setting as the night shift manager of a New York City morgue. He’s unhappy though to have to share duties with Bill (Michael Keaton) who’s talkative and partying ways are a complete contrast to Chuck’s introverted manner. Chuck’s home-life isn’t much better as he’s engaged to be married to Charlotte (Gina Hecht) though her habits and constant complaining are at odds with Chuck’s. His only solace is Belinda (Shelly Long) a prostitute whom he sometimes bumps into as she’s servicing his next-door neighbor Luke (Tim Rossovich). When Chuck finds her beaten-up inside an elevator he decides she needs to find a work environment that will afford her more protection, which gives Bill the idea to open-up a prostitution ring inside the morgue, which goes-off surprisingly well for  awhile before rival pimps become aware of it and threaten Bill and Chuck with their lives unless they agree to let them in on the payout.

This marked the second feature length film directed by Ron Howard and was inspired by a New York Times article about a real-life morgue that became a prostitution hang-out during its night hours. He decided to offer the leading role to Winkler, who had the choice of either playing Bill or Chuck but went with Chuck as he felt it would be fun playing against type, or in his words a ‘chance to play Richie Cunningham’. Winkler was still acting in ‘Happy Days’ TV-show at the time, so he’d shoot this on Mondays and Tuesdays in New York and then fly back to Hollywood to play Fonzie on Thursdays and Fridays.

While the change of pace may have shown what a good actor Winkler was it really didn’t help his image as the protagonist here is too wimpy. A somewhat passive guy is okay, but this guy lets people push him around too much making him look pathetic and his buttoned-down personality doesn’t show much energy making most of his moments in front of the camera too subtle to be either funny or engaging.

Keaton on the other-hand is too flamboyant, and his talkative ways become obnoxious instead of endearing and I personally didn’t blame Winkler for telling the guy to shut-up and leave him alone as I would’ve felt the same way. The story could’ve worked just as well if not better had Keaton not been in it at all and let Winkler carry-it alone, which would’ve allowed for a more interesting character arch at seeing this nebbish guy run a prostitution ring and thus learn to open-up more because of it.

Winkler’s relationship with Charlotte made little sense as the two had nothing in common and all she did was nag and complain. Why would anyone want to date someone like that let alone get engaged with them? I realize this was supposed to be part of the ‘comedy’ but for it to be funny there actually has to be some truth in it and these two shared no chemistry and at least one of them would’ve in reality come to their senses and broke it off and logically it’s surprising that it didn’t happen. The Charlotte character wasn’t even needed because the focus is on Winkler’s budding romance with Long, so why not just have him be a single guy who’s lonely and can’t make it with women and thus becomes entranced with Long despite her being a hooker simply because she showed him some attention.

While she gives a really good performance that’s light years removed from her Diane Chambers role from ‘Cheers’ that she’s best known for, and she sure looks great in the scene where she wears skimpy panties, her character here is problematic. She’s too wide-eyed and innocent for a woman whose been working as a call girl on the big city streets and even been badly beaten-up a few times by her pimp and johns. Seems like she should’ve formed a very hardened, crusty exterior for her own basic mental defense and the fact that she doesn’t show any of this and instead is so openly sweet seemed not remotely believable.

The premise has great potential, but it doesn’t do enough with it. For most of the way the pace is leisurely and the comedy subtle. I was expecting dead bodies coming-in amidst the sex and lots of mix-ups and confusion, but that stuff barely even gets touched upon. The prostitutes are portrayed as an extreme caricature with no distinct personalities, which reveals how shallow the whole thing is. Back-in-the-day, and I know because I was around, movies dealing with the subject of prostitution was considered ‘edgy’, but now stuff like this is looks trite and barely even touching the surface in regard to realism.

My Rating: 6 out of 10

Released: July 30, 1982

Runtime: 1 Hour 46 Minutes

Rated R

Director: Ron Howard

Studio: Warner Brothers

Available: DVD, Blu-ray, Plex, Roku, Tubi, Amazon Video, YouTube

Leave a comment

Posted in 80's Movies, Buddy Movies, Comedy, Movies that take place in the Big Apple, Movies with Nudity

Tagged , , , , , ,

Blow Out (1981)

Posted on December 3, 2024 | 2 comments

blowout2

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 5 out of 10

4-Word Review: He hears a murder.

