A Blast From The Past: Capitalism

Posted on July 25, 2016 by Lisa Marie Bowman

If you’re a long time reader of the site, you may know that I occasionally enjoy tracking down old educational films. If nothing else, they’re good time capsules and you know how much I love history. And, since we’re in the middle of an election year and people are tossing around all sorts of labels and claims about history, I figured why not share something from the past?

Capitalism is from 1948 and it features a group of teenagers (who apparently have their own radio talk show) sitting around and debating whether or not capitalism is a good thing or a bad thing. After spending a long amount of time debating whether or not local storekeeper Mr. Brown is a businessmen or a parasite, the teenagers (who all appear to be in their mid-20s) start their show and immediately start to visualize various adults giving their opinion on capitalism. The teenagers also remind us that “this is your forum. What is capitalism?”

Since the film is from 1948, you can probably guess that the message of this film should not be mistaken for the message of Michael Moore’s documentary of the same name.

As I watched Capitalism, I couldn’t help but wonder where those teenagers were now. I imagine that some of them are probably dead but undoubtedly, there’s a few who are still alive and they’re probably still freaking out over their grandchildren voting for Bernie Sanders.

“Why, I remember when I used to host a radio forum and me and my high school peers very politely discussed this very subject!”

“Whatever, grandpa. Have you seen my Che Guevara shirt?”

Who knows?

I just hope that Mr. Brown eventually made enough money to retire some place nice. Yes, he may have charged too much but he had the right to make a living, dammit!

The Things You Find On Netflix: Paradox (dir by Michael Hurst)

Posted on July 25, 2016 by Lisa Marie Bowman

Poor Zoe Bell!

Zoe Bell is a kickass stuntwoman and a better than average actress. Ever since she appeared in Quentin Tarantino’s Death Proof, she’s had a strong cult following and there are people who will definitely watch any film in which she appears. I like her because she always plays strong, independent women who can kick ass better than any man.

But — with the exception of Death Proof and Raze — it’s hard not to feel that her unique talents have been largely wasted in many of the movies in which she has appeared. I have to admit that I even groaned a little when she showed up in The Hateful Eight, largely because I knew it would just be another pointless cameo where she would only be allowed a few minutes to talk about being from New Zealand before being killed in some dramatic fashion.

(Seriously, Quentin — we all know you love Zoe Bell so why not write her another worthwhile role, instead of just using her as your latest directorial trademark? Write her a role and a film worthy of her!)

The latest film to waste Zoe Bell is Paradox, a sci-fi slasher film that you can currently find on Netflix.

Paradox is a time travel movie and I’m a little bit hesitant to talk too much about the plot because the plot sounds a lot more interesting than it actually is. Gale (Zoe) and Jim (Adam Huss) are part of a team of scientists and engineers who have built a time machine in an underground bunker. The mysterious Mr. Landau (Malik Yorba) has shown up to be given a demonstration of how the machine works. (Meanwhile, the NSA is sitting outside the bunker, hoping to figure out what’s going on. It turns out that they have a mole working on the inside and blah blah blah…)

Now, you would think that a time machine would be a pretty cool thing to have but it turns out that the machine has a few flaws. First off, there’s the fact that the mere existence of the machine forces people to engage in ponderous dialogue about paradoxes, time loops, and whether or not the future is set in stone. Secondly, the machine also gives anyone who uses it minor brain damage. Third, after Jim uses the machine to jump forward an hour, he returns and announces that, in the future, everyone in the underground bunker has been murdered!

That’s right — there’s a killer among the scientists! Who could it be!? And could that killer possibly be working for the mysterious Stephen Devlin, a man who apparently used the time machine to become a billionaire in the future and who now has to make sure that the scientists in his past don’t destroy the machine in the present? (My head hurts after typing that.)

It’s full of twists and turns and secrets. But it really doesn’t matter because the execution is never as good as the premise. Paradox is one of those films that should be great but instead, it ends up collapsing under the weight of a low budget, a bad script, terrible performances, and indifferent direction. Zoe Bell is pretty much wasted, though she at least gets to do more here than she did in The Hateful Eight.

