(From the 2010’s film, Birdemic, a scene of pure joy.)
Category Archives: Film
Brick Speaks For Many of Us…
(From the 2004 film Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy, a far superior film to The Big Short.)
That’s Blaxploitation! 7: TROUBLE MAN (20th Century-Fox 1972)
One of the earliest Blaxploitaion films is TROUBLE MAN, a 1972 entry about Mr T…
…no, not THAT Mr. T! THIS Mr. T…
Thank you! This Mr. T is played by Robert Hooks, a tough talking private eye who drives a big-ass Lincoln Continental and “fixes troubles” on the mean streets of L.A. T gets hired by gangsters Chalky Price and Pete Cockrell to protect their crap games, which are getting ripped off by masked gunmen. Things go awry when Chalky shoots one of the heisters, a dude named Abby who works for rival gangster “Big”. Abby’s body is dumped and word is on the streets T did the killing. Police Capt. Joe Marx puts the heat on T, as does “Big”, so T arranges a late night summit between “Big”, Chalky, and Pete at Jimmy’s Pool Hall . “Big” arrives, but before Chalky and Pete do, some cops raid the joint. These…
View original post 373 more words
Film Review: Fugitive at 17 (2012, dir. Jim Donovan)
It’s been awhile since I did any of those Amazon Prime Recommendation Worm posts. Anyone who has read them remembers that the posters that are made up for the indie foreign films are often ridiculously misleading. With that in mind, lets look at the disc and menu for this movie.
She does run right at the beginning of the movie. That’s about it. Oh, and there are no explosions in this film. Let’s take a look at the DVD menu.
Again, we have those hilarious explosions that don’t exist in the movie. Also, that isn’t her laptop that she pretends to use in the movie. I love the crosshairs because I’m nearly 100% positive that no one shoots at her. I’m also quite sure that there are never choppers used in pursuit of her.
What can we conclude here? That they put “Fugitive” in the title and tried to sell it as if it were The Fugitive (1993). Yes, there is a comparable scene to the beard cutting one in The Fugitive. At least the DVD and the menu are honest that actor Marie Avgeropoulos is nowhere near 17. She was actually 25 when she made this movie. However, they had a good reason for it that I will explain later, so let’s dive in.
After showing our main character Holly (Marie Avgeropoulos) run away into an alley for the title card, we cut to 24 hours earlier in Philadelphia. This is when we get introduced to Holly and her underwhelming laptop.
She has just installed a new OS so that “this puppy has more processing power than a brand-new computer.” It’s not BackTrack Linux running in a virtual machine that an actual hacker/pen-tester might use. Too bad. I was hoping they would at least have her do some war driving to find a WiFi network to use or set up a WiFi honeypot to capture the network traffic of the bad guy. Nope. She’ll just do bullshit.
Speaking of bullshit. Holly’s friend wants her to hack into the university she has applied to in order to see if she has been accepted. That means it’s time for Holly to show off her ability to look at screenshots inside of a browser and look intently as green text goes by her face.
Yes, it is a screenshot sitting on the computer’s local hard drive of a browser showing a college’s website that she is viewing in another browser. Now that text starts to roll by.
I love that she just instantly installs a backdoor. Not to give Tinfinger…I mean Blackhat (2015) too much credit, but at least Thor did a phishing attack to get the password to the system he wanted to break into. However, I do like this.
Somebody actually knows that deleting things like IDS and firewall logs on your way out is a good idea in order to cover your tracks. Credit where credit is due. Keeping with Accused at 17 and Stalked at 17, Holly’s friend invites her to a college party, which she agrees to attend.
Now we meet who I call Detective Padding (Christina Cox) and her son (Dylan Van Wylick). I call her that because while she is the one chasing Holly and will come to her rescue at the end, she only exists so that when they need to extend the runtime of the movie, they can cut to her.
Now it’s off to the party. That’s where we meet Dan (Daniel Rindress-Kay) over stealing WiFi from the factory next door to the party.