Jack (John Travolta) works as a sound effects technician for a film studio that specializes in low budget horror movies. He gets instructed by his producer Sam (Peter Boyden) to come-up with a more realistic sounding scream, as well as other audio noises, for the most recent exploitation production that they’ve been working-on. Jack then goes out one night to capture the necessary noises, but while doing so witnesses a car drive-off the road and into a nearby river. He immediately jumps into the water and saves a passenger named Sally (Nancy Allen), who had been sitting in the backseat, but he’s unable to get to the driver. Later it’s revealed that the driver was a candidate running for governor and Sally was his escort and pressure is put on Jack by the campaign officials not to reveal this to the press. Jack also comes to the realization, while going back and listening to what he had recorded, that the car going to into the river was no accident as he had initially thought, but instead it had been caused by a gunshot from an undisclosed assassin who intentionally shot at the tire so the vehicle would swerve-off the road, but when Jack goes to the authorities about this they don’t believe him.

The film is noted for having been heavily inspired by the Michaelangelo Antonioni’s classic Blow-up, which came-out 15 years earlier and focused on a photographer who inadvertently witnesses a killing via a picture he takes, while this one is on what the protagonist hears. This could also be considered quite similar to The Conversation, a masterpiece that was released in 1974 and dealt with a sound expert that gets in over-his-head with a criminal underground. Both of those films though were better than this one, which has some flashy camera work, but little else.

I did like Travolta. This was the first film where he becomes essentially an adult and no longer stuck in that quasi-age of a post teen growing into manhood and needing to prove himself. Here we get the bona fide thing and the character’s cynical nature about his job and being stuck in an industry that he doesn’t really respect, or all that excited about, is a refreshing change-of-pace from his more wide-eyed, idealistic roles of the past. The behind-the-scenes look at the movie business, including all the posters from actual horror films that line the walls of the studio hallways, and the wannabe starlets dying to break-in even if it meant just letting-out a simple voice-over scream in order to be a part of the cast, I enjoyed and helps add an authentic ambience to what it would be like working in that type of culture.

The character development, or if you could even call it that, is incredibly weak. Nancy Allen is especially annoying not so much for anything she does, she actually puts-on an effective Brooklyn accent, but more for her cliched character. Portraying a prostitute as a blank-eyed, dim-witted simpleton, who still has a ‘heart-of-gold’, is about as overused as it gets making it a laughable caricature and succeeding at causing one long eye roll every time she appears and opens her mouth. The gangsters and police officials are equally contrived though Dennis Franz plays his role, as the corrupt low-life pimp, with such amusing gusto that I was willing to forgive his scenes, and was even entertained by them, but found the rest of the supporting cast to be wasted and transparent.

There are also a few too many plot holes. For instance, the assassin, played by Jon Lithgow, sneaks into an auto repair shop late at night, to remove the tire from the car that had been retrieved from the river, so no one would find out that it had a bullet hole, but wouldn’t the police have thought about looking for that already? The fact that they don’t seems shockingly shoddy as the first thing to investigate after any accident is the cause and not immediately removing the tire and sending it away to a lab for further analysis seems beyond incompetent. Some may argue that the police were paid-off to look the other way and were a part of the ‘cover-up’, but if that were the case then they would’ve still removed the tire, knowing that it was crucial evidence, and then just conveniently ‘lost it’ versus leaving it on the vehicle in some unguarded repair shop that anyone could walk into.

Having Travolta drive his jeep through a parade and nearly kill hundreds of people in the process and then crash into a storefront window where pedestrians come to his aid and call for an ambulance seemed questionable as well. Maybe it was a more innocent era, but I would’ve thought those same people would’ve beaten the crap out of him when they caught-up versus helping him as they would’ve presumed, he had plowed into the parade intentionally and therefor deserved some rough ‘street justice’ for having put so many lives at risk.

Revealing who the killer was in the second act and the reasons for why he did it ruined the suspense and would’ve been more intriguing had the viewer only figured out his identity right when the protagonists do, which comes near the end of the third act. I also thought his killing of other prostitutes who looked similar to Allen, in order to create this fictional serial killer known as the “Liberty Bell Killer, were rather fake. For one thing if a bad guy is intent on killing somebody and stalking them, they come prepared with their own weapons and not hope to inadvertently pick-up some sharp object along the way like he does here. The scene inside a public restroom where he stands over the toilet stall wall in order to strangle his would-be victim who’s standing on the other side and the woman does not sense someone hoovering over her, she looks around, but doesn’t bother to look-up, is baffling since his body was blocking the overhead light and his shadow would’ve tipped her off that there was someone above.

Spoiler Alert!