Paradox was given a brief and very limited theatrical run before coming over to Netflix. In fact, if not for the fact that watching Hardcore Henry actually left me feeling physically ill, I would be tempted to declare Paradox to be the worst film of the year so far.

As I said, Paradox is on Netflix right now. It’s one to avoid.

Insomnia File No. 18: Only The Strong (dir by Sheldon Lettich)

Posted on July 25, 2016 by Lisa Marie Bowman

What’s an Insomnia File? You know how some times you just can’t get any sleep and, at about three in the morning, you’ll find yourself watching whatever you can find on cable? This feature is all about those insomnia-inspired discoveries!

Last night, if you were suffering from insomnia at one in the morning and you turned over to one of the Cinemax stations, you could have watched the 1993 film, Only The Strong.

Only The Strong is an example of a film genre that is a personal favorite of mine. This is one of those films where a dedicated but unorthodox teacher returns to his old high school and saves a bunch of troubled teenagers by teaching them how to beat the crap out of each other. (For another example, check out The Principal.) It’s hard for me to explain why I always enjoy these films. I’m always tempted to say it’s because there’s a part of me that would love to be a teacher but, honestly, that answer is way too easy. Add to that, if I was a teacher, I doubt I’d be one of the “I’m going to teach you how to beat the crap out of each other” teachers that tend to show up in these films. It seems like that would be a lot of effort.

In fact, now that I think about it, I don’t think I’ve ever met a “I’m going to teach you how to beat the crap out of each other” type of teacher. I get the feeling that these teachers might not actually exist. Maybe that’s why I like these films. For someone, like me, who went to a very nice but somewhat boring high school in the suburbs, a film like Only The Strong is the ultimate fantasy of what high school was like.

Anyway, in Only The Strong, Mark Dacascos plays Louis Stevens. Louis was a troubled teenager but, luckily, he took a sociology class taught by Mr. Kerrigan (Geoffrey Lewis). Kerrigan taught Louis that there was something more to life than just selling drugs and getting into fights. After he graduated, Louis joined the Green Berets and spent four years living in the jungles Brazil. In Brazil, he learned capoeira, a type of martial art that combines dance, acrobatics, and kick boxing. In fact, Louis got so good at capoeira that, when he is recalled to the states, a village wiseman gives him a special instrument, a musical bow called a berimbau.

Louis returns to his old high school and visits Mr. Kerrigan. He discovers that Kerrigan has been beaten down by life and is no longer the inspiring teacher that he once was. He also discovers that his ex-girlfriend, Dianna (Stacey Travis), is now a teacher and she’s dating another teacher, Hector Cervantes (John Fionte). Hector assumes that Louis worked for the CIA in Brazil and accuses him of organizing death squads.

Annoyed by what has happened to his old high school, Louis starts to leave. However, before walking out, he uses capoeira to beat up a Jamaican drug dealer. Everyone is so impressed that Louis is soon working for the high school, teaching 12 of the school’s worst students both capoeira and self-discipline…

(To be honest, as I watched the movie last night, none of the 12 students really seemed to be that dangerous to me. It was difficult to imagine the majority of them ever committing a felony, though I could visualize more than a few of them waiting in line at Starbucks. Then I remembered that this movie was made in 1993 and perhaps it was easier to scare audiences back then.)

It doesn’t take long for Louis to start to make a difference. In fact, it only takes a four-minute training montage. Soon, those 12 students are being respectful and thinking about the future. Donavon (Ryan Bollman) is even remixing capoeira music and acting so worshipful towards Louis that you just know that he’s going to end up getting killed towards the end of the film, in order to provide Louis with the proper motivation to go out and kick some ass. Unfortunately, the local Brazilian drug lord is not happy about Louis’s influence (especially after Louis encourages the drug lord’s cousin to spend his weekend camping instead of stripping cars). Needless to say, it all leads to a violent showdown. It also all leads to one of those inspiring graduation ceremonies that always tend to pop up in movies like this.