Holly pokes around on her cellphone and tells him to try MillerEmployeeGeneral. It’s not likely that would actually work, but those would be the first kind of passwords that you would try before you’d do more involved things. What I love about this whole thing is that they now show her cellphone screen that says she is on cellular, not WiFi.
Nothing can top “Logan’s Hacking Screen” from the Garage Sale Mystery series or almost every line from the hilariously bad Ex Machina (2015), but this is pretty funny.
Holly’s friend goes backstage with Spencer Oliphant (Casper Van Dien). He slips her some drugs. Unfortunately, she has an allergic reaction of sorts to the drugs that kills her. Fortunately, Holly’s pompadour sense goes off.
One thing leads to another, and we find out why they cast a 25 year-old.
When this film decides it’s time for Van Dien to get rough, he is quite rough with her. I’m sure they figured they’d play it safe by casting a 25 year-old rather than one who was only 18 or 19.
Because plot, she winds up getting accused of this whole thing since there was some sort of history of her stealing drugs using her imaginary hacking skills for her sick grandmother and those drugs winding up in the hands of her dead friend.
Now we get another example of her hacking skills. It just might blow your mind.
Detective Padding gets a call from her son who has dropped his cellphone in the toilet. She actually follows up those lines by asking him how he dropped it in the toilet. I would say that she got her knowledge of boyhood from the film Boyhood (2014), but that was still two years out. Regardless of the fact that she didn’t know her son was masturbating when the phone slipped from his hand, she tells him that they had to confiscate the sorbent along with the rest of the drugs they found. Just kidding, she doesn’t know what to do, so that’s why Holly tells him to remove the battery and the SIM card, clean it off, and then put it in rice, which will act as an absorbent like sorbent does. Of course, that does depend on the phone not having already shorted out. If you want to see a hilarious example of that, then look up the TWiT episode (not sure which show) where Leo Laporte decided to test this stuff you coated your phone in to make it waterproof by dropping it in a glass of water. You could see it short out right away. The best thing about that was that the Apple Genius he took the phone to had seen the episode.
Meanwhile, back in the film, they couldn’t afford a train, so they put her in a van to be transferred. She breaks free when the other prisoners are saved by friends who attack the van. That’s when she decides to recreate the beard cutting scene from The Fugitive. Except Holly doesn’t have a beard to cut, so she dyes her hair instead.
She also changes clothes and gets her fancy laptop. Now she decides that the place to start is to track down Dan from the party. That’s why she goes to the school website and types “Central University, Employee Log in” into the school site’s search box.
That gets her right into the student records. As bad as Blackhat was, at least somebody looked up actual Unix commands that Michael Mann could cut to closeup shots of all the time. Again though, credit where credit is due. Dan comes home and…
finds her in his place already. I love that he asks her how she got in. He got into the “Central University of Pennsylvania” how exactly? Sadly, they will basically say it was due to her ability to pick locks instead of her simply socially engineering someone into letting her in as a girlfriend.
Detective Padding and Holly’s mom try to pretend they are part of the story now before we cut to Dan and Holly as they try to track down Van Dien. It turns out that some guitar players grow out their nails. Van Dien’s long nails are the only thing she remembers strongly about him. When I played, I always kept them short like I do for typing. However, they’ll explain that when you are trying to perform something like Spanish Caravan by The Doors, then having all your fingers on one of your hands as picks is handy.
They figure out the name of a faculty member who teaches music. That means it’s time for Holly to get in contact with Detective Padding so that she can check him out after they are sure he has his nails grown out. It being Lifetime, she interrupts Padding’s son’s near his downward spiral into the world of Internet porn.
She is using something called Cloud Dial. I guess that’s Lifetime’s version of Skype. Holly eventually gets Padding on the line and it’s so cute how they try to have a Harrison Ford/Tommy Lee Jones conversation, but we need to move on.
As always: Of course Holly quickly finds this teacher and he leads her right to Van Dien. Before paying him a visit, she decides to remind us of a scene from Sneakers (1992).
To get to her grandmother in the hospital, she pretends to be a singing telegram. It was better in Sneakers when they used several people to overwhelm the staff till one of them gave in and just buzzed in Robert Redford. This version does has Kate Drummond from the Flower Shop Mystery series at the desk though since this movie was filmed in Canada.