The biggest head-scratcher gets saved for the end where Travolta essentially gives-up on pursuing the bad guys, even after Allen is murdered, and goes back to his ordinary life as a sound man though in a more guilt-ridden state. The explanation for this is that when Lithgow throws the film of the assassination into the lake along with the audio tape that means the evidence was ‘gone forever’, but it really wasn’t. He had made a copy of the audio tape already and the film was from motion picture stills he had obtained from a tabloid magazine, so all he had to do was buy another copy of the magazine, resync the pics up with his audio tape copy, and his evidence to take to the authorities would be as good as new.

My Rating: 5 out of 10

Released: July 24, 1981

Runtime: 1 Hour 48 Minutes

Rated R

Director: Brian De Palma

Studio: Filmways Pictures

Available: DVD, Blu-ray (Criterion Collection), Amazon Video, YouTube, Pluto TV, Tubi

2 Comments

Posted in 80's Movies, Political Thrillers

Tagged , , , , , , ,

Outland (1981)

Posted on November 28, 2024 | 1 comment

outland

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 6 out of 10

4-Word Review: Deaths at mining outpost.

William (Sean Connery) is a federal marshal assigned to an isolated mining outpost on one of Jupiter’s moons. The outpost, known as Con-Am 27, is supervised by Mark Sheppard (Peter Boyle), who boasts a high productivity from his miners, but this comes at a cost as they seem to be steadily dying-off after suffering from bizarre psychotic episodes. William brings a blood sample of one of the latest victims to Lazarus (Frances Sternhagen), a nurse stationed at the outpost, who runs it through some tests and learns that he had been taking a powerful drug that can allow the men to work long hours at a high rate, but they will eventually burn-out and be driven crazy after about 10-months of use. William learns that Sheppard is fully aware of the drug use and allows it since it helps his workers achieve high results while also paying-off the police authorities to keep quiet. William refuses to go along with this and openly challenges the status quo of the space station causing Sheppard to call-in two assassins who’ll arrive on the latest shuttle and dispose of William unless he’s able to kill them first.

The film was inspired by writer/director Peter Hyams’ desire to make a western, but was advised by studio execs that westerns were no longer profitable, but sci-fi movies dealing with outer space were, so he decided to switch the setting of High Noon, a famous western starring Gary Cooper, to that of a space station, but otherwise kept many of the story elements from that one intact. The response by critics at the time was mixed with some labeling the effort as ‘trite’ while others, like critic Desmond Ryan of the Philadelphia Inquirer calling it ‘scarier than Alien, which I found funny since that one has gone on to be a timeless classic while this is largely forgotten.

The film does score when it approaches the human factor like greed and the way management can and will exploit the workforce if it’s able and the resentment and apathy workers can have towards their jobs, which even if it’s in some distant future could still most likely be reoccurring elements that will go on no matter what the time period. The look of the space station, particularly from the outside, is cool and I enjoyed the way the film replicates the ominous silence of space especially at the beginning.

Some other futuristic effects don’t work as well like the way the computers feel the need to make little beepy noises every time it prints out a word, or message, which may have seemed high tech at the time, but is now antiquated. The television screens display the old tube models while today we have the flat HD variety making this ‘future’ seen here seem more like the past. There’s also plentiful shots of people openly smoking in meeting rooms, but since second-hand smoke was proven to cause lung cancer and outlawed now, more people vape anyways, then why would it have been brought back in the future?

Connery shouldn’t have to explain why he’s going up against this evil conglomerate when no one else will help him, as the viewer should be able to surmise this on their own, which shows how poorly fleshed-out his character is. Having him rebuff his son’s and wife’s request to come back to earth with them because he has something to ‘prove’ unintentionally works against his likability as it makes him seem selfish versus noble. Would’ve been better had his wife left him on bad terms, maybe because for example he was an alcoholic, or too focused on his job, and thus with nothing else to lose he decides to prove to himself he can do at least something right by taking down the bad guys since he’s essentially failed at everything else. The audience would’ve been more emotionally invested in his quandary if he had nowhere else to turn, instead of here where he technically does have an option.

Sternhagen is an interesting choice for the female lead in that she’s not the proverbial young and attractive heroine like viewers have come to expect in Hollywood action flicks. Had she been more romantically enticing that might’ve made the viewer dislike William, particularly if he acted upon his emotions, since he was already married, so to avoid any possible conflict they made the lady character older and sarcastic and thus not somebody to typically fall in love with. While I appreciated the concept of having two people work together without it leading into a sexual escapade, which becomes a cliche in itself, I still felt it was hard to fathom that she’d be the only one at this outpost that would offer him assistance. The work crew wasn’t real happy with management especially finding out that they were fed a drug meant to ultimately kill them, so I’d think there would be some of them who would want to help William take down their oppressive employer, which would’ve also helped it add a wrinkle to the High Noon formula, which it otherwise follows too closely to the point that it becomes predictable and redundant.