Anyway, Only The Strong is one of those films that currently has a 0% rating at the Rotten Tomatoes but I thought it was kind of fun in its own stupid way. (It probably helps to be half-asleep when you watch it.) Even if you don’t buy into the film’s argument that it could be used to save an inner city high school, capoeira is a lot of fun to watch and Mark Dacascos has an appealing smile, which serves to set him apart from a lot of the other actors that starred in actions films in the 1990s. Only The Strong is silly but fun, making it a good film to watch at one in the morning.

Previous Insomnia Files:

Film Review: The Purge: Election Year (dir by James DeMonaco)

Posted on July 25, 2016 by Lisa Marie Bowman

I had really high hopes for The Purge: Election Year.

While the first Purge film was definitely flawed, it still had an interesting and thought-provoking premise behind it. What would we do, the film forced us to ask, if we could do anything we wanted to for one night out of the year? Would you hide in your house or would you go out and randomly kill people? Yes, The Purge had its flaws but it was an interesting film.

And then, in 2014, The Purge: Anarchy was released. Anarchy was one of the best films of 2014 (a film that saw no shortage of great films). It was a big, loud, and over-the-top masterpiece of the pulp imagination, one that managed to be as thought-provoking as the first film while also keeping audiences entertained. It was a political movie, perhaps one of the most overtly political to be released over the past ten years. And yet, it was also amazingly entertaining. By further exploring the type of society that would come up with something like an annual Purge, Anarchy forced audiences to think even as it gave them reasons to cheer and hiss. For many viewers, it also served as an introduction to a tough and grizzled actor named Frank Grillo. In the role of the enigmatic but ultimately good-hearted Leo Barnes, Frank Grillo gave an outstanding performance.

Well, The Purge: Election Year continues its exploration of the culture behind the Purge. And Frank Grillo is back as Leo. It should be said that, just as he did in Anarchy, Grillo supplies Election Year with some of its best moments. Much like Clint Eastwood, Grillo can communicate an entire backstory just be squinting his eyes.

But overall, Election Year is a disappointment. As I watched it, I found myself wondering if maybe director James DeMonaco should have quit when he was ahead and ended the series with Anarchy. Anarchy pushed the idea behind The Purge about as far as it could go and it is perhaps not surprising that Election Year often feels like a rehash that was constructed out of leftovers.

Election Year finds Leo working as head of security for U.S. Sen. Charlie Roan (Elizabeth Mitchell). Charlie, who saw her family massacred during an earlier purge, is running for President on an anti-Purge platform and it appears that she’s about to overtake the candidate of the New Founding Fathers, the Rev. Edwidge Owens (Kyle Secor). The New Founding Fathers decide that the best way to take care of Charlie would be to assassinate her on Purge Night. They announce that, for the first time since the Purge began, government leaders will no longer be granted immunity.

In short, anyone can be killed!

Leo’s idea is for Charlie to stay inside during Purge Night but, if that happened, there wouldn’t be a movie. Naturally, Leo and Charlie eventually end up on the streets and they get to witness a few surreal and violent moments, none of which have quite the impact of anything we previously saw in Anarchy. They are given some assistance by a deli owner (Mykleti Williamson) and, naturally, they meet up with rebel leader Dante Bishop (Edwin Hodge). Just like in the previous film, Leo is eventually forced to decide between purging and showing mercy.

And it’s really never that interesting. The whole film just falls flat. The first two Purge film worked because they convinced you that something like The Purge could actually happen. When, at the end of Anarchy, Leo chose not to murder someone, it felt like a great moment because you truly believed that Leo could have gotten away with murder if he wanted to. But Election Day is never convinces you that you’re watching anything more than a standard issue sequel. With the exception of Frank Grillo and Kyle Secor (more about him in a moment), none of the actors are particularly memorable or believable. In fact, Mykelti Williamson gives a performance that is almost amazingly bad.