At this point, we can jump over a lot. Basically it’s a bunch of scenes to insure that we get the running time out to a feature film, and make sure Detective Padding and Grandma are still around.
It all comes down to a showdown between Detective Padding, Holly, and Van Dien. Van Dien loses. A quick party for Grandma is held before the movie ends abruptly. Then the first person who is credited is the “Financial Consultant”.
After that, it’s the standard “players” credits for these “at 17” movies.
Out of the four “at 17” movies I have watched recently, I think it’s a tie between Stalked at 17 and this one. That is if you must watch one of them that I have reviewed.
Fear Not, TSL Readers…
…the world is yours.
(This beautifully shot scene is, of course, taken from Brian DePalma’s 1983 gangster epic, Scarface.)
Words of Wisdom From Sucker Punch…
Words to live by!
(And, by the way, Sucker Punch is one of the most underrated and misunderstood films of all time! Check out my review of Sucker Punch here and Arleigh’s review here.)
4 Shots From 4 Films (William Atherton): Ghostbusters (1984), Real Genius (1985), Die Hard (1988), Die Hard 2 (1990)
Yesterday, Arleigh spotlighted Everybody Wants To Rule The World by Tears for Fears. I grew up listening to the song all the time because it was featured in one of my all-time favorite movies: Real Genius (1985). At the heart of the movie is a slimy embezzling college professor who is taking advantage of smart kids to build a special laser for the government to assassinate people from space. However, this wasn’t the first, or last time that Atherton was cast as a scumbag in the 1980s. I thought it would be fun to spotlight four of them, including his turn as Professor Hathaway in Real Genius.
Film Review: Ghostbusters (dir by Paul Feig)
If you need any further proof that 2016 is a screwed-up year, just consider the fact that Ghostbusters, an entertaining but ultimately rather mild-mannered and innocuous summer action/comedy, has become the center of one of the biggest controversies of the year.
It all started, of course, when the reboot was first announced. Fanboys reacted with outrage, offended that Hollywood would even consider remaking a film that was apparently one of the defining moments of their childhood. Then, it was announced that Ghostbusters would feature an all-female cast and it would be directed by Paul Feig, the director of Bridesmaids. The howls of outrage grew even louder. Then that infamous trailer was released and even I felt that trailer sucked. I wasn not alone because the trailer quickly became one of the most disliked videos in the history of YouTube. Reading the comments underneath that trailer was literally like finding yourself trapped in a production of Marat/Sade.
Suddenly, in the eyes of very vocal group of internet trolls, the reboot of Ghostbusters went from being simply another dubious idea to being a crime against humanity. And the trolls were so obnoxious that they managed to turn this big-budget, studio-backed production into an underdog. Here was a movie directed by one of Hollywood’s biggest directors and starring some of Hollywood’s hottest stars and suddenly, it had become David in a biblical showdown with the Goliaths of internet.
And then it happened. Earlier last week, Ghostbusters was finally screened for critics. The first reviews started to come in and they were surprisingly positive. In fact, they were so positive that I found myself distrusting them. I found myself wondering if critics were reacting to the film or if they were simply trying to prove that they were better than the trolls who leave obscene comments on YouTube.
Which was true, I wondered. Was Ghostbusters the worst film ever made or was it the greatest? Or was it perhaps just possible that Ghostbusters would turn out to be a typical summer film?
With all the controversy, it’s tempting to overpraise a film like Ghostbusters. Battle lines have been drawn and sometimes, I feel as if I’m being told that failing to declare Ghostbusters to be the greatest and most important comedy of all time is the equivalent of letting the trolls win.
Well, that’s not true. Ghostbusters is not the greatest or the most important comedy of all time but you know what? Ghostbusters is good. Ghostbusters is entertaining. Especially during the first half, it’s full of laugh out loud moments. At times, Ghostbusters is everything that you could hope for.