While I did like the shoot-out that happens in the giant greenhouse, which visually is impressive due to its vast largeness, I did feel overall the assassins weren’t interesting. We barely see their faces and they come-off as being no different than the other workers already at the station and this lack of distinction makes them forgettable. Initially I thought William wouldn’t be able to know which ones coming off the shuttle, as there are quite a few people who disembark it, were the killers, so there would be added suspense of him being unclear of who exactly was after him, but this quickly gets answered when William can see via circuit cameras the two men taking out their weapons, which ruins what could’ve been an added mystery. Ultimately, I felt the assassins shouldn’t have been human, but instead an indestructible killer robot, which would’ve kept it more in the space age realm and given it added excitement and special effects.

My Rating: 6 out of 10

Released: May 22, 1981

Runtime: 1 Hour 49 Minutes

Rated R

Director: Peter Hyams

Studio: Warner Brothers

Available: DVD, Blu-ray, Amazon Video, YouTube

1 Comment

Posted in 80's Movies, Movies with Nudity, Police Drama, Sci-Fi

Tagged , , , , , ,

Going Ape! (1981)

Posted on November 20, 2024 | Leave a comment

goingape

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 0 out of 10

4-Word Review: He inherits three orangutans.

Foster (Tony Danza) is an outcast in his family because when he grew up, he did not get involved in the family’s circus business. Now that his father has died, he’s set to inherit nothing and everything left to his greedy sisters, at least that’s what he presumes. Instead, he’s given custody of three orangutans that were part of his father’s circus business. If he can care for them for 5-years and none of them dies he’s set to inherit the $5 million estate. Foster takes on the challenge, but his live-in girlfriend Cynthia (Stacey Nelkin) doesn’t care for it and moves-out while Foster spends the rest of the time trying to win her back. He also becomes menaced by a couple of mafia-styled hitmen (Art Metrano, Frank Sivero) who want to kidnap the apes and do harm to them because if just one of them dies then the entire fortune would go to the zoo.

In 1977 Jeremy Joe Kronsberg was a struggling writer who had only one writing credit to his name, penning an episode to the short-lived series ‘Code R’. He sent out a script called Every Which Way But Loose, that all the studios rejected it as they considered the storyline and comedy be inane and silly. However, by chance Clint Eastwood came upon it and to the surprise of many decided to take it on as his next vehicle. He had been looking to do a comedy in order to broaden his appeal and thought this script would achieve that despite the advice from his agent and production staff who all insisted it would be a bad idea. The movie managed to make a ton at the box office, which convinced Hollywood studio heads and producers alike that maybe this Kronsberg guy, which they had all considered to be a hack writer, ‘had something’ that they just didn’t see and therefore his next script, no matter how bad it may seem, was going to be automatically green-lit and what’s more he’d even be given the offer to direct it.

It was like the Hollywood dream. The little guy that everybody thought had no talent was suddenly the overnight success story, but like with a lot of Hollywood dreams, it didn’t end so well. This movie became both a critical and box office bomb and lead any potential future offers that Kronsberg may have had thrown off the table. Though he’s still alive today, at the ripe old age of 87, he never got another script or teleplay sold and his entire Hollywood ‘career’ ended up being nothing more than a 3-year flash.

The film starts out alright. I actually chuckled at the Danza character cutting-off splinters from his wood desk and trying to sell it as pieces of Babe Ruth’s bat, but the quirkiness of the beginning gets overtaken by the orangutans, which I found ugly and obnoxious. Their rotted teeth alone are disgusting to look at and every time they open their mouths it’s more unsettling than peering into a hillbilly’s. They were trained  by then world famous Bobby Berosini, a Czech born immigrant who became a famous orangutan trainer that began to do stage shows with them in Las Vega during the 70’s, but then in 1988 a Vegas dancer secretly recorded him abusing the apes, including slapping and punching them, before going onstage and when it was sent to PETA it became available to the public and his career and image took a massive downfall.

The stupid villains, which are nothing more than a hammy, cliched send-up from the Godfather movies, are pathetic and the point where the movie really goes downhill. Their pratfalls are dumber than something you’d see in a kiddie flick and devolve the film into the inanest level possible. It’s also chillingly prophetic as Metrano, who plays the head-honcho, is seen twice falling from a lofty height including once out of high-rise window, which had a creepy similarity to his real-life accident in 1989 when he fell from a ladder and became paralyzed.