I think a huge part of the problem is that the character of Charlie is never credible. Elizabeth Mitchell is a good actress and has appeared in some of my favorite TV shows (she was Juliet on Lost, for instance) but you never believe that she’s a dynamic senator who is destined to save America from itself. Every character in the film has at least one moment in which he or she is required to talk about how much they love Charlie. The film spends so much time worshipping her that it apparently forgot to make her believable.

(It’s hard not to compare Election Year to Anarchy. Anarchy advocated revolution. Election Year argues that the system will eventually correct itself, going so far as to present the revolutionaries as almost being villains because they’re not properly deferential to a wealthy white liberal.)

However, I do have to say that Election Year is occasionally elevated by the thoroughly over-the-top performance of an actor named Kyle Secor. It’s almost as if Secor alone understood that Election Year needed a jolt of pure adrenaline and, at the end of the film, he goes out of his way to provide it. He bulges his eyes. He shrieks out his lines. His entire body shakes and it’s damn near brilliant. He’s a lot of fun and his performance is probably the most entertaining thing about Election Year.

Undoubtedly, there will eventually be a sequel to Election Year. Hopefully, it’ll be an improvement.

Let’s Talk About Atomic Shark!

Posted on July 25, 2016 by Lisa Marie Bowman

In case you missed it, it is currently Shark Week on the SyFy network. (Or, as theSnarkalecs and I like to call it, Snark Week!) Sharknado 4 will be premiering on Sunday and, in honor of that historic event, SyFy has devoted this week to broadcasting some of their trademark original movies. Along with showing such classics as Jersey Shore Shark Attack and Zombie Shark, SyFy is also premiering several new shark films.

The first of those films premiered last night. And its name was ….

ATOMIC SHARK!!!!

Seriously, that’s a great name! In a few of my Lifetime reviews, I’ve pointed out that there is an art to picking the perfect title for a Lifetime film. Well, the same is true for a SyFy film. A title like Atomic Shark tells the audience everything that they need to know. On the simplest level, it lets the viewers know that the film is about a shark and that the shark is, in some way, atomic. But even beyond that, a title like Atomic Shark announces, “This is going to be a fun movie! Sit back, relax, and don’t worry too much about the specifics. Just enjoy yourself.”

As I watched the movie last night, I saw a few people on twitter worrying about things like whether or not a shark could actually become atomic or whether the characters were acting like logical human beings. Those people were missing the entire point of the film. Seriously, you have to be the world’s biggest douchebag to actually nitpick a film that has a title like Atomic Shark.

The film takes place on the San Diego shoreline. At first, it seems like a normal (if rather overcast) day at the beach. Men in speedos. Women in bikinis. Lifeguards on duty. Jeff Fahey steering a motor boat and barely noticing when a water skier is suddenly devoured by a glowing shark. A kid pretending to drown, just so he can get some mouth-to-mouth.

And then there’s the drones. There are drones flying up and down this beach. The majority of them are lifeguard drones, which are used to deliver life vests to people drowning out in the middle of the ocean. However, there are also a few drones being controlled by pervy little Fletcher (David Faustino), who films unsuspecting swimmers and joggers and then uploads the video to his site. Even when confronted by an indignant lifeguard, Fletcher responds, “The beach is public domain!”

Well, the beach may be public domain but it’s about the become … atomic domain!

That’s right, there’s a glowing shark out there and it’s hungry! Not only is it eating people but, because it’s radioactive, it’s setting them on fire too! In fact, this shark is so radioactive that it’s causing sea food to become explosive. When the local restaurant blows up, the authorities blame it on a gas leak but we know it was because of the radioactive plankton.

(The film also lets us know that the restaurant had four stars on Yelp before the explosion and only three stars after.)