No, it’s not a perfect film. Paul Feig is a great comedy director but, in this film at least, his direction of the big action sequences often feels uninspired (especially when compared to his previous work on Spy). The final fourth of the film gets bogged down in CGI and the film goes from being a clever comedy to being just another summer spectacle. Even the one-liners, which flowed so naturally at the start of the film, feel forced during the final half of the film. Ghostbusters is good but it never quite becomes great.
Here’s what did work: the cast. As he previously proved with Bridesmaids, Paul Feig is a director who is uniquely skilled at creating and showcasing a strong comedic ensemble. Kristen Wiig plays Erin Gilbert, who is denied tenure at Columbia when it is discovered that a book she wrote on the paranormal has been republished and is being sold, on Amazon, by her former best friend, Dr. Abby Yates (Melissa McCarthy). When Erin goes to confront Abby, she not only meets Abby’s newest colleague, Dr. Jillian Holtzmann (Kate McKinnon) but she also gets dragged into investigating an actual case of paranormal activity.. Soon, Erin, Abby, and Holtzmann are investigating hauntings and capturing ghosts, all with the secret approval of the Mayor of New York (Andy Garcia). Of course, for PR reasons, the mayor’s office has to continually disavow the Ghostbusters and occasionally have them arrested. Working alongside the three scientists are Patty (Leslie Jones), who apparently knows the history of every building in New York, and Kevin (Chris Hemsworth), their adorably stupid receptionist.
As written, both Patty and Kevin are fairly thin characters. Kevin’s the handsome dumb guy. Patty is streetwise and sassy. But both Hemsworth and Jones give such enthusiastic and sincere performances that they transcend the stereotypical nature of their roles. At times, Kevin runs the risk of becoming too cartoonish for even a Ghostbusters film. But if you can’t laugh at Chris Hemsworth explaining that he took the lenses out of his glasses because they were always getting dirty, what can you laugh at?
Erin is an interesting character and Kristen Wiig deserves a lot of credit for her performance. Erin is actually given a fairly affecting backstory, centering around how she was haunted by the ghost of the old woman who used to live next door to her. Erin is a former believer, someone who, in order to succeed in the “real” world, gave up her beliefs and conformed to the expectations of society. When she actually meets a ghost, it’s more than just a confirmation of the supernatural. It’s a chance for Erin to finally embrace who she truly is and what she truly cares about. When she and the other ghostbusters chase after evil spirits, Erin is not just doing a job. Instead, she’s finally found somewhere where she belongs. She no longer has to pretend to be someone that she isn’t. Wiig plays the role with just the right touch of neurotic wonder. She grounds the entire film.
But the true star of the film is Kate McKinnon. Whether she’s cheerfully smiling as a ghost vomits all over her colleagues or cheerfully explaining how easily their equipment could kill them all, Holtzmann is the greatest character in the film and McKinnon gives the best performance. If Wiig grounds the film, McKinnon provides it with a truly demented soul.
The first half of the movie, which focuses on the relationships between the characters and features snappy and endlessly quotable dialogue, is wonderful and I was thrilled while watching it, convinced that the entire movie would be as good as the first hour. However, the second half of the film gets bogged down in a rather predictable plot and the final action sequences could have just as easily been lifted from Pixels or one of The Avengers movies. The surviving cast of the original Ghostbusters all show up in cameos that are, at best, inoffensive and, at worst, groan-worthy. The end result is rather uneven. If the film had maintained the momentum of that first hour, it would be a classic. But that second half transforms it into just another entertaining but not quite memorable summer action film.
That said, Paul Feig is an excellent comedy director and let’s hope that he never gets so self-important that he ends up turning into Jay Roach. Hopefully, if there is a sequel, Feig will return to direct it and Kate McKinnon will have an even bigger role.
Rockin’ in the Film World #6: IT’S A BIKINI WORLD (Trans-American 1967)
IT’S A BIKINI WORLD is one of the lowest of the low-budget “Beach Party” ripoffs you’ll ever see. Yet it has a certain charm to it, a likeable little “battle of the sexes” soufflé featuring some great 60’s rock acts and the undeniable appeal of beach bunny Deborah Walley.