Danza is likable enough, but I found his character to be ridiculous with the way he put up with the apes even as they tore-up his apartment and kind of felt he should’ve given-up on them just like his girlfriend did and came to the conclusion the money wasn’t worth the hassle and just pawned them off on somebody else, or even given them away to the zoo who seemed so desperate for the fortune. Despite winning the Razzie award for his performance I really felt it was DeVito, who speaks in an accent, that was the scene-stealer and had he been made the star it might’ve worked better.

Nelkin is cute, so she gets a few points there, and Walter has great potential as her snobby mother, but unfortunately her services here get greatly misused as she soon sides with Danza and his cause instead of working against him and becoming the chief villainess of which she would’ve been great.

There are some reviewers on IMDb who proudly insist that this is ‘the greatest movie ever made’, but I feel they are either desperate for attention and will say any outrageous thing to get it, or haven’t seen any of the timeless classics, so that they really don’t know what they’re talking about. In either case this is a bad movie that will harbor very little enjoyment to anyone who sees it whether they’re young or old. Yes, there’s a big smash-up car chase at the end, but this is just thrown-in to camouflage the lack of originality in the story.

My Rating: 0 out of 10

Released: April 10, 1981

Runtime: 1 Hour 27 Minutes

Rated PG

Director: Jeremy Joe Kronsberg

Studio: Paramount

Available: Blu-ray, Amazon Video, YouTube

Leave a comment

Posted in 80's Movies, Farce

Tagged , , , , , , , , ,

One From the Heart (1982)

Posted on November 17, 2024 | Leave a comment

oneheart

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 2 out of 10

4-Word Review: Break-up/make-up

Hank (Frederic Forrest) and Frannie (Teri Garr) have been together for 5-years but while celebrating their anniversary at home the cracks in their relationship begin to show. Frannie is upset that they can never go out and wants more adventure. Hank doesn’t see this as a problem, so the two break up. Frannie meets Ray (Raul Julia) a waiter who has ambitions to become a singer. Hank gets together with Leila (Nastassja Kinski) who is much younger than him and lives the fast lifestyle. Each spends a night with their new partner, but end-up longing for their former mates when it’s over. Ray offers to take Frannie to Bora Bora, but will she really board the plane, or will Hank catch-up with her in time and convince her to move back with him?

The movie has a weird look about it and this is mainly because director Francis Ford Coppola decided he wanted to film the entire thing on the soundstage of his Zoetrope studios. This in retrospect seemed absurd as the setting was Las Vegas with one of the most flamboyant downtowns of any city, so if the real thing is already visually arresting why trump it with a fake one that isn’t half as exciting? The artificial presence kills the movie from the very start and what’s worse is that it was so painstakingly expensive to create the set design, which is massive, that it sent Coppola and his studio into bankruptcy of which it took many years to recover and all of it wouldn’t have been necessary if they had just shot it on-location, which would’ve been a thousand times better.

The lighting is one of the more annoying aspects particularly the red light that shines through the couple’s home window making it look like they live in the red-light district of Denmark, or near a police station. The outdoor scenes look as phony as you’d expect including having the night sky shown to have a ‘ceiling’ and the distant mountain vistas appearing as nothing more than a cheap matted on paintings. Everything comes-off as loopy like a great director whose ego got the best of him, and he made a massive artistic overreach for no other purpose then just to see if he could. The music interludes by Crystal Gayle and Tom Waits don’t work either. If a movie is intended to be a musical, as this one kind of is, then each song needs to sound distinct and at least moderately peppy, but here it comes-off like the same droning song that just never ends and adds little to the already goofy set-up.

The characters are poorly fleshed-out and, with the modest exception of Harry Dean Stanton and Elia Kazan, wholly uninteresting. The break-up is the biggest problem as the ‘squabble’ appears to be over nothing more than the fact that Hank didn’t take Frannie out on their anniversary, but to move-out because of something like that seems awfully trite. Normally for relationships/marriages to go really bad there needs to be a lot of anger simmering underneath the surface and this thing at best is just a tiff especially when at the beginning they seemed content with other. To make it realistic there should’ve been clear underlining animosity right away and not go from ‘happy couple’ to break-up with a snap-of-the-finger.

Not sure either if it’s exactly possible to get back together after the other partner has slept with someone else. Granted there could be some exceptions, but most people would consider it an extreme betrayal and unforgivable and certainly not something that they could just conveniently forget about and return back to the ‘happy couple’ that they were. Yes, in this instance they both cheated, but that makes things even worse. Who’s to say you can ever trust the other again? If one tiny disagreement can get each one to suddenly jump in the arms of a perfect stranger what’s to say that won’t get repeated in the future?