Unfortunately, only one person truly believes in the existence of atomic shark. Gina (Rachele Brooke Smith) is the greatest lifeguard who ever lived but, unfortunately, her superior, Reese (Adam Ambruso), is a dumbass jerk who doesn’t understand that workplace sexual harassment is no longer acceptable. Since Gina can’t get any support from the authorities, she gathers together her own group of shark hunters and, before you cay say, “We’re going to need a bigger boat,” they set out to destroy the atomic shark!

One of those shark hunters is the boat captain played by Jeff Fahey and I have to say that I was so happy when I realized that Fahey was in this movie. Jeff Fahey is one of those immensely likable actors who can make almost any line of dialogue memorable. Playing the Quint role here, Fahey is a lot of fun. Also deserving a lot of credit is Rachele Brooke Smith, who kicks so much ass as the no-nonsense Gina that I found myself thinking that, in case Gal Gadot demands too much money to reprise her role, Smith could easily take over her role in any future Wonder Woman films.

As the film’s screenwriter, Griff Furst, pointed out on twitter, Atomic Shark is a comedy. Taking it seriously is definitely the biggest mistake that a viewer could make. This is a movie that was meant to be watched with a group of your loudest and snarkiest friends. It’s a lot of fun.

(That said, just because it’s comedy, that doesn’t mean that anyone’s safe. This is the rare shark film where you’re actually shocked when a few characters fail to escape the nuclear menace of atomic shark.)

Atomic Shark is a lot of fun and it was a great way to start Shark Snark Week on SyFy!

Film Review: Ghostbusters (dir by Paul Feig)

Posted on July 17, 2016 by Lisa Marie Bowman

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.

Cleaning Out The DVR, Again #40: The Wrong Child (dir by David DeCoteau)

Posted on July 11, 2016 by Lisa Marie Bowman

(Lisa is currently in the process of trying to clean out her DVR by watching and reviewing all 40 of the movies that she recorded from the start of March to the end of June. She’s trying to get it all done by the end of July 11th! Will she make it!? Well, I guess she did since this is the 40th review!!! YAY!)

Finally, we have reached the end. Two and a half weeks ago, I started the process of reviewing all forty of the films that I recorded between the start of March and the end of June. It hasn’t always been easy, within the two and a half week time frame that I set for myself, to watch and review all of these films but I’ve managed to do it. As soon as I publish the review that you’re reading right now, I will be able to say that I have officially cleaned out my DVR.

So, what was the final film waiting to be watched on my DVR? It was The Wrong Child, which originally aired on June 26th on the Lifetime channel.

In The Wrong Child, Vivica A. Fox plays Renee. Like many Lifetime heroines, Renee would appear to have it all. She has money, glamour, a teenage daughter, and a tragic backstory. (Her first husband was killed several years ago in a traffic accident.) She also has a wonderful house, which regular Lifetime viewers might recognize as being the same house from The Wrong Roommate. She has recently remarried. Her new husband is Charles (Gary Daniels), an architect who may or may not have a few secrets of his own lurking in the past.

One day, Andrew (Robbie Davidson) shows up at the house. Andrew is a handsome and apparently normal teenager. He explains that his mother has recently died of stomach cancer but, before she passed, she informed him that Charles is his father. Charles is skeptical but Renee and her daughter welcome Andrew into the family.

Of course, it turns out that Charles was correct to be suspicious. Andrew is a sociopath, the type of guy who takes pictures of strangers while they’re out jogging and who also is totally willing to murder anyone who might have any evidence that his name is not actually Andrew. Andrew may be crazy but he has a very specific reason for tracking down Charles and his new family.

The Wrong Child is a pretty standard Lifetime B-movie but director David DeCoteau always brings a certain flair to even the most predictable of thrillers. You know that Andrew is crazy as soon as you see him but Robbie Davidson still gives a really good and rather chilling performance.

Add to that, there’s the house! I loved the house when it appeared in The Wrong Roommate and I loved it even more in The Wrong Child. Here’s hoping that the house appears in another wrong film soon!

Well, that’s it! Two and a half week and 40 movies later, I have now officially cleaned out my DVR! Now, I can get to work on filling it up again!