Beach stud Mike Samson goes gaga for knockout new redhead Delilah Dawes (Samson and Delilah, get it?). She thinks he’s an egotistical jerk and gives him the big freeze-out, telling him she prefers the “serious type”, so Mike dons a pair of thick glasses and some nerdy duds, passing himself off as intellectual brother “Herbert”. Herbert takes her to museums and zoos, while Mike competes with her in skateboarding and boat races run by local customizer Daddy, owner of hangout The Dungeon. Delilah discovers Mike’s scam, and they compete in a final Cross Country Race that consists of car racing, motorcycles…
View original post 611 more words
Until Dogs and Cats Live Together, Your Childhood Will Survive: Ghostbusters (1984, directed by Ivan Reitman)
I always wanted to be Egon Spengler.
I can not remember how old I was when I first saw the original Ghostbusters but I know I was young enough that “Gatekeeper” and “Keymaster” went over my head. But I do remember that Ghostbusters was one of my favorite movies from the first time I saw it and that Egon Spengler (played by the much missed Harold Ramis) was always my favorite character.
I know that, for most people, Peter Venkmen (Bill Murray) is their favorite. It is true that Peter got the best lines and Sigourney Weaver. But I always wanted to be Egon. Egon was the one who knew everything. He knew how to track down and capture ghosts. He knew that the only way to defeat Gozer was to cross streams. No matter what happened, Egon was never surprised or scared. Egon always knew what to do. Egon did not get Sigourney Weaver but he did get Annie Potts.
Dan Aykroyd’s Ray Stantz never gets as much attention as either Peter or Egon, even though, without Aykroyd, there never would have been a Ghostbusters. Aykroyd originally envisioned Ghostbusters as being a sci-fi epic that would be a vehicle for him and John Belushi. After Belushi died, Aykroyd and Harold Ramis rewrote the script and scaled back the story. Bill Murray took the role that would have been played by Belushi and the famous ghost, Slimer, was created as a tribute to their fallen friend.
As for Ernie Hudson’s Winston Zeddemore, his role was much larger in the original script. But with each rewrite, Winston’s role got smaller and Peter’s role got larger. Winston’s role is still important because he is the ghostbuster who stands in for the audience. He is not a skeptic like Peter but he’s not a true believer like Ray and Egon. Winston just wants a steady paycheck.

I remember loving the original Ghostbusters when I was a kid but a new Ghostbusters is being released today and I have read that some people think that it is going to destroy my childhood. Since the lovely Lisa Marie Bowman and I are planning on seeing the new Ghostbusters tonight, we rewatched the original on Wednesday. In case my childhood was on the verge of being destroyed, I needed to enjoy it one final time.
32 years after it was first released, the original Ghostbusters holds up well. With the exception of Slimer and the Stay Puft Marshmallow Man, the special effects are no longer special but the script is still full of laugh out loud moments, from the opening with Bill Murray testing students for ESP to Rick Moranis asking random New Yorkers if they were the Gatekeeper to “It’s true … this man has no dick” to “when someone ask you if you are a god, you say yes!” Even the song is still catchy.
As I watched the original Ghostbusters, I realized that my childhood was not in danger of being destroyed. I hope the remake is good but even if it is terrible, the original Ghostbusters will always be there and it will always be too good to be forgotten. The original Ghostbusters was both smart and funny enough to survive a bad sequel, which Lisa and I made the mistake of watching after we finished the original and about which we swore to never speak again. Ghostbusters will survive a remake. If the remake is bad, it can be placed in storage with Ghostbusters 2, The Phantom Menace, X-Men: Apocalypse, Gus Van Sant’s Psycho, Batman and Robin, and every other ill-conceived remake, reboot, and sequel of the past 50 years. If the remake is good, it will be continuing a fine legacy of comedy. If a new audience enjoys the remake as much as we enjoyed the original, who are any of us to begrudge them that pleasure?
Whether the remake is good or bad, I’m not worried.
My childhood is going to be fine and so is everyone else’s.
Or, at least, it will be until dogs and cats start to live together…


