Garr, who appears topless in several scenes and even fully naked from the back in one moment, is okay. The supporting cast is also good especially Allen Garfield as Julia’s perturbed boss. I even found Kinski a bit mesmerizing with her singing and the way she was able to balance herself on a big orange ball that used to be the sign for the Spirit of 76 gas stations, but overall the thing is so thinly plotted, with too much emphasis being put on the garish set design, that it can all be summed up as a hopeless experiment gone wrong. Even Coppola has admitted in subsequent interviews that it’s a ‘total mess’, so if the director is warning you that his own movie doesn’t have much going for it, you’d better listen.

My Rating: 2 out of 10

Released: February 11, 1982

Runtime: 1 Hour 39 Minutes

Rated R

Director: Francis Ford Coppola

Studio: Columbia Pictures

Available: DVD, Blu-ray, Amazon Video, YouTube

Leave a comment

Posted in 80's Movies, Movies with Nudity, Romance

Tagged , , , , , ,

Animal Behavior (1989)

Posted on November 11, 2024 | Leave a comment

animal

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 4 out of 10

4-Word Review: Cellist falls for biologist.

Alex (Karen Allen) is a biologist employed at a university where she is researching on finding new ways to communicate with chimpanzees including the use of sign language but finding it challenging in getting any funding. Mark (Armand Assante) works at the same school as an orchestra instructor. He meets Alex by chance and while their first encounter is awkward, he immediately takes an interest in her and tries to pursue a relationship. Alex is so involved in her work that she doesn’t pick-up on Mark’s advances initially and then when she does, she comes under the mistaken impression that he’s married which causes her to avoid him and making Mark believe that she doesn’t like him when deep down she really does.

The film, which has never been released on either DVD or streaming and can only be obtained from a very rare VHS print, is more known for its behind-the-scenes troubles than anything that goes on in front of the camera. The main issue was the squabbling, or ‘creative differences’ between director Jenny Brown and the producer Kjehl Rasmussen causing her to leave the project, which began filming in 1984. The production then ran out of money forcing it to be shelved for many years in an unfinished state before Rasmussen was able to receive enough funding to complete it with him as the director. However, out of its initial $3.5 million budget it was only able, after its limited release, to recoup a paltry $41, 526 at the box office making it a huge financial loss. It also came-out 4 years after one of its stars, Alexa Kenin who plays a not very talented cello student, died mysteriously at the young age of 23 for causes that are still unknown to this day.

Despite all of its production problems I came away finding it not too bad and enjoyed the orchestral score and the giant animated musical notes that appear during the opening credits as well as the vast New Mexico landscape. Assante is an interesting casting choice as he plays the romantic lead not in a lovesick way but approaches it instead in more as a matter-of-fact type, which you’d expect a person working in Academia might do. I did though find his ability to handle chimps as relaxed and comfortable was a bit of a missed opportunity as having him afraid of them, which is what I think most people would be like, would’ve given their young relationship more of a challenge to work through and thus more intrigue to the story.

His inability to every criticize Sheila, played by Kenin, who is a very poor cello player, made him in-turn come-off as a failure of a teacher. Granted the film wanted the viewer to like the Assante character and if his criticism of her playing was too harsh it might make them turn-on him, but the guy is her teacher and not her friend. A friend is someone that doesn’t want to hurt the other person’s feelings, but a teacher is paid to get to the source of the problem. If he is just going to allow this student to leave in a delusion that she’s a competent then when is she ever going to get better, or be motivated to improve? A good teacher is obligated to call a student’s attention to their shortcomings and by avoiding doing this he comes-off as weak and ineffective.

While Allen’s performance is also good, I had some problems with why Assante would want to get into a relationship with her. It’s clear from the get-go that she’s so into her chimps that she’s out of touch with everything else around her. Why pursue someone romantically who’s always going to put her monkeys first and make him have to constantly compete with them for her attention?

A far better love interest would’ve been Coral that gets played by Holly Hunter who is an absolute scene-stealer and gives the movie some much needed spunk. This was before she won the Academy Award, so her role is limited, but she still makes the most of it playing a single mother with an autistic child, played by Crystal Buda. She is a neighbor to Assante and the two get into a quasi-style relationship though they don’t have any sex, but I didn’t know why she didn’t want to pursue further past the friendship level as they seemed quite compatible and it would’ve allowed in more drama forcing both her and Allen to compete for the same man, which could’ve lead to some juicy confrontations.