Cleaning Out The DVR, Again #39: Full Out (dir by Sean Cisterna)

Posted on July 11, 2016 by Lisa Marie Bowman

The 39th film on my DVR was Full Out, which aired on Lifetime immediately after Center Stage: On Pointe.

I enjoyed Full Out when it first aired and I enjoyed it even more when I watched it a second time. It’s a truly enjoyable and inspiring dance film and it’s one of the best films to have appeared on Lifetime this year. Not only is it wonderful to watch but it’s a Canadian film, which is always a good thing. It features not one, not two, not three, but FOUR Degrassi actors!

Full Out tells a true story and what a story it is! Ariana Berlin (Anna Golja) is a talented gymnast who is bound for Olympic glory when she and her mother (Ramona Milano) are involved in a devastating traffic accident. While Ariana survives the accident, she spends five days in a coma. When she awakens, she discovers that she has two broken legs, two collapsed lungs, a broken wrist, a broken collarbone, and several cracks ribs. A metal rod has been placed in her leg and her doctors tell her that she’ll never compete again.

At first, Ariana is bitter. Not only does she miss the Olympics but she also has to watch as her best friend (played by Sarah Fisher) goes in her place and wins a silver medal. Ariana lashes out at her friends and her family. Everyone is prepared to give up on her, except for her physical therapist, Michelle (Asha Bromfield). Michelle teaches Ariana hip hop dance and introduces Ariana to her dance troupe. Through dance, Ariana starts to gain back her confidence. Michelle eventually asks Araina to coach the dancers for an upcoming audition to join a famous dance team.

In fact, Ariana has become so confident that she feels ready to return to gymnastics. She is accepted at UCLA, where her coach is the demanding Valorie Kondos Field (Jennifer Beals). However, Ariana struggles to balance both gymnastics and dance. Can she have both or will she be forced to make a difficult choice?

Full Out is an incredibly positive and likable film, one that made me feel good both times that I watched it. The acting is wonderful, the story is inspiring, and the dancing is pure joy. Watch this when you’re in a bad mood or when you’re feeling hopeless and it will immediately cheer you up, I promise!

As I’ve mentioned a few times in the past, this has been a good year for Degrassi actors appearing in Lifetime films. Full Out sets some sort of record by featuring four Degrassi actors! Sarah Fletcher (who played conflicted Christian Becky Baker on Degrassi and also starred in The Stepchild) plays Ariana’s best friend and occasional rival. Jake Epstein, who played bipolar musician/photographer Craig Manning on Degrassi, appears as one of Ariana’s coaches. Ramona Milano, who played Drew and Adam’s mom on Degrassi, plays Ariana’s mom. (Interestingly enough, on Degrassi, Sarah Fletcher’s Becky was a potential girlfriend to both Drew and Adam.) And finally, Anna Golja, who plays bitchy Zoe on Degrassi, gives a great and empathetic performance as Ariana Berlin.

In fact, everyone is great in Full Out. WAY TO GO, CANADA!

Cleaning Out The DVR, Again #38: Center Stage: On Pointe (dir by Director X)

Posted on July 11, 2016 by Lisa Marie Bowman

The 38th film on my DVR was Center Stage: On Pointe, which premiered on Lifetime on June 25th.

Center Stage: On Pointe is the third film in the Center Stage series. The first film, which was released in 2000, is one of those films that, at the time, you pretty much had to see if you were into ballet. The second film, Center Stage: Turn It Up, aired on the Oxygen Network in 2008 and laid much of the groundwork for what happens in On Pointe.

At the start of On Pointe, Jonathan Reeves (Peter Gallagher), the head of the American Ballet Academy, has a problem. The Academy is still doing great work but it’s not bringing in much money. Unfortunately, the ABA has developed a reputation for being stodgy. It needs to be shaken up. It needs new dancers who are going to challenge the teachers even as the teachers challenge them. Over the objections of just about everyone else at the ABA, Reeves decides that it’s time to bring modern dancers into the Academy.

Reeves and his choreographers (including Kenny Wormald’s Tommy Anderson, the male lead from Turn It Up) set out to recruit dancers to compete at a camp where the winners will be invited to join the Academy. Among those dancers: Bella Parker (Nicole Munoz). Bella is the younger sister of Kate Parker (Rachele Brooke Smith), whose story was previously told in Turn It Up. Seeking to escape from her famous sister’s shadow, Bella auditions under a false name. However, everyone immediately knows who she is. It’s not easy being Kate Parker’s sister.

The camp turns out to be absolutely beautiful (even if it did remind me a bit of Camp Crystal Lake from Friday the 13th) but the dance world is a competitive and often unforgiving one. Not only is there tension between the ballet students and the modern dancers (and that tension is one of the most realistic aspects of the film) but one of the instructors appears to be obsessed with trying to destroy Bella. Will Bella and her fellow dancers survive the grueling camp? Will Bella ever escape her sister’s shadow? And will the ABA manage to change with the times?

You already know the answers. There’s not a surprising moment to be found in Center Stage: On Pointe but the film is well-shot, the music is great, and the dancing is amazing. Yes, some of the performances could be better but when you’ve got dancers who can move as well as the ones in this cast, it really doesn’t matter whether or not they’re the greatest actors in the world. This is a dance movie, after all. The dance scenes are amazing and that’s what is important.

(By the way, fans of Dance Moms may be interested to know that Chloe Lukasiak has a small role in Center Stage: On Pointe. And, though she may no longer be a member of ALDC, she’s still a great dancer.)

Cleaning Out The DVR, Again #37: All This And Heaven Too (dir by Anatole Litvak)

Posted on July 11, 2016 by Lisa Marie Bowman

The 37th film on my DVR was the 1940 film, All This, And Heaven Too. It originally aired on June 21st on TCM.

All This, and Heaven Too is one of the many melodramatic historical romances in which Bette Davis appeared in the late 30s and early 40s. These films usually featured Bette as a strong-willed woman who was often condemned for not conforming to the rules of society. Typically, she would end up falling in love with a man who society said she could not have. Bette almost always seemed to end up alone, which I guess was the way women who thought for themselves were punished back then.

In this one, Bette plays Henriette Deluzy, a French woman who ends up in America in the 1850s. When she shows up to start teaching at a private, all-girls school, her students immediately start gossiping about her. It seems that Henriette was at the center of some sort of European scandal and everyone is speculating about what happened. Finally, at the start of class, Henriette tells her students that she’s going to tell them the true story of what happened back in France.

It turns out that Henriette was a governess. She took care of the four children of the Duc de Praslin (Charles Boyer) and his wife, the Duchesse (Barbara O’Neil). The Duchesse was mentally unstable and soon came to suspect that her husband had fallen in love with Henriette. Though she may have been insane, it turned out that the Duchesse was correct. When the Duchesse fired Henriette and then lied to her husband about it, the Duc flew into a rage and murdered his wife.

Under the laws of the time, the Duc could only be judged by his fellow noblemen. He was told that if he simply confessed and said that Henriette was the one who drove him to commit the murder, he would be set free. (As opposed to the characters that Bette Davis played in The Letter and The Little Foxes, Henriette was totally innocent.) Would the Duc confess and allow Henriette to be blamed or would he deny his love for her and sacrifice his life as a result?

All This, And Heaven Too is a rather slow movie and it’s hard not to be disappointed that Henriette is such a boring character. She’s so innocent and victimized that the role almost seems like a waste of Bette Davis’s talents. A big production that featured lavish (though black-and-white) recreations of 19th Century France, All This, And Heaven Too was probably a big deal for contemporary audiences and, if you’re a Bette Davis or Charles Boyer completist, you might enjoy it. But otherwise, it’s really nothing special.

All This, And Heaven Too was among the 10 films nominated for Best Picture of 1940. However, it lost to Rebecca.