Josh Mostel, as Assante’s friend, is fun, not so much for anything he says, but more for his big white-guy afro. The climactic sequence, which takes place in a large scale maze made out of hay bails is diverting simply because it’s never been used before, or since. However, the characterizations of the University faculty, who are portrayed as being stiff, uptight, while also a bit ‘wacky’ is too broad to be either amusing or insightful.

My Rating: 4 out of 10

Released: October 27, 1989

Runtime: 1 Hour 28 Minutes

Rated PG

Director: Jenny Brown

Studio: CineStar Productions

Available: VHS, DVD-R (dvdlady.com)

Leave a comment

Posted in 80's Movies, College Life, Comedy, Obscure Movies, Romance

Tagged , , , , , , , ,

Uphill All the Way (1986)

Posted on November 5, 2024 | Leave a comment

uphill

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 2 out of 10

4-Word Review: Bumbling cowboy con-men.

Ben (Roy Clark) and Booger (Mel Tillis) are two con-men living in the old west, who don’t have a dime between them. After getting kicked-off a train for not having tickets they then venture to a saloon in order to win some money at poker, but even though they attempt to cheat, they still end up losing. In desperation they try to trade in their rifle for a loan, but the bank teller (Richard Paul) mistakenly thinks they’re trying to hold him up and sounds the alarm. The two then go on the run while being chased by a posse of sorts that includes the sheriff (Burl Ives) two prostitutes (Elaine Joyce, Jacque Lynn Colton) and the town drunk (Frank Gorshin).

The film is a misguided effort to replicate the campy, rural humor of the TV-show ‘Hee-Haw’, which Roy Clark hosted for almost 17years and which Mel Tillis made several guest appearances, and try to turn it into something resembling a movie. While the show never met any critical acclaim it still managed to succeed because all the humor, much of it being ribald and corny, was set-up into brief segments that only lasted for a few minutes if even that long and relied almost exclusively on one-liners. As soon as the punchline was uttered it would quickly move to another segment much like the variety show ‘Laugh-In’ was styled. However, trying to expand that format and silly comedy into a feature length film is virtually unworkable. Instead of a plot we get a collection of goofy situations coupled with goofy characters saying and doing cartoonish things that gets strung along with a mind numbing 90-minutes before it finally, mercifully manages to end much like putting a sick horse out of its misery.

Had the chemistry between the two stars been better it might’ve had some chance, but Tilis and Clark, both better known as country singers of which they’re very good at, don’t have what it takes to carry a movie. I was thankful at least that Tillis didn’t rely on his old stuttering routine for cheap laughs and here for the most part he articulates quite well, but he fails to have much to say that is amusing. Clark with his tubby physique coupled with his high-pitched voice seems all wrong for different reasons and his attempts at being exacerbated comes-off as affected. The banter between the two is stale and with both being in their 50’s they lack the fresh boyish charm that they might’ve otherwise been able to exude had they done this when they were in their 20’s.

The supporting cast falls equally flat. Burl Ives looks old and tired here and like he’s just phoning-it-in. Gorshin, a great and versatile talent if given the right material, is completely wasted as a drunk who does and says very little. Trish Van Devere, who during the early 70’s was considered a leading lady, reveals how sadly her career had fallen, she officially retired after doing just one more movie after this one and I think it was because she was no longer getting any quality offers, doesn’t appear until 55-minutes in and almost becomes like a background character with not much to do. Burt Reynolds does appear briefly near the beginning, he apparently accepted no fee for his work here, but is quite amusing and had he been in more scenes might’ve saved it. Elaine Joyce stands-out too as she usually played bubble-headed blondes, but here is a bitchy, angry type and does surprisingly well with it though if she’s going to be the best thing about a movie then you know it must be in real trouble.

The story is disjointed too as it starts out as a playful chase comedy then strangely diverts into an extended shoot-out where the two become hold-up in a home with another family trying to fend-off a group of bad guys that are separate from the ones chasing after them making it seem like two different, poorly realized plots meshed into one. I will give it some credit for being a movie with a Texas setting that was actually filmed in Texas unlike some other movies that say the setting is Texas when it really isn’t. You can tell that it is the Lone Star state because of the prickly pear cactus that is seen all about, which is different from the upright variety that’s seen in the deserts of Arizona and California. Though on the negative end it was shot in the month of October when the searing heat of the region was over and any good Texas movie should have the heat play a factor since that’s very much a strong characteristic of the state.

My Rating: 2 out of 10

Released: January 21, 1986

Runtime: 1 Hour 26 Minutes

Rated PG

Director: Frank Q. Dobbs

Studio: New World Pictures

Available: DVD, Blu-ray, Amazon Video, YouTube

Leave a comment

Posted in 80's Movies, Buddy Movies, Campy Comedy, Movies that take place in Texas, Westerns

Tagged , , , , , , , , ,

The Nest (1988)

Posted on October 28, 2024 | Leave a comment

nest

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 3 out of 10

4-Word Review: Cockroaches invade small town.

Richard (Franc Luz) is the sheriff of a small New England town, who wakes-up one morning to find cockroaches all over his home. He goes to the airport to pick-up Elizabeth (Lisa Langlios) a former girlfriend who’s also the daughter of Elias (Robert Lansing) the town’s mayor. During her visit they become aware of several dog deaths where the animal’s entire bodies are rapidly eaten raw by some sort of insect that leaves only the bloody carcass of their prey behind. Elias calls-in Dr Morgan (Terri Treas) who specializes in insect research. She soon determines that these are not the normal kind of cockroaches, but instead an engineered species created inside a lab for the purpose of eating off the other insects on the island that the town is on and then promptly dying-off after one generation. Unfortunately, the mutated species found a way to survive and continues to reproduce while being immune to the regular forms of pest control causing the mayor to consider making the difficult decision of having the entire town’s populace vacate the island before the roaches completely take it over.

The film was directed by Terence H. Winkless who up until this time was best known for having done the short film Foster’s Release in 1971 about a stalker who terrorizes a babysitter that later inspired The Sitter, Halloween, and When a Stranger Calls. This film though, his first feature length release, lacks the tension and atmosphere of those. The biggest detriment is the setting as it’s too bright and sunny and horror films work much better when things are dark and gloomy, which creates an eerie feeling that this thing doesn’t have. While it’s supposed to take place in New England it’s very clear that it’s instead California, which is so obvious that it’s almost embarrassing to pretend it’s anything else. If the producers didn’t have the money to shoot it on-location, then they should’ve changed the story’s location to California and chucked the pathetic charade.

The type of insect that gets used isn’t all that scary. I’ve lived in Texas for 10 years now and have seen first-hand cockroaches that seem to invade everyone’s homes down here. These roaches are far bigger than what you see in the film, and they move very quick and even have a creepy way that they crawl. Had those types of roaches been used in the movie it might’ve actually been scary, but compromising on the smaller version (apparently because they were more plentiful and easier to trap) does it in. We also don’t get to see all that much of them, there’s a fleeting shot here and there, but mostly it relies on a loud hissing sound that they make, which becomes too constant and eventually quite annoying.

The script makes the mistake of revealing its cards too soon. Had it remained more of a mystery of what was killing the pets it might’ve allowed for more intrigue, but by the second act it’s made clear what’s causing it. Thus, the rest of the movie becomes redundant as we’re shown, over-and-over, the bugs and the noise they make until it gets quite boring and seems to be going nowhere. Seeing the bugs actually bite into the animal’s flesh, which would be difficult to do, but still possible with micro photography, might’ve helped add a memorable image, but just seeing a quick glimpse of a bloody carcass isn’t as impressive. The bugs are also somehow able to devour the flesh of an animal in literally seconds, which even with a genetically engineered breed seems wildly exaggerated.

The script was in desperate need of some sort of a subplot. Possibly having a violent confrontation between the sheriff and mayor, which it kind of teases, but never actually happens, or even having the mayor hold the sheriff hostage and thus preventing him from warning others and then him try to find a way to escape in time could’ve helped make things a lot more intriguing. Also, not giving away that Dr. Morgan was a nut until the very end could’ve allowed for a surprise reveal/twist of which there is none.

Spoiler Alert!

The roaches being able to mutate into whatever species they’ve eaten is when the whole thing jumps-the-shark. I suppose some might be impressed with the special effects of seeing the mayor morph into a giant rodent, which the filmmaker’s were clearly banking-on as being the movies’ ‘shock highlight’, but it’s overreaching. Trying to do some hybrid insect/monster movie doesn’t work when the logic isn’t there, which in this case it definitely wasn’t. While I’ve never seen a bug movie that I’ve totally liked there’s still plenty out there that are better than this one.

My Rating: 3 out of 10

Released: November 20, 1987

Runtime: 1 Hour 29 Minutes

Rated R

Director: Terence H. Winkless

Studio: Concorde Pictures

Available: DVD, Blu-ray, Plex, Tubi, Amazon Video

Leave a comment

Posted in 80's Movies, Horror, Sci-Fi

Tagged , , , ,